HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008 12-02Meridian City Council December 2, 2008
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday,
December 2, 2008, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Tammy de Weerd, David Zaremba, Keith Bird, and Brad Hoaglun.
Members Absent: Charlie Rountree.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Pete Friedman, Tracy Basterrechea, Joe
Silva, Steve Siddoway, Clint Dolsby, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll -call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I'll go ahead and start tonight's meeting. I'd like to welcome those of
you that have joined us this evening. For the record, it is Tuesday, December 2nd. It's
7:00 o'clock. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 2 is our pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us
in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by
De Weerd: Do we have a member of our clergy with us tonight? I didn't think so.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: We will go ahead and skip on to the next item, which is Item 4, adoption of
the agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Let's see. On the agenda for this evening, under the Consent Agenda, which
is Item 5, number C, the resolution number will be 08-636. Number D, the resolution
number will be 08-637. On the regular agenda, Item 12, the ordinance number is 08-
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 2 of 49
1391. Item 13, the ordinance number is 08-1392. And there are no other changes
requested. I move that we adopt the agenda as announced.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and second to adopt the agenda as presented. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A.
B.
C.
10)
Change Order No. 1 with Civil Survey Consultants for Well 27
Design for the not to exceed amount of $15,064.00:
Professional Service Aareement with USSSOA for Assignment
of Basketball Officials:
Resolution No: Water / Sewer Rate
Increase:
Resolution No.
Bylaws:
De Weerd: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
MYAC Amended
Zaremba: With the note that item C on the Consent Agenda is Resolution 08-636 and D
is Resolution 08-637, 1 move that we approve the Consent Agenda for the Mayor to sign
and the Clerk to attest.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is
no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Department Reports:
A. Planning Department:
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 3 of 49
1. Update Seeking Acceptance of Bids for Split Corridor
Phase 1:
De Weerd: Item 6 under Department Reports, we have our Planning Department
speaking on the split corridor.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. What you have before
you tonight is a report on the acceptance of bid by ACHD for the first phase of the split
corridor project. The highway district has received seven bids. They have identified the
low bidder, Nampa Paving, who has proposed, essentially, doing the project in either
alternative, alternative one being the normal course; alternative one being the expedited
course for the same price. That price came in about 32 percent below the engineer's
estimate and if they were to go with the alternate bid number two, that would cut
approximately 60 days off the construction time. So, essentially, because of the
agreement between the city, the Meridian Development Corporation, and the highway
district, the district is seeking your concurrence on the -- on the bid. And I believe that
the commission will be opening that -- or examining that tomorrow at their commission
meeting.
De Weerd: Thank you, Pete. Christie, do you have anything you want to add? Council,
any questions for Pete?
Bird: Looks good.
De Weerd: Steve?
Siddoway: Thank you, Madam Mayor. I just wanted to point out that in the memo that
is provided in our package from the Planning Department it does mention the
anticipated maintenance cost for this. You have seen this before. It came before you
as we discussed the interagency agreement that was signed a couple of months ago
and while we are not seeking formal approval of an actual bid on the landscape
maintenance cost tonight, I do want to make sure that that's in front of you and clearly
anticipated that we would be coming forward with an enhancement for next year and we
will have to wait and see if we need an amendment for this year, depending on how
quickly that split corridor does get built and come online. If it's late in the season, we
may -- we hope to be able to absorb it into this year's cost. We do have a budget in
there that's based on several months of service, which may not be needed. So, we
hope to have some savings based on that 2009 number, depending on when the actual
project comes on line for us to maintain. That's all. Thank you. Unless there is any
questions.
De Weerd: No. Steve, thank you for pointing that out. Council, any questions,
comments? Ails I heard was expedited.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 4 of 49
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I hope they do the alternate bit number two, the expedited. I think that's a very
nice bid and I hope they accept the low bid, get the contract, and get it going. Long
awaited.
De Weerd: Okay. Pete, do you need specific motion by Council?
Friedman: I would want to defer to Mr. Nary if we need a motion or just a Council
concurrence.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think probably for ACHD, because of
our agreement, you don't need a roll call vote, but a voice vote would probably be
appropriate.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I don't think -- tell me for sure, Nampa Paving has not been awarded this contract.
Friedman: Madam Mayor --
Bird: They are standard low bidder and are going to get awarded it. I have a problem
voting yea or nay on something that hasn't been awarded.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, you're not voting yea or nay on awarding
the contract. All you're doing is voting yea or nay to recommend to the ACHD to award
the contract under what you propose alternative two to the low bidder. They are free to
choose -- the commissioners to choose their course or reject all bids or anything. All
you're doing is making a recommendation.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Hoaglun: So, question for Mr. Nary, then. So, really, all we are doing is just concurring
with ACHD staffs recommendation that the bid be awarded to Nampa Paving at that --
at that price.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, Council Member Hoaglun, that's correct.
Our MOU with them says that we would concur -- or they would -- we would advise
them of our opinion on the -- the bid process and in the bids that they got. So, MDC
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 5 of 49
and the city and ACHD were cooperatively working together on this project. So, again,
all you're recommending is that they award the bid as proposed to the low bidder and to
that alternative two, as Council Member Bird stated.
De Weerd: So, it's a recommendation.
Bird: Call for a voice.
De Weerd: I don't have a motion. I would ask --
Bird: I move that we approve -- or we recommend to the Ada County commission to
approve alternate bid number two and awarding of the contract to Nampa Paving.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: I'm sure Pete or -- and Christie will get the word back. Okay. I know it will
be written up in the report this evening. And we will play nice.
Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd: Okay. Items -- there were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 8: Continued Public Hearing from October 28, 2008: AZ 08-001 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of 9.06 acres from the RUT & R1 zoning
districts in Ada County to the C -G zoning district for Overland Village by
Relo Development — 3330 East Overland Road:
Item 9: Tabled from October 28, 2008: VAC 08-001 Request for a Vacation of
the existing right-of-way of S. Rackham Way for Overland Village by Relo
Development — 3330 East Overland Road:
De Weerd: Items 8 and 9 were continued public hearings from October 28th on AZ 08-
001 and tabled Item VAC 08-001. 1 will ask for staff comments.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. As the Mayor
indicated, you have before you a request for reconsideration of your decision on an
annexation as zoning and right of way vacation for nine acres located at the northeast
comer of Overland Road and Eagle Road. The proposed project seeks approval of
commercial zoning to allow the property to develop with retail office and restaurant
uses. The applicant has not submitted a subdivision application, but intends to do so at
a later date if the applications are approved. They had submitted a concept plan for the
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 6 of 49
original consideration and there is a revised one that is in the information you received
and we will put it up in just a moment. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard the
request in February, March, May and finally in June of 2008 they concluded the hearing
and recommended approval of the application to you subject to a number of conditions
that were proposed in the proposed development agreement. They had one change
that recommendation for the development agreement at the applicant's request to note
that they wanted to include some language that buildings up to four stories may be
allowed. At the Council hearing on this on September 2nd, the Council reviewed the
recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and at the conclusion of
that hearing voted to deny the application request based on concerns about insufficient
emergency access to the site, the necessity of bridge construction across Eight Mile
Creek, potential for flood hazards from Eight Mile Creek and the timing of development
of this site in relation to adjacent uses. Until remedies to these issues could be
addressed, Council did not believe it was prudent to annex the site. Thus, the vacation
request was subsequently denied, because Council wouldn't have jurisdiction with the
denial of the annexation. The applicants submitted a request for reconsideration, which
you granted on September 23rd and based on the applicant's proposal to provide an
alternative means of emergency access to the site and willingness to contribute a
proportionate share towards a connection to Silverstone Way. Since the last meeting
the applicant submitted a revised site plan, which you can see on screen. The original
site plan is on the left and revised site plan is the colored one in right -- on the right.
Revised building elevations were not submitted to coincide with the revised building
footprint that's located in the central portion of the site plan. However, we still do have
some elevations that were submitted for the original consideration. Chief Silva is going
to address the emergency access issues, because they seem to be probably one of the
most critical issues related to this application. So, when I conclude I'm going to tum it
over to the chief. We are suggesting that if you do vote to approve the project, then, the
development agreement should be required and include the minimum conditions that
are set forth in the information that you have before you tonight. The applicant has
received a copy of those development agreement provisions with staff -- staffs
recommended changes as identified in the red bold under line and strike out. So, I
would be happy to answer any questions you have or I will turn it over to Chief Silva at
this time.
De Weerd: Thank you, Pete. Any questions for Pete at this point? Oh, you changed
sides.
Silva: I did that, Mayor and Council, just to kind of familiarize myself with the
technology. Just to kind of recap what we had discussed when this was previously in
front of Council for consideration, one of our unique challenges associated with this site
is the access as we kind of -- as Pete alluded to. It's just critical that we have -- be able
to service this project at all phases. As you can see, the master plan here has quite --
quite large as it develops to the north and to the east and so it's going to become more
critical as the site develops with footprints greater than 62,000 square feet of cumulative
construction on this site, which would require at least two access points, buildings
greater than 30 feet in height would require three access points. So, we have to kind of
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 7 of 49
keep that in mind as this project develops to be beyond what's being considered this
evening. We discussed with the design team some -- we attempted to analyze what are
our options. One of the options we explored was a connection to Eagle Road via an
emergency access easement along the northwest comer of the project that would
provide for emergency access only -- just up a little bit more, Pete. Thank you. That
would provide for emergency access. ITD denied that request, even though it was only
being made for emergency access. So, that brings us back to our primary access point
that we need to consider this evening, which is off of realigned Rackham, which we
have to have that access point because of the unique circumstances that are presented
with this particular site at this particular location. This site is typically serviced by Fire
Station Four, which is south of this site on Eagle Road. If it has to go through the
Silverstone business park to access this project via westbound Overland, if this access
was cut off from us, we would travel -- normally, the direct access would be -- the
shortest route would be come up to Eagle and Overland, tum right, that access would
be approximately three-quarters of a mile, if we had the most direct route. If we have to
go through the Silverstone access, it adds another tenth of a mile -- 9/10ths of a mile.
Not that much. But, nonetheless, it impacts our response time. The real critical
problem becomes if the secondary engine is tied up and the second due engineer's
location, that being station one at 540 East Franklin, responds, probably most likely
from coming eastbound Overland through Eagle. If they have to go up to the
Silverstone business park, then, we are looking at going from a response distance of
2.6 miles to 3.5 miles. Again, that's a time and distance thing. So, it considerably
hampers the second due engine company required at this site, either if the first
company is due -- is already tied up or if it's a structure fire reported at this location. So,
what the design team brought forward to us was a keyed left tum, which would be on
the realigned Rackham. We were supportive of that, because this ends up becoming --
to kind of recap the access point, a right -in access on the most westerly driveway.
