Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 02-14 ~y Counc!!...M.!!!! na February 14. 2006 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, February 14, 2006, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Shaun Wardle, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree and Joe Borton. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Craig Caleb Hood, Len Grady, John Overton, Bill Johnson, Doug Strong, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X Shaun Wardle X Charlie Rountree X X Joe Borton X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call the meeting to order. It is Tuesday, Valentine's Day, February 14th. We'd like to thank you for joining us and taking away from where ever else you should be on this special evening. So, thank you for sharing it with us. We will begin with roll call, please. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance by Sara Malaise and Katie Killpack: De Weerd: Okay. Item 2. We will be led tonight by Sara Malaise. She is president of her local chapter of the FFA and Katie Killpack, vice president. If you will all rise. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Glen Olsen, with LDS: De Weerd: Item No.3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Glen Olsen. He's with the LDS church. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of silence. Olsen: Our Father in Heaven, we are grateful that we can meet together as community members of this great place where we live. We are thankful, Father, for the service of our Council and pray for their -- the blessings of the Spirit to be with them that they might have understanding and make wise choices as they are placed before them this evening. We pray for those who will present and that they might also have the ability to speak their minds and present those things which are important to them. We are grateful for our freedom and for the peaceful community we live in. We are grateful for those who provide that and who -- particularly who remain in harm's way. We are grateful for their service, our military people, our police, our firemen, all those who Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 2 of 56 provide for the well being of this wonderful community. We pray thy blessings and thy Spirit upon the meeting in the name of Jesus Christ, amen. De Weerd: Thank you for joining us tonight. Now, Glen, I don't know if I have given you a City of Meridian pin before. Olsen: You have, but I would love another one. De Weerd: Well, I'd love to give you another one. Thank you for joining us. Olsen: My pleasure. Thank you so much. Item 4. Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Okay. Item No.4 is adoption of the agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: With the permission of yourself and our President of the Council, I would like to add under department reports the Fire Department, Deputy Chief Johnson, would like to talk to the Council and get a response from the Council on the contracted labor through the Forest Service fighting fires, so with your permission I would move that we change the agenda to make one more department report and that would be Item C, Fire Department. Our resolution, which I will also repeat under the Consent Agenda, is 06- 503. And with that I would move that we approve the revised agenda. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. You have a motion in front of you with an amendment to the agenda. All those in favor, please, say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Proclamation: FFA Week: De Weerd: Okay. Item No.5. I have the privilege tonight to read a proclamation and that is why we have guests from the FFA and I would like to just come down to the podium. And after I do this -- well, Trudy and Sara, if you want to just come up and stand next to me as I read this proclamation. Okay. Whereas the Future Farmers of America and agriculture education provide a strong foundation for the youth of America and the future of food, fiber, and natural resources and whereas the FFA promotes premier leadership, personal growth and career success among its members, and whereas agriculture education and the FFA insure a steady supply of young professionals to meet the growing demands in the science, business, and technology of Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 3 of 56 agriculture, and whereas the FFA model, Learning To Do, Doing To Learn, Earning To Live, Living to Serve, give direction and purpose to these students who take an active role in succeeding in agricultural education and whereas the FFA promotes citizenship, volunteerism, patriotism, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do hereby proclaim the week of February 18th through the 25th, 2006, as FFA week in the City of Meridian in recognition of the success of the Future Farmers of America program in our community, dated this 14th day of February, 2006. And I'll give that to you and thank you for joining us. Malaise: On behalf of the Meridian FFA Chapter, we'd like to present an award to Mayor Tammy de Weerd on her continued support to our FFA chapter. For all her continued support through helping us students gain potential in premier leadership, personal growth, and career success and for these reasons we would like to present this award to our Mayor. De Weerd: Thank you. And a reminder that you have a breakfast on Friday morning bright and early. Thank you for joining us. And you are from Meridian High School; is that correct? Okay. Thank you for joining us. We appreciate that. Item 6: Consent Agenda: A. B. C. Approve Minutes of January 9, 2006 City Council & ACHD Commissioners Special Joint Workshop Meeting: Approve Minutes of January 31, 2006 City Council Special Meeting: Resolution No. 06-503 : VAC 05-015 Request to Vacate City of Meridian water and sewer easements for Marce Subdivision by James R. Wylie - 3070 Fairview Avenue: D. Aareement for Professional Services with Civil Survev Consultants. Inc. for Broadway Avenue, Meridian Road to Fifth Street Utility Replacement: E. License Aareement for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Proiect: F. Contract for Expedition Technical Assistance and Pipeline Proiect with CH2M Hill: G. Contract for South Area Lift Station and Pipeline Proiect with Ashley land Services: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Pretermination Hearing for Kelly Krommenhoek, 2735 W. Higan Street: Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 4 of 56 De Weerd: Okay. Item No.6 is our Consent Agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Our Consent Agenda, Item C is resolution number is 06-503 and all the agreements, contracts and stuff, has been signed by the contractors and all is in place for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest and I move that we approve the Consent Agenda as noted. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Department Reports: A. Mayors Office - Tammy de Weerd 1. Proclamation I Recoanition to Marshall Eichenberaer 100th Birthday: De Weerd: I have the privilege tonight -- and it's kind of an executive privilege I have taken. It's, on Saturday, my grandfather's 1 Oath birthday. So, in recognition of that, our City Clerk as done an absolutely fantastic job of doing a recognition and proclamation in his honor. That is in recognition of Marshall Ike Eichenberger's 10ath birthday. Whereas in this day and age that a 10ath birthday is a major milestone in anyone's life, but especially for one that has grown up and raised a family in this valley and whereas Marshall Ike Eichenberger will turn 100 years old on Saturday, February 18th, 2006, and whereas he is the last living member of the first graduating class of 1924 in Melba High School and whereas he is one of the last true pioneers with many everlasting adventures and experiences growing up in Melba and the Treasure Valley, therefore, I, Tammy de Weerd -- okay -- Mayor of the City of Meridian and granddaughter, do hereby proclaim Saturday, February 18th, 2006, as Marshall Ike Eichenberger day in the City of Meridian in recognition for his 10ath birthday celebration. And I will be with him in Sun City in Arizona to celebrate that with our entire family, my sisters, and his extended family, which he has several brothers and sisters still living as well. So, I appreciate you allowing me this executive privilege and this is quite a recognition. I do Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 5 of 56 have another grandfather as well who turned 96 last month. So, as I have told my husband he's got me around for a long time. I think he's excited about that. B. Parks Department - Doug Strong 1. Discussion of Meridian Youth Baseball and Softball Proiect Cost Issues with Amendment to the Aareement: De Weerd: Okay. Item 7-B, our parks department. Mr. Strong. I also might note, my grandfather is still living by -- he and his wife are still living by themselves in their own home and so that's quite a feat. Strong: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. As you may recall, two weeks ago I was here to talk about some of the increased costs that we have experienced in Meridian Settler's Park with the partnership that we have with Meridian Youth Baseball and the baseball complex at that park and discussed the increased cost and the need for some additional park impact fees to cover what we are projecting to be the total cost of our phase one green up of that project. So, I would be happy to discuss -- or review those numbers for you if that's necessary to go back to that, but also a part of what we are discussing was revisions to the agreement that we have with Meridian Youth Baseball to bring that into alignment with the changes that we are making in city funding going in phase one versus the way the agreement was originally written and you should have a copy of that revised agreement for your review as well. So, with that very minimal introduction, I would be happy to answer questions related to this request. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Doug, in your department, with your impact fees and stuff, what is -- first, let me ask what does phase one consist of? Is that ready to play ball? Everything except the concession stand and the lavatories? Strong: That's correct. Bird: Okay. Do you have in impact fees enough to finish that? We can't have it in parts. I'm speaking personally. Strong: We do have -- we have about 958,000 currently un-obligated in park impact fees as of today from our fiscal department. Bird: And Boise Youth -- or Meridian -- Boise. And Meridian Youth Baseball had 300,000, as I understand? Strong: About 315,000. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 6 of 56 Bird: And what does it cost to finish it? Strong: It will cost -- a total cost of the project estimated right now for phase one is 1,690,000. And as you may recall back in August there was some additional funds put towards this project. We have 768,757 of the city funds obligated at time remaining, with the 315,000 that MID has in their account. That's 1,083,757. So, it leaves 660,243 dollars. Bird: And you just told me you had 900 -- Strong: We have 958,000, I believe. Bird: So, you can cover that? Strong: Yes. Bird: This is one Councilman that would like to see it finished and get done. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: But just the numbers that you just gave us are only phase one and do not include the lavatories or concession; is that correct? Strong: That's correct. And that portion of the development, as you see in the agreement, would be the obligation of Meridian Youth Baseball to complete the buildings and structures on site. Wardle: And I guess we can hear from a representative if they have some, but I'd like to know what kind of a time line that would be. Strong: That's identified in the agreement as phase two and three, I believe, as you go through. I think phase three is the maintenance building. De Weerd: Well, Council, I had told Trace I wouldn't call him up here and put him on the spot, but since you requested, I -- Wardle: I'll request that, Mayor. Rountree: We'd love to hear from him. Layton: Trace Layton, Meridian Youth Baseball. De Weerd: You want to remove your hat, sir? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 7 of 56 Layton: I just got done with practice. Wardle: Trace, I guess my question -- and my question at the last time we discussed this was with a lifetime of little league baseball under my belt, I know how important those restroom areas are for players and family members and coaches and all those kinds of things and so I just -- is September 2007 that I see in the agreement, is that feasible for Meridian Youth Baseball to have those facilities? Layton: At this time I believe so. Even though I haven't even told Doug this. In the last week I have been working hard on -- that's where we really feel that we can get a lot of in-kind donated labor, donated materials, and not including the equipment as far as concession stand equipment. I'm pretty confident that right now I have got everything donated to build them, except for the block and the masonry work. So, they very well could go in at the same time as phase one. I have still got to get some of that firmed up, because I want to get phase one going before those guys all want to commit a hundred percent to doing this. They kind of want to know, well, when am I going to be donating this labor, you know, now or is it in two or three years and so we are trying to get it done right now, but I can't guarantee it a hundred percent, but I'm very confident that we can do it. Wardle: Okay. De Weerd: So, Mr. Bird, do you have any questions to elaborate on that? Bird: No. I think it's very capable of -- being involved in -- with the building of the Legion field, the restrooms and the concession stands and the announcer's booth was the least of our worries. Getting the -- we got a lot of that donated and got that up at the same time we was able to open and I think Trace can -- I think it will come through for him. I just want to get it finished. I don't want to see it out there half finished and it's something that -- that park was -- in '92 was originally bought for baseball and sports and I think that's the last thing we have got on it and that's what it was basically bought for was because -- to give youth baseball some more fields that they dearly need. So, I'd just like to see it get -- whatever the rest of the Council feels like, I'm one that -- let's get it built and we know that Meridian Youth Baseball will work, we will take care of it, and it will, five years from now, look better than what it did when we opened it up. De Weerd: So, Council, would it be appropriate to go ahead and consider the request in front of you tonight and maybe let Mr. Layton and Mr. Strong work on the restroom facility -- restroom, concession stand, whatever, and bring that back with a time frame and some associated costs. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 8 of 56 Wardle: I guess my opinion is the agreement and the revisions are fine, I just wanted to know, you know, if that's a solid date and if Trace says he can meet and even maybe beat that, I'm comfortable with moving forward. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Just a question for Doug. I could have one for Trace, but I'll let him go. Would you require a budget amendment first to apply the additional six hundred and some thousand dollars to finish phase one? Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council and Councilman Rountree, I believe that in order to add this amount of money it would require Council -- or an amendment to the budget, so -- De Weerd: Yes, it does. Rountree: Thanks, Doug. I guess from my perspective I agree with Councilman Bird that we have waited long enough, the costs keep going up, we have the money in the bank and we are not earning interest as fast as inflation is causing the cost of construction to go up, so the time is now. Let's get it done. Wardle: Is that a motion? Bird: Second it. Rountree: If you need a motion, that's a motion. Bird: I got a second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is get it done. Rountree: Get 'er done. De Weerd: Get 'er done. Strong: That means the money is a part of that motion, then? Just want to be sure. The additional funds are part of the motion? Rountree: Do I have a specific amount? Strong: Well, we have identified a specific amount. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page g of 56 Rountree: Okay. Do I have it here? Strong: You can round it off. Up would be good. Rountree: Six hundred and what? Nine thousand? Strong: It's 606,243. That's very specific, so -- Bird: 610. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I would move that we approve a budget amendment for the Parks and Rec's. Department in the amount of, not to exceed $610,000 for the completion of Settler's Park phase one. Bird: Second that. De Weerd: Okay. In addition to the get 'er done, we do have a motion to approve budget amendment for the Parks Department. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Now, I assume that that was the amendment to the agreement on the get 'er done. Bird: Yes. Rountree: Yes. 2. Amendment to the Agreement with PAL for Heroes Park: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Trace. Okay. Item No.3. Or -- yeah. Actually, Item No.2. Strong: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a very minor update to the agreement with PAL and the soccer complex development that is underway at Heroes Park. As you recall, back in August when additional money was approved by Council for this particular project, what you approved was to pave the parking lot and so the way our agreement with PAL was written, at that time the parking lot was going to have a temporary surface. So, this became an obligation of the city to put in the parking lot and pave the parking lot, which is different than the original agreement. So, it's just that one area of the agreement that's changed. So, it's to update the agreement to reflect that. They are still performing the portions of the agreement that were initially identified and the city has been performing on the other Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 10 of 56 portions of the agreement, with the exception of having a change to reflect that we are also paving -- installing and paving the parking lot. So, with that I would entertain questions. De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, Doug, is the reflection on item number two -- or is the change in item number two reflective of the request for item number three or are we getting ahead of -- Strong: Item number three is a part of the Heroes Park development, but it's a new issue that's emerged since the original agreement was put together, so -- Wardle: I guess my question is are we going to -- if we consider item number three, do we need to, then, re-amend item two again? Strong: No. I don't believe so. Wardle: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move we accept the amendment to the agreement with PAL for Heroes Park. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to amend the agreement with PAL with Heroes Park. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 3. Budaet Amendment ReQuest for Heroes ~k Cons~: De Weerd: Thank you, Will. Okay. Item 3. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 11 of 56 Strong: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I have asked park superintendent Elroy Huff to talk about this particular item and the details of what we are requesting under Item 3. Huff: Madam Mayor, Members of the Commission -- or City Council, just to let you know, I brought my Valentine with me tonight. She's never been to a City Council meeting, so she gets to see how things work. De Weerd: Well, what a great way to spend your Valentine's Day. Huff: I had to drag her along. Bird: That's better than chocolate. Huff: I promised her that she wouldn't go to sleep. Anyway -- so, to get down to business, I'm just requesting 31,585 dollars as an impact fee budget amendment to Heroes Park relating to some issues that came up there with some street issues with some old drainage pipe that goes under street that goes off property. It's the overflow for the lake. We had some piles of spoils out there that came from an unknown source somewhere in Lochsa Falls. I couldn't trace it down. It happened after the bid was let. That amount of soil that was there can show up there in a few days if you're not on the site and we weren't all the time. So, you get just stuck with something and as soon as you go talk to everybody they all shut up and, then, nobody else drops anymore stuff there. It's kind of interesting sometimes. The 20,000 that you see on here is a contingency. We have been asked by Ada County Highway District now to sleeve that old pipe under the road. It's an 18 inch pipe. We got to slide a 12 inch inside of that. That's a strong enough pipe that if that one fails everything will be okay there. And if that works fine, that's good. We have tried to figure out the integrity of that pipe and, hopefully, that will slide through there. If there is a problem with that and we have to dig up the street, that's where that contingency is. I hope that we don't have to do that. I have done as much investigation as I can, other than we haven't slid any pipes down the thing to see -- we think it will be fine. But just another note of interest here. On this project, since that started, we had a little deal worked out with PAL to do some excavation on the irrigation lake and a few other items there and when we got ready to start the contract this fall it got to the point where they weren't able to get those things done. Those would have been extra cost to us in change orders and we had a good talk with PAL about those things and they went ahead and paid those and so we had some extra things in there from PAL that they paid. It amounts to over 18,000 dollars. So, they have been really good on this project to help us with things and I've just enjoyed working with them. It took us a little while to get going. There is a lot of excavation going on in there right now and so we should have grass seed going. The first time we get things going -- if the weather will permit. We have about a half of an irrigation system to still be installed and I know the contractors faunching at the bit to get out there. I was out there today and it's just a little bit too muddy to get on right on the top. And so we are looking forward to that. For this year's budget I have 111,000 dollars in there and with that we will plant at least somewhere in the neighborhood of Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 12 of 56 150 trees on that site with Eagle Scout projects, things like that, I have got working. Thirty picnic tables. A new 30-by-60 shelter. And about 30 trash cans. So, come fall about time that soccer is ready to go -- there won't be a restroom and stuff there, but there will be enough stuff there to handle the load of a 490 some car parking lot. So, that's where I'm at tonight. So, I would request an impact fee amendment to Heroes Park budget of 31,585 dollars. De Weerd: Council, any questions for Mr. Huff? . Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I move we approve the request for impact fees of 31 ,585 for Heroes Park. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve the request for 31,585 dollars. Any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you so much. We appreciate you bringing your wife to share in this special evening. Huff: Thank you very much. Rountree: You better watch what you get for the next holiday. 4. Request for Impact Fees for Heroes Park by Farwest, llC: De Weerd: Okay. Item No.4. Mr. Nary, I believe you are covering this. Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. You have a letter on your laser fiche from Wilson and McColl. I did speak with a representative from Farwest, LLC, this evening and they weren't able to get a representative here. You have this letter in front of you. I don't know if you have all had an opportunity to read it. I can summarize it very quickly. Basically, when the Lochsa Falls Subdivision was proposed and part of the ground that was being proposed that is now Heroes Park, a portion of it was to be donated and a portion of it the city was going to purchase at a fairly reduced Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 13 of 56 price, especially in today's market per acre. The strange thing in the development agreement that was imposed at the time indicated that the impact fees that were collected from Lochsa Falls would be applied towards the purchase price. It didn't just indicate all the impact fees, but ones just from that. There was some -- I guess some changes in the partnership that brought -- or brought the Lochsa Falls Subdivision -- some of that property has been removed and put into a different project that eventually became Kelly Creek. So, the city has been taking all of the Lochsa Falls impact fees and applying it and reimbursing the developer, but what they are asking is is there will be a shortfall based on the number of lots that have now been re-adjusted due to these changes and, therefore, they are asking for reimbursement for the full amount of what was contemplated at the time. You know, it certainly makes sense as to what they are requesting. If you would like to have a member from Farwest, LLC, be present, I told them I would ask you if you wanted to set that over, l'd notify them of the date that they could be present in the future. If you think there is enough information here for you to take some action, that's certainly within your prerogative to do. But that's the basis of the letter in a nutshell. If you have any questions I hope we could answer those for you. $120,157.50 is the difference. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I do have a question. Bill, do we -- did you find out if under the Gibson Fulfer deal, did we collect the impact fees on that, too, and was that credited to Lochsa Falls or how was that done? Nary: From what I understand, the ones -- once it became not a Lochsa Falls project, those impact fees are collected, they just weren't credited towards this purchase. So, the city did collect impact fees from all of these projects, just that the way this development agreement was worded at the time indicated the only ones that would be reimbursed were from the Lochsa Falls project. Bird: Yeah. That's what -- I mean I just -- De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Bill, is this -- have there been other occasions like this where this has happened, where there has been a shortfall and, if so, how was that treated? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 14of56 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council member Borton, I'm not aware of another one. I think because it's not -- it isn't common for the city to have dedicated specifically like this. I don't know -- I can't recall specifically why it was done in this particular fashion, but it isn't common. Normally, the impact fees are simply reimbursed towards it. It generally works out on a one-to-one basis as was contemplated. Here because the property changed hands and the development changed a little bit after the deal was struck, is the reason for the shortfall. But normally, no, I don't believe I can recall in the last five years this type of request, it's just that most of them don't get specific to this degree in saying it has to be this project. There is some language that was contained in there that talks about requesting reimbursement if the city ever went to zones and the city doesn't have any zones currently for parks. They look at parks in the global scale for the entire city, so we collect impact fees city wide for all city projects and I think what was anticipated at the time of this agreement was that if that potential existed, it would still give them the ability to request beyond Lochsa Falls, because it was determined that this park would be serving more the Lochsa Falls Subdivision, then, the city would be free to, then, reimburse from other -- other impact fee zones. Again, we don't have any zones, so that never happened, but it was contemplated at the time that if it did, then, the city would be free to reimburse from other areas or pockets where they would have gotten impact fees. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Bill, in the original, Gibson and Fulfer property was included in that. Nary: Yes, sir. Bird: So, basically, we would be living up to the agreement if we used those that they received and that gets it back to the right amount of lots. Am I not right on that deal? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, that's correct. I think realistically what they are asking is just simply an adjustment and a request for a budget amendment to take it out of the impact fee account. Again, we don't have zones, so we collect all the funds from the city and put it in one pot and, then, divvy it out for different projects and budgets in particular for different reasons. But, yeah, you're exactly right, if you took the same amount from Kelly Creek and those other subdivisions that were developed, North McMillan and Ten Mile area, it would, essentially, be the same result of what was contemplated at the time. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Mr. Nary, the purchase -- the original agreement on purchase price was not changed; correct? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 15 of 56 Nary: That is correct. No, it has not. Wardle: And, essentially, we have -- from what I hear, we have collected fees already and are in the impact fee area, just not specifically under the same name. Nary: Correct. Wardle: Okay. Nary: Yes. All they are contemplating in their letter is that if we stuck to this specific language, that once they have built out Lochsa Falls and there is not a large number of lots remaining, they will still have the shortfall of 120,000 dollars. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? And we are looking for direction. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you want to -- if you feel comfortable based on the letter and the information that's been provided to make a decision, you're free to do that. If you would prefer it have a representative from Farwest, LLC, in case you have other questions or concerns, you certainly can reset this to another day. I will notify them of that specific date and they will have a person here. So, it's really up to you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I'd like to ask Director Strong if the parks has any -- if they agree with this or if he - - you know, I'm sure he does, because -- Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilman Bird, in my review of this and review of the legal department, it looks like a reasonable request. I'm certainly not an expert in these situations, but it looks like the way it sorts out would make sense. Bird: You're okay with that, then? Strong: Yes. Bird: Okay. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I just need clarification, I guess, from Bill. All of the fees have been collected to make this difference in the other subdivisions that have been developed since this property changed hands or are there more fees to come towards this and the way I read the agreement, if that's the case, then, would that not Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 16 of 56 necessarily apply all of the -- the differences at this point, but simply maybe an amended development agreement, to have those fees payoff as stated in the agreement? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, thank you for clarifying that, because I think that's probably what I left out. What they are asking is that the Council approve that the fees be collected -- as the fees are collected that they be made whole for the total amount of what the purchase price that was contemplated when the park property was purchased from the -- by the city. They recognize that we aren't necessarily giving them a check for 120,000 dollars. That as we are continuing to collect, Lochsa Falls isn't completely done. All they put in this letter is saying once it is there is no shortfall. We are still collecting fees from Kelly Creek and the surrounding subdivisions as they develop. So, all you would be authorizing is that the city would make them whole, complete the full purchase price and apply the fees as collected from the other subdivision or out of the park impact fee account to make this whole as they have been collected and contemplated, Does that make sense? Rountree: Uh-huh. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: To make sure -- it makes sense to me. So, it's not necessarily an allocation of collected impact fees right now, it's more recognition that impact fees as they are collected in the future, will still be allocated to cover that. Nary: Councilmember Borton, that is correct. Yes. As they are collected they can be, then, reimbursed to them as it comes through the city. Borton: Does that require action now to approve that or is that something we just need to be aware of and, then, when those -- when Lochsa Falls is finished with its sales that that gap be filled in at that time. Nary: If you would -- if you would prefer, I mean they can certainly request to amend the development agreement for that portion. If you think -- because you're correct, if you -- I think what they are seeking now is your -- Council's action saying you're going to concur with their request, you will authorize that the future collection of impacts fees, until this full amount is reimbursed to Farwest, LLC, that they be paid from those impact fees that guy collected. Again, it doesn't have to be from one specific subdivision, it can be from any of the impact fees that are collected, but they would be reimbursed as these get collected. If you want it in a different formula, we could ask them to bring what their proposed formula or timing is. You can ask them to bring a development agreement amendment in conjunction with your motion to concur with the request, but requires them to amend the development agreement to reflect that and the timing and any of those options are certainly available to you. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 17 of 56 De Weerd: Okay. Any further information needed? I will need a motion to act on this. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I move that we -- that we -- I guess inartfully worded -- concur with the request for Farwest to be made whole, along with the original intent of the development agreement, but that an amended development agreement be brought forth for the Council to reflect that concurrence and the city's obligation to make them whole for the entire impact fee amount in the shortfall. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the request and bring back an amendment -- an amended agreement. Mr. Nary, is there any further information you need? Nary: No, ma'am. De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion, Council? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call role. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. So, as I understand it, we will come back with an agreement, but will you also notify the accounting department of this? Nary: Madam Mayor, I will. c: Fire Department - Mr. Johnson. De Weerd: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Strong. Okay. Item 7-C. Fire Department. Mr. Johnson. Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Tonight I'm here to discuss with you the equipment rental agreement with the Idaho Department of Lands for assistance on wildland fires throughout the summer. A couple of weeks ago they approached us to sign this agreement, which we have not done in the last several years due to costs that would be incurred by the city and fire department, because of the way the agreement was written. What they want is to rent a piece of our fire apparatus to go up to a fire out of McCall where it's threatening structure, use a Meridian fire crew to help protect these structures. The way the contract used to read was it was a flat fee for the apparatus and equipment and our contracted labor costs through the union and stuff, would actually end up costing the city more money. So, they went through and Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 18 of 56 amended how they do their payment and stuff, where we can now send an un-operated piece of equipment up there, call it that. They will give us a flat hourly rate for that piece of fire apparatus. Then, they will reimburse us for employee costs to make us whole, including the benefits cost of this. This is the way that they have come around to get it, so the departments like Meridian, Nampa, Caldwell and Boise can actually sign onto this agreement, so we aren't expending large amounts of City of Meridian dollars, to be up fighting fire anywhere in the state of Idaho. Basically, what they want us to do, again, is to assist with protecting structures out there in the wild land, say in the Lowman area where certain members of our department own property. That was kind of a side note there, but -- you know, so we can help these other rural communities that can't help themselves. Basically, what we are asking for tonight is just Council's approval to sign this rental agreement. One note is just because we sign this agreement doesn't guarantee that we will get called out. Last year there were no fires that required a call out. A couple years ago the Atlanta Fire had some equipment called out. What we are proposing is one of the older fire engines, Engine No. 306, which is the one we are currently trying to sell, be the piece of equipment when we ran out and, then, approve -- total staff with the off-duty personnel that would be covered in this contracted cost and, basically, we would be just going to a fifth as needed. It could be for two or three days or it could be two or three weeks and we'd rotate our personnel to insure that we didn't incur any home staffing costs, we'd send guys that were on their four days off to allow them to go up, work the fire, and, then, bring them back in time to work their regular shift. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Mr. Johnson? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Has legal counsel reviewed this rental agreement? Johnson: Not that I'm aware of. Rountree: Thank you. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Chief Johnson, would the employees be acting as employees of Meridian fighting their fires or would it be like a second job? Under whose control? Johnson: We would be kind of -- we would be working for Idaho Department of Lands under a rental agreement. We would have a Meridian supervisor up there watching the crew for their safety, but we'd actually be reporting under the incident command system Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 19 of 56 to whoever was in charge of the fire, whether it be Idaho Department of Lands or the federal forest service. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If I'm right, Mr. Johnson, they pay the money to the city and we issue checks to the employees; is that not right? Johnson: That's the way I understand it, Councilman Bird. Bird: Yeah. That's the way I understood it last time. De Weerd: Okay. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: For me I like the idea -- I don't have a problem, but I think it makes sense to have legal counsel review any agreement before approval was given to make that obligation. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I would make a motion and see if this would be acceptable. I move that we enter into a contract with the Idaho land for firefighting rental contract upon the approval of legal staff. They got to get it back before next week. Wardle: Second. And discussion? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Mr. Nary, is that language in the motion okay or do you need our approval after your recommendation, I guess? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council member Wardle, I think what you probably want to do is you want to approve the Mayor signing the agreement subject to our review. Is there -- what I'm hearing Mr. Bird say is there a date that they want confirmation we are willing to do this? Johnson: Mr. Nary, Madam Mayor, yes, there is. I'm not sure of the date myself on this. I do know that they came to us a couple weeks ago and, basically, what Chief Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 20 of 56 Anderson has asked me to do is to get your guys' blessing for him to sign the contract, not necessarily the Mayor to sign, and I'm here acting for the chief. Nary: Yeah. I'm thinking it's probably better, Council, if your motion is to authorize the Mayor to sign without you seeing it again, the Mayor to sign upon our approval. If there is an issue of any concerns to you, we will bring it back to you next week. I don't -- have never seen it, so I don't know. There probably isn't anything, but I want to make sure. But I think you would be sounder, because of what's being asked and personnel being -- basically going outside the city, you're probably better off having the Mayor sign that, rather than the chief sign that. But if you authorize the Mayor to sign it, based on your motion, as long as we can review it and approve it, then, you won't have to have it back before we have another signature, so -- Bird: The motion maker has no problem with that, if the second agrees. Wardle: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor, just a point of concern I would have is that the liability situation that the city is in in that arrangement, praying that it would never happen, but we had that extremely unfortunate incident a few years ago with Kuna and a wildland fire situation, and hoping that would not happen to our firemen, but to make sure that not only the city, but our employees are protected in that situation and their families. So, that would be my caution. Nary: Certainly. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: And I do have a specific interest in that. De Weerd: I would say so. Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Borton. Borton: Madam Mayor, along with Councilman Rountree's concerns, to the extent it's going to be reviewed by counsel and signed before it comes back, I would only throw out that I would hope that each and every expense, every dime, every nickel and penny that could possibly be incurred by the City of Meridian or its employees in any way covered in contract be considered when generating the rental price or rate or whatever it is we are going to reimburse. That every nickel and dime be accounted for. It's a pretty great service that we would be providing and helping with, so with that I think it's a good idea. De Weerd: Council, since there is no time element on this and we do meet next week, I appreciate that there is -- Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 21 of 56 Bird: I think there is a time element on it. De Weerd: It has to be signed before next week? Bird: I think it was something like February 13th, if you want to know the truth, and that's went by. Johnson: I'm not seeing any dates, but I can't -- and Chief Anderson didn't tell me of any, but I know that they are wanting it back as soon as they can, so they can get their mobilization list built and stuff before the fire season does hit. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I would say that, certainly, the motion to me seems fine. If the Mayor finds that there are additional issues, she cannot sign the agreement and, obviously, bring it back and we will put it on the agenda next week for discussion. De Weerd: Okay. I feel comfortable with that. Mr. Nary, I guess if there are serious concerns we can bring this back to Council next week and -- Nary: Certainly. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. We do have a motion on the floor. I will ask Mr. Berg to, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 9. Discussion of Deeding Messina Meadows Park to City of Meridian by Westpark Development: De Weerd: Item No.9 is discussion of deeding Messina Meadows Park to the City of Meridian by Westpark Development. I guess, Mr. Strong or Mr. Nary? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I wasn't here -- I think this came up sort of on the fly last week was what I had understood. I don't know if anybody talked to Westpark and asked them to be present tonight. Berg: Yes. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 22 of 56 Nary: Oh, there is somebody here. Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I guess just from an agenda item, it was an issue that had come up from the applicant's request. We have heard this issue a number of times. They re-requested an audience before the Council and that's why you see it on No.9. De Weerd: Okay. Would you like to come forward? Please state your name and address for the record. Neiffinger: Trent Neiffinger. 1240 West Barrymore, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Johnson had requested that this -- a decision be made on the park donation and so we just put this on the agenda. Do you have any additional information to present to Councilor -- Neiffinger: I do not. I have something I sent last week over. It's a donation versus reimbursement sheet. I don't know if you guys have that still. De Weerd: I didn't notice it in our packet. Neiffinger: I have one here if you would like to look at it. De Weerd: Can you, please, give that to the city clerk. Neiffinger: You bet. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Wardle: This is in your final plat item. If you look under -- at the bottom there, final plat, comments, e-mail from Trent is the document. De Weerd: Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 23 of 56 Wardle: I guess maybe just to kick it off, my recollection of this project was when I understood we last left this was. not what the cost to develop the park would be or reimbursement was, but was whether it was a suitable park for the city to take over, given some of the issues that we brought up in past conversations. So, if someone else has a different recollection, let me know. Rountree: That's my recollection that the question was, were we going to get a park or a maintenance headache. Bird: And that was mine, too. De Weerd: Council, I believe there were a couple of items, though, that we did ask of the developer in distinguishing what the donation actually was, what would be the additional considerations in what wasn't covered that we saw the pictures, such as the trees and parking and that sort of thing. The document that you have on your screen in front of you is the donation value of what the developer appears to be willing to do as part of the donation and what would remain in developing the park to be a city amenity and that would be the -- the additional information in front of you as well. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Trent, as a new guy can you give me the thumbnail sketch of what happened to this property, if anything different, that the city is not maintaining it and it's just maintained by the homeowners association? Neiffinger: So, if we don't deed it to you, what will happen to it is what you're asking? We will probably continue to make it a park. I think what we will do is move the community pool that we have in a different location inside of the subdivision into the park area, so we can free up a building lot. But we will probably build it pretty much the same, minus a few things. Probably the bathroom and the baseball backstop, things like that. Just minor things that for us, for just a neighborhood park, we don't see as being something we would spend money on, but if it's something that we would donate to the city we would be more than willing to build the bathroom. The bathroom building is 125,000 dollars. We would be willing to do that if the city was willing to take it and maintain it. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: You would be reimbursed for that bathroom expense, though? I mean the city would be paying for the bathroom. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 24 of 56 Neiffinger: We would pay for it up front, Yes, and, then, we would ask for reimbursement of it. Borton: So, other than a baseball backstop, it would be more or less the same? Neiffinger: I think so. Yes. Be very similar. We would continue to have a parking lot, because of the swimming pool and the playground. We would plan on doing that, along with the swing set. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Okay. Thank you. Neiffinger: Thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Strong, do you have anything you would like to add? Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just as a way to recall what we last discussed about this park, there was concern expressed about the maintenance of the park. If it's -- if we build the park it would be built to city specifications and we expressed at that time that we didn't have any particular concerns with the ability to maintain it in the same fashion we maintain other city parks. There was a question about the donation value versus what the city would be paying out in impact fees. The restroom building that's shown is, essentially -- it's building the same restroom that we build in neighborhood parks now, that we will be starting construction on in Champion Park within a few weeks. So, it's the same design specification, using, actually, the same -- the same engineering documents that we use -- that we'd modify if it from the restroom we build at Champion Park. So, we know that the cost is pretty solid for what they are showing there for those -- those pieces of construction that would be left to the city. So, as we expressed last time, we don't have any particular concerns about maintaining the park if the city should assume it. De Weerd: Okay. Strong: It will be built, essentially, the same as we build other neighborhood parks. De Weerd: Thank you, Doug. Any questions for Mr. Strong? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: Doug, just one question. Can you tell me a little bit about the differences or opportunities available to the city or loss to the city with this park as far as the ability to use it for city rec activities, baseball programs, other activities, it's a city park you can maintain and control and utilize it versus with homeowners you couldn't? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 25 of 56 Strong: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilman Borton, when it's in city -- city ownership we certainly can reserve the shelter for different city functions. Anybody in the city could reserve a shelter there, just like any of our other parks. They can reserve the play fields for practice for soccer or baseball, and if they want to know that they have a secure time to use the field they can do. that online through Our office. So, it would be, essentially, managed like any other city park that we have currently in our inventory. Currently south of the freeway -- and it's one of the attractions to this park or any park opportunity we have south of the freeway, we have -- we have Bear Creek Park and the Kiwanis neighborhood park that we are building next to Mountain View High School and that's, essentially, the acreage we have south of the freeway right now. So, that is an area of growth that there is certainly an advantage to gaining more city park space south of the freeway. De Weerd: Well, I guess, Doug, to elaborate on that, as a neighborhood park what population will this park serve, other than the houses in that vicinity, and Messina probably Village and Meadows? Strong: Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, typically a neighborhood park by design and what's described in our Comprehensive Plan is to serve a mile square radius of that neighborhood park primarily. So, it's located in the neighborhood, it certainly would serve that neighborhood very well, because that -- it's about a mile -- it's located right in the center of the neighborhood. It will reach out to Eagle Road and south. So, as it develops south of the freeway it certainly can extend beyond that mile radius. Just as an example, we have an increasing request for lacrosse fields, because currently in the Meridian School District lacrosse is not a sanctioned high school sport, so they can't use high school fields for the practice or games, so they are coming to us looking for space for lacrosse. And certainly in a park this size you can fit a lacrosse field in there for their games or practice. They are currently using the field at Chateau Park for lacrosse practice and games and schedule for that. We have a request from the Mountain View High School lacrosse team for a place to play lacrosse. They typically prefer to stay south of the freeway when they are looking for field space. The closest we would have for them when it's complete by some time next September would be the neighborhood park in Kiwanis Park, but geographically -- De Weerd: Since it's right next door that makes sense. Strong: It's right next door. Rather than going to Chateau Park, which we could provide them now, which would be the one space right now that we could provide for them to play. So, it would serve the geography south of the freeway, I guess, is the most condensed answer to that. Crossing the freeway seems to be somewhat of a barrier for people looking for play fields. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 26 of 56 Bird: Doug, this sits back in the -- if I recall, it sits back in the middle of the subdivision; am I not right? How many acres was it? Refresh my memory. Rountree: 8.9. Strong: It's about eight, I think. It's changed a little bit, because of the -- they are not tiling that irrigation ditch that goes through it. But that was the proposal that came to you last -- Bird: You know, you say it's nice to use as a field and everything, but do we really want to create that many more car trips through a subdivision? You know, one of the biggest complaints we get is traffic through subdivisions and stuff and you start using it -- the other thing I -- reason on a city park is the location. How many average citizens is going to know where it's at? You know, our parks -- Settler's, Chateau, Tully, all them parks -- Storey -- is by a major road that you can see from a major road and I'm kind of like the Mayor, I think this park will be a beautiful neighborhood park and that's what it should stay is a neighborhood park. That's my opinion. Strong: Excuse me, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilman Bird, we do have neighborhood parks that aren't on major roads and, actually, the park that we are building, Season's Park right now, is off Black Cat back in the neighborhood. Chateau Park is certainly not on Ten Mile, it's off Ten Mile on Chateau Street, which is a good collector street to get there. So, neighborhood parks typically are located off the major arterials in town and that's the way they are described in our Comprehensive Plan. Parks like Tully and Bear Creek are located on major roads and because they serve a more active type of participation at the park and they have ball -- baseball fields and skate parks and things like that that attract more activity. So, the neighborhood parks are typically used by the neighborhood and the comparison I like to use is Chateau Park versus Tully Park, because I live right in between them and on any given day I can drive to Chateau and see a much different level of activity than at Tully. Tully is much busier. So, that's the best comparison we have right now. De Weerd: And I think Champion Park is not visible from the roadway either. Strong: It's not and -- it's open on two sides and fenced on two sides as well. A very typical neighborhood park design. De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions? Bird: I have none. De Weent Thank you, Doug. Okay. Council, do you need any further information? Okay. Do you have any direction on this item? Wardle: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 27 of 56 De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: After gathering additional information and recalling our past conversations, I certainly -- the value of the park in dollars was never in question to me or the generosity of the developer to be willing to give that to the community was never in question. Certainly, that was never a consideration that I considered. My question was whether this is a good city park for the community in Meridian and as I remember our consensus was at that time we didn't feel it was and I guess this additional information hasn't changed my mind to that respect. Bird: Is that your motion? De Weerd: Any other discussion? Bird: I have none. I've made my statement. De Weerd: Okay. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: For what it's worth, I might be in the -- not having gone through this last summer, I understand the location and situation is not ideal. I understand that additional obligations are imposed on the city by receiving it, but I think Doug's comments, from my perspective, are well taken when we talk about what neighborhood parks -- other neighborhood parks are available here in the community, not all of them being on arterials. I think it's a fine line to draw exactly how accessible an individual neighborhood park must be to be acceptable to the city. I think any opportunity the city gets to obtain dominion and control over some park land, especially in this location, is a good one and a tough one to pass up as the city grows in this area and the recreational opportunities and demands continue to grow, I think it's, all things considered, an asset to the city and I think it's, from my perspective, something that we should accept and agree to and take every advantage and let the community know that it's an additional opportunity for them to recreate and utilize it as we go forward for the next many many years. I think it's a chance we will wish we would have taken. I think it's something we should accept. Those are my thoughts. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Borton. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I have probably been the hardest councilman on this particular project to -- in the past in terms of is it really going to be an asset to the city. My issue initially was that -. -.-. -- -. -. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 28 of 56 there was really little development of the drainage and we have gone from, essentially, no thought about the drainage to a pathway to tiling the drainage and now we have a concept that appears to turn the drainage facility into kind of an area amenity, as well as a parkway. I'm still uncertain, because I do not have, based on the information we have today, how much usable land there is for park activity. I still am concerned about -- it appears the City of Meridian is being put into a position to maintain the entrance to a subdivision. If I can be assured that the usage acreages of this park is somewhere in the seven and eight acres, I think sufficient hearing and learning has been done on the part of the applicant to sway me to accept this particular park, but I need -- I need that -- we don't have that information here tonight. We have a statement of 8.9 acres. We have what we typically get that's scanned in that you can't read for a plan view of the park. I heard mention of a swimming pool, but, as I recall, that's in another part of the subdivision. So, I guess I'm moving to be inclined that maybe we have got something here, but I want to see the plan view finally. I want to see a better detail of what, in fact, they are going to do with the drainage facility and if, in fact, it does represent the kind of things we have talked to the applicant about in the past, I would probably move from my previous position. So, I guess I'm saying I'd like a little bit more information. De Weerd: And I think that's very reasonable for the developer to bring back a picture and show the pieces and components in here they say they will construct and with the city's portion will be. A little bit detail. Lieutenant Overton, did you have a comment as well? Overton: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have a concern and I don't know if you have the answers to this or not. With a park that's no longer a community park, but a city park comes cars. I'm not as worried about the trips into the subdivision as I am the parking, which we deal with continually when a park is designed -- a community park is designed for people generally to walk to. If we make it a city park -- I don't know if you have that information in front of you -- what kind of parking facility is there or are we going to be dealing with parking issues in that subdivision when they hold an event there. I just wanted to put that out in front of you. De Weerd: Yes. Would the applicant like to respond? Neiffinger: There is a parking facility there. Is there a picture that came with that -- that document? De Weerd: It's really bad. Rountree: You can't tell. Neiffinger: Okay. Well, there is a parking facility -- I believe it's somewhere between eight and 12 parking stalls, which isn't a lot, but there is approved parking all along the street that the parking lot is on. I don't know if that resolves any concern for you, but I think there is ample parking there. I did a quick calculation on the usable area of the park and the drain -- actually, it's not a drain, it's a canal, I guess. It is 1,755 feet long Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 29 of 56 and it would be approximately 12 feet wide. And if you calculate that, that's about almost a half an acre. So, if we take a half an acre out of Our 8.9, we still have 8.4 acres of usable space around the park. We will also -- if we leave the canal open, we plan on paving to the north of that, so the walkway inside of the park is continuous all the way around. If it's -- if we have to fence the canal, we probably will not pave the area to the north of the canal. So, I don't know if that helps out any, but that would be our usable acreage. And, then, we feel like the parking would be adequate on the street. There is a main collector that is -- well, it's not a main collector, but it is, I guess, a collector street that goes next to the park where the parking lot -- it abuts to it. So, there would be eight spaces in there and, then, additional parking along the side that would be ample for a SOccer game or a lacrosse game. De Weerd: Would you be able to come back again next week -- Neiffinger: Sure. De Weerd: -- and present a better visual and -- I think, too, there was a question as to is any of this park at the park part of your storm water drainage or retention area and how would it look and those kinds of things as well. I think that was part of it. Would like to see a landscaping plan. It does say that plant material is part of this. If you could just provide a little bit more information and for Councilmember Borton's consideration, since he wasn't part of this original application, it just would be nice maybe to have some materials that could give a visual to it. Neiffinger: Okay. De Weerd: In addition to addressing any -- I think that the concern was an entrance from Messina Village into Messina Meadows and that this would have something to do with that. The traffic considerations. The on-street parking. How many spots that that would add to it and what kind of traffic patterns it would add into that collector into the subdivision. Those -- those seem to be concerns that it would be nice to see a visual to gain additional information as well. Neiffinger: Okay. De Weerd: Any other pieces that I missed? Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, if you would just allow the clerk and I and legal counsel to look at our agendas. We did move a number of meetings -- a number of projects to the 21 st. So, maybe the 28th, if that's okay with the applicant. Neiffinger: That's fine with me. I'm new at the game, so I believe that we have final plat approval, so this isn't going to hold up our final plat and as long as that's the case, then, we can wait two weeks, I believe. That would be fine. Nary: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 30 of 56 De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: Councilmember Wardle is correct, your agenda next week is fairly heavy. Your 28th, although you have a pre-council meeting on the 28th, the regular agenda meeting isn't very heavy, comparatively. So, that might be better to wait two weeks. De Weerd: We can look at our Council agenda"meeting on Friday and see how things fall out and Mr. Berg can, then, notify the applicant. Okay? Neiffinger: Thank you. Item 10: Tabled from January 24,2006: Resolution No. 06-504 Approving and Adopting Fees for Public Use of the Meridian Police Department Conference BQ2m: De Weerd: Okay. Item 10 was tabled from January 24th. Resolution 06-504. Okay. Was there some remaining issues on this, Mr. Nary? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you recall, you had asked us to amend some of the wording in the resolution. The resolution is on your computers in front of you. Section two is the portion that we amended from the Public Hearing discussion that you had. We did run this by the police chief. He was comfortable with the language. It was just to be able to give the chief some discretion in waiving all or a portion of the fees for organizations or for nonprofits or for other things, some occasions where we have circumstances where we have to bump a group out of that -- out of using this room, which has no charge, and moving to a room, because your needs or a different commission's needs, we wouldn't charge them a fee in those circumstances, and it was just to give them that flexibility. If the language is satisfactory to you, you can approve the resolution, and if you want us to work on that a little bit more we can certainly do that. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions or issues on what is in front of you? Okay. If none, do I have a motion? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move that we approve Item No.1 0, Resolution 06-504. Borton: Second. De Weerct Okay. Motion is to approve Item 10. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 31 of 56 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 11: FP 06-002 Request for Final Plat approval of 18 building lots and 4 common lots on 2.06 acres in a R-40 zone for Arnke Subdiyision by Mike Arnke - 2070 West Pine Avenue: De Weerd: Okay. Item 11 is FP 06-002. Mr. Hood. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a final plat for Arnke Subdivision. Just briefly, there are 16 townhouse dwelling lots on approximately two acres. We do have an e-mail handout that I gave to the Council just before the hearing from the applicant stating that they have no issues or concerns with the final plat staff report and I will stand for any questions you may have. De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion, then. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move we approve Item 11, FP 06-002. Borton: Second. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item No. 11. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 12: Public Hearing: Idaho Community Development Block Grant - Meridian Senior Citizen Center: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 12 is Public Hearing for Idaho Community Development Block Grant for the Meridian Senior Center. I believe we have a representative from Sage. Jennifer. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Tomlinson: Jennifer Tomlinson. 1001 South Orchard, Boise. 83705. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 32 of 56 De Weerd: Thank you. Tomlinson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are here tonight for a Public Hearing for phase two of the senior improvement project. A brief explanation of the program. The Community Development Block Grant program was enacted by the Community Development Act of 1974 authorizing HUD to operate this program. It's a federal program distributing funds to Idaho cities through the Idaho Department of Commerce. Cities and counties are the only eligible applicants for this program. This year there are 576,000 dollars for senior and community center improvements with an application deadline March 3rd, 2006, and the handbook will be available for review with the city clerk's office. For phase two of the project we are upgrading the front ramp to make it meet ADA code, installing ADA compliant doors, new windows, and new sound boards in the dining room. Under phase one we completed our top seven priorities, which included a really fantastic new bathroom, ceilings and lighting in the kitchen. An accessible exit from the dining area, modifying the west exit ramp to meet ADA accessibility guidelines. The leaking roof was replaced and a ramp connecting the dining area to the recreational area was lengthened. The garage has just been constructed and completed for the van. And for phase two we are proposing modifying the ramp at the main entrance, because it currently doesn't meet code, and installing -- and also the ramp from the board/computer room to get that one to meet code also. Air-conditioning the kitchen facility. Replacing all of the windows in the building. And replacing 30 inch office doors, as well as the front entry doors. All of the costs have been estimated by a licensed contractor and currently the total project costs are estimated at 79,993 dollars. Planning and administrative costs include -- or are a total of 8,500 dollars, 5,500 for administration and 3,000 for city audit. The construction portion is 71,493 dollars, with a breakdown on your handout. For a total cost of 79,993. We are -- so far we are at 55,000 for the block grant, but we are kind of expecting that to go up a little bit, because we haven't got all of the estimates back on the ramps and we are waiting on Davis Bacon wage decisions, which will probably make them go up. And, then, the Meridian seniors are counting 25,275 dollars for the cost of the new garage as their cash match. And, then, the in-kind audit fee of 3,000 from the city and a private donation of 2,500 dollars from Sage. For a total of 85,775 dollars. A draft application document will be available for review until Tuesday, February 21 st at 5:00 p.m. and it will be available at City Hall during regular business hours. Comments regarding the project should be made in writing for the next five days. And following resolution of any comments or questions, the hearing will be closed. So, this hearing will remain open for written comments until Tuesday, February 21 st, at 5:00 p.m. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Jennifer? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: I have none. Thank you. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 33 of 56 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. This is a Public Hearing. Would the Senior Center care to comment? Are you just here for moral support? Just looking good in the audience? Okay. Since they have no answers, they are just moral support. We appreciate what the Senior Center does in our community. Certainly the phase one improvements with the Community Block Grant and Sage's participation was extremely helpful. It's made a huge difference at the senior center and we appreciate everything you have done up to this point. I guess if there is any public comment, does that need to be in writing or can that be entertained at this Public Hearing? Okay. It can be entertained here. Is there anyone from the public who would like to provide testimony on this application or on this item? Okay. Seeing none, I -- just for the record, this will be continued until the 21 st and we will have that on our agenda, then, next week to close the Public Hearing. Mr. Berg? Okay. Well, thank you for being here. Mr. Berg, we don't need a motion, do we, to continue this or we do? I just stated it for the record. Okay. Okay. I don't need a motion to continue this. It is noted in the record. Okay. Thank you for joining us this evening. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 05-055 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 35.33 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Ambercreek Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - North Meridian Road and West McMillan Road: Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 05-057 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 175 single-family residential building lots and 16 common lots on 35.33 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Ambercreek Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - North Meridian Road and West McMillan Road: De Weerd: Items 13 and 14 are a Public Hearing on AZ 05-055 and PP 05-057. I will open these two Public Hearings with staff comments. Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next two items on your agenda are commonly known as Amber Creek Subdivision, which is located on the south side of McMillan Road and on the west side of Meridian Road. It is not right on the intersection, however. There is a five acre out parcel right on the corner and I will talk about that here in just another minute. This project is east of Cedar Springs and south of Paramount. There is 35.33 acres and the applicant is proposing to annex and zone it to R-8. The preliminary plat includes 175 single family residential building lots and 16 common lots. There is a mix of lots proposed in the subdivision. Ninety of the lots are alley loaded lots, which are the internal lots here in the subdivision and 85 are single family detached lots. You have got four blocks of alley-loaded lots here and, then, a -- pretty much the perimeter lots are your standard single family detached lots. All of the lots do conform to dimensional standards of the proposed R-8 zone. The average lot size is 5,000 square feet. Nearly 12 percent or about four acres of the site is being set aside for space. Six percent or approximately two acres of the site is being set aside for usable open space. Just a couple of quick things to point out on this plan. One of the comments from ACHD, as well as city staff, was that they move this stub street to stop the long straight stretch of this street, put that in alignment with this micro- path that would, then, lead to their community park here. This is just a private park, but Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 34 of 56 it being in alignment with the micro-paths and, again, it would stop that long straight street. Another comment was that they provide access to the five acre out parcel at their main entrance here. I just want to point those two out. The applicant has agreed to comply with those at least at the Planning and Zoning Commission level, it's just not reflected on this plan, so I just wanted to point those out. There was no opposition to this project at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting hearing on the 5th. Subsequent to that meeting, however, we did get -- I did, I talked with Steve Siddoway and he has been in contact with some of the members of the transportation task force and, originally, they wanted to see a sidewalk constructed -- there is a future middle school site on the northeast corner of McMillan and Meridian and I guess I should explain that first. So, in 2007 a middle school is planned to open up there. Staff did require originally and the Planning and Zoning Commission confirmed that the applicant should be required to construct a sidewalk on their property with the first phase of the development. The transportation task force wanted to take it a step further and, actually, have them construct the sidewalk in this general location, the frontage on McMillan Road adjacent to that out parcel. They have just more recent since that time - - there is a memo that I handed out from Steve Siddoway prior to this meeting. To paraphrase that memo, it says that due to some other constraints -- and I'll tell you what the two are right now. One is basically -- this will be the dividing line for the middle school kids that will go to Sawtooth versus the middle school kids that will be on the other side of Meridian Road going to the new middle school -- the new middle school. The other constraint would be the right of way in the Lemp Canal and just being able to actually construct the sidewalk there. The sidewalk -- the ultimate sidewalk is being constructed in Cedar Springs development and other developments further to the west on the south side of that canal. So, really, your sidewalk for the road is detached from this street, separated from the street by a pretty large canal. So, they thought this -- this requirement did not make sense any longer. It was a good idea I think in theory, but the safe sidewalks to schools, it wouldn't appear that having them construct the out parcel sidewalk at this time makes much sense. They still would like to see the requirement for the developer to construct the sidewalk adjacent to their property with the first phase. I think that is it and I will stand for any questions you may have. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for Caleb at this time, Council? Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton. Borton: Caleb, the school district boundaries, as you know -- everyone knows around here, change literally every year. Assuming these kids do go to this new Heritage Middle School, which I think when it's all built out they will. Is that really the only hang up as far as the sidewalk requirement that the kids might not actually be going there? My bet is that they will. Hood: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember, I am not sure of the history of the changing of the district boundaries. These are just proposed boundaries Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 35 of 56 and I'm sorry for the map. It's not very legible in making out the streets. That seemed to be the biggest thing was putting an off-site requirement on a developer, when, in fact, the sidewalk may not be used by those kids. That is a pretty big issue. And, again, the right of way is the second issue is where do you put the sidewalk. If you look at the -- the site plan, the kids are going to have to walk -- the sidewalk that this applicant will be constructing will be on this side of the canal. The right of way constraints -- the existing right of way only goes up to the north side of the canal, so the private property, if the sidewalk were constructed in alignment with the sidewalk that they are -- they will be constructing. That's why I tried to put in this aerial. So, this sidewalk will come in somewhere in this neighborhood. The existing right of way ends up in here. So, there is really no way to have a continuous sidewalk. There is going to be a break, a bridge, or something has got to be able to get kids to that -- the off-site sidewalk somehow. Now, the applicant could construct the ultimate sidewalk and an additional say asphalt walking path up here or something. I mean that is a possibility, but, again, that seems like an awful lot if they aren't going to be using it, so -- I hope that answers your question. De Weerd: Mr. Borton, did that answer your question? Borton: It did. Somewhat. It's just -- I was just curious if the concern is -- or the hesitation for that requirement -- because I think the requirement is a good one, whether he's got to cross it or not, to be on the north side or not. I know for a fact -- from my perspective, if I lived there, I'd use it with my kids regardless of where they go to school and play there and practice Optimist football, probably, on those fields. Eventually they will go to school there. So, I think it's a great requirement. I was just curious if the reason that it might not be necessary is solely because the kids might not go to school there. If there was an additional reason, I'm not sure what that is. But if it's a school issue, I just wanted to flush that out. So, you answered it. Hood: Okay. Borton: Thanks. De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? Would you like to put your board on the stand? Nickel: Madam Mayor, if you can see it, I have got a handout also that has the plat. De Weerd: Could you give one to Caleb so he can put it up on the screen for the audience, so, instead, it will block Mr. Lakey. Nice to see you. And I don't say that often to attorneys, you know. Nickel: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council Members. My name is Shawn Nickel, 839 East Winding Creek, Suite 201, in Eagle. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 36 of 56 Nickel: Here tonight representing the Amber Creek Subdivision. First of all, I'd like to thank staff for their work. Very seldom do we have the same staff planner get all the way up to the City Council to do the presentation, so just wanted you guys to know that we do appreciate their work and their help getting us to this point. We are requesting annexation and rezone of this property to R-8. There is 35.33 acres. I want to point out that we have accomplished this development without doing a PD. We did -- if you look at the plan on the screen, we laid out this property -- as you can see, we tried to layout this property and take into consideration the streetscapes. So, as you come in off of Meridian Road we have detached sidewalks throughout the subdivision with tree lined streets and trying to get away from the garage dominated streetscape in favor of that landscaping with the detached sidewalks, have the alley-loaded concept in the middle of the project. We did keep the lots at a greater than 5,000 square feet. All the units will be detached units. In that little packet I brought you is some examples of elevations of the product type. Can you forward to that, please, Caleb. Go through them. That's what you have in your packets. Again, examples of the elevations of those -- of those houses with the alley-loaded garages. Again, the detached sidewalks throughout does provide that -- that nice landscape streetscape. Then if you could go back to the colored plan. What Caleb has put on the board there is, actually, the revised plan. As you can see, we did revise and move the stub street and add the stub street here as requested by ACHD. In addition, Council, we do have an open space plan. It calls for a large open space park centrally located, with a pathway that, as you can see, runs north and south and provides great pedestrian circulation within the development and also provides access on all of our east-west roads to get to the -- to get to the park. Then, if you will put the very bright colored map up, Caleb? This development has been designed to meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. I have provided you a very bright colored picture here to kind of show you how this area is developed and approved for development. The bright pink are -- it does represent R-8 development. The orange is R-4 development. In this particular intersection, as you know, you have quite a mix of land uses, in addition to the middle school that will be built in 2007. In Paramount you have general commercial on the corner, with some high density development and, then, of course, the Paramount development with the R-8. We also have more R-8 to our west. This is our project right here. So, you have quite a good mix in this intersection of land use. We believe that the Amber Creek Subdivision provides another opportunity for property owners in this area. Also, keep in mind -- just to point out that a lot of these developments that have been approved in the past were approved as PDs and, again, to stress that we are doing this under the standards of your new zoning ordinance, which does allow us to provide this type of development. The Planning and Zoning Commission did like this plan. They recommended approval of this. Staff concern regarding the sidewalk I believe we can accommodate. I do understand the concerns. I, for one, think it's important to have a connection to all the schools and to provide a safe pathway. What I'm concerned about, if staff would put up that picture of McMillan Road that I have provided. As staff stated, we are providing a detached sidewalk on the south side of the canal. I'm concerned about and what my developer is concerned about is if we do provide a temporary paved pathway on the north side, I'm just concerned about kids walking along this busy street and having that canal on the other Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 37 of 56 side of them, more so than I am whether or not the kids mayor may not go to that middle school. It's more of safety on that pathway right there. However, we will listen to what City Council has recommended and I think we can work -- we can work with the city and with staff on that. But that is our concern with that pathway. And, again, the only other changes we have comment on is on the plan with the stub streets. With that I will stand for any questions you have. We think this is an excellent subdivision. I did provide you with those elevations to show you what we are envisioning and I would love to answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Council, questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: You have got the 20-foot public alleys. Thank you. What's the width on the street there? Nickel: Oh, I'm sorry. Thirty-three foot. Bird: Thirty-three? Thank you. Nickel: Thirty-four foot. Sorry. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: On the alleys what's the building setback? Nickel: We are providing to allow 20-foot driveways from the edge of pavement to the garage. You will have plenty of area to park cars. They won't be hanging out into the alleyway. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Rountree: Follow up? On the picture you have displayed there, I assume that the property boundary is on the north side of the lateral or canal or -- is their proposal to green that space up or is it going to be what we see there with landscaped sidewalk area on the south side? Meridian City Council February 14,2006 Page 38 of 56 Nickel: Councilmember, it will cleaned up, but, yeah, the landscaping will be on the other side of the canal. There is currently about 12 feet, I guess, of right of way, 15 before our property line. Rountree: I guess my question is, is there going to be anything done on the street side? Nickel: No. Rountree: Then, the green you have on your graphic is not green? It's dirt. Nickel: I'm going to sit down and look at my landscape plan just before I answer that, just to make sure I give you the right answer. Rountree: What are the side setbacks? standards? Are you going to meet the minimum Nickel: Yes. We are not asking for any waivers of the setback requirements. Rountree: Okay. Nickel: To address Councilmember Rountree's question, it looks like according to the landscape plan that there is a small strip of grass on the north side of that canal and, then, there will be a gravel strip along the right of way. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Sorry, I was waiting for you to answer that question. Just, first, I'd like to commend you on your presentation. One of the things that I see from this application is that you are providing information that this Council has asked to make their decision. You certainly have been here a number of times. Staff and Council have asked if people in your position can take that just one step further and allow the staff to be able to present that on the overhead, just for future reference. It's great information. One question that I have is -- and my concern is that this is the area which is not your property, which is the ACHD right of way currently; is that correct? Nickel: Madam Mayor and Councilmember Wardle, a portion of that is right of way or will be future right of way and, then, a small portion will be -- is our property. That strip that I talked about on the other side of the canal is ours. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 39 of 56 Wardle: And I guess my concern is that certainly you have children -- you know, this is a busy street and they will be -- if you put a pathway there, traveling that next to the busy street, I guess my concern for the situation -- and I'm sure that you're well aware of this -- Sawtooth Middle School, this is the only situation that those kids have and they will be traveling on, so, if you're willing to work with staff to allow some sort of transportation for those children, I strongly encourage that. Nickel: And, Councilmember Wardle, I think we are willing to work, understanding that when -- once this property does develop and you know how fast property development is in this town, there will be continuation of the permanent sidewalk along that -- along that boundary and I think what we are talking about as a temporary solution, so -- and I do appreciate your comments about the elevations. What we are hearing from these folks is you're wanting to see what type of quality is going to go into these developments and we are more than happy to provide you with that information in advance, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Any additional questions? Okay. Thank you. Nickel: Thank you very much. De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Lakey: Certainly, Madam Mayor. Thank you. My name is Todd Lakey. My address is 17 12th Avenue South, Suite 206, Nampa, and I'm an attorney licensed to practice law in the state of Idaho. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, first let me say happy Valentine's Day and also express my appreciate publicly for understanding spouses. Covered that. Madam Chairman -- or, excuse me, Madam Mayor and -- Rountree: We will let her know. Lakey: I have two meetings tonight, Council Members, so -- De Weerd: Do you need me to sign a note? Lakey: That might be helpful, Madam Mayor. We can talk about that afterwards. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm here to just briefly address the off-site sidewalk issue from a legal perspective. In reviewing that requirement and also the case law that is applicable, the courts have couched the appropriate language in analyzing required improvements from a governmental entity in terms such that there must be a rough portionality between the condition imposed and the projected impact of the proposed development. They also state that the requirement must be related in nature and extent to the impact of the project. The focus, Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, is on the impact of the project and how does -- how is their -- or what is the nexus between the impact of the project and the proposed condition. In this case Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 40 of 56 requiring the additional off-site improvement is fairly easy to establish that particular nexus. It's focused on that particular application within the boundaries of the project. Stub streets, sidewalks, all the conditions that cities typically impose. If you go off site, then, it becomes a little more difficult to establish that nexus. Stub streets, for example, aren't extended onto neighboring properties. You don't build the streets for the adjacent properties, but you do put in stub streets to allow connectivity and future development to utilize those. But on the other side of the coin, in traffic studies sometimes you will see a stoplight requirement within a public right of way. But, then, again, that's based on specific findings that usually are a pretty thorough analysis in traffic study. And in this case we don't have that kind of solid data establishing that nexus and as was stated earlier, essentially, we are looking at a project that may not utilize that proposed middle school, in addition to the safety consideration. Furthermore, that empty piece of property is -- as Mr. Nickel stated, will very likely be developed in the reasonably near future. The 2007 requirement -- or 2007 proposed date for the school, again, puts that nexus further out from this proposed project. I think that, Madam Mayor, would conclude my comments. Would stand for any questions. De Weerd: So, in plan English? Lakey: Madam Mayor, the proposal to require the development to fund the off-site improvements does not have that direct connection to the impact of the proposed development, particularly considering that they propose that requirement for the sidewalk based on the middle school that would be constructed in 2007, considering the subdivision will not utilize that particular middle school. Additionally, this school is set to be constructed in 2007 and that particular parcel of property would likely be developed and would be more appropriate to have that particular developer put in that sidewalk. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions from Council? I guess I have a question. Any green space is considered by a parent and a child as open play area and to suggest that the off-site concern should not be a concern because of the placement of this, that there be foot traffic from this subdivision to that open space on the opposite corner I think is short-sided and one of the concerns that this Council -- these elected officials take very serious is our commitment to public safety and community safety. So, I think it does somewhat blow a hole in your contention that there wouldn't be any need to facilitate a safe route to a piece of open space and that's just my own personal opinion on that, but I guess at the annexation stage there is an ability for additional consideration and I think it is in our purview and certainly our responsibility to make sure that situations we create are to keep first and foremost the safety of our public. And I guess that would be my only statement in response to your comments. Lakey: Thank you, Madam Mayor. If I might respond? De Weerd: You bet. Lakey: Madam Mayor, I don't mean to insinuate that off-site improvements are never appropriate. I think, again, what you have to look at is the establishment and the Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 41 of 56 connection between the project and the proposed off-street -- or off-site requirement. What I'm saying is the off-site conditions -- it's more difficult to establish that connection with the proposed project. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be considered or shouldn't be utilized. In this particular case you have factors that make that connection more difficult, considering the fact that it was proposed because of that new school and the time frame when the new school would be constructed. I agree that the open space may be attractive to children, but, again, excuse me, that entire parcel is open space at this point. And, then, I agree also that safety is a legitimate governmental interest and should be considered. I think there was some discussion with Mr. Nickel as well on that part, that practically speaking placing the sidewalk in that 12 foot right of way and funneling the kids between the busy street and canal poses a safety hazard in itself. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Question for Mr. Nary after hearing Mr. Lakey's testimony. Would -- could -- I guess just a brief opinion -- such findings be made through a study of some type and some thorough investigation based on the transportation task force, their experience, their recommendation, the school district, the highway district, and some of the specific instances that we have in -- even in the north Meridian area in retrospect to a middle school and some of the surrounding development, would that -- could that somehow produce some findings which would allow the city to require these? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Wardle, I mean Mr. Lakey is correct, I mean what a court's going to evaluate is the nexus when you're going to require an off-site improvement. Certainly that type of study, that sort of analysis this Council can consider in making the decision. I mean, really, I guess maybe to follow up on the Mayor's question in plain English, I think what I'm hearing Mr. Lakey saying is that there is at least a concern from this developer's mind of whether or not to require that type of improvement would fit and pass a legal challenge and, certainly, today I don't know myself or Mr. Lakey can tell you definitively how a court would decide one way or the other. Any other information you gather or what this Council's interpretation of that is, is certainly what a court is going to make their decision upon in how you base your decision on Our ordinances. As we have discussed on many other annexations, it, obviously, falls within your purview to decide what is in the best interest of the City of Meridian at this time and whether or not to consider this application and annexation. You are free to reject it or consider it based on any conditions you wish to place. If they are not -- if your concern is over this, as the Mayor stated, in safety and those types of concerns, and Mr. Lakey's concerns, again, I think is valid, you certainly are free to consider that as well. But I mean any information you can gather, access, as was stated by some of you, the attractiveness of that open space and green space that's immediately adjacent to this property across the street, I mean those are all things you can consider in making your decision on whether to annex this property or not. ---- -- -- -.-- Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 42 of 56 De Weerd: You know -- and I guess I'm one of those that like to learn from past experiences and we have a couple of incidences that we should learn from and safety is a concern. We have had a developer in off-site develop -- in his off-site improvements put a safety curb that helped with the safety factor and providing a safer pathway for the kids to walk in a similar situation to school and that did help. Those cars would find it difficult to jump the curb and, certainly, they are going to be slowing for a stop sign in that area as well. So, you know, it's an attractive nuisance and sometimes it's the chicken and the egg. If you don't put this here, you're not setting yourself up and you tie them in accordingly to the road improvements or you ask for an intersection improvement before you would consider a development. I guess those are considerations that we have as well. So, I just wanted to share my observation and what I feel that our responsibility to our public and to situations that we may cause intentionally or unintentionally -- I would hate to know some of the lessons we have learned and have a child that is injured or perhaps even killed because that green space on the kitty-corner or what seems kitty-corner to their development was too tempting to not make the right judgment in how they proceeded across the road. Borton: Madam Mayor? De Weerct Mr. Borton. Borton: I might have misheard what the applicant had said, but my recollection -- it's in my notes -- indicates that in light of the considerations that other members and myself have talked about, that the applicant would be willing to place that pathway along the north side to the intersection. Is that -- I mean I understand this discussion is academic if that's the case. De Weerd: I can't tell if it was academic or not. Borton: If that's the case -- sure. Nickel: Shawn Nickel again. Yeah. Kind of the way I left it is I'm kind of leaving it up to you. If you would like to see that within that 12 feet of right of way, we would be more than happy to do that. Again, my concern was the safety. My overall concern was requiring off-site improvements and we are lucky in this instance that we do have 12 feet of right of way on this property, but if for some reason say this parcel went all the way out to the center line, we wouldn't be able to get that without getting the permission from an adjacent property owner. That's what concerns me about off-site improvements, because, then, it gives another property Owner the power to more easily -- for lack of a better word -- hold the developer hostage to work with them on getting that pathway. That's my overall concerns with off-site improvements. In this case, yeah, if you think it's important to have that pathway, we would put that -- try to get that within that existing right of way on the north side of the canal. Borton: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 43 of 56 De Weerd: Mr. Borton. Borton: I appreciate that for one. I think Mr. Lakey's comments with regard to portionality and the impact on the project relative to the entire project and the nexus necessary is well taken and something I think everyone up here on the Council is mindful of or at least needs to be mindful of every time this type of situation arises. But I agree with the Mayor in the heart of hearts this is a situation where a tie goes to the kids who might be utilizing this intersection and this is a case where we might not -- we need to have that discussion about whether or not there is a right and a court might need to get involved or whether or not the city has the right to impose this requirement. Again, I appreciate Mr. Nickel agreeing to do this. For what it's worth, I can tell you my inclination would be to do it anyway, because I think there is -- if we delayed it and put more research into it, that there would be sufficient evidence to support the portionality that Mr. Lakey mentioned and that there is going to be use and I think this will be a project that we can be -- kind of keep an eye on and see what happens when this path is put in and we look at the use of the children here. I don't think it creates an attractive nuisance. I don't think it's going to entice kids to come near McMillan Road anymore than they otherwise would. That does make it safer. So, I think it's an excellent addition to the project. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Lakey? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Lakey: Thank you, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Do you have additional comments? That's always dangerous to ask an attorney. Sorry. Lakey: Madam Mayor, no, just to get the note from you after the Council meeting. De Weerd: Maybe it should be from a male. Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony? Yes, Mr. Inselman. Inselman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Gary Inselman representing Ada County Highway District, 3775 North Adams, Garden City. We are all aware that the middle school is coming in and I have been pursuing opportunities to work with developers in the area to improve some of these intersections. This is one -- and I have not had the opportunity to speak with this developer yet. I have spoken with the school district, the developer on the north side, and have had indirect contact with the developer on the east side of Meridian Road. There is interest in trying to improve this intersection. We would propose working as best as we can to get this fully improved before the middle school opens. Obviously, that would require some cooperation from the property owner on the corner with the five acres. The highway district would be Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 44 of 56 willing to purchase the right of way from them necessary to make those improvements. So, that we will be working towards that. Barring that, a pathway next to the -- between the road and the canal would cause some concern for the highway district if it were, basically, a wide shoulder. If you have traveled east of Meridian Road -- I can't remember the name of the subdivision. Saguaro Canyon. You notice they had to widen McMillan Road and we had to require a guardrail be installed, because it moved the road closer to the canal. That would be, in effect, what would happen in this location, that the shoulder would be widened to provide a walking path. It would make improvements to the road along side the canal. We may be required to, then, require a guardrail along there, because we would be making improvements to the road next to the canal, which would cause us to have to meet current standards regarding those requirements. So, we would have to investigate that and see what the distances were. I just wanted to let you know that we are trying to make a cooperative arrangement with the developers in the area to try and improve that intersection, signalize it, put in curb, gutter, and sidewalks, as far as from the approaches we can go to make it safer for the children before the school opens. De Weerd: I appreciate that. I guess a condition can be found -- when you say you're going to work with the development -- or property owner on the corner and you're improving that intersection, would you, then, connect a sidewalk to this development sidewalk? Inselman: Assuming that the property owner on the corner was willing to grant us an easement to place the sidewalk on the south side of the canal to connect to this development and get it to the intersection, yes, we would have that built with the improvements. But we would not be in a position to condemn to require the easement or the right of way necessary I don't believe. De Weerd: Mr. Nary, I guess with this knowledge could we write a finding that we would ask that some connectivity be made and that that would be worked out between the developer and ACHD in consideration to what the road plans are at the time of construction? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean, yeah, I think that's consistent with other types of findings that we have made and if the Council is of a mind set to approve this, that they work out these -- these details about the connectivity with the highway district and all of that. Since they have made an offer on the record about making some of those connections to the corner, I think that's probably adequate. I don't know if Mr. Hood has a different perspective, but it certainly doesn't sound inconsistent with what we have done on other projects. De Weerd: Mr. Hood, do you have any comment on that? Hood: Mayor, Members of the Council, I have no different take on it, I guess, than our legal counsel. I have some reservations, I guess, about, you know, getting that -- acquiring an easement across the five acre parcel. If that doesn't happen, what Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 45 of 56 happens then. But it's no different -- I think we can make the findings fit whatever motion there is, either way, however the Council decides they want to go. De Weerd: Thank you, Gary. Inselman: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further testimony? Okay. Mr. Nickel. Nickel: Again, Madam Mayor, Shawn Nickel. And, again, I'm fine with that. Again, I don't want to be held relying on another piece of property to grant an easement or right way, so however Mr. Nary wants to write the condition or the finding, I think it needs to be that we have agreed that we will provide some sort of connection, whether it be on the north side of the canal or working with the highway district, but I don't want to -- again, I don't want to get locked into relying on that property owner to work with the highway district if they don't want to do that, but to get on the record that -- so it's either/or. We'll let Mr. Nary work that out, I wanted to get that on the record. De Weerd: Okay. And when you get a copy of the findings, make sure you read that. Nickel: I always do. Thank you. Hood: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Hood: I may add just in lieu of what Shawn just mentioned, that the -- be in the development agreement is going to be the most appropriate place to include this requirement, if you so choose to requirement it. And I think you can make it be two parts, that unless ACHD acquires an easement to construct the sidewalk in its ultimate location, the applicant shall construct a -- and I don't know if you guys are talking concrete or asphalt, but it is just going to be temporary, so I was figuring asphalt or something like that. From their Amber Creek Drive to the intersection. Then, they are off the hook. If ACHD is able to get that easement, they don't need to make this requirement. But if by chance they hit a snag and this developer is ready to occupy their homes, there is a sidewalk there or an actual path to the school site. At least the intersection. De Weerd: And I guess we can leave it to staff and ACHD and the applicant to make sure we are maintaining the goal of safety and that it doesn't put these kids at further risk. Okay. Any other questions, Council, of the applicant or staff? Okay. No further comment. Okay. I would -- if there is no further information needed, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 13 and 14. Wardle: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 46 of 56 De Weerct Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move we close the public hearings on Items 13 and 14. Borton: Second. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Any discussion before a motion is made? Rountree: Mr. Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I'm going to say it again for you, Joe. I'm not in that big a hurry to annex an issue for the City of Meridian to have to unweave or un-ring the bell on while we have no readily apparent solution. We have issues from the subtleties of a potential litigation if we ask for something that we fill strongly about and we, then, have to craft the right language in some kind of a document to potentially make that happen or not, and it seems to me that we have testimony from ACHD that they would like to have an opportunity for some input as it relates to future development that they generously stated that they would get done before the school is built, so I'm not inclined to vote in favor of approval of this annexation, having stated that. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. We have heard from Mr. Rountree. Do I have a motion from Mr. Rountree or anyone else? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move we approve Item 13, AZ 05-055 and ask staff to draft Findings reflecting applicant's testimony, specifically the willingness to voluntarily construct a path from Amber Creek Way to the intersection of McMillan and Meridian Road, direct a two part finding allowing utilization of ACHD's right way of additionally -- or excuse me. Additionally, if ACHD acquires an easement through the property, the adjacent property can utilize that piece. Mr. Nary, am I missing anything? Nary: I don't think so. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Borton: Second. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 47 of 56 De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to approve with the additional condition as stated. Any discussion. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. De Weerd: Okay. Motion carries on Item 13. MOTION CARRIED: THREE A YES. ONE NAY. De Weerd: Item 14. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I move we approve Item 14, PP 05-057, preliminary plat for Amber Creek Subdivision. Borton: Second. De Weerd: The motion is to approve Item 14. Is there any discUssion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 passes. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. Item 15: Item 16: Item 17: Public Hearing: RZ 05-021 Request for a Rezone of .94 acres from R-8 to C-G and Rezone of .95 acres from R-8 to C-N for Champion Park Addition by Hillview Development Corporation - north of Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road: Public Hearing: PP 05-061 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 48 single-family residential lots (24 detached lots and 24 attached lots), 2 commercial lots and 4 common lots on 11.44 acres in the R-8, C-G and C- N zones for Cham ion Park Addition by Hillview Development Corporation - north of Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road: Public Hearing: MCU 05-004 Request to modify previous Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development (CUP 02-049) by removing the proposed mini-storage use and including attached and detached single- family dwellings for Cham ion Park Addition by Hillview Development Corporation - north of Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road: Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 48 of 56 Item 18: Public Hearing: MI 05-015 Miscellaneous request to modify the recorded development agreement for Parkstone Subdivision (AKA Champion Park Subdivision) by Hillview Development Corporation - north of Ustick Road and west of Eagle Road: De Weerd: Okay. Items 15, 16, and 17 are public hearings on RZ 05-021, PP 05-061, and MCU 05-004, and MI 05-015. I will open these four public hearings with staff comments. Hood: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, having some technical difficulties. Hopefully, my slide show will be back up here shortly. Champion Park Addition is located on the north side of Ustick Road, approximately 1,300 feet west of Eagle Road. As the Mayor mentioned, it is a rezone, a preliminary plat, and modification to an existing Conditional Use Permit, and also miscellaneous application to amend the existing development agreement for Champion Park, also known as Parkstone Subdivision. This property was previously approved for a mini storage and commercial uses within the Parkstone Development. The applicant is now proposing to construct single family residential where the mini storage was previously proposed. The applicant is also rezoning 1.8 acres R-8 to C-G and C-N, approximately one acre each. And also a preliminary plat and a Conditional Use Permit approval for 48 single family building lots on 11.44 acres. The miscellaneous application is to modify the existing development agreement, as I just mentioned. The gross density of the sub is 4.77 dwelling units per acre. At the January 5th hearing, Mrs. Becky McKay was at the hearing. Tom Davis showed up and testified in oPposition. And Jonathan Seal showed up representing the property owner directly to the east. The key issues of the discussion by the Commission were the land use buffer widths and, then, also requiring CUPs for the two commercial lots that are proposed. Also at the January 5th meeting the applicant agreed to construct a six foot vinyl fence along the east property line adjacent to the Center Point development. The applicant also agreed to include a clause within the future purchase agreement stating -- acknowledging to potential property owners that they acknowledge that directly to the east of Champion Park is a commercial development. Staff has included that condition for a fence in the attached staff report and has not included the requirements for the disclosure statement, as we do not want to track all of those. I do not have any outstanding issues. Just the key items that were discussed at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. Maybe just an update. I don't see Jonathan in the audience, so just a brief update. This project was a mini storage. W.H. Moore had a -- and probably still does have an issue with residential and, then, having to provide the full 25 foot wide landscape buffer and working with Mr. Seal on putting together an application for claimant's complaints and knock that landscape buffer down to ten feet, but, then, put shrubs in there. I haven't had a chance to speak with Becky about that, but I did speak with Sheri at Engineering Solutions for a couple of minutes about that and they seem to be fine. Everyone seems to be in agreement, so I think they will turn this compliance request -- will probably be approved once it gets -- we see that application. So, with that I will stand for any questions, then, I will get you a picture of this development here shortly. ..". Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 49 of 56 De Weerd: You know, Caleb, I guess my question is on the alternative compliance, when we approve the commercial project to the east of this, it would be abutting a storage facility, so any change should be, really, on this development -- should be this development's responsibility, since they are coming in with the change that would result in a landscape buffer to begin with. Hood: Madam Mayor -- and that is something that when I evaluated this alternative compliance request I definitely will take into account the one -- Winston Moore did proceed with his zoning of the property to a commercial district, but you have not seen any actual development adjacent to this Champion Park. So, they were in first with their zoning, but not seeing a development plan and not really knowing what they were going to do, it's a little -- a little dicey to say that they shouldn't have to put up any landscape buffer, because property is currently R-8. It does have a residential zone today and they do have other homes in Champion Park that are not part of this subject application that Winston -- that his project does abut that he would have to put in a 25 foot wide landscape buffer anyways on. So, this is only a portion of what they abut overall in the Champion Park Subdivision. So, that was something that -- I think we have come to an agreement that says, you know, it isn't fair for them to have to put in a 25 foot buffer, because they are changing their use. However, they are also gaining on the north end of this and not having to put a 25 foot buffer next to existing homes that the developer has constructed in Champion Park. So, that's why I think we had a happy compromise. There is not much you can do down to that five foot. They'd have to have five feet anyway, so it's, really, just an additional five feet and some landscaping. But at least that's my take on this so far. De Weerd: Well, we love happy compromises. So, any questions for staff at this time? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Great way to spend your Valentine's, uh, Becky? McKay: Yeah. Valentine's Day, anniversaries, birthdays, I'm usually at a hearing it seems like. Unless you guys start making it a holiday and we get it off. Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, 150 East Aikens, Suite B, Eagle. I'm representing the applicant in this particular application. I will be as brief as possible, so everybody can get home at least while their significant other is awake. Rountree: Too late. McKay: As you recall, the Champion Park Subdivision is in a medium density residential designated area. We came in under the old ordinance with a planned development, which allowed us a 25 percent exception. Therefore, we had about I think 12 to 13 percent nonconforming use. The two nonconforming uses consisted of this mini storage along the eastern boundary, some office, and, then, some neighborhood friendly commercial located here. The project had the neighborhood park here in this central area, which, if you guys have had an opportunity to go out and look at it, it is Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 50 of 56 really looking nice. The only thing that I think they have got left is the restroom facilities and my understanding is they are waiting for the ground to dry out a little bit more to get going. So, it's really turned into a beautiful neighborhood park that I think the city and this particular subdivision can be very proud of. When we did this subdivision, this is the first time that I had ever planned a mini storage facility within a subdivision and as a component. All the other mini storage facilities we have done were a stand alone. It was kind of a trial. We knew that this is mixed use regional to the east of us, so we thought that at the particular time we came through the city that this would make sense. As the project has developed, as the park has been improved and the housing market has changed as far as the prices that the lots are being sold for and the demand that's out there in consulting with different architects, real estate agents, people who are in the mini storage business, it was determined by my clients that that really wasn't the best use and, you know, in hindsight, looking at this, the neighborhood park is the central feature. I spoke with some of the neighbors across the south side of Ustick, they were here when we were at the Planning and Zoning Commission on an application to the east of them, and asked us, gee, what are you doing at Champion Park. I said, well, we are coming back in to eliminate the mini storage and put in single family homes, about 24 attached and 24 detached. They said we think that's a great idea. If you look at it now, what we are proposing here, we just, basically, kind of stuck that in like that. The access remains -- oops. I'm sorry. I have prop difficulties. The access point to the collector remains the same. We are creating a loop system. All of these are public streets. And you can kind of see the overall look. I think it has a softer look. A mini storage, you know, we can do a lot with the architectural style, but, nonetheless, it still is a harsher look. We will bring in this public street, loop in here. This particular residential lot was eliminated. These are all detached single-family dwellings. These range from around seven to 12,000 square feet. These range from 40 some -- 4,500 to 5,000 square feet. We do have some zero lot lines here. We put one pedestrian access to the east. I have talked with Jonathan Seel in length. He indicated we do not object to your project whatsoever. He said I just -- we just do not want to be penalized with a 25-foot landscape buffer. They are going to put a sign facing this particular project that puts them on notice that this -- that their project will be developed for commercial purposes. We agreed in all purchase agreements and in the covenants for this particular sector, making sure that they are aware of the fact that that will be commercial to the east. Jonathan offered up a ten foot alternative buffer. My client said he thought that would be enough. We will be building all the perimeter fencing. Winston's project comes clear up to here, as Craig indicated, so we already have some single family residential that abutted him. As far as our density, we are at I think about 3.6 dwelling -- 3.69 dwelling units per acre on the overall project. Prior to the addition of these 48 lots, we were at 3.58. And that excludes the commercial and the office. The staff has asked us to come in with a rezone for the two commercial -- neighborhood commercial lots, because they indicated that it's too confusing if it carries an R-8 zone, which is that's what's on the property at this time and prefer that it be zoned to match the use. Therefore, that's why we asked for the C-N and C-G. That was at staff's recommendation. We are asking for modification of the development agreement, because we would have to, obviously, add these 48 additional lots and, then, eliminate the mini storage. Mr. Davis came in and testified at our Planning and Zoning Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 51 of 56 Commission meeting. His main concern was what are those commercial uses going to be. He still resides in his home, him and his wife. They are going to be office in the future, so they are a transitional use. We agreed that any commercial use would require conditional use. So, he would have opportunity to get input on hours of operation and what that Use is and if it's compatible with this neighborhood, which we thought was very important. We think this is a good change. We had 11 percent open space in the project in its entirety. So, this really, you know, just fit right in there. We didn't have to allocate open space to meet the overall requirements. Do you have any questions? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I definitely have one big question. Three of us here got to sit until 1 :00, 2:00 o'clock in the morning listening to Crossroads Subdivision, and the 50 or 60 people that packed in, because there was never going to be anything built beside them, even though every time you drive in you seen this big sign. So, Becky, you're going to tell me that all those people, every time Mr. Moore or whoever has that Center Point property, puts up a two story, three story office building over there or something commercial, we are not going to have 48 people sitting in here telling us that isn't the right thing for it? McKay: Madam Mayor, Commissioner -- or Councilman Bird, that's why it was our recommendation that they include in all their purchase agreements and to protect their covenants, that the property to the east is regional commercial. That a commercial project is proposed over there. Kohl's -- and my understanding is they are -- I talked to the engineers. They are working on their construction plans as we speak to get going on the Kohl's as soon as possible. So, that's going to be going in there far before we ever get online. So, it's going to be very obvious -- I think the Crossroads thing, it sat -- the property sat vacant for so long, the commercial portion with the ShopKo center, that a lot of those people -- you know, you're absolutely right, they see the sign and, then, they don't register that fact. So, that's why we wanted to make sure that we included that in all documentation, all the purchase agreements, so that no one could ever come before this body and say I bought this house right here and nobody told me that it was going to be commercial and I am just shocked that you are going to approve commercial. I think this is a little bit different situation. Like I said, the mini storage, originally, I thought made sense. But as this developed I just can't envision that next to that city park. It's just too pretty, I guess, to be honest with you. Bird: But, you know -- and I don't disagree with that, Becky, but if I'm still on the Council when these things -- when Winston starts his or whoever is going to have that, starts it, if I get any complaints in here you're going to buy me lunch. Rountree: You're getting off easy. McKay: I'll come into the hearing and just extend this position that was taken. ----"- Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 52 of 56 Bird: The real estate people aren't going to tell them to make a sale. McKay: I know. And that's why the purchase agreement I thought was good, because builders see that, homeowners see that, they don't always read those CC&Rs. In fact, a lot of people don't. They should. But we want to make it -- I mean, I don't know, we can even put a note on the plat, you know, do whatever -- Bird: Well, I think there definitely should be a note on the plat. McKay: I mean as much as we possibly can to let people know what's going to go on. But this is not unlike other situations where you do have attached residential adjoining commercial or office uses. Hopefully, it will still cut down on the trips with that ped path there. I know Jonathan was -- he wasn't too sure about it, but I think -- I'd like to see people walk over there to go to Kohl's versus getting in their car and driving out to Ustick if at all possible. Bird: I agree with you. McKay: So, I think it's a good compromise and, obviously, Jonathan is not here this evening, he seemed to be satisfied with what we went on the record with. So, I'd ask that the Council look at this favorably. We think it makes sense and we think it makes a lot better looking project. De Weerd: Is there a reason why there isn't a stub to the east? McKay: That was hotly debated when we came in, Madam Mayor. We ended up putting a pedestrian pathway here and now we have another one here. But there was a big debate over do we send that residential traffic to that complex, take the chance that they -- maybe they cut through their parking lot to get out to Eagle. There is pros and cons. You know, a lot of times the highway district does not like us mixing that residential and commercial traffic. So, there is situations where a vehicular connection makes sense. In this one it was determined by the highway district and the Council. It was discussed quite lengthy, you know. I don't know. Maybe Gary may want to comment on that. No, he doesn't. Do you have any other questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Madam Mayor, on that topic of internal circulation, it seems to me that at a point in time in the not too distant future there is going to be a signalized intersection on Eagle Road somewhere between the half and quarter mile area and internal traffic here ought to be able to access that light. And I don't see it there. I suppose in your complete piece you might show a stub out that can get people over there. McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree -- Meridian City Councîl February 14, 2006 Page 53 of 56 Rountree: Right here. McKay: -- that's what this street is right here. Rountree: Okay. McKay: I did Wainwright there at Cameron Park. Let me get my bearings here. I don't have my glasses on. I'm getting really blind. De Weerd: Oh, we all age. Rountree: You're giving away your age. McKay: I know. Okay. Right here. When I did Cameron Park we put that Wainwright right at the half mile. I matched it on the west side in Zebulon Heights, which was in Boise city and, then, brought it into Meridian here. My understanding is that the signal will go at that half mile. In Champion Park we stubbed that there. We also -- Ada County Highway District worked with my client here at Zebulon, we had a 40 -- 45 foot buffer, I believe, landscape buffer between my Boise office site and the residential. ACHD, I believe, has either acquired that or has an agreement to acquire that, so that they can get a public street south to connect to Winston Moore, which, then, will allow his traffic to come up to that half mile. But the stub is -- I matched the stub up here at Zebulon. There is one parcel between me. Mr. Ketlinskì I think it is. Yeah. So, we are trying to get interconnectivity up to that half mile light. Now, Winston will have a light on Ustick, I believe. Rountree: Yes. Okay. Great. Thank you. McKay: You're welcome. De Weerd: So, there is a connection, it's just-- Rountree: You can weave your way through there. De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions or comments, Council? Thank you, Becky. Okay, Council, what would you like to do? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: If nobody has any discussion, I move that we close Items 15, 16, 17 and 18 for the Public Hearing. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 54 of 56 De Weerd. Okay. Motions to close Item 15 through 18. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: If there is no discussion, do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve RZ 05-021 and include the comments made by applicant and staff. Well, no, we have already got the Findings. And approve the Findings. Don't we? Yeah. And include approving the Findings. I don't think anything was changed. De Weerd: Do I have a second? Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve Item 15, the Findings, acknowledging we have staff and applicant comments. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. Item 16. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve PP 05-061 Findings and include the staff report and applicant comments. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 16. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 17. Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 55 of 56 Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Bird: I move we approve MCU 05-004 and approve the Findings and also include staff and applicant comments. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 17. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Eighteen. Bird: I'm on a roll. Madam Mayor, I move we approve MI 05-015 and that has Findings also and to include the staff report and applicant comments. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Thank you. We have a motion to approve Item 18. Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 19: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(c) (to conduct deliberations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is not owned by a public agency): De Weerd: 2345(1 )(c). Okay. Item 19 is an Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67- Bird: And (b). De Weerd: And (b). Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1 )(c) and (b). Meridian City Council February 14, 2006 Page 56 of 56 Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: De Weerd: Okay, I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session. Rountree: So moved. Bird: Second. De Weerd: All those in favor. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. De Weerd: Do I have a motion to adjourn? Rountree: So moved. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay, all those in favor. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:59 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MMY DE WEERD\\\\\\"I1~~~"111111 \\\' of fljw::f1.'~" 11'1/ \' -4. <.v;'A // .;;::.',..(:.. "' 1"". ~... $' v Oí\1>ORI i('. 'V ~ ~ 'R ð ~ ~ r:""""'Ac\TE TE -;: . "-c',- ,.,,--_.." - - :::: /"J':: ~"Yc.... (J':::: -::. - -4~ ,\,> 0 .:::: ~"fA Vsr 13\' X' g -:'" Y.:ð -' .&";.'~... ,,~ /o! -, {\,... . ,v ,;:- ~"""'I""VUN1i . \\\,\<' 111"""1 uti'" 2- / Zø / {} £; DATE APPROVED