HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 10-07Meridian City Council Meeting October 7, 2008
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday,
October 7, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, Brad
Hoaglun, and David Zaremba.
Others Present: Ted Baird, Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Anna Canning, Bill Parsons, Kyle
Radek, Bill Johnson, John Overton, Steve Siddoway, Tom Bany, Clint Dolsby, Rick
Clinton and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Good evening. I will go ahead and start tonight's meeting. We appreciate
all of you that are here in attendance. We will start tonight -- oh. For the record, it is
Tuesday, October 7th at 7:00 o'clock. We will start tonight's meeting with the roll call
attendance.
Item Z: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Item No. 2. We are privileged to be led in the pledge tonight by Troop 152.
If you will all rise and join us in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
De Weerd: Well, thank you, boys. I will offer you your own City of Meridian pin that was
very well earned. Thank you so much. We don't try and trap the youth that come to our
meetings, but we -- we always love to engage our youth when we have the opportunity.
These three young men are earning their citizenship badge and we appreciate you
taking the risk and stepping up, showing your leadership and leading us in the pledge.
Item 3: Community Invocation by Bob Cutler with Christian Lutheran
Church:
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will led by Pastor Bob
Cutler. He is with Christ Lutheran Church. Thank you for joining us. If you will all join
us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection.
Cutler: We pray. Heavenly Father, as a citizen of our beloved City of Meridian I would
intercede with you for our representatives in this beloved Council chambers. Lord, you
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 2 of 90
have established in our midst the law making powers dedicated to the upholding of
order and liberty. Lord, I pray that you would bless and preserve our form of governed
in this city, in our state, and in our nation. Lord, grant that our legislators and our
Councilors here -- and Council Members may be ever mindful of the welfare of all their
constituents. Grant that they may be guided to serve unselfishly the common good of
all the people. Lord, preserve them from all double dealing, pettiness and self seeking.
Protect, I beseech thee, those liberties of rule by representation, which are the
comerstorie of our government. Lord, teach us Christians to grace -- teach us
Christians the grace to use our freedom to preserve and proclaim your word and to use
each and every opportunity to serve our fellow man. May we give proof of our gratitude
to you, Lord, in seeking the welfare of our city and our state. In using our privileges of
ballot and the freedom of press and speech for the improvement of our community and
for our entire nation. Be with our nation this evening, Lord, as we are going through
struggles of financial magnitude that we can't even imagine. Lord, be with us. We pray,
Lord, that you would bring these blessings, that you would grant us, dear Lord, these for
our Lord Jesus' sake, amen.
De Weerd: Pastor Cutler, I do have a City of Meridian pin for you as well. Thank you.
We appreciate you joining us. We do have different places of worship join us every
week to lead us in our community invocation. We have many places of worship and
they kind of grace us every week with a good reminder in the beginning of our meeting.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: So, Item No. 4 is the adoption of our agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: On our agenda there are a couple of adjustments to be made. On the
Consent Agenda, Item H, 6-H, there is a request to have some discussion on that, so
6-H will come off of the Consent Agenda and be moved to Item 8. And just for sake of
reference would become 8-H. Then, continuing on the Consent Agenda, Item O is a
resolution and the proposed number for that is 08-620. The next several are
resolutions. I will just read the number and the number. Resolution -- Item P is
Resolution 08-621. Item Q is Resolution 08-622. Item R is Resolution 08-623. Item S
is Resolution 08-624. Item T is Resolution 08-625. Item U is Resolution 08-626. Item
V is Resolution 08-627. That concludes the changes on the Consent Agenda. Then,
again, Item 8 has 6-H added to it. And on Item 10 there has been a request by the
applicant to continue that one until November 5th, 2008, which we will do. For those of
you that have a calendar in your head, November 5th, 2008, is a Wednesday. As you
know, we normally meet on Tuesdays, but since November 4th is a national election
day, we move our Council meeting to the Wednesday. So, that one will be continued to
Wednesday, November 5th. And with those modifications, Madam Mayor, I move that
we adopt the Consent Agenda -- adopt the entire agenda.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 3 of 90
Hoaglun: I second the motion.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve the agenda and a second. All those in
favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Discussion. Madam Mayor, I do not concur that we want to continue Item
10.
De Weerd: Okay. We will discuss that when we get to it.
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay.
Zaremba: The message for the people in the audience is if you came for that item, don't
leave, because we may not be continuing it.
Item 5: Proclamation for National Arts and Humanities Month:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 5 is a proclamation and we have with us today our chair and co-
chair of our Meridian Arts Commission and so maybe I will ask them to come forward
and I will come down and read this at the podium. We formed our Meridian Arts
Commission about a year and a half ago and these two energetic young ladies have
been great leaders in the arts community. We have made great progress and much of
their efforts you will see in the new City Hall, but -- and so it is my honor to read this
proclamation. Whereas the arts and humanities embrace and enrich the lives of all
Americans and whereas the arts and humanities affect every aspect of life in America
today, including the economy, social problem solving, job creation, education, creativity,
and community livability and whereas cities and states through their local and state art
agencies and representing thousands of cultural organizations, have celebrated the
value and importance of culture in the lives of Americans and the health of thriving
communities during National Arts and Humanities month for several years and whereas
the City of Meridian joins other communities in recognizing the contributions that the
arts and humanities have played in developing the dynamic of each individual
community. So, therefore, I, Tammy de Weerd, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do
hereby proclaim the month of October 2008 as National Arts and Humanities month in
the City of Meridian and to encourage everyone to embrace the arts and the humanities,
because they represent our heritage and define the character of our community. And
that's dated the 7th day of October.
Item 6: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of July 28, 2008 City Council Joint Meeting:
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 4 of 90
B. Approve Minutes of August 5, 2008 City Council Special Meeting:
C. Approve Minutes of September 2, 2008 City Council Regular
Meeting:
D. Approve Minutes of September 9, 2008 City Council Regular
Meeting:
E. Approve Minutes of September 16, 2008 City Council Workshop
Meeting:
F. Approve Minutes of September 23, 2008 City Council Regular
Meeting:
G. Approve Minutes of September 30, 2008 City Council and Planning
and Zoning Commission Joint Meeting:
I. Approve Transportation Project Request List from Planning
Department:
J. Ratify Art in Public Spaces Purchasing Agreement - "Old East
Meridian" by Dwight Williams:
K. Ratify Art in Public Spaces Purchasing Agreement - "A Warm
Evening" by Gregg Russell:
L. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 06-
063 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 38.68 acres from RUT
and R-1 zones to C-G zones for Waltman Property (aka
Browning Plaza) by Waltman, LLC - 505, 521, 615 and 675
Waltman Lane:
M. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 08-
001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52 commercial /office
lots and 1 common lot on 38.21 acres in a proposed C-G zoning
district for Browning Plaza (aka Waltman Property) by SLN
Planning, Inc. - 505, 521, 615 and 675 West Waltman Lane:
N. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 08-
003 Request for Rezone of 27.17 acres from I-L to C-G zone for
Kennedy Commercial Center by DBSI Meridian 184 LLC - 1250
W. Overland Road:
O. Resolution No. Appointment to Valley
Regional Transportation Authority:
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 5 of 90
P. Resolution No. :CPA 08-004 Request for
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use
Map by changing the land use designation of approximately 40.5
acres from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use-Regional for
Meridian and Amity by Hawkins Companies -Northwest Comer
of West Amity Road and South Meridian Road:
Q. Resolution No. :CPA 08-009 Request for
a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use
Map by changing the designation of approximately 9 acres from
Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential for Biskay
by Greg Johnson -south side of Harris Street, west of South
Meridian Road (SH 69) and north of West Amity Road:
R. Resolution No. CPA 08-005 Request to
amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change
the land use designation on 33.59 acres of land from Industrial to
Commercial for Kennedy Commercial Center / Western
Electronics by DBSI Meridian 184 LLC and Herman-Treasure
Valley Business Park ILLC -1250 W. Overland Road:
S. Resolution No. CPA 08-001 Request to
amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change
the land use designation of 15.46 acres of land from Medium
Density Residential to Mixed Use -Community for Janicek Ten
Mile /Chinden Property by Janicek Properties, LLC -Southwest
Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West Chinden Boulevard:
T. Resolution No. CPA 08-007 Request for
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify the Future Land Use
Map by changing the land use designation from Medium Density
Residential to Mixed Use -Community for approximately 10 acres
for Zamzows Chinden by JR, LLC -south side of Chinden
Boulevard, approximately'/ mile east of Meridian Road:
U. Resolution No. CPA 08-006 Request to
amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change
the future land use designation on 11 acres of land from Mixed Use
- Waste Water Treatment Plan to Office (2+/- acres) and Low
Density Residential (9+/- acres) for Kartchner by Richard
Kartchner - 4325 and 4315 North Ten Mile Road:
V. Resolution No. VAC 08-003 Request to
Vacate note #6, which prohibits direct lot access to Eagle Road and
Pine Avenue, on the recorded plat for Porky Park Subdivision No. 1
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 6 of 90
for Jacksons Food Store #105 by Jacksons Food Stores, Inc. -
3291 East Pine Avenue:
W. Union Pacific Supplemental Agreement:
X. Addendum to Development Agreement: MI 08-002 Request for
a Miscellaneous application to modify the existing Development
Agreement for Education Campus Commercial by Joint School
District No. 2 -Southeast Comer of North Locust Grove Road and
East Leigh Field Drive:
Y. Change Order No. 2 with Knife River for Black Cat Trunk Sewer
Phase 4 for $16,358.00:
Z. Cooperative Agreement for Water Main (UPRR Crossing) at
Lewis and Clark Middle School for a Cost Not to Exceed
$71,700:
AA. Approve Beer and Wine License Application for McTime
Coffeehouse at 2951 East Overland Road:
BB. Agreement for Independent Contractor Services for Test Well
No. 28 (Construction) with Treasure Valley Drilling and Pump
for $99,485.00:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 6 is the Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Noting that Item 6-H has been moved to become Item 8-H and that there
were a list of resolutions for which I read the resolution numbers - do I need to repeat
those for anybody?
De Weerd: No.
Zaremba: All right. In that case I move we adopt the Consent Agenda as amended.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second and authorize the Mayor to sign and
Clerk to attest.
Zaremba: Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
That's part of the motion.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 7 of 90
De Weerd: That's great. 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.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 7: Department Reports:
A. Public Works Department:
1. PW Department Reorganization
De Weerd: Item 7 under department reports. We will turn this over to Mr. Bany under
the Public Works Department Reorganization.
Barry: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Tom
Barry, Public Works Department. It's my pleasure to present to you the update on the
Public Works Department reorganization. You may recall that on September 9th I
briefed the Council on the status of the reorganization and as promised I'm following up
this evening with a status report regarding the realignment. As you may recall, our
review was intended to take a critical look at the roles, responsibility, and reporting
structure of the staff within the department and to determine if improvements could be
made with modifications to the organizational structure. This was accomplished by the
development of a strategic leadership team in the department comprised of 11 senior
managers and took place over a time period of approximately four months, with bi-
weekly meetings of that staff team. I provided a detailed memorandum in your box this
Friday afternoon detailing not only the process, but also the results of the reorganization
and also provided a transition plan for your reference. So, I will be brief in describing
quickly the work. Essentially, what we did is evaluate the various types of
organizational structures that we reviewed and we, then, reviewed and revised our
mission and vision statements to insure that what we organized around was clear and
set clear expectations for our staff. That work culminated in the development of the new
organization chart, which is presented in your memorandum. During this time period
the work was monitored by the Mayor and members from AspireOn Consulting,
Incorporated, and also were reviewed -- the results were reviewed by human resources
staff and our Public Works Council liaison. As you will note, we made several
modifications in the organizational chart structure. We moved four vacant positions
from operations, because we felt we were heavy in operations, over to engineering and
reclassified those. We reconciled several inconsistencies that we found between
records in human resources, the finance department, and our own departmental
records, so we have 13 job title changes. We also reclassified eight vacant and
currently filled positions to insure that the work that we identified was properly
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 8 of 90
categorized and appropriately titled. We also reallocated five existing positions to
insure that we placed the appropriate resources where they were needed most in the
organizational structure. And, finally, we did add two FTEs also to fulfill our service
level commitments as identified earlier in the project. As a follow up, we made an
announcement to the staff regarding the reorganization on Thursday, October the 2nd.
We implemented those improvements yesterday, October the 6th. We have developed
a transition plan, as I mentioned earlier, which was included in your memorandum to
insure that we had smooth and systematic implementation of the overall changes. We
have also worked as a leadership team to develop leadership action plans for staff that
are assuming new roles or new responsibilities, so they had clear direction and
expectations, as well as a very supportive series of endeavors that we wanted them to
pursue in order to be successful in their new roles. We also are identifying training for
those new supervisors. And, finally, we are following up with staff and supervisors
during the transition plan to make sure that we address all comments or questions or
concerns. Being in our second day of implementation, Ivan report to you that things
seem to be going very smoothly in the organization. I think for the most part staff, when
we presented this, while somewhat maybe some of them may have had some anxiety
as it relates to the roll out, much like any new change in any organization, by and large
the organization has embraced the changes and we are moving full steam ahead with
those changes. I do want to take a moment to thank both the Mayor and Charlie
Rountree, our Council liaison, Mr. Bill Nary and his staff, particularly Nancy Powers.
Josh Grant from AspireOn. And every member of the leadership team, most of which I
think are here tonight. It may be advantageous, if you are so interested, to hear from
AspireOn regarding our process or any of the staff regarding the process, the results,
the outcome, or any questions you have about the organizational structures. So, with
that I will turn it back over to you and take any questions or comments you might have.
De Weerd: Mr. Barry, you might want to introduce those that you have with you. I know
probably Councilman Hoaglun hasn't met many of them, but if you will take a moment to
recognize those that have come to the meeting.
Barry: Thank you, Madam Mayor. It would be my pleasure. I'll try to pick them out of
the audience, since we have somewhat of a full house, but Mr. Crane, Tracy Crane, is
our co-manager of our wastewater treatment plant. He is also on the strategic
leadership team. Mr. Rick Deeds is our utility operations manager, also on the strategic
team. Shane Linn, GIS analyst, also on our team.
De Weerd: And he's more than that.
Barry: Oh, he is. He is lots more than that.
De Weerd: I listened to the presentation. I'm with you.
Barry: That's right. Mr. Bjomson, Brent Bjomson, is our building inspector coordinator.
He's also on our team. Josh Grant, consultant, who participated from AspireOn in most
of our meetings, gave us valuable insights and guidance. Mr. Rick Clinton, our water
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 9 of 90
superintendent, also on our team. Mrs. Kari Glenn, now business operations manager,
also on our team. Mrs. Becky LeCarry, executive assistant for Public Works. And,
then, Mr. Bruce Freckleton, development services manager. A couple other folks
behind me. Mr. Clint Dolsby, acting city engineer, interim city engineer. And, then, also
Mr. Kyle Radek, engineer, with -- assistant city engineer, rather, for Public Works. All of
which made up the strategic leadership team. So, I -- again, hats off to those ladies and
gentlemen as they performed phenomenally and I think you should be very, very proud
of their accomplishments in this endeavor.
De Weerd: Thank you. Do any of you want to make any comment? Now, you stood up
under the pressure of your peers.
Zaremba: That's about as open an opportunity as you will ever get.
Grant: Yeah. I better take these chances when I get them. Do you want my name and
address for the record?
De Weerd: Just your name, Josh.
Grant: Josh Grant with AspireOn. I just wanted to provide a few brief comments on the
process. As Mr. Bony noted that we weren't catalyst to this process, but, rather, invited
by him to participate in the meetings and provide our input. And, you know, we have
been involved in many, many reorganizations, both public and private organizations,
and I must say this is one of the best we have been a part of. The leadership team did
a phenomenal job. They were very thorough and objective through this process, as it
took several months to do. They maintained a level of faith in the process as they went
through it and definitely put the organization first as they worked through the
reorganization and so I just want to make sure you guys were aware of that and provide
the third party perspective of that, but they definitely did a phenomenal job. Thank you.
De Weerd: Anyone else?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I'd make a comment. I was involved in the initial kick off of
this with Tom and, then, he developed a strategic leadership team and went to work
with AspireOn and his team. When they were done they rolled out large voluminous
scrolls showing what was going on and why and after that I told them it was too much
for me to digest right now, I would get back to them, but I took it as an opportunity,
because the room was full of the team, to ask the team specifically -- now is your
opportunity, if there is something that really bothers you with this, let me know. And
they were -- they were pretty open and honest in the general consensus and if not the
unanimous consensus was it was a fair process. Some of them had some difficulty
going through the process, but as it progressed they saw the reasons why things were
the way they .were and the reasons why things could be better through this
reorganization and in the final end product they all pretty much were engaged in
accepting that this is the way Public Works ought to go. It was at that point Tom
brought the reorg to City Council and, then, implemented it -- kicked it off last week and
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 10 of 90
yesterday was the start and I'm glad to hear that it's going well and that some people
are concerned and have issues with it, because I would be surprised if there weren't
and if it was completely acceptable to everybody something might be wrong with it. But
I think -- as I explained to the leadership team, as you roll this out you will find things
that you did not talk about and situations that you may need to remedy and they all
agreed that, yes, they could handle that and they could take a look at the organizational
structure as it started to work and as they worked it. So, I think they did a heck of a job
and my appreciation and thank you to all of you. You worked hard. A lot of -- was it
Tuesdays or Thursdays? Probably Wednesdays. So, I hit all around it.
Barry: Mondays and Thursdays.
Rountree: Mondays and Thursdays. Missed them all.
Freckleton: Madam Mayor and Council, I just wanted to take this opportunity just to try
and shine the spotlight on Tom a little bit. Without his leadership we wouldn't be where
we are and he -- you've definitely got the right guy on the job. I have expressed that to
you before, Tammy, and we did come together as a team. We -- Tom challenged us to
anticipate the kind of problems that might roll out after we implement and we have seen
some of those problems and the cool thing is we did anticipate it and we set a plan in
place to deal with it. We transitioned, we came up with a transition plan. We also are
developing leadership development plans to try and mentor those people and bring
them along and we don't want to lose anybody through this process. So, having been
with the department for 16 years, I mean we have -- we have gone through a lot of
change in that 16 years. I have seen -- we have had reorganizations in the past and I
would say there has been a lot of good things that were changed with those
reorganizations, but they haven't had the plan for the follow through and follow up to
make sure that they are successful in the end and this one does. And so I think I speak
for our entire team, you know, without Tom's leadership we would not be here and I'm
120 percent behind the process and know it's going to be successful and you definitely
have a better Public Works Department because of it, so --
De Weerd: Thank you, Bruce. Hi, Kyle.
Radek: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Council Members, I'd like to add just a little bit to
that, too. I agree totally with what Bruce said about Tom. I really look forward to the
future, because I have been in other organizations where you make mission statements
and vision statements and you put them in a -- put them in a drawer somewhere and go
about your business. But I have a lot of faith that we are going to take ours and we are
going to move forward towards them and we are going to accomplish things and so I'm
really excited about it. I feel like -- I feel like over the past couple of years we have had
a lot of additional duties put on us in my section of the organization that have really kind
of kept us from getting -- you know, getting the A plus that we want to get in really
serving our customers the way we want to and we have kind of had to spread ourselves
pretty thin to get C minuses to get the job done and I feel like this re-org is going to
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 11 of 90
enable us to get the A pluses we want to get and move forward and go from good to
great. So, I'm -- I'm excited going forward with the whole thing.
De Weerd: Thank you, Kyle. Hey, Tracy.
Crane: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Tracy Crane, wastewater division co-
manager. I'm going to take the opportunity to brag on my division a little bit again, but I
think, as you well know, or you might know, wastewater went through a similar process
earlier in the year and we examined what we were doing and looked at the organization
and see if we could do things better and the rules, then, were the same as they were
with this reorganization, take nothing personally, put the organization first and see if we
could challenge this division to do better. Challenging it has been and continues to be.
I would say, though, that the results do speak for themselves. The wastewater division
staff have really risen to the task and challenged -- just a short list of our
accomplishments. We have had wastewater process enhancements. We have
established programs for standard operating procedure review and to put them in place.
Development of in-house safety and training programs. Establishment of cross-
sectional work teams. Better communication. Our productivity has increased. Our
morale has improved. It's been an honor to represent the wastewater department and
be part of this leadership group. I, too, believe the public -- the results of this
realignment will bear the same fruit that it did in our wastewater department and I think
we can expect great things ahead.
De Weerd: Thank you. Well, I can tell you since I have been involved from the very
beginning, it's been a very thoughtful process. I commend the team. You have rolled
up your sleeves and done a very difficult task. You first evaluated yourself and your
organization and, as Tracy said, you kept the organization first and now the pride that
you see throughout Public Works will have purpose and they will have direction. I have
appreciated the leadership planning that has been put together and those that didn't
land in the leadership positions who were concerned about that, they have been given a
map to success, if they so desire to as well. So, the devil is in the details and now the
true work really begins. But you had laid a strong foundation, you created tools, and I
have every confidence that you will land in the good to great, Kyle, that you mentioned
and appreciate how you unrolled it. You gave a lot of respect to your peers, certainly
the room was -- was buzzing not just with the kick ball champs, but also with some real
concern with what does it all mean to me. But the way you unrolled it and took
ownership and responsibility for each of your teams, it was -- I would like to commend
you for that and know that the leaders up here are solidly behind you and we look
forward to seeing how it starts to roll out. So, good job, Mr. Barry.
Bany: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Councilman Rountree, I definitely appreciate your
support and guidance along the way and attribute our success and to your great
leadership, inspiration and support. So, thank you very much. And also to that of staff,
I appreciate all of your support.
Rountree: Thanks, Tom.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 12 of 90
B. Legal Department:
1. Tabled from September 23, 2008: Detox Center
AAreement•
De Weerd: Okay. Item 7-B is our legal department. Mr. Baird.
Baird: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a follow up to the
discussion we had last week regarding the joint powers agreement, the proposed draft
of that agreement for the Treasure Valley Dextox Center. Last week City Council and
the Mayor gave me some direction regarding some concerns with that agreement.
Primarily having to do not with the 52,000 dollar commitment for the first year, but how
the commitment for ensuing years would be determined. There was also a concern
regarding a desire to prorate the first year's contribution depending on when the center
opens within the fiscal year. Took those concems and I contacted the representative
from the city attorney's office in Boise, Amanda Horton, who worked on this agreement
with Ada County and the State of Idaho. Amanda took my concems to the -- to the
group. They did agree that they overlooked the need to prorate during that first year,
but the feeling regarding the need to further clarify the successive year contribution,
they felt comfortable with the agreement, because they are not forcing any entity to
appropriate a certain amount that you would have to agree to it, you could negotiate it.
They are trying to get us comfortable with the fact that it would be proportional to the
first year's contribution. I would agree that the agreement does allow for that sort of
negotiation. It does allow you to bail out of the agreement at anytime beyond the
current appropriation. However, they did leave an open invitation to any specific
proposals that we have to negotiate something into the agreement. To be honest with
you, I -- I think they are just asking us to take it on faith and it will be -- it's up to you. I
think tonight I'm asking whether you're comfortable with the agreement as is or whether
you want me to direct us back to the table with some specific items to negotiate.
De Weerd: Well, thank you, Mr. Baird. I have never seen a contractual agreement that
is entered into without the specificity that we desire and only on faith. So, Council, I
don't know what your preferences are. When Mr. Baird and I have discussed it,
certainly my interest to go to the table to talk specifics and to tighten up the contract, but
certainly I only vote if you tie.
Baird: And, Madam Mayor, I might add that taking it on faith was my interpretation of
their response. That wasn't their words.
Rountree: Like trust us.
Baird: Yes. When attorneys ask you to trust them beware.
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 13 of 90
Zaremba: Actually, two separate questions if I may. The first one was there discussion
of billing nonmember cities for per patient charge if they do put somebody into the
detox?
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Council Member Zaremba, it's the
intent to collect where ever they can, even from -- I believe that even from anyone from
our jurisdiction, if there is a way to get them to pay for something they will and they will
certainly be doing that for nonmember entities or residents from nonmember entities.
But there was no desire to put anything specific into the agreement with regard to that.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd: And those are the kind of things I think should be here.
Zaremba: Yeah.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
Zaremba: And I had a second question.
Rountree: Oh. Go ahead, David.
Zaremba: And I guess this is one of my sideways questions, but I attended a forum last
week of candidates for Ada County and one of the non-encumbents raised the issue
that detox centers and the like are by law the purview of the state, not the counties. I
don't know how accurate that was, but my feeling is we have already determined that
this -- having this facility -- it's worth our city contributing to it, because of the savings
that our police department will have for other expenses. So, I think we have felt that it's
a valuable thing for us, but do you know whether there is any validity to the fact that it's
supposed to be the state and not us.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council and Council Member Zaremba, there is
no prohibition for you to contribute to the operations of -- of the city and the state,
through the Attorney General's Office, has been involved in the negotiations of this
agreement. In fact, the A.G. representative is the one who put the final touches on it. If
there was any concern with the way that the joint powers entity was being formed, you
can bet that the Attomey General's Office would have raised that. So, your attorney's
office doesn't see any problem with the joint powers entity as proposed.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: But, Mr. Zaremba, I think if the question you asked does -- is it the
responsibility of the county or the cities, the answer is no. If it's a question of -- if it's not
a priority of the state to the cities and the county be partners to something that isn't quite
a priority, the answer is yes.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 14 of 90
Zaremba: Sounds good to me.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I agree that we need some specificity in the contract of how funding will
progress in the future. We have a number of formulas for other organizations that we
participate in, whether it be compass or the VRT, based on population and other
activities. So, I would suggest that legal counsel sit down with the drafters of the
resolution -- or our agreement and take a look at some of those and see if one of those,
either straight out of the books modified, would not be applicable in this particular
contract and at least we would know for future budget projections what we might be
getting ourselves into. I appreciate that we have an easy out, but once you enter into
these things sometimes it's very difficult to divorce yourself from them.
Baird: Madam Mayor, if I may inquire of Council Member Rountree. Is there a template
for a particular organization that you point to that is one that we might want to emulate
in this situation?
Rountree: I would say COMPASS probably is -- probably is the better of the ones that I
can think of.
Baird: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Anything else?
Baird: And, Madam Mayor, I will reiterate as we enter into this that my direction from
the Mayor and Council is that we are committed to that first year's 52,000, but we are
interested in just pinning these items down for the second year and successive years.
Rountree: Yes.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Baird. Okay. Just before we move out of Department
Reports -- and Isee -- I thought I saw Mr. Siddoway here. But I did want to let you
know that the city did receive -- the Layton Family Baseball Complex received the
outstanding facility parks and special use award at the annual Idaho Recreation and
Parks Association Conference and they have recognized it for the community facility
that it is. It has eight fields. It served over 1,400 children ages five to 15 this year. It
held a number of state and regional tournaments that attracted teams from over eight
states and one foreign country. I guess if you call Canada foreign. Well, it still counts.
And it's a great honor to know that we have been recognized as one of the best in the
state. So, if Steve was here I'd give him kudos.
Item 8: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 15 of 90
H. Tabled from September 23, 2008: Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for Denial: 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: Okay. We did move Item H from the Consent Agenda.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I asked that that item be removed
from the Consent Agenda only because it's not a Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law. You will note that I have prepared a letter to send to the applicant with regard to
the Redbox DVD and I think it's pretty self-explanatory. I just wanted to pull it off the
Consent, because it wasn't Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. That's all.
De Weerd: Thank you. So, Council, I need a motion.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the letter prepared by the planning director to be
sent to the applicant on McDonald's Redbox application.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none,
Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 9: FP 08-016 Request for Final Plat approval for 5 building lots and 1
common lot on 4.80 acres in a C-G zone for Emerson Park Subdivision
by Kuna Victory, LLC - 130 East Victory Road (Lot 4, Block 1 of Mussell
Corner):
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9 is FP 08-016.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we do have a letter from the
applicant stating they are in agreement with the conditions with the clarification that they
are not proposing any perimeter fencing. Staff has already modified the staff report
accordingly.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 16 of 90
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, if there is no questions for staff, do I have a
motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item No. 9, FP 08-016.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9. If there is no
discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: Continued Public Hearing from September 9, 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: Okay. Item 10 is a continued public hearing on AP 08-003. Is the applicant
here tonight? They might have made the recommendation and assumed that it would
be continued. Council, I would say that I did meet with the applicant -- not regarding
this application, but regarding the rail corridor and the movements that Union Pacific
Railroad has made in considering multi-year leases and their question Ithink -- and I
don't know why they have requested the continuance, but I would think that there is a
relationship with the urban renewal district and how this would correlate with the urban
renewal district's plan. So, that's -- that's the limited knowledge I have on this. Anna,
did they give an explanation?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the applicant e-mailed me Tuesday
saying that -- as you mentioned, they did have some commitments from Union Pacific.
They want to make sure that those are in writing before they bring anything back to you
and they hoped to have that done within the following month. So, that's primarily why
they -- they are holding up on that.
De Weerd: We did send an a-mail --Ithink it should be part of the public record -- from
Jim Larsen with the Union Pacific that does reflect their movement for amulti-term lease
-- or multi-year leases.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my concern with this is that we have heard that for
something on the order of three months, if not longer.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 17 of 90
De Weerd: We didn't believe it before, though.
Rountree: Do we now?
De Weerd: From what I have heard from their representatives that I have met with, I
think there is some very positive movement for our community.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree, I'm looking at the
September 24th a-mail from Jim Larsen of the Union Pacific. At the end he does say he
will prepare a draft for these -- this entity to review regarding the multi-year lease. So, if
your concern is that we are just getting strung along with the same excuses, it looks like
there is some movement. We would certainly want to review the document itself, rather
than the a-mail regarding those commitments.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, with that, then, I might suggest that the date be moved to the
26th of November -- or to the 25th of November.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: What date?
Rountree: 25th.
Bird: Of November?
Rountree: And that's light speed for the entities we are dealing with.
De Weerd: I guess, Mr. Rountree, I don't know why they chose the 5th, but --
Rountree: They actually didn't in their letter. It just said to November hearing, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Well, certainly, if there is a motion, if it's the 5th or the 25th, it's
certainly your motion.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I would move that we continue Item 10, public hearing AP
08-003 until November 25th, 2008, for one final time.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue Item 10 to November 25th.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 18 of 90
Item 11: Continued Public Hearing from September 9, 2008: 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. Item 11, is a continued public hearing from September 9th on AP 08-
005. I will start this discussion with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you did hear this item previously.
Just to refresh your memory, it's located at 1065 Fairview Avenue on the south side of
Fairview just west of Locust Grove and the application before you was a City Council
review of the planning director's denial of a CZC. At the previous hearing Council left
the public hearing open and directed staff and the applicant to develop DA provisions to
accomplish the following: One was to allow the reduced street buffer of 17 and a half
feet as proposed by the applicant. And that one has been accomplished by the DA. I
believe Mr. Nary submitted the DA with your packet for tonight. The second one is to
document the development commitment with regard to the south property line. There
was a five foot buffer and an eight foot fence originally proposed during the hearing.
That five foot buffer is committed to. The applicant is now proposing a six foot fence,
instead of an eight foot fence. The third item was to allow the septic system as
proposed by the applicant with a timeline for sewer connection and to and through the
property at a specific date. The septic is done. We have committed to allowing them to
use that. The proposed date of hook up by the applicant is 2014. Council had indicated
a time frame of up to 18 months. Fourth. The applicant was to provide cross-access to
the east and west property. The applicant refuses to provide cross-access.. And, then,
just as an FYI, the UDC also requires a five foot buffer along the eastern property
adjoining any parking areas or drive aisles and they have not provided that. We haven't
had an opportunity to discuss that with them before, due to the other outstanding
issues, but that his a deficiency of the site plan. And you can see that a little better in
the landscape plan and with that I can answer any questions Council may have or
Mayor.
De Weerd: Council, any questions for Mrs. Canning at this time? Okay. Is the
applicant here?
Collins: My name is Roger Collins from The Land Group.
De Weerd: Can you pull that closer to you, Mr. Collins. Thank you.
Collins: My name is Roger Collins. I'm with The Land Group, representing the client,
462 East Shore Drive, Eagle. Is there a question before us? Is there a specific
question you want me to --
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 19 of 90
De Weerd: I don't know if Council has any specific questions. Do you have any specific
comments?
Collins: One comment that I wanted to address -- we have updated the site plan and
provided that with the development agreement to show the five foot buffer in the rear. It
also includes a five foot buffer at the east property line. The west property line is
actually larger than five feet, except for where the garage is. An existing building. So,
it's a little bit smaller than the five foot, but overall we are actually larger than the five
foot. The comments that -- in regards to the access, our client is still very concerned
about having access through their inventory of cars. We have provided on the site plan
a no build area that in the future could possibly be used for across-access, but they are
just not willing to grant the access at this time, but are willing to limit themselves on
where buildings can be placed and so forth, so that -- that can be done in the future.
De Weerd: I think there was also a question of the time frame for hooking up to city
services.
Collins: Yes. There was -- and I wasn't party to the conversation, but I guess there was
some conversation with Mr. Nary and he seemed fairly agreeable to that. I'm not sure --
I wasn't here at the last hearing, so I wasn't sure where the 18 months has come from.
De Weerd: I think it came from Council.
Collins: Did it? Okay. Okay. Council, any questions for the applicant?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, just -- you heard the planning director articulate what was
agreed to. That's consistent with your understanding?
Collins: Yes.
Rountree: And that's the position of the applicant?
Collins: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions from Council or the applicant? Thank you.
Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide testimony on
this application? Good evening.
Andrus: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Richard Andrus, 251 East Front. I'm
here, actually, on behalf of Joann Butler tonight. I believe she was at the hearing last
night -- last time and the conversations between her and Bill Nary -- unfortunately, it
looks like Ted Baird is filling in for --
De Weerd: No. That's fortunately.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 20 of 90
Andrus: Fortunately is filling in for Bill this evening and so we are -- I guess we have the
second level on both parts. Just to address some of the matters that were brought up,
the six foot fence along the rear of the property line, I believe there had been discussion
about an eight foot fence. The city ordinance -- actually, the height limit in the
ordinance is six feet. The client in this case may be willing to do eight -- an eight foot
fence still. I know that discussion has been out there. But, really, I'd defer to them on
that. But the reason why the change was made to six feet is so that it would match the
requirements of the ordinance. Also in Section 5.1.2 of the development agreement
that was provided to Bill earlier, to clarify the landscape buffer along the rear of the
property, we'd request that the following language be added. The landscape buffer
along the rear property shall be five feet wide. I know there had been discussion about
that, but it -- it isn't clear based on the paragraph here that that's the condition that will --
would be included. As far as the cross-access goes, I know it's presented as the -- the
applicant in this case is unwilling to grant cross-access. It's a little more nuance than
that in this case. I'm sure you're all aware that they plan to have an auto dealership on
this lot and it creates of substantial burden in that setting to have public access across
the drive aisles of -- of the dealership. In this case neither the applicant, nor either the
properties on either side have requested this access. There is a billboard on the
adjacent property that makes it somewhat impractical and the adjacent property also
already has access off of Fairview. So, just the practicality of it is we -- we wonder why
cross-access is -- is actually needed in this situation. There was an extended
conversation between Bill and Joann regarding the city's authority to request that cross-
access and I mean if you have questions on that I guess I could, you know, go a little
further into that, but I think just from a practical standpoint across-access doesn't make
sense in this situation. As far as the timing of the sewer, I read through the transcript --
Idon't recall 18 months as being a timeline that was discussed. Maybe it was. But the
timeline that was put in the development agreement was one that -- the feeling from
both parties was that would be a workable situation. I think that's all I had, so -- if you
have any questions I will stand for questions.
De Weerd: Great timing. Council, any questions for the legal counsel?
Rountree: I have none for Richard. I have some for Bill.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Andrus: And, hopefully, I didn't put words in Bill's mouth or Joann's mouth.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony?
Canning: Madam Mayor, the height limit within the commercial districts is eight feet for
fences. It's six feet for residential districts, but --
De Weerd: Thank you for that clarification. Okay. Council, what would be your
preference? If we need to get further information from Mr. Nary, we can set this further
on the agenda, or you could continue this item to another meeting.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 21 of 90
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Baird.
Baird: If I could inquire about the nature of the question I might be able to field it.
De Weerd: Okay.
Baird: Bill did brief me on his discussions with Joann Butler.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Baird: And he is on his way, so by the time we are done talking he might be able to
confirm whatever the question is.
De Weerd: Okay. Counsel? Mr. Rountree? Mr. Bird?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my questions relate to the discussion on the connection for
the septic system and the cross-access discussion, both I think critical issues.
Baird: Uh-huh. Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, with regard to cross-
access, we think the city is within its rights to require it, so we are in disagreement with
the applicant regarding that. With regard to the sewer, was there a specific question
that you had?
Canning: Madam Mayor?
Rountree: Well, what
Baird: There are some staff over there that might be able to chime in as well.
Rountree: I guess my comment on that is I recall some discussion of a shorter period of
time than six years -- on the order of a year and a half. So, I don't know that we gain
much headway there.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the applicant had proposed the 2014
date within their development agreement. We didn't have much discussion. I did have
Mr. Parsons verify as to what -- to go through the minutes and verify what date Council
had looked up -- or had suggested at the last hearing and it was up to 18 months. So,
there wasn't all -- a discussion about it -- or that I am aware of. Mr. Nary cc'd me on
most of those a-mail discussions, so I don't believe we discussed it one way or the
other. It's what the applicant proposed.
Baird: So, Madam Mayor, I believe to put that another way, that's totally within the
Council's discretion on when to require that connection.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 22 of 90
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Just in the administrative process, is there a tickler system of whether we
discuss 18 months or six years, as they are requesting -- is there some way that a flag
would come up at that point for somebody to check on it?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Council Member Zaremba, we don't have one right now. I'm
hoping to make greater use of our GIS system to kind of at least flag properties, so that
if someone goes and researches the site they would notice that -- that there was a
commitment to connect to sewer services at that time.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I have a question for Anna. On the matrix you built for just us --
Canning: Yes, sir.
Rountree: -- the various years, the second to the last item is a DA required as a
condition of annexation and in 2008 you say no, but that's really a mute point, is it not?
Canning: Yes. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as I presented that matrix mix
to you last -- at your last hearing, what it was is I was looking at 2008 as there is not a
DA in place, what are the requirements, just based on the Unified Development Code.
So, that's what the 2008 column represents.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, Anna indicated we had a copy of the DA, but I don't find it in
my packet, unless it's hidden in the minutes somewhere. So, I don't know what the
language in the draft DA reflects, if it reflects our guidance in terms hook-ups, our
guidance in terms of cross-access and fencing and that sort of thing. So, currently
Richard might have to --
Andrus: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I have copies if you'd like to take a
look. It's -- I think section five is the pertinent section.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this does appear to be the last
version that Mr. Nary forwarded to me.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 23 of 90
De Weerd: Anna, who is it prepared by? Mr. Nary?
Canning: Mr. Nary sent our template document to the applicant and they modified that
document and sent it back to us and, then, I think we had acouple -- we had
commented on it one or two rounds.
De Weerd: So, that's why there is a six foot fence, rather than the staff suggested eight
foot?
Canning: Madam Mayor, it was never a staff suggestion to my knowledge. It was just a
previous commitment made by the developer.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, a question for Anna and maybe Public Works. If I recall from
our discussion at the last meeting on this issue, the sewer line on Fairview was -- was
how far away? It was --
Canning: Four hundred and twenty feet.
Hoaglun: On Fairview and that was out in this general direction? This was Fairview
and it was out -- was it through this property, which they own, but they are not
developing, is that --
Canning: Correct, sir.
Hoaglun: -- correct? My recollection is
were we talking about -- I had asked --
south that did not go through at the
connection right through here for the
property is developed, is that --
correct. Okay. And if I remember right, then,
there was a development planned here to the
time and that's going to be a much shorter
m to connect into, if and when that is -- that
Canning: Again correct, sir.
Hoaglun: Okay. Madam Mayor, you say -- and this is kind of what confused me. In this
draft DA it says sewer is currently 420 feet away from the applicant's south property line
and -- and I think this right now is much farther away. I think this right now is much
farther away. I think if that development went in it would be coming up. That was
where the proposed development was going to be coming in, but the sewer line out
here, that's 420 feet away, is that --
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Hoaglun, I believe
you're correct, there is an error there that it's not the south -- applicant's south property
line, it would be the applicant's east property line. Is that correct, Kyle? Northeast?
Hoaglun: And right now, Kyle and Anna -- if I may continue, Madam Mayor, that -- the
current sewer line, then, is probably somewhere down here and they were going to be
bringing -- once that was developed, whichever way they were coming in, I don't know,
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 24 of 90
but, then, that would be sewered throughout that property and, then, they would just
attach through there, so --
Canning: Yes, sir. There is a stub street right there.
Hoaglun: Okay. I see that. Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think we may have gotten
confused. We are going to rewind. It is 420 feet from the applicant's south property
line. So, the distance to the hook-up --their possible hook-up in Fairview is shorter.
Christensen: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Eddie Christensen, 1882 North
Prestwick, Eagle, Idaho. I guess some of the confusion for simple people, like my
partner and myself, is a year ago -- over a year ago when we purchased this property,
members of the staff are the ones that told us that we could hook up to that specifically
in meetings. We have it documented. They told us that we could hook up from the
south as soon as it was brought to us. There are plans for a storage facility to go in
there, you know, thus you're looking at an eight foot fence and that type of thing. I
mean, you know, at one point they may want to put a higher fence, I don't know, but,
you know, it's frustrating, I suppose, for us a year later that we are still discussing the
sewer issue when, literally, we were given that instruction and, then, in April there was
some changes in the staff and, then, they came back and they said, well, now we are
saying this. And I mean those are the facts. We were instructed and told that that's
what we could do. So, we proceeded with everything else and -- I mean, ironically, you
know, we sit here today and we are still discussing the sewer issue, when we have
every intention of hooking up or did once they brought it to us, but, you know, I'm not
going to cry a sob story over the 30,000 dollars that it's going to cost to take it from the
street versus the south side, but those are some major issues right now and getting it
paid and doing what we want to do, it makes it -- you know, and beautify the city, if you
will. So, I guess we just struggle at this point where it is an easy -- easy fix at that point
to tap in and we will absolutely at one point, you know -- but that's why those were put in
the -- in the documents that you have there with the times and all of that, but I just
wanted to clarify that, you know, we haven't really touched on that, but I mean from the
beginning I just don't know if there is a level of accountability or we just take it, you
know, and we address as it is today, but literally we were -- that was the instruction we
were given initially, that it was -- it was anon-issue -- well, there was a septic tank that
at that point we could connect and, then, there were some changes, so any other
questions?
De Weerd: You know, unfortunately, the staff, nor the city, can control what another
owner does on their own property. If they had slated it and told the city that this is their
intentions, you know, they are just as good as what you tell us and we can
communicate what is -- was -- is what is passed onto us and I don't know if that holds us
liable for what someone else tells us. We can pass that information on to you. Where
you do have control is bringing the services through your own property and I do know
that the preference of this city and this Council has been to hook up to municipal
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 25 of 90
services. Septic systems are not environmentally good planning, especially when you
have a municipal service that is within your reach and when it's within your reach it
certainly is the preference of the city to do so.
Christensen: And I appreciate that.
De Weerd: And you asked and so I thought I would tell you.
Christensen: Right. I do appreciate that. I guess e I guess the property should have
never been annexed, then, with the septic on it; is that -- is that correct?
De Weerd: Those are -- are annexed with the intention that they will be connected and
that's why Council put the time frame on it, because oftentimes the adjoining properties
don't necessarily do what they say and in your particular case you are the adjoining
property owner, that you can deliver that service to this other parcel.
Christensen: Okay. I have nothing further.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other comment from -- yes, sir.
Burrup: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Dan Burrup, 2284 Piazza
here in Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Burrup: Just to follow up on some of the things that my partner was saying, the cost to
connect is a burden at this time. The market is not what it was a year ago when we
bought this piece of property. You know, we are -- we are just trying to keep our costs
as low as possible. We do understand the need to connect to sewer. We are having to
do so and we feel that 2014 -- not it's January 1st, 2014, so it's not quite six years. It's a
little over five years. We are agreeing that at that time if the development to the south
does not come in, we will go ahead pay to have that sewer connected from the north.
That is what we are proposing. That is what I greatly assume was agreed upon
between Mr. Nary and our attorney in drawing up the development agreement.
Eighteen months simply just is not enough time. You know, last month when we had
this hearing it was a closed hearing and you guys -- and Council -- you brought up this
18 months after we couldn't say anything. You know, we honestly felt like we were
somewhat blind sided by that, simply because there was no discussion of that
beforehand and so the 18 months just simply is not enough time. If we were going to be
having an 18 month time frame, we might as well just do it now, because it would cost
us more to have to dig it up within that short of a period of time. It's going to take us six
months just to get it developed to what we see there now. So, it only gives us a year
operation and we'd have to dig it up again. So, simply it just doesn't make sense. Our
philosophy has always been to start small and grow and as we have grown we have --
and as we have expanded we have bettered everything that we have done. We are not
afraid and we are not saying we don't want to tap into sewer, we want to build a new
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 26 of 90
building on here, we want to make -- beautify this place even and that was the other
part of our whole application is that when we do build a building, perhaps in two years,
three years, whenever that may be -- if it's before that five year time frame, obviously,
we would be -- we would need to connect to the sewer at that point. So, that's what we
propose is -- is the five year and two or three months, whatever it is, time frame, just to
let us get our feet underneath us, get our business going, and in five years we can tap
into it if we haven't already. As far as the cross-access goes, it just simply is not
practical for an auto dealership. Most of the time auto dealerships seal off with chains
or barricades their entrances at night, because of the damage that can happen and we
are fearful of that and the effects the cross-access could be. So, I appreciate you
hearing us out and if you have any questions for me I will be happy to answer.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I do have a question. In the discussion from the last hearing
-- and I read it here again, you're looking -- if the septic system were to remain and be in
use, there was a pervious material put over it. Is that more expensive than just hard
asphalt?
Burrup: Yes.
Hoaglun: Significantly more expensive, slightly more expensive, because I'm not
familiar with that type of surface.
Burrup: Roger with The Land Group could probably answer that better than I can. It is
more expensive. I don't know how much more. Part of the development agreement it
states that we will use pervious concrete over the top of the septic system that exists, so
that it can drain. It will drain just as if there was nothing put over it with that. We
actually plan to build the whole lot out in a green way. As far as the lighting asphalt
when we do a building, we want to do a green building. That's our focus, but -- so,
yeah, we are planning to do pervious concrete at this point throughout the whole thing,
especially over the septic.
De Weerd: What is your maintenance of that surtace? I know that they recommend
maintaining it every -- twice a year. So, that it continues to drain, instead of getting
plugged up. And I guess that's been some of the down side of those type of surfaces.
Burrup: I would like to defer those questions to Roger with The Land Group if I may. I
do know that they cannot be sealed like asphalt, because, then, you just plug it up. As
far as the maintenance, I don't know. Everything I have heard that they have been
successful. But if there is anymore questions for me, I will answer those.
De Weerd: Council, anything else?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 27 of 90
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: While you're there I would address the cross-access issue. One of the
reasons that we require it is that on major arterials we are trying to have less reason for
anybody to have to drive out into the street to get from one property to the next. Uses
are not permanent, but accesses, either their existence or lack of existence does tend to
become permanent. You could be wildly successful and in a few years need to move to
a bigger property and, then, we are stuck with a piece of property that it doesn't have
cross-access and that's uncomfortable for us. You mentioned how you normally would
chain off your entrance driveway, it would be my assumption that you could make a
cross-access to the property line and chain that off in the same way, which could, then,
be removed if the use changes. That would certainly be a preference to me. Is even
that a possibility. I'm not saying that the cross-access needs to be used, I just think it
needs to be permanently available.
Burrup: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Zaremba, we have
indicated to our counsel and, hopefully, the conversation from there to Mr. Nary and
staff was that we are not opposed to allowing potential future cross-access. It would --
we don't -- we don't need to say that we are never going to allow it. Our concern is
during -- while we have cars parked for sale we really can't have people driving in
through to get to other places. We have accidents on our lot very frequently by people
trying to maneuver between tightly parked vehicles. It's just the way it is. And to now
have a business potentially next door to us and somebody trying to come through our
lot mostly a lot faster speed than what we would like to have, accidents will happen.
Damages will occur. And we can't have that. If we can have an area for cross-access, I
believe that as long as we can still park cars there and we do not have to allow that
access while we are in business there, I don't see a problem with that.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, my personal opinion would be that if you park cars in front of
it and left it chained 24 hours a day as long as you're in business, that's not a problem
for me. I -- I can just see atime -- because the adjoining property, particularly the one
to the west, is such a small property, they will probably lose their access to Fairview if
they ever change their use. And if you're still operating as a used car lot, then, that's
probably not an option, but if the uses change at about the same time, we would want
that available and as you have offered in I guess responding -- we are probably saying
the same thing. I have no concern that it be usable at the moment, you can park cars in
front of it, change it, but it just needs to exist.
Burrup: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, a concern just came to mind that I
know we have addressed before and that is that there are future plans for Jericho Road
to extend along the east boundary of 1139 Fairview, which is to the west of us -- or to
the east of us there. Our fear with the cross-access as well is that if we agree to a
cross-access, is that going to force us to lose our access on Fairview on 1055 Fairview?
If we have across-access agreement, would that not, then, say that -- that they tell us
we are going to take our access through 1139 Fairview off of Jericho Road? And that's,
quite frankly, something we are not willing to risk, that we would ever lose our Fairview
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 28 of 90
access, it simply would not work. A car lot would not work without Fairview access. So,
I guess what we would be willing to do would be to allow cross-access, as long as we
can still park cars there and as long as it doesn't impede future access issues to
Fairview off that parcel, we are entitled to now.
De Weerd: I don't know. I guess it baffles me and I guess it's kind of frustrating that
you have two pieces of property next to each other under single owners that are not
interested at this point to master plan, to at least give an idea of how these two parcels
will have a relationship with each other and, you know, we do try and learn as we make
mistakes and sometimes that's why we are emphatic about doing things a certain way,
because we have seen them fail. And access points, cross-access, access agreements
and connecting the sewer are -those are all things that we have leamed some pretty
nasty lessons from and that we won't bore you or anyone else in this room with, but, you
know, I guess my question is I don't know what you have planned for next door, but I
imagine you do and is it going to be compatible with this and, you know, I guess to staff,
can we require across-access if they ever get a building permit? I mean that's -- that's
one way to trigger that you have to design when you have along-term plan for this or if
you're going to do a higher and more impactful use for this piece of property, that that's
when you have the integrate it into your plan. I think a DA can do that. It helps with
your temporary use and it makes you plan these things into your long term use. So,
again, we are not interested every application at recreating or re-inventing the wheel.
We do try and take lessons leamed and apply them, so that we do have a better
community and every access out onto Fairview, which is an extremely busy road, is
another accident waiting to happen and I'm just saying that on the -- because I know
Lieutenant Overton would if I gave him a chance, but -- and it's -it's not to be preachy
or anything else, but that is why this Council pays attention to some of these details,
because we are responsible for the public safety, not just those of your customers that
are going to go in and out of your property, but those that they have a potential to hit, so
--and that's why these details matter.
Burrup: Absolutely. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I understand where you're
coming from. I understand your concerns. You know, in this hearing -- in this short
hearing this is the sum of 13 months now of meetings with the staff in Meridian, with our
legal counsel, with our development group and so can't bore you with all the details that
we have from all of that, but we have -- we have a master plan in mind. We actually
have shown that master plan. But, staff basically said we are not interested in seeing it,
because we have to apply for a new CZC anyway, so we can't -- they could not take any
consideration whatsoever as to our master plan, because we were not developing 1139
Fairview at this time. And so we do have aplan -- I don't -- perhaps, Roger, do you
have it with you? We don't -- but the plan is is to make it all one master plan. We
propose to ACHD, we propose to staff, one, consolidating the three accesses that exist
today between the two parcels into one access, we have proposed it. Quite frankly,
right now we have 1139 Fairview up for sale and the reason for that is because we
wanted to insure that we had Fairview access for 1065 Fairview and -- and by selling
1139 it eliminates the potential of having to connect through Jericho for that whole
parcel. We feel we have been very reasonable in giving up two of the three accesses
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 29 of 90
and consolidating one access for that whole entire piece. One building and the rest
parking stalls, well lit, with clean inventory that will look very nice. That is our master
plan for your mind's eye, but I -- I cannot -- I cannot delve into that now, because we
have always been shut down on the thought of presenting the whole big picture. We -
nobody would let us. So, we are trying to do it here. That's our business now. I mean
it's on one half of an acre. We keep it very clean. We keep it -- we are very meticulous.
We have --our inventory average year old is about four years old. So, it's not old clunky
cars. We -- the plan for this dealership is, actually, to be -- think green car company.
Want to focus on hybrids and the alternative fuels. We are going to do a green building,
as I mentioned. Everything is going to be green. So, that is the master plan for what it's
worth. We are not trying to ask for anything that we don't feel like we are entitled to.
We feel like we are giving up quite a bit in order to have the one access, but that's
why --
De Weerd: So, sir, in your long term plan will you be able to provide cross-access?
Burrup: In the long term plan we -- we will. My only fear is we don't want to lose
Fairview access. We need one Fairview access point, whether it's right-in, right-out, as
mandated by ACHD or whomever, we have to have Fairview access for our master plan
to work at all. And so if we can take one access off of Fairview for the two parcels and
one access of Jericho, as detailed in prior approvals that you have made for the
property behind us to the south, we will be happy with that.
De Weerd: Welcome, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you.
Canning: I think, Council, did you have questions for Mr. Nary that Mr. Baird would not
-- was not able to answer?
Rountree: My question's been answered.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Mine has, too.
De Weerd: Okay.
Burrup: If I could just add one more thing. If we -- if we knew that our master plan
would be approved and that we could do that, I'm quite confident we would take the
property off the market. We do want to go forward with our plan.
De Weerd: Well, certainly, it's my preference for a master plan, but legally I never know
what I can ask for. So, that's what Mr. Nary and Mr. Baird are for, to keep the electeds
out of problems. But, you know, in -- from a staff perspective, they can -- they can tell
you what is in our plan and what the parameters that they have to operate under. Ours
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 30 of 90
are a little bit more vague and that we have public safety, we have other considerations
that this Council does have the authority to ask and I can tell you sometimes we stump
the staff in what -- so, if they didn't tell you that, they were being nice.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I just wanted to find out -- and maybe Roger can tell me this.
The reason for my question on that pervious surface, if it's a substantially higher cost,
you know, if you look at connecting to the sewer and, then, you don't have to do that --
you know, if the dollar amount -- you know, if that's a savings and, then, you can apply
that to sewer, connecting the sewer is expensive when you got to dig those lines out.
The value to your property to the east, does that -- having a sewer line connecting to
that property adds value to that property, if you're looking to sell. If you're looking to
develop, it's already in, it's part of the infrastructure. I know in this market in this day
and age it's the way the finances are, that's difficult, you know, every penny counts. It
always does. And more so today. But that was just something -- I don't know of the
cost differential is that much where it would save you money to go with the hard surface,
not go with the pervious surface, allows you to put that money into -- into the sewer
connection, allows that value to be added to the property to the east. You know, just
something I was just kind of curious to explore.
Burrup: Well, just -- just to answer that briefly, that's -- that's part of the reason why we
are just asking for five years. You know, originally -- and, again, you know, you already
went over this with my business partner, but we were told that we would be able to
operate off of our septic indefinitely, until sewer was provided and, then, we would be
forced to tap in within six months of that. That was said on three different occasions
with meetings between your staff, our development group, us, among many many
people. So, we went through our whole process, only to be denied at the end, because
of sewer, which was the thing that was resolved from day one, before we -- before we
ever hired anybody to do any development agreement. And that is the reason why we
are only asking for five years. If five years from now we haven't connected, we will
connect, because we feel like that would be enough time -- who knows how long we are
going to be in the economy that we are in. It just isn't feasible right now to connect and
18 months isn't enough time. Eighteen months we might as well do it now, but to do it
now I think is pretty much a deal killer for us. We -- as far as the cost goes, in the
development agreement it states -- it states that we will provide that pervious concrete
over the septic area. So, we are only talking an area maybe 20 by 20. The cost
differential is not going to be that great. We are looking at 1,500 dollars to connect from
the rear, if it was provided by the south, 35,000 dollars if we have to connect to the
north right now.
Hoaglun: Thank you for that. I appreciate it.
De Weerd: Okay.
Burrup: The plan, too, just to -- just to lay one more thing out there, we do plan to take
the old structures down ultimately and put up a new building that would go to the rear of
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 31 of 90
the property and towards the center between the two parcels, ultimately, would be the
goal. So, any other questions?
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would have a question for Public Works, perhaps, and I don't know if off the
top of your head you would be able to say how -- how close to this property is the city's
nearest well? Or is that even an issue? If the septic tank is operating correctly, do we
care?
Radek: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Councilman Zaremba, the closest well is -- Well
10 is about a half mile away. There is not anything that's very close to it and I don't
think that's a major concern for us.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from Council?
Rountree: Not at this point.
De Weerd: Okay. Any clarification on the surtace?
Hoaglun: No. He answered that adequately. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anything -- any final comment from the
applicant? Okay. Staff? Council, any further questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further, do I have a motion to close? And,
remember, if there is any comments, discussion, let's do it before we close the public
hearing.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I'm just going to make a comment. The way the DA was
drafted and the conditions that are set forth, it's not acceptable to me. The reasons
being we have a history of some seven years on this property of promises and I think
Madam Mayor explained that we have teamed from experience, not necessarily
mistakes. In that time we have had at least two applications, promises to get things
done. We have yet to see them get done. We have a commitment of some five years
from now, six years from now, something might get done. That's not acceptable to me.
We need to get it done. As a Council, we have taken some strong positions about if
you're part of the city you're going to be hooked up to our infrastructure. We have made
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 32 of 90
some exceptions with some pretty strong conditions that at a time certain you will. I
think those strong conditions our still applicable in this case, whether it's 18 months or
two years, depending on what the timeline might be. In all honesty, if we were to
approve this with a five year period, my guess is that it would get lost and some 30
years from this point in time when their septic system failed, somebody would realize
that they should have been hooked up for the last 25 years, so -- and that's nothing
against staff, that's just what I have seen historically. These things get lost in the file
cabinets. So, that -- right now that's where I'm coming from. I can approve this if we
change the conditions of the development agreement. I have heard from the applicant
that if we do that it's a deal killer. So, it's kind of lose-lose for them which ever motion
that I might put forward after we close the public comment period.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I, too, echo Councilman Rountree's thoughts, because we have both sat on the
Council long enough to see things like this happen. I can assure you we are going to
get hooked until the system does go bad, if it's 20 years from now or if it's one year from
now. I think we got to -- to definitely make sure we -- in our agreements we provided,
within a reasonable distance, sewer hook up and water hook up and condition of
annexation has always been that, so I could -- I could probably live with two years, but I
certainly can't live with 2014.
De Weerd: Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Me three, plus the cross-access.
Hoaglun: Yeah. Madam Mayor, two years is acceptable to me. Having the availability
of the cross-access I think is important, knowing that they can block it, it's -- but it's for a
future time when that use of the property changes, things can change, but two years is
as far out as I can go on sewer.
De Weerd: Okay. Final comment from applicant?
Burrup: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council --
De Weerd: If you will state your name once more.
Burrup: My name is Dan Burrup. I would just like to ask Mr. Nary what the
conversations were between him and Joann Butler for the last 30 days. We were led to
believe immediately after the Council meeting on September 9th, I believe it was, that
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 33 of 90
five years would be a reasonable time that we could negotiate. We invested one more
month of attorney fees, development costs, all these things to be told the same thing
again today and we were led to believe after that meeting that five years would be very
doable and over the last 30 days the development agreement has gone back and forth
with the five year and three month timeline and not once has any concern ever been
brought up to us. Why are we -- why are we still dealing with this today is what I want to
know?
Nary: Madam Mayor, could I respond?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Nary: I don't know who told you any of that. I spoke to Ms. Butler in the hallway on
September 9th. She told -- she was bothered just like you said about this hook up time
period. I told her you can propose whatever you want, it's up to the City Council. They
told you 18 months when we were sitting here a month ago. She wanted five years. I
said propose five years. She wrote that provision in the contract when she sent it back
to us last week. I spoke to her on Friday. The only comment staff made was to make
sure the hook ups were right, but Ms. Butler's always known or should have always
known that was the sticking point -- has always been with the city, because it's never
been a discussion point that it has changed and certainly myself and the Public Works
staff and the planning staff can't speak for the Council. They clearly gave direction a
month ago. Ms. Butler should know that all that you were doing tonight was proposing
an altemative to what the Council had suggested and whatever that altemative is is still
their discretion to make that decision and that's what they are telling you.
Burrup: The other item is this property was annexed, I believe, in 2003. There was no
development agreement given at the time for it to be hooked up to the property. That
was something that your staff and many people in the city have tried to find how
something went wrong back then. I don't how. All I know is it wasn't my fault. All I
know now is that we are willing to work with you -- we are willing to put this sewer in in
five years, if we haven't done so sooner. We are willing to do all that. But we need
more than two years. You know, the economy isn't good right now. If it was like it was
a year ago, I think we would be happy to do it right away. But, quite frankly, we can't do
it right now. And, you know, we didn't miss this development agreement, there is
nothing that ever said that sewer was going to be brought to the property when it was
annexed in. Something got missed by the previous owner of the property, by the City
Council, by staff -- everybody. But it wasn't us and so we are trying to work with you as
far as all that goes. Any other questions?
De Weerd: No. Thank you. Okay. Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I move we close the public hearing on Item 11.
Bird: Second.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 34 of 90
De Weerd: Okay. 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: We have had discussion. Do we have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I believe I have heard that there is not any wiggle room with
this agreement at this point as it relates to at least the sewer hook up, so I propose a
motion that after hearing comments -- public comments, stafFs comments, I move that
we uphold the director's decision to deny the CZC for 08-010 and at ALT 08-004, as
presented in the hearing this evening, for the reasons of not being able to reach a
timeline for connection to the sewer that's acceptable to the city and cross-access
agreement conditions.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Discussion? Okay. Hearing none, Madam
Clerk, roll call.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Public Hearing: AZ 08-004 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
318.74 acres from RUT to R-4 (69.72 acres), R-8 (192.20 acres) and R-15
(56.82 acres) for Oakcreek by Norpac, LLC -east of North McDermott
Road, west of North Black Cat Road, south of Chinden Boulevard & north
of Ustick Road including the southeast and northeast corners of West
McMillan Road and North McDermott; and near the southwest comer of
West McMillan Road and North Black Cat Road:
Item 13: Public Hearing: PP 08-003 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 139
lots including: 118 residential lots and 21 common lots on 30.72 acres in
the proposed R-8 zoning district for Oakcreek by Norpac, LLC -east of
North McDermott Road, west of North Black Cat Road, south of Chinden
Boulevard & north of Ustick Road including the southeast and northeast
comers of West McMillan Road and North McDermott; and near
De Weerd: Okay. Items 12 and 13 are public hearings on AZ 08-004 and PP 08-003. I
will open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Before you tonight is the
Oak Creek project. The site is located -- apologize for that map. It doesn't depict it too
much -- very well as far as the property boundaries, but it is south of Chinden, east side
of McDermott Road, west side -- west of Black Cat Road and north of McMillan Road,
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 35 of 90
with two parcels located in the southeast -- a parcel located in the southeast comer and
this is a parcel located in the southwest comer of Black Cat and McMillan Road. The
applications before you -- the applicant is requesting concurrent approval for annexation
and zoning of 318 acres to R-4, R-8, R-15 and preliminary plat approval for 118 single
family building lots and 21 common lots on 30 acres in an R-8 zone. So, here is the
aerial of the site. Again, this is what's being -- this whole area is what's being proposed
for annexation and at this time this is what they are proposing to plat with this
application. The applicant is proposing a mixed use residential master planned
community. The applicant is proposing three different neighborhood plans and zoning
districts to provide communities of all income ranges. Each community proposes a
range of product types to include single family detached, townhomes, alley loaded,
single family attached and multi-family units and the densities associated with them. On
the concept plan the traditional family neighborhood offers approximately 215 home
sites and consists of 69 acres zoned R-4. The mixed density single family
neighborhood offers 1,000 home sites on roughly 192 acres, zoned R-8. And the mixed
density area consists of 58 -- excuse me -- 56.82 acres zoned R-15. So, this is where
your R-4 zoning would be as far as the traditional neighborhoods and, then, transition to
R-8 and, then, the orange color here would be your R-15 zones that the applicant's
proposing. Gross density for this site -- for the entire project is roughly five acres -- five
dwelling units to the acre for the 30 acre plat located in the southwest comer, they are
at 3.84 acres -- gross acres -- dwelling units an acre. Here is more of -- they are
showing their lot layout. Again, some of their road -- proposed roadways that they are
showing for the whole site, as I mentioned earlier. This is the 30 acre plat that they are
going forward with now. The reason why they are able to plat this at this time is
because this site is within the Black Cat sewer shed and that's the only -- at this time
only that parcel and this parcel up here could be serviced with current city services.
Here are some of the elevations that they propose. The first group of elevations that I
will be showing you tonight is, basically, tied to the annexation. The applicant has
proposed separate elevations for the preliminary plat. So, this is some of their attached
units, their duplexes, their larger style homes on the site. I'll move through this very
quickly. Here is some of their alley loaded product there. Their townhomes. And,
again, some of their -- or, again, some of their cluster homes there. Here is, again, the
30 acre plat that they are proposing tonight. It is roughly 118 acres. Here is the
landscaping plan for that portion. Excuse me. One hundred and eighteen lots. This is
the landscaping plan. They exceed the UDC requirement. They are providing over ten
percent open space within that 30 acre parcel or plat. Excuse me. Here are the
elevations that they are proposing with the plat. All of these elevations have been tied
to the development agreement that has been attached to the development agreement
provisions that are part of this application. This is one style, the single story style that
they are proposing. Here is a two story. You can see they are going to have
modulation in the building, some -- a lot of glazing on the building. It's three car
garages and stone accents, front porches. Staff was real supportive of what the
applicant proposed with the first phases of the plat. Some of the other DA provisions
that staff might like you to be aware of is, one, right now, if you recall, there is a
Highway 16 study going on along McDermott Road and so the applicant has proposed
in the DA -- with the DA provisions that they would not plat any properties within 700
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 36 of 90
feet of that until that study is complete. So, we have that attached as one of those extra
ordinary type DA provisions to make sure that that alignment study gets in place before
we see any access to that roadway. Also, the applicant is proposing to construct an
interim lift station, so the additional 288 acres can be serviced with city sewer. They are
also proposing to construct multi-use pathways that are consistent with our master
pathway plan. They are also proposing to construct at least four pocket parks totaling a
minimum of five acres and providing two amenities with each of those pocket parks.
They are also -- if I can go back up to the aerial here. Along this portion of the project is
Ten Mile Creek. They are proposing to do an enhancement restoration along that
portion of Ten Mile as part of this project. The applicant also has a range of units
between -- not to -- not to be less than 1,000 units and up to a maximum of 1,300 units
at build out with this subdivision. At the Commission hearing on August 21st, 2008,
they voted to approve the project. Becky McKay, Thomas Coleman, and Tom Coleman
spoke in favor of the project. Key issues of discussion by Commission at that hearing --
one was the Highway 16 alignment study and where they are in relation to the timing of
that. The interim lift station. Commission was wondering how other potential property
owners in the site could upgrade that interim lift station and propose development and
annex within the city at that time -- at a future time. Commission wanted further
classification on how they were proposing to restore the Five Mile area -- the Five Mile
Creek area. And the other big thing -- the other thing I failed to mention, too, is the
applicant's proposing to participate in the reuse program that we currently have
underway with Public Works. So, a portion of this site in the future will -- hopefully,
there will be a pilot program out there to use reclaimed water from the wastewater
treatment plant to use as irrigation in the future. So, they have agreed to kind of
participate in that as well with this. And so Commission wanted some more information
on that as well. The other thing that -- the key changes to staff -- when we went before
the Commission, the applicant didn't really depict how they were going to develop the R-
15 portion of the development and prior to Council -- excuse me -prior to Commission
the applicant did get staff revisions to the concept plan and Commission was able to act
on that and recommended approval of that concept plan. So, written testimony as the
staff report -- a gentleman -- I can't pronounce the last name very well, but his name is
Mike, he was in opposition of the project. He would like to see some type of bike lane
along McMillan Road for -- as future roadways develop out there. Walt Morrow from
Western Ada Recreation was in favor -- was in favor of the project. And Kevin Howell
also submitted written comments. He's in the audience tonight. He's -- he owns this --
these two parcels here between the applicant's project and he's curious on - he wants
to know if there can be some provisions that he can hook up part of the sewer
connection as well. So, hopefully, he can provide some more comments. All those
letters should be in your packet tonight. Hopefully you got them and were able to
review those. So, outstanding issues before Council tonight is one -- there is actually
two. Should we annex this -- should this Council annex this property prior to the
completion of the Highway 16 alignment study and prior to the construction of the Can-
Ada lift station. Is this project in the best interest of the city. And, then, the other thing
I'd like to bring up is one of the DA provisions that staff had written into the staff report
was the applicant was to construct a minimum of an eight acre park site located
centrally to the northern portion of the development. In discussions with the applicant
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 37 of 90
and their representative, they'd like to decrease that number to a six acre park and
simply tie the whole project to an overall open space requirement of 12 percent. At this
time staff -- or that concludes my presentation and I would be happy to answer any
questions Council -- Mayor and Council may have of me.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff at this point?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: On the park was it the thought that the eight acre park would become a city
park?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, no, it was, basically, an amenity for the
residents --
Zaremba: A homeowners park no matter what.
Parsons: That's correct.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is the applicant here?
Coleman: Madam Mayor, Councilmen, my name is Tom Coleman. Address 1025
South Ridgeway, Eagle. I would like, before I start my remarks, to make a request and
a promise. The request is that we get an additional five minutes, because we have a lot
of information to present. My promise is that my remarks personally will be very, very
short.
Rountree: We will hold you to it.
Coleman: You can do that, please, sir.
De Weerd: You have 30 seconds.
Coleman: Could I have less. My name is Tom Coleman and I am an owner of Coleman
Company, who is the owner of the land, the developer, and will be the pirimary home
builder at The Oaks. We are privileged to be able to present this project to you tonight
and we appreciate your receiving us. Because this is our first project in Meridian, I
would like to take just a brief moment to present ourselves to you. Coleman Homes has
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 38 of 90
been a family owned business for 60 years and continues to be an exclusively family
owned business. We are very proud of our company's history. We have been at it a
long time. We have been primarily residential community developers and home
builders. We also have a significant experience in retail commercial, retail office, and
apartment building. We are very proud of our company's history. We have always
maintained very respectful relationships with municipalities with which we have done
business. Our employees, our subcontractors, and especially our home buyers, who, of
course, are the blood of our business.. While proud of our history, we are acutely aware
that we are newcomers to Meridian and need to do the work to eam your -- eam from
you the same respect we have earned in other communities. We are committed and
excited to do this work and to make The Oaks one of our best examples of what we can
do. At this time I would like to yield -- I hope that wasn't too much over 30 seconds --
and to people who will make a much detailed presentation. Thank you very much.
T.Coleman: Mayor and Council, Thomas Coleman, 1002 Winding Creek in Eagle. I
wanted to present to you briefly a little bit of project history and give you some details
about the project's master plan itself and, then, Becky McKay will provide any details
and probably everything intelligent we have to say. Could you go to the next slide, Bill.
I just wanted to correctly just kind of introduce our project team. We are really happy
with the extensive and knowledgeable staff team that we have had of local and regional
companies. And, actually, I just wanted to give you a little bit of project history. I won't
take more than a second. Bill, if you don't mind going to that next one. We bought the
property in 2005 and have since, then, been having a lot of meetings with consultants,
city staff, neighbors, and to this point got our application in in February of 2008. We are
really happy that we don't have any neighborhood opposition. We have been working
with them very well and I think we have made a lot of progress there, as well as with
staff. We really appreciate all of the time and effort staff has put into this. It's been a
very big effort and they have -- they have helped us out tremendously. I wanted to give
you a little bit of an idea of our vision for The Oaks and how we began this process and
in doing that we kind of established what our initial goal was for the community, which is
to provide a long term value for our residents, as well as the City of Meridian. We want
to do that by integrating our amenities, our landscaping, all of our homes, so that we
bring value to not only our community, but the City of Meridian itself and we do that by
offering a high quality design, not only our homes, but the entire community. And what
we are seeking to achieve here is what we call a mixed density synergy, which we have
all residential uses, because we don't have any commercial, but we are proposing a lot
of different types of residential uses, single family homes, townhouses, those types of
things, so that we can bring a diverse group of home buyers, so that everybody gets to
enjoy the benefits of a master planned community without having to pay what you
typically see as extremely high prices for those types of things. As my dad mentioned,
we are the owner, the developer, and the home builder and that allows us to provide
higher quality homes at reasonable pricing, because there aren't three different people
that are all looking to make a profit off of the same benefit. And it also allows us to offer
that level of amenities that are more commensurate with alarger -- a higher priced
community. This is a long term commitment for us and the reason that we are
approaching this with a concept plan and a plat is that we want to be able to offer
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 39 of 90
diverse and ever changing home styles, so that as the home buyer preferences change,
we can meet those and not have to come back in and make adjustments and change,
we can continue to move with that and what that does for the City of Meridian, as well
as us, is it helps us achieve a successful project, because our sales rates are there to
meet what current demands are. So, we are not always trying to play catch up with
what has been successful in another city. And in doing this we can create a distinctive
place where residents can buy the first home that they are moving into that can move
up when they are to have a family or they can retire there. We like to think that people
can live in our neighborhoods throughout their entire life no matter where they are. We
oftentimes see people moving in and, then, they have their parents follow them and
sometimes their parents follow them and that's really what we seek to achieve. All of
our homes are going to be very thoughtfully designed with architectural features that will
all be approved through our in-house architect and architectural committee for the entire
master plan. One of the fundamental aspects which Bill touched on is the city's water
re-use program, which we are really excited to be a part of. We think it's an
environmentally responsible thing to do and our understanding is that the overall
program would save the city about 35 million dollars and we think it's a fantastic idea
and we are just happy to be a part of it and to, hopefully, get this thing launched and to
put that in place. And in following that trend we are hoping to seek out additional
environmentally friendly response options like permeable driveways, responsible use of
our stormwater, energy efficient homes, as well as the restoration along Five Mile
Creek. All of that kind of culminates into our concept plan, which is focused around a
central boulevard, which is similar to some other communities where you have a lot of
neighborhood set off of a central boulevard, but what we have done is focused on the
design of this to create a unique atmosphere where we will have a sidewalk on one
side, which will be meandering and on the opposite side we'd like to do something
similar to the city's pathway system, so we can expand the city's pathway system
throughout our entire community. Overall we will have about seven miles of pathways
throughout the community. So, you can see that we would have more active uses on
one side, like people riding their bikes and running, where people could walk and linger
more on the opposite side of the road, so that we don't have conflicting uses. The
reason that we designed our concept plan the way that it is is because of where we are
located at the -- we are right by the intersection of future Highway 16 and 20-26. We
think this will be an ideal location for residents who work anywhere in the valley, it will
be very good transportation for them and also, as Bill mentioned, we have designed the
site to accommodate for any alignment that Highway 16 is currently being considered at
this time. In order to insure the concept plan is achieved in the way that we -- the
promises that we are making and what our vision is, we have entered into a
development agreement and have made substantial requests in there that have been --
that we have worked through with staff to make sure that all of these things are
achieved -- to make sure that our community vision is consistent and that the
commitments that we have made to you are consistent. The design is focused around
the three neighborhood types as Bill mentioned. Our traditional neighborhood design
will be larger single family homes on larger home sites with substantial landscaping and
are more compatible with our surrounding uses. The mixed density area, which -- I'll get
a pointer out and show you -- is the orange area, which Bill mentioned as well, and this
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 40 of 90
will be kind of a transition to a little bit higher density area. We will have some more
particular single family homes there, some houses that are on alleys that are normal
single family homes, but we'd also like to introduce some of the duet style homes that
you saw and those types of things. And I'll get into those a little bit more. Our third
neighborhood area are -- is what we call our mixed density neighborhood core and
that's what we'd really like to focus a lot of our homeowners. It gets them closer to what
we -- our public amenities are and decreases the amount of traffic we have within our
community itself. These will be single family homes as well, but some more attached
homes. We'd like to work some more imaginative designs on the home styles, so that
we can create a lot of different offerings for people. There won't be any rental homes in
there. The only reason that we requested R-15 zoning for that area is so that we can
utilize the setback requirements and those types of standards to achieve the housing
types that we'd like to build in there. The community amenities are all focused around
the central park, which Bill mentioned. We'd like to commit to six acres there. We have
shown a couple of different renderings and different sizes of that, but the park itself we
think will be about six acres to have enough room for play fields, a community center,
and a swimming pool. We, then, wou•Id like to distribute some of that open space to
other parks in the community. We think that each one of our individual neighborhoods
will have its own park, which will have its own specific identity for that neighborhood,
with a different type of amenity, like a botchiball court or something along those lines.
Overall, we will be over more than 30 acres of open space and we have committed to
12 percent. About six miles of pathways, as I mentioned earlier, and, additionally, we
are working with the Western Ada Recreation District to commit a site to them that
would house a swimming facility and some play fields as well. So, we are really excited
about that. I think it will be a very good opportunity for us to integrate with the
community and provide something for them as well. Our home styles -- getting back to
those briefly. Our traditional single family home -- our traditional single family homes
are similar to what you see in a lot of your nicer communities around town. They front
onto the street. They have larger backyards and very nice landscaping. The other
single family homes that we'd like to build are more along the alley. You get a little bit
nicer street scene, because you don't have our garage there, so the front of the house is
a little bit more appealing. After that we kind of get into a little bit more unique product
type, which you have home styles called green court homes or passeo homes and
those are these that orient themselves on a green area. It promotes kind of community
interaction between all the residents that live in that green area. These are a lot more
appealing to people looking to downsize or younger families that don't want nearly as
much maintenance or a bigger yard, but still kind of price that community feeling that
you get. The grouping of houses that we have -- if we can go to that next one -- are
duet homes and two unit townhomes. These could be in our R-8 zoning area. They are
relatively low density or an attached product, but we get to provide a little bit lower price
point for people while keeping the amenity level and the level of our housing very high.
You can see that these front onto a street and these would be on an alley, so that we
can integrate them all together into -- into the same neighborhood. We wouldn't have to
divide these up into pods of all of one type of house or one or the other. The last that
we are -- the last type that we are looking to build are mansion homes and tuck under
townhomes and these are two ideas of what some of our .multi-family for sale houses
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 41 of 90
would look like. Mansion homes are really unique in that they integrate very well with
just typical single family houses, because that's exactly what they look like. But they
usually have anywhere from three to five different townhouses within that. Tuck under
townhomes are just four units in a row, but they are also very appealing from the street
and those can be oriented on an alley or a courtyard area. And just to kind of
summarize where this idea comes from, we, unfortunately, are not really brilliant enough
to come up with this on our own, this is something that's been kind of a tried and tested
plan in places like Daybreak in South Jordan, Utah. Valley West in Bozeman, Montana.
And McKay Landing in Bloomfield, Colorado. And as you can see here this is Daybreak
in South. Jordan and what they have done -- each one of these colors represents a
different type of house style and they are able to integrate each one of these house
styles into individual blocks or neighborhoods by making them all integrate very well,
but, then, they also achieve a very diverse type of home .buyer. But they still offer great
amenities. All of their -- this yellow area is an amenity for the homeowners. It's been a
very successful community. With that I'm going to tum it over to Becky for anything that
she might add, which is a lot, unless you guys have any questions from me. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, before .Mrs. McKay starts, I have a question for her and,
then, possibly a declaration to make. Is this the project you have been discussing with
the Westem Ada --
McKay: Yes, sir.
Rountree: -- in the past probably six months?
McKay: At least six months, maybe longer, sir.
Rountree: Okay. I am a director of Westem Ada Recreation as well. I have recused
myself on any issue that would ultimately come to the city before an application has
been made or presented to Council. I have recused myself from this application, have
not discussed this project with either the applicant or with any of the board members of
Westem Ada, with the intent that I would make action on this project as a city
councilman as it related to the city. So, does anybody have any problem with that and if
you do I will recuse myself.
Bird: Stay in your seat.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
McKay: Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, 1029 North Rosario. And you know I
can't do anything in 30 seconds.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 42 of 90
Nary: You already went past 30 seconds.
Bird: You're an attorney, remember.
McKay: Yeah. What you see here is kind of an overall concept plan. As Thomas
indicated, we are taking advantage of the continuous collector concept, which what we
show here as far as our collector network is consistent with your comprehensive plan.
We have -- this is the half mile, so that could potentially be a signalized intersection and
based on build out it does warrant a signal in the future. Then, the collector goes up
here and stubs to the northern boundary, which, then, we anticipate would be extended
on and go up to the half mile at Highway 20-26, which is also consistent with the Comp
Plan. The collector system wraps down here. We have got a short collector here. This
is the proposed Western Ada Recreation site. We have been working with them for
months now and they have been great to work with and as Councilman Rountree
indicated, he has not been present at any meetings that we have had with their board of
directors. We also show a collector that comes up here to the eastern boundary. It
transitions to a local street here and exits out to Black Cat. The reason that we did that
was the future collector is going to be located right here at the half mile. That is an
alignment with the collector at Volterra and the future elementary that is between Keego
Springs and Volterra. Therefore, when this collector is constructed we have a stub
street that drops down here, stub street that interconnects here, then, this would be
eliminated. And we think that that will work very well. Our point of being contiguous
with the city limits is right up here. This property is 215 feet wide and it's over five and a
half acres and that was a parcel of record, so this is not considered a shoe string. Right
now before you is the preliminary plat application on the 30 acre parcel here, located on
Black Cat. We did work with Public Works and paid for a water stub here, water stub to
the north and a sewer stub to this property. So, this preliminary plat will not require
tearing up Black Cat Road that they just paved. We provided preliminary sewer
analysis on this to demonstrate that this can very easily gravity flow and based on the
excessive depth you have got there in Black Cat we did not have a problem. The
different colors, as Bill indicated, represent zones and different product types, as
Thomas went through. Right up here we have the R-4. That constitutes about 22
percent of our project. We have the R-15 right down here against McMillan and, then,
again, against McDermott and that's about -- the R-15 is about 18 percent.
Predominately you're looking at an R-8. About 60 percent is within that R-8 range. As
Bill indicated, we have got -- we anticipate between a thousand and 13 hundred
dwelling units. That would put us between four and five dwelling units per acre. Bill,
could you switch to the next slide. One of the things I wanted to go through is the
Highway 16 extension. We have definitely been involved in this process. I have been
meeting with ITD on multiple occasions. I have been involved in three other projects
that are in alignment with the future Highway 16 extension. The preferred route is what
they call the near west route, which is 400 feet west of McDermott Road. Initially, ITD
evaluated I believe in their level one analysis 12 alternatives. They have whittled that
down in their level two analysis to three routes. Near west, near east, and in alignment
with McDermott. Their preferred, based on prime agricultural land, the number of
homes within the alignments, the number of property owners affected, wetlands,
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 43 of 90
historical sites -- they have a whole criteria that they look at in determining what is the
preferred alignment. That near west is where they want to be. Obviously, that cannot
be solidified until the EIS or environmental impact study is approved by the feds. They
are wrapping that study up. I believe they were trying to get it done last month and get
that submitted and start processing through the system. We -- to the next one, Bill.
This also demonstrates you can see our -- the subject properties right here. That's a
300 foot corridor that ITD is looking at. One of the things that we designed into our
project is a safety factor. We intend to not develop this 700 foot strip in through here
until ITD and the city have agreed upon where that alignment is going to go. This
collector is right there on the edge of it, so as far as our conceptual design, it would
remain intact. If they decide to go in the alignment of McDermott, we would just slide
over it a little bit and increase our buffering. But we have -- all the buffers that we show
exceed the recommended buffers along those arterials. As far as the overpass, the
interchanges will be at 2026 and at Ustick, when it will have an overpass over McMillan,
so McMillan will go under it. Reason being it wouldn't be the reverse, it will be cheaper
to cross future three lanes with the six lane than the reverse. This is an expressway, so
we do not delineate any access to McDermott within our design. If by chance it -- this is
solidified, then, we left the option in our development agreement open that was
potentially with the city's approval and ACHD's. Possibly have a collector outlet at that
half mile. Bill, can you go to the next one. As far as the sewer, right now what you see
here -- this is the current city limits and these are approved projects. The Tree Farm.
This is Volterra and Bainbridge. We are contiguous here at Keego Springs. Obviously,
you can see this -- this is a natural -- oh, boy. I'll try to wrap up.
De Weerd: Time flies when you're having fun.
McKay: It does. This is a natural progression here --
Zaremba: Madam Mayor --
McKay: -- we are proposing a --
Zaremba: -- I would propose some extra time, since she's doing an excellent job
without using any display boards. Do you feel like you're missing something?
McKay: I do.
Zaremba: You're doing very well.
De Weerd: I wouldn't propose extra time, because, then, she will take that plus.
McKay: I will expedite --
Zaremba: I was just trying to make it a reward for --
McKay: Thank you, sir.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 44 of 90
Zaremba: -- working with the electronics.
McKay: What we are proposing is an interim lift station in the future to handle the three
-- or the 288 acres that are not part of this preliminary plat. In your 2003 sewer master
plan it initially showed a regional lift station right here at our southwest comer. When
you moved your area of city impact out -- boundary out to Can-Ada, then, this became
the Can-Ada regional lift station. We have worked diligently with public works as far as
providing them information on the estimated depth of that wet well. Obviously, we also
want to make sure that the improvements that we put in are permanent improvements
as far as facilitating the future gravity flow back to the Can-Ada regional lift station. Bill,
can you switch over. This kind of shows you the layout. We have also been working
with staff as far as proposing a future well site right here at this location along the
collector roadway. We also submitted to the staff amulti-use pathway plan. We show
your ten foot multi-use pathway -- or pathway going up to the north, wrapping down to
the south, and, then, going on out to Black Cat. That will extend, connect to the one at
Volterra, which will take you clear over the Heroes Park. We also show the multi-use
pathway coming here and going along Five Mile Creek, therefore, leading to the
Westem Ada rec. If you can switch over. This is the recreational facility that is currently
under construction at the Coleman's project in Middleton called West Highlands. They
had this specifically designed for that particular site. I wanted to show you that, just to
demonstrate the amount of effort that they put into their amenities and into -- to show
that this is going to be a top notch development. Bill. Okay. Back. In the Westem Ada
site we researched this. This is in Humbolt, Iowa. It's an aquatic center that is public.
The site plan that we developed here showing the building, the pool, the lanes and the
parking area, we are consistent with that. We thought it was a good model. We have
agreed to donate the site. It's approximately four and a half acres. We will do all the
perimeter landscaping. Put in any infrastructure that was necessary. And we also
stated that we would coordinate and work with them in trying to see what facilities we
could put in or to be back onto our improvements on their behalf and make it a little bit
cheaper for them. Bill. This is the preliminary plat that you see before you. This is
going to be the first phase. We have the Settler's Canal that bisects this property here.
We do not propose to pipe it. It will take a 72 inch RCP due to the size. The Settler's
canal comes over here and, then, dumps into Five Mile Creek. We do propose wrought
iron fencing along there and our primary open space is a 1.4 acre, centrally located
area, with pathways, picnic, I think we have benches and some various other activities
there. I stub to the adjoining properties. This property is real small. During ACHD's
current standards it could only have aright-in, right-out. So, we worked with Tom
Zumwalt to provide public street access here, so, eventually, that could be taken off that
intersection there. We have stubbed to all the adjoining properties and I think staff
praised us on our interconnectivity. Bill. One of the other things that we did that I have
never done before is we submitted elevations of all four sides of these -- of these
dwellings. This is a small step here, this first -- this first preliminary plat. We want to
take our time with this and make sure that we do it right and, obviously, that will be the
example that we bring before the Council when we come back for a preliminary plat
approval on the remaining 288 acres. As Thomas indicated, this is amulti-generational
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 45 of 90
project, as opposed to single product. I think some of the biggest disappointments that
Council has had are smaller projects. If we look at the larger projects, Bridgetower,
Paramount, Lochsa Falls, those projects have the size to do significant amenities and
create some variety and create a real community and sub-neighborhoods within that
community and I wanted to mention when I did Bridgetower -- Mayor --
De Weerd: You need to --
McKay: Yes. This is my last comment. Mayor Come looked at me and he said you
have painted a beautiful picture. Don't disappoint us and I want it to look like the picture
you have painted. And I'm here to tell you tonight this particular project is going to look
like the picture we have painted. Thank you.
De Weerd: Council, questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: This might very well be for one of the Toms, but you have mentioned a pump
station -- pump facility. I'm assuming you're thinking that there is going to be some kind
of a pay back program on that or has that been considered?
McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I believe our development agreement
states that the interim lift station will be built to your standards, turned over to the city,
for ownership and maintenance. It would be at our sole cost.
Rountree: Okay.
McKay: If any additional capacity is added to the lift station, above and beyond our
needs, based on input from Public Works, then, we may be eligible for some
reimbursement. But the city has no obligation to pay for any of that.
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: Staff comment on the well site.
Radek: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Council Members, the applicant has also
committed to providing a future well site in one of the -- you know, I believe it's by phase
five, so -- I'm sure what --
De Weerd: And we have all of the details worked out -- I mean we are not going to
come back in in five years and have a whole different scenario -- are we laying out
expectation on the well site and --
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 46 of 90
Radek: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: -- ownership and all of that stuff?
Radek: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Another question, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Rountree: On the creek through your first phase, you said you'd fence it with wrought
iron fence. Is there going to be any work in that drainage in terms of pulling banks back
if they are over steepened? Re-vegetation. Will it be stipulated in the CC&Rs that that
will be -- is that an easement or an ownership by Settlers or Nampa-Meridian or will it be
owned by adjacent property owners and will there be stipulations that they will --
homeowners association will be responsible for the care and feeding of that? What's
the situation?
McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, Settler's Imgation District has a 50 foot
easement along here. At least that's what Nathan Draper indicated to us. None of the
lot boundaries encroach into that 50 feet. That is a separate common lot, so it would be
under control of the HOA. As far as any improvements in there, Nathan was quite
emphatic that we not put a pathway in there. As far as trying to make it a little more
esthetically pleasing, we are at the mercy of Settlers and their license agreement
process. Obviously, we are concerned about how that looks, since we have lots
backing up to it and our roadway crosses it. They have in some instances allowed us to
install turf and sprinklers, no trees or shrubs, but they want that maintenance access,
which I believe is 14 feet, and is never very attractive. So, we will -- we will strive to
work with Settlers and, hopefully, since this -- this is the end of that -- that Settler's
Canal that they will be a little more open to our idea, but we want to make sure it does
look acceptable.
De Weerd: Is this something, Kyle, that we can use the standards we have sat on the
Five Mile Creek on our pilot project to --
Radek: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Council Members, I really don't think we can
apply the same kind of expectations -- Five Mile Creek is a natural drainage and we
have a canal here, so, you know, as far us being able to lay claim to it as a natural
drainage and say, you know, in the case of Five Mile Creek it's -Nampa-Meridian
claims it as a drain, but we also claim it as a creek and here it's a canal and it's nothing
else. So, I'm not sure -- I'm not sure what we can do with that.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 47 of 90
De Weerd: Just one other question. And I appreciate it will stay in single ownership. I
-- we have heard that before. So, when it's marketed, is -- is this whole master plan
going to be shown? So, I'm not going to -- in the multi-family in five years the residents
are going to stand in front of us and say: You idiots, why did you approve apartments
there.
T.Coleman: First of all, we have committed to not build any rental housing, but no --
part of our marketing will be the entire master plan. I mean that's part of what we are
selling to home buyers is that they get all the amenities of a master planned community.
De Weerd: Okay. But you will -- they will get that entire plan --
T.Coleman: Absolutely.
De Weerd: -- when they buy an individual lot.
T.Coleman: Absolutely.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Hoaglun: Question for Thomas or Becky. What -- go through the phases again -- your
general time frame for your phases -- of course, lower right, first phase, what you're
looking -- yeah. It's market driven, I know, but it's also -- there is an impact on roads on
a development like this and the timing and what's planned and different things like that.
T.Coleman: Absolutely. And we have done our traffic impact study for the entire site,
as well, as a detailed study for just Oak Creek, which is the 30 acres, and so we know
what our mitigations are for that and. we will continue to update that traffic impact study
when we have additional preliminary plats. Our first three phases are in the 118 lots
that we are proposing in the preliminary plat. After that we would probably -- the logical
progression would to build this entryway and move into these areas here. I don't know
how much we will build. I mean that's partially market driven as to what we feel there is
demand for at that time, although our -- our plan and our commitment is to build the
main boulevard and the initial park area with that phases, once we get into there, so that
park will be built with that, as well as that main boulevard. Where we go off that main
boulevard is probably in this section and possibly over here as well, it just kind of
depends on which kind of community or home style we would like to get going on.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, if I might follow up. Are you looking at doing a mix right off
the bat or are you going to start, you know, single family homes or --
T.Coleman: Initially in here we are somewhat limited, because of the kind of remote
location of that relative to the rest of the community, so we have kind of had to have
been a little bit more simplified than we would like to be in here, but, in general, what
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 48 of 90
we'd like to propose would be some diversity in each phase and we'd like to get into
that, depending upon what the demand is, but we see demand in -you know, in large
lots of different areas and so -- but that's our -- our general plan is to offer several
options. And trying to integrate those into not just phases, but neighborhoods and
blocks and those types of things.
De Weerd: Okay. I'd like to talk transportation for a moment.
T.Coleman: And Becky is --
De Weerd: Okay. As we looked at some of these mammoth planned communities --
not mammoth -- larger sized, they offered -- certainly Volterra and Bridgetower offered
right of way and preservation of the transportation corridor and certainly the only
improvements we seem to have in north Meridian have been developer driven. So, you
have an intersection there, you have roads that have no horizon on certainly a five year
plan, let alone probably ten. What -- what are the plans, if this should build out sooner,
rather than later, to mitigate for traffic?
McKay: Madam Mayor, McMillan is a minor arterial, it's scheduled for three lanes. We
met with ACHD on multiple occasions as far as how that's going to build out. In their -
I'm on their -- ACHD'S new committee to change their policy manual. That's one of the
things that we have been looking at as far as, you know, on a three lane or getting most
of that asphalt installed by the developers. And so in the past we end up building these
tum lanes at our entrances and a lot of times it makes the most sense to continue that -
that additional asphalt, instead of starting and stopping. And so a lot - we work with
ACHD to try -- to try to make that happen. We will also be building detached sidewalk
along there. We will be required to install a signal here when the warrant's met. We will
also be required to install a signal here, based on traffic generation, when that warrant
is met. So, with those two we would be installing lights and, then, making
improvements along McMillan. One of the problems we have with McMillan is at the
intersection of Black Cat, the .existing pavement is shifted north and that pavement
comes and meanders back in alignment with the right of way. It's not centered in the
right of way is probably a better way to say it. When Idaho Power came in and installed
the new transmission poles, they followed that edge of pavement, not the right of way.
So, we have got a little bit of a complex situation that we have been working with ACHD
staff in solving and, obviously, making that work. As far as donation of the right of way,
I did talk with Thomas and I mentioned to him that other large projects have voluntarily
donated any necessary right of way for future expansion. He said that they would take
it into consideration. I guess, you know, I am always a proponent of it. I think as a
planner I have had more clients donate right of way than any planner in the valley,
because to me it -- you know, it just makes sense. As far as what they get from -from
35 feet from center line or an additional 13 feet of right of way, it just saves the public
money.
De Weerd: Any further questions?
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 49 of 90
Rountree: Along that line, Madam Mayor, you have indicated that you would hold back
the preliminary platting of some 700 feet off of McMillan. I would suggest that at some
point in time after you start development in this area, assuming it gets approved, I would
request that signs be placed along McMillan where there is any visibility from the
traveling public and future potential buyers in this area, indicating that that is the future
comdor of a major cross-county and through state facility, even though at some point in
time in the future a buyer will say, well, I didn't know. But we like to do everything we
can to get it on plats, get it out there where people can see it and not only have them
put up, but have them maintained for whatever period of time is required.
McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I think that's a great idea. The
advantage that this particular project has is there is a developer, the builder, and they
have their own marketing team. I think where we have ran into problems, you got 25
different realtors selling lots for 15 different builders and each realtor may tell a different
story. Here they will have their a obviously, their information office with -- with their
master plan and that's probably a good idea that they note that on that master plan, so
you don't end up with a full house here.
De Weerd: We will have a bigger house --
McKay: Yeah. You have got a bigger house.
De Weerd: -- to fill next time.
Rountree: I have nothing else.
De Weerd: Anything further?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I'm intrigued -- I'm one of those that always says bring in things that look
more interesting than what we get and you have hit that. That's very good.
McKay: Thank you.
Zaremba: My concems are that McMillan is still being listed as a three lane road out
there. I think that's not -- it's far distant future I think it's five lanes. That's a personal
opinion, but with some transportation history attached to it. So, it worries me that what
you're given as official knowledge is that it's a three lane road. That -- I don't know how
we solve that. But, actually, I do have a solution, but it's a different subject than a City
Council meeting. And the other issue that concems me a little bit is the alignment that
you have shown for Highway 16 I believe is also Meridian's preferred alignment.
De Weerd: No, it's not.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 50 of 90
McKay: Huh-uh.
Zaremba: It's not?
Rountree: No.
Zaremba: It's close to it.
De Weerd: Meridian's preferred alignment goes down McDermott.
Zaremba: Centered on McDermott at that point?
De Weerd: We didn't want the -- the no man's land of land use between Ada County --
Ada and Canyon county.
Canning: Madam Mayor, would you like a short update on Mrs. Bowcutt --
De Weerd: That would be great.
Canning: It's not Bowcutt anymore. That's an old name. Sony. Since the -- since the
three altematives were developed, the consultants for that Highway 16 extension
project has been working on those three. They have, basically, narrowed it down to two
altematives. One is just west of the existing McDermott roadway. So, McDermott
would still function as a roadway, although it would stop and start and -- in spots, but it
would still. function as a roadway under that altemative. That's the city's preference at
this -- at this point. And, then, the other one is the near west one, which creates some
developable land to the west of McDermott. So, McDermott would stay open in that
case, too. So, in either of the altematives that are still under consideration, McDermott
would still function in some sort of capacity. One is a much higher capacity. One's an
arterial and, then, the other would be an intermittent collector.
McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, as far as the McMillan Road, on our
preliminary plat that we submitted to ACHD we show, I believe, 48 feet center line of
right of way along McMillan. ACHD is quite adamant that it is only going to be three
lanes. All I can tell you is, you know, we are doing what they asked us to do. They
have backed us off to 35 feet from center line. We are utilizing our buffer for sidewalk
and, then, I have also added extra landscaping due to the transmission lines and in the
event that they change their mind in the future and it does become five lanes. I agree
with you it seems to make sense that everything will eventually, in some point in time,
be five lanes, but they say otherwise.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor. In defense of ACHD, they are constricted by what
COMPASS tells them will happen within the next 20 years and as some people know,
my point is that 20 years is not a long enough view, but that's not ACHD's fault. They --
they see it within that constriction as a three lane and I appreciate your providing for a
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 51 of 90
future alternative that may be different from that. My question about Highway 16 was
actually going to be -- and discussion of which the alignment actually is wasn't really the
point to me. The issue is, even though we seem to be narrowing down what the
alignments will be, as you mentioned, it still has not gone through the environmental
impact process and I cannot imagine anything that would be different on that side of
McDermott, as opposed to the other side of McDermott, but if the environmental impact
study came back and said, no, this can't go where all of our preferred alignment choices
are and they said it has to be on the east side of McDermott, for some environmental
consideration, that would be kind of stuck. Now, I do appreciate that you have said that
one of the last phases to develop would be the back-age against McDermott over there,
but I don't know, how much risk are you willing to take that the environmental impact
throws it off an alignment that most of us are fairly happy with?
McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, what -- the information that we have
gathered from ITD is why they are discounting the near east option is the cost is
substantially more and I believe the number of homes that they will be eliminating is
greater and that's one of the criteria that they take into account when reviewing the
environmental impact study. So, the westerly route is where they think they want to be.
Your Comp Plan says that it will be right there on McDermott. ITD's position is we don't
want the state highway to be on McDermott, because, then, we have to build not only a
state highway, but a frontage road, and the cost would be cost prohibitive. So, that's
kind of how we have arrived to where we are. As far as the risk that we are taking, in
coming up with this -- this concept, we made sure that we allocated enough room
through here, plus buffering, that we could accommodate, if, by chance, for whatever
reason, they say, oh, we are going to shift over to the east, it would still be the near
east. Like I said, they have -- you know, they got from three -- said they have got it
down to two. So, I don't -- I don't believe, based on all the information I have received,
it's going to shift over to the half mile. I mean they have ruled those out a long time ago.
So, if we preserve this corridor and wait and don't do anything there that would hamper
ITD's efforts, we will be fine.
Zaremba: Okay.
McKay: We are confident.
Zaremba: Thank you. And, Madam Mayor, a third question if I may. I think I
understood your explanation about the lift station over at Can-Ada, but I guess I don't
get the logic behind it. Are we saying that sewage from your property would go over to
Can-Ada and, then, have to come back all the way past Black Cat to our sewage
treatment plant?
Bird: That's right.
McKay: Yes, sir.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 52 of 90
Zaremba: A couple of miles of extra -- actually, it's about four miles of extra travel.
Why?
McKay: Yeah. Initially you have a series of lift stations, your -- your South Black Cat,
North Black Cat lift station and, then, they had -- this was back in 2003. Then, they had
the McDermott lift station. That would have -- would have, then, taken your far western
boundary -- when you moved your area of impact, then, Can-Ada became the regional
lift station. Now, the problem with that is growth is, obviously, taking place from the east
and working itself westward. So, the lift station -- development's not going to start on
your west boundary and work its way back. So, to answer your question, the -- your
sewer master plan shows the -- the sewer gravitying down to this point here and, then,
eventually, going over to the lift station, then, the lift station pumps back to the plant.
What we are proposing is an interim lift station consistent with your 2003 sewer master
plan here and, then, it would pump back. So, we'd end up building some of that
pressure line, building gravity lines that are -- are consistent with your master plan. We
are not stepping, you know, far out and building what we call throw away infrastructure.
But, yeah, it's got to pressure back to the plant one way or the other.
Zaremba: So, I missed something there. You're proposing that you hook into what
would be the pipe returning from --
McKay: Yes, sir.
Zaremba: -- Can-Ada, not piping your stuff all the way over to Can-Ada and having it
come back again.
McKay: Yes, sir.
McKay: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, anything further?
Rountree: Nothing.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who
would like to provide testimony on this application?
Lee: Good evening.
De Weerd: Good evening, Gary.
Lee: My name is Gary Lee. Kevin Howell Construction. It's been awhile since I have
been in front of this body.
Rountree: It's been a long time.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 53 of 90
Lee: It's really unusual for me to be here on behalf of a property owner, instead of a
project. I would like to commend Becky and her presentation. I have seen her present
a lot of projects and that's the fastest one I have ever seen.
De Weerd: Oh, my God.
Lee: I'm impressed. As was indicated in that letter that I -- that Kevin had sent over to
you, he owns that hundred acres in between the Oak Brook project and the piece
further west, bounded by McMillan and Five Mile Creek. He's had that land for quite
some time and has waited to develop that based upon availability of sewer.
Zaremba: In here?
Lee: Yes. Right in there. And with the installation of the Black Cat trunk, it opens up
some possibilities, not only for The Oaks project, but possibly for Kevin Howell. That
line is very deep, 25 to 30 feet as I remember, and there is certainly some capabilities to
sewer a portion of Kevin's property, but all of it, back to the west. I know it's been an
item of discussion for city engineering for quite awhile in how far that sewer shed should
go to the west, but it physically can go farther than what is being proposed tonight. We
are estimating probably about 30 to 40 acres of Kevin's hundred could possibly go back
to the Black Cat trunk and we'd just like to have the opportunity to work with city
engineering staff and the Colemans and bring that line through their first phase at a
deep enough depth and at minimum slopes that we have a possibility to hook on and
cant' a portion of our sewer to their project over to Black Cat. The balance of it would
have to go into that same trunk line that would be planned along the Five Mile Creek
and, hopefully, we can work with the Colemans in expanding that temporary lift station
and be part or that project as well, because we do want to proceed with some
development in there if they are successful this evening in going forward with their
project. So, with that said, I just wanted to make that request of the city to see if we had
the opportunity to be a part of that gravity sewer.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, no questions, but a comment. I don't think we will be making
that decision this evening, but appreciate your input, Gary.
Lee: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony? Bill, can you get the
microphone.
Nary: Uh-huh.
De Weerd: Thank you. Good evening.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 54 of 90
Waterfield: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. My name is Barbara Waterfield,
and I live at 6100 McDermott, which is north of the property that the Colemans are
developing, and I just wanted to say that I have talked with them several times and it
seems like this would be just a wonderful thing for the City of Meridian and for our
community and I am very supportive of them. I have the 40 acres that is right near that
property and I'm really excited to have them developing that land and I think it would be
a nice addition. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you very much. Any further testimony? Okay. Wrap up remarks? I
was hoping for the first speaker.
McKay: Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions. We will be glad to do whatever your
staff requests of us as far as coordination with Gary and Kevin Howell. The indications
that we had received from the staff is that that quarter mile line, as far as what could --
what would gravity into Black Cat, was -- was set in stone and that was based on
capacity, not on depth. But we, obviously, will cooperate with whatever Public Works
asks us to do. I'd just like to thank Barbara for coming and sitting here this long and
Kevin saying such nice things. I mean it doesn't happen to us very often and we sure
appreciate it and I appreciate the time you give me. Thanks.
De Weerd: Thank you, Becky. Any questions, Council?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Anything further from staff?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I guess I would ask Public Works a question. Are we ready for this?
De Weerd: You have to speak into the microphone, please.
Zaremba: I was trying to be close. Are we ready for this? We haven't in the past been
planning to put the sewer out that far.
Radek: Madam Mayor, Mr. President, Council Member Zaremba, as Becky fairly -- I
think she covered it pretty well. I mean we -- we had adjustments to our impact area.
We adjusted our master plan. And what they are proposing is, you know, an interim lift
station totally at their expense. It's -- I guess from a Public Works standpoint it all
works.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 55 of 90
De Weerd: Kyle, I guess the question I heard from Councilman Zaremba was are we
ready for it as far as capacity at our plant, compared to the other growth priority areas
and commitments that have been made, are we ready?
Rountree: Tom's behind you just in case.
Radek: Is he coming up?
De Weerd: He's got your back.
Barry: Madam Mayor, Tom Barry, Public Works Department. We are ready for -- for
definitely this 30 acre plat. We can accommodate that. We have conditions in the staff
report that require that upgrades to the plant be done certainly before any additional
platting would take place. So, what we understand is coming through at this point in
time is that 30 acre preliminary plat, which -- which we don't have any problems with
with regard to capacity or -- or restricting -- any restrictions as it relates to the treatment
plant. So, we are ready in that way. We are also working with the developer on the
reuse programs and have language in the staff report to have cooperative approach to
how we integrate that, but as it relates to longer term sewer capacity and gross priority
areas, we will continue to work with them as they bring in different phases for
preliminary plats, but as they had proposed it at this point in time we are able to
accommodate their request.
De Weerd: I guess so as we make a commitment to annex we make a commitment to
serve and it's understood the first parcel is 30 acres, but, again, with other commitments
to the south, once we get the new capacity online, do we have the capacity to serve this
size of a development?
Barry: Madam Mayor, I'd have to look into a full accounting of the various properties as
it relates to capacity and -- for the south end that you're referring to. I don't believe that
there is going to be a concern here. Our treatment plant capacity has gone from what
was 7 MGD now to well above nine and with some chemical enhancement we can get
close to 12, according to our consultants. So, when you consider that we can
accommodate roughly 3,500 to 4,000 lots for MGD and a number of lots that are being
talked about here, I think we at a thousand total, or just over a thousand or so. I think
we are going to be okay. But we haven't done a full accounting of that and we can
certainly bring that back to Council, if you wish.
De Weerd: Well -- and I guess with the reuse program that -- that helps to minimize the
complete impact as well.
Barry: Perhaps for loadings as we discharge and those discharges are regulated by our
MPDES permit, but not necessarily for treatment capacities. So, that, again, would
have to -- if you want certainty as it relates to our ability to serve, I can only give you my
best guess at the moment, which is I believe we can, but if you'd like that certainty, we
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 56 of 90
would have to run an analysis and do an accounting of the capacity at the plant versus
what other annexed properties have already been taken into account.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Hoaglun: Just a comment, Madam Mayor. On projects like this, you know, there is the
up side for a large planned community like this and there is a down side. The up side is
that in those areas along McMillan, that intersection of Black Cat and McMillan, they are
willing to invest the money to pay for signals to upgrade the roads in front of #heir
development. The down side 'is if the market heats up again, which I don't see anytime
soon, but down the road and they do their work on these things, but we have other
areas out there where down at Black Cat and Ustick and some of those others areas
where it's not developed and those remain, just like they were 40 years ago and we are
putting more traffic on those roads and I appreciate that they are doing that for their
areas -- for that area, they are putting developer dollars into that and saving the
taxpayers that money, but in other areas, you know, we are looking at Linder and
Ustick, for example, and just because I sat there the other morning fairly early and it
took me two minutes and 50 seconds to get through that four way stop.
De Weerd: How long?
Hoaglun: Two minutes and 50 seconds for a short little deal, but I mean that's -- that's
the facts, you know, and those are the types of things we are dealing with and, you
know, that's something we are -- it's a transportation funding issue and that's the down
side of a large -- large development like this. The up side is that they do use their
dollars to mitigate the impacts in those areas, but those areas where there is
development, it hasn't been planned out yet, and ACHD doesn't have the money, that's
the down side. But I appreciate them stepping up and doing what they are doing with
this project for the roads in that area.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from Council?
Rountree: I have nothing.
Bird: I have nothing.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further questions or information needed, Council, I
would entertain a motion to close the public hearing.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve -- or close the public hearings on AZ 08-004 and PP 08-003.
Zaremba: Second.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 57 of 90
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 12 and
13. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing no more discussion or anything, I would move that we approve AZ 08-
004, request for annexation and zoning of 318.74 acres for Oak Creek by Norpac, LLC,
and to include all staff, applicant, and public testimony.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Zaremba: Yes, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Did we -- I don't think we did discuss the applicant's request to update the
DA provision about the eight acre park. I don't think anybody had any objection to it, but
we need to include something about that.
Bird: No. And I -- that was part of the applicant's deal on here. I didn't hear anybody
have a heartburn with it, so I just figured that it was -- we'd go through with it.
Zaremba: The applicant's request is okay.
Bird: Yeah.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd: I guess just a point of discussion that I guess was included in public
testimony that Mr. Rountree had mentioned the signage of the site, so that the public
would know of the development potential or commitment.
Bird: I believe that was applicant testimony that they would do that.
De Weerd: Okay. Just wanted to make sure it was captured.
Bird: Yeah. I -- that was the plan.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, roll call, please.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 58 of 90
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carves. Okay. That's on Item 12.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Item 13.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve PP 08-003. The request for preliminary plat approval of 139
lots for Oak Creek by Norpac, LLC, and to include all staff, applicant, and public
testimony.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I'd just make a comment and it's directed to the applicant, I
would hope that you would make extraordinary efforts with Settlers to try to resolve what
will ultimately become a real sore point for you and your future homeowners out there,
so we would encourage that.
Zaremba: If that was not captured on the record, the applicant said he felt it was in their
best interest to do that.
Bird: I think he stated that up here.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? We have a motion to approve. Roll call, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED:. ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Just to comment, this is a very nice project. I'm one of those who would
rather have the big picture than little pieces and it seems that even though that's the
preferences of many municipalities, it seems like we make it a little bit more difficult
through our process. I believe that staff has been very excited to work with your team in
bringing a product like this to our community and we appreciate your attention to detail.
We appreciate that you have worked with the surrounding neighbors to create a vision
and get a buy in to that vision and that's -- that makes certainly, I think, the Council's job
easier: But also that you take a look at future impacts with the pathway system, with
your open space, with donation of right of way and looking towards the impact in
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 59 of 90
providing an intersection improvement that will at least take away the four way stop
signs and allow the traffic to flow. We appreciate that. And we look forward to seeing --
seeing your development come out of the ground and look forward to working with you.
If you would like to come up to the microphone.
Coleman: I just wanted to say that we put a lot of work into our presentation to staff, but
a lot of these good ideas came from staff. So, you should be proud of your staff and
their insightfulness into what your city is best served by and it will be a pleasure to
continue to work with them and yourselves.
De Weerd: Thank you. I'm sure they appreciate that that was captured on the public
record.
Coleman: Give them all a raise.
Bird: Hold it.
Rountree: What was that?
Rountree: I move we reopen the public hearing.
Bird: Can we redo those motions?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary, I think we need to add a finding to the development agreement.
It's the cost of the raise. Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, can I propose a five minute break?
De Weerd: Yes. We will break for five minutes and, then, reconvene.
(Recess.)
Item 14: Public Hearing: AZ 08-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 2.953
acres from the R1 to the R-8 zoning district for Sctroi by Nunzio Sgroi -
4405 East Ustick Road:
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call this meeting to order. We are at Item 14,
which is AZ 08-011. It is a public hearing. I will open this public hearing at this time
with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Sgroi project. It's located
at 4405 Ustick Road on the south side of Ustick, approximately three-quarters of a mile
east of Eagle Road. As you can see, the --
Rountree: You're not quite there.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 60 of 90
Canning: No, you can't see. You can see the hatched area on the display screen. The
application before you tonight is one for annexation and zoning. The request is for
annexation and zoning to accommodate a 30 to 40 unit assisted living facility. However,
no development is proposed at this time. The applicant is requesting -- I believe it's R-
15zoning. I wanted to show you the site. This is Red Feather development. There is
one property still in the county and, then, this is in Boise city. It is an elementary school.
This is the proposed site plan, although staff has conditioned the project to not take
access from Ustick, but, rather, from Red Feather Subdivision, along their south
boundary. And they have also added DA provisions to provide cross-access to the
west. Let me quickly go through the other DA provisions that are kind of nonstandard.
That they would comply with the design standards. That a Conditional Use Permit is
required for development as an assisted living facility on this site. No other new land
use, including, but not limited to single family duplex or townhouse subdivisions, shall
be allowed on the site without City Council approval for a modification of the subject DA.
As part of any future DA amendments, elevations shall be provided. A certificate of
zoning compliance application shall be submitted to the planning department for
approval of the proposed assisted living facility on any new other use. The site plan
submitted with the CZC shall substantially comply with the conceptual development plan
attached to the DA. The applicant shall be responsible to install water mains to and
through the development and to coordinate main sizing with Public Works and the
applicant will be responsible to stub sewer and water services to the west. And we do
have some elevations. The Commission recommended approval at their August 21st,
2008, public hearing. Tom Whitworth spoke in favor of the application. No one spoke in
opposition or commented and, then, there was no written testimony. Key issues of
discussion by the Commission were the clarification that the assisted living facility
require CU approval in the future and there were no key Commission changes to staffs
recommendation, nor are there any outstanding issues before City Council that staff is
aware of. With that I will answer any questions Mayor and Council may have.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: This may be a question I would think either police or fire or the post office
would ask. If they change their access to North Shannon Avenue, they would need to
change their address as well; is that correct?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Zaremba: Okay. Have they been told that?
Canning: My guess would be probably, no, but --
Zaremba: Okay.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 61 of 90
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? If you would like to comment.
Nary: You need to come up here, sir.
De Weerd: If you will state your name and address for the record.
Sgroi: Good evening. My name is Nunzio Sgroi at 4405 East Ustick Road, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Sgroi: And I agree with the staff report.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: I guess I would ask the same question. Are you aware you will probably
need to change your address? That probably shouldn't bother you, but --
Sgroi: Won't bother me.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: You're much too agreeable.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: I have a concern given where this is and the surrounding land use is pretty
much all R-4 and if this were to go to an R-8 -- and I can understand why, so we can
have the use that's being proposed. My question is can we have a development
agreement condition that if another use is proposed other than the one that's being
applied for, that the zoning would up zone to R-4? I guess that's a question for Mr.
Nary, if that's something we can do.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree, certainly we
can put in this is development agreement limiting what the uses are. That's not
uncommon. I mean if you want to limit it to only that single use, I don't know if Mrs.
Canning has any other thoughts of other similar uses in that location, (mean -- but I
think we are talking about assisted living, whether a day care might be something that
doesn't require a development amendment -- or a DA modification, but if you want it to
be the single use, that's certainly your prerogative.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 62 of 90
Rountree: Madam Mayor, my concern is flipping the property and having something
come in there that isn't acceptable, but could be done in an R-8 zone.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it clearly states they need to come
back to you for a development agreement modification. You could add a clarification
that you don't anticipate that residential development at the densities allowed by the R-
15would be appropriate in this -- in this situation.
Rountree: That would -- that would help me if that could be added to the DA.
De Weerd: And do you understand what Councilman Rountree is suggesting to be
added to the annexation DA?
Sgroi: To become an R-15?
De Weerd: That would be the zoning, but the concern is that it would not be for the use
that we are considering it for now. So, they would state that it would be for the single
use or an R-4 density. Is that -- was I following the discussion correctly?
Rountree: And I think that would be the outcome of what Anna is saying. Our concern
-- and let me explain it -- is that we get applications to change or to establish a zone and
we if don't condition it, you as an owner, can -- we see it flipping, but sell your property
to somebody and it's zoned R-8. If there is no conditions on that, then, that person
could come in there and build at a density that's residential that's at a residential density
of R-8, which is multi-plexes and, in my opinion, since all the surrounding residential --
or at least abutting residential to that property, with the exception of the county piece, is
low density or R-4. So, I would not want the density of residential, if the property were
to sell and you don't -- you know, you're gone and your commitment goes with you and
somebody else comes in and says, well, it's R-8, I want to do this and we have no
control. But what I want in the development agreement is that it's for the use that you
applied for and that the density of residential in any future application would be no
greater than what the surrounding land uses are, which would be R-4.
De Weerd: Is that acceptable to you?
Sgroi: Well, I hadn't thought about it.
Rountree: Yeah. That's -- we have to think about that kind of stuff, because it has
happened to us a few times.
Zaremba: Well, it's a provision that only triggers if you sell the property before you build
something on it.
Sgroi: Right. So, if that would be zoned R-8 and I want to put an assisted living it's
okay.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 63 of 90
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
Rountree: But you have to -- you have to still use -- bring a Conditional Use Permit
before the city that would talk about --
Sgroi: Sure. Yes.
Rountree: Yeah. Yeah. That sort of thing. Yeah. Yeah. That still would --
Sgroi: If I sell it to you and you want to put housing, then, it would be R-4.
Rountree: Then I -- if I wanted to put residential there, then, it would be at a density
that's equivalent to R-4.
Sgroi: Okay. Is assisted living and a nursing home the same?
Rountree: That I can't answer, but --
Canning: Madam Mayor, yes.
Rountree: Yes.
Sgroi: Okay. That's fine.
Rountree: Okay.
De Weerd: Anything further, Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Sgroi: Thank you.
De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide
testimony on this application? Yes, sir.
Pentecost: I'm Bob Pentecost. My address is 11079 West Tinsdale in Boise and my
interest in this -- my father-in-law has the property next door, 4315, and the questions
arise about the cross-access through the property next door. His concern is maintaining
access to Ustick and what is -- what can force a change so that he would lose that
access and have to use the cross-access that's being required.
Canning: Madam Mayor, shall I? Thank you. The property in question is still in Ada
County, so we would have this property grant the cross-access, but the other property
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 64 of 90
doesn't need to make use of that at this point. At some time as the use changed on the
adjoining property and they sought annexation, the City of Meridian would likely ask that
the access to Ustick be removed. But it would only be upon application -- or upon
annexation and a change in use.
Pentecost: Okay. So, as it stands it's -- nothing changes to his property.
De Weerd: Nothing changes to his property.
Pentecost: Okay. And the question brought up about the address change, that would --
if you lose access to Ustick and you're accessing from other street, then, his address
also changes?
De Weerd: And that's only if you were to develop -- redevelop your property.
Pentecost: Okay.
De Weerd: If you change your use.
Pentecost: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay? Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony from the public? Okay.
Council, any further information needed?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we close the public hearing on Item 14.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 14.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Canning: Madam Mayor, you forgot to ask the applicant if he wanted a rebuttal period.
There wasn't much to rebut, but -- I'm sorry.
De Weerd: Mind your own business.
Hoaglun: No raise for you.
De Weerd: Yeah. That stress ball before the meeting didn't help. Sir, you didn't need
any further comment, did you? Okay. Council, do I have a motion?
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 65 of 90
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I believe I moved that we close the public hearing.
De Weerd: Yeah. And Ithink I --
Rountree: We voted on it.
De Weerd: -- even voted on it. Uh-huh.
Bird: We all voted.
Zaremba: Where was I?
De Weerd: You were with Anna.
Zaremba: Well, I vote aye in -- retroactively.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion?
Zaremba: In that case, Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I move we approve AZ 08-011 to include all applicant, staff, and public
testimony.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 14 with the stipulation
as Councilman Rountree as stated in the DA. Correct?
Zaremba: Yes. Including that stipulation.
De Weerd: Just wanted to make sure that that was done. The specific was caught.
Okay. Any discussion? Hearing none, Madam Clerk, roll call.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. Thank you, sir.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 15: Public Hearing: AP 08-006 Request for City Council Review of the
Planning and Zoning Commission's decision to restrict the hours of
operation for the Maverik convenience store and fuel sales facility to the
hours between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. / 7 days a week to allow it to operate
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 66 of 90
24 hours aday / 7 days a week for Maverik -Locust Grove/McMillan by
Landmark Engineering & Planning, Inc. -Northeast Comer of North
Locust Grove Road and East McMillan Road:
De Weerd: Item 15 is a public hearing on AP 08-006. I will open this public hearing
with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is the Maverick project at
Locust Grove and McMillan and surprisingly enough it's located on the northeast comer
of Locust Grove and McMillan. The .application before you tonight, a City Council
review of a Planning and Zoning Commission decision. The -- give you a highlight of
the proposed development. They had applied for a conditional use approval for a
Maverick convenience store and fuel sales facility. Further requirement of the
development agreement for Woodland Springs Subdivision. The site is currently zoned
C-N and consists of 1.42 acres. I do have a site plan. The purpose of the plan on the
left is to show the general access. It's not very legible, though, so that's why we include
the plan on the right. It's a little easier to read, but the access isn't a clear. It also
shows the access to McMillan that is off site. And this is the landscape plan and these
are the elevations. The Commission approved this project at their July 17th, 2008,
public hearing. Dan Murray and Todd Meyers spoke in favor of the application. Jeff
Green, Andy Mitchell, Kimberly Mitchell, Judy Horlacher, Joann Horlacher, and Doug
Racine all spoke in opposition. No one commented. Val Greenspan, Jason Overy, Liz
Pew, Susan Greenman, Bart Naylor and John Amold, III, all provided written testimony.
Key issues of discussion by the Commission were ACHD's plans for widening and
signalizing the intersection. The affect of a proposed convenience store and fuel sales
facility on adjacent residential properties and limitation on hours of operation. The key
Commission changes to staffs recommendation -- they added a condition of approval
for the hours of operation of the convenience store and fuel sales facility to be restricted
to the hours between 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m., seven days a week. They added a
condition of approval for the requirement of a type one vapor recovery system to be
installed for the fuel facility. They added a condition of approval for the applicant to
work with ACHD to obtain a license agreement to install landscaping and irrigation
sprinklers on the property south of the detached sidewalk along McMillan Road to the
edge of the future back of curb. The applicant shall also be responsible for maintaining
this area and they added a condition of approval for the applicant to submit a road trust
to Ada County Highway District for a minimum of a five foot wide detached sidewalk on
McMillan Road once that road has redeveloped. Outstanding issues before City
Council. The applicant is specifically concerned with the limitation on the hours of
operation. Through the conditional use process the Commission does have the
authority to impose time restrictions related to the use. Although there was no limitation
on the zone in effect at the time they applied for the conditional use, Council did
approve time limits of between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. for the C-N and L-O districts
on July 8th. So, that change was approved prior to approval of the Conditional Use
Permit. And.with that I will answer any questions Mayor or Council may have.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 67 of 90
De Weerd: Well, I think that last comment answered my question, because I thought
we had already discussed this under annexation or when did we talk about -- I thought
we had talked about time limitation.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you discussed it in general, with a
UDC text amendment.
De Weerd: Oh. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any questions for staff?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I don't know if this is an important comment or not, but under the key
Commission changes, item two add a condition of approval for a requirement of a type
one vapor recovery system, I think that's usually referred to as a stage one vapor
recovery. I'm not absolutely certain of that, but --
De Weerd: It is.
Zaremba: -- I think that's the common --
Bird: It is. It's stage one.
Zaremba: Stage one vapor recovery. Just so there is no confusion about what we
mean.
Canning: I will note that correction for the findings either way.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here tonight? Or a representative. Good evening.
Boyle: Good evening. Members of the Council. Clint Boyle with Landmark Engineering
and Planning. Business address of 322 Broadmore Way in Nampa, Idaho. This
evening I have just a quick packet of exhibits. I think that the Council's already seen
these exhibits, other than these are in color, so they might be a little easier to visualize
the site plan, if I might pass those out.
De Weerd: Okay. Just, Anna, for clarity, this is not on any elevations or design or
anything, it's -- it's just on the hours of operation or what are we hearing?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the -- the applicant's request is that
you reconsider the hours of operation. The way the UDC is set up, this is not an appeal
hearing, this is a new hearing. You have the ability to hear this item in full and act as
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 68 of 90
you see fit on any portion of the application. So, you're, basically, having a hearing on
the conditional use application itself.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Canning: Mr. Nary I think would have jumped in if I were wrong. There we go. Madam
Mayor, Members of the Council, you do seem to have all this material. Do you want me
to put it on the overhead or --
De Weerd: I think you're good.
Canning: Okay. Thank you.
Boyle: All right. Members of the -- Mayor and Members of the Council, this evening, as
was indicated by staff, the primary item of concern by the developer Morgan
Development is the restriction on the hours of operation for this particular site that was
previously approved by the Planning Commission for a Conditional Use Permit. That
approval came on May 9th of this year. The application was submitted -- excuse me.
The application was submitted on May 9th for the Conditional Use Permit, with it
deemed complete on June 5th, and, then, the ultimate approval by Planning
Commission on August 7th. As was indicated by your staff, you have been in the
process of updating your Uniform Development Code. That occurred on July 8th. After
that a Conditional Use Permit had been submitted into the city. That particular code did
place some restrictions in the C-N zone in general and I'm going to talk about that briefly
here in just a moment. This particular site -- the Maverick portion of this site sits on just
under an acre and a half, 1.4 acres. The overall Woodland Springs development -- if
we can go back to the vicinity map for just amoment -- is seven and a half acres. That
particular project with the color exhibit that I passed out just now and also should have
been in your packets, that color exhibit is a display of the color presentation that was
presented to the Council when the annexation, zoning, and development agreement
came forward in front of the Council -- I don't have the exact date, but roughly a year
ago. This is the board that was presented to the Council. It was a full size board that
was up in front of you, is my understanding, and I guess what I want to illustrate is that
the developer of this project has wanted to be very clear on his intentions for the
development of the site. From the very start this Maverick has expressed an interest in
this site and in this comer location in working with -- with the staff and with the city and
insuring that the Maverick would be an acceptable use. He's been very sensitive in
making sure that everybody has known all throughout this process that that was the
intended user on the comer of this particular project. In addition to that, in meeting with
the city staff, he's worked diligently on this site plan. The site plan and the layout of the
buildings on here specifically provide for buffering to uses that are out beyond this
particular site to the north and to the east. When this particular project came in front of
the City Council for annexation and zoning, at that time, with the discussion of the
project, the City Council deemed it appropriate to limit the hours of operation on the two
buildings -- the two retail slash office buildings that are shown on this site in the northern
area and the eastern area. They specifically did not restrict the hours of operation
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 69 of 90
where the Maverick store site is located. Now, I wasn't present at that meeting, so I
don't know the context of those comments from Council, but I would speculate that you
looked at what are good planning techniques. On this particular comer, if we look at the
surrounding uses, has an Idaho Power substation immediately to the south already
developed. Not a residential user. To the north of this particular site you have some
additional what I'll call rural residential parcels that may develop in some fashion in the
future, but they are, actually, a county property right now. And as you travel to the west
of this site you have several larger rural residential with just one or two homes on it and,
then, east of the site you have another development that is just starting, has just
received approvals, the Portico Place development, which this developer has been in
close contact with the developer of that property and working out the access locations to
try to minimize the number of access points onto McMillan Road and they are coming in
with a new street this developer is participating in the construction of that particular
road. In the staff report for the Conditional Use Permit in front of Planning Commission,
the staff indicated that they did not object to the proposed hours for the Maverick store.
They did indicate that the Commission should listen to the testimony of the neighbors in
making the determination on whether it was appropriate, but they indicated that they did
not object. With regard to the planning aspect, though, this particular location we think
makes good sense fora 24 hour operation. Due to the surrounding uses you do not
have what would be deemed an urban city development -- residential development that
is adjacent to the site, outside of Portico Place, which -- which, again, is just starting to
develop. They are very much aware of what's intended and what's going in on this
comer. Outside of that, there are no residential city type uses that are adjacent. The
site itself, with the buildings, also you will the landscaping that's proposed. There is
significant buffering around this site to the north, to the east. Again, to insure that this is
a low intensity impact on any of those surrounding uses. The bulk of the customers for
the store, for the Maverick location, are going to be customers that frequent it during the
daytime hours. However, 24 hour operation or the availability of 24 hour operation is
critical to Maverick and they have several reasons for that. They do have a
representative here that would like to address a couple of those, but I'll just hit on them
briefly. One of those reasons is competition and there is an exhibit that is in your
packet, it's the fourth exhibit back, which is a vicinity map, and I don't know that we have
indicated every single 24 hour convenience store within the city or those that have the
availability of being 24 hours, but we have provided just aspectrum -- kind of a mix of
locations that are afforded 24 hours. Some of them that are near this vicinity are the
Fast Eddy's on Ustick Road between Meridian and Linder. The Planning Commission
also just approved a Maverick at Ten Mile and Ustick that was -- that was also afforded
the 24 hour operation. So, these -- and there is a mix. The zoning -- you can see from
the zoning table on the side, some of those are located in neighborhood commercial
areas, some of them are in general commercial areas. The other thing that that -- that
we did with this table is we took a thousand foot radius and we just said, all right, within
a thousand feet of these stores how many residential lots are there within that -- that
zone, just to see what -- what the mix of residential in close proximity to those 24 hour
stores are and as you can see, our site is at the bottom with 99 lots within a thousand
foot radius. You can see on some of them, up near the top -- and these -- the key on
the side corresponds with the location on the map. So, A, which is the Maverick that's
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 70 of 90
on Cheny Lane, 157 residential lots surrounding that one. C-N zone. Neighborhood
commercial. And you can go down and kind of see for yourself those numbers. The
other thing that it illustrates is how close the nearest residential lots are to those 24 hour
operations and in this particular location the nearest residential lot -- urban residential
lot is approximately 215 feet away. That's actually I guess what I would call kitty comer
to northwest of this site. You can see there is a -- basically, a tip of a subdivision that
comes in. It's across Locust Grove, just the very back side of the particular project. So,
this particular proposal, as far as driveway locations -- for instance, headlights and
whatnot, those either come out pointed at a substation or come out in the back of the
rural residential, so there are not any headlights shining into any lots or any nuisances
such as that. The other reason that Maverick likes to operate 24 hours is they will
typically have employees within their stores for extended periods of time. In other
words, they have a bakery inside the store at night. They are typically getting those
baked items ready for the next early moming. They will have, obviously, people that are
restocking shelves and whatnot. And so, you know, they want to, obviously, capture the
opportunity if somebody does want to frequent that in the later evening hours or early
moming hours, to have that available to them. With regards to the traffic and noise --
and I'm keying in specifically on the hours of operation, because that's, really, the item
that -- that is contested by the developer. The traffic for a Maverick store -- there has
been a traffic study that's been prepared for this site by PEC and the majority of the trips
that are frequenting a Maverick store are pass-by trips and what that means is that the
bulk of the traffic that actually stops at a Maverick is going somewhere else. Maverick
was not their final destination. It's me traveling to work; I stop in in the moming to grab
a donut on my way into the office. It's somebody coming home at night, swinging into
get a soda or candy bar. or whatever it might be on the way home. So, Maverick, the
bulk of the trips that frequent a Maverick are not even generated by the Maverick, it's
traffic that are already -- is already out on the roadways. The majority of their deliveries
are also during the daytime hours. So, if you look at the delivery trucks that come in,
the bulk of those occur between the hours of 9:00 and 5:00 and these are just statistics
from Maverick and you can quiz him, I guess, on where they get them from, but that's
where their typical deliveries come in. And my understanding from that is because
that's generally the operating hours of those delivery companies. They work daytime
hours. So, typically, you're not seeing deliveries in the late evening or early moming
hours that would -- would potentially cause some sort of noise nuisance. Maverick
stores are just that, they are a convenience store that is meant to serve a neighborhood.
That's why they like to space themselves throughout different neighborhood areas,
because that is exactly their target market. And the Maverick stores a they have done
studies throughout their system -- they have 47 stores, it's my understanding, within the
Treasure Valley right now and all 47 stores are 24 hour operations or allowed and there
are two stores that are not open 24 hours within the Treasure Valley right now, but they
have the capability of going to 24 hours. They look at customers coming in and whatnot
to make that determination, but all of the stores within the Treasure Valley right now for
Maverick are 24 hour operations. In fact, they have 195 stores throughout the nation
and of those 195 stores there have only been two stores that have been restricted as far
as their hours of operation. Now, the reason I bring that up is particularly because
Maverick strives to be a good neighbor and you're going to see that tonight, because
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 71 of 90
the developer of this site and Maverick, after the Planning Commission meeting, have
had discussions with neighbors and whatnot -- tonight you're going to see, I believe,
significant number of neighbors that are in support of the Maverick and the 24 hour
store operation. So, that's another, hopefully, consideration that you will take in,
because I believe that they do like to work with the neighborhoods that they are in. As
far as the customers that frequent them, they have some statistics on that as well and
typically for a Maverick store, 60 percent of their clients, typically, come within a one
mile radius of that store. Sixty percent of their customers are in the neighborhood that
they are in. So, they are definitely neighborhood oriented. And the final thing that I'd
like to just point on is some crime statistics and that's the last page of your packet. We
received this information from the Meridian Police Department related to felony offenses
and it breaks it down by different uses and these are statistics right from your city and
this particular -- these particular graphs are for four years, basically, the previous four
years. So, from 2004 through 2007. And they relate to their top ten kind of land use
offenders. And you will note on there in 2004 a gas station made the list down near the
bottom of the list. Since, then, 2005, 2006, 2007, they are not even on the list. You
have other uses, such as restaurants, department stores, construction sites,
government buildings, banks, commercial offices that -- that have all, over the city as a
whole, have had higher felony counts than the convenience stores within town. So,
again, Maverick -- they strive to make these safe locations through their lighting. Their
lighting, if you look at the elevations, it's downward lighting on the front of their facades.
They do -- do some nice lighting and hopefully you take those statistics into
consideration as well, because they do try to -- to make these locations safe. Thank
you very much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Clint, you know, lunderstand -- how much of their income is gas and how much of
it is retail sales?
Boyle: Madam Mayor, Council Member Bird, I don't have that information myself, but
we do have a representative from Maverick here that it might be more appropriate to
ask.
Bird: Because I personally think that while it is a gas
Convenience store. So, your statistics that you showed
isn't a hundred percent accurate.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
station, it is also a retail store.
us from the police department
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 72 of 90
Hoaglun: Question. It looks like you have five gas islands. How many pumps on each
island? Are there two per island? Is it one per -- which would be one -- one on each
side or you got two separate pumps, which can go either way. I'm just curious how
many you have got there.
Boyle: Council Members, they have ten fueling stations total, so I'm not sure what kind
of arrangement -- if they are side by side or staggered, but --
Hoaglun: Okay.
De Weerd: Anything else from Council? Okay.
Boyle: Thank you.
De Weerd: I do have a number of people who have signed up for. When I read your
names, if you would like to provide testimony at that time, you can come forward.
otherwise, I'll read into the record your support of this project. Matt Morgan, developer,
signed up for.
Morgan: My name is Matt Morgan. Morgan Development. I'm the developer of
Woodland Springs. Madam Mayor and Council Members, I know it's getting late, so I'll
respectfully try to keep this short, so we can all get out of here tonight. Mr. Boyle did a
pretty good job of describing kind of the history of the project. I would like to reiterate
from onset of the development approximately a year ago Maverick was part of our
developing efforts from the beginning in our land planning efforts and working with the
staff in how we laid the project out. Top priority and the biggest concern being -- as we
did numerous different layouts and drafts for the development was the buffering for the
Maverick store with the other buildings. The shape, configuration, and the placement of
the buildings to buffer the Maverick store from the properties -- Portico Place that would
be to the east and any future development to the north. Of course, the substation on
the south already being developed. We -- through those developing efforts and our final
land plan, we think we were very successful in what is an optimal land plan for the
buffering of the Maverick. We -- we have worked hard with Maverick and they have
worked great with us to bring continuity to the buildings that we will be developing and
building as far as design goes, with our design and the Maverick design. The -- through
our entitlement efforts I wanted to make it really clear from the beginning that we did
have Maverick as our -- as our comer user, as a fuel provider and a C store on the
comer. I wanted that to be part of our presentation. As Mr. Boyle had stated, we had --
we had a large three by four board here, which represents -- which the draw colored
rendering you had there, represented that same board. In addition to that, Maverick
was with us through those hearings and testified in those hearings. The hours of
operation for Maverick was a discussion during the preliminary plat, which ultimately led
to the restriction of hours with the buffering buildings. The rest of the buffer buildings on
the site, which ultimately lead to the restriction of hours from 6:00 to 11:00 with the other
buildings, which we had no problem with that and still don't. But the comer site in the
Maverick in the developing agreement was left out of that due to those discussions. So,
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 73 of 90
needless to say, when Planning Commission put those restrictions during the CUP it
was kind of a -- kind of a bombshell for me in the sense that -- that my contract with
Maverick allows them to withdraw from the development after all the efforts and the
work that we had put into it and the utilities that we -- in good faith I made the decision
to move forward with. So, needless to say, if they do pull -- do the restriction hours,
which I think there is a strong possibility that they will. I have asked that question and
I'm no getting an answer. But I believe there is a strong -- strong possibility with their
model and their policy that they will and, obviously, that's going to create a detriment to
my development and our efforts and create a hardship. I think Maverick is a class act --
you know --
De Weerd: Mr. Morgan, if you will summarize, please.
Morgan: Okay. In summary, ma'am, I'd respectfully like to request that you reconsider
the hours of operation for Maverick at the Woodland Springs development.
De Weerd: You know, I guess just to comment, since, you know, I know when your
application came through, because you did put it as something different and I can say,
frankly, the summer when this application came through that we talked about the
relocation of the ditch and that this would be a C store and gas station I was surprised.
I did not have that as part of the picture when you came in with your development and
so you just testified that it's always been here and we knew that. I didn't and I don't
know if the Council members did.
Morgan: Respectfully, Madam Mayor, they testified at the hearings, Maverick did.
De Weerd: I didn't hear someone say there was -- I'm the gas station on the comer and
that's -- that's all I'm saying is, no, I don't know who owns Maverick and now that I do,
because it's on the signup sheet in front of me, then, I will know when Mr. Lillyquist
comes to our council chambers that that is Maverick they are going to be part of that
development, but, no, I didn't and that is why when we had the discussion this summer,
you know, this was aneighborhood-related development and, you know, it's -- I just
wanted to clarify, just me personally I didn't know a gas station was part of that. We
discussed that this summer and enough said.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: A question. When you speak of Woodland Springs -- and I'm somewhat
familiar with the area -- is that all to the east or is it also to the north of this
development?
Morgan: Woodland Springs consists of what you see on the site here, which is
approximately seven acres. What we are doing right now is phase one.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 74 of 90
Hoaglun: Okay. It is just this. And, then, Portico comes in right in here and is that what
-- what is this particular area here?
Morgan: That is a preliminary plat that's been approved for Patio Homes.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Morgan: The developer Mr. Sargent and I are working cooperatively together and,
basically, we are down to the point where we are ready to asphalt Portico Place. We
have built the road.
Hoaglun: Okay. So, the access, then, to -- to the station and from McMillan, if you are
traveling west, you would come in on Portico and, then, enter in this way and, then, that
road, then, turns and access would be the patio homes right in there. Okay.
Morgan: Yes, Councilman.
Hoaglun: So, just to clarify, those homes are not yet built right there.
Morgan: No. Not as of yet.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I do have a clarification. When it did come through I believe I didn't know it was a
Maverick, but I took it that there was going to be a -- some kind of a fuel station there.
Convenience store. But also we discussed the time and that was included within the
6:00 to 11:00 p.m. time deals and nobody at that point complained. So, that's my
clarification on it.
Morgan: In the developing agreement it's not included. The comer was left out of the
developing agreement. And we did agree to the -- to the rest -- you know the rest of the
development, the buffering buildings.
De Weerd: Well, I can say your elevations are very attractive.
Morgan: Thank you very much. We are trying hard to bring a quality project to
Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions, Council? Okay.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 75 of 90
Morgan: Could I -- in closing I'd like to just bring up two other points. Through the tree
mitigation plan, the caliper of trees that we removed from the site, we have worked with
city in replanting of the trees along the east and northern boundary, so we have 235
caliper inches of trees that we will be building along, including the fence on the east
boundary and the north boundary to try to -- try to help create that buffer. Additionally, I
would like to say we have -- through our neighborhood meetings we have been
prepared at all of our neighborhood meetings that we are required, through the
entitlement process, and a little frustrated that nobody showed up at any of those
meetings, but, yet, came to the CUP in opposition. Since, then, we have worked hard to
try to educate some of the people and we think that tonight shows that I think we have
done a good job in kind of calming the situation down. So, I'll close with that and just
ask respectfully that we could reconsider those hours of operation and thank you for
your time.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Don Lillyquist is signed up for.
Lillyquist: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Don Lillyquist with Maverick. 880
West Center Street, North Salt Lake, Utah.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Lillyquist: I appreciate the opportunity to address you. I would just like to reiterate that
24 hour operation is critical to our stores. Not necessarily that we will be open, what
drives whether we open 24 hours or not is based purely on customer base. If we have
customers that want to come to our store and get something at 3:00 o'clock in the
morning, we want to be there for them. It's a convenience store. We want to be
convenient for the people that shop our stores. As Mr. Boyle said, the majority of our
customers come from the neighborhood within a one mile radius of our stores. We are
there to serve them. We -- we want to be a good neighbor and we want to provide a
product that everybody will be happy with. I happen to have made the presentation to
the Planning and Zoning Commission for the store that was approved at Ten Mile and
Ustick and I realize that that's a little different zoning, it's straight commercial, rather
than neighborhood commercial. There were, obviously, no restrictions put upon that
store. It's allowed to be a 24 hour operation. My -- I guess my -- my biggest point on
this particular store is the fact that it has this buffering of the other stores around it, the
landscaping, the fencing and everything else. I believe that this would be the only store
that we have in our system that will have this type of buffering around it that would
prevent the noise, the light, the smells, whatever people object to, that would confine
our operations to that area and not spill out. So, I guess in my mind where we have
straight commercial areas where we have residential abutting right next to our property
and we have been allowed to have 24 hour operation, why would this area where we
have major buffering and more distance from any homes, why would we be restricted.
That's all I have. I'm willing to answer questions if members of Council have any.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any question? Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 76 of 90
Lillyquist: Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Christie Hansen signed in favor. Good evening.
Hansen: Madam Mayor and Councilmen. I am in favor of --
De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address.
Hansen: Christie Hansen. 4376 North Tall Grass Avenue. I am in favor of the
Maverick. As being a health care worker, I work variable shifts, so it would be nice to
have the convenience of being able to stop in when I'm getting off the evening shift or
going in for a night shift. And it's just right down the road on my way to work, it would be
nice for stopping for gas, because there is not really anywhere else as close.
Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Ed Hansen.
E.Hansen: Madam Mayor, Councilmen, Ed Hansen, 4376 North Tall Grass Avenue. I,
as well as my wife, work at the hospital, work at St. Luke's, whether it's the downtown
facility or Meridian, and my main artery is down McMillan to Cole Road and I'm in favor
of the Maverick being open 24 hours a day, because I am out -- I spend most of my time
coming home like between 12:00 and 5:00 in the moming or going to work before that
time, so it would just be nice to have a 24 hour store, because, as you know, Eagle
Road is kind of a pain to get to -- in and out of things, even at that time in the moming.
De Weerd: At that time of the moming?
E.Hansen: At that time of the moming. It's just -- like the Stinker station on the comer,
you're restricted at how you can come in or go out of that store and it's just a pain in the
butt. But -- so, I would be in favor of that, because I go right down McMillan, whether
I'm going to work or taking my son to my parents, because they live right there on
Locust Grove and this would be really convenient for me and I enjoy Maverick stores,
because they are always clean, well kept, everything is friendly, and, besides, they have
cheaper gas than everybody, too.
De Weerd: Thank you. Jeremy Fowers signed up in favor.
Fowers: I'm Jeremy Fowers, 5109 North Spangle Avenues and I actually live like right
next to the Woodland Springs development. I'm the vice-president of the homeowners
association and I spoke with several neighbors. There is several people in my
subdivision that work evenings, work early mornings, but, myself, I work usually very
early in the moming and it would be very nice to -- like Mr. Hansen said, you know, that
the Stinker on Eagle, it is very restricted to get in and out of there and you have to kind
of go out of your way, so I just think it would be a very good benefit to the whole area,
the neighborhood, the whole area down there to have a Maverick open 24 hours.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 77 of 90
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: Question for Mr. Fowers. You indicated you're the vice-president of your
HOA.
Fowers: Yes.
Rountree: Are you hear representing your HOA or just your personal --
Fowers: It's -- I talked to several people in the subdivision this evening. Actually, over
the last week or so, so I don't -- I mean, no, I'm not, actually, representing the HOA
tonight.
Rountree: Thank you.
Fowers: Yeah.
De Weerd: Brad Van Meuller signed up -- you're just lucky I even attempted it at this
hour.
Van Meuller: I live in Heritage Commons --
De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Van Meuller: Brad Van Meuller at 3624 North Holly Mountain Place.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Van Meuller: I play hockey at -- down at the Bank of America Center. Well, now, it's
Qwest Arena. And our hours when we play, we are playing at 1:00 o'clock in the
morning, so it would be very convenient -- and in our area we don't -- we don't really
have a convenience store out in that general area. If you look at an oversize map and
we are trying to pinpoint in the Meridian area. So, I would -- I'm in favor of trying to -- of
having something out there that would be very convenient for us. Because it is only a
half a mile and Fred Meyer closes down in the middle of the night and we know we have
to go along different -- a lot of other directions, but -- anyways, I'm in favor of it. Thank
you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Tammy Farmer signed up for. Good evening.
Farmer: Good evening. Tammy Farmer. 1897 West Ditch Creek and I'm actually here
because my husband's working and he works on shift as well and he's pretty excited,
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 78 of 90
we saw Maverick and was disappointed to hear that they not be open 24 hours and,
basically, I'm here, I'm in favor for it, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Farmer: Uh-huh. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Lance and Sylvia Champion signed up in favor. Okay. John
Carpenter signed up in favor. Kevin Amar signed up in favor. And Chris Todd signed
up in favor. Okay. Council, any additional questions? Would the applicant's
representative like to have final remarks?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Canning: Madam Mayor and Council, before the applicant comes up, I did find a copy
of the development agreement and on number --
Zaremba: Four.
Canning: -- four it does state the business hours of operation for the professional office
and multi-tenant retail business shall be limited to 6:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m.
Rountree: That's what I remember.
De Weerd: Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I guess a question about noticing. I noticed that none of the people that
previously spoke in opposition are here. Tonight's meeting I assume was noticed in all
the normal ways or -- to the clerk or --
Canning: The UDC does require that it be posted and property owners be notified, so
that should have occurred.
Zaremba: So, the people that previously spoke in opposition had the opportunity to
know about the meeting. Okay.
De Weerd: Well, I guess the problem is you already had it posted for the P&Z meeting.
They were here, they heard the hours restricted, and I don't know if they necessarily
thought they had to come back, so -- I don't know.
Zaremba: Well -- and that's my concern, that they have thought it was over.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 79 of 90
De Weerd: Well, public noticing in -- on that comer, 300 feet is -- is probably just Mr.
Fowers. Eleven mailings.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean certainly if that's a concern of
yours, I mean if you want to continue that, we could certainly send notice to the people
who previously testified. I mean that would be unusual, but -- because this is a
Conditional Use Permit and it is final at the Planning and Zoning Commission, it may not
be very intuitive to people to know that an appeal process is available and that another
hearing may be heard. The radius notices only go out 300 feet. The notice, then, goes
in the newspaper, and on our agenda and is posted, but as Madam Mayor just noted,
many times those signs -- because they don't change, we see them in our community a
lot and they don't necessarily change unless you go look at the text very closely, that
may have been overlooked or maybe not. I don't know.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Mrs. Canning?
Canning: No, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay.
Boyle: Mayor and Members of the Council, again, Clint Boyle. Hopefully, I can clarify
this quickly, so we can all get out of here and hit the Maverick before it closes. Actually,
hopefully, they are open late, so when we are at these late night meetings we can all go
and grab our coffee or soda on the way home. With regards to the notice, I guess I'd
just note a couple of things. The initial Conditional Use Permit in front of Planning
Commission, received the exact same notice. Those neighbors came out, because
they saw signs -- I don't know if they saw it in the newspaper, whatnot, heard about it
and came out to that meeting. This evening what I can tell you is the signs went down
after Planning Commission. They have been off the site for, I don't know, 30 days plus.
New signs went up. Those new signs -- I mean specifically talk about the request
again. Conditional Use Permit they are appealing, because of the hours of operation.
And we have submitted pictures of those signs on both roads right out on the frontage.
Highly visible. They are not tucked away. You have got pictures of them with your staff.
So, again, anybody passing by, which my understanding is that's how the both of them
heard about it before, would see these signs and notice them. So, the noticing that has
been done at least as far as signage, which is what we have control over as the
developer's agent, has been exactly the same as Planning Commission and it wasn't
something where the sign just sat there and some text got changed, they came down
and, then, they went back up again. I clearly know that, because we had to pay for the
reinstallation of the sign, so --
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 80 of 90
Zaremba: Madam Mayor? That considerably helps my concern that -- if they were
absent for 30 days, then, people should have noticed that there was new signs going up
again. I'm happy with that. Thank you for doing that. We have people that leave them
there for years.
Boyle: I appreciate that comment. I'm not sure if it was that. I'd like to think that. Or if
it was just a matter of they were in the way of construction, so they had to come down,
but -- but we will take that compliment anyway and, hopefully, that was the case, that
they were removed appropriately. So, with that -- with that said, I mean I believe that
the notice has gone out again. My understanding from the previous hearing on this was
that, you know, in general those neighbors that came out -- and I might just note that
from the written comments there were positive written comments as well and there were
-- I don't remember the exact count, but maybe four or five neighbors that came out in
opposition and, then, there was several letters in opposition and some in favor. But
what I might note there is my understanding -- and I wasn't at the hearing, but I have
studied these minutes pretty scrupulously and I have had discussions with the people
that were at that initial hearing -- is that the general sentiment at the time was a
convenience store in general going in on the site and I think that that -- I'm speculating a
little bit here, but I think that that may have been what -- what drove a lot of people was
just the nature of actually having a convenience store there. We talked about traffic a
lot and there was concems about traffic and whatnot that were brought up. There was
concems about noise and the buffering. Again, that's why I tried to expand on the
efforts that have been taken to -- to mitigate that. Now, since, then, what the
developer's done is, yeah, he's had some more discussion with the neighbors and I
don't know if he specifically contacted those neighbors or -- he went around and tried to
work with those neighbors and were impacted and I believe one of them is right
adjacent to our site. Obviously, he's worked with the Portico Place developer. So, he's
-- he's trying to bring everybody together and make this awin-win for everyone, get
everybody comfortable with that store and balance the needs of Maverick with the
needs of the community and, you know, we believe that he's accomplished that through
his site design, for one, because of the buffering there, with the substation below, with
the way the buildings are located that will completely shield any visibility at least of the
Maverick to the north. To the northeast there is the other smaller office building that
also restricts that view to the east. So, it's going to be a really kind of an enclosed area,
because Maverick indicated that's -- that's not always the case and in many instances
there is residential that back right up to them and they just have a landscape buffer.
This has not only landscape buffer, but structures that buffer it. So, wrapping up, again,
I guess what I just want to reiterate on is you heard from many neighbors that they felt
that it would be a convenience. That's why they want the 24 hour operation. If they
didn't feel that people were going to frequent the store, they wouldn't be open 24 hours.
They want it for the convenience of the people, so they can capture some of that. They
want to do the competition, Fast Eddy's and whatnot that are open 24 hours, they want
to be able to compete in the marketplace. With that said, most of their clients are in the
neighborhood. You hear of many of them this evening and we'd respectfully ask for our
approval with the 24 hour operation. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 81 of 90
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any final questions from Council?
Rountree: None.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, that includes our public testimony. What is
your desire? If there is no further information needed, I would enter a motion to close
the public hearing if that is your desire.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I move we close the public hearing on Item 15.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 15. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move that we remove the time restriction and allow 24 hour, seven days a
weeks operation for AP 08-006, specifically the Maverick store, and with the intention
that that not change the hour restrictions on the other buildings on the property.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve the request.
Hoaglun: I'll second.
De Weerd: I have second. Any discussion? I don't have a sense in how the vote will
go, but if I were to break a tie I would vote against the motion, so --
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, just comments from my perspective. And not having dealt
with a lot of these and, then, from what I have teamed about the C-N zoning and the
reasons for our restrictions, I can clearly understand why when you have a little comer
parcel carved out and you have residents around it abutting to it, why you want to
restrict the hours of operation. You know, as I look at this one, I'm trying to think, okay,
does this -- is this the same criteria that meets those of other locations that have the 24
hours. I'm thinking specifically the Maverick at Ustick and -- or, I'm sorry, Cherry and
Linder, which abuts up with a car wash and those types of things and that occurred
before this type of zoning, but I can see why, in a situation like that, if that were to go in
today, why we would want to restrict those hours. When I looked at this plan, I can see
that there is a buffer to the north and east. To the east you have got a development that
will be going in with the knowledge that this Maverick is going to be located at this
comer and that -- to me, you don't have an established neighborhood right there to that
east. That kind of makes a little bit of a differences for me. You don't have any
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 82 of 90
residents right to the south, because you have the Idaho Power substation. So, in my
mind that tilts it a little bit to -- I can see a 24 hour operation at this particular location.
Again, it doesn't fit for everybody, because I can see why that C-N is with limited hours,
but for this particular one I can see how that fits. That's my two cents.
De Weerd: Thank you. ~Is there any additional discussion?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Okay. Three ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
Item 16: Public Hearing: TE 08-018 Request for approval of an 18 month Time
Extension to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the Final Plat for
Chesterfield Subdivision No. 2 by Centennial Development, LLC -south
side of West Pine Avenue between North Black Cat Road and North Ten
Mile Road:
De Weerd: Item 16 is a public hearing on TE 08-018. I will open this public hearing
with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Chesterfield Subdivision
No. 2. It is located west of North Ten Mile, approximately a half mile south of Chevy
Lane. The application before you tonight is a time extension to record subsequent
phases of a final plat and to keep the preliminary plat and the planned development
allowances valid. I'm going to skip down to the staff recommendation. If you want more
information on the previous approvals and the actual plat, I would be happy to provide
that. Staff has recommended denial. It goes to the presentation I made recently to
Council regarding upcoming time extensions and the memo that was developed from
that meeting. Staff has recommended denial based on the following considerations.
Council had determined that all projects should meet all current UDC standards. This
project does not meet our current R-8 standards. It was done previously as a planned
development. Also, there is not a development agreement on the property, nor is the
property subject to design review. So, given those two considerations, staff is
recommending denial. Gary Schweiger has provided written testimony in opposition to
the time extension and he's also expressed concerns related to previous commitments
by the developer and also a possible error in the annexation legal. The outstanding
issue before City Council really is just the question of whether~the time extension is in
the best interest of the city and, then, also as a sub issue perhaps is the property
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 83 of 90
boundary and possible error in the annexation. With that I will answer any questions
Mayor and Council may have.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff? Okay. This is a time extension. Is
the applicant here?
Amar: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. My name is Kevin Amar.
Address is 2364 South Titanium Place in Meridian. As a side note, the debate is over
and both sides are claiming victory, so -- I have no idea. This is a project that was
started years ago. As far as time frame for completion, we developed the first phase,
which was 84 lots. We have a number of those lots, unfortunately, still remaining
available to the public. As far as time frame to move forward, we don't have a specific
time frame. We would like to get this extended if possible. There is activity out there.
There are people buying houses and, actually, houses being constructed, although as
I'm sure you're aware, it's a tougher market today than what it was yesterday, for that
matter. So, with that I would be happy to answer any questions. I will address the
property boundary. I was under the impression -- Carl Porter and Dave Short were the
surveyors that did the property boundary. It was my understanding that they had
resolved the boundary description. Unfortunately, Bruce left and he was familiar with
that also. I would be happy to look into it more, but I thought the actual boundary
description had been resolved and I'll stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Thank you. Is there anyone who would like
to provide testimony on this application? I have to ask. Okay. Council, any further
information needed?
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I did speak with Bruce Freckleton today
regarding Mr. Schweiger's issue of the property boundary and at least in Mr Freckleton's
mind there certainly is still an ongoing dispute, but it's a dispute between the two
property owners, not the city. We based our ordinance of annexation based on the
surveyor's description, so I don't think it's our issue. I do think it's an issue that still -- at
least from Mr. Freckleton's perspective, what he communicated to me, still needs to be
resolved between these parties, because Mr. Schweiger is getting taxed on his property
as if it's within the city and, of course, he never asked to be annexed into the city. So,
there is an ongoing dispute, but it isn't ours, it's really Mr. Amar and Mr. Schweiger's to
resolve.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Anything further, Council? Do I have a motion to close
the public hearing?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 84 of 90
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close the public hearing on TE 08-018.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 16.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Do I have a motion on this request?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, just a comment. These time extensions are more and more
and we did give some guidance to staff on how to look at those and recommendations
to make. This would be the first request of Council, but the second request for an
extension on this piece. It's going on four years old. It no longer meets the R-8
standard that has come to be since it was originally approved. For that reason, I
probably would not be in favor of granting this time extension. That's where I sit.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other comments or do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'll put a motion out, we will see if we get it. I move we deny the extension of TE
08-018. I suppose I better give a reason. My reason would be it -- as Councilman
Rountree stated, it don't meet the existing R-8 standards and when you come in to
extend it, then, you're opening it up to get it brought up to current standards. So, that's -
- and I believe we have extended it enough, so I move that we deny it.
Rountree: Second that.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny this time extension
application. Any discussion?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, just aquestion Ithink -- what expires is the preliminary plat
and conditional use. Annexation would still stay in effect; is that correct?
Nary: Yes.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 85 of 90
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 17: Public Hearing: TE 08-017 Request for approval of an 18 month Time
Extension to record the Final Plat for Irvine Subdivision by Dyver
Development, LLC -Southeast Comer of North Ten Mile Road and West
Chinden Boulevard:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 17 is a public hearing on TE 08-017. I will open this public
hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Irvine Subdivision project.
It's located at the southeast comer of Ten Mile and Chinden and the application before
tonight is a time extension to record the first final plat and keep the preliminary plat still
valid. Staff recommendations, again, is for denial. Staff had recommended denial
based on the following considerations: The project does not meet current UDC
standards and more specifically the project does not meet the ten percent requirement
for open space. And, then, with regard to MEW developments, Council had said that
staff should offer and encourage, but not require that private streets be converted to
public streets. Subsequent phases -- not the first phase, but subsequent phases of this
preliminary plat to show MEW development. We have not yet even discussed that with
the applicant, so I did want to just let you know of that -- that it does have a MEW
development. And, then, second, if there is not a development agreement on the
property, nor is the properly subject to design review, staff should consider denying the
request for a time extension. And with -- so, there is neither a DA nor design review
associated with this project.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Amar: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. Again, for the record, Kevin
Amar. Address 2364 South Titanium Place. I think this is -- the proposal that's here
was one that was not approved. Actually, the one that was approved is not a MEW
proposal. We had a couple go a-rounds on this project when it was originally approved.
The one that was approved was a straight R-8 zone. I'm just correcting for the record.
Canning: Madam Mayor, we have had a hard time getting the old one off there and I
forgot about that, so --
Amar: Anyway, there are no private streets. In fact, there is no public streets at this
point.
Rountree: That's why you're here.
Amar: That's why I'm here. And to be quite frank, the three applications we have
before you, Chesterfield, which we just spoke about, Irvine, which we are speaking
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 86 of 90
about, and Amber Creek, which we will speak about, were all made -- applications were
made prior to the guidance given by Council to Anna. This project, although we'd like it
extended and we hope that you extend it and we understand -- we have not begun
construction and have no time frame to do so. So, I guess with that, extend it if you will.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Amar: It's a nice project and we will let you know what we are going to do with it.
De Weerd: It's late. Any questions for the applicant?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. There is no members of the public, so if you so desire, I would
entertain a motion to close.
Hoaglun: I would move, Madam Mayor, that we close the public hearing on TE 08-017.
Zaremba: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 17.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES..
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion or do I have a motion?
Rountree: Well, Madam Mayor --
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: -- I move that we deny the request for extension for Item No. 17, TE 08-017,
for the reasons stated in the staff report related to the project does meet the ten percent
requirement for open space and that there is no development agreement in place for
this property, nor design review part of the annexation.
Bird: Are you done?
Rountree: I'm done.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to deny Item 17. Is there any discussion?
Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 87 of 90
De Weerd: Okay. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 17: Public Hearing: TE 08-016 Request for approval of an 18 month Time
Extension to record the Final Plat for Ambercreek Subdivision No. 2 by
Dyver Development, LLC -North Meridian Road and West McMillan
Road:
De Weerd: Item 18 is TE 08-016. I will open this public hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, our last project of the evening is the Amber Creek Subdivision
No. 2. It's located on the west side of Meridian Road and the south side of McMillan
Road. The application before you tonight is a time extension to record a subsequent
phase of a final plat and keep the preliminary plat alive. The staff is recommending
approval. The applicant -- they have proposed three conditions as part of that
recommendation for approval. Applicant is to meet all terms of the approved
annexation, preliminary plat, and final plat for the development. The applicant shall
submit a development agreement modification application to the Planning Department
by January 7th, 2009. And that's three months after the time extension approval. And
said application shall propose building elevations for this property that is similar to those
shown in Exhibit A-4 and I have those photos for you. And these are photos of homes
within the subdivision. If the applicant submits a DA modification, as stated above, and
signs the addendum to the DA as approved by the City Council, then, the applicant shall
have 18 months until January 18th, 2010, to obtain the city engineer's signature on the
final plat for Amber Creek Subdivision No. 2. The city engineer will not sign the final
plat for Amber Creek Subdivision No. 2 until the applicant complies with the conditions
herein. If the applicant fails to submit and sign a DA modification for this site that
incorporates building elevations, then, the subject approval or the time extension 08-016
shall be null and void. We have received no written testimony and the outstanding
issue for Council, again, is -- is the time extension in the best interest of the city. This
subdivision, unlike the others, does continue to have activity and building permits -- or
buildings are going up, it's just at a much slower pace than we are used to seeing.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Amar: One last item for this evening. Kevin Amar again for the record. 2364 South
Titanium Place in Meridian. This project is our bright spot in Meridian right now. Of the
174 lots we did develop 101 of those lots in the first phase. So, the time extension
largely is -- we continue to have activity out there. We have six to eight sales a month,
which in this market is extremely -- extremely good. Had we had it to do all over again
we probably would have developed 40 foot lots in the first phase, but we are just
working through the first phase and we will be on to the second phase. We understand
the conditions of the time extension and the development agreement modification.
Further, this project does meet the current UDC code with the R-8 guidelines. I believe
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 88 of 90
that was part of the findings. So, with that we would ask for a time extension approval
on Amber Creek Subdivision and I will stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: Answered mine.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Rountree: No.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion to close.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the request for time extension for Amber Creek Sub
No. 2, Item No. 18, subject to the staff comments.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. And the extension is good until
when?
Rountree: Until January 7th, 2009.
De Weerd: Second agree?
Zaremba: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 89 of 90
De Weerd: Yes.
Canning: Can I clarify that motion? That January 7th, 2009, is the DA date.
Rountree: That's the DA. 18th. 2010.
Canning: The applicant nearly jumped out of his seat.
De Weerd: Here you just thought you had a motion in your favor.
Zaremba: Three month time extension.
De Weerd: Okay. That is noted for the record. Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 19: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(a) - (to consider
hiring a public officer, employee, staff member or individual agent, not to
include. This paragraph does not apply to filling a vacancy in an elective
office)(b) - (to consider the evaluation, dismissal or disciplining of, or to
hear complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee,
staff member or individual agent, or public school student), (c) - (to
conduct deliberations concerning labor negotiations or to acquire an
interest in real property, which is not owned by a public agency), (d) - (to
consider records that are exempt from disclosure as provided in chapter 3,
title 9, Idaho Code), & (fl - (to consider and advise its legal
representatives in pending litigation):
De Weerd: Item 19 -- and I'm song it is a quarter to 12, but it is an Executive Session
per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(a)(c)(d)(b) -- I don't know what else still applies.
Bird: (d) and (f).
De Weerd: And (f).
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we go into Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345
paragraph (1)(a)(c)(d)(f) and (b).
Meridian City Council
October 7, 2008
Page 90 of 90
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: I'd entertain a motion to adjourn.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Thank you.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:08 A.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
„~:~1
MAYOR T Y De WEERD
'I g
`~ /o~ /~
DATE APPROVED
ATTEST: ~J cx•
JAYCEE
c1' ~~w°R+r~
o
..e,L '
HOLMAN, CI Y LEF~i AL
= 9 ~~
1
,, ~~
,,,,,qco~ `o~.`,,,,