HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 01-22Meridian City Council Meeting January 22, 2008
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:40 p.m., Tuesday,
January 22, 2008, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird., Charlie Rountree, Joe Borton
and David Zaremba.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Jeff Lavey, Joe Silva, Len Grady,
Steve Siddoway Kyle Radek, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Joe Borton
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I will go ahead and open tonight's meeting and, first, with an apology of
making you all wait. Certainly our discussion went a little bit longer than anticipated, but
thank you for bearing with us. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
Mr. Berg.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: Jack & Mike Borton
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 2 is our pledge of allegiance. Tonight we will be
led by Pack 62 and we have Jack and Mike Borton with us and their colleagues. If you
will -- do you want to come up to the microphone and if you will all rise and join us in
the pledge.
(Pledge of allegiance recited.. )
Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter with Treasure Valley
Worship Center:
De Weerd: I would like to -- Mike and Jack, since you led us tonight, I do have City of
Meridian pins I'd like to give to you. Thank you so much for leading us. Okay. Item No.
3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor Gordon Slyter. He's
with the Treasure Valley Worship Center. If you will all, please, join us in the invocation
or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Pastor.
Slyter: Let's pray. Almighty God, we thank you for this day that you have given us.
We thank you, again, for the privilege of living here in this wonderful city, the many
blessings you have given us, and we thank you for those who have not only been
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 2 of 101
elected, but have chosen to serve our city. We pray that tonight you would give them
wisdom, that your hand would be upon them, each decision that is made, all of the
discussion that is offered., would you, please, oversee it according to your sovereign
goodness and providence. Thank you for those things we pray, and giving you praise
for all of the privileges we share as citizens of the United States of America, we pray in
the name of the Lord Christ, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you, pastor. Item No. 4 is the adoption of our agenda.
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I hope I have got the current one. We have Item B on the Consent is resolution
number 08-596 and we'd like to -- under department reports, Item E, which would be
Council president, the appointment of liaisons, and -- oh, I'm sorry. Under Item 5 on the
Mayor's -- the resolution number is 08-597 and ordinance number on Item No. 9 of the
regular agenda is 08-1343 and Item 11 is 08-1344 and Item 21 ordinance number 08-
1345 and 22 is 08-1346 and Item No. 23 will be an Executive Session as per Idaho
State Code 67-2345(1)(a). With that, Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the
agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as amended.
All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRGED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of November 20, 2007 City Council Regular
Meeting:
B. Approve Minutes of December 11, 2007 City Council Special
Meeting:
C. Approve Minutes of December 20, 2007 City Council Special
Meeting:
D. Approve Minutes of January 8, 2008 City Council Regular Meeting:
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 3 of 101
E. Resolution No. CPA 07-012 Request for
an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map
to change the land use designation from Low Density Residential to
Commercial for Strada Bellissima Commercial by Strada
Bellissima Commercial, LLC -Northwest Corner of Meridian Road
and Victory Road at 114 and 156 West Victory Road (Lots 2 & 3,
Block 2, Strada Bellissima No. 1 Subdivision):
F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval.: CUP
07-016 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for 171 multi-family
dwelling units in an R-4 zone on a ten acre site located within the
Lochsa Falls Planned Development for Selway Multi-Family
Development by J-U-B Engineers -west side of N. Goddard
Creek Road, approximately 500 feet north of McMillan Road and '/
mile east of Ten Mile Road:
G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 07-
014 Request for a Rezone of 30.08 acres from R-8 to C-N (13.59
acres) and TN-C (16.49 acres) zones for Cavanaugh by Kasterra
Development, LLC -Southeast Corner of South Meridian Road and
East Victory Road:
H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 07-
015 Request for Preliminary Plat for 518 lots consisting of 443
single-family residential building lots.; 1 residential building lot
consisting of 32 apartment units; 8 residential building lots
consisting of 61 future condo units; 4 mixed use lots consisting of
commercial retail on the 1St floor with 12 residential lofts on the 2"d
floor; 9 commercial building lots, 1 school building lot, 1 civic/social
hall lot, 46 common lots and 5 other lots on 177.43 acres in C-N,
TN-C, TN-R and R-8 zones for Cavanaugh by Kastera
Development, LLC -Southeast Corner of South Meridian Road and
East Victory Road:
I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
07-017 Request for a Conditional Use Permit approval to convert
the existing Caven home into acivic/social hall in an R-8 zone for
Cavanaugh by Kastera Development, LLC -Southeast Corner of
South Meridian Road and East Victory Road:
J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 07-
012 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RUT
to C-G zone for Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties,
cou~~~~ orth Eagle
Meridian2 ~ 2005 Corner of N
Janua4 of 101 Northeast
Page No~hwest Corner and
LLC -
Road and East Fairview Avenue. _052 Request for AnneCreek
AZ 05
Development Agreement: R~ to C_G Zone for Sadie LLC -
K• of 7.87 acres fr landmark Development Group,
and Zoning
promenade auiedRoad n by one of
3055 North E 9 07.006 Request for a Rez ~ E
reement: ~
Development A9 _8 to an R-15 zone fo Roadabrook Y
L.
4.38 acres froLLCn 300 South Locust Grove
Development, reement for
Water Main Easement A
Sewer andprope~Y Investment, LLC:
M. Sanita
Minert plaza by D8~R reement for
Water Main Easement LLC:
Sanita Sewer and Mason Creek,
N• uare Subdivision by g School by
Bienville S
asement A reement for Sienna K-
O. Water Main E
Joint School District No• 2: in World by
reement for Cam
Water Main Easement A
p' LLC:
pebgar+ a Subdivision No• 6
i ht A reement for Settlement Brid
Q, Streetl meet:
by Capital Develop and Cartoonin
nt for Instructor Serve ndts forDa n 't to exceed amount
R A teems Rembra
Instruction with Youn pance
of $3,360.00: for Ballroom
Services ount of
for Instructor
Victor Burke for a not to excee am
S. A reement
Instructions with
$2,940.00: for Bell Dancin
Services for a not to exceed
for Instructor
T. A reement
ruction with Jenifer Cavaness-Vl-illia'r
Inst
amount of $576.00: eN~ces for Earl Childhood Activit
ement for Instructor S e for a not to exceed amount of
V Are Sheri Do I
Instructor with
$5472.00:
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 5 of 1.01
V. Aareement for Professional Services for Appraisal Services
with Buich Appraisal Services for a not to exceed amount of
$5,000.00:
W. Aareement for Professional Services for Construction an
Additional Parking Facility at the Existing Heroes Park with
Stanley Consultants for $3,600.00:
X. Contract with McLeran Well Drilling, LLC for Well 14
Rehabilitation Work for a cost not to exceed $25,000.00:
Y. Contract with Civil Survey Consultants for Design of Water and
Sewer Improvements in Conjunction with ITD Road Project
Franklin, Touchmark to Fivemile (No. STP-7403(100) for a cost
not to exceed $20,380.00:
Z. Task Order No. 5 with CH2M HILL relative to the continuation
of Qualified Professional Engineer (QLPE) review Services in
Lieu of Submittal of Drawings /specifications to the Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality (IDEA) for Review with a
not to exceed amount of $24,000.00:
AA. Memorandum of Agreement with International Association of
Firefighters Local 4627 to replace Local 2311:
BB. Addendum to the City of Meridian / Meridian Rural Fire
Protection District Firefighting and Life Preservation Service
Contract and Joint Exercise of Power Agreement:
CC. Budget Amendment for New City Hall Construction Costs
Carry forward for $3,314,021:
DD. Budget Amendment for Public Works for Black Cat Water Main
for $800.00:
EE. Budget Amendment for New City Hall Clock for $24,000.00:
FF. Budget Amendment for New City Hall Construction Costs
Carryforward for
GG. Budget Amendment for Public Works for Latecomers Expense
for $3,700,000:
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 6 of 101
HH. Cooperative Construction and Reimbursement Agreement with
Venga Ventures, LLC for $71,683.45:
II. Cooperative Construction and Reimbursement Agreement with
James Prather Black Cat Trunk Sewer Phase 4, Schedule C for
$71,683.45:
LL. Approve Beer 8~ Wine License for Rojo Callente Restaurantes,
Inc. dba Qdoba Mexican Grill #473 at 3068 East Overland
Road:
MM. License Agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for
the Black Cat Trunk Sewer, Phase 4, Schedule B 8~ C Project:
De Weerd: Okay. Consent Agenda. I think we are addressing it.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: I move that we approve the Consent Agenda with Item E as 08-596 and to
remove items JJ and KK to Item 7, JJ and KK.
Wardle: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda with
the removal of JJ and KK to Item 7. Is there any discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRfED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Department Reports:
A. Mayor's Office:
1. Appointment of Sharon Borton to Parks and Recreation
Commission:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 6-A under the Mayor's department. We have several
appointments on here. I will start with item number one. I am asking for your
confirmation of my appointment of Sharon Borton to the Parks and Recreation
Commission. She is filling the seat of -- that was vacated by Mr. Jim Keller. His seat
was expired in October of 2007 and so this term would be until October of 2010.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 7 of t01
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Absolutely. With great pleasure and without hesitation, I move that we
approve the appointment of Sharon Borton to the Parks and Rec Commission.
Bird.: Second..
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? We should ask
Sharon if her arm was twisted or if -- any pressure?
S. Borton: None whatsoever.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Calk Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
2. Update on Meridian Arts Commission Application for Public
Art ~ Cultural Facilities Grant from Idaho Commission on the
Arts:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item number two is an update from the Meridian Arts
Commission and we have Meg Glasgow here with us, as well as Nancy Rountree.
Glasgow: Good evening. I'm here to update you on the Meridian Arts Commission's
progress on our application for the grants that we are applying for with the Idaho
Commission on the Arts and also ask for your help in supporting this grant application
process and the reason it's critical to discuss this now is the application is -- deadline is
quickly approaching and I wanted you to have an opportunity to review our grant
application and if any discussion was needed we could change and still have time to
meet that February 15th deadline. The Meridian Arts Commission anticipates the new
City Hall to really become a cultural art center for certainly our city and also the
Treasure Valley, with the outdoor performing amphitheater, we have got the rotating art
exhibit upstairs on the third floor and also we see as a keystone piece in the lobby the
possibility of the two spots we have identified. One with the possibility of a hanging art
sculpture that would suspend from the ceiling in that two story glass atrium. The
second be outside that beautiful curb wall outside Council chambers, as two possible --
two possible sites. So, our budget, obviously, cannot cover the cost of commissioning
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 8 of t01
an original piece of art for either of those two spaces, so in looking at that we have
committed a portion of our budget -- we are applying for this 10,000 dollar grant with the
Idaho Commission on the Arts and because it is a matching grant, meaning we have to
contribute a large percentage of this 32,000 dollar price tag for this -- we are budgeting
this original piece of art to begin. So, out of that -- if we are successful in winning this
highly competitive grant, the remaining 22,000 would come from our funds, a
contribution from the public, both corporate and private, and our fundraising efforts,
which we have already begun. But as aggressive and optimistic as we are, we don't
believe that we can secure 17,000 dollars in donation money by February 15th, our
grant deadline. So, that is why we are asking you to support this and underwrite us until
the point we can continue to raise funds to match the rest of the grant obligation. I
wanted to share with you, too, a little bit of our vision, because in talking about what is
possible in the space, this is just one possibility of an illustration that I found online and
you're welcome to pass that around.. That is just one possible example of what an
original sculpture hanging from the ceiling might look like. And so as we begin this
process -- once we receive the grant we can put out the call to artists, have artists
around the region submit examples and, then, we'd select from that and begin the
process. So, we don't expect this piece to be installed, actually, until -- finished until
2009, because of the way the -- how long it's going to take -- average time is about 16
to 18, sometimes even two years before this whole process can be completed. So, we
are a little behind the wire, so we would love to have it by the opening of next fall, but
we have got some more ideas what we can do for our work in City Hall, but we will talk
about that later. So, with that being the case, do you have any questions for me or any
other discussion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Megan, what you're asking for for us -- is us to underwrite 17,000 right now and,
then, after you raise enough, then, we will be paid back. But you need 17,000; is that
what --
Glasgow: We need to show -- as a requirement for the grant, because of the
requirements being a matching grant that we had to show -- and we have attached a
copy in your packet of -- of the proposed budget and how we reached that number and
so if 10,000 dollars coming from the Idaho Commission on the Arts and 5,000 coming
out of our budget and we have already received -- some donations are starting to come
in. But to meet that 22,000 dollars that we need to show in matching money, we are
asking the Council to underwrite that and we will continue with our fundraising
campaign.
Bird: Okay.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 9 of T01
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd': Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Does that mean that can be a pledge or do you the need money transferred
immediately?
Glasgow: No. Just a pledge. Isn't that true, Nancy? Yes.
N. Rountree.: No money.
Bird: No money. Just pledge.
De Weerd: They just need to show that they have the funds as they apply for the grant.
Mr. Borton.
Borton: Megan, my desire would be to commit to 22, not 17. And I say that only
because -- does your allocation of your existing deplete your account and prevent you
from doing anything other than this?
Glasgow: I will refer that to your finance chair and --
De Weerd.: You would have to come to the microphone.
Glasgow: It's pretty close.
De Weerd: I`m sorry we need your testimony on the record.
N. Rountree: It is very close. If you look at the existing budget for this year. But we,
actually, won't be expending this money until, oh, probably early May. So, I -- I mean
we'd take more, but -- but we might -- we might need that at a later time. If we can get
the 17,000 underwritten, so that we can submit the grant, then, we are moving forward
and, then, we will continue our fundraising efforts to cover that 17,000. You won't have
to spend any once we get 17,000.
Borton: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.. Council, any additional questions? Okay.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: I would need a motion.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 10 of 101
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I, too, agree with Councilman Borton that I would just as soon underwrite 22.,000
for you right now, so you can have your 5,000. You never know what you have coming
up. Hopefully, we won't have to give it up, but I would make a motion that we
underwrite up to 22,000 dollars for the Meridian Arts Commission grant application.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and second. Any discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird., yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRfED: ALL AYES..
De Weerd.: We will need a budget amendment form reflecting this current motion.
Bird: You can take it out of the Council's budget.
De Weerd: Out of the Council's budget.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor. We will get that taken care of and have it on the
Consent Agenda for your approval.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Glasgow: Thank you.
De Weerd: Just remember, that doesn't happen very often, where you ask for less and
they give you more.
Bird.: The president threatened us, though.
3. Re-Appointment of Nancy Rountree to the Meridian Arts
Commission:
De Weerd: Okay. Just thought I better note that. Okay. Item three is reappointment
of Nancy Rountree to the Meridian Arts Commission. Her seat was one of the
staggered ones. Since the Arts Commission was established last year, we staggered
the dates and she had- one of the one year terms and so I'm asking to reappoint and
have your confirmation to reappoint Nancy Rountree to the Meridian Arts Commission
until February of 2011.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 11 of 104
Rountree: Madam Mayor, it's my privilege and honor to move to approve the
reappointment of Nancy Rountree to the Arts Commission.
Bird: Second.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg,
will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
4. Resolution No. Establishing a Seventh
Seat on the Meridian Arts Commission and Appointing a Youth
Member to Seat Seven:
De Weerd: Okay. The next item, when we established the Meridian Arts Commission
we authorized up to nine members. For the original seating to convene a group that
would look at the by-.laws and the organizational structure, I only filled six of those
seats. They have had several members of the youth council that have been attending
their meetings and wanted the one dedicated seat to a youth member. And so this
resolution -- and I don't have a resolution number, but this would be establishing a
seventh seat on the Meridian Arts Commission and allowing me to appoint a youth
member to fill that seat, which would be seat seven.. Are there any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird.: I think that number is 545, if I remember right. 08-545. If there is no questions, I
move that we approve resolution 08-0545.
Rountree: Second that.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. I will ask Mr. Berg to, please, read
this by title.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I have ordinance -- or
resolution 08-597.
Bird: 597.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 12 of 1D1
Berg: We have already done three of them. This will be the third one tonight. A
resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian establishing a seventh
seat on the Meridian Arts Commission, appointing a youth member to seat seven of the
Meridian Arts Commission and providing an effective date.
De Weerd.: Okay. So, Council, I do have a motion to approve. If there is no discussion,
Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
5. Appointment of Jonathon Stucker to the Meridian Arts
Commission Seat # 7:
De Weerd: Thank you. And the last item is to appoint Jonathon Stucker to the Meridian
Arts Commission, seat seven. He has been attending the Arts Commission meetings,
along with another youth member. This was one of the recommendations made by the
Arts Commission and also confirmed by the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council that
Jonathon would be their choice of a youth representative. So, Council., tonight I'm
asking for your confirmation of this appointment. And this is a year by year
appointment.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the appointment of Jonathan Stucker to the
Meridian Arts Commission.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd.: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Barg, will you
call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Gorton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
B. Legal Department / IT Department:
1. Training and Education Reimbursement for Keith
Danielsen:
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 13 of t01
De Weerd: Thank you. Item B is our legal department. So, I will turn this over to Mr.
Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. What I have in front of you
-- there should be a -- a memorandum from Terry Paternoster, our IT manager,
regarding one of our employees in the IT division, Keith Danielsen, and our city policy
manual we have education reimbursement that is available for employees at our end, a
continuing education program, and so it's just simply requirements that they need to
meet to receive that as a city benefit. Additionally, in 2005 we had amended that
particular policy that allowed the departments to request with your approval for
additional monies to help pay for education costs for employees. Mr. Paternoster had
indicated in his memorandum that Mr. Danielsen's program was, one, beneficial to the
city. They are related to his employment. They -- the classes that he's taking, one of
the things that I was very comfortable in making this request to you, is as Mr.
Paternoster stated, one of the things that's a benefit to the city was employees that see
to advance their education in this particular manner. One, they do it on their own time,
which is what Mr. Danielsen does, he takes classes at Boise State on evenings and
weekends. It doesn't interrupt his worktime. The money that we would be requesting to
be used towards this additional reimbursement is out of our training funds that we have
for IT. This particular type of course can be, again, significantly more expensive than
the type of reimbursement requesting and as Mr. Paternoster states in his memo, the
other cost to the type is that lost time when employees are attending those classes,
either out of town or even in town, having them out of the workplace can sometime be a
real challenge, especially in a small department that we have -- or division we have at
ID. So, based upon the -- the policy that we have, it does require that I bring that back
in front of you. I did bring that to our liaison and, Madam Mayor, prior to bringing it in
front of you, I'd seek your approval for that additional reimbursement to him for his
education costs.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we approve the training and education reimbursement for Keith
Danielsen.
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 14 of 101
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
C. Planning Department:
Request for a Refund of .Application Fees for North
Phyllis Canal Proiect Comprehensive Plan Text
Amendment:
De Weerd: Okay. Our next item is our Planning Department.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the request before you tonight is
with regard to the North Phyllis Canal Project. You may remember when the Council
held the Public Hearing on that Comprehensive Plan amendment that there was a text
amendment associated with it that staff had originally suggested that the applicant
submit the text amendment, but as we processed it, we found that the text amendment
was not necessary and that application was withdrawn. We did not spend a substantial
amount of time reviewing the text amendment and the noticing fees amounted to $5. 88
and the applicant originally paid 606 dollars in fees. So, staff is requesting that the
applicant receive a refund of $600. 12, which is the amount paid, less the noticing fees.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions for Anna?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Is the -- are the Ewings okay with staff recommendation?
Rountree: Thank you, John.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: For the record, that was a head nod yes.
De Weerd: I think Dean heard that.
Borton: I appreciate staffs consideration to make sure this gets back to the applicant
and I would move that we approve the request for the refund to the applicant in the
amount of $600. 12; is that correct?
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page TS of T01
Rountree: Second.
Bird.: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the request on Item 6-C.
Mr. Berg.
Roll-Gail: Bird, yea.; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton., yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
D. Parks Department:
1. Proposed Name for City Park in Tuscany / Messina
Meadows of Renaissance Park:
De Weerd: Okay. Our next item is our Parks Department with our brand new, first-
day-on-the-job, Parks Director Mr. Steve Siddoway. Welcome.
Siddoway: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. First, I'd like to
welcome Sharon Borton, if she's still here -- to the Parks Commission. Look forward to
working with her. She did attend our last meeting and she will be a real asset to us.
The -- we are bringing before you tonight the desire to name the park that's been
referred to as the Messina Meadows park in Messina Meadows Subdivision. We have
been -- we have engaged the neighborhood in trying to name this park and, as you will
recall, back in November the name of Verona Park had been forwarded and., then,
turned down because of potential confusion with Verona Subdivision in north Meridian.
We, then, subsequently requested all the names that had been submitted by members
of that subdivision for consideration of park names and the Commission reviewed those
on their December 12th meeting and are recommending the name of Renaissance Park
and that name has an Italian theme and with the Tuscany Lakes, Messina Meadows
Subdivision, all being in that Italian theme, they feel that it fits and it's one that was
recommended by a homeowner in that subdivision.. They are also recommending as a
backup name Shakespeare Park, as all the names in that subdivision have to do with a
Shakespearean theme, but the recommended name is Renaissance Park and I would
propose that name to you and seek your approval.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Rountree: No. Good choice.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 16 of 101
Zaremba: I move that we approve the name Renaissance Park for the city park in
Tuscany Messina Meadows.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the proposed name on
Item 6-D. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would just put one item of discussion in. As the parks
director mentioned., the original generation of the choice of names was from the
homeowners in that subdivision themselves and there are probably none of them here,
but I would want to thank them on the record for their effort in it and thank you very
much, then, for taking part in that and that was a creative and novel way to come up
with a name and I appreciate it.
De Weerd: Do you have any comment before I ask for the vote? It's your last
chance..
Zaremba: The clerk is pointing out we are going to have to abbreviate that name to
three letters in order to afford the sign for it, but --
De Weerd: We have to have spelling lessons on it anyway. But I think it's a great
name and we need to theme our activities thusly. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
E. Building Department -Bruce 1=reckleton:
1. Update on the Status of 1535 North Main Street:
De Weerd: The last item is with our building department. I would like to take this
opportunity, since the building department is under the umbrella of Public Works, I --
yeah, Ihad to stand up, Tom, to see if you were actually there. But we do have our new
Public Works director here with us tonight. I know that we introduced him to Council
earlier in our special meeting., our pre-council, but we'd like to welcome you and look
forward to working together and bringing the talent that we saw in the interview process
and apply it here in Meridian. So, welcome, Tom. And just a quick moment as well, I'd
like to thank Len Grady, who has been our interim Public Works director, for the
incredible time commitment and dedication that you showed over the last six months,
seven months --
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 1'7 of 101
Grady: Six or seven.
De Weerd: It seems like years, uh? But thank you, Len. We certainly appreciate
your leadership and, you know, we have you also in a new capacity and look forward to
moving forward. Okay. So, I'll turn it over to Bruce.
Freckleton: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The item that we'd
like to discuss with you tonight is just give you an update on the status of the 1535
North Main. You might remember it was around Christmastime '06, I believe, when we
had discussion with you regarding some dangerous, hazardous situations with the --
with these apartments and wanted to just kind of bring you up to -- up to date where we
are. On December 7, '06, the building department issued a notice of pending
disconnection of utility service necessary to eliminate an immediate hazard to life and
property. On December 8, 2006, all utility services were terminated at this address. At
the time there were two tenants in this apartment complex. The property owner
informed those tenants that they were not to return to the premises at night to sleep.
However, he would allow them to come to the premises during daylight hours to retrieve
their belongings.. Mr. Bettis issued a letter to the city explaining that situation. He also
stated in that letter that some individuals will be permitted on the property and in the
buildings to work during daylight hours. It was our intention to try and bring these --
these buildings up to code to be able to be occupied. These photos that we took here,
this was the situation on 10/18/06. You can notice that the windows are intact, the
doors are intact. This photo was taken the 15th of this month. These windows have
been broken out. The front door's been broken -- broken out. This window is
completely missing. January 11th of '08 when we were out there, the doors were all
closed and appeared to be locked. We came back out the following week on the 15th.
The doors had been kicked in. It just continues to show possible transient activity and
malicious activity going on on the premises.
De Weerd: What are those panels on the roof?
Freckleton: They were -- they were solar panels.
De Weerd: Solar. Oh, because they can't get electricity, that's their way of getting --
Bird: That's how they heat it.
De Weerd.: -- heat.
Freckleton: Yeah. They were heated with solar back in the day, I guess.
Bird: That was back in the '70s.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page t8 of 101
Freckleton: Yeah. What we are trying to show is just that over time it just continues to
dilapidated and we have got a -- we believe transient activity going on. The owner is
not -- not done a whole lot to try and secure the premises and we have been in contact
with him.. On January 17th we issued a new notice ordering the owner to secure all
openings to the structure by means of boarding up. We also ordered him to post the
properties, not -- or, excuse me, no trespassing. That was at the suggestion of our
police department. The owner was also in that notice offered an appeal period, which
will expire at 5:00 p. m. this Friday. The deadline to complete the boarding up work is
Wednesday, the 31st of January. I also requested from the owner a new letter that talks
about the no trespassing situation, because his first letter -- he said that people could be
there during daylight hours and get their belongings, but I think they have gotten
everything that they need and so I asked him to get me a new letter basically saying
that no one is authorized to be on the property and that should be considered
trespassing if they are. We received that letter and I passed that onto the PD and to
legal. Joe Silva contacted an outfit that he has worked with in the past., it's a boarding
up service, to try and get an estimate of what we would be looking at if we have to step
in and do the work and that came in around a thousand bucks. I don't hold out a lot of
hope that we are going to see action from the -- from the property owner and we wanted
to have some discussion with you tonight regarding us moving forward if he does not
act and get this thing boarded up. In our notice there is provision in there that we can
lien the property for whatever expense we incur and as well as pursue any criminal
and/or civil action that might be appropriate.
Silva: Mayor, Members of the Council, one of our concerns here as the fire department
-- excuse me -- is that peering through a lot of these openings, we have excessive
amounts of light combustible material. Through one of those doors that Bruce did not
point out, there was some Coleman fuel and a partial container with gasoline in it. A lot
of the things that somebody who is intending to do something bad has all the tools right
there and our concern is that this needs to be secured as it is a distinct hazard. Just to
kind of orientate you, the property, which is Cahoots Bar to the north, is only about four
or five feet away on the north property and our concern that any fire involving the north
-- the building on the north side of this complex could quickly impinge on the Cahoots
property and that's one of our major concerns. And there is, obviously, signs through
our -- through our investigations that there is transient activity there. We are sure about
that. We had -- we had closed all those doors and basically secured them, just utilizing
some tape and some, you know, sma11 pieces of wood and, obviously, they have been
pushed open. They had to be forced open to get them reopened, so we know that there
is activity there..
De Weerd: Are utilities all still cut off from that piece?
Bird: Yeah.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 19 of 101
De Weerd.: Chief, any illegal activity, any police calls or code enforcement issues?
Well, we see code enforcement issues, but have they been out there on calls?
Lavey: This has been an ongoing mess for about ten years and so I can't say that
there has been any police activity recently, but it's an ongoing factor. We just have to
pull our records and say -- I mean I have been dealing with this for ten years, so it just
continues until we get something done about it.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Lavey: And code enforcement has been working with Bruce quite regularly, so --
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Is there any chance we could get the owner of the property to consent to the
fire department using this as a training area and just removing it entirely that way?
Freckleton: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we've had those discussions and
we have looked into -- into doing just that and the buildings are of a vintage that we
anticipate that there is asbestos in there. There is also quite a -- quite a lengthy list of
liens and judgments and that sort of thing against these -- this property. So, I think
there was -- there was some hesitance on the part of the fire department and also legal
had some real concerns with this as well.
Silva: Mayor and Councilman Zaremba, yeah, we -- we were going to do that, but,
again, it's very close to the property to the north, the Cahoots property, and we have
probably, in all likelihood., exposed that property if we attempted to do it as a training
burn, so -- we had explored that option.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, I believe staff is looking for direction on the boarding up
issue and what your thoughts are.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird:: My thoughts on this are we have given until January 31st. If it isn't done, go get it
done. As I understand, there is probably more liens on the property than it's worth. We
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 20 of 101
can -- still we can stick another lien on it, I guess. At least I would feel more
comfortable that kids walking by there could not get in and get hurt and that's -- that's
my biggest fear is children walking by and -- and there is a trailer park right down beside
it. I don't know how many children is in the trailer park anymore, but, you know, kids will
go exploring things and so my -- my vote is if they don't get it done by the 31st, the 1st
we be there and do it.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I agree wholeheartedly. The public safety concerns are great. I'd give them
until 8:30 tonight, quite frankly, to get infixed up.
Bird: We have already given --
Gorton: I mean you have given them tons of opportunities. I'd board it up and spend
the money, make sure the public safety issues are addressed and resolved as soon as
possible. And if the owner's upset and wants to sit down and talk about it, be glad to do
so. So, the 31st is fine. If it's earlier, so be it. It's a scary property.
De Weerd: I think Mr. Nary would advise January 31st.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Just reading your mind..
Nary: Thank you.
De Weerd: Council. Yes.
Rountree: I would move that we have the building department move forward with
monitoring this and if we do not see an appeal by January 31st that they be authorized
to solicit a contractor to board up this establishment.
Bird: Second..
De Weerd.: Council, could we ask that that be sought before that time, so they can
commence it on the 1st?
Rountree: I believe they have already done that.
Bird: They have already done that. The 31st, if it's not done, it's the 1st we go in and
do it.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 21 of 101
De Weerd..: Okay. Okay.
Borton: Second..
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Does that motion include that if the owner does not pay for it we would file a
lien on the property?
Rountree: Certainly.
Zaremba: Or is that automatic?
Bird.: It's automatic.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Also to add -- and probably shouldn't make light of it -- it's a pretty drastic step,
but I do appreciate all the efforts you have taken to try and continually contact and work
through it. I think that's definitely the way to go. It's probably frustrating on your part to
plod along, but it's appreciated., because we don't want to have to ever do this, but --
Freckleton: No. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further discussion by Council, Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRfED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Bruce, we do have a gentleman that raised his hand in the back. If you can
just discuss comments with him. I don't know what they might be regarding, but it
probably is in relationship to this.
Freckleton: Okay. Thank you.
F. Council President Appointment of Department Liaisons:
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 22 of 101
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. The last item under Department Reports is Item F,
which is Council Appointments. I'll turn this over to Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Thank you, Madam Mayor. My first official duty tonight as the president of
Council is to make reappointments of Council liaison to departments and I know the
department heads are just sitting on pins and needles. They are all jumping now. So,
the liaison assignments for this year: Planning and Zoning will be Councilman Bird.
Police will be Councilman Bird. Parks and Rec will be Councilman Zaremba. Fire will
be Councilman Zaremba, to whom he owes his life. Legal, HR, IT, will be Councilman
Borton, as well as finance Councilman Borton. I will be working with Public Works and
the Mayor's office. And I will just point out that we will be working with three new
administrators this year in our capacifies as liaisons and I think we need to provide them
every opportunity of our wisdom and/or guidance that we can and I will offer to all of the
directors that I am available to each and every one of you on any kind of notice that you
need my support or help. So, as president I offer you that as well. So, work with your
liaison and if you need a couple of us, I'm there for you as well. I hope this works out.
I'm sure it will. I think everybody is excited about the new assignments. I think there is
new departments for everybody and new Councilmen for everybody. So, it should be a
fun year. With that, good luck and God speed.
Borton: He's saying that to them, not us.
Rountree: Yeah. To them.
Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
JJ. Cooperative Construction Reimbursement Agreement Lift
Station and Oversize Main for Bittercreek Meadows:
KK. Amended Agreement for Bittercreek Meadows:
De Weerd: Good luck, crew. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Rountree. Okay. Item 7 we
moved two items from the Consent Agenda, JJ and KK. I will turn this over to Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. These two items are
agreements with the Bitter Creek Meadows Subdivision that is south of the city limits
currently. The items are -- one was a reimbursement agreement for a lift station and
oversize main. The other was an amendment to an existing agreement with Bitter
Creek Meadows, which involves the city purchasing and taking over the operations of a
municipal water well on that property. We have been engaged actively in the last week
on this particular -- these particular agreements and trying to finalize some conditions
for the city taking over those responsibilities. We haven't been able to finalize that in the
last week as we had hoped to do and so we'd like to at least put on the record, if
possible, establish a special meeting that would give us some target dates to get these
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 23 of 101
done by and., hopefully, get some of the due diligence that we feel it's appropriate and
necessary for the city to do prior to taking on the responsibility of both the municipal
water and, then, the cooperative construction agreement for reimbursement for a lift
station at some point in the future for that area. I had asked Mr. Grady maybe to help
identify some of the specific points that we still haven't been able to get completed in the
last week and what we need prior to getting these finalized. Mr. Grady.
Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think it's boiled down to the
agreements themselves -- I believe an estimate would be that we were 90, 95 percent
complete. I think we have agreement in principal and we are really down to nailing
some of the details in those agreements. Short of that we have some -- we have taken
some water quality samples, which we haven't received back and I think it would be
appropriate for us to wait for those to be received. And, then, finally, some fire flow
concerns. We need to be able to validate what the fire flow is out there. We believe it
may be insignificant fire flow and we just want to quantify that. If it is insignificant, it's
not adequate out there, we would be wanting to work towards some method of being
able to rectify that. So, I think, again, a little bit of time for us to do some research and
work with the developer would be appropriate.
De Weerd: Thank you, Len. Anything further, Bill?
Nary: No, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I think, as I said, I think we will --
what we want to do from the staff end is make sure we get the direction from you as to
what other information you feel you need prior to making these agreements, bringing
them back for final approval. Like I said, in our discussions with the developer, we have
discussed the concerns about fire flow and making sure that public safety aspect is
covered and, secondarily, we have told them that the water quality needs to meet the
DEQ municipal standards to do that and we need to quantify that, as Mr. Grady said,
and we did some testing to assure that and before we take that on some of that testing
hasn't been completed yet. We don't have the results of those yet. If there is other
issues, we want to just make sure we get that all on the record and, then, again, if we
could have a target date, if at all possible. I know we have some quorum issues for the
next few weeks, but if we could get a target date, even if we have to set a special
meeting for this, so that we can get these finalized, I know the developer is very anxious
to get these completed as well. So, if we could have a target date from you, we can
certainly get that at least the best we can, get all of those completed by that time.
De Weerd: I believe we would still have a quorum on February 1st. Would that give
sufficient time? That's a Friday. That's --
Grady: The Public Works director thinks we can make that happen, so we will do it.
De Weerd: We just -- we just will not have a quorum that next week. So, that's kind of
the last work day before we have a quorum issue. Does that sound reasonable? At
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 24 of 101
least for a target date and we will work with each of the schedules. I know Councilman
Rountree will be out of town, but if the three remaining Council members can do
something., we can get it scheduled.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: That's fine by me and I appreciate Mr. Grady and Mr. Nary sort of restating
some of the concerns that we as Council members have raised and some of the final
issues that we wanted to get pinned down and wrap this up, to the extent that these
things can be done even sooner than then, I'm sure we'd all be willing to make our best
efforts to be available, even earlier than the 1st. It's in everyone's best interest to get it
resolved and we appreciate the applicant's efforts to do so. Mr. Nary, Mr. Grady, your
efforts to get this thing going, and we will shoot for the 1st. If it's earlier, all the better.
Bird: Sounds like a winner.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I just would express one additional concern that I think has been addressed,
but just to make sure it's on the public record, that somewhere in the agreement the end
users do not expect us to increase capacity or make more capacity available than is
available. I think that's a subject that has been discussed, but make sure that that's
known and on the public record as well.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Yes.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Zaremba, yeah, that is
part of the agreement that the -- the water system that is currently on site is able to be
used for the homes that are programmed for that area and nothing in addition to that.
That was part of the original agreement that is folded into the new one. It's probably
more specific. But that was always the intent of the city and agreements that currently
exist, as well as this new agreement that it be spelled on, that that's what those water
source is for, future development, whether it's this developer or any other developer
would require additional sources of water.
Grady: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- and I'd like to add to that. DEQ
requires two sources of water above 25 -- 25 or more lots. This has 24 lots. So, one
more lot means another well, another source of water, as per DEQ standards, so --
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 25 of 1'01
De Weerd: Okay. Well, we will look for your follow-up on this. If we can do it sooner,
we can get that scheduled, but February 1st at the latest at this point.
Nary: Thank you.
Rountree: Do we need a motion to hold those over, those two items?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, all we need to do, since these are just
agreements to be approved, we -- you can simply -- we have moved from the regular
approval agenda. You can certainly move to vacate them from this agenda and we will
just bring them back whenever we schedule the meeting. We don't need to schedule
that today, so I think probably a voice vote to just vacate them until they are brought
back is probably adequate.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we vacate items JJ and KK.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd.: Okay. I have a motion and a second to vacate JJ and KK, set to a later
date. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 8: Presentation and Discussion of the 2006 International Building Code
by Bruce Freckleton:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 8 is a presentation and discussion of the 2006 International
Building Code. Mr. Freckleton.
Freckleton: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The 2007 legislature
adopted the '06 I codes for building. The proposal before you tonight is for the City of
Meridian to adopt the '06 International Building Code, International Residential Code,
and International Energy Conservation Code. There is really -- were not any major
major changes in these codes. The only real notable item that -- that I added in was we
did not have a provision in our past codes to double fee anybody doing fire trade work,
when they work without having permits in place. And we do have that provision for all
the other codes, all the other trade codes, structural codes, but fire, for some reason,
never did have that. So, we added that into our code. Deputy Chief Silva added that
into his code, too., just to make sure we were doubly covered. We did take our proposal
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 26 of 101
to the BCA on the 8th of January. Made a presentation to them. And we didn't receive
any objectionable comments at all. The city of Boise was in the process of doing theirs
at the same time, too, and we had some real good dialogue with those jurisdictions and
it's a pretty straight forward deal. So, that concludes my presentation, unless you have
any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bruce. Council, any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor. I just have a comment that on all of these items, the next
four items, when we blanketly adopt those uniform codes, every once in awhile there is
something in there that gives us all heartburn and I would direct staff that if, in fact,
those issues do come up on a frequent basis, that you apprise your liaison and get it to
the Council as soon as possible, so we don't have staff put in a position where they are
having to defend the codes that we have approved or not approved and maybe the
Council can get to some resolve sooner, as opposed to later.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: And just a minute, Mr. Bird.. I guess just to make a comment to that is that
the state has adopted these codes.
Freckleton: Correct.
De Weerd: They are the minimum codes. And so I don't know what flexibility we have,
since they are the minimum by the state as well. But, certainly, as any issues arise, we
will make sure, Mr. Rountree, you are the first to know as --
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: -- the liaison for that department. Mr. Bird.
Bird: Make me the second to be known. I will be truthful with you --
De Weerd: You probably will know before we do.
Bird: I -- I don't like anything that -- that says International Building Code that I don't get
to look at first, because what pertains to New York or Chicago might not do any good to
Meridian, Idaho, and might have stuff in fire codes, in particular. And the reason we
went to workshops is so that we can look these up on that workshop and, then, bring
the ordinance forward at the other time and have discussions on it. I wholeheartedly
back Councilman Rountree and as president I know that he's not going to allow this to
happen again. So, that's all I'll say.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 27 of 101
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Actually, a question and I guess it's along the same theme and I don't
remember whether it's the International Building Code or the International Fire Code,
but I thought we learned during some development discussion late last year that when
the state adopted one or the other of these codes, they actually exempted something
having to do with sprinklering --
Rountree: Sprinklers.
Bird: That's right.
Zaremba: Are we adopting the code as written or are we adopting the state's adoption
with exceptions?
Freckleton: That's a very good question. We are adopting the code as written. The
state adopted it with the exemption again. The city of Boise this year -- let me back up.
The '03 codes, city of Boise adopted it with the exemption for three or more units to
have to have fire sprinklers. The new code adoption for '06 codes, city of Boise did
away with their exemption and adopted it as written, as we proposed it. The city of
Nampa is that way. So, basically, the major jurisdictions in this valley have adopted the
codes as written., which is contrary to what the state's adoption was.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council?
Rountree: I have none.
Item 9: Ordinance No. 08-1343 Adoption of the 2006 International
Building Code:
De Weerd: This isn't a public hearing. Any comment from the public, though? Okay.
Okay. Council, you have heard the presentation. We will go ahead and move onto Item
9, which is ordinance 08-1343. And I will ask Mr. Berg to, please, read this ordinance
by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 08-1343, an
ordinance amending Title 10, Chapter 1, of the Meridian City Code, regarding adoption
of the 2006 edition of the International Building Code, 2006 edition of the International
Residential Code, and the 2006 edition of the International Energy Conservation Code,
amendments to the adopted codes, providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules
and providing an effective date.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 28 of Y01
De Weerd: Okay. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone
who would like to hear this read in its entirety? Okay. We appreciate that. Okay.
Council, what -- what is your direction at this point?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve ordinance 08-1343, the International Building Code.
Bird: With suspension of rules.
Rountree: With suspension of rules.
Bird: Second..
De Weerd,: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9. Any discussion?
Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: Presentation and Discussion of the 2006 International Fire Code by
Joe Silva:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 10 is presentation and discussion of the 2006 International Fire
Code by Deputy Chief Silva.
Freckleton: Madam Mayor, can I just ask one question?
De Weerd: Yes.
Freckleton.: Is that recommendation -- or that adoption -- I had made a
recommendation fora 30 day effective date on that. Is that -- is that your approval?
Okay. Thank you.
Silva: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have before you this evening for
consideration is the adoption of the 2006 International Fire Code. Along with that in
front of you I forwarded to you a copy of the local amendments that we are requesting
be incorporated into that adoption document. What we have done is we have
formalized or put into our local amendment things we have been doing by policy.
Essentially, things like providing work -- working without a permit, the same provision
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 29 of 101
that Bruce alluded to. Also, the fact that having fire department connects within a
hundred feet of a fire hydrant, as an example. Essentially, this is the same document
that we currently have as our amendment document here locally. One change if we -- I
do want to bring to your attention is on page eight. In discussing with the fire chief, we
talked about serving homes with over -- homes that have only one access point or one
way in, serving greater than 50 homes, and one thing that we did change here -- or
requesting consideration of Council is that if a portion of a subdivision or call it a phase
for purposes of our discussion, has only one way in, sometimes what we have done is --
our present amendment would be that we would require those homes to be fire
sprinklered. In my discussions with the fire chief, we are requesting that when we have
that situation arise, which Anna can allude to a little bit in block lengths, that all the
homes in that subdivision be required to be fire sprinklered. Ordinarily when we -- when
we make the developer aware that we have got just one access point, we are serving
over 50 homes, 99 percent of the time we are able to obtain a secondary access that
meets the minimum requirements of the fire code for that situation. So, it has not been
a problem. We would like to have Council consider that. We have also included in
there just below that the definition of what considers -- we consider to be remoteness or
what qualifies as secondary access, asking for some separation between the primary
point of access and the secondary point of access. Normally, it's been considered to be
one half the diagonal measurement of -- of the project. And with that -- with that I'll
stand for any questions should you have any.
De Weerd: Joe, did you have this discussion with the developer's council?
Silva: I did not have that opportunity. This discussion came up late when I discussed
this with the fire chief and so what -- if you would like, Iwill -- if we want to perhaps work
in adopting the balance of the code and, then, I'll take that back to the BCA or whatever
organization you would prefer that I take that to, I would be glad to do that.
De Weerd: I guess if this is an add-on since you addressed the group, I think we do
have a process in place and that process should at least be considered if you make any
changes. That's certainly my opinion. Anna, do you have additional comments?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as Chief Silva said, this isn't going
to come into effect very often. I think in the four years I have been here we have never
had a project that didn't have either a temporary secondary access or stub streets to an
adjoining property that would eventually provide that secondary access. So, it really is
quite a rare instance. Now, the Council did -- there was a presentation to the Council
regarding private streets sometime back that Council seemed favorable on allowing
private streets. This would impact them and I just realized that as the hearing was
going on today, so I didn't have a chance to mention that to Joe. But that is a possible
impact to developments with private streets.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 30 of 101
De Weerd: You know, Joe, I think it's fair to come back with this as an add on and I
probably was the one that really prompted the discussion with the recent multi-family
application that we had and the concern with the secondary access, which was only
emergency, when it did have the opportunity for a different secondary access. So, it
would be a good discussion to have, but it should have at least that -- the avenue of
how we regularly do it. Council, any questions for Joe?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would agree wholeheartedly with you that if this -- if we didn't present this to
them -- to the people that this affects and we need to go redo it and, then, pass on it at
that time. I don't think we are causing a problem by not passing it tonight, am I right,
chief?
Silva.: Just to -- Mayor, Councilman Bird, the state has adopted and required that we
adopt it by January 1. So, we are a little bit behind the curve. What I was going to
request is whether or not we could adopt the balance of the code and, then, bring this
issue back as a separate issue. I would ask that --
De Weerd: Yeah. I think that was his question, Joe.
Silva: Okay.
De Weerd: -- is more particular to the add-on than the code in its entirety.
Silva: Understood.. Understood..
De Weerd: Okay. Anything from Council?
Rountree: I have nothing.
Item 11: Ordinance No. 08-1344 Adoption of the 2006 International
Fire Code:
De Weerd: Okay. Do I -- well, I will go ahead and move on to, then, Item 11,
ordinance number 08-1344 and --
Bird: Are you going to read it by title?
De Weerd: I guess I could read it. I need to pull it up.
Nary: Do you want me to do it?
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 31 of 101
Rountree: Bill --
De Weerd: Oh, yes. Mr. Nary, if you will this, please, by title only.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, ordinance
08-1344. It's an ordinance amending Title 10, Chapter 4, of the Meridian City Code
regarding adoption of the International Fire Code, 2006 edition, amendment to the
International Fire Code, also 2006 edition, providing for a waiver of the reading rules
and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Okay. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone
who would like it read in its entirety? Okay. Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Bird..
Bird: I would move that we approve ordinance 08-1344 with -- I forgot what paragraph.
I got to go back.
Rountree: Z I think it was.
Bird: Uh?
Rountree: Z.
Bird: With the exception of paragraph Z until we reintroduce it to the appropriate
community members. And with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second.. Joe, did we reference the correct
paragraph? Okay.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just so the record's clear, it's paragraph
Z, International Fire Code, Section D, 107. 1, one or two family dwelling residential
developments. The effective date on the ordinance in front of you is January 1, 2008.
So, if you want to pass it with the same 30 days as you did the building code, then, I
would make sure that's in your motion just as a specific date of approval.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 32 of 101
Bird: Thirty days. That -- I agree a hundred percent.
Rountree: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? We did have it read by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I just was confirming with Bruce Freckleton on the
previous ordinance and we kind of agreed to a February 25th date.
De Weerd: So, a date certain of February 25th. Is that okay by the motion maker?
Bird: That is fine with me on the fire code, too.
De Weerd.: Second agrees?
Rountree: Agreed with the second.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Request for Reconsideration of Denial for the Rezone for Strada
Bellissima Subdivision by Strada Bellissima Commercial, LLC:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 is a request for a reconsideration. Council, I believe you
have that request in front of you. Does Anna or Mr. Nary have any additional
comments? Okay.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no, I really don't. There is a fairly
lengthy letter with the reasons for this request in front of you by Pinnacle Engineers. I
don't know if the requester has any additional information in regards to their request. It
seems fairly detailed in their letter as to their reasons for asking you to reconsider this
request. I think that matter is simply before you for that consideration.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? If you have any new items for consideration
that are not outlined in your letter, you may do so at this time. Okay. Thank you.
Council?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 33 of 101
Borton: I'll float one motion out in light of the letter and information provided. I would
move that we approve the request for reconsideration on Strada Bellissima Subdivision.
Bird: Is that it? Second.
De Weerd.: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the request for
reconsideration and if Council were to approve this, we would set that for hearing date
again with public noticing; correct, Mr. Berg? Okay. Any discussion by Council?
Okay. Hearing none, Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
Item 13: Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: RZ 07-013
Request for a Rezone of 1. 76 acres from L-O to C-N zone for Strada
Bellissima Commercial by Strada Bellissima Commercial, LLC - NWC of
Meridian Road and Victory Road at 114 and 156 West Victory Road (Lots
2 & 3, Block 2, Strada Bellissima No. 1 Subdivision):
De Weerd: Okay. So, Mr. Nary, what are the next steps on that?
Berg: Next item is to be --
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Item 13 can be vacated and what the
applicant will need to do is work with the clerk's office in setting a new date, paying the
new fee for noticing and, then, that will be set back in front of you probably within four to
six weeks.
De Weerd: Okay. So, what action needs to be taken on Item 13?
Nary: Just simply move to vacate those findings.
De Weerd: Okay.
Gorton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I would move that we vacate Item 13.
Bird: Second..
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 34 of 1.01
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to vacate Item 13. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14: Public Hearing: AZ 07-013 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.
92 acres from Ada County RUT to an R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision
by Equity Development - 1235 East McMillan Road:
Item 15: Public Hearing: PP 07-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16
single-family residential lots and 3 common lots on 4.92 acres in a
proposed R-4 zone for Matador Subdivision by Equity Development -
1235 .East McMillan Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 and 15 are public hearings on AZ 07-013 and PP 07-017. I
will open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this the Matador project. It's located
at 1235 McMillan Road. The applications before you tonight are an annexation and
preliminary .plat. The applicant has applied for annexation and zoning of 5. 18 acres to
R-4 zoning and preliminary plat approval of 16 single family residential building lots and
three common lots on 4.92 acres. The proposed gross density for the subdivision is 3.
25 dwelling units per acre, with a net density of 4.02 dwelling units per acre. And the lot
sizes range from 8,077 square feet to 14,454 square feet. You will note that it says old
plat, new plat, and I'll get to that in a moment. The Commission's recommendation was
based on old plat. There are a couple DA requirements proposed and that's that the
developer shall construct homes on the site that are in substantial compliance with the
elevations and the applicant shall construct homes on the site that contain the following
design features: Gable roof lines facing the street, shutters, substantial colors with
substantial bases and front facades, accented with brick/stone and covered porch
areas. Building materials should be of quality materials, including, but not limited to
wood siding, hardy plank siding, and/or stucco, incorporating varying siding materials.
Wide plank. Narrow plank. Board and batten. Cedar shingles. Painted in earth tone
colors. We have some elevations of those. The Commission recommended approval
at their November 15th, 2007, Public Hearing. Sabrina Wfiitehead, the applicant's
representative, spoke in favor. No one spoke in opposition or commented or provided
written testimony. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were the zoning
approved for neighboring residential projects and that was largely -- there is one project
-- and these two existing lots and that was R-4 with a little R-8 closed to Locust Grove.
And, then, there was another one approved over these two lots and That was R-4.
Nothing immediately adjoining this property. There were no key commission changes to
staffs initial recommendation. There are some outstanding issues for Council. During
the hearing staff presented to the Commission a recommendation to reduce the lot
widths of the buildable Lots 2 and 3 of Block 3, which are these two lots and expand the
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 35 of 101
nonbuildable lot, Lot 1, Block 3, this one in hatched, to increase the amount of open
space and to accommodate a picnic area or tot lot. Currently it's all shown as seepage
beds, so it's not really an open space, it's a drainage lot. So, the idea was to decrease
the adjoining two lots and add some actual open space onto that drainage lot. The
Commission agreed with staffs recommendation and forwarded that onto City Council.
This morning staff received a revised preliminary plat and revised landscape renderings
for Matador project and the revised plat changes were as follows: And you will see it
here. They have moved the drainage lot from the corner to -- on the north side of
Copper Ridge and now there is five buildable lots on the south property line. The
relocated common lot has been reduced from 10,920 square feet to 4,953 square feet.
In addition, the total amount of open space for the project has been reduced from 8.1 to
5.5. And the term open space is lose there, because there was a drainage lot. It's non-
buildable lots, really. Due to the reduction in the common areas, the average lot sizes
have increased from 9,751 square feet, to -- that's per the old plat. And to the new plat
is 10,124 square feet. On -- I heard that later today there was a third plat presented to
staff that there was not time to evaluate. So, I think -- I'm not sure if the applicant has a
revised revised plat or not at this point, so -- and., then, the -- there was some pictures of
the amenities, the tot lot and, then, the picnic table, as proposed for the new plan. With
that I'll answer any questions that Council and Mayor may have.
De Weerd: So, Anna, you just got these plat revisions today?
Canning: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions at this point?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none right now.
Zaremba.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I have lost track of where the amenities are now. Are they on the new
drainage lot?
Canning: This lot, I believe, is designed to accommodate the open space, as well as
the drainage. The prior one was just designated as a drainage lot. The subdivision is
less than five acres, so it's not required to have open space.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 36 of 101
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant. here? If you will, please, state your name and
address for the record.,
Whitehead: Absolutely. Madam Mayor, Council members, for the record., good
evening. My name is Sabrina Whitehead and here on behalf of Briggs Engineering and
Equity Development. My business address is 1800 West Overland Road., Boise, Idaho.
83705. And as Anna has mentioned, tonight I'm presenting before you Matador
Estates. This is a request for annexation, zoning, and a preliminary plat. With this
development the developer took into consideration the character of the area, City of
Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, as well as the existing residences out there. With all
these considerations, the developer felt that the R-4 zoning would be the most
compatible with the existing area and surrounding land uses. Therefore, as has been
mentioned, we are requesting 4.92 acres to be rezoned to R-4. This will include a total
of 19 lots, 16 which are buildable and three that are common. The site will have ingress
and egress off of McMillan Road., which will provide public stub roads to the east and
west. The site will have pressurized irrigation through Settlers Irrigation District and at
this time it's kind of unknown who will maintain it, either the district or the HOA. As for
sewer, we are in negotiations with the developer to the west to provide sewer
easements -- sewer and water. On July 3rd of last year I conducted a neighborhood
meeting where I had three neighbors attend. The concerns expressed by the neighbors
was Curt Hert. His concern was the view shed and so the developer agreed to limit Lot
3 of Block 2 to be single story within the CC&Rs for him. The other concern brought up
by one of the other neighbors was access for the fire department. And as Mr. Silva's
here he has approved the plans with what we have set forth. Now, I do want to discuss
the open space. Originally we didn't provide any open space, due to the fact that it
wasn't required.. However, after the Planning and Zoning Commission, talking with city
staff, the developer agreed to provide usable open space. So, usable is kind of like the
key word here, because before we did have open space., but it was for a retention pond..
So, technically, it's not super usable. So, with our engineering firm we decided to locate
the retention -- water retention is a seepage bed, which would be underground,
therefore, leaving it more usable and for people to be able to use it. So, today, when we
have so many modifications -- and I do apologize, it was kind of last minute, we decided
to take the -- that one lot, the retention, and move it into another location, which the
engineering felt would be better for water retention. We, actually, increased that lot size
that you see as the new plat to -- so, it will be 50 feet in width. So, it's actually larger.
So, my main point here is that, one, this is more usable than having a retention pond.
Two, with the seepage bed being placed underground, it will be safer not to have a
playground located next to a pond. Three, it's more centrally located. I know that
Planning and Zoning have desires to have it across the street, but we felt on the corner
lot it will be more centrally located, easier for the residents to access, as well as making
it safer and more visible and not so isolated as we know sometimes these common lots
can have some problems. And my fifth and my final point here, trying to persuade you
that while our open space percentage has decreased, in my opinion I feel it has
increased, because it's due to the fact that it's more usable, instead of just having a
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 37 of 1.01
pond. So, I hope that I have made my points and outline and request that I feel this is
the best comprehensive and best scenario for this subject property. And with that I will
stand for any questions and thank you for your time and consideration.
De Weerd.: Sabrina, I guess I have a question as to -- this was in front of the Planning
and Zoning Commission in November and they recommended the changes that I
assume are -- were the ones that were received today. Why were they just received
today?
Whitehead: Well, I -- we didn't get the landscape updated until just recently and it was
my fault for not getting -- us getting it in sooner. I just -- I didn't know if it was going to
be such a concern having it relocated to that lot.
De Weerd: It takes staff time to evaluate, so they can make a recommendation to City
Council and I guess it's just consideration of staffs time and the neighbors. If they
came into our office to look at what would be proposed tonight, we wouldn't be able to
show them what is currently in front of them and I don't think that is fair to the public
either. So, I guess that's my point. And it's not to chastise you, but maybe it is, so --
Council, any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree.: So, what we see here is not what you're saying, you're saying this lot will be
an additional 50 feet?
Whitehead: Is increased. It was originally 35.
Rountree: In width?
Whitehead: And we increased it to 50.
Rountree: And that is taken out of all these lots cumulative and --
Whitehead: Uh-huh.. We reduced them in size. Correct.
Rountree: And they remain in excess of 8,000 square feet?
Whitehead: Correct.
Rountree: Okay.
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 38 of 101
Borton: Madam Mayor. Sabrina, I understand you're kind of in a jam, but I tend to
agree with the Mayor in this situation and at least for me the evaluation of the planning
department and their comments and review are critical in gathering all the information,
not only for us, but also for the -- for the public to be aware of what's going on. Having
something provided the day of, for me I wouldn't even want to go one way or the other
and approve it or not approving the project until that's done and I am extremely sensitive
to delay and I totally understand what that -- what that means to a developer and the
financing, et cetera. In this situation it doesn't look like there is really any -- any unique
excuse which justified what's become a huge delay. What I'm getting at is my sense
would be is just to continue the matter. I mean I, for one, am not comfortable going
forward to approve anything today until staff has a fair opportunity to review it, to look at
it, comment upon it. So, that sort of shortcuts where we are at, at least for me right
now, but I think just to be fair to your client and fair to staff there --
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Not to be repetitive, but what you're describing sounds like very good
changes and I appreciate that you have taken the time to make these changes and
think along with what has been said, you can understand our needs to do that. I mean
there is a lot of things that happen. What may seem like a very minor adjustment in the
plat, in order to move the drainage lot from where you did to across the street,
something has to change in the drainage flow, so, you know, the planning staff needs to
look at it and the Public Works staff needs to look at it to -- to see what those changes
mean- So, it doesn't mean we don't appreciate that you're probably going the right
direction, so --
Whitehead: Sure. No. I understand.
Zaremba: We need our staffs input.
Whitehead: If you feel it would be best to table it -- to continue it for the review, I'm a
hundred percent in support of that, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from Council? Thank you. This
is a Public Hearing and so we'd invite any members of the public who would like to
comment at this time. Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 39 of 101
Bird: What I'm hearing is -- from Councilman Borton is probably continuing these public
hearings, which right now Councilman Rountree and Mr. Clerk, Berg., needs to tell me,
but I think probably the 18th of February would be the soonest we could --
De Weerd: That would be the 19th.
Nary: 19th.
Bird.: 19th I mean. What did I say?
Nary: 18th.
Bird.: 19th is the soonest we can get it. I would like to see the preliminary plat as
presented today, not what we are getting here, and I'd like to see how those other lots
are -- how the 15 foot's taken out, whether it's two foot per lot or 15 foot out of one or --
or what. And so I am with Councilman Borton and if the other Councilmen want to,
would like to continue these public hearings until February 19th and get -- get that
preliminary plat drawn like the proposal they want to present and have it before us.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, just for Council's consideration, the preliminary agenda for
the 19th is pretty busy. I mean we have -- we have Town Center -- it was continued.
But that may not happen. Probably won't. But we have South Meridian Comp Plan
amendment as well. I mean we can try for the 19th and if Town Center doesn't show,
which like I said, probably won't -- have you heard anything from them?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Rountree -- or
President Rountree. Got it the second time.
Rountree: Whatever.
Canning: I had never anticipated you would get much on February 19th, other than an
update as to whether or not they have turned in the traffic study and I have not heard
that they have turned in the traffic study yet, so I can almost assure you that we won't
have anything to present to you on the 19th.
Rountree: Well, that looks like a reasonable date, then.
Bird: Is the 19th okay?
Nary: Yeah.
De Weerd: Okay.
Zaremba: Was the motion seconded? I would if not.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 40 of 101
De Weerd: There was amotion --
Bird: I was going to.
Zaremba: Oh, I thought Keith made it.
Bird: No.
Borton: I appreciate the second in advance. Madam Mayor, I would move that we
continue Items 14 and 15, AZ 07-013 and PP 07-017, to February 19th.
Zaremba: It would be my pleasure to second that motion.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a nice second on Items 14 and 15 to continue
the Public Hearing to February 19, 2008. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion
carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 16: Public Hearing: RZ 07-015 Request for a Rezone of .28 of an acre from
an R-8 residential zone to an O-T zone for 6th and Broadway Property by
Linda Loehr - 532 East Broadway Avenue:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 16 is a Public Hearing on RZ 07-015. I will open this Public
Hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the 6th and Broadway
property and it's located at 532 East Broadway Avenue and the application before you
tonight is a rezone -- it's a rezone of .28 acres from R-8 to OT. The applicant is
requesting the rezone., so that they can build a new two story four-plex on the site.
Under current code multi-family developments are not a permitted use within the R-8.
The Old Town zoning district allows multi-family development as a principally permitted
use. Due to the small size of the subject property and the applicant's intent to improve
the site, staff believes that a DA is not necessary in this instance. And that's, really,
because of the requirement for the design review. Most likely they will be subject to a
conditional use for design review and, therefore, we didn't recommend the DA. We do
have some elevations for you tonight. This is the site plan. Point this out a little bit.
The streets run on the bottom of the page and to the left and, then, an alley runs on this
right side. You have parking off the alley and, then, two parking off of the street.
De Weerd: Anna, do you want to move the microphone closer.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 41 of 101
Canning: Yeah. I'm struggling with trying to see out of my new glasses, so I apologize,
I'm having a hard time getting everything --
De Weerd: That doesn't sound good..
Canning: The gray hair you can cover. The need for glasses is a liftle tougher. Here
are the elevations. This is the roof plan and the reason that the planner wanted to
include the roof plan is to show that the applicant has increased the complexity of the
roof line over time. You would have noticed some old elevations versus new elevations
and they are fairly subtle, but they have increased -- made an intent to increase the
complexity of the building and vary the roof lines and provide some additional materials.
With the -- so, the applicant did submit the elevations and they are all two stories in
height. They all incorporate front porches and provide eight covered carports. Staff is
recommending some changes to the application's elevations and site plan to insure
compliance with the downtown design guidelines. If the following changes are not
made, the applicant may need a CU to construct the four-plexes and that's, again, if it's
not consistent with the design guidelines, a CU is required. Staff believes the building
should shift five feet to the south to allow more turning radius into the rear parking off
the alley. This area. This shift will allow the side of unit one to be built right up to the
back of the sidewalk on Broadway. Parking stalls three and four should be relocated
towards the alley to provide the future tenants more common area. Align these parking
stalls with the other parking stalls. Staff is concerned about the parking stall number
eight being so close to the 6th Street alley intersection. Parking stall number eight
should be shifted to the next parking stalls number one and two. More articulation
should be shown on the front facade along 6th Street. Units one and four should shift
so they are -- one and -- let's see. One and four are these two units. So, units one and
unit four should shift, so that they are built to the back of the sidewalk on 6th Street and
this shift also provides a screen for the parking areas and adds modulation to the front
facade. Staff is recommending changes be done prior to submittal of the CZC. The
Commission recommended approval at their October 4th, 2007, Public Hearing. Linda
Loehr, the property owner, and Dennis Loosli, the applicant's representative, spoke in
favor. John Coles spoke in opposition. No one commented. There was one letter in
opposition from Mrs. Cole and neighbors. Key issues of discussion by the Commission.
None. And there were no substantial changes to staffs initial recommendation. The
outstanding issues for City Council are the neighborhood opposition and perhaps the
need for a DA. Written testimony since the staff report, you are hearing this item tonight
as a request for reconsideration from the applicant. They had a previous hearing that
the applicant was not able to .make and, therefore, requested a reconsideration. And
with that I'll answer any questions that Mayor and Council may have.
De Weerd: Council, any questions? Okay. Is the applicant here? Would the applicant
like to provide testimony? Well, if you want to talk you have to provide testimony. You
will need to state your name and address for the record.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 42 of 101
Loehr: My name is Linda Loehr and my address is 843 West Creek Berry in Meridian,
Idaho..
De Weerd: Thank you.
Loehr: Madam Mayor, I'm not a very good talker, so I just would like to --
De Weerd: That's all right. None of us are.
Loehr: -- get this rezoned, if it's possible.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for the applicant?
Bird.: I have none.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: Director was making some suggestions and I assume you were listening to
them, had them given to you. You are in agreement with the changes that are being
requested?
Loehr: Yes.
Zaremba: Okay. Would you say that loudly?
Loehr: Yes.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, while the applicant is at the podium, what -- what was the
basis of the reconsideration? What are we reconsidering?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there was a family emergency the
night of the hearing and the applicant just couldn't make it and without an applicant, as
sometimes happens, the Council just, without much discussion, moved to deny the
project.
De Weerd: Oh. Now I remember.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 43 of 101
Zaremba: My recollection would be that at the time, along with staff, we were not
happy with the elevations that were presented, with not the opportunity to discuss it, that
was why it was denied, so it sounds like -- to me the elevations are being improved and
I'm glad it's being reconsidered.
De Weerd: And you do agree with -- with where the recommendations are at at this
time?
Loehr: I do.
De Weerd: Okay.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Anna, with your comments and suggested changes, does that bring it into full
compliance with the downtown design guidelines in the Old Town?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the changes that I spoke of today
are in the recommendation from the Commission, so they have been known for quite
some time. We believe they do, but on design ones it's a little hard to see how they --
it's alittle harder to say if you do this, then, it will meet, but we believe that it will get the
application there. It's not as easy as the site plan when you say increase it to 8,000
square feet, then, we know it meets a standard. It's a little tougher on the design
guidelines, because they are more guidelines than standards.
Borton: Okay.
Canning: But we believe it will bring them into compliance.
Borton: Okay. Thanks, Anna.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further for the applicant, Council?
Rountree: I have nothing.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Loehr: Thank you very much.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 44 of 101
De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide
testimony on this application? Okay. Council, seeing no additional public testimony,
do you have any information that you need from staff?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Not from staff, but I think the applicant's representative maybe has a rendering.
De Weerd:: I'm sorry, sir, but we need you to speak on the record.
Borton: Madam Mayor, I had seen you hold that up and wanted to give you a chance
to --
Loosli: My name is Dennis Loosli. Address 1220 North Meridian Road., Suite B,
Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Loosli: And here was a rendering that the architect had drawn up.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Does that incorporate the changes recommended by staff?
Loosli: I thought it had., yes.
Bird: It looks like it's up to the sidewalk.
De Weerd: They have seen those changes.
Loosli: Would you like me to bring this close?
Canning: No. I can actually -- make distance vision is pretty good. It's the close-up
stuff. No. I'm just -- it does appear to have the modulation of unit one and unit four and
it does appear to be -- the site concerns are -- appear to be met.
Borton: Madam Mayor. I don't know if that's something that you have got in electronic
format --
Loosli: Yes, we do.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 45 of 101
Gorton: -- that can be provided and incorporated into --
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, they will need to submit for a
certificate of zoning compliance and at this point we are recommending a development
agreement, so there would be no need to collect a copy of that, other than --
Borton: You are recommending?
Bird: Yes.
Borton: Okay.
Canning: No. Right now we are not recommending a DA. So, if Council wants to
attach these elevations to a DA, then, that would need to be in addition to the
Commission's recommendation.
Borton: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council?
Rountree: I have nothing.
Bird: I have nothing.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further information needed, I would entertain a motion
to close the Public Hearing.
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close the Public Hearing on RZ 07-015.
Rountree: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item
16. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 46 of 1.01
Bird: I move that we approve RZ 07-015 and to incorporate staff and applicant and
public testimony. In particular applicant's agreement to re-adjust the building and make
some changes as directed by the staff.
Rountree: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. I have motion and a second. Mr. Bird. If you will add on the
elevation to be submitted to the city and tied to this.
Bird: New elevations to be submitted electrically to the city.
De Weerd: Okay. Second agree?
Rountree: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call.: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. We have been meeting since 5:30 and., I apologize, but we need to
take a ten minute break. So, we will reconvene at 9:30.
(Recess)
Item 17: Public Hearing: AZ 07-016 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 224.
29 acres from RR to R-2 zone (45.14 acres) and R-8 zone (179.16 acres)
for Castle Rock by Providence Development Group, LLC -south of East
Amity Road and west of South Eagle Road:
Item 18: Public Hearing: PP 07-020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval
consisting of 848 residential building lots and 100 common /other lots on
181. 11 acres in proposed R-2 and R-8 zones for Castle Rock by
Providence Development Group, LLC -south of East Amity Road and
west of South Eagle Road.:
Item 19: Public Hearing: PUD 07-001 Request for approval of a Planned Unit
Development for deviations from district requirements to provide an
opportunity for exemplary site development for Castle Rock by
Providence Development Group., LLC -south of East Amity Road and
west of South Eagle Road:
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 47 of 101
De Weerd: Okay. I'll go ahead and bring this meeting to order again and open the
public hearings on Items 17, 18 and 19, which is AZ 07-016., PP 07-020, and PUD 07-
001,with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is the Castle Rock project. It's
located on the west side of Eagle Road midway between Amity and Lake Hazel. The
property consists of 224. 29 acres. The applications before you tonight are annexation
and zoning, preliminary plat, and planned unit development approval. The preliminary --
or the annexation. and. zoning is of 224.29 acres. R-2 for 45. 14 acre and R-8 for
179.16 acres. You can see those district boundaries on this illustration. So, the
annexation does include the large lots on top of the hill. The preliminary plat consists of
847 single family residential lots and 99 common lots, on 182.08 acres. In the planned
unit development or PUD is for deviations from the district requirements pertaining to lot
size, street frontage, and building setbacks, to provide an opportunity for exemplary site
development. The gross density of the R-2 area, including Black Rock Subdivision No.
1, is 2.39 dwelling units per acre. The gross density of the R-8 area 4.71 dwelling units
per acre. And the overall density of the proposed development is 4.65 dwelling units
per acre. And, again, that's excluding Black Rock Subdivision No. 1. Approximately
22.8 percent or 41.6 acres of the area being subdivided is being set aside for open
space. There are some proposed development agreement requirements of interest -- or
of note and those are that the applicant shall provide a ten foot wide multi-use pathway
on the south side of the Ten Mile Creek, as depicted on the landscape plan. And the
applicant shall construct said pathway to the parks department standard and grant the
city an easement. The applicant shall construct a neighborhood park on the site. It's
right in the center of the development. And dedicate said park to the city. The
neighborhood park shall be constructed and accepted by the city prior to the 400th
building permit being issued for this development. And, then, as far as the planned unit
development allowances, were as follows: For the street setback, the living area would
have a ten foot setback and garages, a 20 foot setback. For alleys, the living area
would not -- on the village lots, which are these alley loaded lots down here, would have
a ten foot setback and the garage would have a 20 foot setback and the side setback
would be five feet in the Legend and Cottage areas. The applicant will have to describe
-- let's see. The Legend series -- custom homes are in this kind of orangish -- darker
orangish color. The Legend series is the -- this other lighter orange color. The Cottage
series is this purplish one. Mauvish perhaps. And, then, the alley series homes are
these down here. So, the side setback in the Legend and Cottage series -- so, that's in
this orange color and this mauve, would be five feet, but within the Village area it would
be two feet and eight feet. So, there would still beaten foot setback, it would just be
kind of staggered.. The rear setback would be 12 feet. A minimum lot size would be
4,200 in the Legend area and 3,.800 in the Cottage area and 3,100 in the Village area.
Minimum living area would be 1,400 in the Legend., 1,000 in the cottage, and 900 in the
Village. And, then, we have varying lot frontages measured at the garage front setback
from down to 40 and minimum lot frontage measured at the street from -- at 30 for
Legend and Cottage and 40 for Village. The DA requires that they set side at least 22.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 48 of 101
8 acres as usable open space. Construction materials used on the wall surfaces of all
structures shall incorporate a minimum of three different types of materials. Materials
may include the following: Vertical and horizontal siding. Board and batten. Shingle.
Shake. Hardwood. Scallops. Stucco. Brick or stone. And that was per the Castle
Rock design guidelines. All structures shall substantially comply with the building
elevations submitted with this application, included in Exhibit A, and approved with the
application. And I will run through those. The applicant I know will provide more detail
on these. We have quite a few elevations. The Commission recommended -- the
Commission held a hearing on this item on December 6, 2007. At that Public hearing
they moved to recommend denial of the subject annexation, zoning, preliminary plat,
and PUD request. Jerry Armstrong and Justin Lucas from Hubble Homes spoke in
favor, as did Shawn Tracy. Craig Sabala, Tony Sabala, Charmaine Anderson, Debbie
Wickham, Tim Foster, Russ Fulcher, Tim Taylor, Tom Sylvester, Jenny Foster and
Darwin McKay, spoke in opposition. Barbara Fulcher commented. And there was no
written testimony provided. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were
clarification of the cooing concept proposed within the development. Adequacy and the
number of parking stalls proposed on the city park site. The effect of traffic generated
by the proposed development, with traffic signals at the Eagle-Amity intersection and
the entrance to the subdivision. The donation of the 7. 1 acre -- 7. 19 acre park to the
City of Meridian, including the ground, lawn, sprinkler, trees, and parking lot. The
requirement for the structures is to incorporate three different types of materials on the
wall surfaces. The proposed density of the plat in relation to the desired density
contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Not enough transition in lot sizes between the
lots on periphery of the development and the adjacent rural lot properties. Allowing the
applicant to -- the opportunity to continue the project in order to redesign the plat
according to the Commission's discussion, instead of issuing a recommendation of
denial. The applicant was given that opportunity to continue the project. However, the
applicant declined for timewise reasons and asked that the Commission forward a
recommendation onto the City Council. Outstanding issues for City Council. The
Commission, as noted, did recommend denial for the following reasons: The majority
of the Commission felt that the proposed density of the plat does not meet the intent of
the Comprehensive Plan and that a step up in density to R-8 is too high for the area.
And, two, the Commission would like to see larger lots along the perimeter of the
subdivision, especially adjacent to the Black Rock ridge area. So, we have received
written testimony since the staff report and, in fact, we have received a revised plat and
product exhibit, both dated December 21st. Staff has reviewed the revised plat and
sent a memo to the City Council, dated January 17th detailing the proposed changes.
Basically, those changes say -- are that the lot size and number -- there are larger and
fewer lots are now depicted along the southwest -- southwest and northwest boundaries
of the plat. So, along here, here, and along the west. The original plat consisted of 847
buildable lots. The revised plat consists of 789 buildable lots. Open space -- the open
space that was originally shown on the rear of the lots along the south boundary, has
been removed and other open space areas have been reduced in size. The original
plat consisted of 22. 8 percent of open space. The revised plat consists of 21. 3
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 49 of 101
percent. The overall density of the original plat was 4. 65 dwelling units per acre. The
overall density of the revised plat is 4. 33 dwelling units per acre. The density of the
area designated low density residential on the Comprehensive Plan was originally 4. 48
dwelling units per acre. The revised plat depicts a density of 3. 5 dwelling units per
acre. And, again, those numbers do not include the existing Black Rock Subdivision.
Although staff has not performed a comprehensive review of the revised plat, these
appear to be the major changes that are not reflected in the staff report. For tonight's
hearing staff did receive -- and I know that Council received additional written testimony
from Russ Fulcher. And with that I will answer any questions. The applicant did inform
us early on that they would be providing a revised plat. Staff is always in a -- a little bit
of a difficult situation with revised plats, because we feel obligated to bring you the
Planning Commission's recommendation and that's what we do. That's why those were
outlined in a separate memo to Mayor and Council regarding the revised plat.
De Weerd: Anna, it seems like there is a substantial change in the plat and it certainly,
I believe, was initiated because of the comments at the Commission and probably the
subsequent denial. But these look substantial. Shouldn't they go back to -- what is the
proper procedure of that? Should not they go back to the Commission, rather than to
come to Council?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that is certainly an option left open
to Council to remand it back to Planning and Zoning Commission. We did discuss with
the applicant that that would be a possibility. So, they are aware and prepared for that.
The changes within those areas -- they did not relocate roads. What they did was
combine lots in these areas. So, they, basically, would just reduce the number of lots
there, without changing the road pattern. So, although it's substantial because of the
number of changes and just the sheer size of the project, they were fairly easy to
visualize, but we certainly warned them that a remand back to Planning and Zoning
Commission was maybe in their future.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: Question for Anna. Anna, do you think that this revision -- and I'll ask the
applicant as well, but from your perspective this revision was an attempt to address all
or a portion of the comments that were received from Planning and Zoning?
Canning: They were clearly an attempt to address what they felt they could address
from the Commission's concerns. There is a -- there is -- the question with regard to
density was not resolved and I haven't highlighted it much. Basically, a portion of this is
shown as low density and if you -- if you calculate in the existing Castle Rock, which is
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 50 of 101
part of this annexation, it brings those densities into line. But the preliminary plat, as
you look at the Comprehensive Plan boundaries, the plat, in and of itself, does not meet
the density targets and that was a big issue of discussion and it was just an agreement
to disagree on how to calculate the appropriate density for that project, whether or not to
use the existing Castle -- or Black Rock property. So, that issue has not been resolved..
I think the other issues with regard to buffering the larger lots along the rim and along
the boundaries, they have attempted to meet the concerns expressed by the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. Anna, does staff utilize some type of formula for calculating
the density?
Canning; Just units per acre..
Rountree: But in this particular application it's multiple acres with multiple zoning. So,
is it by application or is it by a spot on the map or how is it calculated?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, typically, we do not have an
annexation area that varies this significantly from the preliminary plat. So, to my
knowledge we have never had to address this issue.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Steve, did you want to go ahead and make staff comment at this time
about the park?
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, on November 14th, 2007, the
Parks and Recreation Commission did meet and discuss with the applicant the
proposed neighborhood park that is in the center of the project. The Commission does
recommend approval of the proposed partnership and as it came before the
commission there were originally additional lots that -- that wrapped down this west side
and the proposed parking lot came into center of the project and kind of bisected the
park. Based on the Commission's discussion, they have removed those lots and
increased the number of parking spaces available to address the Commission's
comments. Staff comments to the Commission at the time -- or, actually, recommended
removal of the lots that wrap the park to try and provide additional views and
accessibility into the park. If you -- can you go back to the plat, Anna, or -- as you can
see wifh the park located here and the lots that are along the north side, there are
several streets that come into the park that could terminate with a vista into the park if
those lots were not there and that was -- that's an outstanding issue from a staff
perspective. However, what is shown here does meet the commission's requirements
of the -- of the applicant. So, that would be the only outstanding issues from the -- from
staffs perspective and I'll stand for any questions.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 51 of T01
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: A couple questions for Steve. Again, you feel that the parking provided
would be sufficient for the kinds of uses that would occur atthis --
Siddoway: Yes. The amount of parking in the revised plan I .believe is 49 spaces, if I'm
remembering correctly, and for a neighborhood park that would be adequate.
Rountree: And I guess this is a -- I'm seeking your opinion, but one would think that the
neighbors adjacent to a park would be a good thing and there would be a good neighbor
relationship. However, I've not found that to be true. There becomes a turf battle
between the neighbors and the park in terms of, well, it's not green enough or the
leaves are not picked up on time or somebody's playing near my backyard. I have
some issues with that. What's your opinion as a new parks administrator?
Siddoway: Well, I -- I certainly see -- there are always those types of conflicts,
whenever you have active public recreation uses, ball fields, playgrounds, next to back
yards. My initial recommendation was to remove that entire row of lots from the park,
so that you just had a -- kind of a central park with a ring road and all the roads just kind
of terminated into it. It would address the types of concerns you -- you bring up. When
look at the road configuration, if the -- for me, if the -- if the issue is really the access
and the views and the terminal vistas for each of those roads to be able to have the
park at their end as you drive through the subdivision and really make it part of the
community and their identity, that -- that road there is the most critical for me, as
additional lots to remove adjacent to the park, but certainly I -- by removing all of them
you would address those concerns that you bring up.
Rountree: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: If recollection serves me correct, at some point in this process I thought
there was also a request from the police department not to have that same row of
houses there and I guess I would ask the police department to chime in as well.
Lavey: Madam Mayor, Council, I am not aware of my staff recommendations as far as
removing those houses and any recommendations that the police department had
would be contained in the staff report that Anna provides today.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 52 of 101
De Weerd.: Council, anything further?
Rountree: I have nothing at this point.
Bird: Not at this time.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from staff at this time?
Hearing --
Zaremba: Are these the elevations?
Canning: There is a variety of material.
Okay. This is a Public
De Weerd: This is a Public Hearing and we were going to hear a presentation about a
particular type of application called cooing that is part of this application. Council did not
want to hear it separate, so we did offer to allow up to seven minutes extra to the
applicant's presentation to talk specifically about cooing. So, I would suggest to the
applicant let's hear the cooing aspect first and, then, we will enter into your time element
for the application itself.
Armstrong: Madam Mayor, City Council, my name is Jerry Armstrong. My business
address 701 Allen Street, Meridian, Idaho. I'm currently the vice-president of land
development and planning for Provident Development Company. What I'd like to share
with you this evening is just the general concept of cooing. This is unique to Meridian
and so we thought it was really important to kind of understand this concept. We spent
a great deal of time discussing this issue with Planning and Zoning to try to get them to
understand what Cooing is about. In introducing this -- this new concept, what this is
about is the feeling you get as you progress through a subdivision. In other words, as a
car is moving down the street, the headlights would shine into this green open space
that's in front of these homes, rather than into the homes themselves. What it does is
allows for increased landscaping within this coved area that you don't normally see in
normal subdivisions. The other thing you get with the curved street is a variety of
orientation of the houses, all of the houses facing a different direction, instead of being
all lined up in a row. The other thing it does is it increases the front yard setback.
Instead of the house sitting up next to the road, you have a great deal of setback from
the street. In addition, you get a meandering sidewalk through this landscape area,
rather than just an attachment of the sidewalk to the curb. This gives you a lot more
feeling of meandering sidewalk and allows for a lot more landscape. Next. This is an
illustration of a typical subdivision. The same amount of land as the cooing concept.
The difference is if you look at just the road configuration here, you will see that the
roadway itself, just right of way, eats up 23 percent of the total ground mass of the same
size, where on the cooing concept you utilize only 11 percent. So, you almost cut in half
the amount of roadway in the cooing design. What does that mean? What that means
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 53 of 101
is it helps solve one of the problems we currently have with ACRD and that is they can't
maintain all these roads that we are building and this cuts down the amount of asphalt
that we are putting in the road. In addition to that, we are also talking about all the
utilities that go in that street as well. The storm drainage system, your cable system, all
the various utilities that go in that roadway system, you have reduced them by almost
50 percent. The second issue is by better utilization of the land you actually increase
the size of the lots. For example, in here these lots are roughly 13,000 square feet
each. With the coving concept they are 14,000. So, it increases the number of lots -- or
the size of the lots. In addition, you increase the density, because the lots are narrower
in configuration, you can put them in a different configuration and so you create this
meandering -- or the very front setbacks, you also have what we call facade modulation.
So, a number of -- a key issue is you're adding curved streets, which, actually, reduce
the speed. You have a varied front setback. You have the facade modulation. You can
see how these houses look laid out on these various lots, versus all in a row. You have
the increased open space and you have decreased roadway. Here is an aerial of an
example of coving that inserted in a standard subdivision. This is down in Spanish
Fork, Utah. This is an aerial. These two subdivisions on either side were built first.
What this shows is a coving concept coming through the middle of this area. What you
can see from the area -- or from the aerial view is you. can see these large areas of
open space in here versus the standard subdivision where there is no open space in
this. Same amount of road area. In here there is more density in the coved area. We
took these neighbors and we had them stand down here at this same corner, the same
corner that they stand in their subdivision and we asked them which development had
the higher density and they said their subdivision did, versus the coving. So, you get
the illusion of more open space and it actually decreases the roadway as well. This is
an example in our project that we are proposing here, this is where our Cottage series
are. But what we have chosen to do with this is instead of the roadway following this
line, which would normally be the setback line of the lots along here, you can see that
the roadway substantially decreases in the amount of area. You're also putting a trail
through there and you're also adding more to the front yard. The reason you're doing
that and the reason why we are asking for the R-8 zoning is because the lots don't meet
the minimum size and the width. The width of the lot is actually back at this build to line.
So, what we do is establish on the plat what we call a build to line. That's this line right
here. So, you're actually building the houses to that varied line back there, rather than
the lot line, which is out at the -- out at the street. What are the benefits of coving?
Number one, you get a decreased length of street and maintenance cost. In the case
that we compared, our new layout versus the old layout, even with higher density we
are reducing the lengths of street by 24 percent. We are talking about reduced public
utilities for .more efficient delivery of services and we are, again, reducing the amount of
public utilities in the streets by over 25 percent. The additional benefit you get is
reduced maintenance, of course, of that sewer water over time, as well as the reduced
maintenance of the street over time. But the real neat thing is you really provide
increased open space in the other areas and we have not included in our open space
calculation the coving, which is an additional benefit to the -- to the calculation. One of
Meridian Ciry Council
January 22, 2008
Page 54 of 101
the things that this promotes, then, is higher densities, which also promotes sustainable
development over time, because you can afford to pay for the maintenance of these
benefits. So -- so, with that, that's pretty much the cooing. If you have any questions I
would be happy to address any of those.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird.: On the cooing, I know the lot line goes out to the road. I take it that the developer
will put in the landscaping and walkway and stuff like that and, then, each homeowner
will be responsible for upkeeping it, just like the rest of their property; right?
Armstrong: Yeah. This, actually, owned -- is owned by the property owner.
Bird: That's what I mean.
Armstrong: They actually own that land and they take care of the maintenance of that
landscaped area.
Bird: Who puts in the walkway and stuff, the meandering walkway?
Armstrong.: Well, in this case, you know, the developer's putting in the walkway, as well
as the front yard and landscaping.
Bird: Because I was going to say, some of those individuals might not want to put in a
walkway or something.
Armstrong: Right. And, traditionally, the way this is done is you make a requirement
for the developer to put in the sidewalk, as well as to put in the landscape and sprinkler
in that .particular area out there, because that benefits everyone. And you want kind of
a uniform appearance, you don't -- you don't want a whole bunch of difference. I can
give you kind of an example that -- I have a project that I worked on, oh, almost 25
years ago. It is down at Riverside Village in Garden City with those lakes that are -- as
you drive down Riverside Village you notice it has a cooing, that road meanders through
there. It's offset from the Boise River. That's an example of what cooing is and that
was done a number of years ago there in Garden City. And you can see that generous
setbacks and a lot of that is maintained -- the way we chose to do it in that particular
case was under the HOA. So, the HOA maintains that natural green area and the
sidewalk, so that -- because they learn from that experience that there was more
continuity of control over the landscape materials that go -- go in there. And it's been
very successful.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 55 of 101
De Weerd: Well, that makes more sense than having each property owner maintain it
differently, fertilize it differently, mow it at different times -- I mean there wouldn't be a
unified look to it.
Armstrong: Right. And legally, though, they do own that lot. They do own that lot. But
it's the same thing, you know, when you run lot lines a lot of times out into a water
amenity like a lake, the lot lines run out into the lake physically, but the lake is
maintained by the homeowners association. So, it's the same feeling, because you
want the same look and feel of the beaches and everything else along the waterway, so
that's typically, legally, how it's down.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: It definitely makes sense to me that there should be common maintenance
to it. The other question, since each plot is individually owned, it would seem to me
there also needs to be across-access agreement, because if I owned one of those
houses, I'm allowing the public to walk through my property.
Armstrong: Yeah. There --
Zaremba: Are you providing cross-agreement?
Armstrong: There has to be in that case to have that sidewalk there, if it's owned in
common. In other words, if it's maintained in common. I'm sorry. Rather than the
individual taking care of that piece of sidewalk. The other thing -- the other unique thing
about this concept is in some cases you will see in like Riverside Village, they actually
had common driveways. So, instead of having two driveways or 24 foot wide concrete
pad leading up to their home, there is one driveway that's only 12 foot wide that serves
two 24 foot wide garages, so instead of 48 foot of asphalt, you put that in green and you
only put in a 12 foot wide driveway leading up to those -- those homes. It's, really, a
way to provide additional landscape.
De Weerd: Any other questions, Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor, if I may ask. On your build line, you don't -- your width of your lot
at the build line is pretty close to an R-4 width, isn't it, Jerry?
Armstrong: That's correct. What happens is -- is right here at the build to line we do
meet the -- your standard width requirement on all the lots. The issue is that out at the
street, because of the taper, it doesn't. And that's one of the problems with regulations
when you regularize the size of lots, you can't bring in the creativity of varying frontages
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 56 of 101
on lots. And this solves that issue, because part of the platting process -- we, actually,
put on the plat this -- this build to line here, which establishes also this setback line that
you see for each of the individual pads for the homes. The other thing I might mention
is because of that, if this is your minimum lot, what it does is give each of the owners a
larger backyard. In other words, they are all wider in the rear as well.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions about the cooing concept?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Armstrong: Thank you for allowing me the time to present that, because it is a difficult
thing if you haven't seen it before, to kind of get a total grasp of what's going on, so
appreciate your time on that.
De Weerd: Okay. We will go ahead and take your presentation on the application
Castle Rock.
Armstrong: Okay. What I want to talk a little bit about is -- so you understand why we
asked to have this moved to the City Council from the Planning and Zoning, was an
issue of timing. We have some large real estate contracts that are due on the 13th of
February and so we wanted to bring it before the Council, so we could at least get your
-- our look see at the whole thing. If there are changes, we would be happy to go back
and do them, but we -- we needed to for the timing of those contracts. Just know that
since we met with Planning and Zoning we had a second neighborhood meeting
regarding the redesign. In addition, we have met with the staff. The other thing that
was missing at Planning and Zoning is now we have the approval of the ACHD
commission on the transportation piece. Our revised layout, we have more transition of
the lot size, which they had requested. The overall decrease was the 59 lots and, in
addition, just know that we are in full agreement with the planning staffs original
conditions of approval. We wanted to contrast the original application of the Castle
Greens, so you get a quick picture. Originally we had 644 lots. Prior to Planning and
Zoning we had 848. We now have 789. The units per acre, contrast the old plan, 3. 62
to 4. 33. We increased the open space from between 27 acres to 39 acres, 29. 3
percent. We have added four different housing types. We have upgraded the
architecture. We have done innovative land plans, as well as design guidelines. The
context in which we did the design was recognizing this prominent ridge along here,
which goes from 100 feet vertical down to 32 feet. The Ten Mile Creek, which his all on
our property. In addition, relocation of the Beasley Lateral. You can see on the site
plan this is the existing Black Rock development here with the green space in the
middle. This is that ridge, runs along here. At this end it's about 100 feet vertical and
about 35 at this end. So, all these houses up on this ridge actually look out over top of
any homes that would be built at that lower level. The other key feature was moving the
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 57 of 101
original park from this location back to the center of the piece, so that from these lots up
here you would have the view of this large park area, which is also increased in size. In
addition to that, the other features are for these people up here are these open spaces
that we created by doing the cooing, in these areas which would have various activities
in those. We even centered this Village around about a one and a half acre park. The
other thing, instead piping the water out of this Beasley Lateral, we chose to open that
up and have a water feature through the site. And here this is that Ten Mile Canal that's
located along here. We are allowing about a hundred foot buffer along there, which
would be a landscape buffer area. This is your current Comprehensive Plan. To kind of
address the question that came out earlier, this is an imaginary line that's drawn on your
current Comprehensive Plan where this green is. That's showing low density, zero to
three units per acre. If you calculate that out, we are providing 257 units total in that
area, which is the total annexed area. That's two and a half units per acre. For the
medium density, which is in the yellow, is designated as three to eight units per acre.
We are providing 570 units there at 4. 74. If you take the total area, the green and the
yellow, and add them together, the low and the medium, the total allowed on this total
site is 1,208 housing units. The annexed area total is the 224 acres. A total of 833
units, for an overall density of 3. 71. Transportation is key. I think the chief talked
about this earlier. Prior to the -- right at the beginning of the -- of the development we
would provide an emergency connection to White -- through White Bark Subdivision to
Amity Road.. We agreed with the ACHD commission. Went back and negotiated to add
a signalized intersection at Eagle and Amity Road at the 127th lot, which is paid by the
developer. We would also provide a signalized intersection with dedicated turn lanes at
the entrance of the project, which is about the half mile section after the 400 -- or prior
to the 400th lot. We would also review at the 200th lot whether or not that would be
needed. The transportation by having the on-site recreational opportunities, will actually
reduce vehicle trips per day. We have the possibility of a shuttle service that will be
operated by St. Luke's, as well as Valley Ride, a transit stop that we have agreed to
build.. I want to talk about the architecture. What we have provided here -- and you
have a copy of our Comprehensive Plan design guidelines. We have had housing
diversity, four distinctive housing types, with the emphasis on adding front porches and
corner elevations, as well as facade modulation to all the units. You will see our custom
lots here, which was an addition from the Planning and Zoning. These are all
approximately quarter acre lots, so that provides a transition from these half acre lots
into the quarter acre. There is 120 of those custom house sites. The custom house
sites would be two different kinds of housing types. One would be a custom builder
partnership or the Hubble signature series of the higher end product, upgraded
architecture, a commitment to do ten percent brick or stone. Three materials, as
expressed by the staff. Living spaces or porch would extend out to the street beyond
the garage and we would have corner lot architecture. These are some pictures of
those. This is our Legend neighborhood. These are our larger series of homes in this
area. You will see they are all orchestrated around these common open areas where
people can meet and greet. This is the neighborhood. You will see these are not all
lined up in a row. These all have the front articulation of the architecture. We have a
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 58 of 101
variety of material, board and batten and brick, other features all along, so both sides of
the street have a very different kind of look and feel. The Legend series have distinctive
lifestyle floor plans that are unique and upgraded and we have upgraded elevations
facing the open space, as well as the larger lot. This is our new elevation, which --
which we reviewed with staff, showing the various materials. All these with the front
porches. This is our Cottage neighborhood. This is around that Beasley Lateral and is
also orchestrated around these open spaces, as well as face on to the neighborhood
park. You can see that all the housing type in here, the architecture, the main part of
the house, extends out beyond the garage. So, they are no longer garage dominated
elevations. This is an entirely new series and the homes will start at 900 to 2,400
square feet, with the patios and living spaces extended towards the street and extensive
facade modulation. You can see the extra architecture that we are adding into this
specific unit. The rear architecture, we'd also have a variety of material types and large
extensions and overhangs. Then, we have the traditional Village. These are our alley-
loaded product that are organized around an additional park that is for all age groups.
These are the alley loaded. Has unique architecture. They all will have porches facing
out onto the street all along here, so as you drive down a street all you see are front
porches. The living spaces are ran into the side yard and we offer these in both one
and two story floor plans. Here is your two story. Here is your one story with the front
porches. This is a site plan of one of the units, which shows the living has been
organized off to the side of the unit, rather than to the front or to the rear. Landscaping.
We will provide sod and sprinklers will be installed in front of all yards of every house in
the development. The homeowner will be responsible for a minimum of one tree and
five shrubs in the front yard within 30 days of closing, as required by the CC&Rs. We
also are offering additional full landscape packages. Our space amenities include the
neighborhood park, pocket parks, gazebos, tot lots, basketball courts, bike paths, and..,
then, we have the landscape buffers along Ten Mile Creek and the spine road. Again,
the city neighborhood .park, which is kind of the center piece of the whole thing. This is
the neighborhood park of the Village Green. Again, we are providing something for all
age groups, with basketball, tot lot, gazebo. We will have picnic tables.. We have these
pocket parks. Each one of them would have their unique identity where they would
have basketball for the teenagers. We would have tot lots and areas for the elderly and
for the young tots. Different amenities in each of these specific areas. The Beasley
Lateral, which would be about a hundred foot wide in width, we would provide a major
trail running through here, which could become a regional trail, as well as the water
amenity through this area. In addition, we have agreed to put in landscape buffers from
the neighbor over here, who suggested that we provide an intense landscape buffer.
This is a picture of what that buffer would look like. Also, we committed to the people
up -- living up at Castle Rock along the spine road., we would also do heavily
landscaped buffer along that entire spine road., which would look like this. The
neighborhood park, we did meet with the parks commission. You know that we got their
approval for this current layout. One of the issues was that we needed to have over
seven acres, which we did. This is 7. 19 acres. This is a park that's designed for all
age groups. I would also like you to know That Hubble Homes is donating this entire
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 59 of 101
park to the City of Meridian, not only the property, which is worth 898,00.0 dollars, but
also all landscape with sprinklers for an additional 673,.000, pathways for 15,000 and
parking lot for 64,000. So, the entire gift to the City of Meridian is 1. 65 million dollars.
In addition to that, we are networking all these parks, so you can walk through the entire
development without walking next to a road, through all these different parks, are all
interconnected and they all come to this central piece, which is the large neighborhood
park, but we have put in over five miles of trailway systems throughout this project. We
also -- this is the regional park along the Ten Mile here, as well as this additional piece
through here. The connectivity is we have the regional pathway along Ten Mile, which
we agreed would be the ten foot wide. We also have over five miles -- this is what that
would look like along the Beasley Lateral when it gets fully developed as more of a
natural landscaping with the water. Clear linkages between all the parks and over 39
acres of connected space. So, with that I would like to thank you for your favorable
consideration and open it up for any questions that you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Gorton.
Borton: Jerry, you made one comment several slides back -- I thought of stopping you,
but it was with regards to the -- the landscaping in the front yards of the homes and I
think it said something. to the effect of front yards would be in within or at closing -- or
prior to closing?
Zaremba: Just the sod..
Armstrong: The sod and sprinklers we will do.
Borton: Okay.
Armstrong: The sidewalks, sod, and sprinklers, we are installing those before we close
any house.
Gorton: Okay.
Armstrong: And, then, the homeowner will be responsible -- because they may want to
pick their own kind of tree that they want, but we are going to require that within 30 days
of closing they will do a minimum of one tree and five shrubs. Now, they can choose to
go ahead and have us do it during this stage, but we are allowing them at least the 30
days until closing. And., then, we do offer other full landscape packages, which include
rock and some of the other upgraded packages as well.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 60 of 1.01
Borton: Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Who is going to enforce the 30 day limit?
Armstrong: We will.
Zaremba: Okay. Let me ask Anna, if I may. Is the requirement to have trees and
shrubs in the front yard only a CC&R issue or does the city also require that?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no, we do not require trees in the
front yard.
Zaremba: All right.
Canning: We have policies related to trees in a landscape buffer for a detached
sidewalk if you want it to count as open space. Perhaps that's what Councilmember
Zaremba is recalling.
Zaremba: Thanks. On -- same subject. On the -- what do you call it, houses that
would include the coving, is that considered their front yard or would the trees and
shrubs have to be out of the coving area?
Armstrong: No. It's included in the -- that is their front yard. It's part of their lot. So, all
that coving area that you saw will have the lawn and sprinklers in it.
Zaremba: Okay. But, then, the trees and shrubs that they would install would go in
that coving area as well?
Armstrong: Would be the same -- yeah. Absolutely. Because that is their front yard,
so -- and when -- one other thing. In those deeper lots, obviously, we have other
landscaping packages that will -- will be a better fit.
De Weerd: So, will there be common maintenance in the coving areas?
Armstrong: Well, you know, we haven't really discussed that. We have not made that
a condition for these people, but, you know, if that was desirable from the City Council's
point of view, you know, I mean we would certainly take a look at that. I mean as you
can tell by all the other open space that we have on the site, it's all going to be taken
care of by the homeowners association, so you can imagine the dues are going to be
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 61 of 101
pretty high for each of the individuals. But if that's desirable from the City Council, we'd
certainly be willing to take a look at that.
Bird: And, Madam Mayor, it would from my point, Jerry, because I think Mayor talked
about it a little earlier, one person mows once a week and another person mows twice a
week and one mows once a month, all in the coved area. You don't get a -- it don't look
right. I think something like that where you put in and stuff, hopefully the homeowner
association would have it taken care of and I don't think it costs that much more while
you're taking care of all that open space at the same time. I would desire that if it was
possible.
Armstrong: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, I think how we would probably handle
that is I know at Riverside Village it's more of an easement, so they create an easement
to that build to line and., then, that's how they take care of that. The only impact is it,
you know, increases the dues for the individual homeowner, but a lot of them like that
service, just because it really does add to that uniformity of the entire area and really
looks nice.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: Riverside is done that way, if I remember right.
Armstrong: It is.
Bird: And it's by the homeowners association.
Armstrong: Yes. It's done by one landscape and., then, they put that out to bid every
year for those services.
Bird: I would prefer that myself, if it's possible. It's marketable.
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. Since Kyle's here this evening and somewhere in this pile of
paper that I have got it's probably mentioned, but is Ten Mile or Beasley Creek, either
one, subject to our floodway, flood zone requirements and have they been met?
Radek: Madam Mayor, Council Members, Ten Mile Creek does have a FEMA map to
flood plain. It's in our number A zone and I think this -- this development came through
before we had our -- originally, preliminarily, before we had our flood plain application.
but it certainly will be addressed before anything is built and from the looks of it what
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 62 of 101
they are planning to do is, for lack of better words, not a big deal for flood plain it won't
be hard to meet our requirements.
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: I guess I would have a question regarding your difference of calculation of
low density in that area that's next to the phase that's already developed and not in the
city. Because it's not in the city and it's not part of this annexation application, why is
that being used into your calculation on densities?
Armstrong: This entire area is being annexed into the City of Meridian.
De Weerd: The area that is already developed that already has houses on it?
Bird: Castle Rock.
Armstrong: That's correct.
De Weerd: Oh.
Armstrong: That was an agreement that was reached when the original Castle Rock
Subdivision came through that -- there was an agreement between the City of Meridian
and the development that --
De Weerd: To bring water --
Armstrong: -- the city would provide sewer and water to that development that when
this contiguous land got annexed that it would all be annexed together. So, all the sales
contracts in Black Rock reflect the fact that it would be annexed into the City of
Meridian. Therefore, those calculations of the density.
De Weerd: Now, also in the -- the first application some of the concerns expressed at
that time was certainly the densities, but, then, also the look and the accent. Now, I did
notice in one of your slides it said ten percent accent. Is that consistent throughout or
are you going to have a higher accent requirement in the area surrounding the lower
density?
Armstrong.: This is, actually, a higher requirement in those buffer lots and if we can go
back to that -- that site. We, actually, chose to do two rows of housing, so as you drive
down the street you would have the consistency and look and feel on both sides of the
street as you drive down, so you don't have a different look. So, you have the quarter
acre lot on both sides and that way you can control that facade modulation in those and
we do have a higher level of architecture required. Obviously, we have to, because of
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 63 of 101
the size of those -- those lots. We have to have premium dollars for those -- for those
particular lots. So, therefore, the architecture will be substantially greater.
De Weerd.: And what does that mean?
Armstrong: I think we had it in our design guidelines, but this pretty much discusses
what that is, that we have agreed to the minimum of the three material types, we have
agreed --
De Weerd: Oh, that's only the custom home sites, that's not the entire subdivision. I'm
sorry, I --
Armstrong.: This is the custom home. We broke it down into the Legends, but all of
them have increased architecture, if that's the question. As I went through each one of
those neighborhoods, they all have the distinctive floor and upgraded architecture. No
matter which series it is, we committed to the upgraded corner lot elevations, the
upgraded elevations facing out on the open space, which that means they will have
porches and that. The only differentiation is in the lot size. And we have committed to
the architecture that was shown in the design guidelines, which the staff reviewed and
supported. And it's very carefully laid out in there exactly what the specifics area that
we are -- we are required to do. And they recommended approval of that.
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: Jerry, go back to the overall plan there. Right there. Are you going to phase this
or how are we going to build it?
Armstrong: Yeah. We have a phasing plan. Anna --
Bird.: Have we got a phasing plan?
Canning: I don't think it was in mine.
Bird.: Because the phasing plan is going to guarantee a lot of good architecture.
Armstrong: Here is --our phase one will be right -- right in here. There it is.
Bird: Okay. There we go.
Armstrong: Thank you. So, we are going to do our model complex will be right off this
entrance as you come in. That's the main entrance. We want people to see these
homes as you drive in and these will all have the porches facing out on this spine road,
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 64 of 101
as well as a heavy landscape along this spine road. This will be our phase one. Our
second emergency access is right here, which comes in and so we are bringing the
sewer down, it will come down this street, and over into this phase one and, then, phase
two we would build south of the road. So, this would be completed. Phase three would,
actually, be the park and the center piece right here and, then, fourth and fifth would be
in these areas. And the discussion was that if these custom lots were -- if we got good
sales from down here, down here we have all four different housing types shown or
represented in here. We might change these phasing to reflect the marketplace. Right
now I can tell you that the sales that we area getting, in spite of what you read in the
newspaper, our housing sales are -- were up in December to 51 units we sold in
December in Ada and Canyon county. Out of most of those lots, people are favoring
the smaller lots. We don't have enough smaller lots. That is the market. That's the
reality.
Bird: Madam Mayor, follow up. And this is just for my own consideration, but I feel by
that -- that phasing makes me feel real comfortable, because you're going to build
quality houses in one and two and three, because you want to sell six, seven, and eight
and four --
Armstrong: Absolutely.
Bird: -- and eight and if you don't build good quality houses there, you're going to have
a hard time selling lots back there, so that -- I like that phasing.
Armstrong: And part of our marketing is to have this open visual through here, so that
people can really see these -- these homes as they come down Eagle Road.
Boston: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Gorton: Jerry, there is comment in Exhibit B that makes reference to -- in fact, it states
that it's the responsibility of the homeowners association to develop and maintain the
smaller pocket parks. Is that the intent of the -- like the little ball fields of those three
collections that you had showed would be --
Armstrong: Yeah. All these --
Borton: -- for lack of a better term, vacant? So, the homeowners association --
Armstrong: No.
Gorton: Okay.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 65 of 101
Armstrong: We -- we -- because this park's going to be part of phase one, okay? So,
we fully develop it and what we do is we fund it until these homes are sold., until we get
fees in. We, actually, fund all of our homeowners activities until they can -- until their
due structure catch up with -- with that total.
Borton: Okay. I read that -- I just read it wrong when it said develop and maintain, I got
the impression that it meant the association itself was responsible for the actual
development of it.
Armstrong.: Yeah. Let me clarify that. When we go out and do these developments,
we are fihe homeowners association. The developer is the homeowner association. We
run it, because there is -- there is no structure. They -- we are the officers until we finish
the developments and so we are the ones that maintain and keep them up. But,
obviously, we are going to keep them up, because we want to increase sales out here,
so there is, really, a motivation for us to have that control. And, then, at a time when
these developments mature and we turn them over to the homeowners in that transition,
once they are able to get their due structure up, then, they take that over. Yeah. Good
question, though.
De Weerd: Jerry, you heard comments from our parks director on what their
preference would be and I notice in your -- the first park you will build., it doesn't have
houses backed up to it. What are your thoughts on removing at least the -- I don't know
what north is on that, but over by the -- yeah, that upper -- that upper curve at a
minimum -- in removing those and integrating that into the park.
Armstrong: Can we get the blow up of the -- of maybe the park? Okay. Here we go.
Madam Mayor, let me explain. There is -- there is two philosophies on this and I think
Councilman Rountree hit -- hit the nail on the head.. I have been involved in architecture
all my adult life, some 40 years, and I can tell you all the school that we -- we design --
we have playgrounds at all the schools and we love to have housing abutting up. We,
actually, find that they are safer, because people feel like that they own this green
space out here and what happens is they insure the safety of the kids that are playing
out in these parks when -- because your police can't be out there all the time looking at
these -- at these parks, so it's a little difference in philosophy how you look at that, but
over time I can tell you the preference has been when you design parks, that you want
houses facing into that park, just like we have provided houses here. Now, if the issue
is that you want full access around the park, that's fine, we would put a road in there, if
that's what you would like to see. So, it's really a choice of -- of how you want to design
parks. But I can tell you these people feel like they are more owners than these people
over here. The reason we removed these houses all along the street -- originally we
had house lots all along here and we removed them, was to open this all up, so it had a
better visual quality. As you come down this spine road you have full visual of this. You
have full visual from this street. We also provided a visual corridor through there and
we had talked about if it was the desire to put visual corridors through there, if that's the
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 66 of 101
issue is visual, but I think from a safety point of view and the fact that you're going to
have all different age groups in here, this is a much safer scenario and I think what
happens is a lot of times these parks get totally imbedded with houses all the way
around them, so that's -- that's the issue. But those are the choices that we have to
make. You would sacrifice some of the square footage in the park to create this
additional 24 foot road around -- around that park to have that separation. But if that's
the -- if that's what the city would like, we'd certainly consider that. We really don't want
to lose the lots because of our density issue and we are well within the Comprehensive
Plan. We would have to delete other amenities to pay for those lots.
De Weerd: Yeah. I don't know, Jerry. I know you look at our Seasons Park versus our
Champion Park and Seasons just -- the neighbors front yards all look out at it and it
seems that that park has had less issues than Champion Park, who has houses backed
up against it, with their fences that who knows what goes on in the park. So, you know,
there is -- yes, there is a difference of opinion there, but we also have a little experience
behind that as well.
Armstrong: Well, I can tell you that, you know, the Boise School District, for example,
has 46 different schools in their school district and in all cases they require any housing
that goes in along those -- those playgrounds, they'd all be vision fence. So, you do
have that safety factor. So, you can require that. I mean if you want us to provide a
vision fence through here or maximum of four foot high or whatever you want, I mean
that's kind of the standard way you attack that particular issue. But it's really a decision
and a philosophy from the city. I mean if you want a road in there or would you rather
have open fences along there. I mean it's -- those are the two -- two decisions that you
have to make. To us it doesn't matter one way or the other.
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird.: Staying on the park, I -- I, for one, have no problem with that. I would want a
vision fence. 1 don't want solid fence through there and Idon't -- I don't think our police
would prefer a solid fence. I look at this as -- as one nice amenity for that -- this
subdivision. I don't see people from downtown Meridian going out there to participate at
this park. I don't think you're -- I think you're going to see most of the kids, if you have
got your pathway set up where they can get to it, I think most of the adults and kids will
either ride their bikes or walk over to it. I don't think it's going to be a real busy traffic
park, other than foot traffic and bicycle traffic. I would not like a road going around the
outside of it. That brings in the danger to young kids running out in the street that's at
the park playing, chasing a ball or something, so -- I also want to comment that this is
the first park that's been given to us without impact fee .retribution and I appreciate that.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 67 of 101
Canning: Madam Mayor? Code does require open vision fencing for any lots that
face out onto an open space area.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: If I'm remembering correctly, some of the other discussions at the Parks and
Recreation Commission, they were recommending that the city only accept the
contiguous park and not have to cross the street to do maintenance on these two little
pieces. When you gave us the calculation of how much park is being given to the city,
is it just the one park or were you including the two little side parks?
Armstrong: Originally, Councilman Zaremba, when we had these lots in here -- in here,
which we have agreed to remove through the Commission, that increased the amount
of square footage in this park. What they were concerned about -- the staff report
thought we had included this area here, as well as this area here, into our park land
calculation and that's not so. Our calculation of the 7. 19 --and, by the way, your code
says a minimum of seven acres. 7. 19 is along this line, along this road, along this
road, and along this road.. Does that clarify that?
Zaremba: That's exactly what I was hoping you would say. Madam Mayor, I have a
question on a different subject if we have exhausted the park for the moment.
De Weerd: For the moment.
Zaremba: Okay. Can we go to a broader site plan or -- yes. Thank you. In previous
discussions, the discussion about this outparcel over here was that at some day if the
use or development of that happened, they would have to give up access to Eagle Road
and I have seen versions of this plan and I realize they are old ones, where they were
given access here, so that they were able to lose the access to Eagle Road at some
point. I don't see that as part of this plan.
Armstrong: Yeah. We have left this open in here, as well as right here. So, there
could be a future bridge connecting over even to this piece here. There is one piece
that lays in here.. There is an additional piece in here.. We have allowed for an
easement and it's showing on the preliminary plat for access into this --
Zaremba: So, the easement is actually provided in case --
Armstrong: Yeah. So, they can put the roadway connection in there. The other thing
that we were requested, because the regional park comes along this -- this Ten Mile
here --
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 68 of 101
Zaremba: The pathway.
Armstrong: -- the thought was it may never go through this piece, so what we have
agreed to is allowing for that regional park to actually come down and to the road, so we
could use road right of way. So, if the trail continued across the street here, we are
allowing an easement and access of that through -- through our property. So, that is
part of the agreement that we would do that, so that there was two wins there. One is
the access and the other was a trailway system to have a backup in case you're not
able to get that other piece. Because that is a regional park and there are specific
requirements to make it like ten foot wide and those kinds of issues, which we have
agreed to do.
Zaremba: To put the pathway --
Armstrong: That's correct.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Council, any additional questions at this time?
Bird: I have none, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Armstrong: Thank you.
De Weerd: I do have people that have signed up and if we haven't totally driven you
away pulling your hair out yet, if you would like to come forward when I call your name,
please, do so. Carol Jarvis signed up against. If you will, please, state your name and
address for the record.
Jarvis: My name is Carol Jarvis. I live at 1875 Suzanne Drive, Meridian.
De Weerd.: Thank you.
Jarvis: I guess my number one question is what has really changed on Eagle Road?
Since you turned it down last time they added 150 houses, which, according to
somebody's -- in the article it estimates that there is ten trips per household, which
would be another 150 households. That would be another 1,500 trips a day. And fixing
-- it would be nice to have Amity and Eagle with a light and fixed up, but that wouldn't
change anything at Victory and Eagle, which is really the place that is a problem. Traffic
backs up there half to three quarters of a mile whenever there is heavy traffic, which is
every day at coming home time. I don't even use it anymore. But that is a problem
there, because the fire station is there and it could impede fire trucks from getting out of
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 69 of 101
the fire station if the traffic happened to be backed up there at the wrong time or a fire
happened at the wrong time, whichever way you wanted to look at it. Also on density, it
doesn't seem to me like the original hillside subdivision, which was already there and
planned for, should be included in density for the lower part, this what they are planning
now. It doesn't have any -- it's already there, even though it carries the same name,
that's just sort of by accident, I think, and wasn't even planned by the same people.
And one -- those were the main points that -- I just really do think the density is really
high for that location and Idid -- I went by and did some checking today and found out
that there are some other school locations, possibly, not too far from that area, besides
the one that's on -- the next one to be built, I guess, is down in -- near Victory and Eagle
Road. There are some other ones that maybe the school already has land. I don't
know. I was wondering about that. But when this went around before, why they didn't
think they needed another school -- it looked like they may already have plans for
schools in that area. But the traffic on Eagle Road still is going to be a problem, as near
as I can see, so -- and, of course, it would add also -- I mean everybody is not going to
use Eagle Road. Some people are -- are going to use Amity or Locust Grove or
Cloverdale and everybody doesn't go to exactly the same place, but there are still -- at
least on Locust Grove there is still fourway stops and they are beginning to -- especially
when there is problems on the highway, whenever there is an accident in the evening,
everything goes out the window and just -- everybody leaves the freeway and starts
using those side roads and when you have those -- those fourway stops that are out
there, they are just killers, because they take so long to clear when you have a lot of
added traffic. And that's still, like I say, was the problem at Locust -- at Amity -- I mean
Eagle and Victory is the big problem that I -- as I' see it as far as traffic goes.
De Weerd: Thank you. Carol brought up a good point and I was going to ask Christie,
put you on the spot, if you could comment on this area, some of the plans, the timing of
them, the Commission's recommendation, that sort of thing.
Richardson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Christie Richardson, representing the Ada
County Highway District. 3775 Adams Street in Garden City.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Richardson: Regarding the roadway improvements, I'm kind of doing the original
application and where we are at now and --
De Weerd: Well -- and, Christie, I guess I'd like to start north at Victory and South
Eagle and -- because certainly we were hoping to get that and, then, it was delayed and
so that plays into the impact of this development as well. Not to put you on the spot or
anything.
Richardson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you will recall from our
joint meeting just a couple weeks ago between the Council and ACHD commission, the
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 70 of 101
five year work program is still in draft form and hasn't been adopted and won't be until
the end of February, possibly early March. The current five year work program, though,
does have Victory and Eagle to be widened and signalized in 2009. But I believe based
on some of the conversations we have had with some of the funding issues, I'm not sure
that that's still where it's going to shake out when the new plan gets adopted. But,
again, I don't know how that's going to look. I do know that that intersection is a priority.
It's been in the five year work program for some time now and the design is nearly
complete. So, you know, it's definitely on its way.
De Weerd: Where is that intersection coming out in the preliminary discussions or
recommendations at this point?
Richardson: I haven't been involved in those and so I really -- I really don't know. On
whatever draft plan your staff had received., I don't believe that's changed any.
De Weerd: Where is Anna? Well, I have a question for Anna while Christie finishes
the information about -- from ACRD, if she can find out what the recommendation is for
the Victory, South Eagle intersection in the five year plan.
Siddoway: Five year work program?
De Weerd..: Yeah.
Richardson: Madam Mayor, do you want me to just to continue down the list? Again,
this information was provided in the staff report. Eagle Road is scheduled in the draft
five year work plan to be widened to five lanes between the Ridenbaugh Canal and
Victory. Again, in 2009, with the intersection project. Originally I believe those were two
separate projects and we are really trying to get those done together. And Eagle Road
between Amity and Lake Hazel is in the C1'P, if you will recall from our last discussion
that's out there quite a ways. This developer is required to install a signal at the
intersection of Eagle and Amity. We talk about the different -- the number of lots and
we will be looking at an addition to Eagle and Amity, as the applicant mentioned, the
main entrance to the subdivision as it intersects Eagle, we will be looking at that prior to
the final platting of the 200th lot and, then, again, at the 400th lot. Back to Eagle and
Amity, though, it is, as the applicant mentioned. final platting 15 percent of the lots or
that calculated to 127 homes and that is a change from the original approval from the
highway district commission back several months ago.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Christie?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 71 of 1.01
Richardson: I'm sorry I don't have that draft plan with me.
De Weerd: Maybe we can find it. Okay. I do have more signed up. Jennifer Thiel.
Thiel: Thiel.
De Weerd..: Signed up against.
Thiel: Madam Mayor and Council Members, thank you for your time and, for the
record., my name is Jennifer Thiel and my residential address is 2308 East Hyper Drive
in Meridian. I apologize for reading from my notes. I'm feeling a little rummy at this
hour and, plus, if you were a group of second graders I would be much better off.
De Weerd: I'm not going to comment on that.
Rountree: Don't go there.
Thiel: I come before you as a homeowner whose property borders this proposed
development. I'm speaking against this developer's request, because of the negative
impact it will have on the Meridian community and, more personally, mine and my
neighbors' current property values. I feel strongly that if deviations from district
requirements are to be granted, I would hope that it wouldn't be for a developer whose
decades old reputation and product are considered substandard at best and are only for
the sake of maximum profits. I'm a life long resident of the Treasure Valley and I don't
feel that it's in the city's best interest to continue more of what many residents consider
to be future suburban slums from humble homes. It's my understanding that planning
and zoning has denied approval several times and I would ask that you would not
permit any deviations for the request of this developer.
De Weerd: Thank you. Tim Foster signed up against.
Foster: Madam Mayor, City Council, my name is Tim Foster. I own a lot at 5805 South
Graphite Way. Although I haven't built or done anything with it, pending what happens.
One thing that I'd like to really point out. I know that it's been mentioned, but we are
taking density here and the last two times at Planning and Zoning they have said that
it's two dense and, yet, all they have done is increased houses to up to 789 homes,
which I mean realistically it's a rural area and I know eventually it won't be. I mean I've
grown up, you know, in Kuna, so I know what it's like. But, you know, you mentioned
the coving on how it's a new design and everything, but he also mentioned right off the
bat that it increases density and it gives you an illusion. That, again, is against what
Planning and Zoning really wanted. They don't want something this dense. They are
having to use Black Rock Subdivision., which is theirs, but they have to use that in order
to get to these levels that they need to be at in order to, you know, come even close to
what you guys want them to have. And as for the homeowners, I mean the coving
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 72 of 101
aspect of it, coving is great and I have never been to Riverside Village, but I would
doubt that it's a good, fair comparison to what they are doing here. From the sounds of
it, Riverside Village is down by the Boise River and probably doesn't have 700 homes in
its little community and like you guys mentioned., the coving part of it is taken care of by
an association. This would be a phenomenal feat for an association to take care of, the
large aspect that they have got there, and when you do have a homeowner's
association taking care of that, now what is the -- the residents have to do -- I mean that
really kind of takes that aspect out of their -- out of their home. I mean now they have --
yeah, they have got this front yard that they can use, but, you know, if your kids are out
there and the lawnmowing service comes by, you got to get your stuff out of the way or
you got to make sure your stuffs out of there, you know, if you have got stuff laying out
in the yard. So, you know, I agree that if they were to do some sort of coving that it
should be maintained by something, because if you have individuals trying to take care
of it, everybody is going to mow differently, you know, you see that anywhere you go,
whether you're in 100,000 homes or million dollar homes, everybody does it differently.
But that is one Thing that I would like to point out is -- is these homes up on the ridge are
half acre or acre lots. They are not going to be 300,000 dollar homes. Most of us paid
over 200,000 dollars for our lots. There is potential for homes to be up there for over a
million, the city -- over homes that are going to be a couple hundred thousand dollars.
It's really going to drive our values down and you can see it even though the market has
dropped in housing, you can see that aspect, because they have 19 homes -- home
sites up there for sale now that have been for sale for a long time, because people
aren't buying up there., because they know what's going on. They know that Hubble
owns this whole area and it's nothing against Hubble as an association, but people
know that it's owned by Hubble and they don't want to build their house above what
Hubble is going to bring in and, honestly, had I known that Hubble was trying to do this
-- and it was -- that was my part. I should have done better exploration on where I was
buying. But had I known I wouldn't have bought up there, because Idon't -- even
though I'm on the far end, as far west as you can get from their subdivision, I don't want
to drive through what they are planning. You know, it's real -- realistically it's still going
to be starter homes and I -- you know, I don't want to drive to my house that I have
worked so hard to get to, and drive through starter homes that eventually will be rentals
and eventually, you know, won't be kept up as good as we would like it to see when we
have got what we do up on the hill. You know -- and I don't mean to sound snobbish or
anything., but that's the reality. You don't see starter homes next to Castlebury. You
don't see them in places like that. That's -- they are not there. There is a reason for it.
And that's what I have. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Justin Thiel is signed up against. Okay. Thank you. Tom
Sylvester, signed up against.
Sylvester: My name is Tom Sylvester and I live 1910 South Marshwood in Meridian
here. The questions I have this evening is the last time the Council looked at this
project there was 644 homes there. What is there about 789 that makes this more
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 73 of 101
appealing? Coning the streets I think is a good -- good idea. Fixing the houses up a
little bit is a good idea. There is just too many homes in a small area. I would be
curious to see what the density numbers are if you don't include that Black Rock. I think
that including Black Rock is just an illusion. The two subdivisions aren't developed
together. I don't know why you can -- why you can accept an inclusion of Black Rock
with this subdivision. I'd like to see what those density numbers are as they are broken
out. Why do we have a comprehensive use plan if we are going to allow this many
pieces of property in a rural area. We have a plan to control -- to control the growth and
to control how it's developed, but I don't think this fits within the comprehensive use plan
at all. So, I don't think this is a project that you are going to be proud of in 20 years. I
said to the Planning and Zoning Commission I think that they have taken a bad plan and
made it worse. So, I really urge you not to approve this plan this evening.
De Weerd: Thank you. Tim Taylor signed up against. Okay. Those are the names
that are on the sheet. If there is additional testimony, please, come forward.
Donohue: Madam Mayor and Members of the City Council, my name is Christine
Donohue. I'm at 12476 West Merchison Street in Boise and I had some questions after
hearing the testimony by the applicant. One of my questions about the Coving is with
the planning and zoning was that -- am I correct in understanding that it's going to be
less wide at the streets for the home sites?
De Weerd: I believe they narrow there.
Donohue: So, one of the questions that comes to mind is that you're going to be
seeing more cars bumper to bumper parked on the streets if you're having less width of
the street line.. We have that problem in our own neighborhood of trying to control
people parking on the street and I notice that most of the plans were for two car
garages, so my question would be with the visual appeal of the coning, I think you're
going to see a lot of cars parked along those roadways. And the second thing that
came to mind was when you're talking about the sprinkler systems in the Coving, if the
sprinklers are run by the homeowners lot and it's damaged by the landscaping company
that's run by the homeowners association -- that's hired by the homeowners
association, then, it's going to be difficult to get your sprinkler heads fixed and also if a
homeowner chooses not to blow out their system and those sprinklers are in the Coving
lot -- Coving part, then, maybe you're going to have damage from freezing to the part
that's owned by the HOA. So, I would suggest running those sprinklers in the Coving as
part of the common area and not connecting it with the homeowners lot. Those are just
two things I thought of as he spoke.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Donohue: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 74 of 101
De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there any additional testimony at this
time? Or at all? Now is the time to do it.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have no idea how Council is going
tonight, but I'll just -- before the Public Hearing is closed I wanted to raise some issues
that I heard similar to some of the last testimony. I started to get a little concerned with
the thought of a homeowners association taking care of that front yard, because for
some folks that's all they have is the front yard. They don't have a rear yard. So, I
would be concerned that if it's the homeowners association, that that homeowner may
not have the ability to really modify that front yard or we'd have to have very specific
instructions on how -- what kind of landscaping they would do. I mean it -- it may be
something that the Council wants to consider further or to -- depending on how the
decision goes tonight, allow some time for the applicant to work with city staff to come
up with a solution that provides that maintenance, but still gives that homeowner some
flexibility in how to use that front yard. Things like patios, you know, whether a
barbecue would be allowed in the front yard or if it needs to be landscaping, but if that's
the only yard they have, then, that would be an issue.
De Weerd: So, Anna, can you tell me in the low density area, if you took at the
development that's already there and don't use it in the calculation, what would be the
needed reduction?
Canning: The applicant is indicating that it's currently 3. 5. I can't do that kind of
calculation this time of night in my head, but I -- we could come up with how many -- are
you asking how many lots would need to be reduced to bring it down to 3. 0 -- or to 2.
9?
De Weerd: Can I also ask another question and., certainly, it was raised in the
testimony. Is -- there was concern -- and certainly is probably the most focal in my own
mind.. When this first came up in the timing aspect, I still have that question. In the
timing aspect, not only of the road improvements and certainly the intersection
improvement addresses some of it. The safety aspect of sidewalks while you're putting
kids out there would be a remaining one. But how we kind of went from a lower number
to a higher number with all of those concerns, I guess we hear it fits the Comp Plan, but
we have a Comp Plan that is still not in front of Council yet. So, there is another timing
aspect. So, can -- was this discussed at the Planning.and.Zoning Commission?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't know that timing issues were.
I knew -- I know the Comprehensive Plan issue was discussed and I don't think there
was full resolution on -- on whether or not it met the Comprehensive Plan. I think the
majority of the Commissioners felt it didn't. But I don't think the other timing issues were
necessarily discussed. This is a different project than the first one. It was substantially
different to the point that they could submit what they wanted. There was no
requirement that it had to be less than what was denied. So, we certainly warned the
Meridian city Council
January 22, 2008
Page 75 of T01
applicant that there would be a question related to that, but it was within their purview to
ask.
De Weerd: That's true. But it still goes to the question of this Council hasn't seen the
Comprehensive Plan for that south Meridian area.
Canning: No, ma'am. And it -- what happened was once this -- once the former
application on this same project was denied, staff understood that part of the denial was
the desire to decrease the density. So, the draft Comprehensive Plan for the south
Meridian area does show this all as low density residential. But the application is vested
with the Comprehensive Plan that's adopted and in effect at the time that it submitted.
So, that's the one with the split designation that you have seen a couple times tonight.
Now, the Council has in the past known that there was another Comprehensive Plan
amendment coming up. Baraya is a prime example where Council waited until the Ten
Mile -- continued the application out until the Ten Mile specific area plan was complete.
The applicant was willing to do that. They were willing to wait for that document and
worked with staff on that document to -- to bring those two projects into sync with one
another.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, questions for staff before I ask for the final remarks by the
applicant?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba?
Zaremba: I have a comment and it sort of echoes the very first comment you made
and I will repeat it, because I was planning to bring it myself at some point. As the one
of us who had most recently has been a Planning and Zoning commissioner, while on
the Commission I often felt that a few times we had been blind-sided by a developer
who changed the plan after we had made our recommendations and there were many
times where we felt it would have been appropriate to remand it back to the
Commission to look at the new plan. Remembering those days, I would be inclined to
say this is one of those. There have been significant changes. I would like the
Commission's recommendation on whether they feel they were positive changes or not.
Just in discussing what's been presented to us, I was aware of the cooing, but I was not
aware that it was -- that area would be owned by the homeowners. I was under the
impression it was going to be common area entirely. That's a little surprise to me. That
it's not common area, but I guess my overall statement is that I would lien toward
remanding this back to the Commission to -- to consider the changes.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 76 of 101
De Weerd: Anything else from Council? Okay. Would the applicant like to have final
remarks?
Armstrong: Madam Mayor -- excuse me. It's late. Members of the City Council. I'll
address these in order. I think Carol brought up the -- the issue of the Victory and Eagle
light. We did -- in our original application, the original 644 unit, we did not have that and
dealing with ACRD, we committed to put the one in at Eagle and Amity and in their work
plan, as Christie so pointed out, the goal is to have that in -- built in 2009. So, the idea
is we would be putting in the light at this other corner about the same time if this gets
approved. So, the timing would be that those would be sequenced together, because
we committed not only on the time, but we have committed the dollars to -- to put that
in. Unlike ACRD making a commitment to these plans that don't get implemented, at
least we have made that commitment that we have to do that. So, I think that's a huge
huge step. The other comment that was made as regarding the school location. And I
believe your Comprehensive Plan shows a site right there for an elementary school.
And that was one of the reasons why we connected all this trailway system, so the kids,
instead of being bused to school, can all walk to school. But the location that's been
picked by the Meridian School District is right there and it's within this mile section that
you see before you. So, I wanted to clarify that issue. The other misconception that
she brought up is this Black Rock Subdivision is owned by Provident Development. We
own that Black Rock and we own all this ground here. We control that. That's not a
separate ownership, that's -- we control the entire thing, which also leads me down to
Tim Foster's comment and saying that, well, we really didn't care about the sales. We
do care about the sales of these lots. How would you like to carry that on your
inventory. I can tell you the sales have been rather brisk in a terrible economy for that
price of lot. We did not start selling in that until February of'07 and we have sold 21 lots
out of the 44. So, the sales for that type of product, that's -- for those high dollar lots,
that's more than anyplace else in the entire Ada County and Canyon highway that the
sales have been that high for any developer that was holding lots of that price bracket.
The reason being is is those lots all sit up on that bluff and their views are going to be of
the mountains and not of the houses. And the other thing is we broke it up with all the
parks and open space, so that their view -- they are not looking down on roof tops, they
are actually looking down into open space. Christie Richard, so talked about the Victory
and Eagle in 2009 and I think they also had in their work plan the widening of the road is
slotted for 2009. And we did commit to having a review of this light going in here. Once
we get 200 lots in there, that we would review whether or not there is a need to put in
that -- that light. But we did commit that it would be in at the 400s, but we would
conduct as study to see what the traffic impacts were and if it was warranted -- if it was
warranted. at the 200th lot, we would go ahead and commit to push up that schedule to
put in that light at that particular location. So, I wanted to clarify that for the record.
also wanted to comment on Tim Foster made the comment about that he didn't want to
go passed all these other homes on the way up to Black Rock. That was the reason
why we committed to that landscape buffer and that was part of our listening to the
neighborhood and saying you won't even see these homes along here, because of the
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 77 of 101
landscape buffer on either side of that spine road. This road is designed as a collector
road at the half mile section, just like you would put in a normal half mile. It just
happens to have a bend in it. But we have committed to that heavy landscaping and
you can see it right -- right here. The whole idea of it is -- they wouldn't even see these
houses along here as that landscaping matures. The other -- the other issue that we
had on there was the Comprehensive Plan that I think was brought up by Tom and just
know that we were vested under the current Comprehensive Plan for the City of
Meridian and that Comprehensive Plan did go through a full public review before it was
approved.. It was approved in 2006 and just know that we are well under the density of
1,200 when you take into consideration the entire land mass that we own. I believe that
covered all the comments at least I heard, unless there were some other comments that
failed to write down here.
De Weerd: Was that comp plan approved in 2006? We have been doing the south
Meridian plan for almost two years now.
Armstrong: Justin, do you want to pull up the slide which shows their Comp Plan?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the development community
initiated the current Comp Plan that we have in the south area, because it was evident
that our efforts on the larger south Meridian area plan were slowed down by
negotiations with Kuna at that time and different efforts.
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think part of the clarification is the
current Comprehensive Plan map shows it last amended in 2006. That was when it
received the north Meridian area amendment. The south Meridian area here was
adopted in '02.
Bird: No.
Siddoway: '05?
Canning: He's new.
Siddoway: It was prior to the north Meridian -- no?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I don't remember the timing exactly, but I could visualize Kent Brown coming
in before us with what eventually I think was a comp plan amendment --
Siddoway: I stand corrected.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 78 of 101
Zaremba: -- for some of this area within a mile or so either way and I would peg that as
being about two years ago. That's a guess.
Armstrong: It was just 2000 -- fall of 2006. So, it's a little under a year and a half ago.
Zaremba: Yeah.
De Weerd.: You can see it's 11:30. Our minds are not -- Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Armstrong: Thank you. Thank you for staying here to this late hour.
Canning: Madam Mayor, before the public hearings close, there was a number of
issues raised by Senator Fulcher in his letter that had not otherwise been testified to. I
don't know if the applicant wanted to respond to those or if Mayor wanted the applicant
to respond to those.
De Weerd: Did you want to response to that?
Bird: Has he seen it?
De Weerd: Council, did you need -- do you want a reply to that?
Gorton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: I don't think so. I think it's -- it's just some of the same information we had
already heard about whether or not annexation -- how it relates to areas of impact. I
don't think there is anything to present, respond, or comment upon on that issue.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird.: I feel if we did it wrong, we did it wrong, when we got water and sewer to go out
there with the condition that it be annexed at that -- I don't think we need to comment on
it.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 79 of 101
De Weerd: That's what he said.
Bird.: I was talking to myself.
De Weerd.: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Could I go back to the school issue, unless -- I didn't mean to cut you off if you
were doing a comp plan.
Armstrong: Go ahead'-and leave it on that slide. That shows a school site.
Borton: I saw the -- the letter in the file from Wendell Bigham and the school district
talking about -- it looked like it added up to about 700 new kids being generated by this
development, underlying the words, you know, extreme impact upon the schools and
the capacity issues. He makes reference to Lake Hazel Elementary School -- his letter
doesn't make reference to an adjacent site, which will be ready to house and school
these kids. It references other existing schools and busing issues. Is there any other
information you have from the district which solidifies that there is -- I don't even know if
something on. this is a purchased acquired site. It hasn't been funded, I know for a fact
if there were any prior bonds, so I'm just trying to see how firm we are on that or are
these kids at the very best going to be bused to an already overcrowded Lake Hazel
elementary, middle, and Mountain View High School?
Armstrong: Madam Mayor, Councilman Gorton, as you know, traditionally in Idaho we
don't build schools prior development. They are always built after development occurs.
That's the way we do things. We set up the laws so that it also requires atwo-thirds
majority vote to put in additional schools within the state of Idaho. I can tell you that
your Comprehensive Plan indicates a school site either existing or potential -- these are
your words off your Comp Plan, at that particular site. That's what we had. That's our
best information now. The school when they go in and begin to negotiating land like
buying any land anywhere, it's your best deal that you can -- you can cut. And so, you
know, you want flexibility, basically, within that mile section somewhere to purchase
some land.. So, the intent would be that they would purchase some kind of ground
within -- in those areas. But as you know, as we sell lots and as we sell homes, there is
monies that go to fund, through property taxes, that help fund those school bonds as
you move forward. So, that's how we do schools in this area. You don't do them until
the demand is there, until you're overcrowded. Voters aren't sympathetic to
predevelopment, so I guess that best answers that question.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 80 of 101
Bird: It was my understanding also that the -- I believe at the corner of Eagle and Amity
-- and don't ask me which corner -- that 40 acres was purchased for a middle school.
Am I -- do you know anything about that, Jerry?
Armstrong: Madam Mayor, Commissioner Bird, I don't know that that's -- whether that's
true or not. I do know that we recently acquired this 40 acres at the corner of Eagle and
Amity. So, if the school district wanted to negotiate with us, we have a piece of ground
for sale.
De Weerd: You know, Jerry, I guess when you had your other hat and you were in the
public sector, you were a big advocate of Blueprint for Good Growth and adequate
public facilities ordinance. And that would have addressed some of the school issues
anyway. That's what we hope and still hope so. And as I maintained when we visited a
plat and a proposal on this same piece of property before, that was my same -- my
same comment. We can't be in a hurry in that area, because we are waiting for better
tools to address some of the deficits that -- that we don't want to keep repeating the
same thing. I think that was the definition of insanity. But, you know, I guess as an
advocate for Blueprint for good growth, there -- that had a lot to do about timing. I put
you in an awkward position right now, because that timing question is -- it has abig -- a
big impact on is the timing right for this. We are in the process of considering a south
Meridian plan that had a great deal of public participation in it. We still have not a final
plan on the roads in that south area. We don't have an adequate public facilities tool yet
to figure out how growth can better pay for itself. So, if you were sitting up here with
your participation at the public level, tell me about the timing aspect.
Armstrong: Madam Mayor, I'd love to address that. And City Council. I did, I served
on the Blueprint for Good Growth committee for three years. I also served on all the
discussions of areas of impact and all those other issues and how you fund these
things. I really believe and I have always believed -- and I have been doing
development in this valley for over 38 years -- and my belief is that growth should pay
for itself. Period. New growth should pay for itself. The issue is that we discovered in
that process is we don't have the tools in place and that's the reason why we had to hire
a consultant -- to ferret out the different kinds of tools that we can utilize to adequately
fund our development. We don't have the tools to give to developers like ourselves.
We would be happy to contribute. We can't even -- as you know on a lot of
developments -- you read it in the paper on Avamore, they can't even fund the state
highway and the state highway can't even take their money. There is no means for
them to collect money, even though the developers have gotten out their checkbooks to
write -- write the check. The issue is new development should pay for itself. There is
no -- there is no means by which to do that right now. There has been attempts at the
state legislature level to get ordinances in place. There has been -- the last three years
that I have followed, there has been bills that have gone through asking for that
opportunity for the developer to tax those development projects where those people
who live in those new developments to pay their own way. Those have been turned
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 81 of t01
down by our state legislators. That's the problem that we have is -- and that was the
purpose of the Blueprint is to help influence those legislative decisions so that can
happen in the future. It's very frustrating. The other problem that we have is that we
haven't paid attention to the maintenance and operations costs and that's why we have
to look at new creative solutions in how to -- how to arrive at paying for those. I don't
think there is one developer that isn't willing to pay their own way. What they don't want
to pay for is they are saying, hey, public officials, you're the ones that let us get into this
position, so how do we make up that deficit. I think the governor right now is looking on
creative ideas. Maybe through registration fees have been talked about. Other means
of raising fuel tax. There is other creative means to pay for those roadway systems,
because they are., frankly, underfunded. So, that's how I would address that. We just
don't have the tools in place to allow for that.
De Weerd: Amen. But do we wait for the tools before we continue?
Armstrong: Well, you know, I think that's an important question. I mean right now your
designation on this -- and you can see it -- this is your own map. I mean you're showing
that as medium density there in that -- in that yellow, which is part of our property. Our
property sits right in -- in here. And under your current planning area you extended your
own planning area -- this was called urban planning -- service planning area. The whole
idea of Blueprint for Good Growth -- this was the other goal at the county -- having
represented the county, we had areas of impact and that area of impact is broken. I can
publicly attest to that, because it was broken --
De Weerd: You can say that now, uh?
Armstrong: I said it at the podium when I worked for the county and I think the county
commissioners even recognized that it's broken. There is an attempt to fix it. You guys
are really the model by going out here and developing these planning areas and Anna
and I sit on those committees tirelessly talking about what we need to do is a different
system of which is creating a planning area. You did that. You went out here and
created this red planning area and, actually, you developed the Comprehensive Plan
through public testimony and this is the way it needs to be done in the future, rather
than as -- under the control of Ada County. Ada County needs to -- to take control of
the disputes and try to solve where those planning areas end up being and which are
the better choices for which cities that you go into. But at the end of the day what we
were all pushing for and what we were working with with our consultant Mike Loher was
to create this, idea of developing planning areas, so we didn't have those overlaps in
those planning areas of -- as you guys can testify, between Kuna and Meridian, is this is
the correct approach to go about that. And I believe this is the correct approach.
De Weerd: And I agree with you again.. Again I have the timing question, so -- and
don't think we will get to an answer tonight.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 82 of 101
Armstrong: Madam Mayor, I'll try to address that again. Let me talk about the timing a
little bit. You have approved a new hospital, regional hospital. You have approved a
number of office complexes up here. There are no housing opportunities for those
people in those office complexes and for that new lifestyle center and for St. Luke's.
They want housing. There is no housing provided in this area at this time. So, is the
planning correct or were we ahead of time when we developed and allowed the
commercial to go in. There needs to be some roof tops, so that we don't have the
congestion on I-84 of people having to try to drive to Nampa and Caldwell to have
housing opportunities when we could provide housing opportunities within a mile and a
half of St. Luke's. So, it is a timing issue. I agree with you.
De Weerd: We just have different definitions. Okay. Council, any other questions for
Jerry? Okay.
Bird': I have none.
De Weerd: No? Thank you. Okay. Council, any additional information needed? Is
there a need for discussion before you close the Public Hearing? What would you like
to do?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my comments, just for discussion -- they may raise some
questions. And it gets to the timing issue. It also gets to some of the other issues that
have been brought up tonight in terms of what's going to happen with the roadway
infrastructure and when's that going to happen. We all know what it's like out there.
Another 8,000 vehicle trips a day on Eagle Road., you know, it's not going to be any
better. There has been a commitment on the part of the developer to make some
improvements out there and for that I applaud them. It's a step forward from what they
presented previously. The product that they are talking about in this development is a
step up from what we saw previously. I guess the question and what I have to weigh is
the better quality -- the right way to go, as opposed to the increased density in order for
the better quality to show up. I heard this not long ago. The bitterness of low quality
lives longer than the short-term joy of low price. And I think that's kind of the rub of
what's going on with some of the folks here is that they are concerned about quality. I'm
concerned about quality. But I also understand the real world as it relates to your real
estate, your investment, and what it's going to cost you to develop out there. I am torn
right now -- I think that the applicant has heard on many fronts what the Council said in
the past and what Planning and Zoning has said. I think they have made a legitimate
attempt to address those. I'm not sure they have gotten there. I still hold to my mantra
that --
De Weerd: I'm in no hurry.
Rountree: What's that?
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 83 of 101
De Weerd: I'm in no hurry.
Rountree: Yeah. I'm in no hurry. That doesn't necessarily help the folks that have
purchased the larger lots. Something's going to happen down there at some point in
time. You just have to face up to that. Maybe it's time to resell your lot. I don't know.
And that gets back to the genesis of why we are here, knowing today and the last
hearing on this you folks wouldn't have a lot to buy, because we probably wouldn't have
moved forward with those large lots that were sold to the City Council that that's what
this area was going to be. Not just your rim lots, but the previous developer, the
previous owner, that's how it was presented to the city. I'm just rambling at this point,
but I'm trying to talk myself into going one way or the other and I think I'm talking myself
to go -- when we close the hearing I think we have two options. One, we can remand
this back to Planning and Zoning, because this appears to me that there is a fairly
significant change from what they saw and the applicant's attempt to address issues
they had.. I don't know if there is an inclination to approve this or not tonight. That's
another option. The third option is to deny it. So, I'm just thinking out loud. Testing the
water. Give you guys something to think about and you can give me something to think
about as we discuss this.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Rountree. Any other comments?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird: Well, I agree a lot with what Charlie has said. I think that this developer has --
has done good -- tried hard to come back and do something that we had asked, even
though the density grew, which I don't think anybody likes that, but I think the quality --
being in construction role for over 42 years, I have seen some 500,000 dollar houses
that weren't built half as good as 100,000 dollars, so I don't put a lot of faith in what the
dollar value is. To be truthful with you, we all know that land and houses is overinflated
right now. They are getting down to reality again. I, for one, would like to see this go
forward. I'm in favor of passing it. I'm -- we keep telling developers to do something
and they come back and do it and we tell them to do something else and pretty soon we
have got to make a decision, we either pass it or we don't. And I, for one, am -- I realize
there is some changes. I don't know how much -- to me I don't know how big a change
there was from what Planning and Zoning and if -- for the change would change their
mind or not after reading the minutes of their Planning and Zoning meeting I would be
real shocked if it was -- if taking out 145 homes would make a big difference. But we
can -- I'm like Charlie, let's see where it lays. I'll listen to others.
De Weerd: Okay. Others?
Rountree: Close the hearing.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 84 of 101
Zaremba: Well, Madam Mayor, I think I tipped my hand and I wanted to say it before
the opportunity for the applicant to speak. I feel this is one that should be remanded.
When there have been small changes, then, it's understandable that we consider what
those changes are and not remand them back, but this is one that needs some very
careful consideration. There are a lot of things that it has affect on. Eagle Road being a
major part of it. But some of the new concept designs -- I certainly think this is --
regardless of whether you count the number of lots or not, the overall plan is a much
better one than the one that we denied before. But I feel that the Planning and Zoning
Commission should have the opportunity to see this newest version and to either
reconsider or reconfirm their recommendation to us. But my vote would be to remand..
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I, too, appreciate the changes that have been made here. As many questions
that we had and Planning and Zoning had that needed to be answered have been
answered. Some still haven't. And we probably all feel the same way, but I know
speaking for myself, I take particular time and attention to what Planning and Zoning
does and their comments and review of it. Their recommendations up or down on any
project are pretty important to me. They play a pretty big role. And I can't think of a
situation where I would want to move forward on something of this magnitude without
remanding it. And I understand the concern of delay and the desire to get this thing
going forward_ And I don't feel comfortable going forward with it right now. I surely
wouldn't want to act to deny it just for the sake of getting a decision done. I think there
has been some great improvements. I think the cooing concept is phenomenal. I think
it's a really really interesting aspect to it. Does it create an additional density concern?
Maybe it does, but maybe there is a trade off. I don't know yet. I think it's a unique
concept. I agreed one hundred percent with the comments about the funding
mechanisms and the tools that developers need to be provided to meet some of these --
these public facility needs. And I know there has been legislation in prior years. There
is some this year. Some community infrastructure district legislation. It's just -- it's got
to get done and anything -- call me any day, anything I can do to help pound on
anybody to try and help that process, because it -- otherwise, your hands are tied when
municipalities say provide everything under the sun, but you really don't have any
means to finance it. So, that's sort of a difficult soap box issue. I'd like to see that get
done. So, my comments with regards to this project is I'd be most supportive of
remanding it to P&Z. If there is anything we can do to make that go quicker than
normal, get it to them quicker than normal, so be it. That's what I would lean towards
doing.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 85 of 101
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree.: I think Mr. Armstrong started his comments that, you know, they are poised
and need some kind of direction, because they have a business deal. They have got to
get it consummate or terminate. And, though, I don't disagree with the remanding
aspect of this, I'm not sure that necessarily gives them the clear way to go. I have
heard favorable comments and I have heard unfavorable comments. Even if we
remand it, that's more time and there is no assurance or no indication that this is yet
going to be approved, even if it's remanded. I don't know what their timeline is. I
suspect it's short, or they probably would have gone back through P&Z before. I'll just
state right now I'm probably not inclined to vote, even after the remand, for this at this
particular time. So, at least they can weigh my comment in their business deal at this
point. Though I don't think remand is the only thing, I think that's where it needs to go.
and I think we owe it to them some flavor of where we are going with this thing.
De Weerd.: You know, I -- if you choose to remand it, I think the development
community knows that that's not a guarantee when it comes back to Council it's an
approval. But if you do remand it, it will answer some the questions that come up and
timing and the coving -- some of the questions that came up in the coving concept on
maintenance and upkeep and back yards and front yards and all of -- all of that stuff.
About the park. About the answer to the improvement at South Eagle and Victory,
because I will tell you what, it's great that this development is looking at putting in an
intersection light at South Eagle and Amity. But if you can't get through Victory, you
know, it's going to be a mute point. So, you know, there are some things that need to
be answered regardless, but -- so, what would you like to do?
Bird.: Well, Madam Mayor, I'll --
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird: I'll make the statement that -- my statement is I would go forward with this. You
know, I know Charlie and I differ on this, but I would be -- I don't know why we want to
reprimand it back. The Planning and Zoning passed, I believe, the 644 units and we
denied that. And so -- I don't know. I -- it's -- we don't seem to have any problems
bringing in big -- don't get me wrong, everybody knows how I vote for it, but I don't have
any problems bringing in big developments, commercial and stuff along Eagle Road. Of
course, in the last half mile we try to solve the traffic situation, which is impossible to do,
but -- but, then, we get out here and we get an applicant that's going to put in a stop
light for us at a very busy intersection and it's going to get worse and I realize Victory
and Eagle is -- but when we met with ACHD I did not come away feeling that that was a
guaranteed 2009 project. I mean they are way way over budget and -- at that part. So,
don't know. Let's see what -- let's see where it goes.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 86 of 101
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird.: All I know it's late, let's get something going.
De Weerd: Let's see where it goes. Let's see where it goes.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: With all due respect -- and I agree with many of the points that Councilman
Bird has made, but I move we remand this back to Planning and Zoning.
Rountree: How about closing the Public Hearing first?
Zaremba: Uh?
Bird: Let's close the public --
Rountree: Let's close the Public Hearing.
Zaremba: Do you close it to do that?
Mayor, I move we close the Public Hearing.
Yeah, I guess you do. I'm sorry. Madam
Bird: On what?
Zaremba: All three items.
Bird: Seventeen, eighteen, nineteen?
Zaremba: Seventeen, eighteen, and nineteen.
Bird: I'll second it.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items
17, 18 and 19. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 87 of 101
Zaremba: I move that we remand AZ 07-016, PP 07-020, and PUD 07-001, back to the
Planning and Zoning Commission to reconsider the changes and other items that we
have brought up.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to remand these items back to
Planning .and Zoning. Any discussion?
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Canning: It would probably help the Commission if the Council could give some
direction on a few key items. One being the Comprehensive Plan, because that was a
big issue for them at their last hearing. So, without any direction from Council with
regard to a decision regarding the Comp Plan, it may just come back as another
recommendation for denial. So, they are going to need some help from Council in
ciphering through today's testimony, but also if Council has specific items that they
wanted addressed regarding density or regarding maintenance, architecture, coving,
lots around the park, transition to surrounding properties, schools, timing of facilities --
any detail you can provide to that motion will really make the remand much more
effective. Please.
De Weerd: Well, I tried to give you something. Even though I can't vote. It was a
suggestion. Anything you want to add, Mr. Zaremba, to your motion to remand?
Zaremba: I would ask them to consider the items that have changed since they last
saw this and what their opinion about that would be. In addition to that, I would ask
them to consider the traffic impact to Eagle Road, not only here, but farther up the line
between here and the interstate, specifically the Eagle and Victory intersection. I would
ask them to consider not only maintenance, but ownership of the coving areas and/or
who has the rights to do what within the coving areas or not do within the coving areas.
Within the consideration of the redesign would be their reconsideration of the densities
and how that relates to latest version of our current Comprehensive Plan and how it
relates to the coming south Meridian area plan. Am I missing anything?
De Weerd: The park. The lots at the top of the park. Or bottom or whatever it is.
Zaremba: Oh, yes. And -- yeah. On the future city park, the houses that line the park -
- (realize some have already been removed, but a discussion removing more of them
on the block that has the city park, whether or not there should be as many homes
along -- or even any homes at all along there.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 88 of 101
De Weerd: Council, any other items to add for this --
Rountree: Is this a build your own motion? ,
De Weerd: Would you consider anything else -- he wants to know if it was a build your
own motion and I say why not. It is midnight.
Zaremba: And the more guidance we can give them --
Rountree: Sure.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, if the maker of the motion would consider discussion about
on those lots or easements along Ten Mile that would be future access points that those
lots or areas be so posted with an explanation of what potentially could occur on those
areas.
De Weerd,: Along Ten Mile?
Rountree: Ten Mile Creek. Yeah. Potential bridge and/or access to additional
properties.
Zaremba: I think that's an excellent idea. I include that in the motion.
Rountree: That's the last of my notes.
De Weerd: Will you repeat your motion?
Zaremba: Yes.
De Weerd: I'm sorry.
Bird.: I don't want to be here until 2:00.
De Weerd: Anything else? So, we do have a motion to remand with a good healthy
list --
Rountree: Second agrees.
De Weerd: -- to give plenty of comment to both Planning and Zoning and the applicant.
Mr. Berg., I'm going to go ahead and ask for a roll call on the remand.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 89 of 101
Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
Item 20: Public Hearing: VAR 07-019 Request for a Variance to UDC Table 11-
2A-5 that requires a minimum rear yard setback of 15 feet to be reduced
to 2 feet and a minimum street setback of 15 feet to be reduced to 12 feet
for Redden by Mike Redden - 1418 North Vineyards Avenue:
De Weerd: Thank you. Thank you for bearing with us. Okay. Item 20 is a Public
Hearing on VAR 07-019. Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Redden application. It's
located at 1418 North Vineyards Avenue. The application before you tonight is a
variance. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from
15 feet to two feet and a minimum street yard setback from 15 feet to 12 feet. There is
the site plan and, then, this is a view of the shed that is currently in the setbacks. How
about that. Okay. There is the aerial. I'll start over again. So, they are asking to
reduce the rear yard setback from 15 to two and the street side setback from 15 to 12.
There is the site plan. There are the photos. The applicant states the reason the shed
was installed was due to a letter that he received from the homeowners association
regarding safety concerns that people could not see around his Idaho Power work truck
parked in front of his house. In response to these concerns the applicant hired Stor-Mor
Sheds to install a shed in the rear yard for storage in order to be able to park his work
truck in the driveway. He states that he was unaware that a permit or compliance with
setbacks was required, because the shed is not on a permanent foundation. The
approval of the variance by City Council would allow the existing shed to remain in its
current location. Denial would require the shed be relocated. There is also a 15 -- a ten
foot public utilities and drainage easement that exists along the rear property. The
structure is currently located within the easement. Staff informed the applicant that if
Council approved the variance and a rear setback of two feet is granted, the structure
would still need to be removed by the applicant or at the applicant's expense if access
to the easement was ever necessary. Further, if a variance is granted by the city, the
applicant would still need to obtain permission from the utility companies that hold the
easement in order for the structure to encroach within the easement. The applicant has
received letters of testimony in support of the variance and those come from his
neighbors, Michelle Gomez, located immediately to the west. Cassie Summerville,
located just to the north. And Dan Barber, located just to the east. Per the Unified
Development Code in order to grant a variance the City Council must be able to make
the following findings. One, the variance shall not grant a right or special privilege that
is not otherwise allowed in fihe district. The variance relieves an undue hardship
because of characteristics of the site. And the variance shall not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, and welfare. Staff has reviewed the findings and believes that
granting a variance for the reason requested by the applicant would., in fact, grant a right
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 90 of 101
of special privilege to the applicant that is not otherwise allowed in the district. Further,
staff believes that there is no undue hardship due to the characteristics of the site that
would prevent the applicant from meeting the required setbacks. If the Council should
decide to grant the variance, staff believes that it would not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, and/or welfare. However, the City Council should rely on any testimony
provided at the Public Hearing to determine the findings. If the Council chooses to deny
the applicant's request, staff does recommend that within 30 days from the date of
approval of the findings the applicant relocate the shed to be in conformance with the
setback standards of the R-4 district. With that I will answer any questions Council may
have.
De Weerd: Thank you., Council, any questions for staff?
Bird: Not at this time.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: Question for Anna or Tom, but he's not going to be able to answer this. For
the construction of this size of shed, is there a building permit required?
Canning: Yes, sir. It's 240 square feet. So, a building permit would have been
required for anything over 200.
Rountree: And my understanding is there was not a building permit?
Canning: Stor-Mor did not submit for a building permit.
De Weerd: Does the applicant want to comment?
Redden: Mike Redden. 1418 North Vineyards, Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Redden.: The reason this all came about, obviously, was not just a single letter, but
several letters from the homeowners association and people in general living in the
area. My truck is a small bucket that I'm required to take home for work, so I have it
parked out in front. So, that you can see it, nobody's going to mess with it. And I have
had the police out and it's legally parked, but it is on a corner, so people or children
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 91 of 101
crossing the street probably would be a hazard to them, because you have to go out
and look around it or slow down, which a lot of people won't do either. It's a stop sign
there, but they don't stop. So, anyway, I just went ahead, just because of all the years
at my work that safety is always an issue, it's first and number one with the company,
they have a little acronym, Best O. S. ,see it, own it, solve it. So, that's basically what
did. In order to get my truck off of the street onto the driveway, I had to move
everything out of the garage and, of course, you know, get a shed or something to put it
in. So, I had a trailer back there, so I moved the trailer out and put ashed -- bought the
shed at Stor-Mor, which I thought was kind of a reputable -- they have been here over
20 years and never said anything to me about permits or setbacks or anything, they just
built the shed.. One day -- so, I didn't know anything about it until somebody
complained, so that's why I'm here going through the process. I just kind of cured one
problem and created another one. The letters and stuff had stopped., obviously,
because the truck's now parked in the driveway, so there is similar sheds throughout the
neighborhood that are basically the same size. So, I guess really had no -- no idea they
had setbacks or anything, but I had pulled the plat map and looked at it and there is no -
- the easements are all on the side of the house. I mean I don't know what it is for the
back yard.. There is nothing there. There is no irrigation, there is no sewer, water,
electrical, gas, phone, anything, it's all on the side of the house, so the shed is,
obviously, out of the way of those if somebody did need to get in there I could certainly
move it. As far as the setbacks, meeting the setbacks, they are different from a corner
lot, I found out, from just a regular lot next to you. They are three times the length
versus the neighbor next to me has setbacks of five feet. So, not knowing that either,
that's why I'm here asking for the variance, otherwise, I'm kind of forced to I guess
somehow get rid of~ the 6,000 dollar shed that I'm sure nobody wants either, so stuck
financially trying to get rid of it if, indeed, I can't get the variance. To move it to the
setbacks would set the shed into the house and it wouldn't fit, where if I had to go 15
feet, 15 feet, it wouldn't -- it would be piled into the side of the house. That's why I'm
here asking for the variance. I guess -- you know, and, again, if I can't get it I'm back to
square one with everybody calling and complaining and a safety issue on the corner
again, because that's the only place I have to park the truck. I guess that's it in a
nutshell.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Could you park your truck in the street in a garage?
Redden: Pardon me?
Rountree: Did you park your truck when it was on the street in a structure?
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 92 of 1'01
Redden: In the shed?
Rountree: No. My question is why did you put a shed in to park your vehicle there?
Redden: No. My truck was parked on the street. My work truck. Because there is no
room to park in the driveway. So, I cleaned the garage out, put everything in the shed,
now I can get two extra cars in --
Rountree: Okay. So, you don't put the truck in the shed, you put the truck in your
garage.
Redden: Right. I put it -- it's just junk in the shed. Everything out of the garage.
Rountree: Okay. That's --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird:: On that -- on that Stor-Mor shed, I have a real problem believing that they didn't
know you needed a building permit or the owner -- they probably thought the owner got
a building permit and the owner thought the Stor-Mor got a building permit, I'm sure.
How did -- that come out in sections, didn't it? They didn't stick build that -- did they
stick build it?
Redden: No, they just -- they came out and built it. Yeah.
Bird: Is it on a foundation?
Redden: No.
Bird: It's got a floor and everything?
Redden: It's blocks. Yeah.
Bird: Set on blocks with a floor?
Redden: Right.
Bird: So, you could take a trailer and a -- and take it off that way; right? You could
move it that way?
Redden: If you had to, yeah.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 93 of 101
Bird: Okay.
Redden: I asked the Stor-Mor folks to -- when this all happened if they could take it
back or if we could get -- trade it for a couple of smaller ones and they pretty much
didn't know who I was kind of thing. They wouldn't work with me at all. I mean, you
know, realizing now that, obviously, you have to have 200 square foot and below you
can put a shed anywhere you want, but I couldn't have gotten everything into a 200
square foot shed either, so I kind of -- I would have had to put two of them back there
or --
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we allow one shed in the required
rear yard that's less -- that's 200 square feet or less.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions, Council?
Bird: I don't.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone who would
like to provide testimony on this application? I apologize for the time.
Hensheid: I was beginning to feel like Cinderella. Madam Mayor, Council members,
my name is Doty Hensheid, 2031 West Sonoma Drive, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you:.
Hensheid: And I'm president of the Vineyards homeowners association and concerning
Mr. Redden's shed, the shed did comply with our standards in the neighborhood, other
than the size and -- but we do approve the design and color of the shed. We have
asked him two things to do, which are realign the fence line to the way it used to be. It
had come out at an angle and, then, that way and, then, back in. You can't really see
that, but it's quite ugly. And he said he would do that and we asked him not to use the
shed for any commercial reason and he said he would do that. So, whatever you
Council members decide to do we will accept and I thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any further --
Snow: Kevin Snow. 1470 North Silverado. Also a member of the homeowners
association. One of the things brought up by Mr. Redden --
De Weerd: Can you pull the mike up just a little bit? Thank you.
Snow: One of the things brought up by Mr. Redden was the safety issue. I wanted to
add a little bit to that. That particular intersection you see we often have cars parking on
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 94 of 1.01
-- on both sides of the street and as that is a major avenue out to Cherry Lane, it's also
worth noting that that intersection is not lit. We do not have a light at that intersection.
We are currently working on that to see if we can have one approved, but that's been
another concern about that intersection and another reason why we applaud Mr.
Redden's efforts to get his vehicles off the road there to make a safer area. I'd also like
to add I spoke with several of the neighbors -- there are no houses that directly face that
particular side, so you're looking at side yards all along that particular street, so there
was no one that was particularly offended by the height or by the shed being there and
in all we found that there was no objection from the immediate neighborhood for having
that there. If there was going to be a shed that exceeded recommendations, that would,
essentially, be the place to put it. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony? Yes.
Kerr: My name is Diane Kerr and I live at 1892 West Sunnyslope Drive and as to not
knowing you needed a building permit, there is CC&Rs that are signed and they have
resided at this residence for a long time. They also receive regular notices that say if
you want to do any architectural changes you do need to submit those, so there is, then,
ample notice that you do need to comply with those things. I was not particularly asked.,
.but my house does --Igo out my door and I can see that. This gentleman has -- one of
fihe reasons why he can't park in his garage is because it's full of motorcycles, stock
cars, things that are worked on that block the sidewalk, including his utility vehicle. He
has it in the driveway. A lot of times it is blocking the sidewalk, so I have to walk out in
the street when I walk my dogs. My concern is -- and, then, also, he works on his
vehicles out there in that driveway also. So, one of the reasons why he doesn't have
the space is he's outgrown it for the use of having lots of toys. Anyway, my concern is
now that he has this large -- and it looks like the size of a shop. I mean it does not look
like a shed, it looks like a shop or a mother-in-law apartment. And my concern now is --
is there going to be motorcycles in and out of there, are we going to work on -- just like
we worked on our other vehicles at the front of the house, is it now going to become an
area to work on, which faces right by my house.. Right out there are we going to take
our motorcycles and our stock car and different things and work on it right there in the
street. Because it's becoming more of a storage area. We have a large storage, we
have lots of storage of vehicles. We have lots of storage of motorcycles and it's just
looking like a whole lot of storage.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Kerr: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any further testimony? Yes, sir.
Crandall: Getting punchy, too. My name is David Crandall. 1864 East Lochmeadow
Street in Meridian. I'm actually the neighborhood property manager. I work for the
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 95 of 101
association. I just want to reemphasize the association's position. If you decide to grant
the waiver, we would ask that as a condition of granting it that you ask that that fence be
realigned and that it not be used for commercial purposes.. Those would be two
conditions we are asking for. But the actual position of the association -- we are okay
with the shed, we just want those two conditions included.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony? We always let the applicant
have the last word. Seeing none -- please come forward.
Redden: Mike Redden. 1418 North Vineyards, Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Redden: I don't have any stock cars. I do have four wheelers. My son and I have one
four wheeler. My wife.. And, then, we have motorcycles that we ride. And that's part of
what's in the storage shed now. I don't do any commercial work. I don't -- I just work on
my own vehicles and my kids' cars. So, that's -- that's what's going on there. I don't
know where we got stock cars.
De Weerd: Well, thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: Mr. Redden?
Redden: Yes.
Bird: How many -- how many cars do you -- on a normal night have parked there,
excluding the Idaho Power truck?
Redden: Five.
Bird: Five?
Redden: I had six and., then, seven with the Idaho Power truck.
Bird.: This is actual cars?
Redden: Yes, sir.
Bird.: That you would have -- that you would have parked there at a night?
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 96 of 101
Redden: Yeah.
Bird: Five cars.
Redden: Yes, sir.
Bird: Okay. And can they all be off the street or are they parked --
Redden: I have three that go in the garage when it's empty. That's what the shed's for.
And, then, the Idaho Power truck and room for another car to park there.
Bird: So, two of them have to be out on the street?
Redden: No.
Bird: Or in the driveway.
Redden: Right. There is two on the driveway. That varies, because they are going to
school, so -- weekends they are home.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor? .
De Weerd: Do you have a question?
Zaremba: If I may. I appreciate your effort to work this out and also appreciate the
work that you do. I know that's -- to be called out at all hours of the day and night., that's
why you have the truck I'm sure.
Redden: Yes, sir.
Zaremba: When the truck is parked in your driveway does it overhang the sidewalk?
Redden: No.
Zaremba: Are you able to pull it in far enough that it doesn't block the sidewalk?
Redden: Right. I can pull up far enough. I'm sure there has been occasions where I
have pulled up, jumped out to get something or whatever and got back in, but you can
pull far enough up that you can get by on the sidewalk.
Zaremba: But it would fit if you --
Redden: Uh-huh.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 97 of 101
Zaremba: -- when you try?
Redden: Yeah.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have a question for you and it has nothing to do with your application, but
what I see in the picture and the idea that the fence has been brought up this evening.
Did you have a variance and do you know if the neighbor has a variance for that fence?
Because it appears to be inconsistent with city ordinance.
Redden: When I first moved in we got a variance for the fence --
Rountree: Okay.
Redden: -- and later found out that they had changed it, so you don't have to get a
variance. It's ten feet off of it now anyway, so -- and the reason that the fence has a
bend in it is because I had a little ramp that when I first saw the sheds there -- I don't
know, they are built a lot lower, so now it's probably a foot off of the ground., so I had to
have a little ramp to get the motorcycles and stuff in there, so the ramp was a little
longer than the shed and I had to keep the dogs in, so I just did that to get everything
loaded up in there and it will all go back the way it was.
De Weerd: You have a complicated issue
Redden: I do. It's unbelievable.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions, Council? Thank you.
Redden: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, if you don't have any further questions for the applicant or
need answers from staff, I would entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Rountree: So moved,.
Bird.: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item
20. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 98 of 101
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd.: Okay. Any discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I can't see that the -- this application and the situation meets
the -- at least the first two criteria for granting the variance. I think it somewhat meets
the third criteria as it relates to safety and potential welfare in the neighborhood, but
don't see that it constitutes an undue hardship and I do see that if we were to grant it it
would be a special privilege, so that's what I see or what I heard.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird: Mark this down. I agree one hundred percent.
Rountree: First time. No.
Nary: That's why we keep it on record.
De Weerd: It must be the hour.
Rountree: Yeah. All right.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If our two partners down on the other end don't want a deal, I'll make a motion
that we deny VAR 07-019, the request for a variance to UDC Table 1128-5 for Mike
Redden at 1418 North Vineyards Avenue. And do we need a time for this to come
through? And that -- the date -- given until the 1st of March to be in compliance with
the city ordinance.
De Weerd: Okay. Does second agree?
Rountree: Second agrees. Second seconds.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 99 of 101
Item 21: Ordinance No. 08-1345 AZ 07-015 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 1. 88 acres from RUT to an R-2 zone for the property
located at 1650 Dunwoody for Dunwoody Property by Marshall Williams
-1650 Dunwoody
Item 22: Ordinance No. 08-1346 AZ 05-052 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 7. 87 acres from R1 to C-G zone for Sadie Creek
Promenade Subdivision by Landmark Development Group, LLC - 3055
North Eagle Road:
Item 23: Ordinance No. 08-1347 RZ 07-006 Request for a Rezone of
4.38 acres from an R-8 to an. R-15 zone for Bellabrook by J. E.
Development, LLC - 300 South Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 21 is ordinance -- and 22 and 23, Ordinance 08-1345, 08-1346
and 08-1347. Mr. Berg, will you, please, read those ordinances by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance 08-1345, an
ordinance for annexation of a parcel of land being a portion of Dunwoody Subdivision
and all of Lot 1, Block 1, Dunwoody Subdivision, lying in the southwest quarter of the
northwest quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian., Ada
County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and territories
situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate limits of
the City of Meridian, as required by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining
the land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT to R-2 in the Meridian City
Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County
assessor, the Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission., as required
by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the
reading of the rules and providing an effective date.
Berg: Ordinance No. 08-1346, an ordinance for annexation of property located in the
U. S. Government lot of Section 5 and U. S. Government lot 4 of Section 4, Township
3 North, Range 1 East,, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment
A and annexing certain lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho., adjacent and
contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of
Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands
from R-1 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 for effective date.
Berg: Ordinance No: 08-1347, an ordinance finding that J.E. Development, LLC, the
owners of certain real property has made a written request for a rezone of the zoning
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 100 of 101
classification for real property located in the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter
of Section 17, 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
lands and territories situated in Ada County, Idaho, and within the corporate limits of the
City of Meridian, rezoning the land use zoning classification of said land from R-8 to R-
15 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 these ordinances read by title only. Is there anyone who
would like to hear it read in its entirety?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I don't hear anybody wanting to read -- hear it, so I would make a motion that we
approve ordinance 08-1345, 08-1346, 08-1347, with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the ordinances on Items
21, 22 and 23. If there is no discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 24. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(a):
Bird: Madam Mayor, I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-
2345(1)(a).
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRI'£D: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
January 22, 2008
Page 101 of 101
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
De Weerd: Do I have a motion?
Rountree: I move to come out of Executive Session.
Bird.: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor.
MOTfON CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Move to adjourn.
Bird.: Second..
De Weerd: All those in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:27 P. M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
MAYOR T Y De WEERD
ATTESTED:_~~
JAYCE
DATE APPROq , /
/~~~~''%
o
_ ~
HOLMAN, CITE C E.,~t
-' `\~
~ ~~