HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-05Meridian City Council February 5, 2019.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:02 p.m., Tuesday,
February 5, 2019, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Tammy De Weerd, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Ty Palmer, Genesis
Milam, Anne Little Roberts and Treg Bernt.
Also present: C.Jay Coles, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Stephanie Leonard, Clint Dolsby, Jamie
Leslie, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X__ Anne Little Roberts X _ _Joe Borton
X__ Ty Palmer X__ Treg Bernt
__X___Genesis Milam __X___Lucas Cavener
__X_ Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I would -- I would like to welcome you all to our City Council meeting.
Thank you for joining us. For the record it is Tuesday, February 5th. It's 6:00 p.m. I would
like to -- I would like to start this meeting with a moment of silence. If you will join me in
respecting the passing of our former city councilman and Council President Keith Bird.
Just with your respect of a moment of silence. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Clerk. For the
record it is Tuesday, February 5th -- I think I might have said that. It's after 6:00 and we
will start with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in the
pledge to our flag.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Troy Drake of Calvary Chapel Meridian
De Weerd: Item 3 is our community invocation. If you will all join us in the community
invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Pastor Drake, thank
you for joining us.
Drake: It's a pleasure. Thanks, Mayor. Let's pray. Lord, I just first want to acknowledge
you as the maker of heaven and earth and we just appreciate so much the life that you
have given us and, you know, just remembering Mr. Bird and that you brought him here
to help with the city and all the things he did and we just appreciate him, God, and we
have gratitude for our own life and -- and the free life that we do have, God. We also so
just acknowledge that you're the provider of comfort for us in times of loss and -- and
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 8 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 2 of 53
needs. I'm thinking of, Lord, the needs in our city, like someone who might need a job
that they would find work and maybe a child in foster care , Lord, that's just wishing for a
family, God, to adopt them. We just pray for those kids and, God, someone who is -- it
doesn't feel safe tonight, Lord, that they could just find a place of refuge -- refuge and,
God, also we are grateful for this free society that we -- we live in and -- and with that
comes a measure of evil and we just pray that you would protect us from evil and that the
-- the men and women who protect our city would have the necessary resources and help
to do that. We appreciate them, God. And, Lord, here tonight we are praying for the
wisdom for our city leaders. Actually, everybody who works in this building, just pray that
you would give them lots of wisdom and especially here, again, tonight for the Council
and -- the City Council and our Mayor, Lord, I pray that you give them lots of guidance as
they leave this meeting and make decisions, the big ones and small ones that are all
important to you and so, Lord, would you just help with all these business matters and
thank you, God, for listening to me and we just pray for your hand of protection upon the
City of Meridian, in Jesus' name, amen. God bless you guys.
Item 4: Adoption of Agenda
De Weerd: Thank you. Pastor Drake, you remind me of my dad. His prayers were like
just talks with God. So, thank you. Okay. Item 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Item 10-A is going to come off the agenda and be moved to a different date.
That's the only -- only change we have today. So, I would move that we adopt the agenda
with that amendment.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as amended. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum)
De Weerd: Mr. Clerk, any sign-ups under five?
Coles: No, Madam Mayor.
Item 6: Consent Agenda [Action Item]
A. Approve Minutes of January 15, 2019 City Council Special
Meeting
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 9 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 3 of 53
B. Approve Minutes of January 15, 2019 City Council Regular
Meeting
C. Approve Minutes of January 22, 2019 City Council Regular
Meeting
D. Oberg Subdivision Sanitary Sewer & Water Main Easement
E. Shelburne Subdivision No. 2 Sanitary Sewer Easement
F. Silverstone Apartm
G. Silverstone Apartments Sanitary Sewer and Water Main
Easement 2
H. Silverstone Apartments Water Main Easement
I. Final Order for Caven Ridge Estates East No. 3 (H-2018-0132) by
JUB Engineers, Located between S . Meridian Rd. and S .
Standing Timber Way and South of E . Victory Rd.
J. Final Order for Little Creek No. 1 (H-2018-0136) by Little Creek
Partners, LLC , Located on the East side of N. Locust Grove Rd.
on the South side of E. Wilson Ln.
K. Final Order for Paramount Director Subdivision No. 2 (H-2018-
0137 by Brighton Development Inc. Located on the SW corner
of E. Chinden Blvd. and N. Meridian Rd.
L. Final Order for Verado Subdivision No. 3 (H-2018-0138) by
DevCo Development, LLC, Located on the SE corner of the
intersection of
N. Locust Grove Rd. and E. Ustick Rd.
M. Final Order for Vicenza Commons Subdivision No. 2 (H-2018-
0131) by Cottonwood Development, LLC, Located East of N.
Black Cat Rd. and W. Gondola Dr.
N. Final Order for Vicenza Estates No. 4 (H-2018-0133) by
Cottonwood Development, LLC, Located East of N. Black Cat
Rd. and South of 1. Gondola Dr.
O. Final Order for Vicenza Valley No. 2 (H-2018-0140) by
Cottonwood Development, LLC, Located East of N. Black Cat
Rd. and North of 1. Gondola Dr.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 10 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 4 of 53
P. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Linder Village (H-2017-
0088) by Lynx/DMG Real Estates Partners, LLC , Located at the
SE Corner of N. Linder Rd. and W. Chinden Blvd.
Q. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Entrata Farms (H-2018-
0125) by FIG Village at Parkside, LLC , Located 3880 and 3882
W. Franklin Rd.
R. Irrigation Crossing License Agreement with Settlers Irrigation
District at the Coleman Lateral for the ACHD Linder Rd. – Ustick
to McMillan Utility Improvements
S. PY18 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG )
Subrecipient Agreement with Meridian Development
Corporation (MDC ) for a Not-to-Exceed amount of $180,000.
T. Approval of Contract to Track Utilities, LLC for the “WRRF
PRIMARY POWER IMPROVEMENTS - CONSTRUCTION” project
for a Not-To -Exceed amount of $267,410.50.
U. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 2.a to extend the contract
for Landscape Maintenance Services” to Lawn Co. for the Not-
to Exceed amount of $180,952.20.
V. Resolution No. 19-2126: A Resolution Appointing Dave Neal to
Seat 3 of the Solid Waste Advisory Commission.
W. Resolution 19-2127: 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 Northerly Pedestrian Entrance To Heroes
Park On Ten Mile Road, In Section 26, T4n, R1w, Bm (A Portion
Of Ada County Assessor ’s Parcel S0426233770) In The City Of
Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; Instructing The City Clerk To
Establish And Notice A Hearing To Review The Proposed
Conveyance; And Providing An Effective Date.
X. City of Meridian Financial Report - December 2018
Y. AP Invoices for Payment 1/30/19- $521,385.57
Z. AP Invoices for Payment 1/31/19- $151,213.36
AA. AP Invoices for Payment 1/31/19- $152.50
AB . AP Invoices for Payment 2/6/19- $751,388.38
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 11 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 5 of 53
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 6 is our Consent Agenda.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I move that we approve the Consent Agenda as published, for the Mayor to sign
and Clerk to attest.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is no
discussion, Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 7: Items Moved From The Consent Agenda [Action Item
Item 8: Community Items/Presentations
A. Mayor's Youth Advisory Council Update
De Weerd: Our next item is under the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council update. Oh, and
I didn't see you. So, I will turn this over to Ben.
Hutchins: Thank you, Madam Mayor. So, I'm Ben Hutchins with the Mayor's Youth
Advisory Council. I'm the vice-chair this year. So, our update for the past month -- first
we had our legislative breakfast. This year we are propo sing that we lower the voting age
to 17 for primaries if the individual will be 18 by the general election. This event was a
great success and we decided, based off of our deliberation with all of the people that we
had invited, that next year we are going to be bringing this to the house and senate if we
have it perfected over this year. We are going to take this year to deeper consideration
and make sure that we have it as good as we possibly can. We are going to take it to the
Republican party and see what they are going to do to pass it -- what they would do to
make it look better and we are going to take it to the Democratic party as well. Next we
had Youth Lobby Day. We had over 25 high school participants and we partnered with
the American Heart Association and we partnered with Safe Routes to School. This was
another awesome event where we got to go speak to senators and legislators and get
really in the feel of what it's like to be in the Capitol Building as a lobbyist, which was
always a unique experience for teenagers, talking to people that we normally wouldn't be
able to talk to and have conversations that normally people our age wouldn't be able to
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 12 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 6 of 53
have conversations about. We lobbied for safe routes to school to get funding continued
throughout the next years, because their bill was sunsetting and we wanted -- and all of
us decided that this was something that affected us and we thought it would reflect well.
We are having with our community service subcommittee a volunteer fair. We are
volunteering with the -- or we are partnering with the Meridian Library and we are going
to have a MYAC fair where we are going to see what a volunteer fair is like and see what
we can do in the future and really get our feet in the water and see what it's like. Next we
have plans for Valentine's Day coming up where the school ambassadors recently made
over 360 Valentine's Day cards to pass out throughout their schools for anybody who may
-- may not get a Valentine's Day card on Valentine's Day to make everybody feel welcome
and happy and, then, we are having a Valentine's Day party on February 14th. Thank
you.
De Weerd: And stand for questions; right?
Hutchins: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Council, any questions? Or comments? You guys are rocking it.
Hutchins: Great. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Thank you, Council.
Item 9: Action Items
A. Request for Reconsideration for Timber Creek (H-2018-0042) by
Neighbors of Timber Creek Recycling's Illegal Heavy Industrial
Use (Joshua Leonard)
B. Request for Reconsideration for Timber Creek (H-2018-0042) by
Mark Perison
De Weerd: Thank you, Ben. Okay. Item 9-A is under Action Items and this is a request
for reconsideration for Timbercreek, H-2018-0042 and Item B is also a request for
reconsideration, but I will turn these two items for comments first from our city attorney.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. You have two items before
you tonight, a request for reconsideration on the Timber Creek project, H-2018-0042. Both
of them have raised various issues with your approval of that project . At this point for
reconsideration the Council's decision point is either to affirm the decision that's been
previously made -- that has to be done by motion and a vote. Modify the findings so you
would have to motion to either remand it for the limited purpose of modifying the findings
and bringing it back to a later date for that final document or reversing the findings that
have been done by motion, a vote to reverse the finding -- or the original findings -- or
direction, as well as resetting it for public hearing at a future date. So, those are the three
decision points for you to make tonight. We have reviewed the record, we have reviewed
the request for reconsiderations, we have provided you with our legal opinion on moving
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 13 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 7 of 53
forward from this point. I can go into that if you wish or if you can take it from there,
whichever you prefer.
De Weerd: Council, what would your preference be? Would you like him to -- to detail
that out? You have all received the memo. I think if there are any questions, then, we
will direct it to you.
Nary: Thanks.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. So, Council, in front of you you have two different
requests for reconsideration. So, we will open this up for discussion and/or questions.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: This was -- this was a project and an application that -- that I had voted against
and wasn't supportive of back in September and stated the reasons why back then, but
the purpose of what I understand the reconsideration today is is a little more narrow. I
didn't see any specific deficiency in the process utilized, not necessarily certain a
deficiency -- any legal deficiency in the substance of the decision made either. However,
it may be helpful if a remand were to occur, to do so to more clearly state the findings of
fact and conclusions of law from the existing record and I would be supportive of a remand
for that purpose, to try to -- to more clearly articulate within the record those findings and
conclusions perhaps better than it had been done before. Probably benefits everybody
to do that and make that more clear. If that's the way this could be addressed. I don't
know, Mr. Nary.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Borton, yes,
this is a very lengthy record in this case, as you all know. We had a number of hearings
for a number of hours. So, the record is very large and we would recommend that we --
we make clearer the findings that you have. Not the decision, but just as the findings,
because from those findings stems the development agreement. We had a number of
discussions about the development agreement and in reviewing the record those
discussions took place over a number of hearings and you discuss ed them in parts and
so -- and there were changes to the original development agreement that was proposed
that you discussed in September and, then, again, I believe in November and so what we
would recommend is what Council Member Borton is suggesting and doing that and, then,
that way the development agreement that flows from those findings is clearer and more
concise and in one document, because, again, as we discussed -- that we discussed
pieces, we changed some of the original to -- there was some new numbering that was
done and some of those things and that detail is in the record, but it's in two different
parts. So, we would suggest that would make a cleaner record for appeal if that's where
we end up.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 14 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 8 of 53
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions or comments? Okay.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Question for legal counsel. Is -- we have got two separate requests for
reconsideration. Are we addressing them each individually or --
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: We are handling No. A right now?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Borton, we opened them
both for your discussion, but I would -- I would recommend you make motions on each
one separately.
Borton: Okay. Madam Mayor, another follow up. If I heard you correctly is -- would it be
remanding for setting forth of the findings of fact, conclusions of law in a more clear,
inclusive, succinct manner than they were previously done?
Nary: Yes. And with -- and with -- with a modified development agreement that goes
along with it, yes.
Borton: Okay. It wouldn't be an amendment of any substantive finding.
Nary: No.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: With that explanation, as to Item 9-A, H-2018-0042, I would move that we grant
the request for reconsideration for the limited purpose of remanding for new findings of
fact, conclusions of law consistent with what legal counsel has provided. I believe the DA
would be part of that as well. And that to come back before Council for its review and
approval.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Little Roberts: Second.
De Weerd: Do I have any discussion? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 15 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 9 of 53
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Item 9-B.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: From the review of 9-B, this is Mr. Perison's letter. It seems to mirror some of
the -- the substantive issues raised in the 9-A request for reconsideration. Some of the
same concerns. I echo what I said in the previous application. Same applies here as far
as where my position was on the original application . Nonetheless, it could benefit us
and all parties to go the same route with this one. So, I will make a motion and we can
discuss after if there is discussion, but I would move that we grant the request for
reconsideration on Item 9-B as well with the same directive, for it to be remanded for
findings of fact, conclusions of law consistent with existing record in a more complete,
succinct manner, inclusive of the DA that legal counsel has referenced just moments ago.
Little Roberts: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Okay. Mr. Clerk, will you
call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
C. Public Hearing for Proposed Vehicle Sharing Program
Ordinance and Associated Proposed Fees
1. First Reading of Ordinance No. 19-1809: An Ordinance
Adding a New Chapter, Chapter 6, To Title 3, Meridian City
Code, Regarding Vehicle Sharing Programs; Amending
Meridian City Code Section 4-2-2, Regarding Party
Responsible For Nuisance; Adding A New Section, Meridian
City Code Section 7-1-9, To Title 7, Chapter 1, Meridian City
Code, Regarding Electric Power-Assisted Bicycles And
Scooters; Adding A New Subsection, Subsection 7-1-9(F ), To
Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, Regarding Prohibited
Parking; Adopting A Savings Clause; And Providing An
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 16 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 10 of 53
Effective Date.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-C is a public hearing for the first reading of Ordinance 19-1809.
Mr. Clerk, will you read this ordinance by title.
Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 19-1809: An
Ordinance adding a new chapter, Chapter 6, to Title 3, Meridian City Code, regarding
vehicle sharing programs; amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-2, regarding party
responsible for nuisance; adding a new section, Meridian City Code Section 7-1-9, to Title
7, Chapter 1, Meridian City Code, regarding electric power-assisted bicycles and
scooters; adding a new subsection, Subsection 7-1-9(F), to Meridian City Code Section
7-1-9, regarding prohibited parking; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective
date.
De Weerd: Okay. You have -- I have opened this public hearing and heard the first
reading. Mr. Clerk, do we have any signed up to provide comments?
Coles: Madam Mayor, it looks like we have one. Randy Rutland.
De Weerd: Yes. Come on down. Sorry, you're not a contestant on The Price is Right,
but it just --
Rutland: That's too bad. Thank you.
De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Rutland: My name is Randy Rutland. Address is 12063 West Rock Hampton Street in
Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rutland: My reason for coming this evening was to get a little bit more information on
Meridian's take on the ride sharing program with the scooters and which companies plan
to come to Meridian, if it's the same as what the city of Boise does, because I do have
comments on both companies that are currently with Boise. So, that's my question is just
will it be the Lime company, as well as the Bird scooter company.
De Weerd: Thank you. And, Mr. Nary, do we have a presentation on this?
Nary: Madam Mayor, I mean I certainly can -- for the record purpose, for the folks in the
audience who are watching, what you have in front of you tonight is a proposal to create
a franchise program in the city that will be limited under this iteration to t wo franchisees.
So, we don't have a franchisee -- as this gentleman questioned, we don't have any
franchisees yet. So, this is to establish that program to be able to operate within the City
of Meridian.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 17 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 11 of 53
Rutland: Okay.
De Weerd: So, those details can be found as they are contained in the ordin ance. We
will -- I suppose -- I think we will have three readings and so this is just the first reading,
so it would introduce it to the public. You have an opportunity to review the ordinance
and ask any questions that you have regarding the ordinance , but it -- it would be as -- as
Mr. Nary indicated. We don't pick who the e-scooter companies would be. It would be
on a fair, even basis. So, first two in are the first two that -- that offer the service in the
City of Meridian. Is that correct, Mr. Nary?
Nary: Yes, ma'am.
Rutland: I see. All right. I think that answered my question. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Sir, you mentioned you had some comments specific to the two companies that
we had experience with?
Rutland: I do. I -- I actually -- I'm considered an independent contractor with both of them
and I have pros and cons for both companies. Obviously, the pros would be the -- the
fact that it takes away some of the traffic, parking issues that the city may encounter.
Pollution. An affordable, cheap ride to get, you know, maybe your first or last mile of your
trip where ever you plan to go. Some of the cons are, though, that their customer service
is very poor in my opinion. I have been working with them for the last few months, since
-- since they have established in Boise in late November -- or, I'm sorry, late October and
whether there is a decision to be made or it's already been made and whether or not you
bring on these scooter companies, you know, hopefully, there is some talk about -- and I
have read the stipulations that are required by them. However, there is zero talk about
what it does for the community as an independent contractor and what they have to go
through in order to succeed with their profits. So, basically, it's really a customer service
thing. Their -- their technology is -- they claim to be a billion dollar company each one of
them and yet their technology is -- is poor at best as far as their app and the way you use
their system.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Additional question for you, Mr. Rutland. As an independent contractor can you
share with us what type of direction you receive from the two companies that you contract
with about where to place the scooters?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 18 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 12 of 53
Rutland: Yes. It's -- it's on their app, so -- it's on their -- when you use your phone it will
tell you exactly where the scooter is to be deployed. Now, with both companies it's before
7:00 a.m. and there is many times where there is -- this morning, for an example, I went
to deploy a couple of Bird scooters and it told me to scan a regular Bird. I didn't know
what that meant. So, I asked them. Now, unfortunately, the only correspondence you
can have with them is through e-mail. There is nobody you can talk to on the phone. So,
you really have to wait for them to reply back to you and my question literally was: Would
you like me to scan a woodpecker? A crow? What would you like me to scan? Certainly
I was being funny, because it's kind of frustrating. I work downtown at the courthouse in
Boise and I mean it's just frustrating when you're trying to do what they ask of you, but,
yet, there is multiple, multiple glitches with their app.
Cavener: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you for joining us.
Rutland: All right. Thank you so much.
De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide comment
on -- on this item? Okay.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I would. So, only in like the last hour was the -- the point was brought up to me
that there is more than two -- I didn't even know -- companies out there and that it's literally
the first two that can submit fast enough and so when I read through the ordinance I
wasn't really -- had that in mind, so I wasn't really looking for, you know, performance
requirements, so I don't know if they are in there or not, but my concern with that would
be if -- if there are multiple ones that are interested, if there is more than two, do we have
built into the ordinance any kind of -- they have to have so many deployed by a certain
date or anything like -- time frame? Because my concern would be that if -- if that doesn't
happen somebody could just kind of buy up the franchise and wait until they are ready,
whether it's six months or a year down the road or I'm going to -- if I owned one -- I don't
know if you could get away with it, but I would imagine I would probably want to just set
up another entity and take them both and, then, just not do the other one and, then, you
would -- instantly would have exclusivity, so --
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Excuse me, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Palmer. Yes,
that's exactly correct. So, there are -- there are two it contemplated. The minimum is a
hundred and the maximum is 350. So, once they can have the total amount and what
the city contemplated under its ordinance currently is 700. There are means to up those,
but, yeah, there is exactly the scenario you're talking about certainly could occur if they
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 19 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 13 of 53
file the application timely and pay the fees, it is based on first in time. So, you know, from
a -- from a standpoint when we were exploring this since last year -- originally -- and I
think what they experienced in the city of Boise and what we experienced here is at the
time we had these discussions there were only two vendors that expressed any interest
and that -- and Boise originally didn't cap the number of vendors, they just capped the
minimum and the maximums and the maximum total and not the vendors themselves.
But, again, they looked at it with it being probably two. Now, you're correct, we have had
increase from other vendors that are interested and this could create that problem where
it really is just the first in the door. That's the nature of the licensing. We talked before
about franchising and going through a different route on the selection process. That
would be different than what's before for you right now.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I think Council Member Palmer brings up I think a fair concern, but I do believe
our ordinance gives the city some teeth that if a vendor isn't performing, that they could
be removed and I would take somebody who had the license and is not deploying it in an
appropriate or timely manner noncompliant and we could, essentially, remove their
license and award it to the next in line. So, I think there is some -- there is a carrot and a
stick to have our operators operate appropriately within Meridian.
De Weerd: Did that answer your question, Mr. Palmer?
Palmer: Madam Mayor, yeah. Oops. Sorry, Dean. I usually try to be perfect with that.
But that -- yeah, if that satisfies that issue -- and I don't know if anyone would attempt this
-- I know this -- but the fat gut, capitalist -- free market, unapologetic capitalist in me,
thinking these things through -- the other thing that I would ponder on if I were in that
position is could I buy both of them and, then, paint them a different color, but still be the
same entity, using the same app, or if -- and, then, you would still have both of them. I
don't know if anyone would go to that effort in Meridian to make that happen , but we are
still early in this process and I would rather not regulate them, but, obviously, we are going
to and so I want to make sure that we are giving and -- making sure that there is an
opportunity to actually have competition.
Nary: So, Madam Mayor, Members of Council, to answer your question, Council Member
Palmer, so what's required in the application is notice -- notice to us when you are going
to begin. So, it doesn't have a start date requirement. So, it doesn't require you begin
within 30 days or 60 days or whatever. They simply have to tell us when they are going
to start. So, again, if you would like us to change that we can change that. But that's
currently the way it is, is they simply notify us when that start date is, so apologize that
Council Member Cavener is out of the room, but -- so it wouldn't be a violation if they told
us the start date was 90 days from now or 120 days from now and they didn't -- as long
as they stayed within the time period they said.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 20 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 14 of 53
Milam: A year?
Nary: Well, the current -- the -- sorry. The question was could it be a year. This license
period expires December 31st of this year, so -- and, then, they are subject to renewal.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? When we get to the renewal can whoever has the franchise just
be the renewal or do they have to reapply at 8:00 a.m. on the day after their expiration?
Nary: I'm looking at the -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member
Palmer, so the renewal section, basically, the -- I don't -- the way I read it -- and I wasn't
on the committee and maybe Mr. Coles would know better, but it doesn't read that there
is a preference to the current vendor. So, it says December 15th is when the renewal
period begins and the renew it -- it says renewing franchisees may request authorization
to deploy the number of shared vehicles authorized in the previous year, but that doesn't
give them a preference of start. And I may be mistaken, maybe it's somewhere else and
I'm just not seeing it, but in the renewal provision there is no -- there is no preference for
existing vendors.
Coles: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council --
De Weerd: Mr. Coles.
Coles: -- Council Member Palmer, so I think that it's the other way around, I believe. The
renewal does actually give preference to the current franchisees , because they can apply
for renewal on December 15th, I believe. However, an initial franchise --
Nary: Oh, I see.
Coles: -- cannot be applied for until January 2nd. So, an initial one is a franchisee that
doesn't currently have the franchise agreement . They can apply January 2nd. The
current franchisees can apply for renewal December 15 th.
Nary: I see. Okay.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
Nary: Okay.
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Sorry to dive so deep into this, but I want to get it right. So, if -- if somebody
were to get the first one, could they say I -- we plan on starting in 450 days and, then, go
a year without deploying, just so that they have locked down the position and, then, do
the renewal, because they were the first one in and, then, deploy later in the second year?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 21 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 15 of 53
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, no, I don't think we would accept an
application that the start date exceeds the current period of the license. I don't think that
we would allow that.
Palmer: Works for me.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: It brings up a good point. That's the type of clarity that would be helpful for the
applicant to know, whether it's part of -- you know, in addition to the initial application for
a franchise that, you know, makes them aware of the fact that whatever they pick as their
initial start date must be something -- no later than the end of the current term that you're
applying for or 90 days from your application or something that gives them that
understanding that should they want to invest in this program here there is a date by
which they have to launch, so they can make a decision.
De Weerd: So, this is just the first reading, so as -- as we continue to accept comments
-- if you find these things and you want to change it, that -- that's the beauty of the three
readings, that you have opportunity to -- to gain further information and -- and look at
some of these technicalities or opportunities, depending on how you want to say it. Mrs.
Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, since I recently learned, I think like everyone else did, that
there are more that are interested than just the two we are familiar with, just maybe some
food for thought and discussion at a later time, would we consider maybe doing an RFP
or something, having them be a little more competitive than just if you're first in the door
you're automatically in and, then, potentially struggling if they are not meeting our criteria?
Maybe we need to just think about that.
De Weerd: That is, indeed, another approach and -- and one that you could ask for letters
of reference and how they -- their technology works or their experiences in -- in other
communities or -- it would open up for additional discussion as to what those criteria would
be. Mr. Nary, anything you want to add?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean I think -- certainly that's -- that's
an option. Again, that's not what's in front of you and we can certainly suspend this if
that's the direction you wish to go and move forward with an RFP process, because the
benefit is -- as we have previously discussed, you can set the criteria that's most important
to you on how this is done, how it's operated, hours of operation, where it's -- I mean can
be used. How it needs to be used. Have selection criteria that's weighted for those things,
so that you have a way to discern the difference between number one and number
whatever and -- and, again, if you want a cap of numbers of individual scooters per
franchisee, cap on the total amount in the city, whatever -- whatever your preference. I
mean certainly those can be done in our fee. It's a little more difficult than the licensing
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 22 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 16 of 53
one, other than having the -- not having a cap on the number of franchisees and that's
what the city of Boise chose to do.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: The UD, I guess, of the less regulation or this version is that you have competition
that's created just purely by who wants to get in the market and who gets there first and
my concern with an RFP version is, then, we get to where government is picking who is
going to be there, who is going to be allowed to do that business in town, and if -- you
know, if one sucks and the other one doesn't, the free market will take care of it and
people will ride one and not the other. If they suck equally, then, either they will ride them
or they won't, but ideally whoever wants in can get in if they are the first two and try to be
better than the other, instead of having us just pick who is going to do the most favors for
the city. Not that -- I don't think any of you guys, but I'm worried about future councils that
I don't know and trust.
De Weerd: Okay. Any -- anything further on this? We -- oh, yes. Chief.
Lavey: Madam Mayor, Counsel, I just want to point out that using Councilman Palmer's
analogy of a business sucking, you just need to realize that not using the ridership or the
ridership is only one part of the suck -- is if it's a bad company it's going to create lots of
manpower for us and so we want to make sure that we have reliable companies in there.
I support the RFP process, but I also support the free market. If we are going to do the
free market, then, we need to make sure that we have rules in place that allow us to
revoke these people when they do suck, because my experience with a few of the
companies have not been great. But I will tell you that there is currently four companies
that I'm aware of. Three of those companies are looking -- well, two of those companies
are in Boise. An additional is looking at Boise and there is a fourth one in the wings. So,
there is four floating around there that could come to Meridian. So, just want to point out
that not riding them is only one part of the equation . If they got bad business practices,
then, they are going to create a lot of workload on our part. So, just making sure that
whatever ordinance we come up with has a mechanism that we can revoke them if they
are poor performers. So, we either judge them before or we judge them after, but if they
are a bad company we don't want them doing business in the city. And since it was a
long walk to get here, I'm not going to leave until I make sure there is no questions.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: Chief, since you walked all the way up here in pain, I just want to wonder -- I'm
wondering if any of those companies are purple? Are any of them purple?
Lavey: Any of them are purple?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 23 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 17 of 53
Milam: That's the most important thing.
Lavey: Just because you have a purple sweater on right now, is that why, or is there
some other reason?
Milam: I just --
De Weerd: There is a color to a tot lot.
Milam: My favorite color.
Lavey: I do know that -- I do know the colors of two that I will not mention. I do not know
the colors of the other two.
Milam: I'm just kidding. Madam Mayor, I agree with -- with what the chief is saying and I
-- I would -- I think maybe first come first serve isn't the best route to take on this. I think
if there are four companies we should have a better system for looking at them and picking
the two that are going to be the best -- or at least that we think are going to be the best
companies and -- and what happens if you get three at the same time or all four -- or all
at the time. So, I think that needs to be looked at real carefully.
Coles: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: I think Mr. Clerk has been looking at that. Would you like to comment?
Coles: Absolutely. And to the chief's point, just so the Council is aware, my office has
been actually in communication five total companies. So, the limited communication --
five. I'm not aware of the colors however. Sorry, Council Member Milam. In terms of the
first in, our Enterprise software that we use to track intake and issuance of licenses is
what we will use to track when we receive applications, so it won't be at our front counter,
it will actually be through our Enterprise software, which will date and time stamp and I'm
told it has the ability to go down even to the millisecond in terms of time stamping. So ,
we know who the actual first -- first in is or the first two in. Then from that we will be
looking at completeness of applications. So, if five total companies submit, it's the first
two that have submitted -- that have a complete application without our office having to
go back to say you have missed a step or you have missed three steps. So, we want to
make sure that the application is complete and that we are lessening the manpower on
our staff to walk people through the process, because that takes time to answer questions
and walk through the process. So, that's what we have been looking at in terms of the
first in in determining who those first two are.
De Weerd: And you can't be early, because you aren't qualified. Mr. Nary, is there a
hybrid model you could look at to -- to maybe find that middle ground between the two
concerns -- one if they are qualified and they meet certain criteria and, then, two, that they
would have a submission date and still allow the free market to choose them once they
are qualified.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 24 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 18 of 53
Nary: So, Madam Mayor, we have had a committee working on this for quite a while and
I know they have explored all of those options. So, under the licensing one -- I mean this
is -- this is the standard model -- model for licensing any type of activity. So, I guess the
concern I have -- and when we were talking about deficient business practices, those
really aren't something we normally regulate in a license circumstance. So, here in the
ordinance, if you look at it, really, the only basis for revocation is they are not operating
as they told us they would, whatever -- whatever they tell us how they are going to
operate, so where they locate them, how they located, when they put them out, take them
back, all of that. They violate the law or they have lied on their application or they don't
pay the fee. That's it. So, I -- I have a sense from everybody talking what you think of as
bad business practice is more than those things and that's the problem. In the licensing
circumstance it's very difficult to manage preference and so that's why the conversation
was over an RFP where you could set out their criteria that you want it to be and pick your
successful vendor based upon that. So, there are -- there are just two distinct ways of
doing it, but the cap on the number creates that race to the -- to the clerk's office that
maybe not -- may not be the best way to do it. But the only way to really change that is
to, then, not have a cap on the number. You can -- what Boise did was they put no cap
on the number, they put a requirement of a minimum and a maximum and maximum total
in the city. And, like I said, at the time I think -- and Mr. Coles can confirm, but I think they
are considering new caps because of more vendors, because they did the same thing,
they just capped the total number in the city and that allowed more than one vendor to
participate or it could have allowed two or three, but you had them -- each one picked up
their full load up front and so it absorbed the entire cap by two vendors to start. That's
why they are looking at more.
Lavey: Boise -- Boise is capped at three companies currently.
Nary: Three? Okay. But I think it's capped based on the numbers.
Lavey: They have a -- they have a number which is 750, not to exceed that --
Nary: Right.
Lavey: -- and, then, they have a cap of three vendors currently.
Nary: Right. But -- I'm sorry to disagree with you, but I don't think it says there is only
three allowed in the city.
Lavey: Yes, it --
Nary: Oh, it does? Okay.
Lavey: It says only three vendors currently, yes, in their ordinance.
De Weerd: And I guess the committee really focused on -- if we are going to do this we
want to do it right and the race to be the first to submit, I don't know if that necessarily will
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 25 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 19 of 53
give you the most qualified to -- to try and do this right, because I will tell you we had a
lot of complaints after the first rollout and if the comments and the -- the phone calls that
we have received are any indication, we don't really have a large percentage of our
citizens that are supportive of this program to begin with. Kicking it off wrong I think would
not be a good way to start a program -- to see how it would work, because I think as we
heard earlier, there are advantages of being an alternate transportation form of low
emission and an inexpensive way to -- to have alternative transportation. So, you would
want to do it right. I don't know, it's -- it's certainly your decision.
Lavey: Madam Mayor, Council, just to comment on that and I echo with what you said. I
wasn't real supportive of this because of the experience we had the first time, but I have
really tried to come around and give that benefit to the -- to the city and to the companies
that we did have experience with. I will tell you that there is one company that is still very,
very disappointing, even after I reached out to them and they said they heard me . Well,
they have now forgotten me and we still have not met. So , I am really, really concerned
if we go forward this way with first in -- first come first serve, because they haven't proven
their reliability and -- and, frankly, with what Mr. Nary said about we are limited in how we
can revoke, I'm concerned we are going to have a nightmare all over again. So, I think
we need to slow down and we need to not rush this. But that's one person's opinion, so
-- I realized the vote rests with you, just, please, proceed cautiously, because that trust
has not been earned yet in some of those companies.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: A couple thoughts. Appreciate the comments from the chief. As one who has
worked on RFPs in the past, everyone who works on an RFP works really really hard to
make sure your organization looks as best as possible when you submit something and
so I have been on the side where we have selected our piece for organizations and they
haven't performed to the level that they had indicated and promised they would. I think
that -- what I'm hearing from the chief, which I think maybe worth some further exploration
-- is strengthening our case or our basis for revocation if a -- if a licensee isn't performing.
I think that's more appropriate than entering into an RFP process. Again, I don't know if
there are other provisions that the committee that worked on this discussed. Perhaps
that's something that we could hear feedback from the committee before a final vote. I
am not one that gets really excited about an RFP process for this, just because I think it's
-- it's a formalized sales pitch from businesses and , you know, we -- as -- as I hear from
the chief it sounds like we have got one operator in the valley right now that has been
forthright and has met with the police department, one who is not -- and, then, it sounds
like three that are kind of an unknown. So, I think the Mayor's correct, let's try and get
this correct, but I think that we can achieve what maybe sounds like some additional
Council Members want to see without necessarily having to invent an RFP process, go
through a scoring and, again, scores are driven by a small group of people -- did they
have breakfast that morning? Is the -- using favorite words? I mean there is just so many
variables that I don't get really excited about an RFP process. So, if we can avoid it I'm
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 26 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 20 of 53
supportive of that, but let's -- let's take some of the feedback from the chief and feedback
from you as Council, if there is additional teeth that you want to add to give the city greater
strength to remove a licensee if they are not performing and I would support that.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for the chief?
Lavey: I can limp back up here if you have them.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: What run -- what run were you on?
Lavey: What was that?
Cavener: What run were you on?
Lavey: It was Nugget.
De Weerd: It's the bunny hill.
Lavey: On the back side. Yes. Chair six. Before we got to 16 inches of powder.
Cavener: Glad you're okay.
De Weerd: Yeah.
Cavener: Appreciate you being here.
Lavey: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Okay. Anything further? Otherwise, we will put this on the
next week's calendar. Okay. Okay. Very good.
D. Public Hearing Continued from January 2, 2019 for Warrick
Subdivision (H-2018-0115) by Schultz Development, Located
at 2445 E. Amity Rd.
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 36.22 acres of land with
an R -4 19.94 acres) and R -8 (16.28 acres) zoning districts;
and
2. Request: a Preliminary Plat consisting of 125 building lots and
19 common lots on 36.22 acres of land
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 27 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 21 of 53
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-D is a public hearing continued to -- from January 2nd for
H-2018-0115. I will ask for staff comments at this time.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This particular item is the
Warrick Subdivision. It was before you on January 2nd -- excuse me. Before I get into
that I will give you -- get you familiar with where the property is located. So, the application
is here, again, discussing annexation and preliminary plat of the particular project. The
site consist of 36.22 acres of land, currently zoned RUT in Ada county and located on the
south side of Amity Road, midway between Locust Grove to the west and Eagle Road to
the east. The applicant is asking for split zoning on this particular property. If you
remember at the January 2nd hearing we had a portion of -- half of it -- approximately half
of it was going to be zoned R-8 and the southern portion was going to be zoned R-4.
During that hearing the Council had some concerns with the applicant's request for a step
up and asked the applicant to revise the plat to lose approximately, I don't know, 20 lots
or so -- or 18 lots if I remember correctly, and lower their destiny from roughly 3.6 dwelling
units to 3.09 dwelling units to the acre. So, the exhibit on the left-hand side is the original
plat that was before you on the 2nd. The revised one is the larger one on the right-hand.
As you can see here staff has annotated the plat to let you know where they -- they haven't
lost all of the lots that were discussed at that particular hearing, but what they did do is
add the tot lot based on some of the discussion that was heard at the hearing. They did
remove the request for attached product, so all of the units within this proposed
development are now all of the single family detached homes and you can see here they
roughly last -- compromise with the total decrease in lots -- to the number of five. So,
again, staff feels this still is -- takes the discretion from you to allow the minimal step up
from three units to the acre to 3.45 dwelling units to the acre. Staff has received additional
written testimony on this application since it was heard on the 2nd. There was four
neighbors had -- supported the Council's recommendation to reduce the lots and not allow
the reduction in the step up in density and, then, we also received testimony in which one
of the residents did not agree with the -- the noticing requirements of the code, felt like
we violated that, we should have required a greater notice, rather -- rather than 300 foot
radius we should have had a greater notice radius notification. But our code only requires
that we notice annexation with a 300 foot radius. So, we are in good sta nding as far as
our ordinance goes. And, then, Steve and Kathy Stark. Again, if you recall at the last
hearing on the 2nd there was a lot of discussion around the floodplain and how that would
impact their property on the other side of Amity Road and so they want to make sure that
his body remembers that discussion and that they incorporate the appropriate conditions
in this project if you were to approve this particular project this evening. They want to
make sure that both culverts are upgraded per the required sizing based on the study that
will be required as part of the project. The applicant did commit to making those changes
and adjustments, so I think we have them on record. But, again, they want to make sure
that that's incorporated into the staff report. Again, staff is recommending approval of this
particular project. It did come before you with a recommendation from our Planning and
Zoning Commission. As I mentioned to you the lot count isn't exactly what you had
requested of the applicant, so I will go ahead and conclude my presentation and stand
for any additional questions you may have.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 28 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 22 of 53
Borton: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions of staff? No? So, Council, this was --
before we get into Matt's comments here, this was heard on January 2nd. That was a
Council meeting I was absent at, so part of preparations for today's hearing was going
through the entire record from the initial application , review -- reviewed that, reviewed
everything in the public record, the staff reports from P&Z, City Council, December 4th,
December 24th. Public testimony that was submitted in writing. Bill Pro. Dave Palumo
-- I'm going to say some of these wrong, but -- Elise Pessetto. Elise Poulson. Lisa
Nomura. Steve and Kathy Stark and their live testimonial at the last hearing. Susan
Karnes. Susanna Bohlman. William -- I can't read my own handwriting. William
Prolsdofer? I apologize, William, if you're here, because I know that's probably not your
last name. All of that to say as part of being able to participate in today's hearing, the
entire record was reviewed and all of the minutes were read. So, I feel because of all that
comfortable participating today in the discussion and ultimate decision, so --
Little Roberts: Mr. President?
Borton: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Mr. President, I as well was gone that day and thank you for stating all the
names and everything. I did spend about three hours this morning reviewing everything
and feel that I am prepared to participate in the conversation as well.
Borton: Okay. Council and people, I guess, if you're watching or folks here, one of the
reasons that it's -- we probably are going to do a better job stating that on the record.
Council, when we miss we always do that, review everything, review minutes, prepare,
catch up if we are ever going to participate in something that we missed, but we will all
do a better job making sure that we say that on the record and tell you publicly, it's
important for you to know that. We know the work that we do and we understand that
that's necessary to make a decision, but sometimes I think we fail to share that with you,
which is our fault. So, we are going to try and do a better job on those occasion s when
we miss, to make sure you know. Make a record that we have done that and got caught
up, so the decision making process and ultimate decision, at least you're comfortable that
we are doing it with our eyes wide open and with a full understanding of the application.
So, we will do better going forward.
De Weerd: Go ahead. I don't know where you are.
Borton: Madam Mayor, we -- Mrs. Little Roberts and I just finished describing for the
record the review of all the materials and the minutes necessary to participate today. So,
it's Mr. Schultz's turn to come forward.
De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward. Thank you for joining us. If
you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Schultz: Good evening. Matt Schultz. 8421 South Ten Mile in Meridian. Here on behalf
of Berkeley Building Company and the Warrick family in the process of selling the property
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 29 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 23 of 53
to Berkeley Building Company and they have been on the -- they have lived on the
property for many many years. Mr. Paul Warrick is 101 here in a week or two and he
remembers dad building the house that he's still in right now October of '41. That's when
he bought it. He remembers when Pearl Harbor hit they were building for -- building it
and we have had an opportunity to meet with the Warricks a few times and enjoy his --
his vitality and sparkle in his eye and firm handshake and he actually -- he remembers
his dad building the barn across the street on the Wells property that developed when he
was five back in 1923. A lot of good stories about the neighborhood and -- so, what was
Meridian like back then. Like it was small. He used to go to work in Boise. Meridian
used to be kind of small. Whatever that meant. I don't know. That's what he said. It was
really small, you know, way back then. Anyways, I digress. So, thanks for letting us come
back. Last time on January 2nd. Appreciate the opportunity to reevaluate our application
and that night when I went back to the -- to the office I thought, okay, how is this different
from say portions of Hill Century Farm, Sky Mesa, Reflection Ridge and Tuscany and
what jumped out at me was the attached product and the 40s. Our intent wasn't to lose
a certain number of lots, we said let's just eliminate those and see what -- see what comes
out of it. It wasn't a set number and it ended up being five that we lost and so with that
we thought we have kind of molded and actually exceeded amenity wise and some other
things in comparisons to other adjacent subdivisions in doing so. So, we felt comfortable
coming back with this. I acknowledge we didn't go all the way down to all R-4. I did look
at it that night, though, said what if we did go back to R-4, what would that -- what would
that generate or -- you know, there is a 3.0, you know, number that we talked about, but
there is also what about just all R-4, which is considered a low density and I put in my --
my cover letter here that it -- we would bet about 116 lots about, 3.2 to the acre. So, my
experience of doing this over the last 20 plus years as an engineer and as a planner, laid
out a lot of lots myself -- I mean this is my layout. Give it to the engineer, they -- they do
what they got to do, but I really am familiar with the staff and what makes it so interesting
to do this is every site is different. Every piece of property is a certain shape, every piece
of property is a different size, has a different efficiency, if you will, as to how -- how it yields
on a -- on a -- on density, this number that we use for gross density, which is the -- the
area off the center line of the road, off the center line of a ditch, divided by the total number
of units, we use that as a -- as a guide to how close we are to -- to the goals of that
comprehensive plan. Everyone is different. It's amazing, you have the same number, the
same size a lots, say R-4 to the south here is -- is 3.36 to the acre, pretty efficient, you
know, just over the ten percent open space on its own. If we use that same size of lot
across the street on Wells, which we did, it came out 2.7. It just was less efficient, it just
-- it just was. It was the shape, it was the amount of ditches, the amount of road, it just
-- that's the way it came out. So, I don't want to get too hung up on the exact number of
lots. In our experience R-4 would lay out to about 2.6 and 3.4 or 3.5. That's just where it
lays out and just -- everyone's different. Some are more efficient than others and we felt
it was important to provide a mix, to provide some different size in exchange for that go
with exceptional open space, exceptional amenities and all those things that we have
done here as far as amenities. We have five -- I think two are required in terms of
playground. The pool, the pathway or over 15 percent open space is considered an
amenity and, then, we actually have a more -- more than just a pool house, it's like a little
clubhouse. So, we have five. When it comes to the percentage of open space, like I said,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 30 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 24 of 53
this is really a good, solid number. We feel proud to have -- really want this to be a premier
subdivision in south Meridian, which is a premier area and destination place to live. Done
a lot of projects over the years down here and I'm proud of it. So, the pool was something
we wanted to do and I wanted to mention that in our experience -- at least from what I
know about Tuscany and Reflection Ridge, they got a pool for about every 250 residents
-- 250 lots. Tuscany has got a thousand lots. Four pools. Reflection -- Reflection Ridge
has 250 lots, one pool. I don't know about the other guys. This has one for 125. So, it's
doing better in that regard, too. Not everybody is going to use the pool. I think some
people that buy here are going to like the idea of they could use the pool or their grandkids
could use the pool if they wanted to. Now, whether they do or not, I don't know, but it's a
good -- it's a good thing to have. Along with the playground. Same thing. Not everybody
is going to use it, but some will. So, with that said, we think that what we brought back
before is something that matches what's in the area as exceptional amenities, exceptional
open space and speaking of the Starks, that was their one opposition. They, you know,
have a flood zone issue that we are going to go out of our way to fix across the street.
It's not our fault, but we are not going to make it worse, we are going to make it better in
fact by -- by fixing two culverts instead of one. But one of the other issues at the
neighborhood meeting and also at P&Z -- I'm not sure she mentioned it or they mentioned
it at City Council was the attached product and so I made sure I mentioned that to her
before I walked in here, hey, we got rid of the attached and she said thanks. So, anyways,
we did that. So, just for the record, I don't know what you got for all the written testimony,
but they were the only person who showed up that was a pseudo protestor and even that
was more about the flood zone than anything else. As far as the -- if you do make a
recommendation for approval we would like to request -- there is two parcels on this piece
that we -- that we get an early building permit, potentially, before the plat records for the
pool and the clubhouse. We want to get that going sooner than later and so that would
be something that's at your discretion to allow, subject to all the other requirements that
Planning and Zoning has, to pull building permits. So, with that we are excited about it.
We are proud of it. One other issue about the schools, you know, that was a hot button
for at least one person. These more efficient lots from our experience -- and like Council
Woman Milam said, it could be a hundred kids or 700 kids. I remember that. You know,
because it could. You just don't know; right? But in our experience the initial buyers of
these more efficient lots are downsizers, empty nesters a couple without kids, or could
have kids and it could change over time, but what we are seeing is like 60 to -- 60 to 70
percent are of that category and they all pay taxes, whether they have kids or not , to the
schools and so we see that is our answer to the school issue. Not everybody here is
going to have kids, but they will still pay taxes to the school district. So, with that I will
stand for any questions and ask for your approval after. Thanks.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 31 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 25 of 53
Borton: I just have one. On the -- the lot reduction request that was made, was the -- the
decision to not eliminate the additional lots that were requested based on any physical
features of the parcels themselves? Were you prevented from an engineering
perspective from doing so or is it a more subjective either business purpose behind it?
Schultz: Excuse me, Mayor, Councilman. I'm sorry as far as inability to take off more?
Borton: Correct.
Schultz: It's -- it's purely a business decision. Berkeley Building Company prides itself
on doing a variety of products, all the way from say 300,000 up to si x, seven hundred
thousand. And these more efficient lots give us a better cross-section of buyers to -- to
attract and so it is a business decision --
Borton: Okay.
Schultz: -- very much so, that we want this and it's not more lots are better -- obviously
that plays into it somewhat, but it really truly is about having a variety of buyers that can
get us -- it's not even really affordable anymore, but around 300 for these smaller ones,
so --
De Weerd: Thank you.
Schultz: Thanks.
De Weerd: Mr. Clerk.
Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Susan Karnes is the only one that signed up wanting
to testify this evening.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Karnes: Good evening.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Karnes: Susan Karnes. 5556 South Graphite Way.
De Weerd: Thank you, Susan.
Baumgartner: Kathi Baumgartner. 2310 East Lake Hazel.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Karnes: We would like to open our remarks by expressing our deepest condolences to
Councilman Keith Bird's family and to you, his esteemed colleagues and friends. We
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 32 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 26 of 53
would like the public record to reflect our community's deepest respect for Mr. Bird and
his remarkable record of service to our city and his lasting and indelible legacy. Thank
you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Karnes: We are here this evening representing the Southern Rim Coalition and to report
to Council the consensus of the nearby neighborhoods regarding this application . As you
have seen, the Warrick Subdivision offers desirable amenities and generous open space.
We thank the applicant, who is a Meridian resident and also desire sustainable
neighborhoods -- for designing a neighborhood that would be a highly desirable R-8
neighborhood. However, this land is zoned R-4. As you know, the Southern Rim Coalition
is on the record for asking Council to adhere to the current future land use map and to
suspend all new step-ups until Meridian stakeholders have crafted a new vision for our
city through its new comprehensive plan. In your September 4th meeting you directed
staff to, quote, highly discourage, unquote, Comprehensive Plan text or map
amendments. All the areas of town has seen numerous step-ups in residential density,
especially step-ups from low density to medium. More significantly, our schools are
overcrowded and they are facing an even greater crisis of overcrowding. At this moment
hundreds of homes -- at least 891 by our count -- are just now entering or soon will enter
the pipeline for our schools. Hillsdale Elementary as of today was built with a capacity
for 650 students. Today's enrollment is 788. Kathi has a list for you of the homes broken
down, so you can see out of these 891, almost every single one is under construction or
let -- yet to come online. Sky Mesa, 278 homes. The streets are just now nearing
completion. None of those homes are built. This application elicited an especially vocal
and negative response from our ne ighborhoods and those most affected by it, the Sky
Mesa and White Bark residents and parents of school aged children. Many express their
anger that the applicant reduced his original iteration by only five rooftops. We see no
compelling reason to justify this higher density, which is, essentially, a zoning step up
while we are actively creating a new Comprehensive Plan. Our area has numerous R-8
neighborhoods. Our schools are grossly over capacity and the nearby White Bark
neighbors, who had very recently purchased their homes with the assurance their back
fence neighbors would be comparable R-4 lot sizes, are few in number, only seven have
moved into their new homes. The adjoining homes are under construction. These
residents do not have a resident run HOA to support this play to Council that you adhere
to the Comprehensive Plan and the city's legal right to restrict this land to R-4 density
standards and dimensions. We deeply appreciate the quality of this R-8 application, but
respectfully request that you deny Warrick Subdivision, unless it meets 3.1 or lower
density. Stand for questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Susan. Council, any questions? Thank you both.
Karnes: I would just like to take a moment to acknowledge to Council that Matt Schultz
has been really very professional and outstanding in his communication with us in
discussing his application and its amenities and benefits. So, just would like to express
our respect to him. Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 33 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 27 of 53
De Weerd: Thank you for adding that. Thank you, Kathi.
Coles: No other sign-ups.
De Weerd: Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone else -- sir. Good evening.
Thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Stark: My name is Steven Stark. I live at 2630 East Amity Road and --
De Weerd: Thank you.
Stark: -- my letter to the City Council explained a concern I had about the floodplain on
our property being increased from the established FEMA floodplain map as it stands today
and I expressed this concern at the last city -- City Council meeting and the two points --
I would just like to verify is that Matt has just commented that he would make things better,
but as I -- the older I get the more stickler I am about details, you know, so what I would
like to make sure is that the two culverts would be replaced, the floodplain would be
reduced on our property and that would be at no cost to us and I wanted to insure these
commitments made by Schultz -- Matt Schultz at the -- and the Berkeley Building
Company at the last meeting was incorporated in any approvals today. So, that's all I
have. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Stark. Is there anyone else who would like to provide
testimony? Yes, ma'am. Thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name
and address for the record.
K.Stark: Kathy Stark. 2630 East Amity Road, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
K.Stark: Matt -- I do appreciate him getting rid of the adjoined or -- I call them duplexes
-- connected housing and the tot lot, but we still have R-8 and that's a step up in density
and our schools are really overcrowded. I was just doing a little research and I found a
program -- what was it? I will have to put my readers on. KIVI TV had a program saying
-- called Making The Grade and they interviewed Eric Exline and he stated that in West
Ada School District there has already been 14,000 houses -- sites approved and that he
has -- and I can quote him here -- it says that's a big number. Like I said, that's 11,000'ish
future kids that will show up when those houses are built and sold out. Eleven thousand.
That's scary. Rocky -- he said Rocky is about 600 over and Mountain View is 500 over,
but the other two major High Schools, Centennial and Eagle are also over. So, I thought
is this true? I'm going to call him. So, I called him and he said it is true, but he also said
that Mountain View is going to get 18 extra classrooms and I said how many students will
that accommodate and he said 170, but they were about 500 over. So, that doesn't even
take care of the overcrowding that we currently have and with -- like the other gal said,
we have Century Farms, they are not totally built out, White Bark, the Wells Subdivision,
Sky Mesa -- huge. I drove by there today and they are just putting their streets in and
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 34 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 28 of 53
there is lots of houses in there and, then, I heard -- now, I don't know if this is true. You
guys would know better than me. That there is 1,800 homes that there is in the works of
planning. Lake Hazel and Locust Grove'ish -- I think by the new park area. That's
incredible. And I asked Mr. Excline -- I said so what's the next school slated for our area,
because the elementary is overcrowded, the junior high's overcrowded -- or middle school
is overcrowded, the high school is overcrowded and he said that it would probably be an
elementary school, but it would be a while. So, I have a great concern for the kids and
the overcrowding that they are already experiencing and that this is not going to be
relieved by a step up in density and, you know, while I appreciate the extra amenities, I
don't think it's a fair exchange for a step up in density. So, I would ask that you would
hold to the comp plan and do R-4. And the other thing I just want to say is thank you guys
for your time. I know it's a thankless job at times I'm sure, but we do appreciate your
service to the city and we would like to see our city stay a great place to raise a family, to
live and for our kids to be educated. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Kathy. Any further testimony? Yes. Thank you for joining us. If
you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Atalla: Sure. Joe Atalla. 2275 South Eagle Road, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Atalla: Thank you again for your consideration of this project. I am with Berkeley Building
Company and I guess a few things. One, there has been a lot of discussion about the
schools and the impact that this project would have on the schools and from the
discussion that I have been hearing it sounds like we are somewhat being punished for
other communities that have already been approved ahead of us. As -- you know, as I
look at the redesign of the plat and, you know, please understand that the reduction of
only five units versus what had discussed last time was not in any way meant as an
offense, but to reiterate some of what Matt was saying, we really looked at the plat, some
of the concerns at the time. Also what the comp plan goals are and whether our project
met those goals and as far as the number of home sites and how that affects the schools,
you know, again, as Matt said, the smaller lots -- our experience has been in other
communities that we have built with the smaller lots in Meridian is typically, like you said,
empty nesters, also, you know, families starting out with -- without school age children,
young couples, singles and that type of home provides that opportunity for them. So, as
we were looking at laying out the -- the plat, to answer your -- you know, to speak to your
question about, you know, whether it was a business decision , Councilman Borton, I did
not -- I couldn't in good conscience create a plat that only had homes that would ultimately
be 500,000 dollars and up and when I looked at it I thought this would be a great location,
in keeping with the other communities surrounding us and, you know, create a premier
community with great amenities, great lifestyle opportunities for, you know, people who
can't afford 500,000 dollar houses and I know there has been a lot of discussion about
affordability in Meridian and, you know, what does that look like exactly and a lot of people
feel that 300,000 dollars is still not affordable, but it is a step in -- you know, in the door
that in most communities right now that's not really an option. So , when I look at it I feel
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 35 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 29 of 53
like the number that we are talking about is maybe an additional -- you know, losing an
additional 15 lots and I look at that number compared to how does that affect the overall
community that we are requesting and what type of lots that would have and ultimately
what price point of homes and whether, you know, we can afford to provide this level of
amenity in the community with the fewer lots. So, that's the reasoning for our resubmittal
of the design and kind of what we are trying to achieve, I guess, with the community.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Atalla: Yeah.
De Weerd: Your time is up. Council, do you have any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Just one. I -- I appreciate that. It -- the amenity package is -- is fantastic with
what you're providing, which probably necessitates the lots in order to coverage it, which
I get. Do you think that an application of this size, when we talk about a diversity of
housing opportunities, is that a concern that's more appropriate from a citywide kind of
macro perspective that we try to address and provide a diversity -- diversity of
opportunities throughout the city or do you think we should focus and make that type of
requirement upon each individual application?
Atalla: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, to answer your question, obviously, it's
something that does need to be considered citywide and where appropriate . W hen we
looked at this site and saw the -- again, the surrounding neighborhoods that also had the
little bit higher density as part of their community, like Century Farm, Tuscany, even Sky
Mesa that we abut and considering the fact -- now, this may have changed, I don't know,
but the Albertson's is supposed to go on the corner, the proximity to the freeway, the
proximity to business centers, we felt that this type of density was appropriate and,
honestly, we didn't feel like we were asking for, you know, anything crazy, you know, not
putting apartment units or anything like that on there, we just felt like in this location t hat
level of density and this product type was appropriate. So, I hope that answers the
question.
Borton: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Thank you.
Atalla: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any further testimony? Good evening. If you will, please, state your name
and address for the record.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 36 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 30 of 53
Warrick: That piece of ground I was raised on.
De Weerd: Sir, can we first find out what your name is.
Warrick: My name is Roger Warrick.
De Weerd: Roger, thank you.
Warrick: The ground belongs to my father Paul Warrick. He was born on the corner of
Amity and Eagle Road in 1918. That house you see there wasn't there. If you look across
the road up from the house, there is a little house with -- with a porch on it and he was
born there. He still lives on this property. He will be 101 years old the 23rd of this month.
De Weerd: Wow. That is -- congratulation.
Warrick: I lived on that property. He was raised across the road from that property. My
grandfather rented that place where he was born. Three years later he bought the ground
on the north side of the road and my dad was raised there. Then he moved out the day
he married my mother and nine months later I was born and I was born in Nampa, Idaho,
and, then, he bought that piece of ground ten -- the first ten acres from my grandfather
and I was three years old when we moved into that house. He has lived there all that
time. He's not in very good shape, but he wants to see this approved and see it go and
he has lived in that thing right there within a half a mile all that time. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Borton: Thanks for coming.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further testimony? Matt, any wrap-up remarks?
Schultz: Thank you, Mayor, Council. I do appreciate the partial support, Susan Karnes'
words. I will take it. Whatever I can get. Some nights -- and I do want to just kind of
emphasize that this was not zoned R-4, which was mentioned. It is Comprehensive Plan
low and there has been given -- on step-ups said, hey, no more, but it's still in the books.
This is a very -- this is a step-up light. Like I said last time, This is a step-up of an inch,
not ten feet. This is literally -- in my cover letter that I submitted with this you can see
where an R-4 lays out 3.36, the R-8 lays out 3.56. We are really, really, really splitting
hairs here and I -- this is not high density, even though we are asking for a step up, we
are getting into semantics, but the reality is this is just a handful of lots -- and to Joe's
point -- allows him to offer this amenity package, which benefits everybody in the
neighborhood. The neighbors as well, more so than having all R-4 lots and I heard a 3.1,
which is better than 3.0, but still, like I said, R-4 for does lay out denser than that with
ample open space. It just does. And I just would hate to see you guys start shooting
down R-4s, even at 3.3. I mean that would be really, really sad if it comes to that. It just
wouldn't be the way things have been done around here for -- for a long time. So, in any
case, I just want to reiterate that our average in the R-4 is 9,000 square feet and our
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 37 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 31 of 53
average in the R-8 is 6,700 square feet R-8 does allow a 4,000 square foot lot. We are
at 5,500 as our minimum and our average is 6,700 and the overall average over the whole
thing is right at -- really, really close to 8,000 -- 7,958 square feet overall. So, we are --
our overall average is -- it really is an R-8 super light. It's not a -- it's -- it just allows some
dimensional flexibility is really what it's allowing us . It would be really, really close to an
R-4. So, in fact, 75 percent of our lots are over the 7,000 -- over 7,000 square feet. So,
I just want to reiterate that and, hopefully, we get a motion for approval and we can fulfill
Paul's dad's wishes and see this thing go. So, thank you.
De Weerd: I like the addition you have of new planning terminology. An R-8 super light.
So, you know, our Comprehensive Plan is going to have all kinds of unique definitions;
right? Okay. Council, any further questions?
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, I think this is probably a question for Bill. We had a couple
of letters from a gentleman who said that this would give him like three neighbors behind
him and it doesn't look like any of the areas that change d would have rectified that. Do
you have a map that would show us that?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't have an exhibit for you on that
this evening, but if you look on the open space exhibit before you, that gentleman was
referring to the westerly boundary of this particular project north of the stub street. You
can see there is some lighter lines along that exhibit and those are some White Bark lot
lines that were platted with that subdivision, so what -- what he's referring to is there is
potential for two lot lines -- two homes facing each lot along the east boundary -- or west
boundary along the White Bark Subdivision. So, it's -- it's highlighted in this area here, if
you can see the cursor. You can see how the lot lines split between the parcels of White
Bark and this particular solution. That's -- that was the e-mail that we received from that
gentleman today and that was his concern.
Little Roberts: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions? Okay. If there is no further questions for the applicant,
those who have testified or staff, I would entertain a motion to close. Or not.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we close Item 10-C.
Cavener: Second.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 38 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 32 of 53
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor
say --
Milam: Sorry.
Cavener: 9-D.
Milam: Sorry. It's 9-D.
De Weerd: That's all right. We knew what you were talking about. All those in favor of
closing the public hearing, please, indicate by saying aye. Okay. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I will just jump right in. I don't know where the rest of the Council is. I was -- I
was very disappointed to see that after I -- what I thought was fairly extensive feedback
from Council, to give the applicant another opportunity to get this right and come back
and only see five lots removed to me was disappointing. So, I'm not supportive of this
application. I don't know if any members of Council have anything they want to talk about.
If not, I'm happy to make a motion.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: And I was hoping to see I guess more -- more lots removed. However, with the
amenity package and the nice subdivision and the mix of housing options that this offers,
I think this is a nice project. It's barely over the amount. I mean as far as a step up it's
barely a step up. It's like a little two inches up and it's 12 or so houses more than it would
need to be. So, we are talking about overcrowding and schools, we are talking about 12
houses, which, based on statistics, is like eight kids or something. So, I don't think that
this subdivision, the way that it is, is going to, on its own, push schools into overcrowding.
That's a whole other problem and that's not one that we have been using necessarily to
make decisions on development. So, I am in support of this development. I appreciate
the -- the developer has gone -- has been working with the city, gone back to Planning
and Zoning and made some changes. It's a better product. So, I'm glad we waited a
month. I like it better and I'm approving it. Anybody else?
De Weerd: Okay.
Milam: A motion.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 39 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 33 of 53
Cavener: A motion is always in order.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move that we approve H-2018-0115.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, I'm sorry to interject in the motion, but if you approve this project
as you see it this evening, there are some conditions of approval that need to be modified
to reflect that approval. We have some conditions here that don't -- for example, as the
applicant testified, we are removing that attached product component, so we have
elevations tied to the staff report and we have conditions that they depict zero lot lines.
So, if you would just allow me to indulge you which conditions need to be removed and
modified and, then, I would -- can proceed with an accurate motion, so that we can
capture it as part of the record, if that's your pleasure.
Milam: Yes.
De Weerd: Yes. And that's assuming -- we don't know the outcome.
Parsons: Right.
De Weerd: But any motion should be detailed.
Parsons: Yes. Please. Thank you. So, the first item would be DA provision 1-D.
Planning and Zoning Commission did strike the requirement for a tot lot and the applicant
does have that as part of their proposal this evening, so we want to add that back into
that DA provision. We have condition 2-C that requires the zero lot lines, so if there aren't
going to be any attached product as part of this development that condition is no longer
relevant and we need to strike it. Condition number nine requires design review for all
single family attached homes. Again, if there isn't going to be attached product we don't
need to do design review for that particular -- for any of the homes within the development.
The other item that I would add is -- as part of the applicant's testimony -- he asked to
have the ability to be able to pull a building permit for the clubhouse before a plat is
recording. Now, it's something that I discussed with the applicant and other department
heads within Community Development and they were amenable to that request, so if
that's something you're in favor of you can certainly add that as a provision to the
development agreement, that they are allowed to pull one -- obtain a building permit for
their clubhouse prior to a plat recording. And, then, the other item is if you're so inclined
to agree with the Starks' testimony this evening, add a condition for the upsizing of the
two culverts as part of the flood plan study. With that I will conclude my comments.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill.
Milam: Madam Mayor, can I just add those comments to the motion?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 40 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 34 of 53
De Weerd: Yes.
Milam: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. So, I have a motion. Do I have a second?
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion from Council?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: And I echo many of the comments Council Member Milam made. I think that
the -- the amenity package -- I commend them to really building a quality part of our
community is well appreciated. I also think that it's -- in the two and a half years I think
that we have heard from -- individuals from the Southern Rim Coalition, I don't think I have
ever heard them praise an applicant. So, that's a big deal. That's a really big deal to me
and I appreciate your willingness to connect with our citizens and in a real meaningful
way. I, obviously, will still be voting against the motion, but it's not because I don't value
the quality of the product and, really, a reflection of your due diligence throughout this
process.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I originally voted in favor of this project. As those who are in attendance know,
you know, we value -- I value step-ups and -- and especially the importance of -- of why
the discussion -- why we talk about step-ups and the importance of them and why they
may or may not affect different areas of our community and so I appreciate that dialogue.
I appreciate the applicant making changes to this proposed application. I appreciate the
sentiments of the Southern Rim Coalition. You're a strong voice in that -- in that neck of
the woods and I value your opinion immensely. I look at this project and I value that -- I
also value the -- the diversity of -- that this -- this project brings. It's -- I understand it's --
it may add kiddos to the schools or it may not, depending on who moves in, but I -- I like
this project and I know that it is a step up, but it's -- it's a small step up and so with that
-- with that said I'm -- like I voted before when I voted for it then and I will be voting for it
this evening.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 41 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 35 of 53
Borton: Just on the -- as the Comprehensive Plan processes -- it is being revised and
this issue of step-ups, I -- I don't know where they are when -- in its discussion, but I'm --
I'm certainly hopeful that it goes away. I think it probably helps applicants, as well as the
public, to know if that opportunity is not there -- if an area is intended to be low density,
let's -- let's be consistent with what our map says and with what we are telling the
community and the applicants can, then, go into it with -- with an understanding that that's
-- you know, the rules are the rules with regards to what's planne d there, so I'm not
supportive of step-ups now, I'm not supportive of them in the future if they remain in our
comp plan as proposed, I just think it's -- it's not appropriate.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I think the value of the step-up opportunity is to have the ability to do this when
it's minimal and makes sense, as opposed to having to go through the process of a map
amendment for more significant issues. So, I mean there is going to be cases where this
makes perfect sense to do, a minor increase for, essentially, what would be the same
project with a few extra houses, whereas it wouldn't be worth the effort maybe even to
build it with the level of amenities on a particular lot -- or particular size of land I guess
without a minor step-up. So, I think there is definitely value to maintaining it, but at least
going away --
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Well, never mind. It's probably a topic for Comprehensive Plan, not necessarily
this application, but -- I'm good. Thanks.
De Weerd: Any further discussion? Okay. Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, nay; Milam, yea; Cavener, nay; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
De Weerd: Okay. The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO NAY.
E. Public Hearing Continued from January 22, 2019 for Alicia
Court Subdivision (H-2018-0107) by Riley Planning Services,
Located 4036 E . Granger Ave.
1. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 6 building lots and 2
common lots on 3.084 acres of land in an R -4 zoning
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 42 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 36 of 53
district
De Weerd: So, Item 9-E is a public hearing continued from January 22nd on H-2018-
0107. I will ask for staff comments at this time.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Next item on the agenda
is the Alicia Court Subdivision. The site consists of 3.084 acres of land currently zoned
R-4 and located at 4036 East Granger Avenue. This property was annexed and platted
with the Red Feather Estates Subdivision back in 2006. Currently the site is developed
with an existing residence and an outbuilding that is to remain as part of the development.
The Comprehensive Plan designation for this particular property is medium density
residential and the applicant this evening is actually requesting a step down in density
from medium density to low density residential. To develop the preliminary plat that's
before you it's going to be a six lot subdivision, five new structures and as I mentioned to
you, the existing structure would remain on Lot 1, Block 1, which currently takes access
to Granger Street. This is a unique property. It's actually -- it abuts Boise on the east
boundary and that's where the existing stub street is to this particular property. So, this
is right at the edge of our area of city impact and our city boundaries and so the -- as --
although this looks like an extension of a public street, it's actually a common driveway
that's going to provide access to five of the new homes within this particular subdivision
and, again, the existing home is taking access off a Granger Street. The applicant is
requesting a Council waiver for that to remain, because Granger Street is a collector street
on the master street map and as you know our UDC tries to limit access to collector
streets when a local street is available. So, if the waiver is not granted this evening the
applicant would have to redesign the plat, so that it would take access from a common
drive that they are -- they are proposing with the five other lots. When the subdivision
was proposed back in 2005, '3, '4, '5, '6 when it got final platted, utilities were stubbed to
this particular property, hence the reason for the utility slash pedestrian connection into
the development from East Granger Drive. This will serve as two purposes. One, it will
be a pedestrian connection into the development, but it also will have sewer and water
that is brought into the site to serve the proposed development. Because this property is
under the five acre minimum, there is no required open space for the subdivision. I would
mention to Council that when this particular lot was approved as part of that subdivision
that Council at the time did approve the common -- the landscape buffer that's along the
adjacent streets to be depicted as an easement in lieu of a common lot. So, currently,
the way the code is written all common lots -- or all landscape buffers or open space for
subdivisions need to be owned by an HOA and placed in a common lot. This was given
a pass back in the day by Council to allow it to remain, along with the current access that
you see today. So, really, nothing's changing on that particular property, except for the
intensification. So, as far as the step down request in density, so the applicant's gross
density is 1.94 dwelling units to the acre, which is quite a bit lower than what we see with
the medium density, which is three to eight dwelling units to the acre. I would also mention
to the -- the Council that there is an existing fence along the front age of the property as
well. Some of that fence does encroach within the required 20 foot landscape buffer that's
required along the street and so the applicant has been conditioned to either, one, remove
the fence or seek alternative compliance with their final plat application to allow the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 43 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 37 of 53
existing six foot fence to remain in front of the property. It's hard to see on this landscape
plan, but it's -- it's delineated right in this location along the south boundary. So, in front
of that particular residence. The applicant did provide conceptual elevations. So, due to
the lot sizes on this particular property they are proposing larger homes on the particular
site. Staff has a condition in the DA -- or at least the plat that homes that back up against
a collector street would have changes in materials and modulation in the facade to break
up monotonous wall plains, which is a standard condition these days. So, our Planning
and Zoning Commission did recommend approval at their hearing. Speaking in favor was
Penelope Constantikes. No one testified in opposition. No one commented on the
application and we did not receive written testimony and the re were really no key issues
of discussion. One of the items that was brought up at the Planning and Zoning
Commission, if I can step back here, was the realignment of the pathway. From a Public
Works perspective staff felt that it was easier for them to have a straight route for utilities
if they were to relocate that utility corridor along Lots 3 and 4 here, but the Commission
went ahead and supported the applicant's position on it and left it the way it was designed
and, then, also as this is not a required pedestrian connection into the pathway and it will
serve as a maintenance road for those utility extensions, the applicant did -- the
Commission approved the applicant to construct that pathway of decomposed granite in
lieu of asphalt. So, changes to the staff report. Based on what transpired there, the
Commission struck site condition -- site specific condition of approval 1.A. They modified
site condition of approval 1.B to allow the pathway and common lot to remain in the
current location as you see it before you this evening. They did recommend that Council
grant the access for the existing home to remain off of Granger Street. They did support
the applicant's request for the step down in density and, then, they modified condition of
approval 2-B to allow the maintenance road to be constructed of decomposed granite in
lieu of the asphalt. So, really, the two outstanding issues for you this evening -- and they
are not really outstanding issues, but just something to take under your consideration is,
one, the -- approving the step down and, two, allowing the existing home to take access.
We did -- staff did receive written testimony from the applicant's representative in
agreement with the Commission recs. With that I will conclude my presentation and stand
for any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions? Okay. Is the applicant here? Good
evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Constantikes: Thank you, Mayor. Penelope Constantikes. Post Office Box 405, Boise.
83701.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Constantikes: Thank you. So, the applicant -- the project team have reviewed the staff
report with the updates and concur with the conditions of approval as recommended by
the Planning and Zoning Commission and we do respectfully request that the subdivision
be approved as designed. Bill brought up several items of note. One of them was the
waiver request. I did provide some traffic data with the application and the trip generation
or the traffic on both Granger and Grenadier is really pretty low for a collector. The Woods
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 44 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 38 of 53
have lived there for a long time. Their house I think was built in 2003 and their garage
does face the street. So, we were hopeful that they would be able to continue to access
their property at that location. And this step down in density is a little bit unusual,
especially given the conversation that preceded us about stepping up. It provides a nice
variety I think without being -- it's a small subdivision, so you're not putting in 20, 30, 40
large lots, it's just a nice size in-fill that buffers the neighbors to the north a little bit and
utilizes the property in an appropriate way, given its location. We will relocate or remove
the fence that's sitting inside that easement right now, but those will all be converted to
common lots with a subdivision. So, all the landscape buffers are going to be parked
inside common lots from this point forward. No -- less is always more. Less can be more.
So -- and you have things coming up behind us. So , rather than take up time discussing
items that are in the staff report or the record from the Planning and Zoning Commission
hearing, I would be happy to just answer any specific questions that you have .
De Weerd: Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you.
Constantikes: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Clerk.
Coles: No -- no sign-ups.
De Weerd: Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to provide
testimony on this item? Okay. Council, any questions for the staff or applicant? Okay.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we close the public hearing for H-2018-0107.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 9-E. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we approve Item No. 9-E, H-2018-0107, which includes the approval
for the step down in density from MDR to LDR and allow the existing home on Lot 1, Block
1, to continue to access East Granger Avenue.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 45 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 39 of 53
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion ? And that would include the
relocation of the fencing.
Bernt: Yes. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Anything further? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
F. Public Hearing for Bainbridge Franklin (H-2018-0057) by
Steve Bainbridge, Located at 2075 and 2155 W. Franklin Rd.
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 3.68 acres of land with a
C-G zoning district
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-F is a public hearing for H-2018-0057. I will open this public
hearing with staff comments.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, next item on the agenda is the
Bainbridge Franklin annexation. The site consists of 3.6 acres of land, currently zoned
R-1 in Ada county. It's located at 2075 and 2155 West Franklin Road. There is no history
on this particular property and the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation
is mixed use commercial, which is part of our Ten Mile interchange specific area plan.
Originally this application was scheduled to be in front of you -- it originally came with a
recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission for denial. If you recall, the
applicant came back before you in November, I believe, and asked for you to remand it
back to P&Z to see if they could correct some of those issues that the P&Z Commission
-- some of the concerns that they had -- he heard during the P&Z Commission. We have
done that. Staff has updated the staff report to reflect those changes and that's really
what I want to dive into this evening as far as Planning and Zoning Commission
overwhelmingly supported the changes to the plan and recommended approval to you
this evening. I wanted to go and particularly site in with the C-G zoning district, which is
consistent with a mixed use community designation and I would let you know that the site
is currently operating with a small engine repair business in one of the homes -- the
additional lot has a single family residence and typically those are nonconforming uses
under our code and so as part of our recommended DA provisions to you this evening we
are -- have a provision that -- that those uses cease upon annexation of this property. So,
our mixed use community designations -- we typically envision a mix of office, retail,
recreation, employment, and other miscellaneous uses on this particular property, in
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 46 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 40 of 53
conjunction with some higher density uses, but given the fact that this is only three acres
in size, it makes it a little bit different to get a true mixed use for what's really envisioned
for this particular property. I would also mention to you that the target density of a
residential component is contemplated for this land use is between eight and 12 dwelling
units to the acre. What's happened in the immediate area -- and I think this commission
-- or Council is very aware of it -- is we had adjacent properties to the east and to the west
that have recently come through -- last several years and done multiple comp plan
changes on the property. So, we have added more of a commercial component and less
of a residential component, although they did still include a lesser residential component.
Staff believes that there is adequate land uses planned within the area and with additional
concept plans that envision additional residential. So, in this particular case , given the
size of this particular property, we don't feel like the entire site needs to comply with all of
those design elements of a Comprehensive Plan, so both planning -- both staff and
Planning and Zoning Commission were amenable to not having a residential component
as part of this particular development. So, as I mentioned to you, the applicant has
provided a conceptual development plan , which we usually get with annexation request.
The concept plan before you depicts five commercial pad sites ranging in size between
4,300 square feet -- or structures ranging between 4,300 square feet and 29,250 square
feet. The applicant is proposing one access from West Franklin Road, which has been
approved by the highway district and as part of the mixed use designations we like to see
projects integrated with the surrounding properties. So, you can see to the -- both the
west and to the east the applicant is providing cross-access to those properties in
accordance with our UDC and in accordance with other development agreements that
have been approved with the adjacent properties. One of the items that were discussed
at Planning and Zoning -- at least part of this designation is having a consistent design
theme in a certain density or intensity on the particular property and so we went back to
the drawing board with the applicant. We tried to get them to increase the square footage
and the intensification on this property with their office component and come up with really
a cohesive design theme and that's what you see here with the back buildings. You can
see there is a mixture of single story, two story and three story buildings on this particular
site. The back building up along the residential uses here where you can see my cursor,
that's going to be an indoor -- potentially an indoor storage facility, which would require a
separate conditional use permit, when, in fact, that use is proposed for the site, but
conceptually that's what they are proposing this evening and there is a retail component
and office component. So, there is a mix of commercial uses on the site, as I mentioned
to you, but just not that residential component. I would also mentioned to you -- and I
think you're pretty familiar with this, but because the applicant is requesting a C-G zone
they are up against multiple family on the east boundary and so if you can see my cursor
here, because this zone is up against a residential use typically we require a 25 foot wide
landscape buffer between commercial uses and residential uses. That's something that
we discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and staff is amenable to
the ten foot setback that the applicant is requesting, but that does take a Council waiver
to reduce that buffer width down from 25 feet to ten feet and that's something that the
applicant wants you to take -- to take under consideration this evening. Also part of the
mixed use standards is having an open space or gathering area and you can see the
applicant has that. That ties into that street buffer along Franklin Road. So, again, not all
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 47 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 41 of 53
the elements are here, but the vast majority of them are here and Planning and Zoning
Commission did concur with that as well and that's why they forwarded on a
recommendation for approval to you this evening. So, as I mentioned to you, we are
recommending a DA with annexation. Nothing too heavy, but, basically, the -- the DA
provisions before you this evening require compliance with the concept plan that's before
you this evening. We want to make sure that the applicant -- or the development does
include a mixture of both single, two story and three story structures on the -- on the site
as proposed to be in alignment with the current future land use designation . Of course,
if any ordinances change we want the development to comply with those. All those uses
and buildings on the site need to be removed upon annexation of the particular property
and, as I mentioned to you earlier, we are requiring that they reciprocate cross -access to
the adjacent properties and that would be submitted with their first certificate of zoning
compliance application. The applicant has provided pedestrian connections to the
adjacent properties. So, we require that as well. And, then, they needed to comply with
the design standards in the Ten Mile specific area plan as well. So, Item G is the one that
pertains to the 25 foot landscape buffer along a portion of the east boundary, particularly
where that self storage use is adjacent to the multi-family currently under construction.
We have some language there -- unless they obtain a waiver from you this evening. So,
it's -- there is flexibility built in for the applicant. The indoor self storage use will require a
separate conditional use permit and it needs to comply with our specific use standards in
the code and, then, also we want to limit access to this particular property, so we are fine
with the one access, but we want to make sure there aren't any future accesses in the --
in the future. So, one access point to Franklin Road is supported by staff and ACHD as
well. So, testifying at the Planning and Zoning Commission we had Shawn Nickel. The
only key items of discussion at that -- at the Planning and Zoning Commission was the
parking. Currently on the concept plan that's before you the applicant is depicting 96
parking stalls. In the staff report I alluded to you that self storage facilities have a lower
parking ratio than other commercial uses. So, both Commission and staff felt that the
parking ratio proposed on the concept plan was adequate for this particular site that's
before you this evening. So, really, the -- there were no changes to the staff's
recommended DA provisions and the only outstanding for you this evening is taking under
the waiver of the recommendation for the reduced buffer along a portion of the eastern
boundary. Staff is recommending and Planning and Zoning Commission is
recommending -- has recommended approval. I will conclude my presentation and stand
for any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Bill, this is actually a fine map. Bill, if I'm not mistaken, there isn't any current
residential development next to the -- kind of the larger L-shaped commercial building;
correct?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 48 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 42 of 53
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Cavener, there is. There
is actually what we call the -- the Villas At 12 Oaks. It's a multi-family project --
Cavener: Okay.
Parsons: -- along that boundary. So, it's -- it's been entitled, it's been approved through
-- for building permits, so it should be under construction pretty soon.
Cavener: Madam Mayor, follow up.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Cavener: Do we know how far away that -- when those developments are going to be,
then, from this building?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I do not have that information for you.
Cavener: All right. Thank you.
Parsons: Certainly look it up if you -- if you'd like me to pull up the site plan I can certainly
dig into that and get that for you.
Cavener: We can hear from the applicant and -- maybe.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further, would the applicant like to come forward.
Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Nickel: Thank you, Madam Mayor. For the record Shawn Nickel. 247 North Eagle Road,
Eagle, Idaho.
De Weerd: Hi, Shawn.
Nickel: Representing the applicant. Before I begin I just want to say -- very nice tributes
and love towards Keith Bird. He will be duly missed. So, thank you for announcing that.
We worked very well with -- with staff as you -- as you recall we -- we were requested to
go back to Planning and Zoning Commission to address those specific concerns that they
had in their first recommendation towards you. Excuse me. Staff did a really good job at
kind of guiding us through the waters of that specific plan to make sure we did meet as
many of those -- of those standards as possible, including the -- the multiple stories that
we have before you. We do request that you consider the -- the waiver of the -- of the 25
foot side setback. I don't have the site plan for that building next door, but I believe it's at
least 25 feet from the property line east, which would give it another ten feet to our
building. We are in agreement with all the conditions of approval that staff and the
Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended and I will just stand for any
questions.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 49 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 43 of 53
De Weerd: Thank you, Shawn. Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Is that the Ten Mile to the south? What's the southern border of this?
Nickel: That -- to the southern boundary. The creek?
Borton: Yeah. What runs along the southern border?
Nickel: It's not -- it's not the Ten Mile. It's smaller -- it's a smaller ditch.
Borton: Okay.
Nickel: Yeah.
Borton: All right. Okay.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: One question is -- on the -- on the L-shaped building on the corner, is -- that's
going to be an indoor storage facility it looks like?
Nickel: Correct.
Bernt: Is that a done deal?
Nickel: Madam Mayor and Council Member, yes, the -- the applicant is working on the
plans right now and we are going to be submitting a conditional use for that, yes.
Bernt: Perfect.
De Weerd: So, that will need to come back through the CUP process.
Nickel: Yes.
Bernt: Madam Mayor, follow up. My only concern was the parking, but if that's -- I think
that's appropriate parking for that type of business.
Nickel: Yeah. It will have very little parking --
Bernt: Right.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 50 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 44 of 53
Nickel: -- demands because of the use.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions for the applicant?
Bongiorno: Madam Mayor, if I may.
De Weerd: Oh, hi, Joe.
Bongiorno: The Fire Department. Thank you. I want to make sure that the applicant's
aware of Item 3.2 in the staff report about the two access points for buildings over 30 feet
high. So, three stories will require two points of access. So, those proposed will need to
be solidified before you can do that three story building.
Nickel: Madam Major -- I'm going to mispronounce your name.
Cavener: Chief is good.
Nickel: Deputy chief. I will make sure that we coordinate that with your department when
we are designing the building.
De Weerd: Thanks, Joe. Anything further from Council? Thank you.
Nickel: Thank again.
De Weerd: Mr. Clerk.
Coles: No sign-ups, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to provide
testimony on this item? Okay. Applicant, any further comment? Thank you.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: If there is no additional comment, I move we close the public hearing on H-2018-
0057.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 51 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 45 of 53
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Just a comment maybe before a motion. I applaud the -- the applicant and
property owner for taking the approach of listening to P&Z, good remarks, good
comments, asking for a chance to take a second crack at it. That's a really good approach
and this product -- great product here before us I think. So, hats off to you for -- for
addressing it the way you did. I will make a motion --
De Weerd: Okay.
Borton: -- and see if there is any discussion for it. I'm going to move that we approve H-
2018-0057 as presented and as to the issue of the -- the ten foot -- I believe it's to the
east -- is that right? Yeah. That setback to the east. Allowing the ten foot as proposed,
rather than the 25 that would otherwise be required.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I typically tend to frown on reductions. I think, though, in this particular
application it's appropriate. Don't like making a habit of these types of requests, but I
think in this particular instance I don't have a lot of concerns. I'm supportive of the motion.
And, Madam Mayor, just to echo Council Member Borton's comments -- and I think that's
good for our Council to hear -- appreciate staff re-reminding us that the applicant was the
one that wanted to go back to P&Z. We don't see that a lot and I -- I echo Council Member
Borton's comments. Appreciate you doing your due diligence on that front.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further, Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
G. Public Hearing for Cope Collision (H-2019-0002) by
Mussell Construction, Inc., Located 1724 E. Franklin Rd.
1. Request: Modification to an Existing Development Agreement
DA Inst. No. 2018-027680) for the purpose of revising the
building elevations from those approved in the original
agreement
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 52 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 46 of 53
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-G is public hearing for H-2019-0002. I will open this public
hearing with staff comments.
Leonard: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next project before
you this evening is a -- for a development agreement modification. The site consists of
1.73 acres of land. It's zoned I-L and it's located at 1724 East Franklin Road. In 2017
the property was rezoned from I-L to C-G. A Comprehensive Plan map amendment was
processed at that time as well. The recorded DA records compliance with commercial
design standards in the architectural standards manual. The applicant requests
modification to the existing development agreement to revise the building elevations from
those approved with the original agreement. Those are on the left -hand side. The original
elevations included steel panels with exclusive glass -- or extensive glass storefront and
overhead doors. The applicant is requesting a modification to replace the northern glass
storefront component with stucco and glass roll-up doors to access vehicle bays on the
west side of the site. So, it's over here.
De Weerd: I will tell you what, Mr. Bird would have loved that elevation. All that glass.
Awesome. Sorry. I couldn't help myself.
Leonard: It's a beautiful building for sure. The originally proposed elevations do not
comply, so the ones that are on the right-hand side, the ones that they were originally
proposing, we actually received revised revision -- or revised elevations, too. So, these
elevations do not comply with a couple of the design standards found in the architectural
standards manual for commercial districts. Specifically the architectural standards
manual requires the buildings include some kind of banding along the base of building to
provide a visual anchor and that they use at least two field materials on facades. Staff
included conditions in the staff report regarding those areas that need the revision and
the applicant has since provided revised elevations. The revised elevations are here and
they are more in line with the architectural standards manual requirements for commercial
districts. The revisions do provide banding around the base of the building, which is on
of staff's conditions. However, staff is still recommending that initial field material be
added to the building elevation. The applicant has shown two different shades of gray
stucco. Staff would like to see a greater variation in color, additional score lines or some
kind of variation in texture to help create more compliance with the architectural standards
manual. Staff would also like more information regarding the dimensions of modulation
and articulation and recommends that the applicant provide further detail with the CZC
and design review application. Staff recommends approval of this project and I will stand
for any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Stephanie. Council, any questions at this time?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 53 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 47 of 53
Bernt: Just one. What -- what is field material? Like -- like landscaping or is it something
else?
Leonard: Madam Mayor and Councilman Borton, field material is like the main material
that's used. So, we have -- it would be -- and for -- on this example it's the stucco, because
it's the primary material. Accent material would be the stone, for example. So, in the
architectural standards manual, you know, basically for commercial districts stipulate that
they use two field materials. So, two different materials to kind of add variation to the
facade, rather than just one wall of one kind of material. Hopefully that answers the
question.
Borton: Madam Mayor. Yeah. So, if they are being required -- if they were required to
comply with the architectural design manual that would dictate how many field materials
or -- it reads as though -- it looks as though you're asking us to require an additional fields
-- an additional field material. If that's the case we need to make that a recommendation?
Leonard: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton -- I guess, yes, technically, you're right in
that at CZC and design review they will be presenting the elevations and they will have
to comply with architectural standards manual. In this case we were kind of hoping for a
little bit more than their -- they -- I believe that they do comply with that, but we were
hoping for a little bit more, just because the original elevations were so nice, I guess, and
to help them kind of come into more of the character that's in the area, to kind of be more
consistent with the other buildings that have been constructed .
Borton: Okay.
Leonard: Thank you for the clarification.
Borton: That's helpful. Thank you. That's it.
De Weerd: Okay.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: So, we are going from what was to this, because the applicant wanted to change
or because we wanted the applicant to change it?
Leonard: Madam Mayor, Councilman Palmer, they wanted the change.
Palmer: Okay.
Leonard: They originally -- with the comp plan change they agreed to commercial
standards and a set of elevations and have since decided that they would rather go this
route, so --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 54 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 48 of 53
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Okay. Would the applicant like to make comment?
Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Fledderjohann: Good evening. Mark Fledderjohann. My address is 2022 South
Ridgepoint Way, Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mark.
Fledderjohann: Thank you for your time. We decided to change to this type of
construction, because a glass structure really isn't correct for an auto body. There are
things in the auto body shop that can fly around the shop. They do welding , they do
grinding and trying to keep all that storefront clean would be difficult at best. So, the
Cope's really feel that this would be a better application for their shop and more meet their
needs. So, we would like to change to this type of construction from all the storefront.
De Weerd: Thank you. I see that you did this in 2007 when Mr. Bird was on here and we
figure that you put all the glass in there to impress him.
Fledderjohann: Well, I wasn't involved in the project at that time, so I can't comment on
that.
De Weerd: I didn't think you needed to. That was in jest. Any questions for Mark? Mr.
Bernt.
Bernt: Mark, to just clarify, are you in agreement with staff's recommendations for the
different elevations and the field color and so on?
Fledderjohann: Yes. As -- as you can see from the previous elevation that we submitted
we have added the rock around -- the banding around the bottom. We have also added
the vertical accents around the building to try and, again, modulate the building and break
up the different surfaces. We also modulated the parapet at the top of the building a little
bit, so that you have different elevations there. So, it isn't just a large box, but it actually
has some character and movement to it.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I notice you also added some purple trees.
Fledderjohann: We were thinking of you.
De Weerd: Well, some people would call it pink. You know, I would call it pink.
Milam: Fuchsia.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 55 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 49 of 53
De Weerd: They are -- they are very beautiful.
Fledderjohann: It depends on what monitor you're looking at as to what color.
De Weerd: That's true.
Milam: It matches my sweater.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you.
Fledderjohann: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Clerk?
Coles: None indicating that they wanted to provide testimony, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who wishes to provide
comment on this application?
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we close Item 9-G, H-2019-0002.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we approve Item 9-G, H-2019-0002.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Discussion?
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 56 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 50 of 53
Milam: Does that motion include the changes that staff is asking them to still make
regarding the color or adding another type of field material?
Bernt: Yes, I believe -- absolutely it does and the applicant agreed to that in an earlier
question I asked him, so I think -- yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: Department Reports
A. Fire Department: PTSD /PTSI Legislation Update and Request
for Support [Action Item]
De Weerd: Item 10-A was vacated and it will be placed on a later date when our chiefs
are healthy again.
Item 11 : Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 18-1774B : An Amended Ordinance (H-2018-0006
Fast Eddy’s) For Annexation OfA Parcel Of Land Being A Portion
Of Lot 2, Block 1 Of Jasmine Acres Subdivision (Book 59 Of
Plats At Pages 5,829 Through 5,830, Records Of Ada County,
Idaho) And A Portion Of Unplatted Lands, Situated In The
Northeast ¼ Of The Southeast ¼ Of Section 32 And The
Northwest ¼ Of The Southwest ¼ Of Section 33, Township 4
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 150 Acres
Of Land From Rut To C -G (General Retail And Service
Commercial) 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.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 57 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 51 of 53
De Weerd: Item 11 -A is Ordinance 18-1774-B. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, read this by
title.
Coles: Thank you, Madam Chair. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 18-1774-B, an
amended ordinance File H-2018-0006, Fast Eddy's, for annexation of a parcel of land
being a portion of Lot 2, Block 1 of Jasmine Acre Subdivision, Book 59 of Plats at pages
5,829 through 5,830, Records of Ada County, Idaho, and a portion of unplatted lands,
situated in the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 32 and the Northwest 1/4 of
the Southwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 4 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 zoning classification of 1.50 acres of land from RUT to C-G, General Retail and
Service Commercial 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.
De Weerd: You have heard Item 11 -A read by title. Is there any discussion or do I have
a motion?
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I move we approve Ordinance No. 18-1774-B, with suspension of rules.
Little Roberts: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 11-A. If there is no discussion,
Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Future Meeting Topics
De Weerd: Under Item 12, any items for this number? For 12. Other than the State of
the City is tomorrow at 3:29. I know. What a shock. It is at Wahooz in the gallery event
center and the Taste of Meridian is in Wahooz cafeteria or restaurant area. So, they have
a nice space and it looks actually pretty roomy. Mr. Bird's funeral is also scheduled for
Saturday, February 9th, at noon at the Meridian Middle School.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 58 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 52 of 53
Item 13: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(a): To consider
hiring a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent,
wherein the respective qualities of individuals are to be
evaluated in order to fill a particular vacancy or need
De Weerd: So, if there is nothing further, Item 13 is the Executive Session. I would
entertain a motion.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
De Weerd: I move that we go into Executive Session pursuant to Idaho State Code 74-
206(1)(a).
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn into Executive Session. Mr. Clerk,
will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt,
yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: (8:20 p.m. to 8:34 p.m.)
De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Borton: So moved.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Do I have a motion to adjourn?
Cavener: So moved.
Borton: Move to adjourn.
Milam: Second.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 19, 2019 – Page 59 of 476
Meridian City Council
February 5, 2019
Page 53 of 53
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:34 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR TAMW DE WEERD
ATT.ES .
C. tAY CO ULb, CI ILCA RK
2 / l9 /)
DATE APPROVED
("IV 0r w
(✓lel E IDIAN�-
IDAHO
1zfi SEAL �/