HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-05-19 Regular MeetingMeridian City Council May 19, 2020.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:10 p.m., Tuesday, May
19, 2020, by Mayor Robert Simison.
Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Jessica Perreault, Brad
Hoaglun and Liz Strader.
Members Absent: Treg Bernt.
Also present: Chris Johnson, Adrienne Weatherly, Bill Nary, Caleb Hood, Bill Parsons
and Joe Bongiorno.
Item 1: Join the Meeting at https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89365592278 or
by calling 253-215-8782, Webinar ID 893 6559 2278
Item 2: Roll-call Attendance:
__X__ Liz Strader __X__ Joe Borton
__X__ Brad Hoaglun _____ Treg Bernt
__X__ Jessica Perreault __X__ Luke Cavener
__X__ Mayor Robert E. Simison
Simison: Okay. With that I will call this meeting to order. For the record is Tuesday, May
19th, 2020, at 6:10 p.m. We will begin this meeting with roll call attendance.
Cavener: Steve, you might want to turn off -- there we go. Sorry, Mr. Mayor.
Item 3: Pledge of Allegiance
Simison: No problem. Item No. 3 is the Pledge of Allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 4: Community Invocation with Steve Moore of Ten Mile Christian Church
Simison: Council, I'm not going to lie, I think that was our best performance and maybe
having Council President Bernt not present was -- Item No. 4 is our community invocation.
I see we have Pastor Moore with Ten Mile Christian with us. If you all would, please, join
in the invocation or take this as --
Moore: This is Steve Moore and I'm hearing lots of static, but I will give it a try here. Dear
God --
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 2 of 54
Simison: Pastor Moore, I think it's not going to work with whatever is going on
electronically this evening. So, I will just say thank you for the attempt and we will just
have to move on to our next item this evening.
Item 5: Adoption of Agenda
Simison: With that, Council, ask for Item 5, adoption of the agenda.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: We don't have any changes to our agenda this evening , so I move that the
agenda be approved as written.
Cavener: Second.
Borton: Second.
Hoaglun: As written. Thank you.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda is published. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed
nay. The ayes have it. The agenda is adopted.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Future Meeting Topics
Simison: Adrienne, did we have anybody sign up under future meeting topics?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, we did not.
Item 7: Action Items
A. Public Hearing for Frazier Council Review (H-2020-0011)
by Nick Frazier, Located at 5343 N. Maplestone Ave.
1. Request: Council Review to review Director’s approval of
an Accessory Use for Daycare, Family (A-2019-0388).
Simison: Okay. Then we will move into Item 7-A, public hearing for Frazier Council
Review H-2020-0011 and I will turn this over to Caleb Hood.
Hood: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of Council. You have before you a public hearing
for an appeal of your decision on March 24th to revoke an accessory use permit for an in
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 3 of 54
home daycare. So, I'm going to run through the timeline with you real quick and , then, a
little bit of the next steps procedurally for this hearing tonight. So, on December 30 th
planning received an application for an accessory use perm it for a proposed home
occupation daycare for six or fewer children at 5343 North Maplestone Avenue. The
applicant was Mrs. Elisabeth Songe. That -- that address is in Jump Creek Subdivision
just off of Black Cat north of McMillan. On January 2nd planning did issue approval of
that request, subject to compliance with Meridian City Code 11 -439, which is our daycare
standards. In the R-8 zone residents can operate an in home daycare with that
administrative approval for an accessory use permit. On January 22nd planning did
receive a City Council review application, also known as an appeal, and I will probably
refer to it as that going forward, of that daycare approval from Mr. Nick Frazier, an adjacent
property owner. On March 24th that appeal hearing was held. During the meeting the
Council voted to reverse the director's decision to approve the daycare due to insufficient
evidence that a neighborhood meeting was ever held by the applicant. Further, the
Council directed staff to refund Mr. Frazier his appeal fee of 692 dollars. On March 27th
staff did issue -- wrote and -- and sent a revocation letter to Mrs. Songe stating that she
needed to cease the daycare use. On or about April 6th the city received a request from
Mr. Jim Jones representing Mrs. Songe asking Council to reconsider their March 24th
action. So, that's, essentially, what you have before you tonight is a reconsideration of
your March 24th decision. So, this is essentially a do over of that hearing on March 24 th.
It's my understanding talking with our legal counsel that this process we don't go through
very often, but it is Mr. Frazier who is up first. Again, as it's almost a de facto new public
hearing on that appeal request, so Mr. Frazier will have the first chance to address you
and state his reasons for requesting the director's approval of this be reversed and , then,
Mrs. Songe or her representative can go after that. So, I will stand for any questions
before I -- I turn it back over to you, Mr. Mayor. I will note here about an hour ago or so
when I looked there were 15 different pieces of letter of public input, most of them e-mails,
I believe, from the public on this application. So, I would just direct your attention to that.
I didn't count them, but roughly 50-50 in favor of the daycare and against, but I would just
draw your attention to that -- those pieces of public testimony if you haven't already read
those. So, with that I will stand for any questions you may have.
Simison: Thank you, Caleb. Council, any questions for Mr. Hood or Mr. Nary before we
hear from the applicant and others?
Cavener: Not right now.
Simison: Okay. Thank you. And, Mr. Nary, or -- how much time does Mr. Frazier have?
Does he have ten minutes?
Nary: Whatever your preference is, Mayor. I think we did ten minutes previously.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Frazier, you are recognized for ten minutes.
Frazier: Firstly, please forgive my -- Mr. Mayor, Council Members, firstly please forgive
my lack of proper decorum. I'm a terrible public speaker and not being in person
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 4 of 54
somehow makes it worse. I want to start by highlighting a few sections of the Meridian
ID Unified Development Code. So, from 11-1-2 purpose, E is ensure the most appropriate
use of properties. F is to protect property rights and enhance property values. 11 -1-8,
preservation of private property rights, A is this title shall be interpreted to equally protect
citizens from the undue encroachment on their private property by their neighbor uses --
their neighbors uses of their private property and equally protect each citizen 's right to
use of their property without creating undue burden upon their neighbors. So, given these
portions of unified code I would ask these questions . Given the density of homes in this
neighborhood is a daycare an appropriate use of the property. Does it impose undue
burden upon neighbors? Does having a daycare next door enhance property values? I
believe that given the density of housing and the close ness of the proposed daycare to
my house and others in the neighborhood, including houses presently being built, it is an
undue burden due to noise and activity of children. As property owners in a residential
neighborhood we are all looking for, expecting, and have the right to quiet enjoyment of
a properties. When we live in such high density housing we have to make decisions and
compromises to not unduly interfere with a neighbor's quiet enjoyment. Please note that
I am not alone in this belief. The Council has testimony from several other members of
the neighborhood that they do not want a daycare in the neighborhood. Some in writing,
some came in person to the first Council review. Should we not allow a neighborhood to
have some say about what they want to allow in their neighborhood? I noticed there were
a number of public comments from Mrs. Songe's colleagues who all extol the value of
child care. I do not disagree one bit. Child care is important. It just does not have to
occur in such a residential neighborhood. And note that none of these colleagues are
from this neighborhood. Everyone wants better cell coverage until they put a cell tower
in your backyard. Mrs. Songe appears to have an extremely strong and active support
system. I have great confidence she could get wo rk or even start a daycare center in a
more appropriate commercial area. My house was actually the first to be built in this
particular area. When I first moved in there was merely dirt surrounding my house on all
sides. I had no idea who my neighbors would be. If the situation were different and I was
looking at a house to buy and knew the neighbors ran a daycare I would not consider
buying that house. So, I'm concerned about the impact if I tried to sell my house in the
future. If I would not consider buying a house next to a daycare I have to assume that
would be the case for others as well. So, how does this impact my property value ? In
the end I'm merely asking that each Council Member puts themselves in my shoes and
make a decision accordingly. I thank the Council for its time and consideration in this
matter. And that is -- that is my time. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Frazier. Appreciate it. And I think that you did quite well in your
presentation. No worries here. Council, any questions for Mr. Frazier?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Frazier, I appreciate your narrative. Being that this
is a do over I'm hoping you could take maybe a couple of minutes and just explain to the
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 5 of 54
Council your perception about any neighborhood meetings or any communication from
the applicant to the neighbors about her intended use of the property.
Frazier: Absolutely, Council -- Councilman. So, I did not receive any kind of notification
that there was going to be a meeting, but I'm certainly willing to admit, based on testimony
that -- that Mr. Jones submitted that it got lost in the mail or something. I'm willing to
accept that I didn't get notified, but it happened, I suppose, so, I'm willing to accept that.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Frazier. I can sympathize with the -- with the
situation of perhaps not receiving something in the mail. That is why -- another reason
why we hold public hearings for these situations if an individual isn't able to make that
neighborhood meeting and I wanted to ask -- I think I -- that we had had a brief
conversation about this on the first hearing, but I want to understand -- first of all let me
say this is -- this is -- I really wrestled with this and I want you to know that as Council
Members, you know, we do take these scenarios really -- we -- we consider them very
carefully and we do really think about them at length for one or two individual homeowners
in our city. It's important to us. So, I'm curious if your neighbor, whether it's Mrs. Songe
or a different individual were to have six of their own children, how would that change
your use of your property and the quiet enjoyment? Help me understand that. So, would
it -- would it be an issue if your neighbors had six children themselves or is it -- help me
-- clarify for me what the concern is about there being six children in the home next door.
Frazier: Okay. It is -- it is about noise and -- and, essentially, any kind of distraction, you
know, by noise. So, I mean if they had six children , you know, it would just have to be a
question of, you know, we will see, you know, and if it was too bad I might approach them
and say, you know, hey, is there -- is there a possibility, you know, at least during these
times where -- you know. So, I would -- I would try to work it out with them, but if it was
just too much I would -- I would probably try to find out different place to live.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor, a follow up?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Mr. Frazier, have you had an opportunity to speak with the Songes and -- and
perhaps have a conversation like you would do if it was just a large family that was living
there?
Frazier: I have not, but I say -- I will say that Mrs. Songe sent out a letter to a number of
neighbors, so I at least got her point of view.
Perreault: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 6 of 54
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Mr. Frazier, I'm curious, I kind of wish I could just go send you guys to go work
this out. Honestly, I'm wondering are there changes to Mrs. Songe's business plan that
would get you more comfortable with having a daycare next door? Are there modifications
to, you know, the -- the time she's operating or the times that folks are picking up or
dropping off that would get you comfortable with having a daycare next door?
Frazier: So, I mean I am certainly willing to -- to compromise. I will say as I mentioned a
number of other neighbors had submitted public comments that they were unhappy about
the prospect of a daycare in -- in the neighborhood. But I guess my biggest concern is,
you know, if those changes aren't codified and, essentially, like who is responsible for --
for ensuring that there -- that those requirements are met.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Maybe staff could -- could kind of go over some of the protections that are
already in existing code. I mean I -- I was noticing already there are several points about,
you know, limiting noise, limiting playing outside beyond certain hours and maybe that
would help Mr. Frazier as well as he's considering this.
Simison: Mr. Hood or Mr. Nary, do you have any information that you would like to --
Hood: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, I can -- I can tackle that. So, Mr. Mayor or Council Woman
Strader, as I have mentioned kind of in my opening remarks, 11 -4-3-9 has specific use
standards for daycares. So, I'm not going to read all of that section , but some of those
provisions or protections or standards, if you will, for daycares are contained in there. I
have highlighted just a couple that -- that I think are probably most important. But, again,
there is more here. One of them states: On-site vehicle pick up, parking, and turnaround
area shall be provided to ensure safe discharge and pick up of clients. Hours of operation
just came up. We limit the hours of operation to between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. I will
just note there is a -- in the application -- or the reconsideration application there was a
note from the HOA property management and their approval I believe limited the hours of
operation even further than what -- what city code does. There is that provision for a
neighborhood meeting also in that subsection. It does say all outdoor play areas shall be
completely enclosed by a minimum six foot, nonscalable fence to secure against exit and
entry by small children in the screen abutting properties. Outdoor play equipment over
six feet in height -- in height shall not be located in front -- in any front yard or with any
required yard. Outdoor play areas in residential districts adjacent to existing residents
shall not be used after dusk. It says in no way shall the family daycare -- and this one is
where it gets a little -- I'm not a code enforcement officer, but the question came up about
-- to ensure who enforces this, this is where code enforcement can become involved. In
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 7 of 54
no way shall the family daycare emit lighting, noise, fumes, smoke, dust, odors, vibrations
or electrical interference that can be observed outside the dwelling. It goes on to say a
sign -- a small sign may be put up on the property and , then, it talks about off-street
parking shall be provided as set forth in the title in addition to the required off street. So,
there are some nuisance like provisions in our daycare standards that hopefully address
your -- your question, Council Woman.
Simison: Council, any further questions for the applicant?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Mr. Frazier, when you first brought -- when you brought the original appeal you
talked about concern that the -- that the neighborhood meeting wasn't held or that you --
you didn't receive anything. Are you -- are you -- I just want to double check. Are you
comfortable that -- that with the -- with Mrs. Songe and her attorney's testimony that it
happened and that you have spoken to your neighbors to confirm that it happened? I just
want to find out if that's still something that's a part of your appeal or if you are amending
that as -- as a reason that you are making the appeal and changing that to an issue
regarding quiet enjoyment.
Frazier: I will say I am amending that. I think Mr. Jones, while -- could have been a little
bit more tactful in some of the aspects, I think he submitted enough information that made
me think that it must have just got lost in the mail.
Perreault: Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any further questions? All right. Appreciate it very much.
As noted this is a public hearing. Madam Clerk, who else do we have signed up to testify
on this item?
Nary: Mr. Mayor, we should have the Songes or Mr. Jones go next before you take public
testimony.
Simison: I assume that they are the first ones signed up.
Nary: I don't know. Sorry.
Simison: I assume they are the only ones. I don't know that for a fact.
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, I don't have them signed up. I do have one other person signed
up, so I can call them after Mrs. Songe.
Simison: All right. So, Mrs. Songe, will it be yourself and Mr. Jones who goes first?
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 8 of 54
Johnson: Mr. Jones is --
Jones: This is Jim Jones.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Jones, if you will -- if you are going to be speaking --
Jones: Yes.
Simison: Council, would you like three minutes for the testimony or ten minutes as --
okay. So, Mr. Jones, we will recognize you for up to ten minutes.
Jones: Mr. Mayor, I think I can do it in three, but thank you for giving us this opportunity
and I do appreciate hearing from Mr. Frazier. I can tell you this that the Songes will work
-- Elisabeth will work with him in trying to make sure that everybody respects each other's
rights. As far as pickup and drop off of kids, Elisabeth picks up the kids and brings them
to her home and, then, takes them to their families later in the day. So, there is no people
coming to pick up kids and drop them off. There is no more traffic than Elisabeth has on
her own and I appreciate Mr. Frazier's concession with regard to the neighborhood
meeting. So, that really appears to be a non-issue at this point. The one thing that I
would say is that the first issue I did raise in some of my papers is that the appeal was
just too late. It was five days late. The notice of approval was dated January 2. It said a
party of record may appeal and Mr. Frazier is a party of record being a property owner
within a hundred feet of the Songe property. So, it says that the appeal must be filed no
later than January 17, 2020. The appeal period is 15 days under the code , which is
Section 11 -5A-7B. Fifteen days. The appeal was filed on January 22nd, which was five
days late. So, I don't know that there is any alternative but to declare that the appeal was
untimely and that the Council deny the appeal and reinstate Mrs. Songe's permit. There
are a number of other people -- and I will defer to them -- in particular I would suggest
that you hear at this point from Jenny Hay, who assisted Mrs. Songe in getting all the
papers filed. Her testimony was going to -- I think be directed primarily at the issue of the
neighborhood meeting, but she also worked to make sure that Elisabeth complied with all
the rules and requirements of the city and perhaps if you could hear from her and, then,
Mrs. Songe herself. Thank you.
Simison: Council, we will just put this all under the ten minutes for these three individuals
to speak and try to get them in per Mr. Jones' suggestion. So, Ms. Hay.
Hay: Hi. My name is Jenny. I work for Jannus Economic Opportunity in Boise and
Elisabeth is a client of mine and I do want to note that Elisabeth is an English language
learner, so she does have a helper with her via conference call , Moses, to interpret for
her and so it might be a little disjointed as we are working with that. Like Mr. Jones said,
I assisted Elisabeth with the entire permit process. This is a big piece of my job is to help
refugee women begin small in-home child cares and make sure that they are following all
the compliance rules and -- and even though it sounds like we have gotten away from the
conversation about whether a neighborhood meeting was held, I actually assisted
Elisabeth with that process just to clarify. This has been stated by me in writing and
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 9 of 54
submitted under penalty of perjury from my own personal experience and submitted to
the City Council in April. I assisted Elisabeth through the entire application process,
including working with her to create that neighborhood meeting notice, which included not
just an invitation to a meeting in November, but also the narrative explaining what she
was planning to do in case the recipient of the invitation was not able to attend and I
personally addressed all of those envelopes, postage prepaid, to the addresses of
homeowners as provided to me by Kim Taborini at the City of Meridian in early November.
Elisabeth had the meeting on November 21st, but, no one came, and she notified me the
next day on November 22nd that no one had attended the meeting and just to qualify
some of the comments that have been made thus far, I have an ongoing relationship with
my clients and a big piece of that is something like home visits and kind of coaching them
on making sure that the business is working out , that they are providing the care in a
respectful manner, working with the neighborhood, et cetera. So, this -- this particular
issue can certainly be a component of the coaching that I provide.
Simison: Thank you. And just for the record, can you give us your business address,
please, Ms. Hay.
Hay: Yes. It's 1607 West Jefferson, Boise, Idaho. 83702.
Simison: Thank you very much. Mrs. Songe or if you prefer, Elisabeth, if you would like
to provide any comments at this time we would welcome them. And you will need to
unmute your microphone. There you go. Mrs. Songe, we are not able to hear you.
Mukengezi: Can you guys hear me?
Simison: We can -- Moses, we can hear you, yes.
Mukengezi: Okay. I can hear what she's saying on the phone as well. So, if you don't
mind just me translating or do you want to hear her voice?
Simison: Council, is that okay with you just to hear the translator's comments? Okay.
Go ahead.
Mukengezi: Mrs. Songe is taking to me -- she's on my phone right here.
Simison: Okay.
Mukengezi: Okay. I had to stop so I can say what she had said before I forget everything
she was saying. She said my name is Elisabeth Songe and I -- I moved here in Meridian,
but I had my child care in Boise. When I first moved to Meridian Jenny told me that my
license was going to move into the city of Boise to get a new license and Jenny helped
me through this process of getting a new license and she told me all about making new
notices for my neighbors before I can start operating and we made the notices and sent
them out to all the -- the neighbors. And on the 21st, as the notice has mentioned, we
waited for -- my husband Didier and myself waited for anyone to show up to the -- to the
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 10 of 54
meeting and we do not off our lights or anything, we just waited with our lights on in the
house and no one showed up and after that we are here today and we just want to work
with our neighbors. We don't want to be bad neighbors and we just want to continue with
our business with -- and being good with all the neighbors around us. There is not a lot
of traffic. They have -- because I pick up the kids and drop them myself. There is no --
nobody else comes and goes. I go pick them up and I drop them off on my own. That's
it.
Simison: Okay. Thank you very much. Council, any questions for Mr. Jones, Ms. Hay,
Mrs. Songe?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I have one question for Mr. Jones and, then, a couple of questions for Ms.
Songe -- Mrs. Songe. Mr. Jones, I'm curious if -- if an individual in the neighborhood was
not to have received notification how they were supposed to have known about the appeal
deadline and just wondering if -- if you would happen to have any conversation with Mr.
Frazier. He's -- we can potentially ask him at the end of testimony about when he became
aware of the appeal deadline, but I'm curious if an individual doesn't receive notice that
the meeting existed, how do we as Council hold to that deadline, if you have any thoughts
on that, please.
Jones: Well, I think that you have to look at them as separate instances. The appeal
deadline in the code does not say that a person has to know of any particular aspect of
the appeal. I presume that when the permit is issued some indication goes out to people
as to the fact that it was issued, but even if that was not the case I don't know that anybody
could come in and say some other condition of the license application was n ot fulfilled up
until the time that the permit was issued , would they be able to -- would somebody who
was not aware of that fact be able to come in and attack the permit and -- and seek to
appeal it? Say it was something like failure to prove that the Songes owned the property,
which is a requirement of the code, and it's found out later that they didn't own the
property, would a person be able to come in after the appeal deadline and challenge it. I
don't think so. The second thing is that the mailbox rule that I have talked about, that is
the rule that says that the law presumes if a notice is mailed it's presumed that the person
got it. So, presumably there should have been -- you know, if it arrived in Mr. Frazier's
mail and he didn't read it or somehow the dog chewed it up, it is presumed under the law
that he got the notice and so, you know, we have to operate under rules like that. It's just
like the City Council sent out notice on the 23rd of March to Mrs. Songe saying your permit
is revoked. It takes nothing more than that to revoke it. It doesn't matter whether she got
it. If she is continuing to operate the daycare, even if she didn't get the notice, then, she's
in trouble.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor, a follow up on that.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 11 of 54
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: With -- with your permission -- I saw Mr. Hood shaking his head. Caleb, is
there anything you wanted to add to that?
Hood: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, I didn't realize I was shaking my head.
Perreault: Oh.
Hood: But I do actually have something to add. So, we did actually receive a letter asking
to appeal this decision by Mr. Frazier in due time. There was an e-mail -- and I just looked
at -- at my e-mails I sent to Mrs. Kane in -- in our Legal Department. Part of the process
to ask for Council review is -- part of that is to post the site and part of my question to our
legal team was how am I supposed to ask an appellant to sign an affidavit saying they
are going to put a four by four sign on someone els e's property. So, we kind of -- I don't
want to say we held Mr. Frazier up, but there was this question to our legal staff about
how -- what does posting for this look like. How -- how am I supposed to ask him to sign
a piece of paper saying he's going to, again, post somebody else's property before this
-- the public hearing on March 24th. So, there was a little bit of delay, but we did receive
that on -- on January 17th, the letter asking Council -- it was dated the 10th, so I don't
know what happened between the 10th and the 17th, but I have it and that e-mail to Mrs.
Kane on the 17th asking her for some -- some guidance. So, I'm in between a couple of
attorneys -- actually, three I brought into the conversation there, but -- but there is that
piece that I wanted to at least provide the Council to that we did have at least the makings
of that application for an appeal consistent with our code.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I mean this is an important point, because if the appeal -- appeal was not filed
timely, then, there was no appeal. This won't be before City Council and the director's
approval stands. So, did that appeal -- was an appeal filed in a timely manner under our
requirements and is Mr. Fraser a party of record. I think that was another issue.
Simison: And I think that issue was determined as yes, at least by one attorney, but all
Mr. Nary -- these questions.
Nary: So -- so, Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, Council Member Hoaglun, to answer the
first question on is Mr. Frazier a party of record. He is, because he was a -- a party of
record because he is listed as a property owner within a hundred feet of this application
and his name was on the mailing list to be sent notice. So, he is -- is a party of record.
What Mr. Hood has just told you is that he did file a request to appeal this on January
17th. So, he was timely. There was a delay in the processing of it , because of this
question about signage and notice, but he did provide notice by January 17th to the
Planning Department that he wished to appeal. The only other thing I can add is -- and
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 12 of 54
this is a little bit how Mr. Jones sort of explained it. If no -- if the process had not been
followed, in my opinion, the Council has some minimal discretion to grant some leeway
to the appellant to be outside the timeline, because, again, if he receives no notice -- until
he has some reasonable reason to know it he wouldn't even know to appeal it. But also
if the -- if it was done timely and the process was followed and Mr. Jones is correct , the
noticing requirement here is simply mailed notice, and if that was accomplished, then, the
process is followed and the timeliness is required. But Mr. Hood has stated that he did
make contact with Planning on the 17th. So, again, within your discretion, Council, you
can -- you can approve that as a valid appeal. So, then , the question, then, becomes
what Mr. Frazier has raised and what Mr. Jones has raised and , again, in our code there
is no specific language in regards to daycares on the questions of -- all of it's trying to
capture, as Mr. Hood stated in the standards for daycare, to deal with noise and impacts
on neighborhoods, impacts on neighbors, and we use code enforcement as our
mechanism to enforce those things.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Hoaglun: Quick follow up with -- with Bill. If we all collectively conclude this issue is
properly before us, then, our -- our decision is to -- since this is an appeal, this is -- this is
a do over, it's just like the first time we heard it. He wants us to deny the director's approval
and so that is our choice to either uphold the director's approval or to deny the director's
approval and, therefore, the license. Those are our two decision points; correct?
Nary: Yes, sir.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you.
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you. I have a question for Mrs. Songe via Moses. I want to make sure
-- Moses, would you ask that she understands that Meridian does have a code that
regulates the daycares and also ask if she has been able to read that code and
understand it, that she could have neighbors who report the daycare to code enforcement
and a code enforcement officer could show up at her home to discuss those concerns
with her. I just want to make sure she's aware that -- that that's a possibility.
Mukengezi: She says she understands the code and she -- she has been doing child
care in her home in Boise for three years now, that she had to do some more of where
she was at.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any other questions at this time?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 13 of 54
Strader: I would like to ask the same question of Mrs. Songe that we asked of the -- Mr.
Frazier, which is, you know, you are running a business, you have a neighbor who is not
happy. Are you willing to sit down and do your best on your part to work this out with him
and get him comfortable in terms of your hours of operation, your plan for transporting the
children and managing the traffic?
Mukengezi: Would you like me to ask her?
Strader: Yes, please. If -- thank you.
Mukengezi: She says that will be even better. She said a neighbor is supposed to be a
friend and I would like to talk the two of us and that way we can -- I can explain my
business to them, our work, and, then, he can tell me what he doesn't like about it and
we can just work it -- work it out. A neighbor is -- and I wouldn't want my neighbor to be
unhappy with me all the time when I'm doing my -- when I'm working and doing my job
and I would not like that at all. I would like to be close to my neighbor, because if anything
happens with me at my house in the middle of the night or -- and whatever that I can run
to him for help.
Strader: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, a follow up for Mr. Frazier if I may.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Mr. Frazier, would you be supportive of the Council giving you an opportunity to
sit down with Mrs. Songe and try to work this out and withdrawing your appeal or some
type of a continuance in the hopes that you two might work this out on your own ? I know
some of your neighbors have provided testimony, but you are the one that appealed it.
It's a little unorthodox, but I'm just -- I would always prefer an approach where this could
become a successful outcome. You could come to an understanding and , then, this
doesn't, you know, lead to a bunch of code enforcement issues and so forth. So, I would
like your feedback on that.
Frazier: Thank you, Council Woman Strader. So, maybe -- maybe Mr. Nary can -- can
respond to one comment. I think as a person of record I am -- I am the only one that
could appeal, but I am -- I am willing to sit down, absolutely, as long as any decisions can
be codified and I guess I want to represent that this feels like the only avenue that I had
to try to prevent issues and so, you know, like the last thing I want to do is -- is having to
be calling code enforcement on a neighbor. That's -- that's -- that's gross and so it felt
like the best and safest solution was to -- to avoid the problem. I'm not crazy about having
a daycare, but I mean I think it could be made better as long as -- as those kinds of -- as
long as whatever is decided upon it could be codified.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, a follow up for Mr. Nary.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 14 of 54
Strader: Mr. Nary, is it possible if the appellant Mr. Frazier and Mrs. Songe come to an
understanding about the operation of her daycare , that following that understanding we
could put -- similar to a development application certain conditions to her approval that
would get everybody comfortable that this is happening in a way that makes --
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, I would probably have to ask Caleb, but under our
code there is no method of authority for us to require some contractual agreement
between these parties. So, that's a little more problematic , because, again, that's -- we
would, then, be in the business of enforcing a private contract and so there is nothing in
our code that grants that. I don't know in issuing the accessory use permits, other than
what's listed in the code as the requirements that they have to have , as Mr. Hood talked
about, the play equipment and parking and those things , that we ever impose any
additional conditions based on neighborhood input . Mr. Hood is saying no. So, we -- and
I'm not certain what Mr. Frazier means by codified, but it is already in city code. That is
how we enforce daycare standards is through the city code that already exists. So, I think
it's problematic to create a separate contract with them that has no basis in code to do.
Strader: Thanks.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: This -- this is for Bill or Caleb. For example, you know, learning that she does
the pick up and drop off, I mean that's -- that's a great service for her clients, of course,
but also it does minimize traffic and, Caleb, is that something -- I mean that's very unusual
and not something we would put into code saying that's required, but are there areas that
you could go in this situation that -- that is appropriate, because if -- if this were approved
I mean -- and she has up to -- could have up to six kids and watching six children, including
her own in that property, we could just say, well, we -- we uphold the director's approval
then -- then, you know, she doesn't have to pick up or drop off or are we able to make a
condition like that, which, admittedly, is unusual, but -- I'm just trying to explore options,
like Council Woman Strader.
Hood: So, Mr. Mayor, I can probably partially address that. We have -- if someone, as
part of their application say -- again this is up to six and they say, hey, I had my
neighborhood meeting with the neighbors and they would really only prefer that I have
four kids. So, my application is for four kids, we have written that into that permit saying
they are self imposing that restriction. The code would allow them to have up to six, but
they have talked with their neighbors and they are only applying for four, we can issue
that permit that says, again, you get up to four. That isn't typical. I mean I -- I can think
of maybe once that we have done that or twice where, again, someone says I can do up
to this by the code, but I'm willing -- I'm only applying to this and I'm -- I'm good with you
conditioning me to that level. You know, it's hard for me -- it's unorthodox. I like -- I like
where the -- you know, the tone of this meeting, I just don't know -- kind of to Mr. Nary's
point, I don't know how we would, then, take that all together and make that a condition if
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 15 of 54
-- if things aren't nicely packaged into -- regarding parking and outdoor play equipment,
the number of children -- if it's something else I don't know how we enforce any of that.
This isn't a development agreement. There isn't any contract here and I should probably
just stop there. But sort of, I guess, is the short answer there.
Simison: Mr. Hood, would it make sense from your perspective. If she would withdraw
her previous application and resubmit with those elements? Is that the best way to codify,
for lack of a better word, those elements or not really? There is not really a place on the
permit that would make sense.
Hood: Sure. Yeah. Mr. Mayor, it is an option. I guess my -- my only hesitation there --
and I -- and I would like to believe that when the two parties sit down they can -- they
agree to all the terms, but Mr. Frazier may want something she's not willing to capitulate
to in her application. So, I don't -- I don't know that and, again, I would like -- it seems
like there is good faith there, but I have no real way to ensure that what she applies for
is, in fact, what he agreed to or -- or vice versa, so -- but if that's what -- again, some good
faith on the Council's part and the city's part to do that, I -- I think we could -- again, we
could issue that approval letter with those provisions.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I see that Ms. Hay is still with us. Are you willing to answer a question? Your
microphone is off. Please turn your microphone on.
Hay: Yes.
Perreault: Okay. So, my question is how long do you continue to work with the Songes
through their process and are you comfortable with -- with helping them if they are -- if --
if they were -- if the appeal were to not be approved and the daycare were to move
forward, are you comfortable helping them if there are any code enforcement issues ?
And I don't know how much you are involved at that level or how long you will be involved
in their -- in their business.
Hay: Elisabeth is eligible for my program until the end of my grant period, which is
September 29 of next year 2021 and there is a likelihood I could continue to offer her
service after that for different reasons, but, yes, this is a huge -- a very significant and
meaningful and valuable -- and I'm really sorry about the barking dog. A valuable
component of my work with my clients is helping them adjust to the needs of their
environment, be compliant, and moving into a new home, their first home. She's very
proud of it. Sorry I'm speaking subjectively. But, yeah, coaching her on how to work with
the neighbors and communicate and, if needed, I can pay for an interpreter. Usually I
only pay for an interpreter when I'm there or it's like a group training session or something
of that nature, but, you know, yes, I definitely will take that into account and have that be
a large component of coaching her and providing a level of case management to work
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 16 of 54
within the neighborhood and make sure that she's not only compliant , but also culture --
understanding the culture of the neighborhood.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Just a comment of clarification. I understand Mr. Frazier's desire to not need
to contact code enforcement and I appreciate that, because as Council Woman Strader
has been -- has been getting to, we really would like to see goodwill happen. So, we don't
want to encourage people calling code enforcement on their neighbors, but we do also
understand that it's there for a reason and if there isn't any other way to resolve a
scenario, it's there if it needs to happen and that's why it's really important that -- that both
parties understand what the code says about what -- what the limitations are with the
daycares and what is available to each party to resolve those issues. So, I just -- it's
really important to me that Mrs. Songe were to understand what the code says if she were
to have the accessory use permit held up -- you know, agreed -- agreed to. Thank you.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I would like to ask Mrs. Songe or also -- or her attorney or both. Maybe via
Moses if needed. Are you willing to amend your application after meeting with Mr. Frazier
and resubmit it with -- with whatever changes you think are helpful in getting on the same
page with your neighbor?
Mukengezi: Yes.
Simison: Thank you. I don't know the answer to it right now. Our services currently being
-- being provided in the house at this point in time? Ms. Songe, Jenny, their attorney,
what is the current status of daycare in the house?
Hay: She is not providing care for children other than her own at this time.
Simison: Okay. Thank you. So -- so, Council, I know we have one more person signed
up in the public hearing component, but I would like to -- I think I'm -- I think we are tracking
with maybe the direction to be post -- move this out potentially two to three weeks to give
the applicant and the neighbor an opportunity to speak, see if they can come to a
resolution through that process and, if so, then, this public hearing could be removed and
if not we could continue the public hearing -- we could hear the rest of the public hearing
in that two to three week time frame. Are there any concerns with that process from
Council or the applicant at this point in time?
Jones: Yes. I wonder if I could join in at this point.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 17 of 54
Simison: Mr. Jones.
Jones: I'm wondering what the areas of dispute are, what -- what are the parameters of
what we are looking at? Is it with regard to how long the children are there during the
day? Is it with regard to what the children do as far as playing outside or staying inside ?
It concerns me that we have an open ended thing here where one party or the o ther may
have a possibility of a veto power and if we could have some sideboards as to what the
issues are that are going to be worked out. You know, the -- the code has a lot of
conditions for a daycare operator and, you know, obviously, Elisabeth is going to comply
with those, but if we are going to have additional requirements I think we need to pinpoint
some of the things that we are negotiating on , because it's just -- if it's just a wide open
negotiation, you know, only two kids outside playing in the yard at a time or you can't pick
up the kids from the parents and bring them to the house until 8:00 o'clock in the morning,
it -- it's just a little bit a little loosey goosey from my standpoint and I think we probably out
to know what the real concerns are.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Borton.
Borton: And I have been -- I have been somewhat quiet, but just to your -- to your question
and -- and to Mr. Jones' comments, this -- I wouldn't be supportive of a continuance. This
accessory use permit was approved with our director. Having -- having listened to this
and reviewed the record in preparation for today, I think all of the parameters that are
conditions upon an accessory use, they are laid out in 11-4-3-9. They are -- there is a
long list of things that this permit requires compliance with , otherwise, it's a violation and
assuming there is compliance with each and every one of those I don't anticipate a
problem. My sense is that's why the director probably approved it so long as it's compliant
with the provisions of our existing UDC. I wouldn't want to go down the road and invite
-- I have never -- I don't have any recollection of this happening before, but I wouldn't
want to -- even with good intentions invite this to be continued and, then, have an
appellant create some additional layers that may or may not be agreed to. I think all of
the intent is -- is in the right place and I understand Mr. Frazier's concern, but our director
went through and applied the UDC that we have. If we want to amend that at some future
date and apply consistent objective criteria to -- to residential daycare units we can do
that, but continuing it I think invites a big problem for us to have the appellant do that and
I'm not totally certain that the appeal is timely either in my eyes, but if -- even if we were
to assume that it was, substantively I -- I'm not supportive of overturning the director's
approval in light of the UDC conditions that are placed on this use.
Simison: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Borton. Well, Council, what I would like to do is at least
give the person who has signed -- unless there is any additional questions for the people
so far, I would like to get the other people who have signed up an opportunity to testif y
and, then, we can see what direction you would like to go. Okay. Adrienne, do we -- you
said we had one other person who has signed up. Are they still on the line and would
they like to testify?
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 18 of 54
Weatherly: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I'm not sure if Elise -- excuse me Elise Cleveley is on the
line. Elise is signed up and stated a wish to participate. I'm not sure if it's one of the
phone numbers we have as an attendee, but, Elise, if you are here can you raise your
hand, please.
Simison: And I think you can do that on your phone by doing star nine on your phone
and, then, we can identify you and bring you into the conversation.
Weatherly: And, Mr. Mayor, that would be the only one that signed in.
Simison: Okay. Well, then, we will just go ahead and extend it to anybody who is currently
on -- in the call or watching that would like to testify, if you can use the button in the middle
of your screen to raise your hand and we can bring you in. I do see we have one person
who has raised their hand to participate. I see we have another one as well. So, it looks
like we have a few people. So --
Johnson: Mr. Tommy Stout.
Simison: Yes. Is he in? Okay. Mr. Stout, if you can state your name and address for the
record and you have three minutes to speak.
Stout: So, my name is Tommy Stout. I live in the house right across the street from
Elisabeth. My address is 5338 North Maplestone. I was really ready not to say anything.
It sounds like the Council is going the direction that I would like it to, but I will say this, as
far as character, I have worked with Elisabeth and with Didie and they are amazing
people. I was aware of the meeting. It wasn't a big deal for me, so I chose not to go. I
was -- I bought the house maybe a week after they bought theirs. So, I didn't get a notice.
But they came over and talked to me about it and told me about the meeting in person
and so I had reference there. I have also put on our -- our neighborhood website and
there is some resounding -- what's the word? Support for them. Being across the street,
you know, obviously, traffic would be a concern, but after talking with Didie and Elisabeth
that was resolved with them transporting the kids. And, then, also with the community
being finished where there is two entrances, there is not anywhere where they have to
turn around, they can go straight through and pull through without any turning aro und at
all needed. Being a realtor for 15 years I can say I have never had an issue of an appraisal
because there is a daycare next door and those -- that's basically my testimony. Basically
just -- they are -- they are great people who deserve a shot.
Simison: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions for Mr. Stout? Thank you very much.
Up next we had raised their hand was Diana. Diana, if you can state your name and
address for the record and you have three minutes.
Haibel: My name is Diana Haibel. 1891 East Grand Canyon Drive in Meridian. And my
husband and I have adopted this wonderful family since they first arrived here and we
have known them intimately. We have had them in our home within our lives. We have
had their six children in my small little living room and in my house and I have never met
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 19 of 54
more well behaved, more respectful, obedient children. They -- they -- they can put a lot
of families to shame. These are wonderful people. These are the kind of people you
want in your neighborhood. They are hard workers. If you knew their personal story,
what they have been through, what they have escaped, the years that they spent waiting
to come to America, these are the people you want to reward. These are the people you
want your children to spend time with. These are the people you want in your
neighborhood. Believe me, you will make no better decision than to accept their appeal.
They will be influencers. These are wonderful , wonderful people. And on that I just ask
that you would vote with your heart, vote with your -- your mind, vote with the code, but I
think you have a great opportunity to reward these kind of people and thank you very
much. I appreciate being able to listen to all of this.
Simison: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions?
Strader: Yes, Mayor, I have a question for Caleb.
Simison: Was it pertaining to the last person's testimony? Okay. If we can hold on we
have someone else who would like to testify as well. Mr. Walsh, if you can state your
name and address for the record and you are recognized for three minutes.
Walsh: My name is Nate Walsh. 1821 Gourley Street in Boise, Idaho. I met the family a
few years ago. Didie, the husband, came through a job training program that I was the
training manager of. In addition to his 40 hour schedule at the deli he works at , in order
to get a raise and promotion, so it wasn't a surprise to me two years later that they had
saved a pretty substantial amount for a downpayment, had great credit scores, and
worked really hard to purchase this home. So, I was the realtor that helped them to
purchase the home. We were very deliberate in our month long search to find a
subdivision that was going to be accommodating towards that and without this business
I am pretty certain that their pursuit of the American dream through homeownership would
be in serious jeopardy. So, I just plead with the Council to possibly rule in their favor to
make sure that they have the opportunity to continue their pursuit.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Walsh. Council, any questions for Mr. Walsh? All right. Thank
you. And that -- those are the only people that I notice that's raised their hand to provide
testimony. Adrienne, is that correct on your side as well?
Johnson: This is Chris. That is correct.
Simison: Okay. Council Woman Strader, you had a question for Mr. Hood?
Strader: Yes, I did. I was just curious, you know, in the letter from Mrs. Songe that
originally got sent to the neighbors, it appears that she describes pretty proactively the
hours that she's going to operate and that her husband will be providing transportation to
reduce the amount of vehicles likely to stop there. Is it possible for her in this hearing or
to just amend her application to stipulate that that is her intention. Is that something --
how would that work, amending an application, is that something that's challenging, do
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 20 of 54
we have to start the whole process again, or is it something that could be decided on in
this hearing would be my question.
Hood: So, I'm going to start to answer that. I may ask Mr. Nary to if he doesn't mind. We
haven't talked through the -- the options here that you have before you this evening. So,
some letter -- some letter of decision is going to be issued -- well, unless it gets continued
tonight. So, the city's got to take some action; right? Write -- write a letter to both parties
saying this is what the Council has done. If approval, I -- I think we could if that's part of
the motion -- amend that or re-issue the accessory use permit and that's what I don't --
I'm not quite sure what this letter of -- record of decision really is or does, but re-issue the
AUP or reinstate it or whatever with those specific conditions of 7 :00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. I
don't know what else you were thinking about in that neighborhood meeting to potentially
included in -- in that approval, but -- but I see some potential there. As you state, I don't
know that we need -- necessarily need a revised application. It's already in that narrative,
so if you wanted to hold her to those -- whatever those things are in the narrative you
want to hold her to, I would think we could probably re-issue or issue for her another time
this accessory use permit.
Simison: Thank you, Caleb.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: A couple of questions for Caleb as well. And maybe just one. Caleb, can you
just share with us the purpose of -- of the neighborhood meeting. And the reason why I'm
asking, is there a -- is the intended goal just to inform? We have received some
communication from neighbors that are in support, we have received communication from
neighbors that are in opposition, and if -- if neighbors are opposed, but an applicant wants
to move forward anyway, does the feedback from the neighbors matter I guess is the -- is
the overall question.
Hood: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener. I think it's a good question. I guess from
my -- although the intent isn't stated in the code, I think the intent of any neighborhood
meeting is -- I would like to think we have, you know, the same way that Mrs. Songe looks
at these neighborhood meetings. Neighbors are de facto family members. I mean you
are really close to them, it's to get off on the right foot to understand the proposal and if
there are some serious considerations to what you are proposing we would like to think
that you back off of that or are there provisions that I can -- in my application say I'm
willing to not have more than X amount of kids outside or I'm willing to self restrict those
things. But you are right, if they don't agree that doesn't mean that -- that that person
can't apply and we won't approve it, but there is this appeal process as well and I would
think it wouldn't look good for the applicant of that day -- you know, whatever business to
say, yeah, I met with the neighbors and I didn't care what they said and I just went ahead
with it anyways; right? I mean if that gets before you -- I know you are a relatively young
Council, but I can't see that playing well with you ; right? So, again, the intent is to be
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 21 of 54
neighborly, to disclose, to discuss, to see if there are concerns that you could consider in
your business plan and, again, this is a quasi business, it's in home, it's accessory to
someone living there. It's not really a business. Yes, there is some income generation,
but we don't -- it's a tweener; right? And that's how our code addresses this. Is this
something in Meridian that is appropriate to operate out of your home with specific
provisions. I'm getting a little off of your question, but that's really the intent of the
neighborhood meeting is to require neighbors to be neighborly.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor, a follow up for either Mr. Hood or Mr. Nary.
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: If I'm understanding things correct, Caleb, then, the director has some
subjectivity in determining if they do want to approve or deny that -- we don't grant the
approval because they have jumped through -- they have completed all the steps, we are
providing an approval because it -- it meets the desire and the input of the community. Is
that correct?
Hood: So, Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, I'm not quite sure I understand your question,
but let me answer it maybe this way, unless you want to clarify. So -- and this was kind
of alluded to. Essentially we almost will always issue the approval with the conditions,
even if -- even if we have heard negative feedback from adjacent neighbors saying we
know they are going to have 14 kids over there , we can't -- we don't have anything to
revoke. We don't have any code to enforce if we don't first issue the permit, then we can
revoke that. Then there is an actual item for our code enforcement officers and so we
almost give the applicant the benefit of the doubt to say here is the rules to play by, here
is your permit and -- and how you are supposed to act to be a good neighbor here and if
you violate those, then, we go down that path, even if -- even if that track record you know
maybe isn't good up to that point, we don't have any hammer or anything to really -- any
code to point to, because there is no permit to revoke or any -- anything to -- any code to
enforce if you will. So, again, I'm sorry if I didn't answer your question, but that's kind of
how I thought you were asking it.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Caleb and Bill, I guess what I'm trying to get to is -- is an approval granted as
long as the applicant does all that's required of them?
Hood: I can't think of an instance, Mr. Mayor, Councilman Cavener, where that's not a
true statement.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, I can maybe help additionally. So, again, remember, this is a land use
application. So, we have the rules in the code that they are required to follow. As Mr.
Hood stated, they can self impose some restrictions. That's not uncommon. In Mrs.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 22 of 54
Songe's application she does talk about pick ups and drop-offs, so she doesn't indicate
in this application that she's going to pick them and drop them herself. She does say
parents will be bringing them there. So, I don't know if that's a temporary thing right now
or her business plan. It does talk about outdoor play and what some of the limitations
are, but, for example, in -- in the application it says she would limit their playtime to one
hour in the morning and one hour in the afternoon. In the middle of July that may not be
as practical. I don't know the age of the children. In the middle of December that probably
may not be practical either. But, again, the idea is is they are supposed to try to work with
neighbors as best as possible, but the code is real specific on what's required for this
application to move forward and there is very little limiting language in the code to deny
it, because the adjoining neighbors can't agree on how it's supposed to be operated.
Cavener: Okay. Thank you.
Simison: Council, any further questions or comments? If not, I would turn to Mr. Frazier
for the last word before Council determines how they would like to move forward.
Frazier: Thank you, Council -- Mayor. Mr. Mayor. So, I will say that the first I ever heard
of any of -- of kind of Mrs. -- Mrs. Songe's plans for -- for her daycare was -- was with a
letter which I received about two days ago and I felt that her plan was pretty reasonable.
I think the -- the drop off -- pick up and drop-off, those things like that, I thought it was
pretty reasonable. I debated whether or not I should just , you know, kind of let things lie
in -- in aspect of, you know, just goodwill. The thing that -- that decided the other way
was based on, you know, the public -- I looked at the public comments and at that point
in time, you know, there were five or so other neighbors in the area that were against it ,
but I will say, you know, my issue was essentially -- it's one thing to say what you are
going to do, but how -- well, like how -- what rules are there to enforce that. But I like
what Mr. Hood said about, you know, we can, essentially, accept those and based on --
on feedback from -- from other neighbors and people about the good character of Mrs.
Songe and her husband, I'm fine with -- with maintaining that we are allowing them the
daycare center.
Simison: So, Frazier, you would like to withdraw your appeal of the director's decision, is
that what I'm hearing?
Frazier: Yes. And based on -- based on what -- what I have heard from Mrs. Songe and
-- and others and her plan and for -- for goodwill in the neighborhood.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Mr. Frazier, I commend you for making that decision and I'm really excited for
both of you to become good neighbors and I -- it just makes me so happy that you guys
have worked this out and I would encourage Mrs. Songe to keep in touch with you
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 23 of 54
regarding her business plans, but I wish that all these conversations would have
happened previously, but it just makes me so happy that it's all been worked out. Thanks.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Frazier, I would also like to say thank you for your openness and
willing to listen to the conversation and I would like to think that that's what Council was
doing tonight as well. You could tell that they were in a difficult spot in terms of how they
viewed this and it was a really good dialogue.
Frazier: Yes. I appreciate the seriousness with which everybody -- the Council and Mr.
Mayor kept this and mediated. Thank you very much.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I just wanted to thank Mr. Frazier for -- for his -- his comments and willingness
to drop his appeal. I know when he came forward it did not appear to me there was
anything of ill intent or maliciousness, just that -- the fact that, hey, I did not receive notice
and -- and -- you know. And based on the testimony and no other comments, you know,
the Council took action, which was at the time under the rules. So, I do think for Council
for future reference in subdivisions that have increased densities, as developers put these
houses closer together because of land prices, they are trying to keep housing affordable
and the fact our Comprehensive Plan encourages those densities, what is -- what do we
need to look at down the road for daycares and these types of developments ? I mean
that's not pertinent to this application that we will be deciding , but that is just something
for future consideration as -- as we move forward where people are packed closer
together or should we take a look at making any -- any changes to daycares in those
areas or limitations to numbers and that sort of thing. So -- just a -- kind of future marker
for that.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Hoaglun. I'm sure Mr. Hood will put that on his future meeting
topic conversation list.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I echo my fellow Council Members statements. I really appreciate the goodwill
that we are seeing here this evening. Mr. Frazier, thank you so much for that. I know it
has not been an easy situation for you and -- and I myself have -- you know, we -- we
hear a lot of different kinds of applications and it's interesting how -- how this is one that
we -- that I have wrestled with. I'm a -- I'm a realtor. I'm a realtor myself, I'm a real estate
broker, and I understand concerns regarding values and uses in neighborhoods and so
for me it's been especially challenging, because I also appreciate anyone's ability to come
in and make a life for themselves in our community and don't ever want to be in a rush to
take that away as well. So, I see our role as Council as -- as ones who uphold the code
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 24 of 54
as best as possible and -- and also yet still supporting all of our citizens to the best of our
ability. So, I have learned a lot in this. So, I appreciate that -- I don't feel like this has
been time -- you know, I feel like this has been time spent well I should say. It's been
helpful for me to even get clarity on some of our -- on some of the approach that we take
in these -- in these situations. So, thank you.
Simison: Excellent. So, with that, Mr. Nary, do we need an official action on this topic?
Nary: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Council, so with Mr. Frazier's withdrawal,
Planning can re-issue the permit. What you do, though, need to do is grant the request
for reconsideration and approve that -- that Mr. Jones has filed to finalize that, because,
then, we have to issue an order for that and with that -- included in that granting of his
request include in there to issue -- re-issue the accessory use permit for Mrs. Songe.
Simison: I'm going to turn to our attorney Mr. Borton and, hopefully, figure out what that
type of motion looks like.
Borton: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nary, do we need to close the public hearing prior to that?
Nary: Yes.
Borton: Okay. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I move we close the public hearing on Item 7-A, H-2020-0011.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Second that.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor s ay aye. Those opposed nay. The
ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Question for Mr. Nary. If I tracked it correctly, it sounded as though action could
be granting the request for reconsideration and, then, are we just literally accepting the
withdrawal of the appeal and the existing accessory use permit remains ?
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 25 of 54
Nary: I would request if you could direct that they re-issue the accessory use permit
based on the granting of the request for reconsideration.
Borton: Okay. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I move on item H-2020-0011 that we grant the request for reconsideration that's
been filed and accept the appellant's withdraw of his appeal and direct Planning staff to
re-issue the accessory use permit.
Strader: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second on Mr. Borton's motion. Is there any discussion
on that motion? If not, the clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Bernt, absent; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Simison: Thank you very much to everybody for that conversation and outcome and best
of luck to everyone moving forward, including a great working relationship between
neighbors.
Jones: Mr. Mayor, if I could I would like to thank the Council and I would like to say bless
your heart, Mr. Frazier. I think you will find you have a good neighbor.
Simison: All right. Excellent. Thank you. Council, since we came right out of Executive
Session right into this meeting and we are getting close to the 8:00 o'clock hour, I would
suggest we take a 15 minute recess to allow everyone to freshen up before we get into
the next two items that will likely take us for a couple hours. So, we will recess until 7 :55.
Fifteen minutes.
(Recess: 7:40 p.m. to 7:55 p.m.)
B. Public Hearing Continued from May 5, 2020 for Idaho
Central Credit Union (H-2020-0016) by Idaho Central Credit
Union, Located at 3152 W. Peak Cloud Ln.
1. Request: Modification to the Existing Development
Agreement for TM Creek Subdivision ( Inst. 2017-113747) to
update the conceptual development plan for the site to allow
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 26 of 54
for the development of a financial institution with a drive-
through.
Simison: All right. I will call -- call us back into -- of recess and I will open up Item 7-B.
7-B is a public hearing that was continued from May 5th for Idaho Central Credit Union,
H-2020-0016, and I will turn this over to Sonya for staff comments.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. This project is a request for
modification to the development agreement to update the concept plan and elevations for
the site. It was heard by the City Council on April 14 th. At that hearing Council directed
the applicant to revise the development plans shown to be more consistent with the
design elements in the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan as noted in the staff report.
The applicant has submitted a revised concept development plan , building elevations,
and prospective renderings of the building. Next slide, please. As shown staff has
reviewed the revised plans for consistency with the design elements noted in the staff
report and offers the following analysis. Although the proposed use is by nature vehicular
focused, pedestrian walkways are proposed from perimeter sidewalks along adjacent
streets and driveways to the main building entrance from all four sides of the site
consistent with the plan and UDC 11-3A-19. The structure has been moved closer to the
corner -- excuse me -- at the corner with the drive-thru lanes and parking to the south of
the building creating a street oriented design with a consistent edge to the public space ,
making streets more friendly and walkable consistent with the plan. Although the new
building exceeds 30 feet in height in accord with the plan , it does not have a continuous
unbroken frontage along required build to lines for at least 75 percent of the property front
-- frontage as desired. It's at approximately 64 percent as proposed. The building now
holds the corner at the intersection and avoids additional building setbacks consistent
with the plan. The design of the building meets the minimum 40 percent of the linear
dimension of the street level frontage along Ten Mile and Franklin Roads in windows or
doorways as desired. The floor -- floor area ratio has increased from .06 to .22 with the
increase in building square footage from 5,672 to 19,200 square feet. Although a
substantial increase, it's still not consistent with the goal of one to 1.25 or more in this
area. The height of the building was increased from one to two stories consistent with
the plan. The building is consistent with a 30 percent of buildable frontage of the side
occupied by building facades required by UDC 11-3A-19 in mixed use designated areas.
And, finally, a gateway feature in the form of a sign is proposed at the intersection . Next
slide I believe. Thank you. Within the street buffer to announce arrival at the Ten Mile
crossing areas as desired in the plan. The developer Brighton has also stated in an e -
mail to staff that they intend to retain the area a bit and create an expanded plaza paver
and seating area with sandstone seating between the sign and the corner. Details to be
provided at a later date on that. The developer also plans to work with ICCU to create an
improved area along the creek to the east of the ICCU building for employees to gather
and relax. Based on UDC standards 11-3A-16 for self-service uses, specifically financial
transaction areas and drive-thru establishments and 11-4-3-11 C-5, staff recommends the
original recommendation for screening to be provided with in the street buffers adjacent
to drive-thru lanes is stricken. These areas are required to be visible from the public street
for surveillance purposes. Staff also requested the applicant to work with Brighton
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 27 of 54
Corporation to come up with a palette for future buildings in this area to address key
elements, such as materials, i.e., walls, roofs, architectural elements, et cetera. Colors,
et cetera, to unify the development. Buildings may have individuality, but should share
key design elements and colors as set forth in the plan. The applicant did coordinate with
Brighton, but only for this building. The proposed elevations are consistent with other
buildings already constructed in this area. To ensure future development in this area
share similar design elements, the developer Brighton is working on a design palette and
standards for the overall development area that they intend to include a subsequent
amended development agreement and planned unit development. Staff will stand for any
questions.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions? Okay.
Hoaglun: Mr. -- Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry, I'm trying to unmute here. Real quick question. A
question about the -- that unbroken frontage and, Sonya, I'm assuming that's on the west
and north property boundaries, since those are street facing, and I just want to make sure
I understand. Unbroken means is it a continuous straight line? Explain that to me a little
further.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Hoaglun, it just means, basically,
that the building is up to that setback area and it -- it's not separated by like two buildings.
It's unbroken. There is a continuous building facade along the frontage of the property.
Hoaglun: Okay. Mr. Mayor, follow up. So, it doesn't mean they can't have architectural
features like we see here where that's popping out , that's -- that's what confused --
confused me. It sounded like continuous and it's -- so it's between buildings -- between
structures within that -- that -- is that correct?
Allen: Yes. More or less. It's -- our code does require modulation, so we don't want just
a flat building facade. So, yes, that's correct.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you, Sonya.
Simison: Council, any further questions at this time? Okay. Then I will ask the applicant
to come forward and add I will be doing the timing for the applicant, just so you know, and
I will try to notify you when you get down to the one minute, but -- if you go that long, but
you are recognized for 15 minutes.
Heazle: All right. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council Members. My name is Mark Heazle
with Lombard Conrad Architects. Address is 1221 Shoreline Lane, Boise. 83702. Sonya
-- Sonya, I appreciate all the efforts you have put into this helping us through this process
and the late hours you spent reviewing the revised documents. We have submitted this
revised package, which takes a 5,600 square foot single story building to a roughly 19,000
square foot facility that is two stories. We have taken the primary occupiable area and
placed it along the fringes of Ten Mile and Franklin, relocating the drive-thrus to the south
side. The second floor extends over the drive thru area and creates the -- the -- the
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 28 of 54
frontage that you see that Sonya -- Sonya has presented on the screen currently. This
building fits in, maintains the aesthetics established for this area for Ten Mile Creek area.
We have coordinated with Brighton. We have drawn the character and the look of this
facility directly from existing buildings out -- out in this area. One of them being the
Brighton building itself as evident in our elevations. The other being the Lofts at Ten Mile,
which is located 2940 West Cobalt Drive. Very close to this facility. As described with the
elevations we have a masonry veneer at the main levels , as well as masonry veneer at
the stair towers. The upper portion is primarily eifs and a metal panel canopy. The eifs
maintains the colors established for this area with, for instance, the lots close by. We
have a -- I would say a generous amount of glazing on this building. We meet the
minimum requirements for that. The site itself and the building itself ties in to both Ten
Mile and Franklin through sidewalk accesses. We have the primary entrance into the
facility office off Ten Mile Road and we also have a secondary entrance for customers off
of the east side of the facility where the primary parking is located on the east and on the
south side. We have our four drive-thru lanes with an escape lane in case there is any
backup traffic located within an area. We have coordinated not only with the city, with
Sonya -- again I appreciate your efforts on this -- but also coordinated with Brighton to
make sure that we are staying consistent with any of the future development for this area.
And with that I can answer any questions.
Simison: Okay. Thank you, Mark. Council, any questions? And it's not looking like it.
Sorry, in this split screen I can't see if you are shaking your heads or not, but we will move
forward. So, with that I will turn -- Madam Clerk or Mr. Clerk, I don't know who we have,
but do we have anyone signed up to testify on this item?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, we have one person signed in, but they did not indicate a wish to
participate.
Simison: Okay. Well, as a reminder for those that are listening in, if you would like to
testify on this item, please, raise your hand and if you are on the phone star nine either
way and we can bring you in for further comments to testify and we will just give it a
second to see if anyone does that. And, otherwise, I will let Council think of any additional
comments or questions they may have.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I just have a quick question for Mr. Nary. Just because I can't recall. If I was
not in the previous Council meeting where this was discussed , although I have reviewed
the information, am I allowed to vote this evening?
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Woman Strader, as long as you have
reviewed the record, yes, you may.
Strader: Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 29 of 54
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: In light of the remarks by the applicant were there -- are there any remaining
unresolved questions that Sonya might have that needs to be addressed ?
Simison: Sonya, do you have anything --
Allen: Mr. Mayor, I'm sorry, I don't have any further questions, no.
Borton: Okay. Thank you.
Simison: And I'm not seeing anyone based on what I can tell that they would like to testify.
So, I will turn this back over to the applicant for any final comments.
Heazle: No final comments at this time. Sonya, I think you commented on the building
heights in the elevations. Our building height is currently 36 feet with this two story
concept. Just wanted to make that evidence and point that out.
Simison: Okay.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: If there is not any additional questions for the applicant or staff, I will move that
we close the public hearing on H-2020-0016.
Hoaglun: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay.
The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Just to kick off some discussion, this continuance was in large part to try and
address some opportunities to comply with the Ten Mile specific area plan a little more
specifically I guess. I think the applicant's really done a good job in -- in addressing the
concerns that were raised at that meeting and I think they provided a better product that
goes along with this requested modification and it does resolve those concerns that were
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 30 of 54
raised before. So, I appreciate those efforts made to be more compliant with that Ten
Mile specific area plan and -- and working well with our staff and the direction that's been
provided, so much improved.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Borton. And from my perspective I think you took the words out
of my mouth, because I think this really -- at least for this Council says that the plan that
has been developed out in this area remains the vision for the area and I think this gets
much closer to being in -- not in -- just in general compliance, we heard there is a few
concerns from staff, but it definitely hits the mark in terms the spirit of the plan in my
opinion.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: I can't see, was that Councilman Hoaglun?
Borton: Got to put our group scheme back on.
Simison: Yeah.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Yeah. Brad Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Yeah. It's -- it's substantially complies with the plan. There is definitely a good
faith effort to -- to meet those -- those goals and this -- this definitely is -- is a better product
for that corner. That is a key corner for that Ten Mile development and I think they did
very well not only for the development, but I think for -- for Idaho Central Credit Union to
have a building like that is -- is something -- that that stands out and I think it would be a
benefit to them as well. So, I appreciate their work on that. I knew it took some time and
-- and, of course, time is money and then -- but we -- I know I appreciate that -- that effort
for what they did.
Simison: Is there any further discussion or is there a motion?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I move that we approve Item 7-B, H-2020-0016, consistent with staff and
applicant comments from today's hearing and includin g the updated staff report and
renderings provided by the applicant.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 31 of 54
Cavener: I will second that.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve the application. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not I will ask the clerk to call the roll.
Roll call: Bernt, absent; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Simison: Thank you very much, Mark and the team at ICCU for this proposal and we look
forward to seeing it moving forward.
Heazle: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council Members and Sonya.
Simison: And thank you, Sonya, as well. Appreciate your effort to help make that happen.
C. Public Hearing Continued from April 14, 2020 for Andorra
Senior Living (H-2019-0127) by Sawtooth Development
Group, LLC, Located at 715 & 955 S. Wells St. and 971 E.
Wells Circle
1. Request: Annexation of 16.99 acres of land with TN-R zoning
with a conceptual development plan for a senior ( age 55 and
older) living community consisting of (76) single-family
dwelling units and a 3-story apartment building with 88
dwelling units and a building footprint of 30,000 square feet;
and,
2. Request: Request to Vacate existing ACHD right-of-way (
unnamed cul-de-sac) consisting of 0.45 of an acre of land that
lies between the properties located at 715 and 955 S. Wells
St. & 971 E. Wells Circle.
Simison: Up next is Item 7 -- 7-C. It's a public hearing continued from April 14th for
Andorra Senior Living, H-2019-0127. I will open this public hearing with staff comments.
Mr. Parsons.
Parsons: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Pleasure to be with you
this evening. I think this is the first time that I have actually got to present a project to the
new Council, so I'm excited to do that. This project was continued from the April 14th,
2020, hearing. The applicant needed some time to work with one of the adjacent property
owners or one of the owners -- the sellers of this particular property, so that they could
get the plan headed back on track and make sure that we could come forward and bring
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 32 of 54
forth this plan that we are going to discuss this evening. So, the applicant is here this
evening to discuss the annexation and zoning of this property and also they are proposing
to vacate some right of way that's currently owned by the public and owned by ACHD.
So, the site consists of 16.99 acres of land currently zoned RUT and R-1 in Ada county
and it's located at 715 and 955 South Wells Street and 971 East Wells Circle. In 1983
the property was platted in the county as the Magic View Subdivision. If the Council
recalls, during the Comprehensive Plan update this was one of the properties that staff
was recommending some future land use changes on. So, in this particular case about
approximately eight acres of the site is mixed use neighborhood and the other nine acres
is -- is -- has the medium density residential land use designation on it. So, the applicant
is again proposing to annex in 16.9 acres of land from Ada county to -- with a TN-R zoning
district in the city. You can see in the slide before you this evening that there is a
conceptual development plan for how they intend to develop the site with a senior living
community consisting of 76 single family style dwelling units and three story apartment
building with 88 dwelling units and vacate existing unnamed ACHD right of way between
715 and 955 South Wells Street property and a portion of East Wells Circle, so the
roadway can be extended to the west boundary for future extens ions. So, what I have
tried to do in this exhibit before you is the areas that are highlighted in black -- outlined in
black that would be the right of way that the applicant is proposing to vacate in the middle
of the site and, then, towards the south -- the bottom south end of the site there is an
existing cul-de-sac and a portion of that is also being vacated as part of the request this
evening. In discussions with ACHD and looking at their staff report they do agree with
what the applicant is proposing and with their vacation request. I would also make
mention to the Council that the Council is a recommending body on the vacation of right
of way and the applicant will have to go before ACHD and get their final approval from
that body. So, as I mentioned to you, the property, approximately eight acres -- eight
acres is mixed use neighborhood and the other nine acres is medium density residential
on the future land use map. The applicant is proposing to develop a 55 and older multi -
family residential development consistent with the goals and policies contained in the
Comprehensive Plan. The applicant is also requesting to construct a building footprint of
36,000 square feet where a 20,000 square foot is -- foot building as desired in the MUN
designation, unless the public use's larger building -- if there is a public use involved with
the proposed layout, the applicant may request, through Council's approval, a larger
building footprint. In this particular case the applicant has ample open space and as part
of this project you can see highlighted in green that's bisecting through the middle of the
development the applicant is proposing to extend a ten foot multi-use pathway that is
currently stubbed along their west boundary and run it into the site and, then, bring it out
to the adjacent street on Wells Circle or Wells Street I believe is what's on their east
boundary. Staff finds that this proposed development is consistent with the mixed use
neighborhood standards and does support the request for their larger building footprint. I
would also make mention to Council that during the Comprehensive Plan update this area
was targeted for future connectivity to provide another -- I guess another way in and out
of this particular development. Over the years we have heard -- as developments
occurred in this area we have heard Woodbridge residents time and time again ask for
additional connectivity in this area because of all the cut through traffic through their
subdivision getting folks to Eagle Road -- between Locust Grove and Eagle Road. As
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 33 of 54
part of that Comprehensive Plan update a few months ago and recently adopted, the plan
was to eventually stub a road to tie back into Locust Grove somewhere in this area and
the applicant is doing that by stubbing their street to the west boundary. Now, I would
mention that during the Planning and Zoning Commission that was a topic of discussion
and a lot of the residents in the Locust View Heights Subdivision was concerned that the
city was going to annex property and so that we could force the developer to extend the
road. I want to be very clear on the record this evening that the city does not force annex
any -- any property owners. Don't force -- we don't force them to annex into the city and
we are merely requiring a stub street, so if and when the Locust View Heights Subdivision
is redeveloped in the future that that road could be extended consistent with the vision
and, then, tie into Locust Grove at some future date. Again, it's not proposed or required
as part of this development application, nor is the city trying to force any development
onto the adjacent county subdivision. So, access to this development will be from local
streets, which is Wells Circle and, then, Wells Court and, then, as part of its internal
access the applicant is proposing gated private streets. As you can see in th e
development plan they are also proposing to develop this site in two phases. So, primarily
the northern half will be done with phase one and that consists of 57 units and the
clubhouse, which is located central to the development and, then, phase two will be the
three story office building and 18 additional individual units and a restaurant and the
extension of East Wells Circle. Per the Planning and Zoning Commission the southwest
corner of the concept plan was redesigned to accommodate the existing 20 foot wide
public works easements and two of the residential units were reoriented to prevent direct
access to the East Wells Circle. As part of the concept plan the applicant is proposing
26.6 percent of the site as common open space, including the following amenities. A
clubhouse, fitness facility, a restaurant, spa, salon, walking trails, a pool, open grassy
areas, community gardens and various sport courts. Although some of these amenities
are conceptual at this time, staff finds the proposed amenity package for this development
is commensurate to the size of the proposed development. Conceptual building
elevations were submitted for all of the proposed structures within this -- this
development. You can see from the slides before you that there -- they have a pretty
similar design theme, so it's integrated per the mixed use standards. Building materials
comprise of stone, stucco, and wood. Any -- any further review of these elevations will
require compliance with the design standards in the architectural standards manual and
the UDC. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this project
at their March 5th, 2020, hearing. Testifying in favor we had Clay Sammis and Jeremy
Garner. We had -- commenting on the application we had Monica McKinley, Pat Rennison
and Barbara Valdez and, then, written testimony was provided by the Woodbridge HOA,
Alan and Carol Jax, Barbara Valdez, Bob and Lindy Neufeld, Dennis Bailey, Pat Rennison
and Cassy Peck. Key items of public testimony was the extension of East Wells Circle at
the west boundary. Public hearing notification to homeowners in the Locust View Heights
Subdivision and, then, of course, impacts from this development on the Locust View
Heights Subdivision. Key issues of discussion by the Commission included the amount
of open space and the number of amenities proposed for the development. Square
footage of the balconies proposed for the three story apartment complex. And , then,
Commission also made the request that no units take access onto East Wells Drive. They
were concerned that at some point when that road gets connected to Locust Grove in the
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 34 of 54
future that that could become a de facto collector road, so they wanted to make sure there
were no curb cuts from this development onto that roadway. So, key changes to the
staff's recommendation -- again, no direct access for any of the units to East Wells Circle.
As I mentioned to you in my presentation the concept plan has been modified to reflect
that change and, then, at the Planning and Zoning Commission we also talked about the
amenity package for this development. The developer would like flexibility as to what
they do within the development, so the P&Z Commission actually provided -- modified a
DA provision to allow -- they put a minimum six to eight amenities, including clubhouse,
walking trails, and fitness facility with the remainder of the amenities being coordinated
with staff. Certainly if the Council likes some of the amenity package, the amenities I
discussed this evening, that's also within your purview to include those within the
development agreement this evening. So, outstanding issues for Council this evening.
