The URL can be used to link to this page

2002 02-07• II • ,:-Y: , ~~~~ CIIi Y OF MERIDIAN ;, _; MERIDIAN PLA NING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING " '` " AGENDA Thursda'' ,February 7, 2002, at 6:00 P.M. r ~, 'City Council Chambers ~_ ' 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Davr Zaremba X Jerry Centers ~tl X Leslie Mathes X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup _~;, ~- '~. ~ 2. Adoption of the Ag~nda: 3. Public Hearing: Pro~'posed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System ~;', and Action Plan: Re~~ommend approval to City Council with one -page ~ ~~~ amendment II M; <;s_:•, ~~i ~: `;i;j s ~~r~- .7.~ ~ P._~',ir t; Meridian Planning and ~oning Commission Special Meting Agenda - F~ruary 7.22 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented lat public meetings shall t~ecome properly of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accq~nmodation for disabilfies related to documents and/or hearings =, ~:.~: please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. i~; ~~ II 4 r 4F~~h .~ f r,r t' VZ~. 'L'. / C; ~ , 'T 5 Y + E ~ .S ~ '. r 1: ]_ ` 5,~ l~ 1 y ~.~ t ~ ~ ~t j'. a t f ' _ ~ , f r i ~' ~~~` ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA `,.: `,`~ Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 6:00 P.M. City Council Chambers b'~ 1. Roll-call ~ endance: ": David Zaremba Jerry Centers _ Leslie a es Keven Shreeve _~Chairman Keith Borup ~= 2. Adoption of the Agenda: t ~~ ,: 3. Public Hearing: Proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Y'~ and Action Plan: =. ~..~ ,::~ `'44 ~ .,.I F x, f a . PP; Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Agenda -February 7.2002 ~; h,~,, Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ,; ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ,z ~~~ - ~~s ~~ HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY MAYOR Robert D Come A Good Place to Live LEGAL, DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 . CITY OF MERIDIAN P~L~c WoRKs x CITY COUNCIL. MEMBERS (208) 898-5500 • Fax 887-1297 - William L. M. Nary 33 EAST IDAHO Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 BULLRING DEPARTMENT Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 - Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 P1-ANNING AND ZONING (208) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854 xi ; •. _; NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING COMMISSION ~.~. . ;:., .: i ~ "f '"~ .~ ~ ,~ ;.~' t :~ / / -OZ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, February 7, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 15th ~~,~, ~:. tiitt~ . ~`. . ~~~~r ~~'~ 2002. ~-- G. BERG, JR. ~ - ~ CLERK ~~~~ _ .~ ~:... _ ` . r' 1. ~: ~ •V ... .r' ~• . G 1..1 - 7 1 ~.YK, " "' ~, xuB of 7R~sunE uArtl:r ~~~ MAYOR LEGAL DEPARTMENT Robert D. Come A Good Place to Live (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 ~~~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN CrrY COUNCIL, MEMBERS PUBLIC WORKS (208) 898-5500 • Fax 887-1297 ~~:" William L. M. Nary 33 EAST IDAHO ~' MERIDIAN BUILDING DEPARTMENT Keith Bird ,IDAHO 83642 Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 t ' ' - Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 PLANNING AND ZONIlVG f,.~ (208)884-5533 Fax 888-6854 ~; .4, NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING Fr 4 ~- ~; MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING COMMISSION ~~: ~„ r~::-: M:'<_ j' i ~': NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of ti. the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, February 7, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian y, :. x ''° '°`~ Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan for the City of Meridian. `' - The public is welcome to attend. ~~ ~~ t; _ ,,.:; ~ • ~ ._ ~~ s -.;. I , a wok ~ a ~ ~ ~ r ar, r ~. .. '. ~ J ~ ' , ~ a i' .# ' i• ~ . , -~ ~ ~ g ~ • r ~s^x= ~ y ~ ~ r ~ r~ , I x ~ , f ~~ ~~ ~ I ~ f '~' 1 # 1 9.. D ~ S 'J3N 3~h 'J`ryk~ "~ f ~{. t} .1 x:k ../~ .... • : ~ nYy":A kSV ~• ~ .~y 'q,. ~ ::~ ~ .. + ~: ~. 5'. :' r. Fa ~ , ,', ,c. ~ " ti . ~ ' . .. 1 ~.~{'.n ~":{ xY$ rant va ,, I ~ ~ ~ ~. 1 ~ } r ,~ Tir" - _ I f ,A ;: ~ Ii . N..,.~i~J...x ~,~i;rt.c.~a a 19~ .~ ~' 351':;'^x' tr~,'<~' ~;~,,. ..~,~u:zr°~ . vT, F~ .9. 4 ~, rt•~~ .•1~ 'Wt.~i .. YlA,v...~ ~ ~'~. 'I• l .-. r'i:k, u-~i i, u ~ L t4e is S. •~4 K'. ~ . . •'' ~ • . i •T 4 ~ ~ j- 1 . 1 ~. t Y .1: t, ~f . ~ , ~~ ~ 1 , 1 :f,•: ~"T.. ,•l. ' I ~~ i ..,7,5.91 , y,•'3~, .: ~~1•t (~i :tY<.,YtS~_ i. ~ . .,F , h, l~ p~' Y•. 'b. R',~:iA y^.a 3 s,m , ~`• .~; •ry ~ T ~ %~Y I. 4 %"~. I: ~. 4 4 ' . +~ i ; Y+;~ qyk ~. ~ ~ x 3 sA~ . ~' L: r.' ~~-a ~:J,: ~` :SYr^~"•e', J. I ~ ~ •15 •'~.,,, :. ~. e'.. fl . ; !ap ~ ~~ICY:v )~ 't'•.: , •"~= e(-9:'.'~. !. ~rt:~2,'~,., .. 'c~u' 4 Y .'.>., ' l d ` ^ ak` r ~r {` r 1 ~ ~ •`.% '.Y: ` ~.S N'' , - n'v ` 1: 'r _y{ ,,,i ~' u~• ,+ : znx,'t ` ;~ • x2~:'&+' ; £';, f ~ ~ # ., v ; .. Y~ I . o L 3 . • .~1 a . , x '; ~ y,, j • i } , . . b f • , y •.. W •.ti .•~~ xy ~,Y•j~:: '~.a d ' :4 r. t. . F i ~ - : is 'E ,y'., a 6. 4~ ry I1 r ~ ~ 4 } ~tSJ ~'h 1 jj .Y. Jq• i'i-' 3'l8 f~ 4` :11~"^ t. !°,g 4 f F ~ry, ~11J t!'°y .~ (.~~~ q Y, a + ~ ~~fW t 4~~I~^~~'•°5~ `~y 5r~ Y { n .ii a., t'S * „,r.. 2y~,• u t~'a' .,~ +,• ` , ~`'.,~.~ .~ ' r ;'h .: `~ ii, 1 4 t •~. ` fi , ~,'.. ! i ~ c~:iT :~:a, 4. ''• '~.. F~ " ° : '3' ~~ '' ti Yry`~ , ,YN ,~: S1y~ >~..,: 3. ~I . ~: -r 1 : :k~.S • s ~ 1 4• 4.st .: : u e'. W AFi~.+~ F... -~ ~ N~ w .: ..: : • a ~_, ~- 1 . t, W :. - ~ ,.~ y 1' .. you TX TION REPORT ~ AS OF JfW 16 '02 PAGE.01 r 4 .`~~`~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ?.~ DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS 03 01/16 10:31 3810160 CMDtt STATUS ~~~ EC--S 00'33" 001 04 01/16 10:34 8841159 EC--S ' " 127 OK ,."~^ 08 23 001 05 01/16 10:35 2088840744 EC--S 00'22" 001 127 127 OK OK `y ~ 06 01/16 10:35 2088845077 EC--S 00'22" 001 07 01/16 10:36 208 B98 5501 ' 127 OK EC--S 00 22" 001 08 01/16 10:37 LIBRARY 127 OK ~~ EC--S 00'25" 001 09 01/16 10:38 92083776449 EC--S 00'22" 001 127 127 OK OK I ~ 10 01/16 10:39 BBB 6854 EC--S 00,23„ 001 127 OK r~ it 01/16 10:40 2083757154 EC--S 00'22" 001 127 OK .,W " 12 01/16 10:41 8950390 EC--S 00'22" 001 127 OK """ : 13 01/16 10:42 CHERRY LANE EC--S 00'25" 001 127 OK - 14 01/16 10:43 POST OFFICE EC--S 00'31" 001 127 OK 15 01/16 10:44 IDAHO ATHLETIC C EC--S 00'26" 001 12'7 OK z ~'~ 16 01/16 10:45 Walter R Johnson EC--S 00'23" 001 127 OK • „ 17 01/16 10:46 208 888 6700 EC--S 00'22" 001 127 OK = 18 01/16 10:50 PUBLIC WORKS OF--S 00'13" 001 9 127 OK 1 01/16 11:00 LEGAL DEPARTMENT ----5 00'00" 000 127 BUSY ~_~,~ 20 01/16 11:01 CHAMBER-COMMERCE --S 00'00" 000 127 BUSY - ~~~-~-~ THIS DOCUMENT [S STILL [N MEMORY ~3 MAYOR HIIB OFTREASURE YALLEY Robon D. Coble A Good Plfloe to Live ~'~ DePAR71.48M' CI (ZOB) 288-2<99 • Fu 288.2so1 CITY COUNCII. M&MBBRS TY OF MERIDIAN vusrJC woRxs William L M. Nary 33 EAST IDAHO (ZDB) 698•s50o • Fac 867-1297 y,, xeith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 isuuoING D0'AR7MPNT ~ ~,. Tammy deweerd (208) 888-4433 • Fex (208) 887813 (208) 867.2zu • Fac 887.1297 Cherie McCandfeas City deck Office Fax (208) 888-0218 PIAIVNiNG AND 2:ONING (208) 860-s533 • Faz 888-685a / / -02 NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION '" ~' > . t, >r>' '. >i . .~a. ~r; j.,. a _ .. ;. ,~.;~± >:{ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East ldaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, February 7, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Ptah for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 15th v ~?j~O n^i C:r:: +~ ,yC~J• ' t~i% ,,~ 2002. ~~. ' ~ L „x ar."~ t•~.,.; _ _ `,~ r° ~a;.~==! ~, ~. [• ~~`. r t s :`^ ~; .~ ,,,~ .„ ,~ ~ = ~ '',; `cr~, g -S _ 4 ~~~ a F ~~ ~ Y, `1 e. - I ~ R k.G t HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY MAYOR Robert D. Come A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPA1TMENT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 2ss-2501 CITY OF MERIDIAN P11B~.I~ woRKS . ~~Y COUNCIL MF.~1BERS (208) 898-5500 • Fax 887-1297 William L. M. Nary 33 EAST IDAHO Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 BUILDING DEPARTMENT (20s) 887-221t • Fax 887-1297 Tatum deWeerd Y (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 PLANNING~Faa 888 6854 (208) 884-5533 / / -OZ NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, February 7, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 15th 2002. y l~` ~9~i ~+ ~' T,~ ~ 'mac ~~~i~~G~-~ /~ ~/d!~ s =~ ~ ~1/ILLIAM G. BERG, JR. ~ #~• r 1r:~.dS M ~i~ .~ ~: - .Zr ~t r h.. ~ -~ z t 'k r {i +n~ l~z~'.'1 r'f~s~?xu14.w,~ltah~r K ~'~~~t=~ 3'#j ~ 9"~ @`~~e9Fq'$Fr _ ~ ~ _ ti w .?t ~~ . `~' ~~ t ~+ ~ ' . ~ ,r 3 ' Y -~ ~ T ~ ~ t ~~ ;~ ,tai ~r '' i.~-3,~` .,H' t k~..j t ~ ~ ~e~r~,~'~ ~~ 3 ~ d ., ,. ~'~e, ra ;.ti ~~ ez~t-; '~~'~` r~~ "--w'C[~$ ~ - t'K?a~``t ~~•'k" kt" ~ Fri: rtf x f rr - + :/ S f{':~'~a~~ ri±yce' ~y'~ 'y4'~ _ i _ t • ~4~;. x ~ 'f :it'i''}` ~ ~'~^~' J ~~$ (~` 41 _ }. ~k6M #'7~,~"~ T (.. , ti FA~"Y ~.._ .. r .:~~ K ~, tit {3 Ky ~~~ ~ v"s~. r~`~'{~'F ,^ry i ~ ,~ r a dltr 7. ~ :a ~ ~ t ~a~~ !,t '~l~~T ~~{ ,k ~, h~4 F S~F ~~~~ k1 r ~,z~ { f ~.~,~~p.7~r~.., ~ ~e~; ~~~r, a7 f.~h f r ~:~;~ - ~. ~ ci~!~~. '#RY. ~;.': '.' f ', 7a~" .r yr:. s c ~i. F4 ~ S t dial ~~v~A r .. -. - pp~~~y ) [~jy~ ~ J$YJ~ 'nt s y ~ E~, s~_,,, ~, r x~ .~r~ s ~~~3 ~rS"r"d 1V~;'.' r~. rs, 4/~"i 1 L. {tr ~ a, ,.~~~. ~ ~ 5 r £~ ~ - ~.~ ,- ~ r 4: n-•`t ~.,yy 5, ~ t ~ r„~~` t ~Y ty'~ +..~~ ~ rd' ~ ~ ~ _ ~~' :ill - ~ t - > r, r s~-r ruv.y' S+ Fl t? ~~ .tt :t"~?. ~Ikr ~~~~ ~z4 {~,,~ ~ 1 Y,~. ~~",~, 1.~.,~' + IT ~S y •~Kg~;. f +t S~N~1 r w ~ ~:~Y'~jLa ~, F.~ra" tF ~i '3a A ~ ~ r,~,. ~ 1~~ ~., - ~~; {.~. # a sl = 5~~ t~ f ~ .~ a v i r - rl ~ y„ anl,~r ~r~~-; _ y.._ Y ,a , ~ :,~ ~~ ~ , ~, a i ~ - _ } ~,~~ per, ~ ~~. e r i ~.~ ~~~ `. ~v~t~i~~,`,} & . ~r,,[ ~~~ ~3~ s s[ ' x r .,. -; .~. ,a~}~, y ,~ ~ ~ 'µY' ~ : ~~y, ~ ''~-'fir S ~ ' c~a J~ t 1- s : r +~'~'344 - ~ ~' •"'~~:: Y ~i ~ s ~, [, i ~. i a ~l r ' s~< ~ i ,~, „~ ' ~ ~~ Meridian Parks & Recreation: Addend to Parks and Recreation Plan ~,-,' , . ~; ,.. February 7, 2002 1; ~ Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2 "Neighborhood Parks" ~~~ ~ ~ • Page 2-3, table 2.1 -Under "PROPOSED" add N-25 Autumn Faire ~k," ` , Park, page 2-9. • Page 2-4, Facility plan map -Add asterisk for N-25 in current ~ location in C-5 and move C-5 to northeast corn of Cherry Lane and ~' ~~~~..;.:,.": `~. McDermott Road. y ~ r~ry1 'r • Page 2-7, first paragraph -Last sentence should read "Size ranges y~ ~ ° from 5 to 10 acres, with the optimum size at 7 acres." iw. ~ ~~~5 ~~ ' • Page 2-7, section B-1 item A -Delete all of A and replace with ' ~ "While the city supports neighborhood parks its primary focus is on "- ~ L "" =: developing community sized parks that provide a reater verit of ~r~ ." ~ ,~ g y functions and serve a larger number of citizens. The city would look ~-~. ,u ~ favorably at developers providing public neighborhood parks. The n " ~ ~ ~~~ = " city could assume liability and maintenance responsibility if the N-. ~ ~ ; ~ developer chose to deed the park to the city." '` • Page 2-7, section B-2 item A & B - (A) should read "no smaller than _ five (5) acres in size." (B) Delete the word `reasonably'. ~ • Page 2-8, table 2.3 -Add park number N-25, site: Autumn Faire, ~ 14 ~ ~ , ,.r acres: 6.80 (E), action: Development. Change total to 26.7 and ~ Existing Acres total to 24.5. ~~ *` 4 }~ • Page 2-9, section title "Proposed Thousand Spring Park" first ,.~G , ~` paragraph -Thousand Springs Park should read (2.8 acres). Should ~~F .: also read "In addition, the school district has first option on a 2.2acre ~. ~ parcel just North of the Los Alamitos Subdivision that will revert to .. ~ - the city if it is not developed for a school site." Second paragraph last -: sentence change 8.4 to 9.0. " ~ ' ~ ~~ Page 2-9, section title "Proposed Autumn Faire site N-25"-paragraph pry ~` k+ ~ to read: "The developer of Autumn Faire has agreed to provide a 6.9 ,. ", r ~ acre site in their subdivision for a future neighborhood park." ~' ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ' . ~t~ -' Chapter 2, Section 2.2.3 "Community Parks" . ` °~ ~ ~ • Page 2-10, section B-2 item A -change 15 to 20. ~ ., ~F ~ u'm~(1{~ CSI ~,n ~ `4I 5 $~, . v ~~~~ ~ ~: 4~ FEE - - ~ ~a~~ t ~~y ~~ ~` `'° ~ ~~11' OF 1V~~T A ~ "~ r , ¢ti~ .. .v . .~ ~~~ ~ #~N ~ t .f Z > ~, ~q.a~^' l ki . ~~ ~ '.t :1 E t ,`~n ~ _ n ' ~u_ ~ia i ~o ~ r :_ '~ y R a ~ y ,.4r ~} ~ s 1 :ya. 'vi,E k+.q - t fiy t ~'~i'~ a 5~, ~ .i, i . :.. s ~~-' y~~..:r.. :Y. ~ <~ l1 ~" h' ~ ,'ins .t ~,'- ~ ~, '~~.r #~ F~+tY~'Fr ..yy~~ ~ ~~*!'1~' ~~ ~~ 4 '~ f.i 2 r I4~ ~ '~ .~1 ~ >ri~r~+r ~FSr 4? ~~ ~p''~ -; .. lati, ~T -+ ii~'. L ~r f nlf~~, ~ tR': ~'1!~a~,~~^' ~~ftf~ .~i, <+~ r ~a :: ~ Ck .,.~`,~ 'yd~+, i ~ oti~ .~ a.3 ,~ ~ , ~ #,~ r ~ -, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ { ~. S. ~ ~ ~;~ ~ i ,:~ o ,;r»~s s ~,~ y ~ r r~s ~ ~j ~ lg ~ b~~ 4~Yy ~ Y`'g'"F ~ yp~J~ - r _' ~ ~ yy~ f~7 n.~ ~ c ;.~ r~ i g,~;J" , R :~... ,~"`.f ~3 ,*.,,ti~"[G"rh l,`~ ` ~. ~ ~ ~ ,y ~t.~'.. g Hsi,, ~ v ~5 ~a ~:~ ~~ ~. .H ~,~ C,-e + ~.~, ~~ Rf ~ .r r ~~ t€ i ~~`~'f~r '"~~ '~~ ;~~~ ~~ '3RD + ~ ~ ~~ ~"~ ~ - - ;Era f~:" ..,}„ tom' +~ 'S '>a - ~' .f d '~5 -.k t ~ r~T ~q~{P~rjS , = t.~ ~'" ;: i -7 h ~., °~ 3raAn:. "~+si ~ '.~+a5'i_ 1.s~ ~ ~, -. ,: [G~'. ~~" ~ ~ yr ~th c tr't"~~*13 ~`~Yi~ ~ ' ~Y"" ~ x" P ^'~ >,^.~k~t; ~', F f SF 2 .. Y ~~ ~k - iw 1( ~T P:..~ > (~, g~t ~ ..t J ^ ~ I ..a ,, y ,~ F" ~ ~~i'~~a ~~ r~ t } °fiP`i '~t ~'~..~ y'~°1r~?~'h '. r.1 nY ~ ~ y fl'. ~ 1 ~ - _ '~ ~,~. .. _ C.; ~`artfa sj, ~ ~> ~ r ~" r y r pi~ ~.F++i~' ~ f..r~'~i i~~ ~ E, ~''~i ,. x.p. - .. - - .. i ~,l ,; F A. uLr Fes, _~5,c„ ,. :: ~; :; ; ``sg - ~ 9 ~~ °A'~~ 9 :.~ t 2 ty...a~ ,~2~•,' t ~s,; .~~, ~' :~%< ~? $. -.: t !t ~~t 4 i~r: `'~ ~~ ~. ?:F ~~,; F~, ~~,~`.xr,.. 5# ' Y' ~~ ' e ~;.. ;r'; :: t fit' ' ~~,. f~1 r' ' ~i;: p Meddian Comprehensnie Parks~ecreabon System P/an Funding Sources Expenditures Ch ap t e r S- Prof e c t Fin a n ci n g • -Table 5.1 Six-Year Funding Program -Capital Improvement Plan City of Meridian .. Impact Fees $2,400,000 General Fund $2,400,000 Grants $ 500,000 Donations $1,435,000 `,Total Funding Sourt~s ` - ". 56,735;000 _ Table 5.2 Six-Year Expenditure Plan - Capi[at Improvement Plan City of Meridian ZOOI Land Acquisition C-2 Ten Mile Road Park (proposed) <30 acres (?$20,000/acre> $900,000 C-5 Blackcat Road Park (proposed) <29 acres @$15,000/acre> $435,000 C-23 Locust Grove Park (proposed) <PAL> $0 C-24 Eagle Road Park (proposed) <20 acres f~?$25,000/acre> $500,000 Subtotal ~ 51,835,000 New Park Development C-2 Ten Mile Road Park (proposed) (Phase I) c30 acres @$6,000/acre> $180,000 LU-4 Meridiah Community Park <35 aues @$80,000/acre> $2,800,000 C-5 Blackcat Road Park (proposed) (Design/Udlities Onl ) $125,000 G21 Bear Creek Park (Final Phase) $300,000 G23 Locust Grove Park (proposed) (Design/Utilities Only) $150,000 C-24 Eagle Road Park (proposed) (Phase I) <20 acres X56,000/acre> $120,000 Subtotal - $3,675,000 Park Renovation C-18 Stor Park {Phase II) $115,000 N,B 8°i Street Park $65,000 OS-9 Five Mile Creek Pathwa $95,000 Subtotal 5275,000 Miscellaneous Projects - Recreation Facility $500,000 LU-4 Adventure Playground $450,000 Subtotal $ 950,000 TOTAL 6-YEAR PACKAGE 56,735,000 Page S- S 1 ~- Y ;t~<: MERIDIAN PLANNING ~ ZONING COMMISSION 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 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, February 8, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. DATED t~iis~ ~a~ °~ uary, 2002. 'Y r ~.. . ,~ .~~~~~ _,r t~.~ ,'`" `~ ti;. WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. I CLERK -rs.,._ ~ .. _C,~...~n '1 MAYOR Robert D. Corrie CITY COUNCII. MEMBERS William L. M. Nary Keith Bird Tammy deWeerd Cherie McCandless HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live ~~ DEPARTMEiT (208) 288-2499 • Fax 288-2501 CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 • Fax (208) 887-4813 City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING ~t + ~F-~, 7 1 7 $ ;~ ~F .. -~~~` + I ~- ~ ~7 ~Y ~ 3 ~~~ ~t ~ ' ~ 1 ~ r ~~ 4 ~t 1 L~d ~ ~ ~d i 4 ~ C V -~~}~+N . ~ , b ~rt .. . ~ r -~ c- .. ,~ r + z ~i~1Tr ~~ ~.+ ~ ,fx., y P ,w ~ l~i~"2~a ,~ § . ryytiv ~.. ~N a i ' r S , ~ i ~ t~~ ~ E ~£ ~ .may:? r ~ 3'~ ;.:~ i~; + f. 4 ..,t~< {. F' P ~~ ~ ~ i ~ {'t ~ ~ ~L~l ~ ~ ~ L T~~~ r ~ i"f~~~. trl{ ~yei F. I` e f '~ ryy~ ~! ~ ~ i t• ~ ryli~~ ~ .. .~r,~ 4 i ~ ~g ~ ~4 ,._F A~` ~ '.'~v;: 'C Z '~S ~y, i. ~''1'~~~ t 'i~a +r ''tom .!'i' ~ x+~ s x f~ F f ~" r. gF~n 5~k 1 ~' ~~ '. Y;': 1 ~. fi t~ J ~~.ti'N ~- ~ t try t £..,.:. Syr ,.L' ~,~.-'.bM.- 1 k~i,~y v~ Fll= y w,~ n Y ~~ ~ r 'Jf,T~'1~ y ~~ ~ ~ ~1 ,: ~ ~ f~1 -t ~ j ,Ta ' i ~ Ih; .+'K~)YY~7 ~~3~$'~ ~' i!. , 1 ~~ ~ 3 ~(.hi."" J ~ ~ i Y ~ i.'~ ~ ~i N~d .. _ __ T~,_. '. ~.hyp.J i, } T ~~,, ' + tiY ~ _ rt 1T ;. ~ ~~, _ ~ L¢sr h r~`rF 'Sd s4~i r1 x~x a_> ~ y ,~ " q ~ ~ r S . f ~ t _ ~~r ,~,p ~,~`' #, ~gg ,~ k~,; tii "~' ~•esh e'' i,,.e~~t~ 5i~~~~ L~r rR, ~ SC..':4~,ft r~ k 3 ,7,..r l r Y w ~~ ~ > P i '.b t i w d!? 1 INK f.~riY7~3h' rii-4E 5: k`~ ~~ ~ .. i y~ ~{fl rU _ '} ""fi ~ - N^ S l r k L -. lfr}.kF 'S 3 r r~ s ? ~~~ _yY ~f. r.ti c r ~ I~ ;~. ~ ~..~ s 'T r~~f k ~ v ~ 3k}~' ~~1 Y _ ~'~ ~ Y ~ J ~ ~ ~ •-~ ~^ ~~ 1 w~ y"~''~""Yr ~r .w ~:.~~r ` ,v ~ r ~'~ _ ` t5`~ 3k~~yA ~„ ~ ' r d fht: N t L iw.~: ..,~aa.,, ,~ u F~ fwK .~. "F.~: ~ti ~ ~?~' :-.' a'.` r,~f r: ;',~; ~' i-~' :~t~,a .' f " _' f. _~z ~, -:~ 1 ~ , y~; r {. ~,; ., t fi ;>3 <. ~ R °; ~ i:~; _ ' ; +z` ~~ ~, -?~' ;~, _,,~~t ` ; r , ; rr~~~ ~: ~~; ~. .!. r ° Ya .. - , ~4~.'.'d_. -. %i'~`~ ~'... `N,-" i _ gt,Ay ~t a ** TX COI~RTION REPORT ** RS OF JAN 15 '02 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIRN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDq STRTUS 18 01/15 17:51 3810160 EC--S 00'32" 001 112 OK 19 01/15 17:52 PUBLIC IJORKS OF-S 00'13" 001 112 0K 20 01/15 17:54 8841159 EC--S 00'22" 001 112 OK 21 01/15 17:55 2088840744 EC--S 08'23" 001 112 OK 22 01/15 17:56 2088845077 EC--S 00'22" 001 112 OK 23 01/15 17:57 208 898 5501 EC--S 00'22" 081 112 OK 24 01/15 17:58 LIBRRRY EC--S 00'25" 001 112 OK 25 01/15 17:59 2083776449 EC--S 00'23" 001 112 OK 26 01/15 18:00 888 6854 EC--S 00'23" 001 112 OK 27 01/15 18:01 2083757154 EC--S 00'22" 001 112 OK 28 01/15 18:01 8950390 EC-S 00'22" 001 112 OK 29 01/15 18:03 Laurel EC--S 00'23" 001 112 OK 30 01/15 18:04 CHERRY LANE EC--S 00'26" 001 112 OK 31 01/15 18:05 POST OFFICE EC--S 00'32" 001 112 OK _- 32^01/15 18:06-IDRHO ATHLETIC C-~- EC_~S- 00'25" 001 ---112 -AOK -~~--Y --- MAYOR XUB OF TREASURE VALLEY Robert D. Currie A GOOd P18ce t0 Live LEGAL D1TAK17rffdV7' (208' 288-2499' Fax 288-250! CITY COUNCII. M6MBII2S PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF MERIDIAN William 1.. M. Nary ~ ,~~ mAIiO (208) 89&5500 • Fax 887.1297 Keitd Hind MERIDjArj, iIDASO 83(142 et)11DING DEPALtTMENT Tammy deWard Cam) 888.4433 • Fax (208) 887.4813 ~> 887-22! l • Fax 887• t 297 Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 PLANNING AND 7AN1NG (208) 8845533 • Fax 888.685a NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING MERIDIAN PLANNING >~ ZONING COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, February 8, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. ' ``~~~~'~ p'r ~ "':fir :.,. DATED ~E`bs~` ~ uarys, 2f~2. r '~~~L - ~. =; y~~~T ~~ , ,~, :,' WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CLERK ~~~, .a ~... ~ •-cif:.::"~•; r ~ ~ < ~. .1~~ '-~; .F °`> ~i ~~ `~~~`. °£ ~k ~'1 .~.~ -~., 7: ,. ;.; ~~r ~~ °4 y; ?,~ '~"A '';= . ~': '~.< ~: r,. ,~: _:~ , ~'' ?f ** TX CONFIR~ON REPORT ** AS OF JAN 15 '~18~20 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# 01 01/15 18 07 208 888 6700 EC--S 00'22" 001 112 STATUS O 10 01/15 1820 LEGAL DEPARTMENT ----S 00'00° 000 112 K BUSY THIS DOCUMENT IS STILL IN MEMORY /Ol ~~ ~d(~-~ Jay- ~~~L ~f~7~'(.2~ ~' MAYOR HU$ OF TREASURE VALLEY + ~ Robert D. Cowie A Goad Place 10 Live LEGAL DEPARTMF-WT ~~$)~-?A99• Fax Z66-ZSOI CRY COUNCII MEMB CITY OF MERIDIAN PUBLIC WORKS . ERS W[lliam L. M. Nary 33 ,~~. IDA.DO (208) 898-5500 • Fax 887-1297 Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDA,SO 83642 BUILDDVG DEPARTMENT Tammy deWeerd (ZG8) 888-4433 • Fax (ZOS) 887-4813 (~) 687-2211 • Fu 887-1297 Cherie McCandless City Clerk Office Fax (206) 888-4218 PLANNING AND ZANING (208) 884.5533 • Fax 888-685a NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING MERIDIAN PLANNING 8. ZONING COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, February 8, 2002 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan for the City of Meridian. The public is welcome to attend. ti~t~~r'•"`~~n DATED ~`is~ y uai~, 2002. w 9l r ~"~ / ~'' ~ WILLIAM G. BERG JR. +% 9~.,~"~~r,Jt •~ ~,?~~'. ~ CLERK ~~,` _ it. ,.. ~,44, ~:, •~ ,v ;i ,'. i ... - - '1 ~z m ~ >I NOTICE OF HEARING ~`~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~~~-~ COMPREHENSIVE PARKS & RECREATION SYSTEM PLAN ~Y The Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will conduct a public hearing ~;~ on Thursday, February 7, 2002 @ 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 33 _' °:~ ~`< E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho to accept public comments and testimony on the City's proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan. Copies :~5. ~ of the Draft City of Meridian Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan :::R (November 2001) is available for public inspection and review, at the following locations: Y''°[~1 Meridian City Hall, City Clerk's Office, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho ~'~ Meridian Library, Main Desk, 1326 W. Cheny Lane, Meridian, Idaho <~~~~ Meridian Parks 8< Recreation Department, 11 W. Bower Street, Meridian, Idaho "'"`°~' Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Department, 660 E. Watertower Lane, Suite 202, `~`~Gv Meridian, Idaho These documents and accompanying maps can be reviewed free of charge at these ~~~>~~; locations during normal business hours. ., :,~ _ The public is encouraged to review these proposed documents, attend the public hearing and offer comments and testimony. Oral testimony may be limited to three (3) '~ minutes per person. Written comments are welcome. Please send written comments to ;~~ the Meridian City Clerk, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. ~r~~ All materials presented at the public hearing shall become property of the City of ~~ ' "'~ Meridian. The hearing will be held in a facility that is accessible to persons with €~ r disabilities. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents :;~ and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 72 hours ~~ prior to the public hearing. ~~~ ~s "~~ DATED this 7th day of January, 2002. ~'~ ~d ~~ ~~~`"'`r~~~~~~ ~i~~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., ITY CLERK 4~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~' i ~ =, PublisF~Ja 11th, 1~th 25th and February 1st, 2002. kd ~,~, ~~..~ 'M~' z 61~ :++i. ~ .~y ~~ ~ ~ I ~1, T ~~ ~ N ~ ~ iqf ~~~~~~ r ~,f~- ,~ -'. i ~~ ~` ,~..x ~~ ~.u.t4 ~' .~:{s F„_ ;~; ~_.,~; >:.a3 •'~: ~, ~y4 -; ' ^ r ,; ~. ;+ .=°J ~. Y T'.~` t , ~ 4 ~m ' h pi .-! "? 'Y ,. •1 _. ~S ~i~: ~~i:; Rh ~' ._ . 5~ ' 7F~~,- .. >~ TX TION REPORT kou AS OF JRN 15 '02 ~ PRGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DRTE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDtt STRTUS 02 01/15 18:08 3810160 EC-S 00'42" 001 113 OK 03 01/15 18:09 PUBLIC WORKS OF-S 00'19" 001 113 OK 04 01/15 18:12 8841159 EC-S 00'28^ 001 113 OK 05 01/15 18:13 2088840744 EC-S 00'28" 001 113 OK 06 01/15 18:14 2088845077 EC-S 00'28" 001 113 OK 07 01/15 18:16 208 898 5501 EC-S 00'27" 001 113 OK 08 01/15 18:17 LIHRRRY EC-S 00'34^ 001 113 OK 09 01/15 18:18 92083776449 EC-S 00'27" 001 113 OK 11 01/15 18:20 208 388 6924 EC-S 00'35" 001 113 OK 12 01/15 18:21 868 6854 EC-S 00'28^ 001 113 OK 13 01/15 18:23 2083757154 EC-S 00'28^ 001 113 OK 14 01/15 18:23 8950390 EC-S 00'28^ 001 113 OK 15 01/15 18:25 Laurel EC-S 00'29^ 001 113 OK 16 01/15 18:26 CHERRY LRNE EC-S 00'35" 001 113 OK 17 01/15 18:27 Pt%T OFFICE EC-S 00'43" 001 113 OK 18 01/15 18:28 IDRHO RTHLETIC C EC-S 00'34^ 001 113 OK 19 01/15 18:29 208 46? 9562 EC-S 00'33" 001 113 OK 20 01/15 18:30 208 888 6700 EC-S 00'28" 001 113 OK 21 01/15 18:43 LEGRL DEPRRTMENT --S 00'00^ 000 113 BUSY THIS DOCUMENT IS STILL IN MEMORY NOTICE OF HEARING CITY OF MERIDIAN COMPREHENSIVE PARKS ~ RECREATION SYSTEM PLAN The Planning & Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian will conduct a public hearing on Thursday, February 7, 2002 ~ 6:00 p.m. in the Couna7 Chambers at City Hall, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho to accept public comments and testimony on the City's proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan. Copies of the Draft City of Meridian Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan (November 2001) is available for public inspection and review, at the following locations: Meridian City Hali, City Clerk's Office, 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Meridian Library, Main Desk, 1326 W. Cherry Lane, Meridian, Idaho Meridian Parks ~ Recreation Department, 11 W. Bower Street, Meridian, Idaho Meridian Planning 8 zoning Department, 660 E. Watertower Lane, Suite 202, Meridian, Idaho These documents and accompanying maps can be reviewed free of charge at these locations during normal business hours. The public is encouraged to review these proposed documents, attend the public hearing and offer commers and testimony. Oral testimony may be limited to three (3) minutes per person. Written comments are welcome. Please send written comments to the Meridian City Clerk, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642 All materials presented at file public hearing shall become property of the City of Meridian. The hearing will be held in a facility that is accessible to persons with disabilities. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Cleric's Office at888-4433 at least ~2 hours prior to the public hearing. DATED this 7th day of January, 2t7Q2. WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., ITY CLERK ~ oi= , ~,~ {~~~ ~~~~ r Publist~,1 1s 1th~, 8th .25tk~ and February 1st, 2002. -i .t,. o ]~ i ~ UR • ~'~ ~.~ kF- - , ^t',., . CITY OF MERIDIAN ~'~~ ' MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING . ~~~a AGENDA ~ ~ ~~ K ~'. .' Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 6:00 P.M. :=~ ;., 1 City Council Chambers ,'_{ ~~ 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~{ '~ X David Zaremba X Jerry Centers i ~~ X Leslie Mathes X Keven Shreeve _~ ~~- X Chairman Keith Borup R5 $ "~'~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: ti ~~ P'~ ~ 3. Public Hearing: Proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System ~.~ and Action Plan: Recommend approval to City Council with one page .h". ~~, amendment ~ i z ' 4 4 ~ ~, =r, rv v ~ti7; =iE~ "$ ''S?c, i.~ r „y 'Slx~i. ~:,~ ~n~+~ N. ~~ ,. ~(^ ~. 14 ~ ~..~. n? ~y [ K i - ~' ~~ ' '' Merldlan Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting Agenda -February 7.2002 :~4A ~~`~ Page 1 of 1 = EF~ All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Clty of Meridian. .~~, Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings .~, ;~ ~. please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ~ ~ ~°~ ".', ~ i* - ~, ' '~K e ttt jjj t Jf yCCC A Y, ' g ~ ~' I ~~. t $~ iS-` '~ µ, I '4,` A ~ v _ ~~ ,. V S .' W" l ~1. TY y y }~r r ~ a i ~{'' ':~ Y~~:. ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~( ~~ti ? ,~ ~ }~ ~ 4 I } fl" ~~. [ '2. ', ~' ~:•- e.:; '~"~ 4 ~~,, e ~ ~~ ,~ ~. ~¢~ - ~,, ~~: }i ~ % : i i,s' ~ Y h Rtp'',,:~,~ 1 ~• ~ s 5 f ~i v '~~ ,i. fir. _~ .. S' x f'' t Meridian Planning and Zoning Suecial Meeting February 7, 2002 The special meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was ~_~ called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Thursday February 7, 2002 by Chairman Keith Borup. ~~ ~~~~ Members Present: Keith Borup, Leslie Mathes, David Zaremba, Keven Shreeve, ,,>:~ and Jeny Centers. Others Present: Larry Moore, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Bruce Freckleton, Tom Kuntz, `- ,:r: and Will Berg. =.