Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-05-07Meridian City Council Workshop May 7, 2019. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 7, 2019, by Council President Joe Borton. Members Present: Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Ty Palmer, Genesis Milam, Anne Little Roberts and Treg Bernt. Members Absent: Tammy de Weerd. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Stephanie Leonard, Kyle Radek, Crystal Campbell, Berle Stokes, Joe Bongiorno, Steve Siddoway 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 ____ Mayor Tammy de Weerd Borton: Good evening, everybody. Welcome. Tuesday, May 7th. It is 6:00 o'clock. We will begin tonight -- it's our regular City Council meeting and we have roll call attendance, Mr. Clerk. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance Borton: Thank you. Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Troy Drake of Calvary Chapel Meridian Borton: Item No. 3, our community invocation. We will be led tonight by Pastor Troy Drake. Thank you for joining us tonight. Drake: My pleasure. would you join me in a word of prayer. Oh, God, first I just want to acknowledge that you are just so good and we appreciate your grace and this place that you have made, created for us to live and you have given us life and so we appreciate that so much, God, and -- and, Lord, I'm also grateful for the country that we live in, that we have freedom to pursue our hopes and dreams and live where we want to and -- and -- and enjoy our -- our great freedom that so many have sacrificed for us ahead of us and -- and, Lord, also we are grateful for the city that we have and the peace and -- and prosperity that there is. It's -- it's an awesome thing, Lord. Thank you for all those who Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 8 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 2 of 55 serve here. Lord, we are praying for the first responders this evening. The police and -- and those who help with medical emergencies and, you know, just all those who -- who serve the public, God, I pray that you would provide for them and -- and that there would be peace and safety here tonight. Lord, also we are -- we are thinking of those who are poor or maybe hungry this evening and I pray that they would find their -- their way to some place where they could get their needs met, those services that are available to them and that we would show them love and -- and last, but not least, God, I just pray for the Council here tonight and all the things that are discussed, the city business and -- and all those matters big and small. I pray, God, that you would bless the servants that represent us and, God, that you would give them lots of wisdom and grace and so we thank you so much, in Jesus' name, amen. God bless you guys. Thank you. Item 4: Adoption of Agenda Borton: Item No. 4, Adoption of the Agenda. Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Let's see. No need to make any changes, so I move we adopt the agenda as presented. Milam: Second. Borton: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as published . All those in favor say aye. Agenda is adopted. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Announcements Borton: Item No. 5, Announcements. This was suggested -- I think Councilman Cavener had recommended we try and move it to the front when we have got more of a crowd talking about some of the upcoming events and some announcements . Unplug and Be Outside all week is this week. There is dozens of events. The city website has a description of all the ways and opportunities you can unplug or you can not look at a website and literally unplug and, then, run around and get fresh air. Kind of a trap there. Main Street Market is Saturday, 9:00 to 2:00, on Broadway. It's expanded much bigger and better this year. And Main to Meridian groundbreaking is May 13th, 4:30, on the corner of Main and Broadway. You can tell that there is lots of work going on and things have been leveled, so that will occur on May 13th. And we have today at noon our very own Councilman Genesis Milam was recognized, rightfully so, by the Chamber to receive the Chairman's Award for her vast array of services and kindness and work you do in our community. So, I'm glad that you were honored and recognized for that. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 9 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 3 of 55 Milam: Thank you. Borton: You help out in a lot of ways in our community. So, that was great. And, then, last, but not least, also today the Meridian Library District, your library announced that they were selected and received the National Medal for Museum and Library Services . The gold medal. It's a huge award and recognition for our library district for what they do in our community. Gretchen and their staff will be heading back to DC later on to accept the award. It's very prestigious and libraries around the country -- she has described have reached out to congratulate her. So, it's a testament to the great work that our Library District does in our community. So, if you go to the library tell the staff congrats and if you see Gretchen let her know as well. Those are the announcements. So far so good. Item 6: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum) Borton: Future meeting topics. Mr. Clerk, anyone sign up? Johnson: Mr. President, nobody was signed in. Item 7: Consent Agenda [Action Item] A. Approve Minutes of April 23, 2019 City Council Regular Meeting B. Stonemont Subdivision Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement No. 2 C. Final Plat for Caven Ridge Estates West Subdivision No. 2 (H- 2019-0048) by Lasher Enterprises, Located East of S. Meridian Rd. and South of E. Victory Rd. D. Final Order for Bainbridge Hess No. 2 (H-2019-0047) by Dallas Hess, Inc., Located 1/4 mile South of W. Chinden Blvd., East of N. Black Cat Rd. E. Final Order for Movado Greens No. 2 (H-2019-0028) by DevCo, LLC , Located at 4155 E. Overland Rd. F. Final Order for Oaks North Subdivision No. 2 (H-2019-0024) by Toll Southwest, LLC , Located at 6060 W. McMillan Rd. G. Final Order for Oaks North Subdivision No. 3 (H-2019-0025) by Toll Southwest, LLC, Located at 6060 W. McMillan Rd. H. Final Order for Volterra Heights Subdivision No. 4 (H-2019-0030) by WH Pacific, Inc., Located South of W. McMillan Rd. midway between N. Ten Mile Rd. and N. Black Cat Rd. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 10 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 4 of 55 I. Final Order for Volterra Heights Subdivision No. 5 (H-2019-0029) by Cottonwood Development, LLC , Located South of W. McMillan Rd between N. Ten Mile Rd. and N. Black Cat Rd. J. Final Order for Whitecliffe Estates No. 1 (H-2019-0033) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, Located at 943 W. McMillan Rd. K. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Bengal Parking (H- 2019-0045) by West Ada School District, Located at 915 E . Central Dr. L. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for ICOM Parking Expansion H-2019-0019) by The Land Group, Located at 885 S . Locust Grove Rd. M. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Quintale Condominiums Project No. 1 (H-2019-0031) by T -O Engineers, Located at 4574 N. Ten Mile Rd. N. Revised Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Razzberry Villas H-2019-0130) by Ed Bowman, Located at 1434 and 1492 Star Dr. O. Development Agreement Rackham Subdivision (H-2019-0005) with Idaho Central Credit Union (Owner) and BVA Development, LLC Developer), Located at 1020 S. Eagle Rd. P. Professional Services Agreement for Meridian Arts Commission Strategic Planning Services with Delta James for Not-to-Exceed 1,575 Q. Program Year 2018 Community Development Block Grant Amendment to Meridian Development Corporation Agreement for a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $362,195.11 R. Approval of Change Order 2 to Sonntag Recreation, LLC for the Design, Supply & Installation of Discovery Park Playground” project for a Not-To -Exceed amount of $147,145. S. Approval of Award of Bid and Agreement to Coonse Well Drilling & Pump Co. for “Settlers Park Well Replacement” Project for a Not-To -Exceed Amount of $137,996.71. T. Approval of Award of Bid and agreement to Challenger Companies, Inc. for “SCADA PRV ’s Upgrades 22, 31, & 32” project for a Not-To -Exceed amount of $79,400.00. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 11 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 5 of 55 U. AP Invoices for Payment - 04/19/19 - $1,228,873.82 V. AP Invoices for Payment - 04/25/19 - $62,472.53 W. AP Invoices for Payment - 04/30/19 - $153,690.39 X. AP Invoices for Payment - 05/01/19 - $222,430.50 Y. AP Invoices for Payment - 05/08/19 - $334,651.06 Z. Approval of Award of Bid and agreement to Golden Enviro, LLC for Digester 5 Cleaning” for a Not-To -Exceed amount of $109,842.00. Borton: Okay. That moves us to Item No. 7, the Consent Agenda. Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as published, for the Council President to sign and the Clerk to attest. Milam: Second. Borton: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as published. If there is no discussion, Mr. Clerk. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 8: Items Moved From The Consent Agenda [Action Item] Item 9: Community Items/Presentations A. Mayor's Youth Advisory Council Update Borton: Thank you, everybody. Item No. 9 under Community Items and Presentations, we have our MYAC, our youth council update. Mr. Hutchins, welcome. Thanks for coming tonight. The podium is yours. Hutchins: Thank you, Council. Borton: You bet. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 12 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 6 of 55 Hutchins: I'm the vice-chair for Mayor's Youth Advisory Council. Ben Hutchins. And, yeah, first of all, we just recently had at our last meeting the MYAC elections, so I'm going to introduce to you our new members. Some new faces and some old ones. This year we have Jaelahna Coursey as our chair. Abby Hutchins, my sister, is going to be filling my position next year as vice-chair. Cashon Neely is going to be our secretary. Courtney McBride is our communications coordinator. Chloe Robbins is our social coordinator. And, then, our school ambassadors we have Luke Amar for Rocky Mountain High School ambassador. Tyson Dunn is Meridian High School ambassador, Brooke Arnold is our at large co-ambassador. Ty Post is our Mountain View High School ambassador. Hannah Challum as our Rocky High School ambassador. Travis McQuiry as our at large co- ambassador and, then, our subcommittee chairs and co-vice-chairs. Carson Moore is community service vice-chair -- or chair. Sarah Gonzalez is the community service vice- chair. Logan Clonleger is our Teen Activities Committee chair. Miranda Ramirez is our Teen Activities Committee Vice-Chair. Amber Graves as our government affairs chair and Cole Satterfield is our government affairs vice-chair. And, then, recently our last meeting we had Mad City Money where Cap Ed came and helped us out and they ran a month long simulation teaching us how to balance checkbooks, how to be responsible with finances. Taught us about credit cards and spent two hours with us teaching us everything that we need to know. Well, giving us a rundown on the basics of financial information and that we may not know and it would be helpful for our future. Any questions? Borton: Thank you, Ben. Appreciate the update. Council, any questions? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Ben, it was great to see you. I assume you're a senior and graduating. Hutchins: Yes, sir. Cavener: Do you mind sharing with the Council what your plans are or what you're going to do next? Hutchins: Yeah. I'm going to be going to Oregon State University of Cascades in Bend, Oregon, and I'm going to be studying at the School of Business there. Cavener: That's awesome. Cavener: Well, Ben, thank you for all you have done for -- for MYAC and I have always appreciated your updates. Youth Council is better because of you and hope that after you leave and conquer Oregon you come back and plant some seeds here in our community. Hutchins: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 13 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 7 of 55 Cavener: Oh. And Mr. President? Just -- if I could, I just want to thank -- you know, our MYAC does a great job, but we have remarkable advisors and Jodi oftentimes doesn't get recognized for the work that she does to elevate this council and our students are off finding success academically, Jodi is setting the standards and developing the programs and just -- we have great employees here and I just wanted to recognize you for all you do for MYAC and for our community. Borton: Well said. Council, any other questions? Appreciate it. Hutchins: Thank you. Item 10: Department Reports A. Community Development Block Grant Program Year 2019 Funding Recommendations Borton: All right. Item No. 10, Department Reports, CDBG program year funding recommendations. Campbell: Thank you, Councilman. So, we are -- I'm here tonight to let you guys know what came out of our application process. This CDBG scoring committee reviewed the submitted applications that are applying for funding for program year '19, which runs from October 1st, 2019, to September 30th, 2020. So, the application process -- it started with the application being available from the middle of March to the middle of April. Right after that the CDBG scoring committee reviewed those for the next couple of weeks and on May 1st. Then they looked those over and made the final recommendations that I'm presenting to you tonight. The scoring committee represented four of the Meridian residents, one Ada county continuum of care representative, one city council member, and four City of Meridian employees. That was representing the Community Development Department, Finance, and the Mayor's Office. We received seven applications and we were able to find all of them. Two applications were new, but the rest of them were projects that we have seen before. We received requests for about 50,000 dollars more in funding than we had available and the projects are broken out in the following slides in three categories. The first one is public services for low to moderate income households, which was capped at 15 percent of the total grant. Then we also had public facilities and housing and projects that benefit the redevelopment plan . These projects on the screen -- this is how they were ranked for the public service projects. The top ranking one was the Jesse Tree of Idaho's emergency rental assistance program, which provides one time rental assistance to Meridian residents who are at immediate risk of homelessness. We funded -- or we are recommending funding a little bit less than what they had requested. The Boys and Girls Club scholarship program provides scholarships to kids to participate in the extended care programs and we are recommending that they receive funding what they requested. The next two programs are the two new ones. The first one is Catch and they have an application program which provides care coordination and assistance to individuals applying for SSI and SS DI who are experiencing homelessness and have a mental health disorder. We are Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 14 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 8 of 55 recommending funding -- a little bit less than what they had requested, because it's a new program and we -- we just have limited funds. The final public service project is Pathways Community Crisis Center, which provides up to 23 hours and 59 minutes of triage and stabilization for adults experiencing a mental health or substance use crisis and this one is quite a bit less, but, again, we have limited funds. So, they requested 30,000 and we are recommending 13,500. For the public facilities and housing projects, we have the Ada County Housing Authority homeownership program that provides funding to supplement the down payment and closing costs associated with purchasing a home . They requested 50,000 and we are recommending 30,000. And, then, Public Works is wanting to upgrade and install streetlights along walking routes to the Meridian schools, several different ones, and they are requesting 125 and we are recommending 115,662. The final project is in the redevelopment area and this is the MDC sidewalk project that is going to be improving the area along East 3rd Street and they requested 180,000 and we are recommending that they receive it all. So, the next steps -- as long as there is no big concerns with what our recommendations were, then, I'm going to continue working on the action plan and on June 4th, then, I will present that to you and I will include a short presentation from the providers coming in for select ones. We won't have time for all of them, but I'm hoping that you will give me some feedback on some that you definitely want to see and, then, we will have the action plan open for public comment until July 16th, when we will have a public hearing and close public comment. The following week, on July 23rd, then, I will present any edits we have and request that you approve the final plan and on the 31st -- no later than the 31st, then, I will submit the plan to HUD for final approval. So, again, I want to make sure that I know which projects and providers you guys want to hear from, but definitely the two new ones and if there is any other ones that you guys would like to hear from , then, I would like to hear that and with that I will stand for questions. Borton: Thank you. Great report. Council, any questions? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Crystal, thanks. You're so efficient and thorough. I feel like I get tons of information. I really appreciate it. A couple of questions. With those organizations that were recommended funding less than the requested amount, we have had an opportunity to communicate with those applicants and they feel confident that they can achieve the goals that they were looking to achieve with that reduced amount? Campbell: Yes. We haven't -- I didn't want to talk to them too much about it. I let them know that they received the first recommendation, but until I have heard back from Council, then, we haven't had any in-depth conversations, but from talking to them during the application process I think that they will be happy, especially the two new projects, just getting their foot in the door, so that they can score a little higher next time. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 15 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 9 of 55 Cavener: Mr. President, a couple comments. I am -- I'm supportive of the recommendations. I would like to hear from the two new ones, just to get a better sense. I always worry -- you know, an organization builds a plan and they submit it with dollars that we need and, then, we recommend less. Sometimes those are all the dollars that they have and so I don't want us to create a false expectation for them that now they have got to find additional dollars to achieve the outcome and goals and it may be better to recommend funding at a lower amount or not at all if the dollars that we are going to allocate they are not going to use. And just an additional comment. I think moving forward for future years, I know that you worked really really hard to try and address some of the challenges with the Meridian Food Bank and I really appreciate that. Obviously, it's really disappointing for me to not see something related to that. I see Patty's here. A great article in the Meridian Press about Dan Clark retiring and the great work that the Meridian Food Bank does and I think all of you know I was a former board member and specifically the backpack program is so critical, not just to kids, but to their families. That's often the only food they have on the weekend. So, I guess a request would be is between now and a year from now if we can figure out a way either through the Idaho Food Bank or another food shelter to try and partner with them to restore that funding back , at least to the backpack program, I see that just being a critical need for our community, especially our little ones. Borton: Council, any other questions or direction for June 4th? Okay. Thank you, Crystal. Campbell: Thank you. Item 11 : Action Items A. Impact Fee Advisory Committee: Impact Fee Study Report and Acceptance Request Borton: Appreciate it. Okay. That moves us to Item No. 11 , our Action Items. Our first one is going to be the Impact Fee Advisory -- Advisory Committee recommendation. As you know we have got a large group of talented citizens who have worked long and hard reviewing a bunch of data and a bunch of objective matrix trying to update and revise our impact fees, make sure they are code compliant, so Mr. Lavoie is going to kick off the presentation as I understand it. We are going to walk through the work of the committee, where we were and where the recommendation is that we might go. We are not necessarily asked to take action tonight, but to allow us to digest, to chew on it, and, then, it should be on the agenda for next week for any follow-up discussion and a decision by the Council. So, Todd, take it away. Lavoie: Mr. President, Members of the Council, again, appreciate the opportunity to present to you tonight the Meridian impact fee study. Tonight you will have a presentation by our consultant Raftelis, Incorporation. They have -- Dwayne Guthrie is the principal that represented us on this study. We also have Matt Adams . He is a member of the Impact Fee Advisory Committee, so if you have any questions for him he is here to answer any questions as well. The Finance Department, myself, I'm the administrator of the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 16 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 9 of 55 Cavener: Mr. President, a couple comments. I am -- I'm supportive of the recommendations. I would like to hear from the two new ones, just to get a better sense. I always worry -- you know, an organization builds a plan and they submit it with dollars that we need and, then, we recommend less. Sometimes those are all the dollars that they have and so I don't want us to create a false expectation for them that now they have got to find additional dollars to achieve the outcome and goals and it may be better to recommend funding at a lower amount or not at all if the dollars that we are going to allocate they are not going to use. And just an additional comment. I think moving forward for future years, I know that you worked really really hard to try and address some of the challenges with the Meridian Food Bank and I really appreciate that. Obviously, it's really disappointing for me to not see something related to that. I see Patty's here. A great article in the Meridian Press about Dan Clark retiring and the great work that the Meridian Food Bank does and I think all of you know I was a former board member and specifically the backpack program is so critical, not just to kids, but to their families. That's often the only food they have on the weekend. So, I guess a request would be is between now and a year from now if we can figure out a way either through the Idaho Food Bank or another food shelter to try and partner with them to restore that funding back , at least to the backpack program, I see that just being a critical need for our community, especially our little ones. Borton: Council, any other questions or direction for June 4th? Okay. Thank you, Crystal. Campbell: Thank you. Item 11 : Action Items A. Impact Fee Advisory Committee: Impact Fee Study Report and Acceptance Request Borton: Appreciate it. Okay. That moves us to Item No. 11 , our Action Items. Our first one is going to be the Impact Fee Advisory -- Advisory Committee recommendation. As you know we have got a large group of talented citizens who have worked long and hard reviewing a bunch of data and a bunch of objective matrix trying to update and revise our impact fees, make sure they are code compliant, so Mr. Lavoie is going to kick off the presentation as I understand it. We are going to walk through the work of the committee, where we were and where the recommendation is that we might go. We are not necessarily asked to take action tonight, but to allow us to digest, to chew on it, and, then, it should be on the agenda for next week for any follow-up discussion and a decision by the Council. So, Todd, take it away. Lavoie: Mr. President, Members of the Council, again, appreciate the opportunity to present to you tonight the Meridian impact fee study. Tonight you will have a presentation by our consultant Raftelis, Incorporation. They have -- Dwayne Guthrie is the principal that represented us on this study. We also have Matt Adams . He is a member of the Impact Fee Advisory Committee, so if you have any questions for him he is here to answer any questions as well. The Finance Department, myself, I'm the administrator of the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 16 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 10 of 55 impact fee. We have Ted Baird as the legal representation and we also have the Parks Director, the Fire Chief and the Police Chief as the other administrators -- or the representatives of the city for the impact fee committee. This study that is being presented to you is part of the state of Idaho statute . Every five years we must present to you a study. The last time we were here it was in 2014. So, this is our -- meeting our obligation from a state statute standpoint that we present to you a study at a minimum five years. You can do it sooner. We have decided to do it every five years. Tonight, again, Dwayne Guthrie will present to you. I did hand out the printed version of the presentation for you. The study was presented to you about a month ago via e -mail. I presented that full study. So, if you want all the details it's in that document . We don't have that here for you today. We presented that to you about a month ago. The study itself is a collaborative approach that the impact fee committee members , all seven of them, the -- all department staff, including Fire, Parks and Police, Finance -- we had Building Department, we had the IT Department and the Planning Department all involved with this discussion and, then, we also had the consultant and his staff. So , this is an agreed upon study that we are presenting to you to consider. We are requesting the full cost recovery approach, so the dollars here are a full cost recovery standpoint. We are asking that you accept the report as presented. Again, we are here to answer any questions. The staff is here. Dwayne can answer a majority of the questions and we have the committee as well. If you accept the report as is, we will have to have a public hearing in the future. So, I will listen to your guidance and, then, we will put a public hearing together for you for the citizens and community members to give an opinion on. So, again, I will hand this off to Dwayne. He is going to give the majority of the presentation. The staff members are here to answer any questions if you do have so me, so I will bring up Dwayne Guthrie from Raftelis -- oh, question for you, Joe. Borton: Yeah. Todd, I think for you -- maybe for Bill, but that last part -- is the procedure that -- if we -- even if we acted tonight to accept the report, that just sets in motion a future public hearing to determine if and how much we might want to implement as a new impact fee? Accepting the report isn't necessarily making a decision also on the fee itself? Lavoie: Yes. Borton: Is that right? Nary: The direction would be if the -- if the Council wants to direct us to bring it back we would need to do an ordinance change to bring it back to make it effective. Lavoie: But would we still have a public hearing, though, for this? Nary: Oh, yes. Lavoie: So, if you guys accept the numbers we will do a public hearing in the future with the data that you have accepted in this report and, then, allow the community to give the public input and, then, Bill would do an ordinance based on your decision on the input. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 17 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 11 of 55 Borton: Perfect. Okay. Thank you. Lavoie: Thanks. So, I will bring up Dwayne to present. Borton: Welcome, Dwayne. Guthrie: Good evening, Council Members. I have about ten slides I would like to go through with you guys this evening, give you an idea of what we have done. Just some highlights verbally of the study and the changes. A lot of things are laid out in the Idaho's enabling legislation for impact fees, like you have to update your land use assumptions, basically lay out all the projected development, rates of growth, that type of thing. So, we have done that. Your community is kind of like an exponential mode, you're -- you're moving along quite well and, in fact, that was one of the big needs for the study is to take account of the actual development that's happened in the last five years. Then we have to also in Idaho document our current levels of service. That's one of the requirements that the fees have to be based on those existing levels of service and, then, we -- using our development projects project out the need for additional facilities over the next ten years and so that's included in my presentation this evening. We are making some recommended changes this time around. Now, the current fees are of per dwelling unit, with no variation by type, like single family, multi-family or no variation by size and those are usually your two basic options. Best practices that most communities now are moving more towards the -- breakdown by size threshold. It's a little easier to implement. So, it's kind of like the small, medium and large kind of concept, but mostly of your apartments being at the smaller end of the threshold, kind of the more traditional three bedroom, single family kind of in the middle and, then, larger four plus bedrooms kind of at the upper end. That's -- that's the concept. The reason you go by size is it's a little easier to implement, so you don't have to worry about is this a townhouse or a condo or zero lot line or all those kind of ownership variations, those aren't important we just get the actual size of living space from the building permit records and that's how I assess the piece. The other changes is we are recommending two nonresidential categories this time around. The current fee schedule is just every type of nonresidential pays the same. So, commercial would be like a retail restaurant, that will have a higher -- slightly higher fee. All others would be industrial, institutional, offices, healthcare, all those kind of things would be in that other category and those have a little bit lower rate per thousand square feet based on floor area of the building. So, I would like to kind of drill down and give you some summary tables up front and, then, we will look at the details for the three fees that we are doing, which are Parks and Recreation, Police and Fire. So, here is -- in words kind of what we -- how the fees are set up. All the fees are being based on citywide service area. The community doesn't really need to -- based on the type of infrastructure that we are basing the fees on, we are focusing more like, for instance, on larger parks that would draw patrons from the entire community, things that involved league play, that type of thing. We are not doing small neighborhood parks that a lot of times are just included in the -- provided by developers as part -- and maintained even -- a lot of time by homeowners associations. So, for parks it's -- we are doing park improvements and the things I mentioned and also recreation centers. That's a new component that we are adding. Then for Police we are focusing on buildings. One of the unique things in Idaho Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 18 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 12 of 55 is that you also have the useful life requirement for vehicles and other police cars get turned over faster and they are really not eligible for that. How we are allocating costs for Police is based on functional population. That's the idea we have data on, the people that live here and also jobs within the community, the jobs in Meridian and so we make some adjustments for our commuting patterns and, then, time spent like at work versus home. So, those are what we call functional population and we looked at calls for service and we decided we needed those broke down in a little more detail and we didn't quite have that level of detail this time around for Police and Fire, so functional population is a good methodology to basically allocate what's the percentage that needs to be paid by residential versus nonresidential. And that's what we have done. Now, when we get into the actual differentiating the fees for commercial versus all other types of nonresidential, then, we use trip generation rates for that, because as you guys know, the commercial development, retail, restaurants, those type of things, have much higher trip generation rates per thousand square feet and they also have much higher calls for service. So, Walmarts and those kind of things generate a lot more call volume per thousand square feet than like an office building or industrial building. So , that's one of the reasons the way we differentiated the fees. On Fire we are looking at fire stations and also their rolling stock, their apparatus. They do maintain those or keep those longer than ten years and so they are eligible and the only slight change on this one is so on the nonresidential, we are using job density, employees per thousand square feet to differentiate the fees. So, things that have a lot of employees, like in office buildings and institutional type of schools, those type of things, they have a little bit higher trip generation rate -- I mean job density. So, here is the proposed fee schedule. There is a column for each one of the fees. You see the fees broken out by the size thresholds. Just for comparison purposes, what we did was -- the arrow that's shown there that goes through the fourth row down that says 2,501 to 3,200 square feet, that would be, basically, the equivalent fee if you maintain your current methodology where all the units pay the same and so if you just kind of want to get an idea of the magnitude of the dollar change, you can see that the proposed total for that fourth row down would be 2,943 dollars for all the fees added together. The existing total using the previous study from 2013 would be 2,017, so it would be an overall increase of 926 dollars and we will dive into the details to see there are some winners and losers. Steve and the parks folks increases. Public safety is kind of flat. Police actually goes down a little bit. So, there -- there are some variations. So, we will -- we will talk about the details on those things in just a moment. Nonresidential. Those are per square foot of building and you will see the commercial and all other, the two categories we are recommending. If we were to do the one fee for every type of nonresidential, that's that very last row on the table that we should see there , you could see that the current fee is 47 cents per square foot . The proposed amount would be 56 cents per square foot. So, it will be a slight increase, roughly 20 percent. So, not a big change on the nonresidential, but, again, there is some variation. If you're commercial you're going to be paying higher. All others actually just a small decrease from what the fees are today. So, now we will dive in. I just have two slides for each one of the types of infrastructure to give you an idea. I know there is a lot of numbers, but we just kind of wanted to give you an overview of how the fees are calculated. So , at the top you will see the base -- major categories of types of infrastructure that we are -- we are doing for our analysis. We documented a need for park improvements. Over ten years we will be Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 19 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 13 of 55 adding -- improving approximately another hundred acres of parks. We have a cost factor per acre for those improvements, so that would be things like athletic fields and -- and basketball courts and all those kind of things included in that. Landscaping. It's an all- inclusive total project cost of 241,000 dollars per acre. So, we are looking at big dollars. It's over ten years approximately 24.6 million dollars for park improvements that will be needed just to accommodate new development. The reason that we only have a small amount for park land is you have some vacant undeveloped parks that will -- can be developed over the next ten years, but doesn't quite match that 102 acres, so we need to purchase five additional acres and that's why that's a relatively small amount. And, then, on the recreation center we documented our current relationship of square feet per population in the community, projected out the need. You need an additional 17,000 square feet of community and recreation centers over the -- over the next ten years. Cost factor is 225 dollars a square foot. So, approximately 3.8 million dollars of additional recreation centers over the ten years. So, that is the kind of thing that we did for each one of the departments and I will show you those details and, then, we allocate the cost. This one goes all per -- to residential and so we did cost per our service unit, which in this case is a resident and so for each additional resident you need to spend 744 dollars to avoid additional capital facilities. This is just capital -- growth related capital, it's not operating cost in the impact fees. And, then, we multiply that by the average number of persons per housing unit. We have good demographic data from the Census Bureau. They do this thing called the American Community Survey, it's ongoing monthly mail out and we have demographic data that we can document the number -- average number of people by the unit sizes and we have local building permit data and assessor data that we use to get the size. So, we have good data to document all these numbers and we worked with the committee and I think everybody's pretty happy with the analysis and the way the fees are broken out. So, the -- the line with the green bar all the way across , again, is that like if you were to basically do one flat fee for all units and no variation by type or size, that would be roughly what you would charge, but we are recommending that you break it out and so, actually, if you -- a very small -- like apartment, a one or two bedroom at the very smallest size threshold, would actually get a little decrease in the fees, the other ones go up, with the biggest increase for a unit over 3,200 square feet, so -- kind of flip through the park plan, how we are going to spend the money and impact, there is three critical things that we always look for. We look for the need for additional facilities that benefit to the fee payer and that the fees are proportionate and that's kind of all the -- all throughout our analysis. So, part of the way we show benefit is how we are going to spend the money, so we actually have a comprehensive financial plan and this -- these are the improvements that you guys will be approving throughout the years . You can see on the left-hand column there, the fiscal year, so some of these -- one project might be broken out on several years, because you might do design in one year and, then, actual construction and that type of thing. So, you're going to be spending money on West Meridian Regional Park, New Community Center and, then, some additional parks there at the bottom of the table and you can kind of see how that's broken out. So, going down to the bottom right corner of the table, you can see the impact fees pay for approximately 80 percent of all these projects. They pay for the -- the growth amount, but there are some additional features to some of these products that we -- for instance, you will see at the top these -- these improvements add up to 151 acres. The growth Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 20 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 14 of 55 need is only 102 acres and so there is a little bit of money that's going to be funded by other revenue sources. For Police it's a little simpler. For the top you will see we have police buildings and, then, what's a little unique this time around the staff is proposing an outdoor training facility, so we have kind of a 23 percent growth share for that, because it is a new thing that -- it, basically just sets our levels of service, we basically looked at the amount of development over the next ten years and compared it to the amount of development that we will have in 2029 and that's how we came up with the projected growth share. So, Police, we are looking at adding approximately 4.7 million dollars worth of improvements. We net out some existing fund balance and, then, come up with the amount that we are actually funding with the impact fees. So, the middle portion of the table basically is the cost allocation and it's -- the residential is done similar to the last one where we broke it out by housing units. I mean persons per housing unit and, then, the bottom of the table shows nonresidential being broken out using trip generation rates and that's how we come up with the fees for commercial and all other. So, on this one you can see in the residential section that th e residential fee will actually go down slightly. Commercial fees, the only one that goes up, approximately 12 cents per square foot, for Police. All other -- which would be industrial, offices, those type of things, actually have a small decrease also. And here is how the Police Department is planning to spend their money over the next ten years, doing the training facility classrooms, adding onto the administration building in two phases and, then, a substation. So, you can see those things and, then, the outdoor training facility we already talked about. Their growth share -- the impact fees are paying for approximately 59 percent of their capital expenditures and so there is an equal proximate 3.26 million that come from other revenues. The last two slides are on Fire. Fire we are doing fire stations and fire apparatus. You will see at the top approximately 11 million dollars worth of improvements to add or expand -- add stations or expand stations and, then, add rolling stock, about 2.9 million dollars of additional apparatus. This is not replacing things you have today, this is expanding the fleet, adding new rolling stock. So, cost allocation is kind of similar. The way we did the residential at the bottom, the nonresidential is being done based on jobs per thousand square feet and you can kind of see that if you're -- the kind of average size residential there is a slight increase of 12 dollars per unit. If you're smaller than the average you get a decrease in the fees, if you're larger it's an increase of 328 dollars -- I mean 128 dollars. Sorry. And, then, on the nonresidential, both of these go up slightly from what they were today. Part of the reasons on the change of the nonresidential is that we had better data this time around. The previous study assumed some nonresidential for calculations. We actually got assessor data this time to verify the actual nonresident ial we had in the community. So, part of the changes on the nonresidential is just due to better data that we had. So, that concludes my presentation. We will talk about the -- excuse me -- the fire expenditures. At the top you will see the two stations that we are adding, seven and eight, and, then, the planned apparatus. Again, they -- they are buying some equipment. We are only expecting the growth share to be approximately 2.9 million. Their total acquisition is about 4.3 million in apparatus items. So, their growth share at the bottom right corner you will see is approximately 79 percent being funded by impact fees, some additional funding for those other items, so that's my final slide. Sorry. Glad to go back and answer questions. We have the detail report. I have the spreadsheets, anything you want to know now is the time. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 21 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 15 of 55 Milam: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Thank you for this -- this report was a lot easier to follow than this whole report. I guess my -- my biggest question is like regarding police going down so much. That -- to me that seems kind of dramatic and -- and the only 59 percent being covered by the growth and who decides if it's 59 or 79 or 89 percent that should be covered by the growth? Where do those numbers come from or are they just -- Guthrie: They came by document -- documenting our current levels of service. We inventoried the buildings that we have for the -- for the police department and allocating those to the number of service units in the community today, which are the residents and nonresident -- for the nonresidential it's vehicle trips to development within Meridian and so that -- based on that current relationship of the nonbuilding space that we have today, to the amount of service units, that's how we projected that out into the future to show what the growth need is and compare d that to their planned expenditures and so it's -- the growth share is based on the current service levels being maintained by impact fees and, then, the reason that doesn't cover all of it is that the police department is, over the next ten years, wanting to do some things that are just a little more than the growth share. Part of that's just the lumpiness of capital improvements, like to build a whole station and so there is a big increase in level of service. So, part of it is just that kind of stair step kind of pattern that you get and what -- what they are -- how they are planning to do their improvements over the next ten years. Bernt: President Borton? Borton: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Thank you, Mr. Guthrie, for your presentation. Got one question. My -- my concern is very similar to Councilman Milam's. Can you go over one more time how the allocation between Parks, Police, and Fire were figured? Guthrie: Basically all of them were -- back to this slide here. We talked about the method that we use. Bernt: Right. Guthrie: The incremental expansion method is basically taking a snapshot of the way things are today, documenting current levels of service for each one of the items listed in that column. So, we actually inventoried the amount of parks that we have, the acres, inventoried the size of the recreation center, documented the floor area for the police buildings, the floor area of the fire stations and got their inventory, the rolling stock. So, we documented the current levels of service and those levels of service we use to project the need to accommodate growth over the next ten years and that's how the -- each of the fees is done. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 22 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 16 of 55 Milam: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I guess the only -- I understand that the methodology. My only resistance to that is the extreme fast growth that we have had over the -- over the last five years since impact fees were established last and since maybe the last building was built is really talking about infrastructure, that our level of service is down in some areas compared to where it was or should be and I -- I'm not saying that as a fact that they are lower -- I'm assuming that they are lower, because we have the same buildings and 30,000 more people. So, adopting something that is going to maintain the current, which is inadequate because of the fast growth just seems a little wrong. Guthrie: Do you want me to answer that? I thought you were going to jump in. Milam: Sure. Guthrie: Okay. You can increase levels of service and -- and, in fact, that's kind of what we are showing that we are planning to do with each one of the comprehensive financial plans, but we just have to do that with other revenue sources and so even though the impact fees only growth should cover 28.8 million dollars of improvements , we are actually going to spend 36 million dollars worth of improvements. So, the level of service will go up if we follow this comprehensive financial plan, because you can't do it from impact fees, you have to add 7.3 million dollars worth of other revenues and that's part of what we looked at with the Finance folks to make sure that we could do that from sales taxes or property taxes or other revenue sources. Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Mr. Guthrie, the report that the clerk provided us -- thanks again, Chris -- on Friday was very enlightening. To Council Member Milam's point, not exactly light reading, but really really insightful. I did have some questions, though, about where the factors of growth came into play and how those were derived. Guthrie: Okay. Cavener: I think it gets to Council Member Milam's question is as long as I have lived in Meridian we have been growing, you know, like crazy and I think the concerns are that it -- how -- it seems every expert that kind of predicts what our growth rates are going to be always underestimate and help me understand where those numbers come from and, obviously, I know you -- it's hard to -- to project out ten years and that's probably why there is a one percent there, but give me some understanding about where those numbers came from and how they are derived. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 23 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 17 of 55 Guthrie: Sure. At the back Appendix A is the land use assumptions. I'm looking at the draft report that's dated March 28, 2019. Cavener: And I'm looking at figure A-1, Annual Development Projections. Guthrie: Right. That's -- that summary table is population, housing units -- Cavener: Yes. Guthrie: -- all the critical factors. On the residential side I think staff has been doing a very good job of tracking those and pretty -- we are pretty comfortable on the residential. For the nonresidential I think we have relied on COMPASS, your local kind of regional planning agency, as one of the main drivers for those. I'm trying to look myself at the actual details. Cavener: And if I can I think maybe the point that -- where I'm trying to get -- and maybe to give me some -- some guidance, because you're an expert when it comes to this. When projections are under the reality or over the reality, what are the appropriate steps for a local council to do in response? Is it to convene another group with a new set of recommendations? Is it -- is it look at this on an annual basis. I mean what are the -- what are the best practices for cities? Guthrie: Well, in a lot of ways the impact fees are self adjusting and that -- if your development happens faster you just accelerate your capital improvement program. So, the amount per unit is correct, it's just that you're getting units faster, so you need to accelerate your capital improvement program. So, staff kind of monitors that and can do that as the timing when they bring things forward. If things are very much out of whack or costs change greatly, then, you can update your -- your study faster than the five year mandatory cycle, which Todd mentioned is an option, but a lot of ways the impact fees actually are self adjusting, so -- the rate's not necessarily off. If we just said here is our capital improvements and we are going to divide by the projected amount of development, then, it's more problematic that the methodology that we have used to basically document our current levels of service and just projecting out the need, it minimizes that kind of problem. Cavener: So -- thank you. Mr. President, one more if I may. And if I missed it in here my apologies, but I didn't see any part that contemplates inflation and -- Guthrie: Correct. Cavener: -- what is the -- the reason why I asked, it seems every -- we are in budget season and so I hear time and time again we have go to buy it now, because it's going to cost us more next year and you got to buy now because it will cost more three years from now. Why is inflation not contemplated and what are best practices again for Council to look at that? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 24 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 18 of 55 Guthrie: Yeah. The reason is that, basically, if you're going to project changes in cost and you have to also project changes in revenues and everything else and so it's best to kind of basically do things as -- as they are today, our current levels of service, current cost factors. Some communities do consider annual adjustments to the impact fees where they look at basically some kind of index, like the one by engineering news record or a Consumer Price Index, some kind of construction kind of index as one possibility of doing that, but you -- that's probably a legal thing that we should talk about, whether that's a good idea or not. It's using -- it's a fine thing to do, you just don't want to do it automatically, you want the Council to actually consider it and -- and enact every time you do that. That's -- the danger is you just don't want to set it on autopilot and have it happen. Cavener: Thank you very much. Milam: Mr. President, I have one more question. And now if you want to go back to the slide that was talking about the population per household. Guthrie: Sure. Milam: And did you say those were based on national numbers or those are Idaho numbers? Based on those numbers like, no, there is no average even in a 3,500 square foot, 4,000 square foot house that even has four people in it. Guthrie: These are averages for -- very specific to Meridian. They are -- they are areas of 100,000 people and rough -- that's almost your population exactly. They don't draw the area that -- they are called public use micro data areas, PUMs areas. Your -- they don't draw it based on Meridian's boundary, but they match up very closely in your particular case and, then, we do adjust the control totals to vary to Meridian in actual numbers. So, we know the actual number of persons, residence, and we are dividing them by the entire housing stock and so there is really two different options. You can do persons per household, which is an occupied unit, but, then, you have to assume vacancy rates and all those kind of things and so this is number of residence divided by the entire housing stock, which are called housing units. It's simpler method -- methodology. You don't have to worry about seasonal folks and all that type of thing. And it generally is the best method to do. So, we have good count of housing units. We have a good count of residents and we have good sample sizes, which are documented in the very back. There is some tables in the very back with that information. But it is really specific for you r -- for your community. Milam: Okay. Thank you. Borton: Council, any other questions at this point or -- I don't know if Matt wants to come forward and talk a little bit about the committee's process as well. Guthrie: He was hoping not to talk, but I think he will. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 25 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 19 of 55 Borton: Thanks for being here. We will put you on the hot seat, because it's a good group on that committee and you have gone through a lot of work and a lot of meetings in trying to facilitate this and probably asked a lot of the questions that we are asking up here. So, give us a snapshot of the work of the committee that culminated in this report. Adams: Thank you. Yeah. We do -- we have a great group. It's a good cross-section. Different ages, different professions, many different perspectives on this group. So, all of these questions have come up. I would say that -- so, I have been on the committee from the original -- well, the report that was done seven years ago, eight years ago -- okay. Five years ago. Then I did the update a couple years ago and, then, we are doing this one and every time we had a good process. We had good people looking at it. And because we went through the process, we did this presentation, and it went to a hearing, it always kind of had a good outcome , a positive outcome, because we were funding these projects. I have really enjoyed working with everybody on that -- that committee and the staff has been tremendous as well. I -- I would say -- and all of our committee members agree -- the process with Raftelis was dramatically improved over the previous process. Their professionalism, their -- how thorough they are, their accuracy was a huge, huge improvement. So, you have a far better report in front of you than you did five years ago. Our opinion as a committee is it's accurate, it's thorough, it addresses the needs of the Parks, Fire and Police and it is fair to people buying homes and people building homes and businesses. After many quarterly meetings over a few years and asking all these questions, we had -- we voted unanimously to support this report and send it to Council for consideration. So, our group was one hundred percent on board with it and we always looked to the fire chief and the police chief and the parks director to make sure they are giving us the nod and in -- in that group they are comfortable, Finance is comfortable, and, then, all of our committee members are comfortable. So, it's terrific. Great -- great process. And these are good questions. I -- I'm not the expert like Dwayne, so I don't want to dive in on details, but the police question, you know, if you were building a new police station every eight miles and you ended up wanting to build a police station six and police station seven, you would see their number way high. But they don't do that and impact fees don't buy police cars and they don't put cops in uniforms. So, it's a -- it's a different animal and I think it kind of -- it looks like they are not being funded, but because of the nature of the service they provide they don't have as many buildings and they don't have vehicles that last ten years. So, that I think for me that's kind of how I look at that specifically. But that's -- that's kind of my prepared thoughts or comments. I'm happy to answer any questions and visit with you as long as you want. Borton: Okay. Thank you, Matt. And I appreciate it. It's good to hear the feedback from the committee and -- and their ultimate conclusion and recommendation and the work that led up to it. Council, any questions of Mr. Adams? Adams: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Borton: Appreciate it. So, Council, here is the -- the ask before us. It sounds like an acceptance of the report and the work that's been done sets in process the future public hearing, additional input from the public and our community, allowing us to make a Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 26 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 20 of 55 decision whether we want to adopt the full recommendation of impact fees or do something different. So, acting tonight -- which might have been something -- I might have thought it was a little different, so approving the report tonight I guess we could do or we can table it a week, chew on it. Again that is only the first part of a two part process. So, what's your pleasure? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I know Matt sat down, but a question did pop up that I think will at least help us for kind of future planning. I'm sorry. We are notorious for you sitting down and I bring you back. Matt, did the -- the committee have a recommendation for a timeline for implementation should the Council approve a recommendation or some variety thereof? Adams: That's a good question. Council President, Councilman Cavener, we -- having -- almost everybody on the committee went through the update that occurred a year or two ago. Recently. When we looked at the CIP from the different departments, looked at the report, we felt it was critical that it be adopted quickly and implemented quickly in order to capture growth that is occurring right now that's driving the need for these improvements. So, I think we -- we would all want it to occur as soon as possible. Thank you. Borton: Mr. Lavoie, you might have something to add to that. Lavoie: I do. Councilman Cavener, we do have a process that we need to implement on the building side to accept this new structure, so we do have some lead time that we need based on your guidance and your approval, if it is the new approved, you know, distribution approach we need to do some programming on the computer side. So , again, we do need some lead time. Yes, we do want to make the rates effective as soon as possible, but we will be still comfortable with even in October 1, new fiscal year date, if that is comfortable with you guys. Again, we need to figure out the program timeline. We will communicate that with you guys, but as soon as we can get it we will do it, but we do need some lead time on programming the system, getting all the building department staff set up, getting the documents and everything set forth and we have had them in our communications, they have been part of the committee meetings, they have approved this approach that it is doable, they just need some programming time. So, as much as we want to go as fast as we can, please, work with us and allow us to get the system set up, so our community -- or development community doesn't have any issues when we first turn this key on. Bernt: Mr. President, just one question. Is this -- has this plan been presented to different stakeholder groups that would be affected by these -- these changes and fees? Lavoie: Great question, Mr. Bernt. We have presented this document to BCA 30 days ago and we have also asked our realtor group representative to present it to them as well Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 27 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 21 of 55 when we gave this document -- or published this document 30 days ago. I see Mr. Yorgenson is here, so I don't know if he is -- I'm not sure if they have drafted any comments, but, again, we have communicated the actual draft to those two agencies over the last 30 days. Borton: Questions? Palmer: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: Is there -- is it in here or is there an easy way to calculate where we would be at if we did nothing, but based on the projected growth. If we didn't change the fees. If we kept the methodology and the fees as they are, but based on the projected growth, what the revenue differences would be? Lavoie: Mr. Palmer, we do not have in here if you kept the rates at -- in this matter -- I'm not sure if it's showing on your screen -- 223 dollars in this example. We did not take the math and multiply that against the 12 ,466 homes that we are projecting. We did not do that in this document for you. We are presenting to you a report and a fee structure that we believe is necessary for the next ten years. Palmer: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: And I don't fault you for that at all. That was the only easy one I think to calculate. The rest had a few extra factors that are harder to do than based on -- I guess what's on the report or on the slideshow, because I -- I do believe that whatever it is that we are planning to do is what we need to be charging for to be able to pay for it and that could start to vary as soon as this year's budget cycle or when the majority of us that sit up here are no longer here as early as next year, that may change again, and so I think knowing where we are at if we don't do anything different based on what the projection is or what's being proposed based on what the projection is and based on what our habits have been, I think would be a useful tool to help us in the decision, because if it's, you know, massive, massive millions of dollars more than what we would collect anyway, then, I think it really helps us take a look at ourselves and what we are going to do over the next -- over this budget cycle that we are in right now as to whether we are actually on the path to being -- to really wanting to build out that many things, knowing that we are going to also have to maintain them and, then, also with that do -- do you -- it's probably in one of my reports from you somewhere -- know what -- if we were to take the three percent whatever -- I know it's different -- to be able to maintain all of the things that -- all of our other revenue sources have to be used to maintain those, do we know that if we were to build out everything possible planned in this ten year proposal and maximize all possible other revenue sources to maintain those things, do they equal? Would we be able to actually do it? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 28 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 22 of 55 Lavoie: Mr. Palmer, I will answer the second question first. The comprehensive financial plan will be delivered to you this month , to answer that question. If we did everything on the CFP what does it look like and can we fund it. As I have presented to you in the past, we have always balanced five years, but the second five years we don't balance. So, again, that report was presented to you later this month. To answer the first question about the fees, please, note that as Mr. Adams said and Mr. Guthrie said , these approaches are to be fair and proportionate based on the state code that we must calculate, so that we don't overcharge. So, in the police example or even on this example here, 223 is the current police fee. We are proposing 152. By law we would not want to charge 223, because that's not the correct proportionate share that we would charge a police impact fee. So, to leave it as is we would not suggest that to you, because that would be violating the state code, because we are not being fair and proportionate based on our future growth. So, to answer the question what if we kept the rates the same, wouldn't recommend that, because for the ones that came would -- are going down would be violating the state code that we are not doing a fair and proportionate share of necessary development in the future. The ones that are -- the fees that are going up, again, you would lose money in that situation, because, then, you would be collecting less than what's allowable with the full cost recovery and the fair proportion ate share. So, hopefully, that -- I'm not sure if that answered or confused it more, but we can't really just keep the rates the same to do so, we have to follow the state code and the proportionality and the fairness that Mr. Guthrie and Mr. Adams spoke about. Palmer: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: And completely understanding that -- I mean that's the reason we would look at -- if you change this or do this negative results may be this, it's still useful data. There is never -- you can never have too much data. Understanding, obviously, that's one that clearly has to change for legal reasons, but just kind of as a control factor of if nothing changed this is where we would be and, then, we can continue to play with numbers and -- and either plan to keep with our habits or see if we need to make some adjustments , especially knowing now that we are going to have massive additional amount of information coming in the next month and your request to -- or I guess that it would be okay to take our time while -- while you work on other things on your end. I think it would be incumbent upon us to at least wait, you know, a week or more ideally until we have the report from Todd a month from now. Guthrie: I think it might be helpful just to go back to the summary slide that I have on the screen there, number four. Just kind of comparing totals, adding parks, police, fire to the proposed total increases for residential, the proposed total increases for nonresidential. The new fees will generate more revenue than your old fees, so just because the police fee went down, it doesn't mean -- if you add them all together you actually generate more from residential and you will generate more from nonresidential. So, the overall is an increase in revenue. It's not a decrease. So, I just wanted to make sure that that's clear. I think we got stuck on that. We shouldn't have stopped on the police slide, because that Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 29 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 23 of 55 was the negative one. The other ones are -- so, in cumulative, there is -- more revenue will be generated by the fee update and it's something that the state really requires you to do, that you have to document all this good stuff and base the fees on that, you can't just say what -- what, you know, are other communities charging or what, you know, we want to stick with our current fee schedule, we really need to keep it updated and follow the state statute. So, this is our -- our recommendation that you adjust -- make the adjustments that we are proposing. Borton: So, Council, the ask before you is do you want to adopt or accept the report, which you could do today by motion , setting in process the -- the future public hearing, vetting and discussion that might get less into the methodology, but perhaps more into the consequences of the ultimate dollar figure picked, so -- Milam: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Milam. Milam: Well, based on that this is a report that's been thoroughly provided and vetted and I think approved from the stakeholders that are going to be affected by this, I have no problem accepting it the way it is and I appreciate all the work that's gone into it . Borton: Thank you, Mrs. Milam. Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I would tend to -- before I personally would be comfortable accepting this report I would like to hear from the public, you know, in a public testimony -- in a public hearing just to hear what they have to say. Maybe hear from the stakeholders group and the realtors and the builders and get their -- their -- their feedback as well before I would be comfortable, you know, accepting the report in full this evening. So, I -- that's -- that's what I would -- Milam: That would be the next process, right, Mr. President? Borton: Yes. As I understood it, accepting the report doesn't adopt the fee or -- Bernt: Okay. Borton: It just starts the process, which will be the public hearing, gathering of input from all the affected parties and future open meetings that -- Lavoie: Mr. President, I think Mr. Nary can confirm or deny this. I'm just looking for an acceptance of this report, so I can publish a public hearing so the public has a document to base their comments on, so they come to you. My comments are based on this document that you're presenting to the community. If I don't have a document to present to them in some form or fashion I think that might have some confusion, but I will let Mr. Nary confirm or deny that for guidance. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 30 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 24 of 55 Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, no, I would -- I would agree. All you're -- all you're doing is accepting that the work has been completed to prepare this report and, then, this can, then, be published to the public, so they have the opportunity to comment and, then, we will schedule it for a public hearing three weeks out, two weeks out, so that you can, then, have that -- you can have one hearing or multiple hearings, depending on what feedback you get. Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Question, then, maybe for -- for Mr. Lavoie. I think I'm hearing from a couple Council Members that maybe they want to hear from the public about the report and I don't know if there would -- the questions would be questioning the methodology or -- or concern about the numbers or what, but have we -- have we heard from any stakeholder who has voiced any concern or objection to the report? Is there anyone who has questioned the validity of the data or anything along those lines that we need to be aware of? Lavoie: Mr. Cavener, we -- I personally, as the administrator, have not received any comments from BCA or realtors, but I have also not allowed them to present the comments yet. We have not had the public hearing. Cavener: Sure. Lavoie: So, we presented the documents for them to read and digest. We still need to have the public hearing that would allow them, then, to present to you a formal comment for you to consider and, then, we can discuss whether or not you wish to make changes based on the comments, i.e., the public hearing. Cavener: Perfect. Borton: Any other questions? Lavoie: Thank you. Borton: Any questions from Council or is there a motion to take some action to get public process started? Milam: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move that we approve the Meridian Impact Fee as presented. Cavener: Approve or accept? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 31 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 25 of 55 Milam: Accept. Not approve. Accept. Little Roberts: Second. Milam: Receive. Borton: Thank you. It's been moved and seconded to accept the impact fee study report as presented today. Any discussion? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Just wanted to explain my vote. I will -- I'm going to support the motion. Appreciate the great work of the committee and staff. As a brand new council member six years ago I think we got presented with this information and it was a little daunting and I feel much more confident understanding all of the information that's been presented to us. I thought the report was great and the presentation was -- was -- was really, really valuable. Clearly I think like the rest of our body want to wait to hear from the public and stakeholders, their thoughts and comments. They provide a different perspective. And so just because I'm supporting the acceptance of the report doesn't necessarily mean that I'm in full support of implementing the recommended fees. I think like many I struggle with wrapping my head around this shift between kind of one size fits all versus based on square footage. I still want to wrestle with that a little bit. So , appreciate the good work and I'm happy to support the motion. Palmer: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Palmer. Palmer: To most echo Councilman Cavener, I think it's critical that we remember that even though -- if this motion is going to be approved that the entire thing is up for further debate and learning, especially from those affected. I have no clue whether the development community would love the methodology or hate the methodology or love or hate the numbers -- I don't know. I imagine if you exclusively built residential homes that were 3,201 square feet and larger -- now you might not be pumped about this, whereas if you maybe build some that were 1001, but were on the edge, you might just start building exclusively 1000 or less. I don't know. So , I look forward to -- to receiving that commentary for them being allowed to share it with us. I believe that this is a legislative issue, not a quasi-judicial, so I would imagine that we would be able to have off -the-record discussions and -- and opportunities to learn more of those things. Am I right? So, please, provide us all the information you want, whether it's in a public hearing or not, so that we have the best possible chance of making the right choice when it does officially come before us. Borton: Any other discussion? Mr. Clerk. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 32 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 26 of 55 Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Public Hearing for Knighthill Center Subdivision (H-2019-0043) by JRW Construction, Located 6343 N. Linder Road 1. Request: A Short Plat of 2 buildable lots on approximately 1.61 acres in the C -G zoning district. Borton: Thank you. And thank you again for the good work and just getting the process started and we look forward to some -- some public input from everybody involved. We are going to move onto Item 11 -B. 11-B, a public hearing for Knighthill Center Subdivision. It's a short plat application. We will begin tonight with staff comment. Leonard: Good evening, Mr. President, Members of the Council. The first project before you this evening is a short plat for 1.61 acres of land located in the C -G zoning district at the corner West Chinden and North Linder Boulevard at 6343 North Linder Road. In 2013 the City Council approved a preliminary plat consisting of five commercial lots and one common lot. The final plat was then approved in 2014. In 2016 a short plat for Knighthill Subdivision No. 2 was approved to split one of those original five commercial lots into two. The subject of -- the proposed short plat consists of two building lots on 1.61 acres of land and is a subdivision of Lot 5, Block 1, within that existing subdivision. Written testimony was received from Ren Wylie, the applicant, in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval with conditions in the staff report and we will stand for any questions. Borton: Thank you very much. Council, any questions? This is a public hearing. Is the applicant here? Welcome. Thanks for joining us tonight. Go ahead and state your name for the record. Wylie: Ren Wylie. 1676 North Clarendon, Eagle, Idaho. Mr. President, Members of the Council, we are bringing this short plat subdivision to you to create t wo lots out of -- out of one. So, we're taking a 1.6 acre parcel and creating a .6 and a one acre parcel. Excuse me. We feel that this will give us more flexibility in marketing on this property as we have had a lot of potential users that it's just too large for -- as it currently exists. We agree with the staff conditions and I will be happy to take any questions if you have some. Borton: Okay. Thank you much. Council, any questions? Wylie: Thank you very much. Borton: All right. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone else -- well, first has anyone signed up? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 33 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 27 of 55 Johnson: Only the applicant signed in. Borton: I assumed that might be the case. Anyone here who wishes to provide some testimony on this application? No? Milam: Mr. President, I move that we close the public hearing on Item 11 -B. Little Roberts: Second. Borton: It's been moved and seconded to close the item -- public hearing on 11-B. All those in favor say aye. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Milam: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I move -- move that we approve H-2019-0043. Little Roberts: Second. Borton: It's been moved and seconded to approve H-2019-0043. Any discussion? If not, Mr. Clerk. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. C. Public Hearing Continued from April 2, 2019 for Stapleton Subdivision (H-2018-0129) by Stapleton, LLC , Located at the SW corner of S . Meridian Rd./SH 69 and W. Harris St. 1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 38.15 acres of land with an R15 zoning district; and 2. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 223 building lots and 27 common lots on 35.67 acres of land in the R-15 zoning district Borton: Thank you. Item 11-C. It's a continued public hearing from April 2nd for Stapleton Subdivision, southwest corner of Meridian Road and Harris Street. It's an annexation and zoning. We will begin this application with staff comment as well. Mr. Parsons. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 34 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 28 of 55 Parsons: Mr. President, we are waiting for a staff member to get here to present that application. I believe she is on her way now, so we will get you the necessary hearing outline and we will get underway. Thank you. Borton: Good cover. Allen: Sorry about that, Council. There was more of a lag in the live system than I realized. Borton: No worries. Couldn't start without you, so -- Allen: All righty. Thank you. The next applications before you are a request for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat, and a variance. Staff is recommending the variance is either withdrawn or vacated from the agenda, if Council deems appropriate, based on a letter received from IT D that seems to grant approval of the proposed access via State Highway 69. The site consists of 35.67 acres of land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at the southwest corner of West Harris Street and South Meridian Road, State Highway 69. This property was part of a larger area as shown there, which included the property to the south that was part of an application that amended the future land use map, to change the land use designation from medium density residential to mixed use regional for the overall property. An annexation application was also approved. However, the development agreement was never signed, so the property was never annexed and the approval has since expired. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is mixed use regional. The app licant is requesting annexation and zoning of 38.15 acres of land with an R -15 zoning district. A preliminary plat consisting of 213 building lots and 22 common lots on 35.67 acres of land and a variance to UDC 11-3H-4B for access via State Highway 69. The site is proposed to develop with a mix of residential uses consisting of 212 single family residential units, 96 attached, and 116 detached and 28 multi-family residential units in seven four-plexes, for a total of 240 residential units, at a gross density of 6.73 units per acre. A concept bubble plan shown there on the left was submitted that depicts how the site is proposed to develop and how the adjacent property owner to the south plans to develop the adjacent property with a mix of office, multi-family residential, and commercial uses. The overall mix of uses planned for this area is consistent with that desired in the mixed use regional designation and although staff would prefer to see a higher density in this area because of its proximity to a major transportation corridor, State Highway 69, the density which falls at the low end of the six to 40 units per acre desired in mixed use regional areas is within the desired range at 6.73 units per acre. There is a north-south collector street designated on the master street map and that's shown there on the map on your right -- across this site that was intended to provide access between Harris Street and Amity Road. This designation was placed on this property in 2008 when the future land use map amendment to mixed use regional was approved, because of the intensity of uses planned with the associated development and the need to disperse traffic to the existing and future signals at Harris and State Highway 69 and Amity and State highway 69. The street was intended to serve as a backage road for the commercial development along State Highway 69 as required by the UDC and that was the development plan that was Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 35 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 29 of 55 shown at the time when the comp plan was amended. However, the property was never annexed and the property wasn't developed as intended. The proposed plat depicts a short segment of the collector street at the north boundary from Harris Street to the first intersection and that would be this area right here and at the southern boundary from State Highway 69 to the north to the first intersection that is right here. And , then, to the south boundary for future extension. Staff and ACHD agree that the construction of two discontinuous collector streets does meet the intent of the master street map and doesn't preclude construction of the southern segment in the future and makes sense in the absence of the previous development plan. One access is proposed at the north boundary via West Harris Street, a collector street, and one full access is proposed via State Highway 69, although ITD is only in support of the right-in, right-out, left-in access. A collector stub street is proposed at the south boundary for future extension. Staff is requiring access to be provided to the west to the future multi-family development where none is currently proposed in accord with the Comprehensive Plan, which encourages interconnectivity between developments and the UDC, which requires local street access to be provided to any use that currently takes direct access from a collector street. In this case that would be Harris Street. So , that is referring to this orange property right here and there is no specific development plan for that property at this time , but there is a concept plan approved for multi-family residential and there is no access available to the site, except for the Harris Street collector street connection. The UDC prohibits new approaches directly accessing a state highway, State Highway 69. Public street connections are only allowed at the section line road and at the half mile mark between section line roads. However, Council may consider and apply modifications to the se standards upon specific recommendation of the Idaho Transportation Department. In this case a variance was submitted with the original application for access via State Highway 69, but since that time comments have been received from ITD that include conditions of approval, but seemingly grant approval of the access. The Council should determine if this is sufficient for approval of the access without a variance. If so, the variance request should either be withdrawn or vacated. The plat is proposed to develop in five phases as shown, with the first phase dependent on access via State Highway 69. The second access -- or excuse me. The second phase will have access via Harris Street, followed by the third phase at the corner of Harris and State Highway 69 and the fourth phase directly west of phase one. The fifth phase will be the multi-family residential development, which will require approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant proposes the following improvements -- improvements with each phase. Phase one, the State Highway 69, South Meridian Road roadway improvements. A ten foot wide multi- use pathway and street buffer landscaping along the full length of the project boundary along the State Highway 69 and South Meridian Road. Phase two, the West Harris Street roadway improvements, including curb, gutter and detached sidewalk and street buffer landscaping along the full length of the project boundary along West Harris Street and the installation of the traffic signal, the West Harris Street and State Highway 69 intersection. The applicant has since changed their proposal on the phase two to install a traffic signal with the second phase to, instead, when traffic counts require it as directed by IT D and ACHD and they would pay 25 percent of the construction cost. Prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancies in each of these phases the associated improvements, as proposed by the applicant, are required to be completed. If Council doesn't approve the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 36 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 30 of 55 access from the state highway, the Harris Street improvements, including the single -- signal, are required to be completed with phase one. The traffic impact study would need to be updated to reflect the new trip distribution and volumes. The preliminary plat will also need to be revised and reconfigured to remove the access and a new phasing plan would need to be submitted. A minimum of ten percent or 3.57 acres of qualified open space and two site amenities are required for this development. The applicant proposes open space and site amenities in excess of the minimum required. A total of 13.9 percent or 4.95 acres of qualified open space is proposed consisting of half the street buffer along the highway, the buffer along collector streets, a few parkways, common areas containing pathways, a small dog park and a half acre central common area. Site amenities consist of a segment of the city's multi-use pathway system within the northwest pipeline corridor at the southwest corner of the site. A multi-use pathway within the street buffer along the highway. A park with children's play structures consisting of a 24 foot by 36 foot play structure, swings, climbing dome, rock climbing boulders, basketball court, big wheel track and seating area with four foot tall wrought iron fencing with a gated entry surrounding the park for children's safety and a dog park for small dog -- dogs with seating areas. A six foot tall concrete fence on top of a four foot tall berm, ten foot above the center line of Meridian Road, State Highway 69, is proposed as shown in according with UDC standards for residential developments adjacent to state highways. The Carlson Lateral runs along the west boundary of this site and has been piped. The easement for the lateral is outside of adjacent building lots. The Northwest Gas pipeline runs across the southwest corner of this site and lies within a 75 foot wide easement contained in a common lot. Because the narrow lots, approximately 32 feet wide for detached homes and associated driveways, there is not adequate room for on-street parking in front of those lots for guest parking. In some areas parking is quite a ways away. Where attached homes are proposed there is room for approximately one space for every two lots for on - street parking. On-street parking is also available adjacent to common lots. The applicant has submitted a parking exhibit here that shows the availability for guest parking, which amounts to approximately 109 spaces available for guest parking. Conceptual building elevations and photos were submitted for the proposed single family residential attached and detached units and the multi-family structures as shown. The single family attached and multi-family structures are required to comply with the design standards in the architectural standards manual. Structures adjacent to West Harris Street and State Highway 69 are proposed to all be single story in height, except for those on Lots 60 and 62, Block 1, which will be two stories in height. The Commission recommended approval of the subject application, the annexation and zoning and the preliminary plat. And I will just go through a summary of the Commission hearing. Those that testified in favor are as follows: Deb Nelson, Ronnie Winks, Debbi Jeske, Dennis Green, Brandon Whallon, Hawkins Companies, Andrea Newland, Randy Nelson, Will Dilmore, Britney Elliott and Carol Daley. No one testified in opposition or commented. Written testimony was received from Kimberly Porter, Evan and Annalynn Frazier, Sandy and Randy Nelson and Will Dilmore. Most of the comments were from happy homebuyers and other developments by the same applicant and builder and the need for housing options in the price point offered by this developer. Key issues of discussion by the Commission are as follows: Timing for installation of a traffic signal at the Harris Street, State Highway 69, intersection. Previous ITD approved accesses for the site via State Highway 69. The Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 37 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 31 of 55 proposed variance for access via State Highway 69. The proposed -- or the provision of a local stub street to the property to the west planned or multi-family development as recommended by staff and required by the UDC, unless otherwise waived by Council. Provisions to the phasing plan if access from the state highway isn't approved and fire department's requirements for curbs to be painted red in addition to no parking signs installed where parking is only allowed on one side of the street. The Commission made the following changes to staff recommendation. They removed the requirement for the rear of structures visible from Harris Street and the highway to have varied setbacks to avoid monotonous wall plains and they directed the applicant to work with the Fire Department on whether or not curbs needed to be painted red, in addition to the no parking signs where parking is only allowed on one side of the street. The Fire Department has since changed that requirement to only require no parking signs and not curb paint. Outstanding issues for Council tonight. Staff is recommending condition number A-2-E and A-3-G in Section 8 are amended to require a local street connection, rather than just a vehicular connection, to the future multi-family development property to the west in accord with UDC 11-3A3, unless otherwise waived by Council. That section of code states that all subdivisions must provide local street access to any use that currently takes direct access from the arterial or collector street. And last, Council should determine if ITD letter is adequate for approval of their proposed access via State Highway 69. If so, the variance request should be withdrawn or vacated. The only written testimony received since the Commission hearing was a letter from the applicant Laren Bailey and I will just let him go over his comments with you. Staff will stand for any questions. Borton: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions? Would the applicant like to come forward? Or the applicant's rep. Welcome, Deb. Thanks for being here tonight. Nelson: Thank you. Happy to be here. I have a presentation I would like to pull up before I get started here. Are you going to try to pull that up for me, Sonya, or -- Borton: Go ahead and give us your name and address to get us kicked off. Nelson: Deborah Nelson with Givens Pursley. My address is 601 West Bannock in Boise and I'm here tonight on behalf of the Stapleton Development team, who are also here in case I need any additional details. Since Sonya has done a good job of going through a lot of this, I'm going to try to stick to the highlights. A couple additional points on the location that we really like. It's close to Roaring Springs, Wahooz, the Majestic Theater and various shopping opportunities. Also close to schools and parks. Also this location provides a nice transition between the residential to the north and west, which includes one R-40 piece, but also a lot of larger single family lots and the future mixed use commercial to the south and nonresidential mixed use to the east. Looking at the site plan, Stapleton has a really thoughtful design and arrangement to achieve the density that the city staff really wanted to see and to be consistent with your Comprehensive Plan, which asks for a minimum of six units per acre and still provide that quality neighborhood that Meridian citizens want. We have got the mixed use, which is four-plex townhomes up in the northeast adjacent to the R-40 zoning. Single story attached product is along Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 38 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 32 of 55 the perimeter on the north and east side. So, that there is always an attractive visual of the development from the external streets and, then, the two story detached is located in the center. There is a centrally located large neighborhood park with additional passive and active open space spread throughout the development, in particular with the regional pathways. Landscaped boulevard truly accent the entrances on both ends of the development and there is landscaping along all of the end units. So, it's always attractive when you're driving into each end point. There is three types of residential products that are all for sale. As I have already mentioned, the single family detached. These are two stories and range from about 1,315 to 1,850 square feet. The single family attached that are along the perimeter of the existing streets, these are great for mature empty nesters. They are a little smaller. And, then, the multi-family townhomes, which we expect will be four units each to their own -- excuse me -- four-plexes, 28 units and seven buildings, they will each have their own external access, which is a nice feature, but all of that will be determined in a conditional use permit we come back for those details. There is a lot of high demand for the quality and price point of these homes in your city right now. I think a lot of that success is driven by the quality of the amenities and Sonya spent some time with this, so I will be quick. We exceed the open space that -- per the code requirements as she mentioned, but the city code doesn't even count all of the open space that we provide. So, if you count all of the open space that's here , it's 6.9 acres or 19.3 percent of the development. So, it's a very attractive place. The most important amenity, you know, from a -- from a cost standpoint and the contribution to the city a nd the entire area, in my opinion, is these regional pathways. We have got a ten foot regional pathway along the southwest along the Williams Pipeline and, then, one along the entire eastern border along Meridian Road. In total this is over 1,200 feet of regional pathways. That is a lot for development of this size. That's going to provide connectivity for all of those residents, as I mentioned, to the north and west to get down to the mixed use and commercial that's south of us. So, it benefits not just our residents, but everybody around us. And, then, this large half acre neighborhood park, which is just going to be great for these residents with all of the amenities, with the soccer field and the basketball court, the play structures and with each of these amenities there is just, again, thoughtful design about what residents want and what makes an attractive neighborhood here with the pathways and the bench seating and also features like having a fence around the park to keep the toddler safe from wandering out in the streets. Great pedestrian connectivity here. Stapleton has significant connections on all sides. More than a dozen connections for pedestrians on all sides of the development . Especially, again, with those regional pathways this is going to be a very walkable development. Great parking is provided . It meets the city code with two spaces and garage , two spaces in the driveway, plus significant on-street parking. Given the significant roadway improvements and frontage improvements on a corner like this, the development's going to be phased in, but those improvements are going to be front loaded and so with the first phase, which is down in the southeast area, the entire improvements along South Meridian Road will be done with that first phase. So, even up against phase three that will be finished with phase one. Phase two similarly up in the northwest area, but all of the Harris Street improvements will be done all the way out to Meridian Road. So, along phase two and phase three that will all be done front loaded with phase two and the central community park will be done in phase two. Phase Three is up in the northeast and , then, the phase four is in the Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 39 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 33 of 55 southwest when the regional pathway will be completed along the Williams Pipeline. So, there is only two places where we are asking for a change to the staff recommended conditions. So, I would like to walk through those. First, staff has requested a vehicular connection to the west and as you heard Sonya say tonight, she's clarifying that she really wants a local street connection to the west. That's the -- the condition she's asking for. In prior development applications to the west , those Graycliff Estates, the city did not require that either, between these portions of the R-40 property and the subdivision there or a local street to our property. The owner of that R-4 property still is not asking for a local street connection to Stapleton. They just want an emergency connection, which we provide. That's that upper green arrow. The R-40 property also has emergency access to the single family portion of the Graycliff Estates, which is that lower green arrow and that's the same owner and developer of both of those properties. So , if the city now has determined that they want the R-40 property to have a local street connection, then, the appropriate place for that is in Graycliff and that's for several reasons. The only place that this could be added into our design without their projects ' trips exceeding our street capacities is along the collector segment at the north end. This means that it doesn't really gain any new connectivity or traffic dispersion, because those trucks are still going right up to Harris Street and they already have a direct connection to Harris Street, except what it does create is a cut through. It cuts right through the corner of our development. ACHD looked at that exact issue and specifically directed that the R-40 traffic should connect directly to Harris, not to Harris through Stapleton. Further the single family portion of Graycliff Estates provides connection to multiple roadways, not just to Harris. They have got a connection to the west that goes to this new collector that will eventually connect all the way from Harris Street to Amity. They have got street connection to the south. Street connection to the east going over to the future mixed use and commercial retail area and they have got that existing emergency access between the two that could be built upon. The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed this issue at length. They uniformly believe that staff 's proposed street connection to Stapleton was a bad idea. They asked whether or not they could make that change and the recommendation and they were told that they could not, that that was a Council level decision, but they noted several times that they wanted that in the record to be communicated to the Council. It's not clear that the UDC does require this particular local street connection . The code provision that Sonya referenced says all subdivisions must provide local street access to any use that currently takes direct access from an arterial or collector street. That use is not currently permitted or in existence, hasn't been constructed, there is no conditional use permit for apartments, it's just zoned. But in any case the more important part of that -- that code provision to note is that it can be waived by City Council and so to the extent you think that applies we are asking you to waive that. Staff did raise the concern that the pipeline company might want to limit the number of crossings and that would be in between those two sections and Graycliff Estates. That shouldn't be an issue, because there is already an emergency access required there, but to confirm we did reach out to the pipeline company and asked if there was any limit on crossings and they confirmed that there is not and we did provide that response to staff. So , we are asking for this -- these staff conditions that all relate to this vehicular connection just to be clarified to require emergency access only, which we are happy to provide. Second condition of issue -- it deals with the timing for the traffic signal at Harris . There is a condition of Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 40 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 34 of 55 approval in staff's proposed condition 1-D that requires that we construct that signal with phase two. ITD and ACHD control this intersection. They control the timing of when a signal can be built here. It is completely out of our control. What is within our control is contributing our fair share of the cost of that signal and so both agencies recognize that this development is just one of many contributors to the impacts of this signal. A CHD carefully analyzed the trips that we are generating compared to others and determined that our fair share is 25 percent and they imposed a condition of approval for us to contribute that 25 percent and we will do so. We just want to make sure that there is not a condition of approval coming out of the city that requires an impossible timing, that we can't construct that signal before it has been warranted. We are asking for access to Meridian Road. We are asking the Council to modify the access standards to allow access at the quarter mile. As a little history -- and you heard some of this from Sonya. As part of the previous Hawkins project in 2012, three access points were approved along this stretch, which includes all of the property you see in this image here. The Stapleton development and the Hawkins portion remains to the south . That was approved by the City of Meridian and ITD. In fact, they were constructed pursuant to permits issued by ITD. So, the accesses are currently there. Of the two access points that are on the Stapleton portion of this development, we are agreeing to forego one of them and asking for approval to continue using the one on the bottom. The southern end puts it centrally located and can serve our property and the Hawkins property and this is necessary for our development. It allows us to disperse the traffic throughout our local streets , so that we can achieve that density that the city desires and also that quality neighborhood and housing product that's in demand for the city. This access is also critical for the future commercial development to the south. I think this Council is well aware of how important access points are for commercial develop -- development to successfully site on a project like this. ACHD approved that road layout with the access point. ITD carefully considered all of the traffic patterns and determined the access at that location was appropriate. They conditioned the access on right-in, right-out, left-in movements and on construction of a median to safely navigate those movements to protect those movements and they also required construction of a southbound turn lane along Meridian Road. We are in agreement with all of the conditions imposed by IT D. Based on that ITD recommendation you have the authority to approve this access by modification and we would withdraw our variance request. The last slide here, just to summarize, the -- what we are asking you here, we do ask for approval of the application that's been submitted in accordance with the staff report and all of the conditions , with the exception of the two that I identified already, clarifying that that vehicular connection to the west is emergency only and to strike that requirement to construct the signal at Harris with phase two. We will do that in accordance with the ACHD conditions and we are asking for approval of the modification. We have had great positive neighbor comments as you heard from the summary from the Commission. We had eight individuals testify in support and none against. That never happens to developments I'm working on, so it seems worth noting. And they were really nice comments about the great quality housing, the location, the price points, how the neighborhood feel and the amenities -- so, I mean really exciting stuff that they have had success in your city and -- and have now found a new great location for this project and hope that you will agree and be in support and I will hand out just that same last page, just so you have it in front of you, if you're inclined to approve, so that you have that in Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 41 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 35 of 55 front of you when you make the motion and I will do that when I end, but I would stand for any questions in the meantime. Borton: Great. Thank you, Deb. Council, any questions? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Deb, thanks for being here. A couple just clarifying questions. As it pertains to the staff recommendation to A-2-E, A-3-G, requiring that local street connection, when did staff communicate that to you? It sounded like from your testimony like that somewhere through this process that the requirement from staff for that to be a local street connection changed. I'm just curious about when that happened. Nelson: Council President and Council Member Cavener, we knew of staff's desire to have a vehicular connection there early on. That wasn't a surprise. I didn't mean to suggest that. I just was noting Sonya's comment this evening that she's changing the language from vehicular to local street. Did I capture what you said correctly there? Yes. Cavener: Great. Appreciate it. One additional question. Deb, talk to me about the rationale behind having that beautiful park piece coming in with phase two, as opposed to phase one. I just know that we hear all the time when -- and it's not casting light on anybody, but it's -- we see something in a -- in a design and, then, what actually gets built is something different and I also know as someone who moved into a neighborhood how my kids wanted those amenities, you know, right away. So, help me understand why phase two versus phase one. Nelson: Absolutely. Mr. President, Council Member Cavener, it's a good question, but in this -- in the scale and the phasing that we have laid out here there are significant improvements already front loaded into phase one and only 52 lots and so it's a small number of lots carrying a large number of improvements already. There is also some feasibility with infrastructure of getting up to that park from the existing streets and so it's designed and built within the phase that makes the most sense with the surrounding streets and infrastructure and, then, the timing here, they are going to bring in each phase right at the end of the next -- of the prior phase with one phase coming in each season and so before you have really got residents that are there enjoying first phase, the second one's already going to be close on its heels and so it's going to be a short window. It does keep the construction of the park and amenities and all that in the phase where the homes are also being constructed. It kind of segregates that impact. But, then, it's quickly brought online. Milam: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Milam. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 42 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 36 of 55 Milam: I will piggyback on that question. So, is the intent, then, to do those improvements the beginning of phase two or at the end of phase two or -- so that maybe that could appease any -- Nelson: Council Member President, Council Member Milam, at the beginning. Milam: Okay. Thank you. That's -- that's almost the end of phase one; right? Nelson: That's right. Milam: The next day. Borton: Council, any other questions of the applicant? Deb, I had one question on the -- facilitating the construction of the signalization on 69 -- Nelson: Uh-huh. Borton: Highway 69. Is the payment of that proportional share -- does that occur in phase two or is there some other trigger in the ACHD staff report as to when those funds are provided? Nelson: Mr. President, the ACHD condition requires that that be paid prior to the final plat, if we haven't already had a warrant that required construction. Borton: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Thank you much. Nelson: Okay. I will pass this out. Borton: Mr. Clerk, do we have any signups? Johnson: Mr. President, there are several. First is Dennis Green. Borton: So -- we got you, but we are going to make you put on the record what you were trying to say. Go ahead and give us your name and -- Dilmore: Will Dilmore. 5854 North Rosepoint Place, Boise. 83713. The members that signed up just want to go on record that they are in favor -- the individuals that signed up just want to go on record that they are in favor, as well as I am, but were not able to stay and speak. Borton: Okay. Thanks for being here. Johnson: And, Mr. President, for the record there were five signed in in favor wishing to testify. Borton: Okay. You want to go ahead and read those names that you have got. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 43 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 37 of 55 Johnson: I can do that. It was Dennis Green, Debbie Jeske, Ronnie Winks, Randy Nelson and Brandon Whallon. Borton: Great. Any other names that were called that just changed their mind and now -- I just want to make sure you got a shot to testify. Okay. Yes, sir. Come on forward. Welcome. Thanks for being here. Whallon: Thank you, Mr. President. My name is Brandon Whallon. Address is 855 West Broad in Boise, Idaho. I represent Hawkins Companies. So, we are absolutely in support of this application with Stapleton. As we stated earlier, we had a master site plan for a mixed use regional commercial development, which also contained a housing element. As we negotiated the access issue with ITD and the City of Meridian, it kind of protracted out the approval process and the major tenant that we had that would have been the anchor for the -- the mixed use regional retail center, we lost them to another property and since, then, the retail market has really been up ended. So, at this moment, you know, we think that the Stapleton Subdivision is a suitable use of the property. We have every intention of augmenting that with a mixed use office, residential and retail development, but as was stated earlier, the approval of ITD having that access point is crucial for us to have a successful and productive mixed use regional type of development there on the property. So, as stated earlier, we are absolutely one hundred percent in support of this application and I would stand for any questions that you may have. Borton: Thank you for being here and sharing that. Bernt: Council President Borton? Borton: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: So -- so, to confirm, you are going to do office, retail, commercial -- not to -- I'm not going to hold you to the exact layout of what was presented in this application, but you know, similar to that in the south? Whallon: Councilman President and Councilman Bernt, that's absolutely correct. We did put together a rough bubble plan -- Bernt: Right. Whallon: -- that did show those types of uses and we have every intention of doing that and having it as intensely of a development as we can do, mixing maybe multi-family residential, office, and retail. Bernt: President Borton? Borton: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: Any reason why you wouldn't? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 44 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 38 of 55 Whallon: No. Absolutely not. That was the intent when we purchase d the property. As stated earlier, the retail world has -- Bernt: Right. Whallon: -- kind of shifted and so we are still trying to figure that out, but we are trying to find the highest and best use of that property, so we need the regional mixed use designation of the Comprehensive Plan. Bernt: Perfect. Borton: Council, any other questions? Whallon: Thank you. Borton: Thank you again. Bongiorno: President Borton, if I may? Over here. Fire marshal. Borton: Yes, sir. Bongiorno: I just wanted to let you -- when we first saw this -- when we -- I'm talking of police and I -- first viewed this preliminary application we had mentioned that having traffic cross Highway 69 to turn left out of Harris is a bad thing, because it's not just their subdivision that is going to be utilizing Harris, you already have the subdivision to the north that's utilizing it. You also have the Kentucky Way area up to the northwest that is also utilizing this access point as well. So, that was one of the discussions that probably prompted the whole -- we need a signal there, because it is too dangerous to pull out onto Highway 69 when that's a downhill slope right there in that particular section. At 55 miles an hour it's -- it's going to be fatal. So, I just wanted to bring that to your attention as well. Borton: With that discussion was there any of your concerns that were left unresolved? Bongiorno: No. No. I think -- access as far as -- I mean there are some things that -- that lower access point in phase one will need to be installed and, then, once we start getting through the phases we will -- we will make some accommodations for dead end streets and stuff and, you know, I could work with Laren on that. There shouldn't be any other problems. But for -- for Police and Fire that signal was crucial to this development. Borton: Thank you. Council, any questions of staff in light of that? Any other members of the public that wish to testify? Yes. Welcome. Come forward. Thanks for staying. And give us your name and address and -- LaFever: Hi. My name is Denise LaFever. I'm at 6706 North Salvia Way in Meridian and as we all know we are right in the middle of a Comprehensive Plan and part of our issue was on south of I-84 is there is a sea of residential and not a lot of commercial mixed use. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 45 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 39 of 55 So, when we are looking at this we really need to look at is the mixed use designation fully being utilized the way it's supposed to. And right now this appears to be just a one use residential. The intent of mixed use is not being realized and the bubble plan doesn't include more than 30 acres of future mixed use. Mixed use requires three types of land use and this only has residential currently. There is no guarantee that the -- that the development will come in as promised that we are being submitted. So, that's an issue. And per the staff report it says right in there per staff, project may not be as well integrated as desired by the comp plan. There is a requirement for quasi-public space or public space. This application doesn't meet it. Is there any guarantee that the other applicant will meet it and do they want to bear the cost of that, because you're basically shifting that cost off to them. There should be a collector road to Amity -- Amity for livability, safety, and convenience. I'm not clear on there where you see that. The parking plan as stated by the staff report is inadequate and doesn't offer residents convenience and in some cases reasonable access to parking. The application requires multiple exceptions to the city's plans, transportation corridors multi-use development, open space, vehicle connectivity and CUP without really raising the bar. When I look at the -- the space in here for the open space, a half acre just doesn't seem adequate for the amount of properties that you're putting there. In addition, on the bubble plan there is a multi-family unit that's going in there as well. So, I have some concerns about just raising the bar. That was one of the things that we talked about. That's one of the things the Mayor talked about, raising the bar and, you know, I'm not a hundred percent opposed to this, I just think we need to raise the bar and there needs to be some commitment on here that there is going to be truly a mixed use as designated in here and those components really are going to be met and an understanding of who is going to pay for that quasi-public space and who is going to take care of that public space. I -- I'm not hearing where that's at and is that fair to push all that cost back off onto the other developer and we don't even know if they are going to develop it, so -- and I will say in fairness I have walked the properties over with -- with Devco Development and they are very conscious about when they put properties closer together about making sure there is not light pollution and making sure that the quality of the product that I looked at was a good quality. I'm just thinking that we need to go back through and really raise the bar while we are doing an annexation. Borton: Thank you, Denise. Council, any questions? Bernt: One question -- or one comment. I -- Denise, I had those same -- I had the same concern regard to the property -- or in the south. It almost makes that south to be able to meet the conditions of -- that -- you know, the -- the designation in that area, it almost makes it so that property the owner in the south has to do some -- you know, some -- some commercial and some office and some retail and so do you have any concern that what the Hawkins representative -- you -- do you feel like you reasonably -- they could come through with it what he just said he was going to promise? LaFever: That -- that has already been -- had a proposal once before and the market changes, so there is no guarantees. It would be better if it were coming forward as a co- application, just as Costco and Brighton came together as a co-application. They are going back through in a mixed use designation and, really, honestly, presenting an R-15 Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 46 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 40 of 55 with multi -- multi-family there and so they are not really meeting the true spirit of the zoning without having Hawkins coming and doing a co-application and putting a plan together. There is no guarantees. Things change. Bernt: One -- one point of clarification. Is -- is the Hawkins property -- has that been annexed yet? I'm not sure. It's not? Okay. So, there is your guarantee. LaFever: There is no guarantee if it's not annexed. Bernt: Oh, we -- you know, we can -- as a Council we can -- we can give that direction. LaFever: And -- and, honestly, is it fair to Hawkins? I mean if they want to stand up here and say that's going to be how they develop it, is it fair to them to pick up those additional costs? Bernt: Well, I would agree with your concern. But, again, I -- I think -- when I was reading, you know, this application, I had those exact same concerns, because it almost limits the Hawkins folks to what they can do on their -- on their land. I mean they basically have to do what they are saying that they are going to do and those -- those are the reasons why I asked those questions. LaFever: Well, thanks for asking. Bernt: Yeah. So, I think that -- I think that -- I don't have any reason to believe that the Hawkins Company is not going to do what they are saying they are going to do personally. But I appreciate your concern. LaFever: Thank you. Borton: Thanks, Denise. Anybody else present tonight that wishes to provide some testimony? If not we will have the applicant come back up for summary and some final questions. Nelson: Thank you, Members of the Council. Just a couple of quick items there to respond to. Yes, this is a residential project, but it has three different types of residential. Staff did a great job of walking through and enormous detail in the staff report about how this is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the goals that are in there and in part it is, because of the surrounding mixed use and commercial designations on your future land use map and not just the Hawkins property to the south, but also further south across Amity and east of the property is all mixed use nonresidential and as was learned from the Hawkins project in 2012, the big box retail commercial that was going to take over this entire site wasn't feasible, the market has shifted and so it makes more sense to have that smaller commercial with the interspersed residential and office like they are talking about and, then, they get the benefit of our denser residential next door to support it with rooftops. There was comments about inadequate parking. As I had covered in my presentation, we meet the city code on parking and we also have on-street parking in Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 47 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 41 of 55 addition to what the city code requires. Now, part of that is just supporting a dense development, which staff really wanted here and your comp plan calls for, that you have got narrower lots, but there is still plenty of parking here. She also made the comment that there wasn't enough open space, but as we walked through we exceed the standards in the code for qualified open space and have almost 20 percent overall. So, I think those points are covered largely in my primary presentation , but I would stand for any questions about them. Borton: Thank you, Deb. Council, any questions? Little Roberts: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Sorry. Not on that, but, Deb, back to the light. That really concerns me with the expression of our safety. It sounds like maybe it was further down the road rather than sooner. Do you have any feeling as things get going number wise? It seems like sooner rather than later would be optimal, but I know you're only 25 percent of the cost of the light and it now depends on ITD when it happens. Nelson: Mr. President, Council Member Little Roberts, I appreciate that discussion. In particular President Borton's question of, you know, were all of your concerns addressed when the agencies looked at this, because they did impose requirements about when that signal can come in and -- and who pays for it and I appreciated the response that, yes, they were, because the signal will be built when it is warranted and so those safety concerns that are addressed will be addressed in a timely way. The signal just cannot come in before it is warranted. The agencies that control the roadway where the signal would go in have jurisdiction in determining when it comes in and so they are going to determine that. When the warrants cause the signal to be built, it will be constructed. Little Roberts: Thank you. Follow up? Deb, did they give you any numbers like the road is at -- the intersection -- is it this number and when we get to this number is when it will be built or do we think it will take a year? Do we think it will take six months?. Nelson: Mr. President, Council Member Little Roberts, yes, that was studied in the traffic impact study, which makes estimates about growth and background. So, yes, they look at all those numbers of what they expect the growth numbers to come in around and whenever a development -- whether it's us or another development -- triggers that warrant, they will have to construct the signal at that time. If it's not us, then, we will have our 25 percent share that goes into that road trust that they will use. If it's us, then, other people will have to pay us back. Little Roberts: Thank you. Nelson: Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 48 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 42 of 55 Borton: Any other questions? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I have got a quick one for staff, but I don't want Deb to have to sit down and have to get back up, so I guess, Sonya, if you can -- I'm still trying to wrap my head around in the staff report this requirement of a vehicle connection versus a local street connection. Help me understand the difference between the two and why the change. Allen: Council, it's -- the UDC requires a local street connection. That's the difference. A local street as a public street versus just a driveway connection. That's what the code calls for. It also allows for a Council waiver to that requirement. I did ask for a change to that provision from just a vehicular connection to a local street because of that. Cavener: Thank you. Great. Borton: Any other questions? I have got a couple for you. One on that point, I -- quite frankly, I agree with -- with staff and I appreciate your input in -- in stating that the local connection applies. There might be unique circumstances, which I think you have, quite frankly, described to warrant a waiver, you know, unique to this situation that might grant it, but I think the fact that the -- that adjacent property to the west hasn't yet developed doesn't eliminate the requirement. I think when you look at what's the intent of that requirement, you know, to try and ensure you have got those public street connections to full access -- this is off these arterial, my sense is that's why that requirement is there and the fact that it's not built yet doesn't eliminate the -- the purpose behind it. So, I do think what -- what you have described is a unique circumstance that warrants a waiver. In this case maybe not in other cases, but -- so, I -- I appreciate the inclusion of the local street. On the access to Highway 69, it's -- it's not requested to be a full access; is that correct? Nelson: Mr. President, that's correct. Borton: Okay. Nelson: We are in agreement with ITD's condition that it be limited to three turning movements. Borton: So, at least one question. What -- if -- if you had requested full access and ITD said what they said, would we be allowed to grant full access without a variance? This is kind of a wonky question, but I was curious. When I first read it I thought the request was for full access. ITD authorized something less. So, would we even be authorized to grant full access in light of ITD's more limited approval? Nelson: Mr. President, I don't believe you could. ITD has jurisdiction over that roadway. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 49 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 43 of 55 Borton: Yeah. Nelson: And so if they limit us to three turning movements, that's all we can construct. Borton: Okay. That makes sense. One other comment and one other question. I think the end cap landscape feature on this -- and I have seen it in some of the developments -- is really a great way to soften the edges on. I think it's a great design. I have seen it done well in other developments in the community and this is a good example of it. I also think that -- that Denise brings up a good point and it's something we are challenged with and you do a lot of land use development around the valley -- Nelson: Uh-huh. Borton: -- but when you have got a -- kind of a blob, for lack of a better term, of a mixed use regional area that is not constrained by the parcels themselves, she brings up a good point that we wrestle with. Granted you have multiple -- different types of residential, but it does seem to gobble up a large part of one type of what mixed regional -- constraining the remaining parcels, how do you assist elected officials in reconciling the -- the constraint we are placing on what we intend in that region as a whole? Nelson: Mr. President, I appreciate the opportunity. I mean as you know your -- your plan is a guide and particularly when you look at those big areas just as blocked designations like you see in that future land use map in that area, clearly you couldn't have all high -- you know, high intensity commercial on every single one of those corners in the sizes that they are and have that succeed. So , in my opinion -- and, really, I mean your staff are the planning experts on this, but from -- in my experience of siting these, you have to think about the uses that make sense as they come in and that's dictated a little bit by land ownership; right? And when a project is ready and a particular landowner sees that there is a good opportunity for their product, they are going to bring it forward and you're going to look generally at your plan and see does this make sense and generally comport and that's the analysis that Sonya did in her staff report, to go through and determine why this use is appropriate and consistent with your plan. It does put a little bit of pressure on the subsequent properties that things are eaten up. I mean I do think that's natural. But if you evaluate each one to say, yes, this makes sense and here are the reasons it makes sense, you know, that's why I kind of walked through I think that great transition from the larger lot single family that's north and west to the commercial that's to the south o f us and in particular with no residential being anticipated currently in your plan to the east, you have got a lot of room to fill in some residential there before it's eaten up. Does that help answer your question? Borton: It does. It -- it describes that balancing act I guess we have and that discretionary role, to make sure we don't lose sight of what Councilman Bernt is saying that -- Nelson: Right. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 50 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 44 of 55 Borton: -- we got to recognize we are putting a little heavier burden on different uses to the south of the mixed use regional. Nelson: Mr. President, if I could follow up. You're also helping them, because they need rooftops and they need density and they need connections to them and this project really -- it coincides with that Hawkins property. It was designed with them in mind. It provides the connections they need, it provides the access that they need, so it really enhances their opportunity to bring that forward. Borton: Thank you. Council, any other questions for the applicant? Nelson: Thank you very much. Borton: Thank you, Deb. Appreciate it. Staff, was there anything that we missed or should be addressing that we haven't covered ? Allen: No, I don't believe so, Council President. Thank you. Borton: Police, Fire, anything? No? Okay. Council, you have heard all of the staff comment, public comment and from the -- from the applicant. How do you wish to proceed? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I move that we close the public hearing on Item 11 -C, Stapleton Subdivision, H-2018-0129. Milam: Second. Borton: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item 11 -C. All those in favor say aye. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Borton: Any discussion amongst the Council? Bernt: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Bernt. Bernt: I'm -- I'm generally in support of this project. The first thing that came to mind was exactly what Denise spoke about earlier in regard to putting -- to -- to fill the -- the land use -- you know, a future land use in this area would require the southern property, which is Hawkins, to -- you know, to develop more of a -- almost forces them to do something Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 51 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 45 of 55 more commercial, something retail, office space and one of the things -- I was -- I was hesitant to approve this without Hawkins here to be able to confirm that and with -- with -- with the representative from Hawkins here, knowing that that property has not been annexed and we can, you know, provide some guidelines and knowing as a Council we highly recommend that you come back with an application for your project that you bring something back with something commercial -- you know, office-related, retail-related in order to fulfill this -- this land use designation. So, I think the application is -- is good. Unfortunately, I would love to have 50 percent open space in every development that comes before us. That would be fantastic. I'm highly in support of that, although that's not what's required for the developers that come in before us and so there is not a whole lot we can do when a developer comes and say, you know, they -- they fulfill the requirements that we ask of them and it's important as a Council, in my opinion, to be consistent with that. It's what the development community deserves and expects from this body and so they know there is discussion in regard to that, you know, what may or may not happen going forward, but -- so, I think that they have done a great job with the amenities. No concerns there. So, I'm in support of the project. Milam: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Milam. Milam: I support this project. I think it's a good project. It has lots of foliage, which is very appealing, and that is one heck of a tot lot, I just have to let you guys know. Thank you very much. My -- my only concern is the signal, which they, obviously, have no control over, so unless they had a STARS agreement or something with -- to put it in and, then, get reimbursed later, I just -- I don't see how we can constrain the -- the approval with that. So, it stinks, it's -- you know, it's not a great situation, but it is what it is and it's out of their control. So, I'm good. Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I'm going to echo a lot of the comments that were made in Planning and Zoning. I mean this is a no brainer. This is the right location for this type of product. I love the diversity of housing. We need more of that in south Meridian. So, my grumbles and gripes about little things here or there are not that big of an issue in terms of when it comes to a good project. So, I'm happy to support a motion or make a motion, if nobody else wants to speak, and I will navigate through this if needed. Borton: Was there -- as part of that was there any concern over the requested waiver of local street connections and instead allowing the emergency connection as proposed by the applicant? Cavener: So, Mr. President, that is a consideration. I think that if I were to make a motion -- and this is where I would ask for help from staff or legal -- to make sure that the motion Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 52 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 46 of 55 would incorporate the appropriate waiver for that to be an emergency access. I have wrestled with that particular piece, but I ultimately feel the explanation from the developer or developer's representative sufficient enough for -- for my sake in making a motion. I'm a big supporter of connectivity and would like to always see more connectivity, as opposed to less connectivity, but I think in this particular circumstance a waiver, if that's the appropriate vehicle, is something I would support. So, it would be contemplated should I be the one who is making the motion. All right. Mr. President, here we go. Let's see if I can not screw this up. Mr. President, I move we approve Item 11 -C, Stapleton Subdivision, H-2018-0129, include all applicant, staff and public testimony with special consideration for Items A-2-E and A-3-G, that a waiver be provided to the applicant for emergency access, as opposed to a local street connection. There is another request that I have -- so, as it pertains to -- oh. To ITD's letter I deem as adequate, so I'm supportive of vacating or -- that variance. I guess I don't -- so, my -- that would be my motion, Mr. President. Borton: I will second the motion for some discussion. Questions? No questions, no discussion, nothing to add? Nary: Mr. President, the request also was on the signal be done as warranted and not required -- tied to the phase, as was in the staff report and I just wanted to make sure, I -- I think I'm -- I'm certain this is what Council Member Cavener meant, but you are basically allowing them to withdraw the variance for the access and granting the modification under the code provision in 11 -3AH3. Cavener: Mr. President. I guess two points. I think -- yes, Mr. Nary, your recollection or your report or review is correct. I didn't address Condition 1-D pertaining to the signal, because that's -- I didn't think that's a determination that we can make. So, if we need to remove that piece from the staff report, I'm supportive of amending my motion to include that. I just didn't know -- since it doesn't pertain to us if we should, so -- Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council -- Borton: Mr. Nary. Nary: -- you would -- since it is a directive to be included as a requirement and so you would be removing that requirement and following the ITD recommendation that they provide the cost share with it and it be done when warranted by ITD. Cavener: So, Mr. President, based on that I would like to amend my motion to include striking the requirement to construct a signal at Harris with phase two, but only to provide the appropriate cost share for the time deemed by ITD for the construction of a signal. Borton: Second agree? Yes. That's me. So, any other discussion? Any question on what the motion is? Crystal clear? Cavener: Mr. President? Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 53 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 47 of 55 Borton: Yes. Cavener: Just want to make sure for staff. You're good with that? I know I muddied that up pretty bad tonight. It's been a long day. My apologies. Borton: They got it all. Cavener: All right. Thank you. Appreciate Council's patience. Borton: And we are good? No questions? Mr. Clerk. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. D. Public Hearing for East Ridge No. 1 (H-2019-0041) by Devco Development, LLC, Located on the North Side of E . Lake Hazel Rd, West of S . Eagle Rd. 1. Request: A City Council Review to allow the 40 foot irrigation easement graphically depicted along the rear boundary of Lots 5-10 and a portion of Lot 11, Block 1 to remain as an easement on the buildable lots rather than contained in a common lot Borton: Thank you, everybody. We have one -- one public hearing left. Item 10-D. 10-D is a public hearing on Eastridge No. 1. It's a City Council review of an irrigation easement issue. We will begin this public hearing with staff comment. Thank you. Leonard: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. The last project before you this evening is for City Council review of an irrigation easement, as previously stated. The site consists of 41 acres of land. It's zoned R-4 and is located north of East Lake Hazel Road and west of South Eagle Road. In 2017 the property was annexed and received preliminary plat approval for East Ridge Estates with 139 buildable lots and seven common lots on 41 acres. In 2018 the final plat was approved with a condition regarding the irrigation easement that we are speaking of tonight. The request is for a City Council review to allow the Grimmett Lateral within a 40 foot irrigation easement along the rear boundary of Lots 5 through 10 and a portion of Lot 11 , Block 1, to remain as an easement on buildable lots, rather than being contained in the common lot in accord with UDC 11- A -- 11 -3A-6B. A condition was included in the final plat in 2018 and was discussed during the hearing at the time in July -- July 17th, requiring the applicant to either place the irrigation easement in a common lot or seek Council modification to include it as part of the adjacent buildable lots. Due to the -- due to the topography of the area several lots within this development are located within a sloped appeasement. The lots in question contain both the sloped easement, as well as the Grimmett Lateral irrigation easement. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 54 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 48 of 55 Staff has received public testimony in regard to the maintenance and the erosion resulting from the sloped easement existing within buildable lots in this development. These concerns have been echoed throughout the area due the -- due to the topography of the area, especially in this part of Meridian. Similar sloped easements exist in Sky Mesa and Southern Highlands north of the subject property. Staff does understand these concerns. However, they are not applicable to the subject application. A staff report was submitted by the Boise Project Board of Control. At the time of the preliminary plat and annexation application indicating their preference to keep the easement unencumbered -- and to get further clarification for this staff report, staff did contact the Boise Project and was informed that their irrigation district does not want any portion of the 40 foot easement within buildable lots. Staff -- staff finds the best location for the easement is within a common lot in accord with UDC 11-3A-6D, location of the easement within a common lot will provide an easily accessible easement for the irrigation district and will ensure that future residents will not be responsible for maintain ing an unusable 40 foot part of their rear of the property. Locating the easement within a common lot may also provide potential code enforcement issues in the future and into our issues with the irrigation district may incur upon homeowners. Written testimony was received from Laddie and Andrea Tlucek against the subject application with concern regarding weeds and erosion associated with the slope along the rear of lots, with reference to slope easements within common lots. And Susan Karnes, who is requesting denial of the application with concern regarding erosion, weeds, lack of watering and general maintenance -- maintenance issues associated with slope easements. Staff recommends the applicant locate the irrigation easement within a common lot and obtain approval of a final plat modification prior to obtaining city engineer signature on the final plat. Revised landscape plan shall be submitted with that final plat modification, indicating landscaping in accord with Boise Project Control's allowances. So, with that staff will stand for any questions. Borton: Thank you. Council, any questions? Mr. Conger. Welcome. Thanks for being here tonight. Conger: You bet. Borton: Through all of it. Conger: Oh, it's a great night. Mr. President, Members of the Council, Jim Conger. 4824 West Fairview Avenue. In front of you -- this is, obviously, our -- one of our final plats -- we will have three ultimately on this project. This particular one is the estate lots, which is our phase one. It's that little gray strip that you see in the corner -- corner up to the east boundary to the midpoint. Basically, yes, if you call any irrigation district they will say we would love to have our easement in a common area. When you go through the 14 month process to create this deed that was a deed created in 1940 that I got to re -up, because I'm moving a portion of it and that takes 14 months, you go through this entire process and you get brand new language that doesn't say put me in a common lot. They know it's a residential development. So, this in front of you is our deed easement and it's the language that says, hey, we get the use and enjoyment of our property, because you can imagine in 1940 when they negotiated their first lease if they w ould have told that Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 55 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 49 of 55 farmer you don't get to do anything on this property, they would have got thrown off the property before the easement got written, but -- but it does say I cannot, you know, erect buildings and structures or permission, actually, to the public to access -- oh, that makes sense, so -- so this is, obviously, what the language is. We -- we don't want to go any -- any -- use the property any more than what this easement allows with Project Board of Control. We are not interfering with the easement. It will function the same and I -- I think, really, what it comes down to is when we -- when we went through this process of getting an approval, we heard it from -- I think we had 50 neighbors in here, as you all -- some of you all remember and the Council kept saying this is the rim, we want you to go back, we want estate size homes on the rim in Meridian, we don't -- we don't have a lot of that and this is a good spot for that. We bought into that statement . We went back, redrew our project and came back with estate lots and actually worked very hard with the neighbors, specifically the adjacent neighbor to the west Kathy Bumgardner was a -- very much a champion in those negotiations and we came back with our smaller product out towards like Lake Hazel where it belongs and preserved the rim lots. These are half acre lots to three quarter acre lots. Point of all of this is we don't need to make these lot smaller. People live and want to say they are on a half acre and we have all the way up to three quarters of an acre lot. But you -- we start reducing the square footage where all of a sudden I don't have estate lots. Yes, maybe estate lots to sell, but also that, you know, people, even though they are not using them, want -- want the benefit to say that they have the half acre home site. Now, this -- we -- as we all know we had the wettest February since -- for about 40 years. We get about 12 inches of rain in this valley a year. We got 11 inches up to April 10th. So, I'm just saying we have struggled with our -- our slopes, because we built them all winter and we haven't been able to go finish prep them. I just got the irrigation and the trees put in it and that will get looking good. But the point of this is -- if I go back and forth, you can see the yellow area. Forget about the irrigation easement for a minute. During our preliminary plat process we were allowed the approval through that process to create -- our home sites go to the edge of our properties as you see on the right screen, but we have what's called a slope easement that we committed to in the approval process to have our HOA maintain these. We -- we didn't actually fight that at all. We think it's a great idea. So, the thought of the letters that just came in over the last couple days that this is -- this easement, which is down in the gravel area mind you, that you can see where we are just finishing that, you know, the irrigation districts, if -- if you need 12 feet they want about 30 feet of gravel just in case. So , the point of this is we are a little sliver that's already encumbered by the use easement. I, as the developer, in putting the wrought iron across the top , which you can see has not started yet, that entire area was too muddy from the winter we had and we had to remove a couple feet and put it back in, but the point of that being is we will have wrought iron across the top. Our plat, which I continue to show you, that dashed line of where the yellow is, is the encumbrance that we put on that -- that the rest of the balance will be maintained by the HOA. So, as much as we agree with -- with code and even staff on you should usually do a common lot , I'm calling that a small lot concept. I don't believe in a -- in an environment where we have these bigger lots , that it makes sense that you have to do the common lot in the back of these. We are already addressing it in the CC&Rs, which will be recorded. My last point of this -- and I think it comes back to the estate lots and the city and ourselves, we bought the property, pretty proud of this rim and Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 56 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 50 of 55 Black Rock is proud of their homes on the rim -- is I have done probably five, six or seven foothills projects in my lifetime in Boise and this is reminiscent of my foothills days in Boise. If you want to estate lots and you want lots that are on slopes and hills, you're going to have a portion of these lots that are encumbered and not usable by the -- by the homeowner. That's normal. But you always give them their three quarters of an acre or their half an acre. No one's going to come up in here and -- and live on a 10,000 square foot pad or lot and -- with the view and everything, you just don't encumber that in a common area. So, we -- I will stop now, but, basically, everything functions. The maintenance of the slope area is not up for question today, but the maintenance of the irrigation easement, we need it by the HOA, it's already encumbered and says in my plat it's going to be by the HOA. Whether that's in a common lot or whether that stays an easement as I'm requesting or even borderline begging, it's going to function identical and be maintained by the HOA. That's it. I definitely would stand for any questions. Borton: Thank you, Jim. Conger: And I would definitely love to have an easement. Borton: Council, questions? So, I do, if I could. So, the -- remind me -- and I apologize, I got myself sideways thinking back and trying to figure this out. The slope easement also the irrigation easement, do they overlap? Conger: Yes. President Borton, the -- the slope easement is in this case for -- is my green area and the road area. The irrigation easement is just the road area. So , if we come back to this screen, the orange is, hey, we are taking a highlighter strip across here, but the yellow is slightly bigger. Now, at the very south end they match. That orange and yellow are the same area. At the very south end, which is the bottom. Borton: And the portion of the slope easement to the north, are those all within the private parcel ownership, yet maintained by the HOA? Conger: One hundred percent. Great question. So, if you look at my yellow areas, the white areas are the pads and where my wrought iron fence will be -- Borton: Right. Conger: -- the yellow are -- you can see -- let's -- let's go up to the upper right corner. You can see where the lot lines go all the way to the end of the yello w in every one of those. So, they are all identical. The residential lot is -- the entire area of the slope easement is the yellow inside of a residential lot that will be maintained by the HOA . Borton: Got you. Conger: Not complicated in the documents, though. It's in -- it's extremely easy in the -- in the master decoration. We have already done that, so -- Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 57 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 51 of 55 Borton: Okay. So, the concern of maintenance -- consistent maintenance and weed abatement, et cetera, that is taken care of in the orange as it is the yellow, since they overlap throughout the area? Conger: Present Borton, that is correct. They are -- that's already accounted for in the CC&Rs as they are written, because of the slope area easement. Correct. Borton: Council, any questions? Little Roberts: President Borton? Borton: Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: Jim, so if it stays an irrigation easement, then, the HOA can maintain it and have control over weeds and things like that? Because I know that that's not always a top priority. Nothing against irrigation entities. Cavener: Yes. Mr. President and City Council Member Little Roberts, yes, the -- the whole point of the yellow area is because of the weeds and -- and any of them and we are actually -- we put in an irrigation system when we had our original approval that wasn't a requirement. We were going to dry land that. We went and spent a lot of time in our other developments in Boise in the foothills and you just don't get -- we think this is a prominent look from Eagle Road, so we went in and put the irrigation -- and, actually, if you look at our landscape plan, we have doubled the trees and everything on that as well. But that is just some self gratification I said out loud. The real answer to that question is, yes, we will be maintaining weeds in that road , because it's in that same HOA managed area. Yes. Little Roberts: Thank you. Conger: Perfect. Borton: Council, any other questions? Okay. Conger: Thank you so much. Borton: Thank you, Jim. You bet. Mr. Clerk, do we have any signups? Johnson: We had Andrea Sheldon sign up, I do not believe she is here. Borton: Okay. And, Denise, do you want to come -- come forward. LaFever: Denise LaFever. 6706 North Salvia Way. Meridian. There is only two really concerns is that it's really clear that when it comes to the weeds that somebody is taking care of it, so you don't end up with a fire issue from burning. And, then, the one concern I have, if I were buying a lot there and that irrigation easement was there, I would want to Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 58 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 52 of 55 have it really clear that there is some real restrictions in what I can do with my property. So, when you go back and you include that as -- as your acreage, but you have all these restrictions, you don't really have the right to your property. So, not opposed per se, but I think they really need to make it clear that you don't have the full rights and you can't just go plant whatever you want, do whatever you want with it. So, that's my only -- that's my only concerns is that it's just really clear that they -- will the HOA have access, can they fence their our yard, you know, how is the HOA going to have access to the property. So, just a couple things to think about. Borton: Okay. Thanks, Denise. Anyone else from the public who wishes to provide some testimony? From everybody and anybody? Want to make some final comments, maybe address Denise's question? Conger: Mr. President, Members of the Council, Jim Conger again. Yeah, I could have made it a little clearer on that use easement, which is outside the fence. We actually -- those homeowners are severely restricted. We don't want them plan ting a blade of grass on it. It is a hundred percent maintained by the HOA and if there is additional plantings it has to be through the HOA itself. It's delineated by a legal description on the plat and I'm talking about how it's delineated in the CC&Rs and it's also delineated in layman's terms by the wrought iron and everything below the wrought iron. So, we -- we wanted layman's terms, so an individual wouldn't think they can go out there , plus we did it legally to -- to get it. Now, the point of that is we don't want a doghouse, we don't want a viewing center, we don't want a cute little couple having wine glasses in a little table out there, that slope is not made for any of that. This access road for the irrigation easement is just part and parcel of the whole bigger picture and it's already -- it's already addressed in the CC&Rs. Borton: One of the questions was a concern over access. Is there anything that would restrict the HOA's access to the irrigation company blocking something that might prevent you from doing that maintenance? I think that was one of the questions. Conger: I -- Mr. President, Members of the Council, yeah, I heard Denise's comment was she was worried that the HOA would have access to it. Borton: Right. Conger: I -- I am more than happy to show her our landscape plan and how -- the fence plan and how that's all a hundred percent open. That whole yellow area is a hundred percent unfenced. Our fencing is at the top, which is at the white area its access is already granted through the plat for the HOA to maintain it. But there is no access issues. We do not want it fenced and unencumbered. It's not a pathway, but it's maintained by the HOA. Borton: All right. Conger: Yeah. Perfect. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 59 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 53 of 55 Borton: Thanks. Council, any questions? Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: I move we close the public hearing on Item H-2019-0041. Little Roberts: Second. Borton: Moved and seconded to close the public hearing on Item 11 -D. All those in favor say aye. The public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Cavener: Mr. President? Borton: Mr. Cavener. Cavener: Just -- just a comment for Council and it somewhat dovetails in your comments earlier, Council President Borton. This one kind of threw me for a loop, because it was -- you got kind of competing easements and I remember the public hearing and some of the commitments from the developer about this piece of land being maintained by the HOA and to receive comments from the public that kind of question or concern that it kind of threw me for a loop and I say all that just because I want to compliment staff and this is something that I don't do near as often as I should and I would encourage you all to do it. If you get thrown sideways on this that's, why we have such great staff and I was able to connect with them, clarify some of my concerns that I had seen on Friday and feel confident in my decision. Appreciate the applicant being here and just reiterating that for the record. I think that this is to me a -- a very easy request, one I'm happy to support. So, Mr. President, I move that we approve the request and I guess request and approve the Council's approval of the 40 foot irrigation easement to be contained -- or not contained as a common lot to be left -- essentially, we ask it to be left as is -- as an easement. Great. Irrigation easement. On a buildable lot. Thank you. Boy, I am -- Little Roberts: Second. Borton: It's been moved and seconded to approve the application in 11 -D, allowing the easements to remain on buildable lots. Any discussion ? If not, Mr. Clerk. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 60 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 54 of 55 Item 12: Ordinances A. Ordinance No. 19-1824: Authorizing Community Service Officers to Enforce Fire Code Parking Regulations Borton: Thanks for your patience. Item No. 12, Ordinance No. 19-1824. We will have this ordinance read by title only. Mr. Clerk. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. President. Ordinance 19-1824, authorizing community service officers to enforce fire code parking regulations. Borton: Short and sweet. You have heard this ordinance read in its entirety -- or read in its title. Anyone want to heard it read in its entirety? No. Good answer. Council, what's your pleasure? Little Roberts: Mr. President? Borton: Mrs. Little Roberts. Little Roberts: I move that we approve Ordinance 19-1824 with suspension of rules. Cavener: Second. Borton: It's been moved and seconded the motion to approve Ordinance 19-1824 with suspension of rules. If there is no discussion, Mr. Clerk. Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; L ittle Roberts, yea; Bernt, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Future Meeting Topics Borton: That brings us to the end of the agenda. Is there a motion to adjourn? Little Roberts: Mr. President, I move we adjourn. Palmer: Second. Borton: Moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor. Good work. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:40 P.M. Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda May 21, 2019 – Page 61 of 576 Meridian City Council Mary 7, 2019 Page 55 of 55 (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) � 19 MAY /I DE WEERD E APPROVED �Pt�p AUGUST' , ATTEST: Chrid Jobtr sWinter y Clerk B IDIAN� 10 AHC Y W J