HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 11-08Meridian City Council Meeting November 8, 2000
The regularly scheduled City Council Meeting of the Meridian City Council was
called to order by Mayor Robert D. Corrie at 7:38 on Wednesday, November 8,
2000.
Members Present: Robert Corrie, Keith Bird, Tammy de Weerd, Cherie
McCandless, Ron Anderson.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Bill Musser, Steve
Siddoway, Ken Borup, Tom Kuntz, Will Berg.
Corrie: I’ll open the Meridian City Council Meeting at 7:38 on November 8, 2000,
and at this time, I’ll have the City Clerk do roll-cal.
Item A. Approve minutes of September 13, 2000, Special City Council
Meeting:
Item B. Approve minutes of September 19, 2000, City Council Meeting:
Item C. Approve minutes of October 3, 2000, Special Pre-Council Meeting:
Item D. Approve minutes of October 3, 2000, City Council Meeting:
Item E. Approve minutes of October 17, 2000, Special Pre-Council
Meeting:
Item F. Approve minutes of October 17, 2000, City Council Meeting:
Item G. Tabled from October 17, 2000: Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law: CUP 99-039 Request for Conditional Use
Permit for planned unit development including continuing care
retirement community, single- and multi-family residential and office
and retail use by Touchmark Living Centers – Joseph A. Billig –
east of St. Luke's between Franklin Road and Interstate 84:
Item H. Tabled from October 17, 2000: Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 00-006 Request for
annexation and zoning of 12.73 acres from R-T to L-O and R-15
zones by Vicki Welker / Gold River Companies, Inc., for proposed
Valeri Heights Subdivision – northeast corner of Pine Avenue
and Ten Mile Road:
Item I. Tabled from October 17, 2000: Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 00-005 Request for
Preliminary Plat approval for proposed Valeri Heights Subdivision
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 2
with 10 building lots and 2 other lots on 12.73 acres in proposed L-
O and R-15 zones by Vicki Welker / Gold River Companies, Inc. –
northeast corner of Pine Avenue and Ten Mile Road:
Item J. Tabled from October 17, 2000: Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 00-014 Request for
Conditional Use Permit for proposed Valeri Heights Subdivision
for a 128-unit apartment complex, townhouses and office on 12.73
acres in proposed L-O and R-15 zones by Vicki Welker / Gold River
Companies, Inc. – northeast corner of Pine Avenue and Ten Mile
Road:
Item K. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: VAC 00-008
Request for vacation of the easement common to lots 14, 15, 18
and 19 of Block 2 in Honor Park Subdivision No. 3 in a C-G zone
by Briggs Engineering – south of Franklin Road abutting the west
side of Stratford Drive generally between Scenery Lane and
Schiller Lane:
Item L. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: VAR 00-018
Request for variance to the current Landscaping Ordinance to
permit landscaping in compliance with the proposed Landscaping
Ordinance by Power Engineers c/o Micron Technology d/b/a
Crucial Technology – off Eagle Road between Franklin Road and
Fairview Avenue:
Item M. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: CUP 00-045
Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a telephone call
center in an I-L zone by Power Engineers c/o Micron Technology
d/b/a Crucial Technology – off Eagle Road between Franklin
Road and Fairview Avenue:
Item N. Development Agreement: AZ 00-013 Request for annexation
and zoning of 5.4 acres for proposed Elliot Industrial Park
Subdivision for office and shop in an I-L zone by Chuck Elliot, The
Elliot Group – south of Fairview Avenue and east of Locust Grove
Road on Wilson Lane:
Item O. Ashford Greens No. 4 Streetlight Agreement:
Item P. Approve Bills:
Item Q. Meridian Ten Mile Fire Station Contract Materials Testing and
Inspection Contract:
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 3
Item R. Architect Service Contract for Police Station with Lombard Conrad
Architects:
Council, you have the Consent Agenda in front of you. What is your pleasure on
that?
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Item G, the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Touchmark Living
Centers is still not completed. I would move that we table that to December 19,
2000. Items H, I and J, the Valeri Heights, I move that we move them to Items
1H, 1I and 1J in the Regular Agenda. Item R, the architect service contract for
police station with Lombard Condrad Architects – I would like to move that to
regular item 1R. With that, I would move that we approve the Consent Agenda
as it stands.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda with the
correction of Item G to be tabled until December 19, 2000 and H, I and J be
moved to the first item on the Regular Agenda along with Item R. Any further
discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 1H. Tabled from October 17, 2000: Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 00-006 Request for
annexation and zoning of 12.73 acres from R-T to L-O and R-15
zones by Vicki Welker / Gold River Companies, Inc., for proposed
Valeri Heights Subdivision – northeast corner of Pine Avenue
and Ten Mile Road:
Corrie: The first item on the Agenda is 1H, which is tabled from October 17,
2000 – the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for approval of the
annexation and zoning of Valeri Heights Subdivision. At this time, I’ll open it for
discussion on the Findings and Facts on Item H.
De Weerd: Do you want to ask staff first?
Corrie: Yes, I will. Staff comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I don’t have my file that – what all the issues are.
I know we had asked for some changes to the Findings and apparently the
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 4
applicant has asked for some clarification on some items. I don’t have any –
unless you have anything specific to ask me, I don’t have anything to add.
Corrie: I think the attorney may have some here. Anything else from the staff at
this point? Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. We’ve had a number of weeks to
try to get these findings put together to reflect the Council’s decision. We have
gone through all of the minutes, and I am the first one to admit that I may not be
perfect and we may have missed something on here. We try to reflect what the
testimony was and the Council’s motion. We do have – there have been at least
three letters or communications received – one from Irma and David Atkinson
dated October 16, 2000 and one from Susan Wildwood, the attorney for the
applicant and one letter from David Bailey, which was also attached to the letter
from Susan Wildwood, the attorney for the applicant, commenting on the
proposed findings. I have put together a memo for you dated November 2
nd
specifically addressing the Wildwood letter, setting out our draft findings and
what the applicant has asked with regard to those specific findings. Again, there
are items – and that covers primarily just the Preliminary Plat and the Conditional
Use Permit. I don’t believe she had any specific comments to the annexation
and zoning findings. Councilwoman De Weerd has mentioned to me there are
some issues in some of these findings. I can’t remember if the annexation and
zoning was one of them or there may be some references to ACHD’s prior
recommendations before the site plan was revised – and also the necessity in
any of these, where it’s appropriate referring to the site plan which was received
by the City on August 21
st
, which was the day before the one public hearing – so
that the site plan is specifically referenced as the one that the City received on
August 21
st
, regardless of whatever date might be on that site.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Shari, did you have any comments on Mr. Nichols’ memorandum
dated November 2
nd
responding to the attorney’s request? \
Stiles: I don’t.
De Weerd: The first one mentions, in addition to a paragraph, to state redesign
of office building has been completed and reviewed by City. I don’t see why that
needs to be added in there, but –
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 5
Nichols: Councilwoman De Weerd, Mayor, members of the Council. Those
specifically directed the Preliminary Plat findings, so it would be appropriate to
take those up at that time.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess I just want on these findings to specifically note – on page 7,
it talks about adopting the comments of Ada County Highway District from their
letter dated August 15
th
as follows and there are a couple of items that I
appreciate these findings, but they need to be noted that ACHD’s will change to a
certain degree as far as the recommendations and how they are affected by the
limitations we put on our conditions – especially in reference to Gray Cloud Way.
There is a reference on page 7 of the ACHD report No. 9 that talks about Gray
Cloud Way. I don’t know if it needs to be noted in these findings – the change or
not. It talks about to meet all requirements within the site specific requirements
and standard requirements and if they meet them all, then it’s going against
what’s going to be in the Preliminary Plat and the CUP requirements. If it’s just
going to be stated in 16.7, on page 7 of these findings that our requirements are
met and all the requirements don’t apply because of the certain conditions that
were placed. Can you put “with the exception of these items,” or do you have to
get that specific in the annexation findings?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Councilwoman De Weerd, Mayor, members of the Council. If you want
to modify 16.7 on the annexation and zoning findings so that you indicate that it’s
-- all requirements within the site specific requirements and standard
requirements shall also be met except as modified in any findings passed by the
Meridian City Council. That should take into account anything that’s different.
De Weerd: Okay.
Corrie: Any other corrections on the findings and facts of the annexation?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Shari.
Stiles: I guess I’d like clarification of what Dan was talking about on the findings
and whether that was the extension of Gray Cloud Way to and through the
property, because the Highway District has indicated they will not approve gating
that.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 6
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Has it gone to their Commission?
Stiles: I don’t believe it’s gone back to the Commission.
De Weerd: Because when I talked to Terry Lowe, that was the next step – that it
would have to go to the Commission.
Stiles: Back to them to ask for their approval?
De Weerd: Yes.
Stiles: Okay, but it hasn’t.
De Weerd: In my opinion, that’s not what is questioned here. We made the
condition that that be accessible to emergency, bicycle and pedestrian. That’s
our condition. It’s now up to ACHD whether they accept that or not. If that
condition can’t be met, then it’s not a project.
Stiles: Okay. Thank you.
Corrie: Anything else for staff?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: I would entertain a motion on Item H, which is the Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for the approval of the annexation and zoning.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we accept the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
for annexation and zoning of Valeri Heights Subdivision of 12.73 acres from R-T
to L-O and R-15 with the changes noted on page 7, Item 16.7 as suggested by
the City Attorney, using that verbiage and to have the Mayor to sign and the
Clerk to attest.
Corrie: Do I hear a second?
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the annexation and zoning on
Item H with the corrections and additions of page 7, Item No. 16.7. Any further
discussion? Hearing none. Roll-call vote, Mr. Clerk.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 7
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Bird, aye; McCandless, naye; Anderson, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE.
Item 1I. Tabled from October 17, 2000: Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 00-005 Request for
Preliminary Plat approval for proposed Valeri Heights Subdivision
with 10 building lots and 2 other lots on 12.73 acres in proposed L-
O and R-15 zones by Vicki Welker / Gold River Companies, Inc. –
northeast corner of Pine Avenue and Ten Mile Road:
Corrie: Now we have the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the
request for Preliminary Plat of the 12.73 acres in proposed L-O and R-15 zone by
Gold River Industries – northeast corner of Pine Avenue and Ten Mile Road.
Any staff comments at this point? Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Again, if you will look at the
memorandum dated November 2
nd
, which sets out the applicant’s comments with
regard to specific items in the proposed findings of the Preliminary Plat – if there
are any of those that you wish to adopt, that you would tell us. I know specifically
Item 2.45, in the conditions, I couldn’t really tell exactly how many garage units
have been reduced. That’s why there was a blank there. I need the Council to
instruct me as to what number to put into there.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I counted them. It was reduced by two units to 159. It went from 161
to 159.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I’d just like to state for the record – clarification, it states in
there that I had requested two garages be reduced. That was not accurate. I
just indicated that I did not like a solid wall of garages several hundred feet long.
It was their suggestion to delete garages and to break them up, not mine.
Corrie: Any others?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. If you look through the applicant’s
proposed language, you can see some opportunities here for clarification which –
I guess what I’m asking you to do would be to specifically address any that you
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 8
want addressed. For example, on the – if we go to page 3 of my memo, which
had to do with 2.49, which was the memberships – membership availability and
that was so that the Community Center or Recreation Center could be used by
people in Thunder Creek Subdivision. I thought the testimony was 30 to 50
memberships available. It looks like, in the applicant’s version, they’re saying to
make up to 20 memberships available since there are 20 lots in the Thunder
Creek Subdivision. It’s an opportunity to say that that’s a household family
membership. That’s the clear indication from the applicant’s request. That would
be a modification regardless of whatever the number is, but the number of family
memberships available – that’s an opportunity to clarify that. Each one of these
things down through here – if you want to clarify those hours of operation – I can
go down through each one of these and tell you why I put what I did down.
Bird: I would appreciate it.
Nichols: Why don’t we do that? In 2.42, that was derived from staff comments
and also looking at the minutes and what had been testified to in terms of the
revision that the office building would be different so that there would be – I think
in one version, there were no windows on one side or something like that. Now it
would be the decorative windows door styles on all sides – that there would be
this cut-through on the building on the corner so that pedestrians could go
through the building to the traffic signal. On 2.42, I’m not sure that the testimony
reflected that the redesign of the office building had been completed and
reviewed by the City. I don’t know whether that’s occurred. Under 2.43, a
restriction on a type of businesses – no bars or taverns. That’s straight out of the
testimony. Hours of operation – I put down here from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
because it basically said “daylight operation.” I don’t believe, in my review of the
minutes, and having been here for each of these meetings, I don’t know that
there was any testimony that said 10:30 p.m. was the close of business time or
what time would be appropriate for the business to open. I just remember it was
“daylight” or “day operation” I think is what was testified to by the applicant’s
engineer. I interpreted that to mean 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. We’ve already talked
about 2.45, which is the number of garage units. It looks like what the applicant
is asking is that if they reduce it more, then they would be allowed to reduce it
more than the two units that had already been reduced and so it could be – 2.45
could be reworded to say “reduce the number of garage units by at least two to
increase open space and landscaping.” There would be no requirement that they
have more than that. Under 2.46, this is one that actually may be redundant
because I believe that this is the road that now stubs into the development.
There is a turn-around and so it does not actually go through to Thunder Creek
anymore. That 2.46 could be eliminated because the site plan calls – I don’t
believe that there’s a – I could be wrong, but I don’t – I guess that’s a question
that maybe Shari can help us with because if it’s not a thru-street, then there
doesn’t need to be a fire gate there.
De Weerd: Mr. Attorney.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 9
Nichols: Yes.
De Weerd: I wonder if that – it doesn’t really refer to it as Lightning Way. Would
that one be referring to Gray Cloud?
Nichols: Councilwoman De Weerd, Mayor, members of the Council. This came
out of, I believe, the Planning and Zoning’s recommendations. I’m not really
clear. We did have a specific recommendation on – I think it was on the CUP. It
may have been a Preliminary Plat, but with regard to Gray Cloud Way, which had
to do with restricting the access to pedestrians and –
Bird: That was part of the motion, wasn’t it?
Nichols: Yes, it was.
Corrie: Shari, staff comments on that 2.46?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, if the conditions of Ada County Highway District
are included in these findings on the plat, how can you include those conditions
of Ada County Highway District if a later condition is taking away that
requirement? I don’t believe Ada County Highway District will approve the gates
and that was why I asked before when you made the motion to include those
gates to add “if approved by ACHD.” Gray Cloud Way is a lengthy dead-end
street with no turn-around at the end. The Fire Department, I don’t believe would
approve it. The plat doesn’t show any kind of a hammerhead configuration that
would allow for the turn-around. I just don’t want to get in the situation where
we’ve got the conflicting requirements and ACHD says flat out, “No,” and they
won’t approve the plat. They won’t sign the plat. Then we’re back here later
trying to make compromises on something that you never intended. I don’t know
where we’re at. I don’t know how you can approve a plat with these conflicting
conditions.
De Weerd: Can Mr. Nichols answer that?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. There may be conflicts here, and
that’s why I worded the condition on Gray Cloud Way, “if approved by ACHD.”
That’s why I worded it that way because I picked up on Mrs. Stiles’ comments
before. I think I may have made that comment to the Council at the time that we
could word it in that way – that if ACHD approved the security gate, or something
where restricted to pedestrian, bicycle and emergency vehicle traffic, that that
would be a condition. If they didn’t approve it, then it wouldn’t be there. That’s
the way I took it and that’s why it was worded that way in the findings.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 10
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Since we are not the transportation authority, we can only put our
desires – the main concern from the residents was access of the traffic into their
subdivision and which, I agree. If that condition cannot be worked out with
ACHD and the applicant, then the project is killed by ACHD. That is the City’s
requirement and I think that’s what we all agreed on. I didn’t modify my motion to
say “if approved.” They have to work that out with ACHD, who is a transportation
authority. We can’t make the final say on it, but we can certainly make the
condition.
Stiles: I wish I had a picture of it to show you right now so that you could see that
length of the dead-end street with no turn-around.
De Weerd: It will have to probably be worked on with ACHD as to how that’s
going to happen. Again, that’s not our purview. That is theirs. I’m not going to
sit here and speculate as to what ACHD is going to approve or not approve, just
like they don’t try and do the same in our situation. Whatever they decide, that’s
between them and the applicant.
Stiles: As long as it’s clear to the applicant.
De Weerd: If it isn’t by now, I don’t know what else I can say.
Stiles: Okay. Thank you very much.
Nichols: Continuing on, Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. I believe the
next item was on page 3, which has to do with sidewalks. The applicant wishes
to have that modified to say, “where permission can be obtained from the land
owners.” There was quite a bit of testimony about whether permission was
obtained or not. It was my understanding the Council’s motion was that the
sidewalks had to be in on the east side of Ten Mile. On the next item, which is
2.48, which was “restrict the right to make application for any additional increase
in the allowed R-15 density or change of use, except to as what is allowed in the
yellow designation under the conditional use of the office building. The applicant
wanted that to read “restrict the right to make application for more than the
allowed R-15 density and I don’t know how that that’s any different than what
we’ve asked for in our finding. In 2.49, the next one, which was the one I’ve
already addressed with regard to the number of memberships, if the intent was
each homeowner in Thunder Creek was to have a membership in the Valeri
Heights Homeowners Association – would give them access to the facilities,
which seems to be what the applicant is saying. We could say, “up to so many
family memberships or one per resident’s basis,” or something if the applicant
wants further clarification. I think that’s it on those. I want to look for a letter. I
can’t seem to find my copy of the letter from Mrs. Atkinson. I think Mr. Bailey’s
letter went toward the Conditional Use part of it. Mr. Bailey’s letter addressed the
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 11
Conditional Use Permit, so we can look at that. I believe that Atkinson’s
concerns have been addressed through our discussion here, with regard to the
Preliminary Plat. They raised the issue of the fire gate and at least as the
Preliminary Plat part of it goes, the issue of if ACHD approves the number of
memberships and whether that’s family or not – so that’s that issue.
De Weerd: I have nothing further.
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Anything else from Council on the –
Anderson: I was just going to comment, Mr. Mayor, that I think the attorney has
accurately reflected in his Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law how I
remembered the testimony and the motion. These requests for clarifications in
here from the applicant, Susan Wildwood, I think are addressed in our Findings
of Facts and Conclusions of Law quite adequately already.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: If there’s no other discussion, I would try and make a motion. I move
that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for the request for
Preliminary Plat for Valeri Heights Subdivision with the following changes: to
make sure on page 4, No. 7, that the site plan is indeed, the one received August
21
st
, but to note the change of the site plan drawing. That change would also be
effective on page 5 – to make sure that the recommendations on page 7 by Ada
County Highway District is amended as per additional conditions set by City
Council. That would effect 2.18 and 2.20 and that reference should be made to
Lightning Way. The details are on their August 15
th
letter, No. 7, page 7 – that
2.45 be amended with the language that the attorney suggested to reduce the
number of garage units by at least two – to eliminate 2.46 – on page 12 on 2.52,
to strike out “if ACHD approves” – to amend 2.49 to read “make 20 family
memberships available,” and that’s the end of my motion.
Anderson: I’ll second it.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law with the corrections and additions that were made at this
point. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Roll-call vote, Mr. Clerk.
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, naye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 12
Item 1J. Tabled from October 17, 2000: Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 00-014 Request for
Conditional Use Permit for proposed Valeri Heights Subdivision
for a 128-unit apartment complex, townhouses and office on 12.73
acres in proposed L-O and R-15 zones by Vicki Welker / Gold River
Companies, Inc. – northeast corner of Pine Avenue and Ten Mile
Road:
Corrie: Item J.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Before we move on, I guess I failed to mention or get clarification on
one item on page 12 of the Preliminary Plat, and that was 2.51. That stipulation
was that the stoplight and the road improvements and the sidewalks be put in
prior, or before any structural building permits were allowed. Is this verbiage in
here sufficient to reflect that?
Nichols: Councilwoman De Weerd, would you give me the reference again,
please?
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: The last paragraph takes care of all that. It says that no structural permits
shall be issued until all of the improvements required by the City and this
decision are built and all other conditions are met.
De Weerd: Is that clear enough?
Nichols: Councilwoman De Weerd, Mayor, members of the Council. That’s the
reason that I put it in the order portion of the Findings of Fact, so that it was clear
that all of those – that there would be no permits issued until those improvements
have been put into place.
Corrie: All right. Next will be 1J. This is the Findings of Facts and Conclusions
of Law for approval – request for a Conditional Use Permit for Valeri Heights
Subdivision for 128-unit apartment complex, townhouse and office on 12.73
acres. Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. The latter part of my memo has the
Conditional Use Permit findings that are at issue. Some of these are redundant
to what was in the Preliminary Plat. Specifically, the first one had to do with the
redesign of the office building. Again, the applicant asked that the additional
language be inserted – that it had been completed and reviewed. The hours of
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 13
operation – we’ve already talked about that. The number of garage units, which
was addressed in the specific motion that just approved the Preliminary Plat
Findings with the change. 13.69 is the fire gate issue. 13.70 is the sidewalk
issue again. 13.71 is again, the change with regard to – well, not really a
change. Again, I don’t see the applicant’s version. I don’t understand the
request for the change on that one. The memberships available – that was also
in the Conditional Use Permit Findings. The other thing that’s in the CUP that
was not in the Preliminary Plat had to do with the number of residential units.
The motion of the Council was to reduce the northernmost building from three
stories to two. The minutes reflect that when the question was raised – how
many units is there on that third floor? The minutes reflect that – the applicant’s
representative is not on the tape, but Mrs. Stiles, reported to the Council that the
applicant’s representative indicate that that would be a reduction of eight units.
The applicant has now seen a letter from Mr. Bailey that says that essentially the
top floor was only four units and not eight on these buildings. Therefore, it was a
reduction to 124 – total residential units in the development instead of 120, which
is the way I have the findings worded because it was a – again, the key thing was
a reduction and that height of that building from three stories to two. The
applicant’s point is that if there were only four units on the top of that building and
it was reduced down to a two-story building, they should only be docked four
residential units and not eight.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess since I made the motion, I will respond to that. I could just
refer the City Attorney to Mrs. Welker’s letter of July 18
th
, which mentions
reducing the height of the two most northerly three-story apartment buildings by
grading. Mine was reference to that and the developer’s promise to the
neighbors that those would be reduced in height. Because the applicant could
not tell what the height would be, I thought the easiest way would be to take the
story off of that. In fact, in that very same letter, she mentioned that these luxury
apartment complex buildings would be a combination of two-story and three-story
buildings. I guess when I made my motion, I was actually looking at, again, the
promises made to the neighbors and trying to reflect dialogue that the applicant
had with the neighbors. I would say that stands at 120.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: As I recall in seconding that one, that was very specific. We asked Mr.
Bailey at that time because I questioned if one building going down was a full
eight apartments – one story going off – and he assured us that that was eight.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 14
The motion was very specific about being eight and he agreed with the eight. As
far as I’m concerned, it stays that way.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I guess I’m just a little confused on that issue because we’re hearing
two different terms being used here. One is a condition that we reduce the
height of the northernmost building, which from what I understand, would only be
four units, technically. But yet, the motion is stating eight units, which would
mean we would have to lower the two most northern buildings. Just for my
clarifications, Councilwoman De Weerd, are you saying that they must lower the
height of the two most northern buildings to two stories?
De Weerd: Yes. Actually, that’s what my motion was intended to reflect. I don’t
know if I said, “the one most northerly most building.” I was just replying to her
letter with the buildings on the far north.
Anderson: Thank you.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Members of the Council, Councilwoman De Weerd. It would appear
then, that – if I can find the findings specifically here. It would simply be to say to
reduce the height of the northernmost buildings or two northernmost buildings to
two stories, and that would reflect what you wanted on that.
Bird: That’s what I seconded.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess I had a question for staff on page 7. Shari, on page 7, 13.10
and 13.12 – are those necessary to have in there? They refer to storage areas
for boats, campers or trailers – kind of standard comments that – and a
maintenance building.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor, Council and Councilwoman De Weerd, those were original
conditions. Those were our comments as we originally prepared them for this
project. I believe that requirement was taken out by Council – action approved
not to have the storage units.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 15
*** End of Side 1 ***
Stiles: -- and I believe they explained that they would have a maintenance
company come and do all of that, so those would not be required.
De Weerd: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols, I have one other question. On page 10, and I guess this
would effect all of the comments that include ACHD recommendations. When I
read these, I wasn’t really clear as to make sure that there were lane
improvements at the intersection of Ten Mile and Pine and that there would be a
turning lane on there. I did call Terry Little to get clarification on their findings of
August 15
th
and on their page 6, Item 3B, it does state that those road
improvements were to be done. I just want to make sure that those are reflected
in our findings.
Nichols: Councilwoman De Weerd, Mayor, members of the Council. I believe
13.33 has a center turn lane and 13.34 has a center turn lane. So one has it on
Pine. One has it on Ten Mile.
De Weerd: Okay. I wasn’t sure if that just related to the entrance into the
development, or if that was actually at the intersection.
Nichols: I believe it’s shown on the site plan.
De Weerd: It is.
Nichols: So that would be incorporated by reference into this as well.
Bird: In a state’s intersection.
De Weerd: I have nothing further.
Bird: I have nothing.
Corrie: I’ll entertain a motion then, on the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of
Law for the Conditional Use Permit.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 16
De Weerd: I move that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of
Law for a Conditional Use Permit for proposed Valeri Heights Subdivision for a
120-unit apartment complex, townhouses and office on 12.73 acres in proposed
L-O and R-15 zones to note the following changes. On page 7, delete 13.10 and
13.12 referencing the storage areas and maintenance building. Note that ACHD
conditions of August 15
th
would also apply to any additional City Council
recommendations in how they effect those. That would be on page 14. On page
15, 13.68 – reduce the number of garage units by at least two; 13.74 to just add
a “S” left-turn lanes; 13.75, delete “if ACHD approves.” I couldn’t find where the
120 units were mentioned, but use the verbiage that the City Attorney
recommended on that. On page 14, 13.63 – and that it says “buildings.” Where it
says “The entire complex shall have a total of 122 units,” it could reference that
that was changed from 128 to 120. That’s it.
Anderson: I’ll second it.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Conditional Use Permit with
the approval of all the conditions and comments of changes from the motion.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Just something of discussion. I know questions were raised as far as
bonding or improvements such as the sidewalks, and since it is a condition that
those improvements have to be made prior to any structural building permits,
bonding is not a viable option. I just wanted to make sure that that was – you
can bond for it, but you still can’t build until it’s in, so.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Yes.
Bird: I believe, on our findings and stuff, it says, “No structural building permits
may be issued until all of the improvements required by the City in this decision
are built and all other conditions are met.” That takes care of any bonding or
anything else.
Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none. Roll-call vote, Mr. Clerk.
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Bird, aye; McCandless, naye; Anderson, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE.
Item 1R. Architect Service Contract for Police Station with Lombard Conrad
Architects
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 17
Corrie: The next one is R – architect service contract for Police Department with
Lombard Conrad Architects. Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. To proceed with building the new
Police building, the City has selected Lombard Conrad as the architects. I have
been through the proposed agreement and made some suggested revisions. In
the last communication I had from Mr. Moorehead, it appeared like we had all of
those worked out. When I went back through and compared the latest draft,
which I have, the only issue that – his previous correspondence to me indicated
he had agreed to my changes except for a couple of items. We’ve subsequently
got those two items fixed. In one of my prior comments, the attendance at a
public hearing is an extra service not covered by the regular fee. We know this
building will be subject to the Conditional Use Permit process. We know that
there will be at least one public hearing required as a result of that Conditional
Use Permit process. I felt like they ought to be there at that meeting to provide
testimony, input and answer questions. It ought to be part of their base services.
If it may have an oversight – I haven’t been able to talk to Mr. Moorehead, but I’m
comfortable with the way things are if we can just simply resolve that issue. I just
don’t want the City to be billed extra for somebody showing up at the public
hearing when they know, going in, that there’s going to be one.
Corrie: Yes, they’re going to have to show up for it. That’s for sure.
Bird: I think – Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I think it’s probably an oversight on their part. I don’t think it would be any
problem. I believe that CGA has always done that for us on the Fire Department
– any extra. I believe it’s an oversight. I wouldn’t – if no more discussion, I
would move that we accept that contract with Lombard Conrad with the condition
that that one item of extra charge for public hearings is taken care of between the
Mayor and the attorney and Lombard Conrad.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the contract for the Police Station
with Lombard Conrad Architects with the approval of the attorney – gets the
change on the contract and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Any
further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 1. Tabled from October 17, 2000: FP 00-018 Request for Final Plat
approval for of 61 building lots and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres by
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 18
Packard Estates Development for proposed Packard Acres
Subdivision No. 2 – south of Ustick between Locust Grove and
Vintage Lane:
Corrie: Now we are back to Item 1 on the Regular Agenda. This was tabled
from October 17, 2000. It is a request for Final Plat approval for 61 building lots
and 3 other lots on 23.02 acres by Packard Estates Development for proposed
Packard Acres Subdivision No. 2 – south of Ustick between Locust Grove and
Vintage Lane. I have a question, Council, on this one, before we do a Final Plat
on it – approval of that from the attorney. We’re having some problems on this
lane – North Windgate Lane. I noticed in the letter that the homeowners there on
that lane said the property owners on the lane established this lane as a private
lane July 25, 1913. Looking at the plat, the Packard Subdivision people think
that their ownership on their plat goes to the middle of that road. I guess my
question would be, Mr. Nichols, is if there – if there’s something there that says
that lane has been there that long, can the developer actually show that half of
that lane is theirs? Property or that – I’m a little concerned about where we’re
going here with this.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. I’ve reviewed this matter and
specifically spoken with Mrs. Stiles, Mr. Smith and Bruce Freckleton. We’ve
worked with the plats, and I think even at one point – it’s been a while back, but I
even looked at the deed which contained the easement – the 1540 easement
which is of issue. I’m not prepared to offer an opinion as to what the rights of the
landowners are because I don’t have all of the facts. I will say this. It appears
that the actual road bed itself is not built within the actual 15-foot easement. The
road bed extends – or at least it’s Bruce Freckleton’s opinion that the middle of
the road bed goes right down the section line or half-section line – whatever it is
there, so that half of the road bed falls with inside of the easement and the other
half falls outside of it. It’s been that way for a very long time. The owners, or the
people that have benefited by the easement may have some sort of claim against
the property upon which they encroach through a prescriptive easement. I’m not
going to offer an opinion on whether they do or not. I’m just saying that they
may. At the same time, what I believe the City’s responsibility is to make sure
that the 15-foot easement that is covered by the deed restriction is still there -- if
the City does not do anything to impair the 15 feet as contained in that deed from
1913. If there’s an issue with regard to the roadbed, because it’s not built within
the 15-foot easement, then I think that’s something that the easement holders
have against the property owners into which the land encroaches – or the road
bed encroaches. I understand there is some construction going on out there –
stuff being put in the middle of the road bed, but it’s within the boundary line of
the property to the east. So, they may have some damage claim. They may
have something like that, but from the City’s standpoint, the key thing is to make
sure the 15-foot easement, for the length of that parcel on Packard Estates No. 2
is preserved. There is still a question. Does that mean that the developer has to
build up that 15-foot so it will take traffic? I’m not prepared to offer an opinion on
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 19
that, but the 15-foot easement has to be preserved. Your question as to – an
easement is just – it’s a limited interest in land for a limited purpose. So, the
owner of that land, over which the easement runs, does in fact own the land and
they have rights in that land except to the extent limited by the easement. They
can be on the easement, as long as they don’t interfere with the ingress/egress.
They can’t do something in the easement which is going to restrict
ingress/egress. An example would be when we go to get pathways along
Nampa / Meridian’s – one of their drain ditches, if they hold title to the drain ditch,
we just deal with them for the pathway agreement. If they simply hold an
easement for that drain ditch, then we have to get consensus from each one of
the titled owners that has property bordering on that ditch. So, I don’t know if that
answers your question or not, but we’ve reviewed the situation. Staff and I have.
I think the key for the City is to make sure that 15-foot is kept open. I’m not sure
that the City has any obligation to make sure that the property – I mean we’re not
a court. We’re not to issue an injunction. We don’t have the power of the
property owner to say what they can or can’t do that way. It’s complicated by the
fact the road bed isn’t built entirely within the easement. Actually, if they’re only
seven and a half feet off, that’s pretty good for 1913.
Corrie: Yes, I think it was. Council, any other questions for staff? Comments?
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I’ve got a little legality of the easement and all that stuff. It’s very important.
When these developers came in and did this, they promised to the Windgate
people that they wouldn’t do this and they wouldn’t do this and they consistently
have done this and that. I personally went out. Gary has been out, I’m sure. I’ll
let Gary address that. I don’t think they’re holding up their end of the promise
that they give to these people. I realize these people aren’t in the City limits. I
don’t know the legality of the road easement or anything else, but I think if you
make some commitments in public testimony, that you live up to them. I realize
that they have a new developer there. One of the original people are not
involved, but when they take over the development of it, they acquire the
conditions that this development was processed under. I don’t think they’ve been
good neighbors to Windgate people. They haven’t done what they had stated
they would do. I just don’t think it’s right. I know there’s probably nothing legally
we can do, but they just didn’t – they haven’t lived up to their promises in their
conditions.
Corrie: Thank you. Staff, do you have any comments on this final plat? Gary?
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members. I was out to the job site yesterday
evening and the contractor working on Packard Acres No. 1, which is to the east
side of this plat that you have on the overhead is approaching Windgate Lane
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 20
with their improvements. That is their water and storm drain. I was informed by
the Contractor Superintendent that they will be installing some sand and grease
traps for storm drainage control at the end of the Challis Avenue, which is the
street at the very bottom of this Plat No. 2, and it extends on to the east. They
will be installing those sand and grease traps within the next day or two. Those
sand and grease traps are located within their property on the No. 1 Sub.
However, as Mr. Nichols pointed out, their property line is approximately in the
middle of the existing gravel surface of Windgate Lane. Therefore, Windgate
Lane is going to be disturbed with excavation to install those sand and grease
traps by the developer of Packard Acres No. 1 Subdivision. There is a
requirement, as I read the Development Agreement, to install a boundary fence
along Packard Acres No. 1 Subdivision’s west boundary. Again, that west
boundary is approximately down the middle of the existing gravel surface of
Windgate Lane. I think you can see where this thing is heading and that’s why I
ask Mr. Nichols for his opinion, as far as the legal ramifications to the City of
Meridian. I did find a letter in our file from the developer, Mr. Craig Groves. It
was written on March 22, 2000. It was addressed to Mr. Vern Allman and Mr.
Dale Sharp. I will quote a couple of sentences from that letter. “I want to assure
you that you will have the required legal access along Windgate Lane and any
damages caused by our contractors will be repaired immediately. The developer
guarantees to provide at least a 15-foot right-of-way for Windgate Lane.” That
letter was signed by Craig Groves, and it was received and signed for by Dale
Sharp and Vern Allman. As far as I know, at this point, as of yesterday evening,
Windgate Lane is accessible by property owners – Mr. Sharp. Obviously, if the
fence is installed, it won’t be unless the contractor builds additional width to
Windgate Lane and provides that access width. Again, that existing road bed is
not within the legally described easement for Windgate Lane, but I suspect there
is some kind of prescriptive use, as Mr. Nichols referenced. Again, that’s a legal
question that’s just an opinion. I’m not a legal person. All I know is it’s been
there. At least, reportedly, it’s been there for a long time. They are providing the
easement for Windgate Lane as described in the legal document on this plat. In
fact, we are requesting that they provide an additional five feet to increase that
width to 20 feet so that it’s accessible with two-way traffic. Right now, it’s pretty
much a one-lane road. However, there are wide spots here and there where
traffic can pull off if there is an oncoming vehicle. But, you could rest assured
that if somebody encountered a BFI trash truck on that road, they’re going to
have to look for a place to hide as that goes by. At this point, we have not
received a response from the developer or their representative. We have a need
for a – perhaps we just can’t find it in our files, but we have a need for a copy of
an easement for the pressure sewer line along that large lot at the end of the
long cul-de-sac – along the west side of that large lot at the end of that long cul-
de-sac – clear on the west side – the long cul-de-sac that goes north/south, yes.
Right along there, we’ve got a pressure sewer line that comes from the lift station
down right there by the arrow and we need to get a copy of the easement across
that large lot. We also had a question. Item No. 20 of the staff’s review
comments on this Final Plat, is a bit of a conflict with the Highway District’s
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 21
requirements concerning Challis Drive and its crossing of the Windgate Lane. I
don’t know if you have that condition in front of you or not, but staff is requesting
your comments on that issue because we do have a conflict with the Highway
District as to what they want to provide and what the users of Windgate Lane
want. This concerns the extension – or the connection of Challis Drive on No. 2
– to Challis Drive on No. 1.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Gary, have you talked to ACHD about this?
Smith: I haven’t specifically, no. I was just referencing this condition that Bruce
and Shari had written.
De Weerd: Okay, but perhaps we can revisit this at the next meeting.
Smith: I can get some information for you on that, yes. That’s all I have, Mr.
Mayor and Council.
Corrie: Thanks, Gary. Well, it sounds like we need to table this one until the 21
st
anyway. So, I’ll entertain a motion to that effect, if it meets with approval of
Council.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I move we table this item for a request for Final Plat approval for 61
building lots and 3 other lots by Packard Estates Development and revisit it on
November 21
st
.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to table Item No. 1 until the 21
st
of
November meeting. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of
the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Corrie: With Council’s permission, why don’t we take a five-minute break?
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we take a break.
De Weerd: Second.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 22
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to take a five-minute break. All those in
favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
(Meeting reconvened at 9:05 p.m.)
Item 2. Continued Public Hearing from September 13, 2000: Proposed
changes to the Landscape Ordinance by the City of Meridian:
Corrie: We’ll come back in from recess. Item No. 2 is a continued public hearing
from September 13, 2000. It is proposed changes to the Landscape Ordinance
by the City of Meridian. At this time, I will continue the public hearing. Staff.
Steve.
Siddoway: Yes, Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. As Councilwoman De
Weerd suggested earlier, I have submitted a memo dated November 3
rd
,
requesting continuance again of this hearing tonight, as we’re not ready for a
final decision to be made. At the last hearing, when the Landscape Ordinance
was heard, the Building Contractors Association was here and testified as to
several concerns they had. I was instructed by the Council to meet with the
Building Contractors Association and to try and work out some of the issues and
compromises. We have met twice. I have a third meeting with them tomorrow
and we’re making some significant progress. However, one of the most hotly
contested issues is the open space issue. The Draft Ordinance, as you have it,
requires five percent common open space internal to new subdivisions. The
compromise that the Building Contractors Association is asking for is that we
allow the street buffers to count for up to half of that five percent, effectively
reducing the amount of open space that we get internally in half to about two and
a half percent. It won’t necessarily be the case in all cases, but in many cases, it
will. When we drafted this original ordinance, we felt that five percent internal
was the minimum standard that we wanted to see in order to have – raise the bar
in the subdivisions to create a better quality of life for the residents that are in
them and prevent what we see today as miles of subdivision – lot after lot without
much of an open space break. I’m here tonight because the hearing is open and
if anyone wants to testify, I’m here for questions. I’m also hoping to get some
feedback from the Council and Mayor on this issue to see what your feelings are
– if we should hold to the five percent – if we should drop it as the Building
Contractors Association has requested. It is my understanding that a
representative from the Parks Commission is here tonight. I don’t know if they
are or not, but they were going to testify on this issue. With that, I’ll stand and
see if anyone is here to testify and answer any questions. I’d love to have some
feedback.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 23
Corrie: My voice may not last very long here, but I’d like to put two-cents worth in
to you. I’d like to see it stay at the five percent. We’re growing at a fast pace
here now. I don’t think we’re going to be hurting for more subdivisions the way it
looks. I want five percent to stay, if I have my way. I don’t always get it, but still,
you ask for our opinion, and I’m going to give you mine now so that you have it. I
may expel on that next – on the 21
st
, but this is a public hearing continuance. Is
there anyone else here that would like to enter testimony now and they could
also enter on the 21
st
as we continue it. Is there any comments from Council?
Do you have the member of the Parks and Recreation here?
De Weerd: I didn’t see anyone. Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: Since I was on that Committee, I would support it as well.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Just to give you a little more direction, I support the five percent, too.
Corrie: I’d say 10, but we want to be reasonable about this. If there is no more
testimony, I would entertain a motion to continue the public hearing until the
request of the Planning and Zoning – Steve – to table this to the 21
st
of
November – or not table, but to continue.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we continue the public hearing on the Landscape Ordinance to
November 21, 2000.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the public hearing until the 21
st
of November. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the
motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 3. Continued Public Hearing from October 3, 2000: PP 00-014
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 5 building lots and 1
other lot on 8.29 acres for proposed Waltman Court Subdivision
by John and Sandra Goade – Waltman Lane and SW 5
th
Street:
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 24
Corrie: Item No. 3 is a continued public hearing from October 3, 2000. It is a
request for a Preliminary Plat approval of 5 building lots and 1 other lot on 8.29
acres for proposed Waltman Court Subdivision. At this point, I’ll open the
continued public hearing and invite staff’s comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, we did meet with the applicant and their
representatives regarding this project. The main issue that has yet to be finally
determined is the easement – either common lot or an easement for a future
pathway along Ten Mile Creek. These are some pictures that Steve went out
and took of the site. This picture here is looking south across Waltman Lane
along the creek area. This picture is looking north. This is roughly right at the
entrance to the property. It’s a little overgrown and dense in this area. They do
have a fence that runs adjacent to the creek, and then the old Waltman house is
back here. This is also showing the Waltman property would be here. It is a
beautiful existing natural feature that we would like to retain and have the chance
to put a pathway in there. Tom Kuntz and I met at the site and looked at how the
pathway might be constructed. The fence was put in by the present owner of the
property, I believe, in an attempt to create some safety due to the fact they were
having some functions at the Waltman house and wanted to prevent people from
falling into the creek. The biggest area where there is a little bit of a problem is
as you come into this property from Waltman Lane, the property line is shown
here. They are also proposing a sewer easement, because apparently they can’t
serve this property with the sewer that would be coming down from Troutner
Business Park. So, Tom and I did go out to the site. We would still like the
applicant to consider the common lot concept so if in the event this continues
through – through what would be the Landing Subdivision further to the west
here -- On the south side of Ten Mile Creek, once you get to the Landing
Subdivision, there’s pretty much a clear shot all the way to Linder Road. What
we were proposing is that a minimum 10-foot wide pathway be provided along
this area. This would be a future bridge that Ada County Highway District has
actually agreed in writing that they would participate in paying for the crossing of
that bridge – that they will pay a portion of that. What we would propose is that
the pathway be constructed along these two lots until you get to the bridge. Then
the bridge would have a sidewalk crossing as part of the bridge. At that point,
the pathway could continue on the south side of Ten Mile Creek. The revised
plat we got from the applicant’s engineer does not show the common lot or an
easement for the Ten Mile Drain. I did speak with the applicant’s engineer today
and they’ve indicated that the easement is 50 feet from the center of the drain
each way. Mr. Hickey is here tonight. Hopefully, he can address this issue. I
didn’t see any remaining items, unless he can think of something else. Their
concern, mainly was the driveway here and with the pathway and the driveway
be able to both be accommodated and maybe somehow share that. I think that’s
something that as they get into the final design for the Final Plat, we’ll have to
look more closely at, and maybe see some of the pins out in the field when they
go to stake those lots. With the provision of the bike path as a detailed, I would
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 25
ask that the Preliminary Plat be approved with that condition and see if Mr.
Hickey has any comments to make on that.
Corrie: This is a continued public hearing.
Hickey: Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I’m Tony Hickey, 2090 South
Cole Road in Boise. I represent John and Sandy Goade. In talking with J.J.
Howard Engineers, we have determined that from the existing fence over to the
property line on lot 3, which is along the Waltman house, and along lot 4, all the
way up to where Corporate Drive will come across, John and Sandy Goade
would, in fact, create a common lot there from the existing fence over to the
property line – whatever that distance is. John Goade and Tom were out looking
the property over and as Shari said, the biggest problem we have right now is the
first 30 feet, I would guess, or perhaps 40 feet north of Waltman Lane. It’s very
tight and congested right through there due to the location of the house and the
entrance coming in. I don’t think there’s a problem at all in getting the sanitary
sewer there. That will be very simple to do. Our problem would be in
guaranteeing it to be a 10-foot wide flat area between the fence and the creek
right through there. John and Tom Kuntz were together yesterday, I believe or
the day before and feel that whatever issues that need to be resolved can be. It
may be a small area of caressing. It is something that can be, in fact, worked
out. We’re willing to do that and proceed on. I would hope that if you can grant
preliminary approval tonight, that by the final approval, we’ll have the plat
showing the common lot all the way along. We’ll have a little more insight into
exactly how to do that pathway through there. Primarily, it does make a lot of
sense to me to have a pathway right there. It’s gorgeous. It’s a beautiful
location. It can be dangerous along there simply because it is so very close to
the water. It’s steep going down to the water’s level, but that’s not my point to
make. We will make provisions for a land area there and hopefully be able to
work out something with Parks so that we can get a pathway in there that’s
acceptable. Apparently, the pathway is – the width and everything – there is a
certain amount of discretion by the Parks Department and I think we need to
have – for 20 or 30 feet in there, we’ll have to utilize some of that discretion.
Once we get past the house itself – the old Waltman house, them things open up
and then there’s not any problem at all. If we had to move the fence a couple of
feet or whatever, I don’t suspect that would be a major issue. The first driveway
area right there is going to be very congested. By moving the driveway over to
the east side of the house, we’ve completely destroyed the yard and the whole
ambiance of the property, so we’re going to have to figure out some way to work
within that. The easiest thing to do would be to move the pathway on the south
side of the drain all the way along. It wouldn’t bother us if we did that, but if it has
to stay on the north side on our side, we’ll be certainly willing to dedicate that
common lot area. John and Tom will be able to work out something, I’m sure –
something that will be satisfactory to the City and affordable for the developer.
Any questions?
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 26
Corrie: Thank you. Is there anybody else from the public that would like to issue
testimony? Yes, sir.
Roghani: Good evening, Mayor and Councilmen. My name Fo Roghani. I
reside at 2273 Riviera Drive.
Corrie: Okay. Would you spell your last name.
Roghani: My last name is Roghani – R-O-G-H-A-N-I. I am one of the partners
on the multiple lots at the south side of Waltman. We don’t have any opposition
to the development. The only thing is considering this idea is all future
commercial industrial zoning. I just wanted to make sure the proposed streets
are wide enough to handle the future traffic. As you all know, there is now way
into or out of Waltman at the present time. We don’t have any objections today.
We just want to make sure that the roads are adequate to carry all the future
traffic considering that eventually, it’s going to be a commercial industrial zone.
Corrie: Okay. Any questions from the Council? Okay. Thank you. Is there
anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony? Council.
Questions, comments or testimony?
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: The question that brings up the issue – all around WinCo and Home
Depot and all that area, I think we have so much development going on now that
I think those roads are too narrow. I guess my question for staff is what is the
criteria and at what point do we move to wider road requirements if we know
that’s all going commercial.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor, Council, Councilman Anderson, the Ada County Highway
District is only requesting a local street section on Waltman Lane, which is 50
feet wide. Their commercial sections are 58 feet wide. They have not
requested, that I am aware of, any additional right-of-way on the Waltman Lane.
What will happen – you can tell a little bit better here – when Corporate Drive
comes through, and I am told that is going to start happening very soon.
Corporate here would be Bolo’s. Corporate would come through here. West 5
th
would connect to Corporate, then Corporate would come down here and they
would put in a trust fund – a deposit for half of the cost of the bridge to cross Ten
Mile Creek. I don’t know what the ultimate configuration is there, but it would
connect back with Waltman Lane at some point and it was also expected that
there would be an extension connecting into the existing Landing Subdivision at
this Dub Street location. That would give them a collector street getting back out
either to Franklin Road or through Corporate to Meridian Road. Their
expectation is that this is not going to be very functional –
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 27
*** End of Side 2 ***
Stiles: -- as these properties come in and request development, they are going
to need to widen that portion of Waltman Lane to meet a commercial roadway
section width. I also had a comment about Mr. Hickey’s statement. I wanted to
make sure that we were clear on this. What we were requesting is a ten-foot
common lot that would be beyond the existing fence as the majority of that
existing fence is nearly at the top of the existing bank. The total width from the
property line would be approximately 20 feet. If that’s something that can be
worked out with the design of the Final Plat, we are agreeable to that, but I just
wanted to make sure, because I thought I heard Mr. Hickey say that the 10 feet
would be on the south side of that existing fence and that’s where the slope
starts to go down into the creek. It would be very improbable that a pathway
could be provided within that 10 feet. It would need to be north of the existing
fence that’s out there now.
Anderson: Shari, in our Comprehensive Plan, what is this area scheduled to be
designated?
Stiles: It’s just currently shown as a – I believe that one is mixed plan use. It is
shown as existing urban. It’s shown on our map as being existing urban, but it
wasn’t in the city at the time this map was done.
Anderson: And then, our revised plan – do you know what it’s going to be?
Stiles: No. It’s already zoned. It’s annexed and zoned at this time, so it’s going
to be – I would imagine that all of that freeway frontage that’s south of Waltman
Lane is going to be some type of commercial or industrial or technological park or
whatever.
Anderson: It seems logical to me that we ought to be recommending to ACHD
that they get 58-foot roads, instead of 50, like they have in residential – if we
know that going into this.
Stiles: We can certainly ask them for that. I don’t think -- in this particular case, I
don’t think there’s enough frontage there that it will make a huge difference.
Maybe Mr. Hickey has some other ideas. That would be an additional four feet
beyond what they provided. There is in the recommendations that they have a
requirement for 29 feet dedication on Waltman Lane, which would be four
additional feet. I was going by the comments submitted by the applicant’s
representative that said ACHD was not requesting any additional right-of-way on
Waltman Lane. But they are. They are at least planning for a commercial
industrial roadway section there.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 28
Anderson: My other question had to do with the pathway. If the slope of this
thing is so steep and if the area up by the old Waltman house is too tight,
wouldn’t it seem more logical to try to put the pathway on the other side of the
Ten Mile when development goes in there?
Stiles: It probably would be. One problem that we have is we don’t know when
that other property is coming in or if it’s coming in at any reasonable time frame.
It is an existing residential use at this time. When this property was annexed,
that was a condition of the annexation. It was included in the Development
Agreement and it’s kind of like the first one in is the one that gets hit with the
requirement.
Anderson: It seems that as we do these pathway plans, we ought to plan them
on one side of the ditch or the other. We don’t ever know which side of the ditch
is going to develop first. You can’t be jumping back and forth across the ditch
with your pathway every time a new development comes in. Approach the side
of the ditch that seems the most logical for the pathway and then solicit the right-
of-ways from those property owners as they develop.
Stiles: When the annexation and zoning came in, we didn’t have the luxury of
seeing a plat or knowing where the property line existed in relation to the creek.
We didn’t have any idea what the contours were. The developer did agree to
having that requirement as part of his annexation and zoning. There is quite a bit
of difference between this side and this side. This is quite a bit lower on this side
and it is pretty much fully landscaped up to the water’s edge as part of that
house. It may be that it’s not needed in the future, but I’d hate to give up the
opportunity of even having one because we failed to require what was agreed to
in the Development Agreement.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I, too, agree with Ron. I love the pathways. North, knowing that property a
little bit – that north is – or east side of it is pretty steep and way to keep the
house, which is a historical house out there – to keep an entry way and stuff, I do
not know how you’re going to get off of Waltman for about the first – Oh my God.
That’s 150 – 200 feet with a pathway without somebody going down this or
building something over like that. You’re going to be back by the garages and
stuff before you – back there a little bit before that starts giving you enough room,
I believe. The west side or south side – whatever you want to call it – of the ditch
is much lower and much flatter. I know this was a Development Agreement and I
think once you got past there, you could probably – if the developer gives you
that much ground, you probably can be flat. That first 150 or 200 feet is going to
be a real challenge to get a pathway. Mr. Kuntz has to.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 29
De Weerd: You mentioned that the property on the other side of the canal is
already annexed. No. It’s not zoned. This is currently zoned light industrial?
L-O? Oh. Are ACHD requirements in an L-O just 50 feet for the roads?
Stiles: The Waltman Lane requirement would be a total of 58 feet – 29 feet from
the center. As corporate comes in here, it is 70 feet. They show 60 feet on this
plat, but the Highway District has requested 70 feet. The plat would need to be
revised to reflect the 70 feet and the additional 4 feet on Waltman Lane. It also
needs to show the existing easement for Ten Mile Creek.
Corrie: Mr. Kuntz.
Kuntz: Mayor and Council, just a couple of comments from the Parks
Department. One is this is a key piece to connecting Waltman Lane along the
Ten Mile drain all the way to Linder Road and possibly Black Cat. It will allow
pedestrian and bicycle traffic once the overpass is rebuilt to create bicycle and
pedestrian pathways across the freeway to get on Waltman Lane and traverse
that pathway. The Parks Department is in agreement that it would be more
appropriate on the south side, but in lieu of us not having that opportunity at this
point, we’d hate to pass up the opportunity for a dedicated portion of the
pathway. The narrowest part, as Council member Bird pointed out, is at
Waltman Lane to the barn – if I can see the next photo there. From Waltman
Lane, there is the barn there. Back to Waltman Lane, we have 20 to 23 feet.
That section – a pathway would be very narrow. The path would have to be 10
feet in that area with not much shoulder to it. The developer has agreed to –
once we get to that barn, to let us come out towards the barn and increase our
width at that point and then all the way to the back property line. So we think we
can come up with a solution to the problem based upon the property that’s
available for the pathway. Thank you.
Corrie: You wanted to add something here and answer a question that they
might have raised.
Hickey: Hi. I’m Tony Hickey. My comment on the easement to the fence line is
the first 100 or 120 feet or whatever right through there. After we get past the
house, the barn and the garage that’s in there, it widens open enough to where
10 feet isn’t going to be a big problem anywhere we go. It’s just that first portion
coming through. If the Parks Department and the developer can work out some
sort of deal where we don’t have a lot of riffraff or high walls, or additional safety
issues through there, which it appears that we can, there shouldn’t be any
problem one way or another. That ought to work just fine. J.J. Howard
Engineers – Jerry Parker has been in discussion with ACHD on Waltman Lane. I
don’t believe that there is any problem with it and I’m not even sure that the
whole four feet is coming off of our side. I do believe that there’s room in there
for that four feet. That isn’t going to be an issue. That should be very easily
resolved.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 30
Corrie: Thank you, Tony. Any other questions or comments? Hearing none. I’ll
entertain a motion to close the public hearing.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close the public hearing on Waltman Court Subdivision – the
request for Preliminary Plat.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No. 3 –
Waltman Court Subdivision – request for Preliminary Plat. Any further
discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Corrie: Any discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: I’ll entertain a motion then on the request for Preliminary Plat approval.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve the Preliminary Plat for 5
building lots and 1 other lot on 8.29 acres for proposed Waltman Court
Subdivision for John and Sandra Goade – Waltman Lane and South 5
th
and
instruct the City Attorney to draw up the appropriate Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order subject to staff comments.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Preliminary Plat and have the
attorney draw up the proper Decision of Order and include the conditions of the
staff. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call: Anderson, aye; De Weerd, aye; Bird, aye; McCandless, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 4. Public Hearing: RZ 00-004 Request for rezone of .55 acres from
I-L to L-O for a proposed licensed childcare facility for 48 children
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 31
for Healthy Beginnings Daycare by Kasha and Wendell Lawrence
– Linder Road and Pine Avenue at 737 North Linder Road:
Corrie: The next item is a public hearing – request for rezone of .55 acres from I-
L to L-O for a proposed licensed daycare center for 48 children by Healthy
Beginnings Daycare. At this time, I will open the public hearing and have staff
comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property located at 737 North Linder
Road. There is an existing building there and it’s currently zoned light industrial.
They would like to get into a daycare center, which is prohibited in the light
industrial zone. The Lawrence’s are requesting a rezone to L-O. Staff would
recommend approval of the rezone to L-O. That’s all I have.
Bird: Any more comments?
Stiles: Well, you have the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning
Commission and that’s all we have. The Condition Use Permit is next.
Bird: Any other department comments? Is the applicant here?
Lawrence: Hi. I’m Kasha Lawrence, 370 North Linder Road. There currently is
a – I guess it was kind of an office building there before. I’m not sure what the
previous use was. It’s about five years old. In some of the staff comments, I
noticed that they had referred to it as – it needed to be constructed. I just kind of
wanted to clear that up. It was already there. When I was looking through
Planning and Zoning’s staff comments, it said “to be constructed.” The building
is currently there.
Bird: Council, any questions for the applicant?
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I just had a question. Is there some other businesses in this, too?
Lawrence: No. It’s on a strip. It’s the second property over. It’s the second
property south of Pine on the corner. The property that’s right on the corner, I
believe is – it looks like a split-level residential.
Bird: Is this just behind Midich’s old split-level house and there used to be a little
garage repair down there? It’s a little building.
Lawrence: It’s a small yellow building.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 32
Bird: Okay. Any other questions?
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: (inaudible) Does ACHD comment on these? I don’t know if there’s
any (inaudible)
Stiles: We do have some draft comments on it.
Lawrence: Yes. We went to a conference with ACHD and when he had voted
five years ago, he had given right-of-way and ACHD had not asked for any
additional right-of-way, but they are asking for – I guess they put it in trust funds
for the sidewalks at the time that they do expand Linder Road. ACHD is asking
for that – the money to be put for when they do. The sidewalks aren’t there right
now and they don’t want us to put them in. They want us to put the money up so
that when Linder Road is widened, they can utilize that.
De Weerd: Do they anticipate this creating more traffic than what is there
currently?
Lawrence: ACHD considers child care a “on the way.” I’m not exactly – the term
that they use, but they consider it somebody that’s already using that road.
Bird: Any other questions?
De Weerd: No.
Bird: Thank you. Anybody else that would like to testify? Step forward and give
your name and address.
Carmack: Mr. President and Council members, my name is Becky Carmack. I
live at 1705 West Pine, which is on the other side – the third house to the west
on Pine. I attended the hearing that was held on September 12
th
for the Planning
and Zoning and some issues that came up then. We just wanted to follow
through on – our family is not necessarily opposed to this, but we do have some
concerns. Within the last few years, as you probably are aware, a lot of fairly
high-density housing has been approved in this area. With the approval of Valeri
Heights tonight, it increases the complexity of our traffic problem at the other end
of Pine. We see this as potentially increasing that traffic problem. I’m glad that
you addressed that somewhat, Mrs. De Weerd. We have four elementary
schools within a mile and a half of our home. Meridian High, of course, is just
right across the street and Meridian Middle School is just barely over a mile.
That means 6,000 children are traveling to and from school within a mile and a
half of my home every day. Traffic is, indeed, a problem. For people who are
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 33
traveling northbound on Linder who want to cross this road to go into the
daycare, I can tell you that traffic now is backed up at crucial hours of the day to
the railroad tracks. I would anticipate having parents waiting there to cross. If
they are heading northbound, it would not be of benefit in any way to the traffic
movement on that road. It will be a problem. We have problems, of course.
Before school, there are zero-hour classes and also before the 7:50 class bells
ring, that is very difficult and a very congested intersection. My kids have walked
through that intersection many times going to school and it is very unsafe
increasingly so. We also had a problem at the lunch hour and a problem after
school and then again, a problem at the end of the day when we have a conflict
between after-school sports getting out and people coming home from work. So
there are four periods of the day when traffic is indeed, an issue at that
intersection. I certainly would ask you to consider that. I know when this was
brought up at the Planning and Zoning Meeting, a comment was, “We’ve just
given up on addressing the traffic problem in Meridian.” I would hope that you
would not give up, because it is increasing. It affects our quality of life. It affects
the safety of our children. I have five children ranging from a Kindergarten
student to a 19-year old. We live in the area. We’re there all the time and we do
have concerns about our own children and friends coming back and forth to our
school and the traffic problems there. We’re not opposed to the daycare. I think
it’s an improvement over an industrial zoning. I certainly have no problem with
that, but I would ask that you consider that. I know that at the Planning and
Zoning Meeting, the issue was also made that this is just a beginning – that the
daycare plans are to extend us to include 78 children. Again, that’s an issue that
I would just ask that you would consider – not just for this development, but for
anything else that you do to our area. Please, at least think about that as you’re
making those decisions. Thank you.
Bird: Any questions?
Anderson: Just a comment. There are plans from ACHD to improve Linder
Road and to put curbs and sidewalks and widen that and I think also a stoplight.
I can’t remember the exact years of those, but it’s sometime within the next few
years. I was just reading those plans the other day. We are concerned about
that, too. We’re not just blindly approving projects with no light at the end of the
tunnel. We are pushing constantly to get those road improvements in there.
Although they don’t come specifically from our budget, we get to recommend
ACHD projects and that is a project that we have recommended to them that
needs improving.
Bird: Anybody else from the public like to testify? Council, do you have any
questions before we close the public hearing.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 34
De Weerd: Shari, on the comments from ACHD, that being so close to the
intersection, that does back up at that stop sign. Is there any turn lane
requirements or is there anything in there that addresses the traffic generated or
how to facilitate vehicles turning into that area?
Stiles: Just a minute. They haven’t asked for any improvements. They do say
they have 45 feet of right-of-way and I’m hoping that this site plan reflects that
right-of-way already here on this plan and so that landscaping is beyond that
right-of-way. ACHD’s report said that this would generate 200 additional trips per
day – that there were 20 existing. That’s what their draft report said. As far as –
they want money for a sidewalk. It’s planned for expansion to a three-lane road
in 2005. I don’t see anything in the report that asks for any type of improvement
at all.
Lawrence: Councilwoman De Weerd, Ada County Highway District – and I think
it’s in the report and it isn’t really going to – it’s not something now, but I know
that they have left access open on the south side of the property so that – I don’t
know. I know that our daycare that is down the street, 444 North Linder Road,
right across from the tracks – they had us do the same thing – leave an
easement open for the property. Eventually, we’ll be – yes, right there. We’ll be
accessing through the other properties, so it will be farther away from the
intersection. A little bit lower where those two trees are.
Stiles: They have asked for a cross-access easement. It says “a cross-access
easement for the parcel to the south to use this parcel for access.” I don’t know if
that’s just to get some better circulation or – isn’t next year – that’s a storage
area –
Lawrence: Yes, that’s where they have the strip.
Stiles: -- with all the boats parked out front. I’m not sure what the purpose of
that is other than to have some circulation between the two lots.
Lawrence: The way I understood it is because our entrance is so close to the
intersection that eventually we would have to – our access would be through the
south and we would no longer be able to access through that entrance that is
there currently. Of course, they didn’t give us any timeline.
Stiles: The only thing a cross-access agreement would do is give them access
through your lot. It wouldn’t give you access through their lot.
Lawrence: Okay. I didn’t understand that. That was done. The previous owner
did that. I assumed that’s what it was. They addressed that when they also
addressed how close our access was to the stop sign. I assume that’s why they
left that cross-access open.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 35
Bird: Shari, get the site plan up there.
Stiles: The elevation of the building?
Bird: No, the site.
Stiles: This is the site.
Bird: This isn’t the site.
Stiles: Vicinity map.
Bird: Is this the complete site?
Stiles: It’s this little piece right here.
Bird: I thought it included some of those down on the other deal.
Stiles: This is where the storage units are. This –
Bird: You’ve got a little strip mall right there.
Stiles: Yes, right here.
Bird: We don’t usually do this, but go ahead.
Carmack: It came up in the Planning and Zoning. My name is Becky Carmack
again. Where she just pointed out for that access to go through, right at the
bottom left corner there where the trees are, there’s an irrigation access there
that accesses us to the whole line of houses on that property. If something were
to go in there, that would be very detrimental to all of the pieces of property along
there because that is the only irrigation site that we have as a headgate to turn
on and off our irrigation. That would be very difficult for us if a road was put
through on that side. That would not be good.
Anderson: They still have to provide you access to your irrigation water.
Carmack: Right. We did talk about that before, but there was nothing mentioned
about a road being put from that side of the property in. I am concerned to hear
that. That’s a surprise to me.
Bird: Anybody else like to testify? Council, do you have any more questions?
Lawrence: The headgate is located across from where the parking stalls are. It’s
not right there. Right there, where the two trees are, the irrigation is up farther
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 36
right straight across from where the parking stalls are. That’s not where they
have the cross-access. Even though I’m not sure how far it extends down, but
when I went out there and looked at it, there’s one in the back which our fence
misses, and that I assume that it goes down the side of the property line there.
It’s the parking lot – if you walk straight over from the parking stalls, you would
run into the headgate – which I assume is the headgate.
Bird: I think you’re right. I think it’s right off the road there, isn’t it? Okay. Any
other questions now? If not, I would entertain a motion to close the public
hearing.
Anderson: So moved.
Bird: Do you have a second?
McCandless: Moved and seconded that we close the public hearing on Item No.
4. All in favor say aye.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes.
De Weerd: Before we vote, I do have an item. Usually, ACHD gives us levels of
service in these areas and how those affect those levels of service. This
intersection will be similar to that at Ten Mile and Pine with the intersection
improvements that were being made up there were actually upgrading that
intersection. I don’t see that anything here is going to do anything but negatively
effect that intersection and make it frustrating for the parents that are trying to get
in and out of the daycare. I don’t know if this is a really good location in the way
that Linder currently is. I don’t see Linder being improved for some time,
because even if it is slated for 2005, it most likely will be traded off to another hot
spot that we need a road improvement more. I would like to continue this until
we can get some information from ACHD as far as level of service and how this
will impact that service level.
Bird: We’ve got a motion to close the public hearing.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Just a comment. We’re not traffic engineers. I guess I have to rely
on the comments that ACHD provides and if they indicated that this was a
problem and that this daycare was significant to impact the traffic on that road
that it would warrant some type of a road improvement, I would think that they
would comment us in that fashion. I feel like delaying this project based off of
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 37
what we’re summarizing – that ACHD may say. They have had the opportunity
to comment and they didn’t say that. We’re almost trying to put words in their
mouth. My personal feeling is that they would have told us if they felt that this
was a problem and we’re trying to play traffic engineer here, which I don’t feel
comfortable doing.
Bird: Any other discussion?
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I don’t believe I’m trying to be a traffic engineer. Certainly, I have no
interest in being that. The thing is they’re inconsistent on their recommendations
and providing us that information. All that I’m suggesting is that we delay this so
we can have that information in front of us. I haven’t even read the report. Have
you?
Anderson: We just heard what it said from our staff.
De Weerd: I’m sorry. You can go ahead and vote on that. I’m just one.
Bird: We’ve got a motion and second to close the public hearing for the Healthy
Beginnings Day Care. All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE.
Bird: Council, what is your recommendation for the request for rezone?
De Weerd: My recommendation would be more information. What’s your
pleasure, Council?
McCandless: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: In the recommendations of City Council, on the Conditional Use, it
says – are we working on that yet?
Bird: No. We’re working on the rezone.
McCandless: Okay. Sorry.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 38
Anderson: I’ll make a motion and see where it goes, then. I would make a
motion that we approve the request for a rezone of .55 acres from I-L to L-O for
proposed licensed childcare facility for 48 children for Healthy Beginnings
Daycare for Kasha and Wendell Lawrence.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Motion made and seconded to approve the request for rezone of .55 acres
from I-L to L-O for the proposed licensed childcare facility for 48 children for
Healthy Beginnings Daycare by Kasha and Wendell Lawrence. Discussion.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I feel that I just cannot make a decision at this time with the
information that we have.
Bird: Mr. President, all this is would be for requesting rezones, so this doesn’t
actually approve the daycare at this point.
De Weerd: But we (inaudible) rezoning for a particular business use and that’s
what I have a problem with.
Bird: Anymore discussion? If not, Mr. Clerk.
Roll-call: Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; De Weerd, naye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE.
Item 5. CUP 00-046: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a
licensed childcare facility for 48 children in an I-L zone and a
proposed L-O zone for Healthy Beginnings Daycare by Kasha
and Wendell Lawrence – Linder Road and Pine Avenue at 737
North Linder Road:
Bird: Item No. 5. Request for a Condition Use Permit to construct a licensed
childcare facility for 48 children in an I-L zone and a proposed L-O zone for
Healthy Beginnings Daycare by Kasha and Wendell Lawrence – Linder Road
and Pine Avenue. Staff? Comments.
Stiles: Mr. President, Council members. The report from ACHD, just to clarify
does show that it’s a better than “C” is the existing level of service and with the
project built out, it’s still better than C. That’s what they put in their report.
Basically, they’re saying the level of service will not change with this project.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 39
De Weerd: Thank you for providing that information after the fact.
Stiles: We were dealing with the rezone, not the Conditional Use Permit.
De Weerd: It still influences the decision.
Bird: On with your comments now, Shari.
Stiles: They are proposing a facility for up to 48 children, I believe is what the
last count was. Brad Hawkins-Clark had prepared a staff report that did some
calculations and based on his calculations, he thought that this facility would only
support 30 children. Instead of their recommendation, that’s the
recommendation under – on page 3 under Item 1.11. My recommendation would
be that they just – they have to comply with whatever Health and Welfare and the
Fire Department Standards indicate is warranted for the facility. They have
revised their site plan as shown here to show the additional parking stalls that
were needed. We would like to make sure that this is the future or ultimate
roadway section here and that landscaping is provided beyond that roadway.
We will ask for detailed landscape plans to be submitted and would recommend
approval for the daycare with staff conditions.
Bird: Any questions, Council?
Nichols: President Bird, members of the Council. Shari, did ACHD make any
recommendations on this at all?
Stiles: I don’t believe they ever make any real recommendations.
Nichols: They have no site-specific comments?
Stiles: They have site-specific requirements in regard to the driveway on Linder
Road and paving the driveway at least 30 feet into the site, installing pavement
tapers with 15-foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. There will be a little
bit of pavement at the driveway location in addition to what’s there now.
Nichols: The reason I ask the question – I don’t find the ACHD report in either of
our files. We usually put those site-specific comments and conditions in the
proposed Findings of Fact, Conclusions and the recommendation of City Council
does not reflect ACHD comments. If you give me a copy of that, then I can
include those, if that’s what the ultimate motion is.
Stiles: Does no one on Council have these? Do you have them, Will?
Bird: Is the applicant here? Would you like to address?
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 40
Lawrence: Kasha Lawrence, Healthy Beginnings Childcare, 370 North Linder
Road. The parking lot currently is totally paved. What we are showing to add is
the extra stalls which will also be paved there. It’s paved all the way out to Linder
Road. As far as ACHD’s recommendation back on that again, to the best of my
recollection was the only thing that they did specify other than it’s already there
and it’s five years ago that he had built this – was the trust money for the
sidewalks.
Bird: Any questions for Mrs. Lawrence? Thank you. Council, any questions?
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess what still remains is where that shut-off is. Has staff – I see
the Police Department made a comment on the water supply. Do you know
where the shut-off is? All codes and water supply shall be met. I’m sorry. Have
you been out there, Gary? Do you know where that shut-off is?
Smith: You’re talking about an irrigation control box? No, I don’t.
Anderson: The code requires that they maintain access for all downstream
users.
De Weerd: So they’d have to move the box.
Anderson: So they can’t stop the flow of water to people down south.
Bird: Not irrigation water. Nampa/Meridian will make sure of that. I think it’s right
next to the road, if I remember right. Any other questions? Council, what’s your
pleasure?
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve the Conditional Use Permit to
license a childcare facility for 48 children in an I-L zone and a proposed L-O zone
for Healthy Beginnings Daycare for Kasha and Wendell Lawrence and instruct
the City Attorney to draw up the appropriate Findings of Facts and Conclusions
of Law and Decision of Order and subject to all staff comments and all comments
from ACHD.
Bird: Do I hear a second? I’ll second it, then. The attorney says I can. It’s been
moved and seconded to approve the request for a Conditional Use Permit to
construct licensed childcare facility. Any discussion, Council?
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 41
McCandless: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: I’m a little concerned about the road coming in if it is blocking a
headgate for irrigation.
Bird: Shari, as I understand and remember now because it’s right on the
southeast corner of the property, isn’t it? That’s where they have this property.
The one they got cut in –
*** End of Side 3 ***
Bird: -- to those if they allow them to go across to the south there – that it might
go over it, but they still have to maintain a right-of-way to it.
Anderson: Is that a picture on top of a picture because that driveway angle
doesn’t look right. There’s no driveway that goes in at a 45 degree angle like
that.
Siddoway: Councilman Anderson, it’s a composite of four photos that were
taken. That is Linder Road. That extends from the left side to the right side and
the – it does intersect at 90 degrees, and you can see that it is fully paved. We
were looking to see if we can see in the photo where that headgate was, but it’s
not showing up very well.
Bird: It’s right back there by the sign, isn’t it – over by the telephone poll? Isn’t
that right? Right in there.
Siddoway: If it’s in there, then it would be in the right-of-way. It would not
interfere with the extension of the parking and drive isle. It would be in front of it.
Bird: But is that an open ditch or is that already tiled?
Siddoway: I don’t know.
Bird: So if they go out, they will have to tile that, if I’m not right. I believe Idaho
water laws – they’re not going to be able to stop you from getting your irrigation
water. Okay. Any other questions? Roll-call vote, Mr. Clerk.
Roll-call: De Weerd, naye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 42
Item 6. CUP 00-047: Request for a modification to the CUP of the front
landscape setback in a C-G zone for Centennial Motors by Sam
Fishel – west of Meridian Road on Franklin Road:
Bird: The next item is a request for a modification to the CUP of the front
landscape setback in a C-G zone for Centennial Motors by Sam Fishel – west of
Meridian Road on Franklin Road. Staff comments.
Stiles: I need to get back in this other program here. Just one minute please.
Poor Mr. Fishel has gone a lot of ways for this.
De Weerd: We have seen him. We know what he has to say and what you have
to say.
Stiles: The recommendation was to reduce his landscape requirement on
Franklin to 20 feet down from the 35 feet that was originally required in his
Conditional Use Permit. That was recommended for approval by the Planning
and Zoning Commission. He’s out there working right now trying to get that
landscaping in.
De Weerd: That’s very nice. I see you’ve already got the rocks in.
Bird: Shari, do you have any further comments?
Stiles: I don’t.
Bird: Any other staff? Any questions of the staff, Council?
De Weerd: I have none.
Anderson: I have none.
Bird: Mr. Fishel. Do you have anything to say as the applicant?
Fishel: Sam Fishel, 225 West Franklin Road in Meridian. Council members, as
you know, this has been a long road and I need the help. That’s all I’ve got to
say.
Bird: Do you have any questions, Council?
De Weerd: No.
Bird: I would entertain a motion.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 43
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for modification to the CUP of
the front of the landscape setback in a C-G zone for Centennial Motors and for
the attorney to draw up whatever he needs to draw up – the Findings of Facts
and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Anderson: Second.
Bird: Any discussion. It’s been moved and seconded to approve the request for
modification to the CUP of the front of the landscape setback for Centennial
Motors and for the attorney to draw up the proper papers. Mr. Clerk, roll-call
vote.
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 7. Time Extension: Request for a one-year time extension on the
Preliminary / Final Plat for The Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 9
Subdivision by Briggs Engineering, Inc., due to design problems
causing a delay in construction and recordation of Final Plat:
Bird: Next item is a time extension – request for a one-year time extension on
the Preliminary / Final Plat for The Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 9 Subdivision by
Briggs Engineering. Staff.
Stiles: Mr. President, Council members. The applicant’s representative has
requested an extension. Their plat would have been required to be recorded on
November 3
rd
of this year and they are requesting a one-year extension because
they have had some design problems. I’m not sure what the details of those are,
but I think a lot of it has to do with drainage.
Bird: Yes, they’re requesting an extension. They just want an extension of their
approval. Any other staff reports? Council, any questions of staff?
De Weerd: Nope.
Bird: If not, what’s your pleasure?
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I move we approve the request for a one-year time extension on the
Preliminary / Final Plat for the Lakes at Cherry Lane No. 9 to November 3. 2001.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 44
Anderson: I’ll second that.
Bird: Any discussion? Moved and seconded to have the time extension for The
Lakes No. 9 at Cherry Lane. Mr. Clerk.
Roll-call: McCandless, aye; Anderson, aye; De Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10. Ordinance No. 895: AZ 00-013 Request for annexation and
zoning of 5.4 acres for proposed Elliot Industrial Park
Subdivision for office and shop in an I-L zone by Chuck Elliot, The
Elliot Group – south of Fairview Avenue and east of Locust Grove
Road on Wilson Lane:
Bird: Item No. 10 is an ordinance for the annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres for
proposed Elliot Park Subdivision. What will the ordinance number be, Mr. Clerk?
Berg: Mr. President. Ordinance No. 895.
Bird: Okay, Council.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: He needs to read that.
Bird: That’s right. I’m sorry. City Clerk, will you read the ordinance by title only?
Berg: Thank you, Mr. President, members of the Council and audience.
Ordinance No. 895: An ordinance finding that certain land within Elliot Industrial
Park as lies contiguous or adjacent to the City limits of the City of Meridian,
County of Ada, State of Idaho; and finding that the owner has made a request for
annexation and writing to the Council; and that said land be annexed to the City
of Meridian and zoning designated light industrial district I-L; and declaring that
said land by proper legal description as described below be a part of the City of
Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho repealing all ordinances, resolutions,
orders or parts thereof and conflict herewith; and directing the City Engineer to
add said property to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho; and directing
the Clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map
of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer
and Assessor and the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho pursuant to
Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 45
Bird: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Is there anybody in the audience that would like that
ordinance read in its entirety? If not, Council, what’s your pleasure?
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve Ordinance No. 895 –
annexation and zoning request for 5.4 acres for proposed Elliot Industrial Park
Subdivision for an office and shop in an I-L zone by Chuck Elliot and the Elliot
Group with suspension of rules.
De Weerd: I would second that.
Bird: Okay. Moved and Seconded that we pass in favor of Ordinance No. 895
with the suspension of rules and for the attorney to draw up the proper papers.
Roll-call vote, Mr. Clerk.
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
Item 11. Cherry Lane Golf Course – Discussion on Landscape Issue:
Bird: Okay, Council. We added one item. No. 11 is Cherry Lane Golf Course.
We’ve got some questions that came up on that. Shari or Steve, do you want to
present your –
Siddoway: Mr. President, members of the Council. I’ve been asked to present
this. I was the one who reviewed the landscape plans and issued the Certificate
of Zoning Compliance. These are the site photos of what’s out there today.
These photos were taken yesterday. You’ll notice that many of the tree sizes are
very small – half-inch to three quarter-inch caliper. They’ve gotten larger along
the roads up to a two-inch caliper. Everything is gravel in the landscape areas.
This is the plan that was approved. We worked with the applicant extensively on
getting this plan approved. I think there were three revisions until we came up
with this one. The Certificate of Zoning Compliance was issued based on it. I
would point out two things. One, that all of these landscape areas in here, along
the road and internal to the parking lot are called out with the note as sod. I think
you are also aware of a note on the plat – or not on the plat, but on the plans
stating that the drainage basins will be covered with a minimum of two inches of
one-inch wash drain rock mulch. We didn’t have a problem with that note,
knowing that these areas were to be sodded. The thought was that perhaps it
might be placed elsewhere. The Certificate of Zoning Compliance was written –
it was issued on June 25, 1999. The wording in it was that all trees must be
planted as per the approved landscape plan. The landscape plan was in
compliance with the conditions of their Conditional Use Permit, but also know
that the landscape plan is not to be altered without prior written approval of the
Planning and Zoning Department. If they had come to us and requested that the
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 46
modification be made to replace the sod with gravel to accommodate the
drainage, we certainly are friendly to accommodating drainage areas in required
landscape areas, but we would have requested a design along the lines of this,
which is an infiltration swale, which still provides the grass on the top and the
drainage rock below, so that the effect is still one of the landscaped area and still,
also able to handle the drainage issues. I would like to point out that this is a
Conditional Use Permit and in the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law, as
well as in the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for all Conditional Use
Permits, it states that conditions may be attached to a Special Use Permit,
including, but not limited to – and then there are several listed -- one is requiring
more restrictive standards than those generally required in an ordinance. It’s not
unusual. In fact, that’s the purpose of a Conditional Use Permit. We saw it
tonight with Valeri Heights and reducing from three stories to two stories. That’s
not an ordinance. It’s because it’s a Conditional Use Permit that we were able to
do that. Another requirement of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
that came from Central District Health was that all storm water shall be treated
through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact of
ground water and service water quality. That’s the other reason for requiring the
infiltration swales for the pre-treatment in compliance with this requirement. The
way that the landscaping has been put in is in direct conflict with this requirement
of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and is a major modification of
the landscape plan that was approved. No changes were ever brought to us and
we would expect that it be built the way it was approved.
Bird: Is that a stamp set of drawings that you’ve got there? The approved set.
Siddoway: This is the approved plan.
Bird: And it is stamped.
Siddoway: It’s not stamped.
Bird: Does the owner have an approved stamp set? Steve, come here and take
a look at it. See if it’s the same one you’ve got.
Siddoway: I concur that the plan that he’s showing you is the approved plan.
Bird: Okay.
(Inaudible conversation amongst Council)
McCandless: My question is that if these don’t carry as much weight, why are
they even there?
Siddoway: They do carry weight. The issue is not the weight that it carries. The
issue is that those areas are showing sod, and based on that note, and based on
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 47
the approval that was in the Certificate of Zoning Compliance – if they wanted to
through that note, change the plan from sod to have those be the drainage areas
and gravel, then they should have come back for a written request for a
modification of their landscape plan. That was what was written into the
Certificate of Zoning Compliance.
Anderson: So by following the landscape notes, we should have just followed
the pictures?
Siddoway: Without a modification, yes.
McCandless: That doesn’t make much sense to me. Don’t write this stuff down
then, if they just have to follow the pictures.
Anderson: When they give specific detail of something, and it says in here that it
can be bark or two-inch rock mulch – I mean this is a more detailed drawing of
what is in here, to me.
McCandless: They thought they were following the plan.
Anderson: -- then just looking at the overall pictures.
Siddoway: Looking at the overall picture, to us, it was clear that the area was
intended to be sod. I don’t know what else to say.
T. Holloway: I’m sorry, Council. We were trying to do what we thought was right
by following what the instructions said. We mistakenly read the notes.
Stiles: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, Shari.
Stiles: I did talk with Brad Watson, who reviewed the drainage plan this
afternoon. He said that the landscape plan would not have anything to do with
the drainage plan. The surface treatment is not of concern when they’re
reviewing a drainage plan. The drainage plan can show that it’s all drainage and
show what is under the surface, but the landscape plan would be what’s over the
drainage area. Steve has a degree in landscape architecture. I don’t know that
any of you, but typically you look at the plan. You look at the symbols that are on
the plan, and that’s what you go by. You don’t look at some notes that were put
on at the last minute after three different changes to the plan. None of these
notes showed up on any of the other plans.
Bird: Wait a minute. This is a stamp set. What notes are on here is on here.
I’m not an engineer, but I’ve looked at a lot of plans. I’ll guarantee if I don’t read
notes on plans and stuff, I wouldn’t be in the business very long.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 48
McCandless: Mr. President, I would submit that I’m sure Steve does have a
degree, but I don’t think that Tad or his wife have a degree in landscaping. They
were following what they thought was the right thing on that particular plan.
Bird: Steve, on the trees, what caliber under that deal of trees were they
supposed to put in?
Siddoway: The requirement that’s in their Conditional Use Permit is 45 three-
inch caliper trees. Knowing that they were going to have difficulty in finding those
three-inch caliper trees – for about a year now, while we’ve been working on this
Landscape Ordinance, we’ve had an interim policy that allows them to reduce the
tree caliper size to two inches as long as they’re providing 110 percent of the
total caliper inches required, which is what that number is – 148.5 caliper-inches
that was written on their plan.
T. Holloway: One other question I have on the trees – I was told earlier today
that we have planted the row of trees back in this area here that said would not
be counted because it wasn’t on the parking lot. I would like that to be
addressed. We have a row of trees back here on the back side that was
addressed that it would not be counted because it wasn’t part of the project. I
would like to be addressed to Council.
Siddoway: Are you talking about the trees that are down here at the lake?
T. Holloway: No, the trees right here that would be on the other side of the canal.
Siddoway: Along here? They are counted. I don’t have a problem with counting
those.
T. Holloway: This afternoon, they were not counted.
Siddoway: I disagree. The requirement was that it – the ordinance is 1 three-
inch caliper tree per 1500 square feet of asphalt. The ordinance is 1 three-inch
caliper tree per 1500 square feet of asphalt. The reason for the ordinance is for
the softening of those parking areas that are creating the asphalt and the need
for the trees. We require them to be in proximity to the parking area. That is
true, but counting these trees that are in this row, there’s not a problem with
counting those towards your requirement.
Anderson: So are they short trees or are they long? Are they long or are they
okay or what?
Siddoway: I haven’t counted. The assumption is they’re short. Many of those
trees are very small – down to a half-inch.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 49
T. Holloway: They are going to be short trees because of the trees that are lined
up here over on Talamore – down on this area here that’s along the canal. The
trees will be planted. That property is taken care of.
Siddoway: I could go out and take caliper measurements and find out how many
total caliper inches there are, but I haven’t done that.
T. Holloway: Will someone answer my question on the trees please? On the
trees, how much more caliper of trees will we have? Do you know how short we
are?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
T. Holloway: We’re going to be short all of these trees right here, and these,
which is along the tiling of the ditch in Talamore, which is property that we’re
waiting on.
Bird: Within that agreement, it was clarified to me tonight that that agreement
(inaudible) tile, but somebody has got to put it in.
T. Holloway: The ditch company will install it is what I was told.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Siddoway: What’s being discussed is who is paying for what?
Anderson: The tiling of the ditch.
Bird: The tiling of the ditch. I was told that was one of the hold-ups up. I also
was told that the landscape architect went out there and said half the trees were
dead or something.
Siddoway: I don’t know about that. Apparently, someone did say that some of
the trees were dead. When I was out taking photos, I was unaware of that issue.
It was obvious that many of them still had leaves on them and were alive. I don’t
know if any of them are dead. I just wanted to make two points, if I could. One,
from the applicant’s testimony, in the City Council meeting, when the Conditional
Use Permit was approved – let me find out who’s saying this – Yost – Mr. Yost.
“Any and all changes that the City wants on the landscaping and vegetation of
that parking lot will be complied with. The landscape architect will work with you
and the city folks. The Planning and Zoning or the City Engineer will provide the
proper vegetation and the other conditions for that parking lot without exception.
We did work with them. Together, we came up with this plan. The ordinance
requirement was for three-inch caliper trees and we tried to provide them some
relief by allowing them to go down to two-inch caliper trees as long as they met
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 50
that policy of 110 percent. It’s clear that what is out there is certainly less than
two-inch caliper. Those are the issues that we have.
Bird: And there’s no issues regarding the – no hold-up or anything because of
the ditch not being tiled and taken care of?
Siddoway: I’m not familiar with that issue. Public Works – I turn it over to Gary.
Smith: Councilman, I’m not prepared to answer that question. I don’t know what
the requirements are. There was a land trade between Steiner and the City of
Meridian. I don’t know the status of that land trade. That land trade, as I
understand it, included that Steiner was going to furnish pipe and I believe
Nampa / Meridian was going to install the pipe. I don’t know the details of that –
how much pipe they were going to provide, when the installation was going to be
made. I would assume that it was going to be done sometime during this off-
irrigation season, but I don’t know any of the details of that agreement.
Bird: Okay. Do you have something, Jennifer?
J. Lovan-Holloway: Yes, I do. Two things I would like to clarify – one was I’d like
to address the issue with the dead trees because that was very adamant. Shari
Stiles and I had a conversation on the phone. I came back in her office today
and asked her about who the landscaper was. She said, “Well, it was a third
person. I can’t give it to you right now.” When Tad called back this afternoon to
get that, Steve informed him that it was somebody that just came in and said
that. The second issue is I would also like it stated for the record or whatever
that she has brought up to me about the trees – none of this area here – this is
the only landscaping area – that none of this around the new clubhouse would be
counted. We asked her specifically today on that. My question is when it’s at the
project – this is the whole project area. I am trying to figure out where the trees
stop and where they don’t stop at so that we know where the caliper of trees are.
We have trees along over here that are in that project area that should be
counted. I would like to know – I mean, we were planning on using part of those
trees as counting. If they’re not, I would like to know where the project area is or
is not.
Siddoway: My response would be that we’re just simply trying to get the trees
planted as per this plan.
Anderson: I guess my question is kind of along the lines of Jennifer’s. What are
we looking at when we’re calling this a project? Are we looking at just the
parking lot and are we trying to meet a minimum number of trees and caliper in
that area or are we talking about the clubhouse? To me, they’re all one project –
both the parking lot and the clubhouse here, so I am just a little bit confused on
that.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 51
Siddoway: Basically, we’re willing to count any trees that are from the clubhouse
going west into the parking lot. From the clubhouse heading east, those are golf
course trees and we want the trees to be located from the parking lot to the
clubhouse.
J. Lovan-Holloway: What I would like to know is where exactly – when we did
the plans, not only for the clubhouse, but where it started on the driving range,
the driving range was part of that project. Can you tell me how far out that goes?
Siddoway: I’m not familiar with what you’re talking about.
J. Lovan-Holloway: If you just go from the clubhouse, that part in front of the –
towards the driving range and the lake that is now being constructed –
Bird: Well, it goes right to the lake as you can see in the drawings. That’s
showing redoing to the lake.
Anderson: What’s the dotted line on the map? Isn’t that your project area?
J. Lovan-Holloway: Well, that’s what I would assume, but they’re saying it just
starts at the clubhouse that direction.
Anderson: Are those trees lining the driving range – are they in?
J. Lovan-Holloway: We have two trees right in this area, but we had some other
trees. There’s a couple here and (inaudible).
Anderson: Steve, that dotted line that’s on the map –
Siddoway: Yes.
Anderson: I was out there this weekend and that’s kind of the project area.
They’ve landscaped all that, too. Are you going to count the trees that are in that
area?
Siddoway: Yes. We will count the trees that are within the project boundary.
We just don’t want to be counting trees that are part of the golf course. The tree
requirements were written at 45 three-inch minimum trees or 148.5 caliper
inches, and then they show their plant schedule, just as we had asked. None of
the tree sizes were less than two inches, and they came up with the total caliper-
inches in excess of their minimum, which is 148.5 at 157.5. I believe that did
include those trees that are shown going out from the clubhouse towards the lake
where the driving range is. But those are all three-inch Red Oaks. What’s been
planted out there, in no way meets this plan as far as the sizes.
Bird: So, you are saying if they have the right caliper, they have enough trees?
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 52
Siddoway: I don’t know that. I haven’t been out to count trees.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Bird: Two inches. Three-inch you can’t hardly find.
J. Lovan-Holloway: The other question is when did the two-inch – I heard you
say it came into effect this year.
Siddoway: Last year. That’s why it’s written on your plan. It’s on your approved
plan up there.
J. Lovan-Holloway: Where is the two-inch?
Siddoway: The tree requirements – it’s in the plant schedule. None of them are
less than two-inch, which is what we requested of the landscape architect. Two-
inch is the minimum size. It goes from two-inch up to three and a half-inch, but
nothing less than two inch.
De Weerd: If they did two-inch, how many trees are required then?
Siddoway: If they’re all two-inch?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: You would need 148.
Siddoway: Divided by two.
Bird: That would be 74. Those are bigger down that side there.
Siddoway: Yes, 74 trees at two-inch would be required.
De Weerd: You can assume that you don’t have three-inch calipers here.
Bird: I think the main thing that you guys want to find out is what you got to get to
get your (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Bird: Let’s – I think we – Steve, I think that the main thing that Cherry Lane
would like to know is what do we need to do to get their occupancy.
Siddoway: We’d like to see the plan that was approved put in meaning the small
half-inch trees should be replaced with trees that are at least two-inch caliper.
The surface gravel should be sub-surface and with sod on the top as shown on
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 53
their landscape plan. Those two things are the two main issues for me and
meeting the total caliper-inch requirement of 148.5 total caliper-inches on the site
and the project area.
McCandless: Steve, actually what you’re saying is that your requirements would
keep them from having a Certificate of Occupancy until Spring. Is that what
you’re saying?
Siddoway: Unless they bond for it and get temporary occupancy.
Bird: Absolutely not.
McCandless: I know you’re trying to have your ordinances followed, and I
commend you for that. That’s what you need to do. It seems to me that they’ve
had so much trouble and they’ve worked so hard out there. I’m sure that they will
comply with things that you say they’re not doing right. But they did try to comply
with what they saw on those plans. If they read them wrong, I probably would
have done it myself because I don’t have the knowledge that you do, but they
sold their trailer. They were planning on moving in next Wednesday. The
clubhouse is ready. It’s a beautiful building – something we should be proud of
here in Meridian. I don’t know what you want them to do right now. They can’t
go out there and plant trees or put in grass or sod now. They can’t thaw the ditch
bank because they have to wait until the rest of it is tiled.
Siddoway: Council, we’re currently in the process of completing two projects –
one, the water tank landscaping and Generations Plaza and both of those
include sprinkling systems, soil, trees and sod and those will all be completed in
the next two weeks. It’s very possible to ask what the staff is recommending.
Thank you.
Anderson: I guess, from my perspective, I agree with you. I think some of the
calipers of the trees are – obviously, they’re less than two inches and probably
need to have additional trees and meet the number of trees of the total inches
that you wanted there. I guess, on the gravel part, to me, that is clearly spelled
out on here that that would either be two-inch gravel or mulch. We stamp that
and we approve that and I guess those are also, in my mind, the drainage areas
for the parking lot and it doesn’t make any sense to me to put soil aid or mulch
because if that fills with water, every time, it’s just going to wash down the sides
and you’re going to have a row of mulch or something there in the center of that.
I guess I would like to see us accept the gravel around the outside perimeter and
then all the back area and where the tiling is going to go would be the sod. I
guess it boils down to interpretation of the ordinance, really. That’s kind of how I
read it when I read our ordinance and we don’t really specifically tell anybody that
it has to be sod and they submitted a plan that said “either or” and we stamped
okay on it.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 54
Siddoway: I would agree with you, but I would say that the requirement of the
Conditional Use Permit was to get a landscape plan that was approved. This is a
landscape plan that was approved. That is what we wanted to see.
De Weerd: Isn’t that what you’re getting, Steve – was the rock?
Anderson: It says that and you missed where it said “rock.” Evidently you didn’t
read that part. You guys both just weren’t on the same page. They were
thinking all along that rock was okay and you were thinking that it was going to
be sod. The plan clearly says it, and we stamped okay on it.
Siddoway: It also clearly says “sod” in those areas. I guess our feeling was if
they’re changing – I mean it’s stamped sod all over those areas. That note
should hold as much weight, to me, as the one that says “gravel.” If they’re
changing those areas that are clearly marked “sod” to be gravel, then it should
have come back as a modification.
Anderson: I guess I blame that more on whoever drew this plan. I don’t know
who drew it, but they’ve got sod and then they’ve also got in the notes that it’s
gravel. I can’t blame that on you and I can’t blame that on the applicant. I blame
that more on whoever drew these. I think both parties just had different
intentions here. Again, to me, just because of that being drainage for parking lot,
it makes more sense to have it in gravel than it does in something that’s going to
wash away every time those areas fill with water.
Siddoway: It’s often done to combine the two with that section that I showed you
that is able to have landscaped areas that are grassed and able to accommodate
trees and still able to handle the storm water detention areas. We have no
problem with having these areas have double functions. They are street
landscape buffers – was their intent and we wanted them to be vegetated.
T. Holloway: If I could add something to that – some of you might have gotten
phone calls on some of the grass drains that they put on the golf courses that
have not held up to their standards, or they have not been draining as well as just
the regular gravel drains. We had looked at that. Also, when we were making
plans and saw the gravel and thought that was the way to go since they’ve had to
replace two of the grass drains already this year out there at – going along Black
Cat, then we’re going to be working on another one right off of Talamore.
Siddoway: I can respond to that, because I have looked at that. The reason for
most of those failures are that they use sod from a clay soil over the top of it
which prevents the drainage down into the primeval layers. That’s why it shows
eight inches of sandy soil, or you need to make sure that it’s a primeval soil that
the sod has been grown in.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 55
T. Holloway: It seems like we’re getting nowhere with this. Is there any way that
we can apply for temporary – something through this landscaping? The trees on
Talamore aren’t going to be put in and those will have to be subtracted off. The
ones that are around the ditch – it sounds like we’re going to have to not – that’s
not going to be the case. It sounds like we’ve overlooked where we need to
replace some trees that are under the two-inch caliper. What is your suggestion?
Anderson: My feeling is, and I don’t know what the rest of the Council’s is, this
whole golf course issue has been a real thorn in our side and it’s been a black
eye for the city. Obviously, we want a nice facility out there and I think that you
guys have built a nice facility. I think we’ve got a few bugs still in the landscaping
stuff, but I, for one, would be in favor of seeing the mobile home go bye-bye and
would be in favor of a temporary permit and get you in there and then we haggle
out the details on this landscaping stuff and we get it tweaked to where we can –
both sides can live with that. I would be in favor of some type of temporary. I
don’t know whether we can swing that or what it would take to do that. I guess
legal counsel, I guess, for your advice on how we could do that. That would be
my feelings.
McCandless: And mine.
Bird: And mine.
De Weerd: And mine.
Anderson: That’s kind of a question for you, Bill.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, Mrs. De Weerd.
De Weerd: I might suggest and I think they know they need to go and look at the
trees that aren’t the two-inch caliper. To keep the rock where it is and to put the
sod where the areas that are not improved yet is – or do you have rock along
Talamore?
Bird: Talamore hasn’t done it because they don’t own the property.
De Weerd: When plans are made, those plans you would work out with P and Z,
but as far as – you can’t say read the notes on one thing and not read the notes
on another thing. With your two-inch caliper, you had better read the notes
because it talks about it and but with the rocks, don’t read the notes and look at
the picture. It’s inconsistent, and again, I agree with Ron.
*** End of Side 4 ***
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 56
De Weerd: With staff, they can figure out the caliper – the total number of caliper
we already have and see what they need to put in there. They can make that up
in some of the unimproved areas as well.
J. Lovan-Holloway: We do have an additional eight trees that will be in – are
sitting there ready to plant – that are more than a three-inch caliper. The other
thing that I would like to request is that when we do have – whether it’s Steve or
whoever comes out to count the trees, if we could also have a certified
landscaper that comes out with it for measurements so that the inches – so that
everybody – there is a set standard.
Siddoway: Sure, as long as you pay for them.
J. Lovan-Holloway: That’s fine. We don’t have a problem with that.
Siddoway: Standard is six inches above the –
J. Lovan-Holloway: Yes, six inches above, but we would like –
Bird: If you’ve got a tape measure, you can do that.
Siddoway: I understand where the caliper is measured.
J. Lovan-Holloway: But, I would like somebody if we could.
Bird: Let’s let the attorney give us what we can do.
Nichols: Mr. President, members of the Council. If it’s the Council’s desire to
have a temporary Certificate of Occupancy issued, then I believe that staff is
prepared to do that so long as the conditions and the time within which those
conditions have to be met are spelled out so that staff can go check on the – run
the punch list and see that there’s the required number of caliper inches, for
example, and whatever your pleasure is with regard to the issue of the planting
islands and that way, staff knows what your position is. Then they’re prepared to
issue the temporary Certificate of Occupancy and we can proceed with this. Is
there anything else?
Siddoway: I would ask the question. It’s an ordinance requirement in my view in
order to get a temporary CO to issue a letter of credit for the improvements that
are not yet complete. Is there a way to get around that in this instance?
Nichols: I’m not familiar. I have to tell you that I’m not familiar enough with the
ordinance and I don’t have the city ordinance with me. If, in fact, it says that
those improvements that are yet to be made have to be bonded, or letter of credit
or some other surety, such as money in the bank on deposit for the estimated
value of those improvements are 110 percent of the estimated value or whatever
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 57
the number is in the ordinance, then that’s a requirement that has to be met. The
Council can’t bury that. The bonding – and I’m just telling you. I don’t know if it
says that or not. I have to look at it. If that’s what it says, then that’s – you can’t
go around that part of it. But I don’t know how much money we’re talking about if
we’re simply talking about a certain number of trees. I don’t know what other
conditions there are that have not yet been done and Mr. Holloway says he has
the punch list of the things that are not yet completed.
Anderson: I was just going to state, too, Bill, that I guess something that
complicates that a little bit more is we’re asking them to actually provide
landscaping on property that they don’t own. We actually have some third party
people in here and I don’t know how that would figure into the formula here and
about bonding and – or letter of credit for landscaping on somebody else’s
property. It doesn’t seem too feasible for me to require someone to post a letter
of credit to plant landscaping on somebody else’s property that ultimately, we
own. It’s a vicious circle. We either require consent from both owners or we
require it to be on their property if we have to cash in the letter of credit. We’ll be
able to cross on the other property.
Nichols: Mr. President, members of the Council. A question to Mr. Holloway. Is
there a problem with getting consent from the owner of this property where West
Talamore is? Is there any problem working with those folks or is it just now that
you have found out that –
T. Holloway: It’s his last project – his development.
J. Lovan-Holloway: With working with Brad Watson on this for quite a while and
this issue on landscaping, Brad and I have had a conversation to wait on the
landscaping because it’s not actually us that has anything to do with it. It is
deeded by Brighton Industries to the City. The real property has really – we don’t
have anything to do with the real property. You, as the City, own or don’t own
that.
Bird: Not yet.
Nichols: I’m more confused than I was before, which I did not think was possible.
If I understand what she just said correctly, the issue is it’s in the right-of-way for
West Talamore, I take it. If the street is dedicated, West Talamore is dedicated
as part of Brighton Corporation’s Development, then I don’t know if we own it or
ACHD owns it. Some public entity owns it. I guess the question would be that
should be a bondable (sic) item. I don’t frankly know how much that costs or
what you have to post for that, but we can’t vary the ordinance that says that
improvements that are not yet finished, have to be bonded. Certainly, the tree
thing could be finished within a few days, I would expect. You get the right
caliper trees in and take care of that. If the Council wants – and so the only issue
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 58
then, is those areas that are impossible to do right now, which is where the drain
is going to be tiled and West Talamore. Am I missing anything?
T. Holloway: No. So you’re going to bond us for your property that we don’t –
that is going to go to you that you haven’t gotten and you’re going to bond us for
it.
Nichols: Mr. Holloway, I believe that you agreed to this landscape plan as part of
your development and part of your Conditional Use Permit Application and so it
would be my position representing the City to say, “Yes, that’s what you’re going
to do.”
Anderson: Really you’re not bonding for that land. You’re bonding for the
improvement. You’re guaranteeing to us that you’ll plant some trees there.
That’s what your bonding or issuing a letter of credit – like the attorney said. It
can’t be too expensive for a few trees.
Bird: I still didn’t get an answer.
Nichols: Mr. Holloway also had – what else beyond the landscaping needs to be
done? You said you had the list.
T. Holloway: The Water Department is coming out in the morning. Pre-
treatment, excuse me and the zoning and landscaping and the mechanical.
Then it says that we have to turn this back in. I don’t know how long that process
takes. Can anybody answer that question for me?
Siddoway: The process of getting a signature?
Bird: Gary can answer that.
T. Holloway: Once we get the signatures and turn it back in, how long is the
process for occupancy?
Siddoway: Once we have the bond, you can go downstairs and get it. I don’t
know that it’s very long. I signed one today on a project. The applicant brought
in a letter of credit to – or he actually brought in cash – a check to bond for some
unfinished improvements. He went from there downstairs and had them print up
the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. I signed it 15 minutes later.
J. Lovan-Holloway: I have one question. So if we go ahead and put the trees in
that aren’t on our property within the next two days, is that sufficient if those are
the – if we just go ahead and put them in and suffer the consequences if
something happens.
Siddoway: I have a couple of issues that I need to have clarified as far as what
Council wants to have happen. It seems clear that they need to bring the total
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 59
caliper inches up to the number that’s required. One question that I have is the
trees that are less than two-inch caliper – do they need to be replaced or do they
just stay as they are and add additional ones? Second of all, the landscape
treatment of the ground plain – are you willing to take it as is with just the gravel
or do you want any modifications to that?
Anderson: I’ll speak first. I’m okay with the gravel in those areas where that
drainage is going to go for the parking lot, and then the rest of it – the sod. As far
as the trees, I guess what the ordinance says is that three-inch, but we know
they can’t meet that, so we’ve made a modification to go to two-inch. If they’ve
met the total caliper-inches in two-inch trees, then I’m –
Siddoway: But we’re only counting two inches and above toward that
requirement is what you’re saying.
Anderson: Yes.
Siddoway: Okay.
J. Lovan-Holloway: Could I ask for expectations, please? So those trees will be
planted where? Does that include the Talamore area? Does it not include that
area?
Siddoway: Yes, it includes that area. It includes all the areas on the plan.
De Weerd: But you want those planted now on Talamore?
Nichols: Mr. President and members of the Council. I think we’re getting a little
far field here and let me see if I can bring it back and take a stab at 11 and 12. If
I understand staff correctly, all they’re looking for is where you have trees now –
where you have trees specified on the plan. It is possible for you to plant now.
Those trees have to be two inches or better to count. On West Talamore, that
could be one of the areas that’s bonded for.
Siddoway: They could be planted, too.
Anderson: They don’t want to do the bond, so they’ll plant whatever trees they
have to.
J. Lovan-Holloway: Well, we’ll plant them and then if we have to go back and
take them out, I guess that would be our consequence.
Nichols: I guess I would say that it’s not likely that you’re going to have to take
them out.
Anderson: The curb is already in. It’s already paved.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 60
Nichols: If the street is there, it just hasn’t been dedicated yet. Is that it?
T. Holloway: The (inaudible) hasn’t been landscaped since it’s been put in and
no one has even talked to them about that. There’s a bunch of weeds growing
out there that we’re going to landscape right next to.
Anderson: That center medium – but that’s
Siddoway: Get them next week.
Anderson: That is the issue from this one right now.
Nichols: Mr. Holloway, you have to understand that the Council is getting really
serious about code enforcement and we’re starting to do some stuff around town,
so things are changing from what it used to be. The gravel stays is what the
Council is saying.
Siddoway: What I’m hearing is the gravel stays. Meet the total caliper-inch
requirement. Only the trees that are two inches or greater count towards it and
place trees in the areas where the landscape plan shows. If you need to add
additional ones to make it up, then add them in other areas around the
clubhouse.
Anderson: And all the trees in the total project area count.
Siddoway: Yes. Total project counts two inches or greater.
Bird: That’s the way I understand it.
Nichols: Mr. President, members of the Council. May I make a suggestion,
though? That is before – just so we can avoid additional conflict, before Cherry
Lane goes out and starts planting trees, that essentially take one of these plans
or something similar and make an overlay and say we’ve got them here, here,
here and here. We’ve got a half-inch tree or one-inch tree. We should pull it out.
We’ll put in a two-incher (sic) or whatever they’re going to do that way and then
show where these additional trees are. Get Steve out there or something so we
don’t have some sort of blow-up over this deal because the trees weren’t in the
right place. So there’s this communication between Steve and Mr. Holloway. I’m
sure you can work that out, but that needs to be done in some fashion so that
there’s not any further miscommunication about where these trees are going to
be to be “within the project.”
Siddoway: That would be just fine. I’d be happy to go out and check stakes or
something. I can tell you my position would be that in a location where a tree is
showing, I would expect to see a tree and if additional trees are needed, then
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 61
they need to be provided within the boundary that’s shown on the plan of the
project boundary. Okay?
Nichols: Mr. President, may I make a further suggestion? Since Mr. Siddoway is
going to go out and caliper trees to determine sizes and so forth, there are
probably two more trips needed – one to go out and caliper the ones that are
there. If Mr. Holloway goes out and calipers everything and he marks with a red
tape or something those that are too small, you don’t have to – he says we are
going to replace these with two-inch or whatever. You get out there and caliper
the other ones. Then, at the same time, he could say, “Here’s where we’re going
to put the others.” Would that work, Mr. Holloway?
T. Holloway: Yes. I just have one question before we go on any further. That’s
on the picture where these trees are laid on the plan.
Siddoway: If I put the plan up there, could you point to them up on the screen?
De Weerd: In the ditch area.
Siddoway: You can use that microphone that’s on the stand there to talk.
T. Holloway: This right here, which is going to be in the tiling of the ditch. Are
those going to be required to be put in, too?
Bird: I don’t know how you could.
T. Holloway: Is it just the three trees here that you’re talking about? One, two,
three, four –
Bird: Five of them.
Anderson: Five total.
Bird: Which would be 10 inches.
Siddoway: The tree locations don’t show that they are in the easement. They all
show up outside of the easement, so I’m wondering why you couldn’t put them in.
T. Holloway: They’re going to be flipping through there and (inaudible).
Siddoway: Okay. You’ll either need to bond for them or we’ll need to agree on a
relocation within that project boundary.
Anderson: Just relocate them.
Siddoway: Just relocate them.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 62
Bird: Council, anything else?
McCandless: Can you do that, Tad, in the next couple of days?
T. Holloway: I sure hope so.
Bird: Okay, Council. I think we need to make sure that, like Mr. Nichols said, we
understand – Steve understands that he’s going to go out there. I believe that it
was the four Council’s people. The gravel is okay. We’re going to get up to the
148 caliper-inches of trees. Then we can get an occupancy.
Siddoway: And two-inch caliper minimum.
Bird: Keep two-inch caliper minimum, yes.
T. Holloway: Are we going to replace the trees that are too small?
Siddoway: That was what I asked. I was under the impression that you were
replacing the ones that were too small.
Anderson: Anything that’s under that two inches isn’t going to do you any good
in your count, so you might as well replace them.
J. Lovan-Holloway: Is it an option to relocate those – I mean as long as we have
it in the project now?
Bird: That would be up to you guys to lay out with Steve, just like Mr. Nichols
said.
Siddoway: The caliper-inches of those smaller trees won’t count, but they can be
relocated.
Bird: They’re wanting to leave the small ones there, Steve, and put the two
inches – relocate the two inches somewhere else that will count. Is that going to
be a problem?
Siddoway: I would just ask for your recommendation. When you get smaller
than two-inch caliper trees, you run into problems constantly with people
breaking them off and two-inch caliper is where we find that that stop is
happening. I would like to see those trees in the parking lot be two-inch caliper
minimum. If they want to have some smaller ones and relocate some of those
smaller ones closer to the clubhouse where they’re more protected – go ahead,
Tad.
T. Holloway: I’m just trying, since we’re on a time frame. Pulling trees out and
putting other trees in –
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 63
Siddoway: Is your preference to leave the small trees where they are and just
add to them?
J. Lovan-Holloway: Could I make just a suggestion? If one of those trees is
broken, can we have whether it’s 30 days or something, unless it’s absolutely
frozen out that we could pull it – that those would be pulled out right away
(inaudible).
Siddoway: That’s agreeable to me.
Bird: Well, I think you guys go out there and get this – the caliper settled. They
get it in, then we get the occupancy.
Siddoway: Okay.
Bird: And that’s along Talamore and everything. Is that agreeable with Council?
Let’s get that done this week. Thanks, Steve.
Anderson: Just for clarification, it sounds like as soon as you’re signed off on
that inspection form and you’ve done those tree things, you ought to be able to
get your temporary that same day, it sounds like.
Siddoway: If everything was in, it’d be permanent.
Bird: It’d be the permanent, yes.
J. Lovan-Holloway: (inaudible)
Siddoway: Tomorrow is going to be difficult unless it’s –
McCandless: And Friday is a holiday.
Siddoway: Friday is a holiday. Could we do it Monday?
J. Lovan-Holloway: We’re under a real time strain. We need to do this by
Wednesday.
Siddoway: Can we do it Monday morning? I have a 10:00 a.m. appointment
Monday, but –
McCandless: Is there someone else that can come out besides you, Steve,
because they got three days.
Siddoway: Well, especially if there is an independent landscaper who is there
doing the callipering (sic).
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 64
Siddoway: How early could you be ready for me tomorrow?
J. Lovan-Holloway: We could be there as early as you would like to be there if
it’s daylight.
Siddoway: I thought you were going to through and tag first the ones that we’re
under so that we were only callipering (sic) the ones that counted. I’d like to
have you do that first.
J. Lovan-Holloway: Yes. Do you need to be there so that you know they count?
Siddoway: No. If you already have tagged the ones that you’re not going to
count, I don’t need to be there for that because I’m not going to count them
anyway.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Council members)
Siddoway: Does 10 a.m. tomorrow morning work?
J. Lovan-Holloway: Yes.
Siddoway: I’ll be there at 10:00 a.m.
McCandless: Thank you, Steve.
T. Holloway: The other thing, Council, to bring up, and I hate to, but when we do
get occupancy, one of the conditional use was to get the trailer out. Do we have
some leeway there to move into our new building?
McCandless: In other words, you can’t move the trailer before you move in.
Right?
T. Holloway: Right.
McCandless: Because all of your stuff is in there.
Bird: The Conditional Use says the trailer goes out the day they open up the
deal.
Anderson: I think common sense –
Bird: Common sense tells us that’s not going to work.
McCandless: I mean they can’t put their stuff out in the parking lot that’s mud
right now.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 65
Anderson: Yes.
Bird: Thank you.
Siddoway: As long as it’s not there in six months.
Item B. Public Works Director – Gary Smith:
1. Engineering Agreement for Design of a Laboratory
Building for the WWTP:
Bird: Thanks, Steve, very much. Okay. Item B in our department. Gary Smith, I
believe you’ve got some things.
Smith: Thank you, Mr. President. I’ve got three engineering agreements
presented to you tonight. The first one is the energy agreement with CH2M Hill
for a laboratory building at the Waste Water Treatment Plant. That’s the final
design and preparation of construction and bidding documents. The preliminary
design has already been completed by CH2M and we’ve reviewed that and
satisfied ourselves with what we need to do there. This agreement with CH2M is
for the preparation of the final design and the bidding documents for the project.
I have in bold type on that memo sheet the requested Council action. The
amount of the Engineering Agreement with CH2M is $80,480.
Bird: Okay. Councilmen, what’s your privilege?
Anderson: Didn’t we just build a laboratory building last year?
Smith: No, sir. An administrative building was built a couple of years ago. Right.
Correct. Our lab building right now is still in the operations building – or our
laboratory, I should say, is still in the operations building and we’ve just
absolutely run out of room. We’ve got equipment scattered around throughout
the operations building and the requirements that have been placed on us with
our new MPDES permit, we need the extra room and additional testing abilities
so that’s the reason for this.
Anderson: Mr. President, I would make a motion that we approve the
Engineering Agreement with CH2M Hill Consulting Engineers for the preparation
of the final design and construction, bid documents for construction of a lab
building at the City Waste Water Treatment Plant in the amount of $80,480 and
for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
Bird: Do I hear a second?
McCandless: Second.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 66
Bird: Discussion. All in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT
Bird: Okay, Gary.
2. Engineering Agreement for Re-coating of the
Elevated Water Storage Tank:
Smith: Thank you, Council. The second item I have is an Engineering
Agreement for repainting of our elevated water tank. That’s the 500,000 gallon
yellow tank that was constructed in 1978. That’s out there next to Zamzow’s and
the Speedway. CH2M has been monitoring the surface – the paint surface inside
the tank and outside of the tank for a number of years for us. They are proposing
to prepare the design and construction bidding documents for re-coating the
interior and exterior of the tank. The amount of the proposal is less than
$25,000, therefore we have not gone outside for and requested the formal
request for proposals because of that limitation on the dollar amount. In that
regard, and with CH2M’s experience in this type of work and the amount of work
that they’ve already provided for the City of Meridian in this water tank, we are
requesting that you approve the Engineering Agreement with CH2M for
preparation of the bidding documents to re-coat the elevated water tank inside
and outside in the amount of $24,797.
Bird: Council.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Yes, sir.
Anderson: I make a motion that we approve the Engineering Agreement with
CH2M Hill Consulting Engineers, Boise, Idaho, for preparation of construction bid
documents for re-coating of the interior and exterior of the City’s 500,000 gallon
elevated water tank in the amount of $24,797 and for the Mayor to sign and the
Clerk to attest.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Discussion, Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Council, I hadn’t had a chance to talk to Mr. Smith about this yet, but he
provided me copies of all the contract documents on all these items. I talked to
John Wiscus at CH2M Hill with regard to the contract on this portion and we’ve
agreed that 6.10, which is a waiver of consequential damages could be struck
from the contract and he said that – I think Gary’s got two contract agreements
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 67
and we could line through 6.10, have the Mayor initial that and they’ll initial it.
That’s the way we’ll take care of it. That should be done, and also, just as an
additional aside, when they prepare those bid documents, the Builder’s Risk
Insurance Provision, if it’s the Council’s desire, the Builder’s Risk Insurance for
the contractor be included in their bid. We need to make sure CH2M Hill does
that because under the insurance requirements and so forth that are in there,
they say it’s either the City provides it or the contractor provides it. We’ve got to
make sure it’s in the bid documents that way.
Bird: That’s true. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Nichols. Your motion includes his –
Anderson: Yes, I would amend my motion to include the City Attorney’s
comments with the deletion of Item 6.10.
Bird: Does second agree?
McCandless: Second agrees.
Bird: Any more discussion? If not, all in favor of the Engineering Agreement –
repainting of the elevated water tower for $24,797, say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT
Bird: Gary.
3. Engineering Agreement for Design of Pump and
Pumphouse for Well No. 21:
Smith: Thank you, Council. The last agreement that I have is an Engineering
Agreement for the preparation of the bidding documents to construct pump and
pumphouse for City Well No. 21, which was just recently completed – for which
the drilling was just recently completed. This well is located just slightly north
and east of the elevated water tower. It’s on the park – Storey Park property
directly east of the Speedway. It’s in that gravel area that they use for staging, I
believe. Superintendent Tom Kuntz has been cleaning that area up and done an
excellent job. The agreement is with Civil Survey Consultants of Meridian and
Civil Survey has done all the pumphouses for us since Well No. 15, and they’ve
done a very good, professional and complete job. We’ve had good projects from
the plans they’ve prepared. The design portion of the plan – for the plans on this
project – their Engineering Agreement amount is not to exceed $12,375.
Construction Services that they would provide after the bid with the construction
– with the contractor, is estimated at $7,180. All of our projects in the past have
been within the amounts that they’ve estimated on this construction services
project – portion of the project. I would recommend that you approve this
Engineering Agreement with Civil Survey Consultants of Meridian, Idaho for the
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 68
pump and pumphouse, Well No. 21 in the design amount of $12,375 and
construction services of $7,180.
Bird: Council, any questions?
Anderson: No.
Bird: I would entertain a motion.
Anderson: Mr. President, I would make a motion that we approve the
Engineering Agreement with Civil Survey Consultants of Meridian, Idaho for the
design and specifications to construct the City Well No. 21 pump and pumphouse
for not to exceed, unless approved amount of $12,375 and for construction
services estimated at $7,180 and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
Item C. Parks and Recreation Director – Tom Kuntz:
1. Change Order for Generations Plaza:
Bird: Mr. Kuntz.
Kuntz: Mr. President and Council. Three items tonight for your consideration.
The first is a change order, a request for Generations Plaza II. The change order
is a result of an increase of $475. It mainly contributed to finding contaminated
soil and removing of that soil. That amount was about $1100. There was a
decrease resulting from changing the drinking fountain out to a more of a old
fashion style that matches the clock there and then Monroc reduced the price of
the concrete to us in the form of a donation of $175, so the total increase that
we’re asking for is $475.
Bird: Council, any questions?
Anderson: No. Mr. President.
Bird: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve the change order request for
Generations Plaza II in the amount of $475.06.
McCandless: Second.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 69
Bird: Discussion? Hearing none. We have a motion to pass the change order
one – No. 1 for Wright Brothers on Generations Plaza II for the sum of $475.06.
All in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
2. Master Pathway Agreement with Nampa Meridian:
Kuntz: The second item is the Master Pathway Agreement with changes
resulting – or results from the meeting with Ada County and Meridian and Boise
Parks Departments. Our City Attorney has approved it and I believe it meets with
his approval for your consideration tonight.
Bird: Any questions? Mr. Nichols, do you want to publicly say that that’s a good
contract?
Nichols: Mr. President, members of the Council. I won’t go that far. I will say
that it’s been through several revisions and like anything else that’s submitted to
different lawyers, each has had their own input into it. I think we’ve got it down to
the acceptable level. Wouldn’t you say, Tom, in terms of dealing with the
sometimes contentious Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and at least we’ve got
the structure there for future pathway licenses that would fit with this. This thing
has been through the mill for several months now, back and forth. I’m
comfortable with it.
Bird: I’ve got one question on this. On Item 19, and maybe this is right, but any
notices or mail or anything – certified or stuff is going to the Parks Department
instead of City Hall.
Nichols: President Bird, I am not sure, but it would be really easy to change that
to say that –
Bird: Well, what do you think?
Kuntz: It should go to City Hall.
Nichols: We’ll just have them change that to the – because it says “to the City of
Meridian.” It has the wrong address. That’s the problem.
Bird: Yes, that’s what I was thinking. It’s the wrong address. If I was Tom, I
wouldn’t want that responsibility and crap coming to me. Council, what’s your
pleasure?
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 70
Anderson: Mr. President, I would make a motion that we approve the Master
Pathway Agreement between Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and the City of
Meridian and authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: It’s been moved and seconded to accept the Master Pathway Agreement
with Nampa / Meridian and the City of Meridian and for the Mayor to sign and the
Clerk to attest. With no discussion, is everybody in favor? Say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Okay, Tom.
Kuntz: Before I enter the last item, Mr. President, I just want to request that we
be allowed to come to Pre-Council on November 21
st
at 6:00 to meet with the
Parks and Recreation Commission and our consultant on the Action Plan – that
we have some really urgent issues that need the Council’s direction on. Maybe
this isn’t the appropriate time, but I just want it to go on the record that it’s really
important that we schedule that time if possible with the Council.
Bird: Pre-Council, Tom, on the 21
st
?
Kuntz: Yes, preferably 6:00 p.m.
Bird: Have you got that, Clerk?
Berg: Are you going to make decisions? Why I asked that is we might as well
just have a Special Meeting and just do it.
Bird: Are you going to want a decision, Tom?
Kuntz: Yes, sir.
Bird: We’d better just ask the Mayor if it’s okay with him.
Kuntz: Okay.
Bird: We’ll take care of it, Tom.
Kuntz: If it could be next week, that would be great, but I was told there’s really
no time or place.
Anderson: When you’re talking about bringing a Parks and Recreation
Commission and that, that’s going to take more time than a Pre-Council – is
boom, boom, boom, boom. It sounds like you’re wanting to discuss something
that’s going to take more time.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 71
Kuntz: Yes, sir.
Anderson: I don’t think the Pre-Council is the format to do it.
McCandless: Well, what time does the P and Z meet? 7:30 p.m.?
Bird: They should meet on Tuesdays. Ron is talking about a week from today.
This is a Wednesday.
McCandless: That’s what I said. What time do they meet?
Anderson: Yes, I don’t care. I’d just as soon get it over with.
Berg: We can work out some dates options.
Kuntz: I was told that the Council was tied up next Wednesday, Thursday and
Friday.
Bird: What for? I think the Mayor is out of town – that energy thing.
Kuntz: That would be great if we could do it next week. Could I just work with the
City Clerk?
Bird: Yes, you and the City Clerk work with the Mayor and see what we can
come up with.
3. Generations Building property-line Discussion:
Kuntz: Thank you. The last item I have for your consideration – you should have
a memo in regards to the Generations building encroachment. It’s a difficult
situation and I think our City Attorney may have some suggestions on how we
can resolve the problem.
Nichols: Mr. President, members of the Council. My recommendation would be
to do an Encroachment Agreement and be done with it. Technically, if we make
it a sale of the three inches or four inches or whatever it is, then it becomes a
major process of appraisal and so forth if we just simply call it an Encroachment
Agreement and they pay us some reasonable consideration and then we’re
done. It, in effect, takes away three inches or four inches or whatever along that
side of City property and perpetuity for as long as the next buildings up. In the
overall scheme of things, I don’t think it’s worth trouble of actually selling it. Just
do an encroachment.
Bird: Council. What’s your pleasure?
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 72
Anderson: So the option is not one that’s listed on here, then? It’s not to sell it.
It’s to sign an Encroachment Agreement?
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, that’s correct. That way, we’ve got the – they
have the ability at the point of the Encroachment Agreement. It’s like a party wall
agreement. At that point, they can go ahead and proceed with their construction.
We could clean it up and do the boundary line adjustment and do the thing that’s
so forth later on, but I think it’s just as easy to go ahead and do the
encroachment. It’s less trouble.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Bird: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I would make a motion that we have the City Attorney draw up an
Encroachment Agreement for the building that’s being built by Stuart Lanney and
Benoit next to Generations Plaza and authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk
to attest.
Bird: Do I hear a second?
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Okay. Any discussion? Hearing none. Let’s vote on the motion made for
the Generations building property line encroachment. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Any more, Tom?
Kuntz: No. Thanks a lot.
Item C. Fire Chief – Chief Bowers:
1. Ten Mile Fire Station Owner/Contractor Agreement:
Bird: Thank you, Tom. Mr. Bowers.
Bowers: Acting Mayor and or President Bird, City Council members. The first
item we have is the Ten Mile Fire Station Agreement between the owner and the
contractor. Bill Nichols has went through it and found out the risk insurance was
not put in there this time. He has went to a couple seminars in the last year and
he has found out that there is some different things on risk management
insurance now and some different things on the AIA Contract. We will make sure
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 73
that anything in the future will have that in it. At this time, I would like to have the
Mayor and Will to sign it and attest it if that’s approvable by you guys.
Bird: Hadn’t we already agreed upon that with just – haven’t we already agreed
on that contract?
Anderson: Yes, but it hasn’t been signed by the Mayor.
Bird: The only thing was Bill was going to check in to see about the Builder’s
Risk, but we had passed on it. Do we need to pass it again, Bill?
Nichols: Mr. President, members of the Council. I can’t remember now if the
motion was to approve it subject to my review or if it was descended to me for
review. I can’t remember. If you want to double check, go ahead and make your
motion. Do it over again and then it’s done and then we know we’re going
forward just in case –
Anderson: We’re already a month behind where we wanted to be with this thing,
so I’ll go ahead and make the motion to authorize the Mayor to sign and the
Clerk to attest on the agreement between the City of Meridian and the Contractor
in this case who is K.J. Incorporated for the construction of the Ten Mile Fire
Station.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Moved and seconded to accept the contract between K.J. and the City of
Meridian for the Ten Mile Fire Station. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
Bowers: We’re going to try to have a ground breaking next Friday in the
afternoon – 1:00 or 2:00, we’ll put a notice in your box as soon as possible.
Bird: On the 17
th
?
2. Memorandum of Understanding:
Bowers: Yes. Item No. 2 is a memorandum of Understanding. This is between
the Meridian City Rural Fire and the Local 2311. Basically what this is is to take
the position of the Fire Marshal out of the Union because in the future he will be
having supervisory position. We sent the contract to Bill Nichols. He made a few
changes and it came back that the Union has approved it. I would like to have
the City. The Rural has looked at it.
Anderson: Mr. President.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 74
Bird: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I would like to make a motion that we approve the memorandum of
understanding between the Fire Fighters Local 2311 and the City of Meridian for
removing the Fire Marshal’s position from within the local and authorize the
Mayor to sign.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Motion made to authorize the memorandum of understanding with the local
Union regarding the Fire Marshal’s job description. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
Bird: I think Kenneth has one more thing that wasn’t listed on the deal.
3. Agreement with Green Consultants
Bowers: Yes, I sure do. The third thing is a contract between Green Consulting
and the City of Meridian. This is where we’d like to hire Rich Green as our
consultant on our plans to do the building plans for the City of Meridian –
*** End of Side 5 ***
Bowers: Bill Nichols has come up with a contract wording for us. Rich Green
signed it. He was supposed to have signed it as of yesterday. He did. Bill said
he did sign it and we’re trying to track it down, but we would like to have the
Mayor to sign it and Will Berg to attest it, if possible.
Bird: Council, when – Kenny, before the deal – Him and Bill and I were talking
about this. We need to get this guy on line because we’re getting behind. I don’t
know how you two feel. I feel very comfortable if Bill has agreed upon it, looked
at it and the guy has signed it. I don’t know why we can’t have the Mayor sign it.
I don’t need to read it. Let’s put it that way. I got enough faith in Mr. Nichols that
I would never have to worry about it.
Anderson: I agree. If it’s reviewed by our legal counsel, he’s going to look out
for our interests. I would have no problem with making a motion to have the
Mayor sign and the Clerk to attest the agreement to hire Green Consulting to do
our plans review for our Fire Department subject to the approval of the City
Attorneys.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: Now, discussion.
Meridian City Council Meeting
November 8, 2000
Page 75
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, President Bird, members of the Council. I drew
the contract, so I approve it.
Bird: So we can take that out of the motion, then. Agreed?
McCandless: Agreed.
Bird: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
Bird: I don’t see anything left on the list. Gary, have you got anything?
Smith: No, sir.
Bird: Captain Musser?
Musser: No, sir.
Bird: Tom, Kenneth, City Clerk, Mrs. McCandless, Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Kenny, on this deal from Materials Testing. That was approved in the
Consent. I have nothing.
Bird: I sure don’t, so I would entertain a motion for adjournment.
Anderson: So moved.
McCandless: Second.
Bird: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:50 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK