Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-02C~E IDIAN~--- CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 02, 2012 at 7:00 PM 1. Roll-Call Attendance X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance Troop 168 w/ Meadowgrass LDS Ward 3. Community Invocation by Stephanie Moore of Ten Mile Christian Church 4. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted 5. Consent Agenda Approved (Pg 2-5) A. Professional Services Agreement with J. Amber Conger for Refinerii for Preparation of Meridian Split Corridor Phase 2 Public Art Project Proposal a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $1,500.00 B. Professional Services Agreement with Byron W. Folwell for Studio Maelstrom, LLC for Preparation of Meridian Split Corridor Phase 2 Public Art Project Proposal for aNot-to- Exceed Amount of $1,500.00 C. Professional Services Agreement with Ellen Nasvik for Post Modern Concrete for Preparation of Meridian Split Corridor Phase 2 Public Art Project Proposal for a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $1,500.00 D. Joint Powers Subscriber Agreement with ICRMP E. Approval of Agreement for Professional Audit Services for FY2012 to Eide Bailly for the Not-To-Exceed Amount of $52,750.00 F. Approval of Agreement for "Parks and Recreation Maintenance Facility - Pre-Engineered Metal Building Construction" to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, October 02, 2012 Page 1 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Alpine Construction, Inc. for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $72,411.00 G. Approval of IDScan.net End User License Agreement H. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 12-005 Canterbury Commons by Heartland Homes, LLC Located at South Side of W. Pine Avenue, East of N. Ten Mile Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 107 Residential Lots and 12 Common Lots on 21.45 Acres in an Existing R-15 Zone Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: MDA 12- 002 Canterbury Commons by Heartland Homes, LLC Located South Side of W. Pine Avenue, East of N. Ten Mile Road Request: Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (Inst. #106187188) for the Purpose of Removing Certain DA Provisions That Are No Longer Applicable AND Adding New DA Provisions Relevant to the Proposed Canterbury Commons Subdivision J. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 12-003 Olson & Bush by Ronald Van Auker Located at 2950 E. Franklin Road Request: Annexation and Zoning a Total of 7.2 Acres of Land to the C-G (1.41 Acres) and I-L (5.78 Acres) Zoning Districts K. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 12-001 Paramount East by Brighton Development Located West Side of Meridian Road, Between W. Producer Drive and E. McMillan Road Request: Rezone of 12.47 Acres of Land from the L-O (Limited Office) Zone to the R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zone L. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 12-002 Paramount East by Brighton Development Located West Side of Meridian Road, Between W. Producer Drive and E. McMillan Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 46 Residential Lots and Six (6) Common Lots on 12.90 Acres in a Proposed R-8 Zone M. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 12-005 TM Crossing by Brighton Investments, LLC, Steven Smith and CRS10 Located Northeast Corner of I-84 and S. Ten Mile Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 89.22 Acres of Land from Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, October 02, 2012 Page 2 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. the RUT Zoning District to the C-G (General Retail & Service Commercial) Zoning District N. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 12-003 TM Crossing by Brighton Investments, LLC, Steven Smith and CRS10 Located Northeast Corner of I-84 and S. Ten Mile Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 50 Commercial Building O. Resolution No. 12-873: CPAM 12-003 Olson & Bush by Ronald W. Van Auker Located at 2950 E. Franklin Road Request: Amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Designation on 5.66 +/_ Acres of Land From Commercial to Industrial P. Resolution No. 12-874: CPAM 12-002 Paramount East by Brighton Development Located West Side of Meridian Road, Between W. Producer Drive and E. McMillan Road Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to Change the Land Use Designation on Approximately 12.90 Acres of Land from Office to Medium Density Residential (MDR) Q. Resolution No. 12-875: CPAM 12-001 TM Crossing by Brighton Investments LLC, Steven Smith and CRS10 Located Northeast Corner of I-84 and S. Ten Mile Road Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to Change the Land Use Designation on 75.5 Acres of Land from LC (Lifestyle Center), MHDR (Medium High Density Residential) and HDE (High Density Employment) to Commercial 6. Items Moved From Consent Agenda None 7. Action Items A. Public Hearing: CPAT 12-001 South Meridian by Meridian Community Development Department Request: Amend the Text of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan Which Includes the Following: 1) Changes to the 2010 Existing Conditions Report; 2) The Addition of the Airport-Overland Road Extensions; 3) Changes to the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan (TMISAP); and 4) Miscellaneous Text Changes to the Comprehensive Plan Approved (Pg 5-21) Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, October 02, 2012 Page 3 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. B. Public Hearing: CPAM 12-004 South Meridian by Meridian Community Development Department Request: Amend the Future Land Use Map (PLUM) to Designate Future Land Uses AND Amend the Area of City Impact (AOCI) in South Meridian Approved (Pg 5-21) C. Public Hearing: MDA 12-005 Sgroi by Nunzio Sgroi Located at 4405 E. Ustick Road Request for a Modification to the Existing Development Agreement to Allow the Development of Single- Family Residential Homes on the Site Approved (Pg 21-35) D. Public Hearing: Update to City Clerk's Fee Schedule (Pg 35- 36) E. Resolution No. 12-876: Adopting Fee Schedule of the Meridian City Clerk's Office: Authorizing the Clerk's Office to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Approved (Pg 36) F. Public Hearing: Proposed Right of Way Property Disposition for 1700 W Lanark to Ada County Highway District by the City of Meridian (Pg 36-37) G. Ordinance No. 12-1530: Authorizing the Conveyance of Real Property to Ada County Highway District (ACRD) for Right-of- Way Purposes Approved (Pg 37-38) 8. Department Reports A. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 12-877: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian, Reappointing Matthew Adams to Seat 4, Steve Elliot to Seat 7 and Appointing Treg Bernt to Seat 5 and Spencer Martin to Seat 6 of the Meridian Impact Fee Advisory Committee Approved (Pg 38-39) B. Legal Department: Solid Waste Advisory Commission (SWAG) Recommendation on the Renewal of the Solid Waste Franchise Agreement with Republic Services for FY 2013 Approved (Pg 39-41) 9. Ordinances A. Second and Third Reading of Ordinance No. 12-1528: Downtown Core Sidewalk Facility Standards Update - Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, October 02, 2012 Page 4 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Proposed Draft Title 8, Chapter 1 Ordinance and Proposed City of Meridian Improvement Standards Second Pealing Only (Pg 41-42) 10. Future Meeting Topics None Adjourned at 8:54 p.m. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, October 02, 2012 Pa e 5 of 5 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City ouncil October 2, 2012 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, October 2, 2012, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Charlie Rountree, David Zaremba, Keith Bird, and Brad Hoaglun. Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Pete Friedman, Sonya Watters, Caleb Hood, John Overton, Perry Palmer, Steve Siddoway and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Good evening. I'd like to welcome you to the Meridian City Council meeting and certainly would like to recognize our Boy Scout troop here tonight. We always enjoy seeing our -- young faces in our audience. So welcome to our meeting. Also to the visitors on this side of the room as well. So, thank you for joining us. For the record it is Tuesday, October 2nd. It's 7:00 p.m. We will start with roll call attendance, Madam Clerk. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance Troop 168 wl Meadowgrass LDS Ward De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance and tonight we will be lead -- of course I have buried it, where ever I put it. We are going to be led by two Boy Scouts and I think one was George May -- did I get that right? And someone by the name of Diam. Logan Diam. Logan Diam. If you will, please, all arise and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) De Weerd: Boys, I would like to offer, since you must have drawn the short straw, two Meridian City pins. Thank you for leading us today. Item 3: Community Invocation by Stephanie Moore of Ten Mile Christian Church De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Stephanie Moore with the Ten Mile Christian Church. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Thank you forjoining us, Stephanie. Meridian City Council ' October 2, 2012 Page 2 of 42 Moore: Thank you. Please pray with me. God, we thank you for this beautiful evening in which we can see so many lovely things that you have created for us to wonder at and to explore and to enjoy and, God, in the middle of such beautiful things sometimes it's really difficult to come to a meeting and sit down and deal with really tedious things, but, God, we know that the tedious things still need to be taken care of, people's lives are impacted, and you honor us for taking care of those sorts of things. I pray that in tonight's agenda and the people who are here to see to those things that you would bless them for their commitment to this community and to one another and to the dialogue that's so necessary for that. We do thank you so much for your presence in all of that and especially your guidance and so we pray for your presence in all of that and especially your guidance and so pray for this evening in Jesus' name, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda De Weerd: Thank you, Stephanie. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Couple of Items to note on tonights agenda. Under Item 5-O, that resolution number is 12-873. 5-P is resolution 12-874. 5-Q is resolution number 12-875. Also under Action Items, Item 7-E is resolution number 12-876 and 7-G is ordinance number 12-1530. Under Department Reports, Item 8-A is resolution number 12-877. And also under ordinances 9-A will be a second reading only out of the ordinance. With those noted, Madam Mayor, I move adoption of the agenda. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda A. Professional Services Agreement with J. Amber Conger for Refinerii for Preparation of Meridian Split Corridor Phase 2 Public Art Project Proposal aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $1,500.00 B. Professional Services Agreement with Byron W. Folwell for Studio Maelstrom, LLC for Preparation of Meridian Split Corridor Phase 2 Public Art Project Proposal for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $1,500.00 C. Professional Services Agreement with Ellen Nasvik for Post Modern Concrete for Preparation of Meridian Split Corridor Phase Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 3 of 42 2 Public Art Project Proposal for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $1,500.00 D. Joint Powers Subscriber Agreement with ICRMP E. Approval of Agreement for Professional Audit Services for FY2012 to Eide Bailly for the Not-To-Exceed Amount of $52,750.00 F. Approval of Agreement for "Parks and Recreation Maintenance Facility -Pre-Engineered Metal Building Construction" to Alpine Construction, Inc. for aNot-To-Exceed amount of $72,411.00 G. Approval of IDScan.net End User License Agreement H. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 12-005 Canterbury Commons by Heartland Homes, LLC Located at South Side of W. Pine Avenue, East of N. Ten Mile Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 107 Residential Lots and 12 Common Lots on 21.45 Acres in an Existing R-15 Zone Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: MDA 12- 002 Canterbury Commons by Heartland Homes, LLC Located South Side of W. Pine Avenue, East of N. Ten Mile Road Request: Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (Inst. #106187188) for the Purpose of Removing Certain DA Provisions That Are No Longer Applicable AND Adding New DA Provisions Relevant to the Proposed Canterbury Commons Subdivision J. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 12-003 Olson & Bush by Ronald Van Auker Located at 2950 E. Franklin Road Request: Annexation and Zoning a Total of 7.2 Acres of Land to the C-G (1.41 Acres) and I-L (5.78 Acres) Zoning Districts K. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 12-001 Paramount East by Brighton Development Located West Side of Meridian Road, Between W. Producer Drive and E. McMillan Road Request: Rezone of 12.47 Acres of Land from the L-O (Limited Office) Zone to the R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zone L. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 12-002 Paramount East by Brighton Development Located West Side of Meridian Road, Between W. Producer Drive and E. McMillan Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 4 of 42 Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 46 Residential Lots and Six (ti) Common Lots on 12.90 Acres in a Proposed R-8 Zone M. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 12-005 TM Crossing by Brighton Investments, LLC, Steven Smith and CRS10 Located Northeast Corner of I-84 and S. Ten Mile Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 89.22 Acres of Land from the RUT Zoning District to the C-G (General Retail & Service Commercial) Zoning District N. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 12-003 TM Crossing by Brighton Investments, LLC, Steven Smith and CRS10 Located Northeast Corner of I-84 and S. Ten Mile Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 50 Commercial Building O. Resolution No. 12-873: CPAM 12-003 Olson & Bush by Ronald W. Van Auker Located at 2950 E. Franklin Road Request: Amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Designation on 5.66 +/-Acres of Land From Commercial to Industrial P. Resolution No. 12-874: CPAM 12-002 Paramount East by Brighton Development Located West Side of Meridian Road, Between W. Producer Drive and E. McMillan Road Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to Change the Land Use Designation on Approximately 12.90 Acres of Land from Office to Medium Density Residential (MDR) Q. Resolution No. 12-875: CPAM 12-001 TM Crossing by Brighton Investments LLC, Steven Smith and CRS10 Located Northeast Corner of I-84 and S. Ten Mile Road Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to Change the Land Use Designation on 75.5 Acres of Land from LC (Lifestyle Center), MHDR (Medium High Density Residential) and HDE (High Density Employment) to Commercial De Weerd: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 5 of 42 Hoaglun: Under Item 5 I have noted 5-O is resolution 12-873. 5-P is resolution number 12-874 and 5-Q is resolution number 12-875. I would move approval of the Consent Agenda and the Mayor to sign and Clerk attest. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda as printed. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Items Moved From Consent Agenda De Weerd: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 7: Action Items A. Public Hearing: CPAT 12-001 South Meridian by Meridian Community Development Department Request: Amend the Text of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan Which Includes the Following: 1) Changes to the 2010 Existing Conditions Report; 2) The Addition of the Airport-Overland Road Extensions; 3) Changes to the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan (TMISAP); and 4) Miscellaneous Text Changes to the Comprehensive Plan B. Public Hearing: CPAM 12-004 South Meridian by Meridian Community Development Department Request: Amend the Future Land Use Map (PLUM) to Designate Future Land Uses AND Amend the Area of City Impact (AOCI) in South Meridian De Weerd: So, we will move to our Action Items, 7-A, a public hearing on CPAT 12- 001. I'll ask for staff comments at this time. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. If you wouldn't mind, would you mind opening up 7-B as well concurrently. I will tackle them separately, but they do integrate quite well together, so if you don't mind opening both of those. De Weerd: I sure would. I will also open up 7-B on public hearing CPAM 12-004. Thank you, Caleb. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 6 of 42 Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I think probably some of the inspiration for the invocation tonight was after Ms. Moore looked at the agenda and saw these two items. It is a little tedious, but it is important. So, I hope that you will bear with me and give me some time to run through a lot of the changes we are proposing to our Comprehensive Plan. Our Comp Plan is now a little over a year old and we do have some updates to it that we would like to propose that you adopt into the Comprehensive Plan, both in the text of the plan, as well as the future land use map. So, I'm going to go through both of those and, again, it is kind of integrated and I will point out most of the times where there is map and text changes that are proposed concurrently. So, the big item, the item headliner is the south Meridian land use plan. This is something that we as a planning division have been working on several years now and we have had a new process that -- that we integrated to try to come to some resolution in southwest Meridian and we think we have an answer for you this evening and we will propose that here in a minute. The rest of the items on here we will run through some of them, we will spend a little bit more time on than others. These aren't listed in any particular order necessarily, but, again, we will spend probably more time on -- on the map itself and in south Meridian. I do want to -- in Item 10 here the other miscellaneous clean up, I don't want to just gloss over those. There were quite a few changes -- text changes, but most of them are pretty tedious. So, hopefully you have had a chance to review that attachment and concur with those. I'm not planning on going through them item by item, but they were -- you should have found all those changes in your packet for this evening. I'm going to start with the future land use map. I use FLUM, so pardon me if I slip there into my -- some say FLUM, some say FLUM, Future Land Use Map. This is CPAM 12-004. So, we will jump into some of the changes. So, on the left-hand side of this slide you can see what we have had our on map since 2008. We grade the area -- this area out when we couldn't really come to some concurrence on what the appropriate land use designations were in this area and we refer to it currently as a future planning area. So, that's what is on the books right now on the left. On the right is the preferred land use scenario from three public workshops that happened here earlier this year between February and the final report in July. There were about six different iterations of a map and land use designations in that southwest area. We included members of the city of Nampa, Nampa Highway District, Ada County, Brent Danielson is here in the audience this evening, by the way. ACHD, COMPASS, our own Public Works, Central District Health Department and, then, we hired out Parametrics to assist us in some of the logistics for the plan helping us compose the report. So, I'd like to thank all of them for making this happen. We did something a little bit different. You all were there at the first public workshop where we played the You Are The Map game. That was a little new for us. We thought it was pretty good. Would have hoped the turnout would have been a little bit higher, but we thought the process was valuable. In fact, we are doing our presentation at the Idaho APA conference here next week on that with Parametrics staff. So, hopefully, it takes hold and others are able to replicate what we did with that game. We also set up the -- aseparate individual website -- project website where people could come and touch base that are curious in that area of what was happening with south Meridian. Props to Brian, he oversaw that and maintained that website. It's still up and running. We let people know, you know, hey, there is a hearing today, those types of things on the Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 7 of 42 website. We also used the Valley Times, obviously, to notice and do an article. Our own city website we e-mailed people, we phoned -- made phone calls, wrote letters, Twitter, Facebook, city news stories, et cetera. So, we tried to get the word out there, engage folks. You know, it's not always what you hope sometimes with the turnout, but we thought we got a pretty good cross-representation from the people that did engage and they stayed engaged throughout the process, so that was encouraging. Some of the factors that we considered as we were contemplating appropriate land uses for this area include prime soils and irrigation land, the topography, nitrate -- high nitrate area levels you can see on that -- that -- I guess the map. It's closer. there is some nitrate issues in the area down there. So, those -- there is some of the things factored in. Topography, obviously, and sewer sheds are something we factored in. So, you can see here these aren't the official sewer shed numbers, just for our ease we number different sewer sheds. The orangish lines represent basically high point and so the middle of these areas -- I hope Warren doesn't kill me, but, basically, the base -- the basin of sewer shed nine is something like that. So, it drains to the middle of that and so that's essentially where your line would be to collect sewer and, then, push it back to your treatment facility. Also just point out associated with that we got this slide, it also shows topographical features, so there you can kind of see where some of those ridges are on the plan, too. So, those are just some of the things that were considered as we went through this project process. You can also see -- we called out a separate sewer shed down here in one hundred -- maybe Iwill -- it's. a little bit hard to see on this presentation, but Kuna -- the city of Kuna has annexed a large portion of that area that we have got labeled as one hundred in that sewer shed. So, just wanted to point that out that Kuna has annexed some properties within our planning study area as well. So, what we heard from folks was -- particularly in this -- this lower southwestern most portion of the planning area was that they preferred the area to stay rural. That was an overarching theme that we heard from a lot of people, not just in that area, but as you can see from the proposed designations a lot of this there was -- we heard from a lot of people that they like it how it is and would like to kind of retain a lot of that rural character, save maybe the Ten Mile corridor. We heard a lot of people say that Ten Mile -- they envision something a little bit different along the Ten Mile corridor. So, as you can see we have some mixed use areas, a little bit more intense density, just off of that corridor as well and so we have responded to some of those comments. After getting those comments back we met with Public Works and I'm not going to steal Warren's thunder, but I do want to go back to the first part of the slide. Staff originally recommended in this application before you that we remove the area that's cross- hatched from our area of impact. Tonight I would ask an amendment to that original staff proposal and the Commission -- the Planning and Zoning Commission agreed with staffs original recommendation. We would like a little more time to think about that, if now is the appropriate time to do that or not. Certainly there is no big push or any reason at this time where we need to release that back to Ada County if that's, in fact, what we want to do, but maybe just a little bit more time to understand all the implications of that. And so instead what I would recommend tonight is that we -- we go with the land use designations that we heard from, the stake holders that participated and that we add a new designation onto our future land use map for a rural estate residential designation. That is the lightest green color you see here. We currently Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 8 of 42 don't have that. I can jump there if you'd like, but I have got a slide coming up when I talk about the text portion of these changes, it basically calls out what it means to be in this --this lighter green color and it is meant to essentially preserve a lot of what's there now for agricultural and low density residential up to one dwelling unit per five acres and to be sensitive to new development needs to be sensitive to existing neighbors, so -- in a nutshell that's what it says. Again, I can go --there is a slide 18 if you like right now. I did want to pause, though, and give Warren an opportunity to -- to further explain some of the implications of your decision tonight, so -- Stewart: Good evening. De Weerd: Hi, Warren. Stewart: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- and, Caleb, you can come draw for me anytime. I wanted to just take a moment and talk about some of the utility serviceability implications and/or impacts that this plan may have. As you may know, our current master plan, which was for sewer -- our sewer master plan, which was completed in 2010, essentially contemplates sewer service to this entire portion of south Meridian and -- but it also contemplated in that plan that the densities throughout this area would be at a minimum of about three dwelling units per acre. Because based on our analysis then, as well as some follow-up analysis that we have done recently it takes about three dwelling units per acre to, essentially, justify the installation, maintenance, and operation of that infrastructure for the long term. We heard from the community, as Caleb has said, that in this southern most portion, which I will call the Mason Creek sewer shed, which -- if this will draw for me -- is essentially this area. That they didn't want that kind of density and they -- the real -- the thing that I kind of want to discuss with you a little bit tonight is that if we go ahead and do this as is recommended, we would probably be seeking a modification to our master plan that would, essentially, remove this area from the eventual installation and construction of infrastructure. We currently plan to serve this area with a series of trunk mains and lift stations along the McDermott corridor. Those lift stations and sewer trunk lines are sized to accommodate that entire area and if you chose to exclude that area we could reduce the size of those main lines and those lift stations and save the city a lot of money. Even this line that we are talking about actually extends further way off the map and goes to the north here. Eventually it's about a 40 inch diameter line and we could -- you know, those are incredibly deep and expensive to install and if we remove that area we could potentially have significant savings in that sewer infrastructure. So, we wanted to make sure that we would be seeking your direction on what you would like us to do for that southern- most portion of this planning area. There are a couple of other things there I think that are important to note. It would not only be, you know, difficult for the City of Meridian economically to serve that, but because there is another option in close proximity that might be more feasible, it would be I think -- if we -- the other option is sort of to go ahead and build that infrastructure to serve the entire area and -- with the idea that someday that area may change -- that that zoning may change. But even if it were -- if there were pressures immediately to develop in that -- in that area there is other options that would probably be less expensive. So, I guess it's just -- you know, Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 9 of 42 sort of a gamble and I want to make sure that those different issues were understood. With that I guess I will stand for any questions that you may have with regards to serviceability, especially sewer serviceability in this area. De Weerd: Thank you, Warren. Council, any questions at this time? Bird: I have none. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just a clarification and discussion, I guess, of an opinion. The area that you have outlined and the -- I have attended the meetings, the people that live there have been pretty clear about -- as Caleb said, they like the way it is now and they'd like it to stay that way. If it stayed at those kind of densities I am making the assumption that their current service, which is private septic systems and private wells, would serve a very low density population very well without us doing anything. But the flip side of that is, as you say, if -- if we choose not to plan to serve that area, because it's going to stay low density and they can serve themselves privately, that's a decision that's hard to undue, because as you say downstream we would put in smaller pipes, fewer pumps, and to undo that 30, 40 years from now would, essentially mean digging up all our infrastructure and putting in bigger; is that correct? Stewart: Essentially that is correct. Either putting in larger or parallel lines. Zaremba: So, we are talking about a pretty permanent decision here. Steward: Yeah. And I apologize, but, yes, that's kind of the -- kind of the point of that I was trying to get across is that if we elect to do this and to scale back our infrastructure installation now, it has very long-term implications. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: And I guess you have to understand that this is not just about sewer. We have other city services that we have planned according to our area of impact that are impacted as well. So, it's -- sewer is essential and important, but it's -- it's not all that we have to --that we are committing to. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Question, Warren. Is it a problem for Public Works if we take a look at that -- putting something in text and just kind of letting this sit and knowing it's a unique area and we may do something in the future, but not necessarily act on that now, but -- I Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 10 of 42 mean the points you make are -- and in our previous meetings I mean they are very good points and there are other options out there that could be explored, but is that something if we kind of just let it sit, put in some text and just kind of see what ripens down the road? Stewart: Well, I'm not sure I understand your question. I'll try and answer it and you tell me if I'm -- if I got close. Hoaglun: Okay. Stewart: We are certainly willing -- in fact, we have had some discussion about whether we leave this area with -- in the impact area of the city and I certainly see no harm in leaving it that way for the time being. At some point -- we are not there yet, but at some point we are going to start marching down the McDermott corridor with infrastructure and we will have to make a decision whether we are going to size that infrastructure to accommodate this area or not. That's not today, but if the economy picks up it could happen relatively soon. We don't know. I don't have a crystal ball. But -- does that help? Hoaglun: It does. So, we do have some time to kind of see how this proceeds, but there will be that decision point where, okay, what's it going to be, because we have got. to go and you guys will be kind of pushing us to make that decision it sounds like. Stewart: Yeah. That's a fair statement. Hoaglun: Okay. Thanks, Warren. De Weerd: Well -- and I guess just to add in the sewer master, this has been kind of that last priority or last phase of the master plan, so -- and that's why it makes sense to keep it as it is with the public participation and reflecting their desires that really doesn't conflict with our sewer master plan at this point in service, but I guess it's time to revisit it as far as densities and what we do with our partner to the south. Stewart: Yeah. Madam Mayor, I believe that -- if I understood you correctly, that is true. I mean we have some time. We haven't started down that path. When we do start down that path, which will occur in an area north of what this map even shows, we will need to make a decision at that point whether -- we want to size things accordingly or where we want to go. I just wanted to come tonight, make sure everybody understood sort of these serviceability implications. We are certainly, you know, willing to march down whatever road we get direction to go down, we just want to make sure that you guys have all the information you need to make a decision. De Weerd: Anything further from Council? Okay. Thank you Stewart: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 11 of 42 Hood: He will let me draw for him, but he won't let me speak for him. Thank you, Warren. Appreciate it. So, some of the other infrastructure you mentioned, Madam Mayor, that -- you know, sewer is not the only utility that was looked at. The roadways are also looked at by ACHD concurrently with this study. They looked at the impacts based on the preferred land use scenario and I'm going to quickly fly through this slide, but, basically, it has cross-sections and improvements, it's a roundabout or a signalized intersection, a number of lanes, based on the land uses that were contemplated from the general public. Also the existing master street map and a proposed street map will be amended to reflect those changes that the land use dictates, so typology is what we are talking about here. So, how wide are the sidewalks, the bike lanes, center medians, those types of things. So, what you have on the left is the existing typologies of cross- sections in the master street map and on the right are the proposed. A lot of the changes actually have to do with the collector network and, again, Ten Mile, because Ten Mile before was in this future planning referral area, which, basically, took us ultra low density and now that we have that you can see that Ten Mile portions of it are planned commercial, rural still down in the southwest portion and, then, residential arterials, which about 85 or 90 percent of our roadways in Meridian are residential arterials. So, those are our proposed roadway typologies we will work with the highway district on amending. And I want to quickly go, unless there is any comments on that slide -- De Weerd: I guess, Caleb, my only question to you is when we did our Comprehensive Plan a while back and that was some years ago -- ACHD didn't like us putting collector roads in these square grids and they are good with it now? Hood: Madam Mayor, yeah, it's kind of a case by case. Generally, though, you do want a collector -- at least one collector east-west and one north-south per mile section. And we are designating them now in the master street map. You know, the difference between an arterial and a collector is they won't build the arterials -- at least that's there policy, they won't -- you know, arterials will be constructed by the highway district, but this is more for planning purposes and it helps us in the planning department say, hey, we need a collector as development occurs in this general location. Some of them reflect existing roadways and some of them are future roadways, so -- De Weerd: I think the concern in the past has been that they didn't want to have to pay for it. So, they didn't want it on our plan. Hood: Again, again, Madam Mayor, this -- they wouldn't be paying for the collectors, but it helps us plan for that infrastructure knowing that you have been doing it -- De Weerd: Okay. Just want to make sure. Thumbs up, Justin? All right. Hood: It doesn't go in the programming side of things, the collectors, but the arterials will, if that -- any questions on that one? Rountree: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council October 2, 2072 Page 12 of 42 De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Caleb, back to -- it shows that that S curve on Overland is residential. I'm not sure that's -- if it's an arterial or it's a collector, but it's certainly not necessarily all residential. And, then, that airport road from that point west is a different alignment that you show on your existing in this end and I don't think that they are different. Hood: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, to your first point, the -- the Overland -- that section of Overland is outside of the study boundaries. I can certainly work with ACHD on that, we just didn't feel comfortable at the staff level making that change without any -- you know, if that wasn't something that was discussed or evaluated as part of this. I will work with ACHD and if that's what we want to designate it, planning commercial or -- I'd have to look at the adjacent land uses, I can't remember exactly what Southridge has there, but -- Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, currently in the Southridge Development we have, essentially, multi-family plans for that area just south of the curve, if you will, south of the S. Right now the zoning to the north of it is I believe R-8, but we had a Comprehensive Plan amendment here a couple years back to make it mixed employment. They haven't come forward with their rezone application yet. So, you are going to see mixed employment on the north side of the S there. Hood: So, if we could make that change on the map. And, then, regarding the alignment, Brian looked at the -- the preferred alignment 2D and so what we have -- on the proposed master street map that -- that most closely reflects the referred alignment versus just the -- we don't know exactly, so it's not an exact center line, but it does generally reflect what alternate 2D looks like and I have another slide and we can look at that here in a little bit, too, so -- we did clean that up based on the study. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Hoaglun: Caleb, I just want to be sure if you can reassure me that on Ten Mile, you know, we have the red plan commercial and the blue is residential, that doesn't necessarily mean the road is going to be residential, just two lane, whereas commercial might be two lanes -- the center turn lane and made four lane and narrowed down. It's just that's a reflection of what may be on each side of the road or one side to the other, but the road would be able to accommodate that traffic on that corridor; correct? Hood: Madam Bird, Councilman Hoaglun, you're correct. And I -- I know it's a little bit blurry on this side, but you can see Ten Mile here is a five lane roadway, it's a little bit difficult to see here. Literally that other map I was just on just talks about, again, basically outside of your -- your drive aisles, what happens. Do you need bike lanes? Are they extra wide sidewalks like in a downtown area where you're looking for 12 foot Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 13 of 42 wide sidewalks or a five foot detached or seven foot attached, that's really what a lot of the typologies get to is the entire cross-sidewalk, not just 11 and a half foot travel lanes for a number of cars, it's the context of the interaction of bikes, plus cars, so that's -- Hoaglun: Okay. Good. I just want to be sure that -- Hood: It's a good question, though. Sorry. Some of this stuff I'm -- but it's a good question and if you have others like that, that's what the livable street design guide really talks about, the typology section, not the number of lanes. Here is a quick summary of what ACHD did. I talked about the first one, we will pursue amendment with ACHD. The CIP shows that, basically, there is no changes needed. I didn't plan it out previously, but the -- the study that ACHD did didn't assume Airport or Overland would be constructed by the horizon year of 2035, which is probably a good assumption. We asked them to look at it. Well, what if it was. What does that do to the need for victory to be a three to five lane roadway and they helped us look at some of that stuff, but the assumptions were that the Overland extension wouldn't be constructed by horizon year. We will look at Victory a little bit more with them doing a specific corridor study on it if we need to preserve for five or not. And all intersections are consistent with the 2009 south Meridian study, as well as the Ten Mile corridor study, which I have been -- just this past year we have talked about the Ten Mile intersections that I'm looking at the intersections. So, you see in this diagram are the four red intersections are different than what the previous plans called for. Probably the biggest one is Ten Mile -Lake Hazel. Previously at Ten Mile and Lake Hazel there was a -- a roundabout and now it's planned to be a signal. So, that was the biggest -- biggest change. Some of these other configurations of the Linder Road intersections are just the configurations. They were always planned to be signalized and just, oh, we need an extra right hand turn lane or dual left instead. Some minor tweaks to the intersection configuration. But that Lake Hazel -Ten Mile one is different than what the corridor study plan called for in its 2009 study. So just -- that will be signalized. That's what this study calls, signalizing it, instead of a roundabout. De Weerd: Caleb, is that also consistent with the COMPASS Communities In Motion? Hood: Madam Mayor, this is a little bit ahead of that process. They are still trying to figure out exactly what that preferred land use scenario is and in looking at funded and unfunded corridors. So, it's not inconsistent, but it doesn't exactly match up, because this is a little bit ahead of that, so -- I mentioned previously that on the PAG COMPASS was involved, so Mary Ann Waldinger at COMPASS was on our PAG involved -- they have been involved in this process, including looking at modeling this is ACHD. So, they are fully aware of some of the recommendations that Parametrics and ACHD are calling for in this area and we will make sure, again, it's actually integrated and planned to happen within the year 2040. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 14 of 42 Hood: And just the last bullet on this. I thought it was interesting -- and Amar threw it out there when he -- he made this presentation to the Commission that three lane roundabouts may be considered in the future. He didn't say how far out they were and you could see some interesting looks, but he didn't want to give it up or at least he was being coaxed by others over there to not give up maybe three lane -- three lane wide roundabouts, but I wouldn't hold my breath happening anytime soon. So, a couple of other changes to -- to the map and, again, this one -- this one I'm going to show you here overlaps with also text changes and application. The downtown transportation network, what we had proposed to add onto the future land use map are dashed lines for both the third street alignment that was done in 2009 by Six Mile and it just hopes to clarify for people that we envision this extension in the future, Third Street making that connection. Similarly -- and we have talked about this previously -- is an extension of Broadway slash Idaho over to Commercial Drive to provide that east-west connectivity, because, again, Pine is the only thing between Fairview and Franklin east-west in the downtown. You can't get from Locust Grove to downtown or vice-versa. So, what you see here is not an exact alignment and some of the other things we have talked about tonight, but just more of the text which says, you know, we need this -- we need to explore opportunities to connect commercial back with Main Street. So, however that needs to happen, either Idaho and/or Broadway, but some compilation to get motorists and bicyclists back into downtown or out of downtown. So, these are changes we propose to add to the map. De Weerd: But those would be developer driven. Hood: Madam Mayor, yes, those would both be developer driven. So, those are the changes for the downtown transportation network to again, both the map and the text. Similar story here for the Overland extension. We have talked about this. I'm not going to go into it too much, but for those that may have not been familiar with -- the alignment study was completed in 2011 -- July of 2011. City of Nampa and Nampa Highway District No. 1, ITD, ACHD, Parametrics, I participated. Councilman Zaremba was there. They had two public involvement meetings. I have been here at least a couple if not a few times presenting to you and getting feedback from you on a preferred alternative and that was alignment 2B was the preferred alignment and so, again, we propose to add this to our future land use map just so it's clear envision, again, another developer driven project. At least at this point in time this is one of the rare arterials that we aren't looking for ACHD to fund construction of that, at least at this point in time. I think they are open to other funding sources, but -- so here are the -- the -- in totality the changes to the map. And this is kind of a before and after shot and just so -- so, here is what it looks like today. Here is what it looks like -- as you can see, most of the changes in the southwest portion of our area of impact. Kleiner Park Number One and Number Seven, the Ten Mile interchange, are both still shown as future on our map, so we just change those to existing parks and existing interchanges. I already talked about number two, three and four, those are just 3rd Street and Broadway extension and the Overland alignment. And, then, our entryway corridors. So, what we have done is to be consistent through the city I designated that first half mile corridor kind of depending on the arterial and if it's a principal or minor arterial designating the entryway corridors into Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 15 of 42 our city. So, in essence, those are the actual maps --- the land use map changes -- I have just one more -- maybe two more slides that show the legend, because there were a couple changes to the legend, too, but it's a quick summary of all the changes. Any questions on that slide? De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Okay Hood: This -- real quickly on this one. Again, here is some amendments to the legend. Not going to even talk about those. Those are pretty straight forward. So, here is the -- on the left Commission recommended future land use map. Again, the main change -- or this is the only change. Removing the area in southwest from the area of impact versus what staff is recommending this evening is to go with the land use designations for now, reevaluate it, see where we are at in a year or two, three, whatever. I don't know how long that is, but reevaluate that to see what makes sense and, then, also the blue arrow down below we would add the designation of rural estate residential to the legend on our map, so it -- that means something to people when they see that green color, so that's -- that's the map we would ask you to -- to approve this evening. And that is my conclusion on the map changes. I do have some text changes I will call out, but we are almost there, I promise. De Weerd: Thank you. Hood: Questions on the map? De Weerd: Council, anything at this time? Okay. Hood: Okay. On the CPAT 12-001. So, in the packet (mentioned -- you should have received the entire list of changes to the goals, objectives, and action item table. We worked with all the departments here at the city to figure out the priority for these out of the priority column or it's been relocated, excuse me, and we added a numbering system. We even readdressed the responsible lead. Again, it's only been a little over a year since we adopted this, but we wanted to make sure we had it right. You know, this one is a -- it's not planning, it's now community development, so we changed that throughout. There is some other ones where it moved from -- well, there is an example on here -- Mayor's office to parks and fire being the responsible lead. So, we had a handful of those based on comments -- De Weerd: I love the -- I love that comment. Hood: So, again, all the changes -- all the text changes are in the application itself. I will just highlight a few of what I think are a little bit more important changes. We did clarify in the text that when we are talking about residential density, we are talking about gross residential density, so it wasn't -- is it net or is it gross, we are specifically saying we are talking about gross densities in residential areas. So, the MUI designation or mixed use interchange areas along State Highway 16, since they are -- the preferred alignment is done and we know where the three interchanges are going. We are Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 16 of 42 changing the designation -- or the text in those plans to reference those specific interchange locations to clarify on the map. The text before was getting a little more vague about what the -- the mixed use interchange areas -- where they were. SSC is now Republic Services. Qwest is CenturyLink. The future acquisitions office. This is something we also talked about a few times. So, this is something I wanted to -- to call out. What staff is proposing is to disregard the idea of the future acquisitions map as we talked about last time we talked about this, but we will work on an internal future facilities map that consolidates existing and planned infrastructure and we can use kind of internally to make sure that if we can share resources or land or whatever that we can -- we are all on the same page there. So, that's something that we have talked about previously and that was should we go the direction given at previous meetings. Some of the acronyms have been -- been amended, clarified. We are cross-referencing MDC's Destination Downtown plan and integrating that into Chapter Seven, so that's come on line since we adopted the comp plan here a year and a half ago and the Western Heritage Byway is now also called out as being an important thing we need to highlight in -- economic development opportunities and some other things to really highlight that the Western Heritage Byway is something to build upon. So, those are, again, in a nutshell some of the more significant minor changes, if you will, to the text. Here is the aforementioned real estate residential text that we had asked you to approve. This is assuming that you go with staff's amended recommendation tonight and we have a real estate designation for properties in southwest. I will give you just a minute to read it. De Weerd: So, Caleb, would it allow ag uses on it, livestock or hobby farming, those kind of things? Hood: Yes, Madam Mayor, that is a part of the intent of this area is to allow those uses to continue and if you have a development that would be a five acre hobby farm development that's something that we could -- we could allow in this -- in this designation or in these areas that are designated. So, yes. those are the highlights of this -- the format of this paragraph is consistent with how the other residential districts read. The only real changes we have on there may or may not have city services, so we -- that's not typical in our comp plan and, then, again, yeah, the ag and single family homes. So it can be both a density of one unit per five. Makes it pretty rural, so -- but that is the vision, essentially, at least to this point. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: The only comment I would make is that there is a provision for protecting view sheds and I'm not sure we can do that. In whose eyes? Hood: Madam Mayor, Councilman Charlie -- or Rountree. Sorry. Rountree: That's close enough. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 17 of 42 Hood: If you want to strike that, that is -- it is something we are proposing to you this evening, so if you're not comfortable with that -- it would be difficult for us to enforce. This is a vision document, it's not an enforcement tool, so we are really just asking people to be respectful of that, don't build 40 foot homes. You're right, though, I mean if they put something in -- if they propose something and it met our code -- Rountree: If the intent of this to -- a vision and the intent is a guide then -- then the word respect as opposed to protect would be probably more appropriate, as opposed to imply that we have some enforcement ability. Hood: I like that change. If the maker of the motion would note that, that would be excellent for later this -- in a couple of minutes. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would support that as well. I -- one of the -- back in the days when I was on the Planning and Zoning Commission one of our precepts was that you're not guaranteed a view through. your neighbor's property and while I agree that it would be nice to help people be respectful of it, it's a little too sensitive to say we would protect it, so -- I like that idea. I would ask one other question if I may, Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Zaremba: Different subject. And this is on the -- uses my include agricultural related activities and I want to make sure that would include -- if the area is going to stay low density and mostly rural and have operations on the properties, there is a certain infrastructure that also has to go along with that to make it viable. In other words, there needs to be co-ops and exchanges and as long as we are thinking that agricultural related activities would not preclude having a co-op someplace, which, essentially, looks like a business, not a residence, but places where they can take their goods and combine them and sell them and maybe even some farmers markets, is that what agricultural related activities would include? Hood: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, in the context of that I don't think it was, because we got the larger scale before that. But certainly a co-op idea is something that was envisioned in this definition. So, having a place for them to sell goods that are -- that are grown or raised on site or in a general vicinity is something that could be envisioned here. I will just kind of take that next step, if the Council likes this definition or some version of this and this designation what we need to do is, then, work in the code section of the UDC to come up with allowed, prohibited, conditionally allowed uses within a zoning district. We need to come up with a zoning district for this. R-2 doesn't quite work for this. So, we are going to need to come up with an RR or an RES or whatever we are going to call it in the UDC, so we can address things like you're talking Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 18 of 42 about. Some retail sort of type things or some -- you know, just the use of it may be marginal, so maybe that's a CUP in this zone. Whether they are allowed with conditions versus if you want to grow crops it's principally permitted or if you want to do a subdivision you just need a plat. So, we haven't quite got to that level. We wanted to see what the feedback was this evening, but that's one of the next steps that we will need to work with others in the planning division and legal to work on updating the UDC to reflect a lot of uses in this designation, so -- Zaremba: Great. Thank you. Hood: I think Pete has something maybe to add. Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member, I, in terms of the context of the south Meridian plan, I think the immediacy of addressing those kinds of things is lower on our list than it is higher on the list, because it will still remain in Ada County, it will be the five acre lot size, it will be consistent with their RUT zoning and so some of those uses that they allow or may not allow are the produce stands and things of that, but as Caleb did rightly say as we think to the north and as we now are in our FY-2013 year and we look at the fields district that may be the time as we do our market analysis and, then, our comp plan amendment, build in some time and some thought to coming up with that sort of urban agricultural zone and so forth, because. I -- I see more immediacy in the fields area than I necessarily do in our south Meridian area, but -- De Weerd: Yeah. Because in the fields district that, too, will address more business potential of that ag use as we are trying to define. Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, just -- I was thinking along the same line and this is more detail oriented. How do we -- if this is an agricultural use area and people want to sell eggs or they are selling calves -- I mean -- and this is within the city, it's in a -- we have got a bunch of other things to come, but that's more detail oriented, this is a little broader right now, so more fun to come. Hood: Madam Mayor, I can let the Council know -- I mean we do have things like occupations and things. I think it prohibits a lot of the retail sales, but if you do grow or make some of that stuff on site you can sell -- we will address that and thank you, Pete, for that clarification, because I do -- don't expect -- you know, we are still a mile, mile and a half, two miles away from touching this and it even being contiguous to the City of Meridian and being eligible for annexation with one of our zoning designations. So, we think we do have some time to work on what's appropriate in these areas and may be this morphs into something more for fields. So, that was a -- I appreciate that -- that comments. Any other questions on this text or how we may use this? Okay. Entry monument signs. So, in chapter two, which is our community design -- community design chapter of the Comp Plan, we have three new action items under strengthen community pride and identity, that goal within our Comp Plan. So, I want to just bring this back to you all and this is the sign that we will be asking developers to build as they annex in through development agreements and whatnot. So, as they -- as they -- as Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 19 of 42 they develop they are looking for something like that and over time -- or if it's a constrained situation will retro fit with the more vertical -- the more vertical sign. But I just wanted to bring this back before everybody. This has been on your docket for a couple of other things in the recent past, a couple of entryway signs, so we will be working with a couple of other developers on building the sign on the bottom here. Just a rough ballpark, depending on how it's constructed and everything, about 10,000 dollars or so for the sign on the bottom is a rough estimate. So, again, there is more to come on that, but we are going to get some specs on how to build that here in the near future. And real quick on this slide in the existing conditions report, part of the text got covered by -- by the graphic, so we are just proposing to move the graphic up and they can read the text that references the livable street design guide and, then, finally, the Ten Mile specific area plan -- the definition of canopies and the interpretation of canopies and the terminology with the UDC we are just trying to clarify all that so we are consistent throughout our planning documents and our code and, then, also adding pedestrian scale building enhancements, awnings that also include the canopy kind of definition and lighting for those awnings. So, the UDC side of the amendments will be coming in the new future, so, again, we are all on the same page and it's all integrated, but there are some changes to the Ten Mile specific plan, but, again, they are all related to lighting, awning, canopies, those types of things. So, Madam Mayor, with that those are all of the changes we would ask for the Council to approve this evening and I will stand for. any questions you may have. De Weerd: Caleb, do you have the recent changes that were made by Council included on the map in the Ten Mile area? Hood: Sorry, Madam Mayor, I missed the first part. What - De Weerd: I think Turnbull was in -- Brighton Corporation was in a couple weeks ago or just last week -- time flies when you're having fun -- with a Comprehensive Plan change. Is that reflected on this map? Hood: Madam Mayor. So, the way we have been approaching amendments is really just on the future land use map, because that's what we are using the -- the Ten Mile specific area plan -- it's a living document, because we are changing some of the text, but the map part of that is basically replacing the city's future land use map which integrates all the designations. So, any changes to the land uses are really reflected on the city wide future land use map, so -- and we have got a note to that effect in our comp plan. Somebody can go to the city's website and look at the Ten Mile, this was the document as it was approved in 2008 -- '7? 2007 if you want the most current information go see this document for it. So, it's -- we use it, but it's not every time that a property has changed designation we don't go back and change that plan, because it was kind of what the plan was in 2008. Does that make sense? Friedman: Madam Mayor, if I -- if I heard your question correctly, if Council moves on this tonight we will be amending the future land use map, but I think the timing is very good, because of the action that we took on Brighton's application last week or the week Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 20 of 42 before. We haven't amended the map yet. But when we -- we can pull those both together and amend them at the same time. Yeah. We will just incorporate those and, then, we have a -- under our Title 9 agreement with the county we have I think 30 days to transmit all these land use map changes to them. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions from Council? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Not a question, just a comment. It is clear that this is the result of a great deal of effort and good thinking and I appreciate the effort that went into it and the presentation. Hood: Thank you, Councilman Zaremba. Real quick if I can reciprocate that. I appreciate your all involvement in that and the meetings you attended, particularly for the south Meridian stuff, so -- I know the feedback was greatly appreciated. De Weerd: Well, it helped hearing it ourselves and that was very beneficial. Anything further from Council? Okay. Thank you, Caleb. Hood: Thank you. De Weerd: This is a public hearing. I don't have anyone listed as signing up to testify. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this item? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Or did we put you in a trance? Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Seeing none, Madam Mayor, I move that we close the public hearings on Items 7-A and B. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Item 7-A and B. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Any discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 21 of 42 Rountree: If there is no discussion, I move that we approve Item 7-A, CPAT 12-001 with the changing of the wording in the estate residential definition from protect view sheds and open space to respect view sheds and open space and include all of the staff comments and recommendations. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-A. Any discussion from Council? Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Item 7-B. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Item 7-B, CPAM 12-004 with keeping the existing city impact boundaries as suggested by staff this evening, with a note that reevaluation will occur at a future date. Hold off on the southwest utility planning decision until there is an urgency or there is resolve with our partner to the south and include all of the rest of the staffs recommendations included in the presentation and their submittal to the Council. Zaremba: Excellent. I second that. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Do we have hunting season already and trying to get those ducks? Friedman: I think -- Madam Mayor, I think we are trying to get some deer and some other ungulates on there, too, so -- C. Public Hearing: MDA 12-005 Sgroi by Nunzio Sgroi Located at 4405 E. Ustick Road Request for a Modification to the Existing Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 22 of 42 Development Agreement to Allow the Development of Single- Family Residential Homes on the Site De Weerd: Okay. Good luck with that. Okay. I will go ahead and open the public hearing on 7-C, which is MDA 12-005 with staff comments. Wafters: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application before you is a request for a development agreement modification. The site consists of 2.81 acres of land. It's currently zoned R-8 and is located at 4404 East Ustick Road. This property was approved for annexation in 2008 with an R-8 zoning district. A development agreement was required that restricted development of the site to an assisted living facility. Any other use would require modification to the agreement. Further, if a use other than an assisted living facility were proposed residential densities in excess of those allowed in the R-4 district would not be allowed. The applicant requested a modification to the development agreement earlier this year to allow the development of a single family residential subdivision on the site, which the Council denied largely because the density is exceeded that of the R-4 zoning district. Council felt very strongly that the proposed subdivision should be consistent with the adjacent R-4 zoned Red Feather Estates Subdivision. The current request is for an amendment to the development agreement to allow for the development of a single family residential subdivision consisting. of 14 single family detached dwellings and .two attached dwellings on 2.81 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. This site is designated on the Comprehensive Plan future land use map as medium density residential, which allows for single family homes at densities of three to eight dwelling units per acre. Their proposed density is 5.17 dwelling units per acre, which falls midway within the desired range. Access is depicted on the concept plan by East Arch Drive, a local street in Red Feather Estates Subdivision at the south boundary of the site. Access to Ustick Road is prohibited by the city and ACHD. A center median is proposed at the entry of the subdivision right here as a traffic calming device. The applicant has submitted ten different building elevations of homes that may be constructed within the site. There is a wide variety of architectural styles, mix of materials, and designs proposed as you can see here. Just a little additional information on this application. To address the previous concerns of Council regarding compatibility between the proposed development, the existing Red Feather Estates Subdivision and the development standards of the R-4 and R-8 zoning districts, staff has provided a comparison table here as shown. In summary, the proposed minimum house sizes and street frontages actually exceed those approved in Red Feather through the planned development which allowed for reductions to the minimum standards of the R-4 district. The minimum lot sizes are slightly under the minimum in Red Feather. Although the proposed density is slightly higher at 5.7 dwelling units per acre than Red Feathers overall density of 3.82 dwelling units per acre, which factors in a variety of lot sizes over 90 acres of land, it is still consistent with the density desired in medium density residential designated areas such as this. Further, it's comparable with street frontages, lot sizes, home sizes and architectural styles and the quality of homes in this area. This is an aerial view of the surround Red Feather Estates development with the proposed site plan overlaid so you can get a comparison of the -- of the overall lot sizes and homes that are there. Written Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 23 of 42 testimony has been received from Denise Lauerman the applicant's representative, response in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval of the proposed changes to the development agreement with inclusion of the proposed concept plan and building elevations submitted with this application. Staff will stand for any questions the Council may have. De Weerd: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions for Council? Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Sonya, on the center median is that a landscape median? Watters: Madam Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, it is not a landscaped island. It's a little too small for that. Hoaglun: That's what I was wondering. Okay. That's all I needed to know. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Let's see. On the access to the property to the west, which will also some day when it develops differently I assume lose its access to Ustick Road as well, shouldn't that access be actually a dedicated public right of way? It appears to me that it's more like a driveway or an easement. Watters: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, it is just an access road. Zaremba: Say that again. Watters: It is just an access road. It probably should be a public right of way Zaremba: Can we condition that? Watters: We certainly may. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to make comment? Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 24 of 42 Lauerman: Yeah. Denise Lauerman with The Land Group. 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle. De Weerd: Thank you, Denise. Lauerman: I brought some slides, just because I'm a visual person and it will help the -- De Weerd: Do you want to swing that microphone over to where you're standing. Thank you. Lauerman: Is that good? De Weerd: Yes. That's -- Lauerman: Okay. I haven't run this one before. So, I am here for Nunzio Sgori and here is just what we have already seen. There might be some repetition here from Sonya's -- but in the red is the outlined area with the lot lines in pink of the surrounding area. This was the previous assisted living facility. It does show the access off of Ustick, but that would not have been approved that way. The Comprehensive Plan, as Sonya had stated, is three to eight dwelling units per acre in this area. And here is the new plan. We had put in speed bumps at the entranceway also for traffic calming, but those are not supported by ACHD just because of where they would be located, so we have got the median and a stop sign, of course, would be at the entrance. And this is just a comparison. When Red Feather Estates had went in the requirement of the city the lot size was 8,000 square feet per lot in 2003 and they proposed 5,200 square feet minimum, so they were under. So, we just want to -- the biggest thing we want to do is put up the comparison of the Sgroi property with the surrounding areas, that it really does fit and home size requirement at that time was 1,400 square feet and the Red Feather Estates proposed 1,200 square feet. Frontage requirement was 80 feet and the proposed was 33 to 37 feet. The next slide just has a comparison with Red Feather, since that's where -- closest to the adjacent property. Still we have a 5,039 square foot minimum lot with a 6,671 maximum square foot lot, compared to Red Feather, 5,250 square feet that they had proposed. So, we are trying to go above and beyond to fit in to make it a great neighborhood consistently. The frontage is 50 to 60 feet, so that's above and beyond. And the home size is 1,501 square feet, so -- and this is another repeat, but it does show the lot sizes, how comparable they are to the surrounding area, even to the north of Ustick, as well as Red Feather Estates. I just wanted to bring this up, because I know traffic was a concern of the neighborhood and with the school there. In the circle in green that was where the speed bumps were proposed, but ACHD said it's not an option for that, but the median will help where it enters East Arch. So, here are some of the homes. What I did was I went out and took photos of the actual built homes and so this is the west lot on number one and on the built example. You can see -- I mean it's a great looking home. Second one is the same. It's just a few of these examples there. And, then, randomly there is no addresses on here, I just took some photos of what exists today in Red Feather Estates just to show that they look -- you know, they do look like the previous -- the map is showing the blacked in lots are where Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 25 of 42 these homes are located, so it's right adjacent with the proposed subdivision and there is some more. And, once again, that's just a map kind of showing how it all fits together. And that's what I have. Any questions? De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant at this time? Bird: I have none. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Just a quick question from the last hearing. Homeowners in Red Feather -- the city doesn't enforce homeowner association agreements and those types of things, as those are private agreements, but that was a concern they had raised that they wanted these folks to be part of the homeowners association. How did that come out? Where are you on that? Lauerman: Well, in conversations that I have had with the owner it's -- he wants to work with the neighborhood. He can certainly come up and say a piece, but he definitely wants to work with the neighborhood -- be a part of the neighborhood, so I'm sure they, can work that out. Hoaglun: Yeah. They were just concerned about pool usage and that kind of thing, so - Lauerman: Right. Hoaglun: Okay. Good. Thank you. Lauerman: Uh-huh. De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would ask my right of way question. Is it your intent that the access to the property to the west be a public right of way? Lauerman: I would think that would be dictated by the city and so, yeah, it probably would have to be. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Pete? Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Zaremba, currently number two in the existing development agreement says that direct lot access Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 26 of 42 to Ustick is prohibited. It further directs that cross-access shall be provided to the property to the west for future interconnectivity, however, does not specify whether that is public right of way or private access. So, that's -- that's the current language in the -- in the development agreement. If it is the desire of the Council to see that, then, there would have to be some language in here that -- because you only have a concept plan and development agreement modification before you tonight, any future subdivision should include -- subdivision design should include provisions for public right of way access to the property to the west. If that makes sense. Zaremba: Okay. To do in the development agreement modification? Friedman: It's up for grabs right now. It's all open Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. Watters: If I might add to that, Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba. It would also depend on how that property redevelops in the future, whether or not a -- you know, a public street frontage would be required. Obviously, now is the time to plan for it, too. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Thank you. We did have a couple of people signed up. ,Mark Aronson signed up against. Would you like to provide testimony at this time? Yes, sir. Okay. Come on forward. Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Aronson: It's Mark Aronson and my address 4233 East Arch Drive. So, it's just trying to -- I have never really spoken in public, so -- De Weerd: Well, I think you're doing just fine. So far so good. Aronson: What I wanted just to say about this was it's interesting that they are proposing these houses, which is fine over there, but the way it stands is many many children funnel right down East Arch Drive to go to the back of -- at the elementary school there and just watching lots of children walk down that street and adding more traffic down East Arch Drive, cars and whatnot, is a little bit disastrous to that one street, because so many other streets that connect around there -- all the kids have to walk down East Arch Drive to get to the -- to the elementary school and it just seems weird that the entrance has to be right -- I don't know how to use this, really, but I understand that there can't be any entrance to this, but to create such traffic and more danger for all the kids seems just -- I don't know, a little short-sighted and that's really all I wanted to say regarding that. De Weerd: Could I ask a question in terms of is there access to the back of the school? Is that -- is that why they are walking down Arch? Aronson: Yes. There is access -- Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 27 of 42 De Weerd: Oh. Okay. Right there. Aronson: -- to the school through that back entrance right there, right where they are proposing to put the -- I'm not really sure the right of way that you're talking about. De Weerd: Yes. There is a pointer on it right there, so -- I have -- they have pointed it out to me. Aronson: Yeah. And so I guess it's just a point of contention to a lot of the neighbors and people around that area to kind of wonder how they propose to get inside their development, whatever they want to create. I mean it's a -- it sounds like a great development, it's just amatter -- it's not going to -- it's not going to, you know, reduce any of the -- the -- you know, the home values or anything like that, it's just -- more importantly it's the children and -- that are walking straight down that one little quiet street that they are now going to create who knows how many more vehicles in mornings and the afternoons -- you know, I just wanted home to be -- well, not just me, but lots of people wanted to be looked at in a smart way, so -- De Weerd: Well, thank you. Aronson: Thats what I had to say. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you so much. Aronson: You're welcome. De Weerd: Lacy Holzbauer. Probably get it like de Weerd, you know. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Holzbauer: Yeah. Lacy Holzbauer at 4026 East Chandler Street and our house is that house right there. I just -- Holman: Ma'am, it's okay. When he gets that back to your slide hit the red button at the top of the screen and, then, the pen will started drawing in red. Holzbauer: All right. Or blue or green. Okay. That's my little girl. Okay. Here is -- okay. We are actually -- we are actually going to be -- why do I keep on messing it up? Usually -- okay. All right. Okay. I can touch it now. De Weerd: Did you hit the red button? Holzbauer: I have it hit, yeah. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 28 of 42 Holzbauer: Okay. Anyway, we live over the main -- the main channel of -- that's coming into there with Grenadier, the entrance off of Ustick. De Weerd: Uh-huh. Holzbauer: The -- if you turn to the west, that first street -- yeah. That's where we live. And so -- and, then, there is four houses on that street that also have kids my kids age, but I have two kids that walk down that street and they go there every day and they do the -- we try to get them on the sidewalk as much as you can, you know, but we got home, but the amount of children -- there is a lot of kids and so if we needed, as homeowners to take a video of a period of time between let's say 8:30 and 9:15 to show you what it looks like there, just knowing visually what it is, there is no crossing guard there. It is actually a sidewalk and, then, the area just to the north of that walk is a drain area, that's why it's -- it's empty there, but it's a drain field area, a big grassy area where the kids play when -- when they are done with school and so it's actually a -- a paved nice sidewalk with a gate entrance. It's not a dirt trail behind the school. So, there is a school crossing sign, but like I said, no crossing guard and so the biggest concern there -- it looks like the -- the appearance of the home are going to be similar. We do pay close to 400 dollars a year for owners association fees and the homeowners associations and the management company, obviously, would take care of making sure those. got paid. But it is quite a substantial amount of money that they need to be aware. I have not heard that they have worked out with the HOA that and so they say that they want to, but we haven't heard from them. So, that has to be done first. De Weerd: Do I assume that you're on the HOA board? Holzbauer: No. We -- no, I'm not. I'm not on the board. But it's an open -- it's open meetings, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Holzbauer: Yeah. So, that's pretty much our concern is -- is really knowing the logistics of what the kids -- what's happening at that intersection. No speed bumps. They tried. But, you know, that little tiny median is not going to do a bit of difference. So, that's it. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Just curious. How do they -- is there a crossing guard at Grenadier or how do you cross? I'm sure you're with your kids or someone's with your kids to cross that? Holzbauer: On Grenadier? Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 29 of 42 Hoaglun: Yes. Holzbauer: No. It's just a crosswalk across the street or -- Holzbauer: Yeah. There -- it's a -- from one sidewalk to another. It's a through lane street, because they go across, yes. Hoaglun: And is that the main exit for people headed out to Ustick Road? Is that the main direction people travel in the mornings when they are headed out? Holzbauer: Yes. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Thank you. And Dean Holzbauer. Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. D.Holzbauer: Dean Holzbauer. 4026 East Chandler Street. As my wife was saying, you may have made a comment about Grenadier, there are stop signs on Grenadier that the kids are able to go to and cross on the --they are not on Arch, they are the next street down to the south, I believe it's on Race and that is one option for the kids to cross with cars to stop. My biggest concern is always about safety, about the kids, and you don't want to see any kids hurt and they talked about this little median, how are we going to -- how is that going to be monitored, you know, how are the cars going to see kids if they are not paying attention and I guess that's always an issue. But, yeah, I have seen many many kids walk through that area and there is a lot of cars, coming there, they congregate after school, parents picking up the kids right there -- there is just a very large number of kids that use that back entrance in going to school. De Weerd: You know, I certainly understand your concern. I lived in a neighborhood that was three blocks on a main street to a school and so every subdivision that went in around us entered into our subdivision, so I do understand that, but what I -- I did finally come to realize after I stood in the exact spot that you did on each of those subdivisions with the same concerns, many of those are parents with -- are parents with kids as well, so there is a caution as they come out of their own block and -- and we -- I walked my kids to school every day, because I will tell you what, my own neighbors were racing down the streets. That scared the crud out of me and so I totally understand what you're saying, but I -- I think that as long as we teach our kids how to use the sidewalks and to be cautious and we continue the homeowners association to share, you need to be careful as, you know, during the school hours, I'm not sure how much more you can do. Because if it's not the cars from this -- this area it's going to be the cars from the existing homes. I don't know if that gives you any piece of mind, but I can tell you that I know exactly what you're standing there conveying to us. Council, do you have any questions? Bird: I have none Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 30 of 42 Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for being here. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony -- oh, well, good. Our Ada County Highway District rep. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Lucas: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Justin Lucas representing the Ada County Highway District. Business address is 3775 Adams Street, Garden City, Idaho. I just wanted to speak to that access real quick, because this is a modification to a development agreement as I understand it. I'm assuming that the applicant will be required to come back in with a preliminary plat and a final plat for this -- for this project and I think it would be the highway district's preference to deal with the public right of way issue through the platting process, because that's when our commission would have the opportunity to take a look at that also. In general our commission does not look at modifications to the development agreement in detail, because a development is primarily an action of the city and so if we are able to -- I guess it would be my recommendation to maintain the language as is stated in the development agreement and, then, through the platting process, in coordination with ACHD, we can determine if, indeed, public is really required to that -- that property to the east and the reason I state that and took your time tonight is public road standards would -- have a certain width and that width can affect the ability of that property owner to get in a certain amount of lots and other things and so we want to be careful -- we will put the applicant in a funny position where you're requiring through a development agreement that they do public right of what, but, then, for whatever reason my commission thinks that they don't and that can put the applicant in a tough spot and I think together we can figure that out through the preliminary plat and final plat process. So, that would be my recommendation. But you certainly have full discretion in the matter. De Weerd: Well, certainly, Justin, you have heard the concerns primarily about the cars entering in on that collector road and so as you evaluate it on the next stages that you keep the safety aspect in mind and the vision of kids as they walk in that area. Lucas: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Through that process of preliminary and final plat we can establish applicant school walk routes, we can require the developer to paint crosswalks and all of those things are -- when we go through that process can be analyzed in detail and so I'm hoping that through that process -- well, I know that through that process ACHD staff will have the opportunity to make those recommendations. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for Justin? Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, while Justin is up I did have a question and when we went through this process before -- and this is a much better plan, lower densities, different things like that coming forward, but sharing that sidewalk that comes into the back of Ustick I know there was discussion about having a crosswalk there or signage or Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 31 of 42 something. I don't know if ACHD has looked at that. Do you recall anything happening from that from ACHD's side for that particular crosswalk for kids who are on the other side of Sharon to walk across? Lucas: Madam Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, I'm just looking at this here . Hoaglun: Where they have got the pointer now they have got -- Lucas: Got it. Got it. I'm not sure of the current configuration there, but in general we prefer students to cross at corners of the street just because that's what drivers usually expect and I'm not sure how the crosswalks are painted in this area. We can certainly do an analysis out here and see if there is more than needs to be done and those are things that we do all the time. So, we can look at this certainly. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Yeah. And I appreciate that comment, because a crosswalk right there around a corner doesn't seem as the best place for it. Lucas: Correct. De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba, did you have something? Zaremba: Yes, I did. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I appreciate your insight and that certainly sounds reasonable to me to address this at the plat, but I -- not that I'm questioning you, I would just like to ask Pete to confirm -- we don't lose the opportunity if we don't do it in the DA, we would still have an opportunity later? Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Zaremba, as I mentioned earlier, the current development agreement condition is cross-access shall be provided to the property to the west for future interconnectivity. It doesn't -- it doesn't preclude it, however, on this concept plan they show about a 20 foot wide access and that would not be adequate to provide public right of way if, in fact, the highway district determined that public right of way would be appropriate. So, I would say that we may not want to walk in that access strip there on the concept plan and address it at the preliminary plat process. As long as we have the language in the development agreement, then, we are not at odds with what's shown on the concept plan. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further for Justin? Thank you, Justin. I appreciate you coming forward. Any further testimony? Okay. Seeing none, staff, any further comment? Would the applicant like to make any final remarks? If you will state your name again for the record. Lauerman: Denice Lauerman Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 32 of 42 De Weerd: Thank you. Lauerman: Just one. If I can get back to -- okay. There is a photo that shows that walkway to the school. Next one. No. Next. Right there. The bottom on the right. Right next to the map. That -- it's not a real closeup, but that's that pathway right by that open space that goes back to the school, just so you have an idea of kind of what it looks like. That was the only thing I was going to add beyond the, you know, traffic concerns, Madam Mayor, you stated it pertectly well, you know, the people that buy those homes are going to be also probably this children, concerned about the same things, so -- and going through the plat process when the road gets built there will be the crosswalk and stop sign and -- I think the median will help a little. Whenever there is a median is a little bit more of a slowdown I think. So, that's all I have. De Weerd: Now, you mentioned there is a median, but also a stop sign. Lauerman: There will be a stop sign. De Weerd: They do have to stop? Lauerman: Uh-huh. Yeah.. Definitely. De Weerd: Any questions for the applicant? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Would you happen to know off the top of your head what you estimate as traffic counts that this portion of this subdivision would add? Lauerman: I don't. ACHD staff report -- and I think if they have anything -- they didn't have one. Zaremba: Okay. Usually that's the case if they don't think the impact is going to be very significant. Lauerman: Fifteen additional vehicle trips per hour in the p.m. peak hour, 146 vehicle trips per day. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Any further questions from Council? Thank you. Lauerman: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 2, 2072 Page 33 of 42 De Weerd: Pete? Friedman: No questions -- no comments here, ma'am. Just trying to figure out what's happening with our technology over here. De Weerd: Council, any further information needed? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just a question for staff. The discussion -- and I think your initial comment was that having 16 dwelling units on this property is very close to what the rest of the subdivision has. I guess my question is without a development agreement modification they could put 11 dwelling units on that property without ever asking for anything to change; is that correct? Wafters: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, they would still have to apply for a development agreement modification. Zaremba: ,Okay. I guess where I was going is there. is not a great deal of increase. Wafters: Currently the development plan is approved as an assisted living facility, so that's what they are locked into at this point, unless they do a modification. Zaremba: That's what I thought, that it did have the backup, but if they didn't do an assisted living they already have approval to do an R-4, which would be 11 -- Friedman: Get the language -- Waters: Give me just a second and I will give you the exact language here. A conditional use permit is required for development of an assisted living facility on this site. No other new land use, including but not limited to single family duplex or townhouse subdivision shall be allowed on this site without Council approval for modification of the subject development agreement. As part of any future development agreement amendment elevation shall be provided. Anyway. Then it goes on: If the site does not develop as an assisted living facility as proposed residential densities in excess of those allowed in R-4 district will not be allowed. So, either way it requires a modification of the agreement. Zaremba: Thank you for that clarification. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further for staff? Okay. I would entertain a motion then Zaremba: Madam Mayor? Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 34 of 42 De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move to close the public hearing on MDA 12-005. Hoaglun: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 7-C. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Anything discussion? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we approve MDA 12-005 and this is not a condition, but it is with the understanding that the access will be further defined by ACHD, access to the property to the west will be further defined by ACHD during the platting process. Hoaglun: I will second that. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hoaglun; Madam Mayor, just a brief comment on this. What they are requesting is an area that is already zoned R-8 and -- and at the time if they hadn't gone with the assisted living location it could have been developed at the same time as the rest of subdivision, those houses have already been there and -- and going forward and this -- what we are going through is a legal process if -- we would have to have a very good reason to -- to deny allowing residences in a residential zone and that's something I don't feel comfortable with risking a lawsuit because of adding -- adding some houses to this that could have been part of this development originally and I share the concerns, you know, it's always difficult where I live, we have much larger units going in and the kids are walking to the great school. In fact, I have to go to talk to Tim about some street lights here down the road, but we have corners without street lights and -- and from my question I asked earlier about the landscaping on that median, because of -- we don't want to have any obstacles for drivers seeing kids and so there is concern for that. Really, there is no grounds to -- to turn this down. It's much better than it was before. I think it met the objections -- the concerns of the neighbors in the area. Traffic is always a concern and not only here, but all subdivisions, but it's to the degree that we -- we will have to live with that. That's not something we could -- we could offer a denial on. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further questions? Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 35 of 42 Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Council, I will call roll on this item. This is on Item 7-C. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. D. Public Hearing: Update to City Clerk's Fee Schedule De Weerd: Sorry. I had Madam Clerk out on a -- on an errand. Sorry. Okay. We have moved to item 7-B, which is a public hearing to update the City Clerk's fee schedule. I will open this public hearing and ask for staff comments. Holman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the public hearing on raising some of the fees -- actually incorporating mainly some fees into our fee schedule, lower some and some of this -- this was all brought September 11th. The proposed changes to the fee schedule and, basically, helping to incorporate some of the increased fees from Idaho State Police for the fingerprinting process on our permits and licenses that require a federal background check. So, if you have any questions I'd stand for questions at this time. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions on this item? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to offer testimony on this item? Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I would move that we close the public hearing on 7-D. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 7-E. Oh, sorry. 7-D. I was trying to rush things. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 36 of 42 E. Resolution No. 12-876: Adopting Fee Schedule of the Meridian City Clerk's Office: Authorizing the Clerk's Office to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date De Weerd: 7-E is resolution 12-876. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I -- on 7-E I would move approval of resolution number 12-876, adopting the fee schedule of the Meridian City Clerk's office. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-E. If there is no discussion from Council, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion, carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. F. Public Hearing: Proposed Right of Way Property Disposition for 1700 W Lanark to Ada County Highway District by the City of Meridian De Weerd: Item 7-F is a public hearing. I will turn this over -- open the public hearing and turn this over to staff for their comments. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is an ordinance on your 7-G. It's simply a disposition of some of some small parcels of property for the -- the maintenance facility for the parks department and, Mr. Siddoway, if he wants to he could add anything, but they really are just slivers of property that ACHD is requiring and so this is just the process to get that accomplished. Siddoway: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Siddoway. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 37 of 42 Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I just wanted to put this up just for a quick clarification on what areas we are talking about out at the site for dedication to ACHD. At the end of Nola there is a sliver that you see highlighted in orange that will widen the end of that cul-de-sac to work for fire truck turnaround radiuses and things like that. And, then, right on the very corner of the intersection of Lanark and Nola there is a small triangle of right of way that's a standard chamfer distance for that -- for that corner and so we are in complete agreement with the dedication. Our plans are based on them and I will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thank you, Steve. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any members of the public who would like to provide testimony on this item? Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird:. I move we approve Ordinance No. 12-1530 -- do you want to read that, though? Oh, I'm sorry. Close the public hearing. I move we close the public hearing on 7-F. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on 7-F. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. G. Ordinance No. 12-1530: Authorizing the Conveyance of Real Property to Ada County Highway District (ACHD) for Right-of- Way Purposes De Weerd: Madam Clerk, will you, please, read the ordinance on 7-G, 12-1530. Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 12-1530, an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of certain city-owned real property to Ada County Highway District located at 1700 East Lanark Street, a portion of Ada County parcel number F1108336013, located in the southwest one quarter of Section 8, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian, Ada County, Idaho, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute and attest on behalf of the City of Meridian the purchase agreement, deed, and other documents necessary to complete the transaction. Providing for a waiver of the reading rules and providing an effective date. Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2012 Page 3B of 42 De Weerd: You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone who would like it read in its entirety? Seeing that we put Ralph to sleep, Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I will get online now. I move we approve ordinance number 12-1530 with suspension of rules. Hoaglun: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-G. Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 8: Department Reports A. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 12-877: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian, Reappointing Matthew Adams to Seat 4, Steve Elliot to Seat 7 and Appointing Treg Bernt to Seat 5 and Spencer Martin to Seat 6 of the Meridian Impact Fee Advisory Committee De Weerd: And there is 8-A. Council, in front of you you have resolution 12-877. This is reappointing two members to the impact fee committee and appointing two other members that are representing specific seats and Trey Burnt to represent the Parks Commission and Spencer Martin to -- as an alum from our public safety academy. I would entertain any questions at this time. Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun: Hoaglun: No questions, I would like to move that we approve resolution number 12-877 for the reappointment of two and appointing of two others to the Meridian Impact Fee Advisory Commission. Zaremba: Second. Meridian Cily Council October 2, 2072 Page 39 of 42 De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve item 8-A. If there no questions, Madam Clerk. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Legal Department: Solid Waste Advisory Commission (SWAG) Recommendation on the Renewal of the Solid Waste Franchise Agreement with Republic Services for FY 2013 De Weerd: Item 8-B is our Legal Department. I will turn this over to Mr. Nary. Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. You have in your packets a memorandum and some supplemental material from the Solid Waste Advisory Commission. When we had a conversation with the Council in the past you asked that we have the commission each bring to you as a recommendation to continue with the existing franchise agreement with the current franchisee or whether or not to enact the termination clause and to move forward with terminating that contract and moving forward with a new process. The memo that's in front of you dated September 26 from the Commission was a unanimous vote by the commission to recommend to the Council to continue with the solid waste franchisee, they outlined some things that I want to just make clear on the public record. There was a transfer in this last fiscal year from SSC to the Republic Services. That transfer went in effect on April 1st of 2012. The City Council passed a resolution at that time agreeing to that transfer. They also, then, have done some things that I think have been very positive that want to make sure the public is aware of. The recycling is still a very big and popular activity in the city. It appears they have distributed approximately over 18,000 -- almost 19,000 recycling carts in use now. They have increased the volume of recycling both in the commercial as well as residential. Republic Services in this last fiscal year has returned almost 39,000 dollars in recycling revenue to the city for disburse in the recycling program that you're aware of. This makes a total of 97,000 dollars since the program was relaunched in 2011. Republic Services also agreed -- we had alittle -- a little gap in our new program that we instituted as a pilot in Settlers Park this summer for recycling. We had basically printed under the commercial recycling program not residential. All of the revenue that we get from residential recycling is what goes into the program for other projects. All the revenue for commercial recycling is retained by the franchisee. But they agreed that anything that was collected through the parks we would conclude as a residential recycling component and that was a good addition, because it's been a very successful program. I think Mr. Siddoway will probably come and talk to you about that at a future date, tell you how well that's gone and what maybe some future opportunities that may be in doing some recycling in the parks. The -- also the Republic and SSC -- or Republic has been a great partner with them applicant, they are an active member of the Solid Waste Advisory Commission, they are a great partner with the changes in the Meridian City Council October 2, 2072 Page 40 of 42 different things in the recycling business and making sure the city is informed about all of those things and, then, the other issue that had come up in the last year, fall leaf collection is also a very active program in the city and they have extended that program now from a one week program into a three week program and Republic had committed that that will remain as a permanent part of the collection program without any additional cost to the customers. Last year they collected over 854 tons of leaves in the City of Meridian. Also in the business of recycling, as well as business of trash collection Republic has been a great partner in basically keeping the Commission informed and city staff on changes that occur at the landfill, changes that may affect rates, changes that may affect the city, as well as changes in the marketplace. There has been a -- as most of you know from previous discussions the marketplace for recyclables fluctuates greatly and during a very boom time we have realized a great revenue source for projects for citizens in our city and through other times we have basically had a very flat period where we didn't receive any revenue and, basically, that the recycling that the citizens are able to do in our city still helped pay for other programs like the hazardous material collection and the sharps containers and all the other types of programs that get funded out of this. So, even in the flat time we have been able to sort of stay at a zero cost to our citizens to maintain those additional programs, even when the recyclables are low. So, it's been a good partnership, it's been a good transition this year, and the recommendation from the commission was to continue with that. That's it. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Appreciate your report. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Do we need a motion renew the contract or does it just renew automatically if we don't refuse it? Nary: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Zaremba, a voice vote to continue with the contract is adequate, because the contract would remain unless you directed us to enact the clause to terminate. Zaremba: Okay. Madam Mayor, I move we do not enact the clause to terminate the Republic Services contract. Rountree: I'll second that. It could be more positive. De Weerd: That's kind of what I was thinking, but -- I have a motion and a second. Zaremba: I thought that was what he said. De Weerd: Is there any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 41 of 42 De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Ordinances A. Second and Third Reading of Ordinance No. 12-1528: Downtown Core Sidewalk Facility Standards Update -Proposed Draft Title 8, Chapter 1 Ordinance and Proposed City of Meridian Improvement Standards De Weerd: Item No. 9-A is the second reading of Ordinance 12-1528 as amended and, Madam Clerk, will you, please, read this ordinance by title only. Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 122-1528, an ordinance of the City of Meridian repealing and replacing Title 8, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, city core streetscape ordinance, definitions, requirements for all encroachments in the city core streetscape, requirements for encroaches in the use zone, requirements for encroachments in the street furnishing zone, penalties and enforcement and severability, repealing Title 8, Chapters 3, 4 and 4, Meridian City Code, and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Okay. You have heard this ordinance by title. Is there any comment on this ordinance? If not -- Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Nary: I just wanted to clarify for the record. We did advertise this as a second reading based on the Council's direction last week. We received some comments from MDC's counsel yesterday afternoon with some requests and some clarifications. They are fairly minor changes, we discussed them internally today, felt the changes were probably appropriate for clarity sake, so that's why we requested it be second reading. We will make those changes and it will be on your agenda for approval next Tuesday. Item 10: Future Meeting Topics De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. And for the record it is on the October 9th Council meeting. So, Council, we are at the end of our agenda. Are there any topics for future Council agendas? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council October 2, 2012 Page 42 of 42 Zaremba: This is not exactly future meeting topics, but I would like to comment on a couple of nice things that went on today. Early in the day the Mayor and Councilman Rountree and I attended a meeting of the Central Valley Expressway Coalition where the news was very positive about the progress, at least on the first portion of it, from Highway 44 over to Highway 20-26 and positive feedback from the governor and at least one legislator about continuing on with the effort to get it all the way to I-84. That was a very positive meeting and uplifting and, then, later in the day Director Siddoway and I attended a groundbreaking, so to speak for a six acre pond that will be in a future 50 acre park on the Aldape property along the river and we were given explanations of the plans for the park and the pond and that's going to be a very positive addition to Meridian some day also. Just thought I would throw in two pieces of good news. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Zaremba. Did you get muddy? Siddoway: Dusty. De Weerd: Dusty. Oh. Okay. Well, then, I could have gone out there. I can handle dust. Anything further? Council, you did get arequest -- we did get a request for -- to put an item on Council agenda and Councilman Hoaglun and I had talked about it at our last agenda setting meeting and felt it was. a staff issue and we are working to -- to address that. So, if there is no questions, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Rountree: So moved. Hoaglun: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: We are adjourned. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:54 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS} /b i l4~ i Ia.-. MAYOR MY DE WEERD ~ PPROVED 444 US~~ T EST: City of ~ ~~~~.~~ IDAHO CEE MAN, CITY CLERK. ~r ~~,,, F~A~~ ey~~ ~~rlt 7AEAay~