HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 12-01MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 1. 1998
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. on
December 1, 1998 by President Rountree.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree.
OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Bill Gigray, Bill Gordon, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles,
Malcolm McCoy.
Rountree: First item on the agenda this evening is the consent agenda. Anybody wish
to discuss those items.
Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve all the items on the consent agenda.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the items on the consent agenda.
Is there any discussion? Hearing no discussion, all those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Rountree: Motion to approve the consent agenda passes unanimously.
ITEM NO. 1: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LAKE AT CHERRY LANE
NO. 8 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT — PORTION OF NW'/4 SEC. 3, T.3N., R.1W:
Rountree: Shari, do you have a report for us on what has transpired there?
Stiles: Yes President Rountree, commissioners, I did meet with Doug Campbell at
Steiner Development yesterday, Mr. Lovan, wasn't able to attend that meeting but I did
meet with him this morning. It is my understanding that Mr. Lovan and Mr. Campbell
have reached an agreement as to the tiling of the ditch and are working out possible
land swap to their mutual benefit and that the ditch will be tiled.
Rountree: Okay, any questions? Staff any discussion on this? You have the
preliminary plat from last week, the item that is going to be—it was tabled because we
had some concerns about whether or not that portion of the lateral adjacent to the
subdivision would be tiled or whether or not it would be waved because of the size of
the tile required and to work out some arrangements with the golf course. If I
understand Shari correctly, the agreement is to tile the portion of the eight mile lateral
adjacent to Lot 23, 1 believe. That Wally Lovan and Doug Campbell will work out
arrangements to accommodate the golf course needs in terms of tiling and club house
location on some type of property arrangements outside of the subdivision boundaries.
Wally is here if you have any questions for him.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 2
Gigray: Mr. President and members of the council, for your consideration on any
motion if you are going to make the motion for approval subject to conditions, just for
clarification because we try to prepare an order as a follow-up to this is that we get
information correct. Would we be referring to the conditions as stated under general
comments and site specific comments of the Planning and Zoning Administrator and the
City Engineer of October 7t"
Stiles: That is the date of the comments from the public works department and planning
and zoning.
Rountree: Okay, that will be correct. Any other questions, comments?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: None.
Anderson: None.
Bentley: I would move that we approve the preliminary plat for the Lake at Cherry Lane
No. 8 subject to the conditions of P & Z and staff of October 2nd and subject to
agreements being worked out between Wally Lovan and Doug Campbell.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the preliminary plat for Lake at
Cherry Lane No. 8 subject conditions as stated, any discussion?
Bentley: That should be October 7t"
Bird: Not 2nd
Rountree: On the reference letter. It's been moved and seconded to approve plat Lake
at Cherry Lane No. 8 subject conditions in the October 7t" letter. Any discussion?
Bird: None.
Rountree: All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Rountree: Motion passed all in favor.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 3
ITEM NO. 2 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS O F LAW: REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL CARPET STORE BY CLAY HARTZ
d/b/a FASHION FLOORS AND INTERIORS — 126 KING STREET:
Rountree: Do you have those findings of facts and conclusions? I know that you just
received them, do you want to take a few minutes to run through those. Mr. Gigray?
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the council, do you wish me to review those with
you since you directed me to prepare them at the last meeting?
Rountree: Is that your pleasure council, or do you just want to...
Gigray: Thank you, Mr. President and members of the council, as a result of the action
of the City Council at the last meeting I was directed to prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law in conformance with your decisions which was a denial of the
application for a special use permit. We have therefore prepared the findings. Those
findings that you have in front of you include in the beginning the findings with regards
to notice that was provided and is required under city and ordinance and state law and
you find that it was done in accordance with those and those are specified in finding No.
2, finding No. 1 is just taking judicial notice of your own ordinances and Comprehensive
Plan. Findings 3 has to do with who the applicant is, record owner is finding 4 the legal
description for the property is 5 present land is subject property is residential is finding 6
the proposed use is for a floor covering store with parking area in front and behind the
existing garage and so those are findings relative to the proposal. Present zoning in old
town is finding 8 property is present occupancy by a home, a nicely landscaped and
surrounded by residential use is finding no. 9, that has to do with existing conditions in
the area. Finding 10 residents of the immediate neighborhood wish to keep the use of
the premises residential and not place a retail store in the middle of a residential
neighborhood. Finding 11 that all the property south of King Street between 1 st and 2nd
is residential except for the hub cap store which is east of 1St Street. Finding 12 has to
do with retail stores are allowed in old town as a conditional use. Finding 13 is and this
is an important one of your consideration, the proposed use will not be harmonious with
and in accordance with a Comprehensive Plan. The subject request for conditional use
proposed development relates and is in conflict with the goals and policies and
provisions the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian as follows. Then you will see
here in finding 13 the listing of numerous provisions of the Comprehensive Plan which
are said out here which deal with either commercial development or commercial and
retail in residential or next to residential areas and are provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan of which form a basis or your decision of denial. Then the conclusions of law
which follow that—those findings of fact of course deal with the appropriate state law
and city ordinances that deal with your zoning and your conditional use authority and
the Comprehensive Plan provisions, which are a part of this decision making. Then that
is followed on page 8 by an order of decision of denial and then approval of that order of
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 4
decision of denial of course and then this is followed and I have extra pages here
proposed a notice of final action which would be to the applicant and anyone else who
would be interested to receive of this decision so they are aware of what their rights are
with regards to seeking judicial review. This I would hand to the clerk because I'm not
sure this notice is appended to this particular form I noticed as it went out. If you wish I
could review the Comprehensive Planning provisions that are in part 11 here, but I think
as you will see and as you go through there, I believe that supports the decision that
you announce that you made at the last meeting, which was deny this application.
Rountree: Thank you, any other questions?
Bentley: Have none.
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: Have none. I make a motion that we approve the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law in the order of the decision of denial in the matter of the application
of Clayton Hartz d/b/a fashion floors and interiors at 126 King Street for an application
for conditional use permit.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law with respect to denial. We need a roll call vote on that. Is there any
discussion?
ROLL CALL: Bird — yea, Anderson — yea, Bentley — yea.
MOTION CARRIED: All yeas.
ITEM NO. 3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE FOR WHITESTONE ESTATES NO. 3 BY WHITESTONE DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY, LLC — SOUTH OF FRANKLIN RD & WEST OF LINDER RD:
Rountree: Any questions, discussion on the Findings of Fact as prepared by legal
counsel?
Anderson: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: I have none.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 5
Rountree: Okay, I'll entertain a motion.
Anderson: I make a motion that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law in order of decision in the matter of the application of Whitestone Development for
a variance and Whitestone Estates No. 3.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for the Whitestone Development Company. Any discussion?
Bentley: None.
Bird: None.
Rountree: Hearing none.
ROLL CALL: Bird — yea, Bentley — yea, Anderson — yea.
MOTION CARRIED: All yea.
ITEM NOA: FINAL PLAT FOR THOUSAND SPRINGS NO. 1 SUBDIVISION BY
FARWEST LLC — NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE ROAD:
Rountree: Staff do you have any comments on that item?
(Inaudible)
Smith: Mr. President, council members, we did receive a response from the applicants
engineer and their comments are acceptable as far as our comments are concerned,
their response that is. We don't have any disagreements.
Rountree: Any questions of staff or the applicant?
Bird: Mr. President?
Rountree: One of you two.
Bird: Are we talking about the conditions on the November 30t", 1998 Gary?
Stiles: Yes.
Bird: Okay, thank you.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 6
Anderson: I make a motion that we approve the final plat for Thousand Springs No. 1
Subdivision by Farwest Development.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the final plat for Thousand
Springs No. 1 Subdivision by Farwest LLC. Any discussion?
Bird: Yeah, Ron did that include those conditions?
Anderson: Yes.
(Inaudible)
Bird: I withdraw my second.
Anderson: To include the comments and conditions of staff.
Bird: I'll second that. Oh, put the date on.
Rountree: November 30th
Bird: I'll second that now.
Rountree: Motion has been amended to approve the final plat for Thousand Springs
No. 1 Subdivision by Farwest subject conditions of the November 30th, 1998 letter from
city staff. Any discussion? No discussion. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO. 5 FINAL PLAT FOR STETSON ESTATES BY JIM JEWETT — TEN MILE
AND VICTORY ROAD:
Rountree: Shari or Gary do you have any comments on that?
Stiles: President Rountree, Councilman this is a subdivision that is in our area of
impact. It's south of Victory Road off of Ten Mile. It is in an RT zone which requires a
five acre minimum. The plat complies with our requirements except for the fact the cul-
de-sac length exceed the maximum of our ordinance. In all other respects it complies
with the city ordinance for that area.
Rountree: Any comments Gary? Questions, discussion?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 7
Bentley: Since this is in the area of impact, would they have to come before or talk to
us about a variance for that block length?
Stiles: I don't believe Ada County requires that they come to us for a variance, it's just
that the plat does need to be approved by the city and will be signed by the city.
Bentley: Thank you.
Bird: Shari, did they reply to your comments on the 25th of 1998, November 25t"? The
general comments, site specific comments? Or do they need to when it's out like that?
Stiles: We did request written response to our comments. I don't believe we've
received the written response. My packet is not right.
Rountree: Mr. Berg?
Berg: Councilman Rountree, Councilman Bird, if you look on your packet that's for the
previous item. Because there was no comments made by staff, written comments.
Look on the cover sheet.
Rountree: The cover page is labeled incorrectly.
Anderson: This is the Landing.
Stiles: The comments that we had made to the county were on the preliminary plat
when they requested information. I can't remember if that did go before council. We
did mention the fact that the cul-de-sac length exceeded our maximum and in that letter
to the county we also stated that we would not require a re -subdivision plan or dry line
sewers as is mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
Rountree: Additional questions or comments?
Bentley: So Shari, you are satisfied, your department is satisfied with this final plat.
Stiles: Yes I am.
Bird: I move that we accept the final plat for Stetson Estates by Jim Jewett on Ten Mile
and Victory Road.
Bentley: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 8
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to accept and approve the final plat for
Stetson Estates, any discussion? All those in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Rountree: All in favor.
ITEM NO.6: FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC –
SW '/4 SECTION 13 T. 3N.. R. 1W:
Rountree: Staff any comments? Mr. Collins is back there to answer any questions I
think. Is that correct?
Smith: Mr. President, members of the council, as far as our records show we have not
received a written response from the applicant on the comments that were offered dated
November 25th, those were faxed to the applicants engineer that day.
Rountree: Would you like Mr. Collins to address that?
Smith: Please.
DAVID COLLINS, 3350 AMERICANA TERRACE, BOISE.
Collins: We received, or I received a fax of the memorandum of 25, November about
3:00 Wednesday afternoon before the turkey day. It was kind of, I didn't look them over
thoroughly enough to see that this was a response in writing required prior to the
council. I didn't read it, I saw that as a condition once you approved it, that we had to
respond in writing to them. We have no difficulty with the general comments, take
exception to none of them. ON the site specific comments there is a couple of
questions that my client requested that I bring to you. They deal with item no. 4 which
reads "the Idaho Transportation Department in a letter regarding a development across
the interstate commented that structure should not be any closer than 150 feet from the
state right-of-way in areas of full (Inaudible) of access, which is a freeway configuration,
or separation of 100 feet in all other areas". The question is, is this—it's a statement, it
doesn't require anything of us, so far as I can see in reading it. If it doesn't, then the
client would like to have that removed because it doesn't condition us to do anything, it
just makes a statement that they sent a letter. We don't know what the development
across was, but my recollection is that it's commercial directly across from the Landing
there. No. 5 is documentation request regarding minimum house size—I won't read the
entire thing, but this has to do with the compliance with the provisions of the previous
ordinance under which the preliminary plat was approved, or compliance with the
current ordinance in the R-4 zone as it exists today. In here it states that the previous
legal council indicated that the property was zoned under a previous version of the
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 9
ordinance, those ordinance provision should prevail. My developers attorney concurs
with that -that we should be complying with the previous ordinance conditions under
which the preliminary plat because we've kept the preliminary plat live and valid, we
haven't allowed it to lapse. So those are the only two, everything else, we have no
problem with what so ever. Typos will be corrected on the plat and all as usual.
Rountree: Any questions?
Bentley: Comments back to staff. Shari, do you have a response to those two items?
Stiles: Councilman Bentley, Councilmen, no.4 because we did not get any response
from the Idaho Transportation Department, I'm not sure that it was transmitted to them
and whether they had an interest in commenting. Due the non -response we did take
the comments we received about the Roaring Springs Waterpark and I would assume
that those comments—maybe it's a false assumption but I would assume that the same
would hold true no matter which side of the interstate that you are on. Number 5 we
have requested minimum house sizes and have not received that information. There
was discussion of the percentages that were presented. They never proposed
percentages on the minimum house sizes, until we got to late phases of this project. It
was never proposed in the preliminary plat stage. Only at the final plat stage. That is
when they started designating the minimum house sizes. This project currently does
not meet even the old ordinance provisions. There are numerous other items that need
to be addressed and staff would fee much more comfortable if they would address
these in writing and take care of some of the problems prior to your action on the plat.
One thing that was not mentioned from the applicants representative, No. 3 is a
particular concern. I would like to see some details on that berming that they are
proposing, it should be made a common lot. There are extensive HUD and FHA
standards that apply to any kind of funding/financing for those homes if they would
propose to have that kind of financing and we would like to see that is a consistent
treatment there, particularly since it's also an entrance corridor into the city. I'm not
sure they can provide the proper line of site restriction barrier within a 25 foot wide area
either.
Rountree: Any other questions staff?
Bentley: I don't have any more questions thank you.
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Any discussion?
Bentley: Yes, seems there is a couple of serious items here that need to be corrected
in my estimation before we can act on this. One, I feel they need to developer and the
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 10
staff need to get together and work out these site specific comments and then respond
in writing as the requirement for the final plat and my feelings would be to table this and
see if they can get it worked out by the next meeting.
Rountree: Would you like to make that a motion? We'd appreciate that.
Bentley: I would move that we table the final plat for the Landing No. 11 for Mallard
Landing LLC and request that the developer and staff get together and work out the
disputes and site specific comments and have the developer respond in writing as
required for the plat on the 15th of December.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we table Item No. 6 the final plat for
Landing No. 11 by Mallard Landing LLC until our next regularly scheduled meeting
December 15th and that staff and applicant get together and resolve the outstanding
comments that have not been resolved at this point. Any discussion? All those in favor
of the motion? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Rountree: All in favor, motion passes. Next item on the agenda, David?
Collins: My developer has not received the comments yet. So if you could direct staff
to be sure the developer gets the copy.
Rountree: They've just been faxed to you.
Collins: Yes, and it didn't have a cover sheet to me either on it. So there was a little
confusion (Inaudible).
Stiles: There was a cover sheet included and the packets are available Friday prior to
the meeting and are made available to the applicant.
Rountree: We know there was a cover sheet because we have a copy of it, but if you
(Inaudible). See that the developer got a copy.
ITEM NO.7: VARIANCE FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PACIFIC
NORTHWEST ELECTRIC — NW '/4 SECTION 5, T3N. R1 E:
Rountree: Staff do you have any opening comments on this?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 11
Stiles: President Rountree, Council members, you probably remember this as a very
long process that we went through for approval of this subdivision. It's next to Vern
Alleman's property, just east of Vern Alleman's property to—Vern Alleman's property
is to the west of this and then Carol's Subdivision is to the east. I believe, I can't
remember whether they had already received a one time extension or if they missed
asking for the time extension. It seems like they had just missed asking for the time
extension within the one year time period. They're asking for a variance from the
requirement to submit a final plat on the project within one year of the approval of the
preliminary plat. Shari, do you have any—Is the applicant or the applicant's
representative here? Need to state your name and be sworn.
PAT TEALEY, 915 W. JEFFERSON. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY.
Tealey: My name is pat Tealey, Office address 915 W. Jefferson. I represent the
applicant Pacific Northwest Electric and Edmonds Construction. The developer is
asking for a time extension from the August 5th date which was the date that the
preliminary—one year from the date that the preliminary plat was approved. We are not
asking for any change to the conditions. If you remember some of you were on the
council at the time. This is about 2'/2 years of labor to get this approved, it would seem
a little bit much to undo all that time and effort, because of an oversight by the
developer. The developer was engaged during this time in the past year building the
sewer trunk line, main line, through this approved preliminary plat. We had just
completed it and it's been accepted by the City of Meridian within the last couple of
weeks. There would be great financial hardship, of course to the developer if this time
extension were to be denied. That is set forth (Inaudible) in our October 21St letter
which should be part of your packet where in we request the time extension. Again,
there will be no change to the original conditions of the preliminary plat. All we are
asking for is an extension of the extension of time from the August 5th date. Not from
the hearing date of today. If there are any questions, I would be glad to answer.
Rountree: Any questions?
Bentley: I have none at this time.
Rountree: Thank you Mr. Tealey. Anybody wishing to provide testimony in support of
the application for variance? Anybody wishing to provide testimony in opposition to the
request for variance. Mr. Alleman?
VERN ALLEMAN, 2101 E. USTICK, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE
ATTORNEY.
Alleman: Mr. Mayor and City Council, it is my understanding that the city has received
information from the developers at Packard No. 2, whereby they the developers will
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 12
change the three culverts they installed about November 15t" in our irrigation ditch.
These 12 inch culverts will be replaced with 18 inch culverts. Timing for this is indicated
to be as soon as they can get the construction company back in to change this. I want
to compliment the developers and Gary Smith and his staff for reaching this agreement.
We have never approved the preliminary plat for our ditch which crosses Packard No. 2.
My information to you the City Council July 5t", 1997 indicated this and indicated the
amount of water, 125 minor inches was the amount of water the place, the plan needed
to be planned for. At this time, I was led to believe we didn't need to be concerned
about this because the developers would be required to get our written approval before
any changes were made. Such approval to be filed with construction drawing. I
referred to ordinance 9-605-M2, which says no ditch pipe or structure for delivery of
irrigation water or for carrying irrigation waste water shall be obstructed, rerouted,
covered or changed in any way unless such obstruction rerouting, covering or change
has first been approved in writing by the authorized representative of the persons
owning the water rights, delivered or diverted by means of the ditch and/or the system
operator. For the purpose of this section, person shall be defined as an irrigation
district, ditch company, water users association, or water right holder. Should a person
not have an authorized representative a determination of the majority of the holders of
the water rights, shall be binding. A copy of such written approval, by such authorized
representative or majority holders of the water shall—water rights, shall be filed with the
construction drawings. In the event the developer can not obtain a response from said
authorized representative approval will be assumed to be obtained if the developer
meets the petitions as outlined in section 9-605-M6. In view of this and the problem
with the culverts, I ask you to walk us through the process as to when, how and what we
need to do in this matter to protect our water rights. In connection with this, I would like
to enter for the record Ordinance entitled irrigation and drainage canals and ditches
(Inaudible) sections 9-901, 9-902, 9-903 which are --9-901, it is hereby found that—
intent and purpose, it is hereby found that water and irrigation are a (Inaudible) to
property right within the city limits and these rights need to be protected and regulated.
That it is the intent and purpose of this chapter to regulate the use and (Inaudible) of
irrigation and drainage canals and ditches to ensure that each property owner and his
property receives a full and lawful amount of water and the full amount of head and
pressure. Section 9-902, maintenance of canals and ditches and embankments, it is
hereby declared to be unlawful for any property owner of land through which an
irrigation canal, ditch or drainage canal or ditch (Inaudible) such lines shall to fail to
maintain in good order and repair any such canal or ditch that transverses through his
property such that said canal or ditch is ready to transfer water. Additional such owner
of the land through which such a canal or ditch transverses shall main the embankment
there in good repair in order to prevent the water from wasting during the irrigation
season and shall not at any time permit a greater quantity of water to be turned into said
ditch or canal than the banks there will easily contain and can be used for beneficial use
or useful purpose. Section 9-903, maintain as defined, for the purpose of this chapter,
maintenance shall be defined as sufficient upkeep, repair, cleaning, debris removal,
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 13
weed removal, break or whole repair, rodent killing, or construction that is at a free flow
of water maintained and a downstream user has a water head amount and pressure he
is legally entitled to. In view of this and problems with the culverts, I ask you to walk us
through the process as to when, how, and what we need to do in this matter to protect
our water rights. In connection with this, I would like to enter for the record—I'm sorry
I'm going back on that, I'm sorry.
Rountree: We don't want you to repeat it Vern.
Alleman: I'm sorry, I lost my place. I have another concern with Packard No. 2, this
concerns weeds on this development. You may ask why I am concerned about this.
One is the fear of fire, if these weeds catch fire, there is a good chance my haystacks
would be lost because they are a few feet from the boarder of Packard No. 2. Number
2, noxious weeds, Canadian Thistle and others have gone to seed and this blows and
spreads to surrounding properties, including mine. This is an ongoing problem. When
these are allowed to mature and go to seed as they did last year, this becomes a very
serious problem. I respectfully ask you to take action to correct these. I would
appreciate if you would walk us through the process of where we go in protecting our
rights.
Rountree: Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Mr. Gigray had his hand up.
Gigray: (Inaudible) Mr. President and members of council and for purposes of this
gentleman's testimony, I would just offer this comment in terms of procedural
information. As I understand what we have before us is an application for a variance
request of what is city code section 119604F, which has to do with the requirement that
there is a sense that preliminary plat approval of one year and less within that year
period they make an application for a one year extension and the statute, rather the
ordinance provides for a one year extension if they make a timely application, which has
not been made. So, as I understand it what the council has to be considered with in this
instance is not the specifics of the particular preliminary plat or it's approval or any of it's
conditions, it's whether or not there are circumstances surrounding the failure to make
the request in a timely manner and I have in front of you the criteria as to whether they
meet those criteria in circumstances that would warrant granting a variance. I can
imagine for many people getting notice of a public hearing of this request it gets kind of
confusing as to what it is that is before the council.
Rountree: Thank you Mr. Gigray, Mr. Bentley?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 14
Bentley: Vern, I wanted to ask you, the ditches have been rerouted, is that what you
are saying?
Alleman: No, we never did approve the preliminary plat as—which they were supposed
to get the approval from us in writing, and never have gotten it. So, it's not been
presented to us and as I stated, we never approved them and yet the ordinance says
they have to. They have to get our approval and it has to be in writing.
Bentley: The ditch issue though, on the culverts, you are satisfied that they are going to
be changed now?
Alleman: Well, with what the staff told me, the information I got from the developer as of
yesterday morning. I would like to still know how are we to—what are we to do when
they don't abide by the provisions for preliminary plat approval?
Bentley: That's part of what we've got to discuss here tonight is the extension of it.
Alleman: Well, okay, but...
Rountree: Mr. Bentley, there is a couple of issues here, but it's when, how and what.
can't answer specifically your question about your assumption that you have the
authority, have been given the authority to approve the preliminary plat, I would have to
ask staff if that is an agreement or something that we have in an ordinance. As far as
the process, the when is when you recognize something is awry in whatever is going on
out there, you need to notify the city. In this case, as it relates to preliminary plats, you
did alert Gary Smith and the public works folks about your concerns with the irrigation
piping. It appears that was a satisfactory engagement and you think you've got some
resolution with the developer and—you don't think you have resolution with that?
Alleman: Well, not on the preliminary plat...
Rountree: No, I'm talking about the pipe size...
(END OF TAPE)
Rountree: ...the culvert size, okay and that's the issue you need to bring forth to the
city. Whatever issue you have, or understanding that you have needs to be brought to
the city so we can say yes that is a correct understanding and here is what we need
now to do to effect that change and get the developer to agree what they have agreed
to do. That's the responsibility of the city. So you need to notify the city of those
instances. When is when you recognize that, how is that you bring it to the city and you
bring whatever your issue is with the city and we will assist in resolving that.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 15
Alleman: Am I not doing that now? Saying that they didn't get the proper procedure?
Rountree: You can do that any time, you don't have to wait for a public hearing.
Alleman: I hope that it will be considered in this now being that I brought it up.
Rountree: As far as the weeds go, we have a weeds ordinance in the city, this property
has been annexed. Is that not correct that they are subject to that ordinance if they do
have a weed problem. We recognize that they weeds are both issues that you brought
up. You notify the city that it's a weed problem, we will notify the property owner that it's
a problem, give them so many days to clean it up and then if they don't clean it up, we
have a contract with an individual who does weed mowing for the city. So we will get it
mowed and bill the property owner.
Alleman: That was done last year and it still didn't solve the problem.
Rountree: Well, you need to keep raising the issue. I see Shari is gone, so she will not
be able to respond to that. That's what you need to do and that's our process. I would
ask that don't wait for a public hearing, bring your issues before the city when you have
an issue and get them resolved up front.
Alleman: Being it hasn't been done here before, can we not do it now?
Rountree: You can do it now, but this particular hearing as Mr. Gigray pointed out is not
related to issues as it relates to the preliminary plat. It's related to the issues as the
ordinance states, that the final plat has not been advanced and they have certain time
to do that. They are asking a variance from that ordinance so we can authorize them to
proceed on the basis of an already approved preliminary plat. Have that go carry on for
another year as of their August date, not the issue of irrigation or weeds or those kind of
things.
Alleman: Well, we've got a plat that hasn't been approved properly though.
Rountree: I don't know what the issue is there, I think that is an issue that you need to
discuss with Gary. Do you understand what the issue is?
Smith: Mr. President, council members we've talked with Vern in the past on the
irrigation plan and he has made some suggestions which we've passed along to the
developer as far as location of pipes. We've already had a process in the public works
department that when the final development plans come forward for the development of
the subdivisions, then we require the developer get approval from the downstream
water users, or the irrigation district, whoever is responsible for the ditch. In that regard,
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 16
we require that they send out—I think it's a certified letter to the users so they know that
we are asking them for their feedback.
Rountree: Just for clarific—we are not at that point yet.
Smith: Right, but we've always done that at the final plat process when the
development plans are being done, when they are submitted. I don't know if the
ordinance refers specifically to preliminary plats, I'm not aware of it. Preliminary plats
are to show that type of information when they are submitted for approval. Obviously
the preliminary plats are available for property owners to review and comment on.
Rountree: We've already had the public hearings on that and gone on with the approval
in August.
Smith: Right, at the time that the preliminary plats are done, I don't know that there is a
significant amount of engineering that has gone through to develop the piping plans, all
the details for the piping plans. I think they show those sorts of things in general
fashion, such as they do for the lots, the dimensions of the lots. They're in approximate
dimension, say 100 foot deep by 80 foot wide and they may end up on the final plat to
be 101 feet, 101.65 feet deep and 80.65 wide, so there is some details that come out on
the final development plans that aren't included in the preliminary plat. That's the
process that we've taken in the past, that's what we've done to preserve the integrity of
the system, the water system, so that it does deliver the water down stream, so there
aren't problems. In that regard, we've taken some heat from the developers that we're
taking responsibility away from the developer and their engineer to provide that water.
They are responsible for that. The developers engineer puts his stamp on that plan and
says this is appropriate engineering to transfer the water. They are responsible by state
law to do that. What we try to do is be a mediator between the developer and his
engineer and the downstream water users to make sure the water users do maintain
their water rights. That's what we've done in the past, but we've always done that on
the final plat at the final development stage.
Alleman: I guess that my is that we don't get bypass and find out we come in too late.
Rountree: I understand your concern about not getting your water on time.
Alleman: Well, and coming into the plans too late and we haven't had our say and find
out we are too late getting our say, so we are left out in the dark. Not knowing the
process, that's where I'm coming from. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you Vern. Anybody else wish to offer testimony and opposition to the
variance?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 17
ROBERTA THOMPSON, 2950 WINGATE, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE
ATTORNEY.
Thompson: I guess what I would need to do is offer opposition if that is the correct way
to make some other facts be known. The reason why we are bringing this to this
hearing, number one we were invited and kind of lead to believe that this is what this
forum was for and also because even though the final plat is where all this takes place,
the work has been done. Things have been done preliminary to the final, supposed to
have happened. So that's why Mr. Alleman was here to talk to you about it because
this was of urgency to this situation. I have some questions that I have for you
gentlemen from the residents of Wingate Lane and I would just like to offer each of you
a copy. I won't go through all of them in the time, but I want to refer to the March 11,
1997 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on page no. 12, article 19. 1 will read just
a part of it, it says the applicants representative Pat Tealey responded to the comments
from the public, which was public comment substantially as follows, one of the sections
of this says the applicant will do whatever it can including entering into an agreement to
ensure the delivery of irrigation water is not disrupted with regard to Wingate Lane, the
applicant does not plan to access Wingate Lane in any way. With my questions, we
have a situation that is occurring right now. Machinery and access vehicles, and
different things that are being used for construction of this site, traveling up and down
Wingate Lane, causing some great damage to it. We were under the understanding
that that was not to be happening. I guess my question is why is this happening. What
do we need to do where he has made this statement that they will not try to access it in
any way. Access is traveling, there is also a situation where from east to west there is a
small road being constructed across Wingate Lane, right over the top of there the
utilities went where there is being some traffic back and forth across there, accessing
both sides of this subdivision. That is against the agreement at the beginning. Also, it
was agreed that we have fences, berms, and gates in place along Wingate Lane to
keep there from being any access from any kind of traffic at all to go up and down the
private lane and those are not in place and seems that construction has begun there,
development has begun. So our questions are, we need to have maybe an answer to
who enforces these provisions for private lane owners when developers once
(Inaudible) once they are on record from previous City Council decisions. So these are
previous decisions that have been made and documented and yet they are not being
enforced or adhered to. So what—where do we come on that? We're not totally
against the subdivision being there, but we are against the way in which it is being
developed and things that have been infringed upon our area. It's not that we aren't
willing to share, but it just doesn't work, because it's ruining the road, more than it
would've been if this traffic had not been on it. There was one other little thing that I
wanted to mention. In the meeting, the same meeting that this statement was made,
there was a concern by the applicants as far as why would we worry about there being
use by the residents of this subdivision on our lane. I think the fact that just arbitrarily
this traffic is going up and down our lane now proves the fact that that would definitely
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 18
happen by any kind of residents. So my question to you along with these six questions
that I have listed here, what kind of action can we expect and what should we do on this
situation?