Really there aren't any. Before the public hearing I have had a chance to look at the
public record and since the Commission hearing I have noted that three additional -- the
written testimony was provided from Barbara Valdez. Her concern is still the stub street
at the west boundary and, then, Alan Fox and Pat Rennison submitted audio comments
in favor of the application. As stated staff and -- both staff and the Planning and Zoning
Commission are in support of this application and did recommend approval. With that I
will conclude my presentation and stand for any questions you may have.
Simison: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Bill, these internal streets are our private streets and, therefore, they are more
narrow than a public street; correct?
Parsons: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Perreault, that is correct. The private street
standards only require the minimum width of the street is 24 feet.
Perreault: Thank you.
Simison: Council, any other questions for Mr. Parsons at this time? All right. If not, we
will go on to the applicant. Well, I feel like I should know how to pronounce your last
name, but I'm going to let you do it for me. But if you can state your name and address
for the record and you will have 15 minutes.
Goede: Yep. My name is Will Goede and I work for Sawtooth Development Group. My
address is 2619 North 28th Street in Boise, Idaho.
Simison: Thank you. And I would not have gotten that.
Goede: I'm very used to it at this point, so no worries at all. Well, first of all, thank you
for -- for staying late and still making time for us and thanks especially to Bill Parsons for
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 35 of 54
his work and his guidance so far in this project. Thanks to our neighbors at Woodbridge
and Locust View Heights for their support so far. We have had a chance to get to know
them after two neighborhood meetings. We went to an HOA board meeting. We held
another Woodbridge community meeting and really appreciate the letters of support we
have and the -- as Bill noted, the letter of support from the Woodbridge HOA, which
represents 279 homes. So, it's been a -- been a pleasure working on this project so far.
At Sawtooth we are really excited about this development for a couple of reasons. First ,
the location is -- it's just ideal for -- for a 55 plus community. To the east you have St.
Luke's Hospital, surgery centers, dentists, eyecare, physical therapy. To the west you
have neighborhoods. Woodbridge. Locust View Heights. So, it's -- it's really kind of a
perfect transition for this development. But also more specific to this site there is the Five
Mile Creek running right through the middle of the property, which -- which really gave us
an opportunity to focus our entire site around that creek and that's -- that's what we did.
That's kind of been our marching orders. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here , but it's
proven that increased interaction with nature leads to better social functioning,
psychological functioning and better physical health. So, we really took that to heart as
we -- we designed the entire site around Five Mile Creek and --- and all of our amenity
package as you can see and as Bill pointed out it's just kind of situated around the creek
with the restaurants, there is putting greens, walking paths, community garden. Let's see.
What else did I miss? A firepit. A fitness center. And it's all situated around the creek
and more than that really meant to feel like it's in nature . Right now the -- the -- working
with our landscape architect we -- you know, we are working with natural grasses and
trying to really make this feel like a little oasis in the middle of the city. So, it's been a --
yeah, it's a really cool site that we are really excited about. Go to the next slide here. Oh,
no.
Johnson: That's my error. I'm fixing that now. One moment.
Goede: Well, I will keep -- keep talking while he gets that resolved. The -- the site plan
has, as Bill pointed out, 76 single story buildings and, then, a three story apartment
building. This is one of the single story buildings . You can see where we are going with
a mid century modern architecture and even though we are in conceptual phase we are
excited about what we are seeing so far. This is now -- okay. There we go. Thank you.
Just another scheme of one of the single family -- or single story buildings. Keep going
on to the next one here. This -- in those 76 single story buildings there is also a number
of duplexes with similar layout going here. Another example of a duplex and, then, I think
the next is the three story building with -- this building is actually kind of adjacent to the
Holiday Inn, so it's -- it's really trying to keep all the single story buildings on the west side,
you know, by Locust View Heights and Woodbridge and, then, as we -- we go to the
southeast corner of the site that's where we position the three story tower just to be in
sync with the current surrounding and the Holiday Inn that's over there. Going to the next
one here. One more. Just another view of the three story tower. This is a view,
unfortunately, without all of the beautiful -- beautiful landscaping I was trying to describe,
but this is looking almost like if you are standing in the creek looking back at the restaurant
that kind of overlooks the creek here and , then, a common area by the tower. Go to the
next one. Bill touched on the fact that we did send in an updated site plan and I think
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 36 of 54
through that process and with Bill's help we have been able to addr ess all of the main
concerns that came out of our Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and our
meetings with Fire Department and Public Works and I will just talk you through that a
little bit. The -- primarily all the concerns were in the southwest corner. So, the bottom
left. There is a sewer line running along the left portion of the property there. So, that's
why we reconfigured the roadway for Public Works to have access on the west boundary.
The existing cul-de-sac is -- was too small to meet current ACHD requirements, so our
new plan shows putting in a new full size cul-de-sac that meets current ACHD
requirements and meets Fire Department turnaround requirements as well. So, I think
with that -- I mean Bill did a great job of giving you an overview of the project. I have got
a couple of colleagues on standby, Clay and Jeremy, for questions as well if we get --
Jeremy can cover specific questions on the operation side and Clay can help me with any
others. But thank you again for your time. Appreciate it.
Simison: Thank you, Will. Appreciate it very much. Council, any questions?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Good evening. Well, I'm also not going to attempt to say your last name ,
although mine is equally as complicated. So, I -- overall I think the -- that the project looks
pretty good, but we regularly and consistently hear concerns regarding parking and so I
wanted to get your thoughts on that. My main concern is that oftentimes when you have
smaller units a lot of individuals use their garages for storage and especially the one car
garages are used for storage and, then, if you have individuals there that have two -- two
vehicles, so -- so now the garage is not being used for parking and you have two vehicles
parked, I guess one in front of the other, because you have a driveway and, then, you
have a 24 foot private drive, which doesn't really allow much room for on-street parking.
If there is I assume it will only be on one si de of the street. And, then, let's say that their
family members come and visit and now we add another car or two cars and, then, it's
trash day and you have a bunch of trash cans. That really can become a challenge and
we regularly hear this concern regarding parking. So, can you share your thoughts with
us.
Goede: Yeah. Absolutely. And, obviously, I hear your concern. One advantage to a 55
plus community is that you tend to have less traffic. Less -- yeah, less cars. They -- you
know, each space does -- or each unit does have at least a single car garage. Some do
have larger garages that you could get to and park in the parking lot. There are some
guest spaces around on the site plan that I think you can probably pick up on. But the --
yeah. We are above and beyond the -- the nursing and residential -- residential care
facility parking requirements. So, I think that we ha ve, you know, exceeded that
requirement here.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor, a follow up.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 37 of 54
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I can understand that -- that the parking requirement of a half of a spot for the
three story building, but -- but the duplexes and the single family I was of the
understanding, based on the staff report, that -- that that -- it would be complied with
based on single family requirements for the size of properties that -- that are there and
the square footage -- the square footages of those units were not in the application , so I
don't know how large they are going to be. I assume they are going to be like 11, 12
hundred square feet and so as -- I read through the staff report a couple of times and
definitely will ask Bill to clarify that later on. It was not clear to me exactly how the parking
is working for the two separate areas.
Goede: Yeah. So, for the single family -- and, Bill, you can probably chime in if I'm wrong
here, but I believe the requirement would be two spaces for each of the single family,
which is a regular residential requirement and that's satisfied by one garage spot and,
then, one driveway spot. And Bill will chime in if I'm misspeaking in any way.
Parsons: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Woman Perreault, I appreciate you
picking up on that parking analysis in the staff report, because that's certainly something
that I had discussed it and I guess that the overall feel of the community it -- Will -- Will is
correct. So, essentially, for the duplex units and the single family units, if they are one
and two bedroom units that code requires one garage car space and one parking pad
and I believe that's what they are targeting for this development. And , then, as part of
their private street segment section that they are proposing for the development, they are
doing some on-street parking for guest parking, if you can see that in the updated plan.
They have some parallel stalls in or dispersed throughout the development to make up
that deficiency. So, we are probably going to run into a parking issue and it's really not
an issue is the parking standards that they want to apply to the apartment complex,
because typically if we consider that a multi-family building and, then, it -- in my staff report
any one and two bedroom units -- or any one bedroom unit needs to have one and a half
parking stalls and, then, any two and three bedroom unit needs to have two surface
parking stalls and approximately half of those have to be covered per the multi-family
standards. In this particular case in the concept plan that's before you the applicant wants
to take advantage of the previous parking ratio that we had in code for a nursing care
facility. That no longer exists. We removed that parking requirement. Well, we -- we
have that in there, but we are not classifying this use as a nursing care facility. So, if you
have picked up in my staff report, well, we know the site will be deficient 35 parking stalls.
We feel confident based on the fact that this is a 55 and older community that there is a
less -- lesser degree of parking needed for this development and as we get closer to
building permits the applicant will have to come back before the city and seek staff level
variance or an alternate compliance request to allow for the reduction in the parking and
make a case for that and that has -- that is -- that is a DA provision in the -- in the staff
report, that if they -- they either need to comply with the parking or seek alternative
compliance and -- and justify why their parking plan is equal to or better than city code is.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 38 of 54
Simison: Council, any additional questions for the applicant at this time ? Okay. I know
that we have at least one person who signed up to testify and I believe I saw them -- I will
turn to -- Chris or Adrienne, do we just have one person signed up or do we have more
as well?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, we have one person signed up. Mr. John Overton representing
Woodbridge HOA.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Overton, welcome you to the conversation and allow you to testify.
Or are you representing the HOA? So, would you like ten minutes or will three suffice?
Overton: Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, can you hear me okay first?
Simison: Yes.
Overton: Ten minutes will suffice. I hope to be done in three.
Simison: Okay. Well, we will give you ten and let you go. And just for anyone else who
is listening, if you would like to testify on this item, please, raise your hand, use the button
at the bottom of your screen, or if you are on the phone press star nine and we will get
you queued up to testify next. So, with that, Mr. Overton, you are recognized for ten
minutes.
Overton: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council and city staff. Woodbridge is
fairly active in all the developments around our subdivision due to the traffic concerns we
have had over the years and in this case a big thank you initially to city staff, because
they had the applicants actually meet with us before they submitted their initial paperwork.
We are a little skeptical. We have been told a lot of things about some developments in
this area in the past and so we kind of put the pressure on the applicants and I got to
admit they have come through. We are somewhat familiar with some of the retirement
developments in the area. Some of my family live in and some right behind St. Luke's
across Eagle Road and I like the way they have laid this out. I think when we look at --
from a Woodbridge standpoint we are not anti-growth, we are smart growth. We want to
see something that they put back there that's going to have the least negative impact to
traffic that comes through Woodbridge and I think this is exactly the type of development
that we look for. That will enhance the area . It fits in with previous mayor's years and
years of talking about the medical corridor in this area and how this is the type of
development that would fit in with all the businesses that they would need to feed off of.
It doesn't go without concerns. We -- multiple members of our HOA sat on different parts
of the comp plan committees as those were going forward and we were very very
concerned that that roadway would remain intact, even the stub street, that could -- and
we will say that -- we are not saying it will, but it could go through into Locust View Heights
in the future and become another avenue to the signal at Locust Grove through that
development area to alleviate traffic in Woodbridge. That's been something discussed at
various times that that could be a long range redevelopment plan, not something we
expect to happen in the short term, but we want to see that preserved and it looks like in
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 39 of 54
this plan it is still preserved. It's not -- I know there is some concern in Locust View
Heights that we are going to try to tear into the subdivision now. We just want to make
sure that roadway is preserved for any future redevelopment that could come down the
road. The second aspect of our concern -- again, it's not with the development, it's not
with how its laid out, it's with history. In 2008 when the financial crisis hit we had another
development come in not too far from this one. It's still there. It's a five acre lot. It was
going to be a 55 and over development and we all supported it. It was great. But,
unfortunately, it went bankrupt and it's no longer under any guidelines to be a 55 and over
development. It can be almost anything it wants to be just because of the way things
were drawn up at that time. So, we would kind of like to hear from -- from Bill or Caleb in
planning or even in -- from the city attorney if there is anything being put into a
development agreement or any other part of this process that gives us as the
homeowners of Woodbridge some sort of a surety that because we are in not the greatest
economic times right now, that if something were to go wrong -- and we hope it doesn't.
We hope these applicants are completely successful in what they want to do with this
entire project -- that something can happen and all of a sudden we end up with an
unrestricted high density set of apartments and homes right behind Woodbridge that don't
have all these amenities and don't have the same -- they don't appear the same to us.
They are not going to give us the same sense of more peaceful traffic coming through our
subdivision. Again, a big thanks to the -- the applicants. We have met with them several
times -- several members of our HOA have met with them. We have no outstanding
issues other than making sure the roadway is pre served for future possible
redevelopment and that this doesn't change from a 55 and over development. I think they
have done a really good job.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Overton. Council, do you have any questions? All right. Thank
you very much. Adrienne, did we have anybody else raise their hand to testify?
Weatherly: Mr. Mayor, I don't see anybody else in the waiting room with their hand s
raised.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Borton.
Borton: Mr. Mayor. John had asked the question just kind of a quick snapshot on how
this application if the DA itself might provide any certainty and an approval is tied to
whatever conditions that are placed upon the application. I don't know who would answer
it, but a short response would be helpful.
Parsons: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Parsons.
Parsons: Members of the Council. Currently the DA does not restrict this to a 55 and
older community. What it does tie it to is the design concepts that are being shown to you
this evening. So, if that's something that the Council wants to add as a recommended
DA -- as a DA provision, then, certainly I would open it up to the applicant and see if they
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 40 of 54
are willing to restrict themselves to that, because that's what they have always committed
to, to not only the city, but also the residents. So, if that's something that they are willing
to do and propose to do that to themselves, then, I'm certainly open to having that added
as a DA provision.
Simison: Will, would you like to respond to that question or comment?
Goede: Yeah. We -- we would agree to that. We fully plan to develop a 55 plus
community. So, that's our intent.
Borton: Okay. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, I can also add in I think for the Woodbridge neighbors -- I mean we have
had those types of provisions in other development agreements around the city, so we
are comfortable to include that. Then, again, of course, the caveat always is if this
developer were not to build this project and a different developer were to come in to ask
a future council to change the DA, to change that provision, it would at least be a public
hearing about that. But I mean that's certainly the purview for a future council if they wish
to do that based on markets and other issues. But there would be a public hearing to that
conversation.
Simison: Okay. Thank you. Seeing no one else wishing to testify --
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I would ask one question of the applicant.
Simison: You bet.
Borton: If nobody's signed up. Will, the -- one of the conditions speaks to the list of
amenities and I see that there is the condition as written has -- provides a little certainty
-- at least I think three or four specific amenities are to be provided and , then, some
flexibility for you to work with staff to pick the remainder, but on the list in the staff report
at least it lists some of the proposed amenities to include -- and there were three that
maybe I misunderstood just how they might be amenities. The three that stood out to be
a little odd where a spa, a salon, and a restaurant, all of which seem to be -- unless the
spas are a hot tub, but at least two of the three seem to be private enterprises , which
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 41 of 54
aren't customarily amenities. So, I wasn't sure why those were on the list and you can
comment about that.
Goede: Yes. Happy to -- happy to take them off the list. It's --
Borton: Mr. Mayor. I think they are great. I think they are great to have and I would hope
they would all be there, but as far as whether it qualifies as a, quote, amenity or not, I just
-- I don't think I have seen something like that qualify when you have got -- whether it's
public art or pickleball courts and there are a lot of other types of opportunities in your list
that actually have been amenities. So, I just didn't know if there was some specific reason
why those were included.
Goede: No, there wasn't. The -- I know from the Planning and Zoning Commission they
-- I think they -- they specifically called out clubhouse, fitness facility, walking trails and
open grassy areas and, then, that -- yeah, they left some -- some openness for what --
what we are past that. If -- if you wanted to -- you know, to clarify that the ones in excess
of that can't be the restaurant or the salon , I think that would be fine. I think the -- you
know, something more like the sports courts and the community garde ns, yeah, are
probably a little more relevant to being offered as amenities there.
Borton: Okay. Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Well, that makes a lot of sense. That -- the design, though, still seems to include
and anticipate hopeful inclusion of something like a salon or a restaurant, which all seems
to make great sense, but --
Goede: Uh-huh.
Borton: -- hopefully that's not lost. If it doesn't qualify as an amenity, I don't want that to
be lost necessarily.
Goede: Yeah. Definitely the intent is to have -- to have everything shown, you know,
including restaurants and spa and everything. But -- and I think -- you know, I think that
our intent is -- is to provide an incredible amenity package and, you know, to attract
hopefully a lot of -- a lot of tenants. So, I think our goals are -- are the same. If -- we
have already worked with Bill a little bit on , you know, trying to clarify and I think Bill is
also -- in our Planning and Zoning hearing, you know, was particular about trying to tie
the development to certain amenities to make sure that the amenity package was , you
know, at least similar to what's being presented as concept based, so, yeah, if he had any
more thoughts on -- on that as well. If -- you know, there is some further clarification or
commitment that you would like out of us to maintain, which I'm happy to discuss with Bill
or if you had thoughts on that.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 42 of 54
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: You have answered the question and provided that clarity that -- that I didn't have.
So, I appreciate that.
Goede: Okay.
Simison: Council, the applicant has the last word, so I'm going to officially turn this over
to him for any final comments that may bring more questions, then, we will go from there.
Goede: Just thanks for hanging in there and just one more time. It's Goede, in case -- in
case I see any of you again.
Simison: I love -- I love the cheese, just so you know.
Goede: There you go. Thank you.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: It's not a question, but it's a comment before -- I don't know where we are headed
next, but hearing an adjacent HOA representative and an applicant provide testimony to
us about early cooperation and discussions and collaboration is an extremely great -- it's
just a wonderful approach to hear. It's great to have us receive that as the -- the
framework for this project. You probably did resolve a lot of challenges before they even
became problems by doing so, so hats off to you, Will, and your development team for
taking the time and for Mr. Overton, if he's still listening, thank you as well for your HOA
taking the time to be interested and involved in the process with these guys. So,
everybody wins when you do that.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: This -- this application has been more challenging than I -- than I anticipated.
I -- I appreciate the conversation regarding whether or not it is required to be 55 plus in
the DA and I'm glad that if there were to be an issue in the future that an applicant could
come and amend that and change that and the reason I say that is while I completely
hear the concerns of the neighboring HOA about it maintaining its status as a senior living
community, the population growth data shows that the baby boomer generation is 70 plus
million, but the Generation X, which is their children, is only in the 40 million range and,
then, millennials is a larger population than the baby boomer population and so the
likelihood is that in ten or 15 years when we no longer have our baby boomers , that
developments like this are going to struggle and if they are age restricted they are going
to struggle because the -- depending on the age of the Generation X, they may not be old
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 43 of 54
enough to live there and so I really want to make sure that there is definitely an option for
whoever manages or owns these properties in the future are able to modify that if
possible, because it could mean that in a short amount of time there is no longer anyone
available to buy those properties for a period of time. So, when I'm -- I want to make that
-- just make that really clear that the 55 plus sometimes, yes, it is a big benefit and other
times it's not a big benefit, because now you only have a small percentage of the buyers
of the homebuyers that are able to purchase those properties. You have now taken the
total amount of homebuyers in your town and you have limited it to a small amount of the
overall homebuyers and so currently in our market more than 50 percent of the buyers
are first time homebuyers. So, we actually do not have a majority of buyers being those
that are in the 55 plus age range and in addition, as Mr. Goede -- I think I got that right --
probably knows, we have several 55 plus communities that are either being considered
or have already been approved. So, I have a slight concern that we might actually create
an overage of those units in the not too far future. By the time everything is built our baby
boomers will be a few years older and -- and I'm concerned that -- that -- that we may
have too many and, then, it may not be very easy for a developer or an applicant to
change that -- that criteria and that does affect property values in a negative way. So --
which could affect the Woodbridge owners in a negative way. So, I just want to kind of
throw that out there, because I am concerned that at some point in time that we will have
too many of these 55 plus communities that will negatively affect our entire community.
And so I don't know if the applicant has anything to say about that , if he's actually done
studies on the numbers or looked at actual numbers of 55 plus units that have been built ,
but what their -- what their absorption rate has been and if he has any thoughts that he
can share about that.
Goede: I think that -- actually, I know that you are probably more -- more knowledgeable
than I am on this, but I think that you are -- I think that you are right and -- yeah. While
-- while our current pro forma is focused on, you know, the next 15 years, it's a great
observation and agree that it could be beneficial for sometime in the future -- you know,
again, not our intent now by any means, but to give some flexibility and maybe it's not full
flexibility, but maybe it's -- it's either the apartment building or the single family or
somehow taking the, you know, 160 plus total units and not tying all of them to 55 plots in
the future. So, yeah.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Just a couple of thoughts. I think -- I start from the framework of the developer
building this project is taking the equity risk and I trust that their skin is in the game and
that they are doing their due diligence regarding the demographics and the huge number
of 55 plus people moving here, that they have access to, you know, Reese reports and a
lot of other data that led them to believe that this project made sense. I also kind of c ome
back to the commitment that they made to the neighbors in Woodbridge that -- that they
would pursue this as a 55 plus community and I think that it makes sense to create that
restriction and, then, if they wanted to change it they could come back to us . So, that's
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 44 of 54
my take on that piece. But I do want to say I -- I really like this development in terms of
its design. We don't have very many environmental features that are in Meridian and to
use the creek as a focal point I think is really beautiful and I love the collaboration with
the neighbors and that you guys really got ahead of issues by meeting with so proactively.
We rarely see that and it's just very encouraging. So, I don't want to retread -- personally
retread any of that road that's already kind of been paved between the developer and the
neighbors, but I am supportive of the project.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Well, since Council Woman Strader brought up roads, I did want to just make
sure that -- I think it was Barbara Valdez who raised the concern about the stub street
and, you know, the concern by the Locust Grove Heights Subdivision -- concerned about
that being pushed through while are still there and -- and from my perspective it really is
about future preparation. We don't know how that will develop in the future . When this
group of people decide they are going to sell off and that neighborhood transitions, it very
well could be more commercial, office, that sort of thing. So, we want to preserve that
option. But for those neighbors there this is not going to be punched through while that's
a -- that's a residential area. So, just to alleviate their concerns there. And which goes to
the point that, you know, in the future we don't know what happens and this does -- even
if we make the DA a 55 and older, they can always come back to a future council and say
we are changing our plans, this is what we want to do, and it might very well fit what the
demographics have changed in that area and that's -- that's for other folks to -- to decide
when that time comes. So, I'm comfortable with it. It looks very nice. I'm not a wild fan
of mid century modern, but some people are, but it is -- it is well done. So, I appreciate
that.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I have a question for Mr. Nary. So, if -- if the -- a developer or, you know, there
is no longer one individual group involved, now the -- now the homes have -- have been
sold to individuals and now the three story building has been built and it's occupied , how
would -- how would that -- how would they go about -- I assume collectively changing the
requirement of 55 plus? Would it have to be like the homeowners association that applies
to do that? I mean how would they as owners go about changing that when there is no
longer a developer involved anymore, if -- if they were to collectively decide to do that?
Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Perreault, I would
anticipate that they would have to, then, incorporate that into any of their CC&Rs. Those
types of restrictions are commonly in CC&Rs. So, again, a future property owner is going
to know what requirements are on them moving to that. Obviously it's built to look and
feel like a 55 and older community, so it's not -- it's going to be pretty transparent. It's the
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 45 of 54
same thing with the requirements of the multi-family living, it's going to be very similar
type of thing where there will be other restrictions and -- placed into their CC&Rs, so that
people know that that's what they are buying into and that's what their future residents
are going to know. So, I'm not real concerned . I mean there is going to be some
managing of it, you know, we are talking ten years from now there may be some
management -- managing issues, but I don't really anticipate problematic enforcement
with that, so --
Perreault: Mr. Mayor, a follow up.
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I guess my -- my question was more along the lines of is the -- is the DA going
to -- if they decide they want to remove the 55 plus requirement from their CC &Rs, for
example, how -- how are they are still affected by the DA?
Nary: So, they would have to do it in two steps. They would have to change their CC&Rs
and come back to the city to change the development agreement.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Quick question for Will. I don't want to try the last name. I'm sorry. Is this legally
structured as a CCRC? Is it a continuing care retirement community where it's a fee for
entrance and, then, the developer is maintaining control of the entire community or will
there be individual private ownership of the resident -- the single family residences?
Goede: For that I think the best person to answer that would probably be Clay, who is
also on the call. Is it possible to --
Simison: If Clay would raise his hand and, then, our clerk will get them brought in. There
he is. Mr. Sammis, if you could state your name and address for the record.
Sammis: Let me try to get coordinated here. Apologize. Yes, Clay Sammis. Address is
133 Simpson Street in Ketchum, Idaho. 83340.
Simison: Thank you.
Sammis: Mr. Mayor and Commissioners, thank you. I can help with that. Jeremy's
probably -- he's our operations. We have an operations. We do intend to do 55 plus. But
to answer your question Jeremy might be more -- more equipped to answer that. I think
I can, though. If I can field this and, Jeremy raise your hand if you need to step in. But
it's -- it's independent senior living. So, it's -- it's going to have all the same services, but
not -- it -- those services are going to be third party offsite . It's offered -- some of the
similar things that we have in the senior -- senior housing, obviously, are the things you
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 46 of 54
see in our amenities. The restaurant. The food service. The -- you know. And the things
like the theaters and the art studios and -- and yoga and fitness, so -- so -- and, again,
the spa that was mentioned, so -- so, that's where we fit to the senior housing for that
type of demo graphic. But, no, we are -- we are -- we are not the traditional nursing home
as maybe you had mentioned. And I would -- I would add on the flexibility for Perreault,
if I could, who brought up -- sorry. Commissioner Perreault had mentioned that, yeah,
that due to changing times, which we cannot necessarily predict and we are talking about
later, I think the traffic issue in my mind is more on the apartment building. That's -- that's
where we -- we do agree. We are building that for -- or the whole thing's 55 plus, yes, but
the -- the apartment building by nature is -- is going to be going for that reduced parking.
That would be more specific to the, you know, nursing home and our seniors that would
be living there, so -- so, if there was -- I agree, maybe -- if you guys are going to not put
a restriction on the -- the development agreement or if -- like Will had mentioned, to ease
the pain on traffic, you know, the restriction should probably fall more on the apartment
building more than -- than the cottages. But we have, yes, committed to moving forward
on a 55 plus. So, either would work, but if you want to remain flexible I would -- I would
opt to stick it on the apartment or -- or not at all, so we can actually, you know, put forward
of what we intended to do originally, with Jeremy as our operations and -- and our -- and
our senior housing group for the 55 plus.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, a follow up.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: So, I am super sure, in my experience senior housing communities ownership
could come in different forms, so I -- what I was getting at was if there -- if it's truly
independent living and there will be an individual fee simple mortgage -- fee simple
ownership in each residence, that would answer Council Woman Perreault's question to
some extent and, then, whether you are hiring an operator and -- and residents are paying
an entrance fee, but actually owning outright their fee simple interest in their property, but
they are paying an entrance fee and, therefore, have a condominiumized type ownership
of their residence. I'm just trying to understand the exact -- if you have it. You may not
have that finalized, but if you have more of a sense of the property type or if there are
multiple property types, which is what I would normally see, which is, you know,
independent living, perhaps assisted living as well, and memory care.
Sammis: Yeah. I apologize if I have missed -- missed the intent of the question, but the
-- these are all for rent. So, the cottages will be 55 plus for rent. The multi-story tower
would be probably more closely to an age of in the 70s, because we -- and that's what
our management company, which we are self managing through -- with Jeremy as our
partner, would be -- would be doing, so -- and that's also for rent and we would be
collecting, you know, monthly rent through -- through those rental contracts.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 47 of 54
Strader: Thank you. I think for Council Woman Perreault that should answer your
concern to some extent, because there will still be one individual owner of the
development and the residents will be renting their units and so there is a mechanism for
which they could appeal -- you know, come to us for a DA modification. It doesn't totally
answer your concern, but I think it's not as if you have multiple owners at that point.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Thank you very much, Council Woman Strader, for asking that. That helps a
lot. I appreciate that. I know what you mean by the different ownership types , like
Touchmark, for example, is a similar type of product where they -- they, essentially, buy
in, but they don't own the -- the property fee simple. My concern, then, with the application
is in the future if -- if the -- the owner were to come and request a DA modification such
that it would no longer be senior living, how would we address the parking if it has been
approved at a half of the parking spot per unit. So, essentially, it never really could be
converted to anything but senior -- a senior apartment structure, because the parking
would not meet the city code requirement for a standard three level multi -family property
and so this is just kind of the things I'm struggling with.
Simison: Well -- and not to make it more complex or better, this is one of the things I have
always struggled with with any 55 and over conversation is how does anybody really ever
enforced that moving forward. If someone can explain to me how -- how it's enforced for
the Cadence properties that Brighton owns, or in this property in the future, I would really
like to hear it, because I -- unless they come back into the city for something I don't know
that there is anything we can ever do to them to -- for them to not do something that they
say from this -- from an age restricted level. And perhaps Mr. Nary has a better answer,
but it's really self enforcing to a certain extent, but the short answer would be, you know,
if they came in for a DA I assume that they would either have to meet whatever the current
standards are or apply for variance that would -- you know, to do that so all those factors
would have to be taken into consideration if they went through the proper channels. Mr.
Nary, how do we enforce 55 or over as a city?
Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a very common question, of course,
we have had in other types of projects. Again, development agreements are contracts
and you have a contractual arrangement with someone, so, you know, you, obviously,
one tool is to de-annex the property, which is probably the biggest hammer that you have.
It's not the most usable hammer in a lot of cases. There are other ways. You can certainly
enforce them through damages. Again, they are contractual requirements that people --
that developers have to meet. So, again, it would probably be driven by code, because
we are not going to necessarily know firsthand who is a tenant in their cottage homes or
in the apartments, so it's going to be driven by code enforcement and complaints of
people that are saying they are not adhering to their development agreement . No different
than any other DA that we have. So, it really is -- I mean the Mayor is partially right, if
they never need any other thing for that development, it's completely built, there is nothing
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 48 of 54
else, you are looking at either contractual damages or a de -annexation situation, which
may or may not be practical at the time. To answer Council Member Perreault's question,
again, on the parking issue I don't know what the parking standards will be , so we could
have flying cars by the time they want to come in to amend their development agreement.
I have no idea. So, it really -- I think the Mayor hit it on the head. It's going to be meeting
what -- the standards that exist at the time and the council's decision that it can't -- it can't
meet that and it doesn't have compliant parking and so the change wouldn't be approved.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: Mr. Nary, would that -- would that multi-family come in as a CUP and, then,
just be decided by the Commission?
Nary: Yeah. The multi-family I think -- I guess Mr. Parsons should probably answer that,
but I would assume it's going to have to come back to the Commission for a review as
well.
Perreault: But it won't come to Council?
Parsons: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council -- Council Woman Perreault, no, it
-- with the TN-R zones multi-family is a principally permitted use, so this is the one time
to get it right. After this it's all staff level approval.
Simison: So -- so, Council, I'm just going to give you my two cents on -- on this project in
terms of -- whether it's 55 or over, I leave that to your discretion if it feels like it makes
sense to put into a DA. I don't know that we ever want to have our code enforcement
officers going and checking on the age of people in buildings, if that's right or not from
that standpoint. I understand the commitment to the neighbors from that standpoint, but
I don't know that future neighbors are going to want to be checking the DAs and the age
of people. The one thing I really do like about this -- and this was alluded to by Council
Woman Strader and this open space and amenities group kicked off their conversations.
I wasn't part of that meeting, but, you know, I think that this is an example of a great use
of open space and amenities for a project in terms of how it is funneled and interwoven.
The percentage is higher than obviously is necessary, but I think more importantly the
way it's utilized in this project is quite attractive and beneficial to the overall project. So,
there is my two cents that you didn't ask for.
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: I'm glad we didn't close the public hearing, because now I am finding myself
with more questions. I would like to ask the applicant directly if he would make
consideration of adding more guest parking in the cottages area . I just -- I'm really still
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 49 of 54
struggling with -- and this is based on experience of seeing these types of properties be
developed and, then, getting calls into the city regarding issues with on -- on-street
parking, you know, just there not being enough space, especially with the -- the single car
garage properties. So, I don't -- another -- in light of what the Mayor just stated, we
certainly don't want to come -- to have code enforcement called anymore than necessary.
I really like to address these kinds of things while we are here now and so I just -- I had
heard application after application after application and I am familiar being in real estate
with how these 55 plus communities work in this area and I very -- very infrequently see
those homes have -- have fewer cars than -- than just regular single family homes. It
doesn't seem to me -- I understand that there is an assumption that there will be fewer
vehicles, but I don't think in reality -- at least with the cottages that you are going to see
fewer vehicles.
Sammis: Well, thank you, and if I -- if I -- I will address that. I think we might be somewhat
different than the other standard 55 plus I would think, because we are transitionally right
there up against our multi-story building that will be, you know, the higher ages. So, I
think we will attract maybe higher than the 55 plus, because that's -- that's kind of the --
the entry to the cottage, which, then, is the entry to the apartments. But to address -- I
think that what we could, you know, commit to and we have been looking at it is making
the garages wider for storage -- for the appropriate storage. We are meeting and I think
exceeding the parking requirement. We do have guest parking and -- and -- and to -- to
alleviate -- alleviate your concern that -- that someone is going to use their garage as
storage, we want to -- we want to address that issue. We will -- we will make them wider
for racks and storage, but not -- not -- we don't know -- because it's a give and take. If
you are -- if you are going to increase the parking standard for this project on those
cottages, then, we -- we, then -- you know, it's a struggle. We won't get the open space
or the amenities or the -- the nature walks that we -- that we really want. So, I think I
could commit to you that we will -- we will -- we will make sure that we have shelving in
our garages, so a car has adequate space to pull in. Does that help answer your
question? Sorry for the --
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Perreault: It's a good start. I would rather hear you say that all of them are going to be
two car garages, but I don't get the feeling that you are willing to throw that out there,
because it's going to decrease the number of units that you have and I understand what
you are saying. The intention is to have individuals move into the cottages and , then, in
a few years eventually move into the apartments. It's supposed to work in a transition
type of setup. But if it is an active lifestyle community, which is what it sounds like you
want it to be, obviously, the people who are going to be living there are going to be active
enough to be playing sports and to be -- and to be, you know, going out and doing things
in the common areas. They are, obviously, going to be active enough to -- to be driving
and -- and, you know, having vehicles and -- and taking trips and traveling and maybe
needing -- or wanting to store camping gear or wanting to store skiing gear and so it's a
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 50 of 54
totally different situation when you are in sort of an independent slash assisted living
scenario where those individuals are not active enough to have sports gear and -- you
know. And that kind of thing. But that doesn't sound like what you are trying to attempt.
It sounds like you are trying to attempt appealing to folks that are active that will be
wanting to be getting out and doing things and so that's -- that's my struggle.
Sammis: Understood. I think these are small units. They are -- they are -- they are the
elderly seniors and I -- and while we want them to be active, I think they will be active on
site and with many of our -- with many of the activities that we have offsite, too, I suppose,
but -- but I think that, hopefully, they -- they -- they won't even need cars to drive, because
they will be doing so much on site. But I guess I -- we will -- we will strive to make, you
know, the attempt to add additional guest parking, but I don't know what the commitment
is today. I mean certainly we could look at it, but we have already tried to add as much
as we can along those -- those streets. So, I guess I would just defer to maybe a Council
decision in how you want to move forward on that. But we -- we feel we are meeting
and/or exceeding code, at least for the -- for the cottages and, then, if we get the -- the
nursing, which is under -- and I -- what is it, Bill? NIACS code 6-2 -- 6-2-3, I mean we are
-- our independent living and all the facilities that we have they are not building do qualify
as a nursing building, so I think it is the .5 -- the .5 park and it would have -- and we are
-- I don't know if we are double, but we are well in excess. We are closer to the market
apartment rate -- multi-family parking than we are the -- the nursing parking. So, as it
relates to parking to the south, you know, cottages and overflow and guest parking could
park also in the apartment parking lot because it's well in excess of the nursing parking
and we do have a bridge that connects the two communities . So, we feel that parking
can be met there.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any further questions? Comments? Motions to close the
public hearing? All comers.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I move that we close the public hearing on Item 7-C.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 7-C. Is there
any discussion on the motion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed
nay. The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 51 of 54
Strader: I will just kick off hopefully a conclusion of our discussion , but we will see. You
know, I -- I feel good about approving this one and I also feel good about approving it with
the condition that it's 55 and up and the reason is that we have parking appropriate for a
55 and up project and if things change in the future I'm confident that the legal ownership
structure allows the -- the owner at that time to approach us and we can consider the fact
at that time. The whole project was tailored toward 55 and I feel like that that's the
agreement they struck with the neighbors. I don't have as many compliance questions.
I think it's something that usually handles itself and, you know, they were intentional about
their parking and it was geared toward this type of project. So, you know, I'm okay with
that kind of a condition. But either way I feel comfortable approving it.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I agree with Council Woman's Strader's comments and rationale on the project.
I do think it makes great sense and I'm supportive of the proposal to have the DA include
the 55 and over component as well.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: I tried to remain relatively quiet on this one. In part because I wanted to hear
from my colleagues. For me this project is -- is a no brainer. Is that right blend of creativity
and thoughtfulness and if it's approved it's going to be great addition to our community.
I'm fine with whatever the body wants to do on the -- on the age requirement piece. I
think it's built and designed to meet that 55 and up model. If adding that language to the
DA makes Council feel more confident in our decision, I'm supportive of that. I think the
Mayor brings up a really valid point. Are we going to turn our code enforcement into the
age police and checking IDs of residents. I don't think that's a reality, but I do think it is
-- at lease a step if our intention is just to signal to the developer and to the neighbors
what our intention and what their intention is I'm supportive of leaving it.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Yeah. I'm good with that DA requirement. It makes sense to do that and this
development I -- I think it would be a good show place to show people what you can do
with open space and amenities and from what we have seen from the drawings -- and I
hope it does that and I think it will. I didn't know if we had to do anything with the amenity
portions. You know, Councilman Borton talked about, you know, taking out those -- and
that's on the record about the restaurant, spa, salon and I think Commission, you know,
allowed some -- some variance from that, a few -- a couple things that were for sure and,
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 52 of 54
then, they could select from the others and I'm good with that. But overall it's a very well
done development.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Just closing up on the amenity comment, around the city where Pickleball is one
of the more popular endeavors, especially with folks over -- from 40 to 94. So, if amongst
your flexibility there is incorporation of Pickleball I'm sure it will be wildly popular, because
they are on the roads going to the parks to use our courts.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I will try to make a motion, but I will rely on Mr. Borton to help me. I -- after
considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony I move to approve file number H-
2019-0127 with the modifications that we include a condition in the DA that this be a 55
and up development and with the further condition that the applicant work with city staff
on an amenity package that is acceptable.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve the project. Is there any discussion
on the motion?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Just before -- before the vote, Council Member Borton touched on this briefly
about the neighborhood participation and I just wanted to add a thanks to staff. I don't
know if this -- if I have missed one in the past, but having those audio testimonies added
was also equally appreciated, you know, and I know that we heard from Woodbridge, but
you also heard from a lot of the residents through this process , but I liked having the
opportunity to hear them audibly. So, thanks for including that.
Borton: Good point.
Simison: I'm glad that taking testimony in many forms is getting a little bit more play these
days. All right. If there is no further comments, I will ask the clerk to call the roll.
Roll call: Bernt, absent; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
nay.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 53 of 54
Simison: Four ayes. One no. The motion passes. Thank you very much. Best of luck
as you move forward.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT.
Item 8: Ordinances [Action Item]
A. Ordinance No. 20-1880: An Ordinance (H-2019-0134 Hill’s
Century Farm North) for Rezone of a Parcel of Land Being a
Portion of the North ½ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 33,
Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County,
Idaho; Establishing and Determining the Land Use Zoning
Classification of 39.9 Acres of Land From R-8 (Medium Density
Residential) Zoning District to C-N (Neighborhood Business)
Zoning District (4.9 Acres), C-C (Community Business) Zoning
District (4.35 Acres) and R-15 (Medium High Residential) Zoning
District (30.65 Acres) in the Meridian City Code; Providing That
Copies of This Ordinance Shall be Filed with the Ada County
Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as Required by Law; and Providing for a Summary
of the Ordinance; and Providing for a Waiver of the Reading
Rules; and Providing an Effective Date
Simison: With that we will move on to Item 8-A, Ordinance No. 20-1880. I will ask the
clerk to read this ordinance by title.
Weatherly: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ordinance No. 20-1880, an Ordinance, H-2019-0134,
Hills Century Farm North, for rezone of a parcel of land being a portion of the north ½ o f
the northwest ¼ of Section 33, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian, Ada
county, Idaho; establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of 39.9
acres of land from R-8 (Medium Density Residential) zoning district to C-N (Neighborhood
Business) zoning district (4.9 acres), C-C (Community Business) zoning district (4.35
acres) and R-15 (Medium High Residential) zoning district (30.65 acres) in the Meridian
City Code; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County
Assessor, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax commission, as required by
law; and providing for a summary of the ordinance; and providing for a waiver of the
reading rules; and providing an effective date.
Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard this ordinance read by title. Would you or
is there anybody on the phone call who would like it read in its entirety? If so raise your
hand. Okay. No one did that. So, with that, Council, do I have a motion?
Perreault: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Perreault.
Meridian City Council
May 19, 2020
Page 54 of 54
Perreault: Treg continually -- or Council -- Council President Bernt continually reminds
me that it is a Seat 5's job to make these motions on the ordinance, so I will gladly carry
the torch. I kind of miss him actually giving me the eyeball when -- when it's time. So, I
move that we approve Ordinance 20-1880 with the suspension of rules.
Hoaglun: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve for Ordinance No. 20-1880 with the
suspension of the rules. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, clerk will call the
roll.
Roll call: Bernt, absent; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion passes. Thank you very much.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 7: Future Meeting Topics
Simison: Is there any item under nine for future meeting topics ? If not, I will entertain a
motion.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move that we adjourn.
Cavener: Second.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. Is there any discussion on the motion?
If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Those opposed nay. The ayes have it. We
are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Simison: Thank you, everybody, for a great evening of public involvement and
participation.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:30 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
_______________________________ ______/______/______
MAYOR ROBERT SIMISON DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK