Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 10-19 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 19,1999 -7:30 PM CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL: X RON ANDERSON X CHARLIE ROUNTREE X GLENN BENTLEY X KEITH BIRD X MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE CONSENT AGENDA A. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 5, 1999 APPROVE B. MINUTES OF MEETING HELD OCTOBER 5, 1999 APPROVE C. VACATION AND SICK LEAVE POLICY RESOLUTION #258 APPROVE REGULAR AGENDA ORDINANCE # 847 - OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER - THE IDAHO STATESMAN DISCUSSION OF IDAHO INDEPENDENT BANK'S REQUEST TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUEST OF COUNCIL BY CHERRY LANE GOLF COURSE LETTER OF CREDIT. SPECIAL MEETING OCTOBER 28,1999 6:30 PM 1. TABLED 10/5/99: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF 7.265 ACRES FOR CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE II FROM R-8 TO R-15 BY WilliAM & LUCILE LEAVELL-END OF 5TH, NORTH OF CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE AND SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW: TABLED UNTIL NOVEMBER 3, 1999 MEETING 2. TABLED 10/5/99: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT 16 FOUR PLEXES WITH POOL AND CLUBHOUSE FOR USE BY PHASE I & II (PROPOSED CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE II) BY WilliAM & LUCILE LEAVELL: TABLED UNTIL NOVEMBER 3,1999 MEETING 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR IN HOME DAYCARE BY KATHY PURCEll-LOCATED AT 2241 E. CLARENE STREET: APPROVED 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EXPANSION OF FACILITY TO ACCOMMODATE EXISTING CHILDREN BY RAY CHASE/REGENT BUSINES5-1302 E. FIRST STREET; APPROVED 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT STORAGE UNITS ON UNUSED PORTION OF COMMERCIAL LOT BY SERTA WAGNER- NORTHWEST CORNER OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND TAYLOR AVENUE: APPROVED 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ADD ON AN ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE AND 1 BAY CARPORT (BOAT STORAGE) AND REMOVE OR RELOCATE: EXISTING SMALL DETACHED GARAGE BY MEL AND DEBI LACY - 1414 N. MERIDIAN ROAD: APPROVED 7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF .6 ACRE FROM R-8 TO L-Q BY MIKE GAMBLIN-LOCATED AT CHERRY LANE AND LEISURE LANE: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT-TABLED FF&Cl UNTIL NOVEMBER 3, 1999 MEETING 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 12.801 ACRES FOR TARAWOOD SUBDIVISION BY MICHELANGELO INVESTMENTS, LLC-SOUTH OF LOS ALAMITOS PARK & NORTH OF SHERBROOKE HOLLOWS: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - TABLED FF&CL UNTIL NOVEMBER 3, 1999 MEETING 9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 4.34 ACRES (R-T TO C-G) BY SONNTAG EYE ASSOCIATES OR ASSIGNS LOCATED AT LOT 15 OF MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION: APPROVED 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH AND MAXIMUM CULDESAC LENGTH FOR THE LAKES AT CHERRY LAKE #9 BY LOUIS J. STEINER (STEINER DEVELOPMENT)-EAST SIDE OF ASHFORD GREENS AND WEST OF LAKE AT CHERRY LANE #4: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FF&CL 11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PROPOSED ENGLISH GARDENS SUBDIVISION BY PROJECTS WEST -SE CORNER OF TEN MILE ROAD & CHERRY LANE: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FF&CL 12A. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FROM MIKE WETZEL TO KATHY ANDERSON FOR DA YCARElPRESCHOOL: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE ORDER ( 128. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-15 AND L-O FOR VALERI HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION BY GOLD RIVER COMPANIES, INC.-NE CORNER OF PINE STREET AND TEN MILE ROAD: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FF&CL 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND REZONE FOR TEN MILE MINI STORAGE BY ED SEWS-WEST OF TEN MILE AND NORTH OF USTICK ROAD: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FF&CL 14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MINI STORAGE FACILITY CONSISTING OF NINE BUILDINGS AND ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING/OFFICE BY ED SEWS --WEST OF TEN MILE AND NORTH OF USTICK ROAD: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FF&CL 15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) BY S1 AMAS CORPORA TION/IONIC ENTERPRISE, INC.-SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO NOVEMBER 3, 1999 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PHASE 3 OF ST. LUKE'S MERIDIAN MEDICAL CENTER -- BY ST. LUKE'S REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AT 520 S. EAGLE ROAD: CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FF&CL 17. APPEAL APPLICATION: REQUEST FOR APPEAL DECISION OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR BY MIKE FORDN ANKE MACHINE SHOP: APPROVED APPEAL 18. REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR USE OF PYROTECHNICS OCTOBER 29TH AND 30TH BY BRUCE YOUNGER, MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD AND TEEN MANIA MINISTRIES: DISREGARD 19. APPROVAL OF CITY ELECTION JUDGES AND CLERKS - APPROVED 20. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. JANICE SMITH 1. TREASURER'S REPORT B. GARY SMITH: 1. HIRING OF CONSULTING ENGINEER-LATECOMER AGREEMENTS APPROVED j" 2. INTERSTATE 84 SEWER CROSSING (LATE COMER'S AGREEMENT) APPROVED 3. CITY OF MERIDIAN WATERLINE PROJECT, PHASE II APPROVED C. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT 1. CONTRACT FOR THOMAS B. DOMINICK, ATTORNEY AT LAW FOR PRE-TREATMENT PROGRAM - TABLED 2. CONTRACT FOR PATRICIA BROWN (ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS) FOR QAQC PLAN - APPROVED D. MAYOR CORRIE 1. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENT - CHRISTIE SMAGULA 2. DISCUSSION ON HEALTH INSURANCE CARRIER FOR 2000 BROKER RESEARCHING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 19.1999 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. on October 19, 1999 by Mayor Robert Corrie. MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Corrie, Charlie Rountree, Ron Anderson, Glenn Bentley, Keith Bird. OTHERS PRESENT: Shari Stiles, Gary Smith, Chief Gordon, Gill Gigray, Ken Bowers, Pauline Skeggs, Will Berg. Corrie: Okay. We'll open the City Council meeting for Tuesday, October 19, 1999 at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Clerk, would you have roll-call, please. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Berg. I want to welcome all of you here this evening. like seeing a full house every meeting. We'll see where we go from here. I would like to have the Chief come up here, please for introduction. Gordon: Mr. Mayor and Council, the WRICOPS Assessment Team arrived in Meridian yesterday to assess our police department. I'd like to have John Walters come up who is in charge of the assessment team and introduce the crew and maybe give you a brief overview of what we can expect this week. Walters: Thanks. Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. My name is John Walters. I am the director of WRICOPS, the Western Regional Institute for Community Oriented Public Safety. We serve a five-state region of Washington, Idaho, Montana, South Dakota and Wyoming. One of the services of the many services that we offer is going into a community and bringing a team of folks in, spending about a week in interviewing a lot of people on the streets, in their homes, in their business and looking at things in the police department, internally and externally, and making some recommendations in terms of all related community policing. We have a great team for here for you this week. Some of them are here tonight, and some are out working. I work them very late. John Goldman in back, John is the former elected sheriff from Spokane County, Washington. Donald Beardness (sic), Don is a judge, six-time elected judge from Billings, Montana. Mike Erp, Mike is in the criminal justice program at Washington State University, Spokane, a former police chief. We also have on- site here Dave Cole. Dave's a captain for the Sioux Falls, South Dakota Police Department. Rick Ball who is the police chief in Gillette, Wyoming; Mike Sines, a captain from Pier, South Dakota; Chuck Crats who is the director of a county youth services program in the state of Wyoming in Freemont County. Myself, and we also have on-site, Andy Jockomazi who's a professor at Boise State University who's assessing the assessors to evaluate our work. It's a very interesting process. The hospitality's been incredible. The weather is beautiful, and we work very long hours and very late hours, and we've probably talked to some of the folks here already. If we haven't, I'm sure we will and meet many of ( Meridian City Council Mee(lng October 19, 1999 Page 2 you folks tomorrow afternoon, I believe. I don't know if you have any questions or not, but we will be here all week then we'll head out of town on Friday. It'll probably be a few - eight weeks before we issue a draft report and then a final report about a month or so after that. We're excited to be here and appreciate the hospitality very much. Corrie: Thank you, John, and thank you for the assessment team. Good to see you again, Mike. Any questions from the Council? Bird: I have none. Walters: Thank you~ CONSENT AGENDA A. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 5, 1999 B. MINUTES OF MEETING HELD OCTOBER 5, 1999 C. VACATION AND SICK LEAVE POLICY RESOLUTION #258 Corrie: Council, we have the Consent Agenda A, Band C for the minutes and a vacation and sick leave policy resolution. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve the Consent Agenda, Items A, Band C. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion's been made by Mr. Anderson, second by Mr. Bird to approve the Consent Agenda A, Band C. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ORDINANCE # 847 - OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER - THE IDAHO STATESMAN Corrie: Before we get to the regular agenda with the smiley face here, we do have an ordinance for the amending Section 1 of Chapter 12 for the Ordinance providing for designated Idaho Statesman as the official newspaper the local paper has gone out of circulation for the present time. Mr. Clerk, what number would that Ordinance be? Berg: 847. ( Meridian City Council Meeung October 19, 1999 Page 3 Corrie: 847. Okay. Mr. Berg, would you read the Ordinance No. 847 by title only at this point. Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Ordinance No. 847: An ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho amending Section 10f Chapter 12 of Title 1 of the revised and compiled ordinances of the Cit,Y of Meridian providing for the designation of the Idaho Statesman as the official newspaper of the City of Meridian and providing an effective date. Corrie: Okay. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have Ordinance No. 847 read in its entirety? What this is, it makes the Statesman at the present time will be our official newspaper for all the announcements of the City Council and ordinances and that type of thing at the present time. Council, what is your pleasure on Ordinance No. 847? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve Ordinance 847 making the Idaho Statesman official printed paper for the City of Meridian with the suspension of rules. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion was made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 847 with a suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote; Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: All ayes, motion carried. Ordinance 847 is approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES / i Meridian City Council Me~lIng October 19, 1999 Page 4 (- @ DISCUSSION OF IDAHO INDEPENDENT BANK'S REQUEST TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUEST OF COUNCIL BY CHERRY lANE GOLF COURSE LETTER OF CREDIT. Corrie: Okay. On the regular agenda, first before No. 1 is the discussion of the Idaho Independent Bank's request to make additional request of Council by Cherry Lane Golf Course letter of credit. Before I start, I want to let the public know that this is not a public hearing. There will be no public input in this. This is a discussion between the City Council and what they have been requested by the Independent Bank to do. I guess, what is the pleasure of the Council? Do you want to have the attorney explain his letter to you? Anderson: Yes, please. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Bird: Do it in layman's terms, too. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as I understand the consideration before you, it is the request by the bank that the City agree by a separate agreement to provide the bank with notice on two occasions: one if there's a default on the part of Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc., and number two, there is a 60-day notice request in the event there would be modification of the lease agreement. This would be done by a separate agreement between the bank and the City. It's something for you; I think it's a matter of your discretion as to whether or not you wish to do this. I believe that the City Council has taken the action that is required under the terms of the lease agreement to perform, but is a matter for your consideration. I have been asked to provide some information to the Council by the Mayor to acquaint you with at least some of the terms and conditions the lease-hold deed of trust in regards to its provisions so that at least you have that information available to you. I believe you have the lease-hold deed of trust in your packets, and it has a very small font which is somewhat difficult to read. If you want me to go through this memo with you, I'd be more than happy to do so. I defer at this point, Mr. Mayor, as to what you want me to do. Corrie: Okay, Council. Anybody want to go through it? Bird: Short version. Corrie: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Gigray. Bird: Yeah. I do. Corrie: Okay. Let him know that. ( Meridian City Council Me~[Ing October 19, 1999 Page 5 Bird: Mr. Mayor, I want him to go through that. Corrie: Okay. Mr. Bird would like to go through it, please. Gigray: Sure. BasicallY1 the instrument proposes like a deed of trust on your house to secure an obligation of a loan which I assume Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. would have received from the bank, and then as security for that loan, they would have a lease-hold deed of trust. We don't - our statutes regarding deeds of trust talk about providing a security interest in real property. I know the bank says this is a somewhat unusual form in Idaho. Not often seen. It seems like there's a plausible explanation under Idaho Law that you can in fact do this. What happens is that there's a trustee appointed which would be Pioneer Title Company. As long as payments are made timely and there's not default under the original note or the deed of trust, nothing happens other than it's held by Pioneer Title and then they'd have to reconvey the interest of the bank back to Cherry Lane Recreation once the obligation is paid. If Cherry Lane for some reason defaulted under the terms of the agreement, and I have in Point 5 kind of a laundry-list of what that deed of - lease-hold deed of trust provides would be a default, then the foreclosure procedures after notice, and if there was a failure to cure the default, could be entering and taking possession of the property and proceeding to sell the property as you would sell the property after 120-day notice first for sale and then the purchaser, the highest bidder, would then get the interest of Recreational Properties, Inc. There are some provisions here where the bank, through the trustee1 could assume and take possession and manage the property. They would have to perform the terms and conditions of the lease agreement as the lease agreement has provided. They couldn't remain in default because they wouldn't be in any higher position than Cherry Lane Recreation is. That is basically how this is set up. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: This is also the letter of credit? This is more than just the letter of credit. This is for the loan. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I know that having and going through these requests or condition, as I understand it, for the issuance of the letter of credit. You may want to inquire of Cherry Lane Recreation as to whether or not it involves more than that. Point 3, I noticed on the form that was provided, provided for two separate loans, one in the amount of $400,000 and the other in the amount of $500,000, and it is drafted so that if there were arrangements subsequent to entering into the lease-hold deed of trust up to $1,800,000, it would still cover that. It limits - that doesn't mean that the initial loan would be that amount, but it would provide for that kind of negotiation in the future. Corrie: Other questions from Council? ( Meridian City Council Met::ung October 19, 1999 Page 6 Bird: I have none~ Corrie: Any discussion on their request? Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Do we have any indication from the lender that this is the only avenue that they can accept in order to make the loan, provide the money for the letter of credit and apparently the money for financing the construction? Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Rountree, members of the Council, the discussions that I have had relative to the request that you have before you are with Mr. Edward Hansen who represents Idaho Independent Bank. He advised me that the bank is somewhat uncomfortable with lease-hold deeds of trust. No reflection upon Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. It's just the form and that they would be in a position, at least, this is my understanding of his representations to me on the phone, that they would proceed to issue the letter of credit and proceed with the loan arrangements, I assume, with Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. if the City would agree to the request that you have before you. There was originally a discussion with Mr. Hansen, and he had indicated that they would like to have a provision that the bank would be in a position to have to consent to any change in the lease agreement. My discussions with him were that I thought that this would be a very difficult issue for the Council to deal with, but certainly they have any right to present whatever they want to. He felt that they could live with notice and so you see the form of this request, and it's two-fold. One, if there's a default, they have to receive notice of the default. The bank does in addition to Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc., and number two, 60 days prior to the effective date of any modification of the lease agreement, the bank is to be notified, and, of course, as you look through the lease-hold deed of trust, if the bank didn't like . some of the provisions of any amendments to the lease agreement, they would have to take that up with Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. Bird: Ninety days. Gigray: Ninety days. Excuse me. Ninety days notice. That's in my memo. I misstated it. Thank you, Councilman Bird. Rountree: We've been at this too many months now. Personally, I would like to see it move forward, but I cannot accept the position the City would be put in this particular proposal. I have no particular problem with the notice requirements, but I do have some problems with the idea that the City would be taken out of any position as it relates to the Golf Course in a default situation. I don't have a ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 7 solution. I believe we were advised at the beginning that the solution was there, but it apparently hasn't been found at this point. Corrie: Any other discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I guess the other comment I would make is it seems that this negotiation process that apparently has been established is not acceptable either. I think we need to just sit down and roll up our sleeves and find a solution. If we continue to have letters bantered between our attorney and their attorney, and then have to have it scheduled at a regularly scheduled Council meeting, the soonest anything can be done has a two-week delay. We're not getting anywhere. We've been two weeks here and three weeks there a month just meeting our meeting schedule, and I don't know if a special meeting is in order to deal with this specifically between our legal representation and us that we can negotiate something that appears acceptable and then take action. Throw that out for discussion. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I agree with Councilman Rountree. I think it's went on long enough. I don't know how we got it, but it's got to go forward. I have a real problem taking this out of the first. If you read the Pioneer Title will be the trustee and they've got the right to come in and sell the lease, whatever, which I don't like. If this is all because of the letter of credit, then I for one would be for dropping the letter of credit. It all falls back on us regardless one way or the other, so if this defaulted, we're going to pick up the bill. I think it's went on long enough. Let's get the thing solved and let Cherry Lane go on with their clubhouse and we get out there and get us a good clubhouse and get the course going like it's supposed to be. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I, too, have some real reservations about some of the items in the lease-hold deed of trust, and I would concur with Councilman Rountree. I'm not sure that this the right format to set down and discuss these. I think probably a one-an-one meeting with the City Council and Cherry Lane, Inc. and their legal representatives and ours and has out what some of our courses are, and let's get that agreed to before we come back to a Council meeting because this has taken forever in the current process and current format that we're doing it now. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Yes. I concur with what's been said tonight. I can't put the City or the taxpayers' property up for a loan, but I think we do need to sit down with an open ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 8 meeting with them and see if we can't come up with some form and means of getting this project put together. Thank you. Corrie: It seems to be the consensus that we need the Council, the two attorneys and the Cherry Lane Rec to sit down with the Council. Bird : Absolutely. Anderson: And the bank. Corrie: And the bank, yes. And the bank. Since they're involved here. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: If the bank's willing to accept the notice requirement again, I don't have a problem with that, but if it's going to go beyond that, then I agree. We need to sit down and hammer it out. If we can offer that back to them, and they're willing to accept that along with the offer that if that's not acceptable, we'll sit down. That gives them the option. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, just to answer Councilman Rountree's question, it is my understanding the bank would be prepared to go ahead with the loan if the City honors their request that you have before you. Rountree: The whole thing. Go ahead, Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Right. And as I have discussed in my memos to the City Council, I believe you've already done what you are legally obligated under the lease to do. I think this goes beyond that, but I think it's a matter of your discretion whether or not you want to do that. If you want to enter in negotiations with the bank and with Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. on if you are going to provide them with notice and go this extra step that you need some consideration on the other side with regards to potential modifications of the lease agreement or otherwise, then I think it'd be a very good idea to sit down with the representatives of the bank and Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. to see if that couldn't be hammered out. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Gigray, are you talking about the agreement of September 30th? ( Meridian City Council Meering October 19, 1999 Page 9 ( Gigray: Yes. The one that's in the packet. Bird: Okay. Corrie: Any further discussion? Bird: Yes. Corrie: Wouldn't you like to make this into a motion that we do that, Mr. Rountree, per your preference, or do you want to just - Rountree: I didn't hear anybody object to that, oppose. Corrie: I didn't either. If nobody objects to it, we don't have to have a - Bird: Let's set a date. Corrie: Okay. Bird: The sooner the better. Rountree: Do we want to discuss a potential date, Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Pardon? Rountree: Discuss a potential date, Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Okay. What date would you like to - we've got 26th, there's a - we have a set - Rountree: We could have a special meeting on the 26th in conjunction with the workshop. Bird: Okay. Corrie: Do you want to have that? Bird: That's fine if that's agreeable with the other parties. Corrie: This is not a public hearing, but is that all right with the bank? The 26th? What time would you like to have it? Bird: 6:30? Corrie: 6:30? ( Meridian City Council Mf::t::(Ing October 19, 1999 Page 10 Bird: Is that okay with Cherry Lane? Corrie: Cherry Lane, is that permissible to you? The 26th at 6:30? : (inaudible) gone until the 28th (inaudible) Corrie: He's gone until the 28th. I'm sorry. Okay. That's going to put us into - we can have it before the meeting at 6:30 on the 3rd of November. He'll be back by then, will he (inaudible)? : (inaudible) Corrie: Can you come up here while that - so we can get it on record? I couldn't hear you. Lovan: Mr. Mayor and the Councilmen, my name is Wally Loven. (inaudible) of Cherry Lane Recreation. As I said, my attorney is gone until the 28th of this month. I was considering having an attorney of his organization come in this evening. He said it would take him quite awhile to go through and get everything square in his mind so he represent me. Right now, I started last February in getting this thing, trying to get it going, and here we are now in October. Now we're going to November and we're looking at the first of the year. I don't know the answer except that we're just not going anywhere. We're spinning our wheels. Corrie: That's why we want to get together. Lovan: Yes. I know that, Bob. I guess it'll have to be that way. Corrie: Yeah. Council, would you like - Lovan: Then- Corrie: Can everybody be here on the 28th? Bird: Yeah. The 28th is fine with me. Corrie: Charlie? Rountree: I'll be here. Corrie: Okay. (inaudible). Bird: Is his attorney going to be here or does he just get in that day? Lovan: He's supposed to get back on the 28th. \. Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 11 / ( Corrie: Will that give him enough time to have the meeting at 6:30 the 28th, then? Lovan: That I can't answer. Bird: We need to set a meeting and get it - Wally's right. We need to get this thing ironed out and get it done and let's get going. Lovan: If we go into November, then I wait a month and a half to finish the clubhouse, and there's no way. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we schedule a special meeting October 28, 1999 to negotiate the terms that may be necessary to reach agreement for the bank of the leaseholder, Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. to agree to lending the leaseholder sufficient funds to cover letter of credit desired by the City, meeting to be held at 6:30, City Hall. Corrie: Do I hear a second to the motion? Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion's been made by Mr. Rountree and seconded by Mr. Bird to hold a special meeting October 28th at 6:30 p.m. to work with the Cherry Lane Ree, the bank and the City to see if they can resolve the letter of credit at that point. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I'm assuming that we would leave the caveat that if their attorney does not have enough time on the 28th if he doesn't get in until late or something that we could leave that up to you to reschedule a meeting or something. Corrie: If that's desired - if that's okay with counsel. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, that's within your power. Corrie: Okay. All right. With that in mind, any other discussion? Okay. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES { Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 12 Corrie: All ayes, motion's carried. 6:30 p.m. October the 28th here at the City Hall we'll sit down and we'll see what we can do. Bird: And get it done. Corrie: Thank you. ITEM 1. TABLED 10/5/99: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF 7.265 ACRES FOR CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE II FROM R-8 TO R-15 BY WilliAM & LUCILE LEAVELL-END OF 5TH, NORTH OF CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE AND SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW: ITEM 2. TABLED 10/5/99: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT 16 FOUR PLEXES WITH POOL AND CLUBHOUSE FOR USE BY PHASE I & II (PROPOSED CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE II) BY WILLIAM & LUCILE LEAVELL: Corrie: Item No.1. This is a tabled item of 10/5/99, Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. All right. Item NO.1 is the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: Request for rezone of 7.265 acres for Creekside Arbour Phase II from R-8 to R-15 by William and Lucile Leavell, end of 5th, north of Creekside Arbour Phase and south of Fairview Avenue. Council, you have the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law in front of you. What is your pleasure. Gigray: Point of information this item. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: And Item No.2 Corrie: Okay. Gigray: We still have not reached an agreement on the development agreement by reason of the fact that the legal description that is required to be approved by Public Works has still not been obtained. Once that has been obtained, this should go through, and I think it'd be appropriate to move this to the next Council meeting so that can get accomplisheda I've been in contact with Mr. Larry Knopp who was their architect. Mr. Shoemaker who is an attorney representing them and Bruce Freckleton is the point person in the Public Works on the legal description. Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 13 ( Bentley: I move we table Items 1 and 2, the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Creekside Arbour and the conditional use permit until November 3rd. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded to table Items No. 1 and NO.2 until November the 3rd for the development agreement. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR IN HOME DA YCARE BY KATHY PURCELL-LOCATED AT 2241 E. CLARENE STREET:\ Corrie: Item NO.3 is the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: Request for conditional use permit for in-home daycare by Kathy Purcell located at 2241 East Clarene Street. Council, you have your Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law from the Planning and Zoning - I'm sorry. (inaudible) confusing. Any discussion? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on the Item NO.3. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the Findings and Facts and Decision of Order on request for conditional use permit for home daycare, Item NO.3 Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on Item NO.3. Roll-call vote; Mr~ Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. { Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 14 Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EXPANSION OF FACILITY TO ACCOMMODATE EXISTING CHILDREN BY RAY CHASE/REGENT BUSINESS-1302 E. FIRST STREET: Corrie: Item NO.4 is the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: request for conditional use permit for expansion of facility to accommodate existing children by Ray Chase/Regent Business, 1302 E. First Street You have the Findings of Facts in front of you. Any discussion? Bird: None. Corrie: Entertain a motion on the Findings of Facts. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order regarding the request for conditional use permit for expansion of facility to accommodate existing children by Ray Chase/Regent Business, 1302 E. First Street Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to accept the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law as stated. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote; Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bird. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 15 Bird: Aye. Corrie: And Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT STORAGE UNITS ON UNUSED PORTION OF COMMERCIAL LOT BY BERTA WAGNER - NORTHWEST CORNER OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND TAYLOR AVENUE: Corrie: Item NO.5 is the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: Request for conditional use permit to construct storage units on the unused portion of commercial lot by Berta Wagner, northwest corner of Meridian Road and Taylor Avenue. Council, any discussion on that Item 5? Bird: I have none. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for Item NO.5. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order granting a conditional use permit subject to conditions for Berta Wagner,. construction of storage units and expansion of existing child care facility. Bird: Child care? Corrie: Do I hear a second? Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded to approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on Item NO.5. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll- call vote; Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 16 Bird: Aye. Corrie: And Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ADD ON AN ATTACHED 2 CAR GARAGE AND 1 BAY CARPORT (BOAT STORAGE) AND REMOVE OR RELOCATE EXISTING SMALL DETACHED GARAGE BY MEL AND DEBI LACY - 1414 N. MERIDIAN ROAD: Corrie: Item NO.6 is Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: Request for conditional use permit to add an attached two-car garage and one bay carport (boat storage) and remove or relocate existing small detached garage by Mel and Debi Lacy, 1414 North Meridian Road. Any discussion on Item 6 and the Findings of Facts? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on Item NO.6. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I'd make a motion we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, a request for conditional use permit to add on an attached two-car garage and a one-bay carport and remove or relocate an existing detached garage for Mel and Oebi Lacy. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on Item NO.7 - 6. Excuse me. Further discussion? Roll-call vote; Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bird. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 1 7 ( Bird: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF &6 ACRE FROM R-8 TO L-O BY MIKE GAMBLIN-LOCATED AT CHERRY LANE AND LEISURE LANE: Corrie: Item No.7; Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: Request for rezone of .6 acre portion of R-8 to L-Q by Mike Gamblin located at Cherry Lane and Leisure Lane. Shari. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I have missed one item on this. Under the Findings of Facts and Conclusions at Law on Page 24, Item 2.20; it says applicant shall dedicate right-at-way for Leisure Lane and improve to ACHD standards. We discussed that last time, and said that the applicant would build curb, gutter and sidewalk on his property and match existing pavement. Bird: That's right, Shari. So we need to strike that one? Corrie: 2.20? Bird: Uh-huh. Corrie: Okay. Gigray: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Point at information. Mayor and Council, I also see that there are a number of conditions upon the rezoning designation, and so I would recommend to the Council that in their Findings and Decision of Order and we will prepare the appropriate substituted pages if you should follow this recommendation that it direct the city attorney to prepare a development agreement because you cannot condition a zoning ordinance on conditions, and that's why we have development agreements that would include those conditions which are set forth in Section 2 of the Order. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor. (' Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 18 Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I need a bit of interpretation to what I just heard. Bird: I do too. Corrie: Mr. Gigray, would you take another step back? Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I apologize. I'll try to make this clearer. As I read the Decision of Order, this is a change of zone, and there are a number of conditions placed in this order for granting the change of zone. In order to do that, we have to have a development agreement as a condition of rezoning in order to effect those as conditions of the rezone. We can't pass an ordinance saying that they're zoned L-O and in that ordinance say there are all these conditions on their rezone because we have an ordinance that defines what uses can be done within an L-O. The state law says that we - our authority to put conditions on rezone is in the development agreements, and that's why we do them on zoning or rezoning designations. Rountree: So we would need the development agreement (inaudible) - Gigray: If you want conditions on the rezone. If you don't want conditions on the rezone, then you can effect it through your own ordinances and you don't need the development agreement. This order should just show that it's going to be rezoned L-O and that's all we need to do. Rountree: Okay. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: In light of that information) I would make a motion that we instruct legal staff to draw up a development agreement on this request for rezone and included in that motion I would request that we table the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law until November 3rd. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded to table the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and to have the attorney draw up the DA here until the meeting on the 3rd of November. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ( Meridian City Council M~eting October 19, 1999 Page 19 : (inaudible) Corrie: It all depends on if we get to it (inaudible). ITEM 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 12.801 ACRES FOR TARAWOOD SUBDIVISION BY MICHELANGELO INVESTMENTS, LLC-SOUTH OF LOS ALAMITOS PARK & NORTH OF SHERBROOKE HOLLOWS: Corrie: Okay. Item No.8, Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: Request for annexation and zoning of 12.801 acres by Tarawood Subdivision by Michelangelo Investments, LLC, south of Los Alamitos Park and north of Sherbrooke Hollows. Council, do you have any discussion on Item 8 or staff comments? Stiles: Mr. Mayor, Council, I think some of our comments were taken out of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. There appear to be only two items, and I think we discussed this at the last meeting. This would also require a development agreement. I would just ask that our comment be incorporated in that development agreement, if that's possible, such as the fencing and things that aren't in our ordinance. Corrie: Any discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion to table this one for the development agreement. believe this is appropriate for this one because we don't have a development agreement either. Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: I move we instruct the city attorney to draw up a development agreement for the Michelangelo Investments rezone of 12.801 acres and incorporate staff comments and that we table this Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law until November 3rd. Corrie: There's been a motion to the floor. Do I hear a second? Anderson: I'll second it. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 20 Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have the attorney draw up the development agreement and to table the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law until the November 3rd meeting. Any further discussion? Gigray: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: members of the Council, I would just note that a development agreement has been prepared and routed, and I guess the issue is whether or not it contains the necessary conditions. The one that I have, at least in my file, along with the draft of the ordinance provides for some conditions of the development having to do with the existing irrigation and drainage ditch requirement and any existing domestic wells and/or septic tank systems within the project should be removed from their domestic service. This may not be complete enough, and that may be what the problem is here, and what we will do on this table is I'll go back and review the minutes of the City Council to assure what that action was and submit it back for your consideration. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Gigray. Bird: Has that been signed? Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Has that been signed? Because he's got a copy - we don't know where the original is. (inaudible discussion between Council members) Corrie: Have you seen it, Shari? Stiles: No. Corrie: Any further discussion? Gigray: I just explained, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, the reason we don't circulate Findings to staff is because you have a record that's produced, and that record has - the action has to be based on the record l so we submit it to you first for your consideration because of the issue, it's a quasi-judicial matter, and we can't have a record of proceedings outside of the proceedings. So we try to keep that as clean as possible as we process these matters, but it certainly has been brought to your attention that maybe there's some conditions that were included in your actions. We'll double check those minutes to assure that that's done, and then we'll resubmit it for your consideration at the next Council meeting. ( Meridian City Council f\Aeeting October 19, 1999 Page 21 Corrie: Any further discussion? Motion is on the floor. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Motion is carried, table the Findings and the development agreement would be checked and reviewed by the attorney. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 4.34 ACRES (R-T TO C-G) BY SONNTAG EYE ASSOCIATES OR ASSIGNS LOCATED AT LOT 15 OF MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION: Corrie: Item No.9, this is Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: Request for annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres, R-T to C-G by Sonntag Eye Associates or assigns located at Lot 15 of Magic View Subdivision. Council, you have the Findings of Facts there. Any questions? Staff, comments? Anderson: I have none. Bird: I have none, Mayor. Corrie: Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on Item NO.9. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order for the annexation and zoning of 4.3 acres from R-T to C- G. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote; Mr. Anderson Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. ( Meridian City Council M~cting October 19, 1999 Page 22 ( Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH AND MAXIMUM CULDESAC LENGTH FOR THE LAKES AT CHERRY LAKE #9 BY LOUIS J. STEINER (STEINER DEVELOPMENT)-EAST SIDE OF ASHFORD GREENS AND WEST OF LAKE AT CHERRY LANE #4: Corrie: Okay. We're getting into the public hearing part of the City Council meeting. I think we can probably get through it unless we have heavy debating going on a couple of them. So we'll watch the time. We want to try to close it up here by at least 10:30 (inaudible) run too late. I'll open the public hearing on Item NO.10 which is a request for variance of maximum block length and maximum cul-de-sac length for the Lakes at Cherry Lane NO.9 by Louis J. Steiner of Steiner Development, east side of Ashford Greens and west of Lake at Cherry Lane No.4. *** End of Side 1 *** -- first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for a property that you previously reviewed for a plat. It's located on the golf course. It's in between Ashford Greens and other phases of the Lakes at Cherry Lane. With the design that they have, this would be where a proposed Wilkins Ranch Subdivision once came before you that was denied. They have this block length that exceeds our 1 ,ODD-foot block length. They do have a proposed stub street that would come in this area and also the cul-de-sac length, I believe, exceeds our maximum. They are requesting a variance for the cul-de-sac and block length requirements. This is also the Eight Mile Lateral running along here. If they did stub into this property, they would need to build a bridge, and that's all the information I have. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain the developer to testify first, and if we have any questions as referenced to the Findings of the Planning and Zoning director. Becky. Bowcutt: Becky Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering, 180D West Overland, Boise. You saw this as a preliminary plat, the Lakes at Cherry Lane NO.9. As you well know, this property is isolated by the golf course and the Eight Mile Lateral. This cul-de-sac exceeds the 450 by approximately 70 feet, so it's 520 feet and then we've got this continuation of a block here 'and the block here that exceeds the 1 ,ODD-foot maximum block length. This particular variance application does meet the requirements for a variance. You can make the findings that there's site- / \ Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 23 ~(' i, specific restraints that hinders compliance with those subdivision standards. That's all. Do you have any questions? Anderson: I have none. Bird: I have none, Mayor. Corrie: Questions from Council? Thank you, Becky. Anyone else in the public like to issue testimony in this public hearing on Item No. 10, request for a variance? Okay. Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to Council to close the public hearing on Item No.1 o. Bentley: So moved. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No. 10 for the variance request. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Council, discussion on the request Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion then for the variance request. Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: I move we instruct the city attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law with a favorable recommendation for the variance of the maximum block length and maximum cul-de-sac length for the Lakes at Cherry Lane No.9 Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded that we instruct the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law in the affirmative for the request for variance. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote; Mr. Bird. Bird: Aye. I \ Meridian City Council M~eting October 19, 1999 Page 24 Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PROPOSED ENGLISH GARDENS SUBDIVISION BY PROJECTS WEST -SE CORNER OF TEN MILE ROAD & CHERRY LANE: Corrie: Item No. 11 is a public hearing: Request for preliminary plat of proposed English Gardens Subdivision by Projects West, southeast corner of Ten Mile Road and Cherry Lane. At this time, I'll open the public hearing and have the staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for approximately 40-acre parcel at the southeast corner of Black Cat and Cherry Lane. It's bisected by the Ten Mile drain. They're proposing this to be a common area here. I don't have the latest version of the plat. Hopefully you have that in your packets. I didn't have a reduced version of that to present tonight. Ada County Highway District requested them to cul-de-sac this area here and to bring this road through. They do currently show that this is a storage lot, and we've discussed with them that storage is not a permitted use in the R-4 zone and they would have to make that into building lots. This would be a drainage lot here, and they also have a large lot here that would be for single-family residential only unless they submitted some kind of a rezone application for that. They have made some modifications to the roadway system based on Ada County Highway District's request. This road would go straight through, and then they have brought this through with a knuckle that would come on down here. They also proposed a pathway system. It is shown on their plat for a greenbelt along the Ten Mile. They also have on their notes that would need to be revised that they are showing access from this storage - proposed storage lot and the drainage lot directly to Black Cat and no access would be approved except for the public road systems that are approved by Ada County Highway District. Gary has worked with them on some sewering of the property, and he may want to address those items. Corrie: Mr. Smith. \ Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 25 Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council. The southerly portion of this project will need to be seaward via a lift station, and we will consent to approve that installation. The lift station is to serve only this property. This property is also subjected to Black Cat trunkline sewer fees. Once those fees are finalized, and that's shown as Item 1.32, and that should read "fees" instead of "feed." The reason for this restriction is that the lift station, the Ashford Greens lift station does not include capacity for property beyond this project. Thank you. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Shari, what's the latest dated version on the plat map? Stiles: I have a revised plan; however, it does not show a revision date. It's the same date as the original submittal. Corrie: Okay. Public hearing, I'd invite the applicant to come forward. Unger: Mr. Mayor and Council members, my name is Bob Unger. I'm with Pinnacle Engineers. Our address is 870 North Linder Road, Suite B, Meridian, Idaho 83642 Idaho, and we represent Projects West on this development. As Shari as reviewed with you, we have made revisions that were required by the Highway District and also changes that the staff had recommended and requested of us, and I have these before us for your review this evening. I do apologize that we didn't have a revised date on the one that you got there. Bird: What is the revised date, Mr. Unger? What is the revised date? When were these drawn? We've got to have that for the record. Unger: Actually, I don't have the date on this, the date that we revised these. These were - I believe we actually revised these prior - just prior to the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing. As you can see, we've eliminated this entrance here, moved it down to here as required by the Highway District. They did not want this entrance that we originally had, so we've shifted over here, continued to have this entrance and we have a stub to the east. We will have to cross over the - this is the Ten Mile Creek here. We are showing a pathway along here and down which would tie in to the park that's over in this area. We're providing landscaping all the way along down through here. We will provide the improvements along Black Cat Road as suggested by staff. We no longer are showing any kind of a storage lot, although, this was some reason it was still labeled as storage. It is not a storage lot. This would be a building lot. This being a drainage lot down here. The total number of lots that we are looking at are at 101 single-family lots. We have seven open spaces, two drainage lots and irrigation lot. Our density in the project is 3.47 dwelling units to the acre which is compatible with the existing zoning of R-4. It's also compatible with the policies and goals of the City Comprehensive Plan. As reviewed by Gary Smith, we have worked out the sewer issues on the project, and we believe that we have made ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 26 ( all the appropriate revisions as requested by staff, and we have reviewed all the conditions of approval and the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. We have no problems with those at all, so we ask for your approval this evening, and I'll stand for any questions that you might have. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: This new revised addresses all the recommendations within our paper here? Unger: Yes, it does. Bird: Okay. Corrie: Any other questions? Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Block 1, Lot 5, what's the - it's probably on here somewhere, but I haven't found a note that tells me what that's all about. Unger: That is considered as one of the lots. The developer is not sure what he wants to do with that lot eventually. He may just go ahead and develop it as a residential lot, he may sit on it in the event that some day if the Comprehensive Plan were to change and allows some sort of a commercial or something on the corner, they might come back in and ask for some sort of change on the use on that lot itself. Currently, it is reflected as a residential lot. The Comp Plan doesn't call for anything, any kind of commercial use in that area at this time. He's just trying to look to the future. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Along that pathway there, you show some shrubs and some trees and that kind of stuff. How much landscaping is there going to be along that? Unger: We actually anticipate probably not a lot of trees. Probably mostly smaller shrubs, trees to the north primarily because this is within the easement and right-of-way for the Ten Mile Creek. We will be doing some lawn and some ground cover type shrubbery. More so than anything else. Anderson: Thank you. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. r Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 27 Rountree: Did I hear you say that per staff comments that the improvements along Black Cat, I guess in front of, for the lack of a better word, that area will be included in those improvements are curb, gutter and sidewalk? Unger: Yes. We have to get the permission of the current land owners to do those, and he has indicated to us that he would support us on that and allow us to give up the right-of-way to do that. Rountree: So that's a little different than what you just told us before? Unger: I'm sorry? Rountree: You said you would do it, now you're saying you would do it conditioned on the property owner. Unger: Well, the property owner has told us that he will grant the right-af-way for us to make those improvements. We don't have anything signed or any kind of contract with him at this point, but they originally owned all this property, so they support the project, and they're willing to work with us to get that taken care of. We don't have a problem with that being a condition of the approval. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: It's not a question, but I'd like you to place that board up beside the others so the audience can see the changes made, please. Unger: Sure. I'd be glad to. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: How are you going to make the connection from your parcel to the western Ada parcel? Unger: I'm sorry. Our parcel to the western? Rountree: Along Ten Mile. Are you going to make (inaudible) Western Ada Recreation is the owner. f \ Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 28 / - { Unger: Right here? We can only go down to this corner. That's as far as we're going to be able to go, but that abuts the park property right there. Rountree: So there is a connection. Your property goes all the way to theirs? Unger: The corner of our property goes down to the same corner of the park area, Fuller Park it used to be. In fact, there's a little sliver that runs along like this and then as the Ten Mile Creek goes along here, then it starts to get wider as you go further east. In fact, it's right in through here. So that connection can be made right there. Rountree: Do you know if that particular easement along Ten Mile is - is it easement owned by an underlying property owner or is it, in fact, owned by Nampa Meridian? Unger: It is actually right-of-way, and we have to - we've discussed it with Water Resources and - it's not Bureau of Land, it's - Rountree: Bureau of Reclamation? Unger: Yeah. Bureau of Rec. They said that they would work with us and allow us to put that path down through there and grant an easement for that use. Rountree: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Unger: Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else from the public like to issue testimony in this request for preliminary plat? Okay. Hearing none, Council, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing on Item No. 11. Stiles: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Excuse me, Shari. I'm sorry, yes? Stiles: I'm sorry. I just had one correction to make on the recommendation to City Council on Page 2 under Item 1.1 where it says dedicate 43 feet of right-of- way. That should be 48. Corrie: Is that just a typographical error and the developer knows it already? Stiles: Yes. Ada County Highway District requested 48 feet. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. ( \ Meridian City Council Mt::eting October 19, 1999 Page 29 ( Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made a seconded to close the public hearing. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Council discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I guess I would commend the developer and the architect because I think this is a nice-looking project in my opinion. I think some of the changes they made are, would be very beneficial for traffic-flow patterns, improvements to Black Cat with the curb and sidewalk, the extension of our greenbelt pathway system. I think that's a real plus for the City, and the density of it is well within the zoning, and I just think this is a good, clean project. I like it. Corrie: Any other comments? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion to (inaudible) prepare to the order then. Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: I move we instruct the city attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law with the due-pass recommendation for the preliminary plat proposed for English Gardens Subdivision by Projects West. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have the attorney draw up the proper order and Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law in the affirmative. Any further discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor. \, Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 30 ( Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Can I assume that to include staff comments and recommendation from Planning and Zoning? Bentley: That's correct. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 12A. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FROM MIKE WETZEL TO KATHY ANDERSON FOR DAYCARE/PRESCHOOL: Corrie: Item No. 12A is a public hearing: Request for transfer of conditional use permit from Mike Wetzel to Kathy Anderson for daycare/preschool. At this time I'll open the public hearing on Item 12A and invite staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for a transfer of an existing daycare located on the northwest corner of Cherry and Northwest 11th. Our only condition that we would ask is that any signage be subject to design review by Planning and Zoning Department staff and that we do a re-inspection to ensure compliance with current ordinance and also have the fire department re-inspect. Corrie: Okay. Anything else? Okay. Being a public hearing, I'll invite the applicant to step forward, please. Kathy Anderson: Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council. I'm here tonight to request a transfer of a conditional use permit for the purpose of opening and operating a preschool in Meridian. Currently, Idaho ranks 49th in the Nation for quality of daycare. It is my intention to do my part to help improve our state's standing. My goals are to offer the best quality preschool education at affordable rates; maintain low student-teacher ratios ensuring plenty of individual attention to all students; require all teachers to go through a licensing process including federal fingerprinting and background checks; require teachers to seek continuing education; install a minimum of two computers per classroom specifically for student use; to complete the accreditation process within the next two years; within three years install closed-circuit cameras which will allow parents to monitor their children's daily activities via the internet. I am also improving the site. To date, new paint is being applied inside and out; new wheelchair ramp and handrails are also being installed; a new lawn will be planted in the spring along with new play equipment shortly thereafter. Opening this preschool will allow me to do two things: the chance to expand the minds of { Meridian City Council Mttting October 19, 1999 Page 31 the youngest citizens ensuring their success in elementary school and creating and building a successful business that I can be proud of. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Just maybe my mistake, but I didn't get your name. Kathy Anderson: Oh. I'm sorry. It's Kathy Anderson. Corrie: Thank you, Kathy. I thought so, but I needed to make sure. Thank you. Kathy Anderson: Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else that would like to enter testimony in this request for transfer of conditional use permit? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion of Council to close the public hearing. Rountree: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No. 12A. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: I'll entertain discussion or a motion from Council. Bentley: I have no discussion. Bird: I have none. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I just have a procedural question. Does this require a Finding or can we just approve - Gigray: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Members of the Council, if you choose as is recommended by the administrator, and I didn't hear any objection on the part of the applicant to include some conditions which are not in the original conditional use permit over and above the order transfer, I would need some direction in that regard, and we ! Meridian City Council rvl~eting October 19, 1999 Page 32 (' would include those additional conditions in the order and the ones that I heard had to do with the signage review and the re-inspection. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Gigray. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we have city attorney prepare an order approving the transfer of conditional use permit from Mike Wetzel to Kathy Anderson with the additional conditions in the order that signage be subject to design review and the fire department re-inspect the site. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson - excuse me, Mr. Rountree and seconded by Mr. Bird to approve the request for transfer and with the additional conditions set forth in the motion. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I think these next couple might go a little longer. I think we better take our customary break. I would make a motion we take our break now. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. We'll have a ten-minute break. Thank you. (At which time the City Council meeting was in recess at 8:45 p.m.) ITEM 128. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-15 AND L-O FOR VALERI HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION BY GOLD RIVER COMPANIES, INC.-NE CORNER OF PINE STREET AND TEN MILE ROAD: Corrie: All right. If I could have your attention, please, we'll open the meeting back from the recess. Item No. 128. This is a public hearing: Request for annexation and zoning to R-15 and L-O for Valeri Heights Subdivision by Gold River Companies, Inc., northeast corner of Pine Street and Ten Mile Road. How many people are here for testimony on 128? Okay. Seems like there's quite a ( Meridian City Council Mt::eting October 19, 1999 Page 33 (' few. We'd appreciate it if you would keep the comments pretty close to three minutes. I just looked at my watch (inaudible) I'll have one of the Councilman tell me when the three minutes, and then we'll give you the high sign for time here. I'll open the public hearing on Item 12B, the request for annexation and zoning. We'll need to have staff comments first, please. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property at the northeast corner of Pine and Ten Mile. If you're familiar with this property, the Ten Mile comes through this corner here. They have concrete barricades around this intersection just because it is a dangerous intersection. The applicant has submitted a request for annexation and zoning. I'm not sure the exact configuration. Part of this would be they had requested for an L-O and the remainder of it for an R-15. They have submitted the conditional use permit proposal and the preliminary plat which Planning and Zoning Commission elected to leave as a continued item on their agenda to see if the City Council would support this request for annexation and zoning. You have their recommendation and their reasons for recommending denial of the project. If I can answer any questions, I would be happy to. Corrie: Any questions of staff at this point? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Public hearing is open. I'll invite the developer, the request to the annexation and zoning to (inaudible). Unger: Mr. Mayor and Council members, my name is Bob Unger, I'm with Pinnacle Engineers, our address is 670 North Linder Road, Suite BJ Meridian, Idaho. We represent the Gold River Companies, Inc. on this project. As staff has reviewed, we are requesting a rezone to an - an annexation and zoning to an R-15 and an L-O. As Shari said, this corner right here, we're requesting for the L-O and the balance of the property would be for the R-15. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the project or the request for the annexation and zoning on September 14, and as Shari said, they made their recommendations and on the annexation and zoning and tabled the conditional use permit and the preliminary plat. I don't know whether you gentlemen this evening want to address the annexation and the zoning or whether you want to look at the entire project. We are prepared to present the entire project to you and respond to each and every issue that was brought up by the Planning and Zoning Commission. I think it is somewhat appropriate for you to all at least look at the project as far as what we're proposing which we need the zoning and the annexation for, but I will try to keep that as brief as possible, and if you want additional information, we have three or four representatives here for the project who can respond to additional questions on the project itself. We are proposing 158 apartment units and a limited office complex. We also are looking at - we're proposing townhouses here and here. All of these would be single-story ( Meridian City Council M~eting October 19, 1999 Page 34 apartments. We have single- and two-story here, and these are all two- and three-story apartments in this area here. This is all an open-space area with clubhouse, pool, numerous recreational facilities in that area. This is the L-O property, the area that we're requesting an L-O, and this is an office space that we would - are proposing to build in the project. The City Comprehensive Plan calls for development of this particular area right in through here as a mixed use. This would allow up to an R-40 type development, and we are requesting an R- 15. It also provides, this particular zoning would provide an excellent buffer to the industrial-type zoning that is called for down here on the south side of the tracks, of the railroad tracks. The - I hope you folks got a copy of our response letter pertaining to the Findings that were made by the Planning and Zoning Commission on their recommendation for denial. One of the first things I want to point out to you is that in their deliberation prior to taking their vote for the recommendation, each one of the Planning and Zoning Commission members present that evening indicated that they thought and felt that an R-15 was appropriate for this property. I don't know if you have copies of the minutes. I have not seen them, and I hope it's in there. If not, we certainly would like to get the tape and listen to that. They do all, each and every one of them, felt that it was appropriate for an R-15 zoning on this property. In reviewing the Findings for their decision, one of the issues - the first issue that was brought up was the traffic on Ten Mile. There's an ACHD report; Highway District Commission has reviewed the project, they have approved the project, felt that there would be no adverse affect on the traffic system from this project. There's also a traffic study which was done by Dolby Engineering that also supports their decision. The second issue that was in the Findings was the tandem parking and the potential stacking and circulation problems within the development itself. First of all, this is something that needs to be addressed in the conditional use/preliminary plat review. If's not an issue of the annexation and zoning. But we've tried to respond to some of those concerns. Our original plan - from our original plan we have reduced by better than half - I believe almost % the number of tandem parking. We still are reflecting in this area some tandem parking and also over in this area, but we have provided additional parking to go along with that to prevent any potential backing up or stacking problems that might occur. As far as circulation, we have good circulation throughout the project. We have provided sufficient parking as required by Code, and, once again, this is an issue that should be reviewed in the CU and the preliminary plat. Talk about the incompatibility of this use and the surrounding area, I believe like I said, the Comprehensive Plan calls for this type of development or allows this type of development. It also - this development would also provide an excellent buffer to the more commercial/industrial uses to the south. The fourth Finding they listed is the quality of materials is inconsistent with the proposed upscale nature of this development. We didn't review the materials with them. We gave - we told them what type of materials and type of development that we were proposing. I'm not sure where they found - where they came up with this at all, and once again, this is an issue for the conditional use and not the annexation and zoning. Fire access. There's no response from the Meridian Fire ( Meridian City Council rvl~eting October 19, 1999 Page 35 Department saying that there is a problem with fire access within this development. That is a statement that came from someone who testified in opposition. Their Finding here is not based upon any factual matter whatsoever. The last and final is the density of the development. In the Comprehensive Plan will allow up to an R-40. We're requesting an R-15. We feel this density is very appropriate. It's a good transitional density and well within the limits of the Comprehensive Plan. I can go on and address more issues that pertains strictly to the development layout itself and the traffic and the materials and windows. We have it all here this evening if you want to see it. We'll be more than glad to bring it in because it's all over here in the corner for your review if you want to review that. At this point, we feel that the project is a good project. It falls well within the limits of the Comprehensive Plan. The project can be sewered, it can - we can - we have drainage lots and it can be drained. There's a gentleman that's going to stand up here and tell you that he's been in the development business for 40 years and there's no way we can sewer it or drain it. Well, a good engineer can do that. We have a good engineering firm and engineers that can do that. He knows that. At this point, I can stand for questions or we can bring up somemore of our people. Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Thank you. At the beginning you spoke that you were here for the annexation and zoning, but you'd like to show us the plats and your design and everything else. Then you get into discussing the problems that P & Z has with it, and you're saying that this shouldn't be discussed now. Well, you can't have it both ways. So if we're going to open it up for everything, we're going to discuss everything. The first question I've got for you is when was the traffic study done? Unger: Traffic study was done in August of '99. Bentley: Okay. You're taking a traffic study that's in the middle of summer which no where near reflects the amount of traffic that goes through that intersection when the kids are in school. We've got an abundance of kids that drive to Meridian High and they all come right down that street or they go the other way, and we all know what a stacking problem we've got at Meridian and Linder. I've got a real problem with your traffic study being during the summer months when we have nine months of kids in cars. Unger: Okay. I can briefly address that. I can have Mr. Dolby get up and address that. He and I have discussed the same. The stacking problem that occurs from the school is in the afternoon, and that ranges from 2:30 to 3:30 and the school traffic is gone. Okay? It really doesn't change the traffic study itself, but I also, at this point, I think it's important to point out to you that we have talked with the Highway District and the Highway District concurs with us and ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 36 ( they're going to work with us. We're going to be putting in a left-turn lane on Pine right here. They're going to - we're going to tile the Ten Mile drain there. Highway District's going to work with us. They're going to provide the tile, we're going to install it, and that way we'll be able to widen it and put in a left-turn lane and, of course, a right-turn lane. As far as addressing, you know, the traffic study, I think Mr. Dolby would be the one to really give you all the details that you would need on that. Rountree: Do you have any means of controlling the people? The kids in general using your facility to pass on through to avoid that stacking area? Because we have that problem at Pine and Linder where they go through the businesses that are across the street on the east side. How are you going to keep those vehicles from going up and driving through the subdivisions to the north of it? Unger: I'm sorry. Pine and Linder? Okay. Right. That's where my office is. Thank you. Actually, at Pine and Linder, it's very, very easy for the kids - well, half the kids park over there. That's why I never have parking spot. I have to walk a half a block to get to my office. But that is a very, very direct - it's just a right turn and boom, they're out of there and through that cutting through that area. This is not as easy; although, we have good circulation. It's not something that's going to make it easy for them to come through here and cut over here, come back out over here. It's just not that simple. You have parking - parked cars and things to that effect. It's really not going to be as easy for them to cut through there as it is at Pine and Linder. Rountree: I have concern for apartments, you're going to have children, and I have some real concerns that they will be cutting through there. Not just through there. They'll go up through the north and cut out through the subdivision to the north. Unger: Kids will do that at any subdivision be it a multi-family subdivision, be it a single-family subdivision - Rountree: But when you have an intersection that doesn't have a traffic-control light on it, it stacks. That's all I have. Unger: Yeah. We understand your concerns and do appreciate those. Corrie: Any other questions? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. \' Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 37 Anderson: I had a couple. Concerning traffic, you had mentioned on Pine you were going to put in a left-hand turn lane, I'm assuming to go south on Ten Mile; is that what you're talking about? Unger: Yes. Anderson: And the right-hand - are you going to make any improvements on Ten Mile itself? Unger: Absolutely. Anderson: Turn lanes or- Unger: There's extensive improvements required by the Highway District. There'll be a center island that will run from the corner up to approximately this area right in here. This entrance right here is a right-in right-out only. This would have full access, this one has full access. Left-turn lane to Pine southbound. Yes. There's extensive improvements that we have to make on Ten Mile. Rountree: I'm surprised they would even allow that lower - the right-only exit from the facility. It just looks like it's very close to the intersection to me. Unger: It meets the Highway District's requirements. Rountree: Does it? Unger: Yes. Anderson: You mentioned you were going to tile the ditch; were you talking about the entire ditch that's on that piece of property or just a section right in the corner, or how much area of that are you going to tile? Unger: It runs right across like this. So we'll be tiling it from Ten Mile over to Pine. Anderson: You'll tile that entire section on that piece of property. Unger: Hence, we won't have anymore barriers there, won't have anymore cars in the ditches - you know, I used to live at Cherry Lane Golf Course up until just a couple of months ago, and I know this intersection really well. Rountree: I live right behind Albertson's, so I drive it several times a day, too. I'm very familiar with the intersection. That's all the questions I have. Thank you. Bird: Mayor, I do have one. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 38 Corrie: Okay. Mr. Bird. Bird: Again, date on the latest plans? Unger: This latest plan - this revised plan here was done approximately 10 days ago. I've made a note to myself we'll do those revisions, put the dates on there for you from now on. Bird: Yeah. Thanks. Corrie: You had a question? Unger: Do you want us to bring up Mr. Dolby to address the traffic and our architect and the developer and have them testify on the project itself, overall project? Certainly, we can do that. Corrie: You'll have the last word, so if you want to have them address any questions that may come up, you can do that. It's a public hearing, so I'll start the public hearing on this side. All those in favor of the project, and when they're through, we'll do the opposition, and you'll have the chance to be the last to answer the questions that may come up. Unger: Okay. Corrie: I'll leave it up to you and Mr. Dolby. Unger: Okay. Corrie: Okay. Unger: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Okay. Anyone else that would wish to testify in favor of the project? Okay. You go first. If you will give us your name and spell your last name, please. Fuller: Yes. My name is Shirley Fuller, F-U-L-L-E-R. I own the property that we're discussing right now. My husband was unable to come here tonight. He's up hunting. I think most of you know him as Mr. Roadway. I thought maybe it'd be best if I showed up anyway. Seeings how you haven't seen my pleasant face. We're well aware of the situation with the amount of traffic on this corner. We have called several people, City Councils (inaudible) City of Meridian, Ada County Highway, begging them to put a light in there. We've owned - well, this property - most of you have been around here for quite awhile, and you know this property as being the old Depler (sic) place. I'm sure you do. Growing up in Meridian, I love this place. This place was my heart. I always wanted it. My \ Meridian City Council Medting October 19, 1999 Page 39 (- \ husband and I, we finally purchased it eight years ago. We knew then when we bought the property that the high school was down the road and that we were going to have a certain amount of traffic. We knew we could live with the traffic from the high school kids. We knew that would be fine. Then look at all those subdivisions. My goodness. You talk about peace and quiet. Boy, it was ruined for me. I work nights. I try to sleep during the daytime. It doesn't happen. If I don't get home in time before the rush hour starts and all of these other things take place, I don't get any sleep. I'd like to sell out and get out and be on my way someplace else. This corner is kind of a special corner. It has people thinking. It has people thinking of the fact, you know, we don't want anymore traffic. We don't want this kind of operation going on here. You know what's really interesting? I didn't really care for those people moving north of me, either. They're probably not going to like me when I start bailing hay about 2:00 in the morning. If I have to go out and change water at four or five; but you know what? That's part of growth. That's part of change. My husband went and talked to some of the people north of us last week, and they said, "You know what? We really love your horses and we love your silo, and, God, it's just a great place." Uh-huh. Well, we wanted to be out of here before you guys got here, but we're not. This corner, we looked at it for a long time and think of what we want to do with it. That's kind of our little nest egg. What do we want to do with it? Do we want to go on and do something with it? Do we want to sell it to the first guy that comes along? We offered it to Mr. Blaser three times. On the first and second try, he says, well, I'm not ready for that yet. He was still working on the other parts of Haven Cove. Well, that's fine. We can understand that. So then Vicki Welker came to us with a proposal, an offer, and we decided that she was the only one that would really address the corner issue, because it is a bad corner. had - cannot tell you how many people I've pulled out of that ditch, how many drunks have run the stop sign. It needs a light. That's what it needs. Vicki's going to widen it. That's wonderful. But come on, guys. It needs a light. You talk about stacking up, sure they stack up, but you know what? They're going to Albertson's to go buy food for lunch. You know. They're leaving. They're going. You talk about the amount of congestion and traffic. You want to talk about traffic? Let's put a light on the corner of Pine and Linder. Let's get some flow to all of these areas instead of stacking up. That would help a lot. I see no problem with the complex that she has here. I've talked to a lot of people that I work with. I work for Albertson's - *** End of Side 2 *** what this is. This is going to be an enhancement to Meridian. It's not going to be a determent. I'd like to see this done nicely. I'd like to see it done nicely because this has been mine for eight years. It was the old Depler place, and I'd like it to be something - people that go by and say, "Yeah. That's great. That's a nice complex right there," instead of, "Oh yeah. There's just another subdivision. See the cracker-box houses?" Well, there we go. Thank you. I do ramble on a lot. Thank you for your time and your patience. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 40 Corrie: Thank you. Welker: Good evening. My name is Vicki Welker. I live at 2326 West Renoir Court, and I am the developer of this project. First of all, I would like to distribute to you copies of a petition that we've been working on. We've gone out door-to- door and to businesses and people in the community, both renters and homeowners, people who want to move into Meridian and people who work in Meridian, and we have positive support for this project. In three days, we've obtained 102 signatures in favor of the project. They were shown the drawings, they were shown the building drawings and the layout, and they were given information on everything I know about the project which hopefully is everything there is to know. The quality of the project seems to be in question, and I'd like to address that. I'm attempting to do an upscale, professional housing project here that Meridian can be proud of. Meridian has been trying to make itself known as the place to be. So far, Meridian doesn't have an upscale apartment project. A lot of our children and our grandchildren live in Boise because that's where there are upscale projects that have amenities that go with them, amenities that are in the center where their children can play and not be in the street which is a concern you addressed. That is one of the reasons we have the amenities for the project encircled by the buildings so that the children can be safer. I don't have a problem with making this a gated community if that helps alleviate drive-through. That lends itself to upscale, and I'd be happy to do that. My father is Roger Welker. He owned Meridian Ford here in town for 45 years, and he was the volunteer fire chief for 37 years. I'm not about to bring a project in that would damage my father's reputation in this community. I am about quality, I am willing to work with everyone on it6 Some of the neighbors have expressed concerns to me about the fact that the roads go through that subdivision. We did one plan where we looped the roads to stop the traffic so it wouldn't come through that subdivision or we couldn't go through that subdivision. That's a personal preference is not to be able to go back and forth, but I was told I couldn't do that. We have re-drawn this project six times to try and address all of the concerns. I am willing to do it again. I am willing to meet with the neighbors. I tried to contact the neighbors. Word didn't get through to some of them, so they haven't had an opportunity to sit down and see what we're doing and to give me their input. I'm more than happy to work with them on that. If you have any questions or concerns, I appreciate your time. Corrie: Okay. I'll let (inaudible). Any questions? Bird: I have none. Anderson: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you, Vicki. Anyone else to issue testimony in favor? Okay. Testimony against? Oh. You're in favor? Okay. Give us your name and spell the last name. ( Meridian City Council Mt::;cting October 19, 1999 Page 41 Killian: (inaudible) Killian, K-I-L-L-I-A-N. Corrie: Thank you. Killian: I have a couple issues to address regarding the property. One of the issues that I am aware of - I am formerly in property management myself. I was assistant manager at Woodbine Complex in southeast Boise which is a very upscale apartment complex. One thing that I do know about Boise complexes is there is quite a bit of competition, and I think it's healthy because it creates a need for owners and management to maintain their properties, create anything that's more enticing to renters to come in. That's one thing that I really think that Meridian lacks as far as their apartment complexes that are here. Either they're low-income properties or they are properties that basically don't have much competition; therefore, there's not much maintenance, there's not much upkeep as far as the looks and the exterior to get more residents coming in to rent because they're mostly full. I was born and raised in Meridian. I love the city. want to stay here, but it's been very difficult for me as a young person to find upscale apartment to rent. I'm not anywhere near ready to move into a home yet. I would definitely want to do that in the future, but I would like to be able to have more selection out there for apartments that I can rent that are decent, that are upscale. I'd like to see competition. I think it's healthy for the City. There is a drastic need for it here in the town from the people that I've talked to. Another thing that I wanted to address is that I do believe that this property is a quality property. I've compared it to a lot of the properties that I'm familiar with as far as places in Boise. I do see it as being a positive growth for Meridian residents. Thank you for your time. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else in favor that would like to testify? State you name, spell the last name, please. Alvarado: My name's Steve Alvarado, A-L-V-A-R-A-D-O. Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, I'd just like to address these issues with this. As far as the driving, the traffic goes, I think that it's going to exist there no matter what you try to do. From listening to this and also listening on some of the Planning and Zoning meetings that went on with this, it kind of seems to me that those aren't the real issues. It seems more like to me that it's becoming a battle of subdivision against apartment complexes. I'm a student and a full-time - working full time right now, and I know what it's like to want to protect your family. I have a two- year-old son, and I understand those issues, but, you know, like the lady was saying for, you know, there's just not very many places to live. Two months ago I was looking for a place to live. I can't afford a house right now, I'm a young guy, barely starting out, and, you know, I'd love to have a house some day, you know, and I think these subdivisions are nice, but I like the variety in the choice. Something else that I found was that the rents were higher because there are a lot of people who want to get away from Boise, live away, and so because there ( Meridian City Council M-eeting October 19, 1999 Page 42 ( are so few apartment complexes in the area, there's really not anything you can do about that. The other issue is that the complexes that are here aren't really all that great. They could use work. I think there are some good ones, but I think further competition would help all of them try to attempt to make themselves better. It's just my opinion that the developer, you know, has done a lot to re- plan, she seems willing to work with everybody, and I think it's kind of, you know, someone who's willing to work that hard, you know, you should go with that because a lot of times you'll get somebody in here who's going to be big business, some big company's going to come in and they're going to have the money and, you know, they're going to come in and eventually, growth is going to happen whether you want it or not. People say they moved to Idaho - they enjoy the quiet, it's peaceful, it's a nice town, well, it can still be a nice town, you know. Apartment people aren't any less than people who live in houses. They're just starting out fresh, you know, trying to get a grip on life, and I'd like to have a nice place to live and that was affordable. That's all. . Corrie: Thank you. You're doing real good on the time. Thank you. Anyone else in favor of the project? Okay. Opposed? State you name and spell the last. Blaser: I'm Glenn Blaser and I live at 3450 Stonecreek Road in Boise. My qualifications are I designed and built the nine-story apartment house next to St. Luke's called Bannock Arms. I built Glenn Manor; it's on 8th Street behind (inaudible) the one that's up on stilts, and you park underneath it. I built University Village Apartments which is a government subsidized housing, and at one time I owned and was managing 264 apartments in Boise, so I know a little bit about apartments. This is - before the Planning and Zoning Committee, I got a little carried away, so I have to watch my words carefully. This project needs a lot, leaves a lot to be desired. I can't imagine that where they get this idea that the Highway District approves their highway plans. I talked to Gary Ensleman about it, and he says, "We don't examine the traffic on a plat until the plat comes in." He said, "We've been asking about that and we haven't made any objections and until a plat is presented to us, we really have nothing to go by. It's just word of mouth." Larry Sale was standing in the rear. He didn't enter into the conversation. I don't know what he thought, but he didn't disagree. Now this is not an upscale apartment. This is poorly designed, and it would not pass subsidized housing standards. The FHA would not approve this project. May I walk over there and point, it's hard to - Corrie: There's a microphone right there. You've got about two minutes. We just want to get it on the record. Blaser: Right in here, you come in here, the fire truck is supposed to make that bend right there. Now that bend cannot be made by the fire truck because they - on all our subdivisions, they won't let (inaudible). This is not a road. This is a parking lot. Tandem parking on each side. If a woman has her car in a garage wants to get it out, she's got to park this car parking two spaces, she brings the ( Meridian City Council rvh:;eting October 19, 1999 Page 43 ( other car - and then she drives the car out of the garage and parks it over here parking a couple more and then she puts this car in the garage. That is horse and buggy time - now the drainage in this thing - let me just go back and say this that I put in an application before this board here two years ago to build 12 townhouses on this property. That was R-4. It's three acres, and you turned me down. You didn't want multiple housing here. Twelve on three acres. Now, 158 on 12 acres plus commercial, we brought the sewer right to this point. My engineers which is Pacific Land Surveyors, they say that this portion of the project can be sewered, but this one can't be sewered without lift pump. Now maybe they're - maybe they don't know what they're talking about, but that is the reason we haven't been anxious to acquire that because this is so low. Now you can't widen this down here because the drain ditch is right over here. If you're going to widen, that street's got to acquire property on this side of the street, too. This (inaudible) Pine Street. This drainage in here would be abominable because you see, there aren't any gutters. This is just one flat parking spot here with 320 cars, 156 each person nationally has more than two cars, 320 cars. I went up to Larry Barnes and (inaudible) 320 cars - that's a lot of automobiles. Corrie: One more minute. Blaser: Okay. Any way to drain this property, they're trying to drain it into this central pond. Same time they're trying to use this pond as one of the amenities to support their clubhouse sort of like a little lake. It can't be full of water and be a drainage pond. It's either got to be empty to catch the water when it comes. Now all of the roofs and all of this blacktop in here will shed water and there'll be a lot more water than comes off this subdivision or you only have the roads because you got the whole parking lot and all the rooms. The front doors of these apartments look out into the back of these garages. There's no front yard; the back yard, they're side by side when you - (inaudible) air conditioner behind everyone of those, and they're made out of this cardboard siding, the noise from those air conditioners will make that unlivable. I (inaudible) fence generally been after me as the developer, so I hate to be too blunt, but this is not the kind of a project that you would want. You've been careful in making your subdivisions, and I think you've done a good job so far. But the police and the - would be down this project every other day settling arguments and squabbling, and it isn't only the kids that are going to cut through that project. There's going to be 320 cars in that project. Thank you very much. I can say a lot more, but I've already given you the idea that I don't like it. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: If I could ask a question of Glenn. Blaser: Yes. ( l, Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 44 ( Rountree: Certainly I can understand how you feel about the project. The question before us is, one, do we annex the property; and two, if we annex it, what zoning is applicable? In your opinion, is this something that you would favor - Blaser: I admire you gentlemen because the job you have - I don't envy your job. I don't want it, but I do not oppose apartments. I wouldn't mind a decent number of apartments in that project, but 158 plus a limited office space. Now, he said that corner they're going to have a left-turn lane there. That's where the parking is going to be for the limited office space. You know, you're just cramming too much in too little space. If they want to build a high-rise, you could get that many apartments on that spot. To stick them in like that, that would be hard to rent and - Rountree: You've answered my question. Blaser: To answer your question - Rountree: I think you have. Blaser: -- I would annex it, but I don't know what I'd zone it. You could certainly put apartments on it. I don't think this project is up to standards. We've built these other lots over there would feel knifed in the back if a project like that went In - Rountree: Thank you. You've answered the question. Thank you. Corrie: Yes, sir. daRosa: My name is Joe daRosa, D-A-R-O-S-A. I live at 1162 North Lightning. In fact, we're here for the annexation in question is what I'm seeing here, and the representative for the developer, the first representative indicated to you that the Planning and Zoning Committee, all of the members indicated that that zoning was okay, that they liked it. But, in fact, if you go through the minutes, and I know because I stayed here the whole time, they said that the density was too high for that area. They did not like the amount of apartments or the amount - the density for that particular property. The other issue I have is there are no other apartment complexes in Meridian that have - that would - that when they said the stacking problem would come through here or if any of these people in this apartment complex would go through the subdivisions, which is Thunder Creek and Haven Cove at this point. There are no other apartment complexes that actually have these exits. That was another condition that the Planning and Zoning did not deem approvable was because it did have these accesses into the subdivision. The other concern I have is that when they were talking about the last time when he came up in front of Planning and Zoning, he said that this was rated F when he came to the traffic issue. His comment was, "We can't / Meridian City Council rVi8eting October 19, 1999 Page 45 ( make it any worse than an F because that's as bad as it can get." Well, sorry, gentlemen. At this point, that particular zoning or that particular annexation or that particular project just does not fit with the existing area. He was indicating that would be a nice mix or nice change compared to the industrial that's going on the south side of the railroad tracks. That's a quarter of a mile down on the road where the railroad tracks are. He's talking about the south side of that. He's not talking about directly across from it. In my opinion this just doesn't fit with the surrounding area, and the aesthetic view or the density that would - the amount that it would cost. Populational. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Your name and spell the last name, please. Walther: My name is Rees Walther, W-A-L-T-H-E-R. I attended the last Comprehensive Plan meeting, and in the Comprehensive Plan meeting that the old Comprehensive Plan was stating that this was to be zoned multi-use area. Now what came up at the Planning and Zoning - the Comprehensive Plan meeting was that between R-4 and any other zoning, what needed to be done was creating a buffer zone. I think, given the other testimony and what's been said at the Planning and Zoning meeting last month, that a better use of this area would be a much-needed park. I heard in the last Valley News, the last one, that it was - that park space was really needed in the Meridian area. I also, being an educator, I also believe and knowing that - I teach at Eagle Middle School, we have 1400 students. We're built for 1 ,000. I think a better use for it, and I talked to the Mayor last year, I had you in my class room last year, and you were saying that we needed to set aside and plan for the future as far as schools go. I think that would be a much better usage of the area as well. Also, traffic, it's already been addressed, but I'd just like to address it again, it's already a high-traffic area and it's just going to get more and more and more traffic. It's going to be - already going to be - it's already planned to become a five-lane way and a connector onto the freeway. It's - to add this many more right there on the area is, I think, I feel, is too much. Mr. Bentley, you've already addressed my other concern. It was this traffic study was done on August 9th when there's no students around. Just one other bit of concern. I would like for the neighbors to move as well. Seeing that he has come over to my house and threatened me and told me that he was going to become a bad neighbor if we fought City Council on this. So I just feel that this is a wrong area for apartments, and I feel that there's a lot of support for that. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Ash: My name is Bonnie Ash, it's A-S-H. I live at 2430 West State Street, and I would like to challenge to all of you if you don't think there's a traffic problem to try to get onto Pine to take your children to the high school which I've done for five, six years in that area. It's not just after school. It's before school, it's when they go on break, and it's at lunchtime. In addition, I teach in the Meridian District and have since I moved here 13 years ago. Please, please, please look ;' Meridian City Council rVlt::eting October 19, 1999 Page 46 ( at the population. You know, I have worked at a school where I've seen what apartments - they add more children. We're already adding because of subdivisions. But this is too many for that small space. The best thing we can do for our kids is provide schools and we can't keep up with what we're doing. I just think it's a very poor place to put that number of people. The schools in that area, around that area are at capacity. Meridian High has been as large as a small college. Please consider that when you think of the use of the area. Thank you. Atkinson: Hi. I'm Erma Calnan Atkinson, Atkinson is A-T-K-I-N-S-O-N. Life-long resident of this community, and currently building at 1124 North Lightning. This has been one heck - this is really (inaudible) getting to know the neighborhood. We heard about all of this on Saturday when we were visiting our home. I assume you all received my letter that I sent to the Mayor and the Councilmen. If not, I have copies available at no charge back there. I just wanted to reiterate a couple of points. On the traffic, it's not limited to 45 minutes, obviously, when the kids from the high school are leaving. I've done the carpool thing for a couple of years between Chaparral Elementary and Meridian Elementary with the neighborhood kids. We have the morning rush. We have the afternoon rush. We have the lunchtime rush. So it's a day-long event. Secondly, I think there's a difference between what's allowable under the Comprehensive Plan and what's appropriate with the existing homes and the traffic limitations. I have no problem with the corner developing. I expect that. I've lived here all my life. I've seen it happen. But I guess I would challenge the developer on given the makeup of the existing area, how can 600 people living on 12 acres ever be considered upscale? Corrie: Thank you. Tamas: Good evening, Mr. Mayor. My name is Marie Tamas, the last name is T -A-M-A-S. I live at 1125 North Roper. A lot of things have been addressed here this evening. Earlier in the evening you introduced a gentleman here to - for your police department. We live in the Court. My husband is retired. He is home all day long. I don't know how many times just in the nine months we've been there, he has had to call the police to have them come drive through to slow the kids down, high-school students, while school was in effect. Then when school was out, he had to call the kids because of the building, kids were getting into the houses and damages, fires, so forth. Imagine the police kind of know his name by now. I would like you to consider this. If you are considering a gentleman on your police force how to serve us better and possibly increase it. You increase it by that many people living in that small space, you're going to get tempers flared, you're going to have a lot more police called in that area. Then that area's going to get a bad name. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. ,/ Meridian City Council rvltdting October 19, 1999 Page 47 Wade: Hi. My name's Lisa Wade, W-A-D-E, and I'm a concerned mom because about the traffic. My son has to walk to Meridian High School along that road, and the traffic is horrendous. To put 300 more cars in there, they have a zero hour at Meridian High School. They also have kids getting out throughout the day. That's not - it's not a 45-minute problem. My son has to walk along that road, and there's kids going across - along there, that's going to cause - there are going to be kids in that apartment building going to school, too. I can't get out of my subdivision when school's getting out to go pick up my son to drive him home because of traffic is so bad. The other thing is, I bought my dream house, and I bought it because I can see the Owyhees from my house. As soon as those three-story apartments go in, my view's gone. You know, I don't appreciate that. There's a lot of two-story houses is the same thing. I don't want to look at the back of somebody's apartment. Thank you for your time. Corrie: Thank you. Walters: Hi. Good evening. My name is Jeff Walters, W-A-L-T-E-R-S, I'm just a resident, 2496 West Forecast. I don't have a lot of expertise in engineering and all that stuff. I'm just a concerned resident there. Basically, like all these other people, I just want my name on the record that this is just way too many people for that small space, and along the traffic problems, you're going to have a lot of other ones, mostly which have been addressed. One of the big ones that I see that I think it's funny, I didn't even think about the fire department until that first gentleman, engineer brought it up, but you put that many people there, forget getting a fire engine in. How are you going to service that many people? Meridian, when I moved in, I was told that my fire insurance was higher because I live in Meridian rather than Boise because of the coverage by Meridian Fire Department. I know they're expanding, but are they going to be able to expand to a rate that we're incurring on them by doing this? I think that's something to be considered that wasn't brought up. I didn't even think about that until that gentleman brought that up. I just thought I'd bring that to your attention it's something a little new. And I'm very concerned as a young father with a young child and more on the way that it will continue to increase. I don't mind growth. I don't even think I mind apartments. A park would be great, but I'm not the designer or the builder, so I can't say what goes there, unfortunately. I just think it's too many - 156 is an awful lot. Sixty is an awful lot. But 158 is - however many is - 150 plus is an awful lot. Thanks for your time. Ryan Anderson: My name is Ryan Anderson, A-N-D-E-R-S-O-N. I live at 2565 West Carlton. We moved in about two years ago. We bought the home, our first home, newly getting married as an investment. We have a little baby on the way. I don't really even want anything like that in the area. I wouldn't mind an office complex, something really nice, low scale. I've lived in two different apartments. I was in - went to BSU for about five years and just graduated from there. I lived in both the Clock Tower Apartments which is a gated community. The gated community thing never works. They tried and tried. We all had Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 48 passes, they all had our phone numbers. It just never worked. I lived also in the Huntington Apartments, southeast Boise. Very both upscale apartments. The ambulance and the fire trucks and the police were in there all the time. I just don't want to see this in this area. All kinds of fights and drug busts and I got out of that area and came out here to settle down in a nice, quiet neighborhood. I believe it's nice and quiet. My parents were up here last weekend, and my dad was out in the backyard, and he made a comment of how quiet and nice it was out here, and I just really want it to stay that way. Thank you for your time. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else that wishes to testify? Yes, sir. Fleming: Hello, gentlemen. My name is Michael Fleming, F-L-E-M-I-N-G. I live at 2796 Santa Clara which is about three blocks northeast of the proposed site. I'm a licensed, State of Idaho licensed real estate appraiser, and I've seen the effect that projects such as this have when they're that close. Actually connected to residential developments like that. The developer mentioned - I'm sorry. The representative for the developer mentioned that there was a buffer zone, but again, as the first gentleman questioned, I don't understand what it's buffering to. The industrial is at least a quarter mile and it's on the other side of the road - it's on the west side of Ten Mile where the new storage facility is. I just think that this is an inharmonious land use for this area which is consistently single-family residential, detached homes. I think we all know the density is - this kind of density equals more traffic. I don't think that road, Ten Mile Road, is equipped to handle that much traffic right now. I know that there is plans for it to go to five lanes. That's like a five-year plan, I believe. I don't think it can handle it at this point. As Mr. Anderson mentioned who lives in that subdivision where Chaparral Elementary is, my kids cross and go across Ten Mile to go to that school also, and right now it's extremely dangerous as it is with that kind of density there's going to be so much more traffic, there's going to be - we can all imaging how much worse that's going to be. I agree with you with the comment Mr. Bentley had on the traffic study. It was done when school's not in session. This is just going to be that much more traffic. I do a lot of residential income property appraisals in Meridian and in Boise. I don't know if there's the need for that many units. I don't know how they can fill that many units. I don't know if it would ever come to - subsidized project just to fill it, but I don't think any of us want to see any vacant units out there. I just don't know where the tenants are going to come from to fill those units. As far as the employment, I don't know _ the nearest major employer, corporate employer, would be Hewlett Packard. That's quite a ways away. I just don't see where the people are going to come _ the demand is. I can't see where they'd fill those units up. Corrie: Thank you. Fleming: Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else? Okay. Bob, you have the last one here, then. { Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 49 Unger: Once again for the record, Bob Unger with Pinnacle Engineers. I guess I'm just going to go down through the list here real quick and rebut some of the testimony. I'm - as far as Mr. Blaser's comments on fire access, it's not based, it's not founded. It's his personal opinion, and I don't believe he's really giving us a fair shake in the - in fact, since he is the developer of the property to the north, he feels that this development is going to hurt his development as far as sales of his lots, et cetera. In fact, he has told me that on numerous occasions. So I'm not sure that his opinion is - whether he's really taking a close look at this or whether he's totally (inaudible). As far as drainage, we have seven drainage lots on this property. We're not going to use the pond for our drainage. We have numerous drainage lots. We have one here, one over here, here, there's one over there, one down here. There's numerous drainage lots. So what he's saying about us using our pond for a drainage is totally incorrect. Okay? Our drainage has to be handled on the site, and you're right. If we're going to have a pond, he's right - if we're going to have a pond and we were going to try to use that for drainage, then you couldn't have water in it all the time because it wouldn't handle the drainage for the 50 or 1 DO-year event. So we have separate drainage ponds for the drainage. As far as sewering this property, I'll give him that. We do have to raise this up, this corner down here, we're going to bring in about three, four foot of fill to make it work. Like I said in the beginning, we know how to engineer it and make it work and comply with the law. In fact, we submitted preliminary plans for our sewer and everything to the engineering department. They reviewed them. I've received no negative comments from them on those. Just a quick comment. We're not building cardboard boxes here. We will have vinyl siding, et cetera, on structures, okay? I do want to clarify, if I could, we were talking about this being a buffer to the industrial, proposed industrial uses based upon the Comp Plan. This corner right here heading south and west is designated under the Camp Plan for light industrial. This area all through here and to the south is for mixed-residential, and that's what we're looking at and what we're asking for. The most comments I've heard this evening are traffic. Traffic, traffic, traffic. Mr. Blaser said that he talked to Gary Enselman, Gary Enselman has no idea, has not seen this project whatsoever. Gentlemen, I hope you have a copy of the approval from ACHD and it's for the entire project. It's for the conditional use, the planned development; everything. That was approved by the Ada County Highway District Commission on 9/8/99. So, you know, we certainly have had this reviewed. We've had Mr. Dobie do a traffic study. We do understand that there's a lot of traffic at this intersection. But the traffic on Ten Mile and the traffic on Pine are not even close to capacity as designated by ACHD and APA. The traffic study that Mr. Dobie put together and ACHD's review, they all acknowledge that it's not even close to capacity. The intersection is not even close to capacity for these streets. Pine is to be upgraded someday in their future plans. Ten Mile, of course, arterial, upgrading is continually on-going. They're taking 48 feet of right-of-way out of this project as they have done to the north, you know, for the widening, et cetera, of the project. We feel that our density is appropriate. We feel that we comply with the Comprehensive Plan. I don't recall seeing a response from the Chief of Police ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 50 ( here in Meridian. If there was a negative response or concerns about this type of a development and problems that it mayor may not cause, I hope I would have seen that and been aware of that. I have not seen that. If there is, I would hope that someone would let me know. I think it all boils down to the traffic concerns. I think the Highway District has reviewed it appropriately. I think we are agreeing to do above and beyond the requirements from ACHD in trying to mitigate some of those concerns that we've heard from the neighbors. Some of the problems that I am personally aware of in trying to provide the left-turn lane on Pine, or westbound on Pine. Just two comparisons of recent apartment projects that have been approved, you have Aspen Hills on Meridian Road. That's a very large project, very nice project which this Council's approved - then we have Cobblestone which is a subsized (sic) project that is, I believe it's on the agenda for this evening that has gone through the approval process. What we're trying to accomplish here is what we feel is a much more upscale project than either of those which have recently been approved. Certainly, when we go through the review process for the conditional use and the preliminary plat, if we get that opportunity to go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission with that, certainly we will be open to working with the staff and Planning and Zoning Commission and any recommendations that they may have on the project to alleviate some of the concerns of the neighbors and also those of the Planning and Zoning Commission. With that, I will conclude my rebuttal testimony and stand for any questions you might have, and certainly we ask your consideration and ask for your approval in the project on the annexation and zoning. Corrie: Okay. Any questions at this point? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Do you agree with the staff reports of September 13th? Modification stuff from the Planning and Zoning staff of September 13th? Unger: You know, I don't have them right in front of me. Most, as I recall, the majority of what staff had commented on we didn't have a problem with. There were some discussions on the tandem parking, the amount of tandem parking, et cetera that we had. I would have to look at those some more, but, certainly, we are wide open to continual work - continually working with your staff to try to resolve the issues that might be out there. Corrie: Okay. Thank you, Bob. Unger: Thank you for your time. Corrie: Okay. Item 128, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. ( Meridian City Council Mt::eting October 19, 1999 Page 51 Bird: So moved. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item 12B: Request for annexation and zoning. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Council, discussion? Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: I think we've heard just about every argument on this thing that we can possibly hear. I still have a real problem with the traffic flow into the subdivision. I have a problem with the traffic flow, period, out there. I think the density is too high for that area, for that small parcel of land, so I won't support the annexation. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. I also have concerns about the traffic and we've had a number of projects come before us recently that are of a very high density nature that are looking at putting on two-lane roads. I think the infrastructure is just not there to support these types of developments at this point. I agree with Ms. Fuller talked about a stop light. We would like to see one there, too. That's not up to us to do. That's an Ada County Highway District function. We'd like to see a lot more stop lights, one at Linder and Pine and some of those other areas, but I think in light of the testimony that we've heard here tonight, I agree that this is too dense of a project for this area and would cause some considerable traffic problems in that area which would compound the traffic problems that we already have. So I would not vote in favor of that project. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I personally don't object to their request for the annexation. It's going to be part of the city at some point in time whether it's now or in the future. I don't necessarily object to the zoning request which is what the hearing was about. It's something that the City's going to have to deal with in the near term as it relates to these kinds of uses. We've had several of these kinds of opportunities or challenges, if you will, presented to the City, and they're a tough sale when they're adjacent to an R-4 subdivision, but there's still something that's ( \ Meridian City Council Nleeting October 19, 1999 Page 52 required to make the community viable. Which gets me to the project which seems to be where everybody is. My opinion of the project is not particularly high. If I have to resort to denying annexation in order to get a project that might be of what I would feel would be the right density, the appropriate buffering we've heard about buffering. This Council's position on buffering has been more, let's buffer existing uses. We don't see that being done at all. There's no buffering at all adjacent to the existing R-4 subdivisions with this plan, and I can see that it could be done relatively straight-forward. Heard testimony that the plan's been changed six times, eight times, and they'd be willing to change it some more. We've had developers that have taken that kind of information and gone back to the community and they've worked out decent solutions that have been acceptable to everybody. Come back to the City with a uniform and a directed project that most everyone can support, so I've gone full-circle from the hearing which is annexation and zoning to the project. Knowing that if it were annexed, it's very difficult at that point in time to modify projects and probably lean towards not supporting this particular application even though - it's not that I don't favor this kind of land use. It's more directed at the project that's been presented. Corrie: Any further discussion? Okay. Hearing none, I'll - *** End of Side 3 *** request for annexation and zoning on Item 128. Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: I move we instruct the city attorney to prepare Findings with a request to deny the annexation and zoning to R-15 and L-O for Valeri Heights Subdivision by Gold River. Anderson: I'll second that. Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Bentley and seconded by Mr. Anderson to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the denial of the annexation and zoning of Item 12B. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote; Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Aye. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Meridian City Council Sro:;cting October 19, 1999 Page 53 Bentley: Ayea Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND REZONE FOR TEN MILE MINI STORAGE BY ED SEWS-WEST OF TEN MILE AND NORTH OF USTICK ROAD: ITEM 14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MINI STORAGE FACILITY CONSISTING OF NINE BUILDINGS AND ONE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING/OFFICE BY ED BEWS --WEST OF TEN MILE AND NORTH OF USTICK ROAD: Corrie: Item No. 13 is a public hearing. This is a request for annexation and rezone for Ten Mile Mini Storage by Ed Sews, west of Ten Mile and north of Ustick Road. At this time, we'll open the public hearing and invite the staff for first comments. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property that's located immediately north of the Wastewater Treatment Plant on Ten Mile Road. It is designated in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan as being agricultural rural residential which requires a five to ten acres lots that they are residential uses. The staff's recommendation is that if this approved for annexation and zoning that the uses be restricted and that there be outright restriction of certain uses or the possibility also would be that this be the only use that's permitted on that lot. The light industrial zone that they've requested would be compatible with the Wastewater Treatment Plant. I talked to John Shawcraft, the Wastewater Treatment Plant operator, and he has no particular concerns with the project. I will, if I may, I would like to cover the conditional use permit at this time in my comments. They're proposing storage units along this entire perimeter. Would be storage units. They have added some landscaping and we have requested that the landscaping on this northern boundary be approved by our staff and that trees be planted at least 40 feet on center. They also would have the office/residence here. Staff would support leaving the Creason Lateral open provided that some kind of treatment is given to the land area here either through some kind of lawn or fescue or something of that nature. There are existing trees here as part of the Wastewater Treatment Plant's property. There's the road for the ditch rider, the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District is on the Wastewater Treatment side. One thing that Mr. Shawcraft has asked just verbally tonight in reviewing this plan, they are currently showing all of these units here to be open. He has requested that they at least be enclosed on the southern boundary here because of the ( \ Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 54 construction activities that are going to take place at the treatment plant. His concern is that there will be a lot of dust generated and the vehicles that are parked in this area will be covered with dust and they won't be very happy. Staff would support recommendation of this annexation and zoning and the conditional use permit with the conditions outlined in our report. There also will be a trunkline sewer - how big is that? I believe 3D-inch trunkline sewer that will be extended from the treatment plant, and it will follow this 20-foot wide corridor all the way to Ten Mile, and that will start us on the way for the no-name trunk sewer. Corrie: Anything else from staff? Stiles: Do you have anything, Gary? Smith: I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. No. I don't have any other comments to make. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Developer. Okay, Becky, the Council has indicated that the members of the council that we might deal with the public hearing for both the request for the conditional use permit and also for the annexation and rezone Bowcutt: Yes, sir. Corrie: -- at the same time. Bowcutt: Yes, sir. That was my intent. Corrie: Thank you. Bowcutt: Becky Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering, 1800 West Overland, Boise. I'm representing the applicant in this matter. As Shari indicated, this adjoins the Wastewater Treatment facility. The Wastewater Treatment facility is also zoned I-L, and that's where this property is contiguous with the city limits at this time. Water is available in Ustick and Ten Mile intersection. It will be extended to the north with the project located on the northeast corner of Ten Mile and Ustick. We have contacted your water department and have received some analysis of what the flow rates are out there. They tell us they're 3,338 GPM at 20 PSI because that's one of the concerns with these types of facilities because you do, under the Uniform Building Code, are required to have firewalls at certain distances based on the amount of fire flow available. The property's about 13.79 acres, and based on the location, this is probably the best use that one can think of concerning what we have next door. This project - not that it's bad. Corrie: It's got to go somewhere. { \ Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 55 ( Bowcutt: We wouldnJt want to put anything in there that would conflict, let me put it that way, with the adjoining use next door. The I-L zone, we chose that zone because your staff indicated that's one of the few zones that does allow for mini- storage facilities. The zone does in its purpose statement encourage clean, quiet, free of hazardous or objectionable elements which this particular project would be. These projects don't generate a lot of traffic. The traffic they do generate is not associated with peak hours. We've got about 164,904 square feet of mini-storage. The units would range in height; about the maximum would be 14 - around 16 feet, I think it is. There would be one single-family dwelling which would also serve as the office. If you look at this site plan here, the office would be located right there at the entrance roadway. The gate would be inset right here at this island, so we would have adequate room for stacking which is one of the concerns that Ada County Highway District always has when youJre doing this type of facility with a gate. They're typically a coded pad so each person would have an individual code to enter the facility. There will be parking provided, handicap parking. We have allocated 20 feet of landscaping outside of the right-of-way as staff requested, and we have landscaping, I believe, six, six and a half feet along the northern boundary. We had one gentleman at the P & Z, his only concern, he owns this property here, was that these trees would be left in tact because I guess they do kind of straddle the property line. I have talked to my clients about that, and they stated that they didnJt have any intent to remove those four existing trees; however, when that trunkline, the sewer trunkline is extended down along that northern boundary, sometimes we find, due to the excavation, that the trees will die. Not saying that's going to happen, but that is a possibility. Obviously, if that were the case, the tree would then have to be removed and we'd have to replace it with a new tree. Based on staff's comments, there were only a couple of items that we were not in agreement with. All the others we concurred. General requirements, Item 1, your ordinance does require that you pipe any irrigation facility. We do adjoin the Creason Lateral. It runs all along the southern boundary and separates this between the Treatment Facility. Based on the fact that this is a mini-storage facility, we don't have the issue of ditch safety. It's back behind the buildings. To answer staff's question, the rear of these buildings joining the Treatment Plant, this will be enclosed. Only the face of these is open to the interior, so we wouldn't have any conflict there. What we'd like to do is request a waiver of piping the Creason Lateral. We feel that it just doesn't make a lot of sense to do so where we don't have any residential, adjoining uses. Secondly, we don't want to put any manicured landscaping back here behind these buildings. We have allocated some areas where we're going to retain some of our storm drainage. We have about 300,000 square feet of hard surface area. That generates a substantial amount of storm drainage. So outside of the easement for the Creason, which is I believe 25 feet from the center line of the ditch, we have some pocket areas where we're going to retain some storm drainage back in that area. Planting something like a red fescue or something that you don't need to maintain, you still have some problems with it. Our preference would be to sterilize it and that's typically the preference of the irrigation district because then they don't have any ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 56 / \ maintenance required. If we were to encroach into their easement with any type of landscaping, even something like a red fescue or buffalo grass, we would have to obtain a license agreement from them. ThereJs a substantial amount of trees along here. You know, it is a ditch. It's going to look like a ditch. Beings that it's back behind the building, kind of situated between these two parcels, I would hope that we could get some understanding there. As Shari indicated, the 30- inch sewer trunkline will be coming out of the treatment facility. This is the no- name trunk. It'll come into the property here and run for 2,000 feet and exit out to Ten Mile. For the record, our intent is to construct, design and construct that facility this winter. We'll also be doing our design and construction of our extension of water north on Ten Mile. The other condition that we disagreed with was Condition No. 13. Staff indicated that the ordinance reads that for every 15,000 square feet of asphalt on a site that one will plant a tree. But it doesn't differentiate between any uses. Obviously, when you have 300,000 square feet of hard surface area, you would have approximately 200 trees based on that calculation. Staff has stated that their preference would be a tree every 40 feet all along Ten Mile and then running along the northern boundary, and that would be from center of trunk to center of trunk. When you calculate that, that would require 68 trees based on those two dimensions. We concur with that. We do agree. So we would like No. 13, the reference to 15,000 square feet deleted because it just doesn't make any sense in this type of facility. I don't know where youJd put the trees. You just have trees on top of trees. We've agreed to detailed landscaping plan for what we show. We've also agreed to a development agreement. We understand that this property is being approved for a mini-storage facility only. We are not opposed to that being referenced in the development agreement for this rezone to an I-L. Do you have any questions? Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Becky, you're going to make your new resident aware of where heJs living? It is the sewer plant behind them. Bowcutt: Yes, sir. He will maintain and take care of the facility. You need someone there, but- Bentley: What? The sewer plant? Bowcutt: Yes. Oh - no. Not by the sewer plant. Yes. Bentley: Gary'd like that (inaudible). Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. ( Meridian City Council Mt::eting October 19, 1999 Page 57 ( Rountree: Becky, what's the distance between the buildings on the north and the property line with the treeline and my concern is if that's where the trunklineJs going to go, is there sufficient easement in there for repair and maintenance? It's a little tight. Bowcutt: This dimension here is six and a half feet, and then in addition to that is 23.5. Rountree: Okay. So that'd be in the 23 feet? Bowcutt: So it'd be about 30 feet from the center of those trees, approximately, back to the edge of the building. Rountree: Thank you. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Becky, that Creason Lateral that runs along there - Bowcutt: Yes. Anderson: You had indicated that there was a possibility that youJd like to sterilize that. I guess I'd like to maybe see that as a condition if there's not landscaping done simply because I'm assuming there's probably no access to that, and it would just become a weed hazard if you didnJt do sterilization or something back there. Bowcutt: Yes, sir. We would want to sterilize it because the ditch companies like to come through and burn them periodically, and that wouldn't be a good thing. So, yes, sir. We are not opposed to that being a condition of approval. Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else who would like to issue testimony? The public hearing is open on 13 and 14, both the annexation and rezone and request for conditional use permit. Okay. If there's no other testimony, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on Items 13 and 14. Bird: So moved. Bentley: Second. ( Meridian City Council Nlt;eting October 19, 1999 Page 58 ( Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item 13 and 14. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Discussion, decision or motions. We (inaudible) take the annexation and rezone first. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we have the legal department draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order in favor of the request for annexation and rezone for Ten Mile Mini Storage by Ed Bews west of Ten Mile, north of Ustick Road. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Ordinance for the favor of the annexation and rezone for the Ten Mile Mini Storage by Ed Bews. Any further discussion? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: That includes the development agreement and the conditions as was stated by staff and by the applicant. Corrie: Okay. (inaudible) second. Anderson: Yes. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. Motion is carried for annexation and rezone. Item No. 14 which is request for conditional use permit. Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the request for the conditional use permit for mini storage facility consisting of nine buildings and one single-family dwelling/office by Ed Sews west of Ten Mile and north of Ustick Road and for the legal C Meridian City Council rvltJcting October 19, 1999 Page 59 department to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Bentley: Development agreement? Bird: And development agreement. This is a conditional use. Development agreement was on the other. I'm done. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on the request for the approval for conditional use permit and the Decision of Order. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I just wanted to make sure and see if we could include the condition in there of the sterilization and then the other changes that we talked about on the waiver of tiling of Creason Lateral. Bird: My conditions meant what the developer and staff agreed to at the public testimony and Planning which that was stated wrong. It was part of the conditions. Corrie: Sterilization- Bird: Sterilization and the non-tiling of the Creason and the planting of the trees was changed from the 200 to the - Corrie: Okay. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Will be interesting to see what the record reflects. I think our intent is there. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Motion carried. Mr. Gigray, if you'd get that all in there, we'd appreciate it. ITEM 15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 96 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX (PROPOSED ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 60 ( COBBLESTONE VILLAGE) BY STAMAS CORPORATION/IONIC ENTERPRISE, INC.-SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: Corrie: Okay. We've got two public hearings yet. How many is here for the public hearing on No. 15, request for conditional use permit for 96-unit apartment complex at Cobblestone Village? Okay. And how many are here for the public hearing, request for St. Luke's? Okay. Why don't we move to table the public hearing on No. 15 until the next meeting? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we continue the public hearing on Item 15 until our next regularly scheduled meeting, November 3rd. Corrie: Okay. Do I hear a second? Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion made to continue the public hearing on Item No. 15 until the 3rd of November. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. Motion's carried. That will be a continued public hearing on No. 15 for November 3rd. ITEM 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PHASE 3 OF ST. LUKE'S MERIDIAN MEDICAL CENTER -- BY ST. LUKE'S REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER AT 520 S. EAGLE ROAD: Corrie: Therefore, I'll open No. 16, the public hearing: Request for conditional use permit for Phase III of St. Luke's Meridian Medical Center by St. LukeJs Regional Medical Center at 520 South Eagle Road. At this time I'll open the public hearing on No. 16 and invite staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, we have nothing to add to our comments that have been presented. The major issue seems to remain the public road issue. The residents in Montvue Subdivision are concerned about their inability to gain access to Eagle Road, and I don't believe I see Mr. Sale in the audience or anyone else from Ada County Highway District. We did receive a letter from him today unsigned. Other than that, staff has nothing to add. Corrie: All right. Since this is a public hearing, let's hear first from the St. Luke's Regional Medical Center representatives. ( Meridian City Council rv\t:;cting October 19, 1999 Page 61 Bodnar: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and City Councilmen. My name is Bill Bodnar, B-O-D-N-A-R representing St. LukeJs at 190 East Bannock in Boise. I'm a Vice President there. We are very pleased and excited to be before you tonight, to say the least, to present and review this proposal for St. Luke's planned new hospital to serve Meridian and the surrounding communities. I'd like to identify for you some of the details about that new hospital very briefly. On the chart before you, you see essentially the six-story new facility outlined by the colored blocks and the existing facilities to the west represented by the rendering here and the connection at ground level. This new hospital would provide on the ground level floor, 24-hour emergency department services, something that certainly would provide much greater and needed access for residents of Meridian as well as Eagle, Kuna and other surrounding areas. On the second floor of the hospital would be the surgery department and the cardiac catheterization labs so that patients with heart attacks and other serious cardiac needs would be able to get here in this hospital through this emergency department. It does not include open-heart surgery. That's only done at our downtown hospital and would not be appropriate to have it done out here; however, it does include cardiac catheterization. On the third floor would be the obstetrics unit, the nursery, the labor and delivery areas, and we've sized that to accommodate up to 2,000 births, approximately. On the fourth floor would be the medical/surgical floor which you and I know is kind of the normal in-patient areas in a hospital. The in-patient beds. We would have (inaudible) the fifth and sixth floors of the facility so that we could add additional beds within the shell that we would create at this point in time in the future. The initial project calls for us to complete and occupy 62 in-patient beds. This tower, when fully finished, on the fifth and sixth floors would include 146 in-patient beds which to give you perspective, would be roughly the size of Mercy Medical Center. Share with you the conceptual computerized renderings of the facility, something which we continue to work on. They are still conceptual renderings. We continue to tweek these; however, shown here the elevations looking - let's see, this would be looking to the north, northwest. With the existing facility and the new tower here, this view would be looking from the northeast basically the emergency entrance and patient discharge areas here. This would be a view from the east, again showing similarly the emergency and patient discharge entry as well as the drive- under canopy for patient and visitor receiving. This project is designed to meet an urgent community need for in-patient beds. I donJt have to tell you about how much growth there's been in this community, but you probably would be surprised to know that St. LukeJs in this past year, and all of the work that we've done on our downtown site, the number of in-patient beds in this community is growing to become a critical shortage, and so this is certainly what this is designed to address. The approval process has been very thorough. We announced this project actually one year ago, met with the neighbors earlier this summer. That was actually on July 22nd, and there was no oppositiion to the project. A lot of good questions from them, and we certainly strive to meet their questions, and then kicked off with the first public hearing with the ACHD on July 28th. Throughout that process, there have been essentially no objections to the ( Meridian City Council ME::eting October 19, 1999 Page 62 hospital project itself; however, as staff indicated, there have been a number of concerns expressed for the neighbors relative to the traffic issues and perhaps even more specifically, their access for - through a public road through our site to Eagle Road. Montvue Subdivision, however, is seeking this public access for an undefined commercial development. We have offered them and continue to offer them, I will share with you again that offer, that we have continued to make to those residents for a private lane residential easement. One that would be deeded and recorded and they would have that right as a resident. As a resident it would not be transferable to a commercial right, but it would be a - certainly address the needs of those residents. We are seeking timely approval for this process so we can get things going. We certainly are aware and appreciate the process through ACHD which recommended that the infrastructure does exist to support this project. Also would like to note that Montvue has no development plan or proposal or concept before this Council. You will hear a lot about their needs in order to some day comply with the Comprehensive Plan and develop into a residential - I'm sorry, a commercial area; however, they've never presented such plans. So as a result, we find all of the requirements of the Planning and Zoning Commission acceptable but do ask that you not impose requirement 1-1.21 which I will refer during the next few minutes as the road requirement. I think it's probably where most of the public testimony will probably fall. There are four basic reasons that we'd ask you to not consider imposing requirement 1.21, the road requirement: consistency, campus traffic concerns that we have that we feel are legitimate and overriding, the unknown use that Montvue may spill onto this medical campus of ours, and the fact that we believe other options exist. Very quickly, consistency. 1994 the planning process for Meridian's campus, the public approval process envisioned a quiet medical campus with a ring-loop road which I'd like to, if I may, I'll put up on the board over here. The ring-loop road certainly has been designed to create a pedestrian-friendly campus and circulation patterns in 1994. In 1996, there was an application from Ed Bews for the development of his land to the east of our project, and this City Council denied that request for a public road through our site and, again, in terms of consistency in 1996, the City Council endorsed and the continued maintenance of our quiet medical campus and ring road. This project's plans are based on continuing the sanctity of that private loop road. The pedestrian-friendly medical campus. Again, we believe a public road, therefore, should not be required and would create hardhsips for us. Those hardships, which I enumerated, too, is the campus - traffic concerns we have. First off, following many hours and hundreds of pages of testimony with ACHD, they recognized that a public road should not be required of St. Luke's. We ask that you accept their recommendations. The number two - they recognized all the problems with a potential ring road and those problems just begin to multiply by requiring a public road of St. Luke's. A public road coming through our site and connecting to the Montvue Subdivision will virtually guarantee more traffic and more congestion at the lighted intersection. Something that we do not feel would be beneficial to patient care. It would create traffic stacking problems, campus circulation problems and patient visitor safety and way-finding problems. / \ Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 63 The current roadway, a private loop road in that entrance off Eagle Road was not constructed to ACHDJs standards. Its width is not according to standards, its- the intersection grade-level change as we exit our site and go down to Eagle Road was not constructed to ACHD standards because it was accepted and always has been accepted as a private road. To bring it up to speed would cost, it's been estimated in millions of dollars plus we would have the disruption, construction disruption and tearing up of that entrance to our campus to accommodate that. Current and future campus plan is consistent with - is inconsistent with Meridian's and ACHDJs setback plans for a public road. If this were to become a public road in any part, all of a sudden all the rest of our campus plan, the vegetation, the wear of the parking occurs, the wear of the landscaping and curbing and just the entire circulation on our campus, the sidewalks all become subject to new setback requirements relative to a public road and would be very problematic for us. It, obviously, threatens to destroy our quiet medical campus. Number three, the unknown use of Montvue. ThereJs no question that there are developments which would create massive traffic problems on our site and the pedestrian patient safety on our campus would be compromised and could be compromised by whatever unknown use Montvue's asking you - will be asking you tonight probably to approve in terms of a public road through our site. This project of ours does not create significant traffic or reasons for such a taking of private land for this unknown use. Number three, Planning and ZoningJs requirements to create a public road through our site creates - could create the start of an eventual cut-through as our property to our east is developed, and basically St. LukeJs campus becomes a cut-through to Franklin Road. Again, that is something that I don't think should be entertained, we donJt believe, at the expense of our patients and visitors. Last, there are other options that exist. St. Luke's, during the ACHD process, reviewed and offered the deeded residential access, I mentioned, I'd like to share with you if I may, a copy of our proposal. This proposal would provide the residents with the access they need to safely get in and out of their intersection, use our road for low-volume residential-type uses. We feel that that's consistent and would not be a problem to our campus. That's why we met with ACHD and shared with them this proposal, and they considered all of the pros and cons. ACHD recommended that St. Luke's and the neighbors work together to provide residential access to the campus, and I know you have a copy of the ACHD's recommendations, but I would like to submit a highlighted, one-page summary which highlights that it's - that they urge that we should work with the residents. They never urged that we should work with an unknown commercial development to create a public road. The - we believe there may be other options for future commercial development which, certainly, commercial developers have the responsibility to (inaudible) as they come before you to develop those options as well. But those other options include the possibility that rather than thinking only about Eagle Road that access to Franklin Road be considered and studied and that perhaps the Touchmark Development could develop in their application options for those neighbors. Or we could actually look at the actual ACHD recommendation being a requirement of this project to ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 64 supplant 1.21, and, certainly, you have that before you which would be a recommendation. This hospital project in summary does not create a need for a commercial public road running through our site. A public drive and public road dedication should not be required of us.- We certainly appreciate your interest. We appreciate your support and encouragement to build a hospital in this community. As soon as would be appropriate, the time is now, and we appreciate your interest and look forward to your approval if that's appropriate. I'll stand for any questions or would defer - it's your pleasure. Corrie: Council, any questions of - Bird: I have none. Corrie: Thank you. Okay. We'll do the same thing on this one as we did the previous one. We'll start with those who approve or in favor of this conditional use permit. First, limit to three minutes, please. Okay. I will switch around and those who disapprove step up and give you name, spell your last name and limit your comments - try to limit it to three minutes if you can. I'll give you a sign like that, and you have a minute to wrap it up. Rife: Gentlemen, my name is Patricia Rife. I've been a resident of Montvue Drive for over 18 years. I appreciate your hearing what I have to say now. The gentleman from St. Luke's very elloquently spoke about the needs of St. Luke's Hospital, the safety of the patients, safety of the visitors. You can turn that around and apply the same thing to the people who live on Montvue Drive. We have safety needs. We have circulation needs. We have needs just like St. Luke's does. They can get up and whine about how poorly done they have been, make claims about how we're trying to destroy their project. We're not. The hospital, I'm a registered nurse and have been for years, and I know how important it is to have medical facilities nearby for the residents. It's a wonderful thing this happened in our community. But along with it, some not-sa-wonderful things have happened to us as residents of Montvue Drive. It's been characterized that we are greedy and avoricious because we want to see the neighborhood attain its fullest and highest use. The City of Meridian in its original plan have stated that this will probably be commercial; it's designated as such. Maybe not right now, but maybe next year or the following year. It isn't really avoricious or greedy of us to have those expectations that we should receive the highest and best for what we've worked and sacrificed for so long. Also, it isn't right for St. Luke's to be greedy and avoricious and join together with another commercial enterprise to endeavor to block us, land-lock us, so that they are the only potential future users of the land. I donJt know if they expect that we're going to put a nudist colony there to entertain the patients on their seventh floor building? Our intents are not - we only want what's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. If they can be avoricious and greedy and waiting to pounce upon our land at retail prices, bargain-basement prices because no one else can buy it. That's what they're after. That's not right. I'm a widow. That- ( Meridian City Council Mt~ting October 19, 1999 Page 65 my house is alii have. He gave you a piece of paper showing their generous, their very, very generous offer to put in a little country lane. By the way, we were at one time a very beautiful secluded country estate. Their nuscance came to us. So there - in all their great, magnificent generosity have offered to build a road over my land for which I will not be compensated. I will lose a great part of and my land is not available to be given away. It's alii own in this world. So I hope you will take this into consideration that we do need another way out. The land will just be a gift from you to them if there is not some other way than a right way in and a right way out, that's what's planned for our entry. We need an alternative. Their hospital has not only, you know, I'm talking about endangering the people who occupy their grounds, who work there. One morning I looked out from my beautiful backyard, and here was a road nine feet above my houseline. From ground level, they built it up nine feet. I had no idea this was going to happen. They're going to plant trees and put fences in and berms and plant them so we'd be safe. They removed the fences that were there that protected us. We've had a daylight burglar who came up the ditch through my backyard. Fortunately, my doors were locked and I was home that day. A neighbor came home and this man was in her kitchen. Fortunately, a neighbor saw him come in. He'd come up from where they'd taken down the fences, left us absolutely like sitting ducks. She knocked on the window and he came to the door and said, "May I help you?" This guy was a man who had just escaped from prison who stole a car, ran it through the house in the subdivision on the east end of the irrigation area, and he fled to our area. These are the kinds of things that have been happening as a result of the project by St. Luke's. So we suffered right along with - and none of us really needs to do this. We do need a safe way in and out for whatever purpose. I hope you will really think this over because it's something that we're going to need for our survival, and it's not out of greed. Thank you very much for hearing me. Corrie: Thank you. McCreedy: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is John McCreedy. I'm an attorney. My business address is 1275 Shoreline Lane. I represent the majority of the Montvue residents and have for the past several months on this issue throughout our proceedings and in front of the Ada County Highway District and the Planning and Zoning Commission. It's been a moderately long proceeding, and I would like to try to shorten it up as much as I can tonight, but I would request your indulgence. If I could have the Montvue residents stand just very briefly so you know who they are, at least the ones that are here tonight. I would request that I be allowed a little more than three minutes. I think that myself and Ms. Rife will be the only ones providing comment on behalf so hopefully in the long run it'll shorten your evening up. We do have Pat Dobie here who has done some work, traffic issues related to the issue before you. I would hope that I could complete in approximately ten minutes if that would be acceptable. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 66 Corrie: (inaudible) three others testifying? McCreedy: There will be Mr. Dolby who will provide some very brief comments. Corrie: Our goal tonight is to convince you that the requests the residents have made is reasonable. It's lawful, it's reasonable and it's consistent with the plans that you currently have in place. It is not extraordinary. It is not so lavish or so beyond the call of reason as to shock anyone. If I could have staff put back up the vicinity map, if you might. One more back showing the Montvue property, and I'll continue while weJre trying to get that. I want to state specifically what it is the residents are asking for. I'm assuming you had an opportunity to review the recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission. They recommended that St. Luke's be required to dedicate 200 feet of right-of-way. Not build a road. Not pay for the construction or road, but simply dedicate 200 feet of right-of-way in order to preserve future access to the Montvue Subdivision. We're asking you to do tonight is to increase that amount to 400 feet. Again, not to require St. Luke's to spend money to upgrade that road, not require the road to be built at this point, but to simply to preserve 400 feet of public right-of-way for future access to the Montvue Subdivision. If I can approach the map, the public road would end somewhere in the vicinity of the alignment of what I hope is west Montvue Drive. I think I've accurately described that. It would be along St. Luke's now private driveway, so it would end up going tosmething like that. The way we ended up with the 200 feet instead of the 400 feet, I believe, was from testimony of Mr. Sale, and I think he wrote a letter to you explaining to you how that was misconstrued or missupplied. ACHD standards, as I understand it now, are, in fact, a full 400 feet in order to support the use that the Montvue Subdivision has designated for in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan which is mixed-planned use development. Now, the four comments made by St. LukeJs representative, I'd like to just respond to those briefly and do so with a little bit of history and I apologize for taking you back all the way to 1994, but I think that's the place to start. I submitted to the Planning and Zoning - *** End of Side 4 *** my compilation of the history and the studies on the traffic issues and the various positions that ACHD has taken regarding the public road in the past. I give you that volume of information simply because I want to show you that has consistently planned to be a public road in that area. In fact, not just an entrance of a public road of a mere 400 feet, but, in fact, an entire public road along S1. Luke's northern boundary extending through its property to the property to the east which is now proposed for development by Touchmark and then extending north to Franklin Boulevard, Franklin Road, excuse me. A loop road. A loop road similar to the loop road that is currently existing near the Home Depot in Boise. That's the new exit from the freeway, you go around the mall, you take a couple of right turns and you get to Home Depot, and that avoids traffic congestion at the intersection of Emerald and Milwaukee. That's my layman { Meridian City Council rvlbdting October 19, 1999 Page 67 synopsis of what ACHD has been planning for this area for quite some time. So I take you back to 1994. The original ACH 0 approval of the S1. Luke's application. In this application which is Exhibit 2 to the package I submitted, the traffic numbers that were put forward at that time were a mere 420 estimated vehicle trips per day. With the traffic volume on Eagle Road, 11 ,915. This is ACHD Commission's Findings and Conclusions regarding St. Luke's first conditional use permit application. What did ACHD write in a document that was sent to St. Luke's? That staff anticipates future roadway connections to the east; in other words, the very roadway connections we're talking about tonight. St. LukeJs was advised of those as early as June 1994. Shortly after that, ACHD and the City of Meridian received an application from Mr. Bews whose application was here earlier, he is, I believe, the owner or a former owner of the Touchmark property, the property to the east and to the northeast of the St. Luke's property. In 1995 in March, ACHD wrote the following regarding Mr. Sews' application: Staff recommends that two stub streets be provided to the undeveloped land to the east and two stub streets provided to the west; one to connect with the future east-west public road on the north end of S1. Luke's Hospital parcel. Again, I was there during much of the controversy on the Ed Bews application, and I know the St. Luke's representatives were aware of Findings and Conclusions by ACHD recommending a public road, again, on the northern boundary of their property. In 1995, ACHD commissioned a study by CH2M Hill and that study concluded that St. Luke's development could generate as many as 25,720 vehicle trips per day. That study's been provided to you as part of the record before the Commission. After ACHD looked at the study that was performed by CH2M Hill, it made some final recommendations regarding the Sews development application, and I've again provided those to you. These are Exhibit 5. What ACHD concluded on the Sews application was when a specific traffic impact study warrants a condition that Sews be required to acquire right-of-way for and construct a public road from the project site to Eagle Road. From the Sews parcel to the east through St. Luke's property to Eagle Road. Again, a public road. In 1997, ACHD commissioned MK Centennial to do what's called the Eagle Road Access Control Study. This is perhaps the, what I would consider to be the most critical document to what we're trying to present as part of this application. The Eagle Access Control Study, and Mr. Dobie can explain this much better than I can, but in laymanJs terms, it recommends shutting down access to Eagle Road in order to increase the capacity on that road; to stop the interruption of the flow of traffic. Access to Eagle Road is to be shut down when Eagle Road exceeds its acceptable level of service according to ACHD standards. I don't profess to understand how they figure all that out, but that's what the study recommends. I'll read from Page 11 of this study: When Eagle Road begins to break down as a suburban arterial, implementation of the Level 4-5 access control plan should begin. All access within a continuous half-mile segment would lose direct access to Eagle Road when the LOS, level of service is unacceptable according to the ACM and current ACHD policy. Alternative access must be provided to the properties prior to the elimination of access to Eagle Road. Again, these are the studies that have been generated and used by ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 68 ( the agencies and the traffic experts over the past three to four years. So the question now becomes are we at the appropriate time? Is it reasonable to begin to plan for as the planning agency, as the governing body responsible under the local land use planning act is now the time to exercise some authority to plan for future access for the Montview Subdivision. Our answer is undoubtedly yes. In January of 1994, ACHD made a recommendation to the City Council on the McDonalds, Chevron, Idaho Power Credit Union application. I believe some of you might be familiar with that one. It did have some controversy. ACHD imposed a requirement that a new public road be dedicated as part of that requirement because of increased traffic and safety problems. I'll read from Page 3 of ACHD's Findings: Because of these safety problems, ITD staff and ACHD staff have recommended that a new public street be constructed connecting to Eagle Road at this site's northern boundary. ACHD also wrote in that same set of Findings and Conclusions that maintaining the existing signal location, the St. Luke's signalized location on Eagle Road allows the future potential for signalized access from the Montvue Subdivision to Eagle Road via St. Luke's driveway. Again, it seems to have been the consistent plan that this the way the Montvue residents are going to get out onto Eagle Road is through St. Luke's driveway, and that driveway must be made public at some time. Again, the question becomes one of timing. Is Eagle Road beyond capacity? In - On July 28 of 1999, ACHD sent another set of recommended Findings and Conclusions to this City Council. This is on the medical office building at Gentry Way, Allen Street and Eagle Road. It's across the street, across Eagle Road. I'm not sure if this application has made it to the City Council yet or not. I know that it was in front of the Planning and Zoning Commission about the same time that we were debating the St. LukeJs application. I provided that this is Exhibit 9 in the package I provided. ACHD writes it Page 4: Eagle Road will not be adequate to accommodate the additional traffic generated by this proposed development. There are approximately 31,970 existing vehicle trips per day on Eagle Road. With this development and other proposed developments within the vicinity of the site, Eagle Road will have approximately 47,235 vehicle trips per day. This will exceed the level of service F. In July of 1999, Eagle Road was beyond capacity. I'll have provided you with another development application in that same set of exhibits, another medical office building where ACHD made the same conclusion, level of service F. I provided you with Mr. Dobie's study where he concludes it's level of service F particularly for the existing Montvue access. The only access they have to Eagle Road and particularly during rush hour traffic. My point is it has always consistently been envisioned by the traffic experts that St. LukeJs driveway would be designated public. It is envisioned particularly by that 1997 MK Centennial study that the Montvue residents would gain access through St. Luke's public - through St. Luke's driveway at that time private. One of the questions is, is it legal to impose the requirement. I will submit to you having been present at the ACHD Commission hearings that the only reason why ACHD didn't impose the public road requirement, or perhaps the most dominent reason is the better way to say it, is because they didn't feel that they had legal authority to do so. The Planning and Zoning Commission was ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 69 ( advised by Mr. Rutherford, who was serving as legal counsel, that it did have the legal authority to do so in this case. He writes, "It would be legal and legitimate to require St. Luke's to do as Mr. Siddoway's recommended or, quite frankly, to dedicate it and approve it," and improve it, I think, was what he meant. Transcript is not clear there. What Mr. Siddoway, the planning staff, had recommended was imposition of a public roadway requirement all across Eagle - St. Luke's northern boundary. Not just the 200 or the 400, but the entire stretch. Mr. Rutherford saw as legal at that time. So our position is that what we're asking for tonight is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. It's consistent with your authority under the zoning ordinance to address these traffic issues. It's consistent with your responsibility to plan for the future because ultimately, this residential property is going to go commercial in some fashion or another. I want to address a couple of comments on the offer St. Luke's made. It has - Corrie: One minute. You've had 15 already. McCreedy: Okay. It has a residential restriction attached to it. That doesn't solve the problem for the future. In fact, it gives St. Luke's, in my opinion exactly what it needs, and that is the ability to constrictly control public access to the Montvue Subdivision. The access they have right now is functionally, well, not functional. It doesnJt work. It's unsafe. That comes from Mr. Dobie's study as well as Findings ACHD made in its own report. Now, one of the concerns that S1. LukeJs has is the unknown potentially devastating development that might happen in the Montvue Subdivision. That's what this process is all about. If the Montvue residents sell to a commercial developer and he wants to put in, you know, a mega-super super shopping store, that's absolutely inconsistent. Both traffic and compatibilitywise with St. Luke's, then they get to come down here and object to it and if you find it inconsistent, it's denied and we go back. Hopefully there'll be more reason and reasonableness applied to it and the use will be similar and compatible to St. LukeJs. That shouldnJt mean that at this point we don't plan for the future and preserve that residential access. I know I've gone over my allotted time already, and I do appreciate your patience. One of the things that I wanted to emphasize in my closing was that the residents were very pleased with what happened at the Planning and Zoning Commission and recommendation that came out of there. They relied, I think, quite heavily on Mr. Sale's testimony that the 200-foot requirement was enough. It wasn't until after that hearing that they realized from Mr. Sale - that I personally realized from talking with him that the recommended distance is 400. That's the letter that he wrote to you today in that regard. Mr. Sale testified at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing regarding his understanding of why the ACHD Commission didnJt impose this requirement. Here's his comments, this is page 34 of the minutes. "Highway District's feeling is that while we firmly believe this should be a public street at some point, we are not sure we have a full legal basis to require it at this time based on the traffic that S1. Luke's has generated." That's where we relied on Mr. Rutherford's testimony that, in fact, City does have the authority Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 70 and the legal basis to do that. We would request one other modification and that is that a conditional use permit be required if they, in fact, do want to construct the heliport in the area. I put that in a letter I wrote to you today which I hope you had an opportunity to review. I know this is a lot of information and a lot of volume. I would certainly stand for any questions. Corrie: I think (inaudible) any questions at this point. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Explain to me this 200, 400-foot dedication for future - where is it? Who owns it? McCreedy: Who owns the 200 feet? Rountree: Or the 400 feet or whatever. McCreedy: Could we put the S1. LukeJs site-specific map back up? What the residents have consistently asked for is that they be provided that a requirement be - a condition be imposed on St. Luke's to require them to dedicate, not at this time construct the public road, but dedicate public right-of-way so that when their access is shut down, they have a way to get out. In addition, they would like the public access to support future commercial uses (inaudible) property under the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. That is what the Meridian Comprehensive Plan envisions. Rountree: I didn't ask that. Where is the two to 400 feet? McCreedy: So it would be along St. LukeJs existing private driveway extending 400 feet from the eastern most right-of-way of Eagle Road; the width north-south would extend from, as the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended, from St. Luke's northern property line one foot south of the existing curb cut of their private driveway. The difference between 200 and 400, I think, is tied to Mr. Sale's testimony to the Commission, but that's the location. Have I answered the question? Rountree: So the 200 or 400 feet is a distance from Eagle Road into the current St. Luke's property. McCreedy: Right. Two hundred feet from the eastern most right-of-way of Eagle Road into the property or, as we're requesting tonight, 400 feet in. Corrie: Any other questions? ( Meridian City Council Mt;eting October 19, 1999 Page 71 ( Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. I have no questions from Council. Thank you, John. McCreedy: Thank you for your consideration. Griffiths: I'm Trisha Griffiths, I live at 3295 North Montvue. Trisha Griffiths. Corrie: Spell your last name, please. Griffiths: G-R-I-F-F-I- T -H-S. Corrie: Thank you. Griffiths: If you wanted to know exactly where it's at, I can kind of point it out from what we figured. Corrie: Use this if you like. Just press the button and it's on that end. Griffiths: (inaudible) Corrie: Just don't look at it and you'll be all right. Griffiths: From what we calculate, we - I think 200 feet is about right there. Then about 400 is about right there from our residence. I have a map here. I don't know if you could tell a little bit better on here. I could pass it around to you. Rountree: My question has been answered. Thank you. Griffiths: Also, on the other map are - Montvue Drive does not go straight. It kind of curves down. Another thing I just wanted to mention is that I was relying on ACHDJs recommendation of 200 feet. I could tell you if a square goes into a circle, but I can't tell you if - I can't judge 200 feet is until I go out there and kind of measure myself and see. If someone said it's a football field then I could kind of get an estimate. It's - I think we're saying 200's about right there, and we calculated about right there at the curb is what we though ACHD was talking about. That's what I thought would be 200 feet from there. I was mistaken, and like I said, I donJt know how to calculate feet and yards and stuff without someone really kind of giving me a distance. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: So who would be giving up the right-of-way to put an access road into the subdivision? The property owner on the corner there? ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 72 Griffiths: Yeah. What we - at first they were talking about between these two, but to really align it would be the property owner right here. What Larry Sale was saying, this road kind of curves right here, and I thought if what they were talking about, the frontage goes down and then comes over and connects like that. Anderson: So weJre talking about a frontage road or just an access road? Griffiths: Well, weJre talking about - we want an access road. He was talking about this - he thought would be the most convenient place to have it. Anderson: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Griffiths: Uh-huh. Corrie: Okay. Going to pretty well limit you a little bit here. He's - had 20 minutes or 15 minutes. Dobie: I can talk really fast. Mr. Mayor, Council members, my name is Pat Dobie. I'm a traffic engineer, and I was engaged by the Montvue Homeowners Association to prepare a study of the impacts of the St. Luke's project. Just- when the five-lane construction of Eagle Road was completed a few years ago, there was a significant increase in traffic on Eagle Road, significant increase. When you add the St. Luke's traffic to that mix, it will overwhelm the capacity of that road system to accommodate everything. The condition that exists at Pine and Ten Mile, you know, for a couple of 15-minute periods, right now, during school periods will exist on that section of Eagle Road for 12 to 14 hours a day. ThatJs the level of congestion that you can anticipate. The agency responds to that will be to go in and increase the capacity by closing driveways. One of the driveways that will be closed is the driveway going into the Montvue Subdivision. Now, if the signal hadn't been constructed at St. Luke's, they could have moved their access down to that location. The signal was constructed at St. LukeJs, and because of ACHD offset criteria from that signalized intersection, they had no alternative to gain access to Eagle Road other than to take access through the St. LukeJs signal. That driveway going into their campus is basically a mid- section line collector. It's the same as Pine Street is. ACHD developed mid- section collectors as (inaudible) access to provide public roads, to provide access - the center of the section and to provide access to those properties adjoining it. Allowing a road like that which has significant public benefit. To be a private road creates some public policy issues. It puts the control of land use, it puts implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, it puts a lot of other things at risk. It would be a bad idea, in my opinion, to allow that to continue as a private road. The ACHD - the single-use campus plan was originally approved without the benefit of any comprehensive traffic study. Every subsequent study that has ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 73 (/ - been done has recommended that be dedicated as public road and connected on through to Franklin. Some of my comments. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else that has something different to say? Fuss: Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor, Councilmen, my name is Jeff Fuss, F-U-S-S, and I live in the Montvue Subdivision. If I hit three minutes, raise my hand and I'll go sit down because you guys - it's late and I know we all want to get out of here. We've heard a lot of talk about private versus public and future use by the Montvue Subdivision residents and why we should be talking about that at this time. One of the problems - the main problem that we've seen over the last couple years, and I've only lived in there two years is resale of our homes. We had one resident of Montvue that was transferred out of state. They had their house on the market. They didnJt get any offers. Any legitimate offers. We've had another resident who put their house on the market. Again, pulled it back off the market because they couldnJt receive any offers. WeJve - our real estate appraisals, two years ago when I moved in, were well above what the tax assessed value was. The tax assessed values have not moved very significantly in the last two years, yet the real estate appraisals that we're getting are coming in well below that. The problem is to bring other people in for residential use, weJre having a real hard problem doing that. You're talking about properties that are an acre, most of them are an acre or more, are horse properties. Small one- to two-acre family homes with room for horses, and we have several people that have horses. Now, this - that kind of a property is in high demand in this area. As you heard from St. LukeJs, we're in a high-growth area. So why are we having a problem selling our houses? So that's why we're talking about the possibility of future commercial development because we see that at this point is the only way out for us. We have some elderly residents in there that if something happens and they're forced into some sort of a care situation or they can't be in there anymore, they're not going to be able to sell their homes or they're going to be selling their homes dirt cheap. Now, both of the commercial developments that are on either side of us, both St. Luke's and T ouchmark, theyJre aware of the real estate situation, and theyJve been watching it very closely. I think that's kind of interesting when they talked about their closed- campus and how that was more important than some of the other issues involved. What weJre talking about is the families' financial future of all the people who live in Montvue Subdivision. If I'm transferred out of here tomorrow and I canJt sell my house and I'm forced into, as other residents have been, forced into a situation where I'm having a management company come in and take care of a rental situation, that's a losing proposition. So, I just wanted to put that out there so you understand why we talk about future commercial use because we don't see any way of selling our homes in the future as a residential. So, that's alii had. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else? Different? Okay. St. Luke's, youJre up. Finish. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 74 (' Bodnar: If we could go back to the campus slide. Thank you. ACHD's study - heard Mr. Dobie's, Mr. McCreedy's and certainly is aware of all of the studies that ACHD has commissioned and/or looked at over the years as well as lTD. They studied this, they listened to the tesimony, they rejected their request because ACHD, as they studied this issue and (inaudible) knew that they were going to create more problems than would be solved with any requirement for a public road through St. LukeJs site. The 200 or 400 feet, if I could just quickly illustrate. Somewhere in there and somewhere in there because it's a very moving target and has been throughout this process, is where this proposed public road and taking of St. Luke's property would occur. The intersection is where ambulances will be accessing the new 24-hour emergency department. I'm not a traffic planner. I know probably not many of us ever want to be. At this late hour, it- the people who have studied it for St. Luke's as we've been through this public process and through the planning process since 1994 and again in 1996 studied this campus circulation plan and believe and tell me that this would create serious problems. We ask for your consideration of our proposal and our project and consideration of not imposing Requirement 1.21 on us. We've offered an alternate solution and ACHD in their Findings of Facts also offered an alternate solution. Either which we will find acceptable. I will stand for any questions. Corrie: Any questions? Mr. Rountree. Rountree: St. Luke's have anything posed for that piece of private roadway that you have now other than transportation? You're not going to put a building there or a moat or a mountain or whatever? It's going to be a roadway. Bodnar: That is intended to be part of our private loop road circulation pattern. Certainly, we do have utilities and easements all along the northern common property line that we share with the Montvue area subdivision and significant utilities, and that's where everything was placed when we planned the project originally. Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Any questions? Okay. Thank you. Okay. I would - Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, just point of information. It would be my recommendation if you are going to consider the possibility of imposing the condition of the dedication of the road right-of-way that you might consider continuing the public hearing and exercising your authority and of the statute to require a specific report from the Ada County Highway District with regards to their possition on the proposal. As I understand the request and the condition of recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commisison, it recommends that there be a dedication of that, and since the Ada County Highway District is (inaudible) Highway District and is the only one that would have the legal authority to receive such a dedication, it would be under their ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 75 ( jurisdiction and authority, although, they would have no duty to maintain or to build a road. That would then pose a problematic issue with regards to continued occupancy of the area which would be dedicated and how that would be occupied and used in interim either by some license agreement or otherwise the Ada County Highway District by St. Luke's and it seems that it would pose some issues with regards to your findings relative to the effect the proposed conditional use permit upon neighboring properties and its compatibility and also the issue with regards to the transportation in the area affected by the proposed conditional use permit. I think that there should be some very difinitive information available to the Council from the jurisdiction who will have that responsibility. If you were going to consider imposing such a condition in this matter, and it seems like the record is a little scant on some of those points. Maybe I'm missing it, but once you close the public hearing, then our ability to receive additional information of record to support findings is then closed. I offer that observation for your consideration. Corrie: Okay. Does this Council want to look into that possibility with ACHD? Have you decided what you - (inaudible). Rountree: WeJllleave this letter dated October 19th, Mr. Mayor indicates what ACHD Commission's action was. Corrie: At this point, it looks like we have a motion to either continue this public hearing for further evidence or close the public evidence and make a decision. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded that we close the public hearing on Item No. \ 16. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Discussion, decision or motion. Mr. Rountree. Rountree: We have been provided the ACHD Commission's decision not to require dedication of public road. Their recommendation to continue some voluntary cooperation on the part of St. Luke's and the subdivision be considered but not required. They further go on and state they clrify their previous position that the 200 feet was not sufficient, that they needed a 440 offset in order to ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 76 accommodate an intersection with this access or to provide access to the light on Eagle Road. We also heard some testimony that it's been ACHD's position all along to provide public access. I think the statement was made that that's been in their planning - may have provided that information - they have provided that information on occasion to the City. The City has taken the position historically from the get-go on this that it's been a public access - private access, excuse me, and previous approvals of annexation, conditional use permits and the development of this St. LukeJs complex have been made with that understanding. I sympathize with the traffic problems on Eagle Road. I do not prescribe, however (inaudible) all the problems (inaudible) St. Luke's. If in fact somebody whether it's ACHD or ITD requires the closure of access to Montvue Subdivision, it's been stated for the record and it's correct that an alternative must be provided. That alternative must be provided at the cost of whomever the agency is that takes that access away. It will be paid for through that process. I'm not sure that's going to happen in the near future. Don't know what's going to happen to Montvue in terms of whether it's going to be commercial or remain residential. At some point in time in the future if the access is required and the signal at Eagle Road at St. Luke's is the only solution, then the public entity that requires that access has the ability to condemn and compensate to provide that access. Montvue is going to have access some way or another. I'm not sure given our previous decisions that we are in a position to exact that from St. Luke's. I believe it probably could be construed a taking, and we may, if we did it, have to compensate them for that, potentially. I'm not going to practice any more law, Mr. Gigray. That's my position on this thing. I guess I'd say let's get Findings and Facts and Conclusions of Law prepared and weJII - with an encouragement St. Luke's to continue their effort with subdivision to accommodate access for residential use. If that doesn't bear fruit, they can continue on with the development of their site and plan. I would, however, like to see, and I can't remember whether there were comments and recommendations from staff as it relates to the heliport, but I think that was pointed out, and I think that is an issue that needs to be addressed and coordinated. Any type of activity such as that needs to be remote from any residential area. Bird: Is that a motion? Rountree: That's just my - Corrie: (inaudible) Anybody else have any comments? Bentley: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: In my time of sitting here going through St. Luke's process, I never recall the dedication of a road outside of a private drive. In fact, if my memory serves me correct, there was talk against making it a public access. The heliport ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 77 issue, I would agree with Charlie. I think it needs to be taken up in a separate deal away from the residents, and I'd be in favor of pressing forward with this issue. Corrie: Other comments? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I agree with a lot of comments by the two Council members. I, too, think thereJs some other alternatives. We haven't seen any development plans for the property to the east yet, and I think, as Councilman Rountree pointed out, that if ACHD does close down the one entrance to Montvue, there would have to be an alternative provided. At that point, then it would be their responsibility to bring the road up to standards and provide a wider access. I think St. Luke's has made a fairly generous offer that would ensure the safety of the residents and give them a stoplight to be able to exit through their existing stoplight at present times, and so I think I would lean in - not requiring the land - the 400-foot easement. Bird: Mr. Mayor. I also agree with him. I agree so much that if you want a motion - I would strike the 1.21 completely on the 200-foot dedication. I agree with Councilman Bentley and Rountree that this has never been an issue of making them dedicate anything to them. Public right-of-way and looking back through the minutes and testimony of '94 and '96, a lot of the people that are here wanting the stuff was there, wanting - not wanting the public one back there are testifying, so I'm - I donJt think we can hold them to dedicating that 200-foo1. Corrie: Okay. Is that your motion? Bird: I'll make a motion if you want me to. Corrie: Please. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve their request for conditional use permit for Phase III of S1. Luke's Medical Center on 520 South Eagle Road and delay it to Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation 1.21 from the deals and from the legal to prepare the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Bentley: Second. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 78 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Bentley to approve the conditional use permit request from St. LukeJs Regional Medical Center with the exclusion of 1.21 of Planning and Zoning's recommendations and that the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on that basis and Decision of Order. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 17. APPEAL APPLICATION: REQUEST FOR APPEAL DECISION OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR BY MIKE FORDNANKE MACHINE SHOP: Corrie: Council, do you want to table the appeal application and request for special (inaudible) or do you want - request for special (inaudible) I think it's going to have to be taken up (inaudible) Bird: Mr. Mayor, I would - let's get this appeal thing over with and then we're pretty well wiped out. I hope it don't take too long. I'm wiped out already anyway. Corrie: Okay. (inaudible) Item No. 17 is an appeal application: Request for appeal decision of zoning administrator by Mike Ford/Yanke Machine Shop. The - who is going to be - okay. Ford: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name's Mike Ford. I manage and develop real estate for Ron Yanke and his affiliated companies. I'm here - Shari, can you put up that first - that one there. These properties, this piece of property we refer to as the (inaudible) property and the Howell (sic) property. The reason I'm here is that I sold these two properties. They're separate parcels. One in 1997 and one in 1998. One of those property owners now has applied for a building permit, and Shari has told them that she believes that they're illegal lots. I'm not sure what my legal obligation is, but I certainly have a moral obligation that I sold those lots with the intent that each of those buyers had the right to a building permit, and the property to the north had legal access by a 60-foot easement. Those properties have been split and in there you'll see the deeds, since 1974. That's two years before the State Land Plan Act even came into effect. In 1981, the City of Meridian annexed the property along with all those other properties that are shown up there. The ordinance annexing those properties is also enclosed in your package, and you'll see that the City annexed those properties as two separate properties with a 50-foot easement going to the north property. In 1989, Shari, if you could go back to that record of survey, please. I did this record of survey in 1989. The property remains split in the same place it was originally along the ditch. The ditch is what's always referred to. What I did, I moved the easement, the 60-foot easement from the west side of the property, the long side of the - to the short side feeling that when I went to ( i Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 79 sell that property, it was, you know, made more sense to me to have a shorter road to the back property than on the west side. Shari tells me she believes on the road issue it has to be, the property has to be touching the highway. I'm probably saying that wrong, and she can better explain it. But, to me that is just a driveway to the property and back like you see if there's a residential lot, we see a lot of driveways going back to a piece of property. That's basically what I know. I have Dick Heaton with me who is general counsel to Mr. Yankee and his companies. If thereJs legal questions. Walt Morrow was kind enough to come tonight because Walt was along with Ron Van Auker who I've spoken to and told me the same thing. WeJre the catalyst behind having this property annexed and zoned back in '81, and he knows the history of what went on with the City and the intent and everything at that time. Be happy to answer any questions. Also, the folks that I sold the property to are in the audience tonight, too, and they're certainly the ones that wold like to be able to get a building - be eligible for a building permit for each of their properties which Shari has told them. The way she looks at it right now, there's only one building permit that can be issued for these two properties. Any questions? Corrie: None right now. Ford: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: yeah. We have to establish that there was an error (inaudible) so anything that you have, that would be fine. Morrow: I'm Walt Morrow, 2340 West Franklin Road, last name spelled M-O-R-R-Q-W. Just a point of clarification, can't add a lot to what Mike has said except in terms of the history, properties were - *** End of Side5 *** and put together beginning of 1977. As Mike has stated, the annexation requrest that was put together by myself and Mr. Van Auker and what you have in your packet were all separate parcels of ground at that point in time. They paid separate property taxes, they had separate legal descriptions, they were annexed as separate pieces of property. There was an access easement from the Rattigan (sic) parcel to what was known as the Howell parcel that was done prior to the Land Use Planning Act of 1976; it was the only means by which you could access another piece of property at that point in time. So there are many of those types of access agreements or access easements with rural agricultural property that you will run into as the City begins to annex and zone other properties. We put together the project, brought it forward for zoning and annexation in 1981; it was zoned (inaudible) industrial as Lender Industrial Park with each parcel being represented in its shape at that point in time that I'm familiar with; there's been no resubdivision of any of the original parcels. The parcels ranged in size from one acre to 40 acres; the zoning and annexation that ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 80 we did was with the agreement that if and when it became time to develop each parcel that if they developed as a single parcel, it was a single building permit. If there was to be more than one user in subdivision created the property that the subdivision would then conform to the applicable subdivision's ordinance that the City of Meridian had at the time that that subdivision was done. So in the case of these two pieces of property, there's individual users for each property, they would get one building permit utilizing the six acres as one site and the 14 acres as another site. If they wish to split that into any other uses, then they would have to conform to all the zoning-annexation requirements, subdivision development requirements that the City has in effect at this particular point in time. Any questions with respect to the history of these properties? Bird: I have none. Corrie: No. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Shari, would you kind of give us the reason for your decision. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, the more I've researched this, the more confused I get. The warranty deeds that were attached to what Mr. Ford provided me did show some splits; however, it looks, at least just going over it right now, it looks like the property changed hands at least six or seven times within a week in '81. I'm not an attorney or real estate attorney, I can't dig through all this. There was a quitclaim deed that basically gave Lake Hazel Shopping Center the entire property on May 29, 1981. The legal descriptions and the warranty deeds that were provided to the City upon annexation were rejected because they were not meets and bounds descriptions; the tax commission could not accept them for legal annexation. So what eventually, the ordinance that was passed by the City Council was a meets and bounds description of the entire parcel that was presented as the Lender Park Industrial Subdivision. As part of that annexation in the ordinance that was passed by Council, it said the property was annexed subject to - property was annexed to the City of Meridian subject to the following requirements: that the preliminary plat to be submitted answers to the questions of traffic, landscaping, sewer and water connections and design review. We're kind of faced now with pretty much a peacemeal development out there; no consideration for any of the access or it's approximately 160 acres, and what really triggered all of this was the people that bought this property, this piece here, came in for a building permit, and we asked that they provide evidence that it was in that configuration in 1984 which is what we do to establish whether it's a legal parcel or notJ and they submitted a warranty deed that hadn't been recorded, and then they also submitted this piece of property showing it in four pieces now; although that's not been anything recorded. It was a big problem with where they proposed to put the building because the building would have been right on top of this 60-foot easement. I can't tell from Ada County's records, they've been doing some researching. I'm going to go back down there this week and try to figure out why this record of survey was done. If it wasn't splitting property, I don't know what the purpose was. The legals that were ( Meridian City Council rVree"ting October 19, 1999 Page 81 previously done on these six to ten deeds, I donJt know how many deeds if they are, all describe this entire parcel except some of the deeds say except that portion south and west of the canal. The only thing I can figure is, maybe they can answer this, is now they have actually done a meets and bounds description that shows they are going to the center line of that canal. Before it was impossible to tell from the deeds even where - there was no meets and bounds description. It wasn't based on - I couldn't tell what it was based on. Because this lot has no public road access or no approved private road, we deem this split to not be legal, and that's why we did not accept the building permit application. Corrie: Council have any questions of Shari and that explanation? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Do you want to say something? Heaton: Yes. My name is Dick Heaton, I'm general counsel for the Yanke Machine Shop and related entities. I'd like to respond to a couple of the comments. First of all, the deeds are consistent. The first deed out from the Rattigan's of any portion of the property was in 1974. That deed conveyed way the what's now called the Howell property and conveyed an easement on the west side of the property 60 feet wide. Every deed since then contained those same legal descriptions, and one - the legal description to the Howell proprety was the legal description of all the property except that property south and west. The legal descriptions to the Rattigan property was that property south and west. That's the legal description that was written into the annexation ordinance. Shari mentioned that the annexation ordinance had been changed. The annexation ordinance that is in front of you was the ordinance that was approved in June 1981; it was recorded on June 8th of 1981. Shari is right. There were several deeds recorded on or about that same time in 1981. The reason for that was there had been some escrowed contracts. So they were pulled out of the escrows and recorded at the same time. Lake Hazel Shopping Center, which is a partnership owned by Mr. Tom Nicholson and Mr. Ron Yanke, purchased these two properties in two separate transactions. The Howell property was purchased from a combination of Howell and Barnes. There was an escrowed contract at that time. Purpose of the quitclaim deed was to clear the titles so that there was no question that the Howell interest in the property had been conveyed to Lake Hazel Shopping Center. The warranty deed ran from Larry Barnes and his wife to Lake Hazel Shopping Center. You have those deeds. A couple of years after that, Ron and Tom in taking care of their affairs, transferred the property to Yanke Machine Shop. The Howell property and the Rattigan property were transferred as separate parcels, two separate deeds, and you have in your packet, I believe, a separate deed for each parcel. The Assessor's Office, which is maybe the most difinitive spot to look in terms of whether a division had been recognized prior to the action by the City to annex, had assessed those under two separate parcel numbers. The Assessor's Office still does. The assessment ( Meridian City Council fVlccting October 19, 1999 Page 82 parcel numbers are in the maps in front of you, and thereJs one for each parcel. The purpose for the survey was because we felt, and by the way, I'm not speaking for Mike, we felt that to convey that property was best to define the boundaries. The boundaries are the same now as they were before except that now they're definite. Several of the meets and bounds (inaudible) changed as they always do when you go from unsurveyed land to surveyed land, but the nature of the property and the two lots never did change. The significant change was Mike moved a 60-foot easement that ran from here back to there to here back to there. The reason for that move is common sense. That's a private driveway; private driveways are very common. We just spent a lot of time in the last few minutes listening about a private driveway to service St. Luke's Hospital. We can certainly serve that one lot with a private driveway. Yanke's feel and obligation to make sure that the people who bought this, and those, again, were two separate transactions, separate years, got what they paid for. Each one of those people bought a lot thinking that it was eligible for a building permit. They thought that because we thought that. We had thought that for 25 years. Is there any questions? Bird: I have none. Ford: If I could speak to the last thing that Shari said aobut when the applicant Caparelli (sic) came in and had it split up into four lots or something like this, that - Corrie: Identify yourself again, Mike. Ford: Excuse me. I'm Mike Ford. Shari's comment was the Caparelli came in with something splitting that up four times or something like that. As she is aware and as I have told Mr. Caparelli and his partner, that's strictly between them and the City. That is subdividing that piece of property, and that's none of my business, basically. I'm here again to hopefully be able to say, "Yes, I sold you what I thought I sold you and you bought what you thought you were buying." Thank you. Corrie: Okay. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Question for you, Shari. You indicated when you started off your reasons for denial, you were confused. Has any of the testimony youJve heard tonight, has that helped clear anything up for you? Do you still have the same opinion as you had before, or are you still confused? ( Meridian City Council rv~(.,.,~ting October 19, 1999 Page 83 Stiles: It has - I am still confused, but it hasn't cleared it up that the most recent warranty deed I have for the property shows it as one parcel; it was conveyed as one parcel from Lake Hazel Shopping Center to Yanke Machine Shop. Bird: I disagree. Stiles: It was supplied to me by Mike Ford. Bird: Which number is it, Shari? Which deed number? Stiles: 8218773. It's the entire parcel from Franklin Road to the railroad. Bird: 8212136- Stiles: That is the most recent deed prior to their sale, and that's what we would rely on in determining whether it was a legal, separate parcel. Heaton: May I speak? Corrie: Give your name first. Heaton: This is Dick Heaton again. Corrie: Thank you. Heaton: I have in my hand two original recorded deeds. These are not copies. One is from Lake Hazel Shopping Center to Yanke Machine Shop, and the legal description starts out: That portion of the following property line south and west of the canal to wit, and then it continues to describe - Bird: What's the number on it? Heaton: The number is - Bird: Up at the top. Heaton: -- torn off the top. Recorded on May 4th of 1982. The other deed does have the number; it's 8212136. It says - it describes the property at the bottom, it says: Except that portion south and west of the canal. That's the way all of the legals have been written. One is clearly of the north property and one is clearly of the south property. These are the originals I have in my hand here. Bird: Ours reads the same thing. Heaton: Okay. J ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 84 Corrie: Yankee - that warranty deed (inaudible) Lake Hazel Shopping Center to Yanke Machine Shop. That was April 30th '82; is that correct? It says 8218773 (inaudible) - Stiles: He's right. That is describing the one south and west of the canal. The other one is except south and west of the canal. Bird: Mr. Heaton, before you go, when were you annexed? Heaton: In 1981, June of 1981. Bird: This split was done back in '74? Heaton : In 1974 was the - yes. Bird: And when did it go on the tax roll as separate properites? Heaton: I would have presumed it would have had to have gone on immediately after 1974 because two different people owned it. Bird: That's right. Heaton: But I don't have copies of those tax (inaudible). Bird: (inaudible). Heaton: But it would have had to have been taxed continuously since 1974. We know it's been taxed separately continuously since we've owned the property. Bird: Since you've purchased it, you've paid taxes on two separate parcels. Heaton: Two separate parcels; right. Bird: It has not been divided since the annexation? Heaton: It has not, no. Bird: It was divided before the annexation. Heaton: That's correct. Bird: Okay. Stiles: I just want to clarify that the ones they show is dated - the deeds are dated '74. They're not recorded until '81; ten days before theyJre annexed. ~.~ - ( Meridian City Council rvlt:eting October 19, 1999 Page 85 ( Heaton: That was the escrow's contract. (inaudible discussion amongst Council members) Corrie: Okay. Any further questions? Bird: I have none. Anderson: I have none. Corrie: (inaudible) Okay. Then I'll entertain a motion as far as the appeal of - Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I don't know how to state this, but I'll try. I move that we approve the appeal of the decision of Zoning (inaudible) and not taking anything away from Shari, but also realizing that that was split before it was brought in, but if they - they will have to go through the process, the new owners will have to go through the process if they want to split anymore. So I move that we approve the appeal decision. Rountree: I'll second. Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the appeal request. Gigray: Point of information. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: If this motion passes, then what I would - understand my directive would be to prepare the necessary order which would include a Finding by the City Council that the legal descriptions as provided in the evidence for the two parcels existed at the time of annexation and that they could proceed with their applications in accordance with the state of those properties at that time is how I'd write it up given your motion. Bird: I would agree to that. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Stiles: Could I get some clarification now? ( Meridian City Council Meerlng October 19, 1999 Page 86 ( Corrie: Yes. Stiles: There's an existing easement 60-feet wide on the west side and this easement created, I guess, I don't know why this record of survey was done, but now it shows there's an easement on the east side. Bill, do you have any advice on - Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, I think that what I understood the motion to be was that it would make the finding of the existence of these two parcels at the time of annexation, which at that time included an easement, I believe, on the west, whether or not the easement being on the west or the east or the east has anything to do with issuance of a building permit I think was a matter of review on the part of the staff as to what effect, if any, that has on existing ordinances. That may pose other issues or it may not. I just don't know. Their position is that they probably made a trade of the easements at some point in time. I don't know that that necessarily affects the - comes under our jurisdiction under the subdivision ordinance, but that could be looked at separately. I think this issue has to do primarily with whether or not - I think there was some - maybe some confusion, even on the part maybe of Yanke, because I know we staffed this originally with - not Mr. Heaton, but another - it was Mr. Miller, I believe. I was getting confused because I got the impression - okay. Well, I'm sorry. I got the impression that we had parcels established by a record of survey with some reliance upon past practice of the City allowing one- time splits, and I think we kind of got off on that direction, and what I hear their possition as presented by the evidence, supported by your motion is there were two parcels at the time of annexation which is a different situation. We may have learned something through this process. : I guess my question is, you know, (inaudible) whatever, (inaudible), Shari, to you, I guess, which side that easement's on. Is that important to you (inaudible) if it is (inaudible). Stiles: If the easement exists, then, obviously, it matters. : Well, (inaudible). Stiles: If there's two easements of record, then they can't build on either one of them. : Give one up. Stiles: I had another concern is since this property back here has no access, and this record of survey establishes the property line at the center line, at least the new legal descriptions that were prepared in '89, whoJs going to pay for their half of the bridge? r' \. Meridian City Council MeeClng October 19, 1999 Page 87 (" : (inaudible) property owners have dealt with that. That's not going to be a public road. I think the property owners are willing to deal with that. Again, I think the question (inaudible) Stiles: If whatever Ada County Highway District will accept is whatever offsets - : (inaudible) not an ACHD road (inaudible) Corrie: But it's an access. Stiles: So the Council is approving, basically, a private road to this back parcel? Is that not correct? Bird: Wait a minute. We didn't approve anything but this thing that it was split when it was annexed. It has - it had an easement. Now, I donJt really care what side the easement's on. I'm kind of like that. But whatever it was under, that's what we approved. We didn't approve anything dealing with a road yet. That was a right-of-way easement. Stiles: But when the back parcel comes in, it has to have frontage on a public road or an approved private road. Is this an approved private road? Bird: That's when we deal- we do just like we did with the Treasure Valley Baptist Church and K & L over there. That's - we dealt with the thing over there. I donJt know how you'd deal with it now, Shari, because they may want to put it up the center. Stiles: So you'd approve it at the time they came in with a development? Bird: That's would be my thinking. That's the way we've done it before. The one or two since I've sat on the Council we've done, that was done in the development agreement when they come in for the devleopment. All this appeal was basically was whether it was a one parcel or two parcel when it was annexed. We determined it was two parcels, it was two separate parcels. Stiles: But that doesn't indicate they're two buildable parcels, then, because you haven't approved the private road. Morrow: Mr. Bird. Bird: Have at it. Corrie: Mr. Morrow. Morrow: I'm sorry. Walt Morrow for the record. We determined that there was two parcels. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 88 ( Bird: Yes, sir. Morrow: The second parcel which is the Howell parcel in 1981 had an access easement to that parcel. That still exists. If those folks want to come and get a building permit for those 14 acres and access it on that existing easement, they access it. They donJt have to go through a (inaudible) Bird: I agree with you. But the appeal was on a two - whether it was one or two parcels. We don't have anything to do on the development on this thing. Morrow: No. Bird: And so I could care - sure, I care, but as far as tonight, it don't matter whether they have an easement or not. Morrrow: I'm trying to get to - well, the answer to her question is, in my opinion, is that if the people that own the back parcel come and ask for a building permit- Bird: Yeah. Morrow: -- they have a legal lot. They have access. The City upon aprpoval of plans issues the building permits. Bird: That's when that easement is handled at that point. Morrow: Wel" the easement exists at that point as a driveway to there. It's not a development agreement that has to be done unless that piece of property is further split into other pieces of property. Bird: That's what - and as I understood, that's what happened to that piece of property is Sill and his partner come in and showed her four separate lots or something which you - I don't know anything about that, but what we were dealing with tonight was whether it was one parcel land or whether it was two when it was annexed. That's the part that I'm concerned about. That's what we're done with tonight. Morrow: And the further question that she's asking for guidance on is which easement is it that they're going to utilize to access the back piece of property. Bird: Well, I think that can be done by whoever owns the property (inaudible) get together. I mean, you know, if they want to use it 60 up the long way, that's fine with me. If you want to do it the other side, 1 don't care. Morrow: (inaudible) position they take. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 89 ( Bird: That's the position that they have to take for the development. I thought, I mean, we've done what we were asked to do tonight, and the rest of it comes (inaudible). Morrow: I think the point it had (inaudible) discussion was try to get some clarity from the standpoint because if the issues raised by Shari and others outside of this forum, and then it has to come back to the Council in terms of private sectors thing, then, what did you really mean here. Her question is fair. Bird: That's true. But that is handled when the plat or whatever you want to do coming in to develop it. Morrow: It's a single development or there wouldn't be a plat. Bird: That's right. It's a single development. Morrow: (inaudible) Corrie: Okay. We're back to - stay up any longer. Bird: You got over the easy part now. ITEM 18. REQUEST FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR USE OF PYROTECHNICS OCTOBER 29TH AND 30TH BY BRUCE YOUNGER, MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD AND TEEN MANIA MINISTRIES: Corrie: Item No. 18 is a request for special permit. That's against - that's going to have to go by the wayside because you can't get a special permit because the ordinances (inaudible) reads, and they don't have the (inaudible) in the first place. Bird: I was going to say - Corrie: (inaudible). Bird: (inaudible) a one week. Corrie: It shouldnJt have even been on the agenda. ITEM 19. APPROVAL OF CITY ELECTION JUDGES AND CLERKS Corrie: Item No. 19 - approval of City Election Judges and Clerks. Will. Do you want to tell us about it? Show us here what they're about? ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 90 Berg: Yes. Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, in your packet is a list of election judges and clerks that my Election Judge and Clerks Coordinator, June Pack, has submitted together from past elections that she's had experiences with these people. I just have the formality of putting these names before you and for your approval for our election on November 2nd. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the City Election Judge and Clerks as stated and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded to approve the list submitted by the City Clerk for the Judges and Clerks, Mayor to sign, City Clerk to attest. Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES ITEM 20. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. JANICE SMITH 1. TREASURER'S REPORT Corrie: Department reports; Janice, is she here? Okay. Berg: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, Janice provided a memo to you that I passed out that kind of explains the situation of the closing of the fiscal year, and she'd be more than happy to come to the next or the soonest Council meeting and advise you of the closing of the year. At this time, they don't have that completed yet. Bird: They got one more day. It's the 20th. Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: While we're on that, has our audit contract been signed with the auditors? Corrie: Yes. Bird: Good. Thank you. ( Meridian City Council Meeting October 19, 1999 Page 91 (' - B. GARY SMITH: 1. HIRING OF CONSULTING ENGINEER-LATECOMER AGREEMENTS APPROVED 2. INTERSTATE 84 SEWER CROSSING (LATE COMER'S AGREEMENT) APPROVED 3. CITY OF MERIDIAN WATERLINE PROJECT, PHASE II Corrie: Gary. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council members. First Item I have is request to retain consulting engineer to assist us in development of some late-comer agreements. That is the engineering portion of the late-comer agreements. Requesting that you approve hiring of Keller and Associates from Meridian to help us in determining the service areas and correlating the costs of the sewer and/or water line installations with the service areas to arrive at the late-comer fees that would be inserted into the late-comer agreement or agreements. The work order agreement submitted by Keller and Associates has been reviewed by Bill Gigray, and his comment was that we should strike next to last paragraph that requires or limits the engineer's liability. I'm in agreement with that request. Bird: Run this by me again? Client agrees to limit - which one? Smith: It's a limitation that Keller is asking us for to limit the liability not to exceed $50,000 or their total fee. Bird: What's your standard practice - Smith: I think we've just been eliminating it, Councilman Bird, totally. They're responsible for - theyJre liable. They're being retained to prepare this information for us; therefore they're liable - Bird: So they're liable for anything. Good. Smith: Yes, sir. Bird: I go along with that. Smith: And they have been requested - you have requested it in the past to remove it from a contract, and they have removed it at our request, so it's not an unusual request on our part. Other than that, I donJt have a dollar value for you, projected dollar amount. Alii can say is we'll just keep very close tabs on it. It'd be (inaudible) material. Do you have any questions that I can answer? Corrie: Why don't you do all of them, Gary and then we'll do a roll-call vote on each one of them and then (inaudible). ( Meridian City Council MeetIng October 19, 1999 Page 92 ( Smith: Oh. All right. Thank you. The second item is a request from Gary Voigt, Gary L. Voigt, that is the lead developer on the installation of the sanitary sewer line crossing under 1-84 which would be an extension of the Five Mile trunk. He is requesting by letter that the City enter into a late-comers agreement for the costs of that sewer line extension. This is accordance with the requirements of the ordinance for extension of sewer and water lines. It's called a Cooperative Agreement. Lovingly referred to as late-comers agreement. Bird: That's a standard procedure? Smith: Yes, sir. That's the first step in the development of late-comers agreement is your approval to allow them to enter into an agreement for reimbursement of costs. I would request your approval of that request. Last item I have is the request for your approval of Mayor Corrie's signature and City Clerk, Will Berg's signature on two ditch crossing agreements that are needed between the City of Meridian and the Settler's Irrigation District for waterlines that will be crossing their facility on Locust Grove Road and also on Meridian Road. The agreements are the same, very similar, except for the location. Mr. Gigray has reviewed the agreements, and he doesn't have a problem with them. The Settler's Irrigation Board has reviewed these agreements since the time that they were sent to us for review and approval, and IJve been informed by phone from their legal counsel that their Board has approved of the agreements as they were submitted to us. So I would request your approval on that and to authorize Mayor Corrie to sign and City Clerk, Berg, to attest his signature on each one of those agreements. Corrie: The motion for the first. The hiring a consultant engineer late-comer agreement. Bird: Can we do them all as long as we do them all together? As long as we've got a roll-call vote? Mr. Mayor. Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Bird: Go ahead, Charlie. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we pass the hiring of this consulting engineer (late-comers fee agreement), Interstate 84 sewer crossing late-comers fee agreement and the City of Meridian Waterline Project Phase II for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest these agreements. Bentley: Second. { Meridian City Council Me'e",ng October 19, 1999 Page 93 ( Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded to approve the hiring of consultant engineer (late-comers agreement), Interstate 84 sewer line (late comers agreement), City of Meridian Waterline Project Phase II. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor ,of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council. May I ask one more question? Corrie: Sure. Smith: We have - Will and I have been meeting with ZGA Architects and the development of concept plan for the Meridian Municiple Center, and this was a contract that you folks approved sometime ago for them to develop a concept plan for that building. I think they appeared at one of your workshops and had an elevation perspective-type elevation of a building. They proceeded on that basis to develop some space based on the space allocation study that they had done for us previously. They have at this point submitted some very preliminary plans for space allocations on a three-story structure and kind of based on that perspective view that they presented to you at one of your workshops. I'm not sure where you want to go with this. If you want to have a meeting with them and take a look at what they submitted or just how you want to proceed, but we did have a - City does have a contract with them for a certain number of dollars to provide a certain amount of work, and right now, they're at a point where I think it needs to be presented to you for your review and direction. Corrie: You have to make a decision in open meeting, but if you want to have them come, Charlie, they come the 26th or you want to have it November the 3rd - presentation to you people at a pre-hearing? Rountree: What kind of rush are they in? Bird: What kind of rush are they in? Rountree: TheyJre just dead in the water? Smith: I think their schedule - your schedule, whatever, however you want to proceed is not - Rountree: Okay. Mr. GigrayJs got a comment. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, one thing you may consider in setting this is the degree of - One of the things you may want to consider is the amount of public presence that you might want to have, and they have this I \ Meridian City Council MeeIlng October 19, 1999 Page 94 ( presentation. I noticed this evening when you had the Pre-Council schedule, there were a number of people here probably in preparation for later items. There tend to be less people when you have workshops, and I donJt know what stage you're in, what - how you want this presented at this point. Either way, it'd be a public meeting, but I think one provides a little more privacy than the other. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Mayor. Rountree: We could add that to the 26th. What kind of (inaudible) need a half an hour? Smith: I wouldn't think that it'd be anymore than that. Bird: I think we - I'd like to do a little more study. I'd like to see their deal. I'm with you, Charlie. But on the 26th, we've got to devote, I feel, most of that meeting to getting a sewer plan, a trunk fee in place, given Gary and his department some guidance of where we want to go and how we want to go and when we want to go. Are we going to have it ready in two years, 50 years or 1 00 years? We need to - I think we need to put a lot of that on that trunk. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Also better get the budget finished. Corrie: Have we got the things I talked to Charlie about, we need to make some decision, too, on that (inaudible) land. Senior citizens' request and that's pretty primary, I think. Charlie has considered that, too, at the meeting. Bird: I though we had the (inaudible) all figured out. Just write the check, man. Corrie: Give me authority. C. JOHN T. SHAWCROFT 1. CONTRACT FOR THOMAS B. DOMINICK, ATTORNEY AT LAW FOR PRE-TREATMENT PROGRAM 2. CONTRACT FOR PATRICIA BROWN (ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS) FOR QAQC PLAN Corrie: Okay. John Shawcroft. Shawcroft: Good morning, Mayor. Good morning, Councilmen. Corrie: You can do both of these at the same time if you'd like to. ( Meridian City Council Mee[lng October 19, 1999 Page 95 Shawcroft: Yeah. These will fast. I think the first one, the contract for Thomas Dominick, I think I'd tabled at this time with your permission. Corrie: Okay. Shawcroft: I had a discussion with Mr. Gigray earlier and I'd like to go a little deeper into it. The second is a contract for Patricia Brown with Brown and Caldwell to develop a QAQC Plan. This is the plan is required in our new NPDES permit which becomes effective November 2nd, and it effectively gives the City 120 days to develop this plan and 30 days after the development to implement. Basically what a QAQC Plan, it's a quality assurance Quality Control Plan for the laboratory. What it does is it is an assurance to EPA that we are doing our tests correctly and that we are controlling outside factors which could affect those results so that actually the numbers that we're getting is what we should be; is in fact true, I should say. Corrie: Okay. Any discussion on that? Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Charlie. Rountree: There's a reference in here that standard terms and conditions as the agreement that's been provided by Brown and Caldwell been reviewed by Council. Bird: You're tired, too. Corrie: No, it's not that I'm tired. I just- Gigray: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Members of the Council, I don't have a present recollection of reviewing that. That doesn't mean that it hasn't been done. (inaudible discussion amongst members) Rountree: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve entering into a contract with Brown and Caldwell for QAQC not to exceed $8,000 subject to review by Council. I \, Meridian City Council Meerlng October 19, 1999 Page 96 ( Bird: Second. Corrie: It's okay. Gigray: I've looked at it. As long as John's satisfied with the scope of the work and amount, it's fine. Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded that we approve the contract to Patricia Brown (environmental consultants) for QAQC Plan. Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES D. MA VOR CORRIE 1. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENT Corrie: Okay. The last item, Parks of Recreation employment. I had (inaudible) Christine and - her name just went by me. Donna Brown - not Donna Brown, but anyway - Debbie Watkins. They both came in, talked to them both - *** End of Side 6 *** I recommend employment of Christine Smagula Rountree: You did that well for this late at night. Bird: If you pronounced - so moved. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Parks and Recreation employment. Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES 3. DISCUSSION ON HEALTH INSURANCE CARRIER FOR 2000 Corrie: Discussion for health insurance carrier for 2000. Pauline. Been up for a long time. (inaudible discussion amongst Council members) Skeggs: In regard to the renewal process, we are in the process right now with Blue Shield. They have sent out to bid. We got the renewal from Blue Shield, and our broker, Marsh/Seabury & Smith, which was currently Sedgwick, they ( Meridian City Council Me'bung October 19, 1999 Page 97 have merged with another company so their name has changed, they sent it out to bid with Blue Cross to get a comparative quote. We've received the quote in from Blue Shield, and it looks like the renewal's at 10.7 percent which last year when they came in, they told us that there would be a maximum, they would guarantee a maximum of not over 12 percent. Well, the renewal quote came in at 10.7 percent. We - they're in the process of getting a quote from Blue Cross, so we haven't gotten that information yet. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Pauline, are we just having one agent quote it or - my question is did - we didn't sign up for a two-year program with Sedgwick. I call it Segwick. Are we having other agents quote it? There's other people that handle Blue (inaudible) and there's other people that handle Blue Cross. Skeggs: Right. But normally, you know, this is a service contract. It's not a bid for work, and normally when you have a broker of record, you continue with that broker unless you've encountered problems and then you can change the broker of record. If you send it out to bid with several carriers every year, they're going to come back with the same bids unless they're not quoting the group the same because if they're not disclosing risks within our plan, like, say we have some high claims and they don't disclose that, the bidJs going to come in lower. But they're not comparing apples to apples. You're going to get several brokers bidding on it, but you're going to get the same quotes, and it doesn't benefit us - Bird: I disagree with you. Skeggs: It doesn't benefit us to go out and have several brokers quote it. Bird: How come private does it? Skeggs: Privates don't always do it. Bird: Private, big private companies do. Corrie: No, the don't. Skeggs: No, they don't. They only go out to bid if theyJre not happy with the service or the cost - there's a cost comparison. Bird: No. Skeggs: I've been doing this for 18 years, and my last job I went out and bidded for groups, and we didn't bid them on an annual basis. It isn't done on an annual ( Meridian City Council Me"elfng October 19, 1999 Page 98 basis unless you're encountering problems like we did last year. There was significant change in the cost of Blue Cross, so we went out to bid to see what (inaudible) - Bird: (inaudible) Skeggs: -- but we didn't have several brokers doing it because we have an agreement. We have one - Bird: We have an agreement? Skeggs: We have an agreement, a broker agreement. Bird: I donJt think (inaudible) Skeggs: You always have a broker of record. Corrie: Hold it. Hold it. Hold it. SheJs got the floor. Bird: Okay. Skeggs: You normally have a broker of record, and you don't go out with several brokers to bid it. Self-insured plans do because it's a change in stop-loss carriers, but not several brokers bidding it. It just doesn't make sense. Corrie: Okay. Mr. Bird. Bird: No. I don't have anymore. Corrie: SO there are - youJre getting a bid from Blue Shield and also Blue Cross? Skeggs: Uh-huh. Corrie: Okay. The other one is only - there's one more, I think it's available - Skeggs: John Alden? Corrie: John Alden, yeah. Okay. Any other discussion? Okay. December the ih, would you like to have the Norm (inaudible) come in and talk to you about these Parks and Rec master plan? On December the 7th they've asked - the 7th or the 14th of December. Rountree: Seventh would be fine. Corrie: December the 7th is on Tuesday. Yeah. Okay. We could do that in Pre- Council? Meridian City Council ML.rng October 19, 1999 Page 99 Berg: Yeah. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Rountree: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:20 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) \ \ \ \ \ -Il , f r Illl! ,,\\\\ 'c l\ p.Cr--~_~ 111/1 '\' ',...J OI-, f'l: ~<.-, l..< J -":t. I~I.I " A" ......r.1 ') /.. ......" r~r. /~o- .~ 'jI1~...,'t "-'l"" .$ v / , O,~..r ~~4h" ~ ~ f ~Ci ~o "t. ~ ~ = SEfiL = = ~ & ~ ~ ,c..Q<'l "C5 0 g ~ 'G\ rsi 1S-1\ · ~ $ ......... ~.;1 ~~ ..::: // 'e ~ " //1/<< OUN"r'l t "" 1;// .. \\\\ /J/fnrH t'H"\\'\ ATTEST: /- October 15, 1999 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: OCTOBER 19,1999 APPLICANT: ITEM #: 20C REQUEST: JOHN T. SHAWCROFT 1) CONTRACT FOR THOMAS B. DOMINICK, ATTORNEY AT LAW FOR PRE TREATMENT PROGRAM 2)CONTRACT FOR PATRICIA BROWN (ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT) FOR QAQC PLAN AGENCY CITY CLERK: COMMENTS CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CtTY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE OEPT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ;rJ-J V~ ~'JY / ~/ CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY SEWER OEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. -0 c: OJ r- :b nO t) --- t:J :I:-f .. ... - ;0 m-< rn CJ) ~o CI) ......~ v' -It f? Z G)s (.f)m -AJ , , G>-. ~c -- z)> 0 (J)z ~ ::I: ~m m m 0 -I fn \) ~ c-J 1--1 ~ o';tJ 0 n trJ ~ --I ... ~ ~ (1 to tI1 ;0 ..... ~ ......... c..o t:' c..c ~ to e '-\ ? ~s r r \......-- ~rn ~ ~~ ClJm o ' ~ rn-l -. ~ ~', 1J_ ~ ~z ~ r.;::. o ~ V) t. ~ <:G) P t ~ ---; ~ (" ~ n, ~ '" -c ~ ~ c: l>J ~ ~ .. ~ OJ ", ~ 0 'S) \.N ~ r- ~ ~ ~ 0 - n lfJ \". '" <1';) () ~ ~ ~ N \J lI) b ~ '" ,.J r, tJ :c: -I ('" .. :t: :::---- Z\ ~ "" t::J m -< 1'\. ~ ~ :0 P J0 C rn )> 0 5 ~ (I) " ~ CI) ;0 '"') f ':v ~ - " ;- > Z r--.. 0 r -f-' G) s ~ ~ ,l::: ~ (J) m ~ ~ Cl) ~\ ~ ~ 6'\ -0 - AJ ~ ~ ~ ~ :z: G) .~ (j) ~ , .~ ~ : .r::f) ) '\ i ~I 0 -.:m:. ~ \:J. tv ~ ~ <: Z C ~ "b{ '-Q \N ~ ~ t' 1'J \JV rn I ""J ~ "" VJ V - ~. 'v'\ '- - > ~ co ~\ ~. Z ---t) (\ . . Z 0 ' --....... en 5" r 0 ('b ,~ )> :J: ~ '" -... "0-1 m. ." ,. ~ f ::om m 0 --I G\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . \) V' ~ ---; ,-i r() () a t--t o~ ~0 ~ (\ 0 n :J ~ --I 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ...... trJ ~ f- "O~ c..o '1 ~, ) " J "0" pj ....... ~ ( ~ 0 ~ <.0 .~ ~ ~ 00 0 c.o ;i ........ ~ c.c \. /\i ~~ r tJ ..[ ~ N ~ .~ .~ . ._~) . 'C .. , s:::> :~ . '. -) :.. ... .. T ~ ~ 7 Q 1 ~ ~ .~ ~ cc b .V\\ c C QJ J) ~ ~ ..-t- -' /0 1: - "- G\ ~ x.- ~ +- -i l/j 0 (""'<0.. IS ~ /1 v~ ..A ~ ~ ~ ~ pi ~ ;? EJ ~' . 0-, ~ (y ~. ~ (j\ ~ w~ ~\ ~-- ) 5 ~ ~ E o r: 1 [; b~~)~ -- G - f5 <f--> ~ r ~ c..- O> ~' ~ r ' ~ ~ X.C ~ ~ ..c ~ ~ ? c~~ ~ ~. l' G\ ". ;K :q:. ~ Q \ .., 0\ L~ -i- ~ l\ ftB~ z:)"f ~ (]V ~ -l '-D .Vi \:) ,.. ~ s V' L,,) .) ~ 0. ~ ~ w (- c. ~ ' ~ ~ Ob ~ ~ 00 y ~ (),~ , , ~ ~: i ~ .\Jl ~ fP ~ t: - r < ~. ----- p" T () \ VJ -:t::. ~ o "'o~ "'0<::: 00 ~~ t:J 13 ~S ~rn C/)m rn-i 1J_ 322 ~G) ~ ~ rn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t1 t:J ::0 m C.t) 1J :z: o <: ", o l> "'0-1 ::om o fn () --; ." c: OJ r- -() n__ :I:-f m-< )>0 22" z G)$ cnm -AJ G>_ 20 I _ z)> cnZ :I: m m .--1 L) im-t ~ ~ ~ ~ --I (1 ~ ~ tzj ~:j -.. ~ ~-4 (.0' t:;1 (.0 ~ (.0 C ( .. ~ ~ 1) <;/ ( l"'--s ~m ~ ~ t'\~ ~ ~ ~ (j\ tnm ~, ~..~ < C\ Il'; ~ '" P 111-1 ~ V\ G --o_ r ~ ~ VJ ~Z rj~~- ~ P <:G) f\. 0- ----t iF ~;. ' .; :f: (c ~ \S v ('t, ~~1 ~~ ~. ~ --.... ~ ~ ~ ~ rn ~ , ~ -0 * c: \f) ~ OJ 0 r;- ..0 r- Vl 5l,) - - () 01 G h n c .... ~ t:J :t: --I ...r ? t:J 1 (' :0 m -< r.., ~ ~; rn :t=- en 0 -I f n CI) ;C c: 70 c " 'b <.: - "l ~ (0 Z G) s: }J 0<) ~ -0 (J) m ~ ~ - ;0 ~ :J:: G) i .:J 0 ~ ........ ~. 0 <: Z C ........ "'"'-- , ,..c rn I cc - - . . Z )> C' 0 en Z p )> :z: --- "'"'- p ,,-1 m "" ..::::") I ;om m 0-, ~ 0 -I ~ - ~ G"\ rt ~ ~ ~ C) -) V\ T' r" --; (/) ....:r- (/\ c./) c ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 n }:) ~ ,,~ ~ -f 0 ~ 0 u "<::: ~ .... tl1 (r/J '1'\ C 00 c.o ~ f1l CI) ~~ pj -.II. ~ V ~ ~ c.o t::1 to t:J ~ to , --.... r . . ~ It " c: OJ r c=;n .... ::I:--f m-< ~o z" G>s cnm 5;0 z-' .0 -- z)> (J)Z :z: m m .-i ~ .... ~ C> ~ ontLj ~ -I ~ __ 0 bd to t:rj ~ --. ~ t::; to ~ ~ c; ( MERIDIAN PARKS~ g~ RECREATION Memora"ndum To: From: Date: Re: Mayor Corrie and Council TomKuntz~. October 13, 1999 Davis Drain Tiling - Chateau Park On September 29th, we opened bids to tile Davis drain which borders the future five acre Chateau park on two sides. The low bidder was Sommer Construction with a pnce of$59,976. We budgeted $40,000 in last year's (98-99) capital expenditure for tiling the ditch. My lUlderstanding from our auditing firm is that the money cannot be carried over into this year's capital budget. I did not request new money from this year's capital budget for the tiling project because I assumed the project would be lUlder contract by September 1999 and the money would be carried over from last year. I would appreciate your direction on this project as Sommer Construction is waiting to hear from us. Thank Yau. From The Desk Of. . . ~ q ~/vt lO/l TOM KUNTZ 11 W Bower St. Meridian, ID 83642 (208) 888-3579 MEMORANDUM CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY CLERK'S OFFICE TO: Charlie Rountree, Council President FROM: William G. Berg, Jr. ~~ DA TE: Monday, October 4, 1999 RE: Presentations for Legal Representation I have sent the attached letters to the three applicants for legal representation. I set the schedule by reverse alphabetical order as we talked about. If you need me to do any more follow up work, let me know. Thanks 7:00 PM White, Peterson, Pruss, Morrow & Gigray, PA ~ Foley & Freeman, Chartered - dl- 7:30 PM 8:00 PM Hamilton, Michaelson & Hilty, LLP ..~ ~ ~ tul~A dl-C{ tA./ /' ~ tvlayor ROBERT D. CORRIE ( HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Li ve LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 · Fax 288-2501 City Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD 33 EAST IDAHO lVIERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 City Clerk Fax (208) 888-4218 PUBLfC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 · Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 · Faz 887-1297 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, October 19,1999 at 6:45 P.M. The Meridian City Council will discuss agenda items on the regular City Council meeting. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 15th day of October, 1999 , ".' . .. O ~~ ~cv0 , Ylt} ~- :J. Vi _ -- ,I / _ l,/./; /)-1 / n r V/.-..'1/lA----/t..............rc..--- {/U-t;,d-'~,,_ ,-",VUllvll r1...bt:illUa rage 1 or I REGULAR MEETING 1st - 2nd - 3rd Tuesday of the Month - 7:30 P.M. Fourth Tuesday of the Month - 12 noon 150 North Capitol Blvd. City Hall - 3rd Floor - Les Bois Room MAYOR BRENT COLES CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS * CAROL YN TERTELING - Council President *:MIKE WETHERELL - President Pro Tern * SARA BAKER *p AULA FORNEY * ANNE HAUSRATH * JER01vIE MAPP ~-~-,.~~~:~... ~~~ Agelldas will be posted on or after 5 p.m. on the Friday before the meeting A Summary of Legislative Action will be posted on the Internet by 9 a.m. the following day ";;:~~~~~i~~~;;~}~:'~;l ~~~tS;t:i~ t1r.;~'[_~~ Pre-Council Meeting Agenda Schedule for October 12, 1999 5:00 P.M. Parks Discussion: Jim Hall, Parks and Recreation Department 5:30 P.M. Area of Impact Boundary Adjustment: Scott Spjute, Planning and Development Services http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agenda.htm 10/15/99 vUUll~1l1""\.gt;11UU rctgc k, Ul I ( 6:00 P.M. Executive Session: Labor Negotiations, I.C. 67-2345(1)(c) 7: 00 P.M. Pre-Consent Agenda (see attached) and Dinner PRE-CONSENT AGENDA: ****Items scheduled on Pre-Consent and Consent Agendas. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: * A. BidIRFP: Approval of Payment of Reimbursable Expenditures for Operation of The Grove Street Parking Garage, Parking Control *B. BidIRFP: Award ofContract~ Approval of Agreement Number OO-Con-03: Contract for Audit Services, Division of Financial Management ******C. BidIRFP: Approval of Contract for Communication Dispatch Services, Boise Fire Department ******D. BidIRFP: RFP 99-075: Foothills Open Space Management Plan, Boise Parks and Recreation Department *E. The City Clerk requests the following claims(s) be received and referred to the office of the Treasurer: a) Carissa M. Thornock, Property Damage ******F. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 9, 1999: a) CAR99-00048/Charlie Anderson requests a development agreement approved under RZ-23-93/DA. The modification would change the use restrictions in the development agreement to allow an application to be processed for a planned residential development on 13.0 acres located at 8565 W. Fairview Avenue in a C-2D/DA (General Commercial with Design Review and a Development Agreement) zone. b) CAROO-00045/Capitol City Development Company requests approval of a rezone of approximately 1/8 acre from H-SD (Health Service with Design Review) to C-2D (General Commercial with Design Review) at 910 N. Raymond Street. ******G. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 16, 1999: a) CAR99-0001 8/DA/Bruce and Steve Murdoch requests approval ofa rezone of 4.9 acres of property from R-1C (Single Family Residential) to L-OD (Limited Office with Design Review) with a Development Agreement at 13131 W. McMillan Road. CAR99-00018 was remanded by the Boise City Council to the Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the rezone with a Development Agreement that ties the rezone request to an office park development. The Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission previously recommended approval of the rezone request without a http://W\VW.boisecityclerk.comlagenda.htm 10/15/99 '-"'V u..L.I.'-'.l..1. ~6""J.J.UU. ..t. "5"" -' VL I Development Agreement on May 3, 1999. *H. The City Clerk requests the following minutes and reports be received by Council and directed filed in the office of the City Clerk: a) City of Boise Treasury Division, State of the Treasury Report, September 1999 b) Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, September 13, 1999 c) Boise City Building Construction Report, Calendar Report, Jan.-Sept. 1999 d) Boise City Building Construction Report, Fiscal Report, Oct.-Sept. 1999 e) Boise City Building Construction Report, September 1999 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: * A. 0-62-99 AN ORDINANCE (CAR99-0033/ AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1200 N. LIBERTY ROAD) AMENDING ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE FROM R-2 (COMBINED RESIDENTIAL) TO L-OD (LIMITED OFFICE WITH DESIGN REVIEW); SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF SUCH ZONE CHANGE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *B. R-456-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, AN AGREEMENT FOR GO-CON-D3; AUDITING SERVICES, DIVISION OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY AND BALUKOFF, LINDSTROM AND CO., P.A.; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******C. R-457-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, AN AGREEMENT FOR RFP 99-075; OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR BOISE FOOTHILLS PUBLIC LANDS, BOISE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOSIE CITY AND SPATIAL DYNAMICS, INC.; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *D. R-458-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY A LICENSE AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN BOISE CITY ACTING THROUGH THE BOISE PARKS AND RECREATION DEP ART MEN T (GRANTOR) AND HORMAECHEA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (GRANTEE) ALLOWING GRANTEE TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN SIDEWALKS AND A WATER FEATURE ON APART OF GRANTOR'S RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *E. R-459-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DESIGNATION OF AN EASEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CITY SEWER PROJECT DRI 1187 ALONG AND ACROSS LAND OWNED BY THE CITY OF BOISE AIRPORT; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID DESIGNATION OF EASEMENT DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******F. R-460-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, A CONTRACT FOR CO~CATION http://www.boisecityclerk.com/agenda.htm 10/15/99 '-./'-' \..U..A.\"I..u ,L-:1.6 \"I ~~\..I.u. ~ a.o \.I ...,. V,I. I DISPATCH SERVICES FOR BOISE CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT, BOISE CITY, TO ADA COUNTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *G. R-461-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, ADDENDUM NUMBER 1 TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH ADA SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRlCT FOR THE WARM SPRINGS PARK WETLANDS PROJECT, PARKS AND RECREATION DEP ARTMENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ~~)~.~'.:2:.~ !Ul~_"!IJI'llV~ Council Meeting Agenda Schedule for October 12, 1999 MINUTES OF THE BOISE CITY PRE-COUNCIL MEETING, October 5, 1999 MINUTES OF THE BOISE CITY COUNCIL MEETING, October 5, 1999 SPECIAL BUSINESS: CONSENT AGENDA: * All items with an asterisk(*) are considered to be routine by the Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which case the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence. The City Clerk recommends approval of the consent agenda items on tonight's agenda: that 7 A thru 7G, 8B thru 8N (inclusive) be considered read in full: that SA be considered read for the second time by title; and that proposed resolutions R-437-99, R-447-99, R-448-99, R-449-99, R-450-99, R-451- 99, R-452-99, R-453-99, R-454-99, R-455-99, R-457-99 and R-460-99 be adopted. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: * A. Request for approval of the Boise City checks nos. 025869 thru 026388 in the total amount of $1,495,144.51 as of October 6, 1999. ******B. Bid/RFP: Approval of Contract for Communication Dispatch Services, Boise Fire Department ******C. BidIRFP: RFP 99-075: Foothills Open Space Management Plan, Boise Parks and Recreation Department *D. The City Clerk requests the following claims(s) be received and referred to the office of the Treasurer: a) Beverly S. Myles, Personal Injury and Property Damage ******E. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 9, 1999: http://www.boisecityclerk.comlagenda.htm 10/15/99 vV UJ.l\.1ll .L1..e, ~llUa rctgti J Vi I ( a) CAR99-00048/Charlie Anderson requests a development agreement approved under RZ-23-93/DA. The modification would change the use restrictions in the development agreement to allow an application to be processed for a planned residential development on 13.0 acres located at 8565 W. Fairview Avenue in a C-2D/DA (General Commercial with Design Review and a Development Agreement) zone. b) CAROO-00045/Capitol City Development Company requests approval of a rezone of approximately 1/8 acre from H-SD (Health Service with Design Review) to C-2D (General Commercial with Design Review) at 910 N. Raymond Street. ******F. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 16, 1999: a) CAR99-00018/DA/Bruce and Steve Murdoch requests approval of a rezone of 4.9 acres of property from R-IC (Single Family Residential) to L-OD (Limited Office with Design Review) with a Development Agreement at 13131 W. McMillan Road. CAR99-00018 was remanded by the Boise City Council to the Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the rezone with a Development Agreement that ties the rezone request to an office park development. The Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission previously recommended approval of the rezone request without a Development Agreement on May 3, 1999. *G. The City Clerk requests the followil1g minutes and reports be received by Council and directed filed in the office of the City Clerk: a) Ada County Highway District Commission Minutes, September 8, 1999 b) City of Boise Treasury Division, State of the Treasury Report, Revised July 1999 and August 1999 c) Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, August 30, 1999 d) Quarterly Treasurer's Report, January 1 - March 31, 1999 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: * A. 0-60-99 SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE (CAR99-0030/DARRELL AND CHRISTINE WILSON FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3318 NORTH COLE ROAD) AMENDING ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY P ART ICULARL Y DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE FROM R-1C (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO L-OD (LIMITED OFFICE WITH DESIGN REVIEW); SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF SUCH ZONE CHANGE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *B. 0-61-99 FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE (CAR99-0025/NfICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8000 S. FEDERAL WAY) AMENDING ZONING CLASSlFICATION OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY P ARTICULARL Y DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE FROM T -lD (TECHNOLOGICAL-INDUSTRIAL PARK WITH DESIGN REVIEW) TO T -2D (TECHNOLOGICAL-MANUFACTURING PARK WITH DESIGN REVIEW); SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF SUCH ZONE CHANGE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *C. R-437-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A ONE (1) YEAR AVIATION LAND LEASE http://www.boisecityclerk.comlagendahtm 10/15/99 '-U Wi\; II r1..!:5 ~ilUa. rugc:: U VI I BETWEEN BOISE CITY AND UNITED STATES OF AMERIC~ ACTING THROUGH THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, FOR THE LEASE OF CERTAIN PREMISES UPON BOISE AIR TERMINAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREEJ\1ENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *D. R-447-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEJ\1ENT OF LEASE BETWEEN BOISE CITY AND MCDAN L.L.C. FOR THE LEASE OF PROPERTY UPON BOISE AIR TERMINAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREEJ\1ENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *E. R-448-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, TASK ORDER NUMBER ONE TO RFP 99- 050J; MISCELLANEOUS LEGAL SERVICES, LEGAL DIVISION, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY AND JAMES J. DAVIS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *F. R-449-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, TASK ORDER NUMBER ONE TO RFP 99- 050G; MISCELLANEOUS LEGAL SERVICES, LEGAL DIVISION, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY AND MOORE, BASKIN AND PARKER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *G. R-450-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEJ\1ENT OF LEASE "A" BETWEEN BOISE CITY AND MARTIN-RICO INC. FOR THE LEASE OF PROPERTY UPON BOISE AIR TERMINAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREEJ\1ENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *H. R-451-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEJ\1ENT OF LEASE "Bit BETWEEN BOISE CITY AND MARTIN-RICO INC. FOR THE LEASE OF PROPERTY UPON BOISE AIR TERMINAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREEJ\1ENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *1. R-452-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO RESPECTIVELY EXECUTE AND ATTEST A RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF A SEWER EXTENSION AGREEJ\1ENT WITH KMST, LLD FOR EXTENSION OF SANITARY SEWERS TO OVERLAND MARKET RETAIL CENTER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *J. R-453-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY A COMNIERCIAL/INVESTJ\1ENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEJ\1ENT BY AND BETWEEN NORV AN L. AND LEONA C. JENSEN (SELLERS) AND BOISE CITY (BUYER) FOR THE PURCHASE OF APPROXIMATELY SIXTY SIX (66) ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9920 LAKE HAZEL ROAD IN ADA COUNTY IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *K. R-454-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY A GREENBELT LICENSE AGREEJ\1ENT BY AND AMONG HARRIS FAMILY RANCH, LLP AND HARRIS/BRIGHTON LLP (LICENSORS) AND BOISE CITY (LICENSEE) FOR THE PURPOSE OF RELOCATION OF THE GREENBELT PATHWAY TO ACCO:MNIODATE CONTINUED GREENBELT ACCESS AND USAGE OF THE GREENBELT NEAR SQUAW CREEK ROAD DURING HARRIS RANCH http://www.boisecityclerk.com/agenda.htm 10/15/99 LOunCll Agenaa Page 7of7 DEVELOPMENT AND UNTIL THE LICENSED PARCEL IS PLATED; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *L. R-455-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN NATURES WOOD DUCK ISLAND HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC. (GRANTOR) AND BOISE CITY (GRANTEE) TO SUPERCEDE AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG BOISE CITY, RIVERVIEW VENTURES AND WOOD DUCK ISLAND HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION FOR THE USE AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PEDESTRIANIBICYCLE P ATHW A Y LOCATED IN NATURES WOOD DUCK ISLAND SUBDIVISION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******M. R-457-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, AN AGREEMENT FOR RFP 99-075; OPEN SP ACE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR BOISE FOOTHILLS PUBLIC LANDS, BOISE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOSIE CITY AND SPATIAL DYNAMICS, INC.; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******N. R-460-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, A CONTRACT FOR COMMUNICATION DISPATCH SERVICES FOR BOISE CITY FlRE DEPARTMENT, BOISE CITY, TO ADA COUNTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: A. Public Hearing: CAR99-0034/ Annexation/Boise City is requesting the annexation of approximately 2,782 acres located to the west and south of existing City Limits. The area is bordered generally by City Limits on the north and east, by the Area of Impact boundary on the west, and by Overland Road on the south. NEW BUSINESS: NO SUBDIVISIONS SCHEDULED W.:~~J~fli~J~~Y~ ~{~,~j~~'r~. Office of the City Clerk Copyright ~ 1997 City of Boise. All rights reserved. Revised: October 08, 1999. http://www.boisecityclerk.comlagenda.htm 10/15/99 vu.] '-'UUll\.;ll .lYllllU"'~~ r a.e,C ~ VJ. 4 BOISE, IDAHO PRE-COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 5,1999 The following Council members were present: BAKE~ HAUSRATH, MAPP, TERTELING and WETHERELL. Absent: FORNEY. Mayor COLES announced that this was the time and place for the Pre-Council meeting. RECONSIDERATION DISCUSSION ON CARTWRIGHT CANYON SUBDIVISION Councilmember TERTELING addressed Council regarding the motion and substitute motion of Cartwright Canyon Subdivision from the September 28, 1999 City Council meeting. UPDATE ON DOWNTOWN FOOT PATROL Chief Larry Paulson and Sgt. Rich Schnebly, Boise Police Department and Jim Dumont, Parks and Recreation Department, updated Council on the Downtown Foot Patrol. SECURE PRESENT ATrON Chief Larry Paulson and Captain Prynch, Boise Police Department, presented to the Council the SECURE presentation. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOD) WITH ADA COUNTY Alec Andrus? Division of Financial Management, updated Council on some changes that Ada County wanted to the Memorandum ofUnrlerstanding of resolution 15642 approved on September 28, 1999. EXECUTIVE SESSION Moved by TERTELING and seconded by HAUSRATH to move into Executive Session in accordance with Idaho Code 67-2345(1)(c) for the purposes of discussing labor negotiations. Roll call on the motion resulted as follows: YEAS: BAKE~ FORNEY, HAUSRATH, MAPP and TERTELING. NAYS: WETHERELL. Motion carried. Moved by TERTELING and seconded by WETHERELL to move into Executive Session in accordance with Idaho Code 67-2345(1)(t) for the purposes of discussing pending litigation. Roll call on the motion resulted as follows: YEAS: BAKE~ FORNEY, HAUSRATR MAPP, TERTELING and WETHERELL. http://www.boisecityclerk.com/minutes/l00599p.htm 10/15199 '-" u. J '-'V Ul.l'-'.u .1 v .L.I..UU ......~ ~ aeV ~ V~ ~ ( Motion carried. Moved by TERTELING and seconded by BAKER to move into the regularly scheduled Pre-Council meetil1g. Roll call on the motion resulted as follows: YEAS: BAKER FORNEY, HAUSRATH, MAPP, TERTELING and WETHERELL. Motion carried. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Office of the City Clerk Copyright ~ 1997 City ofBoise~ All rights reserved. Revised: January 19, 1999. http://www.boisecityclerk.com/minuteslI00599p.htm 10/15/99 Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE HUB OF TREASURE \/ALLEY ( A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 · Fax 288-250 I City Council Menlbers CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD 33 EAST IDAHO lVIERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 City Clerk Fax (208) 888-4218 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 · Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING D EPART1vlENT (208) 884-5533 · Faz 887-1297 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, October 19, 1999 at 6:45 P.M. The Meridian City Council will discuss agenda items on the regular City Council meeting. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 15th day of October, 1999 ( C::'~~t~,." :::.~,~~,,,. .:'~:::,' ':'.:.".:;-:'.-:~'.':~...:-:~~./ j' -1,*.C:.~J -, "~',~.:.~v.~:~:-~~:'.~:~-~~":'~~:.'~~~J~_'~~~~~'T(W~~~~y:~.'~:~) "-C()Un~il~Ag'" eoda"-}W"'''~' ,,~",.., <.~..~e."'>~ ',c' ",.' · .' -, ":: ~;~~!~~.,. ~J REGLrL.-\R "IEETING 1st - 2nd - 3rd Tuesday of the Month - 7:30 P.M. Fourth Tuesday of the Nlonth - 12 noon 150 North Capitol Blvd. City Hall- 3rd Floor - Les Bois Room I\'J.~ \'~OR BRENT COLES Cln~ COlJNCIL rvrEI\tIBERS * CAROL YN TERTELING - Council President *MIKE WETHERELL - President Pro Tern * SARA BAKER *P AULA FORNEY *ANNEHAUSRATH * JERONIE MAPP .-.rw~"'~"l-'B.:~::s ,>;..:1.. ~...,..,....~ Agendas will be posted on or after 5 p.m. on the Friday before the meeting A Summary of Legislative Action will be posted on the Internet by 9 a.m. the following day ..:..;:~ ~e.:~~~.:~~:#~J~.~?) ~~_~1'" ....~"i:f;; ~~~ Pre-Council Meeting ,Agenda Schedule for October 12, 1999 5: 00 P.M. Parks Discussion: Jim Hall, Parks and Recreation Department 5:30 P.M. Area of Impact Boundary Adjustment: Scott Spjute, Planning and Development Services http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agenda.htm 10/15/99 ( 6:00 P.M. Executive Session: Labor Negotiations, I.C. 67-2345(1)(c) 7:00 P.M. Pre-Consent Agenda (see attached) and Dinner PRE-CONSENT ~~'GEND..\: ****Items scheduled on Pre-Consent and Consent Agendas. i\-'J ISCELL..-\NEOlTS Bt~Sl~ESS: * A. BidlRFP: Approval of Payment of Reimbursable Expenditures for Operation of The Grove Street Parking Garage, Parking Control *B. BidIRFP: Award of Contract, Approval of Agreement Number aQ-Con-03: Contract for Audit Services, Division of Financial Management ******C. BidIRFP: Approval of Contract for Communication Dispatch Services, Boise Fire Department ******D. BidIRFP: RFP 99-075: Foothills Open Space Management Plan, Boise Parks and Recreation Department *E. The City Clerk requests the following claims(s) be received and referred to the office of the Treasurer: a) Carissa M. Thornock, Property Damage ******F. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 9, 1999: a) CAR99-00048/Charlie Anderson requests a development agreement approved under RZ-23-93/DA. The modification would change the use restrictions in the development agreement to allow an application to be processed for a planned residential development on 13.0 acres located at 8565 W. Fairview Avenue in a C-2D/DA (General Commercial with Design Review and a Development Agreement) zone. . b) CAROO-00045/Capitol City Development Company requests approval of a rezone of approximately 1/8 acre from H-SD (Health Service with Design Review) to C-2D (General Commercial with Design Review) at 910 N. Raymond Street. ******G. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 16, 1999: a) CAR99-00018/DA/Bruce and Steve Murdoch requests approval ofa rezone of 4.9 acres of property from R-l C (Single Family Residential) to L-OD (Limited Office with Design Review) with a Development Agreement at 13131 W. McMillan Road. CAR99-00018 was remanded by the Boise City Council to the Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the rezone with a Development Agreement that ties the rezone request to an office park development. The Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission previously recommended approval of the rezone request w~thout a http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agendahtm 10/15/99 ( \ Development Agreement on May 3, 1999. *H. The City Clerk requests the following minutes and reports be received by Council and directed filed in the office of the City Clerk: a) City of Boise Treasury Division, State of the Treasury Report, September 1999 b) Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, September 13, 1999 c) Boise City Building Construction Report, Calendar Report, Jan.-Sept. 1999 d) Boise City Building Construction Report, Fiscal Report, Oct. -Sept. 1999 e) Boise City Building Construction Report, September 1999 ORDlN~-\:,,[CES ~-\ND RESOLl~TIONS: *A. 0-62-99 AN ORDINANCE (CAR99-0033/ANlERICAN INSTITUTE OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1200 N. LIBERTY ROAD) ANlENDING ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE FROM R-2 (COJ\1BINED RESIDENTIAL) TO L-OD (LIMITED OFFICE WITH DESIGN REVIEW)~ SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF SUCH ZONE CHANGE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *B. R-456-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, AN AGREE11ENT FOR 00-CON-03; AUDITING SERVICES, DIVISION OF FINANCIAL MANAGE11ENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY AND BALUKOFF, LINDSTROM AND CO., P.A.~ AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******C. R-457-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, AN AGREE11ENT FOR RFP 99-075; OPEN SPACE MANAGE11ENT PLAN FOR BOISE FOOTHILLS PUBLIC LANDS, BOISE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPART11ENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOSIE CITY AND SPATIAL DYNANlICS, INC.; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *D. R-458-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY A LICENSE AGREE11ENT BY AND BETWEEN BOISE CITY ACTING THROUGH THE BOISE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPART11ENT (GRANTOR) AND HORMAE CHE A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (GRANTEE) ALLOWING GRANTEE TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN SIDEWALKS AND A WATER FEATURE ON APART OF GRANTOR'S RIGHT-Of-WAY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *E. R-459-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE DESIGNATION Of AN EASE11ENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF CITY SEWER PROJECT DRI 1187 ALONG AND ACROSS LAND OWNED BY THE CITY OF BOISE AIRPORT; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID DESIGNATION OF EASE11ENT DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY~ AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******f. R-460-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, A CONTRACT FOR CO!v1MUNICATION http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agenda.htm 10/15/99 DISPATCH SERVICES FOR BOISE CITY FIRE DEPARTl'vlENT, BOISE CITY, TO ADA COUNTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *G. R-461-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORlZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, ADDENDillII NUMBER 1 TO THE l\.1ENIORANDillII OF UNDERSTANDING WlTH ADA SOIL CONSER V ATrON DISTRICT FOR THE WARNI SPRINGS PARK WETLANDS PROJECT, PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTNIENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ."lIO'C'~"""'~).lt~::s:_~.. ----.;r IIlE l -=..:.~~~ CouncillVleeting ~4genda Schedule for October 12, 1999 MINUTES OF THE BOISE CITY PRE-COUNCIL NIEETING, October 5,1999 IvlINUTES OF THE BOISE CITY COUNCIL l\.1EETING, October 5, 1999 SP-ECIL-\.L BlTSINESS: CONSENT L.\.GEND.~: * All items with an asterisk(*) are considered to be routine by the Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests in which case the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence. The City Clerk recommends approval of the consent agenda items on tonight's agenda: that 7 A thru 7G, 8B thru 8N (inclusive) be considered read in full: that 8A be considered read for the second time by title; and that proposed resolutions R-437-99, R-447-99, R-448-99, R-449-99, R-450-99, R-451- 99, R-452-99, R-453-99, R-454-99, R-455-99, R-457-99 and R-460-99 be adopted. lVIISCELL~;\NEOUS BUSINESS: * A. Request for approval of the Boise City checks nos. 025869 thru 026388 in the total amount of $1,495,144.51 as of October 6,1999. ******B. BidIRFP: Approval of Contract for Communication Dispatch Services, Boise Fire Department ******c. BidIRFP: RFP 99-075: Foothills Open Space Management Plan, Boise Parks and Recreation Department *D. The City Clerk requests the following claims(s) be received and referred to the office of the Treasurer: a) Beverly S. Myles, Personal Injury and Property Damage ******E. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 9, 1999: http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agenda.htm 10/15/99 a) CAR99-00048/Charlie Anderson requests a development agreement approved under RZ-23-93/DA. The modification would change the use restrictions in the development agreement to allow an application to be processed for a planned residential development on 13.0 acres located at 8565 W. Fairview Avenue in a C-2DIDA (General Commercial with Design Review and a Development Agreement) zone. b) CAROO-00045/Capitol City Development Company requests approval of a rezone of approximately 1/8 acre from H-SD (Health Service with Design Review) to C-2D (General Commercial with Design R~view) at 910 N. Raymond Street. ******F. The City Clerk requests the following public hearing be scheduled in Council Chambers on November 16, 1999: a) CAR99-00018/DA/Bruce and Steve Murdoch requests approval of a rezone of 4.9 acres of property from R-I C (Single Family Residential) to L-OD (Limited Office with Design Review) with a Development Agreement at 13131 W. McMillan Road. CAR99-00018 was remanded by the Boise City Council to the Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission to consider the rezone with a Development Agreement that ties the rezone request to an office park development. The Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission previously recommended approval of the rezone request without a Development Agreement on May 3, 1999. *G. The City Clerk requests the following minutes and reports be received by Council and directed filed in the office of the City Clerk: a) Ada County Highway District Commission Minutes, September 8, 1999 b) City of Boise Treasury Division, State of the Treasury Report, Revised July 1999 and August 1999 c) Boise City Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes, August 30, 1999 d) Quarterly Treasurer's Report, January 1 - March 31, 1999 ORDrN~--\NCES AND RESOLUTIONS: * A. 0-60-99 SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE (CAR99-0030/DARRELL AND CHRISTINE WILSON FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3318 NORTH COLE ROAD) AMENDING ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE FROM R-IC (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO L-OD (LTh1ITED OFFICE WITH DESIGN REVIEW); SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF SUCH ZONE CHANGE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *B. 0-61-99 FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE (CAR99-0025Irv1ICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8000 S. FEDERAL WAY) AMENDING ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE CITY OF BOISE CITY TO CHANGE THE CLASSIFICATION OF REAL PROPERTY P ART I CULARL Y DESCRIBED IN SECTION ONE OF THIS ORDINANCE FROM T -lD (TECHNOLOGICAL-INDUSTRIAL PARK WITH DESIGN REVIEW) TO T -2D (TECHNOLOGICAL-MANUF ACTURING PARK WITH DESIGN REVIEW); SETTING FORTH FINDINGS OF FACT IN SUPPORT OF SUCH ZONE CHANGE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *C. R-437-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A ONE (1) YEAR AVIATION LAND LEASE http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agenda.htm 10/15/99 - -0 - ~ ......... , BETWEEN BOISE CITY AND UNITED STATES OF AMERIC~ ACTING THROUGH THE FEDE_R..A.L AVIATION ADNllNISTRA.TION, FOR THE LEASE OF CERTAIN PRENIISES UPON BOISE AIR TERNIINAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE NIA YOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE ..J\ND ATTEST SAID AGREEi\1ENT; AND PROVIDING Al'f EFFECTIVE DATE. *D. R-447-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEi\1ENT OF LEASE BETWEEN BOISE CITY A..1'ID MCDAN L.L.C. FOR THE LEASE OF PROPERTY UPON BOISE AIR TERMINAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREENIENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *E. R-448-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE lYIA YOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, TASK ORDER NUNIBER ONE TO RFP 99- 050J; ~lISCELLANEOUS LEGAL SERVICES, LEGAL DIVISION, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY AND JAMES J. DAVIS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *F. R-449-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, TASK ORDER NUNIBER ONE TO RFP 99- 050G; MISCELLANEOUS LEGAL SERVICES, LEGAL DIVISION, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOISE CITY AND MOORE, BASKIN AND PARKER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFE-CTlVE DATE. *G. R-450-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREENlENT OF LEASE "A" BETWEEN BOISE CITY AND MARTIN-RICO INC. FOR THE LEASE OF PROPERTY UPON BOISE AIR TERNllNAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREENlENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *H. R-45 1-99 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREENlENT OF LEASE "B" BETWEEN BOISE CITY AND MARTIN-RICO INC. FOR THE LEASE OF PROPERTY UPON BOISE AIR TERNllNAL (GOWEN FIELD); AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST SAID AGREE:rvtENT; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *1. R-452-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO RESPECTIVELY EXECUTE AND ATTEST A RELEASE AND SATISFACTION OF A SEWER EXTENSION AGREE:rvtENT WITH KMST, LLD FOR EXTENSION OF SANII AR Y SEWERS TO OVERLAND MARKET REI AIL CENTER; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *J. R-453-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY A CO:rvt1vIERCIAL/INVESTNlENT REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREE:rvtENT BY AND BETWEEN NORV AN L. AND LEONA C. JENSEN (SELLERS) AND BOISE CITY (BUYER) FOR THE PURCHASE OF APPROxrMATEL Y SIXTY SIX (66) ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9920 LAKE HAZEL ROAD IN ADA COUNTY IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. *K. R-454-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY A GREENBELT LICENSE AGREE:rvtENT BY AND AMONG HARRIS FAMILY RANCH, LLP AND HARRIS/BRIGHTON LLP (LICENSORS) AND BOISE CITY (LICENSEE) FOR THE PURPOSE OF RELOCATION OF THE GREENBELT PATHWAY TO ACCOMMODATE CONTINUED GREENBELT ACCESS AND USAGE OF THE GREENBELT NEAR SQUAW CREEK ROAD DURING HARRIS RANCH http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agenda.htm 10/15/99 ( DEVELOPrvIENT AND UNTIL THE LICENSED PARCEL IS PLATED; Al'IDPROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DA IE. *L. R-455-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MA YO.R AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AND ATTEST ON BEHALF OF BOISE CITY AN EASElYlENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN NATURES WOOD DUCK IS.LAND HOl\lIEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC. (GRANTOR) AND BOISE CITY (GRANTEE) TO SUPERCEDE AN EASEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND ANlONG BOISE CITY, RIVER VIE\V VENTURES AND WOOD DUCK ISLAND HOlYIEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION FOR THE USE Ai'ID MAINTENANCE OF THE PEDESTRIANIBICYCLE PATHWAY LOCATED IN NATURES WOOD DUCK ISLAL'ID SUBDIVISION; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******M. R-457-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, AN AGREEMENT FOR RFP 99-075; OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR BOISE FOOTHlLLS PUBLIC LANDS, BOISE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BOSIE CITY AND SPATIAL DYNANllCS, INC.; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ******N. R-460-99 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE lYIA YOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BOISE, A CONTRACT FOR COlYWUNICATION DISPATCH SERVICES FOR BOISE CITY FIRE DEPARTNIENT, BOISE CITY, TO ADA COUNTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. {JNFINISHED BIJSINESS: A. Public Hearing: CAR99-0034/ AnnexationIBoise City is requesting the annexation of approximately 2,782 acres located to the west and south of existing City Limits. The area is bordered generally by City Limits on the north and east, by the Area of Impact boundary on the west, and by Overland Road on the south. -NE"'i BUSINESS: NO SUBDMSIONS SCHEDULED ~iTd~i.t~6,~:~f~ ~(J!~Jii#;~:~. Office of the City Clerk Copyright (b) 1997 City of Boise. All rights reserved. Revised: October 08, 1999. http://www.boisecityclerk.com!agenda.htm 10/15/99