HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-24Meridian City Council April 24, 2018.
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, April
24, 2018, by President Joe Borton.
Members Present: Joe Borton, Genesis Milam, Luke Cavener, Ty Palmer, and Treg
Bernt.
Members Absent: Tammy de Weerd and Anne Little Roberts.
Others Present: Bill Nary, C.Jay Coles, Warren Stewart, Caleb Hood, Bill Parsons,
Sonya Waters, Josh Beach, Jeff Brown, Kevin Fedrizzi, Steve Siddoway, Garrett White,
and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll -call Attendance:
Anne Little Roberts X Joe Borton
X Ty Palmer X Keith Bird
X Genesis Milam X Lucas Cavener
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Borton: Good evening, everybody. Welcome to tonight's City Council -- City Council
meeting. It's Tuesday, April 24th. It's 6:00 p.m. We will begin tonight's Council meeting
with roll call attendance. Mr. Clerk.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
Borton: Next item on the agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance. We would like the fellows
from Troop 174 if you would, please, come forward and give us the honor of leading us
in the pledge tonight. If everyone would, please, rise.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Michael Carver with the Settler's Park LDS
Stake
Borton: Thank you, boys. Next item on the agenda is the community invocation.
Tonight we are going to be led by Michael Carver with the Settlers Park LDS Stake. Mr.
Carver, if you're present come on forward. Thanks for joining us tonight.
Carver: Thank you very much. I'm Michael Carver. I'm a bishop of a local
congregation for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter -Day Saints. Our dear, kind,
gracious Heavenly Father, we are so grateful for this wonderful day that we have had,
for the sunshine that we have been able to experience and have. We are grateful for
the time that we have to meet together tonight. We are so grateful for our country, for
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 2 of 87
the freedoms in which we can have in our lives. We are so grateful for this wonderful
city in which we live and for the many blessings that we have to be able to raise a family
in this wonderful area. We are grateful for our local government, the Council Members,
and for the sacrifices that they make to lead us and -- and to make this community such
a great place. We are grateful for the local Boy Scouts who are here, for the
contributions that they make and we pray that they might be able to be edified and they
may be able to learn as they are here to participate in this Council meeting. Please, be
with us this night that we may be able to have good, respectful discourse. We are
grateful for thy son Jesus Christ and for his atoning sacrifice for us and, please, bless us
that we may ever strive to walk in his footsteps. We love thee and we open this meeting
unto thee and do so in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of Agenda
Borton: Thank you, Michael. The next time this evening is the adoption of the agenda.
Cavener: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we approve the agenda as presented.
Milam: Second.
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as published. All those in
favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum)
Borton: Thank you. Our next item is our future meeting topics. Mr. Clerk, anybody
signed up?
Coles: No sign-ups, Mr. President.
Item 6: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of March 20, 2018 City Council Regular
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of March 27, 2018 City Council Regular
Meeting
C. Approve Minutes of April 10, 2018 City Council Workshop
Meeting
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 3 of 87
D. Approve Minutes of April 17, 2018 City Council Regular
Meeting
E. Release of Sanitary Sewer Easement by Blue Marlin at
Timbergrove Subdivision
F. Release of Water Main Easement by Blue Marlin at
Timbergrove Subdivision
G. Timbergrove Subdivision Water Main Easement by Centre
Pointe Property LLC
H. Timbergrove Subdivision Sanitary Sewer Easement by Centre
Pointe Property LLC
I. Southridge Apartments Sanitary Sewer and Water Main
Easement
J. Fast Eddy's Car Wash Sanitary Sewer and Water Main
Easements
K. Final Plat for Caven Ridge Estates East Subdivision No. 2 (H-
2018-0034) by New Cavanaugh, LLC Located East of S.
Standing Timber Way and South of E. Victory Rd.
L. Final Plat for Movado Estates Subdivision No. 4 (H-2018-0030)
by Conger Management Group located on the south side of E.
Overland Road between S. Topaz Way and S. Cloverdale Road
M. Final Order for Whiteacre No. 4 (H-2018-0020) by Whiteacre
Development Corp. located at the West Side of N. Meridian
Road between W. Ashton Drive and W. Lava Falls Drive
N. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Lost Rapids (H-2018-
0004) by GFI Investments II, LLC and Brighton Investments,
Located at the Southwest Corner of State Highway 20-26
(Chinden Blvd.) and North Ten Mile Rd.
O. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Fast Eddy's (H-2018-
0006) by ALC Architecture, Located at 3775 N. Eagle Road
P. Development Agreement Oaks West Subdivision (H-2017-0170)
with New Oaks, LLC and Hayden Homes Idaho, LLC located at
the southeast corner of N. McDermott Rd. and W. McMillan
Rd., in the NW 1/4 of Section 33, Township 4N., Range 1W
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 4 of 87
Q. Resolution No. 18-2072: Oaks West Subdivision H-2017-0170:
A resolution to amend the future land use map of the 2002
comprehensive plan for 7.25 acres known as Oaks West
Subdivision generally located at the southeast corner of N.
McDermott Road and W. McMillan Rd., in the NW 1/4 of section
33, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Meridian, Idaho
R. Resolution No. 18-2073: A Resolution Declaring The Intent Of
The City Of Meridian To Convey To The Ada County Highway
District For Right Of Way Purposes A Portion Of Certain Real
Property Located Near The Corner Of Meridian Road And
Woodbury Drive; Instructing The City Clerk To Establish And
Notice A Hearing To Review The Proposed Conveyance; And
Providing An Effective Date.
S. Acceptance Agreements for Display of Artwork in Initial Point
Gallery Lynn Fraley - May 2018
T. Award of Change Order No. 6 to JC CONSTRUCTORS, INC. for
the "WRRF Liquid Stream Capacity Expansion" project for a
Not -To -Exceed amount of $63,311.11.
U. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement to QUALITY
ELECTRIC, INC. for the W CHATEAU STREET LIGHTING
CONSTRUCTION project for a Not -To -Exceed amount of
$66,667.58.
V. Award of RFP and Approval of Agreement to HICKS
BROTHERS WOOD FLOORS, INC. for the "FY18 Homecourt
Floor Refinishing" project for a Not -To -Exceed amount of
$80,000.
W. Approval of Purchase Order #18-0352 for ACHD Road Trust for
South Meridian Regional Park in the Not -To -Exceed amount of
$148,000.00
X. AP Invoices for Payment 4/25/18 - $1,632,995.55
Borton: That moves Item 5 along quickly. Next item is No. 6, the Consent Agenda.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as presented.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 5 of 87
Milam: Second.
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as published.
If there is no discussion, Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 7: Items Moved From The Consent Agenda
Borton: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda, which brings us into the
-- the Action Items. We have a couple of land use items tonight and I thought I would
take a quick second to give a snapshot of what -- what happens when we do our land
use hearings. Most of you -- maybe members of the public already know this, but the
way we do these processes is we will have -- for each of these applications our staff will
present a brief staff report, give us some background information. We will have the
applicant come forward, present some information in ten minutes time and, then, we
have members of the public participate, provide any information that you want to
provide any testimony if you choose to do so. The applicant, then, gets the last word.
They will come back up if they choose and provide any final comments to the Council
and -- and we will, then, ask questions of the applicant, questions of the public and
perhaps staff as well. So, that's sort of the process we use. We have had a chance to
review public comment, e-mails that have been provided, staff reports, comments from
area agencies, all of that kind of leads up to tonight, so we will walk through that
process in that order. We use some time limitations to make the business be completed
hopefully in one night. The applicant generally has ten minutes. Members of the public
we limit to three minutes. We have got to put some time frame on it, so if we cut you off
we are not trying to be rude, we are just letting you know that the three minutes is up
and we will give the next member of the public a chance to -- to provide some
testimony.
Item 8: Action Items
A. Public Hearing Continued from April 17, 2018 for Oberg
Subdivision (H-2018-0012) by DevCo, LLC located at 2855 N.
Wingate Lane
Request: Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres of land with
an R-15 zoning district; and
2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 25 single-family
residential building lots, 3 common lots and 1 other lot on
4.79 acres of land in the proposed R-15 zoning district
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 6 of 87
Borton: Okay. So, we are going to start the first one, Item 8-A, and we will open the
public hearing -- it's a continued hearing from April 17th for the Oberg Subdivision,
annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat and we will begin this continued public
hearing with staff comments.
Allen: President Borton, Members of the Council, this site consists of 4.79 acres of
land. It's zoned RUT in Ada County and is located at 2855 North Wingate Lane. The
Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium density residential,
which is three to eight units per acre. The applicant is requesting annexation and
zoning of 4.79 acres of land with an R-15 zoning district for the development of single-
family residential homes, 22 attached and three detached units, at a gross density of
5.21 units per acre, consistent with the medium density residential future land use
designation. A preliminary plat is proposed as shown that consists of 25 single family
residential building lots, three common lots, and one other lot on 4.79 acres of land.
The subdivision is proposed to develop in one phase. Access is proposed via the
extension of East Kamay Street at the west property boundary. An emergency only
access is proposed at the east boundary via the existing private street Wingate Lane
from Ustick Road. Two stub streets are proposed to the properties to the east for future
extension and interconnectivity upon redevelopment of those properties. Staff is
recommending an additional stub street, North Lapis Avenue, is provided to the north
boundary. A 15 foot wide road access for Wingate Lane and utility easement exists
along the east boundary of this site and is proposed to be located within adjacent
building lots until such time as it's no longer needed for access to adjacent properties.
At that time the easement may be vacated and the area absorbed by the adjacent
building lots. Until that time the easement area is to remain as is for use by adjacent
property owners for access to their properties. Because this property is below five
acres in size, the qualified open space and site amenities are not required by the UDC.
However, the applicant is proposing .86 of an acre or 17.9 percent of open space
consisting of the common lot where the South -- or, excuse me, South Slough and
Finch Lateral is located through the middle of this site. A segment of the city's multi -use
pathway system is also proposed along the north boundary of the waterway.
Conceptual building elevations for the proposed single family residential homes were
submitted as shown that demonstrate the quality and style of development proposed.
All units are proposed to be single story in height. All single family residential attached
are required to obtain design review approval and comply with the standards in the
architectural standards manual. The Commission did recommend approval of the
proposed annexation and zoning and preliminary plat to the City Council. Jim Conger
testified in favor. No one testified in opposition or commented. Laren Bailey, the
applicant's representative, did submit written testimony. There were really no issues of
discussion by the Commission. However, the Commission did make one change to the
staff recommendation as requested by the applicant and recommended by staff to
amend condition number 1.3.5 to reflect the homeowners association, not the applicant,
will have an ongoing obligation to maintain all pathways. There are no outstanding
issues for Council tonight and there has been no written testimony since the
Commission hearing. Staff will stand for any questions.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 7 of 87
Borton: Thank you, Sonya, for that report. Council, any questions of staff? If the
applicant would come forward. Mr. Conger. Good to see you.
Conger: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Jim Conger, 4824 West
Fairview Avenue. First off I wanted to thank Sonya and all of the City of Meridian with --
with staff and the fire department. We had numerous meetings to get where we are
today to have a staff report that we certainly are in agreement with as it's written and as
it was slightly modified and recommended for approval by the P&Z Commission. That's
where I was going to stop with my speech tonight, but we do have two sets of neighbors
that -- that are here tonight and I have been out in the lobby talking with them. We had
-- we touched and had numerous neighbor meetings. We have had, obviously, no
neighbors come to the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing meeting and what
they are here tonight on -- and the one item that I know about they will speak for
themselves if there is more than one item -- is simply about -- I call it simply, but, you
know, both of these stub roads that are required by the city and ACHD stub to their
private land called Wingate. Wingate has been a -- kind of a hot topic for probably a
little more than a decade of private -- the three or four private users at the south end of
Wingate. We have the fire marshal okay with -- in our original meetings with, you know,
putting a -- they want a fence up at those stub roads so nobody can walk over there.
We were able to get that on the north stub road, but the south stub road at the end of
our negotiations and meetings with fire was still a bollard requirement for quicker access
for safety and emergencies, not only I guess if our neighbors need an emergency
access from Wingate, which the fire does have the emergency to Wingate, or if the
Wingate neighbors need an emergency they would come through the public road to that
stub. So, I believe we can work this out with neighbors and fire marshal while we go
through final platting and those kind of processes. I think that would be extremely
typical and normal. Just bringing that up tonight that's what you should hear about.
But, again, I guess we could put our gate and fence across that, but we -- we definitely
need to respect and understand fire needs and I -- I have had numerous meetings on
fire. This is at kind of the end and this wasn't one meeting with Fire Marshal Joe, this
was numerous meetings over, you know, several months. You know, this was, you
know, eight months ago during the planning process. But with that we -- we definitely
are in agreement with the project as it was recommended to you at the Planning and
Zoning Commission and I would close with that.
Borton: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Conger: Thank you.
Borton: Mr. Clerk, any members of the public signed up?
Coles: Mr. President, I have Rosellen Villareal Price signed up as neutral, wanting to
testify.
Borton: Welcome.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 8 of 87
Price: Thank you. My name is Rosellen Villareal Price. I live at 2700 North Wingate
Lane in Meridian. Unfortunately, I was unable to be here at the meeting on the 17th,
because the very next day was at the funeral for my father in New Mexico. That is why
was not here. Otherwise I would have been. We have a lot of concerns about having a
bollard at the south entrance. This is going to be very close to the property front that
have. I have horses. As it is now I am surrounded on three sides by subdivisions and a
lot of the subdivisions treat Wingate Lane as a recreational path. I have had kids get
into the pasture with my horses. Fortunately I have been able to see them, but this is a
liability to me, even though I have signs up that say do not enter. We also have signs at
the entrance and the exit of the road that say do not enter, private lane. This does not
stop anyone. We have a constant stream of traffic that comes up and down that lane.
So, these signs are not effective. For us to have a bollard there invites people to use
that area as a walking path, as they already do. I have neighbors that live at the end of
the street that have alpacas. On several occasions she has also found people in with
the alpacas trying to feed them , which could actually be deadly to them, because if
you did not feed them the correct type of food it can kill them. We also have chickens.
We, basically, run as a farm -type operation in kind of an island. We would very much
like to say that we would like to have a solid fence there, because, otherwise, we will
have people coming in and using the lane as a walking path. Bicycles. Motorcycles.
ATVs. And even on one occasion we had someone who was testing their snowmobiles.
So, we would very much like to have a solid fence there to discourage anymore future
traffic that will impede upon our properties. Thank you.
Borton: Thank you, Rosellen.
Coles: No other sign-ups, Mr. President.
Borton: Okay. Is there anyone here who wishes to provide any testimony on this
application? Would the applicant like to come forward and -- oh. Come on. More than
welcome. Just state your name and address. Thanks for joining us tonight.
Thompson: My name is Craig Thompson. I live at 2950 Wingate Lane and I'm just right
across from where all this activity is taking place. I do have an acre there and there is
an open ditch and once they come passed that area that's -- that's going to be open,
there is a ditch there and it goes under a flume that goes through that. Okay. And it's
scary. I have seen kids on bicycles go passed that and stop and throw rocks in and
play with the water. You know, I go over there and very courteously like -- I get their
attention and talk to them about this and send them down the road. But concerns about
the animals and I'd say a very good fence through that and that has been -- been
explained and as far as anything open will give us a huge liability on what's -- what's
transpiring there. So, I would encourage the city to pass that to have a fence all the
way across that, so that the public cannot enter. Okay. Thank you.
Borton: Sir, just to make sure I'm clear, that the concern isn't necessarily the
development itself, but the southern stub to the east over that roadway is what you're --
or both I guess. Both stubs. That there will be a solid fence; correct?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 9 of 87
Thompson: Yes. All the way across that. I don't think there should be any opening.
And I think right now I -- I don't even know what they look like, the bollards or whatever
they are called. What are they? Bollards. Whatever they are. Anyway, I guess are the
stubs -- posts that come up and so I guess if there is any incident that happens that they
can run right over the top of them. And if that's open in between we will get traffic as far
as -- I would say motorcycles and other -- anything that can go in between that we
will get, because that is a shortcut and -- and just the traffic going through there by foot
is quite a bit. It's a nice little place for them to walk and if they don't disturb the animals
it's not too bad, but many times they do do that.
Borton: Okay.
Thompson: Okay.
Borton: Thanks for clarifying.
Thompson: Okay. Thank you.
Borton: Council, any questions?
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I have a question for fire. So, obviously, it's been recommended that there be
bollards, not a gate, but what if there were to be a gate with a Knox Box or something?
Fedrizzi: I would think -- my understanding is -- I was talking to Chief Bonjiorno this
morning and I guess those conversations have been had and that's why they landed
where they did. But I would imagine if it was at the -- the expense of the -- the
developer to put those gates in -- we just don't have any way to activate that gate
wirelessly -- wirelessly right now. I know that product is out there. That would be
another option, but that would be a big expense to equip all our -- our fire engines as
well. So, a Knox Box is going to delay our response, because the crews will have to get
out of the fire engine, get the Knox key out, unlock it and come around. So, that would
be some of the downside to it.
Milam: Thank you.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 10 of 87
Cavener: I guess for clarification, then, for myself, how -- talk to us about the timing
with having to remove the bollards when it -- when a truck arrives on scene versus
having to unlock a Knox Box.
Fedrizzi: Councilman Cavener, I'm -- I'm not sure the discussion that Chief Bonjiorno
had. But I'm sure it would be about the same kind of delay. So, you know, without
knowing that -- being privy to all the discussions, I'm sure they have covered that and
we -- so, it would be an equal or two.
Borton: Great.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Are the connections to Wingate a necessity or a nice to have as opposed to
cul-de-sacs?
Borton: Good question. Perhaps, Sonya, you might comment on the connectivity.
Allen: President Borton, Councilmen, what is needed is a secondary access,
emergency access. So, the cul-de-sac won't -- won't do it. They would have to have
another available access. That is something that, you know, if -- if -- that we -- they can
discuss further with the fire chief, but as discussed there has been several
conversations about it already.
Borton: Any other questions, Council? Would the applicant come forward and make a
final remark.
Conger: Members of the Council, Jim Conger again. So, to -- to answer the question of
Council Member Palmer, the -- the stub roads -- we attempted to do this as a private
street and just its own little enclave of kind of some cottage type stuff. That didn't make
it through the Ada County Highway District or City of Meridian. That stub road is
needed. There is actually almost -- I'm going to have it wrong. The neighbors would
educate me. But like four or six acres of -- of what the world would call undeveloped
land -- it's their homes of course. So, that stub road is -- is required by the highway
district. Now, as far as the -- the gates versus the bollards, everybody -- the fire will
allow a gate, but the typical gate for a fire road would be single metal bar and what that
is is -- is just for the ease of the men or women opening up the gate after they unlock it.
Now, the bollards in the new world -- they are all one -- one style. They actually rotate
down on a hinge system, but you still have to unlock it. So, you still have to get out of
the vehicle for that. The gates wouldn't achieve -- this has been thoroughly vetted, you
know, for several months, but the gates won't achieve what the neighbors want,
because what the neighbors want would be a pretty heavy gate, which we can build and
do, it's just -- it might be harder for fire to open. So, I think that's what your challenges
are. Your fire did give -- on the north one saying they won't need -- even though that
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 11 of 87
goes to the same emergency access point, that they could just survive and live with the
south one. So, that really had gone through -- so, it could be a gate. So, I want to
clarify that when I keep saying bollards, but that gate -- and it could also be a chain
across it, but I don't think that achieves what the neighbors are thinking as well.
Borton: Jim. So, the northern stub is to be fenced?
Conger: It will be --
Borton: A solid fence?
Conger: Sorry. I jumped in on that fast there. I thought it was Jeopardy. But, yes, that
-- that north piece is allowed by your fire department to be a six foot sold fence. It will
not be for secondary access or emergency access.
Borton: Sonya, can you remind us how many -- what's the requirement on -- that
secondary access, how many units can be built before one is -- 30 units.
Allen: Anything over 30 units requires a secondary access.
Borton: So, the reason for the question is we have less than 30 structures here that are
attached housing, so not certain --
Conger: Can I -- so, it's -- it's 30 dwelling units and we also have a 550 foot length
issue, but we do have an approved turnaround. We have a hammerhead at the end of
that. So -- so -- so, your -- your fire department does have the hammerhead, they just
wanted that additional security of the being able to come off Wingate as well. So, could
it -- could it be a solid gate? I suspect your fire department might -- might concede that
at some point. I'd hate to have it conditioned that way in the approval tonight, but -- but
meeting with them again would certainly be an option, but -- but how we have it stand in
thoroughly vetting it out to get the right configuration is the south one needed to be a --
a quicker access, either the metal gate which is kind of one bar, the chain, or the
bollards.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Jim, it seems like maybe there is somewhere in between, like some kind of
compromise that -- I can envision a -- like a three bar fence that would still be easily
openable by the Fire Department. It will deter people from riding bikes, walking,
because they are going to have to climb between bars. They could still, if they really
want to, get through there, but they are going to have to work a lot harder for it and
think that they would -- if they really want to get over there they are going to get over
there anyway, so--
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 12 of 87
Conger: Sure. Yeah. Mr. President, Council Member Milam, I think there is some way
to make that work and still have quick access for the fire department and we have
already committed and will continue to commit for -- and also placing no trespassing
signs on -- at that point at our east boundary. So, if anybody does -- I mean they will
have to call law enforcement and I know that's -- that's harder and half the time it
doesn't work, but it's one more thing that we can do and we are doing that anyhow, but
-- so, I think there is some -- some middle ground there that could still be made to get
everybody remotely satisfied.
Borton: Council, any other questions?
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Sorry, I almost called you Madam Mayor. Habit. So, the connection is -- is
needed to satisfy the city and ACHD, but the -- the need to have access to it for fire is a
-- is a fire condition; right? So, how does that work? Is there -- do we always no matter
what do what fire says? Is there situations where you say, hey, this will be a connection
some day --
Conger: I do.
Palmer: -- but for now --
Borton: I don't -- Mr. Palmer, to piggyback maybe on the question is if you have got -- if
a rule is that we utilize that, you know, 30 units and, then, a secondary access is
necessary for emergency purposes and in this context, right, if these were 25 single
family residences, we wouldn't have this discussion. So, we have got 25 attached units
-- you have 25 structures. So, it seems like that rule might not necessarily apply in this
situation, which would afford some flexibility to allow the neighbors' concern, which I
don't believe you object to necessarily, you provide fence on -- on both stubs properly
marked, so long as the concerns from fire. So, is there something unique about the
number of units, even though they are attached, which still necessitates the
emergency?
Fedrizzi: Council Borton and City Council, there is -- the density is really what drives life
safety and you have a lot of people in a very small area and that's why -- why the
secondary egress is important on those over 30. That's the benchmark for it, is to get
the resources into that area that are needed to -- so services those 30 plus is -- is a
matter of real estate, is we can't get all our crews in there to facilitate the rescue if
needed and fire suppression in a limited space and that's why the fire marshal asked for
the second egress and entrance, so we can facilitate that. So, that's probably -- life
safety is the biggest -- biggest issue.
Borton: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 13 of 87
Allen: Excuse me, President Borton. After thinking about this a little bit more, I think
that the reason that that secondary access was required is because fire code requires a
turnaround or through access if the -- if the roadway is longer than 150 feet in length.
So, I believe that's why that condition was placed on this one and -- and the city does
require a -- is requiring a stub, as well as ACRD, to the properties to the east. So, that's
why a cul-de-sac was placed in there.
Borton: Okay.
Allen: An alternative might be to provide a -- a turnaround on that last lot or something,
but if you want to leave them some wiggle room to work with the fire department further
on and -- you know, that might be something. But they might allow in this case -- I'm not
sure if they did discuss a fence -- or I mean a gate with them or not, but it doesn't
appear this one reaches the 30 dwelling units, so --
Borton: Okay. Thanks for clarifying. Council, any other questions of the applicant or
staff?
Fedrizzi: Councilman Borton?
Borton: Yes.
Fedrizzi: Just in contact with the fire marshal and he's not opposed to the -- the fence
with a Knox Box lock on it. That discussion -- he's willing to have that discussion in -- in
place of the bollards. So, that might be some kind of middle ground for -- for this issue.
Borton: Okay. Thank you for sharing that.
Conger: And we are fine with that.
Borton: Okay. Great. Thank you.
Conger: Thank you.
Borton: Council, any questions? Anything else needed on this application for
discussion? Oh. Sure. Come on forward. Go ahead and state your name and
address. Thanks for coming.
Thompson: Roberta Thompson and I'm at 2950 Wingate Lane, right across from it. I
guess my question here is not to cause any antagonism or anything, but I am wondering
why Wingate is an option. I mean it's a private lane. If you were building a subdivision
somewhere else without a private lane next to it you would figure out how to get that
other egress within your subdivision. So, I'm wondering why Wingate Lane is even an
option, you know, as far as using it and kind of causing the problems that with -- with the
animals and the different -- you know, the safety issues and that. It is something that
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 14 of 87
we don't really want to have to police, you know, as far as -- and we care about these
little kids and these people that are coming over there and whatever and if there was
any -- a better way, you know, to keep them from -- maybe to just discourage them from
being there. We don't want anybody's house to burn up either. We have seen fire
engines come down there and they are stuck, they can't turn around, they can't do
anything except go out into Packard Subdivision and, then, wander around in there. So,
it's just too small of a lane to really be a good use for the -- for a fire engine. So, that is
my question, the question of why is that an option when it's a private lane and -- and
don't think it really would help you that much. So, thank you. Appreciate it.
Borton: Thanks for sharing that. Mr. Conger, do you want to come forward again, you
do get the last word and it's an opportunity, probably, to answer discussions you
probably had with planning staff to look at what options are available for you.
Conger: Yeah. Mr. President, Members of the Council. So, yeah. No, this
development meets its requirements and turnarounds. It has -- actually has a
hammerhead instead of a cul-de-sac. That's why those lots are extra wide at the end of
that same stub road. So, as far as meeting those requirements we -- we didn't ask for
any waivers, any variances, anything of that nature. The lane that everybody keeps
talking about does have -- is blocked off into Packard Estates to the south that you can't
see on this, but -- but on the Ariel. So, your -- your emergency services do have an
electronic gate at that point for Wingate Lane. We think -- the fire marshal actually
called in, so we think that's workable to figure out how to do a gate that's solid and if
they are good with that, I have already been on the record that we are totally fine with a
solid gate. We would probably prefer that as well. So, it sounds like we have already
resolved it with the solid gate. The applicant and me will go back and meet with the fire
marshal and get it -- get it figured out. I think that's wins for everybody.
Borton: Thank you.
Conger: Thank you.
Borton: With that, Council, any other questions? Okay.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Anyone dying for any further conversations? I move we close the public
hearing on Item 8-A.
Milam: Second.
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2018-0012. All
those in favor say aye. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 15 of 87
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we approve Item 8-A, H-2018-0012, include all staff, applicant, and
public testimony, with special consideration that the applicant will bring -- work with fire
for a suitable solid fence to create a deterrent for that secondary access.
Milam: Second.
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to approve H-2018-0012 as stated. Any
discussion? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Public Hearing for Summertown Subdivision (H-2017-0142) By
745 W Ustick, LLC, Located at 745 W Ustick Road
Request: An Annexation and Zoning of 15.13 Acres of Land
with a TN -R Zoning District
Borton: Next item on the agenda is the Summertown Subdivision of H-2017-0142,
request for annexation and zoning. We will begin -- open this public hearing and begin
it with staff comments. Josh.
Beach: Good evening, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Before you this evening
is an application for annexation and zoning. This site consists of approximately 15.13
acres of land. It's currently zoned RUT within Ada county. It's located at 745 West
Ustick Road. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designating is mixed use
community. The applicant's request tonight is for annexation and zoning, as I said, of
that 15.13 acres of land and -- with a proposed TN -R or traditional neighborhood
residential zoning district. I will note that the TN -R zoning designation lists multi -family
developments as a permitted use and, therefore, there is no additional public hearing
required. Typically with multi -family projects there is a -- there is a conditional -use
permit application as well. So, with this particular application we asked for -- in greater
detail a site plan, landscape plan, and elevations, so you will see those this evening.
Commission did recommend approval with conditions. A conceptual development plan
was submitted that depicts a 272 unit multi -family project, consisting of ten multi -family
structures. Those are three and four stories in height. A clubhouse. And the nine
single-family residential lots on the south boundary. Approximately three acres of open
space, including the following amenities: A pool. Two play structures. A clubhouse. A
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 16 of 87
patio. A dog park. And a water feature. I will mention that since the Planning and
Zoning Commission staff became aware of an issue with the particular annexation.
There is a boundary dispute between the current property here -- I will show you on the
aerial map here a little bit better. There is a property dispute between these two
properties, the property that you see with the RUT and the property to the east, zoning
of C-2 in Ada county. The legal description for the property to be an extend -- is not the
actual complete parcel. There is a portion of the parcel left out of the annexation
request, which would create what is commonly known as a spite strip, a portion of the
property would be in the county still and a portion -- a larger portion would be in the city.
It's not something we typically like to do, so we have analyzed that with the applicant
and felt that that was something that they either needed to request to be continued to
address the issue with both county still being in -- or both properties still be within the
county. That seems like the logical step is figuring out with the county -- they opted to
move forward tonight and ask for potentially some conditions to mitigate that concern.
The moving on -- the Meridian -- as I said, the Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission heard these items on several occasions. On the 7th of December, the 21 st
of December of last year, the 4th of January, February -- the 15th of February and the
15th of March of this year. Most of those were due to continuances. The applicant's
representative Kent Brown was in favor. Adam Garcia was in favor. Shannon Robnett
was in favor. Joseph Simunich was in favor. In opposition was Vita Ballard. There
were several that commented that did not state their -- their position, which were --
Vita Ballard, obviously, was in opposition. Bill Jackson. Cathrine Garcia. Tyler Moss.
Adam Garcia. Kent Brown. Shannon Robnett. Tamara Heron. Written testimony prior
to the Planning and Zoning Commission was received by Bethany DeWitt. Carrie
Hovey. Dan Adams. Diane Ryssel. Kira Kernin-Loya. Lance Mertz. Lin Pyles. Mari
Jo Hessler. Rosemary Taylor. Ryan Kruger. Susan Littlefield and Tyler Moss. I,
myself, Josh Beach, was the staff that presented the application, with additional
comments from Bill Parsons. Issues of public testimony were the large number of
apartments being constructed in the area. I will -- apologize -- show you the elevations
here. These were what were shown to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the
previous hearing. Since then we have received some additional conceptual elevations
from the applicant, which are here showing what those -- what those could look like.
So, again, key issues of public testimony were the large number of apartments being
constructed in the area. Potential traffic congestion in the area due to the increased
number of apartment units. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were why the
proposal change from senior housing commercial and multi -family to just multi -family.
Another question where are four story buildings appropriate for the parcel in relation to
Ustick and existing single family homes. Is the transition to the existing single family
homes appropriate. Commission changes to staff's recommendation were they
modified Condition 11.11.11D to read as follows: Prior to the Commission hearing the
applicant shall provide greater detail with further development to ensure that the
architecture complies with the architectural standards manual and limited a portion that
says property shall be subdivided prior to receipt of any building permits for the project.
Modify Condition 1.1.G1 to read as follows: The northern access to Venable shall be
utilized as an emergency access only. So, going back to the site plan that would be the
accessed proposed in this location due to its proximity to Ustick and emergency access
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 17 of 87
it makes the most sense there. Also eliminated condition 1.1.1G7. And, as I said, the
outstanding issue before the Council tonight is the -- as I described earlier about the
property boundary dispute. Since the Planning and Zoning Commission we received
additional testimony from Kira Kernin-Lola, Lin Pyles, Susan Littlefield, Mari Jo Hessler,
Carrie Hovey, Diane Ryssel, Bethany DeWitt, Dan Adams, Ryan Kruger, Lance Mertz,
Rosemary Taylor and Chris Williams. With that I will stand for any questions you have
on the -- the application.
Borton: Thank you, Josh. Can you -- is this the -- the depiction that resolved that
1.1.1.D, the greater detail?
Beach: Right.
Borton: Is it? Okay. Council, any questions of staff? Does the applicant want to come
forward. Welcome, Kent.
Brown: For the record Kent Brown, 3160 East Springwood, Meridian, Idaho. Josh, can
you go to the picture I got of the -- the neighborhood center. The difficulty I see in
moving a project through like this is that the comp plan calls out higher density at the
intersection of Venable and Ustick Road and, then, trying to do that creates an issue
with the neighbors and what their uses are and -- and then -- and everybody
understanding it and the interesting thing is about -- looking at the -- the comp plan for
this area, we are only 21 percent of the residential portion of what would be the existing
after -- if -- when approved we would be at 21 percent of the existing residential that's
there. With -- with our approval we end up being 8.4 units per acre for the
neighborhood center for the residential components that are there. The interesting thing
is that the development that you just approved was eight units per acre and the reason
being is that a lot of the neighborhood center includes the neighbors that are here
testifying, both to the east and west of us, along our southerly boundary. Part of the city
park is in this -- the same area and the thought process you can see from the city in the
Comprehensive Plan is that you have a park, you have schools that are close. The
housing that surrounds us in an area map, Josh, someplace, that area map around us
shows that there are higher densities of the residential neighbors that are adjacent to us
and those increases are near this neighborhood center. The apartments that are
directly to the west of us where it says 980, those apartments that are in that area, they
-- they have 80 units and they have 16 units per acre. Our overall density is 18 point
something units per acre. So, we are very similar. Also in the Planning and Zoning
Commission there was a discussion about the buildings and the -- the height of the
buildings. Everybody kind of was stuck on -- that there were four floors versus the
allowance in your code is that we go to 40 feet. We have the buildings under 40 feet
and they ask that we maybe take the perimeter buildings -- Josh, if you can go to a --
that colored site plan. The ones along Ustick and along Venable we agreed to step
down the building, so that it wasn't just one big mass as you looked at those -- those
renderings that were submitted, the ends of the buildings go down a flour creating a
balcony up on top for the center part of the building. Our neighbors that are to the
south, Sedgwick Street, it's at the bottom here, the closest that we are to any of the
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 18 of 87
neighbors with the multi -family portion of our -- our project is over 235 feet away to
where we get to the multi -family building. We have the open space planned in the
center. So, if you're coming down Venable, you come to the one and only entrance that
we have to our project, which takes you right into the clubhouse, pool, and the
amenities that we have in the center. Then we have the buildings along the street, just
like many of the other projects that you have out in this area along your major road,
creating this open space for the residents to enjoy on the inside. We have along our
southerly boundary of the apartments, north of the street that goes east -west -- whether
that's going to be called Stanhope or not I don't know, but we have garages planned
there with landscaping on the other side of that. So, the intent was -- is to try to buffer
our neighbors in -- in our design. This is about the 18th version of this project that we
went through. If you look -- and I'm just going to walk you around the side, but in our
northeast corner of the site there is a commercial operation there in that C-2 area. The
parking lot is adjacent to our building. Then we have our buildings across the street
from commercial that's on the other side of the road and the city park. Then we go
down Venable. We are next to the apartments. The interesting thing, even though
those apartments aren't as tall -- aren't -- it doesn't have as many floors, there is only
five feet difference in the height of the buildings between us and what those buildings
are. Then along our southerly boundary we have single family homes. We have a
storm drainage pond and as I, then, said, going to the north we have over 235 feet
before you get our first building, the multi -family building. And, then, along our westerly
boundary we didn't stick any of the buildings next to that property line, because how that
will develop in the future we have kept our buildings away from that and have parking
along the edge with the landscaping. The intent of this overall design was to try to get
as much open space as possible, so you make the buildings bigger. We could have
less -- we exceed your open space requirement. We could have shortened our
buildings and filled in that -- some of that open space, which is I think what you guys are
used to seeing, of people coming in. We chose the opposite. We made our buildings
go up. It's something that we are familiar with doing when we do projects in Boise. You
make the building a little taller and, then, you have more open space. We -- the parking
that's here adequately parks the number of residents that would come in the future and
our intent is to try to comply with your Comprehensive Plan for the neighborhood center.
This neighborhood center is almost completely built out. There is a few properties to
the east of us that haven't been built on. There is one property on the north side of -- of
Ustick that is south of the ditch, the drain, that is still vacant. They have a commercial
sign on it, which kind of matches what is taking place in that area. So, that's all I have.
I can stand for any questions. We do have the traffic engineer that has done the traffic
study for a total build out of this project if you have any questions on that.
Borton: Thank you, Kent. Council, any questions of the applicant at this point?
Brown: Thank you.
Borton: Just one quick question for staff. Oh. Mr. Cavener. Kent, you're back up.
Apologize.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 19 of 87
Cavener: Thank you, Mr. President. Kent, this is the first time that I have -- I have seen
something like this. Can you give us some -- some background on this -- I think it's a
spite strip issue that staff talked about and your reluctance to want to continue until it's
resolved. Get me caught up to speed on this piece.
Brown: What -- what we have is -- on this drawing -- Josh, if you would take the -- the
ones that kind of look blue, the building, that's the roofs. Right there. They built the --
they built their houses -- or those buildings on our property, so they hang over the line.
We could go through a property dispute and try hammering that out. Developers just
have a tendency to -- it's easier just to give them the ground. Well, that always pretty
much works, because they are RUT and we are RUT, but this property is a commercial
use. So, for the county to take it it needs to be changed. So, we need to do a rezone
for a 20 foot strip of ground that we are giving them to resolve any future land issues
with them. Realistically we could have gone forward and, then, argued about this out
building that they have that's over the line. It's -- it is going to cause us a delay,
because we have to go to Planning and Zoning at Ada county and we have to go to
planning -- and to the board for them to make that decision. We have had a
neighborhood meeting. We have scheduled to -- you wouldn't believe all the red tape
that developers go through, but we can't submit our application, because we don't have
a pre -app meeting. We have done everything that is required to submit the application,
but we have to have a pre -app meeting. So, if we comply with the pre -app meeting they
would accept our application somewhere around the 15th of May and, then, we go
through a couple months process. You guys have six months and -- I think is the -- the
ordinance that Commissioner Borton -- Councilman Borton put in place a long time ago
for us to work this out and get it rezoned and do a property line adjustment, give them
20 feet. It's about 4,000, 8,000 square feet. Does that help?
Borton: So, Kent, is the proposed solution that if this were to go forward that the
annexation -- is it officially approved by ordinance until that gets completed?
Brown: I know that my client would like to speak about that. If we have a condition that
gives us a time period to work on that -- I mean because it -- it should happen. There
isn't any reason why it shouldn't happen, but it's like saying, you know, if you have been
to those Council meetings when you go -- they normally eat Italian food on Tuesday
nights and they must have had Chinese, because their decisions didn't all come out the
same. So, I don't -- I can't say what the public body is going to do. But it makes total
sense. I -- I'm not a betting person, but I would bet on this happening.
Borton: That's the -- the request I guess?
Brown: Yeah.
Borton: Okay.
Brown: To give us some time to go do this property line adjustment and, then, move
forward. That's the only purpose.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 20 of 87
Borton: Okay. Mr. Nary, can you maybe articulate that a little clearer than I did as far
as what option, if any, there could be to -- if there is progress tonight that doesn't really
get it over the finish line until it's resolved with the county?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I guess I'm not totally clear what the
applicant is asking for. If the -- if the objective of the Council is to grant this, ultimately if
the property line adjustment is done, then, the cleanest thing in our process is to
continue this until that's done, because, otherwise, it requires the city staff to go, then,
verify the county's process and whether it's complete. Right now we get a -- a property
description as a legal description of the property, which right now isn't accurate,
because the does include this portion of --
Brown: It does not.
Nary: I'm sorry?
Brown: We never included it.
Nary: Right. So, we don't have a way to create a -- a usable development area,
because we need to have a property description. So --
Brown: Can I interrupt you, Bill, there?
Nary: No. Let me finish -- give me one second and just to answer President Borton's
question. Our normal process is we would have a property description that would be
attached to the development. The development gets signed. The ordinance gets
published -- or gets sent for approval. What they are requesting is outside of that
normal process and as we have seen in the past, those are when the hiccups occur or
errors occur or something happens later. So, the cleanest from -- from a legal
perspective would be finish their property boundary adjustment, give us a clean property
description and, then, the Council, if you're comfortable, can approve it. You can't
contingently approve annexation, so you really are delaying a decision either way,
because if you're saying we are willing to approve this but for these conditions working
out. If they don't work out, I don't know what we have. I would rather you decide when
you have it available to annex cleanly without issue, to, then, approve it and, then, it
goes through the normal process. So, sorry to cut you off again. I just wanted to finish
that train of thought before we got into more questions.
Borton: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Yeah, Kent.
Brown: So, the annexation description that we submitted does not include this strip.
Never -- never has. We -- we recognize that that needed to have a property line
adjustment. We thought we could just submit a property line adjustment that takes -- it's
an administrative -- it takes 30 days to do type deal and have the -- that work all done
and the hiccup in this is that they don't want to have a parcel that has two zones. You --
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 21 of 87
you're kind of the same. The city doesn't like that either. So, we -- we intended to do
the property line adjustment, have all the work done --
Borton: Sure.
Brown: The landowner -- the current landowner -- I don't know that necessarily wants to
give property away. The future landowner is agreeable to giving the land away, but he
doesn't want to do it if he doesn't have an approved project and so there is -- there is
kind of the catch is he's not buying the ground if he doesn't have an approval --
Borton: Sure.
Brown: -- which would make the strip happen.
Borton: So, let me back up with a couple other questions on this.
Brown: Okay.
Borton: And let me clear this. There was -- there was comment on size of the buildings
and I don't know if I heard you correct, but where the buildings along Ustick and
Venable change to be the three story --
Brown: Two and three story. Three and four story. So --
Borton: Which is which if you -- is there a way to --
Brown: Three and four story. What they did is they -- we stepped down the ends of
each one of the buildings -- there. That's designed so we have a four story, then, we
have -- also in the middle we have step-downs on them. So, there is a four story above,
but, then, there is balconies that are --
Borton: So, they are -- they are four story, they are just -- have balconies on the ends of
them.
Brown: Yes.
Borton: Okay. Along Ustick and along Venable?
Brown: That's correct.
Borton: Okay. And, Josh, if you could put back up the site plan. Give us some
discussion on the connection between what looks to be Stanhope that southwest corner
property adjacent to you.
Brown: That's Mr. Simunich. To the south of us?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 22 of 87
Borton: No. When you see east -west, Stanhope Drive.
Brown: Yeah.
Borton: It goes into Venable Lane and talk about why the design doesn't continue that
through, but it looks as though there is a jog --
Brown: It starts to jog. Yeah.
Borton: -- just 50 feet south.
Brown: The -- the discussion was -- is that the highway district -- part of -- they were
okay with the -- the location at -- where we have it, not aligning with Stanhope. Their
concern was that we would have to get additional right of way from the landowner to the
south of us, Mr. Simunich, to complete that right of way. They didn't feel that they could
compel us to do that. We have approached Mr. Simunich -- he's even here today --
about keeping it straight, instead of putting a couple of S curves in there and that also
helps us in the standpoint that there is dedicated right of way on our side of the road
going down -- that we wouldn't have to go vacate. So, it -- it allows us to take
everything to the south of where our stub street is at that location -- is going to end up
being ACHD storm drain pond and Mr. Simunich's driveway until his property
redevelops at some later time. There isn't a need for the street to go south to Mr.
Simunich. In the staff report there is a connectivity map in there that shows that this
road connection doesn't -- doesn't serve anybody and isn't needed and the highway
district doesn't want Venable to extend south of our -- our street.
Borton: Okay.
Brown: Did that help or --
Borton: It did.
Brown: -- did I confuse the point.
Borton: No. It helped.
Brown: Okay.
Borton: I figured there was a story there. Josh, is there anymore to add on that? No?
Okay. Any other questions of the applicant? Okay.
Brown: Thank you.
Borton: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, members of the public signed up to testify?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 23 of 87
Coles: Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. First on the list Dawna Ray -- I think that says
McNair. Signed up against, wishing to testify.
Borton: Welcome, Dawna, thanks for coming tonight.
McNair: Good evening. My name is Dawna Ray McNair. I live at 2692 North
Sommersby Way in the Crossfield Subdivision. First of all. On Venable Drive all of the
roads on our side of the subdivision have gates on them. We are not -- we have no
access to Venable from our subdivision. So, it kind of upset me when even the -- the
apartment complex that's in front of our subdivision -- they were denied access to
Venable. So, they have to go through our subdivision to enter and exit and that's the
way theirs was designed. That's why you -- you, the board, told them they had to build
it. So, it upsets me that you now are changing your mind for a bigger complex, which is
going to be a direct path -- walking path from my -- from this subdivision -- or from this
subdivision, which is apartments, all the way to Tully Park. I'm already getting
vandalism in my front yard at night from kids that walk through the three subdivisions
that adjoin ours and now you're going to add a subdivision where there is no ownership
and that's my only problem. I don't care if you had seniors living there or if it's single
family dwellings, but because there is no ownership there -- people who have no
ownership don't care about people who do. They really don't. I'm from L.A. and I have
seen it. I have lived it. And I understand Meridian wants to grow and God bless you for
wanting to grow and I'm glad we are on all these lists, but let's not forget why are there
and I think sometimes we forget or just so excited to build, build, build, but we are losing
why Meridian is so great and I -- I just -- I love that small town feel and think we are
losing it and you put this big building, which looks like it belongs in -- in downtown L.A.
or in downtown Boise even and I feel like that we lose that small town feeling and that's
just my opinion, and -- but that's -- my concern is the vandalism is going to happen in
our subdivision. I mean we have a pool. We have a park there and we already have
problems with people coming in from other places and vandalizing our property and we
are having to put security cameras in our subdivision right now to protect ourselves from
this intrusion from other areas. So, that's all I have to say.
Borton: Okay. Thank you very much.
Coles: Susan Littlefield signed up against, but no indication of testimony.
Borton: Welcome. Thanks for coming tonight.
Littlefield: Thank you. My name is Susan Littlefield. I live at 2968 North Fairglen in the
Crossfield Subdivision and I just don't feel that we need a complex of this size when
already at McMillan and Meridian are -- I think it said 280 unit complex and they are
three stories and we are talking four stories. I just -- it's not something that I feel is
acceptable to the area, just to be honest. It just doesn't make Meridian feel like
Meridian. Also, the -- the access to our subdivision -- I think people will perhaps avoid
turning onto Venable if it's crowded and they will start coming through our subdivision,
the Crossfield Subdivision, to get to their -- to their apartment units. I know the
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 24 of 87
discussion was for parking for 500 vehicles. That's a lot of cars to add onto Ustick.
Also schools. If we are going to be adding that many people, families with children, it
seems to me that, again, with those apartments on McMillan and Meridian, that's a lot of
kids to dump into the Meridian School District. I noticed on Meridian Road -- and I'm not
real good on directions, but between Fairview and Ustick, I see an apartment complex
and it always has now renting. So, it doesn't seem like there is a huge need for more
complex -- more apartment complexes. So, that's my concern. Thank you.
Borton: Okay. Thank you for coming to share that.
Coles: Next was James Littlefield against, but no indication of testimony. No?
Borton: Okay. Thank you, sir.
Coles: Etta Helen Hill signed up against, no indication of testimony. Cathrine Garcia.
Oops.
Borton: Come on forward. Thanks for coming.
Hill: Good evening, everybody.
Borton: Good evening. Go ahead and --
Hill: Nice to be in a council meeting. I haven't been for a long time.
Borton: I'm going to have you grab the microphone and get a little closer to it.
Hill: 2968 Fairglen.
Borton: Okay. And what was your name again?
Hill: 2968 Fairglen.
Borton: Oh. No. Your name. I apologize.
Hill: Oh. Etta Hill.
Borton: Okay. Thank you.
Hill: I saw the pictures, the apartment complex. I'm sorry to say it's the ugliest picture
have ever seen in my life. Oh, I know an artist would probably turn over. And the traffic
here is horrendous. It's unreal. And, like I said, they are going to put four -- I may as
well move to Boise to have a four -- four floor apartment complex with 500 cars -- you
can't even get in and out now without a delay. And to have that much moving -- and like
she said that the school system -- how many more children is going to be in that big of
an apartment complex? The school bus has to pick them up now and they have to have
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 25 of 87
five or six more school buses added to the school district, it will costs you more money.
So, I really believe that -- it's a subdivision -- and in the original thing it was supposed to
be, if anything was built there, it would be a complex for senior citizens and maybe you
ought to resort back to that original plan or tell these developers to learn how to be able
to make them pretty instead of ugly. Please. Thank you.
Borton: All right. Thanks for coming.
Coles: Cathrine Garcia against. Would like to testify.
Garcia: Bring my notes or I will forget here. Cathrine Garcia. 2970 Northwest 8th
Avenue. I am the property that is on the corner of Stanhope and Venable and
Northwest 8th Avenue. I am the property that Stanhope connector will dead end into
and, hopefully, in wintertime I don't have any cars that slide into my backyard from that.
Borton: Can you hold on real quick. Josh, can you put a pointer where -- where your
property is?
Garcia: Yep.
Borton: Okay.
Garcia: Yeah. That's my property.
Borton: Thank you.
Garcia: So, I'm going to address some facts tonight. I know these are nice and I'm
definitely -- when we bought this property, looked into it, zoned rural, looked at this road,
saw the sign that says the road was going to continue through. Felt that the reasonable
expectation was that Stanhope would carry simply directly across. So, worst case
scenario there is not going to be a lot of -- a lot of traffic carrying beyond south of
Stanhope. That apparently is -- is not the case. So, there is a need for apartments in
Meridian. I feel that Meridian is addressing that need. I spent my Saturday perusing
the public records for the 18 months prior to December of 2017. From what I could find,
because it isn't always clear what a project -- what project is going to have apartments
or high-density housing, because they will be called subdivisions. From what I could put
together in 18 months prior there was a minimum of 3,000 units. So, basically, anything
that is deemed a townhome and -- a townhome -- townhome, four-plex, duplex,
apartments, things of that nature. Three thousand units have been approved and that --
and that doesn't include anything that has been addressed this year. My question is
what is -- and the county's here, so I'm going to kind of call the county on the carpet for
this one, too. The last that I saw as well was that there were master plans put in place
as a 2,000. There has been time to widen the roads before everybody moved in. There
has been time to get Meridian, which is deemed a highway, wider than a two lane
country road. We are now in excess of 100,000 people and growing very, very, very,
very quickly. You're in every single news article on a weekly basis, which is great, but
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 26 of 87
one of the things they are coming here for is quality of life. If the roads are not widened
there isn't quality of life. It's a safety issue. All up and down Meridian between Ustick
and Fairview children are waiting in the wintertime in the dark. People will come
through all those back neighborhoods from this complex, coming out -- whipping out --
there is going to be a lot of traffic and it's going to -- it's a concern with the height of
invasion of privacy into my backyard, into my neighbor's backyard. There is a lot of
children. There is nothing along Ustick that is this tall. I understand that they are within
code, but it's in excess of anything that is along Ustick. Thank you for your time.
Borton: Thank you. Josh, can you comment briefly on the ACHD condition of approval
with improving Venable Lane from Ustick to Stanhope to a full street.
Beach: I will have to look at the condition. I don't remember exactly what it is. But
can look that up and --
Borton: I will come back to that. All right.
Nary: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Nary.
Nary: While he's doing that, could I kind of make an additional comment based on the
last thing Mr. Brown said in regards to the -- in regards to their property description. So
-- this is not to fault anybody, but realistically this application should have never been
accepted. We normally required that they provide a legal parcel of record that we can
annex. What they provided is a legal parcel of record that they would like to achieve at
a certain point in time that isn't today. We have never accepted applications of what
you would like it to be eventually, it has to be what exists as of today when you apply
and that's concerning to me, because that's a precedent that we have never allowed
someone to simply submit an application based on a parcel drawing that they would like
to have be a legal parcel of record, but it doesn't exist at that point and the -- the door
opening of that -- and I understand we are far along in the process to have this
discussion with the applicant and what their intentions were and I totally believe Mr.
Brown that they thought this would get taken care of, but they didn't, and we don't
normally allow anyone to apply to an annex with a parcel that cannot be annexed as
they have described it, because it technically doesn't legally exist yet and that's a little
concerning to me, that even just continuing the matter and hoping it works out is a great
concession, but I don't know how in the future the staff tells applicants you can't bring us
something you would have it to be, you have to bring us something that already exists
and that's really a problem that -- again, we are a lot further in the process than we
normally would have been and for whatever reason -- and it doesn't really make any
difference now -- we probably should never have accepted this application at all until
they did exactly what they are trying to do, which is sever the parcel, create a new
parcel of record, create the property boundary adjustment and all of that. Once that's all
done it's a legal parcel, it's not an issue. But to just continue -- even continue it just to
do that still sends a message you can come apply and we will try to work it out for you,
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 27 of 87
when, really, it's on their -- it's on them to really do it. It's really the responsibility of the
applicant, not the city.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Mr. Nary, so are you -- are you saying that what we need to do is deny this
application and have him start over after they have the right parcel of record?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Council Member Milam, what I'm saying
is that -- yes, if that was totally my decision that's what I would suggest. But I -- if you
would like us to do it differently -- understand the concerns of the person that you are
setting to do that. You can legally do that. You can set it over -- if they get it worked out
-- what I'm more concerned with is approving it contingent on them doing it, because if --
if that's the direction of the Council and it doesn't get done, you have six months --
think what Mr. Brown was citing, the six months to sign the development agreement.
We don't have a six months requirement to do anything other than that. So, if the six
months -- so, what happens in six months if they don't sign it and they -- and they don't
get it done for whatever reason, what is it? I mean technically we would come back and
-- and de -annex it and deny the application and create, again, another public hearing to
do that. That's really what -- what would happen and that's not something we have ever
done, it's just that -- usually we have a situation where we have done a legal
annexation, they don't sign the development agreement, we notify them that their time
period has expired and their application is now denied after a public hearing. We have
only had that come up -- I would -- I can't recall. I don't know if Mr. Parsons or Josh
know, but less than ten times in the time I have been here. That doesn't come up very
often. But, again, it's a legal decision. The parcel is of record. All that stuff is done.
This isn't even there. So, that's -- that's my concern.
Milam: Thank you.
Borton: Thanks for sharing that. Mr. Clerk.
Coles: Thank you, Mr. President. Next on the list is Diane Ryssel. Signed up against,
wishing to testify.
Borton: Welcome. Thanks for coming tonight.
Ryssel: Good evening. My name is Diane Ryssel. It's a German name. I'm at 2981
Northwest 11 th in Meridian and I'm a homeowner there and I'm here, as with all -- all
those who have talked before me -- and, actually, anyone you talk to, at the dentist
office, at the grocery store, in church, where ever, the conversation continues is route
back to the growth in Meridian and the Treasure Valley and the concern for lack of
adequately developing an infrastructure that will support the building that's going on.
have been alive a long time and I have also been a part of development, real estate,
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 28 of 87
and growth and the upside and the downside of it and it concerns me for what's going
on here in the Treasure Valley, particularly in Meridian where I live and adjacent to the
subdivision where I live. I'm concerned about putting in high density housing in an
environment that is predominantly single-family housing and this type of structure, as
others have also commented, cosmetically alone, let alone the amount of impacted
population that would be coming out of those facilities. It's not a good fit. It's just -- it's
something, as others suggested, belongs in a downtown area. It would complement
that and be more suitable. High-density housing is not a good fit for this area. My
biggest question to you folks is would you want this in your neighborhood? Would you
want this adjacent to you? And I ask that you really consider that. If you are willing to
support this for someone else, your constituents, would you also feel compelled and be
compatible to having this next door to you. That's a huge question. For me, even
though I am impacted by this, I would be here at a City Council meeting on behalf of
someone else, because I do feel this is not a good fit for this particular area. Is there a
place for high-density housing? Yes, there most certainly is. But it's not in this
particular area. And also just because you can should you. And I really ask you to take
that into consideration. Thank you.
Borton: Thank you for coming tonight.
Coles: Next on the list is Igor Osipchuk. And I'm certain I mispronounced that.
Borton: Welcome. Thanks for coming tonight.
Osipchuk: Thank you. Name is Igor Osipchuk. It's Ukrainian. That's close enough. I
have heard many different ways. I'm here to say that I'm against this project. I live
2878 North Ridge Haven Way. I live in the subdivision right -- south side of -- of the
development -- proposed development. I don't really like the four story that's wanting to
come up there. In my opinion it doesn't really fit well. We are mostly single two story
housing coming in or built already in there and the apartments next to us -- two story
apartments and they kind of blend in with the whole surrounding areas. I'm not quite
sure how we even got to this with the four stories being approved. I know at the
Meridian Planning and Zoning meeting on February 15th staff report recommended that
there is only two or three story apartments should go in in that area and to quote the
that was the initial meeting and things change. They -- they brought out different --
different ideas. To quote from the meeting it says no multi -family structures should
exceed three stories in height and the multi -family building in front of -- the front long
public street shall not exceed two stories in height. Staff feels that it is not necessarily
appropriate for the area and so we have asked them to reduce these down to three and
two around the perimeter. That, obviously, didn't happen and at the end of the meeting
on February 15th the developer was given a task to come up with a better design that
would actually fit a little bit better to that area and the next meeting that was -- I believe
it was March 15th the developer came up with this, which would be slightly reduced, but
there is still four stories in there. In my opinion, even if they build the design with three
stories, the design that he's providing it's not -- it's completely out of architectural design
for the surrounding community and the houses on there -- kind of talking to some
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 29 of 87
people that live around me, kind of showing them idea what's in there is some of the
opinion that I have heard that the design almost looks like a prison. It doesn't really -- in
my opinion it doesn't really fit in there. The developer keeps on bringing up the point
that the apartment that's just a little bit taller than the ones that are right next to it. They
are taller. They are five feet taller and they look different compared to what the other
one that actually has a nice pitched roof that kind of blends in with everything else. So,
you don't want to keep this. In my opinion it still doesn't fit. The four stories -- four story
apartments they might be appropriate at some locations, but not in here. Originally this
was proposed subdivision that would have 55 plus area and some multi -family and two
story apartments and some commercial buildings, which that was crap. So, they didn't
go for that proposal. So, to finish this, I would like to see this application denied all
together and, if anything, go back to the original design -- the original proposal that was
proposed to have 55 area, two story apartments and some businesses if all possible. I
would personally like to see them denied completely. Thank you.
Borton: Thank you. Mr. Clerk.
Coles: Mr. President. Joe Simunich, with no indication for or against or neutral and a
question mark in wanting to testify. Karen Boudine. Against. No indication of
testimony. Tyler Moss. Against. Wanting to testify.
Borton: Good evening. Welcome.
Moss: Thank you. You need to build these a little taller. My name is Tyler Moss. I live
at 2946 Northwest 8th Avenue. I live in the Crossfield Subdivision just on the southwest
corner there by these. First off, I just wanted to say thank you to the wise counsel given
that this should have been denied before it got to this point and I hope you guys listen to
this counsel. A couple things I want to bring up. There are hundreds of units already
approved to the apartments that are being built one mile north of this. There is also
apartments on the corner of Ustick and Meridian Road, several units going in there and
there aren't -- there isn't infrastructure -- I don't see the schools. We have a daughter
we are taking her to elementary school three miles away on Eagle Road, because that's
where -- that's where we are going. That's the only school that will house our daughter
to go to. With all these going in if you put a population of say 1.5 kids per unit with this
apartment going in and the units going in on the corner, that's about 600 kids and where
are these kids going to go? There is no new school and there isn't plans for a future
school to go in any in the near future and they say Settlers Park is a great place for
some of these people to go to and enjoy. Settlers Park is already full. My wife goes
there during the week and it's clear full. So, adding more people to the park is just
creating more chaos and I just want to say on that southwest corner, you see those --
that road right to the back of our houses, I don't know -- the thought was that it would
extend off of Stanhope and go straight and I don't know if any of you would want
someone's lights going into the back of your home every night as they go in and out of
the subdivision, as well as the noise that goes right in the back of our neighbors -- in the
back of our yards. And one big thing that hasn't been really talked about is the
transition. You see that southwest corner building, that is directly across from single
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 30 of 87
and two story unit single-family dwellings. So, you go from a single unit -- a single level
to a 40 foot high structure. I don't think -- I don't call that transition and they say -- I
guess everything is according to code, meets code, but if you look at the surrounding
area it doesn't really match up with what we -- with what we intend with Meridian.
hope you guys can see that and we have talked about -- it's only five feet high than
these apartments just on the west side. The way that those are built, they are at peak
at 35. It drops so the entire length isn't 35 feet. These -- the entire length is going to be
that massive block. So, thank you for your time.
Borton: Okay. Thank you.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I think for the benefit at least of Mr. Moss and some of the folks that are in the
audience, there is an elementary school planned north of the gas station and west of
Settlers Park and I believe that school is slated for construction as a result of the bond.
Borton: Hang on. Ma'am. Sorry to cut you off, but everything's on the record. Why
don't you come forward. Name and address again and --
Garcia: Sorry Cathrine Garcia. 2970 Northwest 8th Avenue. I believe it was asked at
one of the Planning and Zoning Commissions -- went or Planning and Zoning meetings
when they were going to put that school in. At that point in time it was -- I believe that it
was stated -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- that there time set frame as to when that
school would go in. Also with reference to that school going in, that dirt lot at present
time is used as overflow parking for every single baseball, soccer, and lacrosse
practice, anything that exists. The parking is already overcrowded at Settlers Park and
you're not allowed to park on the street, which means all of the overflow parking from
Settlers Park will transition into all of the surrounding subdivisions, so --
Borton: Thank you.
Garcia: No. But there is no school -- it will take that additional time -- or additional
space rather. It will take up additional square footage that at this point in time is
presently used and correct me if I'm wrong, but there is no set date for when that school
is slated to be broken ground on.
Borton: Thank you. Appreciate that. Mr. Clerk.
Coles: Scott Hill was next on the list against. No indication of testimony however.
Shannon Robnett in favor, wishing to testify.
Borton: Welcome. Thanks for coming tonight.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 31 of 87
Robnett: Mr. President and Members of the Council, my name is Shannon Robnett. I
reside at 5103 Zamora, just a mile down the road, and I am the client. A couple things I
would like to clarify on this project. We have more common area than required. We get
that by going vertical. We have more amenities than we are required. We get that
because we see the need for that inside of our own community. We have everything
centrally located. All of the people that are surrounding us in the Crossfield Subdivision
have larger lots than what are proposed in the rear. We could have done smaller. We
just knew that that wasn't going to be the fit. There is no variance in your code that
allows anything to exceed 40 feet in height. So, there is no opportunity for us at any
point to get any higher than that. I'm currently under construction on a three story
apartment complex at Meridian and Pennwood. We are three stories tall and we are 43
feet high. The property that everybody keeps referencing at Meridian and McMillan is in
my backyard and I'm okay with that, because I knew it was there when I bought the
place. But it's also taller than this and it's still only 40 -- or still only three stories.
Everybody gets caught up on the stories. Everybody gets caught up on the three
versus four and the reality is the -- what we have planned is kind of a penthouse feel
on the top. So, you will enter the unit on the third floor, you will have the dining room,
the main living area and the master bedroom, with the two bedrooms upstairs to allow
you an outdoor living space that will be separated from the rest of the area. So, to say
that there are four floors housing people is very correct. To say that all units will have
an entry onto that floor as in four different units per, that's not exactly how that's going to
work. The other thing that was brought up was the Crossfield Subdivision terminated --
those roads terminating into Venable. The reason that is is because that's a private
lane. We complete that project. We complete that road and we allow that access to
happen back out to Ustick when we improve Venable Lane at our expense. The
schools. The schools are overcrowded. They were overcrowded when my kids went
there. They were overcrowded -- they are even more overcrowded now. But we
generate over three million dollars in fees with this project alone. We have a 2.8
percent vacancy in the City of Meridian right now currently and that's just with what's
available. What's coming online doesn't keep pace with the development that's coming.
But the real reason I wanted to speak with you guys tonight is about the conundrum that
we find ourselves in and Mr. McNary spoke to -- or Mr. Nary spoke to as far as how we
got to this point. We have it -- we have a parcel that in the county currently has a
problem with the property lines that Mr. Brown will speak to a little bit further, but the
problem is if we dedicate the area that's needed to correct the problem from the
property that we have, that we create an illegal situation in the county, because now we
have a property that the county has a piece of land that is C-2 on one part of it and is
RUT, which is what our property is, on the other part. So, we have to go through that
rezone process. The problem is the county will not take our application until they know
that we are coming with the rest of the property to you guys. So, we are kind of in a
circle that somebody has to do something and I understand that -- Mr. Nary's point that
it's not ideal, but it is necessary that somebody says that at some point if you can
correct this problem that has been existing for a long time -- and Mr. Brown will tell you
that it started back in a survey back in the 1800s and it's never been corrected, that it's
not our fault and it's definitely not the parcel's to the east of us fault, it's just something
that happens that needs to be corrected and that -- that through that process with your
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 32 of 87
indication that we would be approved, then, the county will hear us, because we create
an illegal situation for them should we go through their process and, then, denied by
you, so --
Borton: We are going to have you --
Robnett: I stand for any questions if you have them. Thank you.
Borton: Thanks for providing that clarity.
Coles: Justin Chase signed up against, wanting to testify.
Borton: Welcome, Justin. Thanks for coming.
Chase: Thank you. Justin Chase. I live at 2777 North Somersby Way in the Crossfield
neighborhood. A lot of my thunder has already been heard, so I don't need to echo it.
would like to, again, speak to the school issue. My now five year old is getting -- my five
year old is now hitting kindergarten and we cannot go to the school that we can walk to
from our neighborhood, because of the population concerns already there. So, adding,
obviously, a significant number of people into the neighborhood is going to impact the
schools even worse. People mention people coming through the neighborhood and
getting into our pool and stuff, just the 80 unit complex that was mentioned at the front
side of the neighborhood. As a side note, I might add that that was actually not part of
the original Crossfield neighborhood when it was designed. That was actually changed
afterwards, adding in this higher density, right, and, then, now we are using that as a
justification to change this to even higher density housing, if that's the right word, similar
density. Excuse me if the numbers are not correct. We already have issues of people
coming into our common areas and into our pool, hopping the fence, breaking things.
We have had numerous repairs done to our pool facility and stuff and that's just from a
smaller complex right there and we turn around and add another 272 units to the side of
this. I understand they have a clubhouse and a pool and a playground. The existing
one that is adjacent to our neighborhood also has its own pool and its own playground.
They -- they don't care, they come right into ours and they break our stuff and it comes
out of our homeowners association fees to, then, repair these damages that are done.
So, it is impacting us and I believe that adding the additional housing units would as
well, in addition to, obviously, traffic on Meridian and Linder Road, which is bottlenecked
everyday anyway. I just believe that this is -- to tack onto some of the others, this is --
this is definitely impacting livability in Meridian and I really hate to see that.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Thank you.
Palmer: Question for you. Sir. So, if you know -- be able to identify who it is that's
doing damage to your pool, why aren't you pursuing --
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 33 of 87
Chase: I would love to identify the people that do damage to the pool. They come in
the middle of the night, they hop the fence, they throw all the pool chairs into the pool,
they come in and smash the gate, damaging the lock mechanism. We have had our
lock repaired multiple times there. It's -- it's just -- I would say that in a bigger city that's
just normal stuff that goes on when you have a lot of people around. I just feel that it's
going to be exacerbated by adding so many people right next door that have a quick
little walk right down to our facility. So, it isn't necessarily that people are getting away
with it as much as it is -- somebody else mentioned we have to actually install security
cameras now to try to catch people. But even then, you know, it's the middle of the
night, can you get a facial ID, do you know where these people are, you know, who they
are, that kind of stuff. It's just -- it's already an issue and it's just going to get
significantly worse, so --
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: So, you don't know that those who have caused damage to your pool have
come from the apartment complex adjacent to your subdivision.
Chase: What I can tell you is that we have -- I have personally caught people coming
from the apartments into the pool area, into the playground and playing and -- and
throwing rocks in there and things like that and have told the kids to get out of there and
go back to their play structure and shewed people out of our pool. We try not to call law
enforcement when it's our neighbors and we try to at least handle things personally to
say, hey, this is our pool in our neighborhood. You guys have a pool. You need to stay
over there. It just keeps coming anyway. So, it is -- no. I mean I know that law
enforcement has been called and somebody in the neighborhood can probably verify
that, but they have been called in the past to people there, but I can just tell you that --
that the middle of the night damage, I don't have proof that it is specifically coming from
there, I just know that that's been that the area of the -- the most impact has been
coming from there. The residents have pool keys. There is no reason for them to come
in and break things and throw stuff in there. And I'm not saying that there is not some
maybe teenage kids or something coming in there and just causing -- wreaking havoc.
I'm not sure where specifically they are coming from, I'm just saying that having that
happen and, then, adding an additional 500 people potentially is just going to make it
worse I feel.
Borton: Thank you.
Chase: Thank you.
Coles: Amy Kernin Laye signed up against with no indication of testimony.
Borton: I think she's going to testify. Welcome. Thanks for coming tonight.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 34 of 87
Laye: Thank you. My name is Amy Kernin Laye. I live at 2762 North Fairglen Avenue.
So, one thing to keep in mind is with the recent widening of Ustick it has made that flow
of traffic much better in that area and is much easier to use, but there is no light at
Ustick and Venable. It's a stop sign. And, then, a hundred or so feet down from
Venable you have an entrance in and out of the gas station and, then, the other
direction you have an entrance in and out of Crossfield Subdivision. To add 200 cars to
this traffic in and out on a regular basis is a huge safety issue. My other concern is that
you have added these children that now have nowhere to go and we have addressed
the school issue before, but our subdivision has three schools -- elementary schools
within a couple miles and none of the children are now going to those schools, because
of overcrowding. They now send them to Eagle Road where River Valley is. There are
schools on the slate for West Ada to be building that is not in the area of our
subdivision. There in the Bainbridge Subdivision area and the Black Cat area. So,
there is not an elementary school zoned for that area coming up in the near future,
meaning the next three to five years. So, there is that issue to address. The traffic is an
issue to address. And just the structure of itself, I understand that there are other
apartment complexes. You have approved one on Corporate and Meridian Road, which
is just towards the freeway going out there that is going up. You have got a large
apartment complex going up at McMillan and Meridian Road as well and we have
vacancies in all the apartment complexes around us. So, the need to have 275 units of
density housing is not really a need in our area right now, because we already have
multiple, multiple apartment complexes going up and we have vacancies in all of them
that are around us at this point. So, my concern is the traffic, the light at Venable, which
does not exist, and the overcrowding and the schools and the eye sore that it creates
when you come to Ustick and you see houses and you see pasture and you see single
story, second story homes and, then, you see this giant structure and I'm sorry that
there is this vicious circle of county and city or whatever, but you have the opportunity to
just nay this project right now and we can put an end to this county -city wheel that
keeps occurring. The penthouse issue -- that's fabulous if you're in a downtown, but
when you're overlooking someone's backyard and their privacy on a third or a fourth
story, you can call it what you want, give it a fancy name, but, nonetheless, you're going
to have people standing on the top of a building having a beer, shooting the breeze,
enjoying their friends, all the while overlooking at your backyard while your children are
trying to play, you might be trying to suntan, whatever it is. It's an invasion of privacy
and it's an eyesore on this street. Thank you.
Borton: Thank you.
Coles: Mr. President, that concludes the sign-ups.
Borton: Okay. Anybody who is here wishes to testify who didn't sign up or have
additional comment you want to -- you have testified, but you have been raising your
hand and you certainly have something else you want to add, so --
Garcia: Cathrine Garcia. 2970 Northwest 8th Avenue. With regard to Mr. Palmer's
concern about who is exactly causing the damage to the pools, that is one issue that is
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 35 of 87
not always easy to tell. I can tell you for a fact that I have called the police several times
on drug deals that I have witnessed and watched the cars drive back up to the
apartments right there on Crossfield. You can pull the police records. We call -- I have
watched very inappropriate things that did not need to happen in the middle of the day
on that little side street of Stanhope that, hopefully, thankfully, my boys weren't out front
playing, as a couple was engaged in something else. There are issues already with the
apartments there. There are issues with the -- I don't think that they are there anymore,
but they would be leaving every five minutes -- starting from about 9:00 p.m. on they
would leave every five minutes, drive up to Fast Eddy's, come back about ten minutes
later and they would do this from about 9:00 o'clock until about midnight and it was the
exact same car happening over and over and over again. Safety is a concern. The
more people that come in here the more safety, the more drugs, the more issues are
going to be. It is a matter of growth in large cities. I appreciate that the developer is
trying to attract high end clientele. I just still feel that this particular development is just
not appropriate at this specific location, so --
Borton: Thank you.
Garcia: Thank you.
Borton: For what it's worth, some of the reason that -- that a project like this gets
located here and the city could be blamed, because a while back as part of the
Comprehensive Plan process -- it was identified briefly by -- by staff in their
presentation, but these neighborhood centers -- mixed-use community locations, right,
we have planned to have greater density, maybe -- you may or may not constitute this
type of application, but we have drawn, as you saw early, those -- kind of the big brown
circle to plan for future higher density locations. So, right or wrong to a certain degree,
an application may come forward to us within that region to be consistent with what we
are telling the community that area should plan for. Not specific to this particular
project, but that's what invites, you know, a higher density request, for what it's worth.
Anyone else who has not testified who would like to provide testimony? Okay. The
applicant gets the last word. Kent, if you want to come forward and address some of
the comments. One of the questions as you go through the list of -- of some of the
things that have been discussed that was touched on briefly tonight and in -- I believe in
an e-mail as well was concerns with -- I guess the roundabout construction and safe
crossing to the park across the street.
Brown: If you want to talk about the roundabout and traffic, the traffic engineer that did
the traffic study is here and I would like to defer to an expert if you -- if you want to talk
about that. As I understand from just a brief conversation with him, with total build out
of this we would be at a level C. The biggest thing that has taken place is the widening
and the improvements that's taken place on Ustick to handle the traffic and, basically,
the roundabout, as I understand from talking with staff -- ACHD staff -- has kind of gone
away. They are not -- they are not asking for that. But he's available if you want him to
talk before I do or --
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 36 of 87
Borton: Want to hear from the traffic engineer or --
Brown: If that would be beneficial.
Borton: -- have Mr. Brown proceed? Go ahead and --
Brown: I think Mr. Robnett addressed a number of the things -- access to Venable, the
development to the -- to the west of us as Crossfire didn't have access to it. They did
put some of their property aside for right of way. The difficult part was that all of the
property was on this parcel's side, so with -- with the development of our property it -- it
gets improved and it's -- all the further that it goes down is to our east -west road that
staff asked us to put, so that we can pick up these other nondeveloped parcels. You
can see -- go back there, Josh. I know you're trying to help. So, if you look to the --
the south and west of us there is a stub street directly to the south of us and, then, to
the east of us, I'm sorry, in that R-8 zone there is a stub street coming to those vacant
RUT parcels and another one and, then, on the other side you have a dead-end street
that also stubs in there. All of those are providing a connection. There is going to be a
connection going to the north right straight across from the park and the reason for that
connectivity that staff is asking for is that it works both ways, that the traffic is bound up
at this location and further to the -- to the east and get that. I think the biggest thing as
have listened to the concern, we are asking for RUT zoning. That's what's next door
where the apartments and those single family homes are at. We are proposing a similar
type of scenario. We have this boundary that Mr. -- Mr. Nary talks about whether it
should -- should be or is a legal parcel. I have only been doing this for 27 years and so
I thought I really understood the rules and the parcel stuff and this one is just kind of
different. You normally have a certain distance from section to section. This one's off
just a little bit and what's interesting is as you look between us and Meridian Road, there
hasn't been very much survey work that's been done that direction, so when they laid
out the parcel they came from the section corner that would be at Ustick and Meridian
Road and they went so many rods. If I remember correctly a rod is like 16 feet and so
those rods created this, if you will, error and so realistically the parcel that's to the east
of us, they match their -- their legal description and we match ours, because ours is tied
in from coming from the west and tied in with Crosswinds and all of those others. So,
we both have legal parcels, we are just trying to avoid any property dispute between the
two, because no one's ever fixed the error and that's why when we found out about it
we were submitting our application, we said, okay, we can fix this error, we can fix this
error with five feet or we can -- we knew we had to do a property line adjustment and
figured that they would have a problem with a building just being inches from the edge
of the -- the boundary and so we gave them a 20 foot strip and the -- the whole purpose
of it is to avoid anybody being drug into court over that. Do we have a legal parcel?
Yes, we do. It's just depending on which way you -- you measure it. It would be
impossible I believe for your staff to do what Mr. Nary has done. I don't know how many
projects that I have done -- I can think of at least ten where we have a property line
dispute where there is fences in a certain location and one surveyor -- they are very --
they are Rednecks -- all of the surveyors are all Rednecks and they -- they just will
stand behind what they say. I mean they are stamping something they feel firmly that
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 37 of 87
they are -- they are right and everybody else in the world is wrong and so that kind of
butts heads with another person's survey. So, the easiest thing was to do this property
line adjustment and now it creates an issue for us at this point. But catching it in the
beginning is -- is an impossible task and -- and, you know, I'm -- I served on Boise City's
staff for nine years. We tried to do the same thing. Mr. Nary and I worked together at
Boise City at that time and we tried to not have those things, but this is just a surveyor
error that we are trying to correct and correct for the public good that's out there. I think,
hopefully, that answers that question. I think as I started what -- what causes us to be
here and have the neighborhood opposition that we have is because of the comp plan.
The comp plan is saying that you in this area, in the circle that is the neighborhood
center, where you have residential products, you want it to be eight units per acre. With
the approval of our project you're going to be right near that -- that number. When we
met the first time with Planning and Zoning staff they were concerned with the
commission, they were concerned about the -- the look of the building and the size.
What we have done is by stepping those down and creating those patios and -- and
studio, if you will, the bedrooms up on the top, we have dropped 22 units. So,
realistically, our number, instead of 273, is down around 250. We haven't reduced any
of the parking stalls, so the -- those 20 something units we still have that additional
parking planned into our plan. But we have -- we have dropped 22 units in that -- we
didn't make a big deal about dropping those units, because we weren't really sure until
we -- we looked at the details of the plans of the building, you know, how many that
would be. We have tried to comply with your ordinances and tried to exceed that. We
are under the 40 feet. I know everybody gets hung up with a four -- four story and
think Mr. Robnett handled that. We have talked about all these other buildings that are
taller and they are three story. We have put, I believe, a good design together. In the
end that was Planning and Zoning's determination that they liked having us with having
more parking, having the open space in the -- in the middle. That's all I have. Thank
you.
Borton: Thank you, Kent. Council, any questions?
Cavener: And, Josh, we need a Google Map or an aerial. Can you give me an
approximation of the distance from these apartments to Mrs. Garcia's home that's there
-- right there on the corner?
Beach: Bear with me just a minute here.
Cavener: Thanks.
Brown: It's 115, 120 feet from her property. But from her home it would -- you would
have another 15, 20 feet on top of that.
Parsons: President Borton, Members of the Council, I do -- I do want to chime in a little
bit on the Comprehensive Plan analysis and what kind of transpired at the Planning and
Zoning Commission hearing, just to give you some context and how we kind of -- this
project kind of morphed and got before you this evening and as Josh mentioned to you
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 38 of 87
in the presentation this evening, you can see this has been continued for quite some
time and been continued multiple times in order to get it right. But what I want to point
out to you -- and you're right to some degree, the comp plan is guiding the density on
this site. But the other thing that we have to look at is the context of the area. If this
was a standalone 15 acre parcel we would probably want a commercial node, transition
to higher density, and possibly transition to a single-family development, so that it
blends in with the surrounding development. That's some of the context that we
provided to the Planning and Zoning Commission when we were there on this project
for that hearing and that's why staff's recommendation at that time was to provide less
density and smaller scale type buildings with three and two story structures as the
neighbors testified. Through that hearing the Commission did continue this project in
order to look at revised elevations to see that -- if it could blend in with the adjacent
neighbors. What I testified to at the hearing was if you look at the apartments on the
west side and the Crossfield apartments, that rezone came through in 2009. At the time
that staff analyzed that project we made a concession that we wouldn't require
commercial on that piece, because we were anticipating getting additional commercial
on this piece that we are talking about this evening and so I shared that context and that
history with our Planning and Zoning Commission. The Commission also looked at the
surrounding area and -- and we also discussed that on the north side of Ustick Road is
a ten acre commercial node that could satisfy some of the commercial uses that could
happen in the area and serve as part of the commercial for this neighborhood center.
So, that's why in this -- in this concept plan that you see before you and why the
Commission came forward with a recommendation is, one, they felt comfortable with the
way the buildings were stepped down, they felt that did try to provide that transition, but
also they felt comfortable that there was an adequate commercial area to serve the type
of density that the applicant was proposing. So, I did want to give you some of that
context. The other item that I heard from one of the neighbors was the extension of
Venable and why did -- why did that not happen with the adjacent property with
Crossfield. Well, at the time that Crossfield Apartments came through with that rezone
application there was a development agreement for that particular property. That
development agreement specifically stated that Venable would not be extended until
this property came before the city and was annexed in and that's why this developer is
responsible for extending Venable in its entirety with the first phase and that's how it is
currently structured in the development agreement. That we are proposing with this
project. So, I just wanted to provide you with some of that context as you take this
under consideration this evening.
Brown: I did think of one more thing as Bill was speaking. The concern about the
amenities. We are proposing over 900,000 dollars of -- of amenities. A fitness room, an
area where the pauses -- and the swimming pool that are befitting this -- this type of
project and at the same time, because of the height of the building, having that open
space that you see in and around the clubhouse and pool area, but also the three
buildings that are in the southwest corner -- or southeast corner of the site, instead of
fitting another building there that we would normally do, we have got more -- more grass
and more open spaces are available to keep our people on our side of the line and their
people on their side of the line and -- and I do a whole bunch of single family residential
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 39 of 87
developments and you have this discussion about the pool, that people are going to
come swimming in Treg's pool over at his neighborhood because --
Bernt: Happens all the time.
Brown: -- the neighbors are close by. But that's -- we have -- we have tried to
accommodate and something that is worthwhile in the amenity that we are proposing.
So thank you.
Borton: Hey, Kent, can you -- sorry. Real quick.
Brown: No, I'm -- I'm --
Borton: We have got -- just back to the building height. There is comment in the -- in
the staff report about the height being a concern and -- and the slide you showed looked
like kind of the end cap of that fourth floor becomes a patio.
Brown: Yes. That's correct.
Borton: But the -- the --
Brown: And also -- and also in the middle, so it -- it goes up and down. There is --
Borton: There you go. I see. I guess here is the reason I ask the question. I will just
cut to the chase. The center mass of the structure, in essence, is the same height at
the time the initial concern was raised. It articulates a bit, but it's the same height.
Brown: Yeah. Thirty-nine something.
Borton: And there is -- there are some elevations that are three stories at least in some
of the materials. Are there some of these that are three stories and some are four?
Okay. You're going to have to say that again for the record.
Brown: He said the design for the most part is four stories.
Borton: Okay. So, what we are looking at right here in the packet, which shows
elevations for a three story product, there is not going to be a three story product on this
parcel -- on this project?
Brown: No.
Borton: Thank you. That helps clarify that. Council, any other questions of the
applicant or staff? Thank you, Kent. So, Council, there is a few options it sounds like
from the comments from legal counsel, from Kent and from the public, in addition to
whether it's an up or down on the project itself, but just the matter is also subject to a
continuance, it can be, as I understand, continued with the public hearing open, allowing
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 40 of 87
opportunity to address the legal issues with the property line matter, gives is the
applicant time with the county to address those, but perhaps also address any concerns
that the Council might have that -- if there is any changes to the project itself that would
be requested to at least be considered, in which case the public hearing could be left
open. There weren't any changes requested to be addressed, a continuance could
occur with the public hearing being closed, but still continue to allow those property line
disputes. So, it sounds like a continuance path has a couple of options with regards to
keeping the public hearing open or not, so any discussion on any and all of that?
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I don't really think this -- discussion on the property line at this time, because
think that the density for this particular parcel is inappropriate. So, I think this is a
beautiful project. I love the open space. The amenities. Parts of the looks, the way
that you have done the patios on the buildings -- I just think this is the wrong location.
This would look really good at like -- like Ten Mile and the freeway. Franklin
somewhere. I think that there are too many apartments within a close range of this and
this is -- this is way too high density for this area right now after all of the approved
apartments that are already being built and built.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: A question for Ms. Milam. I believe if this were to be houses -- single-family
homes it would be about the same number of units given the -- would it not? I thought
heard at some point that there was -- that if it were to be homes it would be about eight
units per acre anyway.
Bernt: He's talking about buildings. Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I think what -- what they are talking -- what they are talking about is there is eight
buildings. I think that's what they are talking about when they -- when they speak of
eight, if I'm not mistaken, so --
Milam: Mr. President?
Bernt: So, it's not only units, it's buildings.
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 41 of 87
Milam: This is designated for mixed use commercial, which I could see it happening.
Well, that's what it says in our application. So, that would be some office and, you
know, light commercials and maybe a little bit of denser housing. There was a plan for
some 55 and older, from what it sounds like, homes going in there. So, as a -- as a
mixed-use I could see some high density residential in there, but to take the entire piece
and make it just all high density residential with three percent single family homes, it's
too much. It will affect the quality of living on everybody nearby and I have a two story
home and if I stand -- I have a back patio and I stand out, I can see in all of my
neighbors' homes -- in their backyards and that's just at two stories. So, you know, from
four stories up -- it's just the wrong location. It's a great project. I like it. But just not
here.
Borton: Josh, thanks for pulling up the mixed use community general standards. So,
Council, any other discussion?
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: And I think it's important that -- I think that, Mr. Borton, to your point I think
there is a couple of different pathways likely for a continuance for this -- this project, but
separate from the -- the lot line issue, which definitely I think needs to be addressed
before I'm supportive of any type of a vote, I do think it's important for at least the
applicant to get some feedback from the Council on this particular project. One thing
that I would remind the Council that our comp plan does is that it encourages some
creative thinking when it comes to different projects and I -- I actually applaud the
applicant for bringing kind of a creative approach with being able to do a -- a four story
product with a -- with a minimal height. However -- and I am one of this body that
continues to be very supportive of multi -family. I think it's important for our community.
I think that creating diverse housing in all areas of our town is very, very important.
think that this somewhat gets to that goal. However, to Councilman Milam's point,
would like to have seen more single family homes. Nine houses in a -- in a mixed-use
community -- you have got I believe 18 and a half units per acre. Josh has done a good
job of highlighting that we like to see between six and 15. So, I think that there is some
potential there. I just think that we are trying to crow bar way too much -- and maybe it
was done because of your attempt to be creative and I applaud that. But we are trying
to fit too many bodies into too small of a space over there in my opinion. I am generally
supportive of some multi -family in this area. However, not at that high of a density.
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Once again, Mr. Brown, you have brought a fantastic project to this body.
Honestly, you're a seasoned vet, you understand the planning and the zoning and
everything that goes along with design and with different applications you always do a
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 42 of 87
great job. I -- I actually love this project. I love the look. I love the amenities. I love --
love the vertical nature of it. I could go on on all of the wonderful things I feel that this
particular project affords this -- this community. However, like Council Member
Cavener, I'm also very much in favor for diversity -- you know, housing that's diverse in
our -- in our communities. I know there has been talk about -- there is too much multi-
family in our community. However, I feel it's the complete opposite and we have seen
the data. There is not enough. And the demand -- the demand for it continues to rise.
Rent continues to rise, because the demand just, you know, is there. I just don't believe
that this is the right location for it. I don't believe that -- this would be a fantastic location
in -- in -- in other areas that Council Member Milam spoke of. Downtown Meridian in
our downtown corridor would be fantastic. I would love it. But I -- and I -- and I promise
you that if -- and those who are now five minutes ago saying no to me that are now
shaking their heads yes -- I mean if this was downtown Meridian you would think this is
a beautiful project. You're not in favor because it's in your backyard. This is nothing
about the look of it, this is absolutely a wonderful -- it's a fantastic project, it's just in the
wrong spot. Plain and simple. So, I know that, you know, there is a -- there is a dispute
with the property line. I wouldn't even be able to vote on this until that was taken care
of. There is just too many what ifs and too many unquestioned -- you know, questions
that aren't answered for me to be able to offer up a vote on this evening. But I think it's
important -- appropriate for -- for us to -- to give our thoughts and where we are -- might
be heading on this -- on this application going forward.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Mr. President, I just want to comment on the property line issue. So often as
government we tell people this is your problem to figure out and, then, they have to go
to another government and, then, they say this is your problem to figure with another
government. I think -- I mean the reason I ran was because that was the problem with
Meridian city government was that it wasn't a how can we help attitude and that's --
mean I think the comment -- or the -- the talk needs to be, okay, is there a way to get
around this? How do we -- how do we figure this out and, then, discuss the merits of
the project itself, assuming we are able to find a solution to that, not we are not going to
touch this until you figure out this other 20 foot issue. Sorry.
Borton: Well, for what it's worth, the spite strip issue is clearly something that has to be
resolved. We have seen in communities when that doesn't get resolved I mean the
name says it all and it's a disaster in perpetuity, so -- I mean there will be opportunities
for us to review how we do our process and is there ways that we can catch things
earlier on and provide better direction earlier, great. I mean we can always do things
better. But, nonetheless, we are also hearing this application, rather than just shutting it
down because we are trying to make a unique circumstance still progress forward. The
challenge for me -- I like the project. I think the massing is just too large on -- on Ustick
and Venable. It's got -- in the staff report it speaks to the 18 and a half dwelling units
per acre -- anticipated to range is the six to 15, so there was some room to move. I
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 43 of 87
think the -- the articulation that was added is a great benefit and those patios are great
and I like what was done that you still have a four story building along Venable and a
four story building -- the majority of which is along Ustick as well. So, if it was -- if it
was, you know, two along Ustick, three in the interior, I think that meets not only within
the range of the mixed use community designation, I think it hits some of the comments
from the neighborhood and, quite frankly, from staff as well. I don't know if that's an
option. It may or may not be and if that necessitates eliminating a little bit of the open
space I wouldn't -- that doesn't bother me as much, because we -- in this location we
also have a massive public amenity across the street that we want these residents to be
able to utilize. That's some of this mixed-use community opportunity here invites that.
So, if -- if there is room to move to -- to revisit that, that that's a -- in light of everything --
for me that's kind the fatal flaw, the four stories, it's a hard one to ever accept. So, if
there was room to move and change that, that would make what would appear to be a --
a dense multi -family project located where we anticipate it to be located, but just be a
more appropriate fit within the community. So, if there was a continuance to -- to
certainly address the legal issues, but perhaps to address the design issues, I would
ask that that be at least requested of the applicant for consideration.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Question maybe for the applicant, Kent, if you're willing.
Borton: If you want to come on forward.
Cavener: We have heard some comments about trying to get this lot line addressed
and I recognize that you're heading down that process. I'm supportive of continuing this
application, but I'm one that likes to have a date that we can continue this, especially for
those that are here in the audience, but I also want to make sure that you have got an
appropriate amount of time to address the issues at the county before we have you
come back and so is a -- like three month continuance satisfactory with your timing? Is
that -- is that too much for your --
Brown: No. It's not long enough. Because they send out for responses, because they
are in your impact area. They give you so long to respond and they don't -- they don't
shorten that up, even though staff could turn around on your end -- it is required certain
amount of time. So, that -- if you're in Boise's impact you have 45 days before they -- to
allow the city to respond. So, it's probably four months that it would need to be done.
And I did talk to my client because of what the president said, that, you know, we could
drop the buildings down to three stories. We would lose another 30 units. I did quick
math as you were discussing. We are currently at 16.6. We would be In the 15
something range, which is part of that mixed community that -- that Josh is pointing to.
But overall -- and the eight that I spoke of was that for the neighborhood center with
270, we would be at 8.4. Now, that number -- and that's your goal for the neighborhood
center. The city's goal for the neighborhood center is to be 8.4. Obviously there is
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 44 of 87
some vacant properties that can develop, but as they develop they are adding acreage
that still will allow those number that can stay closer to your goal of eight, you know, if
they come in, so -- but he said he would be willing to go down to three stories but that's
-- but that's about another 30 units. So, that's dropping us to 220.
Borton: Kent, so the continuance question, whether it gets continued a week or a year,
the time frame that we pick really isn't as relevant as the time frame that you're subject
to with the county, so, really, if there is a continuance it would be kind of the best
guesstimate, with the understanding that it still could get continued again from that.
Brown: Okay.
Borton: Right. Because we would, you know, continue it to July 1 and -- and turns out
that you're not going to be ready until July 20 and might get kicked down a little bit down
the road again. That's -- so, if we were to pick a date that is not really overly long, you
know, the best guesstimate in your experience that should -- should capture --
Brown: We would need to be at least four months.
Borton: At least four months. Okay.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Mr. President. Kent, what do you need from us to be able to follow through
with that? Does a continuance work with some kind of unofficial commentary from
Council saying, hey, we would probably be good with this at three stories or did you
need an approval to be able to make this happen?
Brown: He is the one that has the land deal. I --
Robnett: Shannon Robnett at 5103 Zamora. The key issue that we have is -- as you
guys are looking at it, there is the opportunity if we go forward that we create an illegal
-- an illegal problem in Ada county. So, what Ada county is looking at is they are
looking at you going, guys, we don't really have that much of an issue with it. It's
procedural for us. But we need to know that if we do this you guys aren't going to leave
us with an illegal parcel, which would be the much smaller one that is the -- the Blue
Rider C2, with a sliver of RUT. So, that's -- that's if we bring it into you guys. If we go
the other way, then, you have this piece, which is now 15 acres of RUT with a sliver C2.
So, what we are really looking for is that if we can continue to work on the elevations,
continue to work on the density -- and, again, there is subscribed density in this. It's
about meeting staff's requirements for that and the development agreement nails the
floor -- or the footprint down. Nails the amenities down. Nails the open space down.
So, those are the things that you nail down in the development agreement. So, if we
can continue to work on that toward that goal and give Ada county an indication that you
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 45 of 87
guys are willing to do that should they correct this problem, then, they have something
that they can go, okay, now we know that if we do it we are not creating a problem for
ourselves.
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I -- just one last comment and I -- and I want to say this just out of respect for Mr.
Robnett and your development -- you know, your proposed development. I -- I don't
want to waste your time. I'm just not in favor of the apartments in this location. I'm just
going to be honest with you. I'm just not. And I don't -- and I don't -- I don't want to
have you kick this can down the road and have you waste a bunch of resources of
money and so I'm just going to be honest with you. That's just my opinion.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I'm on the same page as Councilman Bernt. I would rather you leave this four
stories and put it somewhere else, because I do think it's a great development, I just
don't think this is -- 30 less isn't going to change my mind. It's still going to be too high
of density for this location in my mind. So, I don't want you wasting time and money
and, then, come back to us and -- well, at least two of us will say no.
Borton: You can have a seat. I don't think there is any questions.
Brown: Uh?
Borton: You can have a seat. I don't think there is any questions. Thanks, Kent.
Probably wait until you sit down and, then, ask a question and come back. The
comment for me was -- and with regards to the scale, I thought that the -- the two and
three was most appropriate and another option -- if -- if you need time to make some
assessment as to whether or not that makes sense for you -- you know, a shorter
continuance can be granted to kind of bring back either a redesign to address those
concerns or some remarks that says, hey, this doesn't work. We can do that. That's --
that's the adjustment that would be necessary for me to be supportive of it. I don't know
if that's able to make that type of decision here on the fly. If the applicant can make that
decision, but --
Nary: And Mr. President. Mr. President, maybe to add to that comment that you just
had, our code does not contemplate stories, it contemplates height and so really we
need to evaluate what height restriction the Council would like, if that's the direction the
Council should go to put in the development agreement, because it's my just -- earlier
discussion today with the planning staff and based on this particular zone you wouldn't
see this again as you might in other types of zones where you would have a CUP,
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 46 of 87
which is required for multi -family. In the TN -R zone it's not. So, if the Council were to
approve it, whatever -- whatever restrictions or limitations you place in the development
agreement, which Mr. Robnett sort of alluded to, is the restrictions that will exist. So, in
light of what you just said, Mr. President, again, if they need more time so that both they
can be sure what they are comfortable with and staff can also compare that with code
requirement to make sure we match those up, that certainly a little bit of time would be
helpful.
Borton: That's -- yeah. The height equivalent of two stories -- there is probably some
wiggle room, but that's kind of the concept. I think everyone gets what we are trying to
capture, but -- articulated in height. Thank you. Council, any other discussion,
comments, questions? Action?
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: It's kind of hard, because in order to take certain action we would have to close
the public hearing and we can't close the public hearing if your -- if, then, the action is
going to be to continue it, so we are in kind of a conundrum.
Borton: Kent, can you -- I'm going to ask you a question I guess before we close the
public hearing. In light of what you have -- you have heard in the door one, two or
three, and it kind of goes through this painful process for the applicant's benefit to try
and see if there is ways to make things work and, you know, a lot of effort has gone in
to get it to this stage, so you have heard several options here, one of which would be a
short continuance leaving the public hearing open allowing -- a redesign probably is too
strong of a word; right? But adjustments to be made and also maybe some specific
language with -- with you and legal and planning to maybe articulate some of the height
issues. That probably can be done within 30 days, at least that issue to see if you can
get over the hump from that point.
Brown: The issues comes then two of the councilmen are saying no to apartments in
this area when the mixed plan community for this area is requiring us to be between
eight and 15 units per acre, which the only way that you can do that is with going
vertical and -- I mean your comp plan is saying for us to do one thing and we have the
inability to do that.
Borton: So, I'm -- I appreciate that. I guess one of the -- the question, though --
Brown: Because it's not just a minor redesign when Commissioner Bernt is saying no
apartments at this location.
Borton: My -- my question, though, would be if there is adjustments to the height and if
you were, for example, to make Ustick -- I'm going to use the word two story, right? The
height equivalent of what would be two story and three story elsewhere -- if that type of
adjustment were to be considered and what language is necessary to articulate that, if
you were open to that, would that be something that you could respond to and provide
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 47 of 87
within a couple three weeks? And understanding your response might be we are not
willing to do it after you dig into it.
Brown: Yeah, we would be willing to do that. We could do that method in a month's
time, Yeah.
Borton: We are just trying to get some options for us if there's -- you know, if it goes
forward for one reason or another, if there is going to be some redesign elements to it,
there is no sense in doing that in August --
Brown: Right.
Borton: -- quite frankly. Right. Because if there is insurmountable challenges in the
design of it, then, solving a legal issue perhaps isn't number one concern perhaps. Just
trying to think of schedule wise.
Brown: Right.
Borton: Okay. I think you answered spot on.
Brown: Yeah.
Borton: Thank you. Council, that was -- I just throw that out as -- if it's an option that
gives us something to consider in mid late May, see what that alternate design would
be. It may or may not solve any -- or everyone's concerns or issues, but --
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I -- I just want to make it clear that I would prefer there not to be apartments
here, you know, but if they want to go back and redesign and do something that's
different and unique, whatever, I mean -- I don't think it's my position, you know, to say,
guys, this is what you absolutely need to do. This is out. I'm absolutely going to vote,
that would be impossible for me to do that. I'm just -- I'm just talking about what I prefer.
I'm -- and if I were in your shoes I would want to hear that for myself. I'm just trying to
be honest and I'm trying to be up front and so it's not -- I'm not drawing a red line in the
sand. I just want to make that clear. If you want to go back and redesign and do
something, think about it. If you want us to continue this I'm for that. I'm open -- I'm
always open to listen. I'm always open to whether you're for it or -- whether you're in
favor of the project or whether you're against, I'm always going to listen. That would be
my point of view.
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 48 of 87
Cavener: Mr. President. Thank you. I appreciate the consideration you're trying to -- to
make in maybe continuing this for 30 days to give the applicant an opportunity to take
another look at their site plan. If you get some of those issues resolved before we have
kind of the heavier lift with the property line adjustment piece. I, for one, would just
rather have all of that addressed at the exact same time. So, I think in the interest
think of time and in fairness to the applicant, I -- I firmly believe the applicant is here to
listen to the public and hear from the Council and will bring forth the best project that
they can with the limitations that they have with the property and their availability to
move forward. But I would be supportive of continuing this application and leaving the
public hearing open to August 21st, recognizing that -- that we may have to eventually
continue it again.
Borton: Mr. Cavener, the reason that I would -- my preference would be to have -- I was
thinking, for example, May 15th. For the applicant's benefit and the public, too, quite
frankly, if -- if this alteration truly is -- is acceptable by the applicant to allow that two
story along Ustick, three story elsewhere, that comes forward and even with that, if this
Council just isn't supportive of it, the sooner that gets communicated I think the better
and if they can have that before us in May and we can give that direction, I think up or
down that really helps. If we -- if we wait until August, the applicant probably is going to
have to go down the road and do a bunch of work for the county and if they want to
know that more definitive up or down, quite frankly, sooner and if we can give them that
in mid-May I think -- I don't see any harm in that, if the applicant truly is willing to provide
that to us that quickly, the public -- it's fresh in their mind, they are going to respond.
We can give that direction within 30 days.
Cavener: Mr. President? I -- I appreciate -- again I appreciate where you're trying to
kind of move things along. I would not -- unless we have a mechanism -- and I know
the Mayor's not here to direct staff, but I think Council Member Palmer brought up a
very important point, which is how -- how are we providing the best level of customer
service on this particular issue as it relates to the property line adjustment piece. If
there was a mechanism that this body would feel comfortable at that public hearing,
assuming all the issues related to the design of the project have been admitted to the
satisfaction of the Council and, then, we would want to speak in favor or opposition to
the project, I can come to terms with that. What I -- what I'm struggling with is that we
are going to have the applicant come back in May to address some of the concerns that
we have heard from Council, we still won't have the property line adjustment piece --
just that we are going to continue it yet again.
Borton: Correct.
Cavener: It's just not -- I'm one that doesn't favor multiple continuances, especially on a
project that has received a significant amount of continuances already.
Borton: Councilman Cavener, the reason that is for my mind why in this circumstance it
would be appropriate is the alternative is worse. The alternative is greater delay for the
applicant and the public to get some direction from us if this project is going to be viable
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 49 of 87
at all and there is no benefit to delaying that decision I don't think into August. If a
continuance -- public hearing can be open, a continuance to May 15, allows the
applicant and the public to come back, allows legal staff and planning staff to assess not
only the height language, but perhaps they will have a better road map of what's going
to take place in the county if it were to be approved. There is no decision on that yet.
What might come back on May 15th might not satisfy Council and everyone would love
to know if it were to go that route, the sooner the better and a continuance to May 15th
think allows that to occur. At least that decision to be made relatively soon, rather than
delayed.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I move we continue the public hearing to May 15th on H-2017-0142 and with
that a plea for Mr. Nary and staff to find a way that if it can be done, mitigating major
concerns for us to be able to approve to, you know, let us know what that mechanism
would be, so that should the adjustments on the day that it comes be acceptable that
we can make it so.
Borton: Second agree with that direction? Mr. Bernt?
Bernt: Second.
Borton: Okay. Discussion? In addition to that direction on May 15th to be -- to come
back with those adjusted elevations and in regards to the two story and three story as
described. That will be what will be before Council for consideration on the 15th. The
public hearings left open. So, anything else?
Roll Call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Milam; yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Thank you and thank you everybody for your patience in working through this.
C. Public Hearing for Gramercy Heights No. 2 (H-2018-0025) by
Gramercy LLC, Located South of E. Overland Rd. and West of
E. Copper Point Dr.
Request: City Council Review to Apply for a 6 -Month
Extension to Obtain City Engineer's Signature on Gramercy
Heights No. 2 Final Plat
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 50 of 87
Borton: We have got a couple of more short ones. We will just continue on forward.
The next item, Item 8-C, I will open a public hearing for Gramercy Heights No. 2. This is
H-2018-0025. Council review for six month extension. Mr. Parsons.
Parsons: Mr. President, Members of the Council, let's talk about some plats that have
expired and try to get creative with the Council this evening. That's what we are talking
about this evening. And so this -- this Council -- this is probably that -- I have been with
the city for almost 11 years and this is the first time that I have come before you and
presented what we call a miscellaneous application and they -- the first next two
applications that are before you have to do with the same issue. But this first request is
for the Gramercy Heights Subdivision. The site consists of 4.59 acres of land currently
zoned R-15 in the city and is located south of Overland Road, west of South Eagle
Road. In 2017 the City Council did approve the final plat that -- for the second and final
phase of the Gramercy Heights development and it consists of 31 lots and one common
lot. As a condition of approval of that project the applicant had approximately four
months to obtain the city engineer's signature. In the UDC that's the requirement for
satisfying that you have -- that's the mechanism that extends the plan -- either a
preliminary plat or a final plat. The time that this was brought to our attention the plat
had expired and the reason why in the letter or the narrative from the applicant they
explained that the applicant or the developer thought that expiration date was in error,
that they had actually -- it should have been expired in '18 and not '17. Looking at the
county records I did verify that Mr. Warren did actually sign the plat and the actual
expiration date. They had four months to get this one recorded and they failed to do so.
So, the other caveat to it is the subdivision is now under construction, so their
construction drawing are still valid and they are under construction building this project.
And you can see here in the aerial that they have commenced with the first phase and if
you can see my cursor here, this --
Borton: Hang on. Hang on. We can't see you.
Parsons: Don't have it? My apologies.
Borton: That's all right. Thank you.
Parsons: My apologies.
Borton: No worries.
Parsons: But now if you see my cursor here you can see that it's really a remnant
portion. There is really not that much land for them to further subdivide in this area or --
it's the last piece to -- to receive their approvals. But, typically, the normal process in
the UDC is that the applicant is supposed to apply for an administrative time extension
with city staff and they are supposed to do that prior to the expiration date and the first
time extension, as I mentioned, is a staff level approval and, then, subsequent time
extensions after that require them to do a neighborhood meeting, post the site, and
come back before City Council to grant another extension. Well, because of the amount
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 51 of 87
of time that's elapsed there is no -- they can't -- they can't apply for that. So, in working
with our legal staff and talking with the planning division manager, we kind of put our
heads together collectively and said what's the best solution to remedy these type of
situations. No, we don't want this to occur on a regular basis, but we have had to
recently that we are, again, sharing with you this evening. So, we are asking for at least
your take on it. The applicant is requesting that you grant them a six month extension,
at least keep their plat valid for another six months. And in my memo that I prepared for
Council I stated that we would start that six month window from after tonight's hearing,
so they would get six months from the -- from the date of tonight's hearing. I would also
mention to Council that because of these two issues that have been brought to our
attention, I am personally working with our IT staff to make sure that we can create
some kind of record or database in the system so that we can run a report out of
Accella, which is our database system, and run a monthly report and see which plats
are set to expire. That way we can communicate that information to our applicants
moving forward. So, with that I will -- I will conclude my presentation and stand for any
questions you have regarding this particular project.
Borton: Thank you for that. Council, any questions? Pretty straight forward? Kent, do
you want to provide some brief comment? I think it's pretty clear.
Brown: This is a -- again, Kent Brown, 3161 East Springwood, for the record. This is
exactly what Councilman Palmer is talking about is the creativity to help us solve a
situation. The next public hearing is the first time I saw that we were expired as I'm
under contract to help the developers go through this process. So, then, immediately I
pulled up everyone that I have received and this was a new project that I had just
received a few days you earlier and I called the developer back and say, you know, you
give me a dead -- a dead plat. The plat's expired. I said -- but I don't understand why
that that really wasn't discussed, you know, as you're getting your application and you're
doing your final plat approval that it could have been easily just submit a time extension
and we can change that date for you, because it's -- an administrative approval is pretty,
you know, seamless and pretty easy. I would say that this year I'm submitting at least
seven or eight time extensions, because I have one project that they were all to be done
on June 8th. There is just no way this one developer could build seven different phases
and have them all signed by Warren. Warren goes on vacation and does something,
don't know what it is, but he's kind of hard to catch, so -- so, would appreciate your
approval. Thank you.
Borton: Thank you, Kent.
Brown: And it is -- technically it's our fault. I mean that it -- the developer should have
known better, but that's -- that's where we are at.
Borton: It's a public hearing. Anybody sign up?
Coles: No sign-ups.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 52 of 87
Borton: No sign ups. Anybody here interested in this? No? It looks pretty straight
forward. I appreciate staff's taking this as an opportunity if there is ways -- to
Councilman Palmer's point, we can improve, maybe do things a little bit better, catch
stuff on our end. Not blaming -- pointing fingers, but we always want to look at
opportunities to do that, so if this invites that, then, it's a great benefit from it, so --
Council, any action?
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Just -- I guess -- I don't feel bad. From my comments earlier, I -- my point was
more -- every one I have ever heard from loves dealing with our staff. They hate
dealing with our policies. And so that's really what my -- my comments were about is to
try to adjust and -- and fix policies to make it so that staff has the flexibility to -- to
perform the service that they want to do, so -- yeah, I appreciate the -- you know, finding
ways to make things work for our customers. Thanks.
Borton: Questions? Close the public hearing? Mr. Cavener? Mr. Palmer?
Cavener: Mr. President, sorry, I thought Mr. Palmer had his mouth open like he was
getting ready to make a motion and so I was going to let him do that, but I --
Milam: Want me to do it?
Cavener: Now, I'm -- I move that we close the public hearing on Item 8-D.
Palmer: Second.
Cavener: C.
Borton: Second agrees?
Palmer: Still agree.
Borton: Motion and second to close the public hearing on Item 8-C. All those in favor
say aye. The public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we approve H-2018-0025, a six month extension for Gramercy
Heights No. 2 final plat.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 53 of 87
Palmer: Second.
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 8-C, H-2018-0025. Any
discussion? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk.
Roll Call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Milam; yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
D. Public Hearing for Trilogy (H-2018-0024) by Challenger
Development, Located at the Southeast Corner of W. Chinden
Blvd. and N. Black Cat Rd.
Request: City Council Review for the Purpose of Extending
the Expired Plat to Allow a 6 -Month Extension to Obtain City
Engineer's Signature on the Final Plat
Borton: Item 8-B. We will open the public hearing on Trilogy, H-2018-0024. Time
extension issue part two.
Parsons: Part two, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Again, this is another
situation that I just described to you, but this is, again, the Trilogy Subdivision. It is a
larger development. It consists 21 -- 28.16 acres of land, zoned R-8 and it's located on
the south side of Chinden Boulevard, east of North Black Cat Road. The subdivision --
the subject plat consists of 144 buildable lots and nine common lots. Currently in this
particular situation -- a little bit different than the last one. In speaking with the applicant
or the developer this -- this evening before -- Mr. Conger is the one that is constructing
the first phase of the Trilogy Subdivision, he has confirmed that landscaping is going in
at this point with first phase. The roads are paved. The sidewalks and all of those
improvements are happening, along with fencing, and the surety -- the city does have a
surety to guarantee those improvements. So, in this particular case a little bit farther
along down the road than the previous project. What makes this one a little unique is
that the developer had sold off a portion of this property to the Brighton Corporation and
if you can see my cursor here, this little square piece of property will be -- at some point
be incorporated into the Bainbridge Subdivision. So, the transition is more seamless
within that urban fabric out there and so now we have two developers kind of on the
hook if the plat is -- because the plat is expired, that they would have to also go back
through that process, again, being creative, we had communications with the applicant,
said this is the process that we would send you through in order to keep this valid.
Again, I won't go in too much of the history on this. Again, they are requesting the six-
month extension as well. And I will stand -- from today's date. Yes. And I will stand for
any questions.
Borton: Thanks, Bill. Council, any questions? Mr. Brown.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 54 of 87
Brown: Kent Brown. 3161 East Springwood. I have been working with staff trying to
have this so that Warren wouldn't have anything to do tomorrow morning and sign this
plat, but I'm not quite there. Hopefully next week, if not by the end of the week. They
have signed a lot of plats. Just a little trivia. The county has recorded 43 plats so far
this this year in Ada county. Nineteen of those came from the City of Meridian. Nine to
the city of Boise. Five to Eagle. And four to Star. So, Warren has been busy doing
some of that and his staff and I appreciate their help and I just know that they got a lot
to do, but -- so thank you.
Borton: Good. Council, any questions? This is a public hearing. Anybody signed up to
testify?
Coles: No, Mr. President.
Borton: Anybody in the room wishing to provide testimony on this matter? Ralph?
Okay. There does not appear to be anybody who wants to testify. Council, what's your
druthers?
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I have a question for Kent. I'm just kidding. Sorry, Kent. I was just waiting for
you to sit down.
Cavener: I better make a motion.
Milam: Mr. President, I move that we close the public hearing on item 8-D.
Bernt: Second.
Cavener: Second.
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2018-0024. All
those in favor say aye. The public hearing is close.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we approve H-2018-0024.
Bernt: Second.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 55 of 87
Borton: Moved and seconded to approve H-2018-0024, six month time extension. Any
discussion? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk.
Roll Call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Milam; yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Thanks, Kent.
E. Public Hearing for Proposed Homecourt Fees
Resolution No. 18-2074 : A Resolution Adopting New Fees
of the Meridian Parks And Recreation Department;
Authorizing The Department To Collect Such Fees; And
Providing An Effective Date.
Borton: Item 8-E. Our public hearing for proposed Homecourt fees with a resolution --
or proposed resolution 18-2074. Garrett, welcome.
White: All right. Mr. President, Members of Council, thank you for your time tonight.
I'm here to talk to you guys about a monthly -- a proposed monthly court membership
fee for the Homecourt facility. Currently the YMCA offers this type of membership for
those who participate in pickleball, noon ball basketball, open court times that only have
access to the courts. As you guys know that when the YMCA moves out the fitness
equipment would go away. So, we were wanting to propose a similar membership.
When the YMCA lease is up -- or expires on May 24th of the -- of May, we plan to
continue these programs that would include this type of membership to keep the
transition from YMCA program to city program as smooth as possible. In the past,
don't know, since the YMCA has been living there since we purchased the building, the
YMCA has been anticipating for us to take this -- these programs over once they do
move out for that. So, they are well aware of this and right at their new facility they
wouldn't have as many pickleball courts and basketball courts to meet the demand of
morning pickleball and noon ball, things like that. So, the proposed fees -- right now we
are proposing are 15 dollars a month for Meridian residents youth and Meridian resident
seniors. Twenty dollars for Meridian resident adults between the ages of 18 and 54
and, then, 25 dollars for all non -Meridian residents. What this membership would get
you into is, like I mentioned before, the morning pickleball. They have a later day that
we do pickleball over there as well. Noon basketball. Even open gym and open court
times. Similar to what the YMCA currently offers. With that I can stand for any
questions.
Borton: Council, any questions for Garrett?
Cavener: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 56 of 87
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Garrett, can you give us just a little bit better analysis on how the fees were
derived? What was the decision making process? Who was involved in that decision
making process? Where are they coming from?
White: Sure. Good question. Councilman Cavener, Members of the Council, the
YMCA currently charges 20 dollars per month for this court membership fee. So, we
kind of based that starting with that starting point, obviously, because they already have
that established. I did some research trying to call different rec centers, things like that,
to offer a court membership and the reality of it is there is really nobody offers a court
membership, because they don't have as many courts as we do. They all have fitness
equipment and things like that involved in their rec centers. The closest one I could get
to is Blaine County Recreation District, which was right there near Sun Valley and
Hailey and they offer a 25 dollar a month pickleball court membership fee type of thing.
Tied to those fees, the 15, 20 and 25 dollars is kind of -- it is shaped around what we
currently offer our drop-in rates, the two, three or four dollar rates that we offer for open
gym and things like that. Two dollars for seniors and youth, Meridian residents, three
dollars for Meridian adult residents and four dollars for all non-residents. So, taking
those numbers and, basically, the ratio works out to be -- if you go eight times it's
equivalent to the -- the current prices. So, that's how we kind of came up with those
fees based on what currently exists, as well as doing the research to see what else is
offered. I hope that answers that question.
Borton: Council, any other questions?
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: These are monthly?
White: These would be a monthly fee. Correct.
Cavener: Okay. Discussion?
Borton: Yes.
Cavener: Mr. President. Just my two cents and I don't think this will come as a surprise
to -- to Garrett or Steve. I have never been supportive of us charging our taxpayers for
a resource of an asset that they have helped purchase. If you are asking our opinions
on this I think that the fee for non-residents is too low and the fees for our residents,
specifically our youth and seniors, is too high.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 57 of 87
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I agree. I think you either skyrocket the non -Meridian resident and drop
everyone else or significantly drop resident and -- a little bit and raise non-resident.
mean I understand, you know, if you want to guarantee that you're going to have a -- in
our parks the -- the shelters and, you know, provides for insuring that someone is going
to be there to kick other people out if necessary and that there is a clean-up factor. But
this one -- we are not a gym.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I think it's important -- I appreciate -- I know exactly what you and your staff
are trying to accomplish is to re -coop some of the costs of maintaining that facility --
White: Right.
Cavener: -- the use of that facility, the cost off -setting the use. I look at this differently
than I look at a shelter. You know, when Council was presented with this opportunity to
purchase this asset for it was -- I always looked at this as just like another park facility
and that we don't charge our citizens to swing on a swing or to fly a kite in the park and
just -- I have always struggled that we -- even slightly trying to monetize the use, while
the intent behind it I think is -- is noble.
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Garrett, what's the ratio between residents and non-residents who use the
Homecourt?
White: That's a great question, Council Member Bernt. Right now it's tough to get that,
because the YMCA, they are --
Bernt: Oh. Okay.
White: -- when they are offering these programs they don't do a resident and
nonresident deal. I really couldn't give you an accurate answer in my opinion, unless
you go through and just do a quick survey and talk to them and figure out where they
live and this and that. I do know that the numbers -- I can just tell you numbers. I really
don't know where they live. Morning pickleball, winter -- late fall, winter, spring, you're
looking anywhere between 80 and 90 people there on a heavy day between 7:00 a.m.
and noon. The heaviest hours would be 9:00 and 11:00, but -- I mean there is a lot of
people and they are using all those courts. They use nine to ten pickleball courts
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 58 of 87
typically every -- every day they are in there, Monday through Friday and, then, also on
Sundays. Noon ball uses the three classrooms. But when it comes to resident and
nonresident, I just can't answer that question.
Bernt: One more question.
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Those -- those that are playing pickleball, are they involved in another rec league
that they are paying other fees in association -- above and beyond what these -- these
fees would be?
White: No. To my understanding they are not. They may be part of the BAPA, Boise
Area Pickleball Association, and to my understanding that's a ten dollar a year fee that
they do. BAPA -- it does have a presence at Homecourt. They don't necessarily charge
any monies to be in there by any means than that, but it's ten dollars a year to my
understanding.
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I guess my question was -- it's not part of a rec program type situation.
White: Correct.
Bernt: Okay. Well, I mean -- one more question.
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I don't see this any different than, you know, almost like a rec program type of a
situation. I mean -- I mean we charge people to play in our rec programs and that
includes courts and that includes us having to staff different locations and, you know --
you know, includes different -- I don't know, different resources that are involved in
providing that luxury to our residents. I just think this is another added benefit. I would
be open to talking about, you know, maybe restructuring the pay structure if we need
be, but I don't -- I don't mind paying -- I -- I know my son goes to -- and plays open gym
a lot with his buddies. He's in seventh grade basketball. He plays for Lewis & Clark
Middle School and I don't -- I live on a slope that doesn't provide a home basketball
court for -- for my family, so my kid and his buddies goes to Homecourt and they pay
two or three bucks every single time and I have no problem with that whatsoever,
because it's a luxury that we -- and it's a facility that we provide our residents and, you
know, we have to maintain those and it costs money and so if they expect us to provide
these -- if the citizens provide -- if Meridian expects us to provide these, you know,
luxuries and amenities for -- for them to enjoy, then, I think that, you know, charging
them a little bit I don't think is out of the question. That's my opinion.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 59 of 87
Cavener: Mr. President?
Milam: Mr. President? Oh.
Cavener: Please.
Borton: Councilman Milam.
Milam: So, I'm somewhere in between. I -- I realize that there is a cost to maintaining
the floors and the staff and the lights and the heat and the air conditioning, so I don't
expect this to be free for -- for all citizens. Frankly, all Meridian citizens aren't
taxpayers. So, you know, that -- I would also like to see some kind of a scholarship
program for at youth risk -- or at -- at risk youth, some -- some kind of an income
limitation or something, because I do want this to be available for all kids in Meridian,
not just --
Bernt: The ones that have money.
Milam: -- people who can afford it.
Bernt: Right. That's good. I like that. Very good.
White: That's a great comment. Thank you.
Bernt: Great comment.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Garrett, I -- were these fees presented to the parks commission?
White: I don't -- no, they have not been.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Borton.
Cavener: Garrett, I think maybe where I'm getting at and I'm -- I think I'm prepared to
make a motion -- is for me it's a lot easier to make -- to support a recommendation for
fees if they are based on a rationale of -- this is what we believe is the use of this type of
group. This is the cost and this is the percentage that we think is -- that group is
responsible for, broken out per person or per group and that's -- that's how that fee is
derived. I recognize you're in a challenging spot, because there aren't a lot of facilities
like this. I don't know if a facility up near Sun Valley is the place that I would run to look
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 60 of 87
necessarily a comparison, recognizing it's all you had available. So, I guess what I
would like is for maybe you to go back to the drawing board, come back with a
recommendation that's based on some findings about is the reasons why we are
choosing that amount, not just because that's kind of what we feel we have seen from
some of the other neighboring municipalities and that may give me more confidence in
being supportive of -- of a fee recommendation like this.
Bernt: And --
Cavener: So --
Bernt: Oh. I'm sorry.
Cavener: No. I was going to make a motion, so if you -- if you --
Bernt: Mr. President, I -- I feel like they have made that explanation. You know, they --
if -- if -- if you have a kid who -- who routinely is using the Homecourt and he's here
multiple times during a month, I think, you know, 15 bucks isn't out of the question.
think maybe your discussion tonight maybe talk about -- if we feel like that's a little bit
too much or whatever, maybe we have that discussion, maybe we talk about Council
Woman Milam's idea of providing a scholarship or something like that to those who can't
afford it. I like that idea. I think it's pretty cool. It gives people opportunities to use the
facility when they -- I don't think we should punish kiddos that don't have -- that don't
have the money to use our stuff. I think it's a great idea. I would have never thought of
that. that's awesome. But I -- I don't know if we need -- I think that we can spend ten or
15 minutes talking about this and just make a decision tonight.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: The terms can't afford is completely up to interpretation, because I mean how
many people would we consider a reduced or non -fee for because they can't afford it,
but have a smart phone? Ninety-nine percent to a hundred. I mean I do car loans
every day for people who can't afford to pay cash for a car, but every one of them has a
smart phone and they put giant speakers in the cars and the cars are full of scratch
tickets when we repo them and so I -- to -- I think that this needs to be available to
everybody in the city, because they are already paying for it. If they are living in the city
odds are pretty good that they are either paying rent or paying a mortgage and whoever
owns that property is going to be paying taxes. Just to echo Councilman Cavener, this
is a park and I'm okay with us losing money maintaining a park.
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 61 of 87
Bernt: Mr. Palmer, what -- and educate me, because maybe I'm missing something, but
what's the difference between a rec league, you know, basketball program fee and this?
I mean -- in your opinion.
Palmer: Mr. President, I don't think we should be in the business of those either.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I think first to answer Council Member Bernt's question, I think Steve or
Garrett can speak to this is the significant amount of staff resources that we allocate for
leagues and programming that we run. What I would think would maybe be beneficial --
and, Garrett, I know we have got a new council member on here and maybe to answer
some of Council Member Palmer's concerns, can you maybe just give a quick rundown
about the care to share program and the requirements that are associated with that
before we would fund somebody? I think that would at least give this body some
greater understanding about -- we have already got a process in place to evaluate a
needs based scholarship for youth in our community that want to take advantage of the
programs that we offer.
Garrett: Council Cavener, thank you for bringing that up. I was going to step in and talk
about that as soon as I had the opportunity. I was letting you guys speak. But we
currently do have a care to share program that we do offer scholarships for kids that
can't afford it. Can't afford to be in a summer camp or a summer program or things like
that. I don't know the ramifications of it. I know Jake Garro, my coworker, would know
more about that, since he oversees that program and the summer camps and
programs, but there are certain stipulations, such as from reduced lunch programs, if
you qualify for these type of things and annual incomes and things like that that we do
have to show proof of before we offer those scholarships and there is a specific
percentage that they have to pay up to and they get a certain dollar amount as well. So,
those stipulations are already set in place. When it comes to the actual fees
themselves Steve may be able to answer that question a little bit better than I can, so --
Siddoway: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Siddoway.
Siddoway: Is this on? Okay. I just pulled it up on the -- on the website to make sure
had my facts straight, but financial assistance is available through the care to share
program for children up to 18 years old who want to participate in Meridian Parks and
Recreation activities. They can receive assistance for up to 80 percent of an activity
fee, with a maximum of 150 dollars per year per child. To be eligible for the program
they have to be receiving assistance and be deemed eligible for one of the following
assistance programs. Free school lunches. Food stamps. AFDC or energy assistance.
And they must reside within the Meridian city limits. So, we don't go through a -- an
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 62 of 87
approval process of our own to ask for financial records. The position for the care to
share program has been if you have qualified for one of these other programs you
qualify for this.
Borton: Thank you. That's helpful.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Council. Yes.
Cavener: I think also a piece may be for clarification for either Steve or Garrett. I know
in the past that fund has been at zero dollars. It relies on the donations of others.
Where does that fund sit today in terms of financial availability ballpark?
Siddoway: I don't have a number for you, but it's been a balance in the thousands. It's
primarily received its funding through the donations of employees who pay five dollars
to wear jeans Wednesdays in the summer. It's been a care enough to wear jeans
program and there is -- it's also available through donations to the community and we
have received outside donations as well, but a lot of the recent funding have -- have
come through that -- that program through employees.
Borton: So, Council, is there comfort to move forward or not one way or the other?
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: As I mentioned earlier, I'm not in a position tonight where I can be supportive
of -- of the recommended fees. I think that there is some added analysis. To me I think
it's completely appropriate to have vetted this through our parks commission. I think
that's an opportunity for them to maybe dive a little deeper into this and for staff to share
where their recommendations are coming from.
Borton: Certainly an option.
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Would this body be open to the conversation about lowering the fees? Would
that be more comfortable, more palatable to the taste this evening?
Cavener: A motion is always in order.
Milam: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 63 of 87
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I don't know. Well, but -- but what Councilman Cavener asked them to do is
justify these fees or at least come up with a formula that -- to acknowledge where they
come from, so us just kind of randomly discussing and changing fees without any of that
data is no different -- or maybe -- I shouldn't say no different, but it's certainly no better
than anything that's already transpired where Garrett's had an opportunity to actually do
some research, we would just be randomly grabbing numbers and to that doesn't make
any sense.
White: And if I could speak on that just real quick.
Borton: Certainly.
White: I mean, really, the only recommendations that we had or to go off of was like I
discussed earlier, was what the YMCA currently offers. We kind of looked into it and it's
like, oh, yeah, if we did charge we will save 15 dollars a month for a senior or youth,
what is that equivalent to in visits, you know. So, if you do that you're looking about
seven to eight visits, right in that scenario per month to be there and get there. When
you look at the average -- we will say pickleball players, because, obviously, there is a
big crowd of those -- the average pickleball player plays three to four days a week over
there. So, if you average that up it would be worth it to them to get the -- the
membership and, then, there is a couple of them that only do a day, two days a week
and at that point you would probably just do a day drop-in rate type of thing. So, that's
kind of some of the information that maybe I didn't explain well enough earlier, but it is a
seven to eight ration of visits there, too. And, really, we were kind of leaning on the
YMCA's current structure in the fact of we want this transition to be as smooth as
possible, just that -- you know. And we can try this for a year and -- or less and revisit it
as we go through it. It's just -- that was the recommendation we went with, just because
of what was already established there.
Borton: So, Garrett, is there -- is there also an option, in light of the time of the year and
we have got budget considerations coming up, to take a more holistic view of
Homecourt and the complete expense for its operations and, then, the various means in
which some or all of those costs may be recaptured and that is done through the fees
for sports programs, fees perhaps for a Homecourt monthly membership and look at it a
little broader and determine if the Homecourt operations costs X for the way in which we
use it, what portions of that do we want to recapture and how. A lot of which we already
do, right, with our existing fees. We are not starting from scratch, but, you know,
through our budget process maybe we will see those numbers and we will see a gap,
right, to Councilman Palmer's point, right, a lot of these facilities there is not supposed
to be profit, right? These are taxpayer funded. That might perhaps assist the Council in
making a decision to say as a policy perspective, you know, we understand what the
gap is and we understand the various means in which those costs can be recaptured
and in light of that we are or are not comfortable charging anything or perhaps only
charging nonresidents might be another option, since that's only a few months away.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 64 of 87
White: Sure.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Siddoway: Oh.
Palmer: Sorry, Steve.
Siddoway: A couple comments. One, we -- we can bring a look at Homecourt costs
with -- and revenues. The -- I can say that if you set the fees at a place where we would
recoup all of our costs during the time they are there it would be astronomical. It would
be too high. I wouldn't want to propose that. It would not be realistic. So, we do have a
calculation based on an approved day drop-in rate, a number of visits on average that
we think would be used in that seven to eight range that Garrett just discussed. The
existing YMCA fee and the example that was given of Blaine county, provide a sniff test,
but are not the basis; right? The basis needs to be -- it's the approved fee that Council
has already approve and how many times are people likely to come and is that
reasonable. So, I would propose to you that we have a calculation we would like you to
consider. If you wanted it based on actual recouping fees I guess I would want more
direction, but I don't really -- my sense is that you don't really want to go there. And the
last point that I want to make is if you want to send it down the road for more analysis
what we will need some direction on is we have pickleballers that will be without a
program, noon ballers without a program come the end of May a month from now. So,
what would we do in the interim if we had to renotice -- I suppose in light of not
renoticing we could -- we have already noticed, so rather than, you know, starting over,
we can either discuss and come to an agreement tonight of what they ought to be
based on the calculations that we have done or continue it if there is more information
you need.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I do have a question for Steve. What is the -- so, first of all, I want to say
something. I think you're right in kicking this down the road until like October that we
went with the budget cycle would cause -- if they are paying a daily rate would cost
these people so much more money than any of these fees, because they would just --
all they would have to go on is a daily drop-in rate. But what is the daily drop-in for a
nonresident?
White: Four dollars.
Milam: Four dollars. So, the only thing, really, that I see on here that I would maybe
change is raise that one to 30. Because that doesn't equate. If you're basing this -- if
you are -- what is a resident?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 65 of 87
White: Three.
Milam: Three. So -- yeah. So, three times seven -- I mean, I guess I would be a little
bit more. It would be like 28 1 guess or -- right? No. Thirty-two. I'm doing really bad
math right now. It's too late. Anyway, that would -- I think that would be a little bit
higher to Councilman Cavener's point as well, he thought that one was a little bit low,
but I think having a program in place where -- that you can get started with and you
have something to offer other than the daily rates particularly for those who are there
quite often, would be a benefit to our residents.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Yeah, Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Steve, your explanation I think gives me a better understanding about where
the fees were derived from and that formula seems to make sense. Again, it's not a
surprise you want to -- I have significant reservations about our entire fee structure
related to this facility, but that's not up for discussion here this evening. That I think is a
conversation this body could revisit sometime soon. A question, though, is is the intent
-- we talked briefly about care enough to share. Is it the intent that care enough to
share would qualify for people if they wanted to use that for this court monthly service?
Is that something that staff has contemplated and --
Siddoway: We haven't talked about it, but it seems to fit the model and I think with
Council direction we can say yes or no tonight based on your direction.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Milam.
Milam: Just to throw a little bit more in there, Steve. I would like to see something
where maybe you have at the front desk or whatever a post or a sign to let the members
know, because especially those pickleball players they -- not to specifically point them
out, but you may have members that would be coming and really want to give back and
help support, you know, a kid going through that program or to be able to access that.
So, I think would really help as far as the end of this, which is the fundraising for that
program.
Siddoway: Ask them to -- advertise for donations.
Milam: Yes. For donations. Yeah.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 66 of 87
Palmer: To Councilman Cavener's point, you know, at least a third of Council is
interested in reviewing the Homecourt fees in general anyway and so I think it would be
better to bring this at the same time as we have that conversation, as opposed to
establishing this, getting it -- you know, people on the idea that they can do this and,
then, a few months down the road if we have that conversation and decide to change it
guess the idea at least for me would be eliminating it, and so maybe they would be
happy with that. But I think it would be better to have this whole conversation at once,
as opposed to establishing this program and maybe eliminating it.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: And if we were having this discussion maybe a few months previous, which
maybe in light of this conversation would have been better, I think we would have been
in a better position to do that. To staff's comments, which are completely accurate, is
that we take over ownership of this facility in a little over a month and I think it's
important that we keep the programming as consistent as possible. So, perhaps if -- if
the direction that Council Member Palmer is alluding to, if we are having that sooner,
rather than later, meaning in the next two to three weeks, I'm -- I would be supportive of
a motion like that. If the -- if the thought is we are going to have this conversation in the
next two to three months, I think, unfortunately, Council has set the precedent already
as to what we are going to charge for fees. The modeling that staff has brought
correlates with that and -- and I would be supportive of -- of speaking and voting in favor
of staff's recommendations tonight, recognizing that we -- it may be months before we
have this conversation about fees as a whole. So, that -- that I think is -- is -- there is
two paths we need to go. It's either do we want to have this conversation about fees
related to Homecourt sooner rather than later and if that's the case, then, I'm supportive
of continuing this for a couple weeks. But if it's -- if it's not, then, let's just make a
decision tonight, so we can allow staff to move forward.
Borton: Councilman Cavener, I think you're spot on as far as making a decision tonight
being a path.
White: And, Council President, one thing to speak to Mr. Cavener's idea there, is if we
did do this in a -- three to four months, whatever, is we will have a better analysis of
resident -nonresident, how many seniors, how many are not. Now, on that same note,
the summer months are a little bit lower in the fact everyone wants to be outside; right?
So, there is not as many court memberships during the summer months in the fact that
everyone wants to be outside. The heavier months are towards the end of September,
all the way through May is the heavier months for that. So, just -- we would have a bit
more data at that point.
Borton: So, for example, the hearing could be closed, the resolution could be passed,
the fees could be implemented and that doesn't mean that you're going to stop a review
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 67 of 87
and analysis and bring back additional data, like you already do with your sports fees
and how you assess those.
White: Yeah.
Borton: Okay.
Siddoway: Yes. Mr. President. We can do that. I would request a little time to do that,
so we get some history -- so that we get some history so that we get -- I would also like
to work with Brad Purser, the new financial analyst in the finance department. I think he
was hired to help us do some of these sorts of analyses, but we won't be able to turn
that around in a couple of weeks. We would need a little more time.
Borton: Council, is there any action?
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we -- Mr. President, I move that we close the public hearing for E-1
Milam: 8-E.
Bernt: A-E. Oh. Yeah. A -E-1.
Milam: Eight.
Bernt: Where? Oh.
Borton: Is there a second?
Milam: Second.
Borton: All right. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on the
proposed Homecourt fees. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? The public
hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Council, any action on this resolution?
Bernt: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we approve resolution number 18-2074.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 68 of 87
Milam: Second.
Borton: Moved and seconded to approve resolution 18-2074. Any discussion?
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I guess only the discussion on a slight raise in the non-resident fee. How does
anybody else feel on that one?
Borton: The motion is to approve the fees as presented in the resolution attached.
Milam: Oh, the resolution is already -- that's right.
Borton: It doesn't negate us from -- yeah. So, the fees as published and presented
have a set fee structure. It sounds like from staff's comment that doesn't mean that
there is going to be somewhat current or soon and recent review and analysis and
tracking and also opportunities to review those as well, but --
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: It is published there what's before us in the motion.
Milam: Right.
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I think just for clarification for staff, I know that we do an annual look at fees
kind of citywide. Parks comes more frequently as kind of response to programing, but it
would be ideal for us to have had that conversation, so that these particular pieces --
these annual fees could be built into our annual fee review, I think which is scheduled in
October. So, the conversation happening maybe late summer or early fall, so that
Council, should any changes come, can be built into that overall larger fee discussion.
Borton: Moved and seconded. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Clerk.
Roll Call: Borton, yea, Cavener, yea; Milam; yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Thank you. Thanks, Garrett.
Item 9: Department Reports
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 69 of 87
A. Parks and Recreation Department: Homecourt Bay 5 Update
Borton: We now have one Department Report. Mr. Siddoway, welcome.
Siddoway: Thank you, Mr. President.
Borton: Homecourt Bay 5 update part two.
Siddoway: And C.Jay is bringing up my PowerPoint.
Borton: You had circulated some information to all of Council last week --
Siddoway: Yes.
Borton: -- about this, so --
Siddoway: And to clarify, I'm not here to request budget approval. I'm not here -- but I
am here to seek your direction, because we are preparing a budget enhancement for
the budget process and I don't want to go spend too much time and energy barking up
the wrong tree, going down the wrong road. I would like to know the level or effort that
the Council would like to see happen in the philosophy that is with the Council for that --
for the Bay 5 area. The -- but -- let me just launch right in. So, Garrett White, who is
still here, made a presentation to Council on March 20th. There were several -- I did
watch that Council hearing and there were many questions. I categorized those
questions into three main components. What's the history of this? Have we been
talking about this? Is this new? What's the budget? Is there a budget? Garrett talked
about some numbers. What's the -- there is some confusion around those and what we
have and what we don't have for this project. And, then, you know, what is the scope of
this project and Council Woman Milam asked for a -- you know, to lay out some options
for some of these lower -- potentially lower cost alternatives that were brought up. So,
let me just quickly remind us what we are talking about. This is the layout of the
Homecourt facility. There are four basketball courts. Bay 5 is what we are here to talk
about specifically. That is where the YMCA currently has their exercise equipment and,
then, on the far right is the -- the leased space for the church that's part of the
Homecourt as well. So, history. This is something that we have been talking about for
some time. Early brainstorm ideas and we were just talking before we purchased, but
when we were just talking about, you know, what do we do with this space, included
everything from classrooms and an expansion of the community center to an indoor
playground that Council Woman Milam remembered and I think mentioned on the -- on
the record at the last hearing. The -- the direction has gone away from that -- that
indoor playground and more toward the -- the classroom idea over the two to three
years. In FY -16, which was the June 2015 budget hearings, that was when we were
talking about the budget enhancement for the purchase of Homecourt, it was noted,
then, that tenant improvements included renovating areas of the building into classroom
and office space. Moving forward another year to last year, the Council did approve
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 70 of 87
75,000 dollars for us to -- for Bay 5 design and construction documents. That is the
process that we are in the middle of right now and pulling the language straight from the
enhancement, it was to design and produce construction documents for the Bay 5
renovation. Once the YMCA completes the South Meridian YMCA they will move out of
the facility, leaving Bay 5, the current fitness area, empty. Based on the parks and
recreation master plan information we plan on creating three classrooms, office space
and storage. It will provide more opportunities for community education classes. A year
ago that was our -- our direction. Those design costs were approximately ten percent of
a 750,000 dollar'ish project. You know, we don't have an exact amount, because we
didn't have a design. But that was the -- the rough guess for what it might cost at the
time. Forward to September of 2017. We took the Council, Commission and others on
the park facilities tour. We toured the Homecourt at that time and shared with you the
initial concept plan for Bay 5. This is the plan that was in the packets for the Homecourt
tour in September of 2017. It included three classrooms. Again, that's what we were
trying to build at the time. The office, the storage, and the restroom renovation that you
see before you. There were no cost estimates at this time and -- but we were just
developing concepts. You know, what is it we are trying to do. The subsequent
discussion after the -- the Homecourt tour with the commission was that, hey, we are
building these -- we have room for two stories, but -- so, if we put a roof -- a ceiling on
this at a single story, we have all this wasted space up above, but we are going to need
ceilings for what we envisioned at the time in order to prevent sound to travel back and
forth, so they said, look, we got one chance to do this right, let's at least look at a two
story option. Let's maximize the available space and see what it -- what it could be. So,
they came up with the two story option, which looks very similar on the ground floor as
the one story option, but, then, includes elevator, stairs and some additional classroom
space on the second floor. We, then, took that through a cost estimating process
through December and January, got -- got back the cost estimates and we all took a
gasp, you know, it was more than we expected. But the -- the first floor only option was
about 1.8 million. If we said -- and the three stories -- or, sorry, the option three, the two
stories, was about 3.1 million and, then, we also asked to price out a -- if we only build
the first floor, assuming we might not be able to afford both floors at the same time, but
could we build the first floor to accommodate the second floor structurally, that was
about almost 2.7 million dollars. So, we all agreed immediately these numbers were too
high. This is too much. That the cost is too much for any of these options to seem
palatable. If I'm wrong, please, let me know. But that was our immediate take and we
are like we have to scale this back. This is -- this is too much. So, the very next month
in February we took that back to the commission and we said we shared the numbers
with them and they agreed. They are like, yeah, we wanted the two stories. We wanted
that. But it's too much. Let's rethink this. So, they scaled back their recommendation.
That scaled back recommendation included the office front desk, restroom renovation,
the storage areas, improved access between the -- the Bay 5 and the four basketball
courts and, then, instead of three classrooms, just made it a multi -use sports court that
would accommodate recreation classes, such as Zumba, martial arts, dance and things
that can use the open area. Didn't necessarily need classroom space. And at the same
time, you know, it also functions for multi -use recreational sports, for basketball,
pickleball and volleyball. We didn't have a specific cost estimate, but -- but expected
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 71 of 87
that this version would be under a million dollars. So, in March the very next month the
commission made that recommendation that this is the direction we would like you to
take. We brought that forward to the Council to say are we on the right track. We
presented those options to you and, then, we got the questions that I'm here to talk
about tonight. So, what I wanted to talk about is why -- what was behind the
commission's recommendation for the scaled back version. Are they -- there was eight
items we pulled out of that discussion. One, it gives us space for the dance, martial
arts, fitness education classes that we were trying to grow from the community center
over to some additional space and allow us to backfill other recreation programs at the
community center and/or at the Homecourt. And it allows the city open gym program to
move from a basketball court into this multi -use space, allowing more -- more space --
another court, basically, opens up for reservations and adult league games. That, in
turn, allows us to meet the growing demands for the adult sports program, having
another court available for reservations in the evening, allows for more revenues if that
is important. Not sure it is based on the conversation I just heard. The multi-purpose
area as a design would function better for this building, what we were trying to cram into
it. There were concerns that the -- the classrooms -- especially the two-story option
would exceed the current parking limits of the facility that's out there. The budgets more
realistic and, you know, but still see this need for -- for the community center expansion
and a need to discuss a future community center, but they are willing to table that and
say let's do this. This is a multi -use function that fits what's going on at the Homecourt
and we can look to future needs for a community center at another time. So, now we
are to April. I'm here tonight trying to address those follow-up questions from Council.
As I mentioned, seeking your direction to know that we are headed down the right road,
so that we can prepare a budget enhancement to bring forward with the budget
process. So, there was confusion around the budget. So, let's talk about that.
Currently we have zero dollars allocated for the renovation. We do have in our budget
634,000 dollars in the Homecourt line that is carry forward savings from the original
Homecourt purchase. It was generated from using some impact fees toward the
purchase. We have carried that money forward with the intent of asking Council, you
know, to use this toward the -- the renovation, but Council has not yet had that
discussion. It is in our budget, but it is carry forward from the purchase, just to make
that clear. We do have in the CFP for FY -19, next year, capital improvement fund in our
savings account 500,000 dollars earmarked for Bay 5. So -- and Councilman Borton
asked me to look and see was that just added this year or was it also in last year's CFP
and it was in both. So, it's been -- it's been in there for at least a couple years. Now --
so, this is -- when Garrett mentioned the 1.1 million dollars, this is -- that came from
adding 634,000 dollars of carry forward, plus the 500,000 dollars that's in the CFP
anticipated for next year, which we saw internally as the potential upper limit for funding.
We thought anything above that is not realistic, but still even with that our goal -- we
the 750,000 dollars was kind of what we had already talked to Council about with the
the 75,000 dollar design budget. So, let me just pause there and ask if there are
questions related to this -- this budget layout. Okay. So, this brings me to the
Homecourt options and menu. Council Woman Milam asked if we could bring back a
menu, things that you could pick and choose from, break it down a little further, so we
have tried to do that here for you. There were some specific discussions at the last
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 72 of 87
hearing about the restroom area and remodel and could we not -- maybe not remodel
the whole thing, but just take care of some ADA issues and do some minor
improvements only. We have a number for that, but I need to caution you that it's not
fully developed, there are some unknowns that I will go over here on the next slide, but
it's a ballpark to give you an idea. For the multi -use courts there was -- we -- our
proposal is to -- to update the -- the sports court flooring and bring a new flooring and
get rid of the -- the 13 year old flooring that's in there. But there is an option to talk
about of using what's there, repairing the existing flooring, and doing some various
painting and miscellaneous repairs to the walls and things there. There is also,
separate from Bay 5, some additional items that have been recommended to us for
humidity and condensation control and there is a separate option for that, that if you
only want to take a -- a smaller step to see what kind of an impact it makes, we can just
finish out the zoo fans that we -- we started that project last year and it's wired and
ready to accept those fans now and we -- that's an option and I will get into the pros and
cons a little bit here. So, there are issues with these potential cheaper alternatives.
With the restroom area remodel one of the biggest unknowns that we still need to
develop is these privacy walls. One of the main issues if we are going to try and do a
remodel of any kind to meet current ADA standards the privacy screen that's just inside
the door is in a clear zone. There is no place to move it inside the restroom, so those
privacy screens would have to come outside. If they extend that onto the wood floor we
can't just attach it to the wall and the wood floor, because the wood floor floats and
moves, so there is a -- there is a -- a question there that will need some additional
looking. But we have looked at it enough already to know that the privacy walls would
extend onto the wood floor where the score keepers currently sit on court four for
scorekeeping and to within five feet of the pickleball court lines and the -- on the back
side in Bay 5, because there is doors on both sides, right, on the court four side and on
the side in Bay 5. If that private -- if this -- if that privacy wall needs to L, which is hard
for me to imagine that it wouldn't, but there would need to be some more analysis to say
can a straight wall provide enough screening to not see directly into the restroom. But if
it -- then on the Bay 5 side there is stair supports that go up to the -- that upper
mezzanine and the L would be in the way of accessing the women's restroom and we
would need to, then, modify the stair supports. So, that still needs to be looked at. With
the remodel that's being proposed we are proposing to double the number of fixtures.
This isn't just pretty it up, this is -- let's -- let's get more -- more toilets, urinals into the
facility and another item is a desire to separate the showers from the restroom use. So,
if we -- if we don't do that, then, we have -- we still have the combined shower -toilet
areas. Our -- our proposed design also includes family restrooms, which we wouldn't
have if we choose not to do that. With the multi -use courts, flooring, this is probably one
that's had the most interest and attention. I think it is possible to just repair what's there,
but one thing we have discovered just in the last couple weeks since Garrett was here
before you is those flooring colors have been discontinued. So, are we okay with
swapping some out with some other colors, you know, I -- that's a call that -- that we can
discuss. But to match --
Borton: Steve, real quick on the flooring. Is that just kicking that can down the road?
mean rather than replace it now is it just delaying that expense that you were --
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 73 of 87
Siddoway: Absolutely.
Borton: Okay.
Siddoway: Yeah. And I have some pictures I can show you if you're interested in that
as well.
Borton: Sorry.
Siddoway: Councilman Bernt and I went out there to look at it, you know, I think it's --
it's in okay shape, you know, it's not -- it's not horrible. There are some issues, though, I
will show you, because it is starting to -- to bubble and some seams are starting to -- to
lift and -- but a ball can bounce on it. You know, there is -- it's not unusable.
Borton: Okay.
Siddoway: The humidity and condensation control -- you know, one of the questions
can't answer is, you know, if we don't do the solution recommended by the engineer for
us to take care of the condensation that -- that is forming on the ceiling, do we risk a
more costly fix in the future if there is mold or other things. We would -- we would like to
get on top of that one. But -- but there is an inter -- interim step if you want to try it. So,
costs. The original single story option that we got the cost back on was the 1.78 million
dollar option that we all agreed was too high. The proposal that the -- that we have
taken to the commission and the commission is recommending to you is at 690,000.
So, less than the 750 that we have been aiming for. If you were to take all of the
minimized alternates that -- that would add up to 280,000 and you can -- you know, you
can pick and choose others in between. So, I do have some photos I could show you.
This is the flooring. So, you can see some of the locations where the seams are
starting to -- to bubble, the corners are lifting a little bit. There are -- you know, it's not
unusual, but it is 13 years old and it's had a lot of use with a lot of fitness equipment on
top of it. Our preference would be to -- to put down some -- some new flooring, but it is
a blue, you know, modeled with some white and we were hoping to meet with the
manufacturer today. We had an appointment to see how close can we get to this. They
were unable to make that meeting happen, so I don't have that answer to what -- you
know, how close is the -- the nearest color that we -- that we can get.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Steve, I don't know that I'm worried about the color necessarily -- maybe
depending on how many and we could do it in a way to make a pattern look kind of cool,
actually, probably. My only question on the flooring is -- we have moved some of those
-- the equipment is still there.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 74 of 87
Siddoway: It is.
Milam: Have you moved them to kind of just really get a good idea of --
Siddoway: What's underneath.
Milam: -- what damage has been done and is it going to come back up or is it
permanently smooshed down by the weight of the --
Siddoway: Great question. We have -- we did move some while we were there. It
wasn't -- it wasn't --
Bernt: Nothing.
Siddoway: -- much different underneath than it was outside. There is not a lot of extra
indentation underneath the equipment that's there. There is an area where the weights
are that is a more spongy surface that I think would need to get replaced. It is also kind
of sliced and worn from -- from dropping weights and things on it. It's a -- it's a smaller
area on the -- what is that, north -- the south side of Bay 5. This is the walls. There are
some areas that are chipping and peeling and just lots of dirtiness that have happened
over the years and so we would want to freshen that up as part of anything we do, so --
and, then, if you're wondering what the -- the full list of items on the humidity and
condensation control is, I typed that up here. So, this is what's all part of the 125,000
dollar option. The 25,000 dollar version is just item number one on that list. So, it's,
basically, the zoo fans, in-line exhaust fans to a specification. Louvers that would open
and close with motorized dampers and, then, the controls to have them all work in sync
with one another. So, that's what's being proposed and that is my presentation and
would welcome the discussion, but I think I will go back to -- I think to this slide.
Borton: Thank you, Steve. Great presentation and additional information. Council,
comments, questions? I will throw out my two cents. I think the recommendation for
Planning and Zoning is appropriate. You have done a great job of narrowing the
expense into -- almost entirely into a window of existing savings from the way that the
purchase was structured. It's been within the CFP plan for a couple years. To do any
of the red sounds to me like it's inviting future expenses. It seems a bit short termed.
So, I think the recommendation from Planning and Zoning is appropriate.
Siddoway: Parks and Rec Commission.
Borton: Parks and Rec. Planning and Zoning. Had a long week. Transportation
Commission's recommendation. Parks and Rec. Sorry. Six ninety.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener. Some thoughts and maybe a conversation with Steve. I agree,
think that some of these changes and remodel have been contemplated for a number of
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 75 of 87
years, but I also think what we had hoped to achieve is outside the scope of what
budget we have available at this particular time for this project. I have spent
considerable time thinking about this and taking both yours and Garrett's comments
about the need to heart and -- and one of the things I have come back to is -- what
hear oftentimes that we hear from -- from staff is if -- if only we would have known when
we did X that really we needed Y and one of the things that I really think that this
Council and maybe staff needs to consider is us getting in and really taking ownership
of the building before we come forth with a true recommendation for what type of
remodel or upgrades or improvements that we need to make. Now, I think clearly there
are some immediate needs that I think need to be addressed and some of the things
that are proposed may be that, but one of the things that I would -- I guess I'm one that
would like us to get back to that initial plan of -- of multi -classroom space. That's --
that's the vision that I think has been prescribed and that's one that I would much rather
us get back to, recognizing that it might not come next year or maybe two years. So,
where I am is -- is I guess I'd like to have the conversation with -- with you about what
are those immediate needs that you think are the most critical to the facility. Excuse
me. And, then, maybe going from there. I don't -- I don't know if -- if you believe the
proposed is the immediate need that we need all of those today or we need those very
shortly after we take ownership?
Siddoway: What we have proposed is exactly what we see as the immediate need with
the caveat that I think we could figure out -- we could -- we could use the flooring for a
few more years if we wanted to -- to do that to minimize those costs, but the immediate
need is to -- we are out of space at the community center. We need to be able to -- and
it's difficult to line dance in the community center where there is a post in the middle.
It's difficult to do some of those types of classes that need space to -- to spread out.
think this meets that need for classroom space in a way without building classroom
walls. It -- so, one of the things that Councilman Bernt asked us to look into, instead of
building walls, can we put in curtains. There was a -- that's another item -- you can see
on the bottom, curtain divider costs are still being determined. We -- not for lack of
trying. We have reached out -- those costs are still coming. The -- to do a mechanical
motorized curtain like exists already in Bays 1 through 4, the cost we got back to do
those -- just to replace one that's there, if they could use the existing rail, was almost
20,000 dollars. So, with the -- and I don't think that's where we should go. So -- and it
would be more than that by installing the rail. I don't know exactly how much yet, but if
we go with manual curtains that we can just pull, you know, it should be in the -- the
seven to ten thousand dollar range I would think for the types of curtains that we are
talking that are commercial. They are about 5,000 dollars themselves, plus installation.
So, we don't have an installation bid yet and we would probably like to have two
curtains, but this -- this is the solution that I think meets the immediate needs. That
allows us to pull some use out of the community center, that it frees up space to do
there and allows for both a combination of recreation class and programming use, as
well as the recreational sports use.
Brent: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 76 of 87
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Great presentation. Looking at the facility, I do believe being a flooring guy by
no means am I advocating I'm the guy that fixes the problem. I just want to make that
clear right now loud and clear. I do know people that you can call -- they are not
affiliated with me -- that probably could fix that. I don't know how much they charge.
You can go talk to them. More power to you. But I do believe that -- that the floor is
fixable. We will have to replace that -- the spongy area where, you know, the heaviest
equipment was at. That place is destroyed. And I'm thinking that we possibly could find
some similar type of equipment that would be black or something that would be -- that
would look nice. I -- looking -- my biggest concern is -- are the restrooms and you had
sort of given me a heads up about, you know, your concerns, but after we looked at the
facility and looked at the restrooms, one of the concerns was, you know, you can glance
in that -- into the men's -- and we didn't look at the women's, but we looked in the men's
and the concern was -- you can glance in and you can see dudes changing in there and
I was -- we were having a conversation, a gentleman walked up and glanced -- I could
see him changing and so it is a concern and so -- and I think that we -- that needs to get
resolved before we have anyone use those restrooms, in my opinion. I think -- I think
it's -- that should be a high priority. And another concern that I have is -- is separating,
you know, the family use versus the other use, just for obvious reasons. I don't know if
it's appropriate to have, you know, grown men showering, you know, and having little
boys in there, you know, using the bathroom. I just don't know if I feel comfortable
doing that, knowing -- we live in 2018 and, unfortunately, we don't have control over
some -- you know, the weirdness that happens in our society every once in a while and
if we have to spend a little money to ensure that that does not happen and that we have
a safe facility that's available for young kids and older men and women, then, I think that
we need to address that and take care of that. As far as the humidity control is
concerned, I -- I don't have enough experience. I mean I would -- I would think that
would go off your recommendation, but -- but what are involved with the other costs?
Siddoway: Oh. Those were the testing that would need to happen for -- like materials
testing. Permitting. There is permitting costs. While a lot of permitting fees are waived,
we do pay the direct costs for permit reviews, furnishing, fixtures and -- what's the E in
FF&E? But the furnishings that would go in the office, it's just those -- those additional
costs that would go into the -- the facility.
Bernt: My two cents. I thought the floor was in pretty decent shape. I mean I literally
grabbed a basketball and I was dribbling between my legs like -- like Kobe Bryant back
in the day when he was on top of his prime. It was pretty similar I thought. And it was --
it was -- I think it -- I think it can be usable for at least two to three more years easy, in
my opinion.
Borton: Council, anymore direction -- decision I guess? Direction?
Cavener: Steve? I'm sorry. Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 77 of 87
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Steve. On your -- on your total budget -- and I appreciate pulling up this
slide. When you look at the total budget, the third column is 280,000 for the -- it's shows
like the minimum alternates.
Siddoway: Correct.
Cavener: We are -- again, I'm not that bright and we know that, but I can count 90,000
on the list and I just don't know where the other 190,000 that equals the 280 is coming
from.
Siddoway: Oh. It brings over the 165 from the office front desk -- everything that
doesn't have a red. The 25 from other costs and that would be it.
Cavener: Still don't --
Borton: Item number one is in both and item number four is in both. It's just --
Siddoway: I had originally created multiple options for you based on one, two, or three
of the alternates with -- with different, but it got -- it got complicated and in talking with
President Borton he suggested this is a layout that you could pick and choose. So, I will
say if you minimized all the alternates -- if I did my math correctly -- I did double-check
it, but unless I made a mistake, the total should be 280. If you were to do something
that -- like accept everything except the flooring on the multi -use courts and just do
the 25,000 dollar alternate, I think that 75,000 would come off of the 690 and whatever
that comes up to be. Six fifteen if I did my math in my head correctly. But we would be
what I think Councilman Bernt is talking about.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Steve, in your proposed 2019 base budget you have dollars in the base
budget for repair and maintenance of this facility related to courts or any assets or
resources associated with the facility and, if so, ballpark what's that amount?
Siddoway: So, last year we -- we took out the -- the maintenance for the -- the wood
floors, because we were doing the larger refinishing project that was approved tonight
on the -- the Consent Agenda. Those -- those are proposed to be added in -- back in.
mean they were -- they were approved originally as annual amounts. We have just
approved a one time drop out of 20,000 that would come back next year. Other
maintenance funds -- I don't have off the top of my head. Garrett?
White: Councilman Cavener, we have maintenance funds -- just that line item there is
55,000 a year annually. Like Steve mentioned, we dropped the 35,000 last year,
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 78 of 87
because 20 of that is typically the annual floor maintenance. So, the next year's budget
we are wanting to go back up to 55.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Yeah.
Cavener: I don't know if you're looking for maybe direction or what -- what are you
looking for from us and, then, I think --
Siddoway: Direction. Looking for direction. Please.
Borton: So, we are going to pick a path -- Mr. Bernt, it sounds like he was at a six
fifteen path if you delayed the sport court.
Siddoway: I'm fine with that as well.
Borton: With his background I think that makes great sense as well, so --
Cavener: Mr. President, obviously, I'm always open to what the will of the Council is.
am one that I would like to see us take full ownership of this building, recognizing that
staff has a mechanism with a budget amendment that they could bring to us once we
have been in the facility for a certain amount of time and can better articulate maybe
what our true immediate needs are and they may be different. I'm supportive of carrying
over the savings that they have from the purchase of the building, so that they are at
least aware of some of the budget dollars that could potentially be available. The other
piece that -- you know, that we are -- I struggle with making a decision about this in a
bubble. There is some big demands for our parks system that I -- as I understand we
are going to be talking about this year's budget session and so I'm -- I'm more in favor of
us being in a holding pattern and to maybe re -review this in six months to a year is
where I would be more comfortable with.
Siddoway: And if I understand the direction it's -- there will be an enhancement in this
budget this year that we will see, you know, late May and June that's going to have a
figure that comes from this discussion for us then to decide.
Siddoway: Yeah.
Borton: Correct?
Siddoway: Mr. President and Councilman Cavener, we do think that the -- the majority
of this is a next year project, but to make it a next year project we would need to discuss
the budget of that this year. The one difference I would say, if we are willing to allocate
some of those existing cost savings to some of the repair and paint, then, we might, you
know, with your blessing, come back with a -- with a request to use some of those funds
for the -- to repair the floor and paint the walls this summer. But even if we do that, the
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 79 of 87
restroom remodel isn't ready to happen this summer. But we would need to know now if
we want to do that next year, so that we can do the construction documents, have that
ready to bid and -- and have a budget proposal ready for you. So, the only thing right
now that I think we could conceivably do is the -- the floor and wall repairs in -- in Bay 5,
if you want to leave those. I think the rest would be an enhancement for next year.
Borton: And so, Steve, when you say no now, you mean no this summer as part of the
budget process. So, for example, if we point to now, yeah, do the proposed -- for
example --
Siddoway: Uh-huh.
Borton: -- that's not being decided now, you're, then, going to bring back an
enhancement, which would get reviewed in conjunction with all the other
enhancements. In June and July we decide whether --
Siddoway: Correct. But we are about to -- we have already submitted draft
enhancements. The draft that we have submitted is just based on the CFP at this
moment, but we -- having this discussion will allow us to refine that enhancement, so
that it's -- it's more in line with Council's desire and, then, there is also a balancing
process coming up with the Mayor and directors, so that we bring you a balanced
budget. We will just be better prepared to do that with better information.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I -- yeah. A lot of stuff. This is a lot of money, Steve. I am -- I don't remember
the restrooms and I don't remember them -- I remember using them and I don't
remember them being in dire need of repair. So, to me I look at that 275,000 and that
number strikes me the -- the most and I'm sure they could use some touch-up, but we
are having two different -- two different conversations in there. We don't want to charge
our people anything, because they are taxpayers, but we want to have the fanciest
state-of-the-art facility with these 300,000 dollar bathrooms. I have -- I struggle with that
and I don't think we can have it both ways. Well, we could, but it's a lot -- I mean it's a
lot of money and Councilman Cavener had a good idea. If the -- if the visibility is a -- is
a problem you put a curtain right inside the door, just like they do in hospital rooms.
That has to be very inexpensive. It covers up and nobody can see and --
Bernt: Could do that now.
Milam: Yeah. I mean that could happen immediately if we are worried about -- about
the visibility. So, I would go with almost all the minimum alternates on this. The
humidity controlled, those fans are needed as part of that, so it's not like we are
spending 25 and we might have to do something different, they are part of the whole
package. So, I say let's start with that and see if it -- it helps the situation. We might be
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 80 of 87
surprised. We might actually not need the entire thing. I might go a year like we really
still need the whole thing and it doesn't cost any extra really; right? Other than the rest
of the package.
Siddoway: Yeah. Other than inflation and -- but yes. You're right.
Milam: But I think things like touch up, you know, paint and fixing the -- the floor and it
has to be replaced and touching up the rest of it, I think is this a fine alternative and --
and a way to make this still a nice, clean, presentable facility that doesn't necessarily
have granite toilets.
Siddoway: And I want to make it clear that we are not proposing that.
Milam: Just kidding. I'm exaggerating.
Siddoway: We do not want the most expensive restroom and that is not what we are
proposing and I need to make sure that's crystal clear. What we want is something that
is -- is quality, efficient and effective and safe. But not -- not the most expensive.
Milam: I apologize, Steve. I was -- I was exaggerating a little bit. That's on me.
Bernt: I have never seen granite toilets.
Milam: This is a -- it's a huge number and -- you know. I don't remember them being
that bad, so that was -- that's where that came from.
Borton: Those are -- can we get to even a consensus of what an enhancement request
would look like? I mean, otherwise, we are going to do this again in June. You can pick
a -- pick a path yourself, bring the enhancement, and see what happens in our June
discussion and we are going do to this again. We will have everything else to view at
the same time at least.
Cavener: Mr. Borton -- and I don't want to penalize staff where I appreciate coming and
having this conversation. It -- it definitely is a different way of us looking at
enhancements outside of kind of our normal process and I -- and I recognize the reason
why, but it -- it is challenging to say here is what I think you should do based on what's
in front of us today without being able to have a full consideration for what the budget is
going to look like and, again, you're the director, you run the -- the department, you rely
on your staff and your liaison to bring what you think is best and it's our job to weigh that
versus dollars that we have availability and what we think is best in -- in the totality of
our city and so I struggle with saying do X for fear that you're going to go and do X,
everything that Council says, and, then, we are going to get to the budget hearing and
we are like, oh, we can't do that. It's too much. And so --
Siddoway: You know what, for me that's okay. If I -- if I'm developing -- at least know
I'm developing the enhancement that you would like to come back and, then, you have
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 81 of 87
the option of doing whatever needs to happen within the context of the rest of the
budget. I understand.
Cavener: So, again, I also know that staff and the department is trying to not bring lots
of enhancements and the optics of that, but I guess what I would say -- bring an
enhancement for the humidity control, bring an enhancement for the multi -use courts,
the repair, replacement, and those would be the two that I would suggest that you would
bring, two separate enhancements for -- for next year.
Palmer: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: And I would add -- and maybe you said it. I don't know. Repair to the wall and
paint. It looks bad.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: As I understand, the -- you have a budget right now that you could use to
take care of some of those things as soon as we take ownership of the facility; correct?
We have got a budget for repair and maintenance --
Siddoway: We have a budget, but I don't know how much if it's even remaining for this
year, so --
White: I believe we do -- excuse me. I believe we do have some money left in that
budget for that. We would have to get quotes, obviously, on paint and things like that,
but, yeah, I believe we do and the basic building maintenance that we discussed earlier.
Cavener: Mr. President, I think to that point I don't think we ever want to set the
precedent as a Council to tell a department where they need to handle repairs or
replacements of a facility. They are the subject matter experts. That's why we have the
budget process on an annual basis for our facilities and you're going to be in that
building on a daily basis and are going to be able to say this is what we need to do right
now with the budget that we have available.
White: And, Councilman Cavener, to speak to that, we haven't got quotes to painting
that whole big -- that's a lot of wall space there and things like that. So, I don't want to
say yes for sure we have the -- the building maintenance funds. They are available
right now. But to do the wall replacements and repairs, stuff like that, absolutely, the
patches here and there, but --
Bernt: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 82 of 87
Borton: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I -- I would also -- I personally, after being there and looking at the -- the
restroom situation, especially the -- I would include the restroom remodel. I just don't
think that it's conducive to a family situation personally. I mean I -- I think that you could
-- there is some issues -- definite issues and so I would -- that would -- that would be my
-- I would say that that's more important than the humidity control in my opinion. But my
next questions to you is could you do the office -- could you do -- could you do -- do we
have to make a decision on like the office? Is that in conjunction with the restroom
remodel at all?
Siddoway: Yeah. We have it separated out right now.
Bernt: I know, but those can do -- be done differently.
Siddoway: They can be done separately.
Bernt: Okay.
Siddoway: What I might propose, given that I have heard do the proposal, do the -- you
know, the restrooms, but not the floors. And, then, a couple -- I think what I will do --
will put together an enhancement with -- with line item options that can be accepted or
rejected in -- during the -- the budget process. We will bring forward the -- the full deal,
but we will also have the options in there for Council to make the decision during the
budget process.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I know -- and I don't think it's a term easier, but maybe easier for processing
purposes, to put -- bring them all on separate budget amendments -- or budget
enhancements and, then, we approve the ones that we want to and we don't the other
ones and it's based on this project, as well as everything else that going on.
Siddoway: It's probably the same to me either way. It's -- it's either one enhancement
with multiple options or separate enhancements, but I understand that you want options
to accept this and not that.
Milam: Right. So -- okay. So, I guess the problem is like this conversation that we are
having -- okay. So, we all have -- gave you totally something different, but if we have --
if we have got whatever -- six different enhancements, we are going to vote on each
one yes or no, yes or no, yes or no, where if it's all on one we could be talking for four
hours and not really ever come to a conclusion. Do you see what I'm saying?
Siddoway: It might streamline the discussion.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 83 of 87
Milam: I think so, but that's just my personal opinion. I just -- I see that it could be
easier for -- like actually making decisions and, you know, are we going to do this or not.
We talked about it, but -- I think otherwise we are just going to do this for --
Borton: So, in conclusion, your direction is there is no clear direction. There is no clear
consensus. You understand the range, the menu of options and in light of everything
you have heard we will see where it goes in June.
Siddoway: Okay. The -- the one additional item I would say is we will take a look at the
-- the cost for the repair of flooring and wall and paint in Bay 5. We will look at that in
relation to existing budget. If we don't have the existing budget, then, would you be
okay with me bringing back a request for using some of the funds that we have in our
carry forward amount toward that to use this summer.
Milam: I would open --
Borton: Yeah. Steve, to the request, sure. Yeah.
Siddoway: Yeah.
Borton: I mean from my perspective we own the building and we are going to operate it.
It's got to look first class as we intend it to and if, by God, you got to patch holes and
paint it, it needs a little extra revenue to do that, certainly ask. Gosh, let's get it done.
It's not -- and that's how you operate your department, so --
Siddoway: We will look at that as a -- a potential improvement for this year. The rest of
these will be part of the budget discussion for next year. Okay.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Okay. Just let me clarify what I said about the enhancements. Yes, one, I
would definitely have the alternate and the same enhancement. Either/or. But you do a
-- bring them forward the way you want, but I just -- don't separate those out.
Siddoway: Okay.
Milam: Those should be this way or this way on the one.
Siddoway: Okay. All right. Thank you.
Borton: We are good? All right. Thanks, Steve.
Milam: Thank you, Steve. Have a good night.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 84 of 87
Item 10: Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 18-1771: An Ordinance (H-2017-0154 — Lasken
Annexation) For Annexation Of A Parcel Of Land Being A
Portion Of Lot 1 Of Onwiler Subdivision, A Recorded
Subdivision On File In Book 8 Of Plats At Page 378, Situated In
The Northwest 1/40f The Southeast 1/40f Section 7, Township 3
North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, As
Described In Attachment "A" And Annexing Certain Lands
And Territory, Situated In Ada County, Idaho, And Adjacent
An 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 35.35
Acres Of Land From Rut To R-2 (Low Density 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 Rules; And Providing An Effective Date
Borton: Moving on. Thank you, Garrett. Item No. 10. Ordinance No. 18-1771. Mr.
Clerk.
Coles: Thank you, Mr. President. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 18-1771: An
Ordinance (H-2017-0154 — Lasken Annexation) for annexation of a parcel of land being
a portion of Lot 1 of Onwiler Subdivision, a recorded subdivision on file in Book 8 of
Plats at page 378, situated in the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 7,
Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in
Attachment "A" and annexing certain lands and territory, situated in Ada county, Idaho,
and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian as requested
by the City of Meridian; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification
of 35.35 acres of land from RUT to R-2 (Low Density 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 rules; and providing an effective date.
Borton: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. We have heard this ordinance read by title only. Does
anybody wish to hear it in its entirety? Seeing none --
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 85 of 87
Milam: I move we approve Ordinance No. 18-1771 with suspension of rules.
Cavener: Second.
Borton: Moved and seconded to approve the ordinance in 10-A. Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea, Palmer, yea, Little Roberts, absent,
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Item 10-B, Ordinance No. 18-1772. Mr. Clerk.
B. Ordinance No. 18-1772: An Ordinance (H-2017-0170 — Oaks
Subdivision) For The Re -Zone Of A Parcel Of Land Located In
The NW 1/40f The NW 1/40f Section 33, Township 3 North,
Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, City Of Meridian, Ada County
Idaho; Establishing And Determining The Land Use Zoning
Classification From L -O (Limited Office) Zoning District
To R-8 (Medium High Density Residential) And R-15 (Medium
High Density Residential) Zoning Districts In The Meridian City
Code; Providing That Copies Of This Ordinance Shall Be Filed
With The Ada County Assessor, The Ada County Recorder,
And The Idaho State Tax Commission, As Required By Law;
And Providing For A Summary Of The Ordinance; And
Providing For A Waiver Of The Reading Rules; And Providing
An Effective Date
Coles: Mr. President. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 18-1772: An ordinance file (H-
2017-0170 — Oaks Subdivision) for the re -zone of a parcel of land located in the NW 1/4
of the NW 1/4 of Section 33, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise meridian, City of
Meridian, Ada county Idaho; establishing and determining the land use zoning
classification from L -O (Limited Office) Zoning District to R-8 (Medium High Density
Residential) and R-15 (Medium High Density Residential) Zoning Districts in the
Meridian City Code; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada
County Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as
required by law; and providing for a summary of the ordinance; and providing for a
waiver of the reading rules; and providing an effective date.
Borton: You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Does anybody wish to hear it
in its entirety? Seeing none --
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 86 of 87
Milam: I move we approve Ordinance No. 18-1772 with suspension of rules.
Cavener: Second.
Borton: Moved and seconded to approve ordinance 18-1772. Any discussion? Seeing
none, Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. Ordinance No. 18-1773: An Ordinance (UDC Text Amendment
H-2018-0011) Amending Meridian City Code as Codified At
Title 11, Pertaining to Uses Allowed in Table 11-2A-2;
Standards for Portable Signs; Daycare Facility Specific Use
Borton: Last but not least, Item 10-C, Ordinance No. 18-1773.
City Clerk. Standards; Provisions to Allow Multi -Family Private
Open Space Standards to Be Eligible for Alternative
Compliance and Modify the Subdivision Street Names
Standards to Align with Newly Adopted Title 8, Chapter 2,
Uniform Street Name and Addressing Number Code; and
providing for a waiver of the Reading Rules; and Providing an
Effective Date
Borton: Last but not least, Item 10-C, Ordinance No. 18-1773. City Clerk.
Coles: Thank you, Mr. President. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 18-1773: An
Ordinance (UDC Text Amendment H-2018-0011) amending Meridian City Code as
codified at Title 11, pertaining to uses allowed in Table 11-2A-2; Standards for Portable
Signs; Daycare Facility Specific Use Standards; Provisions to Allow Multi -Family Private
Open Space Standards to be eligible for alternative compliance and modify the
subdivision street name standards to align with newly adopted Title 8, Chapter 2,
Uniform Street Name and Addressing Number Code; and providing for a waiver of the
reading rules; and providing an effective date.
Borton: Thank you. For this ordinance read by title only, anybody would like to hear
this one read in its entirety. Going once. Seeing none.
Milam: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 18-1773 with suspension of rules.
Cavener: Second.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 87 of 87
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to approve Ordinance 18-1773. Any
discussion? Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea, Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 11: Future Meeting Topics
Borton: Item No. 11, Future Meeting Topics. I think everyone has got the draft
agendas in front of them. The only thing I would add is there is a Town Hall on the 9th -
- Wednesday the 9th of May, so --
Item 12: Executive Session Per Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(d): To Consider
Records that are Exempt from Disclosure as Provided in Chapter 3,
Title 9, Idaho Code and 74-206(1)(j): To consider labor contract
matters authorized under section 67-2345A [74-206A](1)(a) and (b),
Idaho Code
Borton: Item No. 12, Executive Session.
Cavener: Mr. President?
Borton: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we go into Executive Session per Idaho State Code 75-206(1)(d),
(1)(j) and 74-206(a)(1)(a) and (b).
Palmer: Second.
Borton: It's been moved and seconded to go into Executive Session as stated. Mr.
Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:43 p.m. to 10:04 p.m.)
Milam: I move to adjourn. Mr. President?
Borton: Need a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Meridian City Council
April 24, 2018
Page 87 of 87
Milam: Second.
Borton: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Motion to adjourn.
Cavener: So moved.
Milam: Second.
Borton: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:49 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
5 �-
MA MY DE WEERD APPROVED
ATTEST:
C. JAY CC
;Dl K