Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 09-02Meridian Citv Council Meeting September 2, 2008 A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, September 2, 2008, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree and David Zaremba. Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Anna Canning, Sonya Wafters, Keith Watts, Ron Anderson, Bill Johnson, Jeff Lavey, Bob Stowe, Clint Dolsby, Steve Siddoway, 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. I will go ahead and start tonight's meeting. I'd like to welcome you all here this evening. We appreciate you joining us. For the record, it is Tuesday, September 2nd. It's 7:00 p.m. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join Lieutenant Stowe in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Stephanie Morris -Ten Mile Christian Church. De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Stephanie Morris. She's with Ten Mile Christian Church. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Morris: Our God, you're good and loving and we thank you for this opportunity to reflect on the good things that we have in this community, the things that are valuable to us and the commitment that these folks have to the people and the community. I ask that in your presence that you would guide these folks in their decision making, so that they can continue up uphold those values and those commitments that they have made to this community in Jesus' name we pray, amen. De Weerd: Well, Stephanie, we appreciate you joining us tonight and I do have a City of Meridian pin for you. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 2 of 72 Rountree: Thank you. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 4 is the adoption of the agenda. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: There is a couple of items to make note of. Under 6, Department Reports, C, Mayor's office, number one, the resolution number is proposed to be 08-616. Number two, the resolution number is proposed to be 08-617. Number three, the proposed resolution number is 08-618. On the regular agenda, Item 15, the proposed ordinance number there is 08-1378. And Item 16 the ordinance number proposed there is 08- 1379. And with that I move that we adopt the agenda with the modifications noted. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as presented. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Approve Minutes of May 27, 2008 Pre-Council Meeting Minutes: B. Water Main Easement Agreement for Verona No. 4 by Primeland Investment Group: C. Sanitary Sewer Easement Agreement for Verona No. 4 by Primeland Investment Group: D. Water Main and Sanitary Sewer Easement Agreement for Verona No. 4 by Primeland Investment Group: E. Task Order No. 0773 with Pharmer Engineering for Engineering Services for WWTP DAFT System for $42,950.00: F. Task Order No. 0775 with Brown and Caldwell for Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for $13,000: G. Task Order No. 0774 with CH2MHILL, Inc. for Engineering Services for $42,641.49: Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 3 of 72 H. Underground Utility Easement Agreement for the Black Cat Lift Station with Idaho Power: De Weerd: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we adopt the Consent Agenda as published. Bird: Second. De Weerd: We have a motion and a second. Any discussion on this item? Hearing none, Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Department Reports: A. Police Department: 1. Police and Fire Games Results: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 6 are our Department Reports. We will start tonight's reports with the Police Department. Lavey: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council. Earlier Lieutenant Stowe and I were arguing over who is going to go and, then, we realized that he didn't have his glasses and so I have to go. De Weerd: I thought the chief always won. Lavey: Well, unless I don't want to do it. I have a couple of items I'd like to talk about today in the department report and one that just came in this moming that I have shared with the Mayor, but I don't believe she shared with anybody else. Earlier this moming I found out that the Meridian Police Department and the MADC was awarded the Drug Free Community's grant for 2008, which totals 625,000 dollars over the next five years. That was kind of a two year process. We tried last year and we weren't as successful and this year we kept getting a lot of questions and had to do a lot of follow-up work and the police ofFicer in me kind of got suspicious and said that these people are just going to tell us to go away if we can't get it right and everybody else was saying, no, if they want additional information that's a good sign. That's a good sign. And, apparently, it is Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 4 of 72 a good sign. But we are still waiting for the official word. The letter didn't come in, but everybody started congratulating us on Friday, but nobody was working Friday, so we didn't get the message until today and it is on the website, so it is official. With that being said and the next item on the agenda is the 2008 police and fire games and I asked the Mayor if I could come forward and talk about the success that the police and fire had during these games and, then, to recognize a few people as well. And I brought copies today, because the length -- or the list is quite lengthy, so I'm going to hand these out for you. I don't have an exact count of how many police and fire personnel actually participated, because I just didn't count on the list, but I'm here to tell you that the total count is 22 gold medals -- or, excuse me, 22 medals awarded to the police department. Six of those of gold, 11 of those are silver, and five of those are bronze. And as you look through the list I gave you it has Michael de St. Germain earning four medals. One silver, one -- or two golds, one bronze. And I'd like to point out here is the oldest individual on the police department and he is the one with the most medals. So, congratulations to Mike. Eric Strolberg has four different medals for shooting events. Branden Fiscus has three different medals for shooting events. Justin Root has four different medals for shooting events. Brian Caldwell has one medal for a shooting event. Brian Lueddeke has the gold medal for motocross and he -- he was successful over the police chief of Emmett who actually went over his handle bars and broke his ankle. So, not too many injuries, but he did have to go out by ambulance. Tracy Basterrechea actually got a bronze medal in wrestling. Scott Coliainni got a gold medal in the bench press. Darren Hurst got a gold medal in the bench press and he had a silver medal in boxing. Martin Flores actually has a bronze in softball and some of the other participants was Shawn Harper, Earl Scharff and, of course, the ultimate dodge ball team the command staff put together -- De Weerd: I have pictures. Lavey: Yeah. She has pictures and I have been blackmailed, I believe. But the one thing that we'd like to point out there is that although we only won two games, we did win over the Boise command staff and we did win over the Ada County Sheriffs Office. So, if we had to win two, those are the ones that we wanted to win and the team from Sacramento, they can tell whatever story they want to tell, because they are in Sacramento and we are here. The police -- or the fire department also has the results of their winners, but what I'd like to do is recognize a few people that had made this all possible and I -- but I believe it's only fair that I turn! it over to Lieutenant Bob Stowe, because he's been an integral part of actually making these games happen and if you recall we came to you about two years ago with a proposal and that's when you gave us your support and he started with the police and fire games and I believe he needs to end with the police and fire games. So, Bob, if you have your glasses and if you're ready to go. Stowe: Okay. Thank you, chief. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, we did have a very successful games over the past week -- I think it was -- I don't know. I have just caught up on my sleep, so I'm -- I think it was a week ago. But we do have some very important people that we need to recognize and those are our volunteers that Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 5 of 72 helped make these games successful. I don't have them listed on my form here, but there was some firemen that were very important to the games, three in particular. One was Drew Young, who is our on board of directors. He created the medical plan for the entire games. We had Grant Hamilton, who was our soccer coordinator, and Blake Campbell, who was our baseball coordinator. And without their help the games would not have been -- come off as smoothly as they did. They all put in a ton of hours. From the police department we had several people that volunteered and I'd just like to publicly thank them and they are Martin Flores, Shawn Harper, Darren Hurst, Macy Hill, Gene Moore, Abe Antonucci, Liz Ashworth, Kathy Gonzales, Deb Mersch, Isaiah Wear, and Eric Strolberg. And each one of these people played a different part in these games in different various -- or in different various. That's kind of redundant. In various aspects of them, whether it was just picking up where someone needed some help, they were there to always provide what assistance there was. Now, there is five more people that were very much important and that's the coordinators for each event. These folks, like I mentioned about Blake and Grant, they put in so many hours coordinating their event. They had to answer e-mails, telephone calls, at all hours of the night and I thank them so much for the work they did, because they just were tireless. And that is Scott Coliainni, who was the coordinator for racquetball, Laetitia Warren, who was the coordinator for the bench press and push-pull events, which I don't know how she survived it. I had to talk her off the ledge one night, I think, just because of all-the -- those bench press guys are different. But I don't know, their wants and needs were really strange. Stefani Leiper was the coordinator for volleyball. She started out almost two years ago when I started putting this together as my volleyball coordinator. In that two year period she became pregnant and her due date was right around the time that the games were in progress. In fact, she delivered on August 17th. So, right in the middle of our week. But stepping up for her was Jessica Flores, who took over as the volleyball coordinator and between the two of them they worked their tails off and it was very appreciated. And, then, Mike de St. Germain, again, the oldest guy in our department. He probably hates us saying that. Winner of four medals. He was the coordinator for flag football, which was an event that got canceled, but prior to it getting canceled he, too, put in a lot of work on that and it was too bad that we didn't have the participants to make that event come forth, but I'd still like to recognize him as to all the work that he put in. So, with that I thank the Council and the Mayor for their support. The city. We had people here at City Hall that had volunteered. In finance Rita, Kathy, Jennifer, they all were right there with us. So, a big thank you to everyone and the games were a huge success and I think we got Olympic fever here in our department and our city. I will answer any questions. De Weerd: Thank you, Bob. Council, any questions? Bird: Just a big thank you. Rountree: No. Thanks for leading that up. De Weerd: Well, thank you, Bob. After we get the fire report, I would like to present you and a fire representative with a couple of plaques. But I appreciate all the time and Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 6 of 72 effort you put into this. I -- it was two years ago you came begging for money and I think it was a great investment. Certainly, the City of Meridian was made proud not just because of the number of medals, but you really showed a good face on Meridian, maybe not you personally, but the rest of the department. Remember, I watched the dodge ball. I thought we were going to have to buy a TV camera there for a little bit, but it was a great event. So, appreciate all you did. Stowe: Thank you very much. Lavey: And she didn't mention the green neon shorts or the yellow socks. De Weerd: We did have a laugh at -- Lavey: With that being said, I'm going to tum it over to Bill Johnson from the fire department, who would like to talk about their results as well. Johnson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I, too, would like to congratulate several members of the fire department. We came out with not as many medals as the police department, but we did end up with eight medals, four silver and four bronze. Our medallists are Tim Kelly in mountain biking cross country. Derrek Nolt, he took a silver. Christopher Kert, Tyler Rountree, Christian Forbee all got silver medals in ice hockey. Christian Forbee also took two bronze medals in kayaking, both rapid river and river cross. And, then, Demck Nelson took bronze medals in two mountain biking events as well. And, for the record, I have copies of our results and pictures of our silver medallists there. I, too, would like to say that Tyler and Blake -- or Blake, Drew, and Grant did countless hours of work trying to get people to help, as well as the police department. And, again, I have heard nothing but positives from the event. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Lavey: Madam Mayor and Council, there is one other city department that needs to be recognized for their hard work as well and that's the Parks Department. Not only did they have our parks looking nice for us, but they actually had allowed the use of some of the parks, including the Settlers and the ball fields and with that being said I'd like to thank Steve Siddoway and his staff for all of their hard work that they have done, too, because they also made us look good. So, thanks, Steve. There is a -- actually, before I get into that separate item, Mayor, did you want to do those presentations? De Weerd: Yes. So, Bob and Bill. Or, Ron, you want to come up, too. I know all of you put in a great deal of time and entertainment. I would say I have never watched dodge ball before attending this. I didn't even know what it was. And I'm kind of glad I didn't, but it was -- we did, we beat the right teams and they did it with great finesse. I just -- it's a memory I'll cherish for a lifetime. Okay. I do have two presentations. We were -- we were honored in the boxing ring on Friday night, kind of the -- the big -- the big to do. Yes. Culmination of the entire week. And they presented us with two plaques and I thought it would be more fitting that these plaques be displayed in the Meridian Clty Council September 2, 2008 Page 7 of 72 police and the fire departments, rather than here at City Hall, because they really have earned them. They put a lot of time and, again, I'm very proud of how they represented our community. This plaque I will present to Lieutenant Stowe. It's presented to the City of Meridian for your partnership and support in hosting the Western States Police and Fire Games in the City of Meridian, in appreciation of the thousands of police and fire competitors from the western United States who have come to the City of Meridian to compete in these games, our heroes salute you. Stowe: Thank you. De Weerd: Now, this one it said something similar to that, so I won't read it, but what they had done -- the post office had established a stamp that they set up at the convention center and so this presents a stamp that canceled out mail that went out of Boise during the time of the games and so this I will present to our fire department. Who wants it? Our Chief Johnson. Johnson: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you to both of our chiefs for being here. 2. Report on Mutual Aid on Oregon Trail Fire: Lavey: Madam Mayor, Council, I have one more item on the agenda and it's more fitting, probably, for the fire department to talk about this, but I will start. Last week, as many people recall, we were - we were involved in a homfic incident in Boise where the actual foothills had caught on fire and we lost ten homes, lost one human life, and many other homes were damaged and it was something that was unique to this valley in a long long time. And one of the things that happened during that time was a general call or general orders for the fire department that every single fire department personnel was called into assist and also they put out a mutual aid request across the Treasure Valley and Meridian Police Department actually sent one entire team to assist the officers and the firefighters of Boise during their event. I'd like to recognize a few individuals who actually went over there. Officer Craig Hoodman, Officer Michelle DeGrange, Officer Justin Northway, Officer Jeff Fuller, Officer Will Stoy, and Detective Shawn Harper assisted the Boise Fire Department and the Boise Police Department with emergency evacuations and crowd control. All six of these individuals were also treated for smoke inhalation in the hospitals after their duties that were performed, but I'd just like to thank you -- or thank them for their service and to recognize them here today in this forum and also the Meridian Fire Department was called down there and I will have Chief Johnson come up here and talk about that and, really, we were -- on a smaller scale we kind of had an event similar yesterday and he may talk about that as well. So, with that, Chief Johnson. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 8 of 72 Johnson: Thanks, Jeff. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, last Monday evening when Boise did have their large fire, we sent three first out engines, engines 301, 303 and 304 down there to assist, each with three personnel on it. We also sent one reserve engine with four more personnel, as calls for more assistance kept coming, and, then, we sent one of our grass units down there with three personnel and Chief Anderson went down. These guys were down there anywhere from four to about seven and a half hours assisting in this fire fight. And some of the guys, actually, were responsible for the saving of some of the homes. They did suffer severe damage, but they were -- weren't completely burnt to the ground. We also had an interesting mutual aid call that same evening. St. AI's Hospital called up and as you -- Councilman Bird may recall, we bought some carbon monoxide monitors for checking our citizens when they call in for CO alarms, also checking firefighters. Well, St. AI's Hospital called and asked if we could bring one of our monitors down to the hospital to help with the evaluation of the police officers that were being brought in. So, we sent two personnel down there and one of our monitors to assist with that. So, these are great devices. Got them on each of our first out engines and it's real nice to be able to even help out the hospitals in their time. We did have a smaller scale event yesterday. I don't have the exact numbers, but I do know that Boise fire, Eagle fire, Star fire, all came to our call for assistance yesterday afternoon -- or yesterday morning during a much smaller scale, luckily event, where we had one house under construction completely destroyed, another one suffered some damage, but the houses that were directly in the flame front after that had minor smoke damage is all. So, I want to personally thank the guys for the hard work they did and the great job and, you know, this mutual aid does pay off. We got the assistance back that we gave out. So, with that I'll stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thanks, Chief. Any questions? Bird: Thank you. Rountree: No. Now, to extend our thanks and appreciation to both your staff and Chief Lavey to -- to your officers as well. Good job. Johnson: Thank you. Lavey: Madam Mayor and Council, the Boise Police Department and the Ada County Sheriffs Office actually came to our aid to help us yesterday with crowd control and traffic control, like we went to them last week, and with that being said that concludes my report. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Chief Lavey. Any questions? Chief Anderson, do you have anything you want to add? I probably -- Lavey: You had to ask, Mayor. Anderson: I just wanted to echo some of the comments that were made by Chief Lavey and Chief Johnson, but having been there firsthand that night and witnessed what went Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 9 of 72 on up there on Sweetwater in Boise, it was just amazing. I mean I have been in this business for over 30 years now and those are the types of fires that you maybe only see three or four in of your career, but to see ten houses totally destroyed and another ten that suffered major fire damage, it was like walking through the middle of a war zone as I walked down the street there and the firefighters just did a heck of a job that night -- all the firefighters that were there, as well as the citizens, everybody just pitched in and did whatever needed to be done to save people's homes and it was just a great community effort and it's been wonderful to see the community support that has come about as a result of that. The Boise firefighters a couple evenings later set up a booth down at the Center on the Grove at Alive After 5:00 and they collected over 10,000 dollars that evening for victims of the fires up there and our -- we have been receiving donations at our fire stations for those victims, too, and it's been very heartwarming, we have had people come in and drop off a check for a hundred dollars, we have had 12 year old kids going through the neighborhood collecting money and turning in 24 dollars cash. Just the community has been wonderful and the support has been wonderful and it's nice to know that we live in an area like that where people care. So, I wanted to share that with you. De Weerd: Thank you, Chief. And I know that Chief Anderson and I talked today and I think that some of the lessons learned during that certainly we can bring back to our emergency management team and work into our own emergency response strategies. So, we appreciate both your crews and Chief Lavey's in helping out. That's what that mutual aid is all about. Anderson: Yeah. Thank you. B. Public Works: 1. IDWARN Mutual Aid Agreement: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 6-B is our Public Works Department. Dolsby: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I would defer to Mr. Nary for an update on this agreement. Nary: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, speaking of mutual aid, this IDWARN agreement we had discussed last week and the Council's direction was to talk to our insurers ICRMP and get their perspective of this indemnification clause and, again, just to remind everybody, the indemnification clauses in this agreement are unlike what we say in our public safety aid agreements. In the public safety agreements what we agree to indemnify is when we request assistance from another agency, we will indemnify them for anything we direct them to do, anything within our control or authority to do, so, basically, as we direct the situation they are -- the individual people that respond, we are covering them under our insurance and ICRMP is aware of that and that is covered. This one ICRMP has the same concerns that we do. One it's written poorly. I think this is a national type of an agreement, from what I understand, Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 10 of 72 so it's a template sort of agreement, so the entities that want to be a part of this don't have the ability to request any wording changes. They probably could make some wording changes that would be more in line with the Idaho Code, as well as the Idaho constitution. ICRMP raised two issues. One, there is a clause here that says the city is not liable for anything more than what the law allows them to be liable for. But it doesn't include the constitutional provisions that the second clause, which is where the concerns were, goes further and says the city would be responsible -- if we request assistance and we are responsible for the acts of the people that come to provide assistance, whether we direct them or not. So, if someone were to come and assist on a major catastrophe -- and, again, this is not in the public safety arena, but more in a wastewater or water circumstance, we may or may not be actually supervising these people, they may have their own crew, they may be simply working within our city to assist us with a problem, but we are liable for them for whatever acts they may do. We may not have any control over that, so that's the risk that we have. I spoke with Boise's attorney today, because they did sign off on this agreement last week and they felt the risk to them was pretty minimal. ~ They actually felt it was of greater advantage to them , because their feeling was the city of Boise, as large an entity as it is, may be requested to provide assistance more than they would be requesting assistance and this, then, covers them if they sent some employees out to assist in some other city, then, they would be covered under this agreement by this very fuzzy language. That doesn't apply to us, because ICRMP covers that anyway under our agreement with ICRMP, because Boise is self insured and we are not. Under our agreement with ICRMP if we direct employees to go assist another entity based on this mutual aid, our employees would be covered anyway. So, it doesn't make -- the city would be covered anyway. So, that value that Boise felt was of benefit to them doesn't really apply to us. As I also said the last week, the risk in this agreement is fairly small. You know, I haven't had a discussion with Mr. Barry or Mr. Dolsby on the value that Public Works may find in this process. I haven't been a part of that. We were just asked to reevaluate the agreement. Again, the language is a little fuzzy. It does trouble me a little bit. I don't think it's a huge risk, because I think we can limit that exposure if we choose. I don't know the necessity of joining this group. I don't know whether there is an urgency to join this group. I don't know if Clint knows either. But those are the issues you asked me to look at and, like I said, ICRMP was a little hesitant to simply endorse this agreement as it's written. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Clint or Tom, any comments? Is this something that Public Works feels is a timely issue, something that has some urgency to it? Barry: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no, there is no immediate sense of urgency to enter into this agreement at this point in time. However, we do feel that from our standpoint in Public Works it is a good system to'be a part of. So, with that, you know, we would be happy to take any direction as it relates to trying to modify the agreement or to -- the Council's wish to go ahead and enter into that agreement. But, again, we think it's great for Public Works. We think it's a good system to be a part of. You never know when you need assurance like this. We are a small utility. It would be great to be able to work with our neighbors and others throughout the state to be a Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 11 of 72 partner on emergency-type related situations and this agreement would help us to facilitate that. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I still have the reservations that Mr. Nary identified and I would like to see us take some time and see if we can't work out that language. I agree that it may be of benefit to us at some point in time in the future, but I think Boise is the only city in the valley that has entered into this agreement at this point in time and I think there is only one other city in the state and I believe it's either in northern or eastern Idaho, so -- Nary: One in each. Rountree: One in each. Two. So, I don't know that the urgency is there and I think we have time to try to make it right. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I would chime in in agreement with that. I generally am in favor of mutual aid agreements anywhere we can do them and offer our help and receive other people's help when we need it, but I agree with the concerns that Mr. Nary has raised as well and if there is a way to adjust the wording I would like to go that direction. De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would -- I could never vote for the language after you read through that. I don't think I'd ever vote for an agreement that's written like that. De Weerd: So, I guess, Mr. Bany, if we can work with Mr. Nary and -- on the language and see how we can de-fuu it. Barry: Absolutely. We would be happy to do that. C. Mayor's Office: Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 12 of 72 1. Appointment of Julie Pipal and Re-Appointment of Keith Bird to Meridian Development Corporation: Resolution No. 2. Re-Appointment of John Nesmith, Creg Steele, and Tom O'Claire to Parks and Recreation Commission: Resolution No. 3. Re-Appointment of Steve Turney and Tom Hammond to Historical Preservation Commission: Resolution No. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Under 6-C, Mayor. In front of you I do have appointments for our Meridian Development Corporation, our Parks Commission, as well as our Historical Preservation Commission. You should have the resolutions in front of you that detail out the seats and to the length of service. Under C-1 for the Meridian Development Corporation I will be making a new appointment of Julie Pipal and it is for a three year term and the reappointment of Councilman Bird. Any questions on that one? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. I would need a motion to approve this resolution. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve Resolution 08-616 for the appointment of Julie Pipal and the reappointment of Councilman Keith Bird to MDC. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, roll call. Roll-Call: Bird, abstain; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE ABSTAIN. De Weerd: Are you okay with your reappointment? Bird: We already discussed it. I don't need to vote. De Weerd: Okay. Under Item C-2 I will be asking for your confirmation of reappointment of John Nesmith and Creg Steele and Tom O'Claire. This will be John's Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 13 of 72 second term and, Creg, this will be his last term he can serve. And, Tom O'Claire, this is -- this will be the beginning of his first full term or -- yes. First full term. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move we approve the Resolution No. 08-617, reappointing John Nesmith, Creg Steele, and Tom O'Claire to the Parks and Recreation Commission. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. If there is no need for discussion, we will have roll call. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. All ayes. Okay. Our last one is a reappointment. This one kind of got a little bit away from us and so these two have served on the Historical Preservation Commission. They have been very involved and have been great contributors and I would like your confirmation of these two reappointments. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we approve the reappointment of Steve Tumey and Dr. Tom Hammond to the Parks Commission and approve the Resolution 08-618. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the reappointment. If there is no discussion we will have roll call. Holman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I just wanted to point out that Charlie, you said -- or, I'm sorry, Councilman Rountree said on the record it was the Parks Commission and it's HPC. Rountree: Oh. HPC. Yeah. De Weerd: I knew what he meant. Rountree: HPC. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 14 of 72 De Weerd: I appreciate that. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. D. Finance Department: 1. Approve Bid Awards and Contracts for East Parking Lot for Phase V: Package 1: Terra West, Inc. for Sitework for $127,900.00 Package 2: Axelsen Concrete for Concrete for $28,720.00 Package 3: Sunshine Landscape for Landscaping for $57,317.37 Package 4: Tri-State Electric for Electrical for $67,540.00 De Weerd: Okay. Under our Finance Department. Mr. Watts. Watts: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. We are here to ask for approval of our bids for the phase five construction of the east parking lot for the City Hall project. On August 11th we went out for bid for this project and we received bids on August 28th. Our estimated construction budget was 500,000 dollars and we came in at $281,477.37. We have four packages to this phase. It's site work, which was -- the low bidder was Terra-West, Inc., for 127,900. For concrete it was Atchelson Concrete for 28,720. Package three was landscaping. That was -- the low bidder was Sunshine Landscaping for $57,317.37. And our electrical was package four. The low bidder was Tri-State Electric for 67,540 dollars. For a total of 281,477.37. I'd answer any questions. We also have Gene with Petra here as well to answer any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Certainly like to see these come that far under bid. Watts: It was a nice surprise, yes, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: What is the anticipated beginning date and completion date? Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 15 of 72 Watts: We are anticipating to start on the 8th. We are still awaiting -- well, actually, we have our consultant Terracon is working on -- working with DEQ to get our approval to move the dirt on the site. We have verbal approval from DEQ, which, basically, has told Terracon that they won't issue a written, because they are more interested in the groundwater and they don't anticipate that this is going to cause any issues with the groundwater, as long as we pave over it. So, we are anticipating to move forward on the 8th. De Weerd: Okay. Very good. Okay. Anything you would like to add? Okay. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the bid for our east parking lot phase five for the City Hall construction, Terra West, 127,900. Axelson Concrete Construction, 28,720. Sunshine Landscape, Incorporated, $57,317.37. Tri-State Electric for 67,540 dollars. For a total of $281,277.37 and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. De Weerd: Thank you. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda: De Weerd: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda. Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from August 12, 2008: AP 08-004 Request for City Council Review for a McDonalds Redbox (DVD kiosk) located in an approved C-N zone by Anna Canning, Meridian Planning Director - 3415West Cherry Lane: De Weerd: So, we will go to Item No. 8, which is a continued Public Hearing because of posting requirements on AP 08-004. I will start with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the McDonald's Redbox project. It's located at 3415 Cherry Lane, near Ten Mile intersection. The application before you tonight is a City Council review of a certificate of zoning compliance and that Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 16 of 72 certificate of zoning compliance was to install a Redbox movie DVD rental kiosk on the southwestern portion of the property. De Weerd: Hey, Anna, can you talk into the mike a little bit. You're not that loud. Canning: And that the Redbox is located just north of the entrance for the drive-up window. You can see it here on the site plan. The kiosk is about 24 square feet in area. We do have some photos. This isn't the facility. This is a different one. But this is the general look of the Redboxes. Staff approved the certificate of zoning compliance on June 26, 2008. And although the plans comply with current code, they are concerned that the proposed 25 hour use conflicts with information that was given the neighbors during talks with the developers and the builders when the McDonald's itself was being constructed. I requested City Council review to insure that the neighbors can express their concerns to Council. And with that I will answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for Mrs. Canning at this time? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: And this may be a question for the police department. If people are going to have access to it 24 hours a day, it would make sense to me, both for the benefit of the neighbors in the residential area behind it, but also for surveillance by police, that it actually be on the north side of the building. Has that been discussed? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Zaremba, we did talk to the owner about relocating the facility on the east side to be further away from the residents, but we never discussed the north site. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for staff? Rountree: Madam Mayor, given that question, the police chief is over there. Do you have any issues with the surveillance question? Lavey: Madam Mayor, Council, we don't really have any issue as far as where it's at. If it's going to be there, then, we will address it as it's there. It's just a matter of if it's something that's there, then, we know that we need to pay more attention to it. We like to encourage our officers to actually drive into the parking lots anyways and so I'd rather have them drive into the parking lot or get out and walk around than actually just drive by Cherry Lane and think that they have already checked it. So, I know it's an issue for some people, but as long as it's visible and as long as it's lit, I really don't have an opinion of where it's at on the building. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 17 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Would you like to add -- would you like to provide testimony? If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Seamons: My name is Scott Seamons. I'm with Baumgard Construction. Address is 880 West Amity in Boise. De Weerd: Thank you. Seamons: I'm here on behalf of Redbox. We are the general contractor that submitted the application. Redbox is intended for the McDonald's customers. The machine doesn't attract a large quantity of traffic outside of McDonald's customers. It's primarily used during the day for McDonald's customers. As far as averages go, after hours I know they -- the machine is operational 24 hours. They are averaging three to five rentals from 11:00 to 3:00 p.m., but -- depending on the site it's around. The intent of this machine isn't to disrupt the neighbors, it mainly just serves the McDonald's customers. De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: You meant 11:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m., didn't you? Seamons: Yes. 11:00 p.m. to 3:00 a.m. I'm sorry. Bird: Just wanted to clear that up. Seamons: Yeah. De Weerd: So, you have in -- you have two boxes at Albertson's. Seamons: Redbox currently does, I believe, yes. De Weerd: Okay. So, this would be by a different owner or franchise or -- Seamons: It's the same company as far as Redbox goes, yes. De Weerd: Okay. And so are you taking the three to five rentals during that time period from the experience of those two Redboxes? Seamons: No. It's based off of their -- on some other sites throughout the valley at McDonald's restaurants. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Is there a Redbox at the McDonald's on Corporate, isn't there? Up in that area? Seamons: Yes. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 18 of 72 Bird: And it's 24 hours, isn't it? Seamons: Yes. Yeah. All of the external machines are 24 hours. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions at this point? Okay. Thank you. Okay. This is a public hearing. I did not have anyone signed up to testify. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony? Okay. Yes, please. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record. Caldwell: My name is Steve Caldwell. I live at 3476 West Fir Creek Court in Meridian. My home is directly behind -- I share the longest property line with the McDonald's development. I would like to start out by putting a little context to how we got where we are today. I want to read from the Meridian City Council meeting minutes from March 15th, 2005. Several members were here, some were not. This was when the Conditional Use Permit was reviewed for what was, then, known as the Shops at Cheny Lane. The -- Brent Dixon, who was the applicant, gave some pretty thorough testimony as to what his plans were. Highlighted at the bottom is what I'd like to talk to. His statements, in the developer's words: In terms of type of use, I mentioned a bank. I'm also in discussions right now with a cell phone company. I could see an ice cream parlor coming in here. A Hallmark-type shop. A quick sandwich Subway-type use. There is some certain obnoxious uses that I would be willing to, as conditional approval, shy away from. I don't think this is the right spot for a fuel center. I don't think this is the right spot for a contemporary fast food restaurant in the sense of a McDonald's or a Taco Bell. As a condition of approval the Planning Commission asked if we would be willing to move the drive-thru right to here and we are willing to do so. So, he's speaking to some specifics about how the layout was proposed at that time. Not happily, but notwithstanding, as well as a condition of that there was some concern -- we are going to hear about that in a moment from some of the neighbors as far as noise and lights go. As some of these were similar concerns that were raised when Albertson's was originally approved several years ago and part of that was mitigated by the erection of a masonry wall that we have agreed to continue the wall up to the southern edge of the property and so, then, also remove the drive-thru. And, then, the meeting goes on to a bunch of other questions. So, just the context of the mere fact that the McDonald's is there. So, the developer was unable to fulfill his tenants as he originally proposed. Two and a half years later development started after he worked with the city to bring in McDonald's, which he stated in his original testimony was an obnoxious use. We have a McDonald's now. We can't get past that. The Redbox is yet an extension of their business operation to 24 hour operation and so I -- I'm also on the homeowners association board. I reviewed the request with the board members, so I'm here to speak on my behalf, as well as the homeowners association board and -- De Weerd: You want to add two minutes to that. Caldwell: -- current operation at the restaurant now is 11:00 p.m. weekdays, 1:00 a.m. weekends. What we are talking about is a 24 hour unsupervised vending operation Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 19 of 72 immediately adjacent to a residential neighborhood. We have concerns about lights, noise, a potential for loitering and vandalism. We have no proof of that. And increased traffic flow. There is two existing Redboxes already on the site at the Albertson's, which everyone discussed, which is completely shielded from the neighborhood. This Redbox will be immediately adjacent to and visible from the neighborhood. I discussed this with the homeowners association and we were in agreement and this -- I'll read for you the letter that I sent to Anna and Robert regarding the homeowner's association perspective on this. The letter I sent says: I discussed this with the HOA and we are in consensus that we do not want a 24 hour business operation immediately adjacent to our sub development. We are not opposed to a Redbox movie unit rental inside the McDonald's building where it is subject to normal business hours and under business supervision, but do strongly oppose a unit on the exterior of the building. An interior placement is also consistent with several other McDonald's in our area. A comment that's not in the letter here. The McDonald's that's by the Fred Meyer on Cheny Lane and Locust Grove, internal unit. The McDonald's in Eagle, interior unit. So, interior units are placed in McDonald's and so this is not an usual situation. And we are not opposed to them having a Redbox where it's under supervision, normal business hours. I closed the letter by saying: Please contact me if you wish to discuss this further. We are very happy that you sought our input and hope it's reflected in your decision. Please inform me of the outcome of this matter. And I understand that they have continued to pursue this and so, you know, we are here to voice our opposition to it. We did have traffic access, but the latest one I have photos of. These occur right on my back fence. Occurred the 21st of August. A rather significant one took two hours to clean up. I don't know if you want to see those. And I also have several photos of the -- the view from -- Ithought Ihad one here. How did I get here without it? So, I took some photos from the location of the Redbox unit and its adjacency to the neighborhood, as opposed to how the Redboxes are positioned at Albertson's. Completely shielded on the Albertson's side, but on our side they are immediately adjacent to our housing development and the homes of the neighborhood. De Weerd: Thank you. Caldwell: I think that's all I have to say. Thank you for the extended time. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Theasons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Daryl Theasons. I live at 3487 West Fir Creek, right next to Steve Caldwell. A lot of my points mimic what Steve says. Our main concern is the lighting that is going to be needed for security for this location. As of right now the lights are deemed, most of them are turned out for the Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 20 of 72 parking lot when the business closes. If the Redbox is put in, in order for it to be secure we feel that they would need to have lighting on this parking lot 24 hours -- or at least during dark. And that will be shining light into our bedroom window. As it is right now, those are extinguished, you know, at 11:00 p.m. week days and 1:00 p.m. on the weekends. Other things that we were concerned about is the late night traffic that's going to be driving through that parking lot. The main access to that Redbox, the driveway is right next to our fence. Parallel to our fence, so those cars that are coming in there will be driving right by our fence at all hours of the day and night with their music on, whatever. You know, right now that ends at 11:00 o'clock on the weekdays and that will not be the case if there is a 24 hour business there. Loitering in the parking lot. You know, right now it is unattractive for people to be loitering in that parking lot, because there is nothing to draw them there. We are afraid that if there is a 24 hour kiosk there that it will be more incentive for them to loiter there. There are two existing Redbox machines, as Steve mentioned, on the same property, but where they are shielded from the neighborhood up under the awning at the Albertson's. 'These will handle the three to five returns, rentals that are needed in those off business hours. I cannot see that two machines cannot handle the traffic flow from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 -- or 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., that there should be a machine that needs to be added to this McDonald's. And, again, we have no problem with -- with putting in a Redbox inside the location. It seems to work quite well for the McDonald's corporation at the Locust Grove and Fairview location. It's supervised -- it's still accessible during business hours and it would have no impact on our neighborhood, no additional lighting, no additional noise. That's -- again, we came before the Council to just state our opposition to a 24 hour exterior kiosk. De Weerd: Thank you. Chrisman: Mayor de Weerd and Councilmen. I think several of you are aware, know me by now. Mary Ann Chrisman. I live directly behind McDonald's and most of you are aware that -- Nary: Address, ma'am. De Weerd: Oh, I'm sorry. Nary: For the record. De Weerd: If you can -- Chrisman: I'm sorry. 3440 West Elm Creek. Directly behind McDonald's. And I think many of you are aware that I have been kind of battling with this McDonald's issue for a long time and it's a sore subject with many of the neighbors in Parkside Creek. This may appear to be a small situation with the Redbox, but it does impact us and I do speak for several of the neighbors along side that were not able to make it tonight as well. They are all opposed. I have not met one that was not opposed to having a box Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 21 of 72 there. I have -- I -have seen the two boxes in front of Albertson's and there are times where there is quite a crowd there and the later it is it seems like the younger the crowd is. And I have two teenagers and I'm amazed at how they want to run out at midnight and go rent a movie. I mean that just amazes me. But that's what they do. And if you remember, Mayor, we were concerned about the little bench and the seating area with the grass area at McDonald's. We wanted to get rid of that, because we didn't want to do anything to promote congregation of the kids and we feel that this Redbox -- it gives these kids an opportunity to go out late and rent movies in our backyard. Now, you may not be aware of this, but all of us that are anywhere remotely near the McDonald's can no longer ever sleep in in the mornings thanks to McDonald's. When they dump that dumpster in the moming, it is, what, from 6:00 -- say around 6:00 a.m. We all get a wake-up call. Right? We all get awake-up call around 6:00 to 6:30 a.m. Saturday moming, Sunday moming, every moming. And I could tell you it's very disheartening, because none of us can ever sleep in again and it's very loud. Now, we are wanting to put a Redbox out there to where kids can congregate lay at night and they do do it, because I have observed it. So, we are not going to be able to get to bed early, either. Now, that's not to say every one of them are going to be loud and noisy every night, but there are going to be nights that that is going to happen. I have seen it at Albertson's. So, we feel -- and we have all talked about it, that we don't have a problem with a Redbox within the structure itself. That's fine, because, then, it can be monitored. There is the time issue involved. There is not going to be the congregation. That's a different issue. So, we are comfortable with that. To have it outside is a real serious problem for us, because we feel that McDonald's itself is a poor location, because of where its -- the situation is located. Now to add a Redbox is just going to promote additional lighting, additional traffic, and additional kids congregate later at night. And if any of you have seen some of those, kids to congregate there very late. Thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Additional testimony? Hi. Chacamino: Hello. Mike Chacamino. I am vice-president of Baumgard Construction. De Weerd: You want to also pull that up and, then, state your -- Chacamino: Mike Chacamino. Vice-president of Baumgard Construction. I live at 2160 West Canalo Drive in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Chacamino: I have a unique perspective on this in that being involved with McDonald's and working with several of them and oftentimes late at night when we are doing work between shifts and whatnot, a lot of all minors I have observed. I have observed the Redboxes and how they -- how they are frequented during the evening. I have a it varies site to site and I have observed that it's --that the traffic and the impacts in the off hours has been pretty minimal. I have, honestly, never seen a congregation of teenagers around Redboxes, any of them. And I have been in several -- several stores Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 22 of 72 late at night. Usually what I'll see is I'll see a customer pull up, stare at it, car might be idling. Usually they shut it off. Headlights are facing towards the Redbox and they pick a movie and, then, move on. I had mentioned that I have a unique perspective, because I'm also a neighbor of this neighborhood. I don't live in the neighborhood. And I certainly am sensitive to their concerns. I wouldn't want to be woken up at night either. But being in the neighborhood and frequenting that McDonald's and that Albertson's quite a bit, I haven't ever observed anybody congregating there. The other thing I wanted to point out is that the Redbox does not -- got to remember this, does not require 24 hour lighting: It's self lit. I have been in several stores where the lights were dimmed because it was after hours and the store wasn't on and, yet, the Redbox -- its canopy was illuminated enough to allow people to come in and do their business. I don't feel traffic increase is a valid argument. If you're going to have two to three cars a night going in there utilizing this, maybe four, that can't be anymore of an increase than people just driving through there for whatever. reason. My big concem about this is -- and lempathize with the neighbors the process that they have gone through to get to this point and the perception, true or not, that they were misled, I would probably be a little frustrated, too, with that. However, my concem is that this debate about this Redbox is not about the Redbox, it's more about the McDonald's being in place. Accidents on Cheny slash Fairview, that's not a novel concept, that's a busy street with a large Albertson's in there and several other stores. I find it difficult to blame that on the McDonald's and I certainly do not see the Redbox application being relative to accidents on the street. It was mentioned -- there was mention of other McDonald's having Redboxes installed inside and there are several of them. However, they tend to be older stores that are -- have a Hitch or a spot that easily accommodates the inside Redbox and that's not the case of this store. That's all I have to say. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Yes, sir. Baker: Mayor, Council Members. My name is Rich Baker. I live at 3468 West Elm Creek Drive, Meiridian. I'm right behind the McDonald's and the Albertson's as well. And I would like to say that I'm with my fellow neighbors and I strongly oppose the Redbox at night. If there was only three or four people that were going to be going up there between 11:00 and 6:00 in the morning, then, they wouldn't really have a desire to have it in the middle of the night I wouldn't think. I think that definitely there will be more people that would go to the Redbox in the middle of the night and in addition to the -- to the noise problems with people just loitering there, we have a tendency of a lot of screeching and motorcycles as well that are really loud and I think that in addition to the -- just the kids being loud that will go there in the middle of the night, because I mean any kids that are -- you know, even two people that are going to go in there in the middle of the night, they are going to have a tendency to be loud, they are not going to be -- you know, if they are up that late they are not really concerned about the neighbors and in addition to that, you know, I have noticed that -- I have only lived there for five months, but that there is a lot of screeching and the motorcycles, they just are really loud and I feel like we will have a lot more of that going on in the middle of the night as well. So, again, I'm definitely, strongly opposed. I would hope that they would just put it inside. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 23 of 72 De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any additional testimony? Typically we don't have rebuttal from the -- but Council? . Bird: I don't care. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Whatever. Chrisman: Mary Ann Chrisman. I just want to make one quick comment. I do disagree with one comment the gentleman made and it's not to be argumentative, but I have personally witnessed massive amounts of people at the Redbox in front of Albertson's very late at night. Not every night, but I have seen it and Iwas -- and that's why I think they have added a second one, because at one time they had one and, then, they added a second one. I think it's because it couldn't handle the amount of people. So, I have personally -- and I go there all the time and I have personally seen large amounts of people standing around at the Redbox very late at night. So, I do disagree with that. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. If there is no further testimony, if the applicant would like to have wrap-up remarks. Final comments. No? Okay. Thank you. Council, any additional information needed at this point? Rountree: I don't need any. Other than some guidance from the planning administrator. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Yes, sir. Rountree: What's -- I guess the note I have to myself, what's the action from Council? You have asked us to review this, but you have said that it is consistent with code. So, what are our action choices? Canning: Mr. Nary and I were discussing that via a-mail and perhaps Mr. Nary can help me out. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Ithink -- I guess it sort of depends on what you want to do. I mean if -- some of the testimony is wanting either a limitation on that type of use adjacent to residential properties --Iwas trying to look at the code to see if we have -- in that particular type of zone if we have time limitations. Normally, unless done at the annexation stage there really isn't any time limitation on those. But if your concern is this is a use that's adjacent to the residential properties that isn't allowed in other parts of the city or currently isn't found in other parts of the city, we can certainly look at that if you would like us to take a look and see whether there is some restrictions that might apply. That's the only thing I can think -- see. I mean I think the Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 24 of 72 testimony I think is accurate, I mean most of the Redboxes that are in -- some of them are near residential properties are inside the stores, some of them that are in more commercial areas are outside the stores. I don't know if that's just a preference of the customers -- or of the property owners -- I have no idea. I know the testimony is correct, the one at McDonald's on Locust Grove and Fairview is in the store. The one at McDonald's by the freeway, both at Eagle Road and Meridian Road are outside the store. But, again, there is no residences that are adjacent to it. Right now these are found in limited areas. We don't have a lot of 24 hour uses in the city in general. We do at the Maverick at the comer of Cherry Lane and Linder, but there are no external uses to the facility. But, again, that's not where you're being asked to decide that. So, I don't know right off the top of my head in looking at the code if we have specific time requirements for these in our code or by the district. This one I don't believe is a neighborhood commercial district. I think that's what Mrs. Canning asked and I don't recall that this is a neighborhood commercial district. It is? Okay. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Any further questions from Council? Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: Well, Madam Mayor, that was a good response from a lawyer. Now, what did you tell me? Bird: Now condense it down. De Weerd: It's your decision. Nary: What you would like us to consider -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you would like us to look and see if what you're seeking is some time restrictions -- currently our time restrictions are done at the time we annex the property, we make that maybe a condition of a development agreement. For example, the Walgreens that's across the street at Ten Mile and Cherry Lane has a time restriction that was done at the time that we rezoned that property, but there isn't a general time restriction in our city code in all circumstances and I think Mrs. Canning and I were both trying to see if there was a specific one by this zone, but I'm not aware that there is. Mrs. Canning seems to be looking rather intently, but I'm not aware that we have a specific time restriction otherwise for this type of use. If you'd like us to craft that, I guess we would like a week for us to figure out if that's something we can do in our code. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: We have a number of things in our code and I guess they are all over in different sections that limit what can be done within 300 feet of residences, what can be Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 25 of 72 done within 100 feet of residences. I'm not sure this distance -- I'm sure it's within 300 feet. I don't know if it's within 100 foot. I don't know. Legal or not, I don't think it's fair to put it there. It is an additional drive-up business. I would think that would require a CUP and if that's the way we need to go I'd ask that we pursue that. But it would seem to me it either needs to be inside or on the north side of the building. It's not appropriate to me to have it near the residences. Someway we need to get that done. Rountree: Anna, if you would put up the first slide. I think it was an exterior shot showing the location. Okay. The first photo. Excuse me. Thank you. You have to remember who this is coming from, but it seems to me that to put -- and there is nobody here from McDonald's, apparently, other than our contractors. Well, this question would be for McDonald's. Is the next thing we are going to be seeing from the McDonald's corporation is the World Bank of McDonald's in a drive-thru banking situation? It appears we have got a banking situation going on there. So, is that an approved use? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a photo from a different location. Rountree: Oh, this isn't at that location? Canning: No. Rountree: Okay. Canning: This is not. This would be a stand alone kiosk and it's unfortunate that this is the photo we have, because I believe the one at Cherry is more attractive than this one. It's a stand alone kiosk as well, but -- Rountree: Okay. Obviously, it wouldn't be this location. It doesn't have a Redbox. I stand corrected. But the banking activity is yet another issue. Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, with regard to the -- what I was intently looking for is we did pass an ordinance recently -- it's not on the codified pages yet for some reason and I don't remember exactly how it goes, but the C-N district does have time limitations, but I believe it's only in the purpose statement and the idea of putting in the purpose statement is that we could make arrangements with folks as they were annexing to put that into the DA provisions, because the existing uses to put a limitation on them didn't seem the appropriate way to go when we passed that ordinance change. So, that's what I was looking for to verify that, but that is my recollection. I can't verify it at this moment. Regardless, that ordinance codification change was not done when this application came in, it had happened since we accepted the CZC for the Redbox. Rountree: Thank you. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 26 of 72 Rountree: A question for the representative for McDonald's, if you would. De Weerd: If you will, please, just state your name and address for the record. Darmody: Sure. It's Rick Darmody. 12959 North Andy's Gulch, Boise, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: You have heard a number of testimonies this evening. My question relates to your willingness or ability to explore the Redbox in an interior location. Darmody: As was stated by one of the representatives from Baumgard, the design of the new building, which is what is on Cheny Lane, does not as easily accommodate the inside location. The other reason to pursue the outside location isn't so much to get late night transactions, as the neighbors are concerned about, which I understand, as it is just to make it more visible so people know that it's there. The two locations that you're referring to that have -- that the neighbors have referred to that have inside locations -- excuse me -- inside Redbox locations are the only two that we have in the valley and just happens one's in Meridian and one's nearby in Eagle. The one in Eagle does significantly fewer transactions than a McDonald's restaurant of similar volume. The one at Locust Grove does slightly less, not significantly less, but it's also right at the front door as you walk in. So, that helps the visibility as well. I would be happy to pursue that with Redbox. It's definitely not Redbox's preference to pursue an inside machine if they don't have to and it wouldn't be my preference, because it takes up space in the lobby and I think it detracts from the overall ambiance in the restaurant, so that wouldn't be my choice either. And if I could just address the picture, I -- Councilman Rountree, I apologize, I didn't understand what you were asking, but this picture is taken at a co-branded Chevron - McDonald's location and those signs are Chevron's signs, to give an example of the Redbox, it just so happens that they have some signs posted on the wall there that referenced their ATM and apparently they sell money orders as well. I wasn't aware of that. So, that was the reference to the banking. It has to do with the Chevron side. Rountree: John's in the banking business. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Would you consider or be able to put it on the north side of the building? Darmody: We haven't explored that option. One thing that was done during construction, because it was, to be honest, much cheaper to do it during construction, was to put in the infrastructure to accommodate the Redbox, the weight of it and things. It needs reinforced concrete and we didn't put it on the north side, but we could look at Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 27 of 72 that, I suppose, putting it towards the front on the -- I'm song, around the comer on the front the building. It will require some additional construction to make that happen. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Going to the north side there, that's your drive-thru? As you come out you can either go right or left? Isn't there a driveway there on the north side? Darmody: Are you speaking the north -- can we look at this -- can I approach the picture? De Weerd: Yeah. And you can take that microphone right there. Darmody: Sony, I'm not very tall. Yeah. Right there. Is that the side of the building that we are referencing? Bird: Yeah. Darmody: Well, the drive -- the drive lane goes on the east side of the building and, then, there is a decision making process right there at the end of the drive-thru lane after you have received your food to go left to that exist or I suppose around the building or to the right through Albertson's parking lot. Bird: Okay. Is there room between there -- between the building and the drive-thru to -- because Mrs. Chrisman's right, I have seen -- during the day I have seen big stacks at the Redbox -- at a lot of the Redboxes, so I fear for the safety aspect if you had -- if you put it on the north, as long as that's going to be a drive-thru and think it has to be a drive-thru, because everybody don't want to come out through Albertson's parking lot. Darmody: I'm song, I'm not sure I understand the concem. Bird: Well, do you have enough room between the building and the drive-thru? Darmody: The kiosk would fit on the sidewalk, I believe. I would have to go with Baumgard representatives on the north side. Bird: Okay. Darmody: There is a grassy area there as well before you get to the drive lane across the front of the building. My only concem there would be parking as well. People pulling up to quick drop off a movie and parking in the drive lane. We wouldn't want that. That was initially why we picked the location back here, is because there is parking there. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 28 of 72 Bird: I understand. Darmody: Can I address the Albertson's Redbox briefly? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Darmody: Just in terms of the groups that are there renting movies late a night, I don't have numbers to back this up and I'm not related really to Redbox, other than to partner with them on these kiosks, but they have indicated to me that the Redbox at that Albertson's is one of the busiest Redboxes that they have in the state of Idaho. Bird: I can believe that. Darmody: Not just in the surrounding area, but it's a very busy -- which is -- to Mrs. Chrisman's comments why they put a second one there and, then, also why they would like to pursue one at a new McDonald's location, because they want to spread that demand out a little bit and provide better service for their customers. De Weerd: Well, I guess probably my kids have been some that have congregated around it and they can't just go in ones, they have to -- to group around to make a team decision on which movie they are going to rent. So, it depends on the age group. I guess, you know, your representative stated that you wanted to serve your customers and I can understand that. Your customers can be served during your hours of operation and inside -- and having been part of the discussions prior to tonight's meeting, there was a commitment not to do the 24 hour activity and so I'm a little hung up on that and I know that you inherited the testimony of the developer, but these are the kind of things during annexation that would have been put on there had a certain use been anticipated, but because of that testimony that was never requested by the neighbors, nor thought of by Council, because of the statements that were made. So, the 24 hour operation to me is -- is a big deal and when you can go to get three to five of your movies just right on the other side of the parking lot, that makes more sense and certainly I have seen -- because I have gone to the McDonald's at Main Street, because the line was too big at Ten Mile and people do idle their cars. There is -- there is some people that just don't like to stand and wait in line outside their car and that would concern me as well if I was a neighborhood. So, for me, this makes sense inside your building and so it can serve your customers during the hours that you're open. Darmody: Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I got one suggestion, too. On your kiosk you can make those so that they could be lockable. So, if you wanted to keep it outside, then, when you're closed you close them up, too. •There is folding gates, there is all kinds of things you can add to it. So, it Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 29 of 72 don't detract from your inside. You get too much inside and you get into the life safety of your occupancy and how they can get out. So, it's really beyond me why anybody needs to be go getting a movie after 11:00 o'clock anyway, but -- De Weerd: Talk to our kids. Bird: My kids wouldn't. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: We didn't have it when my kids were growing up. Anyway, I would have no problem with it being outside. I do have a problem with 24 hours. But I think you could put a gate or something on that that was automatically locked up. As you close up, it gets closed right at the same time. And that way have got it outside during the day, so you're not interfering with your inside customers, but you're not open 24 hours. That's an idea. Darmody: And that would be something that I'd have to take back to Redbox. This is a really unique relationship in that it is their kiosk, but it operates at different businesses, obviously. It operates at Albertson's. I think a few Mavericks have them and, obviously, they have a partnership with McDonald's, but we don't design or we come to an agreement on the placement, so as not to inconvenience the customers that don't want to be inconvenienced by it inside, outside, those types of things. So, it's not my decision ultimately to put a gate on it, although that's not a bad idea. I don't know that they have the capacity to do that, but I could explore that with them. Bird: If I was the manager of a McDonald's store and they were going to interfere with my customers coming in and out and I'm working off of percentage profits, I wouldn't want it inside. I wouldn't want it there period. Because I'm sure they are not getting any part of that. But that's my own personal opinion. I don't -- I'm like the Mayor, I don't see why we have to have a 24 hour Redbox there at that location when we have got two of them over at Albertson's. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Darmody: Thanks. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we close the -- well, I'm going to move that we continue this public hearing and direct staff to see if there is anything as it relates to the neighborhood commercial that can restrict the hours of operation. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 30 of 72 De Weerd: Mr Rountree, would that include if restrictions were put on if it were inside or outside, if you could restrict use if it was outside? Because I think the owner is -- Rountree: Madam Mayor, my motion relates to what we can do. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: I could make a motion to have the applicant do that as well, I suppose, but I don't know that they would necessarily abide by my motion. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: I'd second it. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and asecond -- Rountree: And that would be to continue it until the 9th. De Weerd: Okay. So, the motion is to continue this item to the 9th for specific information from staff; is that correct? Rountree: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 9: Public Hearing: VAR 08-007 Request for a Variance to UDC 11-3H- 46.2.a, which prohibits new approaches directly accessing a state highway, to allow aright-in only access to the site from SH 55/Eagle Road for Jacksons Food Store #105 by Jacksons Food Stores, Inc. - 3291 East Pine Avenue: Item 10: Public Hearing: VAC 08-003 Request to Vacate note #6, which prohibits direct lot access to Eagle Road and Pine Avenue, on the recorded plat for Porky Park Subdivision No. 1 for Jacksons Food Store #105 by Jacksons Food Stores, Inc. - 3291 East Pine Avenue: De Weerd: Okay. So, this will be continued until next week. Okay. Items 9 and 10 are a public hearing on VAR 08-007 and VAC 08-003. I will open these two public hearings with staff comment. Wafters: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the next item before you is a request by Jackson Food Stores for a variance to UDC 11-3H-4B.2.a, which prohibits new approaches directly accessing a state highway other than at the half mile between Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 31 of 72 arterial roads to allow aright-in only access to the site from State Highway 55, North Eagle Road. With the variance request is a vacation request to vacate plat note number six on the Porky Park Subdivision No. 1, final plat, which prohibits direct lot access to the site from State Highway 55, North Eagle Road, and direct access to Pine, unless approved by ACHD. You can see the site is located here on the southeast comer of the Pine Street and Eagle Road at 3291 East Pine Street. This is an aerial view of the site. To the north is the Metro Express Car Wash, zoned C-G. To the east is the Country Inn and Suites Hotel, zoned C-G. To the south are industrial businesses, zoned I-L. And to the west is vacant undeveloped property, zoned I-L. That's part of the future Pine Bridge development. A little history on this site for the Jacksons. Last year in 2007 a similar variance and vacation request was denied for a right tum only access from Eagle Road to the site. Plat note number six was also requested to be vacated at that time. Their request is essentially the same. As you can see here from the two site plans, the one on the left is the plan that's currently proposed. The one on the right is the previous design. The design that they are requesting approval of now -- they are proposing a right tum lane onto Pine from Eagle Road and they are proposing aright-in only access to the site from Eagle. This time instead of just curving directly into the site and dropping into the parking area, it's -- there is a longer decel lane and stacking area that goes to the north further and, then, drops out into a drive aisle. The applicant has managed to address pretty much all the concerns that Council and staff had previously with the design. Like I said, the new design allows for longer decel and stacking area. It shouldn't affect trafFic now on Eagle Road as much, you know, due to slow downs and possible rear end accidents from that turn lane. The turn lane onto Pine is consistent with ITD's long range design for Eagle Road. There is no written testimony on this application. Staff is recommending approval of the variance request per the findings in the staff report. Staff recommends approval of the vacation request only if Council approves the variance request and grants aright-in only access to the site. Staff is not supportive of striking note number six entirely, but is supportive of striking the portion that prohibits access to Eagle Road. Staff will stand for any questions Council may have at this time. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff at this point? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: It's a little blurry, but it appears that the right-in only off Eagle Road, just so the record's clear, the arrow looks to me like that's an exit and a right only. It's an interesting design there. So, is that aright-in and right-out as well? Wafters: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, if you're inquiring about this access right here -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 32 of 72 Rountree: Yes. Wafters: -- it's only a right in, It's not aright-out. Single lane. Rountree: So, that arrow is pointing the wrong direction. Wafters: It appears to me that it's pointing the right direction. Are you asking about this one right here? Rountree: Yes. It looks to me like it's pointing towards Eagle Road. Wafters: This one right here or this one? Rountree: No. That one right there. Wafters: It's pointing -- it's pointing up into the lane. Rountree: Okay. Then it's bluny. I just want to make sure that it's -yeah. It's a right-in only. So, just to make sure. That's the only question I have. De Weerd: Okay. Anything else for staff at this point? Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Jeffrey Wardle. My address is 877 Main Street. Here on behalf of Jacksons Food Stores. We are in agreement with the staff report. As staff indicated, this design is -- has been significantly redesigned and we have worked at length with ITD over the course of the last three years to come up with a design which is acceptable to them within the confines of the rights that were granted by ITD to this property owner years ago when Eagle Road was initially widened. Tonight we have Joe Canning of B&A Engineers with us, as well as Mr. Jackson. The record is detailed. You have had this application before you previously. The difference that you have tonight is that you have complete approval by ITD of this design, that this design has been worked on with ITD for months to come up with a design which is consistent with their ultimate build out of this intersection and is also consistent with all of the concerns that you previously addressed with respect to stacking, road speed, and safety. As a result, this whole project as depicted with the right turn lane, the decel lane, the enhanced taper and the right-in only, would be constructed by Jacksons at its sole cost and expense. We can get into more depth as to the administrative record. The proceedings with ITD were detailed. They were lengthy. They resulted in a petition for judicial review, which resulted in a remand back to ITD for further consideration of Jackson's application. Jacksons brought this back to you with a modification~from what was originally proposed during the pendency of that and that explains part of I think why you did not have a full and complete presentation previously, because ITD -- ITD still had discomfort. ITD has come to the recognition that this is an acceptable design as evidenced by the information that's in the packet before you. Don't really want to take anymore time, unless you have specific questions about this, or the administrative record or any of the other factual or legal issues that relate to this. We believe that Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 33 of 72 everything that staff has stated is correct. We are in agreement with their recommendations, including their proposed modification on the request for vacation of the plat note, that the portion of the plat note regarding ACHD's requirements remain. And with that I will stand for any questions, as will the members of our party here tonight. De Weerd: Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Jeff, show me how a semi comes in -- and I think the diesel pumps are down at the very south end of the deal. What's their route through there? Wardle: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, currently there is -- there is no access here. Bird: No. No. I mean on the new access. Wardle: On the new access -- as set forth in the record and as Jacksons has previously offered, we are amenable to a restriction on diesel trucks coming in this way, because the fact of the matter is that the way that this is engineered to insure that there is adequate stacking and to insure that there is adequate deceleration, we don't think that diesel trucks would come in this way, that it's too tight of a radius to come in that way. As depicted right here, this is where the tanks are currently, so to serve them currently trucks come in this way, and, then, to be able to get back out if they are turning west on Pine, they come back to this point, which is a full turn. De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council? Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. These two items, Items 9 and 10, are public hearings. Any public testimony on this item? Okay. Council, there is no public testimony. Any questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: Any further comment from the applicant? Rountree: Madam Mayor, we do have an Ada. County Highway Commissioner here. I'm wondering if she would like to speak to this subject and I guess I have a question for Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 34 of 72 them. Is it yet to be on their agenda for consideration of the change on Pine. I think you have acted on it once. Amold: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, Rebecca Amold, Ada County Highway District Commissioner. I'm not aware of us acting on this application, because it's an access on a state highway. However, I will give you my opinion as one of five commissioners. I think this is a much better design and access than what currently exists. Although we don't control the state highway portion, we do control Pine Street and anything that will get cars off of Eagle Road into that facility before they get to that intersection is an improvement, because it places fewer cars into the intersection and causes less congestion at certain hours of the day. I happen to be a customer there occasionally and it would save me some time, some gas and some frustration if I could get in sooner, instead of going through the intersection and looping back around. I would be happy to answer any questions you have. Rountree: Thank you. I just knew you had something to say. Amold: No. I was strictly a spectator. De Weerd: Just glad she's there and -- Rountree: I'm just glad you're here. Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: If we don't need anything else, I move we close the public hearing on VAR 08-007 and VAC 08-003. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 9 and 10. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Maybe I should have asked this before we closed the public hearing. I don't know who I would ask it of. But their drawing depicts two northbound lanes on Eagle Road, plus the tum lane that they will be adding. Totally separate discussion about Center Cal and the activities going on north of here, they are offering to add a third travel lane. This does not accommodate that. I don't know what the status of that is. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 35 of 72 We believe we have approved a project subject to some of that happening. I don't know whom I should ask that question. What is happening with there being three lanes in each direction at this point? De Weerd: Well, I'm glad you waited until the public hearing was closed. Bird: Yeah. Zaremba: That was wrong. De Weerd: So, staff cannot answer it? I don't know if the applicants can point, but in order to ask the applicant we'd have to reopen the public hearing. Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I would move that we reopen the public hearing. I would make note that nobody has left the room since we closed it. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. We have a motion and a second to reopen the public hearing on Items 9 and 10. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Wardle: Madam Mayor, Jeffrey Wardle, counsel for Jacksons. Certainly not here to speak for ITD, but the issues and concerns with Center Cal have, obviously, been part of the discussion with ITD and with respect to this design as you can see, there certainly is going to be need -- and I think the discussions with Center Cal envision that additional turn lane, as you indicated, Councilman Zaremba. However, this is fully occupied and this can be fully developed within the existing right of way. To the extent that additional right of way and additional lanes are going to be needed, it's my understanding from our discussions with ITD that they will look to the west, because of the additional right of way that exists over there and if they have to realign and restripe, they will do that. We have had that issue and question with ITD at length previously and not to be glib and be the attorney, as ITD told us, they said, well, you were the first one to the courthouse, so we'd have to look at your application in the process. We recognize that Center Cal is there. We recognize that Center Cal has proposed certain improvements. But to the extent that we have come forward with an application which is consistent with ITD's intended build out for the eastern section here, we think that we satisfied those requirements as set forth with ITD's statements that are in the record. But that said, to the extent that there are additional turn -- additional lanes, there is far more right of way available on the west side of Eagle Road than there currently is on the east side. De Weerd: And, Councilman Zaremba, I believe when we looked at that comdor that is the direction they were going, because they would have to, then, move a very expensive power pole, if I remember the -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 36 of 72 Zaremba: The east side has power poles, as I recall we well. De Weerd: Right. Yeah. Wardle: Councilman Zaremba and Members of the Council, that is -- that is part of the issue as to why we have moved this as far south here. As you know, there are those very large power poles that are quite large, you know, we are talking several hundred thousand dollars apiece to move each one and that kind of confines the eastern boundary of the right of way and that would force everything to go to the west anyway. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Zaremba: Thank you. No. That helps. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Wardle: Thank you. Anymore questions? Zaremba: I move we close the pubic hearing on these two items. Rountree: Second again. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close Items 9 and 10. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: It we don't have anymore discussion, I would move that we approve VAR 08-007, a variance to the UDC 11-3H-4B.2.a, to a right-in, right-out with the new design and to include all staff and applicant comments. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Yes, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I believe the maker of the motion said make aright-in, right-out. Bird: Oh. I'm sorry. Right-in only. I'm sorry. Yeah. Thank you, David. Rountree: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 37 of 72 Bird: Before I vote I want to take and tell this applicant -- as you know I wasn't for it the first time around and you certainly went back and redesigned this and did a nice job, so -- Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Do we have to -- we have to enact upon the -- De Weerd: You have to do Item 10. Bird: I move we approve VAC 08-003 and include all staff and applicant comment. De Weerd: And that motion was to vacate the piece of number six that has been discussed; correct? Bird: Yes. As in the note. De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Discussion, Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Just to clarify. We are not revising how the note refers to Pine Street. Bird: No. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 08-001 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.06 acres from the RUT & R1 zoning districts in Ada County to the C-G zoning Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 38 of 72 district for Overland Village by Relo Development - 3330 East Overland Road: Item 12: Public Hearing: VAC 08-001 Request for a Vacation of the existing right- of-way of S. Rackham Way for Overland Village by Relo Development - 3330 East Overland Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Items 11 and 12 are public hearings on AZ 08-001 and VAC 08-001. I will open these two public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Overland Village project. It's located on the northeast comer of Overland Road and Eagle Road and the annexations before you tonight are annexation and zoning -- I said the annexations before you tonight, didn't I. The applications before you tonight are annexation and zoning and a vacation. The highlights of the proposed development include the annexation and zoning of 9.06 acres to C-G zoning and, then, approval of the commercial zoning would allow the property to develop with retail office and restaurant uses in the future. The applicant has not submitted a subdivision application at this time, but intends to do so at a later date. However, the applicant has submitted a concept plan for how the subject property may develop and elevations for what the future buildings will look like and staff has reviewed both the concept plan and the elevations and has recommended a DA to the Council. The DA should include at a minimum the following: The site and buildings on the site shall comply with design review and these are shortened to make this conversation a little less lengthy. The applicant must substantially comply with conceptual site plan and building elevations. They will construct a minimum of two and a maximum of four buildings on the site. No footprint for a single building shall exceed 20,000 square feet and, further, no building shall exceed four stories in height, with a maximum height of 65 feet. Any drive-thru on the site needs CU approval. Direct access to or from this site from Eagle Road shall be prohibited. Access to the site shall be provided from one full access point from Overland via Rackham Way and one right-in access point to the site from Overland Road, as depicted on the concept plan. The Rackham Way access may be limited to right-in, right-out only in the future. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway will be required and the applicant shall construct a public stub street from Rackham Way to the west easement boundary of the Eight Mile Creek to allow for future connectivity to the east and access to the signalized Overland Silverton intersection. So, what that means is that they will stub here for eventual crossing of a bridge that will come down to this signalized intersection. Any work or improvement within the floodway or floodplain shall require a floodplain development application with Public Works and Five Mile Creek, which runs along the north boundary and the Eight Mile Creek, which runs along the east and north boundaries of the property, shall be protected through the development process. Improvements along the creeks are encouraged as development amenities. The requested vacation tonight is for approval -- would allow the applicant to do a land swap with ACRD and to reconstruct Rackham Way to Overland Road further to the east. Currently it is in this location and they will relocate it to the east. I do have some elevations for you. The Commission recommended approval at their -- at their June 5th Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 39 of 72 public hearing. They also conducted hearings on February 21st, March 20th, May 1st, May 15th, and June 5th. Summary of the public hearing. Tamara Thompson and Gary Allen spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in opposition, commented, or provided any written testimony. Key issues of discussion by the Commission included the necessity of a bridge across the Eight Mile Creek to provide connectivity to and from the parcel to the east. The disproportionate share of the cost of a bridge for the subject property in comparison to larger adjacent properties. And possibility of putting a sunset clause on the road trust for the cost of constructing a bridge across the Eight Mile Creek in the event that that property to the east doesn't develop within a certain time period. The key Commission changes to stafFs recommendation were to modify the DA provisions to allow buildings up to four stories in height, instead of three, and up to 65 feet. The written testimony since this staff report. You have received a letter from Gary Allen with regard to DA provision K, which reads: The applicant shall construct a public stub street from Rackham Way to the west easement boundary of the Eight Mile Creek to allow for future connectivity to the east and access to the signalized Overland - Silverstone intersection. The applicant shall submit a road trust to ACHD for half the cost of construction at the bridge over the Eight Mile Creek to provide interconnectivity between the subject site and the property to the east prior to the first occupancy being granted on this site. So, they are asking that the last sentence be struck. Outstanding issues for City Council, that is -- the primary one I just mentioned. There is a secondary one. If Council supports the Commission's recommendation to allow buildings up to four stories in height, up to 65 feet, the Council may want to see revised building elevations, since only one and two story buildings are shown on the elevations that they have submitted. I have also wanted to let you know about the condition of approval from the fire department and it ties to the road trust issue. The fire department has been very concemed about the full access for the realigned Rackham Way being potentially shut off in the future and them having only right-in, right-out access to that property and that's why they have advocated for the road trust for the future, hoping to get that bridge. So, they are a little bit concemed about the -- the road trust potentially going away, as stated in Mr. Allen's letter. And with that I will answer any questions Mayor and Council may have. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I don't know if these elevations and design details are something that's just out there that you can extract off your computer, but I think they are strikingly similar to the ones we saw last week for the comer of Victory and Eagle and probably my same favorite store. And I'm not too crazy about that, but I think the DA stipulation talks about shall comply with design review. I would like to see that language and we can talk about it as we go through here, but reflect that it -- it be consistent with the -- the new design guidelines, even though they may not have been passed at this point in time. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 40 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. Any other -- or any questions for staff at this time? Okay. Applicant? Allen: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Gary Allen. My address is 601 West Bannock in Boise. I'm here representing Cameron Investments, which is the assignee of the original applicant in this case. They are the actual owners of the property. We agree with all of the conditions of approval that have been proposed, save the one that staff mentioned. I'm going to spend my time talking about that. This is a -- first of all, this is a -- if we could start with this. This is a site where a development is appropriate and the city wants it. The development area of the site is 4.77 acres to 9.06 acres and includes the right of way on Eagle and Overland to the center line. So, this is a small park -- if you see up here, this is a -there is an 85 acre undeveloped area all around here, all of which will be served by the accesses we are going to talk about in this area. So, some preliminary planning has been done for the surrounding properties, but there is nothing yet proposed and all of those properties are -- have already been annexed into the city. If I could get the next slide up, please. Can you go to the next -- there we go. The site plan. The development is appropriate to the area and to your plans. It's consistent with your Comp Plan goal of mixed use commercial in this area. The site is large enough for the proposed uses and if you could put the next one up. This shows you how the right of way will be moved here. This corrects a defect in the original construction of Rackham Way, which was done by ITD. It moves the Rackham entrance to align with the Silverstone entrance across -- across Overland and it's now an appropriate distance from the Eagle -Overland intersection where previously it was outside of standards. ACHD has approved the access scheme and I'll discuss the details of that in a moment. We have already talked about the elevations a little bit. There was a question about that. We think this project will be an asset to the city and the area. This is the same architect as the project you saw last week at Victory and Eagle, but these are just -- are conceptual ideas. Could you put the -- there we go. These are just a conceptual idea of what the buildings could look like. Obviously, we need to go through design review and meet your standards and that process and so that's where issues about the design can be resolved. We think the uses will be appropriate here, small retail shops, potentially a bank with a quality commercial design that will be subject to your design review. We have large landscape setbacks, multi-use pathways, and the park and ride that's already on Rackham Way will remain. Could we go back to the vicinity map now. The difficulties with this site are the accesses. Because of the -- could we go all the way back to the overhead. There we go. You can't get any access off of Eagle Road because of the proximity to the freeway entrance there. On the north you have got Five Mile Creek running across there. There is an existing crossing there that -- it makes it -- and because of the way that -- the culvert's constructed there and under Eagle Road, they are undersized and so it increases the size of the floodway behind them, so it's going to be very difficulty to increase that entrance -- that entrance there, so you have got access constraints, but you do have an access up to the north property. On the east side you have got Eight Mile Creek. The property runs -- boundary runs right up the edge of the right of way, but there is no part of this property that is part of that Eight Mile Creek right of way. And, then, to the south you're close to the Overland -Eagle Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 41 of 72 intersection and so the only access that's appropriate is the one that will be here at Rackham and, then, here at the -- where the existing Rackham is there is a right-in driveway that's proposed. If I could -- we could go to the site plan now. That's one click. Thank you, Anna. But despite all of these difficulties, ACHD has gone ahead and approved the proposed access and let me explain the access proposal. There is an ACHD -- a letter from ACRD in your packet that talks about what happens at Rackham Way in terms of restrictions there, which is kind of at the heart of what we are talking about. This relocated Rackham Way is proposed as full access interchange, without -- and ACHD has no plans to change it from that and they have said in a letter that it would be your restricted only if ACRD determines that full access poses a safety hazard and that a connection is provided at the light at Silverstone Way. So, ultimately, down here there will be a development up here that will allow something to come over and connect into here. I'll talk about that a little bit later as well. Aright-in driveway is provided here to take some of the pressure off of Rackham Way and, then, you have this access to the north, which is a -- which is off site, but via an existing crossing of the Five Mile area to the properties to the north. Furthermore, we have agreed to provide a stub street to our property line here off of Rackham to the Eight Mile right of way boundary to provide a possible future connection to this property to the east. This is a separate ownership from the other side of the canal. So, the remaining issue that we have got is that the fire department asserts that access may become difficult for emergency vehicles if ACRD places restrictions on Rackham Way in the future. If you could go back one. I want to go back to the aerial there. So, here is what we have for fire department access now. Your primary responder is down here in this area, can come up here in this way to the site. The secondary responder comes this way, down Eagle, up Overland, into Rackham and the tertiary responder comes up Overland from Boise and into this area. So, the fire department has access through all of those areas and all of those meet your response goals. So, the heart of the issue is that the fire department would like an access to this properly from the Silverstone light, which is here. Now, we'd like that, too. But the problem is that our property's not adjacent to that light and there is -- no development's been proposed on the adjacent properties. So, the solution that we have -- after meeting several times with the fire department, is to require the applicant to place money in the ACHD road trust, sufficient funds to construct half of a bridge across the Eight Mile Canal here to this lower property that is south of the Five Mile Creek and because -- but the problem is because of that expanded floodway that you have got there, because the other culverts are undersized, the bridge would cost approximately a million dollars, making Cameron's share 500,000 dollars or over 100,000 dollars an acre. Now, we very seriously take the -- we take the fire department's concerns very seriously and have tried very hard to resolve this, but we do believe that the fire department's request is unreasonable, because ACHD has agreed to maintain an emergency vehicle access and you can see by the letter we have provided in your packets that they say even if they think there has to be restrictions on Rackham Way here, that they are willing to insure that there is a left-in access allowed for the fire department. So, we think that there is -- you know, that there has been a good accommodation there and, frankly, the fire department's approach kills the project. We cannot afford 100,000 dollar an acre additional cost and nor could any other project that you could imagine that would be on this property. So, as set forth in our letter, here Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 42 of 72 are our problems with the fire department's approach. First, it far exceeds our proportionate share of the benefit of the bridge. We feel we are already doing our share. If we could go to the site plan. By relocating Rackham Way -- some of this doesn't serve our project at all, especially up here. We still have to rebuild that road and, secondly, we provide a stub street to the east, which meets your normal policies of what our obligation is as the property owner. Now, any crossing that's built here or across the Five Mile is -- serves the entire 85 acre undeveloped area there, of which Cameron is only about five percent, yet we are being asked to pay 50 percent of the cost. Now, it's also unduly burdensome -- we can't bear that 100,000 per acre cost and it's unfair to impose it when other properties get far more benefit. Now, if we could look at the -- slide number five, which is the master plan for the area. So, even though there aren't any developments -- submitted development plans, we think the property -- the area around here is going to develop something like this, so our properly is just this little comer here. And so we have provided this part of the road and we think that what's very likely to happen is that the owner of this property will build a crossing across Five Mile, instead of across the Eight Mile and that, then, the connection is going to come up here and, then, access will be provided here. Anything that happens here is, you know, pretty much up to this property owner here and they would have to see a significant benefit in this area in order to consider doing that, but they already get at it -- you know, good access this way. It's going to be hard to justify that million dollar cost down on this area. So, we think that it is unnecessary to set aside that kind of property when we don't -- you know, when it may be totally unnecessary. There are also practical problems with the approach. The road trust is not designed for this. We can't insure that the money would be earmarked for this and not used for something else. There is no provision for a return of the money for payment of interest if it's not used and no deadline on when the money has to be spent. So, for these reasons we ask you to approve the project with the conditions proposed by the staff, but that a portion of section 10-A-1 K of the conditions of approval be deleted and we have provided the specific language in your handouts. So, with that I would be happy to answer any questions that you have. De Weerd: Council, questions? Bird: I have none. De Weerd: I guess, Anna, can you go back to the site plan. Yeah. That's good enough. Do you know the problem that you will inherit here? This is the -- a Park & Ride -- where is it, right in here? Rountree: Right there. De Weerd: That whole road is part of the parking lot, so -- and I don't know if you have been out there and seen that, but how do you -- your development will be accommodating additional cars by taking that away, unless they just -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 43 of 72 Allen: By parking -- people park along the side of the road, is that what you're saying, Madam Mayor? De Weerd: I mean it's almost full. The roadway. In addition to the parking lot. So, because of that Park & Ride, those cars are going to park somewhere. Allen: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I -- you know, I assume the owner is going to police the parking within their parking lot and that -- you know, so maybe that means that their -- ACHD ought to be accommodating some expansion of the lot, but I think this gives us abetter opportunity -- I mean, first of all, it fixes the alignment of that road, which is a big problem. I mean it's way too close to the intersection now for an uncontrolled intersection and, you know, to the extent there are -- there is too much demand for that parking -- Park & Ride lot, this gives a better chance to regulate that. So, it's a so, it goes to appropriate places and, then, if there is, in fact, too much demand, then, you know, ACRD or ITD should consider expanding the lot. But, you know, if -- we understand that that's our neighbor. De Weerd: Okay. Well, I'm not sure if that's the answer I was looking for, because as a taxpayer I kind of like that we don't have to expand that parking lot and they can just use the road to park. So, I just wondered if you had considered the problem that you would be inheriting and how you would deal with it. I like the fact that it's accessible. Allen: Well, there is more road -- there is more road after -- when we are done. I think there is some of it that is too narrow for on-street parking, but -- but I think that might only be up in this area. So, there is still -- I believe there is still on-street parking and -- for parts of it. I mean it's not fair to ask this property owner to bear all of the burdens of, you know, whatever overburdened parking lot there might be there. We do believe there are development rights. There are three parcels in here now, Imean -- but we think it's not good for anybody if we don't move the road. So, you know, I think that we have done what we can and we have done our part to try and accommodate things in there. De Weerd: So -- but have you had a conversation with ACHD on that? Allen: This is the first I have heard of that issue. We -- ACHD has approved the road dimensions and access scheme that we have proposed, after rigorous review I will add. De Weerd: Well, apparently no one has been out there, because we have pictures that certainly we could share with you tonight if you so desire, that that is a full facility. Allen: It was very interesting, because Rackham Way used to be called Huber Way and so Commissioner Huber had a great deal to say about the whole history of this area and Commissioner McKee used to work in the Silverstone project. So, she had a lot to say about it and they were both very happy to see the road moved to the location that we are proposing. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 44 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. Council, anything further? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Madam Mayor, there was mention of a right of way swap. I guess to clarify that, that has to do with the swapping of ownership of the current Rackham Way alignment? Allen: Right. There is -- Rackham currently comes down approximately here. That right of way would be traded for this right of way and that's a good deal for ACHD and, you know, this property has a fiber optic line under it. We can't use it for structures. And I think they wind up getting a little more property out of this. But it's reasonably close, so that's how that would work. Rountree: And, Madam Mayor, I have a question for Tom. Where is Kyle when you need him? Barry: He's got the night off. Rountree: Are there any base elevation difficulties on this site as it relates to that current culvert just north of this site along that access road and have we reviewed it from that perspective? Barry: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Members of the Council, we have not reviewed it from that standpoint. I don't believe that there are any issues, but we would have to look into that more closely. Rountree: And I would think that we would want something mentioned in the DA about that, because if there are some issues -- because we do have some new elevations in that particular area. Allen: You're talking about flood elevations? Rountree: Flood elevations. Allen: May I respond to that? Rountree: When I'm through, sure. So, anyway, I think we need to look at that with respect to what we might put in any approval we might do. Allen: Madam Mayor, Council Member Rountree, there has been a flood elevation study prepared for both the Eight Mile and Five Mile Creeks here. It was in the record of ACHD. It hasn't been approved by FEMA yet, but what we are doing is consistent with that study. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 45 of 72 Rountree: Madam Mayor, I -- either Tom or Clint respond to that. I assume it's the same study we just were apprised of last week? Barry: Mr. President, I just wanted to remark, in the development agreement, we have recommended that any work improvements within the floodway or flood plane of this property shall improve -- or, excuse me, shall file a floodplain development application with the Public Works Department, which also require the study that you have just mentioned. Additionally, we have also made mention of the fact that improvements along the creek -- both creeks here are encouraged as development amenities as part of the project as well. So, we would expect to see that incorporated in a proposed development agreement. Rountree: And I'm aware of those last two bullet points, but I'm not so sure we might not want to have a stronger word than encourage. If we haven't reviewed it to any great detail. Bany: Okay. We will make sure that our review is diligent and respond accordingly. Allen: Madam Mayor, I do have a copy of the map that I can place in the record. Not -- I don't think we object to strengthening the language a little bit on that, but just so everybody's got the information, I can give you a copy of the floodway map study that was done. De Weerd: Okay. Go ahead and give it to the clerk. I guess, Anna, I did notice on this site plan is an attached sidewalk. Do we really want an attached sidewalk on Overland and Eagle? Or am I reading this wrong? Canning: Madam Mayor, you are not reading wrong. It was recently constructed. De Weerd: The sidewalk was constructed? Canning: That's what Mrs. Wafters has told me. She's second guessing herself now. She will look it up. When they widened Overland Road and did the intersection improvements, we believe they constructed a seven foot attached sidewalk and that's what you're seeing. De Weerd: That's one sidewalk that's not going to be used. Okay. Any other questions from Council? Okay. Thank you. Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application? Johnson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Bill Johnson, Deputy Chief, Meridian Fire. As to some of the fire department -- as to the fire department's concerns there is as we are coming into this project some of the comments on that letter from ACRD talks about athree-quarter access or a crossable median. The problem with that is as that fire apparatus comes through the intersection and we take control of the light from the direction we are coming on, if any cars that are westbound on Overland, as soon as one Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 46 of 72 gets stopped, they can't back up to open that intersection up for us, so the only way to access it would go clear down to Silverstone and tum around and come back. And do a right-in tum. Conversely, you will notice the deputy chiefs comments 31.5, it's in the staff report, you know, that if they do put a median down through there, our only access from Fire Station Four would be to go through the Silverstone and Goldstone complex completely, winding around. Engine 301 or the ladder truck would have to, then, access the same way going further down Eagle Road another half mile and coming back around, whereas if we get the access through Silverstone, it's a controlled intersection, Silverstone and Overland, then, we can come into the project and these commercial projects do -- especially with some of the stuff I have heard potentially proposed or stuff that we see in commercials, do increase our call volume into those areas and that could be of concem, especially with the stacking of traffic, as I know you have been out there at all hours of the day and seen that intersection back up without us taking control of an opposite going light. De Weerd: But, Chief, I guess I would ask in an emergency situation would the police ticket you if you did aright-in or if you went into aright-in? I would imagine you'd still have access. Johnson: The problem with the access is crossing the westbound traffic, because they would be backed up bumper to bumper on cars and getting through those cars, you know, we would be, basically, going across five lanes of traffic going against us and you get one semi in that tum lane, we are now blind and if the semi stops and another car sees that, hey, there is a shot to move up and they come flying up, that becomes a concem, not only for fire, but EMS and also law enforcement responding into that area. De Weerd: I see your point. Okay. Thank you. Johnson: Thank you. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have a clarification on the sidewalk issue. I apologize. There is an attached five foot sidewalk currently, but one of the conditions of approval is for the applicant to install a ten foot multi-use pathway consistent with the pathways plan, because this is such a high volume intersection, really, and the only place to safely get folks across is at the intersection. So, they would be increasing that five foot sidewalk to a ten foot sidewalk. But it would still be attached, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any additional testimony? Does the applicant have any final remarks? Allen: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Gary Allen. 601 West Bannock. The frst thing I'd like to touch on is what exactly did ACHD say and in your packet there is a' letter from them that discusses what restrictions they would consider here and we think this is about as good a commitment as you're going to get from ACRD is a lot of discussion about this and so let me just read that paragraph. It says in order to insure adequate Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 47 of 72 emergency response to this area, ACHD's staff will coordinate with the Meridian Fire Department to assure that any access restriction devices to be installed at the intersection of Overland Road and Rackham Way will allow for emergency vehicles to tum left into Rackham Way from Overland Road, such as athree-quarter access, meaning left in only or a mountable median. This left tum access will be maintained at least until a public connection across Eight Mile Creek north of Overland Road is achieved. So, I think one of the concems the fire department has had is the idea of a mountable median, whether they are really mountable or not and I think that's a legitimate discussion for your department to have with ACHD at the time that happens. I mean I think it's very unlikely here, if not extremely unlikely, that ACHD would put in something to try to accommodate the fire department that they didn't want or that didn't work or that harmed your vehicles. So, we think that there is a clear commitment from ACHD to allow for that left in emergency access. I don't see how --and, you know, I don't see how you're ever going to have to cross five lanes of traffic to get in there. 1 think that that -- you know, you got to cross two lanes and, then, you have got a -- you have to be able to get through the tum bay and I -- two lanes going away from the light, going to the east, so I think this is adequate. ACHD thought it was adequate. We all thought it was adequate until we walked into the Planning and Zoning hearing to discover that the fire department still had concems, so -- but we think that there is as clear a commitment as you can get that -- that that left in at least is going to stay open. It's going to be full access, you know, that -- the plan is for full access, unless there is a problem or until you have the light available down at Silverstone. So, we think that that's as good of access as most places get and certainly meets all of your code requirements. I just want to touch briefly on a couple of things to make sure I was not unclear about how we discuss the flood issues and the floodway versus the floodplain. What we are talking about in terms of bridge span here is the actual floodway. The channel where you would expect the flood to be, where you cannot put anything in it -- any sort of structure within it and that's what's depicted on the map that you have and so this property is very unique in that way and it's kind of surrounded by these restrictions. And, by the way, that study has been submitted to your staff and is under review. And I wanted to clarify the parking issue along Rackham Way. The road is going to be wider throughout its length than it is now. I was trying to remember. There is a very small section of this road that is 25 -- 29 feet, so there is -- but it's only down to the first driveway. So, beyond that the road is wide enough for cars to park along both sides. We are not relying on any of that on-street parking for our project, all of our parking is provided off site. So, there is actually more parking available for that Park & Ride than there is today. So, that completes my comments and I would stand for any questions. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Okay. Thank you. Lavey: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 48 of 72 Lavey: I have a comment. Jeff Lavey. Police chief for City of Meridian. You know, ACRD, in fairness to them, has done great things for emergency services, but they have not always done the best for emergency services and so they may try, but they also are not perfect either. But the one thing that we have concerns about is no matter what you put in place, if traffic decides to block it, as in blocking intersections like happens every single day, it doesn't make any difference what sort of median's in place or anything else, the fire truck and the police cars are still going to have to go across multiple lanes of traffic and we are going to have to wait until they break open traffic for us, delaying our response. So, it's great that they want to put that in. We may have to deal with it, but it's only as good as people following directions and once they don't do that, then, you are creating those problems. So, that being said -- De Weerd: I guess you would be out of a job if everyone followed directions, uh? That wasn't any threat or anything. That would be a great ideal world. Okay. Any final comment from the applicant? Allen: I bet you really didn't want me to take you up on that, Madam Mayor. Gary Allen. 601 West Bannock. The one thing I would say about the police chiefs last comment is simply that you can stripe around that Rackham intersection and have a keep clear area. Obviously, some people may slide into that from time to time, but, you know, that's the best you can humanly do under these circumstances and, you know, you're going to keep all of that open and available at least until you get a connection to the light down at Silverstone Way. So, we think this is adequate for emergency access. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Council, if there is no further information needed, if you have all you need, you need to close the public hearing. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close the public here on AZ 08-001, VAC 08-001. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to close the public hearing on Item 11 and 12. Do I have a second? Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 49 of 72 Zaremba: I will venture an opinion. De Weerd: Okay. Zaremba: There are a number of things about this project proposal that I like. It would be nice to have something go forward. I agree with the realignment of the road. But knowing how busy that intersection and the approach to the intersection is, even now I feel I need to support our safety services in either requiring a bridge or some other way to have access to this and I do see that it can become a problem and -- we give them enough challenges. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any other comments or information needed? Do I have a motion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I'm not seeing a way to make this work for me, so I will just float this motion, so we can have some more dialogue, I guess. I would move that we deny the annexation request for Item 11. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny the request on AZ 08-001. Do I have discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor, I guess for the record, my concern is -- and I will go back to my old saying is I'm not in that big a hung and I think there is some significant issues at this site. This is an area that has some access issues and I know there is multiple ownerships, but I think conceptually all the owners are going to have to deal with this issue and put forward some kind of an infrastructure plan that's going to work not only for their future tenants, but for the traveling public in Ada county and in Meridian. So, I think it's probably the right use. I just think it's too soon. And I'm concerned about access. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further discussion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would echo Councilman Rountree's thought and add to the point that I don't believe this applicant should be responsible for 50 percent of a bridge, but I believe that bridge is necessary. I have been burnt once, I'm not being burnt twice on bridges that Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 50 of 72 should have been done when the application went through. I have a real concern on -- on the access to this property. I believe that -- I believe on this comer I think we have all known that this was going to be a tough one to get developed. We were hoping the whole 90 acres or whatever it is. I think it's about a 90 acre piece with everything there, ~ would come in together so we could -- I don't know how you would even think you could get emergency vehicles in there, because you're only talking about probably ten, 12 cars backed up and you couldn't get in there from the stop light and that happens every time the stop light goes red. So, I -- I don't know, I just can't support it at this point. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further comments? Rountree: Madam Mayor, Iguess -- I would agree with Councilman Bird's comment about the bridge and Idon't -- I agree that it's not necessarily something that needs to be bourne by this applicant, because it isn't a proportionate share, but it is an issue that needs to be dealt with. I think we -- on anything in this location we need to take a real strong look at the floodplain and flood hazard issues and some potential remedies for some of the issues that are already out there and I know there is some suggestion that there might be multiple stories in this particular location, but even if access were a little bit better, I don't know that right now that's something that I could agree to either. So, there is multiple issues with the project. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 is the vacation. Mr. Nary, does this need formal action, since annexation wasn't granted? Nary: Madam Mayor, you still need formal action. I mean you can still deny it, based on the fact that no -- no annexation was granted. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, do I have a motion on Item 12? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: I move that we deny VAC 08-001. Having denied the annexation and zoning, we don't have jurisdiction over it. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Rountree: I'll second that. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 51 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny VAC 08-001 on Item 12. If there is no discussion -- Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: I would make a comment, though, I agree with what Councilman Zaremba said, we would have no jurisdiction. I don't disagree with the vacation, but since we have no jurisdiction I think we can't act on it. De Weerd: Thank you. Madam Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 13: Public Hearing: AZ 06-063 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 38.68 acres from RUT and R-1 zones to C-G zones for Waltman Property (aka Browning Plaza) by Waltman, LLC - 505, 521, 615 and 675 Waltman Lane: Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 08-001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52 commercial /office lots and 1 common lot on 38.21 acres in a proposed C- Gzoning district for Browning Plaza (aka Waltman Property) by SLN Planning, Inc. - 505, 521, 615 and 675 West Waltman Lane: De Weerd: Okay. Items 13 and 14 are public hearings AZ 06-063 and PP 08-011. I will open these two public hearings with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a reconsideration hearing and on reconsideration hearings generally I try to treat them as if they were a new hearing. Given that you have had I think five or six hearings on this matter, it didn't seem the appropriate approach at this time. So, I'm going to do a different version. If you want me to go back and fill in details I can do that. I'm going to try and get you up to speed on the points of consensus versus those that are still outstanding. So, this is the Waltman -Browning Plaza project. It is located on the south side of Waltman, east of The Landing Subdivision and directly north of I-84. The applications before you tonight are annexation and zoning of 38.68 acres to C-G and a preliminary plat for 40 building lots and two common lots. There are two concept plans proposed by the applicant. Here is the first one and here is the second one. Both of the concept plans are referenced in the proposed development agreement provisions. The concept plans all depict retail, hotel, offices, and a variety of other commercial opportunities. Proposed commercial square footage is approximately 400,000 square feet of office, hotel, big box retail, and smaller retail spaces and that's as shown on concept plan one. The number of proposed buildings varies, but there -- we have recommended a minimum of Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 52 of 72 ten buildings are required in the memo from staff dated July 3rd and that is the one that proposes the DA provisions for this property. So, the issues of discussion over the past hearings and the DA provisions that are not outstanding issues include the existing agricultural use is allowed to continue. The applicant will improve Waltman Lane adjacent to and off site. Trips shall not exceed 800 ADT prior to the extension of Corporate Drive. Ruddy Drive shall be extended as a public street into the site and up to Waltman Lane. Pedestrian network within the area. All buildings subject to design review. All buildings generally consistent with the conceptual office and retail elevations. I could go down and show you those. All buildings contain architectural elements and landscaping that break up along facades. Prohibited uses along the western and northwestern property line include drinking establishments, drive-thrus, fuel sale facilities, truck stops and vehicle washing facilities. The hours of operation for the west and northwest property boundaries, again, are limited to 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. There is a height limit of two stories and a minimum setback of 25 feet adjacent to the existing residences, with the exception of the proposed hotel. I'll go back to the concept plan. No loading, delivery, or trash areas or obtrusive lighting adjacent to existing residences. Again, as I mentioned before, a minimum of ten buildings. Development generally consistent with either one of the two conceptual site plans. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway. Protect vegetation and trees along the banks of the Ten Mile Creek. Construct a 50 foot wide buffer on the interstate, 20 foot on Waltman, and 25 foot landscape buffer and a six foot tall masonry wall between residential uses and the property zoned C-G. Relocate Waltman Lane further to the south, making the existing right of way, and install a 25 foot wide landscape buffer on the north side of Waltman adjacent to the Haddock property and that was related to concept plan one. Construct two driveways on the south side of Waltman no wider than 36 feet each. No driveway access to Waltman approved west of the Waltman-Corporate intersection. And a maximum of five access points to Corporate Avenue. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard these items on March 15th, May 3rd, June 7th, August 2nd, October 4th, and December 20th of 2007, and February 21st and March 20th of 2008. Those testifying included Joe Borton and Shawn Nickel from Rose Law Group and Robert Winer in favor. And in opposition were Kathy Floyd, Cindy Jones, Donna Aldridge, and Mike Swenson. Commenting were Curtis Lee, Christie Haddock, Nona Haddock, Nathan Floyd, Joe Lorcher, and Terry Farnham and Rob Haddock. Written testimony was from Art Beny. The Meridian City Council heard these items on April 22nd, May 6th, June 17th, and January 24th and July 8th, 2008. Those testifying were in favor, Shawn Nickel, Roger Stang, Dave Moore, Robert Winer, Ross Erickson. In opposition were Mike Swenson, Kathy Floyd, Nathan Floyd, Nancy Swenson, Donna Aldridge. Those commenting included Gary Inselman, Christie Little, Curtis Lee, Nona Haddock, Joe Lorcher, Duane Cope, Christie Haddock, Edward Haddock and Robert Haddock. And written testimony was from Donna Aldridge and Duane Cope. The outstanding issues -- there are two for the applicant. The applicant requests that the Council reconsider DA provisions nine and eleven. Number nine states that if the extension of Corporate Drive is completed prior to the split corridor of Waltman Lane, Meridian Road, Main Street intersection, no building construction traffic shall be allowed to use the Waltman Lane, Meridian Road, Main Street intersection until it has also completed. However, construction traffic for the purpose of infrastructure, sewer, water, Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 53 of 72 and road improvements shall be allowed to use Waltman Lane prior the completion of the intersection. And Number 11: At no time shall construction traffic associated with the development of this be allowed to access this site between Ruddy Drive or any other street within The Landing Subdivision. If the Council were to approve the applicant's request -- well, what the applicant is going to request -- and it's a little counter intuitive at first and so I'll try and explain it to the best of my abilities tonight. The applicant's concern is that they want to be able to start vertical construction while the Main Street, Waltman, Meridian Road intersection is still under construction. Part of the testimony that Council heard was regard to that from the neighbors was that the construction for the intersection itself would create difficulties for them to be able to get in and out of -- to their homes and, then, putting additional construction in that area would make it further difficult. So, what the applicant is proposing is a temporary a and it would only be temporary -- gate at West Ruddy Drive with key cards for the residents. So, the construction traffic wouldn't use Ruddy, but the neighbors, if they wanted to avoid the intersection improvements and all the construction related to that, could come out Ruddy and go up Linder, essentially, to bypass that construction traffic. So, that's the -- the gist of the applicant's proposal with regard to that provision and I'm sure they will explain it as well. If we did -- ACHD did contact us earlier today saying they weren't going to be able to make it, so we did converse with them with regard to all the applications. We didn't anticipate the Mayor's question on the Overland Village one, but with regard to this, we did speak to them and if we were to -- if Council were to approve the applicant's request to allow construction traffic in exchange for providing a gate for Waltman residents to use Ruddy, ACRD would need the gate removed prior to dedication of the right of way and acceptance of the street connection to Ruddy, which may or may not coincide with the occupancy of any building. So, that was their only comment with regard to the gate. They weren't opposed to it, they just wanted to make sure it was removed prior to dedicating the street. When the -- after the Council asked for this item, staff did meet with the application and we discussed the need for some clarity with regard to some other provisions and it was largely all the provisions related to the conditional use approval and they include number 16, 17, 19 and 20. Staff is recommending the clarifications that were in Ms. Wafters' memo and, then, I have repeated them for you there on the notes. Basically on the number 16 it would read: Except for a potential hotel site at the southwest comer, any structure, housing or use other than office within a hundred feet of the west and northwest boundaries adjacent to residential uses shall require Conditional Use Permit approval, unless the adjacent uses are changed into nonresidential uses. Number 17. That would be -- could be deleted, because it was captured in number 16. We still have the one about the distance for the potential hotel site. Or the limitation on the 100,000 square feet without conditional use approval and, then, the one with regard to restaurants, because number 16 requires a CU for any restaurants, we felt that the seating area -- any outdoor seating areas could be discussed during the CU application for that restaurant use. With that I will fill in as necessary for Council or answer any questions you may have. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: Not at this point. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 54 of 72 De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Nickel: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. For the record Shawn Nickel. 6333 North Discovery Way, Suite 200, in Boise. Here, again, tonight representing the Waltman project. As staff has indicated, we have been in front of you several times now, hopefully, this will be the last time. I think the results of being in front of you and all the conditions and everything that we have put forward in the way of conditions of approval have made this overall a better development. What we are here tonight to discuss are just the two issues that Anna has brought up. The first is with regards to the uses along the -- on the westem boundary. Anna, could you put the other site plan -- this is concept one, which is referenced throughout the -- throughout the conditions of approval. What we -- what we have proposed in those meetings and in negotiation and working with staff and with you guys, we presented -- or I presented past examples of existing commercial developments that have abutted residential areas and used that as an example. We agreed to apply existing and future design review standards to all the buildings. We have provided examples of elevations, which have been incorporated into the development agreement. We have agreed to architectural elements proposed by staff. We have provided and agreed to prohibited uses along the residential areas, including the exclusion of drive-thrus, gas stations, and drinking establishment, among the other -- other uses. We have agreed that if a building is over 100,000 square feet and within a hundred feet of the west and northwest boundary that we would apply for conditional use approval. We have agreed to hours of operation. We have agreed to height restrictions and setback restrictions. We have agreed to restrictions on loading, delivery, trash, and lighting areas along those boundaries. And we have proposed to construct a 25 foot landscape buffer and a six foot high masonry wall on the west boundary. It was our intent and understanding that with these concessions it would not be necessary for retail uses to be required to come back and get additional conditional use approval for those uses along these boundaries. So, what we are asking for tonight is clarification and if it is agreed upon, revisions to those appropriate conditions to allow us to move forward with those uses without coming back in for individual conditional use permits. Now, if the use itself is required to have a Conditional Use Permit and, then, we would go through that process. But if it's a principal permitted use in the C-G zone, we are asking that -- because we have -- because all the concessions and the additional conditions that we have placed on ourselves, in addition to what staff has recommended, we feel that those uses are appropriate on these boundaries. Also keep in mind there has never been any opposition or testimony from any neighbors on that westem boundary. The testimony that you have received we have provided. There are additional conditions in there on how we are going to maintain transition and landscaping. So, that's the first -- that's the first issue with regard to the uses. The second issue is -- and I did bring this up at the last meeting -- was the need by the developer and his potential buyers of this property to at least have the ability to pull building permits for the first phase of the development. Now, as we have stated in the past -- and I believe it's still true -- you're probably going to see the first phase being the anchor or big box development in this -- in this development. The concem with the neighbors and the testimony that you heard at the last meeting revolved around the Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 55 of 72 intersection construction of the split corridor and the Waltman off-site improvements that we were required to do for this development. So, we came up and we met with staff and discussed an altemative access point for the neighbors in the event that there was some disruption with the -- with the circulation in and out of the Waltman area. And that would be to utilize the existing emergency access easement that is currently I believe in this area right here that is owned by the city for emergency access to The Landing Subdivision and we would improve that on a temporary basis with -- and we could put a temporary automated gate in that location to keep cross-traffic from The Landing coming through the development, which would increase the congestion and allow for those residents the ability, if they wish, to have another altemative access in and out of their neighborhood. Also keep in mind that we are allowed to do on-site improvements at the same time that the improvements to Waltman and the intersection take place. So, a lot of those improvements are going to have to be completed prior to even starting the building of this -- of this project. So, I think the construction traffic you're going to see will kind of be swapped out with the construction traffic that is working on Waltman and the improvements, are probably going to be more or less finished or in the process when those building permits are pulled for that first phase. So, I don't know how much more -- how much additional construction traffic you're going to see out there. I think providing that altemative access point is a good faith effort on the developer's part to help the neighbors out if that -- if that conflict does ever -- ever occur. So, those are the two issues that we are presenting as part of our reconsideration tonight. We are in agreement and do appreciate all your time listening to us and I will stand for questions that you have. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Zaremba: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba. Zaremba: Two questions. The first is a clarification. Is this a request for reconsideration or this is the reconsideration? Nickel: This is actually the reconsideration. Zaremba: Say that again. Nickel: This is the reconsideration. De Weerd: This is the reconsideration. Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. So, the second question is -- I'm not understanding how the gate at Ruddy would work. Would it be manned so that only chosen people could go through it or -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 56 of 72 Nickel: The gate would be accessed by the folks on this side of it through either a key pad or some sort of electronic device that would open and allow access. Zaremba: It would allow them out. Would it also allow them back in? Nickel: It could, yes. Zaremba: Using the same -- Nickel: Yes. Zaremba: -- key pad? Nickel: And, again, it's not -- it's not intended to allow construction traffic, because we do have a specific condition that no construction traffic is to go through The Landing. It would just specifically be for their -- for their use in the event that -- Zaremba: And police and fire would have the code as well? Nickel: And the key would be -- police and fire would have -- at this point they would have better access than they currently have right now, because I believe it's a locked gate at this point. So, they would have a -- and we would work with them on the type of access that they would require. Zaremba: Thank you. De Weerd: Any other question from Council? Okay. Nickel: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I did have one person that signed up as neutral. William Kissinger. Kissinger: Madam Mayor and the Council, loriginally -- De Weerd: If you will state our name and address. Kissinger: Oh. I'm sorry. William Kissinger. My address is 420 Waltman, Meridian, Idaho. De Weerd: Thank you. Kissinger: I originally -- when I decided to come out tonight, I wanted just more of a fact finding to find out what they were planning on doing down the street and so, you know -- and Iwas hopeful that I would come up to speed with what appears to be several months of -- of inquiry and so forth, but -- and I started out that, you know, this was Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 57 of 72 neutral, because of the fact I recognized the inevitable, that they develop those -- that property. After all, they have developed all the other comers of Meridian and I-84, so why wouldn't they develop this comer as well. But hearing some of the plan and the timing of those plans, I think I shifted my neutral to more of opposed. I would like to also mention the fact that I appreciate these -- this article coming up as number 13 and 14 or else I wouldn't have got to team all about a Redbox. But that being said, you know, the -- you know, one of my biggest concems is we are about halfway down Waltman, you know, just beyond the storage area and it's a pretty slow road. It's pretty much a dead end and, in fact, as you tum into that it's always kind of a -- you know, a challenge, because coming off of 1st Avenue there you hope nobody blocks your entry, because they are in -- and obeys those signs that says do not block that entrance, because that's the only way in and so we sit there quite frequently and wait for that intersection to clear or some kind person to, you know, make way for us so we can go in and out of that a down that street. The other thing that I -- that it caught me as part of the comments and so forth was the concept plan showed what looks to be maybe 12 to 15 buildings, but, yet, I notice that reading the request that they were having 52 commercial office lots. So, I was kind of, you know, curious about that and so I was really more concerned about the concept plan up west -- excuse me -- east on Waltman on what their plans were and how they are going to widen that and get all that traffic through there and after -- after hearing it, I would ask that the Council consider delaying any plans until the ACHD did whatever they are going to do with that intersection at 1st Avenue and Meridian and so forth, because I can't imagine -- let alone us getting in and out on Ruddy. I can't imagine the construction traffic that would be required to come down that street as it is now and how that would work, you know, back and forth. So, I would -- I wouldn't see a project like this being able to go forward without at least that intersection work completed before they are able to accommodate that kind of construction traffic. So, that's my comments. De Weerd: Perfect timing. Thank you. Okay. Is there additional testimony? Haddock: Thank you, Mayor, Councilmen. Rob Haddock, 560 Waltman Lane. You have heard from me before, so I'll try not to rehash my -- my prior complaint. I agreed with the counter intuitive comment, not just for that one point, but the entire project. A lot of the language of the development agreement references we won't do certain things to the northwest or west boundary. One of the concept plans had to give some right of way and additional buffer to the north, but north has been deleted from that. So, I guess we had a question whether -- what kinds of use and it sounds like they have got a blank check for the north side is how I read that. So, that's one of my concems. The other concern has been stated already, that the intersection that exists now at Waltman Lane and Meridian Road is not going to accommodate large trucks. In order to do work on the sewer you're going to have to have chips to bed it and, you know, that's not going to be one load a day, that's going to be a constant in and out and, yeah, where one car is waiting for an opening, you know, a truck with atrailer -dump truck with a pup trailer, for instance, it's not going to happen. So, I'd just like to -- you know, I'd like to see a plan that makes sense. I don't know what the big rush is. Until these road improvements are done nobody is going to come anyway. So, I'd just like to see the Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 58 of 72 road improvements in place and I'm still not happy with -- with the whole concept in general. And, yeah, just -- if we have to have more of these meetings, I'd love to move it up on the agenda. I'd hate to recount all the hours I spent in neighborhood meetings, I don't know how many Planning and Zoning meetings and you know how many City Council meetings and it seems like it's always shifting and it was nice that we didn't have to excuse a City Council member this time. I appreciated that. But I guess that's all I have. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Floyd: Good evening. Kathy Floyd. 520 Waltman Lane. I agree with Rob. The Waltman Lane cannot handle construction traffic. The intersection can't handle it. I think that they are pretty lucky to even get this through, when you look at the agenda items just before us, it's the same problem, they are having to put a bridge through before they can construct and they are not. It's -- this isn't in their section and it's just the same situation and I think as far as trying to rush it even further, it's a bad idea. That's all I have to say. De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? Lavey: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Lavey: The police department has a couple comments. Jeff Lavey with the police department. We actually had some concerns greater on this project than the last project and I believe a couple of gentlemen just proved our case as far as blocking that intersection and everything else. This is one of the most difficult intersections there is in the city as far as trying to get through and so we have concems about that. We don't believe it makes sense to start construction until that intersection is~completed. We can compromise slightly on the bridge, but we also agree on the bridge, too, that that connectivity would also be beneficial. The other concern that we have -- and it's really kind of a future concern, but you actually have a roadway that's leaving a public roadway, going through a private business, and, then, connecting to a private roadway again and any sort of construction that we -- or, excuse me, any sort of traffic problems that we have in there is not enforceable by our codes, because it's a private roadway and so any of the traffic congestion-type problems, the speeding problems, the only two problems that we can deal with is reckless driving and drunk driving and so when the neighborhoods to the west start complaining, there is nothing that we are going to be able to do about it, because it being a private roadway and, then, what sort of problems is that going to create for the future tenants, the business tenants that actually build there. So, those are just a couple of our concerns. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 59 of 72 Canning: Madam Mayor, just to clarify, right now it is private, but it will be public in the long term. Okay. De Weerd: We got the point. Any further testimony? You knew you sat here all night. Sony. Haddock: Christie Haddock. 650 Waltman Lane. Kathy pushed me out of my chair. My concern is I leave several times a day taking kids to school, from school, and various activities and do not want a child flattened, my car flattened, because I cannot see a truck coming down a road that is not wide enough, so it's just the issue of the roads. I need someone to be responsible that nothing bad happens on our lane. Thanks. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Would the applicant like to have wrap-up remarks? Nickel: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council. Again, for the record Shawn Nickel. Again, to reiterate, we are not asking to pull building permits for that first phase until the intersection begins. Keep in mind that we are allowed to -- that Waltman is going to be under construction through that entire process, because we are required to rebuild Waltman Lane as part of our off-site improvement. So, there is going to be construction traffic along the lane. My contention is that because of -- because those improvements are going to be required, for the most part, before we can begin construction on site of any buildings the infrastructure is going to be in place or is going to be constructed. I don't see that great of an increase in construction traffic from what is going to be there throughout the entirety what the Waltman or split corridor construction and the improvements to Waltman. Again, the access to Ruddy is just to have a secondary access point for emergency purposes for all those involved. Those being on Waltman and also for emergency services. We are not asking for any changes to the north from what was original reapproved by this Council, the only -- the only clarification that we are asking for is the Conditional Use Permit requirements, along the northwest comer and the west boundary of the project. So, with that I will stand for any questions. De Weerd: Council, any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Shawn, I just need to be clear on what you said and I'm not sure I am yet, but part of the conditions that this was approved with and the one that we are reviewing again tonight related to construction and construction activities and whether or not things would move forward with respect to building permits and building on the site until such time as the infrastructure was in place and you've kind of talked around it and I think that's our intent. So, let me try to paraphrase what I think you said. Nickel: Okay. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 60 of 72 Rountree: I think you said that you wouldn't start building on this site until the intersection improvement started. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: And that you would be building Waltman at the same time the intersection improvements started. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: And that with all of that construction going on, the additional construction that might take place on site would not further exacerbate the construction traffic issue. Nickel: All but the last part. I think what I'm saying is that because we are going to have to do the improvements to Waltman ourself, bring the sewer, bring the water down Waltman, prior to -- we are going to have to do that prior to pulling the building permits on site for the structure, we are going to have to bring them down Waltman and, then, we are going to have to bring them into the site, where ever that first stage ends up being. So, what I'm saying is that that construction trafFc's going to be there putting in those utilities and at the same time improving and widening those portions of Waltman. So, as those trucks -- or as that construction decreases, then, you will be seeing an increase in the construction coming on site to start the foundations and the construction of whatever building would be -would begin in that first phase. What I'm saying is that you're not going to -- I don't think you're going to have a substantial increase in the overall amount of construction traffic just because of the way that those services have to come down Waltman and how Waltman has to be constructed prior to us actually getting those building permits. Rountree: So, let me try this one more time. Nickel: Okay. Rountree: And let's talk about it as phases. You brought up the word phases. So, the first phase is the reconstruction of Main and Waltman and, correspondingly, the first phase, subset A, is the infrastructure work on Waltman Lane. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: Water. Sewer. Widening. New surface. New striping and connecting, ultimately, with a new intersection on Main. So, at that point, then, phase two, if you will -- I'll just have a two phase project, at that point you would, then, start pulling building permits and start construction on the site, so the infrastructure would be in place. Nickel: Correct. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 61 of 72 Rountree: Now, in the interim, as the infrastructure is being put in place, you would make yet another access available on Ruddy Lane during that period of time for access of the current residents on Waltman. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: So, you would not start anything in a phase two, the underground work or anything, until Waltman was improved? Is that what you just -- Rountree: I think I -- that's what I said. That's -- yeah. Nickel: Right. Now, it might not -- it might not be completed, but we are not going to be able to pull a building permit -- I don't think the fire department is going to allow us to pull a building permit until we have water on site for -- for fire protection and we have some sort of access road put in to get in for emergencies. So, again, we are not -- we are not going to be pulling building permits the day that Waltman -- the Waltman intersection starts, but we don't necessarily want to have to wait until everything is approved before we can start pulling our building permits. There is going to be a certain amount we can do during that point, but it's going to depend on how quickly the improvements are to Waltman and those services come down the street and onto the site. Does that make - De Weerd: I think that that's currently what is in the findings, isn't it? Nickel: I couldn't hear you. De Weerd: What are you asking to change? Nickel: Right now the condition -- the way the condition reads is no building permits shall be issued or construction traffic allowed, except for infrastructure improvements, such as water, sewer, and roads on the site until the construction related to the split corridor, Waltman Lane, Meridian Road, Main Street intersection is completed or Corporate Drive is extended across the Ten Mile Creek and is connected Waltman Lane. That's the current condition. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: So, what -- what stage of completeness, if you will -- because I understand a road can be perfectly serviceable and functioning and not necessarily be complete in terms of -- by the terms of the contract, but operating? Operational? Signalized? Nickel: I don't have the -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 62 of 72 Rountree: Paved? Gutters? Drains? What are we talking about? Our condition was the infrastructure's in place and you can utilize it, so it's not inconvenient to get in and out of there, because it is right now and without that improvement, unless you cut some kind of a deal with ITD or adjacent neighbors to pioneer another road in there, I don't know how you're going to get construction equipment down there very easy. Nickel: And that's -- that's going to -- that's going to determine when that is -- I mean there is going to have to be a certain amount of -- and I don't know the answer, but there has got to be a certain amount of improvements to that intersection and to that roadway before we are going to be able to get back in there anyway. What we are saying -- and I don't have the answer as to what stage that's going to be at, but the way it's written now we can't do anything until all the improvements are in on Waltman at the intersection and Waltman Lane is constructed in its entirety and what that does is that puts any potential building out an additional year, if they have to wait to that point just to get their building permits and, then, start construction. And that was the reason to offer up the secondary access to relieve that, which I think is good, even if -- even if we don't -- even if we are able to pull a building permit a month before the improvements are complete, we just don't know when that date is. You're going to be able to have a secondary access in and out of that -- out of that site and that can be done -- we can time that to be done at the beginning of the project when the -- when the first part of the improvements to the intersection occur. So, you would have that ability at all times to have that secondary access. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: The way I view it and the way we approved it and the language that we have there, the impetus is on the developer to get her done. Nickel: Correct. Rountree: You know, if they want to -- if they want to do a three month project in six or eight months, then, that's on them. But I don't see that that Waltman Lane project is that tough a job. That lengthy. I mean it's a tough site to get to, but I mean you can get in and get out of there fairly quickly I would think. Nickel: As far as the Waltman -- Rountree: Yeah. Nickel: -- extension. Yeah. And we are going to be -- Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 63 of 72 Rountree: The intersection is another -- another critter and that's very complicated and going to take a lot of extra work, but it will operate, I believe, the full time it's under construction. Nickel: Correct. And so we have control over the Waltman section. Rountree: Right. Nickel: We don't have control over the -- the intersection and I think you're correct, the -- ACHD or -- ACHD is going to be -- is going to keep that intersection functioning, but we don't have control over that. We do have control and we probably e with that control we would be able to get the Waltman part done quicker. Rountree: And that's the rub. And that's your rub. You have no control over the intersection. Nickel: Correct. And, obviously, the developer or the builder -- or the developer and the builder would be taking a risk, because they would still be at the mercy of ACHD finishing that -- that entire intersection, lights and everything, prior to occupancy. So, that's -- you know, at some point they are going to have to say, okay, ACHD is far enough along where we can have a reasonable assumption of when it's going to be completed and, then, time their construction. De Weerd: Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Nickel: Thanks again for the opportunity. Rountree: Madam Mayor, I do. You heard the staffs recommendations on the changes of the conditions and one of the changes you express concern about was the Conditional Use Permit requirement on the west side and staff offered the change to point number 16. Do you -- and you have those? Nickel: Yes, I do. Rountree: And you're in agreement with that change? Nickel: No. Condition number 16, the way it's revised and written by staff, still requires a Conditional Use Permit approval for any structure that we build along that -- along that western boundary. So, my argument is that by us building -- building a wall, building a 25 foot buffer, limiting hours, limiting height, limiting setbacks, trash enclosures, you know, all -- everything, limiting that in the conditions of approval now, you, basically -- and, then, you have got design review, the design elements, we have, basically, taken into consideration what you would review in the Conditional Use Permit. Also, the fact that we have had several neighborhood meetings with no opposition or even testimony from the neighbors to the west. We are also limiting the restaurant -- or drive-thrus, the drinking establishments, the fuel stations, at all times. So, I think we have covered all Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 64 of 72 the bases. It's tacking on an additional three to four months process for conditional use review that the developer is having the heartburn over. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I do want to comment on that one a little bit. The applicant states that they believe that when they offered all those things that it was in lieu of -- of not having the conditional use requirement and I never understood it to be that way through all the public hearing process, all the discussions we have had, and that's why I haven't supported the applicant in that request, but have tried to at least clarify when the CU would be required. De Weerd: Thank you. Nickel: And, again, Madam Mayor and Council, that was the main reason we offered up the buffering and the wall. Why would we do that for an office complex. It would also be compatible to residential. What we are saying is we will build a wall along the whole thing and buffer it to provide transition and noise and sound and visual buffer right at the very beginning. That was the whole reason for doing that. Otherwise, that could have been taken care at the conditional use process and looked at on a case-by-case basis. So, that was our intent was to offer that up and to agree to those other conditions that I spoke of. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any further questions? Thank you. Nickel: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. Council? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve -- approve. I move that we close the public hearing AZ 06-063 and PP 08-001. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. 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: Any discussion? Do I have a motion? Rountree: Madam Mayor, question for Anna. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 65 of 72 Rountree: Again, it's back on that point 16. Canning: Yes, sir. Rountree: I think in going over all the other DA conditions we pretty much excluded just about everything over on that side, with the exception of restaurants and commercial establishments. And maybe Redboxes. I'm not sure. I certainly hope so. Canning: I can pull up the full list of approved uses, but most of them do fall under the retail category. If Council is leaning that way, you may want to reconsider adding in -- back in the outdoor seating areas, because those aren't regulated. Likewise, I would be concerns that we maintain the 100,000 square foot size limitation, because without that, then, you could have potentially a very large retail building going in those areas. Rountree: I don't think that's at issue here, but I think something with respect to outside use, not just necessarily a restaurant, it might be -- Canning: A Redbox. Rountree: Yeah. It might be an archery shop or something that has an outdoor display or -you know, who knows. Bird: A motorcycle shop. Rountree: A motorcycle shop. Scooter shop. There might be a lot of those these days that might have some kind of a outdoor facility. I would be more inclined to see a CUP on something like that than just blanketly either retail or restaurant. Be more specific as to what we would want to see that potentially could be a nuisance. That certainly addresses the real issue, but on Item 16 I think that would help me. I don't know if that would help the applicant. I guess the other question I have, if you have some suggested language that might address what we are trying to get at with trying to restrict access in that area for construction purposes, as opposed to the language we have now --the language we have now is certainly easy for us. Canning: And by that, sir, do you mean with regard to just saying the completion of the intersection improvements? Rountree: It's all done before you issue permits. Canning: And you will have to forgive me -- Rountree: I think in all practical purpose it will be done -- it will have to be done with the -- at least Waltman Lane would have to be done before we issued permits. Whether or not ACHD and ITD cast the final approval on the intersection at Main and Meridian and Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 66 of 72 Waltman that might take quite awhile, but in that process it will be fully functional. So, the word complete may not be the -- Canning: So, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree -- Rountree: It's getting late. It's getting late. Having a hard time with that. Canning: So, would you like me to come up with language now or -- I'm not quite sure -- Rountree: I'd love for you to be able to do that, but I can't and I wouldn't expect you to. Canning: Thank you, sir, because it's not one of my better days to begin with and it's certainly late. We can work on that. It sounds like you want -- that the intersection needs to be initiated, at least, and -- Bird: Well, yeah. Rountree: Yes. Canning: And Waltman needs to have all utility work done and needs to have the pavement, curb, gutter done, is what I was hearing. Rountree: I don't know that they are going to curb and gutter it, but the pavement needs to be done so you can provide access in and out of the residences. Canning: Okay. And Ithink -- there, we can check on the pavement. I have got a -- I think they are doing it at least on one side. If you would like me to include that as done. Rountree: Yes. Canning: We can -- we can -- if that's what Council would like us to rework that condition, we can do that. Rountree: Okay. Canning: And, then, on 16, am I hearing that, Council Member Rountree, you would like that re-worked to discuss outdoor uses? Rountree: Outdoor uses would be subject to conditional use. Canning: Including seating areas? Rountree: Yes. Canning: And to keep number 19 in there; correct? Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 67 of 72 Rountree: Yes. Canning: We can work on revised conditions to that effect. Did you want us to address the gate issue, sir? Or Council? Or Madam Mayor? Rountree: Do I still have the floor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: Certainly. I think that that's a -- that's something that would be beneficial. Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, any thoughts on the timing of when the gate should be installed prior to release of the building permits or did you have other timing? Rountree: I believe the timing of the installation of the gate would be at the time the construction activity was in full swing and access to and fro Main Street and Meridian Road was difficult. Canning: Okay. We will work on something and get it to the applicant. Rountree: Okay. Canning: So, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it sounds like we need to reopen the public hearing for us to bring these back to you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: On -- on that gate, I think that's got to be in and working before we start putting infrastructure in down Waltman, because once you start infrastructure down there you're going to have the road tore up and I feel that before -- before they are going to get any building permits we are going to have infrastructure into the site and Waltman Lane has got to be usable, you know. But I'm not including the intersection, because I hate tying them to ACHD and ITD. Because for them to complete that, they have got a lot of work to go all the way to Franklin. That's my two cents worth. Canning: I can incorporate those thoughts, sir. De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? No? Rountree: I have nothing. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions or needed clarification from staff'? Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 68 of 72 Canning: No, ma'am. I think I actually have got it. It scares me tonight, but -- De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I would move, then, that we reopen the public hearing for staff to make the changes in the conditional -- or the development agreement language and bring it back to Council for consideration. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree:.) didn't give you a date certain. I'm sorry. Nary: It would be a separate motion to continue it. De Weerd: Yeah. It would be a separate motion. Rountree: Okay. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we continue this public hearing until September -- Anna, help me with the date. Can you do it -- Canning: We could do it -- I guess, sir, the 23rd, since the 16th is a -- Rountree: Workshop. Canning: -- workshop. Rountree: September 23rd. Zaremba: Second. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue this item to September 23rd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 69 of 72 Item 15: Ordinance No. Annual Appropriation for 2009 Fiscal Year Budget: De Weerd: Okay. Item 15 is Ordinance No. 08-1378. I will ask Madam Clerk to read this by title only. Holman: City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1378, an ordinance pursuant to Idaho Code 50-1002 and 50-1003, providing for a title and findings, providing for the adoption of a budget and the appropriation of the 80,253,015 dollars to defray the necessary expenses and liabilities of the City of Meridian in accordance with the object and purposes and in a certain amount herein specified for the fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2008, and ending on September 30th, 2009. To levy all such appropriate taxes and levies as authorized by law upon taxable property and to collect all authorized revenue. To provide for the waiving of the second and third readings pursuant to Idaho Code 50- 902 and providing for an effective date and the filing of a certified copy of this ordinance with the Secretary of State. De Weerd: You have heard this ordinance read by the only. Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Seeing none, Council? Bird: Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve ordinance 08-1378, the annual appropriation for 2009 fiscal year budget, with suspension of rules and also get it on file with the Secretary of State within legal time, which I think is the 12th or something like that. De Weerd: Coming up. Rountree: I second that. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 16: Ordinance No. Budget: Amendments for 2008 Fiscal Year De Weerd: Okay. Item 16 is Ordinance No. 08-1379. Madam Clerk, will you, please, read this by title only. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 70 of 72 Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1379, an ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho, amending Ordinance No. 07-1336, the appropiriation ordinance for the fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2007, and ending September 30th, 2008. Appropriating additional monies that are to be received by the City of Meridian, Idaho, in the sum of 30,258,236 dollars and allocating additional expenditures and providing an effective date. De Weerd: You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Seeing none -- Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: I move that we approve Ordinance 08-1379 with suspension of rules. Bird: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 16. If there is no discussion, roll call -- or roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 17: Ordinance No. 08-1376 Downtown Meridian Striping Ptan (2nd $ 3rd Readings): De Weerd: Item 17 is Ordinance No. 08-1376. Madam Clerk, please, read this by title only. Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1376, an ordinance of the City of Meridian adopting a downtown parking plan with modified standards for designated parking spaces for disabled persons, pursuant to Idaho Code Section 49-213-1 D and providing an effective date. De Weerd: Okay. This is the second and third reading of this ordinance. Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Seeing none, Council, do I have a motion? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 08-1376. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 71 of 72 Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve this ordinance. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 18: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(fl - (to consider and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation); & Q) To engage in communications with a representative of the public agency's risk manager or insurance provider to discuss the adjustment of a pending claim or prevention of a claim imminently likely to be filed. The mere presence of a representative of the public agency's risk manager or insurance provider at an executive session does not satisfy this requirement. De Weerd: Next item is Executive Session. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f) and (1)G)• Rountree: Second. De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Roll call, please. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Rountree: I move that we come out of Executive Session. Bird: Second. De Weerd: A motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Meridian City Council September 2, 2008 Page 72 of 72 De Weerd: Do we have a motion to adjourn? Rountree: Move to adjourn. Bird: Second. De Weerd: A motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor? ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:42 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR TAM De WEERD ATTEST:_ JA ,,,e iqy .,. ,~ ~, r '- ~o AL '9~"~STts~' '/~~~~~~~rr~rii~ n~nv ~~~~ ©~ DATE APPROVED