HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-09-08Meridian City Council Workshop September 8, 2015
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 3:03 p.m., Tuesday,
September 8, 2015, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Charlie Rountree, Keith Bird, David
Zaremba, Joe Borton, Genesis Milam and Luke Cavener.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jacy Jones, Bruce Chatterton, Caleb Hood, Bill Parsons, Kyle
Radek, Tracy Basterrechea, Mark Niemeyer, and Patti Perkins.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X _ Joe Borton
X__ Charlie Rountree X_ Keith Bird
__X__ Genesis Milam __X__ Lucas Cavener
__X_ Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I'm going to go ahead and get tonight's -- or today's meeting started. Thank
you for being here. We missed you, Ralph. For the record it is Tuesday, September 8th.
It's 3:03. We will start with role call attendance, Madam Clerk.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in the
pledge to our flag.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Adoption of the Agenda
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is adoption of the agenda.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: On Item 6-B of the agenda, it is proposed that we -- the resolution number is
15-1087. On Item 6-G, the Public Works Design Standards update has been requested to
continue again on October 13th, 2015. On Item 7-B, the ordinance number is 15-1658
and Item 7-C the ordinance number if 15-1659. And there is an amendment to the
agenda to add an Executive Session under State Code 74-206, (1)(f). With those
changes and amendments, Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the agenda.
Bird: Second.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 2 of 52
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as amended. For the
record adding the Executive Council was an unexpected event and the item is to concern
-- advise its legal representatives of pending litigation. So, all those in favor say aye. All
ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 4: Consent Agenda
A. Approval of the August 25, 2015 City Council Meeting Minutes
B. Approval of the September 1, 2015 City Council Meeting Minutes
C. Approval of the September 1, 2015 PreCouncil Meeting Minutes
D. Addendum C to the Professional Service Agreement for Animal
Control Services and Dog Licensing Between the City of
Meridian and the Idaho Humane Society for a not-to-exceed
amount of $352,132.00
E. Development Agreement Shelburne Subdivision (AZ 15-003)
Located at South ½ Of The Northeast ¼ Of The Southwest ¼ Of
Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho
F. Continued from September 1, 2015: Professional Services
Agreement For Event Coordination Services: One-Day Youth
Farmer’s Market Expo for a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $2,000.00
G. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement for Hillsdale
Elementary
H. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement to AME ELECTRIC, INC
for the “WELL 12 AND WELL 23 CONTROL SYSTEM
UPGRADES” project for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $82,398.00.
I. Christmas in Meridian 2015 Sponsorship Agreement Between
Borton-Lakey Law and Policy and the City of Meridian for a Not-
to-Exceed Amount of $3,000.00
J. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law: RZ 15-008 Avebury
Subdivision by Avebury Development, LLC Located North Side
of E. Pine Avenue and West of N. Locust Grove Road Request:
Rezone of Three (3) Acres of Land from the L-O Zoning District
to the R-15 Zoning District
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 3 of 52
K. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law: PP 15-007 Avebury
Subdivision by Avebury Development, LLC Located North Side
of E. Pine Avenue and West of N. Locust Grove Road Request:
Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of Fifteen (15) Single
Family Residential Lots and Five (5) Common Lots on
Approximately Three (3) Acres in a Proposed R-15 Zoning
District
L. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law: MDA 15-008 Jump Time
by ALC Architecture Located Near the Intersection of E. Franklin
and S. Eagle Roads Request: Modification to the Development
Agreement to Amend the Recorded Development Agreement (DA
#111006191) for the Purpose of Modifying the Approved Concept
Plan and Specific Provisions
M. Final Order for Approval: TEC 15-003 Avendale Subdivision by
Silver Oaks Apartments, LLC Located North of W. Franklin Road
and West of N. Ten Mile Road Request: One (1) Year Time
Extension on the Preliminary Plat for Avendale Subdivision in
Order to Obtain the City Engineer's Signature on a Final Plat
N. Letter to Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) Regarding US
20/26 (Chinden Boulevard)
O. Letter to Ada County Highway District (ACHD) Regarding Initial
Draft of the FY2016-2020 Integrated Five Year Work Plan (IFYWP)
De Weerd: Item 4 is our Consent Agenda.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the Consent Agenda and authorize the Clerk to attest
and the Mayor to sign.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. Madam Clerk,
will you call roll.
Roll call: Rountree, yea; Bird, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 4 of 52
Item 5: Items Moved from Consent Agenda
De Weerd: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 6: Department Reports
A. Human Resources: Annual Update
De Weerd: So we will move to Item 6-A under our HR for annual update.
Perkins: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, thank you very much for this opportunity to
give my annual update. It's my second annual update, so now I'm a veteran. And this will
be thankfully brief. I'm not -- not real -- real long on -- on talking about our
accomplishments. But I did want to remind you of who we have in the HR Department
and since I did everybody's pictures last year, I didn't think you needed -- bless you,
Mayor. Didn't think that we needed a repeat of everybody's pictures, but I did want to
make sure that you had an opportunity to meet Jessica Moore, if you haven't already.
Jessica joined our team last November and she has just been a fabulous addition to our
team. The remainder of our team rounds out with Crystal Ritchie as the HR manager,
Laura Lee Berg is our HR generalist, Christena Barney is our benefits administrator and,
then, of course, Jessica. Highlights for last year. We have quite a lot of things that we
can be proud of, I believe, for the year. We deepened our relationships with the Clients
Group -- The Client Group through increased integration of the business partner model
and -- which include quarterly updates with many of the departments. That business
partner model is something that is a little different than the way the HR department was
structured prior to my joining the team and really involves a vertical integration of the HR
-- assigned HR business -- or representative to that department. So, they do everything
from soup to nuts with that department, thereby really developing those relationships and
it really I think is -- is an opportunity for HR to be more involved in the management of
each of the departments. This past year we assumed most of the work of the job reviews
and compensation work that was formerly done by -- almost exclusively by a vendor, we
really have the expertise in house to do the job classifications and the comp work
internally and so we -- we were able to save quite a bit of money on -- by doing this work
internally. We integrated two new HR system modules this last year. Christena Barney --
both of these models have to do with benefits. We asked for them in our previous budget
request and we are integrating those. One has to do with billing enrollment and billing and
the other one is an employee self-service module, which is going to be taking center stage
with our open enrollment activities this coming fall and I think -- I want to give a shout out
to Christena, because when we hired her it was, you know, to handle benefits and leave
administration and she does an amazing job with that, but she also is very technically
savvy, unlike the director, and so it is wonderful to really have her on the team and she
was able to save us over 10,000 dollars in support that we had budgeted for this project
by doing the troubleshooting and fixing the bugs and things herself. I can't begin to know
what she did, but she worked really closely with IT and really saved a ton of effort from the
vendor in that regard. We developed and implemented a more formalized orientation
program. We were doing kind of piecemeal orientation, so anytime somebody would get
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 5 of 52
hired we would sit down and do an -- do an orientation -- a real informal orientation. We
streamlined the effort and by doing so we were able to put it together in more formalized
presentation and we do them in groups now. We have two different days during the
month that we bring new hires on board and it really starts the new hire off in -- really well
in that they get to meet other people, they have a sense of camaraderie and getting to
know people in other parts of the city when they start work on the same day and so that
has -- took a little getting used to for folks, because they were used to being able to bring
people on just anytime, but we have really worked with them and if we have to do a one
off, but this has really proven successful and I think really improves the new hire
experience. We enhanced what -- the wellness program this year and we integrated the
wellness program more in with our health insurance, which we will continue to do. We
updated service awards and the presentation protocol and Mayor has at least two or three
months where she presents the service awards to folks and all of HR comes and we cheer
them on and it's really been a nice -- a nice way to recognize employees. We introduce
new best courses with really some great presentation this -- participation this year and
some really good feedback on some of the new courses. We established a mother's room
in the HR department for new mom's returning to work and have had some customers, so
it's been really -- really nice to have that. And we had another successful employee picnic
and youth work life skills program, which we will talk about a little bit in -- later in the
presentation. One of the things that people think of first when they think about HR is
really recruiting and we had a fairly active year of recruiting. We posted 53 different jobs.
We had more hires than those 53 postings and that's because some of those jobs, like the
seasonal groundskeepers and the youth life work skills postings have multiple hires on a
single requisition. So, we had 126. Now, not all of those folks stay on, because the
seasonals are on for a specified period of time and, then, of course, the youth life folks are
only here for six weeks. But we wanted to include the numbers here, because that is a lot
of work that we do and even if they are only going to be here for a short period of time, it
still represents a recruiting effort done by HR. So, this is not as to head count or any of
that kind of thing, these are -- these are simply recruiting activities. The regular full-time is
49. The regular part time, which was -- includes some of the seasonals and the youth
interns is 53 and then -- well, seasonals are the 24, so that makes up the 126. So, I am
very proud to report that the average days to fill is 70.3, which is a big improvement over
the prior year. We improved 37 percent. We had a couple of really, really long recruiting
efforts the previous year that kind of skewed that number a bit, but we -- I think having
anything under a 90 day average time is pretty -- pretty decent. Some of these are real
quick and some of them aren't quick all, it just sort of depends on the position. The
advertising costs, this time last year I was reporting I think around 14,000 dollars that we
had spend, so we haven't spent quite as much this year. We are trying to be -- get things
with the Statesman and do things that are cost effective -- cost effective in that we will get
packaged deals, instead of onesy, twosy kind of things, so that -- that helps us really save
that budget. Benefits and leave administration. This is the area that Christena Barney
manages and she really has taken the lead on all of these activities this year. So, we
have completed our benefit design review for this coming year for 2016 and benefits start
on a calendar year, not a fiscal year, so that -- that is for the entire year of 2016. We, for
the first time, are going to have a dual health plan offering. We are going to offer the
traditional PPO that we have -- that we have had for a long time and, then, we are also
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 6 of 52
going to be offering a high deductible health plan with a health savings account. As I
mentioned before, the employee self-service portal will be operational for open enrollment.
It is up and running currently, but we haven't rolled it out. We have had it kind of as a soft
rollout. There is a couple of bugs here and there that were -- that Christena -- not we --
Christena is still working on. We introduced a new life insurance offering here very
recently, a whole life product through New York Life, that is of no cost to the city, but it
really allows the employee to create some cash value in a whole life product. We have a
robust communication plan for open enrollment already underway and this effort is
e-mail and educational meetings as the health savings meetings are already going on, but
I will also handle -- or conduct ten open enrollment employee meetings. So, we are
wanting to make very very sure that the employees are fully comfortable with all of the
different choices that we have for them this coming year. We -- I mentioned that we had
integrated the wellness program this past year and wanted to let you know that we had 97
percent participation in the wellness program and this is where we instituted an employee
premium that could be discounted by wellness participation and by a nontobacco usage.
So, we had 97 percent participation and that will continue as part of the program for this
coming year at the same breakdown. Seventy-eight percent of the employees receive the
full discount. So, of that group there is a -- there is a small portion that either didn't want
to give up tobacco or didn't want to participate in wellness, one of the -- one of the two, so
they pay a little bit of a premium and there is only three percent of employees that have
opted to pay the entire premium amount. As part of the benefits -- ongoing benefits
management we have a benefits committee and I thought I would just remind you of the
committee's goals. Our intention is really to put together a strategic road map for benefits
offered for the next five plus years. Now, it's a road map. It won't be in stone, because
the benefit landscape and the healthcare landscape keeps changing, so we want to be
flexible to that, but we have to kind of know where we are going in order to get there and
the idea is really to be competitive, attract and retain and to manage costs. So, we have
to balance all of those important aspects of benefit programming. We want to provide
more choices to employees and evaluate emerging trends in healthcare, in health
insurance. For example, there are -- you have all heard of the state exchange, but there
are private exchanges out there that we want to investigate as well that will allow us to get
away from the big dog in the city if we choose or if the employee chooses. So, we will
have several different providers. So, we will be continuing to -- to evaluate those private
exchanges and, hopefully, here in the next year or so that will make some sense to bring
on board. In addition to that we are constantly looking at the feasibility of self insurance or
using a trust to fund these kinds of things, so we are trying to keep on top of that every
year and make changes as it makes sense. We want to encourage family participation in
wellness. Wellness is important because it helps us in a couple of ways. Number one, it
helps -- when you have a healthier employee group you have greater productivity, you
have less days out, you have less days on leave, you have people just being able to
produce more, because they feel better. If their families are involved as well they have
that encouragement at home. So, we are looking for ways to continue to encourage
family participation in wellness. The other piece to this is that the -- bulk of ours in terms
of our experience rating -- so, how they determine how much our renewals are going to be
each year -- is really driven from the dependent usage of our healthcare benefits. So, we
spend an awful lot on because we have heavy usage on the dependant side. So if we can
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 7 of 52
encourage wellness, maybe we can lower that experience rating a little bit and that will
help us contain our cost as well. Finally, one goal is to educate employees so they can be
better consumers of healthcare and so that they know when it's appropriate to go to, you
know, doc in the box or whatever. Urgent care. Those kind of decisions are really
important and also go to the experience rating and our costs, as well as the cost out of the
employee's pockets. Compensation. Fun topic. Very complex. As I mentioned, we have
assumed most of the job review work in this past year. We are still on task to begin our
internal alignment. Our intention is to review the job descriptions and salary rates of about
a third of the employees or job -- jobs. Not employees. But jobs each year, so that every
three years each job will be reviewed and a job description updated. We did a lot of that
in preparation for the budget. A lot of jobs that we would have reviewed were contained in
the -- in the jobs that -- that we did in preparation for budget requests. We will continue
testing the market for key jobs, meaning, you know, jobs that are hard to fill here or
important to us in other ways to get exactly the right set of experiences. We will continue
to be looking at the salary data that is provided and, then, as I mentioned, job descriptions
will continue to be reviewed and we have got a little -- a different format that makes it
easier to post, easier for somebody to read it. It may -- we have shortened them up a bit
without sacrificing the important detail, but somebody looking at a job description no
longer is going to be an eight or nine page job description, they will see a two or three
maybe. So, it is a better applicant experience for them as well. Best training. Crystal
manages training efforts here at the city and she spent a great deal of time with our
primary provider of training delivery, Kathy Jurey Vogel, and she spent a lot of time
developing new content. We have got ten courses that are currently under development,
with four of those ready to go. We delivered a couple of new ones this year, but you can
see that we have 14 sessions over this past year, 227 participants, and that amounts to
558 training hours for employees of the city and this is both management level,
supervisory level, and nonsupervisory level employees. Employee engagement. As I
mentioned, service awards have been revamped. We take -- we try to publicize these in a
couple of different ways. Number one, with the Mayor and HR team doing the
presentation in person, much closer around to the anniversary date and people seem to
really like that and we present -- the Mayor will present a certificate and a pen and a little
gift that we -- we kind of revamped the gifts a little bit. We also recognize people who
have seen service anniversaries in our HR To You publication, which is six times a year
and we have actually done that and not been late on any of them. That was kind of a cool
deal. We have the annual employee picnic as part of our engagement projects and that.
