Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 01-20MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 20, 1998 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Robert D. Corrie at 7:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree, Keith Bird MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Mayor Robert Corrie, Wayne Crookston, Will Berg, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Bill Gordon, Brad Watson: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JANUARY 6,1998: Corrie: Council, you have the minutes of the previous meeting held January 6, 1998. Are there any alterations or corrections on those minutes? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay, I will entertain a Motion for the acceptance of the minutes, as written. Bird: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second. Do we accept the minutes as approved. All those in favor, say yea. MOTION CARRIED: All yea. ITEM NO. 1: TABLED DECEMBER 2,1998: FINAL PLAT FOR DEVLIN PLACE SUBDIVISION BY D.W. INC.: Corrie: Is the representative from Devlin here tonight to answer any questions? Shari would you like to go first? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I haven't received any additional correspondence from the applicant, but I do know that he is waiting for the development agreement to be executed with Prestige Care to outline the details of that property, and I don't think he is willing to proceed until he's got that in hand. Corrie: Okay. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 2 Stiles: If you would like to put it off another month, I don't think it's going to be ready for at least another month. Corrie: All right. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, would another month be through February or the end of February meeting. Stiles: The third Tuesday in February — the 17th. Rountree: Would that give them sufficient time or go March? Stiles: I think we could go March. I just would hate to see if they see suddenly took some interest in getting that done, that it would be put off it. Corrie: So, it would be the 3rd of March. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move we table the final plat at Devlin Place until March 3rd Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second that we table the Devlin Place Subdivision until March 3rd from the discussion. Hearing none -- All those in favor say yea. MOTION CARRIED: All yea. ITEM NO. 2: TABLED JANUARY 6,1998: REQUEST FOR INSTALLATION OF SEPTIC SYSTEM FOR A WAREHOUSE BUILDING BY MCCALL PROPERTIES: Corrie: Shari, are they here? Shari: I believe Mr. Summers is here to address the Council tonight. Corrie: All right. Summers: I represent McCall Properties who owns 7.5 acres over at Commercial west of Eagle Road. Corrie: Can I have your name please? Summers: Yes, Mark Summers. Corrie: Thank you. Summers: And are proposing to construct a warehouse building approximately 50,000 square feet on the portion of the property. We've talked with Shari, and she has indicated that we City Council January 20, 1998 Page 3 should go in front of the Council because we need septic approval because there is not sewer access there. So we are asking for septic approval. Rountree: Do you have any indication from DEQ about the acceptability of the septic system in that location? Summers: No, we do not. Rountree: There is a potential that they may indicate since the sewer is in the vicinity that they would wish that they be connected to the city sewer. Summers: And we'd welcome the idea to be connected to the city sewer actually. My understanding it hasn't been brought through there. There's some sort of block getting the sewer to us. We'd certainly be willing to pay our portion of that to get it to there. Rountree: What's your time line on your construction? Summers: We'd like to get it done in the next couple of months, get started at least. Corrie: Who owns the property that you are wanting to do this on? Summers: McCall Properties. We've owned it for excess of ten years, and it's about time we do something with it. It's just been sitting in our books. Corrie: What we're trying to do to give you some feedback here is trying to get an easement through the Roland Saums property to get that sewer line over there to the Coca Cola, Albertson's, what have you. I haven't been able to get a hold of Paul Clayton or Roland Saums. I've been trying. Mr. Clayton has been in Alabama, or some place — he's out of town until next week. Hopefully, -- he may have to go to California to go to Roland Saums. There seems to be a problem between his property and Van Auker and there is something in there that is just not right. I don't know what it is, but we're trying to find out. And I have not been able to get a hold of either one of them yet. Summers: Sure. We were just asking for some direction so we can proceed with the building. Corrie: Does anybody here know any more than I do on Roland Saums and what's going on out there? Rountree: He seems to be a phantom. Corrie: Yeah. Rountree: Paul is out of town. I've been trying to get a hold of him. Corrie: And you have not talked with DEQ yet? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 4 Summers: No, we have not. Bentley: I might suggest that you make some contact with DEQ and get their feelings on it, and maybe in the interim — when Mr. Clayton gets back, the Mayor can get a hold of him and see if we can't get a meeting set up and see if we can't find out what the problems are and can't get something going and get the easement. Summers: What's the position of the Council, I mean, we would just as soon have sewer there. But I guess we'd like direction from the Council. I mean, it doesn't make sense to put in a septic system if we're not required to. Rountree: Well, like I'd say from the Councilman's position is that my preference is it'd be sewer. Summers: Okay. Rountree: And we pool our resources and direct them that way as opposed to having you build a septic system and then in six months have to abandon that and connect to the sewer which in fact is what would happen if we get the sewer through there. Summers: Sure. Rountree: We also have a willing participant in that sewer extension as opposed to the current property owner, so we have the physical ability it appears to get that sewer through there. We just need the right of entry of any easement established. And that may eliminate the road block that we have at this point, and again, as the Mayor said, we have not been able to contact the property owner. Summers: So, I should proceed with DEQ and just expect an answer back. What's a reasonable amount of time for that? Rountree: I think that they would be part of the permitting process as well, and you are going to have to have some specifics in terms of your flow rates. Summers: We have that. We have the architect already drawing everything up. Rountree: It's our understanding that there is some problems with one of the septic systems that is in the location now. So it may not be doable. Summers: So, we just need to wait back for an answer — go to DEQ and see what we can do and wait back to hear from you. Corrie: In the meantime, I will get in touch with somebody in California. If not Roland, it will be his representation. And we'll either go there or — because we have one of two choices. Either we get the easement through there or we have to go through condemnation. I don't the Council wants to go that forward with it, but we may have to. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 5 Summers: Okay. Bentley: One other point, I wouldn't go signing up for any permits on this or anything like that for putting that septic tank in until we — at least give us an attempt to try to get this out so you are not out any additional money. Summers: Okay. Bentley: Gary, do you know any more on this? Smith: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bentley, Councilman, I don't know. I haven't heard a word, not since the last meeting when the committee was formed to look into to securing the easement or finding out what the problems are with the property owner. Bentley: Okay, thank you. Corrie: Council, you want to table this until the next meeting and then we have a chance to talk with somebody — He has a chance to see DEQ. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, my preference would be that it stays on the agenda so we stay current with it and then don't leave these guys out in the dark on this thing so with that I would move that we table this item until our next regularly schedules meeting. Bird: I would second that. Corrie: Motion made and second that we table this discussion until the next meeting which would be February 3rd. Any further discussion? All in favor of the motion? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All yea. Corrie: In the meantime we will find out for you so — (inaudible) ITEM NO. 3 TABLED JANUARY 6,1998: ORDINANCE #785- CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENTNICE PRESIDENT: Corrie: Ordinance #786 — City Council President and Vice President. City Clerk says that that should be 785. We dropped one. Bentley: Seeing how we just received these — or I just did a couple of minutes ago, I `d like to table this so I can sit and have a chance to review it. I know there's been some changes made, but I haven't had a chance to look at them. Corrie: Further discussion? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 6 Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I've gone through the six or so versions that we have. I've come up with one that is very similar to the one that we were presented this afternoon. In fact, it's identical. I have some changes that need to be made in it. I would like those on the record — I would like those changes made. I think with those changes, at least from my point of view, the ordinance seems to contain the language that has been discussed in the planning sessions and previous meetings, and then if the council either wishes to table or take action on that at that point in time, I will let them decide that. Obviously I'd like to get these changes out to the Counselor so we don't have them yet again. I would say on page 3 of the document that I have as reference received January 9th, 1998 which is identical to the one I have stamped original in 785. It has no page number 3. It may that it just didn't copy well. Paragraph D on page 3, the second sentence "The President may sign warrants along with other required city officers." That needs to be stricken. That's redundant. Paragraph F, is also the same sentence. It needs to be stricken. From that point on, all of the paragraphs need to be re-identified. On paragraph E, the paragraph reads, "The President with the City Council concurrent shall establish and set the agenda for all City Council." Between the words for and all should be added "budget, legislative and strategic planning issues at". Bentley: Would you repeat that? Rountree: I sure hope I can. The sentence would read, "The President with the City Council concurrent shall establish and set the agenda for budget, legislative and strategic planning issues at all City Council meetings." My last addition would be on page 4, paragraph J, second line, "other than those mentioned above," there should be a "t" inserted in whatever word that is and it should say "stated" by the City Council, I believe. With those changes, that version comes — what I've come to understand has been the intent of all the previous discussions on the ordinance. Corrie: So then that the regular schedules — City Council meetings will stay the same as they were now with the City Clerk, with the advice of the Mayor and City Council. Rountree: I think the intent — I think the intent of those items are in there so that the Council can and will get on the agenda budget, legislative and strategic planning issues not being overlooked. Corrie: Okay. Anderson: I would make a motion then that we approve Ordinance #785 with the changes that Councilman Rountree recommended. Bird: I would second it. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson and second by Mr. Bird that we approve the Ordinance #785 as amended by Councilman Rountree. Any further discussion? Discussion: Hearing none, I shall have a roll call vote. City Clerk, would you give the roll call, please? ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson -yes, Rountree -yea, Bentley -yes, Bird -yes. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 7 MOTION CARRIED: All yea. Corrie: Mr. Attorney, would you please put that in a correct form for us, and I'll sign. Crookston: I certainly will. I believe the one that was delivered to City on January 9th should have been exactly as you stated, but if it's not, I will correct it. ITEM NO. 4 TABLED JANUARY 6,1998: ORDINANCE 4786 — ETHICS ORDINANCE: Bentley: I would like to see this ordinance sent back and give us a chance to review the pamphlets that we received Idaho Ethics and Government manual that was put out by Attorney General Lance. We received them at the training seminar last week. And briefly looking through this manual, it states all the state codes that are governing the ethics in government, and I'd like to see if we aren't duplicating what's already on the record. So you have an extra ordinance that we don't really need. I would put that in the form of a motion to discuss it at the planning meeting. Bird: I would second it. Corrie: Motion made Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Bird that we table the Ethic Ordinance and take it up in the planning meeting until February the 3rd. Any further discussion? Rountree: I guess I would just remind the council that one of the things we tried to accomplish with this ordinance was to take it a step beyond those issues and those code that remain in state code. And include some language that has actually been stricken and actually strengthen the ethics aspect —just a point of reminder. Bentley: And I don't have a problem with that, but here again too, we just received this copy tonight, and I have not had a chance to review it. Corrie: Also, I have copies of that meeting that each of you can have too as well. There's some changes. Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say yea. MOTION CARRIED: All yea. ITEM NO. 5 REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TV BROADCASTING STATION HOPE TV 22 WITH MICROWAVE DISH STRUCTURES TO BE PLACED ON ROOF, SATELLITE DISHES ON ROOF AND NEAR BUILDING BY WILLIAM HULL — 230 S. MERIDIAN ROAD: Corrie: Is Mr. Hull here tonight? Yes, sir, Mr. Hull. Hull: As you have in your notes from the Planning and Zoning meeting, we located this building because of its proximity of direction to the Deer Point, and then have put the dish for testing and as I stated if the tests didn't work out, we wouldn't be here, but testing showed that it was City Council January 20, 1998 Page 8 workable, and we have endeavored to comply with all of the other requests that we know of and hope that we've done what we could to provide a TV station in this location. Rountree: Mr. Hull, have you had an opportunity to review all of the terms and conditions of the Findings Of Facts as presented to you from Planning and Zoning? Hull: Yes, I've looked those over. Rountree: And they are acceptable to you? Hull: Yes. Rountree: Okay. I have no other questions. Corrie: Mr. Hull, what is Hope TV 22? Hull: Hope TV 22 is the title use for it. Its four letter call letters are KCLP. We use channel 22, a broadcast channel, and thus we just use the title Hope TV 22. But its official title will be KCLP Broadcast Station. Corrie: What kind of — is it a nation hookup or news or public TV or what? Hull: We're hoping it will be an active local TV station. Present our access is to the worship network which is strongly religious. And so it will always have a strong religious flavor to our programming with a lot of local programming. We're hoping that we will have a lot of the young people from the churches coming and training and learning how to go back to their church and produce programs that we can broadcast. In addition to that, we will have issues and ideas programming, some sports programming, quite a variety of programming that we hope will reach the community needs. Corrie: Okay, thank you. Any further discussion, comments? Anderson: I had one question. I noticed in the Findings Of Facts and Conclusion, it referenced adequate parking several times, and in the letter from Steve Arnold from ACHD, he mentioned that parking along the front would be eliminated. And in the Findings Of Facts and Conclusions, it didn't concur with that, and I guess my question to Shari is whether there is a minimum parking that is required and is that met or — Stiles: Commissioner Anderson, Mayor and Council, that parking will be eliminated when the widening of Meridian Road takes place. It's minimal now as far as parking requirements, and there can't be backing back out on to the street. There will be a vertical curb there, and there will be no way possible for people to park right directly in front of the building. I don't know how the parking is allocated as far as the remaining buildings and the remaining tenants there. I don't notice that they have any kind of a parking problem now, except when they have league play or something over at the bowling alley. But I think that was one of my comments too, that that would be eliminated. That was probably not an answer to your question, but — City Council January 20, 1998 Page 9 Anderson: Maybe Mr. Hull could answer. Do you anticipate a lot a traffic in there? Hull: No, we really don't, and there is ample parking in the center, and so far we haven't had any difficulty even when there is large number of people there at the bowling alley. So there always seems to be adequate parking. There was a little uncertainty about that parking where it said that it would be eliminated, and yet one of the gentlemen for the Highway District who was there said, "Well you could come along through that alley and turn and park parallel to the sidewalk. But whether that will take place or not, I don't know. There's adequate parking that's available even at the end of the building and in the center area, so I don't think parking is going to be a problem. Anderson: Yes, my other question is, it was noted in here about size of the satellite dishes and the number of them. One of the things we've been talking about is trying to keep the entry way corridors coming into the city — keeping them in a nice looking fashion, and is there anything that can be done to try and make these satellite dishes look a little less discreet, any type of screening or positioning that can be done with them? Hull: The interesting thing is as industry is changing, everything is shrinking in size. We're not even sure that we will put up the ten foot mesh dish. The ten foot mesh dish being mesh always looks smaller in size than even the eight foot solid dish, that is the microwave dish on the north side of the building. The eighteen inch dishes, you're familiar with those, the small ones, we'll have two of those on the south end of the building. And we're at first planning on putting the larger ten foot dish, but as of yet we're not sure even that we will need to put that up. But if we do, it will probably not stay up for long. I am anticipated that within a year, everything will have gone to the digital DBS dish, and we can then take that one down. Anderson: Thank you. Corrie: Any further questions? Mr. Hull, thank you very much. Any further questions of staff? Okay you have the Findings Of Facts and Conclusions in front of you from the previous reports. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that the Meridian City Council approves the Findings Of Facts and Conclusions of Law as prepared by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree and second by Mr. Bentley that we accept the Findings Of Facts and Conclusions of Law by the Planning and Zoning Commission. ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson —yea, Rountree —yea, Bentley -yea, Bird -yea. MOTION CARRIED: All yea. Corrie: I will entertain a motion for the conclusion. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 10 Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that the Meridian City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the Findings Of Facts and Conclusions of Law and others required by the City Council. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree and second by Mr. Bentley that we have the decision and recommendation as read. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say yea. MOTION CARRIED: All yea. Corrie: Mr. Hull, you are all set now. ITEM NO. 6: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR FIRST STREET PLAZA: Corrie: Shari, anything we should know about this one other than the one we have here? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, apparently then they are coming up against their deadline and they are within the allowable one-year extension? Shari: Yes. Rountree: Okay. I guess as a point of update to the new councilmen that there is a time limit required for filing final plats; is that not correct, and if it's going to exceed that time limit, the developer comes to the City and ask for an extension of that time. It's customary that we have allowed a year extension from the date of — has it been the request or the date of expiration date? Shari: They have one year from the date the preliminary plat is approved to submit a final plat and then one year thereafter to record it. And so they're up against the recording date. Rountree: Recording date, so that's what the request is. Is there any problem from staff with doing that? Shari: Still trying to get some landscaping and a redesign of the parking there. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would move we extend the preliminary plat filing approval for the Cherry Plaza from one year past the current expiration date. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Rountree that we extend the preliminary final plat for First Street Plaza for one year from the date. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion, say yea. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 11 MOTION CARRIED: All yea. ITEM NO. 7: WALTER SMITH: DISCUSSION OF HARLEY DAVIDSON RALLY AT SPEEDWAY: Corrie: Is — front and center. Smith: Evening. I'm site coordinator for the 1998 Harley owners group state rally committee, and we have arranged with Ken Hamilton with Meridian Speedway to hold '98 state rally at the speedway July 10th and 11th of this year, and there is two chapters of Harley owners group in Idaho, and one here in the treasure valley sponsored by Cycle Nuts and Bolts and one over in Blackfoot sponsored by Blackfoot Harley Davidson. And the rally goes back and forth every year, and this year it's our year to sponsor it. Upon an average the rally pulls in 250 to 300 motorcycles somewhere between 300 and 500 people; not Hell's Angels. Basically, -- Rountree: You sure? Smith: Yeah, positive. I don't think we have any of those chapters here actually. That's a whole different group. Anyway, I've had a couple of conversations with the Chief of Police, a conversation with the Mayor. We've talked to the people who run the park. We've talked to the people who run the pool, and everybody seems to think that this is a good idea. Basically why I'm here tonight for is to make sure that the experience is a positive one for both the City of Meridian and the participants in the 1998 hog rally. Just want to make sure that if you have any questions or concerns, that we get them out now in January instead of waiting until the last minute, and people start freaking out because 300 Harleys roll into town. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, what's the dates for this? Smith: July 10th and 11th, which is a Friday and Saturday in July. Bentley: And where are they going to be staying, are they going to stay right at the — Smith: -- Well, the speedway is going to be used as the central rally point, if you will. Our intentions for this year are to have a few field events that are going to be held inside the speedway itself. For the most part, the rally is going to consist of rides throughout the treasure valley and the surrounding areas for those two days. There is not going to be a parade coming down Main Street or drag racing in the park or anything like that. Basically the speedway is just a rally point and place where everybody comes to and then departs from. Bentley: Okay. Thank you. Smith: All right. There will be — we are proposing anyway — Ken Hamilton has an offer to us. He's got about approximately 4 and half acres, I guess, immediately east of the city park. He has offered to us for camping. There doesn't seem to be any problem between the park and the pool with restroom and shower facilities being available to us. If necessary, we can pull in extra City Council January 20, 1998 Page 12 restrooms, only that's not really a problem. We figured we'd work that out as we get a little closer to time for this, and see what our needs are actually going to be. That's about it. Corrie: It would be a good one for Tom Kuntz. Rountree: I guess I could point out to you, I think you are going to max out any facilities at the pool. They are pretty limited, so you are going to have to — if you are looking at on-site staying, you are going to have to have some kind of portable facilities. Smith: Our plan calls for having portable facilities. At this point we are still in the real early planning stages of this thing, and sometime in the next sixty days, we will be firming things up, but no, we don't intend to overload any of the City's facilities. We are going to go out of our way not to overload any of the City's facilities. There shouldn't be any conflict here at all. I'm a pretty cautious, and I have a tendency to overplan and overbuild — one of my faults — and so we will be making sure that we're not running afoul of anyone here. Corrie: We'll have you get in contact with Tom Kuntz who will be the parks director. You know, kind of go over some of the things we need to do as well. So — Smith: Okay, is he the new park director? Corrie: He is the new parks director. Rountree: Yes. Smith: Okay, have we already talked to him? Corrie: He will be coming in the 291h of January, and be all set to go. Smith: Okay. Yeah, we talked to the old parks director, and we talked to — what is it recreation district that runs the pool? We talked to the guy who runs that. So as much as possible we've made contact with the people we figure we're going to have primary impact on. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I'd like to have a comment from Chief Gordon, if I could regarding this. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, Council, Mr. Smith approached me approximately three or four months ago and advised me of what their plans were. I've an opportunity to do some checking and found that he is a reputable businessman in Garden City. What he usually starts, he finishes. And I have no doubts that this is going to be a asset for the City of Meridian. I think this kind of highlights our need for a special events ordinance, which I am working on now, which would spell out all the needs and everything we need to do for an event of this nature and magnitude. But as far as the police department goes, we don't have any problems at all with it. Smith: Thank you. Bentley: Are you going to ride the new Kawasaki's with them? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 13 Bentley: I would have one request, that we have a competition between the Meridian Police Department's new Kawaskis and one of the Harleys. We need to decide whether we are going to continue to buy Kawaskis or Harleys. Smith: I would be more than happy to participate in that. Both as a member of the rally committee and as general manager of Cycles Nuts and Bolts Harley Davidson. I would be more than happy to participate in that. As long as I get to designate the operator of the Harley Davidson. Gordon: We talked with Mr. Smith when we were negotiating or determining which motorcycles to buy. The issue was money, not performance, I might add that. Anderson: So, they can't catch these guys if they do do something bad. Smith: Well, he probably thinks so. Gordon: I guarantee you our radios are faster than those Harleys. We don't have any problems. We are looking forward to it. Corrie: Okay, any further discussion? Rountree: I have nothing. Just a general comment. I think it would be good for the city and be great to put something together where we have a shared experience with it. Smith: That's what we are hoping for. Good positive thing for everybody. Thank you gentlemen. ITEM NO. 8 NON -DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR HONOR PARK SUBDIVISION NO. 3: Corrie: Mr. Crookston, have you read over the non -development agreement? Crookston: Yes, I have. Corrie: Your comments. Crookston: There is just one or two very minor changes that I have written on my comments, Corrie: Doesn't change the meaning any? Crookston: No, it doesn't. Bentley: So, you are satisfied with it for approval? Crookston: Just with those minor changes, yes. It could be approved subject to those changes being made. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 14 Corrie: There's a place here on this one. There's my signature and Bill Haun, the developer. There's not one for the City Clerk to attest. Crookston: That is one of the changes that I had. It needs Will Berg, the City Clerk to attest, the Mayor's signature, plus it needs a secretary signature for Mr. Haun's — and I'm not sure whether or not Mr. Haun is a corporation or not. Corrie: So, those are your suggestions and changes? Crookston: Yes. Corrie: All right. Okay, now Mr. Bentley. Bentley: I forgot what I was going to do. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the Non -Development Agreement authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest subject to the changes addressed by Counselor Crookston. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Bentley to the Non -Development Agreement subject to the changes by the City Attorney for the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest. Further discussion? Smith: Mr. Mayor, I was just curious if Wayne received any comments that I had given to the City Clerk? Crookston: I don't believe that I have, Gary. Smith: Okay. I had a couple of questions that I was just asking requesting information on in terms of what they were going to develop and what they weren't going to develop. Whether or not they had meant to include lot 20 which is the roadway, which is a private roadway as part of this non -development agreement. Otherwise they would be non -developing all the lots around this roadway, which was not included as part of the non -development request. And perhaps they missed it when they drew the agreement up thinking that it was a public street, and in fact, it's labeled as a private street, and it has a lot number designation on it. So my question would be whether they want to include lot 20 in the lists of lots for non -development. Rountree: The paragraph related to those lots indicates they desire now to withhold development of streets, utilities and lot improvements. But I understand what you are saying. The street is actually designated as a lot on the — Smith: Yes, yes. I have some other concerns with some wording — and this is legal I guess — and I just need some information from Wayne. Do you want me to just to review that with Wayne, Mr. Mayor and Council? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 15 Rountree: That would be fine. Bentley: That would be my preference too. Rountree: Just get on with it. Corrie: Any further discussion then? Rountree: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Rountree: Unless you want the motion amended? Corrie: I was going to ask if you wanted to amend it to that lot 20? Rountree: I was just going to amend the motion to include the concurrence between the City Engineer and City Attorney. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Any further discussion. The motion reads to approve the non -development agreement with the — subject to the staff approval wording. Is there any — is that correct? All those in favor of the corrected amended motion, say yea. All those opposed, no? MOTION CARRIED: All yea. Corrie: So if you'll get together with him Gary, get that finalized. ITEM NO. 9: DEPARTMENT REPORTS Corrie: Gary? Smith: I have no reports this evening, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Shari? Bentley: Uh-oh. She's getting up. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, we had a request from Ultra Touch Car Wash for a revised sign from what they previously submitted. The sign they had previously submitted still wasn't approved by Council, but as you can see by this sheet behind the Phillips 66 an Ultra Touch Car Wash sign. The Findings specifically addressed the height and the maximum square footage of the sign as part of their Conditional Use Permit. What they are proposing is substantially more than what those Findings indicate. The applicant also asked that if this were not approved, if he could have two signs each of 120 square feet. If that would be considered or if that is something City Council January 20, 1998 Page 16 you specifically want to look at. I don't have a copy in here of the previous application he submitted. It was more on the lines of Central Valley Corporate Park design with (end of tape) -- much taller. I just need to know if you want me to tell him to go back to the drawing board. 1 let him know what the Findings said, and he was well aware of that. He wanted me to go ahead and present this. So, that's what I'm doing. Rountree: My comment would be that during our consideration of the conditions and the Findings Of Facts, they had an opportunity to comment on that, and I'm sure they were asked if they were in general agreement with the conditions. Though I don't have those minutes. My position would be that we hold them to the conditions in the Findings Of Facts. I think they are even more generous than they would probably get today and go from there. Stiles: Okay. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I will concur with that. Stiles: I would like to bring any signage they propose back to the Council whether it's — I don't know if you want it in a public City Council meeting, or want to review that as they come in, but I think we are going to have a lot more of these come up. The main control that we have over these signs, until we get the sign ordinance changed, is that it is a requirement of their Conditional Use Permit that they submit this and get it approved as part of their design. That's our savings there. Rountree: I guess my comment to that would be unless there's a deviation from what we have in the Findings Of Facts, staff should be able to take care of that. Stiles: Okay. Anderson: I would conclude with that too — you know, I know we need to do some work on our sign ordinance, but it was very clear in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions what they could do, and what they're presenting is completely than those so I think that's something that you could probably handle at your level. Stiles: What about the request that each business, even though it's a combined business, that they each have their own individual sign? Anderson: I think again that needs to be clarified in our sign ordinance, but that wasn't allowed in the original Findings of Facts and Conclusions. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I prefer that we go with one sign instead of two. Stiles: Similar to what they proposed previously. Bentley: That's correct. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 17 Stiles: It does say in the Findings that all signs shall be designed approved by the City Council or the City official designated by City Council to approve signs. I mean if that's what you — Bentley: You have a new title. Corrie: You may be harder than the Council. Stiles: I like to be the good guy though. Corrie: Once in a while you can be. Stiles: Okay. Bentley: Once in a while you'll tell somebody yes. Stiles: The next item I had was from a request of a realtor. I guess that I really shouldn't have been considering this since they are not the legal owner of the property, but it's kind of a "what if' situation that hasn't come up before, and I wanted to know what your reaction would be to it. You have a copy of Turtle Creek, and the shaded in area — this applicant — or this proposed applicant is not proposing to take that entire area. It would be, I think, about 16 acres. But let me turn on the overhead here, and I'll show you what the proposal is. Gary, did the Council get a copy of your memo about Turtle Creek, or Brad's Memo? Smith: No, they didn't yet. I'll make a copy. Would you like me to do that and pass it out? Stiles: That's great. Bentley: Shari, would you for the benefit of the Councilmen tell where -- what the cross streets are, the main streets? Stiles: This is the famous Turtle Creek. It's across — it's just west of Tully Park on Linder Road. It's approximately 72 acre piece that was platted originally approximately three years I think. In the meantime we've undergone some problems. They've requested extensions. The latest extension that's been granted — this area here has received final plat approval. They've also platted this house here. Apparently the developer has let the bank take it back. The owners of the property, the Cairns. Cairns? Is this Cairns? Cairns' property apparently is being marketed in the real estate world as being more piece than it actually is. They were all ready to do this. I'm not sure how much of the utilities were in. But they did do some substantial amount of work out there and stopped. The request that was made of me is what would happen is somebody took this piece here and wanted to develop that piece. I would hate to see the development broken up. I don't know why it's being marketed that way now, but the major problem I see with that besides some of the other problems — the extension on this plat expires March 20th. If this final plat is not recorded by March 201h, then the entire plat is null and void. The major problem I see with developing this is they don't have a direct access off of Linder Road. They will be going through local streets to get to the existing stub streets here and here. There is probably a lot of people in the area that are just thankful. Some of the construction had City Council January 20, 1998 Page 18 ended over here, I really don't think that's fair to them when it wasn't presented in that way to develop it in that way. Gary's making a — did you get Gary? Smith: She's bringing it in just a few minutes. Stiles: There are several issues involved here. Tully Park, the developer was initially agreeable to helping design and construct the pump station that would serve all of Tully Park as well as this subdivision. That's still in limbo now, because this property is not being developed. There are some developers that are interested in taking the entire project on. I don't know what the bank's position is on it. But there's also some drainage issues as far as — the irrigation season is coming up, and there's a ditch that has been tiled from here, I believe, to over here. And apparently there's just a big mound of dirt somewhere in this area that has been causing some drainage problems, flooding of this stub street. And if that's not taken care of before irrigation season, it may be a matter that the City's going to have to go in and do it and put a lien on the property. That's as bad as the situation is. The people proposing to do this portion over here are here if you'd like to talk to them. But Gary has some other issues I think in that memo that Brad came up with, it's a problem all the way around, and we just didn't know how to proceed, so that's why I am coming to you. Bird: Shari, they are just asking for the purple? Shari: Yes, they want to develop that portion of the approved preliminary plat which was proposed as phase 3 of a 4 phase project. Rountree: It seems to me that if the project has chopped up like, then in effect, we have a new project. It would have to go through the public hearing process. It wouldn't necessarily be trying to meet the deadline of the March deadline for the filing of the final plat. So, I think from that aspect, it's not doable. In my mind it would have to go through the Planning and Zoning. It would have to go through the City Council with a public hearing process, not just simply a matter of filing a final plat for that portion. It is a difference concept. The concept originally was to provide access from Linder into that development. One of the issues with that development has always been and will continue to be the concern of people on Chateau of carrying the traffic burden of that development without access on Linder. So, I think it would merit another public hearing if that were being proposed. They also have to deal with the question of pressurized irrigation system. And as far as I'm concerned that piece of property is on the hook to the City to help finance that pump station. Bentley: I would concur with what Charlie has said on that. I am real familiar with the flooding on Monaco. I received several calls on that since I happen to live in the area. I too feel that running all this traffic past Linder Elementary is just asking for trouble safety wise and the complaints from the public. I too agree with his comment on the pump station was going to be my next. We're putting the park in, the pump station's going in, and we need to have that resolved so I would not be in favor of doing this in this fashion. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 19 Corrie: I know there is a lot of traffic on Chateau that would be in to that and I'm getting calls now about Chateau traffic. And so is ACHD and some of the signs and speed bumps on that Linder School. I concur there. Stiles: I just — I didn't know if Council had ever come across applicants — somebody trying to do something like this. I certainly have never heard of anything — Rountree: I haven't seen in Planning and Zoning or Council before. —(inaudible) scaled back, not in complete phases, but cell phases as their independent subdivision. Stiles: And there is a development agreement, I believe it covered the entire project that was entered into by John Steel, recorded agreement that encumbers all of the property. So, Gary do you have some more issues you want to bring up on that? Smith: No, I don't, Shari. Mayor and Council, I think Brad covered everything that he could find in his research of the file. He did that for me and for you for tonight's meeting. Unless you have any questions. Stiles: Next item is a request by Subway that is over in the Fred Meyer development — Subway and Brueger's Bagel. I don't know if they are proposing the in two space below there signage for the additional two tenants or not. I would assume that's what it's for, but they are not proposing any signage there at this time. The total square footage on this would exceed what has recently been approved across the street which was a six by twelve maximum 72 square foot sign. I believe that because this part of a Conditional Use Permit that Council has the authority to put some regulations and to be able to review some of those signs. We've had some problems with the temporary A -frame signs appearing out on the berms. And this is their attempt to alleviate that problem and still get some exposure in there. They're having trouble getting people passing by to recognize that they are there, and that's the reason for the sign. I guess my proposal to them is that they stick with the 6x 12 and not exceed that 72 square foot maximum for that sign unless Council sees another issue there. Corrie: Who's paying for that sign? Stiles: Who's paying for it? Bentley: You are with the next sandwich you buy. Corrie: So, I assume it's a combination of people. Stiles: In this case it would be an on -premise sign. It wouldn't be an off -premise sign. We've had proposals from other people interested in the Maxi -Java and the Postal Connection back there to put signs out on Fairview. But those would be off -premise signs. This would actually be included on the lot where the building is. It is a little difficult to see with the berm there. It's not a bad looking sign. I just — I guess I would propose to them that it meet the 72 square foot maximum. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 20 Bentley: Do you know what the plan is for the bottom two blocks? Stiles: There's currently the cleaners and they show another tenant. I'm not sure if there's something in there. What is it? Do you know? Bentley: So, they're planning on putting other tenants in their cubicle on this? Stiles: Well, it almost looks like it, but I couldn't say that that's what they're proposing. Bentley: Well, my preference would be that if we went ahead and let them have the sign, that we go with the 72 square, and that all of the people that are in that lot premise be on one sign. That no one come back with another sign. Stiles: I don't know if it's that they've approached them, and they're not willing to participate yet, and they think that they might in the future, but it would be nice to have them all on one. Bentley: Right. That would be my preference. Stiles: Okay. Well, we can certainly make that a condition of their Conditional Use. Okay? Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I don't have a problem with that. I think it's a monument sign consistent with what we're trying to get to. I just find it interesting that we can have four business advertised on this sign, and a previous applicant wanting a change couldn't get their business advertised on one that's about 25% larger. Stiles: True. Corrie: Anybody else? Okay. Stiles: I just had one more issue. And it has come before Council before with the direction to me to revise the comprehensive plan to reflect this change, and that hasn't been done. Since we have two new councilmen, I'd like to ask the Council again, there's a property owned by Gordon Harris that's off of Eagle Road. It's about a half mile south of Victory. He's got — it's on the west hand side. He's got his home, a nice home. He went to Ada County Commissioner and requested a rezone to R-1 and subdivision of that property into 5 acre lots except for his existing home, which he's proposing to be 1.88 acre. The Ada County Commissioners in their Findings Of Fact and Conclusions of Law recommended denial of the request to change to R-1 because it was not in accordance with our comprehensive plan. Our comprehensive plan calls for a minimum of 5 to 10 acre lots unless those lots are served by municipal sewer and water which this would not be. He's proposing septic and wells. So, that's why he went with the 5 acre minimum, but as part of the Findings Of Fact and Conclusions Of Law by Ada County Planning and Zoning Commissioners because our comprehensive plan calls for their dry line sewers, that's a requirement of this plat. Council in the past has decided with the advice of Gary Smith, those dry line sewers are nothing but an expense. The City has no control over how they're constructed. You don't know what kind of condition they will be in when they are actually proposed to be connected to sewer, and they would like a motion by Council to delete the City Council January 20, 1998 Page 21 requirement for provision of dry line sewers in this subdivision. It will be I believe a total 3 lot subdivision, and he wanted to develop it more density. We let him know that it's in a mixed residential area, and in accordance with our comprehensive plan, we would also like some kind of a note on there to let everybody know that the surrounding properties will be developed at an urban density, and that would not be cause for objection to those proposals. I don't know how you feel about that dry line sewer requirement in the comprehensive plan. Any new insight from the new members or old members? Rountree: Some old insight from some old members. I could comment, I think on the dry line sewers. Originally it was felt that in those kinds of developments we would at least have any opportunity to (inaudible) in to our infrastructure once we got to those locations. And they've since proven not to provide that, the opportunity. I think that I would be looking for is the easement for those utilities in the future. The understanding, either by deed or plat, those dwellings will hook to the municipal sewer and water when it is available to them. And that we will participate in the costs of extending sewer line to and through them at such time as the sewer and water is extended. They need to understand that. Ultimately that's the intent. And again they need to understand that point you made that it's going to be various residential density in the area. On my question to you on your question to us is, will the county act on a motion that we make that would defer the requirement for the dry line sewer and reconsider their application? How is that handled? Stiles: They may upon motion by the Council if you specifically desire to that. In the past it's like they didn't pay attention to it, but they are trying to follow our comprehensive plan now, and I would like to — you know— Rountree: I appreciate that. Stiles: I do too, and I hate to just go back and say, "Well, you know, we didn't really mean this." Or, "this is bad policy. We decided is not good anymore." But there's no use in people in spending that — I mean if people are going to be spending that money, they might as well put it in a reserve fund to actually construct the sewer at a later date. Bentley: I would have a question what the legality would even show that if we put a motion together that — we don't want the dry line. I mean I think if we just write them a note and accomplish the same thing. Because I can't see how we can make a motion on a county issue. mean realize they're trying to follow our comp plan. We appreciate that. I don't know, does it hold any validity? Stiles: Now it does. I mean because they are actually paying attention to our comp plan. Our comp plan — Corrie: We need to address a new comp plan or adjustments to the comp plan very soon, which you're working on now. I think if we just — I think if we use a motion to the effect — City Council January 20, 1998 Page 22 Rountree: What's the precedence? I know it's been done in the past. I just don't recall. Gary or Shari, either one? Was it Council's action or did the county just press on knowing that it was not an issue with the Council? Stiles: I think they just pressed on. I don't think they were paying attention to what our comp plan said. You know, I'm grateful that the staff is looking at it now. Bentley: Well I feel a response — we need to respond to them in some fashion to let them know what our feelings are, and if the motion is the proper way then so be it. Stiles: I mean, I don't want to come up against this on every single project — somebody—I don't know. Does it take a motion by Council — that's a new policy that dry line sewers will not be required in those areas that develop? Crookston: There would have to be a change in our Comprehensive Plan. Corrie: That's not an ordinance or anything, that we have to have it. So, it's a plan. Crookston: Well, the Comprehensive Plan is an ordinance. Stiles: The Comp Plan is an ordinance. Corrie: Well, it is itself, yes, but not each individual item isn't. Each individual item is a plan, but the Comprehensive Plan — well, maybe I'm wrong here. But every item in the Comprehensive Plan is not an ordinance. Crookston: It's part of an ordinance. Corrie: Part of an ordinance, right. Stiles: But these are policies within that ordinance. Corrie: So what would be the best, Counselor? Crookston: Change the Comp Plan. (Inaudible) Rountree: If we start tonight, that's six months from now. Crookston: You can only change the Comprehensive Plan every six months. So the six months runs from the last time we changed it which was in 1993 — December of 1993. Stiles: So we're in good shape. Please let me get my staff first before we have to do it. Rountree: Is there any way by motion we can communicate to the county that it's not an issue that we would pursue if they were to approve the subdivision at this point? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 23 Crookston: You have to stand by the Comprehensive Plan because it has been passed as an ordinance. If you desire to adopt a change in that, you're really then in violation of the Comprehensive Plan — the motion itself would be in violation of it. Rountree: So it would have to be a variance, ordinance variance. At a minimum you have to have a hearing process for a variance? Crookston: I'm not aware of a variance on the Comprehensive Plan requirements. Corrie: So, we're back to square one. Rountree: Work with us Wayne, work with us here. Corrie: Can we just give them the — Crookston: You can indicate your intentions as to what you want to do, but you need to tell them that that is not binding in any fashion. Bentley: What isn't binding, our intention? Crookston: Correct. Because what you want to do is say something — state something that's in violation of the Comprehensive Plan, and I don't think that I can advise that that is correct. You should not do that. Corrie: Then we won't do that. ???: Does it state in writing in our Comprehensive Plan that we require dry sewers, or is that just a policy? Crookston: Yes. It's in there. Stiles: --as a policy. Rountree: It's in there as a policy, but it's been adopted as a overall comp plan ordinance. Corrie: Well, since we are going to address the Comprehensive Plan, probably within six months, when we get to that. Shall we just —do we tell the county commissioners to kind of — well, we can't tell them anything. Rountree: I guess, Mr. Mayor, just to make the waters more muddy, I make a motion to — Crookston: Gary has a comment, excuse me. Smith: Mr. Mayor, councilmen, did I hear someone that the owner was willing to have the properties assessed for the installation of the sewer line? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 24 Stiles: No. Rountree: No, that was just a comment made. Smith: Okay. Stiles: That would be a good idea though. Smith: I thought maybe if there was some vehicle for installation of the sewer at a future time, that we would be — maybe in a round about way — Rountree: Doing the same thing. Smith: Applying, I mean concurring with own comp plan. Corrie: I don't think that Mr. Harris said that. Did he? Stiles: Well, there's in place to allow him to do that anyway. Rountree: I guess my motion would be to inform the Ada County Planning and Zoning that the City of Meridian is intending to modify and revise the Comprehensive Plan and intends to address the dry line sewer issue at that point. So they at least know we're working on it. Bentley: Is that a motion? Rountree: Yeah. Bird: I'll second it. Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Rountree and second by Mr. Bird. You heard the motion. Any further discussion? Bentley: Is that okay with you, Mr. Attorney? Rountree: Just information. Bentley: Just exchanging information. Crookston: Certainly. Corrie: All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All aye. Stiles: Thank you very much. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 25 Gordon: Mr. Mayor and Council, approximately at this time last year, Meridian received a federal grant to hire two police officers. As a three-year grant, the first year being 75% federal money and 25% city money. The second year is fifty-fifty, and the third year is 75% Meridian, and 25% federal grant. The fourth year, we assume the two officers ourselves. We hired the two officers with approval of the Council, and we went the entire year fighting the beaucracy trying to get reimbursed for the wages and the benefits. I think I talked to every voice mail and E-mail in Washington D.C., Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York. Some places I wasn't even really sure who I was talking to. All of this was to no avail. In December, I finally reached the limit, the grant had gone one full year. We had not retrieved one penny of the grant money. We spend the entire amount out of the city budget, my budget. So I contacted Senator Kempthorne's office here in Boise. They took it from there, and within three weeks, I received a check for the entire year's amount which is $39,897.00. Within two days, I received another letter from the federal government approving another grant for two more officers for the next three years. 75-50 and 25. The proposal that I have — that I've passed out, -- the Council was going to do a wage adjustment on the police budget to allow for the new building or the temporary building that I was moving into. And also to reimburse the police department for the over time on the crossings for the Regio Sprinter. What I would propose is the Council approve the additional two officers on this new grant that will cost the City $16,425.56 — is the twenty five percent match for this year. I would like to place the money from last year's reimbursement into my budget this year to pay that $16,000, hire the two officers. That would leave a little over $23,000 — in fact $23,471.44 to be exact — use that to pay for the temporary building which totals $24,930.00. By using this check instead of the budget adjustment being $49,000.00, it would cut it down to $9,781.00 is what the City would have to come with out of this year's budget. This check would fill the rest of the gap. Plus I would get the additional two officers. Any question? Anderson: I have a question. When these grants, you say they show 75 and 50 and 25. Is that regardless of what we pay our officers as a salary, they'll pay that or is that based off some type of national standard. Gordon: No, sir. That's based off our salary rate. That's wages and benefits. They don't pay equipment. Now I understand that I don't have money in my budget for radios, vests, things of this nature. I will have to get that from another area in my budget. But they do pay wages and benefits. Rountree: The other question — I thought we were talking about 8,000. Was that just an annual lease payment on that temporary structure? The 8,000 that we were talking and 24 is the total cost of it? Gordon: No, sir. I think Councilman Rountree — back on the third page, I broke down the temporary building. We are already in to this budget year, which we're paying $1,800 a month for the Pine address. That totals $10,800 for this year — out of this year's budget. The remainder of the year — six months would be at the new price which is $1,000. That would be $6,120.00, and I think that the 8,000 that you're referring to was the set up fees, the delivery, the tear down fees, and that. That's $8,010.00, which they require we pay upfront. Does that answer your question. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 26 Rountree: Yeah, that might have been the figure I was thinking. Gordon: That was the $8,000. The first year to — which would be six months at the old building, six month with the new building, the tear down and the set up fees was $24,930.00 for the first year. Once it's in and established, the cost for the second year is $12,240.00. Rountree: What's the total price if we just bought it outright? Gordon: $52,000 approximately. Bentley: I can't remember whether the Chief pointed this out or not, but it is not — the Council has not given the Chief in his budget the lease money for the current building they are leasing. He's footing the bill for that out of his budget. That was another adjustment that was going to have to be made. Rountree: Chief, I would say my position at this point is to look at this a little more closely. I would say we take that reimbursement for monies we've already spend under that grant, -- yes, included in this year's budget. Take a look at these adjustments that the Council — and I'm not aware that the Council committed to make these adjustments — seems that there might have been an understanding that the adjustments would be made within the existing budget. Defer the jumping into the new grant and the two new officers until we can get this budget issue resolved. And if there is a surplus, my preference would be looking at establishing possibly some kind of — if you will — capitol improvements fund that would defer the rental rate on the portable, if in fact that's what we do. We own that outright at the end of two years by a lease option type of thing. And that could go anywhere within the city to support any other city function, at such time we re-establish a permanent base for the police department. So that would be my recommendation, is that we take a look at what expenditures you exceeding the rent that was not budgeted; what your costs are, I would really like to see reconciliation of your expenses and budget before committing to — adding to your base budget with an additional two officers. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Rountree, I don't understand reconciliation of my budget. The Council approved me moving into the temporary building, and they were going to do a budget adjustment, the last council did. So that's why we moved, and I've been spending that money out of a budget that I don't have the money in. I'm already $2,000 over in that account. Rountree: I understand. Those are the kinds of things that we need to adjust and take of with this money — (inaudible) to hiring new people. Gordon: Correct. Okay. Rountree: And I need to understand because I'm still not clear on this temporary building rent arrangement that was made. I was either asleep that night or not here, and as I recall I've only missed one meeting. So, I need some refreshing on that. Anderson: I would just kind of like to echo what Councilman Rountree is saying. One of the things we learned in our Councilman 101 training is anything that needs to be done tonight you City Council January 20, 1998 Page 27 need to take a little more time and study it. You need to take at least a little time and look at it, and these are first time that we've seen these figures. So I would like to have a little to look at them and maybe discuss it in a strategic planning session about what we want to do the money that has come back, and how we want to adjust your budget and all of those types of things. Corrie: Do you know what the Findings Of Facts and Conclusions Of Law came out on that planing and zoning meeting on your trailers? Gordon: The building? No, sir, I don't. Possibly Counselor would know. I have not seen it. Corrie: We had the hearing, but how did the hearing go? Gordon: Planning and Zoning asked for Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Corrie: But there was not testimony to the contrary? Rountree: -- Testimony to the contrary as I recall. Gordon: Not on the Findings. Anderson: One more question for Chief Gordon. Is there a deadlines on these federal grants? Gordon: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Anderson, to my knowledge, no. But here again the trouble that I had last year, Senator Kempthorne's office assured me there would be no problems this year, and I can't help but believe there is a red sticker on Meridian's file back there in D.C. The head of the grant's division called me personally, and his number 2 person called me personally and his number three person called me personally all within an hour. So I think they know where Meridian, Idaho is now. Anderson: Good, with respect to the outstanding grants, are we now current on all of them? Gordon: Yes, sir. I only have the one, and that's the two officers from last year. Rountree: We had one from a previous year that was at 25% as I recall and one from a previous year that paid out? Gordon: No, sir. I've had other grants, but they were four and five years ago. They've been up — they were banded grants, drug grants, things of that nature. The cop's program, we've only had the two and that was last year. Bentley: One other comment on this. The Regio Sprinter over time that was approved by the Council. We never did get the money in. We're waiting on final figures. Gordon: Yes, H-4 is my final figures. But, Mr. Mayor and Councilman Anderson, to answer your question to my knowledge there is no time limit on that. What causes the problems is the grants are — they are requested and awarded in December, which doesn't even allow me to — and City Council January 20, 1998 Page 28 I brought it up prior to the budget meeting, and the decision then was to not even budget for it, because if we didn't get it, then we would have that money committed in my budget. And that's what we did last year and the year before. Well, true to form, wait until the budget's passed. We're in this budget year and then they approve these two officers and it requires a 25% match. Anderson: So if you hired three new officers in October and those became available in December, you couldn't use that money for those three that you hired. Gordon: No. They don't allow it to be — supplement existing employees. The figures — the packet that I gave you has all of the figures that we're dealing with right now. To kind of reiterate, during the budget year, the two existing councilmen I think remember that at that time, I requested eight police officers. Four were approved with the assurance that we would readdress this later on this year. And I was looking at the grant at that time. Anderson: So you definitely put these to use? Corrie: We will take this up on the 27th of this month. Do you have anything? This is out of line here, but do you have anything from the Committee of Parks and Rec? Okay. Counselor? Crookston: I have nothing. Bird: I have got a question to ask Mr. Mayor. This is the second meeting, before we go into Executive Session, and maybe I'm out of order here and tell me if I am. Just slap me on the head. We need to elect our president and vice president of the Council. And I would like to do that right now, if it's not out of order. Corrie: You can do that right now. Bird: Okay. Can I make a motion? Corrie: You certainly can. Bird: I make a motion that we nominate Councilman Charlie Rountree for Council President. Anderson: I'll second that. Corrie: Okay, the motion is made by Mr. Bird and second by Mr. Anderson that Charlie Rountree be elected President of the Council. Charlie do you have any — yes, no, feelings about that? Rountree: Well, according to the new ordinance we have, I can say no, but I would accept that if that's the wishes of the Council. Corrie: Okay. Bentley: Put the new ordinances in effect. (End of Tape) City Council January 20, 1998 Page 29 Corrie: -- further nominations? Okay? Discussion? The motion is made that we have Charlie Rountree to be the President of the City Council. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All aye. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I would like to —(inaudible) Corrie: No, we can't at this point it's not going to be in effective until the next meeting and then we can do that. Bird: I don't have any more then. Rountree: You've done enough. Bird: I've done enough. Corrie: Boy, that's pretty good — the first round out of the chute. Okay, anything else, Mr. Bird? Bird: No, thank you. Corrie: Mr. Bentley. Bentley: Yes, I have several things. I have a question. Where are we at with adopting the 1997 Uniform Mechanical Code? Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, I was ill the night that you had the last strategic planning meeting. I don't know what the outcome of that was when Rod appeared before you and presented his case as to the changes that he wished to see. And he presented a letter also. Beyond that, I don't know what's happened. Rountree: I think the discussion at the planning session to Rod was that he made a good presentation, he'd made some good recommendations, we asked him to put it down in writing which he's done. My guess it would have to be an agenda item for us to act on it. I think what I've read in my last packet is sufficient, and hopefully you've reviewed that. Smith: Yes. Rountree: And if you have no further recommendations, I would say that we get that on our next agenda and take action. Smith: I have no other comments. Rountree: He had some qualifications, and he was suppose to come up with a fee schedule. Have you reviewed that? Smith: Yes, I reviewed the fee schedule that was attached. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 30 Berg: Mr. Mayor, Council, if I'm not mistaken, I believe we passed that by ordinance, and my concern is I think we'd have to have a public hearing especially if some of those fees, even though we're complying the '94, we are now in compliance '91 Uniform Mechanical Code. And we may have to have a public hearing noticed. Rountree: Our discussion at that meeting also was that we wanted to go through a public hearing process and make additional effort to make sure that those industries were notified of our hearing and had an opportunity to provide testimony on our adoption, or proposed adoption of those codes, and that was something Rod was going to do was get a hold of the — apparently there is an association, and some other industries that were involved — get that information to you, Will, so you could include them in our — Berg: Yes. He was to do that. He has not yet, but he had several places he wanted to notify personally with our notice. And so if that's the case, I will get with Wayne, and we will present an ordinance with those exceptions — I mean present a notice with those exceptions. Crookston: I think we have to have a public hearing first. Berg: Notice with those exceptions and publicize it for a public hearing, my second of my comment. Bentley: We have stuff in our files on the Ida -Ore Planning and Development Association. In there it states that this memo serves as a '98 statement of dues to the City of Meridian in the amount of $752.73. Where are we at on this? Corrie: We don't belong to Ore Ida, so we don't owe the dues. Rountree: We took action about this time a year ago not to participate. Bentley: I thought that was the case. That's why I was wondering why the bill was here. Rountree: Well, if you pay it. Bentley: Welcome aboard. I'd like to have some stuff added to the planning session if Mr. Rountree cares to make a list. Rountree: Well, I would certainly take that list on right because I see that that's a new duty. And I'm not prepare, so I'm open. In fact I'm open to all items (inaudible). Bentley: Fire planning. Rountree: And can you tell me what that means? Bentley: Yeah, buildings. There's going to be several of these grouped together. Plans for future building for City Hall and Fire, and my question is have the new councilmen picked up their copies of the space study? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 31 Berg: Yes, I talked to Ron Tolsma just this afternoon, and he was going to find that and drop it by City Hall so that I can give it to Ron, and Walt Morrow was going to give his to Keith so that we didn't have to go from ground zero. Bentley: Are both of you aware of what this is? Anderson: No. Bentley: Okay, ZGA did a space study for the whole city, all the offices, and planned out up to the year, I think it's about 2010 or maybe a little bit farther as to what our space needs would be for police, fire, city hall, and so on and so forth. And it's a good guide to help us figure out what we need for acreages, for land, for city hall, what we need for police department, public works, and so on. What their needs will be, and that's how we are going to design what a city hall will look, locations, and so on and so forth. Corrie: What's he's saying there, you have a week to read that book and be ready — Crookston: Ready for the test. Bentley: We need to change the ordinances that we've got hanging in fire. Rountree: Do you have any numbers right off the top of your head? I'll get them. I'll get with Wayne and figure out what we've got hanging in the fire. Ethics, financial fiscal policy are two of the important ones that I can think of. Anderson: And I'd also throw in sign ordinance. Every time it seems to come up — Bentley: Well, Shari and I have started working on the sign ordinance. We're also working on cellular tower ordinance. We are going to get a basic done, and we'll pass it out to everyone and then at that point, everyone can start chipping in what they think, and I think we need to get some commercial people involved, since they are the ones that are going to get hit by it, and get some input from them. I would like to see something crafted that's going to be acceptable to everybody, so we don't have to sit here and have arguments in here — discussions or whatever -- over why I need a sign on every project. Also, the police issue of the grant money and the budget issue money. Bird: Also I think Shari was going to bring us back zoning fees, application fees. Corrie: Don't get too much on there. Bentley: No, but I mean this is stuff — we may not get to all of it in one night, but we can prioritize what we need and we can —(inaudible). Yeah, but the point is we can start thinking about on our own some of the things we need to get done. And also I want to give a report on the mayor's office committee, I guess you call it. We were looking at that, the three of us met, Councilman Anderson, Attorney Prior and myself. We met with Paul from ZGA, and we worked over the plans came up with some better ideas. I took them before the Mayor, and he City Council January 20, 1998 Page 32 came up with an excellent idea of cutting down the meeting room over there and have a hallway so you can pass through, have a way to get over to three new offices that will be created in there. So that you weren't walking through the middle of somebody's conference in the conference room. And we moved the walls around a little bit to provide a little more space. I think we've really cut down on the costs in what we've done. We've already budgeted and approved the $21,000 to do the work, but it appears that we are going to be well under budget, probably half. And you know, there was some real cooperation done, some real trading off of ideas. It worked out. I passed out the plans tonight. We just drew them up today. And we're in the process of getting the three required bids. Rountree: I commend you all for your effort. Bentley: And that's all I have. Rountree: Since Tammy had nothing to report, I guess I have nothing as well, other than, I see Brad is here tonight, and if Gary would permit —just give us a brief synopsis of the Tully project, where we are. I know we are in suspension of most of the items. Bentley: We're in mud. Rountree: We're in mud, snow, and frozen ground and thawed ground and all of that kind of stuff. I don't get too much gray hair, so I guess I'm doing okay. Watson: It's like you said, it's a stand still right now, except for the building. When it was bid, it was understood that that would proceed no matter what the weather conditions, and they're on schedule for it. They started making too big of a mess with the site work, so they requested a shut down and we gave it to them. I think we are all in agreement. But budget wise, they are about 33% done, that's where we are. Rountree: One thing that I am going to want to work with you on — and Gary — is we need to figure out how to time the pressurized irrigation with the need to be able to move the trees sometime in March. So, that's going to be a real exercise. We may have to put them in the ground on a temporary basis out at the water reservoir site. But they are going to have to be in the ground and being watered in March sometime, or we are going to lose them. Watson: The irrigation system definitely won't be up and running then. Rountree: No, I'm not worried about it being up and running, but just being laid out. Watson: It won't be laid out. Even when we bid this, we have a very detailed plan of it, but my experience with the golf course that the best laid plans when it comes to sprinkler installation — installation plans. Rountree: If we could have a discussion with the contractor on that to figure out how we can work within his schedule to know what we need to do with those, because I would have to lose — City Council January 20, 1998 Page 33 Watson: Okay. Rountree: If we have to hold them over, move them twice, then I guess we'll have to do that. If he knows of a way, pick his brain, and see what kind of an answer he might come up with. Because definitely we don't want to get in his way because I know it's going to cost us more money if we do. Watson: Okay. Rountree: Thanks for the update. Bentley: Can't we just fill them in with sawdust? Rountree: They are now, but they need to be in the ground after they start to break bud. They're pretty good size specimens. They're not going to hold well in the sawdust. At least that's what I've been told by the experts. Bentley: Yeah, I don't know how big they are so I don't know. Rountree: I'm not a tree expert even though it's part of my name. Anderson: Yeah, but yours in round. I've never seen a round tree. Corrie: Mr. Anderson? Anderson: Nothing? Corrie: I'd like to congratulate Charlie for being nominated and elected the president of the Council. You will need to get some cards signed for signature cards, and Will can take care of that so just come in — Rountree: Thursday, --I'm going to be on the road all daylong. I'll be in Thursday if you can arrange that. Berg: Sure. Bentley: Two more things before I forget. First off, I am meeting Thursday with Lance Johnson from I.T.D. We're having discussions, we're meeting on top of the overpass on Meridian Road. We are going to be discussing pedestrian safety up there. Chief Gordon is going to be there with us providing pedestrian safety. I've got a real concern with Boondocks opening. There are suppose to open spring break in March. And there is absolutely no way to get across there, kids on bikes, walking. They have no sidewalk paths there. And the scary thing is that guard rail strikes you in the knee. Kids being kids and the horseplay, I'm afraid we are going have somebody on the hood of somebody's car on the freeway if something isn't done. Originally, -- for the new councilmen that don't know this, -- originally, there was suppose to be a foot bridge put on for the cost of somewhere around a quarter of a million. Then the plans came out to City Council January 20, 1998 Page 34 totally rebuild the overpass and those monies were moved to a different project, instead building and then ripping out. As of a week ago, Walt Morrow told me that that bridge had been totally move off the five year plan. Rountree: I would point out that just last week, I believe, the department put out an application for enhancement projects, which would include transportation, pedestrian kinds of add ons, a bike path if you will, so I would suggest that Gary get with APA, or Shari get with APA, make sure that they get us that application and that we put together something — reapply for that project. Bentley: If I may add before you respond there, Gary. Ada Planning Association and ACHD approached I.T.D. on this, and I have copies of the letters and I.T.D. said they were not planning on doing anything with the bridge, and that's when I responded back to I.T.D. directly. And they called me immediately and wanted to set up a meeting out there to discuss the issues. I don't whether they were even aware of Boondocks existence out there. But it's getting pretty close to being completed. So hopefully with what they see — because I'm going to take them on-site also over there and show them what's going to be there so we can get some sort of response. Corrie: What we did too — or what Mr. Bentley did was put I.T.D. on notice that the liability is in their court now. We've told them about the possibilities and they haven't — I don't know how much legal it will carry, but at least they know about it now. And I gave that to Shari on the APA to look at that. So Smith: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Rountree, that enhancement money, as I understand it, is an 80% federal 20% local split, so whatever the cost of the project would be, the City would need to come up 20%. Rountree: Unless we can plead our case and get a hundred percent. It can be a hundred percent. Smith: It can be? Rountree: The selection criteria, I believe, is based on the local's ability to match and of course those project that are matched at a higher rate are probably going to get selected above those that are going to seek a hundred percent. But I think it's something that memory serves me right the situation was similar on Wild Waters in Boise when they were there at Cole. There was an awful lot of pedestrian traffic over the fence, over the right-of-way fence, and didn't even bother to go through the Cole intersection. They just crossed the interstate there. I see that — Smith: Right. Rountree: I didn't even think about it, but that's going to happen there as well. Bentley: Chief mentioned that. City Council January 20, 1998 Page 35 Rountree: So, I think that pointing that out to the department may help the selection and — you're right, at a minimum we'd have to come up with the 20% of whatever project that cost might be. Smith: A couple of other things about that interchange. Council Bentley is right. It has been removed from the five-year plan. Secondly, there's a quarter study that's going on right now through I.T.D. for location of interchanges along I. 84 from Boise to Caldwell, I guess. I don't know the limits of that, but that interchange is not in very good condition. We've been patching the deck. Last year they patched the deck where the rebar was showing or where it was — the concrete was falling away. There were three different alternatives that were proposed at one time to provide pedestrian access across the interstate, and they ranged from narrowing of the lanes to striping a pedestrian walkway to constructing a separate free standing structure. And I think the prices range from very little for striping and narrowing the lanes to some where around $400,000 for a free standing structure. In the short period of time that we have to work with, it appears that we did to react, or the state needs to react fairly quickly with some kind of a preventative. I don't know what that would be, whether it's access — pedestrian access prohibited period. Or if some other means would be available to narrow those lanes. I travel that overpass often from where I live to where I work, and in the mornings two lanes of traffic each way and a center turn lane does not leave much room. Rountree: No, it's an old structure. Smith: And to restripe that for an access for pedestrians I think would be as dangerous as anything. And in the short term, when I was thinking about it today when the Mayor mentioned it at the chamber meeting, just right off the top of my head, "pedestrian access prohibited". Bentley: But who's going to enforce it? Smith: Well, I don't know the answer to that question, Councilman. But from a liability standpoint, I think something needs to be done, and I guess that's I.T.D.'s liability then; is that right, the overpass and the approaches to the overpass? The other thing that's happening out there is this year there will be about 150,000 dollars spent by the state in adding a turn lane on the westbound off ramp. And I don't know — it wasn't clear at our transportation meeting whether that was a right turn lane or left turn lane, but it's going to be an improvement there. Rountree: I believe it's a two left hand turning movements. The subgrade's already built to accept that lane. It's just a matter of paying it. Smith: I see. The lady from District 3 that was there, the planning. Rountree: Sonna Lynn Lewis — James. Smith: Yes. She wasn't absolutely certain. I think that's what she theorized too that it was a double left hand turn. And there's also some that are being made for — I want to say it's the other half of the Clover; is that right, Charlie or is that — City Council January 20, 1998 Page 36 Rountree: There was at one point in time, but I don't know if that's been resurrected or not, Gary. Lance will know when Glenn meets with him. Lance will know what it is that they are working with out there. Smith: Well, anyway, there's some improvements planned for the interchange, but replacing it is not in the plan. Thank you. Rountree: That's it for me. Corrie: Also, Tom Kuntz will be on board 8:00, January the 29th, his first day, Thursday. And Keith, do we need to get with you or have the three contractors for the Mayor's officer over there to the cost of that window possibly? Bird: Not with me. No. Rountree: Not unless you are going to donate it. Bird: We might look at that but — Corrie: I just need somebody from your company to give us — the contractors, can they go into your place of business — Bird: Yeah, they can get it done. Corrie: It's not you, it's them. All right. Hearing nothing else, I would entertain a motion to go into executive session for the purpose of personnel and union discussion according to state code. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, one point, do we have the names prepared for the traffic safety committee? Corrie: Yes, we do. But you will have them probably Tuesday evening of the 27th and it will get voted on the 3rd of February. Rountree: That's seven folks? Corrie: Nine. Bentley: Three at large. Corrie: Three at large. I have the three at large names. Bird: Motion Mayor (to go into Executive Session)? So moved. Anderson: I'll second. Corrie: Motion made and second. All those in favor say aye? City Council January 20, 1998 Page 37 MOTION CARRIED: All aye. (EXECUTIVE SESSION) Corrie: Okay, I'll call the meeting the back to order at 10:35 P.M. We are out of Executive Session. No decision was made at the Executive Session. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we notice an executive session scheduled for Thursday, January 22nd at 6:30 P.M. and notice an executive and special meeting on Friday, the 23rd of January. Corrie: That will be a joint meeting with the — Rountree: Joint meeting with the Rural Fire District. Anderson: I'll second it. Corrie: Motion made and second of the joint meetings for the executive and special meetings on Thursday and Friday the 22nd and 23' 6:30 P.M. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. No one oppose, all ayes. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Would you have pizza ordered for that night, and if we do have a meeting on Friday, there's a possibility we might not if we get it all done then. We can have some sandwiches or something for that night. Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we adjourn. Bird: I will second it. Corrie: Motion made and second. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All aye. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:37 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) City Council January 20, 1998 Page 38 APPROVED: ROBERT D. CORRIE — MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. — CITY CLERK