Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 02-05Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:30 P.M., Tuesday, February 5, 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, Will Berg, Ken Bowers, Tom Kuntz, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: __X__ Tammy de Weerd __X__ Bill Nary __X__Cherie McCandless __X__ Keith Bird __X__ Mayor Robert Corrie Corrie: Okay. It's 6:33. I'm going to open the City Council regular meeting for Tuesday, February 5, 2002, in the Council Chambers. Role call of attendance, please, Mr. Berg. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: Okay. Thank you. I want to welcome the public this evening for being here. We have got a little better weather for you tonight than we did the last meeting, so -- Council, Item No. 2, the Adoption of the Agenda. Do you have any changes that you would like to change at this time? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda we had a -- we'd like to table Item C -- or D, I mean, of the Five Mile Trunk Latecomer Agreement until February 19, 2002, so the attorney and Public Works can get together. Item No. E, the applicant has asked that we table that to March 19, 2002. Item G, there is some things we need to discuss. We'd like to move it to Item 5-G on the regular agenda. And item M, I'd like to see that pulled to 4-A-3, so Brad can discuss what is going on with this and, other than that, if nobody else has anything else, I'd make a motion to approve the Adoption of the Agenda. Corrie: Okay. We may have one more. Bird: Okay. Nary: Item O. Bird: Item O? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 2 of 88 Nary: The chief has that separately on the revised -- Bird: Oh. Okay. Yes. Item O -- he didn't want to? Just leave it? Worley: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, unless the Council has other discussion they want to engage in. -- Bird: I don't know of -- Corrie: Okay. One other thing, chief. Do you have all the signatures on J, the beer and wine license for the Whitewater Pizza? In our packets there was only two signatures, yours and one other. But I guess the City Clerk would be the one I should ask on that. I'm sorry. Berg: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, on Item J, the beer and wine license application, the most important one is the chief of police, but I always have signature on the other ones in case there is some compliance issues that they made need to look at. I got no response, so -- Corrie: Okay. That's fine. If the Council will have patience with me. Okay. Any other changes? Okay. Do I hear a second to -- sorry, Mrs. Stiles. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, could we take F off the agenda, just for clarification of some of the issues in the findings? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would change my motion, then, to make -- pull Item F to the regular agenda of item 5-F. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and second. Any further discussions or report? Okay. Hearing none, adopt of the agenda, then. All those in favor say aye. Opposed no. All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 3: Consent Agenda: Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 3 of 88 A. Approve minutes from November 8, 2001 Special Joint Meeting with Ada County Commissioners / ACHD Commissioners: B. Approve minutes from January 15, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting: C. Approve minutes from January 22, 2002 Regular City Council Meeting: D. Tabled from January 15, 2002: Five Mile Trunk Latecomer Agreement: E. Tabled from December 4, 2001: Order Granting Appeal: AP 01- 00 Stop Work Order at 2340 West Franklin Road by Walt Morrow: F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 01-012 Request for a Variance to the Landscape Ordinance for Elixir Properties Subdivision by Paul Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-028 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a fast food restaurant with drive-thru in a C-G zone for proposed Wendy's by Wenco, Inc. - northwest intersection of Corporate Drive and East First Street: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 01- 019 Request for annexation and zoning of 4.25 acres from RUT to C-N zones for LDS Church by Larry Maurer - south of EastFranklin Road and east of South Locust Grove: I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-038 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the development of an LDS Church in a C-N zone for LDS Church by Larry Maurer – south of East Franklin Road and east of South Locust Grove Road: J. Approve Application for Beer / Wine License by Donn Wilson for MRPC Meridian LLC dba Whitewater Pizza and Pasta at 1510 N. Eagle Road: K. South Slough Sewer Temporary Construction Easement: L. Ten Mile Interchange Sewer Study - J-U-B Engineers: M. Woodbridge Subdivision No. 2 Off-Site Water Line Project - Agreement for Professional Services: Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 4 of 88 N. Approve Bills: O. Police Department Organization Plan: Corrie: Item 3, is the consent agenda. I'd entertain a motion, then, for the consent agenda. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve the consent agenda as noted on the Adoption of the agenda with the changes. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the consent agenda with the corrections adopted from the agenda. Any further discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I think Mr. Berg could just note for Item 3-A, the approval for the minutes of November 8th, special joint meeting of the Ada County Commissioners, that I would prefer to be listed as an abstention on that. I was not present at that meeting, nor a member of the Council at that time. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. Mr. Berg, roll call vote on the consent agenda. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4: Department Reports: A. Public Work's Department - Gary Smith / Brad Watson: 1. Request for water and sewer hookup for Shannon Chaney at 2770 North Locust Grove Road: Corrie: Item 4 is the Public Works Department. Gary Smith / Brad Watson. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 5 of 88 Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council Members, Item 4-A, No. 1, request for water and sewer hookup for Shannon Chaney at 2770 North Locust Grove Road, by telephone message on the 30th of January she withdrew her request to connect sewer and water. Chaney: No, I didn't. Smith: You didn't? I'm sorry. I have a phone request -- a phone message here from Bruce Stewart that stated that you were not going to go forward with it, because of the cost. Chaney: I have all my stuff right here. Smith: Okay. My mistake, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Okay. Smith: There is a -- there is a provision that Public Works director can approve of the connection for a single family home to sewer and water. I don't know if Mrs. Chaney wants to discuss costs or if you were here to discuss this request at all. Chaney: I was just told that I had to be here. Corrie: Ms. Chaney, I need to have you come up here, because we have a stenographer taking this. If you could just identify yourself and then we can ask the questions if we need to. Chaney: I'm Shannon Chaney and they just told me I needed to be here. I don't know why, but they just said I needed to be here. I am working on my annexation request, so I don't know what they wanted me to be here for. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: It sounds like it was a good thing you were. Smith: Certainly is. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Chaney: Thank you. Corrie: So -- Smith: She is working on her annexation request, which is part of the agreement that we would need to draw up between the city and Ms. Chaney, so -- I'm not sure if our Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 6 of 88 City attorney has any comments to make in regards to when this connection would be made and I'm not sure when the connection needs to be made. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Smith -- and maybe Mrs. Chaney can answer this, but I did note there is a letter in here from Brad Hawkins-Clark with the planning department basically laying out kind of how this works and that if a person wants to hook up prior to being annexed, that at least in the past, unless the Council has considered this a necessity or emergency of some sort or something -- and I don't see any other information as to what the reason is? It would be simpler just to wait for the annexation to occur, if that's what happens, let that process take its course and I don't know if you have an answer to that, but maybe Mrs. Chaney does. Smith: I don't, Councilman Nary. Nary: It would seem to me if we would simply wait until the annexation happens and just let it follow its course like it normally should. Smith: Right. Corrie: Mrs. Chaney, is that -- you're not in a big hurry to have your water before the annexation; is that correct? Are you wanting the annexation along with the water or do you need to have the water before the annexation? You got it starting now. Chaney: Well, yes, but it was just explained to me that -- that everything was kind of coincided, that as I'm being annexed I get permission for the water and sewer and so on and so forth and that -- yes. I wouldn't say it's not an emergency. I'm just trying to get hooked up. Corrie: Okay. Yes. Let's follow that procedure, then, and Gary can take that into consideration on the annexation and the water and all that can be done at the time then. Chaney: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. 2. White Drain Trunk Sewer Permanent and Temporary Construction Easement - John Kennedy: Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council. The next item I will have Brad Watson discuss with you. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 7 of 88 Watson: Mr. Mayor and Council Members, the next item is a request for a sewer easement for the White Drain Trunk Sewer. The sewer would be on Mr. John Kennedy's property. As you will note in the memo that I hope is in your packet this time, is that there is an existing easement that traverses the northern part of his property. He signed that in early July, it was approved by the Council July 12th of last year. Between then and now Mr. Kennedy has requested that we provide him an easement that corresponds to a future subdivision layout. This property is immediately west of the proposed Cedar Springs Project. The very last sheet in that packet is a sketch that shows the relationship of the proposed Cedar Springs Project and Mr. Kennedy's proposed layout. That layout was not engineered, it was a sketch that was just provided to him, I believe, perhaps, by the Cedar Springs consultant. The original easement was signed and approved by Council with no payment for the right of way and no other consideration. This revised easement, Mr. Kennedy would -- requesting payment for the easement that corresponds with the appraisal that we had done on the original easement. The original easement was in the neighborhood of half an acre. The revised easement is .87 acres. The long and short of it is either alignment technically will work. The revised one may have some minor advantages over the initially approved one. Mr. Kennedy is in the audience tonight and first I would take -- be happy to answer any questions and he's here if you would want to ask him any questions as well. Corrie: Council, any questions of Brad? Bird: Not right now, Mayor. Corrie: Okay. Mr. Kennedy, are you here? Kennedy: I would like you to know that I'm very hard of hearing and if I don't understand you, I will ask my son to tell me what you asked. Corrie: Okay. Anybody have any questions of Mr. Kennedy or -- Bird: I don't have any, Mayor. Corrie: Anybody have any -- Bill? Nary: Mr. Mayor. Mr. Kennedy, what's the reason you want us to move this easement? Kennedy: The Cedar Springs Subdivision -- right there. When they requested that they be allowed to build in there, the right of way that they suggested was -- would make my land landlocked and so they agreed at that point that they would allow access to my land through the proposed road there and that they would stub the end in the sewer and water and have the gas company and the electric, whatever they do do, to have it stubbed out there for future to my land and that presently the land is not being farmed, because I haven't been able to find a renter the last year or so. Before that it was farmed and I intend to continue to have it farmed as soon as I can get a renter. The -- that road that they had given me access to my land is in relationship to the Cedar Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 8 of 88 Springs Subdivision, if the -- which the sewer line will be coming down, if they just go right straight across of my property there, then if and when my land is ever subdivided there will be a benefit there, because there will be enough of the land behind the sewer line that you can put a row of lots in there and then on the other side it can be subdivided in a manner that would be beneficial and that I feel that the sewer crossing my land is a benefit to those people also and that it will be a detriment to me for farming. However, with the idea that maybe in the future it would be -- make my land more valuable, then that would -- I would accept that fact there and the sewer as it goes across mine there, it extends for almost an 8th of a mile across the land and it will be no additional expense to install the sewer line there than it would be if it was installed where it had been originally along the canal bank. As a matter of fact, it might be much easier for them to do it, because of the dirt that's been dug out of the canal and all this and that and Idaho state law provides for a payment that is agreeable, you know, between the parties for the land itself -- for usage of the land itself and the agreement that Brad has drawed up and which I signed is agreeable with me and as long as it's agreeable with the City Council, then I guess we have a contract for crossing the land and basically that's where I stand on this thing and I don't want to delay the sewer, you know, being put in in any way anymore than necessary, you know, to get the sewer across my -- Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Kennedy, though, what I'm hearing you saying is that it's not going to cost anymore, but it's actually going to cost almost 10,000 dollars more when we already have an easement. You already gave the City an easement to build that sewer across your property; correct? Kennedy: I gave the sewer company an easement to cross -- the right to cross my land, but I never gave them the land. Nary: Well, you're not giving us the land here either. All you're giving us is an easement, but we are paying 10,000 dollars for something we already have. Kennedy: Well, I don't see it that way, sir. Nary: Okay. Kennedy: When the fellow came out on -- and I think his name was Caldwell -- I'm not sure. Anyhow, when he came out and talked to me about the land, you know, to cross the land, I said, well, I had no big objection to them crossing the land, as long as crossing the land went, and I asked him then what was the payment -- the acreage -- the land has been appraised out at close to 36,000 dollars and so as I understand the way that the agreement -- the law provides for is half of that is cut in half and then it's cut in half again and that amounts to 9,550 dollars and that -- and at that time he Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 9 of 88 indicated that that would come up later, but then -- I don't know, you know, as far as the payment of the land goes. It's the -- it's in you people's ballpark now and I have signed the contract, they have went out and drilled a well on the land there approximately where the sewer is to go through and I think they were testing for groundwater and that and so that's where it stands now and I -- and that's the way I feel. Any other questions? Corrie: No. Thank you. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Brad, Mr. Kennedy signed an agreement last June or July, didn't he, for the easement that had no compensation? Watson: Councilman Bird, Mayor, and Council Members, that's correct. It was -- the form and format was identical to this one, with the exception of the payment and the location of the easement. Bird: Who did we have out there getting these easements that he was telling us that come up with the money? Watson: Keller and Associates is our consultant who was doing easement acquisition at the time. They were the ones that met with each property owner along the way. At the time when he first began in negotiation and until now we haven't paid for any easements. The whole premise was to get donation of those easements and except for one -- Bird: When did we decide that we needed to change the easement location and then this was redone or did we decide that? Watson: Councilman Bird, we didn't decide that we needed to. The sewer will work in either location. This was done at Mr. Kennedy's request and I agree -- I met with Mr. Kennedy five or six times over the last four to five months and I have told him that I would bring it before you for your consideration. If that property develops in a similar manner to Cedar Springs, it ultimately would probably line up better, but we don't know that it will develop in that manner. Bird: Is that -- is it not -- when that development goes in and stuff and if they don't give an easement, that land will be land locked, won't it, if they don't have a -- Watson: Councilman Bird, I'm not quite sure I understand. The sewer is going to go through that property -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 10 of 88 Bird: I realize that, but I mean is this land not -- when Cedar Springs goes up, if they don't put a road up there, isn't it land locked? Kennedy: There is a right of way from the -- Bird: There is a right of way coming from the north down? Kennedy: There is a dedicated right of way through there to provide -- which have -- Bird: Mr. Mayor, I'm like Mr. Nary, I don't understand why all of a sudden we go from an easement at no cost to an easement with a 9,500 dollar cost. You're telling me that the sewer could stay in the old easement line that was donated to us or given to us? Kennedy: The easement that I signed -- I was with the understanding that the land that they took would be paid for and the man that came out and talked to me about it and was -- he said -- I said, well, what about the payment of the land and, like I told you earlier, he said, well, you can -- that can be taken up later. So I signed it and that, but as far as the old -- the old sewer that goes through, the old land agreement, it actually is -- destroys part of my property and it also is a detriment to my property, because it's clear down on the end and it takes 40 feet off the end of my land, but with the new easement, the easement can at a later date be a road. You see what I'm saying? An extension of the road. Bird: I understand what you're saying. Kennedy: And, therefore, the -- what -- the old easement, as far as I'm concerned, is null and void now. Bird: Let me ask you a question. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Go ahead. Bird: If it's null and void now, when you signed that you were under the impression the people that was representing the City give you the impression that you signed this for the easement and then we'd negotiate price later? Is that what I'm understanding? Kennedy: It was my understanding that when I signed that -- now maybe I signed it out of ignorance, I don't know, and -- and maybe you can hold me to that, I don't know. Bird: I'm not asking that. That's isn't what I'm asking for. Kennedy: But it was -- like I say, the payment for the piece of land is -- I think that the sewer company itself going across an 8th of a mile of my land is a great benefit to them and that and if there is this benefit for them, you know, and the way it lines up with the other Cedar Springs Subdivision, that road in Cedar Springs Subdivision will have to be put in there, because it's under the agreement to -- preventing them from land locking Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 11 of 88 my land and this was taken up with the attorney and that and so the road will -- will come up to it and the sewer line will be in it and that. So if, in fact -- another thing that enters in here is the -- the big canal -- no, the big drain ditch that goes through there, I think you're probably all aware of that drain ditch. Right of my property it jogs 25 feet to the north and that and so the jog that's there, the 25 feet, for them to bring the sewer down and then get back into the lane that's in Cedar Springs is -- there is no extra cost there, because they have already done it down on my end of the land. You see? They have come back there, so -- for the lineup there. So that cost is not any greater to the sewer company, you know, that's putting it in and that and, anyhow, that's my understanding of what -- Bird: Mr. Kennedy, what I'm trying to get at is that you were under the impression when you signed that easement the original time, somebody would be back and negotiate money for the land? Kennedy: Right. Bird: Okay. But also by moving this up to where that roadway is and stuff, that makes your land, if it's ever developed, much more valuable, too, don't it, because it's kind of in the -- it's kind of split through so you can divide off of both north and south. Kennedy: Well, that's true that at a later date if and when I ever sell the land and the economy the way it is now may never be sold, but -- and with it going through there now cross the deal, you know, is an asset maybe in the future and that. Bird: Thank you very much. Kennedy: Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Watson, what I'm hearing is that this change in this easement now would appear to benefit Cedar Springs and Cedar Springs has somehow been involved in this discussion with Mr. Kennedy and it's mentioned in your memo to Mr. Howell you mentioned that this change would actually benefit Cedar Springs more than where it's currently located; correct? Watson: Councilman Nary, Mayor, an Council Members, that is correct to a certain extent, although Gary did have a verbal -- or a phone conversation with the Cedar Springs consultant. That corner lot in the northwestern most corner of Cedar Springs is an open space lot, drainage lot, so it's not as big a concern as I was initially led to believe by the developer. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 12 of 88 Nary: I also heard you say that the other easements along this particular stretch, the City hasn't paid for any of those easements, all of those have been donated or -- is that correct? Watson: Councilmember Nary, that's true to a certain extent, although we still don't have the Cedar Springs easement. Nary: True. Watson: And in that same mid mile the school district was -- granted an easement to us not for cash payment, but it was approved that there would be an offset in their assessment fees on their project on that particular property. Nary: So the private landowners along that way had all donated these easements? These are not things the City had been paying for previously? Watson: Councilman Nary, correct. Nary: So what I'm curious -- and maybe it was just simply miscommunication and I don't know whether or not we can find that out tonight, but Mr. Kennedy is saying he was believing that somehow we were going to negotiate some price later on and it sounds to me that that really wouldn't have been the discussion if we weren't negotiating a price for anybody along that particular stretch. There must have been some misunderstanding or some miscommunication about that, I guess. Watson: Councilman Nary, Mayor, and Council Members, I wasn't a part of that conversation, but I know that those were not Keller's marching order when they left our office to start securing easements, that we were proceeding on a donation basis. If something else was said, I'm not aware of it. Nary: So that I'm just clear -- I'm no engineer, so you've got to help me here, but we already have an easement, we can already build the line through this property and we don't need to do this to make the sewer work or to make anything work, we can already do with what we already have approved and agreed upon; is that right? Watson: Councilman Nary, that is correct. We have some shades of gray as to what is the best alignment, but -- Nary: Right. The best thing -- I mean if we take that into consideration, we -- if this hadn't come up after last July when this was approved, we were just going to go forward and be done with it on this property; correct? Watson: Correct. Nary: All right. Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 13 of 88 Corrie: Any other discussion? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would -- and this is for Mr. Kennedy's sake and our sake both. I certainly don't want to cheat this gentleman if he was led to believe that we would be back and negotiate price to him. I'd like see this pulled until the next meeting and have Brad investigate with the person that was representing the City and see what could have been -- what could have given Mr. Kennedy the notion that he would be getting reimbursed some money for this and -- because I have a real hard problem -- and also as a Council person I'd like to -- and I'm the first to say that I sat here and voted on it, so probably seen it, but I didn't keep it. I'd like to see a copy of that original easement, the wording on it, and so I'd like see this pulled to February 19, 2002 and bring it back at that point, if it's agreeable with the rest of the Council. Nary: Was that a motion, Mr. Bird? Bird: That's a motion. Nary: I'd second it. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to table it until the February 19th , the White Drain Trunk Sewer permanent and temporary construction easement with Mr. John Kennedy. Any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: When staff meets with Mr. Kennedy -- I think it would be worth noting up until the White Drain we haven't paid for any easements. It's generally noted by the property owners that it does add value to their property and that's why it's been a common practice and I guess one that we haven't questioned. So just if staff could talk with you about how we have done it in the past and so you know the process. Kennedy: It's my understanding the Idaho State law provides for easements across people's property and at a fair value price. At least that's what Barry Peters tells me and that and I don't think I'm being unreasonable. The assessment was made of -- the value was according to your assessor and that value was 9,500 and that was for .55 acres. You now have .8 acres, because the -- because it aligns with the road. The road is 50 feet wide and before it was 40 feet wide and that and -- and I'm only asking for .55, that's what your assessment was originally, and so that's the way I feel and that's where I stand on it. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 14 of 88 Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Kennedy, just so you understand, I mean you're not incorrect in what you were told. If we make you give it to us, we have to pay you for it, but if you give it to us we don't, and I think that's kind of where we are stuck on, is that it appears that a year -- well, six or eight months ago you gave it to the City and that's kind of where we are stuck on this issue. So you're right in what you're staying, if we made you give it to us we have pay you for it, but we don't if you give it to us, so -- Kennedy: So then misrepresentation can be considered then. Nary: Well, that's what Mr. Bird's motion was, to figure out exactly what happened. Bird: That's what we want to find out. Corrie: Any further discussion? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Corrie: Okay. All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: So we will be talking with Mr. Kennedy and the staff and seeing what we can come up with. 3: Woodbridge Subdivision No. 2 Off-Site Water Line Project - Agreement for Professional Services Corrie: Okay. Item No. 3 under M, I believe it was for the Council. Brad. Watson: Thank you, Mayor and Council Members. This item is -- I don't know if you want any background or not. The background on this is that Woodbridge No. 2 was approved on the condition that the City Public Works Department provide the design and construction of some off-site water to tie that subdivision into the high pressure zone. We thought it beneficial to both the City and the developer -- that the developer include the design and construction within his cost and that a reimbursement agreement be entered into for both design and construction. I corresponded with O'Neil Enterprises and they were agreeable to that. It provided a reimbursement agreement for the engineering costs that -- you have a copy of a red lined agreement, that was all I had by the time I had to get this into your packets. A revised agreement -- it is signed by Derrick O'Neil with the corrected cost amount of $4,772.50 is in my possession. I would be happy to answer any questions if you have any. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 15 of 88 Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Brad, is that cost real legitimate? That's about eight percent of the estimated construction cost? Watson: Councilman Bird, Mayor, and Council Members, I think it is and that construction cost estimate is a little lose. We don't know what the patch back requirements are at this point, so it could be plus or minus, but I -- Bird: This is the construction management of this -- within this also? Watson: Correct. This includes design, construction, staking, and some construction – Bird: Construction administration? Watson: Right. But those costs are in line with what we have paid on our waterline projects. Bird: Okay. I have none. Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion, then, for the Woodbridge Subdivision off-site water line project, agreement for professional services. McCandless: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I move that we approve the reimbursement for design, construction, staking and project administration of Woodbridge Community, LLC, for the Woodbridge Subdivision No. 2 off-site water line project in the lump sum amount $4,772.50. Authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and -- by Mrs. McCandless, seconded by Mr. Bird to approve the $4,772.50 payment. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Attorney Department - Bill Nichols: 1. Draft Agreement with ACHD for the Locust Grove Overpass Project: Follow-up from ACHD: Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 16 of 88 Corrie: Okay. Mr. Nichols, Draft agreement with on Locust Grove. Nichols: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. You will recall that at the joint meeting of the City and the Ada County Highway District Commissioners on January 7, 2002, the issue of the reimbursement of up to 1.8 million dollars for a right-of-way acquisition on the Locust Grove overpass was discussed and we are kind of getting down to the final terms of the agreement. The communication I received from ACHD requested that the Section 5.2, which allowed the termination from 30 days notice be eliminated and if it were eliminated they would accept our definition of what the 1.8 -- or up to 1.8 million dollars could be used for, which essentially is hard land costs in payment to the owners and/or their encumbrancers from Franklin Road to Overland Road, including some of the work on the Overland-Locust Grove intersection. Stacy Kilchenmann indicated to me that she had a discussion with somebody at ACHD with regard to the timing of the payments -- let's see -- and what she indicated was the City would have 45 days to pay after receipt of all of the appropriate documentation and would pay quarterly anything over 50,000 dollars, that they would give at least a couple weeks advance notice, so that for cash flow purposes, investments, and so forth, can be moved around to try to take care of that. So we needed to have you discuss it and if you want us to go forward with language along those lines, then we will put it together and we would bring a draft back to you to look at before the joint meeting in April. The expectation was to have the language all hammered out so that you could sign it at your joint meeting in April. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: So, Mr. Nichols, you said that our finance director was okay with 45 days? Because she has been saying between 60 and 90 days. Nichols: Well, let me quote from her e-mail that she sent me on January 17th . Someone from ACHD accounting department, I think, called me and we talked about the release of the overpass money. We agreed that the City would have 45 days to pay and that we would pay quarterly. If anything over $50,000 was coming, he will call and give me a couple weeks notice. It might have been possible to pay all at once at the end of the project, but that was not their first choice. De Weerd: Okay. Well, then if it's fine with her, the 45 days is great, and including the intersection of Locust Grove and Overland is not a problem, as long as they, again, understand it's reserved and it's not to exceed 1.8 million dollars. Nichols: That's correct. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 17 of 88 Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: My recollection of this discussion, Bill, was that part of the reason for that termination provision is pretty standard language, so that we don't have any issue regarding the constitution provision about binding future councils and I recall Mrs. Cain having a real problem with that, because -- just because there was a concern that somehow it gets into this project and the City might change their mind. But that's the reason that provision exists is because future councils can change their mind about these things. I guess I'm a little bothered -- and I wasn't here in the beginning of this agreement, but the City of Meridian is willing to cough up 1.8 million dollars that the Ada County Highway District doesn't have to come up with for something the Ada County Highway District is responsible to build and they are saying they are only going to accept that if we agree that we won't have any way to back out of this deal in the future, even though the State Constitution requires that. So what's our way to get around that constitutional requirement that says we aren't binding future council's decision? Nichols: Mr. Nary, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, it's my opinion that it does not violate the Constitution, because it is a funded project. The Constitutional prohibition is really in terms of going out and obligating a council based upon, you know, some future revenue, as opposed to money that you already have in the bank. This like a Public Works project that carries over from one fiscal year into the next here you have it budgeted, the funds are set aside, and it just carries over from one year into the next. It's not really binding a future council in the same sense as going out and say building a building and getting a conventional loan and you're expecting tax revenue to come in to pay those annual payments, so -- Nary: So it's already fully funded -- the 1.8 million dollars is already fully funded? Nichols: Yes. Nary: -- up front? Okay. Nichols: And let me just say, too, that at least in my conversations with ACHD's attorney who prepared the draft of the contract, she pulled that in the standard language of some of their other agreements that they had with vendors and contractors and that sort of thing and it wasn't intended to reflect the constitutional issue or -- it was just basically part of the boilerplate that she put in. Nary: Then what's our check, Mr. Nichols -- I know you had it here before and I just don't have it with me at the moment, but what's our check to be sure that we are comfortable with what's being purchased, besides being able to pull out of -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 18 of 88 Nichols: Councilman Nary, Mayor, Members of the Council, before any reimbursement is made, they have to provide us with copies of purchase and sale agreements, closing statements, all of the documentation, so that we can see that what they are asking for is just what got paid to the owner and/or encumbrancer. Nary: Okay. That sounds reasonable. At least some way we can make sure that we are buying what we wanted to buy. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Corrie: Okay. We will just go on with it and have you go with that. Is that what you – Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I just -- what I would prepare for you would be another draft that would include our definition of what the money is to be used for, payment per what I read from Stacy Kilchenmann's e-mail, elimination of Section 5.2 from the draft agreement with the regard to 30 day termination, and I think those are the only issues that we really needed to get clarified. So unless someone has an objection on the Council, that's what I will work on and prepare next. Corrie: Do I hear any objection from Council? Nary: No objection. Bird: No objection. C. Park's Department - Tom Kuntz: 1. Request to reject all bids on Meridian Skate Park Project: Corrie: Thank you. City Parks. Mr. Kuntz. Kuntz: Thank you, Mayor and Council. You will find in your packets a memo from the Parks and Recreation staff requesting authorization to reject all three of the bids for the Tully Skate Park. All three bids were well over the budgeted amount of 120,000 and the architect's estimate of 128,000, which is 12 dollars a square foot. The low bidder was Wright Brothers with 188.750. The next low bid was CSCI of 190,000 and KJ Corporation at 196,978. Staff has spent the last 45 days, one, meeting with Wright Brothers to discuss possible deletions to the contract to bring the price down. We met with a skate park consultant and the Land Group who designed ours and made some value engineering design changes, hoping to bring that price down, as well as we have approached certain supply vendors to see if they would contribute in kind contributions for the project and to this point have not been able to bring it down substantial enough with the low bid to make it work. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 19 of 88 Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Tom, what are your plans when -- after we reject these -- or if we do reject these in getting our skateboard park up, which we have made a promise -- we have actually got 104,000, I believe, left in our budget and we have got some donations and stuff I'm sure we can get in, so what is your plans? Kuntz: Councilmember Bird, and Council, Mayor, our plan is to take the redesign features that were discussed with the consultant and actually have some additional suggestions that we are going to meet and discuss and try and incorporate those into the new design. We will go out to bid for the third time. I have met with one contractor who has assured me that with the new design that they know it can be built for between 150 and $160,000.00 with the changes that they are already recommending from the Land Group and the consultant. Second, we received one offer from a concrete supply company to donate half of the concrete material, which is a $10,000 savings. We have received confirmation from Friends of Meridian Parks, a $2,500.00 donation, with the possibility -- strong possibility of another 2,500, to bring that to 5,000. We are meeting with all the youth in the community who are interested in seeing this built tomorrow at 5:00 to show them a list of things that we feel like we can get contributed if we talk to the right people in the community and we are going to get the kids involved in going out and meeting with these suppliers to see if they will contribute in kind. In addition to that, in the other in-kind cash contributors, the kids probably have some ideas and where they can go knock on some doors to make that happen. So with all those things thrown together, we feel like we can build that skate park this summer. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Tom, who is going to be the construction manager on this? Kuntz: The Land Group. Bird: And this is all within their fee or are they going to charge us more? They have already received the 16,000 for the design. Kuntz: That's included in their fee. And, Councilmember Bird, they call it construction administration. Bird: Okay. And that is no more fee to them? Kuntz: Correct. Bird: Okay. Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 20 of 88 Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: With that, if there is no more questions, I would move that we reject the three bids, as I know Tom has went and worked with the apparent low bidder, they can't get down there, we got to figure out a way to get a skateboard park built and we certainly don't have the money to go -- and I know these three contractors bid this under good intentions. We put it out for bid under good intentions. I hate to see this have to be done, but to get that skateboard park I believe this is the only way we are going to be able to do it, so I would make a motion that we reject all three bids. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any other discussion? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Before we go -- I would like to have those kids get involved. Let them get some stake in it and we might not have so much damage out there if they get some of their sweat and blood into that and I think it's a good idea. Let the kids know what's going on here. I think they are going to get it done. If we can't, they will. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'd like to say one thing on behalf -- and I believe I can speak for the City and the Council, the Parks Department. We don't like doing this to general contractors of any sort when they bid the jobs. We do it and they do it, work hard getting it done, and we go about -- but this is one thing that we just -- there is just no way that we can justify their revised low bid at a skateboard park at this time and I just would like to assure the general contractors that this is not a policy that the City wants to do, but at this one -- this one point I believe we have to do it. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I do believe, Tom, when we put this out to bid, isn't there an estimate noted somewhere for -- at least the three contractors -- oh, there wasn't any estimate on the bid? Kuntz: Councilmember de Weerd, the estimate was given at the pre-construction meeting held on site approximately two weeks before the bids were closed. So the -- I know all the plan holders who attended that meeting were told what the architect's estimate was. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 21 of 88 De Weerd: Okay. Well, so I don't think there is going to be any surprise that these bids are rejected and they do know how interested the City is in getting this skate park and I appreciate your consultant's time and will work with the city in trying to get this here. Thank you for your efforts, too, Tom. Corrie: Any other discussion? Comments? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Motion was to reject all bids that were presented by Mr. Kuntz. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no. Motion is carried. Thank you Tom. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. D. Police Department - Mike Worley: 1. Intouch Solutions, Inc. Sales Agreement: Corrie: Item No. D, is the Police Department, Mike Worley, Intouch Solutions, Inc., sales agreement. Worley: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, you have in your packet a copy of a proposed contract between the City and Intouch Solutions, which was formerly known as Tele-Con for a telephone system for the new Meridian Police building at 1401 East Watertower. The contract is in the amount of $75,750.00, which is approximately $10,000.00 below the budgeted amount and breaks down to $33,250.00 for telephone equipment and $42,500.00 for the Cat-5 wearing for the building and that includes both voice and data wiring. This particular agreement is issued pursuant to -- I believe you also have a copy of a contract between Tele-Con and the State of Idaho Department of Administration Purchasing, SBP-016 as amended, which is valid until May 8, 2002. Ask the Council's approval, for the Mayor to sign, and the Clerk to attest. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I do have a question, but first I'd like to thank you for the tour of the station you gave us. This community has much to be proud of. You're doing a fine job out there. Worley: Thank you. De Weerd: Well, thank you. It was very nice. I do have a question. Was this put out for - - do we have estimates in addition to this on this project? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 22 of 88 Worley: Mr. Mayor and Councilwoman de Weerd, this is issued pursuant to an existing state contract. We did get one additional bid from another company, but it was nearly twice the amount here. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Any other discussion? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on the request for the $75,750.00 total purchase price on the Intouch Solutions, Inc. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move the approval of the agreement with Intouch Solutions for the telephone system for the Meridian Police Department at the contracted price of $75,750.00 as per the staff report that's been presented and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest for that agreement. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 01-012 Request for a Variance to the Landscape Ordinance for Elixir Properties Subdivision by Paul Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-028 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a fast food restaurant with drive-thru in a C-G zone for proposed Wendy’s by Wenco, Inc. – northwest intersection of Corporate Drive and East First Street: Corrie: Thank you. That takes care of the items that were -- items that were moved, so we have Item F and Item G; is that correct? Bird: Yes, sir. F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 01-012 Request for a Variance to the Landscape Ordinance Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 23 of 88 for Elixir Properties Subdivision by Paul Clayton - 521 North Eagle Road: Corrie: Okay. So let's take up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the request for a variance to the Landscape Ordinance for Elixir Properties Subdivision by Paul Clayton. Discussion, Council? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, under the Decision and Order, page 15 of 11 -- I guess that needs to be fixed, but under the Decision of Order I had some suggestions for rewording that to make it clearer. The wording is a little hard to understand, in my opinion, anyway, and I would suggest that starting at number one -- well, I will just read it how I would -- I would suggest it be put in the Findings. One, that the applicant is hereby granted a variance approval of the landscape buffer requirement between Lots 1 and 2 part one in Finding 15 above. Period. Then the next Item, No. 2, the applicant is hereby denied the elimination of the required street buffer adjacent to Commercial Court. And then to delete the last sentence there. I would suggest that for your -- whatever decision you have there. It just seemed to make it a little clearer for me, anyway, and hopefully for the applicant as well. Corrie: Okay. Paul. You heard what she had to say. Do you have any – Clayton: No. I'm already aware of that. Corrie: Okay. I thought you were. Clayton: However, I do wish to thank you staff for what they have done and the one item that there is a problem with, we want to discuss that with staff, because it does present a problem that's going to be difficult to handle and I'd like some suggestions from staff. If they could meet me at the site sometime at their convenience I could work that out and have it taken care of. Corrie: Okay. Does that have anything to do with what we are talking about here tonight, though? Clayton: Yes. There is one item there that she just mentioned that you don't want to approve. It's the area in front of the existing building that's in question there, because of the restriction of the space that's there from the original development and it has to be discussed by the staff and myself to see if we can work it out to make a proper decision. Being a beat up old architect, I can take a lot of suggestions. Corrie: Okay. Council, do you have any -- Bird: Shari, do you understand what Mr. Clayton is talking about? Stiles: Well, I -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 24 of 88 Bird: Because I don't. Stiles: -- I think I understand is he still doesn't want to do the landscaping, the required street buffer along Commercial Court. Clayton: No, it's not that we don't want to do it, it's that we've got to have a decision of how it's going to be done, because of the restrictions because of the existing building when it was built back in 1968 and the original road that was put in, the area that is in question is not big enough to satisfy all the requirements. Bird: Do you understand what he' talking about, Shari? Along there when the roadway to the -- as I understand it, it's to the east of the existing buildings? Clayton: North. Bird: North I mean. Yes. North. Stiles: I believe that we talked about -- I guess I'd like some clarification on what the conditions are and we realize that there will need to be some asphalt removed in order to put landscaping there. Clayton: Well, when the building was built originally in 1968, when I drew the plans for that building, we had no restrictions of anybody requiring anything out there and when it wound up as it is, there is not enough room to do the required parking and put a planter and a sidewalk in that area and we have got to make a decision between the staff and company what we are going to do with that to satisfy the requirements of the staff. Stiles: I would be happy to come out. It's just we are bound by what the ordinance said, so -- Clayton: I know. That's why we have got a problem and I would be tickled to death to have somebody come out there and help me work it out. I have no -- I have no qualms about it whatever. Whatever you want we will take care of it, it's just got to be done with some kind of decision by the staff what we can do. Stiles: Well, I would be happy to get someone to go with me from the Public Works Department and -- would Monday be okay for you? Clayton: You just tell when you're going to be there and I will be there. Stiles: Okay. Great. We can do that. Clayton: The rest of it is in good shape, because everything else is what we want and I have no problem with it at all. But that's one item that's going to be a problem -- not a problem, it's going to have to be decided how to do it, that's all. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 25 of 88 De Weerd: A challenge. Corrie: Okay. Council, we can table this until the 19th if you so desire. Bird: Get that worked out. Corrie: Pardon? Well, we -- yes, we will deal with those findings on the 19th . Yes. Correct. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess it will give us a chance to see the revised findings and then we can just vote on them at that time. Corrie: Okay. Do I hear a motion? Bird: Yes. I make a motion that we table the Findings, request for variance on landscape ordinance for Elixir Properties Subdivision, 521 North Eagle Road, to February 19, 2002. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and second to table the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on VAR No. 01-012 until February 19th and have staff meet with Paul. So any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 01-028 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a fast food restaurant with drive-thru in a C-G zone for proposed Wendy's by Wenco, Inc. - northwest intersection of Corporate Drive and East First Street: Corrie: Thank you, Paul. We have No. 5-G. It was pulled. This was the CUP, request for Conditional Use Permit for Wendy's. Who pulled the -- De Weerd: I did. Corrie: Tammy. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 26 of 88 Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: As I reviewed the findings I did note there is some revised ACHD findings, dated January 2, 2002. On page seven of Finding 12.18 -- and I guess it's also on page 17, 1.18, ACHD did grant them full access to the right-in, right-out driveway, so that does need to be noted on these. Also I think that David had comments that -- regarding the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission. I don't know if those changes are in here, I didn't make notes by it, so, Shari, did you have a chance to review these findings? Stiles: I didn't, but I believe -- I thought that David had and -- did he not submit a memo on this? De Weerd: He did, but when I read them -- I don't have that information in front of me, so -- Stiles: I don't either, because I didn't realize there was still a problem. I didn't bring the whole file. De Weerd: I only ask that those were incorporated into these, just to -- if he can make sure they are, because the two findings that were changed by ACHD, one was changed and one wasn't, so I don't know -- Stiles: We didn't receive this final decision until January 23rd , so I doubt it is in the findings that are here. I don't know. The Findings are dated January 18th , so I don't know how they would be able to -- unless they all had copies of that prior. De Weerd: Well, it looks like we may have to table these Findings just to have that verification that they were incorporated in, so I guess with that said, I will move to table the Findings for request for a Conditional Use Permit for a fast food restaurant by proposed Wendy's to February 19th . Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mrs. de Weerd, second by Mr. Bird, to table the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for CUP 01-028, Wendy's, by Wenco, until the February 19th meeting. De Weerd: 2002? Corrie: 2002. De Weerd: Just thought I would clarify that. Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion is carried. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 27 of 88 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Okay. I believe that takes care of the consent agenda items, Council? Bird: Yes, sir. Item 6: Resolution No.___________: Public Work's Fees and Adjustments: Corrie: Okay. Now we are on the Item No. 6. This is a Resolution No. 02-374. This is a Public Work's fee and adjustments. Mr. Berg, if you will read the Resolution No. 02-374 by the Title only at this time. Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Resolution No. 02-374. A Resolution of the City -- by the City Council of the City of Meridian making certain findings and adoptions -- adopting -- excuse me -- new fees and adjustments to the Public Works Department. Corrie: Okay. Council, any questions on Resolution No. 02-374? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: We received a letter from Brad Watson dated February 1, 2002, talking about Section 3 of this Resolution's effective date. I just wanted to make sure that it is felt that this is specific enough, Brad, for the issues that you raised in your memo? Watson: Council member de Weerd, Mayor, and Council, I think so. I read the resolution. I think it addresses what I had expressed concern about in that memo. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions on the resolution? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on Resolution No. 02-374. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move the approval of Resolution No. 02-374, Public Work's fees and adjustment resolution for the new fees and adjustments for the Public Works Department, the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest for the adoption of this resolution and that the new fees take effect March 1, 2002. McCandless: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 28 of 88 Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Nary and second by Mrs. McCandless to adopt Resolution No. 02-374, and the Mayor to sign and the Clerk attest. Have any discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion for Resolution 02-374 has been approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Tabled from January 15, 2002: FP 01-015 Request for Final Plat approval of 23 building lots and 5 other lots on 8.15 acres in an R-4 zone for Staten Park Subdivision by D'Alessio Building Development – south of West Ustick Road and North Black Cat Road: Corrie: Item No. 7 was tabled from the January 15, 2002. This is a request for a Final Plat approval of 23 building lots and 5 other lots on 8.15 acres in an R-4 zone for Staten Park Subdivision by the D'Allessio Building Development, south of West Ustick Road and North of Black Cat Road. Counsel -- excuse me. Staff comments. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this project was initially before City Council on September 18, 2001. It has been tabled quite a number of times and I believe the applicant's representative is here tonight. Apparently there has been a change in the owner of the property or the applicant, but I'll have Mr. Leavitt speak to that, and we would recommend approval with all of the conditions originally placed on the project and make sure that the new owners are fully aware of those requirements. Corrie: Any comments, questions from staff? Okay. Yes. I think the applicant -- Leavitt: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members, I'm Reese Leavitt with Leavitt and Associates Engineers. I can see you're aware that the project has changed ownership and that's one of the reasons it's been on the table for some time. It has been bought CavCo and one of the representatives of the ownership Doug Campbell is here tonight, but we have made changes to the drawings, which reflect the change in ownership on the plat and improvement drawings and we have addressed the comments that have been given to us on the checklist. We just want to get the drawings off the table now that the ownership has changed and get them back in line for approval. Didn't really come to present, but I would be happy to address any questions which you may have. Corrie: Okay. Any questions from Council? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 29 of 88 De Weerd: You have seen, then, all the comments and, staff, have you received comments back? Stiles: I'm not sure that they ever replied. De Weerd: Was there anything that you did not address? Leavitt: I have City Council Final Plat approval comments 9/18 and those we have addressed, but we have not submitted the drawings, we have just barely changed the title block to reflect change in ownership, but we have the drawings ready to re-submit and I don't think we have any disagreement with the comments. De Weerd: Okay. When you say you are resubmitting, what are you resubmitting? Leavitt: We are resubmitting drawings with the corrections requested. De Weerd: Okay. Corrie: Haven't changed the plat or anything. Leavitt: No. Other than to reflect change in ownership. Corrie: Okay. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, that would just be the construction plans for the subdivision. They have reviewed them and red lined them and given them back to Mr. Leavitt and he's made those corrections and he's ready to resubmit them to Public Works. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Leavitt. Corrie: Thank you. Okay. Council, I'll entertain a motion on the request for final plat. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: It would be my privilege to see this taken off of our agenda. I would move to approve FP 01-015, request for Final Plat for approval of 23 building lots and 5 other lots on 8.15 acres for Staten Park Subdivision, to include all staff conditions and comments and to ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 30 of 88 Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mrs. de Weerd and second by Mr. Bird to have the Final Plat approval for Staten Park Subdivision and have the staff comments and the attorney to draw up the final papers. Any further discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would simply note that I would abstain on this particular project, since I was not present for the Public Hearing. Other than the many times it has been tabled, I have heard no discussion about it. Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg, roll call vote, please. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, abstain. Corrie: Three ayes, one abstention. The request for Final Plat approval has been approved. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSTENTION Item 8: Tabled-from January 15, 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: Corrie: Item No. 8. This is tabled from the January 15th meeting also. This is a request or 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 request for the Final Plat? Discussion? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, as part of the background on this, we had originally requested that this be tabled due to the fact that the submittal for the Final Plat for Bear Creek No. 5 is not in accordance with the approved Preliminary Plat, specifically they have taken out open space that was originally shown on the Preliminary Plat and staff cannot approve that as a minor change in the platting. We don't want to be in the business of negotiating moving open space. So the plat -- since that plat was not in conformance and we think it's really important that these phases be developed in the order they were approved on the Preliminary Plat, we'd ask that this not be acted upon until a conforming Final Plat is submitted for No. 5, so that we can then act on No. 6. We kind of ran into a problem particularly with Packard Acres Subdivision and Packard Estates where there is so many changes in the numbers that we couldn't even follow what was going anymore. So that's the reason that we are requesting it to be table. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 31 of 88 Corrie: Okay. Is there a representative at all from Bear Creek Subdivision? I didn't see anyone. Council, request from staff is to move this to a different date. What date, Shari, did you want this? Stiles: I would request it be for the first meeting in April. Corrie: Okay. Would that be April 2nd ? Stiles: Yes. Corrie: Okay. Did I miss a motion here? Is there -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Okay. Bird: I move that we table the 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 and that number is FP 01-026 until April 2, 2002. Nary: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to move Item No. 8, the Final Plat 01-026, until April the 2nd . Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Anybody opposed? No. Okay. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from January 15, 2002: CUP 01-035 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a building to be used for wholesale building material distribution in an I-L zone for Intermountain Wood Products by The Banks Group, LLC - south of East Franklin Road and west of South Locust Grove: Corrie: Item No. 9 is a continued Public Hearing from January 15, 2002. This is a request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a building to be used for wholesale building material distribution in a I-L zone for Intermountain Wood Products by Brooks Group, LLC, south of East Franklin Road and west of South Locust Grove. At this time I will continue this Public Hearing. Staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, hopefully your memory is a little bit better than mine on this project. I believe we had asked for a new site plan to be submitted showing how the trash enclosure was going to be taken care of. We have received a new plan. It's dated January 22, 2002. I don't know if it met all the original conditions. I know that there was Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 32 of 88 some question about the noise that the different equipment would make and we did want to see a plan of what was proposed for the landscaping. We don't appear to have a -- still don't appear to have a landscape plan. De Weerd: Yes, we do. Stiles: Oh. Not one that I'm familiar with. There was the issue of the propane and the generators and Mrs. Smith is here again to testify. I'm sure she can all recall exactly what her issues were. I don't have anything else to add right now. Corrie: Okay. This is a continued Public Hearing on this Conditional Use Permit. Is the applicant here tonight? All right. Oh, yes. I remember now. Banks: It's the haircut. Corrie: No. I was trying to recollect and then I remember your face and I remember – Banks: My recollection from our last meeting, there were several concerns. One was the landscaping plan. Ben Banks from the Banks Group. Mr. Mayor, when you introduced this you said the Brooks Group. Just want to make sure that you understand it's the Banks Group. Corrie: Excuse me. Understand correctly. Banks: So you have the landscaping plan. On that plan you will notice that the propane tank has been removed. We are going to run the generator with natural gas. You will also notice that the concern with the trash collector has been addressed as well. The other issue that was brought up was that the noise of the trucks and the forklifts and we did a little research into that. I don't know that that's an issue for a Conditional Use Permit, but just for your information we contacted the manufacturers of the industrial lift trucks and just the regular trucks. There is no law on the books that requires backup devices. They sent us a sheet from the American Society of Technical Engineers and all it says is every truck shall be equipped with an operator controlled horn or other sound producing device and then it says the user shall determine if operating conditions require the truck to be equipped with additional sound producing devices. So I suspect if you were in the residential garbage business you might want some type of sound producing device on it, but it is not a requirement. So then we contacted OSHA to see if they had some written material and OSHA indicated to us that there were no current regulations or laws that required sound producing devices on trucks or forklifts. Bird: Backup. Corrie: Backup you mean? Banks: Backup. Exactly. Yes. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 33 of 88 Corrie: Okay. Any questions so far, Council? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess there was one other issue and that was the stipulation in the fire department. Banks: On fire hydrants? De Weerd: Well, no, it was on the vertical clearance. Corrie: Chief Bowers? De Weerd: I think that was supposed to be a clarification. There was a stipulation in here on vertical clearance for the covered loading area at 13 feet six inches. Bowers: City Council member de Weerd and Mayor Corrie, what is it, 13, six? Was that what it was, Tammy? Maximum? Okay. What that is is the loading dock has to be that high to get trucks in and out of it so they are not hitting the top of the building. So basically that's all it was was that the opening has to be that tall, so we have to pull a fire truck in there we can get it in there. De Weerd: Okay. so you're talking a minimum. Bowers: Yes. He didn't completely fill it out or didn't do something right, so -- De Weerd: Okay. That was a question we had, so -- Bowers: Exactly. De Weerd: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Let the record show you're still under oath from the first time. Thank you. Banks: Thank you. Corrie: Anyone here that want to testify? Jeri Smith, are you here? Raise your right hand. J.Smith: Jeri Smith. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 34 of 88 Corrie: Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? J.Smith: Yes, sir. Corrie: Okay. Give your name and address, please. J.Smith: Jeri Smith, 235 South Locust Grove. Since I didn't see the landscaping, I'd like to ask a question on the landscaping. he 20 feet that we have between our back fence and from his back property line, is there any landscaping that would benefit us in the back of that building or is it only a metal building that we will be looking at continuously? Because when Mr. Barnes put the property -- when he developed it all we got was trees that were from about three to maybe six feet high in a 20 foot buffer zone and those -- none of us in the Council or myself will live to see those trees even give any kind of protection and some of those trees are dead now. I know there is one outside my house that's dead. So we have no protection, other than just the metal building out behind us and if noise does become a problem, maybe a buffer of some sort out there might help it. I don't know how the Council is going to address the fact that if there is noise it's going to be very disturbing to us, since we are an occupant 24 hours a day. Are there any suggestions from Council? Nary: Is this your property right there? J.Smith: Yes. The lighter one is. Nary: The big one? J.Smith: Yes. Nary: Okay. J.Smith: And the buffer between us and his back property line, like I said, is nil as far as anything -- visual sighting or noise or anything. There is no protection in the fencing or anything. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: If I'm reading this right Jeri, I think that all you're getting -- all that's in the back is a retention pond and grass. I don't know if it's on a berm or -- J.Smith: There is a fence -- no. It's not on -- no. Bird: I don't think -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 35 of 88 J.Smith: In fact, he didn't -- Bird: And then you got an existing 20 foot planter strip that you -- J.Smith: There was a 20 foot strip between our back fence and his back fence, which would be Mr. Banks' -- or Intermountain Wood Product's back fence. Bird: Yes. J.Smith: And, like I said, there is no -- as far as the trees are concerned, they will give us no protection whatsoever in that buffer between our back fence and their back fence and so I'm -- the point that I'm making is we have nothing but a metal building back there. I would like to see some kind of buffer put back there. Bird: What kind of buffer? J.Smith: Well – Bird: Trees? J.Smith: Trees or a berm would look nice back there. If there is noise that's involved in it -- because any kind of papers or anything that's going to come loose is going to lay directly up against the fence, which does now, because it's going to be whatever the length of that building is back there. Our property -- our back yard borders quite a distance of that building. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mrs. Stiles, this is I think -- I guess the third time we have heard this project. Once at Planning and Zoning and now twice here at Council and I don't recall ever having any discussion about trees in the back of that building at all and I don't know how far the setback is, but I don't know if it's big enough have very big trees in the back of that building anyway. Do you know how much space there is back there? Stiles: I believe the setback is about 40 feet. But what the plan is currently showing is a pond -- retention pond apparently for drainage with some lawn and cobble. J.Smith: Is the pond in the back of the -- is the pond in the back of the building, Shari? Stiles: Yes. Bird: Between your property and theirs -- and the building is the retention pond. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 36 of 88 J.Smith: Where is the pond? It's in the back of your building? And how often does it have water in it? Corrie: Go ahead and speak up. He can't hear you. J.Smith: Where does this pond drain? Banks: Into the ground. It's a retention pond. The rain water comes off -- J.Smith: Well, we did have a sump pump that we had to run continuously from the irrigation back there. If there is too much of a problem, which I don't know how watch water there is going to be back there in this pond, our yard slopes -- this slopes right down into our backyard into our basement when they put a pond back here. I wasn't aware that there was a pond or anything, because I have had no contact with Mr. Banks and I wasn't aware that there was a pond back there. I don't know if they are planning on -- is he planning on irrigating out of this pond? Banks: No. This is retention for run-off water that happens to -- J.Smith: Well, Mr. Barnes irrigates out of his out in front and that's why I asked that question. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, maybe Gary can explain what the retention pond's purpose is and -- in looking at its design, you would assume that this wouldn't run into any other property; is that correct? G. Smith: Yes. Councilmember de Weerd, Mayor, and Council, the storm drain retention pond is designed to contain all storm water on site and it's not released to adjoining properties. The Highway District will not allow storm drainage from developed properties, commercial sites, to enter their right of way, so it's all retained on site. And typically it's -- the retention pond is designed such that the water will percolate down into the ground from the holding basin, the depressed area. J.Smith: May I ask a question? Mr. Smith, there is a hard pan layer out there that we have had problems with. Will it penetrate the hard pan? G. Smith: Well, it won't -- the pond would have to be constructed such that the gravels go -- that are installed in the pond will go through the hard pan layer and down into natural sand and gravels. That's the only way the water can percolate away. So they will have to disturb the hard pan layer. J.Smith: So this is not going to disturb our aquifer for our well that's in the back that's only probably about ten feet from the back is fence? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 37 of 88 G. Smith: Disturb it in what manner? J.Smith: Well, it's going to be sediment. Will there be any kind of oil or anything like that that will go down into the aquifer? G. Smith: There is a requirement that before the water is introduced into the retention pond it needs to be collected through a sand and grease trap or it's grass lined, what they call a bio swale, which will collect the sediments. J.Smith: So there is no way that it can get down in the aquifer? G. Smith: No way that -- J.Smith: It can get into the water -- into our drinking water, our supply of water? G. Smith: Well, how deep is your well? J.Smith: 102 feet. G. Smith: Typically in this area, anyway, when wells are drilled, we find a clay layer somewhere around 50 to 60 feet in depth that separates this upper groundwater aquifer from the lower aquifers. Your well is probably deeper than a lot of older wells are. J.Smith: We have some that are much more shallow than that in the neighborhood. G. Smith: Right. Right. J.Smith: There are some that are below 100 feet. I think some are 50 -- they had to redrill further down, but some of them was only about 60 feet and I don't know what the house next door is for sure. G. Smith: I'm not -- I can't sit here and guarantee that there is not going to be any contamination, because that's a very difficult thing to guarantee. It depends how your well was drilled. I doubt very seriously that there were any seals -- that the well casing was sealed beyond just a surface 10 or 20 foot deep surface seal and so -- I mean there are other areas of -- or other ways that contaminants could find their way into your well. J.Smith: We have had it checked and we haven't had any problem with it so far. It was checked last fall. G. Smith: The best management practices are observed for onsite retention ponds and storm water disposal and those would be applied to this development as we apply those standards to all commercial developments that are required to contain their storm water on site. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 38 of 88 J.Smith: Does this run the full length of that property? The full length of that building? G. Smith: What's that? J.Smith: The pond. Smith: I don't know. The pond would have to be sized such that it would be large enough to contain the -- J.Smith: Well, if they could move – G. Smith: -- hundred year storm. J.Smith: If they could move it so that it doesn't slope towards the well, it would be much better. But if it's going to be from our property line the length -- and it looks like it goes almost the full length of this -- I'm not an engineer, I can't read these maps as well as other people can, but – Smith: Mrs. Smith, there is an existing 20 foot planting strip between this project's east boundary and your property line; is that correct? J.Smith: Yes. G. Smith: And then your well is located how far from your west property line? J.Smith: Probably 20 feet. G. Smith: Okay. J.Smith: Or maybe not quite that far. Maybe 15 feet. G. Smith: So your well is 35 to 40 feet east of the eastern boundary of this development, then, approximately? J.Smith: Well, the 20 feet -- and then you said -- how much is it from the building -- from the pond -- from the edge of the pond to the fence? G. Smith: I don't know what the edge of the pond -- I don't know what the limits of the pond are. They just have a retention pond showing that's grass lined for most of it and then there is cobble shown around the grass. So I don't know what the details of that pond actually look like, how much of the -- how much volume is going to be required in that retention pond to contain the hundred year storm. J.Smith: I think that should definitely be taken under consideration with -- up against the residential where you have -- we are not on city water and sewer, because there is Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 39 of 88 possibility of contamination. And the landscaping is around it. I'd like you to consider it, please. Corrie: Shari, I don't know -- we can't make the applicant pay for the landscaping back there that's already done by Barnes, isn't it? It's part of their original plat; is that correct? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, as part of the Conditional Use Permit you can put additional requirements on the development to mitigate the impact of that development. I don't -- I'm not sure, but -- Mrs. Smith can answer this, but I think that she's talking about some plants adjacent to the building to soften the effect of that building. J.Smith: That's correct. Corrie: Okay. Anything else? J.Smith: No. Corrie: Council, questions? Bird: Mrs. Smith, you're talking about some trees along the back of the building there to -- J.Smith: Yes, to -- Bird: Between it and the pond? J.Smith: Pardon? Bird: Between the building and the pond. Nary: Mr. Mayor, so I'm clear, is this the side of the building or is this the back of the building? Bird: It's the back. Nary: The loading dock is -- Bird: The loading dock is on the north. Nary: The Smiths live on the east side of this building and the loading dock is on the north side of the building. This is the side of the building? The back of the building? J.Smith: On the back of the building. Yes. Bird: The east elevation. Yes. Is that the back of the -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 40 of 88 Banks: This is the back of the building. The retention pond is right here. Nary: But on the west side of the building it says there is a berm and grass on that side. Bird: That's the front of the building. Nary: Oh. Okay. J.Smith: If you landscape it from the building that when people -- we are going to be looking at it all the time and I think it's only fair that we get some landscaping in back for the residential back there. Corrie: Isn't there only landscaping back there 20 feet from whole residence that you're going from the north to the south -- or west side. North to south. Isn't there trees there already? Bird: Yes. J.Smith: Yes, Mr. Corrie, there are, but they are probably six to eight feet apart and I mentioned in the beginning that some of them were three feet high and some of them are dead now and landscaping isn't what I -- there is holes in the landscaping about that deep out there. It was done properly in the beginning and we -- none of us will live to see those trees big enough that it's going to give us any kind of benefit back there as far as landscaping is concerned. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Any questions from Council? Okay. Thank you. We will have you last. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to testify in this continued Public Hearing? Okay. Now you can. Banks: Just to respond to Mrs. Smith's concern about contamination in the pond. You will recall that there are no vehicles in the back of that building. The only contamination is going to falling out of the sky. If the rainwater is dirty, then that's the contamination. It's only rain water and it's only for a catch basin. It would seem to me like the landscaping responsibility was the developer's and I think as far as us landscaping more, I think we might have a utility easement issue. I don't think we can plant trees back there. I think we looked at that at one time. Bird: Right. Right. Banks: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 41 of 88 Corrie: Council, any further discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess I'm curious by Mr. Banks' statement, though, if there are already trees there, why can't they plant more trees there? Bird: I think if you go inside that plat -- inside where they are now, there is a water -- Nary: A water line? Bird: Yes. Irrigation water line going down there. Nary: Well, I guess what I'm thinking is what Mrs. Smith is saying is that there are already trees there and some of them are dead, can't you replace those trees? De Weerd: In the existing – Nary: In the existing 20 feet, replace those trees, to soften -- I mean it would have been better if this had been brought up previously at -- either at Planning and Zoning or before tonight, but Mrs. Stiles is right, I mean certainly to soften the appearance of this very long metal building on the back of the property, it would not be unreasonable to have shrubs and trees of some sort. If there are existing trees, at least some dead ones, they can certainly replace them, at least to assist the neighbors in softening the appearance of this long building. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: But if we are replacing within an existing planting strip, that was -- that planting strip was put in by the developer at the time of the development of this and I would think that he would have to -- have to maintain it and I'm sure Mr. Banks is buying or has already purchased the ground from this developer. I would think that he would have the leverage to -- I don't believe the Council probably has any leverage anymore to make that updated, but I would think as a purchaser of the property he would have some leverage on the developer to do that. Nary: Well, Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Bird, we would have leverage. It's Mr. Banks' CUP and if we require the trees there, whether Mr. Banks put them in or he gets Mr. Barnes to put them back, doesn't Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 42 of 88 really matter to us and it doesn't really to Mrs. Smith, but it is his CUP that he wants, so, you know, we can require those trees be there. Whoever puts them there really isn't our concern. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: That's true, but you're giving a CUP and you're putting conditions on ground he doesn’t even own, which I don't agree with. This is something that -- that we need -- that the developer -- this ground -- Mr. Banks has not purchased this 20 feet of planting strip and -- Nary: Isn't he installing this retention pond? Bird: He is, but that's his property. That 20 strip -- existing 20 strip I don't believe is in his -- in his property, is it? Banks: My understanding is there is a 20 feet strip between my retention pond and the Smith property, which belongs to the development. I don't own that, so I don't have – J.Smith: That's correct. Bird: Is that correct? Corrie: Shari? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, that is a 20 foot wide planting strip that is to be owned and maintain by all of the developers within that subdivision. That's the responsibility of the entire subdivision, every property owner within that subdivision. Banks: It would seem to me that when I pay my yearly fee to the developer, that fee should go to maintain that 20 feet strip; correct? Corrie: What's your development agreement with your developer? Banks: I'm not sure. I'm not sure. Nary: Well -- Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess I have a different question, then, for Mrs. Stiles. Is what -- was this development done by CUP? Is the enforcement mechanism for the City, then, a code enforcement issue, because the developer is not maintaining the landscaping as required and the CUP for this whole development, not just Mr. Banks' piece, the entire Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 43 of 88 development, and if he's not, then is there a mechanism that we can use to put these trees back, so that these trees that are there can get replaced that are dead. Stiles: It's a continual enforcement problem. It has been from day one out there. There is dead ones out there now? J.Smith: Yes. There is one out there behind the house that's dead. Corrie: Hold it. Wait a minute. Let's don't get in conversations back and forth. If you want to ask a question, let's ask the question and have them come up here. Stiles: We'd need to go and look and see what was there. I mean they didn't have a lot of requirements as far as -- they did have a certain number of six foot trees they were to plant out there. Some of the trees they have had to replace. They were less than six foot high. It was prepared very poorly. There was no grading of any kind done. It's very difficult to even walk out there, let alone mow it. But at that time we had no standards for how that was to be done. The basic standard was, you know, put this many trees there. Corrie: We still have a hammer. They've got to have that many trees anyway to put back in there. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Shari, our enforcement through the city and through the CUP that we passed that development on is with the developer, not with the association or anything like that, is it? So we -- our enforcement is to the developer, the gentleman that -- or the group that developed the property is the one that got the CUP, that was given the restriction of what he had to do and all this stuff, it wasn't the association or -- as you said, the association was supposed to be taking care of it. Is that not right? Stiles: Once that property is turned over to the home -- or to the building owners, the property owner's association -- and I don't know if that has happened -- it would be the responsibility of each -- Bird: Now what we passed was with the developer, not with some association, so legally we can only go back on the developer that has -- that got the deal. Stiles: All the successors are bound by that. Bird: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 44 of 88 Stiles: And there was -- I forgot answer you before, Mr. Nary, that the Conditional Use Permit applied to specific lots within this subdivision and those were the lots that were adjacent to residential. So that's the reason these are also Conditional Use Permits. Nary: So there is a mechanism for the City if the developer isn't replacing those trees or maintaining that property, whether it's the developer or the homeowners association, to revoke the Conditional Use Permit for that property. Are those common lots? Stiles: It is common lot. Nary: So if we revoke the conditional use of that property because they are failing to maintain the landscaping requirements on it -- I know that's an extreme result, but say that were to happen, what would be the result to Mr. Banks or the other business owners in that business park? Stiles: The only ones with Conditional Use Permits would be those adjacent to the residential and that wouldn't affect the entire subdivision. Nary: So Mr. Banks is adjacent to residential, so how would have affect Mr. Banks? Stiles: I guess if you revoke the Conditional Use Permit he can't operate. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I'd like to ask a question of Shari. Shari, was the subdivision developed under CUP or was it platted with the requirement that those lots adjacent to the residential area be processed through the CUP process? Stiles: It was platted with the requirement that those go through the CUP process. There is also a Development Agreement on the property that requires it to be maintained. Nichols: Okay. So we have -- but as far as -- but the subdivision wasn't a Conditional Permit that could be revoked or modified or whatever, it's just the requirement that each of those lots on the east boundary have to go through the conditional use process in order to mitigate effects with regard to the residences and so forth; correct? Stiles: Not all of them on that boundary, but some of those lots on that boundary. Nichols: Okay. Including this lot in question? Stiles: Yes. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 45 of 88 Nichols: And that's why he's here seeking the Conditional Use Permit, even though it's already zoned appropriately for his use? Stiles: Yes. Nichols: So we have a development agreement that requires maintenance of this common area by the developer and the developer's assigns, which would include the property owners association once all of the lots have been sold; is that correct? Stiles: Yes. Nichols: And if I may, Mr. Mayor, ask questions of Mr. Banks. Have you already purchased this property, Mr. Banks? Banks: Yes. Nichols: Okay. And, Mr. Banks, when you purchased the property did you become, then, a member of this association? Banks: Yes. I believe so. I don't have a problem taking care of the property that I bought. I just don't want to take care of the whole development. Nichols: Mr. Banks, are you assessed fees for membership in that association? Banks: You know, I think I am. I don't know that for sure. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, maybe the way to -- the solution to this is enforcement of the Development Agreement and the building owners association can work with the developer to replace the dead trees and approve that part of it and not necessarily put it into the conditional uses, but the City has some enforcement power to the Development Agreement and Mr. Banks knows that he -- if he's a member, then he has some rights within that association to require that those dead -- you know, his money be appropriately used. Corrie: Okay. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Banks. Any other discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Shari, in looking at this landscape plan, does this meet the requirements? Stiles: I haven't reviewed it entirely, but it appears to meet it. At least the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, they did request some additional trees along the northern boundary, one for every 35 feet. I guess I hesitated Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 46 of 88 in your response about the 20 feet in just enforcing it. I don't think even enforcing it is going to help the Smiths. De Weerd: But with the retention pond on the backside of that building, you can't -- or you can't plant plantings within a retention pond area, can you? Stiles: You could, but I do believe that there is quite a large irrigation ditch that's been piped through there. De Weerd: Yes. It's shown on this map. Stiles: I don't know how deep they can go with the retention pond when that irrigation ditch is there either, but -- De Weerd: It looks like it's just -- well, I don't have a measurement thing with me, but it runs very close to the property line. Within five feet it looks like. So any trees that would be planted would have to be planted within the existing 20 foot landscape strip. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Not hearing any further questions, I'll entertain a motion, then, to close the Public Hearing, if Council so agrees. Nary: I would so move to close the Public Hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to the close Public Hearing on the CUP request. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no. All ayes. Motion carried. The Public Hearing is now closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Discussion on the request? Nary: Well, Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess I'll start. It appears -- I think Mr. Bird's last comment was probably where the issue really lies. I don't think there is a way on Mr. Banks' property to put trees and shrubs that are going to have any impact on this building. It does appear that the planting strip area is where that needs to be maintained and there is a mechanism and I appreciate Mr. Nichols' comments, I think that's the method that our planning staff and Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 47 of 88 the developer and those need to work together to get that properly done like it was agreed to be done. I don't know how much help that is to the Smith's property or the other properties adjacent, but it appears when this was approved that was the intent, that that area was to help soften the impact of this particular project, because the idea was that businesses such as Mr. Banks' were going to be built in this area and that planting strip would, again, provide some buffer between the businesses and them.The 20 foot planting strip, the retention pond, the fact that it is the back of the building is really -- reduces quite a bit for the noise issue that may, if at all, if any, from this particular project. So I don't see any other reason not to approve this CUP as it's been presented here. I think the other thing is a different mechanism and needs to be done separately. Corrie: Any other discussion from Council? Hearing none, then I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, I'd move the approval of CUP 01-035, a request for Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a building to be used for wholesale building material distribution in an I-L zone for Intermountain Wood Products by the Banks Group, LLC, south of East Franklin Road and west of South Locust Grove, for our attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for us approve based upon the staff report and from comments at the hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mr. Nary and seconded by Mr. Bird to approve the Conditional Use Permit 01-035, based upon the staff's information and the Public Hearing. Have the attorney draw up the proper Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Any further discussion? Mr. Nary. Nary: Just one more thing. I don't want Mrs. Smith to leave thinking we didn't hear you, because I think we did, and I do think there is a method to do that and I think our Council has presented a good method that our staff can work with you and the development -- the developer, because we do have some other mechanisms other than this to deal with some of the problems that you have with the way this is and some of those trees and the shrubbery that's supposed to be there, so I don't want you to think we didn't hear it. J.Smith: May I make a comment? Corrie: No. Nary: Not right now. Corrie: Any other discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 48 of 88 Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess the only direction to the staff that this be pursued and if we could get an update at our workshop in March, on March 12th , that would be appreciated. Stiles: I can let you know -- I can let you know -- oh, sorry. Corrie: Is your mike off or am I going deaf? Or both. Stiles: We can let you know next Tuesday. De Weerd: Okay. Corrie: I was going to say you could do it quicker than that. Stiles: Yes. I have been working with Jim Boyd every time I had a problem out there and it's every summer. De Weerd: Just as long as you make sure that this item came up and the issuance of this Conditional Use Permit and we have serious concerns about the conditions out there and we'd like to have their written response to look at it at our workshop. Stiles: Would you like them present or -- Corrie: It would help. De Weerd: That probably would send a stronger statement. I'll get it on the workshop if you will give them a call. Corrie: If you can get them to come. I suppose we could subpoena them, but I don't think that would be a good idea. But I think they will come. If you can do that, I will converse with you the rest of this week on -- Stiles: Okay. Corrie: Okay. We still have a motion before the Chair. Any further discussion? Okay. Roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried on CUP 01-035. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 49 of 88 Item 10: Public Hearing: AZ 01-022 Request for annexation and zoning of 22.66 acres-from R-1 to C-G zones for Queenland Acres by White-Leasure Development, Co. - southeast corner of South Stoddard Road and West Overland Road: Corrie: Item No. 10 is a Public Hearing. This is a request for annexation and zoning of 22.66 acres from an R-1 to C-G zone for Queenland Acres by White-Riedel Development Company, southeast corner of South Stoddard Road and West Overland Road. At this time I will open the Public Hearing on the request for annexation and zoning and staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this property was the subject of a Comprehensive Plan amendment back when we did the several requests at one time. This was -- they had requested it change to commercial and it was approved as mixed plan use. This is where the Overland -- or whatever they are calling this storage here that you have seen recently and here is the Roho -- I'm not sure what you call that, but it's on Overland Road. This is all of Bear Creek Subdivision. I believe their request is only for annexation and zoning, there is no plan at this time. They have requested a -- they will -- we had requested that they do a Development Agreement associated with it. There are some lots or potential lots in the back on the southern part of the property that will not be sewerable until a future trunk line comes through, I believe the second -- Black Cat Trunk is extended and they are aware of that. We would request that all of the uses be developed under the Conditional Use Permit process and also that they enter into a condition of the re-zone and annexation that they enter into a hold-harmless agreement with the City for not being able to develop those back lots and that's all I had. Corrie: Comments from Council? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. The developer first. Raise your right hand, please. Is the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Huber: I do. Corrie: Name and address, please. Huber: My name is Jeff Huber. My address is 416 South Eighth Street in Boise and I represent White-Leisure Development Company, which is the applicant, not White- Riedel, Mr. Mayor. We are in agreement with the staff report. There is just a couple of clarifications that I'd like to make. The property -- in your staff report it says that it's currently zoned R-1. Well, it's currently zoned mixed use. It's designated as general commercial in your Comprehensive Plan, which I don't think you have passed yet, but we envision this property and we have in our request -- in our letter of justification we did note for the record that we feel that this property lends itself to office, warehouse, Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 50 of 88 manufacturing type uses and as well as some retail commercial uses on the -- bordering Overland Road and perhaps on the corner of Stoddard and Overland. So in speaking with staff we -- staff recommended that we request the general commercial and put the requirement for a Development Agreement and conditional uses for each use that will go on this property in there, which gives the City flexibility and control over the property and we will certainly have strict clarification on landscape, I'm sure. So those are the two clarifications I wanted to make and in our letter it does -- it does say that we feel it's best suited for office, warehouse, manufacturing type uses. I think the better commercial uses are on the corner of Meridian Road where currently the County Corner Store is and the property adjacent to that, if you're talking shopping center uses or a grocery store type use or something like that. Not to say that somewhere down the road a commercial use of that type couldn't go on this property either, but we see it being developed as sort of a corporate campus type development that you see along Emerald Street being Five Mile and Milwaukee Street or Five Mile and Maple Grove, those types of uses and those are the types of uses we will probably be coming back to you with in the future. If there is any questions I certainly would be happy to answer them. Corrie: Let me start and apologize for saying White-Riedel. White-Leisure. Evidently my glasses need changed here. It's about time. So I do apologize. Huber: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Okay. Any questions from staff and questions from Council? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Do we have anybody signed up for the Public Hearing? Okay. Is there anyone here in the audience that would like to issue testimony here tonight on this request? Okay. Staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I have -- just to clarify Mr. Huber's testimony, the property is zoned R-1 and RUT. Those are the zonings that exist in Ada County. What Mr. Huber is referring to is the designation on the Comprehensive Plan map and I want to make sure that they know the distinction that just because it's shown on the Comp Plan map that doesn't mean it's zoned to reflect that future land use. So that's all I had. Corrie: Okay. And let the record show that he is in agreement with that, Shari. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Just as a clarification on No. 10 on the recommendation, Shari, it says it's -- it requests zoning to C-G, which is in the Comprehensive Plan generalized land use map. Is that the current one that's in effect or is it the one that's proposed that hasn't been -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 51 of 88 Stiles: That is the current one that's in effect. Nary: Great. And that's what I thought it was. I just wanted to make sure. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Hearing none, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Item No. 10. De Weerd: I move we close the Public Hearing. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Greenland Acres by White-Leisure Development Company. Further comments? All in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Further discussion? De Weerd: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Hearing no further discussion, I would entertain a motion on the request for annexation and zoning. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve AZ 01-022, request for annexation and zoning of 22.66 acres from R-1 to C-G zone for Queenland Acres. Ask the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order and to include all staff comments and the P&Z recommendation. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mrs. de Weerd and second by Mr. Nary to approve the request for annexation and zoning of the Queenland Acres and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law with all staff Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 52 of 88 comments of Planning and Zoning, as well as testimony. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg, if you will give us a roll call vote, please. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 01-024 Request for annexation and zoning of 4.0 acres from M-I to I-L zones for Idaho Trucking Specialties by Victory Properties LLC - 600 N. Eagle Road: Corrie: Item No. 11 is a Public Hearing. This is a request for an annexation and zoning of 4.0 acres from M-I to I-L zones for Idaho Trucking Specialists by Victory Properties, LLC, 600 North Eagle Road. At this time I will open the Public Hearing and invite staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor, Council, this is where the property that's located immediately north of the Coors Distributing Company that was recently annexed. This will basically get rid of the enclave that existed there and we are glad to have Idaho Truck Specialties within the City of Meridian. There were two -- well, there is several of the requirements for the -- in the recommendation to the City Council from P&Z. I would like to maybe add a couple of clarifications and see if that's what you would like to move on. On page two of the recommendation, paragraph four, line three, I would recommend you stipulate a detached five foot wide sidewalk and on page three, paragraph five, where it discussions the signage, the billboard sign, that the signage on the property shall be subject to the sign ordinance upon redevelopment or change of use and I'd like to add that additional -- any proposed additional signage will be subject to the sign ordinance, regardless of whether they are redeveloping and changing the use. And with that I'd ask that you approve the annexation and zoning with all staff and agency conditions. Corrie: Council, questions for staff? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Shari, on your amendment essentially -- or I guess in addition to number five, about any proposed new signage, isn't number eight -- doesn't that take into that? Isn't that already covered? Stiles: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, it does. Nary: Okay. So we really just need to amend or add onto number four as attached. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 53 of 88 Stiles: Yes. Thank you. Nary: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: This is a Public Hearing. Is the applicant here tonight? Yes, sir. Raise your right hand. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Hayden: Yes, sir. Corrie: Your name and address, please. Hayden: Terry Hayden, 6508 West Wintergard, Boise, Idaho. We don't have any problems with the requirements laid out in the proposal. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: That was easy. Corrie: Anyone else from the public like to issue testimony? Okay. Moving right along. Okay. Hearing none, any comments from staff or Council for our Public Hearing record? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we close the Public Hearing. Bird: I second. Corrie: Motion has been made to close the Public Hearing on Item No. 11. Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Discussion on the request for annexation? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion, then, for the recommendation of the staff. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the request for annexation and zoning of 4.0 acres from M-1 to I-L zones for Idaho Trucking Specialties, to note on Item 4, page two, the detached sidewalks and to ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 54 of 88 McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request for annexation and zoning for Idaho Trucking Specialties to include the staff's comments and to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Public Hearing: RZ 01-007 Request for rezone of 3.35 acres from R-8 to C-C zones for Sol C. Yaun by Hubble Engineering Inc. - 725 East Fairview Avenue: Corrie: Item No. 12 is a Public Hearing. This is a request for a rezone of 3.35 acres from an R-8 to C-G zone for Sol C. Yaun by Hubble Engineering, Inc., 725 East Fairview Avenue. I will open the Public Hearing at this time and invite staff's comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property that's located north of Creekside Arbor Apartments that's been recently developed. Next to it is the Meridian Car Sales, Meridian Auto Sales. Right here is Ultra-Touch Car Wash. This is a driveway that enters into the apartments. This I believe is where Ponderosa Paint is located and we have the mobile home park back here. In looking at the recommendations from Planning and Zoning Commission, there -- the staff conditions were not included in this recommendation. I don't know if that was on purpose or what exactly the motion was, but we would ask that you include staff comments as part of the recommendation or in your finding and conditions of approval. The staff report, however, does make several references to L-O. Every place within those comments that L-O should be changed to C-C. That's what the applicant has requested. Also this is shown as a mixed planned used area within the Comprehensive Plan. We would ask that all uses on the property shall require a Conditional Use Permit. There is a significant portion of this property that is within the flood plain. Five Mile Creek runs along here. There is a -- this is part of the other subdivision. The road does exist on the east side of the Five Mile Creek and it is our hope that that is a future pathway location and we can deal with that as part of the Conditional Use, but I believe the road still continues through there, if I'm not mistaken. I don't know if they can access it from the roadway going to the plan -- or the Creekside Arbor Apartments. There is reference in the recommendation to a sewer easement that will be needed for a relief line and they would need to work with Public Works Department on that. We would recommend that the request for rezone to -- from R-8 to C-C be approved with all staff and agency conditions. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 55 of 88 Corrie: Any questions? Is the applicant here this evening? Is the testimony you're about to give tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Carter: Yes, sir. Corrie: Okay. Give your name and address, please. Carter: My name is Greg Carter with Hubble Engineering. My home address is 3203 East Greenhurst Drive in Nampa. We have -- well, Mrs. Stiles, could I ask you one question? The only thing I have not heard yet that you mentioned that you would like to maybe extend a road up through this piece? Is that what I understood? Or was it sewer that you would like -- Stiles: I was referring to the sewer easement that the Public Works Department needs for a relief line in that area. Carter: Okay. So there is no recommendation to connect the road up through that parcel to Fairview? Stiles: The pathway. Carter: As in walking path? Stiles: Walking path. Carter: Okay. Along Five Mile. Stiles: Yes. Carter: Okay. For some reason I thought you said a road. Stiles: I think -- I believe -- excuse me. I think there is a road -- I'm not sure if it exists there, but I don't know where Nampa-Meridian accesses that to maintain it. Carter: Yes. But, you know, that would be something that we would have to maintain if they -- you know, their road is on our side. I'm sure that -- Stiles: If it exists. Carter: Yes. I don't think it does. I don't think there is a road off of Fairview down into -- I guess that clarifies that. A couple other clarifications in this package. There is few places where it's noted that we want to rezone to C-G. I guess if you see that in there, make a note that it's actually C-C, so that we don't rezone the wrong zone. Other than that, I'll entertain any questions. Corrie: Okay. Any questions? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 56 of 88 Nary: I have none. Corrie: She did mention that. Okay. All right. Thank you, Greg. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to issue testimony tonight? Okay. Hearing none -- De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Shari, in your staff recommendations there aren't any -- there isn't anything noted for the recommendation by P&Z to have adopted. There is a note about the easement on Five Mile Creek, but outside of that that's the only thing in the staff comments. Stiles: The staff comments, if you will note, for example, under C on page two, it does say that the property is located within a mixed plan use development section of the Comprehensive Plan land use map use. All uses on this property shall require a Conditional Use Permit. De Weerd: So you have to kind of go in and extract it? Stiles: Well, I guess so. De Weerd: It usually reads a little easier for legal, I think, to pull those out, so -- Stiles: It's a little difficult when there is no proposal for any development, it's just a request for annexation and zoning, so most of our -- you know, under Item G on page three it does talk about this easement paralleling Five Mile Creek and that's probably the extent of it. I did add in my testimony that part of my presentation tonight that that Five Mile Creek is designated as a multiple use pathway and in the future we would like to open discussions on how we might accommodate a pathway through there. But we can talk about that as part of the Conditional Use. De Weerd: Thank you. Corrie: Any further discussion on the Public Hearing? Discussion? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Item No. 12, the rezone request. De Weerd: So moved. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the rezone request by Hubble Engineering. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion is carried. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 57 of 88 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Further discussion? Okay. I'll entertain a motion on the request. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: It seems like the only one with a sore throat up here is the one making all the motions, but I will move -- I move to approve the request for a rezone of 3.35 acres from R-8 to C-C for -- I'm not even going to attempt the name -- for the application in front of us, RZ 01-007 and to include all staff comments that were verbal here, as well as hidden in the staff report, and ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mrs. de Weerd and seconded by Mr. Bird to approve the request for rezone with staff comments and the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: I'm going to ask that we take about a ten-minute recess. (Recess) RECONVENED AT 9:10 P.M. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 01-023 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.97 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for proposed Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group, LLC - 2720 South Locust Grove Road: Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 01-023 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 20 building lots and 24 other lots in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group, LLC - 2720 South Locust Grove Road: Corrie: Are we on? We are on? Okay. I will call the meeting back to order at ten minutes after 9:00. We have Item No. 13 and Item No. 14, which is Inglenook Subdivision, a Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 58 of 88 Public Hearing. One is a request for annexation and zoning and the other is for a request for a Preliminary Plat. So I will -- with Council's approval, I will open the Public Hearing for both 13 and 14 and take testimony on both and see where we go. So at this time I will open the Public Hearing on Items 13 and 14, request for annexation and zoning of 5.97 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone for proposed Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group and also a request for Preliminary Plat approval of 20 building lots and 24 other lots in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Inglenook Subdivision. With that having been said, staff, invite your comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this subdivision recently -- or, actually, not that recently, did come before you previously and it was denied -- at least the findings stated several reasons for denying the project. It was that the open space wasn't well located. This is the previous plat that you looked at. The only open space that was there, they proposed a little strip, a pedestrian walkway back to some land adjacent to Nine Mile Creek, which Council did not feel and feels that it was a really usable area and it was hidden and they didn't -- just didn't think that was appropriate for this subdivision. Another reason noted in the Council's decision and order was that the additional lots would create unreasonable public safety issues and I think that was primarily due to the one way in and no way out until adjacent development occurred. Mr. John Shipley's property is to the south here and also felt that it would cause some development problems with his property and in the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission we'd need to clarify that the Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend the approval of the open space as they have changed it. This is now an open space lot that they have proposed as part of the new plan. Virtually -- it virtually remains the same for the rest of the plat. A typical R-4 development. So I believe -- I'm trying to find that -- excuse me just a moment. I'm looking at the wrong findings. I'm looking at the findings for the Preliminary Plat or the recommendation to City Council from Planning and Zoning Commission. It does include staff comments exactly as they were written. Paragraph three on page three probably should just be deleted. It's not really a recommendation, except to discuss the location and usability of that, because the Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend that it be exact -- that the open space stay as proposed. The main change is that open space reconfiguration. There is a statement in here, it was based on a comment from the fire department that stated the project shall be provided with two means of access from a main arterial. To meet that condition without adjacent property joining in this development that would not be possible. I guess Kenny could speak to that if he would. I'll let Kenny cover that comment. Bowers: Mayor Corrie and City Council Members, not knowing what's going to develop on either side of this or when it will develop, we have to make a decision if we allow just one road to be coming into a subdivision or out, I am not sure if our fire marshal had seen the plans or knows the plans, that they have widened the entrance a little bit coming that, so that might make a little difference to the fire marshal. Oh, it's got a landscape island, so -- I don't know if you have any other questions. They have provided a turnaround, though, at the end there as you can see. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 59 of 88 Corrie: Kenny, on the Deputy Chief fire prevention, Joe Silva gave us a December 18th - - is that up to date as far as his request for this one? Bowers: Yes, it would be. December 18th . Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Any other staff comments? Stiles: I have none, sir. Corrie: Okay. Council have any comments, questions? This is a Public Hearing for the annexation and zoning and also for the Preliminary Plat. Is the developer representative here tonight? Raise your right hand. Will the testimony you're about to give be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Ford-Rudel: Yes, sir. Corrie: Your name and address, please. Ford-Rudel: Good evening, Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council, my name is Ashley Ford-Rudel, I am representing Providence Development Group. I am with Hubble Engineering at 701 South Allen Street, Suite 102, in Meridian. I have three areas of concern regarding the findings and the recommendation this evening. The first item of concern is regarding Preliminary Plat Condition No. 25. The condition states the project shall be provide two means of access from a main arterial. This was not a condition of approval in the staff report, but when it was presented to the Commission, the Commission recommended it as a condition. The site only has 268 feet of frontage on Locust Grove. ACHD has only approved one public street access. It would not be possible to develop this site with two entrances, nor would it meet the required offsets of ACHD. Condition 29 goes on to say located the main entrance off Locust Grove Road 100 feet off the north property line as proposed. Even if we were able to acquire the northern property or the southern property, ACHD would not allow us curb cuts on Locust Grove Road due to the offset -- offsets. Excuse me. Our second area of concern is Condition 14 of the annexation and rezone and Condition 30 under the Preliminary Plat. These conditions reference incorrect lot numbers. The two lots that should be referenced are Lot 8, Block 1, and Lot 1, Block 2. Our third area of concern is comment three in the Preliminary Plat comments regarding the location of the open space and an argument can be made that it be shifted to the west. The applicant has agreed that open space is needed and has provided this on Lot 5, Block 2. With the original application a year ago the applicant proposed a micropath to a common lot that ran along Nine Mile Drain. With the application the applicant has increased the open space to a . 42 acre lot as common space in the southeast corner of the parcel and has reduced the number of available lots in order to provide the open space. There are reasons as to why the open space is placed in this location, rather than in the center of the subdivision. The first reason is because the possible pathway connection along the Nine Mile Drain, which can eventually connect to Los Alamitos Subdivision to the north and to Sherbrooke Hollow Subdivision to the south. Having the open space in Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 60 of 88 conjunction with the greenbelt will improve accessibility. The Parks Department is requesting a ten foot pedestrian pathway on the eastern edge of the subdivision. We also agree with the P&Z condition needing to pave the pathway if so desired. Second, due to the parcel shape, this corner would provide the greatest amount of square footage for open space, rather than placing it on a smaller lot in the middle of Block 1 or 3. Third, the open space is located at the end of the property, which will provide ample safety from traffic. It is approximately 450 feet to the open space from Lot 2, Blocks 1 and 3. This is not a large development. Open spaces are considered a focus of a neighborhood. There has been planning studies that state most dwellings should be within a five minute walk, averaging roughly 2,000 feet of the center. Clearly, all the lots in the Inglenook meet this requirement. As you are aware, the Council denied this application in April 2001. One of the reasons was because of the open space, which I have already discussed. Another reason was the creation of additional residential lots, which would be unreasonable from a safety issue. This is an in-fill project with large- scale development to the north, south, east and west and is located within the city limits of Meridian. We have spoken to representatives of the fire department and the police department in regards to the response times and both have stated that these services can be accommodated. Other than the items I have mentioned, we are in agreement with the P&Z Commission recommendation and request approval of this project and I will be happy to stand for any questions. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Ms. Rudel, for the open space, what's the intent of what they are going to do there? Is it just grass? Ford-Rudel: It will be grass and sod. We will be providing some picnic tables. Right now it's just preliminary. We haven't put anything concrete down as to what we will provide, but definitely picnic tables and an area for the kids to kick around a soccer ball. Nary: Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone from the public that would like to testify at this time? Mr. Shipley, please. Raise your right hand. Shipley: John Shipley. Corrie: 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 February 5, 2002 Page 61 of 88 Shipley: Yes, sir. Corrie: Mr. Shipley. Shipley: I live on the south side of this subdivision at 2770 South Locust Grove. I have about five acres there. It's a little over five acres. The front of the property has already been sold to ACHD for a widening of the road and I have a couple of different issues that -- I just talked to Mr. Star, who is from Providence Development Company. Before this was a Hubble development, so I guess they are hooked together one way or another. My property is stubbed in on my south side to Sherbrooke Hollow and their stub in don't even come close to lining up to it, the one that's already existing there. It will make it sort of a pain in the neck if my property is developed, because where they are proposing the stub is at that turnaround there and I think that maybe that ought to be changed so it lines up to the stub in Sherbrooke Hollow. That would mean they would have to change their design and everything, but then they have been trying to buy my place for the last two or three years and I would sell it if they would come up with enough money to replace it, but they don't want to replace it. They want me to deal with lesser of a place and not as much land and I have looked at stuff clear in Sand Hollow to try to get a cheaper price and it just don't do it. They are wanting to take my home for less money and then they don't even want to pay for the moving expenses or anything and I have got some other issues that they have never even come and talked to me about, but I know for a fact that my drain field to my septic system goes under that property, because when I redone the drain field in 1973, the man that dug it out and put the rest of the new drain field on my property said, well, your drain field runs under that property and I said, well, I didn't put it there, you know. I bought this place -- it's been there since before the land was split up, you know. So what was done in the old farming days out here is coming back to haunt me and I don't see where if I have to hook up to the sewer or something, because they are going to dig into my drain field that I should be -- have to do that for -- so they can have their subdivision and I tried to explain this to the real estate man who was supposed to get me in touch with these people. I didn't even know that Providence -- I thought it was Hubble and I called Hubble back in the past and I got ahold of a Wayne Forey, I guess you guys know him, he's working for Hubble, and I didn't get any relief from anybody on this. There is -- I got irrigation water that pops over on that property, because it was all leveled as one field back in the days when they were farming it and sometimes I need to burn a ditch or something or a fence row along there and if they put them burnable fences around there I can't do what I have to do, but I would really like to see this stub in lined up to the stub that's already in my property from Sherbrooke Hollow and there is -- you know, I could go on for a half an hour, but it isn't going to make any difference, you know. I would like to work with people, but they didn't see a necessity to talk to me about it, they just made me an offer on my property and it won't replace what I got. How do you -- takes you -- you move out of your home and -- where you have lived for -- since 1973 and you can't replace it for what they want to give you for it and, you know, so I will just stay there and I think -- I really think it would be an advantage to have more than one access into that subdivision, because when they put Sherbrooke Hollow in and Salmon Rapids in they put that street up there near me and it really affects me when I'm trying Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 62 of 88 to come out of my driveway, because people come ripping out of there and turn the corner and it -- it's -- you know, it's dangerous, you know. Already somebody had to miss me and they ran into somebody else, because they were missing me, because I didn't see them and they were speeding. So it's just a matter of time before somebody gets hurt up there. It's a safety issue, too, and if they had the whole property it would be a lot better, but if they don't want to pay for it, why I can't leave. I can't take something less for -- you know, I found a place recently and it was over twice as much as what they are offering me for my place, you know, and it was only four and a half acres. That's where I'm at and I'm stuck between a rock and a hard spot and I got to deal with all this stuff continually, you know, so it hasn't been fun. The neighbor kids burning hay stacks and all kinds of stuff. It's bad, you know. Corrie: Okay. Mr. Shipley, thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to issue testimony? Okay. If the developer has got some questions that -- probably that Council may want to ask about some of the things he brought up. Ford-Rudel: I think I can just address a couple of the issues Mr. Shipley brought up. Regarding the streets, we are meeting ACHD requirements. They have approved both the stub streets to the north and the south, which was actually where they required us to put them, so we are meeting all their conditions. In regards to the irrigation water, we will be piping wastewater water to the Five Mile Drain, we will be submitting irrigation plans, drainage plans, so we will not be affecting any other property adversely and we will be required by the city engineer. Corrie: You say you're piping your waste -- the drain water directly into the ditch? Ford-Rudel: Yes. There will be a pipe along the Five Mile ditch, from what I'm understanding from the engineer. Stiles: Nine Mile. Ford-Rudel: Or Nine Mile. Excuse me. Corrie: Okay. Are you aware of the drainage of the septic system into that area? Ford-Rudel: I haven't been briefed on that. The project engineer has been working with all the sewer plans, so -- any other questions? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Ms. Rudel, I noticed on condition two on page two that there is a requirement that a non-combustible fence be constructed along the Nine Mile Drain. Now what is that in relation to what Mr. Shipley talked about in some ditch that he has to burn off of Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 63 of 88 his property, his concern about having fencing that is -- a combustible fence to his property? Is this different? Ford-Rudel: This is different. Yes. The irrigation district has actually asked for non- combustible fencing so when they do go burn the noxious weeds -- and they are afraid that if it was a six foot high cedar fence then it would catch fire. Nary: Sure. Ford-Rudel: Mr. Shipley's fence didn't come up in the last hearing. We would be willing to work with him on that and provide non-combustible fencing. Corrie: Council, any other – Bird: I have none, Mayor. Nary: No. Corrie: Where the cul-de-sac is, that's where the road would go down into Mr. Shipley's property if it was sold; is that correct? Ford-Rudel: Mayor Corrie that would be correct. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you very much. Ford-Rudel: Thank you. Corrie: Council, questions, discussion? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Gary, can you tell me on -- how important is this that the stub lines up on each side of Mr. Shipley's property? Smith: Council member de Weerd, Mayor and Council, I don't know that -- well, let me back up. I assume that the width of Mr. Shipley's property north and south is about the same as the width of this parcel. No? It's narrower? Okay. I don't know how the layout would work on Mr. Shipley's property. It appears that this development is just one street in from Locust Grove with lots on each side of the street. I don't know how the layout would work for Mr. Shipley's property and really how the connection between Sherbrooke Hollow and this proposed project would work. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 64 of 88 De Weerd: Gary, before I make you go on too much longer -- Bird: She was talking about the sewer. De Weerd: I was talking about stubbing the sewer in, why it -- Smith: Thank you. De Weerd: Excuse me. I do have one other question. With Mr. Shipley's drainage field and -- I mean how is this affected and is there some responsibility there if your drainage overlaps onto someone else's property? How do we assure that this isn't going to affect his system? Smith: Right. Well, the concern would be that somebody would dig into it on this piece of property and disrupt the operation of it, so if they know where it is or can find where it is, it would appear to me that it would need to be relocated onto his property and off of this proposed development. I don't know if there is some kind of a legal issue as far as -- well, I don't know exactly how to address that, but from a logical standpoint it would appear to me that it would need to be relocated onto his property. Now who does that, who stands the expense of that relocation, I don't know, but from this developer's standpoint I don't think that it should be a liability for someone buying a lot on this project and the process of constructing something on that lot dig into this drain field. De Weerd: Is that something, Mr. Attorney, that we should be considering in this proposal or is this not within our scope? Nichols: Councilwoman de Weerd, Mayor, Members of the Council, the issue about some sort of encroachment of one lot onto another I think is an issue that really doesn't address the land use context and the rules governing development. The question is whether Mr. Shipley's drain field somehow acquired a prescriptive easement onto the Inglenook Subdivision property and that's really an issue between Mr. Shipley and the owners of that property, which may affect Providence's ability to develop those particular lots onto which the drain field extends and it may, you know, behoove them to relocate his drain field, but, by the same token, if it turns out that he does not have a prescriptive easement, then he's -- unfortunately, he's stuck. But there is an argument that could be made that he does have an easement, because the drain field was there before the property was split. So it's really not an issue to a land use decision that this Council needs to make. De Weerd: Thank you. I appreciate you arguing both sides of that issue, though. Corrie: Where did Shari go? Hi, Shari. Where that arrow is pointing, is Mr. Shipley's property just north of that? Okay. How would that tie into the property in Inglenook down at the other end? I mean I think -- see down here where the arrow -- thank you. Right there is where the highway department says it needs to come in to come into that Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 65 of 88 property and now down here it's coming in down here. Now how are you going to get from here to here? Mr. Shipley, do you own all that property right there? Shipley: I own five acres in there and I'm -- Corrie: Come up here. Shipley: I think it will probably mess up me when I need to subdivide if they don't put the stub in right here. Right there. And we got a stub on the other side into the other property that runs fairly close to the one in Sherbrooke Hollow. I suppose just a little off, but it sort of -- it's kind of a Catch-22 for me. I hated to say anything about it, because they have got their plans, but, on the other hand, nobody bothered to show me the plans or call me in and have me look or ask any questions to me or anything, all they wanted to do is buy my property for less than what I could replace it for. Corrie: Okay. Shipley: And we are having this conversation now, because of their inability to communicate, and it was Hubble before and now it's Providence and I'm kind of -- you know, I got a whole knew -- and the fence issue did come up when Hubble was trying to do it, because I wanted to put a chain link fence along there so that when you got to burn fence rows and that and you got cattle out there, you know, why -- and Sherbrooke Hollow went ahead and put all those wood fences up against the chain link fence anyway, so I still -- you know, they did it anyway, no matter what I said, so -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Shari, go back to the site. There, Okay. That bottom south, that is all your property? Shipley: That's it. Yes. Bird: That's yours. Shipley: It's a long narrow -- Bird: It's the long narrow one. Shipley: It's like 95 foot wide and goes back there a quarter of a mile or so. More than a quarter of a mile. It's hard to -- Bird: Come up here. Come up here and -- I want to ask some more questions. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 66 of 88 Shipley: It's hard for me to subdivide that if they put a stub in over there, because then that -- it screws up me. Bird: Well -- Shipley: And also I had the place sold at one time and because the man found out they were building subdivisions all around me, he backed out of the thing, so -- he wanted it for horses and his kids and that kind of stuff and it's an acreage and they are building hundreds of houses around me now and the city moved out to me and I was in the country and I'll get up and move, but I need to have enough money to replace it and they need to kind of come up with some money for the moving expenses and all the hassle that -- you know, but it's -- it's poorly designed for the area and I don't see where it's safe or anything else, as far anything else. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, perhaps I can ask some questions of Mrs. Stiles. What would be the street right of way requirement in a subdivision? Isn't it 36 foot wide -- what's the average street right of way for a residential street? Stiles: A local street is a 50-foot right of way. Nichols: Okay. So he has 95 feet from the north boundary to the south boundary of his lot. If he had a street down through the middle, he wouldn't have enough lot depth to put lots on two sides of the street. Stiles: I don't know what you would do with it. Nichols: So the only possible development would be essentially a single depth, one row of lots on either the north boundary or the south boundary with -- that lot is so narrow, that's really all he's left with, isn't it? Stiles: And then the lots are only 45 feet deep with the setbacks. It couldn't be a typical residential subdivision. They would have to try to do some planned development with -- I don't know. Some -- I don't know what they would do with it. Corrie: Mr. Bird, did you get all of your questions? Bird: Yes, I did. Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 67 of 88 Nary: I just had a couple of questions. And I think you're going to probably have to come up here again, Mr. Shipley. Where is your house in comparison to these -- Shipley: It's right up there in front. Nary: So it's on the front end of the lot? Shipley: I have a driveway that is on the -- right next -- pretty close to the south border in there, so these other streets here are coming out of the Salmon Rapids and Sherbrooke Hollow are pretty darn close to my driveway, you know. The setback is legal, but it's right at the -- they had to move the canal in order to get it back far enough to do that at a cost of about 280,000 dollars to move the bridge out there the taxpayers had to pay for, because the subdivider, he only paid the impact fees, you know, but -- Nary: Thank you. And I didn't know about where the streets lined up that way and I didn't know the reason they did. Shipley: Well, they lined those streets up so that they could get adequate use of the land and now I'm left sitting there because they won't give me enough to replace it and they are cheap and they are going to ruin the value of my land even more, because we don't want to put things in an appropriate -- Nary: So this is your house right there, sir? And this is all of your property here? This is yours as well? Shipley: No, it's -- Nary: Just this straight back here – Shipley; Just straight back there in the thing. That picture was taken many, many years ago. Nary: So this is the piece we are talking about right now, right there; correct? Shipley: That's the one you're talking about -- right there and mine is on the south side of that property, so that's my house and my -- Nary: And the stub street in -- Shipley: There is 130 year old trees out in front and a few things like that. So that -- you know, it's not wide enough to do anything with, really. Nary: Well -- and it doesn't do a whole lot different than what the other stub street that come up here, Mr. Shipley, up here instead of down. The same -- the one you're talking about is this is parcel right there, because that other stub street comes right here. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 68 of 88 Shipley: Well, they got like two or three acres there, you know, and -- Nary: Well, it looks like there is already houses on it, so there is already something there. Shipley: There is houses on there and -- Nary: There is not a whole lot else they can do with that -- Shipley: I think that's the three acre one on the right side and a two acre one on the other side and -- Nary: Thank you, Mr. Shipley. Shipley: Effectively, what's happened is I lived in the country and now I have been moved to the city. Nary: I understand. Shipley: And we have got -- I'm still in the county, so I have city people making decisions for me who lives in the county on county property and I got to come down here and try to -- I want you guys to get the best manage out of that land as you can, because that's what it's supposed to be. Nary: I totally understand what you're saying, Mr. Shipley. I think what Mr. Nichols had raised was the concern that even if the stub the street here, so that you can connect between this parcel, your parcel, and this stub street down here -- Shipley: Well, there is sewer and stuff in this – Nary: Having this would really end up dividing your property even more so that you couldn't do a whole lot either way. Shipley: No. And there is sewer and stuff in the stub out to the front that they took the sewer -- had to go 22 feet deep to get the sewer out there, because it's just -- you know, that's a lot of extra digging. Nary: I had one other question for Chief Bowers. My only concern, Chief, is on the one Ms. Rudel brought up, Number 25. I mean I think it makes -- I mean I think her point was pretty clear, there isn't any way to make another entrance into this property, but is that provision from Deputy Chief Silva -- is that a Uniform Fire Code provision that we would be granting some sort of waiver? Do we have a liability concern by doing that or -- I mean I think we have had this come up, but we have some subdivisions that were small enough that one entrance is all that really can work, but -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 69 of 88 Bowers: Councilman Nary, City Council Members, Mayor Corrie, we have had this -- excuse me. We have had this come up North Locust Grove also and Fairview that we could only get one way in and out. Yes. On this piece of property there is no other way of putting one into it until there is either development right -- north or south. Nary: Thank you. Corrie: I'll allow one more from the developer to answer any questions. Ford-Rudel: Thank you. I just want to address a couple of things Mr. Shipley said. Regarding the drain field located on the property, we will be happy to -- Providence does want to be a good neighbor and we will see what we can do. Regarding the developability of his property, you know, we are required to provide accessibility via stub streets as part of the Comprehensive Plan for the zoning ordinance, not developability. These are two different things. And we are doing the best that we can to provide him a means to develop his land. We have been, since preliminary layout, trying to figure out how he could develop it. The only -- the most reasonable way to development is to provide a cul-de-sac coming out from Sherbrooke Hollow and providing lots that way and then a cul-de-sac coming from our development and the cul-de-sacs do not have any connection. That is the most economical way to develop his property. With the 30 foot right of way and trying to front 80 foot lots fronting on a 50 foot right of way, trying to get setbacks, et cetera, there is just no way, unless you go through a PUD and have some sort of housing product that could fit there and there is very few housing products that could fit on that sort of lot. So I would be happy to stand for any further questions if you have any. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Thank you very much. Ford-Rudel: Thank you. Corrie: Council, have you -- Bird: Shari. Corrie: I'm sorry. Shari. Yes. Shari: I just want to clarify one thing. Mr. Shipley's property is 195 feet wide, so that would allow, with the 50 foot right of way, he would have 72 and a half foot lots on either side if it were a road that came in the middle. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions Council has? De Weerd: I have none. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 70 of 88 Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Hearing none, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing for Items 13 and 14. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we close the Public Hearing for AZ 01-023, annexation and zoning on 5.97 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for proposed Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group and also to close the Public Hearing on PP 01-023, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 20 building lots and 24 other lots in a proposed R-4 for proposed Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group, LLC. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the request for annexation and zoning on the Inglenook Subdivision. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Council, further discussion? Nary: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: In looking at this application I think the developer here is being as reasonable as they can be in this regard. I certainly agree that relocating Mr. Shipley's drain field is a significant assistance to him, because that can be a significant expense for him to have to do that and I do think -- you know, it's not his fault it's on someone else's property, but it is on someone's else property, so somebody is going to have to pay to move it. So they will have to do that. Also put non-combustible fencing along his property also is a fair consideration. I do like that the open space that they do have now is a green space and that's more usable than a pathway that doesn't go anywhere, a path against a canal that you can't use, and on the access issue on I guess Number 25, I would agree there is no way to do that. There is no possible way for them to be able to do that. Based on this I know we have other subdivisions that are similar to this that don't have a requirement that there be two access point. I would at least make note for the school district, this letter I think is before they changed their response letters and they did indicate that Mary McPherson Elementary School is over capacity, but I would note at least that what their anticipated use from this subdivision is fairly small, although at least I know we at least should look at that and that -- in this consideration, at least the amount that we are looking at from this particular subdivision is a fairly small amount in Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 71 of 88 relation to the school's capacity in this particular area. Other than that, I can't see any other particular reason. I mean I feel for Mr. Shipley, he is in kind of a tight pickle where he's at and it's not really his making, but it ended up that way and it sounds like he should look at something different and maybe those opportunities will be there. I think at least what the developer is trying to do I think is trying to develop right. It isn't their responsibility to try make sure he can develop his land, it's their responsibility to be good neighbors and is trying to provide a good use for the property that they own, so I don't see any other reason that we would wanted to deny this request. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I agree with Councilman Nary. I think that these developers have went back and did exactly like we had asked them to do from the original denial. I do feel for Mr. Shipley. When I moved here in '65 I used to go take my dogs out and go across the street and pheasant hunt all the way out to where the high school is now, so I can't do it anymore, but I guess that's progress. Shipley: There is no compensation for us old guys. Corrie: Okay. Any other comments? Okay. I'll entertain a motion first on the request for annexation and zoning, Request 01-023. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I would move approval of AZ 01-023, request for annexation and zoning of 5.97 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for the proposed Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group, LLC, at 2720 South Locust Grove, for our attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order based upon the staff comments, as included -- well, as the comments made tonight. I don't recall if there was any changes to the staff report or the recommendation that needed to be corrected separately. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Nary and seconded by Mr. Bird to approve the annexation and zoning request for Inglenook Subdivision and for the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and the staff comments and comments made tonight. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 72 of 88 De Weerd: I guess there was a notation on number 14, on page four, on correcting the lot and block or -- I'm not sure -- you talked much faster than I was writing, so -- Nary: You're right. On Number 14 of the annexation report it should reflect Lot 1, Block 2, and Lot 8, block 1. De Weerd: There you go. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: This also would include the drain field agreement within the annexation and zoning? Nary: Yes. Yes. That would -- I guess that would be an additional condition that they would also relocate the drain field from Mr. Shipley's property -- or from their property -- Bird: If they find it -- Nary: All right. Thank you. Corrie: Anything further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried for annexation. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Now the request for Preliminary Plat. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Since Mrs. de Weerd has a sore throat, I will move for approval of PP 01-023, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 20 building lots and 24 other lots in a proposed R-4 zone for the proposed Inglenook Subdivision by Providence Development Group, LLC, at 2720 South Locust Grove and for our counsel to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law pursuant to the staff reports and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, to include the following -- to include in that also that in recommendation number two, the non-combustible fencing will also be placed upon the south boundary perimeter of the property that -- I guess three would be amended to recommend the open space as proposed on the site plan and that number 25 be -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 73 of 88 regarding two means of access would be deleted and that the number 30 would reflect the proper lot numbers, Lot 1, Block 2, and Lot 8, Block 1. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mr. Nary and seconded by Mrs. de Weerd to approve the request for Preliminary Plat, the motion has stated. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg, roll call vote, please. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 15: Public Hearing: AZ 01-020 Request for annexation and zoning of 3.58 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson - east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road: Item 16: Public Hearing: PP 01-021 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 3 other lots on 3.00 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson - east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road: Item 17: Public Hearing: CUP 01-039 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson - east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road: Corrie: Item No 15 is a Public Hearing, request for annexation and zoning of 3.58 acres from R-1 to R-8 zone for proposed Satellite Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson -- De Weerd: Silhouette. Corrie: Silhouette. What did I say? De Weerd: Satellite. Corrie: Okay. It's getting late. East of Meridian Road and south of Ustick Road. At this time I will open the Public Hearing on that annexation and zoning and also on the Public Hearing on the Preliminary Plat as well. Staff comments on No. 15 and 16 -- oh, we've got a CUP. I'm sorry. The CUP. Yes. Right. Okay. So 15, 16 and 17 open the Public HearingStaff comments first. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 74 of 88 Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for property on Meridian Road. Nearby subdivisions would be Bedford Place Subdivision, R-8 subdivision. The applicant is requesting R-8 zoning with a Planned Development in order to have zero lot line development. There are two existing homes on the property. Initially they had come in and requested annexation and excluded those two existing homes from the plat, but they have now indicated they are including those as lots within their plat. So they would actually have 21 buildable lots as part of this development. This is looking at the land as it appears now. You have the Onweiller Lateral. This Onweiller Lateral also goes through Finch Creek Subdivision, I believe, and has been piped throughout that subdivision. This is not the latest version of their plat. They have submitted another landscape plan that shows a pathway all along the Onweiller Lateral and then it continues behind the bermed area adjacent to the landscape setback along Meridian Road. They are proposing duplex units and some -- duplex units and single family attached housing and some single-family housing detached. These are the elevations they have submitted as part of their plan. There was -- we had some concern about the open space that they have proposed. They do propose a pathway along this area here. I'm not sure how far it could go before it would disappear. They are also showing on their most recent submittal that the turnaround for the emergency vehicles would be approximately here. They would have a paved area and they are showing that this would be included as one of the required amenities for a Planned Development. They would put a basketball hoop at the end of this asphalt turnaround to be used for an amenity within the subdivision. With that I'll let the applicant -- I guess the applicant can testify. We would recommend approval of this, provided you believe this configuration of open space is usable and appropriate for this development and ask that you approve it with all staff and agency conditions. Corrie: Council have questions of staff at this point? Okay. Would the representative like to testify at this time? Is the testimony you're about to give tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Pavelek: I do. My name is Richard Pavelek, I'm with Tealey's Land Surveying. We have offices at 2501 Bogus Basin Road in Boise. I'm afraid I was a little bit sharper earlier in the evening, so I will do my best to remember all of the issues here. I think in the discussions that we had with Planning and Zoning, the annexation I think was well discussed in terms of it being contiguous to the city limits and that was supported. The notion of having a townhouse Planned Development in this location, I think in view of that it is in-fill type of a property was appropriate, also the traffic on Meridian Road, were all good reasons for looking at this type of development at this location. We had specific discussion on the layout in -- I believe one of the neighbors is present this evening. I anticipate there will be discussion as far as where we are providing the stub street to the adjoining parcel. This was basically the choice that was given to us by the Highway District. We came to them with a couple of preliminary -- as far as how might develop this and this was basically the location that they felt was desirable. Interestingly enough, the name Richter is the name of the street that actually is to the south approximately an eighth of a mile or so from the stub street and I assume that they do anticipate that one way or the other this is what they would like to see a continuation of. Our other street Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 75 of 88 coming in, it's a given as far as that location, because of the existing street directly across from this parcel. In discussions with staff it was felt that the two existing buildings there is -- or residences, one is a duplex, one is a single family home, should be on their own lots and should not be treated as an out parcel, so we have revised the plat and that's why staff noted that there are two additional lots, buildable lots, that would, in fact, be there for the benefit of the existing homes that are on the property. Right there are the two homes. There is a couple of outbuildings. Those will -- the larger one in the back will be removed. That is right in the center of our north-south leg of our street, so it would extend down from that point. In terms of the open space, there was a considerable amount of discussion about the open space. We are going through the expense of piping the Onweiller Lateral and we will provide significant pedestrian connection to the future undeveloped lands that are to our east. This property. And so, therefore, that was viewed as a desirable amenity. We do have a small space within the development that can accommodate a limited amount of play at the center of the development. We have revised the landscape plan to also provide a full landscaping on the Onweiller Lateral easement and then a clarification of how that, in fact, would be accessed in terms of the sidewalk connection. I believe those are the primary issues that were discussed. Oh, there was two other things that were requested of us. One as the landscape plan, which had been submitted. The other was a letter from the fire department reviewing the temporary turnaround configuration we have and that has been submitted, indicating that that is an acceptable turnaround. So I think we have met all of the requirements that were asked of us for your consideration. We'd ask for your support in the approval of all three applications as presented or amended with the information that was now on file. So if there is any questions I would be happy to address them. Corrie: Questions? Okay. Mr. Moyle. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Moyle: Yes, sir. Corrie: Give your name and address, please. Moyle: My name is Joseph Moyle. I live at 280 North Plummer Road in Star. I am representing Mary Moyle who owns the land on both the east and south of the proposed subdivision and we have not a great deal of problems with the subdivision, except I think it's pretty tight packed. It's a lot tighter than anything really close around it, you're going to have to a quarter or a half a mile away down towards Meridian, and they do have a lot of open space where they have gone that tight and there is no open space in this division -- this proposed subdivision. But that's irrelevant. Our problem is that they went to the County Highway District and proposed to stub roads into our property without our input and we would like the stub road to go to the east to line up with the road on the east part of our property, which is -- if you will follow the subdivision up here, the road stubs in up here and would come down and eventually tie into that road. That's what we would like to see and we would request that you table this motion and return it to Ada County Highway District that we might have a proper hearing on where Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 76 of 88 that stub road goes in. I realize it needs to be done expediently, because winter is going to be gone quick and they are going to want to develop the land, but we feel that the stub road that they put into our property somewhat limits what we are able to do with it. If you will -- there was another picture we had here of just the site and I'll show you just what our property is. No, that's not the one. The one that shows the surrounding area. That pretty well -- this is our property in here and we have a stub road right here that they could stub into this property very easily. If they want to put a stub road in here, which causes us difficulty with developing this property down the road. So we are just saying, hey, guys, we should have had some input. We didn't get any input. We were not -- there was no hearing that we were ever notified of or anything else and we'd like to see it returned to Ada County Highway District for reconsideration. Thank you for your time. Corrie: Thank you. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Moyle, before you sit down, have you -- shockingly, I remember this hearing at the Planning and Zoning Commission, but -- and I know we had a lot of discussion on this road and the house -- where the house is and all that. Moyle: Yes. Nary: But have you requested a rehearing from -- they don't tell us where to put the houses and we don't tell them where to put the roads. Moyle: Well, we went -- we were told this was the next hearing that they would have and this is the one we were notified to come to. We had not been able to talk to them. When we'd call and try to make an appointment they are busy, you can't find the right person, or -- you know how it goes. Nary: Well, I don't know if you're -- I mean I guess what I'm concerned about, Mr. Moyle, is if we delay this I don't know that you are going to get another hearing in front of the Highway District. Moyle: Well, I would like to see us try. I'd like to see us try. Nary: What have you done since December? Moyle: What have I done since December? Nary: Yes. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 77 of 88 Moyle: We have contacted the Highway District, but with very little success. We have been to Mexico twice. We have been to California three times on businesses. We have been to Seattle five times on business. I have been to Utah twice on business. There hasn't been much time to do these things, because this is kind of a -- hey, we are not asking you to do anything other than be left alone a little bit and we told them of our problem. We think it's time if there is a problem, hey, let us talk to them, let's have a hearing -- let's have the hearing that should have been held before, which was -- apparently wasn't held. That's what we are asking for. Nary: My recollection of the earlier discussion, Mr. Moyle, was that the -- that the stub streets where it's currently located may or may not impact the use of your property. If nothing ever happens, you're still -- Moyle: Well, eventually, I hope in the next couple of years we will be before this board again asking that this property be annexed and that we develop it. Our anticipation of developing it has been to have a gated senior community, because of the access to the South Slew and the Onweiller ditch will probably have to be -- will have to be paved and there is a chance that the neighbors on the north would like to run that road that I pointed out right down the top of the irrigation ditch, use that right of way, and access it from both sides. We discussed a little bit of that. The other thing is the access where it is makes it difficult -- if you go to the view of mother's house -- she has another view that shows the relationship to -- Nary: How big is your big property? Moyle: 17 acres. Nary: 17? Moyle: Yes. 17. -- I think it's 17.8 or something. But around 17 or 18 acres. I don't know whether I can get her to switch over to that other view or not. Stiles: You want the aerial? Moyle: Yes. The aerial. The next one -- we want to show the houses. Okay. That pretty well shows it. That's my mother's house that's being pointed there and the road that they are going to bring in is about right there. I think somewhere right there. Is that -- Nary: Mr. Moyle, that ends approximately right -- Moyle: That's our property line. Yes. If you will notice just east of your pointer is a tree. That's the corner of his property right there and that goes north to the ditch right there. And, actually, the property lines there, that ditch has been cleaned from the north side for the last 30 years and the property line is actually over in that road someplace. At least they kind of move and grown and gone around it, because it was cleaned from the Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 78 of 88 ditches. But that's my problem, my concern. I'd like to see it returned to Ada County Highway District for reconsideration. Is there any other questions? Thank you. Corrie: Any other testimony tonight? Okay. Pavelek: Mayor and Council, very briefly. Mr. Torkelson here is present this evening. He did go around and see his neighbors and did talk about where he was going to put the stub street, so I think the discussion has been going on as far as what the Highway District's desire was long before we actually submitted a formal application here and I can appreciate the notion that 17 acres would be a nice gated community, but I think it probably won't happen in terms of the requests that are going to be made by the Highway District as far as the development goes. There are already stub streets there and for them to remain as that, rather than to go across the property probably is not going to happen. Maybe one time in history you could do those sorts of developments without having streets through your properties, but I have found a great deal of reluctance on the Highway Department desire or ability to basically close off those connections. So I think that's basically the crux of the issue is being asked by agency to put in the streets and provide a location for the stub street in a location. We have done that and we have made a development proposal and based on that configuration. If there is any other questions I'll address them. That's all I have to say. Corrie: Any other questions, Council?. Okay. Thank you, Richard. Moyle: One more comment? Corrie: Okay. Moyle: My last comment is that we have wanted this to go to the east, because that way they can take care of the stub streets that already exist without causing difficulty with what our plans were in the future and to the south makes it very, very difficult. That's what I was -- thank you, sir. Corrie: Council, have any other questions as part of the Public Hearing? Okay. I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing for Items 15, 16, and 17. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I'd move that we close the Public Hearing for AZ 01-020, request for annexation and zoning of 3.58 acres from R-1 to R-8 zone for proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson, east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road and also the Public Hearing for PP 01-021, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 3 other lots on 3.00 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson, north of -- East of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road, and also the Public Hearing for CUP 01-039, request for Conditional Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 79 of 88 Use Permit for a Planned Development in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson, east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road. Corrie: Okay. Do I hear a second? Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Nary, to close the Public Hearing on the request for annexation and zoning, Preliminary Plat, and request for Conditional Use Permit on proposed Silhouette Subdivision on Items 15, 16, and 17. Any further comments? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Discussion on 15, 16, or 17, Council?. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I guess the only discussion I would have is to simply make note of a couple of things. On the Highway District issue, I think the report that we have in this packet shows a date of November 29th . I don't know whether or not they will entertain any degree of discussion of this proposal. I really don't know. But I don't know that it would be reasonable to the developer that's requested this to simply delay it on the hope -- or that Mr. Moyle might get a hearing. I don't know that he will. And it's not really -- the developer has done what they have been asked to do and the Highway District has told them where the roads are supposed to go. That's what they are supposed to do and I think the property is large enough and that even having a stub street there, it certainly is going to impact it, but it's going to -- this property is big enough that there is certainly a lot of room to do a variety different things even with the stub street there. I did note the school district's letter of November 16th , indicated that five senior high students is what their anticipated amount of students would be from this subdivision and that Eagle High School is what the appropriate high school is and it's already over capacity, but with the new high school it may not be affected that severely. So at least the school district at least with this one doesn't appear to have a detriment to what's already there. Other than that I don't -- I guess I don't see anything else about this. I understand where Mr. Moyle is coming from, but he's going to have to take it up with the Highway District and I don't know that we need to delay this just for that possibility. Corrie: Okay. Any other comments, discussion? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 80 of 88 Corrie: Hearing none, then I will entertain a motion first for the annexation and zoning, AZ 01-020, of the Silhouette Subdivision, 3.58 acres from an R-1 to an R-8 zone. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve AZ 01-020, the request for annexation and zoning of 3.58 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for the proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson, east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order and include staff comments and also public testimony. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mr. Bird and seconded by Mr. Nary to approve the annexation and zoning of the Silhouette Subdivision and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and the comments of the staff, as well as the public hearing testimony. Any further discussion? Mr. Clerk, give us a roll call vote, please. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion on the annexation and zoning is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Now the request for Preliminary Plat, 01-021. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve the request for Preliminary Plat approval of 19 building lots and 3 other lots on 3.00 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson, east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road, No. PP 01-021, and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order and to include all staff comments and public testimony. Nary: Second. Mr. Bird, isn't it now 21 building lots? Stiles: Yes. Nary: I think it's 21 -- Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 81 of 88 Bird: Yes. That's 21. I'm sorry. Nary: They added to it after that. Bird: Yes. You're right. I'm sorry. Nary: But I would second it. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Nary, to approve the Preliminary Plat approval of 21 building lots and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order, with comments and public testimony. Any further discussion? Roll call vote, please. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Item No. 17 is a request for a Conditional Use Permit, 01-039, for a proposed R- 8 zone for Silhouette Subdivision for a Planned Unit Development. I'll entertain a motion on the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we would approve the Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Silhouette Subdivision by Tyler Torkelson, east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick Road, No. CUP 01- 039, with staff comments and public testimony and the attorney to draw up the proper papers. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Nary, to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development in proposed Silhouette Subdivision. Any further discussion? Roll call vote, Mr. Clerk. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion for the Conditional Use Permit is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 82 of 88 Item 18: PFP 01-007 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 1.46 acres in a C-G zone for Wenco Subdivision by Wenco – Northwest corner of East Corporate Drive and East First Street: Corrie: Item No. 18 is a request for a Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 1.46 acres in a C-G zone for Wenco Subdivision, by Wenco, northwest corner of East Corporate Drive and East First Street. Staff comments. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is the property between East First Street and Meridian Road that the Wendy's Drive-Thru Restaurant is going to be constructed on. Tammy was discussing this earlier. This particular project, was it -- De Weerd: Oh, yes. It's the one I pulled off. Nary: No. That -- Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Nary: I think -- Shari, I think I read this in here, too, but isn't my recollection -- wasn't it somehow not divided properly and this is just clearing up the platting? I mean we have already approved the CUP, but isn't this just clearing up the platting? There was something that it wasn't divided properly or something like that. I don't remember the exact -- but I think that's all it is, isn't it? Stiles: Yes, it is. Nary: Kind of a clean-up thing. Stiles: I wondered if Ada County Highway District had any different recommendation on this as far as the right in, right out. Is someone here representing – oh? The applicant's representative is here and indicates he has read the findings. I guess I have no issues if that's incorporated correct, the ACHD recommendations. The applicant indicated he believes they are correct, so I would recommend they be approved with staff and agency conditions. Corrie: Okay. Any questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Applicant, no questions? Okay. I'll entertain a motion, then, for the Preliminary Plat and Final approval for Wenco Subdivision. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Nary. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 83 of 88 Nary: I would recommend approval of PFP 01-007, request for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 1.46 acres in a C-G zone for Wenco Subdivision by Wenco at the northwest corner of East Corporate Drive and East First Street, to incorporate all staff comments and for our attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as necessary. I think that's it. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Wenco Subdivision for Preliminary and Final Plat and staff comments and attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Clerk. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 19: PFP 01-008 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 1.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Kearney Place No. 4 by Margaret Wood - south of East Chateau Drive and east of North Laughbridge Avenue Corrie: Item No. 19 is a request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 1.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Kearney Place No. 4 by Margaret Wood, south of East Chateau Drive and east of North Laughbridge Avenue. Staff comments. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, it appears that Mr. Wood has drawn the short straw again and is at the end of the agenda. He seems to always end up there. But this is for an in- fill parcel. The property currently is the house where Mr. Wood's mother resides and it is a development to go along with the existing development that surrounds it. They are proposing to have a shared driveway on the south side of Chateau Drive and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that a cross-access easement be recorded for those lots to make sure that they maintain that shared driveway and didn't try to access directly onto Chateau. We would recommend approval of this Preliminary/Final Plat with all staff and agency conditions. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Thank you for staying late. Do you have any comments that -- everything is fine? Let the record show that applicant's representative is fine. Council, your desire on the request for Preliminary/Final Plat? Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the request for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 1.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Kearney Place No. 4 by Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 84 of 88 Margaret Wood, south of east Chateau Drive and east of North Laughbridge Avenue, No. PFP 01-008, and to include the staff comments and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the request for Preliminary and Final Plat for Kearney Place No. 4. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote, please. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 20: Tabled from January 22, 2002 meeting: Discussion of City Seal / Logo: Corrie: I have one other on the logo and then I have a request that we go into executive session for about five minutes. We've got just a housekeeping thing we need to make sure that Council is aware of and then we can go from there. The last item on the agenda is the discussion of the City Seal/Logo. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: We did discuss this at the meeting that you were out of town during and the only change -- although the lettering since 1903 is larger than the one we had kind of looked at, so this needs to be changed, but they did change to 1903 and so all the changes that have been asked for are listed. Bird: Which one, Mayor? We are waiting for you to make your pick. Corrie: I don't know that it's different from your -- Bird: What was the other -- Corrie: That's fine. This is the one you're looking at then? De Weerd: Yes. The two of these. The detailed one for the official type of material or letterhead and those kind of things and the line art for your shirts, business cards, or I think the line -- or the fine one can do business cards, but this would be for vehicles and the lapel pins, that kind of stuff. Did you want to see those? Yes. We kind of -- see, she- - there was different sizes of print on the fine -- the detailed one versus the line art and I Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 85 of 88 told her to use the smaller lettering, but she used the larger lettering, so -- and, unfortunately I just got it today, so -- Corrie: Does everybody like the larger or the smaller 1903? Nary: I actually like the larger one. De Weerd: Do you? Nary: I do. Mr. Mayor, I know this has been a laborious process for Council to get to this, but I did make a comment earlier and I guess I just want to repeat it, I really -- I guess to me one logo seems like money. I like the detailed one, I recognize that's probably not transferable to a lot of things, and I just think having two will just be confusing. I like the line art type. I don't think there is a problem to put it on business cards and letterhead or anything else, but I do like the detailed, but I just -- I think if we are going to go through this -- unless we want to go through it again, that we just pick one and that there just be one logo, one city, we buy all of this stuff, everybody can see it, and we don't have two, so we don't have many more excuses, but I'm certainly not going to vote against it if you want two. I just think having one seems like -- it should just be one. Bird: Tell us the one you want. Nary: I think the line art one is fine. I think -- Bird: This one right here? Nary: Right. No. The bottom one. Because it's more transferable to vehicles or buttons or pins or whatever. I mean it's an easier transferable thing to use the lower one that has the line art. If you're going put it on shirts and letterhead and everything else -- again, I don't mind the detail of the top one, but it just seems like, you know, if we have two and it would just seem more confusing to people. Bird: I agree, Bill. Just go to the one and let's -- and I think this probably is easier to transfer to everything and just have one and Tammy did exactly what we had asked, we asked her to get the water tower back in it. She did everything else, so -- I don't see anything wrong with it. Corrie: Do you like the time on the clock at a quarter until 8:00 or would you like to have it at 11:00? Bird: I'd like to have it at -- Nary: 10:54. Corrie: Okay. So this is the one right here; right? Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 86 of 88 De Weerd: Yes. Corrie: Only it will say 1903, rather than -- De Weerd: Correct. Corrie: Like this. Okay. Bird: That's agreeable then? Nary: Well, we had also discussed previously, Mayor, when you were gone that there was some space available in that logo that if a department wanted to put something on the department itself and I don't know what that would be, but some park trees or something like that. I don't know if it would end up being busier than it is, but -- De Weerd: Well, do you want to move -- we can put the Idaho right next to the N and that way it has free reign for each department to put the -- Nary: Or all the way to the left under the E and that would still give you more space. De Weerd: Oh, yuck. Corrie: Down here Idaho and then down here you can put City fire Department, City Council, whatever the case may be. Nary: That would be fine. Corrie: Okay. All right. Want to vote? Nary: Mr. Nichols I think wanted to comment. Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, as long as this has been around I think just pick the logo and then you can work on the department stuff afterwards. Bird: Very wise decision. Corrie: Okay. De Weerd: That’s why he gets paid the big bucks. Corrie: So the one at the bottom here is the one you want to use and we will work out the details of that with the department heads and that? Bird: So moved, Mr. Mayor. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 87 of 88 McCandless: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded to -- any other discussion? Roll call vote, Mr. Berg. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. Corrie: All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes. De Weerd: I could have the finished copy and present it at our workshop next week. Corrie: All right. That sounds good. De Weerd: It was suggested that maybe at one of our meetings we can display -- present it to the public and ask the artist to be here to acknowledge all their hard work and our going back and forth and back and forth on this thing, so would we like to do that? Corrie: Certainly. Bring them in. De Weerd: We want to try it at a workshop or maybe the meeting after that on the 19th ? Bird: We don't care. Corrie: Your choice. De Weerd: Okay. With that -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we go into executive session as per Idaho State Code 67- 2345(f) to consider and advise its legal representative of pending litigation or where there is a general public awareness of probable litigation. Corrie: Do I hear a second. Nary: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 88 of 88 Corrie: Okay. Roll call vote, please. Role Call: Bird, aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Nary, aye. EXECUTIVE SESSION: RECONVENED AT 11:14 P.M. Corrie: Okay. I will entertain a motion. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we come out of Executive Session. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to come out of Executive Session. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion to close the City Council meeting at 11:15. Bird: I move. So moved. Corrie: All in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:15 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED ___________________________ _____|_____|_____ ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR DATE APPROVED _______________________________ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK