HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-03-15Meridian City Council March 15, 2016
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, March
15, 2016, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Joe Borton, Genesis Milam , Luke
Cavener, Ty Palmer and Anne Little Roberts.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jacy Jones, Bruce Chatterton, Sonya Watters, Josh Beach,
Tom Barry, Mike Pepin, Kyle Radek, Jamie Leslie, Perry Palmer, Keith Watts and Dean
Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X_ Anne Little Roberts X _ Joe Borton
X__ Ty Palmer X_ Keith Bird
__X__ Genesis Milam __X___ Lucas Cavener
_X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I would like to welcome all of you here to our City Council meeting. We
appreciate you joining us. For the record it is Tuesday, March 15th. It's one minute after
6:00. We will start with roll 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: Community Invocation by Steve Moore with Ten Mile Christian Church
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor
Steve Moore with Ten Mill Christian Church. If you will all join us in the community
invocation or take this as a moment of reflection.
Moore: Dear God in Heaven, we have just pledged that we are a nation under you and
that's a special comfort tonight when we realize that there is much that happens in our
world even on a daily basis that's out of our control. So, we pause in this important
moment at the beginning of this meeting to express our dependence upon you and I pray
that you would be with these leaders in our city. Thank you that they are sacrificial. We
are grateful that they take seriously this responsibility they have to make decisions that
often are unpopular with one person and well received by the other and that -- that
responsibility of just making decisions. So, we pray for special wisdom from you for that.
Pray your justice in our community and, God, I -- I pray that we would just recognize as
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 2 of 68
citizens our part. I pray that Meridian, this reputation that we have of being such a great
place to live, that -- that we just do our part, we as citizens for that to happen. Tonight we
recognize that there is other generations like these girls and basketball championship
that's going to be recognized and honored and thank you. We pray a blessing on their
futures and their desire for excellence and these sort of things, God, just remind us that
we are a part of something bigger than ourselves, in the name of Jesus I pray, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda
De Weerd: Thank you, Pastor Moore. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Under the Consent Agenda, Item K, the resolution number is 16-1125. Under Item
9-F it has been asked to continue to April 5th. And also under 9-E the titles have been
amended to read preliminary plat approval consisting of 96 building lots and 12 common
lots on 22.6 acres of land in a proposed R-8 zoning district. Under 10-A the ordinance
number is 16-1675 and under 10-B the ordinance number is 16-1676 and under Item 12
we would like to add an Item 12 which is under -- an Executive Session under Idaho State
Code 74-206(1)(a). With that --
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as changed. All those in
favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: May it be noted that Council Member Milam is here with us as well. Thank
you.
Milam: Sorry.
Item 5: Proclamation
A. Proclamation for Mountain View High School Girls' Basketball
State Champions Day
De Weerd: Okay. I'm going to move to the podium. Before I call up the Lady Mavs, I do
have a special presentation that I thought I would do right now, because I know after I
read the proclamation with the Lady Mavs that this individual will be shooting out the door
to get a picture. So, I will ask Frank Thomason if he will, please, come up and join me at
the podium. Frank Thomason has been an integral part of Meridian history and our
preservation thereof. Frank has been part of our historical preservation commission for 25
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 3 of 68
years. He is our resident and expert historian and I will tell you that he will be impossible
to replace. He has had to resign and step down from our his torical preservation
commission and I will tell you that this will leave a big gaping hole. Our heart felt thanks
certainly to Frank and what you have added to our community in making it a premier place
live, work, and raise our family, but also that our residents, regardless of how long you
have lived here, have the opportunity to get to know the Meridian that -- our roots run
deep and the Meridian that we have built a strong foundation on to what it is today. We
also have an outstanding history walk. We have a third grade program that teaches kids
in our third grades the history of our community. We have engaged citizens at all -- of all
ages into the history of Meridian and we are very proud of where we are and much of that
has had the fingerprints of this man. So, this is presented to Dr. Frank Thomason in
recognition of your years of dedicated service to the history -- Historic Preservation
Commission. City of Meridian has greatly benefitted from your valuable gift of time and
expertise. Meridian is more vibrant -- is a more vibrant community because of your
service. We thank you for all you have done.
Thomason: Thank you. I am overwhelmed and very humbled. Mayor Tammy knows me
well and I probably -- had I known this was coming would have found a way to bolt out the
door. It's also been my privilege to cover -- to have covered the Meridian City Council for
the past 25 years, but who is counting. But thank you so much for the opportunity to
serve this wonderful community, which is getting national attention for the work that the
city and the development community and our public safety departments bring to the
residents and the businesses of Meridian, the number one place in the nation to live,
work, and raise a family. Thank you.
De Weerd: Now it is my honor to recognize a group of young ladies who have
accomplished something that very few have . In fact, they have won the state title for
basketball for the second year in a row and I believe that this hasn't been done since the
1980s and as I understand it this team is already preparing for next year and their third
straight title. So, if you girls would come up and join me, I would greatly appreciate that.
And Coach Skogrand. Skogrand. I knew I was going to blow that one. If you can also
stand up here. I'm going to read this proclamation and I will tell you that I have two of
them I will present to your coach. One has all of your names listed in it and that's going to
be entered into our minutes, so that some day, if you ever want to show your kids that you
were part of Meridian history that Mr. Thomason could have even captured, your name
will be in our minutes and you can come back to this day and point that out. One of these
has all of your names listed in and the other one doesn't and that's the one I will read,
because as you already saw with your coach, I will probably not say your last name right.
Whereas being a Mountain View basketball player is more than scoring points, making
assists, grabbing rebounds, stealing a ball and achieving back to back state titles, it is
training to build leadership, character, confidence, teamwork and resilience, all traits
needed to succeed on the court, in the classroom, and in the real world and whereas the
Lady Mavs overall record for the 2015-2016 season was 23 wins and four losses and
whereas their hard work and teamwork results -- resulted in a 62-50 victory over
conference rival rifle Centennial High School in the 2016 state basketball champion
tournament and whereas capturing a second straight state title makes the Mountain View
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 4 of 68
Lady Mavs the first 5-A I girls basketball Treasure Valley team in District Three to achieve
this accomplishment since 1983 and whereas the leadership, training, and discipline of
their coaches help all team members to focus their talents and passion to become a
winning team, with each player making valuable contributions to their victory. Therefore, I,
Mayor Tammy de Weerd, hereby do proclaim March 15th as Mountain View High School
Girls Basketball State Champions Day in the City of Meridian and I call upon all the
community to join me in congratulating the Lady Mavs on their remarkable athletic
achievement and for representing Meridian so proudly in the state tournament. I sign this
today and I would be very honored to present this to your coach and I would also ask if
each of you would come up and introduce yourself, tell us the year in school you are and
what position you played and, then, I will ask your coach to follow up with some comments
on your behalf. So, if we could start here and if you will state your name and what year in
school you are and what position you play.
Good: Okay. I'm Andi Good and I'm a junior and I play post and forward.
Kreiser: I'm Abby Kreiser. I'm a junior and I'm a guard.
Chanhthala: I'm Allison Chanhthala. I'm a sophomore and I'm a guard.
Clark: I'm Natalie Clark. I'm a junior and I'm a guard also.
Anderson: I'm Kayla Anderson. I'm a junior and I'm a guard.
Villareal: I'm Devenee Villareal. I'm a senior and I'm a guard.
Vickery: I'm Adriana Vickery. I'm a junior and I'm a post.
Perry: Shelby Perry. I'm a junior and I'm a post slash forward.
Whitelock: Braelyn Whitelock. I'm a freshman and I play post.
Carrillo: I'm Taeli Carrillo. I'm a junior and I play guard.
Slocum: I'm Destiny Slocum. I'm a senior and I play point guard.
Spell: I'm Shayla Spell. I'm a junior and I play post.
Skogrand: And I'm Connie Skogrand. I'm the girls -- varsity girls basketball couch at
Mountain View High School and I want to th ank the Mayor and the Meridian City
Councilmen for having us here and presenting this award to us. Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 5 of 68
De Weerd: Yes.
Palmer: As the first graduate of Mountain View High School to serve on Meridian City
Council I wanted to personally congratulate you guys on -- on your win. Congrats. Go
Mavericks.
Item 6: Consent Agenda
A. Final Order for Final Plat for Creekstone Subdivision (H-2016-
0014) by Creekstone Meridian, LLC Located North Side of W.
Pine Avenue, Midway Between N. Black Cat Road & N. Ten Mile
Road Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Thirty-Two (32)
Residential Lots and Six (6) Common Lots on Approximately
6.92 Acres in the R-8 Zoning District
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and
Order of Denial for Knighthill Apartments by James Wylie (H-
2016-0002) For a Request to Amend the Recorded Development
Agreement for the Purpose of Incorporating a Second Concept
Plan, Residential Building Elevations and Modify Certain
Provisions of the Development Agreement for Property
Generally Located on the Southwest Corner of Chinden
Boulevard and N. Linder Road, Meridian, Idaho.
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and
Order for Denial for Westborough Square (H 2015-0036) by Corey
Barton for a Request for a Modification to the Existing
Conditional Use Permit/Planned Development to Change the Use
and Site Layout From an Office to a Multi-Family Residential
Development for 3.32 Acres of Land Generally Located at 6340 N.
Jericho Road, Meridian, Idaho.
D. Development Agreement for Earl Glen Subdivision (RZ 15-009,
MDA 15-006) with Brinegar Investments, LLLP Located on the
North side of E. McMillan Road, East of N. Locust Grove Road.
Request: for Rezone and Modification Agreement of 4.65 Acres
of Land from R-8 Zoning district to the R-15 Zoning District
E. Development Agreement for Citadel Storage @ Amity (H-2015-
0031) with Skyline Boise, LLC Located at the southeast corner of
E. Amity and N. Meridian Roads Request: Annexation and
Zoning of 15.84 acres of land with an I-L zoning district
F. Approval and Authorization of the Purchasing Manager to sign
the Purchase Order to Mtelligence Corp for the Installation and
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 6 of 68
Implementation Services of the Condition Based Monitoring
Software for the Not-To-Exceed amount of $79,000.00.
G. Approval of Task Order 0596.d to JUB Engineers, Inc for the
“South Black Cat Lift Station Improvements - Design” Project for
a Not-To-Exceed amount of $67,116.00.
H. Approval of Task Order 10044D to Brown and Caldwell for the
“Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility Headworks Capacity
Design” for a Not-To-Exceed amount of $1,230,611.00.
I. Pedestrian Pathway Easement Between Isola Creek, LLC and the
City of Meridian Regarding a Public Pathway Located in the
Bellano Creek Subdivision which will Connect Bridgetower
Subdivision to the City's Future Neighborhood Park
J. Professional Services Agreement with WineGlass Arts
Development for Concert Series Production Services for an Not-
to-Exceed Amount of $9,600.00
K. Resolution No. 16-1125: Adopting the Bylaws of the Meridian
Transportation Commission as Amended on March 7, 2016
De Weerd: It's very rare that I can pull one over on Frank Thomason, so thank you.
Okay, Council, Item No. 6 is our Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On the Consent Agenda, as I stated earlier, Item K is resolution number 16-1125.
With that I move we approve the Consent Agenda and the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to
attest.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is no
discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 7 of 68
Item 7: Items Moved From the Consent Agenda
De Weerd: Item 7. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 8: Department Reports
A. Finance Department: Follow -up to the McGladrey Report
De Weerd: So, we will move to 8-A under Department Reports and I will turn this over to
Mr. Barry.
Barry: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. It's my honor tonight to
represent the Public Works Department, the Finance Department, the Legal Department
and the HR Department in our follow-up presentation regarding the McGladrey
Construction Review Report. You may recall that the Public Works Department, along
with the other three departments, were evaluated last fall for conformance to best
management practices as it relates to our construction processes and so we wanted to
just follow up this evening as closure to the activities that have occurred since that time.
The agenda that I have for you this evening is to talk briefly about the background, talk
also briefly about report objectives and scope, as well as the observations and the
compliance status, as well as to offer an opportunity for some discussion at the end. I am
joined this evening in my presentation with Mike Pepin, our deputy director from the Public
Works Department. Also we have Keith Watts representing purchasing, Mr. Nary
representing the legal department. Unfortunately, Crystal Ritchie from the HR Department
is unable to be with us this evening. She fell ill this afternoon. So, any questions,
comments, concerns regarding the HR observations we would want to direct maybe later
to her. All right. If you go ahead and begin. I wanted to just set the context again for the
report itself. As you may know, particularly in Public Works, we are probably the largest
spending and largest -- have the largest number of projects in the city in regards to capital
construction. So, it makes a lot of sense to have the processes, policies, and procedures
evaluated for the department, particularly as they touch -- those processes and policies
touch other departments throughout city. For example, we have 200 million dollars worth
of projects coming up in the next ten years. You can also see by this graph that,
essentially, our capital investment program has grown significantly over the past eight
years and is projected to continue to grow over the next ten. So, there are a lot of good
reasons for insuring that as we begin to -- and continue to ramp up our capital
construction program, that we really take a good hard look at the types of systems and
controls that we have in place for the capital program itself. So, the goals of the project
that were defined was to test the integrity and adherence to established processes
through the construction processes. Evaluate adequacy of existing policies and
procedures related to those processes and insure alignment of those policies and
practices within industry standards and best management practices. The scope that was
undertaken involved looking at a number of different controls and processes throughout
the construction development process. Mostly these controls were identified against
water and sewer utility capital projects in the Public Works Department. So, the reviewers
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 8 of 68
looked at procurement processes, schedules, change orders, budget allowances, contract
close out paperwork, insurance and bond requirements, construction in progress, owner
supplied material, payment application and invoices and et cetera. Again, as I mentioned,
the departments that reviewed were all the departments that have some sort of touch
point in regards to these activities. So, those, again, include Public Works, Finance
through purchasing, Legal and HR. The review approach involved having 16 interviews
with staff from each of the four departments. There were three construction management
contracts that were reviewed in the spot review. Eleven professional services agreements
were reviewed and four stipulated summary agreements were also reviewed. There were
16 total controls that were reviewed and five of those controls were identified as operating
effectively with no recommendations for changes. There were 12 observations noted and
six of those 12 were existing controls that the city already had in place, but there was a
recommendation for formalization of those controls, meaning we have done the work right,
we were consistent about doing it, we just hadn't actually formalized the process. So, that
was good news. There were five improvements that were recommended to existing
controls. So, that means that five controls that were in place were found, but the
reviewers found ways to strengthen those controls and, then, lastly there is -- there was
one existing control which required some Council direction, which we will talk about
tonight in the presentation. These observations were scattered between all four
departments. Five of the observations were found to be in the Public Works Department,
four in the Legal Department, two in purchasing and, then, one in Human Resources.
Now, as you know, the report was presented last fall to the City Council and since that
time the staff from all four of these departments have committed to working together in a
collaborative fashion to develop, essentially, a compliance report, which is what we are
here to talk with you about this evening, and update with regard to how we have moved
forward implementing the best management practices that were identified for us in the
report. So, this is a process we have used over the last several months, meeting together
internally, reviewing our own processes, developing standard operating procedures and
shoring up gaps in some of those procedures to make sure that we were fully compliant
with all of the observations that were identified. So, I'm going to turn the time over now to
Mr. Mike Pepin, our deputy director. He's going to go through each of the observations
and I do want to commend Mike, because he's done a fantastic job leading this work for
our department. He has been very diligent and thorough in his interactions with the
departments and those representatives and in also following up and following through on
all of these reports status action items. So, I'm very pleased to introduce Mike again and
have him take on the presentation from here. We will both be available for questions at
the end. Thank you, Mike.
De Weerd: Thank you, Tom. Welcome, Mike.
Pepin: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Appreciate your time. So,
Tom set this up and as he mentioned I had an opportunity to work with the three other
departments that were included in this review and what I'm going to provide today is a --
an observation or the title of the observation -- the action item that was suggested by the
reviewer, our response to that, and, then, what the implementation plan or the action plan
was moving forward and as Tom suggested, there were many things in place and many
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 9 of 68
things to celebrate that that the city has in its process control right now and staff are
utilizing. It was really formalization of some, improvements to other, and, then, as Tom
mentioned we do have one to discuss this evening on how to move forward and I will
bring that up to you shortly. So, in no particular order. There is no prioritization. There is
no ranking. They are just 12 observations and I will work through those with you. So, one
observation was procedures for reviewing invoices. This was in the Public Works
Department. I can tell you -- and I can attest to this -- we do have procedures in place --
some that are formalized and others that weren't -- that were very effective and we are
working -- the observation from the reviewer was that let's get them formalized, so that
you not only have an accountability tool, but you also have a training tool, you also have a
consistency tool. So, what this slide represents is we built one new invoicing tool for all of
operations. So, regardless of whether you work at wastewater, you work at water, you
work here in City Hall, because our department is pretty diverse, all managers are
approaching the invoicing process in similar fashion and we built the tool and I apologize
for not leading off with it, but you do all have packets. Those packets are not the slides,
they are the tools that we implemented. So, when I get to Attachment A through maybe
K. Thank you. I will kind of refer to those and if you'd like to follow along in those, you're
perfectly welcome to, but -- so, we developed one new one and, then, we made updates
and improvements to four others that were already existing, just to bring them in alignment
with technology improvement that we have made, review process that we have made,
identifying who is responsible to review what, when they are responsible to review it, any
corrective measures that need to be made -- all of those things are documented within
those pay app invoicing and contract close out documents that you have in Attachment A.
We also included what's called a RACI chart. That's really a process control -- business
process control tool where we look at -- and we help to identify what positions are
responsible, accountable, need to be consulted or informed on some of the flow of this.
And there is also a flow chart. So, if we get a new member or we have someone that may
be promoted to a new position, we have the ability to train them on how to follow a
process to accurately look at an invoice, question it or approve it and we move it forward
and all of these have also been coordinated with our Finance Department. Our controller
Rita Cunningham she's reviewed all of them, provided some input. We included that input
and we are happy to let you know today these are in place and working. They are
available on our intranet site. They are part of our on boarding, part of our training
program and from our perspective this observation is closed. The next observation was
the review and documentation on change orders. This was another practice -- an activity
that is ongoing with our project managers and our purchasing department. We don't move
on change orders unless there is communication. This right here formalizes what that
communication is. It's tells the why. So, there is already a form that's in place for change
orders. We took that form, our engineering team worked with Keith Watts in purchasing
and we made upgrades to that form, so that we could really tell the why a change order is
necessary. So, you will see in Attachment B that the form has been updated, it's
implemented, it is in use, so that now the why is being told on change orders. So, from
our perspective as well this observation has been complied with. The next observation is
audit clause and that was one that was identified in legal with some support from
purchasing, so, essentially, an audit clause is the ability for the city to audit the work that a
firm or a consultant is performing for us contractually. So, if we want to look at what their
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 10 of 68
payroll, their costs, their business controls, there budget, things like that, we have the
authority within this to do those things and that -- we have always had that authority, it just
hadn't been as stipulated, as specific as we have made it. Now, there is really two type of
contractors we work with. There is one for construction and, then, the other one that's
kind of the outlier is an AIA agreement and that is the American Institute of Architects. So,
kind of a design of a vertical building. So, what we were able to do was take the language
that is in all of our standard contracts and take that language and import it into any future
AIA contracts to where it will stipulate we have the ability to perform auditing of that type
of work. So, it was really -- it was in place, it was being conducted. This just reduces the
city's liability in and around AIA specific agreements.
Bird: Mike, can I interrupt?
Pepin: Yes, sir.
Bird: I have got a -- I have got a --
De Weerd: Are you on?
Bird: Yeah. I'm on. I have got a heartburn with some of Attachment C -- and not being
able to read this, you know, yet completely, I have no problem with an audit on a time and
material job, but on a bid job I do, because the contractor bids the jobs to do it for X
amount of dollars and as long as he's doing his job and our project manager is saying he's
-- you know, if he turns in 50 percent pay and he's got 50 percent of the deal done, we pay
him a 60 percent. I don't think it's our job to go back and find how much he spent or how
much he's making. He bid that. Now, on a time and material I do agree with that where --
and, you know, where you're saying, okay, you can have ten percent markup on your
costs, then, I think we should do that. But on a contract -- bid contract I have a real
problem and being a subcontractor for 42 years I didn't -- it wasn't -- really wasn't -- unless
the owner give me the job on a time and material, it wasn't really his business how much I
was making, as long as I did a good sufficient job, got it in on time and I -- I'm open to it,
Mike, but I -- it's something that we need to really think about I think. Are we going to
harm our bidding process? Are we going to have people say I'm not doing this -- I'm not
bidding to the city because of this. It's something we need to really think about and I'm
glad you brought it out at this point.
Pepin: Okay.
Bird: Thanks, Mike.
Watts: Mr. Bird?
Bird: Yes.
Watts: Keith Watts. That -- that audit clause has actually been in our contract since I
have been an employee, so it's been in our contracts for the last ten years. What wasn't
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 11 of 68
in was in the AIA agreement, so we haven't had any issues with it before and our bidders
do have the opportunity to disclose or to state that something is proprietary. It's in our
RFP processes and I don't think that's necessarily the intent of that agreement anyway.
Bill maybe able to speak to that -- to some legal terms of why that needs to be in our
contract. I know for grant contracts especially we have to be able to audit any grant work
that's done, but Bill might be able to add something to that as well.
Bird: Excuse me, Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: Before Bill -- yeah. On the grant, anytime you bring federal in you should be
auditing wages, because they have -- they have to be to the Bacon Davis wage.
Watts: That is correct.
Bird: Our money -- our state money don't have to be. I mean I don't disagree with what
you -- I wonder -- I wonder if it's -- if instead of getting ten people to bid on a job we are
only getting one or two, if this -- I mean it's -- have we had any key come back with it
scratched out?
Watts: I never have, sir, no.
Bird: Okay.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Bill.
Nary: Members of the Council, Council Member Bird, as Keith stated, all of the standard
contracts that we have prepared have this clause in it. The only ones that didn't were the
AIA contracts and pointed out to the review that that was a direction we had received from
counsel to not put any to AIA contract and that was why it wasn't included, but -- so all we
are doing is adding that provision to the AIA agreement. That's the only change.
Bird: Okay. And, like I said, I'm open.
Pepin: Okay. You're welcome. Observation number four from the reviewer was a
notification of irregularities. This was found in HR and the irregularities -- if you look at
Attachment D in your packet that we handed out, this was actually one of the first items
that was implemented in response to the report. We have formalized and have always
had something in place to address irregularities and if I can use the term chain of
command, if you feel there is something unethical, immoral, or irregular in work being
conducted, you have a chain of command to express those concerns as an employee.
That's always been in place and still is in place today, but encouraged. What the review
felt was another opportunity -- it is a confidential way to report certain things that could be
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 12 of 68
irregular. So, what HR did was work with a third party firm out of North Carolina. We also
know here in January they lost what is called the complianc e line and that's where
unethical or these types of situations can be submitted in a confidential manner and, then,
handled by the city as they deem appropriate. So, again, we added another layer to work
that we had in place already. Observation number f ive, conflicting policies addressing
gifts. This was, essentially, an observation to provide alignment. HR had one policy
addressing gifts and purchasing had another -- excuse me -- policy addressing gifts. So,
the Legal team, Finance team, the HR team met, discussed it and the decision was made
to remove policy from the purchasing policy that addresses gifts and adopt the policy that
HR has on record. So, when you see purchasing bring updated purchasing policy to you
next week for review of the draft changes that are going to be proposed, this will be one of
them that's included in there and, really, what it does is bring us in alignment with what
was already on record anyways and provides clarity in that instance. So, it's -- it's
identified as open, but can easily be closed through the work with the purchasing policy.
Observation six addressing -- excuse me -- procedure addressing the statement of
qualifications process. This was another one where there was an informal process in
place. We formalized it through the purchasing team developing to SOP that you see in
Attachment F that identifies the process we go through in terms of statement of
qualifications. Observation seven. Additional work awarded change orders. We are
talking a little bit about change orders again. I talked earlier about the form that's
developed that is in use and typical practice. We made another edit to that form. That's
on the front page towards the bottom in Attachment G where now we also can provide
some more clarity in and around -- checking a reason for the change order. So, our
project managers have the ability to provide a little more information in and around
projects and the reason for the change order. Also this form with added information
becomes part of the project file. It can be referred to later on if you want to do any type of
investigation, trending, things like that with change orders, a little bit more information on
the forms moving forward. Observation eight, agreement to addressing change order
pricing. So, language has been included to all city construction contracts, including the
modified AIA agreements that we just discussed and that language is available to review
on -- excuse me -- in Attachment on H. And this is another situation where we improved
basically what was in place, we just added some language to reduce a little liability to the
city.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mike, a clarification. This is unit pricing, but what about -- what about -- maybe I'm
being Devil's advocate when I shouldn't be, but what -- what about the contractor that --
that bids his job at X amount of markup and, then, the -- then when the change orders
come in the markup goes like this, because they have got you over the barrel. Isn't there
a way we could put in our contracts -- and it does in contracts on change orders only give
you a certain amount of a markup, like you can have five or ten or -- ten percent overhead
has been the normal that I have -- that I have seen, but haven't seen one for 13 years
now, but I -- the unit price is not a problem and if the materials has went up in six months
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 13 of 68
they have to prove it. When on a -- just a regular contract when there is a change order
comes in and you need the pricing, we should be able -- instead of -- he bid the job to get
the job at ten percent markup and, then, he's got to work -- and, then, he's got a change
order that he knows you got to have, and he can mark it up 25 or 30, it's not fair. And I tell
you it is done.
De Weerd: Keith, do you want to comment?
Watts: Yeah. Typically, as Mike was explaining it and as Keith alluded to -- or, excuse
me, Councilman Bird alluded to, our schedule of values are set in our line item
construction contract, so if somebody -- if you have an increase in quantity, regardless of
the time, the -- the quantity and the price stating for that line item cannot change, it is
bound by that, so --
Bird: I understand that.
Watts: -- if they want a higher profit or whatever, it's not available and I thi nk Councilman
Bird is alluding to something that is outside of the norm of the contract that wasn't in that
schedule of values.
Bird: I -- excuse me, Mayor. I -- this -- to me this -- we are not going over this procedure
deal just for Public Works. W e got other things -- other buildings and stuff that we have
built and this has got to be an overall city procedure that every department adheres to.
There is a difference between unit price -- when you build -- when you build a building it's
hard to get a unit price. I mean I have never seen one bid that way.
Watts: Correct.
Bird: I mean by square footage. But that's never -- rarely well done. So, there is -- there
is a difference. But we have got to have a procedure that everybody in this city, when
they get a contract, regardless of what department, goes by this procedure, the
contractors know we are going by this procedure, it's just not Public Works and I think -- I
think this is great for unit price, but I think also if we are bidding a job that isn't unit priced
out, which I don't -- I'd have to see one of your building contracts to see if you ever priced
out by unit. But, anyway, that's when we need to have a limit and it's stuck in your
standard -- it's an amendment to the standard AIA contract and there is nothing wrong
with it.
Watts: Yeah. Councilman Bird --
Bird: And we are just all looking at Public Works, which I understand when you're going
under the ground and stuff, yeah, per mile or per foot, you can do it, right, Mike?
Pepin: Uh-huh.
Bird: But when you're building city hall you can't.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 14 of 68
Watts: Correct. And you are right, with our building construction and the way that is --
those are bid out, they are bid out as packages and not line items. That is correct.
Bird: And so --
Watts: And I think that would be -- and it would probably -- it would be a modification to
the AIA bidding documents as well.
Bird: An amendment to them, just like every owner does with the AIA.
Watts: Correct. That would be an AIA modification that we would do on a building
modification and we can look into that and formalize that as well.
Bird: Because we are going for the whole city, not for Public Work.
Watts: Correct. And this is the order form that we use for the whole city. This is not just a
Public Works document. This is a purchasing document that we use for the entire city, but
I will get with Mr. Nary and see if we can't formalize something for building construction
with the AIA documents as well.
Bird: I hate to be a pain in the head, but --
Watts: Yeah. I understand completely where you're coming from.
Bird: I just want something that is clear for everybody in the city.
Watts: Correct.
Bird: And I mean I just -- and I want contractors to be happy to work for us.
Pepin: Thank you, Councilman Bird. Moving to observation number nine.
Documentation and awarded task orders. This was a -- Public Works took the lead on this
with the support of purchasing. We utilized the task order checklist that purchasing
provides when we process any task orders, so we made some improvements in response
to this observation to the task order checklist that is provided and Attachment I in your
checklist. So, again, this is another form of an observation to where we didn't -- there was
no -- nothing wrong identified, it was just an improvement to an existing procedure where
we can provide more documentation in and around the order. It was a gray area at the
bottom of that task order and you can see where the PO will be able to identify the reason
-- and/or reasons why a consultant was selected for a specific task order and that -- that
form is in place and used already. Observation number ten. The City of Meridian utilizes
multiple delivery methods. This is the one that Tom mentioned and I alluded to earlier, the
one that we -- I'm going to turn the floor over to Mr. Nary to lead us in discussion on this
where we are going to need some direction from the Council as we move forward on how
to address this observation. So, Mr. Nary, I would turn it over to you.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 15 of 68
Nary: Thank you, Mike. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this was a particular
one where the methodology they were talking about, this process didn't exist previously. It
was initiated and it originally, most of you know, by the legislature in regards to the capital
project. So, it wasn't a big available for local government to use as a -- as a method of
contracting, so all we have had for a number of years is the CM process that we have
used like for City Hall or the general contractor process. This does exist now in code and
so what we were proposing to do is work with the Purchasing Department and, then,
target a future project of the city to pilot this type of method and what we need to come up
with is some criteria to help you folks make that decision that this is the right project to do
it on. We think it's something that maybe we could be done, for example, on a park
project or something like that and try to -- we will come up with some criteria, have the
discussion with you at a future Council meeting and in a workshop and outlining what the
law allows us to do, why this would be an advantageous one to consider and, then, get
that direction at that time. So, it is open, like Mike said, because we haven't had a project
yet come in front of you to consider for this type of method, but we think we will probably
have one in the near future and we will have that conversation again.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Sorry, I'm confused. Mike, the document that we have in J is the same as I?
Pepin: Uh-huh. Council Women -- Council Woman Milam, yes, there is no attachment for
this observation, it was just purely conversation. The next one I'm going to get to is an
update to the previous attachment.
Milam: So, do we need this in here twice? So, it goes along with J as well?
Pepin: I will explain it here in a minute --
Milam: Okay.
Pepin: -- if you let me.
Watts: Thank you, Councilman Milam. Mike, she might be alluded to the cha nge order --
Pepin: Yeah.
Milam: Yeah.
Watts: Correct.
Pepin: I should have put a blank page in there that said that don't get confused here. So,
sorry.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 16 of 68
De Weerd: You passed the test.
Milam: It would have been less confusing.
Pepin: So, observation number ten, as Mr. Nary has mentioned, will be open we will be
bringing that back to you to identify a future project. Moving on to observation number 11.
That is fee negotiations, which is -- we took the opportunity in this observation to utilize an
existing form, which is the task order checklist, so you saw that in observation nine, we
made an adjustment down in the lower area for the PMs to provide the reason why the
consultant was chosen. We also provided an update to that form that addressed this
observation as well with that one tool to where a PM can now provide a brief justification
at the bottom of that checklist as to the fee negotiations that were -- that was undertaken
with the consultant of the firm. So, that form really addressed two observations, so that's
why you kind of see it if you click it to -- in the compliance report that we provided you.
Milam: Thank you.
Bird: And, Mike, are we talking about the form that -- excuse me -- the form under J?
Pepin: Yes, sir.
Bird: That's what I thought.
Pepin: Yeah. The gray area at the bottom is to be filled out by the project manager, so
you can see why they were selected and, then, fee negotiations, Councilman Bird, as
you're very well aware, they happen via phone, face to face, via e-mail. What we are
trying to do is capture that, document it so you have an historical record of the
negotiations.
Bird: And it looks like this form, just looking at it fast, covers the underground utilities and
stuff, plus the building of a building.
Pepin: It would.
Bird: It would cover -- it covers all the area of construction that the city would ever be into.
Pepin: Councilman Bird, I can ask purchasing to weigh in, but I believe -- because this is
a universal form regardless of whether you work in public safety or public works, you're
not going to get a task order through unless you have this document.
Bird: And it looks like it covers everything. Thanks, Mike.
Watts: Councilman Bird, just to let you know, we use this for contracts and task orders, so
it does cover it --
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 17 of 68
Bird: Good.
Watts: -- all of it. Yes.
Pepin: And the last observation was the custodian of policies and procedures. This one
is still open. This is the one when it was identified we didn't catch it that actually under city
policy HR -- they are the custodians of our policies and procedures and it was identified
that Legal was. So, there was a little bit of communication gap on who was going to
handle this one when we started, but when we got into it and started doing the work we
realized this really isn't a Legal thing, HR should take the lead on this and they are and
Mr. Nary and the legal team are going to work with Crystal and the HR team to develop a
formalized way to manage and be a custodian of our procedures and policy. What they
provided in Attachment K is just some language that department directors and other staff
members in the city can utilize if they put together a procedure and just to be beware of it,
so that when they do go and formalize a policy around the custodian of these procedures,
we are already in alignment and they will be bringing that back to you just to make sure
that -- well, there is really two things, the observation in and around these team at risk and
this last one right here that we haven't fully closed the door on.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: Mike, when we get this together and get it back -- because our policy, with the
purchasing policy that we are going to look at next week, then, we adopt a policy that
goes up there and we can live by, tremendous reply to this report. I appreciate it. It's
good. Each one of councilmen and the Mayor need to look through it and read it and if we
have got -- I hope I'm not talking out of line, but if we got any questions or something we
need to e-mail them to you, we see things that we have a heartburn or something, we
would e-mail them to you, because we know Mr. Barry is going on a nice vacation down
where it's warm and -- is that okay?
Pepin: Councilman Bird, absolutely. Yes.
Bird: Because I think -- I think this is -- to my fast observation, it's a tremendous piece of
work that we -- that will help the whole city in doing construction jobs. It will save the city
money in the long run by a long shot and we will all know what we are doing. We will do it
on one way and one way only. So, thank you very much and I appreciate it.
Pepin: You're welcome, Councilman Bird.
Bird: Now I'd like to hear some of the other Council.
Pepin: And I'd just like to close and, then, obviously, open it up for any questions that you
may have while I'm here. The goals and objectives of the construction program are to
complete projects on time, within budget, and in accordance with specifications. This is
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 18 of 68
straight from the senior reviewer that some of you met -- the city has been successful in
meeting its overall goals and objectives and those are right out of the -- the report and if I
can reiterate the 12 observations, six of them we are formalizing work that was already in
place and being conducted very well. Five of them were improvements to in place policies
or procedures, no violations. We still have a couple open items that we will work on and
get back to you and if you do have anything in response to the attachments, the slide
show, or the actual report itself, you can -- you can contact me. So, at this time I'd stand
for any questions with my colleagues, so --
De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Just -- Mike, a quick clarification point. Do these slides when it shows
compliance, is that compliance as determined by your work group? Is that compliance
determined by McGladrey? A combination?
Pepin: Madam Mayor, Councilman Cavener, that is determined by the four departments
that were involved. There was -- there was no set expectation or standard from the actual
reviewer or the firm that conducted the review. This was something internally that we
worked with our Council president liaison and the Madam Mayor to determine compliance
or open items. So, we took the initiative ourselves to draw a line in the sand on what
compliance was. And I will remind you and the other Council that there weren't any
violations. So, it was up to us to take this news and do something with it and we took all
of it and we did have conversations with the reviewer and we did have collaboration back
and forth on a few things that we felt we were acting appropriately with and we were and
they agreed and they commended us for that. But these were the 12 that we landed on
and knew that there could be improvements or upgrades to existing that we wanted to put
the work into.
Cavener: Great. Thank you.
Pepin: You're welcome.
Barry: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Who said --
Bird: Tom.
De Weerd: It's like --
Barry: I'm still here.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 19 of 68
De Weerd: -- I knew it wasn't God.
Barry: I just wanted to add maybe some confidence to Councilman Cavener's question.
Keep in mind that the action plans that were developed by the departments were in
coordination with the reviewers of the McGladrey corporation. So, what we have done
simply here is follow through on those action items that were developed and reviewed in
coordination with the reviewers from the McGladrey company. So, everything that's been
presented tonight is in alignment with those action items, which were presented to the City
Council as a plan going forward and we are also in alignment with what the reviewers had
mentioned and recommended for us. So, you have I guess sort of an indirect stamp of
approval that what we have done here is in alignment with the action plans that were
approved or more or less reviewed and approved by the McGladrey corporation. So, just
wanted to mention that as well.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Mike, I was curious about the compliance line.
Pepin: Uh-huh.
Milam: How -- if you know how well that's been utilized or --
De Weerd: Think have had one phone call.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I did speak to Crystal Ritchie, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and one of
the things -- they did roll out an introduction to all employees in January and, then, they
have a -- essentially a communication plan going forward on how to refresh that to bring
that back through the employee newsletters and through some other methods internally in
the city just to remind folks that it's there. So, they plan on not just leaving it with just the
one announcement back in January, but to refresh that every few months to remind folks
that it exists.
Milam: Wonderful. Thank you.
De Weerd: And I would say that when they rolled it out they also -- they did have the
communication plan, but it's also been reiterated at each department meeting as we
discuss the employee assessment survey results. It was reiterated then as well. So, it's
been mentioned a couple times.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 20 of 68
Pepin: And it's visible in workplaces on bulletin boards in the environment with the
attachments you see there, those are the poster items that are up and visible in the
specific locations, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Bird: Thank you, Mike.
De Weerd: I appreciate all the work that's been put into this and that all departments are
working together and you came with a unified presentation and, Mike, happy anniversary
and, Tom, go and celebrate your son's birthday. Is anyone here for the item that was
requested to be continue, Item 9-F? The applicant has requested this item be continued.
They are still working out a couple of additional outstanding issues that -- I don't know if it
will change the presentation or not, but that is why it's been requested to continue, so just
want to make sure that no one is going to stay here until that item to fin d it's going to be
continued.
Item 9: Action Items
A. Final Plat for Reflection Ridge Subdivision No. 5 (H-2016-0010)
by Schultz Development, LLC Located 575 E. Rumple Lane
1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Fifty-Three (53)
Building Lots and Nine (9) Common Lots on 18.88 Acres of
Land in the R-8 Zoning District
B. Final Plat for Reflection Ridge Subdivision No. 6 (H-2016-0015)
by Schultz Development, LLC Located West of S. Locust Grove Road
and South of E. Victory Road
1. Request: Final Plat Approval Consisting of Thirty-Nine (39)
Building Lots and Five (5) Common Lots on 12.75 Acres of
Land in the R-8 Zoning District
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-A is on Final Plat H-2016-0010. I will turn this over to staff.
Watters: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application before
you is a request for a final plat application. This site consists of 18.88 acres of land. It's
zoned R-8. Located approximately a half mile north of East Amity Road and a quarter
mile east of South Meridian Road. The proposed plat depicts 53 single family residential
building lots and nine common lots on 18.88 acres of land in an R-8 zoning district. All of
the lots proposed in this space comply with the dimensional standards of the district. A
variance was approved in 2009 that allowed Blocks 9 and 14 to exceed the maximum
block length allowed in residential districts. The location of the multi-use pathway along
the Farr Lateral at the south and west boundaries of the site and that -- if you can see my
pointer here, that's where the Farr Lateral runs right here. There is a multi-use pathway
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 21 of 68
that was required along there and the applicant has changed the location of that to the
front side of these buildings and that has been approved by the Parks Department. Staff
finds the proposed final plat to be in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary
plat as required. Matt Schultz has submitted written testimony in response to the staff
report. He is the applicant's representative. He is in agreement with the staff report,
except for condition number eight -- that's site specific condition number eight, which
requires the Farr Lateral to be piped or otherwise covered unless waived by Council. The
applicant requests a waiver to allow the lateral to remain open due to the large capacity of
the facility. He says that it would take approximately a 30 inch diameter pipe to pipe the
facility. To preserve public safety, the applicant proposes to fence off the common lot
where the waterway is located with a six foot tall vinyl fence. Staff will stand for any
questions.
De Weerd: Any questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to make comment?
Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Schultz: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. Matt Schultz. 8421 South Ten Mile
in Meridian. Here on behalf of Schultz Development. We are the development consultant
for the land owner, which is Mission Coast Properties for this -- these are the last two
phases of Reflection Ridge Subdivision. I'm actually here for phase five and phase six.
So, my comments are going to apply to both. They both have the Farr Lateral in them.
Between the two plats we are talking about tonight there is 92 lots. Fifty-three in phase
five and 39 in phase six. The project's turned out wonderfully. We are kind of wrapping it
up, coming down the home stretch here. Hopefully I won't be back in front of you for
anything to do with Reflection Ridge, knock on wood. This is it. We are going to go build
phase five this summer and phase six probably this time next year and finish it off. From
time to time -- not on all projects, but from time to time it becomes appropriate to request a
waiver of your policy which says, basically, pipe all ditches. Over the years -- you know,
two or three times over the years we have requested and Council has granted where
appropriate -- and I think this is one of those cases -- locations where it is appropriate for it
to be left open. The Farr Lateral, unlike the Ridenbaugh Canal, is under the jurisdiction of
the Boise Project Board of Control, which is essentially federal -- it's oversight by the
Bureau of Reclamation and the federal government. They don't allow anything to be done
inside their -- their easement. They would allow it to be piped, but they don't allow any
pathways, any landscaping, anything that would allow it to be beautified and essentially
utilized. We asked them if we could put a pathway in that easement and they said no,
you know, unless you want to go to congress or something. I don't know. We just said
okay. That's just how they are. And your Parks Department was open to us moving that
pathway to the front. It's a ten foot still. It's a detached planter strip with trees. Your
Parks is open as to moving at least the pathway to the front instead of the back, which is
good. Now we are left with a 40 foot easement that we are deciding what we want to do
with it and if we put pipe in it it's just going to be 40 foot no man's land that the HOA has to
maintain. It's about waist deep as far as a ditch, but the water level is about calf deep. It's
not very deep, not very wide, it's fairly flat. Because it's flat the hydrau lics require a pretty
large pipe. Thirty inches is considered a large pipe in the industry and other waivers, like
Kingsbridge a few years ago that Council granted a waiver for a 30 inch pipe in the Boise
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 22 of 68
Project Board of Control on the perimeter. Almost identical situation. The HOA still will be
responsible to maintain the area. We would rather leave it open as a unofficial amenity, if
you will. We are not doing anything to it, other than keeping the weeds down. But we
think it would be nice to leave the water open as long as it's not a safety hazard and it's
not a safety hazard to leave it open. We are going to fence it off. We are going to
maintain it and you -- this Council granting a waiver would be consistent with previous
councils -- and I know this Council is different. But previous Council granting waiver for a
very similar situation across the other side. This is looking -- obviously this is looking east.
See if I can remember how to do this. Oops. I moved something accidentally.
Watters: I'm not sure it's going to work, Matt.
Schultz: We will see. No. Anyway, on that -- on this -- this side towards the mountains is
where our fence will be. It's -- you can see it's about waste level, but the actual water
level is down there in the bottom, it's three or four feet deep. It's fairly -- it's a nice, little
calm -- little brook in the summer between April and October. It's dry in the winter. It's a
delivery ditch, it's not a -- it's not a drain and as such -- across over here to the south is
the gravel pit, abandoned gravel pit. It's not abandoned, they are filling it up right now.
But it's -- they are not extracting gravel out. They are bringing stuff in occasionally. So,
we think it's a good location to grant the waiver. We think it's safe and we think it's
consistent with some other projects you granted the waiver on and for that reason we ask
for your approval on phase five, as well phase six for this waiver. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Matt. Council, any questions?
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I don't -- well, I don't have a problem with it as long as it's safe and fenced. That's
always my number one. But I just had a question about your -- your multi-pathway.
Schultz: Yes.
Milam: Because it looks like a sidewalk. How is it different from -- where she pointed to it
looks like it's -- just because it's in front of the houses isn't that called a sidewalk?
Schultz: Yes. It's actually ten foot, so it's not -- sidewalks are five. So -- it is in front. So,
it is like a sidewalk in terms of its location. However, in the rear it would have been in a
slope, in kind of a tunnel, if you will, and not open to any policing or anything else. People
looking down into the backyards. So, we thought it better to be in the front. Have it more
open. But it is ten foot, just like the pathway would have been ten feet.
Milam: Okay. Thank you.
Schultz: Yeah.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 23 of 68
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Thank you, Matt.
Schultz: Thank you.
De Weerd: So, Council, in front of you is a final plat for Reflection Ridge in both Item 9 -A
and B.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we approve final plat for Reflection Ridge Subdivision No. 5, H-2016-
0010, with all staff and applicant comments.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Before I second it, does that include waiving the --
Milam: Oh. Yes.
Bird: To include waving the tiling of the ditch?
Milam: Yes. Include waiving the tiling of the ditch.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9-A with the change requested
by the applicant. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, ye a; Little Roberts,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Item 9-B.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we approve the final plat for Reflection Ridge Subdivision No. 6,
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 24 of 68
H-2016-0015, with all staff and applicant comments, and including the waiving of the tiling
of the lateral.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9-B with the changes as noted
in the motion. Any discussion? Madam Clerk.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
C. Public Hearing for Shops at Victory Vacation (H-2016-0017) by
White-Leasure Development Company Located 3210 S. Eagle Road
1. Request: Vacation of a Ten (10) Foot Wide Public Utility
Easement that was Created with the Amended Plat of Lots 3,
4, 5, 6 and 7 of Golden Eagle Estates Subdivision
De Weerd: Item 9-C is a public hearing for Shops at Victory vacation. It's H-2016-0017. I
will open the public hearing with staff comments.
Beach: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is an application for a vacation for
the Shops at Victory. Get there on my slide there. The southeast corner of Victory Road
and Eagle Road. The applicant is requesting approval to vacate a portion of a ten foot
wide public utility easement located on the northwest corner boundary of Lot 3 of Golden
Eagle Estates Subdivision. As I said the easement is ten feet wide and covers
approximately 0.037 acres of land. The -- a concept plan was approved with the
annexation of the property back in 2008. This concept plan shows that a building pad site
lies directly over the easement in question. The applicant is requesting this vacation of a
public utility easement for the purpose of constructing a future commercial building on the
site as depicted on the approved concept plan. The applicant has received approval from
all the applicable public utilities to vacate the easement. Staff did not receive any written
testimony and staff is recommending approval.
De Weerd: Thank you, Josh. Council, any questions?.
Bird: None.
De Weerd: Is the applicant here this evening? Good evening. If you will, please, state
your name and address for the record.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 25 of 68
Huber: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Jeff Huber. The address is
8385 West Emerald and I represent the applicant.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Huber: And we are in agreement with the staff report.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. Council, any questions for the applicant?
Thank you.
Huber: Thank you.
De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony
on this item? Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Seeing none, I move we close the public hearings on H-2016-0017.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing Item 9-C. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve H-2016-0017 and include all staff and applicant comments.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9-C. Any discussion by
Council? Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 26 of 68
D. Public Hearing for Quenzer Vacation (H-2016-0016) by Prestige
Homes, Inc. Located 3997 N. Quenzer Way
1. Request: Vacation of a plat note #5 form the Quenzer
Commons Subdivision No. 10
De Weerd: Item 9-D is a public hearing on H-2016-0016. I will open this public hearing
with staff comments.
Beach: Thank you, Madam Mayor. This is a -- an application for a vacation of a plat note.
The site is located at 3997 North Quenzer Way. The application is requesting approval to
vacate a plat note, plat note number five on their recorded plat that requires that Lot 11,
Block 13, take access from North Quenzer Way. If you can see here on the map,
Quenzer is the north-south road here. So, currently the plat requires that this home, once
built, the vacant lot currently take access from Quenzer and the appli cant is requesting
that plat note be vacated, so that they are allowed to take access off East Leighfield Drive.
As I said, the applicant is desiring to construct a single family home on the lot with the
orientation of the home taking access from Leighfield Drive. Staff has received an e-mail
from the Ada County Highway District stating that Leighfield Drive is not designated as a
collector, which was the case back when this was originally approved. This was a
condition imposed by the Ada County Highway District and staff has received approval
from the highway district of the proposed change and with that staff is recommending
approval and did not receive any written testimony from any citizens. Stand for any
questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Josh. Council, any questions? Okay. Is the applicant here?
Good evening.
McMonigle: Good evening, Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Pat McMonigle.
2701 Table Rock Road. And I'm in agreement with the staff's recommendation.
De Weerd: Thank you, Pat. Council, any questions for the applicant? This is a public
hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this item? Okay.
Council, seeing no public testimony and no further questions for applicant or staff, do I
have a motion to close?
Cavener: Madam Mayor, I move that we close the public hearing on the Quenzer
vacation H-2016-0016.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 9-D. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 27 of 68
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Luke.
Cavener: I move that we approve Item No. 9-D, Quenzer vacation, H-2016-0016 and
include staff and applicant testimony.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9-D. Any discussion by
Council? Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
E. Public Hearing for Brinegar Prairie Subdivision (H-2015-0046) by
Suggs Community Solutions Located 2220 N. Ten Mile Road
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 23.46 Acres of Land
with an R-8 Zoning District
2. Title Amended to read: Request: Preliminary Plat Approval
Consisting of Ninety-Six (96) Building Lots and Twelve (12)
Common Lots on 22.6 Acres of Land in a Proposed R-8
Zoning District
De Weerd: Item 9-E is a public hearing on H-2015-0046. I will open this public hearing
with staff comments.
Beach: Thank you, Madam Mayor. This is the -- an application for Brinegar Prairie
Subdivision for annexation and zoning and for a preliminary plat approval. The site
consists of 23.46 acres of land currently zoned RUT in Ada County, located at 2220 North
Ten Mile Road on the east side of North Ten Mile north of West Cherry Lane. There is no
history on the project. It's -- as I said, it's a parcel in the county currently. As you can see
on the map here it is surrounded by single family residential dwellings, all currently zoned
R-4. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map is medium density residential, which
is consistent with -- with what they are applying for and with the surrounding
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 28 of 68
neighborhood. The applicant has submitted an application for annexation and zoning of
that 23.46 acres of land with a proposed R-8 zoning district. A preliminary plat is also
proposed consisting of 96 single family reside ntial building lots and 12 common lots on
22.6 acres of land for the Brinegar Prairie Subdivision. The applicant has applied to
annex and zone a total of 23.46 acres and, as I said, in the R-8 zoning district and it is
consistent with the future land use map. The plat consists of 96 single family residential
lots and the average lot size is approximately 6,536 square feet. The proposed gross
density of the subdivision is 4.25 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with both the
density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed R-8 zoning district.
Staff has reviewed the proposed plat for compliance with the dimensional standards listed
in the UDC for R-8 district and found the plat in compliance with those standards. The
minimum lot size for a single family detached dwelling is 5,000 square feet, with 50 feet of
frontage. Street lighting is required to be installed with the development in accord with the
city's adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. The applicant shall provide six
foot tall privacy fencing along the border of the subdivision. The internal common lots the
applicant is proposing to construct four foot tall vinyl fencing consistent with the fencing
standards set forth in the UDC. Based on the area of the preliminary plat, which is 22.6
acres, a minimum of 2.3 acres or ten percent of open space is required to be provided on
site. The applicant has proposed ten percent or approximately 2.4 acres in compliance
with the UDC. The amenities for the development include a play structure, a community
park, and several micropaths. The Rutledge Lateral runs across the site and will be tiled
as part of the development. The existing irrigation easement bisecting the property is to
be relinquished and replaced with a new easement as depicted on the submitted plans.
No structures, other than fences, are to be built within the easement without the approval
of the easement holder, which is the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. The applicant has
submitted conceptual building elevations for the future homes in this development and
building materials are proposed to consist of board and batten, stone accents, covered
front porches, et cetera. Staff is in favor of the proposed elevations with their associated
architecture features and I will show you those -- a picture of those show in just a second.
As a review of the Commission public hearing, Dave Bailey was in favor. There was none
in opposition. Several folks commented. Jeff and Claire Chappel. Patrick Cunningham.
Deborah Hoberg. Randy Witt. Daren Welch. Michael Mattson. Peggy Gardner. David
Fulkerson. Randy Zegatta. Mike Miller. And Dave Washbaugh. Written testimony was
received by Shawn Brownlee, the applicant's representative. And staff representing the
application as Josh Beach, myself. Other staff commenting was Bill Parsons and Ted
Baird. Key issues of discussion by Commission that would work. Traffic on Chateau, the
location of the bus stop on North Ten Mile Road, location of North Swainson Avenue in
relation to North Ten Mile Road. Key issues of discussion were, as I said, those streets to
the Commission, changes to the staff recommendation. The Commission requires the
applicant to submit a revised preliminary plat showing the change to the location of the
street connection of West Chateau. So, as you see this is their preliminary plat that was
brought from Planning and Zoning and this was the -- the street question. The Planning
and Commission recommended that they move this further to the east to accommodate
some of the issues of concern from the neighbors and in doing so created a couple of
other issues that we need to address as far as the code is concerned and that's why I
have here that we will show that going back here that this is th e plat that was brought to
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 29 of 68
the Commission and this is the revised plat being brought to the Council. So, in moving
the street further to the east it created an issue with the cul -de-sac. It exceeded the
UDC's requirement for the block length and so there was some -- some changes made
and the applicant decided to connect the road here and in doing so adjusted some of the
lot sizes on the south. So, these are -- this is the memo that was forwarded to the Council
and just to read that and so including those two additional common lots, realignment of
North Swainson Avenue, which is this street here, which does no longer connect directly
to Chateau, but it's lined up with an existing street from the -- from the previous version of
the plat. Realignment of the interior streets to meet the block length -- length
requirements and the applicant increased the number the lots and reduced the lot sizes
along a portion of the southern boundary, which are -- which are these lots here. With
that there are some -- some recommended changes by staff to meet code. So, we
included a DA provision 1.1.1B should read: Because several of the lots front on arterial
or collector streets, all of these homes shall receive planning division approval prior to
issuance of any building permit. These lots include Lots 3 through 15, Block 1, Lots 2
through 15 and 26 of Block 2. Condition 1.1.3E should read: Lots 7, 19 and 34 of Block 1
shall be constructed in accord with UDC 11-3A-8 and UDC 11-3B-12. So, those are two
to be modified. A couple of new conditions. 1.1.3H, that should read: The applicant shall
submit a revised landscape plan consistent with the revised preliminary plat at the time of
final plat application. We did not receive an updated landscape plan with this -- received a
final plat update, but not a landscape plan, so we want to add that, that the applicant
would submit that at the time of their final plat application. Another new condition, 2.1.3H
to read the applicant shall be required to construction an eight i nch diameter sewer main
for an existing manhole in West Chateau Drive through common Lot 7, Block 1, as
proposed. The width of the common lot shall be a minimum width of 20 feet. With that
staff is recommending approval of the application and I will stand for any questions you
may have.
De Weerd: Josh, I'm --
Beach: Yeah.
De Weerd: I'm sorry, I didn't catch -- Planning and Zoning had a concern with the -- the
western street, so did they approve this or recommend denial?
Beach: They did recommend approval.
De Weerd: It has substantial change that, again, should be considered by Planning and
Zoning. What is -- what is our criteria to -- to look at these plats and the changes that sets
in motion that it be heard or be reverted back to Planning and Zoning?
Beach: So, staff was comfortable, because the lots -- the number of buildable lots has not
changed and so --
De Weerd: The sizes on the southern portion certainly have.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 30 of 68
Beach: And that is the prerogative of Council to make that decisio n to remand it back to
P&Z if you feel that's necessary. Staff felt comfortable at the time making these changes
as a result of the recommendations by P&Z. There were some potentially significant
changes to the layout of the streets and to some of the lot sizes. Now, staff did not
require that the applicant change sizes of the lots on the south. That was something that
they did to accommodate some of the concerns that the planning department had as far
as the length of this -- of what was a cul-de-sac. So, their -- their fix was to connect to the
street here and as a result they decided to alter the sizes of these lots on the south
boundary. As I said, that was not something that staff required of them.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Josh, show -- show me the site again, so -- what is the -- if I recall, all the
subdivisions -- and I think you said it -- are R-4s around it?
Beach: Correct.
Bird: They are all R-4s and here we are coming in with an R-8 that's going to be
massive? Okay. Thank you.
Beach: You're welcome.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for staff at this time? Okay. Is the applicant here?
Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Suggs: Good evening, Council and Mayor. Jane Suggs, 200 Louisa Street in Boise and
I'm here representing Trilogy Development and the Brinegar Prairie Subdivision. First, I
think Josh did a really good job, because it was a little complicated, since we had a
condition that did change our layout. I think that I would like to go over that a little bit. I'd
like to tell you a little bit more about the previous plan, if Josh could put that up. So, first,
just know that we -- with this plan we were in agreement with all the conditions in the
findings of fact that the staff had given us on this original plan. It was the change -- that
was only one change that was added to the P&Z -- after the P&Z meeting to address
some of the concerns of the neighbors. Also I want to tell you that we are agreeable to all
conditions of approval for the new plan that we have brought, too. So, we don't -- we don't
have any conflict with those conditions. So, we really have two plans here that you can
approve tonight. We have the original plan or we have the plan that shows the change
that P&Z requested. This is kind of a special piece of property. The Brinegars have
owned this property for a long time and, in fact, Meridian has sort of grown up around it
and, in fact, this is sort of an enclave and an in-fill piece. You don't think of something like
this as being in-fill, this -- on Ten Mile, but from a mile in every direction there is Meridian
and it is -- we are coming with a zone for R-8, though our density is 4.25. So, very close
to the four units per acre. And R-8 is smack dab in the middle of your medium density
residential that's part of the Comprehensive Plan there. So, we are meeting exactly in the
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 31 of 68
middle where the Comprehensive Plan says we should be. We were very careful in
designing this, so that we met the intent and the policies of Meridian's Comprehensive
Plan and also meeting all the subdivision requirements. The neighbors did voice their
concerns at the P&Z meeting about traffic. Chateau Drive is a collector street and that
has usually a threshold of three to five thousand cars a day. In 2015, which is over -- a
little over year ago the counts were done and the traffic was 1,515. Along with the traffic
the neighbors were pretty concerned about the school buses that stop on Chateau -- well,
on Ten Mile, but just at Chateau. The kids wait for their buses there and also the parents
will line up on Chateau waiting to drop their kids off if it's bad weather or waiting there to
pick them up. That creates a little bit of the conflict we are having with Chateau and Ten
Mile, the buses and the parents waiting. A traffic study was not required by ACHD, but we
-- we heard the neighbors and so after the P&Z meeting we were able to contract with
Dan Thompson at Thompson Engineers, to do kind of a brief study, at least a simply count
of traffic so that we would have something up to date. A few of the neighbors were
concerned with not having up to date traffic numbers. We were -- we did this count this
month and Mr. Thompson determined that the Chateau Drive has a peak directional
volume of 106 in the p.m. peak, which is the highest, and this is much lower than the 425
vehicles that are allowable in the hour of the p.m. peak. So, that's current numbers. He
also found that the Chateau -- intersection of Chateau and Ten Mile now operates at a
level of service C in the a.m. peak. He added the traffic from Brinegar Prairie, it will not
change. He checked the p.m. peak -- no. He checked the a.m. peak and found that it
now serves -- operates at a level of service D, the intersection. He added the traffic from
Brinegar Prairie and the level of service will not change. So, one of the things that I'm
finding as we go through this analysis of traffic is we can move the street, but it's not going
to change the traffic on Chateau and it's not going to change the intersection issues. Also
since the P&Z I was a little concerned with the bus stop on an arterial. Those are 45 mile
an hour streets and you're stopping buses there. Several. I talked to ACHD, they are not
happy about it too much either, as a matter of fact. So, I went and talked to the people
who do the routing at West Ada School. I spent an hour talking to the folks that do the
routing and this is what I found out, that those bus stops can change just about anytime,
depending on where the location of the school districts -- and you know they have been
going through that recently. And also, depending on where the kids live. So, we actually
-- I said, look, if we -- if you will take the bus and you will turn it on Chateau, we will do a
turnout, because we are building that area, Chateau, all the frontage now, which is
unimproved, and we will do a little turn out for the bus and we will even put a simple
shelter there and she said no. She said the only way that the West Ada School District
can meet their bus schedule -- bus budget for gasoline and travel expense is to stay on
the arterials. So, that's something that I think really I would like -- maybe one of these
days we will work out is to try to see if we can't get the buses back, so -- on the collector
streets, kind of off the arterials.
De Weerd: Which is really strange, because they will turn onto Muirfield and pick up kids
on Muirfield across Ten Mile and just north of there, but they won't do it there.
Suggs: But they won't do it there.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 32 of 68
De Weerd: It doesn't make any sense.
Suggs: They won't do it there. I thought, well, gosh, just do it there and turn around in the
subdivision even. We will loop the street. Again, trying to find a solution, because we sort
of like the original alternative and we know that the Planning and Zoning Commissioners
wanted to hear the neighbors and I think they are -- they live there and so they are
concerned. Our issue is that nothing we do where the street goes is going to change the
traffic or the buses. What's going to happen is there are a few properties there on the
northwest corner, if they can't get out in the morning, because there is stacking, they will
just have to go through the other intersection and I have to do that on my street. I'm just
off Warm Springs on the east end and so if I can't get out, which I have a school near me,
Adams, and if it backs up I have to choose another way out of the subdivision. So, it
happens in lots of places where you have schools and buses and that type of thing. So,
as we requested, we did move the street, as P&Z requested and, of course, it -- as Josh
mentioned, it's not that simple. We lined up with Warwick Street -- there we go. Thank
you. And, then, we realized that we didn't meet the cul-de-sac length. We were too long.
And that's when we decided to -- we needed to connect the street. So, we talked to staff,
we had a special meeting with them as we were doing through this to figure ou t, okay,
where are we running into issues. So, we made that connection. Of course you lose lots
there and we thought, well, we can add -- we can keep the number -- or same number of
96 lots that we were approved for if we just changed some dimensions. W e feel pretty
comfortable with those lots. They meet the code. R -8. And they are also separated from
the lots to the south by a 35 foot irrigation easement that has landscaping, trees, a
pathway, a road for the irrigation district, and fencing and light ing. So, 35 feet is more
than you would even ask to separate residential from commercial. Your buffers there are
like 20 to 25 feet. We are going to be 35 feet here. So, we don't think that there is a
compatibility issue because of that separation. Oh, yeah. And one of the things I just
realized as I was working through this, we are meeting the R-8 old dimensions. I think
you have just made some changes to your dimensional standards your in zoning
ordinance. Well, plus there were a couple other things we needed to do. We needed to
use the sewer. One of the reasons you actually put the street originally where it was was
because there is a street across the street and the sewer is there. So, it makes sense to
use the sewer. We still have to use that sewer, so we put a sewer easement through and
that's a pathway and one of the other staff conditions was at one time to move from the
cul-de-sac at the end of Swainson to go to Ten Mile up to loop a water line. We are now
looping the water line within the subdivision, but we are going keep that as a pathway.
So, the more pathways the better. We kept the property owners informed. We tried to at
least. We had a neighborhood meeting on September -- excuse me -- December 7th and
I sent follow-up e-mails to -- the neighbors gave me their e-mails on January 15th to
describe the application we had made. February 2nd to describe some of the changes
that have been made and, then, just last night sent another e-mail kind of explaining what
they were going to see tonight because of the change from P&Z. And, finally, just
Brinegar Prairie can be approved tonight just as the staff presented, the change that was
made to P&Z with the changes and the memo or you could also approve the original
layout if you remove the condition that the P&Z added about moving the street. In all
cases all the conditions of approval we will meet and we are satisfied with all of those.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 33 of 68
So, there are actually two ways to approve this project. I think Brinegar Prairie is going to
be a wonderful addition to Meridian and we ask for your approval of either option and I will
stand for questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Jane. Council, any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Jane, on your revised, what's the average lot size -- square footage on the south
there and also that bunch of -- it looks like apartment houses -- what is the width?
Suggs: Fifty.
Bird: Fifty feet.
Suggs: They are 50 and I'd have to look -- actually blow it up or get a larger scale. Just a
minute and I will get a larger scale.
Bird: There we go. Thank you.
Suggs: They are 50 by 105. So, they are 5,250. Five thousand two hundred and fifty
square feet. Now, that is the old R-8 dimensional standard and you guys just changed
that 4,040 in your change to your code. But we are going by the code that we submitted
for R-8.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Anything further? Yes.
Bird: Yeah. I -- follow-up, please. Jane, I -- I have a real problem. You have got some
real nice size lots on your corners and stuff, but I have a real problem sticking an R -8 with
that small of lot inside of all those R-4s, you know, and I realize that when those were all
done that the City of Meridian was strictly an R-4, but I just -- I just have a real problem. I
have got to really think on that one. I -- I would -- I like the old one where you were -- had
the wider lots to match up and even though there is a 35 foot buffer, that's still 35 foot, you
still -- we would like to see it matched up. But I don't like the street --
Suggs: Well --
Bird: -- configuration that way, so --
Suggs: Well -- and I -- and what about the street is difficult? Is it because P&Z changed it
or -- I mean we are finding out that the traffic is not really going to change, so --
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 34 of 68
Bird: The traffic isn't -- go back to the -- the full one where I can see the whole -- of the
revised, please. There we go.
Suggs: There you go.
Bird: I -- the biggest thing is I think where we are coming out is so much better. You're
kind of -- in the preliminary -- the new -- the original one you were coming out so close to
Ten Mile it was -- had to be dangerous.
Suggs: Well --
Bird: And that had to -- I mean that had to be from a safety point. I can't believe our fire
or police even buy off on that as close as -- you know. I -- coming back on your -- after
they changed it and where you're coming back now -- see where you're coming out, it's an
eighth of a mile back I guess. I don't -- I'm sure you have to have two entrances and exits
in that subdivision. I don't know how you could get by with just one, but that -- while I love
your lot size on the original, the road configuration I don't -- I don't think is safe. That's my
personal opinion.
Suggs: Well, Council Member Bird, can I address that a little bit?
Bird: Sure. You bet.
Suggs: We -- well, the original location of that street is because there is a street right
across the street from there. So, it's -- there is a street already. Swainson goes north
from there. So, there is a street -- ACHD didn't have a problem with it and we didn't hear
any kind of conflict --
Bird: I apologize, I had forgot --
Suggs: Yeah. So, there is a street. And that is really one of the reasons that it's -- do you
-- you know there is a street across the street and it's safe because you're entering and
you see the traffic if there is traffic across the street or if you move it down you have to
now look for traffic coming either way and, then, look around to see if there might b e a car
coming from across, just a few hundre d feet away and so the difference about 200 feet,
maybe, between where the street is and now and it's looking at the number of lots, maybe
two -- 220 feet. So, again, I -- it's just -- this is hard to -- we would have loved to have just
moved the street and kept it. Now, that cul-de-sac length is just a number. I don't know if
it's something that's -- kind of keep us from having long cul-de-sacs, but in this case, you
know, there is a turn, it comes in, it goes to the west and, then, comes down and so that
was the reason we had to make the change, is because there is just a number in your
code that says it can't be that long. So, hopefully, that -- I mean we could go back and not
put that connection in and just you approve a cul-de-sac length that's larger and --
De Weerd: Which is possible.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 35 of 68
Suggs: Yeah.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: The one on the north side in there, you're not -- you're not crossing traffic as you're
coming out of there. If you're turning right -- and I would have to say that -- I would
imagine that 80 percent of the people that come out of that subdivision on that road turn
right to get to Ten Mile. Where if you come out of yours and you're density is twice
almost, you're coming out and if you want to get to Ten Mile you're crossing traffic. You're
crossing traffic. You're crossing eastbound traffic off of Ten Mile. Two wrongs don't make
it right and I think we made it wrong there, but I --
Suggs: I will read from the report if you don't mind.
Bird: Sure.
Suggs: I just want to add a little something here. When Dan Thompson prepared this
analysis -- and we just got this, because he was doing it between the P&Z meeting. With
the addition of site traffic we estimate the intersection will operate at a level service D.
This is the p.m. peak with -- we calculate that the bulk of the -- that the average queue
would be about two vehicles. Now, the queue -- the line up of vehicles waiting average.
Now, we know there are times when there are going to be more and you're right. But
there is about space for six vehicles to queue up there before you actually enter -- enter
into the Swainson intersection, so -- I mean, again, like I said, people that are trying to do
that will find another way to get out. They will go to the other intersection and queue up,
so -- I mean I just think that there is a real opportunity to just keep this original design with
the lots along the bottom again, because we are not really cha nging the traffic
configuration at all by moving that -- by moving that street. If we do move the street we
have to make that connection and we have to kind of adjust our lots a little bit and 35 feet
is pretty big, so --
Bird: Madam Mayor, can I have a follow up --
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Would Josh -- while -- don't leave, Jane. So, would the staff -- were you comfortable
with the -- the original preliminary plat with the street at that area?
Beach: Staff did recommend approval.
Bird: You did -- that's what I thought. You were okay with the -- but the Planning and --
what was the reason Planning and Zoning -- if you were there -- what was their
reasoning?
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 36 of 68
Beach: Most of that was concern from the neighbors.
Bird: Okay. Well, we will have them coming up, too.
Beach: And the traffic on Chateau and the proximity to Ten Mile and having to do with the
bus stop and kids waiting on the street and things like that.
Bird: Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Jane.
De Weerd: Any other questions for Jane at this point? Okay. Thank you. I have several
people signed up. When I call your name if you would like to come forward. Randy Witt.
Signed up under neutral. Randy, if you will, please, state your name and address for the
record.
Witt: I'm Randy Witt and I live at 2823 Kandice -- West Kandice. That's in the Sunburst
Subdivision to the south of this proposed development.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Witt: And, Mayor -- Madam Mayor and Council, thank you very much for letting us speak
tonight and the first thing I would like to say is, Mr. Bird, thank you so much for the
questions you have been asking. I have been at the elementary school meeting. I have
been at the previous hearing and this is the first time I felt like there is someone sitting
there that actually hears what we have been expressing.
Bird: Thank you.
Witt: We have had concerns with the fact that this is zoned R-8 and all of us around -- the
subdivisions around it are R-4 and I know they say the lot size is okay, but I think you
have to figure in -- look at the lot size on most of the lots -- there is a big green area in
there and there is a few big lots, but most of the houses are small lots and so it seems out
of character with all of our subdivisions around there and that makes us concerned about
our house values, what will they -- will they go down in the coming year? We don't know
that, but we ask those questions and we get concerned about the traffic congestion
because of the density of the houses in there, you know, and we think Meridian is a great
place to live, but we feel will our part of Meridian be such a great place to live if this
changes that way and we think that one simple thing this Council could do that would
alleviate probably most of the concerns here would be to simply require that it was
rezoned and replatted to be in harmony with the rest of the subdivisions around it. I think
that would address most of what we are concerned about and I could say more, but right
there, if you would do that for us, I think most of us would leave here satisfied.
De Weerd: Okay. Please don't do that. We appreciate your enthusiasm, but would ask if
you would refrain. Joe Bongiorno signed up neutral. And could probably say that's the
only name I probably won't totally mutilate tonight, so I will apologize in advance. Please
state your name and address.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 37 of 68
Bongiorno: Joe Bongiorno. 2812 West Gemstone Drive, Meridian, Idaho. Thank you,
Madam Mayor and City Council. I am the HOA president for the Sunburst Subdivision,
where Mr. Witt was just talking about. I also agree with Council Member Bird. I have
problems with the R-8 zoning as well. It's -- I mean Josh showed the map. It's -- we are
surrounded by R-4. There -- it doesn't seem -- again as Mr. Witt stated, the harmony is
not there with an R-8. The lot sizes, in my opinion, are too small. Everything in our
neighborhood is large and now you're going to take that 23 acres or whatever it is and jam
all these little houses into it. I know as the HOA president one of my biggest complaints
that I get in my subdivision is with parking and now you're going to have these small
houses -- I can't imagine where people are going to park. So, it's -- there is going to be
issues. As far as approve of one plat or the other -- as others I'm sure are going to be
following me, Chateau is a very busy street. Cars are stacked up in the morning more
than two deep. That first plat there would be -- it would have to be a right turn only out of
the subdivision. There would be no way you can make a left out to get onto Chateau to
get onto Ten Mile. I can guarantee that would not happen. So, again, my biggest
complaint or concern is -- is the zoning and, again, I -- I agree with Mr. Witt that I think if
we were to go R-4, make the lot sizes bigger to match what's surrounding it, I think that
would take away a lot of the heartburn that's going on here. That's all I have. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Margaret Enking. Sign up mixed. Thank you for being
here. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Enking: My name is Margaret Enking. I live at 3100 West Gemstone and that is in the
Sunburst Subdivision.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Enking: And Madam Mayor and Council, thank you. Mr. Witt and Mr. Bongiorno have
spoke very eloquently and it is the lot size that concerns me. I have a lot that is 98 feet
wide and, then, I think of a lot 50 feet wide that is just so dense and it's not just the
immediate area that is zoned R-4, it's several sections on both sides of the area that are
also all R-4s and the R-8 is just so crowded and, yes, I'm concerned about traffic. I walk a
lot. I walk on Chateau and the fact -- I don't think there is really room for six cars before
the Swainson goes north into the subdivision on the other side of Chateau. It's quite busy
and I think adding that many more houses and that many more vehicles is just going to be
very challenging. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Cavener: Madam Mayor, I have a question if I may.
De Weerd: If you -- yes, Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I appreciate your testimony tonight. Can you maybe articulate for us what
access is like off Gemstone onto Ten Mile for you in the morning or in the evening?
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 38 of 68
Enking: Well, I'm retired at this point.
Cavener: Congratulations.
Enking: I know. And there are usually -- I have been retired for two years. There were
usually no more than two or three cars. But Gemstone doesn't go all the way through to
Linder, which Chateau does.
Cavener: Great. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Blaine Tewell. Signed up as mixed. And, Blaine, if you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Tewell: My name is Blaine Tewell. I live at 2953 West Gemstone Drive in the Sunburst
Division. Subdivision. First of all, thanks a lot for spending some time here tonight and
allow us to come forward and express our thoughts and our views and what's on our mind.
Does anybody on this Council or the Mayor or any of the staff members live in these
developments that we live in that are adjacent to this proposed property development?
You're in the same developments we are?
De Weerd: I am in that area, yes.
Tewell: Good. My concern is --
De Weerd: I used to live on West Chateau.
Tewell: Oh.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Tewell: Good. My concern is similar to these. The size of the lots. Mine is 7,800 square
feet. We are looking at 5,200 square feet, approximately. It's about a 30 percent
reduction in size. Unless you're building the Taj Mahal on a small lot like that, it's got to
bring the property values down or at least set the reference point lower than where it is
currently. I'm concerned also about the traffic issue. I can't see where you put 96 homes
in a small area like that. Two cars to a home. That's over 180 vehicles that are going to
be in and out of that development. It's got to impact our area. I think Meridian got it right
the first time with R-4 and I hope they stick with that. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Patrick Cunningham. Signed up against. Okay. Thank you.
John and Regina Behrend. Good evening.
Behrend: Good evening. My name is John Behrend. I live at 2836 West Kandice Street
in the subdivision that -- Sunburst Subdivision.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 39 of 68
De Weerd: Thank you.
Behrend: To address City Councilmen Cavener's question, leaving the Sunburst
Subdivision and trying to turn left and go to Cherry Lane is impossible now that there is
the Walmart down the road from us. You have widened the street and changed the traffic
patterns and it's -- it's either turn right or go out the other direction and wander your way to
find the best way out. There is luckily three ways out. These folks are out of luck. There
is not a good way for them to go where they need to go. That's neither here nor there.
You can optimize it however you would like as far as the traffic goes and I appreciate
Councilman Bird's comments about that. I don't think there is a good solution there.
When I stand out on my back patio on an upper raised deck and I look out right now I see
the field across the settling pond, which there is just an eye sore from our side of it
anyway, but now I'm going to be looking at a number of houses into their backyards from
an elevation. I would just as soon limit the number of backyards that I have to look into
from that standpoint and the smaller lots are going to make more people there, more
traffic, and just -- so, when I said against, I was against the second plat, because of the
added number of houses there, but I see the problems with the first plat as far as the
traffic pattern. So, anyway, thank you very much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Ken Tetrault signed up against. And Monica. Good evening. If
you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Tetrault: Monica Tetrault. 2830 West Gemstone in the Sunburst Subdivision and I am the
vice-president of the HOA and I am in agreement with what has been said. Also I go out
in the mornings and it's difficult to get out both on Cherry Lane and on Gemstone, either
one now with the additional traffic because of construction on Black Cat and also with the
additional speed limit increase, find it just takes a little more. So, I'm in agreement with
what has been said by the previous people. I also am concerned with the lot size, but I
have found our subdivision some of the houses, because of being a little bit smaller, we
have lots of rentals. With lots of rentals we tend to have more problems with people
complying with what is in our HOAs. That's something that that subdivision would have to
be concerned with and I'm also concerned with the first plot that they chose the exiting out
onto Chateau, because there is quite a bit of traffic there. So, I thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Dennis Wickstrom signed up against. Good evening. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Wickstrom: Dennis Wickstrom. 3062 West Kandice Street, Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Wickstrom: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have been at this address for over 20 years
and we have seen Ten Mile go from the two lane to the four lane with the Ten Mile
interchange, which we kind of always wanted and we are thankful to have, but it really
made it an issue getting out of Ten Mile off of Gemstone a nd with this -- I always thought
that this was coming, this development, and when I saw this plan I thought, well, that's
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 40 of 68
doable. I don't like it. But when I saw the second plat it just burned me to think that the y
could rezone and I think that the best thing to do is go back to their original plan. I don't
even know what the setbacks will be with that 50 foot lot, if it will be ten foot on each side.
Then you have got a 30 foot wide house and skinny lots isn't in our plan in Meridian. I
don't think it is. But I will let Pam talk. She has got some other issues.
P.Wickstrom: Well, we are --
De Weerd: Thank you. Pam, if you will also state your name, please.
P.Wickstrom: Pam Wickstrom. I live at 3062 West Kandice Street. We live -- we would
be on the opposite side of the south road -- or the south housing that they want to put in
there. So, we are in agreeance with what everybody else has said here. One of my
biggest concerns is pulling out onto Ten Mile from Gemstone, because with the four lane
road now it also pulled it closer to the fence, so when you pull up you do have to really
creep out into the road, because if you look to the left it's almost impossible to see down
the road and with the interchange, with the Walmart, with everything going in traffic has --
Wickstrom: It's too fast.
P.Wickstrom: -- doubled and the speed limit -- we have a 15 year old daughter who is
going back and forth to school, which, you know, like that lady over here said, well, you
know, if people can't get out they will find another route. But do they really? Because
they buy a house, they want what's convenient for them and they are going to say, well,
this is my house, I can go out this entrance and if you want to reroute people from
Chateau, all it's going to do is take you through other subdivisions and there is really -- if
you go the opposite way on Chateau it only takes you through subdivisions. It doesn't
take you to another main road that will, you know, get you there quicker. So, people
nowadays want convenience and, you know, we are in agreeance with where we sit -- you
know, the number of houses within R-8 zoning, the number of houses that are going to be
there lowering -- you know, possibly lowering the value of our house and, you know,
everything else, so --
De Weerd: Well, thank you both for being here. Is there anyone else who would like to
provide testimony? If you would come forward and, then, we will get you. Good evening.
If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Hoberg: My name is Deborah Hoberg and I live at 2254 North Swainson in the Kentfield
Subdivision, Meridian, Idaho, and I really appreciate you, Madam Mayor, Council
Members, for listening to us tonight. There is a lot of concerns that were not brought up --
have been brought up, but not readdressed. Number one was the traffic with the bus stop
there on Chateau and Ten Mile. When the original study was done for traffic that was in
January of 2015. Since then Ten Mile has gone to four lanes and the speed limit's
increased to 40 miles per hour. Okay. Also with -- if you look at the subdivision, the
original plan for Swainson was coming out to meet Chateau -- the new Swainson. I live
right on that other corner and it's not two cars deep in the morning. If you're talking a.m.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 41 of 68
traffic studies, that would be from, what, 6:00 a.m., 8:00 a.m., until 1:00 p.m. It's in the
morning when people are going to work. It's not just my subdivision, it's all the
surrounding subdivisions. They cut through, because they can't get out on Ustick. So, all
of those people come down -- they cut through and they come out there. I hear the cars,
they start about 6:00 o'clock in the morning and they don't quit until 8:30 and it backs up
as many as ten to 12 cars deep at that. If you're trying to come out headed north on the
new Swainson that they want to put in, there is no way you could be able to make a left-
hand turn onto Chateau to get to Ten Mile. People in traffic are like electricity and water,
they will take the shortest route and that would be the shortest route. They will have to go
through more subdivisions to get to Linder and go around and that's putting them, pardon
me, out of their way. Todd that cuts through, the next subdivision over, but that's sti ll
going through subdivisions to go out to Cherry Lane to go down to Ten Mile, because
everyone uses that on-off ramp right now. The other concern is all three schools pick up
children there and it's crowded. I live there and I'm afraid I'm going to have to call 911 one
morning because of an accident, some kid getting hit. There has been several almost hit
already. They don't stop for the school buses, they don't stop for anything, and when they
come off of Ten Mile onto Chateau turning right headed eas t on Chateau they speed
through there. My mailbox has been taken out three timed already since they have
opened all that out. I'm still trying to get it to stand up straight. They speed through there.
There is going to be an accident -- car accidents and people hit and, then, of course, the
other thing that everyone is addressing is the R-8 versus R-4. Every neighborhood
around there is R-4. Someone at the last -- at the zoning and planning commission said --
is that my time up?
De Weerd: Yes. But you can -- you can wrap it up.
Hoberg: They said that -- excuse me. At the last Planning and Zoning Commission they
said that the -- it was -- and this tonight also it wasn't going to increase the traffic there.
Well, I'm not a rocket science or -- scientist or mathematician, I'm a retired hairdresser and
I'm there all day, by the way. So, I do see all this traffic. Ninety-six homes in that area is
definitely all only exiting onto Chateau. You can't tell me that's not going to add to the
traffic there. That's a lot of cars. That's a lot of kids going to school trying to catch the bus
there and they are going to be trying to cross Chateau. That's where it's at. It's
dangerous to have that many homes and R-8, it should be an R-4 like everyone else
around there for the safety, not only of the traffic and the cars, but for the kids, too. Our
comps on the housing. It will take it down. It would be too crowded. It's -- you know, I
love Meridian. I moved here -- well, I moved up here in '97 and I fell in love with Meridian.
Everyone wanted Eagle, but I wanted Meridian. I loved it. And I plan to -- I bought that
house as my retirement home and I want to grow old there, but I don't want to do it
watching kids get hit and car accidents on my corner. I think it should go to an R-4, make
the lots larger, like all the surrounding neighborhoods. We are not so desperate --
De Weerd: Deborah, I need to ask you to summarize.
Hoberg: Yes, ma'am.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 42 of 68
De Weerd: If you could summarize.
Hoberg: Just what everyone is saying. Also I might say that I did get the e-mail from Ms.
Suggs and it didn't describe the new plan that she described tonight. It sounded different,
like she was going to come out into a different subdivision to go out to Ten Mile. We need
to just refigure it. This whole thing. Wipe the slate clean. They need to refigure it. They
can't put all those people on Chateau.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Hoberg: Okay? Thank you so much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Yes, sir. Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and
address for the record.
Matson: My name is Michael Matson. I live at 2343 North Morello, just on the north side
of the proposed subdivision.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Matson: First, my concerns aren't so much about the housing. That's pretty well covered
by everyone else so far tonight. My major concern is with safety, as Council Member Bird
has alluded to and a number of other people. I'm one of the people who picks up my
daughter at the bus stop at the corner of Chateau and Ten Mile. There are -- there are
things within the works to get that bus stop moved. It's not as simple I don't think as the
developer has said about making a -- a bus lane or something to pull off on Chateau for.
The district is very open to moving it. I have spoken with both Cascade Busing Company
and Meridian School District and it's more of an issue of input from the residents in that
area. Not so much an inability to move it. Both people -- I have talked to both Cascade
and at West Ada have never said it's impossible to move that. In fact, they would
appreciate our input and we are working on that with them. Secondly, I'm in contact with
Austin Miller, ACHD, about getting a new traffic study done and he informed me in an
e-mail just a day or two ago that they are going be doing a traffic study on that
intersection, mostly because of the concern of the increased speed limit to the 40 miles an
hour, the wider lanes, and how much traffic increase there is. When I pick up my
daughter at the school bus stop at 4:00 o'clock every day, there are cars flying through
there. The number of 106 or whatever that she gave during that peak time, I can count
that in the 15 minutes I'm waiting for my school bus for my daughter. There is way -- it's a
hundred cars. Secondly, my daughter has only been taking the school bus one year, just
this first year, and we routinely see cars going through the school bus stop sign. My
concerns are not so much, like I said, about the number of homes there, because whether
it's, you know, downsized to 50 homes or left at 90, the major concern for me is the safety
of my family and I don't feel safe already taking my daughter to that school bus stop,
because of the crowded, intense intersection. The kids come north out of this new
subdivision would have to cross Chateau where cars go flying around that corner, where
it's busy. So, that is one of the concerns there along Chateau. My other concern is at the
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 43 of 68
other end of this subdivision where just out of the picture there is a -- a large park.
Chateau Park is right there. I take my kids and my dog there every day. We enjoy that
park. But getting to that park can be tricky, even coming out in your car, because there is
a slight jog in the road right there just to the north maybe 15 feet. But just enough that
you have to inch out of Morello heading south onto Chateau and I imagine the cars
coming north out of that subdivision will also have to proceed with caution and one of the
things that I would like to recommend to this -- to this group -- to the Council Members, if
you have charge to do it, is to install a stop sign at the corner of Morello and Chateau for
two reasons. One, for the number of cars that will be there and, two, people treat
Chateau as a -- as a drag strip, basically, and there are cars that just fly down that street.
They have a -- occasionally they put up a speed limit monitor from the police out right in
front of the park, but it's probably more of a challenge to people to see how fast they can
go down that straightaway. It's dangerous and that's a huge concern and I think that
would help with the -- with the traffic flow is to put in a stop sign at the corner. The last
thing I want to kind of conclude with is there has been quite a few peop le expressing
concern about the size of the development. To me, as I said earlier, it's all about safety
and I would implore you guys to take this opportunity to respond to the safety issues and
the concerns of us, rather than in two or three years when we come back because there
have been the accidents or things that people have brought up where there has been
injuries or people hurt or property damage because of the number of people that -- and
the amount of traffic going to that intersection. Thank you .
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there further testimony? Okay. I'm sorry -- Council?
Milam: If she has something new to offer.
De Weerd: If you have new information. Yes, ma'am.
Enking: And I'm Margaret Enking and I live at 3100 West Gemstone.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Enking: I have wondered why they have the buses stopping on Ten Mile, because it is so
dangerous for the kids. 4:00 o'clock traffic can be backed up behind those buses a
quarter of a mile, solid cars, and so the second the bus takes down its stop sign it's pedal
to the metal to try to get around the bus and the traffic is -- it does worry me with the kids
waiting right there with it. It's a five lane road, because of the suicide lane, and the traffic
really books through there, all the way from Pine to Ustick there are multiple stops and
every time the bus stops, as I say, there is a tremendous amount of very impatient traffic
behind those buses and it is a safety concern. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Yes, sir. Good evening.
Tetrault: Hello. My name is Ken Tetrault. I live at 2830 West Gemstone in the Sunburst
Subdivision and thank you, Mayor and City Council Members, and appreciate the
opportunity to be here and I just came up to clarify a few things about the bus station. I
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 44 of 68
used to work for the Meridian School District and I worked on school buses and had
occasion to drive them at times and the key factor on where the buses stop is economics.
They will try to make the stop where it costs them the least money to -- to stop and so
that's all I wanted to say.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony? Justin, could we ask you to come
up and --
Lucas: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Justin Lucas, Ada County Highway
District. My business address is 3775 Adam Street, Garden City, Idaho. I am a Meridian
resident and I live in this area, so --
De Weerd: So, you're very familiar with West Chateau.
Lucas: I'm extremely familiar with this area, yes.
De Weerd: And West Chateau, especially Kentfield is high speed and it is a little bit
crocked around there. What is the answer to slowing down the traffic?
Lucas: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, West Chateau is designated as a
collector street, so --
De Weerd: It is. But not a speedway.
Lucas: Certainly not a speedway. The purpose of a collector street is to collect traffic
from neighborhood subdivisions and route them out to the arterial streets and that's what
West Chateau does. I would say it does a pretty good job of that. One thing about the
street is it's -- it's not complete. There is only sidewalk on the one side and you get kind of
a narrower section, because it's not complete due to the fact that one side is undeveloped.
I think the nature of that street will change a little bit when and if it is completed through
the development process. Certainly at the curve where you enter off of Ten Mile onto
Chateau. Right now you make that turn and it goes down pretty quick to -- because you
have the barns right there and the horses and that little house that sits on the corner. So,
the nature of that will change quite dramatically if -- if and when all of those things are
removed and so the issue of speed on that street -- I'm not aware of a speed study that's
been completed. If the neighbors come together and want that type of study to be
completed, ACHD is happy to do that. We do those kinds of studies all the time. I know
there has been targeted enforcement on that street with the -- not only the, you know,
signs that show you what speed you're going, but with -- I believe Meridian police has
done some target enforcement out there in the past. I don't know how recently. When it
comes to speeding, that's the way to do it is to enforce the limit and so that's one of those
hard things that happens with a street like this. There is no front-one housing. There is
no driveways. That all slows down traffic, but for a collector street sometimes it's better
not to have those things, because you want cars to be able to move to where they a re --
where they are going. So, I don't know if that answers all of your questions. Certainly not
-- you know, these can be difficult issues. I will always, as I usually do, route you to the
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 45 of 68
written staff report and that's ACHD's official position on al l of the issues raised tonight.
You have all the traffic counts there. You have the policies and procedures that we look
at when we evaluate streets. I did have a chance to sit down with Christy Little, our
development review supervisor, today and talk about the location of that -- that street.
ACHD was okay with how it was prop osed and ACHD is okay with -- and how the new
proposal is. So, we are not taking a strong position either way on that. The -- the location
meets our policies, so --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Justin, we have asked about putting a stoplight up there.
De Weerd: Stop sign.
Bird: What?
De Weerd: Stop sign.
Bird: Yeah. No. Light. Oh, sign. Okay. I thought it said lights. Oh. Okay. He can --
what do you do to do that?
Lucas: I can certainly speak to that. ACHD is reluctant to put stop signs out for traffic --
traffic control reasons -- well, control is not the right -- for traffic calming. That's the word
I'm trying to get at. Because what happens is people just don't pay attention to them. And
our experience has been it's better to not have a stop sign there, rather than a stop that's
not going to be followed, because it can give a false sense of security to someone
crossing the street, it can give a false sense of security to a driver who is trying to make a
turn and that's -- that's been our experience. Now, that specific location we haven't
studied it and we certainly could look at it if, indeed, this were to go forward, we could
certainly look at, you know, what -- what's needed there and if anything is needed. So, I
can't really say one way or the other, but I certainly can't promise that it would be a good
location for a stop sign.
De Weerd: Okay. Other questions for Justin?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: It's not a question. I just -- I so appreciate you coming to these meetings. I mean
it's really an asset to us to have you here on behalf of ACHD to provide this kind of input
and for the members of the public to -- to hear your involvement in some of these
specifics, so it's very helpful. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 46 of 68
Lucas: Well, thank you. I actually, you know, manage the group that does all of the
liaison work to the cities and I think it's really important that we are here to try to answer
questions as best we can and our relationship as an agency with this agency is critical to
the success of the highway district and I believe to the City of Meridian. So, we want to be
in full partnership on these issues. Sometimes it's -- they are tough ones and it's hard to
come to a real clear solution, but hopefully together as we work on these things we can --
we can achieve that, so -- thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Would the applicant like to wrap this up?
Suggs: Thank you, Council. Jane Suggs responding to the concerns of the neighbors
and I do appreciate them coming out. I think -- excuse me -- we have had really good
conversation. The thing that I sent last night has a plat attached to it, so if you weren't
able to open that you probably couldn't see that there was a change that was made,
because it had this drawing -- the new drawing attached to it. I'm going to talk about a
couple things and, of course, they are the same things that everybody talked about. It's
the density and, again, I just want to let you know that we looked very closely at this. This
is listed as medium density residential on your Comprehensive Plan and medium density
is three to eight dwelling units per acre. Our gross den sity is 4.25. I did look, oh, a few
weeks ago at Kentfield across the street. Kentfield. And it's at about 3.56 or something.
So, it's just a little bit lower than this, that they are both within the medium density
residential. We are building at a 4.25 density, which is at the lower end of your medium
density residential Comprehensive Plan density. So, we are doing this. The idea that we
are not doing the same thing is because we are not the same city we were when these
were built. We are talking about adding vibrancy to an area that already is serviced by a
lot of commercial areas that are very close by. Again, this is an in-fill piece. We are
taking a piece that's surrounded by the city and we are adding in -fill to it. So, the R-8
require -- request for the zoning for this annexation fits right into your need for adding
residences that can utilize these infrastructure. Now, one of the things that we didn't point
out was we are a little bit -- have a little hardship. You know, if this was anoth er time and
place there would be stub streets and we would be connecting to other subdivisions.
There were no stub streets on the south or the east and we have an arterial on the west.
So, the only place we can take our traffic is to Chateau and as Austin pointed out, I mean
we -- we do -- excuse me -- as Justin pointed out, we do have it -- we are connecting to a
-- a collector street. A collector is supposed to take traffic from those subdivisions. It has
a threshold. It's much higher than what it's actually being used for right now. So, to get
back to the density issue, we feel like each of the houses will have at least a two car
garage, some will have a three car garage. Somebody was worried about parking. So,
there will be at least a two car garage for all the homes. We do meet the comp plan. P&Z
was understanding of the code and the Comprehensive Plan and why we are doing this
development at this density that's 4.25. They considered it and they both -- they said and
they decided that this was the appropriate zone and they agreed with the conditions of
approval that allowed this to be built at the R -8 zone. Let's talk a little bit about the traffic
and I guess what I heard of a lot of is there is some traffic issues there. But that doesn't
stop development from occurring, because that's -- I mean we will do what we can to fix
that. I did meet with the West Ada School District and I will provide a pull out if they will
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 47 of 68
move the bus stop. I mean I told them we would do these things and they s aid no, that
they -- they were not going to move the bus stop. I will work with the neighbors and try to
get that bus stop moved. I'm in agreement with every one that it seems crazy to me -- in
fact, I mentioned to the person I talked to, Miranda, and I said you're telling me you're
putting economics in front of safety if you put those buses on those arterial streets. I will
do everything I can to make that change. If we put a pull out there it means we get to do
something to -- to help move that along. The improvements on our section on Chateau
will make a difference. We are putting curb, gutter -- we are putting in separated
sidewalks and, then, behind the sidewalks there will be some landscaping. So, there is a
pretty large area there, so kids will have a safe place to stand and walk on the south side
of Chateau. It will change the way the street looks. I will tell you this, we had originally
thought that we would pull the curb -- the existing curb return that's on that south corner,
we thought we would pull it back and make a wider street there and ACHD said, no, they
wanted to go back to the 36 foot street, so in a sense they are actually going to build a 36
foot locally -- kind of a local street section in that area and hopefully that will -- with the
curb, gutter and sidewalk make a difference that Justin was talking about. So, again,
requesting strongly that you consider one of our designs, either the one that has the street
where it was, because that is approvable by ACHD. The one that was o riginal. Or you
approve the one that we changed to -- to reflect the requirements of P&Z and provide that
connection of the street on the bottom. Again, there is that third option and you could just
say don't worry about the street length, the cul-de-sac length, just make the connection of
the street and Warwick where we have done that and don't make that connection and,
then, we get the larger lots along the bottom. And I think -- I don't think staff has a
problem with that, because nothing really changes. We will still keep all the other
connections, we will keep the sewer connection s.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Jane -- right now -- don't leave, Jane.
Suggs: Yeah.
Bird: Josh, throw up an overview of that whole square mile. From Cherry to Linder to
Ustick back down.
Beach: Give me just a second to get there with the --
Bird: Do you have that?
Beach: I can get it for you. Just give me a second.
Bird: Okay. With the zoning on it, because I think you're not going to find an R-8 zone in
any part of that --
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 48 of 68
Milam: R-15 are you?
De Weerd: Yeah.
Bird: R-8 in any part of that quarter mile -- or that 600 and --
De Weerd: Yeah. That --
Milam: There is a little R-8.
Bird: Where?
Cavener: Up Muirfield.
Bird: Yeah. But that's across the road. I'm talking in that square mile.
Suggs: Of R-15.
Bird: Those -- anything that was built in Meridian, Idaho, before 1999 or 2000 was an R-4.
I believe -- and I -- I mean we might have one up there on the north -- the northeast corner
of this -- of this mile square that is an R-8. The code or something like that might be, but I
don't think so. And my -- Jane, my -- I'd like to ask you is there any way that you guys
would consider going to an R-4? Let me tell you, I believe in property rights, you own the
property, you should be able to put on what -- but I also believe that we need to protect
the existing property owners that are there, too, and there is many, many of them. A lot
more than 22 acres. I -- I just have a real hard problem. It's no different than when I was
talked into voting for an R-8 zone back in 2000. So, I just -- with this area, if there was
R-8s around it, other than across the street -- and we know why that was done up there.
Is there any way that -- that your owner would consider an R-4 or is he so tied into it that
he can't?
Suggs: Council Member Bird, I know that R-4 is not going to work for this particular
property. Just the amount of money that had to be paid to buy property that's around --
surrounded by city services and it's just that. It's -- city services are already there. We are
already being serviced by fire and police. I mean even though it's county property -- and
this is what we are trying to do in Meridi an is we are trying to make this change. In fact, I
don't want to sound glib when I say this, but if you build more of the same it doesn't really
necessarily help property values, because no one is going to buy the 1999 house if there
is another house just like it that's newer. So, what you really need to do is mix it up and
put something with a 50 foot lot in that allows people to live here. These are not going to
be rental, cheap houses. These are 200 to 300 thousand dollar homes, just like those
homes that are out there now. They are really nice. I mean they are -- they are going
meet any kind of size requirements you have. Like I said, two car garages for all of them.
At least. And some with three, so -- I mean we are talking about valuable property and a
value option of providing a really good tax base, too, with lots of good home utilizing these
commercial services that are right here, too. These -- all of these services and completing
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 49 of 68
this street. I just know that R-4 is not going to work. We are not going to get the density
that we need to make that work.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Let's -- let's go back to the public safety.
Suggs: Okay.
Bird: You're paying -- you're paying a big mill levy for the fire. You're rural. You pay for
rural coverage. The city isn't furnishing it to you. Okay? Ada County and Meridian City
have an MOU that we jointly cover for each other. So, when you're paying Ada County
taxes you're paying for the sheriff's department. Yo u're not getting per se city -- city
services now.
Suggs: Right.
Bird: Okay?
Suggs: Yeah. I'm --
Bird: I want that -- I want that clear out here.
Suggs: Yeah.
Bird: That you guys are paying a very high mill levy to have that rural fire district. I realize
-- what is -- and, then, my next question. What's going to be your minimum square foot in
there?
Suggs: Of homes?
Bird: Homes.
Suggs: I think we said at P&Z 1,800 square feet minimum. Which is --
Bird: And you -- and what kind of setback on the side?
Suggs: Whatever the R-8 calls for. Just five foot side setbacks.
Bird: Yeah.
Suggs: Twenty in the front -- 15, 20 in the front, 20 in the back. Josh, help me --
Bird: Five on the side.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 50 of 68
Beach: I believe it's 12 in the rear.
Suggs: Twelve in the rear.
Bird: Oh, the rear -- but five on the sides; right?
Beach: Correct. Unless you're on a corner. But interior it's five feet. Correct.
Bird: Thanks, Jane. Appreciate it.
Suggs: I do ask that before you defer us or deny us, that you let me talk to you again.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Jane, I actually have a couple questions for you.
Suggs: Okay.
Milam: I wanted to talk about density a little bit. You threw a bunch of numbers out there
and you said the neighborhood across the street was -- what is that neighborhood?
Suggs: Kentfield and I just ran a rough area around Kentfield, because it's such a
rectangular piece, it's about three and a half to 3.6 units to an acre.
Milam: Gross or net density?
Suggs: That's gross.
Milam: And we are at 4.25 gross.
Suggs: Yeah.
Milam: Josh -- I don't know. I mean I -- I was just comparing that number and I was
looking at -- your net density is 6.76.
Suggs: Net density. That takes out everything. So, I haven't run that on Kentfield to take
out their streets and their open space and all of that. I haven't run that, so -- but --
Milam: They need to be under four; right?
Suggs: No. No. R-8 allows eight units to an acre, but we are actually building to a gross
of four units -- 4.25 units to an acre. And that's how you measure density. That is with the
-- it's not net density that you typically use, so --
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 51 of 68
Milam: Right.
Suggs: So -- but, yes, we are developing at 4.25 dwelling units per acre, taking the entire
area of our preliminary plat and -- so we have 96 lots divided by the 22.6 acres, gives us
the 4.25.
Milam: Okay. Madam Mayor?
Suggs: Does that make sense?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Yeah. It does. I just wanted to make sure we were comparing apples to apples.
Suggs: Yes.
Milam: I wanted to make sure if you were talking about your gross density that you were
talking about their gross density, not your gross to their net or -- you know.
Suggs: No. No. And mine was rough. Mine was just taking a measurement using
Google to measure off the 20 -- the 50 acres that makes up -- 50 sites that makes up
Kentfield and they have X number of lots that -- I don't know how many.
Milam: So, I appreciate when you're talking about the school district, but this -- to me this
project as a whole -- the density is too -- it's -- the density is too high for the area. You
said you wanted to know, so --
Suggs: Yeah.
Milam: I feel like you're as minimum amenities, minimum open space, minimum lot sizes
for maximum profit and that's -- that's what this project looks like to me and I don't feel like
-- to me that's something that adds value to Meridian.
Suggs: Can I look at one thing? Give me just a minute. Council Member Milam, I would
like to respond. First is that we are building to your Comprehensive Plan. That's the
guidance that you have approved -- given to say build to your Comprehensive Plan and
use that as your guidelines to go in and purchase property and develop property. So, we
are, as a low end of what you said you want in that area. So, this is why we are doing
what we are doing. I do want to add that we have a total of 17 percent open space, of
common areas. Now, we didn't count all of that in our usable open space. We didn't even
count the big 35 foot long lot along the bottom. We counted up until we got to the ten
percent and we showed that as usable open space. But we actually, instead of having ten
percent, we have 17 and a half percent common lots, which are open space. It's the
drainage lots, it's the park, which is an acre. It's the micropaths and it's that long open
space that's going to be -- have sidewalks and trees and lighting along the south side that
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 52 of 68
we have -- we count a portion of it. The Ten Mile setback is larger, because we have an
irrigation easement there. We are doing separated sidewalks along Chateau and a
drainage swale behind it. We have some high waster tables that we are filling in, some of
the lots. I think that was one of the questions from one of the neighbors is because this lot
is a little lower we are having to fill to keep the sewer appropriate. So -- I mean we are
doing a lot more open space than is actually required. So, this isn't about minimizing open
space and minimizing lot sizes. We have a mix of lot sizes. We have a mix of lot sizes
and, yes, we have some that are meeting the R-8 zone and that's one of the requests for
the R-8 zoning request is we meet those lot dimensions. And, again, this is a good
opportunity to provide different -- I mean it's really the same housing. Single family
residential housing, some of these will be two story houses, you have a lot of one story
ranch -- older ranch houses out there. I even have some photographs of some of the
neighbors' houses. Some of them are two, some of them are one. I have examples of
houses I don't think you showed those. These are examples of some homes. I even
brought a couple more, because I know a couple of these show three car garages. If you
use that jump drive, Josh -- I'm sorry.
Beach: I was going to try to show three car garages.
Suggs: I know two of them do and I want to show you some that hold two car garages, so
you can see that we can still get an attractive two car garage home on many of these lots.
There you go. Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Jane?
Suggs: Yes.
Bird: These homes we are seeing right here you're going to put on a 50 foot wide lot?
Suggs: Yes, sir.
Bird: Am I not right?
Suggs: Yes, sir, we are. Do you have a question? I'm sorry. I wasn't --
Bird: Yeah. It looks awful big for a 50 foot -- but without a scale to tell, you know, it might
only be 40 foot. So, I don't know. It would have to be 40 foot, because we got to have
five foot on each side.
De Weerd: We have these all over town. Just -- just saying. I mean --
Bird: I know. I know. Not in this location.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 53 of 68
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes. I'm sorry. Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor, I have a question for staff. Josh, I don't know if you have heard,
I'm kind of new around here. So, I have got a question about zoning.
Beach: Sure.
Palmer: So, if -- say this was done are R-4, would that mean across the whole plat there
has to be an average of four or less residents per acre or is it a minimum lot -- or a
maximum lot size or how does that work?
Beach: So, you use that as a guide. So, as Jane said, our medium density residential
covers both R-4 and R-8 and we don't have a specific -- kind of use it as a guide. So, on
average we would like to see for the density to be within the R -4, roughly four homes per
acre, R-8 roughly eight homes per acre, but as you can see there is -- the Comprehensive
Plan allows for some sliding, but we don't like to go over the four for R-4. We don't like to
go over the eight for R-8. Does that answer your question?
Palmer: And that's average across the whole plat?
Beach: Correct. We like the average for the subdivision to be within --
Palmer: Okay.
Beach: -- as Jane said, three to eight. And so this does technically meet the
Comprehensive Plan requirements --
Palmer: Okay.
Beach: -- for that medium density residential designation.
Palmer: Okay. Follow up. So, then, if -- so, if we are at 4.24, if say we reduced to the
minimum theoretically at four homes per acre, we are looking at 90 instead of 96? No?
Suggs: Madam Mayor, Council Member Palmer, with the R-4 zone is a minimum lot size
of 8,000 square feet.
Palmer: So, there is minimum lots --
Suggs: Yes, there is. So, I think that was part of the question, too. There is a minimum
lot size of 8,000 square feet. So, when you take the 8,000 square feet and put it in with
the streets, you're not going to get four units to an acre. So, we -- again, we are working
with an R-8 zone that allows us lot sizes and dimensional standards that allow us to get
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 54 of 68
close to four. You will not get four units to an acre in a four -- R-4 zone, because 8,000
square foot lots don't allow that. If you have any open space and you have a minimum of
ten and we have 17 and any streets. So, yeah, that's the --
Palmer: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions from Council?
Suggs: Can I ask one more thing?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Suggs: It's really important for us to get approved tonight with one of our plans or some
negotiated plan, so -- and we ask for you to consider that.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Suggs: Thank you.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I will kind of frame what I see from what I have heard and the notes I have taken
and lots of good comments from the public, that may or may not be helpful to the
discussion.
De Weerd: Can you pull that a little closer to you. Thank you.
Borton: Certainly. A lot of good comments concerning some of the highlights with
regards to traffic, parking, transition and lot sizes and density were kind of blended
together. I think they tried to address both of those considerations in particul ar to the
south and safety as well were the primary highlights that I noted of concern. But I also
noted -- and Councilman Bird brought it up, which that was a good point, focusing on
trying to be consistent in the development of an area such as this and avoid surprises and
one of the lists of items that I found in reviewing this application and the testimony and the
work done prior is -- for what it's worth we have an application that has been told what to
do and given direction by a variety of entities, including our future land -- future land use
map, the Comprehensive Plan. We have had ACHD, our transportation authority, we
have had our staff work diligently with the applicant --
De Weerd: Can you hear in the back? Okay. Can you just pull that closer, please.
Borton: Certainly. The future land use map, the comp plan, ACHD's review, our Planning
and Zoning's review -- what I'm getting at is we have a variety of entities that have all
reviewed this and have provided input, all of which support its approval and have tried to
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 55 of 68
address all of the concerns and Ms. Suggs had brought it up. As I see it is this is, quite
frankly, an application that we have told the developer it's exactly what should go there, at
least with regards to the density and, quite frankly, it could be more dense and that's just
the message that we are telling the developer and that's the expectation that they have.
So, I understand why the application has come through and I can understand why staff
would support it, ACHD would support it, and our Planning and Zoning Commission would
support it in a way that I was initially surprised there wasn't a request that it be remanded
with regards to relocating the street. Josh, if you will pull up the initial proposed plat and I
see -- it really wasn't addressed, but when I look at the initial plat, when I reviewed it
before today, you can see the efforts at transition. You have got nine or 14 lots on the
southern border adjacent to 14 lots, you have got eight or nine lots to the east ad jacent to
eight or nine lots, which goes to the distinction between density of the project as a whole
and transition and I believe transition is one of the relevant considerations to the south
and I see the applicant has done things to try and address that , in addition to the 35 foot
buffer, which is from R-4 to R-8, which is not an uncommon transition, is a pretty grand
effort to minimize the impact of that transition between those two zones . So, I give you
that laundry list, because it appears to be efforts by a lot of people to assist the applicant
to provide to this Council exactly what, for better or worse, we are telling them to do. So,
if there is a plat that is to go forward, it's the plat we are looking at right now. If the access
to Chateau moves to the east or not, that might be worthy of a remand. That was the
request that P&Z had. They didn't ask that it be redrawn and remanded -- or redrawn and
brought back before them, at least from what I saw, and still make it worthy -- I appreciate
P&Z's input and their recommendation here does carry some weight. So, in balancing the
considerations, that list of objective criteria that the applicant is compliant with, leads me
to favor approving it with the existing plat or at the very least remanding it -- the
application, who has volunteered to do so, chooses to move that access to Chateau to the
east and provide the city what would be a noncompliant cul-de-sac length, which hasn't
been addressed -- the pros and cons haven't been discussed, but that might be option
three that is the best option. That's how I look at what's been presented by all -- everyone
that's been involved.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I have another legal question I suppose. Can we -- do we have to have the map
before us to approve something or can we move the road to the east and give the waiver
for the noncompliance to the -- can we do that tonight or do we have to have a map before
us with it drawn and done?
De Weerd: You need to see the preliminary plat that you're approving.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 56 of 68
Bird: I agree with Councilman Borton on a lot of the stuff, but there is one thing -- once
you zone this R-8 and you get the preliminary plat, you want to remember that this can
come back, can be sold or done something else and come back with a completely
different plat, with minimum R-8 lot sizes and everything else and medium density --
medium density is R-4 or R-8. Everything around that -- everything in Cherry Lane across
there that crosses it, is R-4. The R-15 is a half mile up and on the other side of the road.
I just -- we have got a mile square of homes that these people built and have lived in for
years and stuff and I -- I just don't -- and I understand where the owner is coming from,
don't get me wrong, and I think everybody is entitled to make a fair profit, but, I will tell
you, I just have a real problem putting this density in a bunch of -- in the middle of a bunch
of R-4s and I know the one just north of it probably has got almost as much density, but if
you look in it it don't have the roads out of it. So, they have squeezed some in there
much. So, I -- I don't know. That's -- that's my view and I'd like everybody else to weigh in
here. I have taken enough time.
De Weerd: Council, any other comments?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing no comments, I move we close H-2015-0046 public hearing.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on --
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: For discussion purposes, in lieu of closing the public hearing, I think -- and the
applicant's requested, so at least they have got direction where the Council might be
leaning. We don't -- we don't know that yet and we have oftentimes reopened public
hearings, so I would invite us to skip that step and share our concerns and thoughts now.
We might get a wave from the applicant based on what we say that could save us some
steps. We may want to address -- they have made that request.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: I will pull the motion if -- if that's -- but if we are just going to sit here and look at
each other, I'm not --
De Weerd: Okay.
Milam: Second agrees.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 57 of 68
De Weerd: Second agrees. Okay. Did the applicant have something further to say?
Suggs: Yes. Thank you very much, Mayor and Council Members. I really appreciate the
opportunity to talk to you again. It is very important for us to get some sort of approval
and not a remand tonight. First thing is that we will sign a development agreement to
make sure that this zoning and annexation is contingent on the plan that you approve
tonight. So, we won't come back or sell it and come up with another R -8 plan. So, the
zoning will go away to the development if we don't do according to the development
agreement and that's part of the conditions of approval, that we sign a development
agreement that says we will annex and rezone according to this plan. And I have worked
in other jurisdictions where city council can condition a plat, so that you don't actually have
to see, but you add a condition, just as P&Z did, they add a condition to move the street.
If you want to allow the extension of a cul-de-sac that's longer than the code, which is just
a number, that is allowable. If you take out the condition to move the street and add a
condition to allow the long cul-de-sac -- I would also add one more option -- my developer
is -- if -- we need to do this tonight, because there are lots of ways that we could approve
this -- a condition could be added that the lots along the south side meet the R-4 zone.
That's the transition that Mr. Borton was very eloquent in saying that we tried hard to do
that when we could put our street in the original configuratio n, but when we began to have
to connect streets, we lost too many lots and we went with some smaller lots, so they
weren't the same. We would consider that if you would consider an approval tonight, so
making that transition happen again. Or, again, allo wing that cul-de-sac length to be
longer, so we don't have to make the connection at the bottom. Does that make sense at
all? Does anybody get that --
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor, common sense dictates that if it's legal for us to do that, to just
say we want to move the road over without having to see a map, that is common sense to
me. So, Bill, can we legally do that?
Nary: No.
Palmer: Common sense isn't legal tonight.
Suggs: Okay. Well, other places have, so --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Nary: Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess not to be short on that. You
can approve the annexation and zoning, but you cannot approve a preliminary plat without
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 58 of 68
the plat. So, without that you can only approve number one. You would have to continue
it and -- or they would have to come back with a different plat to put in front of you -- a
preliminary plat.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Go to the revised where we moved -- where the road is moved back. Now, you're
going to tell -- you're reply to Mr. Borton that those on the south in this revised plat, you're
going to go to the 8,000 square foot lots?
Person: R-4 minimum -- to R-4 dimensional standards.
Bird: Which is 8,000 -- which is 8,000.
Suggs: Eight thousand. If Mr. Nary will allow that condition to be added to the plat for
approval tonight.
Bird: It can't be.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm sorry. It's still the same problem. They
can't approve a plat that is not in front of them . So, they still can approve the annexation
and zoning, but they cannot approve a plat based on just conditions without seeing it.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton -- I mean -- sorry.
Palmer: That is a compliment.
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Thank you. I didn't even have to pas the bar. A question for the applicant.
You're really pushing for tonight. Does next week -- if we did this next week, if you could
bring us a new one with that adjustment, is that --
Suggs: If you're willing to -- and staff is willing to make that, we will make that happen.
Beach: Madam Mayor, if I may, typically staff needs a minimum of ten days to review a
revised plat to make sure it meets all of the -- we are going to run into the same issue we
had with P&Z. It seems like a simple change, but there was a lot of consideration having
to do with fire and utilities -- it's not as easy as just changing it and coming back. We
need to make sure that it doesn't cause any additional issues --
Bird: That's right.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 59 of 68
Beach: -- that are unforeseen tonight.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, not to throw a wrench into it, but you're
going to have to have it, because what Josh just said is you need to make sure it's
compliant and it isn't a substantial change that should be reviewed by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, because any affected party, whether it's the applicant or an affected
party like a neighbor, could claim that it wasn't the same thing that was seen before, even
though it is part of this discussion and it was significantly different and should be, then,
reviewed again. So, I would hesitate to put it off only a week if you're looking at a different
plat. Rather than changing -- you know, because now we are talking changing a road,
changing the density, changing the size of the lots -- I mean you're changing a number of
things and all of those really need to make sure they are compliant with your code.
De Weerd: Unless you keep the first plat and you just move the road on the west side to
line up with the -- the other road as Planning and Zoning suggested.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: After hearing staff, Jane, I think the soonest we could bring it back would be the
April 5th and that don't meet your criteria -- criteria I don't think. My biggest concern is
when we change this and if we go to the revised with that thing and go -- make the south
ones 8,000 square feet, then, to keep 96 lots -- those interior ones are going to be the
4,000.
Suggs: We won't get 96 lots.
Bird: But you're going to -- you're going to make the interior ones smaller lots.
Suggs: We will --
Bird: You will stay to the 5,500 or 5,000, whatever it is?
Suggs: We are going to lose -- yes. We stay at -- keep it to what --
Bird: You're going to take out lots.
Suggs: We are going to take out lots.
Bird: Okay.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 60 of 68
Suggs: It's important for us to get approved tonight in some way or fashion.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Then in that case I'm -- I'm fine with the first one, because it -- with this one
where it keeps the lots big on the south side.
Milam: We can't approve it, because we don't have it.
Palmer: No. Just as it is.
Milam: Oh, just as it is.
De Weerd: There is too many people speaking up here.
Bird: Council? Or Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Council, if this is -- if Jane needs this done, we either give an up or down tonight. If
they need it. Because I don't -- I don't want the developer to -- to suffer through the deal.
So, I'm willing to give it a yes or no.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Question for Jane. It sounds like our first meeting in April would be a no go for
you guys, I understand that, and it also sounds like from staff that a week from now is --
would also be a no go. I may get daggers from -- from my colleagues up here, because
we don't have a meeting scheduled on the 29th, but if we were all willing to meet on a
night that we didn't have a Council meeting to further discuss this issue, would you be
amenable to that?
Suggs: Yes.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: My wife might object, but I'm in.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 61 of 68
De Weerd: Silent partner. Okay. Well, Council, you have all kinds of options up here.
So, I think that -- thank you, Jane.
Suggs: Thank you very much.
De Weerd: You have outlined a number of different choices that you have. So, we can
keep this open. We can close it. We can make a decision. You can continue this.
What's your pleasure?
Milam: Madam Mayor?
Bird: Madam Mayor? Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Bill, I got a question. We can -- we can continue -- can we continue this until the
29th and have -- have them change -- do the -- bring back the preliminary plat without
making a decision on the zoning and that right now -- could we continue the whole thing,
Bill?
Nary: Yes, sir.
Bird: Until the 29th? Do we have a quorum on the 29th, Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: It looks like we have at least four of you, so -- I haven't seen -- I have seen
indication from four of you. So, you have a quorum.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: With your approval and the Council's permission, I would make a motion that we
continue public hearing H-2015-0046, Items 1 and 2, the annexation and zoning and the
preliminary plat, to a special meeting for only this item on March 29th and for the applicant
to get with staff and bring back the revised preliminary plat showing the R-4 lots on the
south and east and the rezoning -- or not the rezone, but the difference in the lots and the
open common lots. Am I clear?
De Weerd: No.
Nary: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Part of the discussion was the roadway and the extended cul -de-sac and I don't
know off the top of my head if an extended cul-de-sac is simply a Council waiver or is it
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 62 of 68
something that requires an application and a hearing. Because that was one of the
discussion points and I don't know if that's still a discussion.
Beach: So, it doesn't meet code and I don't know if we have the language in our code that
allows for a waiver of that specifically by Council. So, that is still going to be an issue
moving forward and I'm not -- I'm not sure if that's the way the Council can do that, unless
it's specifically laid out by code.
Nary: And I'm not sure off the top of my head that we can waive the cul-de-sac issue, but
if that's not a consideration, that's fine. I just didn't know if the roadway of still an issue. I
guess I wasn't clear on Mr. Bird's motion if that was still what your direction is.
De Weerd: Well, we don't have a second, so why don't we --
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: Why don't we discuss it before we have a motion so you know what you want.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Just saying. Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Now we have got a second, so we can discussion it. So, we are getting to th e
same spot. I think in light of those comments to include in the motion -- okay. A timing
question. To include in the motion that the plat that -- what's the date of the plat that we
are looking at right there? Just for reference, Josh?
Beach: Give me a second here. I have got to look at -- 12/23/2015 was the previous
version.
Bird: What? 12/23?
Beach: Yeah. So, that's just -- that's just when they are -- that's just from the engineer
putting a date on it.
Borton: Okay. And show me the next plat version. This one -- what's the date of this
one?
Beach: Just a second here, I will pull that out for you. Assuming they updated the date.
January -- they did not update the date. So, they are both 12/23, so --
Borton: Okay. We can call it the original and the revised. The question to the motion
maker was which of those two plats has the applicant asked to incorporate their requested
changes on and, then, whichever plat that is, that the applicant be asked to also show the
location of the road that accesses Chateau, moving it to the east as recommended by
P&Z -- to the extent that could be done by a waiver to bring that forward in that fashion
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 63 of 68
and if they find out that it's not possible to do that, then, obviously, it won't be brought
back in two weeks. But if it's possible do so and if it's not, let us know. So, both of those
questions I guess to the motion makers to which plat you want to --
De Weerd: What did you second?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: The revised plat was what we -- because it seemed they want to move the deal.
The only thing on the revised plat we need to find out is the cul-de-sac length and also
they have got to show the 8,000 square foot lots on the south end and they are going to
have to show more than that, but that's -- that was the revised -- the revised plat was the
one I understood we wanted to bring forward.
De Weerd: So, your motion was regarding the revised plat, to change the configuration
on the south side to --
Bird: The R-4 specs.
De Weerd: -- be an R-4 -- okay.
Borton: Okay.
De Weerd: And second -- is that what second agreed with?
Borton: With that clarity second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay.
Borton: And that also would address to the motion maker the question on the location of
the access to Chateau has already been addressed.
Bird: Right.
De Weerd: Okay. Can I ask the motion maker if you would like to also denote a pull out
for the bus stop? I appreciated what Ms. Suggs' comment was and if the neighbors, the
developer, and the city work together we can definitely get that bus stop moved.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I think that's a great thing, but do we -- knowing the way entities
work, should we make this a condition on her rezoning and preliminary plat where maybe
she can't live with it, so let's just -- let's just encourage her to work with West Ada and
ACHD -- maybe ACHD can help with some of that. I don't -- I personally don't want to
amend it to a condition on the annexation, zoning, and preliminary plat. I don't think it's
fair to the developer. But I do encourage her and you and everybody else to work on that.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 64 of 68
Beach: Madam Mayor, just as a point of clarification so I understand exactly what the
motion is and assuming this -- this motion is approved by the Council, if it's having to do
with the revised plat, there is not an issue with the cul-de-sac length, because there is no
cul-de-sac.
De Weerd: It's only about the lots on the south side and changing those to adhere to R-4
standards.
Beach: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further to this motion? There is a motion to continue this to
the 29th of March to allow staff time to look at change in plat and that meeting would start
at 6:00 o'clock. Okay. Anything further? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Any
opposed? Okay.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: So, to the neighbors that means you get to enjoy our company again on the
29th and this will be taken up. The revised plat will be filed with the city, so you should be
able to contact our Planning and Zoning Department and see what that is and I would
imagine that Ms. Suggs will e-mail that out, so if she hasn't been e-mailing you, please,
get your e-mail address to her and she can -- she can take care of that. Okay. Thank you
so much for being here this evening.
F. Public Hearing for Copperbrook Subdivision (H-2015-0029) by
Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC Located 4725 N. McDermott Road
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 51.45 Acres of Land
with an R-8 Zoning District
2. Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of 199
Building Lots and Eight (8) Common Lots on 51.45 Acres of
Land in the R-8 Zoning District
De Weerd: Okay. 9-F was required -- or requested to continue the public hearing on
H-2015-0029 to April 5th, 2016. I will open this public hearing and ask for a motion from
City Council to continue this.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we continue public -- the public hearing on Copperbrook Subdivision
H-2015-0029 to April 5th as requested by the applicant.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 65 of 68
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue Item 9 -F to April 5th. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 16-1675: An Ordinance of the City of Meridian
Granting Annexation and Zoning (Citadel Storage H 2015-0031)
for a Parcel of Land being Parcel A as shown on Record of
Survey 9941, Ada County Records, and a Portion of S. Meridian
Road Right of Way and a Portion of E. Amity Road Right of Way,
located in Government Lot 1 of Section 31, Township 3 North,
Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho Which
Contains 17.55 Acres to the I-L (Light Industrial) Zoning
Designation and is Generally Located at the Southeast Corner of
E. Amity and S. Meridian Roads in Meridian, Idaho; and
Providing an Effective Date
De Weerd: Item 10-A is Ordinance 16-1675. Madam Clerk, will you, please, read this by
title.
Jones: Thank you, Madam Mayor. An Ordinance AZ MDA H-2015-0031 for annexation
and rezone of a parcel of land being Parcel A as shown on Record of Survey 9941, Ada
County Records, and a Portion of South Meridian Road Right of Way and a portion of
East Amity Road Right of Way, located in Government Lot 1 of Section 31, Township 3
North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A
and annexing certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent
and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of
Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands
from RUT to I-L, Light Industrial District, in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of
this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and
the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the
ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading rule and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard the reading of this ordinance. Is there anyone
who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Thank you for not saying yes. Council?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: In an attempt to improve my motion approval rate, I move we approve Ordinance
No. 16-1675 with suspension of rules.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 66 of 68
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 10-A. Any discussion by
Council?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Just kidding. Just wanted to get the expression.
De Weerd: Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little
Roberts, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Ordinance No. 16-1676: An Ordinance of the City of Meridian
Granting the Rezone of 1.650 Acres of Land Known as Earl Glen
(RZ 15-009) From an R-8 (Medium Density Residential) Zoning
District to the R-15 (Medium High Residential) Zoning District.
The Property is Generally Located at the North Side of McMillan
Road, East of N. Locust Grove in the Southwest 1/4 of the
Southwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 East,
Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; and
Providing an Effective Date
De Weerd: Item 10-B is Ordinance 16-1676. Madam Clerk, will you, please, read this by
title.
Jones: Thank you, Madam Mayor. An Ordinance RZ 15-009, Earl Glen, for the rezone of
a parcel of land being part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 29,
Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho;
establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of R-8, Medium Density
Residential Zoning District to R-15, Medium High Residential Zoning District, in the
Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada
County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as
required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver
of the reading rule and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: You have heard this read by title. Is there anyone who would like to hear it
read in its entirety? Seeing none.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 67 of 68
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor, I move we approve Ordinance No. 16-1676 with suspension of
rules.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 10-B. Any discussion from
Council? Madam Clerk.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 11: Future Meeting Topics
De Weerd: Council, any topics for future agendas?
Item 12: Amended onto the Agenda: Executive Session Per Idaho State Code
74-206 (1): (a) To Consider Hiring A Public Officer, Employee, Staff
Member Or Individual Agent, Wherein The Respective Qualities Of
Individuals Are To Be Evaluated In Order To Fill A Particular Vacancy
Or Need. This Paragraph Does Not Apply To Filling A Vacancy In An
Elective Office Or Deliberations About Staffing Needs In General
De Weerd: If not, Item 12 is 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)(a).
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn into Executive Session. Madam
Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: Bird, yea; Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts,
yea.
Meridian City Council
March 15, 2016
Page 68 of 68
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:11 a.m. to 9:48 p.m.)
Bird: -- Executive Session. Let it be known no decisions were made.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to come out of Executive Session. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Do I have a motion to adjourn?
Bird: So moved.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:49 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR Tt�y DE WEERD DATE APPROVED
ATT ST:
QtYof
E�}II OLMAN, CITY CLERKS
sV�eE`