Gigray: Mr. President and members of the council, for purpose of providing advice to
the council, to the mayor with regards to response to the question, I would state that
based on the representations that have been made by this particular witness a
reference to a finding of fact in a previous action of the council is simple a finding with
regards to what went on during the proceedings as I heard it characterized. It doesn't
sound as if it's a particular aspect of any order of decision with regards to whatever
action was taken and of course what would need to be reviewed would be a specific
condition of approval before the city would have any ability to enforce any provisions, if
in fact these property owners have a private lane of which they are only allowed to use,
then they need to seek their counsel with regards to appropriate legal action to enforce
the private right that they have, which would be some kind of injunctive relief against
anyone else using that property who doesn't have a right to use it. As I understand it
the city—this road if it's a private road isn't under the jurisdiction of the city or the Ada
County Highway District, so that wouldn't be a matter in which the city could provide a
remedy to that. My question would be simply to go with the honor and integrity of Mr.
Tealey where he has made this statement and is not—possibly he is not the one
responsible for that, but someone is. We have obtained—we don't have in our
possession, but there have been notes to some of the drivers of these vehicles giving
them the directions to come down Wingate Lane, so it's not just happening by accident.
I can understand your comments on that, but because it is before the council as far as a
variance, then we have to take whatever avenue that we can to be able to have this
heard and have this situation taken care of. It was agreed and it was something that
was provided for in the provisions of the preliminary plat that this would not take place.
So I feel there is some responsibility on the councils part to make sure that does not
happen. Does anybody have any answers?
Bentley: Roberta, you do understand though that we don't enforce private roads. We
don't have the authority to do that.
Thompson: But it could stop with what the city does own. You could make sure that
they stayed on the property that is with the city.
Bentley: The problem is that we don't the authority to stop them from using that road.
Thompson: But you have the authority to make sure that they have the fences and
gates up?
Bentley: Yes, that part is part of...
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 19
Thompson: That's not happening, so if the fences and gates were up, we wouldn't have
to worry about the enforcement. So we don't need to be on the defense here, I feel.
Bentley: No, but I just want to make sure what the council said that this is actually
heading toward a private legal matter.
Thompson: I understand that, but I feel that is somewhat irrelevant, because if the other
things are in place this situation won't even occur. We won't have to worry about
anything like that. So what can we do about getting that done?
Bentley: That's what we will be discussing.
Thompson: Okay, I appreciate that.
Gigray: Mr. President and members of the council, for purpose of providing information
of the question raised by this witness. If the property owners out there have specific
information with regards to a violation of some kind of approval that the city has made
as a condition or whatever they should present that evidence to the staff for the
investigation. If we have an investigation (Inaudible) and then we have the authority to
do something about it if we get the appropriate report then we can...
Thompson: It is of record though, so whose responsibility? Do we just bring back the
record to you and say this is what you said and please do it.
Gigray: I would say it'd be akin to someone who maybe was involved in some kind—a
victim of a crime, they have to provide information that the investigating offices about
what occurred and what evidence would support that it happened and so on and so
forth. So it's a matter, you folks feel there has been a violation of some kind of action
on the city has acted on, provide the information to the staff so they can look into that
and then they would I assume refer it to our office for whatever enforcement action we
take.
Thompson: Did I somewhat do that, already where I brought it to your attention that this
was happening?
Gigray: This is testimony...
Thompson: I totally understand that. If in fact we have to disagree with the variance, to
be able to be heard on the other matters, that is what we are doing.
Rountree: I guess an answer to your question is how do you address the issues that
you feel you have and felt are not being enforced. If you bring to the city either by a
visit, phone call, or by a letter an instance that says, my understanding is the following
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 20
conditions were implied on this development. By observation, these things are not
occurring. If you notify the city of that, then what Mr. Gigray is saying is that staff will
work through the legal office to do whatever enforcement the city can whether it's a stop
work order, sitting down with the developer and saying look these are the conditions
that you agreed to, you need to abide by what you have agreed to do. If it's not a
condition as Mr. Gigray pointed out in any kind of approval process, then we have
nothing to enforce. So you needn't wait again as I said to Mr. Alleman for a public
hearing. Point it out to the city, when you first know of it.
Thompson: We have sent two letters, September 9th, and I believe November 15th, no
response from those letters, so I think we did that.
Rountree: So I guess my next response is I've been waiting to say this, just call the
mayor.
Bentley: No, we have them.
Rountree: We have them. (Inaudible) if you would take a seat please.
Thompson: I definitely don't, I would like this to work for them as much as we would like
for it to work for us. We just feel like we need to make sure that this is done with
integrity and the way they had said they would do it.
Rountree: I guess my final comment back to you is that I appreciate that you're not
getting response from city hall and that's important for the council to know. We don't
work in the city hall, we work here a couple nights a week or month.
Thompson: (Inaudible) if we don't get answers to the letter, we have to bring our
bodies.
Rountree: I appreciate that, we need to know that and that's good to know. We will see
if we can't get some responses to you. Anybody else?
DON BRYANT, 2070 N LOCUST GROVE RD, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY
THE ATTORNEY.
Bryant: The reason why I'm here is to follow up, I realize this is just a variance, a
request for variance on the plat, on the preliminary plat. From what I'm following up on
what Mr. Alleman was discussing on his problems with these burying ditches, this tile
sizing, the upkeep of open ditches, when these things get extended therein lies a
problem. These extensions get going and nobody takes care of the ditches. I have an
agreement with the developer that if there is anything, if the ditch isn't taken care of I
make a call to city hall, they stop all the permits or whatever unless that ditch is taken
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 21
care of, until that ditch is taken care of, which I want to reiterate at this time. He has so
far, the farmer, Mr. Acshenbrenner who has been taking care of the land to the east has
been keeping the ditches open. He has already buried, I don't know if it's in Packard 1
or Packard 2, he's already buried a portion of the tile or of the ditch (Inaudible) tile and
the developed part. When Gary stated the process in which all this happens, the
problem is right there, we have a preliminary plat the developer starts his work, he puts
all the ground work in, nothing has been improved. All they have to go by is the
engineering. The engineering is either done or it isn't done. I've seen both cases.
When they approve the final plat, they say this is what they have. Okay, that's fine, it
should work, but if it doesn't work, what do you do? That was the case with me as all of
you a long time members well know, that I had problems downstream of mine being
undersized and that is why I'm here tonight. The problem is the enforcement and the
inspections, I don't know the process of when they put the tile in the ditch, who inspects
it, who approves it, where are the (Inaudible). I had a problem when I came before you
three months ago, a problem with flooding. I worked with Gary, I worked with
everybody down here, I tried to resolve the problems and see what the deal was. I had
trouble working with the city. I got little response. Told Gary that I would handle it from
my end and I got a hold of Acshenbrenner the farmer. He and I, he mainly took care of
the problem. He found the clog, it was down stream. Ada County was worthless,
Nampa/Meridian got a roto -rooter out there and it was a tree root in the culvert, or in the
line underneath the road. It got taken care of. When I asked the developers for the
Avest Property in Dove Meadows for as-builts and the city for—I don't know if I asked
Gary if he had any or not. I asked for as-builts for all the stuff that was in the ground on
the irrigation lines and nobody had any. The only ones that I come up with are the ones
that I kept from the initial instruction. They didn't have anything from the Dove
Meadows and the one on the other side of that. I had the only two as-builts that we
went by and what was going on. There's—somewhere along the line things need to be
changed or you are going to get property owners in here at a forum that they are not
supposed to be singing the blues like I am because of a variance—because of things
that are being done that they know is wrong, but this isn't the proper forum to talk about
it. I guess that's the end. The End. Do you have any questions? It's a problem and
don't know the answer. There is something that is going to have to be done between
the preliminary plat and the final plat because during the preliminary plat phase,
everything goes in the ground. The engineer draws it up and says this is what you have
and it should work. I was never contacted, the only person that contacted me when
they developed the four or five subdivisions around me was Roger Alan from Avest,
when they did next door. When I came in here on all the previous, numerous public
hearings that I've been in, they all said yeah we are going to meet with the property
owners, we are going to talk about what their needs are, we are going to take care of
everything they want us to take care of. Everything is perfect in Meridianville and
everyone lives happily ever after. I'm done again.
Rountree: You are done again? Thank you Don. Anyone else wish to offer testimony?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 22
JEFF KEESAR, 3020 WINGATE LANE, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE
ATTORNEY.
Keesar: I will be real brief. I just moved to Wingate Lane two months ago and was
aware of subdivision that was going in. Since that time, I've realized there is quite a
history to the Wingate Lane that I can attest I'm far from up to speed on. I'll try and
keep my comments to the variance at hand. I guess from what I'm hearing even from
some of my neighbors and what I would express to you is that it's hard to move forward
on this subdivision without there being some form of compliance on the part of the
developer. There should be some caution on allowing the variance I think where they
have not done what they have said they would do. I'll just leave—that's kind of an open
end and that's too general. I will speak specifically to what I know. I've got four little
kids and this lane is what attracted us the most was that it was a private lane. I don't
know if you've seen it but it's a little dirt road single car wide and we are the first house
on there. The oldest of my kids is seven. The gentleman representing the developer
kind of chuckled back there when it was mentioned that the road is being used, like
you've got to be kidding me. Well I'm here to tell you, my wife is home everyday with
four little kids and it's being used. I'm not opposed to the subdivision, so I don't want
the developer to think that, or you to think that. It can't be every truck shape, size,
company has used this road and that's really—to grant a variance without there being
some form of—you folks need to play by the rules and again I know that you said you
can't enforce, it's not your job, you can't tell them to not use the road, but you can say
this can be a conditional variance. I mean you comply with what you said you'll do and
we will grant the variance. Until then, you know, from water to kids to—play by the
rules. The fact that we have to potentially get legal help and we may need to do that.
You know, I can't do my own taxes anymore, let alone come in here and talk about land
laws and road access and maybe that's the best way to do it, but you know, good grief.
There ought to be a way that we can still as homeowners come before you without
having to come in with attorneys, but maybe not. I've got an accountant to do my taxes.
Anyway, that's it unless there is any questions.
Rountree: Anyone else? Mr. Sharp?
DALE SHARP, 2445 WINGATE LANE, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE
ATTORNEY.
Sharp: Since we just did this, I would like to bring this up that—my understanding that
the council meetings and the Planning and Zoning Council meeting is a way the system
that we use to negotiate concerns between the city and the developers and the citizens.
It's right here in your ordinance and so forth. During these meetings we swore to tell the
truth and everything. This hasn't happened, I think as far as the developer is
concerned. I just spent a little time here at city hall today just picking out a few
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 23
highlights and Mr. Tealey there will (Inaudible) note on the face of the plat that says no
access from any (Inaudible) subdivision to Wingate Lane. That is one of the
requirements of the highway district. This information is readily available. Another one,
Mr. Tealey, Wingate Lane will remain private areas as I stated, no access from this
subdivision to Wingate. Here is another one, district staff recognized that Wingate Lane
was privately owned and that the district would not participate in any condemnation
proceedings for acquisition of the lane, this is the highway district. So, this is a few of
the things, this is not happening because where I live it's readily obvious and I just
yesterday think I saw a pickup drive down across the lane, drive around the other part of
the subdivision over on the west side, back over, cross back through there and this
happens daily. This is a private lane. It's been established that, in fact, this is from the
Ada County Planning and Zoning Commission this is readily available to anybody who
wants to read it. It says that there is a private road dated 1913 (Inaudible) county. We
have that and it's been recorded and notarized on record. Our house was built in 1915
the same time this lane was notarized and recorded as a private lane. That is on record
here too. As far as—first thing we noticed that they said they wouldn't use this lane,
here comes Tealey's Survey Crew down there in pickups and everything. Then pretty
soon, we had pickups and cars and everything else going back across the lane
(Inaudible). They said well, I asked them why are they doing this, you are not supposed
to be using the lane. Well, they have authority to do it from the land owners. Well, they
have negated their right to use this lane because the Ada County Planning and Zoning
said there would be no more houses on this lane. That means no more access from
this lane for houses. They sold off the Borup (sic) Property which had access. That left
that part of the other lane—land they don't have access. They sold off the Brown
property, so that part. Then the Brown and Borup property become part of the
subdivision, that's part of the city, so they don't have access anymore. It's just a—like
say, this system they say that it's conditions that we negotiate and agree to and the
City Council takes this into consideration and approves based on these things. So we
are saying that City Council should be enforcing these provisions by putting a fence and
gates across these, so they don't have access to this lane. While I'm at it, I'll reiterate
what Vern has to say as far as the weeds. We are getting a hell of a lot of weeds
coming from that one Packard Subdivision No. 1 blowing into our property. You can
come out there and see it today. I don't think I've put up with it. As far as people, we
have a Wingate Lane road association that we put in wanting to keep this lane up and
we can't do it when we have all these trucks and vehicles that we feel are unauthorized.
These conditions should be met. They should Mr. Tealey, speaking on the behalf of the
developers that this lane would not be used and it is open today. You can drive right
across there and back and forth, they are using it. So anyway, we have notified City
Council when we notice things coming up, September 9t", like we say we got this letter.
I don't know if this is part of the public records here, because I didn't see it in any of the
minutes I saw today. I do wish to have these entered in as public record. So there
(Inaudible).
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 24
Bentley: We've got them.
Rountree: Do you want these as testimony?
(Inaudible)
Sparks: As far as the—on the irrigation pipes so forth, I did call in on and was assured
that we would have an opportunity to prove and so forth before anything was done
before the final. Low and behold, we got culverts in there that was too small. What they
will say now—if we said—if we didn't say it now, bring this to you guys attention. I didn't
bring—I called Gary Smith on it. If we didn't do that, pursuant something else done. All
of this work would be done and they say well we can't go back and change it now. We
want on record that we are opposing this, unless they comply to what they swore to in
these minutes. Any questions?
Rountree: Anyone else wish to offer testimony. Mrs. Sharp.
HELEN SHARP, 2445 WINGATE LANE, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE
ATTORNEY.
H. Sharp: One of the things that I think we are forgetting too is that lane is posted,
private lane authorized vehicles only. Obviously that is being ignored. Another thing
that was brought up and they said that Ada County Highway wouldn't have any
jurisdiction on our private lane and for those of us who went to several meetings with
Ada County Highway who got involved in his. We will probably have a good argument
there. The thing—the one argument that we've heard and I've talked to Americore and
I've talked to our new attorney—welcome aboard—that since the developer owners land
on either side of the lane, east and west, he wants to cross. If he crosses fine, but the
equipment can't cross because if the equipment crosses that section it then becomes
public. That part of the lane becomes public. With easement that was written way back
1913 and I'm sure we've gone to the interpretation of that and to me even with our
forefathers who had written that their intention was if you live on Wingate Lane, you
have the option of getting onto Ustick Road, so you can get to and from your properties
and I don't think there is anyway that you can interpret that any differently. Nobody is
trying to stop that. Like they say, we're talking about an extension of a variance and
rather than hash this over, and over again because of hardships, if it's not granted the
hardships were brought on by themselves if they don't comply. If we had the fences
and the berms that were promised, we wouldn't have the problem of crossing Wingate
Lane, we wouldn't have problem with cars going back and forth because they would
have to go in where they are supposed to. We've had contractors trucks and the
equipment say we don't want to drive all the way around. Well, unfortunately that's
what happened when you get involved with a situation like this. So rather than drag this
on forever, I would go along with it, but I think only to extend it if they comply with what
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 25
they agreed to, to begin with. They have not done that. As far as our attorney says,
you are the City Council, you just make these decisions you haven't the authority to
enforce it, our question is who does? If you make the decision they can have it.
Rountree: Anyone else wish to offer testimony? Mr. Tealey, would you like to offer
some final comments.
Tealey: Do you want me to answer any of that?
Rountree: If you would address the questions and answer the questions that council
might have.
Tealey: Mr. Alleman first brought up the issue of the ditch that supplies water to him.
We constructed the main line sewer that serves Packard No. 1, it goes through this area
called Packard No. 2. We are not developing at this time Packard No. 2. The sewer
that we put in there serves Packard No. 1 so we get sewer out of there to the lift station.
When we go and actually develop Packard No. 2 in phases we will then comply with all
of the requirements of the preliminary plat, such as the gates, berming, fences and the
piping of the irrigation ditches. The irrigation ditch that Mr. Alleman referred to—there
are three, 20 foot section of pipe that we put in the ditch that supplies water to him.
These go underneath the dirt road that is required by the City of Meridian to go over the
top. It's a maintenance road for that sewer that we put in. There are three 20 foot
section of pipe that they are talking about that we put in. We originally had on our plans
that they were 12 inch pipes and that's what the contractor put in. We engineered
these, they will flow in those short sections 125 minors inches. However, we were
made aware of by the City of Meridian and this does show that the process does work,
evidently Mr. Alleman or Mr. Sharp, I don't know who it is that came into the city and
said look these 12 inch pipes don't work and their temporary pipes. These are just pipes
that are put in there until we actually do the final development of the Packard No. 2
Subdivision and it was made aware to us by a conversation with the Meridian
Engineering Department, specifically Bruce. I assume he is directed by whomever at
the City to give us a call. We wrote a letter back on November 20th that says this fax is
a response to your call about culverts for the irrigation crossings of the maintenance
road for Packard sewer extension. The developer is going to replace the 12 inch
culverts with 18 inch culverts. Although we feel the 12 inch crossings are adequate, we
realize that Mr. Alleman the adjacent owner is uncomfortable with the size of the pipe.
We do not wish to have another sore point with the neighbors on the project or this
issue. The 18 inch replacement pipes are definitely more than adequate to handle the
125 miners inches. The pipe will be replaced as soon we can reasonably get the
contractor back on the site. I believe if they go out to that ditch, those three crossings
tomorrow, they'll find 18 inch pipes in the place. So I believe the process does work
and the City of Meridian has referred their comments to us and we have taken the
appropriate action. In regards to the weeds, we've mowed it twice this year. There is
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 26
an ordinance. We are in the city. We are annexed to the city. They have code
enforcement. If we don't get out there in a timely fashion to cut the weeds, the code
enforcement person will call us and we'll have to do it or as you said you have a
contract with somebody who will do it for us and bill us. We have done it twice this year.
We specifically met in a pre -construction meeting with the contractor, (Inaudible)
construction. We specifically warned him about access to Wingate Lane. We told him
in no way should you access or use Wingate Lane in order to deliver supplies, to have
your workers go up and down there to get to the project. We felt we did a good job of
specifically warning them. If there are violations, I guess all we could do is apologize for
that. We made that effort. My trucks went up there once, because you can't get into
that project when it first started up because they fenced off all the access from
Chamberlain Estates. We went up Wingate Lane once and Mr. Sharp met us about half
way, and we turned down into our project and parked the truck and did our work and
went back out Wingate Lane. Anytime after that, the only way we got access after that
was to tear down a portion of the fence on Chamice Street, park on Chamice and walk
through that portion of the fence that we took down. That's how we controlled our
people out there. Mr. (Inaudible) was fully aware that Wingate Lane was an issue and
we warned him not to do it. If they have to enforce something, then they should enforce
it. We will give it our best effort to make sure that none of our — all the contractors on
this project are warned, forewarned, and Mr. Fulfer knew for sure on this one because
he's been part of this project for almost a year trying to get this sewer okayed that there
was a problem with Wingate and access was a problem. I don't know how to control
that. We tried to control it. Is there any other comments? I'm glad to address them,
some that I missed.
Bentley: Well I've sat through just about all this on this project and it has been long and
it has been drawn out. Some of these people that live on Wingate made it very evident
all through the hearing process about the problems they feel because it's a self funded
road. And I think they've pretty much shown tonight that not all your contractors are
paying any attention, especially if they've got maps detailing them going up Wingate
and I think you really need to get your subs together and get them lined out on these
issues. The water issues that if you've got the 18 inch culverts in that's fine. But this
project has drug on and we've had some long nights here over Wingate Lane, and I just
can't believe that all these trips are being made without somebody outside of the people
living there knowing it. I just find that hard to believe that these contractors aren't
following up, so I think you're going to have to bring them in.
Tealey: We specifically had pre -construction meetings. The only contractor that's been
out there has been Spirit Construction. We specifically had meetings with him and we
warned him numerous times that no access to Wingate Lane. We're not providing
maps to get there. I mean I don't know. We don't give them maps (inaudible) go use
Wingate Lane.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 27
Bentley: I don't know where it's coming from. Maybe it's coming from their own people
involved, but it's evident that this is what they gave testimony tonight that that has been
the case. That's all I have.
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: I guess just a comment to follow up and it seems like these vehicles using
Wingate Lane has been the real sore spot with lots of people. And obviously word of
mouth telling the contractors is not working, so I guess just a comment would be sounds
like you guys need to go out there and construct some type of a barrier that will keep
these vehicles from going up and down that road and that's the only message that these
delivery drivers are going to understand because if you've got a contractor the word isn't
going to filter down to everybody that delivers a piece of equipment or supply out there.
So you're going to have to do something more substantial to take care of that. Posting
signs, creating barriers, whatever it's going to take and not just word of mouth.
Tealey: Mr. Anderson if you'd go out to the project, that might prove to be a little
difficult. The access to Wingate Lane is off of Ustick, so if we tried to put any gate or
barrier there, that would deny access to all the people along —
Anderson: Well at the end of Wingate or however you get into your subdivision would
be where I'd put it.
Tealey: Evidently it's along Ustick. Maybe I'm not correct on that. I don't know. Again
I don't know about the traffic. I can't go out there. My job isn't to control the traffic. We
made an honest effort. If it's a point of concern, we'll make more of an effort. We'll print
warnings to all the contractors out there. Maybe that's the way to do it so that we prove
that we can make the effort. Anything we can do we don't want these people mad at us.
I'm using we in a collective term. I don't mean to include myself as being the developer
on this thing. I have many other projects that I'm concerned with and I can't go out and
patrol Wingate Lane. But I can certainly influence the developer in trying to control it.
Maybe something along the line of fliers to any contractors that's suppose to go out
there, you cannot use Wingate Lane. We've guaranteed these people in meetings that
we're not going to access this thing. Another thing thought that guarantee that we're
going to access and I know it's on the plat, that is meant when this thing is built out that
there will be no access from this subdivision on to Wingate Lane and that's where that
statement was made, and that note will appear on the plats when we get to that stage,
but right now we're trying to get there, and we made a mistake. We didn't get the time
extension in. We were I guess — again I'm using that term collectively. The developer
was occupied with getting this sewer in. This (End of Tape)
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 28
Bird:.. those big trucks have to back out once or twice. They won't come down there
again.
Tealey: I don't know how they are getting there. I assume they are getting access off of
Ustick.
Bird: You have to get access off of Ustick, but these people don't want them traveling
down Wingate. How are they getting on to your property down there?
Tealey: The developers own on both sides of Ustick.
Bird: Yes, I understand that.
Tealey: So evidently they are coming from Ustick down Wingate and then going into it.
Bird: But the agreement was we wouldn't encourage commercial vehicles to be using
Wingate during this.
Tealey: Right and we warned the contractors about that.
Bird: Okay, that property could be fenced, bermed or something so they couldn't get
over it. Am I not right? So they get down there and they get a dead end. They either
back up if they got a big truck with a big piece of dozer or something on it. They'll only
back out of there once, and then they'll get in the right way. Right? I think that can be
taken care of and I think that's these people's real concerns and I understand that. I
didn't sit on the Council but I think Ron and I in our pre Council sittings here listened to
a lot of this and that was a major concern out there. I think if we make an agreement,
we got to live with it. I know you guys are trying. Short of holding their monies whoever
paying if they hold their money if they drive down there, that will get their attention real
fast. But right now the thing is we're asking for a variance on the plat. So really a lot of
this testimony don't have a thing to do with it other than be good neighbors.
Tealey: The traffic should stop. The sewer project is done, and where they were
crossing the original fencing will be put back up.
Bird: I think if that stops you get rid of 90% of your opposition. When you start
developing it, get the berms and stuff in, then they're not going to be able to come down
there.
Tealey: I agree.
Bird: I don't what Wingate — if I was a citizen on Wingate and it's been discussed, I'd go
to the police and find out what I can do or get a gated entry. I guess that would be one
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 29
thing you do is put up a gate. Then they couldn't get in. But anyway we're looking at a
variance extension on the plat.
Rountree: Keith, the public hearing is still open so if you want to discuss, keep
discussing, but we —
Bird: No, problem. I'm done.
Rountree: Any more questions for Mr. Tealey?
Bentley: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: No.
Rountree: Any more testimony? And this is breaking our normal format. We usually
get one, but go ahead.
Alleman: I just wanted to clarify what Mr. Tealey's testimony was. He said they had
mowed that twice. That is not true. They mowed part of it one time and part of it
another time. They did not mow all of it twice. We had a problem with the City telling
them what to do and they were going to do it and never got there, and by the time they
got there, the weeds, Canadian Thistle, had all matured and blown off. The other thing,
he said that that was planned for twelve inch on that. It is not all on 12 inch. The upper
end of that is 15 inch so his statements are not true. I just wanted to clarify what he was
saying.
Rountree: Let's not get into a debate here. I think that there's misunderstanding of what
was heard and I heard something different than what Mr. Alleman heard.
Tealey: Obviously there is a misunderstanding here. I don't —
Gigray: For a matter of procedure you're going to have a difficult record transcribing —
Rountree: You need to identify your name. Anybody else wish to testify?
DIXIE ROBERTS 2855 WINGATE LANE WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
Roberts: My concern of course is the road and the part we're talking about is the
lateral. We going south to north, and we wanted that gated, so that there wasn't access
on to Wingate Lane. And that's the part not from Ustick, but it's down the lane is where
they've been crossing. Also I've been real concerned about the irrigation about the size
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 30
of the pipe. Really I think a lot of it's been answered already, but that's the main
concern. If they get that pipe in there, it isn't the correct size. How do we get it
changed? They say well you know this is on the plat and you know all this such and
such, and then they want to leave it. They don't want to take the time and the expense
to change things. And then where are we? We're left with a mess. And that's what our
concern is. If we can get things established ahead of time, it's better I think. Thank
you.
Rountree: Does it relate to the variance? Is it something new?
(Inaudible)
Rountree: Please come forward and state your name.
DALE SHARP 2445 WINGATE LANE
Sharp: Yes, I just wanted to clarify. Mr. Bird I think understands what we're saying, but
it's not only north and south traversing on the lane, it's east and west where they cross
over, where they've been crossing over from one part of the Packard Subdivision 2 over
the west side, so we need to have that — something there that will preclude people from
using that. Not only it's people that come out of the subdivision and driving through
there and on down the way and so forth, but that's all I wanted to say.
Rountree: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. Need
a motion to close the public hearing.
Bird: I move we close the public hearing.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and second to close the public hearing. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Bird: I've got a question for staff. What is our policy? Do we send out letters or
anything the time is coming up on these plats? Do we send out letters to remind them
or anything like that?
Gigray: Mr. President, just a matter of procedure. If you're going to ask staff questions,
I would recommend that the public hearing remain open.
Bird: Oh, I thought this was discussion.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 31
Gigray: You're getting more information —
Bird: No problem, no problem. I won't ask because I think I already know.
Rountree: You know the answer.
Bird: Yeah, I already know.
Rountree: Any other discussion? What's your pleasure?
Bird: Mr. Gigray I believe that any action on this would require Findings.
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, that is absolutely correct. This is a
public hearing and variances required Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and
Order of Decision, and I have just for a procedural aspects, I have this worksheet in
front of you which prescribes for agenda item number 7 you'll see request for variance.
That simply follows your ordinances as it relates to the kinds of Findings that you have
to make in order to grant variances, because the criteria here as you'll see where it says
deliberation and possible action by the Council is the items that deal directly with
variances. Then once you've decided on how you feel about that then you just direct me
to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order in accordance with your
deliberation.
Bird: I move that we have the legal counsel get the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law regarding this public hearing.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we have legal counsel prepare Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the request for variance for Packard Subdivision No.
2. Any discussion?
Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council, I'll need some direction with
regards to how you wish to decide this in terms of whether you feel the criteria of the
ordinance has been met by the evidence that has been produced at this hearing or
whether or not it has not.
Rountree: We could have a second motion to that or withdraw —
Bird: I'll withdraw. He withdraw and I'll make a new motion. I move that we the City
Council approves the variance extension and has the legal department get the Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 32
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law with a favorable decision as it relates to the request for variance for Packard
Sub. No. 2. Any discussion?
Bentley: I have a question for the rest of the Council. And then for the attorney. Would
it be appropriate to apply conditions to this?
Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council, there is clearly evidence that this
particular developer needs to have a variance in order to have this preliminary plat
extended or it will fail and they will have to start over. I would recommend if you were
going to apply conditions for the granting of the variance that those conditions be such
that would work in terms of the field and in terms of the process of this development,
and I assume that you're looking at issues involving access to Wingate Road and
possibly I don't know whether or not you're thinking about any tiling or irrigation issues
or weed control issues. But if you plan on any conditions in there, I would suggest that
you put a time table on which certain improvements would be placed and possibly even
the matter brought back for report that those have been complied with or that the
preliminary plat would fail, which might mean that I just would recommend that you put
at time table on it if you're going to go that direction.
Bird: Mr. President I got a question. Don't our preliminary plat have all those conditions
on it? Do we make conditions upon conditions? If we extend this preliminary plat then
we make sure that it's adhered to right? I mean I realize we probably do need a time
limit on it, but we're getting conditions on top of conditions.
Gigray: I'm just saying that as I understand it if you grant an extension and this
extension goes for another year probably from the date and that probably ought to be
clarified from the motion that the extension would go from the date in which it would be
under the ordinance which means from August 5t" to August 5t" of '99. 1 guess if you
have some concern with the immediacy with road access to Wingate, you could
condition that the approval of the variance subject to the developer placing obstructions
to Wingate Road by a certain time table or that variance wouldn't be granted, which
means if it wasn't done in that period of time someone could come in and move or find
that the preliminary plat has failed because the variance conditions aren't met. If you
are going to put conditions. That's what I'm saying. There's some difficulty in doing that
because we get into what are the conditions, how do you enforce them and so on.
Bird: I would leave my motion as it is.
Bentley: I understand what Councilman Bird is saying and what the attorney is saying
and I agree with it. These conditions were already once applied to the preliminary plat.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 33
I would just state that I hope Mr. Tealey and the developer and the builder takes to
heart what has been said tonight and the problems and the citings of previous
commitments and make a conserted effort to get these problems resolved, because as
part of the preliminary plat the proceedings can be stopped as the City Attorney has
stated. So with that that's all I have.
Rountree: Other discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: I guess I just wanted to comment too that I have some concerns also and I
agree with what the neighbors are saying, and I think a much more conserted effort
needs to take place on the part of the developer to block off the access so that those
vehicles can't go through there, and I think it's imperative before any more work
continues on the property that they do something about the access problem because
that's the biggest concern that the neighbors are voicing here and I again would like to
add more conditions to it, but again we're adding more conditions to conditions and I
would be one that would strongly support shutting down the project if these things don't
start getting complied with here.
Rountree: Any other comments?
Bentley: Call for a question.
Rountree: Questions been called. All those in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Gigray: Mr. President, just a matte of procedure. I would report with those Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Approval at the next Council meeting,
December 15th if that be correct.
Rountree: Yes.
Bentley: Mr. President, I move we take a ten minute recess.
Bird: I second it.
Rountree: Moved and seconded that we take a ten minute recess. In favor?
TEM MINUTE RECESS
ITEM NO. 8: DISCUSSION OF RC WILLEY TILING OF DITCH:
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 34
Rountree: We'll call the December 1St session back in order. If people would take their
seats. The next item on the agenda is item number 8, discussion of the RC Willey tiling
of ditch.
Bird: When we approved the plat or anything did we require tiling of that?
Rountree: Question for Gary Smith.
Smith: Mr. President, Council members, I don't have the ordinance if there was one, but
I can read the minutes from the September 1 st meeting, the motion if you would like.
Bird: No, we have that. That's no problem.
Smith: As I understood it, the motion was that the ditch was to be tiled subject to the
diameter of the pipe being 48 inches or less as determined by Nampa Meridian
Irrigation District, and subsequently they have submitted to us stating that a 36 inch
diameter pipe is adequate. So at this point and after receiving that letter, then we
required the architect who is preparing the site plan to show that ditch would be pipe,
which they have done. I received a call from Mr. Mary Jensen from RC Willey today,
and I didn't get a chance to get back to him, but he was asking the question of being
able to supply a bond of some kind, a financial guarantee to the City of Meridian that
they will install the pipe when other property owners on the ditch elsewhere either
upstream or downstream also pipe the ditch. But that wasn't the motion that was made
and approved.
Rountree: Anything else?
Bentley: Two issues to do with this. One I thought we had discussion on the possibility
of bonding since nobody else had tiled the ditch or there wasn't any other process in
place for this, and secondly at an APA meeting here last month there was a gentleman
there from the Department of Water Resources and I posed the question to him. What
are we doing to our shallow aquifer by tiling all these ditches? I said is this not the way
that these aquifers recharge and his response was yes. We are doing damage by tiling
all these ditches. I think we need to take a look at some of this. This ditch that involves
RC Willey's is along the railroad right-of-way. It's a stretch that all Canyon County and
Ada County is talking about trying to preserve the right-of-way. Maybe there's a chance
since this is a I believe a run off ditch that there's a chance that we could possibly
preserve this into a waterway along this if we did get the railroad right-of-way along
here. So my feeling is if we did anything we just bond for it at this time, but I really think
we need to take a look at all these ditches we're filling in. With all the farmland we're
taking out of circulation and all the flood irrigation that's going away. I realize our water
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 35
is out of the deep aquifer but if the shallow goes away, everybody is going to be in the
deep and we're going to be in deep. So that's my only comment on that.
Rountree: Any discussion?
Bird: I believe we got the (Inaudible) if anybody has got any questions.
Rountree: Did anybody have questions for the applicant?
Bird: Has anybody got questions for the applicant?
Rountree: Councilmen?
Bird: Mr. President, I don't have any questions for him. I would like to concur with
Glenn. I think if I remember right we waived tiling the ditch across the street there;
didn't we? Across Eagle Road, didn't we — oh, we didn't require that to be —
Smith: No, not that I'm aware of. The only property that we're talking about over there
is that annexation request isn't it?
Bird: Yeah.
Smith: Or Wheel City or whatever it's called. Yes, I don't recall that that was waived for
them. Could say for sure.
Bird: I for one would like to go along with Glenn and have a discussion on this. I don't
even know if we need to have it bonded if whatever the procedure is with the City. I
have no problem with that. I think we need to look at these tiling of ditches on a basis of
each individual application. I think that we could be hurting our aquifer a little bit, in fact
quite a bit. So I would hope we could work something out between the staff and RC
Willey and about tiling and holding off on tiling that.
Bentley: Follow up to that Keith and I think maybe legal and staff may have to chime in
on this. As I said I don't think we can progress without giving this gentleman some
direction. I don't think we can say go ahead and do it. We're not going to have you tile
it at this time. Then come back later and find out we've changed our mind. We want
ditches tiled and the next guy tiles and he doesn't, so I think the answer is probably
going to be put up the bond and if we don't need to exercise that bond, then you can
retire the bond out or refund it or whatever the correct term is on it. But I think we need
to give direction on this project as to which way we are going to go as far as either
bonding it or we're going to say we're not going to ditch any of it, and I don't think
anybody sitting here is ready to make that determination that we're going to stop tiling
that ditch.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 36
Rountree: You need any discussion?
Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council answer to Councilman Bentley's
question, I guess I'm a little bit amiss of exactly what is before is I see is the heading of
discussion of RC Willey tiling of ditch, and I don't know are we talking about a waiver of
the requirement to tile under section 11-9-605M; is that what we're talking about or is
this just to answer you question, I am just not sure where we are in the process here.
Stiles: President Rountree, Council members, the tiling of the ditch is a requirement of
the annexation and there was a preliminary plat but that is not being pursued at this
time. It was the annexation requirement to comply with the tiling of ditch requirement.
Apparently Ron Van Auker is investigating tiling that entire section. It is extremely deep
and very steep. It's not an amenity. I mean it's not currently designed to be used as an
amenity. It is a safety problem if you had people walking adjacent to it. It appears that
the majority of the water that's in this at least from I have looked quite a length up and
down this drain is groundwater coming up, and it was a little surprising to me even
though I don't know much about sizes of pipes that Nampa Meridian could ascertain
that that only required a 36 inch pipe, because you can see on the level of the banks
that there's a big fluctuation in the water there, and there are geese and ducks and
that's probably something that we need to look at, but in order for RC Willey to get an
occupancy certificate, they would have to have those improvements completed or at
least have a bond in place for 120% of those required improvements in order to get that
certificate of occupancy. I don't know if they are asking for anything other than that they
be allowed to bond that. Staff was at a loss to tell them okay it's fine with the bond,
because of the direction you had taken on the variance is that what the decision actually
was at the Council level, and I think mostly we wanted a clarification of Council.
Anderson: I guess a comment I kind of agree with what Glenn is saying here. I think at
this point what needs to be done is we need to have some more in depth discussions
maybe in a strategic planning meeting about what we want to do with ditches and
whether we want to keep some open ditches or not and I would be willing to accept a
bond at this point in lieu of actually tiling the ditch for them to get their occupancy
permit, move forward with the project.
Rountree: Any other questions, comments? I have a question for Shari. Shari, did this
require a 404 permit from the Core of Engineers to do alteration to this? It sounds to
me like it's a permanent water body. It flows year round.
(Inaudible)
Rountree: That's okay, I just wanted to know that.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 37
Gigray: This isn't a public hearing, Mr. President. You may have him identify himself so
that when they do the minutes —
Lowe: I'm Jerry Lowe with CSHQA Architects representing RC Willey. It is a drainage
ditch, Evans Drainage Ditch which is controlled through an easement with Nampa
Meridian Irrigation District and as far as I'm aware there are no other federal or state
entities that have any interest in this body.
Rountree: Have we ever heard from the Core on that matter Gary because they — well
it doesn't matter whose jurisdiction because if they claim it a water of the U.S., they can
require a permit.
Smith: We've had to deal with 404 permits on Nine Mile Drain, which it's under the
jurisdiction of the irrigation district also, but it's still the Core of Engineers. Five Mile
Drain, we've had to go through Core of Engineers for crossings there for sewer and
water and again that's under the jurisdiction for maintenance of the irrigation district. So
I can't answer your question specifically Councilman Rountree, but it sure seems like
past history would indicate that 404 would be involved in below the water level.
Rountree: And it may very well be difficult to get one for compliance with the City
ordinance that requires tiling of ditches if they have control over the water.
Smith: We did have a problem with — or we weren't allowed to tile Nine Mile Drain
because the Core said that's an open drain. That needs to stay open. They wouldn't
allow it to be tiled even though it was tilable.
Rountree: And I guess the point that Shari made is if it is dealing with ground water it
was built for other purposes besides delivery of irrigation water. It's actually keeping us
from being a wet land.
Smith: Yes, it is a drain. All of the ditches that we've been informed by Nampa
Meridian Irrigation District that all of the ditches crossing through Meridian area are titled
as drains. None of them are creeks. They're all drains. The low ditches, not the
irrigation ditches, but the low ditches are all drains, and they were built for that reason.
If any of these ditches are piped, then they shouldn't be hard piped. They should be
piped such that they could accept groundwater. Either through perforations in the pipes
or open joints, however it might be done, but they are a drainage ditch. I think if you get
into that ditch and start messing around below the high water level, you are going to be
talking to the Core of Engineers.
Lowe: While I'm here, may I make a plea?
Rountree: A plea?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 38
Lowe: I appreciate what you're saying is that the urgency of trying to bring this to
resolution. The owner is amenable to the bond. We've had discussions with the Mayor
for the past 60 days alluding to that type of thing would like to bring it to if that's the
conclusion to allow us to obtain a building permit and proceed with the project.
Rountree: Okay thank you. Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: I have none.
Bird: I move that we temporarily waive the tiling of the ditch behind RC Willey, and for
them to put up a bond as required to tile ditch at later date at 120% above cost; is that
right. That's my motion.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to have the applicant post a bond in the
amount of 120% cost of tiling the — don't have the name of the ditch. Evans Drain.
Moved and seconded to do that. Any discussion? All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO. 9: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF MERIDIAN CITY WATER SERVICE
OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS ON TEN MILE ROAD BY LARRY E. HANSEN-
Rountree: Is Mr. Hansen here to explain the request?
Hansen: My name is Larry Hansen. I reside at 1888 E. Rodeo Lane in Kuna, and I'm
available to answer any questions that you may have. I don't know if you have the
information in front of you as to what we're requesting or not.
Rountree: Any questions for Mr. Hansen?
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: None.
Hansen: I would like to sate if I may that we've worked with staff for about four months
now on this project even though it's outside of Meridian City limits. We're more than
happy to sign any kind of an annexation letter in the future if you would request so. We
appreciate staff's input into this.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 39
Bentley: So your plans are to annex into the city?
Hansen: When possible. We're not contiguous to city limits at this time.
Bentley: Right, thank you. Question for staff. Gary, your thoughts and input please?
Smith: Mr. President and Council members I have talked to Larry and Russ about this
project and we don't have any concerns with the demand that will be placed on our
system. It's primarily a fire flow requirement from the fire department I believe. The
actual domestic water use on site will be very limited at this point. With the project that
they are proposing to build, which is a self storage units.
Anderson: The question I have Gary is how is this different than us extending our water
mains out north of town, and we've had a lot of discussion in that and not being able to
do that unless we can extend sewer lines at the same time. So how is this different?
Smith: I guess it's a little different in that the sewer usage on this project is very
minimal. As I understand it there's one residence there that they already have or in the
process of getting approval from Central District for a septic tank. Like I said earlier the
water demand is a fire flow requirement. They have agreed to and understand the
double assessment requirement of which we don't have an assessment fire flow. We
have an assessment for domestic use. There's a flat fee per month that's charged for a
fire line if it's run to a commercial building. I guess that we're on the edge of having to
make a decision and this is something that we've discussed a little bit about providing
city service outside the city limits and whether or not this is the avenue you want to
pursue as far as development is concerned. Because right now, you're right, we've
tried to keep services limited to properties that are contiguous to the city limits or that
are or can be annexed within a short period of time. We've stepped outside of that
concept a couple of time and in fact we have one small subdivision that's still served by
sewer and water that's not in the city limits that could be. But it's built out now and I
think there's ten lots maybe in it. But I think this is an aspect of development of our
impact area that you need to consider as to whether you want to proceed with this type
of idea for development. I think this is kind of opening the door for that type of process
that would allow development outside the city limits the corporate boundaries even
though at present the ordinance says it's allowable by approval of the City Council and
the user will be assessed a double connection fee for both sewer and water.
Anderson: Where would this water line come from? This property is at Ten Mile and
Franklin?
Smith: The piece that they are proposing to develop now is just south of the railroad
tracks and north of Ten Mile Drain. It's where Stevens has their home and there's a
mobile home there for a hired hand and there's a hay shed where they've stored hay.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 40
Anderson: So this would require boring under the railroad tracks?
Smith: Yes, it will.
Anderson: And it would extend off of Pine Street or where's the water right now?
Smith: It will come from — I'm trying to think of the name of the subdivision that Blaser is
doing right now. Thunder something.
Rountree: On Ten Mile?
Smith: Yes Ten Mile Road.
Bird: How far down is the line there Gary?
Smith: Well they are bringing it to their south boundary right now. I don't know how
many feet that is from there to the railroad.
Bird: And Larry and them takes this on down to Charlie's place down there?
Smith: Yes.
Bird: It's between the house and the railroad track that land in there that they're
developing?
Smith: Yes, it's kind of a triangular piece. Their north boundary lays up against the
railroad right-of-way and then —
Bird: How far is our sewer away from there?
Smith: A long ways. Farther than I can throw a rock. It's —
Bird: It's coming down to the sub isn't it?
Smith: I think it's farther than you can shoot a rifle in fact. Right now the sewer that
would serve that property is our Black Cat lift station. That's where the sewer line would
have to come from to serve this property.
Bird: A mile and a half.
Smith: Yes, at least.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 41
Rountree: Any other questions?
Bentley: I have none.
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, you might inquire of the developer or of
staff Gary Smith as to whether this parcel is greater than five acres that will be served
by this water. I would strongly recommend that and I believe the developer said they'd
be willing to do it that they condition that providing the service they agree to be annexed
into the City at such time as they could be annexed, because if it's a parcel greater than
five acre, that could pose a problem. I don't know if it is or not.
Hansen: The parcel that we're proposing is greater than five acres. I might also
mention that we have made an agreement with Stevens to acquire their entire 80 acre
parcel, and we will be cleaning up that entire corner. Although we have no plans of
developing that in the near future, but again as I've indicated all along we have no
problem at all signing a future annexation request in whatever format that you have.
Gigray: I might recommend Mr. President with your permission that we might want to
fashion some kind of agreement by which this water service would be provided to this
property. We might need to have and I would want Gary's input on this, what parcel
would be served by it. Are we talking about a whole 80 acres or is this one parcel one
part of it and then we could outline all the terms and conditions by which that service
would be provided and bring that back before the Council. This evening you could
maybe take an action directing us to do that. It could get this moving.
Hansen: I might be able if I may interject a little bit here. We have actually split the
Stevens property into two separate parcels. And when I indicate that we have acquired
the entire 80 acres, it is now in two separate parcels. One is a 13 acre parcel that goes
down to the hay barn if you are familiar with the property and lies along the Ten Mile
Drain up to the railroad tracks. That is the parcel that the application is before you to
service. And again fire and one resident manager and that's what is before you and no
application to include the other parcel so we wouldn't have a problem at this point in
time limiting it to that one parcel.
Anderson: One more question to Gary. I guess thinking ahead a little bit then
eventually we're going to have sewer, eventually we're going to have more subdivisions
down there. What size line are we going to put to go down to service this one piece of
property and are we going to have to dig it up in a few year to put a larger line.
Smith: We would have a 12 inch line installed. This extension would be 12 inch in
diameter, and that's what we're running on section line roads typically everywhere
outside of the line coming out of our new tanker. That will be larger, but typically we're
12 inch in all the section line roads, and that's what this would be so there will be a lot
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 42
more water capacity in this line than what that 13 acres would require especially under
this development as a storage area.
Rountree: Anything else?
Bird: I have none.
Gigray: Does the developer put it in?
Smith: Yes, and we would have — at least they have the option to approach City
Council and ask for approval of latecomers agreement on that length of pipe. It would
be up to the Council's decision as to whether that's approved, but that is available
through the ordinance.
Rountree: Thanks Gary. Anything else?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Any motion?
Bird: I move that we grant this request for an extension of the Meridian City water
services to the 13 acres on N. Ten Mile Road just south of the tracks, railroad tracks
and that the developer to pay for the extension.
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to grant the extension of Meridian City water
to the described parcel. Any discussion?
Bentley: Mr. Bird are we going to include the double hookup fee assessment and are
we going to make this part of the — by the agreement?
Bird: I believe this is by ordinance, isn't it the double hookup fee, but do we need it in
the motion? If we do —
Bentley: What we've done in the past we've included it in the motion but also the fact
that upon annexation we can receive one half of the hookup fee back. Or do we want to
put that in conditions to work out?
Rountree: Mr. Bentley, all I'm saying is I want to put that in your memory banks.
Bird: I want it this way. I don't want to have to remember anything.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 43
Bird: Yeah, that could be with the addition of the agreement of the annexation.
Bentley: Right, that would suit me.
Bird: Okay.
Rountree: Motion stands. Any other discussion? It's been moved and seconded as
motion's stated. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO. 10: WATER/ SEWER/ TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
Rountree: Is there anyone present who wishes to contest their water, sewer and trash
delinquency? Bentley is protesting. He never has paid I don't think.
Bentley: Check's in the mail.
Rountree: You are hereby informed you may appear or have the decision of the City
reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho Code. Even though you
appeal, your water maybe shut off and the amount of this turn off list is $32,449.57.
(End of Tape)
Bentley: Mr. President, I move that we approve the water delinquency and turn off list.
Bird: I second that.
Rountree: Moved and seconded that we approve the water and sewer delinquency turn
off list. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Bird: Mr. President, while we're still on this item, can I ask something? How many
actually do we turn off, because this $32,000 is a lot of bucks.
Rountree: Well it was $66,000 last month.
Bird: I know it was $66,000 last month. Now that we got —
Anderson: Very little. They almost all pay in the few days.
Bird: Is that right Gary?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 44
Smith: I don't remember who did the research Councilman Bird, but the amount that is
actually turned off is percentage wise is pretty small compared to what's on the turn off
list and I think maybe Will or Pauline — I don't know who did it, but some months ago
there was kind of a little history run on just that question, and I don't have it with me.
Berg: Mr. President and members of the Council we did have a spreadsheet on the
back every month that told us how the months fall and how much we actually approved
to turn off and how much we do turn off when it comes black Wednesday and it is
substantially lower, but I will find out where that sheet is and why it's not attached to the
back so that you have that record, but it is a lot different than what we approved.
Bird: I would certainly appreciate that.
Berg: And we do have people in the past that I've been here that do come up and
protest their bill and we make particular situations to accommodate them.
Anderson: I have a comment or question. This list is always printed by account number
which really means nothing to us, and if you wanted to look up somebody whose name
like if I wanted to see if I was delinquent for example, I have to thumb through all the
pages. Would it not be easy just to index this just by alphabetical order maybe for the
Council reports?
Skeggs: It's sent to the water department by account number because that's how they
shut it off in sequence, and if it was in alpha order, we would have resort it just to give it
to them in order to shut off. That's why it's done through account number, and we
averaged about 80-100 turn offs when I was managing that department, and normally
you would start off with 500 and something so by the time shut off, it averaged between
80 to 100 actual turn offs.
Anderson: I guess I understand them shutting it off, but I mean for the report to Council,
would it not be an easy matter just to ask it to print out one index by alphabetically
order?
Skeggs: We would have to resort it and then resort it again in order to give it to the
water department, but that's something we can check with —
Rountree: If you want it that way, we can get it that way. It's going to be —
(Inaudible)
Anderson: I was asking if it was something easy to do.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 45
Bird: You have more time than they do.
Anderson: If it was in Excel, all you'd have to do is punch —
Skeggs: Yeah, it's in Microsoft Works right now, but I mean if you wanted it like that we
could just have them — if it would be easier to read.
Anderson: No, I don't want to make waves.
Bentley: Another tree died.
Rountree: It's not waves. If you want a report like that, we can get it. I agree it would
be easier to read.
ITEM NO. 11: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
A. GARY SMITH:
1. LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH NAMPA MERIDIAN
IRRIGATION DISTRICT FOR SEWER LINE CROSSING ON
VAN AUKER SEWER PROJECT.
Smith: Mr. President and Council members the license agreement for that crossing of
by the way Evans Drain, I had reviewed that and sent it back to the attorney for Nampa
Meridian with the request for some revisions which he acknowledged it needed to have
done, and he called me as late as this morning saying that he still hadn't sent that me.
Obviously I didn't have it so I don't have that and didn't have that to submit to anyone
for review. He indicated that he would be bringing that with him when they meet with us
on Thursday to discuss the pathway agreements. So I'll have it then. I'll request your
indulgence in tabling this item until sometime in the future. December the 15th would be
all right. That's obviously — I will have it for sure by Thursday.
Rountree: Gary would it not be just a easy to remove this from the agenda and you put
it back on at such time as you have the agreement?
Smith: Well you could if you'd like, but I was assured I'd have it Thursday. He would
bring it with him.
Bird: Mr. President I move that we table license agreement with Nampa Meridian
Irrigation District for the sewer line crossing on Van Auker sewer project until December
15th
Bentley: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 46
Rountree: It's been moved and second that we table the license agreement with
Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
B. CHIEF BOWERS:
BUDGET CHANGES
Bowers: Mr. President Rountree and City Council, I was suppose to be here a couple of
weeks ago. I didn't realize that. I'm sorry. We have not approved my budget to my
knowledge at this time. There was some questions. Charlie had some questions about
how much money the rural commissioners was going to put in for a truck. And also the
final total from the rural, how much that would be. I believe I put those in your boxes.
It's been quite a while ago, so are there any other questions on that budget change or
anything? Ron and I got to talking today. We couldn't remember what they all were.
Rountree: You answered mine. I don't know if anybody else had any other questions.
Any other questions?
Bird: I have none. You answered them Kenny. You answered mine.
Rountree: While you are here, maybe not on that particular item, but what's the status
of concept for the new fire station?
Bowers: Everything is running along real good Mr. President. December 9t" I believe
we have openings from the architects.
Anderson: We'll have proposals from all the architects that we sent out request for
proposals.
Rountree: Okay so you got the RP's out and they are on the —
Bowers: Yes, they are out at this time. I want to thank Gary Smith. His crew has
helped us tremendously. Brad has helped us a bunch, so I really appreciate it Gary on
that part, getting us rolling and trying to tell us what needs to be done.
Rountree: Any other questions on Kenny's budget? Or anything else?
Bentley: Just for discussion sake and maybe this is something we need to put together
at a planning session. I'd like to see us take a look and we have to sure discuss this
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 47
with the rural too take a look at starting to put plans together for the Ten Mile station and
the feasibility of how soon we can plan on moving on erecting that.
Bowers: Mr. Bentley, we have been discussing that in our meetings. What we would
like to do if everything works out with the building that we have now and all the dates
are met and everything is kosher, that we will be starting the second station or the
substation within a year of this main station being built. We don't quite know yet if that's
the best area for a fire station after talking with Doug Young from the rating bureau. We
might want to move it a little bit closer to Cherry Lane if possible for our mileage for the
rating, but Mr. Anderson has been discussing that also with the rural commissioners.
Bentley: I got a question for Mr. Rountree. I can't remember. Were there conditions
put on the city with that property for the fire station?
Rountree: I couldn't tell you. I've never seen the deed.
Bentley: Question for Gary. Do you recall?
Smith: I don't know Councilman Bentley. I remember that there were — it almost seems
like there was.
Bentley: I believe there was, and I think that's something we have to look at before we
abandoned the site.
Smith: It was something kind of gift I believe from Mr. Teeter and his family.
Bentley: Right and I think it was a dedicated gift for a fire station.
Smith: I think you're right.
Rountree: It could be. That's pretty typical.
Anderson: We had some questions on that. We'd never seen anything.
Bentley: Maybe you can round up the paperwork on that and research that because it's
something that will definitely play into the plans.
Bowers: Exactly. We were going to get right into that when we get dealt into it a little
deeper. We were going to check and see if that was for a well site or dedicated strictly
for a fire station or if the city was able to sell it and go somewhere else, and that will be
pretty tough until we get the paperwork to see.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 48
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, Chief, we can get a copy of the deed.
Does anyone recall whether or not there was any kind of official action on the part of the
council accepting the deed? If there was then we'd look at those too.
Rountree: There hasn't been any. The Council has asked the question and there has
never been officially presented the deed.
Gigray: One of the things I recommend in the future anything that is dedicated to the
City whether a gift or otherwise, I recommend that even if it's ratification after recording
or whatever that you should reserve the authority to accept those dedications so you
know what you are getting. I've seen this in other places where the developers have
tried to dedicate bridges across canals that have been a mess and so we just have kind
of said unless we accept it, we don't —
Rountree: It's a good idea.
Bowers: Yeah, I'm not really sure, Bill, if it's even dedicated yet. I haven't seen any
paperwork on it just hearsay.
(Inaudible)
Bowers: And Charlie knows and Mr. Bentley knows too that we've been told we had
this piece of property for a long time and we never did really have it.
Rountree: That's correct.
Bowers: So we might not yet.
Bentley: It's my understanding the deed is in the house. But I don't know where.
Bird: It should be recorded if we got it.
Rountree: Will should have it.
Berg: For Teeter? Got it.
Bowers: Any other questions then?
Bentley: That's all I had. Thank you.
Rountree: Need a motion on the budget.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 49
Bentley: We've already accepted the budget. I guess all you need to do is clear up the
questions.
Anderson: Mr. President I make a motion that we approve the fire department's budget
and lift any restrictions that were on the budget.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we go forth with the fire department
budget and remove any restrictions. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
C. SHARI STILES:
STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR COMP PLAN
UPDATE
2. REQUEST BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT TO PLACE A
CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IN DAKOTA RIDGE SUB.
(LOT 8, BLOCK 1)
Stiles: President Rountree, Council members we received three statements of
qualifications on our request for update of the Comprehensive Plan on the 20th. The
firms responding were JUB Engineers, SAIC, and Carl Olson. I talked to Charlie earlier
today about how he thought we might want to proceed on this, and with your approval
we would like to set up an interview group to listen to either two or all three of the firms
responding and then offer our recommendations to you. I didn't know if any of you had
any desire to be on that interview team. It's kind of a toss up between two of them at
least for me between two of them right now, but I think the interview will pretty much firm
up our ideas of who we want to go with in that process. If you have any suggestions on
who you would involved in part of that, let me know.
Rountree: Questions?
Bird: I have no desire to be on it or anything.
Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council, I would strongly recommend that
someone on the City Council or the Mayor or someone from this body be part of that
process because I think what Shari is doing here is a very good thing to get the kind of
expertise to help with the development of the Comprehensive Plan. I think it would be
good to have someone from Planning and Zoning Commission on that because these
people will provide a lot of direction on how this is updated and it's a document that
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 50
really drives your zoning and all of your land use planning and maybe even someone
from Public Works could at least sit in on that so they're comfortable with it as well
because we're dealing with impact areas and a lot of city utilities and what not, and so I
think this is no small thing, and it would be a real important decision.
Bentley: When are they meeting on this? I mean times of day or is this something they
arrange?
Stiles: We haven't set up any times with them yet. Malcolm is very interested and
wants to participate in the interview process. Gary just indicated that he would be
willing to do that. I think the Mayor would probably at least be willing to do that. We
could set it up either during the day or after work.
Bentley: Yeah, depending on the hours, I might be able to attend.
Bird: What do you guys think of — I think maybe even a representative from the police
and fire would help. If they would like to sit on something like that. You know the
Comprehensive Plan, the pubic safety is probably the priority of any Comprehensive
Plan I would imagine. It wouldn't hurt to have four or five people on that interview
committee. The more you have the more ideas you get. I think it's very good to have
Planning and Zoning, Council, yourself, Gary, whoever would help. What do you think
of that?
Anderson: I was just going to offer my services to serve on that committee if nobody
else wanted to do that.
Rountree: I'd just point out that we did something very similar to this when we selected
ZGA for the space study. There was a panel of P & Z, City Council, Mayor, Will, Gary
was on it and that worked very well. I guess I'm a little concerned that we get it too big,
it gets a little unwieldy. Somewhere between four and six is probably sufficient. If
Glenn and Ron want to participate, in my opinion, is sufficient participation from the
Council. I don't know that you need a motion for direction. I think that's the right way to
go. Take the lead. You're the department head and get a committee put together. You
got a couple of volunteers here.
Stiles: Okay we would like to get that set up as soon as possible so that we can start
negotiations on a contract and get them started. So I'll be contacting you and see what
times are available.
Bird: Charlie how formal do you want to be? Is this something that you need to appoint
a committee or is Shari going to go ask people to participate?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 51
Rountree: I think we just recognized the group. It wasn't that formal. I think your
general consensus that this is the right way to go. I would recommend we let the
department head take the lead on it. That's her business, and if you want anybody to
review your criteria and your rating, I do that a lot. I'd be glad to offer that service to
you. You want to just fax it to me or e-mail me or something.
Stiles: We do have like a matrix set up that has those different percentages. The next
item, I don't know why they left. Steiner Development has placed another sales office
out on the Dakota Ridge property without asking any kind of permission or permits.
Their letter is a little misleading calling it a construction trailer. It's really a sales office.
They just went out and plopped it down. It's not hooked up to sewer or water. I don't
know what they are doing for those kinds of services, but —
Bird: Shari let me ask you a question. Their letter and I don't know who Cheryl Sable is
Stiles: She's in the Public Works Department.
Bird: It says a construction trailer.
Stiles: It's not a construction trailer.
(Inaudible)
Bird: I have no problem with a construction trailer on there. It's done all the time. We
need it and even small people need it. But if it's a sales office, then something needs to
be done.
Stiles: It is a sales office.
Rountree: Is it both?
Bird: It couldn't be both Charlie. If it's a construction, it's filled with construction
equipment and it's used as overseeing construction.
Stiles: He had a realtor in there. It's exactly what they did —
Bird: It's a sales office.
Stiles: Yes. It's exactly what they did at Lake at Cherry Lane.
Bird: Is it 40 footer?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 52
Stiles: I don't know if you ever saw it out there. It used to sitting where right next to
where the fire station lot is out there.
Rountree: It used to be right on Ten Mile.
Stiles: Yeah. And that was a case where he just plopped it out there without any kind of
a permit.
Rountree: No, that's a sales office. I agree with Shari.
Bentley: Do you have a code officer?
Stiles: Yeah.
Bird: Send him out there and get him out there.
Rountree: Or he can apply for a conditional use permit.
Stiles: I mean he didn't come in and get any kind of permit. I would assume that he
needs a building permit to erect something like that even on a temporary basis. Does
he?
(Inaudible)
Stiles: He had it set up right there on Ten Mile and then he moved it further into the
development on the Teeter Street until the people in the subdivision complained. They
were sick of looking at it so he just picked it up and plopped it out there now.
Rountree: Most outfits build a home and use that for their sales office, then sell it later.
Stiles: Okay, I'll let him know.
Bird: If he's using it as a sales office, he isn't hooked up to water, sewer and electricity?
Stiles: Well he maybe hooked up to electricity but I'm sure he hasn't had permit from
Idaho Power to do that either. Because even to do that he would have to go through
the city to get the permit.
Bird: Does he have an outdoor lavatory?
Stiles: No.
(Inaudible)
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 53
Stiles: Thank you.
D. TOM KUNTZ:
1. BUDGET LINE ITEM ADJUSTMENT / VEHICLE
PURCHASE
Kuntz: At your request we took three of our four antique parks vehicles to the Musick
and Sons Auction in November and received a total of $2566 for the three vehicles.
Bentley: Somebody got hosed.
Kuntz: Actually one vehicle went for $1600. It's a collector's item. And what I'm asking
for is that money you allow me to use that money to offset the expense of the water
department used vehicle that we picked up about a week ago.
Bird: Wasn't this Ford Ranger in your original budget?
Kuntz: No.
Anderson: Didn't we authorize the purchase of a pick up or something like that? Was
one of those purchase or is this that purchase?
Kuntz: You authorized the purchase of a one ton that has been purchased and
authorization of a smaller new vehicle which has not been purchased because we're
waiting for the state bids to come out. Then you authorized $4,000 to go towards
another used vehicle that we purchased about three months ago.
Bird: How many vehicles Tom? I'm going back through and I can't remember? How
many vehicles did we authorize you to buy this year?
Kuntz: Three.
Bird: And we got rid of four?
Kuntz: Correct. It was either that or put new brakes on the fourth one.
Bird: How many you got now?
Kuntz: Vehicles that we're using? We have the one ton, the 91 Ford, which we got
from the water department in the summer and the little Ford Ranger, so three vehicles is
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 54
what we are running right now and we have the fourth antique but we (inaudible) all new
brakes all the way around.
Bird: Is that all that is lacking on that one?
Kuntz: The antique? No, sir. But that would allow us to at least put it on the street if we
could stop it.
Anderson: The one ton, is that that one that has the dump bed on it?
Kuntz: Yes, sir.
Anderson: Question for the other Council members to add money back in there, is this
not a one time budget adjustment because you are adding money to the budget. It's not
a line item transfer.
Rountree: I don't know. We might need an explanation from Janice or Will, but it's a
unexpected revenue. Normally it would probably just go in the general fund. In this
case what Tom is asking is instead it go to the general fund, it go to the water
department to offset the —
Bird: No, it's going into his budget which is like Ron says is a budget adjustment
Charlie. We give him so much money last year and we didn't —
Rountree: It would land in his budget long enough to go to the water department to pay
for the small pick up.
Bird: We understand that, but this is a budget adjustment. You're adding money to his
budget.
Bentley: I would think probably the simplest way to do this would be to let the money go
into the general fund and then do a budget adjustment at the end of the year for the cost
of the Ranger. I think the paper trail would be a lot cleaner.
Bird: That's what we did last year.
Bentley: We can sit here and just approve him go ahead and picking up this truck and
then at the end of the year do the budget adjustment when we do the blanket
adjustments.
Rountree: One time.
Bird: One time budget adjustment.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 55
Kuntz: Sounds good.
Bentley: So if nobody has anything else to say, I'll make a motion we approve the parks
department to purchase the Ford Ranger truck from the City Water Department.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: Moved and seconded that parks department work out an arrangement with
the water department for purchase and transfer of the Ranger pick up. Any discussion?
Anderson: Question for Tom. Is the sale amount that they want is it this $2566 or do
they want more than that?
Kuntz: We haven't come to an agreeable amount yet.
Bird: I guarantee you it is not going to be $2566. Right Gary?
Anderson: Okay so this is one of them open ended deals. I see.
Rountree: Any other questions?
Smith: Mr. President we only gave him one key to the vehicle.
Rountree: I see.
Kuntz: And no license plates.
Rountree: Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Kuntz: Charlie a couple of other quick announcements. Just a reminder that the tree
lighting ceremony is Friday night in front of the post office starts at 6:30 and I'm
wondering Councilman Bentley, are you going to report on the soccer complex tonight?
Bentley: Yes, I can.
Smith: I was surprised that Tom didn't bring up the rest of his adjustment that he wants
on the budget because talking with — he had met with Reta and he wanted some budget
transfers, which I have copies of. You didn't want to bring that up? That has to be
approved to Council when you're adding new amounts. He's just transferring from one
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 56
account to another account. The stuff that you gave Reta. You need to bring that up,
otherwise we can't do it.
Kuntz: I guess I didn't realize they were budget transfers requiring Council action.
What they were is realignment of line items as requested by the Auditing?
Smith: Yeah, the auditors want it approved through the Council to make sure it's in the
minutes.
Rountree: Tom before you go, these were recommended as a result of the audit?
Smith: No, he's added the recreation department and he had in wages and he wants to
separate it out so you can see how much is being used in that.
Kuntz: These are a result of the meeting that we had with Reta and Sue takes care of
our accounting, and myself. The auditor had come up with new line items and then we
looked at those and came up with some changes that we wanted to make for better
tracking and more efficient way of spending out of those line items. So I guess that's
why I was a little confused because some of it was coming from the auditor.
Smith: It's not the auditor, it's our new software.
Kuntz: Okay.
Smith: But the auditor did want it brought up in Council to be approved. Overall it
doesn't change the bottom line figure.
Bird: It's just changing numbers.
Rountree: Changing the line item classification.
Bentley: I've got a question Janice. The first item of the $29,300. The account
numbers are the same, transferring from and to.
Smith: See over to the right. There's one digit difference.
Bentley: My mistake.
Smith: Any other questions on those? They're pretty general.
Bird: This is something we have to do? We need a motion Charlie to change this?
Rountree: Yes, we do.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 57
Bird: I move that the City Parks and Recreation Department budget transform be
approved as presented to us.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we approve the budget transferring form
as it's been presented to us by Parks Director Kuntz. Any discussion? All those in
favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
D. JANICE SMITH:
Smith: Since you're still on that subject, we have one transfer we would like changed
also. We're working with Boise on their accounting numbers and working with the blue
book, the GAAP, the General Accepted Accounting Practices. We've been going
through that a lot with accountants and their new software consultant so I have just one.
And I also made a copy of our last financial statement that you got and you probably
saw that in there, but I'll let you look at it first because I'm sure you'll have a question.
Looking at the blue book and some accounting numbers that we got from Boise, they
are separating out their accounting against utilities. I know this accounting would be
Reta and Karen. They come out of the enterprise fund and their main function is the
enterprise. And we just wanted to separate it leaving the utility wages, taking 67% of
wages and leaving 33% into the accounting wages. You can see it on that expenditure
report. How it's copied. It does not change the overall. The overall together is
$170,300. So the two added together still adds up to $170,300.
Rountree: Any other questions?
Bentley: I have none.
Bird: I think that's got to be done.
Bentley: Mr. President I move we approve the budget transfer form for the MUBS
department.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we approve the budget transfer form for
the MUBS. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 58
Smith: I printed out some history on our investments. A little bit of history on some of
our checking accounts that were non active. I think that we need to get that money out
of there and get it into something else and comes in line with trying to figure the
Councilmen decide on who they are going to have as a consultant for our investments.
You guys all remember everything you read in the Buffington Moore McNeil and the
other investment book that you got from Floyd Ayers. You know it front to back.
(Inaudible)
Smith: Did you bring your books? I thought I would go over the investments that we
have right now. I put these in categories of funds. I figured it was easier. Sometimes
you really don't care what bank you're looking at. You want to see actually how much is
in that fund. So the first page, it's all of the investments in the general account. We
have four banks there. These are all CD's. Usually when the CD's interest rates are
doing good, the state treasurer's department isn't but right now the CD rates and
everything are going down so maybe we need to go into state treasury. Right now you
have $2,000,000 — almost three million dollars in just the general. On the next page two
and three — the next two pages are your enterprise accounts. You have six banks.
Rountree: And the grand total is $14.7 million.
Smith: Yes, that's correct. So that's the enterprise and then the back page is the
building fund, fire truck fund for Kenny wherever he is. Anyway that's what you have.
These are kind of —and you see the dates, it says the date, but that's not the beginning
date. The due off to the right is as they come due, so as they come due, you can
decide what you want done with them. Or if we got an investment advisor they would
help us with that. You can't dip into them right now, but you can when they come due.
Bentley: What about the ones that says due dates 9/5/98?
Smith: I haven't updated it since we've been on the audit. They've been renewed
probably at a year. (Inaudible) Interest rates are going down. This is a couple of
checking accounts and I am not sure — I know that we put some money in the Idaho
Independent Bank. I don't what it is with banks, but they really don't want to get you a
good CD rate unless you open up a checking account, but I stuck my ground and did
not open a checking account. US Bank we have three accounts. One is reserved for
the water and sewer revenue bonds. I didn't put another one on here that's not much
money in it on the well fund, and both of these other ones are enterprise accounts, but
this is money that can be taken out on both of these accounts. This money is not tied
down to a certain amount of time. So this is a start on our firm that we decide to help
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 59
with our investments. In the enterprise account we do have about $10,000,000 in the
bank. We need to get that out of there and get some better interest rates.
Rountree: Did you say we have $10,000,000 in the checking account in the enterprise
fund?
Smith: Just enterprise alone.
Bird: In a checking account?
Rountree: That's above and beyond the $14,000,000 we have tied up in CD's?
Bird: It's in a checking account?
Smith: They are giving a higher rate to us because —
Bird: Well yeah, you got to be kidding me?
Smith: That's why we need to get it out of there.
Bentley: And that's enterprise?
Smith: There's some money in there on the general, but the first three months of our
year in the general, you don't have a lot of operating money until January. You'll get a
million in on property tax, January and July, so then in January you could invest some
more money if the police department doesn't spend it all.
Bentley: In the enterprise fund then you've got $24,000,000?
Bird: Yes, that's what our audit shows.
Smith: The enterprise — one thing about enterprise is they have monthly fees, so — the
enterprise is pretty much self sufficient, but anyway that just kind of gives you a
rundown of what's in there.
Anderson: Inaudible
Smith: No, not since the auditor have been in and haven't been able to get back to
them and put the interest earned because there is interest earnings too that I haven't
recorded.
Anderson: What happens with the money that was budgeted like for example in the fire
department's budget, they had money last year for fire truck fund. There should have
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 60
been at the end of last year a payment that went into this account. Where is that money
and all the money that wasn't spent out of everybody's budget in the checking accounts
at this point?
Smith: Yes, that's in your fund balance forward.
(Inaudible)
Smith: What we were doing this is define those. Please define those, well fund balance
forward and then something happens, reelection comes up and they can't remember
where it is, so we're defining them in our new software so that they are with names on
who it belongs to. What you the Council decide where you want to go.
Bentley: I have a question. I know you have tons of time to look up some of this, but
sometime down the road say before we get into the next budget cycle to put things
together can you show us where all these surpluses are coming from?
Smith: Surpluses like —
Bentley: At the end of the year where it's not being spent.
Smith: Yeah.
Bentley: Which department, what category.
Smith: We've already done that —
Bentley: I know you've touched on it briefly but I think if we could put it together where
we could have it for budget section, we could take a look because if a department is
sitting and constantly budgeting "x" number of dollars for this item and they're not using
that money, but the next year they bump it up another five or ten percent, we need to
reel this in because it's money like the fire department is in need of funds and vehicles
and buildings and stuff and the parks department needs more money. But we're
showing that we've got all this money spent for the year and at the end of the year we're
sitting humming at three quarters to a million dollars that could have been used that
year.
Smith: Yeah, I would like to give you a quarterly report on that too, not just at the end of
the year —
Bentley: But I understand where you are at with the auditors and getting everything
transferred over. But I'm saying if we can get something going before the budget year
comes up so we can have a way to review with the department heads that look you
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 61
keep budgeting the same stuff and it's not used and I don't want to see them get in a
use it or lose it mode either. But if they keep bumping something that's really not a
necessity then we need to have that money so we can allocate it somewhere else.
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, just a point of information on the point
of Councilman Bentley. His comment there and I hear the term enterprise funds. There
are different issues that pose for sewer and water which are dedicated funs for hook up
fees or whatever have to be held for maintenance of the system and you have a little
more leeway if you are holding funds to build a station or a fire truck or whatever and I
assume those are all separately categorized, but there's some statutory provisions that
allow you to do capitol carryovers particularly with fire department things and some
other. It would be real good to pay close attention to that.
Bird: Janice, are you wanting a motion regarding going to an investment —
Smith: Well I know that that — I'm not sure the date it was we requesting a proposal
from these two companies, Buffington, Moore McNeil and Seattle Northwest. They're
both good companies. Met with both firms, really hard to choose, but I always go to the
bottom line. What's it going to cost, so I tagged a couple. Of course they didn't put
page numbers on them. So I suggest that maybe you look at what I've looked at is on
the last page of Buffington, Moore, McNeil, that's their schedule on fees, and when you
look at Seattle Northwest and I can make you copies of these too tonight before I leave
Seattle Northwest (End of Tape)
Smith- —agreement. Met with Floyd Ayers, he's on a sabbatical right now. I think he's
going to be back in December, because I had some more questions for him. On this fee
schedule and agreement, did you have yours with you Keith?
Bird: Yes, I do.
Smith: Because it says he would negotiate hourly rates and other mutually accepted
methods, and I think the water and sewer department might be familiar with Floyd
Ayres. He's helped the city with water and sewer revenue bonds. He worked with
Nampa on a lot of their projects, but then again the Buffington, Moore, McNeil they
worked for banks. They're very reputable. They all know the Idaho laws on
government investments, so they're both good. My next suggestion is give it to our
auditors, make them — this is what their schedule is, maybe I'll narrow it down to say our
investment is $10,000,000. We would give you $10,000,000. What are your fees
instead of just a general oh, 2.32 or .25% of all investments, because they want the
whole pie. But we can't give them the whole pie right now, because we're dedicated to
these banks until as they come due, so I would suggest maybe quick as soon as
possible get this to Kevin Anderson at Balukoff and see if he can review these and look
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 62
at these two pages. And he said he would do that. Then get his input, but I posthaste
do it. Maybe he can get to us within a week or the next Council meeting to give you —
Bird: I don't know about the rest of the guys, but I'm for getting it now. Kevin Anderson
was the one that sat right here and told us to get a investment banker.
Smith: Yes, he did.
Bird: We've dinked around on this for six months. How much money have we lost in six
months. 6.16 is the biggest interest you're getting on any of your CD's, absolutely.
Most of them are 5. They're going to go down. You're not going to roll them over for
that. I'm ready to make a motion. I'm ready to vote on it, get the thing down the road.
Smith: They're both very good companies. I have felt safe working with both of them.
Either one, that is all I have.
Rountree: I know I have talked to Bob a little bit about you possibly getting a hold of
Ken Harward.
Smith: Yeah, I did. He was the one that recommended Floyd Ayres, because he
worked with him in Nampa.
Bird: He wrote their bonds for their recreation center and all that stuff is what — he got
their bonds, set up their bonding because he had him come over and talk to us on
bonding.
Smith: Well it sounded like talking to Floyd Ayres, there was a fee up front and set in
amount no matter how long you use him. But when you look at his fee schedule and
agreement he's negotiable on different things.
Bird: The other one is a flat fee.
Smith: The other one is percentage off any investment.
Bird: If you make money, they take it off from —
Smith: Overall the investments interest earnings are going to pay for either one of
them.
Bird: That's right.
Smith: I mean don't nickel and dime. Let's get it done.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 63
Bird: I agree.
Smith: Any other questions?
Rountree: Thank you Janice.
Bird: Do you want a motion or do you want a discussion first?
Rountree: We can have a motion and a discussion on the motion. If you're ready to
make a motion.
Bird: Mr. President, I move that Meridian City Council enters into an investment
agreement with Buffington, Moore and McNeil for a period of one year with review at the
end of one year as we have with the attorneys. The amount to be invested is to be
determined by the Mayor, City Council, and Treasurer.
Anderson: I'll second it so we can have a discussion.
Rountree: Discussion.
Anderson: Why would we not want to take Janice's advice and get a recommendation
from this Kevin Anderson? Why are you set on the Buffington Moore?
Bird: Well I think that they presented it. Kevin sat here and told us when he went over
the audit with us we need to get on it. We've waited six months. Well it will be another
six months. Right now you are getting into the accountant's busiest time of the year.
Accounting firms are getting ready for their tax season the auditors. I don't know how
soon he could have it back. Could he have it back for the 15th? This was suppose to be
on the agenda for the last two months and then we finally got it on. That's the only thing
I am going by.
Anderson: Janice indicated that he could look at it and have a recommendation to us
by the 15th, didn't you?
(Inaudible)
Bentley: That was my concern too is walking into something and not having a straight
up view as to what the cost was going to be.
Rountree: Any other discussion? All right, I'll throw out my two cents worth. I think we
need to move forward. I agree that we've sat on it too many years, not just months, too
many years. We've probably lost a fair amount of money. Whether or not that means
that we make an immediate rash decision. I don't see that Keith's motion put us in a
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 64
situation that we'd do anything more than enter into an agreement and if we can't come
to an agreement in that process, then we might have to find somebody else, but I guess
if I were going to vote on this issues, that's how I would view the motion and probably
would be supportive of it. Mr. Gigray do you have any advice based on your experience
in municipalities and these kinds of things? In thirty seconds or less.
Gigray: Mr. President, I've only had experience with Mr. Ayres in an $18,000,000 bond
for the Caldwell School District their new high school and he also did the — when they
built Sacajawea and he's also provided technical assistance to the Canyon Highway
District and I've always found him to be an excellent person to work with and has
always given very good advice. I think the other firm has a good reputation as well.
Rountree: That's what I gathered from the discussions I've had in the industry.
Gigray: I think this is a very good idea.
Rountree: Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Rountree: The assumption there I think is Janice and the Mayor take the administrative
action and get something together for the Council.
Bird: I think Janice ought to get a hold of them and get them over here to talk with her.
Rountree: And we'll probably need our auditor involved as well because we're going to
need to have another action that will establish what funds and the amounts of those
funds we're going to invest and how much we're going to need to operate the city and
what constraints we may or may not have on some of the enterprise funds.
E. CHARLIE ROUNTREE
INSURANCE DISCUSSION
Rountree: The next item on the agenda is the discussion on the insurance coverage for
the health insurance for the City of Meridian. We've had some information provided by
both the Mayor and our insurance broker on this particular issue. We have a
recommendation from the city's insurance committee to change insurance coverage
from Blue Cross to Blue Shield. In that the resulting savings is being recommended to
be forward in terms of paying for workman's compensation and what was the other
one?
Bentley: Long term disability.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 65
Rountree: Long term disability and life insurance coverage for city employees.
Increasing the life insurance amount. Any comments, discussions on where we go with
that?
Anderson: Mr. President, in light of the presentation that we had from Ron Tores, I think
we go with the recommendation of the insurance committee. I think in all fairness a
good faith effort was put out to both the insurance providers and Blue Shield offered the
best policy for the money and that's what we had asked them for was a quote and
would recommend that we go with Blue Shield.
Rountree: Any discussion? Is that a motion?
Anderson: I would put that in the form of a motion.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: A motion and a second to accept the recommendation of the City's
insurance committee to change insurance carriers from Blue Cross to Blue Shield for
medical insurance and to include long term disability, was that the intent, and additional
life insurance amounts for city employees was motion and seconded. Discussion?
Bird: I've got a question and this is on something else. I want to know why the city has
only one insurance agent bidding on this. We seem to want to have two or three on
everything else, but we select one agent, insurance agent. There's other very capable
agents out there that does it. I don't like the way the whole thing went down from either
Blue Cross or Blue Shield's way. I think it was a very phony set up. That's my personal
opinion. I don't think either one of them and I don't know what went down with the
agent. I mean we got the agent's story tonight. I have happened to also get the other
side's story too, so I'm so mixed up. I don't know whether I'm punched or bored, but
insurance is the biggest fallacy going which if anything should be regulated, I think that's
one area that certainly should look to doing, but I have a real hard feeling about
changing for the simple fact is Blue Cross come back and I don't like this aspect either.
I don't like Blue Shield getting Blue Cross's rates which was given to them to bid it.
Being making a living in the bidding field and at the same token, I don't like Blue Cross
being able to come back and say I'll meet or match. The same token Blue Cross is a
community tax paying entity. Blue Shield is not. I would say after this I want more than
one agent giving bids on stuff. We require more than one for everything else. There's
other good agents out there that handle Blue Cross, Blue Shield, everything else, and
they can play with their commissions, give us different deals. That's all I got to say.
Rountree: Any other discussion? I guess to that point Mr. Bird that that's probably
subject to an ordinance on the part of the city or some kind of a resolution on the part of
the Council at a future date.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 66
Bird: We'll get that.
Rountree: No more discussion?
Bentley: I'll kick in my two cents. I agree in part with Keith. I'm not real excited about
the way this thing went down. I think it could have been handled better by everybody
involved, but hopefully we can clean that up as we have several other problems we've
stumbled onto.
Rountree: I'll get the final say on this and I tend to agree that I think that the confusion
in being played one against the other is not the situation that I think we need to be in
and I think in the future that if we do retain an agent and the agent does all of that and
we don't need to know what goes on. Anyway I'm a little bit disappointed in some of the
things I heard on both sides, and you guys have a motion before you. As soon as you
get that one and the next one done, we can probably go home. All those in favor of the
motion.
MOTION CARRIED: 2 ayes. 1 nay.
Rountree: I still have the floor in terms of the agenda. Would you all be open to a
planning session next week as opposed to trying to get something going on the week
after Christmas?
Bird: Boy, I would be.
Bentley: Yeah.
Anderson: I'm going to be gone the week between Christmas and New Years.
Rountree: So we're talking the 8th or — how about the 9th? Can we get City Hall the 91h?
Bird: Wednesday.
Rountree: Is that a problem with anybody?
Bird: The 9th?
Bentley: Not at this time.
Anderson: I think we're taking proposals on the fire station.
Bird: On the 9th?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 67
Anderson: On the 9th I think is one of the —
Bird: I thought it was the 10th, on the Thursday.
Rountree: Are you going to be reviewing them that evening?
Anderson: Yeah, I think. I have to check the schedule. I have it written down some
where.
Bird: I thought it was the 10th. I might be wrong. What's wrong with the 8th
Rountree: P & Z will be in here.
Bird: That's right.
Gigray: How much room do you need?
Rountree: Well you never know how many people can show up. I mean usually
nobody, sure enough if you had it in the coffee room, you'd have ten people show up.
Gigray: Can you have it in the other building?
Rountree: You mean in the Mayor's —
Gigray: No, in the building that we're in on Carlton.
Bird: We'd have to —
Rountree: Well in terms of recording and all that kind of stuff, it makes it a little difficult.
How about the 7th? Mondays are bad?
Bentley: Monday is not going to be good for me.
Rountree: Well let's plan on the 9th unless it falls through and Ron you can let us know.
Bird: Really Ron, are you interviewing on the 9th or are you just accepting their
proposals?
Anderson: I can't remember which is it.
(Inaudible)
Bird: Yeah, that's when the proposals come in.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 68
Rountree: So you'd be looking at them later. I don't have much on the agenda, but
there's some things we need to talk about and one that's been hanging around a long
time whether or not we can get it on and that's the cross connection demonstration from
the people in the City of Boise. We need to get that going before we get into irrigation
system. So Gary if you could get that scheduled for the 9t", the video and the individual
to come and talk to us about what — it's United Water that does that; is that correct? If
we could make that happen on the 9t" that would be great. I had some indication that
the new school superintendent would like to be introduced to us, so if you could make
that arrangements, Will, we could meet the new school superintendent. The other thing
is that Bill has talked about to discuss procedure and operations of meetings and some
of our motions and whatnot and he's got a handout for us tonight anyway. That's all I'm
proposing we talk about. Get in and get out hopefully by 8:30 9:00 unless there's
something that's really burning a whole in your desires that you want to talk about. I've
got another one here the Ten Mile Station, but I think we can probably talk about that at
some point in time in the future.
Bentley: I don't have anything that pertains to this. I just wanted to give a report on the
soccer complex at the national level. The corporate decided that the Treasure Valley
wasn't big enough for them to get involved with. Tom, you spoke with the realtor on the
property.
Kuntz: He called me long distance from Oregon on Friday and I just gave the
information that you just shared with the Council. He said he would like to wait until he
got back into town to sit down with me to see if there are some other options available
because the couple who are selling the land really would rather it went towards parks
and he's got two developers who are interested in the property but the land owners are
real interested in it becoming a park. Not necessarily a soccer complex, but a park so
he and I are going to sit down and I may bring some information back to the Council at a
later date.
Bentley: I would really like to the Council to give some thought on maybe just acquiring
the land for a park site or whatever we desire at a later date. At 12 5 it's awful cheap.
We paid 20 for the 56 acre site. And something later maybe come along to where we
can partner up with somebody else to put the plan back on schedule, but you know it's a
thought of buying some land before it all gets away. And I realize the concern is let's
get the 56 acre going, but I think the city is big enough to plan for more than one project
at a time. So I would just like everybody to think about that and hopefully we can work
something out when Tom gets a chance to speak with the realtor and the landowners
again. And I want to thank Tom too for his help in trying to put this together and he
worked really hard at it. We gave it a pretty good shot I thought, and I think that Gary
Babbitt did too with the time he spent with it and the architect and stuff. Maybe we can
revive it different time different place, but anyway thanks.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 69
Anderson: Question for Tom on that subject. I strongly agree that Meridian needs more
park space, but I guess before would endorse going out and looking at a piece of land
just because it's a good buy I would like to see a master plan put together for the parks
department that identifies key areas of the city on where we want to put park space and
what type of parks we want whether they're sports parks or picnic parks or what kinds of
parks they are. I think right now we don't have a good plan and maybe this piece of
land might fit into that land. Maybe it's a good buy, but I really don't know because
haven't seen any kind of master plan and I know we just finished Tully Park and this
seems like it's right out in the same area and just down the road a little bit further and
what are we doing to balance out our park system throughout the city so I guess kind of
in answer to Glenn's question too is instead of giving thought about buying this one
piece of property, I would like look at the overall picture and then decide whether this
one fits into that plan.
Kuntz: I agree with you Councilman Anderson. As you recall you approved $25,000 to
do a park comprehensive plan that would go hand in hand with the updated city
comprehensive plan that's going to be done. And I'm currently working on the RFP's for
that so we can get moving on that, but I agree. We need to have a blueprint and a plan
in place for not only identifying property, but how we are going to pay for that property. I
think that's the thing that's lacking right is I've identified five different sites over the last
six months, but without some kind of a purchase plan, funding plan, in place.
Anderson: Yeah, it doesn't do any good to identify them.
Bird: Another thing my statement is purchasing is fine, but let's develop what we've got.
Kuntz: I think there needs to be a balance and I think that will come out in the
comprehensive plan is that the way that land is being eaten up by developers that by
having a plan in place, identifying the park sites and then having a balance of money
put towards developing and acquisition. Then I think it's going to be a win/win situation
for the community.
Bird: I think the comprehensive plan will really help.
Kuntz: And we know Optimist wants to develop a site here in Meridian to accommodate
those teams and so we're hoping to work with Optimist in the coming years to develop a
site here in Meridian.
Bird: I wouldn't bet on that. I think we've done about all we got.
Rountree: Any other issues?
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 70
Bentley: Just one. We are doing one more order of pies goes in the 3rd, so if anybody is
interested, there's a sheet in the break room.
Rountree: Before you go we have an ACHD meeting potential on the 17'". Do you want
to — my question is are the new commissioners going to be there or are we just going to
be meeting with a lame duck group?
Bird: I thought we were going to wait until the new commissioners come in.
(Inaudible)
Bentley: Well my feeling would be I just assume wait until the new commissioners get
in.
Rountree: Yeah, if they aren't going to be there, I don't want to meet.
Bird: I'm with you Charlie. I don't —
Rountree: There's no sense in meeting with Gary and —
(Inaudible)
Rountree: So do you want to take them up on that offer, or tell them we'd like to sit
down with them in January?
Bird: It's pretty close to Christmas season.
Rountree: Just tell them we want to defer until after the first of the year.
Bird: February.
Rountree: We don't have any issues at this point now.
Bentley: When are they going to get Franklin done?
Anderson: When are they going to make a decision on the one way couplets or
widening Meridian Street?
Bird: That's another thing that's been postponed for two years.
Anderson: I am ready to make a decision.
Meridian City Council
December 1, 1998
Page 71
Bird: I am too. We can't get on the stupid agenda.
Rountree: Well let's get it on the agenda.
Bentley: I was going to say you might check with the Mayor when he gets back.
Because that committee was suppose to be reporting to us —
Rountree: That committee was suppose to have been a month ago. Quite frankly I can
tell you what the committee is going to tell you and I don't know that it's in general
agreement with what I'm hearing on the end of the Council.
Bird: It's the same old committee that we're going to get the same old report. It's the
same people on it. I can tell you who dominated the committee.
Rountree: But anyway yeah we asked him to do that and we need to get it on the
agenda.
Bentley: Would you do that?
Rountree: I will continue to try, yes.
Bentley: Motion to adjourn.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:25 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
/G1WW00]T1'2191
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK