Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 04-02Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:15 P.M., Tuesday, April 2, 2002, by Mayor Robert D. Corrie. Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Cherie McCandless and William Nary. Others Present: William Nichols, Mike Worley, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Brad Watson, Ken Bowers, Tom Kuntz, Dean Willis and Will Berg. Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Tammy de Weerd X Bill Nary X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie Corrie: All right. I will now open the regular meeting on Tuesday, April the 2nd at 7:15 P.M. in City Council Chambers. I will have roll call vote -- or roll call attendance. Excuse me. Mr. Berg. Okay. All present. Before we do the Adoption of the Agenda, I would like to recognize Troop 80 here as Matt Yorgason's troop of Boise working on their citizenship badge. Welcome to them. Troop 128 in Meridian is working on their communications badge and Troop 30 in Meridian is working on their citizenship badge. Fellows, thank you for attending and we wish you well in your scouting. Okay. Also we do have a special presentation tonight. I would like to invite Chief Worley to come up and give the presentation. Worley: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and Council. Jean. People that enter public service are a very special group. They are here to serve the citizens of the community and I'd like to take a moment tonight to recognize Jean Moore from the Police Department. Jean as of yesterday has worked for the City of Meridian for 28 years. She's the second longest serving employee in the city at this point. Jean is the Administrative Assistant to the Chief of Police. I tell you in the six months that I have been here she has gone far and above the call of duty to make me feel welcome. To help me navigate some of the minefields and that sort of thing, the challenges of being a new Chief and I am the seventh chief that she has assisted in the way. Jean, I'd like to present to you with a plaque that says a Certificate of Appreciation presented to Jean Moore in recognition of 28 years of service to the Meridian Police Department and citizens of Meridian. Councilman Bird has a presentation from Mayor and Council. Bird: Thank you, Jean. Congratulations. Worley: And I'd also like to recognize in the audience here Jean's husband Bob, who supports her and supports us. Thank you very much, Bob, for coming. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 2 Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: Item 18. Appointment to Meridian Development Corporation: Corrie: Thank you. Okay. Council, we have the Adoption of the Agenda. I would like to ask if we could on Item Number 17 -- Item 18 is the Meridian Development Corporation Board of Directors Appointment tonight, to appoint them for your approval, on Mr. Craig Slocum, Architect at CSHQA to be on the board. I have handed out the resume that you might be looking at. I was hoping -- I just got the resume today, so I thought rather than waiting any further if -- okay. All right. Council, do you have anything for the Agenda for changes, additions? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we adopt the Agenda as noted with the addition of Number 18. Corrie: Okay. Any further? Okay. Motion has been made. Is there a second? Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Do we need to pull F, G, and H? Bird: He's doing the agenda. De Weerd. Okay. Sorry. Corrie: We will get to that. We are just doing the adoption of the Agenda. Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of February 19, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: B. Approve minutes of March 12, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 3 C. Approve minutes of March 12, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: D. Approve minutes of March 19, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: E. Approve minutes of March 20, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: F. Tabled from March 5, 2002: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PP 01-016 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 28 building lots and 5 other lots on 5.4 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Kodiak Subdivision by Kodiak Development, LLC – 2435 South Meridian Road: G. Tabled from March 5, 2002: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: CUP 01-029 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development for a private RV storage and reduced lot sizes in an R-8 zone for proposed Kodiak Subdivision by Kodiak Development, LLC – 2435 South Meridian Road: H. Tabled from March 5, 2002: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: VAR 01-019 Request for a Variance to exceed 1,000 feet maximum length requirement and to allow the public road being proposed to exceed 450 feet maximum length requirement in an R-8 zone for Kodiak Subdivision by Kodiak Development, LLC – 2435 South Meridian Road: I. Tabled from March 19, 2002: Thousand Springs Subdivision Restrictive Covenant: J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 01- 018 Request for annexation and zoning of 85.36 acres from RUT to C-C and C-G zones for proposed El Dorado Subdivision by W.H. Moore Company – southwest corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road: K. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 01- 020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 32 building lots and 17 other lots +/- on 85.36 acres in a proposed C-C and C-G zone for proposed El Dorado Business Campus by W.H. Moore Company – southwest corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road: L. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-037 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for mixed use with office, retail, restaurant and hotel/motel for proposed El Dorado Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 4 Business Campus by W.H. Moore Company – southwest corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road: M. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAC 02-001 Request for a vacation of an existing sewer easement in the proposed Sundance Place Subdivision by Briggs Engineering – west side of Meridian Road, ½ mile north of Ustick Road: N. Watertower Recoating Project – Agreement for Inspection Consulting Services, Dave Jahn: O. Agreement with Qwest for Qwest Digital Switched Service at new Meridian Police Department building: P. Beer / Wine / Liquor License Renewals: Q. Approve Bills: Corrie: Now Consent Agenda. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda I understand that Items F and G we need to table to April 16th and H. On Item Number I, we need to move to 5-I so we can discuss it and Items J, K, and L we need to move to Items 5-J, 5-K, and 5-L for discussion. With that, I would move that we approved the Consent Agenda as noted. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Okay. I believe we better have a roll call, because there is -- let's have a roll-call vote, because there is some items here that require that. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4: Department Reports: A. Public Work’s Department – Gary Smith: 1. White Drain Sewer Trunk – Award of Construction Contract: Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 5 Corrie: Department Reports. I believe on request, Gary, you can -- asked the request that it be tabled until the 16th is that correct? Smith: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Okay. The Public Works Director has requested the Public Works Department, White Drain Sewer Trunk Award of Construction Contract be tabled until the April 16th meeting. Is there anything discussion? Okay. I'd entertain a motion then. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we table the White Drain Sewer Trunk Award of Construction Contract to April 16, 2002. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 5: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) I. Tabled from March 19, 2002: Thousand Springs Subdivision Restrictive Covenant: Corrie: Item 5 is moved from the Consent Agenda. Bird: 5-I was the first one. Corrie: Okay. Item 5-I, Thousand Springs Subdivision Restrictive Covenant. Okay. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: We asked to have this brought off, because having discussions and stuff we didn't feel that the city is in a position to be involved in restrictive covenants on lots. We have a Development Agreement. In my view the house is not illegal on that lot in the restrictive, so I would make a motion that we not participate, nor sign into this agreement. If the builder and the homeowner wants to sign it, that would be -- they can do it amongst themselves, but I don't believe the city legally is -- should be out there doing this. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 6 Corrie: All right. Any further discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Bird, do we want to give any -- I don't know if it's necessary. Do we want to give any direction? I certainly think it's a good idea between the parties if they want to have a restrictive covenant. I mean we certainly would encourage that and try to resolve this matter. I think it's just our feeling that the city doesn't need to be a party to that particular agreement and it's just not something within our normal course of how we would deal with these types of things. I don't know if there is any necessity to take it upon -- Bird: I agree with the motion -- you know, with that and that's strictly up to the two parties if they want to enter into it. The city is not going to enter into that, so my motion is that we will not enter into it, nor will we enforce it. Nary: And I would second that motion. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Any opposed? Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. I will also entertain another motion. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that this lot and house in question as of 8:00 tomorrow morning be given their Certificate of Occupancy with no restriction as far as the city is concerned. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 7 J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 01- 018 Request for annexation and zoning of 85.36 acres from RUT to C-C and C-G zones for proposed El Dorado Subdivision by W.H. Moore Company – southwest corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road: K. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 01- 020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 32 building lots and 17 other lots +/- on 85.36 acres in a proposed C-C and C-G zone for proposed El Dorado Business Campus by W.H. Moore Company – southwest corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road: L. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-037 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for mixed use with office, retail, restaurant and hotel/motel for proposed El Dorado Business Campus by W.H. Moore Company – southwest corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road: Corrie: Okay. We have J, K and L is that -- Keith? Bird: Yes. Corrie: For discussion? Bird: Yes. Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Okay. Items J, K, and L have also been pulled for discussion on the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the El Dorado Subdivision. Mr. Bird. Bird: There were some questions the attorney -- that was something that wasn't complete. Corrie: Okay. Bird: There was a couple of things and I will refer to Mr. Nichols. Corrie: Okay. Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, there are some requested changes to the proposed findings. We have a letter from Mr. Seel dated today and so I need you to go through those. I think they are probably accurate, but I need to have Mrs. Stiles' comment on the proposed changes. I didn't want you to adopt those findings without having considered his position statement and because the letter was just received today it's not likely that it's going to be in your electronic format. It's going to be a hard Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 8 copy. I can go through them for you if you wish or -- they primarily deal with the Preliminary Plat Findings. I will just go through to this letter. The first -- the Findings of Fact on the Preliminary Plat and also the annexation reference 32 building lots and the plat itself has 34 building lots. Shari may have some comment on that one. Stiles: Excuse me. Do you want me to cover it? I did go over it with Jonathan Seel right before the meeting here, have the pages referenced and -- Nichols: That would be very helpful. Stiles: The only place I could find reference to the 32 lots was on Page 2, Paragraph 6, of the Annexation and Zoning Findings and all of the rest of the changes would be in the Preliminary Plat Findings. On Page 5 -- on Page Five it really wasn't an issue that -- the second paragraph in Mr. Seel's memo, as it was really not dealing with the condition it was just a statement. The fact that was removed would not impact the Findings. On the third paragraph in Mr. -- the third bullet in Mr. Seel's memo, Page 13 of the Preliminary Plat Findings, Paragraph 4, the second line. Northern property should be replaced by the southern portion. I'm sorry. On Page 6 -- I'm sorry. I skipped over one. Page 6, Item 13, if the first sentence of Paragraph 13 on Page 6 were deleted, the remainder of it would be all right. I'm not -- I did not find exactly where the mention of Copper Point Way was, but if we could change any reference to Copper Point Way to Copper Point Drive, that would take care of it. None of these are significant changes and were just meant to be clarifications to the Findings as proposed. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, if I can just confirm with Director Stiles, in Mr. Seel's letter, the first bullet point that's referencing Page 2, Paragraph 6 in the Annexation and Zoning Findings and that requested revision is acceptable and reflects the actual approval of 34 lots, as opposed to 32 correct? Stiles: Yes. Nichols: Okay and the second bullet point is inconsequential and it's not necessary to change? Stiles: Yes. Nichols: And the third bullet point has to do with Blue Horizon Drive? Stiles: Yes. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 9 Nichols: Okay. That one's acceptable? Stiles: Yes. Nichols: The fourth bullet point would revise the portion that's underlined in Mr. Seel's letter where it says northern property. That would simply say southern portion and the rest of -- and it should also be clarified to read that this hard surface path will be north of the Ridenbaugh Canal. Stiles: Yes. Nichols: Then the last bullet point is also acceptable? Stiles: Yes. Nichols: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I would move to approve the findings for request for annexation and zoning of 85.36 acres from RUT to C-C and C-G zones for the proposed El Dorado Subdivision and have the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request for annexation and zoning on AZ 01-018. Any further discussion? Okay. Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Motion approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion on the Preliminary Plat. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the Findings for the request for Preliminary Plat approval of 32 building lots and 17 other lots on 85.36 acres in a proposed C-C and C-G zone for El Dorado Business Campus and ask the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 10 Nary: Second. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the Preliminary Plat with correction. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion on the request for a Conditional Use Permit. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for approval of a CUP for mixed use with office, retail, restaurant and hotel / motel for the proposed El Dorado Business Campus and ask the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 6: Ordinance No. : AZ 01-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee – southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: Corrie: Was there anymore that was pulled off? That was it? Between the paperwork and the computer I get confused. Okay. All right. Item Number 6, which is going to be Ordinance Number 02-947, request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee, southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road. At this time I'd like the City Clerk to read Ordinance Number 02-947 by Title only. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 11 Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance Number 02-947, an Ordinance finding that certain land owned by George and Mildred Davis to be known as Hearthstone Subdivision located at the southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road. Which lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho; and finding that the owner has made a request for annexation in writing to the Council. That said land be annexed to the City of Meridian and zoning designated Low Density Residential District (R-4). Declaring that said land, by proper legal description as described below, be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho; repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith. Directing the City Engineer to add said property to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho. Directing the Clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor, and the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho. Pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215. Corrie: Okay. You have heard the reading of Ordinance Number 02-947 by Title only. Is there anyone from the public that would like to have the ordinance read in its entirety? Okay. Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on Ordinance Number 02-947. I can't do it. De Weerd: Geez. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move that we approve Ordinance Number 02-947, request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for the proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee, with suspension of rules. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve Ordinance Number 02- 947 with suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. Ordinance Number 02-947 has been adopted. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 7: Tabled from February 5, 2002: FP 01-026 Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, LLC – east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road: Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 12 Corrie: Item Number 7 is tabled from the February 5, 2002. It's a request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, LLC, east of Stoddard Road and north of Victory Road. Staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, we would ask that this item be tabled until May 21, 2002, due to the fact that the previous phase has not been accepted for processing at this time. Gary Smith also has an additional item on the Bear Creek Subdivision. Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council, part of the conditions of the original approval of this subdivision was for the developer to construct a bypass sewer line, because they are pumping their waste from one drainage, the Black Cat drainage, into the Ten Mile drainage. The construction -- excuse me -- the design of that bypass sewer project was approved. There was a condition that had been placed on the approval of the subdivision by Councilman Bird at the time the motion was made for approval that the project was to be completed by April 1st . I believe that was the date. In the process of constructing the sewer bypass line, they encountered some problems in terms of conflict with crossing of the Ten Mile Drain. At this point that crossing has not been resolved. The engineer for the developer has brought a hand sketch of an alternative to what was approved, the plans were approved by Public Works Department, and we haven't heard anything further at this point from the engineer, so we don't know what the status of that extension is or that bypass line is. I just wanted you to be aware of this, that the bypass portion of this project has stalled at the moment. On September the 12th of last year, I sent a letter to Matt Schultz, who was the Project Manager for Bear Creek. With that letter, I sent a copy of the minutes from the October 17, 2000, City Council Meeting that approved the Final Plat for Bear Creek Sub No. 1 with the restrictions. I really don't know where this is going to go right now or how it's going to go, but they are not going to meet the April 1st deadline that I had established to construct of the bypass sewer. I would echo Shari Stiles' request that this project be tabled and I guess tabled to the -- I don't know what the time would be for the tabling of the project, because I don't know what the status of the redesign is at this point. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Shari is May 21st a date you chose because the Number 5 plat is now coming through the process? Has that been filed? Stiles: We do not have all the information we have requested for Number 5 at this time. If they brought it in this week that would be the earliest possible time, they would be on the agenda. De Weerd: So could table this until May 21st so we could have the Number 5 Final Plat application, as well as get an update on the bypass sewer line? Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 13 Stiles: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we table FP 01-026, request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots and 4 other lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Bear Creek, LLC, until May 21, 2002. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, before I second that, does the applicant have anything to comment on? Corrie: Give your name and address, please. Arnold: Steve Arnold, 1800 West Overland Road with Briggs Engineering. I'm representing Bear Creek right now. It's my understanding one of the reasons that we had to do a redesign was that there was not enough distance between high ground water in the Ten Mile and the bottom of our pipe. They required two feet, there was only 11 inches, and so we had to submit a redesign. It was my understanding that we did get something in and I don't know if -- I thought it was a little bit more than a hand drawing. I'm assuming we are waiting to get some comments back, but the portion of this drain has been -- it's been constructed, except for this segment that we had to redesign around the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. In regards to Bear Creek No. 5, the information that Shari needs, she will get that this week and that May 21st date is ideal. I'm assuming as soon as we get this redesign approved construction will only take several days to finish. Otherwise, had we had it approved prior to April 1st we would have had it completed. We apologize for the delay. Corrie: Is May the 21st okay? Arnold: In regards to this May 21st is great. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to table Item Number 7, FP 01- 026, Final Plat approval of Bear Creek Subdivision No. 6 until May the 21st . Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 14 Item 8: FP 02-003 Request for Final Plat approval of 20 building lots and 4 other lots on 5.97 acres in an R-4 zone for Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group, Inglenook LLC -- 2720 S. Locust Grove Road: Corrie: Okay Item Number 8. This was a request for Final Plat approval of 20 building lots and 4 other lots on 5.97 acres in an R-4 zone by Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group, Inglenook LLC, 2720 South Locust Grove Road. Staff comments. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property located next to the Tarawood Subdivision and across the street from Salmon Rapids Subdivision, directly north of John Shipley's property and south of Los Alamitos Subdivision. We have the comments from staff. I would like to make sure that you have the most recent memo from the Meridian Fire Department, dated April 1, 2002. The only change on that from the memo dated March 21, 2002, would be Item 9, which states, the project shall provide a stub street to the north, which will eventually be connected to a main arterial. That was the only change on that memo. With that change noted, staff would recommend approval with all staff and agency conditions. Thank you. Corrie: Shari, is the applicant here tonight? Did you get the Inglenook Subdivision Joe Silva, Deputy Fire Chief mentioned on Item Number 9? Did you get that? Any comment with that? Ford: Yes, I do have comment. For the record, Ashley Ford, Hubble Engineering, 701 South Allen Street, Suite 110, Meridian, and representing Providence Development this evening. One of the points of discussion at the Preliminary Plat in February was there a conditional of approval there is to be two accesses to a main arterial. Chief Bowers recognized there couldn't be two access points to Locust Grove Road and recommended deletion of that condition. With the memo dated April 1st , it does say that we should provide a stub street to the north, which will be eventually connected to the arterial. We did have a conversation with Joe Silva yesterday in regards to the intent. We are afraid that could be misinterpreted by staff that prior to the recordation of the plat there shall be a secondary access. However, Chief Silva only wants us to provide the stub street to the north as we are providing and recognizes that we have no control over the property to the north. Other than this point of clarification we don't have any issues and we do recommend approval this evening and happy to stand for any questions. Corrie: Council, any questions? Thank you. Ford: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 15 De Weerd: I move we approve request for Final Plat of 20 building lots and 4 other lots on 5.97 acres in an R-4 zone for Inglenook Subdivision, with the inclusion of the additional comments from Deputy Chief Silva from the fire station and ask the Mayor to sign and Clerk attest. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the Final Plat. The motion as stated. Any further comments? Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from March 12, 2002: Proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan: Corrie: Item Number 9 is a Continued Public Hearing from March 12, 2002, for proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan. Council, that has been requested to be continued again until the 23rd , as we don't have all the information that has been placed with the parks. With that request, I would entertain a motion to continue this Public Hearing until the 23rd . Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Could I ask a question? Is Mr. Kuntz here? Didn't we move this up and have an early meeting so we could move this along quicker? Bird: Yes. Nary: And now we are setting it over? Bird: And now all of sudden we are starting to hold back. Corrie: That was his request. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 16 De Weerd: Council Member Nary, he had to delay it because he needs to get back with the Building Contractor's Association, as well as the Association of Realtors on some issues that they were raised kind of in the 11th hour that he's needed to respond to. As well, in our Public Hearing process we did ask him to include a couple items that has taken a little bit of groundwork and I notice in our packets there are staff comments from the Planning and Zoning Staff. Planning and Zoning Staff has raised several issues that I don't know if Mr. Kuntz has had time to research, but they are very valid issues. They will probably need a little bit of time to following up on as well. I see Mr. Kuntz is here. He can maybe speak for himself. Corrie: Mr. Kuntz. Kuntz: Mayor and Council, unfortunately, I didn't hear the entire question. Nary: What I had asked, Mr. Kuntz -- and I think Councilwoman de Weerd answered mostly it anyway, but we had moved this up and had actually had an early meeting, so that we could get this moving along in the process. I was wondering why we were having a delay now after we had taken the steps to move it ahead. I think she's answered what that was in regards to some other questions that had been raised by the building contractors, as well as the realtors, as well as some of the Planning staff comments that they need a little more time to work through. Would that be correct? Kuntz: Yes, it would be. Thank you, Council Member de Weerd. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move that we table Item 9 -- or continue Item 9, the Public Hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan to our April 23rd meeting. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made to continue the Public Hearing on Item Number 9 until April 23rd . Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. It will be continued, this Public Hearing, until April 23rd . MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from March 19, 2002: PP 01-024 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park Subdivision by Capital Development Co. -- ¼ mile south of McMillan Road, east side of Linder Road: Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 17 Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from March 19, 2002: VAR 01-020 Request for variance on block lengths for one side of two blocks within the proposed Baldwin Park Subdivision by Capital Development Co. – ¼ mile south of McMillan Road, east side of Linder Road: Corrie: Item Number 10 and Item Number 11 is a Continued Public Hearing from March 19th . Item Number 10 is a request for Preliminary Plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park Subdivision by Capital Development Company, one quarter mile south of McMillan Road, east side of Linder Road. With the Council's approval, I will also continue the Public Hearing on the Variance request, so that we can have testimony on all of it if it needs to be. First, I believe, Shari, you had some comments to the Council on this one, too? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I did, and I apologize for not getting them to you as I was directed to get them on last Friday. Just a note of clarification. I think that the action probably needs to be taken on Item 11 first before the Preliminary Plat for the Variance. The Variance request is for exceeding the maximum block length of 1,000 feet. I would ask that the Council not have such specific wording within any motion that they make as far as their request for a Variance on -- for one side of two blocks and then -- and just say that the block lengths are approved as shown on the approved Preliminary Plat, whatever that is. Does that make any sense? Am I confusing you? De Weerd: It makes sense. Stiles: Okay. As far as the memo that I sent to you today, Council requested me to incorporate some of the comments that we discussed during the last Public Hearing. The main issue there was the fact that the recommendations from Planning and Zoning Commission reflected the draft conditions of the Ada County Highway District and with this position statement it details the final recommendations, the final staff report from the Ada County Highway District as approved by the Ada County Highway District Commissioners. The first item on item -- that's shown as Paragraph 3, that was actually the Planning and Zoning Commission's -- or Planning and Zoning Department's staff report. That would change that item within the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, as you would adopt those. Under 16 it refers to the east phase lines for phases three and four. These were recommended by staff and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. It's a little hard to see, but it's -- Phase 3 is here and Phase 4 is here. To the east of that phase line is the pedestrian walkway. This would be one that actually goes to the school site. We asked for that phase to be constructed in the way, including these common lots. One reason is so that they do have the access immediately to the school site that the kids can access without having to go to Linder Road. Another reason is due to the fact that owners -- or homeowners that buy these properties -- or the homeowners that build -- that build houses on these properties aren't necessarily aware that there is going to be a pedestrian pathway adjacent to them. If it's already there, it's less likely that we are going to receive phone calls from those property owners wondering what's going on and why their privacy may be impacted by the construction of that pathway. Under the Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 18 Subparagraph 17-B and 17-D, this was to clarify when emergency access was to be built on Lot 9, Block 7. This is the portion here that's required to be constructed as an emergency access. It would have 10-foot wide asphalt and five feet of grass creet on each side. This is to be constructed prior to issuance of Building Permits in Phase 5. The applicant is to verify that the turning radii from this access comply with the Fire Department requirements. Under D, the emergency access shall constructed prior to issuances of any Building Permits in Phase 2. That would be exclusive of this one that would be constructed prior to Phase 5. I also wanted to clarify for the temporary access that will go along Lot 15 to Linder Road. That needs to be constructed prior to obtaining Building Permits for Phase 2. This is Phase 2 here. The Nonbuild Agreement would also need to be entered into for this lot until a permanent second access is provided to the subdivision. Beginning on the next page, Page 2 of my position statement, this is taken directly from Ada County Highway District's report, Pages 2, 3, 4 and Paragraph 48 on the top of Page 5 is all taken from their report. Then the remaining paragraph numbers would need, of course, to be renumbered as appropriate. The rest are some -- just to call some things to your attention. We are having an increasingly difficult time trying to follow conditions of approval when the plat that is in our file does not reflect the actual plat that's approved. The Development Agreement and the actual findings for the plat reference what you see before you. If that is approved with all of these other conditions, we have to dig back into the files and find out what all those conditions were. We would just ask that you consider that on this and future projects that you be able to approve the plat as you see it and as we see it, so that we are not having to reference several document and several different drawings. In the case of this plat, every -- every plate is dated March 15, 2001 -- '02, I believe, but they do have different revision numbers. This one is shown as revised March 27, 2002. However, it can't be -- it is not approved as it is shown. A couple of them are not as major as others. The micropath section was not approved as it is shown on the plat. In that instance the -- they have a seven and a half foot area on either side of the asphalt -- or the concrete pavement for the walkway. How they show that on the plat is showing it sloping down to a fence and then sloping back up into the adjacent property, the building lot. What that would do is force the drainage down into that -- onto the property line and onto the fence and depending on the construction of the fence that will lead to a wet area that could possibly deteriorate the fence. They need to maintain all of that drainage within the lot and they have agreed verbally -- their representative has agreed verbally that that is not a problem. Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation -- well, Planning and Zoning Department's recommendation was that there be a three foot -- minimum three foot wide separation between the asphalt pathway and adjacent building lots. That -- I'm not sure if it's in a location other than this north south one to the park, but we would ask that anyplace they are proposing a five foot wide pathway adjacent to building lots, that it be separated at least three feet. I believe the applicant's representative had indicated that would not be a problem either. The other one I think that the applicant may still have an issue with was moving those phase lines. Apparently, they didn't want to build those at this time and then wanted to be given the freedom to build those when they chose as part of the other phases. I stated the reasons why we requested that previously. At our last meeting we also asked that the existing proposed easement be Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 19 shown on the plat as required by State Code and City Ordinance. They have shown a 50 foot wide easement for the -- well, it's not an easement, they show it in a common lot for the White Drain and as an easement as well. However, they do not show an easement for the Coleman Lateral that traverses north and south to the property and then goes to the east. It would come down, but they are proposing -- this is not the most recent submittal that we got either. We didn't have an eight and a half by eleven bit of this reduced plat, but it would come through -- they are proposing it to come through in a common lot, at least that's what the most recent letter I got from Steve Arnold said. It would be a 12-foot common lot with nine-foot easements on either side that would be in these properties. That would also impact the setbacks for those properties. They would need to graphically depict those setbacks on the plat and the people would not be able to build within nine feet of those property lines. Then they are proposing that the Coleman Lateral be piped immediately adjacent to the sidewalk. Bruce Freckleton had indicated that would cause a problem with city utilities, as the water meters and the fire hydrants would be in that location. In a conversation this afternoon with the applicant's representative he indicated that they could provide that in a 15 foot wide easement, but we have yet to hear from the Settler's Irrigation District that they will accept that. Then it would continue to the south with -- I believe -- is that a common lot, Steve? A common lot to the south? Easement? Okay. It would be an easement -- I believe they showed it centered on two property lines, so 15 feet on each side would be a non-buildable area for those lots. With those changes we don't have a particular problem with this subdivision, but, again, we would ask for your help in trying to get plats as they are approved, that we have those in our file prior to the approval. Thanks. Do you have any questions? Corrie: Council, questions? Bird: I have none. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: How do we -- how do we do that or how is that not being done now, so that we can have -- I mean does the Planning and Zoning Commission need to be more clear that they want a Final Plat before they will pass this forward to approve it or what do you think needs to be done? What's not getting done now? Stiles: Well, in this case we -- the Planning and Zoning Commission had asked for that to be submitted with the easements and different changes prior to going to City Council -- 10 days prior to going to City Council. That was not done and -- I don't know. I mean I hate to hold them up for so long, but if it's -- if they are making recommendations and they aren't necessarily being followed, it makes it real hard for us to go back later. Especially when we have such a volume coming through, that there is a lot of things going through the cracks, frankly. We are missing things. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 20 Nary: But does it need better direction at the Planning and Zoning Commission level that they are not going to move these projects forward without those final maps? Because I know in the past when I was a member of the Commission, we tried not to send things forward without Final Plats in front of -- or without the final drawings in front of us and we would not send them forward with that type of caveat that they just would have to have it at the end. If it was a minor thing, maybe, but if it was a bunch -- because you have got a lot of suggested information that wasn't included, I guess in anticipation it was going to be there. Is that something maybe a discussion with the Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman, they need to rethink on whether or not to do that, because it's not getting done ten days prior to coming here? Stiles: I think it would certainly help, but you know, that puts them off at least two more weeks. Then given the fact they have already been continued and, you know, face the possibility of being continued again, it would certainly help us if the plat that went to the City Council reflected all of their recommendations. There is always going to be the times when the applicant doesn't agree with those recommendations and is wanting to take issue with the Council at the Public Hearing before the Council and, you know, we will always have that. Nary: Sure. Stiles: But they can make note of that. It would be nice if at least the plat that comes before Council is -- does meet the other -- the remaining conditions. Nary: The other question I have, too, Mrs. Stiles, is that we seem to be getting a lot more of these position statements. At least the majority of them that I have seen so far in the last couple of months have been fairly minor types of changes, something that may have been overlooked or may have been discussed, but just got left out of the recommendation. In this particular one there seems to be quite a few changes that are being requested and what I'm not clear in reading the document. I only was able to get it tonight, because I never got it before this evening, is it appears that a lot of these things -- I can't tell if the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed that requested change and didn't -- and chose not to do it or whether or not it was something that was merely an oversight. I don't have the minutes in front of me so I can't tell if it's something that was previously discussed and rejected or previously discussed and overlooked. If it was overlooked, then who overlooked it and how did that get left out of the recommendation that comes from the attorney that's sitting in the meeting at the Planning and Zoning Commission who is supposed to do all of that. Where is this breaking down that you end up with a -- like this one where it says -- you know, it's a five page document of clarifications and changes -- where is the problem here? Stiles: Well, three of those pages are actually Ada County Highway District's comments. Nary: True. I understand that. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 21 Stiles: I mean they could hold it until they get their final Commission letter. Nary: Used to. Stiles: They did. Nary: Yes. Stiles: But because they are holding it up, in some cases for a long time, they have just sent these on. I mean they have routinely sent things on. I don't know if it would help if the Planning and Zoning Commission actually looked at the recommendations before they got sent on to make sure that they were complete. I know that Keith and -- Keith Borup, Bill Nichols and I discussed that, that maybe they need to actually look at those recommendations before they are sent on to Council to make sure that they -- everything has been caught. I know our staff spends a lot of time looking at those recommendations and catches those and sometimes the workload doesn't permit them to get it in a timely manner to you. Nary: So are all these position statements, are these things that are merely oversights that were left out of the recommendation or are they more than that? Are they things that were discussed and it wasn't clear as to what the decision was and, really, the Planning and Zoning Commission should review it and have it back? Stiles: It's probably a little of both. I tried to detail which one of the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendations -- and some of them are just clarifications, because if you don't spell out the actual conditions -- like it's okay to say, you know, you're going to build this, but when. You know, we need to clarify those things, because then it never gets done. Nary: But is that something at the Planning and Zoning Commission that should be brought forward by the staff. Then that should be included at the discussion stage and is that not being done? Stiles: It's not being done, because we don't get the recommendations until right before we go to Council. Nary: No. No. No. No. No. At the Planning and Zoning Commission, if the staff is concerned when that discussion is ongoing about that particular type of action shouldn't the staff at that point be the one saying be sure to put in when the space has to be completed, so that the person preparing the recommendations can include that and they can also include that in the motion for the Commission? I don't know in reading this if their intention was not to have a particular time period at this juncture. If that's their decision, then I guess we need to decide if we are comfortable with that, but I don't know if that's their decision or not. It's unclear to me as to what was Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 22 intended. If that's what you'd like to see, can't the staff bring that to the forefront at the time and say put those types of conditions in there? Stiles: We could, yes. We probably need a little help from Council, too, because once they get into the motion it's -- staff's not involved in the motion. I mean they kind of raise their hands at times when there is a real problem and they need to clarify something. Once it gets to the closing of the Public Hearing and they are deliberating amongst themselves, the motion may not reflect all of the items that were brought up during the discussion. Nary: Now I guess I have never noticed the staff having a problem of interjecting and saying, you know, don't forget to include this or don't forget to include that if you want to do that. Maybe that's just something between the Commission and the staff they need to make clearer. So -- because I do think this takes a lot of your time post commission hearing that probably could be better spent and if they were done at the time you wouldn't have to spend so much time afterwards basically doing it over. Stiles: Right. Nary: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Any other comments? All right. This is a continuance of a Public Hearing. The developer? Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Arnold: Yes, it is. Corrie: Name and address, please, for the record. Arnold: For the record, Steve Arnold, 1800 West Overland Road. I'm with Briggs Engineering and I'm representing Capital Development tonight. I did receive a copy of these -- the position statement by Shari or Mrs. Stiles this afternoon. I didn't get a chance to go through them. We have reviewed it in its entirety and essentially agree with these additions to the Council report. One thing that we'd like to add is onto 17-B -- and I believe this was the direction of the Planning and Zoning Commission -- is that if there was a secondary permanent access into the subdivision that we wouldn't need the fire access as requested by this item, the 10 foot, with the five foot grass creet on either side. It's a minor addition, if that could be added, that if we do have secondary permanent access out through one of those stub streets that we be allowed just to provide a five-foot wide pathway. Other than that, the ACHD comments that I had in our planning -- as I listened to your discussion about ACHD comments, the one that I had in the Preliminary Plat findings dated -- to the City Council March 15th , I believe had the ACHD final report. It's just a cut and paste of what you have here in this position statement. We were in agreement with all those conditions at that time. We are still in agreement. I guess I don't -- I'm not sure I understood the discussion of how Planning and Zoning needs to either hold things up or wait to move on things Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 23 until they get everything. My understanding is they had that report, because I had it and I'm assuming that they had it as well. Going back to the -- back -- basically what this Council had started to act on -- and there was a second made on it, was this Preliminary Plat. At that last hearing, it was suggested by staff that we defer this item until we get all the easements shown on the plat. Since then, myself and my engineer had a met with Settler's Irrigation District. I do have a letter outlining basically what we agreed to. I was hoping to get something -- and I don't know if you got that tonight, but it was -- if I may, I will hand that to you. Basically the letter outlines our meeting with Nathan Draper, he's the manager of Settler's Irrigation District. We met with him to discuss essentially what he needed for easements for both the Coleman Lateral and the White Drain. As you have got before you tonight a modified plat that's dated March 26th , I believe, of this year. It reflects exactly what he was requesting that we provide, of which was a pathway that would go east-west to service the manholes that we would put in at the eastern boundary for the Coleman Lateral. He needed a total of a 30-foot wide easement, so he wanted a 10-foot wide pathway with a gravel surface pathway to access the manhole, along with the 30-foot wide easement. A nine-foot wide easement would encroach on either side of those lots. He allowed us to pipe the irrigation drain south down to Yosemite along the front of the lot lines outside of the ACHD public right of way. He requested that we provide a 10-foot wide easement on those lots, in addition with the piping along that right of way. I talked to Mr. Freckleton this afternoon. Their concerns were that the water meters and this pipe would be conflicting with one another. They are requesting that we put the irrigation pipe -- in this case it would be further to the east of the water meters, so that there isn't that conflict. That we agreed to and they also asked for an additional easement, a 15-foot wide easement, and that we also agreed to. The easement that we were planning to put in it is in the standard easement in the front of the lots, so we will modify this plat to the Public Works request. We will put a 15 foot wide easement along those lots down to Yosemite and then the lots to the south where we tied back in across the White Drain will have a 30 foot wide easement, 15 foot on either side of the lots. If I can rehash, basically at our last meeting it was the direction of the City Council that we bring back to you a plat that shows those easements. We believe that you have that tonight and that you have something that you can act on with the addition of a five-foot wide easement, to total 15 feet along those lots along Hyde Park Avenue. Basically the other items that were mentioned -- the modification of the pathways, it wasn't our understanding that that was what the City Council was asking from us at the last hearing, but it was just the easements. Had I known that we would have shown that, but we are in agreement with staff. We will keep all the drainage on those pathway lots. We will locate the path a minimum of three feet from the property line, so I don't believe that to be an issue. I guess a final comment on Preliminary Plats. From the developer's standpoint, from our standpoint, there is -- we try to work through as much unknowns and get them known, so that we can present to you a design that we feel will meet your ordinances and that you can act on. There are going to be subtle changes from a Preliminary Plat to a final. Unless you put on a light table an exact copy of what the preliminary is and request that that be done, then it kind of bypasses the Preliminary Plat phase, so we are not proposing any Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 24 significant changes from what you have tonight. We'd request that you act on the Preliminary Plat submitted, dated March 26th of this year. I'll stand for any questions. Corrie: Mr. Nary, do you have anything? Nary: I don't. Bird: I don't. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony on the continued hearing? Council, discussion? Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, I apologize, Mr. Arnold, but I did have a question about your requested revision to the Planning and Zoning recommendation 17-B. I want to make sure that I understand what it is that you're asking for. The current recommendation requires that this emergency access be built on Lot 9, Block 7 and you said that you wanted to have that able to be eliminated if there was a secondary access available through a stub street. If I wrote it down correctly, and then you would only have a five-foot wide pathway. I -- if that's what you intended, then I need to know which stub street you're talking about and make sure that it's clear, so that if the Council chooses to act on your recommendation that I get it straight when I do the Findings. Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nichols, basically any stub street that -- the direction of the Planning and Zoning and their concern was that this development have some sort of secondary access into the subdivision for fire purposes. That's why we offered that 10 foot wide -- or asphalt pathway with the five-foot wide grass creet. Any of these stubs, if they eventually connect to another subdivision where it goes out to an arterial, think that that would be sufficient on our request. Stiles: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Shari. Stiles: I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor and Council, I don't believe they expected this one to go away, that this is the Lot 9, Block 7 right here, up on the screen? Arnold: Yes. Stiles: There is nothing that's going to -- there is no kind of secondary access -- I guess I don't get where you're coming from. I don't think that was intended to ever be Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 25 removed. Is it your understanding that they were saying it can be removed at some time? Arnold: Mr. Mayor, Mrs. Stiles, the intent on the Commission was that the back half of our subdivision be provided a secondary access -- secondary emergency access in there. There was at -- and I don't believe that -- you may not have been at those hearings, but their concern was that we may not get a stub street in the near future while we build out these phases. That was a concern, that we'd get this all built, nothing connecting, and that the back half of our subdivision didn't have a secondary emergency access. My thought tonight is if it's -- it's not a great issue. I just thought that it might be something that we can throw out that may not be needed in the future, that if we get some sort of secondary access -- and maybe even clarify to the eastern half, that if we get that secondary full connection prior to us platting and prior to us requiring, that that not be required. If it's going to create headache and heartburn, I don't think that it's a point of contention tonight. I just thought I'd muddy up the water for you. Corrie: Does that answer the questions that anybody has? Yes, Mr. Yorgason. Yorgason: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council. Vaughn Yorgason, 5000 Fifshire Place in Boise, Idaho. Corrie: Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Yorgason: I do. Corrie: Thank you. Yorgason: I appreciate your taking time to listen to our proposal this evening, continuation of -- I believe it was two weeks ago. Often times -- it's our understanding that often times we have a large subdivision and we need a secondary access when it reaches a certain point for emergency purposes. This street where the arrow is pointed was to serve that purpose. At the point in the future that the secondary access to the back half is provided through any of those stub streets, then we would not have a necessity of having this particular access there. We will still have access, pedestrian access and we will still make it a part of our pathway system, but we don't want to have it the roadway system. It wouldn't be a road, it wouldn't be a public road, and there wouldn't be a need for a public road. Any of those other stub streets that come along, any of those -- any of stub streets would provide that emergency access in the manner that we would all like to have, we certainly agree with that, we concur and we would hope that the Council would agree that this emergency access would not be necessary at the time that the permanent access would be granted. I would be glad to answer any other questions you may have. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 26 Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Yorgason, 17-D says that all the emergency access shall be constructed prior to issuance of any Building Permits. That's tells me that that has to get built before you build any houses in there. At the juncture where this other stub street would be usable for a secondary access, couldn't you come back and ask to amend it at that time? Yorgason: Well, our first phase is up here -- it's an L piece around the existing home. We can't build an emergency access clear to the backside of it while it's still farm ground. That wouldn't serve any purpose for anyone. It didn't -- I wasn't aware of that -- Nary: It's prior to phase -- Yorgason: I think it's the back half. I believe it's the back -- before any Building Permits in the back half I believe is what it is. That's what was represented to us. Nary: Well, that's not what it says in the recommendation from Planning and Zoning, so which one am I supposed to look at? The correction tonight? Okay. Yorgason: We kind of have the emergency access road out here in the middle of the park. It doesn't even go by any lots or streets anything. I think that may be a -- Nary: I agree. Yorgason: That may be an error in there. Nary: I see what you're talking about. Okay, sir. Yorgason: But when the second half starts, if we don't have any other stub streets that provide us the emergency access and prior to any Building Permits in that, second half and we concur with that. Thank you. Corrie: Cleared it up for me anyway. Anything else? Arnold: I don't have anything else, unless you were looking for clarification. Corrie: Thank you. Any other questions from Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 27 Nary: Mrs. Stiles, do you know what the Planning and Zoning Commission -- what you're saying was that if -- your intent or your belief was their intent was that that path -- that that emergency access would always be there, regardless of whether or not secondary access was gained through some other means; is that correct? Stiles: That's what my understanding was. Phase 1 is right here. Phase 2 is -- it's hard to follow. Up here. This area. This is Phase 3, which also includes I believe this -- this is Phase 3, which would already have this access here. This isn't even included until Phase 4, which goes to -- I don't -- I guess that would give them another access to Phase 5. They would have this access and then I guess this would be considered another access, but I don't recall reading where they stated that would go away some day. Nary: So the minutes, at least as you have reviewed, don't reflect -- reflect they had a discussion such as this, but what the intent in the minutes would indicate is that that access would remain? Stiles: Unless I misinterpreted what they said I don't know what they meant. I just thought it would remain there. I know they wanted a second access prior to Phase 5, but I didn't know that that would go away. They would leave it as -- they are saying that they will leave it as a pedestrian walkway. Corrie: That's what they said. That it would remain there as a pedestrian walkway. Stiles: But I don't know of that was a requirement coming the Fire Department or -- Kenny doesn't recall what that might have been. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions of Council? Okay. Any other testimony you want to accept from the Public Hearing? If not, I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items Number 10 and 11. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing on PP 01-024, request Preliminary Plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park Subdivision by Capital Development Company. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item PP 01-024. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 28 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing for VAR 01-020, a request for Variance on block lengths for one side of two blocks within the proposed Baldwin Park Subdivision by Capital Development Company. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the Variance Request 01-020. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. Discussion on the request for the Preliminary Plat? Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you better take up the Variance request first before the Preliminary Plat. Corrie: You're right. Okay. Item Number 11 is the Variance request on block lengths, 01-020. Comments? Discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I think all of the position statement and all the discussion has just been on the plat is that correct? It's not -- I think our discussion on the Variance was a couple of weeks ago and it probably was not very clear in our City Code what exactly is a block. We really didn't have a reason not to grant a Variance, but I think we need to -- I know the plate's pretty full at both the Planning and the Planning and Zoning Commission, but I think we need to re-look at our ordinance to make sure that it makes a little more sense. I think as we discussed a couple weeks ago, we probably grant these a lot, because it's not very clear. We probably need to make it a little clearer so that we know what the intent, so when people bring these plats forward it's a little clearer to everybody. I can't see any reason not to grant this Variance, because I don't know what the block is supposed to mean in our ordinance. I think the Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 29 Variance is to make sure it's built the way it's been proposed I think is fine. I don't know if anyone has more discussion, I -- Bird: Is that a motion, Mr. Nary? Nary: I was going to say that I was going to move that we approve the VAR 01-020, the request for a Variance on block lengths within the proposed Baldwin Park Subdivision. As Ms. Stiles suggested, I'm not going to particularize the one side of two blocks, but that they provide the Variance for the block lengths as per the Preliminary Plat as amended for Baldwin Park Subdivision by the Capital Development Company. Bird: One question for before I second it. Which date on the Preliminary Plat? We have only got about 50 of them running around here. Nary: I think the decided the last one was March 27th . That's submitted on the plat for March 27th . Bird: I will second it, then. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request for a variance on block lengths pursuant to plat -- the March 27th plat. Any further discussion? Okay. Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Now Item Number 10 is a request for Preliminary Plat, Plat 01-024. Nary: Mr. Mayor, I guess I'll make the motion and we can probably discuss it a little bit further, because I'm still a little -- or maybe we can discuss it first. I'm a little hazy on this one particular piece that there seems to be a discrepancy between what the Commission appears to be wanting. I don't have their minutes in front of me, and what's being proposed. It does make sense to me is what Mr. Yorgason was saying and Mr. Arnold that once there is an alternative means to have access to the subdivision, that that particular access should be a path and not a road. I don't see any other reason to do it differently, but I think that makes perfect sense. That may have been an oversight or maybe a misunderstanding or something like that or maybe it wasn't clarified. That's been part of what this process is, but I don't see any reason to make them have a pathway -- or make them have a roadway if there is an alternative roadway access to this particular area. I guess I would move that we approval PP 01-024, the request for Preliminary Plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park Subdivision by the Capital Development Company, pursuant to the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 30 Commission. With the additional comments as provided by staff in the position statement document that we received today, dated April 2nd , with those proposed changes to the findings. To also include a change to 17-B, that it would include, I guess, language -- Mr. Nichols does better at preparing this, but language that would allow this emergency access to become part of the pathway system upon a secondary access of a roadway being available for those phases. It appears to be after Phase 4 of this development, that all the rest of the staff comments be included and that our Counsel prepares Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order for this plat. Bird: Second. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Nary, I think their request is that the width of that path go down to five feet, if I heard it correctly, so those lot owners would be able to extend fences or whatever. I need to know if in your motion you intend that that pathway go down to a five-foot wide pathway or whether to just leave it as built as a rather wide pathway. Nary: And I was kind of hoping you would figure out exactly what it was, because I wasn't 100 percent sure either. I think that's -- I think you're right that's -- the intent was to make it a pathway and that it would be a five foot wide pathway, instead of a 15 foot wide pathway. Isn't that -- is that wrong? Stiles: The applicant's representative stated they would leave it as a five-foot pathway within a 30-foot common lot. Nary: Okay. That's fine. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Nary: Thank you for pointing that out, Mr. Nichols. Corrie: Any other comments? Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion for the Preliminary Plat approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 31 Item 12: Public Hearing: AZ 02-001 Request for annexation and zoning of 1.14 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for Marvin and Violet Werth by Marvin & Violet Werth – 2150 South Locust Grove Road: Corrie: Item Number 12 is a Public Hearing. This is a request for annexation and zoning of 1.14 acres from R-1 to an R-4 zone for Marvin and Violet Werth by the same, at 2150 South Locust Grove Road. At this time, I will open the Public Hearing on the request and staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I'm not sure if the applicant is here. This is for a property that -- to which sewer and water was extended and, therefore, they had to enter into an agreement to annex the property into the City of Meridian. It is located just north of Raven Hill Subdivision and we would ask that you approve this annexation and zoning with staff conditions. Thanks. They aren't proposing to do anything with the property at this time. They are just meeting the terms of their agreement and they will just need to comply with whatever ordinances are in effect at the time they redevelop or construct -- add onto the property. Corrie: Okay. Is the applicant here tonight? Okay. Is there anybody from the public who would like to issue testimony? Okay. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we close the Public Hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the annexation request by Marvin and Violet Werth. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the request for annexation and zoning of 1.14 acres from R-1 to R-4 for Marvin and Violet Werth and to ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusion of Law and Decision of Order and to incorporate staff comments into those Findings. McCandless: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 32 Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request annexation and zoning. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those -- roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried for annexation and zoning. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 13: Public Hearing: CUP 01-045 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a 1743 square foot Sandwich Shop with a drive-thru window in an L-O zone for Subway by Blaine & Cynthia Jacobson – Northeast corner of Magic View and South Allen Street: Corrie: Item Number 13 is a Public Hearing, request for a Conditional Use Permit for 1,743 square foot sandwich shop with a drive-thru window in an L-O zone for Subway by Blaine and Cynthia Jacobson, northeast corner of Magic View and South Allen Street. At this time, I will open the Public Hearing and invite staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this was -- this application is for the site that was previously approved for office buildings. It was approved as a -- one two-story office building and another office building with an ancillary restaurant. They are now requesting that a drive-thru Subway Restaurant be considered for this property. Because that use was not permitted in the Development Agreement, they have submitted a modification -- a request for a modification to the Development Agreement. That will not be before the City Council until April 16th . We have received a letter from the applicant's representative asking that we table this to the April 16, 2002, City Council meeting. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we continue the Public Hearing on the sandwich shop, CUP 01-045, until April 16, 2002. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing until April the 16, 2002. Any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 33 De Weerd: Since this is a Public Hearing and we don't know for sure if anyone is out there that would like to speak to this, could we first find out if there no one here to speak on this item? Corrie: Is there anyone from the public that wants to speak at this time? Okay. Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 14: Public Hearing: CUP 02-001 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development for a 54-unit apartment complex for The Foothills Apartments by Sitzlar Real Estate Development – Northeast Corner of North Nola and East Franklin Roads: Corrie: Item Number 14 is a Public Hearing, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development for a 54 unit apartment complex for the Foothills Apartments by Sitzlar Real Estate Development, northeast corner of North Nola and East Franklin Roads. I will open the Public Hearing. Staff comments first on the Conditional Use Permit. Shari? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property at the northeast corner of Franklin Road and Nola Road. The property was annexed and submitted as a Preliminary Plat under the name of Sparrowhawk Subdivision. They are proposing an apartment complex on one portion of the property that is -- this property has not yet been recorded as a plat. The portion that they have detailed, a Planned Development Application for would be the area on the easterly portion of the plat for apartments. This is looking at the property from Nola and Franklin. You may have noticed some activity happening out there. The pond has been removed. They have had to remove a considerable amount of material out there. It was used as an old dumping ground for asphalt, concrete, heaters and who knows what else, so they had to excavate quite a bit of the property and bring in large volumes of fill to take care of that problem. It's located next to an industrial subdivision to the north. There’s an appreciable difference in the elevations of this property and the adjacent industrial property. They are digging out some of that. Also the old Wooden Nickel is a little out parcel here on the southeast corner of the property or adjacent to the southeast corner of the property. You can see just how close it is to the Wooden Nickel here. They are proposing a 52-unit apartment complex. I'm going to have to rely on the applicant's representative to -- as to what might have come up as any problems or issues that came up at the Planning and Zoning Commission. I don't have a position statement. I don't know if any of you have any position statement on any of the recommendations for this project. I think they worked pretty closely together to make sure that they submitted new drawings and would reach an agreement prior to getting to this point, which we very much appreciated. As part of the original Development Agreement and the annexation and the Preliminary Plat, they will be required to construct all the perimeter landscaping prior to any occupancies on the site. This will involve clear down to Nola Road, the 35-foot landscape setback. I would like to hear discussions on what they will be doing with the Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 34 metal buildings and how soon those will be removed as part of this project. There is also an existing house there that would need to be taken out as part of their improvements. It is a good location for high-density development as far as no neighbors are likely to complain. We did receive one letter from the adjacent -- an adjacent industrial user. They want to make sure that their use is not the subject of complaints as they have been there for a very long time and would not like to have their rights to operate at that location infringed upon. They are proposing a clubhouse, a swimming pool, and basketball court -- tennis courts? A swimming pool? Okay. They have added some parking as requested by staff to allow for some additional parking next to the clubhouse area and for visitors. This is their Landscape Plan. They would need to meet the Landscape Plan as approved for the Final Plat. That would also need -- that would be constructed prior to any occupancy on the property. This, as a subdivision, does need to be recorded prior to applying for Building Permits in this area. They have submitted just a concept of the remainder of the property, how it might be developed. We did not have any detailed comments on this area, because we will see additional applications when those properties come in for actual construction and development. The elevations of the buildings. The clubhouse is a one-story structure. They have a two-story apartment building. This is just showing examples of what the commercial elevations might be and the offices. Staff would recommend approval of this project with all staff and agency conditions and meeting all terms of the recorded Development Agreement. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Any questions for staff? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. The representative, please. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Ford: Yes. Corrie: Name and address for the record, please. Ford: For the record Ashley Ford, Hubble Engineering, 701 S. Allen Street, Suite 102 in Meridian. I'm here representing Sitzlar Real Estate Development this evening. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this detailed Conditional Use Application for the Foothills Apartments with a few minor modifications and these changes have been submitted as required by staff. The Commission also recommended approval of the conceptual uses for the remainder of the site, which includes various commercial, retail, and office uses. We have the understanding that we will have come to in with detailed Conditional Use Applications with each building pad and have no objection to that. That was a part of our Development Agreement. We are in complete agreement with the conditions of approval and request your approval this evening. The one question you had regarding the buildings, when they will be removed, that is a part of our Final Plat -- the Final Plat approval that we would Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 35 have to remove those prior to recordation of that. We will comply with all the conditions of the Final Plat and happy to stand for any questions. Corrie: Okay. Ford: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you very much. Clay McReynolds. McReynolds: Clay McReynolds, 8865 Vic Lane, Middleton, and I really have nothing to add. I would be available to answer any questions you might have regarding the apartment development. If you have any questions I'm here, but we are in agreement with the conditions that were agreed at the Planning Commission and we hope that you will approve them. Corrie: Okay. Any questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony? Okay. Council, if there are no further questions, I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we close the Public Hearing. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the request for a Conditional Use Permit, 02-001. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Discussion? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on the request for Conditional Use Permit. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: In light of giving a facelift for the Wooden Nickel, I would move to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit for the Planned Unit Development for a 54 unit Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 36 apartment complex for the Foothills Apartments to include all staff comments and ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved for the Conditional Use Permit. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 15: Public Hearing: AZ 02-002 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.81 acres from RUT to R-40 zones for proposed Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development, LLC – east of North Locust Grove Road and south of East Wilson Lane: Item 16: Public Hearing: PP 02-001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 22 building lots and 2 other lots on 5.81 acres for proposed Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development, LLC -- east of North Locust Grove Road and south of East Wilson Lane: Item 17: Public Hearing: CUP 02-002 Request for Conditional Use Permit for 22 4-plex units in a proposed R-40 zone for Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development, LLC -- east of North Locust Grove Road and south of East Wilson Lane: Corrie: Items Number 15, 16, and 17 are all Public Hearings on the Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development, LLC, east of North Locust Grove and south of East Wilson Lane. At this time, I will open the Public Hearing on all three, the request for annexation, Preliminary Plat and the Conditional Use Permit. We will hear testimony on all three if you wish and it will all be entered into the record. First, we will have the staff comments first. Mrs. Stiles. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property that's located south of the Econo-Lube Subdivision. It's kitty-corner from D&B Supply. This, the Barger Mile property was previously approved as the Fountain Park Apartments. I'm not sure if that annexation has been finalized, but it also was zoned R-40. This is the new manufacturing facility for Butte Fence and Air Industries that manufactures the inflatable kayaks and canoes, is located immediately to the east here. The Jackson Drain runs immediately adjacent to the property on the southern boundary. There will be a pathway constructed along the property in accordance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and the Meridian Parks Department requirements. This is the Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 37 property, as it currently exists. This is north of the property. They are proposing to subdivide the property into lots. The Preliminary Plat would include all these lots off of a common driveway and they are planning this in order that they may sell these lots individually to people interested in developing four-plexes. They will have a requirement to complete all of the improvements within the -- within the subdivision prior to occupancies on any of the buildings. Staff had originally made a comment about trying to incorporate this open space in maybe a more visible location. However, the Planning and Zoning Commission did take out that request as part of their recommendations to the City Council. We were concerned that there might be a tendency to have kind of a mish-mash of building types within the subdivision, but the applicant has committed to certain building types that they will be required to conform with as they build on the individual lots, so that it appears as a planned community and not as individual lots with widely ranging construction materials and designs. The pathway would be continued along the drain and would be constructed by the applicant. They would be complying with the conditions of the Meridian Parks Department. The elevations of the building that they proposing. They are proposing different types of buildings, three different types of elevations that would be required to be built within the subdivision. As long as they met or exceeded the requirements of these three buildings, they would be allowed to proceed with the Building Permit. Staff would recommend approval of this development with all staff and agency conditions. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Questions for staff? Okay. Is the representative of Cooper Canyon Subdivision here? Please. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Semple: Yes. Corrie: Name and address, please. Semple: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, my name is Barry Semple. I'm with Toothman-Orton Engineering Company, 9777 Chinden Boulevard in Garden City. We have been working with the staff on this project and I have -- we have reviewed the item packets for all three of the cases before you this evening. We agree with the staff recommendations and recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. I believe that the staff issued a brief position paper dated yesterday that clarified a few of the items that were included in the -- I believe the Preliminary Plat packet and the Conditional Use Permit packet. None of them substantial or have much of an impact, they are just more clarifications and a few of the items were -- the Planning and Zoning Commission required, as an example, submittal of a revised Landscape Plan at least 10 days prior to the next hearing. We complied with that and that wasn't necessarily reflected in the packet, so the staff issued a position paper stating that that and one or two other conditions had been complied with. I don't have any other testimony, although I am happy to answer any questions that you may have. Corrie: Okay. Questions? Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 38 Bird: I have none. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess am a little curious on this position statement from Mr. McKinnon and I don't know whether you can answer that or Mrs. Stiles, but what originally is recommended -- or what is the recommendation, it says the Commission is concerned because of the location of the open space. The fact there is no other additional playground, there is no common access and there isn't a whole lot to it and his statement simply just says they are proposing ten percent open space and a pathway. So why so little specificity? I mean I heard you say, Mrs. Stiles, and maybe I misheard it, but I heard you say they discussed it and we are okay with changing it. I guess I'm just concerned as to why there is such a tremendous change from the detail that was included originally to what's being proposed that we have now. Semple: I would be happy to comment on that. Nary: Sure. Corrie: Sure. Semple: Mr. Mayor and Council Members, there was -- the original staff recommendation relating to that open space area was -- did have some concern, not only about the location of the open space, but also the size of it and whether or not there was actually 10 percent open space to -- as required by the ordinance. I gave testimony at that hearing with regard to the more detailed calculations. You will have to bear with me here, I'm trying to find the right -- here we go. It's in the -- Item 4 of the recommendations contained in the Conditional Use Permit packet. I guess I will -- I guess I will address them kind of in reverse order that -- the indented paragraph expressed some concern about whether there was, indeed, adequate open space and that -- requested that the applicant shall provide a corrected calculation for the open space that includes the common areas. I did make testimony that evening and with detailed areas, the total size of the project, the area of the lots themselves, the area of the parking lot area, and the area of the required buffers. The end result was a net of open space of one acre on an approximately six acre total site. I believe the number one was approximately 17 percent open space that was -- and so that's why I had requested. There wasn't any discussion in this packet about that testimony that I gave and that's why that portion of that item is stricken through by staff. Mr. McKinnon was the staff representative at that hearing that night, that's why he agreed to indicate that in the position paper. With regard to the first paragraph, at the Planning Commission there was discussion about accessibility to the -- to that common area. There are now -- we have provided two open space links to that common area. Right. There is one and the other is at the other end of it, which provided the accessibility. There was an issue about -- if that open space had been flip-flopped with the three buildings Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 39 immediately to the east of it. The Fire Department had concern about access to the buildings, because of the large open space in between the buildings and the parking area and so the Planning and Zoning Commission I guess did not take into consideration that recommendation to flip-flop it around, because of public safety issues. Then based on that, plus providing the two common area accesses to the open space, the Planning Commission was agreeable to that -- to that configuration. Nary: This is just a big patch of grass? Semple: Well, the other thing that they talked about was that there is a requirement to provide two amenities. One of the amenities that's proposed is the pathway along the Jackson Drain and the second one, by ordinance, the 10 percent open space qualified. They -- the Planning Commission did not feel that the applicant had an obligation to provide additional amenities, because they had satisfied the requirement of the ordinance to provide two and there were two qualifying amenities. Basically what they said was that if the applicant wants to put a playground -- you know, a tot lot or something in, that's their prerogative, but because the applicant had satisfied the two amenity requirements without a playground or some other facility, that they were not going to require it. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mrs. Stiles, I just can't remember and I don't have a Landscape Ordinance with me, but is the 10 percent requirement -- isn't 10 percent the requirement of open space they are supposed to have? Stiles: Yes. Nary: But that can also be included as an amenity, even though it's a requirement anyway? Stiles: The 10 percent can be -- can be the amenity. Nary: Even though it's required by the ordinance anyway? Stiles: In a Planned Development they can go down to five percent. The subdivision ordinance requires five percent, but if they provide the 10 percent, that can be included as one of the two amenities they are required to have. Nary: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 40 De Weerd: I guess to take this conversation a little bit further, is this open space all designed as a storm water retention area? Semple: Yes. It's one of the facilities that will be provided. You can -- there are proposed to be four areas to provide for storm water management on the site, but they don't show up terribly well on this picture. You can see they are lightly shaded. There is a rectangle on that open space we have been talking about. In the front there is two small rectangular areas right there and then in the rear there is a small area right there. It's one of four areas. De Weerd: So is the applicant considering doing something a little bit more than just the grass? Semple: I think the revised Landscape Plan that was submitted does show some additional landscaping on there and -- De Weerd: Well, I know, I noticed three trees in there, but I mean to make that amenity actually an amenity, other than just grass and a storm water retention area, will there be something in addition to that? Semple: I think that's probably up to the applicant at this point. De Weerd: And that's why I'm asking. Semple: There is no immediate plan to do anything in addition to it. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I note that there is 54 units are that correct? Semple: There are 22 lots and they are four-plex units, so there is a total of 88 units. Nary: Eighty-eight units and how big are these units? One bedroom? Two bedroom? Semple: He said that they vary. Two bedroom, two bath. Nary: So these are essentially 88 units that are for small families or single people, elderly people? Semple: Yes. I think that's probably the target. Nary: A couple, 300 people might be living in there with children and such and all you have is a big patch of grass that's a storm water pond that's the biggest one Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 41 on the site. You don't have any plans for anything else? It doesn't seem like very usable open space and I think that was the intent of the amenities. Usable open space. It's usable, but it's not much of an amenity if it's just a big patch of grass that's swampy part of the year. Semple: Well, not necessarily. The storm water management is -- can come in a lot of different forms. We are investigating right now various options for that, one of which you may not see any facility there, because it's underground, in which case it potentially could be a level lawn area is one option. It could be a mild depression as another option. Any option that is employed there, there are requirement that any accumulated storm water has to drain within a rather short period of time and so I doubt that it's going to be anything that's going to be swampy. Nary: How big is it? Semple: We are in the process of designing it right now, but again -- Nary: How big is it there on the plat? Semple: Boy, you know, I can't give you an exact answer. Nary: It appears to be as big as at least -- I know that may not be exactly the scale, but it looks about as big as four lots. Is that -- Semple: That shaded area was -- is for the purposes of -- Nary: I mean the entire piece. Not just the shaded part, but the entire -- isn't the entire piece the amenity? Semple: Yes. Nary: Okay. At least on the map -- on the plat that's presented it appears to be about as big as four lots. Is that approximately how big it is? Semple: Yes. It looks like it could be three or four lots -- the size of three or four. The lots are -- I think the lots are average about 5,000 square feet, so that area is about 15,000 square feet. Bird: A third of it. Semple: Pardon me? Bird: About a third of an acre. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 42 Bird: Sir, you say that you plan on -- it's going to be for elderly -- the development is going to be -- it's going to be open to everybody? Semple: Right. That's my understanding. Yes. Bird: Is there -- I mean I kind of have to agree with Councilwoman de Weerd, it's a third of an acre, but you know, just green grass. You're going to have a lot of kids in there. I can see that development having a few children. I would hope you could have some -- you know, even a basketball court would give it -- or a tennis court or -- on asphalt or a little playground equipment. I would certainly think would be an addition to the Planned Development Unit, so -- Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Yes. I think I concur with Mr. Bird that -- I mean I don't see this as really very adequate open space or an adequate amenity if it's just a big patch of grass. I think it's nice to have that and if this is what this development is, it's going to need some of that. Just to have blank open space is not really going to be very much of an amenity at all. I do think that there is going to have -- and I guess you can go back and talk to the property owner, but I mean I think you're going to have to commit to doing something more than that, just the grass, and the drainage. Unless you want us to tell you what we want you to put there -- I mean you can tell us what you want, but I don't know that you want us to tell you what to put there. Semple: It looks like the applicant wants to come up and address it. Corrie: Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Findlay: Yes, it is. Corrie: Name and address, please. Findlay: Chris Findlay, 145 Horizon Drive, Boise, Idaho 83702. Well, we thought we were just complying with the open space and the ordinances that you guys have written. That's why we have what we have there and that we actually have 17 percent open space, not 10 percent open space, and -- and that Commissioner Borup thought that with the added of the pathway on the Jackson Drainage area and everything was also the other part of the major amenity. They were fine with it and so we are just complying with what you guys have said we should comply with and now you're saying we need to add more, but then that's not what the rules are, that's not what the ordinance says. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 43 Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I think the ordinance says that we have to decide if it's an appropriate amenity. That's what the ordinance says. We do get to decide what's appropriate or not and I guess what I'm saying is it's not. Just having the open space is nice, but what you're wanting to build there and what you're providing as an amenity for it, the pathway is a very good amenity. The blank open space isn't a good amenity. This is an apartment complex that is going to have families with children and you have nothing for these people to do -- to use there, except blank ground. It isn't outside of the rule, that’s what the rules are. We decide whether or not it's adequate and what I'm saying at least for me it's not. It isn't anybody changing the rules, the Commission makes a decision, we review it, and we make a decision. Findlay: Okay. Nary: Are you willing to do anything more than what you have proposed right now? Findlay: Yes. We can look at it. I mean I don't know what you guys want us to put in. I mean -- I mean that's what we are trying to decide what we want to do, but -- Nary: Would you prefer we continue it, so that you have an opportunity to -- Findlay: No. Nary: -- meet with staff and see what was proposed or would you rather we reject it and start over? Findlay: We probably would put like a basketball court is probably what we'd like to do. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Findlay, you have complied with the ordinance and that ordinance was -- the open space is basically I guess designed for subdivisions where you have houses -- single-family houses with yards, playground equipment in some yards and stuff. We are jamming into an apartment complex or four-plexes, whatever you're going to call it, and you're going to have children in there. To me it looks like the only thing they are going to have to play on would be that open space there or the asphalt in the parking lot. Because, you know, a four-plex and those small of lots you're not going to have a lot of yard. I'm like Mr. Nary, I mean, you know, I think that -- that we -- anything that you would provide beyond the open space -- and I -- you know, I applaud that you have the 17 percent that you're not required, but -- with the pathway down and like that. I would think that to make it marketable and attractive for you, that if you Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 44 do put in some amenities like a basketball court or -- you know, it doesn’t take much, a nice swing set or something like that for younger kids, a little slide, I think it would be very, very helpful from both your aspect and our aspect. Findlay: So do we have to state what we are going to have to put in tonight? Bird: For me? No, not for me. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Mr. Findlay, I guess I would like to take it a little further. As you saw of the application before this, the amenities went to serve the community, which was their apartment complex. These are small little communities and that's how we kind of view them. When the Landscape Ordinance was written it does encourage drainage in your open space, but saying that drainage fills as an amenity without something additional to it to me is not really the intent of what that ordinance states. You know, during this process with the annexation and the CUP that we have a little bit of flexibility to try to make this, indeed, something that is going to service the community that you're trying to build and make it an amenity to our community as well. What -- we are really not trying to make a hard time for you, but we also have to make sure that what is built in our communities is, indeed, going to be an asset to the City of Meridian. Its citizens and the citizens that you're going to house and so we are not trying to be difficult, but we do know in apartments that those kind of amenities are a must and they are a must to support the people that you place in those apartments. I guess an additional concern of my mine is that they are behind those apartments. You know, I understand the Fire Department's need to have accessibility to those buildings, but -- and as we start discussing that kids will be back there. They are also going to be hidden and I don't know if our Chief of Police has any opinion that he would like to share on those kinds of issues, but I do know that to be responsible I think we need to talk about hiding an amenity. Findlay: Well, we don't -- what we perceive, though, is that this is all access and you have cars and everything, too, if you flop those things and have all the stuff out in front, too, then you also have the ability with the buildings around them it gives a little more protection. That kind of situation we felt was better for, you know, kids playing in a little safer area than where there is traffic and cars coming in and doing things like that, too. De Weerd: Did you talk about instead of flipping it, putting the apartments on the other side and having kind of a bulge out with the street? Findlay: Well, we tried to do some just even changing the roads and -- just for traffic flow and that kind of stuff, just for that -- for that situation. We thought we had a better buffer zone than looking out over Airs. We tried to minimize the number Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 45 of houses on -- against the commercial section of it. Yes, we thought about that and we thought we had a better product with what we have here and with the protection of the buildings around for the kids and stuff. I don't have a problem putting -- if we need to put another amenity in or something like that, I don't have a problem with doing that. If we are going to start changing the plat and that kind of stuff, then I have a problem with that, because I think we have a good design. It buffers us between a commercial situation with Butte Fence and Airs and we didn't want those -- we are trying not -- to minimize units overlooking all that stuff, too. I mean this way they are looking over the open and that kind of stuff. De Weerd: Well, I mean the straight shot of the road -- Findlay: Yes so we wouldn't have a straight shot of road. That's why we put it in this sort of path. It slows traffic it does things like that, too. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Just so you understand, Mr. Findlay, what we are looking at, as Council Member de Weerd said, this is a small community and we don't have recreational opportunities for these people to use. They are going to have to get in their car and drive somewhere else to do it and there is nowhere for them to walk very near to this location at this time. They’re right behind D&B Supply, they are in an industrial area, so if all you have is a big patch of grass, there is nothing else for the people to do. They are going to have to drive in their cars to go somewhere else to go do something and what we are trying to do is provide something so we don't have to have more traffic on the roadway just for people to get out and do some recreational things. You have enough space in that approximately 15,000 square feet to do something small, whether it is a small tot lot type of amenity or whether it's a basketball court or something else. You have the ability to put something there, still have a lot of open space, but yet provide them some opportunity so they don't have to drive somewhere else to do everything and that's what we are trying to accomplish here. Findlay: And what I'm telling you is we are willing to do another amenity and get on with what we need to do, too. Corrie: Mr. Findlay, the way I'm looking at this, Council is probably in agreement that you need to do something. I think what -- if what it comes down to a vote for me, I want to see what you're going to do. You tell me you're going to do something and then try to make it up then, what can you do in that 1,500 square feet that would be there? Findlay: Sure. Just a second here. My partner wants to talk, too. Corrie: That's fine. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 46 Callister: Yes. Corrie: Name and address, please. Callister: David Callister, 7011 Holiday Drive in Boise. Thank you for letting me address you, too. We concur with your concerns. We weren't aware of these concerns prior, because we tried to address all the concerns that had been brought to us. You make an excellent point. One thing that I want to bring up and I think it is important is we not only have this area here -- and it is -- while there is going to be a holding pond in that area, a substantial part -- as a matter of fact, the major part of that area is not going to be a holding pond, it's a park. That area is going to be designed and set aside just for a park, even though we can use a holding pond as part of it like we are required to. As far as a patch of grass goes, one of the things we need to be aware of is people use things in different ways. That patch of grass may be dreary to some, but it may be the football field or the baseball field, the kids are throwing their balls -- it may be grass, but for some people it's very viable and, frankly, preferred. That's important. Now we are not only using this area, we have some additional areas in the front and we also have, along with our pathway in the back, some additional areas there that people can utilize and that the pathway gives us access elsewhere. We would like to commit tonight to a sport court. We can put a sport court, which is a hard surface court, there, so now the children can also -- or whoever can also have, in addition to the playing area, which I think is important for them to have. I don't want a hard surface a huge portion of that, but there might be -- and as I look at this as you guys are bringing it up to us, it dawns on us that it would make sense to have additional hard surface areas for tricycles, bicycles, skateboards. There are other kinds of uses that people can use, playing with balls that would be very viable. We would be happy to put a sport court in addition to the grassy area in there and so hopefully what we would be providing is an enclave atmosphere that exceeded the landscaping percentage that had hopefully a park grass opportunity -- open grass opportunity and a sport court and a pathway. Hopefully that not only would comply, but hopefully would be something that would be appropriate and pleasing to the Council and the City. Corrie: See, what you're saying there is you have kids in there. If they don't have someplace to go, they are going to go someplace and if there is not anything there, they are going to start doing things that they shouldn't. I think you're realizing that now and it's an opportunity that you can give you a better selling point for people and, you're right, grass is important. Not everybody wants an asphalt basketball court. I think what you're saying satisfies what I'm asking for. Callister: Well, Mayor and Members of the Council, you have certainly brought up a legitimate point and it's a point that we hadn't considered, because we were -- frankly, because of all the details we had. Complying is one of the things we focus on. Now after compliance sometimes it's easy for us to glaze over and oversee -- you know, see other things. That would be a good addition, not only to comply, but to be a good addition for the entire subdivision and, again, hopefully we create a situation where we Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 47 can meet additional people's needs to recreate on site and hopefully that would be suitable for the needs there. Corrie: It does for me. Bird: It does for me, too. Callister: If there are any other questions I would be happy to answer them. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: What is the distance between your buildings? You know -- Callister: Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman, we don't know, because we have submitted four different sites -- four different plans for buildings and they are different sizes. There is minimum setback of five feet, so it would be 10 feet. If you use a full footprint, which is unlikely, but if you could possible use a full footprint, this would allow a 10-foot -- five-foot setback with 10 foot between buildings. It just depends on which building size. We also want some one-bedroom units on there and those would be smaller buildings on there. It depends on what buildings are put on each lot. De Weerd: All right. Are you going to be fencing in this development? Callister: Mayor and Councilwoman, no, there is no interior fencing. De Weerd: Okay. So you would be able to view -- as you're driving through the parking lot you would be able to get a view there between the buildings into the open space to have some sort of vision in there? Callister: There would be -- yes. You certainly would be able to see through far better than what you see there, because you see maximum footprint block outs there. I can't envision a situation where the maximum footprint would used. Yes, that would be more permeable visually than it looks like there and there is some value to having an enclave in an environment like this where you feel a little bit more secure in having your children present versus having it where it's so accessible to the public that you don't know how far away you want your children. There is some value to that in a community and hopefully this enjoys some of that value. De Weerd: I don't know if you would really qualify that as accessible to the public, but -- Callister: Well, I apologize, I didn't mean to say that. What I meant was the inaccessibility of the public outside of the community has some value to the community, because there are folks here -- you know, if you have children, there are times you want them to play in an environment that -- see, this will have a fence on one side. You will Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 48 have private property around it, except for reasonable accesses -- you can be able to view or secure those accesses from a parent's point of view and feel reasonably secure that strangers aren't at least driving by and having access to your children if they are playing outside. There is some value to that, too, for a community. De Weerd: And you're referring to the fence, then, on the property line? Callister: I am. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Callister: Again, if there are any questions for me and also our -- obviously, our engineer is here, so if there are any technical questions you can ask him. Corrie: Any other questions on -- thank you. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes. Bird: Shari had a question. Corrie: Shari. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I would just ask that if you approve this tonight that you define what a sport court is, whether that's a slab of asphalt or what it might be, if you're looking towards approving this. I also had one question about what kind of sinking fund you're going to establish to maintain this parking area. If all the lots are to be sold off individually, how do they propose maintaining that parking area and whether they are going to have a lot of owners, a subdivision association, to have dues collected so that they can maintain those areas? So we have central location to go to instead of everybody passing the buck and saying, well, it's not our job. We will have a separate contact person and do you have that fund -- will you have that established at the outset. Corrie: I think we have the -- do you want to answer -- Semple: Mr. Mayor, Council Members, there will be a Homeowners Association established for this project. Corrie: Okay. What is a sports court? Callister: Mr. Mayor, generally a sports court is a hard surface playing area. We envision a concrete playing area and -- maybe we don't envision a concrete playing area. A hard surface playing area -- a hard surface playing area would be a playing area suitable for bouncing basketballs, skateboards, trikes, bikes and those kinds of things. About -- usually a sport court is about half of a legitimate basketball court Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 49 of size, so there are multiple uses and it is some sort of a hard surface, which is an asphalt or a concrete surface. Corrie: I'll ask our local sports expert what do you envision that as? Bird: A sports court? Corrie: Yes. Bird: I think what they view as a sports court is about right. They make -- they are approximately about half the size of a full basketball -- you can have basketball on it, you can play volleyball on it, you can skateboard -- if they have got enough room, you can run a little more area. It would be nice, but that's basically, what it is. You have got basketball and you have got volleyball, you can skateboard, you can tricycle. I don't know about concrete, but -- I suppose concrete would probably be as good as asphalt. There is other things they use on tennis courts that there is -- I seen on sports courts and, you know, I don't know -- it's kind of a mixture of -- it's concrete with something on it. I don't know what it is but it's very durable and lasts. Asphalt you will repair quite a bit. Concrete gets slick, you know, collects moisture, it's slick and that isn't good, so -- but I think that's basically what I would call a sports court. I think he's about right. Corrie: Give you some ideas there. Shari, anything else? Does that answer your question or do you want it more specific? Stiles: I guess I would like it more specific. Are you providing basketball standards? Are you going to make any requirements as to what that material is or -- if you don't get into detail it's going to be very difficult for the staff to determine what's acceptable and what's not. We might be tougher than you guys, though. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Bird, this sounds like just a hard surface, so wouldn't they have to put in a basketball hoop or -- Bird: Oh, yes. You put in a basketball hoop and stuff. Yes. It's basically what we have done in our Parks Department, only we have went and done a complete basketball court with hoops at both ends. Now we went to -- now at Chateau to what -- and I can't remember what they call it, names for us old folks, we can't remember. We have a basketball hoop, but they have got -- it's kind of semi-circular and they have got two or three hoops set up on this same thing. There is a lot of things you could do and it's just a nice hard surface where you have a basketball court or you can play volleyball or badminton or you come on -- the kids can come ride their trikes, bikes, or roller blade or -- Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 50 Nary: So would it be your thought, Mr. Bird, to help the staff in determining when they come back with a revised site plan to show the exact location. That it be -- that what they have to be compare it to or what the developer has to compare it to, the designs of other parks in our community, something like that? Would that be adequate, do you think? Bird: Yes. I think that -- Nary: I think if we just have a hard surface -- Bird: Oh, no, you got to get the size. I think you have got to get the size. They are saying that's approximately 15,000 square feet? A regulation court, basketball court, is 94 by -- well, 53? No. I mean what's a standard -- 94 by 53 -- De Weerd: Just say regulation. Bird: Yes. That's taking up a lot of square footage out of their 15,000 square footage. I would say at least a half of a regulation basketball court. Half line in. That would be a pretty good size. I'd like to see about a third of it, 5,000 square feet but another question I think we've got that we need to know that the drainages are -- or how much has that got to be drained to keep the drainage. That's going to dictate a lot of the size to put down as far as -- De Weerd: Because we -- in Bear Creek we do have that basketball -- whatever the term -- basketball court in the drainage. Bird: That's right. We do -- De Weerd: So I think they will be okay wherever they put it. Semple: Yes. I'm just approaching here to see if there was anything I could add to it. Councilman Bird, you had suggested 5,000 square feet of hard surface. That's approximately -- Bird: About a third of that. Semple: But that would – Nary: I say that would be nice. That would be -- Semple: If the dimensions of the basketball court are -- and I don't know exactly what they are, but if they are about 94 by 50, that's full court. If we were to go to a half court that would be about 2,500 -- Bird: I said 5,000 was wishful thinking. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 51 Semple: Okay. Is a half of a court acceptable because that's approximately -- that would be approximately 25 -- Bird: Well, a full court is -- Semple: Well, the only problem is -- that I can foresee is in that -- as I said before, that we are in this process of evaluating several different options for this drainage facility. The only -- if a portion of storage is a shallow, sloping ponded area, taking up a full third of that area might inhibit the ability to employ that option. We are more than happy to do half a court, if that's acceptable. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: You see why I asked if you wanted to design it and come back to show us versus us designing it for you here. You can see why that's a problem. That's why I asked that before. Would that be -- I mean I think you understand what we would like to see. We want to see something more than just grass. I understand your concerns about drainage and trying to make sure that the open space is going to work with what you would like to do and have adequate drainage and all of that. Wouldn't it make more sense for you to take that back and come back in two weeks and show us what you'd like to do with at least a preliminary revised site plan, you would have your drainage question answered as well? De Weerd: That would be my preference. Semple: If I might, I don't mean to diminish the issue, because I do know that it's important. I think we have got a project here that I think is what the city wants and complies with all of the requirements of the city, not withstanding the issue of this court. We'd like to move forward with the process and would it not be an acceptable situation to make the approval of this additional amenity a condition that needs to be satisfied prior to submittal of a Final Plat? Nary: Well, the problem, though, is if we don't answer the question completely at this juncture, we are likely to leave it in the hands of the staff to decide if it's adequate. That puts the burden on you to satisfy them. What Mrs. Stiles is asking, which is very reasonable, is they want some guidance as to what it is. We can give them some guidance, but then you're maybe hassling over it longer than two weeks then if you go back with some idea of what we'd like to see. Come back here in two weeks, we all understand what the rules are and what it's kind of going to look like and the staff has a road map to follow, you have already committed to what you'd like it to be. Everybody is happy and you get it built. If we leave it to the staff, you may be back here again saying we can't agree as to what it is. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 52 Semple: Isn't it the desire of the Council -- it sounds like that if we provided a half of a basketball court with a basketball standard and it's a hard surface, isn't that really the -- it sounds like that's the desire and -- Nary: Where is it going to go? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Okay. Bird: Let me ask -- throw out a question, Mr. Nary. Why couldn't we enact upon this and have the attorney draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. They will come back for passage and before they come back for us and we pass -- we accept them. We -- I would like to see -- I'm with you guys, I would like to see a scale drawing -- scale that, you know, shows exactly where everything is going to sit. At that point you either -- the Council would take a look at it and say, yeah, that's fine -- De Weerd: Then you're entering new -- Bird: No, you're not entering new -- you're going along with the process, but you can turn it down at that point. Nary: We could -- I guess to follow up -- and I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. I guess to follow up on that, Mr. Bird, what we could do is I guess we could -- if we are all in agreement with that, again, they are taking their chances. If we are going to say it's going to be pursuant to the site plan they provide and we are going to look at it and then if we don't like it, then we are going to set it over. You know, I agree that would at least save a little bit of time if we agreed to do that and -- but you're going to have to get it to where everyone would like it and we may -- again, it may not -- it may not save you anytime at all, but we can certainly try that. Semple: And I think that with the direction that we have gotten from the Council, it sounds like -- I think, if I may. It sounds as though if we provide an area -- a hard surface area that's approximately half the size of a basketball court and there is a basketball standard associated with it, then the only thing is really the detail of what the material is and where it's located. I think -- I think as far as the location, it will be -- and I completely concur with coming back with a scale drawing and that kind of thing. I think the location is going to be in that 15,000 square foot area. That's the general location of it and I think as long as it's reasonably accessible, which it will be, to the homeowners in the subdivision, you know, I -- I guess I feel confident that we can work within that suggestion that Councilman Bird made. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 53 Bird: You know, like Mr. Nary said, you're taking a chance and I don't see any -- I really don't see any problem with it. I think it needs to come back with something within that -- and we understand it's within that location. We need something -- a hard court between 2,500 and 3,000 square feet and have it scaled out so we can actually see and -- you guys got to market this. We don't have to market it. None of our money is in it. It's to your benefit to do a good job, so -- I have no problems passing on this, on the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and then with the requirement that before they are passed that we will see a scale drafting of the amenity. Corrie: If you want to take that chance. I mean -- Bird: They would be taking a chance. Corrie: It's up to you. I mean -- Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, since I have to prepare the Findings, I want to make sure that I understand what it is that you're asking me to do. Would you be asking that there would be an additional condition that they submit a drawing, scale drawing of this sport court and its location within that open space? Are you saying that that's what they have to do -- I mean that's a requirement that they submit -- that they provide a sport court with a basketball standard approximately 2,500 to 3,000 square feet to be located in the 15,000 square foot open space and they provide those drawings before you will approve? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Nichols, what I was going to suggest is that we -- taking basically Mr. McKinnon's position statement that we amend Item 4 of his recommendation from Planning and Zoning Commission to read somewhat that it would say: Two amenities are required as part of the Planned Development. The applicant is proposing in excess of 10 percent of open space and the pathways are two amenities. Additionally, the applicant will also provide a sport court of approximately 2,500 to 3,000 square feet within the 15,000 -- approximately 15,000-foot common area open space. The applicant will provide a revised site plan to be submitted with the findings, indicating the location of the sport court, as well as the material it's to be constructed. This sport court will be approximately half the size of a regulation basketball court, will contain at least one basketball standard or other play equipment that may be acceptable to the staff -- I guess that's about it. I was thinking to simply amend the Item 4 that was already suggested and that would include the revised site plan would be a part of that finding. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 54 Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, that's fine with me to do it that way and you, have got down in the minutes so we can refer to it, if that's your pleasure. I would just ask that you make it a condition of the annexation and zoning, as well as the Preliminary Plat, if you choose to do that. Nary: Or to and -- De Weerd: A basketball standard and -- Nary: Oh. A basketball standard and other play equipment? De Weerd: Or additional. The basketball standard should be -- Nary: Right. De Weerd: -- a given. Corrie: Any comments? Semple: That's acceptable to us. Corrie: Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to issue testimony to that? Okay. Hearing none -- De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we close the Public Hearing on Items 15, 16, and 17. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Items 15, 16 and 17, which is the request for annexation and zoning, Preliminary Plat, and Conditional Use Permit for Cooper Canyon Subdivision. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: I think we have pretty well discussed it. Any staff comments about what's been said? Okay. More discussion? Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 55 Bird: I have none. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Do you have all -- because I wrote down some if it. Were you able to get all of that -- Stiles: Will they be coming back to you with anything at all? Nary: Yes. Stiles: Okay. Nary: As part of what the conditions will be is that they will have to provide a revised site plan, including -- to scale to include all of the things that we discussed as to the nature of the court, as to what it's going to be. They will provide what materials it's going to be, that it has to have a basketball standard and any other additional equipment that they want to have included with that. That would be for the staff's approval. Yes, they have to have it before we approve the Findings. Stiles: Okay. Corrie: That will be on April the 16th , correct, Mr. Attorney? Yes. All right. Okay. I guess -- hearing any more discussion? Okay. I'll entertain a motion on the annexation and zoning. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move the approval of AZ 02-002, request for annexation and zoning of 5.81 acres from RUT to R-40 zone for the proposed Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development, LLC, to include all staff and Planning and Zoning comments and also to include -- I think it's Council's suggestion that -- as we discussed ad nauseam here. The conditions regarding the amenities and that it be somewhat as I stated previously -- I couldn't probably repeat it again, but that two amenities required as part of the Planned Development, the applicant is proposing in excess of 10 percent open space and the pathways are two amenities. Additionally, the applicant will provide a sport court of approximately 2,500 to 3,000 square feet within the common area open space as shown on the site plan. The applicant will provide a revised scale site plan showing the location of the sport court, including the material that it will be constructed of. That it will be approximately half the size of a regulation basketball court with at least one basketball standard and other play equipment that's acceptable to the staff and all of that will be provided prior to the approval. Does that sound about right? Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 56 Bird: That sounds agreeable. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. There has been a motion and second on the motion. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: The Preliminary Plat. Request for Preliminary Plat. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move approval of PP 02-001, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 22 building lots and 2 other lots on 5.81 acres for the proposed Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development, to include all staff comments and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, including all comments and discussion this evening as well regarding the plat. That they will provide a -- I guess a revised site plan as part of this plat as well, and for our Counsel to prepare all Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved on Preliminary Plat. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Now we have the request for a Conditional Use Permit. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 57 Nary: I move the approval of CUP 02-002, request for a Conditional Use Permit for 22 four-plex units in a proposed R-40 zone for Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development. To include all staff comments as well as the position statement by Mr. McKinnon, the Planning and Zoning recommendations, as well as the amended Condition 4 as previously stated regarding the sport court, revised site plan, and all information provided prior to final approval of the Findings of Fact. For Counsel to provide Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded for the Conditional Use Permit for approval as stated. Further comments? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is approved for the Conditional Use Permit. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 18: Meridian Development Corporation Board of Directors – Craig Slocum. Corrie: All right. Item 18 is the last item, is a recommendation for the replacement on the Meridian Development Corporation Board of Directors. My recommendation to the Council is Craig Slocum, who is an Architect Engineer with the firm CSHQA. I think you all got the paper this afternoon and there is a memo going around that has his picture on it if you don't remember. He's been coming to the meetings as an ex-officio on his own accord and is quite interested. He lives next to our illustrative City Clerk at 510 East St. Kitts here in Meridian. That would be my recommendation to the Council. I will stand for any questions. Okay. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I would move that we approve Craig Slocum as the seventh member on the Meridian Development Corporation and notify him he's expected at 7:30 a.m. tomorrow morning. You can call him. Bird: Second. Corrie: All right. Motion has been made and seconded. Any other comments? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 58 Corrie: All right. With that I will -- no other thing to come before City Council on the agenda, so I will entertain a motion to close the meeting. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I move we adjourn. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded for adjournment. All in favor say aye. At 10:08. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:08 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: / / ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE ATTESTED: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK Meridian City Council Meeting April 2, 2002 Page 59