Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-10-21(:�WEi IDAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR AHO MEETING AGENDA City Council Chambers 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, October 21, 2014 at 6:00 PM 1. Roll -Call Attendance X David Zaremba X Joe Borton X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Genesis Milam X Luke Cavener O Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Community Invocation by 4. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted 5. Consent Agenda Approved Pg 2-4 A. Approve Minutes of September 22, 2014 City Council Strategic Planning Meeting B. Approve Minutes of October 7, 2014 City Council Regular Meeting C. Recreational Pathway Easement Between Brighton Development, Inc. and the City of Meridian for Messina Meadows #5 D. Resolution No. 14-1025: A Resolution to Retire Police Canines BLITZ and BOWSER E. Approval of Sole Source Purchase for Mtell Predictive Analysis/Conditions Based Management Software and Professional Services from Mtell F. Development Agreement for Approval: AZ 14-006 Victory Middle School by Joint School District No. 2 Located 2045 S. Stoddard Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 27.96 Acres of Land with an R-4 Zoning District G. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: MDA 14-004 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (Inst. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — Tuesday, October 21, 2014 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. #1051844653 and #108101151) for the Purpose of Excluding the Property AND Creating a New Development Agreement to Include the Project Boundary and Site Plan Proposed with Kinsley Subdivision H. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 14-003 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Rezone Approximately 3.42 Acres from L -O (Limited Office) and R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) Zoning Districts to the C -C (Business Community) Zoning Districts I. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 14-001 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Preliminary / Final Plat Approval of Three (3) Commercial Lots on Approximately 2.61 Acres in the Proposed C -C Zoning District J. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 14-002 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Conditional Use Permit for the Following: 1) A Drive-Thru Establishment Within 300 Feet of a Residential District AND 2) Extended Hours of Operation in Accord with UDC 11-213-4 in the Proposed C -C Zoning District 6. Community Items/Presentations A. ACCEM Joint Powers Agreement History Discussion Motion Approved to bring back to November 5, 2014 meeting. Approved Pg 4-9 B. Annual Lakeview Golf Course Update Continued to October 28, 2014 Approved Pg 9-31 7. Items Moved From Consent Agenda None Approved Pg 31 8. Action Items A. Public Hearing: TEC 14-006 Jericho by Viper Investments, LLC Located West Side of N. Jericho Road and South of Chinden Boulevard Request: One (1) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat in Order to Obtain the City Engineer's Signature on a Final Plat Continued to November 5, 2014 Approved Pg 31-32 B. Continued from October 7, 2014: Public Hearing: AP 14-002 Polaris Pre - School at Fairview Lakes by Fairview Lakes, LLC Located 950 E. Fairview Avenue Request: City Council Review of the Planning and Zoning Commission's Decision on CUP 14-010 (Condition #1.4d) Pertaining to the Parking Lot Design Approved Pg 32-34 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — Tuesday, October 21, 2014 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 9. Department Reports A. Public Works: Discussion of Subgrant Agreement with Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEA) and Authorization for Staff to Sign the Agreement Approved Pg 34-36 B. Public Works: Budget Amendment - IDEQ Source Water Protection Grant for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $23,000.00 Approved Pg 36-38 C. Parks Department: Christmas in Meridian Donation Discussion and Approval Approved Pg 38-41 1. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between the City of Meridian and Connections Credit Union for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $1,000.00 2. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between Idaho Independent Bank and the City of Meridian for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $500.00 3. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between All American Insurance and the City of Meridian for Amount of $500.00 4. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between Borton-Lakey Law and Policy and the City of Meridian for a Not -to - Exceed Amount of $2,000.00 D. Human Resources and Legal Departments: Social Media Policy and Social Media Procedure E. Resolution No. 14-1026: Adoption of Social Media Policy and Social Media Procedure Request to bring back to the November 5, 2014 meeting Pg 41- 45 F. Community Development: Unified Development Code Changes - Title 11 Amendments Discussion Pg 45-62 G. Community Development: Adoption of Communities in Motion 2040 - The Regional Long -Range Transportation Plan Adopted Pg 62-64 H. Community Development: Resolution No. 14-1027: Endorsing Communities in Motion 2040 - The Long -Range Transportation Plan for Ada and Canyon Counties Approved Pg 62-64 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — Tuesday, October 21, 2014 Page 3 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 10. Ordinances A. Ordinance No.14-1626: An Ordinance (AZ 14-006) Victory Middle School For Annexation And Rezone Of A Parcel Located In The East % Of The W % Of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, And Determining The Land Use Zoning Classification Of Said Lands From Rut To R-4 (Low Density Residential District) In The Meridian City Code; And Providing An Effective Date Approved Pg 64-65 11. Future Meeting Topics A. IdahoSTARS Request for Discussion Regarding Childcare Standards in Idaho Schedule for a Future Workshop Pg 65-67 12. Executive Session Per Idaho State Code 67-2345 (1)(c): (c) To Conduct Deliberations Concerning Labor Negotiations or to Acquire an Interest in Real Property, Which is Not Owned by a Public Agency Into Executive Session at 9:28 p.m. Out of Executive Session at 9:43 p.m. Adjourned at 9:43 p.m. Pg 67-68 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda — Tuesday, October 21, 2014 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council Workshop October 21, 2014 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:10 p.m., Tuesday, October 21, 2014, by President Charlie Rountree. Members Present: Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, David Zaremba Joe Borton, Genesis Milam and Luke Cavener. Members Not Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Bruce Chatterton, Kyle Radek, Justin Lucas, John Overton, Mark Niemeyer, Steve Siddoway, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll -call Attendance: Z.7RM X David Zaremba X Joe Borton X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Genesis Milam _X_ Lucas Cavener Mayor Tammy de Weerd Rountree: I'm going to open the regular City Council meeting for Tuesday, October 21st, 2014, at 6:10. First item on the agenda is roll call vote. Roll call, please, Madam Mayor. Or -- not Madam Mayor. She's gone. Madam Clerk. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance Rountree: Next item on the agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you'd stand and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Trey Drake Rountree: Is there somebody here to provide the invocation? Thank you. If you would all join us in the community invocation. Welcome. Drake: Oh, God in Heaven, thank you for the City of Meridian. And, Lord, I just pray for peace for our city, all the citizens and thinking of the -- the firefighters and the police officers, the teachers, all those servants who support us and make this city go and so we just pray for them, Lord, and also for the peace of the people who live in this town also, the families and just praying that you would protect them, God, and that all the needs would be met or that there wouldn't be anybody that would be -- that would go hungry or would need somebody to come alongside of them and we just pray, God, that you would take care of them and, Lord, we just pray for our -- these people here tonight. We are thankful, God, that we live in a nation where we get to elect our representatives Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 2 of 68 and we can live free in a way to choose our leaders and so I just pray, God, that you would give them wisdom to make good decisions on how they spend money and the direction of the city, Lord, we know your Word says that righteousness exalts a nation and so we just pray, God, for righteousness to rule over Meridian and these people's hearts tonight and every night and so we just ask God that you bless them and encourage them and it's in Jesus' name we pray, amen. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda Rountree: Thank you. Next item is the adoption of the agenda. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda, 5-D resolution number is 14-1025. On Action Items, Action Item 8-A has a request by the applicant to continue that to November 5th, 2014. the resolution -- proposed resolution for Item 9-E is 14-1026 and Item 9-H the resolution for -- proposed resolution number is 14-027 and with that I move we adopt the agenda. Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor signify by aye. Opposed same sign? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of September 22, 2014 City Council Strategic Planning Meeting B. Approve Minutes of October 7, 2014 City Council Regular Meeting C. Recreational Pathway Easement Between Brighton Development, Inc. and the City of Meridian for Messina Meadows #5 D. Resolution No. 14-1025: A Resolution to Retire Police Canines BLITZ and BOWSER E. Approval of Sole Source Purchase for Mtell Predictive Analysis/Conditions Based Management Software and Professional Services from Mtell Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 3 of 68 F. Development Agreement for Approval: AZ 14-006 Victory Middle School by Joint School District No. 2 Located 2045 S. Stoddard Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 27.96 Acres of Land with an R-4 Zoning District G. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: MDA 14- 004 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (Inst. #1051844653 and #108101151) for the Purpose of Excluding the Property AND Creating a New Development Agreement to Include the Project Boundary and Site Plan Proposed with Kinsley Subdivision H. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 14-003 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Rezone Approximately 3.42 Acres from L -O (Limited Office) and R-15 (Medium High -Density Residential) Zoning Districts to the C -C (Business Community) Zoning Districts I. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP 14-001 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Preliminary / Final Plat Approval of Three (3) Commercial Lots on Approximately 2.61 Acres in the Proposed C -C Zoning District J. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 14- 002 Kinsley by DL Evans Bank Located Northeast Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Pine Avenue Request: Conditional Use Permit for the Following: 1) A Drive-Thru Establishment Within 300 Feet of a Residential District AND 2) Extended Hours of Operation in Accord with UDC 11-213-4 in the Proposed C -C Zoning District Rountree: Next item is the Consent Agenda. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: As stated in the adoption of the agenda, Item 5-D is -- the resolution proposed for 14-1025, which is to retire police canines Blitz and Bowser and with that I move that we accept the Consent Agenda and for the President to sign and the Clerk to attest. Milam: Second. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 4 of 68 Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda. Roll call vote, please. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: And I believe the folks that just got up might have been here for Action Item 8-A, the public hearing on Jericho. If there is anybody else in the audience that is here for that particular item, that's going to be continued until November 5th. So, you're welcome to stay, but you have got -- your evening is freed up if you wish to go, so -- thank you. Item 6: Community Items/Presentations A. ACCEM Joint Powers Agreement History Discussion Rountree: Next item on the agenda is the community presentation of ACCEM Joint Powers Agreement. Hardman: Good evening, Mr. President, Members of the Council. My name is Doug Hardman, I'm the director of Ada County Emergency Management and I was asked by the clerk's office to come by this evening, give you some background information on the joint powers agreement that I believe is before you this evening and answer any questions that you might have and I will keep this brief. Idaho Code 46-1009, called the Local and Intergovernmental Disaster Agencies and Services. It's simply noted that each county shall maintain a disaster agency or participate in the intergovernmental disaster agency, which has jurisdiction over and serves the entire county. Well, I did a lot of research when I started -- I have been here about 25 years and I went and I found in the late 1950s when Ada County decided to create this entity, they decided to create an intergovernmental agency. I think their wisdom back then -- they know that this was beyond any one jurisdiction's capability and all need to work together to do this. So, they created an entity with Boise city and it was called the Ada -Boise Civil Defense. They also approved a 15 member advisory council to help direct those -- civil defense is what it was called back then or emergency management activities. In the 1960s as the city developed the leaders decided there was a need for input from the other cities as they incorporated. So, they asked them to join in and be a part of the advisory council for civil defense. They also, then, created a budget and it was split among those member agencies based on population. Over the years, as I said, -- well, obviously, from the '60s and 70s there has been a lot of changes. Every time there is a new director usually there is a new name and so a lot of things have occurred. One of the biggest ones is in the early 1990s -- about 1991 Ada County Highway District was asked to become a voting member and be a part of the joint powers agreement, because of all -- they own all the heavy equipment and roadways and are a major player in a disaster. So, they joined in. So, today it's called the Ada County Emergency Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 5 of 68 Management Executive Council. It's made up of six cities, the county, and the highway district. There are ten voting members. The six mayors of each of the cities within Ada County, two county commissioners, one ACHD commissioner and one Boise -- additional Boise city council person. For Meridian that's been Mayor de Weerd and Councilman Bird has sat in on many, many meetings as her backup representative. There is membership dues associated with membership in the joint powers agreement. It's, again, based on population for cities and the county. It's -- currently what we are paying is about 33 cents per resident for the population, so for Meridian, to give you an example, Meridian's dues for fiscal year 2015 -- 2015 in the future is about 28,000 dollars. My total budget of -- or the total membership dues is about 288,000 dollars. So, pays about ten percent of that, which is about five percent of my total budget overall. Ada County recognizes it's their responsibility by code to provide this service, so Ada County pays 55 percent of all the dues. They pay of all the county and the unincorporated area again. ACHD pays a flat rate. The joint powers agreement -- what does it mean? It was -- there was a joint powers agreement when I started in 1989. It was updated again in 2005 and this last year we updated it one more time to reflect some of the changes in the past. The joint powers agreement -- really what it does is it insures that each of the cities and their representatives have a seat at the table with the other elected officials. They have a voice at the table to help guide decisions and policies towards making our communities safer and by that I mean it's things like participants of the mayors and county will jointly identify plans for an assessed hazards and risks affecting residents of all of Ada County and you will help guide future preparedness efforts across all mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery activities and you will help set priorities for the development of reaching of what are called core emergency management capabilities. It's planning, training and exercising. So, by being a part of that joint powers agreement you get an active voice and in that with the other cities and the highway district. Our role then -- my office -- I have -- we are a staff of four and a half people. It's our job to make sure that we implement the joint powers agreement and we also meet all the federal requirements that come with that and because we receive federal funds and so do many of your entities -- I'm sure you're all aware there are so many federal laws governing all the hoops you have to jump through to be eligible for certain funds, so a big role that my office plays is to insure that we meet all those. To give you an example, every community has to have an all hazard mitigation plan if you're going to be eligible for pre -disaster mitigation grants and post -disaster. An example in Snohomish county, they had the big landslide, they requested a federal declaration. They would not have received federal financial assistants had they not had that all hazards mitigation plan. So, what my office does is makes sure that we have that in place and that covers the six cities, the county, and the highway district. So, all plans that my office does covers all the cities and on your behalf. Every community is required to have a hazards materials plan according to the Emergency Planning and Community Right -To -Know Act. Following Hurricane Katrina FEMA requires an evacuation plan and I won't bore you with the list. There is many, many, many there and our office works on those plans regularly. We also assist and funded for the City of Meridian a continuity of operations plan or business continuity plan and we also finished emergency operations plans for each of the six cities and the highway district. So, we facilitate all that. We facilitate training through National Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 6 of 60 Incident Management System compliance. We provide also facilitation and assistance with exercises -- emergency drills and exercises and the list is long of the training and exercises that we have done over the years. So, we facilitate all that and, then, the final thing is the equipment. We also manage the homeland security grant program and come with that is some pretty significant federal dollars to purchase certain equipment to make the community more prepared for high risk events like terrorist events or major catastrophes and we facilitate that as well. And, again, as I stated earlier, the joint powers agreement -- I have got about half the cities signed. The other half should be done in the next two weeks and I think the elected officials -- sometimes it's challenging to get all the cats going in one direction, but when it comes to emergencies and planning for, training for and being prepared, our working together is a good thing. And, Mr. President, with that I will stand for questions. Rountree: Questions for Doug? Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: Doug, they have created a new office -- you say you got four and a half people. And excluding -- what is financing this office besides our dues? Hardman: What is the financing? Bird: How -- who is paying for this new office? Is it general funds out of the county or what? Hardman: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, it's -- some of the changes that were made are not very intuitive and they are a little hard to follow, but my office is the same. What has changed is the name. Ada City County Emergency Management is now the name for the, ten executive council members. That's Ada City County Emergency Management. They changed my name from that to the Ada County Department of Emergency Management. So, nothing else has changed. We used to have five and a half positions. I just had an individual retire three weeks ago. So, as of today we are at four and a half. The funding is -- Meridian pays 28,000 out of 288,000 in membership dues. Ada County pays 160,000 of that. Bird: I understand. Hardman: The other half of my budget, then, is made up with federal matching funds of about 240,000. Bird: Okay. And our new executive board -- as it used to be they made the decisions of what was purchased and what was done and stuff, am I not right? And now they -- now them and TAG are just advisory people? They don't make the final decision? Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 7 of 6B Hardman: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, the subcommittee, like the local emergency planning committee, the technical advisory committee, any other committee that the executive council forms is advisory in nature and they make their recommendations not to me, but to the executive council. The executive council, then, makes their vote and their decision on what they want to do and ultimately who signs the very one is Ada County commissioners. Bird: The Commissioners have the final say. Hardman: Correct. Bird: What the executive council decides isn't -- isn't necessarily what will go down if the commissioners don't want it to; am I not right? Hardman: Well, that was -- the discussion was that it would very rarely happen that they see it, but ultimately because the grants go to the Ada County commissioners and the commissioners by the grant have to sign and approve everything, that that's their -- the county attorney's interpretation of that. Correct. Bird: Doug, can you answer another question? Are we required to be members to receive any of these federal grants? Hardman: Councilman Bird, I do not believe that you're required to be members, but I can tell you that the only entity the state of Idaho -- the federal funds come down to all 50 states. From there they distribute it to 44 counties -- Bird: I think that's right Hardman: -- and there is about ten specialized items -- state teams. They do not transfer directly funds to any city that I'm aware of. Bird: Okay. And that's -- I know they have to come through the county, but do you have to be a dues paying member to receive any of these if you need it? Any of these federal grants? Hardman: Councilman Bird, I do not think that you have to necessarily be a member, because we have given money to entities like the American Red Cross for shelters and whatnot. They are not dues paying members. Bird: Okay. Well, Council, I -- this -- I want to -- I'm not ready to vote on this resolution tonight. I think we need to have some more clarity. I'd like to talk to our two representatives from TAG and also the representative on the Council that voted for this agreement before I make a final vote. I'll leave it to the rest of you. Rountree: Any other comments, questions for Doug? Go ahead. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 8 of 68 Cavener: I just want to make sure that I have got enough clarity on this. So, currently under this -- this agreement there is a scenario that exists where the -- if the quote, unquote, advisory would make a recommendation and if the county commissioners disagreed with that, that would void the recommendation from the advisory board? Hardman: There is a ten member advisory board Cavener: I understand that. Hardman: If they -- it's my understanding they could make a recommendation and ultimately the commissioners could deny it. Cavener: Okay. Appreciate that clarification. Thank you. Rountree: Further questions? I have a question for Mr. Nary. Bill, wasn't the previous action on this item approval of the JPA and not subject to this information, but this information would come to us or is that document still needing authorization? Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, what I was going to suggest -- what's not included here, which you previously passed, is a resolution that approved the JPA, along with the bylaws and what you have in here are all of those documents, but don't have any approving documents that goes with it, like a resolution. So, certainly if the Council would like a little more time to ponder this and to consider that -- my intent would be to bring back a resolution for you to approve with these documents that are already attached. If there needs to be further discussion, then, I think that can be done at the meeting level -- Rountree: Okay. Nary: -- not at the Council -- not here. Rountree: All right. No further questions, what's the Council's desire? Bird: I desire to bring it back in two weeks. Rountree: Is that a motion? Bird: That's a motion. Bring it back November 5th. Cavener: I will second that. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to bring this draft resolution back to Council on November 5th. Roll call vote. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 9 of 68 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Hardman: Mr. President? Rountree: Yes. Hardman: If I can help in any way, get you any other additional information, just contact me. Rountree: We will do that, Doug. Thank you for being here. Appreciate it. B. Annual Lakeview Golf Course Update Rountree: Next item on the agenda is the annual Lakeview Golf Course update from Erik Oaas. Good evening, Erik. Oaas: Good evening. Get the presentation on the screen here. President Rountree and Members of the Meridian City Council -- can you hear me okay? Okay. Can you hear me okay now? Can you hear me -- can you,hear me now. There we go. Okay. It's a pleasure to be here before you tonight to again talk about what we call the Lakeview Golf Course progress report. We call it a progress report, because it is a work in progress. We don't -- we certainly don't claim -- and never have claimed that -- that we have got to be all and end all at the Lakeview Golf Course, but we are making what I consider to be substantial progress year after year. How do I -- how do I advance the screen? Rountree: I'm sure you don't know anything about the Polaris Preschool. Oaas: I could speak for hours on that. Next slide. So, just very briefly, an operations update for where things are at. As I mentioned to you last year, there is no changes to Lakeview Meridian investors. It continues to be the lessor of the links of the city. Oaas Lee are the -- continue to be the sole members of the LLC. We have received a letter of good standing from the City of Meridian, which we are very pleased to have, which, of course, indicates that we believe and'the city believes that we are in full compliance with the -- all terms of the lease. The golf industry nationwide remains relatively flat. I think that we see -- we are seeing here in -- at Lakeview a slight uptick due to the excellent course condition and what we consider to be a real customer service focus. Our management personnel has changed from last year. We have a new director of golf operations and food and beverage manager. His name is Patrick Moad. Patrick has over 20 years experience in the golf business with -- primarily with the military, but also seven years with the Plantation Golf Course here in town. Our marketing director and office manager is Mary Claire Norman. She, too, has tremendous experience over ten years here in the valley and, then, our course superintendent and groundskeeper is Rich Rush and the only thing I can say about him is he's the best. We truly believe we have the best groundskeeper and we are pleased with the golf course now and into the Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 10 of 68 fall of the year. It's incredible. Maintenance in 2014. All -- all the maintenance per the requirements of the lease have been -- have been performed per plan. We have also removed the dead trees near the parking lot. We have a tree -- another dead tree on the 14th fairway that will be removed here within the next two weeks and we plan to trim up the two nearby trees at the same time. We also at that time will remove the -- there is another dead tree -- Poplar tree near the number one tee that needs to also come out. This year we also planted the decorative grasses on the dike on the pond and the driving range to -- to give a little bit better of a backdrop. It's such a beautiful scene to look out there at the -- at the Lakeview driving range and the Lakeview pond with a fountain, that the only drawback is that dike that we have to put in when we lose the irrigation water at the end of the season. We -- we pump water from our wells into that smaller part of the pond. We continue to repair multiple mainline irrigation breaks. We had another one today and this year, from a maintenance standpoint, there really has been a concerted effort to really control the weeds on the golf course much better than -- than we have been able to do in the past, because we acquired a -- a sprayer and it really, really has done a -- made a big difference. Just a couple of pictures here. One -- the one on the left is -- I took it this afternoon, but I mean it's just -- the course is just absolutely incredibly beautiful for this late in the year. It's just -- it's unbelievable. Down in the lower right-hand corner this is the new rerouted cart path behind the number eight green that for -- you know, for quite a period of time was creating problems with -- with some of the local -- the local subdivision that borders the area, because we had carts driving on the -- on the sidewalk, but what we did is we -- we just simply cut the turf, rerouted the -- the cart path and -- and, believe it or not, it's just completely taken care of the problem. I mean I was sort of a little bit of a doubting Thomas, I thought people would drive on the -- on the sidewalk anyway, but it's a simple, clean, solution that has worked really well. This is a picture of the -- of the tree on the 14th fairway that will come out. These poplar trees and cottonwood trees were planted when the golf course went in and they provided an awful lot of good shelter, but certainly have a life expectancy and one by one, you know, we take them out as they die. The other thing -- just back to -- the other thing to notice in this picture are all the -- the new young trees that we are planting. You can see that are growing in underneath the shadow of these cottonwood trees and, again, we are -- we are trying to sort of get to a point where we don't have to have, you know, a big break when we take a tree down, but we are continuing to beautify as we go along. Capital improvements for the year. The two on the top are two that are in process and we don't have them completed yet, so I have only listed the items that -- that have already been completed for the year. But we are in the process of buying five additional golf carts. It's -- it will be about 13,000 and we will time them most likely so that we -- we have them before the start of the next season, even though we will put the order in this year and start paying for them as -- in between now and spring. The number eight green is -- has always been a challenge and it's been a challenge - not -- not just because of -- a normal challenge we like to see on a golf course, but -- but it's been likened to playing on the surface of a bowling ball and it's -- it's very, very difficult to have the pin placement on that green anywhere that -- that's reasonable. So, we -- we have in place a tentative plan to rebuild that green and to potentially take some of the -- some of the turf from the green and expand the chipping and putting area near the clubhouse and -- Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 11 of 68 Rountree: Excuse me, Erik. Is that number nine, not number eight? Oaas: I'm sorry. It's number nine. Excuse me. Nine is the -- thank you, President Rountree. It is -- it is number nine. But we -- due to the -- due to the cost that's involved we are trying to -- you know, to find a way to sort of do it in phases, but the first -- the first part of this or what we tackle first will be the -- the rebuild of the green itself. The Toro sprayer I have already talked about and, again, it's made just a huge impact having that when we need it, rather than having to borrow it, you know, for -- you know, what we would take care in a normal day. We have purchased some new capital equipment for the kitchen and put it in place and, again, you have seen pictures of the rebuilt cart path on number seven green. So, for what we have completed and paid for year to date, it's about 7,700, but, you know, there will be additional spending between now and the end of the year. The current challenge is no surprise here. The irrigation system inadequacy continues to cause problems and it's a substantial cost to -- to replace it. We continue to remain hopeful that -- that we will -- we will be able to work with the city and use the city's reclaimed water, but we understand -- we also understand that there are substantial hoops yet to go jump through and -- and with the EPA's NPDES permit for the city -- not in final form yet, we are just trying encourage all -- anyone and everyone to make sure that their voices are heard at the public hearing when that will be -- I presume it will be within the next month or so. We believe -- again, we believe the reclaimed water is just an ideal -- is an ideal use of that water, rather than having to use irrigation water that could be used for crop growing opportunities, why not use the reclaimed water and it certainly makes a lot of sense. Current opportunities. The loyalty of the Lakeview Golf Course golfers is incredible and growing. Our men's and women's associations remain very active and involved and, of course, maintenance, as I have said over and over again, is excellent and if you -- if you -- if you don't keep the course in good shape, the rest of it doesn't really matter. We had a -- just back to this -- here is a quote that, you know, I asked Ken Marler if I could use this and he said sure. But Lakeview Golf Course greens are equal to or better than all of the courses in the valley and he's a guy that plays -- he plays all over the place. He owns the Express Cafe here in Meridian, very credible and -- and a good, loyal supporter of the golf course. Our capital improvements plan for seven years -- you have seen this before. The only change to what you have seen before is -- I'm just sort of showing what is underway according to the seven year plan and what -- we bought golf carts -- five golf carts last year and we are buying another five this year and, again, I got number eight green here, but this -- it's actually number nine is the one that's underway and -- and it will potentially, depending on cost -- it will spill over into the -- the expansion of the putting green and chipping area. Bunker renovation. The car path replacement, as I said before, the work that we did behind the number eight green this year is part of that effort and landscaping projects is sort of a catchall, but -- but all the nearly 200 trees that we planted and the beautification that we -- that we do and put in place around the course is -- is underway and will continue to be underway. And last, but not lease, I would never feel good if I didn't do shameless advising. We are offering our -- our fall pass to be bought online at teetiming.com and also -- we are also trying something new in our restaurant and that is we are publishing ahead of time the -- the Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 12 of 68 daily special for dinner for each -- each night of the week for each month and we will change it up depending on the popularity and how well it seems to go over, but we are publishing that and printing that and putting it on all the golf carts, putting it in the pro shop and -- and even potentially in the local news -- homeowners newsletters. With that I just want to say thank you to the City of Meridian for all your continued support and we greatly respect and honor the privilege that you have given us to lease the golf course and we believe we are doing a great -- great job in managing the jewel for you. Any questions? Rountree: Questions for Erik? Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: Erik, on your -- on your golf carts, are they not replacements or are they new golf carts that you're adding to your fleet? Oaas: These will be additional carts. Bird: Yeah. Your fleet. So, they are really a capital improvement. Oaas: Yeah. Bird: Okay. Oaas: We have -- right now we have 39 carts and that's what we had last year when we added the five. But we -- we will be adding five to the 39, so it will bring us -- bring us up to, you know, mid 40s and -- and there seems to be sort of a magic number of about 55 in a fleet, but -- those -- that's is derived from courses where -- where patrons can't use their own golf carts. So, 45 for us is really the target we are after. Bird: Okay. Thank you. I just -- I didn't know if they were replacements or additions to your exiting fleet. Milam: Mr. President? I just have a question regarding the cost of the -- in your seven year plan you have the cost of the rebuilding of the green on eight -- or nine, 5,000 dollars, but the first slide you showed us that had the error on it, showed a cost of like 13,000 dollars. Is it 13,000 or is it 5,000? Oaas: The seven year plan that we put together -- well, over a year ago was just a best guess estimate. It's -- the cost for redoing that are based on contemporaneous estimates that we received from the people that we will be working with. Timberstone, Raven Golf Course, Raven Golf Club, they do a lot of greens rebuilding and they will be partnering with our team to do this work. So, it is quite a bit more expensive than what we had budgeted, you know, last year. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 13 of 68 Milam: Okay. So, the seven year plan was last year's budget and the other slide with the 13,000 was current, you just haven't updated the seven year plan yet? Oaas: That's correct. What we should do is -- is update that with what the current numbers are and, Councilman Milam, that's a good fix. I appreciate that recommendation. Milam: Thank you. Cavener: Mr. President? Justin, you're controlling the slides? Could you maybe go back to -- I think the update. Right there. Okay. So -- and this is -- I think maybe there being some inaccuracies besides this slide where some of our confusion is coming from, so you can clarify for me -- number eight green, that work is completed, it's underway? Oaas: No. No. President Rountree corrected me. It's number nine that's underway. Number eight has not been touched yet. Cavener: Okay. And is the assumption, then, that the cost to rework or repair, rebuild that green is going to be more than 5,000 dollars then? Oaas: Number eight -- for number nine absolutely. Yes. It's going to be somewhere between 15 and 25 thousand dollars. Cavener: So, yeah, it's not 13, then, that is in the previous slide? I apologize, I'm just trying to follow the numbers. Oaas: Understand. Understand. Fifteen to 25. Yeah. Cavener: And then -- so, in reality, the number eight green has not began, but the number nine has? Oaas: That's correct. Cavener: And your estimation on the progress on that, are we ten percent there? Are we 50 percent there? Are we 80 percent there? Oaas: We are zero -- well -- Cavener: So, it's really not underway then? Oaas: Well, it is underway, we have contacted the contractor, we are trying to get some breakdown -- excuse me. We are trying to get some breakdown of the cost to see how we might be able to do this in phases, but -- but in terms of actually getting shovel to the ground, it's zero -- zero percent complete. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 14 of 68 Cavener: Mr. President, follow up? Rountree: Please. Cavener: Some clarification on these -- these other projects that are listed as underway— Oaas: Uh-huh. Cavener: -- how many of them has work actually began? Oaas: Well, the golf carts, as I indicated, we bought five last year, we are in the process of buying five this year, so that -- that's underway. The cart path replacement, we rebuilt or re-routed that cart path behind number eight green, so that is underway, you know, this is a -- it's a seven year plan and, then, the landscaping project with the trees that we have planted -- oh, plus -- plus the beautification on the dike that we have this year, that is underway as well. Cavener: Mr. President, one other follow up if I may. In your best estimations on those, then, the progress, your -- maybe for your seven years plan, are you 20 percent there, are you ten percent there, ahead of schedule? I mean do you feel that you're meeting your benchmarks or you're running behind or you're ahead of schedule? Oaas: No. Councilman Cavener, good question, but, no, I believe that we are ahead of schedule. Cavener: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Oaas: You bet. Cavener: Thanks for helping me through that. Oaas: Oh, you bet. I apologize for the confusion. Rountree: Other questions? Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: One, thank you for the report and very much want to thank you for separating the golf cart path from the public sidewalk. While that was a problem I heard from plenty of people that it was a problem and immediately as it was fixed -- I forget, I'm thinking four or five, six months ago now, I heard immediately from people how much they appreciated that. So, that was a positive step and a good thing along Talamar Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 15 of 68 there where there was some confusion and conflict. About the EPA public hearing, if you learn when that's going to be can you post it on the bulletin board, so that people that come to your clubhouse frequently can know, ah ha, this is it and maybe participate. Oaas: Councilman Zaremba, good suggestion and, yes, I'm -- I had the pleasure of going through the wastewater treatment plant. What an incredible facility and I think I have a much better understanding of the -- not only of what they do and the challenges that they have, but -- but the challenges of actually being able to utilize this water are not as simple as yes, no. Zaremba: Well, the reclaimed water part of that is -- is quite a project and we are happy to have the city taking the lead on that, it's a good thing, and we are hoping that you will be able to use some of that at some point, so that will probably be a joint effort I'm sure. Oaas: We are certainly hoping that's possible and we -- we commend the City of Meridian for taking that step. You're way ahead of the curve with any other city in the valley, including the city of Boise. I comment you. You're doing a great job. Zaremba: Good. Thank you. One last question and this is back on a subject that a couple of other people have asked and that's on the golf carts. In relationship to all of the property there, the buildings and the grounds, my understanding is if ever the lease comes to an end, those things need to be returned to the City of Meridian in reasonably good shape, wear and tear accepted. The golf carts are a different thing, though. You mentioned buying golf carts and the capital investment in them. Would those become property of the city at the end of the lease or is that something that you would keep and sell? Oaas: Well, Councilman Zaremba, I think that's a good question, but any -- with the city making the -- the commitment -- the annual commitment of the 6,000 dollars towards the lease, that, obviously, would have to be reconciled with any assets that were acquired along the way and the city would have to be reimbursed and so I don't know whether -- whether some would belong to the city and some would belong to us. I guess I'd have to talk to our esteemed general -- or City Council -- counsel -- Mr. Nary and see what -- what he says about it. I don't have the answer to that. But the city most definitely would -- would -- if the carts are deemed to belong to the city, then, they would go back to the city. Zaremba: I was just looking to see whether Mr. Nary had a comment to throw in there or not. Not to put you on the spot. Nary: That's fine. Mr. President, Members of the Council, I was going to pull the lease up, but it's going to take me more than a minute to do that. I don't recall their specific language in regards to the ownership of those assets. They certainly are a consideration, so I think Mr. Oaas is right, if they are used as a consideration for the release set off, then, there is value that he's placing on that and not requiring the lessee Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 16 of 68 to pay the 6,000 dollars. But I don't recall specifically if the language of the lease spells that out or that would have to be in a separate agreement. Obviously, there is some consideration to it, but I don't think we -- I don't think that particular detail in my recollection is spelled out in the lease, just how to determine that if we got to that point. Zaremba: Thank you. Rountree: Questions? Milam: Mr. President? Kind of along the same lines is I was reviewing the letter from this year regarding the capital improvements that were made. The seven year plan looks great. That -- to me this is wonderful, this is capital improvement. Now, from a business point of view -- and, you know, I'm kind of new, so -- but from my business background I'm looking at these other items as personal property versus capital improvements, which would be more of a fixed asset type of thing. I know it's a little bit different in this scenario, but I just need a little bit of clarification, please. Oaas: Councilman Milam, good question. I understand what you're -- what you're driving at in terms of what is capital, what isn't capital, and we have had -- in the golf course focus group we have had this discussion a number of times and I -- from -- I think the last -- the last time we had this -- this discussion just -- just about a month or so ago, the concern was, as you pointed out, are- -- you know, the kitchen -- the improvements in the kitchen, should they be considered capital and from my perspective and the golf course focus group, it endorsed this ultimately, but from my perspective the -- the lease requires that we provide a restaurant at the facility and that's an absolute requirement in the lease. We -- we don't want to put ourselves into a position where nothing -- nothing gets improved in the kitchen and in the restaurant, because the terms of the lease require that -- that be in place and operational and -- and unless -- unless you, essentially, pull all the kitchen equipment out and -- and have to replace it all at once, it will be replaced piecemeal as it comes up. The equipment that we bought -- that we bought that you're referring to is -- it's substantial equipment. It will be around for ten years. The last -- the last fryer that we had in the kitchen essentially had to go, because it was a fire hazard. It was leaking oil. And the new -- the new fryer that we bought is bullet proof and it will be around. The last one was around for ten years. This one will be around for ten years plus. So, in answer to your question I think we need -- we need to understand that -- that that equipment will be replaced piecemeal and the individual components -- it may not be a capital item, but we -- we don't want to put ourselves in a position where nothing gets repaired, nothing gets replaced, and, then, the -- then we are not able to live up to the terms of the lease. Rountree: Additional questions? Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Joe. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 17 of 68 Borton: In follow up to Council Woman Milam's question, which I think hit the nail on the head, what you have got on the screen before us now clearly depicts what's contemplated as capital improvements, improvements that are constructed and when I look at the terms of the lease most recently in 2013 and back in 2005, the concept of capital improvements always makes reference to construction -- use the word construction, you know, uses the approval of plans and it contemplates very clearly that these are the types of items that, obviously, the city would want to incentivize to improve the real property that -- that you're managing. The remark with regard to golf carts and what's on the list now, you know, none of these items are on the list before us today. Perhaps they are on next year's list with documentation, but items such as a couple pieces of kitchen equipment and golf carts I don't think are anywhere close to what's contemplated by capital improvements. It's an expenditure. It's a cost of doing business. It's not different than buying tables and chairs and pencils and pens. It's equipment that you use to operate and the comment that there may be confusion about golf carts and what comes back to the city and there may be some accounting, from my perspective that's absolutely not what's contemplated by the lease or if the city were giving rent relief for the acquisition of a hot dog roller or a fryer, with the idea that that's kind of what the city is buying and we are going to get that back, I don't -- I don't believe that anyone, nor does the language of the lease contemplate that. So, from my perspective what is incentivized for you is to accomplish the projects like what's displayed here. You know, you come back and show receipts of 6,000, 10,000 for digging up the green and improving a green or landscaping, cart path, things of that nature or the capital construction improvements to real property that benefit the city in exchange for the rent. That's how I see it. So, I think perhaps next year with this list you may very well come back and have -- you know, showing expenditures towards this list of items, which is exactly what I think the city wants to see. But I don't think the tangible personal property expenditures that you have got -- you could probably have a list ten pages long of fryers and tables and chairs. That's not what is contemplated in the language of the -- of any version of the lease and it doesn't -- from my perspective it kind of defies kind of the common sense incentive that the city is trying to encourage and reward you for investing in -- in the city's assets, meaning a capital improvement that's truly constructed. So, I think maybe next year you're there. Maybe in prior years you have been there. From what I see that's been expended, I don't think those qualify. I don't know if Finance has told you anything otherwise. I think they are the -- the prerequisite before it comes here, but that's sort of how I see it. I can't get my head around the personal property items being a quote, construction of a capital improvement upon the premises. Nary: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I have been looking at the lease while you were discussing this item and -- and I would agree and I think -- and maybe there is a method in the future to capture when -- when those types of expenditures may be relevant to this Council. For example, if the clubhouse burned down and you needed to Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 18 of 68 replace all of the major equipment and appliances all at once, like the refrigerator, stoves, those types of things, this Council could decide that the lessee maybe had fronted that money and wants relief over a three year period to recoup their investment, we would, then, memorialize that with an addendum to the agreement to say we are going to recognize that type of expense as a capital improvement or your carts -- and, again, I'm not a golfer, so you will have to -- you will have to bear with me, but if your carts all went south all at once, you needed to purchase 25 carts all at once to maintain your operation, that's a significant investment. Those are things that I would agree with you, Councilman Borton, would not normally be considered a capital investment, except for the large scale volume of it and that's how we in the city recognize some capital investments that are essentially moveable goods and can be considered to be a capital investment, depending on the amount of the cost. Then we would memorialize that, so that way the lessee would have assurance that we wouldn't have this discussion every year and decide one year it's okay and one year it's not. But in looking at the contract -- or looking at the agreement, I would agree that it wasn't contemplated, because there is two places in here where it says all of those expenses are the lessee's responsibility. The equipment and such are the -- for both the food operation -- so, although it does say they may operate a food service, it does say all the equipment is their responsibility to do it and it says it twice. So, I would agree that it wasn't contemplated that that simple types of replacements over -- for maintenance purposes, a stove here or a fryer there, those kind of things were meant to be capital. I think you could make them capital if it's a large scale volume, but individually I think the lease -- I think it puts the responsibility of this on the lessee, not -- not to the city. Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Joe. Borton: What one of your points, I haven't been out there much, but I did go out there Sunday and you made a comment about what Rich does. It's in fantastic shape and I have seen it, you know, over ten, 15 years. It's really in great shape and I think that's, again, a testament to my perspective is to -- you know, the little role the city has to incentivize those types of improvements to the ground is fantastic and I think it's improved greatly. I really do. Oaas: Appreciate the comments Rountree: Further questions? Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Mr. Nary made me think of a question. His example of the clubhouse burning down and needing to be rebuilt reminds me that -- I believe there is a Meridian City Council October 21, 2019 Page 19 of 68 requirement in the lease that the lessee carry insurance. Would you confirm that for me, please? One or the other? Oaas: Yes, that's correct. Zaremba: Okay. Nary: That one I don't have to look at the lease. I know they are required to have insurance, yes. Oaas: That's absolutely correct. Zaremba: Thank you. Rountree: Other questions? Comments? Oaas: Mr. President -- Rountree: Yes, sir. Oaas: -- and Members of the Council, I think there is just -- just one other point that I would like to make before you -- you know, before you act and that is that -- that there are years that we have spent, you know, considerable funds well over and above the 6,000 dollars and there is no -- there is no carryover. So, essentially, each year -- each year is a clean slate as it were and -- and so I just -- I guess I would just -- I would just ask that you consider that and -- and in terms of the -- in terms of the -- what we consider capital -- you know, the golf carts, for example, they are -- I guess, again, my understanding of a capital -- capital item is that a golf cart with a useful life of, you know, five years or more, you know, does comply with the definition of capital. So, we clearly understand it. If the restaurant equipment cannot be considered, you know, we understand that, but we also want the Council to be -- you know, to be aware that we are -- we are doing everything we can to keep the place in excellent condition. So, with that thank you for hearing me out. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: One thing to Erik's last comment. I realize there has been times that you have went over the 6,000, but there has been a lot of times you haven't went up to 6,000 and we forgave you -- have forgiven the lease. So, it's -- it's a two-way street and I agree with Councilman Borton, that to me a capital improvement is something that is built or done that is permanent. A golf cart or a stove or a refrigerator is something -- is something you need to operate your business. I know you can depreciate it and stuff, which you can on capital, but I -- to me that isn't capital and I think our agreement pretty well says that, if you -- or at least that's the way I understand it, but I'm not an attorney. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 20 of 68 Rountree: Further questions? Comments? Mr. Nary, this whole question of capital improvement has been an issue of debate for 16, 17, 18 years, something like that. We have attempted to refine it over the years to get more clarity and apparently we haven't, because we have issued you a letter of good standing, which is basically you're in compliance with the contract. You have talked about what a capital improvement is with the focus groups and our attorneys and financial people and every year it seems to fluctuate. We certainly have a lot of experts out in the public that think they know what a capital improvement is. So, I guess my suggestion is a clarification statement in the contract that we can come to agreement with Erik -- what is it, what does it look like, how tangible is it, how secure is it, where it resides, who is the ultimate owner, those kinds of things. So, we can hopefully get around this sometime before I'm no longer a Council person. But, anyway, Erik, thank you for the comments. We have received a couple three letters from folks on this item. One very complimentary, sees everything out there going as well as can be and, then, very complimentary, particularly the condition of the golf course and several that are not necessarily so complimentary, but some of them deal with the issue of what's a capital improvement. That issue ultimately will be a decision of this Council and some dealing with the business and business practices of the golf course and I'm going to state this for the record that we are the landlords and Oaas and Laney are the lessors or tenants and the lease did not contemplate nor direct how they do business, what they charge, what programs they have, other than it requires a recreation program with parks and rec for the use, but beyond that we do not and are not involved in the business practices of the golf course. Having said that we have one individual that has requested to provide comments this evening. It is not a public hearing, but we will operate as if it were in terms of timing. So, Ty Gabby has indicated he would like to make some comments this evening. As per any public hearing, even though this is not a public hearing, you may have three minutes to make your comments, so -- are you Ty? Gabby: Yes. Rountree: Come on up. Gabby: Thank you. Rountree: Thanks, Erik. Oaas: Thank you, president. Thank you, City Council. Gabby: Thank you, Mr. President. Rountree: Please state your name and address for us, please. Gabby: My name is Ty Gabby. I am a citizen -- or concerned citizen on the Lakeview Golf Course. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 21 of 68 Rountree: Your address, please. Gabby: 2515 North Turnberry. Rountree: Okay. It's too official, but that's what we got to do. I'm sorry. Gabby: Want to know my Social Security number? Rountree: Well, if you're willing give it. Gabby: Oh, that's all right. We will -- no, that's all right. Thank you, Mr. President, thank you, City Council, for allowing me to speak. As a member of the Lakeview Golf Course community we are coming to you as extremely concerned homeowners and taxpayers. Previously you have seen a letter outlining our concerns in detail and in the next three minutes that you are allowing me I will touch on some of the points of concern that -- and interest that are most important to us. Lease page 17, paragraph F-4, transfer of partnerships, states that consent to any such transfer shall be refused if the city finds that a transferee is lacking in experience and/or financial ability to render or provide services for the operation of the golf course. The lack of experience and knowledge to run a golf course is evident by the amount of turnover that has taken place in the past year and a half. The course is currently running without a head pro. This affects a great number of facets on the golf course, two of which are tournaments and leagues that are significantly impacted by lack of a head pro. Section 7 of the lease agreement states that there should be list of planned leaseholder improvements. A few years ago we saw improvements on the green of hole number one and the green of hole number six. Since, then, we have not seen any such improvements. If there is a list or an agenda of leaseholder improvements, would it be possible for us to see them? Keep in mind we understand the definition to be improvements to real property to increase the value of such real property, not equipment necessary to operate a food and beverage service as stated page four, paragraph E-3 of the lease, which we have already discussed tonight ad nauseam. Regarding the lease, we acknowledge that we have been trying -- we have been in trying economic times, but that has changed and at what point does the hardship claim end? We again go back to his lack of experience to run a profitable business, to make the small required annual amount of 6,000 dollars. Paragraph 16 provides the city the means to review all records, including balance sheets, P&L statements, and tax returns to determine hardship. Are these records being provided to the city for review? We understand that per the lease they are not to be made public record, but the city has the right to look at them. We as homeowners live on the golf course for a reason. Either we play golf or we just like looking at our windows and seeing green grass as a fairway. Some of us mow, fertilize and weed, seed on the area adjacent to the course and our homes -- Rountree: If you could wrap it up, please. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 22 of 68 Gabby: Yes, sir. We just want to see this be successful. We don't care who makes it successful. We as a community just want to see a successful golf course and I would be more than happy to take any questions. Rountree: Any questions for Mr. Gabby? Thank you for your comments. Gabby: Thank you. Rountree: Erik, I'm going to give you an opportunity to address any issues you might want to or not. But I do have a question for you. We have been talking I think for the last two golf focus groups about the comment card and that sort of thing. Has that been implemented at this point and, if not, when do you anticipate that? Oaas: We do have a comment card in place, but not -- not the one that -- with all the checkmarks in it and that will be in place before the end of the year. Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Rountree: Do you have any further comments that you would like to make? Oaas: Councilman -- or President Rountree and Council, I think we certainly -- certainly appreciate your -- anyone and every one that is supporting Lakeview Golf Course. We certainly appreciate all the fine showing here tonight. The only -- my final point that I will make is that where is the golf course today compared to where it was when we started and it is substantial -- substantial improvement. So, with that thanks very much. Rountree: Thank you. Bill, the action on this is taken by the terms of the agreement, I believe. We do not have to take an action as I recall. Nary: Mr. President, no. The request is to -- to grant the rent relief, which I think -- what's in front of you now you do have to approve that. Rountree: Okay. All right. Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: To that point and to Ty's comment, again, from my perspective the incentive is -- and I would hope that the golfers and the public have the same incentive is nobody wants any rent to ever be paid and the reason being is we -- everyone wants -- the city in particular wants to incentivize these types of improvements which are listed there. I don't think that's clearly happened for what's presented to us today. I don't think there is grounds under the lease to give the rent relief, but I'm encouraged that with this type of list and this type of capital improvement that next year there will be those expenditures that will support it. That's exactly what the city wants to see and I don't think the public Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 23 of 68 necessarily wants rent to be paid, they would much rather have those funds invested into a particular capital improvement. You know, if they golf there or live there, it benefits them as well, so -- maybe that's the intent, but it did come across somewhat sideways, so I don't think they have met it for this year, but I'm hopeful for next year. Bird: Is that a motion? Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Comments? Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: The only question I would have on that lease amount is that it's not untypical in leases -- I mean that's -- that's not a huge amount for the city to collect on this operation and, actually, for many years the amount in the lease was zero. It became 6,000 when it went to 18 holes, instead of nine holes. But I guess my question is it's not unusual for that to be an amount that covers administering the contract and I guess my question would be both to Mr. Nary and perhaps to our parks director Mr. Siddoway, is the city investing any time in monitoring and helping with this contract or is it operating independently from oversight and involvement from the city? Rountree: Steve, if you would -- Nary: As Steve is walking up, Mr. President, I guess from our end the financials are reviewed by Finance annually in this request. That's where the original thought -- and that may be what Councilman Rountree was alluding to was that the relief would be granted automatically if Finance approved those. That's why it's in front of you, because they couldn't make the finding that Councilman Borton did -- or made the same is that it doesn't qualify as a capital improvement. You can consider it an improvement. You have done it previously as a Council when you have approved I think with the purchase of batteries to operate the golf carts. So, you can make that decision. Finance didn't feel they could. That's the only involvement they had. Our other involvement is we have the golf course committee -- and I can't remember what it's called, but made up of citizens. Council Member Rountree is on it. Ted Baird from my staff is on it. Folks from the parks department are on it and there they discuss operations and the maintenance. So, that's -- that's the time invested in personnel that we have made, in addition to whatever the parks may do. So, just so you have some reference. That's the time and effort on the city's side of managing this contract that we -- or this lease that we have had. Siddoway: I feel like I'm going to repeat, basically, but our -- the parks department's involvement is limited to the facilitation of the golf course focus group. They used to meet three times a year, they currently meet twice a year, once in the spring, once in the fall, so it's a fairly limited effort. We -- we have citizens that are appointed by the Mayor on that committee that live out on the golf course to help provide feedback, so that they can give -- give feedback to Mr. Oaas and check in on how things are going, Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 24 of 68 but -- so, twice a year we have a meeting a couple of hours and we create minutes from those meetings and that's really the extent of our involvement. Zaremba: So, my take away is this is not being a burden on the city and costing us a lot of money to administer? Siddoway: No, sir. Zaremba: Thank you. Nary: Mr. President? Rountree: Yes. Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Council Member Zaremba, additionally you may remember a number of years ago prior to this lessee there was complaints or concerns that the city's staff were providing some assistance in weeding and spraying and some other things on the course, so there was that level of involvement that doesn't occur today. I would agree with part of your discussion -- there is nothing been contemplated in the past when these requests have been made. Mr. Oaas is correct, it is a year by year snapshot for the Council to review and if the investments that have been made that are considered investments exceeded the 6,000 dollars, all that's contemplated is the relief of the 6,000. If they were under, but based on progress, the Council would consider that to be adequate. That was within your purview. So, we can certainly each year -- maybe it might be better to capture the -- what's contemplated or what's considered, so that we don't have an inconsistency from year to year on what's allowed as an expense in one year and contemplated or considered for the rent relief and, then, in another it may not be adequate or it may not be the same. It may be the same items, but the value isn't the same. So, however you -- the Council would like us to do that or capture those annually, we could certainly do that. If you would like us to do that, what's been done in the past, I can certainly get Finance and we could put together a report for you probably by next week as to what's been done in the past and what's been granted based on what's been provided, if you would like to see that. Rountree: Questions? Comments? Motion? Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: I would move that we deny the request for 2014 rent relief in light of the comments of Council and staff and presentation today. Rountree: Do I have a second? Cavener: I will second that. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 25 of 68 Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to deny the rent relief. Any discussion? Roll call vote. Roll Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, nay; Zaremba, nay; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION FAILED: THREE AYES. THREE NAYS. Rountree: It's a coin flip. I think in that case, Mr. Nary, it's -- Nary: It fails. Rountree: -- it fails. Yes. Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Does it have to be all or nothing? Can we provide a partial rent relief? Could we waive 3,000 dollars? I guess that's a question for Mr. Nary. Nary: I had the lease right -- I believe you can, Council. I will just verify, but I -- I had the lease just a second ago. Let me just grab it. Rountree: I don't think there is any -- anything in the lease that addresses that. Bird: We can -- any amount. Rountree: Any amount. All or none. Anything in between. Zaremba: I'm not understanding that. All or none is the only choice? Bird: No. Any amount. Rountree: No. Or anything in between. Zaremba: Yeah. Okay. Bird: Up to 6,000. Zaremba: With that discussion, Mr. President, I would make a motion that we provide rent relief in the amount of 3,000 dollars and collect the other 3,000 dollars. Rountree: Do I have a second? Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 26 of 68 Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to collect 3,000 dollars and give 3,000 dollars in rent relief. Discussion? Borton: Yeah. Mr. President. I don't know if that really gets us anywhere. We are talking, you know, a relatively small amount that we are sort of horse trading the lease and not addressing the issues that are really before us. I understand we can do that. We can also continue it a week when we have got a tie breaker here and we will get time to ponder it further. So, that's another option we have before us. Nary: Mr. President? Cavener: Mr. President. Nary: Go ahead. Sorry. Cavener: To Joe's point -- I think the -- I -- if I felt that the leasor would be able to demonstrate that there was one of these purchases that I could justify as a capital improvement, I would be in favor of that, saying, okay, we believe a 50 inch big screen TV for whatever reason is a capital improvement, I would be willing to grant relief for that. But I don't see anything here that I would classify as a capital improvement and so it would be a challenge for me to say, yes, let's grant them relief when they didn't follow the -- the intent of the agreement, in my opinion. Rountree: Further discussion on the motion? Nary: Mr. President, my only comment would be that if -- if the Council wants to grant the relief in less than the full amount, if you would at least in your motion determine what is that based on, so that we have a record. If it's based on the specific purchases, like Councilman Cavener just said, then, we have something to base it on, so next year we are not pondering the same concern or question on what are you granting the relief for. If it's for a specific purchase, that would be preferable, or at least whatever you articulate what you would like it to be relevant to, so we could make sure to capture that intent. Rountree: Does the maker of the motion wish to amend the motion or do I have an alternate motion? Substitute motion? Zaremba: I'm trying to think of how to describe specifically what we are talking about here. There have been improvements made, which is -- I was -- in my mind I was splitting the baby and saying there have been improvements made. There have not been improvements made as fast as I believe that Council thought they would be made in past years and, I agree, I don't see on here things that I would specifically call capital improvements, which is, essentially, being no -- no rent relief, but I don't have a problem contributing towards some of these things, even though they are not capital. That's how Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 27 of 68 I came up with 3,000. Now, that's not a specific number or a specific this project is or this project isn't, but -- and I agree that leaves us open for the same discussion a year from now. But I picked that number because I thought there is progress, there is not enough progress. Rountree: Further discussion on the motion? Milam: Mr. President? Rountree: Yes. Milam: I mean we are really just kind of going in circles, but I look at those as the cost of doing business and, therefore -- yeah, I mean if we want to give them 3,000 dollars out of charity, that's what it would be. It would not be because of our agreement, because he's not met the terms of the agreement and if our -- what we want to do is incentivize him to meet the terms of the agreement do improvements out there„ I don't believe that just throwing charity -- because it isn't going to make or break the business. I don't think that's really going to get us to where we are trying to be at the end of the day. Rountree: Further discussion on the motion? Zaremba: Mr. President? This may not help, but let me throw some numbers in for perspective and this is before the current operators were the lessees. I did actually play a round of golf there. I'm not a golfer, but I just was nosy and wanted to see what the experience was. It was a foursome. We rented two carts. One bag of clubs, because one of us didn't have any clubs. That cost us, this many years ago, about a hundred dollars to do. So, it would take 60 of those foursomes to pay 6,000 dollars. That's assuming that all the cost was profit, but let's say that you took one day and all your expenses went to some other days. Sixty foursomes, if you started one every ten minutes, would take ten hours on a reasonably busy Saturday to make 6,000 dollars. So, to me this is -- this is not a large burden on them to ask them to pay the 6,000 or even the 3,000 that I have most recently suggested. For the previous operators it might have been. You could watch that course all day and not see any players go by. They were struggling and the patrons were struggling just to get by some irritable people who play on the course. So, it wasn't a place that was very attractive, it was not very well kept. There have been considerable improvements and I'm just putting in perspective what 6,000 dollars is. It's about ten hours on a reasonably steady Saturday. Just a comment. Rountree: Further discussion on the motion? Roll call vote, please. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay; Milam, nay; Cavener, nay. MOTION FAILED: THREE AYES. THREE NAYS. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 28 of 68 Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: I think that we need to delay this a week and -- either that or let it go as -- as nondecided. But I think we need to continue this until next week. Rountree: Is that a motion? Bird: That would be two weeks. Zaremba: To the 5th. Bird: No. The 28th. October 28th. Zaremba: Oh. Okay. Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to delay this decision for two weeks. Zaremba: One week. One week is the 28th. Rountree: One week. The 28th. One week. Moved and seconded. Discussion? Mr. Bird, would you be willing to add to that motion that the city put together a history of payment of this particular item for all of us to review -- Bird: I would love it. Rountree: -- so the folks that haven't been here forever and could see what the history has been and what the trend has been. Bird: I would add that to my motion happily. Rountree: Does the second agree? Milam: Second agrees. Rountree: Okay. Discussion on the motion? Roll call vote, please. Oh. Go ahead. Borton: Sorry. Rountree: That's all right. Go ahead. Borton: Another option. Meridian City Council October 21, 2019 Page 29 of 68 Rountree: Is this a substitute motion? Borton: It's just talking right now. Rountree: This is discussion. Okay Borton: Is -- again, the incentive is to get these things done -- not the golf cart purchase, but the other -- on this list of the seven year plan -- done from the city, since we are the ones requesting -- also has the ability to -- for this particular year extend the deadline upon which those things have to be done. I don't know if the season's over -- the city has the option, not that you have been provided with clarity on what a particular capital improvement is as we see it, you know, rework green number eight down, those types of activities, and maybe the requester doesn't give them enough time to actually do -- maybe it does, but it's another option. Rountree: I would remind us all that in the presentation there are two projects yet to be done this year that are going to be started this year that are in excess -- way in excess of the 6,000 dollars. Borton: So, maybe it does afford them time. Again, that's what everybody wants is that type of project done. Milam: I was actually just kind of thinking the same -- along the same lines. If we can extend this and let them go do some capital -- actual capital improvements and, then, he would be in compliance with the lease agreement, this would be a moot point. Rountree: Mr. Nary, you have a comment? Nary: Yeah. Mr. President, Members of the Council, mostly for clarification. The reason -- the reason Mr. Oaas is here is that the 6,000 dollars is due on October 1 of each year. Bird: Yeah. Nary: So -- but what normally has been done is exactly what you have seen. Some of it's related to things that have been accomplished in the last year and things that are going to be done over the next year and so it's -- it's not very -- it's not specified in the contract if the rent -- the rent relief is going forward, but it isn't specified that the relief is granted based on either what you have done or what you're going to do. So, it asks if you're going to extend this to make -- to help clarify, so that, again, we may need to create a clarifying document, are they asking for rent relief going forward only or is it both? Because I think it's been done both ways and it's perfectly fine if that's what you want to do, then, we will clarify that that's our intent. I'm just not always clear on whether or not it's appropriate to be asking for something you have already accomplished or whether or not he's also asking for things that they are going to Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 30 of 60 accomplish. So, is that rent relief for this year or does that rent relief come the next year when it's actually completed and that's not -- that's not spelled out in the agreement which way and that's why I think -- in Mr. Oaas' defense that's the way we have been doing it. We have allowed it to be for both. You certainly have the right to extend when that's due in front of you, but his obligation is to pay it now and that's why it's here. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: On Bill's line, I -- we can -- we can forgive it for six months; right? Nary: Or delay the payment. Bird: We can delay the payment six months and, then, come back and decide whether we make the payment -- delay the payment -- or the nonpayment permanent or make him pay. Am I not right if he don't do what he's got planned here? Nary: Mr. Bird, yeah, you certainly -- you can delay it -- a couple of things. You probably want to hear from the lessee. That may be an issue of how does he contemplate -- if he's going to end up having to pay it in March -- if some of it's construction related he may not be able to do anything until March and so six months may or may not be adequate. But, again, that might be something if you're going to delay it -- if you're going to delay it just a couple weeks to get some findings, that's different, but if you are going to delay the actual payment you may want to hear from the lessee and look at what's a realistic time for delay. Bird: I agree Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: The comment only contemplated -- my thoughts contemplated, you know, 30 days -- sometime relatively soon, just in light of the clarity, so it might not make sense. So, it's not subject to the motion necessarily. Bird: So, we got a motion before us. Rountree: We have a motion before us and a second. Bird: Call for the question. Rountree: You have called for the question. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 31 of 68 Holman: Are you requesting what the motion was? Rountree: Would you repeat what -- the motion. Holman: The motion was to continue to one week from today on October 28th. Rountree: And the question was called. Roll call vote, please. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Items Moved From Consent Agenda Item 8: Action Items A. Public Hearing: TEC 14-006 Jericho by Viper Investments, LLC Located West Side of N. Jericho Road and South of Chinden Boulevard Request: One (1) Year Time Extension on the Preliminary Plat in Order to Obtain the City Engineer's Signature on a Final Plat Rountree: The next item on the agenda is Action Item 8-A. That item has been requested to continue to November 5th. Do I have a motion? Bird: Mr. President, are you going to open the public hearing first? Rountree: I can open the public hearing. Bird: And, then, we will continue it. Rountree: It's open and you can continue it. Bird: Mr. President, I move we continue the public hearing on TEC 14-006 to November 5th, 2014. Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to open the public hearing. All those in favor. Aye. It's open. Now do I have a motion to continue it? Bird: That was the motion. Rountree: It was open and continued? Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 32 of 68 Bird: Yeah. Rountree: Okay. One fell swoop. All right. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Continued from October 7, 2014: Public Hearing: AP 14-002 Polaris Pre -School at Fairview Lakes by Fairview Lakes, LLC Located 950 E. Fairview Avenue Request: City Council Review of the Planning and Zoning Commission's Decision on CUP 14-010 (Condition #1.4d) Pertaining to the Parking Lot Design Rountree: Next item is 8-B. Continued from October 7th. Public Hearing AP 14-002. Polaris Preschool. Staff. Lucas: Mr. President, Members of the Council, before you tonight is the continued -- it's actually a request for City Council review of the Planning and Zoning Commission decision on Polaris Preschool. At your meeting on October 7th the applicant requested this continuance to do a minor redesign of the parking lot related to the Fairview Lakes project and access to Polaris Preschool. We did in memo format provide you with that redesign. Staff has reviewed it, we have consulted with the police department, and have found that it appears to meet the goals that were discussed at the last -- at the last hearing. Staff did have one comment about the pedestrian -- the new pedestrian connection basically needs to be wide enough so that pedestrians can use it and you don't have vehicles overhanging onto the sidewalk, so either wheel stops are provided or the sidewalk is made wide enough so that pedestrians can use it with vehicle overhang. Other than that I have nothing further to add and would certainly stand for any questions. Rountree: Any questions for staff? Bird: I have none, Mr. President. Rountree: Applicant have comments? Tamura: Council President Rountree, Members of the Council, my name is Doug Tamura. I reside at 1124 Santa Maria in Boise and I'm the owner -developer of Fairview Lakes and I appreciate the support from staff and we will just put wheel stops in. We are kind of tight on space, but we need the additional parking, so we met with the police department and felt like that was a good compromise for everyone. So, I appreciate the support. Thanks. Rountree: Thank you. Any questions for Doug? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 33 of 68 Rountree: Thank you. Tamura: Thank you. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: For Lieutenant Overton. You felt that we could -- didn't need a T in there? Overton: Council President Rountree, Members of the Council, Councilman Bird, when they first made their proposal one of the things they were looking at was how they were going to diffuse the traffic and slow it down and not have it become a main drive aisle going directly to the businesses and under the plan they had two weeks ago I don't think that was possible and going back two weeks I made the suggestion that if they made that somewhat of a where we had some sort of diffusion of traffic calming he could accomplish that goal and the applicant withdrew it, came back, met with me this morning and I believe we have accomplished that to the point that we have taken that main aisle away and we slowed down the traffic coming in. Bird: Thank you. Thank you. Rountree: Further questions? Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: It also looks to me like the pedestrians are much more protected by walking up the middle of that parking aisle, as opposed to having a potential of cars backing into them when they are walking. So, this looks like an excellent solution to me. Rountree: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone from the public wishing to testify? Seeing none. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the public hearing on AP 14-002. Zaremba: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item 8-B. All those in favor signify by aye. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 34 of 68 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve AP 14-002 and to include all staff and applicant and public testimony. Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve item 8-B. Any discussion? Roll call, please. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, abstain; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSTAIN. Item 9: Department Reports A. Public Works: Discussion of Subgrant Agreement with Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEA) and Authorization for Staff to Sign the Agreement Rountree: That brings us to the Public Works reports. The first item is Public Works discussion of subgrant agreement. Mangerich: Good evening, President Rountree, Council Members. I am here to let you know that we have the opportunity to take receipt of a Department of Environmental Quality grant of the amount of 23,000 dollars to be used specifically for the enhancement of two source water protection interpretive elements at the wastewater interpretive center. Rountree: Any questions? Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Yes. Bird: Mollie, what -- what is the conditions of this grant? Is there any conditions that we should be aware of or does it come free of conditions? Mangerich: It is a reimbursement grant for a not to exceed 23,000 dollars and to be utilized within 14 months, which takes us up to December 2015. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 35 of 68 Bird: As I understand that, then, we -- we put the money up front and they reimbursed us? Mangerich: Yes, sir. Bird: Up to 23,000? Mangerich: Yes, sir. Bird: With no -- with no conditions of how we have to do it or -- if we have to hire Bacon -Davis people if we hire employees or anything? Mangerich: The only thing that I can tell you is that because of federal pass through money. So, Keith Watts alerted us to -- that there is a wage -- Bird: Davis -Bacon. Mangerich: Thank you. So, there is that and we have discussions of that going on with Finance and with Department of Environmental Quality, since we are utilizing professional engineers to do that design and the placement of the interpretive element on the floor, so -- Bird: On behalf of the city -- Mangerich: Yes, sir. Bird: -- and you make sure that you look at the cost and that added Bacon -Davis don't cost more than the 23,000. Don't add to your project. Mangerich: Yes, sir. Rountree: Further questions? Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: Councilman Bird brings up a good point. Perhaps the -- does the budget amendment -- should it be tabled until you have those numbers and know -- and you're comfortable that -- it doesn't make sense, necessarily, to amend the budget for an expenditure that you might incur until you get those questions answered. Or maybe not. Nary: Mr. President? Rountree: Yes. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 36 of 60 Nary: I was going to say, there is a grant committee made up of the departments and Finance to vet all of those discussions, so they wouldn't move it forward in front of you until that's already been satisfied through Finance as to whether or not those numbers are actual real numbers. So, the not to exceed basically is the amount of spending authority the grant provides. So, they can't spend more than 23,000 regardless of what hiring is necessary or anything, they can't spend more than what the grant would provide us and that's all you're granting authority for is the spending of what the grant money would be towards this project. So, I think most of that stuff has already been accomplished and should be in your packet. Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: And, Mr. Nary, that -- the point of that question is not a situation where there would be an expenditure that in light of Davis -Bacon creates -- you know, the 23,000 is covered by the grant and it creates a new additional expenditure beyond that. Nary: Correct. And it would not be. And they -- Finance would not move it in front of you for even approval until that was already vetted and made sure that that's the total amount of the city's exposure and liability is the 23,000. Borton: Okay. Thank you. Rountree: Other questions? Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: With that explanation I would move that we approve Item 9-13, Public Works budget amendment for the IDEQ source water protection grant in an amount not to exceed 23,000 dollars. Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 9-B. Roll call vote. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, abstain; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Public Works: Budget Amendment - IDEQ Source Water Protection Grant for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $23,000.00 Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 37 of 68 Nary: Mr. President, I think 9-A also requires your approval. The only thing that's different about this agreement is -- is it's -- we requested that the department director sign the agreement -- Rountree: Okay. Nary: -- rather than the Mayor. We have reviewed it, there is nothing in the agreement that can't be signed by the department. It doesn't violate any of our policies to allow that, but it still requires Council's approval. Rountree: Okay. Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton:. I would move that we approve Item 9-A, subgrant agreement and direct the department director to sign. Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 9-A. Roll call vote. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Okay. Thanks, Mollie. Mangerich: You're welcome. Borton: Thank you very much. Mangerich: And now I'm here again for the budget amendment; is that correct? Milam: We already did it. Mangerich: We already did that? Bird: We already done it. Zaremba: We already agreed. Rountree: We did it all -- Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 38 of 68 Mangerich: Thank you. Rountree: We did it backwards, you did it forward, so we got it taken care of. Bird: You're getting as good as Kyle. I didn't even recognize him with that fuzz on his face. C. Parks Department: Christmas in Meridian Donation Discussion and Approval 1. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between the City of Meridian and Connections Credit Union for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $1,000.00 2. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between Idaho Independent Bank and the City of Meridian for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $500.00 3. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between All American Insurance and the City of Meridian for Amount of $500.00 4. Christmas in Meridian 2014 Sponsorship Agreement Between Borton-Lakey Law and Policy and the City of Meridian for a Not -to -Exceed Amount of $2,000.00 Rountree: Next item is Parks and Rec and it's discussion and approval and recognition, primarily, of these donations for the Meridian Christmas celebration. Moss: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. I'm here tonight at the request of Councilman Bird to just talk about -- give a really brief update of Christmas in Meridian. We have four of our sponsor contracts on your agenda for approval and the intention for me being here is just give a little bit of recognition for all the sponsors, local businesses that are making Christmas in Meridian possible. You know, the four that we have on -- on the agenda tonight -- Borton-Lakey Law and Policy -- Councilman Borton here is our overall presenting sponsor for the event. We also have Connections Credit Union, All American Insurance and Idaho Independent Bank are here before you. Commercial Tire is another contract you can expect to see in the next couple weeks. Those are all of our cash sponsors -- our larger cash sponsorships for the event. It's also worth noting that we have several in kind sponsorships, including 107.9, Lite FM, who will be very involved in the promotion of the event, as well as providing our event emcees with Mayor de Weerd, Kevin and Brenda Mee of their morning show will be our co -emcees with her for the parade. Signs Etc., Kendall Ford, Sunbelt Rentals and while it's not confirmed yet we are hoping that Meridian Press will join us again this year as a print sponsor finally. I have been working with -- not with Holly, but -- particularly with one of those sales representatives to talk about a partnership that -- similar partnership Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 39 of 68 to what we had last year where, you know, they provide us with some advertisements on their website and, then, in the paper in exchange for them being one of the sponsors of the event. So, we are -- we are very hopeful that Meridian Press will join us again as well and in addition to these sponsors we also have some lower level prize sponsorships and some sponsorships that there is several more to mention, but we are very thankful for all the community involvement, where -- you know, last year was a wonderful event. We have all of our sponsors back from last year and so we are very thankful to have some great involvement. It's worth nothing that we are starting to add several events for Christmas in Meridian, not just the three that we started last year, which were the downtown business decorating contest, the Winter Lights Parade, of course, and the Children's Winterland Festival. One of the other fun events we are planning to add is the Winter Lights Fun Run, which is going to be hosted by the Pulse Running and Fitness and it's going to be a fun run that starts at Storey Park where the parade begins, they will leave ten minutes before the parade starts, ending at the tree. It's a very easy thing to manage, because we already have the road blocked and so it will be a fun kids fun run. There will be an ugly sweater contest incorporated in this with it and so it's kind of fun -- a fun thing that the Pulse is going to be putting on and certainly invite any of you -- well, for starters we are inviting the Council to be a part of the event. We have a trolley booked for your participation again this year, so we would love for you to ride the trolley in the parade again. But that fun run is just -- is meant to be a really fun thing for kids in particular, so people that are already there waiting for the parade will be greeting them at the finish line at Generations Plaza, but we have added several things to the -- to the calendar, including our Little Free Library is having Christmas books that -- for the whole month. Our letters to Santa mailbox out front. The Christmas Bazaar here at City Hall that's run by Shelley Houston. The holiday classic volleyball tournament that's run by our sports coordinator Garrett White is going to be that Saturday as well, in addition to the Meridian Symphony orchestra and we were hoping to make Christmas in Meridian as kind of a week long and maybe in the future even longer than just the one week, but a -- you know, a week long of here is what's happening in Meridian. Get your families out and enjoy some Christmas spirit, I guess, to kick off the holiday season. So, with that short description I would stand for any questions about the parade or anything else regarding the event. Rountree: Questions? Bird: I have none. I just appreciate it. Rountree: Thanks for the update. Moss: Thank you very much. Rountree: Sounds fun. Do I have a motion? Cavener: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Cavener. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 40 of 60 Cavener: I move that we approve the Christmas in Meridian donations from -- let's see. We have got Connections Credit Union, Idaho Independent Bank, All American Insurance and Borton-Lakey Law and Policy for the sponsorship of Christmas in Meridian. Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 9-C. Does that need roll call? Roll call vote. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Cavener: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Just a quick comment after that last item. I would be happy to run in an ugly sweater before the parade. I think it's a distance just perfect for my stamina. So, I appreciate you being considerate of me when you put together that race course and I would be happy to run with any other members of the Council if they feel so brave. Bird: How much oxygen you got in town? Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: I just -- I feel that this is something that needs to be brought out publically, that -- so that the taxpayers understand that what we are putting on is not coming out of taxpayers' dollars, that we have community members that are jumping to the forefront to sponsor this stuff and they need to be recognized, because, you know, they are digging in their pockets to do this, to make sure that our community gets -- and that's the greatest thing about the community of Meridian, we have always -- we have always done it through donations and stuff. We haven't depended on the city tax dollars to do it for us. So, I just think that anytime we have stuff like this, instead of putting it on the consent we need to have it on the general, take the five, ten minutes that Colin just did and -- and recognize the people. It's -- it's great. Thank you very much. Rountree: Very good. Thank you. Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 41 of 68 Borton: To Councilman Bird's comments, the reason I think people jump on board is because, quite frankly, what Colin does and he deflects credit, but it is a logistical nightmare to do these events and that's my words, not his, but people jump on board from the business community, because they are comfortable that they know exactly what they are going into and Colin is a testament to making this thing a success. Bird: You're a hundred percent right. I will guarantee you Hans Bruijn from the Meridian Show Board will tell you what it's like to put together a parade. D. Human Resources and Legal Departments: Social Media Policy and Social Media Procedure E. Resolution No. 14-1026: Adoption of Social Media Policy and Social Media Procedure. Rountree: Very good. Next item. Item D, human resource and, Bill, is this your presentation, Social Media Policy? Nary: Yes. Mr. President, Members of the Council, in your packets there is a social media policy. Some of you may recall we discussed this last year. We had intended to bring it back in January to give the new Council Members some opportunity to review it and somehow it got misplaced or mislaid and that didn't happen. To cut to the highlights, basically, we felt it was important as the city grew and had more access on social media to the public that we made it clear for a couple of things. One, that we met the legal requirements of the use of social media, that we as the government, again, didn't limit to how speech and interaction and contact was made with us the city through social media, whether it's Facebook, whether it's e-mail, whether it's Instagram, whether it's Twitter -- however the public interacts with the city through those means that we make sure that we at least are complying with the most current state of what the law requires us to do and primarily that deals with things like having established policies, making sure that we aren't hindering free speech. Our limitation, for example, on Facebook is a good example. We do require -- and it does -- it does provide notice on the Facebook page, that your comments have to be relevant to the page. So, if it's a parks page and you want to comment on a parks activity, good or bad, that's perfectly fine. We don't -- we don't change it, we don't edit it, we don't delete it. If you want to make a comment about some other thing, you don't like your water bill, that's not the place or the forum for that, we do take those off, we do direct those people to the proper forum. So, we do want to make sure it's forum appropriate and courts are okay with that. But we don't necessarily -- again, we don't delete unless there is profanity or something else, we don't delete comments. So, we wanted to make sure that was clear. We also wanted to make sure as departments grew and decided that their own presence on the internet was appropriate in varieties of forms, that they went through some proper process so that our communications manager, the Mayor's office, would know where are we out there, so that they would have a way to monitor to see -- the worst thing you can do in the social media world is to put stuff out there and you don't change it, it doesn't get updated, it sort of gets forgotten that it's there and what our Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 42 of 68 communications manager wants to be able to do is be able to make sure that if you're going to -- if you're going to go to the effort of creating it, you have to make sure the content is current and if you don't do that, then, don't have a page. If you can't commit to doing that because of staffing or time or whatever, that's fine, but that's not the right presence you want to have, because that's a negative reflection for the city. So, we wanted to make sure that was clarified. So, our policy is really pretty clear. You need the city's approval to put on any social media site that is representative of the city, that if you're going to do that -- if you don't do that, then, you're subject to being taken down and you're being directed to remove them and, then, if you're going to do it there is a process in which to get them implemented and put them into play. So, again, we discussed it awhile ago and we wanted to make sure you had opportunity to review it. It's eligible to be approved tonight if you wish. If you need more time to review that -- there is, obviously, not a time issue here, so we can certainly set it off for a week if you need a little more time to review it. It's fairly lengthy, but most of it's process, not policy. The policy is really pretty short. Rountree: Questions? Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: I apologize if I missed it. Was there anything in particular that -- that governed the -- either the Mayor or Council to Tweet, Facebook post on our own independent -- you know, Mayor site or City Council site? Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Councilman Borton, no, if you individually want to do that, even in your capacity as a council member -- what we -- what we have determined -- and bear with me -- the law in this changes daily. I mean every court evaluates these in a different way. There is no definitive answer. What -- we have taken the position is that if an individual council member or the Mayor wants to have their own page, as Mayor Tammy does, that's on her. The city doesn't promote it. So, that's her page and she directs what the content is, she directs who is accepted as friends and doesn't, that's totally outside the city's control. That's her choice. If we follow this through the city -- and many cities do this where they have an ask the mayor page that's managed by the city. So, there those rules would apply. If we were going to do it that way the rules would apply as to what the content could be and how we would administer it and edit it. People get very sensitive when they make a comment about the government that they don't like and, then, it suddenly disappears and they think they are getting edited. But if it's an individual site, for any of you council members, you want to have your own, that's perfectly within your purview and that's not part of the policy. Rountree: How do we know the difference? How do I as a citizen know that Mayor Tammy's site is not supported by the city? Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 43 of 68 Nary: Council President Rountree, that's a great question. The only way of defining that from the city's perspective is we don't provide any support. It's not -- it's not linked to our page, it doesn't refer to us. I can't, for example, for an employee, if Chief Niemeyer -- I will pick on him since he's right here. Chief Niemeyer wants to have a Twitter page and, then, he decides to comment about a local business on his Twitter page, we as a city can say you're using the city, casting us in a bad light, we don't want you to do that again. But as elected officials we don't have the same ability to correct that, all we can do is say we don't support it, it doesn't come through us, it's not on our page, it doesn't have anything to do with us, we can't control that from an elected official versus an employee. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: Bill, what -- what -- what if this stuff is being used by city property and phones or -- you know, like you guys can do everything on a phone that I can on a computer and much more, but, anyway, what constitutes where the liability of the city if it's theirs? If it's done on city -owned property, even though it is private Facebook or whatever you want to call it, Bill? Nary: Mr. President, Council Member Bird, for example, our policy -- and the current state of what most cities and what advice has been given is -- it is much more problematic to try to make a zero tolerance policy as the use of the equipment for certain aspects. Checking a news site during the daytime seems kind of irrelevant for most people. It's a productivity issue, not a use issue. But if you have a view, certainly one of the things we do say in our policy is that anything that's done on city equipment is subject to city review. So, any -- anything that you were to use a city computer for that we can access and gather information, we can use that in dealing with the problem, whatever that -- the level of the problem is. And we do restrict the use in certain times of day, certain uses or types of things. So, we have ways on the back end to restrict the uses of city equipment. For example, most of the city computers during the day don't access Facebook and they can't access Facebook during normal work day. So, there are ways on the other end that we can prohibit the use of certain things -- YouTube and some of those things, they all get prohibited during your workday. Bird: Mr. President, follow up, please. Rountree: Please. Bird: Bill, say take the elected officials, if -- if we use city equipment -- say go on Facebook and put something, even though it's on our private Facebook, is that -- is that not public record once -- we are putting it out on city property? Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, using the city equipment itself doesn't make something a public record. A public record is whatever the statue defines as a Meridian City Council October 21; 2014 Page 44 of 68 record and whether or not it's public, because where ever it came from isn't where -- how it's determined, it's what is it, is whether it's a record. Bird: Okay. Thank you. Rountree: Any other comments, questions? I guess that point I make, Mr. Nary, I'm not real comfortable with the answer or the position the city might be put in with a misunderstanding. So, I'd like some more time to think about that and look at this policy. Again, we are getting so absorbed in what everybody is talking about talk communication -- well, a lot of it is not communication, it's exchanging of things with people that you think you're communicating with on subjects you think you're communicating about and misunderstood by somebody else who is looking at it -- and I'm talking about the public looking in at us and I don't know how to tell the difference. If it's something that's created in my name or the Mayor or anybody else that's an elected official, you know, we have got to walk and talk the talk and even if we think it's our own individual site, citizens aren't going to know the difference. So, I need some -- I need some comfort on what it is we can do and how we can differentiate between our personal activity versus the city activity. So, do you have to have a disclaimer on your Facebook or your -- whatever that I am not representing the city in this situation or -- I don't know. Nary: The best thing to tell you, President Rountree, Members of the Council, elected officials are -- is a much different animal, there is no doubt. Rountree: Yes. Nary: If -- if you -- if any elected official would like to have a private Facebook page to interact with their family members and their friends, my advice would be only accept your family members and your friends on that Facebook and you -- if you want to put it a disclaimer and this is my personal Facebook page on there, that's probably not a bad idea. It's when -- the mixture becomes when elected officials use it as a means to communicate with their constituents, which is a very valid thing and, you're exactly right, though, everything on there is going to be scrutinized differently because of that and I can't control it. The policy really is -- speaks more towards employees of the city and making sure it's clear to them -- if we are going to represent the city in the social media in some way and it comes back to the city, because you're using your position or you're wearing your uniform while you -- you have a picture of yourself in uniform on your Facebook page, so somebody now can identify you as a city employee, that's different and we want to make sure there is a separation between your city life and your employment, as well as your personal life and that's the purpose of the policy. Rountree: And I'm not saying that's going to affect me, because I'm never going to be there, but -- Bird: Mr. President? Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 45 of 68 Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: With that -- and I think Mr. Nary brought up a good point. This isn't something that needs to be passed and I think we need to let this -- let us look this over and stuff and bring it back on November the 5th, 2014, and that would be a motion. The Resolution 14-1026. Rountree: Do I have a second? Borton: Second. Rountree: All those in favor of the motion signify by aye. Opposed same sign? Thank MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: And thanks for finally getting that to us, Bill. Bird: Yes. F. Community Development: Unified Development Code Changes - Title 11 Amendments Discussion Rountree: Okay. Item F, Unified Development Code, Title 11. Justin. Or Bruce. One of -- whichever. Justin. Okay. Lucas: Thanks, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Before you tonight is -- it was going to be a workshop item on your last agenda and so it's kind of in that format of a -- of hopefully rather than just a department report, it's something that I am expecting and hoping for feedback directly from the Council on. So, if you want to stop me at anytime or have questions or want to have a dialogue, please, feel free to do so. That's, hopefully, what we can achieve tonight. About -- I don't know, it was maybe eight months to nine months ago I brought some UDC amendments forward and the Council asked that we form a work group of the development community to -- to work on these issues in a -- in a more transparent way and to get feedback directly from the development community prior to bringing these forward to the City Council in a workshop or as to an application. So, we have done that. The first work group meeting was about a month ago and we met with this -- with this group of developers, architects, engineers, landowners, planners and I and several members of city staff, including the planning department building, legal department, etcetera. Had a real good open forum and discussion. Staff had some specific items that we wanted to talk about, but we also had an open discussion about what the development community wanted to talk about. So, tonight I'm here to talk about some things pretty specifically and talk about some things more generally, kind of at a higher level, to get your comfort -- to get your comfort on. In your packet I included a table, which included some actual strike through and underlined changes that we are presenting for the Unified Development Code. It's not an application, it's just a what could become an application. Those changes all have to Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 46 of 68 go through the full public hearing process, but I wanted to give you at least an idea of where we are at on some of those. And those I would consider kind of clean up or clarifications. Some policy level discussions more towards our residential dimensional standards and open space and there is just some other kind of open ended items about gravel mining and I am at the end of the presenting going to turn some time over to Brian from our office to talk about our design review manual and how that's -- how that's been working since it's been implemented and some potential changes that we want to see there. So, that's kind of our overall purpose and I will move through some of these as quick as I can. I'm just, as I say, here for your feedback and your thoughts. I will do my best to present the issue and the problem that we are trying to solve. We are not always trying to reinvent the wheel. But, you know, as our code we try to be responsive and when developers or citizens bring up an issue, if it makes sense we look at it and say, okay, let's change it. You know, we don't want that document to be on something that we are not willing to modify. So, the one is about fencing and it seems like every time I bring forward a UDC amendment we talk about fencing. That is one of those issues that has a lot of opinions and thoughts on it. So, right now this is a good example of a -- a situation that we deal with on a pretty regular basis. This -- this is a subdivision example. There is a common area there and as our current code is written and interpreted, the fencing that would be placed in red shown on your screen there, would be required to be only four -- the requirement is it can only be four feet tall, if it's going to be a closed vision fence, a solid fence, and if it's going to be a six foot fence it has to be open vision, like wrought iron. And what the developers have brought up several times over the last year or so and even before that, is that the owners -- they would prefer a six foot fence, solid, in this situation. Now, the reason we have that four foot versus six foot and all that is based on CPTED standards or Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design and the thought behind those standards is that if you're going to have an open space you want it to be visible and so the thought -- the whole thought process is, you know, if you're going to have open space you want it to be visible and sometimes if it's an open space that is kind of tucked in behind some homes, you want those fences to be either shorter or open vision. But in a situation like this, the way our code currently reads, it still requires it, even though this open space from a developer's perspective and from staffs perspective is clearly visible from the street. There is not really hidden areas in an open space like this and so we went kind of back and forth on this. This is another example of a -- if you're sitting on the street and you can see directly into this open space and Lieutenant Overton can jump in at anytime, but you could drive by, you could shine the light down there, you can see what's happening down there. There is really not a hidden aspect to this -- this type of open space. And so what we have done -- and not going to read all this -- but we have basically modified the code section that relates to this fencing and it says -- it gives the director basically the ability to determine if the open space is visible from a public street. If it's not visible from a public street, then, the four foot solid, six foot open vision would apply. If it is visible from a public street, based on the director and, obviously, the police input, then, we would go ahead and allow the six foot solid fence to be adjacent to that open space. So, that's what we are attempting to do here. There is quite a red line and I don't want to go through -- that's our -- that's our goal and so I can kind of pause on this one, get your take. If you really love the six foot open vision and four foot solid as it Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 47 of 68 currently stands, I'd love to know that, because maybe we won't even bring it forward. But staff is trying to respond to I guess some citizen complaints, we get them all the time, and developers saying, hey, I get the standard, but in this specific situation it's clearly visible, why are you making me do this -- this shorter fencing. So, that's the issue and I will go ahead and pause there and see if you have any thoughts. Cavener: Mr. President? Rountree: Luke. Cavener: Justin, my question is related to the -- I guess it's the term not entirely visible. So, you know, not all of our city parks or open spaced areas are perfectly rectangular. What constitutes some that is entirely versus not entirely and who ultimately is making that decision? , Lucas: Excellent question, Mr. President, Councilman Cavener. We do leave some discretion in this code up to the director or city staff to, basically, on a case-by-case basis look and see and try to apply some common sense. If it's a -- let's say an odd - shaped piece and there is a hidden corner, in that hidden corner we would not allow the six foot solid fencing, we would require the lower vision fencing and prior to making conditions related to fencing, we do meet with the police department in a project review meeting. These issues are discussed out in the open and so we do have a forum in which we can discuss with police what their thoughts are and we can basically make a determination on the visibility of that open area and maybe there is an open area that has landscaping, it's very dense and we feel even though it's -- it's visible from the street, there might be some areas that are very densely blocked on landscaping and we would consider that not visible because of the landscaping. So, just -- what it does is it gives staff a little bit more flexibility to determine that. Rather than have that discussion in front of Council, where they are coming from is they want this type of fencing, we have built it into the code, so we can tweak our conditions to be a little bit more responsive to the individual situation. I hope that helps answer the question. Cavener: Thank you. Lucas: Any other thoughts or comments on that one? I will do my best to keep it moving. I will assume, if I don't hear a nay, that I'm going to go ahead and move forward in the direction that I'm presenting. Rountree: My thoughts on that is you -- you have got it, move towards common sense, and let's sharpen our pencils on it and get that taken care of. Lucas: Next item, Mr. President, Members of the Council, something we have talked about before and this is irrigation easements. There is a purpose behind this and typically we are pretty good at it, but we want to tighten this up, which is to avoid allowing large irrigation easements to be placed on residential lots. You can see that picture down there. This is actually near my house. I live right near Chateau Park. If Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 48 of 68 you look at that blue house, the lot line for that house goes to the center of that canal and now that creates a situation where each individual homeowner along that canal is -- basically owns property that they don't want to maintain, they, basically, can't use, because the irrigation district has a very strong use easement and they are allowed to -- it has to be open, you can't put trees there, you can't improve it, so what we are concerned about here is trying to avoid the situation of these no man's lands that's created by this -- these irrigation easements. I will show you -- this is the -- the blue house is actually on the bottom of the screen there. You can see where the property line goes to the center of the canal. You know, my thought is -- and generally staff's thought is that property line should be at the fence line typically. That should be the rule, because, then, the remainder of that land is placed into a common lot that, then, is owned and maintained by the homeowners association. Even if it's not allowed to be improved, at least if it is a maintenance issue or a code enforcement issue, we can call the HOA and not each individual homeowner along that -- along that stretch of land. Now, there are unique situations. There is times when maybe this, for whatever reason, may not work. And so what we are proposing is to add some language in our section about irrigation easements, basically, that states that if -- if these types of easements restrict fencing and landscaping they shall not be allowed, unless it can be demonstrated by the applicant to the satisfaction of the director that the easement area will be maintained by the homeowners association. And so what's possible -- and we have had this happen on one project, is they had to have it be part of the lot, but they placed a maintenance easement across that area for the homeowners association. So, even though it was on private property, the homeowners association was responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of that area. That's not going to be something we imagine very often, but this language at least gives the developer that option and that was the big push back we had the last time we brought this forward, the development community said, well, if you make it always in a common lot, what about that one situation where we can't and so we tried to create language -- and this is a little awkward, but this language is based on language that's already in this section of code, so we will try to be as consistent as we can in the code. So, that's kind of our goal there. Once again I will pause, maybe show that picture again. That's our intent and that's what we are trying to achieve on this kind of cleanup item. Cavener: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Another question. Justin, in my history, getting a homeowners association to agree on what wattage of light bulb to put in their area is a challenge. How would we handle something if half the association doesn't want to be responsible for this and more doesn't want anything to do with it? I mean what's -- what's their cause and what's our response? Lucas: Mr. President, Councilman Cavener, it's a good question and we deal with this every now and then with HOA's that want to dissolve. They don't get along. They have issues. I don't have a great answer for you on how the city deals with that. We do our Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 49 of 68 best and at the current time we don't review CC&Rs, we aren't really involved in the formation -- of the homeowners association, it's simple a requirement of the subdivision and, then, we look to them to meet their obligation. I would say 90 percent of the homeowners associations do that and will continue to do that. I think there is always going to be the outliers of those who, for whatever reason, may not want to meet those obligations and it's possible the city attorney Mr. Nary has something further to add here. Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I don't have a better answer. I think Justin has hit it on the head. I mean we do have some of these where they are required to maintain drainage lots and -- or green open space that in their opinion maybe serves no value or purpose and so they don't want to do it, they want to sell it or give it away or let someone else maintain it and at least if it's part of the plat all of those decisions would, then, have to come back to you before they could do that. I mean I could definitely see in that example that Justin had up there an HOA coming back saying we want to deed all of those properties -- all of this property and let them have it and, then, they can maintain it. At least you would have the ability to say, no, you're still going to need to maintain this, because someone has to keep this free of weeds, someone has to be responsible for it. You know, whether that's their only purpose, whether it's drainage, whether it's open space, whether it's an easement, someone needs to do that and it is just part of only a subdivision, it's in the CC&Rs, it's in the rule when you buy your home, so it's not a surprise to you. It's an inconvenience for some. But at least in that regard you would see it before it would just dissolve or before they would just go away. Otherwise, code enforcement becomes the tool. Rountree: Questions -- other questions? Does that affect the setback requirements, change where it's measured from? Lucas: Mr. President, Members of the Council, yes. And that's -- it's a good point and that's the point that the developers made when they said, hey, there may be a specific situation where we need that irrigation easement to be on a private lot because of the setbacks and so that's why we left that door open -- Rountree: Okay. Lucas: -- for those unique situations. In general, though, like in this situation above you, that land -- if the setbacks were measured from the fence line they are still in compliance. Rountree: They are still in -- Lucas: And so here it was just let's say a bad decision to allow each of those lots to be -- go to the center of that canal and we catch it and we call it out and require it quite often. But we don't have any code basis to do so. So, what we are trying to do is, basically, give ourselves some curve language to approach you to say -- so, if the developer pushes back and says, no, I want it this way, we can say, well, our code Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 50 of 68 says, no, you need to have it -- you need to have that in a common lot. So, that's our overall goal there. Next kind of cleanup item is signature on development agreements and this was looked at a little bit. It went originally to UDC when it was adopted. It was one year. We changed it back in I believe 2010 to two years to kind of match some of the other approvals. But we have heard from the development community and, actually, members of the Council and some others, the two year time frame to allow for a development agreement to be signed is just too long, because if they do not sign a development agreement the property is not annexed and so it's possible you could hear a project, recommend approval, it moves forward, and that project is not back on your agenda for annexation and development agreement approval for two years. And so some of the concern that two years later maybe the decision to annex that property is -- will be different. And so many cities -- the city of Nampa has recently went down to 30 days. We thought that was a little aggressive. Some of the other cities have reduced this. We kind of landed on six months as a middle ground. It gives the developer some timing, maybe there is financing issues, maybe who knows what. It gives them some time to deal with that, but it also gives the city a closer goal to have that property officially annexed into the city and it also helps the other property owners who might be waiting for their annexation path to kind of have a better -- a more realistic expectation this is going to happen within a shorter time frame. So, very small change to our code, but it could be -- and we brought this to the UDC work group. I thought they were going to balk. I really did. I thought, man, they are going to want the two years, because it benefits them. The majority of them in the room said, no, it should be much shorter. They were saying three months, they were saying shorter, they think it should be -- you come in, you apply for your project, the development agreement should not be sitting out there for two years. So, just -- I will wait for your thoughts on that. Rountree: Is there a provision for requesting an extension of that signature date? Lucas: Currently, Mr. President, Members of the Council, we don't have a provision to request an extension for development agreements. We could consider it and some language like that, but certainly that's up to -- up to you to decide. Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just a comment from my perspective and I am one that has commented to the community development about this. Usually the items that are in a development agreement are hard fought at a public hearing. They are not our standard policy or they wouldn't need to be in a DA. They are items that were discussed at length at the public hearing for the Planning and Zoning Commission and, then, probably again at the public hearing for the City Council. The longer you let it go unsigned the more likely it is you or me or anybody else is likely to forget why that provision was in there and quite often it's not -- you know, the developer agreed on the spot, but it's not something they offered in the first place, it's something that we required and the longer it goes the more likely it is that the developer is going to come back and say, well, I don't want provision 6-A and we will all have forgotten why that got in there, because of points that the public made or that we made and I -- I'm very much supportive of shortening the time. To me six Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 51 of 68 months is even longer than I would allow it to go. But this is a good change from two years and I just wanted to mention my support of why there is a DA in the first place and it either needs to get signed or -- or we all forget. Rountree: Support it. Lucas: Thank you for your comments on that. I'm now moving on to some -- some kind of higher level discussions. I'm not going to be -- I don't have any specific proposals here necessarily for red strike through and underline of the code, but I want to bring some of these items that came up at this UDC work group. These have been, you know, topics of discussion I would say internally with staff for quite some time, but recently we have seen I think some projects that have come in that have brought this to the forefront and so the basic issue here -- what I will hit on is that we have in our code a maximum gross density in our residential districts. It's pretty simple. R-2, two units to the acre, R-4, four units to the acre, et cetera. But if you look at the history of Meridian and how properties actually get approved, in R-2 districts and even R-4 districts very rarely do we see anything near four units to the acre. In the R-4 it was, you know, maybe two, maybe three units to the acre. In the R-8 district seeing something above five is relatively rare. And so what -- what this does is we have these density standards, but we -- through out dimensional standards and open space requirements, lot sizes, frontage requirements, et cetera, we basically make it impossible to achieve the standard that we set. So, for example, in the -- in the R-4 district we have an 8,000 square foot lot minimum and a 60 foot wide frontage requirement and if you actually lay out a subdivision with 8,000 square foot lots, 60 feet wide, you add in streets, you add in ten percent open space, you can't get to four units to the acre and whether that's good or bad, it's just a fact. So, that's why I'm kind of here to talk about that a little bit. But where it's gotten us kind of lately at least -- one of the things that's come up is we have had developers coming in requesting a higher zoning designation, like an R-15, and all they really want to do is do a five unit or six unit to the acre project. So, we look at our zoning designations and we think, well, why can't they do that project in the R-8 zone? They are not asking for density above R-8, really what they are asking for is a reduction in those dimensional standards. The R-15, the lot sizes, the frontages, are much more liberal and you can have more flexibility there. And so we are seeing kind of a shift in market demand -- I think is across the west. Smaller lots. That's something that's more common as land prices go up, you see a desire for smaller lots. You kind of see developers wanting to do some things that are a little bit innovative when it comes to the design of their -- of their product and how big the lots are. But there is still a very strong push to have detached housing, because if you want to get higher density, just attach the units and do duplexes and tri-plexes and things like that and what the development community is coming back and telling us is, you know, those type of products are not what the buyer wants. So, we weigh all those things and we kind of think about it and one thing staff does support is housing diversity. We do think that providing a diverse housing landscape across our city helps the city, because you have -- you can provide different places to live for different people of different incomes. And so that's something the -- as we go through this discussion that's kind of some of the -- and I probably hit some of this already -- but some of the background to why this is an issue from that the Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 52 of 60 development community is raising and is there anything that we could or should do about it. And so I want to highlight one thing, though. As lot sizes get smaller design becomes more important and I think that's a critical point that I don't want to lose on this discussion. If you allow lot sizes to get small it can be very easy to just see garages and that's all you see. You will get a garage with a house behind it and you got a very small lot, that creates a pretty unattractive streetscape and we don't want that. So, we are kind of balancing those two things of smaller lots, maybe a little tighter housing, but not having a garage dominated streetscape and I think there is -- there is a healthy tension between those -- those two things. And so tonight before you I kind of want to talk about eliminating or reducing some of our residential lot size standards, which is a pretty big shift and I think we should recognize it as such, but I'm going to focus on lot sizes and street frontages, not setbacks. I'm not taking about our five foot required setbacks on the side, our 15 foot in the rear in the R-4 and our 12 foot on the rear in the R-8. This is -- this is the lot size minimums, which in R-4 is 8,000, R-8 is 5,000, R-15 it goes quite a ways down, but I think 3,200 and, then, R-40 it's very low and the R-2, which is our most kind of rural residential designation is 12,000. And so I want to show you kind of some -- some of our intended outcomes. Working with the -- the development community, looking at this as staff, we think some flexibility in lot sizes certainly will allow more alternatives in housing types within a neighborhood. So, if you -- in R-4 you're requiring all 8,000 square foot lots, you're basically guaranteeing that all these houses are going to be of a certain cost, because the land value drives that in a lot of ways. If you reduce it you could still have some 8,000 square foot lots and I think we will, because there is demand for that, but next to that 8,000 square foot lot maybe you have a 6,000 square foot lot and so you get -- you could potentially get some more mix of lot sizes within a subdivision that's one outcome that staff I think believes is positive. This could also help simply our subdivision review process. Right now, because of our -- our lot size and street frontage minimums, we are in there with a scale kind of -- because they try to maximize it as much as possible, so a 60 foot frontage in that 8,000 square foot lot, they are right on that, because that's the -- that's what they are designing to. If we lower those, we feel like giving them a little more flexibility will actually help us not have to be so on top of it, because we are hoping that that mixture -- and instead of all the lots being at the minimum, you will see more of a mix in the -- in the subdivision. This can allow for clustering to create more usable open space, smaller lots, more open space, is oftentimes something that we can see and it does encourage densities more in line with the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan. And I think that's probably more of staffs ultimate goal is to hopefully see our densities reflective more of the -- more towards what the zoning designation allows, rather than a developer having to ask for a zoning designation of a higher density just for dimensional standards, we would hope that our dimensional standards allowed for the densities that are -- that are called for in that designation. So, issues -- and I talked about some of these. There is always a question of what if we reduced the lot size in R-4, does that mean that all these people in the R-4 lots are going to go out and redevelop and suddenly split their lot, because they can do two -- not very likely, because I'm not really proposing that we reduce them that much. So, we are sensitive to that, but I don't think it's going to be a -- we have looked at this pretty carefully and I don't think that's going to be just a wide open deal, because they still have to meet our density requirements, you can't just take Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 53 of 68 a lot and split it into four houses, because, then, you're going to be -- you wouldn't meet the density requirements. I think this does increase the need for quality residential design to avoid that garage dominated streetscape which I mentioned and it may increase the need to acquire transitional lot sizes around the perimeter, which is already discussed in our Comprehensive Plan, but it just might highlight that even more, that around the perimeter adjacent to these larger lots we may -- you know, we want to require larger lots adjacent to larger lots and have the smaller lots be more internal to the subdivision. So, those are some -- some potential issues, probably more than that, but those are the ones I wanted to highlight. So, staff is taking kind of a two pronged approach to this -- to this issue. Number one, we are proposing -- at least through this workshop and discussion to consider reducing dimensional standards in our residential districts to allow for those densities to go up a little bit. Once again, I'm not talking setbacks, just the minimum lot size and the minimum frontage and I will show you what I'm going to -- what we are proposing there. And, on the other hand, we are also proposing to open up our planned unit development standards just a little bit, so they are more accessible. Right now I think we had a planned unit development maybe six or eight months ago and that is the first one we had had in the City of Meridian in the last probably ten years and the reason is our threshold to be able to apply for a planned unit development, which allows you to request smaller lot sizes, variations in setbacks, et cetera, has been very, very high. We have some language in the code that basically requires the developer to preserve a significant natural resource or historical feature to qualify for a planned unit development. But looking at Meridian we don't have all the many significant natural resources or historical features for them to preserve, so if they are wanting to do something in a -- kind of a greenfield situation, the PUD is automatically not allowed and so we want to maybe open that up a little bit more to allow for some innovation and some creativity from the developer that will be heavy on why we need to do this and we will be expecting a real special project and so I think we can -- we can get those -- those two pronged approach and that's kind of what we wanted to chat about a little bit tonight. So, let me show you what we are thinking. R-2, no change. Twelve thousand eighty -- this is a -- it's a rural residential feel. We don't think we need to change that through this -- and we don't see a lot of R-2 anyway. I mean we don't feel a lot of pressure to change that specific designation. R-4 -- what we are thinking of is going from six -- 8,000 to 6,000 and lowering the street frontage from 60 to 50. That gives the -- the lot size and street frontage obviously goes down and gives the designer of that subdivision a little more flexibility on those lots. I still anticipate we will see quite a few 8,000 square foot lots, because there is a demand for that, but we will also allow for some smaller lots with those R-4 developments. And you see this in red here, what we are also proposing -- and this was in your packet and the table that I gave, was if you have an alley loaded lot that the setback can be reduced, so that the alley can be a little tighter, so that you're not having to provide the -- a lot of space behind the garage to the alley and that's another thing that you will see as we are proposing here, which does promote a little bit of -- a little bit more density in those situations. So, basically, simplifying this one quite a bit. We had all this 5,000 or 4,000 if it was -- had a common driveway -- basically just reducing it to 4,000 with 40 foot frontage in the R-8. Same changes to the alley. And, then, R-15, no change to the lot size and already right now in R-15 we don't have a minimum street frontage, so we are Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 54 of 68 not proposing to add one. We think that's a -- a doable -- a doable situation. And in R- 40, once again, no change there, except for adding that alley notation about the setback from the garage to the alley. So, we kind of trying to take a step approach. We did kick around removing minimum lot sizes completely. We felt like that might be a step too far. Maybe we take a step down first to see how it goes and, then, in the future if that still continues to be an issue look at that. But this is kind of where staff landed on the -- on the residential dimensional standards. So, I will certainly pause now. I have given quite the speech and I will take any questions or comments you might have. Rountree: Comments? Questions? Bird: I have none. Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Yeah. On that subject. Just -- this seems to be going in the right direction. I know several years ago developers started talking about the trends are that people like their neighborhoods and want to stay in their neighborhoods, but over time their life changes. You have, you know, newly married people with no kids that need a smaller house, smaller yard, then, they start having kids, they want to move to a bigger house. They become empty nesters eventually, they want to move back to a smaller one, but they want to stay in the same neighborhood and that means that -- that you need to have a variety of sizes. Where I'm going with that is I wonder if we would want to contemplate -- let's look at the R-4, which is on the screen right now in front of us. Instead of changing the requirement from 8,000 to 6,000, maybe making the requirement something like half of them have to be 8,000 and half of them can be 6,000. 1 guess my concern is could somebody take this and say, okay, I can make all lots 6,000 square feet or whatever the new standard is on the other ones and that isn't the point. The point is to allow some variety and I wonder whether we might want to say a proportion of which need to be a certain size and a proportion of which could be smaller. I just throw that out for discussion. Rountree: I guess my thoughts on that is it's interesting, I think a developer can do that. They know the minimum. It doesn't mean they can't do something bigger and go back and forth. But that's to me an administrative nightmare. You think about getting your scale out and measuring every lot and you have to keep track of the lot and make sure the lots do meet those percentages -- it just doesn't seem to move towards the efficiency that you're trying to accomplish and we can encourage that, so we really like these mixed sizes, but not require it per se. Lucas: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I can also speak to this a little bit from just my background working for a home builder. You know, they design the lots based on the house models that they have. Some of their houses are 40 feet wide, some are 50 feet wide, some are 60 feet wide and so when they are designing a subdivision Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 55 of 68 typically they design by default some flex in the lot sizes because of the types of houses that -- the widths that are out there. And what we are doing with an 8,000 square foot minimum is we make, basically, every lot fit the largest house that they have and even if you do have a smaller house, it just means that the side yards are bigger and so by allowing some flexibility I think we will get some of that variety just by the nature of house they design it, at least that's our hope. The idea about percentages have been employed in other areas. We have seen that in other codes where we have a percentage. We considered that, but, once again, thought, you know, having -- counting up the lots and certain percentages -- our hope is we can get that without having to do that. But, once again, if we are not seeing it and all we see is 6,000, maybe we do want to go that direction and have some type of required lot mix. But certainly that's -- that's up to your discretion. Rountree: No comments? Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: Just a comment. If you -- if you lower the R -4s to 6,000 feet, you're going to get all 6,000 feet. You're going to get 60 by 100s or 65 by 90s, something like that, and they are going to put their 50 foot houses on there, because we only have a five foot setback. I mean most of the time a guy with any arm span can walk between two houses and touch both houses. But -- so we are joking ourselves. If you want to set it, set it, because that's what you're going to get. Rountree: Other comments? Borton: Mr. President, I don't have an answer to the question, but I think Councilman Zaremba brings up a good point, as does Councilman Bird. You know, if you truly want to try to require without requiring, the variation you described, I'm not sure how you do that. If there were a way -- give it some thought, see if there is a way to require it without making it an administrative nightmare to do. I have the question, but not the answer. Very helpful. Lucas: We can certainly take that back, knock it around. I think, you know, from staffs perspective, going down to a 6,000 in the R-4, even if we have a situation where all the lots where 6,000, 1 still think from staff's perspective, it still helps us get a little closer to those density targets that we have within our Comprehensive Plan and within the R-4 standard. You're still not going to be allowed to go above four units to the acre and so will there be some subdivisions that have uniform lot sizes based on the new standard, I certainly think that's very possible. That issue I guess is -- the next question that would -- is that a problem -- the lots that used to be 8,000 are now 6,000, we had a lot of 8,000 square foot lots on the City of Meridian and if we had all 6,000 square foot lots for the next ten years we would still have a lot of 8,000 square foot lots in the city of Meridian. So, that's kind of staffs thought behind this is even if the R-4 moves more towards the Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 56 of 68 6,000 square foot minimum, it still provides variety in our overall housing stock and land size within our city. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: If you go down to a minimum and you're 6,000 -- and I firmly believe that, you're -- you're going to put five lots to an acre. You take your three percent -- or ten percent open space, that goes to 33,000, that still leaves you 11,000 for your share of roadway and easements; right? And in an acre I don't think you are going to get over that many square feet. Maybe if you have got one acre to develop, but where you have got ten or 15 or 20 acres -- so, you're not -- you're not going to get the three and a half or the four. I will tell you in my opinion the biggest mistake I ever voted for was back in '99 to leave the R-4 -- not to stay with the R-4. Our community was much better with an R-4 overall. That's my personal opinion. Lucas: I can certainly move on. I'm not hearing any other comments on this. We will take this back -- thank you for the comments. We will certainly take those into consideration as we -- as we move this forward. And, as I say, any changes that are proposed, go through the full public hearing process and will full involvement from -- from the community. The next one -- and thanks for your indulgence tonight on the time. Open space and amenities. This is another thing that has come up. It kind of ties into the last one. The city requires ten percent open space. That's somewhat unique within the Treasure Valley. The city of Eagle has a higher requirement. The City of Meridian is ten. Most of the other cities don't have a minimum open space requirement. I'm not here to change that. One of the things we heard from the development community, though, was that the ten percent -- when we require that, we also require amenities and other things with subdivisions, which I think all these things actually help Meridian subdivisions to be nice places to live. So, that's the goal behind those and so you can see kind of our basic requirements here. Under five acres we do not require open space or amenities. Five to 20 acres is ten percent and one amenity. These are our current requirements. Twenty plus acres is ten percent open space and one amenity for every 20 acres. So, I put there some feedback we received from the development community. Two of the highlights. Currently our code -- when we look at amenities, they have got a swimming pool and they have got a tot lot -- a playground and a swimming pool. They are counted as two amenities. It doesn't matter that that swimming pool cost a lot more than that little playground, they get the same value for the amenity and so we got some feedback that that just doesn't seem very fair for a developer who comes in on a project, a 20 -- let's say a 25 acre project and they put in a clubhouse and a pool. You know, they get in a couple of amenities for that, but the same developer -- another developer comes in and builds a horseshoe pit and puts in a picnic table and there is really no recognition of the difference between those two things. Not all -- not all subdivisions need pools or clubhouses, but it was just some recognition within our amenity requirements that -- that there is differences in amenities and that there should be some stratification in how amenities are counted. So, I have Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 57 of 68 kind of put a straw man out there. I'm not necessarily -- this has not been fully thought out. It needs some thought. But I want to at least throw the concept out to the Council of doing that, stratifying the amenities. One way to do that is to, basically, create a point system and you have to get a certain amount of points and certain amenities are worth more points than others. So, if you do a pool you get four points and maybe you're done. You don't have to do a gazebo and a tot lot just to make that requirement. But if you want to do just picnic tables and barbecues, then, you got to do picnic tables, barbecues, a gazebo and a horseshoe pit. You got to do quite a bit more to get to that -- that same level. So, I wanted to throw this out there and get your thoughts on it and your feedback. This was something that came from the work group and they really wanted us to look at this and think about it, because right now the way our amenity section is written is you kind of get what you get, there is no difference between them. If you build a large clubhouse, a million dollars, or horseshoe pits, there is no recognition of that. So, I will pause there and let you kind of chew on that for a second and, then, see what you think. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: I think that's one of the best ideas we have ever come up with. Thank you, Justin. I think it's fantastic. A person puts in a nice amenity should be awarded points for it. Because we are competing -- they are competing with someone that just throws in some grass and calls it an amenity. Cavener: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Justin, when you say recognition, what -- what's the work group referring by that? I mean they want it to be -- I don't quite wrap my brain around what you mean by recognition. Lucas: Mr. President, Councilman Cavener, maybe recognition isn't the best word. I think what they are searching for is some equity in the review process for amenities where a developer who builds a large subdivision and they put in four pools, they are putting in a pretty significant investment into that development and those four pools -- and we have another developer who builds a large subdivision and they put in a basketball court, a horseshoe pit, a picnic table and a barbecue, they get -- they get the same value of four amenities and so the developer who puts in the four pools is saying I'm not putting in the pools, because the city is requiring me to do that, but I don't want to have to put in four pools and all this other little stuff -- a lot of little dinky amenities just to meet some, you know, overall requirement. Because it's one for 20 acres. So, if you have a large development, 200 acres, they have to put in ten amenities and the developer -- his take is if I put in two pools why do I have to put in anything else? I'm putting in two very significant amenities and I shouldn't have to do ten -- just whatever Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 58 of 68 amenities. And so that's where he wants some -- some more flexibility and so this situation would allow for the larger investments in amenities to count for a little bit more and reduce maybe their overall number of amenities that they are required to put in. And so there is some balance there that needs to be met and, as I said, this is kind of a straw man concept. But that's -- that's kind of what the thought was behind the work group. Borton: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Borton. Borton: I agree. It just seems like a great idea and it does -- it gives you an opportunity to incentivize certain types of amenities that might not otherwise be seen. As you see this going forward, you know, fiber optics is listed, neighborhood business center -- you're thinking creatively and there is probably a longer list of -- Lucas: Oh, absolutely. Borton: -- more unique amenities that you might want to put in the high point category to encourage developers to start to utilize. I think it's a great idea. Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I ditto all of that. I think that's an exceptional idea. One worry comes to me and it actually would be true under our present rules as well. Do we have a way to identify -- let's say a developer buys 50 acres and breaks it up into ten different LLCs and says, well, this project is five acres and two weeks later this project is five acres and we don't have any requirement. Can we identify a bigger project that's being presented as small projects or how do we -- how do we know that? Lucas: Mr. President, Councilman Zaremba, so through our pre -application process we do kind of a review of surrounding properties and in our code it does talk about properties under single ownership and even if they are multiple LLCs we can see who owns the property still. They are required to develop, basically, as a single property. So, we try our best to catch that. Is there a developer who could probably get -- I mean I certainly think it's possible. I have been doing this for a little while. I typically don't see that. Typically the smaller projects are exactly what you would expect, in -fill projects, five acres surrounded by existing development. The large tracks of land, the reason they are hard -- the reason they come in all together is we don't allow them to subdivide it prior to -- you know, they can't break it up into five acre portions and, then, come in bit by bit. When they come in and want to annex that property, we want to see the whole picture and so we will require that typically through the -- through the process. So, one way they could maybe get all these five acres -- go buy an existing five acre subdivision and do them one at a time, which is possible, I guess but it's pretty unlikely. So, we do Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 59 of 68 watch for that, though, of properties under single ownership coming in as a whole project. Zaremba: Great. Thank you. Milam: Mr. President? Rountree: Genesis. Milam: So, I -- I really do love the point system and it is good to reward them for putting in better amenities. On the other hand, they will be rewarded, because they are putting in really nice amenities and many of them, their lots are going to sell for a much higher price as well. So, they are being already rewarded. So, I still do like this program. I'm not sure about taking away open space, though. Making it -- you take that in combination with making smaller lots and, then, take away some open space and pretty soon we are just going to cram in as many houses in the property as possible. So, I definitely want to avoid the possibility of abuse of that. Lucas: Certainly. And, Mr. President, Councilwoman Milam is referring to the -- that last bullet point of -- and as I say, these are just throwing out some ideas of potentially allowing some kind of buy down of open space and this really came into -- comes into play on a tight project where getting to that ten percent can be pretty difficult, but they might say, hey, I'd much rather do a real nice amenity and drop down to eight percent than have to do ten percent. That's an idea. Certainly -- I think I said vary up to three percent, so you would still have always a minimum of seven percent. We wouldn't allow them to buy it down all the way to zero. So, it's a thought and let's get feedback if we want to do that or not. There is certainly drawbacks -- there is pros and cons to that -- to that question. Zaremba: Mr. President? Just a follow up on the same subject, then, just to throw in for the general thinking, we I think allow developers to count as open space what I would call the parkway between curb and a detached sidewalk. We allow them to count that as open space. So, if you, then, add to that a reduction in open space, we end up with very little -- what I would call usable open space and I think that is a concern. We want chunks of usable open space and I have difficulty reducing that. Just a thought. Lucas: Thank you. Good feedback Rountree: Other comments? Bird: I have none, Mr. President Lucas: I will try to move through the remainder of this relatively quickly. Gravel mining in a nutshell -- we talked about it with the group. We were interested in their feedback. You recently took this out of residential zones. Staff had some thought of doing -- just restrict this as a city use. We took it to the group, kind of went back and forth, and we Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 60 of 60 are hitting pause on this for now, because we want to let our Public Works Department kind of take this up and some other discussions related to grading permits and other things that have been bouncing around. So, we are just not quite ready to propose a solution on gravel mining yet. Once again, it's not allowed within residential areas. It still is a conditional use permit in other zones within the city, but I don't anticipate we are going to be overwhelmed with gravel mining applications in the next year, so we will have some time to work on this and we want to work in coordination with Public Works. So, those are our next steps. Thank you so much for your feedback today. I really appreciate the comments. I know it's late. We are going to go ahead and refine what I presented tonight. It looks like I have a path forward at least to present these back to this UDC work group, give them a chance to chew it around. Staff will, then, make an application that goes through the full public hearing process for those changes, which allows a whole other round of discussion and thoughts and comments on any changes. Thank you tonight for giving me the direction on that. I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to -- unless there is any other final comments on design -- or on UDC changes, I'm going to turn it over the Brian just briefly to talk about the design manual, which is kind of a companion to our Unified Development Code. Bird: Thank you, Justin. McClure: Mr. President, Members of the Council, thank you. There are currently some challenges with the design manual and I have been tasked to kind of work through some of those. The current process, for example, is explained via 12 pages of text in a number of complicated matrixes, not including the actual introduction. It can be difficult to use. Does not correlate clearly with zoning or land use policy. More than half the design manual are site and transportation considerations, which are typically established for a site well before the design manual is ever required. The process can be very subjective and the responsibility of that subjective process is placed largely on the staffs shoulders. State code also requires express standards. It's not currently very explicit in guidance, that is the design manual, and there is limited use by design professionals. Currently there is a lot of hand holding. Staff would like to explore some options to streamline the current document. I would like to stress that we are not necessarily trying to create new standards, simply to streamline and reorder them and, then, perhaps apply some more specific criteria to them to meet that express requirement. We would like to place more emphasis on consistent application to make it more,predictable and eliminate duplicate and consolidate similar items for which there are many. Recategorize the existing items from urban, urban -suburban, and suburban to something more in line with our zoning land use, such as multi -family commercial, industrial, residential and mixed use, which would better align with zoning and land use. The mixed use would be something determined by land use overlay, such as Old Town, or through a development agreement. Locate critical items not applicable in the design is required into relevant UDC or Comprehensive Plan guidelines and policies. The design manual currently has 740 goals, objectives, and action items related to site and building design, not including those. Three hundred and sixteen of those are related to architectural character, the rest of them are site considerations. To address some of the challenges, such as meeting state guidelines, essentially, we want to explore Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 61 of 68 breaking down the design manual in 740 pieces, rearranging them in new categories, and consolidating them and, then, use them in a smaller document. Hopefully that would better align with the land use zoning policy, address design considerations at a perfect time and direction by state. We would like to do it by establishing community design professionals to rehash some of this, workout the details, and, then, come back before you with something a little more developed. That's kind of what we are looking to do and if there are any questions I would love to -- or comments I would love to take those. Rountree: Brian, I -- this manual was developed with the stated purpose of getting us out of designing projects and if you think it's difficult dealing with 6,000 dollars, you should have been here a number of years ago as we sat here hour upon hour upon hour trying to design projects. So, what we have as a result of us getting out of that business and doing the business that we are supposed to be doing -- and this was created by a group of professionals -- I believe six to eight architects sat with city staff and created this manual. The intent of the manual was to put it in place and see how it worked and as we worked through it identify the difficulties and come forth with modifications. We are now there. I applaud you for bringing this forward. Let's get it done, let's get the committee back together and let's -- let's make it work even better than it's worked in the past. It's been working and it's taken us out of it. But, I agree, it is complicated and we need some consistency and uniformity in how it's applied, so I fully support what you're doing. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: Brian, I agree. You've never sat through some of those meetings when we had people that want to design the project on the developer's dollar, so I -- I think this is fantastic what you have come up with and I -- as Council President Rountree just stated, is I wholeheartedly support. I hope we get back and come back with a new redesigned manual that is more up to date. We have had our curves and straights and we got something to work on now. So, thank you, Brian, for bringing this forward. McClure: Thank you. Chatterton: Mr. President and Council Members, I just want to say thank you for your time, for listening, for being engaged on this, giving us some very, very valuable feedback. A lot of this work is -- seems kind of grinding and gruesome. The only thing that's more grinding and gruesome is you all having to deal with a less than adequate set of tools, codes, and the design manual when things are before you. So, the whole process of freeing things up to let developers design community and staff do their work, so you don't have to design. We very much appreciate you putting the time in this. It's worth it. Bird: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 62 of 68 Rountree: Other comments? Thank you all. We will look forward to seeing the changes. Both in the UDC, as well as the design manual. G. Community Development: Adoption of Communities in Motion 2040 - The Regional Long -Range Transportation Plan H. Community Development: Resolution No. 14-1027: Endorsing Communities in Motion 2040 - The Long -Range Transportation Plan for Ada and Canyon Counties Rountree: Next two items -- Lisa, you're probably more than ready to get up here and talk to us about Communities In Motion. So -- Brian, are you -- are you not -- are you done? McClure: I'm covering for Caleb on the next item. Rountree: Oh, are you? Okay. All right. Brian, are you going to introduce this. McClure: Mr. President, Members of the Council, again, thank you for having me here. Communities In Motion 2040 or just CIM is the original long range transportation plan for Ada and Canyon counties. During its July 21st meeting the COMPASS board of directors adopted CIM 2040. The plan was developed between 2011 and 2014, with significant input from the public, planning team and leadership team. COMPASS would like the city to incorporate CIM 2040 into the city's processes. The purpose of CIM 2040 is to outline a fiscally constrained transportation system to meet the needs of the future. While a multitude a tasks, analysis, and data feed into this, it is generally a five step process, including develop the financial forecast for the funding of transportation facilities, develop a realistic scenario for how their region is likely to grow between now and 2040. This is referred to as CIM 2040 Vision. It's a map. And the future transportation needs based on the CIM 2040 Vision map. Comparing needs of the financial forecast in light of funding -- limited funding the COMPASS board decided that all federal transportation funding allocated through this plan be directed to maintenance of the existing system and to prioritize the list of unfunded need for when -- if new funding becomes available. Staff is before Council tonight asking for adoption of CIM. The city currently recognizes and adopts by reference in its current version of CIM in the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, but COMPASS has requested a formal adoption. The Comprehensive Plan makes reference to and supports CIM in Chapters 3 and 7. During the September 8th meeting the transportation commission forwarded on a recommendation to the City Council to adopt CIM 2040. A draft resolution supporting CIM 2040 has been prepared and I will stand for any questions. Rountree: No questions? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 63 of 68 Rountree: Do I have a motion? Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I will make a motion, but I will throw a comment in first. COMPASS and all the people that they engage in this process do -- do a wonderful job and their product is an excellent product. It's a good guide for looking at development over the next 20 years. My only hesitation is they are constrained by their federal requirements to consider 20 years to be long range and I have to throw in my opinion that 20 years is not long range. I wish at some point we could get to saying this is what full build out of this valley looks like and work backwards from that to say here is how much of it we expect to happen in 20 years, here is how much of it we expect to happen in the next ten years and I always bring up Idaho Power as the example of a commercial company that does that. They pretty well know what facilities they are going to need to support this valley at what is expected to be full build out and they are planning those facilities now. How that relates to COMPASS's work when we talk about what we are planning for Communities In Motion. If we are not looking at full build out, then, we will never be preserving enough roadway, we will never be pushing hard enough on public transportation, because the amount of pain that will happen the next 20 years is nothing compared to the pain that our grandchildren -- your grandchildren -- I don't have any children, but your grandchildren are going to have, because we are not looking that far out. That said, again, I appreciate all the effort that goes into this and I wholeheartedly support this as far as it goes, but I just wish someday we could look at the -- at the full build out and work backwards from that. So, with that said, Mr. President, I move that we adopt Communities In Motion 2040 and use that for Meridian planning. Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to adopt Communities In Motion 2040. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor of the motion signify by aye. Or does that need to be a roll call? I don't think so. Yeah. I don't think so. Okay. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Next item is the resolution on that. Zaremba: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we approve Resolution 14-1027 endorsing Communities In Motion 2040. Milam: Second. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 64 of 68 Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve Resolution 14-2017. Any discussion? Roll call vote. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 10: Ordinances A. Ordinance No.14-1626: An Ordinance (AZ 14-006) Victory Middle School For Annexation And Rezone Of A Parcel Located In The East % Of The W'/2 Of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, And Determining The Land Use Zoning Classification Of Said Lands From Rut To R-4 (Low Density Residential District) In The Meridian City Code; And Providing An Effective Date Rountree: Thank you for staying. Sorry we didn't get you up here. Okay. Next item was Item 10. Ordinances. That would be Ordinance No. 14-1626. If the clerk -- 14- 1626. If the clerk would read that by title only. Holman: Thank you. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 14-1626. An ordinance AZ 14- 006, Victory Middle School, for annexation and rezone of a parcel located in the east one half of the west one half of Section 24, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian. Establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said laid from RUT to R-4, Low Density Residential District in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder and the Idaho State Tax Commission as required by law and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading rules and providing an effective date. Rountree: Anyone out there -- Ralph -- want to hear that in total? Seeing none -- Milam: I move that we approve Ordinance AZ 14-006 -- Rountree: 14-1626. Milam: Where is it? Rountree: I just spoke it. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 65 of 68 Milam: Well, I'm half sleeping. Rountree: 14-1626. Milam: 14-1626. Rountree: Yes. Milam: With suspension of rules. Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the ordinance with suspension of rules. Roll call vote. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 11: Future Meeting Topics A. IdahoSTARS Request for Discussion Regarding Childcare Standards in Idaho Rountree: Next item is future meeting topics. We have one on our list. Is there another one that anyone would wish to add that you know of at this point? Bird: I have none at this point. Rountree: I don't see any. The next item on the agenda is Executive Session. Bird: Mr. President? Holman: President Rountree? Bird: Oh. Holman: The question -- we had this as a future meeting topic -- this item to decide whether you want to add it to a future meeting. Rountree: So, that is a question, not that it's -- Holman: Yeah. It's a question. Bird: Question. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 66 of 68 Rountree: Do we want to have that added and who brought that forward and who is asking, if you could tell us, Madam Clerk. Holman: It's -- Council President, Members of the Council, it's in your packets. It is -- actually, I can pull it up for you real quick. Rountree: Well, I can pull it up. Cavener: It's a request from like Red Sky PR -- Bird: Yes. Cavener: -- on behalf of -- it looks two organizations. Rountree: Okay. Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Yes. Bird: Regarding this. I think that the child care standards is pretty well taken care of by the state laws and -- and I don't know if our -- if we want to be messing around with that. I don't know if Mr. Nary wants to have us messing around with that. We have got a good state law, let's let them -- let's let them take care of this child care business. Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, what's being asked -- you're correct, Council Member Bird. We have adopted the state requirements into our levels of child care as to whether you have to have an accessory use, whether it's a center, whether it's a child care facility, as to the -- from the planning standpoint. So, the other issue that comes into play with these -- and I don't know if that's the specifics with this request -- is some of the enforcement on the volumes and ratios and things like that and in the past you have been asked -- there is a tremendous cost to managing that part of the child care issue and the city has not felt the compelling need to do that and that hasn't been an issue that's been requested of the Council from anyone, other than other agencies, but, again, there is a cost to it, there is no money attached to it, so there is an expense to the city to enhance the requirements or to create more of an enforcement mechanism towards those. We already used the planning process to determine where child cares can locate, as well as the number of children that can be present and things like that. We don't have any other things for enforcement that you might see in other cities of having child care officers going out and doing inspections in the particular places. We do have fire department -- the fire department inspect them in regards to the safety requirements, but for other things and ratios and such we don't do that. Rountree: Okay. Is there a desire, then, to allow them the 15 minutes that they request or -- Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 67 of 60 Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: I have no problem allowing them 15 minutes, but I just wanted to point out that -- that we do have -- Rountree: We do have. Bird: We do have very good child care rules and stuff and -- and what this would be -- an unfunded mandate for us to pay for to do, as I understand. But I will give them their -- I have no problem giving anybody 15 minutes. Milam: Hear them out. Rountree: Other comments? Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would agree with Mr. Bird. I think it's worth listening to them, but from back in my planning and zoning days I know every time that somebody applies for an in- home child care, all the neighbors come and say we ought to have more rules, we ought to have more rules and Mr. Nary makes the point, whatever rule you have you have to enforce, so you have to set up a mechanism to do that and the state laws are adequate. So, I'm willing to listen, but I hope we will be very circumspect in any action we might take about it. Rountree: Other comments? Generally in agreement to have them scheduled for an upcoming workshop, depending on the length that we might see and we can schedule them either November or December. Cavener: Mr. President? Rountree: Luke. Cavener: Mr. President, I think the request is for the 18th. Rountree: I understand what their request is, but it's our decision, so you want to let them know that we will schedule them in a space available in an upcoming workshop. It's a workshop item. And let them know what those dates are, the between now and the end of the year. Item 12: Executive Session Per Idaho State Code 67-2345 (1)(c): (c) To Conduct Deliberations Concerning Labor Negotiations or to Acquire an Interest in Real Property, Which is Not Owned by a Public Agency Rountree: Okay. Executive Session. Meridian City Council October 21, 2014 Page 68 of 68 Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(c). Milam: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to go into Executive Session. Roll call vote, please. Roll Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:28 p.m. to 9:43 p.m.) Rountree: Do I have a motion to come out of Executive Session? Bird: So moved. Zaremba: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to come out of Executive Session. All those in favor signify by aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Need one more motion. Bird: I move we adjourn. Zaremba: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:43 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) q :Y�QATE APPROVED ATTE�;:,,,v��