Loading...
03152007CouncilMinutesCITY OF AMMON CITY COUNCIL MINUTES THURSDAY, MARCH 15, 2007 AGENDA: CITY OF AMMON 2135 SOUTH AMMON ROAD CITY COUNCIL AMENDED AGENDA THURSDAY, March 15, 2007 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Bruce Ard at 7:30 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance – Councilmember Waite Prayer – Councilmember Bean MINUTES: March 1, 2007 ITEMS FROM MAYOR: Appointment of Fire Marshall – Chris Ford CONSENT AGENDA: Attached ACTION ITEMS: 1. Conditional Use Permit for Hawks Landing PUD (Pending Public Hearing) 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Change Request, Low Density Residential to Commercial Designation – Hawks Landing (Pending Public Hearing) 3. Rezone Request Hawks Landing, RP to HC-1 and RP to R-1A (Pending Public Hearing) 4. Final Approval Master Plan Hawks Landing PUD (Pending Public Hearing) 5. Preliminary Plat, Hawks Landing Division 1 (Pending Public Hearing) 6. Conditional Use Permit Liberty Square – Physical/Occupational Therapy Office 7. Preliminary Site Plan - Ideacom 8. Concessionaire Proposal – Peterson Park 9. Memorandum of Understanding – Household Hazardous Waste Event DISCUSSION ITEMS: 1.Personnel Policy Amendments – Idaho Dept. Commerce and Labor 2.Misc. MINUTES The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ard at 7:30 p.m. in the City Building, 2135 South Ammon Road, Ammon, Idaho, with the following City Officials present: City Officials Present: Mayor Bruce Ard Councilmember Lee Bean Councilmember Rex Thompson Councilmember Dana Kirkham Councilmember Randy Waite City Planning Director Ron Folsom City Engineer Bill Manwill City Administrator Bruce Rose City Attorney Scott Hall City Clerk Leslie Folsom City Officials Absent: None Councilmember Waite led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag and Councilmember Bean offered the prayer. MINUTES March 1, 2007: Councilmember Bean motioned to approve the minutes for March 1, 2007. Councilmember Waite seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Kirkham – Yes. The motion passed. City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 1 ITEMS FROM MAYOR : Appointment of Fire Marshall – Chris Ford. Mayor Ard recommended to Council to approve the appointment of Chris Ford to Fire Marshall. Councilmember Kirkham congratulated Chris Ford and thanked him for being a part of the team. Councilmember Kirkham motioned to approve the appointment of Chris Ford to Fire Marshall. Councilmember Thompson seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, and Councilmember Bean – Yes. The motion passed. Memorandum of Understanding. Mayor Ard advised concerning the MOU between Bonneville County, City of Idaho Falls and City of Ammon. DEQ was asking for participation from the cities. There would be no cost for citizens to get rid of their hazardous waste but there will be a minimal charge to the City, which could be up to $3000. This will be advertised to public for what they can and cannot bring. The City of Ammon needs to approve th this so the City can participate in this effort. Bruce Rose thinks the date is May 12 at the Old Fred Meyers site. Councilmember Bean motioned to approve the memorandum of understanding relative to the disposal of hazardous waste. Councilmember Kirkham seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, and Councilmember Thompson – Yes. The motion passed. CONSENT AGENDA : CITY OF AMMON AMENDED CONSENT AGENDA Thursday March 15, 2007 License applications are pending in the City Office for the following: GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE 2007: 1.NEWGENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION: A.The Speech and Language Clinic @IFRC- General – Pediatric Therapy – 1619 Curlew B.SOHO Sounds, Inc. – General – Audio & Video Installation – 1266 Ridgewood Dr. th C.Majestic Auto Body – General – Paint & Auto Body work – 1456 N. 25 E. 2.RENEWALBUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION: th A.Legend’s – General – Convenience Store/Beer off premise – 3480 E. 17 St. th B.Foot Solutions – General – Therapeutic Shoe Sales – 939 S. 25 E. #100 th C.Alpine Jewelers – General – Retail Sales – 2789 S. 25 E. th D.Life Care of Idaho Falls – General – Nursing Facility – 2725 E. 17 Street HOME OCCUPATION PERMITS 2007: 1.RENEWAL HOME OCCUPATION PERMITS: A.Buckhouse, Craig – Home Occupation – Window Coverings - 3015 Fennec B.Boyce, Alan & Janine – Home Occupation – Public Transportation – 1935 Bittern Dr. LIQUOR/BEER/WINE WITH GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE 2007: 1.NEW LIQUOR/BEER/WINE WITH GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE: A.Wilson, Glenn R. – Bartender- . Leslie Folsom suggested we move Glenn Wilson off the consent agenda so he could be discussed further. Councilmember Bean motioned to approve the Consent Agenda for March 15, 2007 removing Glenn Wilson off the consent agenda. Councilmember Waite seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, and Councilmember Thompson – Yes. The motion passed. ACTION ITEMS : Councilmember Kirkham inquired if we need to discuss the public hearing before we move into the action items. Councilmember Bean stated we do need to deliberate. Councilmember Kirkham stated she owed Helen Davenport a public apology. It was not her intent to attack her personally. The petition Mrs. Davenport read with the “low income profiling” did set her off. She can abide talking about traffic and water but feels that profiling is out of line. Councilmember Kirkham stated Mrs. Davenport told her it was not her intent to profile. Councilmember Kirkham asked Mrs. Davenport to come to the microphone to explain her intent so she has the opportunity to clarify her intent. City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 2 Helen Davenport, stated she would like to explain that the condensed cluster housing has always been unfair. She did not mention people. She stated some of her best friends do not have a lot of money. She did not mean people. She was meaning the small homes are so scrunched together and it is a big concern for all of us. Councilmember Kirkham clarified the Council will now be discussing the issue. She stated they need to feel either comfortable or uncomfortable with the decisions they have made to this point. She suggested they either need to say yes or no to Hawks Landing. Councilmember Kirkham asked Scott Hall if that was correct. Scott Hall stated yes it is, with one exception. Scott stated they need to approve subject to the CC&R’s. Councilmember Bean stated the first thing on the agenda is the PUD. At this point and time, we have an ordinance that was passed that we need to approve this PUD under it. By approving the Conditional Use Permit, we approve the PUD. It doesn’t mean we are approving anything relative; we are just approving the PUD overlay for that particular annexation. As I see it, then we have certain things that have to be done if we approve the PUD. Councilmember Bean stated the major issue, as he sees it, does not concern density as much as it concerns cluster homes. It was discussed density would actually increase if we approve it under RP zoning and decrease if we go with the PUD. Councilmember Kirkham inquired if the land as it is zoned right now, they cannot change it, and if he has the right to go ahead and build 250 homes. Planning Director Ron Folsom said yes, with the annexation agreement stipulations. Ron Folsom stated the current annexation agreement would limit it to 165-180 homes. As it stands now, it is actually an increase. Councilmember Bean stated, again, he feels it is a cluster home issue. Councilmember Bean stated we have the right, under a PUD, to determine the structural content of the homes there. He doesn’t want to see matchbox homes either, but if they show him a structural home that will sell for $200,000- $300,000, he does not have a problem. Councilmember Kirkham stated she has liked this concept from the beginning. She stated our current ordinances don’t allow them to restrict very much. She likes the PUD because it gives the City control to actually say this is the kind of development they want in Ammon and make the developer do it. The developer is bonded, so if he walks away the money is there for the City to do it. Councilmember Bean addressed Helen Davenport’s letter. He feels we have talked about the density. He understands concerns about water issues. He realizes we have problems in the City relative to water. This is why they have a $15 million water bond. Two new wells are going in; major trunk lines will be run. He feels the water situation is in hand at this time. One of the things he does not see on there is the sewer. He recognizes we have some sewer issues and we now have a master plan in place that will handle the sewer system up in that area. There will be developer participation to get that sewer in. Councilmember Kirkham addressed the concern regarding the Council position. She stated she does not have a legitimate reason to deny this development. The only issue she sees, that has validation, is the traffic issue for Sunnyside Road. She feels it needs to be talked about tonight. Aside from that, she cannot find a legal reason to say no. Councilmember Thompson stated that in Sept. he totally opposed but after consideration, he supports the PUD. It allows a different kind of home to be built. The City Council has pretty much total control of what goes in the development. He is excited to have commercial property up there. Overall, he is in favor of the PUD, depending on what we see from the restrictive covenants, which they have not seen yet. There is still a chance to turn it down when they see the restrictive covenants. Councilmember Waite stated he feels the Council has a good heart and integrity. When it first came in, he was fairly neutral. They have talked, discussed and learned a lot. Everything that has been said, he pretty much agrees with. He feels the developer is complying with the density with the housing up there. He feels he has made concessions to make us more comfortable. He is not sure we have the right as a neighbor to tell a neighbor how to build on his ground. As long it complies with the laws, we really have no right to deny. Councilmember Thompson stated we do need to address traffic issues. Councilmember Kirkham agreed. Councilmember Kirkham stated in the past we have made developers improve the street adjacent to his property. Unfortunately, in this case, that doesn’t really help the areas that will be affected by the traffic. This would be relevant regardless of PUD or RP zone. Councilmember Kirkham mentioned that the people that live on Scenic have had to have the burden of development and have not been compensated in the least for it and she is concerned about putting additional traffic on their road. th Bill Manwill stated that 17 Street is there for fixing. The problem on Sunnyside is not what to do, but where to get money to do it. Councilmember Kirkham inquired as to the safety of Sunnyside and if it is responsible for us to continue to allow development when the problems have not been fixed. Councilmember Bean stated it is operating at acceptable levels now and will with the new development. It merits saying we know more going in, so when the next developer comes in you have to say no. Councilmember Kirkham stated she is not sure we will say no to the next developer. At some point we have to say no. She doesn’t know if that is tonight, but at some point we have to say no. She supports the PUD, but is concerned about the traffic. Councilmember Bean stated we need to start negotiation with the County for roads and start making plans. City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 3 Councilmember Kirkham inquired if the Council is being responsible in this matter concerning the traffic issues. It was discussed the annexation has already been approved. Councilmember Bean stated development will not stop on the hill just because it is not in the City. It will still happen through the County. Planning Director Ron Folsom explained he was at a P&Z meeting in Iona County last night. The county approved a 900 lot subdivision, as it is causing traffic problems for the City of Iona. He said, his point is, the county will allow it. They have shown they are not against urban development. Councilmember Kirkham asked if he can see this perspective how they feel powerless. Ron Folsom suggested to Councilmember Kirkham to direct their staff to work with the county. City Engineer Bill Manwill addressed the mayor regarding 1000 acres being considered on the hillside. He stated you aren’t going to stop it, so you need to either be involved or let the county do it. Councilmember Kirkham stated she wished there was a compromise where everyone could be happy. She does not know what that is. Councilmember Thompson inquired if there was a map he could look at. He inquired to the developer what kind of accommodations he has for the south (bottom of the page) end of his property. Jeff Hawkes, developer, explained that was Founders Point. He also explained there is a 30 ft strip that George McDaniel owns and wants to have green space; it is on the Founders Point property. Councilmember Kirkham stated her concern is for the citizens who feel they haven’t been heard and perhaps there maybe a threat of litigation. She wants to know if there is a point of compromise. Not an all or nothing for either side. There is still a high level of disdain, and she realizes Mr. Hawkes has compromised. Councilmember Kirkham inquired to the public if they feel they are happier with the way it stands now with the initial zoning, or to let the PUD pass and give the Council more control. Brent Kennedy stated can you have a PUD without increasing the zoning? The developer financially cannot do this and he would go back to the original zoning. It was asked of Mr. Hawkes, by the public, if he could make more money with the half acre lots as it is zoned now. He explained he had his chief financial officer, Blake Fillmore, with him and he stated he could make more money, but they believe in this and think it is a good thing. They are at $1.7 million for the amenities package. They are open to widening Sunnyside Road to a three lane in front of their property and a round-a-bout. They are willing to do immediate things and things in the future. He feels round-a-bouts may be a good option. He is open to address issues. He believes in this development. He believes the homes will sell for $175 per square foot, just will be a little smaller. Six months ago he started with cottage meetings which he mailed to everyone on the hillside because he wanted to hear from them. He didn’t want to get to this point and be in this position. Councilmember Waite inquired if Sunnyside Road is a county road or state owned. Councilmember Kirkham stated it is a county road except for one portion. It was discussed if it is in the current fire district. It was inquired of Dean Ellis, if he knew if where the edge of the fire district is. Dean Ellis stated it use to be east of the power lines but he thinks it has expanded a little bit beyond that. Bill Manwill stated it is all county roads. It was discussed, if it was possible to attach to the lots that people buy, to allocate money for the widening of the road. Councilmember Bean explained they are impact fees and have discussed them before and may discuss them again. If we have impact fees, then developers will go to the county rather than the city and they will develop around us. We will still be impacted. It is beneficial for us to develop and control the area around us. He understands cluster homes are a concern, but he doesn’t feel the concerns will come to fruition. Councilmember Bean explained he is for the development. He feels we need conversations with the county on how to handle the traffic issues. Councilmember Bean asked of Kim Johnson. What would he ask the developer to do if they were to compromise? Kim Johnson asked for half acre lots. Councilmember Kirkham asked if they took away the green space and made bigger lots, would they be happier. Councilmember Bean asked Kim if they built the same size homes but with 30 feet between each other rather than 20 feet, would that make them happy. Kim stated that would be starting to get in the area. Kim said he feels Jeff Hawkes has compromised with the city and not with the surrounding people and that is where the hurt stems. Councilmember Bean stated he does not understand what Kim wants. Kim stated he wanted it widened out, take out some green space and widen out space between homes. Jeff Hawkes inquired how far apart they want the cluster homes. Kim stated he doesn’t know what they want, he just doesn’t like it. He doesn’t want cluster homes. Jeff Hawkes inquired what a reasonable distance would be. A map of the green space was presented. Councilmember Kirkham inquired of Brent Kennedy what he feels would be a viable compromise. Brent Kennedy stated he understands the city’s concerns and realizes Jeff will build a great product. Councilmember Bean addressed Kim and stated he realizes he would like the houses spread out further. He stated there is 15 feet between each home. The side yards on a typical home in R1 is 8 feet, so they are the same as a R1 development. The only thing that can happen is for him, the developer, to eliminate homes to get more space. He does not think that is economically beneficial for the developer. Councilmember Bean explained the density was a compromise to the homeowners, not the City. The last thing we want to do is push development to the county without control from the City. Brent Kennedy inquired if this is allowed, then a lot more situations like this will be allowed. If you allow this, then you allow the ones that come after it. Councilmember Kirkham explained that is the beauty of a PUD. If you allow one, you do not have to allow another one. A PUD is subjective on all of their stipulations. Jeff Hawkes explained this makes sense and it is the perfect location for it. City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 4 Councilmember Kirkham stated she would like to forward with one stipulation. She would like Council to somehow bind ourselves to agree not to approve another development along Sunnyside until we have addressed this road issue and figured someway to generate some revenue to fix that road. Councilmember Bean asked her to clarify if that means no more annexations. Councilmember Kirkham clarified no more annexations until the road problem is fixed. Councilmember Bean asked Scott Hall if doing something like that rises to the level of a moratorium. Scott Hall said it may, but the better answer is to take developments as they come. Councilmember Bean inquired about a round-a-bout. The cost was questioned. Bill Manwill stated that round-a-bout construction only, not including utility work is just under $100,000. He mentioned the one on Lincoln & Hitt cost about $135,000. Brent Kennedy commented on the green space and 100 feet does not seem like a lot. He commented if they approve a PUD right now with traffic issues, then it can lead to more and more approvals because you approved one. Ron Folsom commented by State Statute the PUD does not set precedence. 1. Conditional Use Permit for Hawks Landing PUD: Councilmember Bean motioned to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Hawks Landing PUD. Councilmember Waite seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Kirkham – Yes. The motion passed. 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Change Request, Low Density Residential to Commercial Designation – Hawks Landing: Councilmember Thompson asked Tom Hunsaker about P&Z’s recommendation to change this to commercial property. Tom Hunsaker stated it fit in with the overall plan for the development. The size of that seems to balance out well. Councilmember Thompson asked with the zone changed to C1, why aren’t we doing residential commercial. Tom Hunsaker said because RSC1 is limited to a total of 10,000 square feet within a mile of any other commercial. Ron Folsom mentioned this particular change in the comprehensive plan is a little different than we normally do. The intent was to make the C1 specific to lot lines, tied to the PUD. Councilmember Thompson asked if this proposal has that stipulation. Ron Folsom stated it will in the final draft of the PUD. The commercial will only be allowed under the PUD, if you want to do something else you have to petition to rezone it. Councilmember Bean motioned the request to change the Comprehensive Plan Map to allow commercial within Hawks Landing and Development be approved. Councilmember Kirkham seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Waite – Yes. The motion passed. 3. Rezone Request Hawks Landing, RP to HC-1 and RP to R-1A: Ron Folsom explained Planning & Zoning’s recommendation. Ron Folsom explained what would be allowed in a HC-1. Ron Folsom explained how everything would look on the map. Jeff Hawkes commented the HC-1 was so they could have a restaurant up there, a nice sit- down restaurant. Tom Hunsaker explained Planning & Zoning’s recommendation for R-1A. Councilmember Waite motioned to deny the rezone request for Hawks Landing from RP to HC-1 and to approve the rezone for Hawks Landing, RP to C-1 and RP to R-1A as presented. Councilmember Bean seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, and Councilmember Thompson – Yes. The motion passed. Scott Hall inquired to Jeff Hawkes if that was acceptable to them. Jeff Hawkes stated it was acceptable. 4. Final Approval Master Plan Hawks Landing PUD: Ron Folsom explained the Master Plan and the zoning requirements. It was questioned how many lots are affected by the RP zone. Tom Hunsaker explained the definition of a master plan in a PUD. Ron Folsom explained zones 1 and 5 remain RP; they are requesting an 85 ft set back line. In RP, requirement is 100 ft. Councilmember Bean asked how many lots that affects. Jeff Hawkes stated about 2 lots. Tom Hunsaker, P&Z, explained the definition of a master plan with a PUD. They only have to show the minimum side yard. Ron Folsom explained the next thing they are requesting is basically a lot reduction on the side yard of 5 feet on lots that have a width less than 90 feet. Councilmember Kirkham asked how many lots that affects. Jeff Hawkes explained the reason for the requests basically due to longer and narrower lots. Councilmember Bean asked Ron why we would do this. Ron explained it is PUD and they are turning that property into green space. Soren Simonson explained most of their goals is to have most of the garages behind the homes, which means you don’t need as much lot width. Ron Folsom explained the next item was garages to be detached instead of attached. Soren Simonson stated the goal is to meet with market demands; sometimes it is advantageous to have them detached when they go behind. Councilmember Kirkham asked if see could see them before they are approved. Ron Folsom stated that is why he suggested in their motion they may want to ask to see floor plans as a stipulation. Councilmember Thompson asked if this is a conceptual idea or the plan of how they want it laid out. Soren Simonson stated it is a conceptual idea. City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 5 Ron Folsom explained that item number 4 is that Red Tail Loop in Division 1 has a dedicated right of way of 50 feet, rather than our current requirement of 60 feet. Jeff Hawkes stated they didn’t think they needed that much right-of-way on a small loop road. They wanted it to be a little more intimate and it is not a through street with a lot of traffic. Councilmember Kirkham inquired if its meets the emergency access required. They believe it does. Councilmember Thompson asked if they would allow parking on both sides. Jeff Hawkes stated from the research they have done, they feel they could park on both sides and still allow emergency access. Soren Simonson explained they are requesting narrower pavement widths. Councilmember Bean explained if they are going to ask for narrower roads, then they will probably request no off street parking. Tom Hunsaker explained P&Z’s recommendations. Councilmember Bean asked what Jeff Hawkes would like for pavement width. He gave them a copy of their preliminary design guidelines. Councilmember Kirkham suggested we discuss this in a work session. He stated they view it as a partnership, so he wants to work with the City. Ron Folsom went on with their requests for cluster homes. He stated the minimum lot size shall be 3500 square feet. They are requesting that the setback be 10 feet when the house does not have a trail in front of it and 5 feet if the trail is in front of it. Soren Simonson explained that trail right-of-ways typically are 15 to 20 feet, so most of these homes will have something similar to a 25 – 30 foot setback. There are a few exceptions to that, but by and large they will be setback fairly consistent with what they have now. There are a number of homes that front on green space, so they wanted a good setback for those homes. It was discussed the 5 feet would be from the trail right-of-way. Ron Folsom explained the next item. He explained they requested attached or detached garages again with the cluster homes. It was questioned how they will enter the garages with the cluster homes. Ron Folsom explained the next item; bi-level homes have a minimum of 1500 square feet. It was discussed they are saying they want a 1000 foot footprint with a minimum of 500 square foot on top. It was discussed that they want the flexibility of doing a slightly smaller footprint. Council discussed they would rather see a minimum footprint of 1000 feet. Soren Simonson explained they are not requesting a smaller home, just flexibility in how is built. Tom Hunsaker explained the requirements for each zone. It was discussed that they already allow a 750 square foot footprint. Councilmember Bean requested a picture of a 750 square foot cluster home. Councilmember Kirkham stated she feels she cannot concede on this. Councilmember Bean asked if Jeff Hawkes would be okay with 900 foot footprint. Jeff Hawkes stated they are mainly looking for some flexibility. Ron Folsom explained the next item. Councilmember Bean asked Jeff if this is what he refers to as “mansion homes”. Jeff Hawkes stated yes. Councilmember Kirkham stated she thought these would be larger. Councilmember Kirkham stated she was stunned by this. She doesn’t recall this size. Jeff Hawkes stated there are looking for a compact home for people that don’t live here all year or someone who doesn’t need as much space. They are asking for some flexibility. These homes would be 2400 square feet and split up as a sort of townhouse. Jeff Hawkes stated if you want quality, you have to give on size. If size is a concern, then you have to give on quality. The concept of the mansion home is smaller than a cluster home but is really high end, very nice. He stated he wants to build to the market and make it look nice. It will look like an estate home, but will not be larger than the cluster homes. Councilmember Bean asked about what the largest mansion they have designed. Soren Simonson stated the largest he has designed is 2500-2600 square feet per unit. He stated an average would be about 1500-1600 square feet per unit. Councilmember Bean inquired if we are concerned with how it looks on the outside or what people want. They want a PUD that ascetically looks nice. Councilmember Kirkham asked how big the homes will be in the RP zone. Jeff Hawkes stated that is hard to answer; there are 53 lots in RP. He envisions them from 2500- 4000 square feet - somewhat like Quail Ridge or the Cottages. The architecture will be set apart from the norm. Jeff Hawkes suggested a minimum of 1200 square foot on one side and 1500 on the other side, so 2700 total square footage. Councilmember Bean said he could live with that. Councilmember Kirkham stated she could go with the 1200 - 1500 but she wants the cluster homes pushed up. Ron Folsom explained Section 4. Councilmember Bean asked if they requested a side yard. Jeff Hawkes stated he thought it was the same – they were asking for RPA setbacks. Tom Hunsaker stated he forgot to put that in, but what they would be requesting is 10 foot side yards. Ron Folsom explained the next item regarding a reduction in parking standard. Commercial streets inside development will be 20 ft. instead of 30 ft. The landscaping within the development is being requested to be 10 ft. instead of 15 ft. Councilmember Bean stated we should base it on a usage. Councilmember Bean motioned that we approve the Master Plan of Hawks Landing PUD and the codes, covenants, and restrictions of Hawks Landing Planned Unit Development be made part of the Hawks Landing Development Agreement and City Council have final review and approval of those CC&Rs and the following items be included as part of the Master Plan Approval and also be included as part of the Hawks Landing Development Agreement for Hawks Landing Final Plans with the following changes: 1) All lots affected would be delineated in the development agreement in Sections 1 and 5, 2) 15 foot side yards allowed when the lot building width at setback is less than 90 feet, in Section 1 and 5. 3) Building setback from trail right of way; City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 6 4) Section 6 to read combined levels of home shall be a minimum of 1500 square feet with a 900 square foot footprint above ground and with a 7.5 foot side yard; 5) Section 3 changes Item 6, combined levels of a home shall be minimum of 2700 square foot combined, with a minimum of 1200 on one side; 6) Section 4 should include 10 foot side yards; 7) Section 6 should read reduction in parking standard must be approved by the City Council following recommendation of the City Engineer. It is C1 instead of HC-1. Councilmember Waite seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Kirkham – No. Councilmember Kirkham stated she thinks this is contrary to what was initially presented. 5. Preliminary Plat, Hawks Landing Division 1 (Pending Public Hearing): Ron Folsom explained where Division 1 is located. Councilmember Bean asked if there are any changes that need to be made based upon what they just approved. Councilmember Bean asked if Jeff Hawkes would be willing to do a traffic study. Jeff Hawkes stated they would. Councilmember Bean stated if they were to approve Division 1, then they would want Jeff to improve Sunnyside Road at the same time. Councilmember Bean motioned to approve the Preliminary Plat, Hawks Landing Division 1 with the condition that he improves his frontage on Sunnyside at the same time and does a traffic study, which will include Scenic Drive & the new Quail Ridge, which includes the current Founder’s Point and the proposed Founder’s Point in the future. Councilmember Waite seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Waite –Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes and Councilmember Thompson – Yes. The motion passed. 6. Conditional Use Permit Liberty Square – Physical/Occupational Therapy Office : Ron Folsom explained where Liberty Square is located. He explained this proposal for Liberty Square is to lease a space for an occupational and physical therapist office. He explained P&Z’s recommendation. Angela Tanaka, 5292 Tildy Circle, stated there would be one occupational therapist and one physical therapist plus staff at one time. Councilmember Bean inquired if it was for the residents at Liberty Square or for residents of Ammon. Angela Tanaka stated it would be for both. She believes it will be beneficial to Ammon. Councilmember Bean asked if this area is already constructed. Angela Tanaka stated it is constructed and they would be leasing a spot. Tom Hunsaker covered P&Z’s recommendations. He explained they did not recommend approving an advertising sign, but they did recommend approving a directional sign. Councilmember Thompson inquired to Angela Tanaka, if they are approved by the State. Angela Tanaka stated they have to be certified with the State. Councilmember Bean inquired as to who has the Conditional Use Permit and how long it lasts. Ron Folsom explained that it goes with the Physical/Occupational Therapy Office at the Liberty Square address and lasts three years. Councilmember Kirkham motioned to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Tanaka and Associates at Liberty Square – Tanaka and Assoc. Physical/Occupational Therapy Office with the recommendations by Planning & Zoning. Councilmember Thompson seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, Councilmember Waite – Yes, and Councilmember Bean – Yes. The motion passed. 7. Preliminary Site Plan – Ideacom: Ron Folsom explained the property is located across the street from the Rockwell Development to the South. Councilmember Bean asked if everything meets code. Plans show that the driveways are 25 ft. and they are going to be widening them to 40 ft. Ron Folsom explained Planning & Zoning’s concern was if the first one was too close to the intersection. Bill explained that cueing isn’t a problem on this side of the street. Councilmember Thompson stated he thinks the Council made a mistake with Walgreens when they allowed their storm drainage pond to be included as part of their landscaping. Councilmember Bean asked where he would suggest they put storm drainage. The developer explained the obvious place to put the storm drains would be the 30 feet required landscape along the arterial. Councilmember Bean suggested digging it out and putting gravel in to make it shallow. It is still a storm drainage pond. It is shallower, but it will drain. Bill Manwill explained an option for the storm drain would be to put a standard swale with a drain structure (base gravel) that goes through the soil – simple as a manhole draining cover. They would basically dig out with base gravel then it’s a linear drain, dig out the topsoil, back fill with washed rock to 2-4 inches below that, put in fabric liner with 4 inches of topsoil with the manhole cover. Councilmember Kirkham asked the developer if they would have a problem doing that type of drain. The developer stated it would be added cost. Councilmember Bean explained they don’t really have a choice if the city requires this. Councilmember Thompson stated he doesn’t think the swales will look any better than a hole. Councilmember Bean motioned to approve the Preliminary Site Plan with storm drainage pond to be constructed per an 18” swale dug down to gravel level being a standard set per Bill. Councilmember Kirkham seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Waite – Yes. The motion passed. City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 7 8. Concessionaire Proposal – Peterson Park: Councilmember Kirkham asked where the shave shack is. City Administrator Bruce Rose stated it is at corner of Ammon and Sunnyside and they want to move it from there to Peterson Park. Bruce Rose stated he has a concern about an existing business wanting to move from a commercial forum to public property. A minority would make a special trip to the shave shack. The WBBA does concessions on their own. Councilmember Bean has a problem with putting the snow shack somewhere where there is traffic. It was discussed they would have to find their own electricity or make a proposal. Councilmember Kirkham stated they would reconsider this with different terms. Councilmember Bean said he would not due to safety issues. Councilmember Bean motioned to deny the proposed shave shack in Peterson Park. Councilmember Kirkham seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Bean – Yes, Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, and Councilmember Waite – Yes. The motion passed. Glenn Wilson – Bartender License: Leslie Folsom asked the Mayor to discuss this issue originally on the Consent Agenda. Scott Hall read Glenn Wilson’s criminal record. Councilmember Kirkham motioned to deny Glenn R. Wilson’s bartender license based on Ordinance 4-2-15C, indicating he is currently on probation. Councilmember Thompson seconded. Roll call vote: Councilmember Kirkham – Yes, Councilmember Thompson – Yes, Councilmember Bean – Yes, and Councilmember Waite – Yes. The motion passed. Massage establishment: Leslie Folsom asked if the owner is therapist if they have to pay the therapist fee. Councilmember Bean stated it is in the ordinance, so they do not have a choice. 9. Memorandum of Understanding – Household Hazardous Waste Event: This item was moved to Items from the Mayor. DISCUSSION ITEMS : 1. Personnel Policy Amendments – Idaho Dept. Commerce and Labor: City Administrator Bruce Rose stated to Council, if they recall, they disbursed a little over $400,000 to H&K for a water right project which came to us from the Idaho Dept. of Commerce and Labor as part of the half million dollar economic development grant. That disbursement prompted them to come and visit us and review our grant files and other things based on that grant. They asked to see a copy of our personnel policy. They are requiring us to adopt this EEO policy. We also have to have an Equal Opportunity Agreement procedure as part of the grant. They had a template we used. Scott Hall reviewed both as per Bruce Rose. He would like Council to review them and bring them back for a later date to approve them. Councilmember Thompson asked why we had to wait to a later date. They will put them on as an action item in three weeks. 2. Misc. Leslie Folsom stated on daycare she has had questions from providers asking why they have to have an investigation through the City when they already have one through the State. She contacted three members of the State and they only do one investigation if the people stay with the same business. If they change businesses, they have three years to order another investigation. Then they will do a name check only and a local investigation only. She has told people that it’s not strong enough for Ammon. She thought Council should know in case someone asks them. She would also like Council’s permission to list those daycares and massage that have been approved on our website. Council stated it is all public record anyway, so they do not have a problem. Council discussed a letter sent to Council from Mick Ohman. Councilmember Bean stated he has talked to Gary Cooper, the Mayor and Bruce Rose. It is his recommendation that they do not respond to it. They are claiming they have a contract, and he thinks it will foster ill will. He feels it does not do us any good to enforce anything right now. The reason for the letter was to put them on notice that they have a situation with the Regional Sewer Project to address. He thinks the Regional Sewer Project will eventually contact them. They have an agreement to use our lines. They do not have an agreement with the Regional Sewer Project. Council chose to drop the issue at this point and time. Councilmember Bean recommended to the Mayor to talk to the Regional Sewer Project to see how they want to address the issue. Councilmember Bean motioned to adjourn to executive session. Councilmember Kirkham seconded. All in favor, motion passed. The meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m. ___________________________________________ C. Bruce Ard, Mayor ______________________________________ Leslie Folsom, City Clerk City Council Minutes 03/15/2007 -- 8