HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 02-20MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 20, 2001
The regularly scheduled City Council meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Robert D. Corrie at 6:33 p.m. on Tuesday, February 20, 2001.
Members Present: Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Cherie McCandless
Others Present: Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Ken Bowers, Dave Bowman, Will Berg
Item 1. Roll-call Attendance:
X Tammy de Weerd X Ron Anderson
X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird
X Mayor Robert Corrie
Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Add No. 21 – Discussion of Locust Grove Overpass; Add No. 4-C-1 Bill Nichols
Corrie: First on the agenda will be our consent agenda. Council, we have Consent Agenda A through L. I will open the meeting with any questions the Council may have on this.
Item 3. Consent Agenda:
Bird: Mr. Mayor, the Item A on that, is that all ready to do, or is it the same as a year ago?
Anderson: Or does it need to go on hold for another year?
Nichols: Councilman Bird, Mayor and members of the Council, Steve Bradbury, the attorney for Touchmark is here tonight and he can answer your questions. There are a couple of issues
that have been raised. We are still working on the latest one, which is Touchmark wants -- If you will recall, a standard condition in our Development Agreement is, if the development
wants to go through a phased development, that they can come in and ask for an amendment or an addendum to the Development Agreement. Well, the developer wants to do that phasing.
Their engineer had hoped to have a phasing plan to Public Works by last Thursday. It didn’t get there. I believe it is anticipated by this Thursday. I think it is that the phasing
plan will be before Public Works. If we’re going to do an amendment, we might as well have that on the same agenda as the time for doing -- at this point, so we can put it off till
the first meeting for March and consider it at that point. That would give us enough time to resolve these remaining issues and that’s acceptable with the applicant.
Corrie: The sixth?
Bird: Yes, the sixth.
Corrie: Okay. Captain Bowman, on that Beer and Wine License, everything is okayed by the Police Department?
Bowman: Yes sir.
Bird: Mr. Mayor, on the regular agenda, we have the letters from two items for Stubblefield that asked us to take them off. Item No. 8 and Item No. 7.
Corrie: I thought they wanted eight off and seven to stay on.
Bird: Oh that’s right, seven stayed on. Okay, eight came off.
Corrie: Yes, seven they want to keep on and eight they want to take off.
A. Tabled from November 8, 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
B. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: AZ 00-020 Request for annexation and zoning of 339.73 acres to R-4, R-8 and C-N zones for proposed Keltic Heights Subdivision by Parkland
Development – west of Meridian Road and south of Chinden Road
C. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: CUP 00-050 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a sales and project information office in a temporary trailer for Ashford Greens No. 4
by Brighton Corporation – Black Cat and North Waggle Place
D. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: CUP 00-054 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct the new Meridian City Police Station in an R-8 zone by Lombard Conrad Architects
– south of Franklin Road and west of Locust Grove Road
E. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: RZ 00-008 Request for rezone of 5.17 acres from L-O to R-4 for proposed Devlin Place No. 2 by J-U-B Engineers – south of Devlin Place between
Sunburst Subdivision and Sunnybrook Farms
F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: PP 00-025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 16 building lots and 4 other lots on 5.17 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Devlin
Place No. 2 by J-U-B Engineers – south of Devlin Place between Sunburst Subdivision and Sunnybrook Farms
G. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: RZ 00-009 Request for rezone of .25 acres from R-8 to C-G for general commercial use for proposed Tranquility Ponds by Potter Land Surveying
– East 3rd Street and Fairview Avenue
H. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: AZ 00-024 Request for annexation and zoning of 20.20 acres from RT to C-G for proposed Sparrowhawk Subdivision by Hubble Engineering – northeast
corner of North Nola Road and East Franklin Road
I. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: PP 00-026 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 3 building lots on 20.20 acres in a proposed C-G zone for proposed Sparrowhawk Subdivision
by Hubble Engineering – northeast corner of North Nola Road and East Franklin Road
J. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: VAR 01-001 Request for variance allowing an increased building height to 57 feet from the existing maximum height of 35 feet for the new
Mountain View High School by Hummel Architects – southeast of the intersection between Locust Grove Road and Overland Road
K. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law: VAR 01-002 Variance to reduce the number of landscaped islands in the parking lot for the new Mountain View High School by Hummel Architects
– southeast of the intersection between Locust Grove Road and Overland Road
L. Beer and Wine License: Wal-Mart Supercenter No. 2862, Inc. at 4051 E. Fairview Avenue, Meridian, by Wal-Mart Stores
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, could we add, as Item 21, discussion of Locust Grove overpass?
Corrie: Okay.
Bird: If its not too late.
Corrie: That’s the internal discussion?
De Weerd: Yes, just in light of what was presented at (inaudible) today.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, if you would give me just a brief moment under department reports, I have a report on the Judicial Confirmation on the police building.
Corrie: Okay, we’ll put you --
Nichols: Item 4 C, under the regular agenda.
Corrie: Item 4 C. Okay, anything else on the Consent Agenda?
De Weerd: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I would make a motion, with moving Item A, on the Consent Agenda to the March 6th Council Meeting, moving it until then to approve the Consent Agenda.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Okay, a motion has been made and seconded that we approve the Consent Agenda, except Item A, which will be tabled to the March 6th 2001 meeting. Any further discussion? Roll
Call vote please.
Roll call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 4. Department Reports:
Corrie: Item No. 4, A, Mayor’s Department, Executive Session. If the Council would rather do that at the last of the meeting, that would be fine with me. We have to do some -- I want
to talk to the Council about some land issues. So, it won’t take long, but it might save us some time in here. Okay?
Bird: That’s fine with me Mayor.
A. Mayor’s Department – Mayor Corrie:
1. Executive Session: Section 67-2345{c} [moved to end of meeting]
B. Public Works Department – Gary Smith:
Corrie: Thank you. Item B is Public Works Department, Gary Smith.
1. Will-Serve Letter relating to land owned by W.H. Moore at Ustick and Eagle Road
Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor, Council members. First item is a request from W.H. Moore Company for the City to issue a will-serve utility letter to Winston Moore for property that he
owns at the northwest corner of Ustick and Eagle Road. I believe you received copies of a letter written by Mr. -- signed by Mr. Jonathon Seel, Mr. Moore’s representative, dated February
15, 2001, outlining the reasons for the request for a will-serve. This property, all but 12.23 acres, is presently in the impact area for the City of Meridian. They have had conversations.
Mr. Moore and his representative have had conversation with the City of Boise, to the extent of transferring that acreage to the City of Meridian, so that his total acreage would be
within the City of Meridian’s area impact. Apparently the City of Boise is agreeable to this request, although it hasn’t been finalized yet. So this letter that Jonathon Seel has written
is requesting feedback from City Council concerning City of Meridian accepting this 12.23 acres into our area of impact and also providing a will-serve utility letter for the total parcel
which is fifty-seven point eight four acres in size. Their consulting engineer has determined that the proposed sewer, Ustick sewer line, that is part of the south slough extension,
which is presently under design, will serve the entire 57.84 acres. We presently have a City water line along the north side of Ustick, adjacent to the south boundary of this parcel.
That water line crosses under Eagle Road and continues along Ustick to the east to serve Summer’s Funeral Home. There is not water line presently in Eagle Road, north of Ustick. Mr.
Moore has, in this letter written by Mr. Seel, has agreed to annexation at the time an annexation route is available, or at a time that this property is annexable, being contiguous to
City Limits. Presently it is not. The closest City Limits, I believe, is to the west – Summerfield Subdivision. I guess there are two questions that Mr. Seel is presenting to you
this evening. One is your comments concerning the transfer of this twelve point two three acres from the City of Boise’s area of impact to the City of Meridian’s area of impact. And
secondly, would be the issuing of a letter, of a will-serve utility letter, for the 57.84 acres by the City of Meridian. Of course, the reason for that is that this property is outside
the City Limits, and by ordinance that approval is required by Council. Mr. Seel is here this evening, if you have any questions of him directly. And if there are any questions I can
answer for you, I’d be happy to try and do that.
De Weerd: Gary, what is the time frame on the extension of the South Slough?
Smith: We’re dealing with easements right now. The consulting engineer has been involved in property owner contacts and trying to secure easements through four property owners to get
us to the public right-of-way in the Carol subdivision area. Everything that has been done, at this point, is just preliminary contacts. There are no easements that have been obtained
yet. We’re tying to get a feel of what’s going to be required by the property owners to grant the
easements. Once the easements are…a preliminary alignment has been prepared, but of course that can’t be finalized until the easements have been secured. In terms -- I don’t have an
exact schedule for you, as far as when the line would be constructed. We’re hopeful that easements will be -- we’ll be able to secure easements in a relatively short period of time
and then continue on with the final design and have the project under construction by fall, late fall.
Corrie: I have a question. Jonathon, would you come up here for a moment? Jonathon, in your talks with -- did you talk with the City Council, or the Planning and Zoning people? Who
did you have your conversation with?
Seel: I, in fact, had a copy of the letter -- Jonathan Seel, with the W.H. Moore company. I sent a letter to the City Council, the Mayor and a copy to Wayne Gibbs. At the last Council
hearing, which was last week, unbeknownst to us, we hadn’t planned it this way, but they decided to decide this, they were discussing some other issues. Their comment back, at that
point, was that they thought this was fair and reasonable, to go ahead and transfer that land from the City of Boise to the City of Meridian’s impact area. What Wayne Gibbs explained
to me and this is the first time I’ve gone through this process, so bear with me if I’m kind of going around it. I guess the next step for them is, he is sending a letter to the Mayor
requesting that they have a negotiation with Ada County, which is required I believe, under State law or State ordinance. That is tentatively scheduled for the 27th of this month, which
I believe is next Tuesday, at which time then they would presumably bless it. I don’t see why they wouldn’t, they obviously have already given their blessing to it. At that point then
we would go through the actual formal approval process with the City, and I understand with the County, they do that on their own. They take (inaudible) at their own volition to go
ahead and do their process on their side, as far as transferring it from the one to the other. So, as a result of that, I think what we’re trying to accomplish -- what I’m trying to
accomplish tonight with some feedback from the City of Meridian, one, would they consider accepting the 12 acres, which I would believe you would, but obviously that is your decision.
I think what goes in with that is then the will-serve letter, which is the other critical item. If we can accomplish both, and then we would like to proceed with the formal approval
process, whatever is needed to be done both in the City of Meridian, City of Boise, as well as Ada County. We have also talked to Ada County on a preliminary basis and they seemed to
be receptive to this idea, in fact they felt it makes the most sense to put all this land into the City of Meridian. I have some eight and a half by eleven’s, or eleven by seventeen’s,
if you want to take a look at those. It kind of shows the situation that we really felt that overall it would be in our best interest and probably the most simple thing to do was to
put it all in one. Otherwise we’re faced with duplication of sewer and water. We have certain restrictions with the City of Boise and we have other with the City of Meridian at the
other times. So, I think the Mr. Moore feels that he would like to proceed with that. I have here, and I can give these to you -- this is also, shows you a concept plan that we have,
and this line, right here, I believe essentially shows the area of impact area between
the City of Meridian and the City of Boise. Then it kind of comes up like that and you can see it on this map right here. So, that’s why it makes it somewhat difficult in our planning
and in our development. So we feel overall that if we are in the City of Meridian, we think it will be most conducive in proceeding forward with this project. I think the challenge
so far is, that you have so many different entities, you’ve got to get them all to say, yes, we’re in agreement with this, or no, we’re not in agreement before we can proceed with a
formal process. So, I think that’s what we’re looking for tonight. It’s critical that both we get the will-serve letter in addition to the agreement on the annexation because without
the will-serve letter it really doesn’t do us any good right now. We can’t move forward on the project. As Gary said, I think that we’re making the assumption, that maybe optimistically,
by the beginning of next year, and this is only my opinion, talking to J-U-B that there’s a possibility that the sewer would be in there. This would allow us to start our approval process,
start our stuff. We could almost construct the streets and the sewer in anticipation of where the height of the sewer will be in the street. We can’t begin that process obviously,
until we know we have will-serve letter, and we know where everything fits together. Incidentally, too, I appreciate on such notice, you putting us on the agenda. I appreciate Gary,
here, helping us too, tonight. I know with everything else you’ve got on here, this just added to your load.
Anderson: Jonathon, I did have a question. In the letter you wrote in the forth paragraph down, you actually talked about that the sewer should be available by the first of the year.
Are you implying that in that will-serve that you would like us to commit to a year, or are you willing to live with, whenever we get the right-of-way approvals and when it gets there.
Seel: Councilman Anderson, our feeling is that, that’s just conjectural estimation on our part. I think I put that in more to try to give you a feel of where we think it’s going to
be, but we’re not expecting a commitment here. We understand that there are a lot of things that goes -- we’re prepared to take the risk and we understand that it is not a guarantee
and we’re not expecting that.
Anderson: Thank you.
Seel: But I think, in carrying on from that too, by the time we get through our approval process, we do the design and all the various stuff, we’re probably looking at the better part
of this year, just to get there. So, we think, that realistically, and again it just an estimation, that if it was to occur in the year 2002, that would dovetail fairly well with how
we see our project moving forward. Again, we understand that it’s just a guess at this point.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, just a quick question for Gary. In the letter by their engineer, they believe that we can serve that additional twelve acres, is that correct?
Smith: That’s by their engineer. I have not looked at that. They would have, I would assume they would have picked up the present invert of the trunk line, in Chamberlain Estates,
extended that on to the public right-of-way Leslie Drive, I believe and Carol Subdivision and taken it north to Ustick and east to Eagle Road. That would establish an invert for the
public sewer and then at that point they would have extended it on their proposal alignment into their development and made that determination, but I have not run the numbers to make
sure that that is the case, no.
Seel: Maybe if I could be allowed to add on to that. We had a topo done on the entire area, all 57 plus acres. We sat down with Chemical Engineers on this and got information from
Meridian on the estimated level, so to speak, of the sewer on Ustick Road. Interestingly enough, the land in Boise actually sits slightly higher, than does the land further to the west,
over there in the triangle-shaped area. Even if -- they felt even if the sewer was moved another foot or so, foot and a half, is would still be workable. Actually, we would be in even
better shape than in Boise, than Boise alignment with that sewer then we would, with that portion there at the extreme northwest corner of the property. So, we did do the calculations
and everything, so we’re comfortable with that.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Anderson: Shari is our City limits, is it that subdivision off to the left of it right now.
Stiles: Yes.
Anderson: And then where are the boundaries on your property, Jonathon. Is it that road, that dirt road that cuts through there?
Stiles: Is it this?
Seel: Right there and then coming down and curving around that house. You can -- I can if you don’t mind -- this will give you -- there’s a house that sits there that you can see,
it’s a one acre and a house, and then our property comes up through here, and again this is the area of Meridian that, in fact, as I said this land, right here is actually lower than
this land is up (inaudible) you can probably see the contour of it.
Anderson: So, you’re not contiguous to the City?
Seel: No, and that’s one of the things that I wanted to mention in the letter, if we could be annexed today, we would agree to it immediately. That’s not a problem. That’s not an
issue with us, we just don’t have the choice. If we could, we would gladly do it. That’s why I want in put in there and hopefully, clearly, that at the
time it’s there, we won’t fight. If that a condition to it, then we’re more than pleased to sign anything that says that. We’d do it today. It’s just not there.
Anderson: That, therein, lies the problem for us, because we have lots of developers that are willing to pay for the sewer extension and if they could get their projects built. We
have a real problem leap-frogging outside of our current City boundaries, if its not continuous. I know that sewer and water are an expensive price of the development, but we also have
all of the other things that go along with providing City services that have to be extended there. So it creates a real dilemma for us and I guess, in the three years that I’ve been
on the Council, I don’t know of places where we actually extended the sewer outside the City, unless they were contiguous and were able to annex at that particular time.
Seel: Well, I think, and again, some of this is just conjecture, looking out in that kind of crystal ball, but I think with what’s going on there, in terms of development in this area,
I think it’s reasonable to assume that over the next year, or so, maybe a year and a half, that this land…there will be land that will be contiguous to this, that will be annexed to
the City. Shari or Gary may have a different opinion, and certainly you can ask them, but I think with the amount of development going out on Eagle I think it just -- I think it’s very
reasonable. I think if this was way out there where it wasn’t, then I think it would be more difficult for us to make the argument, but I think here it is. Again, at the same time,
it allows us to start to develop a project that we think over a long term will be a real benefit to the City of Meridian.
Anderson: I can’t disagree with you. I would just feel a lot better if we had that commitment --
Seel: Oh, I understand. I wish I could --
Nichols: Mr. Seel, I take it from your last series of comments you would, in exchange for a will-serve letter or an agreement to extend services, you’d be willing to abide by the City’s
Land Use Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinances, Landscape Ordinance, Sign Ordinance and those sorts of things –
Seel: Yes.
Nichols: – that would be in place at any time an application would be put through. That you would also agree that you would have your application -- currently the way the Blahah case
comes down. It goes through Ada County but we would, at least my recommendation to the Council would be, if they are inclined to grant this will-serve letter, that a condition to that
would be that you also submit your application through the City’s process, so the City has input into how that development looks.
Seel: No, I have no problem with that, Mr. Nichols. We met, actually, with Ada County, a Patricia Nielson. We discussed that. Their recommendation or their suggestion was we would
go ahead and probably do a Development Agreement with Ada County, which is the way we’d have to go. The City of Meridian would be involved with that and then they had conversations
with Shari Stiles after that. So, we understand. We don’t want to hand you a package that you’re saying is in -- conflicts with what your ordinances or desire for the City. We are
willing to work through that so that at the time the annexation comes, it’s a very smooth, almost seamless, transition.
Corrie: As you probably can tell, I’m a little bit concerned because all of the permits are going through Ada County. That’s probably 30 or plus thousand dollars that the City isn’t
going to get. Shari, how far is it from our City limits?
Bird: Quarter of a mile.
Corrie: Quarter of a mile.
Bird: Maybe a half.
Stiles: Are you talking here?
Corrie: Right down the road, yes.
Stiles: It isn’t an easy annexation route, but there are options available, I am sure. This, right here, is about 100 acres owned by Mr. Tom Davis. This is a Class A or Grade A, I’m
not sure what you call it, dairy and they are not interested, currently, in being annexed into the City of Meridian. South of this, let met see if I can –
Bird: Pull up the south. It’s closer to the south, isn’t it Shari, and the school?
Stiles: – would be where John Barnes is doing his current development. Currently this is where the new Elementary School off Eagle Road is. John Barnes has annexed this property.
Sorry I can’t get both of the -- I can’t -- I haven’t figured out to get both of them in the same frame. This would be where they’re building office buildings. This is the Leslie
Drive, Carol Subdivision, where the sewer must come through to serve this development. Also, on this corner there is considerable amount of property that is being proposed, or at least
is being considered pretty seriously for development at this time. On the north side, on this corner, there’s approximately 40 acres owned by the Cavens. That is the absolute edge
of our impact area. Obviously, if they are going to Boise City to get an adjustment, that’s where we butt up with Boise City there. So, I’m not sure if I’ve got the other -- this would
be the southeast corner there that is also poised for development. Summer’s Funeral Home -- which one is that? This one? One of these -- this is where the Summer’s Funeral Home went
in and where we extended our lines to serve that facility. So it really is at the end of the line. There’s going to be the issue of trying to find an annexation route in the near future,
if we don’t have some assistance from all of the parties involved. I guess my preference would always be that the property is developed in the City of Meridian so we can get the building
permit fees. We get the property tax fees. And we are able to control the development to the extent we want to, because we still will be spending the time, staff-wise, to review and
approve this entire development.
Corrie: What do you think is a possible time on that, just east of Fairview there? Because you’re going to catch the corner down here and a corner over there.
Stiles: Down here, yes. All of this is undeveloped. All of this will be served by the South Slough as well as the 160, or is it 80 –
Corrie: Okay.
Stiles: – 80 acres on the west side of Eagle, yet to be developed. So that line will definitely open all of that area for development, or contribute to the acceleration of that development.
Like I say if Staff had any preference, it would be that it was inside the City, prior to any extension of services.
Corrie: Okay.
Anderson: I don’t suppose that a letter with intent to serve upon becoming contiguous would do any good?
Seel: No, because then we could get annexed and that doesn’t –
Anderson: And then at that point --
Seel: – Yes, and that’s where our hands are tied right now, as far as moving forward on development with that, as I mentioned in the letter. I’m not trying to be facetious or anything,
but simply use it as farmland. Our only other option then, is go back to the City of Boise and take that twelve acres and make that our first phase because sewer and water is available
there. That’s obviously not our preference. If it was, I wouldn’t be here tonight. That would be our only other option, then we’d have to sit and wait. We just feel at this point,
as the process is going, that we’d like to get on that train. We think that will all end up at the same point, just about the same time, give or take some. I don’t have any answers
for her, as far as forfeiting the fees on the permits and stuff. I, unfortunately, don’t have any control over that, but what we’re trying to do is, start the process of creating, I
think what’s going to be a very nice commercial project in the City of Meridian, that I think everyone would be proud of and long term, will be part of the City of Meridian.
Bird: And will be paying taxes. Mr. Mayor, I believe that the Council, that we don’t need -- I don’t think we ought to turn down the 12.23 acres that Boise’s offering us. Better mark
it down, because it’s the first. I believe that this would be a development that would be a great asset to our City when it is out there. Even to our impact area. As Jonathan said,
Eagle Road is getting -- is growing and growing and growing and I don’t see any reason that we’re not going to be contiguous out there myself.
Corrie: Certainly would like to see the letter from Boise.
Seel: I can get the letter from you. I also have a copy of the letter that I sent to the Council itself. If you need a copy of that, I have that tonight. I can give you that to you,
but certainly I can request that. As I say, I talked to Wayne Gibbs last week.
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I believe the Commissioners have already been notified of Boise’s willingness to do that. I’ve had a conversation with one Commissioner.
Corrie: Okay. Any others?
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I’ll give you my two cents worth. I’m not sure it does any good here. I agree with Jonathan. I believe that it’s just going to be a matter of a short period
of time before those projects in-fill and that project -- particular piece of property is contiguous, as well as those other pieces of property that are going to develop. I think what
you’re asking us to do, though, Jonathon, creates a lot of other problems for us as City. If we do it in one case, it just opens the floodgates for a whole bunch of other folks to come
and ask for the same thing. We’ve been very diligent about trying to stick to our guns about not leap frogging and not going outside of our City limits now, unless the property is contiguous.
I would love to see the twelve acres. I’d love to see the project developed to Meridian’s standards, and all of that. All I could ask is that, could you please be patient and wait
until something filled in or take another approach to try to make that contiguous. At this point I couldn’t support what you want us to do, the letter of intent, without it being contiguous.
I just don’t think that would be responsible for me.
Seel: Unfortunately, (inaudible)
Anderson: Yes, those two don’t go together, I understand.
Seel: I think he’s anxious to get started on this one way or the other here, so, again you have to make your decisions, what you feel is right --
Bird: Mr. Mayor, we’ve already, in that area, set a precedent when we sent the water line down a mile and a half from our City limits. This South Slough plan has been one of the –
No. 1 priorities. Like Ron, I don’t like the leap-frogging on
the deal, but I think this is something -- and I firmly believe that we will probably have an annex before it’s completed. I don’t think this is a project that’s going to go up overnight.
The people do have to get started and plan it. I’ll get my one-cent worth.
Anderson: I guess the only comment I have to add to that, is on the section where we did have to extend the water line, I think Ada County kind of forced our hand. They approved a
project down there that didn’t have a water supply. So we were forced, in a sense, that we had to provide the water to have flow for fire protection and things like that. I don’t see
that we broke our promise or broke our line of thinking other than where we were forced.
Seel: Councilman Anderson, if you don’t mind, just one other thought just to put in there. I think if the sewer and water was there right now and we were coming to you and saying we
want a will-serve letter now, I think that might have been a little bit different. I think what we’re really talking about is in reality is that at best, you’re probably looking at
a year for the sewer, so we’re not going to get the immediate benefit even if you were to hand us a will-serve letter tonight. I mean, this is down the road. It just allows us to get
the process going at our end and at the time it comes in to be able to dovetail it. So, I don’t if that’s worth anything, but I think that’s an important thing. We’re not trying to
tie into a sewer today. Again, that’s the thing, if we could we would annex tomorrow. If the City could provide us with a path or knows a way we certainly would work with the City
on that one too.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, can you develop property without having sewer and water in the County?
Seel: If we have a will-serve letter, then we can start the process. That’s what we’re trying to accomplish here. Until we tie into the sewer, actually physically tie into the sewer,
no. We could have nice roads out there and everything else, but we can’t do anything. But again, our thinking is that this process is a couple of trains or cars, whatever it is, going
down the road and we’re just going to be one of them and hopefully both get to the same point roughly at the same time. It’s going to take a lot of time just going through the approval
process, get everything there, construct the roads and we’re certainly looking at some time next year for that. So, this is a long-term horizon, but not so long that we don’t want to
get started now on the process. So, I don’t know if that answers your question or not.
De Weerd: Well, to a certain extent it does. I also agree with Staff and you know they are going to be doing the work on this and Ada County will be collecting the fees on it. So,
it’s not really supporting itself on the City side of things.
Seel: Possibly short-term, but I guess I’m looking at it more long-term. I think long-term it is, and again I can’t speak to that, because I don’t have any control
over the payment of permit fees and some of the stuff. I realize that Staff is going to have additional work in this process. But I think long-term it gives you the opportunity to
have a project in here. It gives us the opportunity to start going and talking to potential companies that may choose to go someplace else. Its tough to market something right now,
because we don’t have roads, we don’t have anything, we can’t do anything. So I think, maybe, short-term there is some definite drawbacks to this, I don’t dispute that. But I think
long-term, its fifteen months in this case, it will be a real benefit to the City. It’s just a question. Its -- there’s plusses and minuses on it. We’re faced with somewhat of a dilemma.
We’re trying to accomplish something here that we think everybody will be a win-win situation in the long-term.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I think Shari has something.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, maybe I don’t understand what this request is. Is this just a request so you can begin the Comprehensive Plan amendment process with Boise
City and Ada County?
Seel: Yes.
Stiles: And also the City of Meridian, because what our Comprehensive Plan shows in that area right now is single-family residential and I believe Boise City shows it as single-family
residential. So, prior to any kind of approval process taking place, wouldn’t you have to make sure that those Comprehensive Plans are amended?
Seel: No. My understanding in talking to the Ada County Shari, and I know that she met with you afterwards –
Stiles: Yes, that is right.
Seel: – was that the Comprehensive Plan, as it stands right now, conforms to this because there are no specific geographical boundaries within the Comprehensive Plan. So we are allowed
under that –
Stiles: Or that Ada County did not recognize those geographical boundaries. I haven’t seen anything in writing from Ada County, you know, I kind of would like to know what the process
is from here, on what you have to go through, because what I know of the Land Use Planning Act is that you require both the boundary amendment and a Comprehensive Plan amendment on both
sides. Is that --?
Seel: Well, my understanding is that we would go formally to the City of Boise. We would get a re-zone amendment as they call it, which sounds kind of strange, and then there would
be a modification to the impact area. The Ada County would go ahead and start the process on their own. Then I guess we would also have to go through the approval process with you.
I think right now, what we’re
trying to do, is get the parties together here to say, yes this makes sense. Let’s proceed. It doesn’t make any sense if the City of Meridian for example tonight says, absolutely not,
we’re not going to do this, we’re not interested in it. Then there’s no sense in moving forward. If there is, then we can start the process moving forward, as far as the approval process.
In talking to Ada County, and I know she met with you afterwards, but her interpretation of it was that the Comprehensive Plan did not have geographical boundaries so it allowed commercial
within that area. The new Comprehensive Plan, as they interpret it, does have specific geographical boundaries.
Stiles: What new Comprehensive Plan?
Seel: The one you’re proposing right now.
Stiles: No, it has -- what we have now has more geographical boundaries than what’s being proposed. But –
Seel: Yes, she --okay.
Corrie: Well, before we -- let me cut this off –
Stiles: May I ask one more question?
Corrie: Okay.
Stiles: This is in -- this has been annexed. This was part of Boise City’s great big annexation area, is that correct?
Seel: Yes and it is logged for –
Stiles: And it is annexed -- it is a part of the City –
Seel: It is logged for office –
Stiles: – Boise.
Seel: It is logged for office right now.
Stiles: It is zoned for office?
Seel: Yes, it is. It will be allowed under the Comprehensive Plan to go ahead –
Stiles: Because of the compatibility matrix?
Seel: I’m sorry. I thought you were talking about Meridian. My apologies.
Stiles: Well, I mean –
Seel: In the City of Boise we can construct offices starting tomorrow, if everything was there.
Stiles: So, you could construct office right now in the Boise City for that twelve plus –
Seel: Yes.
Stiles: – acres –
Seel: Yes, we could.
Stiles: – or they are willing to de-annex that property –
Seel: Pass it over to you.
Stiles: – let the City of Meridian adjust –
Seel: Yes.
Stiles: – it’s impact area boundary and let us annex that.
Seel: Yes, but that’s what I’m trying to drive to, because if you say, we’ll take the land, but you’re don’t give the will-serve letter, then we’ve got this twelve acres of land that
we can’t use for sewer. Right now we have the ability for sewer and water. So one leads to another. I’m really looking for feedback here. Does this make sense? Does this not? I’m
not, at least in my mind, looking for some formal approval, signed in blood that says tonight. Its just we need that guidance on whether it makes sense or not.
Stiles: Well, it makes great sense, as far as I’m concerned, as far as having that developed as part of the City of Meridian, however I think Gary may need some additional time to see,
is it sewerable can we serve it? I mean, if you want a will-serve letter –
Seel: Yes, I’m glad to sit down with Gary and we can get Roger Smith and we can go through the calculations and everything. I mean, he would be here.
Corrie: Okay, let me stop this here. Or we’re going to be here all night. Will you give us at least 30 days to work some of this out? I need to do some talking myself too. If he
will hold for 30 days, I think we can come up with a pretty solution for everybody here, and we need some questions answered. I think you do, definitely. And if we can have about thirty
days, we might be able to work this whole thing out to the satisfaction of everybody here.
Seel: Okay.
Corrie: So, if we could do that --
Seel: Sure, and in the interim, what I will do is I will get you the letter from the City of Boise, something whether it is Wayne Gibbs or what have you on that. Get you documentation.
I’ll talk to Wayne tomorrow, let him know where it is and we’ll, you know, maybe at this point, we’ll tread water. We’re, like I say, we’re just looking for that. Again, I appreciate
the time tonight on short notice.
Corrie: I think it will work out a lot better for all of us.
Seel: No that is fine. Thank you very much.
Bird: Thank you, Jon.
Corrie: Gary, No. 2.
2. Change Orders No. 5 and 6 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Digester and Clarifier Facilities:
Smith: The second item is a presentation of Change Orders No. 5 and 6 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Digester and Clarifier Facilities. Dennis Suihkonen, from Keller Engineers
is here this evening. Dennis will present those two change orders to you with a brief explanation on each one. Keller and Associates is the design engineer for the project.
Suihkonen: Council and Mayor we are getting very close to completion of the Digester and Clarifier Project. I put together a little summary of the bid cost when we started and the
change orders processed to date. The Change Order No. which is up for recommendation for approval this evening, in the amount of $37,309. I think includes about 20 different items
and changes and revisions at the plant. Like I say, we’re at about 97.5 percent, so we’re getting very close to completion. I don’t know if you have before you all the various sundry
items. There were -- like I say, about 20 of those. If there is any questions on any of those, I’d be glad to answer those. The total change order amount will be $88,579. On the
original bid contract of $3,114,996, which is approximately about 2.8 percent of the project cost. I think the cost in the change order we received from the contractor mostly are time
and materials costs. We have verified all of those, feel they area reasonable, and would recommend approval of that Change Order No. 5. The second Change Order No. 6, before you, is
a no-cost change order. Basically it is a time extension Change Order. And that –
*** End of Side One ***
Suihkonen: – a Change Order for 45 days and increase of the contractors time. At the time we were costing some of these individual change orders there was some data that was missing
or clarifications that needed to be made on a number of these change order items, as far as the time that it took. We have since gone back and evaluated all of the change orders and
felt that these amount of days for these various items were -- should be allowable to the contractor. It was equivalent to 45 calendar days and that is recommendation for that time
increase. And there would be no cost associated with that. If there is any particular question on either one of those change orders I’d be glad to try and answer those.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I had one on the road back fill on the digester. How did that overflow occur? What caused that to occur that washed out the road?
Suihkonen: Just to briefly let you know what happened there, the process that we’re putting in at the City of Meridian plant is called a temperature-phased digestion process. And on
start up on this process, there is a considerable amount of foaming that has occurred and is starting to regress now, but on start up, because you are feeding the process a fair amount
of sludge in the beginning. So we had some foaming occur and basically the foaming overflowed the top. We fed it a little too fast. Over topped the sides and went down into the area
they were getting ready to prepare the back fill and pave the road. So, as that was no fault of the contractor and actually, I can’t say it’s a fault of anybody, since it’s a new process
we’re starting up and there’s a lot of variables involved. Anyway, that’s what happened.
Corrie: Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay Council you have before you the Change Order No. 5 and 6 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant, the digester and clarifier facilities.
Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve Change Order No. 5 and No. 6. No. 5 with the Turnkey Construction. No. 5, as an increase of $37,318.98 and includes a time extension of 19 days.
Change Order No. 6, is a no-cost condition, just a time extension of 45 days to the contract time and conditioned upon Turnkey accepting terms of the separate project closeout agreement.
To not pursue extended overhead claim against the City. That’s Change Order 6.
Anderson: I’ll second it.
Corrie: Okay, motion has been made and seconded to approve the $37,318.98 to Turnkey on Change Order No. 5, and on Change Order No. 6, the additional 45 days to the contract in pursuant
to the motion of acceptance by Turnkey. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
C. City Attorney’s Department – Bill Nichols:
1. Update on Judicial Review Process for Police Building
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, I wanted to inform the Council that last Thursday we filed the petition for Judicial Confirmation on the financing for the new police building.
The hearing on that petition has been set for 4:00 p.m. on Thursday April 5th at the Ada County Courthouse.
Corrie: Okay, thank you Bill. Any questions from the Council?
Bird: I have none.
Item 5. (Items moved from Consent Agenda)
Corrie: Item No. 5, is an item removed from the Consent agenda. We’ve taken care of that.
Item 6. Tabled from February 6, 2001: Ordinance No. 01-909
Corrie: Item No. 6 is tabled from the February 6, 2001. This is an Ordinance No. 01-901. Any questions on the Ordinance from the Council?
Nichols: Thank Mr. Mayor and members of Council, Ordinance No. 01-909, and Ordinance of the City of Meridian repealing Chapter 14 of Title 11, Meridian City code and enacting a new
Chapter 14 of Title 11 to be known as signs and to include new sections to be known as the Intent and Purpose, Definitions, Procedures, General Provisions, and Requirements, Prohibitive
Signs, Signs for Which a Permit is Not Required, Classification and Status of Existing Signs, Regulation of Sign Types, Signs Permitted by Zoning districts, Administration, Appeals,
Enforcement and Liability, Conflict, Serviceability, and Validity, and to Provide an Effective Date.
Corrie: Council, any other questions on the Ordinance number 01-901.
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: With that being the case and it being tabled, I will and if you have no further questions, entertain a motion on the Ordinance No. 01-909.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approved Ordinance No. 01-909, the Sign Ordinance, for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest with suspension of rules.
Corrie: Do I hear a second?
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Okay, Motion made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 01-909 with suspension of rules. Any further discussion? We’ll have a roll call vote, Mr. Berg.
Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of the Council a roll call vote.
Roll call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 7. Continued Public Hearing from December 19, 2000: RZ-00-005 Request for Rezone of 10.04 acres from R-8 to C-N for proposed Linder Crossing by Hawkins Companies and Stubblefield
Development – southeast corner of Cherry Lane and Linder Road
Corrie: Item No. 7 is a continuation of a Public Hearing of December 19, 2000, RZ 00-005 Request for Rezone of 10.04 acres from R-8 to C-N for proposed Linder Crossing by Hawkins Companies
and Stubblefield Development – southeast corner of Cherry Lane and Linder Road. At this time, I will continue the Public Hearing and with the caveat here that Item No. 8 is being taken
off Public Hearing for the Conditional Use Permit at this point. Hawkins and Company and Stubblefield Development have separated company. Hawkins is no longer on this. Now, what we’ll
do on this Public Hearing, we will have the Staff reports, what’s happened previously. Then we will have the developer, Mr. Stubblefield, give his talk. Then we will open it to public
continued testimony. We will do the first of those who are testifying in favor of the request for re-zone, and then we will have those who are opposed on the re-zone, and then anybody
who is neutral. We’ll have them last. Then after that Public Hearing is done, we will have Mr. Stubblefield answer any questions and then it will be closed. You will have one chance
for it, one chance against it and neutral and then Mr. Stubblefield will have his. There will not be any back and forth after that point. So, at this point, I will continue the Public
Hearing and have Staff’s comments first.
Stiles: Thank you. Mr. Mayor and members of Council, this is for the property located at the southeast corner of Linder and Cherry Lane. It is this property shown here. This is the
Meridian Middle School. This is Northgate Subdivision to the south. Across the street is the Maverick and the car wash and some strip retail down there. Kiddy-corner from this development
is where the former Smith’s store was supposed to come. They have requested withdrawal of the Conditional Use Permit, which was, I believe the primary reason the recommendation for
denial on this project to the C-N. The property is currently
zones Neighborhood/Commercial from this point west. This entire corner is already zoned Neighborhood/Commercial. There are several permitted uses for that location right now, including
a convenient store. What they requested in the re-zone, which for the remainder of this property, which is currently shown as R-8. And they had requested a zoning designation of C-N
and had proposed some fuel kiosks and some fuel dispensers. A very large building approximately in this area, I guess I won’t get into that too much. They had also left this area as
not developed or had shown no plan for that area. The property does have two existing stub streets that come in from the adjacent residential property, that was also a retail proposed
(inaudible). The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend denial of that application. They didn’t feel the use was appropriate. They felt that, perhaps the building that was proposed
was too large for the area and they were also concerned about the area shown as not being developed. And felt that more neighborhood commercial development would be more compatible
with the are. So, the Conditional Use Permit has been withdrawn. This is a request for the re-zone only. A little history on this particular piece of property, when this Northgate
Subdivision was done in 1972, the Stubblefields, who had ownership at that time had also come in with a request for development on this property for a mobile home park. The Council
at that time didn’t think that was a great idea, I guess, and that they might entertain the idea in the future of having a mobile home park, but then immediately thereafter placed a
moratorium on approving mobile home parks. So, that’s a little bit of history of why this has remained vacant for so long. And I do believe Mr. Stubblefield and his company has the
interest of the City of Meridian, eventually in getting this property approved. They currently have no plan, so that’s why it difficult to make any recommendation on the re-one of any
of it until there is potential for some kind of plan for that area.
Corrie: Council have any questions of Staff. Staff, is that it? Okay, Mr. Stubblefield.
Stubblefield: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, as it has been clearly stated, we’ve withdrawn our request for a Conditional Use Permit. Simply put, we’ve got about six months invested
in going through a zone change. It is my understanding, that as the city studies its new Comprehensive Plan, they have indicated that they would like for this area to be commercial.
Simply as I can state it, we’ve got six months invested in a zone change. If, in fact we were going to go ahead with some commercial development, we thought we would try and just save
that in this part of the process and go ahead and have it zoned commercial. We do not have any user at this time. We thought we did, but t5hat fell apart. So, just in keeping with
the upcoming Comprehensive Plan and if this should be developed commercial, that was just one part of the process we thought we should go ahead with as long as we’ve gone this far with
it. That’s it, simply.
Corrie: Any questions, Council?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I have one. He needs to put his name on the record here.
Stubblefield: John Stubblefield, 641 Franklin, Meridian, Idaho.
Corrie: Thank you John. Thank you Bill. Okay, is there anyone here who would like to issue testimony in favor of the request for re-zone from R-8 to C-N? Okay, yes, ma’am.
Gathagan: I have a letter from my neighbor.
Corrie: Okay. Is this in favor?
Gathagan: Well, it would basically be in favor, yes.
Corrie: Then once you read it, we’ll put it (inaudible)
Gathagan: Okay, to the Meridian City Council --
Corrie: Give the name --
Gathagan: My name?
Corrie: No, no -- well, give your name and then the name of the one that writing the letter.
Gathagan: My name is Michelle Gathagan and the letters from Mark W. Stuart. I live at 1537 West 15th. I am one house removed from the post development of Cherry and Linder. I am
not opposed to development, as I make my living on such things. I also knew when I purchased my home that someday the property would be built on. I have reviewed the proposed development
and have attended previous P and Z hearings, which I am not in favor for the project. I reject the project for a couple of reasons…and I guess I should try leaving some -- I do not
feel that a 24-hour retail store is compatible for the neighborhood. It would adverse the effects and the value and the enjoyment of the homes around it. I also do not see the wisdom
of putting a retail center in the corner. The traffic issues as well as the aggress/regress patterns is not fluid and even though Linder is stated to be widened, the patterns will not
improve. I feel that light office space projects is probably more compatible and would meet with fair less resistance. I am unable to attend the meeting tonight, but I am providing
the letter as my support to my fellow neighbors, who I am sure, will be in great numbers to voice their opinion opposing the proposed project. Sincerely, Mark W. Stuart, 1538 W. 15th
Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642.
Corrie: Okay, if you will just give that to the clerk and it will part of the record. Thank you. Okay, since there was no one that stepped forward for it, how many
are going to be testifying against? Okay, we’ll just have you come up one at a time. We’ll start over here and try to keep it within three minutes, if you can, and we’ll go from there.
Whichever one wants to be first.
Gathagan: My name is Michelle Gathagan and I live at 1538 W. 15th. First of all, not knowing -- I just found out about 3:00 p.m. today that the 58,000 square foot store was abolished
from the whole thing and so was the Hawkins Project. I still want to bring up the fact, first of all, have everybody stand up behind me who is here for the purpose of the whole Linder
Crossing in general. Could they -- I asked them all to stand up just to show you guys how many people are her to support us.
Corrie: Okay.
Gathagan: Thank you, I wanted to -- when I did my notes I kind of did it -- it was going to be for the superstore. One thing I wanted to let everybody know was that, relevant to the
-- the goals and policies that were relevant to the application that are from the 1993 Comprehensive Plan that determine what to do, and whether to approve development, there was some
economic development in Section 12 set aside areas for commercial interest where activities are to dominate. This section of Meridian is already dominated with Middle School and Library.
On one-six (inaudible) shopping facilities where effective (inaudible) into new and existing areas and plan for shopping centers to growth and develop out as warrant. We already have
an Albertson’s on Ten Mile and Cherry Lane but the store’s gone so that’s alright. The land use of 48-U encourages commercial use to locate in old town district business parks and shopping
centers near high intense active areas such as freeway interchange. I don’t know, does anything from the Staff report still reflect to this as of the conditions of where to put roads
and where to make roads for going out like on to Linder and stuff? Or is all that abolished now too? All that’s gone? Okay.
Corrie: (Inaudible) this is just request for re-zone.
Gathagan: Okay, one thing we found out and this is all re-zone. We’d like to know does the developer being Stubblefield development have up against P and Z zoning to say this is what
we want to do? Or can they just go ahead and slap on a couple of offices without letting the neighborhood know?
De Weerd: No, they would still have to come --
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, if Shari would note the question, then before the developer has his rebuttal Shari can give a list of what are permitted uses in the C-N zone.
Gathagan: So they can’t just come in -- there are certain buildings that they can put in a C-N zone not just anything like a 58,000 square foot 24 hour superstore.
Corrie: It’s a Conditional Use Permit. That’s not part of it, but we’ll have her give you what it is at that point.
Gathagan: And at the time that the developer does submit another request for development of the property, will they have to once again, let all us neighbors know what’s going on, by
way of a formal letter.
Corrie: Again that depends on what is approved in C-N. They’ll be certain things that are already approved in zoning C-N. And that’s what she’ll tell everybody what that is. Large
department stores, service stations and things like that, probably not. It takes a Conditional Use Permit to do those things.
Gathagan: Okay. In the Planning and Zoning we, as residents, stated that we would not want a white vinyl fence, but like the six-foot masonry wall. Would that still be in statute
now, and the little things that we had suggested as well?
Corrie: It all depends on what he wants -- what they want to put back there. He would come before you on a lot of things, but again I can’t be specific until we know what exactly C-N
does. Then you can come back to the Planning and Zoning and say, okay, we want to put this in as offices, doctor offices, or what have you. Then they can talk about the buffering and
things of that nature. But there are certain things, if it is zoned C-N then you can put in there, without going through approval of Planning and Zoning. Anything else requires a Public
Hearing.
Bird: Mr. Mayor, we’re getting off of the zoning subject. I think that we make sure that these people are testifying on zoning. We don’t need to hear the CUP’s or what they’re going
to put in it or not. All they’re requesting right now is going from an R-8 to a C-N zone.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I understand that we’re getting off the track. I think the average citizen doesn’t understand the process well enough. Somebody should take the time right now
and explain what the action of the withdrawal of the CUP means and that it is just rezone, and then talk about what things that are permitted so that these people can get up here and
testify knowledgeable about things that are happening.
Corrie: Shari, why don’t you tell us what C-N -- what can be put in a C-N zone. Then everybody here will know what it is, and then they can go from there.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the C-N zone would allow several things outright. I know as a condition of rezone in the past we have requested the Development Agreement
that may require a Conditional Use Permit no matter what it is that goes on to the property. There is some concern as to what might go in there. Two of the permitted uses that are
not very well defined or
regulated in the Zoning Ordinance, are a planned commercial development is permitted. Without a good definition of that and some standards it leaves it wide open. We do have a provision
in our Ordinance that requires anytime that you have more than building, which certainly this site, I believe, would support more than one building, they would still be required to go
through the planned development process for that. The C-N zone permits self-service Laundromats, libraries and museums. Like I said, planned commercial development, public service
facilities are permitted with design review which could include up to and including a sub-station…power substation. Neighborhood shopping centers are also a permitted in that zone,
which could be subject to a lot of interpretation. Those are the primary permitted uses in the C-N zone. Everything else would require a Conditional Use Permit. Again, like I say,
it’s a pretty open interpretation of those two items – planned commercial development and the neighborhood shopping centers, to just permit those outright. I did support the re-zone
of this property. Not particularly the site plan that they had purposed or the uses that were purposed, but it does seem a good area to provide some true neighborhood commercial opportunities
for shopping and retail. A place to go get your haircut or to get some milk, or even the Laundromat part. Without a plan it’s real hard to support it. Either it needs to be recommended
for denial and they come back, or a condition put on it that they enter into a Development Agreement and all uses would have to be done under the Conditional Use Process as a planned
development.
Corrie: So in other words, if it was approved to be a C-N, but they could put on the Development Agreement that everything they wanted to put in would come under a Conditional Use Permit
–
Stiles: So everyone in that area would be notified again.
Corrie: – to know what’s there.
Stiles: It would accelerate the process in the future, because if they were in fact rezoned to the commercial zone, our current Ordinance would only require one Planning and Zoning
Commission Public Hearing where they could voice their opinions. Then it would go directly to City Council without the second opportunity to testify. That’s another thing that would
happen with the rezone.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, in the definition of Neighborhood/Commercial, do they have a square footage requirement or a maximum?
Stiles: I’d have to look for the definition of Neighborhood/Commercial. In the Zoning Ordinance, it talks about a neighborhood convenience center, commercial convenience center.
It is a shopping center having approximately 30,000 to 200,000 square feet of gross floor space.
De Weerd: That’s neighborhood?
Stiles: It’s neighborhood convenience center. It’s commercial neighborhood convenience center.
Corrie: I think that is one of the things they were concerned about. I’m just guessing.
Stiles: The definition goes on. It says, it would provide for the sale of convenience goods – food, drugs and sundries, and personal neighborhood services for the day-to-day living
of the immediate neighborhood within which it is located. So, there’s a contradiction there. 200,000 feet would serve a lot of neighborhood.
De Weerd: Is that something that we’re working on in our update?
Stiles: It’s on the list.
Corrie: Okay, now that you’ve heard that, under the basis of that, we’ll hear your, evidently objections, to the C-N. Anybody that has any objections now, for the rezoning, now --
Bershears: Teri Bershears 1423 Northgate. I’ve lived there for 17 years. When I bought my house, we knew that something would be developed there. I assumed it would be housing.
I don’t know if any of you have been -- when school’s let out or when school is going in, if there is like retail there, those kids are going to get hit. That’s a safety issue. When
you’re a teenage in middle school, they don’t think will hurt them and will do whatever they want. They will walk in front of traffic. I’ve seen in at Maverick. They just do whatever
they want. That’s a safety issue with me. I don’t see why they can’t just build houses there, because it’s across from the library. It’s next to a middle school. You can walk to
the middle school. You can walk to the high school. It’s all really convenient there. I don’t think you should go in, that’s my opinion. If is does go in, I want us to be able to
do that -- we decide yes or no type thing.
Bird: Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you, anyone else, now?
Younger: My name is Patricia Younger. My address is 1080 West Clarinda in Meridian. I am here representing the Meridian Library District. We would like to ask at this time that it
be put off until there is a definite plan. At that time we would definitely prefer that it be offices, or something like that, rather than a commercial thing. Again, it’s the traffic
that concerns us, thank you.
Corrie: Thank you. Okay.
Shurte: My name is Jan Shurte and I live at 1522 West 15th Street. It kind of changed our whole plans here, and I would also like the whole thing put off until we can see what kind
of plan they have for it. I think it would be better to do it together, and also in lieu of the fact that I just wanted to mention not only is it the lighting and the noise that goes
into retail for the residential people, but also the high school kids walk down Linder which I assume there will probably be an entrance off of Linder. At the same time the middle school
kids walk east, the high school kids walk west and they kind of meet, some go the library, and some are going home. There are a lot of things and these entrances would have to be onto
Linder and onto Cherry for retail, and plus there may be some entrances, now I’m not sure with the new plan, coming in from the subdivision, which would drag the high school kids in
through the subdivision. That’s why I’m against the rezoning, but I’d also like to see the both at the same time. Thank you.
Bird: Thank you.
Corrie: Anyone else?
Carrier: My name is Kim Carrier. I live at 1215 Elm Court. I’m opposed to it. I don’t know about the openings to the streets, but if they do start rezoning it and open up the streets
at West 13th there, like they were talking about doing, it will not only draw a lot of truck traffic through there, but there are also elementary kids that walk clear to Linder, that
will be walking through there with a lot of traffic, and my main concern is the kids. They have to walk from Meridian Elementary, Meridian High, and Meridian Middle School. I just
don’t think that we need major construction of a super store or even zoned C-N.
Bird: Thank you.
Corrie: Anyone else? Okay, John do you have any rebuttal, anything you would like to tell these folks? I think there is fraise for that, but –
Stubblefield: --no, I really don’t have a lot to say. We certainly would be agreeable to, for this 10-acre portion, to putting a condition on it, that whatever development does go
in there that we would subject ourselves to coming back through the CUP process. Our desire is not to try and skirt anything; we have no problem with the Public Hearings and getting
the neighborhoods input in whatever we do build there. During the public testimony at the Planning Commission level, the Planning Commission was against the conditional use permit;
they seemed to be in favor of the zoning. Like I said, I think Shari indicated that planning would support this type of zoning, so for us it is simply, we have gone this far in the
process if it makes sense to go ahead and complete that part of the process, it just helps us with our planning and its one less thing to take care of during the next application. Certainly,
we would have no problem with coming back for Public Hearing with whatever we would propose, at the time we have something to propose, thank you.
Bird: Thank you, John.
Corrie: Okay, Council questions?
Anderson: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I had one question of Shari, I know stub streets that go into the property, was there ever any allowances made for right-of-way if they don’t continue on into whatever ever
gets developed there? Is there going to be caldisacs created there, or is there not enough right-of-way, or are they just going to dead end right there where they are at?
Stiles: I am not sure, since this was done so long ago. This one would not be as much of a problem with just the one lot debt. This one, however, would be a problem. We will have
to look at the plat and see if was some kind of temporary turnaround easement there. It doesn’t really look like it on the aerial.
Bird: 13th, when they planned to go through with it. Cherie, wasn’t the 13th the plan to go through? Wasn’t that the original plan, the 13th was going to go through and hook onto
13th, on this 13th –
Stiles: On the Conditional Use Permit, yes, they did propose that.
Corrie: I can’t hear you, why don’t you come up here. We have to close the Public Hearing. If you have anything to give us then now is the time to do it before we close it.
Gathagan: I have a copy of the staff report that brings 13th and 15th Street on what was proposed at the time when it was the developed and what was proposed with the planning now.
Corrie: Okay, I think, all right we got it. Okay, any other questions?
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I have a question for Mr. Stubblefield. Why apply for zone change when you agree to CUP on everything you do? Why not just leave it, and go with the CUP as you bring your developments
forward?
Stubblefield: I’m not sure I understand the question –
Bird: Okay, you said with C-N you would agree to a Conditional Use Permit on everything. You can do that with the existing zoning right now and you can come in with a Conditional Use
Permit.
Stubblefield: That is correct.
Bird: So, why --
De Weerd: So, why not do them both at the same time. When you have a plan why don’t you come back for the annexation and zoning and it allows you a little bit more flexibility too.
Stubblefield: That may be a great idea. I have looked at it as two processes. You have two applications, two pieces of paper work to fill out, granted you can in many cases they flow
together. To tell you the truth, this is the first time in my life I find myself in this position. I don’t have real strong opinions about it. I don’t have strong feelings.
Corrie: John that quarter it is already zoned for CSC. If you want to do something there, you can do that. What I think Keith was saying, is after you want to develop that you know
what you want to do, then you can come in and do it all at one time under a planned unit development and go for there. The neighbors could say, what is going in there and they would
have a little better idea of what it is rather than taking it. I think it is going to be okay, but I don’t know for sure, puts them in a pretty good bind. If you are going to do a
CUP for everything as you come in, it just makes it harder for you. If you wanted to come in there for half of that, then you have to do that half, then you have to do something else,
and they have all these Public Hearings. If you come with a PUD, or you have it all planned out how you want to do it, or maybe you want to put a house on it, I don’t know.
Stubblefield: Let me suggest this then. On that basis, I don’t disagree with that, and maybe the appropriate thing would be to ask for a postponement of this or a continuance with
the idea of meeting with Shari and withdrawing this whole process.
Corrie: I was looking at it as helping the process. The City has a lot of time and energy invested in this. We do, so it was not controversial and the Comprehensive Plan was headed
in the direction of this being commercial. Anyway, I was just looking at it as helping to preserve some more, but if it is going to complicate, it is not that big of a deal to me.
Bird: You have agreed to a CUP, regardless of which zone you are in, so it does not matter. I mean, anything that comes before it is going to get a Conditional Use Permit.
Corrie: Shari, if he has to come back, if he has to do this over there would be another charge for the whole thing, right?
Stiles: Sure, there would be.
Corrie: If you table this, how long can you table something? Do we have a turning that he could think about it? I know you are not the fifth member of the Council, but you have to
help us here.
Stubblefield: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Planning and Zoning Commission has to pass on it’s on its recommendations within 45 days of making them to the Council for the hearing, and you have done that. You have had
your hearing tonight, and the hearing is still going. You could close the hearing and simply not make a decision on the rezone tonight. If in the meantime, Mr. Stubblefield, you schedule
this for March 6th and Mr.Stubblefield decides to withdraw his application that can be communicated to staff, staff can bring it up and we can take care of it that way. We can simply
treat it that way, and we and take care of it next month. Is that okay, John? Okay. Council are you ready to close the Public Hearing?
Bird: So moved, Mayor.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Motion made to second the close of Public Hearing, all in favor say Aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: I will entertain a motion to continue until March 6th.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we continue the request for rezone of 10.04 acres from R8 to C-N for proposal under crossing by Stubblefield Development to southeast corner of Cherry Lane and
Linder Road to March 6, 2001.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Okay, motion made and seconded to continue this until March 6, 2001 or the table date. Any further discussion? All in favor say Aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: We will admit you with the staff, John, and then we will go from there.
Stubblefield: Alright.
Corrie: Item 50-S.
Bird: Would you explain to the public the action that we took, so that they understand what is going on?
Corrie: Good, thank you. What we have done here is the developer of that C-N is going to go back and talk to our staff, he will make a decision that he may either want to stop the
C-N zoning request. At that point, if he does that he will give us a letter, and we will stop it right there, or if he wants to come back and say, okay, I would like to do a planned
unit development or something of that nature. He will have some plans of what he wants to do at that time. Right now he was trying to help himself and the City, trying to say okay
we gave it a C-N, it looks like that’s going to be in the new plan. He was just going to put it down then have everything come back to the public, and the public would say Yea or Naye
and vote. So at this point, he is going back and talking to our staff to see which is the best thing that he wants to do. He will either say, let’s don’t proceed with it any further
and then the council will just drop it at that point with the letter from him to do that. If he wants to pursue that under a public planned unit development then he work with it and
show you what he is planing on doing with it at that point. So right now, it is in limbo, and am I doing this wrong?
Stiles: You are confusing me.
Corrie: I believe the action that the Council will be taking by tabling this matter until March 6th is if the application is not withdrawn for the rezone, then on March 6th the Council
will take up whether to grant or deny the rezone. If the application for rezone is withdrawn it will notify the public at the March 6th meeting that it has been withdrawn. You should
check the agenda to see if it has been withdrawn or not, but certainly at the March 6th meeting to which this item has been tabled there would have to action. If it has been withdrawn
it would be acknowledged as having been withdrawn, so any future development of the 10 acre parcel would require a new application if rezone is necessary. That would typically be done
in tandem with whatever ever other part of the process requires the Conditional Use Permit, plan development that would all be done concurrently. So, to clarify it will either be withdrawn
or the Council will make a decision on the 6th. The public is welcome and free to be here, but there will be no additional testimony taken. We will let you know or we will do something
for you, or call the City Clerks office.
Item 8. Continued Public Hearing from December 19, 2000: CUP-00-048 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct a 58,000 s.f. Retail commercial building, four fuel stations with
a kiosk and
10,500 s.f. Multi-tenant retail commercial building for the proposed Linder Crossing by Hawkins Companies and Stubblefield Development – southeast corner of Cherry Lane and Linder Road
Corrie: Okay, Item 8 is a continued Public Hearing from December 19th. This is on --
*** End of Side Two ***
Corrie: -- the Public Hearing, I guess I better continue with it then we can close it and then Council can make the decision, the motion to take it off the agenda.
Bird: Mr. Mayor, can we open the Public Hearing?
Corrie: I am continuing the Public Hearing and now I need to close it.
Bird: I make a motion we close the Public Hearing for the CUP-00048.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made to second the close of Public Hearing on Item 8. All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: I entertain a motion to take the Item 8 off the agenda.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: At the request of the owner requesting to have the CUP permit for Linder Crossing by Hawkins Companies and Stubblefield Development removed from our agenda, I would move that
we approve that.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Okay, a motion made and seconded to take Item 8 off the agenda. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: I will take a five-minute break and we will go into Item 9.
Item 9. Public Hearing: AZ 00-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres from Ada County RT zone to R-8 for a proposed planned development for proposed Kodiak Development by
Hubble Engineering – west of Meridian Road one-half mile south of Overland Road
Corrie: Okay, I will reconvene the City Council meeting at 8:20. Item 9 is a Public Hearing request for annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres from Ada County RT zone to R-8 for proposed
planned development proposed Kodiak development by Hubbell Engineering west of Meridian Road one half mile south of Overland Road. We will use the same format that we used on No. 7,
and we will have staff comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, the applicant has requested annexation and zoning to a zone of R-8 for this 5.4 acre parcel. It is immediately south of the Elk Run Subdivision
and this area would be the Bear Creek Subdivision that has been approved through the City Council. This area down here was recently approved for annexation for the Valley Shepherd Church
of the Nazarene facility. The property is quite narrow. A portion of the property could be served by the Meridian trunk line, if it is extended to the property. The back half is not
serviceable until the Black Cat Trunk is available. The applicant did submit several concepts of what might be proposed for the property, however, those are not considered as part of
this annexation and zoning request. There is an existing, not an existing, but a sub street that has been approved through the Bear Creek subdivision. It is a local street, 50 feet
wide, and it would it stub in at roughly this location here. We would request that any development, if the annexation is approved be conducted under the Planned Development Process
as Conditional Use Permit. That is all I have. The sewer line is held up in this location due to fiber optic line that will need to be extended. Fiber optic line has been constructed
in a location that basically intersects this sewer alignment.
Corrie: Any other comments, Gary?
Smith: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, Elk Run Subdivision is a subdivision immediately north of this project. One of the conditions of the Elk Run subdivider was to extend sewer
to and through his boundary. He brought the sewer into the subdivision on Calderwood, which is the east-west street right there where the arrow is. Then he extended it south in that
long culdesac down to that culdesac, and then is exits in a common lot to Meridian Road. At that point, the sewer was to turn and continue south to his boundary. After they exited
the Elk Run Subdivision, they encountered the fiber optic line at approximately the same elevation as the sewer line. In a horizontal location it was not in accordance with the plans
that had been provided to us by the State Highway Department. The fiber optic line is outside of the easement that was granted to the communication company, which is no surprise I guess
to anybody. Secondly, the extension of the sewer line came to an abrupt halt when there was no solution as to how it
could be extended without getting into the prism of the roadway, the Meridian Road. The Highway Department, ITD, who has jurisdiction on that road was not interested in running that
sewer line up onto the embankment of the roadway. So the developer continued the employ of his Engineer to explore for the location of the fiber optic farther to the south to see where
it was horizontally and vertically, which they did. Those locations and elevations were determined in the field by pot holing and locations to the fiber optics, finding them and accurately
locating them horizontally and vertically. With all that being said, there still is no solution as to how that sewer can be extended. All that information was provided to the Engineer
that was representing the Nazarene Church who owns the property to the south of this parcel sometime ago. I do not know that any resolution has ever been made as to how that sewer can
be extended, where it should be located, so that it is not in conflict with the fiber optics, obviously relocating the fiber optics is probably not a feasible project. That’s a little
history on the sewer. Thank you.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Okay, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Gary is the fiber optics in their easement?
Smith: No.
Bird: Okay, why can’t they move it?
Smith: The sewer has to be in their easement. I’ve got an easement down there. I understood Councilman Bird, that the Highway Department told them they were not in their easement,
and that they were going to have to move it. I guess the communication people, whoever owned that, told them otherwise. So, that is where it is, there is a battle that hasn’t been
waged on that issue.
Bird: I would think the City could take care of that.
Smith: I don’t know, perhaps.
Corrie: A backhoe.
Corrie: I mean fiber optics are easy to move the elevation on, because they do not have a standard grade, you dig a couple hundred feet of trench and you could move them up or down.
I don’t understand what is so difficult about moving fiber optics.
Smith: Well, there is either 8 or 10 4-inch diameter ducts that are concrete incased.
Corrie: So, they ran it in concrete conduit?
Smith: They ran it in PVC conduits that are clasped together with spacers so they are in a certain configuration. They transition from eight horizontal with two on top to ten vertical,
so they are flat then they are vertical then they are flat. These banks are then encased in concrete to protect them from people digging through with backhoes, so they do not break
them up.
Corrie: So, it is a difficult situation with the installation that’s there.
Anderson: I guess I’m like Keith, if they put theirs in the wrong place, though, they ought to be responsible for moving it if they are not in their easement.
Bird: We have got to get our sewer down there.
Corrie: My question is where would we put our sewer otherwise?
Smith: Well, that was something that the Engineer for the Nazarene Church was going to look at for them, and I don’t know how much work was ever done by their Engineer.
Corrie: Are there any more questions?
Bird: Yes, I have one more, Gary, Mr. Mayor. Gary, they said that we are just stubbed out there at that common lot right down there by that cul-de-sac. We are just out to 50 or 69.
Smith: It was brought out to Highway 69. There was a manhole built at that point. They dug a little farther and found that they were in conflict with the fiber optic. They then changed
the alignment from the manhole so they could go either under or over the fiber optic, put another manhole on the east side of the fiber optic, and then start it down the road again with
their excavation and ran into the fiber optic bank again.
Bird: Don’t we have some elevation sewering problems as we get down there a little south? Isn’t round tippers in that area –
Smith: Well, there is very limited service area on the west side of Meridian Road but there is depth enough in that sewer to get to service Meridian Heights Subdivision at Victory Road.
There is a low spot were hardened drain comes through there. You can just barely see hardened drain down there as it is heading southeast, and it is a low spot, but the sewer does
clear under it.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Gary, I thought we had some capacity issues down there on the Nazarene Church. We were only going to be able to sewer part of that property and also that everything that
is dumping from Elk Run and that is going into the wrong drainage right now. Or the wrong service line, and eventually it is going to have to be changed. Refresh my memory on what
is happening down here.
Smith: Okay, all of Elk Run is draining into Meridian road, which is where it was originally intended to drain. The boundary line for the drainage along the bottom portion of Elk Run
is approximately 45 degrees right there starting from that point and going up. To the left, that is the Eight-mile lateral and that is a natural break in the drainage areas. Everything
to the north and east of that Eight-mile lateral drains into Meridian Road to the south and west. Excuse me that’s the Kennedy Lateral, to the south and west drains into the Black Cat
Trunk. There is by elevation a certain amount of property to the west of Meridian Road that will drain into the sewer line in Meridian Road. It is not a very large area.
Bird: It’s just the front part of the Nazarene Church in this property that will drain into there. The other will drain back in towards Bear Creek and eventually hit the Black Cat
Trunk sewer line, am I not right Gary?
Smith: Yes, correct. As I understand it’s an elevation problem, a ground line elevation problem, rather than a capacity issue in the sewer line.
Anderson: So, this piece of property that we are talking about tonight was intended for Black Cat or the one in Meridian Road.
Smith: Part of it was intended for Meridian Road, and part of it was going to Black Cat.
Bird: The same as Nazarene was.
Smith: And I cannot tell you Councilman Anderson, how much of that is going each direction, but it did have a split drainage area.
Corrie: Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay, thank you Gary. This is a Public Hearing we now invite anybody here to testify.
Jewett: My name is Jim Jewett. 4002 Teeter in Meridian. Let me just touch on the sewer real quickly because it seemed to be a long topic. My proposal, when I first looked at this
property and first talked to Public Works about solving that problem was Elk Run has a landscape easement. We are going to be required
to a landscape easement buffering the Highway there. Why can’t we just go back one manhole and stay within the landscape easement, bypass fiber optics and just stay within that easement
instead of staying in the right-of-way? That was the question I posed to the church, why can’t we do that to get the sewer down to them? Let them have their little mistake and keep
it, I guess.
Anderson: Fiber optics.
Jewett: We went and surveyed the sewer down there, it is 15 feet deep and if fact we can approximate it to where the whole class is sitting right now. Figuring out the grade and how
deep the sewer is, and how the ground falls off. The reason that we are applying for an annexation and zoning of R-8 was to have the multiple uses of the R-8, my application states
we would stay to a density of R-4, staying in line with Bear Creek. The R-8 just gives us the versatility of patio homes, town homes, attached housing, so not knowing which way the
City, you Councilmen, would want to go on this project being so skinny. We provided three concepts to the City through the process of ACHD and meeting with the City it was narrowed
down to one concept to the city that I put forward. That they would support if an application did come in front of them. This concept is based on R-4 density, it is utilizing the back
one-third, approximately that cannot be sewer now is utilizing it for open space to but a storage area for not only this little subdivision but for Bear Creek also combining with their
Homeowners Association allowing that homeowners to use that public storage area. We had proposed a recreation area also in there with a tennis court that we are negotiating Bear Creek
to use also. Planning and Zoning suggested other uses that might be more appropriate than a tennis court. We are here tonight to listen to ideas on that. That is not part of this
application right now, but I was told we could discuss as far as giving me ideas on what would be acceptable to the City Council. I had conversations with the church and I was here
and testified when the church got the annexation about the joint entrance. The ACHD was in favor of joined entrance, it sounds like the church is in favor. Again this concept shows
a joint interest up in the south corner with the church. In the front along Meridian Road, again R-8 would give us a little bit more of versatility or uses, such as a daycare. We have
had some interests of someone possibly wanting a daycare right along Meridian road, so that we were showing that on this concept as a non-residential lot. In R-8 there are some limited
uses, like the church itself is an R-8 zoning with the use of the church. So, what I am here tonight is asking for the approval of the annexation and the zoning of R-8, and hopefully
we could get moving forward on a Development Agreement, so that the preliminary plat could move right in behind. I stand for any questions.
Corrie: Questions, Council?
Anderson: On the tennis court and all that, that would common area that Homeowners Association would keep up?
Jewett: Yes.
Anderson: And then you are proposing that that be R-V parking back at the very back?
Jewett: That is correct.
Anderson: And would that be paved or just gravel?
Jewett: Our initial thought was gravel.
Corrie: No further questions?
Jewett: You cannot let me off that easy.
Corrie: You are going to get to come back.
Jewett: Oh.
Corrie: Maybe, okay is there anyone here who would like to issue testimony in favor? Against? Okay, I guess you may not get to come back. Council any other questions for the record
that we are on Public Hearing? Then hearing no other testimony, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Bird: So moved.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing, a further discussion, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Motion is passed. Council discussions?
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I want to bring up one point, and I would like it clarified. He was talking about going down there landscape buffer for a sewer and Gary, I don’t think we allow landscaping over
sewers, do we?
Smith: Councilman Bird, Mayor, and Council we do not allow landscaping of trees over the sewer easements. Grass, small shrubs that sort of thing we can deal with, but trees we cannot
deal with.
Bird: How about a buffer zone?
Smith: A buffer?
Bird: Yes, bringing up, building up and stuff.
Smith: You mean a berm? I guess it kind of depends on what it looks like as far as how high it is and how deep the sewer is below it, how accessible it is. If its 15 feet deep, I
don’t know the elevation of that sewer. Mr. Jewett said it was somewhere around 15 feet. There could be another 5 feet of berm on top of that, it depends of course where it is in the
berm but that is getting to be pretty deep for maintenance, and specifically for personnel and manholes at that depth.
Bird: Personally, I believe that should pursue getting our sewer down Meridian Road in its right easement, and what they do with their fiber optics is their problem.
Smith: I will certainly make a phone call to ITD tomorrow and bring that subject back up and see where it goes.
Bird: I do not think it is fair to the city to have worry about moving that around, when we already have our easement down there, and somebody else is in the wrong easement.
Smith: There was a 10-foot easement that was dedicated on the plans to the communication folks. That 10 feet was off the edge of the right-of-way, and our sewer was between that 10
feet and the roadway. They are way outside their easement.
Bird: Thank you.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: This is a comment and a question for our Legal Counsel. This is a very awkward piece of ground. It is very long and skinny, and it is hard to come up with any real good
type of development plan or layout on it. I think the applicant has done the best job he can with what he has to work with, but my question is before we take any action on this sewering
issue, the City needs to be able to provide the services to annex it. If we do not know at this point tonight in good conscience that we can sewer it, where do we stand legally until
this sewer issue is resolved? I guess I don’t understand what our options are and we can take action on this without knowing how we are going to get the sewer to it.
Nichols: Councilman Anderson, Mayor, members of the Council. That is one of issues that I saw in the implementation that you go through the Elk Run common
lot, so that you essentially come inside the existing boundaries of whatever easements are out there, whether they are express or defacto. Means that the City would first have to have
an easement from the Elk Run Homeowners Association through that common lot for that, to move that sewer line and put it through there, and you do not have that at this point. You do
not know if they would grant it to you or make you pay for it or what. You need to be able to provide those services once the property is annexed in or at least be able to reasonably
anticipate when they would be available.
Anderson: I think the sewer line is through that easement, isn’t it? The way I understood it, it is out to the highway, but as I understand it, it is at the north end of where that
common lot boundary meets Meridian Road. It is not all the way to the south boundary of that common lot, is it Gary?
Smith: That is correct. It is through the common lot from the culdesac to Highway 69. It is out into the public right-of-way, and then it started south in the public right-of-way
and then it stopped.
Anderson: Okay, so it did not get all the way to the end of the Elk Run common lot?
Smith: That is correct. The common lot that is being proposed in which to locate this sewer is property of Elk Run No. 2 Homeowners Association. That is presently landscape with trees
and grasses.
Corrie: Councilman Anderson, does that answer your question?
Anderson: Well, I guess that is providing that we are going to it back into the landscaping area that he is talking about. Otherwise it needs to go out in the public access, right?
Smith: Correct.
Anderson: I think that is the avenue we are still trying to pursue, correct?
Smith: Yes, yes sir.
Anderson: So, if I heard you right, we cannot do anything until we know that we can provide the service. Is that correct?
Smith: My recommendation would be that you not. The other complication though is if I recall correctly, you have annexed the Valley Shepherd parcel, which implies that they have not
come in for their permit for whatever they are actually to do on property. At such time as they do we better be able to get the sewer there, which means that this interfering fiber
optic line is a major problem.
If the fiber optic line was moved, or they somehow saw this as their problem and figured out how to fix it, then it would not be an issue.
Anderson: The difference on this project and Nazarene Church is that the Nazarene Church? We did not know that there was any problem getting the sewer line there. Now we do know there
is a problem.
Corrie: Other than denying, can we not table it until we find out what is going on?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, you may table this to a date certain. The only problem is that you are going to get new information, which comes in. Now I would say this,
this is a rezone application, so it is not quite a quayside judicial deal. It is a legislative decision although we treat them as quayside judicial, but the Public Hearing could be
reopened and then continued to where Gary could come up with additional information. I would say two weeks is not enough time to come up with it, probably another month to find out
who has the say-so and whose line it is, and who has jurisdiction besides the state ITD over granting those easements and on whose property does this fiber optic line trespass and those
sorts of issues.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, can I make a motion to re-open the Public Hearing?
Corrie: You sure can.
Anderson: I would do so then.
Corrie: Okay, do I hear a second?
Bird: Second.
Corrie: A motion made and seconded to reopen the Public Hearing, any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Public Hearing is re-opened.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I would then like to make a motion that we continue the Public Hearing until March 20th, and ask Gary and the applicant to try to get some more information about this sewering
issue and how that can be resolved and bring that back to us on the 20th.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing until March 20, 2001. Have the City Public Works Director contact ITD and the parties involved and see what kind of
information we have at that point. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: The applicant, you know what we have done, so you are aware of what we are doing?
Jewett: Yes.
Corrie: Okay, thank you.
Item 10. Public Hearing: AZ 00-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 8.15 acres from an Ada County RT zone to R-8 for proposed Staten Park Subdivision by Leavitt and Associates –
east of Black Cat Road and south of Ustick Road
Corrie: At this time I will open the Public Hearing on Item 10 and invite staff comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, this is for the property it is immediately west of the property that has been approved as Wilkin’s Ranch Subdivision. Dakota Ridge Subdivision
would be in this location with the elementary school site, the golf course property and Ashford Greens development is to the south of the property. Eight mile lateral runs along the
southerly boundary of the property, and the applicant has requested the zoning of R-4, have you requested R-8? For some reason this is showing up as R-8, and I believe the request was
for R-4. They proposed a Preliminary Plat, which will be on the next Public Hearing and as part of their proposal they are proposing their open space would be partially made up by a
pathway outside of the Eight-mile lateral easement along the southern boundary. We have at least preliminarily plans in the approved subdivisions for the lakes at Cherry Lane, a pathway
that would be on the southern boundary. There is no proposal for crossing the Eight-mile lateral. Part of the reason for that was when The Lakes at Cherry Lane came in Mr. Leonard
Aschenbrenner from the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District was opposed to any type of a pathway on the northern boundary, northern side of the eight mile lateral, but seemed somewhat
willing to work with the city on one on the west side of the eight mile lateral. In this case, with the pathway that they have proposed on the north side, it would be totally outside
of that easement and not subject to the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District License Agreement approval. That is all I have on the annexation and zoning
and just to note that it is a request for R-4, and we would recommend approval with staff conditions.
Corrie: Any other staff? Okay, is the applicant here this evening? This is for the public. This is a request from a RT Ada County to an R-4, not an R-8.
Smith: Thank you, my name is Kurt Smith. I live at 2587 South Side Boulevard in Melba. I work for Leavitt and Associates Engineers who is representing the applicant here tonight.
I am an Engineer in training, working under the license of Reese Leavitt who is licensed to practice engineering in the State of Idaho. With the Staten Park Subdivision, we are planning
a moderate infill development with homes ranging from approximately $135,000 to $150,000 upon completion. The square footage of the homes will range from 1450 to 1800 square feet.
We are adjacent to Wilkin’s Ranch, and Cherry Lane No. 9. We are asking for R-4 zoning, which is compatible with the adjacent properties. The property is within the urban service planning
area with essential City services available. There will be a walking path along Eight-mile lateral as discussed. The 5 percent common area is met. The total area provided is 22,650
square feet, which gives us an open space of 6.38 percent, so we meet the requirements there. Our plan at this time is to connect our irrigation with Wilkin’s Ranch Subdivision. In
conversation with Bill Hansen of Nampa Meridian Irrigation system, he said that would be better than having our own separate system. We are planning on having Nampa Meridian maintaining
the system. As noted in your staff report, there is high ground water table, and looking at our preliminary design with our road profiles, we do not feel it will be a concern to be
3 feet above the water table with our road design. We are requesting a waiver from tiling the Eight-mile lateral. We feel that the Eight-mile lateral will compliment one of our amenities,
which would be our walking path. We also are asking for a fence that would be visible, that we could see through, so we could see the lateral as the pedestrians walk down that path.
All of our common lots will be kept clean of trash and weeds. The developer is planning to keep all of the applicable codes in this development. The streets and street name signs
will be constructed and installed before the building is started. We are planning to make the street name changes that are requested by the Ada County Street Name Committee. The right-of-way
at the Eight-mile lateral will be protected and made accessible for walking along it. We will not be Nampa Meridian easement. We feel that this will work well. The Starwater Management,
we will follow the recommendations of the Central District Health Department, following BMP’s No. 38 of vegetative swell and BMP’s No. 48 of dry extended retention pond with discharging
a pre-development flow to the historic drainage way. Our density, we have 8.15 acres with 24 building lots, if just the building lots are taken into account we are at 2.94 lots per
acre with non-buildable lots included we are at 3.55 lots per acre. Which is compatible with the subdivisions adjacent to us. Staff has recommended approval of this application, and
we hope that you would recommend approval of this project also. With that, I would like to answer any questions.
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Council?
De Weerd: Mr. Smith.
Smith: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: You mentioned the fencing that you wanted it see through in the Staff report it said a 4-foot high solid fence. You would still maintain a 4-foot in height?
Smith: We are planning a solid fence chainlink as denoted by the section that we provided that is in your staff report for the walking path. We feel that the chainlink fence would
still be a solid fence and would allow sight to the lateral. We feel we are meeting that requirement.
De Weerd: Shari, are there mentioned pathway standards that these developments would be operating under? You know any width requirements or pavement?
Stiles: The only standard I am aware of would be the pedestrian walkway standard that is in the Zoning and Subdivision and development ordinances. It has a 5-foot minimum, paved surface.
De Weerd: And what width are you planning?
Smith: According to the detail, we are planning a 5-foot wide surface.
Corrie: Okay, thank you.
Smith: Thank you.
Corrie: Is there any more from the public who would like to give testimony on this request for annexation and zoning? Hearing none, any questions from Council, Staff?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: At this point, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Bird: So moved.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 10, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I’ll just throw this out for discussion, but I know that what they have drawn here meets our Ordinances and that. I just think the developers missed a good opportunity here.
This would have been a great project where they could have done something a little better I think than the 8,000 square foot, standard Meridian lot and could have really dressed this
up and made this a little higher end subdivision. I know there is a real shortage of that here in Meridian. I think there are plenty of people who would be willing to look at those
types of lots. I am not particularly in favor of the chainlink fence. I think that cheapens the look. If you are going to put a nice pathway along these drainage ditches, I think
the chainlink fence will not really enhance that a whole lot. So, I will just throw those two things out as kind of my feelings. Like I said I think the subdivision meets our Ordinances,
but I would have liked to see something a little better.
Corrie: Anything else?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I totally agree with Councilman Anderson. I am so sick of seeing 80 by 100 lots. Our city is full of them, and it is nice. It is just north of Ashford Greens and that is
a great place to bit a little bit of the nicer development, and it certainly would add to the marketability of it. I do not think we are hurting for 8,000 square foot lots in this city.
Corrie: Any other comments? Okay, the proposal in front is to request for annexation and zoning 8.15 acres to R-4.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we prove the annexation and zoning rate 8.15 acre from Ada County RT zone to R-4 zone to Staten Park Subdivision by Leavitt and Associates for the attorney to drop
fighting fast seclusion law and Decision of Order with Staff comments.
Corrie: Motion is made is there a second to that motion?
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the R-4 annexation and zoning of the 8.15 acres at Staten Park Subdivision. Is there any further discussion?
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: Clarification, is it chainlink fence is that in there or are you denying that and going with the staff comment?
Bird: I’m going with the staff comment, which was the solid, which was not the chainlink fence this is a 4-foot wood fence.
De Weerd: Well, this is only annexation and zoning. Would that condition be part of that or a Preliminary Plat?
Smith: Councilwoman de Weerd, Mayor, and members of the Council you can make it a condition of annexation if you so choose.
Bird: It has been made if the second agrees.
Anderson: Second agrees.
Corrie: Then the motion is also including staff comments.
Bird: Yes sir.
Corrie: The verification of the fence as well. Any further comments? Mr. Berg, a roll-call vote on the motion.
Roll call: De Weerd, naye; Anderson, naye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION TIED: TWO AYES, TWO NAYES
Corrie: I kind of agree with Mr. Anderson and Mrs. de Weerd. We are getting an awful lot of these lots just sitting next some other homes out there at a little higher price, and I
too would like to see it a little better. I do not know what the Preliminary Plat is for sure, but I think if I put a naye on the annexation and zoning the Preliminary Plat is going
to be moot at this point. They need to come back and do a little changing. I think that is what I am going to have you do, and I am going to deny it as well and ask you to come back
with a little bit of a different approach here. I think under those terms you will be able to get it passed on the annexation and zoning, so my vote will be naye in this case and have
you come back with it.
MOTION FAILS - TIEBREAKER: THREE AYES, TWO NAYES
Okay, with that on the Item 10, Item 11 is the request for Preliminary Plat, and I believe that would be moot at this point, so I will entertain a motion to deny the request for Preliminary
Plat.
Bird: So moved.
Corrie: Motion is made do I hear a second to deny the Preliminary Plat on the Staten Park Subdivision, any further discussion?
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Motion is carried.
Item 11. Public Hearing: PP 00-027 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 24 building lots and 5 other lots on 8.15 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Staten Park Subdivision
by Leavitt and Associates – east of Black Cat Road and south of Ustick Road
Item 12. Public Hearing: CUP 00-058 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a child-care center for 24 children in an R-15 zone for proposed ABC Club Daycare and Preschool by Janet Torgensen
– 650 West Broadway
Corrie: At this point I will open the Public Hearing and invite staff comments on the conditions for that.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council this is a request for a daycare at 650 West Broadway Avenue. The property is located across the street from the industrial zoned property there
is the Jehovah’s Witness Kingdom Hall here --
*** End of Side Three ***
Stiles: --the mixed uses up and down this street the concrete, some kind of a concrete casting business, further down there are some residential. There is a mixture of industrial and
some residential use on the southern property, the property south of Broadway Avenue. The applicant is requesting for a childcare center for up to 24 students, property is 1.97 acres.
We did receive a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. I did get a letter just today from the Ada County Highway District that had changed their recommendation
to allow the full 40-foot width of driveway to remain as is if
they would take out the paving. The applicant did go forward prior to receiving the approval and paved this entire area for the childcare center in anticipation of approval. They will
need to be taking out all of the pavement that is within the right-of-way and constructing curb, gutter and sidewalk as approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to getting occupancy
if they are approved. Other than that I have no comment on the application. The applicant is here ready to testify and that is all I have.
Corrie: Any other staff comments? This is the Public Hearing on this Conditional Use Permit. Lets have the applicant first.
Torgensen: My name is Dahl Torgensen, 3535 West Angelica Drive. My wife and I called on the property. She is going to do the work and I am going to do the talking. I am here to answer
any questions. We are in agreement with all of the conditions that have been set forth from both Ada County Highway District and from Meridian City Planning and Zoning. If you have
any questions I am more than welcome to answer those. This is kind of a life long dream that we have had to do, we are hoping that it moves forward.
Corrie: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: Has the parking issue been resolved?
Torgensen: Can I address that? In the Planning and Zoning meeting that we had the requirements are if you have 24 kids you need to have two staff parking and then you need one parking
space for each 12 children, according to the plan. We have actually room for 5 parking spaces, but we only need to have two, and I believe in the recommendation, they have recommended
we not have any more than 4 visitor parking spaces and no more than two employee parking spaces which we do not plan to anyway. We only want 24 children there and actually two of the
children will be taken up my two daughters who will be employees. So the parking issue was addressed at the Planning and Zoning meeting and there was no problem there. We are going
to have that as parking coming in rather than going straight into the garage, it is going to be coming in this way, and there is room for a handicap space, two other spaces plus two
in the garage and the employees will be parking in the garage.
De Weerd: Okay and you do not have any other problems with any of the staff conditions?
Torgensen: I did, but I do not now, it is just a lot of money. I appealed, and we are fine. We are moving ahead.
De Weerd: I have nothing further.
Corrie: Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Is there anyone in the public who would like to issue testimony at this period? Okay, hearing none, Council any questions under Public Hearing?
De Weerd: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: I entertain a motion for the close of Public Hearing.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we close the Public Hearing.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Discussion of the Council?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Hearing none, I entertain a motion on the request for Conditional Use Permit.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we approve the CUP for a childcare center for 24 children in a R-15 zone for the proposed ABC Club daycare and preschool on Broadway for the Attorney to prepare
Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
And Decision of Order to include all staff comments.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the request for Conditional Use Permit for the childcare center for 24 children in a R-15 zone for proposed ABC club, daycare and preschool.
Have the Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law including staff comments. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 13. Public Hearing: RZ 00-010 Request to rezone 8.88 acres from an R-4 zone to an L-O zone for proposed St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center Ambulatory Care Center by BRS Architects
– southeast corner of Cherry Lane and Ten Mile Road
Corrie: At this point I will open the Public Hearing and staff comments first please.
Stiles: I am having a little technical difficulty here my battery ran out for a minute. Mr. Mayor and members of Council this is a request for a rezone of 8.88 acres from the current
zoning of R-4 to and L-O zone. The property is located at the southeast corner of Ten Mile and Cherry Lane. Albertson’s grocery store is here with the retail shops. There is an existing
office building, doctor’s office building, that I believe is currently owned by St. Alphonsus. There is a church in this location here also another church here. It is surrounded by
the Haven Cove subdivision on either side. They are requesting the rezone to facilitate an outpatient and ambulatory care center. I believe Ada County Highway District has made one
change on their plan. I do not know if you have a copy of it in your packet, but the applicant had verbally informed me today that Ada County Highway District had approved an access
in this location. It is approximately 205-feet from the intersection. Their normal standard is 220-feet for a right in right out only, because they did not have adequate frontage on
Ten Mile, they had approved a lesser distance from the intersection. This Public Hearing is for the rezone only and the request for a limited office designation for this area. The
following Public Hearing will address the details of the Conditional Use Permit for a planned development for their proposed facilities. That is all I have, if you have any questions.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I do not have questions for staff at this time, but I do need to declare—
Nichols: Councilwoman De Weerd, Mayor, and members of the Council if you have had any ex-party communications from anybody on these applications, I would ask that you would declare
them on the record now.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, they were not ex-party, but I did talk to Dwayne Lingel about a procedural matters that came out of the Planning and Zoning meeting that he had concerns of. We
did not talk about the application, but he did ask me to listen to it for procedural content as council liaison to Planning and Zoning. I did do that, and called back Mr. Lingel to
tell him that we had addressed some of the issues he had raised at our Planning and Zoning workshop and suggested that any comments he had regarding the project itself that he submit
in writing or testify at this hearing. I believe that the City did receive a letter for Mr. Lingel that is also part of public testimony.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor, I also had a conversation with Mr. Lingel along the same lines as Tammy was talking about, mainly about procedure at the P & Z. I also suggested to him that
he attend this hearing and give us his comments.
Corrie: Mr. Attorney does that satisfy the requirements of the law?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, I believe it does. Thank you.
Corrie: That being said, the applicant pleases first.
Adrauchik: My name is Mike Adrauchik. I am the Director of Business Development at St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center. I am here to show you tonight our intentions and our plans
of developing a medical office facility along with a same day surgical center at Ten Mile and West Cherry Lane. I apologize I have had the flu for the five days, so the voice is just
coming back. Hopefully 6-feet is enough distance for you. I want to share with you how we came to this location about 2 years ago we conducted actually a focus group outside of St.
Alphonsus to recognize perhaps what St. Alphonsus needed to be outside of Boise. We conducted that focus group through an outside firm, and they talked to two different groups in the
City of Meridian in and around that location, not specific to Ten Mile and Cherry Lane but in that general area. They were very clear as to what they felt they needed in their neighborhood.
They were very clear that they did not want a hospital. They did not want and ER, they did not want life flight or trauma center in their backyard. What they did want was medical
services coming to their neighborhood that would compliment what they felt they needed on an 80 percent basis of medical care. What they truly needed high tertiary inpatient medical
services, they could go to a St. Lukes or a St. Alphonsus off the freeway or in Boise for those services. We recognize that and that is when we started our planning as far what would
be good location to grow with the City of Meridian which has realized significant growth in the last 10 years and projected to assume additional growth in the next 10 years. When we
looked at this location, this location represented good substantial growth
historically and in the future. We put together an option to purchase that land over a year ago, and November of 2000 we actually purchased that land. When we purchased that land,
we decided we wanted to make sure we met the needs of the citizens of Meridian. Recognizing that we decided we wanted to have a medical office building that could house up to 25 positions
in that facility, and Darrell Fugood is going to grab this board which will represent a visual as far as what we are feeling. Building A is a building represented on the top left, it
is going to be a medical office building, two story supporting up to 25 medical physicians to have their doctor’s offices. There would be some primary care doctors in that building
and also specialty doctors like dermatology, ears nose and throat, general surgery, optimology, eye doctors things like that along with family practice, general pediatrics, and internal
medicine. Recognizing that the transition of medical care is going from and inpatient scenario to an outpatient setting because of technology. We recognize the value to have adjacent
to our medical office building a same day medical surgical center. That way our physicians that are in the medical building that also do surgical procedures that patients that also
need that type of care, patient conveyance, they can go right down the hallway, and doctors can perform a same day medical procedure, knee surgery, eye surgery, things like that. Again,
25 physicians this would represent about 75 staff total that would be in this facility. That would be the maximum at any given time. Again 25 physicians probably would max anytime
there would be 20 physicians in that building. Beyond just medical care services we would provide in there, there is also going to be wellness programs from newborn classes to geriatric
services to community wellness education programs. St. Alphonsus’ goal is not to just cookie cutter what we feel needs to go in there. We have also been very deliberate the last two
years actually that is why we have been looking at Meridian so long to make sure we accurately represented what we felt needed to go in there. It is going to be comprehensive in nature
from medical services to medical wellness programs at that sight. We have taken a look at based on the input we got based at the Planning and Zoning meeting we had some very good dialogue
with the neighborhood, also we had an opportunity to talk to both of the representatives at the LDS church and the Seventh-Day Adventist Church neither one of the churches had strong
oppositions or any in opposition to that, but some of the concerns from the neighbors out there represented increased traffic. Some of the lighting concerns that may be because of the
outside lighting we may have, maybe the perception that we are going to be an ER out there as well and just I guess the increased overall traffic to that location. We went ahead and
did various studies looking at the lighting out there that we are proposing along with increased traffic, and we also looked at our hours of operation. Our hours of operation that we
got indorsed by Planning and Zoning was 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. It is our intention and desire that we are going to be open at that facility Monday through Friday with probable hours more
like 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. I assured the Planning and Zoning Commission that we would grow an ease of the community. It could be as late as 10 p.m., but most likely it will be 7 a.m. to
9 p.m. Monday through Friday probably open on Saturday as well. We will have at our medical office building primary care
doctors, and there was a question about urgent care services out there, and if it is urgent care flashing outside that building would represent an ER, and then a lot of patients coming
in thinking it is an ER and then what would that mean. I came actually from the state of Missouri and managed several family practice offices. We did not urgent cares as they are defined
here in Idaho. What we did was we took our family practice clinics and just expanded their hours, and that way patients recognized what it was through our medical office building, not
a separate center through a surgery center and patients think again it is something that it is not. It is going to be an extension of our family practice clinic in our medical office
building it would just expand all those hours. I wanted to share some of the concerns about a free seeming urgent care center, that is truly not what we are intending here, it is going
to be a comprehensive medical doctor’s office with same day surgery and medical procedures as well. I will refer to Doug Racine, he is our Architect that has been working with our local
consultants on our lighting program, we brought him with his son as well, and some of the traffic studies that might address some of your technical specific issues. If you had any specifics
for me I would be happy to address them right now.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: You were talking about same day services, is that outpatient surgery?
Adrauchik: That is correct ma’am. Same day services in the fact that with our hours defined by Planning and Zoning from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. patients would routinely come in and see a
doctor, one of the 25 physicians, at the medical office building. If that physician deemed warrant that they needed a more medical procedure that was more surgical in nature and that
needs to done more at our surgical center down the hallway, then they would been seen either that day in that center or rescheduled during those office hours in that surgery center side.
So they get care done that same day and then go home of course that same day. We are not going to be 24 hours. I know our zoning application would not permit that anyway. It is not
our intention. It is to be a same day operation just like in a doctor’s office but more comprehensive. We will also have rehab services there, so if you had knee surgery we will have
our stars program for our physical therapy and outpatient therapy also have an office on 27th and Main Street, just down the way a little bit, I mean Fairview. We will have a compliment
of our rehab services there too.
McCandless: Thank you.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: What do you do with your medical waste, how do you dispose of that?
Adrauchik: I may actually defer to Darrell Fugood. I did not know I was going to have to talk tonight, but as far as Darrell is our Director of Facility Management, and I would defer
to Darrell for that comment, sir.
Fugood: My name is Darrell Fugood, and I am Director of Support Services for St. Alphonsus. In regards to medical waste, it is all contracted currently to Stericyle. They bought out
BFI here within the last year or so. It is hauled to Salt Lake City to a regional incinerator, and it is incinerated at that point.
Anderson: Does it get stored outside in the mean time before they come and pick it up?
Fugood: There is a limit on the amount of time you can store regulated medical waste. I think it is something on the order of 48 hours, so there is a staging that will happen with
the waste. It needs to be in a secure area, and it is in containers. At the hospital we have a very similar process there. It is a secured fenced area that that wasted is staged in
until it is hauled away.
Anderson: Is this facility going to be big enough that you are going to have to have liquid oxygen or anything on the sight?
Fugood: I think that is going to be driven by the program, actually. My guess is small bottle service is probably more likely in this condition, much like you would see in a physician
office space. You might, if we got into some surgery spaces, be forced into so manifold gas systems. You would have to have a pretty good-sized demand to warrant the liquid oxygen
tank and operation there. Again, I think that would really be dependent on how the facility develops.
Anderson: No other questions.
Corrie: Thank you, anything else?
Adrauchik: Thank you. I will now defer to Doug Racine to speak to some of the technical aspects on our application.
Corrie: Okay, thank you.
Racine: My name is Doug Racine. I am with BRS architects, 1010 Elante Place in Boise, Idaho. I understand we are hearing just the rezoned portion now and there were some things that
were addressed in a letter and memo that I passed through the City Clerk with a revised plan, and I am not sure if I should address
that now or not. If you could give me some indication if you would like to hear about that as part of the rezone, or should we wait—
Corrie: It is up to you. You can use it now, or you can do it then at this point.
Racine: I think I will just move ahead with what I was going to address. We prepared a cover letter from St. Alphonsus that more or less reiterates what Mike just spoke about and attached
to that -- I addressed in a memorandum some of the issues that were raised in Planning and Zoning staffs recommended conditions of approvals. In particular, we were emphazing the fact
that the bank is a part of the Conditional Use PUD application although we do not have a specific bank on board right now were that configuration to change significantly is defined in
staffs conditions. We have realized we have come back for a modification of that Conditional Use Application. There was one item also the nature of the materials and colors involved
all would have to be approved by staff with any departure from what we presented here tonight. Also, during the hearing in response to staffs comments, there were a few items you will
see in those revised site plans that are part of you packet that we addressed specifically there is a westerly curb cut on Cherry Lane that peraciates these requirements, I needed to
offset 150-feet from the street into the subdivision across to the north on Cherry Lane. I have reflected that in the revised site plan, we have added a screened fenced along the southerly
property line about the residential Haven Cove properties per staff’s recommendations. We have added access through from the 9 parking spaces on the bank parcel, so that they could
actually have access to the bank building. We address some of the parking spaces off the driveway from Ten Mile. We eliminated 3 spaces to provide more internal stack per recommendations
of our Traffic Engineer. We shifted the traction closure slightly to provide better waste truck access, revised some deciduous trees in the buffer to evergreen. We presented this packet
in the revised site plan to staff last week. They have reviewed it, and I believe they do not have any issues. Part of this memo was to clarify hours of operation and what was termed
operation, business operations. With specific regard to the rezone, I would like to point out that we reviewed the existing Comprehensive Plan which I believe has this property indicated
as existing urban and further in the 2000 draft this property is currently designated for potential commercial development. In seeking the L-O zone on this property, we think it is
a less intensive use then a possible commercial use at this property. We specifically oriented the buildings so that the center portion fronting Cherry Lane is a two-story portion,
and building C, which is the angled building, is actually a single story structure with the intent that it would have a less impact on the neighbors in terms of privacy and loss of view.
As far as traffic on this site there is an ACHD report included in your packets, and I believe it refers to something in the neighborhood of 1580 trips being generated per day from
this development. Currently, Cherry Lane has a level of service C which is average or acceptable per my Traffic Engineer a level of service A for reference is free-flowing, no stops,
and unlimited lane change. Level of service E at the other end of the spectrum is capacity where it is totally maxed out, so at a
level of service C existing prior to development and then per ACHD’s calculations the same level as service C would exist after the development is complete. We have addressed some of
the concerns. The neighbors indicated a concern about lighting and making sure that they were not seeing excess light from this site. We have hired an Electric Engineer who has generated
a photometric analysis of the site projecting foot-candle levels and selected a light fixture. We would be more than happy to share the information at this time if you are interested.
If you would like to see that at this point or prior to that if you have any other questions at this point, I would turn you over to my Electric Engineer, and he could give you a brief
explanation of the lighting that we have proposed for this site. Are there any questions specifically of me?
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I had a question on the traffic flow around that bank. I thought I heard you say that you had submitted a revised plan that gave a cut through the nine spaces, where were
you talking about?
Racine: It was at this point I originally had not given it the full thaw out we had designed nine spaces that apply to the bank. It was brought up during the Planning and Zoning Commission
hearing that there was really no access for the people using these nine spaces through to the bank other than to come down on the sidewalk and come in this way. I just took out small
sections of the berm, 48 inches wide at this location to provide access.
Anderson: For pedestrian then, I was thinking that you were talking about vehicle. I guess that is one of things that bothers me about that bank. You have to right in right out turn
going in that entryway off of Ten Mile is that correct?
Racine: That is correct, right in, right out there.
Anderson: So then the bank has to circulate 360 degrees around it and go back out there. I am not sure that is going to be real convenient. It seems like there should be some cut-through
to get through to Cherry Lane to the north without coming back out the same entryway.
Racine: Oh, I see what you are saying. I think we were trying to separate the hospital traffic from the bank traffic and that was probably the reason we did not provide access through
at that point. I really want to emphasize at this point that the bank parcel is shown as very conceptual. We do not have a bank on board yet. I more or less dreamed up that site plan
with configuration based on other banks we have done, so it does not represent what in reality will go there. Thus, the nature one of my comments in the memo is that we did not want
to hang up the whole development on the concept of the bank. We realize that if we go
beyond the square footage or do drastic modifications on the bank as we have shown it; we are going to have come back to this group as a modification.
Anderson: I have no other questions.
Corrie: Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Council?
Racine: Would you be interested in the lighting information at this point?
Corrie: Sure.
Racine: Our Engineer, Wes Smith will come up then and share that will you.
Wes Smith: I am Wes Smith with DC Engineering, the Electric Engineer for BRS and the hospital. We put it in you packet in full detail. We showed the foot level and lighting layout
before for the area for the parking lot. What we have done is we have broken this out into two plans. One plan indicates an average of 2-foot candle across the parking lot, which is
what we design for most facilities. The situation here, down in the left-hand corner of the plan, you will see two diagrams that indicate the throw of the light out of the fixture.
We are quite lucky in the last three years lighting manufacturers have developed a reflectant in the fixtures that allows us to delete any light to incroach on neighboring properties
like we have over on this side. The top diagram is what we are proposing to use, which has a sharp cutoff. If you look at the foot-candle level around the neighboring properties along
the berm, the highest foot-candle level that we are on the buffer zone is .1-foot candle, even though we have a 2-foot candle average out here for patients entering and exiting the hospital.
The City of Meridian only allows the lighting to remain at this level until 11 p.m. They have a deal in place now that we can only leave it on until 11 p.m., so the second plan shows
what we consider the security lighting. From 10:30 p.m. until 6:30 a.m. We also put a dusk control on here so that if daylight came earlier than 6:30 a.m. there would not be a need
for these lights to be on, so we would maintain it to were they were off. Now this foot-candle level is just for security purpose only, and it only lights the parking lot to .5-foot
candle to maintain security. If you look at the buffer zone now, the lighting levels are zero. The fixture that we are proposing to use is a horizontal lamp, so it allows for minimal
glare out of the fixture. The glare portion that you will see in most parking lots comes off the end of the fixture, and this fixture actually caps that and the reflectors are built
to allow for minimal glare out of the fixture. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: No, thank you.
Corrie: Does that conclude yours for right now? This is a Public Hearing, anyone from the public who would like to enter testimony in favor at this point? Those opposed?
Lingel: I am Dwayne Lingel, 2153 Turnberry Way. First of all, I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak, and I did write the letter that you have before you. I did not mean
for that to be offensive. It is strong language, but I felt there were some serious problems with the meeting that took place in January. I have talked about that particular instance,
I do not know if you want to address that here at this time or later in private.
Corrie: You have the floor.
Lingel: Okay, I really do feel that the Planning and Zoning meeting in particular was not well run and at that meeting the only discussion that was brought forward was about the parking
at the bank. I felt that at the first meeting regarding this issue that we as citizens would have or should have had more information without having to come up with information from
our minds about what they were proposing. They really did not propose anything that night they showed the same pictures that you are seeing, but did not propose in the detail that we
got here tonight. Without our inquiry, there really would not have been any information shared. I find it also interesting that at the time of that meeting that they would pass this
onto you as acceptable without knowing how many doctors were going to be performing any kind of procedures or what they were going to be doing within the building. I do not think, in
my opinion, you can have an understanding of what is being proposed without knowing what is going on inside the building by the people and in regard to that they just made reference
to 1580 inflow of traffic into this area. That is a lot of people, in my opinion, for who we are at Ten Mile and Cherry Lane. We moved out there five or six years ago into an area
that was quiet, and my wife drives 20 miles to get to work, so we do not have to deal with the traffic. We would rather live in a lower traffic area which is what we have had in the
past, but would change with this proposal. I think that one of the factors you have to consider is this not traffic from our area, this is traffic that will come from Star, Kuna, or
Caldwell, Eagle it really could come from any direction. I know we have already had some of our family who live in Star, work in Meridian and sure it would be convenient, but they would
never come to our area for this type of service if it were not there. They would not be in our area outside of an occasional visit to us. That is an issue for me and probably one of
the biggest. The other issue, which I wrote about, is the fact that this was a R-4 zoning. You have changed the zoning here from homes and houses to another purpose. I understand
that your Comprehensive Plan is talking about a commercial zoning here, but that is not fact the case of what it was when we bought our property. I do not like the fact that now all
of sudden we live in a commercial zoned area which is not what Ten Mile and Cherry Lane is about. I
really think you need to consider the impact of a rezone from something that will draw from various parts of our county, changing that from a R-4 to this type of zone. The next thing
I would to say is that in the paper this Sunday there was an article, and I do not know if you have read it, but it talks about the growth of Meridian. It really speaks about what looks
like to be the lack of management regarding the growth. In this article, I am going to quote, it was actually by Mayor Corrie, says that he is confident Meridian residents will do what
is best for the town, because most of them fled from somewhere else. They are talking about the small town feel. It says, that you really want to keep the small town feel of Meridian,
and that is what you are quoted here as saying. I do not feel that this proposal would come close to meeting that kind of a comment, and I really think it is going to impact us very
negatively. I will take any questions.
Corrie: Where do you live in relationship to this property?
Lingel: I am around the corner in Cherry Lane golf course to the west.
Corrie: Are you aware of the possibility of an interchange going in at Ten Mile and I-84?
Lingel: I have been made aware of that.
Corrie: Okay, and are you aware that Ten Mile will eventually be a five-lane road north and south?
Lingel: I have not been aware of that.
Corrie: That is an ACHD in their plans for all north south—
Lingel: When did that change?
Corrie: That never did change. It has always been ACHD’s planning for five lanes. I just wanted to check and see if you were aware of that and also the state is looking at Highway
16 that comes from Emmett down to make some kind of connection to I-84 at the interchange if it happens at that point. That is all “ifs” now, but if that happens that is going to be
a lot of traffic whether you have this there or not, so I just want to make sure that you understand that and that the demographics that is possibly going to happen to Meridian in the
next 25 years. Our small town is going to be about 80,000 people. While I would enjoy a small town atmosphere, I do not know whether the citizens will feel the same way that I do at
that point, but we will find out. I just want to make sure that you had some of that information with you if you had not seen it before.
Lingel: That is good to know. I do not know that I feel any different.
Corrie: Okay, I did not want you to make any changes. It was just for informational purposes, because I live out there where you do. Questions Council?
Bird: I have none.
Lingel: Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you, Dwayne. Anyone else in the public?
Hansen: My name is Penny Hansen, and I live 2869 West Ann which is in the Sunburst Subdivision right across the street from the proposed site. My house is right there, the third one
down. I had no idea Ten Mile Road was going to have five lanes either. I knew an interchange was coming in not too far down the road. I do not understand why the City plans things
like this in a residential area. I have lived there for nine years. I have lived in the Meridian area all of my life, which I am not starting to like very much now. I do not understand
either why you do not improve some of the traffic congestion--
*** End of Side Four ***
Hansen: -- in the morning and afternoons. They are really bad traffic hazards, and this is not going to improve it at all. This is going to make it really bad like on Ten Mile Road
and Franklin and down by the high school, another 4-way stop. There are no traffic lights coming in or anything, but we have all of this extra traffic flow. Is there going to be any
fixes to that in the future?
Corrie: I can tell you that Ten Mile Road and Franklin that will be five lanes north, south, east and west. There will probably be a signal there, but the ACHD is ready to do the surveying
now. Franklin will be a five lane all the way to Garrity and it will be all the way into Boise five lanes. Then your north south mile lines will be five lane roads eventually as Fairview
is at this present time.
Hansen: Yes, because there used to be two lanes in front of my house and now there is four.
Corrie: I know I used to live there. Thank God, it is not two lanes there now. That is were it is going.
Hansen: I do not like it either, but I guess there is not much I can do about it.
Corrie: That is what we are here to hear. Thank you, anyone else?
Kindall: Hi, my name is Brian Kindall. I live at 3840 Woodmont Drive which is Cherry Lane Golf Course and I guess a really touchy point for me along with just the growth of Meridian.
I am concerned about the school children. I still have a
small boy, and at one time we had heard depending on where the kids lived, the two schools were an option. Some kids have to cross Cherry Lane over here, so there were crosswalks and
there was the nice crosswalk lady that stand there and guarantee that the kids will be safe. I still do not go to bed at night thinking that is all together true. I am concerned about
this new facility reflecting on that. The school children, there was talk of a footbridge, sky bridge, over Cherry Lane at one time. I wonder if talk like that is still hot to go,
or if that has been set aside. I am just curious about the safety of the kids. Speed limit changes, things like that that might reflect on the little people. Has there been more talk
about the safety of the Sky Bridge, walking across the road type thing?
Corrie: I have not heard anything just a good rumor. Okay, thank you. Anyone else?
Morrison: My name is Robert Morrison, 3841 Woodmont Drive, Cherry Lane Golf Course Subdivision. I also own property over in the Sunburst area. When the people bought all the way around
this property it was zoned for R-4. We all realize there is going to be growth in Meridian. There has been a tremendous amount of growth, but when the people were offered this property
it was all for residential. If you look around the edge of that, they spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to buy their homes there to be developed into a commercial or business section
when you can go down Ten Mile Road where you have already put in storage units. You have taken out a dairy, and you have a lot of room out there that Planning and Zoning has not approved
for tracks to be in there yet which they approved for residential tracks here and then people have to put up with something like this. There is nothing wrong with it, if it is in the
right location but it can be moved either a half of a mile to the south even on Ten Mile Road. They will be out of the tracks, and then Planning and Zoning do not have to put a track
next to it if they do not want to. Or if people buy next to it by then, that is their business, but this was already zoned for R-4. To sell all of these people hundreds of thousands
of dollars of property around it, and then have them pop up with something like this, I do not think it is right. We all know there is going to be growth, in this whole area there is
going to be growth, but hopefully, it will be 15 to 20 years from now, but if it is not so be it. You should not be putting something like this right next to a property that was already
sold to people for R-4 zoning with the property next to them zoned R-4. It is just a matter of Planning and Zoning. They have not done their job. If they wanted to make that commercial,
then why did they okay it for tracks and houses? So the Planning and Zoning and the City Council over the period of years have it themselves. Why keep on continuing to do it and hurting
people all the way around the area for something that R-4 zoned to start with? Like I said, it is just a matter of conscience, evidentially because there is nothing wrong with St. Alphonsus
set up. More power to them if they can come out here, but I think it should be moved to an area where there is not housing tracks already existing which the Planning and Zoning okayed
and the City Council and the Mayor all okayed over the period of years then have this thrown in on top of them. The
lights are not going to bother me from that place because I live over by Bob Corrie, but I still do not think it is right for those people or the property I own in the Sunburst area
to be hampered with something like this and the traffic. What goes on when it is already zoned R-4 and should be residential area in Meridian, which is a very nice area and should remain
a very nice area without your commercial and business zoning after it is already R-4 and people have bought around it. Thank you ladies and gentlemen.
Corrie: Thank you Bob, anyone else?
Lingel: I think one of the things that I would like to add is at the Planning and Zoning meeting there was a threat about the fact that we could either accept this or they could find
something that would be worse to put in there. We certainly do not want something worse. We are not looking for trouble, but we are looking for the right thing, and I hope we can have
your word and your honor about bringing something if this is denied that is not going to negatively impact us. This is Planning and Zoning that gave the threat, I took it as a threat.
It was spoken not friendly and I really believe them, I really truly believe they are capable of putting something much worse than this in and it shows in our City. I hope you guys
will watch out for us because we have given you this responsibility, hopefully, to protect us in some ways and to work with us.
Bird: Just a second, I have a question for him. What do recommend should be put in there, R-4 houses?
Lingel: I really think if that is what it was zoned for, I believe that portion should be houses.
Bird: We just turned down a subdivision to the north of it because it was an R-4. That is not a location where you are going to build half million-dollar houses. You do not have the
view. That is one thing Meridian does not have any place in their city. We are not the Eagles or the Highlands or anything like that. So what would you recommend? We can move the thing
down, like Bob said, a mile, mile and a half so everybody coming to it can drive through my subdivision to get there. Boise, we can all drive to Boise down Fairview, which is very, very
crowded. What would you think would go in there besides houses at that location? And do you think R-4 houses at that property are not going to really impact the traffic? What is it going
to do to schools an R-4 housing compared to what this is, the schools; Chaparral is already crowded. You guys think it should just be housing, I am just asking.
Lingel: In my opinion yes, I think that has been the consensus of the people who have spoken. Brian brought up the thought of some kind of Skate Park I mean I do not know. I am sure
we can dream and figure out something if you cannot put houses in there. I wouldn’t be opposed to it if were not such a large – 25 doctors, I personally need medical care. I am a candidate
for that type of a project, but at
the same time I do not believe it would be right for who were/are out there as I see it. That is just my opinion.
Bird: Thank you, Dwayne, I did not mean to debate with you.
Corrie: Thank you, anyone else?
Durant: My name is Dennis Durant. I reside at 8352 South Old Farm Place, Meridian, Idaho. Originally, I was not going to say anything, but I am actually in favor of this application.
I look at Albertson’s across, and they generate much more traffic than I see the facility actually would. I can see it benefit my family. I think it is a great asset to the community.
I think we all need medical services at some point in our lives, and I think it is really selfish on the part of people that live in that block to say it is not right to have that facility
for other people. That is just what I wanted to say, I think that St. Alphonsus does a great service for us, and I think we need to appreciate that. I think that they have the ability
to – they are taking a big risk by investing in our community, thinking that the project will work. They have already expended a lot of money. Even in just in all these architectural
plans that they have put forth just to do this project. So I think it is a good idea. I know everybody has concerns, but we all have concerns about everything until we get used to
it. I see Albertson’s as an eye sore to me and with all the engineering they are doing with the lighting, I think that they are trying to do a very minimal impact for the neighbors.
I am sure there will be privacy fencing for those people who border the property. To me, if I were living in that property bordering it I would not mind that one bit. I would much
rather have a parking lot that was quiet at night, than the neighbors in the back yard next to me having a barbecue until midnight. That would be much more favorable for me, I would
just like to leave those comments with you.
Corrie: Thank you, Dennis. Anyone else? Okay, developer do you have anything to add questions that have come up that you want to address?
Adrauchik: Just one to really capture why we want to be out there. I really appreciate that some of the neighbors out in that area would rather see St. Alphonsus, although a valued
entity, perhaps off the beaten path to access it’s service. St. Alphonsus' goal truly is to grow with Meridian. We recognize the need to be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhoods,
but we really want to develop a medical community that is less intensive than a hospital, but can compliment the integrity of their neighborhood. Fundamentally, we may have some disagreements
with some of the neighbors on growing with their community, but that is our glow, to appropriately grow with their community. We feel that what we have proposed this evening represents
that desire, not just for today but for the long-term future of how health care is provided conveniently close to their homes.
Corrie: Thank you, Council any questions about the Public Hearing?
De Weerd: I had one for staff, but there is not anyone over there. Well maybe the applicant can answer it. The pad where the bank is supposed to go, if the use is different, are you
coming back or as long as it is compatible, what are the plans for that piece?
Adrauchik: We are in final negotiations with a bank, actually to pursue the purchase of that parcel. If that bank chose not to pursue that what St. Alphonsus would do, we would grate
that lot, seed it, irrigate it, and maintain it until a future opportunity may present itself. St. Alphonsus, there is nothing pushing us to have to sell that lot to a bank. We feel
it is a nice compliment, but if that bank choose to back out and another one was not going to meet our needs then St. Alphonsus would, like we do with a lot of our land, -- like in Caldwell,
we purchased 20 acres, but we will not develop until it is a win-win for our sight.
De Weerd: But you will maintain that, then?
Adrauchik: We would, we grate it, maintain it, and St.Alphonsus’ mission is to have a warm healing environment. Part of our initiative for our sights, so we would make sure that the
site would be maintained, it would be grated, it would be mowed for that lot, and we would support that venture, so it would not be an eye sore. I do not think that anything St. Alphonsus
does is an eye sore, and we would not do that in Meridian either. Good question, thank you.
Corrie: Thank you, any other questions?
Anderson: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Hearing none, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Anderson: So moved.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 13, request for rezone. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Discussion of the Council?
McCandless: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: I have listened to all of the testimony. In some cases I can understand why some of the people feel as they do, but on that corner, on one corner you have a doctor’s office,
you have three churches, one across the street and two behind and you have Albertson’s. You have a pizza place and you have a mail place and the tanning place. I can think of a lot
of things that possibly would be a lot more disturbing than what they have here. Knowing St. Alphonsus they maintain their property well, it looks like they have some really nice buildings
in there, and I just do not see the objections in that particular area as being legitimate. I think they would cooperate with the neighbors. They certainly talked about their lighting
and will try to keep it down so that it does not disturb anyone. I do not live too far from there myself so I do not think it is going to be anything but a good addition to our community.
We cannot stop growth. It is going to keep growing. Talking about Ten Mile Road being five lanes and talking about all the traffic on Franklin that is terrible, it is. We are fighting
with the ACHD all the time to get these roads fixed, but if we get an interchange on Ten Mile Road that is certainly going to benefit the people that live in that area that have to go
downtown to Boise or even to Nampa. They can get out there without having to go through town to get out. I, for one, will probably vote for it.
Corrie: Any other discussion?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I appreciate citizens’ comments and having been on the other side of the podium I know exactly where you are coming from and appreciate your concerns. I think before when
the growth began, there has been a lot of new things that have come out in planning in trying to design your community to serve the whole community, and bringing services closer to where
your people live is a good thing. I think that my kids also cross those streets when they want to ride their scooters to school, they also do that, and it is a concern. That is why
the School District busses kids that are even within a half-mile of those schools, but we cannot change the placement of that school. It is one of the reasons we got the light on Lauderhill,
so it would be a safer place for those kids to cross the street. Traffic is going to be there whether it is residential or commercial in some form or another, and it will probably be
more because more people will have to be driving to those services that they need. Because of the configuration of the street and the plans for these that were done long before any
of us ever dreamed of having a house in those empty fields. Those streets were designated for high use, and right now Cherry Lane moves considerable. As you can see the impact of even
this development does not change that service level, so that just shows you the kind of impact that those streets are made to handle. I believe in urban planning, urban planning is
bringing services closer to the residents and in
corners like that it is a logical place to do that. I think that another point was raised that it is not going to impact our schools like a residential area would and I think until
another elementary school is built that is one thing that we do not have to worry about. I think it is a good use, it is a better use than a commercial use which would be a higher traffic
level, and it is attractive and it looks like St. Alphonsus has done their homework right by meeting with the neighbors that back up to that site. We do not see any of them here, and
so their communication with those neighbors must be well otherwise you can bet that they would be here.
Corrie: Any comments, discussion?
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I just wanted to offer too that this is exactly the kind of development that everybody asks for with these empty pieces of ground that are along Cherry Lane. We had another
project that was down at Ten Mile Road and Pine, and this is the type of project the people wanted there. We just turned down a project earlier tonight, or delayed an action on that,
that is a mile and a half down the road because it was a super store going in that type of a lot. What everybody is asking for is a professional type of office building. I really think
that when you look at it, 1500 vehicle trips sounds like a lot, but in comparison when you say we approved a daycare tonight, that daycare alone is 115 vehicle trips, so really in the
perspective of other commercial things that could go in there, this is very low. I guarantee Albertson’s puts a lot more trips than 1500 vehicle trips a day. I live in this area.
I live over in Parkside Creek, and I personally like the fact that we have an Albertson’s there. I like just walking over to the grocery store or zipping in the car and being at the
grocery store and not having to drive downtown or 2 or 3 miles to get to a grocery store. Like Tammy talked about, the idea is to bring some of those commercial retail uses that we
use every day, bring them into your neighborhood so you are not always driving across town and that saves a lot of the fuel, saves a lot of these roads that have to be build. If you
can put more of the uses in the areas where the people are living, I think this is a good quality project. I do not believe that it is going to impact the neighborhood significantly.
I live there why would I want to devalue my own property? Everyone gripes and complains that we should wait until we can build a road. We have a five-lane artillery road leading into
this property. We do not get this very often I think this is a right project and a right time, and I think it is a good thing.
Corrie: Any further comments?
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I will give my pennies’ worth. I, too, agree with them and regardless that this is not a slam-dunk deal, we have thought hard and long on it. I believe for that corner that
this is probably the most practical application we could have. I believe that our traffic count would be higher if we put that 25 acres into an R-4 with houses in there. I too would
like to see our neighborhoods get more of our own services to them. The Urban Planning, it saves traffic congestion throughout the rest of the City, so I think this is a very nice thing
for the City of Meridian and this area.
Corrie: Okay, with that being said I will entertain a motion on the request for the rezone.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we approve the rezone of 8.88 acres from R-4 to L-O for the proposed St. Alphonsus Regional Medical center on Cherry Lane and Ten Mile Road to include all staff
comments and testimony to ask the Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the request for rezone of the St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center Ambulatory Care Center for the Attorney to draw up the proper order and
the staff comments to be included. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote please.
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: All ayes, motion is approved for the rezoning.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 14. Public Hearing: CUP 00-056 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a planned-unit development in a proposed L-O zone for proposed St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center Ambulatory
Care Center by BRS Architects – southeast corner of Cherry Lane and Ten Mile Road
Corrie: At this point, I will open the Public Hearing and staff comments and any addition comments.
Stiles: I do not have too much to add on the Conditional Use Permit. The applicant and the testimony have reflected pretty much the site plan that has
been proposed. I would just like to add as far as a history of some of this property, I am not sure whatever was intended for this area, the staff would not recommend some kind of residential
development for this piece here. Many years ago this entire 5-acres was approved – I am not sure how to pronounce his name, Quang Thinh Do – it was approved as a 5 acre site for a landscape
and nursery business, so the use that was approved in the past for this parcel was essentially commercial development. There has been no provision made within this residential subdivision
for any connection to provide some kind of interconnection between the neighborhoods. They are limited as far as where their accesses can go in this development. The LDS church here
is not going to impact that use. I guess anywhere that you have two major thoroughfares coming through like this you need to anticipate some kind of a commercial development because
that just springs from any of these types of intersections. It is unfortunate that we have not been able to plan the entire development at one time, but unfortunately our pattern in
the past has been you get one zone. It is an exclusive zone, there is nothing else that is planned to incorporate in that, no other uses that are proposed. Frankly, it has led to a
lot of this sprawl and the development that we do have where they do not have services. You cannot walk to dentist, doctor, whatever, get a hair cut, and we are encouraging that more
in the new Comprehensive Plan. I do find it a little interesting that – I do not believe neighbor that is adjacent to this development has come out to testify against this project.
With that I would end with the motion toward the approval of the rezone and would request approval of the Conditional Use Permit for St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center with staff
and agency conditions.
De Weerd: Mr. President.
Bird: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: Shari, with this new plat has staff looked at it is as far as where the bank is being proposed and traffic circulation? I know Ron had raised an issue during the annexation
portion about circulation of the traffic in that area. Have you had a chance to look at that? Do you have any comments?
Stiles: I am not sure what the difference is between what was originally proposed and this revised plan that we got today. I do not think it was anything significant.
De Weerd: I think just the little pedestrian paths.
Stiles: Yes, to provide access through there. I do not know really what purpose that serves except to – people can always walk over that, they will be walking between parked cars,
so I am not sure that is a great improvement there. They do have the access through here. I think Ron was making so mention to the fact that they had to go all the way around here
to get through the drive-thru and then come out.
De Weerd: There is only one-way in.
Anderson: One way in one-way out. It is like a big circle it just seems like there should be an outlet up in the northeast corner.
Stiles: There is an access here. It is very difficult to see. I do not know if it was even shown on this one. I think it is right there, it is a right-in right-out.
Anderson: No, I mean for the bank out of their parking lot.
Bird: You are talking about the bank. That is not the full plan they said that.
Anderson: Yes, I am not hung up on that that is just conceptual.
Stiles: Again, the applicant is proposing that unless they make significant modifications to this area or the use changes significantly that they are requesting approval of also this
bank.
De Weerd: Thank you. Can a fire truck get in there?
Bird: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Before we have Shari conclude her comments, I would like her to review the applicants memo of February 12, which has some clarifications, specific items, and hearing issues
clarifications, so that I know that if we get down to that point which ones are which, which things are included.
Stiles: From Doug Racine to Brad Hawkins-Clark is that the memo you are referring to?
Nichols: Yes.
Stiles: Doug is this the same plan?
Racine: No that is not the same plan.
Stiles: Okay, I cannot tell the difference, it is just so small. Mr. Mayor and members of Council I do not see any issues that were raised in that letter they were merely clarifications
of what came up. Is there something in particular?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, I am looking at Page 3 of the memorandum. Item 4 with regard to hours of operation, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation was
6 a.m. to 10 p.m., and they asked for further clarification on what it meant for hours of operation. Whether that would include facilities maintenance, staff preparation for patients,
that sort of thing. I need to
know, or think the Council needs to know, what your position is on that question that they have asked for clarification.
Stiles: I would consider their hours of operation, the hours they are open for business. There may be some issues that would probably fall under the noise Ordinance. If they were
out there creating noise with the trash or maybe out there with snow plows when it is snowing or sweeping the parking lot we would have to watch those things to make sure they were not
creating a nuisance. I would say that the 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. was intended to be the hours they were open to the public for business.
Anderson: I was going to say, that right across the street from Albertson’s, they are shoveling snow and cleaning off their sidewalks after they close, and they close at midnight.
Street sweepers and everything else, so I would assume you are correct on that.
Stiles: I do not have anything.
Racine: Mr. Mayor, point of privilege?
Corrie: Yes sir.
Racine: Could we just have all of the previous testimony that was considered on the rezone incorporated as a portion of the Conditional Use Permit application?
Corrie: Yes, that is fine and if you have anything new or different, otherwise we would use the same testimony.
Racine: I am just available for any other questions you may have thought of.
Corrie: Thank you. Any testimony other than the difference that they had earlier. My question was when it was raised by one of the gentlemen. The roof is a metal, metal roof. Have
you thought about changing that? The rest of the neighborhood just has shingles, have you thought of that?
Racine: We thought about it. I guess we choose metal as the material to make it a little more distinctive. I think it was Mr. Lingel’s letter that mentioned that he did not feel the
metal roof was compatible with the residential shingles, and it is definitely not the same material. We feel like the slope roof forms are compatible with the residential roof form,
and with the metal we were just trying to make it look a little more distinctive, add some texture to the community, so that not everybody looks the same. They are compatible but not
the same.
Stiles: What color are they?
Racine: Color? We are looking at a green. Something along the green nature, to be quite honest I do not think we defined the final color pallet. We understand that we have some flexibility
with staff, as long as we do not go to a fuchsia roof or something like that, we can work within that context.
Corrie: Okay, thank you. Any other question for Council? Okay, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Bird: So Moved.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 14, Conditional Use Permit. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Council, any further discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: I have none.
Corrie: I will entertain a motion on the request for the Conditional Use Permit.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the request for the Conditional Use Permit for the planned unit development in a proposed L-O zone for proposed St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center Ambulatory
Care Center with staff comments stated, and for the Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the request for Conditional Use Permit Item 14, have the Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law with all the staff
comments. Any further discussion?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I know it is conceptual, but when we get the plat, if we get a plat, do we get a plat on this?
Bird: No.
De Weerd: It is just that they be sensitive to the access into the bank area that it is not just one entrance in. That is my only comment.
Corrie: Any further comments? All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Due to lateness of the hour, it has been suggested by the Council that we (inaudible) Public Hearing 15, 16, 17 as the first meeting on March 6, 2001 because we do have some
things yet to do tonight.
McKinnis: I am Mike McKinnis from Mountain West Bank on the Conditional Use Permit for the drive-thru. I would love to be able to run through that, if I could.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and members of Council why do not you find out first who is here to testify on the issue of the Mountain West Bank because if there is a whole bunch of people here
it is going to take more time than if he is the only one.
Corrie: Who is with the public in request for the commercial complex? Okay, so in other words it is just the Mallane Plaza subdivision. Council?
Bird: Let us go for it.
Corrie: All right.
Item 15. Public Hearing: PP 00-021 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 5 building lots on 6.95 acres for proposed Mallane Commercial Complex by The Land Group – northwest corner
of Fairview Avenue and North Hickory Way
Corrie: At this time I will open the Public Hearing with staff comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council, this is for the property located at the southwest corner of Hickory and Fairview. Louie’s Restaurant is just being constructed and is ready
for occupancy on this property. It initially asked for a rezone to a commercial designation along with the plat, and the Planning and Zoning Commission initially recommended denial
of the Preliminary Plat due to the fact that they wanted to rezone the property. They have since withdrawn their application for the rezone and asked the Planning and Zoning Commission
to reconsider the plat, which they did. So the recommendation now is to approve
the Preliminary Plat for the Mallane Commercial Complex with all staff and agency conditions.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Shari, we have a position statement from The Land Group, could you comment on their position statement points, please.
*** End of Side Five ***
Stiles: Item 1.15 that deals with the illumination impacting residential property, they have asked for that to be deleted. It is kind of a moot point. It can be taken care of during
the Conditional Use process. All lots within this Preliminary Plat will still be required to go through the Condition Use process. They have requested that the second part of the recommendation
to the City Council regarding the sidewalks, staff had requested a detached sidewalk along Hickory Way and Fairview Avenue, they have requested that those not be detached sidewalks.
Staff would still support requiring detached sidewalks on both of those roadways. I do not know if that last note was regarding anything that was in the recommendations, but it was
a recommendation that all uses be required to go through the Condition Use process. I am not really sure what that last suggested addition was, but I believe that was part of the approval.
Corrie: Is the applicant here this evening?
Hepworth: My name is Russ Hepworth with The Land Group at 128 south Eagle Road, representing the owners for this property. Maybe I can clarify your question, Mr. Nichols pertaining
to those. I am not sure how or why Item 1.15 was recommended for deletion, however because we are requiring that each lot obtain a Conditional Use Permit I guess that could be taken
care of at that point. I do not think that was a request from us to eliminate any interior lighting to the parcel. As far as Item 1.18, we were not requesting the deletion of the meandering
sidewalks except the one on Hickory. They were proposing to have that an attached sidewalk, which is contingent with the development into the Meadows Subdivision, that this borders
on that side of the road. It is an attached sidewalk on the opposite of the road it is a meandering sidewalk, the owner is requesting that it be a attached sidewalk on Hickory only
and have a meandering sidewalk along Fairview which portions of that have already been constructed. The recommendation to put a note on the face of the plat to require each of those
lots to have a Conditional Use Permit was to comply with City requirements because there was a confusion between existing conditional uses already on this parcel, apparently this parcel
has already had three conditional uses imposed on it. That the third Conditional use which was for Louie’s Restaurant and an additional lot over stepped its bounds on the second one,
and so they are saying
that it eliminated the second one. So to clear up any confusion with all the Conditional Use Permits imposed on there, we just said each lot will be required to obtain a Conditional
Use Permit for whatever use they desire in the L-O zone, so that any issues that are brought up or need to be addressed on each individual lot in this subdivision have to brought before
the Council.
Corrie: Thank you. Since this is a Public Hearing, is there anyone else in the public who would like to issue testimony on this Item 15? Council any questions for public record?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Hearing none I will entertain a motion then for the Public Hearing to close.
Bird: So moved.
Corrie: Is there a second?
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the Preliminary Plat from Mallane Commercial Complex. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the
motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Council, any further discussion? Hearing none I will entertain a motion on the request for Preliminary Plat.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we approve request for Preliminary Plat approval on five building lots on 6.95 acres for the proposed Mallane Commercial Complex by the land group to include all
staff comments as well as the position statement by the applicant with the except of 1.18 and to Order of Findings and Decision of Order.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Preliminary Plat with the Attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and to include the comments of staff and also
the deletion of 1.18 –
De Weerd: No, to include the position statement but not the recommendation on 1.18.
Corrie: Okay, and not to accept the 1.18. Mr. Attorney.
Nichols: I just want to make sure that Council understands what this motion is. As it stands now, that means that there would be a detached sidewalk along Hickory, and the applicant’s
testimony was that it would adjoin an attached sidewalk, so there would be a little jog where it meets the detached sidewalk. I just want to make sure the Council understands what the
end part of that testimony was. If you want to have detached on Hickory that makes a little jog to hit an attached, I just want to know that that is what you intended.
De Weerd: That is my intent.
Nichols: Okay, thank you.
De Weerd: To support staff’s recommendations.
Corrie: Any further discussion? Roll call vote.
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, naye; McCandless, aye; Bird, naye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE
Hepworth: Mr. Mayor, I believe it is within your purview to ask the nayes why they voted they way they did.
De Weerd: Or the ayes on why they did?
Bird: We know why you did you made the motion.
Corrie: Yes, I would like to hear that.
Anderson: My reason is the attached sidewalk. I have no problem with making that an attached sidewalk. It does not front one of the entryways into our City, and it matches up to the
subdivision that you are going to tie it into.
Bird: Same thing Mayor. I just cannot –
Anderson: I think it takes up some of the useable space that they could use for development.
Bird: I thought she had went with that.
De Weerd: That is a busy road.
Corrie: Okay, I think I know why the ayes voted the way they did. I think they can probably give us a better Preliminary Plat. I will vote naye at this point.
Nichols: We now need a motion to approve or to deny unless you want to have a new motion to approve.
Corrie: That is exactly right.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the Preliminary Plat of five building lots on 6.5 acres for Mallane Commercial Complex by the land group, and the Attorney to prepare Findings of Facts
and Conclusions of Law and that we do allow an attached sidewalk along Hickory Street. I agree with their position statement.
Corrie: Do I hear a second?
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Preliminary Plat with the attached sidewalk and the Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Is there any further
discussion?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I do not think the traffic is changed in the last couple of minutes on that street. I still believe the detached sidewalks are safer for pedestrian traffic, so I just wanted
that comment on record.
Corrie: Okay, so note it. Roll call vote.
Roll-call: De Weerd, naye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAYE
Item 16. Public Hearing: CUP 00-049 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct a branch bank with drive-thru teller in an L-O zone by Mountain West Bank – Magic View Office Complex
Corrie: All the Public Hearing and staff comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council this if for Mountain West Bank. This property formerly was proposed as two office buildings on this lot, and they also proposed two office
buildings in this location. Since the original proposal they have rethought their positions, we have processed an application for building permit for one office building here, it would
be a single story. It was originally proposed as a two story, but staff did process that application as it did not make a significant change or impact the adjacent property more than
the original proposal. Their Conditional Use application would have St. Luke’s Street. This then turns into Allen Street and connects to Magic View Drive. This would be the access
point. With this plan there would still be some addition property left over in this area here, and we would ask, if that is approved, that they come in with a single story as it was
approved in the original Conditional Use Permit. There is some buffering that they have along the northern property line that was approved in the original Conditional Use Permit. I
believe it was a 20-foot minimum per Ordinance, and they have proposed some berming. I am not quite sure what type of fencing they had proposed in there, but I know that the neighboring
properties would like to see something more substantial than was done adjacent to the Chevron and Credit Union to give them so additional protection from the development on this side.
With that I do not have anything to add, if you have any questions I am happy to answer them. I am sure the applicant is here and some neighbors.
Corrie: Any questions of the staff at this point?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Applicants?
McKinnis: Thank you very much for hearing me at this late hour. My name is Mike McGinnis. I am Senior Vice President at Mountain West Bank. What I’m here for is for a Conditional
Use Permit for the drive-thru. I believe that the bank is okay under Limited Office zoning, so our Conditional Use Permit is for the drive-thru. I will make this as quick as I can.
Mountain West Bank was founded in Coeur d’Alene in 1993. We have offices in Coeur d’Alene, Hayden Lake, Post Falls, and in downtown Boise. We are currently in the process of acquiring
three offices of First Security Bank and four offices of Wells Fargo due to their merger. So we will have three offices in Boise, Ketchum, Hailey, Brigham City, and Park City, Utah.
Mountain West Bank is part of a holding company called Glacier Band Corporation, which is 2.3 billion-dollar holding company headquartered in Kalispell, Montana. Mountain West Bank
is wholly owned subsidiary, it acts independently. It has its own board of directors; it has its own loan committee, et cetera, et cetera. We act independently of any holding company
influence. We are a primarily small business bank. We do residential lending in both mortgage and construction. We do commercial lending both mortgage and construction.
We have an array of business banking services both loan and deposit. We are primarily as I said a business bank, but we have complete consumer banking services as well, as well as extensive
small business administration lending services. We look forward to opening in Meridian. This is going to be our Regional Headquarters here. We have kind of a short fuse, which is
why I want to get up here tonight. We have a modular office building in downtown Boise, and that Conditional Use Permit runs out at the end of July, so I am going to be into the City
of Boise trying to get an extension until we can get this built. So I do appreciate you hearing us. We will have regular business hours of 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Thursday,
and 9:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Friday. We currently have no plans for any Saturday or Sunday business at that location. A bit about the design, we held a neighborhood meeting early in
September for input, and as a result, we designed our drive-thru moving it from the north part of the building, swinging it around to the west side and pointing to the south. Any noise
coming from the cars there would not be between our building and the neighbors, but would be on the west side of the building between ourselves and another commercial office building,
which I believe is scheduled to be built sometime to the west. In terms of a barrier, this is a built to suit for us. We are leasing the project from Magic View partners. My understanding
is the berm on the very north will be a 4-foot berm. There will be 6-foot solid fence on top of the 4-foot berm, and so there will be a 10-foot barrier between our office and our neighbors
directly to the north. Our drive-thru is well lit. It has security cameras and is alarmed. Any speakers that you will see, it will be a completely numatic operation. Any speakers
that are in those little islands there are completely directional and are designed for confidentiality as well as for minimizing and ambient sound that might escape from there. The
ATM will remain open 24 hours a day. It is a drive up ATM, and it is not a walk up. Our primary business is business banking. We do not foresee a whole lot of use of this thing after
hours. I talked about the fence, let me point out very quickly where the ATM is, if you can see that first car near the wall, it is just above that in the wall itself. So you drive
right up to the wall, take your window down, and you are right there. Very good, that is it. That is all I have, do you have any questions of me at this point?
Corrie: On your ATM, does that just take your card, your bank card, or will take all those others?
McKinnis: We are part of the Star system, and it will take Star system cards.
Corrie: Any other questions?
McKinnis: I do thank you.
Corrie: Anyone from the public who would like to testify?
Lloyd: I am here in place of in of Rich Seger. He had to be out of town tonight. He was going to present this letter to you since he is more directly impacted with this. I am sorry
my name is Holly Lloyd. I live at 3091 East Autumn Way. Rick Seger is closer to the – his back yard will back up to this bank area. I am about three houses down from him. I would
also like to mention that Phyllis Brown was here who was next to Cedars. She is an older gentlewoman, and she was here for quite awhile. She could not take it, but she also wanted
to know that she was represented. I did hand a copy to the City Clerk that had signatures from the people on this side of our street who are on this side of Autumn Way who are affected
by this. I am speaking in lieu of Rick, but I am also speaking as a representative of the neighborhood watch. I am the neighborhood watch Committee Chairman, for the Bobcat Jennifer
Autumn Way. I spent 6 years before that being the Chairman for my subdivision when I lived down behind Hewlett Packard where I represented 180 homes. I am quite devoted to the program;
I am a believer that this is the position that I am coming from, so I will take you through the letter. We have tried to make it to the point we do not oppose the bank in any way.
We are thrilled to have them there we are just a little concerned about the barrier. As you are aware from the Planning and Zoning meeting notes, the neighborhood in general has been
supportive of the proposed Mountain West Bank application. It is due to the fact that the applicant has stated that the hours of operation, and the applicant itself is much in alignment
with the concept of the one story office building backing up to the neighborhood which was represented by the developer in the original meetings and the concept plan submitted in the
Development Agreement. If it were not for this 24-hour ATM and the night drop that the bank is proposing then we would not be here. We do not have a problem with the bank we are thrilled
to have them there. We know that we are having growth back there. Banks are what we want. Unfortunately, the one small item remaining that we feel must be resolved before the neighbors
can fully support this development. We have attempted to work with the bank and the developer on this issue, but we have not been able to successfully progress to come to an agreement
on it. Therefore, we feel like we needed to plead our case before the members of the City Council. As you are aware, ATM crime is a major concern in the banking industry; the documentation
is on the second page, as well as within our local communities. For this very reason, security analysts for the banking community along with insurance companies of the banking industry
recommends that ATMs and night drops be placed in sight of high traffic areas where they are very visible to the public at all hours. In our original meetings with the bank, we voiced
our concerns about the security, and the bank representative indicated that security was an issue and that it was a high priority with them. Also at the first Planning and Zoning meeting
the neighbors again spoke to the developer and another representative from the bank about security and specifically requested that they look at several alternatives for the ATM and night
drop. Three things were presented, No. 1, closing the ATM at dusk, No. 2, relocating the ATM to the front of the building where it is more visible and farther away from our neighborhood
and No. 3, constructing an 8-foot masonry wall that could serve as a barrier to potential
crime. The representative has assured us that they would look into the issues, but they did not return our call when we requested to see what progress had been made prior to the February
1st Planning and Zoning meeting. We can understand why closing the ATM would not be in their best interest, and we can understand why it would be expensive to relocate it, but we do
not understand why they have not been willing to talk to us about this wall that we are requesting. Since the ATM is located away from the main street behind the building to the west
and in direct view of trees on berm backing neighborhood yards where a criminal element could hide, we feel that a wall is required for the safety of our neighborhood. Having that ATM
back there is going to severely compromise the safety and security of our neighborhood, particularly the people who back up to it. Attached you will find diagrams and contractor quotes
of how this wall can built with a minimal cost and impact to the bank and developer. It is the same that was used along the Curtis Road extension. The contractor assures us that the
installation on the berm is not a problem as long as the berm is constructed properly. In fact, the same system was used to construct the wall on a berm in Salt Lake City, and it is
still today, 10 years after installation. In addition, when you examine the cost of pre-cast masonry walls versus a wooden fence, it is more likely that the wood fence would be even
more expensive to maintain and replace before the warranty on the masonry wall is ever reached. All it would take is one criminal incident that could alter the life of a neighbor family
forever. Please grant us the courtesy of that consideration when you rule on this CUP. Thank you, do you have any questions?
Corrie: Thank you.
Lloyd: Thanks.
Corrie: Anyone else?
Seger: Good evening, my name is Marty Seger, and I live at 2951 Autumn Way so our residence immediately backs up to the bank. We agree with the neighborhood that this is exactly what
we want, a one-story professional building. It is what, I know you as a City Council is trying to get for us, professional buildings. I just want to preface my comments that this neighborhood
is over 20 years old, so it is not like we are 5 years old. We should have known that all this development was going to occur. I am really just requesting two things: respect, respect
for our neighborhood, our families because we are truly concerned about safety. Masonry walls are not as climbable as a wooden fence. I know the developer mentioned a solid fence.
Solid in our minds means masonry not climbable. Solid, I think in his mind, means wooden. So that is the main distinction that we are more concerned about the safety. Yes it will
allow privacy, but we are truly concerned about the safety. So, No. 1, I am just asking for the City Council to show respect to the neighborhood and to our families because we are truly
concerned about the safety. No. 2, to have the courage to go ahead and say we are going to make a hard decision, and we know that some people
are not going to be happy with it, but we are going to go ahead and do this. I mean the developers are going to be opposed, but with setting the precedent once we approve a fence along
this development there is going to be further development to the east going towards Eagle Road which will be coming before your council soon. So once you set a precedent of a wooden
fence, it is going to be very hard for neighborhoods to convince the City Council then to change that privacy barrier to masonry. So we are concerned that we need to do this now and
start the precedent so that we can be consistent with this fencing that is going to go all the way east to Eagle Road. Thank you very much, do you have any questions?
Seel: Jonathon Seel, WH Moore Company, yes I am here again. Just a clarification that I wanted to make, when I originally came I was the one who spoke on this. There was a Development
Agreement prepared that specifically speaks to a 6-foot high wooden fence with a 4-foot berm. There was no discussion about anything else, and that is what was approved, so it is agreed
upon. I just to make sure that the Council understands that there was no wiggle room as far as that, there as no discussion about it could be this or it could be that. It was a 6-foot
high wooden fence with a 4-foot high berm. That goes along the northerly property.
Anderson: Was not the same night we discussed about there would not be anything more than a one-story building, though?
Seel: And that is all there is there.
Anderson: There was another application that is more than that.
Seel: Another application for what, Councilman?
Anderson: For another building that was more than one-story.
Seel: Not on this lot. We submitted an application to share recess for a one-story building to the south of this there is plans to construct another one-story building eventually to
the west of the bank. The total square footage of those three buildings is less than what was shown on the concept plan.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Shari, what kind of a berm did we end up putting between the Credit Union and the Auto Fair?
Stiles: What kind?
Bird: Yes, what kind of berm was that?
Stiles: I think they just have bark and some trees, I am not sure – I think they have a chainlink fence and that was partially due to the ditch that ran along there.
Seger: Marty Seger, 2951 Autumn Way. We have pictures of the berm that is between the Credit Union and all of that if you wanted to delay your decision. We could bring those to the
March 6, 2001 Council meeting.
Bird: I just could not remember what we had. I thought it was just strictly a berm.
Corrie: So to the east it is just the berm, right?
Stiles: Nothing has been constructed there yet they just built this road.
Corrie: Okay.
Seel: Jonathan Seel, WH Moore Company. I think what the ladies are referring to is the berm that is actually to the east of this lot. You cannot see that in front of the Credit Union,
and there is a cyclone fence, unfortunately that cyclone fence, and we have talked to the neighbors about this, and we understand their frustration with that which is beyond our control.
We keep coming back to this, but is something we have not been involved in. We did not have any control, but that cyclone fence is at the bottom of the berm, and I would venture to
say that that berm right there is probably 2-2 ½ feet tall. The berm on this particular lot that you see to the right as well as the one behind the bank, that is the one where we have
agreed to a 4-foot high berm with a 6-foot high solid wooden fence. Our control ends down there at the end of our property, or what is the westerly portion of the Credit Union. We
were not involved in that, that was several years ago.
Corrie: Anyone else from the public at this point? Council questions? Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess I would like a little bit more explanation on 1.4, Shari. This CUP is for the bank and not for the entire development, so what are the issues and how do they apply
to this application? I know we have had considerable discussion on this berm and the fence on top. I believe there are only one or two neighbors at the time that that was agreeable
to them. I do not recall specifically what it was, but this is what he asked for, the berm with the fence on top. Is that not right?
Stiles: I believe that the previous proposal when it was just office buildings, they did not have an objection, or I did not know that they had a particular problem with it. It is
the fact that the ATM is there with the drive-thru that has caused them more concern and their safety beyond what they felt the office complex would—
De Weerd: On the other side of the berm, that is a ditch, is that right? Is that the irrigation canal?
Stiles: There is an irrigation ditch on the north side of the property. I believe it is on the neighbor’s property.
De Weerd: But 1.4, what is that all about and how does it apply to this application?
Stiles: When this property was initially annexed, if you recall, it was not there very long ago. They came in and we had requested a Development Agreement be entered into. The applicant
requested that a very loose Development Agreement be crafted for this annexation and zoning. Since then they have changed their plan to include this drive-thru bank and another use
on the property to the east that was not at all what was originally proposed. There was a Development Agreement entered into, it is a binding document unless that is amended. That
was simply what is stated in 1.4, the conditions that were placed on the original proposal as presented by the applicant. If through the modification of the Conditional Use Permit some
of those issues need to be revised, they can be incorporated into an amendment to the Development Agreement. I think all that was put forth here is that when the original proposal came
through this were the conditions that were placed on the project.
De Weerd: So for this particular lot they have to have a 20-foot wide buffer with the 4-foot berm and the 6-foot fence towards the back end of that? Is that correct?
Stiles: I am sorry can you repeat that, Tammy?
De Weerd: They require a 20-foot wide buffer along the northerly property line and that 4-foot berm and 6-foot fence are on the back end of that, right?
Stiles: Right and that was a condition of the original proposal, when this property was annexed and when a plan was proposed for the two 5-acre lots.
De Weerd: So that was within the Development Agreement? So if you change it on this particular lot, you would have to go back and change the Development Agreement, or they are only
going to have a 7 ½ foot tall fence on this one lot, and it does not matter what they have on the other lot?
Stiles: Well, the Development Agreement can be amended to whatever your approval is. I am not sure how specific the language gets it was initially for four buildings on two 5-acre
lots.
De Weerd: But in that area where their drainage is there is also a fence lying along the back of it, that will then change to a 6-foot wooden fence with the 4-foot berm?
Stiles: I believe that was part of the initial approval. This is going to be an ACHD retainage pond for storm water, and I believe their requirement was to continue the fence along
there. This is really part of one lot still. I am not sure how the roadway dedication shook out the two different lots, there was a 5-acre lot here, and there was a 5-acre lot here
in the original subdivision. They have since dedicated this roadway to connect to Magic View which since I have not seen any applications for lot line adjustments or what actually was
done. I really do not know where this lot is, I mean if this is one lot, if they have gone and split this off and dedicated Ada County Highway District. I do not know if the condition
changes for this 5-acre parcel the condition should be applied to the entire northern boundary of the parcel, and it should be treated as a whole as far as one piece of property. I
am I not getting what you are asking me?
De Weerd: Well, to a certain extend, it just confuses me even more. We are just looking at this one CUP and how this one application can affect the entire development. I am trying
to see if we increase the height of that fence because it is a Conditional Use Permit, and you can do that. That does not solve any problems along the rest of the development because
this will not affect that.
Stiles: If a wall were approved just for this portion of the site, it would have very little affect on the neighbors.
De Weerd: Well that is my point.
Stiles: Yes.
Seger: On March 6, 2001 there will be another CUP up that is another development around there. We will be having the same discussion about this.
De Weerd: Well, we can only deal with one application at a time.
Seger: I understand, I am just saying that it is a continuing thing that we want to work on.
De Weerd: Right.
Stiles: Tammy?
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would like the applicant to address the safety concerns of the neighborhood group.
McKinnis: Initially, when we had our Public Hearing, or public meeting, we agreed to move that from the north to the west side. Now from a standpoint of security, these ATMs are well
lit, they are alarmed, and they have video surveillance. That is we tape 24 hours a day on these things. I cannot tell you that nobody will come along with a crowbar and try to bust
this thing open. I cannot tell you that nobody will throw a rock through the window either, but it has been our experience in our particular bank that we have not had any issues with
ATM security. With regards to a night drop, that is something that is for the conveyance, primarily of our merchant customers, and that is just something that you pull up, you open
the door, you drop your bag in and you take off. That ATM and night drop which are right next to each other up there in that little square have, as I said, security cameras, they are
alarmed, and they are lit 24 hours, well from dusk to dawn. We have not had any security issues with these things.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: It is behind the bank, you know, so you cannot see it from the road, so is not that a safety issue?
McKinnis: Well, I do not particularly think so. I do not know where on that building you are going to put it where the general public is going to be able to see that thing night and
day.
Anderson: The one over on Cherry Lane is exactly the same way.
Bird: I do not know of any bank ATM that is not in the back.
*** End of Side Six ***
McKinnis: -- security issues when you have walk up ATMs. You do not want a walk up ATM you want one you can drive up to. Even in the Credit Union there, I believe theirs is on the
south side of the building, which is between them and the Chevron station. Without some sort of redesign of the office, we think that is about the safest place we can put it. As I
said, the majority of that traffic will be – during the day and there will be traffic on the weekends, but with our security cameras and the fact that it is alarmed, I think it is as
safe as we can make it.
Bird: What if you flip-flop the floor plan and brought the drive-thru and ATM over to the east side and brought your people around the other way? Or can you go on a counter-clock wise—
McKinnis: No, then I have to bring them all the way in and around that way.
Bird: You to bring them around, you are right.
McGinnis: We agonized over this with our architect just how best to do this. He really thought the best place to put it was up on top on the north side, but we did not want to. After
the meeting with the public, our neighbors, fuss with that, so we moved it around.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I am going to ask Captain Bowman, being with the police, do you know is there much ATM problems, Captain Bowman?
Bowman: I was waiting for this question. In the City of Meridian, I am not aware of any ATM problems.
Bird: As a security standpoint from the Police Department, you did not see any problem with that footprint?
Bowman: No, I did not. I do not see any problem there.
Bird: I have no more.
McKinnis: Thank you.
Corrie: If there are no other questions for the hearing, I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing if so desired.
Boyd: My name is Jim Boyd. I represent Magic View partners. I reside at 5016 Lakes Edge Place in Boise, Idaho. I would just like to clarify some discussion on that berm. The Development
Agreement is a 4-foott berm. It is 30-feet wide up where you see the retention pond, and then from that point on it is a 20-foot wide berm for the Development Agreement. The 6-foot
wood fence on top, part of the disheartening part is the portion of the berm that currently exists just north of the Credit Union was put in. It is a much lower berm then the 4-foot
that is now required, and I think part of this requirement was seeing the mistake that was make there. Plus, instead of putting their fence on top of the berm, they put their fence
on the north boundary line, which is at the low point of the berm on the north side. It was really unfortunate, and I feel sorry for those neighbors that border that improvement to
the north because they have no buffer from headlights that point north as they come into the Chevron, they look right into people’s backyards, so it is very unfortunate. I do not blame
them for being upset, and I think we all would like to help out in trying to get something resolved
there. As far as our part from where the end of that berm which you see exists all the way down to the west property line will all be the 4-foot high berm with the six-foot fence.
Corrie: Any more discussion for the Public Hearing, Council?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Corrie: I will entertain that motion then.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I make a motion that we close the Public Hearing.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on the Conditional Use Permit for the Mountain West Bank. All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Any discussions, talk?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess there are still issues of the Development Agreement that staff does not feel comfortable with. I do not see that it should be a part of this application, and maybe
the attorney can address when is the appropriate time to look at those things that are brought up in 1.4.
Nichols: Councilwoman de Weerd, Mayor and members of the Council, you have to understand the Development Agreement cuts two ways. It is not simply binding upon the developer. It also
binds the City as to what the conditions of development will be for that particular parcel. So when this Council set the standard for example of the berm, which has been discussed at
some great length, it was not the City's idea. I remember somebody came in and wanted that so that there was a 10-foot height, so that headlights and the rest stayed out of the subdivision.
That is what was imposed here on this deal. I guess what I am saying to you is: it is my opinion that this is not the time to go in try to modify the Development Agreement, where
this is a one-story building, where the only issue is whether or not you allow them to have drive-thru with the ATM. I could
be wrong, but I think that a bank is an allowed use in an L-O. It is only the drive-thru and the ATM that make it the CUP. The Development Agreement ought to be left alone because
if they do not agree to the changes, you are going to have to show that these conditions -- if you are going to change the conditions, that they are related to the development.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Corrie: Any further discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Then we will entertain a motion on the request for Conditional Use Permit.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Anderson.
Anderson: I make a motion that we approve the Conditional Use Permit to construct a branch bank with a drive-thru teller in an L-O zone by Mountain West Bank, Mountain View office complex
and ask the City Attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order subject to the staff comments.
De Weerd: Including 1.4?
Bird: No.
Anderson: 1.4?
De Weerd: Yes, which is what we have been discussing.
Anderson: Okay, minus 1.4 because I do not think it is appropriate in this.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Conditional Use Permit on Item 16. Have the Attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
with the staff comments excluding the Item 1.4. Any further discussion? Hearing none, a roll call vote please.
Roll-call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, aye; Bird, aye
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess item 1.4, I know staff has always told us that you cannot mix two things together. If there is something that you need to work out with the developer, you need to
get with them and see that what they are not doing is addressed, but not in an application.
Corrie: Shari, any comment?
Stiles: What was your motion? Was it to approve it, deleting that 1.4?
Bird: Yes.
Stiles: So you are deleting any requirement for them to meet their original Development Agreement requirement?
Anderson: No, this just is not the place to put it.
Stiles: They have to live up to their Development Agreement, but their requirements for CUP that is separate. They still need to abide by the conditions set in the Development Agreement,
but those are separate from this CUP. That does not seem like a requirement to me, it is just part of the Development Agreement, it is just information, it is really not a condition
at all. All of these things exist. These are the requirements.
De Weerd: And they still do exist.
Stiles: Okay, you just wanted – because it was extraneous, you thought. That is the only reason you deleted it?
De Weerd: No, we do not delete those conditions from Development Agreements.
Stiles: You just deleted it as a term of this Conditional Use Permit because it is already taken care of in the recorded Development Agreement.
Corrie: Everything is okay?
Item 17. Public Hearing: VAR 01-003 Variance request for a time extension for recordation of Final Plat for Merchants Plaza Subdivision by Wild Shamrock, LLP – east of Meridian Road,
south of Gem Street
Corrie: I open the Public Hearing, staff comments.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council this variance request was submitted as a result of – the Plat was recorded nearly a year after it should have been recorded. Therefore, we
have some form letters that go out and inform the applicant that their plat is null and void due to the non-compliance with development time requirements. This is really a clean up
issue, the plat is recorded; it was just very late, and there were some health issues of the civil engineer that was working on the project. This is for the property that is just west
of the Round Table Pizza and Under the Onion owned by Thomas, and we recommend approval.
Bird: I have no questions.
Corrie: Any questions from staff? Is there anyone in the public who would like to testify?
Dimser: My name is Jason Dimser. I am Roy Lance and Associates. Our officers are at 391 West State in Eagle. I just wanted to compliment you guys on your incredible endurance here.
It is pretty much just as Shari said, that Mr. Bryan Iverson was the original surveyor and engineer on the project. Mr. Bryan Iverson got sick in the midst of recording the Final Plat
for this subdivision and in association with his illness and several other issues that typically come up. Often delay projects in-between the time when Council gets to approve them
and when they finally get recorded. The allotted time period had elapsed, and we would just like to remedy that situation and get it approved. So if you have any questions I can certainly
answer them, but it sounds like everyone is on track.
Corrie: Thank you, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Is there anyone from the public at this time that would like to issue testimony? Hearing none, any other comments from the Council for the Public Hearing? I will entertain
a motion then.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we close the Public Hearing for the Merchants Plaza Subdivision.
De Weerd: Second.
Bird: Variance request for time extension.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 17. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Any other further discussion? I entertain a motion of Variance request.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the Variance request for the time extension for recordation of Final Plat for Merchants Plaza Subdivision by Wild Shamrock, LLP, east of Meridian Road and
south Gem Street and for the Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Corrie: Motion has been made to approve the request of the Variance for the Merchant Plaza Subdivision, and have the Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
and Decision of Order. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 18. CUP 00-057 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct a new office / warehouse building in a flood plain for Big D Builders in an I-L zone – King Street and Baltic Place
Corrie: Staff questions? Staff comments?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council I did not have the findings in my file, but apparently someone has looked at them because they have made some changes to them from our staff.
I do not have them anywhere within my entire file, so I do not know what—
Corrie: Staff will make amendments and approval for Conditional Use Permit.
Stiles: Do you have them?
Bird: No, we did not get them.
Corrie: Shall we take the one that was received on January 16, 2001? Is that the one we are looking at?
Stiles: But that is not the recommendation.
Bird: That is not the recommendation.
Stiles: I do not know where those recommendations are. Is this also going to be Eagle Concrete Pumping?
Corrie: No.
Stiles: Oh, it is a different one. Since this property is in the Flood Plane they had to go through a similar process that Eagle Concrete Pumping went through. Does anyone up there
have any recommendations?
Stiles: So what do we do?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Given the lateness of the hour, and I realize the applicants have stuck through this to the bitter end, and I know you have an Executive Session you like to do. It is within
the Council and Mayor’s right to continue this hearing to the next meeting on March 6, 2001, and that would give staff a chance to have a copy of these recommendations or find the ones
that have been sent over and also to have them in your packets. My recollection of this issue of the Flood Plane issue is not a simple five-minute issue.
Stiles: It does not look like anything here is—
Anderson: We do not have the information in front of us. I would hardly recommend that we do that because you do not want to be wrong here.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I hope this does not put you in too much of a bind if we have to delay it for a couple of weeks, but it is a very important findings.
Unidentified: I guess I do not understand what information you are lacking is my question.
Bird: We do not have the Findings of Facts, Recommendations, I mean.
Corrie: They do not have the recommendation of Planning and Zoning.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council and the applicant the other thing is by rule, the Council has the right to put off any Public Hearings once they go past 11 p.m.
Corrie: This is not a Public Hearing is it? This is not a Public Hearing
Nichols: This is just the regular CUP application. Okay, I stand corrected it still needs to be discussed. It is not an easy issue because it is this Flood Plane overlay zone issue.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council the only way a position statement could have been prepared is if somebody had a chance to look at this recommendation.
Bird: So, somebody in Planning and Zoning had that?
Nichols: It has been distributed. The position statement that is in your packet would be from the Planning and Zoning staff – I guess I should ask the applicant, if the applicant has
seen this. Have you seen these?
Unidentified: This was all the information we went through with the Planning and Zoning department in their original Planning and Zoning meeting.
Nichols: What I just presented to you is the recommendation that is prepared by our office after the meeting after considering the testimony and the motion by the Planning and Zoning
Commission. This is the recommendation and you should have received a copy of this at the same time that a copy was forwarded to the Council and Mayor.
Unidentified: Then this page is just the exceptions to the—
Nichols: That page that you are holding and just showed me is the position statement which reflects the Planning and Zoning staffs position on the recommendations that were included
here. If there is anything in here that they disagree with or they think needs clarified at the Council level, they put together a position statement and set that up.
Unidentified: You guys have not responded. We have not seen anything in writing from you.
De Weerd: Yes, we have that application, but we just do not have what their position statement –
Bird: That position statement is not his, that is from our staff that says – so they have seen those, but they have done something with them.
Unidentified: How this position statement was arrived at I had a meeting with Steve prior to our Planning and Zoning meeting. He recommended that I make
these recommendations at Planning and Zoning so they would have those on record, and then they would go into the final draft.
Anderson: Well, usually after you get the recommendations from Planning and Zoning the applicant responds in writing himself.
Bird: You need to look it over and make sure you agree with all the recommendations and what you do not. Then you need to respond in writing just like the staff does. That is why
normally—
Anderson: You need to put in writing what you disagree with.
Unidentified: I just find it odd. I talked to him a couple of times coming up this to vent and everything was done according to what they had instructed me to do.
Anderson: They never told you anything about that you ought to respond?
Unidentified: No, I talked with the Planning and Zoning twice after our hearing that we had with the Planning and Zoning group, and they said everything was in line, and then they just
recommended that I pick up the packet from the Clerk’s office.
De Weerd: I apologize to you, you have stuck it out all this time, and we do not have all the proper stuff to help.
Unidentified: That is very frustrating.
De Weerd: Of course it is. I am really sorry.
Unidentified: So what do we do from this point, though? I am on a time line I would like to keep for this project based on I have sold my other shop space. By setting it back two
weeks, how much is that going to impact – my understanding is once we get through this process then there is probably a period for the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law to all
be done and then you have to sign off on those? Then I do not know if there is another grace period after that.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Yes, Bill.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and members of Council clarify for the applicant – essentially you are looking at a month delay because here is what you are looking at. March 6, 2001 the Council
takes this up and they have a complete copy of these recommendations, and you have them as well. Which ever way they vote on that proposal on that date then they direct me to prepare
Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order, which by definition, I really cannot
prepare until they have told me what they have decided. I will prepare those, and we usually have them done within a week or so, so that they are here. Our goal is to have them to
the Clerk’s office preferably by Wednesday but not any later than the Thursday before the Council meeting. That Council meeting would be March 20, 2001 so that everything is there.
You would then get a copy of the proposed Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and so forth from the Clerk’s office. If you have any disagreements with any of those things then
you submit them in writing to the Clerk who distributes your position on those things to everyone on the Council as well as to me. Then the findings are on the Consent Agenda. If there
are no objections to the proposed finding, nobody has any clarifications, nobody wants to look at it again it is on a Consent Agenda, and when the Consent Agenda is approved that is
when the findings get signed by the Mayor and get tested by the Clerk. Is that the end, generally, it is? There is not a whole bunch of people that stuck it out here to testify here
on your proposal, and so it is not likely that within 28 days after the findings are entered that somebody is going to petition for Judicial Review, but those are your time lines.
Corrie: Well, Bill it sounds like he needs some instruction too as far as what he is supposed to do after he sees the findings because it does not sound like he is getting that direction.
Nichols: When you get these recommendations which we will make sure you get a copy of these recommendations, you need to go through them. Now you already have a copy of Planning and
Zoning staffs position statement on those findings. If you have any thing to add or even if all it is I agree with the Planning and Zoning staffs position statement then you do that
in writing. If there is any other part of these recommendations that you disagree with, you need to say so in writing, saying I disagree with item whatever it is and list what those
disagreements are. So, you are going to be getting this sooner rather than later, and when you get it you will have a chance to go through it.
Unidentified: So on March 6, 2001, am I going to be first on the agenda, or where will I be? Will I be No. 18 again?
Corrie: Typically, these things that are – it is kind of a rolling agenda, if it gets tabled. Now we put off – what did we table until the 6th? We tabled to the 6th just the Touchmark
Development Agreement and that was it.
Anderson: We tabled the Linder Crossing.
Corrie: So you would be like the third item.
De Weerd: This really delays you just two weeks, because you would not have had your findings until the 6th. This way you can review them as well and make
sure you know that we are all on the same page. You may want to testify on something else, who knows? I give you that opportunity which we appreciate.
Unidentified: Okay, so there is nothing I can do?
Anderson: We need to have your response on those recommendations.
Corrie: Get them and get them back to us the 6th.
Unidentified: So is someone from Planning and Zoning going to be in contact with me? Is that what will happen or what do I need to expect?
Nichols: Mr. Berg will make sure you get a copy of these. Then if you have any issues on them you need to get a letter to Mr. Berg, and he will circulate your letter to everyone else.
You can still talk to staff if you have some kind of question.
Unidentified: Okay, so it goes through the clerk?
Corrie: I need a request to table this until March 6, 2001.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we move the request for Conditional Use Permit for Big D Builders to March 6, 2001.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to table until March 6, 2001 the request for Conditional Use Permit, so the applicant can get his reply into us. Any further discussion? Hearing none,
all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 19. FP 01-002 Final Plat approval of 82 + 2 existing single-family dwelling lots and 6 other lots on 43.33 acres for Observation Pointe Subdivision by Victory 41, LLC – north of
Victory Road and east of Meridian Road:
Corrie: Staff, comments on that one?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and members of Council we have previously sent a memo requesting tabling until March 6, 2001; however, that is not going to give us enough time to get our comments
together and get any input back from Ada
County Highway District. We would request it be continued until March 20, 2001, this is Observation Pointe that is south of Meridian Greens. The issue is where we had asked for some
traffic calming and a condition of the approval was to specifically design this to make it not as much as through way. The Meridian Greens residents were concerned that there was going
to be a lot of cut through traffic, through their subdivision. It is probably more going to be going this way, but until we get the details of that straightened out we would like this
to be tabled until March 20, 2001.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we continue this until March 20,2001.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue Item 19 until March 20,2001. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 21. Discussion of Locust Grove Overpass
Corrie: Okay, Item 21, Locust Grove Overpass—
Bird: I move we table that until next week.
De Weerd: We cannot – do we want to recap that?
Corrie: Not particularly.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Okay, go ahead.
De Weerd: At COMPASS today, we had a presentation from Pam Lowe at ITD about three items that are on their PD list and Locust Grove was one of them. She asked that COMPASS prioritize
those three projects. One is at Franklin and Caldwell; one is at Franklin and Nampa, and the other one is our Locust Grove Overpass. So, it has been assigned to COMPASS executive board
to do that. Now if we are not the No. 1, and we do not get chosen, this is not even supposed to be scheduled until 2006, so it is going to be far after that. I just want to make sure
to bring that to the attention of Council to see if there is any statement we want to send with the Mayor to his Executive Session on the COMPASS board to
support and to honor the commitment we have gotten from ITD that this is going to happen.
Anderson: So are they making these commitments to other these people too? I mean I thought we had a contract that if we signed it said that this would be built. Is that all contingent
upon whether they do these other things first?
De Weerd: It is all contingent, its sounds like, by the priority that COMPASS gives these three items, and we do not fall to No. 1, then we could continue to stay on PD.
Anderson: How can COMPASS dictate the priority when this is an agreement between ITD, ACHD, and Meridian?
De Weerd: Well, I believe that we have a pretty strong case, but who knows what they promised to Caldwell. Mayor Nancolas was sure that he was going to get his interchange too. They
have put in local money as well. That was all of our concern, and we have commitments, as far as I know, they are in writing from Pam Lowe committing to 2.7 million dollars to the project.
Anything that maybe we can do to support the Mayor’s vote on COMPASS because he has to present our case. If we could solicit the police and fire comments too on how essential that
overpass is going to be on our response time, and it is a safety issue. Anything our City can do to support that overpass at this point the Mayor does not have very much time. He has
to get this material into COMPASS before Friday for the packet.
Anderson: What about a letter from the School District commenting on their new high school and why that would be needed and then also from Jabil along with police and fire?
De Weerd: Well, fortunately the Mayor has an appointment with Dave Bivens and Jabil tomorrow. I talked to Dave Winecoupe the President of the Board of Trustees, and he said that if
the Mayor request that he write a letter he would be more than happy to. I know that ACHD will be meeting on it tomorrow because they will be trying to pull a compelling case together
too. They certainly recognize the need of it, but I think if our safety services puts in their comments along with City Council, the School District, and everyone who supports and sees
the urgency of this project, it needs to be done now.
Corrie: I do not know what they have said to these other two projects, but as far as I am concerned we have got a letter that committed 2.7 million dollars. Then they are coming back
and saying we do not have it to do. Well, they did it they put it writing. That is going to be one of my contentions, plus the school and Jabil.
Anderson: They did not say anything about this offer is contingent upon COMPASS placing priority on this project.
Corrie: And of course COMPASS does not the authority to place –
Bird: That is what I was wondering. Where is COMPASS coming from?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and members of Council I was privileged to be at that meeting today waiting my turn, and this is just a casual observers comment. I think ITD is trying to play three
ends against the middle through COMPASS, and I am not sure it need be that way.
Corrie: Okay, I will take that on record.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Yes.
Nichols: Was the water, sewer, and trash delinquencies to be –
Corrie: No.
Nichols: They are not on tonight?
Corrie: No that should not have been on there.
Nichols: Oh, okay thank you.
Corrie: The executive meeting, I suppose we could have it right here. We need a motion to go into Executive Session.
Bird: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go on to the Executive Session as per Idaho State code 67-243 and I believe C.
Corrie: Is there a second?
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Okay, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
(Meeting reconvenes from Executive Session)
Bird: Nothing was decided?
Corrie: No.
Bird: I move we come out of Executive Session.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to come out of Executive Session. All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: All ayes, I will entertain a motion to adjourn.
De Weerd: Oh, Mr. Mayor what is the update on the Finance Director? I am sorry, but I really think we need to find a director. What is the time frame on that?
Corrie: We have got all of the people now. We are getting the final five, and we are looking at getting Ken Harwood, and Mr. Bird, myself, and Pauline and we will send the letters
out this next week, maybe this week to have them coming in for the interview. I think we – did you get a letter of all those people?
Bird: Yes.
Corrie: Did you give that back to Pauline, your recommendation of your five?
Bird: I think I did, yes.
Corrie: Okay, as soon as we get that on line.
De Weerd: In a couple weeks?
Corrie: Yes.
Bird: He is not going to get hired for another month.
Corrie: Can I have a second?
Bird: I second.
Corrie: All in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Corrie: Closed at 12:20 p.m.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:20 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK