HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 11-16CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
Tuesday, November 16, 2004 at 7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
X Shaun Wardle X Christine Donnell
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
2. Pledge of Allegiance:
3. Community Invocation by Pastor Ed Kreiner, with Meridian Assembly
of God: Presented
4. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve
5. Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of October 26, 2004 City Council Regular
Meeting: Approve
B.
Approve
6. Department Reports.
A. City Attorney — Bill Nary
1. Administrative Leave Policy: Presented
B. Mayor's Office
1. Discussion of ACHD Sidewalk - Ranking of Community
Program Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk: Approve
2. Meridian TIP: Discussed
7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda)
Meridiao City Council Agenda — November 16, 2004 Page 1 of 2
8. Tabled from November 9, 2004: MI 04-015 Request for a Miscellaneous
application approval to allow a one-time lot division to separate an un -
platted parcel into two parcels in an I -L zone for Montague-Sauriol. LLC
by Montague-Sauriol, LLC —1127 East Pine Avenue: Approve
9. FP 04-069 Request for Final Plat approval for 35 single-family residential
building lots and 3 common lots on 10.17 acres in an R-8 zone for
Baldwin Park Subdivision No. 9 by Capital Development — north of West
Ustick Road and east of North Linder Road: Approve
10. FP 04-070 Request for Final Plat approval of 40 single-family residential
building lots and two common lots on 10.32 acres in an R-8 zone for
Roseleaf Subdivision No. 2 by Liberty Development, Inc. — 3615 South
Locust Grove Road: Table to November 23, 2004 Meeting
11. Continued Public Hearing from November 3, 2004: AZ 04-025
Request for Annexation and Zoning of 121.96 acres from R4 (Ada County)
to R4 zone for Vienna Woods Subdivision No. 1-7 and Edinburah
Place Subdivision No. 1-2 by the City of Meridian — NEC of East
McMillan Road and North Locust Grove Road: Prepare Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law for Approval
12. Public Hearing: CUP 04-039 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
women's fitness center in a C -N zone for Lot 1, Block 1 of Cherry
Crossing Subdivision by Robnett Construction, Inc. — northwest corner
of Cherry Lane and Linder Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for Approval
13. Public Hearing: CUP 04-038 Request for a coffee shop with a drive-thru
window in a C -C zone for EI Dorado Subdivision, Lot 6, Block 5 by
W.H. Moore Company — north west comer of East Overland Road and
Bonito Way and west of South Eagle Road: Prepare Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law for Approval
14. Public Hearing: AZ 04-027 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.5
acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Christian Family Matters. Inc. by Don
Weber — east of South Linder Road and south of West Overland Road:
Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval
15. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Approve
16. Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345 (1)(f): No
Decision
Meridian City Council Agenda — November 16, 2004 Page 2 of 2
All materials oreseded at mrblic meetines shall become orooertv of the Citv of Meridian.
Meridian City Council Meeting November 16, 2004.
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M.,
Tuesday, November 16, 2004, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, Shaun
Wardle, and Christine Donnell.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Brad Watson, Gene Trekel, Kenny
Bowers, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll -call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Shaun Wardle
X Charlie Rountree
X
X Christine Donnell
X Keith Bird
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call the regular City Council meeting to order. It
is Tuesday, November 16th. It's 7:05. Welcome. We appreciate you being here with
us tonight. I will ask the city clerk to, please, start with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 2 is the pledge of allegiance and we have Jared Coleman
with us tonight from Troop 128 who will lead us in the pledge. Please rise.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Ed Kreiner, with Meridian Assembly
of God:
De Weerd: Thank you, Jared. Actually, Jared, I have a gift for you for leading us
tonight. Our City of Meridian pin. Thank you. Okay. Item No. 3 is the community
invocation by Pastor Ed Kreiner with the Meridian Assembly of God Church. I will ask
you to, please, join us in the community invocation or take this opportunity for a moment
of silence.
Kreiner: Thank you for the privilege of praying. Lord, we know this isn't a church
service, it is a city meeting, but I thank you that your scriptures indicate that unless the
Lord guards the city, the watchmen labor in vain. So, tonight we are asking that the
labors of this City Council, the labors of our Mayor, and those who are involved in this
evening, would not be in vain, but we would be able to know the guarding and guiding
and leading of the Lord. So, we seek your wisdom and your favor and we seek your
protection and guidance and guardianship over our city. I ask this in Jesus' name,
amen.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 2 of 35
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you. Pastor, I also have a gift for you as well, our City of Meridian
pin. Thank you. Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve the agenda as published.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the agenda as published. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of October 26, 2004 City Council Regular
Meeting:
B. License Agreement for the 2004 McMillan Water Extension
Project:
De Weerd: Item 5 is the Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I cannot believe the size of this Consent Agenda. I think in seven years I have
never seen one this small. But, anyway, I would move that we approve the Consent
Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there any discussion?
Rountree: Would we want to add some things?
Bird: You want to add some.
De Weerd: Mr. Clerk.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 3 of 35
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Department Reports:
A. City Attorney — Bill Nary
1. Administrative Leave Policy:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 6, Department Reports. We will start with our city attorney
on administrative leave policies.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I'm going to pass down --
this is a proposed administrative leave with pay policy that I have worked on since I
came on board about a month ago. Our normal process would be to have this as a
discussion item for our Pre -Council agendas, but we have had such a congestion lately
of some other projects in our Pre -Council, I just wanted to take the opportunity tonight to
deliver that to you to give you the opportunity to review it. If it meets your approval, I
would be bringing it forward to put it on our expanded Consent Agenda in a week or
two, with a resolution and, then, be able to add it to our policy and procedure manual.
Just to give you a real quick thumbnail, what this is is it's to give some discretionary
opportunity to directors for a couple of different reasons on some needs on whether an
employee should be excused from the workplace with pay. One of the things that was
brought to my attention was that because we have a policy that doesn't allow
employees to take leave within the first six months of their employment, that they
occasionally do get into some hardship situations on circumstances with employees that
department directors have exercised discretion in allowing employees some
discretionary leave for limited circumstances, family illnesses, funerals, things like that,
that didn't necessarily fall within the letter of the policy that's already existing, but it was
something that was important and necessary for the employee. This is just to put some
framework around that type of practice. I also included in there circumstances where it
may be a situation where an investigation of some sort may be occurring and it may be
necessary to remove the employee from the workplace for either their protection or the
city's, but, again, using some discretion and allowing that to be done to efficiently
maintain the operation of the business. At the last section of it, the application portion,
there is a couple different criteria that department directors need to meet to allow this
type of discretionary leave to be used and at some level of it the Mayor or yourself, the
Council, will have some opportunity to provide some input as to whether that's
appropriate or not, but if you wouldn't mind, at least within the next week, take a look at
it. If you have any concerns or issues about it, please, get a hold of me and if it seems
all right, if you'd let me know next week, I can bring it forward, we can put it on consent,
with a resolution to, then, have it added to our policy handbook. That's all I have.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 4 of 35
Bird: Not right now, Mayor.
B. Mayor's Office
1. Discussion of ACHD Sidewalk -Ranking of Community
Program Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Bill. Item B is -- you have in your packet a letter from
ACHD. I need to get information to them tomorrow on ranking of community programs
on the curb, gutter, and sidewalk projects. They have four listed and they would like
prioritization of those four or -- and I would like your feedback on that.
Donnell: This evening? Right now?
De Weerd: Yes. Right this minute, because tomorrow is the deadline. Well, not
tomorrow. Friday. And you know ACHD they are taskmasters.
Donnell: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mrs. Donnell
Donnell: As I look at the four choices and think about, I guess, the routes that I take
and where I see that it may be really important to have curb, gutter, and sidewalk, with
the addition of Cole Valley High School to our community and the students walking in
that area, it seems as if 2 1/2 Street would be a high priority.
De Weerd: Council, any other question or comments? Gary, could you maybe tell us
how these projects were identified? Nothing like catching you off guard.
Inselman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm afraid I don't have a copy of
what you're looking at.
De Weerd: I guess I could give you a copy, but it's on my screen. Mr. Clerk, do you
have a copy of that?
Nary: Madam Mayor, I could --
De Weerd: Yes.
Inselman: I'm not sure it would help. The short answer is I don't know how they were
prioritized.
De Weerd: Anna, did your staff have something to do with these particular projects
being submitted? It did mention that they were compiled from applications submitted to
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 5 of 35
ACHD by citizens, cities, and neighborhood associations, and since we don't have
neighborhood associations, did the city have anything to do with this?
Canning: I do believe that Steve Siddoway attended the meeting. It's separate from the
other sidewalk issues that are going on, so he had a couple of different sidewalk
committees going, but I do believe he did meet with ACH staff regarding those
improvements. I don't -- I'm not exactly sure on how they were arranged. I remember
that that was an issue of concern throughout the project, because there were
neighborhood associations kind of carried a little more weight and since we didn't have
an identified neighborhood association, there was some issues as to how they would
fare in comparison to other projects in Ada County. That was the only issue I remember
hearing about. I don't remember that the priorities within Meridian were contentious or
disputed amongst them. I think it was more of how Meridian would rank against some
of the larger -- the larger city to the east was the question.
Inselman: Madam Mayor, if it would help, I could find out tomorrow where these
requests came from and forward it to Will to get to you.
De Weerd: Okay. I think that would be helpful.
Donnell: Madam Mayor, as Councilman Wardle pointed out, three of these have to do
with proximity to schools. So, it would be hard, I think, to prioritize them. Perhaps they
just all need to be done.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: The third item down, the West 8th one on the east side, that's right across from
the middle school and that is probably your highest traffic and density. I happen to be
one that's went by that for 30 years. I know I shutter in the mornings with the kids being
dropped off and stuff. Thank God we do have a cross lane there and people do abide
by it. But 2 1/2 is -- I don't know how -- how you really prioritize these, because they are
all very very important and I don't know how you could say one's more important than
the other one.
De Weerd: I guess I would agree that the middle school has a very high priority, since I
have been one of those cars dropping off a child there. It is a little frightening seeing
how some of that works. If I can get the information from Gary, I can forward it to you
via e-mail, and perhaps you can just give me your feedback and I will get this submitted
by their deadline on Friday. Lieutenant Trekel, if you could -- I had forwarded a copy of
this to our traffic safety committee. I don't know if they had a chance to discuss it. If
you could find out from one of the committee members and I know that Captain Overton
is out of town, but I believe Gene takes minutes. If they were able to discuss this, if you
can let me know what the outcome of that discussion was. Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 6 of 35
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: And just to point out one more thing, it seems that all four of them have to do
with safe routes to schools and the first one -- just to make note, we had an application
here at the city earlier, which dealt with this exact issue, West 1 st Street. Some of the
residents talked about their accessibility and need for that sidewalk and so, certainly,
they are all worthy projects, but as far as what this Council is seeing, we did have some
specific requests on that West 1st Street. And I believe our direction was -- from the
Council to go back and to work with the highway district to -- to bring some resolution for
those residents.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, then, I guess I would suggest and look for your feedback, if
we listed West 8th Street as number one, West 1st Street as number two, 2 112 as
number three, and Waltman as number four?
Rountree: Got it right.
Bird: I'd buy that, Mayor. I would definitely buy that.
Donnell: Uh-huh.
De Weerd: Okay. But I -- if, Gary, you can still get us that information, that would be
helpful. Okay. I will, then, draft a letter and let them know what the priority order is on
this.
2. Meridian TIP:
De Weerd: Okay. The second item was regarding the Meridian TIP. I did get a copy of
it from Brad Hawkins -Clark and I did talk to Bruce Mills earlier tonight. What was sent
over to them just rearranged the priorities three and four and we had more discussion
on that. Unfortunately, that pre -Council meeting was not taped. So, I hope he's
forwarding you a copy of that TIP and look for comments as well on that. But I have told
ACHD that we did revise that somewhat and I would get those to them.
Rountree: What's their response time, Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: They said they still had a little bit of time.
Bird: Don't tell us that, give us a date, or you will be a month from now waiting for some
reply.
De Weerd: I will get something out to you also via e-mail for your comment and Bruce
was going to tell me the last date as well and, Gary, you might remind him of that.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 7 of 35
Item 7: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda)
De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the two items on our Consent
Agenda.
Item 8: Tabled from November 9, 2004: MI 04-015 Request for a Miscellaneous
application approval to allow a one-time lot division to separate an un -
platted parcel into two parcels in an I -L zone for Montague-Sauriol. LLC
by Montague-Sauriol, LLC — 1127 East Pine Avenue:
De Weerd: So, we will move on to Item No. 8, tabled from November 9th, 2004, MI 04-
015. Start with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for a reduction in
platting requirements for the property that's located at the end of -- it's on -- it's south of
Pine and Commercial stubs to it from the east. It's about a quarter mile west of Locust
Grove Road. The owner came in and staff did suggest that this would be an opportunity
to qualify for one of these reductions in platting requirements. As staff got into the
analysis of this issue, we kept on finding a number of issues that kept on adding it up
and staff is coming forward with a recommendation for denial today. This is the
requested split. It's for about three-quarters of an acre here down at the southeast
corner of the property and it would line up — the center line of that new property would
line up with this center line -- or the north property line, I'm sorry, would line up with the
center line of Commercial Avenue. I'm going to go through the reasons that staff has
come forward with this recommendation. As you know, this is a fairly new process for
the city to be doing and part of it is that staff is unclear on how far we want to take these
reduction in platting requirements, particularly for some of these un -platted properties,
and it isn't a guaranteed lot split, it is just at the discretion of staff as to which, if any,
platting requirements that they may want to waive and, then, it says that if it's un -platted
property, then, we come forward to you and that's why we are here today. First of all,
there is some question -- well, the circulation is one of the larger issues related to this
property. We have a letter from MDC requesting that the split be denied, because they
want to facilitate the extension of Broadway through to Commercial, this being one of
those key pieces. An applicant or developer is -- has to go through the subdivision
process to dedicate right of way and this is an issue that's cropping up around town
lately. ACHD currently does not have a mechanism for accepting right of way, unless
it's done through the subdivision process. So, both -- the MDC has requested that this
be required to go through the subdivision process in order that Commercial will be
stubbed to this west property boundary. The second issue is there is some question as
to whether this property should be eligible for the lot split provision. It was -- the original
parcel of record includes what's now platted as Railroad Park Subdivision. Now, at the
time staff didn't require the full parcel of record to be included within the subdivision.
This was left off of that subdivision. So, there does seem to be a question as to whether
it should be eligible. And, again, because we haven't done that many of these, we are
trying to find out where City Council is comfortable going as far as these requirements,
as well as staff. But it does not, technically, meet the original parcel or lot of record
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 8 of 35
requirement, because its been previously subdivided. Now, that's a little different from
previously split. So, previous splits would be very clear. Now, having had some of it
subdivided is not as clear to staff. And I don't know if that made any sense, but you can
ask me questions. The other issue is one with the Comp Plan. The Comp Plan does
have this area here as mixed use and my understanding is that when it went through
the Comprehensive Plan hearings, there was -- this area, in particular, was looked at as
a key transition from the downtown and this industrial property here and, then, the
single family residential to the north and this is clearly the largest of those properties
and will have a big impact. Having said that, Ada County has purchased this property
and the uses they have described to us that they are proposing so far do seem to go
with that mixed-use category. They have got a number of county functions that they
want to place there. I think they are still trying to refine what those are. But they do
seem to be a good mix between having some offices, having some yards, having -- you
know, that are kind of more industrial in nature and, actually, transitioning on the
property itself. Another reason is that the entire property is within the Five Mile Creek
one hundred year flood plain. So, there are some issues regarding elevating structures,
how much fill they are going to bring in, and normally we don't look at any of those
issues with these splits, we would look at them more with a subdivision. The fifth
reason -- there is -- it's a matter of just getting some of the requirements that are in the
landscape ordinance that we don't have as much control over a certificate of zoning
compliance as we do with a subdivision. We have been requiring a five-foot landscape
buffer along the Union Pacific railroad. That landscape buffer assumes that a multi -use
pathway will go at the northern edge of the Union Pacific railroad right of way and, then,
the landscape ordinance does require a five-foot buffer along the multi -use pathway.
So, the Comprehensive Plan shows a multi -use pathway on the railroad corridor. We
have traditionally treated that as following that northern boundary and, then, provided
the landscape buffers to the north of that. Finally, there was some concern from the fire
marshal regarding water supply, but the Public Works Department has had an
opportunity to evaluate that and there doesn't seem to be a concern and if you have
more questions on that, Brad can fully answer that. So, again, it's kind of -- it just kind
of added up to the point where staff didn't feel comfortable recommending approval of
this application, but we were eager to hear Council's thoughts, and the applicant has
crafted a very well worded letter, I noticed, too, in response to staffs -- the staff report.
And with that I will end staffs presentation.
De Weerd: Council, any questions of staff?
Mayor: I have none, Mayor.
Donnell: None.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to make comment? Please state your
name and address.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 9 of 35
Montague: It's Roy Montague, 199 Rooster Drive, Eagle, and I'm the managing
member of the Montagu e-Sauriol, LLC. And this is kind of a first for me. Thank you. I
do want to say that staff has been pretty wonderful to work with. It's been a
cooperative, supportive thing, and, basically, what I'm going to conclude with is that
whichever process we use, we are going to end up in the same place, and I'd like to
think that because we have started this miscellaneous application, as originally
suggested by staff, that we follow through on it. It will allow us to complete this project
within the time frame that we are interested in. As Anna already explained, the property
was sold to Ada County, with an option for Montague-Sauriol to have that one little
corner. And the reason we want that one little corner is to put up a building for a
business that's over on Lanark Street. It's called Ready -Made Plastic Trays, which is a
wonderful business. We get recycled plastic and we make trays and we send the
leftovers back for more recycling. I have put a couple of photos at the very end. I think
you all have the little presentation I put together and I put a couple of photos of buildings
that we built in Oregon and I like to think that we do nice buildings and our type of
business fits in very well with what's going on immediately to the east of the property
that we want to develop, which is the -- I believe called Railside Development, which is
light industrial. When we bought the property it was light industrial and, then, shortly
thereafter it was -- I guess not really rezoned, but whatever the term is, it's now mixed
use. And I think it's a wonderful deal for the city and the county for this transitional thing
from industrial to residential, as Anna already mentioned. As I already said, when we
finished this project -- or finished the application process, we are going to be in the
same place, we are going to meet all of the city's requirements and allowing us to move
ahead, it's -- right now the option will terminate the end of April and the regular process,
it's probably going to extend beyond that. I don't know that we can't extend that option,
that's going to be up to county, but, certainly, if we went ahead with this miscellaneous
application there would be no question about that. Any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Council -- yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Sir, we have got to get a right of way through there for Broadway Street and that's
not real clear on that map where Broadway Street is, but I kind of got --
Canning: The Broadway -- current Broadway right of way extends to that point there,
sir.
Bird: Yes. It goes to Precision Logs.
Canning: It goes -- yeah, about halfway -- just right to there. It doesn't go through this
whole property, it only goes part way.
Bird: And to make our downtown area viable, we feel that we need that right of way
through there to bring Broadway all the way east to hook up to Locust Grove. Do you
have any problem with doing that? And it would -- it would be a better deal if you're
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 10 of 35
taking out two-thirds of an acre in the southeast comer, it would be -- to have a road, it
would give you a little more frontage there.
Montague: Well, we need a road, but I think that's going to happen regardless of --
that's almost a given, I believe, that Commercial will extend through to Broadway. And
it's more up to Ada County and their application process, than it is our little southeast
corner.
Bird: How far off do you come -- how far is your two-thirds of an acre coming off there?
Montague: Well, it's a hundred feet --
Bird: From the right of way?
Montague: Oh, well, the way we originally platted it with the county, it would go to the
center of Commercial when it gets extended, but now we are talking about putting it
right to the edge of Commercial. It makes no difference to me. Did that answer your
question?
Bird: Yes, it did. Thank you.
De Weerd: So, basically, what you're saying is your piece would not impede on the
extension of those roads?
Montague: No.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council?
Canning: Madam Mayor, just to clarify that, if it's brought down 25 feet, then, it would
not impede. There is no frontage requirement in the I -L, so it would still be a build -able
parcel. It would not require frontage on Commercial at this time. He could have a
cross -access agreement with Ada County to get access to Commercial.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Montague: That's it? All right. Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Logan, do you have anything to add?
Logan: Thank you, Mayor, City Council. Will. It's always great to come back to
Meridian.
De Weerd: Please state your name and address.
Logan: Dave Logan, 9200 Lyle Street, Boise.
Meridian City council
November 16, 2004
Page 11 of 35
De Weerd: Thank you.
Logan: But it's nice to come back to a place that I have always called kind of my home.
My hometown. But, anyway, Ada County intends on meeting ACHD and Meridian
Planning and Zoning requirements for the full development of the county's property. We
plan to work very closely with ACHD and your staff in meeting the goals that you have
set for your community. It's critical for funding purposes that the proposed split and
purchase of the property proceed without delay. We, of course, respectfully request
that you consider approving the proposed division and allow the reduction in platting
requirements at this phase of the development. Ada County has no problem with
extending Commercial to the -- I believe it would be the west property line. We
anticipate that our planning process for that site to take a considerable amount of time.
We have very high hopes and very elaborate plans for the property and we'd like to do it
right the first time. We'd also like the site to be a green development, a sustainable site
that is an asset to the City of Meridian. We look -- we anticipate taking months in our
planning process. This would allow us to get started and proceed in the planning
process. We are not delaying our process at all. As a matter of fact, I have scheduled
our first coordination meeting for the 24th of this month and we do anticipate it -- you
know, right before Thanksgiving the sheriff and major department heads in Ada County
are going to come down to the courthouse and we are going to start on the planning
process. We do not plan to subdivide. We do not plan at this time to sell any of the
property off. We plan to make it an Ada County site. We do plan on working with
ACHD on right of way and we have a long history of working with them successfully
together and in getting that land transferred to ACHD and making the roads part of their
system. Hopefully, I could probably answer a few questions about what we intend to do
with the property or any questions that you may have concerning it.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Dave. Council, do you have any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: You indicated that the county has no qualms with extending Commercial to
the west boundary. And you also indicated you don't plan on selling any additional
parcels. Does the remainder on the south end fit with your planning purposes?
Logan: Let's put it that way. It doesn't interfere. There is some wetlands back in -- in
that one corner there and -- which will make it a little difficult, but we will -- we are going
to accommodate that. We had originally started sketching out small departments on
where we would put them in a campus -type setting. We can live with that kind of little
landlocked place between Roy's piece and that wetland and we can accommodate that.
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions, Council?
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 12 of 35
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the
allow a road dedication that created those
would -- just for clarification, it would need
right of way.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Council, if I could, our ordinance would not
kind of two distinct parcels like that. So, it
to be done as a subdivision to dedicate that
Bird: Anna, you jumbled my mind, which isn't hard to do, but on the north end of that
little parcel that Roy wants through now?
Canning: Yes, sir.
De Weerd: Did you say that was already dedicated for a road or did I misunderstand?
Canning: No, sir. Just to the -- Dave, if you could just duck for a moment.
Logan: Why don't I just sit down.
Canning: The centerline of Commercial Avenue lines up right now with the north
property boundary. So, if the Council chooses to go forward, what I would suggest that
you give staff a week to come up with the appropriate conditions of approval. The main
one being that this line needs to drop down 25 feet, so that it would be parallel with the
south end of the right of way for Commercial Avenue and, then, they would need to
have some sort of cross -access agreement to allow getting into that. That way when
the county is ready to subdivide and dedicate right of way, then, they would have full
access to that Commercial Avenue extension.
Bird: Thank you, Anna.
De Weerd: Okay. So, you're suggesting to table this until next week, so you can get
appropriate comments and the applicant can get us a new plat or at least description of
what you're doing that shows the adjustment to allow for the roads. Is that reasonable?
Canning: Mr. Montague is saying that he's not sure that we couldn't just do that with a
written condition of approval and I would agree that we probably don't need a new
survey at this time. We could write it sufficiently. If that's the way the Council wants to
go, then, staff will make that work.
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor. Anna, I have two questions. One, if -- and the staff
recommended that we try the miscellaneous use application? That's correct?
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 13 of 35
Canning: Yes, we did. And I had committed that if the Council didn't want to approve
this, that I would ask that that amount of fees be waived on the new application, just as
a note.
Wardle: Okay. Just to follow up to that, help me understand where the application
would be at if it were through the regular subdivide -- subdividing process, with the
delays and the tabling. Ballpark.
Canning: I'm looking for when the application was submitted. It was submitted on
October 11th. So, the cutoff -- it would have made the October 15th cutoff, perhaps,
which would put it out to the December Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and,
then, it would go to City Council in January or so.
Wardle: Okay. And, Madam Mayor, another follow up. If we were to approve this lot
split with some of the recommendations that we have made as far as the road, would
the county have to come back and subdivide their piece to be able to dedicate that right
of way?
Canning: Yes. Now, if they chose not to dedicate right of way, then, they would not. If
they chose to build private streets or drive aisles that they would maintain, then, they
would not be required. And that was part of staffs concern, is that if that decision were
made in the future, then, we would not have that opportunity to get that. Now, they
have committed that they want to have publicly dedicated streets.
Wardle: And, Madam Mayor, if I could ask a question of Mr. Logan. Just to follow up
on what Anna said, is it the intent of the county to bring this application through after
you have done your planning process, to subdivide it, so that that right of way could be
dedicated?
Logan: If that's the only process for us to transfer that road to ACHD, that would be the
process. We don't -- we don't.intend on maintaining the streets ourselves. We'd like the
experts to do it. Thank you.
De Weerd: We appreciate that. Okay. Anything else, Council? Okay. What would
you like to do?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve MI 04-015 application for two-thirds of an acre
parcel and to have the developer, applicant, and staff through letter get 25 feet on the
north end of the property, go south 25 feet, and get it dedicated for future road right of
way.
Donnell: I'll second that.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 14 of 35
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve with the stated condition. Is there any
discussion?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Bird, we have a list of four or five
standard conditions that we have been putting on these. I don't have a list of those
available. One of them I know is that the -- that they submit a lot line application to
actually effect the lot line adjustment. Would the maker of the motion be amenable to
adding those standard conditions of approval?
Bird: The standard conditions that we put on it? That would be part of the motion, yes,
ma'am.
De Weerd: Does the second agree?
Donnell: The second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. And I guess since you draw up those findings, are you comfortable
with everything you need to put in there?
Canning: Pardon me? I didn't hear the last part.
De Weerd: Since you draw up the findings, do you have all the information you need to
draw those up?
Canning: I believe so. Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion, Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Just a question for Council. Are the comments this evening a matter of
record in any way, shape, or form binding?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council -member Rountree, are you
talking about the statement from Mr. Logan about their future plans?
Rountree: Yes.
Nary: Not -- probably not in the sense of what you mean by binding. Certainly I trust
Mr. Logan's intent today and what he's telling us. Whether that may change in the new
year or when those plans get developed, could the city, then, require those to become
public streets within the project based on what Mr. Logan's statements were today?
Probably not.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 15 of 35
Rountree: Madam Mayor, follow-up question?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Future development of this parcel would be subject to Conditional Use
Permit?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't believe so. I mean depending
what they wanted to do. If it's an allowed use -- it's not -- it's not -- I don't believe so. I
can't see the map from here, but I don't believe that that property by itself requires
conditional use. It may be depending on what the uses are going to be, but if it was an
allowed use, I don't -- I can't see it from here, but I think it's light industrial or industrial
property.
Canning: Madam Mayor, it's zoned light industrial. It does have a mixed-use
designation on the Comp Plan. I can look up -- there were some Comp Plan mixed use
designations that require conditional use approval. I believe it's only the regional,
though, and I can look that up really fast, if Council would like me to.
Nary: At least, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, most of the uses that the
county would likely use it for, office space and those types of things, are probably going
to have conditional use needs to those. Some of the uses, whether it be for
maintenance yards or things like that, may not required that, unless it's depending --
Mrs. Canning would know better than I would -- depending on the types of materials that
they wanted to have, the site may require some conditional use, but I don't know
specifically.
De Weerd: But it does sound like because there will be a road, they do need a plat; is
that correct? Or do a subdivision?
Canning: If they decide to dedicate a road, then, it would be required to go through a
plat process. And, then, Madam Mayor, if I could -- I'm sorry for jumping in so much.
You asked me a question. I think I answered a little prematurely. One of the standard
conditions we sometimes put on, sometimes not, has been exactly a requirement that
they submit a plat prior to the final occupancy on this split parcel. Now, I'm assuming in
this case that that's -- it's inconsistent with what they have asked for as far as testimony,
so I'm assuming that the Council does not want that condition added, but I thought I'd
better check.
Bird: Not for that one little lot, no.
De Weerd: No.
Canning: Pardon?
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 16 of 35
Bird: Not for that one little lot. There would be no reason to plat that.
Canning: Thank you.
De Weerd: For this lot.
Bird: For this --
Canning: For the larger lot.
Bird: -- the one we are passing on right now.
De Weerd: No. She means for the larger lot.
Canning: One of the standard conditions that we have had is that they submit -- we did
this on the Goddains split, the first one that came through. We didn't do it on a smaller
industrial one. But we required that both properties be the subject of a subdivision plat
and that application be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department and accepted
for process prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy on the split property.
Bird: Anna, you got me confused again. No. I think I know what you're talking about.
And that would be -- if that's the way this application is, then, yeah, they will have to
have a plat for the rest of the deal. Now, if we are just passing on this single little two-
thirds of an acre or whatever it is, splitting that, then, I don't -- you wouldn't need a plat
on that.
Nary: It's all an issue of timing.
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, just a question for Mr. Nary. Could we place upon this
provision a condition that the larger parcel come back with a plat before occupancy of
that parcel?
De Weerd: And that is what Anna made suggestion on.
Nary: Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council -member Wardle, I think
what Mrs. Canning said and what we have done is we have required -- and it seems like
it's just a matter of timing. We have required the plat for both parcels prior to occupancy
of the smaller parcel.
Wardle: Right.
Nary: And I think what all Council -member Wardle is saying is rather than requiring it
for both parcels, can we just require it for the county, the larger piece, and not tie it to
the occupancy of the smaller piece. And I guess we haven't done that previously and I
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 17 of 35
don't know -- because I didn't hear from Mr. Logan what their timing is on whether or not
the county is of a mind that they are going to be -- because I did hear -- I did hear that
the smaller parcel piece was March or April was when they needed to exercise their
option and I don't know when the other piece is intending to be brought forward. So, I
don't know whether or not the applicant can concur with either one of those conditions.
De Weerd: Well, we do have a motion on the floor and we are in the discussion phase.
I could ask Mr. Logan if he has comment.
Bird: I would be in favor of that
Logan: Ada County does not have any problem following the Conditional Use Permit
process and it's awfully hard to kind of speculate what's going to be developed and
exactly where, but our preliminary plans show the -- I believe Commercial going all the
way through and also shows the road going -- tying in up to Pine Street. It's going to
take us awhile to do that and -- but we have no problems following the conditional use
process and I believe you will see a final plat and our intended uses at that time and
before we actually start construction on any of our projects on the site.
De Weerd: Mr. Logan, will you have a preliminary idea to -- to staff by next March?
Logan: By this April?
De Weerd: Yes.
Logan: No.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would -- with the second agreement; I would put a stipulation on my motion that
any other property within this development will be through CUP. Any development. If
the second would agree to that? I think that takes care of our worries.
Donnell: I'd agree.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think that the issue still is would they
still have to plat the other piece and when the timing of that plat's going to be. Do you
want it tied to this smaller piece -- I'm trying to mind meld with Mrs. Canning here, but I
think that's -- I think that's the issue is certainly putting the requirement of the CUP
solves the issue of seeing this again and being able to approve whatever -- whatever
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 18 of 35
the county decides to do with it, but there still isn't a platting requirement to the other
piece yet and when timing -- or when that is effective. But Mrs. Canning can probably
answer when she needs that -- when she needs something on that
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the code gives the city engineer and
I the authority to require some or all of the platting requirements. Requiring a
Conditional Use Permit is not one of the platting requirement, so I'm not sure that that
option is open this evening, Mr. Bird. I think that -- I think that Council -member Wardle's
condition -- or suggestion may be -- may be the best answer from what I'm hearing the
concerns of Council. It sounds like maybe we could place the condition that any future
development of the large remainder property go through the subdivision process before
any certificate of occupancy is issued on that property. That leaves the timing strictly at
Ada County's discretion. It still gets a plat requirement on there and that is within the
boundaries of this application to require full platting on that property. We are just
specifying it at a later time.
Bird: Okay. I'm willing to add that to the motion. I'm not going to repeat it.
De Weerd: Do you know what she's adding to your motion?
Bird: Yeah, I do. We will take off the CUP and we will add that on the parcel left off and
this property will be brought through subdivision -wise. Is that right?
Canning: Yes, sir. Thank you.
Bird: If the second agrees.
Donnell: And the second agrees.
De Weerd: And just for my clarification, it's that they have to plat before they can have
a CO on any building in that --
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, no questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 9: FP 04-069 Request for Final Plat approval for 35 single-family residential
building lots and 3 common lots on 10.17 acres in an R-8 zone for
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 19 of 35
Baldwin Park Subdivision No. 9 by Capital Development — north of
West Ustick Road and east of North Linder Road:
De Weerd: Well, the record's going to be very important on this one, Dean, so -- okay.
Item No. 9 is FP 04-069. We will start with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for a final plat
approval of 35 single family residential building lots and three common lots on 10.17
acres in an R-8 zone. This is for Baldwin Park Subdivision. It was preliminary platted
as Baldwin Park Addition. We have Cedar Springs to the east. Baldwin Park to the
north. And, then, we have Sienna Creek, which you will see, I believe, next week, to the
west. The final plat is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat.
There are three fewer lots. They have shifted some micro -paths and a pathway was
added to the east side of the common lot connecting the park area to North Brice
Canyon Drive. So, there were also some issues and the staff report may have been a
little confusing. There were some issues regarding the amount of land dedicated for the
drain and canal, the Coleman Lateral. The applicant was able to negotiate a lesser right
of way for those two features. Because that area was not technically open space, it
would have been fenced, it would have not been usable open space, the reduction in
that easement width didn't affected their open space calculations and, therefore, staff
did feel that the final plat was in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary
plat. I do have an e-mail from the applicant's representative saying they are in
agreement with the conditions of approval and has no issues with the requirements at
this time.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, the applicant agrees with staff findings. Council, any
questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve FP 04-069, final plat for Baldwin Park Subdivision No.
9.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item No. 9. Is there any further
discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 20 of 35
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: FP 04-070 Request for Final Plat approval of 40 single-family residential
building lots and two common lots on 10.32 acres in an R-8 zone for
Roseleaf Subdivision No. 2 by Liberty Development, Inc. — 3615 South
Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 10 is FP 04-070. Start with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this final plat is for Roseleaf
Subdivision. It's on the west side of Locust Grove Road, south of -- south of Victory, I
believe. The Tuscany Village Subdivision is just to the north. They have done the -- or
final plat on phase one, which is to the west. The final plat is in substantial compliance
with the approved preliminary plat. They are asking for 44 single-family residential
building lots and two common area lots on 10.32 acres in an R-8 zone. The gross
density is 4.3 dwelling units per acre and the net density is 5.3 dwelling units per acre. I
was not able to locate a letter from the applicant stating that they were in agreement
with the conditions of approval. I'm hoping they have a representative here.
De Weerd: Is the application here this evening? Okay. Council, what would you like to
do?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Seeing that we don't have consensus from the applicant and we don't have
record of it, I move that we table Item No. 10 to November 23rd, 2004.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to table Item No. 10 to next week, November 11th --
November 23rd, 2004. 11123.
Rountree: The way -back machine.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. We are in the public process of our meeting. We are required by our
ordinance to swear in any of those that are desiring to provide public testimony. So, I
do it all at once and get it all out of the way. Anyone who would like to provide
testimony this evening, if you will, please, raise your right hand. Is the testimony that
you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God? If so, answer yes.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 21 of 35
(Affirmative answers.)
Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from November 3, 2004: AZ 04-025
Request for Annexation and Zoning of 121.96 acres from R4 (Ada County)
to R-4 zone for Vienna Woods Subdivision No. 1-7 and Edinburgh
Place Subdivision No. 1-2 by the City of Meridian — NEC of East
McMillan Road and North Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 11 is a continued Public Hearing from November 3 and I will
start with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this item was tabled last time
because the hearing date was posted for a Tuesday, instead of the Wednesday. It was
right after the election, so that's why its been tabled. We did not discuss this at your
last hearing. The item before you is the annexation of Vienna Woods and Edinburgh
Place Subdivision. They are currently in an R-4 district in the county and we are -- staff
has initiated the application to have them annexed and zoned R-4 in the City of
Meridian. The annexation is comprised of 362 build -able lots, 27 common lots, for a
total of 389 lots. Vienna Woods is located here at the north portion of this inverted L
and, then, Edinburgh is down here. We have McMillan Road along the south, Locust
Grove on the west. With the annexation of Settlement Bridge Subdivision located here
on the south side of McMillan Road, provided an annexation path to the Edinburgh and,
then, Vienna Woods through Edinburgh Subdivision. And also Sheridan Place, which is
located here to the west of Edinburgh Subdivision, provided an additional annexation
path to those properties. I'm going to largely read the next portion, because there are
very specific findings in the state code related to annexation of properties. These are
listed on page two toward the last two paragraphs on that page of the staff report. The
subject of this application is adjacent to the City of Meridian and lies within our area of
city impact of the City of Meridian. The entire property is included within the Meridian
Urban Service Planning Area, as defined in the 2002 Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
The land is laid off into lots and blocks containing not more than five acres of land each.
The city has prepared and published a written annexation plan that includes the manner
of providing tax supported municipal services to this land, the changes in taxation and
other costs which may result if the subject lands are annexed, the means of providing
fee supported municipal services to the lands proposed to be annexed, an analysis of
the potential effects of annexation upon other units of local government which currently
provide tax supported or fee supported services to the land and the proposed future
land use planning and zoning designations for the land. Because staff feels that we
have met these findings, we have recommended that the subject property be annexed
into the corporate limits of the City of Meridian and be zoned R-4, Low Density
Residential. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a hearing on this item on
October 7th, 2004. There were no members of the public to testify in favor or opposition
or commenting on this application. The Commission had no key items, issues of
discussion, nor any changes to staff recommendation. To staffs knowledge there are
no outstanding issues before the City Council. I do also want to add note that staff did
Meridian City Council
November 16,2004
Page 22 of 35
have a neighborhood meeting on this annexation request and we pretty much had a full
house. We held it here in Council chambers and it was pretty much full for that meeting
and we answered questions and I think we were able to satisfy a lot of people's
concerns regarding the annexation request
Planning and -- no one showing up at the
And with that I will end staffs presentation.
and, hopefully, that was evidenced by the
'fanning and Zoning Commission hearing.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Are there any questions for staff at this time?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Donnell: None.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Well, I would like to give comment to Anna. The staff did a tremendous
job in the information that they got to the neighbors and I believe as this development --
as these developments were approved, the public notice on the plat and on the signings
with CC&Rs were very well notified that this would be the step taken once they were
contiguous and this really does emphasize and underscore how to do it right. We don't
want to do it, but we like to grow up like we are supposed to, but in this case it was done
very well and appreciate the staff efforts, in particular Craig Hood. He put together a
very nice analysis of impact to the neighbors on what would happen and it was an
outstanding job. So, thank you, Anna. Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we close the public hearings on AZ 04-025.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: The motion is to close the Public Hearing on Item 11. All those in favor say
aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve AZ 04-025, Vienna Woods and Edinburgh annexation and
zoning.
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 23 of 35
De Weerd: The motion is to approve Item 11. Is there any further discussion?
Hearing done, Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Public Hearing: CUP 04-039 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
women's fitness center in a C -N zone for Lot 1, Block 1 of Cherry
Crossing Subdivision by Robnett Construction, Inc. — northwest corner
of Cherry Lane and Linder Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 12 is a Public Hearing on CUP 04-039. I'll open the Public
Hearing with staff comments.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Before you begin staff comments, I am going to recuse myself from this
application, because of a personal conflict of interest.
De Weerd: Okay. Does Council have any problem with that?
Bird: Absolutely not.
Donnell: No.
Rountree: Not a bit.
De Weerd: See you later, Mr. Wardle. Okay. Staff.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for a Conditional
Use Permit for a woman's fitness center in a C -N zone for Lot 1, Block 1, of Cherry
Crossing Subdivision. The entirety of Cherry Crossing Subdivision is outlined here. It's
at the -- it's at the northwest corner of Linder Road and Cherry Lane on the south side of
Emerald Falls Drive. So, this does provide a boundary to it to the north. I did want to
explain a little bit about fitness centers and their relationship to a listed use in the zoning
ordinance and, of course, there is no such listed use. In the past -- that would make my
life far too easy. In the past, such as for Gold's Gym, we classified it as kind of an
indoor entertainment use. It didn't seem appropriate with this scale of development.
With the really large athletic clubs it seemed like an appropriate fit, but for these small
ones it didn't seem like an appropriate fit at all. So, we are bringing it forward to you as
a use not listed, but as similar to other uses listed in the C -N zone and, therefore, it just
requires conditional use approval. So, that's why its before you tonight. This is the site
as the aerial was taken. It has developed somewhat since then. This is the now Lot 1
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 24 of 35
that -- the original subdivision has gone through an number of lot line changes and splits
of properties and shuffling about, so -- but this is the lot as proposed currently. This is
the proposed building. And these are the elevations. I'm looking for the size of the
building, ma'am. I'm not finding it offhand. I'm sure the applicant will be able to let us
know what that is. Sixteen hundred square feet? Six thousand square feet. There we
go. The building is approximately 6,000 square feet. They would have, I believe, a
drainage basin at the north property line. As I mentioned before, there is drive -- a road
-- a public street just north of this and as you look, there are a number of residential lots
that were platted with this subdivision just to the north. The subject property lies right
here kind of just below this roundabout, so there would be some -- quite a bit of distance
to these properties immediately north of it. Part of the approval that they are asking for
is for operating hours to be between 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week for the
property. The City Council has addressed the issue of time limits for the allowed hours
of operation on this general property. Most of that discussion was related to the -- what
was thought to be a Rite Aid, I believe, at the time and the hours of operation for that
use. This, because it is a fitness facility, they do need to open up a little earlier than
was originally anticipated for the subdivision and stay open a little bit later to
accommodate people's work schedules. So, they are asking for 6:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m., seven days a week, just for this subject property. The Planning and Zoning
Commission conducted a hearing on October 21st. Testifying in favor of the application
was Mike Robnett, representing Robnett Construction, and no one from the public
testified in opposition to the application. The Commission did not have a great amount
of discussion on the application and there was no changes to staffs initial
recommendation. So, to staffs knowledge there are no outstanding issues before the
City Council. And with that I will end staffs presentation.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff at this time?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Is the applicant here? Come forward. If you will, please, state your name
and address.
Robnett: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Mike Robnett and I
reside at 655 West Oakhampton. Anna pretty much summed it up well. I do want to
make a -- just a couple of clarifications. We did come forward to you guys a few weeks
ago with a miscellaneous app to amend the hours of operation from what Rite Aid had it
as, which was several different hours, depending on the day. And we have changed it
to 6:00 to 10:00, seven days a week. And that is on the whole parcel. This is going to
be one of two lots in the back and those hours of operation were amended on both
pieces and they will -- they will hold fast on the other piece as well, not just -- not just
Total Woman. When I started working with this property, I met with all the neighbors
and that seemed to be their biggest concern was getting something in there that's going
to run late into the night. The couple hours early in the morning didn't seem to be a
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 25 of 35
problem. We did design this site -- all the parking is in front. The building is between
the parking and the residents, so all your parking lot lighting and stuff will have the
building as a buffer. There is also a berm and fence and landscape buffer already in
place between the proposed building and the residential lots right now. And as Anna
also said, there is no use for this in the C -N zone -- or in the schedule of use control, but
the purpose of a C -N zone is to permit the establishment of small-scale convenience
business uses, which are intended to meet the daily needs of the residents of an
immediate neighborhood. And that pretty much is what the Total Woman Fitness is
doing here. We have a hundred and -- let me see here. Our parking ratio is one per
125 square feet, so we have well exceeded the required parking spaces, so I don't
anticipate any problems of parking on the neighborhood streets if the parking lot fills up.
We have plenty of adequate parking. And we have also -- the density on this has gone
down quite a bit from what was previously approved. We have about 20 percent less
building, even including the future development phases that we have planned. So, it's
going to be a neighborhood commercial center that's very functional and yet the impact
to the neighbors I think will be limited. So, with this I would ask that you would approve
the Conditional Use Permit for Total Woman Fitness and I'll answer any questions.
De Weerd: Can you tell me how high that berm is and with the fence and -- I assume
it's a six foot fence.
Robnett: I don't -- and the berm is probably four feet. And I don't -- I don't believe the
fence is right on top of the berm. And I apologize, we did not put that in and I don't have
cross sections of that. That was in before we put the land under contract.
De Weerd: Are those houses in already?
Robnett: There is about -- immediately behind it probably about 50 percent of them are
occupied and I met with the building contractor who is building all of the lots in that
subdivision and I have a signed letter from him on all of the empty lots saying that he
did not feel that our development would hinder his sales or cause any problems with his
residential development behind us.
De Weerd: Does he know that that back wall is just all brick and -- I mean it's solid, with
no variation? I guess a couple of doors.
Robnett: He has seen elevations, yes.
De Weerd: Okay.
Robnett: What was -- when I took this to Steve Hart -- and he's the building contractor
on those and the neighbors, what was previously approved was a 23,000 square foot
single user in the corner, which was a good four or five feet taller and a lot more -- it
was just a big block in the corner. We are kind of breaking it up with two or three
smaller buildings, setting them around there. You know, I think it will be a much more
pleasing look than what was previously approved.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 26 of 35
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: No questions.
Donnell: Nothing.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Robnett: Thank you.
De Weerd: Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Okay.
Donnell: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Donnell.
Donnell: I would move that we would close the Public Hearing on CUP 04-039.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing on Item 12. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT.
Donnell: And, Madam Mayor, I would move that we would approve a Conditional Use
Permit, CUP 04-039 for a woman's fitness center, even though I don't believe that that
meets recreational use in my view. That sounds like a workout. But for the Cherry
Crossing Subdivision.
Bird: Would that include the 6:00 to 10:00?
Donnell: Absolutely. And includes all staff recommendations.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 12. Is there any further discussion?
You know, I hate to see this go so easily and --
Canning: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 27 of 35
De Weerd: I think you need to put additional conditions and extra landscaping,
windows, maybe, because I saw there were bathrooms in the back. You could put
windows in there. Yes, Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Council -member Bird asked for clarification from the maker of
the motion if it included hours of operation and I was in error. My skim reading was too
much skimming and not enough reading. The Council has already approved those. So,
those findings will not include the hours of operation, that's already been done. I just
wanted to clarify that.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, absent; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 13: Public Hearing: CUP 04-038 Request for a coffee shop with a drive-thru
window in a C -C zone for EI Dorado Subdivision, Lot 6, Block 5 by
W.H. Moore Company — north west corner of East Overland Road and
Bonito Way and west of South Eagle Road:
De Weerd: I was hoping to break a tie on this one. Okay. Item 13 is a Public Hearing
on CUP 04-038. 1 will open the Public Hearing on Item 13. And, for the record,
Councilman Wardle is back with us. Staff.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for a conditional use
approval of a drive-thru. The property is located at the intersection of Overland Road
and Bonito Way in the Bonito or EI Dorado Subdivision, as it's also called. This is the
site. This is the driveway coming through and, then, this is Bonito Way over here. The
drive-thru facility is part of a larger building, as you see. The drive-thru is located on the
west end. The folks will either come in through this driveway and make a U-turn and
come back up in this direction or if they are entering from Bonito, they will come through
and wind their way northward -- northwestward. The drive-thru coffee shop itself is
1,281 square feet. It is within a larger structure, as I mentioned, that comprises 18,855
square feet in a C -C zone. Restaurants, just for clarification, are permitted uses. It's
only the drive-thru that requires the Conditional Use Permit today. The applicant has
proposed a seven foot wide planter island west of the drive-thru lane to help separate
that traffic from the two way drive lane traffic coming off of Overland Road and the drive-
thru lane should be able to stack three to four cars before idle vehicles would block any
traffic in this parking area. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended
approval of this application. They heard it -- the item on October 21 st. Jonathan Seel,
representing W.H. Moore Company, testified in favor of the application. No one from
the public testified in opposition. There was no significant discussion by the
Commission and no changes to staffs initial recommendation. To staffs knowledge
there are no outstanding issues before City Council. And with that I will end staffs
presentation.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 28 of 35
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Any questions for staff?
Bird; I have none.
Donnell: None.
De Weerd: Okay. The applicant?
Seel: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Councilmembers, Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore
Company, 1940 Bonito, Meridian. We have read through the staff report, we are in
agreement with it, and unless there is any questions, I'll sit down.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Well, you really caught them on a good night.
Seel: We are on a roll tonight. I like this.
De Weerd: No. I guess I would have a question. Where is the drive-thru window, just -
- if it will accommodate three or four cars and stacking.
Seel: Yes. If I can -- it's approximately right there in that area.
De Weerd: Okay. And you think you won't have any affect into the drive aisle as you
come in off of Overland to try and make that U-turn around that island?
Bird: Right there?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Seel: Madam Mayor, no, I don't anticipate. As I say, as a dimension, you have got two
options. One is here and this is probably the main entrance coming in, as you well
know, with the arches. So, most people will most likely come through this area. It's less
likely that you're going to see more people come through this area, but we don't
anticipate any problems.
De Weerd: Okay. I just had to make up something.
Seel: That's okay.
De Weerd: For lack of creativity of my Council.
Seel: We are trying to shorten it for you.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 29 of 35
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing CUP 04-038.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the Public Hearing on Item 13. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve CUP 04-038.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 13. Is there any further discussion?
Okay. Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14: Public Hearing: AZ 04-027 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.5
acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Christian Family Matters, Inc. by Don
Weber — east of South Linder Road and south of West Overland Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 14 is Public Hearing AZ 04-027. I'll open the Public
Hearing with Anna's remarks.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for annexation and
zoning of 4.5 acres from RUT to the R-8 zone. About a year ago, October 7th, 2003,
the applicant Don Weber, came before us to request water service for the subject
property from the City of Meridian. They had gone through the. Ada County conditional
use process to locate a church on the property and at the conclusion of that process
discovered that the requirements for fire flow were significant enough that they weren't
able to do it without getting water from the City of Meridian. So, they came to you at
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 30 of 35
that time and requested that water service. They also requested that they not be
required to annex at that time, because they were in the middle of completing the
conditional use process or meeting the conditions of approval, rather, for Ada County.
The Council said that they would provide -- allow water to be provided to the site, as
long as they filed an annexation request and came and told us when they were done
with Ada County. They willing did that and I think they had that application in the day
after we asked for it. We have been holding onto it for a while and they notified us that
they had completed all their conditions of approval with Ada County and we began to
process that annexation request. And that's why this is before you here today. The
staff report does talk about the comparison of the Ada County standards versus the City
of Meridian standards and at one point this property would be brought into compliance,
that the zoning ordinance does have specific language about when a -- kind of a -- it's
not really a nonconforming use, but where you have a parking lot that doesn't meet
landscaping standards -- current landscaping standards, there are provisions in there as
to how much of that parking lot can be resurfaced or redone before everything has to be
brought into compliance. So, staff anticipates that we would just treat this similar to any
other use that just had to meet different standards at the time it was constructed. There
was some discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing as to whether
the property should be required to hook up to city sewer when that service was
available, like if it went by the front of the lot would they be required, then, to hook into it
or at a later date when they wanted to further develop the property. The Planning and
Zoning Commission has recommended that -- that they not be required to enter into a
development agreement to hook up to that sanitary sewer service when its available,
but that just it be at the request of the applicant when they want to do future
development of the property, that, then, they could hook up to sanitary sewer. The
Planning and Zoning Commission did conduct a hearing on October 21st and they did
vote to recommend approval of this application. The applicant Don Weber testified in
favor. There was no one in opposition to the application. The key issues of discussion
were the prior Ada County actions on the property, specifically the CUP approval for a
church, the sewer master plan for this area and, then, as I stated before, whether or not
a development agreement should be required to address nonconforming parking lot. I
think that the issue was also raised about the sewer service. They did also make one
change to staff recommendation. They deleted site-specific paragraph regarding police
chief approval before City Council. I think that was placed in there, because we weren't
able to get police department comments, but he did have a chance to review it and staff
was comfortable -- or the Planning Commission recommended that that condition be
removed. With that I believe I will end staffs comments.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for Anna?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 31 of 35
Rountree: Anna, I had a question about your comments on landscaping.
Canning: Yes, sir.
Rountree: Just run through that again. This would be subject to all City of Meridian's
landscape requirements?
Canning: Not at this time. When they wanted to redevelop, we would look to what
extent they are adding onto the property and use the guidelines that are in the zoning
ordinance to bring that up to code. The applicant -- my recollection was he was pretty
clear when he came to ask for the water, that he -- he asked if he could be approved
with what Ada County had approved. He didn't want to have to kind of redo everything
once he got through the Ada County process. Had he known that he would have to
redo everything to come up to the City of Meridian process, he probably wouldn't -- he
probably would have just applied for a Conditional Use Permit and annexation at that
time. So, the commitment kind of was that go ahead and finish what you started with
Ada County, we will annex you kind of as is after that, but having said that, there is quite
a bit of property that's not being developed here, as you can see. There is quite a bit of
vacant property. I do believe the church plans to expand at some time as the
membership grows and they would be subject to conditional use approval at that time.
They are getting an R-8 zoning and there is a couple reasons for that. One is they do
have some members of the church living on the property at this time, so that was
compatible with that use and also it's designated as residential on the Comprehensive
Plan. So, that's why staff is recommending a residential zone, as opposed to a light
office zone, which would be a church is a principal permitted use and they could just
bypass the conditional use process. They will have to go through the conditional use
process to further develop the site. That was a very long answer, Mr. Rountree. I'm
sorry.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Follow up. Conditional Use Permit would be required for any residential
development as well?
Canning: Not if it were -- either a plat or conditional use process would be required for
residential development, because there would be more than one use on the site. So, it
would have to go through a planned development to have additional principal permitted
structures on the site. Or it would have to go through the platting process.
Rountree: Follow up. That zoning designation goes with the land, not the applicant; is
that correct?
Canning: Correct.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 32 of 35
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions?
testimony? Were you sworn in?
Weber: Yes, I was.
Would the applicant like to provide
De Weerd: Okay. Sorry. Dumb question. If you will please, state your name and
address.
Weber: My name is Don Weber and I live at 1525 South Callistoga Avenue in Meridian.
And as Anna explained in real great detail, really, why we are here tonight and that is
true that last October we came before you, because we were undertaking -- I should
say we were in the middle of our building project and completed our parking lot, our
landscape requirements with Ada County, and we found out that we did need water to
provide for the fire protection on the building, the assembly hall we were building. So,
you were kind enough to grant us that and with the agreement that we would annex and
Planning and Zoning was kind enough to be patient with us to finish up this summer and
get our certificate of occupancy and once we got that I gave them a call and said we
can now proceed forth with the annexation and the rezoning. So, that brought us here
tonight, so I would be willing to answer any questions if you have any.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: No? You picked a good night. Okay.
Weber: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Okay. Seeing none, Council, what would you like to do?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'd like to close the Public Hearing on AZ 04-027.
Donnell: I second it.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item
14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 33 of 35
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: A point of discussion. You know, there is a soft spot in all of our hearts for
these kinds of applications, but this one has an awful lot of loopholes in it and in my
mind if we were to approve this, we would be, I think, neglect and not fair to a whole lot
of other applicants that have come to the City of Meridian, not requiring meeting city
standards. I wasn't on the Council when this was previously submitted and approved,
so I'll qualify that. I'm also concerned with the R-8 zoning, that if the church is not
successful at some point in time in the future, we have this little R-8 enclave out there.
I'm also concerned that there is resistance to connect to the sewer when it's available.
Just a lot of things about this particular application don't settle well with me and I would
have to vote in opposition to this.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Rountree. Any other information needed or
discussion? I would entertain a motion.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I would move that we approve Item No. 14, AZ 04-027.
Bird: I will second it.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 14. Is there any discussion? Okay.
Mr. Berg.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
Item 15: Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 15 is the water, sewer, and trash delinquencies.
This is to inform you in writing, if you so choose, that you have the right to a pre-
termination hearing at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, November 16th, 2004, before the Mayor and
City Council to appear in person to be judged on the facts and to defend the claim made
by this city that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel.
Your service will be discontinued on November 17th, 2004, unless payment is received
in full. Is there anyone present who wishes to contest his or her water, sewer, and trash
delinquency? Seeing no one here, they are hereby informed that they may appeal and
have the decision of the city reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to
Idaho State Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off. The amount of
the turn-off list is one -- I believe it is one thousand -- or 113,000 dollars.
Rountree: Close enough.
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 34 of 35
De Weerd: Yes. Something like that. 113,140.90. Okay. Council, now that I have
stumbled through that one, do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the delinquency turn off for November 17th in the
amount of $113,140.90.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Is there any further discussion?
Rountree: Or however the Mayor said that.
De Weerd: Don't ask me to even repeat it either. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 16: Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345 (1)(f):
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 16 is an Executive Session per Idaho State Code.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f).
Donnell: I second it.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:32 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
Meridian City Council
November 16, 2004
Page 35 of 35
G. BERG, JR,
8 l?&0,/a¢
DATE APPROVED
W