HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 02-19Meridian City Council Meeting February 19, 2008
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday,
February 19, 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,. Jaycee Holman, Anna Canning, Jeff Lavey, Joe
Silva, Len Grady, Steve Siddoway, Bob Stowe, Pete Friedman, Matt Ellsworth, Mark
Neimeyer, 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: Okay. Thank you for your patience. I apologize for the delay of the
beginning of this meeting, but I'll go ahead and call this meeting to order, once we have
the tape on.
Holman: Madam Mayor, the tape's going.
De Weerd: Thank you. And welcome again. It is Tuesday, February 19th. For the
record it is 7:30. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item No. 2. We will be led in the pledge tonight by our FFA
representatives. We have Jessica Smith, Ben Engar, Lorraine Zantman and Jacqueline
Coyle. If you will all rise and join us in the pledge of allegiance.
(Pledge of allegiance recited.)
De Weerd: I do have pins that I present to those that lead us in the pledge. So, thank
you. And I will give one to your advisor when we read the proclamation.
.Item 3: Community Invocation by Will Berg.
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by
Pastor Mike Dodd with Capital Christian Center. Is Pastor Dodd here? I don't see him.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 2 of 75
Thank you. I guess we will just ask our fill-in, Mr. Berg. Will you, please, lead us in the
community invocation?
Berg.: Thank you., Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. If we could pause for a
moment. Heavenly Father, we are so grateful and blessed to be part of this community
and take this time to thank you for all the blessings that you put upon this community
and its people. We want to recognize that it takes many hands to make a community
and we are so grateful for the fellowship and the great -- the enduring gratefulness that
the people have for this community and the spirit that we show and the quality of life
that we provide. We want to thank you, acknowledge you for your greatness, in your
name, amen.
De Weerd: Thank you, Layman Berg. And I would like to take this moment as an
opportunity to introduce our new City Clerk. Will Berg took a position as Community
Liaison and so tonight it's the first night for Jaycee Holman, so welcome, Jaycee.
Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Also, I'd like to welcome our former City Councilman Glenn Bentley. It's
always nice to see faces that used to at one time -- actually, I think we swapped place,
so it's nice having you here tonight. Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On the Consent Agenda 6-K has been asked to be pulled as per Mark Jensen.
That's the Cooperative Construction Reimbursement Agreement. And on the regular
agenda, Items 19 and 20 have been asked to be pulled to March 4th, 2008, because of
lack of notice. And Item 22 ordinance number is 08-1348. And 23 is 08-1349. And 24
is 08-1350. And 25 is 08-1351. With that I move we approve the revised agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as revised. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Proclamation for FFA Week:
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 3 of 75
De Weerd: Okay. This next item I do have a proclamation. It is FFA week and so in
honor of that we have a proclamation. Whereas the Future Farmers of America and the
agricultural education provide a strong foundation for the youth of America and the
future of the food., fiber and natural resources system; and whereas the FFA promotes
premier leadership, personal growth, and career success among its members; and
whereas the agricultural education and the FFA ensure a steady supply of young
professionals to meet the growing demands in the science, business, and technology of
agricultural; and whereas the FFA motto, learning to do, doing to learn, earning to live,
living to serve, gives direction of purpose to these students who take an active roll in
succeeding in agricultural education; and whereas the FFA promotes citizenship,
volunteerism, patriotism and cooperation; thereof, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the
City of Meridian, do hereby proclaim the week of February 18th through the 22nd, 2008,
as FFA week in the City of Meridian in recognition for the success of the Future Farmers
of America program in this community. And if you would come forward, so I can present
to all of you.
Engar: We would just want to thank the City Council and members of the board,. Thank
you, Mrs. Mayor as well. We just want to thank the City of Meridian and all the
organizations that helped us out in the past that we have been able to do some of the
activities, such the breakfast that we did last week. Just not too long ago we had the
new ag shop put in and it was a ten million dollar building, thanks to some of the people
here in Meridian and stuff and we would like to thank you for that as well. Through
some of the opportunities that you people have given us, we have been able to do
extremely well at our competitions, attend nationals, and compete at other regional
events. So, I'd just like to thank you all.
De Weerd: Thank you. And we appreciate you being here. That is a beautiful facility,
so --
Engar: It's very nice.
De Weerd: Anything to add? Great. Well, girls, anything you would like to add?
Bird: Come on, girls, you're not going to let just the boy talk. Come on.
FFA Member: Well, as Ben said --
De Weerd.: We would invite you to come to the microphone.
FFA Member: Well, as Ben said, we really appreciate all this community has done for
us and as Ben had previously mentioned., the new building has created even more
opportunities for us, such as we have a contract with the Miller Welding Company and
we have agreed in our contract to allow them to use our new professional technical
education center as their regional training center and in agreeing to do that, they
Meridian City Council
February t9, 2008
Page 4 of 75
provided us with 300,000 dollars worth of equipment -- of welding equipment. So, we
were really lucky and we just kind of lucked out on that and it was really an amazing
deal for us, so --
De Weerd: Well, that's what partnerships are all about. Well, we appreciate what you
do and what your organization stands for and thank you for joining us tonight.
Item 6: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of January 15, 2008 City Council Special
Meeting:
B. Approve Minutes of January 15, 2008 City Council / MDC Special
Joint Workshop Meeting:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 07-
015 Request for a Rezone of .28 of an acre from an R-8 residential
zone to an O-T zone for 6t" and Broadway Property by Linda
Loehr - 532 East Broadway Avenue:
D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: 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:
E. Development Agreement: AZ 07-006 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 94.69 acres from RUT to a C-G zone for Pinebridae
by Stanley Consultants -south of East Fairview Avenue, east of
North Locust Grove Road and west of North Eagle Road & RZ 07-
010 Request for a Rezone of 75.67 acres from I-L and L-O zones to
a C-G zone for Pinebridae by Stanley Consultants -south of East
Fairview Avenue, east of North Locust Grove Road and west of
North Eagle Road:
F. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 07-015 Request for
a Miscellaneous application to modify the existing Development
Agreement listing the permitted and prohibited home occupational
uses within the Brownstones (Live /Work Units) and ensure the
Brownstones and future condominiums are constructed as shown
with the submitted elevations for Gramercy Townhomes by
Tuscany Development, Inc -south of East Overland Road and
approximately'/ mile west of South Eagle Road:
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 5 of 75
G. Development Agreement: AZ 07-017 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 40.4 acres from RUT to C-C zone (21.3 acres), R-8
zone (6.27 acres) and R-2 (12.87 acres) for Three Corners by
David Dean - 6380 North Locust Grove Road:
H. Development Agreement: AZ 07-014 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 7.55 acres from RUT and R1 to a C-C zone for
Woodland Springs by Morgan Development -Northeast Corner of
McMillan Road and Locust Grove Road:
I. Third Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 07-006
Request for a Miscellaneous application to amend the previously
approved Development Agreement for Touchmark Living Center
Annexation (AZ 99-021) by amending the approved phase
boundaries and various other provisions for Meadowlake Village
North by Touchmark of the Treasure Valley, LLC -Southeast
Corner of Franklin Road and Touchmark Way:
J, Change Order Number 13, of Contract with Owyhee
Construction, Inc. for Additional Water and Sewer Services,
Additional Type "P" Permanent Asphalt Repair, and Additional
Crew Time for the Broadway Avenue, Meridian Road to Fifth
Street Utility Replacement Project for $23,130.91:
L. Approval of Bid and Award of Contract with Superior
Construction for Lanark Avenue North - South Water
Improvements for $105,509.63:
M. Water Main Easement Agreement for FSC /Venga Works by
Venga Ventures, LLC:
N. Sanitary Sewer Easement Agreement for FSC /Venga Works
by Venga Ventures, LLC:
O. Task Order 0741 for Ten Mile Road Interchange Utility
Improvements with Civil Survey Consultants, Inc. for an
amount not to exceed $29,320.00:
P. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Agreement for
Southeast Corner Marketplace No. 1 (aka Gateway Market
Place) by James Kissler, LLC:
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 6 of 75
Q. Sanitary Sewer and Water Main Easement Agreement for
Gardner Ahlguist Gateway No. 2 by Gardner Ahlquist
Development:
R. Agreement for Instructor Services with Sanitary Services, Co.
for Community Education Instruction not to exceed $88.00:
S. Declaration of Environmental Covenant City Hall Deed
Restriction for New City Hall Site:
T. Award Bid for Grant for Sr. Citizen Center Phase 2 ICDBG-04-
111-01-SR for Acoustical Wall Panels by SLA, Inc. Drywall
Construction for $5,952.00:
U. Change Orders No 1, 2 and 3 for the North Black Cat Trunk
Sewer with Brown Construction for $4,978.00:
V. Internship Agreement with St. Luke's Regional Medial Center
for Paramedic Training:
De Weerd.: Okay. The next item is our Consent Agenda, Item No. 6.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: With the removal of 6-K, the rest of the agenda stays as is. On the agenda all the
dollar values is noted, which I certainly appreciate. I move we approve the revised
Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda with
the removal of Item K. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, Madam City Clerk -- I'm
going to have to get used to that -- please call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
De Weerd.: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 7: Department Reports.:
Meridian City Council
february 19, 2008
Page 7 of 75
A. Mayor's Office:
1. Reappointment of Michael Rohm to Planning and Zoning
Commission Seat:
De Weerd: Okay. Under department reports, Council, in front of you I am asking --
requesting reappointment of Michael Rohm to the Planning and Zoning Commission. I
couldn't find a seat number. His term did expire, so we would be renewing it for another
six years, as they are six year terms. So, that would be --
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I move that we approve your reappointment of Michael Rohm to the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Ro11-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
2. Appointment of Michael Martin to Parks and Recreation
Commission Seat #6:
De Weerd.: Thank you. Item No. A-2 is appointment of Michael Martin to the Parks
Commission, Seat No. 6. And this was to replace John Sesser, who resigned from the
board. In talking with the president and vice-president, they wanted to fill the seat with
someone who had a -- who particularly had an interest in pathways, as that will be one
of the priorities in moving for this upcoming year. Mr. Martin is very passionate about
pathways and I would ask -- his letter is also in your packet and I would entertain any
motion, ask your appointment -- or confirmation of this appointment.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 8 of 75
Rountree: I move that we confirm the appointment of Michael Martin to the Parks and
Recreation Commission.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second.. Any discussion? Hearing none,
Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
B. Legal Department /Police Department:
Presentation on Police Pay Plan by Bill Nary and Jeff
Lavey:
De Weerd: Thank you very much. Item 7-B is our legal department. I'll turn this over to
Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what I have
handed you is a summary of a compensation study that we have been doing with the
police department for about six months. The end of the summer you had directed that
we evaluate the -- the current compensation plan at the police department, which is
called the Step Plan, how it's been implemented, what the requirements have been,
how that's fit in the current compensation structure in the valley, how it compares to
other departments, is it still a viable program. We did hire a consultant to assist us with
that and., then, with the assistance of Chief Lavey we did organize a group of employees
to be able to identify really what the issues were and what we found., as you would
imagine, is that the pros of what the employees seemed to like in the Step pay program
that we had was significantly shorter than the problems that they had with it. And many
of the problems were the consistency, the way it had been implemented and continued
to be implemented. There were employees that felt they were in the wrong pay grades
and the wrong categories, that the pay -- and, then, ultimately, at the end of the day the
pay itself wasn't competitive in the marketplace here. And so what we did is we
engaged our consultants that we used to help us flush through some of those issues
and come up with a different proposal, but at the same time we also went and looked at
other departments in both our area and outside of our area. What we did -- and I will
turn this over here to the chief in just a second. What we did is we looked at areas
where we get people from different areas, both in the state, such Coeur d' Alene or
Pocatello, Emmett, Canyon county, as well as we even looked out of the state, places
like Bend., Oregon; Spokane, Washington; Richland, Washington, those areas that had
comparable size communities or comparable size departments to us. We also, then,
looked at our direct competitors. Once people -- people get to the Treasure Valley and
Meridian City Council
February Y9, 2008
Page 9 of 75
they don't necessarily have a particular allegiance or desire to live in one community
over the other, who are we competing with. Well, we are competing with the same
communities for officers that we deal with daily, Boise, Garden City, Nampa., Ada
County. So, we looked at our comparison of what we currently did and then -- and used
that as at least a comparison moving forward. So, we met for a number of months with
a number of staff there and I'll let the chief maybe take it from here -- and came up with
what's the last page of the packet that I have handed you today, with the summary, the
comparison to the other communities, and, then, a proposed new pay plan. We have
met with the finance department and that's the page I also handed you that's not
attached as the cost of implementation and there is a couple of stages that we have
looked at and how we would implement a program like this. What we have discussed
with the employees on numerous occasions was that -- our target date would be the
next fiscal year and the chief would., then, include that as part of his budget. Then, what
we have looked at are there other ways that we could implement this in a different
fashion that might be affordable, as well as a positive for the compensation for the
off. icers. Maybe this is when I can turn it over to the chief and he can give you the
perspective from the department.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Gorton: Before you do that, I don't know if procedurally -- if this is something that makes
sense, because we were handed this to -- to table it a week. What I worry about is if we
are all sitting up here, we are reading while -- while the chief is trying to present and --
and Ithink it -- I don't know how much you have to present, I just don't want to be
reading the document while you're trying to talk. We have got lots of people here, if
there is action we need to take.
Nary: And that may be appropriate. Ithink we were trying to at least lay the ground
work with you with what we have got in front of you. If you have questions and you
certainly want to put it over for a week to get more time to review the information, that's
certainly understandable.
Borton: Okay.
Lavey: Madam Mayor and Council, I only have a couple of minutes of comments and
then -- however you want to do it. If you want to table it and ask me questions next
week, you can do that. The reason why this is critical is we currently have ten openings
in the police department and what's unusual about that is last year we had ten openings
and we actually lose more people than we can actually hire and the goal is to try to
attract not only applicants, but good quality applicants and it's difficult with the current
structure that we have. Unofficially, about a year and a half ago we did a pay study and
we had knowledge that we were behind the eight ball and, then, through -- through time
Meridian City Council
February 1'g, 2008
Page 10 of 75
we actually didn't get that into the budget last year and, then, we hired the consultant.
The consultant pretty much had confirmed exactly what we thought. Although our
starting salary was great, after about three years we have lost everybody and we are
way behind.. So, what we have done is put together this committee to kind of look at
things and say what's -- what's working, what's not working, and a couple of the areas
that they come up was not only the pay structure itself, which, over 21 years time it
expanded 121 percent. The problem with that was everybody was sitting around 10, 11
-- step 10 or 11 and so although the plan -- the plan kept increasing and increasing, the
employees stayed at the same spot. They never went up the scale. So, if you could
have taken those figures -- at the very end they were great, but nobody had achieved
them.. Not one person in the department was at that -- at that rate. A couple other
areas that we have identified is specialty pay and assignment pays for doing some of
the dangerous work that we have, our K-9 officers -- which we currently do compensate,
but there is others out there, like the motorcycles and -- that aren't compensated. And,
then, the other thing that we looked at was some of our employees that go above and
beyond the basic job, such as instructors for the department, second language or third
language speaking people, people that go above and beyond just what we would call
satisfactory. All the other departments in the area have compensation for those. So,
what we have done is -- is just put together a proposal for Council to look at. I'm sure
you're going to have lots of questions, but the main thing was how do we fund it and as
we were talking about for next year for FY09, I have been working finance the last
several months in how we are going to do that and., of course, that would be something
that we would have to take into consideration during the budget process. I would like to
implement it early, as far as stage -- stage one, which would be the adjustments of the
salaries themselves. And through salary savings in the police department, finance te11s
me that we do have enough money as we stand right now to put that in place whenever
we so desire and go from there. So, I guess I'm open for questions right now, if
anything sparks your interest, or we can -- it looks like you got a long night. We can
table it and I can come back next week as well. So, whatever Council prefers.
Bird.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird.: I would -- I agree with Councilman Borton, I -- I have talked to finance, they have
kept me -- but I haven't seen the hundred percent final. I would prefer to do the
questioning next week after I look through here. Jeff, I have got a couple of things that I
don't know whether they were covered or not. I think they were, but --
Lavey: Okay.
Bird: That would be my preference, if it fits the rest of you, that we -- that we bring this
back -- Bill brings this back next week as a department report, if that's okay with the
President and Mayor. That would be my preference right now.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 11 of 75
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I concur with both comments from Councilman Bird and
Borton. There is a lot of material here and I think we are all aware of the issue, but we
need to have a little more time with it and if next week is okay with the rest of the
Council, Iwould -- I would move that we continue the discussion on this department
report until February 26th.
Bird: Second..
De Weerd.: Okay. I have a motion and a second to move this over to next week. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd.: Okay. And we appreciate -- this is excellent information. We appreciate the
employees participation and look forward to a hardy discussion next week.
Lavey: Look forward to it.
Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd.: Okay. There were no items removed from the Consent Agenda. I will go
ahead and -- oh, Item K.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: Wasn't Item K -- was that withdrawn entirely or was it moved?
De Weerd: Well, the way Councilman Bird suggested it was removed. Mr. Bird, did you
want discussion on that Item K?
Bird: Oh, no. No. It was -- it was gone. They requested -- they requested that it be
pulled completely. And I'm sorry if I misquoted you, but --
De Weerd: No. You did fine. I was on the same page.
Bird: Yeah.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: We are okay.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 12 of 75
Item 9: Tabled from February 1, 2008: Amendment to Bittercreek
Aareernent:
Item 10: Tabled from February 1, 2008: Cooperative Construction and
Reimbursement A reement for Lift Station Force Main and Oversize
Main for Bittercreek Meadows:
De Weerd: We are -- I was with you. Okay. Item 9. I will ask Mr. Barry.
Barry: Madam Mayor, Members of the -- pardon me?
De Weerd: Who was going to introduce this?
Barry: Oh, Mr. Nary, were you? Barry. Nary. It's close.
Nary: I think it was you.
De Weerd: I did say Barry.
Barry: That's what I thought I heard. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Tom
Barry, the Public Works Department. In Executive Session this evening you presented
six alternatives regarding the Bitter Creek Meadows issue, with two of those alternatives
being the most appropriate at this point in time. One of those on alternatives embraced
going back to the original agreement that was crafted in 2006. The other, in an attempt
to resolve a tort claim through mediation, that alternative embraced the resolution of that
tort claim, along with avery -- a different agreement. The Public Works Department
staff would like your direction, if you will, regarding a next steps on this particular issue,
so that we can bring this matter to a close and bring some closure to the issue as it
relates to the tort claim as well.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think, basically, what you have in front
of you to consider -- I guess what we are looking for is direction. We had an agreement
-- well, we have an agreement with the developer of Bittercreek Meadows, Mr. Jewett,
who I think is here in the back of the room. We have had an agreement since 2006 that
-- I guess to cut to the chase, requires some completion of some -- some improvements
on Mr. Jewett's part in regards to a well on that site and at the point that those are
completed and the city can take operation of that, that was what was contemplated in
the agreement, and that the city would, then, also build a lift station in the Bittercreek
Meadows area to serve those particular homes that are there and the agreement
contemplates 24 homes being served by a lift station. That's already on the table.
There has been some ongoing dispute about that. We tried to resolve that through a
mediation process, since some alternatives have been considered, but, ultimately, the
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 13 of 75
decision of where we go and the direction the city takes on whether the existing
agreement is something the city would prefer to give direction towards or the
alternatives, which has been discussed with you, which, essentially -- and this is not the
exact detail, but in general the requirements are opposite. The city would purchase the
well, instead of Mr. Jewett giving the well to the city. The city would not -- no longer be
required to build a lift station, but Mr. Jewett would build it at some point in the future
and, then, there is some other considerations in there -- that that agreement that was
discussed at mediation was an alternative for you to make a decision upon. So, I think
what Mr. Jewett is expecting and what the staff is desiring tonight is direction from you
on where you, as the Council, want us to go. If your direction is to continue with the
original agreement that was signed in 2006., that's within your discretion. If your
direction is, instead, to complete an agreement, we don't have an agreement for you
tonight towards the outcome that was discussed in mediation, that's the direction we
need. There has been a number of conversations Mr. Barry has had for the last few
weeks with Mr. Jewett over some other alternatives, but, really, today we still need
direction from you of what do you want us to accomplish as staff in working with Mr.
Jewett, the agreement that's already out there or an alternative, which, basically, we
would require the city to be purchasing the well and Mr. Jewett to be changing his
obligations and a new agreement, which hasn't been completed at this point, because
we have been sort of discussing a number of changes to that, but I think that's, really,
the gist of what we are seeking tonight is just that direction.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Council, any questions?
Bird.: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. We are seeking your direction on this.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: My comment, I guess, on what we have reviewed., having sat through the
mediation session and having the additional information that's been provided by staff,
my recommendation would be to proceed with the original agreement, complete what
engineering needs to be completed, if any, and move forward post haste with the
construction of the lift station.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 14 of 75
Bird: I would -- I agree with Councilman Rountree on the statement, but how fast can
we get this done? I mean we have had this thing going for two years. I'd like to see it
get settled.
Barry: Councilman Bird, regarding construction of the lift station --
Bird.: Well, no, I mean the agreement -- get the agreement signed and get that all taken
care of and get started on doing what we need to do out there.
Barry: Regarding the agreement, I'll differ to Mr. Nary, since that's alegal -- the
agreement, as I understand., is signed already. So, regarding the next step would be a
matter of just going to engineering and cost estimating and, then, making arrangements
for the design and construction of the lift station and the line that would service back to
the -- to the plant. So, with regard to that timeline, regarding construction, I would say,
yeah, by year end we should have that.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, yeah, the existing
agreement has already been signed and executed and recorded. The basis of the claim
and the dispute from Mr. Jewett was the city's dispatch in getting that done in a timely
fashion and that was where the dispute lies with the city and Mr. Jewett. So, that,
obviously, won't go away necessarily simply by going forward., but that is the agreement
that is out on the table. That is the existing responsibility of both Mr. Jewett and the city
was to -- was to follow through on that agreement that was signed in 2006. So, we
certainly can proceed on that agreement as has already been presented.
De Weerd: Any other questions from Council or, staff, any additional comment?
Barry: Not at this time.
Bird: We got two views. What's the other two?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I'm not inclined necessarily to try and resolve potential litigation or a negotiated
contract here in an open forum on public session. That's really not probably the most
efficient way to try and resolve disputes like this. I agree with Councilman Bird to the
extent action can be taken quickly to the benefit of Mr. Jewett and the city. Let's get
this thing done. It might be too simplistic to request that there -- if there is an alternative
Meridian City Council
February T9, 2008
Page 15 of 75
three or an option for a resolution, that that be presented to the city -- to counsel for the
city. Perhaps we can go so far as have it actually signed by Mr. Jewett. To the extent
it outlines firm concrete terms that are absolutely guaranteed acceptable, great. The
city can, then, decide one way or another if that's going to work in an effort to try and
resolve it one way or the other. I think Mr. Jewett would clearly like some -- some
direction, good or bad, as soon as possible. I think that's only fair. So, if that's
something that could be provided within a week or more or less or ten days, however
long it takes, let's try and do that. Again, option -- the original option -- the original
agreement's already signed. Let's continue down that course, as Councilman Rountree
suggested, which very well might be the best -- the best course to go.
Bird: I agree.
De Weerd:: So, is there direction to staff to move towards option one, bring back a time
line for what this would look like and bring that with Mr. Jewett and have this as a
follow-up discussion next week; is that desirable?
Rountree: I think that's what Mr. Borton said.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Jewett?
Jewett: Jim Jewett. 1560 Carol Street, Meridian. Is there a question or do you want
me to start just talking, because I could go for awhile.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: We don't want you to just go for awhile.
Jewett: I didn't think so.
Gorton: Mr. Jewett, the basis of my comment was -- in fairness to both sides and trying
to resolve it, it doesn't make sense for you or us -- for us to ask for X and you to ask for
Y and we say, no, how about Z and you say, no, how about B, and we just -- we have
been doing this and your time's valuable and expensive and a pain in the tail for
everybody. So, the reason I threw that out, if there is -- other than the existing
agreement, if there is some of these specific terms -- and I know you have been working
hard with -- with Public Works and legal to try and flush out those specifics that work for
you -- whether or not they work for the city -- you guys are close on a lot of things that
you could be pinned down, so to speak. The literal sign here is the absolute resolution
if we go this route. But, then, the city can kind of go up or down on it. That might not be
possible, but it avoids the give and take that we are sort of stuck in right now.
Jewett: Yeah. Understand the give and take. I think some of the problem that existed
is -- is direction of Council, because you are the deciding body. During the mediation a
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 16 of 75
lot was discussed and there was a proposed agreement through mediation that I'm
assuming never got ratified., so that one is not on the table. So, I guess the missing link
is the input of what Council really wants to do. I mean I signed the agreement over two
years ago expecting that to happen. Council signed the same agreement over two
years ago. And here we are and there is a lot of water under the bridge, a lot of
money's been spent on both parts. How we resolve that without Council's direction I
think is going to be difficult. I just think you have a -- and your Public Works has worked
-- he and the director has worked diligently with me trying to get up to speed on it, but
he's got a lot of catching up to do, a lot of history here, and that's difficult for him,
especially with all his other tasks, which Imust -- he surely has a lot of other tasks other
than this project. And we just keep going on and on and I don't know what we are going
to accomplish between now and next week that's going to be different than where we
are today. I really have to be honest, I don't know where we are going still. I appreciate
your comments and I appreciate wanting to get this done, but if we are just saying we
are going to go the original agreement, then, what are we going to do with all the water
under the bridge in the last year and a half? You know, I was directed by Public Works
to deed them the lift station lot to do that. I had to spend money to buy that site. I paid
interest on that for the last year and three months and I just think that's grossly unfair for
me to just to sit there and continue to do that.
Borton: Madam Mayor? I didn't -- I didn't -- I didn't necessarily suggest a way to come
up and either vent or try and negotiate anything right now. I understand your concerns.
I just -- I pose that question if that was doable. Maybe yes, maybe not, but we will talk
with staff and Councilman Rountree's suggestion is sort of front and center.
Jewett: I mean as far as the -- the engineering plans -- you know, the plans were
completed., they were approved by DEQ well over -- about a year ago now. So, that
part's been done for some time. But just nothing has proceeded from that point. So, to
take up that from now and go forward, I would think that's a fairly easy process, just do
the engineering and put it out for bid.. As far as the continued negotiations to settle all
the other little issues, I gladly will work with Public Works. I don't .know if going back to
mediation is the right venue for that solution or not. I don't know.
Borton: Okay. Thanks.
De Weerd: Council?
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, if it would be of any assistance, if I understand the Council's
direction, it appears that what you would like is on next week's agenda from Public
Works a plan with some numbers as to this lift station project, what's the time line it can
Meridian City Council
February t9, 2008
Page 17 of 75
get completed and what's the cost to the city to get that accomplished. The direction to
the legal department right at the moment is that there wasn't any option you have
approved., other than the agreement that already exists, the 2006 agreement with Mr.
Jewett to construct the lift station and that the well can be turned over to the city at
some point in the future, according to that agreement., when it meets the city's standards
and requirements. That's what I am taking by your direction. What I also understood
you to say is that if Mr. Jewett still wants to explore other options, he can certainly bring
those forward. That's not something necessarily at this point we are talking about
mediation, that's simply a proposal that he can, then., discuss with Mr. Barry, as they
have been for the last month, and Mr. Barry, if he feels that's an appropriate option, can
bring that forward to you.. But unless I misunderstood you, that was the gist of what I
think your discussion was and if that's incorrect, please, if you could make it clearer if
that's not what you want to see happen.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I think in the interest of moving this forward, we have had several options
presented to us. I would rather interpret this week between now and bringing it back
next week as a time to iron out whatever remaining details there may be on the existing
agreement that aren't clear. I am not excited about exploring new ideas at this point
and I don't know if I'm the only one that is saying it, but I do think there is some need for
both sides to talk about some of the little details and to iron out what those would be
and we have talked about a timeline, but I don't believe I'm too interested in having any
new ideas presented. That sounds pretty closed minded, but we have been a year and
a half, almost two years, discussing new ideas and I feel something needs to move. So,
I may be the only one that's having that opinion. Mr. Jewett is back.
Jewett: Madam Mayor, Council, I may make one other suggestion, in that although
don't want to stay here later tonight, you could table this item to the end of the agenda
and give me a chance, either during a break or during some time when your counsel
and your Public Works director isn't busy, then, I could meet with them in one of the
offices here and maybe we can iron out a few more details to get a more close proximity
of what we want to do, that way maybe a further report could be given later. I don't
know how your other two employees feel about that, but it's an offer that I might make to
try to have some better clarity going forward today.
Bird: Madam mayor, I don't have any problem with that.
De Weerd: Council, we have an Executive Session at the end of the agenda. We
could --
Bird: Come in after that.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 1'8 of 75
De Weerd: -- come in after that discussion.
Bird: So, you want to move 10 and 11 to after Item 24 -- 26; right?
Rountree: Items 9 and 10?
Bird.: Nine and ten. I was trying to get something else through, too. I was going to
make the final plat --
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: I would move that we move Items 9 and 10 to the end of our agenda and
make them Items 25 and 26, if you want to renumber the entire agenda.
De Weerd: Okay. But I'm not going to renumber the entire agenda, so we will just --
Rountree: Okay. Make them the last two items on our agenda, please.
Borton: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. That was a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. All
ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 11: FP 08-001 Request for Final Plat approval for 4 commercial building lots
on 3..77 acres in a C-G zone for Paramount Commercial Southwest
Subdivision by Brighton Corporation -Lots 1-4, Block 1 of Paramount
Commercial Southwest, east of North Linder Road and north of West
McMillan Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 11 is FP 08-001. I will turn this over to Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Paramount Commercial
Southwest, which should be Paramount Commercial Southwest No. 1. We do have an
applicant -- a letter from the applicant stating that they are in agreement with the
conditions of approval, although they did make two clarifications that we asked that the
Council include that letter with the approval of the final plat.
Meridian City Council
February 1.9, 2008
Page 19 of 75
De Weerd: Thank you. Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would move that we approve Item No. 11, Paramount Commercial
Southwest Sub No. 1, with the inclusion of the letter submitted by the applicant.
Bird.: Second.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Ms. Clerk, will you,
please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Continued Public Hearing from January 8, 2008: VAR 07-017 Request
for a Variance to UDC 11-3H-4 that prohibits new approaches from
directly accessing a state highway to allow 3 right-in /right-out access
. points on both sides of State Highway (SH) 55/Eagle Road and 1 full
access point to State Highway 55/Eagle Road located on the east side of
SH 55/Eagle Road for Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties,
LLC -Northwest Corner and Northeast Corner of North Eagle Road and
East Fairview Avenue:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 is a continued Public Hearing from January 8th on VAR 07-
017.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the variance application for
the Meridian Town Center. As you know, it's located on the northwest and the northeast
corners of Eagle and Fairview. This application was continued to -- from January 8th to
allow time for the applicant to submit a traffic impact study to Ada County Highway
District and to allow for comments from ITD. I wasn't going to go into more detail on the
variance application, unless Council wanted me to. I did want to let you know that they
have submitted it -- the traffic impact study to Ada County Highway District. We expect
to see the preliminary comments around the end of the month. But I know that the
application's representatives are here and would like to discuss the application with
Council tonight.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 20 of 75
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Anna. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Welk: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. My name is Andrew Welk, I'm
with Center Cal Properties. Do you need my address and all of that or --
De Weerd: Yes, please.
Welk: Okay. The address is 7455 Southwest Bridgeport Road, Suite 205, Tigart,
Oregon. 97224.
De Weerd.: Thank you.
Welk: I always wonder if I'm going to get that right, so --
De Weerd: You just did this time.
Welk: I think I did. I could have been winging it. Who knows. Well, thank you for
allowing us to come back to you on this variance application. Shortly after our City
Council meeting with you on the 8th of January we submitted the traffic impact analysis
to both ITD and ACHD and -- and we have had afollow-up meeting with ACRD in
contact with ITD and they are redoing the application. We have made ourselves
available to answer any interim questions they may have prior to their comments
coming out. Also at the request of our neighbor and at the encouragement of Council,
we have met with the traffic engineer that represents the neighbor to the south,
Developers Diversified. We had a good meeting with Mr. Thompson and, in fact, I
believe that he's here to speak this evening, but we will encourage, as with any
neighbor, to take their ideas and their concerns into consideration, so that we can
address those in an effective and appropriate way. So, we made that commitment and
will continue to do that. And what I'd like to do at this point is I'd like to allow our traffic
engineer a few minutes to give you a brief demonstration, because we really didn't do
that effectively last time, to show you how the Eagle Road stretch from Fairview up to
River Valley and somewhat beyond would operate and., of course, we have a huge
stake in this, because if it doesn't operate well, it will certainly hurt us more than just
about anybody. So, if you will indulge us a few minutes, I'd like to turn over the program
to Mark Vandehey from Kittleson and Associates.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Vandehey: Thank you, Andy. We have got a Powerpoint presentation we are going to
take you through, but before I do that I'll introduce myself.
De Weerd.: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 21 of 75
Vandehey: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Mark Vandehey, I'm a
principal with the firm of Kittleson and Associates. Our offices are at 610 -- my office, I
should say, are at 610 Southwest Alder, Suite 700, Portland., Oregon. 97205. I say my
offices, because we also have an office here in Boise and you`re probably used to
seeing those faces more than you are mine. Let's go ahead and go to the first slide.
have got just a few slides here that I think will help kind of illustrate our thought process
and how we developed the access plan and improvements for Eagle Road and, again,
at the outset this is just focused on Eagle Road... We have looked at other facilities as
well. Fairview in particular. Records Road. And since the focus of this decision tonight
is based on the variance application for Eagle, that's kind of the focus of my
conversation here. Just as an overview, I kind of want to highlight some of the major
considerations that we took into account when we were developing the improvement
plan, as well as the access management plan for Eagle. First of all., we are dealing with
a large scale development that really does require multiple points of access, not just to
serve the traffic demand, but also related to some of the features we are trying to
accomplish on site by creating a pedestrian friendly environment. Second, it's a mixed
use project. Actually, I caught the tail end of the presentation earlier tonight where there
was some -- some discussion about access spacing for arterials, particularly the half
mile spacing for arterials doesn't necessarily work well for mixed use development.
You're going to hear more of that theme tonight. We -- I think what we have developed
here is something that's a great compromise between maintaining the mobility functions
for Eagle Road, but also providing the needed access for a mixed use project like this.
It does have a very pedestrian focus and you're going to hear a little bit more about
some of those particular features that we took into account when we developed the
plan. The third point is we do recognize there is a need for increased capacity on Eagle
Road and at Fairview. It is a large project, there is no doubt. Existing conditions out
there today, Eagle and Fairview is certainly one of the busiest cities in the state -- or the
busiest intersection of the state. So, we recognize the need for some improvements for
that intersection, as well as the entire frontage of Eagle Road. And, finally, there is a
need for enhanced safety for vehicles and pedestrians. This particularly relates to the
Eagle and Fairview intersection. We will talk a little bit more in detail. So, we have
developed some concepts to improve some intersection -- to improve intersection safety
and also deal with some of the pedestrian crossing movements. So, with that as an
overview, let me just kind of go through each of the major intersections along the --
along the particular facility. I'm going to start at the north end at River Valley. This is
proposed to be a signalized access and let me just -- this is a laser pointer, isn't it, here?
This is probably a good opportunity to talk about some of the improvements that we are
proposing. In general, we are talking about widening Eagle Road to have three through
lanes in each direction from its current two through lanes in each direction. These are
primary north-south travel lanes. At this particular intersection we would be widening to
include two left turn lanes in both the northbound and southbound direction. And
widening the approaches to provide two left turn lanes coming out of the site and a
shared through and right turn lane. Some of the points that we want to illustrate there --
first of all, this is consistent with ITD and ACRD plans. Been planning a signal at this
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 22 of 75
location. This is about the half mile location. This particular intersection will not only
serve the Meridian Town Center project, but will also serve properties to the north.
Second, this will be coordinated with the Eagle Road signal system. So, in developing
the Eagle Road timing plans -- and we have been doing. that work for ITD for several
years -- this will fit very nicely in that coordinated signal system plan at, again, that half
mile location. This is a very important point. This will really provide the only signalized
left turn egress from the sight. In fact, it will provide the only left turn egress period onto
Eagle Road for the site. Okay. So, very important access point for the project. And this
last point, it will provide signalized connectivity between the east and west parcels. We
have got development on both sides of the street and we are going to talk a little bit
about that when we look at the mid block access point as well. But this is going to
provide not only for vehicular crossings, vehicle through traffic, this is the only way to
really cross from one side of the -- from one side of the development to the other if
you're a vehicle, but it is also going to provide for pedestrian crossings. Now let's talk a
little bit about the right-in, right-out access drives. We are proposing those at -- at about
the 1 /8th mile spacing.. Major issues we want to highlight there. First of all, they were
developed to help distribute the traffic. We do have a very large volume of traffic
coming in and out of the site, so we found a need to distribute the traffic beyond maybe
what the typical access spacing allows. In addition to distributing the traffic that's going
to result in less congestion at other intersections and. that's important, because,
remember, we are trying to create a pedestrian friendly environment on site. We don't
want to have any one point be very heavily loaded from a vehicular standpoint. So, this
allows us to distribute that traffic and create less congestion, not only at the site access
points, but also at Eagle and Fairview, as well as Eagle and River Valley. Provide
sufficient capacity for the right turn exiting movements. What we found is when we
looked at what ITD's plan was, which was a signal at the north end and an unsignalized
drive at the -- at the quarter mile access spacing location, which would be a left-in, right-
in, right-out, kind of consistent with our plans. We didn't have sufficient capacity to
accommodate the right turn demand exiting the site, so we really needed that to provide
sufficient capacity for the right turn movements. And, finally, the median design will
enforce the right turn only movements. I know that's -- that is oftentimes a problem at
arterial facilities where we -- where we might sign intersections to prohibit left turn
movements and allow only right turns, but without the provision of a median on the
street you really have no way of physically enforcing that, but in this location we do.
And, then, the design itself has been designed to minimize the impact of through traffic.
We are going to have, obviously, the three through lanes on Eagle, but, then, a
separate right turn lane into the sight dedicated right turn lane exiting the site, so we
really will minimize the impact of through traffic. Now, focusing our attention at the
quarter mile access point. What I'm going to be talking about primarily is what we have
proposed to ITD as -- as a signalized alternative for this access point. We have also
looked at it as an unsignalized access point. We are recommending the signalized
access point primarily for the -- for the points that I raised, but it will function adequately
as an unsignalized left-in, right-in, right-out. Again, this is consistent with the ITD plans
for Eagle Road. Not the signal per se, but the left-in, right-in, right-out movement at this
Meridian City Coancil
February 19, 2008
Page 23 of 75
-- at this quarter mile location. The signalized -- this is now more focused on the
signalized alternative. It really does provide increased capacity and safety for those left
turn movements. We do have a fairly high volume of left turning traffic and with the
benefit of the signal, we get more capacity and we also provide better safety for those
left turn movements. It also provides a safe crossing for Eagle -- on Eagle Road for
pedestrians.. Remember we talked about development on both sides of the street.
Eagle Road really does form a barrier between the east and the west sides of the
project and looking at -- and looking at trying to accommodate the need for pedestrian
movements, you know, without this particular signal at this location we have two
options, one is to go to -- for pedestrians just to cross at Eagle and Fairview, and the
other is to cross at Eagle and River Valley. Obviously, Eagle and Fairview is not the
most pedestrian friendly intersection. This particular design would allow us to provide a
pedestrian crossing at that quarter mile location in a very safe way and cross at a
shorter distance and a less complicated intersection at least for pedestrians than what
exists at Eagle and Fairview. It also reduces the traffic demand at other intersections
with the signalized left-in provision we are going to be able to reduce the left turn
demand at Eagle and River Valley, as well as Eagle and Fairview, because we have got
more capacity at this mid block location we have reduced the demand at those other
intersections and that allows us to, of course, provide more green time for through traffic
on Eagle Road., which is -- improves the mobility for Eagle Road. And finally -- and we
are going to talk a little bit more about this on the next slide, due primarily to the very
efficient operation we can coordinate traffic movements north and south, so that through
traffic -- and this is the through through traffic on Eagle Road, will not have to stop and
I'm going to demonstrate this a little bit on the next slide. I know there is some
questions about how this really functions and this, by the way, is a very simplistic
representation and it may be too simplistic, so I apologize for that if it is, but I think it
does illustrate the basic concept. Before we get into it, let me just describe some kind
of key features here. What we are really just focusing on right now is -- is the
northbound direction. How it operates in the southbound is virtually identical. So, for
simplicity sake I'm kind of focusing on just the northbound direction of traffic. As a
backdrop, the reason this -- this particular scenario operates so efficiently is because at
this quarter mile location we have a significant amount of green time that we can
allocate to Eagle Road. By comparison., at Eagle and Fairview there is a lot of
competing demands for green time. The Eagle Road through movements are,
obviously, very heavy, but there is a lot of other movements going on at the intersection.
Left turn movements two and from Fairview and., of course, Fairview. As a result of that,
we are really only able to allocate about 40 percent of the green time to the Eagle Road
through movements, okay? So, keep that -- keep that statistic in mind. At this quarter
mile access location we are going to be able to allocate approximately 85 to 90 percent
of the green time to Eagle Road through traffic. That allows us a lot of flexibility in how
we coordinate that, so that we can really minimize the impact to through traffic. So, this
-- now I'll kind of get into the little animated demonstration and, again, it's pretty
simplistic. Basically, as -- we are going to cue up these left turn movements, they can
both run simultaneously -- I'm going to run this again, because it went kind of quickly.
Meridian City Council
February t9, 2008
Page 24 of 75
Uri, you want to just kind of cycle one more time. Up at the -- up at this northern
intersection you will notice once the through movements go by -- we actually run the
lefts and the right turn simultaneously. That's an important feature. That's only one
signal phase. That's the only time the light's going to be red for Eagle Road through
traffic. So, that's why we are able to really keep it green 90 percent of the time or
something in that range. And so when that -- we will go ahead and run this again.
When that major through movement discharges from Eagle Road, as you just saw, it will
never have to stop and the same thing will work in the southbound direction, it will never
have to stop at those locations. Some of the turning traffic onto Eagle Road will for a
short period of time when we discharge those movements, but we are going to keep
that cue very small and., again, the major through movements on Eagle we don't have to
stop. So, I know that was pretty simplistic, but, hopefully, that illustrates the point.
Does that kind of -- does that make sense in terms of, you know, how that signal is
going to function and operate, at least in a simplistic way, anyway? Okay. Now, the
final intersection, obviously a very important one, Fairview and Eagle Road. First of all,
we do have an accident problem at that location. The accident history is primarily due --
or avery significant number of accidents is due to the free right turn movements that
occur at that intersection. We want to eliminate those. We want to eliminate those free
right turn movements that are really dangerous for drivers and we can do that by doing
a major widening at that intersection. We are going to be adding some additional
through lanes on Eagle Road. Okay. So, we are adding an additional through lane in
each direction, that's that third through lane that we have been talking about and we will
be carrying through to the south to a reasonable transition point. And these
improvements that we are proposing here, again, we are doing some widening on
Fairview as well. I'm not so focused on that in the presentation. But we really do --fully
mitigate the Meridian Town Center traffic. I'm guessing that means I'm out of time. Let
me just conclude briefly and with maybe the last point that Andy made is that -- you
know, he said they have got a vested interest in making this system work. We feel like
we have very -- very much the same vested interest. Not only have we done a lot of
work for Center Cal over the years, we have a vested interest in making this site work
from a transportation standpoint. Our office has also invested a lot of time and energy
in doing improvements to Eagle Road, working with ITD, so we, obviously, want that
system to work for both the public, as well as the development when it's all said and
done and I think we have developed a plan that does that and we just ask for your
support. Before I turn it back over to Andy for some concluding comments, just open it
up for questions that you might have.
De Weerd: Mark, I guess just clarification.. This doesn't show the -- the proposed
improvements that would be separate in the Star legislation type of --
Vandehey: Correct. This is just focused on what we are proposing to Eagle Road. And
if you go back to the first slide, Uri. Yeah. You can stop at any one of those, but -- just
get me the big picture. And., you know, we haven't shown the whole system, but,
obviously, we have got improvements -- major improvements we are proposing to
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 25 of 75
Fairview, you know, basically, from Venture all the way to Hickory. We are proposing at
a minimum improvements to Eagle Road from -- you know, Fairview to River Valley
and, then, some transition to the north and south. Obviously, Records Road, which it's
a little bit off the site here, but I think you all know where Records is. Improvements to
Records Road., River Valley, all that would be done as part of the project. In addition to
that, what Mayor -- Mayor was referring to was some -- some improvements that we are
proposing that extend beyond that going all the way to the freeway and, in fact, going
beyond on Records Road connecting up to Ustick that would be part of the Stars
legislation package that's ongoing as well.
De Weerd.: Okay. But that wasn't shown in your example.
Vandehey: No. No. I'm just trying to focus on --
De Weerd: That's aseparate --
Vandehey: Yeah. That's really a -- it really is a separate issue and, again., that's why I
haven't really focused on some of the Fairview improvements.
De Weerd: Yeah. Because this is just about the variance.
Vandehey: This is just about the variance. Yeah.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird.: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Vandehey: Thank you very much.
Zaremba: Well, I do have one, but it doesn't relate to the variance, so --
Welk: Okay.
Zaremba: -- I'll ask it another time.
Welk: Okay. Just in conclusion -- and thank you, Mark, for doing that and, actually, to -
- actually, the credit goes to Uri, because I know he spent all that time putting that whiz
bang together and they really are good at putting together things for people like myself
and probably yourselves that don't deal with traffic engineering all the time.
De Weerd: I thought you were saying because he was the remote, uh?
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 26 of 75
Welk: No. He actually -- were you the remote? That's all you did? Okay. Well, he
took credit for all of it, so -- but in closing what I wanted to do is -- we are here focused
on the variance and so I'd like to respectfully request that City Council show its
continued support of the project by granting the variance for our request this evening.
Momentum is a very very important component of any development and certainly a
retail development. We have great excitement going on out there with a lot of key
tenants, but we need to continue to demonstrate to those tenants that we are making
progress. So, you know, we have gone through the annexation and the zoning, we are
now, hopefully, concluding this variance and keep that momentum going. So, if you
would be willing to grant that variance this evening, that would certainly keep that
momentum going. So, if you're -- if you have any questions or if you have any
comments that you'd like us to address, I would be happy to do that now.
De Weerd: Thank you, Andy. Council?
Bird.: I have none.
Rountree: Well, Madam Mayor, I do have a question. At what point do you anticipate
getting comments from ACRD and ITD?
Welk: We met with ACHD last week. Our understanding is that we will have -- it's on
the expedited program and we understand that we will have their comments by the end
of the month. The nature of those comments and the extent of them we don't know.
And I also understand today that ITD is also trying to expedite review of this as well.
So, we are hopeful that we will have those comments and we are making ourselves
available on a regular basis if they have any questions in the interim.
De Weerd: Thank you. This is a Public Hearing. I did have one person signed up as
neutral, Dan Thompson. Would you like to provide testimony? If you will, please, state
your name and address for the record..
Thompson: Thank you, Mayor. My name is Dan Thompson, I'm with Thompson
Engineers. My business address is 181 East 50th Street in Garden City.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Thompson: I have been hired by DDR. They are the owners of the property to the
south of this, basically, just to act as their expert and eyes on the project. They have a
very successful project there, it's been there a little over ten years now, I guess, and it is
very successful. This is a very large development that's going in right across the street
and they are just, you know, concerned about their access and how it might impact their
development. They asked me to get together -- actually, Center Cal was very insistent
in getting us involved in that. I'd like to commend them for that, too, that they did bring
us into the process. But my client did want us to come in and look and see what was
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 27 of 75
going on and as I sat through with Center Cal this afternoon and talked to them, it was
pretty obvious to me that what we are talking about here with this variance really does
not affect my client and so we really don't have any comment on that. I'm going to
ignore my engineering instincts and not comment on technical stuff there. We`II leave
that to ITD and ACRD to do that. What we have asked -- my client has asked us to do
is kind of go on record tonight as just saying that we want to be involved in the future
development, particularly on Fairview and in the Star legislation as applies to Eagle
Road south, because that will impact our client and how that goes, and clear on through
the design phase and be involved in that. I have talked to Center Cal and I do work with
Kittleson on a regular basis, they wholly agree to that, so we just were comfortable with
that relationship. We just want to be on the record tonight as saying that's what our
request is.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Thompson: Any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would just comment that ACHD is in -- I think the early stages of a Fairview
corridor study and those meetings are announced publicly and that's something -- you
may want to watch for the announcements or ask ACRD to put you on their list to be
notified when Fairview corridor meetings are happening.
Thompson: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: And that would be true with the Center Cal people as well..
De Weerd.: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Is there anyone else who would like to
provide testimony on this application? Thank you. Andy, do you have any concluding
remarks? You get the last word. Okay. Council, any questions for staff? Anna, the
development agreement was to include any of the comments and recommendations by
the two transportation agencies, was that correct, on the annexation and zoning of this?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that was my recollection. I can look
up the exact wording if you would like me to.
De Weerd: I think that intent is pretty clear.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 28 of 75
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you are looking at approving this
tonight, please, remember it's a variance and you will need to address the findings that
need to be made for a variance and I can put those up if you want me to.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: When we continued this to tonight we picked a shorter date to motivate
getting their report into ACRD and ITD. My recollection is that we did not anticipate
resolving it tonight. I personally feel it's important that we get the input from those two
transportation agencies before we make our decision.
Rountree: You want to get the other side?
Bird: Yeah. Man, we are jacking these people around long enough. I mean it's -- we
are not -- we are not setting a record out there. I mean this is a beautiful setup and you
go along Eagle Road and there is a lot worse setups in shorter distance. And I -- let's
get it on. We will be here six months from now still discussing it, waiting for ACHD or
ITD to get something back to us. And when they do we will have questions, then. So,
I'm for going forward, one way or the other, up or down.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I wasn't going to suggest six months from now, I was going to
suggest March 4th.
De Weerd: Well, I would be interested in your motion, Mr. Bird, to --
Bird: Well, the first thing I'd do is make a motion that we close the Public Hearing.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Item
12. All those in favor say aye. All ayes.
Bird: Is there any discussion?
Rountree: We can reopen it.
Zaremba: Any opposed.
De Weerd: Oh. Any opposed?
Zaremba: Nay.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 29 of 75
De Weerd: I didn't know if you had said it with everyone else or not. Okay. For the
record it was three ayes, one nay. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, discussion? Do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird: I'll go ahead with a motion. I move we approve VAR 07-017, request for variance
to UDC 11-3-H-4 and to include applicant's testimony, staff testimony, and public
testimony and do I need to add anything else, Mrs. Canning?
Canning: Yes, sir. I need you to specifically address the findings for the -- required for
the variance and perhaps what Iheard -- and you can comment as to whether this is
correct -- is that it will not grant a right or special privilege, because there are other
parcels along Eagle Road that have similar -- similar, if not -- not as good conditions as
being proposed on this one and that it does relieve an undue hardship based on the
mixed use proposed on the site.
Bird: Add it to my --
Canning: Is that the improvement?
Bird: That's exactly what I said.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
Bird: With that I'm done with my motion.
Borton: I'll second the motion and supplement the remarks of the motion maker that the
granting of the variance would not appear to be detrimental to public safety and welfare.
Bird: No. No. I agree.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 30 of 75
Zaremba: For discussion purposes, I would like to clarify that I'm very much in favor of
the project. And you can expect my no vote on this, though, because I do feel we
should hear the agencies.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my concern is similar to Mr. Zaremba's in that if we grant a
variance I'm not sure what we are granting a variance for. We may not have these
variance situations once we get the outcome of the ITD's review, which is, really, the
only things that we would be varying, the accesses on Eagle Road. If there were
language in the variance motion that the variance applies to only those accesses
granted by ITD, I'm comfortable with it, but if it's just a blanket variance, without knowing
what the agencies are going to approve, then, I have some difficulty with the motion.
Bird: I don't disagree with that, except the simple fact is that ITD has approved
accesses every 50 feet, so --
De Weerd: Well, I think it's been a chicken and an egg thing.
Bird: Yeah. I know.
De Weerd: Then they put it back to us and say will the city grant a variance and then --
so it's --
Bird: We grant -- that's what I thought we was doing, so we could grant a variance., so
that they knew we had already granted it.
De Weerd: And I guess, staff, correct me if I'm wrong, the variance is to our ordinance
and --
Rountree: Yes.
Bird..: Yeah. That's what it is.
De Weerd: So, that is -- that is what the variance is about. It still is by final
determination by the transportation agency, so that certainly is -- I would say a granted.,
but if the clarification needs to be made, but the final decision is still that of the
transportation agency. Would the motion maker accept that?
Bird: Yeah. They have got it regardless.
De Weerd: Second okay with just that clarification?
Borton: Sure.
Meridian City Council
February T9, 2008
Page 31 of 75
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. Ms. Clerk --
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Did you say Mr. or Mrs?
De Weerd: I said Ms. Clerk, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Anna, before we go further, does the motion regarding the variance need to
make reference to the signalization issue at that quarter mile?
Canning: No, sir. Our variance has nothing to do with signalization. It's just access.
Borton: Okay.
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Ms. Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, nay; Borton, yea.
De Weerd: Motion carries with three ayes and one nay.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
Item 13: Continued Public Hearing from January 22, 2008: 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 14: Continued Public Hearing from January 22, 2008: 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. Items 13 and 14 are continued public hearings from January 22nd
on AZ 07-013 and PP 07-017. I will ask staff for comment.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 32 of 75
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Matador project and as
discussed, it was continued from the 22nd of January, so I will go to the outstanding
issues before Council. You did vote to continue these items to allow staff to review the
revised preliminary plat and landscape renderings, because the applicant submitted
revised plans that weren't consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation and we got them a little bit late in the -- before -- or close to the
hearing time. Staff has conducted a Comprehensive Plan review of the revised plan
and offers the following. Let me go down to those. Cartoons for you there. The revised
plat shows the relocation of the non-buildable lot from the southwest corner of the
project to the northwest side of Cooper Ridge -Matador intersection by relocating the
common lot centrally within the development the applicant has made it more functional
and accessible for the future residents. In addition, the application has provided the tot
lot and picnic tables to serve as amenities, as recommended by the Planning and
Zoning Commission. And the average lot sizes have increased from 9,751 square feet
on the old plat to 10,124 square feet on the revised plat. If the Council chooses to
approve this application tonight with the revised plat, there are four changes that need
to be noted in the record and those are provided on my cheat sheet there. The first is
pretty simple, just recognizing the new date of the plat. And, then, there are condition
1.12 and 1.25 can be -- are no longer applicable and can be removed. And, then, to
add a condition to relocate the tot lot and picnic tables to Lot 7, Block 1, as proposed.
With that I'll answer any questions Council may have or if you'd like me to go back and
recap the plat, 1 can do that as we11.
Rountree: No.
Canning: And I got one vigorous shake of the head from Council regarding --
De Weerd: I think it was a consensus that, no, you don't need to do more.
Bird.: Madam Mayor, I would like to compliment somebody who is staff or the applicant
to raise -- this has got to be a first for quite awhile, to raise the square footage -- to raise
it, instead of lower it.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Bird, I knew you would be particularly
pleased with that one.
De Weerd: I don't think he was alone. Is the applicant here this evening?
Whitehead: So, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, for the record my name is
Sabrina Whitehead, I am here on behalf of Equity Development and Briggs Engineering.
My business address is 1800 West Overland Road., Boise, Idaho.. 83705. I know you
guys have a long evening, so I'm going to keep it short. As per your request last month,
got right on board, got the plan revised, and got it approved by staff. So, I'm here,
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 33 of 75
hopefully, this evening to gain your approval and to be able to move forward with this
project. So, I will thank you for your time and consideration. I will stand for any
questions that you may have.
De Weerd:: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Sabrina, you heard the four potential changes to the conditions. You're
agreeable to those?
Whitehead: Yes. Councilman Rountree, that's fine.
De Weerd: Anything further? Thank you. Okay. This is a continued Public Hearing. Is
there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Okay. Seeing
none --
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: One of the questions that I had last time when we continued it was for Public
Works to just take a look at it and make sure the new drainage direction worked and
has that been agreed to?
Canning: He's nodding his head.. Did Bill contact the Public Works Department with
regard to the revision? Yeah. The drainage is moving. See the green space on the
right --
Zaremba: It was originally designed to drain to one lot and we changed the lot. Has the
drainage plan changed?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Zaremba: It's okay?
Canning: We are good.
Zaremba.: Okay. Thank you.
Meridian city Council
February 19, 2008
Page 34 of 75
De Weerd: And it's certainly something that is all at final plat determined.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further questions, Council, I would entertain a motion to
close.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I move we close the Public Hearing on Items 13 and 14.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd.: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 13 and
14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? If not, do I have a motion?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I move we approve AZ 07-013 and PP 07-017, to include all staff comments
originally and the revisions requested this evening.
Bird,: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Items 13 and 14. Is there
any discussion? Hearing none, Ms. Clerk, will you please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird., yea; Rountree., yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 15: Public .Hearing: CPA 07-0.02 Request to amend the Comprehensive
Plan Future Land Use Map for the south Meridian area to expand future
land uses designations to include the land east of McDermott Road south
to Lake Hazel Road and'/2 mile east of Linder Road south to'/2 mile south
of Columbia Road, east to '/ mile west of Cloverdale Road; the proposal
includes the amendment of Medium High Density Residential as
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 35 of 75
recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as the
following additional amendments recommended by Meridian Planning
Department Staff: re-designation of the area at the intersection of
Meridian and Lake Hazel Roads recommended for Mixed Employment to
Mixed Use Regional; amending the study area boundary in the area south
of Columbia and east of Locust Grove Roads and re-designating the area
south of Columbia and east of Locust Grove Roads and re-designating the
area from future area planning area to Low Density Residential for South
Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the City of
Meridian Planning Department:
Item 16: Public Hearing..: CPA 07-009 Request for a Comprehensive Plan Text
Amendment to: add Medium High Density Residential to the Land Use
Chapter of the Plan; include residential uses in neighborhood centers and
amending the text of the Mixed Use Regional Designation as
recommended by the City of Meridian Planning Staff for South Meridian
Area by City of Meridian Planning Department:
De Weerd: The next Public Hearing is Items 15 and 16. Anna, did we hear these
separately or do you prefer that they -- together. Okay. I will open the public hearings
on CPA 07-002 and CPA 07-009 with staff comments.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. For the record, Pete
Friedman, Meridian Planning Department. As the Mayor indicated, what you have
before you tonight is the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendations on the
South Meridian Plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission considered the map
amendments and came forward with their recommendation at a Public Hearing on
November 1st, and, then, considered the text amendments on December 6th of last
year. As you will note in the material that we gave you, staff has taken the unusual step
of recommending a couple of minor revisions to the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation.. I think you should look at these as friendly amendments. They are
really not substantive changes, but, rather, they are more for clarification.
De Weerd: Friendly amendments.
Friedman: We have given you quite a bit of information in our staff report and so in
order to help direct and focus the issues before you tonight, Attachment A of that staff
report is a staff memo that was prepared by myself and Matt Ellsworth on February 15th
and, hopefully, that will have brought the issues more into focus for you. In the interest
of brevity, I'm just going to walk you briefly through the background of the plan and,
then, move onto the recommendations. The south Meridian planning process was
kicked off by the city in April of 2006. The Council's charge was for us to develop a plan
that was supported by the property owner of the study area that you see up there on the
screen. The city initiated that process without really any preconceived notions as to
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 36 of 75
what to be the outcome, would the study be in our area of city impact or would it not.
Perhaps it would, perhaps it wouldn't. But it was a very iterative process. We had three
public meetings. We had participation of over 430 people. This included visioning,
exercises, review of preferred alternatives, questionnaires, very high level of one-on-
one staff contacts through telephone, face-to-face meetings, and so forth. In fact that
has continued on right up until about last week. As a result of that initial planning
process, what you see here, we developed a preferred alternative proposed land use
map and this was initially the plan that was going to go forward to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Briefly, it represents about 70 percent low density development,
two neighborhood centers, and medium to high density development along the major
transportation corridors. At ultimate build out that plan would contemplate
approximately 2,800 residential units. So, prior to taking it to Planning and Zoning,
ACHD started kicking off their south Meridian transportation study, so we started
working with ACHD and running the numbers and trying to test our land use
assumptions with some of their traffic modeling for the area and to use a technical traffic
engineering term that results were not pretty. What we ended up with was significant
unplanned improvements. It would have unacceptable levels of service that were
contrary to the residents' wishes out there in order to accommodate this level of growth
almost every major arterial would be a five lane or a seven lane, a facility which would
be contrary to the vision of the area being low density semi rural. So, taking that into
account, staff prepared a revised recommendation for the Planning and Zoning
Commission for their Public Hearing on the amendments, which occurred in April of last
year. That slide that you have up there now represented the staff response. It dropped
out about seven thousand dwelling units. It created for the city what would be a new
Comp Plan designation, which would be a very low density. In other words, we were
actually recommending at that point having areas within our potential city of impact
being on individual well and septic. The purpose of that was not only to drop the
density, but also to created buffers on the edge of the study area, so that we could
create a reasonable identify between our study area and the ultimate area of city impact
for Kuna. So, that was the recommendation that went forward to the Planning and
Zoning Commission and if I might back up for a moment, what we heard when we
developed the preferred alternative was about 59 percent of those participating really
were in favor of low density. Conversely, at the Public Hearing we mostly heard from
people that were interested in more density. So, that was kind of a surprise to us. At
that point the Planning and Zoning Commission took testimony, continued the matter for
two weeks, brought it back to them on April 19th, where they reviewed the testimony
from the 5th and at that point they, then, continued it until November 1st of 2007 and
charged staff to pursue a couple of different avenues. One was to convene another
Public Hearing to explain to folks what -- what the staff response really meant and what
some of the implications of it were. At that time we had anticipated Council was going
to meet with the city of Kuna council and talk about some of our common boundaries
down there. We wanted to get that information. We wanted to give ACHD time to
complete the south Meridian traffic study and we wanted to reconcile some differences
that had emerged in our plan with the southeast Meridian Comprehensive Plan
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 37 of 75
amendment that had occurred the previous April. So, we took the Planning
Commission's directive, we held a public meeting, we had very good dialogue with the
forks -- folks that attended. As you know, you never did have a meeting with the city of
Kuna, so that was pretty easy. We continued our coordination with ACRD and working
on their traffic study down there, kind of pulling the numbers together and taking a
closer look at that. In addition, we were looking at some other factors that weren't
directed to us by the Planning Commission. One was the Council goals that were
developed in April or spring about where you wanted to direct your -- direct the city's
utilities and where we wanted to put our resources and what areas we really saw as
important to physical and economic development of the city. Kind of reviewed those
and looked at how those matched up with the proposed plan. We also consulted with
the Public Works Department, looking at their sewer and water plans, trying to identify
those areas that they were prioritizing for service and those areas that were the highest
priority, those areas that were the least priority due to cost, due to physical constraints
and so forth. At that point we were also embarking on the future planning exercise
through the Blueprint For Good Growth and that had influence on what we were going
to bring back to the Planning Commission in the fall. So, the result of all of those factors
was a revised staff response and that is the recommendation that we took forward to
the Planning Commission on November 1st. And probably the biggest change that you
will see on that is the area to the west and, then, the area to the south that is the cross-
hatched. And the recommendation was that, in essence, that area remained in the
status quo, that it remain a planning and referral area. That's not to say that it's off the
table forever for review and inclusion in the city's Comprehensive Plan, it's just that with
the current market conditions, with the Council priorities as to where they wanted to
focus city resources for growth and development, with the concerns of the property
owners out there -- or at least the responses we heard in trying to maintain a semi rural
environment, it just made sense to step back, put the brakes on for a little while, give us
time to plan some of the other areas to catch up and, then, review this at some point in
the future. That's not to say it's going to be a long time out, but it could be a couple of
years and it gives us time to jell our utility plan, we will have the Ten Mile interchange,
hopefully, open in a couple of years. It also doesn't preclude the property owner from
initiating their own Comprehensive Plan amendments if they have a desire to do so.
So, that is the recommendation that went forward to the Planning Commission on
November 11th. We received quite a bit of testimony, much of it was from folks that,
again, either had different ideas about what their property should be designated, but,
ultimately, the Planning and Zoning Commission did issue forth a recommendation that
night with a couple if minor amendments to what staff had proposed. One was that the
area you see in the circle there, which is to the west of the purple area, which we had
proposed for mixed employment, be included.. The property owner, Mr. Exline, had
requested -- originally been in the study area and, then, we dropped him out in our
recommendation and the Planning and Zoning Commission felt that that should be
included in there. Another -- excuse me. Another significant item that came up that
night was by the Brighton Corporation that owned 80 acres on the southeast corner of
the area that is proposed for mixed employment. That area is currently designated
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 38 of 75
mixed use regional on the Comprehensive Plan and we naa recommenaea tnat tnat
area be mixed employment. There had been some discussions by Brighton about
including residential uses and retail uses in that as currently contemplated in the mixed
use regional. The Planning Commission was, oh, kind of split mind on that. They saw
the need for that type of use -- those types of uses in that area, but they felt that they
needed to treat all the owners favorably, so when they sent the map forward, they also
directed staff to work on the actual text and so what we had happen was on November
1st they made a recommendation to move the map forward. We, then, went back and
started looking at the text for mixed employment and thought, well, wait a second,
because currently the mixed employment only applies in the Ten Mile area and we
didn't want to have two mixed employment designations, so we thought maybe this
would be a good time to go back and look at the mixed use regional and really try to
correct some of the deficiencies that we have in it, which -- and be more specific about
trying to achieve true mixed use with a requirement for actual residential development,
retail development, and so forth. So, we worked closely with the Brighton Corporation,
came up with some recommended language for the mixed use regional and took that to
the Planning and Zoning Commission on December 6th.. Our recommendation, then,
was to change the area from -- which was originally designated as mixed employment,
change it all back to mixed use regional and adopt a new definition of mixed use
regional. So, that's the recommendation that's gone forward to you from staff.
Additional -- there were a couple additional changes to the map, which we were
recommending. One was the mixed use residential there at Lake Hazel and Meridian
Road and the other one was the adjustment of the study area boundary to the south. If
you will recall from the Planning Commission recommendation, we had that as a referral
area, but we subsequently met with the Mayor and planning director for the city of Kuna
and mutually agreed upon a planning area boundary and this map represents that. So,
what we ended up with was a little vestige in the southeast corner there that would have
been unplanned and we figured it was -- just made more sense to make it low density
residential. It would help create that buffer -- or separate we want between the two
cities. So, in summary, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the
changes to the Comprehensive Plan to amend the -- for the text amendment that we
amend the mixed use regional per the text that's attached in your staff report, that we
recognize the south Meridian transportation plan and start requiring residential uses in
neighborhood centers and that we add the medium high density residential text to the
land use chapter of the plan. That designation was never really included in the plan. It
was included in the Ten Mile plan, but we now have those designations on the south
Meridian map, so we felt --and Planning Commission felt that it was appropriate that we
actually have some text for that designation in the plan. So, that's a brief overview of
the recommendation from the staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission on the
south Meridian plan. And I'd be happy to answer your questions or wait until you have
had an opportunity to take testimony from the folks who are here tonight.
De Weerd: Thank you, Pete.
Meridian City Council
February 1.9, 2008
Page 39 of 75
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Just one quick question, Pete. Guess this slide sort of shows it, too. You
made reference to the -- the Cochran Estates, the Exline property.
Friedman: Yes.
Borton: Was it -- was the chronology of that was originally included low density,
removed, and, then, brought back in? Why not brought back in as low density
residential?
Friedman: Well, we were trying, because of the proposed mixed use next to it and if
you look at the other areas around our mixed use, we have been trying to focus more
density around those areas, so that you would have greater connectivity or move roof
tops to be able to take access to the mixed use development. The mixed use -- I'm
sorry. The medium density designation was one that was recommended by the
Planning Commission. They didn't -- they just looked -- I think they believed they looked
at the other uses around it on the other corners and felt that it treated equally.
Borton: Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Okay. And so, Pete, there is a little corner that's excluded on that, that was
requested in. Yeah.
Friedman: That has been included in the Planning Commission's recommendations.
De Weerd: Okay.
Friedman: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for staff at this time?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I went to at least two, maybe more, of the public meetings on the subject and
had lengthy discussions with people that live right off where the off ramp is going to go
and even though that hasn't been designed yet -- first they were alarmed that they were
moved out of the Ten Mile area study, because they -- they thought that they were more
Meridian City Council
February 1.9, 2008
Page 40 of 75
appropriately part of that. I explained to them why that change was made. They were
comfortable with that part of the change being made.. But they feel since there is a
significant bench that runs along here and probably a half to a third of their
neighborhood is going to be taken out by the ramp, they felt that there was a little small
community in there that was not appropriate to be low density residential or any kind of
residential that would be adjoining where ever that ramp is designed to go and I wonder
how we can give them some consideration of that.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members -- and that issue, I think, was brought up in
the memo that we provided to you last week that you could expect to hear from that.
We've had fairly extensive discussions with those folks. Matt has spent a lot of time
with the people meeting there. It was originally -- or it is currently designated as
commercial in our Comprehensive Plan.. Because of the uncertainty about the ability to
serve the area with utilities, because of some of the uncertainties about the actual
design of the interchange at the time we started going through this, because of some of
the access concerns out onto Ten Mile, we recommended that be low density
residential.. Now that we have a better understanding of where utilities probably are
going to go, we certainly have a better understanding now of how Tasa will be
connected to the outside world, really, because there is going to be a tremendous fill on
Ten Mile Road, so it will require an underpass under Ten Mile Road to the -- to the east
to connect it. We certainly -- and as well as more and more of the impacts are coming
to light. I -- you know, we would certainly agree with your -- you know, your ability to
change that back to commercial. Our feeling would be just designate it general
commercial now and., then, as Councilmember Zaremba said, we are probably going to
have eight or nine lots left in there. As time goes on, if someone is able to aggregate
those or, you know, if the folks in there get together and are able to do something with
it, it will, obviously, necessitate an annexation and rezone request to the city. We could
designate it commercial now and., then, kind of define further development options and
zoning options in the future.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions for staff at this time?
Bird.: I have none at this time.
De Weerd: Okay. This is a Public Hearing and I do have a couple of people who have
signed up. If you would like to provide testimony when I call your name, please, come
forward at that time. Suzanne Gruba signed up as depends. Come on up. If you will.,
please, state your name and address for the record..
Gruba: Yes. Madam Mayor and City Council Members, my name is Suzanne Gruba.
live at 3475 Tasa Drive, Meridian. Thank you. I know I have been kind of a pain and I
really don't mean to be, I just want to not be ignored. I mean there is only seven of us
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 41 of 75
that are going to be left on that street when all of this is said and done and we are going
to have to suffer through four years of road construction, because we aren't going to be
bought by ITD.
Zaremba: To clarify, you're talking about the area that I was just talking about.
Gruba: Yes. Yes. Exactly. Sorry. If you -- if you have driven down our street -- and I
don't know how many of you have, we are on the north side of the Ridenbaugh canal.,
but on the south side of the Tasa. So, when you -- our property goes up and backs up
to the Ridenbaugh Canal and we don't want to be clumped with the rest of the people
from Davis on going towards Victory as low density residential. As it stands right now,
we can't sell our property. Our neighbor Bud Morris has written a letter and I attached it
to our letter, which you have in front of you. He's had his house on the market for two
years. Very few people have come to look at it. One that did come that made a full
price offer was a church, which (heir financing fell through, because of this whole
interchange and., you know, for us, we are stuck and I really don't want to be considered
residential, because when it's all said and done we won't be able to sell as a residence.
I don't know about you, but I certainly don't want to live there and I don't know anybody
else that's going to want to buy a residential home in that area once the interchange is
in there and the off ramp is right across the street from our house. So, I'm hoping that
you will take into consideration -- take us off as low density residential and put us in as
something else, like mixed use employment or neighborhood something where they --
can't remember the -- low density residential -- oh. Sorry. I'm not very good at this.
Neighborhood center and mixed use. I really don't have anymore to say, unless you
have a couple questions for me and I'm done.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Gruba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Glenn Bentley. Signed up for.
Bentley: Glenn Bentley. 2250 North Astaire Way in Meridian. Mayor and Council, I'm
here to represent Lawrence -- or, excuse me, Wendell and Kathleen Lawrence of 3797
South Rustler Lane in Stetson Estates. Stetson Estates is a subdivision located in
southeast Meridian. It has 15 buildable residential lots. Six of the lots are five acre lots
-- or five acres in size. Nine of the lots are ten acres lot. Five acre parcels are in the
current Meridian area of impact. The nine ten acre parcels are outside the area of
impact -- excuse me -- but are contingent with the current area of impact. The
Lawrence's parcel is Lot 7, Block 1, is adjoining to the current area of impact. They
would like to be able to divide Lot 7, Block 1, into two five acre residential building lots.
They request the comp plan be amended for future land use to be low density
residential to accommodate the five acre parcels as per the northern section of Stetson
Meridian City Council
February 18, 2008
Page 42 of 75
Estates. Public record shows that Mr. Presidine, also a resident out there, has asked
for the same.
De Weerd: Glenn, is that up -- can you use that -- the pointer --
Bird: It's off of Victory between --
De Weerd: Oh, right there.
Bentley: Yes. It's right of Victory. It's --
Bird: Between Linder and Ten Mile.
Bentley: It's right up in there. But half of the subdivision is five acre lots, as per the
current area of impact.
Bird: Yeah.
Bentley: When the second half of the sub was put in, it was in Ada County area of
impact, so they made them put it in as ten acre lots. The Lawrence's lot actually butts
up to the property line that divides the area of impact right now, so --
De Weerd: So, Anna, is that -- that area a part of what's being removed at this point?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's what's proposed as being in the
planning area at this point, yes.
Bird: It's not in the impact area.
Canning: It is not in the Comp Plan boundaries and I should note that we have had
discussions with Ada County. A lot of the cities are eager to move away from the RUT
zoning, which was what would allow the five acre lots and to keep it as a rural
residential, the R-R zoning, even if it were in the planning area, to allow for the
possibilities of planned communities within the planning area. The RUT designation
would not allow that. So, even if it were put on the Comprehensive Plan without the
RUT zoning, they wouldn't be able to do five acre lots. If Council goes that route with
the zoning designation.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Mr. Bentley? Anything further?
Bentley: No.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 43 of 75
Bentley: Outside of the fact that these two people would definitely like to be able to split
their lots.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Bentley: Thank you and good to see you all again. Have those chairs gotten anymore
comfortable?
Bird: Oh, you bet.
Rountree: They are marvelous.
Bird: At 1:00 o'clock in the morning they feel real good.
De Weerd: Eric Exline.
Exline: Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Eric Exline. I live at 415 West
Lake Hazel Road, the reference to Cochran Estates that Councilman Borton brought up.
I submitted my -- kind of request in writing. I'll give you the history in brief. I went to all
of the planning process and I actually would have to commend the staff, it was a -- I
thought, a well run process. Got a lot of good input. The one thing I regret is that I was
never able to make it to any of the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings, because
they are on Thursday nights and I teach at BSU that night, so I could never get to those.
probably would have testified differently at the one that didn't like the staff response,
but be that as it may. I do live in that little square down there. It's a 40 acre subdivision.
It's been there since 1972. They are five acre parcels. And it was originally part of the
plan, if you will, designated as very low density, which is what it is now in terms of its
current use and, then, after one of the Planning and Zoning Commissions and, then,
before it came to Council, it was sort of dropped from the plan as part of the planning
area. Since I couldn't come to the Planning and Zoning meeting, I submitted my
concerns about that in writing., which starts with the initial meeting I went to, the
visioning meeting, in which (said (preferred -- and my neighbors concurred -- preferred
to be in the City of Meridian, as opposed to in the Kuna planning area and we are right
on the line. And, in part, I have to say that I think that reflects a belief in your process
and how you have gone about this. The thing that I have to say, I have some explaining
to do, is in letter to Planning and Zoning I said we preferred to be included, I sort of
assumed that they would include us and understand at the zoning designation that we
had .been in the plan before. Their logic, as I think Anna explained., was to treat us sort
of like everything else that surrounds that mixed use area. So, they made us medium
high density. That's all high density. The thing that's a little different -- and I have to
say to me is a little problematic, is we had a very low density use sitting next to what's
going to be a very high density use.. That is really not true of any of the rest of that
planning area. There are some single residences around that mixed use commercial
area. They will largely sell their property -- I'm talking like 80 acre parcels, some of
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 44 of 75
them are actually in ownership of the developers, in particular there is -- to the north of
that planning area. That will all develop toward that. Our little subdivision will likely stay
in its use, unless at some point the land became valuable enough that we could sell it all
and they would tear our houses down and turn it into commercial use. That's probably
beyond a window that any of us, the current owners will actually live there. At least that
would be my estimate. Anyway, the long and the short of my request was that we be
included in the planning area and that you designate us as the lowest density that you
can to reflect the use that it is and that we be able to work with staff to mitigate what's
going to be, in my view, some considerable impact between the property line of that
mixed use commercial and the property lines of those very low density. My house is
about 50 feet off of that property line. The other residence on my property where my
father lives is about five feet off of that property line. In fact, if I came to you today you
wouldn't allow us to build where it sits. That, if you were going to have very high density
against what's, essentially, right now farms. We run cattle, sheep, goats, the rest.
don't think the commercial venture will care about us, but we are concerned about at
least trying to mitigate the impact as that develops with our property. But that all having
been said, we'd prefer to be in your planning area than to be either just left out entirely
to be maybe the subject of a future land grab, if you will, or to be brought into Kuna,
because we really identify more with Meridian and, again, we thought your planning
process was well thought out and well executed. So, that's my testimony.
De Weerd: Thank you, Eric. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: I just have a comment. You know, I understand that Thursday night thing,
because we have open houses on Tuesday night and I can never go to my kids' open
houses.
Exline: Yes. I understand. It seems like whatever night you pick, somebody can't get
somewhere.
De Weerd: Well, I thought it was a great opportunity to feel your pain.
Exline: I appreciate that and appreciate the opportunity to come forward tonight.
De Weerd:: Thank you, Eric. Joshua Haws signed up fora
Haws: Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Joshua Haws. I live at
3700 East Columbia Road in Meridian. I identify with Meridian. I want to be part of
Meridian. I am -- I want to commend your staff for being very attentive, being very
organized. They did a very good job as they have gone through this process and been
attentive to people's discussions and kept everybody up to date as far as I can tell. At
least they did for me. I'll be brief. I recommend -- I'm in the southeast corner there and
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 45 of 75
would be included in the area of impact expansion and I -- I am for the area -- for this
plan being adopted and passed tonight. I hope that the county will follow suit and make
it happen. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Gordon Croft signed up against.
Croft: Madam Mayor, City Council, I have made these comments some time ago at one
of the other hearings, Iguess I --
De Weerd: If you can just first state your name and address, please.
Croft: Gordon Croft. 5220 Howry Lane, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Croft: Apparently this pointer doesn't --
De Weerd: Sir, I have one right here if you'd like to use it.
Croft: Thank you. I reside approximately right here on a 40 acre piece that's bordered
by -- mainly on the east side by Rockhampton Subdivision, which is, basically, a
medium density development. We -- we request that we possibly could be considered
for medium density in our property, too, because of the ability to blend in with that other
subdivision.. The developers we have talked to have indicated it would be much better
to have a medium density there, so that we can organize a development that would
blend with the other subdivisions next to us. One thing that I noted, too, is this area
right here, I guess it's not a finalized situation, but that ground's supposed to be
purchased for a middle school construction and on the plan here it's designated as
medium density. So, there is a 40 there that's not going to be medium density if that
school is developed and so that makes another reason I think that it would be logical for
our property to be designated and the property, you know, possibly to the north of us,
too, as medium density, so that that would accommodate the purposes of the school
and that's just a thought I thought I would pass on.
De Weerd: Thank you. Those are the names that signed up to testify. Is there any
other testimony? Yes, ma'am.
Bellage: Hello. My name Carrie Bellage. I live at 2465 Westminster Lane in Boise.
We own 40 acres right in this area here. I guess I would just like to say that I haven't
really been able to confirm. It says that we are in the future planning area. Does that
mean we are in the area of impact or are we now out of the area of impact?
De Weerd: You are continuing to be in the area of impact. They just don't have a
designation for the area yet.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 46 of 75
Bellage: Okay. Thank you very much.
De Weerd.: Thank you.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, respectfully, what we --
De Weerd: Did I misinform her?
Bird: Yeah.
Friedman: No. It just needs a little clarification.
De Weerd: That was politically correct.
Friedman: What you have before you -- where we have the Comprehensive Plan land
use designation, those are the colors, if you will. Those would be areas that would be
considered for request to Ada County for incorporation into a future area of impact for
city. The planning referral area is just that, it's a future planning area. That means to
say that right now that would be an area that we would not contemplate requesting Ada
County to extend our area of impact to, but it's an area that we would come back and
revisit at some point in the future to apply a color to the map, if you will, to, then, lay the
basis for another area of impact expansion request to the county. And for various
reasons, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the staff have said it's just -- now is
just not the right time, it just seems a little premature. It's not cast in stone. I mean this
is not forever. Our Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2002 and heavens knows we
have certainly done a number of amendments to that plan since that time. So, what the
recommendation really coming forward is to say it still is an area that we view as
someplace that we want to go in and look at in the future in terms of the land use and
the future planning, but just not at this moment.
De Weerd: Thank you. No, we had always thought that that line was part of the area of
impact, so --
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it was part of your initial area of city
impact request with Ada County in the 1990s, but they did not include it in the area of
city impact, they included it as a referral area --
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: -- in that document.
De Weerd.: Thank you, So, that request doesn't change.
Meridian City council
February 19, 2008
Page 47 of 75
Canning: Correct.
De Weerd: Did that answer your question?
Rountree: She's more confused.
De Weerd: Ma'am, if you will --
Bellage: I'm sorry. If this plan is approved tonight, would the answer be, yes, we are in
the area of impact or, no, we are not?
De Weerd: No, you are not. You're in a referral area that indicates that would be a
future planning area.
Bellage: Okay.
Rountree: Your status doesn't change.
De Weerd: Which is what you are in right now.
Bellage: Thank you for the clarification. We had written a letter and it still wasn't
clarified with a letter, so I'm glad to get it clarified., although at this point I guess we
would be against the plan, as we would like to be included as even if it was a low
density, we would like to be included in the plan at this time.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there any further testimony?
Armstrong: Madam Mayor, City Council, my name is Jerry Armstrong, I'm the vice-
president of planning and land development for Provident Development Group, located
at 701 South Allen Street in Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Armstrong: And (submitted aletter -- or we submitted a letter in October of this year to
Planning and Zoning and City Council. Basically, our request is that we have made a
substantial investment in about 226 acres that are located right in here in Meridian,
based on your current Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted October 10th of 2006,
which was just less than a year and a half ago with a positive recommendation from
your Planning and Zoning Commission and it was approved as an amendment. Part of
that amendment we had a substantial amount of land that's located right here at the half
mile section. As a matter of fact, we put in this half mile collector road.. With this
change what happens is we lose this northern part of our medium density, which is a
little over half of our property, from the medium density designation. So, we strongly
oppose the decrease in density and request that the city maintain the density that was
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 48 of 75
granted to our property just a little over a year ago. So, that's where we are on that
issue. Thank you for your time.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Anything further?
Turnbull..: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is David Turnbull, Brighton
Corporation. Office address is 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. I'd like to thank the
staff for their presentation and just indicate that our property in this area, too, was
approved back 2006 with a Comprehensive Plan amendment. After that time I think it
was at the -- probably the impetus of the south Meridian transportation plan that ACRD
was conducting and staff and the city's desire to kind of get the two blended together,
that they came back to us and asked if we would be willing to consider some
modifications to the plan as respects to our property and so we worked pretty closely
with staff through that process and I think that we have come to a point of agreement.
1Ne have, as mentioned by Pete, worked on some definitions for the text amendment for
the definition of mixed use regional that I think satisfies the concerns of the city, as well
as us as property owners. I think that there is still some work with the south Meridian
transportation plan that has to be addressed. I think the presentation which you
received tonight in the pre-Council meeting suggested that they are looking at some
different alternatives out in that area and I guess our only suggestion at this point is that
the treatment of Lake Hazel is going to be pretty important, because we own property
on all four quadrants of that intersection of Locust Grove and Lake Hazel and we want
to maintain that -- we want to maintain the transportation system, but also look at
innovative ways to not split that property into four non-traversible corridors that -- and
the mixed use -- or, excuse me, the neighborhood center that's designated on that
corner would probably be rendered unworkable if that's not treated properly. So, we
have been researching innovative intersection designs and street sections and we will
continue to do so and work with ACRD and your staff, but with that I'd stand for any
questions that indicate that we are supportive of staffs recommendation in the Planning
and Zoning Commission recommendation to City Council. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions? No? Thank you. Any further testimony?
Okay. Pete?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, just as a final point in response to Mr.
Armstrong's comments and their -- their comments were passed onto the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Clearly we recognize that what the southeast Meridian plan
amendment was back in 2006. One of the basis for that recommendation was to
actually start pulling some of that density down closer to Lake Hazel in the future transit
corridors and, then., also we were trying to reduce overall density in the planning area
based on the concerns from ACHD in the traffic modeling that had occurred while we
were involved in the planning process. So, that was the rationale for reducing the scope
of density on a portion of the property that Mr. Armstrong was alluding to.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 49 of 75
De Weerd: Okay. Council, is there further questions or information needed?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I guess I would like staff to address a couple of the
comments that have been made, one, the comments of Mr. Bentley and Mr. Croft, in
particular, and Mrs. Gruba.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, let's see, can we go north to south,
perhaps?
Rountree: I don't care. Cover the --
Canning: With regard to the Tasa ownerships, staff is supportive of having those
properties that take access from Tasa have a commercial designation. It's currently
what their -- it's their current designation on the Comp plan. We would support that
change. At the time we recommended the residential we didn't know that they would be
taking access through a commercial development. We thought they would be coming
through large lot residential.
De Weerd: Anna, I guess my question is why commercial? You know, commercial is
not necessarily employment, and would a commercial use -- I guess if you look at the
uses, does continue to make sense or an --
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the lots are one acre. They will be
stripped. out -- they are going to be tough for folks to develop as a large site. It will be --
it will be pretty long and linear, which tends to suit itself better to commercial
development. The commercial designation is your most flexible as far as what folks
would be able to do as far as nonresidential development. It even allows apartment
buildings, but I don't think you're going to see those there. With regard to buffering to
the adjoining uses, you have got a really steep hillside that's going to provide that
necessary buffer. I don't think you will get a lot of retail uses back there, just because of
the access issues. You're going to have to come all the way down Ten Mile, back up
the realigned Overland, and through Mr. Jewett's development at the corner there, back
underneath the freeway and, then, you`re going to -- you're going to get back there. So,
I think what you will probably see is a number of offices, maybe a church that actually
might fit in there well. Perhaps a hotel or a motel. But that commercial designation
would seem to suit what those parcels will be able to provide.
De Weerd.: Thank you.
Canning: Okay. Going a little bit further south to the Stetson Estates, that would be a
big change to this plan as proposed. You would be adding -- to make any sense, you
would basically be adding three-quarters of a mile of more development. The ability to
sewer those properties is questionable. The owners would like to do five acre lots.
That's not something we have ever heard that Council was particularly interested in
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 50 of 75
encouraging, in general, for the City of Meridian. We tentatively proposed that as part
of that first step recommendation that had the very very low -- very low density
residential.. It got very mixed reception from folks. Most folks didn't want it, they wanted
to have urban style densities, so those are the comments I would provide on that. It
doesn't seem to fit in easily into this plan or with the urban -- urban density residential
development. Did you want to comment --
Rountree: Let me follow up on that.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Anna, if that's the case, that that's the rationale of including that -- the lots
that are already adjacent to are part of that one ownership in our impact area --
Canning: They are already in.
Rountree: They already are in.
Canning: We only -- yes. We only kept in what was already in.
Rountree: And are they served by services at this point or just --
Canning: No, they are not.
Rountree: -- an impact area?
Canning: They are individual septic and well.
Rountree: If I might explorer that, then. The potential of five acres in that area could
very well be a planned community type of affair that we have discussed in the past that
we could work with the county that if they were to be approved we could ultimately
provide services at point in time --
Canning: Yes.
Rountree: -- and not necessarily ever be in the city.
Canning: Yes, sir.
Rountree.: Okay.
Canning: Moving to -- .moving to Mr. Exline's property. We were -- we thought we were
doing what Mr. Exline wanted us to do. Low density is fine also. You do have low
density adjoining the mixed use regional right up here that's a nonfarm just to the north
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 51 of 75
of that northeast corner. That could certainly work here. It's a small parcel, it's going to
be difficult to transition and we will have to be very sensitive to those neighbors as those
properties come in for annexation. Croft and Hubble are the same issue and -- and
Pete spoke to this a little bit. What we were trying to do -- this area is not part of
Communities In Motion. I'll back up to those other regional plans. This is all new.
Communities In Motion, the Compass staff, has generally not been supportive of our --
of development in this area, even though we have kept on reiterating we needed some
density when they were developing Communities In Motion. But, nevertheless, it's not
shown as development potential in Communities In Motion. What we have tried to do,
though, is to make it transit supportive, so that it is consistent with Communities In
Motion and so what we have done is we have a neighborhood center where we have
commercial services. We have medium density residential. We have high density
residential and we have medium high density residential. And we have really tried to
locate those along that Lake Hazel corridor so it can be transit supportive. You have
the node at the intersection of Locust Grove and Lake Hazel and, then, we had another
kind of node, more intense development right at our -- as you enter the city coming from
the city of Boise through Rockhampton and that's why the low density designations got
on both of those properties is we were trying to pull that density toward Lake Hazel and
leave the -- up to three units per acre in these areas. I suspect that Rockhampton is not
much over three units to the acre. It's probably very similar as far as Mr. Croft's
property. He has -- the property just to the north of him has quite a bit of parcelization
on it, so there is some question as to how effectively that would develop out at medium
density residential. That was our justification for the way it's shown now. And I think
those were all the comments.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: A quick question and, then, afollow-up question. What's that portion right there
that's designated public/quasi-.public?
Canning: It's a golf course.
Bird: That's the Ranch.
Rountree: Boise Ranch.
Borton: I don't golf enough. The other question -- maybe it's not a question. It's just a
comment. I'm particularly sensitive to what Mr. Armstrong has referenced with regards
to changes in the Comp Plan and, you know, we try not to make changes frequently and
want our landowners to rely on these when they are making their decisions, so --
Canning: Well, if I might address that, yeah.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 52 of 75
Borton: They continue to come in and --
Canning: Well, when that south Meridian -- the developer initiated south Meridian plan
came in, we were already underway or soon underway -- we had the monies budgeted,
we knew we were going to do the south Meridian plan, and we discussed with them at
length that this was not -- that we would be reevaluating this and they'd need to kind of
work with us on that reevaluation. So, I mean it's a fair criticism, I'll grant that, but they
were duly warned as well, because we were taking on a much larger participation effort
with -- with all the parties that we did involve. They do still have an active application,
so they are vested with the Comprehensive Plan that was in place when they submitted
their application..
Borton: Okay. Thanks, Anna.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird: Anna, to kind of follow up on Joe, I can't figure out -- I think Amity is going to be
more of a corridor than Lake Hazel, because if you're going from the length over into
Canyon County and stuff and I know plans are being made to put maybe a couple three
roundabouts on Amity, I can't figure out why we have the low density close to it and,
then, push everything off on Lake Hazel. I don't see Lake Hazel getting busy as Amity
or being the corridor that Amity is going to be, I think.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Bird, if I could
discuss that a bit. You will remember in the presentation by Andy earlier --
Bird: Yeah.
Canning: His last name just escaped me. I'm sorry. Mortensen. Mr. Mortensen.
That's right. There is currently the -- Communities In Motion designates two cross-
county connections, one on Lake Hazel and one on Amity and one of the questions is
which one is most appropriate. We did have a Comprehensive Plan amendment that
already had a neighborhood center located on Lake Hazel. We stuck with that theme of
pulling those -- those kind of type of transit supported uses down to Lake Hazel. I know
Council would have been concerned had we put high density and medium high density
on both Amity and Lake Hazel and it would have been more units than the area could
probably handle as well. So, we did go with the Lake Hazel one. If Amity becomes a
mobility corridor, those mobility corridors have fairly strict access regulations that may
be more appropriate to turn the residential subdivisions to the back of those and have
them access internally and let Lake Hazel serve as more of a community street or
subregional.
Meridian City Council
February 1.9, 2008
Page 53 of 75
Bird: Follow up, Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: Just an observation. If I remember right, Lake Hazel sits up quite a bit higher --
the ground sits up quite a bit higher and to me that would be where your larger homes,
bigger lots would be than down in the valley that Amity is. That's just an observation of
mine. Because once you -- once you start up about a quarter mile north of Lake Hazel,
you gain a little bit of elevation -- in fact, quite a bit of elevation.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Pete's informed me also that as you
come off of Ten Mile, the -- Amity is a transit corridor up to Meridian, but, then, it drops
and it goes to Lake Hazel as you go further east.
De Weerd: And I think that is the concern for the circle there on Lake Hazel.
Canning: The concern for the circle is the mobility corridor issue, not the transit
corridor, I think.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the south Meridian transportation plan -- is that kind of coinciding
with the TLIP exercise, is that the status of it?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, Craig Herndon, who is the project
manager for the south Meridian traffic study, is in the audience and perhaps he could
shed some light on that. Sorry, Craig.
De Weerd: You can thank him later.
Herndon: Madam Mayor, Councilmen, Craig
District. 3775 Adams Street, Garden City, Idaf'
Madam Mayor, on the south Meridian study, ini
even completed, there weren't definite recommE
sort of in a position where we could go back and
recommendations from TLIP came about.
Herndon with Ada County Highway
~. 83714. To answer the question,
ally when the study was started and
idations yet from TLIP. We left that
update or make changes to that once
De Weerd: Okay. So, you do have a transportation plan at this point.
Herndon: We do. But one of the unfortunate issues that we are facing right now is our
transportation plan is based on the revised staff land use -- the second map that Pete
had showed you and we are up to the fourth one now. So, there has been some
changes within that that we need to determine what those land use changes will have
on what the transportation study determined, which we will do at the same time we are
trying to update with TLIP stuff. So, we haven't adopted it yet. It's sitting there, there is
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 54 of 75
a report on the shelf, but we are waiting for TLIP and a decision on this to, then, be able
to move forward, so that we can coincide what we started out to work closely with
Meridian city staff on the transportation plan with the land use that was determined,
so --
De Weerd: We appreciate that. Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird.: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. That was painless; right? Okay. Council, any
information still pending?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Staff, anything further? No?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I move that we close the public hearings on CPA 07-002 and CPA 07-009.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Items
15 and 16. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Council, I guess I would just make a general
comment. I, too, was involved in a lot of the public participation and I think that
appreciated Eric's comments, because I believe that the residents -- the property
owners out there were given a lot of respect in what their desires were and it started out
pretty contentious and staff dealt respectfully, gave every opportunity for public
comment. The meetings were very well attended and working with our transportation
agencies and trying to tie a plan with a road infrastructure is the right thing to do and so,
Matt and Pete, I -- and Anna and all of those others who spent volunteer hours,
countless time, I would like to thank you. It was a great process, very well attended,
and since I was also on the a-mail distribution list, there was great follow up. Every time
something else came up you made every effort to keep people in the loop of
information. Greatly appreciated. Okay. Comments from Council? Any discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I -- on process. We have this before us for consideration and
approval and advancing it; is that correct?
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 55 of 75
Friedman: That's correct.
Rountree: Okay. If we do make recommended changes in what we have seen this
evening, does that require yet another hearing or can we move forward with that?
Friedman: Madam Mayor -- Madam Mayor, Council Members, unless Mr. Nary has
something else to say, I think you could make changes tonight. It's been an advertised
Public Hearing.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, just a comment. Having been through these processes
several times -- and not to put lightly of any of the testimony we received this evening,
but, apparently, we have had as many as 400 folks involved in this process and this
evening we have people who yet still want to be part of Meridian's impact area and
those folks with objections are objecting primarily as to the classification of the density
of the land that would be -- or the type of use that would be included in our impact area.
So, I think all of you and staff need -- and it's justified that you get some kind of an
award and all I can say is thank you. But, you know, it's a tremendous thing that you
have been through, everybody that's been involved in that, and I think the outcome that
has been in my mind seems quite favorable. I can see where I could go with a couple
of recommended changes here, but in total I think we have a good place to start the
next phase of the process and that's to start working with Ada County.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: When we get to talk about recommended changes, I would like to make the
Tasa Drive one part of them that that be designated commercial. That's the one along
the future off ramp of the Ten Mile interchange. As for the other groups that were in the
past, a medium density and -- and this study has suggested that they be low density,
would comment that our Comprehensive Plan allows for a step up or a step down when
they actually make their application. So, even designating it as low density does not
preclude an application for a medium density project. Am I correct in that? I see heads
nodding yes.
Friedman: Yes. That's correct. Although mostly it's up. It's hardly ever down.
De Weerd: Although I know a couple of Councilmen would love the down.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 56 of 75
Borton: I'm going to float something out there.
De Weerd: Okay.
Borton: I'm going to move that we approve CUP 07-002, the Comprehensive Plan
future land use map, specifically the staff response map, if I can call it that, with a
couple of noted changes. One, the Tasa Lane property to the - re-designated as
commercial, and the Cochran Estates - Exline piece that we made reference to, should
be designated - re-designated back to low density residential.
Rountree: I will second that.
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion?
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Borton, would you
include in that that we return a resolution that reflects the approval?
Borton: Oh. Thank you.. Yes.
Nary: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Ms. Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: That was on Item 15. Item 16.
Rountree: Madam Mayor'?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 57 of 75
Rountree: Given our action on Item 15, I would move that we approve the CPA 07-009,
Comprehensive Plan text amendment to reflect the motion for Item 15 with the
appropriate definitions included in the plan amendment.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second?
Zaremba: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 16 as stated. Any
discussion?
Canning: Madam Mayor, just for clarification, Councilmember Rountree, was that --
were you proposing any changes to the recommendation that's before you from the
Planning Commission? For the text.
Rountree: The recommended changes that you would have to address in the text that
would reflect the changes that were made in Item 15.
Canning: Okay.
Zaremba: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion, Council? Ms. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call.: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Council, do you need a five minute break?
(Recess.)
Item 17: Public Hearing: AZ 07-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 6.84
acres from RUT to an R-4 Medium Low-Density Residential zone for
Belhaven Subdivision by Pole Creek Properties, Inc. - 5230 North Black
Cat Road.:
Item 18: Public Hearing: PP 07-016 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 16
single-family residential lots and 5 common lots on 6.84 acres in a
proposed R-4 zone for Belhaven Subdivision by Pole Creek Properties,
Inc. - 5230 North Black Cat Road:
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 58 of 75
De Weerd: I will go ahead and call this meeting back to order. We are at Item 17 and
18, public hearings on AZ 07-011 and PP 07-016. I will open these public hearings with
staff comments.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: I'm going to recuse myself because of a conflict.
De Weerd.: Okey Jokey.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Belhaven project. It's
located at 5130 North Black Cat Road. It's the blue outlined parcel there. A little difficult
to see. There you go. The highlights -- or the applications before you tonight are
annexation and zoning and preliminary plat. The applicant is requesting approval to
annex and zone the subject property at R-4 zone and plat the property with 16 single
family residential building lots and five common area lots, on 6.84 acres. The gross
residential density is 2.34 units per acre and the net density is 3.99 units per acre. The
lot sizes range from 8,077 square feet to 14,454 square feet. The Comp Plan
designation is medium density residential. Just as a note of previous actions, there is a
one acre outparcel. It is a legally created one acre division in Ada County that existed
prior to 1984 and they recently did a property boundary adjustment to enlarge that lot to
about 1.45 acres, just in case you wonder why there is an outparcel. We do have some
elevations for you tonight and staff is recommending -- or Planning Commission also
recommended some develop agreement provisions. Those would be that the developer
should construct homes on the site that are in substantial compliance with elevations
before you right now. And the applicant should construct homes on the site that contain
the following design features: Gable roof lines facing the street. Shutters. Substantial
pillars with substantial bases, accented with bricks/stone and covered porch areas. The
second provision would be that a minimum of four single family building types shall be
submitted to allow for a diverse mix of floor plans and elevation variety within the
proposed development. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval
at their December 20th, 2007, Public Hearing. Shawn Nickel spoke in favor as the
applicant's representative. No one spoke in opposition. Paul Poorman commented and
there was no written testimony. Key issues of discussion by the Commission were the
perimeter fencing for the development. Mitigation for the existing mature trees on the
site. Stubbing city services to the Poorman property. That's the one acre parcel.
Removal of the existing septic tank drain field on the subject site and relocating the
drain field on the Poorman's property. The location of the required trees outside the
Settlers Canal easement. And., then, compatibility and connectivity with the Volterra
Subdivision to the north. Key Commission changes to staffs recommendation were
they modified a condition to require that if four mature existing trees are not retained on
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 59 of 75
each lot, the developer will mitigate those four trees with six two inch caliper trees.
There is a substantial number of trees on this property and so, basically, what was
required was to leave four mature trees on each site. The outstanding issues for City
Council -- from staffs perspective there are none. I think there still may be a question
about the septic drain field. Gale Poorman is here tonight and can discuss that if we
need to. And with that I'll answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd.: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions at this point?
Bird: No.
Rountree: None..
De Weerd: Okay.
Nickel: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council Members. Shawn Nickel, 6223
Discovery Way, Suite 200, Boise, here tonight representing Pole Creek and I'm not
going to add to anything staff had to say regarding the configuration of the subdivision.
I did provide you with kind of how this property lines up in regards to the Volterra
Subdivision. That's that first sheet that I gave you. The second sheet shows kind of
how this property is kind of filling out that -- kind of that south, southwest corner of
Volterra and how it aligns with the rest of the preliminary plat approved properties out in
that area, So, I thought that was appropriate to show you. That -- we have gone
through a lot of changes on this little piece of property, working with the neighboring
property owners and working with staff. This was an old tree farm, so there was a
substantial number of lofs -- or of trees on the property that we had to consider, in
addition to the stub street from Volterra to the north and the street that we provided
along the south boundary that will provide future development potential for those five
acre parcels that are south of this property. I don't have anything further to add. If you
guys want to ask me questions, I will be sure to address those. Thank you very much.
De Weerd.: Thank you, Shawn. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Maybe it's just a placement in making the copies, but in the thing that you did
hand to us on the top page, the stub street doesn't appear to align. Is that just a
copying error or do they not align?
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 60 of 75
Nickel: Yeah. No. My scale's a little off on my -- on my pretty picture, but, yes, they will
align.
Zaremba: In reality they will align?
Nickel: Yeah.
Zaremba: Okay.
Nickel: I can guarantee it.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council?
Rountree.: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: And, again, it may be differing scales of the two, but the melding of these
with your common lot -- or your landscape lot on Black Cat doesn't appear to line up
with the common lot or landscape lot that's in Volterra. So, we have a sidewalk situation
here that's very similar to what we have on Ten Mile., that you walk down the road and
the sidewalk disappears and you step over five feet and there is sidewalk and away you
go. So, is that what's going to happen here or is there some attempt to try to make
those contiguous?
Nickel: No. We are definitely going to have a continuous sidewalk. Again, I'm going to
fire my drafter immediately after the meeting.
Rountree: So, we are looking at different scales here?
Nickel: Yes.
Rountree: Okay.
Nickel: Sorry about that.
De Weerd.: Thank you, Shawn. I do have Gale signed up to testify. If you would like to
come forward.
Poorman: Madam Mayor and Honorable Members of the City Council, my name is
Gale Poorman. I reside at 5230 North Black Cat Road. My husband and I are the
former owners of the land being considered for this Belhaven Subdivision. We had a
tree farm on this land and I would like to express my appreciation to Don Roberts as he
has been very considerate of us and included us in his planning process. He knows
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 61 of 75
that the -- that our love of this land goes as deep as the roots we planted there 25 years
ago. He has expressed an interest in preserving as many of the trees on the property
as we can, as well as trying to preserve some of the open space in a community
common lot and we appreciate that. However, many of our neighbors are not happy
with our having sold our land for development. Many have worked the land for decades
and are sorry to see the development come. We all like our rural lifestyle and we have -
- as we have in western Ada County and we are all concerned that urban sprawl will
only bring more traffic congestion and noise to our country -- quiet country life.
Currently there is a piece of legislation in the Idaho legislature that would preserve
working farms and ranches and enable people to stay on their land as an alternative to
selling out for development. I believe as more and more people come to Idaho this kind
of open space preservation will help insure that future generations can enjoy something
of the Idaho that we all know and love today. As planners of our community and as you
consider new developments, I hope that you will try to keep in mind the importance of
open spaces, tree, and playgrounds for our children and for our quality of life. These
things help us to keep our connections to the land and make us better stewards of it, for
as the song goes, pave paradise, put in a parking lot. We all stand to lose much. And
thank you for listening to my comments.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any further testimony? Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Shawn, any final comments? Okay. If there is no further testimony or
comments from the applicant or staff, Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close the public hearings on Items 17 and 18.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd': I have a motion and a second to close the Public Hearing on Items 17 and
18. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE RECUSED.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 62 of 75
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 17, AZ 07-011 -- and is the DA included in the
annexation, Anna? And that the annexation include a DA with the provisions as
outlined in the planning administrator's report.
Bird.: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 17. Any discussion? Okay.
Ms. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, recused.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE RECUSED.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 18.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 18, PP 07-016, preliminary plat, including all
staff and applicant's comments.
Bird: Second..
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 18. If there is no discussion,
Ms. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird., yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, recused.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE RECUSED.
Item 19: Public Hearing: AZ 07-018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.764
acres from RUT to C-C zone for Settler's Square Subdivision by Seagle
Three, LLC - 870 West Ustick Road:
Item 20: Public Hearing: PP 07-024 Request for a Preliminary Plat with 12
commercial building lots and 2 common lots on 9.764 acres in a proposed
C-C zone for Settler's Square Subdivision by Seagle Three, LLC - 870
West Ustick Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 19 and 20 has been requested to continue to March 4th.
Bird: Do you want to open the Public Hearings first?
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 63 of 75
De Weerd: Yeah. And I will go ahead and open the Public Hearing on AZ 07-018 and
PP 07-024.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird..
Bird: I move we continue public hearings AZ 07-018 and PP 07-024 until March 4th,
2008.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion and a second. For the record., please, note that
Mr. Gorton has returned. So, all those in favor please say aye. All ayes. Motion
carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 21: Public Hearing: Proposed Fee Increase for Plannina Department:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 21 is a Public Hearing on the proposed fee increase for the
Planning Department. Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I did notify the Building Contractors
Association that this was on -- scheduled for Public Hearing for this date, but I probably
did that in December and I think it's escaped their radar, because we don't have a letter
from them, nor are they present tonight. So, I would suggest that given the late hour
and that you have a number of items still to attend to tonight, that we continue this to
March 14, if there is room on that agenda. I'm not sure what that agenda looks like,
actually, but --
Rountree: Well, I will tell you.
Bird: While Councilman Rountree is looking it up, Anna, I want to compliment you for
going back and getting what we asked you on the comparisons and everything on your
fees. Thank you very much. You did a great job.
Canning: Councilmember Bird, I would like to take credit for having done that since the
last time I talked to you, but, actually, that was in the original packet and I was
supposed to follow up in a little more detail on some of those things and I have to admit
-- I forgot and, then, I ran out of time, so --
Meridian City Council
February T9, 2008
Page 64 of 75
Bird: Well, Ididn't -- I didn't realize that. I know this was in there and I didn't look close
enough to see that that is the true. But, anyway, I compliment you.
Canning: I will try and do a little more research, if you continue this item.
Bird.: I need to open my eyes better.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: I would move that would continue the Public Hearing for Item 2'1 until
February 26th and have the planning administrator notify Building Contractors that we
have done that specifically for them.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd.: Okay. I have a motion and a second.. Any discussion. Oh. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 22: Ordinance No. AZ 07-006 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 94.69 acres from RUT to a C-G zone for
Pinebridge by Stanley Consultants -south of East Fairview Avenue, east
of North Locust Grove Road and west of North Eagle Road & RZ 07-010
Request for a Rezone of 75.67 acres from I-L and L-O zones to a C-G
zone for Pinebridge by Stanley Consultants -south of East Fairview
Avenue, east of North Locust Grove Road and west of North Eagle Road:
Item 23: Ordinance No. 08-1348 AZ 07-014 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 7.55 acres from RUT and R1 to a C-C zone for Woodland
S rin s by Morgan Development -Northeast Corner of McMillan Road
and Locust Grove Road:
Item 24: Ordinance No. 08-1349 AZ 07-017 Request for Annexation
and Zoning of 40.4 acres from RUT to C-C zone (21.3 acres), R-8 zone
(6.27 acres) and R-2 (12.87 acres) for Three Corners by David Dean -
6380 North Locust Grove Road.:
Item 25: Ordinance No. 08-1350 RZ 07-016 Request for Rezone of
3.66 acres from R-15 zone to TN-R zone for Gramercy Townhome
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 65 of 75
Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. -south of E. Overland Road
and west of South Eagle Road:
De Weerd: Items 22, 23, 24, and 25 are ordinances 08-1348., 08-1349, 08-1350, and
08-1351. Madam Clerk, will you., please, read these ordinances by title only.
Holman: Madam Mayor, do you want me to do all four of them in a row or just do one?
De Weerd.: All four in a row.
Holman: Okay. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1348, an ordinance AZ 07-006 and
RZ 07-010, Pinebridge Subdivision, for annexation and rezoning of a parcel of land
being a portion of the northwest quarter, the north half of the southeast quarter and the
north half of the southwest quarter of Section 8, 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, and 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 land from R-1
and RUT, Ada County, and I-L, light industrial district, to C-G, general retail and service
commercial district, 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 rules and providing an effective
date.
Holman: City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1349, an ordinance finding that Tuscany
Development, Inc., the owner of certain real property, has made a written request for
rezone of the zoning classification RZ 07-016, Gramercy Townhomes, for real property
being a parcel of land located in the northwest half of the northeast quarter of Section
20, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, of the Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as
described in Attachment A of this ordinance and rezoning certain lands and territories
situated in Ada County, Idaho, and within the corporate limits of the City of Meridian,
and rezoning the land use zoning classification of said land from R-15, medium high
density residential district, to TN-R, traditional neighborhood residential district 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 rules and providing an effective date.
Holman: You know, I think I might have just read the wrong one. Attachment 22 was
right. I think I attached them all together. I apologize. Okay. So -- how do I do this,
just re-read -- I did number 22 and, then, I skipped to number -- just read the other two?
Bird: Just go ahead. It won't hurt nothing.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 66 of 75
Holman: Okay. Sorry. Does it matter if they are out of order, then, because this is one
fine. I will just .put this with --
Bird.: Heavens, no. Just make sure you got the right number.
Holman: Okay. I got it. Okay. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1350, an ordinance
AZ 07-014, Woodland Springs for annexation of a parcel of land being part of the
southwest one quarter of the southwest one 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 requested by the City of
Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands
from RUT and R-1, Ada County, to C-N, neighborhood business district, 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 rules and providing an effective date.
Holman; Okay. Ordinance No. 08-1351, an ordinance AZ 07-017, Three Corners
Subdivision for annexation of a parcel of land located in the north half of the northwest --
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 requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining
the land use zoning classification of said lands from RUT, Ada County, to C-C,
community business district, R-8, medium density residential district, R-2, low density
residential district, 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 rules and providing an effective
date.
De Weerd: Just to note, Madam Clerk, that AZ 07-017 is 08-1350. And, then, the 1351
is RZ 07-016. And that's Gramercy Townhouse Subdivision.
Holman: Let me make sure I have this straight. Could you -- I'm sorry, I got that one
out of order, so -- okay. Ordinance AZ 07-006 is City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-
1348.
De Weerd: Correct.
Holman: Okay. And, then, Ordinance AZ 07-014 is 08-1350?
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 67 of 75
De Weerd: 1349.
Bird: 49.
Holman: 1349. That's what I did wrong. Okay. And, then, Ordinance No. 08-1350 is
AZ 07-017?
De Weerd: Yes.
Holman: Okay. And, then, AZ -- oh, the Tuscany Development is the 08-1351?
De Weerd: No. That's Gramercy.
Bird: Gramercy.
Rountree: Gramercy.
Holman: By Tuscany.
Bird: By Tuscany. Yeah. You're right.
Hoiman: And that's 1349; correct?
De Weerd: 1351.
Holman: One three -- I'm sorry. 1351. Okay. I think I have got them right now.
Bird: She's read them all, hasn't she?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird.: Madam Mayor --
De Weerd: Now, I still have to say my little bit. You have heard these read by title only.
Is there anyone who would like to hear them read in their entirety? No, I don't see
anyone.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If they did they can read them. Hand them to them, I move that we approve
ordinances 08-1348, 08-1349, 08-1350, 08-1351, with suspension of rules.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 68 of 75
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the ordinances in 22, 23,
24, and 25. If there is no discussion Ms. Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 26: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(fl - (to consider
and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation):
De Weerd: Okay. Item 26 is an Executive Session per Idaho State Code 65-2345(1)(f)
and probably whatever --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd.: Yes.
Bird: Can we do 9 and 10 before we go into that, with your permission, so they don't
have to sit through it, or do we need to --
Nary: We are going to talk about it there, too?
Bird: Huh?
Nary: We are going to talk about it there, too.
Bird.: Okay. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f).
Rountree: Second..
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to adjourn into Executive Session.
Ms. Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
February T9, 2008
Page 69 of 75
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
De Weerd: Okay Council I would entertain a motion to come out of executive session.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All ayes motion carried. We're now on Item Number 9 and 10
Item 9: Tabled from February 1, 2008: Amendment to Bittercreek
Agreement:
Item 10: Tabled from February 1, 2008: Cooperative Construction and
Reimbursement Agreement for Lift Station, Force Main and Oversize
Main for Bittercreek Meadows.:
Nary: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor Members of the Council in your direction Mr. Barry and myself met
with Mr. Jewett and Mr. Brown regarding the Bittercreek Meadows Agreements and I
think what the direction we had was based on the original agreement that the city had
from 2006 one of the requirements in that agreement was that the city would cohstruct a
lift station at a point in the future of which that point is in dispute. If we were to go back
to those requirements and that agreement regarding the well and the taking over of the
well .property and the lift station construction as outlined what else does that leave out
on the table? What other damages, claims exist from that? So what we discussed
with Mr. Jewett and after I recite these maybe Mr. Jewett can give you his either
concurrence wit them or disagreement with them. What we discussed is essentially six
things. One of them was fire flow. There was still an outstanding issue of fire flow for
to be able to serve the houses that are currently built out there as well as future houses
based on the only single source of water that exists on the site. The discussion has
been on the potential cost of upgrading that well to meet the fire flow requirements that
are necessary or some other alternative to meet the fire flow requirements. There was
an issue regarding power. There is additional power that was brought to the site to be
able to provide adequate power sources for a regional size lift station. There's an
ongoing dispute on what the - whether a regional size and what does that specifically
mean how large a lift station has to be built out there but there was some additional cost
that was incurred to provide power to that site to be able to generate power for a
regional lift station. There is a cost for over sizing and I'll probably get some of these
terms wrong but over sizing the trunk main from what's required to serve the 24 homes
in Bittercreek Meadows today and what may be required to serve a regional lift station.
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 70 of 75
There is some pipe sizing requirement. That currently hasn't been built yet. Plans are
engineered but if the city is going to contemplate in the future then maybe there is a
cost that has to be incurred either in the future through hookup fees or something else.
Primarily Mr. Jewett's concern was on timing. There is some belief on Mr. Jewett's
part that there was a commitment of some sort from the city that a lift station of some
size would be built some time last year so in April or so of 2007. That wasn't
accomplished. Mr. Jewett had to use some of the property in that area to put lagoons
on to serve the sewer needs for that area and those lagoons are still in operation today.
There was some dispute over again some completion dates those weren't met. The
houses on the site had to have some biomicrobrial tanks installed for use with the
lagoons out there and the septic systems that exist on the site. We discussed in
addition to those four things we also discussed some perceived claims or potential
claims that still may exist for Mr. Jewett. What we ended up with is if we looked at a lift
station of an adequate size to serve approximately 50 homes so not necessarily a
regional lift station but a lift station slighfily larger than what is currently on the ground
and approved today than what we would be looking at is then the potential for Mr.
Jewett to then at the same time conjunction with us building the lift station the city, he
would be building water lines from a water source to be able to serve this same
property. That water source then would be coming from offsite. Mr. Jewett would pay
for that cost. That could be recouped through hookup fees as well and then that would
provide adequate redundancy for fire flow in this area and the hope was if the city was
going to be building this lift station by the end of the year approximately of 2008 that
these would be done at approximately the same time. Mr. Jewett was agreeable to
basically relinquishing the issue of power because that's already been installed and it
would be used in the future. We would still have to price out the cost with Mr. Barry's
staffs' help on what this trunk size would necessarily have to be and if some of that was
reimbursable to Mr. Jewett or if it's going to be reimbursed through hookup fees. The
timing issue should be resolved if we get to resolution here. Then any additional claims
Mr. Jewett would like the city to consider appraising the value of the two acres of
ground in this area that are being used for the pond they can be reclaimed in the future
and there is associated costs with that so there were cost to install the ponds as well as
costs to reclaim the ponds they would have to be used in the future more amenity type
of use rather than for building lots. They are not reusable for that type of purpose but if
the city would consider compensation to Mr. Jewett for essentially the loss of use of
that ground for building lots we would have to figure out what the value of that would be
and we had discussed the potential of that being done through and appraisal of some
sort. I think those are what we've discussed. Mr. Jewett may want to at least concur
or tell me maybe I got something wrong here and then if we have any other information
we want to put out on the record we certainly can.
De Weerd: Mr. Jewett.
Jewett: Jim Jewett. 1560 Carol Street in Meridian. I'm going to take them step by step
if I could. So one the lift station I think that Mr. Nary mentioned 50 units. I think that
Meridian City Council
February T9, 2008
Page 71 of 75
what we were trying to say is an expandable system that would maybe service 50 units
as the initial construction and as my property further develops it could be expanded
within its own confines to be able to handle additional units. The reason for that and
the reason that you know obviously that I would offer to extend the water main down
from the north for that redundancy would be to further develop because that's
unfortunately the solution is to spend more money to try to make some money to try to
dig out of the hole if we want to call it that. Obviously market doesn't warrant a whole
lot of development but some has to be done to turn some margin some cash flow to
make everything flow. With that small correction I would agree with everything that Mr.
Nary has said is what we talked about and find agreeable.
Nary: And Council he is correct. The intent was that the construction of the lift station
that we would be contemplating now would be one that would be serving approximately
50 homes but would have the ability for future hookup or future reimbursement
agreement or some other future agreement not tied to this one could be expanded to
something else.
Barry: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Yes.
Barry: Members of the Council. I just wanted to add that the construction timeline here
would likely need to be longer than the end of the year for the construction for both
water and sewer if we're going to combine that simply because of the crossings under
the canals and the time periods with which those crossings would be allowed. It
probably seems more likely for us to look at a spring deadline say a year from now for
example from a constructability standpoint with regard to the completion of both the
water and the sewer lift station in lines. Does that make sense?
Bird: Madam Mayor. Tom what canal do we have left to cross?
Barry: There are two canals. I don't know the -
Jewett: We have the Rawson which is closer to Amity and then we have the Calkins
which is closer to Victory. They were crossed with the force main but we haven't been
crossed for water mains and those would have to be in the center of the road. The
crossings that they did for the force mains were on the edge of the road..
Bird: Okay.
Jewett: To further - a December 31St deadline is the dead of winter and also the dead
of holiday season. It's just not a good day to have a termination as far as something
being completed. You either need to be before that or after that. before that with the
likelihood of being able to cross those canals anytime before October 15th of this year is
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 72 of 75
unlikely so a mid November would only give us about a 30 day window at the beginning
of when they would last do the last phase of work and that seems to be a bit tight.
De Weerd: And I think that's what Tom indicated right? It is after midnight so I just
wanted to verify that.
Jewett: It's actually the 20th now.
De Weerd: Council any questions for either staff or Mr. Jewett?
Bird: I do. Mr. Jewett where are you bringing the water from to up that line? What
well are we bringing that from the one over in Bear Creek? Because we don't have a
well down there in your South Ridge yet.
Jewett: I believe there is - if I remember right there is a high pressure line that comes
across at Linder and the freeway. That's where our water source is not from the Bear
Creek. I think that's (inaudible). There is a waterline that you guys put under the
freeway at Linder Road by Bodily RV.
Bird: I wonder what well that is.
Jewett: Whatever well is on the other side of the freeway.
Bird: Well it would have to be on the north side? It must service that subdivision in
there then. So in other words the waterline has got to come up through South Ridge
and go down -
Jewett: All the way up Overland.
Borton: Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Yes Mr. Borton.
Borton: So in light of what seems to be a somewhat meet of the minds is this to you Mr.
Nary to draft it up and send it over and get her done?
Nary: I believe so. I think there's obviously a few contingencies out there. The cost of
the ground is there any other restrictions to the ground the two acres that are currently
being used for the lagoons. The cost of the oversized main and what that's going to
be. If again, we talked about this. tonight. I don't know that all the engineering and
modeling and all the necessary engineering mumbo jumbo is all done so I mean there
may be still some other things but I think if we can conceptually can go forward with this
direction I think my intent would be then to craft an agreement that basically replaces
the existing agreement add this as an addendum so it is clear what the intent of the
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 73 of 75
parties are for both the (inaudible) of this lift station as well as the construction of the
water lines and if there is some value to this ground. What contingencies if any are tied
around that then we can bring that back.
Jewett: Madam Mayor and Council. The clarification on the oversized -there is a -
from my understanding is Public Works had JUB do a study a year and a half ago to
determine what area would service into a potential regional lift station and through that
study they determined one section of a line from the lift station to where we would
connect in would have to be oversized to an 18 inch. I don't know if that's still the
desire of the city but that's what was directed to us so that's what was put in the design
was an oversize from and 8 to an 18. That's the over sizing. It's about a 300 foot
section line.
Barry: Madam Mayor. Just one other comment in drafting this agreement. I wanted
to make sure the record reflected that Mr. Jewett, Mr. Nary and myself had discussed
not only the construction of the water main but also there is the booster pump station
that would be required in order for that water main to function and service the
Bittercreek Meadow Subdivision so I just wanted the record to reflect that. also, there
may be an opportunity to investigate and weigh whether or not a booster pump station
is the best choice as opposed to the construction of a well instead of the booster pump
station. We might want to have a look at that and if Mr. Jewett is agreeable to that we
could have alook - I could have my staff have a look at that and then get back with Mr.
Jewett and maybe the agreement might be reflective of that as opposed to a booster
pump station but nevertheless the line would still need to be constructed.
Jewett: As I told Tom earlier within South Ridge I have offered in the past a well site
and that offer still stands. If we can choose a well site and the booster can be on the
same site or the well could replace the need for the booster. That offer is still available
we just need to pinpoint where it's going to be.
De Weerd: So I guess the next step Mr. Nary that you would draft this up and it would
stop being a moving target.
Holman: Excuse me Madam Mayor can we pause for just a second so I can change the
tape?
De Weerd: You bet. I'll pause.
End of Tape
De Weerd: So you would draw this up. Capture what has been just said and bring that
back next week?
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 74 of 75
Nary: Madam Mayor Members of the Council. I think maybe if we just brought it back
when we get this completed. I don't want to put some false time limit on it. I don't
know whether next week is too soon. We will certainly work diligently to get this done
because I'm tired of it so I'm sure you are too. I know Mr. Jewett is tired of it. I think if
we're close to a resolution I just don't want to put a timetable of a week or two weeks
and then we're just putting it off another week. I think there's every intent for both Mr.
Jewett and the city to get this resolved as quickly as we can.
Bird: Madam Mayor. I would prefer to get this - to have Bill's staff draw it up, get it to
Mr. Jewett, get his attorney to look at it, him sign off on it and then bring it to us. That
would be the way we handle 99.9 percent of the deals so if it takes a week it takes a
week. If it takes two I guess it takes two. At least lets get it solved and I'm sure
everybody has seen it enough.
De Weerd: Is that agreeable. Good. So that takes care of Item Number 10 as well.
We will just table it. Can you table it indefinitely?
Nary: You can just vacate it and we'll add it on when its ready.
De Weerd: Okay I need a motion to vacate then.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. I move that we vacate Items 9 and 10.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay I have a motion to vacate Items 9 and 10. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRi'ED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to adjourn.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRfED: ALL AYES
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12 A.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
Meridian City Council
February 19, 2008
Page 75 of 75
APPROVED:
G~'~~~
MAYOR T Y De WEERD
a3 , Ig ,o~
DATE APPROVED \\\\\\",,,~r~irrir,,,~
,~ ~'~ ~.
0
ATTESTED: = ~~~~
JAYCE OLM N, (QTY RK ,~~ '
~ , .g :`
~~
~~~~~!! rat 1.1~1'1~1 1t e~~~~\\