Access only. This is a right -in only here. Further over to the east is a right -in, right -out,
with a protected left tum in there, be an island that the developer is proposing to install
to separate -- to prevent, I should say, left tum movements from vehicles coming out of
the project and we are supportive of that, as probably police is -- the police department
is for, you know, accident -- in the interest of accident prevention as vehicles cross -- or
attempt to cross a very busy Overland Road. One of the things that I discussed with the
fire chief in working through our access -- unique access problem associated with this is
the issue if we are able to access right here on the realigned Rackham, that we are
concerned about the issue of traffic that gets stacked back here during commute hours
and the developer furnished us with an ACHD traffic cam tape with about two hours of
tape, one hour in the morning during morning commute hours and one hour during the
afternoon commute hours. When I viewed that tape it was either obstructed
approximately -- either partially or completely obstructed 14 times in the a.m. and either
partially or completely obstructed approximately 18 times in the p.m. It's a perspective
that the traffic camera gives you at the elevation that you totally can't see what the
obstruction is, but what's important, if we can go down through our slides there, please.
This -- this was some pictures that I shot yesterday via the ACHD camera at mid day
and you can see obstruction in the upper left-hand comer and the lower right-hand
comer and this mid day, this is not even commute hours. This is just some examples of
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 8 of 49
what we see. But I think the most interesting thing is some shots I took at commute
hours -- if you could move ahead, please, Pete. This was a couple of shots I took at
5:00 p.m. yesterday afternoon and this kind of gives you some idea of the obstructions
that take place periodically -- this is over about a 20 minute period, I'd say over about a
half a dozen cycles of westbound Overland turning green. If we could go forward. So,
you can kind of see this -- this gets obstructed on a regular basis and what we are
proposing to do as part of this development is to put this -- this connection point at a
realigned Rackham, which would be placed approximately 450 feet further east, but,
again, the challenges associated with people not honoring the painted white lines
referred to as stop bars, they just simply ignore them and pull forward and this is a
problem we have experienced at Fire Station One and also at Waltman Lane has also
been a challenge there, because people just pull forward, they don't stop at that stop
line. So, that hampers our ability to get in there and other large vehicles, such as the
Sanitary Services and other delivery vehicles that may have to access the site during
the business day. Could we go ahead, please, Pete. This was -- we even had dump
trucks coming into that -- that area. You can clearly see the stop bar -- this should be
the clear zone and the front bumper of the dump truck is actually at the -- what should
have been the rear bumper, because the access to -- in this case Rackham is right
behind the dump truck. So, you can kind of see some of our challenges that we have
there. The other thing we wanted to comment on is that during our discussion we would
-- you know, we require that access point to be continued to the north to build it over the
existing culvert that goes north into that single family dwelling that's up along the
freeway. It's approximately 24 feet wide. The developer -- back here where you see
the sidewalk, the pavement section is, in fact, 30 feet wide, as the design team has
alluded to in their notes that I think was included in your briefing. But, obviously, as that
site develops further to the north, sidewalks have to make -- we would have to make
allowances for the sidewalks as the project develops. Go ahead, Pete. Just go back.
Okay. So, with that, if there are any other questions. What, essentially, to kind of just
wrap up what our concerns are, we are going to need to have a protected left turn to be
able to continuously access that -- this site and in a letter from ACHD, which I would
request that Christie Little representing ACHD this evening, speak to -- just kind of give
the Council a briefing on that, on the position of ACHD with respect to the -- this access
point being available throughout the duration of -- until that secondary access can be
developed at the signalized Silverstone intersection. The other thing that the developer
proposed to assist in keeping that clear zone was that we would equip the -- the lights --
or I should say the painted stripes on the road that it is a clear zone with flashing lights,
similar to what you see in pedestrian crossing zones in -- for example, in Nampa, as a
way of keeping that access open, because in this case this is our only access into this
site that's already got some challenge associated with it. So, with that I will stand for
any questions should Mayor or Council have any.
De Weerd: Council, any questions for our fire marshal?
Bird: I have none at this time.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 9 of 49
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: I think I heard you say something that's new to me, but it certainly makes
sense, and that is that if you have buildings over 35 feet there need to be three
accesses available? The applicant is requesting to go up to 65 feet, so where would the
three accesses be?
Silva: Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, to clarify, that's 30 feet and anything in excess of
30 feet would require three access points. So, when you kind of go back, if we were
able to maintain the realigned Rackham would be one. The signalized Silverstone
would be two. And, then, the access point that's shown off of Topaz --
Zaremba: The right -in only?
Silva: Yeah. Well, it's the one that's further east that kind of shows -- further east that
goes through the subdivision to the east. The other choice would be to run at this point
being that right -in only at the very west end of the project, for a total of three.
Zaremba: So, it doesn't necessarily have to be a direct access, it just has to be a way
you could get there, even if you had to drive around a little bit.
Silva: Basically direct access. Yeah.
Zaremba: Okay.
Silva: Our preference is direct access, because we don't want to inhibit the movement
into this very large project when it ultimately builds out.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions?
Friedman: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Friedman: Council Members, just one additional comment. As you will see in some of
the proposed development agreement conditions, there is a proposal that the applicant
contribute to proportionate share for the construction of a bridge across Eight Mile
Creek, which would ultimately, then, end up at that signalized access coming out of
Silverstone and with that it could be a drive aisle -- we are not necessarily requiring a
full public street, but it would be a -- just vehicular access and with that access you
could ultimately with the bridge being built, have three accesses into this site and we
would also, then, recommend that this one stub that had been originally shown on the
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 10 of 49
site plan to cross Eight Mile Creek be eliminated, because, actually, the flood plain is
wider up there than it is over here just to the east of this proposed building.
De Weerd: Thank you, Pete. Is the applicant here this evening or representative?
Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Borton: Absolutely. Madam Mayor, Joe Borton, Rose Law Group, 6223 Discovery
Way. And I appreciate the time to come here and present this. I was told -- I got to do
one thing real quick. It's more for -- it's more for parks director, because I saw Steve
here -- that I had to bring this, because Colin Moss was -- I was supposed to pass the
word through Steve to Colin Moss that we have got the Meridian Parks and Rec dodge
ball championship, that we beat Colin handily and won and I told him that I was going to
rub it in if I got a chance to come, to get it in the minutes and come by and present it.
Siddoway: Probably should have passed that on.
Borton: Call me in the morning. Madam Mayor and Council Members, I appreciate the
opportunity to come before you on the reconsideration. I'm not necessarily going to
walk through the entire history of the application and parcel. Tamara Thompson and
Gary Allen with the development team have done that and have made you aware of
that. Really, to give you a quick background of the approach we took to bring this back
on a reconsideration is to review the record in detail and in particular the minutes from
P&Z and from the Council meeting and try to pull out the two or three issues that we
have heard Pete and Deputy Chief Silva talk about today that were the challenges that
we needed to try and address and try and improve and we think we have done that. So,
I'm also excited to have a chance to use some of the new bells and whistles here, so I'm
going to do that as well, so bear with me. These are the -- and some of the screens
bounce, because it's -- here are the three issues that were addressed in some degree
primarily at the Council meeting. They weren't necessarily problems or challenges, but
they are ones that we wanted to address. The park and ride lot, we will talk about
briefly. The floodway crossing plan, which has been highlighted that we have met with
Kyle Radek and we got some more updates for you on that. And, then, the emergency
access, which Deputy Chief Silva has talked about. We will get into those. You have
seen briefly the revised project site plan. One of the things that I know is important to
look at when trying to address the needs of a particular site plan is how it might fit in the
overall region. As the Council and Mayor knows, this is a county island. All property
around it has already been annexed. The 85 acres to the north and northeast has been
annexed and zoned already. That in and of itself presents a unique challenge to the
development. So, you will see how this fits into the site plan -- the concept site plan as
a whole, understanding these aren't -- these parcels north of Eight Mile aren't -- aren't
ones that are in the project's control. When we tried — tried to see, again, how this
might fit, how it could compliment the region, you can set this not only with the zoning,
but with the southern portion of the med tech corridor, could it work, does it make
sense, does it compliment those uses and we wanted to show that it can and that it will.
You will also see this concept plan come into play a little bit later when we address the
emergency access and the flood way issues that have been resolved. Let me click
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 11 of 49
through here a little bit. We will start with the park and ride lot. I think, Madam Mayor,
you made some comments about the park and ride lot and they were well taken. We
are glad to say -- and I know Christie Little is probably glad on behalf of ACHD that it's
used a lot. It's really crowded. And that's a good thing. We think primarily -- and I think
Pete pointed this out -- the relocation of Rackham Way improves the safe access to the
park and ride and the improvement of the site design not only enhances safer access,
you have got additional parking if the lot's full -- there are no plans to necessarily to
expand it. But if the lot's full you're going to have more parking opportunities and safe
access, which we all want, because we want to make sure this continues to get utilized
as we go forward.
Nary: Joe, can you pull that other mike closer to you?
Borton: This one?
Nary: Either one.
Borton: Okay.
Nary: Yeah. That's good.
Borton: Better? Sorry about that. And ACHD's been supportive, obviously, of the
continued use of the park and ride. The second issue which was addressed -- and I
believe Councilman Rountree had brought it up and it was a good question, it was
regarding the flood way crossing plan. So, we went back and we met with Kyle Radek
and tried to confirm what had been done and make sure it's -- all the T's were crossed
and the I's dotted. You have got this in the packet -- in your packet and Eight Mile
Creek and Five Mile Creek flood way study, which was done and had been approved
and I will show you that memo here, which is in your packet. Part of the thing that we
really learned in reviewing the flood way study was where can we put the best crossing
location. Well, the project site, in and of itself, has two access points on Overland. No
additional access points are needed. If and when a 60 foot building wants to be placed
there and a third access point needs to be provided, you know, that is completed when
that -- or we will cross that bridge when the time comes. We will show you here a little
bit what we found out --
De Weerd: I think there wasn't a bridge.
Borton: Not the literal bridge. When you look back at the site plan, as we were trying to
determine, in light of the flood way issues, where is the best way to assist in an off-site
cooperation and one thing that we found was while this stub really didn't make sense
and you will see from Mr. Radek's memo you have got about a 200 foot span here,
which is -- it's just up to the project. It's obvious it's a multi-million dollar -- it's a little
bigger than many portions of the Boise River. So, if we are going to -- if we are going to
do an off-site improvement and we are going to try and help facilitate the med tech
corridor, not only improve access to the site, improve access to Silverstone light, but
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 12 of 49
accomplish something for the project as a whole and be economically feasible. This is
-- this is the crossing that really strains everything. It's the crossing that assists all of the
adjacent property owners, but to a certain degree does assist the project before you
now, because it creates the lighted access loop to the north. As Councilman Zaremba
asked about a third access point, if we can do something that helps facilitate that
crossing, that also provides you a third access point and it's a better -- a better
expenditure of resources. What we have done, then, in talking with Mr. Radek, is have
him -- this is also in your packet -- talk about, one, confirming that the study's been
provided and approved. I think there was no rise questions that Councilman Rountree
had, which are good questions. But also to talk about where shall we -- where shall we
try and cross. So, in taking some of this guidance, which I think was right on the
money, we, then, went out and had some engineering estimates done to -- come on
now. To help us determine -- again, this is just a highlight of what's helped support,
focusing on this Five Mile crossing at the Silverstone light. And even though the off-site
contribution, I know, as this Council and Mayor knows, that there is an opportunity to do
an equitable and fair cost sharing for bridge crossings we try to capitalize on.
Opportunities have been lost in prior situations and you all know that. So, if our project
percentage can contribute to an off site that might not otherwise be required, it makes
some sense. I think it benefits the region as a whole. So, here is what we -- here is a
preliminary opinion of probable cost and I will highlight it here a little more, that shows
crossings that Ross Erickson has been talking with ACHD and I believe with -- with Kyle
as well, for the crossing cost. What we propose is paying our projects percentage share
of those through a letter of credit and help contribute to that crossing, which will benefit
all of the properties in the future. What was presented at the last hearing is our
percentage of the master plan that you see. What we presented is 5.6 percent. So,
comfortable -- I believe my crude math is about 35,000 dollars is the equitable
percentage. I think there was -- there was reflection in the minutes that -- and I think it
actually came from either a Council Member or P&Z -- a P&Z Commission Member
about putting a time frame on it. You don't want a letter of credit forever. You know, I --
from what I have seen, it's four to eight years, three to seven years is a window that's
clearly what the Council feels comfortable with, but I think it' was a good direction that
there be some cap on it. Also -- and I don't think it was raised, but a reason to have a
cap on it is you want to incentivize the adjacent properties to develop and if we are
going to be funding some portion off site, having a -- sort of a feet -to -the -fire deadline
assists in promoting that development before the letter expires and I think part and
parcel of that is the neighbor support. There is nobody here in opposition, but we have
talked to adjacent property owners and I believe you have one of the letter's in the
packet that talk also about supporting this Five Mile crossing. That's really the one
that's going to benefit everybody. Probably benefits everyone else more than this
project site, but it makes the most sense for the region. And the adjacent property, the
Brighton parcel directly to the east, is on the marker. We feel comfortable that this is
going to be one of the keystones to get this whole region jump started. Everybody
knows it's been a challenge to address for some time. So, those are two of the
relatively minor issues. We wanted to highlight them. The minutes reflect that they
were discussed. I think it's good to show that we have got those resolved. The
emergency access we think is another one and we start by saying we agree
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 13 of 49
wholeheartedly with Deputy Chief Silva and Chief Anderson have been great to work
with on this. You know, we share the concerns that if this project is going to be
successful, if you're going to have a retail shop or whatnot in this location, you want
people to be able to safely get there and if there is a problem you want emergency
personnel to be able to get there. That's critical. So, we agree to that. I think we have
worked on a number of solutions that, in whole, they make the Council comfortable with
approving the project tonight, but we will talk about those here briefly. Again, our thanks
go out to the Meridian police personnel, in particular Deputy Chief Silva and Anderson --
Chief Anderson, who we met with, who has been quite frank with the challenges, but
receptive to what we have tried to propose to get them fixed. One of the -- one of the
key components which we think is important to give the Council and Mayor some
comfort level is a letter in your packet from ACHD from Matt Edmond and, then,
confirmed again by Gary Inselman, which makes reference to this left -in access on
Rackham. Rackham at its current location is approximately a hundred feet, it's dam:
near at the intersection. In fact, one thing that I don't have in the slide, but, Madam
Mayor, if I could pass out -- I brought a copy of the current existing
conditions.
De Weerd: You can also pull out the Elmo and show it on that. Just pull the drawer and
lift that up.
Borton: Sorry about that. One reason I'd pass it out also, because I want it -- you'd be
able to have it in front of you as we go through some of the other slides and you can
sort of see at the same time existing conditions and some of the changes. So, I have
got copies if you think that would be helpful. What you're going to see -- can I mark on
this as well? So -- thank you very much. Everyone knows this intersection, but it's just
shocking to see what problems exist today that are -- that are being addressed by -- by
this development. You can see what you have got right here is a full access within
approximately a hundred feet of the intersection right now. There is no time for cueing,
It's -- it's playing a game of Frogger, quite frankly, to cross lanes and get in the tum
lanes to utilize whatever wants to be utilized, the park and ride lot right now. What
makes the existing conditions more challenging -- and this current opportunity that much
more important -- as I said at the start, the adjacent parcels are already annexed,
already zoned, and it's our understanding that the parcels up to the north could come
forward with a project of up to 60,000 square feet and utilize this access right here,
which is an absolute disaster as it stands right now, let alone someone else trying to
utilize it, so -- I have just a couple more minutes.
De Weerd: You don't have a couple more minutes.
Borton: I could talk for --
De Weerd: You can summarize.
Borton: I can summarize. Pete, if I can go back to this. So, what's important now is
ACHD's confirmed that the left -in access at Rackham will be preserved at all times for
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 14 of 49
emergency services. Gary Inselman has confirmed that in a letter. Christie Little of
ACHD has confirmed that. That's a big improvement. Not only will the left -out access
go away, as Deputy Chief Silva's commented, but the left -in access for emergency
personnel will be maintained and ACHD -- we have applauded them for being
cooperative and making sure that will be maintained. In addition to that improvement at
the new Rackham location is what has been discussed, striping and signage to assist
keeping the intersection clear. And there is a big difference that we see in trying to
keep clear of that within ten to 15 feet of an intersection, Waltman and the fire station on
Franklin and those that are 450 feet away. We think there is going.to be a lot greater
compliance further away. This is in your packet and it shows ACHD's commitment to
work with fire to keep that left -in. And this shows you that left -in right there. There is a
median, so you can't go left out.
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: This is the last -- the last comment -- there is also a proposal to include in a DA
an OptiCom, which would trigger the light at Overland to be green for any fire truck that
is utilizing that left -in access. So, if there is an occasion where there is a blockage,
there is a 14 second clearing period, worse case, that the light would tum green, the
light at Silverstone would be red, and it would clear. So, those are supplementing
improvements which adequately provide fire service. With that I will stand for any
questions.
De Weerd: You know, the time goes off your next project. Council, any additional -- or
any questions at this point?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: It's, actually, not on what you have been discussing, it's on another change
that appears on -- Pete, can you go back to the -- the two -- previous submission and
the current submission?
Friedman: Sure. If Mr. Borton will relinquish control of the machine, I will attempt to get
it back.
Borton: Do I need to do something?
Friedman: No. I'll take it from here.
Zaremba: Yeah. Thank you. On the newly aligned Rackham, as you go north from
where the arrow is and get to a comer, there is a new driveway there on the inside of a
curve. That normally is not a very safe idea and I'm just wondering why was that put in
there and has ACHD commented on that?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 15 of 49
Borton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, I don't think that should be there. I think
when the concept -- there wasn't a new ingress into that property intended. So, I guess
you could ignore that additional entrance. That portion should not be any different than
the original one.
Zaremba: Okay.
Borton: Did I answer your question? So, it's -- it's there -- that one exists. I mean that's
a real crude way to fix it. But that's a good question.
Zaremba: Okay. Second question. The -- continuing along Rackham Way, if that stub
street no longer need -- come back down again. If that stub street no longer needs to
be there, the space and the pavement and the labor to do that, could that be moved
over and make the parking lot ride just slightly bigger for the same cost?
Borton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, could it from an engineering perspective,
I'm sure it could. At least the cost of doing that allocated towards park and ride. I don't
know if ACHD wants it expanded, how that would happen. There has been no
discussion, at least from my understanding with ACHD, to improve it or expand it. I see
head shakes to the negative from our ACHD rep. I see where you're going and I like the
idea, but I'm not so sure there is an option that allows for that.
Zaremba: Okay. Am I right that that stub street is going to go away, though? You have
no need for it if you don't bridge.
Borton: Councilman Zaremba, correct.
Zaremba: Okay. Just a thought.
Borton: Okay. Thanks.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Joe, you talked about -- we talked about building height and the three
accesses if it's over 30 feet and, then, there was some proposals for 65 feet. It sounded
like that if there is not three access in the early phases, that there could be some
agreement that the buildings aren't going to exceed a certain height or what -- what
would your folks -- what are they willing to do on something like that if there is not three
accesses provided?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 16 of 49
Borton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, it's my understanding that while that
provision was included to make sure they are allowed to do that, should the opportunity
arise, the reality of it will be that when the loop road to the north is connected and there
is that access to the Silverstone, it wouldn't be until that time that you would have or be
able to construct a building 60, 65 feet tall. At its current configuration, while the zoning
would allow for it, the access points don't and we understand that.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything else? Thank you.
Borton: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide
testimony on this application? Okay.
Little: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Christie Little, testifying
this evening on behalf of ACHD. 3775 Adams Street in Garden City. I just wanted to
clarify on the record Gary Inselman's comments from his November 11th memo to
Deputy Chief Joe Silva and it's in your packets, but even today we have all been on the
phone together, the applicant and fire and the highway district and I just need to clarify
from the highway district standpoint that while with this applicant we are allowing the
left -in movements, we are restricting the strict left -out on Rackham, we have indicated
that if there is a safety problem in the future, we will need to restrict the left -in
movements, so that Rackham would just be right -in, right -out. We would -- don't know
when that's going to happen, we hope it doesn't have to happen, because if that's the
case, then, that means there is a safety problem, an accident problem and I know that
Meridian fire was really hopeful that the highway district would be able to say that we
are never going to restrict it only to right -in, right -out. The memo indicates that if there
is a substantial safety issue, we would have to restrict it just to right -in, right -out, or the
signalized intersection to the east, whichever occurs first. But the memo does go on to
say that if we do have to restrict the left -in movements that we will coordinate with
Meridian fire to make sure that there is adequate emergency access provided. Again, I
could fill in some more detail, but that's all we can -- that's all we can do, but, hopefully,
everyone does understand that the highway district wouldn't make that decision just on
their own and we would coordinate with Meridian fire and other emergency responders
in doing so.
De Weerd: Thank you, Christie. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any further comment, testimony? Okay. Wrap-
up remarks? I'll knock two minutes off of your time.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 17 of 49
Borton: Thank you, Madam Mayor. It's probably warranted. In the big picture, the
concept -- wrap-up comments would focus on what was highlighted a little bit earlier
before was this project is an island in Ada County surrounded by annexed and zoned
property. While we try and have projects come in as a whole, and you want to
assemble parcels and have them come in, this one can't do that. You're not going to
see these people come in and all try annex as a group. There are unique challenges
we think we have addressed. And when we make comment about the OptiCom as one
of several solutions that al.l together assure emergency access that -- that Christie just
talked about, that they will coordinate with fire personnel, that these requirements will be
part of a DA that will be approved by fire prior to building permit. That's what we
propose. One of the challenges for an application to come forward and move to those
engineering stages is we need to know that the city's comfortable, will approve the
annexation, include those conditions to be met within the DA and don't allow any
building permits until they are done -- until that's accomplished and that's what we
propose. The striping, the signing, the OptiCom installation, the assurance that there is
proper alignment with the fire truck and that -- so it works on Overland, that needs to be
accomplished prior to building permit. We can't go spend the funds to engineer that, we
can't go dig up ACHD's street and install that, obviously, without knowing that the city is
comfortable that we have addressed the emergency access issues. Nothing's perfect,
nothing ever is anywhere, but we think the combination of solutions that we have
provided, again, with Deputy Chief Silva assistance, to assure emergency left -in access
through this approved project site. And we appreciate your time and attention and
patience. We'd ask that you -- that you vote to approve the annexation and that the DA
come back with those specific elements.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any --
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: -- questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Again, one of the smaller points, but exploring the OptiCom idea again, the
center, of course, would be on the fire truck. The first assumption is that the receiver
would be at the intersection of Overland and Eagle, but I -- if I'm understanding you
correctly and it probably makes more sense, there is a receiver at Rackham that would
operate the signal at Eagle and Overland.
Borton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, before I babbled on too long that was
kind of where I was -- I was trying to go, because I think that's a great question. What
would happen is -- and I will be extremely crude and quick in this -- is you would have
an OptiCom -- and I'm generally speaking -- in this location, an additional one, so as
emergency personnel tum on their green light, this gets triggered to make this green.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 18 of 49
And it most -- and, realistically, it would occur when it's in the turn aisle. So, it's
impacting traffic going straight forward, it would be aligning -- we have with the OptiCom
folks, who -- and a bit with ACHD -- Tamara Thompson's done an amazing job, spent a
lot of time trying to work through this, because it's fascinating, quite frankly, that as the
vehicle approaches here, while we expect the intersection to be clear with the striping
and signage, it's just an additional element, Councilman Zaremba, to assist allowing
clearage -- these vehicles to move forward. Tamara viewed the videotape and tried to
get them some rough time frames of when it would -- how long that would take. Round
-- round numbers are about six seconds for a traffic light to cycle through and, then,
about 14 seconds for a stacking of this many cars, assuming that exists, from a green
light until they start moving. So, you're at approximately 20 seconds. Not terribly
scientific there. Not a minute and a half. So, that's -- and I appreciate you asking and
think that's -- and that's an additional component that we'd install and we would confirm
with the fire department it works before there is a building permit.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Borton: Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Joe, the problem that I see with that -- I think it's a good concept, but most of us,
as we took -- learned how to drive and go through the rules, when you see an
emergency vehicle you pull over and stop and you're telling people that once that
emergency vehicle turns there on -- on Overland Road going east, that those in the right
lane going west take off; am I not right or am I misunderstanding?
Borton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, that's correct. And I think what would happen
is -- and, again, this is -- this is included as an element only assuming that the
intersection 450 feet back is going to be blocked. So, we are twice where it is right now.
You can never guarantee everyone always follows the rules, that's -- that's just the way
it is, but in the rare occurrence that it's blocked, when you have got an emergency
vehicle here heading in the left tum, these vehicles, who -- which are already, you know
-- the truck's already past, quite frankly, will see the green light and I think they will
naturally move forward. Even if -- I think that's a great question. Even if just the front
vehicles move, you know, really that's enough to dislodge any congestion, because the
reality is -- and Deputy Chief Silva and I talked and just speaking for myself, if I were
right here stopped or stuck and a fire or police vehicle had the sirens going trying to turn
left, I'm not going anywhere. I'm stopped. So, it's a great question. I think it gives you
enough clearage, if all those circumstances arise, to allow access.
Bird: That's why we put big bumpers on fire trucks anyway.
De Weerd: Anything further?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 19 of 49
Bird: I have nothing further.
Hoaglun: Question for Deputy Chief Silva.
De Weerd: Okay.
Hoaglun: I just want to know your thoughts, Joe, on that type of system. I mean it's not
a perfect system. I mean I don't know if there is something we can make more robust. I
think of some of these crossings, like at Lowell Scott on McMillan where you actually
have lights that stop traffic to let -- could you do something like that on half that road to
keep that traffic from crossing that line with an OptiCom system, but I'd like to know your
thoughts on this.
Silva: Thank you. Madam Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, I want to talk -- you know,
speak to that. I appreciate that question, because it's an excellent one. There was
quite a little bit of debate about this -- whether or not this would solve our access
problems,. especially with the OptiCom. Our preference and our discussion for the fire
chief is that we have a lighted -- stop bars or painted white lines, that that would help
draw attention to the fact that that -- we need to have a keep clear zone bars, painted
white lines, that would help draw attention to the fact of that keep clear zone and,
obviously, that's been an application, because it's been applied in Nampa. There are
some concerns here and Mr. Borton referred to it. You know, the time it takes the
reaction -- the reaction time, the signal would cycle, six seconds, for example, for it to
tum green and approximately 14 seconds for it to start to clear, but when we move
through that many vehicles stacked going westbound, that takes awhile for those
vehicles -- you know, once a fire truck and, you know, the -- I guess the distraction of a
fire truck going by for them to realize, oh, the light has turned green, I now need to
move forward. I can go. That takes a little while for that reaction to set in for the cars to
start -- you know, start moving forward. I honestly do think that that's going to be a
problem and this particular application or approach is -- is not something we have
applied in any other intersection or area or project within our jurisdiction. The other --
the other concern and the most likely scenario at this location, that being an EMS call,
that constitutes about 80 percent of our -- our business. If you try to consider what
would happen in there you would have the first responder coming from Fire Station Four
on Eagle Road. The secondary unit would be the ambulance coming most likely out of
St. Luke's. So, they now approach and whoever see -- whatever vehicle or whatever
sensor sees the first vehicle, that's going to grab that signal and control it. So, most
likely Fire Station Four with first access to the signal area to Overland control that, they
make their right, and roll around the comer. One of the other concerns is it's going to be
quite a wait for the EMS unit coming out of St. Luke's if you kind of think about it,
because now the light has turned green for westbound Overland and now no vehicles
can move southbound, equipped with OptiCom, so the ambulance has to stage back for
sometimes -- I think as much as three and a half minutes for recovery of the traffic
signal to get back into the normal sequencing and to allow the ambulance to gain
control of that intersection and perhaps Christie can speak to that more accurately, but
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 20 of 49
that's my understanding of how that sequencing issue would take place. There is major
concern in that letter that's referenced by Mr. Borton in the second paragraph, last
sentence, about have a point where there is a safety -- substantial safety concern that
ACHD staff, after careful consideration, could eliminate this left tum access here. That's
a major -- as Mr. Borton alluded to, major point of concern for the fire department that
our only means of access on this project would be potentially eliminated and we would
have that additional travel distance associated with having to go through the present
Silverstone business park to access this particular location.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: There is a bigger question here and that is how to keep the intersection clear
in the first place, I think, and it -- I think of that, because in other locations I have been
guilty of finding myself in an intersection when I didn't expect to be. I'm following a line
of traffic that's moving and all of a sudden it stops and I'm in the middle of the
intersection, with no intention of doing that, because I understand why you shouldn't do
that and I think I try and watch to make sure that I don't do that, but every once in awhile
I get caught and somebody mentioned something that's happening in Nampa, is there a
better way to make sure that all intersections -- not this one, but the bigger picture,
where people are better warned that traffic is stopping or -- is there another solution for
keeping that intersection clear?
De Weerd: Go ahead and respond, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, I don't know. But I think -- I think we are
on the right page and this project's probably going to create and educate people on
those types of solutions. This OptiCom solution, part of the striping and signage, et
cetera, but we are asking that happen -- you know, we can sit here and it's maybe kind
of fun, at least I think, from an engineering perspective, to try and talk about what could
happen and how you might align OptiComs. We are told and we understand that we
think it could work. I think we need to get it up and running and confirm that. We are
comfortable that -- that this solution will work to clear it out. But the way to do that and
the way to make that happen is complete an approval of an annexation and require that
prior to permit. Whether you can be sure that two stop bars, painted stripe lines, will
keep an intersection clear 450 feet back or not, I think it's a lot more likely than one near
an intersection, but we can argue that for a long time. I don't think that prevents the
Council approving an annexation today. I think what needs to be tied to an annexation
are those requirements that we talked about. That this OptiCom solution, which the fire
department's hand aren't washed of this as of today. If it's approved today with that
requirement, we will work with the fire department, we continue these discussions. The
development agreement requires us to include this OptiCom solution, the striping, the
signage, et cetera, that they participated in and we are going to make sure works,
because we want it to work and came to approve it, the building permit. So, you're not
going to have people using the site at all any more than already exists. Which is why
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 21 of 49
we think you could feel comfortable approving it with -- with that caveat, because I think
we -- I think we can get there. But to keep the intersection clear, that's a great question.
De Weerd: We just hope we have more alert drivers. I'm song, I just couldn't stand
that.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: My comment on -- and that's why I was trying to think, you know, what -- what
other things could be done and I mean because it -- something has to be done if this
property is to be developed before that other comes in, a third access point, you know,
that's what I'm trying to think and I'm not a traffic engineer and don't study this stuff, but,
you know, I think of those crossing guards where they -- they stop traffic and -- and let
the kids cross McMillan Road is where I'm thinking of just east of Lowell Scott and --
because you have heavy -- heavy -- heavily traveled roads, it's five lanes, and I don't
know if something like that works. You know, the lights on the -- they also have lights --
blinking lights and the striping, but then, they have an overhead and I didn't know if -- if
we have an overhead there for that westbound traffic, if that turns red, so people know
they come to that point, they have to stop and you have clearance through the --
through the intersection on Eagle Road if that would help or if that's just an added
expense that doesn't help. You know, I want to talk about solutions that just cost money
and really don't do what they are intended to do, but I don't know, I'm just trying to think
of ways -- how can we make it work for that -- for that time being, but I don't know if
there is anything else like that out there or — and if I might ask Deputy Chief Silva, in
Nampa what you're talking about is just the — Nampa uses the blinkers within the -- the
striping.
Silva: That's correct. Madam Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, I want to also comment on
something that you just said that perhaps we could have a flashing yellow light that
would be similar to the signal at station one. One of the problems we have
experienced, quite frankly, have been the — when the motoring public becomes
accustomed to just seeing that yellow flashing light when it sequences to red, they don't
stop. That's the experience that we end up -- what we have considered in our future
signal installations at fire stations is a full -- it would totally work like a conventional
signal with a green, yellow, and red, which is something that they are accustomed to
looking at and they are actually cued to look at it and respond to it when it turns red and
we think we might have a greater success rate -- Boise fire, for example, installed that
at Fire Station 14, which is their new station in west Boise and they seem to have
greater success with that type of signal installed in front of their stations.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I just think, you know, we'd have to get ACHD partners on
board with something like that to explore it. I mean this is -- just to see if there is
something that could be done on something like this. I don't know.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 22 of 49
Borton: Madam Mayor, I -- Councilman Hoaglun, I appreciate that recommendation and
suggestion. I think we would be willing to do it and, really, what -- big picture what
happens -- and I think we all know it is you're going to have a light at Silverstone, this is
going to get developed. The property, which is listed adjacent to it is going to get
developed. It snowballs and you're going to ultimately -- and not in an inordinately long
period of time, even in this market, you're going to have a lighted intersection at
Silverstone, the entire region. So, it's a critical solution. We are necessarily creating a
30 year -- trying to solve a 30 year problem. I think of an overhead blinking light or
something to that effect, which assists with the sign on the side, which says keep clear,
which assists with the striping, which assists with the ACHD's representation that they
will work with fire to assure they have got emergency access. All of those things are
going to be about everything you could ever do for this project site as a county island,
quite frankly, and there was comment, well, we tried to get emergency temporary
access off Eagle Road. There is not a stone we haven't tried to uncover. I think if it
allows us to move forward and really explore the meat of that we have suggested, we
would be comfortable with -- with including that as a condition. Again, ACHD clearly is
going to have to play a role in that, but if it makes it a safety project, allows it to move
forward in this region to develop, I think that's a win for everybody, in light of what exists
there to day, which is a disaster a hundred feet away from the intersection. I appreciate
the suggestion.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further, Council? Thank you, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any discussion, further information needed? If not, I would
entertain a motion to close the public hearing.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move that we close the public hearing on AZ 08-001.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 8. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 23 of 49
Bird: Before I make a motion here, I -- 1 think they have went out -- this applicant, with
the help of our staff and our fire department, has went out and probably for the situation
done as good a job as they possibly could and while it's not probably a hundred percent
fool proof, I think it's about 90 percent. At least it seems like to me it's a workable
solution that they have agreed upon and have worked hard to do. And my -- my
concern when we denied this was -- was the emergency access, so I think they have
taken care of that. I would have no problem with the stipulations that's been set forward
by the applicant and by the staff and public testimony to pass this, but I'll let -- before I
make a motion, let the other comments come out if they want.
De Weerd: Clint, any final comment on the flood plain issues? Public Works feels that
those have been resolved with the new proposal?
Dolsby: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the only concern that we do have
that's remaining. It's up off of Eagle Road where I think they showed some photos of
where they had widened the road to include a sidewalk there. If we continue that
widening going north, we would need to make sure there is rise in that area. But the
other area where they are proposing the crossing, I think that looks fine and that's
complied with the requirements that we need, the crossing that Mr. Borton proposed
that he'd work with Kyle on.
De Weerd: But that's just something that can be worked out --
Dolsby: Yeah.
De Weerd: -- as the project moves forward.
Dolsby: Yeah. Would make sure they have no rise when they come through with it.
De Weerd: Thank you. Pete.
Friedman: Madam Mayor and Council Members, just a couple of other suggestions,
depending on which way you go. As we said on the site plan that we really don't see a
need for this stub up here and the concern that Council Member Zaremba raised about
eliminating the access on this curve there, we would -- we would also recommend that
the development agreement include a revised site plan eliminating that stub, eliminating
that driveway and, then, showing a stub, whether this building moves or somewhere
showing a stub coming to the edge of the property line over here for future crossing of
the creek there. In addition, I think we would want to work with Mr. Borton and articulate
language that he was directing to Council about the solutions for the access at the
relocated Rackham. I don't have that language currently in a proposed development
agreement, so we would want to get that language from him.
De Weerd: And those were all included in discussions I know. Certainly the stub and
the closing off of the -- I guess the sub further south was part of your discussion with the
applicant as well.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 24 of 49
Friedman: That's correct.
De Weerd: Okay. And I guess if Council does choose to approve this to include to
work with ACHD and perhaps follow up with Councilman Zaremba's suggestion on if
that -- that pavement can add onto the park and ride if ACHD should desire to approve
that. I hate to lose opportunities.
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
De Weerd: Okay. Any additional discussion or comments from staff?
Friedman: Do you need to reopen or -- Council -- well, I can do it. Madam Mayor, just
as a point of clarification, Mr. Borton and I were talking -- if the stub out at -- we do a
stub down in this lower section and, then, we would have them contribute their
proportionate share to a future crossing off site, then, I think we can amend the
development agreement to include that and, then, eliminate the requirement for
construction of half that bridge. We just have a stub there, since I believe that most of --
if not all of the flood ways on the adjacent property. So, we provide a stub to the
property line at the south across Eight Mile and, then, have them contribute to the
contribution for the future bridge construction across Five Mile.
De Weerd: And that was that five point something percent?
Friedman: 5.6 percent. That's correct.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Council, any other points of clarification needed or
discussion? Do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'll try a motion. I'm probably going to leave some stuff out, but I move that we
approve AZ 08-001, the request for annexation and zoning of 9.06 acres from RUT to
R-1 zoning for Overland Village by Relo Development and to include all staff, applicant,
ACRD, fire department comments and to work between the applicant and staff and fire
and ACHD to draw up a DA that can be brought back and accepted by the Council and
-- I can't think of anything else. Other than we are eliminating the one stub road on the
north. We are redoing -- taking away -- the entrance on the curve in there as agreed to,
but that was all agreed to by staff and applicant, so I just -- I move with those conditions
that pass AZ 08-001.
Zaremba: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 25 of 49
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, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. We have Item 9 is on VAC 08-001.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a corresponding
application or concurrent applicant with this. The issue we had before was -- as Council
-- when the Council denied the annexation previously there was no need to move
forward with the vacation of the right of way of the existing Rackham Road, but now that
Council has voted to approve the annexation, we would recommend that you also
approve the vacation of the existing right of way of Rackham Road.
De Weerd: Does the applicant need to add anything? That's good.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we approve VAC 08-001 and to include all staff comments.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9. Any discussion? Hearing
none, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 10: Public Hearing: AP 08-005 Request for City Council Review for an
Appeal of the Planning Director's denial of Instant Equity Auto's request
for Certificate of Zoning Compliance approval (CZC 08-010) to operate
without connection to city services AND denial of an Alternative
Compliance (ALT 08-004) request for reduced landscape buffers adjacent
to Fairview Avenue and a residential zoning district for Instant Equity
Auto by The Land Group —1065 East Fairview Avenue:
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 26 of 49
De Weerd: Okay. Item 10 is a public hearing on AP 08-005. 1 will open this public
hearing with staff comments.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This also is a request
for reconsideration from a decision that you had made previously for the applicant
Instant Equity Auto. The location is 1065 Fairview, south side of Fairview west of
Locust Grove. The applicant submitted a CZC for a vehicle sales lot at the location and
the director denied that CZC due to a lack of city service and noncompliance with our
UDC standards for landscaping. The Council upheld the director's denial of the CZC
and an alternative landscaping compliance at their October 7th meeting. The reason for
the denial was the Council and the applicant could not agree to the terms of a draft
development agreement as presented by the applicant. On October 28th the applicant
granted the applicant -- or the Council granted the applicant's request for
reconsideration of denial. The issues for the proposed development were the lack of a
connection to the city sewer, reduced landscape buffers adjacent to Fairview Avenue
and the residential zoning district and the inability to obtain cross -access to adjoining
properties owned by the applicant. And we have been meeting with the applicant since
that time. You have a letter from them in your packet generally stating that they are in
agreement with the conditions we have worked out with them and those conditions
would be to allow the reduced streetscape buffer along Fairview Avenue based on the
landscaping plan that they did provide to us and we are comfortable with that, as
opposed to the one they previously provided. To provide a five foot buffer on the south
property line and to provide a six foot fence -- originally it was an eight foot fence
proposed, but they are now proposing a six foot fence and we are okay with that. The
applicant also has committed to hooking up to city services within two years or 24
months. I believe at the time Council had indicated the time frame of up to 18 months,
but the applicant has indicated that they would like to just move that out to 24 months
and that as you can see on the proposed site plan, that they do make provisions for a
cross -access to both of the adjacent parcels. So, staff recommends that Council direct
the city attorney to draft a development agreement incorporating the items that we have
just identified above and pull their request for reconsideration. Additionally, the
applicant has requested a waiver of fees for the development agreement and after
some discussion, in-house staff does not oppose that request.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to comment?
Burrup: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Dan Burrup. I'm with
Instant Equity Auto. Our current address is 10221 West Fairview in Boise.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 27 of 49
Burrup: Just want to thank you for reconsidering our application. We feel that the work
we have done with the city staff over the previous six weeks has been very productive.
As Mr. Friedman pointed out, the items that we are -- that we are at this point willing to
put into the development agreement, I just want to point out one more thing. In a prior
public hearing we had -- you had asked the question of what type of work we were
going to do in the garage located at the rear of the building. And at this time we do
have a need to do vehicle service and detail for the cars that we sell and get prepared
to sell. What we would like to do is be able to raise the roof on that building in
accordance with the building department, get the permits that we need for that, be able
to raise the roof, so we can put a vehicle lift in there and do the service. It would -- it
would be -- we don't market service to the public. It's for our own in-house use and
occasionally we have customers that have bought cars from us. that will need something
and so we do that. But outside of -- outside of that, we just want to add that point to
clarify prior questions in City Council meetings.
De Weerd: Had you shared that with staff?
Burrup: Yes. In fact, I detailed that in this letter, which was given to staff and I think it --
we, actually, provided a copy of the letter to -- to go to you as well prior this meeting and
we talked about it with Anna at length. She just thought it would be a good idea for us
to make sure it was brought up to you. According to the city code and everything, she
and Bill Parsons looked it all up and were within the -- the allowances of the zoning --
what the zoning allows by doing that, but we just wanted to clarify. That's what we
desire to do.
De Weerd: And the existing septic system is adequate to that kind of use?
Burrup: Well, we -- our plan, really, now is to -- you know, with two years we are most
likely just going to hook up to sewer right away, just -- it probably won't make sense to
have to tear out things later again. We don't need to have a bathroom or anything like
that out there, so it -- you know, the Central District Health Department will have to
approve the building permit that we do as well and if it's not okay on the septic, then,
you know, I will -- I'm sure it would be denied through the building permit process. But if
we do go ahead and connect to city sewer right now like we are thinking we will, it won't
be an issue anyways, it will be connected to the city sewer -- to city services all
together.
De Weerd: Well, Pete, I guess in your evaluation with the kind of disposal with having
repairs on site, is a septic or our plans -- is that something Central District Health will
require a hookup to city services?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- Madam Mayor, I would have to
check with them to double-check, but I would think that the -- I'm sure they'd probably
allow that use on a septic system in the county, but we -- of course, we would prefer
they connected to city services right away when they are annexed and into the city, but I
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 28 of 49
think they probably allowed that for use before in a septic system. The vehicle washing
and stuff that would go on with that.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for the applicant?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Dan, would you clarify something. You said that the customer bought a car you
might have them back in. That would be strictly warranty work you would be charging --
deriving no revenue out of that detail shop or small mechanic shop?
Burrup: I can't say that -- that there wouldn't be any revenue. It really is a case-by-case
basis. A lot of times with warranty work -- if it is a warranty item, there is no charge.
Sometimes they choose to do certain services and there would be a charge, but --
Bird: Well, then, what you're telling me is you're -- you're going to be a full repair shop
with a lift and everything?
Burrup: That's -- that's, basically, I believe how we need to present it. Yeah. I mean
our practice right now is -- is not going out and trying to acquire that type of business.
We are in the business to sell cars. But as part of the repairs, yes, we would need to
charge for some of that. It would need to be --
Bird: But in the same token, if you were slow and your mechanic's sitting around, you're
going to solicit work.
Burrup: Yeah. I -- it's been slow the last -- the last year and we haven't had a need to
solicit any outside -- right at one of our locations we have one mechanic and we haven't
had a need to -- outside business, which -- we are going to be limited as well by the
size. I mean we can fit one vehicle lift in there, which is not going to be very useful to
cater to the public.
Bird: And I don't think the addition the addition of this extra work is going to have any
influence on the septic system, but I don't think see any -- I mean I hope you're not
draining oil and stuff into the septic system.
Burrup: Oh, no.
Bird: You're not going to be doing that, so -- okay.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 29 of 49
Hoaglun: Question for Dan, then. So, primarily what you're needing that building for is
as you receive cars, cars come in you prep them for sale, there is minor work needed,
that's -- that's where you want to do the work. A customer wants -- they drive a car off
the lot, they are going to buy it, they come back, say, you know, I have got this rattle in
there that -- that wasn't there for the test drive, can you check it out. I guess just to
reconfirm -- that's, basically, what you're going to be doing in this -- in this facility that
you're going to raise the roof on.
Burrup: Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. And, you know, that's why we can't say we are not
going to charge. I mean sometimes vehicle sales are as is sales and, though, a
majority of the time we just take care of our customers, there are the occasions when
we do need to charge for the services that they ask for and so we -- we would need to
be able to -- to do that. But, like I said, it's not something that we are going to go out to
the public and say come get your -- you know, AC service done here.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, that's what I was going to follow up. So, you buy a car from
us, we will grease job, oil change for life, and all of a sudden you got a. traffic, you know,
going in and out of there. That's not something you're going to be doing at that location.
Burrup: Well, we would want to bring people back to do those types of things through
us. The service that we -- you know, our marketing plan is to bring people continuously
to the lot, but it's -- it's to our own customers that have come in and bought cars -- we
want to take care of them throughout the ownership of their vehicle and we want to offer
our services to them throughout that time. But, like I say, to put an ad in the paper or to
advertise on our signage that we are going to -- that we are a full service shop, that's
not our objective. We do just want to be able to take care of our customers.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I have a question for Pete.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Hoaglun: If you could educate me on the zoning request and what they are talking
about doing with that. Is that in compliance or are we in a gray area or are we okay with
that?
Friedman: Well, I think we are somewhat in a gray area given the kind of storied history
of this site, as I understand it. Primarily the auto sales is a permitted use and, actually,
vehicle repair is, but, you know, again, because we are trying to craft or get a use onto
the site that hadn't been originally contemplated in the original development agreement,
I think if we can add a condition to the development agreement among the other things
that somehow that this shall not be used as a general vehicle repair and servicing
center, that it, really, should function and be secondary to the principal use of the site,
which are retail sales -- or sales of automobiles. That any repairs and servicing is
subordinate and, you know, shall not be advertised or represented as being available to
the general public. Did I answer your question, Councilman?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 30 of 49
Hoaglun: Yes. Thank you.
Burrup: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we are somewhat handicapped in that
the meeting that we had with Council -- or with staff, Anna Canning and Bill Parsons,
neither of them, obviously, are here. We did, actually, go through that in detail and we
brought this up to them and they are the ones who recommended we present it to you.
And they, actually, indicated real clearly and they pulled out the manual, that it was, you
know, permitted, that is -- you know, that there wasn't any gray area that we knew of,
you know, up to this point. - We -- we are not asking to be able to do anything out of
what is already currently zoned and permitted. We -- and would request that no
restrictions be put on that in a development agreement in that we are not -- we are not
violating anything with -- we are trying to comply to everything that you have asked for
at this point, so --
De Weerd: Well, I would guess that the concern would be if -- if that is also an equal
use, that as you stated in your testimony, it looks like you might just hook up, because it
-- having the expense now and not having to rip up things later, makes better business
sense, then, I think it would put some minds at ease just saying, you know, hook up to
city services and, then, there is not a concern of what that use would be, because it
would be permitted. But as a secondary use on a septic, until you hook up, that is
where the concern lies.
Burrup: Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as -- maybe as a response to
that within the development agreement, if we were to say that if you do need a -- would
like to say a restriction on it, while we are not connected to city services, we would be
fine with that. But once we are connected, we want to do what's available to code.
De Weerd: I think that addresses the tenor of the discussion.
Burrup: Okay. Great.
De Weerd: Council, any other questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Dan, I take it, then, in the development agreement you would have no problem
with a stipulation that no other building for the use of repair or detailing will be built on
this property. The only thing that's allowable is the existing piece of -- or the existing
building. You would be agreeable to that?
De Weerd: I guess under this application.
Bird: Under this application. Yeah.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 31 of 49
Burrup: Yeah.
Bird: He can always come back and if he wanted to add a couple three more bays on,
but --
Burrup: Right.
Bird: -- at this time.
Burrup: Absolutely.
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: I just wanted to add that clarity.
Hoaglun: That they would be allowed to raise the roof the four feet to accommodate the
lift, yeah.
Bird: Sure. I don't see any problem with that. I just don't want them getting bigger.
Hoaglun: Sure.
Bird: Because I think that they got -- what he's telling me is -- I don't know if they are
going to be capable of changing -- and this small of building they are not going to be
able to do too much, but --
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions from Council? Okay. Thank you.
Burrup: Again, thank you for your reconsideration.
De Weerd: Thank you. This is a public hearing -- yes, sir.
Christensen: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a much nicer facility by
the way. I'm kind of a big dude, so it's nice to have the room. Just not to beat a dead
horse, but just to --
De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address.
Christensen: My name is Ed Christensen. 10221 Fairview Avenue. Instant Equity
Auto. Just to kind of put it in perspective, at this point we are not a franchise, so it's not
-- the oil changes lifetime things -- we are a pretty small organization. Right now we
have got about a hundred cars. We have got one mechanic. To put it in perspective,
with the -- the facility that we are looking at now, raising the roof, we can only put one lift
in that building still and now at this point we would have doubled our inventory, so we
are nearly looking at 200 cars. I'm already paying my mechanic overtime as it is, so we
really don't have the capacity at this point to bring in people off the street and that type
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 32 of 49
thing. We certainly haven't done it up to this point. We haven't needed it. It's really not
what we are in the business to do. We are not mechanics, we are -- you know, we
focus primarily on sales. So, at that point, you know, aside from a different
development plan some date with a larger facility and that type thing just to kind of paint
the picture of where we are with what we have, we are very limited at this point with the
building and the secondary building in the back and, obviously, as Dan stated, it's a lot
more logical at this point after looking at things economically to just go ahead with the
sewer. So, you know, that is an option and at that point if that's -- if that requires that for
that mechanical thing, we have no opposition to that, so -- appreciate your time and
reconsidering everything for us.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Christensen: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further testimony? Okay. Any further comments from
Council or staff?
Friedman: One minor point, Madam Mayor and Council. I think as we talked about an
expansion of the repair facilities or moving into sort of another kind of evolution of
activities on the site, of course, that would require another CZC and another analysis of
its compliance with the city zoning regulations, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Anything else from Council? Final word from applicant? You're
done? Thank you. Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close the public hearing on AP 08-005.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 10. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carnes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the appeal of AP 08-005 on CZ 08-010 and ALP 08-004,
and to draw up a development agreement and not limited to, but to include the allowed
reduced street buffer of 17.5 feet to the proposed by -- as proposed by applicant.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 33 of 49
Document development commitment regard to south property line, five foot buffer and
eight foot fence -- five foot buffer is provided and the applicant now proposes a six foot
fence, which I think is probably more legitimate and more. used out there, so I would go
along with a six foot fence. Allow the septic system to be in place for 24 months, but
within 24 months they will be hooked up to city water and sewer. And applicant to
provide cross -access as indicated on the revised site plans. And with that I also would
include all applicant, staff, and public testimony.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second.
Zaremba: Discussion?
De Weerd: Discussion, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Did we want to add a fifth element to the DA, allowing raising the roof, but
not expanding the facility to -- beyond its use for nonpublic use?
Bird: The maker of the motion would have no problem including that in. I'm sure that
with the testimony and stuff that Mr. Nary would add that in. These four points were the
ones I just wanted to make sure were put in and that's what the staff had requested and
-- but 1 would agree with you, Mr. Zaremba, that that's probably a good point to make,
that we do get that in, too, and I'm sure Mr. Nary's already noted that.
Hoaglun: And the second agrees.
De Weerd: Well, I would note that it is public use, it's just -- until they are hooked up to
sewer, they are agreeable to calling it a secondary use. But I mean their customers are
the public, so --
Zaremba: That's true.
De Weerd: So, it all depends on what your definition of public use is and I just don't
want that to limit and be interpreted by someone that wasn't involved in this decision.
So, I'm sure Mr. Nary can craft that appropriately, but I just wanted that clarified on the
record.
Bird: And the maker of the motion would agree with that, Mayor, that we are not
encouraging solicited business.
Hoaglun: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion, before I really get confused? Okay. Madam
Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 34 of 49
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 11: Public Hearing: RZ 08-006 Request for Rezone of 1.39 acres from I -L to
C -G zone for Lanark Property by Patrick McKeegan — 3131 and 3163 E.
Lanark:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Item 11 is a public hearing on RZ 08-006. 1 will ask for
staff comments at this time as I open the public hearing.
Friedman: Okay. Thank you, Madam Mayor. I just need to --
De Weerd: Pete, I can't hear you.
Friedman: I'm having technical difficulties here, so it will take me just a moment,
Madam Mayor.
Holman: Pete is in training.
Friedman: Okay. I think --
De Weerd: We all start somewhere, Pete.
Friedman: Thank you. I had that working and, then, just -- there we go. Okay. Thank
you, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Pete, I'm going to call a five minute break real quick and we will reconvene
in five minutes.
(Recess.)
De Weerd: Okay. I will call this meeting back to order. We have opened the public
hearing on Item 11 and we will start with staff comments.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. This is a rezone for property located at 3131
and 3163 Lanark Street in the southwest comer of Eagle and Lanark. It's about 2.2
acres and the request is for a rezone from I -L to C -G. Elevations have been provided
by the applicant. The application was heard by the Planning Commission. Those
speaking in favor were the representative of the owner Patrick McKeegan. There was
nobody speaking in opposition and no else commenting. The only written testimony we
received was the applicant submitted a written response to the staff report. Key issues
that were discussed by the Commission were the specific lighting standards that would
be required along Eagle Road consistent with the Eagle study -- Eagle Road corridor
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 35 of 49
study and that additional landscaping be required on site to comply with our current
UDC standards. The applicant -- also, the Commission and the applicant discussed the
fact that the applicant should not be required to install the 35 foot wide landscape buffer
adjacent to Eagle Road, due, in part, to slope conditions that exist there and I believe
we have documentation on the record from ITD saying that it would not be appropriate
-- we considered this also when we did some CZC's for the existing building. Or we
didn't do existing CZC's, but we did consider it when we were reviewing the existing
building on the site. The key Commission changes to the staff recommendation were
that a development agreement be added that the applicant not be required to install the
landscaping buffer. However, one outstanding issue for the Council is that there needs
to be clarification that a CZC -- a CZC would be required for the existing buildings and
all future tenants for a change in use from industrial to commercial. As it's happened
since the previous mattress company left that area and Sleep With Grace went into
occupancy of the building, when you look at their activities, they really are more geared
towards retail than warehousing. About one-third of their space is warehousing. The
rest to show room and retail and that would be consistent with our code, because a
change of use would require a CZC. So, the Commission recommended approval of
this to you at their November 6, 2008, public hearing, with the recommendation that a
specific development agreement provisions being included to prohibit drinking
establishments. That a new trash enclosure be constructed that complies with UDC
standards and specifically the chain link fencing, with or without slats, does not qualify
as screening material. That there be a five foot sidewalk constructed adjacent to Lanark
along the north boundary of the site and construction of a ten foot wide multi -use
pathway on the west side of Eagle Road along the east boundary of the site within the
right of way or within a public access easement and that street lights be installed
consistent with the Eagle Road corridor study. Also that the site and the future users
will comply with current UDC standards and that they obtain fire department approval
for a turnaround on the site that meets current fire code requirements. Right now the
site is a little constrained as to the ability to get a fire apparatus in there and turn it
around, although I know Deputy Chief Silva has looked at the site, staff has looked at
the site, and we believe there are -- is an ability to just do some restriping within the
parking lot to achieve the type turnaround that the fire department has requested and,
again, that CZC applications also be submitted for changes of use on the site. So, with
those provisions in a development agreement, the Commission has recommended
approval of the application to you.
De Weerd: Pete, I would have a question on -- what is the traffic impacts in I -L versus
C -G?
Friedman: I -L, probably, is a little bit lower than C -G I would think, because it's more
light industrial and so forth. C -G, which is general commercial and retail, probably have
a little bit greater trip generation than I would think warehousing would be.
De Weerd: But not something significant enough to be concerned on the left-hand turn
movement onto Eagle Road?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 36 of 49
Friedman: Not enough to warrant a light, I would believe, or channelization. I think it's
-- you know, people will be coming and going. If they can't make the left-hand turn, they
might have to go down to find another way to tum around and come back. Also, now
with Pine Street open you have the ability to come -- you know, depending on where
people are coming from, come up Eagle Road and tum right into the site. ACHD really
didn't come up with any specific comments based on our -- on the proposed zone
change.
De Weerd: Well, does ACHD comment because it's Eagle Road, the state facility?
Friedman: Well, that's -- that's true, Madam Mayor, but they would comment on Lanark
Street with turning movements -onto Lanark Street and any concerns they might have
there. I could also pull up the staff report and see -- I don't believe ITD had any
comments either on this application.
De Weerd: I didn't see any. Okay. Council, any questions for staff?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: On what was the third bullet, about the sidewalk, I agree with that, but if I'm
remembering the location, there is currently no curbing or anything and I guess my
thought is the mechanics of adding -- if it's just five more feet of pavement added onto
the existing roadway, how are -- how is vehicular traffic going to realize that that's a
pedestrian facility and so my question is should we be saying not only sidewalk, but
maybe curb and gutter or something that separates the pedestrian facility from the
vehicle facility?
Friedman: Well, if you would like to qualify that in the development agreement, Council
Member, I think that that would be appropriate.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further?
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, question for Pete, just to -- clarify for me that the applicant
won't be required to construct a 35 foot wide landscape or buffer along Eagle Road,
because I understand ITD does not want that issue, because if they have to do
construction or do something they'll tear it up and they won't put it back, so --
Friedman: There is some fairly significant slope issues on that when you drive by. It's
just not quite feasible to get landscaping on that slope, first of all. It would be down
below the grade of the road, so nobody would really see it. And, secondly, it would be
tough both to plant and maintain.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 37 of 49
Hoaglun: Okay. And, then, to follow up, Madam Mayor, then -- but they are going to be
required to construct a ten foot wide multi -use pathway within that right of way, is that --
Friedman: Within the right of way, Council Member, or within an easement if it so -- you
know, if -- depending on where the right of way is in relation to their property.
Hoaglun: Okay. So, there is room to be able to put that in and with the slope -- I mean
it could get a little tricky, but --
Friedman: Well, then, they have to do some form of retaining structure put in to support
it or a portion of it.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Would the applicant like to comment? Good
evening.
McKeegan: Good evening. Madam Mayor, Council Members, my name is Patrick
McKeegan. My address is 280 North Latah, Suite 100, Boise, Idaho, and I'm
representing Mr. Sigmont in this matter. As you may recall, about a year ago we came
before you with a similar request in conjunction with a conditional use application. Both
of those were denied at that time and we feel that we paid attention and that's the
reason we are back before you. We, actually, came to the city and said we would be
willing -- we actually requested the development agreement, so we could be very clear
as to what we -- what we wanted and what we would agree to and what everybody was
going to get. And for the most part this -- this application is -- is the same as that, with
the exception that the development agreement would not allow any drinking
establishments in this location. It's just not appropriate. And there is really no need for
it. This property -- the property directly to the -- and we are going to -- I'm going to be
playing with the new toy here, so we are going to see how this works. This property --
on, that doesn't work. That is already zoned C -G. Come back. Okay. The property
across the street is zoned C -G. The property south of Franklin Road on this side of the
street is zoned C -G. This little piece here is just a one or two lot enclave that have not
been zoned C -G. We feel that C -G is consistent with the rest of Eagle corridor to act as
a buffer between our use -- between Eagle Road and the much heavier industrial uses
behind us. The difficulty Mr. Sigmont has had trying to lease this property over the last
three or four years is that as an industrial use it's not really large enough to provide for
industrial users. The buildings have already been constructed and we consistently get
people that want to come in and provide like retail services or office services, but when
we tell them that it's going to take a process of a conditional use, which may or may not
be approved, then, they go down the street to somebody else and we end up with a
building that stays vacant. The rezone would also eliminate the need for us to be
coming in here and spending our time and your time on conditional use applications for
every use that we felt we need -- was appropriate for the site, but was not a part of
allowed in the industrial zoning. The site as it sits, with some minor modifications or
some minor tweaks that have changed because of code changes since we originally
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 38 of 49
developed the -- remodeled the building and built the second building -- for landscaping
we can come in and do those, we are not opposed to that. We are in agreement with
staff on that. The five foot sidewalk does exist on site. There is a five foot sidewalk,
which was installed as part of the remodel for this building from -- it basically -- it's
already from here -- how do I stop that from -- and keep it there, please.
Friedman: That's what I'm trying to do right now. On the aerial?
McKeegan: That will do fine.
Holman: Mr. McKeegan, when you have it on the pointer, if you touch the screen it's
going to go to the next slide. If you touch the screen with the pen --
McKeegan: Oh, here we are.
Holman: So, if you use the highlighter, then, you can draw on it and it won't kick it to the
next slide.
McKeegan: On the highlighter. Excuse me. Anyway, the -- the sidewalk is on the north
side of the property, except for the extreme eastern -- eastern comer and the reason we
didn't install it is because ITD is going to -- at some point to reconfigure this intersection
or redo something. The sidewalk, as was pointed out, we don't have any curb, gutters
or sidewalks on Eagle Road to connect to, so we just -- it didn't make sense to us to just
put that little piece of five foot of concrete in for somebody to tear out later on. If it's an
absolute condition that we put that in, it's not a problem, but we are not going to -- but
the five foot sidewalk is there. The ten foot wide multi -use pathway that is -- that is
stated that it needs to be along the full length of the east boundary. If you look at the
east boundary of the property where the red line is, that is approximately our property
line and you can see that there is a significant amount of property between our property
and the -- and the highway, so -- and that is sloped. Even at the bottom of the -- at the
north side of that, the differential between Eagle Road and our parking lot is about two
or three feet and, then, as you get up to the -- our southern property boundary, the
differential is somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 to 16 feet, 18 feet. Depending on
which plans you look at at ITD, they are talking in some -- at some point in the future
there may end up being a retaining wall on our property line to retain tum lanes onto
Franklin at some point in the future, if the Franklin - Eagle Road intersection ever
becomes a city -- an internal cloverleaf type situation. But that's a long ways off. But at
least there are going to be plans to take some of that for a dedicated turning lane and
goes up to Franklin Road. We have no problem putting in the ten feet and we will have
to work with the staff on that to determine where that ten foot wide pathway is going to
be and we have no problem with the lighting standards. We got a copy of those after
the last Planning and Zoning hearing. We couldn't find them online and once we knew
that all we were talking about is one light, that wasn't a consideration or a problem for us
anymore. The fire department -- we just need to go in and restripe the parking lot to put
in a hammerhead turnaround, so they will have a turnaround there at the end of the
parking lot and we have plenty of parking spaces. We exceed the -- the parking
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 39 of 49
ordinance by a factor of four, so we have plenty of spaces, we can lose a couple of
spaces and put in the hammerhead and meet those requirements and we will work with
Mr. Silva and his staff to do that. The buildings have been constructed. They are in
compliance with the city. They are attractive buildings, we don't plan on doing anything
to the interior, except there may be some signage applications, which would be a
separate application and, again, once we get the -- once we pull the first application, we
will probably -- we will have a CZC application with that, which will take care of all the
zoning problems and after that point we wouldn't anticipate needing to have those
applications, because we -- unless an ordinance change and we have a significant
change in use, but we have no problem with the requirements as stated. Just to -- I
guess to conclude, we feel that the C -G zone is appropriate, because it -- you really do
need -- this is one of the -- this is near one of the main entrances to the city and I don't
believe that -- I mean we have had -- I don't believe that you truly want, as people come
down Franklin Road with R.C. Willey and all their landscaping and stuff on one side and
how the rest of the city is developing, on this -- on our side of the road, on the east side
of the road, to have some of the industrial uses that could go in there right now without
any kind of approval and they are pretty heavy -- heavy types of things. I think that Mr.
Sigmont has spent a lot of money on the property at making it attractive, because he
wanted to have an attractive building that would match the rest of Eagle Road to help
the city and, obviously, to help him lease the product. If you remember what the
buildings looked like five years ago, the old concrete pre -cast things, we have come a
long ways and we have made a significant investment and now we are asking for your
approval of the rezone, so that we can at least have parody with the rest of Eagle Road.
I understand that there is currently, you know, 150,000 square feet or whatever of retail
space available on Eagle Road, but at this point Mr. Sigmont does not have parody
without the zoning that the rest of the -- of the corridor does have and we just really
want to have it and we hope that what we have done is going to help as the property to
the north develops and the property so the south that is zoned like this, develops it will
be consistent. And with that I will just, again, reiterate that we are in agreement with
staffs conditions of approval and the development agreement and we will stand for
questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank
you.
McKeegan: Thank you, ma'am. Thank you, Council.
De Weerd: It does not look like there is any further public testimony.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Pete, I got question. While I'd like to see a sidewalk on both sides all the way
down there, I don't think you're going to see -- you don't have any now and you're
probably not going to -- this would be the only piece of sidewalk you would have. How
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 40 of 49
big of heartburn is it to keep that in as a condition? Because the way Lanark is
structured right now, with the vehicles coming in and out of there, commercial vehicles
and stuff, I -- I don't think I'd encourage people to walk that road that much myself and
the same token, I don't want to lose the opportunity of having a sidewalk down there
when -- if and when all the rest of them come and we can get a sidewalk the length of
Lanark there. So, give me your opinion on that, Pete.
Friedman: Madam Mayor and Council Members, I'm not going to -- you know, I think
our goal, obviously, is to try to get continuous pedestrian access where ever we can,
particularly since we are going to have a ten foot pathway up on Eagle Road. If, in the
Council's wisdom they feel that, you know, it's not appropriate in terms the heartburn
caused to us, we are just going to rely on your judgment at this point. There are, you
know, arguments either way for providing it or not providing it, so --
Bird: Thank you, Pete.
De Weerd: So, Pete, can they bond for it and so if -- if the road is improved at some
other point, that money is available for their portion of the improvement, but that way
they don't put in something that will eventually be tom up, but there is money set aside
so when it is practical you have it.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, we could work with the applicant's
representative and ACHD to see if there is some way to put it into a road trust or, you
know, if ACHD does, in fact, have plans, if there is some ability to, as you say, provide
assurety in a road trust or something like that, it wouldn't -- I don't know that it would
necessarily be bonding without providing assurety to us, because we don't, you know,
provide the pedestrian facilities within the public right of way. But if that's certainly the
direction of Council, we would work with the applicant and the highway district.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: You brought up a great question. I -- because we are just requiring a five foot
sidewalk, we are not requiring curb and gutter or anything else.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Member Bird, Council Member Zaremba earlier had
raised some concern about that, whether or not we -- you know, I think we, in
recommending the sidewalk, we are -- you know, anticipating curb and gutter, as well as
the sidewalk.
Bird: Okay.
McKeegan: Can I ask for a clarification, Ma'am?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 41 of 49
McKeegan: Madam Mayor, Councilman Bird, we do have curb, gutter, and sidewalk
along Lanark Street.
Bird: You already have it?
McKeegan: Except for that little piece at the comer. We have had to provide that
during the last project.
Friedman: Correct.
McKeegan: We have -- we have ACHD approved curb cuts and our property is
improved. We have the only piece of sidewalk on Lanark Street.
Bird: Why am talking, then?
McKeegan: Sir, I do not know why --
Bird: I misunderstood you, Pat.
McKeegan: And we agree that --
Bird: It's there, let's leave it.
Friedman: Madam Mayor and Council Members, there is a portion of sidewalk on there,
again, as Mr. McKeegan said, it's just a portion that wasn't put in on the eastern section
of the site.
McKeegan: Maybe six feet. Five or six feet.
De Weerd: And I would wonder if the ten foot pathway would be -- that was more what I
thought you were referring to. If -- I don't know where he's going to put a ten foot
pathway when you have a two foot to 18 foot difference from one end of the property to
the other.
McKeegan: Might -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think our -- we are not
trying to get out of the requirement, but I'm like you, I don't like building things and, then,
having them tom out, you know, when the development down at Eagle Road and
Overland went in and they -- they had the funding to completely rebuild this corridor,
and all of a sudden we have spent ten or 15,000 dollars on something and they come
and bull doze it and, then, they got to spend ten or fifteen thousand more dollars of the
taxpayers' money. I think if there was a mechanism where we could, you know, trust
fund for it or agree that at the time the improvements are made that we would -- what it
would work to accommodate that, I think, you know, we would be willing to do that. We
never --
Meridian City Council.
December 2, 2008
Page 42 of 49
De Weerd: That would be great.
McKeegan: We have never said we don't want to do it, I just don't want to -- because
there is nothing to the north and south of us. It's just really -- it's literally going to be a
ten foot pathway to nowhere.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
McKeegan: And that to me -- I'm a big fan of greenbelts and walkways and stuff like
that and getting people out of their cars and onto their bicycles and stuff and we -- if
you'd just give us, you know, maybe -- maybe staff could come up with the wording or
staff and Mr. Nary could come up with the wording to where it acknowledges that we are
agreeable to doing it, but -- we would be fine with that.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other comments from Council?
Bird: I don't.
De Weerd: Staff?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McKeegan: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any final comment?
McKeegan: We just feel -- again, we have worked very hard to try to get this to work
and we think we have a good project and we just want to be able to bring closure and
get to a point to where we can start attracting, you know, appropriate tenants for the
buildings that we have -- we have on the site. Would request your approval of the
rezone.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McKeegan: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is no further questions or comments, I would
entertain a motion to close.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Move we approve -- we close the public hearing on RZ 08-006.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 43 of 49
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 11. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I had a question for Bill. Bill, in the -- in the development agreement, that ten foot
wide -- I agree with the Mayor, I -- right now I -- I don't know how you put that thing in
and have it practical. Is there a way we could tie into the development agreement that
when it becomes applicable that they would do that at that time, without having to put up
a bond or anything like that? Is there any way we can tie that -- legally tie that to the
development agreement, Bill, and would be -- if he should sell the property would still go
with the property?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we can certainly put a condition in the
development agreement. I think the problem is -- and we have had that discussion
among some of your other projects tonight, is -- is the timing and enforcement.
Obviously, we can force a development agreement through your typical contract
remedy, but, you know, .normally, we have a much stronger hand when it's tied to a
building permit, a CZC, or something else that -- so, without -- without having some
letter of credit or something else held up for it. Because, essentially, what you're
wanting is at some future date if it doesn't get done, that we have the ability to do it and
using the contract remedy in a lawsuit and those types of things as a remedy may be
difficult to fashion now into an agreement with language that gives us some future date
that the city decides now is the time to build the -- or construct something. Not saying
we can't, I'm just saying it's probably -- it may be more difficult to enforce.
Bird: Okay. Thank you, Bill. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird, just a minute. If -- if that can be researched so that it's -- the DA
will need to come back; right?
Nary: Right.
De Weerd: Okay. If that could be researched and maybe appropriate language if -- if
you can't find a mechanism that would work, I guess you just put in the ten foot path
provision, but -- in lieu of another alternative, I guess.
Nary: We can do that.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 44 of 49
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: And follow up on that. I -- another reason 1 don't want to put it in, because I think
in the near future we are going to have one all the way from Pine to Franklin on that
side of the road and I wanted to match up and be continuous. I don't want somebody to
walk 200 yards and, then, have to start walking on dirt or side of the road or something,
so -- and when you put something in, that encourages them to do it and I just think that,
you know, from Pine to Franklin I hope we are able to get like we have got from Pine to
Fairview on both sides. That's what I envision as a ten foot walkway.
Nary: Sure.
De Weerd: Uh-huh. Okay. So, do I have a motion? Did I have a motion? I don't think
I had a motion.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve RZ 08-006, the request for a rezone of 1.39 acres from I -L
to C -G and to incorporate in the DA all staff, applicant, and public testimony that has
been discussed tonight at the public hearing.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 11. Is there any discussion?
Hearing none, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 12: Ordinance No. AZ 07-012 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 258.39 acres from RUT to C -G zone for
Meridian Town Center by CenterCal Properties, LLC — Northwest Comer
and Northeast Comer of North Eagle Road and East Fairview Avenue:
Item 13: Ordinance No. AZ 08-003 Request for
Annexation and Zoning of 12.06 acres from RUT to R-40 (10.56 acres)
and C -C (1.15 acres) zones for Regency at River Valley (REVISED) by
Mason & Stanfield — 2500 North Eagle Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 12 and 13 are ordinances 08-1391 and 08-1392. 1 will ask
Madam Clerk to, please, read these two ordinances by title only.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 45 of 49
Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1391, an
ordinance AZ 07-012 Meridian Town Center, Center Cal, for annexation of two parcels
for annexation purposes situation in the southwest one quarter of Section 4, Township 3
North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A
and annexing certain lands and territory situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent
and contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City
of Meridian, establishing and determining the land use zoning classification of said
lands to C -G, general retail and service commercial district, in the Meridian City Code,
providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the
Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission as required by law and
providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading rules
and providing an effective date.
Holman: City of Meridian Ordinance No. 08-1392, an ordinance AZ 08-003, Regency at
River Valley, for annexation of a parcel of land a portion of the southwest one quarter,
northwest one quarter of Section 4, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian,
Ada County, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and
territory situated in Ada County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate
limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and
determining the land use zoning classification of said lands to R-40, high density
residential district and C -C, community business district, in the Meridian City Code,
providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the
Ada County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission as required by law and
providing for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading rules
and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard these two ordinances read by title only. Is
there anyone who would like hear it read in its entirety? Seeing none, Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve ordinances 08-1391 and 08-1392, with suspension of rules.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: 1 have a motion and a second to approve these two ordinances. If there is
no discussion, Madam Clerk, will, you, please, call roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 46 of 49
De Weerd: Before we -- I seek a motion to adjourn into Executive Session, Council,
next week we have one Consent Agenda item and no other items. Mr. Nary, can we
postpone a Consent Agenda item to the third week of December?
Nary: Madam Mayor, what is the item?
De Weerd: It's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Volterra Mixed Use.
Nary: Yes, we can.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, unless you really want to have a meeting next week, I would
propose that we put this Consent Agenda item over to your workshop the following
week. Would you have a problem with that?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Why can't we have it next week and take off the following week?
De Weerd: Because --
Bird: Charlie isn't going to be here the 16th and I'd like to not be here. I got a grandson
playing a basketball game.
De Weerd: We have a pretty full agenda on the workshop. We have a number of
presentations on SSC collections, Valley Regional Transit.
Bird: Why couldn't we have them on the 12th?
De Weerd: Lake View Golf Course. Gypsy Moth. I'm sure that one's a very --
Bird: It don't matter to me. It don't matter to me.
De Weerd: -- of interest.
Zaremba: I would side with Councilman Bird. If there is any way that they could have
those a week earlier than they were planning, I'd prefer next week to the week after.
I mean I'll go either way, but --
Bird: I will be here whenever there is a meeting. I might be a tad late on the 16th, but
I'll be here.
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 47 of 49
Holman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Bill, it looks like Item E on the -- 4-E,
that's a continued public -- continued public hearing from November 25th for the -- 2007
consolidated annual performance --
De Weerd: Yes. That's our Community Development Block Grant. That has been
officially set.
Bird: We have to hold the 16th. Yeah.
De Weerd: Yeah.
Nary: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess I was under the
understanding Council Member Rountree is not here next week, but is here the 16th.
De Weerd: That's what Mr. Bird said.
Bird: That's not what the e-mail said.
Holman: No. The information -- the dates that he gave me said this week and the 16th.
Nary: Oh. My mistake.
Holman: Now, whether he gave me the wrong dates or not, I don't know. But I wrote
down --
Bird: He will be back -- he will be back Saturday.
Holman: Okay.
De Weerd: This Saturday?
Bird: Saturday or Sunday. Yes. He told me. But I don't know where he's going the
16th. He just told me he was --
Nary: Sorry.
De Weerd: I thought he was gone through the 10th.
Bird: I don't know either, Bill. I'm just with you. Just call the meeting, Tammy, and we
will be here.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, very good. We don't have a meeting next week. Dang. Lucky
you, Tracy. You got the good month for this.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 48 of 49
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Item 14: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f) — (to consider
and advise its legal representatives in pending litigation);
Bird: With that settled, I move we go into Idaho State Code, the Executive Session, as
per 67-2345(1)(f).
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, will you call
roll.
Roll -Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Bird: I move we come out of Executive Session.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: A motion and a second to come out of Executive Session. All those in favor
say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Move to adjourn.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: A motion and a second to adjourn. All in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:12 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
_7" - 01 / 0 �-O/�
MAYOR T Y de WEERD DATE APPROVED
Meridian City Council
December 2, 2008
Page 49 of 49
ATTEST:
JAYCEE E HOI, MM,LFRK
o
SEAL -
yp �sr lei, P�cJ
����h�r rr ►r n n r►N����``