We had a great picnic. That was in June at Kleiner Park this year. We have an employee
engagement survey ready to kickoff at the end of this year. We are going to have
orientation meetings beginning Wednesday and Thursday and, then, folks will get the
e-mail with the link to the survey and instructions and all that kind of good stuff on the
11th. We expect the results from the survey at the end of October, beginning of
November, and this year we have asked American IDC Group to administer the survey.
So, they are going to be conducting the orientation meetings and we looking forward to
that. Here is our current crop of the youth work life skills interns. There is a few folks that
are missing from this picture, but we had a really, really great group of high school kids,
youth working with the city this year. Laura Lee Berg runs this program. She has a lot of
-- a lot of help from other members of HR as well, but she did a really great job.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 8 of 52
Bird: Did we have a -- did we have an older high school student --
De Weerd: I look older than a teenager.
Perkins: She is the mentor. She is the mentor. The Mayor has -- speaks to them and
does a great job with our -- with our wrap up.
Bird: Just a little aged teenage.
Perkins: Some of us never grow up. That's me.
De Weerd: Boy, I will tell you.
Perkins: As I mentioned, Laura Lee Berg is the one that really put together this and she
did the -- the picnic, too. She's the primary lead on these and I could say lots of folks
helped, Laura Lee is very organized and she is really, really good at putting this stuff
together. There were 48 applications that came in as a result and 45 of those folks were
interviewed. There were 2,400 hours worked in six weeks by the interns. We have a
budget of 20,000 dollars for this each year and we spent 18,000 of it. She -- you know,
she's a former banker and she balances this stuff and -- I have to tell you. We had seven
departments and several divisions within those departments utilizing interns and we
always do a resume development workshop for them and feedback forms are completed
on the interns and, then, we always assess the program, see what we can do better next
year. But we had some really, really great kids. It was really fun. For fiscal year '16
projects. I have talked with you before and let you know that we are looking at our
policies and that is actually underway. It's not really to change our policies in terms of
philosophy or content, it really is around streamlining, formatting, making sure that the
policies are consistent between the related policies. We are separating the procedures
from the policy, so that if we make a change to a document we don't have to come before
you and just say, well, gee, we are just changing this procedure, because we got this kind
of tool to use or change the form and so we are going to be -- once we kind of get a
critical mass we will bring that to you and -- for you to take a look at and approve as
appropriate. As I mentioned, we have internal alignment where we look at our positions
and -- as they relate to each other internally. We will have to follow it from the employee
engagement survey. The city's strategic plan, we have some HR, you know, participation
and initiatives in that that we will be working on. We are hoping to redesign the
performance appraisal form and maybe simplify it just a little bit, make it a little bit easier
for both managers and employees. We have HR 101 sessions. These are very short
modules that we might do in a staff meeting for departments and we have outlines and
content complete on a variety of topics that will be ready to actually deliver those here in
the coming year and, then, we want to continue to streamline recruiting, onboarding, and
improving the candidate experience and, as I mentioned, we have already streamlined the
orientation piece. There is some other pieces that are kind of choppy in the process and
probably are not the best candidate experience that we are going to be working on making
some improvements and so we are really trying to make sure that we are utilizing
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 9 of 52
everybody's time and efforts in the most efficient way possible and that is my presentation
to you. What questions do you have?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Very nice presentation, Patty.
Perkins: Thank you.
Bird: And of the 46 new employees, how many of them were replacements?
Perkins: I don't have that off the top of my head. I think -- but by far and away the
majority of those.
Bird: That's what I -- that's what I thought. We didn't hire 46 new positions.
Perkins: No.
Bird: Yeah. I was about to have a heart attack.
Perkins: Oh, yeah. No. No. No. You know, I'm going to go back here, because there
was a -- something I skipped over. Didn't mean to. I don't think I talked about retention
and I know that that's an important --
Bird: We didn't -- yeah. We didn't --
Perkins: I don't know how I missed that. I must have hit that screen too hard. But,
anyway, I do want to make sure that I mention -- talked about retention, because you think
that recruiting, we bring them in, but they also leave us on occasion and I would tell you
that our retention rate is flat. We retained 91.4 percent of folks this year and we retained
91.4 percent of folks last year. We had 32 separations. So, the other way of looking at
that is 8.6 turnover rate. Four of those were retirement. Twenty-two of them were
voluntary separation and seven of them were involuntary and so don't try to put the
numbers -- they won't exactly add up, because I round. But it's pretty darn close. So,
there -- it actually is a very, very good retention rate and the turnover rate, if you look at it
the other way, is something to feel really good about, because there is -- you know,
people's lives change and people move on and we have had a -- actually had four
retirements this past year, which was kind of cool. Sorry about that. I didn't mean to miss
that.
Bird: No. That's great.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 10 of 52
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Patty, is this data that you track, the exit interview results?
Perkins: Uh-huh. We do.
Borton: Voluntary and -- are there a few key elements that are voluntary? For example,
the change --
Perkins: You know, everyone seems to be a little bit different and the -- the voluntary
separations were all over the board. They were moving. They were better opportunities
or different opportunities. Opportunities to do something outside of -- you know, different
than what they are doing here. We don't lose a whole lot of people because they are not
paid enough, but I would tell you that most people when they do leave they will say, yeah,
I'm getting a better deal. So, the drivers are really around what -- I would tell you that the
biggest -- probably the area that we have to work on -- and that's part of what we want to
find out with employee engagement -- is really creating some better career pathing for
folks, because I think people love working here for the most part. You know, you always
have somebody who doesn't, but really we get -- we have really good comments from
folks, but they have a better opportunity for advancement elsewhere and sometimes that's
just a question of the -- you know, the opportunity becoming available and it will take a
while for it to become available here or it is -- they don't feel that there is -- I could name a
couple of different positions and I don't know that I want to call them out specifically, but
we have several jobs that could -- we could do a better job on building job family, so
people feel like they have got some recognition for their level of expertise, but the problem
with that is that if I need a one in something -- but even if somebody has -- that's what the
job is, it's a one level, whatever. Even if somebody has experience to be a three, I may
not need that and so we have them here and so that -- that's a function of our size and it's
kind of hard -- we have kind of in this middle ground where we are not quite big enough to
really draw those job families out, but we are too big, now -- you know, we are big enough
where we can have a little bit of that. So, that's a little bit of balance that we still need to
work on.
De Weerd: Any other questions? Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Just one, Madam Mayor. Thank you. First off, Patty, I just want to commend
you and your team on the employee newsletter and the years of service recognition. I
think that's a great way to let our employees know how much we appreciate what they are
doing and I read your newsletter every month. I enjoy keeping up to date with what's
going on.
Perkins: Thanks.
Cavener: Talk to me a little bit about where are we finding our best candidates from -- you
know, when we are advertising for new positions is there a -- I know you had mentioned
that there is a partnership that you forged with the Idaho Statesman. Is that where the
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 11 of 52
bulk of our most qualified candidates are coming from or is it the trade organization, the
word of mouth, job fair? I mean where are we pulling those people from?
Perkins: I will tell you that the bulk of those folks probably do see a referral ad that we
place in the Statesman. They may not see it in the printed version, but they will see it on
career builder. So, it's -- it's more of a referral ad that says you have this position, go
check out the -- the website. Where we have need of specific certifications or expertise
like a lot in the Public Works area, we will go through their various professional
associations and that's generally where we will find our candidates. Our current -- we
have great data on exactly where all of the different sources are from. It's aggregated real
well, but that is -- that's generally where we -- where we find it. People will want to work at
the city and, then, they will check out the job postings is usually what happens.
Cavener: Another question, Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Cavener: The time from like vacancy to hiring is about 79 days?
Perkins: Yes. Seventy.
Cavener: Seventy. Great. Thank you.
Perkins: 70.3.
Cavener: 70.3. I appreciate that. Does that count the posting period?
Perkins: Yes.
Cavener: And how long do you typically post a position for?
Perkins: It depends. That is the standard HR answer, if you haven't figured that out.
Cavener: I'm learning that today.
Perkins: That's how we start everything. But it really does depend. We have a minimum
of five days that we will post, whether that's internally or externally, it's a minimum of five
days and so it will be posted longer if we -- depending on the number of applicants that we
get. Like, for example, if you -- I would tell you that the -- like the youth work life skills,
which maybe isn't the best example, but it's one I can think of, we only had that posted for
about a week or so --
Cavener: Sure.
Perkins: -- and we got 48 applicants. So, jobs -- we get a ton of applications. At some
point you have to kind of cut it off, but at no time would it be less than five days.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 12 of 52
Cavener: Madam Mayor, one more. Do we include that information to our potential
applicants that this posting will close on --
Perkins: Yes.
Cavener: -- X amount of days?
Perkins: And sometimes we do that up front and sometimes we -- we just leave it open
until filled.
Cavener: Uh-huh.
Perkins: So, it is -- it is not a consistent way, so it's real hard to give you a hard answer
we always do this or we always do that, because it entirely depends on the job that we are
posting and how difficult we think it will be to source the right applicant.
Cavener: Okay. Thank you.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Patty, I'm really happy to hear that you have a returning mother's room. I'm sure
that that's much appreciated by those mothers. My question for you is about the training.
Two hundred twenty-seven participants. That is awesome. Are those unique participants
or a lot of the same people?
Perkins: They are a lot of the same people that go to different classes, so there is -- you
know, not everybody is a repeat on that. I could get you that if you wanted that. But, no,
they are not all unique participants. Well, they are. You know what I mean though.
Everybody is unique.
Milam: Thank you.
De Weerd: And you get feedback on the training, don't you?
Perkins: Yes, we do, and we have gotten some very, very good feedback. I will tell you
that the most recent class that we offered we offered several sessions of it, because it
was so popular we had wait lists and, then, we -- so, we scheduled some additional --
additional classes. But it was the generations at work. So, we are in a really unique
period of time in history where we actually have four distinct generations in the workforce
and so as you might imagine there is some interesting assumptions and
miscommunication and just need for different kind of understanding of how you work with
somebody who is my age versus somebody who is --
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 13 of 52
Bird: My age.
Perkins: Anyway. But it was -- it's got huge -- really, really strong, positive comments on
it. It was real useful for people, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Bird: Very good.
De Weerd: Thank you, Patty.
Perkins: Thank you.
B. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 15-1087: Resolution Appointing
Cheyenne Quilter as a Youth Member of the Meridian Arts
Commission
De Weerd: And thank you, Christena. It's nice to have Christena back certainly always.
We appreciate all you do. Okay. No. 6-B is Resolution 15-1087. Council, this is
appointing Cheyenne Quilter as the youth member on the Meridian Arts Commission.
She successfully offered -- put together a youth art exhibit in our gallery this last year and
has been an active participant on the arts commission. I certainly stand ready for any
questions.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Well, Cheyenne is an amazing lady to work with, so proudly move that we
approve Resolution 15-1087 reappointing Cheyenne Quilter as a youth member of the
Meridian Arts Commission.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 6-B. Any discussion from
Council? Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Rountree, yea; Bird, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
C. Legal and Clerk’s Office: Discussion and Update Regarding the
Beer and Wine License for PreFunk
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 14 of 52
De Weerd: Item 6-C is under our legal and clerk's office.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is kind of an unusual one and I will
give you maybe a brief background. As you all know we issue liquor licenses for both
retail and for on-premise consumption places. We have issued a license to PreFunk.
They have opened in the Heritage Building on Main Street and the state issued one as
well. You're required by state law to have both a state license and a city license to
operate. State law requires if you're within 300 feet of a school or a church you must have
the governing board of the authority, the city, issue the license, rather than the licensing
officer. In the past about -- up until about five years ago all of the licenses were issued by
the Council, but we found there was some delays occasionally because of meetings and
meetings getting canceled or moved that we decided to allow all of the licenses to be
issued by the clerk's office, except for those that fall under that unique category of within
300 feet of a church or a school.
De Weerd: And just to clarify, we didn't decide -- City Council did.
Nary: Correct.
De Weerd: Yes.
Nary: We is the collective we sitting here, which is you. So -- so, the hang up in the state
code and what we are trying to fix here for the licensee is in the state code it says you
measure the 300 feet from the door of the license establishment to the other property, but
it doesn't say where on the other property. The state measures it by the property line and
the city in this particular instance measures it by the closest door that was a public door to
access the property. The difference -- we have never had this happen before, but the
difference is about 15 feet. If you know where the Harvest Church is, that's -- the closest
access to the public is on Main Street, but the property line is at the alley. So, it's about a
15 foot difference. But the state did issue the license to them, as did we, but there is this
discrepancy. So, what the state is -- we are going to clear that up in code and we are
going to take care of this in the future, so we won't have this come up again for either
PreFunk or anybody else, but we are going to make sure we align our measurement with
the state, so there is no dispute in the future and there is no discrepancy between what
licensees get told at the state versus the city. So, we are going to fix it in the future. But
to avoid any confusion at the state level or avoid any hang ups for the PreFunk operators,
we did tell the state we would bring the license to you for approval. There was no other
issue before you, so all we are asking is a motion to approve the license for PreFunk at
the current location as submitted in their application, which is probably in your packet, and
at this juncture there is nothing really else to do. It's been operating. We just don't want
the state to have this dispute and have to raise it with the licensees and run into a problem
that's unnecessary and we are going to -- and we have met with the state, they are
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 15 of 52
comfortable with this, they ask simply that, again, as the state code requires, since they
are within 300 feet of the property line, that we would have the Council approve this
license. Any other questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Bill, this is -- yeah. Just clarification. You say the property line is the alleyway, but
they also own the property down there where the old theater and everything is, which is
closer yet. The parking lot. Does that count or does it not count?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Bird, from the -- what the
state does is they use the facility they use for worship.
Bird: Okay.
Nary: So, it doesn't matter if it's an office or it's an outbuilding for another purpose, they
just use the worship facility and, again, the difference so miniscule we have just never had
that happen before where there was that minor a difference in footage. But, again, to
avoid problems with the licensee, we told the state we would bring this to you and if you're
okay with it all we need is a motion to approve their license.
De Weerd: And just to note this property has been serving long before PreFunk. So, it's a
continued use. Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, my recollection this has come up before and I believe the
resolution was to have a public hearing to give the opportunity -- it was a situation where,
actually, the doors were too close -- I'm trying to remember where it is now. But what we
did at the time was have a public hearing and the people who were all too close to each
other had the opportunity to come and say I have no objection to it, you know, they won't
be there when we are having our services and -- but we did it as a public hearing as I
recall. Am I remembering that correctly? There was opportunity for the neighbors to
come and speak.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the only one I can recall, Council Member
Zaremba, is we had a question regarding -- we used to have a Christian Science reading
room on Idaho Street and there was a licensing a few doors down from that. But all we
did was -- we did have a public hearing. We had a noticed agenda item just like this. So,
we didn't -- we didn't have any other public notice or mailings or radius or postings or any
of the type of stuff. We simply had an agenda item to make clear that -- this is, again, is
unique in the sense that that facility -- part of why there was a lot of discrepancy at the
state level -- that particular location had a license previously when it was a restaurant
many years ago. It had a license when it was a wine bar a few years ago. That lapsed for
a period of time. It changed to a coffee house for a short period of time, but also the
church facility changed use and was abandoned or -- not abandoned. I'm sorry -- vacant
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 16 of 52
for a period of time during some of those things. So, there was a lot of confusion at the
state as to when it was in use and when -- why did something have approval at one point
in time and, then, not at a different point in time. So, a lot of those things we really cleared
up with the state and really just understanding the background of that location, as well as
the church facility location. But at this juncture legally all you're required to do is have
Council approve it and there is no notice or public hearing requirement beyond your
agenda item. So, we are not required to do that and, again, we are just trying to clear up
this for the state. We think we will have it resolved before the renewal period comes up
next spring, so this shouldn't likely come up again.
Zaremba: Thanks.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Bill -- so, have we heard anything from the church? Has anybody had a problem
with it, other than being the 15 foot difference?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Milam, we had no
concern from anybody. The state's actually the one that raised this, because of the
footage distance, but nobody else has brought any concern of any kind to the city.
De Weerd: Okay.
D. Legal and Clerk’s Office: Approval of Beer and Wine License for
PreFunk
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we approve the beer and wine license for PreFunk.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 6-D under the approval of the
beer and wine license for PreFunk. Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Rountree, yea; Bird, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 17 of 52
E. Planning Division and Clerk's Office Joint Report: Staff
Presentation and Discussion Regarding Updates to the City of
Meridian Land Use File Number
De Weerd: Item 6-E is under our Planning Division and Clerk's Office joint report. So --
yes, Ms. Jones.
Jones: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. You have a memo in your
packet that -- that I will give a good visual about what I'm going to talk about today, but
back in 2011 when we purchased Accella, part of the goal with that was to increase
efficiency and communication between departments. We have been working really well
with IT for about the last eight or nine months to update some of our processes and the
work flows in Accella and we have noticed some lapses in our original goal in some parts
and some parts where we have got some redundancies and the way that we are currently
filing our land use applications is one of them. Currently in Accella every time that we
have a separate application we are creating an individual file it's assigned individual file
numbers and you guys see it all the time on your agenda, but what ends up happening
when you have one project -- Easy Jet is a great example of that that has three different
files with it, is it's three different processes that are created into Accella, so every time that
-- you know, that the application moves through the hearing process it's three different
functions in Accella that we have to move forward into the process, so staff is duplicating
or triplicating in this case the work every time. It also prevents the members of the public
from seeing a whole view of where an application is, because they are only able to look up
one file at a time. So, for example, if Easy Jet had one -- you know, the CUP was denied
or something like that, they wouldn't be able to see that at the same time while looking at
the status of the rezone. So, what we have been doing with IT is working on a way to
streamline that process. The proposed solution to this is to create one hearing file
number, so as opposed to having AZ's and RZ's and CUP's like you have previously seen,
what you will have on the agenda is a hearing file and we are proposing we would do it by
-- for hearing 2015 and, then, the usual sequential number system and, then, we will still
list the different applications separately on the agenda. This minimizes the work in
Accella down to just that one file being open, so it's only one click as we are moving things
forward, so staff time we are saving immensely throughout the process and the public can
do everything all at once. So, hopefully, it provides some clarity and planning does have
some ideas on how to work through the motions. I know that right now as we are closing
public hearings we do it for each individual application, which isn't required by code and
Mr. Nary can attest to that, but, hopefully, by doing this it uncomplicates things for all of
us, so -- and I stand for questions and, like I said, planning is here to help kind of field
some of that as well.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 18 of 52
Bird: The only question I have -- and I think I know the answer -- is while it is a joint one,
two, three passage or four, whatever we need to do, if -- and there has been times when
we -- when we passed the rezone, but we haven't passed the preliminary plat. We can
still pull it out and do it individually?
Jones: Absolutely.
Bird: Yeah. Okay. That's my only question.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: A similar question of separating them later -- if somebody later wanted to revise
their preliminary plat or maybe the CUP had a reason to change for some -- they could
time an application that identified only that item?
Jones: Madam Mayor, Council Members, Council Member Zaremba, yes, that's exactly
what would happen. We have built some additional processes in Accella that deal with
those work flows needing to almost be revised or go through that process again and those
are instances -- they happen so rarely, but we are taking care of that on more of the
technology side and, then, they come through the application or on the agenda just like
you would normally see it. It might have a new hearing date, but, absolutely, there is -- IT
is doing an excellent job in working through all of those could happen scenarios and
making sure we are covered.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Anything planning would like to add?
Hood: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just real quickly to let you know we are
actually going to start this this month. So, it will take a little bit of time before you see this
on your agendas. Probably about four or five weeks, something like that, to have a
vacation or a final plat. So, it's not going to happen right away and we wanted to make
sure everyone was comfortable with it before -- I mean IT is helping -- helping us get here,
so, hopefully, it's not a big deal for you all, so appreciate it.
F. Community Development: Unified Development Code (UDC) and
Design Review Amendments
De Weerd: Great. Thank you, Caleb. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Okay. Next item is
under Community Development and I will turn this over to Bill, who has been working
diligently on the UDC and design review amendments. I guess we will turn it over to
Caleb.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 19 of 52
Hood: Madam Mayor, I'm going to kick this one off just real quick here. You're right, Bill is
the one that has been working most diligently on the UDC text amendment. Brian
McClure has been doing the design manual stuff and so they are going to tag team a
presentation. But I just wanted to kind of put a little bit of it in context for you and they will
give the more specifics on their -- on their elements of this. But in the Unified
Development Code there is some standards within there that really are architectural
related and vice-versa and in our design manual and our design review process there is
some things that are site design related or landscape design related, so one of the things
we are trying to do with this process is take the things that are site and landscaping
related and make them wholly contained in the UDC, because that's the process that Bill
and his team go through and entitlement is really when we should be talking about
connectivity between buildings in a six or seven lot subdivision to make sure that the
parking works together and the sidewalks connect and those types of things, not when
someone comes in for their building permit, that's the wrong time to talk about connecting
the building that is off site at that point. So, we are really trying to take the things that are
applicable to architecture and make them, again, wholly contained in what we are calling
the architectural standards manual and, then, take UDC and use that more for site design
things. You have heard a lot of the thing that they are going to talk to you before about
already over the past year. They have both been before you at workshops. We are finally
kind of buttoning this all up and want to present that draft final product to you and just
make sure you're okay with us submitting that for public hearings and going through that
process and, then, hopefully, getting it codified here before the end of the year. That is
the goal that you all are up to speed and we don't want two more Council persons, have to
bring them up to speed after the first of the year and tell that whole story again. So, that's
one of our goals is to submit the application, assuming you're all okay today, here this
next month and, then, again, hearing of the Planning and Zoning Commission probably in
November and, then, a public hearing before you all in December for -- for this topic. So,
that's all I wanted to do, just kind of set the stage, refresh your memory a little bit. Some
of it's going to look familiar. We have talked about gravel mining before and what we
should do with that. We have talked about time extensions for development agreements
and a lot of the stuff before. Bill is not going to go through all of that, but you have it all
before you in the packet and there are some new things as well. So, I'm going to go
ahead and turn it over to them and if there is any questions I can come back up. Thanks.
Parsons: Thank you, Caleb.
De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Caleb touched on this, but, really, we
have two purposes today. One is just inform you of some of the bigger changes to the
UDC that, again, were presented to you back in October 21st, 2014, and, then, also we
would like to get your blessing on -- on those changes and officially submit an application
with a goal in mind of being before Planning and Zoning, the first hearing in November,
and, then, before this Council sometime in December. As we heard at the previous
meeting a year ago, you wanted staff to reach out to the development community, form
this UDC work group and vet these changes with our developers, our architects, our
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 20 of 52
engineers, land owners, planners and city staff. Again we did do that back in September
of last year. Since that time we have met again, which was on May 28th, 2015. From that
meeting we did have additional changes to the UDC that we also shared with that group
and are included in your packet today. My goal for today is to, basically, just touch on the
bigger items again and, then, in your packet you do have the whole list of changes that we
are proposing moving forward in November. I would also mention to Council that we did
attend and present these changes to the BCA group also on August 11th, 2015. So, the
draft changes that were given to you in your packet have a hole host of changes that are
outlined on this graphic. This is just, basically, a synopsis of what we are attempting to
do. Again, my presentation today won't go over all of these changes, but I did want to let
you know that there are quite a few changes that we are bringing forward and are
included as part of that table that I sent out last week. One of the items that were brought
up to you and was just discussed was -- were our dimensional standards and the reason
why we brought these forward is we wanted to make sure -- not only were we getting
quality development, but we were also getting densities that were represented to the
zoning district that the developers were requesting with their development. So, our
proposed changes as part of our packet to you today represents the minimum lot sizes
and the minimum street frontages that we are proposing to change moving forward. They
range anywhere from an R-2 district all the way to our R-40 district. And, please, feel free,
if you have any questions on any of these slides, to interject at anytime, I'm happy to
entertain those questions. If not, I will certainly open myself up to questions at the end of
my presentation. You can see here that there are some substantial changes. Again the
goal is to get more of a mix of uses -- residential uses in our development throughout the
city and also increase our densities as we move forward. Back in 2014 one of our
changes that we proposed to you and was ratified was to remove our sand and gravel
mining uses from our residential districts. In working with our partners, our UDC focus
group in talking internally, we felt that most appropriate that gravel mining was more of an
accounting type activity and not really suited for city or urban development and so our
recommendation today is that we go back to the drawing board and just remove that use
entirely from the UDC. As I mentioned to you, we have already done it for the residential
district. This is just another cleanup to remove it from all the remaining zoning districts,
our commercial, industrial, and our traditional neighborhood districts.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I have a question on that -- on that. I'm not in disagreement, but the cases
where a developer wants to put in say a lake or a water feature and extracting material, is
there flexibility enough in this to allow them to do that and sell it commercially, so that they
can accomplish what it is they want or is it prohibited?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't necessarily know if it would
prohibit -- it's a little dicey for us under the UDC when you say sell it for commercial, but if
they were to do that as part of their grading or part of adding that amenity, I don't think
staff would have an issue with that. I think our recommendation would be that they be
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 21 of 52
forthright in their application for annexation or a plat application and share that information
with you and allow Council to make a determination that that's ancillary to creating that
amenity for the purpose of their development and we can certainly structure something
like that through the development agreement process. But what we found is going
through this exercise -- it was very difficult to come up with specific use standards on how
we wanted to monitor these moving forward and that's why we were really recommending
that they be removed. But I think there is -- there will be some flexibility moving forward.
Rountree: And I ask that, because of several locations in town where these developments
are taking off significant amounts and it's for sale.
Parsons: I know in working with the UDC focus group, that was one of their comments to
us is that they still want flexibility to do some of those items as they grade their site for
development.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Bill, kind of a process question on that. When -- when we no longer have the
ability for somebody to do a sand and gravel mining -- what I'm thinking about, okay, four
or five years from now new Council, maybe some new people in Planning and Zoning,
somebody comes in and wants to gravel a sandpit and there is no mention of that
anywhere in the chart. Where I'm going with that is do we have the ability to say, no, we
didn't just forget the subject, it's actually a no, and what I'm saying is instead of having the
C for conditional use, do we have an NA that says not available or not applicable, so that
we do -- I guess what I'm asking is if we just wipe construction sand and gravel mining off
the list, some day somebody is going to say, well, you never thought that. I want to do it.
What do you think? And I'm just wondering if we can have a category that says NA, you
know we did think about this and that's no available.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, currently the way the UDC is
structured is that if it's not listed on the schedule of use it's prohibited and that's how we
would interpret the code. Certainly I plan on being here five years from now, but I can't --
things change and I would imagine Caleb is planning on being here as well. But certainly
we would tell that story or someone can look at that history and see the record of what's
transpired with gravel and sand mining. But, certainly, if it was a prohibited us the
developer would always have the option to come -- do an ordinance amendment and
propose it be implemented again. That would probably be our recommendation. But
there is nothing currently on the books that says NA as part of our schedule use.
Hood: If I can just elaborate just for a second on both of those -- those two questions.
One, it wouldn't be that we hadn't thought about it, because we still have a definition in our
code. So, we will still be using the definition of that and that goes to Charlie's question,
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 22 of 52
then, in the scenario and there are three things that constitute then a construction sand
and gravel mining operation, use the site for one or more of the following activities:
Operating commercial grade construction sand and gravel pits. B, dredging for
commercial grade sand and gravel. And, C, washing, screening, or otherwise preparing
commercial grade sand and gravel. Now, that -- under C, again, like Bill mentioned, there
is a little bit of flexibility in there, but there could be code violations going on. We are
actually selling it on site. If you screen it like you said, then, sell it that could potentially be
a violation. So, just wanted to let you know, again, it wouldn't be -- it wouldn't be lost and,
you know, we never thought of this. Well, we thought about it, probably in all zones and,
then, again to meet that definition for code enforcement and become a potential violation
we have that covered I think, too.
De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb.
Zaremba: Yeah. Thank you both.
Parsons: The next provision that we are -- we are looking -- this is actually something
new that we had contemplated and, again, this is something that we discussed with you
back in 2014 and the photo I think tells the story of what we are trying to avoid is,
basically, as you're all aware we have large irrigation facilities throughout the valley and
sometimes they integrated very well and to the development, sometimes they are an
afterthought and certainly we want to give the Council the flexibility to have something in
our ordinance that gives us the flexibility to require those be developed and maintained by
the HOA and so this is really staff's best guess on how we want that to look and also gives
you the flexibility if there are certain cases where the developer just cannot incorporate
that into a common lot and gives you the ability through the public hearing process to
allow that to be part of the buildable lot and put in some of those parameters that they get
the irrigation district's approval and they have permission to fence it, landscape it, and it's
owner maintained -- either by the lot owner or the HOA. As Caleb mentioned earlier in his
introduction, the design standards, this is really a two-pronged test or phase. The first
phase, as Caleb mentioned, is we really looked at our design standards and we really had
them broke down into two sections. One referred to our building design standards and,
then, we had site design standards. Phase one is merely to remove, extract those
requirements that discuss these architectural design standards and that's referenced quite
a -- in multiple locations in the UDC. One in particular would be our multi-family standards
and, then, also our commercial, industrial buildings. So, at this point we will be striking
that and then -- and, then, Brian will go into his presentation and let you know that we will
let the architectural standard manual drive much of those design criteria moving forward
and, then, phase two would be a future UDC text amendment that would bring forth to the
Council that ties in or brings forth those requirements for the site design standards when
we talk about the interconnectivity, the walking paths, the defined drive aisles, that we do
get better design -- designed parking lots and better connectivity between our residential
subdivisions and our commercial developments. Another topic of discussion before you is
really the fencing and this is one where we hear quite a bit from not only the residents,
but also from the landowners slash developers and it has to do with our fencing along
common lots. I won't go into the specifics of the text changes, but these three graphics
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 23 of 52
pretty much speak to what we want to try to attempt moving forward as we look at fencing
for internal common lots and micropath lots. So, currently as the code is written we allow
either six foot open vision or four foot solid fencing. Our proposal today would give the
developer flexibility in three fencing styles. One would be open vision six foot tall. The
other would be semi-private fencing, which would be 50 percent open, essentially a picket
style fence, and, then, the third option would be a four foot tall fence with two feet of open
vision on top. These are graphics that we want to insert into the UDC so that not only the
residents, but also developers have a clear vision of what the city expects for fencing
along common open lots or -- yeah. Micropath lots. Internal open space. Open space
and site amenities. I did reference the current code at this time. That was -- at the time
that we presented these changes to you back in October staff had envisioned some more
robust changes to our open space standards. As we looked into that and worked through
those changes and talked those through with the developers, the UDC focus group, we
realized that that point system needed some further refinement. So, it's really a Band-aide
fix as we worked -- we worked with our UDC focus group and we really came up with two
changes that we gained support from them on. The current -- the first one were when
ever you have large lots or estate type subdivisions we wouldn't necessarily require the
developer to put in ten percent open space if they can meet that criteria that's outlined
here. So, you would have to be within a quarter mile of the city regional park. You would
have to have a minimum lot sizes of 10,000 square feet or you would have to be an eighth
of a mile of a community park and, then, you -- that would allow you to reduce your open
space, but you still have to comply with the site amenities -- have your own private
amenities and that would be worked out, again, through the development process with the
public hearing process and, then, for clarification as far as qualified open space, we just
further defined what the picnic area would entail and also rather than -- one of the
arguments or concerns we heard from the development community was that requirement
-- that five percent open space with a large amount of open space be provided and be
counted towards as a site amenity when you have a 200 acre plus development and so
rather than requiring that five percent qualified open space, we conceded to -- if he had
open space for pocket parks that exceeded 20,000 square foot minimum and had to meet
a certain dimension of 50 by 100 square -- 50 feet by 100 feet, then, you could count that
as additional open space or an additional amenity. Again, this change was received very
well by the focus group. They thought that was a good fix moving forward. Certainly if it
is the Council's desire is for us to bring forth some kind of point system that was presented
to you back in 2014, certainly staff will keep that on the list of running changes to the UDC
and maybe we can sort of define that and craft something to bring forth at our next round
of UDC changes. And, then, obviously, this is one of the major concerns that we heard
from City Council where it came down to the time frame for signatures on DAs. I believe it
was Council's desire to keep that -- trim that back from two years down to six months and
so that's what we are proposing here. If there aren't any other questions I will certainly
conclude my presentation and entertain any further questions Council may have.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 24 of 52
Bird: Go back to your lot sizes in your zone. I got a -- I got a real problem with that. In
your R-4s you're going down to 6,000 square feet with only a 50 foot frontage. You may
as well call it an R-5 or R-6, because you're getting -- right now we are getting about 3.67
homes per acre on an R-4; am I not right?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Bird, I believe the
presentation that was presented to you back in October we reflected our R-4 standards
were coming in around two and a half -- under three units to the acre and that's where we
wanted it -- the original recommendation -- or one of our questions to you back then was
would the Council entertain not requiring any lot size or street frontage, have no minimum
standards. Staff didn't feel comfortable with that, truthfully, so we thought let's set this out,
let's work with the development community, our stakeholders, and see how they felt and
this was really a compromise that we worked out with them. They felt comfortable with
this.
Bird: They would, because they would be -- they would be very comfortable with it. I
hope to shout.
Parsons: Certainly if Council --
Bird: You know, I thought at least with R-4s we -- I couldn't walk between two houses and
touch both of them as I was walking by, but I guess now I can. I tell you, we are -- one of
these days we are going to -- when these subdivisions get older and if we have a fire in
one of them and it jumps about six homes right in a row, we will -- me in particular will look
back and say, boy, we didn't do a very good job.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: On that same note, I -- see, I'm having a rough time with that one. I -- sometimes
I think the lots are already too small in some subdivisions, but I would like to hear from our
fire department on what Councilman Bird's was referring to.
Niemeyer: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Milam, certainly that is a
concern from us -- for us. Anytime you get houses that close together we know Idaho
winds can be unpredictable and that's really what pushes that type of fire and when you
have those exposures so close together that requires more resources to be on scene to
protect those exposures while we are fighting the fire in that particular building that it
started, so -- and as we understand land zoning and use, but we have always had a
concern of residences being too close together when you have no defensible space,
you're just touching one to the other. This is a similar urban concept as we face normally.
De Weerd: I guess I would just point out that although we don't see it so much in Idaho,
some of the development standards that are coming are putting homes closer together, so
you can get greater open space and you have a better or at least a greater perception that
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 25 of 52
you have less density where -- because of the amount of open space, that this allows that
flexibility. It's also for those that might be thinking a little bit further down the road of -- as
the area further urbanizes what that open space might redeveloped into. So, it's a
concept that's used across the nation, but hasn't been really explored or utilized so much
here, but you do see it up in Avamore that is using a lot that open space, so that you have
a denser feeling where the houses are, but you have usable recreation space in the rest
of the -- the development. So, this does give that flexibility. Caleb.
Hood: Yeah. Madam Mayor, that clustering we don't -- yeah, we don't see a lot of the
clustering of homes here in Meridian per se, but that is the concept. We will probably see
more. I just want to come back a little bit to the -- the concern brought up and really this
doesn't have anything to do with how close the homes are to each other, this is only the
lot size. There is setbacks. We aren't proposing to change the setbacks. So, in R-2 it
doesn't matter how big -- you know, it's an acre size lot, but we a five foot setback. You
could build that home all the way over to five foot and say R-4. So, your concern I think is
valid, I just don't want to confuse the two things. You could still potentially, regardless of
how big your lots are, you share a property line with somebody, you both could build your
home five feet to each other. Not that you would, probably, but, again, we are not
proposing to change that. I'm not necessarily advocating for what you see here. Like Bill
mentioned, there was some back and forth with the development community, but this is
something that I just wanted to put one more point from their perspective into this and it's
usually -- it's not so much the R-2 and the R-4, but when someone really wants to do --
you know, get above four dwelling units an acre, you can't do that with an R-8 currently
with our lot size standards today and so what they end up doing is doing exactly what we
have got concerns about, they asked to R -- to rezone to an R-15, but they are really not
anywhere near 15 dwelling units per acre, but they want that 2,400 square foot lot size.
The part of that that the development community really struggles with -- and it's hard for
us, too, when somebody calls in is the neighbors say R-15 and we tell them, yeah, that's
up to 15 dwelling units per acre. That's what our -- what, 15 dwelling units? No. Well,
they are doing that so they can have lots to be more to the R-8 standards. So, that's --
you know, people really get worked up sometimes when they see R-15 and they say, holy
smokes, that's dense and I would agree, that is dense, but the project is really 5,000
square foot lots. So, just -- again, just a little bit -- and, again, I'm not advocating, I'm just
telling you some of the back stories, some of concerns they have. I think Bill did a fine job
of saying, you know, this really does match up, where if you zone something to R-4 you
can actually develop close to four dwelling units per acre. We can leave it as is, I just
wanted to provide you that information and setbacks.
De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Going on that, you know, like the R-4s, if you go to 6,000, that's 24,000 and, then,
you got another 20,000, because an acre is 44,000. Twenty thousand to -- to do your
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 26 of 52
easements, your -- half your road and all that kind of stuff in and so you can get a couple
more houses on that, so you're basically not -- you're going to -- the other developers -- I
don't know. You know, we became one of the fastest growing cities in the United States
with these standards and minimums and stuff and I didn't need the density and as the
Mayor said the other day when we -- when I approved -- thought density when it was
good, I marked it down, because you better mark it down, because I don't think this
density is what we need. I just -- I just don't -- you know, you're looking at an R-15, 2,000
size lots, that's 30,000 acres, you got -- or 30,000 square foot off of an acre and, you
know, it's -- they are going to start putting 16, 17 -- yeah, if I'm the developer and I paid X
amount of dollars per acre and I have got so much in for sewer, water, and roads, the
more lots I get on there and sell the better off -- I'm for it a hundred percent. I have a
problem with it.
De Weerd: Any other comments?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I certainly understand that density issue that Caleb explained. I think it has
been before us before and we have had to make some exceptions for it to accommodate
some pretty nice development. The problem I have with this is at what point do we say
no? Do you have any criteria that establishes percentages of these kinds of lot sizes in
certain areas and things like even in a mixed residential community are we going to have
whole sections of R-15? Is there some way there could be some kind of a way to get
them from -- I can see as land gets more expensive and individuals are not buying single
family residences and we have whole communities that are three stories high that are a
section of property, which in my mind gets to the question that comes up about fire
inspection. I know this happens in other communities, particularly in other countries, but
they are primarily built with masonry and their fire service is -- they are actually done with
helicopters, as opposed to trying to get vehicles down road in an hour, so --
De Weerd: Don't even think about --
Rountree: No, I'm not suggesting we go there, but I mean that's the solution to some of
these developments and I don't know that I foresee that. But we ought to be thinking
about stuff like that in terms of how do we accommodate transportation, which is one of
the drivers here, and to accommodate keeping the cost of housing down, yet to
accommodate the public safety, as well as the studies that we use. That's what I struggle
with when we start talking about let's shrink it down and stow it.
Hood: So, there was a question in there before -- and right now we don't have -- we don't
have a cap on how many of your lots could be at the minimum. That is something other
cities have done. You know, no more than 50 percent of your lots being, you know, within
that 1,000 square feet of the minimum. I don't think we want to go there. I guess for me
I'm not as concerned about this. Some of the examples we get it will -- for most projects it
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 27 of 52
does kind of average out. Typically you're going to have -- so you could appease your
existing neighbors, you're going to start with bigger lots along the perimeter and maybe
internally you have smaller lots. See if you can get through the public hearing process.
And that's just how a lot of the projects we see come in. You don't see very many now,
even with our 8,000 square foot minimum, come in with 8,000 square foot lots
everywhere. Yeah, they will have blocks that have 8,000 square foot lots, but typically at
the perimeter they are going to be 10,000 square foot lots, you know, something a little bit
larger and have a little bit of variety. So, they aren't only catering to one building type of
home in there, they are going to have some variety and they can sell those to different
folks. So, no, we don't have that cap right now, if you will, and that's kind of how it was
couched to us, too, you know, even in the R-4 -- I mean it wasn't a pledge by the
development community, they said, you know, we will still -- even in R-4 we are going to
have to provide some transition away from the existing acre lots or the bigger lots that we
have on the perimeter there. Again, we can look at that, we can go back to the drawing
board. I would like some direction, though, for us today if we leave it as is and this isn't
part of the UDC amendment or we will move forward with this to the public hearing
process. I do -- I would like to have it as -- we want you guys to be as a group the most
comfortable with it and so far I hear two and a half people that are concerned. So, I'm not
saying that everyone has to chime in, but some form of a -- almost a motion to say leave
this out or move forward with it at least through the public hearing process -- not
committing to anything and, then, if you want to tweak it -- from my standpoint -- just a
little bit more background. I do think it's -- it's probably the R-8 and maybe the R-4 that
are the -- the 15 and the 40 -- they are not even an issue. We probably don't have to
touch those. And, quite honestly, the R-2, probably, too. But the R-4 and R-8 are the two
that we hear about the most. The other -- the other thing that I would just add to the -- you
know, these go through public hearings. Our code says you meet the minimum lot size,
you can basically do it. But probably about 90 percent of the plats we see, if not more,
have an associated rezone or annexation. If you don't like the plat deny the rezone or the
annexation, they can't do the plat. They can't get these lot sizes. So, similar to that
motion that was made a few months ago -- now, if you don't think the zoning is
appropriate, the plat doesn't move forward. This is strictly a dimensional standard for a
subdivision. Well, the way you don't get a subdivision approved is you don't have the
zoning in place. So, you kind of control that a little bit. And staff will help with that, too. If
we think, hey, they are cramming them in here, this doesn’t seem to fit. Yeah, the
subdivision meets the minimums, but the zone they are asking for is a -- maybe they will
ask for a different zone. So, someone may find a loophole in my logic there, but that's --
that's, essentially, how most of them come through is there -- there is a rezone or
annexation. So, again, just some more direction for Bill as we put the finishing touches on
this and let's get it as close to whatever you would like the public hearing portion of this to
move forward with, so thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 28 of 52
Zaremba: I'm likely to make the count three and a half. I mean just in retrospect, when
we were writing the UDC we had a great deal of public input. We had developers on the
committee that were writing it. It went through public hearings and the old square
footages and street frontages are what was agreed to at the time. Now, of course, we
have had some experience with it and it's my understanding that the R-8 -- it's not -- the
math doesn't workout. You can't physically get eight on an acre if you go by those
dimensions. As Mr. Bird said, R-4 is still close enough. I think R-2 is fine. R-4 is fine.
So, I'm inclined to say I probably wouldn't fiddle with R-2 and R-4. I think we do need to
reconsider R-8, so that it is possible to get eight in that zone. The two bigger zones, R-15
and R-40 those points were pretty much talking about multi-family units anyhow, so I'm
not so concerned about what the lot actually is, it's really up to what's the building going to
be, so -- I don't know. I would like to see R-2 and R-4 stay the old way and have a
discussion about the R-8, 15 and 40.
De Weerd: It might be helpful to maybe bring some examples, so we have a greater idea
of how clustering and these different classifications might look and -- and also maybe look
at something that if you're development is this size or larger to give flexibility to bring more
likelihood of clustering, some product and -- I don't know, just -- just some ideas. But I
think it would be helpful visually to really see what we were talking about and how it might
benefit the community as we move forward to getting better developments that respond to
the new -- new types of housing that people are looking for.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Another comment if I may. I'm not sure that's -- that what I'm thinking is this
exact subject, but I often think in the midwest and the northeast where they have had a
long history of building places, structures that they call Brownstones are very -- a series of
probably fairly narrow lots, but common walls. You have no space between them, so
there can't be a fire come up between them, they build the common wall in such a way
that they are a fire stop. Most of them are made out of masonry that I have seen. But I
just -- I wonder should that be in our future someplace. Have we enabled that?
Chatterton: Madam Mayor, Council Member Zaremba, Brownstones are a great form of
urban housing. I think in and around our downtown we would love to see them or in an
area perhaps with a special plan where you created a village or town center sort of feel.
Of course, an example that's been around for quite some decades is the Belgravia in
Boise, if you're familiar with that. That was one of the first apartment buildings in Boise.
But there are modern examples, obviously, of Brownstones and they tend to be on -- on or
near our downtown streets though. We really -- probably that particular development --
and it can be a great way to activate the street without forcing saying you must do retail.
We must have all this transparency. These walkups are a great way of doing that, but
they tend to be used in just particular situations and I don't know that -- well, I think we
would welcome a development like that in and around our downtown. I don't know where
else in the city currently developers might be interested in building those, though.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 29 of 52
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Yeah. I would like to see R-2 and R-4 -- the R-15 and R-40 you can change them in
my opinion, but -- and R-8 I'm not -- I'm like Councilman Zaremba, I have a little problem
with that. If you wanted to go to these I would like to see our design be strictly brick
siding, because that -- you know, that -- we were talking about -- as Councilman Rountree
said, yeah, they get in close in the big cities, but they are brick. They are masonry.
I don't know. I think that -- I think they are getting enough -- we are getting enough
density with the R-4 and the R-2 as it is. R-8 I could sway one way or the other, but I'd
still prefer to maybe go to the 4,000, but keep the 50 foot frontage.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: That's part of the process to me for this is the public part. I think the logic
described by Caleb is very sound and what the changes they are intending to address, but
all of the concerns that have been raised are valid as well. I don't think there is a better
way to try and make a final decision, other than to bring these forward as presented, run
them through not only the UDC workshop again, if that's been done recently, but -- and
run it through our Planning and Zoning Commission and have some public hearings to
discuss this in greater detail. Perhaps bring back some of the illustrations that can show
us how each change varies. I couldn't tell you today whether any or all of them are
appropriate, but I think the discussion is certainly appropriate and I think gathering the
public input from those various groups and the citizens as a whole would be extremely
valuable to make a final decision whether some or all of these changes are warranted.
So, I would bring them all forward at this point.
De Weerd: I guess I would also suggest looking at our next town hall meeting and having
this as an opportunity for -- because if we go out you go and reach out to the BCA and
ACAR, but those are development-related groups that how do you really get the public
input and maybe this would be something that we could wrap around a town hall format to
present some of these story boards for public comment and get some feedback in that
regard.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: To that point, did the UDC workshop group which, is much broader and more
diverse than the BCA, did they go through all of these after the May 28th meeting more
recently or just May 28th?
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 30 of 52
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Borton, they saw the
exchanges at the -- it was discussed at our May 28th meeting and, then, I made the
changes based on those discussions.
Rountree: They have gone back, then, and seen those and discussed them as a group?
Parsons: They have not.
De Weerd: Who is on that group?
Parsons: Mayor, Members of Council, I don't know all the members off the top of my
head, but we had David Turnbull, Jim Conger, Kent Brown, myself, Caleb. Emily Kane
was there. Sonya Watters. John Brecken. So, we had a real -- Dave Yorgenson. We
had quite a bit of developers that we work with on a regular basis there looking at these.
David was the one that actually -- Mr. Turnbull was the one that actually brought up some
relief to the R-8 and R-15 and R-40 standards based on some of the products that they
were constructing in Boise and so he thought that was a good compromise. As far as
townhome developments go, we don't have quite -- we don't have quite -- we don't have
much of a townhome development in Meridian, it's lacking in the city, and so that's really
something that we want to look at moving forward. It's getting more -- again, more of that
mix of residential into the community, having a diverse housing product within our
community being all inclusive, so -- that really is the goal here.
De Weerd: So, perhaps the offices can work together in looking at how -- how the next
town hall meeting works with where you're at with this process. Okay. Anything further on
-- on that side or on the UDC as Bill has laid out?
Milam: Madam Mayor?
Rountree: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I did -- I had another question that -- some notes that I had written down on the
fencing. Have you actually seen the half open fencing? Because in the picture it looks
kind of broken. Is that what the product actually looks like? I really like the -- the bottom
one with the four foot closed with the two feet of open.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yeah, the line just didn't come across
very clear and so if you can visualize five and a half inches open, five and a half -- a picket
board -- yeah. It's just a glitch in the graphic. But it's supposed to represent 50 percent
open vision. It's what's our definition as moving forward.
Milam: Thank you.
Item G: Public Works: Design Standards Update
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 31 of 52
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Okay. Brian. Design standards. Maybe you can fix
the broken fence.
McClure: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm here today to speak with you
regarding design review updates. Specifically the design manual update, which is the tool
used with design review. So, a refresher. Last time I was before you, as Bill mentioned,
was October 21st, 2014, with Justin. Staff was taking some steps to streamline the
design manual to create more emphasis on consistent application, recategorizing existing
units to better correlate with existing policy and, then, focusing on express standards.
What was done since then. We removed duplicate guidelines and consolidated similar
items. Removed most guidelines not applicable in design as Caleb and Bill mentioned.
Reviewed all sketches and diagrams. There were a lot of changes, too, usually because
of abstract or overly subjective text and, then, we used -- for those items that were kind of
overhauled we used existing goals to keep the revisions focused. Changes usually
involved yes, no, or something that was measurable and, then, intent and the goals were
still left high level. Also not necessarily on this sheet -- and part of this entire process we
had a work group which involved a number of architects and more recently we solicited
BCA and also a broader outreach to kind of regional architects. Not to mischaracterize
that, but we haven't actually got any comments from any of them, other than the working
group. So, what's new? There is a new format. It's intended to work better on digital
screens. There is new photos of local work. The old sketches were -- generally they had
items that conflicted with other guidelines or you couldn't even tell what was going on.
The new document -- this was important to me, this focus on express standards, it really
kind of -- and the removal of -- of subjectivity that involved design, it really didn't lend itself
to the design manual anymore, because you're more looking for kind of the minimum level
of effort, not so much what the design is. So, we are calling it the architectural standards
manual now and, then, a new process we are calling tentatively design standards
exceptions. The intent for this is to behave and act similar to alternative compliance, but
it's specific to -- to the architectural standards and it's intended to support more of the
creativity, innovative, or new construction processes and things of that nature, rather than
I have got a hardship or a terrible site, this is more how can we help you do something
kind of neat. Some context. We didn't just kind of write these and, then, not test them.
We reviewed a number of existing previously approved projects through design review. I
totally made this -- it's really kind of a 90 percent rate for 90 percent of buildings. We will
work with this. There is that other ten percent that actually want to do some things cool or
innovative. The ones we reviewed in most cases they did work. There were a few
exceptions. Usually in those cases the -- the old approved project didn't actually meet
design review either. That was either because there is the -- the staff felt they -- they
exceeded some other requirement and they met that kind of alternative compliance or
they were just missed. And, then, as I already mentioned, there are always design
standards exceptions for those projects that don't meet these new standards. So, why I'm
here today is to get some guidance. I'm not going to go through the whole manual, it's
just a few slides like this. I do apologize for the wall text. I'm not going to read all these,
I'm just hoping to kind of high level gauge your interest on some of the ideas. On the
right-hand side there you will see either red or green test and this is staff
recommendation. On the left side you will see what we call new ID. If there is a letter on
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 32 of 52
the end of it it's a standard, something we will be grading you on. If there is no letter on
the end of that that means it's simply a goal or a standard and we are -- it's just to help the
right context, it's not something that we would actually -- it's not intended to be
measureable. The first one here, 2.1A, is specific to residential building surrounded
closely by large buildings, if you have seen the Disney picture movie Up you kind of know
what I'm talking about. The second was similar, but only specific to commercial buildings.
I think both of these really kind of met the original -- intent of the original text in the design
manual in terms of what they were trying to do, but after receiving a number of comments
in the work group and just talking with the staff, it really seemed like we were trying to
solve a problem we had not had. Zoning is usually pretty protective and there is, of
course, always the public process, so I would like to remove these, even if they were in
the original design guidelines. I will pause after each one. You can either interrupt,
comment then, or comment at the end. If I don't hear anything I will assume you are okay
with staff's recommendation. This one here was a very, very broad design manual
guideline. I have broken it up into three parts to hopefully make it more -- something you
guys should approach and get your hands around. Essentially dictates our building height
with some height disparity as in two or more -- I'm sorry, this may be the wrong one. No.
That's right. Two or more stories. They have to align some element on one building with
another building. So, if you have got a one story building and you build it right next to a
three story building, you don't literally have to line up the windows or line up the reveal
patterns or line up the parapet with the reveal pattern, but to make some case for how you
are going to try to -- not delicately, but try to be compassionate to that adjacent existing
structure. We have had some comments -- one, this wouldn't allow for that eclectic nature
like you see downtown, but I really don't feel it's in any way onerous. It's very, very broad
and you can line up material changes with windows or you can line up the parapet with
one -- with another one. There is other ways to do this and be considerate to that
neighbor and, then, of course, there always are design standard exceptions. The one
thing missing here that we realized after the fact was there is no kind of quantifier here for
distance what is close. What was intended here was, you know, if you're more than 30
feet of an adjacent building, nothing between, that you would -- you would have that kind
of consideration. But if not it didn't apply. The third one is just kind of a left over from the
original text. It's something that's required throughout the design guideline now and in
new professional standards it's kind of a gimme. A lot of these standards have a lot of
synergy with other standards, so in one case you often get two or three in another case.
This one here just says you're really trying to protect pedestrian scale for -- regardless of
what type building you do. So, included awnings, trees, siding -- something like that on
the side of the -- of the first floor -- first story building. The original text there was very --
very, very broad and so we broke it up into three, one goal, two standards.
Borton: Madam Mayor? Brian, this is one example of collections in looking through what
we see in the entire packet in Council chambers. The new text on the top box now
includes the sentence applies to facades or development along public roads. So, when I
read that it seems to be a much more narrow application and it excludes all applications
other than those along public roads, public places, and residential, which is not what the
original text limited to.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 33 of 52
McClure: Correct. We have been -- we have limited conditions here. Typically when
design review come to you before we didn't really consider the back side of the building.
So, you look at the alley loaded buildings they are ugly --
Borton: Right.
McClure: -- and there was -- and I'm not sure what the -- I don't do design review, I'm not
part of the current planning group, so I can't speak for that intent there, but, yes, we have
limited it here, because that's what we have been doing so far, so it's something -- if you
would not like that limited, then, I would definitely appreciate that comment. If you're just
asking, then, yes, that's what the intent is here.
Borton: Madam Mayor? I don't know right now either way, necessarily, but other -- you
know, other scenarios, some unintended consequences by narrowing it so much where
there might be large scale commercial power centers with multiple buildings that might not
be adjacent to residential areas, public spaces, or public roads, but you still might want to
address those concerns. I don't know either way, I just know when I saw that limitation in
scope, whether that was intended or not.
McClure: It was intended, yes, but something came up. So, the first one here is an
existing guideline that to my knowledge has never actually been enforced and I would like
to remove it. This, essentially, requires that the first floor of a multi-story residential
buildings be taller. This is something very common and with all summer buildings, but in
residential structures it's not been typically done and has not been done on any recent
multi-family structures we have had. Since it hasn't been enforced, because I don't think
it's been a practice here or anywhere, unless you're in downtown with integrated multi-use
structure it doesn't seem to make sense in Meridian anyways. The second one here to
ease up on instructions, this is -- the original design manual grouped a lot of thoughts
together. This is one of those. It requires buildings near each other to have varying
slopes and to also have eaves. That doesn't really necessarily -- to me does not really
align with each other and, again, it's also something not enforced. So, eaves is something
we typically require with all new development and if they don't they have to provide a case
as to why they don't need them. Over behind Capital Christian Center the recent single
family example of where they don't have eaves on the side of the building, but the sloped
roofs -- again, we have never required that for multi-family developments. They usually all
have the same roof, they don't vary the difference -- they don't vary the roofs between the
buildings, they all have the same roof. Because to require that -- we haven't been doing it
so far, even though we have always had this requirement, I just struck it. So, if you would
like to see that kept that's definitely one where you could disagree with me. So, this is
another wall of text. I apologize. All three of these are similar and relate to the existing
UDC and design manual guidelines or material types. This one is very important to me to
get your interest -- your feedback on. The first one, 5.1H, essentially disallows a bunch of
materials that are already disallowed under both the UDC and the design manual. So,
there is nothing really different there. The second one, 5.1I is essentially what the UDC
currently disallows, with one new exception, concrete and pre-fab metals are not allowed
as a primary material now or with this one, except when you use two other qualifying
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 34 of 52
materials. So, if you want to put a bunch of metal on your building you can, but you still
need to use a bunch of other approved materials that aren't metal and the same thing
applies to stone. They are currently allowed as accent materials. It's unpopular. Staff
just comes down to quasi-alternative compliance for buildings that leave the -- the one
over -- Kendall Ford building's car wash, for example, that has a lot of metal on it. It's not
technically allowed, but they made the case, because of use of other materials it's okay.
The third one here is specific industrial districts and it's really intended to ease up on
some of the requirements for how industrial buildings look if they are not on a busy
roadway. So, if they are facing a roadway, the front of the building will still have to have
that detail, if you can see it. But if they are off some local roadway the intention here
would be to allow them to use these other materials. Also tilted concrete is very popular.
Technically the reveal patterns and color shades you sometimes see in there is still just tilt
up concrete. The intention here would be to allow some of those other geometric patterns
and colors to counter the textured concrete, which is allowed, versus the untextured, but it
has revealed and kind of coloring which is not counted now. So, there is kind of two
things going on there. If I mess that up, please, let me know. This is the last one for you
here. All three of these are new. It's something -- not only did we review some recent
design review projects, but we also went back and looked at some old projects before
design review. A couple of those that had some issues involved loading docks, will-call
doors, drive-thrus, things of that nature and so we are here where we are trying to provide
a little bit more direction on those. The first one basically says if you do any of those
things they need to be integrated in the building design, which is just a goal, it's just kind
of a broad please do this. The specifics here on the next two basically said that in
commercial districts and traditional when you're integrated, the will-call doors, the loading
docks are prohibited and, then, it provides us the examples of how you can integrate that.
For industrial districts, will-call and loading doors are allowed, but, again, the loading
docks are not allowed. But the quantifier here for all of these is facing arterial and
collector roadways. Most of our new industrial projects the loading docks are on the
sides, it's not been a recent issue and this is really kind of from those old projects before
design review that we couldn't really -- that people said they really, really don't like, but we
didn't have a way to fail them, this is -- it's something that -- this is what we have now, but
it was discussed at the group meeting, so these are some proposed submissions to that
discussion. So, next up is project -- as mentioned before this is -- this is not the final
you're seeing here. We will just continue revisions. Hopefully we will get some more
comments from the public and also I would like to have current planners use this in their
current design review, concurrently with their current design manual to see how it works
with other projects that continue to develop. Later this year if you're okay with it, we will
be back with a formal application and with that I will stand for any additional questions.
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On the industrial text, have you ran that by any industrial developers?
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 35 of 52
McClure: Not directly, but this has gone out to the BCA. We also sent this out in e-mail to
someone with Van Auker. I don't know who their main person is, but --
Bird: That's what I was -- I mean if I was one I might have some problems with some of it
-- some of that text, but -- as long as they get to look at it and see it, you know, that's --
there is a few things that -- that's been done and they -- and the buildings look very nice
and are very affable and stuff, but wouldn't meet our UDC.
McClure: Madam Mayor, Council President, Councilman Bird, if it makes you feel better I
have spent many Sunday mornings driving around getting pictures when there is no cars
in the parking lots. These standards don't say on any of the more recent industrial
projects we have had on arterial collector roadways, so there is some of the recent
projects -- two or three of them have will-call doors in the front, but all the loading docks
are on the side. This really isn't a problem we have had, it's just -- so it isn't a problem.
But I don't -- this shouldn't say on anything that's recently been approved, at least as far
as I'm aware of it. Are you aware of them?
Bird: Yeah. Go to Aluma-Glass there.
McClure: Which one?
Bird: Go over the Aluma-Glass there.
De Weerd: They are not in Meridian.
Bird: They are not in Meridian.
De Weerd: Any other --
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Brian, just a quick question. You mentioned that we are going to be using a
version of this alongside the current document. How long do you anticipate that process
to be? Is that a three month, six month? I'm just curious, how long are you going to use
that process before we come back and update it?
McClure: Madam Mayor, Councilman Cavener, the -- I have gone back and reviewed 20 I
think projects that have been done recently -- or 18 of them that have been done recently
and two of them have been done before that. The planners I'm told have been using this
for the last month or two.
Cavener: Okay.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 36 of 52
McClure: I have not seen any final review for that yet, but I'm told they are working on it
and in the time between now and we came back would be whatever -- whatever time we
need for modification. So, I don't have a set threshold, but it should have been used -- I
have used this to review applications and it will help with the continued review between
now and submission.
Cavener: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, just a comment. What we are going through right now is
exactly what was envisioned when we created the original design guidelines and
standards, that at a period of time that went by they would be reviewed, they would be
updated, they would be modified to make them work better and I appreciate the effort that
you have taken to do that and let's move on and to me this is what we should be doing,
taking a critical look and making the appropriate changes and move forward and I'm glad
to see that what we envisioned to happen is happening.
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree, I thank you for noting that. And I do want to recognize this
entire team. You guys have been taking copious notes on things that walk in the door that
we may never see, because you have been working with them to find something currently
acceptable under our code and noting it, so you can come back and fix it. A couple of
these have risen to Council level and have tried to find some common ground. So, this is
-- this is really an important part of the process and if the market changes we will continue
to see that this is a living document, as it should be. So, thank you for all of your hard
work and this is not the beginning, but it's definitely not the end either. So, thank you.
Anything further from Council?
Bird: Thanks, Brian.
De Weerd: Thank you, Brian.
McClure: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Our next item is under Public Works, 6-G. We have asked that this
continue to October 13th and -- do we need a motion for that?
Nary: No.
De Weerd: Thus is just a department report. Okay. So, note for the record that this item
has been postponed to October 13th.
H. Public Works: Area of Drilling Concern
De Weerd: So, Item 6-H is also under Public Works and I will turn this over to Kyle. Is
there a chance you can make sure that our audience, which is Holly and Ralph over there,
have an opportunity to -- see, I can't even see you. If you can just put it over there by
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 37 of 52
Bruce and kind of angle it. If you put it front of Tom then our audience -- right in front of
Bruce. No. No. Over.
Bird: That's great.
De Weerd: That's good. Sorry, Frank. I didn't see you, because you were behind it.
Radek: Okay. Now that I have confused everyone. Madam Mayor, Council Members --
De Weerd: We like props.
Radek: Okay. I am here to speak to you about a project we have been working on. I was
going to describe it as working for a long time, but I guess that's relative. We have been --
since 1911 we have been pumping groundwater to serve the citizens of Meridian and we
intend to continue doing that for the foreseeable future and in that respect maybe we
haven't been working on this project for such a long time, but at least long enough time
that we need to remind the Council Members that we are here when we first spoke about
it and, then, for new Council Members that maybe have not even heard we need to
describe it to you. So, what I'm going to brief you on is our source water protection area
of drilling concern project and what that is and what the status is. First, I would like to
review source water quality threats that we have, what the primary threats are. I would
like to remind some and inform others about what strategy we chose with Council's
direction a couple years ago to protect our source water, the actions we have completed,
and what the next steps are and, then, I will let you ask questions. So, within our aquifer
system we have -- if you take a look at the visual aid I brought, you see -- from a distance,
anyway, you see just a bunch of lines, a bunch of layers -- different layers of alternate
sand or gravels and clays, sand clays, and it goes all the way down. We access water
down to 800 feet in some of our wells and as you can see there is a lot of different layers
there. Those different layers have different water chemistry and as you can see by the
slide I have here, kind of says here is some different kind of contaminants that can be
introduced into the aquifer and how those contaminants might travel. You can see say the
middle one, the little tractor and what you -- what we have dumped there, that travels
mostly sideways and off the -- off the frame -- or off the slide. That's because
groundwater moves through these different layers mostly horizontally. Groundwater in the
natural system can't move from the surface straight down and that's because of all these
clay layers and the way I have depicted them in this slide is they are kind inter-bedded
clay layers, they are not a solid layer that goes from one place to another, but more or
less you find them all over the place and they do separate those different layers of the
aquifer to quite an extent. They are natural barriers to movement of contaminants
vertically in the aquifer system and so we know that we have both natural contaminants in
our aquifer system and we have man-introduced contaminants in the aquifer system.
Examples are uranium. Uranium is a natural occurring contaminant in our system. We
also know that there are pesticides and fertilizers and things like Perchloroethylene,
petroleum products that are introduced into the aquifer as well and we -- we know that
some wells are drilled in such a manner as to allow movement between different aquifer
units. The example on the slide, as you see the two wells to the left, they are fully sealed
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 38 of 52
wells is what we would describe them as, such as a municipal well would be, and the well
on the right side is what we call an unsealed well where the outside of the casing allows
water and whatever contaminants are in the water to move up and down in the different
layers of the aquifer. So, the combination of the existence of contaminants and the
possibility of introduction of contaminants and poor either irrigation well or private well
construction, because municipal wells are sealed up from the land surface to the point
where they access water, those combinations are our main -- are primary threats to our
source of water. Now, when we first showed you that slide a couple years ago we brought
-- we discussed what the best way to -- what the best strategy to protect our groundwater
was and it is through better well construction. We want to have wells sealed, so we don't
have these holes in the protective layers. So, what was the best way to -- to effect that
change to have better -- better well construction and the two -- two strategies we talked
about were a Meridian ordinance and applying for an area of drilling concerns and the
recommendation we made and the direction we got from Council was we will apply for an
area of drilling concern and the way that works is -- it's in the Idaho Code and
paraphrased it there, is the director of the Idaho -- the Idaho Department of Water
Resources director can designate an area of drilling concern where he is presented data
and it's for the best interest of the public. An example of an area of drilling concern it's
always established that the west Boise area of drilling concern where Perchloroethylene
was introduced and is slowly moving through the groundwater. So, the way the process
works is we would present the director with information. They would analyze that
information, make their decision about what they thought was the right thing to do and,
then, they would have a public hearing and notification prior to designating an area of
drilling concern wherein there would be special rules based on the scientific data, such as
drilling methods and drilling construction. So, since -- since we last presented that to
Council we have completed several actions. We have met with the Department of Water
Resources water quality staff and actually shared with them a couple drafts of our report
and application for an area of drilling concern and have gotten very good feedback on how
to approach this scientifically without saying things that would perhaps give the
Department of Water Resources the wrong impression. We want to say -- we want to say
here is some information you can use to improve the administration of your rules, not the
rules aren't good enough, things like that, and very good comments from them. We have
met with affected groundwater users that are municipal providers in the area that we want
to designate as a joint -- area of joint concern. That is United Water and Kuna. They both
are supportive of the application and we have proofed the final report that is ready to
submit. We also have spoken with the director and the director is I would say
encouraging and we all feel like it's a good time to do that. I would note on this graphic --
this is the front page of the report that we intend to submit. If you look at the upper right
side of the -- of this orange blob that we want to designate as the West Ada Area of
Drilling Concern, you see the WBADC, little smaller orange blob, that is the West Boise
Area of Drilling Concern. You can see how that contaminant that was introduced at the --
at the site of the mall in Boise has traveled to the north and the west under the ground and
it was introduced at the surface and is now 300 feet below the ground and you ask the
question, well, how did it get that far down if there are these natural protective layers.
Well, there are also a lot of wells on the way and we think that is a significant -- significant
contribution to why that -- that chemical is found there and once you have a chemical like
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 39 of 52
that down there you're going to pump and pump and pump and pump and you may never
get rid of it. So, we think it's a real important -- a real important strategy that -- that has --
its time has come and so we are ready to submit it. So, the next step would be
submission of that application and we had a discussion about what the proper outreach
would be and since -- since the process is the Department of Water Resources takes the
application, analyzes it, decides what they are going to do with it and, then, have the
public hearing, we thought the most appropriate thing for us to do in terms of getting
involved with any kind of outreach is to support the Department of Water Resources and
time our outreach with the Department of Water Resources. We don't want to be running
around telling drillers about the area of drilling concern if the Department of Water
Resources isn't going to have a public meeting for five months, so -- and the director was
also very supportive of that concept of us lending our support to that effort. And just
before I open up for questions, I would encourage anybody that hasn't seen it to go take a
look at our -- our -- not just the paper version, but the visual aid with the actual drill
cuttings from Well 10-B that show those different layers of sand and -- sand and clays and
the different chemistry of the water, it's very interesting, you go over there and you will find
a -- you will find a section of sand that has water in it with uranium not present and you go
up 80 feet and you're going to find you have gone through one or two layers of clay, you
will find uranium that is 69 micrograms per liter, which is twice the maximum contaminant
level set by the EPA. So, it's a matter of -- and we have seen it. We have seen it in wells
that have been completed into -- through internals like that. Meridian Heights well is a
great example where the well was completed into an area that had uranium, but every
time they tested it they -- they didn't get uranium, because the well wasn't sealed and so
when the well sat idle the heavier water from above was sinking down into -- and creating
a buffer around that well. And, of course, that's an example where the good water was
commingling with the bad water, but it's just as easy to have bad water commingling with
the good water. Anyway, that well is going to be abandoned properly. You will see -- you
will see a contract coming through in the next couple months that will get that abandoned
properly, just as a side note. And with that I would open it up for any questions you have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Kyle. Council, any questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Just a couple brief questions, Kyle. The first one -- talked about after this what
are the next steps that occur?
Radek: Madam Mayor, Councilman Cavener, the -- the size was dictated by another
question we asked the Council back a couple years ago, which was do we establish this
area of drilling concern in our impact area, do we make it a political boundary or do we
make it a geographical physical boundary and we decided, again, with Council's direction,
it was appropriate to make it a physical boundary that was based on geography and
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 40 of 52
hydrogeology impact area extending upgradient or upstream the way the groundwater
moves to the New York Canal, which is the -- is the -- the first of the higher gradient. So,
essentially, water moved to the New York Canal to the northwest, so that's the reason for
it, so we are protecting everything that is in our impact area and everything upstream of
our impact area. And the process -- I think it's a very simple process and I don't know a
whole lot more about than what I read to you from the state code, but the state code says
-- and this was part of the drilling rules that were developed by -- I can't remember what
year, but -- Tom, can you help me on that? What was the year that the drilling rules were
updated? 2003? '2? Essentially a decade ago and the drilling community especially was
adamant about the fact that we can't have rules that apply statewide, because there are
lots of different physical geological characteristics in different aquifers and different areas.
And that was the whole reason for this area of drilling concern, so that somebody can say,
hey, in this area, if you drill this way and you construct a well this way, you're going to --
you're going to do damage and so that's -- as far as I know the process is the director
looks at this report, it's pretty hefty, 50 pages with lots of circles and arrows and
paragraphs and exhibits and -- and his staff will probably take three or four months just
looking at it and, then, they will decide, okay, we need to have a public hearing and see
what everybody has to say, but, hopefully, it's feeling that the science is pretty good, hard
to ignore, and they -- if they see this they -- they have to -- they have to designate an area
of drilling concern if it's in any way feasible, if it's any way allowable by the public, you
know.
Cavener: Madam Mayor, maybe one more. And this is kind of a sideways question,
because I'm not quite sure how this impacts it, but we don't have a lot of farmers left in
Meridian, but how -- how does creating a proposed area of drilling concern impact what
little ag land we have left?
Radek: Madam Mayor, Councilman Cavener, I believe the impact will be very, very little.
Farmers -- agriculture already has their surface water and most of the agricultural users
that have accessory groundwater wells are -- they are in place. What we see as a -- as a
bigger threat is as agricultural land actually moves to develop land -- and take county
developments where people generally have been drilling domestic wells a hundred feet
deep, 120 feet deep, we think that they are going to start hearing about the uranium and --
and they are going to be concerned with nitrates and they going to be concerned with
Atrazine and they are going to be concerned with pesticides and they are going to start
drilling deeper wells and those deeper wells is what we are afraid of that aren't going to be
sealed. I -- personally I don't think there is much of an effect on existing agriculture. We
do see occasional well -- well applications being put in for -- for augmenting irrigation, but
most of them are not from agriculture, most of them are Meridian parks, up at the new
park site, Black Rock -- Black Rock Development. LDS church. And generally they are --
they are for backup irrigation water for developments.
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I just -- you have given a good explanation of what
we are looking at. I just would add a little bit to that. The -- currently with the -- within the
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 41 of 52
incorporated city area nobody can get permits to drill for drinking water anymore. We
have that right and we are trying to protect that. They can get rights to drill for irrigation
water and the issue that we are trying to address here in trying to protect our own wells
and Kyle has mentioned they may need to be digging deeper, deeper wells, they don't
particularly care if they pick up contamination, because they are not drinking it. They are
not going to get a permit to drill a drinking well, they will get a permit to drill an irrigation
well. So, many people have the feeling, because it's more expensive, they don't have to
seal the well when they have drilled it and the issue to us is the deeper they drill, as Kyle
said, it gives contaminants the ability to use their hole where -- the lining around it to move
the contaminants between levels, which eventually will affect us and so what the area of
drilling concern, if it's established, gives us is the right to say for whatever reason you drill
a well, if it's within our area where we may be drawing, regardless of what type you're
going to drill to, it must be sealed and to me that's the purpose is the forward looking and
saying, okay, there has been at least one example of something that went wrong and has
crossed between aquifers, we need to protect from that happening again and we need the
right to say, no, you can't drill a well that isn't sealed, even if it isn't for your purpose. It
must be for our purpose that you seal your well and, hopefully, I have expressed that
correctly. That's -- that's the point. That's what we are going for.
Radek: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, I think that's a great point. To put a finer,
you know, example on that, yeah, somebody could drill a well right next to our city well,
which by IDEQ standards has to be sealed from land surface to the top of the aquifer
that's being accessed, they could drill it a hundred feet upgradient of us any way they
want and that doesn't seem okay and I would also, you know, put a finer point on it, it
wouldn't be us refusing them, it would be the Department of Water Resources refusing
them to do that. So, due to the area of drilling we don't become the police for what -- the
regulatory agency that already -- already regulates well drilling in the state of Idaho still
does it.
De Weerd: Any other questions? Okay. Thank you.
Radek: Okay. Thank you very much.
I. Public Works: Update on Water Right Transfer Application
De Weerd: Okay. Are you giving us our update on --
Radek: Madam Mayor, I will just stay right here.
De Weerd: Yes.
Radek: I wanted to give you an update on the -- and this probably won't take nearly as
long, because there is not a whole lot to update on, but about a month ago I came before
you with our legal counsel for water rights, Charlie Rountree, and Ed Squires, our
hydrogeologist, told you that we were going to submit our -- our transfer application to
make all of our wells points of diversion for all of our water rights for flexibility -- for long-
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 42 of 52
term flexibility and be able to use those water rights when say we -- when the warning
goes away we will want to use that water right somewhere else. We also talked about
how we were going to do some outreach before we did that, so we didn't surprise any of
the -- the big water powers in Idaho, Idaho Water Users Association, Boise Project,
Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, Settlers Irrigation District. We did that. With one of
those groups, Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, there was a desire to strike up some
kind of an agreement that would satisfy some concerns they had on possible affects on
their delivery systems, their canals, with greater amounts of pumping at different points of
diversion. It's our feeling that we will not have any kind of negative effect, but -- but we
were open to the idea of an agreement. So, we had been working on a draft agreement
with them to satisfy their concerns. In the meantime the last day for a protest on this
water right application is today and there was not enough time to get that agreement in a
form where everybody could sign it and so they -- they have done what they call a friendly
protest. I know it sounds like an oxymoron, but it's done quite often where the protest is
just designed to provide time for the parties to work out what agreement they want to work
out before -- before the other -- you know, the protesting party can drop that. I checked
with the Department of Water Resources at 1:30 today. As of 1:30 they -- they got their
mail and there were no other protests. It was a sidewalk advertisement, so that's pretty
encouraging. So, it looks like -- and I'm sure I will be back in a couple weeks to give you
another update, both on the status of our agreement work, that we probably won't have
any other protests. But at this point we are trying to work out an agreement in a friendly
protest. There are perhaps plenty of opportunities for things to go wrong and plenty of
opportunities for things to go right at this point, so I guess that's an engineer's update, uh?
Bird: It's like your stamp, you didn't put anything solid on it.
Radek: Yeah. At this point there is nothing really solid I can say, but I will stand for any
questions you have.
De Weerd: Any questions from Council? Okay. Thank you.
Radek: Thank you very that.
Bird: Thanks, Kyle.
J. City Council: Update on Saturday Bus Service
De Weerd: Okay. Item 6-J is under City Council updates. Oh. On the Saturday bus
service. So, I will turn this over to Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Thank you, Madam Mayor. As many of you know, the Saturday bus service
did not get very high ridership during the winter. We were hoping that it would pick up
more during the summer and it did somewhat. The summer is better than the winter. But
some new ideas have come to the surface. VRT and -- as reported to us by Kelly
Fairless, the director, asked some of the riders if there was something better that we could
provide and ask nonriders as well and my take away from -- from what Kelly said was, you
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 43 of 52
know, this -- Meridian is a family oriented community and families do things together on
Saturdays and the youth have arrived when they go with their families. They might find it
more useful to have weekday service than Saturday service when their parents are at
work and they need a way to get around. So, that's -- that's one thought. The other
thought is that it doesn't necessarily need to be a year around service and the thought is
that we may be able to provide five day a week service for maybe the middle of May
through the middle of September when most kids are out of school for the same 60,000
dollars. Now, it would not run all day, it would be a few shorter hours, but the thought is
that we would get the committee together again and start discussing what the alternatives
are to morph this into something that will be better used and -- and to that end keep the
60,000 dollars in the budget for 2016, which we have already voted to do, but the other
thing that we talked about is if we are going to go the direction of more service in less time
and we have some time to develop that if we are thinking it would start mid May, there is
some time to work on that, when do we end the current service. Well, if you're saying it's
-- we are working towards a summer service you would end it in the middle of September
probably. Well, we did feel -- and this was one of Kelly's suggestions as well -- that we do
need time to tell the people that we are stopping service. I mean they assume it's going to
keep going every Saturday -- that we are stopping it and, in fact, there will be no service
between now and when we start a new service, which, of course, will come back to the
Council for discussion and approval of what that really is. I kind of stuck my neck out and
said, okay, run it to the end of September, which is the end of our fiscal year and, then,
the last Saturday in September is the last time it will run. That will give time to get the
word out there, maybe cover the signs or take some of them down about where the bus
stops are and, then, put our heads together and see what we can come up with for next
year and, again, we are not preconceived that it's going to be a shorter service on more
days and -- I mean fewer months on more days, but that's kind of the direction we are
going. But what I wanted to update you on is that, as I say, I stuck my neck out and spoke
for the Council, said let's end it the end of September and regroup and see what we are
going to do for next year, which may not be an every Saturday service. So, if that's all
right with everybody, that's what we are doing.
Milam: Madam Mayor? David, is it primarily children that are -- or youth that are riding
the bus now?
Zaremba: There actually have been adults riding as well. The times that I rode it looked
like there was families riding, but it's been a mix.
De Weerd: I guess we did try it for a year. I don't know if a year is long enough to really
determine if this is something that will be used. My concern continues to be our seniors
and disabled community and is this money better used to have a more comprehensive
service to the population that -- that really needs help in getting somewhere and that
would be my only thought and I don't know if that's been part of the discussion.
Zaremba: Well, that's also a question I asked. Could we -- could we add this to the
30,000 that we are already setting aside for senior and disabled service and make a better
service out of that and the response from VRT was that's one of the things we want to
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 44 of 52
include in the discussion. So, I'm -- I'm not predetermining that we will have five week day
service over three or four months. It may very well be that the recommendation is that --
Kelly made some suggestions about some -- some team members that we ought to have.
We already have a couple of us -- Caleb is an active member and I have been an active
member. We have two members from the Meridian Transportation Commission that
come regularly. But, then, others. So, we have -- we have talked about adding somebody
from the nonprofits serving youth and seniors and people with disabilities. Somebody
representing private business. Somebody representing transportation. We have had
ACHD representation in the past. We will probably keep that. Somebody from an
organization that delivers services, such as free lunches or education or cultural activities.
To add to the depth of our committee and it really would be an open discussion. What I
suggested is just an example and what we want to do is throw all the examples we can
think of on the table and one of them is very definitely, okay, let's take that money and add
it to the senior service money and see how we can make that program more robust. So,
that is definitely on the table.
De Weerd: And we do have a real diverse group for the Mayor's senior advisory board
and they are -- they are looking at -- right now their current project is developing a
resource guide that's specific to Meridian, but they are tackling issues such as driving --
senior driving, they want to -- a class on -- in that regard. But also on CPR and maybe a
representative from the Mayor's senior advisory board would -- would be an appropriate
member as well.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Bird: Tell me about the senior driving.
De Weerd: Yeah. You need to take that class?
Bird: I didn't think so.
De Weerd: Any other -- any other comments?
Milam: Madam Mayor? What about a youth member?
Zaremba: Yeah. That was already --
Milam: We have got that on there -- okay.
Zaremba: I think already on the list.
Milam: I thought you said something about that, but --
Zaremba: Yeah.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, I guess it's stay tuned; right?
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 45 of 52
Zaremba: Yes. Stay tuned.
K. City Council Liaison/Committee Updates
De Weerd: Thank you for the update. Which leads us to 6-K under City Council liaison
and committee updates. I will start with Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Great. Thank you, Madam Mayor. My two liaison roles are with Human
Resources and Community Development. Patty gave a very in-depth presentation again
today. Her and I didn't meet, because she was putting the final touches on her
presentation, well worth her time, in my opinion. Bruce and I and Caleb met this afternoon
and I think the biggest piece coming out was that there weren't any responses on the RFP
and now they are working on next steps with engaging the -- the development community
to see if there is other parties that may be identified for the RSP that are interested in
being more involved. And that's it.
Milam: Well, I have got all kinds of information. The clerks are busy with the election and
preparing for a new employee and counter redesign. IT has been meeting with Ada
County regarding the launch of a new CAD system. The police department, they are
having a dedication ceremony for the training center on September 21st at 10:30 a.m.
and with the arts commission now we have five boxes that are covered with art and they
are at Main and Pine, Meridian and Pine, Main and Franklin, Main and Idaho, Eagle and
Franklin. And on the Solid Waste Advisory Commission we are discussing some legal
issues that will probably be brought forth at a later date, but it was discovered there were
some -- some misdemeanor punishment for certain things that -- trash -- a few trashes too
heavy and other items and they are looking at reviewing those and deciding if any of them
need to be switch to infractions, as opposed to misdemeanors. Got it.
Bird: Are you done?
Milam: I'm done.
De Weerd: Sooner rather than later.
Bird: My committee, Meridian Development Corporation, we got our budget passed. We
were like the City of Meridian, we had nobody from the public to come listen to us, but we
do start at 7:30 in the morning, so they got an excuse for not showing up. The Finance
Department is getting ready for close -- year end closing, which closes at the end of this
month and get ready to get the auditors in here and Todd I think has even started to
prepare for FY-17 and at the parks we had a beautiful tour, as three other Councilmen
understand and a couple of our press people missed. We got to go see our beautiful
parks again and every time I go -- we had 33 people that -- I just get prouder and prouder
of the way our parks are maintained, the way they have been built and I -- you know, all of
us have been involved in it, but as of '98 we had two parks in Meridian. We, basically, had
Fuller Park, which Charlie was very instrumental in getting started and that was with
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 46 of 52
Western Ada, which we really didn't have, and we had Storey Park, which was three acres
of playground and grass and one nice baseball field. The rest was weeds. And to think
what this community has done since 1998, that's when we -- I think Tully come on in '99 or
2000 and that was our first project, wasn't it?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: And I just thank the mayors and council previous to us that had the foresight to go
buy land like Settlers Park and all this and, then, we were able to develop it and I know
Charlie and Tammy and I have been involved with all the parks and I know -- I'm just so
proud of the way Mike and his crew take care of our parks. I mean every time I go
through and they look better. My yard don't, but they -- those -- I mean it's just fantastic
and we have got -- we have got a great parks commission that helps and stuff. If one
thing this community has done we have become first class in our parks and I thank
everybody.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Bird. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. Well, in my absence it appears that the Mayor has healed up
rather well, so I will verify that and I hope you're feeling better. Some of my commission
outside activities -- COMPASS next week. Hopefully we will finally act on a new joint
powers agreement and bylaws, which we will implement something I started a little over a
year ago and that's to reduce the number of meetings that the board has to six a year and
that the executive board will do more of the work for COMPASS. David gave you an
update of what's happening with VRT with respect to the Saturday rides and I was
involved with Kelly in talking about what might be the options and would it be possible to
consider other things and that resulted in the e-mail I think we all got just recently about
how poorly the Saturday ride was. So, that's moving forward. Also worked with the letters
you just signed on Chinden to both ACHD and ITD to get our desires identified and our
support for the project, but our desire to get something down sooner, as opposed to later.
Not city, but of interest, I know last time I reported was that Ward had approved a
resolution to move forward with a bond based on polling done by the group that was
retained to poll that particular bond, it was recommended that we pull back and not move
that bond forward in November, but to start an education campaign, get the information
out there and possibly do it next year early or if not next November. So, that's where that
is right now. We just -- we just officially made that resolution today, as a matter of fact.
The screen you have before you I'm the 64 car, fast coming to the finish line, so -- and
based on the announcements yesterday I saw that I'm getting close -- 15 more meetings,
but I'm not counting.
Bird: Mr. Rountree, I thought was -- they were just getting ready to give the green flag,
see. That's going through number four.
De Weerd: No. That's a T-shirt.
Rountree: Close to the finish line.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 47 of 52
Bird: You're just heading for the green.
Rountree: Yeah. That's it.
Borton: Madam Mayor. Brief update from fire. We are going to be hearing -- in October
their strategic planning retreat is going to take place end of October, early November, and
one of the things that the chief is going to bring back to us -- the focus is on the alternate
response vehicle opportunity and there is going to be some opportunities for us to provide
some input to them as far as what outputs and kind of scope of what we want their
discussion to be, some key results that we might be looking for, so they have a good
sense of really what the Mayor and Council want to see and what that type of vehicle can
and cannot do. So, kind of give them some focus as they go forth. So, that's really the
pressing concern within Fire right now. And, then, the pilot project of participatory
budgeting, which everyone is excited about, which is fantastic, is moving forward. It's on
pace. We met with -- Ken and Todd and I have met. We are going to start the
introduction with the new MYAC crew the September 14th meeting and populate the
working committee there and the calendar is laid out for an April 2016 election on a ballot
that will be created throughout this process. The results of that will be integrated into our
proposed budget, brought back and presented to the Mayor and Council at that June
roundtable workshop. So, that process and structure is well underway.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I did talk about VRT a little bit already.
The one thing I left out was the ridership on the Saturday bus and I -- ridership usually
equates to the number of boardings. It isn't -- they may have been the same people
different weeks, but the ridership for the year was 635. So, it wasn't totally ignored, but I
think it's legitimate to say we didn't get quite as much bang for our buck as we could. So,
the earlier discussion was what are we going to do about that, so we are on track to do
something about that. Let's see. Legal Department. Everybody has had vacation and
they actually came back from vacation and medical leaves and so we are fully staffed
there and things are going on. Public Works you also heard from already today. Much
stuff going on there and one thing that I really feel thrilled about Public Works, they don't
just take a what's in Meridian view. They are involved in what affects Meridian, even if it's
way beyond our borders and looking ahead for what may be coming and being aware of
what other people are doing in the region that may be good or not good for us and being
ahead of it. So, I really appreciate that.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Zaremba. And thank you, Mr. Rountree, for saying I look like
I'm on the mend. I'm not sure I always believe that. We are working at forming a working
group to focus on Chinden, 20-26, and so excited to get -- we have put the invitations out,
we hope to have a good turnout to have a discussion about seeing how we can make that
road improvement a priority and -- kind of just like we did with our Meridian Road
interchange rebuild and would thank Councilman Rountree again for his leadership, as
well as Caleb. We have a real gem in Caleb and his advocacy in our transportation -- all
things transportation, but certainly we need to have a voice and we need to take the lead
in getting certain improvements that definitely impact our quality of life and our ability to
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 48 of 52
have economic development and commerce in these major corridors, but also insure that
our public is not sitting on the road and they are actually getting to work or getting home
and spending quality time at both places. So, that is being formed and I will tell you that
our directors are working diligently on the strategic plan and developing the goals and
objectives and performance measures so we can bring that back to you in November. So,
a lot of work being done right now, but very focused and ready to present to you at a -- in
the next couple of months. So, that is our roadmap for the future and excited to fill in a lot
of those next steps as you have approved the structure, now we will fill in the blanks. So,
anyway, with that I will go ahead -- if there is anything further from Council?
Item 7: Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 15-1653A: An Ordinance (AZ 15-003 Shelburne
Subdivision) for Annexation and Zoning of a Parcel of Land
Being Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Zaldien Zerua Subdivision, as
Recorded in Plat Book 81 at Pages 8783 through 8784, Official
Records of Ada County, Idaho and the South ½ Of The Northeast
¼ Of The Southwest ¼ Of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1
East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho. Establishing and
Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of Said 30.205
Acres of Land from RUT to R-4 (Low Density Residential) Zoning
District.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk will you, please, read ordinance 15-1653A by title only.
Jones: Thank you, Madam Mayor. An Ordinance AZ 15-003, Shelburne Subdivision,
for Annexation and Rezone of a Parcel of Land Being Lots 1 and 2, Block 1,
Zaldien Zerua Subdivision, as Recorded in Plat Book 81 at Pages 8783
through 8784, Official Records of Ada County, Idaho and the South ½ of the Northeast ¼
of the Southwest ¼ of Section 28, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho. As described in Attachment A, and annexing certain lands and territory
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 lands 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 waiver of the reading rules and providing an effective date.
Bird: Anybody from the public -- you have heard this read by title only -- would like to hear
the entirety -- read in the entirety? If not, Council, I would entertain a motion.
Milam: Mr. Vice-President?
Bird: Madam Milam.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 49 of 52
Milam: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 15-1653A with suspension of rules.
Zaremba: Second.
Bird: Hearing motion and a second to approve 15-1653A, Clerk, would you, please, have
roll call.
Roll Call: Rountree, absent; Bird, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener,
yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Ordinance No. 15-1658: An Ordinance of the City of Meridian,
Idaho Amending Ordinance No. 14-1622, The Appropriation
Ordinance for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2014 and
Ending September 30, 2015. Appropriating Monies that are to be
Allocated by the City of Meridian, Idaho in the Sum of
($6,574,295.00); and Providing an Effective Date.
Bird: Okay. 7-B. Madam Clerk, would you, please, read 15-1658, the ordinance.
Jones: An Ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho, amending Ordinance No. 14-1622,
The Appropriation Ordinance for the Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2014 and ending
September 30, 2015. Appropriating monies that are to be allocated by the City of
Meridian in the sum of 6,574,295 dollars and providing an effective date.
Bird: You have heard 15-1658 read by title only. Is there anybody that would like to hear
it in its entirety? If not, I would entertain a motion.
Milam: Mr. Vice-President?
Bird: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 15-1658 with suspension of rules.
Zaremba: Second.
Bird: Hearing a motion and a second, Clerk, would you, please, call roll.
Roll Call: Rountree, absent; Bird, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener,
yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE ALL AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. Ordinance No. 15-1659: An Ordinance, Pursuant to Idaho Code
§50-1002 and §50-1003, Providing for a Title and Findings,
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 50 of 52
Providing for the Adoption of a Budget and the Appropriation of
$97,870,219.00 to Defray the Necessary Expenses and Liabilities of the
City of Meridian, in Accord with the Object and Purposes and in the
Certain Amounts Herein Specified for the Fiscal Year Beginning
October 1, 2015 and Ending on September 30, 2016; To Levy All Such
Appropriate Taxes and Levies as Authorized by Law on Taxable
Property; And to Collect all Authorized Revenue; To Provide for the
Waiving of the 2nd and 3rd Readings Pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902;
And Providing an Effective Date and the Filing of a Certified Copy of
the Ordinance with the Secretary of State.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you, please, read Item 7-C, Ordinance 15-1659 by
title only.
Jones: Thank you, Madam Mayor. An Ordinance, pursuant to Idaho Code §50-1002 and
§50-1003, providing for a title and Findings, Providing for the Adoption of a Budget and
the Appropriation of 97,870,219 dollars to defray the necessary expenses and liabilities of
the City of Meridian, in accordance with the object and purposes and in the certain
amounts herein specified for the Fiscal Year beginning October 1, 2015 and ending on
September 30, 2016; to levy all such appropriate taxes and levies as authorized by law
upon taxable property; and to collect all authorized revenue; to provide for the waiving of
the 2nd and 3rd readings pursuant to Idaho Code §50-902; and providing for an effective
date and the Filing of a Certified Copy of this Ordinance with the Secretary of State.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anyone who
would like to hear it read in its entirety? Thought I'd ask.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Seeing none, I move that we approve Ordinance No. 15-1659 with suspension of
rules.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve this item. Any discussion from
Council? Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Rountree, absent; Bird, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener,
yea.
De Weerd: Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 51 of 52
Item 8: Future Meeting Topics
De Weerd: Okay. Council, anything for Item No. 8 under future meeting topics?
Bird: I have none.
Item 9: Amended onto the Agenda: Executive Session Per Idaho State Code
74-206 (1)(f): (f) To Consider and Advise Its Legal Representatives in
Pending Litigation
De Weerd: Okay. Hearing none, I would entertain a motion to -- on Item 9 for our
Executive Session.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(f).
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn into Executive Session. Madam
Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll Call: Rountree, absent; Bird, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: (5:59 p.m. to 6:56 p.m.)
De Weerd: Okay. Council, I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Bird: So moved.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: I move we adjourn.
Milam: Second.
Meridian City Counsel Workshop
September 8, 2015
Page 52 of 52
De Weerd: Just for the record Councilman Cavener is not here. He left while we were in
Executive Session. I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:57 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR TA E VVEERD DATE APPROVED
ATTEST: o�eo�Ptr n a u�Ls?
?C' Jew
Ar" t n — City of
E16 HOLMAN, CITY CLFFTK4 E ID1Z IAN�-
IDAI{O
m
� SEAL
P
1T��o1
the TRF 0111 4