HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 09-09Meridian Citv Council Meeting September 9, 2008
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:03 p.m., Tuesday,
September 9, 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, Keith Watts, Joe Silva, Jeff
Lavey, Clint Dolsby, Steve Siddoway, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba O Joe Borton
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. Thank you all for
joining us here this evening. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
And, for the record, it is Tuesday, September 9th. It's a few minutes after 7:00.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. Tonight we will be led by Tanner
Dillon. If you will all rise and join us in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
De Weerd: Tanner, now I understand you're here for Boy Scouts tonight? Can I
present you with a pin for the City of Meridian for leading us in the pledge? Thank you.
Item 3: Community Invocation by Gordon Slyter -Treasure Valley Worship
Center.
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor
Gordon Slyter and he is with Treasure Valley Worship Center. If you will all join us in
the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection.
Pastor.
Slyter: I have taken a Palms, 122, versus six through nine, which is written as an
injunction to pray for Jerusalem. I have modified it for Meridian. So, this will be our
prayer tonight.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 2 of 66
Slyter: Our Father, we pray for the peace of Meridian. May they prosper who live and
serve our city. May peace be within our boundaries and jurisdictions and prosperity
within our places of government, business, and services. For the sake of our brothers
and sisters, friends, families, and citizens, we will now say may peace be within our city.
For the sake of the work of the Lord and the furtherance of his message of hope, love
and forgiveness, we seek the good of our city Meridian. Thank you, Lord, for your hand
upon us. We pray that you would continue to keep your good hand and your great
grace upon us. Be with the Council as they hear issues, deliberate issues, and make
decisions tonight. These things we pray in Jesus' name, amen.
De Weerd: Thank you, pastor. Can I ask you did I -- have I given you one of these?
Slyter: Yes, you did.
De Weerd: Well, thank you for joining us.
Slyter: Thank you.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item No. 4 is the adoption of the agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would make note that under the Consent Agenda, Item 5-O, change order
number one is being removed from the Consent Agenda. On the regular agenda under
Department Reports, Item 7-A-1, Ada County Landfill Rates Discussion, is being
withdrawn from the agenda. The final on the regular agenda item is ordinance -- be
Item 13, which is an ordinance, the proposed ordinance number is 08-1380. And with
that I move that we adopt the agenda as amended.
De Weerd: Do I have a second?
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as stated. All
those favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR
08-005 Request for Variance to UDC 11-2A-6 which requires
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 3 of 66
building setbacks to be measured from sidewalk or property line;
applicant requests to measure street setback from the back of
ribbon curb for 12 lots, located on the south side of E. Deerhill
Street between Montague ay and Genoard Avenue in Messina
Meadows Subdivision No. ~ 1 for Messina Meadows by Tuscany
Development, Inc. -south side of Deerhill Street approximately 'h
mile west of South Eagle Road and approximately'/2 mile south of
East Victory Road:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MFP
08-005 Request to Modify the previously approved Final Plat (FP
05-076) by removing the requirement for a 5-foot detached
sidewalk along Lots 54-66, Block 5, which are located on the south
side of E. Deerhill Street between Montague Way and Genoard
Avenue for Messina Meadows by Tuscany Development, Inc. -'/2
mile west of South Eagle Road and '/a mile south of East Victory
Road:
C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 08-
007 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.79 acres from RUT to
C-C zoning district for Shops at Victory by LDR-II/DMG, LLC -
3210 S. Eagle Road:
D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 08-
006 Request for Preliminary Plat for 3 building lots on 3.68 acres in
a proposed C-C zoning district for Shops at Victory by LDR-
II/DMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road:
E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
08-011 Request for Conditional Use Permit approval for adrive-thru
pharmacy in a proposed C-C zoning district within 300 feet of an
existing residence per UDC 11-4-3-11 for Shops at Victory by
LDR-II/DMG, LLC - 3210 S. Eagle Road:
F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PFP
08-001 Request for Preliminary /Final Plat approval of 2 single-
family residential building lots on 0.33 of an acre in an R-8 zoning
district for Fullmer by Jeffrey Fullmer -end of E. Carlton between
E. Fifth Street and Cathy Lane:
G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 08-
008 Request for Annexation and Zoning of approximately 5 acres
from RUT to an R-8 zone for Redmont Health Services by The
Land Group, Inc. - 5075 W. Cherry Lane:
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 4 of 66
H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
08-015 Request for Conditional Use Permit for an Assisted Living
Facility consisting of 2 residential treatment buildings and 1
administrative building in a proposed R-8 zone for Redmont Health
Services by The Land Group, Inc. - 5075 W. Cherry Lane:
I. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 08-001 Request for
a Miscellaneous application to modify the Development Agreement
to remove the requirement for cross-access between the properties
located at 125 W. Cheny Lane and 1645 W. 1St Street for Mittleider
by Dr. Dan Thieme -125 West Cheny Lane:
J.
with McLeran Well Drilling for $3,775.00:
K. Water Easement Agreement for The Cottages by Jeff Fullmer:
L.
Five Mile Drain:
M. Fourth Amendment to Lease Agreement with William A. Hon
for 660 East Watertower Lane:
N. Deed of Conservation Easement for Five Mile Creek
Restoration Proiect with Arthur Berry $ Kobe, LLC:
O. Change Order No. 1 for Class A Reclaimed Wastewater
Disinfection and Distribution Improvements with Star
Construction, LLC for $6,414.49:
P. Award of Bid and Authorization to enter into Contract with
(name of winning bidder) for Settlers Village Sauare -Phase 1
for (amount ):
Q. Contract with Star Construction for Well 27 Flush Line for a
Cost Not to Exceed $29,409:
R. Child Safety Day Property Use Agreement with State Farm
Mutual Automobile Insurance Company:
S. Addendum No. 6 to Agreement for City Prosecutor /Criminal
Legal Services with the Citv of Boise:
T. Approve 2009 Stenographic Service Agreement with MD Willis.
Inc. for Stenographic Services:
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 5 of 66
De Weerd: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: As noted, we are removing Item O from the Consent Agenda. Other than
that, I move that we adopt the Consent Agenda as amended.
Rountree: Second.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If
there isn't any discussion --
Zaremba: I believe I should have added for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
De Weerd: I appreciate that addition. And I'm sure second -- both seconds agree;
right?
Rountree: Certainly do.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Swear in Brad Hoaglun as City Council Member Seat #2:
De Weerd: Item 6. I brought to you two weeks ago the -- and asked for your
confirmation for appointment of Brad Hoaglun to City Council Seat No. 2. Tonight he
and his wife and I believe his in-laws are here with him. Brad is going to have his wife
join him and we have our City Clerk that will swear you in. So, if you will come forward,
Brad.
Holman: Raise your right hand and repeat after me. I, Brad Hoaglun, do solemnly
swear, that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the
State of Idaho and the laws and ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that I will,
to the best of my ability, faithfully perform the duties ~of the office of City Council of
Meridian, Idaho, during my continuance therein, so help me God.
(Repeated by Brad Hoaglun.)
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 6 of 66
De Weerd: You can take your seat up here. We also already have his name tag, so we
wanted you to remember who you were and who you represented. So, I do appreciate
his family being here tonight and certainly your family support. City Council is one of
those time consuming -- and, see, I waited until after he was swom in to talk about the
time consuming job this is. The definition of public service: Now after you're swom in,
you're swom at. So, we do appreciate you joining our team and certainly I look forward
to working with you. I know that you have high integrity and I look forward to your term
as City Council member.
Hoaglun: Well, thank you, Mayor. I'm pleased to be here. You have got a great crew
around you with your City Council members and your staff and we have a great
community and I just look forward to serving, as I said, to the best of my ability and just
continue to make Idaho -- Meridian a great place to live and work and I think we can do
that together. Thanks.
De Weerd: Very good. Council, any comments?
Rountree: Brad, just a quick welcome and as you can tell by the hair color up here and
the lack of hair, you will progress either to gray or gray and no hair or no hair, so
welcome and I'm looking forward to working with you for the next term and I know you
will have a few teaming epiphanies across the bow here before long, but you will pick up
on it with your experience that you had in other governmental activities and I think you
will bring a good fresh view of things from a state and regional perspective that we
haven't had before. So, welcome aboard.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
De Weerd: Or you can retain your youth and nice looks like the Mayor.
Hoaglun: I hope to do so.
Rountree: We all started that way.
Bird: Can't remember when, but --
De Weerd: First to go is the memory. Next is the hair. Okay. Anything else from
Council?
Zaremba: I would only add welcome. I'm looking forward to working with you.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Item 7: Department Reports:
A. Finance Department:
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 7 of 66
1. Ada County Landfill Rates /Service Update:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 7 is our Department Reports. We have our Finance
Department. Oh. Actually, we have the landfill rates under the Finance Department
and they have requested withdrawing this from the agenda, because they have not
actually had full action of the Ada County commission on how the increase of 16
percent is to be allocated, so -- because they didn't have that decision, it was hard for
Mr. Neal to come and break it down for us, which does make it difficult for SSC to bring
in front of you tonight for their public discussion. But we will get to that later. So, that
has been withdrawn from our agenda.
B. Legal Department:
1. Discussion on FY09 Benefits:
De Weerd: Item 7-B is our legal department, so I will tum this over to Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is our
annual renewal of our city benefit for our employees. As I presented to our directors
this morning, the renewal -- the benefit renewal every year is like a marathon that at the
end of it is a sprint. We take eight months of data with our different medical providers
and they are very, very slow in providing rates and potential costs of renewal, because
of the apprehension that they have about cost of services for medical coverage and,
then, once they do decide on what that number is, they'd like our decision within about a
week and it doesn't work so well for us to do it that quickly either. I can report some
really good positive things that we have for our benefits. We started out, as you well
know during the budgetary process we have to pick some number to put into the budget
to be able to have a -- some spending authority. So, I worked with the Finance
Department to come up with what we perceive to be a realistic number for benefits, so
that we can make sure we cover the expense without having to amend the budget the
first month we are into a new budget year. So, we anticipated an increase of in the area
of 15 percent for both medical coverage and dental coverage and all the additional
coverage that we have. The original request by Blue Cross, which has been our
provider for a number of years for medical coverage, was 15 percent. The Delta Dental
is our dental provider and their increase request initially was five percent. So, it was a
fairly significant increase. We have not had agood - or we have not had a bad
experience for our providers in the last couple of years. You may recall in the last few
years -- last year we had a zero increase from Blue Cross and the year before we had a
two percent reduction. So, we have had very good experience from them, but the cost
of these services are increasing and so we did anticipate that. We used Parcer
Consultants as our benefits consultants. They have worked with us and with our
employees, as well as negotiate these rates with the providers to try to get those rates
within a reasonable amount. So, part of the process we went through with our benefits
committee, as well as with my staff, was we remarketed our plan to see what would be
available in the marketplace at a better rate and we did find some programs in the
marketplace that were comparable. They had some things that were better and some
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 8 of 66
things that weren't quite as good as what we have, but their increase rate was
significantly less than what Blue Cross was suggesting. Blue Cross, to their credit, was
able to rework their numbers and find a -- find a number that was much more attractive
to us to stay with them as a provider, so they went down from a 15 percent increase to
now a five percent increase and the market rate that we were able to find out in the
marketplace was close, but it was not significantly less to make it worthwhile for the city
to switch providers and change the program for everybody and change all the cards for
everybody and the reporting process and all those things. So, our benefits committee
did meet, they did recommend remaining with Blue Cross, but there is a program out
there in the market that we would like to gain more information on, so we are looking at
some the strategies to at least evaluate that, so maybe next year in that portion of the
time we are in the sprint we are able to gather the information a little bit better so we
can compare an apples-to-apples comparison. But our recommendation is to renew
with Blue Cross at that requested increase. Delta Dental, when we remarketed their
plan, they were at five percent, they are not at two percent. When we looked at other
providers we couldn't find a rate that was better than what they were suggesting, but we
did also get an additional provider that was willing to tag along really at the same cost to
the employees and that's Willamette Dental and this is one that's kind of exciting for us
from HR to present to employees to give them the option to be a part of. As most of you
may recall, we don't provide for the city orthodontic coverage, because it's very
expensive, it doesn't have a tremendous amount of employees that can access it or use
it, it only applies to minors, it didn't apply to adults, so it's fairly limited and to try and
make the balance of benefits when everybody is paying for very few people to use it, we
really try to balance those dollars and try to make sure that we provide the most for the
most people at the lowest amount. Willamette Dental is a new provider in the area and
the basic difference from them is they are a location provider. Have you to go to them.
You can't go to a group of dentists on their list, you have to go to them. But they do
provide orthodontic coverage. So, it is a voluntary option for folks. It doesn't cost any
different for the city to use that if they choose, but it's all or none. So, they can't just opt
it for their kids or if they are adults, if they want to have adults that need orthodontics.
So, it's all or none. But if they have that option and it was no additional cost, the
benefits committee felt that it was a good opportunity for employees to opt into
something that might be of some value to some folks with no additional cost to the city.
So, we are very excited about that. The vision for -- the vision services still is going to
remain the same. The increase was 3.38 to use the ones that we already have, so that
was one where we have kept that the same and that was an affordable increase. The
last one was our EAP benefits. One of the things we have had in the last few years is
we have had employees that used our F~4P benefit and one of the things -- the
limitations that we have had in that program is that the city services e or the city pays
for three visits for employees for whatever issues may be going on, whether it's
financial, personal, whatever may be happening, and what some employees report back
to us is that three visits sometimes really doesn't get anywhere. I mean they sort of
start with the program and, then, all of a sudden it becomes very expensive to continue
on it. Some of it's covered by major medical, depending on what the issue is, some of
it's not covered by their major medical. Sometimes it can be covered under their flexible
spending medical coverage that we have that we offer, sometimes it can't. So, the
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 9 of 66
committee discussed it and we could increase the number of visits from one to five to,
hopefully, maybe provide a little better service for the employees and the cost of that
increase is 3,000 dollars for the whole city. So, we worked out when we -- when we
penciled it out per person it ends up being a fairly insignificant -- a fairly small amount of
money per employee per month to provide that. We have right now about 25 percent of
the employees use that service for a variety of different issues that come up and the
committee felt that was enough of a minimal expense for the savings that we
experience on the other end that it seemed like a valuable addition to our service to up
that for a tiny bit. The other ones are all at the same expense. There is no additional
cost. We have the same programs we have had in the past, short-term disability, long-
term disability. We have life insurance for employees. We are offering this year an
additional service the benefits committee was very interested in. We have a lot of
inquiries -- and this might seem a little odd, but we have a lot of inquiries for people that
want pet insurance and in the past pet insurance wasn't offered much in the
marketplace, because most of it did not cover your common expenses you may have for
a pet, your routine visits to the veterinarian weren't covered and so most people didn't
opt to go into that. There is a program out there that offers it. No cost to the city. It's a
voluntary program. The people pay a hundred percent of the premium. So, it's really
just an option for employees if they wish and we have had a number of people, so the
benefits committee felt it was something we could offer this year, see how many people
take advantage of it, if we think it's something to continue with, again, it doesn't cost the
city any money, essentially, all we are doing is inviting the vendor to participate in our
open enrollment period so people can sign up for it. It seemed a little odd to me when it
was brought to my attention, but, again, we have had enough inquiries we felt there are
a lot of people out there in our employee base that their pets are their kids and to them
it is important and it's something that is now more affordable and the vendor is from --
our reports from other -- our reference checks on them, they are very very good, they
cater their product to the individual people and to their individual pet and they work out
their premium based on their history and whatever information they can gather and so
we felt it was something worth offering. And so we are going to add that as a voluntary
service. So, really, I wanted to just bring to your attention what our renewal is for this
year. Unless you had any questions or concerns, I'd like to direct our provider to get the
contracts done with Blue Cross and forward those back to us, so that we can get that --
get that re-up before the beginning of the fiscal year between Blue Cross and Delta
Dental and all of our other providers. Any questions?
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: Go for it.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 10 of 66
Rountree: Do we need a motion for that, Bill?
Nary: Yes. A motion would be great.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would move that we approve the benefits committee's recommendation for
renewal of the medical benefits for the employees of the City of Meridian.
Bird: 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; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you.
2. Discussion of Doas Off Leash Ordinance:
Nary: Thank you. Shall I do the next one?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the next item is an ordinance that's in
front of you really for discussion. This is the dogs off the leash ordinance. We have an
ordinance in the city that doesn't allow you to have a dog off a leash anywhere within
the city. We have had some discussions with the parks department and the police
department about the dog facility that we have and making that available to the public
and they are working out some of the details between the parks department and police
and how we can make that logistically work and make sure it gets maintained and taken
care of and all the issues on that end. This is just an ordinance that would allow it to
happen, so it allows it at specific designated areas within the city you can have your
animal off a leash. If it's not of any concern or you don't have any questions, we could
put it on your agenda next week -- or I guess the following week.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions or discussion on this?
Bird: I think it's great. Go for it.
Rountree: Just a question, Madam Mayor. It's in draft form -- it will be in draft form and
it's been through code enforcement?
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 11 of 66
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, lalready --
yeah, it's in draft form. It's on your -- it's in your packet and that I already had sent that
to both the police and the parks department for their review and they both signed off on
it.
Rountree: Okay.
De Weerd: And they are actually very excited about moving forward with the dog park
and having that opportunity.
Nary: So, if everything is all right, I will bring it back in two weeks.
De Weerd: Okay. Let's do it.
3. SWAC Recommendation for Compass Public Charter
School for Playaround Equipment for $12,000.00:
Nary: Great. Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the last item I have
on there is the Solid Waste Advisory Committee's recommendation for the Compass
Charter School. This is a request for the -- our recycling funds, 12,000 dollars for some
play equipment at this charter school. One of the things they needed to verify and they
were able to verify is that this is accessible for the public use. That's one of the criteria
when we have dispensed any funds from the recycling monies, that all of the public can
use this. and, obviously, not during school time, but the Compass Charter School
assured us that just like any other public school that we have in the valley or in the city,
they are accessible by the public after hours. So, there are -- it is available for the other
folks. There has been adiscussion -- and Mrs. Kilchenmann from the Finance
Department has been out this week -- to try and verify exactly how much we have
remaining in the account for the solid waste funds. What happens sometimes, as you
can imagine, the committee will recommend approval, the Council will approve that, but
the expenditure may occur in one fiscal year or another. And so there has been some
overlap and so we just wanted to verify what Mrs. Kilchenmann assured me is that the
Council approves this expenditure, that if we had less than the full 12,000 in this budget
year, she is very comfortable that we have more than enough in the account, because
they keep track of the total amount that's provided by SSC and it generally has always
exceeded the budgeted amount that we have. So, what she would, then, recommend is
that we expend the remaining of the funds -- this is the last one for this fiscal year,
spend whatever is remaining in the account and if there is any remainder left, then, we
would just do that in the next fiscal year. So, she's not concerned that it's going to be
any problem. Like I said, generally, the account's been somewhere in the area of
100,000 a year and our budget amount is 65. So, we have generally always had more
money than what we expend in these requests. But that was the only little wrinkle I
wanted you to be aware of.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 12 of 66
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Councilman Hoaglun might be scratching his head wondering what this is all
about, we are giving money away. We have aprogram -- our recycle funds, those
funds that are gained back in excess of the cost of the program, come back to the city
and we distribute them on a matching basis to folks who want to use recycle product,
park benches, picnic tables, playground equipment, that sort of thing, in public spaces
and we have a committee that reviews those and makes recommendation and that's
what we are dealing with now. So, we get a fair amount of money back through the
recycled program that way, as opposed to SSC just taking that and adding that to their
bottom line, they actual bring that back to the city.
Nary: Yeah. And just to follow up on Council Member Rountree, this Council, through
the recommendations from the Solid Waste Committee, has funded a food bank vehicle
to take recycled food before it was sent to the landfill and food that could still be
distributed and was still -- still edible that could be distributed to the folks that are in
need. We have funded a reader board sign that promotes recycling on Linder Road out
at Sawtooth Middle School. They have funded benches and playground equipment in
both public open spaces and pathways in subdivisions and things like that to, again,
promote recycling and we are very proud of this program. It is the only one in the valley
and returns the money back to the community in this kind of fashion and doesn't just go
back to the bottom line. So, it's avery - it's a very positive program.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I would like to add that this SWAC thing was set up by SSC. They brought
the proposal to us and it's been very well used throughout the community. I know the
association I belong to has been able use it for bleachers out at the American Legion
Field. So, it's -- it's a great program and it's something that recycling is paying off and
all of the citizens of Meridian can pat themselves on the back for doing the recycling,
because that's where this money is coming from and we appreciate it.
Nary: We had a meeting yesterday and not to again promote the program, but it's
become so popular -- this is the first year I can think of that we actually spent all of the
entire budget. Normally, we have had money left over, because we have a no -matter
how much we promoted it, sometimes we just didn't get enough applications. This year
we have had a number of them. We have two new ones for the next fiscal year for the
committee to consider that are fairly large. In fact, we have made a decision yesterday
at the meeting to start honing that criteria a little bit, because we may actually run out of
money, which is unique, and we wanted to be sure that we could provide as much to as
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 13 of 66
many people as possible. So, we are also going to be looking at that and probably
bringing that back to the Council as the criteria maybe sharpens up a little bit.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: You and I -- this is on recycling, it's not on SWAC, but we -- at our new City Hall --
and Iknow anybody that's been in construction knows how much stuff -- how many 20
yard dumpsters was hauled out to the deal. Ninety-eight percent of our trash has been
recycled -- or 90 percent of our trash has been recycled at the City Hall. That's
fantastic. And it's --
De Weerd: I'm song, I don't want to make anyone nervous, but I have to stand up.
Rountree: You all don't have to, however.
De Weerd: Yeah. All rise.
Bird: Somebody was telling us how young they were a minute ago?
De Weerd: Okay. My back doesn't feel so young. Smart aleck. Okay. Thank you.
Nary: We need an approval for that.
Rountree: We need an approval.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve the 12,000 dollars from SWAC to the Compass
Public Charter School for playground equipment.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, roll
call vote, please:
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
C. Public Works Department:
1. PW Departmental Reorganization:
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 14 of 66
De Weerd: Item 7-C is our Public Works Department. Mr. Bany.
Bany: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Councilman. Hoaglun, we
would -- on behalf of the staff of the Public Works Department I would like to welcome
you to the City Council. We look forward to working with you in the months and years to
come. Thank you.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Barry: It is my pleasure to present to you this evening the -- an update, essentially, on
the Public Works reorganization. In April of this year I initiated a process to review the
Public Works organizational structure. The review was intended to take a critical look at
roles, responsibilities, and reporting structure of the staff within the Public Works
Department and to determine if improvements could be made by making modifications
to the organizational structure. The process that we went through took about three
months bi-weekly meetings and started with the development of a strategic leadership
team consisting of 11 senior management staff members in the Public Works
Department. These management team members represented all sectors of the Public
Work Department to insure that we had representation from each facet of the
organization and to also insure that what we did in one sector of the organization did not
have negative implications for the other. Moving in this manner also allowed us to
insure that we had some kind of cross-training, if you will, an opportunity for senior
management in one sector to be exposed to the differences of another work group, that
include challenges, differences of opinion, working structure, so that we could all gain a
better understanding of how the Public Works Department functions as a single unit.
We first began by developing operating rules and also defining the scope of our review
and our primary objectives were several. First, to insure that as we moved down the
path of reorganizing that we placed the right resources in the organization in the right
place. We also wanted to be sure that once we positioned the right resources in the
organization where we felt they were needed most, we, then, identified the right
individuals to serve in the positions that were identified. We also wanted to identify and
close gaps in service area, delivery, customer class, and other areas that we felt were
lacking under our current organizational structure and we wanted to insure that we had
clear succession pathways for those staff in the lower ranks, so that they could move
through and up the organizational structure with mentoring and coaching throughout the
process in the career, rather. As I mentioned, the team met for nearly three months off
and on bi-weekly. Our work included evaluating various organizational structures
available to us. We looked at specifically five different structures. We talked about the
pros and cons of each of the structures, how they worked, how they might benefit. the
organization and we also, then, as a joint group, selected a functional
departmentalization structure, which is similar to -- almost identical to the structure we
did have. It makes a lot of sense for the Public Works Department. We reviewed and
revised our mission and vision statements, because as we proceeded through this work
we realized that we wanted to make sure the organization was positioned to
accommodate future needs and so we wanted to identify what those future needs were
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 15 of 66
and staff did a really good job coming together and identifying the fact that our mission
and vision statements as currently written are not as clear as we'd like them to be and
they don't challenge us to the degree we felt that we could take on the challenges of the
future. So, we spent considerable time talking about the mission and vision statements
in the Public Works Department and refined those vision and mission statements to
achieve and establish various goals for the department to insure that we move the
organization from where we are now to where we would like to be at some point into the
future. We -- all of this work culminated in the development of a new organizational
frame work, as well as a new organizational chart for the Public Works Department.
Throughout the process our work was monitored by consultants, a staff from a
consulting firm called Aspireon, as well as the Mayor, and it was reviewed by the
Human Resources Department and also our Public Works Council liaison. Our
proposed modifications at this point in time include moving four basic positions from our
operations -- or the operations sector of the organization to our Public Works
engineering sector. Also to reconcile inconsistencies in about a dozen different job
titles. We realize that there were some significant problems and who was called what
and who did what and who was described doing what. So, we wanted to rectify all that.
We also, through our work, have identified eight vacant and currently filled positions that
require reclassification to insure that the work that was identified in our -- our
organizational chart was properly categorized, reallocated and appropriately titled.
Finally, we have added two new FTEs to the Public Works organizational chart to insure
that we could fulfill the challenges and obligations that we -- we identified for ourselves
through our mission and vision statement. Now, while the focus of our review was not
on cutting operational costs, we did achieve a reduction in the proposed personnel
costs as a result of our review of almost 10,000 dollars annually, despite the addition of
these two new FTEs. I wanted to also mention that while one or two staff in the
organization may be transferred from one work group to another, it is important to note
that no one currently employed in the Public Works Department will be let go or see
their current salary reduced as a result of this reorganization. The steps that we are
going to be pursuing over the next 30 days or so are several. We wanted to make sure
that we were working on a transition plan. We feel like that half the work has been done
and we have another half to do and that is the roll out or implementation of our
proposal. So, we would like the next couple of weeks to develop a transition plan,
which will include several pieces and parts. We have not shared the results of our
reorganization with the staff as of yet. We are still wanting to make sure that we refine
job descriptions, that we have the positions properly categorized, and that we had the
proper pay schedules, at least that met what we preliminarily believe they need to meet.
That work is going to take some time to accomplish with the assistance of the Human
Resources Department. We wanted to make sure that we didn't rush the roll out of this
to insure that staff were not hearing about the results of the organization in a public
meeting, but, rather, were hearing it from their supervisors and the department director.
So, while we are working on the development of this transition plan, we hope to also
accommodate and accomplish the important work of classifying and titling and
benchmarking various important positions that have been identified as either new in the
organization or it being augmented to cover the areas of importance that we feel need
to be covered. What I'd like to do is report back to the City Council in a few weeks,
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 16 of 66
hopefully with the transition plan in hand, as well as the full organizational chart, the
schematic and all the detail associated with our Public Works reorganization. I just
wanted to give you this evening a sense of what we have been up to over the last
several months and let you know that this --that the results of this work are coming your
way, but it is a bit premature to share those results just yet, because we do want to
protect and lessen -- we want to protect staff and lessen the anxiety of the staff
members as it relates to the roll out of the reorganization. So, I wish I could bring more
detail to you this evening, but that is going to be forthcoming. We want to make sure
that we have got our staff on board and certainly want to do that with the help of the
human resources director and our consultant on the project. So, with that I hope to be
back in touch with you in a few weeks and give you the finalized version of what we
believe we have in front of us and, then, entertain any questions or comments you have.
With that I'm happy to address current questions, comments, on our process or any
concerns you might have as it relates to transitioning or roll outs or just general things
that you want us to consider as we move forward on the project.
De Weerd: Council, any comments or questions?
Bird: He addressed mine.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Tom.
Bany: Thank you.
D. Police Department:
1. Mutual Aid / Joint Powers Agreement Regarding
Controlled Substances and Illicit Drugs:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 7-D is our police department. Chief Lavey.
Lavey: Madam Mayor and Council, what I have in front of you is -- actually, I should get
my -- and I think I'm in the class that you guys were talking about earlier, I have both
gray hair and no hair, so --
De Weerd: And you have only been the chief for half a year.
Lavey: A year.
Bird: And you're only 21.
Lavey: Twenty-nine.
Bird: Twenty-nine. Oh. Okay.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 17 of 66
Lavey: That's what I told them today. Twenty-nine. What I have in front of you is what
we call a mutual aid joint powers agreement and I'm sure everyone on Council, except
possibly Councilman Hoaglun, have seen this in the past. And, basically, what this is is
a document that gives us legal jurisdiction in other areas at the time that we are
requested, such as the one that I talked about last week where Boise police and Boise
fire requested mutual aid with -- from Meridian police and fire. We responded to their
jurisdiction and we had legal authority while we were over there. What's unique about
this one is that we have now, based upon the election of the sheriff in Canyon county,
as we have Canyon county sheriff, Nampa, and Caldwell also on board and so what you
have in front of you today is a mutual aid power -- joint powers agreement between both
Ada County and Canyon county. So, essentially, what that means is if we get a major
incident in Meridian and we need to call for help, not only are we going to get resources
from the state police and Ada County, we are going to get resources from Canyon
county as well. So, basically, what I would like to do is answer any questions that you
may have and, then, request the authority to go ahead and sign this document.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just to follow up on Chief Lavey. One of
the reasons we asked to put this on a department report is because the signator on this
document are all the chiefs and the sheriff and not the mayor or the commissioners and
so there is a liability clause. It does match the state code, so it's certainly not an issue
for the city, it's just for the -- not the mayor that was being asked to sign it and so that
was our recommendation was to bring it in front of you and get the chiefs authorization
-- get the Council's authorization for the chief to execute this document and, again, I
don't think there is any issues with the liability, since it follows the state code.
Lavey: It, essentially, basically, says that we accept liability of our people, whether they
are working in the city or outside of the city.
De Weerd: Thank you, chief.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would just comment that one of the provisions in there, of course, is that
each jurisdiction will cover all of their own costs, whether it's equipment or whatever,
and whether they are the requestor or the volunteer responder. That seems fair to me
to begin with. I would only say that maybe that provision should be reviewed again after
two years, three years, something like that, to make sure that there isn't one jurisdiction
that is under funding itself and calling for help more often than it should. I'm not
suspicious of any group that might do that, but I would say that at some point we should
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 18 of 66
make sure that the request and the response are sort of coming out even round the
region.
Lavey: Councilman Zaremba, I totally agree. I can tell you for the record in the past it's
never been a problem. I can also point out that unbeknownst to me that they have set
up an executive board to review this yearly and it has both the sheriff and one police
chief on it and Meridian city I guess is the first police chief. So, I will be on that, so I can
take a look at that for you.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Question, chief. Under section two of the purpose it does look like that you
do have discretion that -- whether or not to render assistance. There might be a
situation here in the city you're dealing with and you get a request and, then, it's up to
you to determine whether or not to provide that assistance, am I reading that correctly?
Lavey: Yes. That's true. This document does not give anybody the authority to make a
demand on services. It mainly is -- is we make the request and if we have resources we
can send, then, we send. The one thing that we have always dealt with in the past and
even dealt with last week is that Meridian city comes first and once the city's covered,
anything that we can spare, then, we will spare.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any further questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Not hearing any -- no more questions or anything, I move we approve the mutual
aid joint powers agreement regarding the controlled substance and illicit drugs for Ada
and Canyon county and all the city police departments and for Chief Lavey to sign for
the City of Meridian.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. If there is no discussion, Madam
Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 19 of 66
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Lavey: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. This was not, to my recollection, added to the agenda. Joe, did you
have something that you wanted to add?
Rountree: It was on the Consent Agenda.
De Weerd: Oh, was it on the Consent Agenda?
also bring to your attention we did receive an e
has given us the guidelines of a Presidential
September 11th. Certainly it is in -- as a memor
September 11th, 2001. He is calling upon the
Patriot Day with appropriate ceremonies, act
display the flag at half staff from the homes or
silence beginning at 8:46 a.m., eastern dayligh~
the innocent Americans and people from arou
result of the terrorists attacks of September 11
your attention, so when our flag is flown at
Okay. Okay. Council, I just wanted to
•mail from the governor's office and he
proclamation declaring Patriot Day on
al to what has happened in our past on
people of the United States to observe
vities, and remembrance services, to
that day and to observe a moment of
time, which is 6:46 our time, to honor
id the world who lost their lives as a
th, 2001. Just wanted to bring that to
half staff that you do recognize and
appreciate what the symbolic gesture is of that action. 50, to our public as well.
Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd: Item 8. There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from August 12, 2008: AP 08-003 Request
for City Council Review for an Appeal of Director's Determination to deny
alternative compliance to allow a portion of the former Idaho Truss site to
be used for shared parking for the Broadway Integrated Proiect (CZC
08-018) by Ward Schwider -130 East Broadway Avenue:
De Weerd: So, we will move to Item 9, which is a continued Public Hearing. This has
been requested to continue to October 7th, as there have been some new occurrences
in the issues that they needed to resolve with Union Pacific. Anna has told them that
Council's desire was not to continue this forever, but there is a specific reason why this
has been continued. So, with that said, does staff have any additional comments?
Canning: No, ma'am. Whatever the pleasure of the Mayor and Council is. I will
present the project if Council doesn't want to continue it, otherwise, I will wait to hear
what action you want to take.
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 20 of 66
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, how -- how comfortable do you feel that this UP thing is going to be settled
by 10/7? Are we just --
De Weerd: Mr. Bird, maybe I will answer that question. I'm sure it was not -- it was
more rhetorical than a question. But our experience with UP has been similar to this
and having a difficulty getting a timely response. Like I said, there are some new
situations in this and so, you know, it does seem logical to continue to -- or address their
request for the 10/7 continuance. But, certainly, that decision is yours.
Bird: Madam Mayor, follow up.
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: I have no problem with continuing it, but I -- knowing the history like we know,
that's just the first continuance.
De Weerd: Well
Rountree: This would be about the fourth.
Bird: It would be about the fourth now, but --
De Weerd: It is a reminder we have had similar experiences ourself. So, it is frustrating
and maybe they have to get on a plane to Omaha themselves to figure out that -- what
they really need to do.
Bird: I don't -- whatever the other three -- I can go with --
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I wouldn't say that I have a problem continuing it. If there is a possibility that
they are resolving something, I would say if by the time we get them to October 7th, if
there has been no resolution, that we may want to make some other decisions, but I
don't have a problem waiting another month while they work with UP.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I just wanted to say on this issue and the other issues we will
be dealing with tonight, I have gone through the records and the minutes of past
meetings and the applications and the comments and different things, so I'm prepared
to vote on this and the other items as they come up, but continuing on one more time --
to me this is their first continuance, so it's not a problem with me.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 21 of 66
De Weerd: Love the new guy. Okay.
Rountree: Fresh eyes.
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: I don't have any problem.
De Weerd: Okay. If Council so desires, I would entertain a motion to continue this item
to October 7th.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 9 to October 7th,
2008. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from September 2, 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 - 3415 West Cheny Lane:
De Weerd: Item 10 is a continued public hearing from September 2nd on AP 08-004. I
will tum this over to Mrs. Canning.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the McDonald's Redbox
project. It's located at 3415 North Cheny Lane, which is near the Ten Mile intersection.
The application before you tonight is a City Council review of certificate of zoning
compliance. The proposed development is to install a Redbox movie DVD rental kiosk
on the property just north of the entrance for the drive-up window. The kiosk is 24
square feet in area. Council continued this item for staff to research what options are
available to the Council regarding actions and to that end Section 11-5-A.4, which is the
administrative process section of the UDC, give the director the authority to require
conditions of approval that are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety,
and welfare and prevent undue adverse impacts on surrounding properties. Granting a
certificate of zoning compliance is listed in table 11-5-A.2 as an administrative process.
Therefore, Council may direct the planning director to impose conditions of approval on
the CZC. The outstanding issues of City Council -- I just wanted to briefly summarize
the testimony that you heard last week in discussion and it focused on the following:
One. Although the plans comply with current code, there is concern that the proposed
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 22 of 66
24 hour use conflicts with information given the neighbors during talks with the
developers and the builders. Two. The adjoining residential property owners have
expressed concern over the 24 hour use. Three. The Council suggested moving the
use inside the McDonald's. The franchise owner did not feel the interior design lent
itself to having the use inside. Four. Council suggested limiting the hours of the
Redbox through use of a gated enclosure. And, five, the city recently passed UDC
amendments that limit the hours of operation within the C-N district from 6:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m. Additionally, you have received two letters of testimony, one from Steve
Caldwell and one from Mary Ann -- and, forgive me, Mary Ann, I just forgot your last
name. My apologies. Chrisman. Thank you. I have provided the Council with
recommended motions, just because on the City Council review ones it's a little unclear
as to what the proper motion is. So, a motion to deny the application would be
upholding the issuance of the CZC as it is. Council also has the ability to approve the
City Council reviewed and modify the certificate of zoning compliance. Essentially,
you're directing me to re-issue the CZC with conditions. Or Council has the option to
approve the City Council review and deny the certificate of zoning compliance out right.
So, those would seem to be the three options. If you want to add conditions to its
approval, but modifying the CZC and I'm sure that's clear as mud. Let me answer any
questions you ma have, please.
De Weerd: thank you, Anna. Any questions from the Council?
Bird: Not at this time.
Rountree: I have none.
Canning: And I do believe your public hearing is still open.
De Weerd: Yes, it is. Okay. Council, if there is no discussion - or questions for staff, I
do have one person that's - oh. Does the applicant have anything to add.
Canning: Ma'am, I'm the applicant, but --
De Weerd: Does the -well --
Canning: We have somewhat treated the Redbox applicant and the applicant as well.
De Weerd: The affected party, I guess. I don't know what to call them, McDonald's or
the --
Rountree: Redbox.
De Weerd: Redbox. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Darmody: I will. Rick Darmody. 12959 North Andys Gulch Road, Boise.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 23 of 66
De Weerd: Thank you.
Darmody: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I brought a few pictures. Could I
give them to the city clerk to share with the Council? The pictures in the file just
represent a few other locations where we do business with Redboxes and face
residential areas and it kind of gives you an idea of the distance that they are. I just
went to the Redbox and turned around and took a few pictures to share that with you. I
wanted to share with the Council we haven't had any complaints from neighbors dealing
with Redbox or noise or anything to that regard since the Redboxes have been installed
at our other locations and, excuse me, I did investigate with Redbox, McDonald's and,
then, also Sanitary Services concerning the trash noise complaint from the last week's
hearing. I'll start with the trash one. I spoke to them, they admitted to me that they
probably were showing up a little early and that they would change our time to be as
close to 8:30 as they could. They said sometimes the trucks do run a little early and
that city code restricts them from being at a commercial development that's adjacent to
a residential development before 7:00 a.m. So, the gentleman I spoke to made the
change, so, hopefully, the neighbors will notice it, a little bit of difference there.
De Weerd: We made that phone call, too.
Darmody: Okay.
De Weerd: And we got the same response.
Darmody: Followed up on multiple times. I spoke with Redbox about the -- the gate
idea that Councilman Bird mentioned. They don't have a gate and, to be perfectly
honest, they are not interested in developing one for a one off situation. I spoke to
McDonald's about relocating to the north portion of the property and they expressed
strong concern to me that it would create traffic flow issues in the front of the building
that, quite honestly, they thought the Council would probably be concerned about as
well, so they more or less vetoed that idea. And I did investigate putting the Redbox
inside and from my perspective it would be a strong preference not to do that, it would
require me to tear out furniture that I just put in and rearrange the lobby that was just
installed at my own cost. Redbox does not -- is not interested in participating in that. I
really think that the Redbox is a -- is not nearly as obnoxious of usage as it's been
portrayed to be. It's pretty innocuous. People drive up, they use it, they drive away.
We haven't had any complaints. That would be --
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I do have one person on the public hearing sign up
sheet. Mary Ann Chrisman.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 24 of 66
Chrisman: Yes. My name is Mary Ann Chrisman. I live at 3440 West Elk Creek, which
is directly behind McDonald's. Madam Mayor, Council, first of all, Steve Caldwell could
not be here this evening and he asked me to read his short note that he did a-mail the
Council and Mayor.
De Weerd: And it is in front of them right now.
Chrisman: Okay.
De Weerd: So, thank you.
Chrisman: So, basically, the homeowners association position is that they are opposed
to having the kiosk on the outside of the McDonald's for reasons that were discussed
last week. Also, I did send an a-mail -- it was rather lengthy, but I do represent -- when I
say represent, I have spoke to many of the neighbors and they all pretty much hold the
same position that they do wish to have the video box on the outside. I know that the
gentleman that was just here commented about how the -- and I appreciate the concem
about the trash noise and how that was addressed. So, I thank those that did make a
phone call and did address that. But he made the comment that they haven't gotten any
complaints about the Redbox. Well, with all of the problems we have had in the
neighborhood of the trash at McDonald's being picked up so early in the morning - it
literally sounds like a cannon going off and I never called -- think to call to complain and
I don't know of anybody else that's called and complained. A lot of times it's just -- we
just deal with it. And so I don't think that that is really a measure of whether it's really a
problem or not. I, myself, and many of the neighbors have talked about the fact that we
have been to McDonald's -- it was mentioned in the last meeting that - or not
McDonald's, Albertson's where the other Redboxes are, that there is a congregation of
people there. I mean I have been there where there is just a crowd there of kids
running around waiting for their parents and so on and so forth. My teenagers have
gone out at midnight with their friends to rent a movie and we are concemed about that,
because we are right -- that -- with that box being in our backyards literally. So, we are
very concemed about that being on the outside. And the concem we have is in the
wintertime when it gets cold, you're going to have people idling their cars in the parking
lot while somebody's standing there in line at the Redbox. Now, it was mentioned last
week this is one of the busiest locations in -- I think it was the city or the state. I'm not
sure what they said. But it's a very busy location. If they need another Redbox they
should put it over at Albertson's, that's more conducive as far as can handle the traffic,
it's not in our background, but to put it literally, we are spacing all of out backyards,
when you have got the winter coming and you have got people idling in their cars on
Friday and Saturday nights, we feel it is going to be a problem and I can tell you I
represent many many neighbors that are very concemed about that. Thank you very
much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any additional testimony on this item? Yes, sir.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 25 of 66
Canning: Madam Mayor, did you want me to put the photos up? I have that technology
available if you'd like.
De Weerd: Council, do you -- sure.
Canning: Do you want all of them or -- let me know what you want me to do.
De Weerd: Well, I don't know. I guess I thought I would see pictures of Redboxes and I
didn't see anything. So, I'm not sure of the pertinence of the pictures personally, but --
so, Idon't know how to advise you on that. Yes, sir.
Seaman: My name is Scott Seaman. I live at 1413 South Benewah, Nampa, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Seaman: I have been involved with Redbox for the last year. I have installed 95 units
throughout the northwest. At this time I haven't received any complaints or conflicts by
the public at any of the locations as far as Redbox goes. In most cases they are happy
about the Redbox being so close to their house. I get many comments anytime
anybody knows that I'm involved with Redbox. They have got nothing but comments.
Their only complaint is they don't hold enough movies for them, that they are out of
movies. So, I think to kind of help her with her question as far as the lines and whatnot
that are at the existing Albertson's, adding another machine in this location will alleviate
those lines, so that there isn't a line when people come up to them and they come up to
them and the transaction takes a couple of minutes to pick one out, get the movie, and
they leave. Adding another unit in this location would only help shorten those lines. I
have been involved in two other City Council meetings and they reviewed a Redbox
installation. They were both in Oregon. In both instances they received no opposition
from the public and were approved by the city council. Locally, as Rick with McDonald's
was stating, we have at least five stores where the property adjacent to the McDonald's
is residential and at this time I have received no opposition of the exterior Redbox. Any
questions?
De Weerd: No. Probably just a comment. I love your ideal world, but I'm one of those
that stand in front of a Redbox for more than a few minutes, because I have to read the
definition of the movie and, then, I am technology challenged and so it never works like
it promises to, so I guess I would say my experience was a little different than the one
you painted, but I wish I were more adapt or --
Rountree: Adept.
De Weerd: Yes.
Seaman: Maybe I should rephrase. Those that are familiar with the unit and visit them
often, if there is not a line there, yes, the transition would take a couple of minutes to do,
if there is not a line there and possibly you know the movie you want to pick out.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 26 of 66
De Weerd: Okay.
Seaman: If that's fair enough.
De Weerd: That is fair. And I really feel the pressure when there is a line to not do that,
but I'm spending a dollar, so it's important. Okay. Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any further -- yes.
Thesons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Daryl Thesons. I live at
3487 West Fir Creek Court.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Thesons: I'm directly behind the McDonald's. As I spoke last week on -- my number
one concern with my wife and I is the lighting at the McDonald's late at night. It was
stated last time that the light -- the kiosk would be self lit, but I have taken time to notice
as I'm coming home late at night after the McDonald's lights are out how dark that
property is and how dark the right of way between our yard and that parking lot is. If we
are encouraging people to come into that dark parking lot to a self lit kiosk and spend
time in there, I'm just not comfortable with it. You know, if there is going to be a Redbox
there I would absolutely want that parking lot lit, so that the police driving by can see
what's going on in that parking lot if we are encouraging people to be there. I wouldn't
feel comfortable walking up to that box with a big dark parking lot around me with
people heaven only knows where in the bushes waiting to rob me, because they know I
have a credit card on me, because I have walked up to that machine and just used it.
So, therefore, we have kind of an interesting situation. We have a dark parking lot that's
ideal for the neighbors that the bedrooms are on the back side of their house facing that
parking lot, but now we have an unsafe environment for people lining up to use that
Redbox. The other side of that if we leave the lights on -- we are already on until 11:00
at night, so we have adjusted our sleeping times and tried to buy blackout shades and
to accommodate that. Now, we have lights on 24 hours a day. So, people using those
facilities are safe, they can walk up and be comfortable with it. But now we have a light
shining in our bedroom window 24 hours a day. So, I would ask that you consider this --
the impact that this Redbox would make on our community. You know, we have tried to
be good neighbors with the McDonald's. I use Redbox a lot. I'm just like the Mayor, I'm
there, I'm renting movies, maybe not in the middle of the night, but I'm standing there
picking out movies, you know.
De Weerd: Hopefully you're faster than I am.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 27 of 66
Thesons: Maybe. I don't know. Depends on what's left in the box, so -- but I would ask
that you consider the impact that this is going to have on the neighbors of this facility
and to know that we are definitely opposed to this Redbox being outside 24 hours a
day.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony? Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have no questions.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I have a question for Anna, I think, on this. I just wanted to be
sure I understand that the C-N district -- you mentioned here it's recently passed 6:00
a.m. to 10:00 p.m. are hours of operation, but is this McDonald's under that same or
does it go to 11:00 -- he just mentioned 11:00 p.m. So, is there a difference?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Hoaglun, that
ordinance with the time restrictions was passed after the McDonald's was approved.
The city attorney and I will work together to figure out an enforcement plan for those --
that provision. We haven't done that yet, but we will work on that one.
Hoaglun: Okay. If I may follow up, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Hoaglun: So, those businesses that -- there is a grandfathering in, since -- for those
businesses that already had hours established from this, but to follow up, the Redbox,
as it come in, it says the plan to comply with current code. So, what we can do, then, is
-- as I was reading through your -- as I understood it, we can say no to Redbox, we can
say yes with conditions, or yes and just let them have it 24/7 as planned.
Canning: Correct.
Hoaglun: Okay.
De Weerd: That is correct. You're a fast learner. Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Even if the McDonald's itself is grandfathered to the hours that they had
before this UDC amendment went in, the Redbox is a separate business. It's not
ancillary to a food service business, it's a separate business, and Idon't -- I don't see
that it should be given any special treatment to allow it to be 24 hours in an area where
we want things to stop between 6:00 and -- I mean between 10:00 and 6:00 a.m., we
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 28 of 66
want them to be quiet next to residential. I don't have a problem with there being a
Redbox, but I can't agree that this separate use should be allowed to operate 24 hours
and -- 24 hours a day outside of the building or south of the building. They have
eliminated the other solutions, but I don't see it as ancillary to the food service business.
This is a separate business that's asking to be a drive-up business 24 hours a day and
that part of it I feel I would need to deny.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is no further information needed from staff or the
Redbox McDonald's folks, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move we close the public hearing on Item No. 10, AP 08-004.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 10.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion? Do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I think Mr. Hoaglun ought to make this motion.
De Weerd: Whoa.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I think they are picking on the new guy here.
Rountree: But since he's a new guy, Madam Mayor, I would move for discussion or
consideration that after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move that
we overrule the director's decision regarding CZC 08-004 as presented in the staff
report for the hearing dated September 9th, 2008. I further move that the director shall
issue approval with the following conditions and the condition is that the Redbox be only
allowed if it is installed inside and operated interior of the McDonalds restaurant.
Zaremba: Second.
Bird: That's your motion?
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 29 of 66
Rountree: That's my motion.
Bird: I second it.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion from Council? Okay.
Madam Clerk, will you, please call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I was just -- it just occurred to me
that if installed inside they don't actually need a CZC, but I think we can figure that out.
Item 11: Public Hearing: AP 08-005 Request for City Council Review for an
Appeal of the Planning Director's denial of Instant Equity Auto's request
for Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval (CZC 08-010) to operate
without connection to city services AND denial of an Alternative
Compliance (ALT 08-004) request for reduced landscape buffers adjacent
to Fairview Avenue and a residential zoning district for Instant EQUity
Auto by The Land Group -1065 East Fairview Avenue:
De Weerd: Okay. Well, thank you. Item 11 is a public hearing on AP 08-005. I will
open this public hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Instant Equity Auto
project. It's located at 1065 Fairview Avenue on the south side of Fairview west of
Locust Grove. The application before you tonight is for City Council review of the
planning director's denial of the CZC. Thank you, guys. The proposed development
includes a request to operate a car sales lot on the subject property that primarily, with
the request to not connect to city sewer, and with reduced landscape buffers adjacent to
Fairview Avenue, but there are also some ancillary issues and those are they would
also -- do not want to provide cross-access to adjoining properties and they do not want
to annex a contiguous un-platted adjacent property. This one's shown as R1-M. And
that property is held in common ownership with the property in question. The applicant
proposed to convert the existing single family home and detached two car garage for
the auto sales lot. And I have some photos. These are standing at the property lines
looking into the property. So, there is from the front. There is from the east side. And
that's along the west side looking south and this is on the south side of the property
looking north. These are some of the adjoining sites. To the north is developed. To the
south is not. This is the view of the site across the street at Fairview. This is the Brood
Awakenings and these are the structures you saw on the pictures on the previous slide.
This is the west and to the east. I struggled with how to communicate this in somewhat
of a clear fashion to Council, because it is a very complicated set of requirements over
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 30 of 66
the years, so I thought the best way to present it to you would be by year and kind of
give you the history of the project. The project was annexed in 2001. At the time it was
-- the proposed use was for a doctor's office. At that time -- I have kind of picked out
some of the key issues and what the requirement was. There was a requirement for a
conditional use approval prior to any development. All landscaping had to conform to
our ordinance. If we are required to have an imgation system, they are required to have
a sidewalk along Fairview. They were also required to remove any wells, septics and to
connect to city sewer and water. The issue with regard to cross-access to adjoining
properties was not discussed. Driveway has to conform to ACHD policy and a DA was
required as a condition of annexation. However, the property was annexed without a
DA. So, we have never had a development agreement on the property. In 2003 there
was a request to modify the original annexation from 2001. The proposed use at that
time was a small retail store. The provision regarding the requirement for the CUP was
not up for discussion. So, therefore, that one did remain. They did discuss whether the
landscaping needed to conform to ordinance and what Council approved in 2003 was
that existing landscaping may be modified to conform with the intent and purpose of the
landscape code pursuant to altemative compliance. If the future use of the property is a
permanent use in the C-G zone and the building footprint is not expanded or modified,
modifications to the landscaping may include additional trees as required and in the
imgation system, if there is not one provided on the site. New construction on and/or
the request for a Conditional Use Permit or subdivision of the property will require
complete conformance with the adopted landscape ordinance that affected the time of
the new application. So, with regard to irrigation system, it said may. Sidewalks were -
Council moved to take out the ACHD requirement for sidewalks along Fairview. Wells
still need to be removed, but the septic system did not and they didn't -- they were not
required to connect to city sewer with this provision. The applicant shall connect to city
water prior to any use of the property. Sewer is currently not available to this site.
Applicant shall be required to connect this existing structure to the sanitary system -
sewer system when it becomes available from the south. Expansion of the existing
structure or new construction on the subject property will not be allowed unless sanitary
sewer is brought to the site by the applicant. Again, cross-access to the adjoining
properties was not discussed. The driveways still need to conform to ACHD policy and
the DA required -- the DA was still discussed and mentioned within that 2003 report
and, yet, we still don't have a DA in 2003 either. So, in 2008 the applicant came in with
an auto sales use, which we have had a code amendment in this time. Auto sales
previously in 2003 and 2001 would have been a conditional use requirement, now they
are apermitted -- principal permitted use. So, because there is no DA on the property, I
was going by code and only code, since we failed to obtain a DA upon annexation. So,
I determined that a CU was not required, because it was a principal permitted use, but I
held them to all the standards. Therefore, landscaping needed to conform to our
ordinances, with the exception that altemative compliance for the landscape buffer
along Fairview is still an option, but it needs to meet the intent and purpose of the
landscape ordinance as suggested in 2003 and as defined by the UDC. The current
proposal for their altemative landscaping on the front buffer depicts 17 and a half feet
along Fairview. Twenty-five feet is required. The 17 and a half feet is the minimum
allowed through altemative compliance. You can only go down -- you can't reduce it to
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 31 of 66
more than ten percent of your lot width. The proposed altemative is to plant two
additional trees within that buffer. Furthermore, the vehicle display area immediately
adjoins this 17 and a half foot buffer and staff is fearful that this sets an unwelcome
precedent in that we continually have enforcement issues related to vehicle display
areas, parking within. landscape buffers. The application does not state how the
proposal complies with the intent and purpose of the landscape ordinance. Where am
I? Okay. The irrigation system is still required. Sidewalks adjacent to Fairview are still
required. Wells need to be removed, as well as septic and connect to city sewer and
water. I did want to mention that with regard to city sewer, the city engineer has given
the applicant an altemative route for sewer, since the properly to the south has not yet
developed. He has made available a connection in Fairview at Jericho, which is
approximately 160 feet away. Still need to connect to city water. Cross-access to
adjoining properties. Driveways conform with ACHD policy and, as I mentioned before,
since there is no DA, I was not looking for them to record one at this point. So, the
outstanding issues before Council - I have formed these in a series of a number of
questions to highlight perhaps what your options are with regard to your decision
tonight. I think the first question is since a DA was not recorded, should Council direct
staff to de-annex this property? The second one would be should the applicant bring is
the contiguous parcel to the east for annexation and seek new DA provisions with
regard to both. properties? If yes, the contiguous parcel could gain access to sewer in
Fairview at Jericho and that would be pretty much immediately adjacent. Now, those
two hit at the larger picture and perhaps not at the CZC issue that's before you tonight,
but certainly are related and are options. Should the applicant enter into a DA with the
provisions negotiated in 2003 and if yes should the applicant obtain CU approval for the
auto sales lot as required in 2003? Is the altemative compliance proposed sufficient to
meet the intent of code and is having the vehicle display area over the septic leach field
acceptable. Moving on to another option with regard to tonight's application. Should
the city stand by the 2003 provisions without benefit of the DA. If yes, the questions are
essentially the same. If the altemative compliance proposed is sufficient, should they
have a CU and is the vehicle display over the septic leach field acceptable. And the
third question would be should the applicant abide by the 2008 code requirement. If
yes, should the city engineer approve the septic system use, particularly with regard to
the location of the leach field. Is the altemative compliance proposed sufficient to meet
the intent of the code and should staff require cross-access to the adjoining properties.
Once again I have provided you with a couple sample motions. A motion for denial in
this case would be upholding the director's decision to deny the CZC and the altemative
compliance. A motion to approve would be overruling the director's decision and, then,
directing me to take action on one or more of those applications. And with that I will
answer any questions you may have, Mayor and Council.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Council, any questions at this point?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Need some answers. No questions.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 32 of 66
De Weerd: Okay. Since we don't have an applicant that is not the city, I would ask for
the affected party if they have comments. Well, hi.
Butler: Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. Young, old, standing, sitting,
whatever. It's good to see you. I do have some pictures that I supplied by a-mail to
Anna, but because we didn't have a chance to get together I also have these in hard
form, so I will provide those to the Council.
Holman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm sorry, could you state your name
for the record.
Butler: I'm sorry. Joann Butler. 251 East Front Street in Boise. I apologize.
Canning: Madam Mayor. Ms. Butler, I do have your photos.
Butler: Thank you. I'll pass these out, nonetheless, because there is some writing on
there. With me here tonight are Dan Burrup and Ed Christensen, who own Instant
Equity Auto, and presently run their business on Fairview Avenue east of here in the city
of Boise and this is a picture of the existing business. They will speak briefly to the
Council tonight. Also with me tonight is Mr. Van Elg from The Land Group and The
Land Group compiled the application for the certificate of zoning compliance or CZC.
Yes, we are appealing the denial of this certificate of zoning compliance and, yes, we
are finding facts at fault with the staff report and some of the facts that have been
presented to the Council. We appreciate this Council's endeavor in our experience to
support your staff whenever possible. In this case I think that our request to have the
Council consider the facts and this testimony before you, it may be that staff was only
saying to us, look, we can only go so far. This is our interpretation of the code and after
that it's up to the Council to review our decision and come to reach a fair conclusion and
we are asking you to take that fair and balanced conclusion and direct staff to issue that
certificate of zoning compliance. We are here to show the Council tonight that issuing a
CZC and allowing the applicant to improve the property will be both beneficial to the
public and the private property owner, which is a balance that I know this Council strives
for. Issuing the CZC will be consistent with your decision to annex the property in 2001.
Your decision to modify the annexation conditions in 2003 and also consistent with your
decision to modify your entire zoning ordinance by adopting the Uniform Development
Code. In addition to this property -- Anna, could you show the next slide? Is that
possible? Which is similar to what -- this is the site that the applicant is attempting to
develop in connection with the past approvals by the city. To add to some of the facts
with regard to the annexation, our predecessor annexed and rezoned this property as
commercial in 2001. At that time it was not identified as a doctor's office, there was no
use identified, and the transcript that we provided the Council in our appeal shows that
-- that Councilman Borup and the applicant at that time had a discussion there was no
identification of the use. And, in fact, there was no identification of a development
agreement at that time and I will provide the -- you do have all those transcripts in your
-- in your packet. It may have been that there was some intention, but I can tell you that
it does not show up in the files or in the findings of the Council. The owner of the
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 33 of 66
property, after that -- when Mr. Smith tried to -- that was the contract purchaser of the
property in 2001. He did not go forward with the development of the property and so in
2003 the owner of the property approached the city asking for some relief to a couple of
the conditions of approval. The request centered on two things. First, it centered on
relief from the full landscape ordinance provisions, because of the location of the home
and the building on the lot and staff at that time supported that request and so did
Council. The Council said that the revised condition of approval will allow staff to
approve a new landscaping that meets the intent of the ordinance, but does not require
complete compliance at this time. The Council said -- and if we tum to the next page,
which is also the last page of the handout, we have the two modified annexation
conditions and what the Council said was the landscape could be modified if we
conform, as Anna said, with the intent and purpose of the landscape code and I'll
explain that, yes, we do and if the future use is a permitted use, which this is, and if the
building is not expanded, which is it not being expanded. The Council at that time said
we might require additional trees and we are providing additional trees and it will require
an irrigation system and we are supplying that irrigation system. The release sought in
2003 also centered on the connection to the sewer system, because it wasn't available.
Staff at that time supported that request and as did the Council and the Council said
that -- and I'm quoting: The proper sewer connection for the subject property is located
450 feet to the south. The original condition of approval would have made the
connection to city sewer cost prohibitive. The Council was absolutely right about those
costs and it's true that after several months the city engineer did change its position and
said that rather than going to the south when that property developed, that we could
extend into another sewer shed north into Fairview and extend a sewer main to the
east. That would cost 36,000 dollars, as opposed to 1,500 dollars to go to the proper
sewer shed to the south. Starting -- and I think Mr. Burrup and Mr. Christensen will
probably explain, because they attended all these hearings, beginning in October 2007
we started to have both pre-application conferences and meetings with the staff. And
we designed the property as that site plan in the last -- it's also the third page of your
packet shows, based on and reliance on those modified conditions that the Council
approved and the guidance of staff in those hearings that they would support alternative
compliance for the landscape design. I will just give you one example. Our original site
plan that we brought to staff showed 25 foot of landscaping across the frontage on
Fairview for a portion of the frontage, coming down to the 17 and a half feet for the
remainder of the frontage and as Anna explained, we -- that is the minimum that we can
reduce the buffer -- the landscape buffer with. At staffs encouragement we were asked
to take that buffer to a consistent 17 and a half feet across the frontage, because staff
felt that it would be visually more appealing. At that time we agreed to include two extra
street trees, 23 extra densely planted shrubs, because of this reduction that we were
asking for. By the way, if that is not enough landscaping, we are more than happy to
provide more landscaping in that buffer. The rear setback shown in the site plan is 15
feet and at staffs request we were -- we indicated that we would put up an eight foot
fence at the rear property boundary. Before I go on I want to -- I want the Council to
understand that the actual landscape width that would be required at the rear is not 15
feet, but five feet. Staff confirmed for that in meetings that it would be a five foot
distance commercial to commercial buffer. Although staff has identified our rear as
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 34 of 66
residential, it's residential in name only and what your code requires is when there is a
vacant property, which this is to the rear, even if it is zoned for residential use, the
Comprehensive Plan designation provides what the actual use will be. This is in 11-2-
8.3. That's tabled. It says that where the adjacent property is vacant the director shall
determined the adjacent property designation based on the Comprehensive Plan
designation. So, what we have behind us is commercial property for this purpose. I
have had personal conversations with the engineering firm that is working with the
owner of that property. That property owner -- I think this Council will remember -- I
think, as it got to Council, came to the city with a condominium project and the city
rejected that project. That owner is now in the process of pulling together an
annexation and a rezone application for the city in which they are requesting
commercial. So, what are we asking for? We are just asking for recognition that what
the Council did in 2003 was to strike a balance for good planning that supports two
things, the public health, safety, and welfare, as well as not putting an undue burden on
this particular private property owner. The Council recognized, then, that the health,
safety, and welfare of the public was not going to be jeopardized by the continued use
of a septic system that is approved by Central District Health. The Council recognized
at that time that the public health, safety, and welfare wouldn't be jeopardized by waiting
to hook up when sewer was available to the south, which would, then, not put an undue
expensive burden on this property owner. The Council recognized that the public's
health, safety, and welfare would not be jeopardized if we created a landscape plan for
this site that meets the intent of the landscape ordinance and I'm going to read a few
sentences from 11-3-B.1, which is the landscape ordinance and this is the purpose and
intent section of the landscape ordinance in part. The City of Meridian recognizes that
landscaping can be a significant expense to business people and residents. At the
same time landscaping improvements improve the appearance and attraction of
commercial areas. The intent of these regulations is to achieve a balance between the
right of individuals to develop and maintain their property in a manner they prefer and
the rights of city residents to live, work, and shop and recreate in healthy and attractive
surroundings. And that's what we .think are altemative compliance that the Council in
2003 said that we could come back and go through, that's what we think we have met.
We think we have met that intent and purpose of your landscape ordinance. I actually
think with a very straight face we can all look at this and say that's a pretty good job,
well done, on the site that you saw that exists today. In addition, we also meet the
code's criteria for altemative landscape compliance. 11-5-B-5-B-2 says that we have to
meet only one of the following conditions. We meet three of six. And if the Council will
let me continue, if that's a stop forme. I don't know.
Bird: I don't know.
Butler: Okay. Thanks. It's the fire department. Okay.
Rountree: Nod of heads. I'm in control of the meeting at this point.
Zaremba: I don't think that timer sound was related to this.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 35 of 66
Rountree: Go right ahead.
Butler: Thank you. The landscape alternative compliance criteria -- we have to meet
one of six. We meet three of six. There is a criteria that says that the -- there is some
site conditions that are such that full compliance is impossible or impractical or there are
site and space limitations that are not usually found. And the site is constrained by an
existing building and that is the basis for the original Council decision in 2003 for
modifying that landscaping condition. They recognized that that building is sitting there.
They said as long as that building is sitting there and its footprint doesn't change, we
understand the need to come in and ask for an alternative compliance. We will give you
that opportunity to show our staff that you can landscape -- not at the full 25 width, but
in a good way until that building is changed. Another criteria -- staff found that they
didn't believe that the environmental quality would be improved as a result of the
reduction in buffer width and they related that to the fact they thought that that meant we
were going to increase the paved area over the septic system that exists. That is not
correct. The city engineer absolutely -- and I think Central District Health would do this
as well -- requires us to put anon-pervious surface over the septic tank and we are
absolutely going to comply with those regulations. I wish I could stop there and just say
that's all we are asking for, acknowledge that we have done a great job on landscaping,
acknowledge that 36,000 dollars versus 1,500 dollars to connect to sewer is too much
to ask when something is going to be coming in the not too distant future. But as Anna
mentioned, there are a couple other things that have cropped up in our discussions with
staff and it made their way into the staff report, although not in the denial letter. Those
issue are cross-access, the conditional use application that Anna mentioned, and a
development agreement. The issue of cross-access was brought up in discussions with
staff and it's a laudable goal. If this community wants to try to assist ACRD reduce the
access points along Fairview and to benefit the pubic that~is a laudable goal. I question
whether or not that particular -- the city can require two private property owners to agree
to cross-access and, in fact, we found that an impossible condition to meet. Some of
you may know the property owner to the west of this. They would not even entertain a
concept of cross-access and, in fact, when that property owner finally, either on contract
or whatever -- somebody else went -- that's in Ada County, by the way. They went to
Ada County for an approval and Ada County has approved it and at that time that
application was sent to Meridian, Meridian did not comment and did not make any
recommendations to Ada County, including no recommendation for cross-access. So,
we really question why this is an issue for us where we were put in a position where we
can't deal with a next door neighbor and, yet, that next door neighbor is not at the same
time asked to deal with us. With regard to the --
De Weerd: You will need to summarize, please.
Bird: Okay. Two things. Conditional use. We need to make a very strict legal
distinction here. The condition of approval that was in 2001 and 2003 calls for a
conditional use for a planned development. That is an animal that is no longer in
existence in the city. This is not a conditional use that was required, it's something
that's no longer required. And I have to say that I have had clients and I have been in
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2006
Page 36 of 66
hearings where your staff has said when somebody has tried to invoke conditional use
for a PUD, that staff has said please don't go down that worm hole. If we do that we will
have to go back and address many other applications.
De Weerd: Ms. Butler, that's not a summary.
Butler: Okay. That's one. Finally, development agreement. It wasn't an issue in 2001
and 2003, but if staff and the Council are saying we would like you -- and we were never
offered the option of that. If you are saying to us we want you to put into writing that you
will develop as you have told us here and record that document, I have no problem with
that. I don't think it gives you anymore comfort than your decision itself, but we would
certainly do that.
De Weerd: Your time is up.
Butler: I'm asking you to, please, direct the staff to issue the certificate of zoning
compliance. We will stand for questions and other people may speak to the Council as
well.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none at this time.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Rountree: Madam Mayor? Go ahead, David.
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Would you have an opinion as to the remaining useful life of the septic
system that's there?
Butler: I can't answer that, but I think our client can answer that.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. Joann, you mentioned a couple things that I need
clarification on. You said if that's not enough landscaping, we'd do more, and my
question to you is how much more?
Butler: You know, I'm going to have Mr. Elg probably answer that, who works for the
landscape -- The Land Group and the landscape architect at that -- at that firm can
probably answer that. I guess from my perspective, since I just had two trees planted
today, this is fresh in my mind and they were very clear about keeping them somewhat
separated, so they didn't interFere with each other. So, somewhat more is something
that wouldn't hurt the existing landscaping.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 37 of 66
Rountree: The other question is related to the sewer hook up and sewer hook up costs
and you mentioned two figures and two directions and neither one of them related to the
comment that I had heard staff present that there is a potential hook up location, I
believe, to the east some 150 feet away.
Butler: Our client owns two different parcels here. In order to get their business off the
ground -- and they are doing this in two phases and they have applied a you know, this
is, basically, what they have told staff: We are applying for the first phase here. The
sewer hookup that you're talking about is on the other side of this second property.
Rountree: Excuse me. If you could identify which property that is.
Butler: Yes.
De Weerd: There is a --
Butler: Thank you. It's closer to Jericho -- Fairview and Jericho is where I understand
the hookup is and Jericho is to the east of these two parcels We have
Rountree: So, we are talking about ownership of both of these parcels?
Butler: That's correct.
Rountree: Okay.
Butler: That's correct. And what we have told staff that we would do -- two things. That
when we get to the second phase, in compliance with that 2003 condition of approval,
which says if we do new construction, which we would with the second phase, we are
going to have to comply completely with the landscape ordinance. That's one thing.
But with regard to sewer, if we don't use our existing septic here that 36,000 dollars that
I said would be required to be paid just for the development of this parcel. Now, I don't
want to stick my foot in my client's mouth, but if it should get to be the point where they
are at their second phase and they are closer to that hookup and sewer hasn't come
from the south, I'll ask them to address as to whether or not the would, then, hookup to
the north. Did that answer your question?
Rountree: Spoken like a wonderful lawyer.
De Weerd: I do have a question. I guess my concern with reduced landscaping area
would be it's still in question what the future right of way width of Fairview is going to be
and if this totally takes landscaping out of that scenario, I guess with the landscape
buffers we have in the developed areas, if they start eating away into that you still have
green left and what we didn't want is pavement, sidewalk, pavement.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 38 of 66
Butler: Right. And appreciate that, Mayor. I think -- here is an answer for you in light of
the lack of knowledge I have on the right of way width that ACHD might require my
clients in the future -- and my clients may have more information on that. When our
client does come back for the second phase, because of your July changes to your
conditional -- to your code, all commercial uses are gong to have to come to you for a
Conditional Use Permit and that will mean that you will transmit to Ada County Highway
District and at that time you will get the information that you're talking about, so that you
know how wide that right of way will be and so that you can impose appropriate
conditions on the two phase, so that you are assured of that green-scape that you're
looking for.
De Weerd: This is one -- just acomment -- editorial comment. This is one reason why I
like the expiration -- or expiration of annexations if they don't develop within a certain
amount of time. It takes the guesswork out of it. It makes it pertinent to current codes
and it answers things like this.
Butler: And a development agreement back in 2001 and 2003 would have as well. I
can just tell you I just know from the record and going through your files it just was not --
it just wasn't done.
Canning: Madam Mayor. Page seven of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law,
item number 20, states: The subject annexation request and zoning designation -- oh, I
started in the wrong place. Sorry. Page six. Number 17. It is found that if the
developer pays for the requested improvements and complies with the conditions set
forth in these Findings of Fact, number 16, and all sub parts, the economic welfare of
the city and its residents and tax and rate payers will be protected, which requirement
shall be included in a development agreement, the condition of annexation and zoning
designation.
Butler: Anna is absolutely correct and I did not see that in there. I don't think that
changes the issue. It wasn't done. And so if -- if it had been done, what it would have
contained would have been the modified conditions of approval, because the 2001
development agreement would have been modified to contain those conditions. So, I
think we are, basically, back at the same place, that we -- the development agreement
would have incorporated the conditions of approval and that's all we are asking you to
let us live by. We think that we have shown you that we meet your alternative
compliance, your intent and purpose, and we are asking you to recognize what the
Council did back, then, again. Let us hook up to sewer at a more reasonable cost.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for Ms. Butler? Okay.
Butler: Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor, can I clarify the record on a couple other items?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 39 of 66
Canning: With regard to the property to the east, you may recall we had the applicant
come in and talk to the City Council about annexation. She had promised that she
would annex. We had petitioned against the -- to the west. I'm sorry. Thank you. We
had petitioned Ada County with a lengthy response with regard to the proposed site
plan, which was largely ignored, as was our complaints with regard to the large billboard
that was put in that was -- again, the comments were ignored. It was appealed up to
the county commissioners. We commented at that. We have put a note in the file that,
basically, says when this property comes in for annexation that they need to abide by --
with all the things that we have requested thus far. So, at this point I have quit wasting
my time providing lengthy comments to Ada County with regard to the piece of property.
I just wanted to clarify that.
De Weerd: It was very fresh in my memory.
Canning: Yeah.
De Weerd: So, when Ms. Butler said that we didn't comment, I thought, hum, I think I
over commented, but --
Canning: Yeah.
Butler: I think Anna has underscored the fact that it was not easy to talk to the property
owner to the west.
Canning: And with regard to cross-access, we don't require that they obtain the
permission of the adjoining property owners, we just required that they provide access
across their property to those adjoining properties. When the adjoining properties
develop, we require the same from them.
De Weerd: And we did ask for that on that property.
Canning: Yes, we did.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Well, this is a public hearing. Is there additional
testimony? Yes, sir. Just in case you wondered, it is three minutes.
Christensen: Okay. My name is Eddie Christensen. 1882 North Prestwick in Eagle,
Idaho, for the record.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Christensen: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are not a major enterprise.
It's -- I'm an accountant. He's a stock broker. My partner. We are trying to beautify the
city. I mean it's -- we are not trying to do anything wrong or not beautify things in those
terms. I don't speak as eloquently as Joann, obviously, but the reality is all we are
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 40 of 66
asking for is what we were told and a year ago when we started this project we sat in a
meeting with staff and we were told that certainly we could operate in -- on the premises
and once that sewer was brought to us from the south, certainly we would connect at
that time. In April we were instructed that was -- that no longer applied, that now we
had to start from ground zero, basically, as far as we were concerned after all these
things and -- and so, really, there were certain things that were told us that we were --
that we based everything upon and why we proceeded and things like that and,
ironically, we are back to ground zero and here we are asking for what we are asking
for. So, I don't think our demands are outrageous. We are simply trying to do things
right. Believe it or not, we are ethical, even though we are auto salesmen. We weren't
seasoned in the business, obviously, so we run a good business and we wanted
contribute to the City of Meridian and, you know, we took an opportunity and bought that
property and, really, the things that we are asking for, you know, I hope aren't too -- too
unreasonable, so thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Yes.
Christensen: The septic system -- we actually did have looked at. It was pumped out.
It was in perfect condition. So, we did have an okay on that. We are as excited to get
rid of that thing as anybody, with our existing building. We spent the money that we
have had, anyway, we have spent to beautify it and make it better. We had a lot of
issues with the roof and things with our existing building in Boise. We have spent
adequate money to make it right. We would do the same with this property and to be in
compliance and we would be the first ones to hook up were that sewer to come. It
wouldn't take six months. We would hook up to it as soon as we possibly could. But in
terms of the water, just for the record, we do have water to -- from the street right now.
So, water is really not an issue. It's really sewer, so thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Burros: My name is Dan Burros. 2284 Piazza here in Meridian. Madam Mayor,
Members of the Council, thanks for your time. I know it's late. Just -- I don't want to
beat a dead horse, but we did purchase this property, we did hire The Land Group. We
did expend a lot of money with the assumptions that were given to us and
recommendations by the staff and, unfortunately, none of the members of the staff that
were in those meetings with us are here tonight, but it's undeniable that they
recommended to us several items and that's really all we are asking for. We are asking
for you to give us what they told us we could have. What -- as Joann presented, legally
appears we should have. And that is alternative compliance on these landscaping. We
are happy to put in additional trees, bushes, whatever it is, we want our place to look
great and the better it looks the more attractive it will be for our customers. We are
happy to do whatever it takes as far as that goes. We were told, in fact, that before we
hired The Land Group that we could hook up to city sewer as soon as it was stubbed to
our property and we would have six months to do so. And that was told us in -- on more
than one occasion by staff and also the alternative compliance on the landscaping.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 41 of 66
Those are recommendations primarily that they gave to us and so we were just going
forward with those. So, I appreciate your time. Do you have any questions forme?
De Weerd: No. Thank you.
Elg: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Van Elg, 462 East Shore, Eagle, Idaho.
I'm with The Land Group. Madam Mayor and Councilman Rountree, in response, to
your question about landscaping, what you see right there is it's fairly dense as far as
trees. I don't know that we could fit another tree in there -- I'd have to talk to one of my
landscape architects -- without causing problems with growth if they start interfering or
growing together. I'm sure that we could talk about some other lower growing bushes or
shrubs if we -- if we needed to, but, again, this is an auto dealership and we don't want
to be completely obscured from the street either, so we would be willing to discuss with
staff any additional requirements and certainly consider what that might be. If there is --
if anybody does want additional landscaping there. Madam Mayor, you had mentioned
that you were concerned about ACHD's encroachment -- future encroachment. They
are requiring an additional ten foot of take of right of way there. As we understand it,
that's what they need for their planned growth at this point. So, what you see is what I
think will be there for quite some time with the -- with the landscaping. One clarification
-- I think somebody mentioned that there would be a pervious -- or an impervious
surface over the top of the septic system, drain field. We are actually installing an
impervious -- or a pervious concrete over the top of, which is something that's -- I don't
know if you have seen it, but Sienna Elementary School has got it now, it's the largest
pour in Idaho. We have been spear heading that. It's a great new product. DEQ a the
agencies love this product. It allows the water to go completely through. We will
scratch off the top soil of this property above the septic system and it will continue to
drain just as if it were -- you know, it's a pervious surface. So, it will accept the water.
We won't alter that -- that drain field as a condition. So, I don't think that that's going to
be a problem. There was a discussion about cross-access and at one point we
discussed the fact that this is an auto dealership. Most dealerships will close off their
lots at a certain time of night. That's their product. That's their life. They don't want
free flowing traffic going through their project during the middle of the night to -- their
product could be damaged or keyed or whatever that might be. Of course, that doesn't
stop people from going onto the site, but it's a deterrent and so one discussion was
made was we would be willing to combine our access with the pool or the coffee house
at the time and provide an access right there, but that didn't come about. And, in fact,
the billboard was in place there, which really caused some problems with trying to get a
cross-access through there. We were told by ACHD that they were going to require --
when that project came through they were going to require them to slip their access.
That didn't happen either and no comments were made by ACHD either during the time
of the pool and fly applications. So, I think those are the -- I think those are the only
issues I -- that I had. If you have any questions I'd sure be glad to answer them,
though. And if I didn't answer yours appropriately, Councilman Rountree, I would be
glad to --
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 42 of 66
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Yeah. Van, you addressed them. I just wanted to make sure how much --
how much was. So, this landscape width is the 17 and a half feet --
Elg: Correct.
Rountree: -- minimum, but you did make a comment that makes me want to ask
another question when you said you contemplated a joint access with this -- with this
neighboring property, I assume at this location, since your applicant -- or your client
owns this, it seems to me that maybe that there, working both, kills two birds with one
stone, gives them a little more spot for displays and makes it -- makes it, I think, better
for them ultimately. Now, I don't know what their plans are, but I'll bet it's auto related or
some such. So, anyway, I would throw that out in terms of, you know, take a look at
your site plan, you probably could save them some money doing that. The other
concern I have is that apparently the sewer is stubbed over here and I don't know if --
it's up here? Okay. It's at the street, but it's on -- it's right at the property line or close
to --
Elg: No. We'd have to -- it's in the street. It's -- whatever the corridor is there.
Rountree: I'm going to get Clint to -- it's in Fairview?
Dolsby: Yeah.
Rountree: Okay.
Canning: Council Member Rountree, it appears to be 25 or 30 feet from this property
line toward the north end of Fairview.
Rountree: Okay.
Canning: Very close.
Rountree: It's very close. Okay. All right. Anyway, I just want to get in my mind where
that is, because it seems to me that that's probably ultimately going to be your closest
location. I'm not asking you for more trees, I think you got sufficient trees. I agree
sometimes you can get them too close, but --
Elg: Madam Mayor and Councilman Rountree, if I could, we have discussed that issue
of moving that access over there to center -- between the center of two properties and
we can't meet the offset distances from Jericho Road when that builds out. So, ACHD
wanted us -- in fact, they'd prefer that we leave it back over there by the coffee house,
but we have shown them that this is an acceptable location for us. They have approved
-- we have gotten the -- an approval from ACHD today for the access location for the --
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 43 of 66
Rountree: I understand that, but when you access this property, you're not going to
meet the offset either.
Elg: I'm sure that it will come from -- it will come from this existing access point and/or
from Jericho Road when that develops.
Rountree: Just use the same one. And, then, in terms of your site layout, as far as
cross-access, I understand the desire to not have the access through the site at night.
We actually have some retailers in the community that have the same concern and they
actually gate their cross-access with others at night, but during the day the access is
open and I would say that, again, Anna's comment is we don't require that you have the
access, but you make provisions for that access on your property, so at some future
date it can happen and I would say just looking at it, it would be in these general areas
possibly, that maybe provisions could be made at some point in time in the future that
that access could be allowed. We all know the issues to the west. But you're going to
want to combine your properties anyway and I don't know that that's an issue.
Elg: That doesn't seem to be an issue. Right.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Rountree. I was going to bring up the gate or the chaining
myself, so -- any other questions, comments? Okay.
Hoaglun: Question for Anna if I might, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay.
Hoaglun: It sounded like they talk a lot about the sewer to the south and what I'm kind
of divining here is that was a potential development going in in that south property that
did not -- and looking ahead that there be a sewer connection they could connect to
and, then, when that development did not go through, that kind of took away that south
access. Am I reading the tea leaves correctly on that one?
Canning: Yes, Councilman Hoaglun, and I'll let the city engineer fill in the details, but I
did want to point -- Touchtone Place was approved to the south of this property in July
of 2006. Now, that has since expired, the two years is gone, or the 18 months. So, it
has expired, but it was approved and it is annexed as R -- is it an annexed piece of
property and it's zoned R-15. That would have put sewer about 460 feet away from this
property line. Or it currently exists 460 feet. It would have brought the sewer to this
property line. Anything else, city engineer?
Dolsby: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Hoaglun, additionally,
once that development goes -- say if this development chose to build asewer -- if they
had the money to build a sewer through there, they would likely get reimbursed once
that development went through -- once that development went in, that Touchstone
Place or whatever ends up going in there, per our new reimbursement policy that we
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 44 of 66
are bringing to Council within the next couple months. And the other option for sure that
we already talked about was up on Fairview was in a different shed, but we agreed to
let them go that way if they would like to as well.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Clint, does that gravity flow from south to the north there in Fairview without going
outrageously deep?
Dolsby: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Bird, yes, it does.
Bird: Okay.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, did Van have a response to my question?
Elg: It was in response to the question about sewer from -- from Touchstone. We have
talked with the owner there, with Briggs Engineering, and we have actually discussed
the possibility of, you know, how soon can you bring it in, do you -- can you identify
where that might be. They just aren't willing to do that at this point, because they are
retooling that site, if you will, for a different application, different commercial use,
knowing that the original Touchstone piece has been denied. So, we are hoping that
that service -- that may come in. In this market who knows when it will happen, but we
have got good septic, we are putting pervious concrete on top of it, we have got water.
The site can function as it was previously approved I think, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Now, I guess I have a question for you. Are they keeping, then, the
house for their sales --
Elg: Yes.
De Weerd: -- place and so not any --
Elg: For the phase one.
De Weerd: Okay. So, not adding any structures. What is the signage? It's not this tall
thing that they have in there.
Elg: The other side of the billboard. I'm kidding. No.
Rountree: Sandwich board, uh?
Elg: Yeah.
De Weerd: You know how to get a denial now for that.
Meridian City council
September 9, 2008
Page 45 of 66
Elg: That might be something that these two better answer.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. If you will state your name for the record.
Burrup: Sure. Dan Burrup.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Burrup: And Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the sign on our existing property
at the address of 10221 West Fairview in Boise was, actually, grandfathered in. It was
built many years ago and so we can keep it as long as we don't make alterations and
we never have. So, in answer to the question of the signage on this new property, it
would simply be whatever is allowed by code is what we plan to put up.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: A question as it relates to the landscaping and an issue that -- that Director
Canning brought up. We do have issues with auto sales and propensity to want to park
vehicles on the landscape area and if it's not vehicles it's a thousand flags waving and if
it's not a thousand flags waving it's a lot of streamers and balloons and whatever. Your
sense of your marketing effort and that kind of an activity, because that's not something
we want to see.
Burrup: We intend to abide by the code, by the laws of the City of Meridian. As you can
see and maybe appreciate by the photo of our dealership, I took that photo yesterday,
just to -- Van called me in the middle of the day. It's not like we set the lot up for it to
look like that. In fact, I would change a few things just by looking at the picture, but
that's how we operate. You know, we do balloons occasionally. We don't have any
streamers. Those have powerful power lines in front of our dealership that we can't do
anything with. We intend to obey the law. We always have.
Rountree: Follow up.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Rountree: What's your intent in terms of improvement to the existing structure?
Burrup: Basically, we just want to improve -- redo the inside, just remodel, new floor -- I
mean nothing to where we are going to take down any walls or anything like that, we
just want to redo the building. People who were there prior had made some changes.
We are just going to update some things at this point.
Rountree: How about exterior?
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 46 of 66
Burrup: Exterior there is a little more paint work to be done and whatever signage will
be allowed by code we'd like to do. I think that's it.
Rountree: Your partner has another comment.
Christensen: Eddie Christensen again.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Christensen: Madam Mayor. I think the proofs in the pudding kind of. I don't know
what the relationship is with Boise, we are in no violation with Boise or Ada County with
our current dealership. We will not be, simply because -- I can't say that to our
neighbors on the east side of us currently in Boise, but we are in compliance e
complete compliance as it is right now. I think that should answer that question and
simply, yeah, we want to beautify the property. With what we have to work with right
now, you know, cosmetically there is some things that we can do to that building
certainly to make it look better. It is phase one. You know, we will have to come in with
a new plan for the next phase, but certainly, you know, we are still growing as a
dealership, so it may take some time to put anice -- blow that building off and put a nice
big building on there and things like that, but with the proper lighting and signage and
beautification of what we have to work with right now certainly we can make it work with
decent inventory. We are not a buy here, pay here, dealership, so we sell quality
vehicles, that type thing, which enhances the dealership. With the concrete and the
pavement that we are going to use -- we currently own Think Green Car Company as
well, it's basically a lease that we have on the comer. Our concept is really think go
green and so with the next building, the next phase, the reason we are going with the
concrete and the drainage and all these things, are simply to -- we are going to focus
mostly on hybrids and more efficient cars. It's really a new concept to the valley that we
are bringing in. We were on a -- recently interviewed by Channel 6 or 7, I think. They
did a big story on us with Intermountain Gas and things doing conversions to vehicles.
We have a lot of ideas. I'm kind of divulging some of those now, but it will improve that
area dramatically based on what you see right now when you drive by and see the eye
sore that's sitting there. So, you know, I guess, finally, in closing, it will be a classy
establishment as you drive by as long as we own it, so -- thank you and thanks for your
time tonight. I certainly want to get home to my family.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I do have an additional question. Noticing from the pictures that are up now,
the second building that is on the property is a garage-type building, it appears to be.
And so my question is other than washing the cars that are on the lot occasionally, are
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 47 of 66
you thinking of doing any repair or maintenance or other kind of work on the cars. You
need to be on the microphone.
Christensen: Yes. We will improve that as well. It will look similar to the building as
you see it now. We certainly wouldn't leave that in the condition that it's in and not
change that, too. Structurally we won't do too much in phase one, simply because of
the requirements and things that -- as far as that goes, but, yeah, it would be improved
as well. The entire facility would be improved with what we own currently with -- in
relation to 1065 East Fairview and, then, we would --
Zaremba: Madam Mayor. I wasn't actually asking about the building, I was asking
about the use of the building.
Christensen: Oh, the use of the building --
Zaremba: If you're going to do any repair on automobiles.
Christensen: Currently it's a storage facility. I mean there is not much we can do with it.
It's not tall enough to put a mechanical shop in it and that type thing. It would really just
be a storage facility. We may park a vehicle in there. We may just park -- you know,
put items for detailing and things like that, but in terms of a showroom, no. No. In terms
of glass and a nice pretty building with cars, no, it will not be -- because ultimately it will
be tom down.
Zaremba: Somehow I guess I'm not making my question clear.
Christensen: I'm song.
Zaremba: I'm talking about repair of automobiles. Are you going to do any
maintenance or repair on automobiles?
Christensen: No. That is not the plan currently.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: I just have a comment when you
don't think green on car lots, usually, because
would love you to think green on phase two.
think green on phase two, you know, I
they are just a bunch of asphalt. So,
Bird: Paint the concrete.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 48 of 66
De Weerd: Or concrete. Okay. Any other questions, wrap-up remarks? Well, it's not
like we have had ~ any public testimony that's contrary to what the applicant has said.
Any additional comments from staff? Okay. Council, seeing no further testimony, do I
have a motion to close the public hearing?
Bird: Everybody satisfied?
Rountree: Yeah. Go ahead if you want to make that motion.
Bird: I would move that we close the public hearing on AP 08-005.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 11. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Not having been here in 2001 and 2003, just what was your guys' task?
De Weerd: Change.
Bird: Our intent was to make it -- to make that property look nicer than it does now. Or
did then.
De Weerd: We could ask that before the 2000, too, to former council --
Rountree: Yes, you could.
De Weerd: -- at that time.
Rountree: Yes, you could.
De Weerd: So, what's your point?
Rountree: I just wanted to know if you could explain what your intent was and Mr. Bird
did that, so --
Rountree: Madam Mayor, just some observations and comments on what I heard and
Anna's questions that she posed to us. I think that in 2001 there was -- there was
direction by Council to have a DA completed on this property and I think that's still in
order and I would think that we would want to do that and I think the DA ought to reflect
that the testimony and responses that we heard this evening and what our current
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 49 of 66
ordinances, I guess, would allow. So, going through these questions I think a DA is in
order. I don't know that a CU is -- would necessarily have to be for an auto sales lot as
in 2003. It's not now. Alternative compliance for the landscaping -- I think they have
indicated that they'd do the 17 and a half feet. Not only that, they are doing landscaping
in the parking lot and the back property, which I believe is new. They are also -- I will
say my desire is that they at least accommodate cross-access on this property, so it
could be done in the future. As far as the vehicles over the septic leach field, if they are
putting the surfacing down as in testimony, that should be part of the DA and I think that
takes care of that particular issue. Should they abide by 2008 code requirements, I
think if they are going to modify the building they are going to have to meet whatever
code requirements that it's going to require as far as the code requirements and the
ordinance from the Unified Development Code. Previous approval by Council was
given direction on how to do alternative compliance with some of those features and I
think that that should be recognized, since we didn't develop a DA. We have talked
about cross-access. I believe as far as hooking up with the sewer, I would like to see
that done. And I know it's expensive. The problem with not doing that is, then, it's
deferred for ever and ever some more. The problem with doing that with the adjacent
property that they own and coming off of Fairview is that they could sell that, then, we
don't have it yet again. I understand their difficulty with the development to the south
and I don't know how to solve that problem, but some way we need to get that property
sewered. I don't have the language for the DA, but I think our intent that that happens
within a prescribed period of time needs to be in the DA. I like the effort that the
applicant's made to try to make this property look like something and I very much
appreciate if they have had any dialogue at all with their neighbor to the west, that, you
know, that's penance enough, but we still have some things we got to do. Those are my
comments.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We sit next to one another and I think word for word I agree with Councilman
Rountree.
Rountree: First time ever.
Bird: My first time ever.
De Weerd: That's getting scary.
Bird: That is. But, anyway, I, too, believe that we got to have a DA. We have got to put
a time limit on when we hook to the sewer, whether it's to the south or to the north and
I'm like Councilman Rountree, I don't want to see it two years from now. I know it's an
expensive process and probably the market out there right now isn't real conducive to it,
but we got to have a time limit and that's why a DA has to be. I believe that for cross-
access in the DA we make sure that in certain areas, certain widths on east and west
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 50 of 66
that buildings are not ever allowed to be built there, so you do have cross-access. Your
landscaping I can certainly agree with, but we have got to have -- we have got to have a
DA and we have got to have a time limit on the sewering, as far as I'm concerned. And
I, too, applaud you for going out there and fixing that thing up and making it -- it certainly
would be an addition to what we have got out there now. Thank you.
Hoaglun: Madam Chairman?
De Weerd: Yes.
Hoaglun: I have been given good advice in the past and I intend to follow it tonight is to
follow the wise counsel of your elders.
Rountree: Careful.
De Weerd: I'm not going to comment.
Bird: I'm sure your not always going to say that.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is no further discussion, do I have a motion?
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, before the motion, is the direction from the Council -- I think I
understand all the conditions you were looking for. In fact, just to clarify, I think the
issue of the leach field probably -- Central District Health -- maybe Mr. Dolsby can sign
off on what they are trying to do to make sure that it's satisfactory, but -- but do you
want us to negotiate with them as to what time period is reasonable to put in that into
the development agreement for the hook up to the sewer -- I mean that really is the
36,000 dollar question it seems like that -- and what I think I heard from Mr. Bird is 18
months seems about the farthest out or something less than that, if I understand
correctly.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary, I guess those questions are more appropriate when we have a
motion, so --
Nary: Just trying to help them form in their mind what they want to put in the motion.
Bird: I agree with you, Bill, I --
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 51 of 66
Zaremba: I agree with what has been said, but I guess my question would be would we
want to see the terms of the development agreement, in which case we need to
reopen --
De Weerd: Mr. Bird and Mr. Nary --
Nary: Sony.
De Weerd: -- this question's actually directed to Mr. Nary, so it's important that he
listen.
Nary: Sorry.
Zaremba: Would we need to reopen the hearing and continue it to see the DA?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Iguess -- Council Member Zaremba, I
guess because I don't know the -- I mean they did offer to do a DA. I think the
conditions that you have discussed to this point, other than the sewer issue, are things
that I think have been put on the record, but because of that provision -- and this is
somewhat unusual, that might be probably wiser than you -- than the Council making
that motion and direction and, then, we can't reach a resolution and we just have to
come back anyway. That might be wiser. But Mrs. Canning has a different perspective,
it appears. She seems to be waving over there.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, with regard to the DAs it says that
the Council can initiate one as long as it's the subject of a public hearing. It doesn't
need to be the subject of an annexation public hearing. So, I think the comments you
have made tonight can be rolled into a DA and perhaps what we could do, rather than
put it on your Consent Agenda, is to have it as an open discussion for the night once
staff has had a chance to work with the applicant and come up with those provisions for
the DA, if the city attorney agrees with that thought.
Nary: That's perfectly fine. I mean as long as -- I just don't want you to pass something
that we come back in two weeks and say we can't reach a resolution with this and they
are not willing to sign an agreement. So, however we want to have that conversation
back in front of you -- Mrs. Canning's suggestion is good.
De Weerd: So, Mr. Nary, does that mean you continue this item contingent on that DA
or --
Nary: Madam Mayor, I think that's what I -- what I understood you to say. Did I
misunderstand that?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you have two options. You
could continue this item and we can work on the DA provisions for you to consider it at a
continued public hearing or you could take action today and, then, we could work on the
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 52 of 66
DA provisions and once the DA is ready for Council, we could bring that to you with the
negotiated agreements.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If we don't have a motion and a DA with provisions how are you going to work on
anything?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council --
Bird: I mean I think we need to go forward and make a --
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, maybe I'm not tracking the same as Mrs.
Canning. I think you can either continue it to a date certain and we can bring back what
you're requesting in a development agreement or you can move to do that and we will
bring it back when we reach a resolution or bring it back in front of you when we don't
reach a resolution. So, I -- I think you can do it either way. I don't really have a concern
that you continue it to a specific date. Normally, if you make these findings we would
bring it back when it was completed, not to a specific date certain. But if you want to
see it within a month, that's perfectly fine.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, you have heard your options.
Rountree: Madam Mayor'?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I will take a stab at this. I move that we direct staff to work with the applicant
to prepare a development agreement that outlines the comments that I stated previously
and have been stated by the rest of the Councilmen during discussion and negotiate
with the applicant a time element as it relates to hook up with the sewer and bring either
a completed and agreeable DA back to the Council for approval or bring conditions that
need resolved back to the Council for final decision.
Bird: I can -- I can buy into that, if we don't --
De Weerd: Is that a second?
Bird: That was a motion?
Nary: Yeah, that was a motion.
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 53 of 66
Bird: I'll second it.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Discussion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: What kind of time limit have you got in mind, Charlie?
De Weerd: I think from his motion it would be -- oh, to bring back?
Rountree: Bring back?
Bird: Yeah.
Rountree: 23rd.
De Weerd: So, two weeks.
Rountree: Two weeks. Is that e
Bird: Is that doable?
Rountree: I know that meeting's going to be about 4:00 o'clock in the morning.
Nary: I think we have a lot on that meeting.
Rountree: It really is getting stacked up. If you could do it -- I wouldn't have a bit of
problem if it works out and goes smoothly as a Consent Agenda item on our -- in our
workshop on the 9th. I mean the 16th. Excuse me. Tonight's the 9th. Can't do it?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we can't get it -- that means it has to
be done Thursday.
Rountree: Yeah. That isn't going to happen. Again, if it's smooth and can be pulled
together, it could be a Consent Agenda item on the 23rd. If it needs further discussion
and clarification from Council, then, it would be --
De Weerd: We could pull it off.
Rountree: We could pull it off and look at it on the 7th.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 54 of 66
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean not to be flip, but it's been seven
years on this parcel it appears. I mean I would prefer October 7th, only because I don't
think -- I don't think October -- or September 23rd -- I think you have a fairly full agenda
and if we have a discussion all we are going to do is move this to the 7th anyway.
De Weerd: We have a very full agenda on the 23rd.
Nary: So, I would suggest we just shoot for the 7th. I think that gives us time and Ms.
Butler's office time to see if we can resolve something. If not, we will just have -- we will
be able to have a discussion on the 7th, rather than bringing it up on the 23rd and, then,
moving it to the 7th anyway. If we have it sooner, since it is just a development
agreement, we can certainly we put it on your agenda on the 23rd, if there is a
resolution.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I'm unclear what the status of the original question about the CZC would be
during this interim period.
De Weerd: It sounds like it's contingent upon the DA.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess what I would suggest -- what I
would say is that you have entered into a motion and a direction that is an alternative
resolution to the CZC appeal that is on front of you. If we can reach that resolution with
both parties, then, that would be the conclusion of the matter. If not, then, on the 7th we
would be having the discussion for you to make a decision on the appeal that's in front
of you tonight. What we have, basically, done is we just took a side road to see if that
would resolve the issues for both the city and the applicant and the planning department
and that's what we are trying to do with the development agreement.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, that brings me back to the question I asked earlier. In order
to accomplish that, don't we need to continue this hearing?
Nary: Mr. Zaremba, you're right, I guess we would need to continue that, because,
obviously, it's still an open question and you would have to hear it. So, again, I still
would recommend the 7th, because if we are going to have a discussion and we don't
reach a resolution on this development agreement and we are going to have -- the
Council is going to make a decision on the underlying appeal, you'll probably have more
time on the 7th than you would on the 23rd. So, you're correct.
Rountree: So, maker of the motion would amend my motion by adding that we open --
reopen the public hearing on Item 11 and continue until October 7th.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 55 of 66
Bird: Second agrees.
Zaremba: And, Madam Mayor, as I always wish to comment, that nobody left the room
during the period of when we thought it was closed.
De Weerd: Okay. So, the motion is to reopen the public hearing and continue it until
October 7th and ask staff and applicant to work on a DA with the comments provided by
Council. Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Public Hearing: Proposed Fee Increases for Solid Waste Collections
by Sanitary Services Company:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 is a public hearing on the proposed fee increases for the
solid waste collections by SSC. I will open this public hearing and ask for comments by
our SSC representative. Good evening.
Sedlacek: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Steve
Sedlacek, Sanitary Service, 2130 West Franklin, Meridian, Idaho. First of all, I wanted
to say -- in response to some of the early public hearings we did not intend to create a
ruckus at the McDonald's and had we known about it we would have fixed it
immediately. We just heard about this issue --
De Weerd: We know that.
Sedlacek: -- in the last few days, so --
Rountree: So did we.
De Weerd: You heard when we heard.
Sedlacek: And thank you for passing that along.
De Weerd: We appreciate your response, too.
Sedlacek: I have given you a memorandum, dated August 12th. I believe you have
that in your packets. It was based on an assumed sequence of events that was
supposed to occur with the county commissioners and whether or not they were going
to raise their landfill fees. The way this was supposed to work was the county
commissioners were supposed to meet with the Ada County solid waste staff yesterday
and decide. They met and they did not decide. I was told earlier last week that there
would not be a 50 percent rate increase, but it would be a 16 percent overall rate
increase and that would be accomplished by raising rates for compacted waste, which
is most of the waste stream that we get from residential and commercial customers, 22
and a half percent. So, they play with the proportions of waste and how much each
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 56 of 66
waste stream goes up or down to achieve the 16 percent. They could not agree on that.
So, I stand before you with no idea as to what the county commissioners will do or what
rate structure should be approved. I have provided you the one on August 12th. I have
also given you another one with the 22 and a half percent rate increase that I thought
was going to go through yesterday. That one has not been published, therefore, I don't
know what that means legally and I'm frankly stumped as to what to do.
Rountree: Say tuned.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Do we know, once they do make their decision, how quickly they implement
it? I mean do they give the two month or three month warning?
Sedlacek: Oh, no.
Rountree: Oh, no.
Zaremba: It's the next day?
Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, typically they can decide anything --
it's soup to nuts. It could be October 1st still. They like to hit their fiscal year criteria.
Their economic models that they use are based on fiscal year, October 1 to October 1,
financial plans. They will be meeting Friday. We will see what happens. You know, we
have this requirement -- these rates are going up so quickly to such an extent that they
will trigger public hearings and we have to have the notification periods to do this and so
that's why we are on the track we are on and it could get to the point where they raise
the rates and give you such a short time you can't meet the public hearing requirements
and, then, I don't know where we are at, then.
De Weerd: But, Steve, I believe that you have published rates that are higher than even
the rates that you just brought back.
Sedlacek: That's correct.
De Weerd: So, as long as you're lowering the rate, I think your published rates meet the
intent.
Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's great. We could call these
not to exceed rates.
Rountree: In fact, that's what they would be.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 57 of 66
Sedlacek: And that's, in fact, what they are. I guess an altemative path is to ignore the
county commissioners and assume that they won't act and we will just go ahead with
our normal CPI adjustment that we do every year. In that case it's a 4.3 percent
adjustment, which is less than the public hearing requirements. Then, the issue with
that, though, is that they will, eventually, act and we will have to go through another rate
modification, the citizens will see a series of bumps over time and that's not good.
Rountree: So, one solution, (suppose -- Madam Mayor, one solution, I suppose, would
be to hold these rates. If they don't raise them quite that high, and maintain them and
you have built in the next rate increase, maybe, and a portion of the next one. There is
several ways to anticipate that, because, you're right, they -- you can't outguess when
they are going to do this.
Sedlacek: That's correct.
De Weerd: But can we tell them they missed their window of opportunity and we won't
pay the increase until next year?
Sedlacek: Well, we don't pay that, so I -- I don't know that we could --
De Weerd: No. We will not require our --
Rountree: I'm not sure it works that way.
Sedlacek: I would like my trucks to get in the gate.
Bird: I was going to say --
Sedlacek: Although one option, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if you want to
look at going to altemative landfills, we can. We are not stuck at the Ada County
landfill.
Rountree: That's one of the questions -- I don't know how much more you wanted to go
into detail, but I had a couple questions and that was one of them of at what point do we
start looking at Elmore county.
Sedlacek: Whenever you would like. There are a number of issues related to that.
Once this tipping fee -- the new tipping fees at the Ada County landfill goes into effect,
when you convert them into a tonnage based rate system -- now currently they are
based on volume. We pay ten dollars a cubic yard. That will be something more soon.
When you convert the future rate to tonnage, it's going to be about a 30 to 35 dollar a
ton rate. The current rate at the Ada County -- or the Elmore county site is 16.50.
De Weerd: Wow.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 58 of 66
Sedlacek: It's farther for me to drive, so my fuel costs are higher. I have to go through
a weigh station. That can be an issue for me. And there are a number of ancillary
programs that the county commissioners offer that the citizens love and one of them is
household hazardous waste disposal. It's free. I mean that's why their rates are higher,
they offer more things. But at some point you reach a tipping point where --
Rountree: You have to look at that.
Sedlacek: -- we might want to deal with somebody different.
Rountree: The other question -- you have talked about they may be adjusting rates
higher for compacted waste. How does that apply to your operation when, in effect, you
decompact them at the transfer station, plus all the material that comes into the transfer
station is added to that truck. Is that all classified as, then, compacted waste, even
though a good share of it's not?
Sedlacek: Everything -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council and Councilman
Rountree, everything that comes out of our transfer station is compacted in our
compactors, so when it gets to this county landfill they classify everything as compacted
waste. So, there are issues with me, in particular -- of our operation in particular, if they
decide to arbitrarily raise the compacted portion of the rate structure higher than any
other. I had heard at one time that they were going to raise their compacted rate 50
percent and raise no other rates. Well, that really hurts me, because, then, basically,
when you bring waste into your transfer station at ten dollars a yard, you're turning it into
15 dollar a yard waste and you can't -- you can't do that very long and stay in business.
And so I had a little discussion with some of the people at the solid waste department
and they kind of understood my position and I don't really know how they are going to
come out with any future rate changes. The discrepancy between compacted and other
rates can't be too far for -- it can be off a little bit and I can be fine, because Ican -- I
have a large compactor.
De Weerd: So, what's the -- what's the definition of compacted and e
Sedlacek: A compacted waste is anything that comes in in a truck and that's
commercially collected and it's compacted in a shape, rear loader, front load truck, or
side load, but it stays in that shape. There is cylinders that push it into a cube, as
opposed to just throwing it in a truck and bringing it up there loose. Or for a roll out box.
De Weerd: So, they are pretty much penalizing those that try and reduce the number of
trips up to the landfill by compacting -- by your transfer station?
Sedlacek: I don't think there is any intention to harm us. I think that they are simply
looking at -- I know that the county at one point is going to be looking at switching from
yardage based systems to tonnage based systems. When they do that the onus or the
increase in rate is going to fall on the consumer and the construction companies that
run the roll off boxes are going to get a better deal, because they are -- right now on a
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 59 of 66
tonnage basis they are paying a very, very high rate, because there is not much weight
in the box, as opposed to the rear load trucks, which have very high densities, because
they are packed. And that may be why they want to start moving toward a more
equitably based system when they finally do convert to weight as a measurement. It's a
little bit complicated. I have a difficult time saying that I know what their, you know,
ideas are. I really don't. I think we will be fine. I'm not worried about that at all. I just
have no idea what their rate structure is going to be and so I stand before you with no
idea of what's going on there.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my suggestion is just move forward with the information that
you have projected and published and if, in fact, you're not harmed, then, make
downward adjustments according to what rates they may come up with at the point in
time they come up with them. Otherwise, put those rates into effect.
Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what I don't want to do is absolutely
stick to those rates, because they are too high and Idon't -- it would be a windfall forme
and the rates in Meridian would be higher than they should be and that's -- I mean it's
just bad for the citizens and it's not right. So, if I have the ability to move backwards
from that point --
Rountree: You do.
Sedlacek: -- I'm happy with that.
Bird: You do.
Sedlacek: I just -- from a legal perspective I just don't know if we publish a rate do I
have to stick with that rate.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you can't exceed the rate you published.
You can certainly charge less.
Sedlacek: Okay. If they are not to exceed rates, I'm good to go, if you're good to go.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, what we could do -- because the normal
course of action that we would take after tonight's hearing was, then, to hiring a
resolution, normally we would just in the resolution indicate these are the actual rates,
but we could indicate that the rates can't exceed this amount, may be less. The
published rate will be available both at the utility billing, at SSC, on our website. So, if
somebody needs to know how much is my trash bill, they will have a way to find it, but it
won't be higher than what we publish and that doesn't violate the state code.
Sedlacek: Just one other comment for the Council and the Mayor. The rates are
getting high enough now where we need to look at differential can rates. Unlimited
waste collection probably needs to go away where we need to offer more recycling
Meridian Clty Council
September 9, 2008
Page 60 of 66
opportunities and we need to have people that generate more waste pay more and
those that generate less will get a break.
De Weerd: That was going to be my question.
Sedlacek: Excuse me?
De Weerd: It was certainly going to be my question.
Sedlacek: So, I believe in the next six months we will be able to go through the solid
waste committee and come to you with a new rate structure. I'd like to think of it as a
two year plan to move towards automated collection and increase recycling, maybe
doing some composting in conjunction with the wastewater treatment plant and --
excuse me -- and just being a better steward of the waste stream and I think we can do
that. It's a large capital expenditure, so it will take some time, but I think if we lay the
plan out and follow it it will be great.
De Weerd: Excellent.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: You have probably thought about this before and I know Boise measures
what each person contributes to the system, the individual homeowners, they charge by
different amounts they collect, but the administrating that -- I mean at the moment your
drivers drive down the street, they pick up whatever is there, they don't make any record
of it, they don't tum a record in. Changing that system is not going to be free. At what
point does the administrative cost justify doing that?
Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Zaremba, the city of
Boise does not measure --
Zaremba: Oh.
Sedlacek: -- they have unlimited service as we do. Now, they are moving in 2010
under a new contract to automated collection with can limits. The way I foresee this
would be you would be offered probably two different can sizes for your garbage, a 95
gallon can or a 65 or a 40 gallon can and you would have a rate for -- pay more for a bit
more and pay less for less. And those would be your only two choices. Everyone
would, then, get a bigger recycling bin and you would commingle everything in one bin.
So, the rate structure is based on the waste can, not all of the other cans. But people
are going to have two or three cans at their house. But implementing -- how you do the
billing system is going to be more complicated. Keeping track of -- well, 75,000 garbage
cans is what it's going to be. All coded and whose is whose and -- it's going to be
difficult, but, you know, most cities are doing it. It's not impossible.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 61 of 66
De Weerd: And you're certainly doing it in Moscow. You charge by the number of cans.
Sedlacek: Yes. They are can limited in Moscow. That's right. And Eagle is also can
limited right now. Now, you don't get a choice of can sizes, but you do have -- you have
options -- for example, in Eagle you can get unlimited service and pay a whole bunch of
money or you can limit yourself to one size can. But you still have to keep track when
you go to that house who is -- you know, whose trash is that. Are they beating the
system or not. It's difficult.
Zaremba: Yeah. I'd drag mine into the driveway next door and leave it.
Sedlacek: That will happen.
Nary: You know we record these, so just to advise you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, actually, another question. If we go to a system where there
is some way to track who is putting how much, one place that I lived about 15 years ago
had a very extensive recycling program, but in addition to that, there was a fine if you
put recyclables into your regular garbage thing and I imagine the drivers administered
that as well, but it's a way to enforce the recycling if we are going to start looking and --
Sedlacek: Yes. These --
De Weerd: And that would be your enforcement, chief.
Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the issues is a revision of the
ordinances and I think that from my perspective I'm not worried about people putting
recyclables in their garbage, I am worried about people putting their garbage in the
recycling can, because that screws up the whole deal. If they are crazy enough to
waste their space that they are paying for to put recyclables in when it's free to put it in
the recyclable can -- I don't think that's as much of a problem. But, you're right, there
are citizens -- or cities that enforce that. Seattle is one and they have garbage police
that go out and they look at your can and they give you fines and you better do it right.
I don't know if we want to get to that point. That's up to the Council and the Mayor.
De Weerd: It's not a job I would want.
Sedlacek: It will open up an entirely new set of issues. Illegal dumping will become
more of an issue. Tracking all the cans. It's -- it's going to change.
De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Or comments? Thank you, Steve.
Rountree: Oh, I do have aquestion -- I do have a question.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 62 of 66
Rountree: I read it in the Trash Notes. You're cycling grass clippings now.
Sedlacek: We are. We are attempting to use those as cattle feed and there is also one
company -- is that right, Doug, that takes it for composting. Tree Top Recycling. Right.
I believe composting is the way to do -- to handle that waste stream and the city has a
large bio solids waste stream. I have got a large grass clipping waste stream and wood.
I have a tremendous amount of wood. And together those things make great compost.
Rountree: So, how are you collecting that? It has to be brought to the transfer station?
Sedlacek: It has to be brought to the transfer station. We have a separate segregated
area for it. We throw it into a -- we don't throw it, we put it into a 30 yard --
Rountree: Compact it nicely.
Sedlacek: Yes. We place it gently into a 30 yard box and we haul to either the farmer
that we have a relationship with or to Tree Top.
Rountree: Is there a fee?
Sedlacek: There is a fee to drop it off. There is no a and there is no -- and there is a
fee to take it to Tree Top, but we drop it -- but for the cattle feeding operation we give it
to them for free. One of the difFcult issues with grass is the seasonality of it. You don't
get any in the winter, so --
Rountree: And way more than you need in the summer.
Sedlacek: And way more than we need is the summer. That's correct.
Bird: Steve, you got a cattle feeder that feeds --
Sedlacek: Yes.
Bird: What do they do, mix it -- chop it and mix it?
Sedlacek: I believe so.
Bird: Because it's very very tough on cattle, just -- it causes bloating and stuff. Or I
have always --
Sedlacek: They approached us and they want it and they signed a release. I worry
about things like, you know, what if a door knob gets in that pile of grass or a bottle of --
aCoke bottle or something and the cow eats it, I mean it's going to be a bad thing. So, I
like composting a lot.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 63 of 66
De Weerd: Yeah. A lot of people don't think when they throw something in with their
grass that it's going somewhere that it could do harm.
Sedlacek: Thank you for your time.
De Weerd: Okay. Council -- this is a public hearing and since I see so many members
of our public out there, I would offer -- is there any further public testimony? Okay.
Seeing none, Council, what is your pleasure? Would you like to keep this open? Close
the public hearing, ask for a resolution? Maybe by next week when the resolution
comes back you will have more information or what would you like to do?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: My preference would be to close the public hearing, make a proposal to bring a
resolution back not to exceed the published prices and I have never known anybody to
complain if the prices are lowered, so -- and that's a not to exceed price. So, that would
be my preference. Yeah. You would also put the effective date of 10/1/08. That would
be my preference. What the rest of you --
Rountree: Is that a motion?
Bird: I would close the public hearing.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we direct the attorney to bring back a resolution regarding the
increase in fees at a not to exceed of the published fees as published by SSC, Sanitary
Services Company.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the rate increase with the
not to exceed and bring back a resolution.
Bird: And 10/1/08.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 64 of 66
De Weerd: 10/1/08 effective date. Okay. Any discussion? Oh, I don't --
Rountree: Want a second?
De Weerd: Yeah. I need a second.
Rountree: I'll second it.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Discussion?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Rountree: Question for Bill. Can we add a -- on the effective date October 1st and add:
Or the date as the rates are increased by Ada County? Because they may not increase
the rate by October 1st.
De Weerd: Sony, we can't have you talk. We have a closed public hearing.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, I think o I
think you can make it 10/1. We could certainly publish that as well as the resolution,
that the rates will be effective whenever. But that's my only concern is how is anybody
going to know.
Rountree: I think Steve wanted to say it also includes the CIP increase, so he could
knock it down to that.
Nary: Sure.
Rountree: So, that would take care of it.
Nary: Okay.
De Weerd: Yeah. Because he has a not to exceed, it can --
Nary: Right.
Bird: Not to exceed.
Rountree: He can take it down to his needed increase.
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Yeah. Okay. Any further discussion?
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 65 of 66
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 13:
Ordinance No.
Position and Titles Ordinance:
Amendments to Director
De Weerd: Okay. Ordinance No. 08-1380. I will ask Madam Clerk to, please, read this
ordinance by title only.
Holman: By the city -- City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1380. An ordinance of the
City of Meridian amending Title 1, Chapter 8, Section 1; Title 1, Chapter 8, Article D,
Sections 1 and 2; Title 1, Chapter 8, Sections 1 and 2 of the Meridian City Code relating
to the title of duties and responsibilities of the director positions.
De Weerd: Okay. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone
who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Ordinance 08-1380 with suspensions of rules.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Okay. Madam
Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: We are at the end of our agenda. Council, I would entertain a motion to
adjourn.
Bird: So moved.
Meridian City Council
September 9, 2008
Page 66 of 66
Rountree: No. No. No. No. That's the duty of the newly sworn in --
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Hoaglun: I would move that we adjourn tonight's Council meeting.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. All
ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:04 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
~GG~~~~
MAYOR TAMM a WEERD
~~ ~ ~ ~~
DATE APPROVED
~,
ATTEST:
JA
$iL~`AL
~~ ~,~ ~
~~
~~~~iiq~t ~ r m w h~~~~~~~,
RK