Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFindingsMAYOR NUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Robert D. Cowie ~ A Good Place to Live CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY OF MERIDIAN William L. M. Nary 33 EAST IDAHO Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 March 7, 2002 Gary A. Lee, P.E./L.S. J-U-B Engineers, Inc. 250 S. Beechwood Ave. Ste. 201 Boise, Idaho 83709-0944 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 PUBLIC WORKS (208) 898-5500 • Fax 887-1297 BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING (208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854 RE: AZ 00-019, PP 00-018 Cedar Springs Subdivision - Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order Granting Application for Annexation /Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat Dear Applicant, Enclosed you will find a copy of the above mentioned document(s) as regards your project(s) pending with the City of Meridian. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions. Sincerely, Sh y Sharon Smith Deputy City Clerk Enc. r' BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL C/C 02-19-02 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF KEVIN HOWELL DEVELOPMENT, THE APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 100.71 ACRES FOR THE REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS SUBDMSION, LOCATED NORTHWEST OF N. MERIDIAN ROAD AND WEST USTICI< ROAD, MERIDIAN, IDAHO Case No. AZ-00-019 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing on December 4, 2001, and continued until February 19, 2002, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, Gary Smith, Public Works Director, Tom Kuntz, Parlcs and Recreation Director, and Gary Lee with J-U-B Engineers, Inc., and Joe Siminich, appeared and testified, and the City Council having duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter therefore makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 1 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) FINDINGS OF FACT 1. There has been'compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code §§ 67-6509 and 67-6511, and Meridian City Code §§ 11-15-5 and 11-16-1. 2. The City Council takes judicial notice of its zoning, subdivisions and development ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof, and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629, January 4,1994, and maps and the ordinance Establishing the Impact Area Boundary. 3. The property which is the subject to the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and is approximately 100.71 acres in size, is located northwest of N. Meridian Road and West Usticlc Road, all within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian and the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area. 4. The owner of record of the subject property is the Leslie Family Trust and Moore Family Trust of Eagle, Idaho; and the applicant is I<evin Howell Development of Boise, Idaho. 4. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as RUT. 5. The Applicant requests the property be zoned as R-4, with the intent to develop 264 building lots and 31 other lots for a residential subdivision, which is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 2 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRF,i~ITING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) C '. designates the subject property as Single Family Residential. The subject property is bordered to the north, east and west by Ada County RUT zoning, and to the south by agricultural land for the proposed City Parlc, zoned Limited Office. 8. There are no significant or scenic features of major importance that affect the consideration of this application. Giving due consideration to the comment received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction, public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the following conditions of development are imposed: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff, originally provided in their Memorandum dated February 15, 2001, as follows: Applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Agreement with the City as a condition of annexation. 2. A condition of the Annexation/Development Agreement shall be that the Applicant provide a minimum of five percent (5%) common open space within the legal description boundaries. This requirement was adopted as part of the new Landscape Ordinance. But since the subject applications were submitted prior to City Council adoption of the Landscape Ordinance, they are technically exempt from the standards in that ordinance. However, if deemed to be in its best interest, the City can impose higher standards than are currently adopted as ordinance as conditions of annexation for any development requesting annexation into the City. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 3 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) C C 3. The open space shall be exclusive of all street rights-of-way and street buffers, except for right-of-way specifically dedicated for landscaping within a subdivision. Stormwater detention facilities must be designed in accordance with Section 11.2 of the Landscape Ordinance in order to count toward the open space requirement. Open space may be active or passive in its intended use, and must be accessible by all residents of the subdivision. Common open space shall be suitably improved for its intended use. At a minimum, common open space lots shall include one (1) deciduous shade tree per eight thousand (8,000) square feet and lawn, either seed or sod. 4. There is 5.16% useable open space, and the storm~vater facilities shall be designed to the standards of Section 11.2 of the Landscape Ordinance. The 5.16% includes the 35-foot buffer along Meridian Road, the 25-foot buffer along Ustick Road, and the 25-foot Settlers Irrigation common lots along the north property line. 5. Due to the single-family uses abutting the east boundary of Lot 34, Block 1 (proposed as future office use), a minimum 20-foot planting strip, in accordance with City Ordinance 12-4-7.A., is required along the west property line of this lot and shall be a condition attached to this property in the Development Agreement. 6. A detached sidewalk with a minimum 5-foot-wide planter strip between the curb and side~vallc shall be required along the Meridian Road frontage. 7. A condition in the Development Agreement shall be that no subdivision infrastructure improvements can begin until the White Drain Sewer Trunk's easements are Finalized by the City and the trunk construction schedule is finalized with the civil contractor that is awarded the bid. 8. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural watervvays, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written conFirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Worlcs Department. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 4 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall have to be removed front their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 10. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Sections 11-13-4.C. and 12-5-2.M. 11. Two-hundred-fifty- and 100-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's e,~cpense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. 12. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas in the proposed future commercial lots. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 13. Off-street parking shall be provided in the proposed future commercial lots in accordance with the City of Meridian Ordinance 11-13 for use of property. 14. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs shall be permitted. 1 S. Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 12-5-2.I<. 16. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 5 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) ~ ., ~ , Adopt the ACRD Recommendations as follows: 17. Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Meridian Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-~vay dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be compensated for all right-of-way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of-~vay from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACHD Ordinance #193. 18. Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Ustick Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first: Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be compensated for all right-of-way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of-way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACHD Ordinance #193. 19. Any existing or proposed irrigation facilities on Ustick Road and Meridian Road should be located outside of the new right-of-rvay. 20. Construct two main entrances on Meridian Road located 270-feet north of the south property line, and 300-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. The roadway entrances shall be designed with minimum 21-foot street sections on either side of a center median. The median shall be constructed a minimum of 4-feet wide to total a minimum of a 100-square foot area. The applicant is proposing to construct two outbound lanes and one inbound lane with a median, within 64-feet of right-of-way. 21. Construct center turn lanes on Meridian Road for the main entrance intersections. The turn lanes should be constructed to provide a minimum of 100-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 6 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) approach and departure directions. Coordinate the design of the turn lanes with District staff. 22. Construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on Meridian Road abutting the entire parcel, located 2-feet within the new right-of-~vay. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 23. Construct one main entrance on Ustick Road located at the west property line, as proposed. The proposed entrance is located in conformance with District policy, and the applicant shall construct Venable Lane as one half of a 36-foot street section, plus 12-feet of additional pavement within 42-feet of right-of-way. The applicant is not proposing to construct a median at this entrance. 24. Construct a center turn lane on Ustick Road for the main entrance intersection. The turn lane shall be constructed to provide a minimum of 100-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the approach and departure directions. Coordinate the design of the tum lane with District staff. 25. Construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on Ustick Road abutting the entire parcel, located 2-feet within the new right-of-way. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 26. Construct the segment of Ashton Drive from Meridian Road to Elsmore Avenue as a residential collector street with no front-on housing, because the anticipated traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicle trips per day. District policy requires that this street segment be constructed as a 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of-way. Parking shall be prohibited on this street segment. Coordinate the signage plan with District staff. The access restrictions for this street segment should be stated on the final plat. 27. Construct the segment of Ashby Street from Meridian Road to Alexis Avenue as a residential collector street with no front-on housing, because the anticipated traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicle trips per day. District policy requires that this street segment be constructed as 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 7 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of-way. Due to the fact that Ashby Street abuts the south properly line, the applicant should only be required to construct one half a 36-foot street section plus 12 additional feet of pavement within 42 feet of right-of-way. Parking shall be prohibited on this street segment. Coordinate the signage plan with District staff. The access restrictions for this street segment shall be stated on the final plat. 28. Construct three stub streets to the north, as proposed. The applicant should not be required to provide paved temporary turnarounds at the end of the stub streets because the stubs are less than 1 SO-feet in length. The applicant should be required to install signs at the termini of the roadway stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub streets with District staff. The proposed stub streets are located: Between Lot 1, Block 15 and Lot 11, Block 18 ^ Between Lot 11, Block 15 and Lot 1, Block 13 ^ Between Lot 8, Block 13 and Lot 2, Block 10 29. Construct Ashton Lane from Meridian Road to the proposed Venable Lane. The applicant shall not be required to provide a paved temporary turnaround at the end of the street because the stub is less than 150- feet in length. The applicant shall be required to install a sign at the terminus of the proposed Ashton Lane stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN TI IE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub street with District staff. 30. Construct Ashby Street from Meridian Road extending 1,400 feet west to the proposed Alexis Avenue and from Greenwich Avenue extending 1,400 feet west to the proposed Venable Lane as a 29-foot street section within 50-feet of right-of-way, as proposed. The applicant shall not be required to provide a paved temporary turnaround at the end of the street because the stub is less than 150-feet in length. The applicant shall be required to install a sign at the terminus of the proposed Ashby Street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub street with District staff. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 8 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FORANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) ~~ ~~ 31. Construct Venable Lane as a locaUcominercial street. The applicant shall construct Venable Lane from Ustick Road to the north property line of the school lot as one half of a 40-foot street section plus 12-feet of additional pavement, with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk within 42-feet of right-of-~vay. To the north of the school site Venable Lane shall be constructed as a 36-foot street section. 32. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this should be required on the Final plat. 33. The applicant should be required to construct all public roads within the subdivision as 36-foot street sections with curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of-way. 34. The public streets within the subdivision shall be located to align or offset a minimum of 125-feet (centerline to centerline). It appears that the street layout is in conformance with District policy. 35. The turnarounds shall be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 36. Provide a $30,000 deposit to the Public Rights-of-Way Trust Fund for the cost of one-quarter of a traffic signal at the intersection of Ustick Road and Meridian Road. 37. Other than the proposed public streets, direct lot or parcel access to Ustick Road and Meridian Road is prohibited. Lot access restrictions, as required with this application, shall be stated on the final plat. 38. Comply with the Standard Requirements (9) listed in ACHD's Planning and Development Division Development Application Report dated December 12, 2001. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: 39. That afire-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute be available to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' pan. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 9 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) ( ~ 40. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. 41. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection is contingent upon acceptance of the water system by the Meridian Water for water quality. 42. Final approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. 43. All radii shall be 23' inside and 43' outside radius. 44. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. Additionally, the applicant shall comply with the action of the City Council taken at their February 19, 2002 meeting as follows: 45. Based upon testimony, and the widely recognized need for infrastructure improvements in the North Meridian Planning area sooner, rather than later, especially as it respects large developments, the Owner/Developer, as a condition of annexation and zoning, shall participate in the negotiations with Ada County Highway District, and shall become a party to any eventual agreements worked out by the Developer/ACHD Group. Therefore, as a condition of annexation, and as a condition of the Development Agreement, Applicant shall participate in any road infrastructure in the North Meridian Planning area agreements negotiated with ACHD and shall faithfully perform the terms of such agreement or agreements. 46. That no building permits shall be issued until the sewer is constructed and connected to the Wastewater Treatment Plant. 47. The Parlcs Department agrees to pay for four feet of the road on the northern boundary which abuts the City park, and pay for the curb and gutter for a total cost of approximately $13,500.00, per ACHD. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 10 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) ~~ r 48. Applicant shall be responsible to construct sewer mains to and through the proposed development which shall include stubbing to the south boundary of the development. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of the centerline. 49. That the Developer shall extend Venable Lane north from Ustick Road, and dedicate their one-half of Venable Lane on the east side to provide a hill residential collector wide street from Ustick to the north, and which will line up with the existing Venable Lane property. 10. It is found that if the developer pays for the requested improvements and complies with the conditions set forth in these Findings of Fact No. 9, and all sub-parts, the economic welfare of the City and its residents and tax and rate payers will be protected, a condition of annexation and zoning designation. 11. It is also found that the development considerations as referenced in Finding No. 9 are reasonable to require and most be taken into account, in order to assure the proposed development is designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner which is harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing, or intended character of the general vicinity, in order to assure that the proposed use will not change the essential character of the affected vicinity and will insure that the proposed uses will not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing, or future neighboring uses, particularly considering the impact of proposed development on potential to produce excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, g]are and odors. But, additional landscaping buffers and design features will be required to make the proposed use more harmonious with the general vicinity and to comply with City FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 11 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FORANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) Ordinances. 12. It is found that the zoning of the subject real property as Low Density Residential District (R-4) requires connection to the Municipal Water and Server systems and will be compatible with the Applicant's development intentions, and will assure that the zoning is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which designates the subject property as Single Family Residential. 13. The subject annexation request and zoning designation and proposed development relates and is compatible to the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 14. The property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer, since the applicant has extended the lines. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian has authority to annex real property upon written request for annexation and the real property being contiguous or adjacent to city boundaries and that said property lies within the area of city impact as provided by Idaho Code Section 50-222. The Meridian City Code § 11-16 provides the City may annex real property that is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 12 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 3. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority and responsibility as provided by "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975", coditied at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code by the adoption of 'Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ord. No. 629, January 4, 1994. 4. The following are found to be pertinent provisions of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are applicable to this Application: 4A Goals 1 through 10, inclusive. 5. The zoning of Low Density Residential District (R-4) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at § 11-7-2 C as follows: (R-4) Low Density Residential District: Only single-family dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional uses shall be permitted except for planned residential development and public schools. The purpose of the R-4 District is to permit the establishment of low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominately residential development has, or is ]ilcely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and to protect the integrity of residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible nonresidential uses. The R-4 District allows for a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal water and sewer systems of the City. 6. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. See Burt vs. The Citv of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P2d 1075 (1983). 8. The development of the annexed land, if annexed, shall meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian including, but not limited to: Section 12-2- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 13 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) 4 which pertains to development time schedules and requirements; Section 12-4-13, which pertains to the piping of ditches; and Section 12-5-2 N, which pertains to pressurized irrigation systems, and Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian. 9. Pursuant to Section 11-16-4 A of the Zoning and Development Ordinance the owner and/or developer shall enter into a Development Agreement, if such is required by the City. DECISION AND ORDER NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby Order and this does Order: 1. The applicant's request for annexation and zoning of approximately 100.71 acres to Low Density Residential District (R-4) is granted subject to the terms and conditions of this Order hereinafter stated. 2. The application is for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres. The legal description shall be prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor, Licensed by the State of Idaho, and shall conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158. The legal description for annexation must place this parcel contiguous to the Corporate City Limits per Ordinance No. 686. 3. Developer shall be required to met the conditions set forth and in the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 14 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) event the conditions herein are not met by the Developer that the property shall be subject to de-annexation, with the City of Meridian, which provides for the following conditions of development, to-wit: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff, originally provided in their Memorandum dated February 15, 2001, as follows: 1. Applicant shall be required to enter into a Development Agreement ~~1th the City as a condition of annexation. 2. A condition of the Annexation/Development Agreement shall be that the Applicant provide a minimum of five percent (S%) common open space within the legal description boundaries. This requirement was adopted as part of the new Landscape Ordinance. But since the subject applications were submitted prior to City Counci] adoption of the Landscape Ordinance, they are technically exempt from the standards in that ordinance. However, if deemed to be in its best interest, the City can impose higher standards than are currently adopted as ordinance as conditions of annexation for any development requesting annexation into the City. 3. The open space shall be exclusive of all street rights-of-rvay and street buffers, except for right-of-way specifically dedicated for landscaping within a subdivision. Stonnwater detention facilities must be designed in accordance with Section 11.2 of the Landscape Ordinance in order to count toward the open space requirement. Open space may be active or passive in its intended use, and must be accessible by all residents of the subdivision. Common open space shall be suitably improved for its intended use. At a minimum, common open space lots shall include one (1) deciduous shade tree per eight thousand (8,000) square feet and lawn, either seed or sod. 4. There is 5.16% useable open space, and the stormwater facilities shall be designed to the standards of Section 11.2 of the Landscape Ordinance. The 5.16% includes the 35-foot buffer along Meridian Road, the 25-foot buffer along Usticlc Road, and the 25-foot Settlers Irrigation common lots along the north property line. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 15 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) 5. Due to the single-family uses abutting the east boundary of Lot 34, Block 1 (proposed as future office use), a minimum 20-foot planting strip, in accordance with City Ordinance 12-4-7.A., is required along the west property line of this lot and shall be a condition attached to this property in the Development Agreement. 6. A detached sidewalk with a minimum 5-foot-wide planter strip between the curb and sidewalk shall be required along the Meridian Road frontage. 7. A condition in the Development Agreement shall be that no subdivision infrastructure improvements can begin until the White Drain Sewer Trunk's easements are finalized by the City and the trunk construction schedule is finalized with the civil contractor that is awarded the bid. 8. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 9. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 10. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Sections 11-13-4.C. and 12-5-2.M. 11. Two-hundred-fifty- and 100-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights tivill be required at locations designated by the Public Worlcs Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense.. -Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. I2. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR AI~INEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) ~ ~ (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas in the proposed future commercial lots. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 13. Off-street parking shall be provided in the proposed future commercial lots in accordance with the City of Meridian Ordinance 11-13 for use of property. 14: All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs shall be permitted. 15. Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 12-5-2.I<. 16. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Adopt the ACHD Recommendations as follows: 17. Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Meridian Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be compensated for all right-of-way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of-way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACHD Ordinance #193. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 17 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) 18. Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Usticlc Road abutting the parcel by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be compensated for all right-of-way dedicated as an addition to existing right-of-way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section 15 of ACHD Ordinance #193. 19. Any existing or proposed irrigation facilities on Ustick Road and Meridian Road should be located outside of the new right-of-way. 20. Construct two main entrances on Meridian Road located 270-feet north of the south property line, and 300-feet south of the north property line, as proposed. The roadway entrances shall be designed with minimum 21-foot street sections on either side of a center median. The median shall be constructed a minimum of 4-feet wide to total a minimum of a 100-square foot area. The applicant is proposing to construct trvo outbound lanes and one inbound lane with a median, within 64-feet of right-of-way. 21. Construct center turn lanes on Meridian Road for the main entrance intersections. The tum lanes should be constructed to provide a minimum of 100-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the approach and departure directions. Coordinate the design of the turn lanes with District staff. 22. Construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on Meridian Road abutting the entire parcel, located 2-feet within the new right-of-~vay. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 23. Construct one main entrance on~Usticlc Road located at the west property line, as proposed. The proposed entrance is located in conformance with District policy, and the applicant shall construct Venable Lane as one half of a 36-foot street section, plus 12-feet of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 18 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) C ~ additional pavement within 42-feet of right-of-way. The applicant is not proposing to construct a median at this entrance. 24. Construct a center turn lane on Ustick Road for the main entrance intersection. The turn lane shall be constructed to provide a minimum of 100-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the approach and departure directions. Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff. 25. Construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk on Ustick Road abutting the entire parcel, located 2-feet within the new right-of-way. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 26. Construct the segment of Ashton Drive from Meridian Road to Elsmore Avenue as a residential collector street with no front-on housing, because the anticipated traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicle trips per day. District policy requires that this street segment be constructed as a 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of--way. Parking shall be prohibited on this street segment. Coordinate the signage plan with District staff. The access restrictions for this street segment should be stated on the final plat. 27. Construct the segment of Ashby Street from Meridian Road to Ale,~ds Avenue as a residential collector street with no front-on housing, because the anticipated traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicle trips per day. District policy requires that this street segment be constructed as a 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of-way. Due to the fact that Ashby Street abuts the south property line, the applicant should only be required to construct one half a 36-foot street section plus 12 additional feet of pavement within 42 feet of right-of-rvay. Parking shall be prohibited on this street segment. Coordinate the signage plan with District staff. The access restrictions for this street segment shall be stated on the final plat. 28. Construct three stub streets to the north, as proposed. The applicant should not be required to provide paved temporary turnarounds at the end of the stub streets because the stubs are less than 150-feet in length. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 19 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) The applicant should be required to install signs at the termini of the roadway stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub streets with District staff. The proposed stub streets are located: ^ Between Lot 1, Block 15 and Lot 11, Block 13 ^ Between Lot 11, Bloclc 15 and Lot 1, Block 13 ^ Between Lot 8, Block 13 and Lot 2, Block 10 29. Constrict Ashton Lane from Meridian Road to the proposed Venable Lane. The applicant shall not be required to provide a paved temporary turnaround at the end of the street because the stub is less than 150- feet in length. The applicant shall be required to install a sign at the terminus of the proposed Ashton Lane stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub street with District staff. 30. Construct Ashby Street from Meridian Road extending 1,400 feet west to the proposed Alexis Avenue and from Greenwich Avenue extending 1,400 feet west to the proposed Venable Lane as a 29-foot street section within 50-feet of right-of-way, as proposed. The applicant shall not be required to provide a paved temporary turnaround at the end of the street because the stub is less than 150-feet in length. The applicant shall be required to install a sign at the terminus of the proposed Ashby Street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub street with District staff. 31. Construct Venable Lane as a locaUcommercial street. The applicant shall construct Venable Lane from Ustick Road to the north propeny line of the school lot as one half of a 40-foot street section plus 12-feet of additional pavement, with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk within 42-feet of right-of-way. To the north of the school site Venable Lane shall be constructed as a 36-foot street section. 32. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this should be required on the final plat. 33. The applicant should be required to construct all public roads within FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 20 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) C ~ the subdivision as 36-foot street sections with curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet of right-of-way. 34. The public streets within the subdivision shall be located to align or offset a minimum of 125-feet (centerline to centerline). It appears that the street layout is in conformance with District policy. 35. The turnarounds shall be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. 36. Provide a $30,000 deposit to the Public Rights-of-Way Trust Fund for the cost of one-quarter of a traffic signal at the intersection of Ustick Road and Meridian Road. 37. Other than the proposed public streets, direct lot or parcel access to Ustick Road and Meridian Road is prohibited. Lot access restrictions, as required with this application, shall be stated on the final plat. 38. Comply with the Standard Requirements (9) listed in ACHD's Planning and Development Division Development Application Report dated December 12, 2001. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: 39. That a Fre-flow of 1,000 gallons per minute be available to service the entire project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 400' part. 40. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. 41. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection is contingent upon acceptance of the water system by the Meridian Water for water quality. 42. Final approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. 43. All radii shall be 28' inside and 48' outside radius. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 21 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) 44. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. Additionally, the applicant shall comply with the action of the City Council taken at their February 19, 2002 meeting as follows: 45. Based upon testimony, and the widely recognized need for infrastructure improvements in the North Meridian Planning area sooner, rather than later, especially as it respects large developments, the Owner/Developer, as a condition of annexation and zoning, shall participate in the negotiations with Ada County Highway District, and shall become a party to any eventual agreements worked out by the Developer/ACRD Group. Therefore, as a condition of annexation, and as a condition of the Development Agreement, Applicant shall participate in any road infrastructure in the North Meridian Planning area agreements negotiated with ACHD and shall faithfully perform the terms of such agreement or agreements. 46. That no building permits shall be issued until the server is constructed and connected to the Wastewater Treatment Plant. 47. The Parlcs Department agrees to pay for four feet of the road on the northern botmdary which abuts the City park, and pay for the curb and gutter for a total cost of approximately $13,500.00, per ACHD. 48. Applicant shall be responsible to construct sewer mains to and through the proposed development which shall include stubbing to the south boundary of the development. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of the centerline. 49. That the Developer shall extend Venable Lane north from Usticlc Road, and dedicate their one-half of Venable Lane on the east side to provide a full residential collector wide street from Ustick to the north, and which will line up with the existing Venable Lane property. 4. The City Attorney shall prepare for consideration by the City Council FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 22 r1~~iD DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) ( ~ the appropriate ordinance for the annexation and zoning designation of the real property which is the subject of the application to (R-4) Low Density Residential District, and Meridian City Code § 11-7-2. 5. Subsequent to the passage of the Ordinance provided for in section 4 of this Order the engineering staff of the Public Works Department shall prepare the appropriate mapping changes of the official boundaries and zoning maps as provided in Meridian City Code § 11-21-1 in accordance with the provisions of the annexation and zoning ordinance. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person is a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the annexation and zoning and who may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the of ~GZZG`2 , 2002. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 23 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) day VOTED~~ ( i COUNCILWOMAN TAMMY deWEERD VOTED~u- COUNCILWOMAN CHERIE Mc LANDLESS VOTED_~~- COUNCILMAN WILLIAM L.M. NARY VOTED~~ MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DATED: ~ ` Jr' DZ. MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and the City Attorney. B j'(~(~Le..~, City Clerlc Z:\Work\N14VIeridianw[eridian 15360M\Ced~r Spgs (2002) AZ00-019 PP00-OI FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -Page 24 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING/REVISED CEDAR SPRINGS (AZ-00-019) ~~~ u jt T.S..,~~ ..-.r+ rue+ Meridian City Council Meeting ~ • March 5, 2002 Page 2 Stiles: H. If we could pull that just to make a minor change, so it's consistent with the approval. Corrie: Okay. H. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: With Mrs. de Weerd's approval I would move that we take Item H to 5-H. De Weerd: Second agrees. Corrie: Okay. Any other changes of Council or staff? All right on the Adoption of the Agenda with H and M, N, O to go to Item Number 5. Any further discussion? Okay. Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes from February 26, 2002 City Council Special Meeting: B. Approve minutes from February 26, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 01-007 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 1.46 acres in a C-G zone for Wenco Subdivision by Wenco -northwest corner of East Corporate Drive and East First Street: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 01-008 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 4 building lots on 1.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Kearney Place No. 4 by Margaret Wood -south of East Chateau Drive and east of North Laughbridge Avenue: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 00-019 Request for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development - northwest corner of North Meridian Road and West Ustick Road: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 00-018 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 264 building lots and 31 other lots on 99.82 acres in an R-4 zone for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development -northwest of North Meridian Road and West Ustick Road: Meridian City Council Meeting February 19, 2002 Page 13 Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion for request for services is denied. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 7: Continued Public Hearing from December 4, 2001: AZ 00-019 Request for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development - northwest Meridian Road and West Ustick Road: Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from December 4, 2001: PP 00-018 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 264 building lots on 31 other lots on 99.82 acres in an R-4 zone for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development -northwest of North Meridian Road and West Ustick Road: Corrie: Item Number 7 is a Continued Public Hearing from December 4, 2001. Let me -- once we have been here before -- I have got to check the ground rules here for Public Hearings. We have got a mess of them and what I would like to do is -- what we will do, we will have the staff report first, then we will have the developer or the requestee have the first on the podium for five minutes. Then we will have the Public Hearing for the people in the public that would like to testify and we have three minutes for each person that wants to testify. Then after we are through we will go back to the developer or the requestee and they will have the last to answer questions that were brought up from the Public Hearing. So, with that in mind I will continue the Public Hearing now on December the 4t" -- hearing from December 4, 2001. This is a request for an annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development, Northwest of Meridian Road, and West Ustick Road. There is also a Continued Public Hearing involving a request for Preliminary Plat approval of 264 building lots and 31 other lots on 99.82 acres in an R-4 zone for revised Cedar Springs. So if the council doesn't object I will open -- continue the Public Hearing on Number 7 and Number 8 and testimony can be taken on both. With that, I will have the staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I believe these applications were continued in part because of the continued work on the North Meridian Area Plan. You did listen to a presentation by Wardle and Associates regarding the plan at your last meeting. We did receive since the December 4th meeting revised staff comments from the Ada County Highway District and I believe a lot of that had to do with the road that was beginning from Meridian Road to Venable Lane. Mr. Tom Kuntz, the Parks Director, has some comments regarding this project and I would like to turn it over to him now. Kuntz: Thank you, Mayor and Council. The parks department just wants to go on record that we plan on submitting a letter to the developer agreeing to paying for four feet of the road on our northern boundary of our park and the curb and gutter, totaling Meridian City Council Meeting ~ • February 19, 2002 Page 14 approximately $13,500 by the engineer's estimate, and that is being done at the request of Ada County Highway District. We just want to go on record for that. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Any questions for staff? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: On our sewer through this -- this is the sewer that will -- that will eventually run through to our park; is that correct? And staff recommendation -- is there a recommendation that that sewer line be run to and through in the first stage or is this developer going to phase it in from the north side and we will just get sewer whenever the phase reaches the park? How does that work? Kuntz: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor and Council, staffs recommendation is that the developer is required to run the sewer through and to their southern boundary line to the northern boundary of the park as part of the first phase of their development. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Kuntz: Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions? Okay. Is the developer representative here this evening? Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Lee: Yes, I do. Corrie: Thank you, Gary. Your name and address, please. Lee: I was just waving at you, I didn't know that -- my name is Gary Lee with JUB Engineers, 250 South Beachwood in Boise, representing AI Murdock, the developer. I believe the last Public Hearing that we had when this project was tabled, we had addressed all the remand items that Council had requested prior to that meeting and went back to Planning and Zoning. They re-heard those remand items and passed a favorable recommendation on to Council and I believe the Council was comfortable with that at that last meeting. I'm certainly glad to answer any questions you may have about the project at this time. Bird: I have none. Corrie: All right. Thank you, Gary. Lee: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting ~ • February 19, 2002 Page 15 Corrie: Mr. Berg, do we have anybody signed up on that one? Okay. Okay. Is there anyone from the public that would like to speak in favor of this project? Okay. Anyone against the project? I have Joe -- you wanted to speak on this subdivision? Raise your right hand, please. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Simanich: I do. Corrie: Give your name and address, please. Simanich: My name is Joe Simanich and I live across the street from this. I have been to two or three meetings on this subdivision and I would like to have a little more information as to what is taking place now. Apparently, there have been some discussions with Venable Lane and other items and I would like to be informed of what they are. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Anyone else like to issue testimony? Okay. Hearing none, Gary, do you have anything you would like to say in reference to what Mr. Simonich had to -- questions? Lee: Yes. Gary Lee with JUB. The question about Venable Lane was brought up about -- from the staff at the last hearing and the plan is to extend Venable Lane north from Ustick Road -- I'm going to guess on the dimensions, probably about 1,500 feet and we will dedicate our half of Venable Lane on the east side. There currently exists an old deed granting right of way on the west side of that center section line where that arrow is going down the map, so on the end there will be a full collector -- residential collector wide street from Ustick to the north and it will line up with the existing Venable Lane property. Thanks. Corrie: Thank you. Council, any discussion on the Public Hearing? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess I have a question for the attorney. This proposal was tabled for a couple of reasons. One was the question as to when the White Drain would come on line. The second was kind of a compilation of issues and those were in regards to being able to provide city services to this property and -- as far as police protection -- police, fire protection, and roads, those kind of issues that we are hoping are addressed in the North Corridor Planning. Can we take action on this and impose conditions that are not yet defined by the North Corridor Planning or can you put whatever is a result of that planning process to answer some of these issues that the city has in question? Is that too vague? I don't think you can really put conditions on something that are not yet Meridian City Council Meeting • • February 19, 2002 Page 16 defined. So I believe that in Bridgetower a condition was put on that they would adhere to any of the recommendations that came out of the North Plan regarding roads, but this is a -- we could look at something like that for this, but how about some of the other things that come out of that plan as well? Nichols: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor, Members of the Council, the only condition on Bridgetower that pertained to anything that might come out of the North Meridian Planning Area has to do with the requirement that the developer was willing to agree to, which was that in the event there was an agreement worked out generally between the development community and ACHD on how to more quickly fund arterials, the road construction. That Bridgetower would participate fully, along with the others, in that and what was contemplated there, if I recall correctly, was that the development community was looking at how can we build things more quickly so that the roads are there contemporaneous with or ahead of the growth, as opposed to lagging behind. Secondly, is there a way that the roads can be built less costly than ACHD's current per mile cost. So there were some ideas being explored, such as having the developers build the roads, private enterprise building them to certain standards and then having a reimbursement through some sort of phase-in thing out of impact fees or going to ACHD and then come back to the developers, kind of like a latecomer's fee. So, you could do something similar to that for Cedar Springs. If the applicant is willing to do that we would put it in the annexation and zoning portion, we'd put it into the Development Agreement, so that it's a condition of annexation, as opposed to a condition of Preliminary Plat approval. With regard to some of the other issues, the public safety issues in terms of furnishing fire coverage, police coverage, and those sorts of things, from the things that I have seen in the North Meridian Planning Area. I'm not sure that there is anything that's necessarily going to come out of that which would specifically address that issue unless it pertains to the issue of impact fees for public safety, which is something that city staff is already looking into. Those, of course, would have to -- they would have to be capital facilities planned. There would have to be zones created so that those impact fees would only be spent in that particular zone and you have that ability to do that now anyway. That is part of the building permit process and just because they build the subdivision and have the lots for sale doesn't necessarily mean that they pay impact fees at all once. So you could still do the impact fee ordinance for those things subject to the Public Hearing process and the rest of it down the road that would apply to this subdivision. It's not that this subdivision would get out from under having those impact fees as far as any heretofore unbuilt upon lots. Somebody that would buy a house that was already built would not have to pay the impact fee. But that issue -- and I also think that -- although I wasn't here on the December 4th meeting when this subdivision initially came before the Council, that was before the last attempt to raise the mill levy at .004. So I don't know if that answers your question, but it's very difficult for me to put conditions into a Development Agreement unless you specifically state what those conditions are. I haven't got my degree in mind reading yet, just ask my wife. Meridian City Council Meeting February 19, 2002 Page 17 Corrie: Tom, I had a question. On this revised plat, I don't notice that it shows where the street is blocked off at the park. So you will have a straight shot? Is that going to be -- where is that place in there? Kuntz: Mayor and Council, if you move the arrow right back -- or right there, that road would now have to proceed to the north. Corrie: All right. Kuntz: And then come back around the block and come back down to the park. So, that section would not have a road in it. Correct. Corrie: Okay. That will be shown on the revised plat, though, for -- Kuntz: That would be my recommendation. Corrie: Okay. So they don't have a straight shot down there? Kuntz: Yes. Corrie: Okay. Kuntz: And that was actually JUB's suggestion and was supported wholeheartedly by ACHD. Corrie: And the developer as well? Kuntz: I believe so, yes. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Gary? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council Members, I believe the developer has been holding off on granting the city sewer easement for White Trunk pending resolution of this plat. don't believe there is a comment in our staff recommendations concerning the easement for the White Drain, but we really need to get that easement moving forward, if this plat is approved, by Mr. Howell. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess that would raise two questions for the applicant. One would be would you be in agreement to participate in any road assessment that might come down to help this North Meridian Area and you might want to comment on the easement that runs through that property. Meridian City Council Meeting ~ i February 19, 2002 Page 18 Lee: Gary Lee with JUB Engineers. As far as the road situation with Ada County Highway District, it really is similar to what they used to do in the old days where the developer would construct their portion of the roadway up to their -- Ada County Highway District standards. I think it's just kind of gotten away from that in the last few years and I think it's catching up to them now. As long as there is an equitable, way for a developer to get his share of the cost back through impact fees or whatever mechanism they come up with, it would be agreeable to do so. As far as the sewer easement is concerned, I have been working with Keller and Associates on the easement document. I have reviewed the easement once and made some comments, took them back to them to review. I have not seen anything back from them to date. I would like to see the final construction plans through that alignment as well just to be sure that we coordinate elevations for alignment and that sort of thing with the developer and the discussion with Kevin Howell on the easement. I don't think he has a problem signing that easement. He's reluctant to do so until we can secure an alignment for a roadway. We don't want to put that easement in there and come to find out the plan is denied and we got to come in with some sort of revised alignment and still make the sewer work, because they both have to kind of work together. Does that answer your question? De Weerd: Yes. Nichols: Mr. Mayor? Mr. Lee, if I may, before you get down, since I wasn't here December 4th, I'm not sure I'm understanding what we are talking about in terms of blocking off the street. Is that -- can you identify that lot and block, tell me -- or are you not going to build that lower portion of the street at all in there? Lee: That's correct. It's anon-continuous street. I handed out an eight and a half by 11 reduction of the plat kind of showing where that area was, but on the -- Nichols: So we have this drawing, which shows that -- Lee: Yes. Nichols: Okay. Can you tell me that block? Lee: We show that at least in our Preliminary Plat as Block 12 and it's between Alexis and Greenwich Avenue and a portion of this continuous street is with that street. The blocks will likely change in the Final Plat. They tend to do that, the numbering system. Nichols: Okay. If we are going to put that into the Preliminary Plat findings I need to have something to tie it to and -- Lee: I understand. Nichols: -- I can't read the small numbers. Meridian City Council Meeting ~ • February 19, 2002 Page 19 Lee: I can't either. Thank you Corrie: Thank you, Gary. Any other questions for the Public Hearing? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, only if Gary's response works for our Public Works Department. Smith: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor and Council, yes, we understand their concern and we will be happy to work with them on their development plan, so that the manhole rims will work with their roadway design. We just need to get this easement document signed by the developer as soon as possible, so that this will complete our plan set that's going out for bid. I don't know at what point the developer would feel comfortable in doing that, but if this plat moves forward this evening, I would like to be able to submit that easement document back to the developer ASAP for his signature. De Weerd: I feel like I'm in a tennis match. Does that work for you, Gary? Lee: Gary Lee with JUB. It certainly does. I just wanted to point out the one comment that I did have on the easement is that there were -- there are two points of connection up in the very northwest corner on that easement document. I think the reason for that at the time was in negotiation with Mr. Kennedy and we'd like to see that northerly portion of the easement go away, because it really is not doing us any good to have an easement across that corner of the project. So hopefully you can get that situation with that other parcel resolved, so we don't have two easements going across there to do the same thing. Corrie: We would hope to have this the 19th of March anyway. Thank you. Anything else? Okay. Then hearing no more, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 7 and 8. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we close the Public hearing on Items 7 and 8. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item Number 7, AZ 00-019, and Number 8, which is PP 00-018. Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion say. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Discussion? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council Meeting February 19, 2002 Page 20 Corrie: Okay. I will entertain a motion on Item No. 7, request for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from an RUT to an R-4 zone for Revised Cedar Springs. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for the Revised Cedar Springs. To include all staff comments, as well as the revised plat, to also ask that the applicant participate in the -- don't know -- Mr. Attorney, you probably have better words than I do on how to word the participation of anything from the ACRD road improvement from the north corridor plan and to have the attorney draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Nary: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made to approve the annexation of 00-019 and to include all staff comments and the original motion. Any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none -- De Weerd: Do you want me to -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Wait a minute. Okay. Mr. Bird. Bird: I do have a -- I'm in favor of it, but I would like to see a stipulation that no Building Permits would be issued until the sewer is up and running through their place and ready to go on line. De Weerd: This motion -- I would agree to add that to my motion, if the second would agree. Nary: I agree. Corrie: Motion was to include no building permits at that point until the sewer line is in. Let the record show that both the motion and the second approve. Any further discussion? Okay. Mr. Berg, roll-call vote, please. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Motion has been approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting February 19, 2002 Page 21 Corrie: Now Item No. 8 is the request for Preliminary Plat approval of 264 building lots and 31 other lots on 99.82 acres in an R-4 zone for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we approve the request for Preliminary Plat approval of 264 building lots and 31 other lots on 99.82 acres in an R-4 zone for Revised Cedar Springs, to also make special notation on the map that we looked at with the -- what street is that? Nichols: Mayor and Council Members, I'm looking at a drawing, which is dated November 30, 2001, by Gary Lee, showing a portion of Ashby Street between Alexis and Greenwich. De Weerd: Okay. As noted, then, by the attorney, to include all staff comments, and to ask the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and second to approve the request for Preliminary Plat with the conditions on Preliminary Plat 00-018. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg. Roll Call: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye. Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from November 20, 2001: AZ 01-012 Request for annexation and zoning of 70.72 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Sundance Subdivision by G.L. Voigt Development - northeast corner of East Ustick Road and North Meridian Road: Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from November 20, 2001: PP 01-015 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 214 single family Tots, 4 future office lots, and 23 common lots and 3.43 other lots on 69.79 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Sundance Subdivision by G.L. Voigt Development -northeast corner of East Ustick Road and North Meridian Road: Meridian City Council Meeting . • Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 47 of 90 they could come here and have an agreement, other than us tying up another hour or hour and a half at a Council meeting trying to -- De Weerd: That's why I suggested that Mr. Jewett might have something more to discuss at that time. Anderson: Well, I'm hoping they have something before that. Bird: But in a Public Hearing, when you continue a Public Hearing, I don't believe we can specify one single thing, because it's an overall Public Hearing, we are -- so, yeah, I would agree with that and I hope that staff could get together -- Anderson: I would encourage them to get together ahead of time to try to work out some of these details. Corrie: Well, I would recommend highly -- I don't have the calendar, but that's the end of the discussion. Okay. Let's have aroll-call vote on that ordinance -- or that motion, please. Roll-Call: Bird; aye; de Weerd, aye; McCandless, aye; Anderson, aye. Corrie: All ayes. Then we will continue the Public Hearing until December 18th on Items 11, 12 and 13. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Before we go to Item 14 I'd like to take about a ten minute break and then we will be back at -- try to be back here about five after 9:00. Bird: So moved. RECONVENED AT 9:05 P.M. Item 14. Public Hearing: AZ 00-019 Request for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development -northwest of North Meridian Road and West Ustick Road: Item 15. Public Hearing: PP 00-018 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 264 building lots and 31 other lots on 99.82 acres in an R-4 zone for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development -northwest of North Meridian Road and West Ustick Road: Corrie: Okay. I will reconvene the City Council Meeting from our recess. The next item on the agenda is the Public Hearing, request for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from RUT to R-4 zone for Revised Cedar Springs by Kevin Howell Development, Meridian City Council Meeting • • Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 48 of 90 northwest of North Meridian Road and west of Ustick Road and also there is a request by the Revised Cedar Springs for a Preliminary Plat approval on 264 building lots and 31 other lots -- or those are two different things, aren't they? Okay. We can open them both up if you'd like. Okay. So I will open the Public Hearing on Items 14 and 15 and the staff comments first. McKinnon: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. I have got a laser pointer, so I can help out now. Hopefully it will help follow along with what I'm saying. This is the 56 -- 58 acre park that the city is working on right now. I know at your last meeting there was some discussion that was had about whether or not the straightaway would be located in the subdivision. Go ahead and change maps here. This is the park right here. There is a straightaway starting from right here running directly across the park frontage. ACHD has some very serious concerns about creating a drag strip right in front of the park, especially with people traveling from the neighborhood across the street into the park. So there has been some discussion with ACHD. I know that members of my staff, Brad Hawkins-Clark, met with the parks department and with the applicant to discuss some traffic calming ideas and some techniques that could be utilized in these areas. The four different ideas that they came up with are as follows: Number one, construct a street section at 29 feet width, rather than the standard 36 feet to reduce the speed of traffic. Essentially just taking the road and narrowing it would not allow vehicles to travel as quickly as they do in the neighborhood subdivision, which typically has a 36 foot wide road section. Number two is to restrict parking on both the orth and the south side of the street. Number three is to paint the south curb, the curb directly adjacent to the park, with a red paint to designate it as an emergency lane and access and also to prohibit people from using that for parking for the park. And, number four, we were talking about installing a landscape aisle to Ashby -- which I believe is this street right here -- to eliminate the straightaway and force vehicular traffic north around the block. So what we would essentially do is right here bump the park out and up right there so that instead of having a straight path they could travel on -- my hand's shaking because it's a long distance from here -- right there they would have to travel along the street and then go up, over, and then back down and across, which doesn't allow them to have a straight shot. So if we had a narrow street right here and then added the bump out right here, they wouldn't be able to travel down the street as quickly as they can right now with a 36 foot wide street section. We are comfortable with those types of traffic calming techniques. ACHD had some concerns with those traffic calming techniques. However, they can only make a special recommendation to the city, they can't make any requirements to do any further changes from this. Brad Hawkins said that the applicant would be here tonight to discuss those options with you and he can go into depth further as to what else they would like to do with that and how they would accommodate those changes. As far as the design of the subdivision, there is very little change, if any, from when you saw it last and I'd ask if there is any questions. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 49 of 90 Bird: David, you say you're taking the street down from 36 feet to 29 feet to reduce speed? McKinnon: That's correct. Bird: The ones that are going to speed in there, regardless of how wide it is, all you're doing is getting in closer to a wreck. I mean the kids -- the guys that are going to speed in there regardless of whether it's 36 or 29. The wider the street the better you are. McKinnon: To some extent I agree with you only from this -- from about right here to here. There is some curve to the street as you get to these areas right here, then if you also add the bump out in addition to the 29 feet of narrowing it -- and that comes from some traffic engineering studies that say that in a neighborhood with a narrower street they actually do travel slower. Part of that is a result of allowing people to park on both sides of the street and they can't actually travel in a fast lane. If you imagine the north end of Boise, the traffic can't actually go much faster because of the narrower streets, the crossing. I agree with you wholeheartedly that a 36 wide one would allow just as much speeding as a 29 and there could be some changes there, but if we made the bump right here, that wouldn't allow them to come as quickly into that bump, because they wouldn't would have as much radius to make that turn. Bird: What about just speed bumps? They are the greatest thing I have ever seen to slow somebody down, especially me. McKinnon: To me, Mayor, Councilman Bird, it's a mixed bag with speed bumps. ACHD -- I have had numerous discussions with ACHD. They receive complaint after complaint after complaint with the speed bumps. I know for a fact living on a street that has had speed bumps in the past that one of the more fun things to do is -- when you're a young man or a young woman that's driving a car is to actually go faster over the speed bumps. You can't catch any air, but you actually -- your suspension feels it a lot less if you go faster over the speed bumps. I've seen it over and over and over again off of Vista where we used to live. The speed bumps do slow some vehicles and I think that there is some types of speed bumps that do, but in neighborhoods people typically do not like to have speed bumps in the neighborhood and, like I say, I think it's a mixed bag. We are looking for something as an alternative to that. Some other alternatives that we discussed with staff was to put in some marked crossings with stamped concrete of a different color going across the street that would designate that, hey, these are crosswalks right here, another idea has been discussed to slow vehicles down. However, at night when you have vehicles traveling it's hard to see and they don't do a whole lot. There is a lot of different ways to calm traffic. There has been some discussion about, you know, putting in the barricades right here, the small bump- outs. If you have ever traveled down Irene Street from State Street to Harrison Blvd., you know that they have the bump-outs across from the park that's there between 24th and 25th -- well, between 24th and 22nd Street. This is similar to this where they have a park with homes adjacent to it and this is the main street through here. What happens with the bump-outs that are right there is the same thing he said, Chairman -- Meridian City Council Meeting • Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 50 of 90 • Councilman Bird, is that the vehicles actually can go straight through those bump-outs. Rather than follow the curve through there, they just go straight through, because there is no other vehicles is coming crosswise at them. We are not going to be able to stop everybody from speeding and we are just trying to come up with some alternatives to putting this park out further and then back in and some all alternatives so speed bumps, because they are sort of a mixed bag. Just some different alternatives and I know that applicant is here tonight -- or he was here earlier, I was talking to him, but they have some thinking and some thoughts on those alternatives as well and I think that they probably ought to have a chance to explain some of the reasoning behind that. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: David, how about traffic circles? Were those considered? McKinnon: A traffic circle as you see in -- where you would have a center circle right here with vehicles that come in and be able to rotate around until they want to escape is De Weerd: I know that you don't have a four way, but as a calming device utilize the circle -- McKinnon: Putting a circle so they'd have to go out and around the circle? De Weerd: Yes. McKinnon: The island, is that -- the island concept? Yeah. We discussed an island concept there, too. Some of the problems that we have with the island concept is that you have an island that's in the middle of traffic that's hard to maintain anything that's planted in there. Otherwise, you end up with just an extruded curb in the middle of the street and that can run into some problems with the fire department when they come down this road for emergency vehicles, they are a larger length vehicle and they wouldn't be able to turn up and around a small island in there. It makes it hard to maneuver the vehicle. In addition to that you have a wider street with parking on the north side, right there, and you have an island right here, to be able to maneuver a vehicle from -- around an island with a vehicle parked right here, it makes it much harder with a longer length truck. We are looking for options and those are some of the options that we have looked at, Tammy, and we would be -- we are very open to any types of options that you guys have and that's as good an option today as we have come up with. Corrie: Okay. Any questions? De Weerd: Does Elroy have anything to add? Meridian City Council Meeting ~ • Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 51 of 90 Huff: Elroy Huff, city parks. I don't know if you guys have -- let me show you -- what I was talking with Gary about today - Corrie: Talk into the mike. Huff: What I was talking with Gary about today was right here is to block that street and I talked to Paul about it, too, and what it would do is essentially bring the park right up into there a little bit and all the traffic would go up and that would be the -- that would eliminate having to do anything else in this street, narrow it or anything else. It would just be that block right there which would be park and landscaped and the traffic would go up and come into there either way. If we can't have a street all the way through, that's probably the easiest option I can see from what I have been looking at. Does that make sense, Dave? Did I get that pointed out to - Corrie: Yes, it does. Huff: The simplest thing we can do the better it is. Corrie: Any other staff comments? McKinnon: That's works for me. Corrie: Okay. The developer. Lee: My name is Gary Lee with JUB Engineering, 250 South Beachwood in Boise, and I just wanted to quickly hit some of the points from our last meeting when this Council had remanded the preliminary plat back to Planning and Zoning. There were five specific issues that were addressed in that remand order. I'll just quickly go through these and read them for you. The first one was to extend Ashton Street to the western boundary. Up on the very northwest corner of the site you can see where there is dashed street going off to the west. That would provide access to the John Kennedy parcel. That was added to the preliminary. There were -- the second item was to remove any references to limited office or multi family. There is a couple of cul-de-sacs, one right on Ustick and one over on Meridian Road, that had notes on the previous preliminary plat about a different use than single family. Those, obviously, were removed. But on the third item was to relocate the street that we just were discussing, that's Ashby Street along the common boundary with the park, and the fourth item was to add some lot size diversity within the development and along with that item -- it wasn't specifically stated, but the Planning and Zoning director had concerns about block length. So we did some redesign work throughout the development to cut down the block length and to also increase some of the lot sizes in there and to get a little better spread on our lot dimensions. The fifth item and last item was the Venable Lane situation along the western boundary about two-thirds the length of the site. We are going to construct Venable Lane as a residential collector up to that T intersection and from that point north we will vacate Venable Lane on our side of the development and we will still provide access to Mr. Kennedy's parcel in two Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 52 of 90 locations. So we addressed those five points and in regard to the preliminary plat before you and the real fly in the ointment is that common roadway between our development and the park. You see that the staff -- now this hasn't gone to county -- Ada County Highway District commission yet and staff has taken the position that they are concerned about safety. I asked the question of a staff member why she was concerned and I never have gotten a really good answer. There isn't a lot of traffic on that road, there is less than a thousand trips. I don't know that we are going to experience a lot of pedestrian traffic that would cause some special concerns crossing that roadway, it's a local street, but they expressed the concern and that's how they presented it to the county commissioners. This particular application was to go to the county commissioners during their mid November meeting, although they neglected to invite myself over to the city to attend that meeting to discuss the situation. So they pulled it off the meeting and they tabled it until this week's meeting with the hopes that myself and also the city parks could attend to review this street. Tom Kuntz was out of town, so we postponed it again to the 12th and we'll have our chance to go in and talk to them. t did take the liberty to contact one of the commissioners who I knew personally and talk to her about that situation and the way it was presented to me was the staffs recommendation is a special recommendation to the City of Meridian. It's not a site specific requirement. It's not something that has been in their ordinances or their policies to limit this kind of design. What they are doing is just kind of throwing up a flag and saying, City of Meridian, you want to do something special here to maybe protect yourself from future liability? So along those lines we met with city parks a couple of times. We also met with the planning department and with ACHD staff and kicked around a lot of different ideas on traffic calming and the consensus was at our last meeting with Mr. Kuntz and Brad Hawkins-Clark was that the four items I dictated on that memo that I just passed out to you to help reduce the safety concerns and to hopefully slow down the traffic and I personally believe that the blocking of the road in that block and -- it's actually one more block over from where Dave was pointing out on this -- right in there. The next one over. In that area is probably the best solution. So what it will do, it will dump more traffic onto the collector street to the north and it will further reduce the amount of vehicles going through that roadway. Of course, they are going to have to slow down to make that maneuver, it's going to be a fairly sharp turn on both sides. Folks will have to slow down. So I believe the combination of those four items is a pretty good effort to show ACHD that we can do some things to calm that traffic. But the decision is yours, you know, from the city's point of view. I will be glad to answer any questions about any of these five items or the safety issue. Corrie: Any questions from Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Anderson: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 53 of 90 Anderson: I just had the one question, Gary. Are you proposing doing all of these options or just choosing the best option? Lee: I think we can do all four or we could do a combination of any of them. I know the parks had stated at one time that they just as soon not do anything to it, just leave it the way it is. But, you know, the choice is yours. Anderson: Okay. Lee: Thank you. Corrie: This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone from the public that would like to issue testimony? Huff: Elroy Huff, park superintendent. We looked at that street a long time and Tom and I have talked about it on occasion and we talked about the fact if there was some way to leave that street open, that we would, but we realize the safety concerns and rather than do a whole lot of fancy stuff, we feel like if we just block that area off, that would cut traffic and we wouldn't have to put a lot of other obstacles into that street. That's kind of what we are looking at without doing a lot of other things, but do that one thing and that would probably take care of the concern with ACRD and the safety issues at the same time without having to put a lot of other traffic stuff out in the street or narrowing the street at all. I'd rather do one thing than do a whole bunch of things. Thank you. Bird: Just a minute. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Along our northern boundary there are we going to have a chain link fence or any fencing from the park to the roadway? Lee: We are discussing what kind of fencing we may need as a buffer along that pathway that goes down the north side of the street that would interrupt anyone from being able to get right into street real quickly, some kind of a buffer, something that you might even just go through and maybe get over, but you just can't go back over into the street without slowing down, but that would be back off the street a little ways. It won't be too close. Bird: And that would have some pedestrian entrances and stuff? Lee: Yes. I don't know if it will be chain link or something decorative, but something that will act as a buffer to make sure that there is some space between that -- that buffer or fence before we get to the street, so if they do get over it real quick they don't just come out into the street. We have those concerns. Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 54 of 90 Bird: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Lee: Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else? Okay. Council, questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 14 and 15. Bird: So moved. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing for Items 14 and 15. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I appreciate all the work that's been done. This is a much more viable project and it works well with the park and that sort of thing. I guess the only thing would raise at this point is this same issue that came up across the street and with the timing of the White and whatever comes out in the recommendations with the North Meridian Planning process. So I just want to put that out for discussion and just again reiterate to the applicant we really appreciate what you have done and I know you had to go through a huge effort with the frontage road and appreciate all your efforts. Corrie: Any other comments? Okay. Hearing none, I will entertain a motion on the request for annexation and zoning, AZ 00-019, 100.71 acres, Revised Cedar Springs. Get paid by the hour. Bird: I will throw something out, find out whether it goes or not. Corrie: Okay. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 55 of 90 Bird: I would move that we approve the request for annexation and zoning of 100.71 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for the Revised Cedar Springs, northwest of Meridian Road -- North Meridian Road and West Ustick Road and for the staff comments to be incorporated and for the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Corrie: Okay. Do I hear a second? Anderson: I will second it. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request annexation and zoning of the AZ 00-019, 100.71 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone, Revised Cedar Springs. Any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Okay. Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess I would like to say again, as I did with the application in the last month, is I don't have a problem with this application, it's more of the timing and getting some answers to the White Drain and the North Meridian Planning Area. So we did delay the action on another one until February and I don't see what makes this different from that. Anderson: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I, too, have a lot of the same concerns as Tammy has and I think the size of this project concerns me. We have talked about sewering issues and we have talked about the development that -- how this will strain public services. I know that we have had a developer who, in the interest of knowing that we had these concerns, had promised that whatever happened with the North Meridian Planning Group that they would be willing to pay whatever additional fees might come out of that and things like that and I would hope that this developer might maybe think along those same lines and get involved in those discussions and so the reason I seconded this motion is just to sort of get it on the table and discuss it a little bit -- a little bit more and what their concerns were. I really don't have any heartburn, if this motion fails, in delaying it a little bit. Corrie: Okay. Any other comments? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Meridian City Council Meeting ~ • Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 56 of 90 De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess my question would be is this would be on an approval, but if it's felt that it would be a denial, but more of a deferral. Corrie: Is everybody clear on what the motion is? Okay. Mr. Berg, roll-call vote, please. Roll-Call: Bird; aye; de Weerd, naye; McCandless, naye; Anderson, naye. Corrie: Okay. Three Hayes. Motion to approve is denied of annexation and zoning. Which makes the item on the Public Hearing request for Preliminary Plat mute at this point. Do we still have to have -- I will entertain a motion on the Preliminary Plat for the approval of 264 building lots and 31 other lots on 99.82 acres in an R-4 zone by Revised Cedar Springs. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: We haven't acted on the annexation and zoning. We didn't deny it, we just didn't approve it. Bird: You didn't approve it, you denied it. De Weerd: No. We didn't. We voted on the motion. So I would like to make a motion on Item No. 14, request for annexation and zoning to defer until February 19, 2002, for the Revised Cedar Springs. Corrie: Defer to what date again? I'm sorry. De Weerd: February 19, 2002. I believe that - Corrie: That's the date that -- Bird: That's the other one. Corrie: Okay. McKinnon: Sundance Subdivision. The Sundance Subdivision would be heard on that same night. Corrie: Do I hear a second on the motion? Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 57 of 90 Anderson: I'll second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to defer until February 19, 2002, the request for annexation and zoning of the Revised Cedar Springs, AZ 00-019. Any further discussion? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I guess just to give clarity -- and I would imagine the applicant probably already knew we took that type of action on Sundance, so might have anticipated this, but it -- to look at how the White Trunk is timed and to what the development frame will be on that and also what recommendations come out of the North Meridian Planning Area. Corrie: Any other comment? All right. Mr. Berg. Berg: Mr. Mayor, thank you. Members of the Council, my concern is we are deferring this and we are going to have a new member of this Council and we are going to have to have some findings to be prepared by the attorney -- Bird: That's right. Berg: -- and I'd just, I guess, ask for legal advice or whatever. Do we need to continue the hearing? Do we want to get information after you have heard Sundance? Bird: But you have already closed the hearing, so you can't -- Berg: You can come back and reopen it. I'm just stating there is another situation that will be happening on the February 19th meeting. Swartley: Mayor Corrie, Members of the Council, I would suggest you reopen the hearing and then continue the Public Hearing until the 19th if that's what date Mrs. de Weerd would like to hear it. McKinnon: Mayor Corrie, Councilwoman de Weerd, that is what we did. Bird: What's that? De Weerd: We continued the Public Hearing? McKinnon: We continued the Public Hearing. Corrie: There is a motion before the floor. Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 58 of 90 De Weerd: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I would happily withdraw my motion. Anderson: I second. Corrie: All right. Then the motion is back on the floor and -- Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we reopen the Public Hearings for Items No. 14 and 15, which is the AZ 00-019, request for annexation and zoning of the Revised Cedar Springs and PP 00-018, request for the Preliminary Plat approval for 264 building lots and 31 other lots for Revised Cedar Springs. McCandless: Second. Corrie: Time? Bird: We have to reopen now. Corrie: All right. Motion has been made to reopen the Public Hearing on Items AZ 00- 019 and PP 00-018. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. Opposed no? All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Now I would move that we continue the Public Hearing for the request for the annexation and zoning of the Revised Cedar Springs to February 19, 2002, and also the Public Hearing for the request for the Preliminary Plat approval of 264 building lots and 31 other lots for the Revised Cedar Springs Subdivision until February 19, 2002. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. We have got a motion and second to continue the Public Hearing on Item 14, which is a request for annexation and zoning 019 and for the request for Preliminary Plat of 018 to be continued until February the 19th, 2002. Any further Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, December 4, 2001 Page 59 of 90 discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of that motion say aye. Opposed no. Motion is carried. It will be continued, the Public Hearing on the 2, until February 19tH MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Item No. 16 is a Public Hearing. This is for avariance -- Bird: No. I moved to approve it and I didn't get a second. Corrie: He didn't get a second. We didn't get it approved. It wasn't denied. Bird: We vote 3 to 1 to not approve it. Corrie: It's not been approved, but now we are coming back and doing the Public Hearing again on the 19th. De Weerd: It hasn't been denied. Corrie: No. I think we are all in agreement of what's there, we just need to make sure we have got everything on that section all put together at the same time. De Weerd: And the reason the Public Hearing was reopened so that if the new Council member needed any additional -- we have the advantage that he's heard this application at P&Z, so there shouldn't be too much. But then we can enter in a time table for the White Trunk and also any information from the North Meridian Planning Area. Item 16. Public Hearing: VAR 01-017 Request for a Variance for Time Extension of one year time frame for Final Plat recording in an R-4 zone for Ashford Greens Subdivision No. 5 by Brighton Corporation -east of North Black Cat Road and north of West Cherry Lane: Corrie: Item No. 16 is a request for a variance for time extension of one year time frame for Final Plat recording in an R-4 zone for Ashford Greens Subdivision No. 5 for Brighton Corporation, east of North Black Cat Road and north of West Cherry Lane. I will open the Public Hearing and have staff comments first. McKinnon: Mayor Corrie, Members of the City Council, I have on the overhead the location of Ashford Greens No. 5. It's directly to the east of Turnberry Subdivision off of Black Cat. The variance requested before you tonight is very similar to the one you heard earlier from Turtle Creek. They haven't submitted this phase of the subdivision within the one year time frame as required by city ordinance. The reason the applicant gave for not submitting within that time frame is that there were some easements that were -- that needed to be obtained from the city in order to accommodate their storm drainage plans. I have gone through the findings. The findings are in front of you. They are based on the fact that the city held them up on this. The city staff