~ y: , ,. ,k: Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: `"~'. X David Zaremba X Jerry Centers X Leslie Mathes X Keven Shreeve ~~ X Chairman Keith Borup Borup: Good evening Ladies and Gentlemen. We would like to call to order our ~; ~- special meeting for the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission. The agenda y. ~' on this meeting is going to be the first Public Hearing on the proposed parks and -~ ~ recreation system and action plan is the full name. We would like to start with the ,, ~' ~ roll call, Commissioners in attendance. - ~> Item 3. Public Hearing: Proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System and Action Plan: . v:: ~. ~ Borup: I will mention this is a special meeting before our regular Planning and ~`~ Zoning meeting this evening with one item on the agenda and that's the f ~ Comprehensive Plan for the parks. We would like to start with again open this , , meeting and start with a report from Mr. Kuntz, our parks and recreation director. He's going to give us an overview of the plan. Kuntz: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Before I start, I wonder if I could get ;; pronunciation on our new commissioner's name David, last name. '~f :4_; ifi~ ~> Zaremba: Zaremba. ~~.~~ t<~. Kuntz: Commissioner David. z ~ Borup: Commissioner Centers as just arrived. }~~ ~ ,~ Zaremba: I do answer to David if that's easier. y~,~ Kuntz: Thank you. First off I want to thank you for allowing us to take an hour of - ~~ ~ your time tonight. I know how busy you Planning and Zoning Commissioners are `~=. so, I'm going to t6ry to keep this as brief as possible. I'm going to give you a little ;_:~T; ^i ~' I:;''. Y l }', - .. rr C u ~. _ 7i.~~ y iS~` ~.f .. ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning mission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 Page 2 of 17 bit of background information. In July of 1999, the City Council approved monies for the parks department to hire a consultant to put together Meridian's first parks Comprehensive Plan. That plan was completed in July of 2000. Unfortunately the plan did not give us the clear direction that staff and the Parks commission we would receive from our first Comprehensive Plan. As a result of that, the Council approved us hiring a second consultant who put together our action plan. That's kind of the meat and potatoes of what I would like to discuss tonight. The initial Comprehensive System Plan really had some fairly generic information that could be used in any city, any park USA. So, I'm not going to even reference that plan tonight but I would certainly entertain any questions that you have from that document. We are hoping to adopt both of the documents at one time. However, as it states in the action plan, if there is, if there's inconsistencies that appear between the two documents, the action plan will take precedence. I just wanted to kind of clarify that. Also tonight, I handed out --. If there's anyone in the audience who has an action plan. We do have our first draft of amendments, addendum to that plan. I brought extra copies if anybody needs to pick one up tonight. Those are some changes that the commission and staff are suggesting at this point, especially in relationship to neighborhood parks. With that, I'll do an overview of the plan. Starting with the introduction on page 1-1. The plan is actually divided up into five different chapters starting with the introduction, chapter one. Two is the park and open space recommendation. Three is facility recommendations. Four is administrative and management recommendations. Finally number five is our project funding which includes asix-year capitol improvement plan. Again, the kind of meat and potatoes of where we go from here. We need to have that six-year capitol improvement plan to be able to ask Ada County to start collecting impact fees in our area of impact. Also, will be the driving force for us asking for an increase in our impact fees. So, that six-year capitol improvement which is in the back of this document is a real important part of this entire plan. Our planning area is 4., or excuse me 40.5 square miles is what this plan addresses. It is a 20-year plan. However it is intended to serve the entire Meridian impact area and City limits at build out and we're not sure when that's going to be. The plan on page 1.4 talks about what our estimates, our consultants estimates are as far as total build out and build out in 2020 is near 80,000 population is what they're suggesting we're going to be at. From there we move into chapter two which is parkland recommendations. It really talks about the different varieties of park that make up a healthy park system, ranging from mini-parks which are traditionally provided by private developers, neighborhood parks, community parks, our large urban park which we have one we're developing this year, the 58 acre park. Then special use areas and open space areas which would include pathways. The first map that you have in your action plan is on page 2-2. That actually shows the existing parkland in the community and school sites. So it is land that is owned by the City as well as Western Ada Recreation District and the school district. I might summarize by saying that currently we have 39.15 acres of developed parkland in Meridian and the impact area. We have 93 acres of undeveloped parkland for a total of 132.15 acres. We add to that the 26 and a half acres that Western Ada Recreation District owns. rt,, ,..~, ~~ -_ ;,:~ .~, m, ,~.'~ ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning C mission Special Meetlng February 7, 2002 Page 3 of 17 So we have 158.65 acres of combination of developed and potentially developed parkland in Meridian and the impact area. That's on the first map on page 2.2, 2- `~ ~~ ~: , 2, excuse me. I'll keep moving along here. On 2-3, the key element is that the . parks proposed in this plan are designed to achieve several objectives. But the :~~ top three are to provide community parks within a reasonable bicycling or walking distance from most residents. Two is to provide land for specialized facilities such as a potential indoor community facility, special playgrounds. Number three "' utilizing linear parks, canals and watercourses for trails and pathways that could hopefully link these parks together. Also on 2-3 is an inventory of our existing °, }= parks as well as our future parks and they are denoted by symbols C-1through ~` C-24 noting community parks, which on the screen are the large red asterisks. - There are a total of nine of those. As well as neighborhood parks which we ~ ~f currently own and need to develop as part of agreement with developers who have deeded us the property with the understanding that those would be developed. There are I believe three of those. Eighth Street Park which we own "~>~'~ now. Excuse me, there's four of them. Eighth Street Park, Chateau Park, which we're almost through developing, a park north of Los Alamitos and then Autumn tip Faire Park, a 6.8 acre park. I will comment that Autumn Faire Park is not included in this document and is included in the addendum. Centers: What about Bear Creek? Kuntz: Bear Creek is actually shown up there. It's a community park because of ~" the size 18 acres. .,~ ` x' Centers: Right. ~ >~~ Kuntz: So it is identified, I believe it's a green square because it's 90 percent complete. With that I turn to page 2-7, which starts to talk about different types of parks design and development policies, where they should be located, how much street frontage they should have. This particular section on page 2-7 is the one that is addressed most heavily in your addendum. The reason for that is, this ~$ overall plan really focuses the City's attention and financial resources to building =~ ~~ the nine community parks on our plan. We support neighborhood parks but given F~ the limited resources that we have available had to make a decision, which the t~, ~ ~'-~ _ Parks Commission supports. There are some of those members here tonight in the audience. We wanted to use our impact fees 100 percent to build this community park system for a couple of reasons. One is the community parks serve a larger population base surrounding them. Two is we're able to actually program more activities and events in community parks. Three is they are less ~r~~ expensive to build and maintain acre per acre when you compare them to °::~'~ neighborhood parks. We're trying to reach, I guess a happy medium with the ',~~ developers to try and build incentive enough to have the developers actually put * "tip' the neighborhood parks, five to seven acres in size in as part of their development in exchange for part of the open space requirement, especially when you've got a ten percent planned development. We're hoping that we can ~,; :.n~= i f ,: : ~;~. ry'~e,. ~' ~ I M ridi Pl i d Z l i i S i ,, ~ ~ e an ann ng an on n m ss on ec al Meetln 9 P 9 F b 2002 7 r, e ruary , Page 4 of 17 >~, V.~ motivate them to put those in. one of the concerns the developers have voiced is '! we put a five to seven acre park in, we don't want the Homeowners Association ;: ~,: burdened with having to maintain them. Staff is taking the position, we don't have Council support yet but we hope we do, that the City would then maintain those t as public parks if they're deeded to the City, which will be added to our overall ~ system. Let's see. We added Autumn Faire. The rest of that chapter, chapter = T°~~ two, really talks about the different community park sites, what size they should ~ be, what some of the different positive attributes are and then the chapter two ; finishes up with some design standards on community parks. How much street frontage there should be, what some of the amenities could be included in a ' ;r community park. I guess won't go into that anymore. Any questions on chapter .~~:; two? ~` ~~ ,, Centers: I have one question Tom. ~~~ Kuntz: Okay. Centers: You mentioned nine community parks, correct? Kuntz: Yes sir. .k ~ _;~,r '`~"` Centers: You have 11 on your map here. You have 11 red asterisks. ~'~ - Kuntz: If you'll subtract the red asterisk in the lower right hand comer N-22 is considered a neighborhood park. So, we're deleting that from the number. Centers: Bottom right? _;~~ Kuntz: Lower right hand, right above Thousand Springs. .-~; Centers: Right. ~ ~ ;-~~ _ Kuntz: So, we can delete that and then C-13 which is right in the middle of out system, what we're hoping for there is to partner with the school district on the Meridian Middle School site to upgrade that, the irrigation system. Friends of Meridian Parks has actually donates some money to the school district to ~' ~ upgrade that system and turn it into kind of aquasi-community park where we ~.; may be responsible for the maintenance keeping it at a little higher level in ;;Y.~ , ~ exchange for the community using it evenings, weekends, that type of thing. So, ~ true community future parks, we count nine. The very end of chapter two talks about large urban parks which we have one of right now. Then 2.6, open space area talks about our open space especially in regards to trails and pathways. Chapter three talks about recommendations geared towards facilities. Actually four of those specifically, pathways and trails, the potential for a future {'~ community facility center, sports fields and then a specialized recreation facility. There is an inventory in that chapter three, 3.4 dealing with pathways, especially 4 •f ~~.~~ P,L' .... . i ') .. ~.~ ~~ .. .. i, ,:,i H t ~; ..:~~. >; j -~ yl .. _-3 ~?k ~,~~ Y ': .,~ ..t ~~.,. ~::. ' :T? rR- ~'~ ~- = ~~., >,{ :;~~. '_`;fi ,~; -: ~;~, ~: Y' :~; ,~.,` ~;; . ":i: ;wk-.... li~`'.. Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~mission Special Meetlng February 7, 2002 Page 5 of 17 ones that we'd like to see in the near future and then some design standards as far as width, clearance and those type of issues. On page 2-, or excuse me 3-5 is our last colored map, which shows our three main pathways that follow Five Mile Creek, Nine Mile Creek, and I believe Ten Mile Creek. On the map on the screen they're showing in, two of them are shown kind of a yellow. One is in a bright green. The other things that are shown on that map, which are perimeter loop, is what we call our string of pearls. That's intended to be a pathway system incorporating sidewalks, inter-subdivision pathways, off street pathways. Really a combination but really is intended to provide the community a way to get from one community park to another on foot, or bike, or rollerblades so they don't have to use automobiles. The last area in chapter three talks about specialized recreation facilities. One being a Skate Park which we are hoping to build, break ground for this spring and get it built this summer. Group picnic areas, an adventure playground which is a large multi-age playground designed especially for the handicapped. That will be located in our 58-acre park. It will include a zero depth water feature, which will have different spray heads, no standing water. It will all run off into a holding tank or into a large lake that we plan to build in that large park. Then a large picnic shelter that will hold up to 300 people again, targeted for the large 58 acre park. Then our wish list includes an indoor ice rink, which we actually have some private foundations who are discussing that issue as we speak. The last chapter, or excuse me chapter four talks about different management recommendations, how many staff we should have based upon the number of acres that we are maintaining. On 4-3, it talks about impact fees and it talks about the cost to actually build this plan as you see it. With a community center it is almost $42 million. Without the community center it is approximately 37.5 million and that's to build the entire system as you see it before you. Chapter five addresses the financing, excuse me, first it starts with our project priorities on 5-1. Those are acquisition of parkland, development of our large regional park, community park, development of new parks, development of sports field, upgrade existing parks, development of trails, development of specialized facilities, which we talked a moment ago. Then development of a future community center. Those are not in any priority order. Then on 5.3 which is at the bottom of page 5-2 talks about different funding options. With that, on 5- 5, is our six-year capitol improvement plan. With that I will stand for questions. Borup: Questions from any of the Commissioners? Centers: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Tom, on page 4.3 you state that current impact fees are $530.00 per single family home and $407 per multi-family unit. I think you should be a little more clear there. Is that an eight-unit apartment complex? Is that $407.00 per unit? SO, eight times 407? Or is it --? I guess you understand my question. Kuntz: I do understand it. I don't know if I have the answer for it. Center: Really? ~,. Meridian Planning and Zoning ~mission Special Meetlng February 7, 2002 Page 6 of 17 Kuntz: Yes sir. Borup: Doesn't that refer to --? Zaremba: (inaudible) per individual unit within the multiple units. Kuntz: That would be my assumption. Centers: Yes. Kuntz: That would be my assumption. Borup: That is a definition? Centers: I think it should be more clear --. Zaremba: -- how the wording isn't clear. Centers: Right. Per unit in an apartment complex or something to that --. Kuntz: Sure. Or a duplex. It would be - Centers: Per unit, $814.00. Kuntz: Okay. Thank you. Centers: Page 5-3, you mentioned park impact fees in the paragraph number six, Meridian has this mechanism in place but the rate is quite low and does not accurately reflect the true costs. But you don't say what it should be. What do you think it should be? Borup: Back on the previous, 4.3, doesn't that answer the question? Kuntz: Yes sir. Centers: You read yours too. Borup: Back on the same page --? Centers: No, that's where it is now. Borup: No, it's saying 1500. Kuntz: Commissioner Centers, on 4-3, the calculations that we ran, if we wanted to bring our park system up to five acres per thousand population. True 9 r: ~~i a ~7; .;; .~=: ~.; a~ ~: ~ ~=~` .,._ ~ry ~_~ . ~ ~ ;~ ;~, ~.~~ ~ ;~, , }V ~~ s ~z~_ r'i ~' ~ ~ '= ~:; Meridian Planning and Zoning C~ission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 Page 7 of 17 costs to buy the land and build the parks today for all the new people that we move in is $1500.00 per household. The political reality is we're at 529. So, our plan is to go to the City Council and request an increase of $200.00, 729, which if you look at the true costs is about 50 percent of what it really costs us to buy land and build parks. Centers: You give the various funding sources or possibilities. Have you tried any of those? My highlighter note was the HUD block grant. Have you tried any of those others? Kuntz: No sir. Centers: I had a note on No. 11 on page 5-3, that sounds interesting. That was my note, joint public private partnerships. Kuntz: Commissioner Centers, actually the partnership is probably one of our Council's highest priorities as far as the Parks Department goes because it's been tried successfully in other communities adjacent to us. That is the City purchases the land and then the non-profit agencies come in and develop the sites, baseball Centers: So, are we pursuing that? Kuntz: Yes sir, definitely. Centers: But you mention the HUD grant. Are you going to pursue that? Kuntz: We are certainly going to pursue grants. I don't want to specifically say we're going to pursue HUD grants but we're going to look at all these funding options because we don't have an overabundance of funds to build this plan. We've got to look for money where we can find it. Centers: One of the complaints that I've heard is there are pros and cons where you know you increase the impact fees which they may be low. Then of course that's not borne by the developer. He passes it on to the homebuyer. If you keep tacking fees on, then the price is going to be at a level where the number of buyers decrease and you have homes that don't sell. Then it adds to inflation and properties don't go on the tax roll. One thought that came to my mind was, now I don't know if it's possible, you know the homeowner ends up paying for it anyway. In the price or whatever. We put the recycle fee on the trash and water bills. Can't we put a park impact fee on the trash and water bill? The people that are using the parks when then pay for it. Apartment dwellers, the landlord wouldn't be saddled. The tenants that are using the parks would pay for them. I don't know a number that hit my head was five bucks. I don't know how many of those bills go out. How many water bills go out? .. _., ~, ; .. - 4. 1- r~~ .,,. S t r~i ~~ 9 tl M idi Pl i d Z i fi i S G l M ~~ ..~~~ ,~? er an ann ng an on ng ss on pe a ee ng February 7, 2002 Page 8 of 17 - Kuntz: Many. Centers: Yes. Then you could decrease it when you get to the point where you ~~.9} have all of the acquisition in place and you're just maintaining. If you want to '~~} develop a park in Thousand Springs, excuse me for pointing at you Keven, ~ because I know he lives there. You start there. I don't know that's an idea I had ~ and I'm not --. You know I know the developers of course, obviously are going to be against higher impact fees. I mean, that's a given. The builders, but you can - - see their side of it. Kuntz: Sure. ^~` =' 1r Centers: It drives the prices up. They're not going to pay it. The homebuyer is ~~ ~ ;%:xN~ going to pay it. So, I don't know if you could legally do that. Let the homebuyer and the tenants pay for their fair share to use the parks. Kuntz: Commissioner Centers, it certainly an interesting concept. I'm sure legal counsel would have something to say about it. Another concept that has been ~~ brought to our attention by one of our Council members is used houses that are resold. There's no impact fee on that. I checked with our legal counsel and there ~ ~ are specific rules that govern impact fees and those types of fees. I certainly hear ~'" , ~ '~~~ - what you're saying is there's got to be a more equitable way to distribute the cost - to build these parks. I understand that. Centers: The people that are using them should pay for them. Ri: _.,-~k~ Kuntz: I understand that. ~t ~~~ Centers: I don't think anyone would disagree with that. But it's how you get them to pay for it and make them feel amenable to it. I think that's all of my notes at ,,~ this time. ~ Zaremba: I'm going to step in and be a little bit contrary to that. I would like to r ' weigh in on the side of impact fees. I thought this was a startling eye opening F~ '""' representation of the short fall. I agree with much of what Commissioner Centers has said. But I also agree with impact fees and raising them. Even though it u ~` ~~,~ raises the price of a home and possibly makes both construction and home selling a little bit more difficult. If we're hitting all fronts and trying to find all ways _ of financing. If we catch up to the right number of acres of park per thousand residents, then any new parks after that are only needed because of new `~ residents. I don't have any difficulty with the concept of thinking that the people ~~ who are moving here should pay their own way on the facilities they need. I . ~ ~~ spread that philosophy to police and parks and schools and everything. I realize ~> we have some sizable impact fees but the facilities are not needed if we didn't ' ~ ''~" - have those new residents. I'm not being totally contrary to Commissioner Centers .. P J~,., ~ _ - . .. i , ... ~ .. .. :,+d ~ - ~.i r: ~. .4. ,..: rr ~ ; - i.-..~a i i ~ ' ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning mission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 P f .~ age 9 o 17 ,;. ':~ but I would like to weigh in, in favor of impact fees and raising them if it's v~ ., necessary. Kuntz: Commissioner David. Initially when we computed the impact fees, we did it not taking into consideration the current population. Actually it came out to about $2500.00 per lot. So, working with the Planning and Zoning department, "' ~ r? Steve Siddoway, we re-calculated making sure that the existing population of , -` 4~ 36,000 that we built that system, five acres per thousand, brought them to a level ' ~ where they should be at, five acres per thousand without burdening any new rr z i`ii` residents. So, that $1500.00 per lot is based upon brand new people moving in tomorrow. Borup: Anyone else? ~~~ Zaremba: I have some general comments that I would like to add. ~~~ s: Borup: Go ahead. Zaremba: I appreciate all the work that went into both of these documents. I did ~~ ~" slog all the way through the Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Plan. ~'` I agree that there was a need for the action plan. The action plan in my opinion ' ~ tells a good story about where we are, where it's projected that we need to go, ~- 73 what will be the pains for getting there and to me the action plan, as you say probably will be the document that will go forward. You know Comprehensive ;~ ~ ~'~=~~ Plans get revised every five years even though they're 20-year plans so I'm sure _ it will be the document that will live. That said, there are a couple of things that I would like to see added to it, either now or in the revision five years from now. - _ Some thought possibly, you list parks that are within the City limits of Meridian - that are owned by Western Ada Recreation. I would like to see some thought of ~Tf` ~,.~~s what it would cost to either acquire those or make some trade so that the City of =' 4' Meridian owns all the parks within it's boundary. Some discussion whether that's even possible or you get a flat no from Westem Ada. I don't know but some ~'' ~ ~ f comment on that. A second thing that I would like to see added, there was one ~•, sentence in the big document that mentioned the golf course. I don't see it mentioned in the action plan. The City of course owns the golf course and by my reasoning even though it's a special use, the same logic that includes the swimming pool we don't own, I would think the golf course should be included. ~'«~ That being said I would also like to see a long range plan for Parks and '`"`~ Recreation to actually administer that contract and be the one that either three ,tip years from now or 30 years from now, depending on what happens is involved in ~ the bids for managing the golf course or taking it over. Some thought on what is going to happen to the City's golf course and how can Parks and Recreation sort " ~ "' of supervise. The third thing that I would add, and this was mentioned again, believe in the big document. Just a short list of the commercial recreation facilities that already exist in the City. Off the top of my head I can think of =~ ~` ° bowling, motor speedway, water park, the Boondocks things, two fitness clubs. I : ~; r u ::. .. - ,, ~.hs. .._ .';~. -.ire: . ' t.. ., '.~ T'k E' r. ,. .:~ ~i4Y ~, ~~. ~'f _ '.'~i ±) ~S '~ ~:.;~ -~. ::;;; f Meridian Planning and Zoning Coission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 Page 10 of 17 think it would be interesting to list those and I notice that there was one comment from somebody that said we shouldn't be competing with a commercial one. But I think like you're talking about the Skate Park and ice skating rink, there may be ways that we could partner with commercial enterprises, maybe they put their name on the skating rink but it's still a City park. Things like that, just some comments in general. Thank you very much for the whole document. Kuntz: Commissioner David, just one comment. Zaremba: Yes? Kuntz: First off thank you. Those are all excellent suggestions. We have actually had some discussion and pursued some of these. But I think the Parks Commission needs to be acknowledged for the amount of work that they've done on these two plans because they've stuck with staff. Zaremba: This looks like a tremendous effort and it's working out very nicely. Borup: Any other questions from any of the Commissioners? Most of the, I think some that I had have been answered. Just a quick comment on the impact fees. I don't think anybody likes to increase any fees of any kind but it's got to be where it's probably a little bit of a way of life. I think most of the industry has learned to be able to live with it if it's, I guess in moderation and within the guidelines. I assume that that's one of the aspects that need to be looked at, are they in compliance with the state statutes on impact fees and such. I would assume that's just automatic given. One of the things that I have been a proponent of and interested in is a trail system. One question I had on that is the right-of--way. You have it proposed right-of--way of 30 to 35 feet, is that --? Where did that figure come --? That's the size of a private road. (inaudible) two lane street going down that much of aright-of--way. Is that how much is really necessary? I guess my concern there if it's too much, are we going .to fail to get the right-of-way that's necessary for the trails. What thought was given into that? Kuntz: Chairman Borup, a couple of thoughts. One is we actually have a citizen's committee that's been working on a trail plan that's not included in this at this point. We don't have their final documents yet. Borup: I'm going to turn to page 3.4, for any of the other Commissioners. Kuntz: Two is many of these specifications have come from other cities that have found these criteria to be satisfactory for their path. r~ , rL^'+ Borup: I'm sure they're satisfactory. I was wondering if they're necessary. Kuntz: Well, the standard that we're trying to adhere to with Planning and Zoning as development comes in now, is major pathways are aten-foot wide ~, ~ Meridian Plannin and Zonin Co mission S ecial Meetin 9 9 P 9 ?~ February 7, 2002 Page 11 of 17 'r hard surface. We would like a minimum of ten feet on either side of that clearance just so we don't create a tunnel effect or a potential crime situation, those types of things. Luckily our Planning and Zoning Ordinances along . ~,: pathways call for a low fence or a fence that can be seen through. But to answer your question specifically, we think 30 feet is a good distance to have for a ~~~ pathway that goes any length. Are we negotiable on that? Definitely. '~- Borup: So, these are set as guidelines? I would assume then that the main thing ~ is the visual impact and the tunnel effect? Kuntz: Yes sir. Borup: So, the surrounding character is what's going to make a big difference? ;; < , Kuntz: You bet. ~ , , ~~~ ~ ` ~ Borup: If you've got it open, you know a water system or something on one side `~' that can't be obstructed, then you don't have any --? Kuntz: Yes sir. ?a `~' Borup: Okay. I mean I would rather see a 20-foot right-of--way and get a pathway ~- ,'': in then not have any at all. l f ~~ ~y Kuntz: We would too. There's a development that I don't know if it has come - ~- ; before you yet, a business development, we met with them, with Planning and Zoning staff and it varies from 30 feet down to 20 feet in certain areas. We put all that on one side because we have a canal bank on one side and we really don't ~~ f need that. But you know these are guidelines but we certainly - r ~~ Borup: Okay. ~~ ~ , -,. Kuntz: -- want to exercise some good judgement and flexibility as we're dealing _ with the developers because right now they're providing our pathway system. Borup: Okay. Thank you. I don't know --. Do you have anything else? We would :.:; like to get to the public testimony. ~~,,, ~ ~ Shreeve: Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of questions real fast. Just a comment f' r" on you block grants. I don't believe that you can get those for 100 percent of the -~ project costs. Aren't they just up to a maximum of 500,000? Kuntz: Commissioner Shreeve, I have never worked on a block grant to be honest with you. So I don't know. Most grants there is some kind of match, either --3 ~ financial or in kind contributions. But I can't answer that question. ~s f y r ~~~-~ 1. ;;,~; -: s <s ., .,:.rK {, ::;. ~~ ,; <<. ~; r ~ Y • ~ `~r . ~.~µa >~, t g~. r <,. :~= ~ ,` <::_; Meridian Planning and Zoning CdlTrmission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 Page 12 of 17 Shreeve: Yes and I believe block grants only go up to a maximum of 500,000. So, just as a point of clarification for reference purposes. Kuntz: Thank you. Shreeve: I don't think you can get 100 percent block grant. Relating to the paths, of course I served on that committee over a year ago for a short time. The comment I have is of course you know the intent is to have the development put in a lot of the paths or at least work with them towards that end. Obviously there's going to be some places that will probably likely need to just simply be purchased or otherwise worked out. I guess either I might have missed it or what is the plan for those in between spots, I guess as far as connecting from development to development, you know where there's existing development that of course there's a path that's shown there? What has ever transpired with that? Kuntz: Commissioner Shreeve. We're hoping that once we get the pathway plan from the committee, which I understand is on it's way. Those areas would be identified. We'll need to then prioritize those areas, put a cost estimate on those area, on either easements or acquisition or those types of things and then construction costs. Similar to what we did at the Five Mile Creek Pathway that connects Linder and Meridian Road along the Five Mile Creek. Then we'll need to start biting off chunks of that and putting them together. The way it's working right now, the developers have been super about providing those as part of their infrastructure. Ithink because they see the values of being able to move pedestrians around. Shreeve: Are the impact fees, you know we've been talking about or just the overall costs. I guess that's some kind of a projection of what those will be although we don't know the specifics of areas, but you tried to incorporate that as far as overall costs of getting the pathways in between developments? Kuntz: In our six-year plan right now, I want to go to that before I make this statement. There is approximately $95,000.00 budgeted for extending the Five Mile Creek Pathway. That money could either be through impact fees or a general fund or a grants or donations. So, we've started to identify the need to have some funds dedicated to making that happen. One of the things we're hoping to accomplish or next year at the latest is to put a pedestrian bridge across Five Mile Creek connecting the current Five Mile Creek Pathway with Eighth Street Park. Right now there's a two by six plank going across there at an irrigation check structure which is used very heavily but it's probably not the best way of getting across there. So, to answer your question, we've tried to identify that in the six-year plan but we would like to continue to rely on the developers to provide those pathways as much as possible. Shreeve: Okay. ~~.. ~~. r-ti-+ ~; +, ~;. ~~r`3 ;~ ~:. :~w ,~,4t s-`s ~~~>~,; ,_. ,:;.. ~~;_ ,~3~~= s`. H ,; `~ h:: F -t,: •.';;~75 .r; >: ~~ ;,r. ,~~:~_ =,< t' r ;, -'~-~_ Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~TlFnission Special Meetlng February 7, 2002 Page 13 of 17 Centers: One last thing Mr. Chairman. I think we learned from experience on your red asterisks for the community parks. If the public is going to see this you want to be with your comments note that they could be moved within a half mile radius and it's not that specific spot. Are you aware of that? Kuntz: Thank you Commissioner Centers. I will go as far to say within a mile radius. Centers: Yes. You want to note that in your verbiage and --. Kuntz: We've had several calls already. Centers: People buy a house thinking there's going to be a park right there. Borup: That's something that you might add to the map. Zaremba: Put it in the fine print on every map. Yes. Kuntz: That's an excellent suggestion. Borup: Okay. Time is getting short so we do want to get to all the public testimony hopefully. So, do we have anyone here to testify on this plan? If you want to come forward. Please state your name and address for the record. Wilder: Janet Wilder at 3340 north Ten Mile Road. Borup: Okay, go ahead. Wilder: My comment is that I would like to ask that either C-1 or C-2 park might be moved to the corner of Ten Mile and Ustick where two of the pathways, the proposed pathways would go right around it. I know this; everyone knows this as a controversial piece of land there and it kind of whatever the Council decides to do with it. I kind of wanted to go on record that we would like to have a park there if it was agreeable with everyone. Borup: Okay. Wilder: Okay? Centers: Mrs. Wilder? Wilder: Yes? Centers: You're referring to this one right here? Move it down this way? Wilder: Move it to the corner of Ten Mile and Ustick on the northwest corner. ., ,, _ . ; ~,~,. . ~: .. ,. h~;; .. ~~3 '• r ,~~.. , f~~~ -r ~~;.. ~<:: Meridian Planning and Zoning Co~mission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 Page 14 of 17 Centers: Ten-Mile and Ustick would be right there. Wilder: Right there. Centers: Yes. Wilder: Either the C-1 or the C-2. Centers: Okay. Wilder: Okay? Centers: Thank you. Wilder: Thank you. Borup: Okay. Do we have anyone else? Does Mr. Beckwith still want to testify? (inaudible discussion from audience) Beckwith: Yes my name is Ken Beckwith. I live at 2866 West Park Stone Street. This young .lady stole a lot of my thunder. I wholeheartedly support the park being put back at Ustick and Ten Mile. The suggestion that Commissioner Sellers said about adding a fee to the water bill, I would much prefer to pay $5.00 a month during the time that I actually live in my house than to have it tacked onto my mortgage payment for 30 years. I think it's an excellent idea. Thank you. Centers: Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Do we have anyone else? Anybody from the Parks Commission have any comments they would like to make? *** End of Side One *** (inaudible discussion amongst Commissioners) Borup: Does anybody got a suggestion for the recommendation you would like us to make? Okay, seeing none other, did you have any final comments Mr. Kuntz? Kuntz: Mr. Chairman, I do have one question of Commissioner centers. Your intent on the trash and water bills, was that for Citywide impact wide or --? Centers: Sure. All the people that use the parks. Kuntz: Thank you. t>,' s, t W ,r >a ,.~: ~ <<.~` ,, '~ :-} ~~,_~~,. `~ ;_~; ~~"~" t,: ~~: T 5 ,~~~ ~~~ ~. <; ~ ~T ;~:~ ,., ,N, _ ,, ~~: ri . Meridian Planning and Zoning Coll~fiission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 Page 15 of 17 Centers: Then one other note that I had to prove that I read this document. Page 3-1 where you talk about the servicing of the trails and pathways. I would be highly against bark chips that's mentioned. In fact in some of the hearings where we talked with developers, I've encouraged asphalt so that it's more usable and the weeds don't grow. I even think sand or gravel is bad news. It becomes weeds and you know --. Kuntz: Commissioner Centers, I believe the intent of those was that there was paths that were more going to be used in the County impact area, equestrian type of paths but the staff would agree with you wholeheartedly that hard surfaces --. Thank you. Centers: So, you agree with that? Because we had one situation where we could have required the asphalt but you had recommended gravel and we went along with the Parks Department's recommendation. Kuntz: We've changed that recommendation since. Centers: Okay thank you. The developers are willing to put in the asphalt. Borup: Okay, Commissioners. I think we're done with testimony. Shreeve: Mr. Chairman I make the motion that we close the Public Hearing of the proposed Comprehensive Parks and Recreation System Action Plan. Zaremba: I second that. Borup: Motion is second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Do we need any discussion? Are we ready to make a recommendation? We have the plan with a page of amendments that has been submitted. I don't know if any of the Commissioners had any other comments that they wanted to add. Commissioner Centers does. Centers: One final thing. I would like to see more options pursued like the HUD grants and you know you list 14, 15 ways to bring in money. Lets go after some of them rather than say I want to increase the impact fee because that's the easy way to do it. Don't get me wrong, I think the impact fee probably should be increased but there's others ways to raise the money. Lets go after them rather than just put them down on a piece of paper and say these are ways we could do it. Let's do it. That's my - .--xy ,~?; Y , 7~ -: ~' F ~: `''~ -fr ~'>'` ~.: r"~" ,; =r,: ::~, ~;`:~, <: :~: {, ,;~~, ,~. '' ~.,t F. w ._ <<~? . S.. s'i ~~ t ~:,: Meridian Planning and Zoning Ission Special Meeting February 7, 2002 Page 16 of 17 Borup: That's what I like about this plan. It lets us know what there is and that is going to need to be many sources. One of course by itself is not going to do it. Centers: Right. Borup: I think that's what you're tried to show here, hopefully. That was more of a comment, not something you wanted to add to the document? Centers: No, they're already in the document. Borup: Yes. Just whatever encouragement we can give the Parks department to follow through on some of those specific areas then. Anyone else? Does anybody else have anything else that needed to be added? Zaremba: Just to put on the record, our thanks to Director Kuntz, and the Parks Commissioners for clearly the effort that has gone in to this and the good thinking that has gone into it and their continued good work. Shreeve: And all the volunteers that have put in long hours. Borup: Right. Okay. Zaremba: Do we need a motion to forward this to the City Council? Borup: Yes. I believe we do. Zaremba: So moved. Centers: Include the amendments. Zaremba: Including the page of amendments that was provided. Borup: Okay. I have a motion. Shreeve: Second. Borup: And a second. Any discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Thank you. Yes we do need a motion to adjourn the special meeting also. Would someone like to make that motion? Centers: Yes I would move we adjourn this special meeting. pied?]' ~T: } ;. ~{ . -. f.; F •'. i. f i ~ '.V L F y~~~~ V~ ~~ ~'~ ~V1 ~-}r5- -tf 4~~ l,hr f~. ,a ~u? 7 ~ ?.. 4 ~'Q'' ° '~~ S~.'h t~~ 'r'~ ~ `rat i'~a T%" v -p,~'. "~'P _ ufi S u ..t 1 ~ ~1 {-tt~., ~ r t ~Et. a V e m k ~-j i~ .1F+11 1[C ~1 ~3 ~3 1 4~~~t .r 1~~Lff~{ +CT,1 f M11 3 r ~ r..,.'r ~ ' ~" A 'Leiy~FF~` y 1 } j 3 ~~ r ~ y ~.•'~~. qtr y ~~ ,J'73 ,'.~ fV,~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ 7g" .p„ 'Ln n ;'tu'~`yh ~ ~~ ~ q~. ~. t V f ~~ fir,, r _ i w r -- ~: ~ s 1~` ~ ~ x ' ~ a a-a .~. i _ .. .._ .: ] ~ yip [ k ~'1 "}~X D 'A ., y ~' ~.: t;1 s,} .`. 'y spy -i. t„~~'(s,~N.A ~~~ .„ ~~ ; • ~ _ ~ ~7i a~~"h ~~~~L~. 9 a .. dt_vx ref r,:: w:~ z ... ~ F~~~: ~/al'. r ~dJ~i7t 9 -Ie'y r ''~ -. ~ K.. C ~ '~ t~ ~. ~~~'°' -~.: :.:'P +~ d~'~~g'~31 3ririx~+.~r ,.-& _r.,'~~ g h~~f ~;- _ r ~~"~t~i: : ,,!~"+', . _ _, ^t' F q4 ~ - t 7 t~ r ~+ ~ *j X~ ~ i 5k f~ "'7~'r" - - t i .f• t-'fit ~` h . e~ 't4. t ~'~.T r ... _ .. -y ~+3y1~ 51 3.:~Sy S r ,`-k _ ~~-~. u~~2a~ tit tli~ `; S ,~:. s u :- ~ %:,; z ~ ~ a ~. _ ~~ra 'ga'd r ~ ~, YI',~-~s~~` ~ h +~+._ s #, ~ ~. '-s t y y `y~L r;~ err t{ ~g,`i.,~~ ,~~'~Y~~c~.r f~2gcy~,~KPrrrrt' 4~ x .fir y~ ~~ Yz t,, '47c.Vrr , ~~ rrtwri '~~X. r r.x ~ J tn.~3h t ~ 'F bn ~~~~' ~~~T~-Y ~x ~ PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET _ ~t :.>~ y,~TM DATE ~/2~/~- ~ / F- ...~.. ._ PROJECT NUMBER ~~"~~~Se~ ~fl~%r~ ~.ehJ~1~~ ~~''~ ~` -,`. ax~ PROJECT NAME ~~~ ~ ~ Thew r `~~~'~^' ~~~^- F, -~-~ ~~.:r F :-~. ~.; ~~ ~k E; "F~ ,.,' ;~ k.,.. ;., y4y~~"~':~.'. h~~ r; i', ... NAME FOR AGAINST ~~ =.:~~ - - .'Sipe' a ,~ t .:.. ~;. i ~ ~ ~' `5. _ ~`?~ ~ i~ CI~,~TY OF MERIDIAN F :;; MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ~~: ~~': Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 7:00 P.M. ~, .° ~!. 'City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: ` Jerry Centers X David ~aremba X ~' ~; ,,., ~~~ _ - X Leslie I~lathes _X Keven Shreeve k; X Chairman Keith Borup ~~ ~ - ~, -"~` 2. Adoption of the Agenda: ,~ :~ _ ~: , ~4~ :~ . onsent Agenda: ;~,.,., F ~' A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning ~, Commission F~egular Meeting: Approved ~4 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure t~ be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for ' " Dreamland Educatipn Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of ~' ,'' East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: Recommend approval . ~'- ~~ to City Council '#'" 5. Public Hearin A~ 01-026 Re uest for annexation and zoning of 2.30 g: q ': acres from R-1 to I~!-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by y ~ Robert Lee - southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat ~`' Road: Recommend approval to City Council ~~~' 6. P 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval Public Hearing: PF~~, ~ , 2.30 acres. in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed of 2 building lots o' ~~: , Hearthstone Subdvvision by Robert Lee -southeast corner of West '" Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: Recommend approval to City , .: Council ~~ _ 7. Public Hearing: CtIJP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for ., one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two _ ~~ ' m a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian story office building r , Hampton Center LL~ -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way: ~,, Recommend apprdl'val to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -February 7.2002 Page 1 of 2 All materials presente~ at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings ~~ please contact the City C~irrrk's Office at 8t3~4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. .'~' j ~y;;:: ~ y'. ~' ?; u N :i~--~ ~ F't ': Y1 G ^ 1 EJ l ~S~ t. .. ~ ~.' Z r~ ~ ~. ~~ Rrv~ 1 x, ` ~ _ - ~ S f S i i ~. '€ .' i ~ {~ ', h ; ' C ~: A ~ ? a 1 t-' ~ lA, w ; k; l ll'` *+~> 1 1 ' ~ ~ :. - S 4::..~ ,~~ . '. ~ ... E ~ k.... '... ~~ is 8. Public Hearing: I~FP 01-010 Request for preliminary and final plat . ~~;- ; approval for 3 building lots on 4.10 acres in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn ~,~ ` Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. -southwest corner of Allen ~~~° < ~; Street and Gentry VV1~ay: Recommend approval to City Council ~, -?' 9. Public Hearing: A~ 01-027 Request for annexation and zoning of 77.9 <,;,;. acres in a proposed'~~'I R-8 zone for the proposed Baldwin Park by Capital ~ Development Co. -' % mile south of McMillan Rd., east side of Linder Road: Continue P~~~lic Hearing to February 21, 2002 10. Public Hearing: PFD 01-024 Request for preliminary plat approval of 272 ~.~~ ~-=: ~ building lots and 16II, other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for ~ ~ hpital Development Co. -- % mile south of McMillan Baldwin Park by C' '~~ , Rd., east side of Linder Road: Continue Public Hearing to February 21, =` . 2002 s ~; ~,~-. ~,, ~~ Meridian Plann,~ng and Zoning Commission Agenda -February 7.2002 ~«'' !~ Page 2 of 2 All materials presented'at public meetings shat) become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accojnmodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City CIQrk's Oifir~ at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ~t ~. 13 y~. ~ ~ j_. ( l~ ZC r P 'r ~. i rf ~~ t ~ ^i,: A ~ ~- ~.. r R tR„ ..~. t ~, - A } f i } yam' 7 - ,~: t s :i ~ x ~ x ` i ? " ^:ij : f~Y-a~.+ p~~:~ • CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING ~`~~~ AGENDA ~:~; Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers '' ° 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~.~ ~. David Zaremba ~c Jerry Centers Leslie Mathes ~ Keven Shreeve .~-: F ~C _Chairrr>lan Keith Borup 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning ~ , .~. ~~.~~ Commission Regular Meeting: ~ x ,_ ~ P 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for - Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of ;~~,; East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: `~c~rvv~~~ ~s~~~~ ~~s ~~ a _ 5. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for annex t n nd zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: `-~ C,~~,vYU vL~ ~,`a ,~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~-1 e~ t 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval ~_ :;~-, of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed >:`` Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast corner of West _ Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: ~Q,C~rv~;v~rt¢,v~d. ~ ~ r~~c~ -lam C~t, 7. Public Hearing: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two - story office building in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Cent er LLC -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way ;~ ~~ ~ L2Z y. n _ ~ ,9-~~v~.Q. ~ ~c I~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -February 7.2002 Page 1 of 2 '~^ All materials presented at public meetings shall becxime property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring acxommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings u ~. please contact the City Clerk's Office at 88&4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Jk ~:,-F:: - ^r ~.. _ r_- ~.__ _ _ , f'§ f. x l ~ ~4 7;: s• ~'' ~ l 4 o-b= 3 s ~-''~ z ~~ ;'.~. - ~! t•3 1' ~ `~ '; ~ T 1. ~ G. ,:i }" r _ l Y ~ `. ;,. ~'y:. _ .3 8. Public Hearing: PFP 01-010 Request for preliminary and final plat approval for 3 building lots on 4.10 acres in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way `~.c;~or~~~e;-~~.,~ ~~ ~ n~v~L.~ -~ c~,,~ 9. Public Hearing: AZ 01-027 Request for annexation and zoning of 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Baldwin Park by Capital Development Co. - %4 mile south of McMillan Rd., east side of Linder Road. ~~,-~_~ 1~ j I2 ~ D2 - 21- c~ 2 ~- 10. Public Hearing: PP 01-024 Request for preliminary plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park by Capital Development Co. -- %4 mile south of McMillan Rd., east side of Linder Road. ~.~~ ~ f ~ ~ t~2 -21-~2, ~: ~~,. =: - "_~:~ii , 7}7}r, a ``;, r r~.. - w'L-'~+ ~ ~J: r;:~ v Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -February 7.2002 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ~, ~' ~ 5~ -~ ~Y :. f y';' /.: . ~ ~" .~~ ~. -.:_. ~: y1 <. - r y ~t_ ' ~ h 5,{ z a, ~' { + i ~.~';i ;r. ..r r; ii w-;:;; ~;; E, C J CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X David Zaremba _X_ Jerry Centers X Leslie Mathes _X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting: Approved 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: Recommend approval to City Council 5. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cheny Lane and North Black Cat Road: Recommend approval to City Council 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: Recommend approval to City Council 7. Public Hearing: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two story office building in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Center LLC -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way: Recommend approval to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -February 7.2002 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the city of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. I .1:, t~ ~~. ~' ;, ~j ,•.° -~ _, ji%: ~ ', ~~, -;y ~: _ _ ~ _ ~ ? -:~ r h-.- x_ ,, F, -x ,;': r"~ ~: t F~. F Y,'; ~..r: ~.~ ; :~~j fi, ~,. ~,, ~~ ~'~' ~., ~~; ~'~> Sri .-, l~: r F'.,: f.. ~.ic~ F. f~'~~ ~ i yF.i. ,j. '~ ,- 8. Public Hearing: PFP 01-010 Request for preliminary and final plat approval for 3 building lots on 4.10 acres in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way: Recommend approval to City Council 9. Public Hearing: AZ 01-027 Request for annexation and zoning of 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Baldwin Park by Capital Development Co. - %4 mile south of McMillan Rd., east side of Linder Road: Continue Public Hearing to February 21, 2002 10. Public Hearing: PP 01-024 Request for preliminary plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park by Capital Development Co. -- %4 mile south of McMillan Rd., east side of Linder Road: Continue Public Hearing to February 21, 2002 Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -February 7.2002 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documerrts and/or hearings "" please contact the City Clerk's OfFce at 88&4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ' `> r T li W} 4 %~; ~; / ~ 1~ 5... :~ ~'_ 1 S iI ?~ _ + Z ~ .- ~~: v f. .,~ " >~ TX CONF I RM~N REPORT ~ AS OF FEB 07 ~ 22 ~ 00 PAGE . 01 '' CITY OF MERIDIAN ~'- ~'~~,~ DATE TIME TOiFROM MODE MINiSEC PGS CMDtt STATUS ~`~'''' 14 02107 2200 20!38881193 EC--S 00'36" 002 159 OK ~~, ;~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ ~a MERIDIAN PLANNING AND 20NING REGULAR MEETING ~~~'' AGENDA ~'; { Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 7:00 P.M. >,° City Council Chambers ~~' 4f ~ ~ ~~ 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba Jerry Centers Leslie Mathes ~ K even Shreeve ~_Chairman Keith Borup 2. Adoption of the agenda: "'~ 3. Consent Agenda: ~' ~Y ~ A. Approve minutes of January 1T, 2002 Planning and Zoning , Commission Regular Meeting: ~ n P fOV~r~. }°~ ,, ,- 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a t)ayc~re Center in an L-O zone for Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: q,,~~,~w,tiot, ~,c„~c~, 5. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for anne t n and zoning of 2.30 ;~> ~ acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by ~~~~ Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat ,. Road: ~Q,Cewtvru.v~l, A~~n~~ "~ G( C. ~ ~°' 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed :: , Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -- southeast comer of West ~~ ' Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: t.Q,COww~e.vld~ ~ ~~ rvocsL,, °h C~c E , ~ 7. Public Hearing: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for ,~`, one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two story office building in a GG zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian '~, ; . Hampton Center LLC -southwest comer of Allen Street and Gentry Way `~.2Cor-2~rt~irtr,~ ~ roV ems, d-o ~ C ~:; ': i ; Meidian Plannir~ arxi Zanurg Comm'ssion Agenda - February 7.20Q2 V{n`1. ~ A_~~~~ ~^^v a~e~OYWYW 1QlOlEY ~ d~rn~ IT sY~ A please Corrtect tP-e City Gerlc's Olfi~ at 8864433 at least 48 flours prior to the public nreeting. a, ',.: r r;r-= ,ti r' { "; ^; jC, "; ' ~ ~, ~, :; y ~' r ~? 4 ~ `, &:Si ;i ~~ _~' ~ '~ i • c f~ ` ,L..~~~: y.~.. ~ ~ i.Y ~ ~ T } - _ U 5`~`"= ~ TX CONFIRM~N REPORT *x~ AS OF FEB 07 22:01 PAGE.01 ~`''° ~, . CITY OF MERIDIAN 2c > - DATE TIME TOiFROM MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS k*~>;~. 15 --------- 02107 22:01 PUBLIC WORKS OF--S 00'27" 002 160 OK ------------ ----------------------------------------------------- ------ ~jk z=x'. s~fr-' crux o~ ~~~~A.lv "~ ' MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING Y AGENDA s ~' Thursday, February 7, 2002, at T:00 P,M. s~ Gity Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba ~ Jerry Centers Leslie Mathes }~ Keven Shreeve ` ~_Chairman Keith Borup ,~ . 2. Adoption of the Agenda: _- 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting: ~ ~ ~ t' DV2,c~ 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a ,vf Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for .~ Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of -: East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: ~Carrv+~~~ cv~c,~, 5. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for anne ti n and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat - Road: ~Z-4.(:cw~.vru.v~.~ ~.,~ru~e~A.~ -1-0 ~l C. ,~~;; 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Pr+eliminary/Final Plat approval ~~t" of 2 building Tots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast corner of West ,*~` < Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: 1~Qf~YVUw~tv1~ ~ ~rocc~,-E;,C( a ~, f 7. Public Nearing: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two story office building in a GG zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian - Hampton Center LLC -southwest comer of Allen Street and Gentry Way ~R ~~ ~roVVe~k, -I-o SIG y. < ~~r " ~; < ~~ Meridian Ptannrng and Zordng Commiesion Agenda -February 7.2002 ~ i ,r>' Page 1 of a All materials presented at public rrreetings shah becarie properly or the city or Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodeNnn for dlsebllltlea releDed to documents endfor hearings please contact the City Clerk's OtTrcs at t36t3-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the publk meettnq. ~, ~• , ss'"~~: ~' :.,;? s,. ` 3 3 i. Y 2 ~' t'. F~- } 3 ., ) Y ~ 1, k.;. ~'_ ":: ~* TX CONFIRM REPORT ~ DATE TIME TOiFROM 16 02107 22.02 888 6854 AS OF FEB 0? ~ 22 ~ 02 PAGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS EC--S 00'3?° 002 162 OK CITY OF MERIDIAN ,.. ~, `: MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, February T, 2002, at 7:00 P.M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba ~C _ Jerry Centers Leslie Mathes ~ Keven Shreeve ~_Chairman Keith Borup ~= ` 2. Adoption of the Agenda: . 3. Consent Agenda: s ~~~~~ ' - A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning ~ Commission Regular Meeting: ~ ~ i~ f pyQ~ 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for =~;~ Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of t East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: `~.eo-~wr'wn~cl, >d•(1.~cv~al~., ~ ` ~, 5. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for annexation and Toning of 2.30 ~ ~ acres from R-1 to R-4 pones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat ~,~ Road: R-Q.CemvYUv~, ~.(} .prtiv eSL, ~ ~1 c. 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West :. Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: ~ec~v~w~.~~d~ ~ ~ ~c~sZ, -~ C(~, ~~~` 7. Public Hearing: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two story office building in a C-G cone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Cen t e r LLC - s o uth we s c m t o r of Allen S e tr e et and Gentry Way ~,'.. ( / ~~ y("/ / / ~ ~/ y n 1 [1 y ~ ~ / ~ ~; r Meridian Plarming and Zoning Cotnrriisslon Agenda -February 7.2002 Pepe 7 of 2 Ap materials preserded et public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring aocomrtrodation foT disab~7'dres related fo doamenls arut/or t~arirgs please contact the Cky Geric's Office et ~8-4433 at least 48 horns prior to the public meeting. r- r ~s, { y~ ~ # t d F x F- ~ i ~ y' F ,;' t ~ ~~ , t elf' S ~ s r ~7 1 k } Y ~ T F F z r } e ~3•r ** TX CONFIRM REPORT >~c AS OF FEB 08 ~09~05 PAGE.01 yc. 4 ... _. ~ ' CITY OF MERIDIAN ~: I DATE TIME TOiFROM MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS ' 03 02108 09 04 3610160 EC--S 00'59" 002 1'70 OK ~9~-:. Rr. r.': CITY OF MERIDIAN 'z ` `" - MERIDIAN PLANNING AND CONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA ~,`; Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 7:00 P.M. `a> City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba ~ Jerry Centers Leslie Mathes Keven Shreeve ,. '~?µ==` __.~C -Chairman Keith Borup "" 2. Adoption of the Agenda: ~;, 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning = Commission Regular Meeting: ~ ~ i~ ~pV~~ r fit.. ~,., 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a " Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-0 zone for Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of r 1r East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: ~~;,ri~u,,~,cf~, ,Q,~cvvcSu 5. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat ~ Road: fL2.(.a,r~xn.~.vv~., ~..~t~v~~A.~ -~ e-~ C, ~~ ;~ s ~`~ ~ 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval ;: of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed `=`~` ~ r Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast corner of West t" Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: ~~~.hd~ ~ i'rovc.Q~ ~ C~c, ~'" 7. Public HeaMng: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two • story office building in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Center LLC -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way M . f ISL - Maridian Planning and Zoning Corronission Agenda -February 7.2002 a Page 1 of 2 Ap materials preserded at public nn~tings shag became property aF the Cny of tUterldlan. Anyone desiring accommodation for disables related to doqurrerds and/or hearings ~~, please contact the Cityy park's Office at Btlt]-4433 at (east 48 hours prior to the public meetirc. ",,4 M _ ~- ~ ^" ! '~. ~ 1 :s• .~~" (a U ~Y :.'f ~ , r~ f .~+~' !~ ~i. r ~ ti 1 , i}. ~,~• }a~ ~j,, ~k; ! ~. ~, ** TX CONFIRMA REPORT ~ AS OF FEB 04 '0~5~10 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MINiSEC PGS CMD# STATUS 15 02/04 15 10 208 887 7781 EC--S 00'34" 002 107 OK CITY OF MERIDIAN MERIDIAN PLANNING AND BONING REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 7:1)0 P.M. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: David Zaremba Jerry Centers Leslie Mathes Keven Shreeve Chairman Keith Borup Z Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of January 17. 2002 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting: 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for Dreamland Education Center by Mornand Enterprises, LLC -south of East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: 5. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: 7. Public Hearing: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two story office building in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Center LLC -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way Meridian PlaNfing and Zoning Commission Agenda - Fabnrary 7.2002 Page t of 2 AB materials presented at publk: meetlr~s shah become propeAy or the CNy of Meridian, Anyare deeding aoeommodation for di9abilitiea related to doeumertls and/or hea'f111gs please contact tha City Clerk's ORke at ti8ti-d4~3 of I~at d8 bows pAor to tha pubAc meettng. t; I ,:;~~ ty s a 7~ t' ~' Y {. '4 `./ ~ + ~ j ~ Y ~ {` ~• J i~ (: L j`:? i. L T_f, 1 ~ • • ,. :;. ~~~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN ~..,. ~`` ` MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING.I~EGULAR MEETING ~~" AGENDA ~k x;;- ' Thursday, February 7, 2002, at 7:00 P.M. r ~ City Council Chambers ~~.`. ~~~~t 1. Roll-call Attendance: X David Zaremba X Jerry Centers X Leslie Mathes X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup 2. Adoption of the Agenda: rt ,' ` 3. Consent Agenda: :~ ~~ A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting: Approved 4. Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a s:~~ ` Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of `;':~ East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: Recommend approval ~'~-'4' to Citv Council S. Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by ' ' Robert Lee -southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat `' ~ ` Road: Recommend approval to City Council y'`'"' 6. Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for PreliminarylFinal Plat approval `~X~i. K of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee - southeast comer of West "`='' Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: Recommend approval to City Council 7. Public Hearing: CUP 01044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two ~~ story office building in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian ..,,; Hampton Center LLC -southwest comer of Allen Street and Gentry Way: Recommend approval to City Council Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda -February 7.2002 Page 1 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Clty of Merkilan. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabiiides related to documents andJor hearings _, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. F~..: ,: 7f Y•n i ~ _ r3:~ ~F J?. ~_' }:- ,.,^_ - 8. Public Hearing: PFP 01-010 Request for preliminary and final plat approval for 3 building lots on 4.10 acres in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn V ,y - Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. -southwest comer of Allen '` ~~' ` ~~`~~ Street and Gentry Way: Recommend approval to City Council -° 9. Public Hearing: AZ 01-027 Request for annexation and zoning of 77.9 ~~=' acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Baldwin Park by Capital Development Co. - %4 mile south of McMillan Rd., east side of Linder Road: Continue Public Hearing to February 21, 2002 4 10. Public Hearing: PP 01-024 Request for preliminary plat approval of 272 ~~}~~ building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park by Capital Development Co. -- %4 mile south of McMillan ~~~` ~ Rd., east side of Linder Road: Continue Public Hearing to February 21, ~~~' ~ 2002 t~. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commisslon Agenda -February 7.2002 Page 2 of 2 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilitles related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's OTPIce at 668-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. F ~- :~' '1 ~ !' t., ~ i l-1 ry_ ~ ~.~. j t ~;i ~ " .y,! , -. h r . i >''- r' - r, 3 t.:~ Yi ~~` ~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting February 7.2002 ~~~y The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. on February 7, 2002, by Chairman °=T' Keith Borup. Members Present: Keith Borup, David Zaremba, Jerry Centers, Keven Shreeve, and Leslie Mathes. ~~~ Others Present: Bruce Freckleton, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Larry Moore, Sharon ~R~~, Smith, and Dean Willis. ~: ~, µ"~ ~ Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: ~~ X David Zaremba X Jerry Centers :r, . X Leslie Mathes X Keven Shreeve X Chairman Keith Borup td Borup: Good evening, everyone. We'd like to begin our regular session of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission. It's our regular meeting for February - 7~'. I'd like to open this meeting and start with roll call attendance. Item 3: Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of January 17, 2002 Planning and Zoning ~:' ~ Commission Regular Meeting: Borup: Did anybody get minutes? How come I didn't get mine? Okay. The first ~~ ~ item on the agenda is the approval of minutes from January 17~", Planning and Zoning Regular Meeting. Do we have anybody that's got any additions, corrections, to the minutes? If not, do we have a motion? Zaremba: Chairman Borup? k'i. "~ Borup: Commissioner Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that the minutes of the meeting of January 17, 2002, be approved as written. Shreeve: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4: Public Hearing: CUP 01-042 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in :: `.x ,.; 2 `> ~__ r ? .,- L, t )~, _ _ ~,! 1`~ t5, L~ } d t } / ~ 1 f .. - ~t. h £~1 Y ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Me3i'fg. February 7, 2002 Page 2 an L-O zone for Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC -south of East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road: Borup: Okay. The first item on the Agenda is Public Hearing CUP 01-024, request for Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-O zone for Dreamland Education Center. We would like to open this hearing and start with the staff report. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, good evening, Commissioners, and good evening to the Commissioner I have not met yet, Mathes. Hi. The subject application here, which is -- the applicant is Monvand Enterprises and it is proposed in the existing platted subdivision, here on the screen, the two lots that they are proposing to locate the center on. Again, here is North Eagle Road. There is a single point of access right now on a public street that comes in to serve this subdivision, this cul-de-sac. It is -- the subdivision is zoned limited office. The Development Agreement that is in place, which was in place when they annexed it, required a Conditional Use, so that's the reason for the Conditional Use on this daycare. Here is a couple of existing site photos. It is located immediately adjacent to the River Valley Elementary School. There is an existing chain link fence that would separate the school, which the play area is back here from the daycare center, which would be in this area here. This is the site looking west directly to the school. The site plan is fairly simple. I won't go into too much detail. The building is situated here on the southern end. They are requesting -- they would have a need to do a lot line adjustment in order to accommodate it. They -- if you read in the conditions, one of our conditions that they would have to get that lot line adjustment prior to a building permit, so that they are waiting to receive approval through you and the City Council on the Conditional Use Permit prior to submitting for the lot line adjustment. They have proposed 120 children. It's 7,000 square feet. I think the only other comments, Sanitary Service Corporation did submit a comment that the trash enclosure was inadequate as currently located and the dimensions are too small, I believe, so maybe the applicant could address that. That's all I have on that one. Borup: Any questions from any of the Commissioners? Shreeve: Yes. I have a question. Excuse me. It shows the parking lot continuing north on Lot 6. What's beyond that? Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Commissioner Shreeve, this would be the first building in this subdivision. Those are just simply vacant lots at this time. I did not check that and maybe Bruce would know. I believe there is across-Access Easement -- have to create across-Access Easement, so they are -- typically on a situation like this we do require the Parking Ordinance to be met on the lot and in this case it is, assuming that they don't exceed that 120 children. So all parking is M d ian Plannin & Zonin Mee~'F ed g g g February 7, 2002 ;x~; Page 3 ':: contained within what would be the new shifted lot line. I believe they are two ~~ N over. That's addressed there on Page four of our staff report, Number two, Borup: Yes and that does mention the Cross-Access Agreement in the staff report. Hawkins-Clark: Okay. Correct. `' Zaremba: Just a question. Somewhere it mentions that they are required to ~` ~ .~'~~ have asee-through fence around their play area and then there is also landscaping requirements. Is there any reference made that the landscaping should not be vines that would grow up the fence and essentially eliminate the see-through feature? Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Zaremba, that's not in the staff report. The Landscape Ordinance doesn't speak to the opaqueness, if you will, of those ~~. °~ , kinds of situations, but we could certainly add that. _ Zaremba: Just a thought. I can see the reason for having asee-through fence around the children's playing area I just worry about the landscaping changing that. Hawkins-Clark: Certainly we could maybe ask the applicant to address that, if they can include that in their -- ~~,~ ~° Borup: Is the applicant here and would like to make their presentation? Knopp: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, My name is Larry Knopp, 355 South 3rd Street. I'm the architect representing the applicant this evening. ;_~ ~ As far as the -- let me start with the Cross-Access Agreement. This subdivision - _ - Carroll Subdivision, was approved conceptually by Planning and Zoning and the ,:.~ locations of the building pads and also parking and cross-access was agreed _ t,"`~ upon and submitted and approved and we have tried to stay within those guidelines that approved originally on the subdivision. This facility needed some additional land, so the owner of the subdivision is willing to go ahead and go through a lot line adjustment to make the one lot smaller and add some additional ground. The concept of egress and ingress -- if I could lr move over here. The entrance -- this was an established entrance that was approved on this subdivision. Concept and parking was established in the front =4~ r ;h with this as a common egress-ingress serving these three lots that were approved on. We tried to stay to that concept, so we didn't have a problem with the initial approval, the lot line will be adjusted, and we will maintain parking for both independent separate lots to meet the City Ordinance. As far as the trash enclosure, we will work with the city sanitation and make sure that the size accommodates the enclosure -- or I mean the size of the dumpster that we are ~~; ~~" ` going to provide there and make sure that it works for them. As far as t ~,Y; ~;~y , a. ay - ~ ~ y.. r -_ ~~ 1r ~ Y ~z '~ ' - ~ "` Meridian Planning & Zoning Me g. ~ r`,x~.~ ~ February 7, 2002 ~~~~~. .~ ~. '~ ~~ -`~ 1 ~ Page 4 '?' r J ~"~~~>x we did submit a detailed Landscape Plan. landscaping There are no vines on it, ti~.~'~~~: , so we should be good there. 4,. ~ ~~ ~. `~'~ "~- ~ ~ ~~r Zaremba: Thank you. ,-_ ~~. . ' 41 .. ~. Knopp: You bet. We have read the conditions of approval and we have -- we ~ ~ ' ~~~ ~° ° ~ don't have any problems with any of it so -- ~ f : , ~., r ~~~~ d .~ :: ~ ~ Borup: Okay. Any questions from any of the Commissioners? Thank you, Larry. 4 ;{ -~ ro a Do we have anyone here to testify on this application? Seeing none, s t.~ ~. ~ Commissioners? '~~" _ Centers: Mr. Chairman, I did have one and it was a question, but just to make -~ , ,~." sure that the applicant saw the letter from the Ada County Highway District where ~~: ~ ~ , fir= ~ they have no intention of lowering the speed limit on Eagle Road. Did you see ~~ ~~~ t -1 that? ~.r,. 4 r;. ..:3 ~.~ ~ - .~~ Knopp: Yes, we did. ": ~~ '~" ~' ",. ,. Centers: And they don't expect a request from you at a later date? Okay. 7 '.~ ~ r ~ - Knopp: We realize that. ~~ ,. ,~, ~ti~~ E.: Borup: Okay. I think we are concluded. We'd like to move on. Do we have a a.: ~,~~ motion? t,~z, ~. wL - ,~ , ~ y„ Zaremba: Well, my only comment on that is that I think a mitigating factor of the ~'' ' s"' ~` speed on Eagle Road is within the subdivision. This is not a property that backs -'~ ~ to Eagle Road, it's on the other side of the subdivision, which isn't that far from ~' ~ { ~~' Ea le Road, but it doesn't back u onto it. N = ;.;_ ~- ~ .~~ ~ ' ~ 4~~ : ' Borup: No, but getting in and out -- I mean the only egress-ingress is Eagle r ` "` ~~' * Road. fi 4~ }f ~ ~ Centers: I just wanted to make sure the applicant had seen the letter. ~s,.. w ~.~~ 3 ~'+~"' , " _ ~ ~ Borup: Right. ~$ , ~,~ ~ ar r~ '~ ~ ` " ~~ Shreeve: Mr. Chairman? , ,~ . ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~; -`"° - ' Borup: Commissioner Shreeve. ~ _ ~ ~. ~:. _.~.: " ~ ~~~~~ ~ Shreeve: I move to close the Public Hearing for CUP 01-042. 'L ~ s7. ~~ '~~~~~$ Zaremba: Second. ~ NYC ~ > ~M 1l1. a g ~ F , ?~ ~: ~.~ ww`a ; iyh" Y 1 '?~je~ 4.. ~pE, b ~ .. i1~" ~; ft f e ~! i~1i .t~ ~j rat ~ 4Yµ:.,, '.'k ~ ~ ,Y+~ t1 ,y,-t s ~3.. ~wr i~ _ ~~+ - ~ 4 ~ ~ ; u nkdc s y. s i f x'M,~ xn. ~~h t; ~,~`~ L ~ , L rj.~ ~ .d 1P E,~ a dl. h ~,v ~ 'z ,:'r ~ ~ tip}- r: 1 `a ~ s" ~y _ c` ~ t ~- _ 4 ~' ~5 r ' i' -~ ~"`"~~k J: Cwt [ y r 3~'. }~,F ~~1~~~ ~'u5l ~ ~ ~~G,..:~.r. - ,y s_ _ ~a~ ~~~ Y r `~{ Y `' y ~ ti°4'" k~ ii i~ t. ,f .R54 T ', r r~ ~.~4rt ,Ka t ~ t „ .i. % ~( ~ ~..- Y~ ~ j ~,. ~ tl ', ~~?E) !.~ ; ~ ~ $ ~Hlf-y3 ~7y 4 G L < x _ lFi*,,.w~^r f ~ ~ ~-I1' xt r-~ ~45Fx. -. k+. ~~ ~ f ~~ _. :.,1 f r~. , red . ~~ '~ ~ "~" ~-- )y ~ ", ~ M ~~~ HY i Q ~ H r Y .~ E~ s ~4~'.f ,. S.f "ry Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~Rlrg. February 7, 2002 Page 5 Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor? ® MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Shreeve: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Commissioner Shreeve. Shreeve: I move to approve CUP 01-042, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a daycare center in an L-O zone for Dreamland Education Center by Monvand Enterprises, LLC, south of East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road, with all staff comments as noted. Also to work with the city on their trash enclosure to satisfy the city requirements. Centers: Second that motion. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor. Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 5: Public Hearing: AZ 01-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: Item 6: Public Hearing: PFP 01-009 Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee -southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road: Borup: The next item is AZ 01-026, request for annexation and zoning of 2.3 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for the proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee at the southwest corner of Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road and the adjoining application. We'd like to open that Public Hearing also, PFP 01-009, request for Preliminary/Final Plat for 2 building lots on the same 2.3 acres. I'd like to, again, open both Public Hearings and start with the staff report. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you, Chairman Borup. Highlighted there in black is the subject property, the 2.3 acres there, which has the frontage here on West Cherry Lane. To orient you, Golfview Estates here on the north side of Cherry, the Blackstone recently approved subdivision here to the west, Pintail Pointe is adjacent here, and then the Parkside Creek Subdivision here. The annexation is to an R-4, which is the same zone that the majority of this yellow property that you see currently has. Here are a couple of site photos. This is the existing house that sits on the proposed Lot No. 1 and then the remainder of the Lot 2, .~ ,~~ .~ ,: ~, t^ 4T ~, .~.(y~ . ,,,, ~~;x: ;, ,,,, ,; __ :.;~: is ~~~ p ~'' , . ~~ -< >,. =~ _,;; «~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~l'rg. S February 7, 2002 Page 6 the vacant lot there. This is a shot looking at the existing private road, which is on an easement that serves this existing house, which is not a part of this subdivision, it is on a lot parcel behind this subdivision, but it is served through this cross-access on this private road. Here is the plat. I don't think there is anything much to point out. I think the applicant is in agreement with most of our conditions. There is the notation that you probably noted about the not currently serviceable with sewer. That was addressed there in terms of how in the future, should sewer become available, they do need to design it to be able to hook up and abandon the septic. I think the only other issue on the annexation application is there is an existing home occupation on this Lot 1 here, so we are just asking that that come into conformance with City Home Occupation Code upon annexation. I think that's all I have. Zaremba: That includes the removal of the sign and -- Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Borup: Okay. Any questions from the Commissioners? Is the applicant here and would like to make a presentation? Ford-Rudel: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission for the record, Ashley Ford-Rudel, Hubble Engineering, 701 South Allen Street in Meridian. We are in agreement with the conditions by the staff for the annexation, rezone, and for the Preliminary Plat. We request your approval this evening and I will be happy to answer any questions if you have any. Borup: So you're in agreement with all the staff comments? Ford-Rudel: Yes, sir. Borup: Okay. Brad had said most of them and I wondered what that meant. ~ Ford-Rudel: We are in agreement with all the conditions. Borup: Thank you. Any other questions from any of the Commissioners? Do we have anyone here in the audience that would like to testify on this application? Seeing none, Commissioners? Zaremba: I move the Public Hearing be closed. Centers: Second. Borup: Motion and second to close the Public Hearing. All in favor. Both Public Hearings be closed right? Zaremba: Yes. I did include -- meant to include the AZ 01-026 and PFP 01-009. Meridian Planning & Zoning Med~fRg. February 7, 2002 Page 7 Centers: Same second. Shreeve: Same aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Would anybody like to make a motion? Shreeve: All right. Mr. Chairman, I move that we approve AZ 01-026, request for annexation and zoning of 2.3 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee, southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road, with all conditions stated in the staff comments. That's enough. Centers: Second that. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: Okay. Next, Item Number 6. Shreeve: Mr. Chairman, propose that we approve PFP 01-009, request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 2 building lots on 2.3 -- 2.30 in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision by Robert Lee, southeast corner of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road, also including all the staff comments. Centers: Second. Borup: Motion and second any discussion? All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 7: Public Hearing: CUP 01-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for one ninety two room hotel, one single story office building and one two story office building in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Center LLC -southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way Item 8: Public Hearing: PFP 01-010 Request for preliminary and final plat approval for 3 building lots on 4.10 acres in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. -southwest comer of Allen Street and Gentry Way ~t~ ~:: Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 8 Borup: Okay. Next, Items 7 and 8. Item 7, CUP 01-044, request for Conditional ~:> Use Permit fora 192 room hotel, one single story office building, and one two ' ~~'~"+'~" story office building, C-G zone, for Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Center, LLC, at the southwest comer of Allen Street and Gentry Way. Public Hearing PFP 01-010, request for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of 3 building lots on 4.1 acres in the same C-G zone. I'd like to open both Public Hearings and start with the staff report. L-'k Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, Members of the Commission, the property is ~~ ~~, : here at the south end of Allen Street, at the corner of Allen and Interstate. , ~ ~. Interstate is not shown on this site plan. There is a frontage road between the - property and the I-4 right of way. Centers: Brad, where is the Holiday Inn Express? '~ ~~ Hawkins-Clark: It's right here. ~" t Centers: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: Immediately across the street. Zaremba: And would you clarify for me, it is a frontage road, that's not the - freeway on ramp? It's two separate things? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Right. :; Zaremba: I couldn't tell from our maps. Hawkins-Clark: Right. It is a bit of an odd situation there, with the right of way and the easement that is there, it's -- I don't know the full history of it, but -- if you ~` fi., want a background, Bruce Freckleton is ready to give you an hour discussion. ~~ The Hubble Engineering has their headquarters building here immediately to the .~ a~~ ~ north. Texaco is situated on this lot here. The McDonald's, Chevron, and then ~ ~ ~. , ra there is a proposed Subway, which you will see next month, on this parcel here. It is already annexed in the city limits. Has a zoning of C-G, which does allow for the uses as proposed with the Conditional Use. Site photos are here. The east boundary on Allen Street looking north there then the southeast corner of the site , ~=: looking at the Holiday Inn Express. Then a site from the northeast corner and , - then the western boundary. Just for you to take note of the westem boundary here, this is the existing residence with some abandoned vehicles right now and r,:"~ ~ you'll note in one of our conditions discussion about the landscape buffer. I will come back to that in a minute. On Item Number 7 here, getting to the Conditional Use -- continuing on the Conditional Use portion, the -- just a ,. quick layout of the site to orient you and then the applicant can hit anything else. The hotel, which is proposed to be three story, is situated here at the northern (.;1: t' ~~~ tde~: - Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee'frng. February 7, 2002 Page 9 end of the properly. Ingress-egress point here off of Allen Street. There is another ingress-egress here off the Interstate. The two office buildings are here. This would be the two. There is across-Access Easement and I would just point out to you in terms of the plat, this is the Landscape Plan and here are the proposed elevations of the building -- of the hotel. Three story. Here is the proposed elevation of the single story building and office building. Here is the elevation of the two story, which essentially is two story, as you will see here on these bottom elevations, because of the day-lit -- this has a deal -- there is, topographically, aslope on the property from the higher point on the west -- or on the east sloping down towards the west. I think the only item to point out to you on the staff report, Item Number 5 on Page three, the applicant shall provide ACHD and the City Clerk a copy of the recorded and Cross-Access Agreement among the parcels. Just so you know, that came from -- that was a special recommendation to the City from Ada County Highway District. We included that in there. The discussion that we had with the applicant, the agreement is -- for the most part, we have never seen this recommendation, first of all. The City has never received such a request. Usually Ada County Highway District makes Cross-Access Easements a part of their own conditions. In this case, I'm not sure why they asked the city to, but essentially the agreement stands as usually a note on the face of the plat, which I think typically is considered binding just as much as an agreement would be. Maybe Counsel can address that. We would be comfortable if either -- to modify that condition to just simply read the applicant shall provide ACHD and the City Clerk a recorded Cross-Access Easement -- or they shall provide across-Access Easement among the parcels and just leave out the agreement terminology or, really, you could choose to delete that, because the plat would serve as the agreement. Borup: Maybe the applicant might have some wording. Zaremba: I don't know if it needs to be an agreement, but if it said Cross-Access Easement on the face of the plat, that probably would satisfy everybody. Hawkins-Clark: Right. I think the idea is just to get it there -and they actually have it already. It has a note on their plat as proposed. It's there. The only other thing to point out would be additional consideration on the last page of our staff report, dated January 9~'. I'm sorry on Page 7. I will just go back to the Landscape Plan here. The City Landscape Ordinance does require a 20-foot landscape buffer between office, hotel use, and single-family residential use. Staff is comfortable with reducing that to the proposed 10 foot, given that the adjacent uses are likely to redevelop at some point in the future and the City Comprehensive Plan called out this piece adjacent to it as a commercial property. Upon annexation request, they have a potential to go commercial and then at that point in the future you would have a commercial use adjacent to a commercial use. We did just want to point out to you, though, that the Landscape Ordinance does require between single-family use and this use M~~ Meridian Plannin & Zoning Me~. 9 February 7, 2002 Page 10 the 20 foot. So I believe Wes, the applicant's representative, will be able to speak to that more. Centers: But you're okay, Brad with 10 feet? Under additional considerations, change the 20 to a 10, if that's what the applicant wanted? Page seven. Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Centers: Okay. Zaremba: As a personal opinion, I agree with the logic that the adjoining property is likely to be commercial. Is the residence occupied now? The residence that exists -- Hawkins-Clark: I have not verified that and I don't believe Dave, who wrote the staff report, verified that. There is certainly a residence there and we -- Zaremba: Were they notified of this meeting? Hawkins-Clark: They were notified in writing. Yes. Zaremba: Okay. I would not have a problem with waiving that requirement, assuming that it's going to be commercial at some time. Borup: Any other questions from any of the Commissioners? Zaremba: I do have two, actually, and while you have those landscape plans up, the comment by the Fire Department is kind of their boilerplate. Number two, all corners will have 28 foot inside radius and 48 foot outside radius on all internal access roads. I see that on many of their comments. My question would be in the far northwest corner that looks to me an extreme acute angle. Has anybody - - I'm assuming that their boilerplate requirement is assuming a 90-degree intersection. This acute angle at the far northwest upper left comer, has anybody determined whether a fire truck can make that tum or do we have it to sole so we can measure that it at least meets this requirement? Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Zaremba, we have not verified that. We have - typically, the Fire Department does receive scalable copies of these plans. We would typically defer those to them. We could certainly verify that prior to the City Council and maybe the applicant has already verified that. Zaremba: I don't see that they drew attention to that particular spot, so if they have seen it and had the opportunity to measure it, that probably answers my question. My other question would be -- and this probably applies to the other hotel and motel properties around as well. Being near the interstate, they are likely to attract 18-wheelers. In the parking arrangement, do we make any space ~:, ~, ~?yi , .. Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 11 for somebody who is ovemighting at the hotel with an 18-wheeler to park? It would probably take up 20 parking spaces. Hawkins-Clark: Right. In that situation, I think they would no longer be in conformance with the Parking Code. Certainly, it's not made accommodation for as presented. Zaremba: Have we had problems with the other two existing hotels yet? Hawkins-Clark: Our department has not received any comments on that. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, if I might, I'd like to maybe clarify one of our staff comments and -- Borup: On the sewer? Freckleton: On the sewer. Yes and maybe after reading this over -- I wrote these fairly late at night, so I would like to add to a comment if I might. Centers: What page? Freckleton: Lot 3, which is the lot down in this corner, as Brad mentioned a little while ago, there is site topography that this drops off quite rapidly. This lot -- this building is not serviceable by gravity sewer at this time. My department is agreeable to this building being served by a private lift station that would pump back into the gravity line as a temporary solution. Sewer eventually -- sewer -- we have a main trunk line that crosses the Interstate in this location. There is a lateral line that takes off about here, goes up and over, and serves the St. Luke's area. Eventually, as this Magic View Subdivision develops out, which we think it probably will, sewer would be brought down and up what is called Freeway Drive, to serve these other lots. So my comment on Page three, comment Number two, when I said -- I said consideration should be given in the design for the eventual conversion to the gravity system when it is available from the south. I would like to add to that, that per City Ordinance the applicant will be required to connect to that sewer when it is available and that they would be subject to the assessment fees and potentially latecomer's fees at that time when they make that conversion. Borup: Bruce, I assume you have already discussed that with the applicant? Freckleton: No, sir, I have not. Borup: Oh, you have not? This may have been a surprise to them? ~~ ~~__ d1't'' ;, .', y e } ~~ ~ h 'r'te -, ~~-. ~.:~ Y. .' [k ~I ~~. r'~z~~ ; ; ;r. -; ~~ Zonin M~ . Meridian Planrnng & g e g February 7, 2002 Page 12 Freckleton: Judging from the looks on their face, sir, yes, I do think it is. Borup: Okay. Any other questions? Do you have anything else, Mr. Freckleton? Freckleton: No, but he just made a comment that he is correct, if he pays assessment fees when he hooks up this lot for the pressure line going to this -- to this main, his assessment fees are done. So the only thing that he may be subject to would be latecomer's fees for the -- to pay their proportionate share of bringing sewer to that area. Yes. You're correct. Borup: Okay. Do you know whether -- is it just the bottom floor or could the main floor be serviced gravity? I guess that would be up to the applicant in their design. Freckleton: I'd have to defer that to them. Yes. Borup: I've had a similar situation where we pumped the basement and gravity fed the upper floor. Freckleton: Can that be accomplished inside the structure? Borup: Yes. I don't know what type of pump system he had in mind here, but that -- again, that would be up to the applicant. Having said that, would the applicant like to come forward with their presentation? Steele: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Wes Steele at 1250 East Iron Eagle Drive, the architect of the project representing the Meridian Hampton Center. In regards to that specific question on sewer design, it's our anticipation that most likely to begin with, if this building ends up being constructed as it is proposed, that the entire building would be serviced via the lift station. Brad, could you put the elevation for that building up for just a second? If you can see there on the bottom right elevation coming from the parking lot to the building is actually -- right here there is actually a bridge coming off of the parking lot to the building. That site slopes away and we are trying not to affect the contours dramatically, so that we would anticipate that that entire building would be serviced via lift station and had intended to -- or expect to provide a service to the south for the future gravity line. I guess my question is, Bruce, the last time I was in you gave me a latecomer fee assessment for the 4.3 acres. Am I going to be anticipated to pay that twice on Lot 2? Freckleton: The latecomer's fee that we talked about previously is to repay the developer of the Holiday Inn Express. He brought the sewer from the line I showed going to St. Luke's. He brought it up Allen Street to service the hotel. The hotel -- your hotel, your commercial building, gravity sewer into that. ~~1, . . Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 13 Steele: If I pump into that I'm going to have to have to pay a latecomer's for that lot into that to pump into and then I'm going to have to pay a latecomer's for the other service line to hook onto it, too? Freckleton: The service area that was calculated for the latecomer's fee for that line coming down Allen Street included your entire parcel. Steele: Right. Borup: Have you faced this situation before? Freckleton: No. Borup: That's what it sounded like, the first time. Freckleton: And I'm trying to play Devil's advocate more than anything, because Steele: Okay. Freckleton: -- there is no plan that I'm aware of to bring that line down Freeway Drive and get it up into that area. Where I'm coming from is I know that's the only way that you're going to be able to service that lot by gravity. Steele: Right. Freckleton: We are looking way out in the future. It's a crystal ball thing. I guess I don't know how to answer your question exactly. I don't know how to answer that question. Borup: I think what you're saying is there is two different sewer lines that affects this property, so -- Shreeve: Brad, go back to the overall area. So to come from the south, what's the -- is that the configuration of that lot or is that really how it is configured, I guess? Freckleton: Yes. Shreeve: So if they brought a sewer line from the south, theoretically it could stop right there and you could live on a pump station forever. Steele: Forever. ~r ~ ~:~ «~+`~ntr~~>~~. Z.i 7~~y_ G~~~ r ` V ~.'4sfi•3~.; r~-~tyk'YS~~ ~ ,. ~fiF`~Srd 4: ' '..1 ~ >A,}~~,~.~y~'~s~`~ ' ~9„4'r-t~$n.4 ~ M ,a. ~ ~.'y ,r Gi a a [ U. '` h is .. r,.'Fft+.,k~r r t , . - - .. s - - icy, .. `}r .. ~~y ~ `~ "~ f air, c •a c ~ ~~ ` Y 1zh 4 ~, ,r 1F ." s ~ ~ rE n~~. L, r ~~~ ~ s 9a:~ v ~^ H+d *~i6'y~~i'~'~k•~~f~ Y ~" },~~~;.~t',C 4: r '4'x~'~ h ~ ~ ~ y{. ~.''t Y.. ,."c+ ,4,~, ~ ~ pia' _ r ca' 4 ~s4d Ka~i~. >o-4a~~~#~~'~k ~a~S Ya, (~j~. §~ [ A ,. ~~ e,+S4 x ~' 'f4~~,iF6~,'s~tcaE' 3 r ~. ~ ~',$° "J ~+. ~~.,'~ 'f.''I- fi~~} y"'-.~ _ ~ ~ wr s ;. ~. 'j a ry'' .p~ ~ vYr ••Ir}'...? .µ.. ,x: F 1 a.1~~~', r~r ~~l rte"s, ~' ",~..r~-r ~ ,~ ~Y `"~, ~'' eta ~ r '' ~s'~~•; 4Y ~ l ~~ "~ lit z'i ~`Y :F. ~ w} ~•~ ~ ~~: C .c.+. rr k„ ~_ ~ t ~ i := ~~f.. .}r~~~,~- ~' ~ > ~~Y' ~f'• ~ ~A _ M'+ki;'i t -r i ~~, i~''tw',; ~~~r,,.1~+53'4ac ~~: ~ -h ~ ~.: ~~.~~ ~ d'''', K ° .t .,~ < # tF ~ t' 1 t P b , ~f• J~ ~y~ ~ a~~~ ~A't~~~h.7yi~rf . ,~,M1t~y^ ~ •. `~ .s;ti{Jy? ,r; ,j ~ ~. -i~ ~~ ~r f` ` r'4'~-• ~r ~~d~ RL.~~~ I i~ k 'SS`~'r='~ r :. ~ ~ ~ ~ Fl L f1 R• r" ~F•w •~ Sae a~.~k*~ '~`~~3 ~T?-~ 3~ ~ ~.u H r~7 ~ , ~ u` $ ,r.~~.JTN~'}kFiihr } aU^: ~~iM , ~'. $`; rr"- . >~~: ~'6 ~ r G~ r k. ~! rJ~{' ~,~f~ Y,+, . ; ~~: ,, N~~~~$.. Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 14 Freckleton: No. City Ordinances require to~and through on building sewer and water lines. You have to bring it to and through your property. You have make it available to the guy on the other side of you. Centers: Are there any other latecomers to come along? Freckleton: The -- Centers: That will help offset his? Freckleton: When we talked before with the applicant, I told him the latecomers that he would be subject to at that point. There are two latecomer's fees. One is the Five Mile Trunk latecomer's fee and the other one is this one for the Holiday Inn Express. The Five Mile Trunk latecomer's fee is a city administered, city latecomers for when the city built the trunk line that came up through here and then out to serve St. Luke's. That's a reimbursement back to the city. We brought service to this area. The other one is the one that I spoke of for the Holiday Inn Express. Those are overlapping service areas. Centers: Well, if I could take you off the hook, Bruce. Maybe this could be negotiated and talked about prior to the Council, if this applicant clears the Commission tonight, to hammer it out with you prior to the City Council where the final approval would be given. Freckleton: Certainly. Like I said, this is the first time that this kind of a thing has come up and -- Centers: We don't have to decide that tonight. Freckleton: No and we don't know how long it's going to be before this sewer comes up here. Shreeve: For what it's worth, I tend to agree with the applicant. It sounds like they are getting socked from both sides, though. Something to think about. Freckleton: Correct. If this did come up here and there was a latecomer's fee, he would basically be paying three latecomer's fees. That's probably not appropriate. Borup: Question about the -- Zaremba: In addition to putting in the pump to make the service work now. He has several expenses. ~~;:: Meridian Planning 8 Zoning Mee~ng. February 7, 2002 Page 15 Borup: That's their choice on the property -- question on the line up Freeway. That would just go -- that wouldn't go beyond their property, would it? Would that go up to the Holiday Inn Express? Freckleton: No. No. That -- Borup: So if everybody -- and this is just a lateral line or -- Freckleton: Yes. It's not a trunk line. It would be an eight-inch line, more than likely. Borup: So if everybody does to and through their property, they are putting in for their own. Once it reaches their property all they need to do is extend that trunk line themselves and there shouldn't be any latecomer's fee in that situation, should there? Each one would be bringing the sewer line to service their own parcel. Freckleton: There are a lot of what ifs. Borup: Well, no, I don't know who the latecomer is going to be paid to in that situation if everyone -- if everybody did the sewer line in front of their own property and you ran it from the comer of your property to where they needed to be, there shouldn't be anybody reimbursed. At least that would be my argument if I were in your situation. Again, I think probably someone will be handling it at a later date. I don't know that it needs to be handled before City Council. It doesn't sound like, does it? Freckleton: At some point in the future. I mean -- Borup: Okay. Any other -- or continue. Was there anything else that -- Steele: No. Other than that, I think Brad did a fairly decent job of addressing our request fora 10-foot landscape strip on the west boundary. Borup: Was that Well's property? Have you been in contact with them? Steele: No. Borup: I'm thinking that's what it was when I checked and there was a letter sent to them, so they were notified and -- Steele: We didn't make an attempt to -- Borup: I'm assuming they have no problem. That was one of the comments I had. I mean that is a City Ordinance as was stated, but, you know, a letter from the neighbor would clarify that, but they have been notified and have not had any ~~,: ,,~, ~,~ ..m„ ~ s~ ~ `'~ Fn ~ `y'~ fit,. ~ t s F ~ ~ t Y $~ ,f..: i 1 , ` : ~,, ~, > ~,~ ~~ t ' ' ~ . .;~~ `~ ;,: .~~~~ ~.3 s~t ~' ~~;r~ ,~ ~, C ~~{5 ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~:, 4 ~ ~S r.,.: {''~.~ Lf,'sy~ , ':~ x ~ ` ti -~. ; F : F < < F .tom. +Z ' +~~~ ~._'.~ r S„~ !" v 1 "' x i ~~ ° ~` S.r~ ~~ ~~' _ ~ ,, ~,, ~ °;~ ~. ~* ~~. ; {~ .~~ K ~~, S• 'F s z~l n r~ ~ ' ~, ~.~ ~ , . r w }may !t ~ ,.: ~ 1 ..: , Y .: t f 12~ J ~Y ~`i~~' 1`l. . r ,~ c , ~~ K ~~;~ 1 .~. ,: a w ~ ~ } ,~ 3 ' ,V ~r ~` ` . F:f ,~ r - v~'1T..~'+~3. ~~~ ; ~ - ~ ~ ~ f t r ~ 'Jlka f F(~' +r ~ ~ .~~~: ~ IL F ~ ?' I ~'~~ 'Nt, .. ~ y., Y ~` 1_ h i ~~ ~ ~ ~~ . '~~~ ~ ~. ~r ~~ .. ,3 .. ~-K ~~ M , A4^fl .' ~~~ J ` t.. y~~ ~~ ,z ~ +~'~~+. ~~ ~k Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~ng. February 7, 2002 Page 16 comments, so it seems logical. So then, you're saying other than the comment on the latecomer's fees on the second hookup, you agree with all the staff comments? Steele: Yes. Borup: Well, actually, the wordage you gave me just said -- at least what I wrote _ down -- they will be required to connect when available -- oh, you did add something about latecomers fees, though, didn't you? Freckleton: Yes but I think it could be worded -- what I put is applicant may. Borup: Okay. Freckleton: Not shall. May be subject to latecomer's fees. I feel like lopened a - can of worms here. Borup: I was going to say a legal term. Steele: That will get us out of here tonight. Borup: Okay. Any questions from any of the Commissioners for Mr. Steele? Centers: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The applicant, he, or she is not here? Steele: No, Centers: I have a question and I wanted to ask it the last time I heard a hotel applicant. Is there a bed tax to the City of Meridian? Does the city get anything out of - Steele: I don't know. Borup: I think in Boise it's just for the auditorium district. I don't know if there is anything additional beyond that in Boise either, is there? - Centers: So -- obviously, the recent tax levy failed in the City of Meridian. So, you know, we are looking for tax dollars. But -- so the only additional tax for this project to the City of Meridian is the fact that it's commercial and it's taxed higher than, of course, residential and that's it? Okay. Of course, the revenue generated with people staying there. Okay. Steele: You got to get your fingers in as ACRD. Centers: Right. Okay. ~ V ~A ~ '~ ~ ~, n.. ~ li # i .. ,t~yr~ ~'9 ~'S m',. .u+.: ., nyF~- i ~~ .~ j I~a^f jjF~~ ~r l 'J ~ V - ~t t t~ ~~ Wt, , ..2 ..+, jT~'p '. +c ,ti ~ 5~+d .3 y .~~ L ~~~ . , Aaf tlf~} ri.' F F~ SF 9 ' 1~' ~ z if ~ 7 ~. , '~ 1 H . . { ~t { ,~ F fx * ~ , a .g +t~ ~ ' " - - .. ~ ~ i. .,.c r 1; ~ qtr , F " ~'?;31ti ~, t u tF~? ~ , r ~1N ~ `~ ro r ~ it < ~'~'~ ~ ~, ~ ~:(~ ~ - ++~~ ,1 ;~ u b , ~'. .~ sibs - tip. r~~k ~' t i•t ~~.{~~ k ~ l ~. F r~4a- ~F ~-.~ ;z F s f ~~. ~#rr~ +C t r f ~~z`~4~`w'"e~ i i^~= H ~ yx c o-3 i.a~ ~M~* ~,~~'-+~,'" ~fi~:. ~~` s t~ r, _• ,.:~~~ ~. to ~,, _. 5,'.' ~'.. 4~~i ~ :. t ? i ~r ~k ay i .~Ry -`'~h'{. 4 ~fi'^S~'~~y"~tr _ ,4: ;~f.~G~'3 {d ~+i~ ~R a: P" "~ ~~r a ; ~I~'° ~ :yam' ~j~~_ s' ~ ~: ~ ~~~" o-~s ti~h~'^5. r, . ~ c. 4 s k t. J~ t ~ .F ~ ~ y ~' a cs1 ~ 2 ; A.T4+'.{~~ 7 _ _ .. -ay ~ s . ~ J. y ~ _ ~~.w.: f ~,~~~~ ~'~M ~ 'h r c~.~~n-"''>'{7~' ~7~.4~v ~:~"'' y3t.ax~. r~}~~ ~r~.~~1~=r.~ i~`~-r r i~~ :; ,_ F r~'~f-r ~, ~ ~` it f~~~ 1w~., ~_ "~'F'rXa~,Fi'" . "~Y ` g£ ~ r ' r l +~ 1 1 ~' ~~ e: ~ - - -; ~ : ~ d ~ _.4`.yy.,i tF Styr ~`~~ F.~.tr,~. ~~~ ~ !'! ~ '. -.7 r t ~ ,•,w~,F`y ~`f~.5. i . ~~ r ~~ ~~~''~33F ~ -. ~h ;T~vG s ~ 1~ ~yy{~'> 1 ~,~r7s7 ~ _ '~1~' .'~ •u 7`~ ~ L .~.1 inn .~~~F"1"~ ~~ 1~ ~t~~ _. ': ? •., ,.,.i;;,, „+ ....... „ n .~w:.i~.>ds'. ".2:it An -v ~h~. ~ .. ~ ,~'+~:,o-s,t u"4ior.'3~aa.Sr_.:t•~~' i~ "~_:~y 7,-v..r.,._ -rte , _ .. ~.~. ... '~ Merldlan Planning 8~ Zoning Mee~CiFig. February 7, 2002 Page 17 Borup: Okay. Any final -- Steele: Did you want us to speak any further to the requirements for cross- access, cross parking? Borup: Yes. Maybe just clarify that. It sounds like you got a note on the plat at this point. Do you feel that it's necessary -- yes, that would be a change that we'd need to make from the written comments if you want that change or do you want them to stand as they are written? Boyle: Planning Commission Chairman, Commission Members, Clint Boyle, Pinnacle Engineers. I was hoping Wes would be able to handle it all. He almost did. We are doing the engineering for the platting portion of this project and we do have a note on the plat related to cross-access, ingress-egress, cross- parking. In other words, this entire site will be kind of a package deal where the three properties have access to drive anywhere on the site and have access to parking anywhere on the site, between the offices and the hotel. So the only comment I'd have on note Number five, rather than trying to prepare a document and record it prior to the plat, I would just request the note be changed to state the applicant shall provide across-Access Easement amongst the parcels for shared parking and driveway access to the public streets. Period. Then that will be an item that the city can check, you know, make sure the note is on the plat, you know, prior to them signing the plat. Borup: Do you have any idea why ACHD worded this way? Boyle: Do you want me to speculate tonight? Borup: Sure. Boyle: This is pure speculation. Of course, I'm on the record. Maybe I shouldn't. Pure speculation. ACHD does have some new staff down there and I know that it was a new staff person that prepared the report and it was something that essentially slipped by me as far as the special recommendation to the city. Typically, ACHD will just have it in their comments that you provide across- access among the parcels and I'm not sure -- Borup: It sounds like they may have just worded it different, not trying to accomplish anything different than they have in the past then. Boyle: Right. There is -- yes. I mean there is no problem at all with ACHD, I mean they are comfortable with a note on the plat and that's typically how it's done, so I will quote that for the record. Borup: Okay. Thank you. ,,,, . ,a~; . .. . t 7~~ .; .. _. s Meridian Planning & Zoning MeeZlFig. °,t-, ,~~..,:'~ February 7, 2002 Page 18 Boyle: Thank you. Borup: Any questions from the Commissioners? Additional? = x°` Centers: Mr. Chairman. Brad, did you note that and are you fine with that? Okay. ~{ .'y`' Borup: Okay. Do we have anyone else here to testify in this application? Seeing none, Commissioners? Centers: Go ahead. Zaremba: I was going to move the Public Hearing be closed. -=~~ Centers: I second that. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES °, } Centers: Mr. Chairman -- ., ~,, ,,: Borup: Yes. This one has two -- again, he did close both Public Hearings right? Zaremba: Yes. Borup: That's what I thought. „~: '`" Zaremba: I did intended to cover CUP 01-044 and PFP 01-010. .,:< ~., ; . Borup: Mr. Centers, did you start to say something? Centers: Yes. Mr. Chairman, I would like to recommend that we approve Item No. 7 on our Agenda, CUP 01-044, request for a CUP fora 90 room hotel, one ~ single story office building, and one two story office building in a C-G zone for ~~{ Hampton Inn Hotel by Meridian Hampton Center, LLC, at the southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry Way, including all staff comments. :. S^:l Borup: I think that change would be on the -- Centers: And that was it. All the changes were related to the next item. :_ ~~ Borup: We have a motion. ~.~., Zaremba: I believe it was a 92-room hotel ;}., ;Yf ~;~~;. ~, ~i~; r. Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~ng. February 7, 2002 ~- Page 19 Centers: Ninety-two. Zaremba: I will second that. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? °~ .a, MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES r . ~~ ; Centers: Moving on. Mr. Chairman, Item No. 8 on our Agenda, I would like to y ~ '~`~~ recommend approval for PFP 01-010, request fora Preliminary/Final Plat approval for 3 building lots on 4.10 acres in a C-G zone for Hampton Inn Sub by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc., southwest corner of Allen Street and Gentry way, including all staff comments with amendments. Specifically Page three, under Preliminary Plat, Item two, to that paragraph add Per City Ordinance applicant °~ ~ would be required to hook up when available -- ,~ Borup: May be. . Centers: Oh, I'm sorry. Borup: No. Would be. Go ahead. {~~ Centers: And a a licable fees and ma underline ma be re wired to a p Y pp y -- y -- q P Y . latecomer fees. Item No. 5 under Preliminary Plat, change the wording as .~~, k -~~- follows. The applicant shall provide and record across-Access Easement among the parcels for driveway access, ingress-egress, et cetera. Page seven, under additional considerations, line two, change the 20 to 10 feet. End of - comments. °, Zaremba: Second. ~- • Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? All in favor? Any opposed? '! s .- Thankyou. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 9: Public Hearing: AZ 01-027 Request for annexation and zoning of -::~~,; 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Baldwin Park _~~ ~' by Capital Development Co. - 1/4 mile south of McMillan Rd., east . k side of Linder Road. ,~ , t ,_ ..~ Item 10: Public Hearing: PP 01-024 Request for preliminary plat approval -' ~ of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Baldwin Park by Capital Development Co. -- 1/4 mile . ,, south of McMillan Road east side of Linder Road ~~ , ";-' ~~~~ _ ., ~~;: - , ~,. .:~~; :x: ., ;~ ; ;~ ~~_ ..,y k 4f' ~<, >,r:~ ~.~ ~ s .4. :- t ~~~ t `.- -- ~~ 4 ~.._ „~,~_., Meridian Planning & Zoning Meeting. February 7, 2002 Page 20 Borup: Okay. Our last two items -- and, Brad, I don't see the applicant here. Is that true? Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, that is correct. Borup: Okay. I assume they still want to -- they didn't notify you of anything? Hawkins-Clark: I had a discussion approximately two hours ago with the applicant, who said they were on their way. Borup: Okay. Let's go ahead and open, I guess. We do have some people here, so either way we want to hear from them. I'd like to open Public Hearing AZ 01-027, request for annexation and zoning of 77.9 acres for the proposed Baldwin Park by Capital Development and the adjoining application Public Hearing PP 01-024, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres. I'd like to open both these Public Hearings and start with the staff report. Zaremba: Mr. Chairman, may I get a clarification ahead of that? We have on most of our records that the Item No. 10 is PP 01-024. I also have another document that appears to be on the same subject that said it is PP 01-025 and I just would like to get a clarification. This is a letter of transmittal dated January 31 St from the City Clerk. Smith: Chairman and Members of the Commission, I was notified by Planning and Zoning that there was a mix up on those file numbers and it is 01-024. Zaremba: The correct number is 024? Smith: Yes. Zaremba: Thank you very much. Smith: You're welcome. Borup: So the Agenda is correct, the memo is -- needs changed is that right? Okay. Brad. Hawkins-Clark: Thank you. Thank you for that correction. On Item Number 9 on the annexation, I will address those comments first. To orient you, McMillan Road is here on the north. Ustick Road is here on the south. The property, 77.9 acres on the east side of Linder Road -- the map does not reflect how this property is legally annexable. The colored items typically on our maps represent city limits and the white represents Ada County zoning. In this case, our map was not updated recently enough to reflect that Bridgetower Subdivision annexed Meridian Planning & Zoning Meetlng. February 7, 2002 Page 21 this parcel here approximately three month ago. In order to annex you need to be contiguous to city limits and in this case, they are contiguous. Centers: Did you note the comments that the Police Department doesn't think it's contiguous? Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner, I did not see that, but we do have an ordinance that has that property annexed, yes. It is contiguous at this point right here at their northwest, because of the annexation of Bridgetower. Zaremba: Would you clarify contiguous only at a point or along one whole border? Hawkins-Clark: State statute actually does not define that word. To my understanding. Maybe Counsel could clarify, but Ithink -- I don't think they define it. Moore: It only has to be connected. If it's one point, that's enough. Zaremba: So the two comer points would do it? Moore: Yes, it would. Hawkins-Clark: Yes. As Mr. Freckleton pointed out, we do have Cedar Springs application, which is another subdivision approximately 100 acres, here around the city's -- the future city park, which would also be contiguous at one point. That application has not been approved by City Council. This body had recommended approval of it, but City Council has not acted on that annexation. So at this point in time they were able to -- we have actually held this application for approximately a year until this Bridgetower Subdivision was completed and annexed and the Annexation Ordinance was published and so once it was published essentially we are obligated to begin processing their application and so that's what we did, but -- Zaremba: But am I correct that this creates an isolated island of county south of this property that's wholly surrounded by city? Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Zaremba, are you referring to this -- Zaremba: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: --group here? Zaremba: Yes. That's an island of county with no contact to the rest of the county? ~~_ ,~,.. ~~~~, .: . "~~: :, . y; , ,~ '~ F ~~t:. -~: ~# ; '~ 5~: ~.. .., , •~R~ ~~ ¢.~ ;,:; R ~~~ ^_~`y: ,, . ~~;,, Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~ng. February 7, 2002 Page 22 Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Other than across the road here, this is county property as well on the west side of Linder. None this property has been annexed. Bridgetower Subdivision had this piece, this piece, this piece, but they did not annex this -- any of these properties here on Linder, so -- the current site photos are here. Here is the north boundary looking to the east and the south boundar~r along the existing White Drain there. As you probably noticed in our February 4 staff report, we do have the proposed future middle school on this site here, about approximately 40 acres. The White Drain more or less courses along this southern boundary right here and that is where this photo was taken from. The staff report -- before I go on, February 4th, we do ask that you incorporate any of our conditions if you do move on this tonight -- we do have a recommendation that you not do a final action tonight, that you continue both Public Hearings, so that staff has an opportunity to review a revised plat based on the changes that we are asking for. I won't leave this drawing up very long, I'm sure you all have looked at it. The blueprint is a little tough to read, but I'll go -- this was a little simpler. Generally, the quick orientation -- again, here is Linder Road. They have one point of ingress-egress into this parcel on Linder and that's essentially in the middle of their parcel north and south. There is an existing residence here. This is an out-parcel that is not included as a part of Baldwin Park Subdivision and it would at this point remain county. They have a collector road that enters here that is -- does not have any houses that front on this collector road that is the standard Ada County Highway District policy. They have called this a collector back until essentially the center of the project here. They have these landscaped islands that are in the center of the road. There is an entrance here to a -- let's call it a pod of approximately 62 houses, I believe, that only has the one road in and out right there. That is the reason for the request in our report to provide -- as well as the Fire Department is asking for that -- to have another point of vehicular access to serve these 62 homes. The application is not a Planned Development, so as many of the applications that you have seen recently -- at least most of the Commissioners -- if it's a Planned Development they have to have two amenities. If it's just a straight subdivision and it's just no Planned Development, then they have to provide five percent open space, but they don't have to provide amenities. So, in this case, five percent open space is a requirement by ordinance and for the most part, they are providing that in two locations. They are providing open space on the lot here and they are providing open space on a lot -- on a lot here. Those are the two primary internal open space areas. The White Drain is here along the south -- along the full southem boundary, which does have an existing easement to -- ~, ~ in favor of Settler's Irrigation District. They are proposing just to -- it says to work r., with Settler's and to see if that's going to need to be piped or tiled or not. As you're aware, Meridian City Code does require all ditches and laterals, except for natural waterways, to be piped. Zaremba: Can I ask you a question on the open space? Hawkins-Clark: Yes. N 4~}. ~~~ . ~ is ^.. ~~5+ ~,.:;` :,; --~i'S:! x~, , .. ry ,AF.. .~ y ~~; .;:; ;+>. n r'~"-7f ~, x , ; ~f; ; Merfdfan Planning & Zoning M~g. February 7, 2002 Page 23 Zaremba: There was note or a comment in here that one of the drawings that apparently you have seen shows a double use of the open space as drainage. Has that been resolved? That doesn't sound fair to me. It should be two separate things right? Hawkins-Clark: Are you referring to the White Drain being calculated as open space and -- Zaremba: No. I think it was a comment that water runoff, settling ponds, or something like that, were counted in the open space. Borup: The Landscape Ordinance allows for that, as long as it's usable space. Hawkins-Clark: Right. They would need to demonstrate to us that the slopes of that -- that that retention pond were not such that a child would get stuck in there. It needs to be pretty flat but we do allow for those to be used -- particularly for non-nuisance water. It's just, you know, one hundred year kind of stuff and you're not going to see it. So in terms of general overlay, I think that's it. You will notice that these narrower strips right here, there are these micropaths that essentially they have provided as their open space feature to the subdivision. This is another micropath here. This area here that goes north and south, comes down to the White Drain, that's all micropath lots. Another micropath lot here. All of this is micropath. It's open approximately 20 feet in width that courses along the rear of these properties. Another one here. I have included generally the City's Ordinance on how to landscape those lots. They do -- we do ask that they be hard surface pathways in there, that they be landscaped on both sides, minimum of five feet in width, and that if your house backs up to it you have to provide a maximum of four foot high fence, so that it doesn't become a tunnel effect and create a safety problem. One other thing to point out on the application. The staff report, dated January 4~', in my discussions with Steve Arnold, who is representing the applicant, generally they are in agreement. What we have a difference on is Item Number five on Page seven. I do point out there, first of all, that they have -- they have a formal variance application that has been submitted. This body does not see those applications, that goes straight to the City Council. The reason for the variance is here up in this northeastern portion of the subdivision, this block right here, and the block length is -- exceeds 1,000 feet there and exceeds 1,000 feet here. That's -- they have submitted a variance to get the -- to exceed the 1,000 feet. What we have asked for in Number five are four additional connectivity points within the subdivision. If you will see on the bottom of that page, the first bullet to provide the three new boundary stub streets mentioned above and those are requirement of Ada County Highway District. One of those stub streets is here in this general area to the north. That would -- that's the Fire Department's request as well, so that's one of ACHD's new stub streets, so they would connect up to this property at stub. Another connection would be in this general area here. It would not be a direct extension Meridian Plannin & Zonin Me~1f . 9 9 9 February 7, 2002 Page 24 of Buckstone here, it would be more in this area, and I believe about 600 feet from the east boundary. So that would provide another stub to the south there. They have an existing stub here and an existing stub there on the east boundary and then there has been discussion about another stub street here to serve the future middle school site. That, according to the school district, they do not want. They do not want to see, as you probably saw, a stub street to their future middle school site that is vehicular in nature. They do want a pedestrian slash bicycle connection that would serve that. If you will see there is a micropath right here existing proposed and what we have discussed -- I have discussed with the applicant's representative is to -- instead of providing that vehicular, essentially insure that that micropath is 20 feet free and clear in width and hard surfaced that would allow for emergency vehicle access only into the school site. It would require a bridge. Zaremba: Is that the area where they are proposing not to pipe it as well? There is a rain there right? Hawkins-Clark: There is a drain. Zaremba: That they don't want to pipe? Hawkins-Clark: There is a drain along this bottom here, yes. That, of course, is largely the decision of Settler's Irrigation District, since they control that easement, and they are the jurisdiction that has oversight there. So the city's general policy -- and maybe Bruce can speak to that, for that 48 -- if it requires a 48 inch pipe or greater, then the City Council has waived the requirement to pipe. If it's less than a 48-inch pipe, then they would have to pipe it. So that would have to be determined by the engineer and they would need to come with a formal request if they did not want to pipe it or would demonstrate that the pipe size is that size. Zaremba: If it's not piped, then whatever bridge would go over it must have some side height or safety factors, those things? Borup: Those safety issues would need to be worked into that, yes. ~~;.. Zaremba: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: Going on on the bottom of page five, that second bullet, provide a connection between West Yosemite Drive on the west side of Lot 12 and then West Yosemite Drive on the east side of Lot 12. That is -- here is West Yosemite Drive here along the south. This is the common micropath lot here and then West Yosemite Drive continues here. It was not made clear there, but we were not asking for a vehicular connection, we were asking for a connection that is similar to this micropath up here. If you were to provide a vehicular connection here, you would essentially have about 2,000 feet of a straightaway road the full ;~.: Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 25 distance of the subdivision. So -- but we would like to see an ability to get across this subdivision on the southern side across this Lot 12 for pedestrians, rather than being forced to go up here to the main drive and around and down. So that's the second bullet there on Page five. The third bullet, provide a connection between West Crescent Street -- this is Crescent here and here. We are asking for that connection to be made to break up this long block here, which would be going up and around. It would provide some connection internally between these two pods of the subdivision. Borup: Yes. That one had me real confused. Have you got the right to lot numbers designated in your -- Hawkins-Clark: I believe Lot 17 should be the micropath lot. Borup: Okay. Hawkins-Clark: This one here. Borup: I was looking at the other lots there. Hawkins-Clark: Lot 17, Block 10, should be there, so -- Borup: Yes. Hawkins-Clark: And then the fourth bullet there, provide a third stub street to the north property line somewhere between Lot 29, Block 5, and Lot 49, Block 5. That refers to this area here in the center of the subdivision and, as mention before, Ada County Highway District is asking for a stub in this general area. Then there is an existing stub here and the distance between those two stub streets would be approximately 1,200 feet and so what we are asking for is maybe an extension of this street here that would be a third connection to the north, so that when these properties redevelop there is adequate access there. I guess I won't hit the other items in the staff report right now. I believe that we are in agreement with the rest of those, so it's mainly those connection issues, so that's all I have. Borup: Any questions from any of the Commissioners? I had one more on item Number five. You referenced three more blocks length over 1,000 feet. Is that still -- my measurements didn't show that. That's why I was wondering. Up on -- third line down on Item Number five, Page seven. Hawkins-Clark: Okay. ~~fr~. s Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 26 Hawkins-Clark: Yes, Chairman Borup -- and some of this gets down to how.one defines and measures a block. Our department staff has typically measured block lengths -- Borup: Center to center -- Hawkins-Clark: Not off the center of the street, but going off of the rear of the lot and that is for an emphasis on the pedestrian connections within the subdivision. So, for example, Block 5 I believe is -- no. This is Block 10. Let's take that as an example. If you were to begin right here on the block, this is the middle of the block, and you were to follow the rear of the lot. If you went there and then you followed up here and you measured around the rear of these lots and you went up around and back around to the point of beginning, that's all a single block. So if you -- just for example, you reside in this lot here, even though the block that -- if you were going to take the block as the street, this cul-de-sac, that certainly meets City Ordinance. In terms of getting connection between Block 10 -- that's all within Block 10, but if this person that lives here wanted to go over to this lot over here, they would be force to come down here and around on this street. The extension of Crescent would provide a direct connection between these two areas of the subdivision. So if you measure it that way, it turns out to be greater than 1,000 feet. Borup: Are you talking a pathway connection or a street connection? You only mentioned a pathway connection there. Hawkins-Clark: Right. Borup: I may be thinking two different things. I thought the 1,000-foot block length had to do with astraightaway -- Hawkins-Clark: Vehicular. Borup: Right. Is that correct? Hawkins-Clark: Well, no, we have got a one thousand feet block is if you measure from the rear of the lot. Borup: But it was also a straightaway without any connecting streets. Hawkins-Clark: Right. We have kind of -- we have used both definitions and, frankly, we could probably use some internal work on that, but, you know, we have used both. Shreeve: I have never heard of outside -- SrY _: Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 27 Borup: I don't think I have seen that either. That's why I brought that up. Perhaps the applicant may have some comment on that. You will? Okay. Hawkins-Clark: But, yes, just to clarify, I mean there is the vehicular -- and that wasn't made clear, but the West Yosemite, the second bullet, we were looking for just a pedestrian connection, but the other two were vehicular. So maybe those words need to be added. So the second bullet would provide a pedestrian `" connection between West Yosemite, the third bullet would provide a vehicular connection. Borup: Oh, you were intending on a vehicle there? You're worried about a car driving to see his neighbor going another few hundred feet when they have got a pathway they can just walk? I guess the answer is yes. Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Borup: Okay. Any other questions from the Commissioners? Zaremba: Well, I marked about ten places where staff suggested that the plat needed to be redrawn. That is still pending? That has not happened yet? Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Zaremba: Okay. One other thing -- and I'm not sure how we deal with this. The Joint School Disti~ ict has said their schools in that neighborhood are already overcrowded and they are not likely to be able to serve the additional students without busing them some distance. Does that have any impact on our decision ,~.. about whether this ought to be happen or not? Centers: Commissioner Zaremba, that's perfect timing, because I had pulled this letter out of the Hearthstone application where we approved the sub with two lots, with one existing house. We had one existing home and it's the same letter. If the school district is going to pull the form letter out of the box and send it to us for every subdivision, whether it two lots or 100, I'm not going to even pay attention to it. This letter was on the Hearthstone Subdivision where there are two lots and Wendel Bigham signed it just like he did for a subdivision that's going to have -- how many lots? Hawkins-Clark: Two hundred seventy-two. Centers: Right. Same letter. I don't take any credence in the letter whatsoever. I have heard the school district just the other night, you build them, and we will school them, something to that effect, so -- Borup: I think what they are saying is, you know, they do have a problem. I mean -- ~~t ;. ^ r;'r~.;;_.. Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 zr~; ,, Page 28 . Mathes: The problem is everywhere, though. L ; `;. ' Borup: Right. They just want us to be aware of it. I guess the extenuating circumstances here, they do have a school site adjoining this property for a new junior high, I believe, is what they are -- _q ?r': _ Mathes: Isn't there a new school site within just -- Zaremba: Proposed. ~~ ~. 3 ~ .-~ Borup: Oh. Mathes: Right. ~4 ~~ Borup: Right now there is a junior high. Zaremba: So we create the short-term plan. They have a -- the school district r ~'' ~ ~ has a plan to eventually solve it. Borup: They do now. Zaremba: Okay. ~` Borup: And just like every other plan, it just takes. money. i ~ ~I '~.~' ,' r Zaremba: Okay. Impact fees. Borup: On that same thing, you may -- there was a statement there that there was an existing landlocked parcel. Is that the one in the center to the north? I didn't see any that was landlocked, that's why -- oh, to the south. Is that the ~''~ one? Or tell me which one. ~~~ ~ ~ ~'~£ Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, no, actually that is an error. I did not see in my review this flag right there. Borup: That was my first assumption. Hawkins-Clark: So this piece is the one I was referring to, which has a flag, so it does have legal frontage on McMillan Road. ~' `'' ~~ Borup: Okay. Thank you. Any other comments, Brad? Hawkins-Clark: No. Borup: Would the applicant like to -- or the representative like to come forward? Are you prepared for a presentation? ry~`i i ' ; `3 r1ro~, '4 r: - .rte: _'., `. ~ .. 0 '~ _ Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 29 Arnold: Oh, yes. Borup: Okay. Arnold: I have prepared a position statement. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, for the record Steve Arnold, I'm with Briggs Engineering, 1800 West Overland Road, Boise, Idaho. I'm here representing Capital Development for Baldwin Park Subdivision. I apologize for my tardiness in getting you that position statement, I just finished that up tonight. I got your report I believe late Tuesday and I worked on some of that yesterday. To go through a brief site information, again, we are proposing 272 lots, 16 common lots, for a total of 288 lots. Open space I have calculated, not including the White Trunk or the required buffering along Linder, to be 7.5 acres. As you can see, we are providing a myriad of micropaths within the subdivision, hopefully to break up some of the block lengths and allow for a variance of those. We are proposing a pedestrian connection between the school site and our subdivision. We will be -- at this time we are not sure if we are piping the Settler's -- excuse me, the White Drain. That will be based on the Settler's Irrigation District requirement. Also as determined by the City Engineer, if it is greater than 48 inches we are not generally required to pipe that. We will be moving the access road along the -- or currently it's along the northern boundary of that drain. It will be relocated south of -- on the southern portion of that drain. Part of it on our property, part of it on the schools. The part to the -- where the school is not adjacent, it will be all on our property. Average lot size here is about 8,112 square feet. We have got a mixture of -- Borup: Excuse me. That's a true average? Arnold: That's -- I'll go -- I'll follow up on that, but that is a true average. I had my staff calculate it before we came here tonight, of which we have got 6,500 -- or 6,500 square feet or approximately -- there is 34 lots 6,500 and greater. We do have several that are less than 6,500. We will modify those to meet the minimums. 7,000 square feet and greater we have 93 lots. Eight thousand and greater we have 102. Nine thousand and greater we have 23. The 10,000 and greater we have 20 and mixed in there is some 12 and 13 thousand. I didn't show those. Yes, that is the average lot size, which is similar to the R-4 zone. We believe this it does comply with the Comp Plan, we are supportive of the staff for the annexation requirements, and that's something that we are in agreement. We have looked at the transportation issues. The main road there off of Linder will be designated as a residential collector, no front-on housing. We will be provide a center turn lane out on Linder Road to help the left turns into the site. Sidewalk will be provided meandering along that residential collector, along with a meandering pathway along Linder Road. To the north, we have got undeveloped parcels. To the south, we have a school undeveloped. To the south and east, we have Cedar Springs, which is a similar density of 3.49 units per acre. `` r'; > 4~ 1 S ~ ~ ~ ~f 1~r. ::~ .~ r ~~:,. ~;; -- _'' ~~~ ~ =_v, ?y~- .:j h ~~ r..:: ;, ~,~ ~~{ Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~fg. February 7, 2002 Page 30 Centers: That is proposed at this point. Arnold; Correct. Proposed. Approved by this board, I believe. Centers: Yes. Arnold: So we do have a similar density then. South of that you have Tumble Creek -- or Turtle Creek, I believe it is, Numbers 2 and 3, which are the 8,000 with the R-4. That's on the other side of Ustick there. I guess basically the only issues that we have with this project and the staff review comments -- and I will briefly hit on those -- is the interconnectivity within the subdivision. The additional stub street to the north, and on that behalf basically when I first looked at the subdivision. I, having experience with the transportation end, I looked and I immediately recommended to the client that we provide a stub street to the north off of that first loop area, a stub street to the south, and then an additional stub street to the south on the other portion of the development. Not only my experience with ACHD, but part of the North Meridian Developers Group that's coming up with this grandiose idea that we are going to be presenting to the City Council next Tuesday. The intent of the interconnectivity and the connection within -- I should say within the subdivision and external is probably to provide access to other subdivisions, other developments, without having the pedestrian or the vehicle driving out onto the arterials to get to another subdivision or the site or internal to the subdivision. So the idea is when you're transportation planning you're looking at the issue of the interconnection so that you can avoid additional trips out onto the arterials and or excessive trip lanes. Hence, I'm getting to the point we are providing two stub streets to the north. The third one that's proposed there, approximately at the center of the subdivision, we don't believe is warranted. 1 think that it would cause more negative effect and than positive effect. As you can see there at the north, the 35 foot wide micropath going east and west was sufficient to help break up that block length. We are in agreement with the -- I have talked with my client. We are willing to provide an east-west connection there down at Yosemite Drive for pedestrian, but we don't want -- we are in agreement with staff, we don't want to do a vehicular connection. If you did that, you're going to get almost ahalf-mile straight shot. That will encourage speeding and it does create additional pedestrian vehicular conflict. We would support at this point -- it's not our preference -- an east-west pedestrian connection between Crescent and -- on the west and Crescent on the east. We don't want to do that as a vehicular connection. Again, it creates straight shots and I don't think that it's necessary. I think we have provided adequate vehicular connection within the subdivision and I think that adding that doesn't provide any additional benefit. The pedestrian will suffice to allow the pedestrians so that they don't have to walk over 1,000 feet. Another issue is the question about piping the drain. Again, I'd like that to be a requirement of Settler's Drain -- Settler's Irrigation District. We are going to have to comply with them and we are going to have to either pipe it or leave it open in a fashion that they agree to. If we do leave it, open we will have to put Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 31 pedestrian bridges, and/or we could pipe it -- we could try to pipe it where we would have pedestrian crossing. So that would be our preference, that the City make that as a condition that we comply with the Settler's Irrigation District for their requirements on the White Drain. The perimeter fencing, I know that that wasn't an issue and we are in agreement with stafFs comments, but right now, the lots currently backed up to the White Drain. We don't want to have to put a perimeter fence south of -- at the border of the subdivision. We'd like to put that, as the Commission has approved in other situations, along the south border of the developed lots. Therefore, we can leave that as an open amenity and not boxing it off in the future with other homes, putting a fence, and then you have this long corridor of basically a no man's land and we'd like to keep that kind of open. We would request that we leave the fence at the southern end of the developed lots. I think those were all the issues that the -- that we have with the development. Again, we are in agreement, except for a lot of the interconnection issues with the staff report. We will modify the Preliminary Plat prior to City Council. I know the recommendation is that they defer this item for one month. If it is this board's direction that they want to see these modifications prior to moving it on to City Council, I would request that we get scheduled at the next Planning and Zoning meeting, so that we are not put off a whole other month. Within those two weeks, we can make the changes showing the stub streets and all the other issues that were requested, the stubs, the phasing lines, all that work, we are in agreement, we can make those changes. So with that I will stand for any questions the Commission may have. Borup: Questions for Mr. Arnold? Centers: Yes. I had a question, Mr. Chairman. Borup: Commissioner Centers. Centers: Why would you have two lots with less than 6,500 square feet within your Preliminary Plat? Arnold: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Centers, I have got a response. We weren't smart enough to check the plat before it went before you. Centers: Did you know you had two lots with less than 6,500 square feet? Arnold: Yes, I do now. This project came -- Centers: I was searching for more, but two just jump right out, but I know the minimum is 65. ~s ~~; Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~rg. February 7, 2002 ".; h, a Page 32 ~,: Centers: I don't have any other questions. ~ ~' Zaremba: We had lengthy discussions about our requirements regarding Preliminary Plats at the last couple meetings and I think we are required to see it in a more final form. If we were to schedule that for our meeting of the 21St, staff needs to have your copies 10 days before that. Would you be able to have new .._ ; copies to them by the 11t"? That's like four days from now. Arnold: I'm not sure how to pronounce your name, Commissioner -- 4.. k . ~~~'j. - Zaremba: Zaremba. Amold: Zaremba. I'm sorry. This is my first hearing in front of you. We will make it so. We will get what staff needs 10 days prior to hearing. {,_ `'' Centers: I think we need to address the staffs concerns, though. They have =~.~, other applicants, other issues, and do you want to tackle it if he gets it to you? I ~'' `~' mean the second meeting of the month is our normal meeting for postponed issues or applicants. I would rather have the staff answer that question and not the applicant. Borup: I had the same question. It looks like -- and maybe that needs to be ' r` ironed out. At this point the applicant is talking about -- they are proposing adding two more stub streets and a pathway connection to the school. Is that -- I ~, y ,~.` ~~ mean without changing any of the street layouts, I mean it doesn't look like it's that substantial of a change to me, that every -- does every agency need to review it again I guess just because it says so in the City Ordinance or -- I mean how much review is needed for a change of that magnitude? I'm just adding that to Commissioner Center's question. ~-,yp; Moore: Bruce, are you looking at me? _~ _ .:~ ~ `~-' Freckleton: You looking at me? Mr. Chairman. Mr. Moore, the only thing I was kind of wondering is there are -- you know, the other agencies have commented regarding stub streets and the like. If this plat is changed and brought back before us do we need to send it back to those agencies for their review? _~r Moore: I think we've had this discussion before that the statute is not clear on ;~ j`' `'. what a substantial change is and that we made a determination that if this body ~ " determined it was not substantial, then it wasn't, and I'm happy with that. , ~~ : ~~ Borup: So maybe just a little more clarification from the applicant on what you would be proposing. I mean at this point you said another stub street to the north in the middle of White Sands, the middle of that block; is that correct? Amold: Correct. ~. ~~ __ r~+ ~~?+ js f;>~"., 7,, ~~~ o Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. February 7, 2002 Page 33 Borup: Somewhere in there? ',. Arnold: Yes. { ,: Borup: And so I assume you're going to be either eliminating a lot or shifting lots to do that? Arnold: Mr. Chairman, it will be probably a combination of both we will have to -j:~~' eliminate and as Brad pointed out, is that ACHD, they have acted on this so they directed us application with the recommendations to provide these stubs ;4~ , to do it, so I don't think that we need to go back before them on that issue. We would be proposing one stub street to the north, one additional stub to the south. What you have before you tonight I'm showing a pedestrian connection to the south and we could add that east-west pedestrian correction between Yosemite Drive on the east and Yosemite Drive on the west. ~`~~~ Centers: Well, according to this you have five -- still have five stub streets. .. ~~ .~, ~~~~> ~~ Arnold: Correct. Centers: According to your memo. ~n Arnold: Correct. Centers: Three right now. Or two. w t~ Amold: Three. Centers: Three right now, so two more. <~~~ Borup: Staff has recommended one more to the north that they are saying they'd ~~-~ rather not do, so other than -- so that's really the only -- as far as stub streets, ' ~` that's the only thing that -- would that be correct, Brad? As far as stub streets, ~.~~ that one extra to the north is the only thing that would be different from the staffs i recommendation? Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, plus one internal. Borup: Right. Well, maybe we need to discuss that one. ~,~; Zaremba: Yes. There are actually two more pedestrian accesses talked about, I ~}~ ~~~ think. Borup: Right. I meant just outside the subdivision is what Iwas -- ;,..~, ~~ :.x~; ,~,;: ,~,:: ,. .. ;~: ; ., _ - .. ~ . ,, „~ ~~ . , ;~ ~ti ., ,.. '~"r *~ a ~.~ '~'° ~~ ~..,~,;. ~:= • Merldlan Planning & Zoning Mee~Pfg. February 7, 2002 Page 34 Mathes: What about the stub street for the fire -- ~~,: Borup: Right. I said pedestrian pathway. Would you like to address that, the emergency access to the school site? Arnold: To the south there? Borup: Yes. Arnold: They have over -- I estimated well over 1,000 feet of frontage. Our preference wouldn't be to be providing them emergency access. I don't think that they will need it from our subdivision. ACHD will grant them -- in the past they have granted numerous times emergency access where ever emergency access is needed and I had a talk with Brad tonight, as Fire Departments, when they get built, ACHD doesn't look at their access. You don't want to restrict the developments -- or the Fire Department's access. Whenever it usually comes to fire access, ACHD is pretty lenient when granting that. In this case, the fire access into the school site will comply with their policy. They have got a ton of frontage. Mathes: There is one fire access, though, off of Block 5. Number 10 in the -- Arnold: Which one is that? Borup: Lot 9, Block 5. Mathes: Up top. Borup: Oh. That's -- isn't that the same one that ACHD said they wanted also? Mathes: They had one moved over towards the side -- Amold: This one? We are providing a stub there. Centers: Yes. In your memo. Borup: Which is the same one ACHD wanted. Arnold: Correct. Borup: Okay but isn't that the same one that the Fire Department was referring to also? Arnold: Mr. Chairman, if I understand correctly, the Fire Department was asking that a stub street be provided up here, because this parcel was considered to be landlocked. It's not landlocked, but we are providing stubs streets to that parcel. So regardless of the Fire Department's issue, we are providing a stub there. s_ -~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~Tfg. February 7, 2002 Page 35 Borup: Okay. I guess the other issue maybe -- I don't know whether we want to discuss it now or later, but that would be the vehicle access between the two ~~~,~ Crescents. That was the other request -- r ~ "' "~ Zaremba: Vehicle or pedestrian? Borup: Vehicle is what staff was requesting. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, if I could just clarify that. Given that this is not .<, ` a Planned Development, it's not like we have great latitude with adding a bunch of conditions. I mean -- so we are simply trying to enforce the ordinance and, ~~: , ' granted, ordinances are open to interpretation. In this case this is the way that , ; z ,fi staff has interpreted the 1,000-foot block length to be broken up and so we are simply just stating what we believe the ordinance is stating. Borup: And that's why I brought it up to start with. I don't think I have ever seen it interpreted that way. ~•x ~' Hawkins-Clark: To measure block length along the rear of the lot line? ~ ~ ~` Borup: Now when there are curves and angles. On the straightaway blocks, yes, but not when -- not when there is that many curves and angles. I may be wrong, but I would suspect there are a lot of other subdivisions that are in the . - same circumstances. _~=;;, Shreeve: I agree. That's -- I have never heard of that. Therefore, I don't know if I agree with a street through there, but maybe putting some kind of a pathway ' Y r ~ connecting, I don't think that would be an impractical -- but I don't know about ,, <::. putting a street through there. Borup: And I -- and that may be an appropriate spot. I wonder how many pathways this subdivision needs. Shreeve: Yes. Yes. I mean there again -- t,, Borup: I mean if the purpose of pathways is to walk and get some exercise, do you put more pathways in so they don't have to walk another 200 feet? But that - -you know, that kind of is a -- and, Steve, didn't you say that you were looking at adding a pathway in that area anyway or you would open to it or -- '~ `. Amold: Mr. Chairman, we would be open to that more so than we would a street } connection. That to me makes more sense. I think we have got plenty of streets. '.=~~ I think that the pathways we have got, again, are sufficient, but if it's the direction of this Commission -- or if you're looking for the pathways or a connection, we'd prefer it be a pathway, than a vehicular connection. ,f•1 -. ~~. ~ -~ ~,~ F.a ~k::. .~. ,~£ ki ,. 3 `..~~~a`11 Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~lrg. February 7, 2002 Page 36 Shreeve: You know, even whether you went straight across or just -- you know, what -- from the East Crescent just one way, so at least they could come in, up, and out, even though there would be some coming around about - of course a pathway typically is just for pleasure of walking. You're not necessarily -- Borup: Wanting to go -- Shreeve: Yes. Zaremba: I think we are talking like maybe there? Shreeve: I'm just talking one lot like -- Arnold: I believe we have got some width there that we can play with if need be. That's something that would be -- Zaremba: And the other one that you were talking about -- Amold: That one. Zaremba: Down there right? Arnold: Correct. Maybe that -- makes a nice jogging subdivision. Borup: Well, I don't know that we have seen that many pathways in a subdivision this size before. It's got a lot already. Centers: How many square feet is that open space? Amold: 45,236. Centers: How about that one? A little smaller? Arnold: This one is actually a little bit larger 78,386. Centers: This one right here? Amold: Correct. This is the area that would be utilized for overflow for storm drains. It's the -- we will be providing it such that it's the four to one twelve minimum. We will be providing -- we will meet the minimums, which are required in the Landscape Ordinance. It only handles the 100-year floods, not the nuisance water. We'll treat the water before it gets in there with sand and grease traps. Centers: Brad, you never answered the original question. ui~~ R'. ~.- R C'x' ~, . ,~~ r,, ` : ~~ ~- ~~E `r ~~~ ~ ~. F. ,, :<>~ ~, ~=: `;:F T M~ 4 ~~. Meridian Planning & Zoning MeeZRfg. February 7, 2002 Page 37 Hawkins-Clark: I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question? Centers: If we postpone this until the 21St, does that give you enough time to get together with the engineer and the developer and iron out the wrinkles and then - Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Centers, we need 10 days prior to. Centers: You had requested -- Hawkins-Clark: Right and, frankly, that was given just past experience on the amount of time it takes to send these back to the engineers and have them get a revision and get ten copies made and get copies to everybody and we just didn't expect that to happen in four days. If they can get it to us 10 days prior to the next meeting, that's what we want, so -- it doesn't really matter. Your next meeting is a fairly light agenda, so if -- we are certainly open to reviewing it. Borup: Brad, are you -- have we already reached the cutoff for the March meeting? Will there be any additional items on that agenda? Hawkins-Clark: No, there will not. The March 7t" meeting? Borup: Yes. Zaremba: March 7t" is pretty full. Hawkins-Clark: The cutoff is past. Borup: I thought we had only like four items or more on that. Hawkins-Clark: March 7t" is quite full. Borup: Okay. So - Shreeve: Let's go to the Public Hearing and maybe postpone that for a minute. Borup: Yes and you will have some time at the end anyway. Okay. We'd like to continue with any public testimony. Those that would like to come forward. Fisher: Frank Fisher. I live at 4450 North Linder, which is directly north of this where they are proposing their last stub street. I'd like to know what kind of fence, first of all, will be put between us and them. I'd also like to know -- there is a road that runs down along that side -- Borup: And, Mr. Fisher, your property is the one that's got the little flag going to Linder or is it the piece in the back? 0 Merldlan Planning ~ Zoning Mer'~fg. February 7, 2002 Page 38 Fisher: No. It's right on the right -- right on the -- Borup: Okay. The large one or the small square? Fisher: It's both of those. Borup: Okay. You own both parcels? Fisher: Yes. Borup: Okay. Fisher: Along between us -- right now there is a road -- there is a main ditch runs down through there and then there is a concrete ditch that feeds that property there. I don't know -- I was curious if that road is part of their stub -- their planned subdivision or if that road is a right of way or -- I don't know that part. Borup: Okay. We will clarify that and that road is not on your property? Fisher: It's not on my property, it borders. my property. It borders my property and the ditch that runs the full length of that. Borup: Your two properties abut and it's not on yours that -- Fisher: I don't know. Well, see, on the other side of their property there is a right of way that runs through there for the irrigation. Borup: Okay. Fisher: But it runs down that drain -- what they call the White Drain, I guess. I'm just curious on that part. Also they say that the property has to be adjacent -- what Iheard that the property had to be adjacent to the property trying to get annexed into the thing. Well, you're talking a county road between the two properties and they are only touching barely on the corner. Borup: Right. Fisher: That is legal? Borup: Yes. Fisher: Okay. I just wanted to clarify that also. Also, what are they planning -- I'd like to know what they are planning on doing with Linder Road to accommodate the traffic. The traffic on Linder Road now is horrendous now. You can hardly get across to get your mail. Are they planning on -- what are they ~;~, :_ d"[;:- ~i tt: Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~fg. `, ~~ ~.~ February 7, 2002 Page 39 planning on doing to the keep cars from backing up in front of my house trying to get into the subdivision that they are talking about? Right now we can't get across the road as it is and all -- everything heading south crossing in front of my {~ house is going to be stopped there trying to turn into that subdivision. If they have only got one access there and they put 300 -- 272 houses in there, you're talking a lot of vehicles trying to make that turn in front of there. I'll never get in t ~~~~ ~ my driveway or out of my driveway, either way. Borup: Okay. We'll get some answers on that. Fisher: Other than that, I think that's about all I got. I'd just like to know those ~-= ~= - answers. -- ~ Borup: Okay. Just a clarification on a couple items. You want to know --did you ~- ~; say you had some questions on this stub street or -- Fisher: Well, no. I'm assume that's going to -- I just want to know if that's all going to be fenced off from my property and how much trouble I'm going to have, '`, = ,z~~,~ - because I have farm animals out there. Borup: Right. ` ~~ Fisher: And this is still a farm area all out through there and they are still farming that property right there and there is a lot of people with a lot of animals right ,. through there and they are not always in, but I want know what kind of a fence there is going to be across there. .y: S t ~ Borup: Okay. Does your property end at the curb line -- ~~ Fisher: Yes. To the north. Borup: -- to the east? Fisher: To the north of it. It's on the east side of Linder. ,,~,_ Borup: No. On the east side of your property. That's where the line kind of ~;~ ~ curves there -- ,;y ::~~ Fisher: The curved line, yes. ~' Borup: Okay. ;~;'Y Fisher: We also -- well, we also rent that other piece that's back there, but that's _ not mine, I just rent it. ?}~ ~. ~ .- Borup: The one with the -- the flag lot? ;~;,: 4F}~~_: ~4i.; rr?`; ' ~ ~ ; Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~lrg. O , ~ February 7, 2002 ,;.,;,. Page 40 Fisher: Yes. Right there. Borup: Okay. Well -- and I don't know if the applicant stated exactly where that -~ stub street is going. I had the impression it was basically between the two r, parcels. Close? Have you got a preference or would you just as soon not have the stub -- Fisher: I'd just as soon not have any on my place. Borup: So you would rather have the stub street go through the other parcel? ~;: Fisher: Yes. _ Centers: Well, it wouldn't be on your place. . ~~ ~:_ Fisher: No. I understand that. I mean basically -- people have a tendency to make paths through those things, you know, sometimes. Centers: A lot of time they put a barricade and, you know, it would be °~~`' advantageous -- there is pros and cons. ~~~ ~~ ~= Fisher: Yes. Centers: But I think it might be advantageous for you. Borup: But it sounds like they were planning on doing it further to the east L+ anyway, so it would probably be off your property, from what I understand, and '' ~ we will clarify that. Okay. We'll get some answers for that. s ~~~~~ ~ Fisher: Okay. Thank you. Borup: Thank you. Do we have someone else that signed up? Converse: Tawnya Converse. I live at 4550 North Linder, just north of Mr. :;r~- Fisher's property that he was just talking about. I just have a quick question. Why R-8 instead of R-4? Most of the other subdivisions, including the , .y Bridgetower, are R-4. ~~ , ~ Borup: Yes and the applicant has addressed that. I don't know if any of the Commissioners have any comments. ,;,.. Converse: He said that the lot sizes were similar and -- Borup: Well, the overall average --the overall average is --the reason needed to ,; ~~ fit with this -- with this project, the reason it needed to be R-8 is some of the lots ~,,. xa~;;: ~~r;~ r=-~:ti: A,. -. ~:~:;; P '~} _;,`__ >~,< $~~r +~ ~~~ ~. ,3~r '' ; Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~rg. February 7, 2002 Page 41 were smaller and some of them were larger, but to have that variety of lot sizes it needed to have that zoning. Converse: Another thing is I was here during the whole Bridgetower deal and this plan looks really limited as far as just the one road off of Linder for all those homes. I remember all the rigamarol and everything that Bridgetower went through and access off this road and that road and how many houses went through one access and how many cars pass by everybody's home and this just looks like a lot houses going out one road. Borup: And that's why additional stubs streets were being asked for, so that there would be six points eventually out of this subdivision. Converse: What is the time frame for this? Borup: I don't know that. We can get an answer if you like. Converse: That's it. Thank you. Borup: Okay. Any questions from the Commissioners? Do we have anyone else that would like to testify or ask any questions? Okay. Steve, I guess it's your turn again. Did you get some of those notes down or -- Arnold: Yes. I guess I'll start with Mr. Fisher's comments. Borup: Yes. Arnold: The road along the north -- I'm not exactly sure what road that is along our common boundary, if there is. Is it east west? Fisher: It runs east west. Borup: I think it's kind of like just an access road for the property or something. His main question was on the fence, what type of fence was going to be along that north boundary. Arnold: We are providing a perimeter fence, cedar, six foot high, dog-ear cedar fence along -- as well as for each phase as required by the staff. The Linder traffic -- to help accommodate the traffic turning into the site we are doing a center tum lane out on Linder Road to take in the left turn movements and so that shouldn't be an issue. We are adding additional traffic out there. ACHD has standards for a two lane minor arterial, approximately 14,000 vehicle trips per day where they have atwo-lane arterial. This road has 6,182 existing vehicles trips, so we are adding 2,720 trips to it, so we are well within capacity. In long term out here, I know that part of this North Meridian Developers Group, we are looking at options of taking impact fees from the Highway District and building Meridian Planning & Zoning Meg. o ~r.` e~7 ,_ ~~ n r-;~;_ ;; :; =°r, ;:,~ ,,~-; ,:: t t, :~:.;~ ', ;; ` W l~ a+ .i ~~ } ~4sr rFrA~ , February 7, 2002 Page 42 streets or wider sections. The District is looking at LID's to do the roadway improvements. So there are some longer-term solutions out there. In the short term, we are not overburdening it based on ACHD's standards. I know it's perceived that you have got a lot of traffic out there and we will be adding to it. Most of the traffic will be going southbound, some will be going -- some from the north. Borup: But at this point you're having a center tum lane both directions from the access point? Arnold: We will have a center turn lane for southbound left tum movement into the site. Borup: Right. You don't need it for northbound, do you. Arnold: And then going to the stub issue, we are -- based on ACHD requirements, we are providing a stub that will be to that ten acre -- I believe it's the Huffman parcel, so it shouldn't affect Mr. Fisher's property. However, I'm assuming once that Huffman redevelops there will be interconnection between the sites. Mrs. Converse, I believe? Borup: Maybe one other question Mr. Fisher had, a question on that irrigation line that was between the properties. Amold: I'm not familiar with that line, but if it is on our properly, we are required to pipe it, so -- Borup: And if they are accessing water out of it, then that also is -- Arnold: We cannot interrupt his access to that based on not just city ordinance, but a long history of water rights issues. We won't be disrupting that usage. If we have to pipe it, he will be able to be required -- he will be receiving the same amount of water he did prior to our development. If I may, I'll move on to Mrs. Converse's issues. Why the R-4? Basically, the R-4, as opposed to the R-8, R-4 has a minimum requirement, unless you do a PUD, of 80-foot frontages, 40 foot along comer lots. Our frontages are narrower, so we are providing within the sub some deeper lots. That's why eventually we went with the R-8, instead of in a PUD. Basically it was for frontages and provides some use within the subdivision between 6,500 and 13,000 square feet that we have, as opposed to, again, the one access point that was a concern out there, we are providing additional stub streets that will give future outlet to the subdivision, so that shouldn't be an issue in the long term. Borup: I think her other question was on -- if there is any approximate time frame at all or is that up to market conditions? Time frame on development. ~. - --- --- - ~w~ ;' ~~~ ;r~~ >~ '~iy~.:, Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~lRfg. O February 7, 2002 Page 43 Arnold: I'll just say, yes, basically. When those stub streets will be constructed, it will depend upon the market and we will have a phasing plan to you Monday. Zaremba: There was a question from staff also about phasing, too. Arnold: Yes. We will have that Monday. Borup: So at this point you don't have an approximate build-out time frame then? Arnold: No. The typical subdivision as far as -- I mean five to eight years total build out at current market. Centers: What's the -- go ahead, Mr. Chairman. Borup: I was just --did you get all your questions answered, Mr. Fisher? Fisher: One more question -- Borup: We need to get you on the record, though. Fisher: Where is the sewer coming from for all this stuff? It isn't -- there is nothing out there yet. Borup: Yes. Go ahead. Unless Bruce wants to, but -- yes. I think the right of way is -- I mean the design is done. Go ahead. Arnold: The sewer is coming from the White Drain across from Linder Road. I believe your guys are 90 percent done with the design and -- or 80? I don't know what it is. It's coming. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, I think maybe -- Borup: You weren't aware it was planned into this property specifically? Fisher: Yes. I wondered when and where. I heard it was coming across where the White Drain is, but I just wondered when. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the -- as we stated in our comments, the design is in our review right now from our consultants. We anticipate that contract will be let for the construction and we anticipate the construction will commence the White Drain sometime in the month of April. It's about a 180-day contract, so it's going to take some significant time to get that trunk line in. Like Steve said, it does come -- this project, the White Drain Trunk, starts on Ten Mile Road, has to come all the way through the section between Ten Mile and Linder and, you know, make it all the way through. That's where sewer is coming from. F ~'.~~ ':J, ;: Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~l'rg. February 7, 2002 Page 44 Borup: Did you have any other -- Arnold: I guess in closing I'd like at minimum -- at best, we'd like to get somewhat sort of approval of some recommendations tonight for City Council. It doesn't look like that's the direction, but we don't want to be put a month out. Put the burden back on Briggs to get something to these guys by Monday. Centers: I had a question, Mr. Chairman. How many feet -- well, let's use this -- from that point to that point? I tried to look on my plat and I wasn't quite sure. Borup: Well, from the center -- Centers: Their ownership -- right. No. No. Their ownership -- frontage on Linder Road. Arnold: Mr. Chairman, if you'd like we can answer. Approximately 886 feet or 868. Hawkins-Clark: 860. Arnold: 860. >:_~, Centers: You know, your comment regarding the stub streets and -- I think you have said would provide future ingress and egress. You have got one ingress and egress point and to me I don't like it. I have got to be very honest with you. I would hate to be this person way back here and trying to get out of that sub, you know. It -- you know, when I looked at the plat initially it just -- I think you need more ingress and egress. I really do. I mean the stub streets are great, but, you know, you can't go in and out of those stub streets and you mentioned yourself in the future six, eight years, I don't know. I just got to be very honest with you, I just -- I have a problem with the access off Linder Road and I have to agree with Mr. Fisher, you have got people coming in and out of there when you're built up and the property around you is not. You have got all those homeowners trying to get in and out -- I think of my own sub, Sportsman Pointe off Overland. We have got two accesses and I don't think we have that much frontage, I really don't. We have two accesses not including the accesses off Locust Grove and through Hunts Bluff, et cetera, et cetera. I mean I can get out of that subdivision five, six different ways. This sub I'm stuck. There is one way in and one way out. That's just my comment when you come back. Borup: Would you -- did ACRD have any policy on this type of thing? What's their preference? Arnold: Mr. Chairman, they have reviewed it, they limit -- I mean their standard policy is to limit the number of access points on collectors and arterials. We are ~.;. , ~~s: :2.:,' ~;' _~ `F:.,:: ~~ ~ .: ~~: ~a~-, Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~rg. February 7, 2002 Page 45 providing future interconnectivity to another subdivision, they see that as meeting their requirement. Borup: What are we looking for on access on -- Centers: They don't want to add to it? Arnold: I'm not exactly certain what they are doing now. I knew that they reviewed this and it was sufficient. Borup: And the reason I asked, Mr. Centers, I know that's kind of the direction they are going in a lot of other areas. They want to limit the access when it comes time -- I mean maybe I'm assuming things -- when it comes time to warrant it, then you have got the traffic light at one location and you don't have a lot of access points along that mile. I don't know that this is where a traffic light would be, within 30 feet, but it seems like on other properties they are trying to -- Centers: If that's the case and they only want one -- Borup: Right. I don't know. That's why (questioned -- I asked. Centers: I don't know. They might. Borup: Is that the official policy or just kind of heading that way or what? Centers: Then I would think it might come down to marketability of the homes on the interior part of that sub. Arnold: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Centers, I mean the two access points -- ACHD would look at two access points when you meet a certain traffic threshold. I'm not sure that a secondary access out on Linder would help anyone on the southeast corner or the northeast comer. They still have to travel through the whole entire subdivision. From a traffic standpoint, ACHD looked at it and the one access point was -- Centers: Yes but you're going to have two ways to get out at 7:30 in the morning or whenever people are going to work. You know, I could see these people being backed up here trying to get out onto Linder into the interior of the subdivision can't you? Arnold: I don't think, Commissioner Centers, that the peak hour traffic at this point will back up that much. Eventually -- that's probably a prime location for a traffic signal, because of its location between McMillan and Ustick. When it does get bad enough, that's when they would do something like that. At this point, if it did warrant a traffic signal, ACHD would require it of this development. }.t r"` ~, x, :_~,, Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~Rg. February 7, 2002 Page 46 Centers: And it may come down to the marketability of the lots and the homes. Arnold: And that may be something that we'd look at. Hawkins-Clark: Excuse me. Chairman Borup, if I could just throw out one thought on that. One thing the city has done on situations like this is place a maximum number of occupancy within the subdivision before a second ingress/egress point is available. ~ Centers: Or Phase two, Phase three. Hawkins-Clark: Or Phase two. Right. I mean the assumption here -- we haven't seen a phasing plan, but the assumption -- I mean you are going to build from Linder east right? I mean it's just going to happen that way and so, you know, you get up to 150 lots and that's it and then until one of those stub streets can go out to Linder Road, then that's it. I just looked, by the way, on -- Sportsman's Pointe has about 1,600 feet of frontage on Overland, just about twice this. So in terms of vehicular -- one thing to bear in mind, imagine in 15 years ACHD -- this is a 96 foot right of way, two through lanes, and -- I mean four through lanes and a center tum lane, that's Eagle Road. The idea, you don't want -- you want to keep those points as restricted as possible on streets like that until you get signals. I mean that's the whole idea. So -- yes. Bruce is recommending possibly, unless the capacity of Linder Road is increased, you know, you could add a condition like that. We did not put that in our staff report, but it could be something like a maximum of dwelling units. I believe on Woodbridge we did 150 dwelling units, which would be 1,500 vehicle trips and then until either Linder Road capacity is increased or a full second vehicular access is provided, then they would not get anymore building permits. Zaremba: And the other access could be off one of the stubs connecting to McMillan even. Hawkins-Clark: Correct. As long as it connects to an existing arterial. Centers: Okay. That's all I have. Thank you. Shreeve: Well, I would say to make that part of the condition. Borup: Well -- and we --did you have a final comment, Mrs. Converse? Converse: Just with what you're saying, it is -- Linder Road is really really bad. I mean you may go up and down it and think, you know, there are four cars in line. Anytime in the morning or afternoon and -- it may take me, you know, three to five minutes sitting in my driveway trying to take a left going south, which is the direction he's saying most of the traffic is going to be flowing and most of the time fi~'i~,. ~;:, ~z, ,;: ,hyf f _:=. } 1L ;',:, i ~: Merldlan Planning & Zoning Mee~Rg. O February 7, 2002 Page 47 when I try to go to Albertson's I go right to McMillan, right on Meridian, and back in a circle. So it is really bad, so you can consider that. Borup: Which traffic -- Mrs. Converse, which traffic is giving you the most conflict, the traffic heading north, or the traffic heading south? Converse: You know, it goes both ways. Borup: Okay. Converse: Probably -- I don't know. It seems like if it was not coming from one way it was coming from the other. Centers: That's because it's a two way street. Converse: Oh. What are they going to do about the mail service out there, so we are not crossing the road? Who handles that? Borup: Well, the mail would be in front of these houses. Converse: Our mail. We have to cross Linder to get our mail right now. Borup: The post office would be -- Converse: I have to call the federal government? Zaremba: Afraid so. Borup: Okay. So are we looking to continue this to -- Shreeve: Yes. Borup: -- the 21 St or -- Centers: Well, there a couple lots he's got to make bigger and, you know, I think he's going to have to do that whole plat -- Borup: Well, is the representative from Briggs here? Oh. Okay. Centers: Yes. I'd like to see some refinement. Borup: Well, we have got two stub streets, but I think we need to give -- I think we need to give some -- right, some specific things that we want to see. I mean they already -- ACHD has already said the two stub streets, so I guess we are -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Me~'rg. February 7, 2002 Page 48 Shreeve: Well, I would say you want the stub streets, you'd want the pathways shown, obviously the two lots that are less than 6,500 -- Borup: Which pathways are we talking? Are you talking the two -- at the bottom between Yosemite? Centers: This one here? Correct? Shreeve: Just the lot. Centers: Just one lot? Shreeve: Yes. Centers: I think the applicant really has an advantage with this preliminary hearing tonight, you know, because he's coming back and hopefully we get it done right? Shreeve: Then I think as we understood right down here; right? Somewhere right there somewhere would be -- Centers: Then this one is extending to the school district site; correct? Okay. So then -- Zaremba: Can a decision about piping or bridging be made that fast? Borup: That's going to be up to the irrigation district of which way -- Shreeve: Then Iwould -- of course, I think based on Commissioner Center's -- which Iagree with, with the condition of so many lots to be built, that certainly that is part of your phasing plan, you know, that you phase accordingly to some number and that gives them the advantage to put in a phasing plan on that. Centers: Are you going to build out the front first and then -- Arnold: One option to address that concern is we could -- you know, the pathway there that goes from the first loop road out to Linder Street there, we could widen that out and ACRD has done that in the past where trafFc concerns were considerations. Obviously, we don't want -- long term we don't want to make that a through street up to Linder. We could put non-build agreements along those lots that are adjacent to it, do a 24 foot roadway -- 24 foot wide roadway from that street out there to get that secondary access should in the future we don't get the stub streets connected out. So that's an option. ~;~~ - , ~~: Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~Tfg. '` ` ~ February 7, 2002 ` ~ Page 49 ~~~ Shreeve: I think that's been done, too, where a lot has been temporarily ~' ` ~ ~ `'' dedicated for an access and then, of course, once you get the stubs it can revert back into a -- Arnold; But that would meet your concerns with the second lane in and out? `~~'~ Centers: It's another option. ,} ':~ Shreeve: You can work that out with staff, would be my recommendation, one way or the other. -~, Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question? Borup: Mr. Freckleton. ~F~: Freckleton: Steve, how many lots do you figure you have got from this point -- z rtn ~.. °.ft~ Borup: Halfway down there? Freckleton: Yes. Basically, if it was right across here forward, how many lots in ,, the front part of the subdivision? ,,~~ ~~ =~ Arnold: It's about 60-40. Sixty over on the east -- " `y~~ Freckleton: So 40 percent of your lots are in the front part of the subdivision? Arnold: Approximately. I have not counted that out. Approximately 60 and 40. Sixty to the east, 40 to the west. So 40 times -- I'm not sure where -- '~~,~ Borup: And Bruce or Brad, can you remember the reason for the stipulation on '`z'` Bridgetower -- or I mean on Woodbridge? I was trying to remember why and I ~~~~_ _;~ couldn't. Arnold: Mr. Chairman? Borup: Do you know why? - ~ Arnold: I think someone from ACRD said that was a requirement, if I remember ~ ~~ ~ correctly. ,_,, i ~,~~ Freckleton: I believe also it was the city. There was a lot of concern with the ~~ secondary access to the north through that existing subdivision for that emergency access. Do you recall that? ;;~~~ Borup: Yes. „~ r; ~~ .:,~~s ~~~ s,GL ~,, . , _ .. - ~~~;. Sri ~ . ... .. ~~~ ~~• O Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~R1'g. February 7, 2002 Page 50 Freckleton: I think the reason they ended up with kind of a different number on '`}" Woodbridge was because the Five Mile Creek basically bisected the property and it made abarrier or anatural -- you know, a good line to design to. + j ~~ x ,~...'~' Borup: But why was it restricted to the 150? That's what I can't remember. What was the concern? Was it traffic access onto Locust Grove or was it emergency access or ACRD thought it was a good idea? Arnold: Someone from ACRD thought it was a good idea. I think there was - Freckleton: Was Steve working there then? ~~ `, Arnold: I thought it was a darn good idea. We didn't get that sub street to the ~~~ north of the subdivision at that time. They made it an emergency access. So at the time it pushed the threshold over the local street and I remember someone with the foresight that required them to do a secondary access and I -- that ~~~ : _ person gave them the option that I threw out here to you tonight, so I think that's _ why. ~~ '. ~ Borup: Well -- and I guess one difference there is Woodbridge had no sub streets to the north or south and one to the east. Arnold: Correct. ~~, '~ -~ Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, if my math serves me correctly, the line that we are -- that Ihad pointed out roughly here, if it is a 60-40 split, that's roughly 108 lots or Y '~ 109 lots in that front portion. Forty percent. Borup: Okay. Which means what? Other than that's just the number? Centers: Four years. Three, four years. Current market for the frontage. Freckleton: I guess what I was looking at it, when you look at the -- you look at ~~ ; the layout, if the second access point was put in here like Steve was suggesting, ,,,a . ~ -"'Y-~ really, the only thing you're doing is providing access to these front portions -- this front portion. This back portion of the subdivision still has to funnel through this one -- this one point. This seems to be kind of a break, you know, where everything has to kind of funnel through that point, it looks kind of the natural point to me. ::{ •~` =° Zaremba: So our suggestion is they focus their phasing on that line? ~`F~ Freckleton: Well, unless they want to do it in a smaller first phase. Borup: Well, they probably -- I mean, yeah, that would be up to the developer, but that is a natural break point if they phase it, I think. That's fairly obvious. y- ~ ~ S~`. ri~Gi f ~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~fRg. ~ February 7, 2002 Page 51 Freckleton: I mean they could have some minor phases, but that would be -- yeah. I throw that out just in case you're leaning towards setting a limit on the r~ number of lots before they can have that second access point, because I think `" h that until an access point is provided out here or out to the east or to the south, you're really not helping this back portion of the development. s ~,~: Shreeve: So my recommendation, just have staff and the applicant work that out and those are our concerns and our issues and so come with a plan. Borup: Well -- and after looking at the difference between some of the others, I `. mean is it up to -- is it up to the City to make it convenient for a homeowner so they don't have to drive as far? I mean that should be something that the ~x1 developer should worry about, because has to do with marketability of their lots, if they are back too far or if it's going to be a problem. Remember, we did do the other where --and that was -- wasn't it about 300 -- I mean 150 was about half of theirs, wasn't it? Freckleton: Roughly. ~;~_ Borup: Roughly and -- but that subdivision had only two access points in the ~'~ whole design, as compared to -- Freckleton: Two access points on the emergency access. Borup: Right. Compared to six. Centers: But, Mr. Chairman, it is up to the City to look at the traffic that will be generated due to -- you know, and as the individual stated, the backup on Linder ,~ ~ ? ` ~ Road -- if they get Linder Road to a five lane like Overland and the rest them not , a problem, you know. Until then, I think it would be, so -- Shreeve: And, of course, there, again, they can choose not to do that and see what we feel like. ~r Borup: Well, the other stub street would relieve traffic anybody wanting to tum '~~ K ` ~` north, you know, they would have a nice right turn out of there. I would assume " anybody going south would want to -- Shreeve: Which is probably going to be most of the people to get into town. ;. Centers: Unless you want to go around the block like -- Borup: But anybody going -- anybody going south has the turn lane there. I just ,, ~ ~.Y~~ ; ; ; want to make one comment on the lot size in the R-4 versus R-8 and I got to say ;<; I really like the looks of this. This is something that I have been wanting to see ~~ _~.os i~ fU~Y .... a`i ... T(xS Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~4fg. February 7, 2002 Page 52 for a lot of years, it would require a subdivision ordinance change, and that's to get more variety in lot sizes. We have, you know, subdivisions with lots from 65 on up to 90 feet and a fairly nice overall average. You know, average 8,000 feet, it would probably still average less than maybe a lot of R-4 subdivisions would, but I really like the variety of sizes. Centers: Yes. Yes. I agree. Borup: It gives you a good option on a variety of house sizes, which is something that's been lacking. We have what -- with the requirements we have got now, I mean all R-4 subdivisions are 80 by 100 foot lots, you know, 90 percent of them, no variety at all, and I do like -- I do like the size variety that this subdivision has. Something I have been wanting to see for a long time and so far no one's had the foresight, I guess, to come in with an R-8 zoning, but still do the larger lots. Everybody else has done the R-8 zoning and had the minimum lot sizes along with the development. Centers: Right. Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, if I could throw one thing out before you get to your next step. Current City Ordinance requires piping of all ditches. It does not have any language in it that talks about this 48-inch requirement. The 48 inch cutoff has been -- has been around for a long time. However, it's been a matter of policy, it hasn't been ordinance. The reason we came up with that 48-inch cutoff was because of several discussions that we have had with the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. Nampa-Meridian has told us that the trash racks or safety grates that they put in front of a pipe, when you get to a 48 inch diameter size pipe, the grates are so far apart that you lose the safety factor of those grates. It's kind of a moot point even having them, because the grates have to be so far apart that larger stuff can pass through. Forty eight inch was kind of a cutoff point where they said, you know, you're really not doing any good by having a trash rack in front of these, because it's big enough that a kid or whatever else could get through as far as a safety concern. That has been kind of a matter of policy. In a Planned Unit Development Council can just waive that requirement. However, this is not a PUD, it is coming through as a straight R-8 development and the current ordinance is very specific and it does not have an exclusion in there fora 48 inch. I guess what I would throw out to you is that unless legal counsel can correct me, I believe that this application would require a variance application to the ordinance, not a waiver. It would require a variance for the tiling requirement and the applicant has stated in their response that the Settler's Irrigation District --and, you know, that's one that we haven't dealt with a whole lot in Meridian. The majority of Meridian is covered by the Nampa- Meridian Irrigation District, so I'm not sure what Settler's stance is on the 48-inch aspect. They may have a total different mindset on that, but the applicant did state in his response that Settler's is leaning towards requiring them to pipe. That seems consistent with what our ordinances are saying, too. ~;: , T~i'..~_ ^~~:: ., . 4 -. 1 ~ a.=~ ~;: ~ ~, • o~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~rg. O February 7, 2002 Page 53 '""`~ 5 Borup: Okay. Is that aspect on the 48 inch, is that maybe something we should , . add to our list of ordinances to look at revisions on and make suggestions to? . ~ } : ~;,~: Freckleton: Yes, it is. Borup: I don't know if that's on -- I didn't think that was on there. Okay. Add that to the list. ='' V` Freckleton: I throw that out, because I don't know how you're wanting to lean on -- I mean if they are basically going to have to get this thing turned around by Monday -- is that correct? Borup: Yes. ~ ~ Freckleton: You know, we are talking a variance application as well. ~ t Borup: Does that need to be in by the same time you're saying? n, ` .a`~; Centers: That would have to go to Council, though, wouldn't it, Bruce? Freckleton: If they are seeking a variance to the piping, yes. Borup: Right. Oh, so you're saying they probably won't have an answer from the ,+1., irrigation district by -- ~~, r ; r Freckleton: Well -- Borup: But do we need to -- Freckleton: -- to support the variance, they would need to get some input from - the Irrigation District. The Irrigation District would basically need to say with the flows that are in that ditch it would require a pipe of X. ,, >4~ Borup: And so that -- Freckleton: They have got to make their case that that size pipe is too big and we are going to lose the safety aspect and they are going to seek a variance. -~ Borup: So to move things along, they would want to have that variance tumed in before it goes to City Council? 3 ~~`~~ Hawkins-Clark: I would say it's up to them. I mean they can choose-not to and if it comes down the line and they have to, then they will just lose two months until the variance is done. „,~ :=;M_ ,~~. ,,,~~ E ~,: '~~, .. ~ ~F . ,. _. dkj4 1'"~ .. ~ - a.. ~_. ~;~-: O S 4y; ~ ' ~ ' ~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~Rg. February 7, 2002 Page 54 Borup: Right. ,~ Hawkins-Clark: I mean I don't think we need to necessarily require it by Monday, no. Borup: Okay. That's what I was getting at, it would be up to them to get it in in a timely manner if they didn't want it to be delayed later on. Hawkins-Clark: It would need to be in prior to the City Council's hearing on the plat, because they wouldn't be able to approve a plat if they were seeking -- but if they are not seeking a variance, then it's a moot point. s Borup: Okay. I think that's clear. Centers: Mr. Chairman, don't you think we want to leave the Public Hearing open, then, just - ' 7. Zaremba: Just continue it. ;i5 Centers: Yes. ~. _ j~. Y' Shreeve: I'd like to make a motion that we continue AZ 01-027 and PP 01-024 for February 21St Centers: I would second that. ' ` -~ Zaremba: I'd like to add the provision that that's provided that the applicant gets -: ~: their materials to staff by Monday, the 11~'. _ .~ Centers: If they don't, they don't make it. Arnold: At the close of business? <~ : Borup: Does that work? ,r i Hawkins-Clark: Yes. ~~ Borup: Okay. Close of business on Monday. Zaremba: Does the motion maker accept that amendment? -` ~~ Shreeve: Yes. ~, ~. ~Yy: Borup: Okay. Motion and second. Any other discussion? All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. '~ ~ - ~~,~ =~. a."yi-, ~l`µl; ~v%d ;a. ¢ 4 ;:~;:; ~' ~:.~.d .~ t :"J,~x ? X~. s -~:, .~:= ~; ;.,; ~;;;: Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~g. February 7, 2002 Page 55 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: What -- the other thing that does is what we have already continued is -- we had the 21St scheduled for our laundry list and we are probably going to have a pretty full meeting. We may not get too much of that done. Shreeve: Is the 21St pretty full? Borup: Well, we have a few items on there that hopefully would not -- Centers: Winston Moore's won't take that long. Borup: No. The EI Dorado should be -- Zaremba: That will be quick. Borup: There were a couple others that Shari told me about, I told her to go ahead and put them on. There was one longer one I told her not to. Shreeve: I think we just get as much done as we can before 8:00. Borup: Okay. Zaremba: May I make a comment before we adjourn, Mr. Chairman? Borup: Yes. Zaremba: I received in my city mailbox -- and I assume we all did -- a copy of The Works, which was apparently a first effort at a newsletter by the Public Works Department and I would like to applaud this effort and would be enthusiastic about it continuing. I found it very informative and helpful. Freckleton: Thank you. Borup: All right. Anybody else have any final comment? Shreeve: No. I'd like to move to adjourn. Zaremba: Second. Borup: Motion and second. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Borup: We are adjourned at 9:37. i= Meridian Planning & Zoning Mee~ng. ~;~~_ ; February 7, 2002 ~~;~; Page 56 t<r `` " MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:37 P.M. ;~; - (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) ;: ~,~~~~ APPROVED: ~...r ~;` ~, ~' ~` Z/ Zf /®~ <~ . ~~,; ~ K TH BORUP, CH IRMAN DATE ..' tt ~~,,r N - "~ z ~. - ~ ~~ -~~ m ,rc ~ TTESTED: -; ~ ~~ %~ ILLIAM G. BERG, JR., TY " LERK ! d.G t .~~N~?S:Pd ~e~ K' ~~ ~... L Ski, jY{ ~ k .N. ~+~ tr:,' Otte.. 1E'~~~' C l S ~ ~; z$:~ ~; k^;: s i' . _ , :~a~ -y G~. ~r°l ~~-~ Gj ~ VLF -~~ ~~~ ~ v~ . V~--F. ' `~--e-I~ o ~ ~ , 2.~2 Item Packet Pickup ~ Project Picked up by Date Time Employee Initials ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ l~ =s~ 0 0 CUP 01-042 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING February 7, 2002 APPLICANT Monvand Enterprises, LLC ITEM NO. 4 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Building Structure to be used as a Daycare Center in an L-0 zone for Dreamland Education Center -south of East Leslie Drive and west of North Eagle Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: See attached comments CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: No Comment CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment SANITARY SERVICE: See Attached Comments MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See Attached Comments CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See Attached Comments IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See attached comment from Idaho Transportation Department. Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ,~_} s~~,. ~~ :.t- AZ O 1-026 MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING February 7, 2002 APPLICANT Robert Lee ITEM NO. Jr REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for annexation and zoning of 2.30 acres from R-1 to R-4 zones for proposed Hearthstone Subdivision -southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: See Attached Comments CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: No Comment CITY SEWER DEPT: iVo Comment SANITARY SERVICE: IVO COmment MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: No Comment IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See attached comment from Linda Ward, 1685 Summerhee, Meridian Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. ,,:. .; 0 PFP 01-009 ";,331: ,; ,;. _~;~. r ~. ,~~~. ,~,, f-~A. . ~, _. ~~:> ;, ,,.-, ..; a ~~:~ r, >r„' ..' Vh-. MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING February 7, 2002 APPLICANT Robert Lee ITEM NO. 6 REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of two building lots on 2.30 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for the proposed Hearthstone Subdivision -Southeast comer of West Cherry Lane and North Black Cat Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: No Comment CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment SANITARY SERVICE: IVo Comment MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: See Attached Comments IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See attached comment from Linda Ward, 1685 Summertree, Meridian Contacted: Date: Phone: AAaterials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of AAeridian. <'[ . ,_ ,,;;: ,:. .. ,,;~: , -, ti ~C: i?~ti F.~ i~+~ 1 I~ PP 01-024 z ,;~, it . ~ ~; r~: 'r ~~ ,..~k~s, ~ _ _ .'F ~~ 5~~~~ .~ :fig _s ~;*}:, ,_ ~-, ~ ~ j` , t.` ?~~: ,...'"r;?1 i w il'--. ip.Y MERIDIAN PLANNING 8~ ZONING MEETING February 7, 2002 APPLICANT Capital Development Co. ITEM NO. REQUEST Public Hearing -Request for Preliminary/Final Plat approval of 272 building lots and 16 other lots on 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 crone for Baldwin Park Subdivision - 1 /4 mile south of McMillan Road, east side of Linder Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: See AtFcched Comments CITY FIRE DEPT: See Attached Comments CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: No Comment CITY SEWER DEPT: No Comment SANITARY SERVICE: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: See Attached Comments MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See Attached Comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the CNy of Meridian. ~::+ '.