HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 09-21MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 21. 1999
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m.
on September 21, 1999 by Charlie Rountree.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie
Rountree.
OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Bill Gigray, Bill Gordon, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles.
Rountree: ... this evening it's a sell-out crowd. You're going to have to I guess
put up with our inaccommodation (sic) for this large of crowd and hopefully we
can move through the first part of our agenda and I think get to what most of your
issue is and I believe it's probably 8 and 9 and we'll talk about in a bit, but we do
have some regular council business to get on with. With that I will open the
Meridian City Council at 7:31 on Tuesday on September 21 st. For those of you
who don't know me, I'm Charlie Rountree. I'm the Council President and in that
capacity I substitute for the Mayor when he is not available to be here and Mayor
Corrie is not here this evening so I will be running the meeting this evening. I'm
not sure if Bob did that on purpose or not, but I'll thank him when he gets back
into town.
10010 601akI W_Te1210197_l
A. APPROVE MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER
7, 1999: (TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
B. TABLED 8/17/99: PROPERTY EXCHANGE LOTS 8 & 9 BLOCK 1 OF
THE LAKES AT CHERRY LANE: (APPROVE)
C. STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT FOR TUMBLE CREEK NO. 1
SUBDIVISION: (APPROVE)
D. RESOLUTION #253 -- SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR FALL CLASSES BY
MERIDIAN PARKS AND RECREATION: (APPROVE)
E. RESOLUTION #255 -- UNION FIRE CONTRACT: (APPROVE)
Rountree: The next thing on the agenda is the consent agenda. Any comments
discussion from the Council on those items?
Bentley: Yes, thank you. I would move that we table item A until October 5th
and that we move item E the Union fire contract to the first item on department
reports.
Bird: I would second that.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 2
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to remove items A and E from the
consent agenda and table item A until our next regularly scheduled meeting and
move item E to a spot just before department reports on the agenda. All those in
favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Motion on the consent agenda?
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the consent agenda excluding items A
and E.
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and second to approve the consent agenda as items
B, C and D. All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
CHERRY LANE GOLF COURSE — LETTER OF CREDIT / LEASE HOLD
DEED OF TRUST UPDATE: (STATEMENT OF CONSENT — APPROVE
RESOLUTION #254)
Rountree: You also have a letter from City Attorney Gigray dated today talking
about the paragraph in the current agreement of lease related to assignment of
subletting. This offers a solution between the City and the financial institution
that will be providing the letter of credit to the City on the construction of the new
golf course clubhouse. Any discussion on that particular item?
Bentley: Yes, thank you. I would like to hear from legal counsel on this.
Gigray: Mr. President, Councilman Bentley, members of the Council, as you
have before you there a couple of memos I believe that you have. One that I
sent on September 16th with regards to a request that had been made
concerning the signing of what has been denoted as a schedule C on a lease
hold deed of trust, which has to do with the financing I believe on the part of the
Recreational Properties, Inc. for their clubhouse project and maybe some other
items associated there with. That schedule C I believe in my previous memos
had some items in it that I would not recommend to the Council that it would
execute which includes whether or not there is any default. We've already
addressed that by a separate which the Council has already authorized to be
signed by the Mayor and attested by the Clerk. It also provides certain
provisions in it that extend default provisions provide additional notice provisions
and go beyond the lease agreement and there also is some concern at least from
this office that if we would become somehow signature to that deed of trust that
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 3
there may be some other legal considerations for which would not be
recommended to the City Council to enter into. On the other hand it seems as if
what the essential of that schedule is to simply to provide a notice that the City is
aware that the lease holder the Recreational Properties Inc is entering into this
arrangement to secure performance of an obligation and using the lease hold as
security for that. There is a specific provision in the agreement of lease with the
Recreational Properties, Inc. entitled assignment of subletting which I have
quoted in my memo to you today which would be a provision upon which I
assume the lessee would rely with regards to right of reassignment on a lease
agreement for an interest to one of its lenders. I think that we could take this in
the spirit of that type of application in order to assist them to meet and comply
with the conditional use permit that was issued and the letter of credit that is
required of this. This proposed consent form would simply be a consent to their
entering into that agreement, and the City would not enter into that deed -of -trust
agreement and with reference to the specific provisions of their original request.
Bentley: Well, Mr. President, by entering into this agreement that you've given
us tonight dated the 21st of September, does this by any way take the City out of
first position on this lease?
Gigray: Well, that's one of the other reasons for this, and this isn't an agreement.
It's simply a statement of consent, and the lease agreement is unaltered by this
consent, and it's done pursuant to that lease agreement, and I felt that an
argument could be made that we would be altering, in some ways, that original
lease agreement if we signed that Schedule C which was on that lease -hold
deed of trust which I'm sure was a form that was provided by the bank to them
that they standardly use, and as the Council is well aware, this is a very unique
situation where standard -form language can cause problems because of the
history of this circumstance. So we're trying to accommodate their needs and at
the same time protect the City's interest with regards that we've entered into one
agreement, and that's the lease agreement or the agreement of lease, and we'll
stand by that, but that's where we are and we don't go beyond that.
Rountree: Any other questions?
Bird: Has the Cherry Lane Recreation seen this?
Gigray: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, members of the Council, since it is my
job to represent the City, I feel that I have to share my communications with the
City, and I shared this first with the President of the Council because I wasn't
aware that this was an agenda item until today. The agendas, of course, are set,
and not by me, and until I'm authorized to release this type of information to other
parties without first running it by our own people, I didn't feel it was appropriate to
do so. I was given the go-ahead to distribute this to members of the Council for
your consideration tonight. Certainly, if you wished to share this with them prior
to taking any action, I would recommend that you well could do so, and you
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 4
could, in fact, table the action on this until they've had a chance to review it, if
they have representatives here, and take it up later in the meeting.
Rountree: Jerry, you're nodding your head. What does that mean? That you're
glad to be here or what?
Mattison: I guess I'm not sure what the question was.
Rountree: Bill, would you explain to Gary what it is we're proposing here to
assure the lease to the lender?
Gigray: This proposal, and I, with your permission, would share this with him so
he could read it, would be that the City would authorize, this evening, the Council
a consent to the lease assignment, and, actually, it's a consent specifically to
Cherry Lane Recreation, Inc. entering into the leasehold deed of trust, but it
would not be signing your Schedule C. This statement would be issued in lieu of
that, and you can read this here, but it's acknowledging that they're entering into
this deed of trust, and its consent is limited to that. I think that's the intent and
purpose of Schedule C. The language in Schedule C, I believe, includes some
provisions that I have concern about in terms of the City. And then my
suggestion was if you wish, give you chance to read this over if the Council and
the President are desirous, they could table this until later in the meeting so you
might have plenty of time to read this over before you'd even have to comment
about it.
Mattison: I appreciate that. The concern I would have — this has gotten down to
a power between attorneys. You're giving this to me, and I am not an attorney.
In all honesty, we need our attorney and our counsel to review whatever it is
you're proposing. I wish I had had this before so I could have faxed it up to them
today, and they could have taken a look at it. To give it to me tonight and expect
to make a determination of the legality of it and whether it'll meet the bank's
needs, I think, is kind of not much of a timeframe. I had given this document,
what we are asking, a month and a half ago to you to review.
Gigray: I told you, sir, the time that was delivered was the time my mother died —
Mattison: I'm aware of that.
Gigray: -- and it went with a bunch of other documents, and the only request that
I was aware of that the bank had at this point, and it was referred to me by the
Planning and Zoning Office was the City should approve the form of the letter of
credit which was the main document that was on the top of it.
Rountree: Let me interject here, Jerry. I understand the position you're in, and
also understand and really sympathize with Bill having just lost my mother a
week ago. So —
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 5
Mattison: (inaudible) there were other times after that that I had direct
conversation with the attorney, and he acknowledged it was fine.
Rountree: I don't know where we are there. We'll rule that out as a solution here
this evening that's been proposed to the City and before the Council. You're not
in a position to say one way or another, so, I guess, now (inaudible) in the hands
of the Council what they want to do with this.
Mattison: The way it was presented to me from my counsel was if the City won't
sign this, you don't have a deal. Now, this may be something that you've come
up with that will mitigate that, and it'll be fine. I don't know. I'm not an attorney; I
can't tell you whether it would work or not.
Rountree: I understand. I'm not sure this is the form to broker a negotiated deal.
Mattison: I agree. I totally agree. That's why we tried to do it a month ago.
Rountree: Thank you. Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: I have none.
Rountree: Discussion? Motion?
Anderson: I guess in light of the information that's come out tonight, and I don't
like putting this off anymore, it's drug on long enough, but I think this is not
probably the place to negotiate this, and it sounds like other parties would need
additional time to determine if this agreement would even work, so I think it would
be pretty mature for us to be voting on this tonight, so I guess I would make a
motion to table this issue until the October 5th meeting.
Rountree: Do we have a second?
Bird: I'll second it.
Rountree. It's been moved and seconded to table. Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Discussion. I don't know if Cherry Lane can wait two more weeks. My
question would be how much time is the attorney and the bank going to need to
review? Maybe this is an issue that if we table this for two weeks we're not going
to be able to bring it up any sooner.
Rountree: If the Council will let me, I'll take my mayor hat off and become a
councilman. Any objections?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 6
Bird: You may (inaudible)
Rountree: I guess my recommendation would be that one of two; we act on this
recommendation and provide that to Cherry Lane and run it through their staff.
That will save some time on their part. The other option would be to move to
give that to them and offer them a special meeting to either negotiate or to agree
to whatever they've come up with their legal staff. Just for discussion. Mr.
Gigray.
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, point of information. Since this
is a statement issued, it's not an agreement. The bank isn't agreeing to anything
in this statement. We're just issuing a statement; the request has been made
and you're consenting that the leaseholder can enter into this leasehold deed of
trust. That's all this says. And I think you could take action on this, authorize the
President of the Council and the clerk to attest, provide it to them, they'll have it,
and if they don't like it, they'll come back. And if they like it and it works with the
bank, it's done. It's over with.
Bird: Let's vote on the motion.
Rountree: Do you have a question? All those in favor of the motion signify by
saying aye.
MOTION FAILS ZERO TO THREE
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we pass Resolution Lot.
Rountree: We're working on it down here. Two fifty-four.
Gigray: Did you assign a resolution number to this consent agenda?
Bird: That will come later.
Gigray: No. Consent agenda was passed, so you've already got it — okay.
Thank you.
Rountree: Two fifty-four.
Bird: I move that we pass Resolution No. 254 and for the Council President to
sign, the clerk to attest with a suspension of rules.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 7
Rountree: Second?
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to approve the Resolution 254 with
suspension of rules. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
1. TABLED 9/7/99: ORDINANCE # -- ANNEXATION &
ZONING OF 6.15 ACRES (FOR R-40 ZONING) FOR PROPOSED
COBBLESTONE VILLAGE BY IONIC ENTERPRISES, INC.—SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF LOCUST GROVE & FRANKLIN: (TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
Rountree: Next item on the agenda was tabled at our last meeting. It relates to
the annexation of 6.15 acres for zoning R-40 for proposed Cobblestone Village
by Ionic Enterprises, Inc. southwest corner of Locust Grove and Franklin. I've
been advised Ionic Enterprises has yet to be licensed to operate in the State of
Idaho, so I would recommend that Council consider tabling this item.
Bird: Mr. Mayor – Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we table the ordinance for the annexation and zoning the 6.15
acres for Cobblestone Village by Ionics Enterprises, Inc. until October 5th.
Rountree: Is there a second?
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded that we table Item No. 1 until October 5th.
Any discussion? Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Is that enough time?
Rountree: Should be. It should be.
Bentley: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: All those in favor of the motion signify by saying aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
2. TABLED 9/7/99: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CHURCH PARKING,
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 8
RECREATIONAL USES AND CONTRACTOR'S BUSINESS BY TREASURE
VALLEY BAPTIST CHURCH / K. D. ROOFING—NORTH OF OVERLAND RD,
SOUTH OF 1-84 & EAST OF TEARE AVE: (APPROVE)
Rountree: Item No. 2 was tabled at our last meetings. Findings of and
conclusions of law for request for conditional use permit for church parking
recreational use and contractor's business by Treasure Valley Baptist
Church/K.D. Roofing. This item was tabled waiting for the publication of the
annexation ordinance. I believe that's been done. Any discussion, motion?
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I move we approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law in
decision granting conditional use permit subject to conditions to Treasure Valley
Baptist Church, Inc. and K.D. Roofing.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the findings of facts for
Item No. 2. Any discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: It's a roll -call vote. Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Aye.
Rountree: All ayes. Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Anderson: Hey. We got rid of two.
3. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR EAGLE ROAD PROFESSIONAL
CENTER BY FERMOR, LLC – NORTH OF 1-84, WEST OF EAGLE ROAD AND
EAST OF ALLEN STREET: (TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 9
4. ORDINANCE # -- ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF
APPROXIMATELY 3.77 ACRES (FOR CG ZONING) OF LAND FOR
PROPOSED EAGLE ROAD PROFESSIONAL CENTER BY FERMOR, LLC—
NORTH OF 1-84 & WEST OF EAGLE ROAD, EAST OF ALLEN STREET:
(TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
Rountree: Just be patient. Okay. Item No. 3. Development agreement for
Eagle Road Professional Center by Fermor, LLC on north of 1-84 west of Eagle
Road and east of Allen Street.
Bird: Mr. President.
C •2'7riT Via■ /I Off41
Bird: Seeing how we don't have any development agreement yet worked out,
move that we table this development agreement for Eagle Road Professional
Center, Fermor, LLC until 10/5/99.
Rountree: Is there a second?
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: It's a tie. It's been moved and seconded to table Item No. 3 until our
next regularly scheduled meeting. Discussion? Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Yes. I'd like to move that we amend that motion to include Item No. 4
since it's the zoning ordinance for the same.
Bird: Okay with me.
Rountree: So we would –
Bird: Three and four.
Rountree: -- table three and four? Do we have a second on that amendment?
:31'ti■Y11-••I MIT1W.1 iL-1011IX-IN
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to table both Items 3 and 4. Any
discussion? All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: Okay. It's passed. Items 3 and 4 are tabled until our next regularly
scheduled meeting.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 10
5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
REZONE OF 7.265 ACRES FOR CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE II (FROM R-8
TO R-15) BY WILLIAM & LUCILE LEAVELL—END OF 5TH, NORTH OF
CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE I AND SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW: (TABLE UNTIL
10/5/99)
6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT 16 FOUR-PLEXES WITH
POOL AND CLUBHOUSE FOR USE BY PHASE I & II (PROPOSED
CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE 11) BY WILLIAM & LUCILE LEAVELL—END OF
5TH, NORTH OF CREEKSIDE ARBOUR PHASE I & SOUTH OF FAIRVIEW:
(TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
Rountree: Item No. 5. Findings of facts and conclusions of law, request for
rezone of 7.265 acres of Creekside Arbour Phase II from R-8 to R-15 by William
and Lucile Leavell. Any discussion? Motion?
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we table Item No. 5, the findings of facts and conclusions of law
seeing how we have not got the legal description right, and Item No. 6, the
findings of facts and conclusions of law regarding the same.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to table No's 5 and 6. Any
discussion?
Bird: The table date is 10/5/99.
Rountree: 10/5/99. No discussion? All those in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: APPEAL OF
PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF PROPOSED
ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER FOR THE IDAHO INDEPENDENT BANK
BY IDAHO ELECTRIC SIGNS: (APPROVE)
Rountree: Item No. 7, findings of fact and conclusions of law, appeal of Planning
and Zoning Administrator's denial of proposed electronic message center for the
Idaho Independent Bank and electronic sign. That item has just been recently
slipped in. No, excuse me. Go ahead and act on this item,and then I've got
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 11
some additional information.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I'd like to abstain from voting on this as I have a conflict of interest on
this particular issue.
Rountree: My question would be, should you remove yourself from the bench or
just abstain?
Anderson: Probably ought to leave.
Rountree: Don't go far. Okay. We have —
Bentley: I have a question.
Rountree: Okay, Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Item No. 2, Page 4, it says this matter is remanded back to P & Z
Administrator for further action. Is this correct procedure?
Gigray: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Gigray.
Gigray: Councilman Bentley, members of the Council, the reason that language
is in there is because that is the -- Administrator's the one that issued the permit,
and it was denied based on that one portion of the sign, and you've overruled the
order of the Administrator by this order, so you remand it back to her in
accordance with this decision as this says so that she can then go ahead and
issue the remaining portion of that sign. And that's the reason that language is
there.
Rountree: Thank you.
Bentley: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: Any other —
Bentley: I have none.
Rountree: -- questions, comments?
Bentley: (inaudible)
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 12
Rountree: I need a motion.
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I move we approve the order granting the appeal overruling of Planning
and Zoning Administrator's denial of an electronic message center portion of the
Idaho Independent Bank sign in order of remand.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the findings of fact and
conclusions of law which overrules the denial of the sign in Item No. 7. Roll -call
vote. Councilman Bentley.
Bentley: Aye.
Rountree: Councilman Bird.
Bird: Aye.
Bentley: Councilman Rountree.
Rountree: Aye. I'll choose not to vote.
Bird: He has to vote.
Rountree: Do I have to vote?
Bentley: Yes, you do.
Rountree: Well, since I made the motion, aye.
Bentley: You thought I was kidding.
(inaudible audience discussion)
Rountree: Tell Ron he can come back now. He's not missing all the fun.
Gigray: You all want him back, don't you?
Rountree: I believe we're now where most of the audience wants us to be, and
that would be with Items 8 and 9. Before we open the public hearing, just a little
housekeeping for all of you to make it potentially easier on us and as well as
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 13
easier for you. We would appreciate that you all give us your thoughts, your
concerns, our issues, both against and for, but to limit your comments to no more
than three minutes and to try to limit the number of times that the same kinds of
things are said. We're looking at a 25 -item agenda tonight, and we'll be here
until sometime tomorrow, and I don't think you all want to be here that later
either, so just a word of procedure. The way the hearing will go will be very
similar to the hearings that you all attended, or at least some of you attended at
Planning and Zoning. The applicant will make a presentation to tell us about
what it is they're proposing. You'll have an opportunity to testify before the
Council. The applicant will again have an opportunity to address any questions
or issues that are brought up during that testimony period. The Council will have
a discussion on that, and the Council will ask questions of both the appicant as
well as those who are testifying, if they have questions. At the end of that, we
will close the heaering, there'll be a discussion, and then the Council will make a
recommendation as to where we go from here. But again, probably for all of us
this evening, I know we've got people who have been standing out there since
6:30, and I wish we could accommodate you all, and maybe if nothing else
comes out of this, the need for a new City facility of some kind. Got to put in a
plug when I can. And again, I welcome you all here this evening. I know a great
number of you are here for the first time in terms of a City Council meeting, and I
don' t know how it will turn out for you, but at least I hope you feel and walk away
that you've been treated fairly. So with that, I will ask one more question. We
have two public hearings on this particular item. One is for annexation and
zoning, and one is conditional use permit. The annexation and zoning deals with
whether or not this piece of property comes into the city, and if so, how it will be
zoned and what kinds of uses could then follow. The conditional use permit is a
permit or a request to do a certain kind of use, presuming it's annexed and
zoned. Now I have the option of asking you all, would you like to have or would
you consent to having both hearings opened up at the same time to save having
to go through essentially the same kind of process twice, or is there enough of
you that would like to see two separate hearings, and I'll do that by a show of
hands, so is there anybody in the audience that would like to see two separate
hearings? And I can't see everybody out there, and I'm (inaudible) hear what I'm
saying. Is there anybody out there that would object to that procedure? Do I
have any objections from the Council?
Bird: No. I think it's a great idea.
Rountree: Or Mr. Gigray?
Gigray: I think it's preferable.
Rountree: The last item I'm going to do, is I'm going to open up the agenda at
this point in time and take recommendations from the Council on if we will close
our consideration of hearings at a certain time this evening. Mr. Bentley.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 14
Bentley: Mr. President, as we've done in the past, I think it would be my
preference to close the public hearings at 10:30 so we can continue with the rest
of our agenda.
Anderson: I concur with that.
Rountree: Concur that — so for those of you who are hear for another public
hearing, we will not open up another public hearing after 10:30. Hopefully we
can get through most of them if not all of them, but if we get to a point where it's
10:30 and there's a couple public hearings left, we will reschedule those to our
next regularly scheduled meeting. I hope that's not a great inconvenience to you,
but really at that point in time, if you're having a public hearing at that time in the
evening, you're probably not necessarily getting the full benefit of everybody's
thinking processes at that late of time in the evening.
8. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION & ZONING OF 20.35 ACRES (FOR
R-15 ZONING) OF LAND FOR PROPOSED 300 UNITS OF MULTI -FAMILY
RENTAL (FOR PROPOSED SUNDANCE APARTMENT HOMES BY
SUNDANCE, LLC —NORTH OF OVERLAND ROAD AND WEST OF LOCUST
GROVE: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS)
9. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 300 UNITS OF
MULTI -FAMILY HOMES BY SUNDANCE, LLC —NORTH OF OVERLAND ROAD
AND WEST OF LOCUST GROVE: (TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
Rountree: So with that, I will open up public hearing for the annexation and
zoning of 20.35 acres for R-15 zoning of land for the proposed 300 units of multi-
family rental by Sundance, LLC and the public hearing for conditional use permit
for 300 units of multi -family housing by Sundance, LLC north of Overland Road
and West of Locust Grove. To have the applicant here to — Shari, do you want to
go first? City staff to make a presentation and will be followed by the applicant.
Stiles: President Rountree, Council members, this is for a piece of property
located south of 1-84. This location is where the existing Better -Built Homes is,
the manufactured homes that's used as the sales lot along the freeway. This is
the Playground RV park, across here is the Sportsman Point Subdivision. This is
still vacant land at this point here. The Treasure Valley Baptist Church is here.
That was an application that you acted on the findings earlier that would have
been this piece here where the roofing business and the church is going to
expand. There is an application for this property that will be before you in a
couple of months. The property is currently zoned R -T. There is a section that is
adjacent to the freeway that is zoned C -G. They are requesting a zoning of R-15
to allow for a 300 -unit apartment complex. This will be the location of a future
overpass across the freeway, and consideration will need to be made for future
right-of-way dedication to allow for that overpass. The applicant has submitted a
new site plan, however, I didn't have an 8-1/2 by 11 that I could show you
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 15
tonight. They have incorporated some of the changes we'd requested as far as
additional buffering on the interstate and along Overland Road and showing the
fencing details. It also is a little misleading because the application that you have
on their site plan that shows that they have open space of 51.5 percent,
obviously, that's including the parking lot area, and they need to exclude those
areas as part of their open -space requirement. It does appear to meet the
requirements of an R-15 should that be your decision to zone it as such. The
Nine Mile Creek traverses along here, and they would leave that open with
fencing approximately five feet off of the easement line. They're showing a
maintenance shed. You all have the elevations in your packets to show what the
buildings would look like.
Bird: Pull that over a little farther so it shows Locust Grove. How it drops off onto
Locust Grove.
Stiles: They are showing one access here, I'm not sure if that would comply with
what Ada County Highway District is requesting or what the future plans for an
overpass. They're showing an emergency access in this location, and then just
the one access onto Overland Road.
Rountree: Mr. Bird, talk in the mike, please.
Bird: I'm sorry. Shari, is that enough access for that many planned
development?
Stiles: I don't know if Ada County Highway District has made any comment on
whether it's adequate. Obviously this access up here's going to go away once
the overpass is there, and I'm not sure that this access is still going to work once
the overpass is constructed. I don't know what the future design of that
overpass, whether this will still meet the access requirement. I believe the Ada
County Highway District counts used vehicle trips per day of about six or seven
for an apartment complex per unit.
Rountree: Folks, it's going to be a long night. I know how you feel, but — Shari,
the parcel on the east, is that one ownership?
Stiles: This parcel right here?
Rountree: Yes.
Stiles: Yes. I believe that is the gas —
Rountree: They own all of that.
Stiles: -- facility. 2400 additional vehicle trips per day was what the Ada County
Highway District report stated.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 16
Rountree: Any other comments or questions for Shari?
Anderson: I have one.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Shari, that emergency access, is that through the existing mobile
home or manufactured home sales that's along the freeway, or where is that
where they get in that from?
Stiles: It would be the existing entrance that's —
Anderson: So would that manufactured home sales go away or they would be
driving through their car lot?
Stiles: It would go away. Their property — the proposal and the conditional use
permit goes clear to the Interstate 84 right-of-way.
Anderson: Are there any improvements that are planned along the Nine Mile
drain other than just a fence?
Stiles: They haven't indicated anything. They are showing some landscaping,
fencing and landscaping. They're not showing a pathway.
Rountree: Any other comments? Any other questions for Shari or our other staff
members?
Audience Member: I have one. How many —
Rountree: No. Please, the Council gets to ask the questions.
Stiles: I'll answer that.
Rountree: Go ahead.
Stiles: The letter we got from the school district said that "these homes, when
completed, will house 99 elementary -age children, 75 middle -school -aged
children, and 68 senior -high -aged students. Even though we are in a difficult
position and need your help in dealing with the impact on growth on schools, we
will approve this development," and it's signed by Jim Carberry, Joint School
District No. 2.
Rountree: Thank you, Shari.
Anderson: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 17
Rountree: You through?
Stiles: Yeah, I'm done.
Rountree: Now, is the applicant ready to make a presentation?
Cooke: Thank you.
Rountree: If you'd introduce yourself; name and address.
Cooke: My name is Peter Cooke. I'm from Salt Lake City, Utah. Tonight what
we'd like to present is the overall view of how we see this development, and we'll
have first that presentation. I've also brought with us with (inaudible) some of the
developments that we're doing, and we'll get into that discussion about how, in
each case, on every development we've done, and the last two where we have
major enhancement of the areas we've been in, including a development where
we own the total side, and we will be developing homes around this about a
quarter of a million to over $800,000 homes. I know there's been some question
whether — how this impacts the community, and we'll talk a little bit to that. So I'd
first like to ahave Keith give you a presentation of the site plan and how it'll look,
and we can go from there.
Bennett: Okay —
Rountree: If you'd introduce yourself and please use the mike.
Bennett: Keith Bennett with PFC Development, and I'm here to discuss the
portion of the plan that deals with the site plan, and then we'll go to other issues.
Basically, we worked with the planning staff on the development of this site and
came to the Planning Commmission and incorporated all of the
recommendations and requirements that they brought to our attention in the
Planning Staff Report. Some of that is where on Overland Road and Locust
Grove Road in the master plan development in the long-term of the city, both
streets would be widened to a 96 -foot right-of-way, 48 -foot center line -of -road
easement which would require, number one, that both streets, at the staff's
request, would be planned to accommodate that extra width to begin with. In
conjunction with the traffic report and requirements that they placed on the first
review, we responded as well and the desires that they had to not only show the
street as an improved intersection to its full width on both sides, but also to bring
in the main entrance at least 315 back from the new proposed intersection widths
and additionally the secondary entrance, which is what they required as well,
coming up on Locust Grove which is well back from the freeway that would be
able to be maintained. Since the plan that was shown in the overhead, it was
also shown in the Planning Commission, that the emergency exit that we initially
showed would not be used because of the projected overpass on the freeway.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 18
So we responded to that showing that as not being access and doing the two
accesses as was indicated by the Planning Staff Report. Additionally there were
concerns of keeping proper setback and open space for the overall site, and this
site compared to the previous one, again, we responded by bringing in a 35 -foot
landscape buffer including — which includes the Nine Mile drain as a 35 -foot
buffer back, a 35 -foot buffer along the entire 1-84 corridor, a 20 -foot buffer along
the gas company's property, and then additionally 35 feet back from the widened
width of both streets as well, giving us the buffer all around that was required by
staff, and we responded to that. The site itself is made of 25 12-plex buildings.
They're organized in groups of two and three bedrooms with two floors of three-
bedroom units and one floor of two-bedroom; the two-bedroom being on the top
decreasing the mass. And we can show that in elevations later. Basically, these
units then give 100 two-bedroom units and 200 three-bedroom units is our mix
for a total of the 300. We're proposing major entry feature that would come into a
clubhouse with the ammenity package of pools and spas, the sports court, and
then by maintaining the entire interior core as green open space. Now, why bring
up this — this is the landscape architect's rendering of the site. It is also
responding, we have given those plans to the staff of the tree requirements, and
they're proper (inaudible) to meet full requirements of the landscape
requirements on the interior of the site, but what you see is a major interior green
space that is shared by all. And when we calculate the acreage and break down
the building area, the parking area, which is not part of the open space, and the
building area, we come up with 52 percent that is just green; that is not building,
not asphalt, not parking, so we have over 50 percent of the site as green, open
space. The idea was to really do something that could make a difference in
apartment living that would be attractive for people to want to be here; be part of
the community, be neighbors, and be happy to live here versus anywhere else.
And we have proposed in your packets, as you have, the elevations that use
stone and cedar siding and articulating the massing with balconies and
entryways that respond to a project that has a richness to it and a character to it
that would become an attractive area for everyone.
*** End of Tape 1, Side 1 ***
We're only at 14.8 units per acre. We could ask for 30 units per acre, the R-30,
but with R-15, we're at 14.8, so we're less density than could have been asked
for for this site, and the parking is handled with at least two styles per unit, and all
that being off-street so there's no parking counted for the street. Basically,
should we go into the renderings and the buildings? We have boards that show
a similar project.
Rountree: Excuse me, Keith. If you could kind of walk those by here. My old
eyes can't make out those —
Bennett: Do you want me to stand in the middle, do you think?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 19
Rountree: If you could maybe bring them up here to where we could see them
and then maybe get them to where the audience could see them.
Bennett: Okay. You do have them in your handout. (inaudible) hold that one
right there. Turn to that page. I don't know — it's about half way into the book.
Rountree: You might just set that up folded up for the audience to see.
Bennett: Do you want me to address — them or you?
Rountree: No. They're going to want to see as well.
Bennett: Okay. This is a project that we're developing in Utah in the mountain
area near Park City, and I wanted to carry that same kind of theme and feel into
this project as well. The project is called Todd Hollow, but the elevation is shown
here with some of the aesthetics of what we're looking at; the massing is 2-1/2
story. It's in the 35 -foot limit of the height of the building that meets the current
zoning codes with one-half level down so that we have a 2-1/2 story elevation.
The first level having a canopy element that brings the elevation down, a roof
element that uses architectural -grade asphalt shingles, and then having cedar
siding, board and bath as well as having shake ciding with stone venier on the
columns and the entries as well as a log look to bring a feel of a rural element to
the site and not using stucco materials, et cetera, that other apartments have
done, and we've done in the past. This is trying to be warmer. We've probably
used earth tones and greens and have a feel of the mountains come down to the
valley and creating an ambiance there that can really set this community apart
and be unique and be an exciting place to be, a destiny to be — a destination to
be instead of just another community. This has the feel that we want to bring of
the log look and the mountain look back to the valley and bring in landscaping
that could respond to that and have a richness of the community there. We have
tried in all of this to meet the entire requirements of the Staff Report; we have no
objections to the Staff Report; we have responded in all the requirements that the
staff has asked for on the site plan and in the design of the layout to meet their
requirements and ask for your approval of this because it is going to be an
exciting place to live.
Cooke: One last question —
Rountree: Get you on the mike.
Cooke: A question that came before was do we own these, and do we keep
them, and do we maintain them. And we do. It's not one of those where you sell
off of our development agreement requires us to be there and maintain those and
keep those for the — actually our developer (inaudible) comes from that, so it's
important for us to keep the development moving and working and being
successful. We do feel like this property has its (inaudible) Planning and Zoning
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 20
meeting that this is good use for this property right next to the freeway, as the
Planning and Zoning agreed; it'll buffer the community from the industrial as it's
near there. We also felt, really important for us
to -- Brian loved it, but we have not seen a development of this quality around. I
said we haven't seen in this area or in Boise or in any of the areas a project of
this quality, and we really feel that the openness and the green space will
enhance the community and be a very positive feel as you move forward and
grow. I think the issue is that, obviously, a lot of development's going to stop
because the sewerability, which we were able to meet that requirement, and
we're very excited about obviously the expansion and the road to be able to have
their access and bring those from both sides of the freeway over, so we're
excited to hear everybody's comments and we'll go from there.
11.170MAN'UM156Ca"I
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Would you have him re -identify himself?
Cooke: My name is Peter Cooke.
Bird: Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Council, any questions of the applicant?
Bentley: I have one.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I don't have a question of the applicant at his time. I wonder if it
wouldn't be better to use the big mike over there at the table so maybe they can
hear better.
Rountree: Yeah. That one does not have — is not hooked up to a speaker.
Cooke: Should I go through what I just went through?
Rountree: No, that's fine.
Bentley: Could we get someone to move that over there?
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: This is the latest site plan that has been submitted to the staff?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 21
Bennett: This is the site plan that was submitted to the staff prior to the, or with
the Planning Commission, and this is the site plan that the Planning Commission
approved.
Bird: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: Are there any other questions for the applicant? Do you have
anymore to present at this point? Okay. Thank you. Having the presentation
from the applicant and the staff, we'll now have an opportunity for testimony from
the public. Probably do the easy thing here first. A sign of those who are
wanting to offer testimony in favor of this proposal.
Bennett: They must all be in the hallway.
Rountree: They must all be in the hallway.
Bird: They're all lost.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Now, again, I would request that we're going to
open up the testimony for those who are opposed. I will recognize those
individuals, have you come up here, you need to give your name and your
address, and then offer your testimony and try to keep it within that three
minutes, and try to keep from repeating too many times. If you all want to testify,
we're going to be here awhile tonight, so let's get going. Let's just start up front
here, and I'll choose back and forth. If this gentleman wants to testify first, thank
you. And Glenn, let's get that microphone over there.
Bird: Just pull the whole stand over there.
Sloan: Thank you. My name is Mike Sloan. I live at 794 East Martinique Drive
in the Meridian Greens apartment complex. I have a couple things I'd like to
present to Council. I've been asked to represent many of the neighborhoods in
the area that's affected by this apartment complex (inaudible) petitions that we
have signed. We have in excess of 800 petitions signed here, and I'd like to get
these entered into public record if I may.
Rountree: If you'd get those to the City Clerk. Point of clarification: 800 petitions
or 800 signatures? One petition?
Sloan: Sorry. Eight hundred signatures all voicing opposition to this project. I've
also been asked by the Meridian Greens Homeowners Association to officially
present to the Council a statement of concerns that we have. Again, I'd like
these documents entered into the public record, and I would like to go briefly go
through the top concerns.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 22
Rountree: Fine. If you want to turn them in now or when you're through.
Sloan: Our top concerns that we have listed there are all dealing with our public
infrastructure system. The top three that I'd like to talk about are public schools,
automobile traffic, and police and fire protection. As has already mentioned,
we're going to have an influx of approximately 240 students into our
neighborhoods, and this is going into an area where the public schools are
already at capacity or over capacity. This has been reviewed a great deal, so we
don' t need to go into much detail, but we understand that new schools are going
to be opening soon, and yet these schools are going to be located far across
town, and we don't understand the plan for how this increase to the public school
system is going to be addressed. So that is our first concern. Our second
concern is automobile traffic. Traffic on Overland has increased dramatically
over recent months. This is due to the construction on Interstate 84 and also the
addition of new recreation areas such as Boondocks and the water park that's
there. Overland is a very dangerous road at this time, and we understand that
there is a project to widen the roads, but this is not scheduled for completion until
2004 which is well beyond the timeframe for the completion of the proposed
apartment community. The traffic at Locust Grove and Overland and at the
entrances of several of the subdivisions often back up which creates a very
dangerous situation, and this apartment community with 300 more families would
undoubtedly increase to that, as we've heard, to the tune of 2400 more car trips
per day. As I said, Overland is a very dangerous road already. The added traffic
could easily provide ample opportunities for many tragic accidents. Finally, the
increased traffic density could slow response times for police and emergency
vehicles for the community, and we'd like to hear how the increased traffic will be
addressed so that we don' t have any public safety problems. The third concern
that we have is for police and crime prevention. Assuming a crime and
emergency rates per person remain constant, the rapid addition of approximately
1,000 people will increase the number of reported emergency incidents into our
part of Meridian. This increase will undoubtedly require additional police, fire and
other resources to patrol and handle the emergency problems concentrated in
our area. And given the recent announcements for budget cuts for the Meridian
Police Department, this seems like a very immediate problem. On the subject of
the police budget, Meridian Police Captain Dave Bowman was recently quoted
as saying, and I quote, "We are not keeping up with the growth. In fact, I think
we're falling behind." This is a current situation independent of any additional
growth. We need to hear how our police and fire protection is going to be
addressed given this proposed growth. So, a summary of adding 300 families to
a small city can have a major impact on supporting infrastructure, especially if the
addition is concentrated on one area over a short period of time. One way to
partially alleviate this impact is to spread out the growth, both in space and time
and to try to increase the infrastructure at the same rate as the population is
increasing. We at Meridian Greens are deeply concerned about the ability of the
City of Meridian to add infrastructure capacity to handle the Sundance project.
We're also concerned about the cost to the local residents and our safety, the
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 23
money and the quality of life to proceed with this project. We request that the
Council reject this approval for this project until the infrastructure in this area has
been developed to handle the requirements necessary for the planned growth.
Thank you.
Rountree: Folks, if you'll applause for every one of you, it's just time against
testimony. I hate to keep grinding on it, but it's a long night. Any questions for
Mr. Sloan?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: (inaudible) Ma'am. Question? Do you want to speak? Oh. You
broke it. Now you have to buy us one.
Martell: My name is Marian Martell and I live at 2534 South (inaudible) Falls in
Meridian Salmon Rapids Subdivison which Salmon Rapids lies along Locust
Grove. From what I am hearing, to accommodate this complex will require
enlarging both Overland and Locust Grove. I am deeply concerned about the
enlargment of Locust Grove. This will have a horrible impact on all our homes. It
will take our common area away, all our landscaping, it even is cutting into the
yards of three people in our subdivision. It is absolutely horrendous. We moved
here to be in the atmosphere we enjoy, not to be in the middle of a metropolitan
area. And most of the people who have moved here, these are not beginning
homeowners. These homeowners are some people retiring, some people still
working, but these are final homes for many people. We don't want to see our
area impacted in the way it's being impacted with these things that are going on.
I haven't heard a hearing, I haven't heard anything given to the people to have
anything to say about the enlargement of Locust Grove which does have
horrendous impact on the homeowners along Locust Grove. We are disturbed
about the quality of life changing. We are disturbed about the traffic, of course.
We're disturbed about the lowering of property values which will happen if you
change this area to a high-density area. We moved here because it is a low-
density area, and I respectfully request that the members of the Council keep
their obligation to the taxpaying residents who live here. Thank you very much.
Rountree: Please. Please. (inaudible)
Bentley: If I may respond to (inaudible) is in regards to Locust Grove and
Overland Road, those have both been scheduled and planned out to be widened
out for many years. As most of you know we have a very poor north -south flow
for traffic. The plans are for (inaudible) Locust Grove as well as Linder, and
hopefully the Ten Mile interchange. Because we've got east -west flow, but we
definitely do not have north -south and Locust Grove, even before it was
subdivided with these subdivisions out there has always been planned out to be
widened out, so this isn't something new because of this project. Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 24
Jarvis: Mr. President, members of the Council, my name is Scott Jarvis. I live at
2048 East Three Bars Drive in the Las Alamedos Subdivision. My family and
many of my neighbors and I are opposed to the 300 -unit apartment complex
that's being proposed for the corner of Locust Grove and Overland. We
presented over 800 signatures of nearly 1,000 homes in the immediate area that
would be affected by this development. Last week my neighbors and I have
gathered just over 110 signatures just from our subdivision and the neighboring
subdivisions alone. Like my neighbors before me, we do not believe the
infrastructure presently exists to support the nearly 1,000 people that will live in
this complex. With this complex at full capacity, the population of Meridian will
increase by nearly three percent overnight in a very small geographical area.
Some of the primary concerns we have, like have been expressed by others, is
traffic. The ACHD says a widening of Overland Road is not planned until at least
2004, so nearly five years away. During peak traffic hours, Overland's an
extremely busy road. If there's any kind of backup — especially if there's any kind
of backup on 1-84, it's used as an alternate thoroughfare. Adding 500 cars to the
mix during peak traffic hours coming and going to single location will create major
problems. New residences develop new traffic patterns. If you're trying to get
into this proposed complex turning left to cross Overland Road, you'll have traffic
backing up all the way to Meridian Road as people wait to be able to turn.
Without additional traffic lanes or turn lanes due for almost five years, Overland
Road will become a virtual parking lot. We're concerned about the schools as
mentioned before. All the Meridian schools are presently at or over capacity.
Any children in this complex will (inaudible) need to be bused nearly across
town. We're concerned about what this'll do to the quality of the schools and the
education our children will be receiving in an already crowded school system.
We're concerned about fire and safety, especially given the fact that the ability to
get in and out of this complex seems to be pretty restricted with a single primary
entrance. There are no sidewalks along the street. If people want to walk along
the sidewalk to get to Boondocks or anything, they have to cross an extremely
busy street, especially when the street's widened. There are no sidewalks, there
are no crosswalks, there are no street lights. It's an extremely dangerous way for
1,000 people to cross if they wish to take a walk or to get across the street.
Summary: adding 1,000 residents to our neighborhood will have a major impact
to the area. I want to get it clear, we're not anti -growth. We're for growth if it's
done in an intelligent planned way that won't adversely affect the quality of our
life, and we recommend — strongly urge to Council not to approve this.
Rountree: Any questions for Scott?
Bentley: I have none.
I.]ToMIITTNTiT•ma-
Rountree:
i -
Rountree: Over here, ma'am.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 25
Babbitt: My name is Freda Babbitt. My address is 2570 South Locust Grove
Road. I've lived on South Locust Grove Road for 35 years. In that 35 years, until
last year, that road was never even paved except for the first time it was paved
which was 20 years before. Now you're telling us that we're going to add 300
more people, 300 more units or over 1,000 people down at the end of South
Locust Grove. It's a dead-end. There is in the five-year plan a plan to go over
the freeway. That five-year plan doesn't mean it will be done in five years. It can
be ten years until that overpass is put in. All this time, this traffic is going onto
Overland Road. You, at this point, during the morning rush hour, traffic is tied up
for almost a mile on Overland Road. You can't get in and out without sitting in
line for sometimes 15 minutes. This is a rural area; it's always been a rural area.
We do not need this type of density. Right now you've got (inaudible) on
Overland, you've got the Coke plant, you've got a church. Those are good uses
to put between Overland and the freeway because there isn't a type of density of
cars, of families. You're still getting your tax dollars from all those businesses
that are over there. So it's still going to benefit the City of Meridian. It's zoned R-
T right now, and I take it that means commercial. Can you tell me what the R -T
rating is?
Rountree: It's rural transition and it's in the county.
Babbitt: So it isn't even in the city limits at this point and that's what we're talking
about.
All of the subdivision, Las Alamedos, when it was put in, it was put in as R-4, all
of the other subdivisions are R-4 to keep the density down, and that was fought
for and won here at Council Meeting because they wanted to go to higher density
than some of these other areas. We don't want the higher density. We do not
want R-15. It's too many people in too small of an area. Thank you.
Rountree: Any questions?
Rasmussen: My name is Sonya Rasmussen. I live at 1395 East Peacock. I'd
like to start out by saying that I participated in the comprehensive planning
workshop last week and thought that there were a lot of committed community
members who felt like I did, and that is that Meridian is growing too fast. We
were concerned about the roads, schools and lack of parks. I feel that we are
giving thoughtful input into the new comprehensive plan in hope that you, the City
Council, will follow what the public has outlined and what will be the new
comprehensive plan and will not be persuaded by developers to change these
plans. I was also on the Meridian School District Boundaries Committee. We
worked hard and anguished over the growing number of developments that were
in the planning stages. We realize that the new schools that would be opening
next fall would be opening too close to capacity. We could not offer much relief
to many of the existing over -crowded schools. The City of Meridian cannot
handle the current growth rate. The schools and the roads are in jeopardy.
moved hear a year and a half ago from a city that was close in size to Meridian.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 26
It grew so fast that the home prices soared. Before long, there were no homes
affordable to young families starting out and trying to make ends meet. So the
City built apartments. They felt this was a solution to the problem. You can build
the most beautiful apartments with the best materials, but you cannot control who
lives in them. Even though these were very nice apartments, crime and drugs in
the area went up. The police often stated that the result of the crimes were from
tenants of the local apartments. We live three miles away from numerous
apartments, and my family and surrounding neighbors were burglarized several
times in the last two years before we moved here. The City should have built
affordable starter homes so families could pride in ownership. I urge that you
provide people with the opportunity to afford their own homes so they will be able
to make a commitment to our community and schools. I know what I'm asking is
not cost-effective and that everything comes down to money. But isn't Meridian
worth it? I know the proposed apartment complex will not increase the quality of
life here in Meridian. It will decrease it. I feel very strongly that we need to make
Meridian a city that we can be proud of 20 years from now; I can look back and
be proud of it. At the August 25th Planning and Zoning meeting, Peter Cooke,
the developer of the proposed apartment complex said he would provide names
and numbers of his other apartment properties to those who had signed a
petition prior to the meeting. We were supposed to be able to contact other
compexes he built so we would be reassured that he was maintaining his
properties. Because he did not follow through on this agreement, I question if he
will follow through on his commitment to maintain this apartment complex on
Overland and Locust. He also stated that night that he could feel our pain. I ask
you, the elected City Council members, to vote no on this apartment complex
and let Peter Cooke feel the pain. Thank you.
Rountree: Folks. I'm going to ask you one last time, and then I'm going to close
the hearing. We've got to keep control of this. I know you all are very emotional
about this. We need to hear what you have to say, and your applause don' t
help, and it takes away from time, please, please, I ask you. Over here.
McCoy: My name is Barbara McCoy. I live at 1692 Sportsman in Meridian.
When my husband and I moved to Sportsman Pointe a year ago, we were very
attracted to the area. The subdivision and surrounding area seemed very well
planned out with nice subdivisions, well kept yards and low -traffic commercial
buildings along the Overland Road next to the freeway. If the (inaudible) live in.
When we were notified of the proposed 300 -unit apartment complex to be built
on the corner of Locust Grove and Overland, we were very concerned about the
effect (inaudible) have on our neighborhood. I testified at Planning and Zoning
that it just didn't seem to fit in with the surrounding area because there were no
other apartment complexes in that area. Other people testified of their concerns
of crime, traffic and burden on the schools. Well, as you know, Planning and
Zoning has approved the change, and as you've heard, it's been mostly concern
about the apartment complex, but not the surrounding area. According to
Tammy DeWeerd, her reasoning was because of the high-quality of materials,
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 27
the construction materials, and the developer is going to work with him. But what
about the area of the people that are already there? There's been no concern
about the compatibility of the area or what the effects that it would have on our
property values. Let's see. We've already talked about transportation that
there's been no concern about the future plans for that. Because of our
frustrations over the lack of responsiveness of Planning and Zoning, which I
would have to say is zoning and not necessarily planning, a neighbor and I
attended the recent comprehensive plan workshop. One of the issues that was
brought up by other people at the workshop was that Meridian should have a
variety of land uses, but that the land uses should be planned so they are
compatible with the surrounding areas. They shouldn't have to (inaudible) rather
than devalue the existing properties. Others in Meridian agree with our
contention. Another issue is (inaudible) brought up at the meeting was that
Planning should ensure adequate public services including transportation. This
was certainly not considered fully during the Planning and Zoning votes. At the
workshop, a current land -use map for the Meridian impact area was shown, and I
have a copy here of the relevent area, and currently the land -use map, which is
not the zoning map, but it's the land -use map that should be — that's being used
in the comprehensive planning process, it shows that every impact area south of
the area is either low-density housing which (inaudible) are last, and as we
heard previously, this apartment complex is 14.5 units per acre rather than less
than five. There's also commercial along the freeway, one small industrial
section along the freeway or agricultural transition. And the current spot, as
we've heard, is high-density housing; 14.5 per acre. I asked, think her name is
Shari from Planning and Zoning, where the nearest high-density land use was
from our area. She looked at the map and said Rose Park, which I believe is on
Franklin Road; the other side of the freeway, clear across the freeway. No one in
their right mind, I believe, really cares for the value and integrity of our
community would want a high-density apartment complex in an area such as
Locust Grove (inaudible) such an area of low impact and very well planned out
community that's very attractive for people and high values. Apartment
complexes have (inaudible) but let's not make rash decisions just for the
developer's sake. If Planning and Zoning doesn't want to consider appropriate
land use, they make (inaudible) and put something in just for the developer's
sake rather than look at the surrounding area. Apartment complexes do have
their place, but let's use the (inaudible) map and do some planning for the future.
Let's find places where apartment complexes and has the value rather than
ruining the surrounding area. Thank you.
Rountree: Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: The gentleman in the back.
Scott: Mr. President, members of the Council, my name is Dan Scott. I live at
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 28
1629 South Labrador Plaza. I moved into my residence in March of this year.
My residence backs up to Locust Grove, so I'm all familiar with the traffic. What
want to address is the crime problem which we're going to be looking at. I'm a
retired police officer. I was a police officer for 22 years. I was raised in a town in
central California that was about he size of Meridian, 20,000 that it just exploded,
and the services didn't keep up. I can tell you from my personal experience that
your police department is going to running their tailends off as this area grows if
you don't keep up. I have no problem with the widening of Overland. I think they
could do that tomorrow and it would satisfy me. But all the pretty pictures in the
world in Park City, Utah don't mean diddley squat to me down here in Meridian,
Idaho. I moved here because of the low density, because it is an area that's
clean, and because I can drive down any street in Meridian and Boise and not
see one sign of graffiti, and you don't know what that does for me coming from
where I came from. But, I can attest to what's going to happen. I understand
that part of this project is going to be dedicated to low-income, and my
experience and our experience in the city where I worked as a police officer was
it starts out that way, then, boom. Because nobody else wants to move into them
per se, the whole thing goes Section 8, and the next thing you know, you've got —
you know, we're in and out of there all the time. Point of fact in this, I was
medically retired due to two back injuries I sustained within 60 days in the same
apartment complex in disturbances, in fights. And these are common. And
people would call for service, and you're going to experience it here, believe me,
if you let this explode, you're going to feel it. We couldn't handle regular calls.
All we handled were emergency calls. Friday night, Saturday night, Sunday night
and Monday night, it didn't matter what night of the week, we ran 24 hours a day
back to back, and if you had a traffic accident, you didn't get a police officer
unless there was an injury involved, and I don' t think that's what you want in
Meridian. I know it's not what I want in Meridian. That's — you know, I moved
here because my ex-wife moved here, and I came because my kids were here.
And I found what I think is a jewel in Meridian. I'd like to see it stay that way.
think the zoning along the freeway should remain commercial. I think there's
already commercial establishments there. I think, you know, with the overpass
there, even with the widening of Locust Grove and Overland is going to be one
hellascious traffic problem with just two entrances in and out of this place, and all
the pretty talk and all the pretty pictures in the world aren't going to change that.
And when you start having fatalities out there, then you're going to realize it.
Thank you for your time.
Rountree: Thank you. Ma'am.
Develle: My name is Robyn Develle. I'm at 1878 East Doberman Drive in the
Raven Hills Subdivision. I would just like to address, again, the issue of the
subsidized housing and ask you to please take a look at what happened with the
Blue Willows Apartment Complex on State Street. You know, miss, and I forgot
your name, but you chuckled when this gentleman mentioned that the whole
thing would go to subsidized housing, and that would be low-income. I saw you.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 29
And I can attest to the fact that my friends were scared to death when their
apartment complex started being a lot of low-income families and subsidized
housing. We saw it in kids running around unsupervised all the time. The
apartment complex became over -run with unsupervised children. Number one,
it's just an added crime problem, and then, two, they were coming over to my
house when they were scared to death as meth labs began to be noticed in those
apartments and being disassembled. So, I would just encourage you guys,
please, take a lesson from that. I hope, you know, I only had heard rumors of the
subsidized -income housing, but I would hope that it's not true or that you'll
reconsider that. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Sir. Excuse me for pointing, but I've got to get to you
some way.
Kohli: My name is Akash Kohli. I live at 2095 South Elkhound in Sportsman
Pointe. I'm concerned about the safety and the —
Rountree: Excuse me, Akash. Could we have you spell your last name, please.
Kohli: K -o -h -I -i.
Rountree: Thank you.
Kohli: Increased traffic will make the Overland Road there very dangersous. I'm
concerned about the safety on the road. What I want to emphasize is that at
least on the Overland Road, if you look between the Meridian Road and the Five
Mile, it is a two-lane road with no median dividers. Unfortunately, this increased
traffic will result into higher frequency of accidents. And I'm afraid some of these
will be fatal. I'm told this infrastructure is in place. I suggest we put this project
on hold Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Sir. And while he comes up, I'll remind those waiting to
testify, remember to try to keep it to three minutes and try to keep from repeating
things that have been said.
Nowell: I'll make this extremely brief.
Rountree: Super.
Nowell: Mike Nowell and I'm the president of the Hunts Bluff Homeowners
Association. I've not spoken to one person who, in our subdivision, that's in favor
of this compex. Just want to let you know that. All of the points that have
already come up here tonight are the reasons. I'm not going to bring them all up
again —
Rountree: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 30
Nowell: -- but I do have in my mind the picture of the vast majority of 240
students waiting for buses at that intersection. I think that's wrong. Thank you.
Rountree: Could you let me know the subdivision again?
Nowell: Hunts Bluff.
Rountree: Hunts Bluff. And you represent the —
Nowell: Homeowners Association.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Anybody down on the side of the wall? Anybody
back there? Oh. Right here. I missed you before. Come on up. We don't have
any doors, but come on down anyway.
Campbell: My name is Gary Campbell. I'm at 1682 East Time Zone in Los
Alamedos Subdivision, and I didn't plan to say anything. I just came to observe
tonight, but as I'm observing these proceedings, one thing comes to mind here.
This man is obviously very successful. He'll be successful somewhere else.
Perhaps he can be successful somewhere in our neighborhood or in our area
that is appropriate. But by the numbers that I see here, the people who are here
think that this project is not something that we want to do, and we're the ones
who are going to stay here and live here, and he's going to go back to Utah, and
I doubt ever that he will ever come back here and see if these buildings are
painted or that the houses are taken care of or that the cars, who we are required
in our neighborhoods to keep in garages. This man's neighborhood is going to
have cars all over outside. The next point is, I don't think the City or we, as a
community, are going to be hurt by changing this and turning this over to
something that has a different tax base, like businesses. I know that I've looked
at that property and have made an offer on part of that property to put my
business there, and I live just a few blocks away. That property could be turned
into something that businesses who are owned by local people could be there,
and it would also create a tax base that would help the community without having
this problem being caused. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Over here? It's this side's turn.
Diffendaffer: Good evening. My name's Brian Diffendaffer. I'm building a house
at 2676 Velvet Falls in Salmon Rapids. Most of the people that have been up
here to talk to you tonight have done an elequent job expressing our concerns. I
would like to challenge the developer about the scale of the buildings on his
drawings; I'd also like to point out to the Council when they're looking at these
pretty pictures, that a lot of them are renderings and just someone's fantasy.
Couple of the things I've picked up here as we've gone along. One of the things
that the developer has done is created a main entrance there. I can't tell from
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 31
the map, but I can tell you it's not very far, less than 1,000 feet, I'm sure, from the
intersection. The major artery into and out of the development, next to what will
be an intersection. I don't know how the County's going to handle it, but I
seriously doubt that you'll be able to turn left there. Most of the cars would have
to turn right and travel back up Overland into Meridian to get onto the freeway.
We need to realize, too, that the Eagle Interchange is a very heavily used
interchage: 2400 cars a day there aren't going to help anything. Mr. Cooke has
made a promise that he wouldn't sell the development. But it's verbal to us only.
It really has no meaning. I'm sure he's an astute businessman, and if it
benefitted him to sell the development should it go into decline or for whatever
reason, he wouldn't hesitate to do so. I think that's all I've really got to say.
Thanks for your time.
Rountree: Over here. See a hand? Yes, sir.
Dodett: Hello. I'm Scott Dodett. I live at 1391 East Griffen in Sportsman Pointe.
I have a lot of comments, but most of them have been fed, but one year ago and
19 days, I remember exactly what I was doing. I was rushing home because my
wife got in a bad accident right there at that intersection. I saw my truck before I
saw my wife, and I was extremely worried. She was stopped for traffic on
Overland Road going into the playground area, the RV park, for a car in front of
her turning left. Somebody came up from behind her and rear-ended her
throwing her car, our truck, into the truck in front of her. Like I said, I saw the
truck before I saw her. And verbally over the phone, I knew she was okay, but
not after I saw that truck. Another 15 minutes for the traffic in that, I finally saw
her and everything calmed down. But I got a lot more gray hairs just seeing that
truck. And 2400 more vehicles in that intersection a day is going to be
horrendous. It's going to be bad. Ada County Highway District went ahead and
made Overland Road a designated truck route just about a month ago. A couple
weeks ago, they also passed their yearly budget. It has zero money for
expanding Overland Road. I wish I had the quote on who said this, but
somebody in the Council or in the Highway District said it is politically incorrect to
have any funding for expanding the roads. They're doing everything they can
with the development and with the population we have. They're also saying,
well, we'd like to do this. I've seen the — I've heard the plans for the overpass
and the road expansion. They say it's going to happen in 2004. Well, I've also
heard it was going to be done a few years back and a few years before that, and
when it is going to happen, they say 2004, 1 don't believe it. Five years with the
added traffic, the added safety hazards with the kids and everything else going
on in that area is not suitable for the neighborhoods. The — you know, I'm a
working man. I'm struggling to make my life better. I bought into an upper -end
neighborhood that is great. It's wonderful. All the subdivisions in that area are
similar. They're upper -end, working class people who are making a better life,
and this is not going to help us. You know, we rely on our budget, we stick to the
budget, and then if somebody comes in and just immediately makes it worse, it's
not going to be happy to continue working for that, and I just would really like to
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 32
see you annex the property for another reason, not this apartment complex.
Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Sir.
Lavado: My name is Dave Lavado. I'm at 697 Trinidad in Meridian Greens, and,
again, like the others, I won't belabor all of the quality of life and impact on the
traffic and things that everybody else have, but I do think we have a very unique
situation here, and that's one where I've stopped to think about where the real
closest rental property is to this area. And it's quite a few miles. So I made a few
calls to a couple real estate folks that I know, and I said, "What would be the
impact of rental property on the real bottom line to the homeowners," which is the
folks in this room and who are on the petition, and their estimates were, without
any other real rental property being there of a complex of this nature, it could be
three to five percent. So my question to Mr. Cooke would be, are you willing to
give all of the 800 petitioners on that list compensation at three to five percent for
your property for the impact to us? And my general guess is no, you're not. So
the next question would be to the Council. Are you going to make us bear the
burden of that?
Rountree: Thank you. Anyone else? Oh. You are going to testify. Come on up.
She's been bugging me all night.
Jackson: My name is Toni, and I live at 1598 East Mastiff in Sportsman Pointe. I
wasn't going to talk, in fact, I'm scared to death, but I fell compelled to say that
have the same concerns that the other homeowners do, being traffic, schools,
these kinds of things. But I guess bottom line for me is that we've made an
investment in Meridian. We've purchased our homes, we've put our money into
our homes. We scouted out our neighborhoods, we tried to locate areas that
were what we felt were good for our families, that had good environments, that
had, you know, low traffic, good schools, these kinds of things. We did all of the
homework to do this, and I worry that the needs of the many here should
outweigh the needs of one person who wants to come in and do a business,
inundate our communtiy with 300 units and then go back to Utah. You know, he
doesn't feel the effects that we feel. We're left here to deal with 2400 cars a day
which, if you've ever driven on Overland Road, right now, it's overflowing. It's
difficult to turn across traffic. It's two lanes. It's not — it worries me that the needs
of the one shouldn't outweigh the needs of the many who have already invested
in our city. And the impacts to us are far worse than the impact to Mr. Cooke if
he was to move his project elsewhere. If our values go down, we lose money. If
we can't get out on Overland Road to get to work, we have to try to find
alternative routes or leave early. If we get in a wreck because we're trying to
take chances to get out there because it's so crowded, we wreck our car, you
know. If our schools are overcrowded, and our children have to be bused
somewhere else or they have to rezone to put our children in different schools,
that impacts us. All of these concerns that we bring in here impact all us
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 33
individually, as families, and as homeowners. And it concerns me that, you
know, I would hope that you're there to represent us as the citizens of Meridian,
and that to take into consideration how these things impact all of us, because
they impact every one of us here and every one of us in the City.
*** End of Tape 1, Side 2 ***
Rountree: We have some firemen here (inaudible). Okay. There you go.
Jackson: It's (inaudible) I guess what I would ask, I'm just one person. We're
just one family. We're just one home. But the impacts of a big multi -complex,
and I've lived in apartments when I was young. I understand the traffic — when
you live in an apartment, you don't have a vested interest. You don't own it. You
don't — you know, you move in, you move out, these kinds of things because
that's what apartments are there for. They're there to live and hopefully you
move on to your first home and these kinds of things. And I would hope that as
our Councilmen that you would represent our needs and the needs of the many
here, and hopefully take into consideration the impacts that your decision has on
all of us as individuals, because it's a huge impact on us. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. He didn't get that. Could you repeat it? Do we have folks
in the wings back there that want to testify? If you do, would you try to get
towards the center of the entrance so that we can get you moving up here?
Ma'am, come on up.
This lady's going to be before you, but thank you.
Fogg-Monchia: My name is Debra Fogg-Monchia. I live at 1429 East Griffen
Street, Sportsman Pointe. I agree with everybody else and what they've said so
far regarding schools, roads. (inaudible) minor — require (inaudible) affect the
water and the sewer system in that area? From what I understand it's also a little
bit old, the system as it is now (inaudible) Thanks.
Rountree: Thank you. Okay, sir. Yeah. You.
Wells: Thank you, gentlemen. My name is Darren Wells. I live at 1725 South
Labrador in Sportsman Pointe directly across the street from the proposed
development. I have a few concerns I'd like (inaudible) you ought to try the
crowded section in the back. I hate to come up here and make jokes and make
light of the situation because I felt it was important enough to come, but I think it
really emphasizes the point everybody's trying to make. Meridian is crowded, it's
not prepared to deal with it, you call this a public hearing, but yet most of those
people who are concerned can't even get close enough to the discussin to hear
it. So I think that just kind of re-emphasizes the problems that we have. That's
kind of one way to look at it. There are a couple other ways to look at it. You
can look at it on a modern economic times; everybody's been reasonably
successful. We've (inaudible) as a community appointed you as our board of
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 34
directors to guide over and deal with the investment that we've chosen to make
when we've purchased a home here in Meridian, you know, and I understand as
a board of directors, you need to (inaudible) city and do what you feel is best, but
your primary job is to protect that economic investment that the community has
made together as a whole in Meridian and to be concerned about other options
for places that aren't making it — haven't already committed to make that
economic investment in Meridian, I think is an error. I appreciate your time.
Rountree: Thank you. Darren, we've got one more seat up here. When it
comes to decision time —
Wells: That actually is my other point that I forgot. I think as a resident, you see
a grand deal of willingness of people to invest time and effort into their
community. I serve on the Board of Directors for Sportsman Pointe; I'm the vice
president, and I'm happy to do it. I think the community I live in is very important.
I think it's important that I watch over and try and provide a good place, a safe
place for my children to live. I also spend a great deal of time, and I come here a
couple times a year to sign my kids up, and I'm happy to volunteer my (inaudible)
soccer program, and I just don't think you're going to get that kind of involvement
from residents in an apartment complex. I understand they need a place to live,
and I don't like the comments, well, we're required to park our cars in a garage,
or we're worried about this or we're worried about that. You know, these people
are people too. They need a place to live just as well as we do, but I again, the
kind of co -habitation of these two different types of lifestyles is inappropriate in
this area. Thanks.
Rountree: Ma'am.
Wilson: My name's Jan Wilson. I live at 1004 East Shepard. I, obviously, am in
agreement with all of the things that have been brought up so I won't say them
again. I've been standing here for an hour and a half or so with the rest of these
people. I see a sign -in sheet here that my husband just signed, but I hadn't
heard anything about it. How do we account for all the people that are here to
voice their opinions but don't have the time or don't come up to say something to
you people? Is somebody going to circulate this or tell people or how do you
know how many people were here to voice their disapproval? I just ask you to
take a look.
Rountree: In response, it's not necessarily a vote. It's the quality and the type
and the array of comments that we receive that we consider. So it's not a voting
situation.
Wilson: (inaudible)
Rountree: Thank you. Gentleman in the red shirt.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 35
Fogg: My name is Stacie Fogg. I live at 2290 South Tagish in Raven Hills. I am
dressed as an EMT because I work for an ambulance service out of Boise,
Idaho. We've been here for about 20 years. My folks have lived out in this area,
and I can tell you right now that Overland Road is four years behind schedule. It
needs to be at least a two-lane road as it is now, from Meridian all the way down
to at least Five Mile because it is — I was an EMT, there was an accident about a
month ago where a guy didn't want to stay behind a sweeper so he decided to
pass somebody. He caused a three -car accident. What I'm saying is that
Overland and Locust Grove is too busy now. People get impatient, they make a
fatal mistake and someone dies. Before this complex gets built, I can understand
how they want to come in and do this. I was divorced, and I needed a place to
stay, and I understand about low-income housing, and I appreciate it, but before
this ever gets developed, the road of Overland and Locust Grove need to be
developed first because people get impatient when they're sitting at a light for 15
minutes, and they say forget this and go around, and someone gets hurt. I am
concerned about the entrances into this complex. I personally think that they
ought to have at least three entrances off of Locust Grove and another three
entrances off of Overland plus an emergency entrance just because they are a
high-rise scenario, and that requires at least a four fire department alarm. You
will get truck one from Boise Fire, you will also get Whitney Fire and you also get
Meridian Fire. And the accesses for those big fire trucks; truck one is a ladder
truck, and it's a huge truck. To get that in there, to get the access, to get these
people out of these houses if they burn or if they catch fire becauses accidents
do happen. So my concern is my kids live, I live in Raven Hills, I get my kids
over the weekend, but my kids are playing out in the street. There is nothing for
my kids to play in a park or something else. They're required — they go out and
play in the street. All it's going to do is increase the rate of someone being hurt.
That's all I have to say.
Rountree: Stacie, I have a question. I either misunderstood you or you
misspoke. You said that Overland needed to be two lanes, and I think you
probably meant —
Fogg: Four lanes.
Rountree: -- four lanes.
Fogg: I'm sorry. I get nervous just like everybody else.
Rountree: That's why I asked.
Fogg: It really does. And it needs to have turning lanes at the intersections
because what they did to Eagle Road was fantastic. But as you look at the
business of Eagle Road, at 4:00 when they go down over — when they go across
Franklin, they're backed up, and this starts at 4:30 and does not end until 7:00
and everybody on the EMS is on alert. They stay close — look at where they're
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 36
building down there on Flying Y. I mean, jimminy Chrismas. I mean, it's busy. I
mean, it's backed up — they back it up all the way to what? Nampa? And
someone's going to get impatient and someone's going to get hurt because they
were late. This can't happen. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. (inaudible)
Southerland: I waited. I have two things — brand new. Number one, I presume
that you gentlemen — my name is Ted Southerland. Mr. Gigray, I know you very
well. My address 2365 East Three Bars. I presume these gentlemen have
businesses in the City of Meridian. I come up Locust Grove to Overland and turn
right because I have so much turning left I have given up. I don't think me and
my and any member of my family together, all of us, has spent more than $150 in
the last year and a half that we've lived in this area, in the City of Meridian. And
it's primarily traffic. By
the****************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
e*******************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
*************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
********************************************************************************************
************************************************************************
planned, that you're going to have some real poor people living next to the
freeway. You're not going to have good quality low-income people living
backyard to that terrible noise. And there's no way the property on Camas had a
huge berm with a fence on top, and I could not communicate with somebody on
the other side of a net in my backyard. That noise is going to deter good quality
low-income people from living in that unit. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Yes, sir.
Young: My name is Stan Young. I live at 671 East Trinidad in Meridian Greens
Subdivision. I came here just last October from Utah. Prior to that I had lived in
southern California, but coming to Meridian was coming home because I was
born here in a little house right down the street. So, I'm very concerned about
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 37
the quality of life in my old home town, and I want to maintain it. It seems to me,
I know you don't like to hear about California, however, they've put in an
infrastructure first, and then they put in the communities. We're doing it
backwards here. We're trying to put in some communities and then come along
and provide for them. Another thing, I lived in an upscale neighborhood down
there, $500,000 homes, this was about six to seven years ago, I was on the
Board of Directors and president of the Homeowners Association for a couple of
years, and we didn't have any crime, no graffiti, until they built some upscale
apartment units, and then it began. I agree with this last speaker. Quality people
are not going to live next to a freeway. Thanks.
Christensen: My name is Virginia Christensen. I live at 635 East Antigua. I've
lived in Meridian nine years, and I love it. It's a wonderful community. I've never
been before you gentlemen before, but I have been before the Planning and
Zoning Commission on two or three separate occassions. Each time was to ask
them to please not change the plan. When we all moved into this area, we knew
what was going in across the street from us because it was zoned accordingly.
We knew what was going in beside us and around us because it was zoned.
That's the whole idea of zoning. And on those separate occassions when we —
I've stood before you, it is because the developer at Sportsman Pointe and
Meridian Greens wanted to change the zoning to accommodate their plans and
not the City's plans. And I would be standing before the Zoning and Planning
Commission had I known about this project coming up, so I am here tonight. I
have just three quick points. I hope I don't repeat anything since I've been way
back out there by the outside doors and haven't heard a single thing, but forgive
me if I repeat. I'll try and be quick. Number one is just that. Please don't change
the zoning to accommodate the plans of the developers. Number two is when
you downgrade the zoning, you downgrade your tax base. I have lived 18 years
in Boise and nine of them in Meridian, and as all of you know, and I know, and
anybody who has lived in here for any time, most of the businesses in Boise,
most of the people that work in those businesses are living in Meridina or outlying
areas, and so we need all the tax base and as much tax base as we can get to
be able to do all of those things that people have talked about tonight. My
husband happens to work with low-income housing, in a kind of a side way. He's
not a developer, and I know how these developments work. The first question is,
if we don't put this in here, where will it go? And you gentlemen probably know
this better than I do, that developers get options on a piece of land and then go
seek to get the zoning or the approval to put in these developments. If it does
not go here, I can assure you, and you probably know this is true that there are
several other properties in Meridian that have already and options placed on
them to do the same kind of a situation, development. When Meridian Ford
wanted to go in across the street from us, I was not objectionable because I
knew that's the kind of development that would go across the street from me. It
was appropriate. But when we downgrade our zoning to accommodate the
builder's wish, then we downgrade our tax base, we hurt our infrastructure, all
those things we've talked about tonight. My last point is this: I have also seen,
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 38
when I moved out to Meridian, that little sign as you came into Meridian, said
7,600 and some -odd people. I've noticed now that that sign says 36,000 and
some -odd people, and I know why that's the case. Because we hold the cards.
This is where the development is coming to. Meridian is called Meridian because
it's right in the middle of everything, and people want to be here. We have
developers coming to us from as far away as Arizona, Texas, everybody wants to
build in Meridian. Did you know that in one of the national magazines we were
listed as the 13th fastest growing city in the whole country? That's because we
hold the cards. Gentlemen, I submit to you that it is high time that we say to the
developers who want to, and I know at least two or three that have gotten
wealthy from building in our community. Wealthy. To the point of retiring
because of the developments they put in our community. I have no objection to
that. I think everybody should make every dollar that they can make, but I think
that since we hold the cards, it is high time that we, as Meridianites, say to those
developers, "You want to build in Meridian? What are you going to do for us?
How are you going to make Meridian a better place to live?" And that would be
my suggestion, too. Before we put anything into this area, and I have no
allussions that it will be not be homes like mine, but before we put anything into
this community, we need to ask ourselves, "What is our overall plan for Meridian?
What do we want to get out of our land?" And we need to say to those
developers, "You know, that's a good idea. Now what are you going to do for us
if you're going to get wealthy out of this community?" Thank you.
Weston: My name's Larry Weston. I recently moved to Sportsman Pointe. I live
at 1365 East Blue Tick right across the street from this proposed development. I
have several concerns. One of which, upon moving here, just recent move -in,
my kids can't go to the school in the area, my moving into with all the
neighborhood kids because it's already crowded at Mary McPherson. I've got to
put my kids on a bus and send them to Lake Hazel. So they don't get to go with
kids nearby. They're already — here in Meridian we're already behind in building
schools for our kids, and it seems ridiculous to me that we're going to go ahead
and build a 300 — or allow a 300 -unit complex built that close, and in an area
where we've already got to be shipping kids away from our homes to go to
school. I'm really concerned about how this picture is being painted as kind of a
really nice family — it's a family unit or family — multi -family complex. I've lived in
areas like that before when I was first married. I didn't think it was all that neat of
an environment. It was unsettling to me that I had to work nights and leave my
wife at home at nights alone and have kids, young adults, not married that they
just — four or five guys got together, moved into an apartment, and partied all
night, and I would get to leave my wife at home with this going on. Many nights, I
can remember when I was at home sleeping listening to them out in the parking
lots cursing, the fighting going on that happens in situations such as that. I can
remember situations where my younger sisters came over and would be
harrassed by guys when she's trying to come up and visit me. This doesn't seem
like a real good environment for a family. We're considering putting this right
next to family dwellings. I think it's neat that maybe we can have places for multi-
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 39
family to dwell, but I also think we need to look at what else is going to come with
a development like that. And I don't think it's making Meridian any the better. So
that's what I have to say. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Anyone else? Remind you to try to keep it to three
minutes and something we haven't heard. Come on up.
Hankley: All right. Nathan Hankley, 1582 East Opossum Court. I just flat don't
want the apartments there. I'm concerned about my eight-year-old daughter's
welfare. I'm concerned about my property values. I'm from California. The one
man said that California built the freeways, built everything before they brought
the apartments in. Everybody knows what a mess California is. Took me twenty
years out of there, twenty years to get out of an apartment. I don't want them
anywhere near me. Thank you.
Wendt: My name is Kimberly Wendt, live at 1991 East Three Bars Drive in Los
Alamedos. I'm a dispatcher for an agency just outside of Ada County, and I've
seen the kind of people that move into low-income housing. They're not all that
bad, but when you have people that are losing their children because they can't
supervise their children because there's ten- and six-year-old boys are running
around at 11:00 at night stealing things from people, breaking into houses, that
kind of thing, now that is an extreme, we're looking at response time for our
emergency vehicles. What kind of response is it going to be for an ambulance
and the fire department to get to that apartment compex at 4:00 in the afternoon
because there's an accident or there's a guy who's having a heart attack and
they can't get in because there's only two entrances? One that'll be blocked off
of Overland? What kind of response are we going to have from our law
enforcement agency when their budgets are being cut? They're not that big of a
department as it is. What kind of response are we going to get from them during
a domestic on a Friday night when we have to go between Ada County and
Meridian? Is Meridian going to be able to get out there? Is Ada County going to
be able to get out there? I don't know that the response times from emergency
vehicles or emergency services have been thought about. And just being my
exposure in the job that I have, I see that on an everday basis. Are we going to
be able to get them out there as quickly as we need to be because of the access
that's going to be blocked because of the increased traffic and the kind of people
that are going to be in there? I don't oppose low-income housing, but what I do
oppose is the kind that eventually fall in because not everybody wants to move
into a lower-income development. I don't know that you guys would be as
Councilmen were going to be living near that area or that you're going to be
travelling on those roads, but everybody else who does are going to be the ones
that are going to be impacted. I just wanted to bring that up. Emergency
vehicles are going to be a big thing. You've got Boondocks. You've got the
water park. When somebody falls off a park or off a slide, are we going to be
able to get those emergency vehicles out there before something major happens
to them, and it goes from something small to something big because we couldn't
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 40
get them out there? That's all I have to say. Thanks.
Riley: Hi. I'm Jerry Riley. I live at 1269 East Mastiff Street in Sportsman Pointe.
I've got a couple concerns. I did 27-1/2 years in the military, I lived all over the
world. Lived in major cities. I lived in Fort Mammoth, New Jersery, Cleveland,
San Antonio, San Francisco, and I've been in places where if I forgot something
in the house, I'd lock the car before I could go in. I chose Meridian because, and
I'm finally able to if I don't remember if I locked the house when I leave, I can
actually go someplace and not have to run back and check to make sure I locked
the door. Another thing, five years ago, I rode my bike across the interstate on
Meridian Road. One time. And the traffic was so bad the trucks were brushing
my windbreaker. So recommend solution, if you are going to bring this in, don't
bring it in until you get a pedestrian crossway over that bridge. Another solution
is if you're going to put it in, put some baseball fields, maybe a YMCA over there
or something like that. And then the last thing I wanted to say is 100 percent of
us here, we live here, this is our home, this is our neighborhood. 100 percent of
us oppose it, so all I can say is I don't care where you guys live, I don't want to
know where you live, but I know if you lived across Overland Road, you'd be
voting right along — you'd be agreeing with us right now. Thanks.
Rountree: Anyone else? Ma'am.
Berta: Hi. I'm Connie Berta, and I live at 2063 South Elkhound Avenue in
Sportsman Pointe Subdivision. I know that this has probably been mentioned,
but not quite in this way is it's been mentioned that the Boondocks and the
waterpark are down on Overland. Those 240 children will be trying to get there.
How do you think they're going to do that? They're going to go by bike and
they're going to peddle it down there. My kids are 16 and 19, and they've
peddled their bikes down there. They've walked down there, and it's downright
scary. They're taking their lives in their hands to go down Overland Road. That
road needs to be a four -lane road before you do anything. Thank you.
Rountree: Anybody else? Okay. If the applicant would like to address some of
the questions that have been raised —
Cooke: If you think you're scared. I guess the hardest one was yours when you
said I felt your pain. I do.
Rountree: Excuse me, Pete. Just get us on record.
Cooke: Peter Cooke — I think everybody here knows my name.
Rountree: We don't on tape, though. We don't see faces on the tape.
Cooke: Mr. President, thank you. The integrity of the individual, this is only
where I'm trying not to be emotional. I really thought that was a comment that I
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 41
do feel a concern here, and whether how this vote goes, I just want to plead for
several things. First of all, I don't know where low-income housing has come into
this factor, because we couldn't even talk about this at Planning and Zoning. The
attorney didn't even allow us to bring that up even as a discussion. It was
referred to as 236s and Section 8s where high crime does come, but I don't even
know where that issue's coming. I know it's been presented to everybody that
this is going to be a low-income housing development. With that comes a fear.
think that has stirred a lot of people up, and I think that's an issue that I think is
not fair for us because nobody said this was going to be a low-income housing
project. There were too, I think, tonight is not defending where I come from Utah
or where — we're all Americans. America is a country where business (inaudible)
support business. Whether or not this development is going to be enhanced by
people living next to the freeway or what have you, this should not be a
discussion of a cast system of — you know, apartment dwellers and what have
you. I will own this development, and I will keep it, and my profit is determined
on how it looks, and I will become part of this residency here meaning I will be
here to make sure that development moves forward. Here is a (inaudible) to
defend the process. You've had professional planners who have addressed
every one of these emotional issues, who have addressed the issues — I'm
concerned too. We are — the Planning and Zoning meeting it was told to us that
because of the activity, that the overall highway expansion was expedited, and
that would fit in, and the Planning and Zoning said that that was a critical vote for
them that this would meet our timeline, and I think that's in the minutes, and one
of the Planning and Zoning people actually brought that up that the infrastructure
would catch up to it. There are many studies, and to say (inaudible) lower the
property value, and one gentleman got up and said, you know, "Why did you
bring up development that you have in Park City," is because we are doing what
we're preaching here. We're building apartments next to $450,000 homes. It's
not a contradiction, and I can refer you to a lot of Urban Land Institute studies
that show that there's no factual — there's no fact that housing will be devalued.
Now, there is facts that saying commercial will devalue. Looking in back of a
semi -truck or other things that can be on a commercial site will. We have
developed this development to have a lot of open space, and I think the school
district has looked at it, the professionals have looked at this, and I think we have
followed the process. There was a lot of others that were before us that didn't
get this far as this meeting tonight. And that process is what I think is here is the
integrity of what you've put together, and I have to say that that Planning and
Zoning Commission and its staff, and I've been doing this for a lot of years, is
probably the most articulate and well versed I've ever been around, and I mean
that with all sincerity. So, thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Just a minute, please. Did you have anybody else from
your staff that — okay. Thank you. The hearing is still open. We will still accept
testimony. I would like to let you know that if you haven't testified, you'll be
recognized to testify. We aren't in a rebuttal situation. Three minutes and try to
keep it to items we have not heard, please. Sir.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 42
Nicholson: My name's Don Nicholson. I live at 456 East Amalie Court here in
Meridian. I have a question for Mr. Cooke. You have three-bedroom apartments
and two-bedroom apartments. What is the monthly rent going to be for those
apartments?
Cooke: In the last time, the attorney didn't allow us to have that discussion
(inaudible)
Rountree: (inaudible) The question needs to come through Council. So you're
asking that — for that information. What are the rental rates?
Nicholson: The rental rates, and the reason I'm asking that question is the
information that I've been given is low-income housing. So that's the reason I'm
asking the question.
Rountree: Let's you address your comments to the Council, we'll get your
question answered.
Nicholson: Okay. My question is to you the rental rates for those units.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
Nicholson: The other reason I'm here is that just to acknowledge or get
recognition that I'm in opposition of this development. Thank you.
Rountree: Ma'am.
Weber: Yes. My name is Dena Weber, and I live at 1740 East Time Zone in Los
Alamedos Subdivision, and I can attest to the fact that I lived in an apartment
complex over in Columbia Villages over in East Boise. The rent was $850 a
month. That was a lot of money. And in that apartment complex was a lot of
people that I don't know how they got that kind of money, but there was a lot of
people in there that scared my kids to death. And I haven' t heard any parent
here on behalf of their children, but I have a 16 -year-old son and a 14 -year-old
daughter who don't know about City Councilmen, who don't know about
developers, but they have mentioned to me on a number of occassions in the last
week when they have been seeing the signs up, how can they be protected from
people in apartment complexes because they lived there? And it was $850 a
month. And that's not low-income. And if it's going to be anything lower than
that, and it doesn' t matter because, most generally, apartments are for people
who are going to be there for a short term or for interim of some sort before they
get into their own homes. It took my husband and I almost three years to get the
home that we have right now, and we are excited about being in that home, and
we want to stay there, and we want to see the quality of our lives maintain where
they are and not have my children in fear. And I would just ask that maybe you
would consider what the children are thinking about right now. Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 43
Rountree: Anyone else? New? Something we haven't heard?
Waite: Yes.
Rountree: Okay.
Waite: My name is Bruce Waite. I live at 1753 South Labrador Place in
Sportsmans Pointe directly across from where this proposed development is to
occur. I've been sitting here listening to this, and we've talked about how this
affects our quality of life as homeowners in the area, and I would submit to you
the quality of life for those folks who live in that complex, it's 300 units, we're
talking 1,000 people living on 15 acres. That's 60 people on one acre of ground.
An acre is 204 feet by 204 feet. There's no sidewalks for the kids in that
community or that apartment complex to ride their bikes. They have to ride them
right on the roads that people are coming out and going in the complex on. It's
totally inappropriate in its location in relation to the freeway into all the
businesses adjoining to it. It's just completely out of place for that location, and
the quality of life for the folks that live in there is not going to be any good for
them, and it's a concern for the safety of the kids that live there. You quoted — or
somebody quoted roughly 170 some kids of junior -high age and less, and how
many toddlers and younger kids and that are going to be riding their bikes,
playing in that area? There's no other area to go to from their to recreate in
other than our subdivisions. There's no sidewalks for them to go up and down
Overland or Locust Grove on, so the quality of life for the tenants in that area is
not anything that I would propose. Park City's one thing. There's upper-income,
folks. You're going to the ski hills. This is not Park City where they're building
that. Thank you.
Rountree: Anyone else? You've testified, sir.
McCormick: Hi. I'm Ed McCormick, 1341 East Beagle. A lot of the people here
are expressing a lot of frustrations towards the Council as if somehow you're the
one proposing this development, and you're not. I know that. The people that
live here, their frustration, a lot of fear, a lot of concern, but if the proposal was
here for a prison or a nuclear plant, it would be just as out of place in that area as
having almost 1,000 people. It doesn't fit into the neighborhood. It doesn't fit into
the community. Now I don't know — this is the first place I've ever lived where a
car dealership was preferable to other people living there. But if the people live
here believe that this is what they want to have, then I just ask that you would
hear them very clearly, and set aside their frustration that you — that their
frustration is fear. And I really do believe you'll make money somplace else, and
I hope you do really well, but just not here.
Rountree: You turned a great phrase there. Again, three minutes, new
testimony, ma'am.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 44
Johnston: Hi. I'm Denise Johnston. I live in Sportsman Pointe, and I just have a
question. If we want to build a fence too close to the road, we've got to get the
whole neighborhood to sign it. How can you change the zoning where people
have built their homes knowing that's the zoning that's going to be there without
getting the majority of people around it to approve it? We can't even move a
fence, but you can consider changing zoning which will affect schools, property
values, and other things you've already heard. And that's just a question that I'd
like to pose to you. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Ma'am.
Brimhall: My name is Brook Brimhall. I live at 840 East Martinique in Meridian
Greens. I'd like to submit for record another ten signatures from our petition. I
just want to bring up as the lady said as she was presenting her information
about the apartment complex, the letter from Jim Carberry from the school district
saying that we will have all these other kids, and he will approve it with the help
of the City Council, and how are they going to fix the problem with the kids? So
that is the question that I bring up to you: How can the City Council do that, and
what are your plans to do that? Thank you.
Rountree: Sir.
Corder: Yes, sir. Kent Corder, 2521 South River Downs Place in Meridian, Los
Alamedos Subdivision. Taking all the emotion out of this and making it strictly a
business decision, sir, we don't need to worry about who's going to live there and
what they're going to pay, and taking away all of the descriminatory comments
and just getting down to business, the infrastructure of Meridian is just not
prepared to it, I believe. The zoning is there, I believe we should stay at the
prescribed zoning and zero community support. So as a licensed real estate
agent, I'd like to offer my card to this gentleman, and I'll make you some money,
sir.
Rountree: We're not here to broker deals. Anybody else? I'll remind you we've
been at this almost an hour and a half. Anybody have new testimony to offer? If
you've testified before, you've had your opportunity.
Traska: Hello. I'm John Traska, 1928 East Blue Tick, Raven Hills Sub. Don't
have a whole lot new to add. Everybody kind of feels the same way I do. I just
like to ask you gentlemen of the Council. You have 800 names submitted, some
more submitted, I think if all the people have been contacted, you'd probably
have two or 300 more names. Those people live here, they pay their taxes here
and they've built their lives here. And we want to stay here. Consider those
people. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you. Anyone else? I have just a question for Peter. Could you
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 45
speak to the possible range, though you may not be specific. If you'd use the
mike.
Cohen: My name's Mark Cohen. I'm with (inaudible) Development Company.
Our original performance are the two -bedrooms would start in the mid to high
$500 range, and the three -bedrooms would end in the mid $700 range. That's
giving you ranges to where we'd start, and that's probably 18 months from now,
24 months from now.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Council, is there any discussion? Need a motion
to consider closing the hearing.
Bentley: So moved. I withdraw the motion. Question for the developer. I was
reading the findings of fact in the information from Ada County Highway District,
and they were talking about on Locust Grove and the overpass and talking about
the interstate that there would need to be some contact with Idaho Department of
Transportation. I haven't seen any submitting material. What I'm concerned
about is if and when they do build this overpass, it's obvious that the emergency
access is going to go away, and I would assume that they probably have some
guidelines on any access roads coming in a certain distance from an overpass.
Has any of that been researched, and would that side access on Locust Grove
go away when that overpass is built?
Rountree: Give us your name, please.
Cohen: Mark Cohen. In fact, if you see —
Rountree: Take the mike with you, sir.
Cohen: I assume you're talking about the emergency exit.
Bentley: Yeah. The second one, when they build the overpass —
Cohen: Down here?
Bentley: Yeah. — is that close enough to the overpass that that would be
eliminated too?
Cohen: No. We've followed their instructions on that. If that was the case, then
the entire gas company and everybody that way up, the recreation, we're far
enough down. They're more concerned about our distance off the interchange
than they were from that up to the overpass. This would not, obviously, work,
and that's why we took that out of our original drawings.
Bentley: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 46
Rountree: Any other discussion on Council's part?
Bentley: No.
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Do we have a motion?
Bentley: Mr. President, I move we close the public hearing.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in
favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: Discussion, deliberation?
Bentley: First of all, I'd like to thank everybody for coming here tonight. We can't
even see you all out there, and we do appreciate the way you conducted and in
an orderly fashion. We've had some here that have gotten out of hand, but we
appreciate what you've done. On the project, I have some real concerns for the
ingress and egress. It's a lot of vehicles, a lot of traffic —
*** End of Tape 2, Side 1 ***
I understand the plans of ACHD and understand their timelines. As of right now,
I have a real problem with supporting this project. The emergency access, as
stated, will go away. No sense in really getting in with it because of the contact
at the bridge. I've got some real problems, so I won't support this.
Rountree: Any other discussion?
Anderson: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I'd like to just make a statement, I guess, to the public, because I
heard several comments during testimony — I heard several comments about
worrying about police and fire protection and public safety, and there were
several comments about cutting the police department budget. I think what's
happening is there's been some misinformation put out there. That was not the
case. The City Council did not cut the police department budget. In each city
department budget, there are three components. One is the personnel cost, the
other is the operating cost, and one is for capital improvement: purchase of new
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 47
equipment or new buildings or vehicles and things like that. We simply had more
requests this year than what we had money. We had a request of over
$1,500,000 for capital improvement for the police department and over
$2,000,000 for the parks department. We asked them to trim that down, they
weren't able to do that for us, so we therefore took the capital improvement out of
those departments' budgets, and we put that money over in another area of the
City's budget, and we will determine at a later point what those capital
expenditures will be. But I want you to rest assured that we are not cutting police
officers, we are not cutting salaries, we are not cutting their operating expenses —
Rountree: We increased their salaries.
Anderson: Yeah. In fact, we've increased their salaries, so I just wanted you
rest assured that we are not doing that and a lot of that has been misinformation
that has been presented to the public. So I apologize for that. As speaking to
the project, I have heard a lot of testimony tonight, and there's been a lot of you
folks that have done some extremely valuable homework, it sounds like. I, too,
have been a long-time Meridian resident, and I remember when that sign said
2500 people as you came into Meridian. I agree with the gentleman that talked
about building the infrastructure first. That would be really nice to do. It would be
really nice to widen all the highways and to build fire stations and hire police
officers and have the schools. We simply haven't found that magical pot of gold
to be able to do all those things prior to development hitting. This particular
project, though, I would tend to agree, is the density is very high for the particular
area, I don't think the infrastructure is there at this point to support this type of
development, I'm not sure it mixes real well with commercial development. My
gut feeling at this point is that I would not be in favor of this project.
Rountree: Any other discussion?
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Yeah. I worry about the infrastructure. Of course, I also feel that if we
were to worry about infrastructures, I am one that was moved here to Meridian
when the sign said 1900.
Anderson: Always trying to one-up me.
Bird: I (inaudible) but, you know, if we had worried about infrastructure, Meridian
Greens and Sportsman Pointe and that stuff wouldn't be out there now. I don't
think it's the time for this kind of development at that point. I believe with the
church, I would a lot sooner see it go to a commercial. I don't think you want
retail out there because of the same reasoning. So I, right at this point, I cannot
support this.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 48
Rountree: Mr. Gigray.
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, this is just a point of procedure.
Since you had a joint hearing for both the annexation and zoning and conditional
use permit, I would recommend you might consider your deliberation on the
annexation and zoning which is Item 8. Depending on what your decision is on
that might govern what you would do on Item 9.
Rountree: Thank you for pointing that out. Any other comments?
Gigray: I have no more comments.
:IToMIITVVX1L7it-3
Rountree: Okay. We need some guidance and direction and a motion for Item
No. 8 which is the annexation and zoning.
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I would move that we deny the annexation and zoning of 20.35 acres
for R-15 zoning of land proposed for 300 units of multi -unit family rental for
Sundance Apartment Homes by Sundance, LLC.
Rountree: Need a second.
Anderson: I would second that.
Rountree: I was wondering where you guys went. (inaudible) I have a motion to
deny. My question with regards to the motion is we need findings.
Anderson: Okay. I will withdraw my second.
Bentley. Okay. Now I understand where you're headed. Mr. President, I would
move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law reflecting the denial of the annexation and zoning of 20.35
acres for a 300 -unit multi -family rental by Sundance, LLC.
Anderson: I would second that again.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to prepare Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law which would reflect the denial of the application for
annexation and zoning of this Item No. 8. Any discussion?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 49
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: All those in favor of the motion signify — excuse me. It's a roll -call.
Mr. Anderson: Aye.
Rountree: I was about ready to call you Mr. Armstrong. That's an internal joke
there. Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Aye.
Rountree: All in favor of the motion.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Now that's Item 8. We have Item 9, the conditional use permit. It's
almost a moot point, but we need a motion.
Gigray: Do we need some instruction? Point of information, procedure. Mr.
President, members of the Council, since your action directs that I prepare
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law regarding denial of annexation and
zoning, and because conditional use permits cannot be granted until there is an
annexation and until there is a zone in which the conditional use permit is
authorized under City ordinance, it would appear to me that it would be
appropriate to simply table Item 9 pending your final action on Item 8 which
would occur when you finally adopt findings and conclusions in order because
it's, as you know, been my advice that you can make changes in those up until
the point that you vote on them, and I think it'd just be appropriate to table Item 9.
Rountree: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we table the conditional use permit for 300 units of multi -family
houses by Sundance, LLC, north of Overland Road and west of Locust Grove
until the findings of facts and conclusion on decision of order for the annexation
and zoning has been passed.
Rountree: Is there a second?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 50
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to table Item No. 9. All those in favor
signify by saying aye.
ulei Ito] [61_1VV1219]I_1IW_Yda601
Rountree: Again, folks, I'd like to thank you all for following instructions well and
making this as pleasant for all of us as we could.
Anderson: Let's not have a jail break.
Rountree: I'm going to entertain a motion from Council right now, because I think
we all need a bit of a break.
Anderson: So moved.
Rountree: Moved. Second?
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SANTEE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX BY PINNACLE ENGINEERS (WES
WORCESTER) — LOT 3 BLOCK 2 OF RAILSIDE PARK SUBDIVISION.
(ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS)
11. PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TOWNHOUSE
CONVERSION OF MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON A 1 ACRE LOT BY WES
WORCESTER —RAILSIDE PARK SUBDIVISION AT PINE AND LOCUST
GROVE: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS)
Rountree: Items 10 and 11, preliminary plat and a conditional use permit. Those
people here on Items 10 and 11, would you object to having both of those
hearings opened up at the same time?
Unidentified speaker: (inaudible)
Rountree: Anybody else?
Bird: Is that the same —
Rountree: It's the same. Is that agreeable with the Council?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 51
Bird: That's agreeable with me.
Rountree: Okay, then I'll open up both hearings 10 and 11 for request for
preliminary plat and a conditional use permit for townhouse conversion on
multiple -use buildings on one -care lots of Wes Worcester, Railside Park
Subdivision. Shari. And before she starts, those people who are here for
hearings, the Council opened the agenda earlier and has made the decision that
they will not open an additional public hearing after 10:30, so after about Item 13,
it's questionable whether or not you'll have your hearing will be opened this
evening. They would be scheduled at our next regularly scheduled meeting
which is October 5th, and they would be on the front of the agenda. Okay,
Shari.
Stiles: Mr. President, Council members, this project has come before you
previously. It was for a conditional use permit because they had more than one
building, one principle building on a lot. The applicant has now decided he wants
to convert these buildings into townhouse units, and that's the reason for the two
public hearings. One is for the plat; the second one is for a conditional use
permit which would allow for the townhouse units, the zero lot lines and the fact
that the townhouse units, the individual lots would not have frontage on a public
street. Maws Addition here, this Pine Street, this is where Locust Grove will
eventually come through. There's some existing development in this area. This
lot is still vacant. This is a residential home that is zoned I -L. If you remember
Wayne Forrey coming through with a development, this is for conditional use
permit for elderly housing development. This would be the plat itself. As you can
see, there are three buildings and they have designated the separate lots for the
townhouse units so they can sell those individually. We have received response
from the applicant. They have agreed with all the terms of our comments, and
staff recommends approval of the development.
Rountree: Any questions of Shari?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: Have none.
Anderson: I have one. On that other overhead that you showed, then, it appears
to me that that's an industrial park and everything that's been developed in that
so far has been industrial? Is that correct?
Stiles: Yes. There's a golf cart country that's over here, there's the plumbers'
Union down here, there's Artec down here, and D & J Auto Transport on this lot.
Anderson: So we're going to put townhouses in the middle of an industrial park.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 52
Stiles: They call it townhouses. It's like a — they first proposed a condominium
concept, but now they're asking for a townhouse concept because each person
will own their own lot, but the buildings will be attached. They'll have fire walls
between each unit, each individual unit, but each of them will be owned by an
industrial user. So it's kind of misleading to call it a townhouse. No residential
use in it.
Anderson: I think I'm tracking with you, now.
Rountree: It's a business.
Anderson: Just throw a shoe and hit me, okay?
Rountree: Any other questions of Shari?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: I have none.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Unger.
Unger: Council members, my name is Bob Unger. I'm with Pinnacle Engineers.
We represent Sonntag Construction on these applications. Our address is 870
North Linder, Suite B, Meridian, Idaho 83642. 1 think Shari's done a fine job, and
to save you all a longer evening, we concur with all the conditions of approval
and staff's comments and ask for your approval.
Rountree: Any questions for Mr. Unger?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: I have none.
Unger: Thank you.
Rountree: Anybody else from the public wish to provide testimony on this public
hearing? Thank you. Any discussion on the part of the Council?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: I have question for staff.
Rountree: Okay. Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Gary —
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 53
Smith: Yes, sir.
Bentley: -- are we having any problems with the water, sewer for this project out
there?
Smith: No, sir.
Bentley: Okay. Thank you.
Rountree: Any other questions, discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Motion to close the hearing?
Bird: So moved.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to close the hearing, both hearings, for
Items 10 and 11. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: Motion passes, close both — request for preliminary plat and
conditional use. Need findings for both. No. Don't need findings for the plat, just
general approval.
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley. Help me.
Bentley: I move we instruct the City Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for Pinnacle Engineering's request for preliminary plat for
commercial complex at Railside Subdivision, and with the reflection of due -pass
approval.
Bird: Been moved and seconded to prepare Findings of Facts with a due -pass
approval for the preliminary plat for Item No. 10. Roll -call. Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Aye.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 54
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Aye.
Rountree: All in favor, motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Smith: Point of clarification, Mr. President. Does that motion, I assume, include
all the conditions that were set forth in the recommendation of the Planning and
Zoning Commission?
Rountree: Yes, they do.
Smith: I'm sorry. Maybe I just missed it because I was trying to write (inaudible)
Rountree: Yes, it does.
(inaudible discussion)
Bird: No, I didn't.
Rountree: That was the intent.
Bird: That was the intent.
Rountree: Need a motion for findings on conditional use permit.
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the conditional use permit for townhouse
conversion of multiple buildings on one -acre lots by Wes Worcester, Railside
Park Subdivision at Pine and Locust Grove.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to prepare Findings of Facts for
conditional use permit for townhouse conversion, Item No. 11, and that included
staff comments, as well?
0i0VtO 1974welrel
Rountree: Roll -call vote to Mr. Anderson
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 55
Anderson: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Aye.
Rountree: All in favor, motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
TWO 2 -STORY OFFICE BUILDINGS (EAGLE ROAD PROFESSIONAL
CENTER) BY ANDREW SIMONDS-FERMOR, LLC—GENTRY WAY AND
ALLEN STREET: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS)
Rountree: Next item on the agenda in this public hearing, request for conditional
use permit for two two-story office buildings, Eagle Road Professional Center, by
Andrew Simonds-Fermor, LLC. Shari. I'll open that hearing.
Stiles: Mr. President, Councilmen, this is for a project that would be immediately
south of the Jacksons on Eagle Road. This is where the Holiday Inn Express will
be coming in soon, I hope. Hubble Engineers has purchased this property and
annexed it and did a plat for their office building. Steve Siddoway did prepare
some response to the recommendation to Council on Item 1.26 on Page 6
regarding pre-treatment of storm water through a grassy swale. That was a
recommendation from Central District Health Department, not a requirement.
Item 1.27, Page 6 states the applicant shall resolve hook-up to city sewer, water
and sewer issues prior to the issuance of a building permit. The applicant has
issued a letter dated September 20th that requests this requirement be revised to
condition their Certificate of Occupancy rather than the building permit upon
satisfactory resolution of the utility problem. Our response is as follows:
Applicant shall resolve hook-up to city water and sewer issues prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Building permits cannot be issued until the site has
adequate fire protection. The water lines must pass pressure tests and
bacteriological tests prior to activating the fire hydrants. Also, the sewer must be
pressure tested and proved prior to issuance of a building permit. This is a
standard requirement for all subdivisions in the city as well. The City will accept
and process the building plans if the applicant signs a letter stating that they
understand a building permit will not be issued until water and sewer lines are
complete and approved. This will eliminate the six to eight weeks of processing
time required after the lines are approved, and it will give the applicant
approximately two months additional time to work out the water and sewer line
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 56
issues while the plans are being processed without additional down-time. This is
the agreement worked out between the City and Hubble Engineering who is also
affected by this water -sewer issue. This became an issue because when this
Holiday Inn Express came in, they built the water lines including down Gentry
Way; however, those have not been turned over to the city yet. They are still, I
understand, owned by the individuals that put them in. And I know that Gary's
been working with them trying to get that resolved so that we can accept those
water and sewer lines, but that issue has not been resolved yet. This is the plan
that they have presented. Again, this would be the Holiday Inn Express here,
Gentry Way, and the Eagle Road frontage over here. Staff would recommend
approval with all of staff conditions included as part of that approval.
Rountree: Thank you. Any questions of Shari? All right. Is there a
representative for the applicant here?
Simonds: Hi. I'm Andy Simonds with Fermor, LLC, 2700 Airport Way in Boise.
We're the applicant on the Eagle Road Professional Center. I agree with staff's
conditions except for two. One I've outlined in that letter, and staff was good
enough to make some changes to Item 1.26 which helps us out quite a bit. But
Items 1.19 and Items 1.27 1 want to talk about. First, Item 1.19 on Page 5 calls
for us to provide a letter of approval from Ada County Highway District prior to
applying for a building permit. We have that, but it also says that the letter of
approval shall include recorded warranty deed for any necessary roadway
dedications. Well, if you got a second, I'll show you on the plan what ACHD
wants us to dedicate then explain what the problem (inaudible). Over here on
Allen Street, ACHD wants us to dedicate four feet of ground into our plan, and
we've taken care of that in our site plan here, but the problem is we're still the
purchaser of the property, we don't own the property yet. And because of that,
we can't dedicate the property until we own it. It's a chicken and egg problem
it's the same problem we have with our development agreement. So if we can
convert this to something like having the — we've already got the approval letter
from ACHD, but if we could put that condition as, again, something to do with our
Certificate of Occupancy rather than issuance of the building permit or submittal
for building permit, it can solve this chicken and egg problem. The other item I
want to talk about is Item 1.27 which is this whole bit about the utilities. As Shari
stated, we had no part in the contract for those utilities being extended.
Obviously, we have agreed and we do agree to pay any late -comer fees to go
along with that, but this issue affects our property, it affects the Hubble
Engineering property, and it also affects the Sonntag project, and Sonntag's
representatives are here. As I said in my letter, I think everybody would agree
that withholding the Certificate of Occupancy until the utility problem is solved,
still gets the City what they need. Ultimately, the problem has to be solved
before any of us can do what we need to do with our buildings. We can't occupy
without the C of O. And truthfully, we'll have more money invested and even
more of a vested interest in working together to solve the problem at the C of O
stage rather than the building permit stage. The flip side and the benefit for us is
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 57
that it gives us more time to come up with an equitable solution to this mess that
has to do with (inaudible) and everything else on those utilities being extended.
That's why we've been pushing this issue, and I ask that reconsider that;
otherwise, I agree with all staff's comments and recommendations.
Rountree: Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Simonds: Thanks.
Rountree: Anyone else from the public that would like to offer testimony? Any
discussion from Council? Do you have a question, Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: Shari or Gary, your response to what he's asking?
Smith: I can, Council President, Councilman Bentley, Council, I can respond to
the sewer and water issue. At the very least, as Steve Siddoway mentioned in
his memo to you, the fire protection has to be available. Fire protection cannot
be made available until the water line is pressure tested and the bacteriological
test is taken and passed, and the line can be turned back into the system or the
system can be turned back into the line. From that standpoint, it would be
treated as any subdivision is treated that we've ever approved in the past. That's
an absolute minimum. I guess our concern in issuing a building permit without
knowing what was going to happen to this sewer and water line was whether or
not the City was incurring some kind of liability to provide the water and sewer
service at a point in time. And it was my understanding after talking to Mr. Gigray
that we would be best to have an agreement with the property owners such as
we have with Hubble Engineering presently; that we would receive their building
permit or building plans for review, but that a building permit itself would not be
issued until such time that this sewer and water line situation is cleared up. Right
now, as I understand it, the contractor who installed the sewer and water lines
has filed a lien against the owner of the Holiday Inn Express project. That lien is
in place. We met — Mr. Gigray and I met with the contractor and with Hubble
Engineering, it's probably been a month ago, now, and to this point, I haven't
heard anything other than I did prepare the letter, agreement that Hubble signed,
and that was returned signed by Hubble agreeing to those conditions. From that
point, we haven't heard anything. So, again, our concern and the Public Works
Department is if a building permit is issued for this building for Hubble
Engineering for Sonntag, are we incurring as a City, a liability to compete these
lines, if they don't get — if the situation is not resolved between the contractor
that installed the lines and the Holiday Inn Express people. We received a letter
— I received a letter, a copy of a letter that you received from Hubble Engineering
today that states, written by Don Hubble, President of Hubble Engineering. I'll
just quote one of his sentences. "My understand is that each of us," and he's
referring to the applicant that's before you right now Fermor, LLC, Sonntag
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 58
Associates and Hubble Engineering, "is willing to pay a proportionate share of
the costs of extending utility as soon as an equitable allocation is determined and
the appropriate agreements are in place. At this time, it's not clear when the K &
L work," and that's the contractor that installed the sewer and water line, "will be
accepted by the City." See, we don't — I haven't been requiring, and I change
that status as of today, and I sent a memo to the City Clerk to that effect, but,
henceforth, we would require a bond for sewer and water installations just as we
require bonds for landscaping, fencing, streetlights, all the other improvements.
If this happens again, we'll be able to access that letter of credit or cash deposit,
and we'll finish the project. Right now we don't have that guarantee in place. It's
provided for in the ordinance that we can have it in place, and like I said,
henceforth, it will be in place, and the developer will be required to put that bond
forward as part of the approval process. But here, I felt like Public Works
Department was out on a limb, City of Meridian was out on a limb getting that
water and sewer line finished and completed. SO that these buildings, if they
were under construction, and they get to a point and still nobody wants to step
forward and resolve the problem, where is the City of Meridian in this process?
And that was the reason that we talked, Bill Gigray and I talked, and I put this
little letter of agreement, and we finally decided, well, okay, we'll accept the plans
for review for Hubble Engineering. We'd do the same for this project, the same
for Sonntag with this same little letter of agreement. It's a one-page deal that just
says that we're going to process the plans, but until the sewer and water issue is
resolved, the building permit will not be issued.
Rountree: Thank you. Any other questions?
Bird: Is the public hearing still open?
Stiles: Mr. President, Council, as far as the roadway dedication, the earlier Items
No. 3 and 4 that were tabled because the development agreement hasn't been
signed, City has a little chicken and egg scenario, too, is that we will not annex
the property until the development agreement is signed and recorded, so it's —
the conditional use permit cannot be acted upon today, and I noticed from their
letter that they would not finalize their purchase of the property until all
entitlements were received including building permits, and that's not the way we
typically run things in Meridian, and hopefully they'll be able to resolve that and
either get the existing property owner to sign that development agreement and
encumber the property with those conditions or finish their purchase and then
they can go ahead with the recording of that development agreement and they'll
be able to dedicate that right-of-way. I think, I don't know — this subdivision
previously, these lots had gone clear out to the center of the road. Even though
Ada County Highway District recognizes those as public streets, most of these
lots still do show the ownership clear out to the center of the road, so particularly
since we have sewer and water facilities in those streets, we want to make sure
that that is received prior to processing the building permit. It gets real hard if
you try to get this documentation after the fact because things get lost. We're
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 59
trying to maintain some consistency so that we have that in hand before we
process because it does get lost after the fact. That's all I have.
Rountree: Any other questions?
Bentley: I have none.
Rountree: Applicant, do you have additional information you want to provide?
Simonds: First I'd like to address the fire -life safety issues with regard to the
hydrants and water -
Rountree: Can I get you to do one favor? Flip the switch on that mike. The
microphone right there. We're getting feedback up here. Thank you.
Simonds: How's that?
Rountree: That's good.
Simonds: Anyway, back to the fire -life safety issues. As far as fire protection out
there, we're building concrete and brick buildings. There isn't going to be a scrap
of would around to burn. So from a fire safety standpoint, we won't need water.
We'll have plenty of extinguishers (inaudible) small fires. Regarding the streets
and the dedication of the four feet and everything, there's still a bit of a title issue
regarding where, Shari had mentioned, where the streets end and our property
starts. There's two interpretations out there we're still talking with ACHD about.
Right now, based on the amended plat for Magic View, the property line goes out
to the center of Gentry Street and also to the center of Allen Street, and we're
trying to figure all that stuff out. So that's part of the reason I want to get some
time on that also. Answer any other questions.
Rountree: Any other questions for the applicant?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Thank you. Again, anybody else from the public? Any further
discussion? Motion to close the hearing?
Bird: So moved.
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: Moved and seconded to close the hearing for Item No. 12. All those
in favor?
[Q9[*7_[47-11V 71211OW-114W-Avi:.11
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 60
Rountree: Motion passes. Hearing's closed. Discussion, direction, motion?
(inaudible discussion)
•Z11r@Tff_ a■J=.11ToI
Bird: I'll just show him (inaudible) —
Rountree: Did you show (inaudible) —
Bird: -- I'll get right after it here. Mr. President.
007
Bird: I move that we have the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Decision
and Order for the conditional use permit for two two-story office buildings on
Eagle Road Professional Center by Andrew Simonds-Fermor, LLC with the
conditions.
Rountree: Which conditions?
Bird: I guess with the Planning and Zoning conditions.
Rountree: I need a second.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to have Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law prepared for the conditional use permit subject to the
conditions of the Planning and Zoning Commission for two-story office building,
Eagle Road Professional Center by Andrew Simonds-Fermor, LLC. Any
discussion? Mr. Gigray.
Gigray: Just a point of information, Mr. President, members of the Council, for a
direction on preparing the findings on the conditions, I believe there was some
evidence produced here by the staff regarding a response by Steve Siddoway in
his letter of September 20th that proposed to amend certain items regarding Item
1.26 and 1.27 of the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
I don't know whether you want that included in this motion or any of the proposed
changes of the applicant with regards to changing those two items from
Certificate of Occupancy to — rather from building permit to Certificate of
Occupancy, I think, was the main issue there of the staff's position and should be
Certificate of Occupancy.
Bird: I think —
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 61
Gigray: I mean building permits.
Bird: I think the recommendation by the staff was to go through the
recommendations that was presented to us, if I'm right. Is that not right?
Rountree: Mr. Bird, what's the intent to your motion, then?
Bird: The staff's recommendations.
Rountree: Okay. Does everybody understand that? You have a question? Roll -
call vote. Mr. Anderson.
/_R.[R•Tii■01C.1
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Aye.
Rountree: Two in favor, one opposed, motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
EXPANSION OF FACILITY TO ACCOMMODATE EXISTING CHILDREN BY
RAY CHASE/REGENT BUSINESS -1302 E. FIRST STREET: (CONTINUE
PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 10/5/99)
14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING (R -T
TO
R-4) BY CHARLES CRANE—LOCATED AT 3610 W. USTICK ROAD:
(CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 10/5/99)
15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF .6 ACRE FROM R-8
TO L -O BY MIKE GAMBLIN—LOCATED AT CHERRY LANE AND LEISURE
LANE: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 10/5/99)
16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
IN HOME DAYCARE BY KATHY PURCELL—LOCATED AT 2241 E. CLARENE
STREET: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 10/5/99)
17. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 62
4.34 ACRES (R -T TO C -G) BY SONNTAG EYE ASSOCIATES OR ASSIGNS
LOCATED AT LOT 15 OF MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION: (CONTINUE PUBLIC
HEARING UNTIL 10/5/99)
18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
60,000
SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING AND OUTPATIENT SURGERY
FACILITY BY SONNTAG EYE ASSOCIATES OR ASSIGNS LOCATED AT LOT
15 OF MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL
10/5/99)
19. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF
12.801 ACRES FOR TARAWOOD SUBDIVISION BY MICHELANGELO
INVESTMENTS, LLC SOUTH OF LOS ALAMITOS PARK & NORTH OF
SHERBROOKE HOLLOWS: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 10/5/99)
20. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
TARAWOOD SUBDIVISION BY MICHELANGELO INVESTMENTS, LLC --
SOUTH OF LOS ALAMITOS PARK & NORTH OF SHERBROOKE HOLLOWS:
(CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL 10/5/99)
Rountree: For those of you who have been here all night listening to hearings,
it's past 10:30, and we will not open by recommendation of the Council additional
public hearings this evening. Those hearings, point of information from Council,
we should continue those; is that correct?
Anderson: To a date certain.
Rountree: To a date certain? Do we have to do that on each individual one or
can that be done as a group?
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, I believe that if you entertain a
motion with regards to all the public hearings so long as you list the items on the
agenda that you'd be referring to, and then list the date certain upon which those
public hearings will be conducted. I suppose you're looking at October 5th.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Mr. President, I would move that we continue the public hearings for
Items No. 13 through Item 20 until October 5th, 1999, and that is on the revised
9/20/99 agenda.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to continue public hearings on agenda
Items No. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 until our next regularly scheduled
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 63
meeting October 5th. Any discussion? All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: I'm sorry for that; because of the lateness of the evening we've got to
move on. Everybody understand that it'll be October 5th? Okay. It'd be on the
front of the agenda. We won't have another two-hour hearing between you and -
Bentley: Table the rest?
Rountree: Well, we can move on the rest if -- I mean, it shouldn't take
Bird: Shouldn't take as long to go through these.
21. REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT OF TREMONT PLACE SUBDIVISION NO.
1 AND 2 BY LARRY HANSEN AND LUNA VISTA, INC. - BROADWAY AND
8TH STREET (951 W. PINE): (APPROVE)
Rountree: We've just got some preliminary plats. Next on the agenda would be
Item 21, the final plat for Tremont Place Sub No. 1. Staff, any comments?
Stiles: Mr. President, Council, this is for the Tremont Place Subdivision, it was
submitted as No. 1 and No. 2. This area right here, the Hansens owned and they
decided to combine these two plats for a final plat. We have received a response
from the applicant; they have indicated concurrence with our recommendations,
and we would recommend approval.
Rountree: Any questions for Shari?
:3R•"MITUZZ7197itI-31
Rountree: It doesn't appear that there is anybody here representing the
applicants. Was Bob - okay. He's gone. Need a motion for consideration of the
final plat for approval.
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I move we approve the final plat for Tremont Place Subdivision No.1
and No. 2 by Larry Hansen and Luna Vista, Inc. subject to staff conditions.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the final plat for Tremont
Place Sub No. 1 subject to staff conditions. Any discussion? All those in favor?
[09[*]i•[OY-11 V V Iall QW -114 »_\'/
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 64
22. REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT FOR VIENNA WOODS SUBDIVISION NO.
1 BY SKYLINE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY — 5400 N. LOCUST GROVE
ROAD: (TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
23. REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAT FOR VIENNA WOODS SUBDIVISION NO.
2 BY
SKYLINE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY — 5400 N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD:
(TABLE UNTIL 10/5/99)
Rountree: Next item, Item 22, request for final plat for Vienna Woods Sub No. 1
by Skyline Development Company.
Stiles: Mr. President, Council, this is the infamous Peterson property. The 80
acres that is just a half mile south of Chinden on Locust Grove. Infamous. It is in
the county; they are required by state code to comply with our zoning and
subdivision ordinance; they have designed the project to meet our R-4 standards.
One item of concern is that we still don't have off-site drawings for any of the
sewer and water improvements. And that is reflected in our comments.
Summerfield Subdivision is approximately one mile south on Locust Grove and
that's where there's an existing well. The initial proposal was that they wouldn't
hook up to city water, but they have since worked out with Gary that they will be
required to hook up to city water and will need to extend services to do that. All
of this area here, Boise area of impact, follows this line. This is all being
developed as an R-1 B, which I think probably equates more to an R-8 in our
zoning ordinance. This is where the city park, Boise City Park is. They have
submitted final plats for No. 1 and 2 which would be this many units, the units —
the lots are large compared to most of our R-4 developments. They would
propose to have a lift station, is it this location? on the southern boundary. Those
details have not been worked out yet. They will also be required to extend the
trunk line for the city's sewer system within the development. Any questions?
Rountree: Questions of Shari?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Okay. The applicant want to present? Okay.
Johnson: Pleasure. My name is Tucker Johnson, I represent Skyline
Development. Address is 10464 Garverdale Court in Boise. This is the final plat
for both the first and second phase. What is currently presented there is the first
phase, just so you're aware. We have responded in writing to staff's
recommendations. We have been working in some detail, and numerous
occasions with staff, specifically Gary and their legal counsel, Mr. Gigray, relative
to several different issues. Some of them are more legalistic than I have the
expertise, so therefore, (inaudible) address some of those items. But we are
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 65
asking for final plat approval this evening. We have submitted the -- thank you,
Shari. That's the second phase. We have submitted the construction drawings
for the sewer and water on site for both of these phases. The off-site facilities we
have been working with staff extensively, as I said, in determining the proper
location for what, in our discussions, we have called a mini -regional type location
for this lift station. So the City would eventually have to have multiple lift stations
was the intent, or is the intent, if I'm not to paraphrase Gary. So we've been
working on that, and we believe through engineering calculations and analysis,
that we have found a suitable location which is the southwest corner, as Shari
pointed out there, on Phase I. The analysis has been conducted and Gary and
staff are asking JUB, your master sewer plan analysis — contractor to analyze
what we've come up with to make sure that conforms with what they've
previously concluded. I don't believe they've concluded their study yet, but from
our discussions it's been favorable in terms of it looks like it could be workable.
Obviously, we can't get any homes occupied until the facilities are operational.
We will be extending the water line and the sewer line from just north of
Summerfield Subdivision where the new — I'm not sure the correct term, but I'll
call it a vo-tech high school or school —
Bentley: Charter school.
Johnson: -- thank you — is being
*** End of Tape 2, Side 2 ***
Johnson: -- being built, so we will be connecting at that location. The
hydroanalysis for the water model basically is being coordinated between my
engineer's office and Gary, with Brad, actually. We have just completed with our
firm and my engineers have just completed, just basically short of a two-mile
sewer extension facility and lift station and so forth in Boise's area of impact in
Ada County project. And having gained that expertise, you might say, we're very
comfortable in working with your staff to achieve an equitable and effective
solution in terms of those improvements. We would like to proceed with the
approval of the final plat based on staff comments and my proposed
modifications to staff comments because the County will obviously need to hear
these final plats and act on the final plats prior to anything additional happening.
At the pleasure of the Council, Mr. President, I would be glad to quickly run
through, I'm not sure if you had time to review my comments relative to staff
comments. I'd be glad to go through those one by one just for your clarification
and understanding.
Rountree: That'd be fine.
Johnson: Okay. Under the general requirements, Item 1 was the street
(inaudible) determined that the street we proposed to name Mandleson (sic),
which is the most southern street be changed to the name Camisky (sic), which
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 66
is a street that aligns but will never directly connect in Boise's city limits. I would
propose and hope that maybe the name Mandleson may be a stick here in that,
well, dispatch perhaps has a different angle on it. The people I talked to and the
people who call me out of confusion of where in the world is this section of
Mitchell Street, for example, they don't under — the general public don't
understand the alignment issue even though they never connect. And with this
subdivision already being based on a theme, people would recognize Mandleson
as part of that subdivision. Completely different jurisdiction, completely different
zip code, I would hope that it may be agreeable to ask the Street Committee --
Name Committee to reconsider that requirement. Under the site-specific, if I may
briefly just run through some of these, Item 1, 1 believe that the Meridian are of
impact with the county specifies that a project like this one must comply with
Meridian subdivision ordinance. These two phases do comply with the Meridian
subdivision ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan with clarification. Ms. Butler
will address that a bit further later on another item. Number 2, no comment.
Number 3, we have designed the storm drain system to ACHD standards which
are actually — and I think staff's comments directed is towards the park, the future
park area that would be contained in approximately Phase III. Just for the quick
sake of understanding, it's the big green area on this particular map — of the
preliminary plat, this central park. It's a depressed -type park situation; something
that the planners and different regional agencies have been pushing for this type
of concept, where in a major event, the storm water would back up in the park for
a short amount of time. ACHD standards are the following: In a 15 -year event,
the water would dissipate within 24 hours. In a 100 -year event, which is the
largest they really design for, it would dissipate within 72 hours. Slightly different
than the City's standards, but it's the standards that the Highway District requires
us to comply with. So for a point of clarification there. Item 4, we will be bonding
for various items, and I'm not aware of any of the plats that you currently have in
your area of impact. That obviously creates some logistical processing of paper
for building permits. If I understand the process correctly. Jump in if you feel
different. Just like they go to ACHD, a builder must get a stamp from ACHD
having paid — and a receipt having paid their impact fees before they go to the
county or the city before they get a permit. In this case, they would go to ACHD,
pay their impact fees at ACHD, and then they'd come to the City, pay their
assessment fees or hook-up fees for sewer and water. Just another item down
lower on the list. And then the City would grant a receipt or stamp the plans to
that affect, and the County would therefore know that they have paid their fees. I
think that's the appropriate procedure, if I'm not mistaken. We would — pardon?
This is the first subdivision we've dealt with. We don' t have a procedure, but
that's a logical one. Logical. We would like to be able to bond for the certain
improvements. Obviously, we can't get a building permit until the fire hydrants
are working, until the street surface will hold a fire engine and street signs are up.
Other items like fencing, irrigation system, we fully intend and will be required, as
I understand from talking to the staff, to bond for — would like the issuance of
building permits to not be withheld strictly because they're not complete — those
items may not be complete at that time for various reasons. Sometimes they're
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 67
seasonal delays. I intended to do a little upscale type — some improvements in
terms of the fencing and so forth. I'm trying to be brief. Pardon me. Item 5,
again, we will be doing some bonding. I kind of addressed that. Item 6 is not a
problem. The lot is 89 feet wide. I'll check the plat while I'm talking. I'll help you
read it. Pardon us. Different lot. We can address — (inaudible discussion) okay.
We'll work with that on staff. Item 7 I've addressed with staff already. I believe
staff understands the 12 -foot landscape and utility easement issue, so I don't
think there's any cause for concern there, if I'm not mistaken. Item 8 will just be
an issue for the plat. Nine, I will allow Ms. Butler to address. Item 10, the
alignment of the sewer trunk and the gravity irrigation and the storm drain lines
can be worked out, I believe, with staff. This comment from staff Item 10, if I may
switch to this other microphone, was that -- this comment is that the sewer lift
station will be located in this location. The sewer trunk line (inaudible) city that
would eventually service this entire area be extended down this pathway here
and down Mandleson Street and then down through a pathway facility here again
to connect with another street — another portion of Mandleson Street. In this
area, because of the existing ditches and storm drain type facilities, we need to
run, and the preliminary plat — the construction drawings show, not only the
sewer line running through there, but also a storm drain line and a irrigation piped
ditch — basically piped, put in a pipe — running through that same general
location. We do have some flexibility that this lot is rather large. We do have
some flexibility maybe clipping off part of that lot. I think we can work that out
with staff in terms of exactly how to proceed on that. I don't know if the staff,
since I didn't hear back, needs an unencumbered 20 -feet period, only with sewer
in it or if they can tolerate a low-level, a shallow irrigation line or something to that
effect in there. Item 11 Ms. Butler will address. Item 12, my understanding that
we've already discussed with staff and have reached an agreement on Item 12.
Thirteen is an issue that we have spent some great deal of time with your legal
counsel and with your city engineering, Gary Smith. This issue is relative to the
imposition of double hook-up fees for your current ordinance requiring for those
connecting to the city services, but not within your incorporated area. We have
met extensively, as I said, with staff and your legal counsel and have addressed
this in the following manner, and I'll try not to put words in your mouth, but to
summarize this, this plat be subject to the revised Meridian City Ordinance
regarding connection fees. I will not put any additional words into Mr. Gigray's
mouth relative to his advice to you, but that is a solution that we have come up
with in our discussions. We'll come back to that later in open discussion if we so
need to. Item 14 is a request that the City will enter into a reimbursement
agreement so as anyone in the future connecting to the off-site sewer and water
line that will be extended because of its development, that anyone connecting
and utilizing those services would just be subject to a late -comers or
reimbursement agreement. I believe that summarizes the bulk of the
presentation I needed to discuss. I will allow Ms. Butler to address the items I
briefly skipped over, but I would be more than happy to answer any questions
that the Council may have for me prior to Ms. Butler's comments, if you so
choose, or we could tag -team it following her remarks.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 68
Rountree: Any remarks?
Anderson: I don't have a questions, but I have a comment.
Rountree: Okay, Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Regarding the street naming issue. For emergency services people,
happen to work in that line of business, having the same named streets is very
critical because it's not just one jurisdiction; for example, that area would be
responded to on a medical call by Meridian Fire as well as Ada County medics
who deal with all of Boise and Eagle and Meridian and other areas. The Street
Naming Committee has extensive experience in naming those streets, and
there's good reasons why. So it's not just a convenience thing, it makes a lot of
sense for emergency responders, police, fire and medical, everybody.
Johnson: Thank you.
Rountree: Comments, questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: JoAnn.
Butler: Good evening, Council. JoAnn Butler, 6078 North 8th Street. Just to
reiterate a couple of things that Tucker's already raised; the specific request that
we're asking for in connection with the changes to the staff report are, again, with
regard to obtaining building permits, as soon as bonding has been accomplished,
because your ordinance does allow building permits with bonding under Section
1254, and also requesting that that temporary construction -type fence be allowed
so that building permits can be obtained before the fencing is put around the
perimeter, so a specific change there. Mr. Johnson asked me to address briefly
the staff report No. 9 and 11, and there's a sub -note under each of those asking
for particular plat items or plat notes to be put on, and that was the idea that
minimum square footage of houses is 1400 square feet exclusive of garages.
That's a provision of your zoning ordinance, and since we're governed here
tonight by the platting ordinance, the subdivision ordinance, and the zoning
ordinance of Ada County applies to this, and that requirement is not in Ada
County's — not to confuse the issue, we're asking that not be included because
that is not a governing ordinance. If you have any questions on that, I'll be glad
to address that further or just direct you to the Meridian Area of Impact
Agreement that has been entered into by the County and the City. In regard to
No's 13 and 14 addressing the connection fee and also the reimbursement
agreement or the possibility of it; as Tucker said, we've had number — on a
number of meetings with Gary Smith and legal counsel and Mr. Johnson's
engineers, and I know that they, in turn, the engineers have been working with
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 69
your outside consultants at JUB, several discussions trying to help the City align
the sewer in this area since we're so familiar with that area. And we've provided
the City with various draft reimbursement agreements that other municipalities
have used to help the City get that under its belt, and we believe that
reimbursement when anybody is over -sized lines, that it's only fair to do a
collection from others that will be utilizing it. And your ordinance under Section
94-19 does allow for that. With regard to the hook-up fee, I know that you are
presently looking at a — or the City probably your department heads — looking at
a change to your ordinance which reduces the double hook-up fee to a
consistent fee across the board: same fee for the same service. The reason for
that, the reason for the change in the ordinance is because that's what our courts
require is that if one person is getting a particular fee, they're supposed to be
charged equally for that fee. And that is what we've discussed this with staff
before, and Mr. Gigray, I know that's the direction the City's heading to, and I'll
be happy to address that further in detail. Not only have we — we're putting in the
infrastructure ourselves, I think we're going above and beyond to provide
services and infrastructure to the City so we are definitely not getting some kind
of service over and above what is charged and what is provided to those
residents within the city limits. So with that, I think that's it. So those are the
items that we have a bit of disagreement with the staff on, and we appreciate the
Council's comments on and be happy to press further.
Rountree: Any questions for Ms. Butler?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Thank you. Any further discussion, questions? Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I had a question for the staff. I'd like to hear what your thoughts on their
responses to your site-specific comments.
Smith: Thank you. Council President, Council members, I will address the
comments concerning sewer and water. We have had several meetings with the
developer and their engineer, and they have come back to us with proposals as
far as the sewer alignment is concerned such that we will have a lift station in the
area serving development or property that could develop other than this
subdivision. And as Tucker pointed out, our reasoning for that was to eliminate
numerous lift stations that could be required to serve the property, and they had
agreed to all of that, and that was in line with Mr. Gigray's and I response to the
County Commissioners when this was before them as far as the service in our
impact area in concerned. And Tucker's correct that their proposal has been
sent to JUB who developed our master plan in this area; for JUB's comments as
to the alignment which is different than what they had shown on our adopted
sewer plan. We have not heard back from JUB at this point. On the water issue,
we will, with involvement of the applicant's engineer, run a hydraulic analysis on
our water system to make sure that the water flow is available at this site for fire
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 70
protection which is a big demand on a water system. And that has not been
done, but it will be done. The issue with the building permits and appropriate
bonding in place isn't any different than any other subdivision that has come
before us, as long as we have the fire protection, the water line is active, the
water line is bacteriologically or free of bacteria and can be connected to our
system to provide the fire flow, and that we do have street signs up and we do
have a road base that will support emergency vehicles. We started out with this
as a very minimum requirement years ago. Over the years, since that time, the
developers have seen fit to improve the development to a point where pavement
is actually in place before they come in for building permits, and, I know Tucker's
been in the building business for a long time, we've seen this develop over the
years to the point where it is now simply because of the confusion that takes
place between the contractors that are building houses and the contractors that's
finishing the streets. There's a lot of collisions that take place between all of that.
So I think the developers have seen the benefit of having the streets paved
before building permits are issued. The double -connection fee, I guess, is an
issue that we've talked about before in the past and have never resolved it as to
why it's even there, other than I've always felt that it promoted an orderly
development of the city from the inside out, and our use fee for those that do
connect to our system outside the city limits is the same as it is inside the city
limits. There is no penalty as far as the use fee is concerned, if you want to
attach the word "penalty" to this double -connection fee. I have received a
proposal from Mr. Gigray concerning an amendment to the ordinance for this
double -connection fee as it presently exists. I've read through it, I haven't read it
enough times to make any intelligent comment. So I don't have any comment for
you this evening concerning what's been offered, but I think it's as much a
philosophical question from the Council's standpoint as it is a technical question
from my standpoint. I know that part of this, as I remember reading it, and Mr.
Gigray can correct me if I'm wrong, but, I think that there's a provision in here
that the development agrees to annexation in the future as part of this connection
to this system outside the city limits. And that would be one very important point
that we need to have that approval, that okay, for future annexation; without
knocking on doors. I probably missed some points, but if I did — do you have any
other questions of me on the sewer and water issues?
Rountree: No, just for Shari's turn.
Stiles: Mr. President, Council, we did have an error in our comments, the No. 6
under site-specific should be Lot 3, Block 3. 1 think there's plenty of room in
those other lots that they can accommodate that 80 -foot frontage. Ms. Butler
brought up the point that she didn't believe our zoning ordinance applied in this
case. Idaho Code Title 50, Section 1306 says plats within our impact area shall
comply with our zoning and subdivision ordinance; so, regardless of what the
County has unilaterally come up with as an Area of Impact Agreement, we do
believe that those zoning issues do apply. I don't think with the size of the lots
we're going to have any problem with having homes less than 1400 square foot,
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 71
but that is our zoning ordinance, and I believe they should comply with our
zoning ordinance. In fact, when this initially came to Ada County, we had to
remind them that we had to approve the preliminary plat; they thought our input
was irrelevant at that time. We did let staff know that state code mandated that
our subdivision and zoning ordinances were the ruling in this situation. That's
probably another issue we probably need to pick up at a later date as far as a
Area of Impact Agreement. It is a unilateral agreement, and the City has not
signed an agreement. There is no mutual document that states that we have an
Impact Area Agreement. They've passed an ordinance, told us that's what it is,
and that's the agreement. So I don't think — I think those are minor issues, you
know. Of course, the major issues that need to be determined are the double
hook-up fees and these off-site improvements. That's my two bits.
Rountree: Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: None.
Rountree: Recommendations, motions?
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Yes, sir, Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I feel that there's too many issues that are unagreed to, unresolved with
this project as far as the staff comments go. And I'm not prepared to pass this
until we can see some light and get these issues straightened out.
Rountree: Any other comments?
Anderson: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I'd say I was kind of astounded to see the 16 site-specific comments
and there were only two of them that were marked okay. So it seems like there
are a lot of unresolved issues. The late hour that this has delivered, the 20th,
and I'll show you there has been a lot of time for staff and the developer to try to
work out some of those issues, but I guess I would tend to favor tabling this and
seeing how many of those issues they could work out.
Bird: (inaudible)
Rountree: Any other motions? Is that a motion, a consideration?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 72
Anderson: I would make it a motion that we table the final plat for Vienna Woods
Subdivision No. 1 until our October 5th meeting and allow staff and the developer
a little more time to resolve some of the site-specific issues.
Rountree: Is there a second?
Anderson: -- on — are we just doing the one right now (inaudible)
Bird: We can probably — we could do both of them (inaudible)
Rountree: We just have Item 23 and 24 or 22 and 23 are actually separate, but
it's one in the same. Phase I and Phase II —
Anderson: At this point, I'd like them to work out the issues on both those
because
It's —
Bird: I would second that.
Rountree: Okay. It's been moved and seconded that we table Items 22 and 23
of Vienna Woods, Phase I and II until our next regularly scheduled meeting which
would be October 5th. All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: Staff reports.
Butler: Council members, if I might. JoAnn Butler, 6078 North 8th. Before you
move into your staff reports, just a point of order or ask, I did deliver a letter to
the Council and to the City Clerk today asking for a reconsideration of your order
and decision from two weeks ago and would like to ask the Council if they would
make a decision on that, and if they would like me to speak to that.
Gigray: Council, have you had an opportunity to read that letter?
Rountree: No, I have not. (inaudible) we take it in advisement and act on the
request at a later date?
Butler: Before you do that, I think you'd probably want to ask your attorney
whether or not that can happen under your procedural rules, a reconsideration
has to be taken up at the next hearing, we are in a situation where we are
requesting a reconsideration, and by that meaning asking the Council whether it
will decide to re -open the public hearing and set it for public hearing at some date
that you set. If that does not happen, I think today, because of the 28 -day appeal
period that runs following a final decision, an appeal would have to be filed. I
think that we would miss the opportunity to reconsider. I can briefly paraphrase
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 73
that letter and what I'm requesting for those that haven't had the opportunity to
read it, if you'd like.
Rountree: If you would hold off for a minute, JoAnn. Mr. Gigray.
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, just to a point of order, as I
understand this letter, and I have received a telephone call from JoAnn Butler
regarding their intent to seek some kind of reconsideration, and I believe they're
doing that under (inaudible) of Roberts Rules of Order; if that's the case, then it
would require someone who voted in favor of the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law and order to move to reconsider that it would require a
second, and then it takes — you can have debate on that yourselves, if you are
going to debate it. The debate should be limited to whether or not you should
vote in favor or not in favor of the reconsideration. And then you would call a
vote on that and it takes a majority to reconsider. And I think that's the spirit in
which their motion has been made. I might point out that I have prepared a
ordinance for consideration by Public Works and by Planning and Zoning
Commission which is designed to deal with motions for reconsideration, and
because I do believe that we are getting more and more of these kinds of
requests. I want to have — recommend, I should say, that the City should have a
mechanism by which those are done, criteria by which they are decided, and I
would tell you that the proposal that I prepared would deal with this on the
standpoint that only a written statement would be prepared that would outline
whether or not, in that statement, that they would have a case for judicial review,
and then the Council would review that written statement and vote whether or not
it would even consider it or not, and that would, of course, be a delayed final
action so that it wouldn't prejudice developers if they wanted to make that type of
motion. But we don't have that kind of ordinance at this place, so, as I
understand it, the spirit of why this motion is being made is being pursuant to
those Roberts Rules.
Rountree: Any other questions of Mr. Gigray?
Bird: Are you going to discuss this? I'm going to leave. I'm serious. (inaudible)
Rountree: I understand your situation. I'm just trying to get a procedural. The
request has been made: do we respond to the request this evening? Do we
want to take it under advisement to enact on it at a later date? I think that's the
question. Ms. Butler wants us to do it right now, apparently, and feels that that's
in order.
Bentley: And I'm not prepared to do it right now.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I'd like to read the letter and consider it more before I make a
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 74
decision; so, I'd like to just take it under advisement at this point.
Rountree: Mr. Gigray, comments?
Gigray: In my view, when you may take final action on Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law and an Order of Decision, that stands until you've rescinded
that, and, of course, if you were going to ever invite a revision of the facts and the
circumstances in this particular matter, my recommendation would be that you
would have to go to the extent of requesting and re -opening a public hearing to
give all affected property owners an opportunity and due -process to address any
additional issues that would come up. If you — if one of you feels that you want to
reconsider this, who voted in favor of these findings and move to reconsider it on
this request, if no one makes the motion, there's nothing that comes before the
Council for action and it dies at that point, and they move on with their legal
action and whatever they choose.
Anderson: Correct.
Rountree: Clear?
Anderson: As mud.
Rountree: As mud. Request for reconsideration received. Having no motion, I
would take that to mean that we aren't receptive to that.
Butler: Thank you.
Rountree: You can come back, Mr. Bird. Before we get into staff reports, we
have the Union contract. You do have a resolution dated September 21 st by
(inaudible). Any discussion? Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Yes. I would just like to say that, and I think I can speak for Ron, but I
don't have to. I appreciated the manner in which the negotiations were
conducted. We got through them a lot quicker than we did the last time with a lot
less problems. We had some disagreements, but you always do. I though both
sides conducted themselves very professionally, and I appreciated it.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I'd also comment, as a member of the Negotiating Committee this
year and last year, that I appreciate the fire fighters' spirit of cooperation, and I
think having one years' negotiations under our belt was a benefit for both sides
because both sides are a little more aware of the processes now. I think the first
contract is probably always the most difficult to hammer out. We did work out an
agreement for a two-year contract this year, and I think the contract is getting
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 75
better each time we go through this process, and as we get into it a few more
years, there will be less and less issues that have to be addressed in the contract
negotiation process, but I'd like to thank the fire fighters for their cooperation, and
I would make a recommendation that the Council approve this contract.
:3R��►�►/iFTiii�iTa:Z��7.[1[iC7itilll'iili�il�
Rountree: It'd be 255, I'll bet, but I'm not sure.
Unidentified Speaker: Yes.
Bird: Then I'll second the motion.
Anderson: I didn't make a motion. I just made a recommendation, but I can put
it in the form of a motion.
Rountree: That would be good.
Anderson: Okay. I would make a motion that we approve Resolution No. 255
and recommend approval of this contract between Local 2311 of the International
Association of the Fire Fighters and the City of Meridian.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve Resolution No. 255,
resolution for the Union Fire Contract. Let's do a roll -call. Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Aye.
Rountree: Mr. Rountree, aye.
Anderson: And also include in that motion to authorize the Mayor to sign that?
Rountree: (inaudible) Do they want it executed immediately?
(inaudible discussion)
Rountree: The Mayor or his authorized (inaudible) if it's signed (inaudible) then it
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 76
could be Charlie.
Anderson: That's true.
Rountree: Motion — the resolution is passed; correct? Okay.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
24. DEPARTMENT REPORTS
A. JANICE SMITH:
1. TREASURER'S REPORT
Rountree: Department reports? Will, you're the first one.
Berg: (inaudible) make a comment?
Rountree: Yeah. You can also — Will will also make a comment on the Treasury
Report, but (inaudible).
Berg: Yes, Mr. President, members of the Council, the City Treasurer asked me
to just to follow up on the information that she submitted to your box about
investments and some other information. She's sorry she couldn't be here
tonight. She said she had another commitment with her daughter and the school
function, but if you had any other questions for her, I could —
Bentley: Call?
Berg: Well, she said relay the messages tomorrow or later on today. Who
knows. So, if there is, let me know.
B. WILL BERG: TABLED 9/7/99:
1. APPLICATION FOR ADULT BUSINESS LICENSE BY VALLEY
VIDEO. (APPROVE)
Berg: Going down to Item B which was a table from last meeting; the application
for adult business license by Valley Video. I had on your desk area the
information, additional information that I received inquiring back from other staff
departments in the City as well as one other outside agency, and I have those
comments attached. I know Shari submitted another letter or comments to you
tonight, also. So I just ask for your decision on this application for adult business
license by Valley Video.
Rountree: Okay. You have that information. This establishment has requested
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 77
an adult entertainment business license for the rental, I assume, of adult videos.
And, no, Mr. Berg, you can't wait until your term is over to — any discussion?
Questions to staff?
Bird: (inaudible) want to review it. Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Why does our City Attorney not want to review it?
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, we have reviewed it and I did
supply a report to Mr. Berg regarding this, but I am suggesting we have some
other amendments to this ordinance that we're going to be recommending that
not only deal with this, but some other things. The problem that you get into as
an attorney is these matters of the issuance of license are quasi-judicial matters,
and the Rirey (sic) School District case which the Supreme Court's decided
within the last year has given the Idaho Supreme Court has taken the position, as
I've seen in other jurisdictions earlier, that due -process requires a fair and
impartial decision -maker, and if you have the City Attorney doing work with
regards to investigation of licensee and then turns around and is advising the
Council as to whether or not the licensee should be licensed or not licensed, or
whatever, could be presumed as a conflict of interest disqualifying the attorney
from representing or advising the Council on those situations. And that is the
reason why I will recommend that that be taken out of that ordinance. And we
don't want to review the videos.
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I see there's a lot of "no comments" in here. Do we get that option?
Bird: Let's go for it. (inaudible)
Rountree: I think it has to be responded to.
Gigray: I guess the question — Excuse me, Mr. President and members of the
Council.
Rountree: Go ahead.
Gigray: Is whether or not from the Clerk's standpoint he feels that he has a
completed application and given the comments that the applicant has met the
terms and conditions of the ordinance. If so, then I don't see that you have much
choice. If there are still incompletions in the — have an incompleted application
form or their based on the staff comments that would show that this applicant is
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 78
not proper applicant to have the license or hold it, then there is a basis to deny it.
And I don't know if the Clerk is still not ready to make that recommendation. I
suppose you could continue it one more time.
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Question, Mr. Bird.
Bird: City Clerk, what's your — is this all — (inaudible)
Berg: Council President, Councilman Bird, as far as I understand, the applicant
in good faith came to my office at the request of the Code Enforcement Officer
and applied for this application not hiding anything from which he is currently
doing which is, my understanding, above what our ordinance says as far as him
dealing with 21 -year-olds only, which our ordinance says 18; him having the
things put in the back room where they're not displays or publications or in view
of other minors. Because there might be some amendments that we need to
make in our ordinance. I can't hold him accountable maybe for some of our
loopholes that we have done. So in good faith, I think in good faith of his
mannerism in which he approached us following our instructions, I don't have any
problems with issuing this type of license. I do encourage that we need to look at
our current ordinance and tighten up some other things as well as some zoning
compliances that we may need to change and strengthen it up.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I got a comment, Charlie. I, you know, we worried about, and we did a
good job of getting taken care of the topless bars and all that crap around here,
but I guess we let something like this slip over. My way of thinking, this is worse
than the topless bars as far as this stupid video stuff, and I know Nampa and
Caldwell has had major problems with it. But if (inaudible) I guess, we don't have
anything to do about it.
Rountree: Comments, questions. Need a motion. Nobody wants to make a
motion? We have to respond to the request.
Bird: (inaudible) if they were under — Excuse me, Mr. President. If they were
under our ordinance and everything, we really don't have to — we don't have to
have a motion on that if they meet all the things, do we? Mr. Gigray? I mean,
that's a licensed — it's a procedure that you just go get a license, isn't it? Charlie.
Rountree: Oh. Excuse me. Will's got me and Mr. Gigray.
Gigray: Mr. President, Councilman Bird, members of the Council, as I
understand it, the way the ordinance reads presently, it has to be approved by
the Council. We can change that provision so it can be simply issued by the
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 79
Clerk, but the way it reads now, you have to prove it, so it's going to take some
action on the record to do so.
Bird: I don't (inaudible).
Rountree: Ordinance actually says City Council will act at the next meeting after
the application, so we've tabled it once, and —
Bird: So we (inaudible)
Rountree: Action needs to be either to approve or deny.
Bird: They told me we couldn't make a motion to deny it.
Gigray: You can. Excuse me, Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Gigray.
Gigray: Members of the Council, you can make whatever motion you want to
make. I'm — if it meets the requirements of the ordinance, if there isn't some
basis —
Bird: (inaudible).
Gigray: -- to deny it — if it's a matter of terminology or whatever based on — you
can make the motion based on the Clerk's report that it meets and complies with
the ordinance that the license be issued.
*** End of Tape 3, Side 1 ***
Anderson: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Due to the fact that I see no violation of City Ordinances here, this
request meets city ordinances, I would make a motion that we approve this
request.
Bird: I'll second it.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded that we approve the request for
application for adult video request, adult entertainment business license. Any
discussion, Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: Yeah. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to agree with him. They are
qualified under our ordinances and, to my distaste and displeasure, we will have
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 80
to support this.
Rountree: Any other comments?
Anderson: I, too, would not be in favor of this type of establishment, and I think
we need to do something as soon as possible to address this in the form of an
ordinance.
Rountree: We don't have any future requests like this coming before us?
Bird: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I agree with what they said, and I think it is true Gigray needs to get that
ordinance redone and get this stuff out of here, and get back before us
immediately if not sooner. And then, like Glenn says, we — if they'd done
everything to the ordinance, there's nothing we can do now. I hate to vote
(inaudible)
Rountree: Okay. Any other comments?
approve the request for the application.
Request has been approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Okay, motion has been made to
All those in favor? It's a silent majority.
Rountree: Request has been approved. Gary.
C. GARY SMITH:
PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION LINE EASEMENT IN THE
VILLAS AT THE LAKES SUBDIVISION: (APPROVE)
Smith: The short version. Mr. President, Council members, first item is a
request from The Villas at the Lake. They're (inaudible) wanting a grant, an
easement across city property which is to be occupied by the golf course
clubhouse for a pressure line, pressure irrigation line that would connect the lake
at Cherry Lane No. 8 Subdivision with The Villas at the Lake Subdivision, and the
document that you have in front of you is, I believe, has been reviewed by our
City Attorney, and being presented to you this evening for approval to grant this
easement.
Rountree: Any questions? Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Mr. President, thank you. Mr. Gigray, have you reviewed this
(inaudible) order?
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 81
Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, the form I have reviewed,
guess the only question I have is whether or not we have the consent of the
leaseholder on this which is Cherry Lane Recreation, since they hold the lease,
and I think Gary's covered that; I just didn't hear that. I'm trying to remember if
we got that on this one.
Smith: I guess I can respond, Mr. Gigray and Mr. President and Council
members, that it was sent to them for their review. I remember seeing that
correspondence. I don't remember seeing a response.
Bentley: Well, question —
Smith: But we've had a problem in the past.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: This does benefit the golf course or does it?
Smith: No. It doesn't, sir. It just ties in the pressure irrigation system for two
subdivisions, and that was the only way (inaudible).
Bentley: So the golf course isn't going to use that for the piece of property?
Smith: No, sir. It would be in their parking area as I understand it. Future.
Bentley: Not after the asphalt's poured, is it?
Smith: No. It's on the other side of the ditch; Eight Mile lateral.
Rountree: Any other questions? Mr. Gigray.
Gigray: Point of information. Procedure. You might consider passing a
resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute this gift deed of easement subject to
and conditioned upon Recreational Properties, Inc. consent as leaseholder to
that lease, because I think that Gary's on top of this, I just had to give him the
needed authority, but we wouldn't be executed until that happened.
Bentley: So moved. You going to second that or what?
Bird: (inaudible)
Rountree: You want to clarify what your motion is?
Bentley: All right. I move that we approve the easement for the pressurized
irrigation requested by Stiner Development through the clubhouse area subject
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 82
and authorize the Mayor (inaudible) to attest subject to Cherry Lane Recreation,
Inc's approval.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to approve the request for the lease for
the pressurized irrigation system subject to Cherry Lane Rec's approval. Any
discussion? All those in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: Motion passes.
2. WATER / WASTEWATER BUDGET LINE ITEM
TRANSFER: (APPROVE)
Smith: Thank you. Second item we have is just kind of a housekeeping item for
the wastewater and water department. These are budget line item transfers, and
what it amounts to in both cases is the distribution of funds that were budgeted
under one line item in this year's budget and breaking that one line item into
specific project line items with specific dollars assigned to each project. And the
reason for this is just to facilitate better cost accounting on the projects, and
that's the basis of the request.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We need a motion to approve this change?
Rountree: Yeah. It'd probably be good.
Bird: Mr. President, I move that we approve this transfer of account numbers into
each different project as they come necessary so for the accounting of the job
costs.
Rountree: Second?
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the account numbering for
the wastewater budget line item transfer. Discussion? All those in favor of the
motion?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 83
Rountree: Motion passes.
Smith: Thank you. Would it be possible just to run one little flag up the pole this
evening before —
Rountree: It's still today. It's not tomorrow yet.
(inaudible discussion)
Smith: And I'll bring this agreement up to Bill Gigray for his review, but we've
been trying to put together a joint project in the southeast part of — well, it's
between Overland Road and the Magic View Subdivision in getting sewer and
water under the interstate. We're trying to make this a joint project with the
developer, Gary Voigt, who is extending the sewer from Five Mile Creek where
it's presently located, under the interstate to Overland Road. And this is being
done to provide service to the future high school site and other property over
there. Because the water also needs to be extended and tied in from the south
side of the interstate to the north side of the interstate, we felt it was an
opportune time to run these two projects together and basically put them in the
same easement. We went through the contacts, the property owners, and finally
got the approvals of everybody to make this a joint -utility easement. Sewer is
considerably deeper in this area than the water would be, and so, facilitate the
installation, it was obvious the sewer needed to go in first because of its depth,
the water would follow along. The developer, with my agreement, bid the project
out so that he's got a bid for sewer and the water installation. I researched it a
little bit and found that City of Boise has done what they call a reimbursement
agreement where a developer has installed a city line, sewer line in this case, for
Boise, and then was reimbursed by the City for the cost of that installation,
provided that they follow certain procedures, and one, of course, was the bidding
process. This project was also advertised in the local newspaper for bidding, but
they had really good bids, they got what I think is one of the better contractors in
the area, Brown Construction, is a little better, and I just got a copy of this sample
agreement, reimbursement agreement, today from the engineer for the project,
and we actually had two engineers working on it. Briggs Engineering was doing
the sewer part, JUB Engineers did the water part because we've also got a water
project going to connect this crossing from both ends to make the loop, and we
were just trying to make this connection, or this crossing, because of the depth,
or because of the location with regards to the sewer, and also because of the
depth and the fact that it had to be bored under the interstate so that we felt one
contractor (inaudible) advantageous to developer, it'd be advantageous to the
City to have one contractor doing both pipelines. So I — the short of this is that
need to bring a reimbursement agreement back for approval and one of the
problems that I found out Monday is that the pipe price has gone up 40 percent
since the time that they bid the project; believe it or not, it went from $10 to $14 a
foot for the pipe. And so I need to get this nailed down or tied down quickly, and
they are preparing, I guess, to move right away on their part of it just because of
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 84
the cost, as far as the sewer goes, and I'd like to tie these together, but again,
I've got to bring this reimbursement agreement back to you, and I need to get it
to Bill so he can review it.
Bentley: Mr. President.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: I would move that Gary work with City Attorney Gigray in working on the
reimbursement agreement for the boring of the sewer and water lines.
Bird: And giving the go-ahead then —
Bentley: Yes.
Bird: -- to pursue — I'll second that if that's what the motion is. Okay.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to have City Engineer work with the
City Attorney on the agreement and to proceed with the agreement on the joint
boring. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: Move forward, Gary.
Smith: Point of clarification. Will this be a boring agreement? Sorry. Never
mind.
Gigray: Only if we have two attorneys talking.
(inaudible discussion)
Gigray: How many opinions do you want?
(inaudible discussion)
Rountree: Shari, you're up.
D. SHARI STILES:
1. PROPOSED PROJECTS IN CITY OF MERIDIAN
REFERRAL AREA: (SHARI TO WRITE LETTER FOR
DISAPPROVAL)
Bentley: She's up late tonight.
Rountree: She sure is.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 85
Bentley: What are you still doing here, Becky? Are you still on the agenda some
more?
(inaudible discussion)
Stiles: Mr. President, Council, I wish I had an overhead so you could see this a
little bit better. The — does everybody have a copy of this — I know you just got it
and you probably haven't had time to look at it.
Bentley: Whose name is on this?
Stiles: Mr. Kent Brown is asking for an area of impact adjustment to be included
in Boise's area of impact. This current area, all colored and everything, this area
is in our referral area. It's not within our impact area. It was what we requested
to be included in our impact area, but that was denied. Gary has responded as
far as the sewer service issues. It's pretty much at the end of the line if it were
to ever be served by the City of Meridian, it's about as far out as you could
possibly get for sewer service. From — I guess, Boise City wanted the response;
they didn't want it to appear as a land grab by them without some kind of --
Rountree: Yeah, right.
Bird: You believe that?
Stiles: No. They wanted a response, and I just didn't want to give them a
response from P & Z. I wanted to make sure that you were aware that this
happening and see if you had any comments on it. If they were to get this
approved, I would like to make sure that there is a pathway required along the
Ten Mile Creek as that would be the continuation, hopefully, someday of our
multiple -use pathway. Apparently, they're proposing to extend what's going on
with the Boise Ranch Golf Course as far as subdivisions, and they would have
some subdivisions on top of the ridge that would be on this southwest side of the
Ten Mile Creek — (inaudible) Columbia.
Rountree: That's where?
Stiles: Columbia, Ten Mile, I mean, sorry — Columbia Road, Cloverdale Road —
Rountree: Cloverdale.
Stiles: And the current impact -area boundary is —
Rountree: Right there.
Stiles: -- right here. So they're requesting this area, 40 acres here, about — oh,
I'm not sure about how many acres there, in this little flag to be included in
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 86
Boise's area of impact.
Rountree: They want part of our impact areas, normal, (inaudible) want to trade
us?
Stiles: It's —
Rountree: How about the park?
Stiles: Yeah, the 40 acres —
Rountree: (inaudible) across from McMillan School. Becky, is that fair to trade?
All developed?
Bocutt: I'll pass that on to the City Council.
Bentley: Would you do that?
Anderson: So what are you asking us? Are we in favor of them taking —
Stiles: I just wanted to know if you had any comments. It's more of just to let you
know what's going on out there. I don't know that it makes any difference
whether you approve it or disapprove it. They're likely to get it approved anyway,
but I didn't know if officially you wanted to make any comments. They apparently
do want some kind of a comment. I don't know if they care whether it is from
Council or staff or -- keep your mits off our stuff.
Bentley: So what are they going to do? Go around behind and start working
their way back up?
Stiles: They could go by way of Kuna and then all the way back through Star.
Anderson: So you would write some comment back to Ada County on behalf of
us?
Stiles: If that's what you want me to do, yeah.
Rountree: I guess what you're asking is direction from Council, and what I'm
hearing is Council is not favorable to this proposal, and that maybe the
suggestion is if you would draft a letter in that regard to whomever has requested
our comments for the Mayor and Council's signature.
Bird: That's what I'm asking for, and I'm definitely not in favor of it. I think
they've taken enough of our — not that this is top ground, but --
Rountree: Well, it won't be the first time that we've taken this position.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 87
Bird: No. It won't be the last. At least we got a commissioner now.
Rountree: (inaudible) done any good, but.
Stiles: So is that unanimous?
Bird: You better believe — well, it is on my part.
Bentley: Amen.
Rountree: Do you want to make a motion to that effect or is that sufficient
direction for you?
Bird: Is that sufficient direction or do you want a motion?
Stiles: That's fine with me.
Bird: Okay.
Stiles: Thanks.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
E. GLENN BENTLEY
1. DONATION FROM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND CITY
OF MERIDIAN. (DISCUSS LATER)
Bentley: Yes. Mayor asked me to pass on a couple of things. Everybody got a
copy, I believe, of the letter from the Chamber concerning the donation they're
liking to do for the Treasure Valley Partnership to work together to bring
commercial growth, companies, to the Meridian and Boise area. They're asking
for a $10,000, they're asking the City to put up $5,000 and the Chamber is
already, by this letter, matching our $5,000 if we put it up. So, I'd like to know
what our pleasure is on that.
Rountree: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I have a question. My understanding is Meridian was part of the
auditorium district that was being proposed between Nampa and Caldwell that
the purpose of that would be to help promote tourism and to bring more business
into the community, and they were proposing funding that through a hotel -motel
tax, and Meridian's chamber chose not to be a part of that. I guess I'm a little bit
curious why we wouldn't be in favor of something like that, and now we want to
take it out of the tax dollars, property tax dollars, to fund the promotion of those
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 88
types of things, and it would seem like the logical choice would have been to
participate in that auditorium district.
Rountree: Did he —
Anderson: Anybody have any comments?
Rountree: Mr. Bird. You've been on the chamber board?
Anderson: Yes, sir.
Rountree: Well, give us the skinny there.
Berg: Well, Mr. President, members of the Council, the presentation from the
Nampa auditorium district presented to the Chamber Board, Meridian Chamber
of Commerce, was a rush untimely situation that the Chamber didn't understand
all the aspects that they were getting into, especially when it is dealing with
proposed voting delegation of certain districts. Things were not established that
Meridian would have a member on the Board or would not — it was the same
thing as from where Boise ends along the freeway to Nampa and Caldwell. So
they were unsure. They thought they were being very pressured and rushed to
get this on board before they had time to analyze the whole proposal. And a
decision was to be made immediately, and they were not ready to make that
decision. That is one point of view of the board member. The other concern was
if it was for sure to be voted on and get it on the ballot for election this fall, and
there were some aspects that it might not make it, or they'd have to do some
things to get it on there. And I'm not saying that they were opposed to it. They
just felt they were being rushed without some specific representation by the
Meridian area. So that was one concern.
Anderson: My understanding, all they're doing is proposing, getting it on the
ballot at this point. And as far as representation, I don't know — I think that would
be something that the Chamber members could discuss among themselves and
figure that issue out. I guess I just have a problem laying this back on the
taxpayers' backs when they had found a pretty creative way in my mind of
funding some of this type of money that could be used for the promotion, tourism,
and things like that. I would think that should have been pursued a little bit more.
Rountree: Any other comments? Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: Yeah. And a follow up; Eagle has agreed. It is already donated
$5,000.
Rountree: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. President, I have to agree with Ron. I'd want more — I'd like to know
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 89
more about the presentation before I decide to kick $5,000 out to something like
this. I'm to agree with Ron that when this was brought up by the other chambers
and everybody jumped on our — didn't go, and I understand Will's scenario of
what went down, and I can understand, and so, consequently, I don't want to
jump until I hear the tax and what this thing goes for.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Maybe I suggest then that we get — can't get somebody to come in and
discuss this at a planning session?
Rountree: I guess that my comment would be — I'd welcome any opportunity we
can help foster development and/or coordination with the Chamber, and I don't
have a problem with the money per se, but I'll bet you that the Chamber's board
didn't make this decision without any information, and this is the first time I've
heard of this, so — yeah, I would want some information, and that's not because
I'm opposed to it, but I just want to have some basis to make a decision. So,
yeah. If we can get them either a planning session or maybe even maybe make
a presentation in a Council meeting, that would be good. And Glenn, if you want
to work that with the Mayor, or if you want to work that with the Chamber, that
would be great.
Bentley: I don't think any of us are opposed to it. We just want to know what the
$5,000 are going for.
Rountree: So can we just leave it at that, or do we need a motion? We don't
need a motion, I don't think.
Bird: No.
Rountree: We want some information on — to make a reasonable decision
whether we approve it or not.
Bentley: Right. Got some more for you.
Rountree: It's not on the agenda.
Bentley: Yeah it is.
Bird: It's not on the agenda.
Bentley: We also need to have Pauline Skaggs to be on our Council Planning
meeting to discuss the pay raises and the way we're going to go about this.
There's some confusion as you know. And also we are going to properly need to
discuss, maybe at the planning session about taking out an option on the police,
the proposed police site for the building. Need to take out, need to have a
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 90
discussion about taking out an option to tidy it up so we can see which direction
we're going to go with it so we don't lose the land. So if you could put that down
for a planning meeting, please.
Rountree: Anything else?
Bentley: No. That be good.
Bird: I'll take care of Bill's.
Rountree: You got Chief Gordon's —
F. CHIEF GORDON:\
1. ADDITIONAL COST FOR ANIMAL SHELTER: (APPROVE)
Bird: Yeah. I'll take care of the Chief's. Okay. First of all, about the animal
shelter which all projects in — you know, we always hope you never have a
change order, but it seems like you always do. We had some additional — you
guys all got a copy of this — we'd already made a change order adjustment for
$1,000 and we need another $625 because the Fire Department was $175,
Intermountain Gas was $650, Water Department was $300, and Idaho Power
was $500 which comes to $1625 in addition, and we'd already authorized
$1,000, so I would move that we authorize a change order for the Meridian's new
animal shelter for the sum of $625.
Bentley: Second.
Rountree: Six hundred or sixteen hundred?
Bird: No, $600. We -- $625. This is the total addition, and we'd already
authorized $1,000 for it.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to authorize a change order for $625.00
for the animal shelter. Discussion?
Anderson: Yeah. I think this brings him right up to what he told us originally the
thing was going to cost.
Bird: It's a little bit under.
Rountree: Motion — all those in favor of the motion?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: Okay. Change order's approved for $625.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 91
F. CHIEF GORDON:
2. NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY ON NEW POLICE
DEPARTMENT BUILDING:
Bird: Okay. Next item is — all of us know that we're looking at some land and
hopefully can start in another year or so on a building, and we need to do like the
Fire Department did so that we get some good bids and get our drawings and
stuff. We need to get some people on board to do some space assessments,
schematic designs and stuff like that so that we can do it. Chief Gordon and I
would like to — we have got two proposals, I believe he's going to get a third
proposal for an RFP. I realize it's too late in this year to take it out of this year's
budget, but this is something that we would like to bring before the Council on
September — October 5th, and get this thing going, and at the same time, I know
Glenn mentioned about the tying up the property at that time, but that's new
budget year, and I would hope that maybe we could just purchase the property at
that time. That's what I got. I — if you guys don't mind, we would sure like to
bring this forward and see what you think of it for a space analysis and some
schematic drawings and stuff.
Rountree: Mr. Bentley.
Bentley: Do we need three?
Bird: We want three, Glenn. One's out of town and one's local. And as you can
see looking at that, either they're not bidding apples to apples or something, and
so we thought we — we got another local firm that is very familiar with jails and
stuff, so Bill's going to call and ask them if they would give us a proposal too. I
think it's smart to have three, that way you know — you know, if I'm bidding a job,
I like to have at least two other bidders so if I know if I'm low and the other two
are high, it's my screwup.
Rountree: Any other questions, discussion, comments?
Bird: All I ask, Mr. President, is that okay if we bring this forward for something,
the 5th, for approval on — something.
Rountree: You want to bring those —
Bird: We want to bring those figures at that point to — on October 5th --
Rountree: -- on October 5th?
Bird: -- for approval to get going with it.
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 92
Rountree: Any discussions, objections to that? I don't know that we need a
motion other than to direct the Mayor to put it on the agenda.
Anderson: And I agree with Keith because there is such a big discrepancy
between these two bids, the third one would be (inaudible) just to see if one of
these is out in left field.
Rountree: I think we just need to make sure to be cautious about how we're
getting bids and we don't —
Bird: And this basically is —
Rountree: (inaudible)
Bird: -- it's a request for proposals that we're asking for, and anybody is willing to
do it, but when we only got the two, we felt that with the difference of it, you
know, it would just be smart to go back. And this is basically just the start like we
did with the Fire Department, and that worked out so well that — you know, when
you have seven bidders and 100,000 separates and that means that you had
some good planning.
Rountree: Okay. Get that on the agenda and make sure that's pointed out for
the next meeting. Last thing on our agenda is an executive session. I have no
idea what that was about.
Anderson: I do.
Rountree: Do you? Do we still need it?
Anderson: Yes, please.
Bird: Yes.
Rountree: Okay. If you're going to do it, you need to identify the basis for it.
Glenn.
Bentley: One final thing I did think of. We do need to set a date to sit down and
finish out the details on the budget.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Rountree: Yeah. That's (inaudible). Well, the last thing on the agenda is the
executive session. I need a motion and --
Bird: Go ahead, Ron. You know what it's —
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 93
Bentley: I would make a motion that we go into executive session to discuss
some personnel matters.
Bird: Second.
Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we go into executive session
pursuant to Idaho Code. Pursuant to — personnel issues — 67-12345; isn't that
right?
Anderson: 67-2345.
(inaudible)
Anderson: Aye.
Rountree: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Anderson: And then you know, one thing I think we're kind of lacked at and it's
got us in trouble with this budget. We talk about this stuff, but we just haven't
given (inaudible) get this here by such and such and such —
Bentley: -- executive session.
Rountree: Been moved, do I have a second to come out of Executive Session?
Anderson: Second.
Rountree: Been moved and seconded to come out of Executive Session. All
those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Rountree: We're out of Executive Session at 12:46.
Bentley: Motion to adjourn?
Bird: Second.
Rountree: No decisions were made, no recommendations were made. Motion to
adjourn has been moved and seconded. Favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Meridian City Council Meeting
September 21, 1999
Page 94
Rountree: We're adjourned at 12:47.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:47 A.M.
(TAPE OF FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED
CHARLIE ROUNTREE, PRESIDENT
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK