HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 06-19
Meridian City Council Meeting
June 19,2007
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M., Tuesday, June
19,2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Charlie Rountree, Keith Bird, Joe Borton,
and David Zaremba.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Bill Musser, John
Overton, Mark Niemeyer and Dean Willis.
Item 1:
Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Joe Borton
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I will go ahead and call the meeting to order. Welcome all tonight. It is
Tuesday, June 19th. It's five minutes after 7:00. We will start tonight's meeting with roll
call attendance. Mr. Berg.
Item 2:
Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: I would like to draw everyone's attention to the picture on our -- our display
screen over there. That is our fearless city attorney. We were at a conference last
week and so you can see that it was team building at its finest. Item NO.2 is our pledge
of allegiance. Tonight we will be lead in the pledge by Hillary Costa. I understand she
will be leaving us, so we do want to give every opportunity to let her lead us in things
like the pledge. Hillary, if you will, please, come forward and if you will all rise.
(Pledge of allegiance recited.)
De Weerd: Hillary, I always give a pin --
Rountree: Yeah. Get your pin finally.
De Weerd: And I'm going to give you both the notorious water tower pin, as well as the
other opinion. Thank you.
Canning: Hillary is even thinking about becoming a planner. We haven't scared her off.
Item 3:
Community Invocation by Pastor Shawn Regan:
De Weerd: We have inspired her I'm sure. Okay. Item No. 3 is our community
invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Shawn Regan and if you will all join us in
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 2 of 57
the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection.
Pastor.
Regan: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, shall we pray. Oh, God, our Heavenly
Father, who loveth mankind and art most merciful and compassionate, Lord, we pray
that you would have mercy on our city and our Mayor and City Council. Direct them in
the path that you would have them walk according to your will for our city and our
community. Give them wisdom in the decisions they make tonight and guide them and
all of those who serve on our behalf throughout the week, that they may accomplish the
tasks set before them. Watch over our police and fire departments, protect them and
keep them from harm's way as they work to protect us. Be with each officer as they
serve to keep us safe. Watch over all of those who are in need in our communities, the
sick and the dying, the hungry and the poor. Help us to reach out in Christian love to
each person in Meridian, especially those who are struggling. Watch over our armed
forces, both those serving at home and abroad. Protect them as they serve our country
and keep us safe from those who seek to harm us. We thank you for all the things you
do, Father, for your great love and your mercy and we ascribe all glory and honor to
your holy name, of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit, amen.
Item 4:
Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you, Pastor. Item 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: In the Consent Agenda we got A is Resolution 07-562. E is 07-563. F is 07-564.
G is 07-565. H is 07-566. I is 07-567. And J is 07-568. And we have -- on Item 14
they have asked to continue that to July 3rd, 2007. Item 17 has been asked to be
continued to July 24th, 2007. Items 20, 21, 22, and 23 did not post their property, so
that will have to be continued to July 3rd, 2007. Item 24 on the regular agenda is
Ordinance No. 07-1320. And Item 25 is Ordinance No. 07-1321. And with that I move
that we approve the revised agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as revised. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5:
Consent Agenda:
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 3 of 57
A.
Tabled from June 5, 2007: Resolution No. 07-562
Works Rate Change:
Public
B. Approve Minutes of May 15, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting:
C. Approve Minutes of May 22, 2007 Pre-Council Meeting:
D. Approve Minutes of May 22, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting:
E. Resolution No. 07-563 : 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:
F. Resolution No. 07-564 : 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:
G. Resolution No. 07-565 CPA 07-004 Request for an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to
change the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial for
Jabil East Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the Joint School
District No. 2 - 1303 East Central Drive (Lot 1, Block 1, Jabil
Subdivision):
H. Resolution No. 07-566 CPA 07-005 Request for an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to
change the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial for
Jabil West Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the City of
Meridian Planning Department - 915 East Central Drive (Lot 2,
Block 1, Jabil Subdivision):
I. Resolution No. 07..567 CPA 07-001 Request for a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use
Map designation from Industrial to Commercial for the property
located at 600 E. Franklin Road for Thomas Comprehensive
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 4 of 57
Plan Amendment by Lynn Thomas - north of East Franklin Road
and east of Meridian Road:
J. Resolution No. 07.568 : Adopting the Amended By.
Laws of the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council:
K. SHP 07.004 Request for Short Plat Approval of 8 residential
condominium units in 2 buildings in an R-15 zone for Mayflower
Place Condominium by Tealey's Land Surveying - 1236, 1254,
and 1278 Northeast 2 ~ Street:
L Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR
07.009 Request for a Variance for location of the subdivision
identification sign away from the subdivision entrance for Strada
Bellissima Business Park by Strada Commercial, LLC -
Northwest Corner of South Meridian Road and West Victory Road:
M. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval for R..2
zone: AZ 07-005 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1.46 acres
from RUT to an R-4 zone for the property located at 1205 West
Overland Road for Pfost Property by Thomas & JoAnn Pfost -
1205 West Overland Road:
N. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 07-
004 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.48 acres from RUT to
an L-O zone for Locust Grove Professional Office Building by
Ruby/Edwards: Architecture + Design - 1695 South Locust Grove
Road:
O. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 07-
005 Request for a Rezone of 9.21 acres from I-L to a C-G zone for
Jabil East Property by the Joint School District No.2 - 1303 East
Central Drive (Lot 1, Block 1, Jabil Subdivision):
P. Streetlight Agreement for Paramount Subdivision No. 15 by
Paramount Development:
Q. Water Main Easement Agreement for Plum Creek Water Line
by Plum Creek Northwest Lumber:
R. Approve Contract for the North Black Cat Lift Station with JC
Constructors, Inc. for $2,745,000.00:
S. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Agreement for
Secret Garden by Oliver / Debbie Cleaver:
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 5 of 57
T.Water Main Easement Agreement for Lowe's (Overland) by
James Prather:
u. Agreement with EI Dorado Business Partners, LLC for
Vacation of a portion of Easement "G" Water Line and Water
Meter Easement, Recorded as Instrument No. 105127519, on
Lots 18 and 19, Block 1 of Bonito Subdivision No.3:
V. Approve Bid for Shepherd's Creek Oversized Sewer to Brown
Construction for $50,846.00 and Approve Reimbursement
Agreement between the City of Meridian and Shepherd's
Creek, Inc. for a Total Reimbursement of $14,830.00:
W. Approve Amended Bid for Water and Sewer Improvements in
Coniunction with the Intersection of Meridian and McMillan
Roadwav Proiect for an Amended Bid of $41,202:
X. Addendum to Lease Agreement with Xerox for WWTP:
Y. Change Order No. 5 for Removal and Abatement of
Contaminated Soils with Ideal Demolition:
De Weerd: Okay. Item is the Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda with the previous listed ordinance
numbers and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all papers.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If
there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6:
Department Reports
A. Mayor's Office:
1. Discussion on Impact Fee Committee Members:
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 6 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 6-A under the Mayor's office. You should have in front of
you the impact fee committee. Last year we had added two new items for impact fee
eligibility and that was police and fire. So, we are collecting impact fees on parks,
police, and fire. So, we did add two additional seats, so that we could have a
representation for our police and fire. I do have a couple of changes to last year's. Dan
Wood will continue to serve. Jim Keller is our representative from our Parks
commission. Gene Strate is the representative for the realtors association. David
Fulkerson is one of our citizen representatives. Phil Krichbaum is also one of our citizen
representatives. Keith Borup was on there as a Planning and Zoning Commission
representative. He will be replaced by Michael Rohm as our Planning and Zoning
Commission representative. However, Keith Borup will continue to serve and as will
Steve Elliott and we have an open spot for the BCA, who I do not know who that
representative is.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Are you looking for approval --
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: -- of the committee --
De Weerd: Uh.huh.
Borton: The BeA spot to be--
De Weerd: To be determined once we hear from them who that representative is.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor? I'm sorry. Maybe I missed it. Did I hear a representative
from either the fire or police department?
De Weerd: Yes. Steve Elliott is our representative for the fire and -- did I mention Mark
Bennett? I'm sorry. I don't have -- and Mark Bennett is for the police.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: It's not on here.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 7 of 57
Borton: In light of the names presented, I would move that we approve the impact fee
committee members as proposed. I understand that the BeA position will be filled as
soon as possible, to make it possible for the impact fee committee to continue its work.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the names as stated
tonight. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
B. Police Department:
1. Budaet Amendment for Waae Adiustments for
Supervisors:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 6-B under the police department, I will turn this over to Chief
Musser.
Musser: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I'm
before you this evening to discuss a proposal for a wage increase for our supervisory
and management staff at the police department. This will include the sergeants, the
lieutenants, and the captain that we have. I have handed out a City of Meridian budget
amendment sheet at this point that should total up a total of 23,336 dollars, which would
be the overall cost for making those adjustments for those staff members at this point.
Also attached to that sheet that you have is a breakdown by individual as to what that
cost would come out to. What I'm looking to do in terms of this request, according to
our finance director, in meeting with her, and, then, also with my follow-up discussion
with the Mayor, they went ahead and signed off the prior form that we had for an
amendment, but Mrs. Kilchenmann doesn't actually recognize it as being an
amendment, because we currently have enough salary savings within the police budget
to make this operational and I was looking to do so effective July 1. Additionally, in
working with the HR director Mr. Nary and moving through and, then, having our
discussions with finance on this, it would be feasible to continue this within next year as
part of the base salary. At this point it has been included in terms of what we would
have available with the projected revenue as we move into the base for the -- for the
FY-08 fiscal year as well. So, I'm not looking to induce any hardships at this point in
terms of the city overall. Our major emphasis for what we are looking at at this time is in
terms of encouraging officers within the department that are qualified to promote for this
sergeant's position, it's been about ten percent to a little bit more the market average
between Nampa City, Boise City, and even Garden City at this point. We had that
looked at and what we are proposing here actually brings them up four percent above
the overall market value at this point. However, because they get to that point I also
have full consensus from all those sergeants that they have no expectations whatsoever
Meridian City Council
June 1 g, 2007
Page 8 of 57
of another merit increase or step increase until October -- after October 1 of 2008,
which would be the beginning of the fiscal '09 year, so that they would remain frozen
from implementation in July 1 here all the way through fiscal '08 if that's the Council's
pleasure at this point this evening. The same thing would apply to our lieutenants, who
are ultimately going to come out just approximately about one percent still under where
the market value sits between Nampa and Boise at this point, but puts them in a much
closer parity area for them and it also raises our captain up into a much more workable
area in comparison to the deputy chief positions and the captain positions within the
valley as well. As a point of clarification, I initially had some adjustments to my salary in
there as well. However, after discussion with the Mayor and the HR director, we are
looking at some other things in general for the directors within the city, so I withdrew my
aspects in there and that's why you have the adjusted form that doesn't have the
signatures on it at this point, because they just want to focus on the sergeants, the
lieutenants, and the captain at this point in time. And with that I would stand for any
questions if there are any at this time.
De Weerd: Counsel, any questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: And I'm sorry I don't know the hierarchy specifically within your department,
but are there other positions like detective that are at parity around the valley or is that a
dumb question?
Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Zaremba, no, it's not a
dumb question. We do have assigned positions. One of the assigned positions we
have is the detective. However, in performing that job function within the department,
you can be at the pay grade of patrolman or at corporal and we do have those and we
do -- we have been able with last year's adjustment to the overall wage scale, it allows
them parity and be able to move forward and we are still looking at even some further
compression within our overall city merit base to pay function to allow them movement a
little bit quicker than what we had initially looked at. That's still in process with HR at
this time.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Any other questions from Council? Okay. Chief, that
was just informational, was that not?
Musser: Yes, Madam Mayor, informational in that to propose that and I guess I would
look at the potential of being able to enact this July 1, considering we have a salary
savings available, if the Council so wishes to have us go ahead and move forward on it.
It's entirely their decision at this point, but I was looking for some direction.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 9 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Yeah, I would want a motion on this.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: The chief and I have discussed this several times and it's gone through
several iterations. We have looked at trying to get our officers at parity to address the
issue of retention, address the issues of cost of training these folks, and the length of
time of service that they have provided the city. The general increases are fairly sizable
at this point, because we haven't kept them at pace with what's going on in the
community. We have the cities around us and the counties around us shopping our
department for folks and we are -- we are and have been a training ground. This is an
attempt to -- again, gain retention, an issue that we have been addressing for a number
of months, not only the police department, but in other departments. So, I'm supportive
of the chiefs request. He's worked with HR to do an analysis of this, which is a -- gets it
away from the analysis that they initially did and puts it into context with the rest of the
city employees. So, that's where I have been with the issue as the liaison with the
police department. And if there isn't any other questions or comments, I would move
that we approve the supervisory wage adjustment request make it effective July 1,
2007.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I have a motion and a second to approve the request in
front of you to be effective July 1 st. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
c. Legal Department
1. Collective Labor Aareement between the City of
Meridian and Meridian Firefiahters IAFF Local 2311:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 6-C is our legal department. Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I'm happy report that we
were able to complete our negotiations with the fire-fighters local union. I don't know if
the contract is in your packet. I'm not seeing it on the electronic packet. We sent it over
last week, but --
Rountree: It's hard copy.
Bird: It's hard copy.
Meridian City Council
June 1 g, 2007
Page 10 of 57
Nary: It's hard copied. Okay. I just wanted to make sure that you did have it. We were
very successful in getting I think a good contract for the city, as well as for the union. I
think it was a good process. The union was very agreeable generally and the -- I think
the end results that we have is a very good contract for both the city and the union itself.
I think it's a very positive step forward for the city. We certainly took a lot less time to
get this resolved than we did the last time, which was very encouraging. I know Mr.
Bird was a member of the negotiating team. I don't know if he has any other comments,
but when he's done, I guess we are seeking your approval for signature.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Before I make a motion, I'd like to thank Chief Anderson and our number one
negotiator Mr. Nary here that did a fantastic job and also the fire department, the four
officers that negotiated. They were very fair, very understanding. I think it went great.
This was my second one and the atmosphere was much friendlier, fairer. So, I think
Scotty and Justin and Lance and Luke all deserve a thank you for the participation they
did and I don't think we could find a better negotiator on our part than Mr. Nary. I hate
to say that with him sitting here.
Nary: Thank goodness we didn't have that picture when we started this process.
Bird: And with that, if we have -- we can have discussion afterwards, but I move that we
approve the collective labor agreement with Meridian Firefighters Local 2311 and for the
Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Thank you. I have a motion and a second to approve the agreement that is
before you. I will ask Mr. Berg to, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
D. Public Works Department
1. Reauest for Waiver of City Services Hook-Up
Reauirements for Tricia Donohue with the Treasure
Valley Veterinary Hospital at 2600 South Meridian Road:
De Ween::!: Thank you. Item 6-0 is our Public Works Department and I would like to
recognize Len Grady, he is our acting Public Works Director right now. Brad Watson
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 11 of 57
left the city to pursue a career in the public sector and so you wear a different hat, but
you're a welcomed old face.
Grady: Thank you, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: And he is the photographer behind this picture, by the way.
Zaremba: Where was he standing when he took it?
De Weerd: On the ground.
Grady: Mr. Nary is about I would say a couple hundred feet up at this point in time,
coming down very fast. Madam Mayor, a couple of weeks ago Council approved hook
up of some water for this -- the Treasure Valley Veterinary Clinic and Public Works
would like to request reconsideration of that approval. In looking back through some of
the history, we believe it should be tied to a development agreement and possibly take
a look at some of the access issues. So, Anna and I have met with Mr. Guho, who
represents the owner, and we are in the process of coming up with something that we'd
like to bring back to you, but, in the meantime, we would like you to reconsider that
approval to allow us time to negotiate a development agreement.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions? Mr. Nary, did you have
something to add?
Nary: No, Madam Mayor. If the Council -- only that if the Council wishes to do that,
they simply probably should do that by, again, another motion, a seconded vote on that,
since you did already make that direction to allow the hook up.
De Weerd: So, we'd need a motion to reconsider.
Nary: Yes.
De Weerd: Council, any questions at this point?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Seeing no questions, I would move that we I guess approve the Public Works
request for reconsideration and allow ample time for the parties to discuss and work out
an agreement, as Mr. Grady had indicated. I don't know if we need to set a time,
necessarily --
Nary: You don't need to.
Borton: Then I won't.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 12 of 57
Zaremba: I'll second that.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the request by our Public
Works Department and with the caveat, Len, that this probably needs resolution at the
earliest possible time for them to move forward as well.
Grady: Madam Mayor, we will do all we can to accommodate any of their schedules.
So, we will push forward best we can.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there any discussion? Okay. Mr. Berg, will you,
please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 7:
Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd: Okay. Items removed from the Consent Agenda are none.
Item 8:
Reauest for Waiver of Fees for a Variance Application for Meridian
Elementary School Sian:
De Weerd: So, we are at Item NO.8. And, again, for anyone who might have come in
late, we did have a couple of items that were requested to be continued. Item 14 is
being continued to July 3rd. Item 17 to July 24th. And items 20 through 23 to July 3rd.
We apologize if you're here tonight to hear any of those items, but they will be continued
to those dates. So, Item 8 is a request for a waiver of fees for a variance application for
a Meridian Elementary School sign and I believe that we had the PT A president here
with us tonight and the former principal.
Yankey: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council --
De Weerd: If you will, please -- Byron, if you will state your name and address for the
record.
Yankey: Okay. My name is Byron Yankey and the address is -- I live in Canyon County
at 11223 Meadow Brook Drive.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Yankey: And we are here -- this is Laura Lance, she's the PTO President for Meridian
Elementary School and we are here to request that you consider either waiving or
reducing the fees. We have a variance request that will be coming before you in the
near future to install a reader board at Meridian Elementary School. This is a project
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 13 of 57
that is solely funded by the PTO for Meridian Elementary. It is a project that's taken a
lot of work to gather those funds over several years with it and, you know, I'm going to
turn it over to Laura Lance at this point and we would welcome any questions you might
have at the end.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Lance: Did you guys all get the e-mail that we forwarded? Well, I have two. Basically,
we are just -- the cost of the reader board is, obviously, large and so we are trying to
keep all of our costs in -- in check and so we are asking if we can waive or reduce the
fee to come before you, hopefully soon, and when we read the -- when we read the
requirements for a waiver, it said to show hardship and we are -- we can do that. Our
PTO is five people. We have great parents who work very hard. Our kids worked very
hard. They earned at our Mother's Day Geranium sale 800 dollars, which is now solely
on hold just for this variance cost. So, we are hoping that we can spend that on books
and reader of the month stuff next year and so we are really hoping that you will look at
our request and know that if a hardship ever was, Meridian Elementary -- we are a Title
One school, we have got about 67 percent population below the poverty line. The kids
worked really hard to earn this money for the sign. So, we are just trying to really be
respectful and keep all the money where it should be, not that it shouldn't be to the city,
but we are hoping that we can put it towards really important stuff at the school. So,
that's where we are at. If you have any questions, please, let us know.
De Weerd: I would like to add to your argument.
Lance: Please.
De Weerd: One of the ideas for the variance is because it will be on the school itself
and it needs to be viewed from the street, many of the parents cannot see it from that
distance and we have a picture here for you tonight -- Anna is -- okay. I won't ask you.
Nary: There is training available.
De Weerd: And we need to fix that to make it easier.
Canning: Yes.
De Weerd: But it is -- it is being requested because of the visibility and that many of the
parents will drop their kids off and not see it and the school is closed for the day and
they have dropped their kids off.
Lance: We have had kids at school when there was no school. It's a holiday and we
have kids there and so safety issues, communication issues, pictures -- you know, half
day, a lot of parents are busy and I, unfortunately, mayor may not have lots of
communication with the kids and we figure if they come and they see no school today,
that's kind of right in their face, that we won't have kids dropped off. Or pick up your kid
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 14 of 57
at 1 :35, rather than 3:30, that will have, hopefully, a reduction or elimination of those
kids being left at school. So, it's not only a really nice --
Canning: Madam Mayor, we need to not be talking about the variance application quite
this much. It will be a future application.
Lance: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. It had something to do with the waiver of the fee, though. That's
right. That was a fuzzy one, uh? Any questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: In light of the presentation and the needs and the hardship presented, I would
move that we approve the request for waiver of fees for the variance application, again,
making reference only to the waiver of fees and not the variance application itself.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Berg, please,
call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 9:
Reauest for Reconsideration of Denial of Rezone and Conditional
Use Permit for Bellabrook by J.E. Development, LLC:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item No.9 is a request for reconsideration of the denial
for rezone and Conditional Use Permit for Bellabrook by G.E. Development -- J.E.
Development. Is that representative here? Staff? Anna. You do have a letter in front
of you, Council, and I have invited Shawn up in case you have any questions that you
have of the applicant, any further information, or explanation of any content in the letter.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I don't think I have got a question of the content of the letter of -- and I can tell
you I'm supportive of the request to reconsider and having seen it come in, I did want to
__ speaking for myself, apologize both to you, Shawn, and Ross. I think it was an
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 15 of 57
awkward situation -- at least an awkward situation from the way I saw it and public
meetings are closed and, then, there is discussion and there was a desire on your part
to try and add additional information. Whether it was after the fact, I think, from my
perspective, I would benefit by giving you that opportunity to present it, not necessarily
telling you what success that mayor may not have, but I think you should at least be
afforded the opportunity to address some of the concerns, at least I know I raised some
after the hearing was closed and I apologize that we took an opportunity from you guys
to address those. So, I'm willing to give the opportunity to grant a reconsideration and
hear how some of these issues can be addressed. Your letter makes reference to the
ability to do that, so --
Nickel: Appreciate that.
Borton: That's my thought on it.
De Weerd: Okay. And I know Councilman Rountree was not here, so I'm sure you
don't have any questions. Okay.
Rountree: Too many for the time we have left this evening.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Anna.
Canning: I wanted to also say I supported the reconsideration and that I would like the
opportunity to address some of those concerns that were raised after the Public Hearing
was closed as well.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Shawn.
Nickel: Thank you.
De Weerd: Council, then, do I have a motion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: I would move that we approve Item 9, the request for reconsideration of the
denial of the rezone.
De Weerd: Do I have a second?
Bird: I'll second it to get a vote.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 16 of 57
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Just a question. If my recollection serves me correctly, the motion that was
made for denial I believe I voted against, which means I cannot propose such a motion
at this point, but I need to ask Mr. Nary can I vote?
De Weerd: Yes, can you.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, you could
have seconded the motion if you wished and you can vote, you just couldn't make the
motion.
Zaremba: Couldn't make the motion. Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: May I vote?
Nary: If you feel that you have enough information to vote, you can.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion?
Berg: Can I vote?
De Weerd: You can't vote, Mr. Berg.
Berg: Okay.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSTAIN.
Item 10:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: 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 11:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: 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: Okay. Thank you. Item 10 is Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for
the denial of RZ 07-006. Mr. Nary.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 17 of 57
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, since you have granted the
reconsideration and that will be done at a later time, you can simply vacate these
Findings and you can do them jointly, 10 and 11 together.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move that we vacate the Findings that are Items 10 and 11 on our agenda
tonight.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Mr. Nary, can I do that by voice
vote?
Nary: Yes. Yes, you may.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. Thank you. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12:
FP 07-018 Request for Final Plat approval for 1 multi-family building lot on
10.103 acres in an R-4 zone for Selwav Apartments at Lochsa Falls
by Meridian Apartments, LLC - North of McMillan and west of Linder
Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 is final plat for 07-018. Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we do have a letter stating that the
applicant is in agreement with the conditions of approval. The final plat substantially
complies with the approved preliminary plat and to our knowledge there are no
outstanding issues before Council.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there anyone here regarding this item on the agenda? Okay. I
just want to take a moment to explain -- a final plat does not go through the public
process. It was approved in 2002, so this is more of a procedural type of thing. In order
for them to move forward they would have to file for a Conditional Use Permit. They
haven't at this point. A Conditional Use Permit is a Public Hearing and it would be
posted on our website. I'm sure we have a mailing list at this point, so we will work and
instruct staff to make sure that that list is notified of when that date is set. Okay. And I
do understand -- yes, Mr. Berg.
Berg: Madam Mayor, the process would call for the normal mailing and posting of the
property and a notice in the newspaper. So, just the regulatory noticing requirements
would be followed.
Meridian City Council
June 19,2007
Page 18 of 57
De Weerd: Okay.
Berg: And I'm sure the people and the neighbor's property would be notified.
De Weerd: I would still like to add anyone we have already sent correspondence to to
that.
Nary: Madam Mayor, I believe we have an address list that we can provide to the
Clerk's Office of the correspondence that was sent out last week. I think what Mr. Berg
is wanting to avoid is some person claiming they should have got a letter and they didn't
and, therefore, they didn't get notice. Legally we are required to provide the notice as
he explained. We can attempt to provide whatever other information and addresses we
have to those people, but it wouldn't be the lack of notice if we had missed one of those
people, as long as -- we have to comply with the statutory requirement. We will provide
the Clerk's office with any other additional addresses that we have.
De Weerd: Okay. And I think we could probably add that to the face sheet that we are
adding additional mailings from contacts that we have received to date, to clarify that.
Berg: Yes, Mayor, that's fine. I just want to make sure we are going to meet the
requirements of the statute and whatever additional we can do.
De Weerd: And you will go over and above that, then?
Berg: Madam Mayor, my office always goes above and beyond the requirements.
De Weerd: I agree. I agree.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I --
De Weerd: You are so right, Mr. Berg. Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I'm just wondering if included in the above and beyond attempt to contact
people, that people send in bye-mail with no mailing address, are we going to attempt
to notify bye-mail? We are stretching beyond the --
De Weerd: I think whatever means that we have to date is the method we would use.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I think -- I think we are getting way out of boundary. I mean each
one of us got individual e-mails from people that isn't even counting that, and I feel that
we are complicating it. As long as we stay in the statutes and the ones that did send
letters and stuff, let's get a list, they go back out, and I think we have more than stepped
up to the plate.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 19 of 57
De Weerd: Well, we will make every attempt, those who have already notified us, to
keep them informed. And I would like to also clarify, there is only one here in our
audience, but -- two, three. Any comment that was associated to city officials and due
diligence was not provided by any of the city officials. So, it was an interpretation and if
anyone was offended by that, we certainly apologize. With that said, Council, this is in
compliance with the preliminary plat, the recommendations, and comments by staff, are
-- we have a letter accepting those. Do I have any discussion? If I don't have
discussion, do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I will make a motion, but prior to making that motion, this particular process
and this particular project has opened some areas of question in my mind as to the
process and the validity. The process, to some degree, is established by statute. We
are following the state statute in that regard and it seems to me that -- that if, in fact, the
final plat is in compliance with what was approved in 2002, why, again, do we have an
approval, as opposed to check. Having said that, there is also an issue as it relates to
time and development from approvals made by past councils that now reside with new
Planning and Zoning Commissions and potentially any council and the ability of the new
council to deal with a decision of a previous council. If it were a fiscal matter, we would
not be dealing with this issues, because a fiscal decision previous cannot be -- cannot
bind a future council. But a land use decision, apparently, does bind in some degree
future councils and future planning and zoning commissions. I think it's something that
we need to explore in some of our planning and workshop sessions as to how do we
maybe flex the system to make it more sensitive to these kinds of issues, because, in
fact, it is not sensitive to them at all. Having said that, I would move that we do approve
the final plat as submitted, since it is in compliance with the previously approved
preliminary plat.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second, but comments prior to that, counsel --
that's city attorney counsel, do you have any comment to that? I guess in our new UDC
we have put time restrictions on some of this, but I don't know if that deals with planned
developments in a number of phases, because these phases have been coming in as --
as outlined. So, any comments from either Mr. Nary or Mrs. Canning?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the Lochsa Falls Project, as
preliminary platted, has maintained the proper phasing plan to keep this project alive.
The action taken tonight is just to create the lot. It doesn't approve anything on that lot,
it's just the last lot -- or maybe second to the last lot that has not been platted as part of
Lochsa Falls.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 20 of 57
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean I think Councilmember Rountree
has, you know, hit on a good point. I mean I think it's a worthy discussion point at a
workshop with the planning staff and maybe the P&Z Commissioners as well. You
know, the problematic issue, which I think you're all aware of, is that in all developments
-- and this isn't anymore unique than any of the other developments we have seem that
are phased, is they are driven by the market needs of the community at the time. Some
develop faster than others. Many that are anticipated to take ten years, take five.
Some that are anticipated to take three take eight. You know, it's very difficult I think
from a development agreement perspective and from a legal enforcement perspective
to try to put very strict rules into that if you're going to allow the market to play that out.
But I think It's worth a discussion of the concerns that we have had and this one isn't
like some other projects that you have seen before this Council, that they have come in
and acquired the entitlements and no action has taken place and the property has laid
bare for a number of years sometimes without any progress. This particular project has
moved along in phases, as was proposed back in 2002. So, it's not quite -- quite as bad
as some of the others, but I think it's still worthy of that discussion at a future workshop
of how do we assure either the information is available to the public, that it's maybe
more visible to the public, that there is opportunities to revisit it if nothing is -- if it isn't
getting phased in properly, it isn't happening, there is an option to revisit that. I mean I
think all those things are worthy of discussion. Again, this particular one may have
brought it to light. It doesn't necessarily have all of those things, but it certainly is
something worth talking about in a future meeting.
Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, a couple of other points. I think
what has been particularly frustrating for these residents is that -- residents surrounding
this project, is that the zoning maintained the R-4 zoning of the entire PD. It's when the
City Council and -- well, staff was not asking the applicants to put the appropriate
zoning on that, rather than just the overall planned development zoning. So, all of
Lochsa has the R-4 zoning. We have asked them to go back on their office portions
and get L-O zoning and they have been willing to do that. That hasn't happened on this
piece of property. The other planned developments that I'm aware of that have the
apartments, namely, Paramount I know got some townhouses approved conceptually
and also some apartments. But that does have R-40 zoning on it. So, that people can
come and look at our maps and see that it's zoned for high density residential and I
think it's just more transparent the way we are doing things now with regard to that,
rather than having -- maintaining it kind of uniform on the whole PD. So, I think that's
been particularly frustrating for folks. So, we are moving that forward that way. The
planned developments that we do now are just -- we are not having every -- every
project be a planned development, so you're not seeing that as much. The other thing
is that Council is now doing development agreements with almost every annexation that
includes something other than single family residential. So, we are trying to get it in that
manner, too. So, I think we have moved forward, so that these kind of concerns and
surprises don't happen to folks, but we can certainly talk about other ways.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 21 of 57
De Weerd: Yeah. It's hard to come up with a solution of how best to inform and I guess
with our commercial development we started signing a future development and maybe
it's even assigning, but, I don't know, it's one of the topics for discussion.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Not to add an additional wrinkle to this, but if we are proposing topics for
discussion on this subject, this is one of the examples of -- at the time before approval it
went through the entire process, which included public hearings. Those public hearings
had all of the legal notice. But as with other projects, when you have a large project like
this, even though it legally had a pathway of annexation, when we notify by putting a
sign there, by putting it in the paper, and by notifying all of the other registered property
owners within 300 feet, if my recollection is correct, at the time that all of the owners
within 300 feet of this project were notified, there were probably only six people that
qualified for that, because it was out in the country. Consequently, I have raised for
discussion earlier and during the discussion about the Unified Development Code
whether or not we can legally go beyond Idaho statute requirements and say if within
300 feet we have not notified at least 40 people, can we expand that radius until we
have notified enough people to really feel like we gave notice about the Public Hearing.
Don't know if that's the right way to put it, but there are cases where, yes, we did all the
process, but there weren't that many people notified.
De Weerd: Well, there are cases where we went above and beyond, but it wouldn't help
in this case, because those houses didn't exist, and so, you know, it doesn't fall in this
one, but it certainly is a discussion item to add. Write it down.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further for the Council? Mr. Berg, we do have a motion in
front of us to approve this final plat. Will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, abstain; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSTAIN.
De Weerd: We do understand there is a neighborhood meeting this week and we will
ask the -- ask the organizer if we could add a planning member to just talk about
process. We do understand that the property owner or applicants representative -- it's
not even an applicant, but whoever is making a proposal and doing a neighborhood
meeting and we would like to -- we are proposing to that applicant that we have staff
over there just to talk about this process. And so I believe that our director has talked
with their representative. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 22 of 57
Item 13:
FP 07..016 Request for Final Plat approval for 26 single-family building lots
and 6 common lots on 5 acres in R-8 and R-15 zones for Arch Rock
Subdivision by CTD Development - south of McMillan Road and east of
Linder Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 13 is FP 07-016, request for final plat on Arch Rock
Subdivision.
Canning: Oh. Sorry. I'm sorry, ma'am. Baraya -- no. Arch Rock. We have a letter
from the applicant stating that they are in agreement with the conditions of approval and
to our knowledge there are no outstanding issues before Council.
De Weerd: Counsel. Do I have a motion?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we approve the final plat 07-016, Item 13 on our agenda.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 13. All those in favor
say aye. Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14:
FP 07..017 Request for Final Plat approval for 29 townhome building lots,
7 commercial building lots, and 8 common lots on 6.29 acres in TN-R and
C-C zones for Harks Canvon Creek Subdivision by Franklin Centre,
LLC - 1845 West Franklin Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 has been requested to be continued to July 3rd.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we continue Item 14 to July 3rd.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 14 to July 3rd. All
those in favor say aye. Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 23 of 57
Item 15:
Continued Public Hearing From April 3, 2007: AZ 06-061 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 95.57 acres from RUT to R-8, R-15 and R-40
zones for Baraya Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc. - 3935 West
Franklin Road and 280 South Black Cat Road:
Item 16:
Continued Public Hearing from April 3, 2007: PP 06-062 Request for
Preliminary Plat approval of 118 single-family building lots on 26.41 acres
in the proposed R-8 zone; 216 single-family building lots on 38.26 acres
and 1 school lot on14.98 acres in the proposed R-15 zone; 2 multi-family
lots on 13.01 acres in the proposed R-40 zone; and 30 common lots for
Barava Subdivision by RMR Consulting, Inc. - 3935 West Franklin road
and 280 South Black Cat Road:
De Weerd: Items 15 and 16 are continued public hearings from April 3rd. I will open
these two items with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Baraya project. It's
located on the south side of Franklin Road, on the east side of Black Cat Road. This is
a continued Public Hearing, but it's been since April, so I'm going to give you a fairly
good background on it. The applications before you tonight are annexation and
preliminary plat. The Comprehensive Plan designation is now within the Ten Mile
Specific Area Plan and they include a school site or civic use, green space, and park
land. Medium density residential, medium high density residential and high density
residential. I think I have got that shown on that figure. The development includes
annexation and zoning of 95.57 acres to R-8 and -- there is a total of 95 acres. I'm
sorry. 28.17 acres will be R-8, R-15 will be 54.13 acres, and R-40 will be 13.26 acres.
The applicant has also submitted a preliminary plat for the subject property, which
proposes 334 single family residential lots, 28 common lots, and one school lot within
the proposed R-8 and R-15 zones and, then, two multi-family and two common lots are
also proposed in the R-40 zone. The R-40 zone is on the east side of the property,
those two large lots. The school is, obviously, on the west side of the property. Access
to the site is proposed from three public streets that connect to Black Cat Road, one of
them does, and Franklin Road, too. So, there is the main collector coming through.
There is also an access here that would somewhat indirectly tie into the school property
and there is a portion of a collector roadway going out to Black Cat. Thirteen acres or
16 percent of the site is set aside for open space. There is also a multi-use pathway,
landscaped parkways, and a 25 foot landscape buffer along South Glen Canyon Drive,
that main entrance coming in. And two community park areas, which include a pool,
with changing rooms, and tot lots are proposed as amenities. I have some pictures of
those tot lots as well. The gross density is 5.16 units per acre and that's for the
residential properties in the R-8 and the R-15 zone only. It excludes the school site and
the future multi-use -- multi-family dwellings in the proposed R-40 zone. We have
several elevations. These are some analyses that I will -- just so you know they are
here and so the applicant knows that they are included in the presentation. I think the
applicant will go over some of these in more detail. Okay. But here are some of the --
some of these are photos you have seen before with -- with staff's annotation beside
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 24 of 57
them and some of them toward the end I have got some new proposals as well. These
were some of the single family product that you saw. The top two were supported by
staff. Staff was concerned on the bottom one, because the entry was not visible, it was
recessed. Again, on this one, too garage dominated. Staff supported one where the
garage didn't overwhelm the entire front of the house. And this one was not quite as
good as the one on the left. This is a new elevation provided by the applicant. Again,
what he's done is pull this porch forward, so that the front plane of the house is not the
garage, it is the porch feature. There is a note here, marginally supported by staff. It's
kind of meeting some of that attempt, but -- some of the desire to move the living area
forward by moving the structure forward, but there is still no living area there. Here is
some more elevations. Again, staff was primarily looking at the domination of the
garages on these elevations. And I will let the applicant talk about this one. This one
you will see the revision to this one. Note the porch here behind the garage and, then, I
think the next one -- here we go. You see they have been brought forward again to
break up that plane and to have those garages recessed a bit. These are some
examples provided by staff of some townhomes, just noting that on these the front plane
of the house, the living area, is in front of the garage and I think we just wanted to
provide what we were comparing these to when we were asking the living area to be
pulled forward. These are some of the alley-loaded product. Again, staff was
supportive of those. Again, we were mostly looking at garage domination and we don't
have that on the alley loads, so -- I'm going to summarize the Commission's hearing,
just to refresh your memory. I'll try and be brief. And, then, I'll go back and I'll
summarize your own hearing from April. At the Planning and Zoning Commission
hearing Matt Schultz, the applicant's representative, spoke in favor of the application.
There was no one in opposition or commenting, but we did get written testimony from
Larry Woodard, the minister at Cherry Lane Christian Church. Key issues of discussion
by the Commission were providing quality building exteriors to include stucco, stone,
and brick. The applicants proposed that the high density portion should be subject to
the Ten Mile specific area design guidelines in lieu of the application -- applicant
generating those guidelines. And they also discussed trees adjacent to the Perdham
Drain, which is in the center of the property -- or angles across the property, if that were
allowed by Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. The key Commission changes to staffs
initial recommendation were to require the applicant to construct products with quality
exteriors, to include natural appearing materials in architectural detail, including, but not
limited to, stucco, stone, and brick and I think that you have seen all these elevations do
try and incorporate a fair -- those details in them. Not requiring the applicant to provide
or develop design guidelines for the multi-family portion of the project, that those issues
can be addressed through the CUP process, as all multi-family projects must prepare
CUPs. At your own hearing on April 3rd, Matt Schultz and Kent Brown, the applicant's
representatives, spoke in favor of the application. Steve Moore spoke in opposition. No
one commented and there was no written testimony. The key issues of discussion by
the Council were discussing the question of does the proposal meet the city's goals for
minimizing access to arterials while still conforming to the transportation for the Ten Mile
area and staff would suggest that the answer to that question is yes. And he also
discussed the signalized intersection on Franklin for a future collector that is to be
located near the east property boundary at the Baraya Subdivision. And that was
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 25 of 57
initially shown as a -- or still shown as a collector on the east. Property will be set aside
for a school on the site. However, at present the school district is unsure of the timing in
construction of that school. Pedestrian pathways within the subdivision for future
children to access the school. And he also discussed that the applicant provide
alternatives to the submitted garage dominated single family and townhome products
and I tried to go over those briefly, continuing the Public Hearing until such time that the
Ten Specific Area Plan is adopted by Council. There are a number of kind of clean-up
outstanding issues for City Council based on some of the past hearings. I will go ahead
and read them now and if you would -- if when you're making a motion you just want to
reference back to those, I can -- I can provide written comment in your packet.
Condition 1.17 references 315 building lots. That number is incorrect. The plan
proposed 334 lots. So, that condition of approval should be modified to reflect that.
Condition 1.1.12 should state that the required landscaping and sidewalks are to be
installed along the arterials corresponding with related phase and the development
agreement should also be modified to reflect that change. Condition 1 .1.10 should state
that the applicant has to comply with the approved elevations and design standards as
outlined in the staff report, as well as any additional standards established by Ten Mile
interchange specific area plan. The DA should be modified to reflect that change.
There is a question of -- for the Council of whether the elevations for the proposed
residential structures, the single family, townhouse, alley loaded, et cetera, are
acceptable. Staff has included the elevations proposed at the previous Council hearing
in the staff report. The applicant recently provided additional townhome renderings,
which I have shown you today. The applicant provided staff with additional residential
design guidelines to be included in the proposed development agreement, which staff
supports. And the applicant provided staff with proposed residential setbacks for the
development. While most of those setbacks do meet the city standards, some do not,
and staff recommends that the Council require the proposed development to comply
with all the UDC setback requirements for the respective zones. You don't have a
vehicle before you tonight to allow a reduction in those UDC standards. There is not a
variance and a variance wouldn't be appropriate and it's not a planned development
application before you tonight. With that I will take a breath and answer any questions
Council may have. Or Mayor.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Rountree: After three times I don't have any.
Canning: This has been before you a number of times, yes.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor and Director Canning, one of the topics that was discussed, if
I remember correctly, was a sidewalk along Black Cat, which I believe some of which
was off site. It was in the original staff recommendation and I think in the Planning and
Zoning Commission's recom'mendation for approval they asked for that and the
applicant was not enthusiastic about that. Am I remembering that correctly and, if so,
where do we stand on that?
Meridian City Council
June 19,2007
Page 26 of 57
Canning: Sir, I don't know. I don't remember that conversation myself, but I was not at
your last hearing and I wasn't at the Planning and Zoning Commission, so I wasn't
aware that was an issue. I would have to go back and look at the minutes.
Zaremba: Okay.
Canning: I'm sorry.
Zaremba: And I may not be remembering it correctly, but I think it had something to do
with access to the school.
Canning: Most of the -- there is -- the properties to the west of the school will not have
children there. They are all commercial properties. the residences in the area would
come from mostly this -- mostly to the east --
Zaremba: Internally.
Canning: -- and to the north. They could come down to the upper portion of the site,
but if they were coming down Black Cat there would be a section of roadway there. And
I know that that has been a discussion before, I just wasn't aware it was an issue that
had been raised with this one.
Zaremba: Thanks.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything else at this point, Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Hear from Matt.
De Weerd: Okay. Matt.
Schultz: Good evening, Mayor -- Madam Mayor and Council. Matt Schultz with RMR
Consulting, 2127 South Alaska here in Meridian. It's good to be back once again. What
month is it? I had to refresh my memory, too. Thanks, Anna, for getting me up to
speed again. It's been awhile, but I am happy to be back to present the Baraya
Subdivision. The last time we left off, the Ten Mile Specific Area Plan was still in
process, still moving forward, on yet to planning commission and not yet to this -- this
body and since, then, it was a good projection of how long that would take and we have
gotten through that now and do have a full consensus of the specific area with respect
to the new Comprehensive Plan, which we meet, which I would hope so, because we
did participate in that very closely and we are a stakeholder in that planning process
and we were working back and forth through that and what we have come forward with
you tonight meets that plan. So, with regards to that, I'm not going to get too much into
the layout and the density and those things that we meet the Comp Plan exactly on.
Where we left off last time were some fairly minor issues, in my mind. There was some
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 27 of 57
architectural concerns. There was a few questions about pedestrian interconnectivity
and I'd like to address those -- those issues specifically and, then, open it up to any --
any other questions and say that we are in full agreement with the staff report and all
the items in addition to Anna's suggested revisions and look forward to hopefully
incorporating all those into a development agreement with Mr. Nary, if we can move
forward. I would like to start with -- with just an issue on the setback summary that
Anna mentioned that the variance -- we are not asking for any variances. If there is any
mistakes in what we submitted, it was a mistake, it wasn't to the intent, it was just -- the
intent would be to attach this to a development agreement, so everybody can see the
builder, city, exactly what the setbacks are for alleyways, for the townhomes, and I did
submit -- I asked staff what was wrong and it was fairly minor. There was one of them
that was -- that was mislabeled and that was all that was. So, I would like to submit for
the record what we do propose to be incorporated into the development agreement,
subject to staff's final approval that it meets UDC and we believe it does and so I would
like to go ahead and -- it follows exactly what it says, but we are going to put it on, so I
will give that to Will. It's dated June 15th on the bottom for the record. Also, if we can
go to the overall site plan, Anna, please, the landscape plan, so I can cover some of the
-- I remember Councilman Borton asked about a pedestrian interconnectivity to the
school, which we do have off -- off the street along the south end here. As far as a
sidewalk along Black Cat, it was only our intent, but say we do this phase here, there
would be a sidewalk here. We wouldn't have to do sidewalk over here if we are just
starting here. That was the intent, just to clarify that the sidewalk would be put in when -
- when that section of the site develops, that was -- that was the issue on sidewalk on
frontage. The original development agreement was a little -- our condition was a little
vague on that issue. We do have exceptional pedestrian interconnectivity. A regional
pathway here that we have worked it out with the fire department and the parks
department on width. We will put extra trees -- this isn't showing it, but we are going to
put trees at the back of the lots along here. We do have room for that. And so we have
good pedestrian interconnectivity in the future -- future mixed use to the south, which is
exciting to me, that people won't have to go out onto the main roads, they can get --
they can, hopefully, do everything they need do in this area, go to work, do some
shopping, eat, whatever. Go to school. As a mixed use regional, which we are one
component of that, one area that -- and also kind of going back to the hearing we had
earlier about separation between higher density and lower density, we purposefully put
this collector road here as a separator between those two -- those two uses. So, that
was an intentional separator, it's not back up -- maybe apartments, too. Single family
residential. So, I think it's a good layout. We have good -- good regional
interconnectivity through these collector roads, to the future main road that goes east-
west down here. We connect north-south. So, we do have -- have that, a good layout.
We have a good mix of lots. Not every lot is for everybody, but we believe we have got
a good mix to where we are going to be able to appeal to a large demographic of people
that may want to live in this area -- this new area of town. I'll jump right into the
architecture, which is my least favorite thing, since I'm not an architect, I'm a civil
engineer, but it is very important that we talk about it. It is something that we do
commonly now in all of our agencies. It's become more important that we do talk about
it. These are some pictures that we took for our last hearing that staff commented on
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 28 of 57
and the dominate comment that we could see was where we had a recessed entryway
where the garage looked like it was the only thing sticking out there, that seemed to be
the negative comment if you looked at all of the comments where staff didn't support it.
We retained an architect to do some of the renderings initially and, then, also some of
the revisions. I do apologize, it took so long to get them into you, it's just so hard to get
these architects to get them done. But we did get them done and one of the things that
we wanted to do, besides nice renderings, I think more importantly, I think these
renderings could be in a development agreement, saying here is what we like, here is
what we don't like, but what we all want to hang our hat on -- I say we meaning RMR
Consulting, who is a citizen of Meridian and a representative to you and you, is to have
some guidelines, some written guidelines that we can hang our hat on. Hard to define.
Some things we like and don't like. Let's at least get -- let's get the big things out there
in writing, so as we move forward we have got some parameters to deal with and for us
we took some guidelines that staff gave us back in January, they gave about five of
these to use and we -- and I said, look, we can do better than that even, let's throw
some more in here, let's put a minimum square footage, let's talk about the front plane,
extending the entryway to the front and I have some revised renderings that show that,
how we bring the entryway to the front or passed it to really have some more
architectural flare, something more appealing, something to draw the eye away from the
garage, which, let's face it, we have these big wide roads and people want to pull in that
way, but we do have 20 percent of our site alley loaded, which, obviously, there is no
garage, so that was our -- we didn't have that going into the planning commission, so
we added that going into the Planning Commission, we added the alley, 20 percent
alleys, we have since made sure that we brought forward say issues like this where you
have a pretty narrow house with a three car garage, there is a lot of garage, and your
entryway is way back, we are saying we will introduce it to the development agreement,
saying you can't have this, we need to pull this forward, but there is some good detail on
this. I mean it's not a bad looking house. I mean it does have a garage in front, but I
would -- I would say there is a lot of them out there that I wouldn't buy and I would -- this
one is an appealing looking house. So, what we have provided -- I hope this is in your -
- in the record -- was some Baraya Subdivision design guidelines June 11th, 2007,
items one through nine. Those are what we would propose -- we proposed to staff and
staff said, yes, we agree with that and it goes through the eaves, the minimum square
footage, the materials, the entryways coming forward and providing a variety of design,
because I think -- we did show pictures, we may be limiting ourselves to things we might
like and kind of takes away some of that freedom. So, what we want is some guidelines
to operate within. So, I would propose that we do introduce all these renderings into the
development agreement, with the staff comments, as well as these design guidelines. I
don't know if you have had anything like this before. I've never proposed something this
detailed before. I would hope you see it as a step forward in how we provide for some
architecture -- I won't say control, total control, but guidelines, you know, is a good word,
because I don't think we are going to get into a committee of five to decide what every
house is going to look like in all 334 lots and that would be a little cumbersome
procedurally. But at the same time we know what we don't want. So, you know, with
that I think -- obviously, we have put a lot of time and effort in this. We have -- I want to
represent something that we can all look back on and say, yes, it was good, yes, it was
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 29 of 57
a good plan and there was some good architecture controls there. And for myself and
for your sake and for everybody's sake that lives in Meridian. So, I'm happy with the
result. I know we can't please everybody with what we have and I think we are at a 90
percent level, I hope, which is pretty dang good. So, with that I will stand for any
questions.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Anna, could you go back to the site plan? And I believe I know the answer
to the question, but I just want to state it on the record, that your proposed boulevard
between the two densities is consistent with the arterial layout that is proposed in the
Ten Mile Comprehensive Plan.
Schultz: Absolutely. There is one minor difference, the Ten Mile plan shows a collector
coming in right here. This could move. We shown it bisecting it, there is some flexibility
in that, but the intent was that, yes, north-south is exactly where we show it.
Canning: Councilmember Rountree, you said arterial. It's just designated as a
collector.
Rountree: That's a collector.
Canning: Yes.
Rountree: That feeds into the arterial.
Canning: Yes, sir.
Schultz: And to that point we are -- ACHD has asked that we contribute half of the
intersection signalization cost and we have agreed to that on a pro-rated basis
whenever they decide it's appropriate to put that in.
De Weerd: Council, any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: I guess, Matt, I do. One of the -- I guess challenges of being the first one in
to a pretty specific area plan is the discomfort that we haven't thought everything
through yet and we are still working on design standards, I believe that we have a
person hired next week or maybe last week, but hasn't started yet, and that's been a
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 30 of 57
real goal for this area is to have that. I do appreciate the work you have done with staff
on that. I guess some of the things that I did hear you say and I don't know if staff
talked to you or if you have considered it, is the view corridors and in looking at the
narrow, skinny houses, you have a very flat back -- you know, I don't see any rear
elevations, but, of course, those are concerns, because houses have gotten closer
together, that there is a wall of house and that has been an item that we had wanted to
have addressed through some of those design standards and how to start breaking that
wall up and I don't know if you had considered any of that.
Schultz: If I may, Madam Mayor, respond to that. Yes, it is a challenge when we are --
believe me, we were told to put higher density in here. I mean -- and you're balancing
out a higher density and do we look at the rears and, then, that thought did cross my
mind, however, nowhere in those design guidelines was it suggested that we do so,
however, I would offer up, especially along -- along here, which these are town home
lots, that we could have some kind of review of staff of that back elevation that will be
two story along there. I think that would be your view corridor that you may be talking
about. Maybe -- maybe Franklin.
De Weerd: Well, yeah, on Franklin.
Schultz: Franklin we have -- we have some of the narrow lots. These are more of your
standard 50 foot and 60 foot lots all along here. We do have wide landscape buffers,
but at the same time we are -- we have always said we want to work with staff as best
we can to make this a win-win and something we are all happy about. That has never
been brought up specifically, Mayor. But it is something that can be placed in the
development agreement to work with staff on rear elevations along here and we can --
and along here we can absolutely, positively, do that.
De Weerd: Okay. And I don't know if you were here during a discussion of a final plat
that we had earlier on our agenda, I do see that you don't have much information on the
multi-family and because it is in a later phase and knowing what we know today, do you
have ideas of how you might be able to -- if this is improved -- approved and they start
phasing it in, to let future and potential homeowners know there is a multi-family piece
to your development?
Schultz: I have a great idea and I don't know if it meets your support, but when I worked
in Las Vegas seven to ten years ago, this same issue came up where it's rapidly
developing mixed use developments and people bought and said they didn't know and
realtors didn't disclose it to me and, you know, it's the same story, I've heard it, you
know, and as an engineer the city of Las Vegas had us do a little zoning disclosure map
that they committed to. It was, actually, enacted into state law, I think, because they
had so many problems with it it was so big down there. But I would commit that we
would -- we would commit in the form of a development agreement to put that into our
CC&Rs, to put that in there that we disclose to the buyer that when they buy this, a
single family residential home in here, that they acknowledge that there is R-40, with the
potential of 16 to 25 units to the acre. I mean that's what R-40 allows. I do not know
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 31 of 57
what exactly will go in there, maybe 16. Either way, somebody may not be happy, but
let's just say in this area I think we all acknowledge it is a little bit higher -- a little bit
higher intensity, more of a people that might be more willing to -- to allow apartments in
this area, knowing that it's a commercial area, it's a mixed use area, so -- but I would
still suggest that we absolutely do put that in there, just for our own future benefit, as
well as the city's, that whenever anybody buys a lot they acknowledge that that is R-40.
De Weerd: Now, will that carry beyond the first home buyer?
Schultz: Every single home buyer gets a set of CC&Rs when they buy in the
subdivision. Every single one of them, first through the last.
De Weerd: Okay.
Schultz: And that would be what I would suggest.
De Weerd: I guess I have a final question before we open it up for any further
comment. You know, I like your layout, the connectivity, and I still have concerns on if
it's premature and, again, I think you have flushed out a lot of the design issues and
those kind of things, but we are in a -- in the next several years I think this area is going
to be hit by a lot of traffic as the improvements are done on 1-84, Franklin Road is one of
the alternative routes. Franklin Road from Ten Mile to Black Cat and Ten Mile to Linder
are still under preliminary development, because they were unfunded and that is a
concern.
Schultz: May I speak to that, Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Schultz: It's a concern of mine as well. I have been through the intersection of Ten Mile
and Franklin at different times of day and depending on what time it can really back up
four way. I remember talking to Mr. Inselman last year when this was first going
through saying, hey, Gary, when is that intersection going to get redone and I think at
that time it was 2007, I think because of an easement issue what they were going to do
is do the whole intersection and, then, go Ten Mile from Cherry to Franklin and improve
the Franklin - Ten Mile intersection with a signal. That's since been bumped back to
2008. We won't have our first houses online until 2008 with where we are at today, so I
think the timing is good for that intersection, which is a concern of mine. And, then,
beyond that the road as it sits has -- has capacity until we can get it widened out. But
that intersection is the big deal in that area and that is getting -- it is on their work plan
2008.
And maybe Gary can talk to that. I don't want to speak for him, but that's what I have
seen on some maps and stuff, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Well, thank you, Matt. This is a Public Hearing. I would invite
anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application to come forward. Okay.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 32 of 57
No one has signed up, but I would like to offer that opportunity. Okay. Council, any
further questions for staff before I ask the applicant if he has any final comments?
Okay.
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Schultz: Unless you have any questions, I think I will sit. I was talking to Anna. I'm
sorry .
De Weerd: I think that -- I don't see Council having any further questions, so no
final remarks?
Schultz: No. I'm here to answer anything you have. Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
Schultz: Oh, Anna --
Canning: No. No. It's your show.
Borton: Matt, I'll make my comments now to give you a chance to respond. One of my
initial concerns, obviously, regardless of what the project proposed, was to allow that
Ten Mile plan to be reviewed and come to Council, obviously, before this application
was heard, that that makes the most sense. I have, since that time, sort of recognized
from my perspective a grave concern of Meridian becoming an inch deep and a mile
wide and when I look at this proposal and the impact on traffic, schools, our sewer,
police, fire -- you're well aware we have heard and reminded again tonight that the
police department still has vacancies it can't fill and an application of this magnitude, in
light of the lag that our city is faced with in being able to provide so many of these
essential services -- transportation -- I don't know if I included growth in the laundry list
of concerns. I love the project and I love what you -- you've done everything you can to
make it as appealing as possible. My concern is that we are not ready. I want to close
that gap, I want all of these different types of services to catch up. That's the general
concern I have. I'd invite you the opportunity to respond.
Schultz: Absolutely. I mean that's a very valid concern, as we have been in a high
growth mode for a long time and how do we keep up on a tax base, wage base, with all
of our emergency services, road service, sewer services, and things like that. I could
say this is a very -- this is a long multi-year project. As big as it looks, it is -- because
we have a bigger piece of property and it is going to be phased over several years -- be
phased in as the market allows. I think the most we'd do -- maybe 80 homes a year, so
this is probably a five year project. We have -- we have worked closely with the school
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 33 of 57
district and have a school set aside. As the first project south of Overland Road, it has
a school. So, I mean at least we have defined that. Sometimes that's not always the
case. As far as transportation, we worked really close with ACHD to be proactive and
say what can we do to help. You know, just tell us as a developer and we do whatever
we are told to do at that time and if it's extraordinary impact fees, we are open to that.
We are open to any workable solution to keep things moving forward. As far as sewer
service, I know that's an issue that -- I mean as far as having the ability to connect, we
have it going to the site already, so -- and water and utilities are all right there, so there
is not a burden in that respect in terms of extending city services with respect to the
water and sewer. As far as police and fire, again, if there is any extraordinary impact
fees that anybody's proposed, then, we are open to be an active participant in that
process of getting those fees raised if they need be and, then, have it as an impact fee,
if you will, on the building permit level. We are saying, yes, please, tell us what we need
to do to just allow things to move forward in a -- not a breakneck pace, but a reasonable
-- as utilities are there and annexation, I find that the annexation rule -- we do have
some semblance of a metering, even though it seems like we are just going crazy.
Some properties will sit a mile away from here for ten years, just because the
annexation route isn't provided. So, there is a -- it looks like chaos, but I think there is a
measured metered growth systematically from the out in, hopefully -- or from the inside
out. So, I think with the new Comp Plan, with the fact that we have waited a year and
we won't get going until next year, that it's a five year project, we are here to work with
the city on this project and others, I would suggest that it's time for the -- for the
approvals and that we can move forward from there. I don't know if that helps or not.
But I think -- I'm confident our city leaders -- and with the development community to
rise to the occasion and roll up our sleaves and figure this out. I don't know of any
developers that are saying, no, we want to pay our share. You know, I don't know of
any and I'm not one of them. We just need to be told what that is, if there is something
more than what we pay in taxes and fees right now. I know there is -- I don't believe
there is a special impact fee for police and fire right now. I might be wrong, but other
cities have enacted one. I don't know if you have recently or not. You have recently?
So, I think with that -- you know, we need to evaluate that on a yearly basis, make sure
that's enough, but unless there is some specific -- you know, it's too far away from a
substation or something like that, we have been working closely with them, if they
needed a substation, we would have given it to them. They haven't said that. You
know, or a police substation, they haven't said that. So, we are always open for those
kind of thing.
De Weerd: Thank you, Matt. Council, any other questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: The points being brought up remind me that there was sometime in the past
the suggestion that the property owner -- not just you, but others that are the neighbors
of this project -- were going to offer -- for some reason three million dollars sticks in my
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 34 of 57
head -- to assist with the Ten Mile interchange, since it would be of great benefit to their
properties. One, I guess I'm assuming that that offer has gone away somehow, but my
follow-up question to that would be is there a way that we could make the area that is
included in the Ten Mile area plan a special LID of some sort. Is that a possibility?
De Weerd: I think we have been exploring mechanisms to look at putting in necessary
road infrastructure and it was mainly the backbone of it and not necessarily the arterials.
Is that correct, Anna?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the things that we were
particularly concerned about was the collector road that network in this -- wrong way. In
this particular area, because it -- there are some properties here in the middle that have
no -- no access to an arterial street. So, we had talked about doing an LID for those.
The -- you know, it seems like once we start on a project we always wish we had that
tool available right then and one of the tools that we have been talking a lot about in
Blueprint for Good Growth, which I know that doesn't sit well, but what I have always
wanted out of Blueprint for Good Growth is an adequate public facilities ordinance and I
think that that's the kind of tool we need to address those kinds of concerns. Now, I
think we have been batting around kind of discussions about when that would apply and
the most likely time it would apply would be at the issuance of a building permit would
be the -- probably the easiest place to get that and that may be something we want to
consider, rather than at a preliminary plat stage, because, then, the opportunity is gone
here. But if it were implemented at a building permit stage, then, we could ask for that
adequate public facility. It's similar to an extraordinary impact fee is really what it is.
So, something like that.
Schultz: If I may comment briefly, Madam Mayor and Council. We are prepared to
build that whole collector ourselves. We are not asking for any money back from
anybody, we are not asking to participate in an LID for that. So, we are building the
whole thing at our expense. I mean that's our contribution to the regional -- you know,
we don't need that whole thing for ours, that's our contribution to the regional master
plan, as well as this collector in here and that collector. This one actually resides -- this
isn't a collector, this is a local street here. And we are building that as well. So, I mean
the idea of an overall idea to help all these people come to grips with how to share costs
is a good one. We have just said we are paying for all of ours. You know, thanks. You
know. So -- so, I mean we are not asking for any money back from anybody and we
would be open if, indeed -- I mean to Mr. Zaremba's point. I was one of the people
involved in the meetings and when the Mayor asked I rose my hand and said, hey, let's
get in a room and let's figure out how we can get this thing going and I worked for a
different builder at the time and we had a project three miles north that we saw the
greater good and I think we had some good momentum and, then, the feds kind of
jumped in, there was a little bit of back and forth -- I don't know how it all ended up, but,
yeah, I mean if something like that comes up where the federal government is not going
to move forward with engineering or stuff, that's where we said, hey, we are going to
kick in a lot of that, we are going to help and that never got rescinded from me. I did
leave that company, but I'm not sure how that all -- how that all worked out. So, we are
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 35 of 57
always open to creative public-private partnership solutions to get these things going.
As far as I'm concerned, the last I heard this thing was going good. I haven't heard any
different lately, so --
De Weerd: We just need to pass one more GARVEE bill.
Schultz: Is that what it is? Okay.
De Weerd: So, Council, any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Canning: Madam Mayor, can I respond to a couple of Council's concerns and just so
that the applicant has an opportunity to comment on them. With regard to the Mayor's
question about the rear elevations of those properties, we roughly threw some maps on
-- on what might be appropriate, but I think what we should consider -- and this is
probably more units than you were originally thinking about, so -- would be anything that
fronts on open space, which there is quite a bit of open space, or anything that backs --
where the rear basically backs onto a street -- so that would be your arterial roads, your
collector roads, and, then, anything that backs onto an open space. So, you have got
quite a few units there. You have got all these units here and, then, all these units
along the pathway and all these units down here. What I would recommend is one of
Matt's -- Mr. Schultz's guidelines states -- provide variety in design and avoid
monotony. Modulate facades on multi-unit buildings, incorporate prominent fashion
overhanging structure types and elevations. I think that that's really all we are looking at
is to have that modulation in the rear, as well as the front.
Schultz: That's totally appropriate and it's just something we overlooked in putting those
together.
De Weerd: Thank you. Anything further, Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Matt had indicated when I was talking about the collectors going to the
arterials that they had committed to at least two collectors, they would be willing to talk
about the movement of the one east-west piece there. I'm more concerned with the
ability to have that occur in the future, as opposed to necessarily have you provide it,
but it seems to me that part of that lower lot that's R-40 would be a location for where
that's proposed to be extended.
Schultz: Right here.
Rountree: Yeah.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 36 of 57
Schultz: Yeah.
Rountree: And if we move forward with approval, with a condition that that would be
something that would be worked out in the final plat was that agreeable?
Schultz: If I may, if we were going to incorporate the -- the design guidelines for this will
be reviewed at the time of the CUP and I would also suggest that we discuss the
location of the east-west collector at that same time, at the time of the CUP.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Schultz: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Hearing no further comment from Councilor information needed, do
I have a motion to close the Public Hearing?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close the public hearings on Items 15 and 16.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 15 and 16. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would like to thank Matt. We have done this I believe the third time. It--
the project has come a long ways from the first meeting when we pushed all your
buttons and you steamed out of here and from that point on general involvement in the
Ten Mile plan, specific involved in the Ten Mile plan, and addressing I think the issues
that we raised at that point in time in terms of timing, in terms of architecture, terms of
transportation issues that were going to fall out of the Ten Mile plan, so I appreciate the
effort that you have undertaken and your patience and your willingness to listen to our
concerns, so just wanted to have that on the record.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 37 of 57
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'd like to echo Councilman Rountree's words, because Matt has -- we did push
his button that first time to get him going, but I appreciate -- I appreciate what he's done
and what he's -- how he's come though this, so I, too, along with Councilman Rountree
appreciate what you have done on this project.
Canning: I don't know if you have looked at Matt lately, but there is a lot of little gray
hairs.
Bird: Anna, you have got to speak up. You're having a whispering campaign over
there. I can't hear you.
De Weerd: It was something about gray hairs. Any other --
Rountree: Very distinguished.
De Weerd: -- any other comments? If nothing further do I have a motion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: I want to make one comment and echo the same sentiments. I am impressed
with Matt and the project and how it's developed. I may be sitting on an island with
regards to the issues that I raised earlier. Those were issues that prevent me from
being in support of the project. I'm inclined to take a step back and allow some of these
essential services that I referenced try and catch up with what Meridian's been dealing
with over the three, five, seven years, driven by access. The developers, Council, we
are all responsible for it, but that prevents me from being able to accept and approve it
tonight.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Borton. I don't think you were an island out there by
yourself. 1 certainly, again, would echo what has been said with the tenacity of Matt and
his willingness to work with this Council and the staff to make this a viable project.
Again, I just fall back to many of the points that Councilman Borton has raised and is it
premature, as 1 do have a serious concern with the traffic that Franklin is going to
experience during the reconstruction of 1-84 and adding additional traffic onto it, I think
puts any future residents out there at risk and would be a concern that the city needs to
consider. So, any further comments from Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 38 of 57
Zaremba: Since everybody else commented, of course, I have to comment. At the time
that I was on the Planning and Zoning Commission and not here on the Council, but --
and I don't remember whether it was Mr. Schultz's project at the time, but somewhere
around two years ago there was an earlier application on a similar configuration of
property and the presentation was nowhere near similar to this. It was not attractive. I
don't remember if Matt was involved in the first one, but this is much better. I believe at
the time the Commission recommended to the Council to deny that application and I
believe the Council did deny it and that's -- that is proof that we can get better if we are
willing to say, no, this is not enough, this is -- this doesn't do it for us, as I recall at the
time the previous application marginally complied with the Comprehensive Plan, but this
is a considerable step up from what was presented before. I think we just do need to be
willing to make the denial sometimes when it's not attractive. I think this was one of the
ones that proves that we benefited by denying the original application.
De Weerd: Thank you. Now, do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 15 annexation 06-061, subject to comments
provided by staff, the comments provided by the applicant, specifically with respect to
including design guidelines and renderings and staff's guidance with respect to design
and that the final plat will reflect design considerations for the east-west collector --
yeah, collector route. And, Anna, you just made a point and I didn't write it down, the
modulation for the open rear of the lots on -- facing streets.
Canning: And open space.
Rountree: And open space.
De Weerd: I have a motion to approve this project with comments as noted. Do I have
a second?
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Canning: Madam Mayor, can I ask for a clarification?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Canning: Does that also Mr. Rountree, does that also include the changes to
condition 1.1.12 and 1.1.10?
Rountree: Those are your comments in the staff report.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 39 of 57
Canning: Yes. Just wanted to clarify. Thank you.
Zaremba: And Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Director Canning did you have the opportunity to review the revised or
corrected setback summary and is that satisfactory?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm not sure exactly what's going on
here, but there is really no way to vary from the UDC with your approval tonight, so as
long as the applicant's clear on that and we are all clear on that, I think he's just
showing that he's meeting it, but anticipating it being from right of way, rather than from
sidewalk, which is how we measure setbacks.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I guess before we vote -- and Councilman Borton has
brought up issues that we all deal with. I guess my inclination on this particular
application and project is that we have heard it three times, the guidance we have given
the applicant was never that we would approve it, but always that we wanted it included
in the Comprehensive Plan in the Ten Mile area. That's been done. He's met our
desires. ACHD has programmed significant dollars for Ten Mile and Franklin Road in
the area. We just completed a multi-million dollar sewer extension through there. We
have water in the area. We are now collecting impact fees for police and fire. So, if we
have any area in the City of Meridian that we are able to develop and meet all of the
requirements, some of which we have no control over, but have succeeded in getting at
least the transportation infrastructure programmed for improvement in the next year or
two, this is an area. So, I'm favorably inclined on this particular application for those
reasons.
De Weerd: Thank you. Anything further? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 16. Do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item 16 for PP 06-062, preliminary
plat, with the conditions included in the previous motion, also applicable to the
preliminary plat, specifically as it relates to the negotiation and finalization of the east-
west collector routes.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 40 of 57
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Discussion, Mr. Rountree. I think I
recall on this we had some questions regarding secondary access and that's certainly
triggered by a certain number of building permits and -- that was a long time ago.
Maybe I'm thinking of another one. But certainly the phasing of this and access would
be of concern and we have had discussions of this in the past. I didn't know what
direction this was going to go, but in regards to tying building permits to road
improvements and -- would there be restrictions until certain road improvements are
done or at least under construction?
Rountree: Madam Mayor -- and it may be an incorrect assumption on my part, but I
thought that that was pretty standard language as it related to development
agreements, so that that would be in a development agreement with respect to how
many lots could be developed --
De Weerd: In the fire code.
Rountree: -- in the fire code prior to building permits until we get a secondary access.
So, if that's not the case, then, I would add that to my motion.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, those are always addressed at final
plat stage. The applicant has worked out a secondary access with the fire department
already on phase one, so they have been working with the fire department, but, yeah,
that's a very hard and fast rule for our fire department.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree,
there was one other condition that needed to be changed, but it wasn't as part of a
development agreement and that's condition 1.1.7.
Rountree: Yes.
Canning: So, I can assume you wanted to include that. Sorry, sir. I forgot to put the
statement part. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, nay.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
Item 17:
Continued Public Hearing from May 22,2007: VAC 07-008 Request for
a Vacation of the City of Meridian utility easement common to Lots 1, 2 &
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 41 of 57
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: Thank you. Okay. Item 17 is a continued Public Hearing from May 22nd. It
has been requested to be continued again to July 24th.
Zaremba: I move we continue the Public Hearing for V AC 07-008 to our regularly
scheduled meeting of July 24th, 2007.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 17 to July 24th. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 18:
Public Hearing: RZ 07-008 Request for a Rezone of approximately 4
acres from a C-N zone to a C-C zone for Lots 1 - 5, Block 1 of the Corner
at Vineyards Subdivision for Cherry Wood Villaae by Richard Brown and
Roy Brown - Southwest Corner of Cherry Lane and Linder Road:
Item 19:
Public Hearing: CUP 07-007 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to
allow retail sale and service of motor scooters within the C-C zoning
district on Lot 3, Block 1, of the Corner at Vineyards Subdivision for
Cherry Wood Villaae by Richard Brown and Roy Brown - Southwest
Corner of Cherry Lane and Linder Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 18 and 19 are public hearings on RZ 07-008 and CUP 07-007.
I will open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Canning: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Members of the Council. I will try to
enunciate, Councilmember Bird, and try not to mumble.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Canning: This is the Cherrywood Village project. It's located on the southwest corner of
Cherry Lane and Linder Road. The applications before you tonight are a rezone and a
Conditional Use Permit for vehicle sales. The applicant is requesting the rezone of
these 4.05 acres from commercial -- C-N, which is neighborhood business, to C-C,
community business. Approval of the rezone would allow the property owners on the
subject five lots to potentially use the site for more intense commercial purposes. The
applicant is not proposing any new structures or additional square footage at this time.
Concurrent with the zoning application is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow
for retail sales, storage and servicing, of motor vehicles or recreational vehicles on Lot
3, Block 1. Also just for your reference, according to our code, vehicle rental sales and
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 42 of 57
servicing are conditionally allowed in the proposed C-C zone, but are prohibited within
the C-N zone. So, that's why they are asking for the rezone and they have the
concurrent conditional use application. I don't have -- what is going on? These were
not like this earlier today, I want you to know. It will take me a moment. I have to rotate
all these figures. I don't know what happened.
Rountree: I think you have done this before.
Canning: It isn't. I swear. It's not my fault.
De Weerd: It's not Anna.
Nary: We do offer free training for all the users.
Canning: Well--
Bird: I think that computer sabotaged you.
De Weerd: We can just try to look sideways, Anna.
Bird: Anna, don't worry about it.
Canning: Okay.
Bird: Go ahead, kid.
Canning: Well, all right. We will have to just look at the aerial tonight. I apologize. We
did have pictures of the front and back of the facility, so that you could see what it
looked like back there. Apparently I need some -- to get my files trained, so that they
change on me from one computer to another and I will work on that. The Planning and
Zoning Commission heard this project on May 3rd, 2007. At that Public Hearing they
moved to recommend approval of the rezone and denial of the Conditional Use Permit.
Richard Brown, the property owner, and Eric Fieldstad, the manager of A1 Scooters,
spoke in favor of the applications. Ralph Gentry, John Wasson, Gilbert Thoreson, Kevin
Snow, Hal De Grange, Kurt Farmer, and David Crandall, all neighbors, spoke in
opposition. There was no one commenting. There was written testimony provided by
Hal De Grange, the neighbor, and a group letter from 13 other neighbors, including
Ralph Gentry, Carol Gentry, Hal De Grange, John Wasson, et cetera. Key issues of
discussion by the Commission were the noise generated by a scooter, the decibel levels
of servicing machines with doors open and issues related to that. The hours of
operation -- the specific services provided by the scooter store, test driving of the
scooters and related safety issues, storage and handling of flammable materials on site,
replacing the existing cedar perimeter fencing with sound abatement fencing and the
provision of additional landscaping to buffer the adjacent residential subdivision. I
would like to kind of summarize that by saying that the Planning Commission really
looked at a number of ways that they might be able to condition the Conditional Use
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 43 of 57
Permit so that it would work in that area, but they just couldn't come up with enough
conditions that would make it work. There was just nothing they could do. So, that's
why they ended up recommending denial. So, the key Commission changes to staff
recommendation were that they did end up recommending denial, but in -- as part of the
approval of the rezoning request, the Commission elected to require the applicant to
enter into a development agreement with the following stipulation: That in addition to
the conditional uses listed within the C-C zone, the following uses will require
procurement of a CU. Fuel sales. Vehicle car washing facilities and building material
sales. That the applicant moves the trash enclosure dumpster to the east, so as not to
be adjacent to the residential subdivision. That dumpster is to be within a concrete
block enclosure. That the applicant provides additional landscaping, preferably
arborvitae and junipers, within the landscape buffers adjacent to the residential
subdivision. So, the outstanding issues for the City Council would be the Commission
has recommended denial of the conditional use application and recommended approval
of the rezoning request. Staff had suggested a number of conditions in conditional use
to address some existing inadequacies in the current parking lot design and
landscaping compared to our current standards. So, this project was developed some
time ago, it didn't meet -- or does not currently meet all of our standards, so staff, as
part of the Conditional Use Permit, had recommended some changes to the parking lot
design to bring that up to standard and the time of a rezone application would be
appropriate, but, then, because the Commission didn't approve the Conditional Use
Permit, those conditions kind of fell by the wayside, staff didn't have the opportunity to
ask them to include them in the development agreement. So, we are bringing those up
to you now as considerations for including within the development agreement, if you
desire to approve that or if you're going to accept the recommendation for denial on the
CU. Hopefully that makes sense. We are hoping these conditions get approved one
way or another. It may be appropriate to put them with the development agreement, so
they are tied to the rezone. Those -- I'll go through these quickly, while still trying to
enunciate Clearly. They would be that the four floating parking stalls as shown on the
submitted site plan immediately to the rear of Domino's Pizza, parallel with the building,
be eliminated. That the applicant installs two additional trees within the landscape
buffer along Cherry Lane. That the applicant install seven additional class one trees
within the landscape buffer between the subject property and the corner at Vineyards
Subdivision NO.2. That the applicant provides three park -- a three park bicycle rack to
be located in the front of Great Clips / Sprint retail stores. That the applicant provides
easements for any required sewer and water mains that are not located within the right
of way. That the application install a pressurized irrigation system for this development,
if not currently existing. The system shall utilize surface water for its primary source.
That the applicant pay Public Works development plan review and construction
inspection fees as determined during the planned review process, if necessary. So,
with that I will answer any questions Council may have and while the applicant is
speaking I will try and get the site plan so that you can see it properly.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 44 of 57
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, how many trees do they have along Cherry Lane right now on their
landscape buffer? Do you have any idea?
Canning: Once I rotate this figure I can tell you and I also have -- there is a montage
picture that's great that shows the relative sparcity of trees along Cherrywood -- Cherry
Lane, actually.
Bird: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Would you back up one, the -- what you had on the display prior to this one --
just back up one. No. Going the other direction. That one. Thank you. Just hold that
for a second if you would. Okay. That's what I wanted to see. Thank you.
Canning: It is unusual -- a portion of the property backs off to this office property --
which I think is a day care or a church.
Bird: Church.
Canning: Church. And, then, just a portion of it backs onto these three homes and,
then, there is two more homes here.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here?
Brown: Madam Mayor, Council Members, my name is Richard Brown. I live in Salt
Lake City, Utah. Thanks, Anna. I think you represented what we are trying to do very
well. Roy and I made the application to rezone this property, because all of the property
to the east of us, as you saw on the previous slide, is already zoned C-C and in order to
compete for tenants we are asking for that same zoning for our property. We are not
anticipating building any additional buildings we don't have the room, number one. We
are satisfied with that tenant mix, with the exception of the possibility of adding the
scooter business to the building. But that's our primary reason for asking for the rezone.
As far as the Conditional Use Permit is concerned, I'll let Eric talk mostly about his
business, but I would like to point out that the staff report is in error -- excuse me -- the
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 45 of 57
minutes of the Council meeting -- committee meeting, excuse me, is in error in that it
states that the hours are incompatible with -- this business is one of the most
compatible in terms of hours for a residential area that we have. First of all, he only
operates five days a week. He's closed on Sunday. He operates -- he opens at 10:00
in the morning and he's closed at 6:00 at night. Those are pretty good hours for a
business in this area. As far as planning and zone staff recommendations, when they
made their recommendation to approve both of these motions -- or applications to the
Council, they made a number of recommendations. We can live with most of those
recommendations. There is one in particular wherein they are asking to move the
dumpster storage, which is right now directly behind the center of our building and it is --
you know, the dumpster--
De Weerd: Is that right there?
Brown: Yes. Thank you, Mayor. It is, in fact, the type of enclosure that was
recommended at the time that we built it. I have a couple of pictures, if you would care
to take a look.
De Weerd: Well, we would be able to see them if they are sideways.
Brown: Well maintained dumpster enclosure, approximately 16 feet wide. It's buffered
in the back by trees, on one side by storage buildings. If we move it, because of the
width of the thing, we can only move it about 20 feet to the east and, then, run into
someone else's property. And I think that's not accomplishing a whole bunch to do that.
But, you know, if -- if the Council wants to discuss that issue with us, we will be more
than happy to see what kind of remedy we can come up with. I would like to point out
that the -- this -- this area was zoned commercial and the plat with filed and approved in
November of 1991. The first residential plat was approved on January 29th of 1993.
That's a period of 14 months later. There is not a single homeowner in this area that
bought a lot not knowing that that was not commercially zoned. And it's a bit
disingenuous to come along 14 years later and -- you know, it's not like it's being used
for commercial purposes. I will let Eric -- I will let Eric address the issues that the
Commission had in relation to the noise that they are concerned about in terms of his
hours of operation again, in terms of the type of services that he's proposing to put in
and, you know, we think we can overcome their concerns, but I will let him address
those.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Fieldstad: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, my name is Eric Fieldstad, I
reside at 12979 West Pinon Court. I'll keep my comments very specific. Throughout
the hearings at the Planning and Zoning level, at the encouraging of Mr. Nary, there
was two stipulations set forth in their recommendation to this body to deny that would
have taken into consideration perhaps an approval recommendation to you. Those two
were: No test rides would be conducted in any way, shape, or form. And that was a
safety issue and a noise issue. And we can accommodate that quite easily by not
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 46 of 57
putting any batteries in any machine in the store and we will post notice that no test
rides could be offered at this facility. The second one was -- I currently have one store
on Fairview Avenue in the city of Boise. Very small, very cramped. This building here
allowed us opportunity to set up a larger maintenance area, but because of use of
pneumatic tools and the mandatory test drives to certify a vehicle repaired to safer
standards, we will not move the maintenance activity to this facility, it will all be
conducted at our Fairview office. I respectfully request consideration by this body for
approval of the conditional use with those two stipulations. I highly concur. I do
appreciate the city staff, their accommodation to our request, and also to the residents
in the area. I have met with them twice and, I tell you what, they are good people.
Thank you, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. We have a number of people that did sign up and
indicated their view on this application. If, when I call your name, you would like to
provide testimony, please, come forward at that time. Gilbert Thoreson. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Thoreson: I will.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Thoreson: First of all, thank you, Mayor and City Council, for this opportunity to present
my position against both proposition 18 and 19. The rezoning --
De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address.
Thoreson: Oh. Gilbert A. Thoreson. 1490 North Santa Rosa Place, Meridian, Idaho.
83642.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Thoreson: I'm not very comfortable talking in front of people.
De Weerd: We totally understand.
Thoreson: Okay. On 18, rezoning it from C-N to C-C, opens up Pandora's Box. You
have a conditional zoning availability to Maverick, to the wash -- car wash and, then,
Domino's. The traffic is significant in that area and there is during the weekends a
hangout for both teenagers and young adults atter -- oh, late at night. It's well atter
curfew. So, opening it up again for additional C-C I think is unwarranted. It also permits
building changes to the existing facilities and would allow other problems that this site
isn't ready for. It's really a small strip mall and it should remain such. But going onto
19, to allow the motor scooter sale there, if I was going to buy a motor scooter, the first
thing I would want to do is try it out before I will commit myself to that purchase. He will
make any kind of agreement in front of you right now, but when push comes to shove,
he will allow someone to try it out and where they will try it out is a nice little run right
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 47 of 57
through The Vineyards. And I know I'd want to do it. If I was going to put money up for
one of those scooters, that's what I would do. I don't trust his veracity, because he
violated his agreement in the beginning by moving scooters into that building, putting
them up for sale, and opening the facility up for sale before approval of this facility. So,
anybody will make any kind of a promise, whether they will keep it, I don't believe it. But
it's just too much traffic in the area. It's an unsafe area and having gasoline there and
dealing with oil and -- so, I think you're creating an environmental hazard as well. That's
alii have got to say. Thank you for you opportunity.
De Weerd: Thank you. Ralph Gentry signed up against. Sir, I guess if you want to say
anything, it does need to be on the public record. I appreciate your willingness to yield
your time. If you will, please, state your name and address.
Gentry: I'm Ralph Gentry. I reside at 1502 North Santa Rosa Place in The Vineyards.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Gentry: I would like to yield my time to better speakers, but I do want to go on record in
direct opposition to this zoning change.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir.
Gentry: Thank you for your time.
De Weerd: You are on the record. Kevin Snow signed up against.
Snow: Hi.
De Weerd: Hello. If you will, please, state your name and address.
Snow: Kevin Snow. 1470 North Silverado Place.
De Weerd: Thank you. And if you will move the mike up a little bit closer. Thank you.
Snow: I'm here on behalf of myself as a homeowner. Also speaking for the board of
the homeowners association of The Vineyards, with 200 plus homes. Also speaking on
behalf of several who could not be here tonight. The De Granges, the Petersons, the
Farmers, several others that have signed the petitions that are before you -- have
authorized me to speak in their behalf and to consolidate our comments into one. The
process began when we received notice in the mail about the neighborhood meeting
regarding this project. there is a long history between the residents and this particular
commercial property, ergo, there was a lot of interest. People were sent. Letters were
written in response to the invitation. People were sent authorized to speak on others'
behalf to let them know where our concerns were and they spoke with Mr. Brown and
with the current owner. We were somewhat surprised in the packet they reported to this
Council that they determined there would be no significant impact. That wasn't the idea
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 48 of 57
we tried to give them. We have tried to express exactly the problems that we have had
with this area. As you can see, the area has a Maverick currently. It also has a
Domino's Pizza delivery outfit. And it has a car wash. All of which are intense use as
far as people just coming for a short stay, five minutes, and, then, boom, they are off
again. The Maverick, thanks to its great prices, is often stacked four deep, the stacking
lane can't be found. Traffic is quite intense on that corner and cars often cut the corner
and go behind or find other ways to go through or around or get in line at this facility.
We compare it to the facilities adjacent to it. Those facilities have sound proof
abatement fences. They paid for them, I presume. One of them went so far as to not
even allow automobile traffic between their businesses and the residential area. They
have gone to great lengths to put in those kind of things and those kind of features to
abate or to at least limit the impact that they have on the residential areas. This corner,
as it so happens, does not have those. It does have the trees, but the fences up there
are the privacy fence, apparently put up by the developer of the division when it was
first put in. Sound does not travel necessarily over it, it travels right through it. It's one
of those gapped, dog ear fences. It's at the point of dilapidation. The homeowners
association is already considering on its small budget replacing all of its fences with
something more lasting, because the upkeep on those fences is becoming a burden to
us. We expressed these desires -- or these problems to the owner, but he decided to
proceed forth through this body anyway, because, of course, if you say yes, he doesn't
have to do anything, other than your stipulations to fix any of these problems or to
address them with the homeowners. The most excruciating part so far that we have
had in this process was listening to the deliberations of the Planning and Zoning. That
was enraging. Let me tell you some of the comments that came across. One: There is
so many CUPs already on this property it's practically C-C anyway, why don't we just go
ahead and pass it. For those who had stood against the previous CUPs, that was
particularly insulting. It was also said it was too expensive to ask them to put up a
fence. Considering they didn't put up a fence in the first place and that all of their
neighbors and competition have had to put fences, I don't think that's a fair assessment
either. It was argued that they just wanted a scooter shop there. It's a coming and
going enterprise and Meridian wants it. That's the closest to a planning decision that we
saw in that particular meeting. Yes, we may want scooter shops. Why they want it at
this particular location I'm not certain. As he said, there is a C-C going in just down the
road 300 yards from this facility that is already zoned for C-C and only needs a CUP
and they have already planned to put in the solid fence. There is also a place kitty-
corner, which is shown on the map as R-4, which I understand has just been rezoned
as C-C. That backs onto a church. I don't know how many churches complained about
this kind of a thing -- about noise, because they are on Sundays and they don't even
cross over generally with the businesses that they are adjacent to. But that's also an
available location, where, if he wanted to, he could not only sell his scooters, but he
could do the maintenance and do the test driving and there is no one to complain about
it. We also heard that because the neighboring businesses weren't there to complain,
that perhaps it really wasn't that big of a problem, to which our objection was, yes, they
are all in an enclosed cinder block compartment, compared to what we are across the
fence from the back door of this location. So, in their deliberations they decided to pass
-- or not to pass the CUP, because we did convince them that there is a problem or an
Meridian City Council
June 19,2007
Page 49 of 57
issue there with the intense amount of traffic that it's simply not designed for. But their
thinking was a little backwards. They okayed the zoning, but they tried to disapprove
the CUP. At that time they were notified by our friends over here at the desk that if they
temporarily do not allow a CUP, they have to give conditions under which a CUP can
pass. In short, you cannot permanently deny a CUP. Yet, one of their arguments was
that because of all the CUPs that had already been done, that they should go ahead
and rezone it. Their jaw about hit the floor. They did not know how to handle that.
They had not anticipated having to make some condition that would allow them to
comply to put the shop at that location. The fact is they have made a crucial error.
Once they allow the zoning change, they have to eventually allow the CUP. Our motion
would be Simply to say it's now commercial neighborhood, it was commercial when we
all bought our lots and moved in. It was commercial neighborhood before all the
problems and impact began to occur. It can stay commercial neighborhood. The
property directly north is still commercial neighborhood. It's doing just fine. We are only
talking about one unit here that he's trying to rent to a scooter shop. And, again, why
the scooter shop wants so intently this particular place, we have not heard an
explanation for. Over all the objections of all the neighbors, it's still going through. Now,
my question is with this location here, you have the C-C shown that's going in. Right
next to that is Meridian Middle School. Directly to the south we have a pre-school.
Directly to the north is Tully Park and north of that a new high school. What is our plan
for this corner? If you really want it to be C-C, then, tell us that's your plan. If you think
that it needs that kind of intense commercial use, we'd like to hear it. If you just think
that property rights of the owner always surpass those of the residents around, then,
fine, state that. We'd like to hear that. If you feel that it's of crucial benefit to the
community that this be made C-C and that a scooter shop be put there, tell us that. But
I think we have demonstrated that this property is perhaps the worst place for this
particular business and the worst place to escalate community business on that corner
and that there are other areas that are already going in that serve that need. And also I
think we have established that there is an impact on the surrounding residential
community. So far Mr. Brown does not truly believe that. He does not negotiate with
us to find abatement situations for our problems and he has been unsympathetic
towards many of the complaints that we have given to him about the running of this
commercial property. What I would like to see from this body is to give us some latitude
to say let's work this out together, that something has to be done to control the increase
of impact if you're going to increase the use. And so we would ask that you not allow
the zoning change. That prevents any CUPs from going on at all until the situation --
some resolution is brought about. And that was the one thing I forgot to mention was
that when the zoning and planning commission could not agree on what would abate
sound techniques, it was decided that they could not approve any and so it was
dropped for none, a default position to pass was, then, resolved, as opposed to saying if
we can't resolve it we will wait until we can. So, our position is against the CUP, if we
have to, but mainly against the zoning change.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Snow. Any questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 50 of 57
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: John Wasson signed up against.
Wasson: John Wasson. 1486 North Silverado Place. I have a couple of concerns.
First of all, it's currently zoned C-N. According to the Meridian website and the Ada
County Commissioners, the Stubblefield property directly across is also zoned C-N.
Three of the four corners are currently zoned C-N. According to the C-N zone, you're
allowed to have a 35 foot building and 7,500 square feet. Under a C-C you're allowed a
50 foot building and 60,000 square feet, without having to come before the board and __
or the body and get permission to make a change. That's a heck of a difference. We
have been told that he wants to be able to compete. Currently, the C-C property that is
owned by Stubblefield next to the current strip mall on the southeast corner is 9.145
acres, valued at about 6,400 dollars. The Stubblefield property is 2.16 acres, valued at
2.3 million dollars. Mr. Brown's property is 1.86 acres, valued at 2.15 million dollars. If
his property were valued at the Stubblefield rate, his property would be worth 1.98
million dollars. He's doing better than Stubblefield. These were all gathered off the Ada
County website. I currently own the house that has the most frontage behind his
building. I have 24 feet from my back porch to the fence line, then, there is another 20
feet in the planter strip where he has his garbage receptacle, which is nine feet from my
fence. We have had difficulties with the gentleman in the past. I had made numerous
calls to the police department for violation of the nuisance ordinance that the city has.
We have had street sweepers 50 feet from my bedroom window at 1 :00 in the morning.
Domino's Pizzas being unloaded at the Domino's store at midnight. Lieutenant Overton
has a present that I found in my backyard several weeks ago. I have cleaned up pizza
boxes that -- I was offered a free pizza from Domino's after cleaning up the ant filled
pizza boxes. Didn't really appeal to me, but because my property is so close to the
dumpster, trash seems to find its way into my backyard. A nuisance, according to City
Code 4-2-1 -- and I will just drop to the last part -- or disturbs the peace and quiet, is
hereby declared a nuisance. Folks, for three years I could read the Idaho Statesman in
my backyard at 1 :00 in the morning, because I had that much light. It took four years
working through the city and with the property owner to get those shielded. I still have
issues with the noise and other problems. Now, I know that's not your concern, but
while -- let me rephrase that. I know that's not the primary issue here. But he wants to
open Pandora's Box. He wants to convert to C-C, so that he can compete more ably.
That means more money. My dad always told me to make money you have to use
money. If he wants to make money, then, he needs to insulate us, give us some form of
protection to take care of us. Otherwise, we are sitting out there and we don't have any
-- any recourse. That's why we as a neighborhood are here to ask you to assist us in
working with him. Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 51 of 57
Wasson: Subject to your questions, that completes my briefing.
De Weerd: Any questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you. Hal De Grange signed up against.
De Grange: Good evening, Madam Mayor, City Council Members. My name is Hal De
Grange. I reside at 1450 North Silverado Place in The Vineyards and I did make it after
all, Kevin, and thank you for speaking on my behalf. I oppose this rezoning. All the
previous testimony has pretty much covered all of the areas that I am concerned with. I
have lived in this residence since 1993. July 4th I moved in. And under Frank Madsen
of Holland Realty, he told me, quote, unquote, this was going to be professional office
buildings and that was the extent -- that was our concern, whether -- I think at one time
Moxie Java was considering opening a facility there. The Maverick was already
established and the car wash was being erected at that time and throughout those
years, the last 14 years, the congestion, noise, pollution has always been an increasing
concern, along with at one time security was a problem from high school kids cutting
through the cul-de-sac and jumping -- not only our backyards, but Kevin Snow's
property. Anyway, like I mentioned, I'm against this. I'm against the CUP and the
rezoning issue. And thank you very much for your time.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Those are the names that have signed up to testify. Is
there anyone else who would like to provide testimony on this application? Please
come forward.
Henscheid: My name is Dotie Henscheid. I live at 2031 West Sonoma.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Henscheid: I'm the president of the homeowners board and I asked Kevin to represent
us tonight and he did and I just wanted to be noted that I was also here.
De Weerd: Thank you for that. Okay. Any further testimony? Okay. Council, any
questions for staff?
Bird: No. The application has a reply.
De Weerd: Anna.
Canning: I do have better images for you now. This is the site plan. I can blow it up
more if you'd like. They do have the Maverick on the -- Maverick station on the corner.
The existing car wash. Domino's Pizza. I think these are the four floating parking lot __
Meridian City Council
June 19. 2007
Page 52 of 57
parking spaces that were discussed. This is the proposed site of the A1 Scooters.
Then, you have Movie Gallery, Great Clips, Sprint, a pet store, Jackson Hewett and
Renewed Expressions. The existing trees are noted on the plan. There are none noted
in the -- in front of the Maverick and the car wash. Then, these are some montage
photos. You can -- it was taken in April, so the trees weren't in bloom, but you can see
a couple there and a few more here. And, then, this is the rear fencing and the
landscape buffer along the rear. And we can all turn our heads back the other way.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Bird, did you have a question for staff or __
Bird: No. I'll wait until the applicant comes up.
De Weerd: Okay. Final remarks from the applicant? You get the last word.
Brown: I get the last word. Thank you, Mayor, Council. I -- you know, I listened to their
testimony and I can sympathize to some degree with some of the things they are saying
and some if it is just plain baloney. You know, we installed hoods over all the lights on
the back of our building the second year it was up. We have to have some lighting back
there. We have employees going out of those businesses at night. There is security
issues. We have a hair business in there that are all females. You know, we have tried
to be good neighbors. We have not ignored the requests that we have gotten. As far
as the dumpster pickup and those kind of things, they are done pursuant to the city's
guidelines and requirements. They are not allowed to pick up late at night or early in
the morning and those kind of things. We have changed our guy that sweeps the
parking lot, so he does not do it in the middle of the night, which was a problem and
those kind of things. We are not unwilling landlords to work with our neighbors. Some
of the requests that have been made are just, you know, obviously, very very expensive
ones. You know, we have talked about the building of a very tall block -- concrete block
fence. You know, I don't have that ability to raise the rents in my building in order to
cover a 38,000 dollar fence, those kind of things. I do believe that the discussion at the
Council meeting was that that was not going to create any significant sound barrier in
addition to what they have -- their recommendations already were for the planting of
additional trees and so on, so given that we will, you know, cooperate with them the
best way that we can and try and comply with what it is that the Planning and Zoning
people would like us to do. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir.
Bird: Mr. Brown, I got one question. It's basically a statement. Myself and I believe
there was one or two other people that sit on this Council -- and if I remember right, I
think it took two or three times to get you to finally shade those lights. I can understand
why the neighbors have some real concerns with what's going to be going on over
there. That is a very very busy corner. Maverick stacks the traffic up. We are also
forgetting that you have got a very nice little shaved ice business sitting there in front
that has three or four cars, if not more, parked there a lot of the times. I will be right up
front, I cannot support the change in the zoning or the CUP. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 53 of 57
De Weerd: Council, any questions for the applicant?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Since we also have the CUP on this, any final remarks from the other
applicant, since we are looking at two of you.
Fieldstad: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Members of the Council. As a business
person I hope and wish to be a good neighbor to everyone involved. We would like to
have the opportunity. Scooters are the fastest growing segment of the motorcycle
industry for the last five years. With gasoline over three dollars a gallon I think we are
all feeling the pinch on the wallet. But more importantly we want to be part of your
community and add a value to the community. Again, I thank you for your audience.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, anything further? If not, do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close the public hearings on Items 18 and 19.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Items
18 and 19. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would -- I appreciate Councilman Bird's comment and add
to them. I don't understand -- well, let me start even farther back. I don't feel that
what's being asked for is appropriate and to approve the zoning change and, then, try
and work backwards to limit back down to what it almost already is to begin with, just
because the proposed use is distasteful, it doesn't make sense to me to approve the
zoning change. We have already got what I think is appropriate for that corner. The
property north of it is the same zoning and, yes, there are some other zonings around it,
but that argument alone doesn't compel me to feel that this zone needs to change and I
feel we are making it way too complicated to say let's change it to a more intense zone
and, then, condition it back to, essentially, what we have already got and -- I mean there
may be some other things we wish we could get in the process, a few more trees and a
better fence or something, but I -- my inclination is to just say let's not change the zone,
it's appropriate the way it is.
Meridian City Council
June 1 g, 2007
Page 54 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I don't want to be redundant, but I'll state my position. Mr. Bird, Mr.
Zaremba, covered both points I would make. I agree. I think that this is a case where __
and I'm not so sure if I was on Planning and Zoning or the City Council in 1991, but we
actually zoned it right and I think it ought to stay that way.
De Weerd: I think I just remember late night times going out and looking at lights
behind that building myself. So, I had the privilege of getting to know Mr. Brown and Mr.
Wasson very well. Any further comment? Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we deny RZ 07-008.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to deny Item 18. Any discussion? Mr. Berg,
will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 19.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we deny CUP 07-007.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny Item 19, CUP 07-007. Mr.
Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
June 19,2007
Page 55 of 57
Item 20:
Item 21:
Item 22:
Item 23:
Public Hearing: MI 07-008 Request for a Miscellaneous Application to
modify the recorded Development Agreement (Inst. 104107406) to
remove the requirement for all future uses to obtain Conditional Use
Permit approval for Gateway Marketplace by Landmark Development
Group - 3205 East Ustick Road:
Public Hearing: VAR 07-010 Request for a Variance to landscape the
surplus right-of-way and decrease the required street buffer along Eagle
Road from 35 feet to 20 feet for Gateway Marketplace by Landmark
Development Group - 3205 East Ustick Road:
Public Hearing: VAR 07-012 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3B-7C2
to count existing right-of-way for Eagle Road towards the landscape street
buffer width in the C-G zone for Bienville Sauare Eagle Road
Landscaping by Redcliff Development - west side of Eagle Road, south
of Ustick Road (Bienville Square Subdivision):
Public Hearing: VAR 07-011 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3B-7C2
to count existing right-of-way for Eagle Road towards the landscape street
buffer width in the C-G zone for Sadie Creek Promenade Eaale Road
Landscaping by Landmark Development Group - SWC of Eagle Road
and Ustick Road (Sadie Creek Subdivision):
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Items 20, 21, 22 and 23 have been requested to
continue. I will open these public hearings MI 07-008, VAR 07-010, VAR 07-012 and
VAR 07-011. I will entertain a motion to continue these four items to July 3rd.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Items 20 through 23 to
July 3rd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 24:
Item 25:
Ordinance No. 07-1320 : RZ 07-005 Request for a Rezone of
9.21 acres from I-L to a C-G zone for Jabil East Property by the Joint
School District No. 2 - 1303 East Central Drive (Lot 1, Block 1, Jabil
Subdivision):
Ordinance No. 07-1321 : RZ 07-002 Request for a Rezone of
0.628 of an acre from I-L to C-G zone for the Lynn Thomas Property by
Lynn Thomas - north of East Franklin Road and east of Meridian Road:
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 56 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Items, 24 and 25 are ordinances numbers 07-1320 and 07-1321.
Mr. Berg, will you, please, read these two ordinances by title only.
Berg: Yes, ma'am. Moved too fast for my paperwork. Ordinance 07-1320, an
ordinance finding that the Joint School District #2, the owners of certain real property,
has made a written request for rezone of the zoning classification for real property being
a parcel of land -- being a Parcel A of the record of survey number 6631 situated in the
southeast quarter of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East of Boise Meridian,
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A of this ordinance and
rezoning certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and within the
corporate limits of the City of Meridian and rezoning the land use zoning classification of
said lands from I-L to C-G in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this
ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and
the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of
the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an
effective date.
Berg: Ordinance 07-1321, an ordinance finding that the Thomas Family Real Estate,
the owners of certain real property, has made a written request for rezoning of the
zoning classification for the real property being situated in Lot 18, Block 3, Meridian
Business Park Subdivision, located in a portion of the southeast quarter of Section 7,
Township 3 North, Range 1 East of Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County,
Idaho, as described in Attachment A of this ordinance and rezoning certain lands and
territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and within the corporate limits of the City of
Meridian and rezoning the land use zoning classification of said lands from I-L to C-G in
the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the
Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission,
as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a
waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Berg. You know the statement here, Ralph, right? You
have heard these two ordinances read by tile only. Is there anyone who would like to
hear it read in their entirety? Hearing none, Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 07-1320 and 07-1321, with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve these two ordinances. If
there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
Meridian City Council
June 19, 2007
Page 57 of 57
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you. We are at the end of our agenda. Council, do I have a motion
to adjourn?
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:55 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED: ~
MAY~ERD
ATTESTED'
WILLIAM G. BERG
1 / J- / t!J 7\11111111
:rb II'
DATE APPROve' ~;:: [>b'\;:'l1:/J,
\....~~~y~~ ~~~~ \\~~;~;.r!~:,-~r'<,:.,
.~:' (j~' Cf~f'OFi:.lJ:'" ",~,.. "'_
~::. ,f.J' .'(..... .." ....~.
2 ,;:."" ())":
f.3Y LERK.,;,~~.L1 ~
~ '(;, ,.{? / !
-;. Q!,. ~,) I 0 .:::-
e;'. ".,..., 0....:. (,t;t 1"'1. /.)i;: ;:.
....... v ,,-"" J 7-::'-,"./ ",. ........
. , .it1I _________. ~>, .,"
/, 1 a ,-r\'~ "
,. // r\> . ~/ ',V .,>
///J '-"UNT ~, \ ,\\
ill \ \ \
'1//1111111\\\\