HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 07-24Meridian City Council Meeting July 24, 2007
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:07 P.M., Tuesday, July
24, 2007, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird., Joe Borton and David
Zaremba.
Members Absent: Charlie Rountree.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Tracy Basterrechea,
Joe Silva, Stacy Kilchenmann, Keith Watts, Elroy Huff and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Joe Borton
0 Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I will go ahead and open tonight's City Council meeting. Thank you for
joining us here tonight. It is Tuesday, July 24th. It is seven after 7:00. Mr. Berg, will
you, please, start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the pledge of allegiance. Tonight we will be led in the pledge
by Councilman Borton. If you will all rise and join us in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Will Berg:
De Weerd.: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. We were to be led by Mr. Joe
Anderson, but he wasn't able to join us tonight. So, tonight we will be led by our City
Clerk Will Berg. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an
opportunity for a moment of reflection.
Berg: Thank you. Our most gracious and kind Heavenly Father, we want to take a
moment out of this busy schedule and our busy times to acknowledge you and your
presence. We ask for your guidance and your direction in all things that we do. We
want to thank you for all this blessedness that you have given to this community and to
our families as we reach out and spread your word. We want to take a moment at this
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 2 of 70
time to be so grateful for taking care of our loved ones across the oceans and provide
them a safe journey back. We ask this all in your precious name, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Item K on the Consent Agenda has been asked to be moved to 6-K and we would
like to also -- well, Item S is -- resolution number is 07-569. Item T is 07-570, resolution
number. U is 07-571 resolution number. And we have added to the Consent Agenda
Item X and it's the new beer and wine license for Rick's Press Room and that has been
asked to be moved to 6-X on the regular agenda. Item No. 12 is ordinance number 07-
1328. In the department reports, Item D, one, two, three and four, has been asked to
be removed. Item 14 is -- ordinance is 07-1329. And 15 is ordinance 07-1330. With
that I move we accept the revised agenda.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as stated. Mr. Berg, can
you repeat that?
Bird: Yeah. It might be different, but I can repeat it.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of July 11, 2006 City Council Budget Workshop
Meeting:
B. Approve Minutes of July 3, 2007 City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP
07-001 Request for aPreliminary /Final Plat approval to subdivide
Lot 13, Block 3 of Vallin Courts Subdivision to create two (2) new
lots for Benewah by Walker Homes, Inc. - 2673 North Ridgebury
Avenue:
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 3 of 70
D. Approve New Beer and Wine License for Gelato Cafe by Gelato
Cafe LLC at 2053 E. Fairview Avenue, Suite 101:
E. Lease of Property between the Union Pacific Railroad
Company (Lessor) and the City of Meridian (Lessee):
F. Approve Additional Plat Signature for Gramercy Park
Subdivision No. 1 in regards to City ownership of Kiwanis Park
lot:
G. Water Main Easement Agreement for Pine Street Warehouse
by Capital Hill Holdings, LLC:
H. Water Main Easement Agreement for Fairview Lakes Building
by Fairview Lakes, LLC:
Approve New Beer and Liquor License for Baia Taco Beverage
Concession by David Edmark at 1735 W. Franklin Road, Ste
120:
J. Public Works Chance Order No. 1, Water and Sewer
Improvements in Conjunction with ACRD West 1S Street,
Washington to Cherry Road Project for a cost of $88,800.00:
L. Approve Contract for WWTP Security Fence with Butte Fence,
Inc. for $47,571.35:
M. Approve Contract for Water System Redundancy and Storage
Evaluation with Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. for
$10,000..0:
N. License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for
the North Black Cat Pressure Sewer within the Five Mile Drain:
O. Approve Public Right of Wav Sidewalk Easement Contract for
the Lift Station Site on Black Cat Road between Ustick Road
and McMillan Road for ACRD:
P. Approve Right of Wav Dedication Warranty Deed for the North
Black Cat Lift Station with ACRD:
Q. Award Bid /Approve Contract for the North Black Cat Pressure
Sewer with H2 Excavation, LLC for $398,376:
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 4 of 70
R. Second Amendment to Lease Agreement for Office Space
between the City of Meridian and the State of Idaho by and
through the Department of Correction:
S. Resolution No. 07-569 VAC 07-009 Request for a
Vacation of the public utilities, drainage, irrigation easements, a
future road easement and a farm access easement for Lots 3, 4, 5
& 6, Block 1 of Kachina Estates Subdivision for Cabella Creek by
ATM Development, LLC -north of Victory Road and west of Locust
Grove Road:
T. Resolution No. 07-570 VAC 07-013 Request for
Vacation of the public utility easement platted on Lots 1-3, Block 2
for Doris Subdivision by Teach Investments and Seagle Three,
LLC - 1330 East Fairview Avenue:
U. Resolution No. 07-571 Appointments for Board
Members and Alternates to the Valley Regional Transportation
Authority:
V. Addendum to Development Agreement: AZ 06-007 Request to
modify Section 4.1 of the original Development Agreement for
Solitude Subdivision with Solitude Development, LLC and
Providence Development Group:
W. Agreement for Professional Services for Polygraph
Mentorship, Education and Training Services with Idaho
Polygraph Association for $4,000.00:
De Weerd: Item 5 is the Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird: On the Consent Agenda Item K needs to be moved to 6-K and Item X needs to be
moved to 6-X. Item S, T, and U are Resolution number 07-569, 07-570, 07-571, and
with that I move we approve the revised Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and
the Clerk to attest on all papers.
Zaremba: Second.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 5 of 70
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is
no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
K. Public Works Budaet Amendment for the WWTP Security
Fence in the amount of $65,000 for FY 2007:
De Weerd: Thank you. Well, there were two items moved from the Consent Agenda to
Item 6. So, we will first hear item 6-K. Mr. Grady.
Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I would just like to amend that budget
request to read 50,000. The contract for that was around 47. That allows for small
change orders, rather than the 65.
De Weerd: Thank you. We always like to see them go down, rather than up. Any
questions from Council? Do I have a motion to approve?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton, I move we approve the Public Works budget amendment, the security fence, in
an amount not to exceed 50,000 dollars.
Zaremba: Second..
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 6-K. If there is no
discussion, Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
X. Item 6-X is a request for approval of a new beer and
wine license for Rick's Press Room Restaurant.
De Weerd: Council, Item 6-X is a request for approval of a new beer and wine license
for Rick's Press Room Restaurant, located at 130 East Idaho Avenue. Mr. Nary.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 6 of 70
Nary: Yes. Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a -- I guess an
unusual request to you to take this off and consider it separately. And my reasoning for
it is is that the state law on licensing of liquor establishments requires that any liquor
establishments that are within 300 feet of a place of worship have to be separately -- or
have to be specifically approved by the governing board. Yourself. This particular --
this particular restaurant with accessory bar is within 300 feet of the Christian Science
Reading Room down here on Idaho Street. There is another bar liquor license within
300 feet as well. That particular one did come for a Conditional Use Permit, so you
were able to view that separately. This one you weren't and so that's why I simply ask
that you knew you were approving this license that's within 300 feet. It is only beer and
wine., so there is an argument to be made that it may not be quite as critical, but I still
think it's probably wise at least for the city to separately consider those that are within
that 300 foot radius of these places of worship. In the last one, if you recall, when that
Conditional Use Permit came, we actually got a letter of consent from the Christian
Science Reading Room folks that said they had no objection, but the license was for --
actually, the license was essentially parked at the Phoenix Catering business. It's not
actually serving there. The Press Room is a restaurant bar, so they will be serving on
those premises and we didn't have any other new license establishments on that
particular area. So, again, I simply wanted to be sure that you knew what you were
seeing and being asked to approve and., then, that there was a state law provision that
at least addresses that you specifically know that before you approve it. So, that was
why I asked for that.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Any questions from Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Has the Christian Science Reading Room had an opportunity to comment on
this one or are they aware of it?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, they probably
have not. I think the Radio Room only required a certificate of zoning compliance,
because it was -- it is a restaurant that is allowed in that zone. So, I don't believe they
had any specific knowledge that I'm aware of, because they wouldn't have received
notice of any of those things. So, I don't know. Mrs.. Canning might know, but I'm going
to guess they don't have any specific notice of what's being requested. There is a sign
there, it has been there -- not a notice sign, but a sign that there is a business and a
restaurant that's going in there. I saw this about a month ago, so I mean that's there,
but they haven't had any specific notice given to them.
De Weerd: Anna, do you have anything you want to add?
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 7 of 70
Canning: No, ma'am, just other than that Mr. Nary is correct, it just required a certificate
of zoning compliance. We did talk to them when the Phoenix Catering went in and they
had no issues with the beer and wine license associated with that catering
establishment.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird.: And maybe they won't have this time either, but I believe they should be -- have
the opportunity, as they did on the Phoenix Catering one -- the opportunity to yea or nay
it myself before I approve the license.
Zaremba: And I would support that, actually, as a general request. Anytime there is a
request within 300 feet of a church or a school, we probably should ask that entity for
their input.
Bird: That's right.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- and
of you tonight is because I think they want to open, i~
have another meeting to consider it until August --
August 7th for Consent and at least seek input, but
have to make a decision on August 7th. That's your
was not for public hearings.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
I think the only reason it's in front
my understanding, and you don't
yeah., unless you put it on your
if they object, then, I guess you'd
next meeting that you -- and that
Bird': This is -- and (realize -- I don't think the Christian Science Room is recognized as
a chapel or anything, is it, counsel?
Nary: Councilmember Bird, it does qualify under the state code definition of a place of
worship.
Bird: And they are within 300 feet, so they have got to give permission to issue this
license, so -- I don't mind having it on the 7th myself, but I'm not going to act on it until
they get a chance to respond to it.
Nary: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, they don't
have to approve it, but I just wanted them to at least have the opportunity for comment.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 8 of 70
Bird: If they got to -- they should get to comment just like everybody else does.
Canning: Madam Mayor, can I speak to that? This is -- I'll have to take some
accountability here. The statute that you have read, it seems pretty clear. And when
first got here I asked about that with regard to beer and wine licenses and restaurants to
our representation -- legal representation at the time and I thought that what I took away
from that was that it hadn't been the practice of the city to treat the restaurants with the
liquor licenses the same as it would a bar. So, I have only been requiring that notice.
We have only been doing that with true drinking establishments where they don't qualify
as a restaurant under Idaho Code. So, that is why the Christian Science Reading Room
had an opportunity to comment on the Phoenix Catering is because there wasn't a
restaurant at the site., it was a catering business with a liquor license. So, this is a new
departure. I'm happy to go this way if that's -- if this is what we need to do. It does
seem to be more in line with what the state code says, but this isn't as usual. I just want
you to know that. This was -- this is kind of a new way of looking at this.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, this is a restaurant first and just beer and wine to go with a meal.
Canning: Right.
Bird.: Forty percent of their receivables will be restaurant.
Canning: However the state makes that classification. I'm not going to -- prepared to
guess.
Bird: Right. Forty percent.
Canning: But yeah.
Bird: Well., that -- that does show a little different light, but I'd still like to see them get to
comment on it.
De Weerd..: Is the applicant here tonight? Council, I know when 43 Degrees North
came in we didn't do that for them, so --
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Meridian Ciry Council
July 24, 2007
Page 9 of 70
Borton: From what I know about Rick's Press Room and what they are trying to
accomplish and some of the hurdles they have tried to clear to get this thing up and
open, I'm mindful of the concerns and the requirements that this is pulled off and we
address this separately. I`m comfortable approving it now, understanding the specifics
of this application as a restaurant use and in light of its proximity to the religious
organization beside it, I'm comfortable approving it now, rather than waiting until August
7th. I might be in the minority, but --
Zaremba: Well -- and I could change my opinion, Madam Mayor. I could change my
opinion based on the director's statement that when it is principally a restaurant. we have
not been polling nearby churches and schools, so this does not make this one a unique
exception. I can also understand that, apparently, the applicant hustled around today to
get all the signatures and as crossing hurdles, so the effort is -- is not to be unfair to a
church or a school that may be near a drinking establishment, but this is principally a
restaurant and we haven't been asking nearby facilities about restaurants and I would
be comfortable deciding tonight.
De Weerd: Any further discussion, Council?
Bird: Was that a motion?
De Weerd: If not do I have a motion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I would move that we approve the new beer and liquor -- or new beer and wine
license for Rick's Press Room.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second.. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Bird: I'm going to vote aye, too, but I do hope that they don't go through years as a bar
before we discover it like the other establishment did.
Nary: So noted.
De Weerd,: So noted.
Berg: And Rountree is absent.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 10 of 70
MOTION CARRIED. THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Berg: If I may, Madam Mayor, I think we are going to try to put something on our
application that addresses this. Our office was approached to come in with the beer
and wine license and we tried to expedite it because of the time frame we had not to
have a meeting the next two weeks and I don't think he was aware of that, otherwise, he
would have probably gone and got a letter, because he went out and physically got
signatures of department heads to get this accommodation made for you tonight. So, I
don't think the intent is to bypass neighbors or to have his neighbors be surprised that
that's what's he's doing. But I think we will try to maybe coordinate something on the
application, so at least maybe as a double-check between the planning department and
ourselves, where they are located, and if they -- in any location next to a church or
school.
De Weerd: Yeah. And, Council, we will work to make sure that that interpretation is
taken, so we have comment in any regard.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would add that in my decision to vote in favor I was also
comforted by Mr. Nary's statement that there is a sign on the building that this is
coming. So, even if there wasn't formal notice, somebody could have known.
Item 7: Approve 2008 Fiscal Year Tentative Budget:
De Weerd: Item 7 is the 2008 fiscal year tentative budget. I will turn this over to our
finance director.
Kilchenmann: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we provided you with -- I believe
-- and Will will correct me if I'm wrong -- that you just need to approve the tentative
budget in its entirety and I think there should be a single page with the big Meridian logo
on it that has the number written that one of you needs to make a motion to tentatively
approve it.
Berg: Madam Mayor, there is a hard copy that was put in their boxes, but it is also
scanned and you can find it in your electronic packet.
Kilchenmann: And I have one, too, if --
Bird: Here it is right here.
Zaremba: I did see the hard copy.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 11 of 70
Berg: Yeah. Madam Mayor, if I could, this -- we need to do this, so that we can make
the formal notice in the paper, so that we can have that prior to our Public Hearing on
August 28 at 6:00 o'clock.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the tentative 2008 fiscal budget for 86,521,920 dollars for
the resolution to be drawn up stating so.
De Weerd: Do I have a second?
Barton: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Berg?
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Gorton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from June 19, 2007: VAC 07-008 Request
for a Vacation of the City of Meridian utility easement common to Lots 1, 2
& 3, Block 1 of the Fallon Greens Subdivision for Hampton Inn and
Suites by Tealey Land Surveying - 815 & 875 South Allen Street and
2870 East Freeway:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 8 is a continued Public Hearing from June 19th on VAC
07-008. I will start with comments from our planning director.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Hampton Inn project. It's
located on the west side of Eagle Road, north of Interstate 84, at 875 South Allen
Street. They have requested vacation of municipal utility and irrigation easements.
Staff is recommending approval. We have received all the necessary relinquishments
and the applicant has met the necessary Public Works conditions. To our knowledge
there are no outstanding issues before Council. I should tell you we do not have an
applicant tonight, they did state -- send a letter stating they are in agreement with
conditions of approval. And with that Iwill -- I'll answer any questions or more likely Mr.
Grady will answer any questions.
De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff? Is the applicant here?
Canning: No, ma'am. We have no applicant. They have sent a letter stating they are in
agreement with the conditions of approval.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 12 of 70
De Weerd.: We have no applicant. I still had to ask. Council, what do you want to do?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve VAC 07-008.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I believe we should ask if there is any public testimony.
Bird.: Oh. Oh, this is a Public Hearing.
De Weerd: Well, I did and there is none, but if -- we would still have to close the Public
Hearing.
Bird: We need to close the Public Hearing. I move we close the Public Hearing on Item
8.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve VAC 07-008.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Public Hearing: RZ 07-00.6 Request for a Rezone of 4.38 acres from an
R-8 to an R-15 zone for Bellabrook by J.E. Development, LLC - 300
South Locust Grove Road.:
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 13 of 70
Item 10: Public Hearing: CUP 07-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit
approval for multi-family residential use in a proposed R-15 zone for
Bellabrook by J.E. Development, LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: I will open the two public hearings on Items 9 and 10, Public Hearing RZ 07-
006 and CUP 07-005, with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Bellabrook project. It's
located at 300 South Locust Grove Road, which is south of the LDS stake center there
on Locust Grove. The applications before you tonight are a rezone and Conditional Use
Permit fora multi-family development. I guess I should state briefly this is a
reconsideration hearing, so I will be going through the whole hearing again, with a
summary of your previous hearing on this item. The project includes -- this will do -- 34
individually owned two plus bedroom condominiums or villas and those will be attached
in combination of two and four dwellings each. We may have a colored site plan that's a
little easier. All the villas will have two car garages with two additional parking spaces
available in each driveway. The proposed buildings are depicted with two and three
story elevations for each group of buildings. Usable open space is in the form of
pedestrian walkways through the center of the project and a gathering courtyard, again,
in the center. Actually, the pathways go down to the creek and through the center and,
then, the courtyard is at the center of the project. And those will create a centralized
open space and gathering area. Sorry. The gathering area will include seating, shade
trees, and community artwork. Additional common area includes a buffer along Locust
Grove Road and landscaping of the eastern strip leading to Five Mile Creek area. The
gross residential density is 7.76 dwelling units per acre. This project was -- this parcel
of land was previously approved for annexation to R-8 and a preliminary plat for 20
single family houses on 20 building lots. They are now asking for the R-15 zone,
because it accommodates some multi-family development to that -- that their
condominium project falls under. They still do not exceed the eight dwelling units per
acre that would have normally been allowed in the R-8 zone. The Commission
recommended approval at their April 19th, 2007, Public Hearing. Shawn Nickel, the
applicant's representative, spoke in favor. Jerry Cunningham spoke in opposition.
Christie Jordan commented. And we received written testimony from Ronald Hodge.
Key issues of discussion by the Commission were the private streets versus public
streets within the development and the requirement of the development agreement to
incorporate the proposed site plan and elevations. The key Commission changes to
staffs recommendation were to again require that development agreement to
incorporate the proposed site plan and elevations. The outstanding issues for the City
Council prior to the previous hearing on June 5th were the requirement for the
development agreement and also the applicant had submitted a perspective view of the
proposed structures and I had shown you that previously. I can go back to that. These
are really just additional items to the record more than they were outstanding issues. At
your last hearing on June 16th -- or June 6, 2007, you did deny the project and asked
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 14 of 70
for findings for denial. At that hearing Council expressed concerns about future
development of the parcel to the east and in response the applicant offered to provide a
stub street to the east boundary. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan and
landscape plan, dated July 15th, 2007, which depicts an extension of East Kalispell
Drive to the eastern property line, with across-access easement through Bellabrook.
Staff reviewed these revisions and does support -- support those as they are consistent
with the provisions of the Unified Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff also spoke with Joe Silva, Meridian Fire Department, regarding the new stub street
shown on the site plan and he is supportive of the extension of East Kalispell Drive to
the east as shown. If the Council decides to move forward with a decision of approval
on this application, a condition should be included for the applicant to record across-
access easement agreement with the property owner to the east prior to application
submittal for certificate of zoning compliance for any structures within this development.
At that original hearing Council also expressed concerns about increasing traffic in the
area and the impact on the regional roadway system. Staff requested Charles Trainer
of Compass to comment on the applicant's proposal and how that project met the goals
of Communities In Motion. That letter was included in your packet and I wanted to read
just a couple paragraphs from that. In noting the project location it says it lies just one
quarter mile distance to Franklin, a corridor identified by Valley Regional Transit as a
high service level transit corridor in its regional operations capital improvement plan. It
is also less than a half mile from the rail corridor now being evaluated for future
commuter rail service and that -- and the last paragraph states: The Communities In
Motion plan approved by the Compass board on August 2006 emphasized more
compact development, a diversity of housing types, and increase in the amount of
development near services and transit routes. Bellabrook Villas appears to support
these objectives, allowing for growth without consuming farm land. These are also
goals endorsed in the Blueprint For Good Growth. Since the last hearing we have also
received letters of support from the following: Eric and Jennifer Barnett. Laura
Anderson. Ryan Retz and, again, Charles Trainer. So, we believe that the applicant is
prepared to talk about where those folks are located in relationship to this project. With
that I'll answer any questions Council and Mayor may have.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Is the applicant here?
Nickel: Good evening,, Madame Mayor and Council. Shawn Nickel, 148 North 2nd
Street, Eagle, Idaho, here tonight representing the Bellabrook Villa Subdivision
development. Thank you all so much for allowing us the opportunity for the
reconsideration of this -- this application. The issues came up at the Iasi meeting and
they came up during the -- after the Public Hearing was closed and there was some --
some issues that were brought up that weren't addressed when the hearing was open
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 15 of 70
that we feel would have probably helped us in demonstrating that this project does meet
all your goals and requirements for the Comprehensive Plan and for proper
development within the City of Meridian. There was three items discussed. Anna has
gone through most of them. I will try not to belabor them too much, but I think they are
important. The first one was with regards to access and as Anna has stated we have
provided -- I think the concern was, as you recall, there is two parcels to the east, one is
this flag lot located right here and there is a landlocked parcel back in this area here.
The concerns from the Council last month were -- with us having our private road
system in here and accessing Locust Grove at this location, that the only -- the only
access to these properties back here would be through this 50 foot wide flag through
probably a public road network. So, I had gotten up at the last meeting and kind of off
the cuff said that we would provide the access to the back. Well, we went ahead and
committed to that with a revised application and site plan with staff that clearly indicates
this stub street to the east, we will, through our development agreement, provide the
access easement through our project and what this does -- this allows the property back
here -- now, keep in mind that a lot of this property back here is in a flood way, flood
plane, and so it's really limited on the development. But this does allow this portion that
is developable, if they wish to continue on this concept, which would increase the
density, to come through our development and that one access point would take most of
the traffic. If they do go the route of a single family development and were to do a
public road, just because of the limitations of the property, you know, the four to eight at
the most single family houses they could get in there, could access off of that public
road and the impact with an additional access wouldn't be as extreme as if you had
higher density. So, in other words, we are going to take the burden of the higher
density through our development, if that's the way it redevelops. Unfortunately, we don't
have a crystal ball, so we don't know how it's going to develop. I think we have
provided good opportunities for whichever direction they go. And in either case the
back area would have emergency access either through our development as a
secondary access or that 50 foot strip as their emergency access. So, we wanted to
point that out. I thought that was important. At the last meeting we weren't really able
to discuss that in detail. And, then, Anna has pointed out the Compass letter that is part
of your packet. I also included it in my little packet right there, one of the comments
from -- from Mr. Trainer does indicate that access onto Locust Grove presents an issue,
especially when the pending completion of the overpass will certainly add traffic to the
street. I understand the developer agreed to a joint access that would provide for
adjacent parcels to develop without creating yet another intersection, which is an
excellent strategy to preserve arterial capacity, so they do recognize that if we do -- if
that probably does develop at a higher density we will have that within our access point.
The second issue was regarding the density and the compatibility and if you look at that
-- packet that I handed out, I have got amap -- a colored map -- if Anna could put that
on the overhead. That first map. Thank you. I have pointed out -- this is a unique
mixed use area in and of itself, considering the Locust Grove corridor, which is going to
be a corridor as soon as that overpass comes into play and, then, the Franklin Road
corridor. The existing single family residential, along with the industrial that you find on
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 16 of 70
the north side of Franklin Road., the mixed use that is surrounding and including our
property, a mixed use Comp Plan designation. There is a church to the north. Across
the street there was discussion on those parcels being -- or those being kind of pushed
out of development. I want to point out that those are comp planned as mixed use
development. There is certainly a -- currently for sale right across the street. One has
an existing L-O zone and the other, again, Comp Plan for multi -- multi use. And, then,
there is some industrial behind those. Of course, you have got the police station, on the
Comp Plan is public. You have got the commercial all up and down Water Tower. A
public designation up in this area. The R-40 apartment complex here and also over
here and, then, there is some areas located in here, although it's owned by ACRD, that
is currently zoned R-40. In addition to all the other -- all the other commercial and office
uses in this -- in this immediate area and., of course, the hospital and all the uses
associated with that out onto Eagle Road. So, you have gvt quite a mixture of uses.
And so what we are -- you know, what we are intending to do is to increase those --
mixed uses with a well thought out, high quality, multi-family development that you don't
usually see -- or you haven't seen, I don't believe, in this city, that is owner occupied,
that's the intent, and you have seen the elevations that I provided and they are very
unique looking and I think it's going to be a very -- very nice asset to the city if approved
this evening. But compatibility and density did come up that last discussion and I
thought it was important that we -- that we are -- were able to re-address that. In
addition -- Anna, can you show the next slide, which is the next page of your packet.
Again, this is a little closer up, but showing the -- again, showing the use. This is our
project site right here. Again, we are asking for 7.76 dwelling units per acre. And just
as a comparison on the compatibility, the Woodbridge development, which was done as
a planned unit development, in the area immediately adjacent to our project, the density
of phase one is 8.9 dwelling units per acre. So, to compare that with our density, we
are actually only six units more with our area than that phase of Woodbridge. So, what
we are saying is compatibility with the surrounding residential, I believe we have -- we
definitely meet that. And., then, to reiterate what Compass said in their letter and Anna
read, their emphasis -- they recognize the emphasis and the compact development, the
diversity in the housing type, increasing development near services and transit routes.
Growth within -- growth without consumption of the farm land and meeting the goals
endorsed by the Blueprint For Good Growth. Those are all qualities within this
development that I believe were not presented at the last meeting that is really
important when we are trying to -- trying to add to -- add to the city this type of project.
And, finally, the third issue was the traffic and the transportation and one of the
problems at the last meeting that we discovered was there was an inaccuracy with the
ACRD report -- the written report. Their staff did get up and talked a little bit at the last
meeting, but the staff report, that we didn't figure out until afterwards, was taken from
the old -- from the old original application and so it indicated that Locust Grove was a
three lane road and, in essence, it is a five lane roadway. So, they did provide a letter,
which I believe you have in your packets, updating that information. But it's important to
point out -- important to point out that ACHD is estimating that our generated -- our
generated traffic will be 238 vehicle trips per day. The original application for the R-8
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 17 of 70
development was 200 trips per day. So, we are -- that's only increasing that vehicle
trips per day by 38 trips. So, I thought that was important to point out as well. And,
then, in the Compass letter they speak about being a quarter mile from Franklin Road,
that Valley Regional Transit showed that as a high service transit corridor and within a
half a mile from that rail corridor that they are studying at this point. Again, we believe
that the confusion, lack of better information, and a better understanding of this area
that we are trying to develop in relationship to the access, traffic, compatibility, has led
us to ask you for this reconsideration this evening. Our intent, again, is to provide a
unique project of the type of residential living that is lacking in this area. In order to
accomplish this we do have to ask for a rezone to the R-15 -- R-12 -- is it R-12? R-15.
Sorry. R-15 zoning designation. However, to point out again, we are not exceeding R-8
density and we are only asking for that higher density so we can accommodate that --
this type of condominium living. So, with that I thank you for your time. Hopefully, I
have addressed some concerns that you had at the last meeting that were not
addressed and I will stand for questions.
De Weerd: Shawn, once that private drive is vacated, what happens to that road?
Once -- once it develops in the back.
Canning: It's going to take a second.
Nickel: Is this what you're referring to, what happens to this strip?
De Weerd: Yeah. U.h-huh.
Nickel: Again, it gives them the opportunity, if they were going to just stick with single
family, to provide a public access back there. More than likely, because they are comp
planned as mixed use, they could follow with what -- the type of development we are
doing, in which case Ithink -- and Idon't -- I hate to put Joe Silva on the spot, but
believe that it would need secondary access in there for emergencies, so I would
imagine that would be a perfect location for an emergency access. If not there, then, if
that was their public road for their single family, then, their emergency access could
come through our -- our private road or private street.
De Weerd: I guess when we discussed it earlier you talked about vacating it and putting
it into a green open space, but -- because we wouldn't want both of those road
accesses onto Locust Grove. That was the concern.
Nickel: Well -- and the problem, Madam Mayor, is that we don't own that property and
so we can't -- I don't think we can dictate what that property owner can do with his
property. What we are trying to provide is as many options as possible for the
redevelopment of that and I think that's why by providing that -- that access easement
and committing to taking that traffic, that we have accomplished that. But it also gives
them the ability, if they do want a public street, again, because of the limited amount of
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 18 of 70
space that they would have and, to be honest with you, the price that they are asking for
that property, I don't know if anyone's going to go in there and really do a single family
development and make it pencil out. So, it would make sense to access it through --
through our project. And that's what we are -- again, with that crystal ball that's what we
are trying to give them as many options as possible.
De Weerd: Any questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Nickel: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone in the audience who
would like to provide testimony on this application?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would ask a clarification of our legal counsel for the record. I'm sorry,
didn't mean to cut you off. The applicant a couple times has called this a
reconsideration, which, in fact, has a meaning and I guess my question is is this a
reconsideration or have we already bridged that and this is a noticed Public Hearing?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, this -- I think
he's using it more in the lay person's context, since we have had a hearing previously,
but this is a new hearing. It's been noticed. This is a Public Hearing. It's all new
information and additional information. But it's not -- it's not a reconsideration hearing,
it's simply a new hearing.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Nary: I don't know if that answers your question.
Zaremba; Just wanted to clarify that for the record.
Erickson: Hi, there. Ross Erickson. 1854 E. Lanark here in Meridian. Madam Mayor,
Members of the Council, I just wanted to touch on a few things that Shawn didn't talk
about in his presentation just real quickly. I wanted to talk about the previous
application that was submitted back in April '06 and., then., also a little bit about the site
and the buildings and kind of how they fit to the area and what we have incorporated
into the buildings and site to make it a really nice project. Back in April of '06 we
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 19 of 70
actually purchased this property and started the application shortly thereafter. We went
through the entitlement process, prepared our construction drawings, and in a period of
time where the market took some pretty significant changes we went through, looked at
numbers, put a lot into it, and found that our project was upside down on paper before
we even got started. So, basically, what we ended up having to do is go back and do
additional market research to try to figure out what was actually occurring with the
market and what we found is that there was a -- there was a significant amount of R-4
and R-8 housing in the Meridian area, but we also found that there was a gap between
that housing and, then, the rental market in Meridian. There wasn't really anything in
between. So, we came up with the concept for condominiums and presented to staff,
we worked through several iterations of the design and different configurations., building
layouts, different architecture, we worked with the neighbors and kind of honed the
design to where it is before you now and to come up with what we feel is a really really
good project in an area that, you know, is -- has a lot of professional services, retail,
pretty much everything around it. It's close to a transportation corridor. Unfortunately,
there is not a mechanism in the city's code to do condominiums. We have to go through
an R-15 zoning designation at a minimum and do the Conditional Use Permit for
multi-family in order to do our condo projects, so we can condo plot it. I kind of feel like
it puts a stigma, because there is a lot of multi-family projects that you see that aren't
refined, they are not done quite as neatly and they are not maintained to a level that this
project is intended to be. So, our project is significantly different than the other multi-
family projects you have seen in the area and some of the differences are that we are
trying to appeal to a buyer, we are not trying to appeal to a renter. So, there is a lot
more detail put into our building., there is a lot more high quality materials being used
with construction. Some of the -- some of the things that we have incorporated into the
building designs are -- we have got private individual entrances, rather than like a
confluence of entrances where there is like five doors or four doors where people go to
their individual units, they are actually individual, so that people can get that feeling of
an individual residence. The architecture, we have massed the buildings such that they
will blend in well with the area. We have got a lot of relief on the building elevations that
will create some interest in the street. We are planning on using various siding types.
We have got lap, some shake, and some board and bat that we are going to mix up on
the elevations to really kind of create some -- some differentiation on the elevations.
We have got architectural gable treatments that you don't see on multi-family houses
and open trusts, some things like that. So, we are not trying to cheapskate these
buildings in any way. Again, we are trying to appeal to a buyer, so we need to create a
sustainable product that will be marketable. We have also got -- we chose to paint the
units different colors to kind of break it up a little bit and kind of differentiate ownership.
Each one of the body colors will have, essentially, different shades of those colors on
each unit to give more depth to it and relief. So, the pictures probably don't do that
much justice, but that's what we are intending to do. We have also got some
architectural stone that will be on every one of the units. Individual driveways and
attached garages, as opposed to covered or like a central parking area, again, to try to
get -- get in touch with that residential feel to where someone could pull in their
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 20 of 70
driveway and they don't have to worry about somebody else pulling in their driveway, so
they have reserve space. As far as parking goes, we have got double the required
parking for amulti-family project. That's excluding the on-street parking. So, we have
got just a ton of parking on this project. So, parking shouldn't be an issue. As well as
the open space. I think we have three times the amount of open space that's required
for a project like this. Our units -- for the most part our units range in size from about
1,500 to 1,800 square feet. We have got two units that are a little bit larger. Each of the
units is three bedrooms, two and a half bath. One of the bedrooms is design to -- the
architecture is designed so that you can actually remove a wall, if that's in the interest of
the buyer, so that you can create a flex space, like a bonus room type concept. We
have got some good letters with input and support from the neighbors and from
Compass, so it seems like we haven't had a lot of opposition with the project. Everyone
thinks -- I would suspect, just by the showing, that we have done a decent job with it. I
think with that I will stand for any questions and ask for your approval tonight.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council? Thank you. Any further testimony by the public?
Your time's up. If you would., please, state your name and address for the record.
Smith: Good evening, Mayor de Weerd, Council Members. My name is Deanna Smith.
reside at 1208 East Jefferson, Boise, Idaho. And I'm here tonight to encourage you to
consider this application from a Blueprint For Good Growth's perspective. As a member
of the Blueprint For Good Growth steering committee, I believe it is important for all the
communities in this county to really look carefully at applications from this perspective
and to consider strongly those that adhere well to the policies of that plan. I believe this
one does a good job of adhering to Blueprint For Good Growth policies. It's my
understanding that one of the greatest concerns in front of you that I have heard is that
the density of this project is fairly -- of fairly significant and greater density than what
currently is zoned or around it, but I wanted to encourage you to think about density
from a perspective of form, function, and location. Location, from a perspective
location, if I have this on the map right -- and (believe I do -- this particular location sits
quite close -- not quite within the quarter mile, but certainly within the half mile to future
high density corridor, that being the rail corridor. I know we don't have that developed
today, but one of the things that Blueprint For Good Growth calls for is to strongly
consider transit ready development. I think you're looking at such development in this
application. As far as function goes, it's not the density that creates compatibility, but
whether it really fits and belongs. You have a location where this piece of ground, this
application would provide some ability for its residents and surrounding residents to
create a few of their trips as walkable trips. You would have small commercial inside of
it that might provide a few jobs. Also could provide some services and reduce car trips.
That is very much something that Blueprint For Good Growth strives for. And, then, the
final is form and I think this application does an admirable job of fitting in very nicely with
its design to the adjacent single family residents. You have multi-family units that really
from -- for all practical purposes look very much like homes. A few of them less so than
others, but many -- the majority of them look like houses. They are large houses, but
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 21 of 70
they look like houses. So, you have got form, function, and location and I think that's
really how we need to look at density, if we are going to be able to adhere to Blueprint
For Good Growth, which calls for us to begin trying to develop our land use patterns in
such a way that we can reduce vehicle miles traveled, improve our air quality, and
support transit. I just wanted to mention I'm speaking tonight as a member of the
Blueprint steering committee and wanted you to think about it from that perspective.
Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? Shawn, do you have any concluding
remarks? No? Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor, I have a question for Mr. Silva that Shawn might want to
comment on. When there is a discussion about emergency access for future
development, is it an option -- I don't know if this landscape plan shows it well enough.
Is there an option to have emergency access through -- and I'm just throwing out an
idea here -- through the parking lot and across this common area? Is that -- is it
feasible? I mean can you utilize that parking area that provides some emergency
access? Because I think I share what sounds like the Mayor's concerned with -- what
this might eventually become and since it all sort of ties into some of our discussion, I'm
curious what your thoughts are.
Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Borton, typically it does not go
through a parking lot. Most typically it's a dedicated easement. It's the way we handle
those secondary means of access and it's always for -- there is different requirements
depending on the individual project that's proposed, whether or not it's square footage,
the height of the building, or number of homes served, will influence the need for a
secondary or a third access point to a project. So, most typically it is not -- it does not
go through a parking lot.
Borton: Okay.
De Weerd: Any further questions, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd.: Shawn, did you have any further comments?
Nickel: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I guess to address that, because it sounds like
there is still a concern about this -- about this property to the east. And, again, without -
- without knowing -- without having the ability to predict, you know, how -- how things
are going to develop that are out of your control, the best we can do is give -- give as
many options as possible. This one, unfortunately, because of the separation in grade
from the LDS church to our property wouldn't work, even if -- even if we could get an
access through there. I think this is the most appropriate location. Also I want to point
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 22 of 70
out, as stated in ACHD's report, that this -- this offset does meet their policy and I know
that's -- it's not the -- it's not the way we want to see it and Idon't -- I'm hoping that it
doesn't develop that way, but, again, keep in mind that as testified by my developer,
who, you know, paid for the property and, then, couldn't do a single family development,
the chances of this going single family would be the only reason that you would need
this access here, because it would most likely need a public road system. But once you
build a public road with a 50 foot right of way, take into consideration all the flood way
and the constraints of the property, I really don't think it's a practical piece of property for
single family, that's why we thought it was so important to provide that access here,
because if it did go to a full family development, then, it could access -- their private
street system could continue off of our private street system and, then, this would
provide an emergency only access, which I believe that the fire department would want
to see being this far away from Locust Grove. So, I -- again, Iwish Iwas a -- I wish I
was a mind reader and a swami to see how things were going to develop, but I think we
have done a good job of trying to -- trying to allay those concerns. At least I hope we
have. Any other questions for me?
De Weerd: You do plan on signing that private road that it will go through?
Nickel: Yes, we wilh Even though it's not a requirement of ACHD, we would agree to a
condition of approval for that, since it's not a public road, there is no condition currently,
but we would agree to that as a condition.
De Weerd: Well, I think that's mandatory, because I do think that the city needs to be
pretty vocal in its -- if that property does redevelop in the back and if this is approved,
that that access will be discouraged in the form that we can. Thank you.
Nickel: Thank you.
De Weerd: Council, if there is no further information needed, I would entertain a motion
to close.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Unless you want discussion. Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I will make a short discussion and, then, proceed. I would like to say that I
very much appreciate the input from Blueprint For Good Growth and from Compass. As
the valley moves forward in trying to incorporate these principals for all cities, not just
ours, I, actually, think it would be helpful to have that be part of the analysis of all future
projects is some -- some comparison to Blueprint For Good Growth, whether or not we
send that out for comment from Compass or develop that analysis in-house is not
important to me, but it would be a nice paragraph to add to either future staff comments
or other agency comments, because I think we do need to be aware of how projects --
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 23 of 70
Meridian has supported the Blueprint For Good Growth and part of our support would
be have their input. So, with that comment I would move that the Public Hearing on
Items 9 and 10 be closed.
De Weerd: I have a motion to close the Public Hearing on Items 9 and 10. Do I have a
second?
Borton: I will second..
De Weerd: I have a second. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I almost cut Councilman Zaremba off to get some of my remarks out before the
Public Hearing was closed. I know Shawn and Ross probably are waiting to hear back.
I think we had some confusion and I probably created it in making comments after the
hearing was closed and although the Public Hearing is closed, Iwill -- my laundry list of
complaints are zero. I applaud you both from my perspective. It's frustrating as ever,
I'm sure, to have something, you know, denied, reconsidered., come back and delayed
and if there is an opportunity to address it on the front end, I know that's desired and I'm
sensitive to the cost and delay. What I see and what you each told me -- in particular,
Ross, I appreciate your remarks about a little more of the history of this project and
some of the dilemmas that you were faced with. I had a concern before when -- and
anytime we approve an annexation and we are approving item A and, then, later on we
are asked to approve B, that might have had an impact on whether or not it made sense
for the City of Meridian to bring that in. That was one of the concerns the led to the
denial, at least in my eyes, and by no means do I think that there was any bait and
switch going on, but your background provided some additional information which
makes me more comfortable with it, coupled with the fact that the detail and the quality
of the product that you're providing, make me feel more comfortable with it and the
access issue to the east makes me feel a lot more comfortable with it. We all wish we
were swamis or however Shawn phrased it on how this property to the east might
develop and the emergency access issues. I hope you're right, it makes sense as you
describe it, what will pencil out there. I trust you would know better than I what would
work. But what you provide it seems to be the best -- the best product for this area.
understand it's =- it was -- I believe mixed use community on the Comp Plan and kind of
had this idea initially, but a long story short, I'm supportive of the project and
appreciative of the changes and the patience that the applicants have shown in trying to
meet some of our concerns.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 24 of 70
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other comment? Do I have a motion?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move that we approve RZ 07-006 and CUP 07-005, both relating to
Bellabrook, to include all staff comments and, specifically, that the applicant shall record
a cross-access agreement for the property owner to the east prior to application
submittal for a CZC and one additional addition to the staff comments that the applicant
be required to post a sign at the east end of the private drive where it meets the
property line of the property to the east, stating that that road will be extended in the
future. End of motion.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Items 9 and 10 with the conditions
as stated. Any further comment? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 11: Public Hearing: MI 07-009 Request for a Miscellaneous application to
Modify the existing Development Agreement to amend the concept plan
for the site for Dorado Subdivision by Winston Moore - NWC of Eagle
Road and Overland Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 11 is a Public Hearing on MI 07-009. I will open this
Public Hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Dorado project. It's
located on the northwest corner of Eagle and Overland.. The applications before you
tonight are a development agreement modification and alternative compliance and I'm
going to give a -- kind of quick rundown on the history and a little bit of staff concerns
about this project. In August 2005 City Council approved a request for annexation and
zoning to C-G. The concept plan approved for the site had two small retail buildings,
approximately 2,800 square feet each, to be located on the lots at the southwest corner
of the property. The buildings front Overland Road, an entryway corridor, with parking
provided to the rear of the buildings. The applicant now seeks to combine the two
buildings into one larger structure, which is about 11,000 square feet, and to have that
structure back up to the existing residential property to the north. Therefore, the
applicant requests modification of the concept plan to construct one large retail building
with alternative compliance to allow the parking adjacent to Overland Road, not behind
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 25 of 70
the buildings, as required by the Unified Development Code. As part of the annexation
approval City Council required detailed conditional use approval for all structures
adjacent to the county residential subdivision to the west. So, this would be one of
those -- or two of those properties subject to that condition. The reason for this
requirement was because not only is the property located adjacent to a residential
district, that's also a highly visible intersection and an entryway corridor and the
applicant did gain approval of a reduced land use buffer between two uses, because it
was anticipated that that residential property may go away at some point in the future.
So, they don't have the full land use buffer. Staff believes that the applicant's request
for modification to the development agreement to construct a single structure is
justifiable. However, staff has not supported relocating the parking. This was a subject
of discussion during those original hearings and continued to be a concern. Staff
received testimony from the residential neighbor immediately to the north, which
requests the parking layout as depicted on the approved concept plan, remain
unchanged. The neighbor states that by locating the parking to the rear of the buildings
it softens the impact and appropriately transitions the commercial use to residential.
Further, Council committed .through the existing development agreement that the city
should protect the adjacent residential properties via landscape buffers and other
provisions. Staff believes that this is additional support for maintaining the parking as
depicted on the approved concept plan. We do have elevations of the proposed
structure. I thought we did. Apparently they are not in my slides. I apologize. Must
have been looking at the staff report. Staffs recommendation is to allow the
combination of the two structures into a single structure, but deny the request to
relocate the parking. Staff finds that the applicant can, in fact, fully comply with the
city's parking standards for structures located on an entryway corridor, as illustrated in
the concept plan, or in these drawings. There we go. Staff finds that the applicant has
not proposed an alternative which provides a superior means for meeting the city's
design standards. We have received written testimony in opposition to relocating the
buildings. Those are from the Overland Way Homeowners Association, President Ron
Van Auker, from Brad Miller for Van Auker Properties, and Bill and Liz Teriff. Hoping I
got that somewhere right. The outstanding issues for City Council -- this project -- and
this is just kind of a question of you all, but this project we are also requiring Conditional
Use Permit. In discussing how to appropriately process the project, the question arose
as to whether Mr. Seel should seek Council's approval for the development agreement
modification first or go through and get the conditional use approval for the -- from the
Planning and Zoning Commission and, then, bring the development agreement
modification to Council. So, in the interest of getting Mr. Seel one answer a little more
quickly than it -- we are able to get to you a little faster than we are able to get to the
Planning and Zoning, so we decided to do it this route, but if you have a preference for
other applications in the future if you could let me know I would appreciate it, because I
really didn't know if you would have a preference, so -- with that I will answer any
questions you may have.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 26 of 70
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, go back to your first thing and show me where -- what you consider the
entry corridor.
Canning: Overland Road is all an entryway corridor.
Bird: Go back there and show me east and west. Go back one, two, kid.
Canning: Here?
Bird: Now, show me where you -- take your pointer and show me where an entry is.
Canning: As shown on the Comprehensive Plan, the second -- the entryway corridor
comes down -- it, actually, follows the interstate, comes down, and, then, goes both
ways on Overland Road.
Bird: It goes both ways.
Canning: Yes.
Bird: And in the entry corridor, UDC does not allow parking in the front?
Canning.: It only allows up to 70 percent of the parking in the front.
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions?
Bird: Not at this time.
De Weerd: I guess, Anna, in EI Dorado across the street isn't there buildings that have
parking in front of them?
Canning.: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, most of those buildings along
Overland Road in EI Dorado were approved prior to the Unified Development Code.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: But there is some over in Silverstone that was just done within the last year that's
got the parking in front of them.
Canning: You can have up to 70 percent of the parking --
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 27 of 70
Bird: I didn't go around back and see if they had a back.
Canning: Yeah.
De Weerd: That explains it.
Canning: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any further questions from Council?
Zaremba: Not at this time.
Seel: Anna, do you have some other slides? I had five slides, so -- I talked to Barbara
about that. She told me she had..
Canning: These are the -- just the three slides I have.
Seel: There was two others that I sent to her and they had -- she had confirmed with
me that she had received them and they were in the presentation. Jonathan Seel, W.H.
Moore Company. 1940 Bonito.
Canning: I may have them in a separate file. Let me check, Jonathan.
Seel: Okay.
De Weerd: Jonathan, can I ask you to maybe put that up on the easel?
Seel: Sure. Sorry for the delay. Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council Members.
Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore Company, 1940 Bonito, Meridian. To give you a little bit of
history, if we can go back to the concept plan first, Anna that we originally had.
Canning: Jonathan, I can't switch back and forth between that presentation and your
overheads. Do you have an overhead of the concept plan, otherwise, I have to switch
the computer back.
Seel.: No. No, I don't have one of those. I didn't think it was necessary. About
everything else., but -- well, let me -- we will just move on, because I don't want to delay
it.
Canning: Here you go.
Seel: Anyway, again, as Anna said, give you a little bit of history. We originally
submitted this concept plan back in 2005. We showed these two buildings here. At the
Meridian Ciry council
July 24, 2007
Page 28 of 70
time, because of the narrowness of this lot, we realized some of our constraints and we
thought that this would probably be our best design. And like any kind of concept plan
you try to anticipate and hope for the best. What we realized over the last year is that
our thinking was, quite frankly, flawed on this design. We found two problems that we
had. Number one, two small buildings like this are so -- so prohibitively expensive to
construct today -- and I know from a city standpoint typically you don't talk about
expense, but I think it's critical, because you don't want to build something and have it
sit there vacant. That -- we couldn't do it. In fact, these two buildings right here we did
ground leases on, because we could not justify buildings themselves. How they did it
we don't know. So, we found out that it was so costly that the rent would be so
prohibitive and there is no way you would attract tenants for these buildings. The
second thing,, then, we started to look at is, okay, let's go ahead and make this one
single larger building, which, of course, the economics of scale, then, make it more
justifiable. But what we, then, found with it is if we wanted to -- as Councilman Bird
asked -- because of the view corridor here and what we were faced with and because of
the narrowness of this lot, your choices are either basically A or B. You either put the
building up front like this, which you saw the other one, or you put it back here.. In
designing it here with comments we got from most of our -- most of the tenants out
there was, you know, we like the location, but it's critical that we have our frontage along
Overland Road and we have the parking there. Well, the only way we could do it was to
construct a building back here, with the parking up here. Anna, if you can flip to the
concept -- or plan with the building in the back. There is the one in the front. Yeah. So,
what we did is we started to look at this design with the parking in the back here -- or
the parking in the front, the building in the back. So, what we are asking tonight is to go
ahead and approve this building with it bordering, essentially, the north property and, of
course, I realize there is existing residential and I'll get to that. Now, the other thing we
asked -- we were asked for is alternative compliance. We had a couple different
approaches that we could utilize, because, in fact, we are faced with parking here. We
don't have the option. We can't put this building in the middle and put some of the
parking in the back, parking in the front. Again, we either go option A or option B. So,
what we did is -- in talking with Anna is we looked at alternative compliance. Do you
have that map there, Anna that shows all the buildings on Overland?
Canning: Just a second.
Seel: If you look at this again, this is our subject property. This is Tulley's, which is
currently under construction. This is Qudovis, which will be starting here next month.
and this is Sterling Bank, which is, of course, you're probably aware is open. If you had
the parking for this, including what's front here, Eagle Road., this parking, this parking,
add the total parking out front of here, you have approximately 50 percent of your
parking in front of the building, 50 percent of it either back or behind. As Anna
mentioned, under the design review, we are required to have no more than 70 percent.
So, I felt in my compliance letter, that we have honored the spirit of the design review
and have only -- in an aggregate amount, only 70 percent of the parking -- or 50 percent
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 29 of 70
of the parking up here. Because, again, we are faced with the dilemma do we put the
building here, do we put the building there. So, I guess my request tonight is that, one,
is that you do approve this building back here, you allow us to put the parking up here
under alternative compliance, because you recognize the situation we are in and the
fact that we do have -- I think we do, in an aggregate amount, honor the desire of the
city under the UDC to have no more than 70 percent of their parking area. Now, staff
had put in the report in their -- and I think they were trying to help out -- that what they
would approve is one large building up here. I guess respectfully I asked is if you don't
approve the location of the building to the back with the alternative compliance, don't
approve anything. I don't really see where that does us any good and (question -- and
don't want to get into it tonight, whether or not we have to modify the development
agreement here when we didn't have to modify the development agreement when we
showed two buildings here. But I just simply ask that either you approve it as requested
or you don't approve anything for us. Moving on. I guess the other thing -- and I want
to mainly address -- can we go to the aerial, please, the wider one. Okay. Which way
are we here? There we go. Okay. This is -- this is Grandview Station and this is the
residential Loder. This is, of course, EI Dorado, Silverstone. This is a project that's just
recently under development. Ron Van Auker owns this. And, of course, the Majestic
Theater. As I'm well aware tonight -- and the people from Loder Street are here and I
know them all pretty well at this point. You have got some letters of opposition on
residential and it's always interesting when you have a commercial development
bordering up to residential, because it's one of the -= one of the things that you often get
in is that we ran into when we did EI Dorado down here with Thousand Springs, which is
below, is you get the homeowner that comes in here, he stands up here, he says,
Madam Mayor, Council Members, my name is John Smith, I live at 555 Pleasant Street,
my home is bordering this residential, I bought this home 20 years ago, I though it would
always be open area, I love the tranquility, and now there is a commercial development
coming in and you are going to affect the value of my property. We have heard it. And
it's a tough situation. So, I guess the question, then, becomes is, well, Mr. Seel, why is
this any different? You have got residential right here. Why is this any different?
You're bordering it. Well, I think it is different. I think if you begin to look -- there is a
couple -- that aerial backup, please. You don't have to put this up yet. Okay. If you
look at this aerial, I think if -- you're familiar, I know, with the Comprehensive Plan. This
whole area, including here, down here, this residential here, is all -- all in the
Comprehensive Plan intended for mixed use regional. Okay. I think that's significant.
Also is I think as you look at your map -- and if you want I'd rather talk about it and
reference this. If you will notice here, Mr. Van Auker owns this property right here, this
property, this property, and this property right here. Mr. Moore owns this. There is eight
homes within this subdivision, of which five are owned by developers. Now, I could be
wrong and I will stand to be corrected, but I don't think Ron Van Auker, when he owns
this land over here, had any need for rental income. I think he clearly saw that with this
being developed some day he's going to do it, I think that he's going to come in here,
remove these homes and this is going to become part of -- I think these are commercial,
they are industrial development. I think -- I don't think that that's in dispute. Now, again,
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 30 of 70
he may have changed his approach, but I think that's it. Mr. Moore didn't buy this home
because he needs rental income, he recognized the same thing. So, I think what you're
seeing here -- I guess my point is what's the difference between this and Thousand
Springs Subdivision? This is clearly a residential subdivision in transition. In fact, if I
can -- and I'll look back to this. Going back in the minutes when we did the hearing
back on August 16th of 2005 -- and I hope I'm not going to embarrass you, Anna, but as
you said in there in your introduction: These are currently residential uses, although this
is very much all a transitional neighborhood in a residential area. If you go back to Mr.
Sasser, who is here tonight, and I know he will be speaking, he said -- and I will quote
again: So that basically what we are asking for, at least at this point in time. Period..
Maybe a year or one day -- dot dot -- or two down the road, the subdivision is going to
go away. Now, obviously, he says: But at least now it's residential and we are going to
live here. The point is Mr. Sasser -- and I mean this in a respectful way, but as far as
know, he no longer lives in that house and hasn't for awhile. In fact, he lives over on
Stardust. I believe his son has been living in that. At one point he, actually, had it
rented out as a business. I guess my point is -- and this is difficult for me, because the
people sitting back here, I have had a good relationship with, so I really don't like having
to butt heads with them. This is not particularly enjoyable. But I think the point is here
that I'm trying to say to the Mayor and to the Council that this is clearly a residential in
transition. If you look at Thousand Springs Subdivision or some of the others, okay,
they are going to be a subdivision today, they are going to be a subdivision tomorrow,
they are going to be subdivision as long as we are on this earth and probably beyond
that. This is different. Okay. This is going to be commercial. I mean that's guaranteed.
It's not if, it's when. And so what we are really asking is we are in a situation where in
order for Winston Moore to build a quality project such as that in there, what he needs is
for the Council to approve moving the building to the back with the parking up front.
would think, from my own personal perspective -- and, again, I know Mr. Sasser would
disagree with me -- I would much rather have that building in the back and acting as a
buffer, versus having potentially lights shining on my backyard.. And we heard that in EI
Dorado all the time, the glare and what have you. So, again, that's his opinion and
respect it. That, unfortunately, is not mine. But, you know, that's the way it is. So,
again, I think in summarizing this, what we are simply asking for is that you approve the
building back here, that you approve the alternative compliance, that you recognize that
this is a residential development in transition and when you're weighing the factors, they
are different than it is with your typical subdivision. And with that I will answer any
questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 31 of 70
Borton: Just one question. With regards to your comment about the parking in front
and behind and the development --
Seel: Yes.
Borton: -- as a whole, how do you reconcile that argument with the specific language in
the UDC that talks about -- and I'm quoting -- no more than 70 percent of the off-street
parking shall be located between the front facade of a structure and the adjacent street.
It seems to make reference to an individual structure, as opposed to the entire
development.
Seel: Madam Mayor, Council Member, I agree with that language. In fact, Anna and I -
-and, again, I hope I'm not putting you on the spot, Anna, but we had talked about that.
I think what I'm saying here is that if -- if we can do it this way, if you look at it in the
aggregate -- if we can go back to that one with all the buildings. Oh, that one. Okay.
All right. Hold on.
De Weerd: That has a lot of buildings.
Seel: Well, that's okay, I think I can address it. My point is when you look at Sterling
Bank, when you look at the aggregate along Overland Road, I think, then, we are
honoring it. The thing to keep in mind, too -- and I think as Councilman Bird asked --
you know, you have to keep in mind that as a retailer in that corner we have to compete
with the retailers further west. We have to compete with the retailers on front of
Majestic. So, when they come in and we say, you know, what, sorry, either got to -- you
know, you got to have it back here, guess where they go, they go down there. We have
to compete with them. We are in a real disadvantage. So, what I'm trying to do to is
say overall I think we are honoring that. I think we have really tried as much as possible
to put the parking on the sides. If you look at Taco Bell., it's the same way on Eagle
Road, and I think we will do that. So, I hope that answers your question.
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor. Yes. While you're here I will discuss a little bit of my
recollection of the Planning and Zoning Commission hearings on this, which were
extensive and lengthy. My recollection is that we agreed with the assessment that you
made that -- what residential is there is in transition and will be some day put to some
other use. Anna, can you do the concept plan. Or something similar to it? That's good
enough. That's fine. And at the time the discussions were that even though the long
future -- and the obvious long future is that this will change to being very similar to the
property that you're developing right next to it, the discussion is how would they have
access -- and what we -- what a lot of the discussion is how cross-access would
happen. One of the reasons that the Planning and Zoning Commission supported
making the buffer between your property and the current residential properties five feet,
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 32 of 70
instead of the required 15 or 20, I forget which, was the thought that eventually when
those properties redevelop it would be appropriate to punch through and cross-access
between your properties and those. This little piece we spent a lot of time on. It was
very difficult for you and very difficult for us. Part of your discussion was you really
couldn't put all that much into a landscape buffer there and have any developable
property.
Seel: That's correct.
Zaremba: The solution to that to me was -- and this is even before the UDC said
anything about whether buildings were forward or parking was forward. The solution to
that was specifically having the building be forward and having the parking behind it,
having nothing to do with the UDC, because it hadn't come into effect there, but to get
the building farther away from what is currently residence and for the future thought of
that landscape buffer may even go away at some time or parts of it may be punched
through and that parking being in the back of it is important for the cross-access and I
believe there was another spot up here where we asked for the same thing. So, I --
fhat's the way I remember the discussion going on at the Planning and Zoning
Commission about why the parking ended up in the back, even though the UDC hadn't
even been envisioned at that point. I still support that theory and I -- I will have to say I
want to hear the other testimony, but I'm leaning towards agreeing with the staff, I don't
really care whether that's one building or two, if it makes more sense to you to have it
be one building, that's fine. But I hesitate at your strong story that -- your strong
statement that if we can't put the building in the back we shouldn't approve anything.
I'm leaning towards what the staff has asked for is allowing it to be your choice of one
building or two, but I'm strongly in favor of keeping the parking in the back for reasons
other than the UDC that were discussed previously. That's not really a question, but --
Seel: Well, if I can --
Zaremba: Yeah. Please discuss.
Seel: Councilman Zaremba. You are correct, we did talk about access. We did talk
about access I recall and I -- you know, sometimes my memory can be a little bit off, but
I think I recall., particularly along here, we can't -- the difficult thing that I think we
struggle with at the time is we don't -- we do not own this. You know, at one time
believe Winston Moore approached Mr. Jim Boyd and Mr. Sasser, and we have also
made -- have approached Mr. Urus about selling their properties and they chose not to
and they are, obviously, entitled to that. We could, if we had to -- and depending on
what developed here -- and I think that's a wild card -- you could potentially put an
access point here. It does lend itself to that. Again, the other reality here is you may
very well have a development here that does not want to have access to it and that's
always the unknown. I mean this -- this may turn out to be an office building, for
example, or something there and maybe for whatever reason they don't. We have
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 33 of 70
encountered tenants that say, you know what, we don't want access to the lots around
us, we want our own secure parking. So, I think that's adifficult -- you know, that's a
difficult thing to know without having that crystal ball and., unfortunately, I don't have
that. So, could it be done? Yes, it could be done. You know, you could -- well, you
could potentially have access here, but that's not going to do you any good. What I'm
saying is right now is that -- and I don't want to misinterpret -- if Council decides not to
approve this back here, I'm just asking that you don't approve anything. I mean that in a
respectful way. I'm not -- I don't see any advantage to it. I don't see it benefits Mr. Nary
to take the time to modify the development agreement for us to go through it. So, I was
thinking of Mr. Nary's time, so -- so, that's what I meant. So, I don't mean it in a mean
way, so -- but that can't be done. Again, it's just the unknown of what's going to happen
here and when and we don't know. But it could be potentially done. But you're
absolutely right, we did talk about it, I did review the minutes beforehand, it was
discussed.
Canning: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any further questions from Council at this point? Thank you.
Seel: Thank you.
De Weerd: I did have one person signed up. Becky McKay signed up against.
McKay: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, 1029 North Rosario, Meridian. I have
been retained by Mr. Sasser, Mr. Gale Sasser and his wife, to represent him this
evening. Mr. Sasser thought that it would be better if I speak on his behalf. What he
wanted me to express to the Council is he is not in objection to the modification of the
development agreement from -- go from two buildings to one larger building. He thinks
that from a marketing perspective that that -- you know, that will help them. He's willing
to meet Mr. Moore in the middle and I think they are looking at this from a spirit of
cooperation. They, you know, didn't retain me to come here and bad mouth this
development, they wanted me to, you know, talk to the Council about the importance of
the fact that even though this is designated mixed use on Comp Plan, the fact is that
there is an existing -- there are existing residential uses in the development. Mr. Sasser
and his wife own this property right here. They have owned it for approximately five
plus years. His son Aaron and daughter-in-law Liz Sasser reside in the home with their
family. There are other homes on the Loder Street that are utilized for residential
purposes. And I was at the hearing that Councilman Zaremba mentioned and I believe,
if I -- my memory serves me correct, the Council made previous concessions by
reducing the required landscape buffer between differing uses -- I believe it was
supposed to be 25 feet and the Council went down to five, even over the objection of
the neighbors, and the Council said one of the things was that they looked at the
narrowness of this parcel here and they deviated from the UDC to help this
development out and, like I said, over the objections of the neighbors. But the
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 34 of 70
neighbors, obviously, accepted that, they continued to utilize these home for residential
purposes. I did have a conversation with Brad Miller. I know Mr. Van Auker has
purchased some homes on Loder Street. Brad Miller said I don't want to object, you
know, obviously, to them going from two buildings to one, we are in support of that, if
that makes this project more marketable. He said but Mr. Van Auker and myself felt
that we had an obligation to the existing residents on Loder Street to go on the record
as they object to the building being set five feet from an existing single family dwelling.
It is the desire of the Sassers that the building be up front along Overland Road. That is
an entryway corridor. The city has been promoting that -- I will wrap up here. And
think, you know, we .need to consider, obviously, the integrity of this subdivision, as long
as it's still residential. We need to look at -- Mr. Zaremba brought up interconnectivity.
It would be a travesty if this were to develop and the traffic had to come out on Overland
to get a cup of coffee and go back, if it were to be an office building. We ask the
Council to go ahead and modify from two buildings to one, but, please, do not allow the
building to be set right up against that property line. Five feet is so close and it will just
wall that home in. And Ithink -- and I would hope that the Council would look at that
impact. And, lastly, as a member of the development community, there are times that
we come before you and we test the waters and maybe we go a little further out on the
limb than we normally do and we always go, based on the premise, what is the worst
that could happen is the Council will say no. And if that does happen, we regroup, we
come up with other options, and get those creative juices flowing and we come up with
solutions. And that's why I asked you, please, do not allow them to set that parking lot
on the north edge of the subject property. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird.: I have none.
De Weerd.: This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to .provide
testimony on this application?
Thueson; Madam Mayor, my name is Greg Thueson, and Members of the Council. I
am the commercial real estate broker, I represent Mr. Moore in a lot of his marketing.
I'm also the broker of Quest and Company commercial real estate and I reside at 4263
Nystrom Way in Boise. But I am a salaried employee also of Mr. Moore. But I am
probably one of three marketing people that has the greatest involvement in marketing
space within the project for Mr. Moore. One of the difficulties that we continue to face is
-- throughout the city is marketing product for retail use that backs up against the street
without parking in the front and visibility in the front. Almost anyone will tell you from a
marketing perspective that they require the ability to see a retail store front, they like to
see signage, they like to see parking in the front door. And the way this facility is now
set and the way it was approved, makes it very difficult for us to find tenants and we
struggle with that where ever we see that type of a setup and the alternatives to going
the other route leave us a very long difficult strenuous journey trying to find tenants that
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 35 of 70
are willing to take the space and the market conditions and rates make it almost
impossible. There are alternatives to this use and the alternative may be coming back
and saying we may need to put fast food restaurants there with late night hours and we
may need to do other things, which may be not allowed. But, nonetheless, there are
other things that we will be faced to look at. There may be a larger sit down restaurant
or something like that. But t just wanted to go on the record myself, that it does really
make it very difficult to lease these buildings where they back up and if you can look
throughout the City of Meridian, and especially Boise, you will see other locations where
they struggle to keep tenants in buildings and keep businesses open where they back
up against the street, their front is away from the street, and with that I will sit down.
Thank you.
De Weerd: You know, Iguess I -- we do have some up against the street and certainly
the majority in Eagle are up against the street, so -- and I was just at one of those
businesses last week and they seemed to do very well. Iguess it's a difference of
location, what -- why is this location different than a number of others that tend to do
okay?
Thueson: Those areas that do okay generally have a very large population of retail
stores and they are a destination location where people can park and they can mingle
and walk from store to store to store and have many many choices. A case in point
would be a small building like this up on the corner of, for example, Eagle and Ustick
where Costa Vita -- and there are vacant spaces that have been there finished ready for
tenants for quite some time and they can't seem to find tenants who want to take those.
And that relates to this same problem and you can put large signage on the back of the
building, you can do a number of things, but you still struggle finding tenants who want
that. Every retail tenant we have wants two things. They want to be found, they want
signage., they want to be accessible to the customer who can see their space. So,
think Jonathan -- his remarks relate to the fact that if we -- if we can't do it this way, we
will have to go back and reconsider other types of businesses, other types of options
perhaps, so -- I'll answer any other questions if you have them. I have been leasing
space for the Boise market since 1983 and that has continually been a difficult struggle
to find tenants who are willing to go into a location where they back up against the
street. And it makes no sense to me, but the majority -- the vast the majority of retail
tenants. Thank you for your time.
De Weerd: Thank you. Sir. If you will, please, state your name and address.
Urus: My name is Bill Urus and I live on Loder Place. I am a neighbor, Madam Mayor
and Council Members, to Gale Sasser. I totally go along with the things there. There is
three points I'd like to bring up. Number one, the five foot barrier, number one, was kind
of a big change and really not debated change. I never got to say a word on it. Maybe
was asked and I didn't say something. That's my fault. Number two, you have got a
plan up there where right to the east you have two small buildings, but to the left you
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 36 of 70
can't put two small buildings? Think about it. Number three. When you buy a short
legged horse, you don't chase thoroughbreds. You have a small property, you make a
small development. And why should it be at the expense of somebody else to go ahead
and put something huge on there. Look to the east of there. There is two small
buildings. Why couldn't the big building go there and the two small ones go over to the
left. Think about it. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is --
Fazenbaker: Gary Fazenbaker. I live on Loder Place. I am directly across the street
from this development going to the left. I'd like to say that I just agree with the Sassers'
representative and Bill just kind of stole my thunder, because I was going to say if you
buy a piece of property and it's not competitive, then, maybe you're in the wrong market
with that property, maybe you should have planned ahead of time before you purchased
it or maybe you need to do something that's different now.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any further testimony on this item? Mr. Seel.
Seel: Jonathan Seel. W.H. Moore Company. I guess the first thing I'd like to do,
Madam Mayor, we talk about the success of buildings along here -- if I can. What
you're looking there at Boise and University where you see that Chalet Drive going
through, many years ago the city of -- the city of Boise asked -- this is a Ron Yonke
project, with the urbanism. And this is BSU over here -- asked that they put their retail --
required they put their retail right along the street and put the parking in the back. To
make a long story short, this piece of retail right now has been given to BSU and the
reason it's been given to BSU is because it can't lease. Bottom line. I mean there is --
there is a real life thing. You asked -- there is probably some retail that puts up front
that could be potentially successful, depending on what's around it, but here is the
situation where they basically walked away from it. I mean I don't think they necessarily
walked away, they donated it. I mean they were -- they are not dumb people. But this
is kind of an example of something that we are dealing with. You know, Becky said
something about -- and we do, we test the waters, we all do, she does, I do -- you come
in, sometimes you hear no and it's tough to take and you go back. The dilemma we
have here is that we don't have a lot of flexibility. We don't have a big lot where we can
put the building here or possibly put the building here or put the building there. We are
really, basically, back in. Yes, should we have realized maybe upfront when we bought
a piece of land and we are stuck with it, we should figure it out -- well, I guess we don't
have a crystal ball and sometimes we do make mistakes, but there is no sense if you
make a mistake of just sitting on it. What you need to do, then, is step back and figure
out what you need to do and that's why we are here tonight. So, that's why we are
presenting it the way it is. And we think it is a fair solution. I# gives us an opportunity to
develop something that's going to be successful and I think something that the
community is going to be proud of. So, you know, as far as the five foot buffer, Mr.
Urus, you know, on that, I guess I get a little bothered when people say I didn't have
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 37 of 70
time. He's noticed in the Public Hearing just like anybody else. He had the opportunity
to speak. I don't think it's any surprise. So, if it was, yeah, shame on him. I guess
that's really it. Again., we are simply asking you for your support. Yeah, we have got a
difficult lot and we are in a situation where we need to come up with a solution that's
viable and without it there is no sense building. The old saying build it and they shall
come maybe exists in the movies, but it certainly doesn't exist in this case. So, unless
there is any questions, I'll sit down.
De Weerd: Council., any questions?
Bird.: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Seel; Thank you.
De Weerd.: Council, we have heard the testimony and if you would have a need for any
further information from staff, have a need for discussion before I ask for a motion to
close -- what's your pleasure?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird.: I do have one question and what -- what we are suggesting is taking the store
front and turning it facing north and backing the back of the building up to the south of
the buffer? Put all the parking around there, so when you drive in you'll get to look at
the beautiful back of a building, like you do along Eagle Road.
De Weerd: Generally they are two sided.
Bird: Well, I tell you what, I thought I was looking at the front of it. That's coming into
the city. I disagree with you on the Eagle one about -- I hope -- and I know its
businesses will be successful, but it's not a pretty site to run by and see stucco -- with
nothing on it but stucco or something like that, no breakup or --
De Weerd.: Mr. Bird, I wasn't talking about the one on Eagle Road., I was talking about
most of the shops in the city of Eagle.
Bird: Your shops in Eagle. I could -- but you also -- they have got glass on it. If you go
down the old State Street. Or new State Street. They got glass showing -- their entry
might be on the side. That's my thing.
De Weerd: Council, anything further? Do I have a motion to close?
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 38 of 70
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: I move we close the Public Hearing on Item 11, MI 07-009.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 11. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Is there any discussion? If there is no discussion, do I have a motion?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: In light of the applicant's comments and public comments and it sounds like a --
kind of an all or nothing request, which is perfectly fine, while joining of the buildings
seem to be understandably appropriate, I respectfully disagree with at least how the
UDC is -- the specific letter of it and also the intent. I think when it states in between a
particular structure and the adjacent street, it speaks to the structure, not the entire
development, I really wrestle with that. I wouldn't want to create an opportunity in a --
with afuture development like this to allow the first unit or two to ask for parking up front
and suggest that maybe the next one will put it in the back to balance it out, it invites
trouble that I don't think we can rectify. But I don't read the UDC to allow it. I think the
concerns of the public mirror the concerns that the UDC intended to alleviate and I think
Councilman Zaremba recalled it -- recalled those concerns accurately and I tend to
agree with Councilman Zaremba and in light of the all or nothing approach, my
perspective would be to deny the miscellaneous application.
Zaremba: If that's a motion I'll second it.
De Weerd: I would suggest --
Borton: If there is no further discussion, I would move to deny Item 11, MI 07-009.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second on Item 11. Discussion? Mr. Berg.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 39 of 70
Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor, before you leave that one, does Council have any thoughts on
if there is a concurrent requirement for a Conditional Use Permit and the applicant also
requires a development agreement, is there -- do you have a preference as to which
one is conducted first?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would suggest doing it in this order. If the development agreement changes
tonight, there is no point in doing the CUP; is that correct?
Canning: I don't mean specifically for this project, I just mean in general.
Zaremba: No. I'm saying if it's a similar situation where they can't do the CUP without
changing the development agreement, I would do it in this order.
Canning: Okay.
De Weerd: This gives them an answer in a much more timely fashion.
Canning: Good. Thank you.
Item 12: Ordinance No. 07-1328 RZ 07-009 Request for a Rezone of
24.69 acres from I-L to C-G zone for Jabil Southeast by Joint School District No. 2 -
1303 East Central Drive (Portion of Lot 1, Block 1, of the Jabil Subdivision):
De Weerd: Ordinance No. 12 is 07-1328. I will ask Mr. Berg to, please, read this by
title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 07-1328, an
ordinance finding that the Joint School District No. 2, the owners of certain real property
have made a written request for rezone of zoning classification for real property being a
portion of Parcel A of Record of Survey No. 6631, situated in the southeast quarter of
Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A of this ordinance and rezoning certain
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 40 of 70
lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and within the corporate limits of the
City of Meridian, and rezoning the land use zoning classification of said lands from I-L to
C-G in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with
the Ada County assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and
providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date.
De Weerd.: You have heard the reading of this ordinance by title only. Is there anyone
who would like to hear it read in it entirety? No takers? Ralph? Council, do I have a
motion?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we adopt Ordinance 07-1328.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to --
Bird: Oh. Excuse me. Before I second it, suspension of rules?
Zaremba: Yes. With -- we have heard a reading and suspension of rules.
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: A motion to approve Item 12. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you,
please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea..
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 13: Department Reports:
A. Finance /Purchasing Department:
1. Request to Pull Bid for City Hall Building Project Ph. III
by Color Craft:
2. Update on Overall Effectiveness on Bidding Process:
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 41 of 70
De Weerd: Item 13 under Department Reports, we will start tonight's reports with the
finance department. Mr. Watts.
Watts: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Council Members. Tonight I have Wes Bettis
here from Petra to --
De Weerd.: Your time is up.
Watts: We have one of the bidders from phase three, the PI bid for the City Hall project,
is requesting relief. I have a letter from the company and I also have a copy of the
applicable statutes that I will hand out to you and., then, I'll let Wes describe the
situation.
De Weerd: Okay.
Watts: I will also let -- Wes will go over the overall project to date as well. He has some
information to hand out. So, Wes, why don't you come on up.
Bettis: Thank you, Keith. Mayor de Weerd, Council President Borton, Councilman Bird,
Councilman Zaremba, distinguished staff. For the record, my name is Wesley Bettis,
construction manager with Petra, Incorporated., 1097 North Rosario Street, Meridian,
Idaho. 83642. This evening we are here to discuss a request for relief on a bid that
was submitted by Color Craft, Inc. Last Tuesday evening as I stood here before you I
was asked if I was concerned about any of the low bids that came in and I replied I was,
but I had spoken with all of the bidders and they were willing to stand by their bids. No
sooner did we get into the office Wednesday morning that it came to our attention a
hand delivered letter that arrived Wednesday morning from Color Craft noting that they
had, in fact, found a material mistake and requesting relief from their bid. They did send
an a-mail to us late Friday or, sorry, Monday afternoon, that did not get into my hands
until, in fact, Thursday morning. By Idaho Statute Title 54, Chapter 1904(c), in asking
for relief from a bid there are three criteria that must be met. A material mistake must
be shown. Full detail of how this occurred must be presented and communication
directly to the public entity be made within five days of bid opening that the material
mistake was in place. There is no argument that conditions A and C of Chapter 1904
have been met. Unfortunately, it's the opinion of Petra, Mr. Bennett and myself, that we
did not receive the proper notice to the public entity within five days of the bid opening.
We have recommended forfeiture of the bond, the bid bond in the amount of five
percent of the total bid. In addition, we have handed out tonight an updated phase
three bid results that I have cleaned up. It's, hopefully, a little easier to understand. It
shows the correction on bid package number one where Suncrest Corporation replaces
Pacific Steel and Fabrication, which did not have a valid license at the time of bid and it
shows the correction for bid package 11, painting and wall coverings, with Commercial
Painting., the second low bidder, replacing Color Craft. I will stand for any questions.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 42 of 70
Bird: What was Color Craft's -- without having to look?
Bettis: Without having to look?
Bird.: No. For me having to look.
Bettis: Fifty-five thousand., I believe.
Bird: Fifty-five thousand?
Bettis: Difference.
Bird: Difference. Oh. Okay.
De Weerd: Difference.
Bird: That's what I -- I didn't think it was --
Bettis: Council President Borton, Councilman Bird, the amount of the bid -- I already
took it off my spreadsheet. 95,600, sir.
Bird: Was the low.
Bettis: They were 95,600. The next low was 151,275, which is Commercial Painting.
Bird: Oh. Okay. I was looking at number eight. Excuse me.
De Weerd: Council, I --
Bird: I thought it was less than a hundred and (couldn't -- I'm going, man, that's --
De Weerd: Any further questions, Mr. Bird?
Bird: No, I don't have any.
De Weerd: Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I guess the issue is if they have established that they are not able to perform
as they bid., then, we go to the next lowest bidder and that's not really a question. I
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 43 of 70
guess the question is whether the original low bidder is penalized for that error by
forfeiting the bond. Is that really the point that we are discussing?
Bettis: Yeah. Council President Borton, Councilman Zaremba, Idaho Public Works
contracting law requires us to take the low bidder, but offers these grounds for relief in
the event that those three conditions are met. Tonight's readdressing this issue is
specifically to note that we are evaluating all three of the conditions and making a
recommendation to Council to pass on the bid, take the second low bid, and
recommend from your construction manager to Council of forfeiture of their bid bond.. I
do anticipate an appeal from Color Craft if you do decide to forfeit.
Watt: Statute 54-904(c) actually requires them -- it states they shall forfeit their bid bond
if they don't meet all three requirements, which they have not. So, they may protest, but
according to the statute we are required to keep that bid bond for our services.
Bird': It's our discretion.
Watts: It says -- the actual wording it says: Bidders not satisfying the conditions found
in Section 54-1904(c) Idaho Code shall forfeit any bid securities.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I take it this is merely notifying us. I don't think you need formal action from us,
as I read the 1904 all saying shall and the report requires us to make those specific
findings, I don't think we have --
Watts: That was my interpretation, but I wanted to bring it before you and let you
interpret it and give us direction.
De Weerd: And certainly, Council, you do need to approve the --
Watts: The new bidder.
De Weerd: -- new bidder.
Watts: The new award.
Borton: Mr. Nary, is there some discretionary function we are missing or -- there is
nothing that indicates they attempted to provide it within five or were prevented in doing
so?
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 44 of 70
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Borton, I think the
recommended action is simply removing -- withdrawing -- allowing them to withdraw
their bid and going forward. I think the purchasing agent can make the decision based
on the statute. If they want to appeal, they certainly appeal that decision of his and.,
then, bring it forward to you.
Watts: Thank you.
Bird: Question for Wes or Pete.
Watts: Yes.
Bird: On Suncrest Corporation, now, they -- they weren't the low, we had to accept the
second, because the others were out of compliance with their license?
Watts: That is correct. And that was brought to you last week, actually, so --
Bird: Yeah. I knew that. I knew that. So, the only one that we got a reapprove is
Commercial Painting.
Watts: That is correct.
Bird: And Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve to enter into a contract with Commercial Painting
for the sum of 151,275 dollars.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Berg, would you,
please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Watts: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. The next item is an update on -- Wes had a few items to go
over as well with the overall and he has a handout.
De Weerd.: Is that the speaker there? The mike? We are going to take a break.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 45 of 70
(Recess.)
De Weerd: I will go ahead and open this meeting back up. Wes.
Bettis: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Council President Borton, Wesley Bettis still on the
record. We have handed out this evening -- and excuse my bad manners, I forgot to
acknowledge that the director of construction for Petra, Incorporated, Art Stevens, was
here this evening as Mr. Bennett was unavailable and out of town on personal
business. We have handed out to you a recap of the cost on this project, how they
have been developed, how we put them together from the concept in June of '06 when
we first met with the city's selection committee to this point after the phase three bids.
Each of these updates has been provided to the Mayor's building committee, as well
additional copies provided for distribution to Council. So, I hope that what you're seeing
isn't totally new to you. I think it's important as we run through here real quickly to note
that the first true budget that we were able to pull together was based on a 20 percent
design with the conceptual plan and some of the working drawings being started in
January of 2006. That was a 16.8 million dollar budget and it was the first time it
included the full basement, which took us from 80,000 square feet of the -- which was
where we were at in June of '06 -- to the 101,000 square feet that we are at today.
February 2006, with release of the 60 percent design, the budget increased by
approximately 400,000 dollars, which included an additional 1.6 million to reflect the
inclusion of the access floor system and the MEP systems with the engineer's
estimates, which were finally available to us. In April -- and, I'm sorry, these should be
2007, not 2006. April 2007 the budget rose to 18.2 million, an increase of
approximately one million dollars. This was when we discovered the groundwater
issues on the site. It included all of the increases to the mechanical electrical systems
associated with the handling of that groundwater, as well as it began to include some of
the additional finishes that were being brought into our vision, as well as yours. That
was also the completion of our bids for phase two. So, we were able to gauge the
market pricing at that time. With the bid closing of last week, we have forecast the
budget at 20.5 million. That's an increase of 2.3 million dollars over the April budget,
but I think it's important to note that in the April budget we showed 800,000 dollars in
value engineering., which I do not show at this time and the reason for that is we are in
the process of identifying all of these items that are available to present to you for
selection, whether you want to include them or not. There is some items that we are
moving forward on at the direction of the building committee, which includes having
raised the billing four foot in elevation to enable us to get out of the groundwater and
eliminate the dewatering expense. That is also changing the masonry pricing, as well
as it is changing the site work pricing, we believe all in a very positive way. Those
designs are complete and the subcontractor is in the process of pricing them at this
time. The new budget also includes all of the contaminated soil removal expenses,
including the additional construction management fee associated with bringing in John
Anderson ahead of schedule as the superintendent to closely manage and monitor that
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 46 of 70
work, so that we can get complete EPA and DEQ approval on that work. It includes a
200,000 dollar allowance for the extra costs associated with Leed certification should
you decide to go forward with that after the August 7th presentation and discussion. It
includes an additional 100,000 dollars for the IT server room HVAC and electrical
upgrades, which were unknown to us at the time we were putting the initial budgets
together. There are now more fixed walls after the department feedback from the
different departments as they laid out their work space from what was originally
anticipated in the design and what was presented by the design team. There is also
three times -- a 300 percent increase in the total lineal footage of cabinets and millwork
in the building after the department reviews from what the design team had showed on
the April drawings. What we have attempted to do with this budget is to give us the
highest budget that we could think of inclusive of all of the items, including the 1.5
million dollar budget for the plaza and community area, so that we have a starting place
to address the value engineering issues and work with you to make a good working
budget out of this project. I'll stand for questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Can you remind me of the concept you had in value engineering and that
reduction?
Bettis: Eight hundred thousand -- excuse me. Council President Borton, the 800,000
dollars was what we had derived at the time in February -- February 22nd that Mr.
Bennett had sat down with myself, with our consultants, the design team, and looked at
the different options that were available to us. We looked at potential savings on the
mechanical side, wet side plumbing, and the HVAC, just looking at changing some
possible equipment suppliers, alternative types of fan units to be able to push the air
effectively as its design. As well we only had one access floor supplier at that time and
a quote that scared the bajeebers out of us, quite honestly. Fortunately, that bid did
come in and we realized 300,000 dollars in savings in the phase three bids with the
alternate access floor supplier. We have looked the deleting the finishes in the
unassigned areas. Putting up bulkhead walls and cordoned those off, make them
accessible to staff for storage or other non-occupied uses, but not to finish them at this
time. We looked at changing the electrical distribution in those unfinished areas. We
looked at the deletion of the dewatering cost, which we now realized and will include in
the next update, the changes that that impacted on the excavation and structural
concrete. Any changes to the steel. We also even went so far as to look at deleting an
entire wing and leaving that as a future expansion. We, basically, looked at every
option that we could to give you, as decision makers, more options and more
opportunities to provide the leadership you do in your decisions.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 47 of 70
De Weerd: Any further questions?
Zaremba: No.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird?
Bird: I have nothing -- no questions, so let's do a very good job in providing for it and it's
more than I wish we had to spend, but that's -- we want a quality building and we -- I
feel that we are more paying for that access flooring is well worth the money. I think the
extras we have, I think it's a building. that we will be proud of forever. Fifty years from
now this will be functional. I think we could have -- and I'll put myself up front, you as
second., I think we could have put the thumbs on the departments a little more and my
plan was to have about 20,000 square foot to lease out and it seems like we took -- it
seems like we took everything out and that's our fault and I don't blame them, don't get
me wrong.
De Weerd.: I heard you. It's on the record.
Bird: I don't blame them at all. I just -- and, you know, the property being cleaned up,
nobody could foresee that. I think we are getting a heck of a building for that money
myself personally. I think it will be a beautiful building. I think it's -- I think will be classy,
that's what we started out to do.
De Weerd: Thank you. So, no other questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Just one other. And I don't see how it's broken down. You got a footnote on it.
What happened with the stand alone HVAC server. Is there -- I don't know what that
change -- how much we are talking about, but is there -- was there ever a time when
there wasn't a stand alone for the server room.
Bettis: Council President Borton, the server room was not identified as requiring a
separate stand alone HVAC system in the additional criteria. This came about -- and,
Mr. Watts, you may need to help me out here -timing-wise it was less than 30 days
ago when IT met with Mr. Bird and Mr. Watts, as well as the design team, said we really
do need, because of the number of servers we are going to have, we are anticipating on
having, we need a separately conditioned room. Now, with an access floor system and
the way that this building has been designed, more air could be delivered to this room in
atypical design and perform the same services. However, after reviewing it with the IT
department, they were adamant that they needed to have this additional air-conditioning
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 48 of 70
for their systems and so this has been added in. Our estimated cost is that 100 to 150
thousand. I put it in at 100,000, in my estimate. It's included in our phase three bids.
De Weerd: Anything else, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bettis: One last thing if I could, please. Just a quick update for you. I spent several
hours on site this morning with Superintendent John Anderson and after 30 years of
kicking around in this industry and 19 different states and some 87 different
communities developing projects, it's a real joy to be working with a professional like
John. He is a master at scheduling and by now he has this project moving along right
on task and he's making little subtle changes to keep that project on schedule and the
quality is exceptional, with incredibly good safety and I just want to pass that along from
my perspective, because it's fun to see.
De Weerd.: Thank you. That is greatly appreciated.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird.: I wasn't going to bring this up, but in our last Monday meeting -- I drove all the
way down from McCall this afternoon to see the steel swinging. I don't see any steel
swinging.
Bettis: President Borton, Councilman Bird, thank you for noticing. That's what I was
mentioning with those subtle changes in the schedule.
6'ird: I know.
Bettis: Mr. Anderson was able to see that by bringing the steel in this week he was
actually going to impact the masonry, so he spoke with the masons, the masons
stepped up, brought in an additional crew, you're going to have a 70 foot stair tower at
the north end of this project by the end of next week, the steel will come in unimpeded,
which will speed up the steel erection. So, fhank you for noticing.
Bird: I don't doubt that. I don't doubt that.
De Weerd: We appreciate that he --
Baird: But I drove all the way to see -- I wanted to see that steel swinging, see.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 49 of 70
De Weerd: Yeah. Please make an a-mail announcement of when it starts to swing.
Well, thank you for joining us here tonight.
Bird: Thanks, Wes. Thanks, Art.
De Weerd: Thank you, Art. Oh. Thank you, Keith. I guess was that the update on the
overall effectiveness on the bidding process? Hey, Keith Watts, was that update on the
effectiveness on the bidding process? Just checking.
Watts: Okay.
B. Parks Department:
1. Discussion of Parks Commission Recommendation on
Proposed Antique Market Event in Storey Park:
De Weerd: Thank you. Parks Department.
Huff: Must be this time of night. I can't read my own writing. We met with Arlee
Marsters on our last meeting at the parks commission about doing an event in Storey
Park. I think you have the paperwork included on that and what it was was an Antique
fair or antique show and sale event and she did a good job producing that and she gave
documentation on -- and letters of recommendation from where she had done it before
in eastern Idaho, as well as Hailey area. So, we looked that over and so did the
commission and forwarded that to -- on to Council for their approval. In that process,
since Doug left, I got involved a little bit and started looking at it and we spoke with
Emily Kane about it at length this morning and what we don't have for a profit event, for
for-profit events, we don't have an ordinance for that, and fee structures and other
things in place. We have an event deal that we use now that's situated for other things
and in speaking with Emily she felt like we would be better off to put an ordinance in
place, which she is working on, to make sure that we have ourselves well covered, that
we have the revenue we should get out of an event like that, and that all our ducks
would be in a row and that's what -- the direction I got from them today. I feel like it's a
worthy event. I feel like we should do it. It's just proper planning ahead of time enough
is okay. I'm within about 40 days of that -- when she wants to hold that event right now.
And so there is some logistical stuff, some stuff to work out with the speedway. The
other thing is to make sure that events don't clash. Those things I think are challenging
for us right now. And we don't have any way to charge for that. So, there is some
things that have to get into place I think before we do that kind of event. However, I
think it's going to be a good one. That's kind of where I am with it. Just one of those
things that's kind of come up kind of quick. She did put in her deal on what our existing
documentation, it's about 60 days ahead of time, and I did talk to her on the phone
today and we have not met to discuss anything yet on the upcoming project or met with
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 50 of 70
the speedway or any of those things that we need to get out of the way, we haven't
done that. We don't know, of course, how to figure out what to charge for an event like
that. So, looking for a little bit of direction from Council on that of what you think the
best thing that we should do in this case.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, some of the things that -- from the legal
department's perspective that we were concerned with -- and I think the direction, like
Mr. Huff is saying, is we are simply looking for the Council's direction to proceed and
seeing if we can get all of these I guess approvals done. At the discussion point with
the commission the applicant here hadn't had any discussions, to my understanding
from Mrs. Kane, hadn't discussed this event with Western Ada Recreation District and
the use of parking that would impact the parking around the pool. They didn't discuss it
with the Legion as to whether or not it would impact any use of the baseball field. And
she hasn't discussed it yet with the speedway or the dairy board., since this is a Friday,
Saturday, or Sunday event, on the impact to the parking. All she's done is come to the
parks department to basically use the park. She likened it, at the parks commission, to
the Dairy Days event. Significantly different kind of event, different in role for the city in
that type of event. The thing Mrs. Kane and (discussed -- and (think -- I had asked
Mrs. Kane to send Mr. Huff an a-mail today to simply advise the applicant that we were
discussing this with the Council and seeking your direction, to make it clear to her that
there is a lot of steps still to go. Mrs. Kane was concerned that at the Commission level
that the applicant seemed to be under the impression that maybe the parks commission
approval was enough. Even though the parks commission was very clear to her that it
was not the end of the approval process, but merely the beginning. But we wanted to
be sure that you were aware and if that's the direction that you want us to proceed., but
we do want to make sure that she has contact with all of those other affected entities,
because of the impact on the parks, the impact on parking around on a weekend and
this is in the second weekend in September I think.
Huff: It's in September, so there are still speedway events.
Nary: Yeah. So, there is still speedway events going on. We also want to bring a
license agreement with you. One of the concerns that we have is for the public's
perception of people using the city, the public's property, for a -- for a profit event and
we allow non-profits to use some of the -- some of the different grounds and the
concessions and things of the city at no cost to them, but for afor-profit event we were
concerned that -- of setting a precedent of allowing those types of activities by,
essentially, every type of sale, watermelons, fireworks, whatever, that we would have of
wanting to put on similar events in this park or other city property. So, we do want to
make sure we negotiate a license agreement. I'm hopeful that we can get that done in
the next five weeks with her, but we wanted to at least advise Mrs. Marsters that that
was your direction, that that's what we were trying to get accomplished and that she
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 51 of 70
would need to make sure -- bring assurances from all those different entities about the
impact to them and what their position was before the city ultimately approved this
event.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Elroy, where would she set up this number of booths in Storey Park?
Huff: She wants to go kind of like we were on picnic last week. You go from around
that shelter, closer to the pool, and, then, work right up through the -- right up through
the grass. She'll want to be on the --
Bird: Yeah. Is there room enough in there?
Huff: That's a lot. Yeah. If you could stretch it out or double it up you can get it in
there. It gets a little bit tight.
Bird: I mean some of these antique -- you can go to some of those deals -- if
remember right, she's had some over in Hailey, in that area. You need a big area.
Huff: We discussed that in the meeting about that site --
Bird: And if it's cut up, you got to -- you got your parking and everything --
Huff: She discussed all those.
Bird: She wouldn't want to go to Settler's, would she?
Huff: Well, we -- and we absolutely discussed that and what we -- what we asked her,
we said., you know, maybe next season. What we are going to do is where the big Oak
is in front of Settler's, I think we are going to grass that all up and bring that up to status,
that you can put anything out there, tents or whatever, around that tree and in that big
open area and there is parking close by. But that might be a better spot for her to be
that would suit her much better. Probably easier to watch and take care of at night,
maybe, than Storey Park. We did talk to her about that.
Bird: And another thing, when you set up tents and stuff like that and have traffic, which
I'm sure she will be getting a lot of traffic, it does damage your grass.
Huff: Yes. We certainly will have an issue with that. I think what I have an issue with is
-- a little bit is still the parking and that is is that you would be surprised how much
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 52 of 70
people in a good event like that will generate. I think we will get overrun, about like we
struggle with Dairy Days.
Bird: Wel{, yeah, parking -- you're going to go to the speedway parking is where you're
going to overflow and at Coriell's corner, which that would --
Huff: Well, Saturday, that --
Bird: And it really -- yeah, and it really -- it concerns me on Saturday if we can't work
something out with the speedway of having that traffic and foot traffic going through the
park with automobiles trying to get into the parking.
Huff: You have all those on the speedway parking.
Bird.: And it really is a concern. I think Teri Sackman in the letter Iread -- read from her
brought up a real concern as to who is going to be down there controlling the parking
and -- and all this kind of stuff. So, while I think it's a great event -- and Ihave -- I have
some real concern about a profit coming in and doing that, but, you know, I think it's -- I
think it would ideal if she got -- to be truthful with you, with Kenny Hamilton and put
inside the speedway where you would have parking and you could control it and have
the area. You could put it on the asphalt and you could put it in the infield.
Huff: Certainly some things to work out there. That's a tight spot.
Bird: I think it's -- personally, Elroy, I think it's something that would benefit this
community to at least try it.
Huff: I believe that's fine. I think it's a worthy event to have. It's just when and where to
have it with all -- everything in perspective and everything right is the key to the whole
thing. Anymore questions?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: In reading the materials I thought that it would be an excellent event for the
city and, hopefully, may be an annual repeat event. I do have the same concerns about
location, that there might be a better one than -- certainly from visibility Storey Park
would be excellent for them, but I don't think it has the space that we are talking about.
In thinking about the due diligence of the city, we -- for afor-profit event we would need
to think of possibly some extra police overtime for the presence at an event like this
and., then, there are some other expenses. Certainly the parks department would have
some cleanup and repair.
Huff: All those things we have bounced around, but haven't any dollar figure to it.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 53 of 70
Zaremba: So, you know, we do need to think through what the end results are going to
be and, of course, if we do it once, then, we will know what we need to change for next
year as well. But I would like to see it happen. I don't know if we can do it this fast.
Bird: Madam Mayor. I do have another idea I just thought about and so help me I
probably -- I'm thinking I'm going to get killed by about seven people. One of them is
sitting down at the far left. I don't know why we couldn't bring that into -- into the legion
field.. You could bring that whole show in there, it's completely controlled that way, you
still have the parking, but I think parking can be solved. That way you have got -- you
have got it contained in there.
Huff: They'd have a little better protection at night to be able to lock it up.
Bird: And better protection for them. I'm not on the board of the legion, so I can't --
Huff: We discussed that -- Doug and I discussed the possibility of that. However, you
know, we prize that legion field a little bit and don't like to do some things on it that is
going to tear it up. It's late in the summer --
Bird.: Nobody wants to hurt it, because I was the one out there helping pick up rocks in
1981 when you put it in.
Huff: So, we need to watch that a little bit.
Bird.: But I think use some control like that. I would sooner see it inside there and repair
the grass if we had to, then out -- scattered throughout the park. I think you have
problems.
Zaremba: Where the Van Auker property is west of Jabil that we are using for soccer
fields, is there enough area there, maybe?
Huff: Never thought about that.
Bird: That's -- the problem is there is the location. Storey Park is an ideal location
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: In light of all these concerns, which are right on the money, just make sure that
she doesn't get any impression that -- that it's a lock. I'd hate for her to spend money
advertising it when we are not --
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 54 of 70
Huff: I think even if we work on it, Councilman Borton, we get down to the end it's going
to get tight and for her to be able to get people signed up and get them here, because
she has to coordinate all that.
Borton: The Scarecrow Festival is six weeks later. I mean --
Zaremba: Might want to just encourage here -- encourage to plan on doing this next
year, instead of trying to get it in this year.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: .Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess if I'm reading you all correctly, if
we can -- we will make contact with both our office and the parks department with her to
explain to her certainly all the hoops that need to be done and either maybe give you a
progress report or bring back a finished product to you within the next five weeks. And I
guess I would say Councilmember Boston's direction clear -- clear to her that, you know,
before you can get approval we need all of these hoops done and that whether it's
putting it in a different location than Storey Park to get it done a little quicker or
whatever, but if that's okay with you, we will just work together with parks department to
make it clear to her what needs to be done so, again, she doesn't incur some cost
expense that's unnecessary and ultimately we can approve the project going forward
and that she understands what she needs to get done and at least helps facilitate that,
because there is a lot of -- as you all know, there is lots of different entities that have
pieces of that park that she needs to talk to and get some either approval or some
consent or something to get this off the ground.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I'd also add to that list -- I know there was a letter from the city of Hailey
saying that they have enjoyed the event, but we may want to ask the city of Hailey how
they covered themselves. What requirements they put on her and cost they charged
and --
Huff: I think Emily's done that already.
Zaremba: I beg your pardon?
Huff: I think Emily's done that already.
Bird: S'he's already got a million dollar policy as I understand; am I not right?
Meridian City council
July 24, 2007
Page 55 of 70
Nary: I believe that's correct. And the long term solution we are looking at is to bring
you an ordinance that would hopefully help solve most of these types of problems that
we could point to directly, that someone could be able to work through the parks
department or the clerk's office or whatever is necessary to get this done in a timely
manner.
Bird: I think it's fantastic.
Berg: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Berg: If I could address the Council. I just want to make it clear -- the struggles we had
in the years past before all of you were around, I guess. I'm the oldest one here -- was
using -- especially Storey Park, because it's a very visible park for profit businesses and
it was very much of a concern of who do you say yes to and who do you say no to and
things change and the box gets wide open and I just want to make sure that we have
some guidance somewhere to just say yes this or no to that. And I don't know what
those are right now.
Huff: Upon whatever criteria has to be met qualifies them to do the event. If they can't
meet that, then, they can't do it. That's what we have to have in place is that criteria.
Berg: Yes. And Iguess -- I think we have just got to be very careful about what that
criteria is and make sure we can uphold whatever decisions we need to make.. And
guess the other thing is not to impact those neighbors there. We have several events
that we do there and they are kind of community events and it impacts everybody, but
everybody plays part of the game. Something like this that I can see, because of that
location -- you know, every other weekend you could have something going on at that
site and you got to remember, we have got a nice playground there, we have anice --
during the summer the swimming pool -- there is a lot of activities that can go on at that
park. Maybe another park. Maybe different guidelines for different parks. I don't know.
I just think we have got to be careful about how we can say yes to some and no to
others.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, do we need a consensus or a motion to request staff to
spend some time on this?
De Weerd: Well, I think you have indicated your interest.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 56 of 70
Huff: You're welcome.
C. Fire Department:
1. Update on Fireworks Permit Process:
De Weerd: Thanks, Elroy. Fire Department.
Silva: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what we would like to do is provide you
with some feedback, a snapshot of the effectiveness of the -- when the fireworks
ordinance was passed Councilman Rountree had requested that we provide follow-up
on the effectiveness of the ordinance and., two, we wanted to provide follow-up on the
application and inspection process that the city undertook to put the fireworks vendors
in place. When we brought the fireworks ordinance in front of Council for consideration,
a couple things that were -- that were really -- we were very concerned about. On page
two of the report that I provided you, in the upper section there, illegal fireworks
complaints on July the 4th. What we were seeing was a troubling trend in terms of state
-- or, excuse me, countywide -- we have gone from 165 complaints to 362 complaints
with the abuse of illegal fireworks in our community and that's why the fire department
brought that concern or that ordinance in front of Council for consideration. We were
also concerned of the misuse and careless use of legal fireworks and injuries that may
occur to individuals within our community. We feel that this -- passing this ordinance
was, in fact, a success due in part to the media attention that was generated as a result
of our new ordinance being put in -- being put in place, as well, as some cautious use of
legal fireworks within our community by our citizens that didn't cause us to have any
unusual fire events and I will kind of elaborate that here in a couple minutes. Also, the
city of Boise undertook a Public Works display at Ann Morrison Park, which attracted a
large gathering of folks that helped also I think deal with the abuse of illegal fireworks.
They chose -- a lot of people chose to go down there and take -- undertake a public
fireworks display versus buying their own fireworks. With that being said, what I'd like to
do is quickly give you a snapshot on the first page of the fire experience that the
Meridian Fire Department had compared to other agencies and cities throughout the
Treasure Valley. First of all, we will kind of look at Boise's experience. We had 13 fires
in the city of Boise attributed to fireworks. Some significant events. First of all there
was a house fire that did 25.,000 dollars fire -- 25,000 dollars damage to the dwelling.
Illegal fireworks were definitely the source of ignition there with retrieved -- we retrieved
bottle rockets off the roof or off the undamaged portion of the roof. They also had a
three acre grass fire that was set out over the desert and when that fire started they
quickly left the area and left their bottle rockets when they did leave the area. So, it was
definitely attributed to bottle rockets in that area. Eagle fire had small -- four small grass
fires. Kuna had three grass brush fires, all less than five acres, but the concern there is
-- as we have seen in the current vegetation and the actions that the governor has had
to undertake to declare a state of emergency in certain portions of our community in our
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 57 of 70
state, that even a fire five acres or less can spread very rapidly to the community that
threatens the community. Meridian had only three fires here attributed to fireworks.
One illegal and two legal, but only did a hundred dollars damage to a fire -- excuse me -
- to asprinkler system. Also, we had a significant reduction in the number of complaints
we had in our community. Last year, referring to that page two real quickly, we had 246
Complaints of illegal fireworks during the sales period from June 23rd to July the 10th,
as compared to 102 this year. That equals a 49 percent reduction in the number of
complaints of illegal fireworks in our own community. Nampa had six fires attributed to
fireworks, one of which was a balcony at an apartment house that caught fire as a result
of a bottle rocket that landed on the balcony causing 4,000 dollars damage that burned
not only the part of the structure, but the combustible patio furniture out on the deck.
They had two children that were injured as a result of -- in separate incidents as a result
of playing with fireworks that had to be treated at West Valley, in addition to a 43 year
old gentleman who was treated for bums. Those injuries were all treated at West
Valley. Caldwell had seven fires attributed to fireworks, two legal -- excuse me -- two
illegal and five legal. One of the most significant incidents during the July 4th holiday
was Middleton fire department, which we previously have not included in our study, but
they had 14 fires attributed to fireworks, the most troubling significant event they had
was a 135 acre grass fire that at one point threatened 34 structures within their
community. So, it was a very serious concern and not with the fire experience that
these agencies had., but also our own ER at St. Luke's -- St. Luke's between downtown
and the Meridian facility, treated three fireworks related injuries during the July the 4th
holiday. So, essentially, that's what we did on the fire experience. We also undertook
some neighborhood patrols to further confiscate fireworks off the street. During that
process we did two four hour patrols on July the 3rd and July the 4th. We made 39
contacts with the community at that point between myself and Inspector Bowers and
worked basically the west and east portions of our community to try to confiscate illegal
fireworks where they were being used. The second part of our report really captures
what we did in terms of our staff hours and, basically, the inspection process to get the
fireworks vendors up and running it took 22 hours of staff time to inspect all the facilities.
That included inspections that were conducted on the 3rd and the 4th of July to insure
that the approvals that we provided up front were, in fact, the rules they were abiding by
when -- on the 3rd and the 4th. So, we did -- we did follow up with those -- a few stands
to just insure they were still abiding by the rules we had approved -- or I should say the
stands that we approved in the first place. The neighborhood patrols took 16 hours of
staff time and this last statement is the amount of time devoted to developing the
ordinance with the other fire departments, the vendors, and city staff, including legal and
city -- and working with the city clerk's office in getting the ordinance prepared for
consideration by the City Council. There was approximately 70 hours of staff time
devoted to that. When we looked at after the season -- after the fireworks season of
some of the things that we could improve for next -- for next year's fireworks season, we
met with the City Clerk's Office, the Legal -- the Legal Department represented by Mr.
Nary, Code Enforcement, the Building Department, and the electrical division and what
we determined is the fact that there could be some things undertaken to clean up and
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 58 of 70
modify some things in the application and also to -- to do some things on the electrical
side to insure electrical safety and insure that all circuits and DFI protected, among
other things, making sure that proper sources of light are used that are not going to
cause problems within the stand. So, we will be also providing a handout to the
vendors to insure that they have the information available, the inspection criteria, and a
one page summary of information to help them with the inspection process. So, that's,
basically, the follow-up on the process and the inspections that we did with respect to
the vendors in processing applications. We were -- with all of that being said, hopefully
those are -- addressed your concerns with respect to what -- our fire experience, our
relative success of the ordinance and also what we do do and -- what we intend to do to
improve the process come next year. When we proposed the ordinance and the fire
chief made a presentation and I made a presentation, a couple of things we were very
adamant about was the -- the -- not one to have the public have general access to the
product before the consummation of the sale. Two, we wanted to limit the size of the
stand and there was a story that came out of the national -- it was on the national news
out of Tampa, Florida, where those things didn't work out and I want to show a short
video clip fhat may demonstrate the importance and why we stood behind those things
and requested that the Council consider a very controversial ordinance. So, with that if
could ask Anna -- Mayor and Council, it seems that we are having a little bit of a
technical problem with this. What l would like to do is I will a-mail you that video clip so
you can view it at your leisure, just so you have got a -- will see the importance of not
having the public have general access to the product, as well as limiting the size of the
tent. And with that -- we had doubled checked that prior to, but this might be part and
parcel to our -- the trouble with our mikes this evening. Mayor, with your permission, I'd
like to just a-mail that to you, so you could view it at your leisure.
De Weerd: That sounds good, Joe.
Silva: With that I will stand for any questions should you have any.
De Weerd:: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor. I want to thank you for all your work on the subject and
protection of our citizens on the highest level. I appreciate that. Is there any -- does the
city try and recover -- if we know a fire was started by illegal fireworks and even if it only
did a hundred dollars damage, is there any effort to recover from the perpetrator the
cost of sending the fire crew out or charge them for our response or somehow penalize
them?
Silva: Yes. Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Zaremba, yes, we do have a
provision available for that. We -- mostly -- the longest duration incident that we had
that we responded to was 29 minutes and, quite frankly, when you look at the cost of
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 59 of 70
the -- the internal billing cost of that, if it was a more prolonged incident we do have that
ability to capture that. Also, there is a provision in there that the parents are held
responsible for any damages that may result. So, any significant fire, obviously,
because of the city code we adopted, we would be able to -- the owner would be able to
go back on that -- on that person who carelessly used those fireworks.
Zaremba: Great. Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions, Council?
Gorton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd; Yes.
Gorton: It's not a question, but it's a resounding thank you to Joe and his department for
what you have done, not only enforcing the ordinance, but providing us feedback and
having a desire to make improvements where necessary. And thank you goes out to
Will, the city clerk's office, Bill and the legal department, and Bruce -- got all these
reports to show the facts, but to improve it going forward. So, that's exactly what we
asked for.
Silva: Yes. And before I forget, Mayor and Council, on behalf of the Meridian Fire
Department we would like to thank you for your support of a very controversial
ordinance. It's allowed Meridian to take the lead on this issue. It's not only important to
the community of Meridian, but also the other Treasure Valley cities. And certainly one
thing I failed to mention, but I will at this point, that the agencies, quite frankly, didn't
have enough time to process and go through the hearing process. It's still in the cue
with the city of Boise, Nampa and Caldwell, to the best of my knowledge, to be put in
place.. But it will, again, be up to those elected officials whether or not they want to go
there. But I thank you on behalf of Meridian Fire Department for your support.
De Weerd: Well, add planning and police in that, too, just so you don't feel left out.
She's too tired to care.
Nary: And Public Works.
Silva: All joking aside, Mayor and Council, we did receive a lot of support from the
building department, planning department, the police department, legal department a
lot, and the city clerk's office. All those departments worked with us to make it work and
I would like to thank those departments, as well as Council.
D: Public Works Department:
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 60 of 70
Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Meridian,
Shepherd's Creek ,LLC and Tuscany Development, Inc. for 27
inch Sewer Trunk from Linder Road to Stoddard Road:
2. Reimbursement Agreement between the Citv of Meridian and
Linder 109, LLC for 27 inch sewer trunk from Overland Road to
Linder Road:
3. Reimbursement Agreement between the City of Meridian and
Linder 109, LLC for 27 inch sewer trunk from Overland Road to
Ten Mile Road:
4. Memorandum of Understanding with Sunrise Rim, LLC to Build
Water Main and a Dry Line Sewer to their Development:
E. Legal Department:
1. Discussion of Arts Commission Quick Funding Grant for Take
Part in the Arts Event:
2. Discussion of Draft Ordinances for Mayor a
De Weerd: Thank you. If there is nothing further, Council, we will move to the legal
department, since Public Works seemed to delete all of their items. Thank you, Len.
You're the favorite guy tonight.
Nary: Gee, thanks. Thanks. Boy, that's hard to follow. Madam Mayor, Members of the
Council, one of the items on discussion is the Arts Commission quick funding grant. At
the last arts commission meeting Commissioner Rountree -- Nancy Rountree is the
chair of the subcommittee on grant funding and there is an opportunity for what's called
a quick funds grant through the state and they would like to seek that -- those funds to
help with an event that they would like to put on in the fall called Take Part In The Arts
Day. What the objective is is, one, we wanted to bring this in front of you tonight,
because the ordinance requires that for any grant funding they must seek your approval
prior to going out to get the grant funding. They will have to bring it back if they actually
secure it with all the -- with all the requirements to work with the finance department,
make sure they follow the finance policies, but they wanted your direction that they
could go ahead and seek that type of funding and, then, hopefully, within the next month
or so the commission would like to also come and give you an update on the activities
they have been working on, the different events they are looking at. This particular one
specifically, some of the other actions that they have been taking as a commission, and
give you a full presentation by -- I guess we can have a longer meeting now -- a full
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 61 of 70
presentation by the Commission, but tonight they want to do that, because there was a
time -- a window of opportunity to do this and they needed your approval to do that.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: It sounds fantastic to try for it now, unless you have got some idea of why there
might be a concern. I think let's do it.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Borton, we don't. I think
it is a good -- I think it's a good opportunity, they just need your -- your folks' permission
to go forward and, again, they would have to bring it back to you before we could finally
approve it.
De Weerd: Do we need a motion?
Berg: I move we unplug David Zaremba's laptop computer.
Nary: No. If your direction is to go forward, again, you will have the final approval, so
you will have that.
Bird: Get it going.
De Weerd: Sounds like get it going. Council, in front of you you have -- on your
computer --
Zaremba: Yeah, we did. The noise stopped when I -- it diminished when I turned it off
and stopped entirely when I unplugged it.
De Weerd: Way to go. We appreciate you being proactive.
Zaremba: I wish I would have discovered that an hour ago.
Bird: My ears are still ringing.
F. Mayor's Office:
1. Pine Street School House Request:
De Weerd: In your packet you had information about the request for the Pine Street
school house. I guess I am seeking your direction on this request. Now, the request
shows the total expenses and that's not necessarily the intention of the school district to
request, they are asking for help in the site that the school -- the school is being moved
Meridian City Council
July 24, 20Q7
Page 62 of 70
to and so any of that amount that you would be willing to help offset would be greatly
appreciated..
Bird.: The 65,000 -- Mayor, I think that's what it was. Bottom line 65,000.
De Weerd.: Yeah.
Borton: At the request of the district did we help fund some or all of that?
De Weerd: Yes. They have the moving expense -- the moving expenses covered.
This would be kind of the hook up, the foundation it would sit on, some of the finishing
work to -- to present the school.
Bird: Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Without having that in front of me again, but I seen something in there by the
construction company -- and don't get me wrong, I don't blame them, but they had
something like almost 11,000 in profit and overhead. I don't know if we are talking
about the same project or not.
De Weerd: Council, what I could do is --
Bird: Put your foundation in and stuff. And I don't like somebody to say, you know, help
us what you can. I'll give them 65 cents of something like that. I like to know how much
they want.
De Weerd: Well, Iwill -- after exec session I will grab it from my office. I didn't bring it,
because it was to be right in front of you. It was in your packet.
Bird: It was? It's right here.
De Weerd: Uh-huh. It was in your packet.
Bird: General conditions, overhead, and profit, 10,650.45. I just can't believe that no
one -- that construction company -- they take a lot less than that, because of their --
De Weerd: Mr. Berg -- and any amount -- in fact, there was some amounts that would
clean up the property it's sitting on, which would not be something the city would feel a
responsibility for, but I guess what the superintendent has requested is to look at those
costs and to help offset the cost of -- for the site that the school would be moving to and
since you knew more about the construction than I did., I thought maybe you would feel
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 63 of 70
comfortable dissecting those out. Now, I could with a good guess, but I decided I would
not go there.
Bird: I would be glad to sit down with Bennett. I mean I just -- I hate somebody to come
in and say, well, give me what you can, because they know an amount they want. They
know what they got to --
De Weerd.: Well, then, they would love the whole amount.
Bird: I know that. I absolutely know that. But, then, also I can also look back on this --
and Iknow it's not probably right, but there has also been done before -- give me a bid
of what you'd charge me to do this, so I can take it and get this guy to pay it and you're
only going to charge me half. I'll get half from them and, then, I don't have to pay
anything. And I know that's not what's being done. But, anyway, let's find out what they
need and what they want. We made a statement in 1993, the city did, along with the
school district, that we'd maintain that school. Well, it's sitting on two nice of property to
be staying there. The school district had found a nice property. I believe we need to
help finance it.
De Weerd: Well, Council, it sounds like Councilman Bird knows this industry and
perhaps he can get with the school district, dissect out what they would appreciate our
help with and bring it back to Council.
Bird.: Do you want me to get to Wendell Bigham? Is that who you want me to talk to?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: I will be glad to. But it's not going to be this week.
De Weerd: No. We don't meet again for another --
Bird.: Three weeks.
De Weerd: -- three weeks. So, we can -- we can bring this back on the 14th.
Bird: You know, I know most of you don't know the history, but we -- the city and the
school district put that up in '93, that was one of our projects as the centennial and I feel
that we are obligated to help the school district move it there. They have given us the
ground to put it back on, so -- and it's something that our children have truly enjoyed.
De Weerd: Uh-huh. Well, Mr. Bird, if you don't mind doing that, we will just reset it in
three weeks.
Bird.: I will see how much we can get -- how much we need.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 64 of 70
De Weerd:: Okay.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: And I just want to point out, this Council did have a discussion back in February.
I did located the minutes -- about this particular issue, on February 27th, about the
moving and Mr. Bigham was here at that particular time and at that particular juncture
they thought all of this stuff was donated and that's what was stated to the Council, that
-- because if you recall, the Planning and Zoning Commission directed that this be part
of a development agreement, so it would be moved prior to the rezone of the school
building, and you folks were concerned about this move and so that was what they had
stated at the time. Obviously, there has been some change, so I just wanted you to
know you have had this discussion with them before, but it might be better if they
actually came specifically to talk about that.
Bird.: That's why I was quite shocked when I got to seeing that bid, I'm going --
De Weerd: Me, too.
Nary: Yeah. It was February 27th was the discussion, so --
Item 14: Ordinance No. 07-1331 :Garage Sale Ordinance:
Item 15: Ordinance No. 07-1332 Mayor and City Council
Compensation Amendment:
De Weerd.: Well, there is a couple different ones, so you're just following my lead.
Ordinances 14 and 15 -- actually, I will just split them out. Counsel -- yes.
Nary: Madam Mayor, actually, Item 15 -- there are two ordinances.
De Weerd: Yeah. Fourteen and fifteen.
Nary: No. No. No. Of the Mayor and Council compensation, there is two different
ordinances. So, I'm not sure why they are combined in one title, but there is actually
one for the Mayor, because it's a different section of the code, one for the Council. The
revised ordinance that's in front of you was your direction at the -- for the Council one
was to not have an increase in it and the Mayor one was the increase that was
recommend by the citizens' committee, but there is actually two different ordinances that
you should have. So, I would recommend that you pass them by separate number, so
that you can find them separately.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 65 of 70
Bird: Well, yeah. The one would be 07-1331 and one is 1332.
Nary: And I show I sent it back on the 18th of July to Mr. Berg's office, but I notice that
I forgot to send it to him. But I did send it to the other staff. Don't know how it got
combined into one, but there is actually two.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would just make a comment and {'m sorry I was absent during the meeting
where this was discussed more thoroughly, but I'm comfortable with the City Council
compensation staying the way it is. I would just like to make a comment for the next
deliberation on the Mayor's compensation that I would like to propose that sometime
that it go to a scale that would be something like a dollar per citizen according to
Compass's most recent estimate and corrected every decade by the census. And that
would allow the Mayor's compensation to increase without a new ordinance, keeping in
pace with our growth. And I think that actually today would mean 71,000 dollars a year,
if that's the latest number. Well, that's actually the April Compass estimate of our
population. And I'm not proposing that we rewrite this ordinance, but I'm just -- I'm
throwing that out as a suggestion for maybe next year's ordinance, that some
consideration be given of just tying it to the population, making it a dollar per citizen
according to some measure and letting it grow that way.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird..: Mr. Zaremba, that isn't a bad formula, except Iwant -- I want the report -- the
revenue sharing the state gives us, which is about 10,000 different from what Compass
gives us. Compass goes off of -- off of building permits. Well, go drive through the
subdivision and see how many empty buildings you have got. You got 24,000
registered voters. That's say how many families, 15, 16 thousand. I -- I would be more
in favor of paying somebody off of what we are paid for revenue. The state pays the
revenue off of what they consider is our population, than what somebody guesses.
Zaremba: Is that a smaller figure or a bigger figure?
Bird: It's smaller. I wished it was bigger.
Zaremba: Well, I would be inclined to --
Bird: Compass likes it larger, because that pays -- that's dues.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 66 of 70
De Weerd: Commerce will say that's also 2005 numbers.
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Just to clarify it, so --
Zaremba: Just a comment.
Bird: That's -- and it's not a bad formula to look at.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd;: I think that's what we tried to do when we raised it a number of years ago.
Tried to find a formula, so it did --
Bird: We were all over the board..
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Nary: The ordinance contemplates that we will have another citizens committee in a
couple years and we will certainly bring all of those types of proposals. I just -- for all of
your folks, I guess, peace of mind, every city struggles with this. I don't know that every
-- any city has any magic formula. If they did, everybody would do it. You know, the
city of Eagle has a population a third the size of the City of Meridian and they just raised
their mayor's salary to 74,000. Nampa has a population that's almost the same as the
City of Meridian and they just raised their mayor's salary to 80,000. Caldwell was half
the size of Meridian and their mayor makes 70,000. I mean they -- every city has some
methodology that probably makes sense to them. Certainly, Councilmember Zaremba,
what you propose is just as valid as everything the Committee tried to do in figuring out
percentages versus -- my only concern is -- I guess from the human resource side, is
that if -- we need to figure out a logical way to make some sense to salaries and the
Mayor -- in my position -- in my -- my feeling is the mayor position is no more -- no
different, other than the elected nature of it, to at least evaluate in regards to what the
duties and responsibilities are. You have to factor in the elected nature of it. I think that
is a reality of the position. But you still have to factor in the duties. One of the things
the committee weighed and decided not to consider is what city managers and city
administrators of other cities do. The Mayor of our city has similar responsibilities that
city administrators do in other cities. There isn't a city administrator that I could find in
the state of Idaho that makes less 104,000 dollars a year. I picked the wrong profession
to go into myself, because that's -- but that's the nature of that business. Again, I
recognize for Mayors it's not exactly the same, there is a little difference, but we
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 67 of 70
certainly will put all of those things and all the input from the Council is valuable to help
the committee put some sense around it, so that we can make it fair to the Mayor, make
it fair to the citizens, make it fair to you as a Council, so that you can have some
objective information. So, I appreciate what you're doing and, again, I don't think there
is any one thing that's better than another, so --
Bird: And I'd only add one thing to that is -- Washington D.C. is the lowest paid
executive is the president of the United States.
Nary: He gets a plane. And a pretty big house.
Bird.: We give our Mayor a car.
De Weerd: Will you give me a house?
Bird: Even if it's a miniature.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird.: Anyway, let's read the -- if we don't -- do we have both ordinances?
Nary: You should.
Bird: In hard copy?
Berg: I don't.
Nary: I can go print it if you would like.
Bird.: Is it going to hurt if we don't do it until --
Nary: No. You have to do it 75 days prior to the election, which would be early --
Berg; Into August.
Nary: It would be -- yeah. The end of August.
Bird: But we need to get it in, though, before the 28th of August.
Nary: It's already in the budget.
Bird: It's in the budget, but we should have it --
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 68 of 70
Nary: So, if you want to send it over for your -- either your Consent Agenda for April 7th
-- or, excuse me, August 7th, or your regular agenda for August 14th, you will be within
the time period required by the statute.
Bird: I'd say let's go for our regular agenda on the 14th.
Berg: Madam Mayor -- and I guess I was expecting two ordinances, because I think
there was some massaging on the City Council and it wasn't I guess in complete form or
assurance for the Mayor, so I was expecting two separate redone ordinances, so I could
do my formatting.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Berg: And I haven't seen it, so -- I'm sorry.
Nary: I just sent it to you.
De Weerd: Well, I suggest that the ordinance 07-1329 for garage sales --
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: Can be read by title only and we will skip Item 15, bring it back on August
14th.
Bird: Okay with me.
De Weerd: It's too quiet without the buzz.
Berg: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Ordinance 07-1329, an ordinance of the
City of Meridian amending Chapter 4 of Title 3 of the Meridian City Code, relating to
licenses for vendors, peddlers, and solicitors and amending -- excuse me -- and adding
a new section to Chapter 2 of Title 4 of the Meridian Code relating to garage sales.
De Weerd: You have heard this read by title only. It was a short one. Is there anyone
who would like to hear it read in its entirety? I don't see any. Do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 07-1329, with suspension of rules.
Borton: Second.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2087
Page 69 of 70
De Weerd: I have a motion to approve on Item 14. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg,
will you., please, call roll.
Rolt-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 16: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(b) - (to consider
the evaluation, dismissal or disciplining of, or to hear complaints or
charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or
individual agent, or public school student):
De Weerd: Item 16 is an Executive Session. Do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(b).
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird., yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Bird: So moved..
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Motion to adjourn.
Bird: So moved.
Meridian City Council
July 24, 2007
Page 70 of 70
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE A68ENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:12 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
MAYOR T Y de WEERD`,,.~~,~~d ~,,~~~/
TAO
~ Q
.,~ Il;~
~~~~~>>iirti n~~~~~~~~~~
~ , 28, ~~
DATE APPROVED
,~
G. BERG JR., C Y LERK