HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 05-02
Meridian City Council Meetin~
May 2. 2006
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M.,
Tuesday, May 2,2006, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, Shaun
Wardle, and Joe Borton.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Bill Musser, Joe Silva, Len Grady,
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 this meeting to order. It is Tuesday, May
2nd. It's a few minutes after 7:00. We'd like to welcome you here this evening. I will
start the meeting with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg.
Item 2:
Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Thank you. Today we will be led in the pledge of allegiance by the Boy
Scout Troop 306. If you will all rise.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3:
Community Invocation by Pastor Randy Rodes~ with Meridian
Vineyard Church:
De Weerd: Young men, if I could give you a pin for the City of Meridian for leading us in
the pledge. Thank you so much. Okay. Item 3 is our community invocation. We will
be led tonight by Pastor Randy Rodes. He is with the Meridian Vineyard Church. If you
will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of
silence.
Rodes: Mayor de Weerd, thank you, and the City Council. Thank you very much for
letting me come this evening. Let us pray. Father God, we just thank you for the
opportunity of living in this great community and these people who lead and make
decisions on behalf of this community have an awesome task. Lord, we ask that as
they make these decisions this evening they will draw upon your wisdom and that you
will guide them in each and every case that comes before them. Lord, we pray that you
would just keep your hand upon our community as we continue to move forward. We
ask for your protection over all that goes on in the City of Meridian and all that concerns
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 2 of 65
it We thank you for the leadership of Mayor De Weerd and these people. Lord, we
pray that you would keep your hand upon them now throughout this meeting this
evening and we commit it to you in Jesus' name, amen.
Item 4:
Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you, Pastor. Item No.4 is adoption of the agenda.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: We have a number of changes, so if you will bear with me for just a moment.
On the Consent Agenda I have Resolution 06-518. Item E on the Consent Agenda is
going to be moved to Department Reports. I'd like to add Department Reports D, Public
Works, to include Item E from the Consent Agenda. In addition to that, item two will
include water and sewer rates report from the department. Item No. 19 on our regular
agenda has asked to be continued to May 9th per the applicant. And just would also
like to remind the public that Items 22 -- 22 and 23 will be continued after a brief
discussion as to where they are at in our process. And with that I would move that we
approve the agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. We have a motion in front of you to adopt the agenda as amended.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5:
Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of April 25~ 2006 Pre-Council Meeting:
B. First Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 05-018
Miscellaneous request to amend the previously approved
Development Agreement for Cottonwood Lane Annexation (AZ
04-029) by William Colson, Hugh Colson Revocable Trust and
Meridian Premier, LLC - 985 East Freeway Drive:
C. Resolution No. 06-518 V AC 06-005 Request for a
Vacation of a public utilities, drainage and irrigation easement
between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2 for Gemtone Center Subdivision
No.2 by Petra Contractor - 1055 and 1097 North Rosario Street:
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 3 of 65
D. Task Order, Scope of Work and Budget for the North Black Cat
Trunk and Lift Station Authorization for Additional Services
No.2 with JUB Engineers~ Inc.:
F. Contract with Mike Rice Excavation for Construction of
Parkway Subdivision Pressure Irri~ation Interconnect:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 5 is our Consent Agenda.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move we approve the Consent Agenda with Resolution Item C, 06-518, and
the deletion of Item E.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve the Consent Agenda as changed. Any
discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6:
Department Reports:
A. City Council President - Shaun Wardle
1. Idaho Power Company Update by Layne Dodson:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 6. Department Reports. We will start with A. City Council.
President Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Layne Dodson with Idaho Power has asked if he
could give us a brief update as to some of the plans that the power company has. So,
as my prerogative I'd like to invite Layne up for a presentation.
Dodson: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, appreciate the time
on the agenda for this evening to talk about Idaho Power issues with -- before the City
of Meridian. But before I begin my remarks, I just -- I wanted to state how impressed I
am with the number of youth that are attending your meeting and the involvement that
you have got out here and how old it makes one feel. Let me pass these -- I have got a
few maps that might be of interest.
Meridian City Council
May 2,2006
Page 4 of 65
De Weerd: We appreciate the government teachers giving extra credit to attend. You
can see who's struggling or scrambling to get extra points; correct?
Dodson: Well, if you don't mind, you might want to call my boss. I could probably use a
couple extra credit points myself. But for those that I may not know, my name is Layne
Dodson with Idaho Power. I'm the community relations representative for this area and
I certainly appreciate the time on the agenda. There is an awful lot going on out here
and, thankfully, I think we are keeping up with it. I just wanted to give you a brief update
on some few projects and some issues that we have that are not major, but just some
tidiness that we want to take care of. I have been working recently with the City Clerk
on annexations, as, certainly, an awful lot of activity with subdivisions being annexed. I
think from a company standpoint we are keeping up with all of the annexations and
notices that are coming our way. Crucial because of the franchise fee issue that we
collect, the one percent of the power bills, and pass that back to the city. Your revenues
are up from '05 for the first quarter from 52,000, roughly, up to 64,000. There is the
growth issue there, plus, of course, the rates had a little increase last year, too. So, that
influenced that. But I think the accuracy of the franchise fee accounting is quite good.
We have a couple of subdivisions that we need to correct, those that -- Vienna Woods
and there is another one out on Locust Grove that was approved -- were approved by
the county and annexed by the city later and we found that. So, we have got a few
bookkeeping things we need to take care of to get those onto the books. But, overall, I
think that process is working well. The clerk and I had a discussion about making sure
that we get existing addresses included on any of the annexations, that they notify us,
we will make sure that we get those coded and start collecting fees on them. Another
issue that's coming up as of June 1 st, new rates that go into effect. We have a power
cost adjustment on the rates, which will, actually, reduce your power bills going forward
this next year, thanks to a good snow pack and low cost energy we have had over the
last year. There are a couple of things that I would mention that are going to be
impacting the City of Meridian and it has to do with streetlights. We have got a
provision in there where on any streetlight circuitry that has a possibility for variable
loads, such as an outlet on a streetlight that's not a metered circuit right now, we need
to clean those up. The commission has asked us to take care of any non-metered
circuits that have variable loads, such as Christmas lights, holiday lights, any plug-ins
that could be used, you know, usage other than street lights. So, that's occurring, you
know, possibly in the downtown area, as well as subdivisions that streetlight circuitry is
being installed by the contractors out there as part of the subdivision and they are
installing those lights out there. So, if there is a non-metered circuit, we are going to
have to address that. So, we will follow up. I don't know what the impacts are going to
be, but we will be doing an audit of that this year. We will have a five year period to
convert to make sure all those are compliant. So, it's not like we have to rush out and
do it all at one time. So, that's going to be a partnership between the city and the
company on that.
De Weerd: Now, when you identify those, you will get a hold of the party that it's
associated with and let them know?
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 5 of 65
Dodson: Correct.
De Weerd: Okay.
Dodson: Yeah. So, we have got an audit process we have got to go through first, find
out how big the problem is. It's -- you know, it's companywide, so we are going to have
a lot of communities to be dealing with. But, yes, we will do an audit and notify the
parties that need to be concerned about that.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Dodson: So, we have got a -- that's a five year grace period for that, thank goodness.
And, then, we have got this issue that everybody's confronting as growth. Got the map
on the board there. I think the good news is with the City of Meridian at this point, the
company has very good capacity installed and in place to accommodate growth that's
occurring here, both the residential and industrial. We have got substations and
transmission lines in place right now to service this and we are planning future growth.
We have three substations -- actually, four substation sites that we have acquired and
have permits. Three of them within Ada County and one within Canyon County. One of
those is the Hillsdale substation located on Eagle Road and Amity or -- yeah, Amity.
Columbia substation is on Columbia Road and the Kuna-Meridian Highway. Amity
substation is on Amity near Ten Mile. And those are all in Ada County and they all have
been permitted by Ada County and so those are in position. So, as we need them that
we will construct at that site. The other substation that comes into play for Meridian
would be the Cherry substation located in Canyon County over on Cherry Lane near
Can-Ada. That will actually feed towards east and pick up some of those loads over in
the far west side of Meridian. And so those are in place and that, essentially, fills out
the electrical infrastructure that we anticipate for the City of Meridian going forward for
the long term. So, I can't say this for a lot of jurisdictions, but I think we are just about
there. We have got the parts and pieces in place as far as substations. We do have
some right-of-way issues on transmission lines that we will have to deal with, but once
we get those dots out there and the sites selected, we can easily get -- get the right of
way to build the lines, even if we have to put it in road right of way. So, I'm very
optimistic going forward that we are in good shape to meet future electric demands here
in Meridian. There are a couple of sites that you might see on your map, the Robinson
site and McMillan site, and both of those will, eventually, fill the service load for Meridian
and those have not yet been acquired. So, those dots don't necessarily represent a site
that we have to have in that location, but more or less just a general area, if you will, so
-- a couple of small projects in Meridian this year as far as transmission lines. We are
upgrading the line from the Meridian substation that's located there on Franklin right
across from the Chamber of Commerce building going west to the Black Cat substation.
That line will be upgraded. It's already in place. It will be upgraded right in the existing
alignment and, then, after that one's done, then, we are headed towards Cloverdale
substation, which is on Cloverdale and Franklin. Lines are already in place, we are just
upgrading the conductors and poles there. And last, but not least, we have -- we are
just about to wrap up our Treasure Valley electric plan. We have assembled quite an
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 6 of 65
extensive community advisory group. Anna's attended a couple of those meetings for
us. We appreciate her participation and they are advising us on how to -- how we are
going to meet this future infrastructure need to serve the Treasure Valley, essentially,
from Mountain Home to Emmett and Ontario and give us some recommendations on
how they think we ought to be serving that with very -- you know, very high voltage
transmissions and generation, man-side management programs, that type of thing. And
they have been -- the community's been very helpful and we have had great
participation through that. We have had a series of about eight meetings, we have a
couple more left, and we expect to have a report out this fall on that and that's been a
very -- I think all the committee members learned a lot during that and we sure learned
a lot from them, that's for sure. We have a tremendous amount of work going on in the
Meridian city limits with the new subdivisions that we are putting in, so you will see a lot
of contractors, you will see our crews out there. We have just -- we just keep
emphasizing safety to our employees and to our contractors where there is so much
work, but we are not going to compromise the safety of the communities, our
customers, our employees, to get it done. We will get it done in a safe and -- you know,
safe manner. We certainly appreciate any watchful eyes that -- if you see something
that doesn't look right, please, let us know. We have got a lot of contractors and they
have got new people, so I hope we are doing business, you know, up to your standards.
Certainly, if you see something that doesn't meet with us, please, give us a call so we
can address it.
De Weerd: You will be the first to know.
Dodson: Appreciate that.
De Weerd: Layne, do you have on your committee someone from the road department,
from ACHD or ITD?
Dodson: We do.
De Weerd: So, these two stations that you still need to acquire on McDermott, you are
aware of the future --
Dodson: Absolutely.
De Weerd: -- transportation corridor and that sort of thing?
Dodson: Yeah. In fact, one of the criteria that our community advisory committee has
emphasized is they want us to utilize existing corridors where possible for transmission
lines, be it existing power line corridors or transportation corridors. And so that's --
that's probably one of the reasons that that's over in that area. But, once again, Mayor,
just keep in mind that those -- where those future sites are, those dots are, the sites to
be acquired, we still need to find a willing seller out there in those locations in order to
site those facilities. So, that could move.
Meridian City Council
May 2,2006
Page 7 of 65
De Weerd: Well, it is hoped that all of our utilities can work in concert in getting these
easements and places to put your lines and -- because we have that same challenge
ourself with our sewer and our water. So, I know that is a challenge, but we would all
do better if we work together.
Dodson: Well, we certainly appreciate those comments and we work really hard with
the other utilities and these maps that you see in front of you, these are maps that we'd
just dearly love to incorporate into your Comprehensive Plan, so your residents know
where those sites are, where the power line corridors are going to be and we will work
with the planning and zoning folks to make sure that that takes place. But I think once
we get that -- those sited and there is an expectation, it's certainly much more palatable
to the residence when we actually have to build those lines.
De Weerd: Anna, is it too late to include it in the update that we are just now doing in
the north -- on the north side?
Canning: Yes, ma'am, it's too late to include it in North Meridian, but we can certainly
fold it in with the next one and the next cutoff is in June. Will we have the plan ready by
June, Mr. Dodson?
Dodson: Mayor, we probably won't have the plan ready at that point, but we can
certainly provide a future acquisitions map and a long range planning map that would be
appropriate for a Comprehensive Plan.
De Weerd: Okay. Yeah. Because a couple of our dots flow, too, so --
Dodson Great. All right.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: No.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Dodson: Well, we certainly appreciate the opportunity and we will try to do this at least
once a year to keep you up to speed on the issues and projects that are coming across
the Meridian area with -- you know, in regards to Idaho Power, so thank you again.
B. Mayor's Office
1. Proclamation for Motorcvcle Awareness Month:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 6-B. I have a proclamation. It is motorcycle
awareness month and so I have a proclamation for that. Whereas, the motorcycle is an
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 8 of 65
energy efficient vehicle which conserves fuel, reduces urban traffic, and parking
congestion and treads lightly on the overworked road system and, whereas, the
motorcycle is an important and economical mode of transportation involving such
activities as commuting, touring, and for recreation and can be an aid to agriculture and,
whereas, the motorcycle promotes tourism and friendship by attracting riders from
throughout the United States and many foreign countries through various clubs and
organizations and, whereas, motorcycles lack the protective armor of trucks and
automobiles, which increases the risk of serious accidental injury and death of
motorcyclists, all motorist need to operate with caution near motorcycles and, whereas,
due to the increased number of motorcycles on the roads and highways of our state and
throughout the nation and because motorcycle awareness and safety is a concern to all,
it is appropriate to set aside a time to alert motorists to the number of motorcyclists on
the roads and to help motorcyclists become aware of the ways they can promote safety.
Therefore, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do hereby proclaim May
2006 to be Motorcycle Awareness Month in the City of Meridian and urge all of our
citizens to be aware of and support the various rallies and events for the safety and
awareness of motorcycles in our community. This is signed this day of May 2006. This
is being proclaimed throughout the state, as asked by our governor. We all know he is
a motorcycle enthusiast, but they are a danger. We need to keep recognition of our
motorcycles on the road as we change lanes, as we turn corners, and all of that. So,
we all are more aware. Thank you, Council.
C. Planning Department - Anna Canning
1. Timing Issues Related to Code Enforcement:
De Weerd: Item C is our Planning Department. Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, some of this is just to give you an
update and, then, to ask you a question at the end. Just wanted to let you know that
code enforcement, planning, and legal staff have been meeting on a monthly basis now
since about November, I believe, and we are coordinating and working together almost
seamlessly it seems like, we just kind of hit a point where we are working really well
together and we are trying to resolve all the kind of consistency issues that we face on a
regular basis. One of those is with regard to businesses that start up either without
getting proper approvals or they start up where they are not supposed to start up and
usually the remedy for those -- there is four remedies. One is a certificate of zoning
compliance. One is an accessory use permit, a Conditional Use Permit, or a rezone.
Those are, basically, the four options that those -- that businesses that start up that
shouldn't have have. So, we send a letter, we say you have ten days to tell us what you
want to do to remedy the situation and if they are going to make application for one of
those things, then, we give them another 30 days to pull that application together. But
the first thing they always ask is, well, while you're processing the paperwork, can we
keep our business going? We haven't had a definitive or consistent answer in the past.
So, we are looking for some policy guidance from Mayor and Council on that issue. For
a couple of them, like certificate of zoning compliance or accessory use, it seems very
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 9 of 65
reasonable that they will be able to meet their conditions of requirement and could
proceed until they get those done. Rezone, on the other hand, is much less certain that
they will actually get to the place they need to get that business going in the end,
because a lot of times it requires a Comp Plan amendment, along with that rezone. So,
that one we would recommend that they not be allowed to continue. And, then, there is
conditional uses kind of somewhere in between and that's the one where we'd like some
guidance from you all as to whether you would like those to continue or -- while we
process the paperwork or have them close down until we can get it done. And with that
I will end my presentation, unless you have more questions. We are just trying to give a
consistent answer.
De Weerd: Anna, can you give examples of situations with the Conditional Use Permit?
Canning: A lot of times a day care will have too many kids in it. They will have eight,
instead of the six they are allowed. That would be a Conditional Use Permit.
Sometimes they end up going into an existing tenant space, just kind of moving in there,
not knowing that it requires a Conditional Use Permit. Since we have so many fewer
conditional use permits, we get less -- fewer of those, but ones where they may decide
to use a drive-thru or they have built a drive-thru and not told us and, then, they need to
go and ask us for permission to have the drive-thru.
De Weerd: So, they have built it without a building permit?
Canning: Well, they just didn't tell us it was going to be a drive-thru. This happened
recently, so --
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Maybe to supplement a little bit from what Mrs. Canning is saying, you know, we
are trying, I guess, from a consistency standpoint, to avoid the asking for forgiveness
rather than permission and we are seeing a little bit more of that lately of some
behaviors of whether it's an accessory use or conditional use, I mean to take the
example that Mrs. Canning stated, you know, if a day care had eight children, instead of
six, that may not seem very significant, if they -- but for us to be consistent, eight and,
then, 12 or eight and 20 are still of the same violation and we want to make sure we can
apply that fairly across the board, so that we don't get people that push the envelope
further and, then, allow that to continue in the two or three months it might take to go
through the process, to go through some of the accessory use permit types of uses are,
generally, I guess, a little less troubling, sometimes, to allow to continue versus the
conditional uses or, as Mrs. Canning stated, the rezone. And I think it's just trying to get
a sense from you and the Council as to your comfort level and us trying to apply the
same standard across the board.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Council, any ideas, feedback for staff?
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 10 of65
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I guess I will kick it off. I agree with the statement that a use -- accessory use,
any type of business that needs a rezone, in most cases it would seem that that -- the
use would be inconsistent with the surrounding properties and that's why they would
need that. So, I can understand that the cease of business, unless there was certain
mitigating circumstances in that case. The conditional use -- I think it's difficult to make
a blanket policy. I would say that my sense would be I would like to see in all cases, if
it's possible, to have that business continue as we have shortened our conditional use
process and I think we have made it a little less egregious than it used to be. I guess in
my mind that doesn't cover all the circumstances that I can think of. So, I don't know
how you can make a blanket policy statement out of that.
Canning: So, if I might interpret that a little bit, it would be to allow conditional use to go,
unless we really saw some negative public -- or a public health and safety concern that
would stop us from doing that?
Wardle: Madam Mayor. I would say certainly any safety issues or public safety issues
from either the police or the fire department or code enforcement, I think that that would
warrant a stop use or -- I'm not sure which order you use. It would make sense that
they would not be allowed to continue until they had either corrected their violations or
got the property comment.
De Weerd: Council, I guess the one example that Mr. Nary gave and the number of
children in a day care can negatively impact a neighborhood, in particular if it's more
than two, if it's more in regards to the six or more, and if the notification is generated by
neighbors concerned with the traffic and safety issues associated with it, so, you know,
where do you draw the line? And I guess it's those gray areas that staff needs some
direction on and I don't know where you draw the line.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: The line -- I guess my perspective, not having experience in need for wiggle
room or gray areas, is the line is the rules as they are set. And it might sound overly
harsh, but we all are required to follow the particular rules of the city or state or
employment or where ever we operate, to the extent that the city has particular rules
that individuals need to follow in order properly run their business in Meridian, those are
the rules and there is your line. Again, I haven't seen a need for wiggle room and
maybe that sounds overly harsh, but that's my perspective, as far as whether or not they
should or shouldn't be able to continue to operate, otherwise, it leaves you in the
tenuous position of having to make multiple judgment calls on whether or not its a public
Meridian City Council
May 2,2006
Page 11 of 65
safety issue or it's two kids versus six kids in a day care, which I don't think is
necessarily fair to you or probably the direction that you're looking for. So, unless that's
overly harsh or there is some experience that the Council has that I haven't seen or
that's been the ruling of many businesses, I think Mr. Nary's comments about people
opening up a business, either not taking the time or effort to find out what needs to be
done to do it properly, and then, comes back trying to say sorry or seek forgiveness or
whatnot, just opens the door for trouble, so --
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Canning: Mr. Borton. So, would you -- you would not like even the accessories or the
certificate of zoning compliance? Just treat all them the same; is that correct?
Borton: Well -- Madam Mayor. There is probably some anecdote that you or another
council member could share with me that tells me why that's mean and harsh.
Canning: I just wanted to make sure I understood, but -- as long as we have a line, we
will enforce it. So, we will take whatever direction Council wants us to go.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Question for Anna. Given the limited amount of code enforcement folks,
how is the city apprised of these issues normally?
Canning: It's a mix -- actually, with -- code enforcement is starting to be more pro-
active, they are able to, with the staffing levels they have now, so we will probably see
more of these. About -- actually, chief, do you know -- I know quite a few of them come
from neighbor complaints. Some of them they are able to uncover on their own, so --
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: My sense of fairness and I guess my sense for encouraging entrepreneurial
activities goes against what I'm about to say, but I tend to agree with Councilman Borton
in terms be being consistent and being able to take the subjectivity and consistency that
the staff would have to show by making judgment calls if we created a gray line in there.
I think the codes we have now probably are sufficient as it relates to occupancy permits
and accessory uses. It seems to me that it's really hard to differentiate between those
two. The accessory use is allowed if asked, typically.
Canning: Typically, yes, sir.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 12 of65
Rountree: And that's pretty much how it's set up in code. But when you look at
Conditional Use Permit, there is a whole process in code that establishes that. There is
a whole list of things that you have to comply with, there is a whole process you follow.
And the same with the zoning change, which is even more rigorous. So, I would say
you have the lines. If you're comfortable to have them fuzzed up and make your job
more difficult, then, we can do that.
De Weerd: I guess, Council, it does put staff in an awkward situation if they are trying to
figure out what rule they don't have to follow --
Rountree: Yes.
De Weerd: -- and give flexibility to. And the person who is affected does have that
opportunity to appeal that and bring it to Council for you to hear. So, I guess, you know,
that option is available as a fall back.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I agree with what you said and I agree with Councilman Borton. I think sometimes
we make too much wiggle room to make it confusing. We have got the rules, let's
enforce them, if we have got the enforcement people. Let's make sure we get them
enforced. And they have always got the opportunity, if they don't like it, they can come
before the Council and explain their situation.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Yes. Part of the intent of this discussion, too, was to make all of you aware, you
know, how the process has evolved and changed significantly in the last few months
and so as you're all aware, sometimes enforcement action has a tendency to trickle up
to you and so I think our intent was to make sure all of you knew how we have been
trying to apply this and trying to be consistent across the board and, obviously, there are
some discretionary choices in any enforcement actions that we have to make, as well
as sometimes prioritizing which ones are we going to take on this week versus which
ones maybe can wait until we get the issue solved. So, you know, as long as you folks
are all comfortable, obviously, we could have a lengthy workshop discussion about this,
but if you're comfortable that there is some process that is ongoing, it isn't something
that's done willy-nilly and that we are continuing to try to make sure that we maintain
that level of consistency as staff, so that when they do end up on our plate, whether by
e-mail or in front of you, that you're going to know there was a lot that went into this
action before they ended up on your agenda.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 13 of65
De Weerd: Thank you. Anna or Joe or Joe, do you have anything to add?
Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the recent examples that I can think of
that, as you asked for, is Bruneel Tire that came in and decided to occupy the former
site of the Alameda Weed Control and he came in and did the right thing and attempting
to get a sign permit and, then, a plan review on a small office -- they were doing a
remodel on an office in the front and, then, the question came about by Rich Green,
who is our contract plans reviewer on these -- during the inspection process, what are
they going to do in the building, and they said the sale of tires. Well, there is some very
specific parameters that you can store tires in terms of quantity, height, and the storage
configuration. And that's an example that I think we would just like to look at and have
the ability to look at a flow chart how that person came in, asked, you know, the
appropriate questions, attempting to do the right thing and, then, we started to ask some
questions further down the road that dealt with the storage of used oil and tires. So,
that's the type of thing I think we would like to workout in terms of the process,
De Weerd: Thank you. It's a good example, especially in the storage of tires. We are
having issues with that. Joe, do you have anything you would like to add? Since you
have the wonderful opportunity to go and face some of these people who -- who we are
talking about.
Venneman: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, from a code enforcement
perspective, of course, I would likely be the person who would say that the less wiggle
room the better. It becomes tremendously difficult to figure out where that wiggle room
comes down at on certain issues and so keeping in mind the fact that we have to be
consistent and we want to promote local businesses, that kind of thing, it -- I'm just
saying the more wiggle room there is, the harder it is to really be consistent, which is
our goal. Our goal is to treat every business the same, every property owner the same,
and the more we adhere to what those rules are, the better we are at that. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Joe. And we appreciate what you're doing. I hope you're
feeling good, too.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we will discuss this at our next
meeting. I think we have one next week or in two weeks and, then, we will try and come
back -- we will give you an update on our discussion and whether we have a line or not
have a line. Thank you.
D. Public Works - Len Grady
E. Award of Bid for Procurement of Biosolids Direct Dryer
System to Andritz-Ruthner~ Inc.:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item D. Len. I guess I would take an
opportunity, if there is anyone that came to hear an update on Items 22 or 23, we will
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 14 of65
not be holding a Public Hearing on those items. It has not been in front of our Planning
and Zoning Commission yet, so that will be scheduled at a later date.
Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have kind of an odd situation here
with the Andritz bid that we received. We went out for bid for a biosolids dryer and it's a
fairly specialized piece of equipment. We received one bid back, which is not unusual.
The problem is the bid came back with conditions attached to it. Basically, that puts that
bid in a condition where it's non-responsive. And so my first request is to reject that bid
and we need Council approval to do that. The conditions that were put on the bid were
not onerous at all. And, in fact, we are willing to accept those conditions. So, I would
like to not only reject the bid, because it was non-responsive, code allows us to enter
into negotiations with the contractor to come up with a valid contract. So, the next step I
would do is to ask you to approve that award of that contract
De Weerd: Now, that's interesting, Len. Council, are you following that discussion?
Bill, do you have anything you want to add?
Nary: Madam Mayor, I have discussed this -- and Members of the Council, I have
discussed this with Len and that is how the process works. If you want to reject the
initial bid, you can do that, and, then, the process, then, would be to work that out and
see if you can negotiate in the market with that bid or anybody else, so --
De Weerd: Okay.
Nary: It seems strange, but that's how it works.
Grady: The contract amount was 2.8 million and change, so --
De Weerd: 2.8 and change. Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: Oh, thank you, Mayor. If there is no discussion, I will attempt a motion.
Madam Mayor, I move that we reject the bio-solids drier bid due to bid conditions and
causing it to be non-responsive and to allow the Public Works Department to enter into
negotiations for a bio-solids dryer apparatus.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. We have a motion to approve the request to reject of the bid. Any
discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
2: Rate increase request.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 15 of 65
Grady: The second item is a -- is a last minute item. For some reason it didn't get on
the Council agenda -- or in your packet last week, but I'm asking for Council to direct
staff to enter -- or to draft a resolution to increase water and sewer rates, both, by four
percent. You have a spreadsheet that I handed out, which indicates that by doing that
we will -- we are budgeted to end up with a net of about 500,000 at the end of this
budget year. However, water is -- I think you will notice in the last column there water is
on somewhat of a negative path. We have the choice this year of going out and
increasing the water or -- and going above the five percent and having a Public Hearing
or waiting to see -- typically, we don't spend all of what's budgeted, so what I'd like to do
is keep a close eye on this and towards the end of this budget year and the first part of
next budget year reassess this.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions, comments?
Bird: Charlie can make the motion.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: My only recollection, since it wasn't noticed on your agenda, that your
recommendation be to simply bring it back onto your agenda with a resolution to do
that State law does not require a public hearing when it's under five percent, but just to
make sure the public's had notice that you're taking that action, that would probably be
most appropriate.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Nary. Okay. Would that be your request from
Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we direct staff to prepare a resolution that indicates an increase
in water and sewer rates by four percent and that this created increase be reassessed
again next year, that the resolution be brought back to our next regularly scheduled
meeting, which would be May 9th.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to bring this back, put it on the agenda. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 7:
Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 16 of65
Item 8:
Appeal HearinQ for Order to Remove Junk Vehicle by Steven Cady
with Meridian Cherry Lane Mobile Home Park:
De Weerd: Thanks, Len. Item 8 is an appeal hearing for order to remove junk vehicles
by Steve Cady -- Cady. Cady. Mr. Nary, you want to kind of introduce this, give a little
background?
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Yes, what you have before
you is a little unusual. We don't see very many of these. This is an appeal hearing
under the city code. A city official, which can be a member of either the city clerk's
office, the police department, the fire department, or the building department, may give
notice to an individual that there are junk vehicles or junk property on their property and
they need to be removed within ten days. After that notice is given, the owner of the
property has the opportunity to appeal that action to you. It doesn't give any parameters
in the ordinance as to what information they need to provide you to -- to appeal that,
whether the property belongs to them, whether they need more time, whether there is
other issues that they may want to raise, they certainly have the ability to do any of that.
It's fairly open in our ordinance. That's the case you have in front of you. There has
been a notice of order to remove. There is a unique circumstance. The property owner
here, Mr. Cady, that's in front of you, is purchasing the property in question. The
property is the Cherry Lane Mobile Home Park. The titled owner is Agnes -- is it Hoff,
sir? Did I get that right?
Cady: It's Seeley now. It was Hoff.
Nary: Okay. Okay. She's still the titled owner, but Mr. Cady has provided a --
essentially, a purchase and sale agreement from 1986 that he is still indicating that he is
paying on that and he is in the process of purchasing that property still. The concern --
or the issue only for the city -- and you may want to establish that in Mr. Cady's
testimony -- is that he has the ability take action of whatever direction the Council
makes in this and that he is the proper person in authority to make those -- to make that
decision and carry out whatever direction you have. There is, in our city code, the
ability to order removal of the property, to order criminal prosecution if the property isn't
removed timely. There is direction to order removal and billing of the property owner for
that removal, as well as assessing that onto their tax rolls, other properties, so that it will
be paid at some juncture, whether it's currently or at sale. There is a number of
remedies that the Council has. What I would suggest for the Council from our hearing
standpoint tonight is Mr. Venneman is here from the code enforcement, he can give you
some background as to how we got here, what code enforcement's contacts with the
property owners have been to this point, what information they provided and when the
notices were given. Notices on your laser fiche -- and that was a letter from code
enforcement that was provided to the property owner, that Mr. Cady has responded to.
Just for the record, that notice to clean the premises was dated April 6 of 2006. That
was given, again, to Agnes -- the person on the title is Agnes Hoff, the owner of Cherry
Lane Mobile Home Park. Mr. Cady did file his response on April 20th, which was
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 17 of65
compliant with the statute from when it was sent -- or, excuse me, compliant with our
ordinance and I think that's probably it from an introductory standpoint. So, after Mr.
Venneman has given you the city's side of what contacts they have had, Mr. Cady can,
then, have the opportunity rebut any of that information or provide you any other
information that he has in regards to this appeal.
De Weerd: Mr. Cady, I will ask Mr. Venneman to give us an overview and, then, I'll ask
for your comments. Okay. Thank you.
Venneman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this matter was first brought to
code enforcement's attention the latter part of January of this year. One of the officers
on patrol for the Meridian Police Department advised us of a number of vehicles that
were parked and being stored at the northern most end of the trailer park -- Cherry Lane
Trailer Park, located at 314 West Cherry Lane. We subsequently went out and we did
an inventory on the number of vehicles that were there. On January 23rd we found that
there were 22 vehicles there, including trailers. They consisted of a wide variety of
situations, meaning some were fairly dilapidated, in bad condition, others no current
registration or plates. We, then, proceeded to contact Mr. Cady, after learning that he
was the owner or the manager of the park, and he subsequently agreed that these
vehicles needed to be removed, felt that they might be a detriment to the park. We,
then, kind of did a back and forth over some time and we provided him with what limited
information we could, given privacy issues, as to who the owners were. He, then,
advised us that he was going to try and attempt to locate the owners of the cars and the
trailers and have them removed. If they did not do so, then, he was going to tag them
and ultimately have them towed. Of significance is the fact that this trailer park does
have two postings, one on the east entrance and one on the back side, that clearly state
that unauthorized vehicles will be towed at the owner's direction. As Mr. Nary
mentioned, on April 6th a certified letter went out to Mr. Cady advising him that he was
in violation. That letter was directed to Mrs. Hoff, our information at the time being that
she was the registered owner of the property. That letter went out primarily because
there was still 14 vehicles remaining on the premises. To Mr. Cady's credit, he did have
some vehicles removed, but as of yesterday there was still 11 vehicles present and as
far as code's concerned he still remains in violation.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions for staff at this time? Okay. Mr. Cady, if you
will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Cady: Steven Cady. 5120 West Cherry Lane, Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you very much.
Cady: I believe as of today we are actually in compliance with the letter that was sent to
us. There are still, I believe, six vehicles in the compound, in the parking area, which,
as Joe said, is on the north side of our property. It's approximately 1,300 feet off of
Cherry Lane. It's not visible from the road. We have 25 marked parking stalls for our
residents and/or their guests. To my knowledge, all but possibly one of the vehicles is
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 18 of65
licensed, has current plates on it. We have had everything else removed or the owners
have removed them. Our biggest probably concern with what has happened through
this is that for -- as Joe said, for 20 plus years I have owned the mobile home park and
from time to time we do have people -- shall we say use our parking stalls that we have
no clue who they are and we find out that normally and once or twice a year we have
things removed. Normally in the spring. About now. But we do have a lot of residents
who are lower income residents, who have vehicles, have trailers, possibly don't -- they
don't use a lot -- that they don't necessarily maintain a registration on, they are perfectly
operable, they don't have flat tires or anything else. That's -- that's my biggest concern
is that, you know, it is private property, they are not a nuisance, they are not an eye
sore. They are properly parked. You know, the tires are full. They just don't have a
current tag. You know, I understand the wiggle room issue and, believe me, I deal with
residents every day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. So, I know what you're
saying. That's the only thing that I'm concerned about is the residents who have these
vehicles -- I mean one of the pictures there you will see is a relatively nice moving van
of some sort. One of our residents owns it. It's got a license plate on it. I think it was
expired three or four months ago. You know, to require him to just have a license plate
to have it parked there when he might not use it for a year or two, if he maintains it, I
don't know that that's absolutely reasonable. As a landlord, if it were a junked item, I
would have it removed, as we had several removed. We had about four or five towed,
because we couldn't find the owners. Or we could find a couple of the owners and they
just said we don't care, do whatever you want to do with them. So, we got rid of them.
But the ones that are left are either now licensed or they are residents -- all of them are
residents of our mobile home park and whether a couple of them have got the license
plates on them yet or not, I, honestly, couldn't say. I think there is one or two that may
not. But I know Joe's talked to them. Whether they come to some understanding I don't
know. But that's my concern. Again, there is one picture there that's from the road, you
cannot see this area at all from Cherry Lane. It's all fenced, has privacy slats in it, it's all
numbered, all the vehicles are nicely parked that remain. You know, it's just a hardship
on some of our residents to store something -- I don't know. According to your
ordinance I suppose if they could store it and they were paying 35 dollars a month -- a
month for it, they'd still have to be tagged. I don't know that that's fair for them. So,
that's my only concern.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I just needed to some questions on storage. Though I don't have any
sympathy for junk on private property, if the vehicles are licensed and operable, does
the city ordinance allow storage of vehicles on private property? I know I drive by a few
storage facilities in the city and other cities and they have vehicles in their lots parked
Meridian City Council
May 2. 2006
Page 19 of65
that are visible. Maybe Joe or Anna can help me with -- or Bill can help me with the
code and that seems to me like that might be one of your gray areas that you got to deal
with. So, help me out here.
Venneman: Councilman Rountree, the city code is, actually, pretty specific in the fact
that in order to store vehicles, you have to have -- you have to be zoned to have a
storage yard there. That would not be the case in a private trailer park. That was one
of the bases for sending a certified letter, is that this type of use is not, frankly, allowed
where it's occurring. The other issues that -- even if a vehicle is, quote, stored, it still
has to be properly licensed and registered and the photographs that I have and I can
provide to Council, if you wish, even from this angle, shows that there are a minimum of
four vehicles with no license plates whatsoever. And that has remained the case since
January. As far as their ability to be seen from the right of way, my understanding that
the code does not address that issue. It's whether the presence of junk vehicles are
there on private property and not so much as where they are visible from.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Maybe I guess, additionally, I want to add for the record purposes, the notice that
was sent and the pictures that are provided to you that are part of your packet and part
of record, are not talking about a car that has an expired license that's a month old. We
are talking about vehicles that have no tires, that are parts of vehicles that are on the
ground, that are not screened, they are not stored in any fashion. You know, this is a --
if that's no longer what's existing today, which Mr. Cady's testimony is, although Mr.
Venneman's testimony was viewing it today there were still 11 vehicles and Mr. Cady's
now saying six. That's the type of enforcement action we are talking about. We are not
talking about somebody who has an expired plate. So, I guess I don't want to muddy up
the record with Mr. Cady's concern about having someone having a car parked in their
parking stall on their -- on their lot there in his mobile home park that has an expired
plate of a week or a month or something like that. In the enforcement actions there are
occasions, I understand -- and that is, again, a discretionary call from enforcement -- for
example, in some recreational vehicles, although they license in January each year,
sometimes people don't license them until May when they are going to use them.
That's not uncommon to do that. If they are screened on their property, they are
allowed under our UDC. If they are parked in a garage they are allowed. But that's not
the issue in front of you. That's not the photographs and that's not the information you
have. So, I mean I think there is a distinct difference by what code enforcement's
enforcing. Mr. Cady's raised a valid concern, that's just not what we are here for. I
don't know if --
Cady: All of the vehicles that you're discussing have been moved. All of those vehicles
-- they are gone.
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 20 of 65
Rountree: Madam Mayor, first of all, I -- we do need to establish -- and you have
already, I believe, established by actions that you have the power and ability to remedy
the situation.
Cady: Correct.
Rountree: And what you have done I thank you. As far as the hearing, I have a
question for Mr. Nary. It's an appeal hearing, so what is the action on the part of the
City Council, either to support the violation, the citation, or to reverse that?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, I think what
you have in front of you, if you have had information provided by code enforcement as
to the condition of the property that led to their notice to remove vehicles. Again, Mr.
Venneman did, I believe, state that there was 11 vehicles still on the property, some of
which were still in the same condition as before. Now, I don't know what time Mr.
Venneman was there. What you can do within your discretion is order either to continue
this matter to verify the condition of the property, you can order that it remain and that
condition be compliant with the city code. Mr. Cady's only really stated in front of you
that he has complied with what was required of him and also had concerns about other
vehicles that mayor may not be something code enforcement would have a concern
with. We can continue this matter to get that issue resolved, if you think that's
something you'd like to do. Otherwise, it appears there isn't any other remedy I'm
thinking Mr. Cady's seeking. He's saying he's complied. I don't -- I think you may want
to verify that before you take any final action. That action can simply be that code
enforcement had enough information to provide the original notice that was sent Mr.
Cady has now complied. You may ask for an update in a week to verify that that
condition exists. We can, then, prepare an order that would say that it has been
complied with as of this date and must remain continuing in that condition going
forward. That's what a court would normally do in issuing some sort of -- some sort of
contempt action or anything that would be in front of them would be just an order
mandating that it continue in that fashion. I don't know if that helps you. I know that's
the long answer.
De Weerd: It was. Mr. Cady, do you have -- I guess I do have a question. There is
more than just vehicles on there. It seems to be -- I see a couch and --
Cady: Yeah. That's -- somebody just put it back there. Don't know where it came
from.
De Weerd: Okay. Didn't think you could drive it.
Cady: No. It just appeared one day, so --
De Weerd: So, Mr. Venneman, had you been out there this week?
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 21 of65
Venneman: Yes.
De Weerd: Either today or yesterday?
Venneman: Madam Mayor and Council, I was. I was out yesterday and pictures were
taken yesterday and I don't know if we can -- there they are right there. This shows the
date and not the time this was taken. This is a picture, Madam Mayor, of the vehicles --
partial of the vehicles that were there, looking from the southeast to the northwest along
the fence line. I would note that the -- that there remain a couple of vehicles with no
current registration or licensing and one of them is that vehicle -- it's been there awhile.
I will say that to Mr. Cady's credit, this yellow pickup is gone. It was there, well, since
January. If we could move down the line of the other photographs. There is a Chevy
Cavalier, that one right there, if we can get it.
De Weerd: It's a moving target.
Cady: It is a moving target. There is a Chevy Cavalier, no plates, no current
registration. The vehicle to the left has plates, but they are expired. Trying to recall
from memory what else is going on. There was also a camper trailer and you can see
that down toward the front of the left side. No current tags on that either. There is also
a camper shell that's pretty hard to see in there, but that has been in place now for
some time. It's just a camper shell. It doesn't require any particular licensing. There is
a U-Haul truck that has remained motionless since January. It has -- it was -- initially it
didn't have current plates, but now, I believe, it does. There is a brown pickup to the left
of it and it is now licensed. And this was as of yesterday.
Cady: The pictures I supplied you were as of this afternoon and I would have to take
exception. The little travel trailer he's speaking of there, I believe the resident took that
to storage a month ago. Approximately a month ago. Along with the flat bed you see.
The other cars, other than the little van here on the right-hand side, have all been
removed. The small utility trailer has tags through 2011 on it, which is kind of behind
the gray van and in front of the little camper trailer. As I say, as far as I know everything
there, except possibly one vehicle, is licensed. If you want to put those pictures up
there, those were taken today.
Rountree: You're talking about these pictures?
Cady: Yeah.
De Weerd: No.
Bird: No. No. No. Those weren't taken.
Cady: The color pictures I delivered were taken today. So, again, I would content that I
am in compliance and my only concern is for residents who have a vehicle that may be
operable, the tires are full, and it's simply -- you know, doesn't have any up-to-date tags.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 22 of 65
And they come through and tell us that we have to do something. So, that's as of today.
There is -- and all of those have, as far as I know, current tags.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nary, do you --
Cady: I would be happy to meet --
De Weerd: Because this is not zoned or even conditional use for a storage. But is why
they --
Cady: Again, I wouldn't define it as storage, as much as I would additional parking for
my residents, which is fairly common in a mobile home park to have an area for them to
park something.
De Weerd: I think that's the distinguishing quality of whether it's registered. If it's
registered it can be on the road. So, it's not considered storage. Would that be the
qualification?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean under our UDC if it is not
currently registered, then, it needs to be screened, if it is on private property. It cannot
be just parked in a parking space. Even on the private property, even on your driveway,
if it isn't currently registered. But, again, we are not talking about somebody's whose
registration expired yesterday, we are talking about vehicles that, you know, are sitting
for months on end. Again, as Mr. Venneman stated, I mean they began this discussion
in January with that So, I think that's maybe the distinction that I think you're drawing,
is that there is a difference. When there are allowed to be unregistered vehicles parking
there, then, it does become a storage facility and it isn't properly zoned for that
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: My take on it -- I agree with Mr. Nary's assessment that maybe in this situation
we ought to set this over for a week and allow Mr. Cady and code enforcement to go out
there and -- there is mixed stories of who took the most recent picture and what
condition these cars are at. Let's let them spend a week, talk about it. I tell you my
inclination, if there is any untagged or flat, unused vehicles out there, that they run a
great risk of losing them themselves to the extent there are any vehicle owners that
you're speaking on behalf of, that they have -- they made known that fact and provide to
you in writing or whatever information they might have, because they run the great risk
of having these vehicles moved. Short of us sitting here for the next three hours going
back and forth on which cars are what condition and --
Cady: I agree.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 230[65
Borton: I defer to code enforcement to at least be able to get out there and make an
assessment and if there is any representations that are inaccurate as to the conditions
of these vehicles and what's out there and what's not out there, would upset me greatly.
So, I trust it can be resolved in a week and --
Bird: Is that a motion?
Rountree: Is that a motion?
Borton: With that I would move to reset -- or to continue this until next week, to May
9th. In the interim have you meet with code enforcement, take whatever photos or
evidence necessary to come back, if necessary, and clear this up.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. A motion to set this over to next week. All those in favor say aye.
All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: So, Mr. Cady, if you can work with Mr. Venneman and review photos and
you do understand the distinguishing aspects of registered versus non and --
Cady: I do.
De Weerd: -- storage versus non.
Cady: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Item 9:
Request for Reconsideration of Approval of a Variance to allow Ri~ht
In Right Out Access on South Meridian Road for Meridian Gateway
by White-Leasure Development Company:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9 is a request for reconsideration of approval of a variance and
I will go ahead and ask Anna to at least give an introduction to this and, then, we will
ask the counsel direction.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the request for the Meridian
Gateway project. I believe they have submitted a letter to you -- oh.
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree is recusing himself from both Items 9 and 10.
Canning: I'll start again. Sorry about that. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the
applicant for the Meridian Gateway is asking the Council to reconsider their motion that
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 24 of 65
approved a right-in, right-out only at the southern portion of their property,
approximately 700 feet from the intersection. They are asking that you consider a right-
in, right-out only at approximately 500 feet from the intersection.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have wrestled with this request for a
week in trying to give you the appropriate advice. I think you have a couple of options
within your discretion. Our city ordinance doesn't -- doesn't have any guidelines as to
what reconsideration you may look at. What we have followed as a practice
consistently is that until you have approved the final Findings on a matter, you may
reconsider your decision if you choose. In each of those decisions we have always
recommended to, then, reset the matter for a new Public Hearing to allow the
opportunity for anyone to be heard on that variance. The problem that's a little unique
here is that this is the second request for reconsideration. That's not very usual or very
common. We normally haven't had a second request. Secondarily, I believe it is within
your discretion to always reconsider a decision that you have made, but the request
that's being made is now for a new request that's different than what had been in front
of you previously. Normally, what we have seen is a request for reconsideration based
on the request that had previously made. What the applicant in this has requested is a
different location of an entrance that's not what you have previously heard. So, you can
take a couple of different actions, in my opinion. You can, in your discretion, deny their
request, because you don't wish to reconsider it. You always have that ability to do that.
You can deny the request, because this is the second request and you don't want to
allow two bites of the same apple, if you don't want to do that. That's within your power
to do so. You can reset it for a hearing if you wish. Or you can confirm your Findings
that you have made and direct the applicant to make a new request for this variance
again. They are, again, asking for it in a different location than they previously had.
There has been no staff work, no analysis as to whether that application -- or that
request is anymore appropriate than what was previously thought. So, they always
have the ability to come back and ask for a variance anyway before they begin their
project and if you approve the Findings or direct the Findings to be brought back for
approval, they can always still go back and request that again and allow the staff the
opportunity to actually properly review the request that's being made. So, I think those
are all your options that I have tried to consider for you to make your decision tonight.
You can go any direction you choose from those.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Council, any comments, questions for staff? Would
you like to hear from the -- from Mr. Hoover?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 25 of 65
Borton: Mr. Nary, is it even an option to reconsider it with a different location, if the end
result of that could be the granting of different variance terms without a Public Hearing
as to those particular terms? Does that make sense?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council member Borton. Well, because
you can reconsider your decision and you have the ability at that public -- you have to
have a Public Hearing. If you choose to rehear it, you're going to have to do that. At
that Public Hearing could the Council at that juncture decide to alter the conditions of
the request? You know, again, that would be within your discretion to do that. If it's a
significant change to what was being requested, you may want to reset that matter
again to give proper notice to folks that may have an impact as where that location is.
Again, not this particular project, but in general. So, you probably can, if you -- you, as
a Council, want to reconsider that, I would suggest or recommend that you make
specific findings why you would choose to do that, since it is a different request that's
being made. But I think it's still within your power to do that.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, do you see anything in 200 feet closer than what we approved being a
detriment to -- I mean I have a hard time --
Nary: Madam Mayor -- sorry. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this isn't the
night for that hearing. So, if you want to have that question, then, you're going to have
to have a hearing. This is just a request by them on whether or not you would
reconsider this matter or set it for a new hearing, not to take facts or, otherwise, you're
going to have to give factual time for the other one and we haven't noticed a hearing for
that.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Follow up to Mr. Nary.
Nary: Sorry to interrupt you.
Bird: That's no problem. I don't want to get in trouble. But, anyway, as I understood --
and maybe I misunderstood what you said at the start, we as a Council have a right to
approve the 500 feet or whatever it is right tonight in our Findings by adjusting the
Findings if we so desire, is that not right?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, that is not right.
You know, you don't have the power to change what you have already approved. You
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 26 of 65
have the power to reconsider that decision by holding another Public Hearing to
reconsider what you have already approved.
Bird: Okay.
Nary: But the issue becomes of making the Findings of -- again, considering a second
reconsideration request, as well as whether or not just the Public Hearing will cure that.
Again, I think you have the ability reconsider it. There is, really, no guidance on this, so
it's within your discretion to do it. But you can't just change your Findings.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: This is one Councilman that would like to reconsider the Findings.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: And to have a Public Hearing. The sooner the better.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other comments from other Council members? Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Better get my glasses on, so I can read the thing. I move that we approve -- or
ask to reconsider the variance to a right-in, right-out access at South Meridian Road for
Meridian Gateway and to set another Public Hearing -- are we getting pretty filled the
9th, Shaun? How soon can we do that? Do we have to notice that again? Okay. For
the 23rd. Is that soon enough? Date certain. Oh. Okay. Just -- just bring it back as
soon as possible. Okay. That's my motion.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I'll second that motion if included in that motion the applicant pays for the
additional --
Bird: Renoticing? Renoticing? I have no problem with that. The motion would concur
with that.
De Weerd: Okay. We have a motion and a second to bring this back on a Council
agenda, with the applicant to pay for the fees associated. Any discussion?
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 27 of65
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Anna.
Canning: Members of the Council, the clerk has an additional noticing fee, but we,
actually, have an additional hearing fee. Is that -- did you want that included as well?
The Planning Department adopted an additional hearing fee last fall. We have never
actually had anyone pay it at this point, so --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, if this were a bigger one, I would say, yeah, let's collect it. But I -- this is -- I
don't believe this is probably going to be that big of a deal. But I do believe they should
pay for the postage and stuff --
De Weerd: It does take staff time to look at it. It is a different plat than the ones that we
have seen. In fact, this is the third one we have seen. So, it does take staff time in
analysis.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I would -- I guess my opinion, I would like the staff to review this current
application, so that I have all the best information to make my decision. Certainly the
second consideration, the scrutinization becomes more stringent, I guess, in my
opinion. So, I would -- if we have an additional staff hearing fee, I'd like to see the
applicant pay for it. Staff time.
Bird: The motion can include that.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Is there any further discussion? I will ask for roll call.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 10:
Reauest for Reconsideration of Denial of a Variance to the city code
to allow access onto Ea~le Road for Bienville Sauare Subdivision by
Red Cliff Development~ LLC:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item 10 is a request for reconsideration of a
denial of a variance and I will ask Anna to give an introduction to this one as well.
Meridian City Council
May 2,2006
Page 28 of 65
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the applicant has requested -- when
the City Council heard this item, you denied the approach in its entirety. The applicant
is asking you to consider a right-in, right-out only on the property. At the place where
they had previously shown full access.
De Weerd: Okay. Do you have anything to add, Mr. Nary?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this one is the more usual type of
reconsideration that you have seen. You still need to have a Public Hearing if you wish
to move to reconsider this action, but it is more of the type we have previously seen.
They are simply requesting the same location, but a different entry access approach,
so --
De Weerd: Okay. Council, would you like to hear from the applicant?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Can we do that? Can we hear from the applicant or do we need to -- before we
even talk to anything specific, decide on whether it's going to be --
De Weerd: He would just explain his request. Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't know that he has much more to
add -- unless he has something different than the letter that's indicated. Other than that,
I don't think you want to hear anything else other than testimony -- or you don't want to
hear any testimony tonight. So, unless there is something significantly different than
what's already in the letter before you, I don't know there is any necessity to hear
anything.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Council?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: My recollection of our denial of this variance was lengthy discussion by the City
Council, by the applicant, and by members of the community and residents. So, I --
certainly, I think in my mind we addressed all those issues at the past hearing.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything else from Council? If not, I -- if there is no motion to
reconsider, we will just -- we will move on.
Item 11:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 05~057
Request for Annexation and Zoning of 17.25 acres from RUT and R1 to R-
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 29 of 65
Item 12:
Item 13:
Item 14:
Item 15:
8, R-15 and C-G zones for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff
Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle Road:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 05-019
Request for a Rezone of 10.05 acres from C-G to R-8, R-15 and C-G
zones for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff Development, LLC -
2935 North Eagle Road:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 05-059
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 54 single family residential lots,
22 multi-family residential lots, 14 common lots and 7 commercial lots for
Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff Development, LLC - 2935
North Eagle Road:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 05-052
Request for Conditional Use Permit for Mixed Use Regional project within
300 feet of a residence for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff
Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle Road:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MI 05-013
Miscellaneous request for a Private Street application for multifamily and
commercial development for Bienville Square Subdivision by Red Cliff
Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 are all on this application. You have
the Findings in front of you, so, Council, I would need a motion.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I know Council member Rountree did not wanted to -- or wanted to recuse himself
on Item 16. I don't recall -- I don't think he recused himself on the remainder of the
project. So, I can go get him if you're going to take up the other --
De Weerd: Okay. Could we just go ahead and -- no, we can't. Forget it. Welcome
back. Okay. I would entertain a motion on -- if you want to do them individually or if you
want to go ahead and just give me a motion from -- for Items 11 through 15.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I want them done individually.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, then, do it.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 30 of 65
Bird: I didn't say I was going to do it, I just wanted them done individually.
De Weerd: Okay. We will wait until someone does.
Bird: I'm not having no problem doing that. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve Item No. 11, AZ 05-057, the request for annexation and
zoning and the Findings and Conclusions of Law.
De Weerd: Do I have a second?
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: You guys are going to make this very difficult to get out of here in a
reasonable amount of time. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll on approval of Item 11.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES,
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 12.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve the Findings and Conclusions of Law on RZ 05-019 for
Bienville Square Subdivision.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve Item 12. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve PP 05-059, the Facts and Conclusions of Law for Bienville
Square Subdivision.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 31 of65
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll on Item 13.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird, Item 14.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I move we approve CUP 05-052, the Facts and Conclusions of
Law on Bienville Square Subdivision.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 14. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Item 15. Mr. Bird.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve MI 05-013, the Facts and Conclusions of
Law for Bienville Square Subdivision. I hope I'm not butchering that name too bad.
Rountree: Second on that.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 15. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 16:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: VAR 05-023
Request for a Variance to allow access to a state highway for Bienville
Square Subdivision by Red Cliff Development, LLC - 2935 North Eagle
Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Just for the record, Mr. Rountree is not going to participate in Item
16. Mr. Bird.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I move we approve the Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial
on VAR 05-023 on Bienville Square Subdivision.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 32 of 65
Borton: Second.
Bird: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 16. Roll call.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSTAIN.
Item 17:
FP 06-019 Request for Final Plat approval of 12 residential building lots
and 5 common lots on 5 acres in a R-4 zone for The Reserve
Subdivision by Jake Centers - 5955 Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 17. We do have a letter from the applicant on FP 06-019 that
they agree with the conditions by staff. If there is no questions for staff at this time, I
would entertain a motion to approve.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 17, final plat, FP 06-019.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve Item 17. 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 18:
FP 06-018 Request for Final Plat approval of 48 residential building lots, 2
commercial lots and 4 common lots on 11.44 acres in R-8, C-N and C-G
zone for Champion Park Addition by Champion Addition, Inc. - 2740
East Ustick Road:
De Weerd: Item 18 is FP 06-018. We did have a letter from the applicant about a
particular item. Anna.
Canning: Yes, ma'am. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the applicant has
raised concerns about a request that -- or a condition that was placed on the property at
preliminary plat approval and I do want to take a little bit of time to explain it, just so you
understand what it was. We did require that the house orientation for -- I believe this is
Lot 14, that it face to the east. So, that these two backyards would, then -- would be
consistent as it applied to Lot 13 immediately west of it. Similarly, on Lot 9 we
requested that they orient north and, then, on Lot 8 that they orient south, so that you
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 33 of65
would have two backyards to one another, similar as you would for the adjoining
properties. If they start going -- this one would face this way. It's a fairly small lot and it
would be difficult to accommodate a backyard there and, then, you would just have as
sideyard here, instead of a backyard. So, we were looking at some of the design
considerations on these smaller lots, because when you don't have a larger lot to play
with, the spacing does become important The applicant originally raised that as a
concern, because they felt that the county surveyor would not allow it to be on there.
We did contact them. They said that they would sign it if we had those conditions. The
applicant has -- wanted me to express that they will abide by that condition if it's
Council's desire, but they did raise it originally. But they are okay with it going forward.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, should we ask the applicant to come forward? She doesn't
want to --
Canning: She didn't want to.
De Weerd: Just thought I would give you an opportunity, Shari.
Stiles: Shari Stiles. Engineering Solutions, 150 East Aikens Street, Suite B, Eagle,
Idaho. Mayor de Weerd, Council Members, the applicant just thought it was an unusual
request. It kind of takes away the ability of the builder to build whatever they want on
that lot. I haven't seen a similar restriction placed on other corner lots in other
developments. You're going to look across the street and see that those attached units
are on much smaller lots. But if it's this Council's desire that we do that, then, we have
no problem.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions, Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would like to -- want the Council's respect, do you want to say how they can build
the houses on the lots and -- it's like Shari says, it -- to my knowledge we have never
done that before, how you place a deal on the lot. I don't like to see restrictions,
because some people might have different plans that don't work out.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I just want to clarify, because I think -- because I haven't heard it before, I think
the planning director said that we may have approved a lot that was too small --
Canning: I did not, sir.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 34 of 65
Wardle: In any case, I'm going to agree with -- based on the planning department's
review of the restrictions and setbacks and all the other things in the subdivision. If they
only feel that three of these lots need to be designated that for it to work, 11m okay to
agree with that, along with the planning director's comments.
De Weerd: Just for the record, we have designated direction of housing and in
particular along collectors where we didn1t want the cars backing out into a road. So,
just for the record. Any further discussion? Do I have a motion?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move we approve Item 18, FP 06-018, final plat for Champion Park Addition,
to include staff's comments in regard to specifically the three home directions discussed
and their facing the street.
De Weerd: And their orientation?
Wardle: Orientation. Thank you. I was looking for that word.
De Weerd: Do I have a second?
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve Item 18 with the Findings as they are
written. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 19:
Continued Public Hearing from March 21, 2006: AZ 05-060 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 4.92 acres from RUT to C-G zone for Ada
County Hi~hway District Ustick Road Property by the Ada County
Highway District - 3595 East Ustick Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 19, AZ 05-060, has been requested to be continued until next
week. Do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we continue Item 19 until May 9th.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 35 of 65
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to continue Item 19 to May 9th, 2006. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 20:
Continued Public Hearing from April 4, 2006: ZOA 05-002 Request for
a Zonin~ Ordinance Text Amendment with the areas to be amended
include: the Definitions of collector streets, adult entertainment, and net
density; the standards for the Traditional Neighborhood Residential
Districts; the fence standards; the table detailing the Decision-Making
Authority by Application; changes to application requirements; how to
measure block length; screening and chainlink fencing; requirement for
certificates of zoning compliance; off-street parking space standards and
measurements; off-street loading space requirements; family day care
standards; and sign standards for family day care by the City of Meridian
Planning Department:
De Weerd: Item 20 is a continued Public Hearing from April 4th on ZOA 05-002. Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, at the last Public Hearing you asked
us as staff to work together and to try and reach consensus on the few remaining items
and, then, to come back to you with a clear kind of position statement from the various
entities involved as to where we stood on each issue. And there was -- those issues
were the street sections, side yard setbacks, maximum height to eave, alley setbacks,
block lengths and alley right-of-way restrictions. So, I am happy to report that -- I think
we came to consensus on all but one issue and that one issue was alley right of way --
just restrictions or the width of the alley, basically, is what it ended up being. But let me
go back to the beginning and briefly get you up to date. On street sections we appear
to have reached consensus regarding the issue that the typical 500 block -- I have a
layout for you courtesy of some help from Mr. Turnbull and a drafter in his service. So,
they have provided this typical block section. This would be 500 feet from center line to
center line. You can see these are about 40-foot widths on the lots. The end ones are
larger. What we would have is 29 feet back of curb to back of curb with parking on both
sides and, then, we would have a choker at a minimum of two points within that mid
block. These chokers would allow the fire department to stage in these locations and,
then, to pull hoses where they needed to from those stage locations, basically. We
have originally shown them at 20 feet back of curb to back of curb on the -- or front of
curb to front of curb on the choker. ACHD has said that they require 24 feet from front
of curb to front of curb. So, as you look at -- here is one of those chokers, 29 feet. It
will, actually, only be about two feet difference from where the parking aisle is. So,
won't have as much choke affect as we had hoped, but it still will serve that purpose.
This street section was based on one from the -- this is from the ACHD manual, just to -
- very similar. They allow 29 feet with parking on both sides where you have 500 feet
from center line to center line and you have a grid system where there is intervening
Meridian City Council
May 2,2006
Page 36 of 65
points. That street system would only be allowed for alley access properties. So, if the
-- if this side of the street had front loaded ones, then, it would be a full street section to
get in there. So, you would have to have alley on both sides similar to this block here.
All my visual aids were for that first Item, so I've gone through them all now, but I will go
through the other ones. The side yard setbacks, planning staff and development
services have met with the joint trench folks trying to get some consensus on whether a
four foot side yard setback is appropriate or not. We can't get the joint trench folks to
budge off of the -- basically a ten foot easement. So, that would be five feet on each
side. So, at this point planning staff is recommending that we change the side yard
setback back to five feet. Or change it to five feet in this TNR district. I will submit a
text amendment shortly after I get this one done. I will submit one for the R-8 and the
R-15, changing that to five feet as well, so we have consistency. The development
community still would contend that the four foot set back is reasonable given that that
side yard easement is very rarely used and that it -- again, that it's consistent with the
current R-8 and R-15 standards. Moving onto maximum height to eave. This was kind
of a new standard that we added for this one that the maximum height allowed is 40
feet The fire department has ladders that, really, can only get to about a 30-foot eave
height. So, we added a standard that says the maximum height to the eave that would
allow full roof access is 30 feet. So, you could kind of go up in a series of eaves from
there, but the maximum height for them to get on that roof is 30 feet. Again, this -- the
40 feet is allowed in the R-15 district as well, so to make things consistent we would be
looking to add that to the R-15 district. The hope is to -- right now, as you approve
these tonight, hoping you do approve these tonight. ]'11 get my plug in here. These
standards will be more restrictive than the R-15 and I will probably come back with a
real look at all those R-15 standards, because I think we want to promote this model
more than we would the R-15 model. So, don't want to make it easier to do something
that is less desirable. So, we will be bringing back all of that for you. Alley setbacks. I
do think we have reached consensus on the setbacks for single family detached and
attached. There is a large outstanding issue about townhouses that I need to get at at
some point. But at this point for single family attached and single family detached, we
have agreed that 20 feet from a 16-foot alley is appropriate and 18 feet from a 20-foot
alley would be appropriate. So, it's kind of two different standards, depending on the
width of the alley. That allows for that parking pad in the back, thereby relieving the
front street of accommodating as much parking as it -- well, with these chokers you're
going to have less parking area, so that will get taken up in the back with those parking
pads for each residence. And, again, briefly, just on townhouses, I need to sit down
with everyone and discuss townhouses, because right now as the code stands, we
would encourage multi-family development over townhouse development, just in the
way the codes are written. It's much easier, you can get much more product in with the
multi-family, rather a townhouse. And, again, I think Council needs to consider whether
we want to promote a more kind of single family type ownership at the same densities
as multi-family with that townhouse project is what I would like to be able to do, is have
that as a viable option for folks at those densities. So, I will bring that back to you. The
development was -- community was discouraged, but it wasn't ready to jump in and take
on the whole townhouse thing, but they acknowledge that I have been fighting a good
war and could put it off for a little bit, so -- block lengths. It was 500 to 700. We
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 37 of 65
shortened it to 500 to 600 and the building community is okay with that. Alley right of
way restrictions. This was the one issue we weren't able to resolve. You may
remember we talked about a 20-foot alley right of way with a couple feet of grass creet -
- grass creet being too expensive. What are the other options. Could it be done
through CC&Rs. What would we do to define the rest of that right of way. Met with the
police department and the fire department again and we just couldn't come to a
compromise. As the PIG group, we started off with 12 feet and thought 16 feet was a
compromise. The Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended a minimum
alley width of 16 feet to you. That initial -- their recommendation was for a 20-foot right
of way with 16 feet of paving. In subsequent conversation with Mr. Inselman, he
indicated ACHD is moving toward 16 feet as a minimum alley width, with a 16-foot right
of way, making those right of ways match the paving width. Most of the -- that is the
ACHD minimum standard, just 16 feet. So, that's what planning staff is supporting
tonight, but that is the one contested issue. We did make some other modifications that
kind of improved that whole alley thing that weren't really discussed. We had a --
weren't really discussed with you just now. They were discussed with staff. Joe Silva
just looked at me like what did she do. There was one that allowed any living areas to
come back with a ten feet of the alley right of way. In discussing it with Mr. Turnbull, I
asked if we could take that provision out, given that I don't think anyone -- these are so
narrow that there wouldn't be the opportunity to have that living area. So, what that
does is there will be a consistently open space here and we added fence provisions that
any fence in this rear setback area -- so within that full 20 feet has to be open vision
fencing, so the police department will be able to see a full 40 feet -- well, actually, 60 --
somewhere between 56 and 60 feet from back of the garage to back of the garage it will
be completely open and visible within there. So, the police department was --
representative was less negative about alleys than I had ever heard when we came to
that arrangement. He was, actually, a little delighted that we could get some open
vision fencing back there, so that there wasn't that opportunity for people to hide and
make mischief. So, that, I believe, gets us up to date. I did put a couple notes on some
little mistakes that were pointed out to me. One was on the footnote for Table 11-2-D-2.
Right now it says alley right of way. Probably should -- it started off as the edge of alley
paving. It probably needs to go back to that. I had changed it to right of way when we
were considering other things. But it probably needs to go back to the edge of alley
paving, so that we have a consistent number. And I had mistakenly called this a
chicane, instead of a choker, so in Section 11-2-D-1-E-1-B, if you could change fire lane
chicane option to fire lane choker option, I would appreciate that. With that I'll answer
any questions or Mr. Silva can answer any questions regarding the alley right of way
and paving widths.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Chief, do you want to comment first or--
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 38 of65
Bird: Let me ask a question. Maybe Anna can answer it. Anna, in the little diagrams
you give us and showed up there, you show a 20 foot alleyway. Now -- and here you're
saying 16 foot -- that you support a 16 foot; is that right?
Canning: Right. And the original recommendation from Planning and Zoning
Commission was a 20-foot right of way with 16 feet of paving. I'm -- the current
standard for ACHD is a 20-foot right of way. So, there is -- I don't have any concern
about keeping that. They may just move toward 16-foot right of way over time.
Bird: The way I read this is that fire and police feel that a 20-foot right of way, fully
paved, is -- the development community contends a 16-foot paved alley is appropriate.
Don't say a word about having 20-foot of right of way with a 16-foot --
Canning: Like I said, we were talking mostly about the paving widths. So, it -- the right
of way is not an issue one way or the other, other than, eventually, I think ACHD is
going to go towards 16.
Bird: Follow up, Mayor.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Well, Anna, as I understand this, if -- the way this is written, that the community
wants 16-foot paved, but it don't say it -- shouldn't we have something like 16-foot
paved with a 20-foot right of way?
Canning: We can certainly do that, sir.
Bird: Isn't that what you had stated?
Canning: That was in the original recommendation from P&Z. Yes, sir.
Bird: Thank you.
Canning: We can change it back to that way.
Bird: Thank you, Anna.
De Weerd: Joe?
Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, one of our concerns is that once the project's
finalized is that in that right of way things like fences, landscape rocks, and other
obstructions show up in that and our concern is if the long-term intention of ACHD is to
match the right of way with the pavement section, that conceivably we would be
operating a fire truck that when its ladder rack is down and its compartment doors are
open, it's 15 and a half feet wide. Trying to operate that apparatus in close proximity to
houses, when you only have a right of way that's guaranteed to you that it's to be 16
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 39 of 65
feet over the long run, with ACHD's future considerations of matching the pavement
section to the right way, causes us a lot of concern and that's what -- that's what our
major issue is as we move forward with this particular TNR revision. Everything else we
have been able to work with the planning department in resolving all the other
outstanding issues, I believe. We have worked very hard. But this is one issue that we
would like some guidance from Council -- Mayor and Council as to what they would like
us to do, but our strong recommendation is that we need a 20-foot -- a 20-foot improved
surface to eliminate raised flower beds, bushes, overgrown shrubbery and everything
else, it seems to invade that right of way. With that I'll stand for any questions, Mayor
and Council.
Wardle: Thank you, Joe. Council, questions for Deputy Chief Silva?
Borton: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Joe, is it -- tell me is there any merit or validity to the idea of being able to
provide fire protection with the front street access and the chokers and is the concept
that you would be able to provide fire protection theoretically without ever needing to go
down the alley? Or is that not an option?
Silva: It depends where the fire is located and the intensity of it when we pull up as to
what is going to be our best plan of attack to defend it, either prevent it from moving into
another structure, to prevent it from moving into the living -- portion of the living -- the
living portion of the -- the living quarters portion of the dwelling. One of our concerns or
one of our prime concerns of when we looked -- worked at with planning when we laid
this particular schematic out, that all portions of the exterior would be able to be reached
by a -- by a fire truck operating in the street, either on that narrower portion, the choker
portion of the street, or on the ends. All portions of the exterior would be within 150 feet
of a -- of what we would consider a fire lane or a 20-foot wide surface. With this
particular layout we were very careful to lay this out, so that all points within these
building footprints would be within 150 feet of an improved surface that's 20-foot wide.
Bird: Mr. President?
Wardle: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Silva, what percentage of fires start in the garage area of house residential
fires?
Silva: Just by the very nature of what you have in there as sources of ignition with the
hot water heater, the heater, your main circuit -- your sub-panel for your electrical and
just people that have hobbies that they do things in garages that bring flammable liquids
and combustible products together, a large percentage of them do occur in the garage
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 40 of 65
and that's, obviously, where you store typically our A TVs, snowmobiles, things like that,
and they are working on them. So, that's a very high hazard area.
Bird: Thank you very much.
Wardle: Thank you. Not to forget turkey fryers, right, Mr. Silva?
Silva: That is correct, Councilman Wardle. That is -- we have had that happen a couple
times and, unfortunately, on New Year's Eve sometimes.
Wardle: Council, additional questions of staff?
Rountree: I have none.
Wardle: I do have one individual signed up for this item. Sherry McKibben. Is that
correct? Okay. If you would, please, state your name and address for the record,
Sherry.
McKibben: My name is Sherry McKibben. I live at 515 West Hays in Boise. I am the
director of the University of Idaho's Idaho Urban Research and Design Center, and we
have been working Meridian for quite awhile trying to promote great design, great
neighborhood design, and great quality of life. And I have got a little Powerpoint that I
would like to show you, if you have time, which is in support of narrow streets and
alleys. Council Members, I'm here to support the text amendment. We stood up in
support of the text amendments at the Planning and Zoning hearing and wanted to
address some of the other benefits of narrow streets and alleys that are a little bit more
complicated than just the safety issues. Here is where they are best used. Obviously,
on slower streets with less traffic, that's neighborhood -- residential neighborhoods.
They need to be the right size for traffic, as you know. They are not collectors. They
are best if they are part of a connected grid of short blocks and that is so that the traffic
isn't concentrated on anyone street. So, a short block, 250 to 350, gives pedestrians,
bicyclists, motorists, choices for their travel path. They -- these streets are safer,
actually, with the on-street parking, because they are -- the motorists perceive that there
is more -- more unknowns and so that they drive more slowly, safer with a separated
sidewalk and a planter strip also. And safer with bulb outs at the corners or in this case,
you know, chokers or chicanes. Anything that's sort of hanging over the street, like
street trees, means visibility isn't great and people will slow down in their cars. Benefits
are reduced traffic speeds and I have got some statistics. Their size can meet actual
traffic, few fatalities, less crash costs, that includes not only to the people in the cars,
but to the vehicles and what the vehicles hit. Less costly to construct and maintain.
That affects, you know, what we all pay in impact fees and taxes. Less impervious
surface, so there is less storm water runoff and less need for areas for that. Less heat
build up. And also they create a greater efficiency in land use. They allow for more
homes in a neighborhood which reduces sprawl. Increased neighborhood livability.
Pedestrian friendly. And, most of all, increased property values with the narrow streets.
This diagram is in your plan already. It indicates that smaller blocks create greater
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 41 of 65
connectivity, more path choices, and, consequently, less congestion. Here are a
number of the reports. Narrow streets with closer buildings, closer to the street, reduce
speeds. The best method to lower that speed is to reduce street width and to add
planter strips. Here is a little graph on street width and injury accident rates, showing
that the narrower streets have few accidents. Slower speeds. Impact speed versus
pedestrian injury, you know, greater speed, greater injury and fatalities. Crash costs
statistics. Fatalities, property damage, are greater with greater speeds. So, there is
savings for traffic calming and narrower streets. And this is, really, a wonderful one.
Increased property values from reduced traffic volumes and speeds. And, you know,
what that means to you is that there are, you know, greater home values, greater taxes
to you, and also people tend to live longer in more comfortable environments. So, it's a
more stable neighborhood. Reduce sprawl. For every ten feet of street width reduce --
ten feet of street width reduces the supply of homes, you know, three to four percentage
points. Neighborhood live-ability is -- you know, really, you know, the most benefit to a
city. If you have great neighborhoods, people are going to come to your city to live.
Houses with friendly faces to the street. And, of course, alleys in the back make those
streets look great You don't have cars, you don't have a street cut up with driveways,
you don't have cars parked in the driveways out in front. So, r have a bunch of alley
photos here. This is a 12-foot alley. They are able to control quite a bit of the
shrubbery and any rocks and things that are handled in that alley through the
homeowners association. We have looked at a number of subdivisions where they
have done focus groups ahead of time and homeowners are looking for alleys that have
a little bit of a turn to them, so there isn't a home that looks straight down an alley, you
know, you just don't want to look down an alley and see all the junk that might be there.
I have got some nice alley shots. But people do park either on a parking pad or in front
of a garage, if there is space, and the alleys are for stuff. They are not -- that stuff has
been taken off of the street -- street front. A ten foot wide alley, you can see there are a
little bit bigger setbacks there for the garages. A 16 foot alley. This has -- it's crowned
in the middle, so the drainage is on the side. And, then, this is in Eagle, a 16 foot wide
alley, with about a seven, eight foot setback for those garages. And we did a little -- our
students did a survey around the valley on what cities have for their alley standards and
we have got Boise, Garden City, Eagle, Star, all following ACHD standard of 16 feet.
Kuna and Star are at 20 feet Nampa is at 20 and we weren't able to contact Caldwell
and Middleton. So, that's what we have locally. Now, if you were to go regionally, there
are a lot of cities, particular progressive ones like Portland and Seattle that have 12-foot
alley standards. So, any questions? Thank you.
De Weerd: Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you. Is there any additional
testimony?
Turnbull: Is this the last hearing on this issue?
De Weerd: I can't answer that.
Turnbull: David Turnbull. 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. You know, we have
been through a lot of territory with the Process Improvement Group. I'm not here to
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 42 of 65
represent developers; I'm not here to represent the fire department. I think -- and the
reason I think I have been going to all the Process Improvement Group meetings and
these hearings through Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council is
because I'm really concerned about what I feel is in the best interest of the city, looking
at all different aspects. I know the fire department has their issues, but they are wanting
to preserve and protect, but I -- you know, when we started out in the Process
Improvement Group and we were looking at all of the various standards, we were
looking at 12-foot alleys, for example. We made the concession to a 16-foot alley to
accommodate the fire department That's probably one of the more generous standards
that you will find throughout the nation. I have been accused through that process of
only caring about money, but I can assure you that if all I cared about was profit, then, I
would be doing just the same old thing, because I can do the same old thing and do as
well or better without any of the -- of the any extra process. So, I think the TNR zone
may be a small part of Meridian's future, but I think it's an important one. We have
incorporated into some of our master planned communities and I think it raises the
architectural bar for the whole community. I think even people that don't necessarily
want to live in that type of environment appreciate that environment for what it brings to
the entire neighborhood. I think we are down to one issue and that's the width of alleys.
A 16-foot alley is, really, as I -- again, as I have said, as I have traveled throughout the
country it's a pretty generous standard. Remind you that the fire department has two
points of access, not one. It has access from a publlc street, it has access from an
alley, and has double coverage, I believe. So, this is, really, a matter before you tonight
to decide whether you want the TNR zoning to be part of the city's future. Alii can tell
you is that from my perspective and the perspective of my company, if we push that
envelope any further, we will probably just stop doing TNR-type development in the
Meridian City and we will look elsewhere and I think that would be a shame for the city.
So, I would encourage you to accept this, the work that the PIG's done and the work
that staff has done as the compromise position and approve the 16-foot wide alleys. I
did talk to Gary Inselman about the issue of right of way versus alley width. Right now
the standard is a 16-foot alley and a 20-foot -- paved alley and a 20-foot right of way.
He says they have considered narrowing the right of way to match up with the paving
width, but they haven't made any determination on that. I would probably encourage
them to keep the right of way width a little wider, just so that the property pins fall
outside of alleys and, you know, it's typical that the right of way width is just a little more
broad than the actual paving width, even in your street sections. So, I don't know if that
helps any, but I thought I'd clarify that and I'll stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: This question, I guess, is for you, Mr. Turnbull, or maybe Mr. Silva. And you
might not have known this when you talked about your travels, what this particular issue
might have been, as hotly contested as it is. Do you get any chance to talk to any other
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 43 of 65
fire departments or cities or communities with regards to alley rights -- or alleys and
whether or not they found any particular problems one way or the other with those?
Turnbull: Did I talk to any fire departments?
Borton: Yes. Or --
Turnbull: Alii can tell you is what's on the books for different communities. I have a list
of those in a file in my binder. That typical paved width is from 12 to 16 feet. There are
a few examples of 20-foot wide ones, but most them are 12 to 16 feet wide. I've seen
them small as small as nine and a half feet, actually.
Borton: Okay.
De Weerd: Any other questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you. Well, I didn't even have to ask this time.
Inselman: Sorry. Gary Inselman with ACHD, 3775 North Adams, Garden City. I just
wanted to clarify our alley standards. There appears to be some confusion. Our
standard alley width is 20 feet in a commercial area. In a residential area we do allow a
12-foot paved surface in a 16-foot right way. And what we are considering, but we
haven't really even started yet, is revising that 12-foot standard, because it appears to
be a little narrow in several situations around the county. But we are most interested in
what the cities and the fire departments would request, as we didn't consider fire access
when we adopted our 12-foot paved standards some years ago. We anticipated they
would access from the street.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Gary, would you restate your standard and what it is you're thinking about in
terms of a standard?
Inselman: Our current standard for a residential area, we do allow to be reduced down
to a 12-foot paved section in a 16-foot right of way. We are considering increasing that
pavement width. The 12 feet has appeared to be a little narrow in some situations. We
have had complaints from residents after they have moved in and some of our
maintenance -- going to 12 feet is a little narrow. And we have debated whether we
should have a right of way width greater than the paved area. There doesn't appear to
be a real reason for that from the highway district's perspective. It's not like we have
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 44 of 65
utilities there or anything like we do in the standard street behind a curb, so -- but,
again, we haven't even started a process there. There is just issues that have come up
in the last six months that we are looking at dealing with in the future, including fire
access to the alleys if the different fire jurisdictions request that.
De Weerd: Any other questions? Did that answer yours? Okay.
Inselman: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any additional testimony? Any further staff
comments? Okay. Council?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Mr. Silva, I think when I asked Mr. Turnbull a question, I made a reference to
you and I guess I'll give you the chance to response, if there were, you know, anecdotes
or information from other municipalities for fire departments where they approved 16
foot alleyways or 12 foot or whatnot, and --
Silva: The majority of the fire departments, as Gary Inselman referred to, are
requesting a 20-foot right of way and a 20-foot paved surface. Nampa, as an example,
Caldwell -- I can't speak to that. One of the problems with that narrower section is that
things -- excuse me. One of the challenges that we have in Meridian is we don't have a
whole lot of experience in dealing with traditional style neighborhoods, but I took the
liberty to shoot some pictures in a similar development in Boise and in the alleyway and
some of the obstructions that came -- came in to obstruct fire department operations or
potential fire department operations in that area. This is the mill district and what we are
looking at here is, again, as -- if we just have a right of way that's not improved and not
an improved surface, people, after the project's been finaled, take it upon themselves to
do what they deem appropriate at the rear of their property. As an example here, we
have a raised flower bed on the left-hand side here that potentially is a thing that we
have to contend with. And I believe these alleys -- Anna, you can, perhaps, help me out
here -- we are dealing with a 12 foot wide surface? Yeah. This was a fence that's
sitting on the right -- on the edge of the right of way with a series of rose bushes that go
down through the side of the pavement and these are things that we are trying to get
around in the middle of the night. Bushes -- bushes that are growing into that edge of
the right of way. And in this case it's really kind of hard to pick up, but there is a
basketball hoop right here. And instead of the actual hoop being straight across, it was
kind of ironic, because the hoop was turned up on one side and when you looked at it, it
was, obvious, that it had been struck by a high profile vehicle at some point, because
the hoop was no longer straight across. Kids will hang on hoops and bend them down
all the time, but you rarely see a basketball hoop bent up. Those are just some
examples, some pictures that I wanted to show you in a similar type of project. Again,
we don't have, in Meridian, much experience in dealing with these, but I felt that this
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 45 of 65
might give Mayor and Council a little bit of an idea of some of the actual physical
challenges we have run into. And I'd like to comment just a little bit further on our
presentation by Sherry. When those cities have been done, they have been done in -- I
saw that the -- the Minneapolis fire department was one of the fire departments that
were profiled there. And Seattle. And I will still contend that their resources are much
greater than the Meridian Fire Department's in contending with problems and
overcoming obstructions in the field when they do encounter them. So, those are some
of the challenges we have in terms of staffing when you1re -- you know, you have got to
compare apples to apples, you know, when you're dealing with studies that narrow
down these alleys and people are expected to operate within these narrow areas.
De Weerd: What do you mean by that? They have greater resources.
Silva: Well, the two -- the two cities that were highlighted in those two studies were
Minneapolis and Seattle. Obviously, their firefighting capability, there is a lot more
staffing available on a daily basis than what we have. We have, you know, four stations
with mutual aid rounding out our response versus what Seattle has at their disposal.
De Weerd: And has that been a problem? I guess I don't get your point in why an
alleyway would make a difference on that. I'm trying to understand your point.
Silva: Thank you, Mayor. When you have to pull hoses around vehicles and other
obstructions, it takes people to be able to do on a -- to make sure we can mount a quick
attack and when we have -- the more obstructions we put in the way, then, we have got
to maneuver around, delays that attack. And that's what I was trying to contend with.
Their stand response is much greater than ours.
De Weerd: But I guess, Joe, wouldn't you have now additional access to those homes,
because you can combat the fire from two sides, other than just one?
Silva: That's correct. Depending on the location of the fire and the intensity of the fire.
De Weerd: So, you would think that this would give you more availability to it.
Silva: If we didn't encounter a lot of obstructions in -- when we went down the alley.
De Weerd: With the chokers or -- or whatever they call them, doesn't that also provide
you that opportunity on the front side of the home as well? Wasn't that why that --
Silva: Yes. That's correct
De Weerd: -- was a reasonable compromise?
Silva: Yes, Mayor, that's correct. The chokers and the cross-streets are the points we
intend to operator from in this proposal.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 46 of 65
De Weerd: Well, with some of these concessions, doesn't that give you access that
was a concern at one point? I guess I'm asking -- they have tried to mitigate all the
different concerns and I think what Gary had mentioned from ACHD's point, it wasn't the
20 feet of pavement they were saying to expand it to 16 feet and whether to, then,
require a 20-foot right of way, not 20 feet of pavement, that's not what I heard.
Silva: Right. One of our concerns is that if they go to a 16-foot wide right of way with a
16-foot wide improved surface, is that we will be trying to operate in a -- our fire trucks
are 15 and a half feet wide with the ladder rack down and the doors open. Firefighters
need room to move in and around that apparatus when it's down in that alley and our
concern is that with only 16-foot right of way and 16-foot wide surface, we are not going
to have much room to be able to operation in there.
De Weerd: Okay. But that's not what this proposal is. It's 20 feet right of way, 16 feet
pavement. Is that -- did I get that wrong, Anna?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, right now it just says 16 feet of
paved surface. Doesn't specify a right of way width. If the standard ACHD right of way
width is 20 feet, then, it will be 20 feet. We do sometimes have private alleys, so the
right of way designation wouldn't be appropriate there, because they don't have a right
of way. But, again, we can add the 20 feet of right of way to the 16 feet, but it won't
change the effect of the built environment, because we were measuring things primarily
from the edge of the pavement or there is varying standards, depending on the width of
the right of way, which is a little confusing. So, if Council and Mayor are more
comfortable having a 20-foot right of way designated, it won't be a problem. I did want
to point out on the fences, we have required -- where is that fence one. I lost it. We
have -- you wouldn't see a fence this close to the alley with the restrictions we have right
now. We have required five feet from the property line. So, if this were in a -- if this
were a 16 and 20-foot alley, then, you would have five feet from there before you had a
fence. So, you will have anywhere up to seven feet before you get -- from five to seven
feet before you get any fence. They won't be close like that.
Bird: Madam Mayor? Oh, excuse me.
De Weerd: I guess -- and your point is that the fire department is not going to be
obstructed on either side. You will still have room to bring your stuff all out, because
you're not going to have a fence right at 16 feet or you're not going to have a garage
right there either, so you will have room to maneuver and that's the five feet point of the
fence.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: The 16-foot with the 20-foot right of way - 16-foot of paved, Joe, I -- if it was
stated within that two foot on each side or -- I guess you'd have two feet on each side,
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 47 of 65
then, it would be paved, that no permanent obstacles or raised things, like raised
gardens could be done, I would think that would take care of your problem. The 16-foot
is wide enough to get the truck down and -- because I know we tried on some -- we had
the opportunity to ride around on some trucks and getting on and off the narrow ones --
the narrower ones is tough for the middle of the night stuff. But I would think if you're --
if we are -- when we have got our ladders down and our doors open we are 15 and a
half feet wide, you're on 16 feet of pavement and you got two foot feet on each side,
should give you enough to pull the hose and everything, I believe, shouldn't it?
Silva: Councilman Bird, Mayor and Council, yes, that's correct. Our concern is just
what may show up inadvertently over the course -- over the life of the -- over the life of
the development. That's our concern. And these were just some visual depictions of
what those challenges potentially can be.
Bird: Madam Mayor, follow up.
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: It's -- it's like anything, though, you know, we can make these rules and
regulations, but sometimes we can't enforce them. It's just like parking on the streets,
they say there is no parking on the street, who is going to be out there to enforce it? If a
friend stops by for ten minutes, they pull out there and at the time the ambulance has to
come back or something. You know, there is no -- that's something you have to live
with I think.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: It seems the issue is really and truly about individual property management
and obstructions in this future alleyway and I would ask this question of Anna and David
both, is there a concept where the alley itself -- I mean you have agreed to a setback of
some 20 feet, if it's a 16-foot wide alley. Could that 20 feet be a common lot providing
access to the garages for each one of those individuals, but be maintained by the
homeowners association that would prescribe what the homeowners association would
put back there and individual property owners would not be able to put a blue spruce in
it or a fence or a raised planter or whatever, but something that would be reasonable
and I think that that could be worked out between the applicant and whomever or where
ever it went within the city and the fire department as well. But, in effect, you would
create a -- something that's on the order of 50 to 60 feet wide that could be -- you know,
could have low growing shrubs and growing planting beds or whatever might be able to
grow in some of those canyons that you create anyway. It's kind of tough to grow stuff
in some of those spots. But it would eliminate the desire of the homeowners to go out
there and put in raised garden for carrots or whatever it is they might want to grow or a
large inappropriate landscape that once it gets huge and beautiful in the way, they are
not about to go in there with a chain saw and take out and there is a lot of landscaping
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 48 of 65
you could do that's low maintenance, attractive, and low growing. So, is that
somewhere we could explore? And I would ask Anna and David and maybe Sherry to
see if that's unreasonable.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, so if you had a common lot -- that
concept seems a little odd, but perhaps maybe a use easement on the rear setback
portion. I'm not sure how that would really be much different than just putting
restrictions on what you could have in your rear setback. Maybe limit it to ground cover,
no tree closer than ten feet or something like that. I mean we are, really, just talking
about that two feet as the area of concern, not the whole back area. If you wanted to
put a columnar pear at five feet, it would probably be okay, even in the long run, so --
Rountree: Madam Mayor, if I might address Anna's question back to me. I'm not
concerned just for the two feet for what the fire department's talking about about access
to their folded out truck, the police have indicated that having some vision through this
corridor is beneficial to them to be able to keep track of the kinds of things we don't want
to have happen in these dark recesses and that they don't want to have to be constantly
enforcing. So, it would create, in essence, a clear zone that doesn't have to be stark
and it would have it under one management, instead of 30 different individuals who
want -- I want a six foot piece of columnar basalt fountain in that little tiny piece next to
my driveway or I want to plant a Colorado blue spruce that today I can buy this four foot
tall and three feet wide and in 15 years is going to be 20 feet wide and 30 feet tall. I
mean just have one management of that area, so you don't have all these odd things
that can happen.
De Weerd: Are we going to do that along our pathways, then, too? I mean I -- I guess I
think the chief and I have had some of these discussions and these alleyways, actually,
give you a better view into the back side of these properties than we have along our
pathway systems or even in our traditional neighborhoods that have the linear parks
behind them and, you know, people are allowed to build or plant or -- you know, I guess
we should look at some precautions, but, then, we -- if we are going to restrict them for
ally ways, we need to look at our pathways and we need to look at any open space
behind it and even at that, in my backyard for eight years I had an empty field behind
me, you know, there was very little vision into that, because there was no road back
there, it was just an empty field, but I will tell you what, there was a lot going on back
there, too, at certain times. So, I guess I hate to get into legislating safety that we as
homeowners should think of ourselves. But, Anna, do you have a response?
Canning: The concept seems a bit odd to me, but I haven't had time to think about it,
other than the last five minutes, so 1 --
Rountree: I appreciate that. It just came to me, so --
De Weerd: Well, it's just coming to us. Mr. Turnbull, do you have any ideas?
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 49 of 65
Turnbull: I think if your intent is to limit the kind of obstructions that can occur within the
alleyway, you can do that on the private side through the CC&Rs, whether it's a right of
way owned by Ada County Highway District or whether it's a common lot owned by the
homeowners association. I really don't think you're going to get a homeowners
association to effectively maintain that two foot strip of ground on either side of a paved
alley. Are you talking about something else, Councilman Rountree?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, if I might explain -- expand my concept. I'm talking about the
20-foot setback to the edge -- I'm talking about the whole corridor back there. Plan the
corridor for safety, accessibility, and visual and have it managed by one group, the
homeowners, and maintain that concept. Just -- I heard the problem and --
Turnbull: So, you're talking about the 20 feet on either side of the alley?
Rountree: Yeah. The problem is obstruction, so, you know, it's a real quick reaction
and I'm just throwing it out there to see if it sticks.
Turnbull: Yeah. Like Anna, I hadn't thought about that. I don't know that I have ever
seen that done in an alley before. Sorry.
Rountree: Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
Bird: Don't leave. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'm glad he's back up here. I wanted to ask him a question. Out at Heritage
Commons what are the width of those --
Turnbull: Twelve foot alleys and a 16 foot right of way.
Bird: Paved. Yeah. Sixteen foot, 12 paved.
Turnbull: Right.
Bird: Okay. Thank you, Dave.
Turnbull: Can I just point out one thing, too? And Joe brought up a number of
photographs there and there is a lot of instances in those photographs where you might
have seen an obstruction encroach near the alleyway and you can prohibit those by
CC&Rs if that's something the Council chooses to do. You will still have code
enforcement issues, both by the homeowners association and probably by the police
department or the fire department and that's a fact of life. But I also would like to point
out that there were many pockets, shall we say, created by driveways, empty driveways
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 50 of 65
where the fire department would have had full operational capabilities. So, just because
you might have one obstacle in a three or four hundred foot stretch, you might have ten
pockets of operational capability by virtue of the fact that you have got driveways
coming off those alleys, too. And, more often than not, not parking, sometimes they
have parking in them, but the ones I have observed mostly not.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there any -- Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, now that I've had one more additional minutes to think about
this concept, one -- one issue would be -- you wouldn't want to do it the whole 20 feet if
you did it, because you would just -- because, then, these back property lines -- these
back structures would be on a zero lot and, then, you get into fire code issues with that.
So, that would be a concern. It's just the idea of having a strip there -- just as a
homeowner, I would be concerned with that in that if my neighbor were out fixing his car
on his driveway and broke it somehow, then, I know I'm having to pay for that over time
and I think that those would seem like a very private space and you would treat them
like a very private space, but, in actuality, the homeowners association would have to
foot the bill for what was happening on that and I think you see when that happens and
what's clearly a common open space, you know, neighbors will say, hey, you know,
don't push down that tree, quit hanging on that limb, you're going to break that tree or
something like that. But you wouldn't have that perception back there if it was the
driveway to one house, I think, so --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: While Anna's got the thing in front of her -- Anna, you feel comfortable and your
PIG group feels comfortable with the 16 foot paved, 20 foot right of way?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Bird: Okay. I could throw out another doubt, but if they wanted to go back to just 16
foot and make everything fire sprinklered, so -- I don't think they want to do that.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, this meeting has gone much longer than I ever thought it
would. Is there anymore discussion?
Bird: I think chief has some.
De Weerd: Chief.
Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, in terms of the idea that we just ran
through, I would be hesitant to endorse that as well. Traditionally, we haven't had a
whole lot of luck with homeowners associations over an extended period of time and if
they have it, nobody takes ownership for the property, as opposed to having it with the
Meridian City Council
May 2,2006
Page 51 of65
house itself. So, some people will at least take some ownership on it. Pathways have a
tendency to sometimes go that way as well, as well as some other amenities within
subdivisions where we have the homeowners associations. I think we might be better
off if we left it up to the individual homeowners and kind of work with enforcing on it.
Who knows what 15 to 20 years will bring us. I just know from my own personal
experience in one neighborhood that while there had been CC&Rs, there was never an
association when we bought the house and we were the third owners, initially, on it, that
did any enforcement in some of those older ones and, traditionally, in Idaho -- and I
have heard some discussions having lived here for my 40 plus years, that homeowners
associations sometimes aren't looked up on with a whole lot of favor and we do need
ownership issues to take place, at least in my line of work with the crime prevention
through environmental design concepts that we look at, ownership becomes a big
portion of how we keep things viable over time and safe for everybody that's living there.
So, that's my two cents worth for you.
De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Is there anything else, staff?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you'd turn to page five of the
memo I presented for tonight's hearing, where it says item number five, alleys. Those
are the standards we have for alleys right now. I think what I'm hearing is a modification
to 3-A, adding a clause that it would be within 20 feet of right of way and I think I'm
hearing an F, which would be that the right of way shall be kept clear of any
obstructions. Or added onto -- you could add that onto A as well. That would give code
enforcement a tool to work with as they have -- if they needed to.
De Weerd: As they would need to.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, what kind of obstructions we are talking about? Because somebody said
ground cover and sometimes those -- you know, if you're jumping off the thing and into
some of those shrubs and stuff that is called ground cover, you're liable to wind up on
your head more than you are on your feet, so -- just be grass.
Canning: I don't know if you want to specify sod. Some ground covers I think are okay.
The low lying shrubs are not, so you might want to say clear of obstructions, including
low lying shrubs.
Bird: Will that do it, Anna, for enforcement?
Canning: Any vertical obstructions? Any vertical obstructions.
Bird: Okay. I would agree with that.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 52 of 65
Rountree: Can you enforce that?
Bird: Well, can you enforce anything.
Borton: Madam Mayor, you could do blue turf up one side, orange turf on the other and
ten yard hash --
Bird: We are for that.
Canning: I see a black and gold statement coming here.
Rountree: How about some black and gold?
Bird: Yeah. We can put Vandals on the blue and orange.
De Weerd: This is a property rights state, right?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I think it's time to close the Public Hearing --
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bird: -- on Item No. 20, ZOA 05-002.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to close. All those in favor say aye. All ayes.
Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Are we at a point where we can have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor, I'm --
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: -- ready to make a motion, if the other Council people don't have anymore
discussion or anything they want to discuss? And I might need some help from Anna,
so keep the mike by you, Anna. I move that we approve ZOA 05-002, the request for
zoning ordinance text amendment and, basically, include everything, except -- well, in
the alley it's going to be 16 feet of paved alley, with 20 feet of right of way, with no
vertical obstructions in the right of way area and to include all the outstanding issues as
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 53 of 65
explained by the administrator, planning and zoning administrator and to include all
public comment by Mr. Turnbull, Mr. Inselman, and Mrs. McKibben. Am I leaving out
anything? And to go back -- well, we have already -- I think that -- you went back to the
five foot setbacks in your deal here. Side setbacks; right?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Bird: Thank you. Is there anything else I'm leaving out?
De Weerd: You can't ask until you get a second.
Bird: Okay. Well, no, I'm just -- I'm asking on my motion. Okay. That's my motion.
De Weerd: Okay.
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion?
Canning: Madam Mayor, if the maker of the motion could just clarify that it's the text --
text changes specified in the memo for the hearing date of May 2nd, then, could -- it's
not the same as your staff report, so I just need you to specify that those are the
changes that you want.
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: I'm sure that's what he meant.
Canning: Okay. Thank you.
Bird: Text amendment changes as stated for the Public Hearing May 2nd, 2006.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: And, Madam Mayor, just for the Council's edification, the -- what we will do is
work with planning to get the codification draft back in front of you. That will probably be
a week or two to get the changes done, so we get the proper format in front of you for
approval, so just so you know that you will see this one more time.
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. But it will be a closed --
Nary: Right. It won't be for Public Hearing. It's just that we can't send a staff report to
the codifiers, so we will have the codification -- or a codified code in front of you in an
week or two.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 54 of 65
De Weerd: Appreciate the clarification. Mr. Borton.
Borton: Madam Mayor? Are we discussing?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Borton: I don't know -- I don't know -- an obstruction, by its very nature, is an
obstruction. So, maybe it's being nitpicky. I don't know what a vertical obstruction is. I
would be inclined for the 20 feet right of way clear of obstructions. I don't want any
horizontal obstructions, I guess, whatever those might be either. I know we will be
asked in two and a half months to decide what that is and -- I might be inclined to just
say no obstructions.
Bird: Well, the motion maker has no problem just with no obstructions at all.
De Weerd: Okay. Second agree?
Wardle: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Thank you. Anything further? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
Rountree: It's with some hesitancy in the creation of yet one more enforcement
nightmare that we impose on staff that I will so vote aye. But don't tell me I told you so.
De Weerd: Okay. We won't.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 21:
Continued Public Hearing from April 4~ 2006: Amendments to the
Pawnbroker Ordinance:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 21 is also a continued Public Hearing. I will -- we
did ask the chief to meet with the owners that would be affected by this ordinance and
so I will ask you to give a report on that.
Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I did confirm that our meetings had
been held. Detective Mark Taylor was coordinating our meetings and making sure that
the revised draft ordinance had been reviewed by our -- by our two pawn brokers, who
are present in the audience this evening, and I was able to confirm with them as they
got here, too, Mark had met with them. At this point my understanding is that they don't
have any significant concerns with the revisions as they were presented. However, we
were also talking and I did have a report from Mark in terms of the computers that we
are looking at requiring our pawnbrokers to use. I was wondering if I might be able to
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 55 of 65
get some feedback from our director in charge of IT, Mr. Nary, as to whether or not the
city may have some old computers available that we could surplus out to the -- each of
the stores that would at least run a minimum of Windows 98. That looks like the
minimum requirement we are going to have to have. Currently we are on Windows 95
with one and I know we don't surplus those out oftentimes to schools or the Boys and
Girls Club, but I wasn't sure where we were at with that or if it's something we might be
able to look at down the road.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we can't surplus property to individuals,
so we can't -- we can't give the city's property to a pawn shop. We can give it to a
charitable organization, we can do that, but we can't necessarily give it to an individual.
That's my initial answer. I mean I will certainly look and see if there is some way that
we can provide this service. I guess if we retain the ownership of it we could probably
do that.
Musser: Yeah. I guess that would be my other question in regards to it, because the
police department is requiring this as a part of the reporting. If we put in there and
maintain that control over it, but have it provided for them, if that might be a viable
option.
Nary: Yeah. Madam Mayor, we certainly can explore whatever options we can do to
do that. If it requires us to maintain ownership of it, then, we will come back to you and
make sure that that's okay, but I don't think we can just simply transfer surplus property
to individuals. But we can figure out something. I'm sure we have some machines that
would be able to be used for this purpose and since there is only two, we could probably
make that happen in some fashion.
Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, additionally with that, we would also --
if that becomes an issue, grandfather that in and make sure that anybody else that
applies for licensing within the city in the future does have a computer available as we
move forward on it. Additionally, in terms of where we were at in talking with both of our
pawn brokers, what we are targeting at this time should -- should the Council go ahead
and move forward with approving the ordinance and moving forward on that, we were
looking at having an implementation time of July 1 of 2006 to allow us, say, a 60 day
period to be able to get everything in place, do some more additional training with it, test
it, and, then, put it into effect after that July 1, 2006, date.
De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Any further questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Any statements? No? Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 56 of 65
Bird: I move we close Item No. 21.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close 21. 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: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: 1 was going to say, don't -- that is by ordinance. Do we have to pass on that right
now?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's Item No. 25 in your agenda, so you
can take it up once you get to that item.
De Weerd: Oh. Sorry.
Bird: That's the ordinance.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bird: We wouldn't pass now, would we?
De Weerd: No. Okay. Okay. And we are clear on the direction as far as the request
from the chief on the computers?
Rountree: If the chiefs clear.
De Weerd: Did you need any additional clarity on that?
Musser: I think I missed something there, Madam Mayor. Is that --
De Weerd: Is there a question on the computers?
Musser: I'm sorry, one more time. I didn't hear you.
De Weerd: Am 1--
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 57 of 65
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I believe the direction of the Council is is
just to work with the two pawn shop owners and see if we can find surplus machines
that even if we have to maintain ownership of those machines, but to allow them to
comply with the ordinance to run the program that we are requiring by this ordinance, to
see what we can do either now or in the immediate future to get machinery in their
shops to be able to do this. If that's the direction. If something changes or something
else, we will certainly bring it back to you, but that's the direction as I understood it.
De Weerd: Do we need a motion for that?
Nary: I would prefer that, simply since we are going to be taking city property and
locating it somewhere other than on city property. I would prefer a motion if that's your
desire.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor. Chief, all you need is Windows 98?
Musser: Madam Mayor, Councilman Wardle, Members of the Council, I believe that's --
that's, basically, all we need at this time. In talking with Paul's wife, I'm sorry, I don't
know her first name right off the top of my head. She advised she had tested it on the
Windows 98 format and it did function. So, that would be, I think, the minimum
requirement that we would have at this time. It won't work on Windows 95, which I
know Terry has in his shop on his old computer.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Are we making a motion to approve the ordinance or--
De Weerd: No, to --
Borton: To place the property?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Has that been done before?
De Weerd: No. Not to my knowledge. But I don't know everything, so -- as long as
you don't tell my husband I said that, we are okay.
Wardle: Madam Mayor? If I might suggest to Council that maybe we -- there might be
a simpler business-to-business solution to our situation that could be had for not a lot of
monetary exchange. If you would give us a week to look at that, maybe I can work with
the chief before we commend city property to this new venture. Is that okay, chief?
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 58 of 65
Musser: Madam Mayor, Councilman Wardle, Members of the Council, that's, basically,
what I was looking for is if we had some options to be able to look at in the meantime as
we move forward on this. That's also why we are requesting implementation in July.
So, I appreciate that -- that offer.
De Weerd: Well, we will go ahead and move forward, then, with the idea that we will
explore the options and a report can be brought back to Council on what those options
would be.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Then we better -- you better reopen the Public Hearing, so we can continue it.
De Weerd: I don't think that's necessary. Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean unless you're looking at other
information on the ordinance itself, I think you're just looking at implementation. You
can certainly table Item 25 to your next meeting.
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary, does that affect Item 25?
Nary: No.
De Weerd: Okay.
Nary: I think, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, unless your concern is of not
implementing Item 25, unless we can -- unless there are computers available for these
two businesses, that would be your only impact by this discussion next week. If you're
still of the mind set to implement it regardless, then, you can certainly pass on it tonight
if you choose.
Item 22:
Public Hearing: CPA 05-001 Request to Amend the Future Land Use
Map of the Comprehensive Plan for Approximately 50 acres from
Medium and Low Density Residential to Mixed Use-Regional, by the
South Eagle Road and Victory Road Property Owner's Alliance - Land at
or near the northeast and southeast corners of South Eagle Road and
Victory Road:
Item 23:
Public Hearing: CPA 05-002 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment to change approximately 11.79 acres from Office to Mixed-
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 59 of 65
Use Community by Conger Management Group - 675 and 715 South
Wells Street:
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. I'll open Items 22 and 23 which are public hearings that are
premature. Anna, do you want to give an overview on those two items? I know you --
you did in regards to -- that they still have not been in front of Planning and Zoning?
Canning: Yes, ma'am. Sorry about that. I packed up all my stuff. I wasn't paying
attention to the agenda. Sorry about that. With regard to the South Eagle Road Victory
Road Property Owners Alliance, the Planning and Zoning Commission has finished their
Public Hearing, in essence. They -- when they submitted their zoning request, they only
submitted for one C-G zone. They came back and they submitted for C-G and L-O,
which isn't a problem, but they also submitted for a residential zone. So, just to be safe,
we weren't sure if it needed to be re-noticed or not, so erring on the side of caution and
with the advice from our astute legal counsel, we decided to go ahead and re-notice the
application with the residential zoning, just to make sure we had a good record. So, that
one is just waiting to be re-noticed and, then, it can come up to you. But it will be heard
again by them on the 18th. So, the soonest it could get up to you is the 20th. And I'm
just providing the soonest dates for you that -- that we are aware of. If the Council is not
having a hearing that date or wants to make sure that -- that one will be ready on the
20th, we are almost positive, so -- on the other one -- do you want to do these one at a
time, Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: No. If you will give them both.
Canning: Okay. On the second one, the Wells Street Comprehensive Plan
amendment, that goes before Planning and Zoning Commission on Thursday. So, if
they were to make a recommendation on Thursday, it could get up to you by June 6th.
Again, we have no idea how that hearing is going to go. Whether they will get through it
in one night is -- I guess I'm a little doubtful at this point they will get through it in one
night, but I'm not sure.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, Council, I guess the direction we would ask from you is do you
want to hear both of these together and if the soonest is June 20th, I do know that
Councilman Wardle will be gone on that date, as will I, and -- but you will still have a
quorum, it would just determine -- you would need to decide if you wanted a full Council
seated for our Comprehensive Plan change.
Rountree: I would think that would be appropriate.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: We discussed this in our agenda meeting and, certainly, if we are looking at
Item 22 and the potential for that to push through, we have got a number of dates that
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 60 of 65
are not going to work. I believe the first available date that we had where both the
Mayor and the Council, that we were aware of, was going to be in full seat was the 11th
of July, which if a June 20th expectation is there, it certainly doesn't seem out of line
that it could come on July 11th. The other issue is on Item No. 23, we could potentially
put that on the agenda for June 6th, hopefully get that out of the way or continue for --
you know, I'm not sure -- we could hear it and we could have that discussion on the 6th.
I believe, Anna, you mentioned that it should come forward after this next meeting; is
that correct?
Canning: Well, if the Planning and -- if the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a
recommendation to Council, then, it would be available for the 6th. Assuming that
Council wants to wait until you have your P&Z recommendation.
Wardle: And, again, just to remind -- I believe we have had that discussion a couple
times, that we would like to see them come forward and -- I don't think we need to hear
them together. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't -- I wouldn't want to hear these two
applications in the same meeting, but if we could go on the 6th for 23 and, then,
potentially July 11th for No. 22. That's what the clerk's office and I have tentatively
worked out.
Bird: Sounds like a winner. Make a motion.
Rountree: Make the motion.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Wardle: I move we continue Item 22 to July 11th.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second?
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to continue these two items -- or hear them on the --
Wardle: Just Item 22.
De Weerd: Item 22 on July 11th. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 61 of65
Wardle: I move that we continue Item 23 to January -- or June 6th, pending Planning
and Zoning hearing.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to continue -- or hear this Item 23 on June 6th. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: They were reopened, right, Mayor? Or opened.
De Weerd: Well, I didn't even know we opened them, because they haven't even been
heard at Planning and Zoning.
Berg: Madam Mayor, these have been heard by Planning and Zoning with
recommendations. There is a project --
De Weerd: Oh, it's the applications.
Berg: -- coming with them that we were trying to match up. So, I'm just making sure
that we did open these hearings and we --
De Weerd: Well, we discussed them, so, apparently, they are open.
Berg: Because we kind of just -- okay. Thank you.
Bird: You opened them, right?
Item 24:
Ordinance No. 06-1229 Adding Title 6, Chapter 2~
Section 9 of the Meridian City Code Regarding; Voluntary
Relinquishment of Dogs and the Fee Therefore:
Item 25:
Ordinance No. 06-1230 Amending Title 3,
Chapter 5~ of the Meridian City Code Regarding: Definitions of
Pawnshop and Related Terms~ Pawnshop Licensing Regulations~
Appeal From Denial of License~ Inspection of Pawnshop Premises~
Records~ Prohibited Acts by Pawnbrokers, Prohibited Acts by
Pawnshop Patrons~ Exempt Transactions, Proving for a Penalty for
Violations:
De Weerd: You bet Make sure you type that into the comments, Dean. Okay. Item
24. I need an ordinance number. Mr. Berg, do we have an ordinance number for 24?
Okay. Ordinance 24 is 06-1229. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read that ordinance by title
only.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 62 of 65
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 06-1229, an
ordinance to add Title 6, Chapter 2, Section 9, of the Meridian City Code regarding
voluntary relinquishment of dogs and the fee therefore and providing for waiving of the
reading of the rules and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Okay. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone
who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Okay. Hearing none, do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve 06-1229 with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 24. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 25. Council, would you like this read by title only? Do you want
to continue to until next week? What would you like to do?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I have no problem with having it read tonight and passing on it. This is something
-- we are not actually -- we are not actually putting the computer, Windows, or anything
in our ordinance, so this is the ordinance doing the amendment. So, I don't see any
reason why we can't pass it tonight and, then, Shaun and chief and the owners can
work out some kind of a deal, which they can bring back and explain to us, but it don't
-- I wouldn't see it would affect the ordinance at all. So, I'm for doing it, if it's okay with
the rest of you guys.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bird. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read this ordinance,
06-1230, by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 06-1230, an
ordinance amending Title 3, Chapter 5, of the Meridian City Code regarding definitions
of pawn shop and related terms, pawn shop licensing regulations, appeals from denial
of license and inspection of the pawn shop premises, records, prohibited acts by pawn
brokers, prohibited acts by pawn patrons, exempt transactions, providing for a penalty
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 63 of 65
of a violation and providing a savings clause and providing a waiver of the reading of
the rules, and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have now heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there
anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? I have to ask that.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Council.
Bird: I would move that we approve 06-1230 and have a date certain of an effective
date of July 1 st, 2006, and pass this with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. We have a motion to approve Item 25. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 26:
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: Thank you. Okay. Item 16, Executive Session. Do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1 )(c).
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Rountree: So moved.
Meridian City Council
May 2, 2006
Page 64 of 65
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
De Weerd: I would remind you that Ten Mile Road traffic has an open house on May
11 th from 4:30 to 6:30 at Ponderosa Elementary. I do need to know who all is going to
the AIC meeting? Keith you are going, correct?
Bird: In Lewiston?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: Yeah, I guess.
De Weerd: Shaun? Charlie?
Rountree: (Inaudible).
De Weerd: Okay, we do have a block of rooms reserved if any of you needs one of
those. I just put in front of you tonight that we did get the community block grant for the
Senior Center, so just (inaudible).
Rountree: Not to be poor sports, but should we send a letter of congratulations to
Coeur d' Alene?
Bird: I think we should. But, it made me sick when I seen the picture of it last night.
Wardle: Motion to adjourn.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor.
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:42 P.M.
Meridian City Councll
May 2, 2006
Page 65 of 65
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
\\\\\\\1111111111/1/11 /: /J2- d? /
,,\\ . C1f 11.11 Ii:? I k- I f../ 0
,,' -"'<I,, -. ". /""
./J-ER~-:- (J~~~o <. A't-t APPROVED
102 -rre.f/cf.k;[. (- ~
= B~AL ~
\Ol':~rl<f{,'~T/_T: ~~ ~
"" "1 ~ h // "
"",1I/II~"f"(, \' ~ I
Illfli/lllltH\\\\\\' WILLIAM G. BERG, ~R, ITY CLERK