HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 11-28
Meridian City Council Meetina
November 28. 2006
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M., Tuesday,
November 28, 2006, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Shaun Wardle, Keith Bird, Joe Borton,
and Charlie Rountree.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Ron Anderson, Gene
Trakel, 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. Good evening. I will go ahead and call our meeting this evening to
order. It is Tuesday, November 28th, for the record. It's also 7:00 p.m. I'd like to
welcome you all here tonight. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
Mr. Berg.
Item 2:
Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Tonight we will be led in the pledge of allegiance by Conner Bird. If you will
all rise and join us in the pledge.
(Pledge of allegiance recited.)
Item 3:
Community Invocation by Darrell Taylor, Cherry Lane Christian
Church.
De Weerd: Thank you, Conner. Grandpa always does that to you I'm sure. Okay.
Item NO.3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Darrell Taylor
with the Cherry Lane Christian Church. If you will all join us in the community invocation
or take this as a moment of silence.
Taylor: Heavenly Father, we are just truly thankful for this time that we can come
together and, Father, I just thank you for the men and women that are gathered here
that want to make Meridian a great place to live and work and retire and just raise kids.
Father, we ask that you will just give them the wisdom and the strength needed to make
the tough decisions and, Father, just may we just give you the glory and honor for what
you're doing here tonight and ask this is Jesus' name, amen.
De Weerd: Pastor Taylor, I would like to present you with a City of Meridian pin.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 2 of 48
Taylor: Well, thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you for leading us tonight.
Item 4:
Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Item NO.4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We have on -- Items 16, 17 and 18 are ordinances, which are numbered 06-1278,
06-1279, and 06-1280. We have no deletions or additions and I move we approve the
agenda as published.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as published.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5:
Consent Agenda:
A. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 06-008 Request for
a Miscellaneous application to amend the previously approved
Development Agreement (AZ 03-025) by removing a provision
requiring all future development to be subject to a site specific
Conditional Use Permit or a Planned Unit Development for the
entire property for Blue Marlin by W.H. Moore Company -
Northwest Corner of Ustick Road and Eagle Road:
B. Contract Aareement for ConsultinQ Services for a
Classification and Compensation Proiect between the City of
Meridian and BDPA, Inc.:
De Weerd: Item 5. Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as published and for the Mayor to sign
and the Clerk to attest on all papers.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 3 of 48
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. 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 6:
Department Reports:
A. Mayor's Office
1. Recognition of Meridian's Recommendation for the
Brightest Star Awards:
De Weerd: Okay. Council, tonight I have the honor to recognize our Brightest Star
award winners. The Brightest Star awards were established in 2001 by Governor
Kempthorn in partnership with the governor's coordinating council for families and
children, as well as the Association of Idaho Cities. This award program recognizes our
community's unsung heroes who work on behalf of families and children in bettering
their opportunities in our communities. These awards are also meant to encourage and
affirm active volunteerism by citizens of all ages. Idaho's 2006 Brightest Stars come
from communities in every part of the state, including our city. They represent all walks
of life and stand as examples to all of us as selfless service and dedication to making
Idaho the best place to live. Brightest Stars personally invest their time and resources
to make a positive difference in the lives of families and children. They strengthen our
communities and in doing so strengthen our state. Tonight I'm proud to introduce you to
two of Meridian's Brightest Stars, one individual and one local business. Both will be
recognized by Governor Risch and First Lady in a ceremony at the capital building and
Grove Hotel next Thursday evening. And let me go down to the mike and I will tell you
a little bit about them. And, first, I would ask Councilman Bird to, please, come down
and join me and I know that his family is here this evening. If they would come up and
join me as well, stand with their dad. Keith Bird is our award winner in the individual
category and I know that the people that sit behind Keith know exactly who he is and
what he's all about and he's had a heart for Meridian for many years, 40 years to be
exact, of community service to the City of Meridian and he has touched people from
nearly all walks of life. It is his passionate dedication to the youth of Meridian that is
most noteworthy. Nearly every child who has participated in organized sports or youth
activities in Meridian owes a debt of gratitude to Keith Bird and I know he would say it's
not just him, but he has been a tireless moving force behind it and he's motivated and
inspired by the kids that he has helped. He's been a tireless advocate for instilling the
values of leadership, teamwork, good sportsmanship, fairness and fitness through
athletic opportunities for Meridian youth of all ages and abilities. Keith has been a
champion for the success and enrichment of the youth of Meridian, whether through it's
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 4 of 48
creation of youth athletic programs or his service to worthwhile civic projects, clubs and
programs, Keith inspires leadership, integrity, and selflessness in all he does as a
husband, father, coach, civic volunteer and community hero. Keith Bird has motivated
thousands of youngsters and adults to do more and be more than they ever thought
they could be. I can tell you I'm very honored to serve with him and he's served with a
huge heart. So, Keith, I would like to present you this certificate. It says in recognition
of your personal investment of time and resources to make a positive difference in the
lives of Idaho's children and families, your tireless work on behalf of our community
encourages and affirms active participation by citizens of all ages and sets a shinning
example for us all.
Bird: Thank you. This is a real honor. I have been a very fortunate man to receive a lot
of honors and this has got to be one of the tops, if not the top. The greatest reward I get
is when I see all these young people like Will and my own son and stuff participating in
the programs that I helped coach them through or helped get them developed. I'm
awful proud of -- this year, as you all know, we put a turf field in out at Meridian High
and I guess I must have passed something off to my son, because he was the leader
that went out and raised the 300,000 dollars to get the turf field in. So, I'm proud of that,
I'm proud of all the kids. I can't -- you can't do enough for the youth. They are the ones
that are going to lead us. There isn't a bad youth. Some of them make maybe not the
right decisions, but I'm 65 years old and I don't always make the right decisions.
Anyway, thank you very much and I appreciate it.
De Weerd: Thank you for joining us tonight. If Tony and Becka and their employees
will also come up. Our small business winners are Heritage Auto Repair. Can I get you
to stand over on this side, you won't have the equipment in your way. And we are here
to honor Heritage Auto Repair. He is a familiar -- Tony and Becka are familiar faces,
anyway, to me. Tony serves on one of our city committees and it's probably one of
those thankless ones, the Traffic Safety Commission, and I know Becka through the
chamber committee that we both serve on as well. Heritage Auto Repair, owned by
Tony and Becka Sanders represents the ideal blend of entrepreneurial spirit and
community involvement. The Heritage Auto staff regularly shares time, expertise, and
attention with those who need it most, whether providing cars to families without
transportation, mentoring vo tech students at their work site, or offering free oil changes
to single mothers and veterans, this small company and its employees quietly contribute
to the betterment of our community in a myriad of ways. This business entrepreneurial
spirit and heart for the community set a glowing example for other small family-owned
businesses in our community, especially in a time when it's increasingly difficult for
small businesses to compete with larger national chain stores. Tony and Becka are
also personal inspirations. Despite parenting four young children and participating in
school, church, and civic activities, they still make time for others, regardless of
personal sacrifices they may have to make. Their willingness to serve others despite
their demands as parents and business owners inspires others in our community,
customers, employees, other small businesses to follow their glowing example and after
Tony and Becka got the letter from my office, they came in to thank me. Actually, I
should have been thanking them. But they gave a very good recommendation and
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 5 of 48
compliment to their employees. Tony says sometimes he has these harebrained ideas
and Becka always supports him on that, but also the employees step up and they do
these things on their time. So, great examples they have and we are very honored to
have you as a small business in our community and just a token of our appreciation.
We'd like to give that to you and thank you.
Sanders: Thank you very much. I would like ever so briefly to thank, as Mayor de
Weerd so graciously made comment, of the employees that I have surrounded myself
with who have allowed me to really pursue the vision that I have to serve and I'm going
to get all choked up. This guy over here, Rob, has been with me for four years now, I
believe, a little over four years. He's a veteran. He's served with me for these four
years, he's a veteran in his field, he's a veteran from the military and since we started
doing the free oil change for veterans, he has faithfully been the leader of the
employees to volunteer his time and just more pour himself out and I just -- men like him
and, you know, men like Councilman Bird here, are an example to me and I have a lot--
big shoes to fill. So, I'd like to thank Mayor de Weerd and the City of Meridian for
honoring us for this unexpected blessing and, you know, certainly my wife is the
strength that allows us to continue on and do the things that we do. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. That ceremony is next Thursday and they will have a ceremony to
recognize the Brightest Stars of Idaho and I do know that united -- or Heritage Auto has
been one of the top three. We don't know who the top one is, but they have been
recognized as one of the top in our state. So, congratulations, we look forward to
recognizing you both again next week. Okay. And, Tony, you guys don't have to stay.
Councilman Berg, however, does.
Rountree: Not necessarily.
Bird: Not necessarily. We have got a quorum.
2. Discussion of Impact Fee Committee Make Up:
De Weerd: Okay. Item number two is discussion regarding our impact fee committee
make up. Per the action of City Council in adopting our impact fees, we have added
two additional ones, and those are for the police and fire. So, it gave us reason to also
look at our impact fee committee to maybe look at the make up and see if we need a
different blend that would also bring some expertise from our citizen base on police and
fire as well. There is just a requirement on the representation and I believe -- and I
didn't print off the memo that our city attorney so appropriately prepared, but I believe
that we are required to have one or two members of our development community -- two
members to represent their interest. Currently we have seven members and six of them
are from the development community. So, I guess I would ask for our Council's
direction in re-appropriating some of our representatives to give a better balance to
have a citizen's perspective on it, to have someone with the perspective on parks, fire,
and police and give us a better balance on our committee.
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 6 of 48
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Just a couple more, Council members. The state code and our ordinance
requires that there be at least five members of the impact fee committee. Two of the
members shall be active in the business development, building, or real estate, as
Madam Mayor stated. Most of the members currently -- not bad. I see Mr. Wood out in
the audience. But they are very heavily involved in the development business.
Because we have added the impact fees for police and fire, it probably would be more
appropriate to have members of the committee that have some background or
experience or some desire to sort of look at that avenue or at those types of fees and
how those -- how the fees are created and what they are for as well. The staff that's --
the city staff provides support both from police and fire, the planning department, the
building department, the parks department. Currently, the parks director has been the
fee administrator. It would be our recommendation from the department that we
probably move that now, since we have all these different impact fees for the city, that
move into the finance department and they would be the ones to manage that as the
administrator of the funds. But I think it would make more sense, because of the
diversity -- other cities have struggled with this. Mr. Baird told me he had had some
contact with another city last week and they have had some problems in trying to
administer their program because of the diversity of fees and they were even
contemplating making a second committee. Well, the state law doesn't give authority to
create another committee. So, the one committee is all you can do, so it would make
more sense to make the diversity on the committee itself and it doesn't have a limit on
the number of members, just the minimum is five, but as we have all seen, I think seven
to nine is a probably more workable number from a working committee standpoint and it
also doesn't end up with a lot of quorum issues. Sometimes if a committee gets too
large we sometimes have quorum problems, because they are required to meet the
public meeting requirements and the quorum can be a significant problem on occasion if
the committee is too big.
De Weerd: Council, I know we asked for a pretty large time commitment to the
committee that brought the recommendation this last fall in that we revamped a lot of
things, worked through a lot of issues that really needed some in depth discussion and,
really, was helped with the consultant that we hired. So, I would anticipate that we have
streamlined, per se, a lot of that process, but we did commit to Council that this would
be an annual review and so there would be probably a period of time each year over
maybe a two month period that they would need to meet to keep our fees current and,
not only that, but look at our capital improvement plan and make sure it still makes
sense, because there are changes that happen and we want to make sure that what we
do have on that ten year capital improvement plan remains realistic. So, I just wanted
to first have discussion, get your ideas, and seek your feedback. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, two thoughts. Certainly, I agree that we need to expand the
committee to incorporate some individuals that have an interest in the police
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 7 of 48
department, fire department, and public safety. The one question I have on that note is
how do you define such an interest in -- in either of those entities? And, then, the
second is that in looking to citizens that have shown an interest in that, we recently had
a graduation from the academy, I would assume that those people might be willing to
serve as a place to start, so --
De Weerd: And thank you, Councilman Wardle, and I would agree, they have indicated
interest. They, actually, have formed an alumni association -- I'm sure it's not similar to
yours, but that they are very interested in being involved in any way they can and they
would be a great pool of interest to approach in that regard. And we do get citizens that
indicate an interest and desire to get involved in some way. This would give another
opportunity.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would agree on expanding at least to nine and getting some different -- you
know, get the views on from the other. That's something I believe you could bring back
to us with the right names and stuff. I also would like to see the committee, like you
say, that for a couple of months, like say April, May meet heavy and, then, come back in
the first of June and let us know what the results of the impact fee is, so we know -- so
we know before going into budget in July whether there is going to be changes or need
to be changes. So, I would make sure that whoever we appoint to that, as we expand it,
that would understand that those two months could be quite busy on the impact fee, but
we -- I think that we as a Council need -- and the Mayor need to make sure that we
have all that information by the first of June, so we can do right by the impact fees.
De Weerd: Council -- and just to assure that Mr. Wood has not lost his opportunity,
because this does not excuse you, it's just expanding and removing two of our
designated seats. We did have a designated seat for our parks commissioner and a
planning and zoning commissioner and because of the broadening of the impact fee, we
will replace those with citizens at large. So, it would be those two seats and the two
additional seats. So, we would be looking for four new members, because we certainly
want to retain that institutional knowledge that some of these members bring with them.
Any --
Rountree: I have nothing to add. I think the questions I had were asked and answered.
I agree. Let's move forward.
Bird: Let's move forward with it.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. I will bring this back in front of you.
Item 7:
Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
Meridian City Council
November 28,2006
Page 8 of 48
De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 8:
Tabled from November 8, 2006: FP 06-046 Request for Final Plat
approval of :85 single-family residential building lots and 8 common lots on
19.57 acres in an R-8 zone for Cedarcreek Subdivision by Liberty
Development, Inc. - near the Northwest Corner of West McMillan Road
and North Meridian Road:
De Weerd: So, Item 8 tabled -- and I didn't look at Anna's thing. Is there any need to
continue this or table it?
Bird: It's fine.
Canning: No, ma'am. We have a letter from the applicant stating they are in
agreement with the conditions of approval and to our knowledge there are no
outstanding issues before Council.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Anna.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve FP 06-046 for Cedarcreek Subdivision.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8. Is there any
discussion? If not. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 9:
Item 10:
Continued Public Hearing from November 21, 2006: AZ 06-042
Request for Annexation and Zoning of 20.18 acres from RUT to an R-8
zone for Cottswold VillaQe Subdivision by Cherie A. Dalton Living Trust
- 2180 East Amity Road:
Continued Public Hearing from November 21, 2006: PP 06-044
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 62 residential lots and 9 common
lots on 20.18 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Cottswold Villa~e
Subdivision by Cherie A. Dalton Living Trust - 2180 East Amity Road:
De Weerd: Items 9 and 10, I don't see any notes on that, we are actually going to hear
this?
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 9 of 48
Canning: Yes, ma'am, we are.
De Weerd: Okay. I will open these two public hearings on AZ 06-042 and PP 06-044
with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Cottswold project. It is
located on the north side of Amity Road, approximately a quarter mile east of Locust
Grove Road. You can see it there in the blue outline. This project includes applications
for annexation and zoning and preliminary plat approval. The gross residential density
is 3.07 units per acre. Much of the surrounding property, as you can note, has been
preliminary platted, but very few final plats at this time. There is the surrounding
property. And this is the plat. The plat includes 62 single family residential lots and
nine common lots. The lot sizes range from approximately 7,750 square feet to 15,000
square feet. The subdivision will provide a large central common area space and you
can see that better on the -- there you go. On the landscape plan. And with a gazebo.
They also have parkways along the streets and the applicant has provided 2.07 acres or
10.2 percent of the site in landscaped open space. On the proposed density does not
strictly comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the site, which designates this area as
low density residential. The applicant is requesting a step up in the designation to
medium density residential. The site was also part of the Comprehensive Plan
amendment for the southern area that you recently approved. Their original request,
again, was for medium density residential, but the amendment that you approved was,
again, for low density residential. But they do have that ability to request a step up.
Admittedly, it's a very small step up, it's 3.07 units per acre. But as you may have noted
in my description of the lot sizes, they are very close. Even though they are asking for
R-8 zoning, they are very close to the R-4 zoning standards. The smallest lot is now
7,750 square feet. Staff has recommended a development agreement. Some of the
out-of-the-ordinary provisions of that development agreement would be that only
detached single family homes and allowed accessory uses of the R-4 zone be allowed.
So, again, even though it's R-8 zoning, the development agreement references the R-4
zone. That a maximum of 62 units be constructed on the site and, then, they have
some restrictions regarding fire until they have a second access. The development
agreement also includes a provision that the five foot sidewalks and 25 foot landscape
buffer be constructed along Amity Road prior to occupancy of any new dwelling units.
The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend approval at their September
21st, 2006, Public Hearing. Kent Brown, the applicant, and Cherie Dalton, the property
owner, spoke in favor of the application. No one spOke in opposition. John Huffman
commented. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were micropath fencing
up along toward the northern area of the site, and the applicant's request for an R-8
medium density residential zoning district where the Comprehensive Plan designates
the area as low density residential, as I mentioned before. The key Commission
changes to staffs recommendation -- they did recommend approval of the applicant's
request for an R-8 zoning district and dimensional standards of the R-8 zone. So, they
did approve the R-8 zone -- or have recommend that forward to you. The outstanding
issues for City Council -- Council still may want to consider whether an R-4 zoning
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 10 of 48
would be appropriate and to have the applicant amend the plat accordingly. The only
written testimony we have received are various requests for continuation from the owner
of the property. With that I will answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Anna, can you tell me what are the designations for zoning that surrounds
it?
Canning: To the west is R-4. The ones to north are primarily R-8. And that area -- this
is also R-8, but this is zoned as low density in the Comprehensive Plan as well. I
believe the project overall -- it was a much larger project, as you may recall, and the
project overall probably met the density requirement. Mr. Brown was the applicant on
that one, too, and he can let you know if they received a step up in density. I cannot
recall. But I'm sure he will address that in his comments
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions, Council?
Rountree: I have none at this point.
Bird: None at this time.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Brown.
Brown: Grateful to finally be here. Kent Brown, 1500 East Iron Eagle, Eagle, Idaho, is
my business address. Anna's basically covered everything. We are asking for
approval. As you look at the site overall, there is just a few lots here on the easterly
side that are at the most 224 square feet smaller than the -- that would be allowed in the
R-4 zone. There is a couple lots here that are -- one's 28 square feet and one's eight
square feet smaller than the -- what would be allowed in the R-4 zone. It's a minor
change, but as drawn we do have some different lot sizes that maybe some of our other
neighbors -- our firm has done the development to the west and those are 8,000 square
foot right on lots. They don't have any different lot depths in this area right here along
the main entrance. Those lots are like 140 foot deep. That's something that having this
a little bit allows us to do. We have some 120 foot deep lots up here in the upper end.
Can we comply with the R-4? Yes, we can. I think that that's been staffs take on it.
The comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission was that if they were going
to allow a bump up, this is so minor that it wasn't that big a deal. We are here tonight to
be approved and intend on being improved and would prefer to leave the plat as drawn
and as recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. I'd stand for any
questions.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 11 of 48
Bird: Kent, out of that how many -- how many of those lots -- I know a depth and
everything and your square footage is coming, but how many of them are 80 foot wide,
like an R-4 requires? The frontage.
Canning: R-4 only requires 60, sir.
Bird: I beg your pardon?
Canning: R-4 only requires 60 feet.
Bird: It used to be 80. Sixty. How many of them are 60? Not all of them.
Brown: There is not very many that are 60, sir. I think that these are like our narrowest
lots and they are the 140 to -- forty deep.
Bird: You got some frontage up there -- I can see one, two, three, four, five, six -- seven
that I would be real --
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Anna.
Canning: We are looking at the plat, just to help the applicant out a little bit. The only
place that we are seeing less than 60 feet is generally on the 90 degree turns where we
allow them to go down to 30 and on the cul-de-sac, which is similarly allowed to go
below. So, that they would appear to meet the frontage requirements of the R-4.
Bird: The inside ones and everything hit the 60. I'm sorry, I thought we still had 80 on
the R-4s.
Canning: No.
Brown: If you would look at the overall -- the vicinity map again, Anna. I guess I still
have a contention that even though you have made this adjustment to your
Comprehensive Plan, when we asked for this initially, that this was a medium density
and we understood that we could ask for a bump up. What our thoughts were and our
attempt to try to do this is that along Amity Road I still feel firmly that you're going to
have higher densities, that this property that's left out here to the east of us, that
because of how that's segregated by the Ten Mile Creek, that that area should maybe
have a higher density and that I think we discussed this when we were looking at that
Comprehensive Plan, that this should also have some higher density, including some
kind of commercial use, like a grocery store. What we have tried to do is we have much
smaller lots to the north of us. We have tried to match what was kind of proposed here
to the west of us, but, at the same time, transition -- I mean realistically overall it's ten
lots, I could make the adjustment to the ten lots and make Anna happy, but overall I --
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 12 of 48
Bird: You did a great job on the west side of matching up to the east side of the existing
plat, so I have nothing wrong with that. I was just -- I was -- I thought we were still at 80.
I apologize. That was my --
Brown: Is there any other questions?
De Weerd: I do. The road infrastructure in that area is -- is extremely challenged and it
becomes more so all the time. Right now concurrent with our area -- or our
Comprehensive Plan activities I know that Ada County Highway District is doing a
planning exercise on the road, similar to what we asked in north Meridian is for donated
right of way or -- and that that be dedicated. Is that something that is going to happen
here? Have you considered it?
Brown: About dedicating the right of way?
De Weerd: Donating that right of way for the road expansion.
Brown: I guess that's never come up before and it's --
De Weerd: Well, you can almost count on it, anyway, asking the question. We are in a
serious situation where these roads aren't even on the five year plan and we are going
to be sticking density out there -- we need to find some solutions in getting those
corridors preserved and figuring out a way that we can get those roads built and all we
can do is look to our development community and seek their assistance in getting
something to happen and that's just me. I'm the tie breaker, so I don't have too much
going for me on this end, but that is my concern, is we have some infrastructure needs
in that area and we need to start figuring out a way to address it.
Brown: I haven't discussed that with my client. I didn't see her here tonight, but --
Canning: She's here. Keep on turning -- there you go.
Brown: You can ask her, I guess. You can ask Cherie--
De Weerd: Okay.
Brown: -- if she's willing to donate that property for the right of way. There is an
existing 50, so what they are asking for is an additional 23, so we can ask her that
question.
De Weerd: And you're not the first one I have asked, so --
Brown: Okay.
De Weerd: Any questions, Council?
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 13 of 48
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: You know, I'd like the owner to respond to your question.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: Kent, she doesn't understand the question. You need to talk to her.
Brown: Along your frontage here there is an existing 50 foot right of way that exists.
ACHD is asking for an additional 22 feet, so -- and they -- their options before them,
because they are not improving that, is that you give it to them or that you -- they buy it
from you, because it's a collector. And the Mayor is asking --
De Weerd: And, certainly, I can allow you time to talk with her. This is a Public
Hearing, there might be further testimony, if you want to -- to chat and we can ask in the
final comments. Okay. I know, I blind side everyone. I don't discriminate. This is a
Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Okay. Well, I guess it doesn't buy you any time.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary -- I mean Mr. Borton.
Borton: That's okay. Anna, can you -- can you give me the thumbnail explanation of
being an R-8 versus -- excuse me -- being an R-4 versus being an R-8 with the
development agreement where you agree to comply with the amenities and accessory
uses of an R-4 and as close as this one is?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Borton, sure. The R-4 district is as purely
residential as one could make it. There are very few allowed uses and, actually, by
putting in the development agreement we are achieving that end of it. It is -- there is
some possibility that over time staff may forget that this has a development agreement
that we need to look to see, that, you know, it's zoned R-8, we -- there is a good chance
somebody may forget to look at a development agreement. We don't have a good
catch in place to catch those things. We do our best. It's unusual to have that provision
on one. In general, staff tries to get zoning that's consistent with the lot sizes. In this
case for -- if, for instance, they were asking for R-8 zoning and had 12,000 square foot
lots, there is a possibility that somebody could go in and subdivide one of the lots,
making two lots where it might not have really been planned for that. You don't have
that opportunity here. But there is a possibility that it could happen. So, we just try and
get the closest zoning that we can get and the easiest to administer in the long run.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 14 of 48
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Would this -- Anna, is there -- is there, really, any possibility that could happen?
Bird: Sure.
Canning: Yes. Some of the larger lots could subdivide, particularly the corner lots that
are -- the minimum lot size in the R-8 is 5,000 square feet. So, for example, that lot
could subdivide in half.
Borton: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: Anna, isn't it also in an R-8 you can put in duplexes and four-plexes?
Canning: Yes. There are a lot --
Bird: And you can also have businesses in there?
Canning: Things like a day care, yes.
Bird: Okay. And in an R-4 you're not allowed to?
Canning: Correct.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any other questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: I'd like your answer, though. I'd like the answer on --
De Weerd: Would the applicant or representative like to respond to the question, then?
Thank you. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Dalton: Cherie Dalton. 1157 West Stillwell Drive, Eagle, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Dalton: I'm the owner of the property and the question as to the ACHD right of way
there, I'm not in a position that I can make a commitment one way or the other, as I
have made a commitment to others previously on this property, so I'm not the ultimate
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 15 of 48
say so on what's going to happen with the property. I can't make a commitment, so __
and my understanding is you're asking on behalf of ACHD or on behalf of the City of
Meridian?
De Weerd: I'm asking you on behalf of myself.
Dalton: Okay.
De Weerd: City of Meridian. I'm not asking for ACHD, but I can tell you that that is what
we did in north Meridian when we saw the amount of growth that was coming and that is
what the development community did up in that area.
Dalton: It all makes sense to me and I, you know, would follow -- imagine that it should
be followed suit, you know, for the rest of the street and the other developments, but I'm
not in a position I can make a commitment.
De Weerd: Okay.
Dalton: Are there any more questions for me?
De Weerd: No. Cherie.
Bird: Cherie.
Dalton: Sure.
Borton: Just to sort of beg the question, is there -- is there an individual that you could
talk to in a particular amount of time to get that answer or is that information you just
can't obtain?
Dalton: It's something that -- it's come to us -- I mean I haven't -- I have been sitting in
City Council meetings in several different cities for years and I have never had this
come up in this situation and so I have never even had it cross my mind before tonight,
before you mentioned it. I don't know that -- has this happened with all the other
subdivisions on the street or -- my assumption is that everyone would follow in suit,
but --
De Weerd: There is not much happening on Amity yet and this is our opportunity to do
as we did up in north Meridian area.
Dalton: I'm sorry, Mr. Borton.
Borton: That's fine. I mean that's -- the question was is there -- do you have the means
to get that type of permission. Not necessarily right now, but when you tell me you talk
about not having the authority, are you talking about there is 37 people that you need to
gather to make that decision or --
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 16 of 48
Dalton: Yes. Other individuals involved. Uh-huh. And I'm not -- I can't make the
decision in this matter. And, you know, it is an easement. I don't think anyone would
object to that, if there is an easement through there. I mean, you know, because of
public right of way, but in terms of whether it would be sold or donated, I can't make a
commitment.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Do you have any idea -- and not to belabor the point, but is it a matter of if you
had a week you could answer that question or is it just not answerable as far as getting
that type of authority to make that decision?
Dalton: I assume we could get you an answer, yes. I would assume that it's something
we could probably get in a week or so. But I don't -- I hate to delay the process and I
don't really know if it's something that, you know, given that we have been waiting on
this application -- you know, if someone had mentioned this in September, we would
have all this time to think about it, but I'm just -- you know, I'm in a situation that I can't
make a decision yea or nay tonight. Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: I could have asked the question during the many times I continued it.
Brown: You probably could have.
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Brown.
Brown: The discussion about the subdividing -- further subdividing the lots to that R-8
zoning I think can be addressed in the development agreement that they are asking for
and I would offer that up as a means of protecting them. We are not asking for the lots
to change from the way that they are being proposed and we feel that we are providing
a little bit of diversity instead of just 100 by 80, so that's what we tried to accomplish with
the centrally located open space.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: How about duplexes, four-plexes --
Brown: That would be fine to --
Bird: Would that be fine to eliminate that? Businesses?
Brown: Uh-huh. Yes.
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 17 of 48
Bird: In the development agreement. Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: What would be the impact on the number of lots in that particular layout if the
lots were to go to an R-4?
Brown: There is no impact. I mean the biggest change is to change them to 224
square feet. What it would do to us is it would make some of the larger lots that we
have in the cul-de-sac and at this end of the development, maybe moving this street
over just a little bit, but it's minor. I mean the lots that are here, if the line moved over
even as much as a half a foot it would make that -- the difference and it's ten lots, eight
of them are located along our easterly boundary and, then, two right there. That's--
that's the location of where those lots are located that do not meet the 8,000 square
foot.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you want to close the Public Hearing or continue this
hearing? Yes, we still have an open Public Hearing.
Wood: My name is Dan Wood, I live at 2025 East Chateau. With your comment about
the right of way, is it not addressed -- mine is -- in the ACHD report that ultimately says
that -- mine does anyway. District policy requires 96 foot of right of way for an arterial
road and it further goes on to say that the applicant is proposing to dedicate 48 feet of
right of way. It probably addresses your issue of -- I think it's going to be one of the
requirements to get approval from ACHD is that her plat probably shows 48 feet.
De Weerd: It does sound like it does, but my question is more -- when you say
dedicate, does that mean you sell it back to them or does that mean it's donated right of
way?
Wood: Okay. So, can I make a comment to that?
De Weerd: You bet.
Wood: The portion that's frustrating for a developer -- it would be one thing if all the
fees from that particular subdivision went to improve Amity Road, but, instead, ACHD is
playing so much catch up elsewhere that they are taking the fees that come in from that
particular project, instead of improving Amity Road, they might go and improve
Overland or Eagle Road, which we all benefit out of it, but the problem is it doesn't go
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 18 of 48
actually to that particular project. So, your help would be if you could get ACHD to put it
where we actually -- you know, before we really need it.
De Weerd: Well, I know that we have had developers who have done the road
improvements themselves and have been paid back through the impact fees collected
in those areas and that is one way that they have found to dedicate those fees to the
road improvement by their developments and it's, basically, been in the business sector,
but I know we are seeing it up in north Meridian with intersection improvements and that
sort of thing. So, it could be done -- not through us, but through the will of the
development community and getting the developers lined up along that road to see that
it happens. So, there are options. I think, you know, we are just in a situation we are
looking at adding more traffic to an already difficult situation without any opportunity or
remedy in sight and so we are trying to help find solutions in the way that we can and
it's very limited when you're not the road authority.
Wood: But in that you also run into the problem like in the present application, as well
as mine, you know, you have the smaller pieces, so what do you do -- even if the
developer did want to build that section of the road, you have so much Amity Road that
is not going to be built, I don't know as -- it seems so much better if you at least get the
right of way to ACHD that when the time does come they can build the whole thing all at
once, rather than have it piecemealed together.
De Weerd: I guess you have to start somewhere and if you never start, you're never
going to get anywhere, and so I asked the question and we listen for an answer.
Wood: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further discussion from Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Oh. Okay. You have rebuttal? No? Okay. Okay.
Rountree: Prior to closing the hearing I guess my comments are -- it seems to me that
there has been a fair amount effort to make this as difficult as possible. Hearing
testimony from the applicant that there is -- it requires very little, if any, change and they
don't lose any lots as it relates to change -- getting this in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan to be an R-4, I would suggest that the development be plotted and
preliminary platted as an R-4 and we eliminate the need for a development agreement,
we eliminate the need for city staff in the future to tract this and make sure that folks
who develop in there at some future date don't have to be aware that there is a
development agreement to track and make sure that it's consistent, only to have
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 1 g of 48
something occur there that shouldn't under the DA if, in fact, we were to approve it that
way and, then, have to go back and remedy that. So, I guess my position at this point is
let's make it consistent with the Comp Plan, let's make it consistent with low density,
let's make it R-4, and let's move on. With respect to the right of way donation, I would
like to see that explored. I believe there are probably some advantages to the
developer to explore that with ACHD in terms donations and tax credits and/or maybe
credits towards impact fees. But at this point my position is that if it were an R-4 it's
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and I would probably be inclined to
recommend approval. I understand fully where they are getting -- the Mayor's coming
from, because the developers are not the ones that hear from the constituents as that
area builds out about not being able to get onto Eagle Road and I suspect that you can't
get on Eagle Road right now on --- at Amity very easily at rush hour. So, it is a problem
and it will be a problem for your future customers as well. So, anything that the
developers can do to alleviate that I would think would be to your benefit.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would echo Councilman Rountree's comments. I would love to see it drop down
to an R-4. We don't have to have a development agreement on that and we would be
consistent with the area out there. So, I personally would like to see it drop down to an
R-4.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other comment? It is still a Public Hearing. Mr. Brown.
Brown: I think just to remind you when I started I said that it really wasn't that big of
issue, but we would prefer this, but we are here to be approved tonight and so that
being said, if those are the sentiments of the Council and you want to go with R-4, that
would be fine and we would be happy not to have a development agreement. I spoke
with Anna and Anna said the only thing that a development agreement would need to
be for is like the landscape buffer and sidewalk out there and I'm sure that my
subdivision is going to be required to have that as a part of it and we really don't need
that and we are here to be approved, so --
De Weerd: I don't think they can approve a plat that needs to be changed.
Canning: Madam Mayor, perhaps I can clarify for Mr. Brown. The only other provision
that the development agreement had was that the five foot sidewalk and the landscape
buffer be built prior to any house on the site being built on the site. You will get that with
their final plat that has -- if they go north to south, then, the landscape buffer and the
sidewalk will be in one of the later phases, but I don't see a problem with that.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 20 of 48
Bird: Anna, that would -- we don't -- we add that in the Findings, can't we, and we don't
have to have a development agreement if we go the R-4?
Canning: Correct. It would be you would -- and Mr. Nary can help me out, but I believe
you would just approve it as an R-4 plat and ask the applicant to change the plat
accordingly when he comes in for a final plat.
Bird: Okay.
Canning: That would be -- when you approve the plat you would make that statement.
Bird: That's -- okay. We have done that before.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, what would you like to do?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing nobody want to talk or do anything, I move we close the public hearings
AZ 06-042 and PP 06-044.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on these two
items. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Any discussion? If not, do you I have a motion?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I would move that we approve Item 9, AZ 06-042, to include staff, applicant,
and public comments and to modify the original application from R-8 to R-4 and delete
requirement for development agreement.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9. If there is no
discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 21 of 48
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 10.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item 10, PP 06-044, modifying -- or asking the
applicant to modify the plat before final plat to be consistent with the R-4 zone as
previously approved in the annexation.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. A motion and a second to approve Item 10. If there is no discussion,
Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 11:
Continued Public Hearing from November 21, 2006: AZ 06-044
Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19 acres from RUT to an R-4 zone
for Whitebark Subdivision by Dan Wood - 2135 East Amity Road:
Item 12:
Continued Public Hearing from November 21, 2006: PP 06-046
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 48 residential lots and 8 common
lots on 19 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for Whitebark Subdivision by
Dan Wood - 2135 East Amity Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 11 and 12 are continued public hearings on AZ 06-044 and PP
06-046. I will open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Whitebark project. It's
located on the south side of Amity Road, approximately halfway between Locust Grove
and Eagle Roads. You will notice that it adjoins corner to corner with the previous
property. The applications before you tonight are an annexation and zoning and
preliminary plat and the gross residential density is 2.52 units per acre. The applicant is
proposing to annex and zone 19 acres to R-4 and preliminary plat approval of 48 single
family residential lots and eight common lots. Approximately 1.44 acres or 7.6 percent
of the site is devoted to open space or landscaping. In this instance most of that is the
parkway planters with the four foot detached sidewalks. I will go to the landscape plan,
so you can see those detached parkways -- or detached sidewalks with parkways.
Even though it doesn't meet the minimum requirement, staff is a little bit concerned,
because they don't -- they lack a common open space for neighborhood gathering
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 22 of 48
areas, such as a small park or a picnic area. The out-of-the-ordinary DA provisions
include -- it basically just states that there only be 48 units on the site, that only those
uses allowed in the R-4 zone, and that the street buffer along Amity be installed prior to
occupancy of any new dwelling units and because there was some questions about the
annexation path through Cottswold Village, there is DA provision that the Cottswold
Subdivision annexation ordinance receives approval and signature from the City
Council, thereby creating a path of annexation for the proposed Whitebark Subdivision.
The Commission did recommend approval at their September 21 st, 2006, hearing.
Kent Brown and Dan Wood spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in
opposition or commented. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were the
design of the cul-de-sac versus hammerhead at the terminus of the proposed south
Limber Pine Street. You will note that the landscape plan has the cul-de-sac. The
preliminary plat currently has that hammerhead. Ada County Highway District has said
thou shalt use the cul-de-sac, so the approval or the recommendation by the City
Council -- by the Planning Commission is that they use the cul-de-sac terminus. There
were no changes to staffs initial recommendation. To our knowledge there are no
outstanding issues before City Council and we have received no additional written
testimony, since the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, other than a request for
continuance I believe you received last week, some testimony.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: And with that I will answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: Not at this point, Mayor.
Rountree: None at this point.
De Weerd: Okay.
Brown: For the record, Kent Brown, 1500 East Iron Eagle, Eagle, Idaho. In this
application my client came to us and asked us to design something that didn't create
cut-through traffic, provided the connectivity, he has a builder team together that wants
to build shops, they gave him some criteria as to what they would need to build that type
of homes and an attached or detached shop. They needed more depth and more width
in the lot and I guess all the guys in the Planning and Zoning Commission could grasp
having a shop. That rectangular shape for those lots is the reason that my clients would
prefer to use the hammerhead. The hammerhead is allowed if -- Anna, if you could go
back to the plat. There. You have a more rectangular lot, even though these are I think
only 120 feet deep, they are not 140 that was ideal, the rectangular lot better served the
ability for the builders. It is a design issue from the standpoint of what the builders are
telling that they would like. The times that ACHD will allow you to do the hammerhead
or the Snoopy -- you know what the Snoopy looks like, so -- yes, you do. The times that
they allow them are in in-fill and so in this case that's the reason that they are saying
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 23 of 48
that this can't be used. Now, this is an outparcel, there is two of them here, two existing
homes that have been there for some period of time. If this was a strictly rectangular
piece of property we wouldn't need to use the hammerhead and we'd have a little more
room, but that necking down of the entrance created that difficulty in us doing that and I
guess that's the marker that my client has chose -- he says he's got builders that are
anxious. He's looked at the other building that's going on in the area, the lot sizes, and
that's the market that he would like to try to reach. In the R-4 -- the majority of these
lots actually meet the R-2 zoning of your ordinance with very few exceptions and that's
why we chose to do the design that we have chose to and my client is here to further
speak to the design issue of the cul-de-sac. I'll stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Yes, Charlie.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Is there going to be a common lot along this access street?
Brown: We have proposed one. Staff is asking that we make sure that those people
have access for a future road. That was our intent in the way that we did that design, so
that in the future when Amity comes in that these people can have access and there is a
condition in there that speaks to that.
Rountree: Okay. And a follow up. Staff, make sure that happens, would you, please?
Brown: The only reason that we proposed having some landscaping there is the current
view is not the best.
De Weerd: Wouldn't help with marketing. I guess we have had a recent experience
with that, if you are sensing anything, and so --
Rountree: He can landscape it for now, but at some point in time in the future it has to
be dedicated for an access, not at the mercy of the homeowners association.
Brown: Well -- and the one that I would like, you know, I guess to use, as an example,
is the Tuscany, the entrance of Eagle Road. There is a specific location, so that those
people can redesign and that -- that has been the intent of the way that we did our
design.
Rountree: Okay.
Brown: We looked at coming in on the other side, but that did not best serve how this is
going to redevelop. If you look and you can see, basically, just lots coming off, it's -- I
mean -- but someone is going to have to buy the two properties, because it's a weird
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 24 of 48
configuration. There is an L shape in there. The easterly property owns the L and the --
that's enough.
Rountree: We have heard you. Anna, would you show the other one with the circular
cul-de-sac? What is that?
Brown: Common driveway.
Rountree: Common driveway. Okay.
Brown: Thank you.
De Weerd: Would the applicant want to address the hammerhead or Snoopy or --
Rountree: Half Snoopy.
De Weerd: Half Snoopy.
Wood: Yes. My name is Dan Wood. I live at 2025 East Chateau. What I was trying to
do up there on the hammerhead -- I have done it elsewhere. There is not that many lots
on that particular street. The lots aren't as deep, but they are, actually, wider. They are
110. I think these are 100, 110 wide and 120 deep. So, it just seemed like a better lot
that I have got to sell. So, I thought it worked out better for the builders to have -- you
know, in that case where the lots would be wider, the builder could, actually, have his
house and still have room to put a shop along side, versus most of the other lots are 90
feet deep and 135 feet -- excuse me. They are 90 feet wide and 135 feet deep, thinking
that they are going to set those up where they will make it so they can have a driveway
go along the side of their house and put the shop in the back of the lot. So, ultimately, I
was out to get a better building pad for the builders. But ACHD -- they have had a lot of
changes it seems like in staff and over the years sometimes they will let you do it and
sometimes they won't. This is one of the times that they recommended that we don't.
So, I was hoping that the Council would see the benefits to this layout versus the other
one.
De Weerd: Maybe if you donated the right of way they would be a little bit more willing
to work with you.
Wood: So, that issue -- I knew that was going to come up. With regards to the right of
way, you know, I would like to look into Commissioner Rountree's suggestion, you
know, if there is something where they will give a credit that -- you know, towards -- that
would be great. I don't have a problem with that. They just haven't usually wanted to
work anything out towards that, so I have no problem with that. And, ultimately, if it
comes that I have to donate it, yes, I will donate it.
De Weerd: Thank you, Dan.
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 25 of 48
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Can you comment on -- I think one of staffs valid concerns about a lack of
picnic area or gathering spots.
Wood: Sure. Part of what, you know, I see, you know, in my experience or whatever,
we have tried to set up a pathway that ultimately -- I don't know if I can figure this thing
out. Whatever. You know, so that there is a pathway actually that goes all along here --
actually it goes all the way down there, straight down through there -- straight down
through there, that actually goes to the project that -- Black Rock that ultimately is going
to have some dedicated parks and areas like that in the futuro, that I have been told.
Why I chose to do it this way, I figure if somebody's got -- you know, most of -- the
smallest lot I have in my subdivision is 10,000 square feet and the largest 15,000
square feet. So, I opted to think, okay, I'm going to give somebody a bigger lot, so why
should they need to have anymore common space. The other portion you run into is by
choosing to go with future lots I don't have as many people to pay for common areas
and it's a burden of -- you know, I have run into that in some of these other subdivisions
I have done where now all of a sudden you have got these homeowner association fees
and not very many to pay for them and you have a budget issue of how -- you either got
to raise the association fees and in this case I don't think very many people would use it,
because they are going to have big enough lots to do their own thing. So, that is why I
chose -- and I thought by doing the broken sidewalks and having the grass, it's a nicer
estate-type lot look versus a lot of the subs that are around Meridian, so I thought it was
a mixture that would be a plus. That's why I chose to do it that way.
De Weerd: They are going to be in their workshops.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: The reason I bring it up -- and, you know, I might respectfully disagree with you
only to the extent -- regardless of the size of the lots, even if it's a small picnic area, a
gazebo type low maintenance area, to the extent you can in the subdivision, from a
livability perspective and you have an opportunity to get people out of their backyards
and into the front yard and into an area where they might gather for any particular
function, I think that's a plus for any neighborhood.
Wood: So, my comment to that -- what I run into so often in -- you know, is now you run
into the fact, okay, if you want your kids out front, what's going to end up happening is
they are out inevitably playing in the streets and, then, now you have the issue of
always worrying about too many people going too fast and the speed limits and these
are the complaints that I'm hearing from the association in one of my other subs that I'm
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 26 of 48
still involved in and so it's almost like you try and give them a bigger lot so they will play
on their home lot versus play out front and in the street. Two sides of the story.
Borton: I understand the concern. To the extent you have tried to create a design to
discourage cut-through traffic and decreases that risk to kids.
Wood: The other portion I guess I was hoping to is -- it seems to me you see more
people wanting walkways and so by having that pathway really from Amity clear to our
south boundary, a quarter mile or so, that's pretty straight and it's separated with the
sidewalk, so I thought maybe more people would use that more of a roundabout way,
get more exercise for probably adults than kids, but it seems like they go outdoors more
than the kids do sometimes.
Borton: Okay. Fair enough.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor, I have one for staff. Mr. Anderson, I'd like a fireman's opinion on
cul-de-sacs or a hammerhead. I don't think you can get a fire truck around either one of
them.
Anderson: Councilman Bird, the hammerhead is, actually, an acceptable design for the
fire department in the sense that it allows us to pull in, back up, and, then, pull back out.
A lot of the cul-de-sacs we don't actually have enough room to pull in and just while
driving in a continuous motion drive around and turn around. And, for example, the one
that you see right there, when they put the landscape in the center, that's, actually, a
design that we discourage, because if there is a car parked anywhere around the curb
in that cul-de-sac, we have to pull up and back up and we have to make a three or a
four point turn to be able to turn a fire truck in that. So, the hammerhead design that is
proposed in that project we would be fine with that.
Bird: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Okay. Kent?
Brown: I know this piece of property doesn't look like a lot, but Mr. Wood really made us
run exercises in the design on this and we did look at a little pocket park down in this
area at one time and I can totally agree with him as a staff person for the city of Boise
for nine years and having homeowners associations after homeowners associations
come in and say can we get rid of this open space that the City Council required our
development to have and it does come down to maintenance and you go, okay, well,
they build half million dollar homes and some of the ones that I saw and they were still
complaining about it and those homeowners dues really do, you know, make them --
you have to have a real good use. I mean having a picnic area -- they just are mowing
a lot of grass and doing a lot of weeding and where if you have a walking area and you
have a lot of the people out doing that walking, a walking path is actually better than a
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 27 of 48
large piece of grass, has been my experience from seeing those people come in over
and over again. They were willing to keep a micropath versus a piece of grass that they
didn't think that maybe everybody was touching, someone else had a better access to it,
and they would ask to quitclaim it to their neighbors, so that's been my experience.
De Weerd: And I guess because of the themed aspect of this and a particular market
you're going for, it doesn't make sense. You know, I would agree with the applicant that
it is a different type of market and you know I'm a park advocate and would certainly, if it
made sense, advocate that now, but I think, you know, the design, the target, and the
donated right of way all make sense. We might have to just disagree.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, I take it the staff was okay with the hammerhead; right? As I recall.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, I believe staffs
recommendation was to go ahead with the cul-de-sac supporting Ada County Highway
District.
Bird: ACHD.
Canning: For that few number of lots and given what they are trying to achieve, I'm not
sure we care all that much, sir.
Bird: Hit the hammerhead again, would you.
De Weerd: What was that?
Bird: We still have the shared driveway, don't we. Just not as well -- I don't know. I
personally on this I'm so happy to see Dan come in with an R-4 zone, I appreciate that.
I think there is a real need for that type of a subdivision for people to have shops and
everything else. I don't think everybOdy wants to be able walk between their house and
the neighbors and touch -- put your arms out and touch each one of them, so -- all the
time, so I appreciate that, Dan. Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other comments?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I just -- we seem to be kind of gravitating towards a
hammerhead solution here per the request of the applicant. What -- we don't have an
ACHD representative here this evening.
Bird: No, we don't.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 28 of 48
Rountree: What kind of impact do we have an ACHD in that regard. I don't think a
whole lot if that's the case. While the hearing is still open Mr. Brown might be able to
tell us.
Brown: I first approached ACHD with that question and they, basically, said that you're
the land use agency. It's an acceptable fire department turn around as the fire chief has
spoken to. It is in their policy that they have these type of turnarounds, as I previously
said, a hammerhead and a Snoopy. So, those being acceptable, what they -- their
preferred method or their policy, they will go along with what you would mandate. They
would -- that's why they use them in in-fills, because you have inability to do other kinds
of turnarounds in certain projects, so that's --
Rountree: Thank you.
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Okay. I would entertain a motion.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: I move that we close the public hearings on Items 11 and 12.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion or motion.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: It's -- I guess from my earlier comments it's sort of clear where I sit on this. It
may seem to be a small issue, but to me it's a bigger issue and I might respectfully
disagree with at least Madam Mayor and probably the applicant as well as far as the
benefits to any particular neighborhood providing some common area gathering space,
whether it's large or small as it can be, whether or not the market in any particular
subdivision may desire that type of amenity, I, for one, think it's important to me to do
what we can to encourage any particular neighborhood to have, you know, a gathering
spot, an opportunity to meet and recreate in the front and not in the back and I
understand that there is expenses and there is some homeowners who might not want
to be involved in mowing and maintaining some of these common areas. I know they
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 29 of 48
are relatively small expenses. I represent quite a few homeowners associations that
deal with some of these issues -- probably haven't dealt with them as much as most of
the developers that come here, but it is something that's -- at least in my mind it's
important to have something like that. On a project that has those, I think create an
opportunity for more of a community feel in an particular neighborhood. If the particular
homeowner doesn't want to deal with it, they can go buy into a different subdivision, but
I have lived in both types of areas as well and this particular project in going forward I
guess that's kind of a sticking point for me, I'd like to see that particular type of amenity
in any type of subdivision to encourage the neighbors to get out and have an area to
gather and meet together. So, I'm not satisfied on this one because of that particular
issue.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other -- yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I respect Joe's view and I agree with it on a lot of deals, but I also think the
Mayor was right on this project here. You know, an R-8 where you have got five, six
thousand square foot lots, yeah, you probably do need a lot of common area to meet
and stuff, but this large of one and the landscaping, the pathway, and stuff like that, I--
I believe that while I agree with common areas in the majority of subdivisions, I believe
subdivisions like this can get by without it. So, I can support this project wholeheartedly.
De Weerd: And I would imagine with the walking path you can puta couple of benches
along the way that create an opportunity to sit and chat while you're walking your dog or
pushing your stroller. So, I mean, really, I think this is a unique subdivision that you
could have opportunities and maybe we will see it at final plat if it's approved. Okay.
Any other discussion, Council?
Rountree: Hearing no more discussion, Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item 11
for the AZ 06-044, annexation of Whitebark Subdivision.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 11. If there is no
discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, nay.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 12.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
Item 13:
Public Hearing: RZ 06-010 Request for a Rezone of 2.20 acres from l-L
to a C-G zone for Lanark Property by Ron Van Auker - Northwest Corner
of Eagle Road and Lanark Street (Lots 1 & 2, Block 1 of Olson & Bush
Industrial Park:
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 30 of 48
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move we approve Item No. 12, PP 06-045 for the Whitebark Subdivision
and indicate to ACHD that we would approve a hammerhead cul-de-sac on South
Limber Pine Street.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 12 with the noted
change. Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, did you --
did you want us to send notice to ACHD and to also delete the condition that's
highlighted up on the screen? Is that what you intended?
Rountree: Yes.
Bird: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for that clarification. If there is no discussion or further
comments, Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, nay.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
De Weerd: And, certainly, Mr. Wood, if you talk to ACHD and they would be willing to
do that, if you'll let us know we would -- and if you would like to set a precedence in that
area, because you're a responsible developer, let us know that, too.
Rountree: It may also be your tax accountant that you want to talk to.
De Weerd: Thank you. Because I am serious, we have -- we have an issue down in
south Meridian and I'm going to hand out planners' phone numbers and developers and
when they are sitting in traffic they have a lot of time on their hands.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 13 is a Public Hearing on RZ 06-030. I will open this Item 13
with staff comments.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 31 of 48
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Lanark project. It is
located on the northwest corner of Lanark Street and Eagle Road, just south of the
railroad tracks. The request is to rezone 2.2 acres from I-L to C-G and, then, the
applicant intends to construct an office and retail uses on the site that would not be
allowed within the light industrial zone. The site is currently vacant.
De Weerd: No. During campaigning there is always signs there.
Canning: All with elephants on them. The other lots within the front portion of the
subdivision are largely developed or built out. I want to point here, you will notice that
the parking lot to the west does stub to this property and that will become important
later. This is the proposed site plan for your consideration. Let me go back up. If you
look on the 2002 Comprehensive Plan, this is clearly labeled industrial. There is a
provision in the Comp Plan that says it's not meant to be parcel specific, you are
allowed to kind of bump and nudge things. This, by nudging across Eagle Road, is the
farthest nudge you have ever considered. But we did bring it before you for your
consideration tonight without a Comprehensive Plan amendment. There are
commercial designations on the south side of the property, but there are intervening
properties there. The R.C. Willey site is designated as commercial immediately across
Eagle Road. So, the proposed zoning is not explicitly consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Despite that, the applicant's request in this area does seem to be
generally compatible with the surrounding land uses, as there is extensive commercial
development along Eagle Road already, including but not limited to the R.C. Willey
directly across the street.
De Weerd: What was the purple thing on there, Anna?
Canning: Purple here?
De Weerd: Yeah.
Canning: That's office.
De Weerd: No. On the railroad track.
Bird: On the railroad tracks.
Canning: Oh, right there?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Canning: That's our transit station symbol.
De Weerd: On Eagle Road?
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 32 of 48
Canning: It's shown as being generally located in the -- it's a floating marker similar to
parks and schools. It's intended that it be generally near Eagle Road.
De Weerd: Was that supposed to be north of the railroad tracks? Wasn't that part of an
application?
Canning: The property that's formerly known as Ten Mile Development, LLC, did show
a pathway on this property that kind of generally brought people from this area if there
were a transit stop that you could walk up to Pine.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: You can see the existing development. There is the proposed site plan. You
will note the landscape buffer adjoining Eagle Road, which is an entryway corridor
through this area. You will notice the cross-access to the west. This is the elevation.
This would be subject to design review. This structure would pass design review, but
there were some considerations about the site plan and I will -- those were mentioned
by the Commission, so I will go ahead and go through the Commission's
recommendation. They did recommend approval at their November 2nd, 2006, Public
Hearing. Brad Miller spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition or
commented. Mr. Ron Van Auker, I believe senior, provided written testimony. Key
issues of discussion by the Commission were the need to vacate public utilities,
drainage, irrigation easements that span the property lines common to Lots 1 and 2, but
the subject property is two parcels. There are two lots in the current subdivision. So,
there are easements along those common lot lines. They also discussed the applicant's
request to postpone installation of the sidewalk along Eagle Road until such time that
ITD widens Eagle Road and, then, there was discussion about the timing of the Eagle
Road widening in this area. The applicant also requested to eliminate the design review
requirement to install the eight foot pedestrian walkway from the perimeter sidewalk to
the building entrance and the applicant requested to install a five foot wide land use
buffer between the I-L zoned properties to the west and the proposed C-G zoned
properties. Staff had requested ten feet. I need to talk about that a little bit, because
you may remember last week we talked about the buffer for industrial uses is actually
25 feet, because that's the more intense use, that's the one that provides the buffer, so -
- because this is asking to go from I-L to C-G, they would only be required to have a five
foot landscape buffer, but because of the zoning was changing, we felt that there was
some obligation on the part of this property owner to provide some of that buffer,
because we didn't get it on the I-L property, because when the I-L property was
developed this was also I-L. And, hopefully, that made some sense there. But we were
asking for five additional feet of a land use buffer in this area, because there is a
difference between the two zones. The key Commission changes to staff's initial
recommendation -- they did eliminate the sidewalk along the western side of the
proposed structure. The applicant had shown one on the submitted concept or site plan
and, then, they had decided that they would not put a public entrance on this side, so
the need for the sidewalk went away and the Commission didn't feel the need for that
sidewalk either, so they did make that change. The outstanding issues for City Council
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 33 of 48
-- these are really more of an update on a couple of items. There was a lot of
discussion about vacating the utilities. In talking with Public Works and the building
department, it's probably not necessary to amend the development agreement to state
that it's necessary to vacate those. They won't allow anything to occur as far as
development on the site until those utilities are vacated -- until the easements, I'm sorry,
are vacated. So, we feel confident that that one is okay the way it stands and needs no
action by our discussion by Council action. Staff confirmed with ITD, because there
was a lot of talk about building the ten foot sidewalk as required along Eagle Road, they
were asking to postpone those installments. We did contact lTD. ITD has said that
they don't actually have any plans to construct that along this area and they are
counting on the development of those adjoining properties to construct those
improvements as it goes along. What they will do is when they are ready to -- to make
those improvements in that segment of roadway, they will line up their sidewalks with
what's existing. So, they are looking for this development to provide that -- that
sidewalk along Eagle Road concurrent with the development of this property. We did
receive written testimony from Mr. Miller dated yesterday, received today, and they are
still requesting that there be a five foot landscape buffer on the west property line. They
are also asking that they not be required to have this cross-access to the west, that they
may want to do it, they may not, but they are asking that it not be required. You know,
we try at every opportunity to get cross-access between nonresidential properties, so
that we can have a flow of traffic without going on the public street. In this case the
public street is Lanark, it may be extended in the future. We are hoping it gets to be a
through street at some pOint in time, so it would be appropriate, and they are still
requesting to defer construction of the ten foot sidewalk. And with that -- oh, well, let
me say one more thing about the ten foot sidewalk. There was talk of deferring it or
postponing it. It makes it sound as if they are asking not to do it. If that's the case, if
Council is inclined to move in that direction, it would require a variance to not develop
that ten foot sidewalk. It is a standard of the UDC that would have to be approved -- or
waived. You'd have to get a variance to the standard. And with that I will answer any
questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions for staff at this time?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Miller: My name is Brad Miller with Van Auker Properties, 3084 East Lanark in
Meridian. As being a member of a development group who has donated land to ACHD
De Weerd: You're awesome.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 34 of 48
Miller: -- and done joint development agreements with ACHD and done impact fee
credit agreements with ACHD, I appreciate you listening to our application tonight. By
the way, you can do all those things. Pine Street would not be in between Cloverdale
and Eagle Road if it weren't for Ron Van Auker and his ability to fund that project and,
then, take impact fee credits in return for that.
Bird: You're a hundred percent right.
Miller: So, I mean it can be done, it's done every day, and, particularly, it's by the
people who have the wherewithal to be able to fund those things and some of these
other people may not. In regard to this project, you mayor may not be aware that the
property to the east is our -- or, excuse me, to the west is our offices. We have offjced
there for almost 15 years now and developed that property and these are two parcels
here that we have left. The first parcel, which is closest to Eagle Road, when they
widened Eagle Road they took some of that parcel, so it's not large enough to develop
on its own, so we chose to put the two together. When that subdivision was done -- at
the time that subdivision was done the standard practice was to put utility easements
along all of the property lines and so the utility issue that -- easement issue that Anna
brought up is just that center line has a blanket utility easement -- I think it's five feet on
both sides -- and we have received relinquishment from everyone, except for Qwest,
and we are working on that and it will not be a problem. In regard to the landscaping,
on the west side -- this office building -- our intent is to move our offices over into this
building and, hopefully, after 12 years I can finally get a window in my office. On the
first floor we would have some lower intensive retail uses. We don't know exactly what
those are yet, but the thought would be that we would have some retail uses on the
bottom and, then, probably two office, maybe there office uses on the top. This property
would be -- the property would be negatively impacted by an industrial user next door.
We don't -- the property next door is used primarily as office. We have about 6,000
square feet of warehouse in the back that is used as storage. The next user that came
along, I guess they could do manufacturing or something that would be more intensive
on that property, but we don't see it as a negative from our point of view and so if the
ten foot landscape buffer is there to protect us as the owners of this property, we don't
have a problem with that -- with it being five feet, rather than ten feet. So, I don't see an
advantage to it, but, once again, I don't want to be disagreeable, I just want to agree
and --
De Weerd: And get along; right?
Miller: Because Anna's my friend. In regard to the driveway -- Anna, would you mind
going back to the site plan, please. The intent was originally we were going to have
some sort of overhead door on the west side of the building and so Mr. Van Auker's
thought was we would have that little turn out area there, so that we could get a truck in
and maneuver there. If you were to draw a line over from the south side of this building
over, you would meet the front of our offices over on the other side. So, that cross-
access really, probably, wouldn't serve any purpose right now we don't think, if it were
constructed. So, we would like to have the option not to have that there. We don't see
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 35 of 48
that there would be any real benefit. The intent would be, as the staff report states, to
have one access point on Lanark, rather than -- East Lanark, rather than two and we
would like to center that and don't see that there is really a need for cross-access
between the two. In regard to the sidewalk on Eagle Road, we are not opposed to the
sidewalk on Eagle Road. We would be more than happy to bond for it. Our issue is
even though ITD says that they would come, they would match their future sidewalk to
the sidewalk that we put in, I just can't -- I have a hard time believing that it all will line
up, that we would be able to put it in the right location at the right elevation and the right
section that would match up with what they are doing in the future. If you go along that
side of Eagle Road from Fairview to Franklin Road, which includes the new jewelry
store there, which includes that new restaurant, and all those other places, there is no
sidewalk along that whole west side at all and I just -- I mean we are not opposed to it
and we will bond for it, but it just seems to me that it's premature for that right now. If
you go across the street from us where Ted Sigmont has his Everton Mattress, they just
completed a new building there and there is no sidewalk there and there is a dramatic
elevation change there, but I mean if you want it we will do it, but I just hate to do it and
see it torn out at a later time. We are more than happy to bond for it, we are not
opposed to it, but right now if you put that in it's not going to connect -- interconnect to
anything, you know, it probably would look good, but we would landscape in that area
right now anyway. So, that would be the only consideration. If you want the sidewalk
there, we are more than happy to do it, I just hate to see it torn out in the future. And
those are my only issues, unless there is any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: No.
Miller: Okay.
De Weerd: Just my statement on sidewalks, because I noticed there was not a
sidewalk up in that area you referenced, because I had to cross the street to go to the
minor emergency room and I had to walk through parking lot. It was -- it was awful and
I really didn't feel good, so -- because I was on the other side of the street, had to go up
to the crosswalk, walk across, looking for the sidewalk, I didn't even know we didn't
have sidewalks on that side. So, where we can get sidewalks put in, it's really nice. I
think it's a real safety issue by not having them there, so -- and, I know, it's connecting
to nothing, but at least it provides a haven of safety in front of your beautiful office
building.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 36 of 48
Bird: I agree wholeheartedly with you on the sidewalk. I believe the only sidewalk is
from Pine Street down to the little street that goes into Yellow Freight. In front of Blue
Cross and stuff they have got a detached sidewalk, looks great. I can't figure out -- they
are taking up that whole -- from the railroad to -- to Lanark and maybe Brad can wisen
me up, but I can't figure out where the elevation is going to be where they could tie in,
so that a foot or two elevation difference is going to make a bit of difference, because
you're, basically, going from railroad tracks to Lanark and, then, you go across Lanark
before you would take off again. So, I can't see the deal. I would love to see if we can
in that area a detached meandering sidewalk. I'm like the Mayor, I wouldn't want to
walk out there, only in an emergency, but if I have to I'd sure love to be off the road. So,
Brad, I don't know, is that possible? And I can't figure out the elevation problem.
Miller: There is not -- between the railroad tracks and Franklin Road -- or, excuse me,
and Lanark, there is really not much of a change of an elevation there. It really picks up
right here as it goes up the hill. That's where the real elevation difference is. I just think
when ACHD comes, they put their median in, they widen out the road and do all that, I
just -- you know, at what level are they going to do that? Are they going to cut it down?
Are they going to build it up? I just don't know. I mean if you want a sidewalk, we are
more than happy to do that.
Bird: How much footage -- I didn't look at the site, but how much footage are you going
to have there between your right of way and the start of the parking lot?
Miller: Anna, I can't read that. What is --
Bird: I can't -- how far?
Canning: The required landscape buffer on an entryway corridor is 35 feet.
Bird: Thirty-five?
Miller: Thirty-five is what we will have.
Bird: So, if you put in landscaping there and, then, run a five foot meandering
sidewalk --
De Weerd: Eight foot.
Canning: Ten foot.
Bird: Ten foot. Ten foot. Wow, we are getting wide. I think I can drive my golf cart.
De Weerd: No, you can't.
Bird: I don't see how we couldn't -- with your elevation and your landscaping could take
care of that elevation if and when they redo the road. And your sidewalk can up -- I
Meridian City Council
November 28,2006
Page 37 of 48
mean they have done it all along Eagle Road down towards Eagle in those two
subdivisions. And I'm like Tammy -- or Mayor, I just feel that we really -- we need to
have sidewalks there. I think you guys are the type that would do that.
Miller: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, we don't have a problem with that. I mean if --
my understanding is the sidewalk can be within the landscape, the 35 feet. I mean if
that's what the deal is, we will put it in the 35 feet and we will make it work.
Bird: Good. I think it's --
Miller: But you're going to have to have lunch with Mr. Van Auker and tell him I fought
hard, okay?
Bird: We wanted to have one, so we will.
De Weerd: We will go walk on his sidewalk when it's built.
Miller: That would be great.
De Weerd: We can walk down to --
Rountree: And count the pedestrians.
Miller: In the 12 years I have been there I have seen three pedestrians, so --
De Weerd: There is a reason for that.
Miller: It's dangerous.
De Weerd: It's scary.
Miller: In fact, I have gotten to the point where I won't -- when I leave our office, I will
not turn onto Eagle Road, there is that little illegal road that's someone cut in --
Bird: I was just going to say --
Miller: -- that Mr. Van Auker cut in right -- where is it? It comes right up there. And I
will tell you, it's been a God send, because we used to see, quite honestly, five or six
accidents a week right along here -- not just from people pulling out here, but just this
whole area, but with the insulation company, with John Deere Landscape, and with
YMC and us, everyone uses this access right here and even though it's illegal and --
yeah, it works out great. Anyway, I don't want to take anymore of your time. Thank you
very much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Plug your ears. And, Dean, will you strike that from the record.
Okay. Council -- oh, this is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 38 of 48
testimony on this application? Okay. Council, is there any further information you need
for this application?
Bird: Madam Mayor, other than a statement. I am so glad to see this property getting
developed and it's a beautiful office building.
De Weerd: Thank you. Do you have a motion?
Bird: I would make a motion that we close the Public Hearing for RZ 06-010.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item
13. As those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve RZ 06-010 from I-L to C-G and that on the east side
between the parking lot and right of way of road that within the landscaping that we
have ten foot of sidewalk and that we have -- that we eliminate the east side cut-through
to the following property. I beg your pardon?
Rountree: West side.
Bird: West -- oh, west side. I'm sorry. Yeah. The east side of the existing, west side of
the new. Am I clear there?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: Anna, am I clear?
Rountree: The cross-access.
Bird: The cross-access, eliminate it.
Canning: Yes, sir. And you wanted the ten foot landscape buffer?
Bird: No. The five foot landscape buffer.
Canning: Okay. That's the only one I -- so, without the requirement for cross-access
and with only a five foot landscape buffer?
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 39 of 48
Bird: And a ten foot sidewalk within the 35 foot of --
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 13 with the changes
as noted. 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 14:
Public Hearing: CUP 06-031 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for
lighted fields adjoining a residential district for Herita~e Middle School by
Joint School District NO.2 - 4990 North Meridian Road:
Item 15:
Public Hearing: VAR 06-021 Request for a Variance from UDC 11-3A-
11 C3 to install light fixtures with exposed bulbs for the ball fields for
HeritaQe Middle School by Joint School District No. 2 - 4990 North
Meridian Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. We will tell him you fought hard. Okay. Item 14 is Public
Hearing CUP 06-031 --
Canning: Madam Mayor, before the applicant leaves, can I check the staff report for
something just briefly?
De Weerd: Yes. I will make my comments. Mr. Bird, City Council gets all these fun
things in their drawers and I don't, so --
Bird: Here.
De Weerd: No, I don't want them, that's--
Bird: I don't want to hear you crying. I don't need it.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are good. I just -- I wanted to
check the Findings to make sure we said it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
in some form, so that was all.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I did open the Public Hearing. Do I need to open 15
along with it?
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Yes? I will open Item 16, VAR 06-021 as well.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 40 of 48
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Heritage Middle School
project. It is located on the northeast corner of Meridian Road and McMillan Road. The
applications before you tonight are for a Conditional Use Permit and a variance. Joint
School District No. 2 has applied for this Conditional Use Permit to allow lit ball fields
adjoining a residential district. Additionally, they have applied for a variance to the
requirement that the light fixtures not have exposed bulbs for the ball field lighting. This
is a close up of the adjoining property. If you have questions about how many adjoining
neighbors -- the ones for -- to the north are just preliminary plat. The one for Saguaro
are platted. This is the site plan. So, the ball fields are generally on the eastern half or
kind the central portion, but the lit fields are in the central area in particular, so the two
red arrows show the fields that will have the lights. The Commission did recommend
approval of this project at their November 2nd, 2006, hearing. Scott Hensen from
Lombard Conrad Architects spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in
opposition or commented and there was no written testimony. The key issues by the
Commission, there were none. And there were no changes to staff's initial
recommendation. To our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before Council
and we have received no additional written testimonies -- testimony. With regard to the
variance findings, there are three findings required. Generally I go through them, so I
will go ahead and do that. Basically with regard to the question of whether it grants a
right or special privilege that is not otherwise allowed in the district, because of the
distance to the residential neighbors, the light out at that boundary is very minimal, it's
approximately 500 feet away and it would be 0.0 foot candles adjacent to the residential
uses, so the actual light won't spill over. There will, obviously, be a glare from those
that folks will be able to see, but staff did believe that the intent of the UDC restriction
regarding flood -- flood lighting is being met for the most part. With regard to the
hardship, the applicant's statement -- and I know this to be generally true -- is that the
cost for having shielded bulbs in a situation where you're lighting ball fields, it is
possible. Sometimes they say it's not possible and, then, they will agree, well, yeah, it's
possible, it's just very very expensive and I have heard that from other folks, even from
folks that are dark sky advocates, they do recognize that it's very expensive to light ball
fields without using an exposed bulb. With questions to whether the variance -- by
granting the variance it will be detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare, staff did
not feel that that was the case. I bring up these findings only because I suspect that
you will never see anyone willingly comply with the requirements to have shielded bulbs
for a ball field. You have received and granted this request once before and if Council
would like to give some direction to staff if they would like to see an exception made
specifically for ball field lighting that could be discussed as part of the conditional use
application, you still have to do a conditional use if it's adjoining a residential
neighborhood, I would just welcome any comments you might have on that, because I
suspect you will always receive this request when it comes to lit ball fields,so -- and with
that I will end staff's presentation, answer any questions you may have.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Keith.
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 41 of 48
Bird: Anna, regarding lights, the speedway is a good example of unshielded bulbs,
which when they were put in in 1953 they probably didn't have them covered ones, and
every time it rains if you're using them, they explode out, they break. I know of a game
in the 70s up there that we lost half the lights and they were falling down, thank God we
had a track between the football field and the stands. We put in -- we put in in 1987 the
lights at the American Legion baseball field and Storey Park, those are shielded. Harold
Cox Trust put in the ones at the softball complex at Storey field and I believe they are
shielded. I, as one, would never vote for an unshielded light, because I think it's a
safety hazard, to be truthful with you. I know they are a little more expensive, but I don't
think -- I think when you go -- when you take like almost 20 years like we have had at
the -- at the baseball field at Storey Park and we have replaced I believe seven lights in
our shielded, if you have an unshielded one you're going to be replacing that many in
one summer, if not more. So, I just feel that as a Council that we need to -- for the
safety and liability of the kids playing on the field, the fans watching and stuff, they need
to be non-exposed light bulbs. They need to be shielded.
Canning: Madam Mayor, I suspect we are talking about two -- a little bit different things.
I think I have a -- I can pull up a diagram on the city code that -- I think I understand
where you're going and we can address that, but if I can find the right diagram or if she's
got it right -- I think this will help.
Bird: And I might have misunderstood you, Anna, too, so--
De Weerd: We can ask the applicant. Anna, I think the -- and these are the same lights
that are at Meridian High School football field; right? As well as Mountain View? Okay.
Bird: Oh, well, they are shielded.
Canning: Yeah. Let me explain what it means. What the no exposed bulb means --
like if this is your bulb, it's got to be up in there so that no part of it, the light, is shining
up into the sky, so that it's all shining directly onto the ground.
Bird: But, still, if you don't have those covered -- I mean the speedway can't -- don't do
it. They are a good example. They have got the nice cover that you screw the big bulb
up into, but if you get a driving rain or something and they are hot, you get breakage,
because you -- the face of it are not cover. All you're doing is covering the glare. And I
don't want to see that at a ball field and he's talking about the lights that are at the
football field, the baseball fields, that's covered lights. That's my interpretation. An
exposed one is one that has -- yeah, it has a cover over it, but it don't have a complete
cover. It don't have the face. The light bulb -- you don't have to take -- you don't have
to remove something to get to the light bulb, you just reach up there and unscrew.
That's what exposed means.
Canning: The UDC is primarily concerned with light going above the horizontal plane,
so they try and keep all the light here or down here, instead of anything going up here.
Most of the ball field lights are kind of up here and they will get light going up into the
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 42 of 48
sky. So, that's what the variance is for. It's not -- it's not for the type of shielding I
believe you're talking about. But that's a very good -- I wasn't aware of that issue and if
that's a change Council wants to see in the code, too, then, that's fine, or we can
address it on a case-by-case basis.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: Anna, to me, for this one Councilman, I don't want to see any of those exposed
bulbs at one -- at one of our city parks deal and I hope being a taxpayer in the Meridian
School District that I don't have to see it there. They are not safe at times.
De Weerd: Especially when you're a partner. Would the applicant like to make
comment?
Hensen: Good evening. Scott Hensen with LCA Architects, at 1221 Shoreline Lane,
Boise, representing the Joint School District No.2, and we have read the staff report
and are in agreement with staffs recommendations. I think it -- probably there is a little
bit more explanation of what some of the discussion regarding the exposed versus
shielded light fixtures are that we are looking at. The ordinances require that lights be
shielded from view, so that, essentially, you can't see the light source and the light is
emitted in a direct downward motion and in ball field lighting you have an 80 foot tall
pole and the only way to light anything flying in the air is to have the light source shining
out in a diagonal direction and to my knowledge there is no such light that can conceal
the light source in a ball field application. Logically it doesn't make sense that can
happen. There are light fixtures that are available in some of these cities that do require
dark sky ordinances that, essentially, require twice as many poles and the light pole has
about twice as many light sources on them of lower wattage, therefore, the glare is not
quite as intense from a distance, but it's still shining outward. There is no way to
physically cover that lamp without, you know, casting shadows on the field. So, what
we are proposing is a standard 80 foot tall fixture that -- the same type of fixture that is
at the high schools and other schools, baseball fields and football fields around the
valley. I cannot speak specifically to Councilman Bird's requirement of having a -- like a
lens cover over those. It's funny, I have been to so many of these things and an 80 foot
tall pole, I couldn't tell you whether or not there is a cover over them, but certainly if that
-- if that is an issue, we can look into making sure that those things are covered that
way, because if there is an issue with, you know, anything -- water hitting those and
breaking them, we don't want that to happen, obviously, either. But there is a shroud
over the top of the light to protect them from that, but we would have to look into
whether or not there is actually a lens over those. With regard to the location of where
they are on the site, if you might be able to go back to the site plan, we have located the
-- of course, as you know, the school is under construction right now, the building is
getting close to being topped out and they are doing interior finish work now. The
parking lot -- well, I found a button. Anyway--
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 43 of 48
De Weerd: You just have to push hard down.
Hensen: I think the battery is dying. Anyway, the parking lots -- the parking lots are
complete. The grading work is virtually done.
De Weerd: Here you go.
Hensen: Okay. Have to be smarter than the pen. The grading work in this area is
complete. All the utilities are in and the underground irrigation is currently being
installed out in this area. So, what we did is we chose the two ball fields that are
probably the most remote from any of the residences around the perimeter, so as you
can see, we have got four light pOle standards on each of these two fields. These fields
here would be unlit. We have also included, at the recommendation of the fire
department, is we have got an access -- a 20 foot wide paved access that comes off of
our fire access lane that goes around the perimeter of the building that will come into
this area and do a hammerhead turn around with access that it will allow them to be
able to get back into this area a little bit easier in case of an emergency, so that will be
installed as part of this project as well, that came out of the review. So, with that I will
be happy to stand for questions.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Scott, I will invite you -- I think next month or so we are going to change some
lights and have a 105 foot lift out there and I'd invite you to go up with me and, then, you
can see what they look like.
De Weerd: You change light bulbs?
Bird: No. I send my kid up. But, anyway, why do you need 80 foot -- those are softball
fields, they are not baseball fields. Why do you need 80 foot? That's a baseball field. A
softball field, I think if you will go measure the ones that Harold Cox -- and to my
knowledge that's been very sufficient -- are only 40 feet, if that.
Hensen: Uh-huh.
Bird: Why would you do that? And, then, in another reason -- you know, I have a
philosophy -- I have no problem with the variance or anything and what you're asking, I
have -- I have a problem with why we want to put lights out there when that school don't
even have a softball team.
Hensen: That probably can't be a question that's being asked of the applicant --
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 44 of 48
Bird: No, it is not.
Hensen: The height, I believe -- and I'm not an electrical engineer. However, from what
I have understood in talking to the electrical engineer, is preferably the higher that you
can go the more downward angle that you can have in the lighting of the fields. The
lower obviously more direct outward light that you have to have, so I think that's in an
attempt to lower the foot candles around the perimeter and the photometric analysis
shows that we submitted, we do have zero foot candles at the property line, but it is --
it's right at the north property line. I mean those foot candles go to zero right as they hit
that property line. So, I think anything lower would direct that light further out and we'd
probably have a difficult time controlling the foot candles at that property line.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: But, Scott, the only problem -- you know, you're basically going to be using those
fields in the summer; am I not right?
Hensen: Yes.
Bird: You don't see the school using it, because you're getting -- the high school is
getting new softball fields or new softball fields being built at Rocky Mountain, they have
got softball fields at Mountain View, and really and truthfully until about 10:00 o'clock
you don't have to light up. We have had legion games go where we have never had to
turn the lights on in the summertime, if they go fast, so I don't --
De Weerd: Mr. Bird?
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: I know with the girls fast pitch, they do plan on doing high school softball
tournaments there and those girls play in the spring.
Bird: Yeah, but -- I realize they play in the spring and they maybe will use it how often?
What I'm getting at is I don't -- I don't think 40 foot lights, no more than they will be used,
is going to be offensive to the neighbors and when you can put them up for about 60
percent of the cost of the 80 footers, I think that you need to seriously look into that.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: I think one of the things that -- the concern Councilman Bird brings up and I see
the conditions of approval -- and I'm sure it's probably the district's intent, for an
approval of not to exceed 80 feet -- I don't know if that determination has really been
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 45 of 48
made, but the primary concern needs to utilize effective lighting that at the foremost
minimizes the impact on the adjoining neighborhood, that every effort been made and
will be made to be sure that that takes place. So, if that can be accomplished with 80
feet and that reduces the impact on the neighbors, then, that's in everyone's best
interest, so to the extent that the issue before the Council today in regards to conditional
use and the variance with regards to lumen output, I don't have a problem with that
either. I think the district is focused on the right concern with regard to lighting.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council?
Hensen: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. This is a Public Hearing. It may seem like a -- just a question I
have to ask. It is. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this
application? Thank you. If the applicant has no further comment, Council, I would
entertain a motion to close.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close CUP 06-031 and VAR 06-021.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close Items 14 and 15. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item 14, CUP 06-031.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 14. Is there any
discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 15.
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 46 of 48
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move we approve Item 15, VAR 06-021.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 15. If there is no
discussion, Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: If I might just briefly. Staff asked for some direction based on variance and I
had some comment some specific lighting options for ball fields and playing fields. I--
my preference would be, at least to leave some recognition in the conditional use
process that would allow citizen input if -- a lot of these that we see we don't have
residential input, because there aren't -- in this application there are no residences near
that. We don't have a dark sky ordinance, but those are things that may happen in the
future and our current code, at least, allows for their input to do that. So, that would be
my -- my preference.
Canning: But keep it as a variance; correct? Yeah. Okay.
Item 16:
Ordinance No.
06-1278
U-Turn Prohibition Ordinance:
Item 17:
Ordinance No.
06-1279
Fire Code Amendment Ordinance:
Item 18:
Ordinance No.
Commission:
06-1280
Ordinance CreatinQ Meridian Arts
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Mr. Berg, what are our ordinance numbers?
Bird: 1278, 1279, and 1280.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 16, ordinance 06-1278, Item 17, 06-1279, and 18, 06-1280.
Mr. Berg, will you, please, read these three ordinances by title only.
Meridian City Council
November 28. 2006
Page 47 of 48
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 06-1278, an
ordinance amending Title 7, Chapter 1, Section 8, Meridian City Code, regarding
making u-turns within the City of Meridian and providing for a waiver of the reading of
the rules and providing an effective date.
Berg: Ordinance 06-1279, an ordinance amending Title 10, Chapter 4, Section 2, of the
Meridian City Code, regarding the fire prevention code floor control valves, providing a
savings clause and providing for a summary and providing for a waiver of the reading of
the rules and providing an effective date.
Berg: Ordinance 06-1280, an ordinance amending Title 2, Chapter 5 to the Meridian
City Code regarding a statement of purpose, definitions, establishing an arts
commission, membership, terms, vacancies, and authority, organization, powers,
duties, and responsibilities and providing a savings clause and providing a waiver of the
reading of the rules and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, you have heard these ordinances read by title only. Is there
anyone in our public who would like to hear them read in their entirety? Any of them.
Thank you.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Nary: I don't want to hear them in their entirety, but Mr. Berg did point out there is a
duplication of a line in the arts commission ordinance, it's in Section 2-5-4 under
organization. In Subsection B, the last sentence says the clerk shall keep an accurate
record of all proceedings of the commission. It doesn't define which -- whether that's a
city clerk or the clerk of the commission or a staff member, but it's already required in
subsection 0 that the commission shall keep all minutes. So, I'd ask the Council, if you
choose to approve this ordinance, that you also include in the motion to delete that one
line out of 2-5-4B. 2-5-4B.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Okay. Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 06-1278, 06-1279, and 06-1280 and with 80 we
change -- we delete the last item -- or the last line on item 2-5-4, Section B.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second.
Bird: Oh, with suspension of rules.
Meridian City Council
November 28, 2006
Page 48 of 48
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, we are at the end of our agenda. We do have go-carts
reserved for the parade for your enjoyment, except Mr. Bird, of course. He's more
important than the rest of us.
Bird: It's a humbling honor, I tell you. It's fantastic. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, I want to compliment you and your staff on these reports we have been
getting. They certainly help me and I thank you for the work your staff and yourself is
putting into these reports. It certainly makes our job a lot easier up here.
Rountree: I second that.
De Weerd: Third, fourth, and fifth. Okay. Very good. Do I have a motion to adjourn?
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:29 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
~~~,,2
MAYOR MY DE WEERD
\ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ II I I . : i J li,,I,'.
I / " / rJ 1 \,' \ ~ Of ME.f?,,~.' 1,',./,
~ ,..... "" ."-1"',r.. 'I'
- " :'\ ~---... '"".)>'1 .'/
A TTESTED~ILLlAM GDS:T:G A~:'~OVElt u ,,"co""OP~' ~ '"
~ 't;.. . <'J,/ 0
-- - .....,.., - "'j.'
~ '() ~G I -is '. . ~/.. ,.~~ ~ ,"
"" 'A "'___________ ~~'t' "
".. "e' ,J '\.'
/.. ("II ,........>0/ ,"
'1, ~", \,.....
11III \\~\
//'1.11111\1\11