Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 03-16MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 16. 1999 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. on March 16, 1999 by Mayor Corrie. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree. OTHERS PRESENT: Mayor Bob Corrie, Will Berg, Bill Gigray, Bill Gordon, Gary Smith, Kenny Bowers, Shari Stiles, Brad Watson. Corrie: I want to welcome everybody here tonight. It looks like a full house. It's going to look like a full agenda too, and I'll explain after the consent agenda what we're going to be looking at and what we're going to face here tonight. Council, you have the consent agenda A, B, C, D and E. What is the Council's pleasure? Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that we pass the consent agenda items A, B, C, D, and E. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Okay motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Rountree to approve the consent agenda A, B, C, D and E. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: As you see here, we've got quite a bit of agenda here. I'm going to ask an agenda call here. How many are here for public hearings? Okay. Is everybody ready to testify on that one then? How many is here on the public hearing number 16, the annexation and zoning by Paul A. Hoffman? Okay, we have one. Public hearing number 17 is going to be requested to be delayed until April the 6t". Anybody here that was going to testify on that one? Okay, we will open the public hearing tonight and then we'll extend it to April 6t" meeting, so you can either give testimony tonight or you can come back April 6t" and give the testimony. It will be entirely up to you. Number 18 is the request for conditional use permit by Robin Walker, Juke Box Party Express. How many are here for that? Okay. And the 19A and B which is the William Hon, Jabil. think we have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. What is going to happen here at 10:30 we're going to close the public hearings and what's left will have the first agenda April 6t" because we've got some other things that we have to do and we have to make sure that we get out of here at a decent hour tonight so we'll see where we are and then I'll tell you about the time we get to 10:00 or 10:15 how far we are going to be going. And then we'll extend that on to the next meeting. MARCH FOR PARKS PROCLAMATION & MERIDIAN WBA PROCLAMATION: Corrie: Proclamation for the WBA, and we've got some ladies down here in the front seat and I'll theirs. It will be number one, and I have here a proclamation of this the week of March the 15t", 1999 has been established as the Meridian Women's Bowling Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 2 Association Week. Whereas the Meridian Woman's Bowling Association was chartered in 1960; and awards Scholarships for the Young American Bowling Alliance Members who learned to bowl at Meridian Lanes and whereas the Meridian Lane proprietor is a part of the "Turnaround Program" which is a fund raiser to help kids in the Treasure Valley who need help with "turning" their lives around and whereas the Meridian Women's Bowling Association at Meridian Lanes is co -hosting the Idaho State Women's Bowling Association Tournament and whereas the Meridian Woman's Bowling Association is co -hosting a tournament for the Great Lakes Deaf Bowling Association, I therefor Robert D. Corrie, Mayor of Meridian, Idaho do hereby proclaim March 15, 1999 as Meridian Women's Bowling Association Week and in Meridian I encourage all residents of the City to observe and support this day as well as the days ahead with respect and admiration for the work they have done. So at this time Gail I'll present you with this and if you want to introduce your board, you can do that, and this is the proclamation for you. (Inaudible — off the microphone) Corrie: Also I have another proclamation. This is a proclamation whereas April 17, 1999 has been established as March for Parks day and whereas March for Parks day has been established nationwide as a demonstration of public concern over the condition of the nation's parks and public spaces and whereas these events will not only raise awareness, but also necessary funds for park improvement, protection and education projects benefiting national state and local public parks and whereas those participating in March for Parks are demonstrating that they are committed to protecting and revitalizing our national treasures for generations to come and whereas the Friends of Meridian Parks, Inc. is sponsoring a march for parks event on April 17, 1999 which will take place at Storey Park, and the funds raised will specifically benefit open space and park facilities in Meridian, Idaho. Now, therefore, I, Robert D. Corrie, Mayor of Meridian, Idaho do hereby proclaim April 17, 1999 as March for Parks Day in Meridian and call upon the residents of this City to observe and participate in this day, as well as the days ahead, with sensitivity and respect for the nation's precious parks and public spaces. Signed Robert D. Corrie, Mayor. So Tammy would you like to come up and I will — (inaudible). De Weerd: Have I ever passed up an opportunity? And since when have you enforced that? Bentley: Starting tonight. De Weerd: I'd like to thank you Mayor Corrie and City Councilmen. We've appreciated the City's partnership with the March for Parks during our first two years. Because of that partnership, Meridian's new Tully Park will have playground equipment for toddlers and older children this summer. Friends of Meridian Parks' mission is to raise the awareness of parks, park projects, their community role and how to get involved. It's also fund raising for parks, open space and facilities. March for Parks is an excellent vehicle to do this. It gets the community involved. I'd like to introduce our committee Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 3 members, and we would like to present you with a T-shirt with our new logo. We have a new look this year thanks to a senior at Meridian High School, Michelle Fellows. First we have David Moe sporting his wonderful sweatshirt, John Birk, Sharon Borton, Dennis Heinrich, you can wave Dennis. He's shy. Again we appreciate the City's support of the March for Parks and helping it bring it here to Meridian. We also have appreciated your participation flipping burgers for us and look forward to seeing you again on April 17th and again we appreciate your continued support of our parks. 2. REQUEST FOR CITY TO HELP PAY FOR GREASE TRAP IN BRUEGGER'S BAGELS BY MARK HANSEN: Corrie: Is Celeste here tonight? Celeste would you like to come up and tell us about this program. Vialet: What we did is the City — the Wastewater Department petitioned the Council to supplement pretty much the restaurants that had no grease abatement facilities at all. The City approved our budget and in the process we had eleven restaurants connect to some kind of grease abatement unit to assist our wastewater plant in treating fats, oils and greases. In the process, Bruegger's Bagels at the time when they surveyed them before they opened it was called Rocky Mountain Bagels and they had no intention of serving anything but bagels at that time. In the process, they've now changed to Bruegger's Bagels and now they're serving soups and after videotaping their sewer lines we're finding that is contributing to fats, oils and greases. We at the Wastewater Plant have no problem with the City proposing to help them in any way, shape or form. It's pretty much up to you gentlemen. We're more than willing to help them any way we can out at the Wastewater Plant. They have since put in an automated grease abatement unit, which is portable so it seems to be working very well. We've had other restaurants in town use the same kind of grease abatement unit. It seems to be working really well. So that's about all I have. Corrie: Council have any questions? Anderson: I had one. Celeste, can you refresh my memory. Was there a maximum dollar figure that we were reimbursing or was it a percentage of the cost of — Vialet: It was half up to $4,000. Half of the unit and installation including electrical and plumbing up to $4,000. Anderson: Thank you. Vialet: You bet. Rountree: And is that what's being requested? Vialet: Yes. Bentley: I have a question. Now this is a one time offering? Vialet: Correct. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 4 Bentley: Their unit goes away, then they're on their own to replace it. Vialet: Correct, we did it as an incentive to get the 21 restaurants in the City of Meridian that had no grease abatement unit at all. So yes, it's just an incentive program that we thought would help the city. Anderson: That brings up another questions for me because you said this a portable unit, so it's something that goes under the sink. If they move their business out or sold their business, is it likely that they would take that with them and we would be faced again with approving and subsidizing somebody else to come in and put another portable unit under this — Vialet: What we did then in the future if somebody did come in and they did leave and took their unit and then a future tenant came in. At that time we have it now that we're mandating a minimum of 1,000 grease interceptor, which is a big vault that sits permanently in the ground exterior of the business. We no longer allow these little units. Only in certain circumstances where they're like old homes that are downtown Meridian that they are converting into restaurants and they just don't have the land application for putting in one of those interceptors. So we do not foresee the city helping or assisting any of the businesses in the future. We did this just as a one time shot to try to get almost all the businesses on some kind of grease abatement unit. Bentley: We keep you up here a while. So we have a situation now where a business is closed, somebody else is looking to take it over. So you're going to require this unit be in place before they open? Vialet: They are open and yes the unit is already in and up and running. What he's proposing to do today is to get reimbursed for half of the installation of it because at the time when we first looked at the business it was a different business type. Bentley: You missed my point. We have another situation where there is a restaurant that is currently closed and somebody else is looking to take it over so we are going to require that unit before they get their permit. Vialet: Correct. Bentley: Thank you. Vialet: Thank you. Corrie: Okay Mark. Hansen: The only part I would clarify is that we'd never operated as Rocky Mountain Bagel Bakery. The initial planning was for Rocky Mountain and Bruegger's took over Rocky Mountain's two existing store before they opened their Meridian store and so somewhere along the line nothing got changed as far as what kind of restaurant we were going to be. So we never received the offer that was sent out. It was about a year and a half ago now. That's the only reason I'm petitioning is for the misunderstanding. Corrie: What is the cost of your unit? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 5 Hansen: The unit was $5,000 without the electrical. I haven't got the electrical bill yet so I would guess $5,000 to $6,000. Corrie: Council questions? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay and you're requesting at least half of the five? Hansen: Just to be included in what the program was. Corrie: Thank you, Mark. Counselor any questions about we can go ahead and do that since we did it before? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, the concerns that I had about this are really just sort of set forth in the memorandum before you on agenda item number 2. If you feel it's appropriate under the existing or the former program and there's a place in the budget to fund this and it's upon recommendation of the Wastewater Treatment Superintendent, I think it's a matter of your discretion. Corrie: Any other discussion from Council? Anybody have anything they want to make a motion or accept tonight? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve adding Bruegger's Bagels to grease trap program that we had previous with the understanding that we're not going to go back on a bunch of other businesses. There was a miscommunication I guess when they were under construction and built. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Rountree to approve the request of half the cost of the grease trap. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor I guess I just have a philosophical difference here in I don't have any problem with understanding of the program that it's designed to help reduce the amount of grease in the sewer lines. It's the fact that we're helping to purchase a portable piece of equipment that could end up being taken out of there at some point as if it's a piece of restaurant equipment and could end up in another city for all we know, so I guess I wouldn't have any problem if I knew this was a permanent fixture but where this is something that's portable and can be moved, I'm not sure the City has any business in helping to fund such a piece of equipment and I also know that this is not the first restaurant that is now come in after the fact of the initial offering and been in this same boat, and I think we're opening the flood gates here to any restaurant that comes in that moves into another building saying well we didn't know about the last one. Will you help fund us here? Bentley: Mr. Mayor as part of my motion was the fact that we would not keep extending this. This was a restaurant that was under construction at the time of this even though it Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 6 was going to be a different company owning it and it changed hands in the middle, but they were establishing while this program was in place and that was the gist of my motion that it not be extended any further. Corrie: Any further comments? Rountree: Mr. Mayor I tend to agree with what Councilman Anderson said. I think the program is a great program, but the intent of the program is to get that infrastructure in place and keep it in place and the portability aspect of this particular application is one that could be here for a week and gone next week and it's $2500 to $3,000 that we don't have in place treating grease and sewer so I would be inclined to vote negatively. Corrie: Mr. Mayor I concur with Councilman Anderson because of being portable. If this was something that was in our line that could be removed I would support it wholeheartedly, but I can't support it when it's a portable. It can be taken out of there with $2500 of our money. Corrie: Okay. Hansen: When approached by the Wastewater, we were given the option of either or and in the midst of petitioning the Council, we went ahead and installed it. The portability is mostly because it was the quickest and easiest and as I understand the cheapest. I'm not certain about that. For me we're not looking at moving out. If you want to work something in about the portability, we don't have to take it with us. It was the ease and we went ahead and put it in ahead of time before the petition almost as a good faith just trying to get it done, and in hindsight we weren't counseled one way or the other by Wastewater which way to go and we were actually I felt steered towards the removable one, so I don't know if that changes any minds. Corrie: Counselor, I have a question. Since it's portable, is it movable property? Can it stay here if we make a stipulation that it stays with the building or not? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, you could reach an agreement to make it stay with the building if the owner is agreeable to that. The question is the ability to enforce that if someone, I don't know how movable this object is. As described it gets to be — it sounds like it would be less part of your system and part of the system within the building, but I don't know what your original program was. Maybe if this is consistent with the original program, I think it's a matter of your discretion in this matter. I don't know whether or not this unit could have affixed to it, property of the City of Meridian so someone knew that it was not to be removed, it might be an impediment to someone inadvertently removing it. Corrie: Okay any other discussion? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would like to ask a question of Celeste. On your way up, how many more of these so called portable units do we have in the City that came under this program? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 7 Vialet: Portable I believe there's four or five of them. You have to undo a lot of plumbing and unhook the pick it up like a microwave oven and walk off with it. foresee anybody wanting to walk off with one. Bentley: Wouldn't want it under your kitchen sink. Vialet: Not really. They're not that attractive. Bentley: Thank you. They're not relatively easy to take. m. I mean it's not like you can just They're messing, I mean I can't Rountree: That was not a criteria then in the selection of candidates for the program? Vialet: No, we were more looking at trying to get rid of the fats, oils and greases and at the time we gave them the two options. Most people have chosen to go with the interceptor because they own their property. The little places that are in the strip malls, they don't really own it, so this seems to be a better choice for them. Bentley: It appears that in the past we have given the option of either/or on the permanent or the portable and I really don't see we can change right now or that we should. Anderson: I have one more question of counsel. Would it be possible to draft an agreement that says that if the business were to relocate or to move within a certain time period that they would reimburse us for the money that we fronted them? Gigray: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Anderson, and members of the Council, it certainly would. We could craft any kind of agreement like that that you would choose and I suppose you could even with the consent of the owner of the real property you could agree that some type of memorandum of agreement could be recorded so that anyone that would purchase the real property would be aware that that fixture that there's an interest in it from the City of Meridian to be included for the grease — I don't know if it's the kind of thing that you'd want to leave there if the business changed and it wasn't dumping grease into the system or would it be something that someone would want to remove. I don't know. Anderson: It would probably depend on what the occupancy ended up of that particular facility. But I think we would recoup our cost within a couple year time frame so I guess I wouldn't be opposed to rewording the original proposal to maybe include a contract that if the restaurant was to move or go out of business within two years that they would reimburse the city the $2,000 that we would apply towards that. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, my question would then be are we prepared to go back to the other four people and ask them to do the same? Bird: I don't think they would come before us because they did it within the time limit. Bentley: But it's still real property. You're still dealing with the same amount of money tied up in portable equipment. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 8 Bird: Yeah, two wrongs don't make a right. Bentley: I'm not arguing that point. Corrie: We want to be consistent as all possible. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I'd offer a substitute motion. Mr. Mayor I move that we accept the application for the participation in the grease trap program City of Meridian by Mark Hansen for Bruegger's Bagels with the condition that if the use of this establishment changes within the next two years there would be reimbursement to the City of Meridian the cost was provided to the establishment for the grease trap. Anderson: I would second that. Corrie: Amended motion has been placed in the consideration by Councilman Rountree to approve for half the cost with the condition of pay back if it's less than two years and as the establishment using the grease trap, second by Mr. Anderson. Any further discussion? Bird: I've got one question. What if there's a UCC on that? You can't do this. I don't see where this motion is going to protect us any more than the first one. Corrie: Any further discussion? Can you tell us Mark, is there a lien or anything? None? (Inaudible) Corrie: Sure getting a lesson in law. Counselor, does that sound reasonable? Gigray: As I said before, I think this is a matter of your discretion as to how you want to administer this without a program and this seems to be some of the tailings of the program you had. You've got a recommendation from your department and what you choose as conditions of allowing them to be a part of this program since the time has passed, I think it's up to you as to what you think is reasonable. There are some logistical issues with whatever you do, but whatever you do I think you could fashion an agreement if you want to if they're willing to sign it. I want to know who the owner of that is and who the owner of the premises is so that we make sure that everybody agrees and that we have the right parties involved. Corrie: Question been called for. All those in favor of the amended motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: 2 AYES, 2 NAYS, MAYOR CORRIE, AYE. Corrie: All right I'll vote aye on this and have the attorney write up this — Bentley: Excuse me, which way is aye? Corrie: For the amended motion. Bentley: Yeah, but which aye? We've got four ayes for two different directions. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 9 Corrie: Two noes, two ayes, and to break the tie I'll vote aye for the amended motion and direct the attorney to draw up the conditions as such. I think (inaudible). All right we've spent thirty minutes on that one. We'll never get through — Bentley: You still got to vote on the first. Corrie: Now we got to vote on the first one. The first one was the original motion by Mr. Bentley. Everybody understand the motion? All those in favor of that motion say aye? MOTION DEFEATED: 1 AYES, 3 NAYS. 3. TABLED 2/16/99: FINAL PLAT FOR VILLAS AT THE LAKES SUBDIVISION BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT LLC — NW OF CHERRY LANE VILLAGE NO. 1: Corrie: Shari, comments from staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council I have met with the applicant. He has provided most of the information that I need. There is one final item that I need a little additional clarification on and the applicant has asked that we continue this to the April 6th meeting so he can get that information. Corrie: Okay do we need to get that from the attorney or the developer? The attorney is fine. Bradbury: My name is Steve Bradbury, 877 Main Street, Boise. Yeah we agree with Shari. We've got to try to untangle one last little issue and hopefully we'll have it by April 6th for you. Corrie: Okay, thanks Steve. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we table item number three Steiner Development final plat for the Villas at the Lakes Subdivision until April 6th Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson to table item number three until April 6th meeting for the Villas at the Lakes Subdivision final plat. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Mr. Mayor I got a question back on the second item. Clarify it for me. You passed the amendment but then we defeated the motion. Rountree: No, we passed the substitute motion. Corrie: Substitution motion. Bird: Oh, it wasn't amended? Corrie: No. Bird: Okay substitution. I thought he said amended. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 10 Rountree: Bob did. Bird: Well if you have a substitution then we should have acted on the first one and then the – Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council I think as long as you all agree that you pass the motion as amended for the record that would be sufficient. As I recall the motions there was a motion to substitute I think that Councilman Rountree made and then there was a reference to a motion to amend and it's a little bit different and as long as you agree that it was treated as a substitute motion on the record, then there wont' be any ambiguity in the minutes. Bird: I just wanted to clear it up. Gigray: I'll proceed with the agreement then. Bird: If that guy walked out of here thinking he was getting it. He would have been back 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DRIVE-THRU KIOSK IN THE PARKING LOT OF INTERMOUNTAIN OUTDOOR SPORTS BY BRUCE A. BENOIT D/B/A BARISTAS ESPRESSO — 1375 E. FAIRVIEW: Corrie: Shari comments? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council I have nothing in addition to what the report has. I believe it was tabled because we made some minor modifications. Corrie: Council, you have the conditional use permit in front of you. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council we prepared this at the request at the last meeting and I believe there was some clarification of the Findings regarding signage and some minor – there was one condition we removed because it wasn't needed. And it's a pretty I think straight forward application. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting the conditional use permit for this application. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to approve the item number four the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call. ROLL CALL VOTE: BIRD, YEA. BENTLEY, YEA. ROUNTREE, AYE. ANDERSON, YEA. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 11 5. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR MERIDIAN JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 2 (WEST SIDE OF EAGLE ROAD BETWEEN FAIRVIEW AND USTICK ROAD): Corrie: Shari any comments on the development agreement? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council I'm not aware if they have signed that development agreement yet. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council I had conversations with Mr. Carberry of the Joint School District, and I have been advised that they have signed this document and that they have before the school board for ratification of this at their very next meeting, and I think the Clerk has the original. Corrie: Any further discussion on the development agreement? Rountree: I have none. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for the Joint School District No. 2 Development Agreement. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion that we approve the development agreement between the Joint School District No. 2. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Bird to approve the development agreement for Meridian Joint School District No. 2. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 6. ORDINANCE #817 — ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF PROPERTY FOR MERIDIAN JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 2: Corrie: This is Ordinance #817. I'll read it by title only at this time. (MAYOR READ ORDINANCE TITLE ONLY.) Is there anyone from the audience who wants to have Ordinance #817 read in its entirety? All right, I'll entertain a motion on Ordinance #817. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve Ordinance #817 for annexation and zoning for this application, authorize the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest with suspension of rules. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson to approve Ordinance #817 with suspension of rules. ROLL CALL VOTE: ANDERSON, YEA. BENTLEY, YEA. ROUNTREE, YEA. BIRD, YEA. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 12 MOTION CARRIED: ALL YEAS. 7. TABLED FROM 3/2/99: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 24,560 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE BUILDING, EQUIPMENT YARD AND GARAGE WITH SECURITY FENCE (MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK) BY HUBBLE — NW OF EAGLE ROAD/1-84 INTERCHANGE, WEST OF TEXACO: Corrie: This was tabled I believe we needed to have the City Clerk attest that the Ordinance was in effect and published; is that correct? Berg: Mr. Mayor yes it is. It's been published. Corrie: Okay that having been done and attested to by the City Clerk any questions on the conditional use permit for Midvalley Business Park? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on the conditional use permit. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion we approve the conditional use permit for the 24,560 square foot office building and equipment yard in the Midvalley Business Park for Hubble Engineering. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Bird to approve the conditional use permit on item number seven. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: ROUNTREE, AYE. ANDERSON, AYE. BENTLEY, YEA. BIRD, YEA. MOTION CARRIED: ALL YEAS. 8. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THOUSAND SPRINGS VILLAGE SUBDIVISION: 9. ORDINANCE #818 — ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF THOUSAND SPRINGS VILLAGE SUBDIVISION: Corrie: Shari, comments on the development agreement? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I'm also unaware of that development agreement has been signed by the applicant. Corrie: Mr. Clerk, has that one been signed by the Thousand Springs Village Subdivision? Berg: Mr. Mayor, I do not have a signed copy of the development agreement by the applicant. Corrie: Mr. Gigray, any comments about this? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as you recall my advice on these matters would be that you would withhold any action on passage of the ordinance until Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 13 you get a signed development agreement because a condition of the annexation and the zoning designation is the signing of the development agreement and I believe we have prepared an ordinance for your consideration on this annexation and zoning designation but I wouldn't recommend you pass that until you have a signed development agreement. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move we table items 8 and 9 for Thousand Springs Development pending the signature of the development agreement. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Rountree on items 8 and 9 to be tabled until April 6th meeting which entails the development agreement and also the Ordinance #818. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 10. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR 8.51 ACRES BY JOHN GOADE (SOUTH OF TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK BETWEEN WALTMAN LANE AND TEN MILE): 11. ORDINANCE # — ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 8.51 ACRES BY JOHN GOAD: Corrie: Mr. Gigray, you have some comments on this one? Gigray: Mr. Mayor my comments would the same as the last. I believe this also involves an annexation and zoning ordinance in addition to a development agreement and I would have to inquire as to the status of the development agreement. Corrie: Mr. Clerk. Berg: Mr. Mayor I do not have a signed development agreement. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we table items number 10 and 11 for John Goade development until we have the signed development agreement to 4/6. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Anderson to table items numbers 10 and 11, which is the development agreement and also the ordinance # until April 6th meeting. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. 12. APPEAL OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO ADA COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BY BRENT E. BARRUS: Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 14 Corrie: Shari, you're up first. Sties: Mr. Mayor and Council, this was an application that was referred to us from Ada County as our Comprehensive Plan has a policy in it that we do not allow less than five acre lots within our area of impact unless they're hooked up to sewer and water. We sent the letter at the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny their application. Corrie: Mr. Barrus, are you here this evening? Aiello: I'm not Mr. Barrus, but I'm here representing him. My name is Michael Aiello, and I live at 5720 W. Overland Road. When we brought this — what we did was we put in an application for rezone to R-1 to Ada County Planning and Zoning, and they turned us down based on Meridian City's recommendation that they not allow us to do that. We currently have an appeal pending with the Ada County Commission. Basically the Ada County Planning and Zoning was in favor of doing it except for the fact that Meridian City was against it and because their plan coincides with Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, they did vote against it although it was a split vote. However the general feeling was that since Meridian City is requiring us to have sewer and water, but has no plans at this time to get sewer and water, it's on the south side of the freeway on the bench and I guess one of the Planning and Zoning Commissioners called Meridian City and asked when any of that was in the plan to get it sewer and water on that side of the freeway and it was not in their ten year plan. Because the cost involved apparently was going to be prohibitive to do that to get it on the other side of the freeway plus up that hill. (End of Tape) Aiello: ...I guess what we're asking for is a variance to that so that we can go to the Ada County Commission and if not a favorable ruling from Meridian City at least not a negative one. What we — this is my father-in-law's property. What he wants to do is subdivide it into four maybe three lots depending on how things shake out. Most of the buildings in that area, if you look at that one mile strip along Overland Road on the south side of the freeway, all of the property there is zoned R-1 except for my father-in- law's property. The property just to the north just to the east and the two just to the west, everything else is zoned R-1. We've talked to Central District Health about the possibility of septic and water and they said without even doing any research they could grant us three lots for sure. Four they would have to look into it and wouldn't know if they would have to do a study, but that would be another time. Also in reviewing the minutes from the Meridian City Planning and Zoning, what their ruling was on this, I guess there was some confusion as to why there was no final plat. Ada County does not require that you do that on a rezone because of the cost involved. It was much cheaper for us to just go with that, so we put in a preliminary plat what our idea is basically if we were to get the rezone, we would submit a final plat later again which Meridian City would have to approve and so we would like to be able to do this. The reason my father-in-law is doing this, he wants to subdivide is A, he's getting older. He's in his mid sixties, and the land is getting difficult for him to maintain. Plus he's Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 15 providing for it for my family, my brother-in-law's family so that we can be close so that we can have our family close together and to be able to provide us frankly with some property that would be affordable for us to have and to be able to build homes on it. I guess basically all I have to say and we would like Meridian City's if not recommendation at least not a negative on that. Thank you very much. Corrie: Excuse me, spell your last name. Aiello: Yeah, it's not A -I -e -1-1-o. I'm surprised at you Will. I used to call you all the time. Corrie: Okay, thank you very much. Counselor, you want any input on this one? I guess the evidence that's presented here the Council has to decide whether or not the recommendation appeal is in error. Is that correct? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, on this agenda item my review of the ordinances in question it appears that for this appeal you would have to determine that there has been an error on the part of the Planning and Zoning Commission in their recommendation. As I read the file which is part of the record of this matter, it appeared that the letter which was sent dated January 21, 1999 by Shari Stiles on behalf of the Planning and Zoning Commission rest the objection to this on page 29, under the heading land use of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian. So in this particular instance it would seem that the applicant on appeal should make some kind of showing to this Council that the Commission has errantly read or errantly reported the provisions of its Comprehensive Plan in opposition to their proposed development. I have included in a memo to you just an overview of items that are in the file and I've also in that memo for agenda item number 12 provided the relative ordinances of the Ada County Code relative to amendments to their Comprehensive Plan and their zoning ordinance which requires in your impact area that they refer it to you, and then the Ada County Code § 851 which is their definition for an estate residential zone, which is what I understand applying to have this rezoned as. Corrie: Council, questions? Discussion? (Inaudible) Barrus: Maybe some clarification — My name is Wesley Barrus. I reside at 5545 W. Overland. We see a little conflict and I don't know if it resides in the City or the County at this point. Our neighbors three lots down directly after the city had annexed this property were allowed to rezone their property to an R-1 and that might — I just wanted to put that towards as well so that you're aware of that. It was the McCoy piece. I don't know if anybody recalls it. But I would like to bend your ear a little bit. This is where I want to raise my family. I like this community. I've been here for all my 29 years. Dad's been gracious enough to let us look at this property, and I would like to ask your support in this. Thanks. Corrie: Thank you. I guess the question here Council was the Planning and Zoning Commission in error when they stating that they were in the difference to the opinions. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 16 Rountree: Mr. Mayor having just heard what I just heard, I have a question for Shari about there's been a fairly recent rezone, since '93 the passage of our Comp Plan on an adjacent property within the county. What would have been the justification for that to have moved forward? What was the City's position on that and what's the difference between that and where we are now? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, Councilman Rountree, I'm not aware of what that project was. I've been here five years and have not been made aware of that application coming across my desk. I know at least since '97 when we finally did get Ada County Commissioners to adopt our area of impact, we have been consistent in every case to require the five acre minimums. (Inaudible) Corrie: Council have you heard enough you think? Bird: I'd it clarified. Aiello: I'm Michael Aiello, 5720 W. Overland Road, what happened was with the McCoy's they own the piece of property three lots to the west. They had put in an application for a rezone and subdivision with Ada County prior to our area falling within the city impact area. As soon as that went through, I believe it was September of '97 that went through. Ada County said prior to that, they said no that you couldn't do this, but once it came in with Meridian City, Ada County went ahead and moved on their own as far as I know, and I don't think Meridian City was ever contacted, but I don't know that for a fact, but I know it went right through Ada County and it was approved in December of '97 from Ada County. Corrie: I don't recall it. It could be, the County does strange things sometimes. Okay. Rountree: Are we just taking discussion Mr. Mayor? Timing is kind of critical I guess on this particular issue and factors in what appears to be some unfairness for the applicant, but it seems that this particular piece of property now is in the Meridian Area of Impact, and subject to an agreement that we do have with Ada County as it relates to impact of development within the county and within our impact area. I don't see any evidence by applicants that would change or say that the Planning and Zoning decision was in error. I'd like to be able to work with these folks and I think we have a window of opportunity to do that given we're in the process of amending our Comprehensive Plan that may accommodate these kinds of requests in the future, but given the Comprehensive Plan that we have by ordinance established now, I don't see any way to take any other different position other than the position of Planning and Zoning as presented to us. Corrie: Thank you. Any comments? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I too would have to concur with Councilman Rountree. I don't see any other action that we can take at this time on this. Corrie: Any other comments? I'll entertain a motion for the attorney to prepare the proper order of decision that you make. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 17 Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, in this particular instance you could move to either find error and therefore grant the appeal and direct that a new letter be sent to the Ada County, or you could move to deny the appeal of no finding of error and then so notify the county and we prepare the order, either way. Corrie: Hearing no further discussion, I'll entertain a motion on your decision. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move that the Council of Meridian deny the appeal of the Planning and Zoning's recommendation to Ada County and instruct the city attorney to prepare such a letter. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Rountree to deny the appeal based upon no error made by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: I have here that such input from the City shall not be binding or controlling on the County, but shall be treated as a documentary evidence, so again how they treat that is up to them. But it's against our Comprehensive Plan as far as the area of impact was given to us by the County Commissioners at that time. Unidentified: I guess the problem we have though is that Meridian City in their letter threatened to lock the subdivision (inaudible) through the County, and if it goes through the County, are we going to be sitting here in six months doing this all over again? Corrie: I can't answer that. I don't know the answer. Gigray: The City if it's in the impact area, the City does approve plats. The final approval is by the County, but it's in the impact area and the City would have to give its blessing to it, but that's another day and that isn't something that you can prejudge at this point. Corrie: And Mr. Rountree did mention that we are in the process of working on the Comprehensive Plan and it could be within a year that it could be changed. 13. FINAL PLAT FOR THOUSAND SPRINGS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY FARWEST, LLC — NORTH OF VICTORY ROAD AND WEST OF EAGLE ROAD: Corrie: Shari, comments from staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, you have our comments dated March 16th, 1999. Ms. Bowcutt was kind enough to be able to respond today. She has agreed to all of our requirements. The development agreement that was previously approved for this subdivision had not exactly errors, but we needed some clarifications on those. believe this has already been recorded. Has this been recorded? No, maybe it hasn't been recorded yet. There were some items if I could speak to these as part of this final Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 18 plat, one of the requirements that we had initially was on the perimeter fencing. We had required I believe it was in the development agreement to require non-combustible perimeter fencing and the only place that we really needed that was along the Ridenbaugh Canal. That one item. Another item was the pedestrian bridges to be constructed over the Ridenbaugh Canal. As Ada County Highway District is the agency responsible for overlooking the construction and inspection of those bridges, they have asked for deposits for half the cost of two of those pedestrian bridges, and they will not be constructed until each side pays their share. Also there was condition that the Ridenbaugh Canal vehicular bridge be constructed prior to obtaining either building permits or occupancies, and as the waters in the canal now, they're not able to construct anything until next spring, and they would like to be able to bond that with the Highway District, and perhaps Ms. Bowcutt could go over if there are any changes besides that, but those are the primary changes that I was made aware of by the developer as requesting a change on the development agreement. It would have been items J, I believe it was J and L on the original development agreement. The development agreement I have in my packets seems to be different than the one I looked at today with the secretary for the attorney. Bowcutt: I'll try to clarify this. Becky Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering, 1800 W. Overland. In the past with the development agreements we used to wait for your staff to prepare them. As the development applications, the numbers increased and their work load increased, it became one of those items that was easy to set aside but yet you couldn't proceed forward without that document getting obviously the approval of City Council and getting it recorded. We worked out a system with Shari and Mr. Crookston in the past where we got a copy of the format which they were happy with and we would use that format and basically do all the work and put in all the information that was required as far as what our conditions of approval were, any motions made by the City Council that had to be incorporated as part of those binding conditions of approval. The system seemed to work quite well. Mr. Gigray has come into the process and he has some excellent suggestions and he's changed the format a little bit. He and I did talk over the phone and I said what's happening now, we're submitting these drafts under the old format because we had not been able to obtain the new format. They go to his office, and we're not getting those documents before you and getting them recorded. I've got plats sitting in Gary's office that it needs a development agreement instrument number. That's the only thing it is lacking, and this is the development agreement. Mr. Gigray is included the staff's original comments in there, but as you well know when we come before you there are particular items that you make in your motion modify and those were not incorporated into the document even the document had been prepared for my client's signature. I recommended that he not sign the document, because it bound him to the original staff conditions, which were fine with the exception of three or four items which you in your motion revised. So we need to try to implement a process to make this as easy as possible for your staff. I still have a proponent of we prepare the document, it goes through Shari, it goes through your attorney, it can go to Will. He can Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 19 verify what's on the record is in that document, and then when it comes before you it's signed and ready to go and all they're doing is just doing a quick review. We use what we call an Exhibit B on all of these and Exhibit B breaks everything out in site specific conditions tailored for this very project. It works real well. We're happy with it and we'd like to keep using it so if I could get some support and assistance here so we can start expediting these. They'll go smoother and use a lot less of your staff's time. Thank you. Corrie: Staff comments? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council I don't remember the meeting that this might have happened. We looked in the minutes where the development agreement was approved and there were no comments on any changes. Maybe Becky can provide us a date that Council incorporated some changes to that development agreement. I know that one of the conditions in the Findings still stated that they would prefer a 57 foot right-of-way for the roads, but as we discussed it with Council, staff did agree that they would prefer to see the planting strip and could live with the 50 foot right-of-way provided that that planting was done by the applicant. So that was one condition that I do recall was changed and approved by Council that still remained in the Findings. As these development agreements are written now, the development agreement is — the main text is there and then attached as Exhibit B are the entire Findings for the project, but those are the major issues and they were items that due to the impossibility of being able to construct the bridge prior to obtaining building permits or certificates of occupancy the 50 foot right-of-way that was approved with the 22 foot setback from the back of curb, and it may have been an error. My comments asked for noncombustible perimeter fencing, it was only intended to be noncombustible along the Ridenbaugh Canal right-of-way, and I don't know if anything can be done tonight to take care of those issues. We did get a letter dated February 25th from Becky. I received a copy of it today. I don't believe I've seen this before, but it was requesting that these changes be made. Corrie: Thank you Shari. Comments from staff? Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, Becky is correct. She's made a request that some changes be made and she's phoned me a couple of times and I have not phoned her back simply because I have requested that the minutes of the meeting which she bases her position so we can verify whether or not this was the action of the Council so that we could then feel comfortable about making the changes. I just can't verify it at this point in time, and that's why I haven't made the changes. I'm not saying that she's misstating the facts. I'm just saying that before we start changing these documents, we're going to go back to the original text of the minutes before we do it. Our procedure now is that hopefully we're going to receive recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission on these. We're going to ask that staff and then Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 20 developers address those recommendations and then we can limit the discussion. If there need to be additions or corrections that they should submit those in writing and then we can eliminate some potential confusion in the future because you do handle a considerable number of items. The development agreement we always now prepare at the time you direct we prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on an annexation or a zoning designation. As you will note of recent, that's produced at that time. And then that is sent to the developer for their review. This particular one may have come about in September earlier when we were just initiating and getting into this process and maybe part of that transition that has been a little bit confusing, but we're more than happy to look into this and try to straighten this out. I just don't have — I just can't verify as Shari stated that these changes were actually part of the Council's action. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, Council can either I guess you have two alternatives. You can approve the final plat with the conditions as stated, or you can table it for April the 6th meeting. Bentley: Mr. Mayor as much as I'd like to clear this, I think we need to have verification on what is part of the minutes and part of this development agreement. My estimation that we're going to need to table this. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, if in fact the minutes exist and we have taken those actions and after hundreds of them, they all run together. But I do remember the right-of-way discussion that Shari brought up. I would think that we could take action subject to our previous directions as the record would indicate and if the record in fact does indicate those that Becky is bringing, then we're moving forward and if they don't we're still moving forward with the conditions that are stated in the development agreement as it sets. Corrie: Any further discussion? Okay we got two thoughts here. Which one of them would like to go? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I am going to move that we table this until we get verification of the minutes to the meeting of 4/6. Corrie: Okay motion made by Mr. Bentley do I hear a second? Anderson: I'll second it. Corrie: Okay, motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Anderson that we table item number 13 the final plat for Thousand Springs No. 3 until April the 6th meeting. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION FAILED: 2 AYES, 3 NAYS, MAYOR VOTES. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 21 Corrie: I think probably I'm going to vote no on the motion. I think Mr. Rountree's approach is probably a little quicker a little better. We got it on record. I think all we need to do is make sure that those conditions are there and the record is on there, and then we can approve it with those conditions so I'll entertain a motion to that effect and see where that one goes. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the final plat for Thousand Springs No. 3 Subdivision subject to the conditions of staff and conditions and modifications made by Council as the record would indicate and that that information be reflected in the development agreement. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to approve with the conditions in the record of the development agreement as stated. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: 3 AYES, 1 NAY. 14. FINAL PLAT FOR SHERBROOKE HOLLOWS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY GEM PARK II — EAST OF LOCUST GROVE AND NORTH OF VICTORY: Corrie: Shari, you're first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, you have our comments dated March 15th, 1999. We have received a response from Ms. Bowcutt. She has agreed with the majority of our comments. However we have asked for some additional soils testing. She has submitted a letter, but it is not enough information to satisfy our Public Works Department and we do ask for additional soils testing at that site. Otherwise she agrees to all the conditions. We have no problem with this going forward and I am not sure if a development agreement has ever been prepared for this. Has it? Sherbrooke Village? Ms. Bowcutt has submitted one. I don't believe it has been acted on by Council. I'm not aware that City Attorney has prepared his own development agreement. Corrie: Mr. Clerk do you have that development agreement in your files? Berg: Yes, Mr. Mayor, I do have a copy of the development agreement in my packet. You should have one in your packet also. It does look like the old format. Corrie: Ms. Bowcutt, do you have any comments on Ms. Stiles — (inaudible) Any other discussion from Council? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 22 Bentley: Mr. Mayor I have a question for Shari. My understanding you haven't seen the development agreement? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, Councilman Bentley, we did get one submitted. Becky did submit a development agreement. However we don't have one prepared in our current format for this particular subdivision. This subdivision was the majority of this subdivision was annexed as the Sherbrooke Village Subdivision. I believe we do have a Sherbrooke Hollows Subdivision development agreement, but this other new annexed portion was not under that development agreement. Bowcutt: On the check list for final plats, it states all the items that we must submit for your staff's review. On that checklist is a copy of the development agreement, and so for quite a while we submitted them at that stage. Now with your new procedure where they're being prepared as you're annexed, we've got some of these hold overs that they went through the process prior to Mr. Gigray so these development agreements need wrapped up. This particular project is subject to two development agreements. One is already recorded and in place. The other one I submitted with the final plat to go to your staff for their review and comments. Thanks. Corrie: Any other staff comments? Mr. Gigray you have a comment? Gigray: The only thing I would say is that my familiarity with development agreements are part and parcel of an annexation actually part and parcel of a zoning designation or rezoning, and so this must have some history that would predate our administration, because I wouldn't be doing it as part of a plat. So I would defer to Shari as to whether the conditions are appropriate or not. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council this may have been during the transition. I'm not real sure the time frame. I've been talking with Mr. Gigray and we're trying to come to some consensus about when to require these and when to not. It's getting to the point on these plats, we've got such a hold on them anyway that unless there's some really unusual requirements for the annexation that we can take care of everything just through withholding building permits. They can't even get a final plat signature until they bond for virtually everything and have a recorded development agreement so hopefully in the future you will be seeing a lot less of these development agreements. Corrie: Any other comments from Council? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on the final plat for Sherbrooke Hollows No. 3. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion we approve the final plat for Sherbrooke Hollows No. 3. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 23 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Rountree to approve the final plat for Sherbrooke Hollows No. 3. Any further discussion? Bentley: Mr. Mayor, should that include the signing of the development agreement? Corrie: Do you want that — I don't think it's necessary, but (inaudible) — Stiles: I believe it was part of the initial Findings. This project did have a requirement for a booster pump installation too, which is a little different, but they're aware of that requirement and intend to comply with that. Bentley: Thank you. Bird: Mr. Mayor, what conditions — what was in the motion? General conditions? Anderson: Subject to the staff conditions. Bird: Okay. Corrie: Motion is made to approve the final plat of Sherbrooke Hollows No. 3 approval with the staff conditions. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we take a ten minute break. Corrie: We've got one more final plat. Let's do one more and then public hearing. 15. FINAL PLAT FOR TUMBLE CREEK NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY STUBBLEFIELD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. — USTICK ROAD, WEST OF LINDER ROAD: Corrie: Shari. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, hopefully you have our comments on this project. I don't seem to have my packet here. I'm looking in the wrong file. Our comments dated March 12, 1999. We have received a response from the applicant's representative. They have acknowledged all of our comments and indicate that they will comply. This is the third phase on Tumble Creek Subdivision just north of the proposed Turtle Creek Subdivision. This particular phase will have a stub street going into Turtle Creek and I have no problems with this plat. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 24 Corrie: Bill, do you have any comments that you want to make or any additions or corrections? Any discussion of Council? Rountree: I have none. Corrie: Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on the final plat for Tumble Creek No. 3 Subdivision. Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the final plat for Tumble Creek No. 3 Subdivision by Stubblefield Construction Company with staff comments. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Bentley to approve the final plat Tumble Creek No. 3 with the conditions and comments of staff. Any further discussion on Tumble Creek No. 3 final plat? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. & Eel 9 Eel ►[e7_1::1121DW—Al IW_\'da601 Corrie: I'll entertain that motion now Mr. Bentley. Bentley: So moved. Corrie: Motion made and second we have a five minute break. All in favor say aye. ►VAEel 9 Eel 0KOYI1VV1'210l/_1IW_\'1'2•01 Corrie: Okay, I'll reconvene the City Council meeting. 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 9.14 ACRES BY PAUL A. HOFFMAN (PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH) — SW CORNER OF MERIDIAN RD., AND USTICK RD: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask staff comments on the request for annexation and zoning. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council this is a request for annexation and zoning with two separate zoning designations. One would be the R-4 and the other would the L -O. That is where the church is located. We have requested that a development agreement be required for this. We have asked what the reason for the annexation was. We've been told by the applicant's representative that they desire to be a part of the City of Meridian. However they take exception to some of our ordinances and do not want to provide sidewalks or tile the existing ditches. There's also the issue of the existing Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 25 house that is in the right-of-way at this time. Staff recommendation was that it be removed. The Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation was that it should be allowed to stay until Ada County Highway District constructs the roadway at Ustick. Those are the major issues as we see them. I saw that we had a memo from Gary Smith saying that if the two existing structures haven't been connected to sewer and water, that needs to be done and we still feel the tiling of the ditches is appropriate to request at this time. Corrie: Okay thank you. Gary, comments? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, I don't have any comments other than the interoffice memo that I passed out. I think you have that in front of you this evening. Unless you have any questions of me on those comments. Corrie: Okay this is a public hearing. I invite anybody who would like to testify in this request in favor of the annexation and zoning to come forward. PAUL HOFFMAN 3235 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE, BOISE, IDAHO Hoffman: Hello again. I'm trying to make this easy and clean as possible. I'd like to respond to a couple of the items. I'm looking at the staff report and the recommendation from Planning and Zoning. As you can see we're looking for two different zones. The church is permitted by right in the L -O zone. We requested the R- 4 zone based on the conversation with the planning staff and I hope I'm not in error on that, but the fact that there were two dwellings, residential dwellings there. The legal descriptions requested were submitted prior to the Planning and Zoning meeting. If they need copies, I'd be happy to provide them. In fact I brought copies. In terms of the home, I think the Planning and Zoning staff was convinced, let me back up. We met with Ada County Highway District, a gentleman there, Mr. Steve Snead who is no longer employed by Ada County Highway District. But he stood before Planning and Zoning, and he recommended to them that the church not put in the sidewalk at this time until such time as the road is widened and improved. Furthermore the former owner, Bob Strausser, placed a bond with Ada County Highway District for sidewalk all along the entire Meridian Road frontage, so the cost of those improvements or at least at the time or the estimated cost has already been placed in the form of a bond with the Ada County Highway District and Ada County Highway District is saying don't put the sidewalk in. We'll probably have to move it. The same logic and I'll get down to it applies to the ditch that runs parallel to Ustick Road at that point. Also the former owner entered into an agreement with Ada County Highway District that at the time that the road is widened that the building would be moved that ACHD would bear the cost of moving that building out of the right-of-way. One of the requirements relates to that right-of-way and from the planning staff, they're recommending that the full I think it's 40 foot right-of-way or 45 be dedicated to Ada County Highway District and in fact it was in Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 26 1995 with Strausser Farms Subdivision No. 2, copy of that plat I have here all but the last 226 feet which is the frontage of the lot one on the corner and the reason it was not annexed is because of that building. ACHD did not want to accept the right-of-way or the expansion of the right-of-way until such time as the building was relocated. The owner of the property has no objection to granting the right-of-way. You know we just look to ACHD for that. Anyway, here's a copy of that and here's a copy of the description. In terms of the irrigation ditches, I have not specifically requested a variance on behalf of the owner. Perhaps I have been remiss. Maybe I don't understand the process. I guess I assumed that a variance request wouldn't make sense until such time as it was actually under the jurisdiction of Meridian City, and maybe I'm in error. The Ada County Highway District has stated in the same vein as the sidewalk they would prefer us not tile the ditch running parallel with Ustick Road until such time as the road improvements go in. Because they're going to have to move them anyway. If we tile the ditch where it is, it would be under the roadway and they would want to move it out of the roadway. (End of Tape) Hoffman: ...that parallels the south, parallels Ustick Road on the south frontage, that would be our position in keeping with ACHD's recommendation. Now, there is also an interior raised concrete ditch that is actually above grade that intercepts a ditch that runs along—another raised ditch that runs along the sidewalk of Meridian Road. So it comes down into the property and heads west for some distance. Again, that is raised and Ada County has already written a letter to me stating that they wouldn't require us to fence ditches, that was one of the conditions of the conditional use when we did the church because of the fact that the ditch is raised and it's doesn't pose a hazard. Furthermore, the church spent or installed about 550 feet of piping to intercept that particular drainage ditch in the area of the site that they developed. They will submit to you as the site gets further developed that would continue and they would pipe more of that ditch, but it does not seem to pose a hazard at this time. So if a variance is required on the ditch, fine, that would be—the church wouldn't object to applying for that, but they would like a variance. The existing residential units are already connected to the sewer system, they are not connected to the water system. The owner has no objection to making that change as requested. I think that addresses all the conditions that either the staff comments or Planning and Zoning recommendations. Rountree: Would the owners of the property be willing to bond for the ditch tiling that would be adjacent to Ustick? I can understand why ACHD doesn't want it tiled, because when they acquire the right-of-way and widen the road, they would have to replace the tiled ditch. If it's not tiled, then they are going to replace an open ditch. Our intent with that and the city is that be closed. So again, would the owners be willing to bond for that? Hoffman: I'm going to answer that in two ways, if I may. The clean answer would be probably. I haven't specifically asked them that. The money answer is I have not been Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 27 able to establish, in fact right now, there is nobody who owns or operates that ditch. In fact, most of that ditch from the corner or Meridian and Ustick to the point where we intercepted the irrigation water is merely a drain that is under nobody's jurisdiction per say and about the only time there is water in it is either at the high irrigation season, or maybe when it's raining quite a bit. It seems to be that the water level keeps dropping as less and less farm land is irrigated. I realize that—I don't know the law on this on whose responsibility or who owns that ditch, I've been told that because it's on the property of the church that it's their responsibility, which may very well be the case. I'm sure they would consider bonding for those improvements, but I think they would want to feel more comfortable with whose responsibility it truly is. If it's Ada County Highway District or the property owner, because the right-of-way has actually been deeded to Ada County, in fact that ditch is now within that deed. It's not merely an easement. Rountree: So they own it. Hoffman: That would be my take on it. (Inaudible) Rountree: Thank you. Corrie: Does anybody else wish to testify in favor of the project? Anybody who would like to testify against the project? Any questions the council needs to ask of anybody? I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing on Item No. 16. Anderson: So moved. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson, seconded by Mr. Bentley to close the public hearing on item no. 16 request for annexation and zoning by Paul A. Hoffman. Council, questions or discussion on the request for annexation and zoning? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion to either continue the public hearing or accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission or modify the recommendations. Anderson: I would just throw out for discussion that it seems like the issues that Paul brought up are very valid ones. I think they have merit to them and I don't know if staff has anything else that they want to add on why we would not want to look at some of those. Corrie: Any other discussion on comment? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 28 Corrie: Mr. Anderson do you want to modify the recommendations anyway or continue the public hearing? Anderson: I guess I would like to see staff work on modifying some of those conditions based off of the information that Paul presented to us tonight. I guess in particular the issue about the sidewalks and the ditch. It doesn't make any sense to put those in if Ada County Highway District is telling us that they would just as soon not have them in at this point. (Inaudible) Bentley: I would agree with Councilman Anderson. We've run into this before with—I don't know why, it seems to (inaudible) up with the churches. We get the sidewalks put in and they are in the wrong place and they wind up being ripped back out. If ACHD is stating that they don't want to—prefer we didn't have them put in at this time, then I feel the same way Ron does and definitely don't want to be tiling a ditch in the middle of a road. I would agree with what he is saying there. Corrie: Mr. Gigray any words of wisdom on how they would approach that? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the council, I'm looking at the recommendations to the City Council from the Planning and Zoning Commission item 1.8B at page 4 says provision for pedestrian walkways five foot sidewalk, five foot wide sidewalks along Meridian Road and Ustick Road as well as through out the development. The sidewalks should not be required until widening of the road occurs or within a five year funded project. I guess that might need some clarification as to whether or not that would be required within five years or at such time as the road is widened. There isn't a bonding provision in there for that and as far as legal liability with regards to ditches, the land owner in Idaho has the right to reconstruct or move ditches to different locations so long as they don't impede the flow of the water. I suppose this is an issue with regards to what you are going to require as a development amenity for granting the zoning request and the annexation. If the applicant could establish factually that they didn't have a legal right to do anything to the ditch, then that would be relevant evidence to that question. Corrie: If I'm hearing right, it's 1.8B, you could strike out to within a five year funded project and make that sidewalk should not be required until widening of the road occurs. Gigray: That would be correct. Bentley: The question would be should we require bonding for that or does this statement stand alone? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 29 Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the council, if you wish a response just from a staffing standpoint, a legal standpoint. The problem—there are remedies available to the city by a development agreement. I think part of the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission was to have a development agreement. A development agreement provides for de -annexation for failure to comply, it also provides for a specific performance remedies, would even be some provisions in our development agreement for bonding as it relates to putting in of improvements that could be dealt with I would think at a staff level with regards to what would be allowed. You will need to open the public hearing and... Corrie: Public hearing reopen it, but because the testimony has already been done and closed. Gigray: My point is just what you would want to require in this regard, what you would find. If you don't feel comfortable with it you can continue it, I don't think we are under any time—this is the first time this has been back here and request that the developer and staff need to see if a couple of these points could be worked out with a subsequent presentation of public hearing at the next council meeting, which it would just continue the public hearing, wouldn't have to re -notice it. Bentley: In that case we would have to re -open the public hearing. Gigray: Yes, before you close this evening. Bentley: Is time an issue? (Inaudible) Bentley: I would move that we reopen the public hearing. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley and seconded by Mr. Rountree to reopen the public hearing, further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Public hearing is re -opened. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 30 Bentley: I would move that we continue the public hearing till 4/6/99 and instruct staff and Mr. Hoffman to get together and see if we can't work an agreement on some of these issues. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and second to continue the public hearing until April the 6t", any further discussion? Since it's still on the public hearing (inaudible) does that meet with your approval of a two week period then? Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Public hearing will be continued to April the 6t" on item no. 16. ITEM NO. 17: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 10.02 ACRES FOR PROPOSED YUKON SUBDIVISION BY JAMES AND KAREN HOLLISTER: Corrie: This has been a request by the—I believe by Becky Bowcutt--excuse me, I must open the public hearing in case we have somebody who would like to testify on this. So at this time I will open the public hearing on item no. 17 and is there anyone from the public who would like to testify at this time? I'll entertain a motion to continue the public hearing on item no. 17 to April the 6th Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that we continue the public hearing on the Yukon Subdivision by James and Karen Hollister until the meeting of 4/6/99. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Anderson to continue the public hearing on item no. 17 until April the 6t". Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Item no. 17 the public hearing will be continued to April the 6t" ITEM NO. 18: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR STORAGE OF ENTERTAINMENT EQUIPMENT IN A PORTION OF THE GARAGE AND TWO TRAILERS IN THE BACKYARD OF ROBIN WALKER D/B/A JUKEBOX PARTY EXPRESS -821 E WILLOWBROOK: Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 31 Corrie: AT this time I'll open the public hearing and ask for staff comments and... Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this application was submitted in response to some enforcement activity. We were forced to undertake due to complaints that we had received. He has been served and I believe gone to court. I don't know if a final decision has been rendered yet or the sentencing for that use. It involves what is called an Orbitron and various other fairly large item that are stored in his backyard taken out with a trailer by his own testimony over 250 times was just for some kind of service. He stated he had done over 250 services that were done for alternative entertainment for schools and youth groups and so forth. The problem is large trailers backing up, loading equipment, taking them to the sites. The comments that were done, were done by Brad Hawkins -Clark. His determination was since we couldn't find anywhere to put it, the closest thing it could be classified was an outdoor storage facility and staff is still not in favor of this application. Corrie: Since this is a public hearing, is there anyone from the public who would like to issue testimony in favor of this request of a conditional use permit. ROBIN WALKER, 821 E WILLOWBROOK, MERIDIAN, ID. Walker: We applied for the conditional use permit. We were contacted by a gentleman by the name of Joe, I don't know his last name, he's an enforcement officer. At the time we had parked some of the entertainment equipment in the street and he came and told us that there had been some complaints and he would like them moved out of the street. So we moved them out of the street and a few days later, a couple weeks later, or a month later, he said you have to have it back, even with the front of the house in order to have those trailers here. We've had some more complaints on that and I said okay we can do that. So we moved the trailers back even with the house. Another month or so went by and Joe come back and said actually those pieces of entertainment have to be behind the fence and so we went ahead and moved them behind the fence. He came back again and said you need to apply for a conditional use permit. We said well, right now is—contact us I think in November, October, which is our slow down period and we didn't have a lot of income. We said we would do it as soon as we can. He contacted us two or three times and finally we—I guess they cited us and then we went ahead and applied for it. We finally found the funds to make that work in December and we applied for the conditional use permit. The nature of our business is that we don't do any of the entertaining or anything on the premises. We do a lot of activities with the schools and church groups, and youth groups and we do much of that as a service. We probably do more than 250 shows a year. Mainly those shows do not require the trailers, they require equipment, sound equipment out of the garage or have sumo wrestling suits that go out of the garage. My guess would be that those trailers go out maybe once a week, probably not that much, because we are very slow during the winter. Maybe once a week during the summer. There are some weeks Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 32 when they go out more than that, but on an average I would say that once a week would be a lot. The trailers are, one is about five feet wide and about seven feet long and the other one is 18 feet long and eight feet wide. They are parked behind the fence to try to be in compliance with the conditional use permit. We have lived there for some time, we didn't own the home until November of this year. First of all, I would apologize to— as a matter of fact we have apologized to most of our neighbors and let them know that we are sorry that we were renting that property. The people who previously owned it didn't want to paint it, they didn't want to do anything on the yard or anything like that. As soon as we knew we would take ownership, we painted the house—or at least had a hope that we would take ownership. We've put gravel along the side there so we can park the trailers there with no problem. IN the back where the trailers are parked. We've put a lawn in the front and back. We've done—we are putting a fence around the other side, which is another improvement, we haven't got that completed, but we are working on that piece by piece. So we are trying to improve the situation. Joe the enforcement officer said to me boy this guy must really have it hard for you because he keeps calling he must really hate your guts for some reason because he calls all the time and is picky about everything. So he at first didn't even advise us we needed a conditional use permit. So the fact that we didn't apply for one until he issued a citation or they issued a citation really isn't applicable because like I say there was never even a suggestion of that until much time had gone through. There were several comments in here by staff that we addressed at the other meeting with the Planning and Zoning. I don't know if we need to go back over those, but basically we don't have any employees on the premises, they come—we do have some employees that are very part time on an as needed basis. They come by, pick up the equipment, go out and do the party or the entertainment and then they bring it back and drop it off. We don't have any—we don't turn up our sound equipment as I made mention before—one of our neighbors has a son that is a drummer and his drums are certainly louder than any of our equipment ever is. We don't do entertaining on the premises. We have lots of neighbors in our neighborhood who have businesses in their home. We took a petition around just to get a few signatures and half the people on this petition for approval—or allowing us to run our business out of their home suggested that they run businesses out of their home and they had no idea that a conditional use permit would be required. At the last Planning and Zoning meeting they suggested that they only do this on a complaint basis and that they had lots of complaints and they could not say that they were not all from the one, same person. If you would like to look at this petition, it's available to you. I went around our neighborhood and took pictures of different businesses that are operating in our own neighborhood. There is—again, these pictures are available if you would like to see them. There is a seal coating company that is through the block from us and there is one around the corner. There is a plumbing and septic tank business and both of these businesses have vehicles parked all the way around the outside of their house. One is on a corner—well, both of them are on corners and they have—one has four trucks, the other has at least five parked around his place. I've got another business across the street that is a concrete contractor. He sometimes has two or three Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 33 vehicles around there with the trailer parked in front of the house with forms and so forth on it. I would point out that first of all that by no means am I criticizing my neighbors, they are just doing business as I am. Here is a person who has an Hotzy (sic) mobile unit that is parked along the side of his house. We have two daycares in our neighborhood. Certainly the daycares have much more traffic than we do. There are some days that we don't even go out, many days we don't' do that so the traffic—I mean a daycare if they have got four kids have eight trips back and forth between the daycare center and back morning and night. Traffic is certainly not a consideration. While I would go on to say that during the time that we were not owning the home there—it was an eyesore, and—but I went around the neighborhood today and took some pictures of lots of places where there is two cars and they are off their axles and sitting on the ground and here is one with the boat, flat tire and a bunch of garbage around behind it and here is one across the street that has a trailer, chairs and camper all kinds of stuff laying out there. Here is a car jacked up with its wheels off. I mean, this is all just in our neighborhood. Then I went around and took a picture of a bunch of the places that have trailers and so forth parked out in the front of the house or RV's parked along the side of the house that is not behind the front edge of the building and so forth. I ran out of film taking pictures of those. My point is that most of our neighborhood is out of compliance with at least one or two of these. Even one of my neighbors on the one side—he has added onto his home, he's put in a deck, he's put in a hot tub, he's putting a shed back there and I checked with the building department today and there has been no permits taken out on these things. So I guess what I'm saying is pretty much the neighborhood flows pretty good unless there is an individual or two that want to complain about all the situations or any of the situations. Again, would suggest that they had a great deal of complaint about how the place looked, but that was before we took ownership and it was not a business problem as much as it was a fact of personal residence that was not kept up because we didn't have ownership. Since that time, since we have taken ownership, we have done all those improvements. I also check to find out what it would cost us to store our equipment off premises. We are looking at—if we had just a sheltered storage unit, it would be about $400, if we had a place for an office and all that sort of thing, we are looking at easily $1,000 a month, and I guess what I would suggest is that with that extra $400 or $1,000 that we can put back in the premises so we will continue to make those improvements. If we are not allowed to run our business in our home, which—if we were not allowed to, certainly our neighbors would have a greater eyesore because we wouldn't be able to continue to make the improvements that we have. I guess that's it, just the fact that as far as the things that staff had made comment about, I don't see any of those areas that we are out of compliance. Yes we have things in our backyard, and yes they do extend over the fence, but you could go anywhere in our neighborhood from any point and see at least three or four places that have swings above the fence or sheds above the fence, or blue tarps over trailers above the fence, or boats above the fence and all that sort of thing. As far as I can tell we have done everything that we can to make it work and we do intend on improving the property as we have ownership. We don't—I would Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 34 make one correction, it does say that if there is only two trailers in the back we do have a dunk tank that we rent out that is 4X4 and six foot high that sits in the back and that is the only items that are outside. The rest of the stuff is stored in half of our garage. Corrie: Do you want to enter those pictures as part of your testimony. Walker: I did have overheads, I don't know if those are necessary, but starting at the top of the stack is the businesses and it goes down through the eyesores an the other people that are—the clerk also has some that we turned in I believe with the Planning and Zoning meeting that illustrated as well. Corrie: Okay. Walker: Let me also turn in this petition if I might. Corrie: Anyone else who would like to issue testimony in approval of this? BILL CAMPTON, 801 E. WILLOWBROOK, MERIDIAN, ID. Campton: I live right next door to Robin and Johnny, I've been there for approximately eight months, we are renting that property. We have recently moved back to the Boise area after being gone for quite awhile. However, I have owned five houses in my lifetime, so I know what it's like to be a property owner. We live on the side that is the business end, the swing gate end of Johnny and Robin's property adjoins our property. In the past eight months, I have observed him continuously upgrading and I would say beautifying to use in lieu of a better term his property. It's a family run business where he and his wife who have been married several years and their 12 children in the home do this family business and with the demands on a family budget with that many children, there are some things that they can't do. Gradually they have demonstrated over the eight months that I have lived in the property next door to them the desire to improve as well as the sensitivity toward their business being out of their home. They are always checking to make sure that they are not a problem. In the comings and goings, it's very minimal and as Robin said, it is a blue collar neighborhood where a lot of businesses are run out of homes. He happens to be the one that has come before this board and before the Planning and Zoning Commission to work out this and do it in the proper fashion. There are a lot of businesses just like he said that are running out of the homes there. It is his desire to be in as much compliance as he possibly can, so I speak in favor of his request because he is a good neighbor and I have no problem with him next door. He has never caused any noise disturbance or since he has put up a large swing gate that covers his equipment, it's never been really that much of a problem, living next to our on the busy end of the property. STEVE VIDEEN, 2051 N LARK PLACE, MERIDIAN, ID. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 35 Videen: Lark is just on the west end of Willowbrook cul-de-sac, the only way in and out of the neighborhood is on Willowbrook, so I do have to pass this house everyday approximately six or seven times a day. Sometimes I go home for lunch and so I get an opportunity to see it all the time. I have to be honest with you, seven or eight months ago, I probably would've been on the other side of the fence and not in favor of this, but he has made a considerable effort to upgrade his home for the appearance and make it look better. As far as the equipment is concerned, I don't find it anymore an eyesore than some of the RV vehicles, trailers and such that other people have up along side of their homes. So I'm just here to speak in favor of Mr. Walker and I don't have a real issue with it. He has made a real good effort to upgrade it. Corrie: Anyone else in the public want to testify in approval of the request? Okay opposed? TROY BROWN, 853 E WILLOWBROOK, MERIDIAN, ID. Brown: I live immediately to the east of Mr. Walker. I've resided here for 13 years, I would like to show you some pictures, there should be some pictures in the file, some transparencies. Just to show you the equipment so you can see why I'm strongly opposed to storage at this residence. This is just kind of what the equipment looks like. I just want you to kind of appreciate what it is. Basically I wanted you to see the equipment that I'm talking about. (Inaudible) Brown: Anyway, you can see that there has been an attempted cleanup, although I'm some what skeptical because of the numerous attempts in the past that have failed. This hearing is about permitting this residential property which I live next to, to become in essence a commercial storage facility. That's basically what we are (Inaudible) here. Equipment for which this permit is being applied for is carnival type rides as you can see and can not be compared to recreational vehicles or anything else, because it is uniquely unattractive and eye catching because it simply doesn't belong in the neighborhood. It can easily and should be stored in an off site storage facility which is already designated for such use. Although the rides are stored on the side of the house, they are still visible especially for lengths of time during loading, unloading and preparation for transport. I recently had my house for sale and while it was on the market heard numerous remarks from prospective buyers that they really liked the home, but did not want to live next to the western Idaho Fair. My listing agent and myself thoroughly believe that this was a major factor in the home not selling. For this reason, the storage of this equipment has reduced my property value. Along with problem of turning the residential property into commercial storage facility is the unnecessary increase in traffic by his own account, 250 trips a year. Brought about by Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 36 the frequent coming and goings of the ride operators. Also, often times cars are parked up and down the street from the operators who drive or ride in these transport vehicles. The Planning and Zoning Commissioners were split on the decision to pass this, even after strong and repeated suggestions from the P & Z staff to reject it. I certainly think if they were the applicants neighbors, it would've never gotten this far. Also it was passed on the condition that this property is continued to be kept up. What happens if it isn't, what kind of recourse do I have and how long would it take to get resolved? You have seen what this place has looked like, I've seen it for ten or so years, however long the applicant has lived there. The bottom line is that permitting this residential property to be used as a commercial storage facility is absolutely unacceptable to me and again this equipment can easily and should be stored in an off site storage facility. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you, any questions of Mr. Brown? Anderson: Looks like from the pictures there has been quite a bit of improvement over the last year, would you agree with that? Brown: I wouldn't say over the last year, I would say over the last couple months. You know, basically what we are talking about here is permitting this property to be used as a commercial storage facility. You know what's going to be next, are we going to permit a mechanic business to store vehicles in his backyard, just basically the same thing, or a junkyard, or something? Anderson: I'm just asking does it look better now? Brown: Yes it does and again I will say that I'm somewhat skeptical because of numerous failed attempts in the past. You know these pictures do not look like a renter, it looks like someone who has absolutely no pride in the property of where they live. It doesn't look like they didn't want to fix up their property because they were renting it. To me it looks like they didn't have any pride in keeping the thing up. Anderson: Is your house across the street? Brown: My house is immediately next door to the east. Corrie: I'm missing something here. You have January 1 St 1998 there and then you had another picture when it's cleaned up a year later. Brown: I believe the one was a February 9t" photograph. That was the date of the Planning and Zoning meeting. Corrie: There is quite a difference between those two pictures. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 37 Brown: Yeah. Corrie: Anyone else like to testify against? SANDRA SEALY, 802 E WILLOWBROOK DRIVE, MERIDIAN, ID. Sealy: I've been there for nearly ten years, after my husband retired from the airforce, we chose to live in Meridian due to the size and positive reputation. Our street was quiet and everything that we hoped for when we finally bought a home. It was a place to establish roots for our family. Like most people we take pride in our home and we try to be a good neighbor. My objection to Mr. Walkers carnival type business is not one of selfishness, it's not one of an objection for him to make a living for his family, it has nothing to do with whether Mr. Walker is a nice person with good intentions. It has nothing to do with what he does for a living. It does however, have everything to do with the fact that this is a nice quiet residential area and not the appropriate place to operate a business of this kind. The amusement rides kept on the Walker property are big, they are noisy and when they are being moved in and out of the area, it's very disturbing. Many times during the summer months when we sleep with our open windows, the noise of the rides being backed into the Walker's yard at two or three in the morning wakes us up. The truck engines race as they try to back the ride trailer over the curb to park them. I can't tell you how many times this has happened. The large truck and amusement rides belong in a storage facility away from the residential area. They certainly can't be considered normal recreational type vehicles. It seems that Mr. Walker's friends see nothing wrong with having carnival businesses run from this residence, they are fortunate, perhaps they live a block or two away and they have not had to put up with the parade of rides moving in and out all spring, summer and fall. They have not had their sleep disturbed when the rides are returned. Some have not lived in the neighborhood long enough to see what it really is like during the busy season. Property values are important to all of us. No one wants to be told by a realtor that even though there are prospective buyers that love your home, as long as the business next door is across the street with a yard full of carnival rides, they won't consider purchasing your property. No one should have to reduce the price of their home when trying to sell it because of this business. No one enjoys repeated trying to explain how or why this type of business is allowed to continue in this residential area. This happens every time friends, family, or acquaintances stop to visit. We simply feel that this business with it's large noisy carnival type rides moving in and out during the spring, summer, and fall sometimes lining the street is disruptive and it has a negative effect on property values in the neighborhood. I assume you are home owners and I doubt you would enjoy having this type of business across the street from your home. Once again, this has nothing to do with wanting Mr. Walker to stop making a living for his family or whether or not he is a good guy. With nice weather approaching and his busy season getting ready to start, please imagine yourself looking out the window of your home or sitting on your deck and seeing what we see and hearing what we hear Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 38 all hours of the day's and night as you make your decision. I doubt that you would approve this carnival type business with it's big amusement rides stored on the property to be run next to the home that you live in. I respectfully request that the permit be denied. Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else? RANDALL SEALY, 802 E WILLOWBROOK, MERIDIAN, ID. R. Sealy: This issue isn't about whether or not someone should or should not be given a chance to earn a living, it's not whether or not he's a hard worker or even how many people are willing to put their names on a petition. We bought our home as my wife said in mid 1989, shortly after I retired from the Air Force, because as she said Meridian is and still—was and still is a place where we wanted to raise our family and hopefully live the rest of our life. However, at the time we bought our house we had no idea that a business like this would eventually be operating across the street. I live across the street from Mr. Walker and one house west. So it's kind of kitty corner. Now tonight we've heard comments and we've seen photos about the current condition of his property which appears to be well kept. The only reason though it's currently well kept in my opinion and the reason it's need is because we've had cooler weather and these rides and related equipment had not been in high demand as it has in the past. Now however, now that we are into spring and summer will soon be here, activity will increase and we will start seeing as in years past regular movement in and out of his property. To truly appreciate our frustration with this situation which we have been sitting quietly and watching for the last few years this collection of rides, trailers, dunk tank, numerous pads, cushions and other paraphernalia that is carried in and out of his property in a couple of pickup trucks. All one has to do during the busy summer months is drive down our street and see what we have had to endure. It seems the only time all the equipment is stored neatly behind the fence as we saw in these photos tonight, hidden behind the fence is just before a hearing tonight or such as just a month ago before the Planning and Zoning hearing. Now I take pride in... (END OF TAPE) R. Sealy: ...to decreasing property values greatly concerns me as we heard from Mr. Brown, a neighbor that lives across the street and next door to Mr. Walker, numerous realtors have indicated that the reason that people shy away from buying a couple of the houses that have been on the block in the past is because of the Walker house. A friend of mine who used to own the house directly across from (Inaudible) right next door to Mr. Walker, a house that is currently being rented, this friend was forced to drop his asking price some $2,000 specifically because of these rides. I'm sure Mr. Mayor and members of the council would not condone a business such as this in your neighborhoods. It's safe to assume that a business like this would not be allowed in too Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 39 many subdivisions, such as Meridian Greens, or the Lakes at Cherry Lane. When we bought our home, we bought it with the intention of enjoying a peaceful neighborhood without the prospect of having our property devalued. Now as Meridian grows a number of alternative storage sights also (Inaudible) facilities that could that could easily accommodate these rides. Mr. Walker says that he can not afford storage because he provides the rides to schools and other charity organizations, but with all the traffic in and out of this property throughout the year, I can only assume there is a facility that could accommodate his collection at a reasonable enough price. I have absolutely nothing against someone earning a living, I have nothing against Mr. Walker personally, but I do feel a residential neighborhood such as ours on East Willowbrook should not have to suffer the consequences for a business such as this. Again, I respectfully ask that this permit be disapproved. Corrie: Anyone else from the public like to issue testimony at this time? The applicant has one last chance to rebuttal of anything up here. We will give you three minutes (Inaudible) I know (Inaudible) if they could. ROBIN WALKER, 821 E WILLOWBROOK, MERIDIAN, ID. Walker: I've heard everything that has been said by those who oppose it and they have valid complaints as far as many of those items. The only thing that I might suggest is that the number of businesses in our neighborhood, as you can see by the pictures that there are many that are much more of an eyesore than what we have there. In addition to that there are many neighbors that have cars up on blocks and mechanic type situations. Those are all in eye sight of my home, so it's not as though we don't have those things in the neighborhood anyway. We have looked at putting these in a storage facility. The cost is somewhat prohibitive at $400 a month. We would have to find a garage area, because our entertainment pieces would obviously attract a lot of kids that would want to ride it and of course our liability situation would be difficult. So we have looked at those other options, I've got a brother that owns some property and he's been willing to let us park them over there, but again, where we can't keep an eye on them we just can't be certain that some kid is not going to get on there and get themselves hurt. So we have chosen for the safety to keep them on the premises as well as we like to keep our cost down obviously so we can put more money back into our home and family rather than spending it on those types of things. I guess you know, the concern that I have is if they close us down and we have to move out and we've got concrete men that will be across the street that will have to be gone and then there will be the builder who is three doors down will be gone, all the neighbors—there is just so many neighbors that do their own business out of their home and I do understand that there was another daycare that was planned around the corner and apparently that was put a stop to by the same individuals because they didn't like the fact that there maybe a daycare in the neighborhood. Around the other corner where they don't have as much influence, the two daycares have started and are operating and one does not even have Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 40 any residence there. It's a daycare only. Then right up the street from that is the sewage cleaning company and the drain cleaning company and he has a big pumper truck parked right in his front driveway and he has got a van on the side and he's got a big truck that is parked in the front street. All these businesses are going to end up finding themselves taken out of the area and it's -1 would say that we are the norm rather than the exception. I guess that's about it. Corrie: One question, you said your brother had some property. Walker: Yes, he is over on Eagle Road. Corrie: Okay, (Inaudible). Walker: So it would be convenient as far as being close to proximity, but again, you know he is not there all the time and it would be a situation where people could come over and ride the rides and it's just too tempting to... Corrie: Is there someone at your house all the time? Walker: Pretty much, it's very seldom that we are not there. I would point out that during the summer we do have one very busy season which is during the graduation party seasons because we do a lot of the high school parties for the senior sober parties is what they call them. Last year we did about 55 parties and two of the rigs were never at the house because they were always on the road going from one to another. One rig did come in and that would be the only time that I could think of that would be late night activity is during that three week period because the rest of the year obviously when we do Albertson's Party, we go do it and they are done at 10:00 or 9:00 and we load up and go home, so it's not like we are coming in at 2:00 or 3:00 during the summer, because you don't stay and work all night long with those types of activities. Anderson: I've never rode one of these, but it would seem logical that you could put a cable around one of these, or put a pin through it and paddle lock that so if it was in an open storage yard, which would cost a little less money than an indoor that it could be secured. Walker: We have a bracket for the Orbitron which is the ringed apparatus and I'm sure that could be—a lot could be devised fairly easy for that. The other one maybe a little more difficult because it doesn't attached anywhere. There is the pin at the top that it swivels on and the rest of it is free. So I don't know how you would ever—you could have to probably chain it I guess and work something out that way. I would also point out that we don't use the equipment on the premises and there is no motors running the equipment, so it is not noisy equipment. I do appreciate Mrs. Sealy and her comments about backing it in and being noisy that way. Like I say, we never had them mention Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 41 that to us like leaving it in the street till morning and then backing it in or something like that. We do have a great deal of street parking. We have a double lot and there is plenty of room for us to park, you know our rigs out there. The other thing that the Sealy's mentioned was that the people that come and pickup my trucks and go out and do the shows we will make sure that they either park in the back or along that side where the gate is at so they will not—the vehicles will not be in the street in the future. That was something that we were not made aware of. Corrie: Any questions of anything? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Anderson: None. Corrie: I entertain a vote, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Anderson: Moved. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Moved and seconded that we close the public hearing. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bentley: First off, Mr. Walker I think you need to be commended for the improvements that you have made on your property. I see several problems that are tied into this. First of all, I know you speak of your other neighbors and the type of things that they are running out of their house, but we have not received complaints in that area. Your main concern is your surrounding neighbors and in my estimation with their complaints really brings the problem to light, because the impact that is being shared upon their properties, I would not be able to support your conditional use permit. Corrie: Any further discussion? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would move that the City Council deny the request for conditional use permit for Robin Walker d/b/a Jukebox Party Express. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 42 Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Bentley and seconded by Mr. Rountree to deny the request for conditional use permit for storage and entertainment equipment by Robin Walker d/b/a Jukebox Party Express. Any further discussion? (Inaudible) Corrie: I think we will have the attorney draw... Gigray: I would have to draw a Findings of Fact and Conclusions for your consideration at the next meeting, since this is a conditional use permit. Corrie: Do you want to... Gigray: You can go ahead and take your action, but then direct that I prepare those and bring them back at the next meeting. (Inaudible) Bentley: Yes. (Inaudible). Rountree: Second. Corrie: All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: If you want to bring it back later, I suppose you can do that, but they've already made a decision. Walker: I need a clarification on one part. Corrie: Okay, I'll do that. What's your clarification? Walker: We also have some equipment that is in the garage and if we find a location for the outside storage equipment, is it possible for me to continue to use the garage for the storage of the smaller pieces of equipment that are not visible and for us to continue to use our office in our home? The application calls for storage of equipment and according to staff they suggested that was for outdoor, the outdoor storage of equipment and what I'm saying is if we continue to use half the garage, is that a problem, or do we—are we going to be... Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 43 Gigray: I think Mr. Mayor and members of the council I would advise Mr. Walker that he should probably consult with the code enforcement staff with regards to the circumstances there and maybe they can provide some clarification. You know, he may want to consider applying for a home occupation that would be a little less intrusive (Inaudible). Walker: That's what we applied for and the staff changed that to this and if there was no way, the staff told me in the Planning and Zoning meeting there was no way it was going to go through. She stood up and sat there and said it would not go through and should not be approved. I'm saying if the compliance officer tells me to file for one and it cost me $500 bucks to put it all together and get it filed, why am I filing for something that she is not going to approve anyway, or she is going to put the stop on. So what I'm saying is why do I want to work with them again with the assumption they will tell me one thing, we will pay our $500 bucks and they'll come back and stop it in the end anyway. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the council, just simply a matter of code enforcement. If there isn't any code enforcement, then I suppose they occupy the ground, if there is code enforcement, then it gets to be a legal issue as to whether they are in violation of land use requirements. You can't prejudge those situations at this time. Corrie: So I guess to answer your question, go back to Planning and Zoning Code enforcement people and talk to them and see what they say as far as the code enforcement is concerned. It's 10:30, this Jabil, is somebody from out of town on this one? Did you fly in? I see that you did. Council? Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would prefer to go ahead and go through Jabil and announce that that will be the last hearing that we do. Corrie: Okay we will do 19A and B together and then items 20, 21, & 22 will be the first on the agenda April the 6t" ITEM NO. 19A: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF .53 ACRES WITH A REZONE OF 55.79 ACRES TO IL BY WILLIAM A. HON / JABIL--NORTH OF I- 84/SOUTH OF STATE OF IDAHO LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY, WEST OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD: Corrie: I'll open the public hearing and Shari, I'm going to—let's do 19A & B together here because it is a subdivision waiver of an ordinance and I think we've got some questions on that one too. Shari? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 44 Stiles: Mr. Mayor and council, this is for the property immediately south of the Law Enforcement Facility on Stratford. They are proposing to bring their company to Meridian. They are currently housed within the Hewlett-Packard facility in Boise. The beginning they would have approximately 400 employees. I'll let them make their presentation as to some of the things that they are doing there. This is only a request for annexation of a little piece of property that was adjacent to the freeway that had been left out of some previous annexations and a rezone of the 55.79 acres to allow this use outright. We have had numerous discussions with them and they will comply with all of our entryway corridors, landscaping requirements, of course all of our ordinance requirements as far as trees, those kinds of things. They have graciously offered to plant and build two soccer fields and put in 120 car lot at their expense for use by the city, I believe that is what their proposal is. Again, this is only a request for annexation of that .53 acres and the rezone to IL they do have some material here to present as part of their application. As far as the waiver for the tiling of the ditch, this is the Hunter Lateral, it is the same lateral that runs adjacent to the future fire station site on Franklin Road. It's currently fenced on one side, I don't know if that's a barb wire fence, farm fence, what that is. We have required fencing of that in the past. It hasn't been very successful or very beneficial to the city to require that fencing, it looks more like a prison compound than any kind of amenity. What they are proposing is to use the existing road that is there and do some berming and landscaping adjacent to that to actually make that an amenity and without fencing it they wouldn't be—I don't believe they would be required if they are not encroaching into Nampa/Meridian Irrigation districts easement to enter into some kind of license agreement that may require them to fence that, but it would be staffs recommendation that we would go with what they have proposed as far as landscaping of that area and not to require tiling of that ditch. Corrie: There is a representative here who would like to speak first. BILL ANDRE, CORPORATE PROPERTIES MANAGER, JABIL CIRCUIT, INC. Andre: The good news is that I'm going to be very brief in deference to the hour. MR. Mayor and Councilmen and staff thank you very much for hearing us. We have met with the neighbors prior to the Planning and Zoning hearing and heard what they had to say and hopefully addressed as many of those issues as possible. The reason I'm going to be brief is to give them a chance to talk this evening and see where we are. Once of the things that came out in the last meeting with the Planning and Zoning was a berm along the Locust area and heavily landscaped which we have accomplished and done. Not available at the last meeting was the rendering of the building and we are far enough along in the design that we have that with us as well. We have some of our engineering types here that could address the lateral and tiling and I'll leave that to them. With that, that's all I have to say unless you have any questions. Corrie: Any questions at this point? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 45 Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Andre: One last thing, I want to compliment your staff, they have been excellent to work with. Our design team has been working very, very closely with them and you should be proud of your staff. Corrie: Anyone else who wishes to testify in favor of the project? Anyone opposed to the project? Yes sir. ROGER OSTERHUES, 975 S LOCUST GROVE, MERIDIAN, ID. Osterhues: I guess my biggest objection is well I moved there 20 years ago, just after it was zoned commercial. The possibility of having commercial buildings in there like restaurants and Albertson's Stores was quite appealing, that would be close to everything. Now with it rezoned industrial, I'd be looking at the parking lot. My biggest objection would be that the City of Meridian is going to make out with all this tax money, Bill Hon is going to make out by selling his land at a good profit and Jabil is going to make out with having a nice piece of property, but the property owners around there get to look at a parking lot. No more sunsets and that's about all that I have to object to, no compensation. Corrie: Any questions? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none right now. Corrie: Anyone else wish to issue testimony in this one? Yes sir. ROBERT R. SMITH, 335 S LOCUST GROVE ROAD, MERIDIAN, ID. Smith: I really don't have any objections to the project itself, but one thing that concerns me right now—this proposed road right here is already under construction, they are building it. They already have the culvert across the Hunter Lateral and Locust Grove Road looks to me it's going to be accessed for all this construction. Locust Grove Road was paved in about late 1940's or early 50's. It's been resurf—or graveled three times since I've lived there. It's deteriorating very rapidly any heavy construction equipment on that road is going to tear it all up. It right now is only servicing us residents that live there because it dead ends against the freeway. I have a fear of what is going to happen when I see it is already under construction and already taken place. The Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 46 neighborhood as it is right now has a 35 mile an hour speed limit and about half that live there don't comply with that as they go by our residence. I can see how they are going to have all this equipment running in and out of there. I ask you that they don't access Locust Grove until Locust grove is going to be made a five lane road. When I confer with Ada County Highway Department they say that isn't in their plans for the next five years at least. If this gets accessed with the 400 people that are there and the equipment and construction that will go on, Locust Grove is going to take a beating and they won't do any repair work on it because it eventually is going to go to a five lane road. I just ask that you consider what is going to happen to our neighborhood when you do this. Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else from the public? REECE MCMILLAN. McMillan: I concur with Mr. Smith here on this road coming out onto Locust Grove. If they use that for construction road like they do at St. Lukes Hospital over Franklin Road, our road going to be tore all to pieces. Not only that, but they actual noise, dirt, gravel, rocks, everything else flying on the road. Like I say, I'm not opposed to the project here, just that this roadway coming across the Hunter lateral there out on Locust Grove. I think they should not open that up until the proposed widening of Locust Grove goes into effect. Thank you. Corrie: Anyone else in the public? RANDY WOLTERS, 1080 S LOCUST GROVE, MERIDIAN, ID. Wolters: I have already—the last Planning and Zoning meeting already said my complaints about looking at a building and parking lot lights. I was looking at this drawing for the first time, it looks like some of the trees might block some of the reflection off some of the windshields, so that might help a little bit, but also I guess it's page 68 of the minutes, it was a comment that I made in regards to the Greenbelt that was proposed along the canal and I believe that Mr. MacCoy agreed that was something that was supposed to be done, it says yes, I thought this would maybe discontinued because of this proposed Jabil site. He said it would not at that time, so I repeated that, of course that says it on page 68. I'm just curious what that proposal of the Greenbelt what the status would be. An additional issue, which I'm kind of seeing now with the rendering drawings here, is that berm is higher than the canal level, correct? I guess—back to the—not to mention the road issue again, I did notice some construction going on in the road and I'm not sure if this is a temporary fix that they are putting in, I guess it sustains some sort of traffic, but it doesn't look like some commercial job, somebody with a Bob Cat has been putting some culverts in and some dirt. I'm not sure really what is going on. I'm not sure if there is some information as far Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 47 as this road, it's permanency or status or whether it's going to be used for an access road for construction. That's about it. Corrie: Any questions of him? Bird: I have none. Bentley: I have none. NORM MARCUM, 1140 S LOCUST GROVE, MERIDIAN, ID. Marcum: My worry all along has been comments that the property value is going to decrease because of the parking lot across the street. I have no objection to the company, I realize that I could suffer a lot worse with a shopping mall or multiple family dwellings, numerous other things that could've gone in there. It appears they are working very hard to ellay our fears. The berm looks—this is the first I've seen of it. It looks like it will be adequate to knock down some of the noise and traffic, maybe even the parking lot lights, I don't know at this point. As the shrubbery grows, certainly it probably will help. This road that is being pushed through, they came out there and I— I'm retired and at home can see all this happening. They come out there with a dump truck and a back hoe and a little Bob Cat and proceeded to scatter gravel and rock and stuff around. Brought out some big culverts that were bound together with strapping material, which is still laying there in my gutter beside the road. If this is any manner of what we've got to expect in the future, I don't want to see it in my neighborhood. Shoddy maintenance that these construction crews have left a trash dump that wasn't there before. I'm worried about the extra traffic and as Mr. Smith and this other gentleman has spoke, that road is not adequate for heavy dump trucks and gravel trucks to be going up and down it. It's broken up several times, they've come out and patched it, and patched it, and resealed it and now it's just rough. I can foresee that it will break up and if we've got four or five years before anything is going to be done with the widening and rebuilding of that road, it's going to be another Overland trail and I don't want to drive on it and run my new rig. Thank you. Corrie: Anything else? ARCHIE ROBERTSON, 185 S LOCUST GROVE ROAD, MERIDIAN, ID. Robertson: I like Mr. Smith have no objection to the project itself, but construction thing bothers me a lot and one thing that wasn't mentioned was—as I understand it, Idaho Power will be putting in a new power line right down of South Locust Grove to service this facility. I would like to request that construction access be given for this project to come in off of Stratford and go along the south side of the Law Enforcement Academy and not use South Locust Grove for construction access. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 48 Corrie: Thank you, anyone else? PIM HOOGLAND, 1625 BENTLEY, MERIDIAN, ID. Hoogland: I live approximately 15 yards from that road coming out. There is currently mud out in that street, I put in new black top in my driveway and they used it to turn around in and tore up my black top. The soccer fields are nice, I love soccer, I've coached every level there is to coach in the State of Idaho, also a USS National coach and with the numbers that I see on two soccer fields on one Saturday, if their game is from 8:30 to 3:30 it would come out to 1500 cars traveling up and down Stratford or right down Locust Grove and into that road. Locust Grove can't handle that. The other thing is what is going to happen to the Greenbelt, there was supposed to be a Greenbelt there down the canal. Corrie: We don't know either. It all depends on what... Hoogland: It's gone? Corrie: It's not gone, but we are working on it. Is that part of Meridian Irrigation or that canal? Anderson: Hunter Lateral. Hoogland: There was supposed to be a Greenbelt there. Corrie: There might still be, I don't know. We (Inaudible) property rights or anything else on that, it's still up in the air. Hoogland: Robin Walker needs a place to go he is more than welcome. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else? :121QS] a►� [0] LVA III W_1►l McMillan: On the parking lot are they figuring on running the traffic out onto Locust Grove or are they going to go back over Stafford and go out that way where they have numerous (Inaudible) to get out. Locust Grove can't handle 400 more cars on it a day as it is now. They've got so much traffic on there now you have to stop and wait to get out of your driveway. I was just wondering if (Inaudible) give you something on that. Corrie: Thank you. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 49 JOHN KEMP, 1947 BENTLEY AVE. Kemp: I'm not against the project, I just want to voice a concern about the construction exit. I live fairly far enough away and probably won't even see it from my house, the other houses in between. In the later mornings, early afternoons, just trying to go to work, the traffic on Franklin, you are sitting on the corner of Locust and Franklin for 10- 15 minutes sometimes waiting to get out. Now you increase that traffic, now I'm sitting behind three cement trucks and a couple of tractors. That would be my only concern, just bypass that traffic to the other side of that police station. I drove over there on my way home from work and noticed that there they have two ways out that they can go, that way down towards 1 st street, or come down Stratford to hit Franklin. Once again, they are going to have the same problem, trying to get out. That's it, thank you. Corrie: Anyone else? The hour is getting late, you had a shot at it once Bob. Is it— okay one time, that's it. ROBERT R. SMITH, 335 S LOCUST GROVE ROAD. Smith: I was going to bring up the fact that it seems like your designing of Meridian, you people are getting your cart way ahead of your horses. You are getting Meridian built up here to a Metropolitan area and we don't have any access. We are talking about making Locust Grove a five lane, we are talking about getting Ten Mile built so you can get access and the traffic flow is so ridiculous on Eagle Road right now that you can't hardly get through it. Franklin, I came from Boise here the other day at 5:00 and I was back clear to Cloverdale and it took me 25 minutes to get to Eagle Road. Now you are going to put 400 people accessing plus out of this thing onto Locust Grove which would happen and Locust Grove can't handle it until you start getting some of this access built into this country. I've lived here all my life and this ain't no horse and buggy town no more. So you are going to have to get something designed into this thing ahead of yourselves instead of over designing your population. I just hope that you start realizing what you are doing to us that live here and what we are going to have to do eventually to compensate for all of this. Developers ride off into the sunset and we are stuck with the problems. So I just want you to know what is happening. Corrie: Okay, thank you. Bird: Bob, you have been out there 30 years, but Bill has had that property for longer than that and it has always been known that at first it was going to be a big shopping center back in the middle 60's we were going to have the regional shopping center. Smith: I was there 35 years ago and it was the Wolf's Property at that time. Agvert's (sic) place then. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 50 Bird: Okay, but it was originally going to be the shopping center that Nahas was going to bring in and make the regional shopping out of it, that was 1966, or 1967. Smith: Not that piece. Bird: Not this, no, no, but his area. I mean, you know they have had this out there and it's been setup for industrial. I don't know planning wise what we can do. I mean that area out there is industrial and stuff, I don't know where we can go from there. I mean we could put housing in there on 55 acres or so. You would have that much traffic going there then. Smith: That's correct, that's what I'm saying Keith. You are getting your cart before your horse. You better get some of this roads built into this before this development has got to these—the magnitude it is now. Locust Grove is supposed to go clear to Chinden is my understanding. The access on Locust Grove that direction is ridiculous with the developments that sit down there. That's what I'm saying, the arteries aren't big enough. I worked for Idaho Power for 40 years. To get cross country, to cross the Boise River, you only had three arteries to get there to get to (Inaudible). We used to fight traffic to get there and this hasn't been alleviated, I mean we are just compounding the thing here in this area. Meridian has got to where you can't get around anywhere. As this one gentleman said you can't believe, I work as a consultant for H & H Construction and I've just got to turn to go to Meridian, I quit driving there, I walk there. I can make it faster walking a mile and a half to the H & H building than I can now to get out on Franklin Road in the morning to get to work. Bird: I certainly wouldn't argue that with you, but it's that way throughout. I work off of Fairview and I know what that's like. Smith: Right, but in fact the traffic flow on Fairview is three times faster than it is on Franklin. It is, because the fact that there is twice as many lanes. Bird: Yes, there is more lanes. Smith: That's what I'm saying, it's just not, it just keeps compounding what you are doing. We end up with the problems, 99% of the problems, we as the people that live there have to try and get solved and everybody just puts it on their answering machine or get back with you, and it never gets back. Bird: That's not right, I'll agree with you there. Corrie: Andre do you have any last comments or questions that have been asked or answers? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 51 BILL ANDRE. Andre: One quick comment, should the council approve this, this will not end our dialogue with the neighbors we want to keep an open dialogue with them all during the construction period and control access by contractors and that type of thing. We have a telephone number that they can reach us at any time. Unidentified: Mr. Mayor can I add one more thing? Corrie: No sir. No. I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Bird: So moved. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made to close the public hearing. (Inaudible) Corrie: Did we have a letter Bill that you said needed to come in? Gigray: I believe there is a report from the city engineer on this project, I don't remember whether that was addressed in staff comment or not. Corrie: Did that come from Gary? Gary was that a staff comment that you want to put into the public hearing? Smith: Yes sir. Corrie: If you would like to do it right now, before we make the final vote. Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor, council members. One of the meetings, I think I was in one meeting, maybe two meetings, with the Jabil representatives. I asked for some information about the quality of the effluent that they will be discharging to our sanitary sewer system. I haven't received any information on that effluent and I think it's paramount that we get a very specific element of the development agreement that addresses pre-treatment requirements. Corrie: Okay, good thank you. Vote on a motion to close the public hearing? Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 52 Corrie: Comments council? Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I believe there is some real legitimate concerns regarding the traffic on Locust Grove and I would like to see us if we approve this project to make sure that all the construction traffic does use Stratford and put that as one of the stipulations. Rountree: Comment on that particular recommendation. I can fully understand an appreciate the concern on Locust Grove that probably is in ill repair, but it is a public street. I don't know how many zeros after one this particular development will pay in impact fees and or could result in overlays and or improvements or modifications to Locust Grove, but we have to keep in mind the needs of the people who use the road to the residents. It has to accommodate them, but I don't think we can prohibit the use of a public street to access private property in this county and in the city. Corrie: Any questions or comments? The request is for annexation of .53 acres and a rezone of 55.79 acres to I -L by Mr. Hon, Jabil. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would move we order the city attorney to prepare findings for the annexation of .53 acres and rezone of 55.79 acres to I -L with the (Inaudible) of the council decision to approve. Bird: I'll second it. Corrie: Motion is seconded by Mr. Bird. Any discussion? Rountree: Would that motion include the development of the—development agreement with the conditions specified by staff? Bentley: Yes it would. Rountree: Also conditions that may be imposed to maintain reasonable operation of vehicle on both Stratford and Locust Grove. Bentley: Correct. Corrie: Okay with those additions to the original motion? Any other discussion? Rountree: I have none. Corrie: All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 53 Corrie: Motion is granted, have the city attorney draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for next meeting. ITEM NO. 19B: REQUEST FOR JABIL TO WAIVE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE: Corrie: Mr. Gigray, you had some concern here and I think maybe Shari did too. We are not subdividing anything are we? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and council, that was about the ditch, the tiling of the ditch. Smith: The tiling of the ditch is in your comments. Stiles: I know lots of people that would like to waive the subdivision ordinance, but that wouldn't happen. Gigray: So that matter has been taken care of? (Inaudible) 20. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SIX LOT SUBDIVISION CONTAINING TWO DUPLEXES AND FOUR 4-PLEX UNITS FOR PROPOSED MERIDIAN ACRES SUBDIVISION BY MIKE STIPA — NORTH OF BROADWAY, SOUTH OF PINE AVENUE, WEST OF WEST 4T" STREET: 21. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MERIDIAN ACRES SUBDIVISION BY MIKE STIPA — NORTH OF BROADWAY, SOUTH OF PINE AVENUE, WEST OF WEST 4T" STREET: 22. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOME SALON BY TINA SAYKO — 310 E. BROADWAY: Corrie: As I said before, the items number 20, 21 and 22 are public hearings that will be on the first of the agenda for the October, excuse me the April 6t" meeting. So we will... (END OF TAPE) Gigray: I would recommend since you haven't opened the public hearing that you ought to re- notice those. But you can continue them to the next meeting. Corrie: You can do that by a motion to continue 20, 21, and 22 then? Bentley: We can't continue them if we haven't opened them. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 54 Rountree: Yeah, we haven't opened them. Gigray: Why don't we just open them and then continue them? Just move to open them. We've had no objection voiced and if anyone were here who would not be available at the next meeting that wanted to enter testimony, you could offer to let them do that like we've traditionally done. Just open them all at once and continue them for the record. Corrie: All right folks if you'll bear with us here just a minute. I'm going to open item number 20, 21 and 22 as a public hearing and is there anybody here that cannot be here April 6t" on those hearings? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to continue the public hearing on those three items. Bentley: So moved. Rountree: It's been moved. I'll second. Corrie: Motion been moved and seconded that we continue public hearing 20, 21, and 22. Without further discussion hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council I just needed a clarification on 19B. Is your recommendation to waive the tiling ordinance for Hunter Lateral? Corrie: Yes. Stiles: Okay, thanks. Corrie: Okay, Janice Smith, I think she's sick. Right Gary? Smith: Yes, sir. Corrie: Is there anyone here Gary Smith, Tom Kuntz, Chief Gordon, Shari Stiles or myself want to delay any of this? Bird: I think Janice's will be delayed. Corrie: Okay, Gary. 09 1] 211 9AlS-49&100No Vcilil 416"] Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 55 A. JANICE SMITH: B. GARY SMITH: ACCOUNT TRANSFER REQUEST. Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor. John Shawcroft has requested that we transfer $14,000 from the Water Administrative Salary Account to the Water Staff Salary Account. The reason for this is that he has one of his meter readers that is expecting a child soon and she will need to be brought in out of the field and she can work in the office area. The existing receptionist is scheduled for some major surgery soon and so the meter reader will take her place as receptionist, but that is going to leave him short a meter reader. Rather than trying to find somebody to hire for a temporary employee for that kind of job, it's his request that he hire a full time person and even when the girls come back after their time off for the surgery and for having a child he's still going to need this person on staff and so it's my recommendation that the transfer of this money be approved to allow him to hire this person for the remainder of this fiscal year and this would be a meter reader position. Rountree: I make a motion that we accept request to transfer the funds to staff salary of $14,000 to pay for a meter reader for the remainder of this fiscal year. Bird: Yes. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to approve the $14,000 requested transfer for the administrative wages account to staff wages account. Any further discussion? Smith: Mr. Mayor I neglected to give you one other piece of information. When the budget was put together for FY 99 1 had included a salary for a water superintendent and we have not hired that position and so that's where this money is coming from, so the money is there. It's not being spent for that position because the situation with John combining his duties has worked out well. Corrie: Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor, thank you Council. C. TOM KUNTZ- LAND ACQUISITION. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 56 2. CHANGE ORDER FOR TULLY PARK. Kuntz: I'd like to switch orders on you and do the change order for Tully Park. Brad Watson is here tonight to answer any specific questions because he was responsible to oversee this project. In your packets you should have a request for change order a memo to me from Brad Watson. Change Order number 8, which is the final close out change order showing all minor additions and a majority of deletions. We did receive Boise Paving signed the change order effective today and so I'm requesting your approval on change order number 7 and 8. Bird: Tom, is that the deduct of (inaudible)? Rountree: That would be seven. Kuntz: That's number seven. Bird: Seven, okay where's 8? Bentley: Before seven. Kuntz: Keith to answer your question, change number 8 is deducted $7,361.99. Bird: Okay I see it now. You're asking for both seven and eight? Kuntz: Correct. Bentley: You mean we have to approve to save money? Kuntz: Yes, sir. Corrie: Any discussion on that? Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have a question for Brad. Does this wrap this baby up? Watson: Councilman Rountree, yes it does. The final one and we're done with Boise Paving. Rountree: And they are in agreement? They're signed off? Watson: They have signed this. Bentley: Mr. Mayor question for Brad. Are they going to fix the pathway? Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 57 Watson: Councilman Bentley, they did today. It's done. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the change order number seven in the amount of $3,805.50 deduct and change order number eight in the amount of $7,361.99 deduct. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to approve the change orders number 7 and 8 for seven in the amount of $3,805.50 and number eight the deduction of $7,361.99. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bentley: Mr. Mayor question for Brad. Was the Boise Paving's backhoe sitting out there today or somebody from across the street using our parking lot? Watson: Councilman Bentley, I'm not sure. I didn't personally inspect today. One of Tom's personnel did as they were doing the overlay. Bentley: Well Chief this is one for you. We're running into problems with people moving the barricades and parking construction equipment in the park. So if we could have the boys take a look. I'm kind of wondering if it isn't the gang from across the street. So, thank you. Kuntz: The last item I have is a request to enter into a purchase agreement. There is one correction on the first page of the real estate purchase agreement. Item number two it talks about totaling 67 acres of which this offer is for 37 acres, not 35 acres and that is reflected also on the attachment to the agreement the last page the attachment to the real estate purchase sales agreement, section three for the parcel. That is 37 acres more or less. I do need to let you know that the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting last night that a motion was passed in a four to three vote to not support the purchase of this property. Rountree: Mr. Mayor what was the rationale of the commission? Kuntz: Two issues, number one was that the purchase of this property would financially detract from the development of the 56 acres that we own at the corner of Ustick and Meridian and the second issue was that this financial commitment would detract from the capabilities of purchasing property south of the freeway. Those are the two issues. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 58 Anderson: Mr. Mayor I had to leave the meeting where the City Council was talking about land acquisition early to attend another meeting, could you fill me in on what happened after I left? Rountree: Well we had those similar kinds of things talked about that you just heard, but the result was for Council and Mr. Kuntz to get together and put together a offer on the 37 acres to the price stated in the back. $10,000 an acre. Anderson: And what was the result of that? Is that what this is? Rountree: They haven't presented it and it's here for us to make a decision. Bird: (Inaudible) Bentley: Mr. Mayor if there's no further discussion I would move that we tender this offer for the totaling 67 acres of which this offer is for 37 of those acres and have Mr. Kuntz tender this offer to (inaudible, the real estate agent. Corrie: Okay motion made by Mr. Bentley, do I hear a second? Rountree: I'll second it. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Rountree to have Mr. Kuntz directed to tender the offer as made to the property of 37 acres with the $10,000 price and the option to buy the other acreage. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor I guess I would just offer this as my input. As I've stated numerous times already that I think it's inappropriate to be making offers on land until we have a master plan of what we want to do with our parks, where we want the land acquisitions to be looked at and I am not in favor of making any kind of just random offer until we've got a plan in hand so we know where we're going to go with this deal and in light of the new information that our own Parks and Recreation Commission voted with a majority saying that this is not what they would like, I think it's foolish to proceed with this offer at this time. And I would not be in favor of such a proposal. Bird: Mr. Mayor I'm just going to say I agree with Ron because I don't think we want to be here thirty minutes with me debating it, so I agree with Ron 100%. 1 think we're way ahead of our horse. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I'm afraid I'm going to disagree. I think it's time this city got off the dime and start working on doing more than one project at a time. We spent $20,000 an acre for the 56 acre park which was absurd. We have a change here to move on some property, possibly at the price of $10,000 per acre. We can do more than one project at Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 59 a time. If we don't start pursuing land now, we're not going to have land to pursue later. Tom and I have been actively looking south of the freeway for property. We have not found any that's available and suitable at this time. Tom is also working actively on the park plan, and as I stated in the prior meeting, we also have a problem. We don't have a plan in place for the fire department. Does that mean we stop building fire stations? No, it does not. Anderson: I'd like to interrupt. We do have a plan in place. Bentley: Excuse me. I have the floor. But the point is need to move on in these projects. As far as the Commission was, I wasn't aware that we were going to vote on this, but they voted on it and that's fine, but the commission is advisory in nature. It is up to this Council to take this City forward and I think we're making one hell of a mistake if we don't start picking up some park ground as we can get it. There's nothing saying we've got to develop it now, but we need tie up the land so that we've got it. If it doesn't fit out need, we can get rid of it later, but the prices are going to keep going up as soon as that sewer hits out there. As soon as that sewer hits south, the price of land is going to skyrocket and we're going to be stuck and we need to start moving on this, and that park land is underway. Thank you. Rountree: Oh, I might as well. First off I have a question for Tom. Tom, what's the projected date on the comp plan? Kuntz: Actually we had a meeting prior to the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting, there's a subcommittee that I asked for some assistance on putting the RFP's together to hire a consultant for the Comprehensive Plan and we met Monday and came up with what I think is going to be a real sellable way to put the plan together and that is a one page RFP proposal stating what questions we want to address and the general scope of the project and that will allow consultants to come in and tell us what they will do and we will also list a budget amount that we have to work within and that will allow interested consultants to come in and tell us how they will answer those questions and what they'll provide for that dollar amount and it's a little different approach than spelling out the specific scope of the project in a ten to fifteen page document. Rountree: We're kind of going off here. What's the time line? Kuntz: By the end of March. Rountree: For the completed comp plan? Kuntz: No, no, for the RFP's to go out to hire a consultant. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 60 Rountree: When are they going to have something? When are we going to have a plan? Kuntz: By the end of the summer. Rountree: Well I guess I'll close. I can't disagree with anything I've heard tonight. Though I will second what I've said before about I think we need to have a plan in place to direct us where we're spending our money, and I agree with what Glenn said about we can do more than one project at a time, but I think we need to have that plan in place and I'd be all for putting two or three plans in place and moving ahead on them if we have the direction that we can agree to. I appreciate the fact that we did get the advice from the Parks and Recreation Commission. That's what we set them up to do to provide a citizen's advisory to the Council. I got to tell you if this vote were taken last week, I probably would vote for it. Having the input from the citizen's advisory group, would say I would defer at this point and wait until we get a comp plan before we actively pursue acquisition. Bentley: Mr. Mayor a point of interest both from this Council and both from the Commission. Both of them stated that if the land was to the south, they'd do it. What's the difference? Anderson: One is north, one's south. Bentley: Outside of that, what is the difference? The whole premise is still the same. Bird: Mr. Mayor I want to see us go south. This piece of ground, I think this ground is really lacking frontage. If we put anything out there 60 foot entry into it, it's going to be pretty tough to sell and get people in and out. If we have to buy the frontage there, then our price per acre goes up quite a bit. I agree with Councilman Rountree and Councilman Anderson. I'd like to see us get a plan in and Glenn I agree with you. We can do five or six things if we have them in line and ready to go. I have no problem with that. Anderson: I think I would add too that on that piece of ground in the meeting that I was at we talked about that to make it feasible 37 wasn't going to be enough. At least a couple of us thought that we needed to buy the full 67 acres or whatever and at this point if you know we're not looking at that and the money that we would spend on that can be spent either looking for a piece of ground somewhere where it would be a more desirable location or for development so I think it's a bad investment at this point. Bentley: If I may. Part of that deal that was part of the meeting that you weren't there for we were tendering an offer on the back side too. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 61 Anderson: That's not on here. Bird: Yeah, it is. Option. Bentley: On the option. Corrie: Okay any other comments? Bird: Question. Corrie: Okay I'm going to give you my comments and then I'll take the question. I think you're all probably right, but I suggest that you don't wait too dang long before you make this decision about what you're going to buy. I think Tom you need to do what you're doing and get it speed it up as much as you can but I have a little bit of heartburn in this statement that was made in the commission that it was on the south side you'd buy it or you want to buy and it irritates me a little bit being on the south side or the north side. The question was what's the difference and I'm not going to get an answer tonight, and I know that, but that's my two cents worth. So I guess we got a question on the board so the motion is made that we tender the offer as stated Kuntz tender that offer for us. All those in favor of that motion say aye. MOTION FAILED: 1 AYE, 3 NAYS. Corrie: Okay, Chief Gordon. �11)4I:I121MCI VBiel 01 PERMITS FOR DOG POUND. Gordon: The animal control center is approaching ground breaking. The building inspector, Daunt Whitman, has requested that I ask the Council for a waiver on the building permits and if the City will waive theirs, then Mr. Whitman will waive his, but he does not something official and in writing so that he can use it as a tax write off. Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that the City of Meridian waive their fees for the building permits on the police dog pound and for the Mayor to sign a letter and get it to Daunt. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Bentley to have the city waive the fee and get the paperwork over to Mr. Daunt. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 62 E. SHARI STILES: DISCUSSION OF ROCKETS, INC. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TRANSFER. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, as we've anticipated there is a new proposed occupant for Rockets. As part of the conditions in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for their conditional use permit, it stated that it was nontransferable. Mr. Gigray has reviewed matter and has determined that it would be possible to do a transfer thereby slightly shortening the time. We would still need a little cooperation from the City Clerk's office as far as still getting in an application and processing that to come before City Council on April 20th. I know it is a bad — has been kind of a cumbersome part with this transfer of conditional use permits, but it also is a protection to make sure that we get a reputable business in there and we're looking forward to some good steaks and seafood. Bentley: Who is coming in? Stiles: She won't tell me her name. Her name is Michelle, but that's all she'd tell me. Bentley: Steak and seafood, huh? See food and you want to eat it. Stiles: I just wanted to let you know that was coming up and we had discussed it with Bill and the (inaudible) but hopefully we will be getting an application next Wednesday or Thursday and schedule that for your April 20th public hearing. Corrie: Okay any comments from Council on the program? Bentley: Sounds good to me. Corrie: Why is it with food, this Council always agrees. F. MAYOR CORRIE: APPOINTMENT OF TRACE LEIGHTON TO MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATIONS COMMISSION. Corrie: Okay, I had one thing the appointment of Trace Leighton to the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission to represent the Meridian Athletic Association. So I do so with the approval of the Council. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the appointment of Trace Leighton to the Meridian Parks and Rec. Commission. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 63 Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: A date for our planning session this month, 23rd or 30th Bentley: 30th would be preferable. Rountree: 30th, is that good with everybody? I have two things that I know of. I have PEBSCO who does deferred compensation programs and I think she talked to you and sent me some stuff wanting to be on the meeting, so you want to get back to her? Anyway they want to present what they can provide the employees. It's another benefit package that we may want to factor in later on in the compensation program, 401 and deferred comp and all that kind of stuff. Kind of expand what the city has got. The other is Gary are we going to have some discussion on sewer extension. We'll have it by the 30th so that will be the other item on our agenda. I've got a third one, but I can't remember what it is right off the top of my head. Bentley: I've got a third one for you. We need to take a look at the wage study that Pauline put together on ours and the Mayors. Rountree: Oh, yeah that won't take long. Corrie: That sounds ominous. Rountree: There's only two ranges. Bentley: I have one more thing if Charlie is done. Rountree: That's all I needed. Bentley: Has everybody looked over the Chief's special request and do we want to act on that or do we want to discuss that at that time too? Rountree: We can discuss it at that time, on the 30th Bentley: Okay. Gigray: I would report that I have on my desk right now I'm almost completed with the letter to send in the last batch on the recodification project. Meridian City Council March 16, 1999 Page 64 Rountree: All right, good job Bill. Bird: I move that we adjourn. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second that we adjourn. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:37 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVE: ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK