HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 05-22
Meridian City Council Meetina
Mav 22. 2007
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M.,
Tuesday, May 22,2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, David Zaremba, Keith Bird and Charlie
Rountree.
Members Absent: Joe Borton.
Others Present: Ted Baird, Will Berg, Ann Canning, Pete Friedman, Brad Watson, Len
Grady, Bill Musser, Ron Anderson, and Dean Willis.
Item 1:
Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba
X Charlie Rountree
X
o Joe Borton
X Keith Bird
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I'll go ahead and start tonight's meeting. Good evening and thank
you all for joining us here tonight. It is Tuesday, May 22nd. Its five minutes after 7:00.
We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance. Mr. Berg.
Item 2:
Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Okay. Tonight we will be led in the pledge by one of our scholarship
recipients Kimberly Stucker. If you will all please rise and join us in the pledge?
(Pledge of allegiance recited.)
3. Community Invocation by Pastor Bob Grove with Capital Christian Center:
De Weerd: Thank you, Kimberly. Item NO.3 is our community invocation. Tonight we
will be led by Pastor Bob Grove. He is an associate pastor with the Capital Christian
Center. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity
for a moment of reflection. Pastor.
Grove: Good evening, Madam Mayor and the Members of the City Council. If you
would join me in a word of prayer? Dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for this day
you have made. We tonight acknowledge you and that you are sovereign and that we
ask that you would impart wisdom as the decisions are made and issues of importance
are discussed, so that the wonderful City of Meridian would continue to progress and
prosper to the benefit of all who call Meridian their home. We pray the blessings of the
Lord that makes rich and adds no sorry to it be upon our Mayor and upon every Council
member and their households, as well as your covering and protection on the city's civil
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 2 of 36
servants, schools, businesses, churches, and our residences. These things we pray in
the wonderful name of Jesus, amen.
Item 4:
Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Pastor, I would like to present you with one of our City of Meridian pins.
Thank you for joining us. Okay. Council, Item NO.4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We do have on the Consent Agenda Item E has been asked to be tabled to June
5th, 2007. Item NO.9 -- and it would include No. 10 -- has been asked to be continued
to June 5th, 2007. Item No. 11, Public Hearing for Hampton Inns and Suites, has been
asked to be continued to June 19th, 2007. Items 14 and 15, two Public Hearings, have
been asked to be continued to June 5th, 2007. And Item 16, the ordinance number is
07-1319. With that I move we approve the revised agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as amended.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5:
Award of City of Meridian Scholarships:
De Weerd: Item No.5, an award of one of four -- oh, two of four of our City of Meridian
Scholarships. Scholarships are to go to students who have shown outside involvement
in our community and to recognize them for the contributions that they give to our
community as a whole and tonight we have two of the four recipients and I'd like to first
tell you about each of these gals and -- before I ask them to come up and be
acknowledged. Our first recipient is Kimberly Ann Stucker. She is a 2007 Meridian
High School graduate with a 4.0 grade point average. Has been awarded the one
thousand dollar Meridian Mayor's Community Service Scholarship in recognition of her
civic involvement. She has volunteered for the Meridian Food Bank, City Light Women,
and Children's Home. The Church of God Seventh Day and the Boise Rescue Mission,
and has been an active member of the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council. Kimberly plans
to attend Albertson's College -- Albertson College of Idaho, where she will study botany
and music performance. Our second recipient is Jessica Ingersoll. And she is 2007
graduate of Meridian High School, has been awarded also a thousand dollar
scholarship to help her pursue studies in early childhood development and elementary
education at Brigham Young University. In addition to maintaining a 4.0 grade point
average, Jessica has been an active member of the Student Council, the National
Honor Society, Key Club, French Club, the Superintendent's Council, and the Mayor's
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 3 of 36
Youth Advisory Council. Jessica is also an accomplished tennis player. So, I think that
these two young ladies certainly exemplify some of our finest and I'm always emotional
and I have really enjoyed working with these young ladies on the Youth Council. They
have added a great deal. I can't tell you how much our Youth Council does in our
community and these girls have been there at almost every step of the way and have
given a lot to the City of Meridian through their community involvement and before I
start to blubber, I will just ask them to come up. See, my staff expects this and so does
the Council, they kind of put up with me. But if you will come over and stand next to
me? I would like to introduce you to the citizens here that are here tonight and also to
the City Council. Our City Council has been very generous in supporting our Youth
Council and supporting the youth of our community and it is with great pleasure and
honor that, Kimberly, I will first give this to you and wish you the best in your endeavors.
Stucker: Thank you.
De Weerd: Second is Jessica Ingersoll and same to you, Jessica, we wish you all the
best and you will be missed. I should ask if either of the girls would like to make any
comment.
Ingersoll: I would just like to say thank you. I really appreciate what you guys have
done for us and it will really help me in my educational endeavors and I have had a
wonderful opportunity of working with the Mayor and coming and hearing you guys often
and so I appreciate all the city does and I really have learned to understand that you
guys do a lot after working with you, so thank you.
Rountree: Congratulations.
Bird: Appreciate what you do, Jessica.
Stucker: I'd like to thank -- I'd just like to thank Mayor Tammy de Weerd. She's
provided a lot of opportunities for youth to get involved in the city government and the
city community and through her the things like the Meridian Advisory Council can take
place successfully and that you can really get involved in the community and I just want
to thank you for that.
De Weerd: Thank you. I feel like a proud momma tonight. Thank you all for being
here. And to the parents, the great support, role models, we appreciate the support you
have given your students to excel not only in school, in their service to the community,
but also I expect in life. So, thank you for being here.
Item 6:
Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of April 24, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting:
B. Approve Minutes of May 1, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting:
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 4 of 36
C. Approve Minutes of May 1, 2007 City Council Meeting:
D. Approve Minutes of May 8, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting:
F. Approve Public Utilities, Irrigation and Drainage Easement for
Paramount Subdivision No. 13:
G. Agreement for Professional Services for Safety Consulting
with Safety Enterprise. Inc. for $10,000.00:
H. Development Agreement: AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density
Residential (115.65 acres), R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential)
(50.17 acres), TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) (65.60
acres), TN-C (Traditional Neighborhood Center) (20.71 acres) and
R-2 (Low Density Residential) (35.21 acres) and L-O (Limited
Office) (3.48 acres) for South Ridae Subdivision by James L.
Jewett - south side of Overland Road between Linder Road and
Ten Mile Road:
I. Contract Change Order with Ideal Demolition Services. LLC for
Asbestos Abatement and Demolition:
J. Approve New Beer and Liauor Licenses for Neil K. Gu dba
Idaho Steakhouse at 3560 N. Eagle Road:
De Weerd: Okay. I don't get emotional about land use, so I'm okay the rest of the
meeting. Sometimes I don't. Staff might not agree. Okay. Item 6 is our Consent
Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: As I stated earlier, Item E has been asked to be tabled to June 5th, 2007. With
that change I move that we approve the Consent Agenda as published and for the
Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all papers.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda as changed.
If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 5 of 36
Item 7:
Department Reports:
A. Legal Department:
1. Discussion of SWAC Recommendation and Presentation
by the Idaho Food Bank on food pick up program for the
Meridian Food Bank:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 7 is our department reports and we will hear Item A
with our legal department.
Baird: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Mr. Nary informed me that
although this is underneath the legal department, we have some folks in the audience
who are much more knowledgeable about the program. One of them is a member of
the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, Councilmember Rountree. We also have Roger
Simon in the audience from the Idaho Food Bank. So, if it's all right with
Council member Rountree, I'll turn it over to you, perhaps, to introduce the program and
Mr. Simon.
Rountree: Thank you. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee reviews applications to
utilize funds generated through the city recycle program and as you all know our recycle
program is to provide benefit back to the community in some form of recycling, whether
it be park benches for schools or parks or public areas that are made of recycled
material or in this particular application recycling food materials that would normally or
eventually go into the landfill. It's a unique application and one that we spent
considerable time talking about. Roger is here tonight to tell us about the Idaho Food
Bank and what the application is about and how they propose to utilize the funds that
are being requested and the number of pounds of food stuffs that will go to the
community -- and emphasizing Meridian -- and not end up in the landfill. So, in that
regard that's how we tied it to recycle, because the net result is to minimize the amount
of solid waste going into our land and being generated by our community. So, with that
introduction I'd like Roger to speak to the application and you can ask him questions
about the Food Bank. Very interesting program. We learned a lot when we heard from
him several weeks ago.
De Weerd: Well, Roger, we appreciate you being here with us tonight and look forward
to what you have to say.
Simon: My pleasure. And I also want to thank our last speaker for moving the mike
down. Greatly appreciated. I am Roger Simon, I'm executive director of the Idaho Food
Bank and Mayor and Members of the City Council, I thank you for putting me on the
agenda tonight. Several years ago the United States Department of Agriculture did an
assessment and came up with 96 billion pounds of food a year are wasted, perfectly
fine food that ends up in the landfill, ends up being tilled back under, that for whatever
reason or another does not make it either to market or to the home. Ironically,
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 6 of 36
America's second harvest the largest network of hunger relief in this entire country
distributes over two billion pounds. A small amount of what is wasted. As was
mentioned to you before, the Idaho Food Bank is proposing to reduce a portion of that
waste right here in Meridian by working closely with the Albertson's store and Fred
Meyer store, we will take produce products, meat products, and dairy products that
would have ended up in the landfill and redirect those right back within the community
with a first right of refusal to the Meridian Food Bank, secondly, to Tomorrow's Hope,
which is another agency of ours, and after that should those agencies not want that
product, make use of it with still other agencies within the area to assure that that
product is not wasted. By reducing that waste we are taking your whole concept of
recycling to a whole different level. Certainly it is not a park bench. Certainly it's not
something you may sit on. However, after being better nourished people will use those
park benches, people will utilize the other parts of our community here. It is a
partnership that helps to reduce waste. You're taking a step in a new direction and I
commend you for that. And certainly it does take a lot of conversation to break that
mold. However, we have a very serious problem. Right here in Idaho we have the
eighth highest rate of hunger in this entire nation. That's inexcusable. And that's not
somewhere else. That's not in Idaho Falls or in Salmon or up in Coeur d'Alene, it's
here, and it's not visible. We don't wear signs. We don't have scarlet letters on saying
that we are hungry or that we are doing without. What happens is that we have juggling
occurring every month on utility bills and food and drugs and everything else. The
products that we will be able to secure over 200,000 pounds during the year of your
support will directly go to help nourish people. We are not talking about the junk foods,
if you will. We are talking about the food that it's so hard for the Food Bank to come up
with. Right now what's going on in our industries is the food industry is becoming far
more efficient, which they have to be. That means that the food we used to be able to
bring in from manufacturers, overruns, partial fills, different things like that, has dried up.
They have also found other markets for that. The Dollar Stores, the liquidation stores,
places like that, where now food that used to be donated is now being sold. So, people
who were in need, who used to get that food for free, are now buying it and now
stretching that dollar even further. Your support will take not just that type of food, but,
more importantly, take very nourishing food, take fresh fruits and vegetables, things that
have become out of hand for a lot of us to afford, and provide that directly to those that
need it. Your support will make a difference and it will be an ongoing level of support.
And also something for you to think about as we talked about -- I guess it was a couple
weeks ago -- is that this provides the City of Meridian an opportunity to market itself a
little bit in a different way, too, in terms of doing something different. You talked before,
Mayor, about the joy, the pleasure you get with the work that you have done with the
citizens here, with the children here, with teenagers as they are developing. This is a
whole different level of joy, because what we are able to do is provide for the foundation
of our community. The children that learn, the two young women that you were able to
honor tonight would not be here if they were undernourished. They simply would not
have been here, because the first thing you hear is not the teacher, it's the stomach.
Our efforts together can help make that difference, working closely with Meridian Food
Bank across the street, Tomorrow's Hope, other agencies, we will take good food that
would have gone to waste and find homes for it. That's what your support is about. I'd
Meridian City Council
May 22,2007
Page 7 of 36
love to respond to some questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. I would mention that those two young ladies were leaders in
our hauling for hunger food drive last October for the make a difference day project.
They raised 5,000 dollars for the food bank and also collected over 2,000 pounds of
food, so -- and contributed or found a donor for the sign that is hanging on the Meridian
Food Bank building right now. So, they have placed their mark in the fight against
hunger. So, I appreciate your words. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Thank you for your work to begin with. You mentioned that you have
assistance or a source from Albertson's and Fred Meyer.
Simon: Correct.
Zaremba: Have WinCo and Wal-Mart been approached or do they have some other
program that they deal with?
Simon: There are some national plans we have in place right now with Wal-Mart. We
talked about this also at our meeting. And I did a whole lot of side stepping at that point,
because we are working on some things nationally that I cannot go into. We are
running some model programs right now in some other parts of the country. I do work
on the national level also. We are waiting to get those going and, then, you will see
some amazing impact there. In terms of WinCo, that door is not closed yet, but more
importantly it's not fully open yet, and we will continue to open it. And I think that -- I
think every success that we have -- every partnership we all create brings us that much
closer and, then, suddenly it becomes more exciting for everybody to come on board.
You know, somebody has to take that first step, has to test the water. So far Albertson's
has locally and Fred Meyers have. I'm waiting for WinCo and others to come on board,
too. I'm patient.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: We have to be. Okay. Council, anything further? Thank you for your--
Simon: My pleasure. I would like to thank you all for what you have done and
encourage you to get engaged with the Idaho Food Bank or with the Meridian Food
Bank, somehow be active. Last -- was it two weeks ago, week and a half ago, was the
letter carrier's food drive right across the street here for collecting food. Hopefully, a lot
you helped make a difference that day. You can do it day in and day out and thank you
for what you do. Appreciate it.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 8 of 36
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, you have a recommendation in front of you from our
SW AC. I will need a motion to approve.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the recommendation from SWAC to
support the application from Idaho Food Bank.
Zaremba: Second.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and two seconds. Any discussion? Mr. Berg, will
you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 8:
Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you so much. Thank you again. We appreciate your leadership on
this. Okay. Council, there were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 9:
Continued Public Hearing from May 15, 2007: For the Purpose of
Reviewing and Considering Fee Changes authorized in Title 9, Chapter 1
Water Use and Service, and Title 9, Chapter 4 Sewer Use and Service of
Meridian City Code including Proposed Changes to water and wastewater
assessment, water meters and appurtenances, water system itemized
damage fees, and water and sewer user rates:
Item 10:
Resolution No.
: Public Works Rate Change:
De Weerd: Items 9 and 10 have been requested to continue to June 5th.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, do we need a motion to that effect?
De Weerd: Yes, please.
Zaremba: I move we continue the public hearings, Item 9 and Item 10 to our regularly
scheduled meeting of June 5, 2007.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 9 and 10 to June
5th, 2007. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 9 of 36
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 11:
Public Hearing: VAC 07-008 Request for a Vacation of the City of
Meridian utility easement common to Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 1 of the Fallon
Greens Subdivision for Hampton Inn and Suites by Tealey Land
Surveying - 815 & 875 South Allen Street and 2870 East Freeway:
De Weerd: Item 11 has also been requested to be continue to June 19th and we will
open this Public Hearing and ask Council for a motion to continue.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we continue Item 11 VAC 07-008 for Hampton Inn and Suites to our
regularly scheduled meeting of June 19th, 2007.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 11 to the 19th of
June. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 12:
Item 13:
Public Hearing: CPA 07-007 Request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan Future Land Use Map for the future Ten Mile Interchange area to
modify various future land uses designations and to create several new
future land use designations for the Ten Mile Area Comprehensive Plan
Amendment by the City of Meridian Planning Department - generally
bordered by Linder Road to the east, McDermott Road to the west, the
Union Pacific Railroad Line to the north and ~ mile south of Overland
Road to the south:
Public Hearing: CPA 07-008 Request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan by adding the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan as an
addendum to the Comprehensive Plan for the Ten Mile Specific Area
Plan Text by the City of Meridian Planning Department - generally
bordered by Linder Road to the east, McDermott Road to the west, the
Union Pacific Railroad Line to the north and ~ mile south of Overland
Road to the south:
De Weerd: Items 12 -- Mr. Baird, probably separately?
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we actually discussed this this
afternoon with the planning department and it's our recommendation that you open both
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 10 of 36
hearings, Items 12 and 13, since there is a factual nexus and, then, once you have
closed the hearings take separate motions for each item.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, I will go ahead and open the two public
hearings on Items 12 and 13, CPA 07-007 and CPA 07-008. Just to give a process to
those who might be here to testify, we begin with introduction of the project from our
staff and, then, we will ask for testimony from citizens who would like to provide
comment. If you are a spokesperson for a subdivision or a homeowners association,
you will be allowed ten minutes and other than that it's three minutes for public
testimony. So, staff, I will start with you.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are excited to bring to you tonight
the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan. Just got to get the right slide going here. There we go.
Here we are. It is located between the railroad tracks from about a half mile south --
and down to about a half mile south of Overland and from Linder over to McDermott, as
shown on this slide. The applications before you tonight are Comprehensive Plan
amendment -- map and text amendment. Is that rain? Wow.
De Weerd: But it's sunny.
Canning: I'm going to pass it over to Pete. We are going to do kind of back and forth
on it, a tag team here. Pete is going to go over our existing Comprehensive Plan for the
area, as well as the proposed plan and some of the text.
Friedman: Anna, thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. What I'd like to
do is kind of just walk you briefly through the designations as they currently exist on the
land use and future land use map for our Comprehensive Plan for the study area and,
then, I'll walk you through the recommended changes to that map and, then, highlight
some of the points of the plan before I hand it back to Anna to go over some of the
outstanding issues for your consideration tonight. So, as you can see, the study area is
outlined in red. This is an enlargement of the study area from our future land use map
in the Comprehensive Plan. Right now the land use designations in it are low density
residential, industrial, this is high density residential, more industrial. We have two
commercial designations down here just south of where the future interchange is going
to be. We have industrial south of the freeway and a neighborhood center. We have
medium density residential here, low density residential here. But the largest
designation currently in the planning area is mixed use regional and, as you know, that
contemplates a mix of use of retail, employment, and residential. But our plan currently
doesn't go into much specifics. So, this is the specific future land use map contained in
the Ten Mile plan. On the surface, if you look at the types of uses we are proposing,
there is not a lot of difference in the uses, but as we dig down deeper -- and this clearly
was the intent of the Council when they -- when they approved the funds to embark on
this planning process, what our Ten Mile plan does is really articulates and refines the
uses that have already been identified for this area and, then, sets a new direction for
what has been currently planned there. The specific area plan actually introduces six
new designations for our Comprehensive Plan, starting with the lifestyle center, which is
Meridian City Council
May 22,2007
Page 11 of 36
a very high intensity, mixed use, retail, employment, hopefully, residential concept in
urban development. We have high density employment, another new designation. We
have mixed employment and we also have medium density -- medium high density
residential, as well as mixed use commercial and mixed use residential. Those are six
new designations that we would be adding to our land use map and through the text of
the Ten Mile plan. I think the biggest difference that this plan has between it and the
existing plan is that it contemplates a planned collector road network, it contemplates a
future transition station up here along the rail line. It also emphasizes economic
development, as well as residential development. It anticipates a more compact urban
form, with a variety of housing choices, more so than we have anywhere in the city
today and relies heavily on mixed use. It tries to get away from the segregation of
separating residential from commercial from employment and tried to pull them together
so that people have opportunities to live near where they work, to be able to walk to
where they want to shop or entertain themselves or recreate. It's a reliance on
pedestrian connections, so we are not isolated from the various uses within the area.
And it, finally, really gets into more so than anything else in our Comprehensive Plan
about design. Design. Design. Design. You know, you look at the plan, you have a
land use and transportation section, but equally you also have a very strong section that
focuses on design and that is everything from building form right down to street furniture
and how buildings are aligned along our streets and how they relate from one area to
another. So, it's a -- as you know, it's a new direction in comprehensive planning for the
city. It was a very inclusive and intensive process, it was an exciting process, one that
many people took part in, including yourselves, the Planning and Zoning Commission,
property owners. We coordinated continuously with our transportation partners, with
our other agencies, like police and fire, the utilities, and everybody had a part,
everybody had a say, and, hopefully, some people actually even had fun in developing
this plan. So, it's been an exciting process and I think it lays the groundwork for an
exciting future for the next phase of development of the City of Meridian. So, that's just
an overview of the relationship of the planned land uses to the existing land use
designations in the area and I think Anna has some more comments about some of the
issues that were brought forward to you from the Planning Commission's record.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, before -- I'll come back to this slide.
The Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item two times. They recommended
approval at their April 19th, 2007, Public Hearing. At that hearing a number of folks
spoke in favor and requested specific changes. They included Kevin McCarthy, Jim
Jewett, Jim Mashburn, David Turnbull, Steve Bainbridge. No one spoke in opposition.
John Peterson commented. And we received written testimony from Steve Bainbridge
and the Ada County Highway District. The key issues of discussion by the Commission
were specific changes to the land use designation by the owners testifying at the two
meetings and we can go through those, start -- we will go from north to south. One was
a change from high -- from medium density residential to high density residential and
that person currently has a designation of high density residential. Another one was a
change from mixed use residential to mixed use commercial. Another one was from
medium density residential to also mixed use commercial. There was discussion about
the second access point to Ten Mile in the area Pete's indicating and whether that
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 12 of 36
would be a full access or just right-in, right-out. And, then, on the south side of the
freeway there was discussion about, you know, where would you have a gas station. In
this whole planning area there was really no place that would accommodate a kind of
auto-oriented use, such as a gas station. So, those were the issues raised by the
owners. And, then, there was an additional issue raised by staff. We had an overlap
between the South Meridian Area Plan and the Ten Mile Area Plan and because we are
rethinking many of the -- many of the options that the city might have in the South
Meridian Area Plan, we felt it was perhaps better to leave this area off of that map for
now and to include that in the South Meridian Area Plan. So, the recommendation that
you have from the Commission does not include the overlap area as shown in the
hatched area there. The Commission also discussed and recommended a right-in,
right-out access at that planned intersection that I had mentioned before, with Ten Mile
and that future collector south of Franklin Road. So, the key Commission changes to
staff's recommendation were they removed the overlap with the south Meridian area, as
you can see there. We are only on the east side of Ten Mile now. They also changed
the land use designation from medium high density residential to mixed use commercial
on the south side of Franklin Road, just west of Linder Road, and that was at the
request of Steve Bainbridge and Dave Connolly. And that continues kind of that Hark's
Corner and then, we had another development there, addition to Hark's Corner and this
would kind of continue that little commercial area, though. And there was a commitment
by that property owner that they understood that even though they had a commercial
designation, they may not have a lot of access to Franklin at that area. The Planning
Commission also changed the land use designation from medium high density
residential to high density residential on the north side of Franklin Road between Ten
Mile Road and Black Cat per Jim Mashburn's testimony. I think you can see that
triangular piece there. There was a -- they changed the land use designation from
mixed use residential to mixed use commercial on the southeast corner of Ten Mile
Road and Franklin Road at the request of the David Turnbull and, again, as you read
through the designations of the mixed use residential and the mixed commercial, there
is -- there is -- they are very similar. It's just what the emphasis is on and, obviously, the
emphasis is more on commercial at that -- for the mixed use commercial and there are
some more opportunities. There staff expressed some concerns, because the original
idea was to create kind of a main street along the collector road there, but Mr. Turnbull
was on record of saying that he would still develop that corridor there and have that
main street character along there, even with the additional area for the mixed use
commercial. They also -- the Commission also changed the land use designation from
medium high density residential to mixed use commercial south of 1-84 and east of Ten
Mile per Jim Jewett's request. And that had -- that piece of property, because it has
access on basically two arterials, would have always had to have had some sort of
automobile direct access to an arterial for automobiles. So it did make sense to have
an automobile oriented use in that area. Or more commercial. Now -- so those were
the -- this is the Commission recommended future land use map. Now, we've had some
additional testimony and we have -- or not testimony, but some additional comments,
property owners that have come in to talk to staff and we thought it was appropriate to
kind outline some of those changes for you. You all received a copy from -- a letter --
copy of a letter from the Ada County Highway District, dated May 11 th, 2007. This was
Meridian City Council
May 22. 2007
Page 13 of 36
identical to a letter submitted in the record at the Commission hearing, actually, the
night of the hearing. It -- it was a letter we had seen and Mr. Friedman has addressed
those issues in a separate memo. And I will also talk about those under the outstanding
issues, but that is an additional piece of testimony we have received. And I just
received an e-mail from Peter Oliver, but he is here and I'm sure he will reiterate his
concerns on record tonight, so I won't go into detail on that. Staff also met with David
Roberts and Brad Janicek, two property owners within the study area. The outstanding
issues before Council -- some of them are just asking you to verify that it was okay for
us to do what we did. The first one being the removal of the area south of 1-84 and west
of Ten Mile Road from the plan as recommended by staff and the Commission. Again,
this is an overlap with the South Meridian Plan, which is still under consideration by the
Commission. That hearing has been continued to the November 1 st, 2007, hearing.
So, we are also holding another public workshop for the south Meridian planning area
and that will be on May 31 st at Mary McPhearson Elementary. We will continue to work
with those property owners within that study area. The second item is consideration of
the written comments from ACHD. Their main points were -- they did request that the
first intersection north of the interchange be moved farther north. We have been
working with our consultant and they have been working with ITD on that interchange
and that first access after the interchange we feel that that's left with those individuals to
resolve and come up with a suitable solution for that. And, again, this is -- although it's
more specific than our current Comprehensive Plan, this is just a vision document. It's
not setting in stone those locations and there is certainly opportunity for those agencies
to coordinate their needs and find out the appropriate location for that intersection. The
memo from ACHD also discussed the funding of the impact fee structure and
implementation for the planned collector road network. We had -- our consultants had
discussed those items with the ACHD and perhaps they are not worded exactly right,
but, again, this is a starting point to go forward and those were just kind of a list that we
can begin to discuss these implementation tools and as I have discussed with Council,
implementing this plan and coming up with the necessary tools to make this real is high
priority for fiscal year '08 for the planning department. The third major one was the --
portraying the alignment of Overland Road as premature. And, again, we felt like ACHD
had asked us to take a -- to move forward with this plan, so that they could move
forward in the final approval of that and with the South Ridge Subdivision the Council
did take that step and discuss this realignment as being appropriate for the area,
moving forward. So, we did feel that those ACHD concerns can be address in the
future and that they just help -- this plan will help to move those issues forward. Finally,
the outstanding issue of confirmation that future development occurring in the areas
designated as mixed use commercial on the east side of the Ten mile, extending north
from the Lifestyle center, this planned transit station would be designed and constructed
as a main street. I talked to you about this before and there was that commitment by
Mr. Turnbull that that would occur. That main street form emphasizes to building
constructed to the edge of sidewalk, thereby framing that street and pedestrian scaled
building frontages, vertically integrated, mixed use, and on-street parking. So, that was
one of the outstanding issues. I need to mention that we worked with Mr. Janicek -- as
you will note the -- there is a green way that was following the trunk line, sewer trunk
line, and Mr. Janicek came in and kindly pointed out to us that that's not the easement
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 14 of 36
he gave the City of Meridian and maybe we want to move that parkway. So, we have
developed an alternative for that piece of property that incorporates the correct
alignment of the trunk line and that -- that green path above it. And what we did -- and I
can kind of toggle back and forth a couple times. Mr. Janicek's parcel, which Pete will
kind of point out right there, it was a mix of mixed use commercial and mixed use
residential and the idea was to get, again, kind of a main street feel heading east-west
from Ten Mile Road and to center it on that green space, so that you could have
restaurants and kind of have a -- make that part of that commercial experience on that
greenbelt there. When the greenbelt moved -- oops. Wrong way. We felt it was
important to recognize that that mixed use commercial designation just should follow it
as well, rather than the mixed use residential, to kind of open up more opportunities
along there. So, we have turned most of that property now into mixed use commercial,
instead of mixed use residential and, again, I'll flip back and forth one more time, so you
can see that change. So, this is just staff revised -- if Council would like to do that on
that piece of property, again, this was not part of the recommendation by the Planning
and Zoning Commission, but because staff had missed the realignment of that
easement we felt it was important that the plan reflect the correct easement. And with
that I'll answer any questions -- or Pete will answer any questions that Council may
have. And our consultant from the HDR team, Don Galligan, is here to answer any
questions as well.
De Weerd: Anna, I just have one. Okay. On the low wedge that is north of Franklin
and west of Ten Mile, just the -- no. Over. Where it goes to high density residential.
Did you say that is already high density residential?
Canning: Yes, ma'am, it is. And the -- the property to the -- on the reverse side of that
triangle was developed under a high density residential Comp Plan designation, but the
densities they achieved are still within the medium high density residential and that's
why staff originally and the consultants originally had it as medium high density
residential, but it's a new category for the city.
De Weerd: Okay. So, if it's -- if it was medium, why are we changing it?
Canning: No. It's currently -- in our current Comprehensive Plan it's high. But we don't
have medium high in the current Comprehensive Plan. So, this is a new category. And
I'm still not answering your question.
De Weerd: It's already zoned.
Canning: No. It was a request made by the property owner at the Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing and the Planning and Zoning Commission responded to that
request.
De Weerd: And is that staff's feeling as well?
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 15 of 36
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, triangular pieces of property are
difficult to get any kind of density on, just because they don't typically layout very well.
The applicant will have a hard time achieving that kind of density that -- on that property
because of that reason. To be truthful, though, staff is a little concerned -- the last
testimony that Mr. Mashburn made was that he was asking for high density residential
so that he could ask for commercial on that property. So, that concerns staff a little bit.
That was a very last moment thing that occurred at the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
De Weerd: So, if it's high density -- and, I'm sorry, I'm continuing to beat a dead horse,
but if it is high density residential, they can do commercial on it?
Canning: And I'm going to have to pitch to Pete a little bit on that.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council members, currently the intent of the high density
residential is just that, it is for higher density residential development, primarily
apartments, maybe ownership-type uses, condominiums or so forth. The plan talks a
little bit about the possibility of perhaps ground floor, nonresidential, but it kind of does
that as a continuing threat throughout the plan. I think in the zealousness to achieve a
mixed use flavor to it, clearly it's something that we were going to have to look at in
terms of the implementation when we go to apply zoning to it. Under our current zoning
you wouldn't be allowed to have commercial in our high density residential districts. So,
overall, the intent of the high density in this plan, as well as in our current
Comprehensive Plan, is still to maintain it a residential land use designation to be
implemented with a residential zoning district.
De Weerd: Okay. I remember the piece of property to the east of that wedge, but --
okay. Council, any questions for staff?
Bird: I have none at this time.
De Weerd: Okay. No?
Zaremba: I may have some later. I'm anxious to hear public testimony.
De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to proVide
testimony on this application. Yes, sir. It can be for or against, sir. If you will, please,
state your name and address for the record.
Shoemaker: Mel Shoemaker. 1620 South Ten Mile.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mel.
Shoemaker: And, basically, it looks to me like the die is cast by all other parties in this
whole deal, but I am a hundred percent opposed to it and a hundred percent against it.
I think it's -- it's an ill-conceived plan. That's my opinion. I think that interchange is in
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 16 of 36
the wrong spot and I know you folks don't think that way, but I certainly do. I think
you're building an interchange that's going to be very green unfriendly. I think it's going
to promote traffic stacking. I think it lacks a major amount of forethought. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Additional testimony? If you would, please, state your
name and address for the record.
Oliver: Peter Oliver. 12601 West Explorer Drive, Suite 200.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Oliver: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, first of all, I just want to say thank you
for the opportunity to be here tonight and also for this plan. We support it. We are
actively involved with it and look forward to seeing it come to fruition. I did send an e-
mail to Anna earlier and we do appreciate the flexibility on the corner of Franklin and
Ten Mile. And while this is primarily focused on the land uses, we would like the
opportunity to explore the potential of a full access point on the first intersection there
south of Franklin and as mentioned to Anna in our meeting, we are willing to commit the
resources to do the necessary studies and the research to see if that is feasible and the
best thing to do there. We would like to have that on the record and we would like to
have the opportunity to explore that knowing that we are going to have to work with the
city further, as well as the ITD and ACHD. And also I would like to reiterate that we are
committed to the streetscape that Anna mentioned on that collector that does connect
down through to Ten Mile off of Franklin. So, just wanted to put that out there for future
discussion and be open to any questions you might have for us.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Oliver: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. If you will, please, state your name and address for the
record.
Meyer: Mayor, City Council Members, thank you for letting me speak. My name is
Shirley Meyer. I have an assisted living home at 3610 West Lamont. We are two-
tenths of a mile from Ten Mile and two-tenths of a mile from the proposed interchange.
Ten Mile at this point in time is a mini freeway or a parking lot. We are totally unable to
get out onto Ten Mile from Lamont at peak traffic times. I have sensed -- in the last
year I have moved to Nampa, because the traffic there where we live on Lamont and
near Ten Mile sucks. So, I totally approve of what you're doing with the Ten Mile
interchange. And I appreciate it, because I think we will get a lot of use out of it. Where
I have my small business we need that interchange. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 17 of 36
De Weerd: Please remind ITD that you support that.
Meyer: Yes, I will, Mayor.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: We will enlist your support.
De Weerd: Yes, sir. If you will, please, state your name.
Jeppsen: Bryce Jeppsen. 3789 Silver Terrace Road. Right there. I certainly agree. I
like what you're doing. I'm just a little bit concerned about --
De Weerd: Sir, if you can take that microphone right there. We need to be --
Bird: There is a pointer there, too, if you want.
Jeppsen: Where?
De Weerd: There is a pointer on the--
Jeppsen: Oh. Okay. That -- where that road connects onto Ten Mile -- I believe this is
Lamont right here that Ms. Meyer was talking about. If this medium density -- this is
medium density housing here. I understand there is to be about a thousand houses put
in here and is the access to Ten Mile going to be here? I understand this won't be an
access point.
De Weerd: That's as I understand it.
Jeppsen: Right. So, all of the traffic that wants to get onto this interchange will come
right here. That's going to load up this point and the traffic that wants to come down
Ten Mile to get onto the interchange is going to come down here. That means that Ten
Mile is going to be fairly full. There is probably going to be a traffic light here. What's
the chance of people coming on Lamont won't ever get on Ten Mile. She mentions it's
a parking lot now. You're going to get considerably worse. You have got a lot of people
that live over here and there is a lot of people over in here that are going to depend
upon Lamont to get onto Ten Mile. This is a natural road that already exists. This is an
artificial road that somebody has decided to put in, a builder, a developer, without any
thought to what is already in place. And my objection -- and much testimony that was
given -- not testimony, but much concern was expressed in meetings before this one
that I didn't hear any mention of tonight, is that this road is in the wrong spot. Why isn't
this road intersecting with Lamont, beefing this intersection up with a light, thereby
making this access point having equal weight with this access point? That's my
comment.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 18 of 36
De Weerd: Pete, maybe you can address that as best as we can.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council members. Yes, I can. As we stated in
our background information that we have provided to you, as we have indicated in this
plan that the proposed realignment of Ten Mile is that it's a proposed realignment. It is
conceptual. There is a couple of things that have been running parallel with our
planning process, but the south Meridian specific area plan, as well as the south
Meridian transportation plan that ACHD is working on, one of the things that ACHD has
decided to do is to expand the scope of that south Meridian transportation plan. They
are going to be starting another public process on the Overland Road realignment, as
well as the potential extension to the west. A couple of concerns. I think one of the first
things everybody looked at was -- you're correct, sir, when you say that it might be a
natural extension to have it line up with Lamont. I believe one of the things that the
transportation -- or the highway district will need to look at as part of that is Lamont has
multiple accesses on it now, so there is questions of putting more traffic, particularly
from a realigned Overland onto Lamont. There is a couple of developed properties that
would probably have to go through, but as part of that study and as part of our
investigation -- and Don maybe can help me out, too, because he's our transportation
consultant -- carry Ten Mile -- or carry, I'm sorry, Overland straight through where it
currently is, you would be bringing it right into the face of a future interchange and that
doesn't work and it would be too close to move it anywhere just a bit to the south. Also,
if you were to carry it somehow through there, you would, then, be going right through
the middle of the Tasa neighborhood and the district would be required to acquire a lot
of properties at a great expense. So, for a lot of factors it was determined that it should
be realigned. It can't move too much farther north from its location now due to some
topographical issues, so I think what I'm hearing as at least the highway district moved
forward with their planning, is that they will be examining precise locations and I can't
speak for the district, but I -- you know, if I was going to be looking at alternatives,
certainly an alignment with Lamont, in addition to another alignment would seem
reasonable.
De Weerd: I'm sorry, sir, we can't have the -- thank you, Pete.
Jeppsen: The whole point was that if you don't think about what you do to Lamont,
you're going to -- you're going to take a normal natural arterial that's used today by a lot
of people and you're going to close it down. There will be no access to that
interchange.
De Weerd: I think the discussion has been -- and we have to rely on our transportation
experts, because we don't have road authority, and, like staff said this is conceptual as
far as the roads go. We depend on Ada County Highway District and ITD on those
alignments, but what has -- what I have heard is they would be connecting Lamont to
that point, so that you would have a light access to it for that safety aspect.
Jeppsen: And you're going to have Ten Mile with a light every hundred feet.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 19 of 36
De Weerd: No. That is why they are stating a road infrastructure today, so -- and our
ideal is have that road infrastructure in before development so it is done right and it is
done according to that plan. And I guess that's what is unique and what I appreciate
about what staff and all of those that have participated is we are trying to do this area
right and I think we have learned lessons from other points of our community and the
valley that we'd like to apply those lessons here and we are working to make this so it
doesn't negatively impact anyone.
Jeppsen: Well, thank you.
De Weerd: Minimally. I know you can't do it one hundred percent, but we are trying to
do this planning area as correctly as we can.
Jeppsen: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. We appreciate your concern. Yes, sir. I'm sorry, Shirley, once
you testify--
Galligan: Don Galligan with HGR Engineering, 412 East Park Center Boulevard in
Boise. I did want to clarify this connection here. The existing alignment of Overland is
planned as a right-in, right-out access. So, as this area, essentially, accesses the
arterial network during the morning commute, they would be able to access at this point
with a right-out only and that gives significant relief to this intersection. When we
analyzed it, we look at cue lengths and the level of service that we were able to achieve
here was level of service C, which is acceptable to ACHD standards. And we wouldn't
be able to achieve that if we were cuing up passed the current alignment here. So, I
just wanted to throw that out for clarification. And that was based on a 2030 forecasted
model. So, it should be good for the next 20 years -- 20 plus years.
De Weerd: And you were trying to plan how some of the existing accesses would
connect to that point?
Galligan: In what sense, Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Well, Lamont.
Galligan: Right.
De Weerd: How does it get to a safe intersection?
Galligan: Well, it's interesting that we kind of took this portion of the plan out, because
we did show Overland extending through and, then, some additional collector access --
there we go. Some additional collector access that would service through to Lamont, so
-- on that as well. So, that was how we initially addressed it. But, then, as we -- as we
looked at this piece as part of the south Meridian area plan, then, we -- you know, those
connections are -- still need to be determined at this point.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 20 of 36
De Weerd: And is a goal with the south Meridian plan and the roadway plan?
Galligan: As far as I know. I'm not doing that one, so--
De Weerd: The right answer is yes?
Galligan: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay. And is that why, Anna, some of that was pulled out?
Canning: Exactly, ma'am. That's what I was going to say, that part of that south
Meridian transportation study was even questioning whether they wanted to extend
Overland or not. So, ACHD will answer that question of whether it's necessary,
practical, feasible to extend Overland on the west side of Ten Mile.
De Weerd: And for the folks that are interested in those answers tonight, if this moves
forward that still will adjust as that plan flushes those issues out?
Canning: Yes. Although we did look at that location quite a bit and there is some room
for it to move, but I think it's -- they did look at totally relocating it to Lamont and that
wasn't really feasible as part -- it was determined that that wasn't really feasible. So,
there is some room to move it, but it's probably not going to move all the way down to
Lamont on the east side of Ten Mile, it's more likely that some roadway system will be
built to get them up to a light on the west side.
De Weerd: So, they are right now dealing primarily with the west side and how to
connect?
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree, did you have a question?
Rountree: I will have a question for staff after.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there further testimony?
Roberts: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Dave Roberts, 744
Kaibab Trail Drive in Meridian. I'm one of the owners of the parcel of ground on the
northeast corner Franklin and Ten Mile. Right here. I was, unfortunately, out of town on
business during the April 19th meeting at Planning and Zoning and wasn't able to
testify. We are in support of this overall concept and the plan and like some of the
design guidelines and requirements what this could be in the future for the City of
Meridian. However, we do want to respectfully request that this portion right here be
changed from mixed use residential to mixed use commercial. I have met with staff,
discussed this designation, believe that mixed use commercial more actually reflects the
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 21 of 36
future use for that for a couple different reasons. One is on Ten Mile. We have just
gone through a right of way acquisition with ACHD and during that they did grant us
three commercial accesses on Ten Mile -- on that road already to the property that
match and align with the accesses on the west side of the property that have previously
been granted by ACHD. Two of the neighbors to the south also request the same
designation and we think that that matches up that very well and that our property is on
the going home side both places and would be a very logical use more focused on
commercial versus residential. We are also in support of and we like this idea of the
spine road and the concept that's there and the kind of neighborhood and the
commercial neighborhood that can be created. We do have a little bit of concern with
that in that all of this property on our border to the east is already annexed and already
zoned in the city as industrial. So, I'm not sure how much weight this has with that,
since it's already zoned industrial and already annexed in the city and we think that the
commercial would be a better transmission with that industrial land versus the mixed
use residential. We are also willing -- you can see on the north part of our property
there is quite a bit that's labeled as civic for a park and ride and a potential transit
station. We are willing to work with the city and we, in fact, had an engineer draw up
some sample transit station parking and -- that would work in that area, but we are
concerned that just economically for the valley and I know there is a lot of talk of it, but
we think a lot of years away before that's really economically viable and don't want to be
locked in and stuck with that designation if that's something that's out, you know, 50
years and we need to develop that before then.
Canning: We also want to work with the city and just want to put it on record that this
corner where Ten Mile Creek is, is probably not a viable piece and we think that this --
when this whole west side of Meridian develops would be an incredible spot for signage
and just as a gateway for the City of Meridian coming into the town right there and want
to work with the city on that as well. And that's all my comments. I'd stand for any
questions if you have any.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions from Council? Thank you. Okay. Any
additional new testimony? Shirley, did you have additional comment?
Meyer: I wanted --
De Weerd: If you will just state -- restate your name.
Meyer: Shirley Meyer. 3610 West Lamont, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meyer: I would like to add to Mr. Jeppsen's comments on putting easier access for
Lamont. At this point in time at peak hours coming -- getting off of Lamont onto Ten
Mile, it's very difficult. Also, I wanted to point out that we do have at the Ridenbaugh,
since I don't -- I can't get that close without my glasses, I'm about the fourth lot in. I can
go point to it if you don't mind.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 22 of 36
Canning: I can.
Meyer: You know where I am, Anna. At the north end of my property there is a
wetlands. We have had deer in there and much wildlife. We are right there at the tip of
the Ridenbaugh. Please take that into consideration when we talk about extending
Overland Road through there. Thank you.
De Weerd: Oh. I'm sorry. Before I ask you to state your name, if there is a Thomas
Torras here, he signed up for Bellabrook and Bellabrook has been requested to
continue to June 5th, so just wanted not to waste your time if you're still here. Thank
you.
Davis: Hi. My name is Bruce Davis. Iljve at 4130 West Silver Terrace and I do have a
question pertaining to Overland. That's currently being developed out to a five lane right
there. The roadway, will this all be five lanes and eventually will that be five over to
Overland?
De Weerd: Sir, I believe five lanes to Ten Mile and what happens west of Ten Mile is
still not known.
Davis: Okay.
De Weerd: From the information I have heard is they did not want to make that through
to Black Cat, so it probably will not be a five lane if that is the decision. Okay. Any
further --
Zaremba: I would comment that farther down in the future that is a possibility. If and
when the interstate -- State Highway 16 aligns with McDermott, then, it would make
transportation sense to have Overland be an arterial all the way to McDermott.
De Weerd: It's hard to say what the plan will be.
Zaremba: This is like 50 to 70 years out.
De Weerd: Any further testimony?
McKay: Becky McKay with Engineering Solutions. 1029 North Rosario, Meridian.
Business address. I'm here this evening representing Mr. Janicek. His property is
located right here. He wanted me to ask a couple of questions concerning the
transportation. We have reviewed the plan and the map. We are pleased with the
modification here of the greenbelt matching up with the existing sewer line. The
questions that we would like answered as far as these collector roadways, it indicates
that this one is a right-in, right-out. It talks about this one being a full access. But our
question is on this second middle one, is that a right-in, right-out or is that a full access?
And I guess one of the concerns that I have is we can draw the collectors on the map,
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 23 of 36
but they don't -- that's not necessarily where they end up being built and we can't dictate
the order in which they are typically built. So, you know, the primary concern I would
have is this -- if Mr. Janicek's property were one of the first properties, obviously, to
develop, how would this property get access? Would, you know, this individual have to
go purchase this piece of property in order to build a collector?
De Weerd: Why don't I just first ask staff to answer the first question --
McKay; Before I move on?
De Weerd: Yes.
McKay: Thanks.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council members. The actual -- what appears to
be the first intersection north of the interchange is actually an underpass. That was a
design that our consultant came up with post charrette in order to increase the traffic
circulation in that area and to actually allow greater access to both property on the east
side and the west side. So, it is a little misleading. It is an underpass. So, where the
pointer is now is the first and only signalized intersection currently proposed north of the
interchange and that would be the seven leg intersection -- interchange, intersection.
And, then, the next one to the north would be the right-in, right-out unsignalized
intersection that Mr. Oliver was speaking to. I think Mrs. McKay has really resonated
on one of the issues that we have talked about and that is the challenge we face is
getting a coordinated collector system constructed and that certainly is a goal of this
plan. A few of the items that were listed in the implementation or action section on how
we might do that may be working with all the property owners in there to come up with
some mechanism to build it in advance, so that we don't have to rely on the first person
in the door being stuck with setting the alignment, setting the tone. That's one
possibility. An LID is a possibility. We are going to have to have some frank and
imaginative discussions with both the property owners and the highway district. But at
least the city's intent certainly is not to address development of the collector system as
we have done so in the past. Be proactive, get out in front of it and figure out a way to
at least get some of the alignments identified and the construction mechanisms and
funding mechanisms identified, so that it's not done piecemeal, so that there is some
certainty for everyone involved.
McKay: I think that answers my question. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further testimony?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I had a question for planning staff and Mr. Roberts brought
up and touched on what my question is and that's the proposed park and ride or civic
use for a future transit station north of Franklin and the timing of that in real terms and
we are not really looking at a 50 to 75 year plan here, we are looking out maybe 20, 25
years, hopefully. I don't disagree with the idea that we need to identify those spots, but I
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 24 of 36
know a lot of communities that have that far reaching need are adapting their plans to
allow something now that's going to be scraped in the future, as opposed to -- and I
think Mr. Roberts used the word tie up -- but to make it difficult to do something with that
piece of property for a rather long period of time. Is there is a way to describe maybe
that location or that classification to allow for a use on an interim period?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree, we have
talked about that and, again, there is so many details we need to work on with regard to
the implementation tools. In this area, that area east of Ten Mile and north of Franklin,
has a couple phasing issues associated with it. As Mr. Roberts pointed out, some of
that land is already zoned and annexed. It's the one portion where we do have that and
they may -- those property owners may decide -- they may see the benefit of using it for
the intent as stated in this plan or they may decide to have some industrial uses, but we
can certainly look at limiting those industrial uses to ones that didn't have a heavy
investment in the building and things like that as an interim use. And, likewise, on the
transit center, it may be feasible to -- for the city to work with the highway district to get
that purchased as a park and ride lot and, then, have that basically land banked for a
future transit site in that regard. So, there are some kind of interim uses we could do
that way and we can certainly look at some -- if that doesn't look feasible, we can look at
some other interim uses. But I think that that -- that area in particular is going to need to
be kind of -- we are going to need to have a plan in place for phasing if those industrial
property owners want to go for an industrial development in the near future, so --
Rountree: Thank you. That answered my other question as well.
Canning: Those industrial property owners have made their desires known with regard
to that and so we went through charrette knowing that that would be an issue.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I do have a couple of questions for staff that did not come up during some of
the other discussion. One is the dotted line making the connection here. I know there
has been some discussion about accessing this more or less main street design area by
having a separate right turn off of the interstate onto it, but the discussion I believe from
ITD was that that would actually have to be part of the off ramp, not a separate off ramp
and I didn't realize it had stayed in the plan. Am I interpreting what that dashed line is
correctly and what is the current status?
Friedman: Sure. Madam Mayor, Council members, that is more of a goal that is not
part of the current consideration of the design for the interchange. ITD and design
engineer made it very clear to us that that's not going to be part of the interchange
design and it was something that our consultant and we developed during charrette is
the possibility that maybe we could work with the future property owner or property
owner in the future. That property owner so far has indicated that -- less than warm
Meridian City Council
May 22,2007
Page 25 of 36
support of that idea. So, it's just a possibility. It's not cast in stone. And certainly if you
want us to remove that from the map we can do that, if that's something that you choose
to do on your -- when you vote on the plan.
Zaremba: Well, if it's ever to be viable, it probably needs to have the dashed line
remain, but is it likely to be viable? I can understand the reason for asking for it.
Friedman: And the question -- yeah, I mean right now, you know, I think we are just
hoping for the interchange, let alone some add-on to it.
Zaremba: Let's not complicate it is the point, I guess.
Friedman: That's true. That's true.
Zaremba: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I could probably address that question. That particular off
ramp was not included with the eight point study that would -- that allowed the Ten Mile
interchange to be considered. So, it would have to undergo another rather lengthy
study to even allow it. Could it happen in the future? Yes, there is precedent for that
kind of an off ramp in Boise at Cole Road into the mall. So, it wouldn't necessarily be
precluded, but it has to go through all of that bureaucracy, if you will, in order to be
allowed. And it's not part of the Ten Mile interchange concept that was approved by the
Federal Highway Administration.
Zaremba: Well, that helps me decide. I don't wouldn't hold up the Ten Mile
interchange.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: It wouldn't hold it up, though, if we just had a dotted line on a planning map.
Rountree: No. No, Madam Mayor, it would not.
Canning: And, Madam Mayor, on the other side, just to let you know what the property
owner told us, because there is currently a sewer easement also going through the
property I think that's at an angle also that they didn't want to have to divide up the
property yet again into more triangles and as I mentioned earlier, triangles don't really
accommodate square buildings very well. So, they indicated that they would not be
pursuing that.
De Weerd: Buildings don't all have to be square.
Canning: That's true.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 26 of 36
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: Different subject. I heard the beginning of a subject about having gas
stations and auto oriented businesses somewhere near the interchange and I either
zoned out or missed any resolution to that. It seems to me a reasonable request that an
interstate interchange should have interstate interchange kind of businesses along it,
restaurants and gas stations and things that would attract through traffic to leave some
money in Meridian. What was the conclusion of that?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, when we
undertook the planning charrette the primary vision for it was to not be like every other
interchange that -- every other -- two. We have got two. Sorry. The other interchanges
that we currently have that are very geared toward catering to the -- the transient auto
population going through. So, it wasn't to do that, it was to be an employment or
lifestyle center, things like that. What Mr. Jewett brought up was, that's okay, he bought
into that vision, but where is anybody going to fill up their car with gas? There just
wasn't even a place to do that simple kind of local servicing, not necessarily serving the
freeway 1-84 traffic, but serving the folks that are on their way to work. And so the
resolution was that it could be here at the corner of Overland and Ten Mile -- relocated
Overland and Ten Mile. Or for ACHD tentatively shown proposed relocated Overland
and Ten Mile.
Zaremba: I guess I thought that was the fire station, but maybe I have misplaced that.
Canning: The fire station is about right there.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Now, Anna, I guess if this does move forward there was legislation passed
this last session on -- it's called the Star legislation and it allows road improvements that
qualify -- and I don't know if they are all state or if some of them could be local --
qualified to be built with these dollars and, then, paid back through sales tax, depending
on who they attract in that area. And so I don't know if it's something that might be a
viable solution for that area, but certainly worth researching.
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 27 of 36
De Weerd: And Peter might have further knowledge on that, but I think it's certainly
something that we can look at as a possible tool. Okay. Do you know what it was
totally called, Charlie?
Rountree: I don't remember the title name.
De Weerd: I do know it was Star.
Canning: Was that the supporting -- does Star refer to something in particular?
De Weerd: Probably is an acronym.
Canning: Okay.
Rountree: It's an acronym for the name for -- in the bill.
De Weerd: I could make something up if you wanted me to.
Canning: No, not necessary, ma'am, we will find out what it was.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I guess I would like to make some further discussion about the northeast
corner of Ten Mile and Franklin and the distinction between mixed use residential and
mixed use commercial I guess is one of degree. And my thinking of mixed use is that it
would incorporate some elements of commercial and some elements of residential. All
mixed use would do that. The difference between mixed use commercial is that it tends
to emphasize more commercial and less residential, but still has a residential
component. Mixed use residential is the other way around. And my recollection is the
original thinking that made us come up with mixed use areas at all was a way to allow
vertical integration, having offices or commercial space on a first or second floor, maybe
specifically offices on the second or third and residential above that. I guess I'm still not
clear on what's the distinction that tosses the same concept from an MUR to an MUC,
that they are very similar and what's the -- what's the degree of difference?
Friedman: Sure. Madam Mayor, Council members, Councilmember Zaremba, I can
address that. It's a blurry line to start with. However, the mixed use residential is
intended to be just that. And that's something we really do want to emphasize. When
we say mixed use, we are talking about true mixed use. As you say, we are talking
about residential, nonresidential commercial, employment, so forth, not a mix of
different types of commercial or a mix of different types of residential. So, in the mixed
use residential, at least under the policies in the plant, it really limits the nonresidential
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 28 of 36
component to about 40 percent of the square footage. That's what it recommends. It's
also intended to be not like a full employment or retail type of designation, more of the
live-work environment, possibly offices down on the main floor, as you indicated, with
residential up above. Conversely, the mixed use commercial as you correctly pointed
out, has a heavier orientation towards commercial and nonresidential, but still does
have that mix of residential. The densities that are targeted for both designations are
the same, about eight to 12 dwelling units. But the mixed use commercial has a
broader range of services, retail, and office, that sort of thing. So, it's intended to be a
little bit more intensely commercial, retail, service oriented than the mixed use
residential. Have I clarified or made a distinction between the two for you? Because it
is a very blurry line.
Zaremba: Yes. Thank you. That helps. Which brings me to my next question. Would
we have a problem changing the designation of that portion of the northeast corner of
Franklin and Ten Mile? I agree with the previous discussion that we at least need to
designate specific property -- or specific potential, even if there is some temporary use
allowed in the meantime. But I could go along with the suggestion to change the MUR
to an MUC. Does that give anybody heartburn?
Rountree: You're asking the Councilor staff?
Zaremba: I'm asking Council and staff.
Bird: I think it's logical, to be truthful.
Rountree: Well, I -- to go back to my comment about the civic use, I understand it, I
don't disagree with it, but I think it's a matter of timing. I see that the residential
emphasis at this point is something that's going to be highly desirable at such time as
there is a transit station there. I mean you won't -- you won't be able to have vacancy
on that corner, being able to walk to a transit station. But that's not going to happen --
I'm not sure in the period of time we are talking about. So, I -- I guess I -- now I wouldn't
have a big concern for it, but I can understand why it's there given the concept.
Zaremba: I certainly agree with the instinct that any reality of a transit station is easily
30 years off.
Rountree: Optimist.
De Weerd: And remember who we are working with.
Zaremba: Uh-huh. Well, Councilman Rountree and I are both on the board of Valley
Regional Transit, so we are participants in their lack of budget and even though they
have the plans, the reality is they don't have the wherewithal to make any of this happen
in the time frame that -- and it would make the property own comfortable. So, I think we
need to seriously, one, consider that we do want to make that part of the plan, because
this is something -- that is the logical place for a transit station to go, but we also have to
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 29 of 36
understand the reality that's not going to happen in the near future and we can't ask the
property owner to just leave it fallow field.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I agree with Councilman Zaremba that -- that I'd like to see the mixed use
commercial there, because we have got enough high density and medium density in
this couple of square miles. The closest commercial retail -- you either go a mile to the
north or you go a mile to the east. I think that would be an ideal corner for some -- for
another Hark's Corner and you would pick up a lot of -- a lot of houses in there. I agree
with the transit station. I agree with Councilman Rountree. But I also think we are
about
a half a million people short from supporting it at this point.
De Weerd: Okay. We had someone come in late. Would you like to provide testimony
on this application? Please come forward. Please state your name and address.
Mashburn: My name is Jim Mashburn. I'm with L&M Associates. I own the property
that's here, designated high density residential currently on the plan. I just --
De Weerd: Could we, please, have your address?
Mashburn: 4571 North Patten Avenue. 83647. 83704. I'm sorry.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Mashburn: And I just -- if there is any questions. I just -- I support the current
designation and if there is any questions, my testimony is basically saying that I'm in
support. I have participated with the charrette from the beginning and the planning
process and I've had a very pleasant experience with it and I think they have done a lot
of planning on the whole plan and support it.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Anything further from staff?
Canning: Madam Mayor, since Mr. Zaremba asked, with regard to the mixed use
residential versus the mixed use commercial, as we expressed on the previous -- the
south side of that intersection, we don't have a concern -- we were -- we are very
concerned about that main street feel along that roadway there and we are afraid by the
idea on having it kind of a limited strip was that it forced those buildings closer to that
collector roadway and we don't have a concern with the mixed used residential versus
the mixed use commercial, but perhaps if Council wanted to, maybe we could add a
note to that section of the collector roadway or a note in the text of the plan somewhere
that talks about what we are looking for, that we are looking for that to be the -- kind of
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 30 of 36
the front door to that area, rather than turning their back to it and making Ten Mile or
Franklin the front door. Or at least have multiple facades.
Rountree: Excuse me, Anna. Madam Mayor. I think you have hit on maybe the
solution and it's maybe a sub set or a -- that color with a hashmark that would indicate in
those corridors where that's the intent of the plan and was the intent of the folks that
participated in the charrette, that whatever might go in there, this is what we want to
accomplish.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, anything further before I ask for a motion to close the Public
Hearing?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further, do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close the public hearings on Item No. 12 and Item 13.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 12 and
13. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my question is the form of the motion. Are we approving to
move forward? Are we approving to continue the process? Are we approving the
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan tonight?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the changes that have been talked
about tonight -- you haven't mentioned whether you're in support of Mr. Janicek's
change that we have on the staff revised proposal. But the only other change we really
talked about is changing this to mixed use commercial and putting a designation or
somehow indicating the main street appearance on this. This slip ramp -- I'm not sure
whether you want that on or off the map. We can make those changes if you like. If
you feel that they are easy enough to describe in the motion, we can also do that tonight
as well. We are prepared for you to make a motion if you so choose.
Rountree: Okay.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 31 of 36
De Weerd: Anna, I guess as we consider that, will you at least go through the steps of
what's next. Is it too long to begin our two year wait for the county or maybe longer?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, once you take action on this plan, it
will become our Comprehensive Plan and the plan we will use to guide growth and
development. We will also submit this to the county for their review. They participated
in the plan -- at least a member of their staff did that no longer works there, but we can -
- so, they know that they participated in the plan, they have been included in the steps,
they have been invited to these meetings, they have been invited to review the plan.
Our hope, certainly, is that this one can move forward much more quickly than the north
Meridian plan. I think that it will for a couple of different reasons. One, I think we are on
the cusp of breaking through the ice jam at Ada County and the second one is this is
already in our Comprehensive Plan, it's not bringing in new area, this is just a change to
the vision that we previously stated. So I would anticipate that this one will go much
more quickly and much more smoothly, so we will --
De Weerd: Ever the optimist.
Canning: Yeah. So, we will submit this to the county. You will have to have a meeting
with the county commissioners, they will have to accept it, and, then, they will have to
schedule it for their next hearing. I think September is the next possible time they can
meet. With any luck we can get this on the same agenda as the North Meridian Area
Plan.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I guess just to ask the question. What is the worst case scenario, that we
could adopt this and that some large property owner in this area would say, well, my
property is still in the county and I'm going to apply to the county to develop it at one
house per five acres and not go along with this plan -- is that the worst case scenario?
Haven't we had like 95 percent participation from property owners?
Canning: Yes, we have. And the -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council,
Councilmember Zaremba, we have actually had a great response from Ada County on
any development that's occurring within the city limits. They are fully committed to
making sure that we do not anticipate that being on sewer and water. So, they have
been very good about any potential rezoning having to come into us for -- for sewer and
water and making sure that we participate in that discussion. So, in that respect they
have really -- I was looking at the -- I don't know if you have looked at the development
monitoring report and happened to notice how much development was going on within
the area of city impact, but outside the city limits, and it was negligible, to say the least.
I mean there was nothing. So, I think that we really addressed those kinds of issues
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 32 of 36
and the only development that's really occurred of that nature has been ones that you
have supported, quite frankly. So, I don't think that that's a worst case scenario.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: If there is no further discussion or questions, I'll propose a motion here and
see if I got all my notes in order. Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item 12, CPA
07-007, the Ten Mile Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment, for Ten Mile area
Comprehensive Plan and that we approve that plan with the following modifications:
That we support the change in zoning in the northeast corner of Franklin and Ten Mile
from MUR to MUC and that those designations on that corridor be so noted on the plan
map, that the intent of the future of those properties is to reflect a main street type
environment. That there be a realignment of the greenbelt through the Janicek property
and that the area south of 1-84 and west of Ten Mile be removed for consideration at
this point for this plan amendment. I'm not sure I missed anything, but --
Bird: Before I second it --
De Weerd: Well, you have to second it before you can discuss it.
Bird: I wanted a clarification on his last statement.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: That's alii wanted.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, the clarification on that area is that it at one point in time was
to be considered in this Comp Plan amendment and is now going to be considered in
the study that's being undertaken now from the South Meridian Plan.
Bird: I second then.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, comment?
Canning: Yes, ma'am. Councilmember Rountree, with the realignment of the greenbelt
to follow the easement on the Janicek property, there was also a change in the land use
designations for the mixed use commercial to follow on the south side of that
realignment.
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 33 of 36
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my intent was to incorporate all staff's suggested changes for
that alignment.
Canning: Thank you, sir.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Any discussion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Rountree, were we taking out the dotted line for the wishful thinking off ramp?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I think for planning purposes a dotted line is there for
consideration. I don't believe it necessarily holds up or requires the property owner to
accommodate that. At such time in the future if it's possible, we have planned for it. If
it's not possible and develops, it will develop as the property owner sees fit. So, no, I
would propose to leave the dotted line there.
Bird: Fine. I agree with you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I agree with leaving the civic designation -- again, I'm in the area where we
changed from MUR to MUC. I agree with leaving the civic designation there as a
planning tool. Do we want to specify that -- that the owners are certainly welcome to
apply for temporary uses, other than that? Do we need to include that as part of the
subject?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Council member Zaremba, I'm sorry, I was coordinating with
Pete on the text issues, if there were any text changes, and I missed your question.
Zaremba: I am discussing the designated civic area just north of the area that we
changed from MUR -- or that we are proposing to change from MUR to MUC. I agree
with leaving it for planning purposes as civic, but do we want to make any statement
part of the motion that the applicant is welcome to propose temporary uses, other than
civic?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council members, respectfully, I don't think we need to do
that, because at such time as -- again, this is a Comprehensive Plan and land use
designation. It's a guide. At some point that property will be zoned. At some point that
property owner will be coming back to the city and to the Council with a conceptual plan
for the area, so that they will have certain rights that accrue to that property under the
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 34 of 36
zoning and at that time will be able to have a feel with an informed discussion on the
best use and balancing of the uses of that property.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rountree: Thanks, Pete.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 13.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 13, CPA 07-008, Ten Mile Specific Area Plan
Text, and that the text be modified to incorporate the changes as stated in the previous
motion.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 13. Is there any
discussion? Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 14:
Public Hearing: RZ 07-006 Request for a Rezone of 4.38 acres from an
R-8 to an R-15 zone for Bellabrook by J.E. Development, LLC - 300
South Locust Grove Road:
Item 15:
Public Hearing: CUP 07-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit
approval for multi-family residential use in a proposed R-15 zone for
Bellabrook by J.E. Development, LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Items 14 and 15 have been requested to be continued
to June 5th. I will open these two public hearings, RZ 07-006 and CUP 07-005, and ask
for a motion to continue these two public hearings.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
May 22, 2007
Page 35 of 36
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move that we continue Items 14 and 15, RZ 07-006 and CUP 07-005,
relating to Bellabrook to our regularly scheduled meeting of June 5,2007.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 14 and 15. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 16:
Ordinance No. 07-1319 : AZ 06-031 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 290.87 acres from RUT to an R-8 (Medium Density
Residential (115.65 acres), R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential) (50.17
acres), TN-R (Traditional Neighborhood Residential) (65.60 acres), TN-C
(Traditional Neighborhood Center) (20.71 acres) and R-2 (Low Density
Residential) (35.21 acres) and L-O (Limited Office) (3.48 acres) for South
Ridae Subdivision by James L. Jewett - south side of Overland Road
between Linder Road and Ten Mile Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 16 is ordinance number 07-1319. Mr. Berg, will you, please,
read this ordinance by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 07-1319, an
ordinance for annexation of property being situated in the north one half of the northeast
one quarter of the southeast one quarter of Section 23, Township 3 North, Range 1
West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing
certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, adjacent and contiguous to
the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian,
establishing and determining its land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT to
R-2, R-4, R-8, TN-R, TN-C, and L-O in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of
this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, the
Idaho State Tax Commission as required by law and providing for a summary of the
ordinance and providing for a waiver if the reading of the rules and providing an
effective date.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is
there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Seeing none, Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council
May 22,2007
Page 36 of 36
Zaremba: I move we adopt Ordinance 07-1319 related to AZ 06-031.
Bird: With suspension of rules. With suspension of rules.
Zaremba: With suspension of rules.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 16. If there is no discussion,
Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, absent.
MOTION CARRIES: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, we are at the end of our agenda. It is 8:52.
Congratulations.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: May I have a motion? Yes.
Zaremba: I move we adjourn.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:52 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED: ~
MAY~~D
; / --'!lJ tJ 7
DATE APPROVED
ATTESTED:J.iA' :4
WILLIAM G. BERG