HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 01-12Meridian City Council Meeting January 12, 2010
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday,
January 12, 2010, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Brad Hoaglun, and David
Zaremba.
Members Absent: President Charlie Rountree.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Anna Canning, Caleb Hood, Bill Parsons,
Sonya Wafters, Tom Barry, Clint Dolsby, John Overton, Joe Silva and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I will go ahead and call tonight's meeting to order and welcome, everyone,
that has joined us. I anticipate it's more for the swearing in than anything on our
agenda, but welcome. For the public record, it is Tuesday, January 12th. It's a few
minutes after 7:00. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in the
pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Stephanie Moore with Ten Mile Christian
Church.
De Weerd: Thank you. Tonight we will be led in the community invocation by
Stephanie Moore. I would invite you to join us in the invocation or take this as an
opportunity for a moment of reflection. Thank you for joining us.
Moore: Let's pray. Our dear and faithful God, we thank you for your presence at this
meeting this evening and we acknowledge your part in our government and in our lives,
as we -- as we seek to make Meridian the community that you have dreamed it to be.
We thank you for the commitment of Council members and of the community to be here
and to place both plans in your hands and to work it out together. In Jesus' name we
pray, amen.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 2 of 54
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda.
De Weerd: Thank you. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: On the agenda, Item No. 9-A-1, the resolution number is 10-705. Item No. 9-
A-2, the resolution number is 10-706. Item 12, Item A, the ordinance number is
10-1439. And with those additions to the agenda, I move that we adopt the agenda.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carves.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda
A. December 15, 2009 City Council Workshop Meeting Minutes
B. December 22, 2009 City Council Meeting Minutes
C. Acceptance Agreement with Zella Bardsley for a display of
Artwork in Initial Point Gallery
D. Professional Services Agreement with Kim Ingraham for
Pilates Class Services
E. Agreement and Bid Results Between Haemker General
Contracting and the City of Meridian Regarding the Downtown
Tree Box Replacement 2010 Project for aNot-to-Exceed
Amount of $29,905.00
F. Approval of Award and Authorization of Issuance of a
Purchase Order with APSCO, Inc. for a Centrifugal Portable
Pumping Station for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $68,700.00
and Approval for the Purchasing Manager to Sign Purchase
Order
G. Task Order #10060B for Consulting Services with Brown and
Caldwell for the Reclaimed Water Booster Station and
Reservoir Project On-Call City Representative Services for a
Not-to-Exceed Amount of $24,000.00
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 3 of 54
H. Task Order #10023 for Consulting Services with JUB
Engineers, Inc. Pursuant to the Request for Qualification No.
PW 10-10023 for the 2010 Sewer Master Plan Received October
9, 2009 for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $149,761.00 and in
Accordance with the Master Agreement Approved by Council
on December 12, 2006
I. Change Order #1 Pursuant to the Master Agreement Dated
January 27, 2007 with Hydro Logic, Inc. for Well #28
Hydrogeological Services for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of
$23,786.19
J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial: RZ 09-004
Cabella Creek by Coleman Homes, LLC Located at East
Victory Road, West of South Mesa Way and East of South
Bailey Way: Request for Rezone of 5.41 Acres From R-4
(Medium-Low Density Residential) to an R-8 Zoning District for
Cabella Creek
De Weerd: Item 5, the Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move that we adopt the Consent Agenda as published and authorize the
Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second on the Consent Agenda. Is there any
discussion? If not, Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Thank you. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Swear in City Council Member for Seat No. 2 -Brad Hoaglun
Item 7: Swear in City Council Member for Seat No. 4 -Keith Bird
De Weerd: Items 6 and 7 are swearing in our two new Council members. It is the
tradition and state code that states the City Clerk gives the oath and we will start tonight
with Seat No. 2, Mr. Brad Hoaglun.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 4 of 54
Holman: Raise your right hand repeat after me. I, Brad Hoaglun, do solemnly swear
that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State
of Idaho and the laws and ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that I will, to
the best of my ability, faithfully perform the duties of the OfFce of City Council of
Meridian, Idaho, during my continuance therein, so help me God.
(Repeated by Councilman Hoaglun.)
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Holman: Thank you.
De Weerd: We will give Mr. Hoaglun a chance to sit down and if you want to introduce
those that are with you here tonight and if you have a few words I'll even let you have
the mike on that.
Hoaglun: Okay. Great. Well, thank you very much, Mayor. Of course, that was my
lovely wife Chandos, who was up there assisting me and I appreciate all her support
and her willingness to share me with the citizens, because it's a lot of work and time
away and -- away from family and I do appreciate that. Next to her my parents, Stan
and Sandy Hoaglun are out there and I'm, of course, very thankful -- you're always
thankful for your parents, you know, because they brought you here into the world and
raised you up and you kind of like that. It was good. And next to them my in-laws,
Harry and Florann Young. So, long time Idaho Meridian folks and really appreciate
everything that they do. Besides, I have to say nice things about them, because we are
neighbors. So, you can't get any closer to your in-laws than that. But I just want to just
make quick brief remarks that I've just appreciated the past 16 months that I have been
able to be on the City Council and we have a great community, we have dedicated city
employees, and -- and I really look forward to the next four years and serving a full term
and with this Mayor and Council, because everyone -- we are on the same page when
we look at this community and the direction we want to go, that's a good thing, and we
may quibble about the details every now and then, but -- and that happens, we all have
our own ideas in how things ought to be, but the vision that we have and what we want
to achieve for this community and what the businesses can do for this community and
people can do for this community, there is a lot of good things that are going to be
happening. Challenging times, but I think we are poised to do some great things down
the road. So, with that, Mayor, thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Our next item is Item 7 and we will be swearing in,
before you swear at, Mr. Keith Bird. And both Keith and Brad did bring their family
Bibles and so they are being sworn in with their own personal things that are important.
Holman: Raise your right hand. I, Keith Bird, do solemnly swear that I will support the
Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Idaho and the laws
and ordinances of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that I will, to the best of my ability,
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 5 of 54
faithfully perform the duties of the Office of City Council of Meridian, Idaho, during my
continuance therein, so help me God.
(Repeated by Councilman Bird.)
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird is a veteran at this, but he sounded like he wasn't there for a
minute. Mr. Bird, would you like to make any comments?
Bird: Yeah. I'd just like to thank everybody for coming out. My wife's sick and my son
and his family is at the ball game over at Centennial. I got a grandson playing over
there. I wished I was there. But we -- I have enjoyed it. My 12 years have been great.
I have met fantastic people, served with fantastic people. Everybody I have served with
has been very, very good and like Brad said, though we don't always agree, we always
leave as friends and that's the main thing and I look forward to the next four years.
Probably going to be the toughest four years that I have had to serve, because in '98 --
when Iwas sworn in in January'98 we were starting our boom and the only problem we
had there was what do we do with the money and how do we keep above -- how do we
keep ahead of development. Through our dedicated employees we got it done and I
think we did it in a very -- very efficient way. Now, we got to wont' about making sure
that we keep our budgets under our revenue and Ican -- I will guarantee you that this
Mayor and Council will see that that happens. We -- we will stay within our budget
regardless of how low it is. We will do it thanks to our employees and to this leadership.
Thank you very much for coming out.
De Weerd: Well -- and I'd just like to say it's a pleasure to work with both of you and I
look forward to working with you in the years to come. Certainly I cut my teeth with Mr.
Bird or -- and sometimes on him and that's why I give him a hard time, but he really
showed me the ropes and he really truly is someone with the biggest heart for Meridian
that I know. You know, we have had our differences and certainly as he suggested we
leave at the end of the day as friends. I hold him in highest esteem and certainly I do
Mr. Hoaglun as well. It was certainly my pleasure 16 months ago to appoint him into the
office and I think our city has really seen how he took up the reigns without a pause. It
was really nice, because we needed leadership in these -- these last couple of years
and he stepped in and filled it and has done a very well job -- or a very good job. So, I
look forward to serving with both of you men and certainly I enjoy my time with this
Council, it is a Council with differing opinions, different backgrounds and experiences
and because of those we have some very rich debates. I think that we owe the citizens
that opportunity to look at every issue that we have in front of us from different lenses
and because of the diverse leadership we have, we have been very privileged to do
that. So, I hope that our citizens are happy with those that they have selected and if
you're not, we have comment cards in the foyer and never hesitate to share your
thoughts with us. We do respond. We want to listen to what you think. And we
appreciate you being here to support those that you helped put into office.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 6 of 54
Item 8: Election of New City Council Officers
De Weerd: So, we will go ahead and move into our next agenda item and those that
came to support the candidates, you do not have to stay. If you want to leave you
certainly can. Item No. 8 is election of new City Council officers.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would like to nominate Mr. -- Councilman David Zaremba as Council president
for the year 2010.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a nomination for Councilman Zaremba as our next new
president. Do I have any other nominations? Hearing none, do you accept this
nomination?
Zaremba: I would be honored to accept if the vote goes that way, yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. If there is no further nominations, they will be closed,
and I will ask for the vote, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: Thank you. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: For the seat of vice-president.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would like to nominate Councilman Brad Hoaglun as vice-president of the City
Council for 2010.
Zaremba: I'll second that nomination.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have any other nominations? They are now closed. Oh. Sony.
I'm supposed to ask you do you accept this nomination?
Hoaglun: I will accept, Madam Mayor. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 7 of 54
De Weerd: Don't want it to look like too much of a railroad job, you know.
Hoaglun: I heard that train coming down the tracks.
De Weerd: Well, thank you. I'm glad you accepted. Since nominations are closed,
Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Department Reports
A. Mayor's OfFce
1. Resolution No. :Appointing Scott
M. Freeman to Seat No. Four of the Planning 8~ Zoning
Commission
De Weerd: Congratulations, Councilman Zaremba and Councilman Hoaglun. I look
forward to working with you and so we will move to our next item. Number 9,
Department Reports. The Mayor's Office has two resolutions in front of you. Resolution
No. 10-705 and 10-706. The first appointing Scott M. Freeman to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. Council, you have his information in front of you. I will ask if you
have any questions.
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Mr. Freeman was not able to join us for tonight's meeting, but I would ask
for your confirmation of this appointment.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve Resolution 10-705, appointing Scott Freeman to Seat No. 4
on the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to accept the appointment of Scott M.
Freeman to the Planning and Zoning Commission. If there is no discussion, Madam
Clerk, will you call roll.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 8 of 54
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
2. Resolution No. :Appointing
James L. Escobar, Sr. to Seat No. One of the Meridian
Development Corporation
De Weerd: Is James here tonight? I didn't see him. The next resolution is appointing
James Escobar to Seat No. 1 of the Meridian Development Corporation. Again,
Council, you do have his information in front of you and I would ask if you have any
questions.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, if there are no questions I would accept a motion to confirm
this appointment.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move that we approve Resolution No. 10-706, appointing James L. Escobar
to Seat 1 of the Meridian Development Corporation.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call
roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Legal Department
1. Change of City Council Meetings
De Weerd: Thank you, Council. Item 9-B is a our Legal Department. I will tum this
over to Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. There is a proposed
ordinance on your agenda. Based on your last meeting of the year you had directed
that we craft a new ordinance that would change your meeting schedule frequency from
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 9 of 54
four times a month to three times a month, with I think little more clarity as to what the
intent of the workshop and when the workshop would be held and the type of format it
would be held in, so the ordinance that's in front of you reflects both the change to the
frequency of the meeting, so that you would meet on the first, second, and fourth
Tuesdays of each month, the first and the fourth being a normal Council meeting as
you're used to, with land use hearings as necessary, and the second Tuesday of each
month a workshop that would begin at 6:00 o'clock. Land use hearings would only be
held at those if there was some urgency that required it, but no other -- normally it would
not be held. They may be held in a different format or a more informal format, which I
think was how you had done those in the past to allow a little bit different level of
discussion. The other thing was just to clean up an Item D of the ordinance. It already
allows in the ordinance that currently exists that if you need to cancel a meeting in the
future, because you know ahead of time that there is not a quorum that's going to be
available or some other reason to cancel it, you could do that. It didn't -- it didn't take
into account situations where a quorum may -- or lack of a quorum may develop right
before a meeting for whatever reason and so it just simply informs the public that if that
happens, then, the meeting would be canceled without a vote, we would notify the
public as soon as possible. I think I captured what you had directed in the last one and
the purpose of tonight was to make sure we had done that and if it is so, we could move
it forward to a reading calendar next week for approval and, then, this would go into
effect beginning the 1st of February.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Bill, you captured my intent when I made the motion, that's -- so, I have no
problems at all with it and we -- we are going to start -- I would -- I would prefer to have
all of us vote on it, but I -- but Charlie won't be here before February the 1st meeting, so
I -- as far as I'm concerned, bring it forward, I'm ready to go forward.
De Weerd: Any other comments, questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I believe it's the way I understood the intent as well and let's do it.
C. Public Works Department
1. Reclaimed Water Program Update Presentation
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 9-C is our Public Works Department.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 10 of 54
Bany: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I'm delighted and excited to
present to you tonight an update of the City of Meridian's reclaimed water program.
Wanted to share some information regarding our program and get some support and
direction from you as it relates to our progress forward. First of all, let's see if I can --
okay. That's not working. I might need to change seats with you. Okay. There we go.
This is our water reuse program that I'm speaking of tonight and I wanted to share with
you some background information that you may or may not have been aware of that's
led us down the path that we are on. First of all, I wanted to talk briefly about the drivers
for reuse in our community. There are several and I'll go into greater detail as we go
along here, but just in summary, the first is you're probably aware that the
Environmental Protection Agency is suggesting increasing its surface water quality
regulations, specifically for phosphorous in the lower Boise River area. That plays a roll
in our strategy with regard to our reuse program. The wastewater treatment capacity is
also of concern and I will speak to more about that in just a minute. Domestic well
impacts are also a driver for reuse in our community, as well as our sustainability and
overall vision as a community. So, going to surface water concerns and issues, you
may recall last year we presented information regarding the EPA's intent to list
phosphorous as a limited constituent along the river, which creates problems for our
wastewater treatment plant in that our treatment plant is not currently regulated for
phosphorous and the new regulations will require our plant to come into strict
compliance with phosphorous reduction. Those reductions have been proposed,
although there is -- continued discussion have been proposed as an 80 percent
reduction in the first permit cycle, which would be a five year period, and, then, a 98
percent reduction in phosphorous quantities or amounts in a three permit cycle, which
would be about a 15 year period. There has been talk by the EPA that suggests they
may consider Meridian, because of our treatment plant -- the technology we currently
have at the treatment plant we may not be given the same permit cycle time to comply
with the phosphorous limit. So, certainly getting phosphorous out of the river is an
important element and does play a roll in how we see the reuse program responding,
particularly if the -- the phosphorous allocations are a seasonal limit. There has been
talk that the seasonal limit would be, essentially, the growing season, which does make
perfect sense for us. If the limit is year around, we may not achieve the same benefits
we are currently hoping for with regard to regulated phosphorous. The second driver,
again, is flow limits. As you know, our treatment plant is restricted under the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System. We have a permit that has been issued in
1999 that restricts our flow to seven million gallons per day of effluent. We are
operating our treatment plant currently today at a level of around 6.8 in the highest
flows. We did have a -- we do have concerns that we will go over that limit here soon
and so if we can divert water from the creek that we currently out fall in and use that
water for reclaimed water or irrigation purposes, then, we may allow a longer period of
time for -- we may increase our limit our -- our flow limits by diverting those flows out of
the creek and onto imgable areas. We did reapply in 2004 for our permit and there has
been no action by the EPA. Our permit has been administratively extended, so we are,
essentially, going on six years here with no action from the EPA and are, therefore,
restricted to our 1999 limits. As you know, our community has more than doubled since
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 11 of 54
1999, so this creates a concern for us. Our plant capacity, by the way, has been re-
rated in late 2008 and approved by the Department of Environmental Quality at 10.2
million gallons per day: So, we have the capacity, we just don't have the permit to allow
us to tap into that capacity. The third reason again, domestic well impacts. Meridian's
potable water consumption during the wintertime is an average of about 148 million
gallons per month. That jumps up to 318 million gallons per month in the summertime,
meaning that our summer irrigation activity increases our overall demand by about 170
million gallons per month. That's quite a taxing on our potable water system and so
incorporating a reuse into our community has the potential to help us conserve 1.2
billion gallons of potable water throughout the year. Now, that does anticipate getting to
the older portions of town, as those are the areas which are going to benefit the most by
the incorporation of reuse long term. And, then, lastly, another reason for reuse is our
overall vision as a community and as a department for sustainability and green initiative.
You know that our strategy in the Public Works Department along those fronts are to
involve things like nutrient recovery, composting, energy efficiency, renewable or
alternative energy sources, certainly reclaimed water is one of those. And one thing we
have realized that we have been marketing our community from an economic
development perspective, is that there seems to be great interest by many firms with
regard to the incorporation of reuse in their overall corporate sustainability goals. That
seems to be an unexpected blessing, if you will, or advantage with regard to our
incorporation of reuse as a long-term water alternative for various uses. So, our
approach to reuse is to, essentially, go after the -- a pilot project and as you know we
have been working on the Heroes Park project for some time. We have overcome
several challenges with the project and have helped to gain ground on that project.
First we received a permit for the Heroes Park site itself and, then, we have had to
overcome several technical obstacles, such as soils loadings or effluent quality, nitrogen
content of the soils, disinfection, overspray onto park amenities, seepage -- we have
had to do seepage tests for the pond and irrigation system tests and, then, of course,
making sure we have enough production and redundancy in the system to provide a
viable long-term source of irrigation for Heroes Park has been important, too. Using
Heroes Park as the pilot project for the city, we were able to test the impacts of
reclaimed water on the -- on that park land and with that we have been able to make
some operational adjustments, so one thing we have realized is that the pond that
originally serves the Heroes Park imgation system is not going to work for us as it
relates to distribution -- a collection and distribution -- storage and distribution of our
reclaimed water and so part of what we learned at Heroes Park is that we really need to
run a pressurized irrigation system with our effluent and so we have begun to modify
our approaches and, actually, I'll speak to that more later in the presentation. But the
Heroes Park project has created an enormous opportunity for us to team on a smaller
scale the impact, the challenges, obstacles, and certainly the opportunities of reuse.
We, as you know, have been working with the Parks Department to develop park
improvements, which at Heroes Park include a reclaimed interpretive plaza and
fountain, various educational planters and demonstration gardens for low tolerance --
excuse me -- drought tolerant vegetation, water-wise demonstration site, and, certainly,
we are sourcing the urinals and the toilet facilities at the concession stand, the restroom
facilities, with reclaimed water also. So, there is great opportunity for us to build
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 12 of 54
educational components into the Heroes Park improvements and get people familiar
with how reuse can benefit them in their community. Once we have achieved these
benefits we began going after a citywide permit and have been working diligently for the
past six or eight months on that. We did receive our citywide permit in draft form just --
just around Christmastime and we are going through and commenting on that permit.
What you see here in this graph -- the yellow area outlines the extent of our permit area.
So, we have started with only about a quarter of the city or so -- maybe a third of the city
as it relates to the area that we first like to target for incorporating reuse. Now, our
permit is a five year permit and so we certainly have plenty of time to grow into it, if you
will. The G's represent golf courses immediately available in that area and P's
represent parks and I didn't locate schools, because there is plenty of -- there is quite a
few schools. And, then, of course, the interchange. Our strategy has been to focus on
adjacent opportunities, like golf courses, parks, open spaces, the Ten Mile interchange,
and schools. And from there accommodate growing areas, such as new subdivisions
and, in fact, we have incorporated in our development agreements requirements, as a
first right of refusal, for reclaimed water, which helps move forward our program more
quickly and preserve that -- other sources of water for their intended purposes. Next we
have begun to retrofit existing -- or next we would like to retrofit existing areas. This will
be late in our program and older subdivisions would -- would be eligible for that. Our
approach, again, with our citywide permit was to acquire our permit first and see what
would be required of us before we developed a program and to see if we could live with
that -- with those requirements and we have received our draft, as I mentioned, and do
believe that the requirements associated with the draft permit are things that we could
live with. We are in the process of developing a business plan and that plan would
include demand studies, logistics, infrastructure, those kinds of things, but as you know
there is an opportunity before us right now and that is to retrofit and construct the
backbone of our infrastructure to serve demands that are just around the comer from
us, like the Ten Mile interchange, for example, and so we have been busy doing that as
well. This is the potential of lands that we see for the northwest Meridian area. The
slide suggests 900 acres of available area and you will notice the total is different at
757, because there is a difference between sort of what's readily available and some of
the assumptions associated with the irrigable area of those lands as well and I'm happy
to explain that more later, but, essentially, you could see in the area of our permit there
is greater than 750 acres of irrigable area, which equates to -- as we have calculated,
about a maximum monthly demand of about six million gallons per day on average and
so there is, certainly, the opportunity that reclaimed water can service these areas and
offset other sources of water and we see that as a major benefit as well. One thing I
wanted to get your input on as well is the construction and capital investments that are
related to instituting a program of this kind. So, I have got two slides here which talk
about the capital investments that are needed for development of the backbone
infrastructure on our program. As you know the pink area on the upper left there
represents the area of Heroes Park. We have spent about 312 or 313 thousand dollars
on our reuse project and we will be spending another 378,000 on improvements to the
park related to the incorporation of reuse. The green line represents what we call the
BRO, the Boise River Outfall line. It's an existing line that we need to slip line or
replace, because it cannot take the pressures under which we would distribute the
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 13 of 54
reclaimed water and that project, along with the blue project, the booster and storage
tank project, for about 2.1 million, are two projects that we just received bids for this
past week and have precipitated our desire to come talk with you about those projects
and how those projects influence and impact the reclaimed water program long term.
Moving to the south, you're aware that there is a desire to get to the Ten Mile
interchange, to irrigate that, as well as to provide an alternative source of water for say
cooling for industries and manufacturing or for other water amenities or imgable areas
in the Ten Mile interchange area. To do this we would have to build a 16 inch reused
pipeline from Ustick, essentially, from the treatment plant all the way to the Ten Mile
interchange and you can see it broken out there in, essentially, three phases. The pink
phase is the project to get us from Ustick to Cheny and the green phase is under
construction as part of the Ten Mile -- as part of the ACRD road improvement project for
the Ten Mile area between Cheny and Franklin and, then, the red project there
represents the area associated with getting reuse to the interchange for the
landscaping. The pink area to the north there, that line represents a future line to
distribute water to the east along the Ten Mile -- or, excuse me, along the Franklin
corridor. So, those are the projects in short. You can see that the program cost overall
would be close to five million. We are currently on the order of 1.5 million into the total
project and we certainly have about 3.4 or so million to go on these projects and we
wanted to share that with you, because we know that as we develop our master plan we
are incorporating infrastructure at the same time and, normally, you would do your
master plan and, then, build your infrastructure. So, we know that because of the
pressures with the Ten Mile interchange, for example, and serving Heroes Park and
some of the opportunities for the Ten Mile area, that we are a little ahead of that plan,
but we all feel that -- that this backbone is the backbone we would need to run the
program long term and so that's why we come to share that with you this evening and
get your feedback on the long-term cost associated with the program. There are
certainly obstacles that we have ahead of us to overcome. Some are greater than
others. One of the things that we are aware of is the public perception of reclaimed
water in our community and that's why we have worked hard to develop opportunities
for the public to get up close and personal with that source of water at the Heroes Park
area as it relates to its use in our restrooms and certainly the -- the imgation of the park
land and also the water feature. Infrastructure, as I have mentioned to you, we have
some investments to make still if we are going to make the program run the way we
envision it. Operationally we will have modifications to the treatment plant, as well as to
the overall monitoring of the effluent and compliance of new permits associated with
DEQ's requirements under the class A permit. Logistically, sort of the timing of projects
and the expansion of the program, are things that we are also considering and it's
certainly program funding as it relates to the construction of the initial capital
investments and, then, as well as the ongoing funding to keep the program running. All
of these are being wrapped into our facility and master plans for the reclaimed water
program and wanted to give you a comfort that we are working on those solutions as we
speak. As you know, there are several benefits to incorporation of a reclaimed water
program in our community. One, the reclaimed water's drought proof water supply and
also can help to extend the shoulder seasons. We noticed that there is greater demand
from our potable water system, even in pressurized imgation systems, between say
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 14 of 54
March and April and sometimes into May and, then, at the end of the irrigation season
as well from say September through October. So, there is benefits there. Certainly we
reduce demands on municipal water sources, we free up agricultural water for
agricultural uses. Can also provide year around irrigation where applicable, provided
the growing season meets needs or for greenhouses or other sorts of things. We would
also provide lower affluent flows to the river and certainly the permit limits associated
with the reclaimed water permit are less stringent than the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System and we also recognize that the incorporation of reclaim water can
be more economically and environmentally sustainable for wastewater plant and,
therefore, we feel also it's the right water for the right use. So, with that we are
interested in your comments as it relates to the program approach, what we have done
so far, what we have planned for the future. We would like some input as it relates to
the capital projects we have laid out for you, their location, their cost, those kinds of
things, and if you are agreeable to the plans and approaches that we have presented
tonight, then, I'd like to talk briefly about a budget amendment that would be required for
us to move forward. The tank and booster station project that we are a bit short on,
since we opened up the bids last week. So, with that I will tum the time over to you and
I'll let you offer your thoughts, suggestions, and comments related to what's been
presented.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Barry. Council, any questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: Just a comment and thank you for the clear and thorough explanation: Just
a comment on the perception of -- of reused water in the general public. We are very
fortunate to already have a separate water system from our potable water system in the
irrigation system that is valley-wide and people are certainly aware that that's not the
same quality as the drinking water and are comfortable in having it around and on their
lawns and I think as we move forward with this, part of our educational challenge will be
to show that the -- the reused water is every bit as clean as the irrigation water and I
understand in some of the things like goose and duck poop being in it, that's not in the --
in the reused water, it's actually cleaner than the irrigation water. So, we have an
advantage that we have the comparison that we can make for the public. No, we don't
think we are going to drink the reused water, but it certainly is as comfortable to be
around as the imgation water is, so --
Bany: Mr. Zaremba, I very much appreciate your observations and you're absolutely
correct and I'd like to share with you some information that I presented to the reuse
conference last year. It's some of the first information that's come out with regard to
comparison of class A reclaimed water with irrigation or what's otherwise known as ditch
water and it is as follows: Ditch water has nearly 15 times the amount of fecal coliform
and E. coli bacteria than our wastewater treatment plant's effluent currently and more
than 1,000 times the fecal coliform and E. soli bacteria count than class A reclaimed
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 15 of 54
water standards by which we would have to meet. And that's based on sampling in our
system in 2007. So, those are pretty big numbers and those are numbers that we want
to make sure the community is aware of. There is -- as it relates to those constituents
there is really a much higher degree of quality with class A reclaimed water than there is
with the current irrigation water.
De Weerd: Any other questions, comments?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: While I am fully in favor of this program, Tom, I -- at this point right now with the
budgets that -- that Public Works has and stuff, I -- I don't know how -- how you plan on
paying for it, unless we are going to rob one thing to pay for another. I support it
wholeheartedly, but the economic times like we got now and the revenue that's coming
in on that part of our budget, I don't know how we are going to pay for it, unless you
have got a magic wand.
Barry: Mr. Bird, if I may, we certainly appreciate your comments. The program itself
has been incorporated into our five year capital improvement program and that program
is presented in part on annual -- on an annual basis as part of our budget presentations
to you and that the Council has been very good in supporting the financial commitments
associated with this -- with this project. This particular year we are short about a million
dollars in the program as it relates to the investments we budgeted for at the beginning
of this fiscal year and the -- the need we have as it relates to infrastructure. We have
looked as a staff at ways to close that budget and have a suggestion if we do want to
move forward with the program now and that is that the Black Cat trunk project, which
was constructed a couple of years ago and finally closed out. We realized a project
savings of 635,000 dollars on and our proposal -- that money has been returned to the
ending fund balance of the Enterprise Fund and we propose reallocation of that in a
budget amendment to be presented later, say next week or so, and, then, also that sum,
in addition to the sum of 490,000 dollars, which is currently in our budget for this fiscal
year, which represents, as I presented earlier, the -- the distribution line from Cheny to
Ustick along Ten Mile. If we postpone that a year, that could free up that money of
490,000, which we could add to the 635,000 to close that funding gap without -- without
setting back any other projects, programs, or operational costs. So, that is one way to
do it, but certainly the Council would need to be comfortable with that approach and that
is one reason that we are here this evening is to provide those solutions and get your
feedback.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 16 of 54
Bird: Tom -- okay. And I have no problem if you come up with the -- with the money. I
think it's a great deal. But we are putting it in Ten Mile between Cherry Lane and
Franklin as they do -- ACHD is doing the work. Will that -- is that budgeted for and will
that be -- will that not be needed to be done immediately when they work on the road?
Barry: Yes. And that money has been budgeted and it is in our current fiscal budget.
Mr. Bird, we are going to bring up that project map for you. Right there. So, the project
in green I think is what you're speaking to, Mr. Bird, and this is the reuse distribution line
between Cheny and Franklin.
Bird: Yeah.
Bany: And that was moved forward and included in our budget, because ACRD was
improving that section of roadway and we felt that we would get a much better cost
savings and coordinate the impacts and the synergy of that project by moving that
forward this year and so there is money for that that's currently on task and under
construction. The red portion there as well is on task as well and being constructed,
but, as you know, we do not need to supply water to the Ten Mile interchange until we
are told November of 2011, which is why we have recommended if we want to move
forward the program now without -- with minimal impact to that delivery system, it
makes sense to postpone the pink portion, which is the distribution line between Ustick
and Cherry and do that in the summer or spring of next year, so it's on the next fiscal
year. That certainly keeps us on task with regard to getting the -- the water from the
plant to the Ten Mile interchange. Alternatively, you know, there could be a
postponement of that project and others related to getting the water to the Ten Mile
interchange as the Ten Mile interchange does have an alternative source, which would
be the potable water system, which, of course, we discourage use of for imgation of
landscapes. So, I don't know if that adds a little more information to --
Bird: Yeah, it does, Tom, but if we are going to spend that kind of money we better be
ready when Ten Mile is ready to need water, if we are going to spend that kind of
money. You come back with showing where the money is coming from and stuff and I
can certainly buy off on it, because I think it's -- I think it's a doable project, I think it's
something that will pay benefits probably more ten years from now than it is right now,
so show me where we are not robbing something to pay for it and I'm for it.
Barry: Okay. Thank you, sir.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Yeah. Just to -- kind of along the same lines as Councilman Bird, I support
the concept of this. I think you guys in Public Works have done a good job in laying out
the planning for this. It is not cheap. But nothing -- I learned here in the last year --
someone said when it came to underground projects, what you can't see is very
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 17 of 54
expensive and I found that to be very true and just like other projects it is expensive, but
down the road this will pay dividends for us and I think protecting our water resources,
which are necessary as we continue to grow, attract businesses, we need to do that and
reclaimed water I think is a good way of doing that, although we are going to have to
have a sharp pencil to make this work and look forward to seeing what you guys have
proposed and how we are going to do that, so --
Bany: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: And I would just repeat that I share the concern of the other councilmen of
whether or not this is time to spend money or not, but I appreciate that you have already
put some thought into where the money would come from. I would also say that I -- one
of my big things when we start throwing huge dollar numbers around like these -- and
these are big numbers to me -- is to also keep in mind the cost of not doing this and as
you have already pointed out, if EPA has a requirement of phosphorous discharge into
the Boise River requirement on us that we almost cannot meet, the cost of doing that I
suspect far exceeds what we are talking about here and this a preventive move to avoid
having to spend the kind of money that -- that may never even solve the problem and I
appreciate that we are having to think very hard about this, but we also need to keep in
mind what happens if we don't do this.
Barry: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bany: Mr. Zaremba, I appreciate your comments very much, but I also, for the record,
want to -- want to say that there are no guarantees when it comes to regulations and if
we pursue this course of action and the EPA changes its mind or there is a new
constituent that comes out that we are not seeing or being -- is being discussed, it can
throw this program or any other program that we have totally in a -- in a swirl. So, we
are attempting to do our best to counter those types of anticipated or known regulatory
impacts, just as say, for example, the city of Boise purchasing land, they have
purchased 50 acres of land outside their city limits to counter the phosphorous
regulations for trading, for example, and there are other municipalities considering, you
know, expense now, even when the regulations are only pending, but not certainly
known yet. So, I don't want to suggest that this program is the answer, because we
don't know that yet. But if you look at it in that context and to several others that have
been presented tonight, it certainly is worthwhile considering and we appreciate the
comments and support that you have lent to that this evening. It sounds also that there
is at least an interest in hearing how we might support the construction of the
improvements that would be required this year to keep on task with the program and so
we will bring something back to you, hopefully, next week. Just as a precursor to that, I
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 18 of 54
would say that, you know, the project that we are concerned about getting constructed
this year involves the construction of two tanks for our hatching process to treat the
water and to store the water and, then, a booster station to distribute the water through
the system, which does require a slip line to Heroes Park for the park to work under that
scenario. It sounds to me that -- well, I guess I want to -- I want to maybe clarify, our
approach would be, when we come back, to ask that you release the budget savings
that we returned to the ending fund balance of 635,000 dollars last year, if we could
reallocate that from the ending fund balance and add to that the 490,000 or so by the
postponement of one year the project in pink on your map here, which would get done
the following year and actually have to if we are going to service the Ten Mile
interchange area. Is that an acceptable approach or should we be considering
something different, because I'd hate to be back in front of you next week with that
approach if you're not comfortable at this time.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Tom, that sounds like about the only doable approach we have got. As you
stated, that's where the money is coming from. I think you need to get with -- get this
out and have finance sign off on it and bring it to us. I don't know any other way you
can do it, unless you have got something -- like I said, a magic wand that -- we don't
have the privilege of being -- United States government just prints more money. That
would be my recommendation for you how to do it, because you have basically to me --
you have satisfied my -- my question if it comes out like that.
Bany: Okay.
Bird: If we have actually got that, I have no problem with it.
Barry: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, we will put it on next week's agenda, so you have it in front
of you in black and white and you have an opportunity to see it in advance and we will
ask you for your vote at that time. Okay?
Bany: Thank you all.
D. Planning Department
1. Presentation of Draft Funded, Unfunded, and Partially
Funded Corridors for Consideration in Communities in
Motion
De Weerd: Item 9-D is the Planning Department. Caleb.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 19 of 54
Hood: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This item shouldn't take too
long. I did want to let you know that COMPASS is going through the process of
updating Communities In Motion. Most of you probably have heard that or are aware of
that. Part of that process is updating CIM and part of that is complying with the federal
regulations and rules, which require a financially constrained transportation plan and
also that for air quality conformity only funded roadways can be used. Given the less
than ideal transportation funding picture for the future, the list of funded corridors in
CIM, at least the draft CIM, has drastically reduced from the 2006 version of the long
range transportation plan. There are only nine corridors that are proposed on the
funded list in the update to CIM. Compare that to 15 comdors that are on the currently
adopted 2006 version of CIM. If a project is not on this funded list in CIM, it is not
eligible to receive federal dollars. So, that's really the -- the reason that you want to be
on the funded list here, is if you aren't you can't receive those federal funds. I do want
to point out that CIM can be amended from time to time if, by chance, money is
appropriated for a project, you can back that into a long range plan, but the idea is to
start out with a plan that's sound and list the projects that can be funded. The
COMPASS board has actually already had this on their agenda and they asked to defer
it for a month, so that the various Councils -- some of the board members were
uncomfortable approving it on the spot there. They asked to have a deferral of one
month, so they could talk about this with some of the councils if they so choose. So,
that's why I'm here tonight is to just -- you received a memo from me late last week,
middle of last week, outlining those funded, unfunded, and partially funded corridors and
I guess I'm here to see if you have any comments or for our two COMPASS board
members that are here, the Mayor and Councilman Bird, any comments for them to take
forward, because it really is at the board level at this point. Our staff has recommended
that attached list, but wanted to clue the rest of the Council in and see if there are any
comments or concerns that maybe our board members could take forward or I could
see what I could do at the staff level as well. I do have -- if you want to compare them
side by side, I do have the current -- the 15 projects in the 2006 version and the nine
version -- or the -- the draft version showing the nine projects. If you want to look at
those two I can pull those up, so -- with that I'll stand for any questions, but that is my
presentation.
De Weerd: Thank you, Caleb. Council, any questions, comments?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'd like to know if Council has -- we have been pretty well briefed on this and -- but
you guys -- does Brad or David have anything they would like to add or see anything
jump out at them or --
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, Caleb, I just want to find out -- the Meridian interchange, was
that ever on a funded list? Was it on -- you mentioned that they got cut down from the
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 20 of 54
15. Was that 15 corridors down to nine? Was that part of the 15 at one time or has it
never been on the list or partially funded list?
Hood: Madam Mayor, Councilman Hoaglun, let me look at that. Most of the projects
are roadway widening projects. There are some interchange projects on the list and
whatnot. The Meridian --
De Weerd: Councilman Hoaglun, I guess I could tell you at one time it was on the
GARVEE list and so it's never been on the STIP or the TIP, because it was
contemplated as one of the costs of GARVEE. In balancing it and reducing it by the
legislature, the director at the time took it off and when that was removed no one really
told the city or even COMPASS, for that matter, it had been removed and so there was
no effort to put it on the STIP or the TIP and it's kind of languished. We have been
looking for other types of funding for it and that is kind of the conundrum that we are left
in today.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
De Weerd: And I said that as politically as I could. Any other questions from Council or
comments? If you don't have any tonight, certainly if you want to get those to Caleb or
Keith -- or Councilman Bird or I prior to the COMPASS meeting, we would certainly like
to hear your comments or concerns.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would just add that it's -- this is something that the transportation task force
struggles with and stuff that -- when you get a list of very important projects, which
important project is more important than another important project is always a struggle.
I would just comment that I'm -- I'm happy to see that Linder Road is mentioned and one
of the comments includes the overpass at I-84 and now that we have Ten Mile
interchange going and hopefully there is going to be progress on Meridian interchange, I
would like to see the Linder overpass get a little more attention. That's about the only
thing I would comment on.
De Weerd: Council -- and I guess I would tell you that we understand from ITD's staff
that they are progressing some -- some portion of the design of the Meridian Road
interchange in anticipation that there might be funding found somewhere. So, that is
good news for the city and for that -- the safety aspects of that and the inability to utilize
-- fully utilize the improvements made on I-84 specifically are compromised until that is
rebuilt, so -- okay. Caleb, it doesn't look like there is anything at this point, but certainly
you might see something before the COMPASS meeting.
Hood: And if I do, Madam Mayor and all the Council, I will forward that onto yourself
and Councilman Bird so you have those.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 21 of 54
Item 10: Items Moved From Consent Agenda
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. There were no items moved from the
Consent Agenda.
Item 11: Action Items
A. Public Hearing: MDA 09-004 Queenland Acres by James
Prather Located at the Southeast Corner of Overland Road and
Stoddard Road: Request to Amend the Recorded Development
Agreement for Queenland Acres in Regards to Parking; Timing
for Construction of the Multi-Use Pathway; Building Size; Site
Plan Requirements; and Fencing
De Weerd: We will move to Item 11, Action Items. The first item, A, is MDA 09-004.
We will open this public hearing with staff comments.
Wafters: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next item before you
is a development agreement modification request for the Queenland Acres project,
located on the southeast corner of west Overland Road and Stoddard Road. Some
highlights of the requested amendments. The allowance for parking in front of the two
building pads along Overland Road at the northeast comer of the site. These two right
here you can see on the concept plan. The current development agreement prohibits
parking between the structures and Overland Road in this area. Staff is okay with this
change, as long as the parking complies with the design standards at the time of
development. Also the allowance for the multi-use pathway to be constructed in two
phases with development of parcels one and three and just show you quickly -- parcel
one is this comer parcel here and parcel three is the large one here shown on the
amended record of survey. The multi-use pathway is required to extend from the south
from Alaska Street in Bear Creek Subdivision, across the site to the north, and come out
at the light at Overland Road. The applicant is also asking for the width of the pathway
to be reduced from ten feet to eight feet. The current development agreement requires
the pathway to be constructed before the first certificate of occupancy is issued for the
entire site. Again, the applicant would like to construct it in two phases. The next item
is the exclusion of parcels one and two, which are these northeast parcels from the
requirement for buildings within this development to be limited in size to 15 percent over
or under the sizes shown on the concept plan, except for the largest building pad or this
-- where the print is here. The applicant is also proposing to change the fencing
material along the southem property boundary from a six foot tall concrete wall to an
eight foot tall white vinyl fence, consistent with the Lowe's fencing to the east.
Modification to the concept plan to remove the bump out and tree. You can see here at
the southern portion of the perimeter boundary of the site. And also to remove the stop
and yield sign indicated on the plan. Next item are amendments to the test contained in
section six pertaining to compliance, consent to rezone, and section 14 pertaining to
certificate of occupancy in order to clarify the intent of these sections. The city attorney
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 22 of 54
has reviewed this text proposed by the applicant and is in agreement with the changes
proposed. Staff is recommending the revised record of survey be included as an exhibit
in the development agreement and is also recommending inclusion of the revised
conceptual development plan shown here per the changes requested by the applicant.
The applicant has submitted a letter stating he is in agreement with the staff report and
staff is recommending approval of the proposed changes as detailed in Exhibit A of the
staff report. Staff will stand for any questions the Mayor and Council may have at this
time.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions at this point?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Not yet.
De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant or representative like to speak? If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Prather: James Prather, 2595 South Linder in Meridian, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Prather: Good evening -- good evening, Madam Mayor. Happy New Year. Council.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Prather: City attorney. Staff. I just want to say that this is my first time in the new
building. I have visited the old building many times. This is a beautiful building.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Prather: Job well done and congratulations to Councilman Hoaglun and Councilman
Bird this evening.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Prather: Roughly about two and a half years ago I was before this Council for this
development agreement. That was certainly a different time and a different climate.
The change which has prompted these changes to this development agreement, most
of them are minor. Some of them are a little bit larger. One of them being the fence.
But most particularly the economic side of this -- these changes are needed. So, with
that said, I concur and agree with staff recommendations. I will be happy to stand for
questions or listen to some of the people that have come from the neighborhood.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions at this point for the applicant?
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 23 of 54
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I just have a comment. I want to thank you, Mr. Prather, for keeping your property
clean and your one large property, that we don't see weeds all the time out there. I
appreciate that. Appreciate it. Thank you very much.
Prather: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. We will ask for any final remarks after we have taken public
testimony. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to provide public testimony
on this item? It looks like you addressed all your neighbors concerns and after the
meeting two and a half years ago I commend you for that. Council, any questions for
either staff or the applicant?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Just one minor thing about the bump out along the south property line where
the tree was going to go. At the time this came through the Planning and Zoning
Commission where I was at the time, there was discussion about trying to prevent cut-
through traffic from turning off of Stoddard and racing around these buildings and
getting to Overland by going through this property and that bump out seemed to be the
solution to that. Are we satisfied that that's not as big a problem we thought it was three
or four years ago?
De Weerd: Mr. Prather, do you want to comment? Thank you.
Prather: That's a good question. There seems to be two speeds through every
commercial project and that's the speed of people who want to attend some of the
facilities and those who are just passing through. What we have done here is primarily
in taking that little bump out and the signs is in order to dock these, we are assuming
that we are going to get a big box user and hopefully a grocery store, which is well
needed. To dock this in the back to get those size of trucks in there, we really need that
removed to adequately -- because we have to dock from the middle of the property
along to the west and this is something -- if speed or if cars go through there like you
were suggesting, we will handle that with either valley -- speed bumps or valley gutters.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other remarks, Mr. Prather? Okay. Council, seeing no
further testimony or information needed, if you so choose I would entertain a motion to
close the public hearing.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 24 of 54
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we close the public hearing on -- oh, I'm sorry. My turn? I move we
close the public hearing on MDA 09-004.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on this item. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Unless we have further discussion, I would move that we approve MDA 09-004
and incorporate staff, applicant, and public testimony that we change the DA to detail in
Exhibit A, which is part of the report.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Okay. Madam
Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries. Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. MFP 09-003 Bienville Square Subdivision by Idaho Mutual
Trust Located at the West Side of Eagle Road and South of
Ustick Road: Request to Modify the Six Foot Decorative
Masonry Wall Along the Western Boundary Approved with the
Final Plat Landscaping Plan for Bienville Square Subdivision
De Weerd: Item 11-B is MFP 09-003. I will ask for staff comments at this time. Mr.
Nary, is this a public hearing?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, normally final plats are not going to be a
public hearing, but on this particular one there has been some comments by the public
about this. I don't know if anybody here wants to comment. There is some modification
Meridian Ciry Council
January 12, 2010
Page 25 of 54
that is being requested for what's been previously approved, so you certainly have the
ability to take comment from the public if there is anyone here.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. Staff, please.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The application before
you tonight is to modify the landscaping plan that was approved with the Bienville
Square Subdivision final plat back in 2007. With that -- approval of that landscaping
plan and the fencing, tonight we are just going to be discussing the perimeter fencing
along the western boundary, so that's really what we are discussing tonight. That
landscape plan -- excuse me. Here is that approved landscape plan that I was talking
about and I have highlighted where the location of that wall is. In addition to that wall
that plan was approved with a ten foot pathway in an approximately 30 foot width
landscape buffer. The majority of the buffer was to be on the Bienville Square
Subdivision side with a small little strip on the back side of the wall. Here is the
approved fencing and the -- currently the constructed fencing on the site. The fencing
on the left-hand side shows that it is a six foot split block wall, basically, with an accent
face block portion and it also had a decorative pilaster and capstone. The fencing for
this project was quite a topic of discussion at the previous hearings. Staff researched
those minutes and that DA for that site and nothing in those minutes or conditions of
approval or the DA specified how the wall was to look, but this is what staff went ahead
and approved with the final landscape plan. I believe everyone was in agreement that a
decorative masonry wall was to be constructed and so what has happened now due to
the current economic conditions, the previous developer no longer retains ownership of
the project, the new -- the applicant has retained ownership and the fence was already
constructed when they regained ownership and so they have gone in, met with staff
several times. Fencing -- with some of -- we never discussed fencing at full detail. At
the time that I started working on the project it was primarily to get CZC approval for the
commercial buildings that are currently constructed on the site. We met with the
applicant. We told them -- staff and Public Works all met with them. I told them what
subdivision improvements needed to be complete in order to get occupancy for the
subdivision. We approved some alternative compliance requests for the buffers along
Eagle Road and, then, right before we were to release occupancy Mr. Tomczak, one of
the affected property owners, came in and talked with staff about the masonry wall
along his property boundary. I pulled out that file, showed him what the wall detail was
to look like, and gave him copies of that from -- from our files. Now we here everything
-- the subdivision are improvement -- are down. The applicant has -- is in the process of
constructing four single family homes in the development. They are looking to get
occupancy for those homes, so that they can market those and begin to sell those
homes and so we are here before you tonight really to discuss three issues with the
amended plan. One, the approved -- or the existing fencing doesn't match the detail, as
you can see, on the exhibit. Two, if I can go back to that landscape plan, right here
where the arrow is you can see that there is a pathway -- a 20 foot common lot,
essentially, and a pathway. Well, that portion of the fence has not been constructed for
20 feet due to the fact that there is an easement that runs through the property for a
canal and so that portion of the wall -- that's currently open to the adjacent property
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 26 of 54
owners as well. I know the applicant's working with that adjacent property owner to put
some kind of swing gates in there to mitigate for that. To my knowledge there isn't a
license agreement in place to allow for anything within that easement as we speak
tonight, but the applicant is here in the audience and they can definitely shine more light
on that. The other issue was the fact -- if you look at the photo in the right-hand corner,
you can see that the decorative features did not end up on the backside of the wall, so
this is what the adjacent property owners look -- are looking at. A smooth face block
wall with, essentially, a five foot dirt berm. You can see in this photo that one of the
adjacent homeowners has just constructed a fence to just close that off, so they don't
have to look at that. The applicant is currently working with those six homeowners. To
staffs knowledge six of the agreements are in place and signed. A couple homeowners
are holding out and waiting to see what the outcome is of tonight's hearing. The other
issue with the wall is that it currently exceeds the height limit of the zoning district. Our
UDC requires that the height of the wall, the fence, be no more than six feet and
currently as we speak tonight -- I did physically go out there and measure the wall and
it's -- the current height is six feet, eight inches. So, it's approximately eight feet. It's
one of those situations here where it's -- staff had a hard time making a
recommendation, but, basically, we felt that the fencing -- the building materials
complied with -- with the building material that was depicted on the landscape plan, it
just lacked the decorative feature. So, staff felt as an appropriate -- or at least as a
mitigating measure that they at least add a decorative capstone to the wall and we
would recommend approval as the wall exists today. Like I mentioned, we have
received written comments from one of the adjacent property owners and they are here
wanting to testify tonight. They have also provided us a sample elevation of a wall
section for you to look at, so I will put that on the overhead for you to view. The
applicant's also here. He's -- they did not like the recommendation of staff, so they
would prefer not to do the decorative capstone on top of the wall, they just want to leave
the wall as is. Staff has not received any other written testimony on this project. This
concludes my presentation. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, do you have any question at this time for staff?
Bird: I don't, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. I guess we will do it in the normal fashion of the public
hearing. Is the applicant or owner of this project here? Good evening. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Slaughter: Good evening, Mayor and City Council Members. My name is Ben
Slaughter, I'm here on behalf of the owner of the subject project, which is Idaho Mutual
Trust.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Oh. I need an address. Did you give me an address?
Slaughter: Oh, sorry. My personal residence or the address of the company?
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 27 of 54
De Weerd: The address of the company probably is best.
Slaughter: Okay. It's 12594 West Explorer Drive, Boise, Idaho. 83713.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Slaughter: So, we have submitted some written comments with respect to the staff
report and we also submitted some comments when we made the application and I
don't know to what extent the Council members have had a chance to take a look at
those, but I will just briefly go over those really quickly and, then, I will wait to hear what
the other parties have to say and see if there is any response needed or any questions
that I should answer from Council members. Basically, the way I -- we read the staff
report is that there is one issue left on the table. There is a recommendation that the
capstone be placed on top of the existing wall. So, I'll address that issue first and, then,
go onto some of the issues that were just raised by Mr. Parsons. So, the -- we just --
we urge the Council to accept the wall in its as-built state. If you take a look at it, it's
very visually appealing. I think at this point it's kind of a subjective analysis, does it look
good or does it not look good and I don't know how you make that determination. So,
what I think everyone should look to is why would we kind of -- if it isn't broke, don't fix it
type of thing. It looks good, it's structurally sound, and it meets its purpose, which is to
be a visual and a sound barrier. So, it meets every single aspect that it's supposed to
meet from a practicality standpoint. The reason -- the problems we would have with
removing the top layer and putting a capstone on there as recommended would be that,
one, we don't know what it will do to the structural integrity of the wall. We haven't hired
an engineer to look into that aspect. Our fear is that it would create an issue by -- by
possibly making us have to do additional work to the wall or maybe having to tear the
whole thing down and redoing it. But as it stands right now it's perfectly fine. The other
problem would be some sort of economic -- it's definitely an economic and
environmental waste. You have spent tens of thousands dollars -- tens of thousands of
dollars in putting the thing in place and, then, to have to go and spend another tens of
thousand of dollars in additional money to tear out the top wall and put a capstone in
place and who is to say if it really is going to look better than it currently does. The --
the other thing is when we look through the development agreement, my interpretation
of it is that -- and our interpretation of it is that it -- the landscape plan itself doesn't
specifically state that there has to be a capstone, it just says a decorative wall -- six foot
decorative wall with the split face aspect to it and it is that. Then, there is a sample
picture attached, which we all know -- in my experience doesn't necessarily mean that's
exactly the specifications that it has to meet, it's just an example. That's how we have
been viewing it. And I think that's a fair interpretation of it. So, I don't think that pointing
out the picture that's attached to the landscape plan and saying it has to look exactly --
exactly like that is the -- is the analysis that we need to approach it from. And the other
problem with putting it -- if we were just to put a capstone on the wall as is, is there is a
-- there is a rounded top to the wall, so we would still have to remove a significant
portion of the wall in order to put a capstone on it. Kind of just backing up and -- at the
larger picture, we kind of took this project over against our will and we are -- when we
took it over it was kind of an eye sore and we have been working diligently, spent
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 28 of 54
hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to move forward and create a viable project for
the community and we are pouring a lot of time, effort, and, like I said, money into this
and we have -- and we want to be able to just focus on the important aspects of it,
which is to build some nice homes, finish it out the way it was supposed to be finished
out and, really, when you look at that picture of that wall, it looks good. I don't know
how you look at it and say it doesn't look good. So, then, to go to the three other issues
that were raised by Mr. Parsons, saying that the -- there is the four feet of property on
the other side -- well, we acknowledge that. The neighbors on the other side wanted a
more substantial wall than just a vinyl or cedar fence. In order to put up a wall like that
you have to back it off the property line, so that you can grade away from it, probably,
and I'm not -- I'm not very knowledgeable in engineering or anything like that, but my
understanding is that it had to be able to put up the type of wall that everyone wanted it
had to be backed off of the property line and we are more than willing and we have
talked to all the neighbors and we are more than willing to make it -- to insure that it's
not a nuisance and, in fact, we told some of the neighbors go ahead and use it, do
whatever you want with it, and we will let you use it as long as you want and you can
just maintain it or you can let us come in and we will maintain it for you. And I -- I
thought that was a pretty reasonable solution to the issue. And most of them have
agreed with that and have allowed us to go down that route and they -- they have
decided to just add that four feet onto kind of their property. They have a license to use
it and they are going to maintain it. But, in any event, we will never let it become a
nuisance, we will always make sure it's weed free if somebody doesn't want to take care
of it and, then, the height being six foot eight, Ijust -- I don't know what to do about that.
We didn't build it. It is what it is. And I think that that is a distinction without a
difference. If you go out there -- we have gone out there, we have gone out there, we
measured at a different height. I'm not going to say that -- that anybody's wrong or
right, but I think that we are talking inches at this point and I don't see benefit to
anybody to -- to reduce it by -- at this point in the game by anything and the -- the
decorative feature on the opposite side of the wall, as pointed out in the staff report,
there is no requirement in the development agreement or in the landscape plan that the
other side of the wall have any sort of decorative aspect to it and, you know, like I said,
we -- we took this as it is. We didn't build the wall. It's there. And we'd like the ability to
just move forward with this project and I guess that's the end of my comments.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Slaughter, that four foot no man's land, would Idaho Mutual Trust be willing to
deed that to the owners of the property there that back up to --
Slaughter: I -- I am not familiar enough -- I don't know if I could speak on behalf of the
company to say that right here right now. I know that right now we have definitely
entered into the -- we have entered into license agreements, which are -- which don't
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 29 of 54
have any sort of -- the only time that they would terminate is if the wall for some reason
was tom down and those four feet were actually part of the property, so we didn't have
to do a lot line adjustment. That's certainly something that would be on the table I would
think, but I would have to talk to that -- yeah, that would be a decision for someone
other than me.
Bird: I just see that four foot being agreed upon now, but five years from now with other
people involved or something, it could be -- it could be a nightmare every year, you
know. So, it's -- you just deed it to their property, it's theirs, they are responsible for it.
don't know -- I didn't -- I'd like an engineer to explain to me why they have to move four
foot off the -- off the property line to build a fence, but I guess there is reasons.
Slaughter: Just my armchair construction slash engineer knowledge is that the grading
when you put up a structure -- a masonry type of structure, which is with cinder block
and, you know, pretty wide and a lot of weight, you have to slope it away from there
and, I don't know, there might be --
Bird: Then, you should put footings in just like you do a house.
Slaughter: Yeah. I guess I have exhausted my knowledge on the topic. That's just
what I was told that they had to --
Bird: You know, you're talking about as much weight as a lot of walls on houses.
Hoaglun: So, Madam Mayor, question for Mr. Slaughter. So, basically, the wall is taller
than six foot more than eight inches, because they did a berm. So, we are talking -- and
it's hard to tell the slope on that, how high that goes. Is that about an eight foot tall -- if
you were standing either on the sidewalk or their backyard, that's about eight foot total,
once the -- with the berm in place, with it on top of that bermed area?
Slaughter: I'm actually not sure. I would have to defer to somebody else on that. I only
know what the actual measurement of the wall is.
Hoaglun: Okay. Follow-up, Madam Mayor. In discussions with the neighbors about the
wall as it faces their house, it has just been the discussion about that four foot strip.
Has there been any discussion about the face of that wall. It looks like just plain cinder
block, as opposed to any decorative features.
Slaughter: There has been discussion with the neighbors. Some of the neighbors --
well -- and particularly one of the neighbors requested that, but we have gone back --
because, like I say, we were kind of handed this as is and it would be costly and I'm
sure you'll hear from Mr. -- I think it's Tomczak shortly about the issue, but it wasn't
required to be in there and we built -- it was built first back as far as I can tell with
respect to the split face decorative aspect of the wall and so we were -- we never
understood that there was a requirement that we had to do anything with that side of the
wall.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 30 of 54
Hoaglun: Okay.
Slaughter: And it sounds cost prohibitive from everything we can determine from --from
the requests that were made.
Hoaglun: All right. Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: This is, again, something that came through while I was on the Planning and
Zoning Commission and we had long hearings on this project and I believe several
continuances and this wall was a big topic of discussion and I can't speak for what
happened when it got to the City Council, but when it was leaving the Planning and
Zoning Commission it was our intent that the decoration be on the neighbors' side of it,
not -- and it was up to the developer what was on the developer's side of it. But I know
at the Planning and Zoning Commission after all the discussion, the expectation was
that either both sides were decorative or the neighbor's side was the decorative side. I
guess that is another example of where we need to make sure more gets into writing
than is getting into the writing. I don't know what to do about it, but I do know what the
intent was at the Planning and Zoning Commission, that the neighbors' side be the
decorative side.
De Weerd: And just to comment on that, Mr. Zaremba, that was probably the
assumption of Council. I know in reviewing the minutes and I was part of the many
meetings as well and it was contentious. They were very concerned of what they were
going to look at and that decorative fence was kind -- it certainly was something that
made the development more palatable and, yeah, we didn't designate what side of the
block masonry wall it was supposed to be on. Maybe that was our mistake or as my
daughter would say my bad, but I think, too, there is something called the good
neighbor fence and -- and oftentimes you see that it's in at least wooden fence you can
alternate the pattern, so each side a little give and take and at least it makes it fair.
From a homeowner's perspective certainly when I build a fence I want the attractive
side, it's at my cost, and I want it on my side. We have never built it that way, because
we do have to live with our neighbors and maybe that is why the Council didn't
designate -- well, if you're going to get this permission, you have to do the decorative on
the neighbors' side and whatever you want to do on your side is your thing. I guess we
assume we don't have to go into all of that detail, but some will do the right thing and I
guess my question to you is would you like to look at the side that the neighbors look at.
If that were your house and you enjoyed your backyard and that's what you looked at.
Now, I know that's an unfair question, but you can choose to answer it truthfully if you
would like.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 31 of 54
Slaughter: Thank you. That's a very pointed way of asking it, but I guess I'd like to kind
of punt a little bit and say that from the perspective of those particular owners, at least
half of them from the perspective of footage of the wall, are happy with it and they prefer
it as is and they are -- they have -- they were glad to sign an agreement with us where
they get to use those four feet, they didn't want anything done to the wall. So, I guess it
comes down to one of those subjective things where some people really appreciate it
and some people don't appreciate it. From our perspective we are sitting here saying
we didn't do it to anybody, we just were handed this. To go in and do something to put
in decorative features on the other side of that wall that half of the neighbors don't want
and half -- or one or two may want and, then, to get those one or two to agree on what
that decorative feature might look like and, then, to maintain that decorative feature and
pay for it, the installation of it, is -- is just -- first of all, when we looked at the
development agreement and read through the minutes, that's all we can go off of and
we just never understood -- I never had the benefit of hearing these previous hearings
and so from just a plain face reading of it, it seemed pretty clear that we were fine as far
as the decorative features being on one side and not the other. So, would I, living on
the other side of that fence, have a problem looking at it, I have no idea, but, you know,
at least they -- there is another four feet of land that we are offering to let them use and
decorate it any way they want in terms of putting in grass, putting in trees -- I think it's a
very difficult subjective question to answer. I don't -- I don't know how to answer it.
De Weerd: And I know I put you in a pickle, but -- and I know that you inherited it, but
still I guess, you know, the question here is what is the right thing. I bought a lemon of a
car and, I'll tell you what, I paid for it, because I bought it in good faith. You know, it's
how you want to be a neighbor and, you're right, I read the same things that you did, it
did not say what side of the fence that decorative side had to be on.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Slaughter, a couple things. First of all, the neighbors are doing you a favor by
taking care of the four foot for you. That would be a nightmare for you -- your firm and I
know how well right of ways and stuff like that's taken care of. Secondly, have -- have
you looked into sand blasting this? You know, sometimes if you go out and put a light
sand blast on -- on concrete walls or cement block walls, it will really add to it and sand
blasting it shouldn't be, you know, hundred thousand of dollars and I -- and I'm like the
Mayor, I realize we are -- we are not preaching to the real choir that was the ones that
come before us, but -- and I think sitting on the Council when it first come through, we
just automatically thought that you would put the decorating side to -- away from the
property, you know, because you take -- every fence I've put up, the good side has
been away from my yard, so that my neighbors or anybody seeing the good side -- and I
put it up seeing the -- the rough side. So, I don't know, I -- I don't know what your -- we
will find out when the other gentleman testifies, but sometimes you can take -- you can
take just a light sand blast, take a little pressure and a sand blaster out there and some
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 32 of 54
sand and take some 120 grit sand and you can make it look real nice. But in the same
token you need to make sure you don't hurt the integrity of the structure of the fence.
Slaughter: Well, thank you for those comments, Mr. Bird. To answer your question, I
don't believe we had looked into sand blasting as one of the potential solutions. What
happened, as far as I can recall, is that we -- we tried to enter into negotiations with all
the property owners and, like I say, half of them were happy and worked with us and,
then, a couple were just concerned and had adifferent -- totally different request, some
dealing with the wall, some dealing with some other things that were -- that just didn't
deal with the wall at all and kept getting side tracked, whereas in a way I feel like -- I
don't know how to prepare for these -- I prepared for this hearing based on the staff
report, which just dealt with the capstone, and I thought that all the other issues were
non-issues at this point, but, obviously, we are back to dealing with this issue again and
I don't -- they are all different people and property owners with different desires and
wants and Idon't -- from what we could gather there was no way we were going to
come up with a universal solution to make everyone happy. It makes it really difficult
when half of the people don't even want us to do anything to the wall and one person
wants us to do something to the wall and put in landscaping on their property and, you
know, pay them some money to do some stuff and -- I mean it gets to the point where
we just had to focus on what we could really do and -- and now that we are at this point
we were hoping to just focus on what was in the staff report, but if we are going to deal
with the neighbors at this point in time, I don't know how we can get to a resolution
sitting here tonight and it is a time sensitive matter for us, because we are sitting on a
very expensive project that's eating up a lot of capital and we really want to move
forward if we can.
De Weerd: Is there a building permit being held up -- building permits?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we don't typically hold up building
permits for the housing, they just won't get occupancy for the sale of those homes. So,
that's what would be held up. The commercial buildings have been granted occupancy,
because their common lots and all their improvements were done for those portions of
those lots, so staff went ahead and signed occupancy for those -- the two -- at least the
one commercial building. I don't believe we have done it on the other one. But we have
informed the neighbors that Idaho Mutual Trust would be proceeding with building
permits and constructing homes out there. We wouldn't hold up building permits, we
would hold up occupancy of that subdivision for the residential portion.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions from Council at this point?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: You'll have a chance for the last word.
Slaughter: Thank you very much.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 33 of 54
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. This is a public hearing on this item. Is there anyone
else who would wish to provide testimony on this application? Yes, please. Take a
deep breath and state your name and address.
Tomczak: My name is Ray Tomczak. I live at 1502 North Leslie Way in Meridian,
Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Tomczak: Mayor, I thank you. Council. It's good to see you all again. We are the ones
that were here before. See, if I can --
De Weerd: We do have your letter on record.
Tomczak: Yes, ma'am. I know that. I hadn't -- we had met with -- with Idaho Mutual
Trust just prior -- before they took over on the property when -- after foreclosure --
before foreclosure and, then, he had told me to get with the neighbors and to meet with
them. He agreed that the wall was -- was a mess. The landscaping definitely needed
to be addressed. He said to get -- you know, sit down with them, get consensus of what
we wanted and what we would like to do. I did that. When it come time we were told to
-- we were referred to -- excuse me. Dan and Ben Slaughter with Idaho Mutual Trust
and that would be Dan Bureau. There is a lot of issues with this wall. I thank Idaho
Mutual Trust for letting us have four feet of it. That's not what I bargained for, especially
if I have to landscape it. I didn't need an extra four feet there. The wall is -- this is a
different wall, this is just an image of one had taken to -- it's a fix to a problem, but want
to go back to the four feet and try not to get too scattered here. So, we had talked to
them about putting a type of mixture on the wall and this is a mud mix. I went and got
some estimates with it and to do my wall, which is 200 feet and sit on the second
property -- or the fourth property in from Ustick, the second one that's affected by this
one here, and it was $2.10 a square foot or roughly about 3,200 dollars to put a mixture
of this onto the wall and that would be sanding down the cinder block line so they didn't
show through. That was just one estimate. And I did go to concrete supply people and
talk to them about this to make sure that, you know, I had my facts straight on this. As
far as the cap on the wall, that's a pretty easy fix. There are a few things you can do.
The cap will come off fairly easy. They will have to chisel it off and straighten it out to
apply the cap on the top. We are not looking for anything else on the wall, but
something that's going to be a little more appealing than just cinder block wall. The four
feet that's there --
De Weerd: Excuse me. Council, if you don't mind, I'd like to add two more minutes.
Bird: Yeah. That's great.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 34 of 54
Tomczak: Thank you very much. The wall also facing on my property, as I stand flat on
my property, is 90 inches tall. It's a big, big wall. That's seven and a half feet. And the
dirt on the berm, of course, is -- and in this letter I submitted to you it did come out
passed their -- their property there. I had to uncover my sprinklers and take care of the
weeds and so the dirt is only 18 inches -- when they put the wall in they just skimmed
the ground, put the footer on it, built the wall. Now, they put a lot of rebar in there, so I
guess it's pretty well built from what I could tell and with my knowledge. One of the
reasons for doing it that way -- it was a lot easier than digging a two foot trench, putting
a footing in there, and building a fence on the property line. So, this was an easy fix for
them. Scrape it, place it, fill it back in. Now I have four feet there that we have to
landscape. When I talked to -- we met with -- my wife and Iwith -- with Dan and Ben at
Idaho Mutual Trust and they told us they would give us a license agreement and they
didn't want to meet with us as a group, they wanted to me with us individually, and that
was I guess Pete made the recommendation on staff to do that. When we asked them
to -- for a landscaping allowance, their -- so you want us to finish the wall and do your
landscaping for you, too. Yes, I do. I'd like a landscaping allowance to be able to take
care and finish that wall up, so it's at least a bit decorative. I don't think that's a lot
asking, considering the fact that it looks like that. It's an eye sore from my side. It's just
a huge wall, which I do have a picture here --
De Weerd: Mr. Tomczak, I'm sorry, you'll have to summarize. Does the picture you
have look too much different from the one staff showed?
Tomczak: That picture is a composition that is build in the Hacienda Subdivision down
on the -- on Meridian Road and --
Parsons: South of the Catholic church off of Chinden and Meridian --
Tomczak: The Holy Apostles Church there. And so what I was looking for was a wall
where they put a skin coat on this -- on a cinder block wall and it looks good, something
that was easy, something that was a fix that was esthetically pleasing and maybe not
that expensive. And so that's the best I can come up with. Now, talking to Concrete
Supply Services there, one of the guys, that they did this up in Donnelly on a fix on one
of the walls up there that they had to do and it's holding up very well, so --
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: If they decide to do this there will be maintenance with this stucco that they apply.
It's not a stucco, it's a slurry that they put on. Concrete slurry. But it will -- it can crack
and chip, so there is some deal -- and I had forgot about that when I was talking about
the sand blasting. But that can -- it can be done and it does look a lot more decorative
and evidently you have got about 1,400 square feet of wall at your place and they are
doing it for about 3,200, so --
Tomczak: Two hundred by I think seven feet --
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 35 of 54
Bird: I figured seven feet, so you're 1,400 square feet.
Tomczak: And so the -- addressing to the issue -- or three of the neighbors that have --
we are all contiguous. Steve Grant, Scott Feeley, and myself and I'm in the middle of
that. Gary has the next property up. He has like 80 feet that's behind a shed, behind a
shop. He never sees it. Mark Snodgrass, which has already done some things, he
wasn't waiting around to wait for this to happen, so he went ahead and proceeded with
his own. He chose to just sign off and let it go for different reasons. The other
neighbor, which has 40 feet and she's up at the end -- both of them have signed off. It's
40 feet and it was back in the comer, they'd never see it, they didn't really care. So, the
three of us, which has 600 and some feet of it, which is very visible from Leslie, Mark
Snodgrass is not, he's back in a cul-de-sac. You don't see his. I did look at it. You
know, he's got some big trees there and so it -- it hides it, but it's still -- it's still there.
We do have one opening I will go through it quick. It's a 20 foot opening for the
irrigation, which is the users -- we are the users on that and we can have that wall --
they can go ahead and finish putting the stone across there. We can make that
happen: Give them the right to do that. It is the Ahman lateral users --
Hoaglun: If I might ask, who -- what's the imgation district? Is that Nampa-Meridian
that runs --that has that easement?
Tomczak: Well, it's not Nampa -- it's --
Hoaglun: Is it Pioneer?
Bird: Or Settlers. One of the two.
Tomczak: Settlers, yeah.
De Weerd: Settlers.
Tomczak: But we have control over that, not the Nampa irrigation. They refer
everything to us. Vem Ahman. He's on the --
Hoaglun: Okay. As long as we aren't dealing with the irrigation district, that gets a little
bit --
Tomczak: Not at all. No.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Tomczak: This is something we have to address with us and take care of ourselves
there.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 36 of 54
Tomczak: Like I said, we tried to meet with them and tried to talk to them, but we'd like
to find a -- I did have Sterling Nursery come out and give me some estimates on
landscaping. There is a concern about the slope of it, but I think I can deal with that, but
I really didn't need another thousand feet of landscaping there to -- or property to
landscape, you know.
De Weerd: Council, any further questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much.
Tomczak: Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
De Weerd: Any further testimony?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, if I could interject could interject for one moment. That 20 foot
opening --
De Weerd: I'm like where is that voice coming from.
Parsons: One thing I would like to point out to Council -- and staff was out there looking
at that opening in the wall and that's where the one photo on the -- the right-hand side
that you saw earlier this evening. There is a manhole there for that pipe, so keep in
mind if -- if that is closed off and they need to get in there and service that facility, they
are either going to have to go through to the adjoining property owner's property to get
to that manhole, because they won't be able to get any equipment in there if that wall is
closed off, so they will have to go through the subdivision and that would affect that
adjacent property owner. So, it looks like he might be here to talk about that more with
you guys. Something to keep in mind.
De Weerd: Bill, is there a fence up in Sadie Creek?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, when I -- when I read through the minutes it was always
implied that this fencing would compliment the Sadie Creek project. However, I
researched that file, looked at the approved landscaping plan for the preliminary plat --
keep in mind that plat's expired now, but that landscape plan did not depict fencing
along that southern boundary, only a 30 foot landscape buffer and that's why Bienville
Square installed a 30 foot landscape buffer to match that buffer with Sadie Creek. So, it
was never afencing -- as far as I can tell from the evidence in our file that that -- there
was to be a wall adjacent to that boundary. So, now we are stuck with this wall that
won't match the adjacent subdivision as well.
De Weerd: Thank you. I'm song, sir. If you will, please, state your name and address
for the record.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 37 of 54
Grant: I'm Steve Grant at 1534 Leslie Way, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Grant: Madam Mayor, Council Members, just a few brief comments in support of what
Ray has already said. It's been established that the -- the previous owners left a mess
and with all these issues. I appreciate Mr. Zaremba's memory of those City Council --
or those Planning and Zoning Commission meetings where I believe you have stated
correctly that that was the intent of the homeowners to have that decorative side and
why they chose to do it the way they did I guess is anyone's guess, but, nonetheless,
the current owners inherited that mess and with that -- with ownership goes the
responsibility to correct that. Doing nothing for -- in terms landscaping that four foot
area leaves us with the responsibility -- fiscal responsibility for that, which doesn't seem
fair. I did meet with the folks from Idaho Mutual Trust and they offered to landscape --
at least the way I asked them to do it. I did not sign that agreement pending the
outcome of this hearing, so I would hope that they still would -- you know, still have that
on the table as we -- as we go forward. I don't know what -- what kind of compromises
can be made in terms of, you know, whether or not just some of the property owners, if
they don't want the wall and it's not visible from the street, maybe only do the ones that
do want it and that would cut the cost down. That's just something that ought to be
considered. Those are all my comments, unless there are any questions.
De Weerd: Any questions, Council? Thank you.
Grant: Certainly.
De Weerd: Any further testimony? Yes, sir.
Feeley: Hello, Mayor and Councilmen.
De Weerd: Hi, there.
Feeley: My name is Scott Feeley. I'm at 1470 North Leslie Way. And I happen to be
the property owner where the hole in the fence is and it's about 20 feet in. The picture
on the right I was noticing -- just to kind of give you an illustration of the situation that --
that I'm in. If you notice the picture, the fence before -- I mean it's like seven and a half
feet by our property and to back fill to make that fence six foot, they ended up putting
dirt and you can see the elevation here just by standing going through that hole on that
fence, you can literally take your arm out like this and get into my backyard. In that
fence right there that you do see is six feet. So, we feel kind of a little bit of a security
issue from people coming into the commercial development, which there is already, you
know, a certificate of occupancy, so there is people traveling all around there all the
time now and I was approached by Ben and Dan via telephone, which I really do
appreciate, trying to work this out. Recently it was a gate that they wanted to put in
there and it was going to be -- and I didn't know, so they started talking to me and they
had mentioned that, well, we are going to match what we have done in the rest of
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 38 of 54
subdivision and that was going to be a wood gate. So, you're going to have this cinder
block wall with a wood gate. And in my opinion I didn't think that was acceptable, so we
were starting to talk and, then, they came back with a metal fence, which was a metal
gate, and, really, what the materials were consisting of were a tin roof -- so, in my
opinion, very flimsy, about 38 gauge with all the research that I did and I just felt that
that was unacceptable, because I really do feel that that is a safety thing for my family
and I, because I have two small children over there as well. And, then, as we are
talking about this landscaping and so forth, being able to furnish landscaping for that
four foot, I had also asked Dan at the time, you know, well, is there anything that you're
going to do with the additional four feet and he goes, no, your landscaping allowance is
that fence -- or the gate for that hole. There is that manhole cover that is there, but
when they went to backfill all of the dirt, that is covered now, and I -- personal opinion, I
think that was not designed correctly in the very beginning, which is an unfortunate
inherent problem that they do have now, but I would like to see that fixed. And those
are my comments tonight, so thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Sir, what kind of a gate and fence would satisfy you? Wrought iron?
Feeley: I think a continuation of the fence --
Bird: Of the block?
Feeley: Yeah. Of the block, cinder, all the way through. That would be very -- because
from asafety -- continuing the same height, because where we are at if I get on our side
of the fence -- I know there is different measurements throughout the whole -- we are
right at about seven and a half feet on our side and so you would have at least to make
it the same height. But I would prefer --
Bird: The block.
Feeley: -- the block.
Bird: Okay.
Feeley: Because we do have the imgation. We have, actually, got part of the irrigation
canal that goes through a majority of our property as well, so there has to be some type
of an easement I think for that.
De Weerd: Well, can you put a permanent structure on an easement? Isn't that why
that portion is open?
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 39 of 54
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm not sure that -- as far as the
building code goes or the easement goes that a wood fence would be any different than
a concrete block wall. They are both technically structures. So, I'm guessing if they are
protectors of the easement and they are okay with it, then, it may be their call. I mean
the issue is if they ever need to get to it, they may need to replace the fence -- the block
wall in that portion.
Feeley: And where that manhole is is -- there was an issue when they originally were
digging the canal, the original developers. They actually had to put an angle in,
because the way that it comes at a 90 degree angle into our property and they actually
made it -- I don't know, like a 45. So, that's why they put that manhole cover right there,
they also put a culvert on our side of the property as well, which that water drains into.
So, I would suggest if you'd be more than willing, I think, to come out there and I have
seen some of the development, but I'd invite you to come out there to see what kind of
an issue it is.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? Mr. Feeley?
Feeley: Yes.
Hoaglun: Is that manhole cover on your property?
Feeley: No. That is not. It is in the direct line of the fence. So, I mean if you were to
draw a straight line, you would be building on top of the manhole, from my perspective.
But, again, I'm not an engineer by any means, but just visually seeing, you would run
right on top of it.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Feeley: So, I think it would either require that to be moved -- I don't know what the
purpose of that is, because on my property there is a -- another culvert, so -- but I think
it's where it just turns from -- from the --from the weir out front it runs that -- you know,
whatever thousand feet that is and, then, turns in.
Bird: Madam Mayor? I -- man, I think we are getting into -- stepping into -- into water
district rules and regulations. That man cover I don't think we can put anything over it,
can we? I mean I could understand -- and I don't know how big the -- the manhole
cover is, but I could see we could put block up to it, but, then, you're going to have to
have some kind of a wrought iron gate or something, so that they can get to that man
cover, because that -- that's been put in there for a purpose. It's either got to be a
cleanout or to be able to get to it. So, I think -- I think somebody needs to be talking to
Settlers big time.
Feeley: Well, these are just my comments and my concerns for my family, so thank
you.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 40 of 54
De Weerd: Thank you.
Nary: Madam Mayor? Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I was reviewing some
minutes -- and I don't know if this will be of any assistance to you, but in reviewing the
minutes of March 14, 2006 -- and I think you all have stated it a number of times, that
the wall was discussed a number of times, both at the Planning and Zoning Commission
and in front of the City Council back in that time period, but -- and I understand the
dilemma that you all face at the moment that you have a -- now a subsequent purchaser
of his property, but the subsequent purchaser doesn't take anymore rights than what
existed from the prior owner. So, at least from a -- from a legal standpoint what you
have is the owner of the property -- and it doesn't really make any difference legally that
it's a different person than was here before, asking for a modification to what was
previously approved. In my opinion it would be a very stretched reading of these
minutes to not believe the decorative part of this wall was supposed to be on the side
facing the neighbors. It is discussed over and over again. But I'd point specifically on
page 45 of the minutes, Mr. Haggett, who was one of the developers of this property,
states very clearly a number of times their preference is to build a Trex wood composite
product fence. They also had proposed a wrought iron fence. And both of those the
neighbors were not in favor of. In fact, Mr. Haggett goes on to say that the type of fence
we prefer is Trex wood composite, it's long life, long lasting fence with a 25 year
warranty. He, then, goes on to say we prefer that in developing this area, but he says I
-- excuse me -- I hope the Council -- we sent out a letter this morning that hopefully the
Council got copies of that. You have and I have copies of that letter here. The letter
was sent to Mr. Berg, who was the city clerk at the time. We are willing to commit to a
masonry -- decorative masonry fence on that west property line if the Council deems
that would be appropriate after hearing public testimony from the adjacent homeowners.
We are trying to be good neighbors here, we are trying to develop what we think is a
good project. He further goes on to say -- again, he's not supportive of a block wall, but
he says: In any event, like I said, we are willing to do a decorative masonry fence if
that's what the Council feels would be more appropriate for this part of the project.
Every single person that testified believed that the decorative part was facing them. It
wasn't -- I don't think you can read this in context -- and when the Council approved the
project, they approved the project based all the comments that were made, as well as
all the testimony that was presented, as well as all the reports that were put into the
record. So, I believe your -- the current developer now, the bank, stated they have
reviewed both the minutes of your meetings, as well as the final orders that were done.
Again, it is my opinion it would be very difficult to believe that the decorative part of that
wall was not supposed to be on the neighbor's side of it. So, if the owner of the property
-- if Mr. Haggett was standing here today and hadn't constructed it properly and wanted
relief from that, that's really the discussion for you. That's the decision point you have is
do you grant relief for that now and the fact is the new -- the new property owner --
certainly is some consideration you could make, but the reality is they don't gain more
rights just because they bought something that maybe wasn't done what was intended
at the time. So, if that's of any help. But there is a number of other references, but that
was the one clearly from Mr. Haggett of committing to the neighbors who had asked
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 41 of 54
over and over for something other than what they proposed and the decorative part of it
was supposed to be facing them.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further questions for staff, Council? Would the
applicant like to -- or owner representative -- I don't know what to call you, because this
really isn't an application. State your name and address for the record.
Bureau: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council. My name is Dan Bureau. I'm
representing --
De Weerd: You want to pull that up.
Bureau: -- Idaho Mutual Trust, the owner. 12594 West Explorer Drive, Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bureau: My name got brought up a couple times, so I thought I'd just come up here and
answer. I have been mainly responsible to speaking with the adjacent neighbors in
trying to come to some sort of agreement with this dilemma. We decided to approach
each neighbor individually, because we felt having a large quorum of people would end
up with a shouting match of, you know, some past things that we were not involved in
that we couldn't answer to. So, we decided to approach them and ask them what they
wanted and what we could do to help them out as their neighbor. The furthest south
neighbor just wanted her -- the wrought iron fence to be tied into the block wall, so that
nobody could walk through that. We obliged and did that. Mr. Snodgrass preferred a
monetary allowance for the work that he did and also be allowed to utilize the property,
as well as apply a topical treatment to the wall if he so chooses, with the agreement that
he was to maintain that treatment. Mr. Feeley, in speaking with him, wanted something
done with the gap in the wall. Again, it's been noted that there is an easement in place
that specifically prohibits building any fence or structure over that and we were,
obviously, not wanting to take on the liability of building anything on there without going
through the proper channels of redrafting the recorded agreement, which at the time
they did not want to go through that process, they wanted to just simply issue a letter
from the president of the lateral granting permission to build something on that. We
weren't comfortable with that from a legal standpoint to just have a letter from the
president, so we offered to, first, build a cedar fence, clean fence that could lock. Mr.
Feeley was not happy with the security of that, so we -- he also requested that it would
be full privacy, like the rest of the fence. We offered a steel panel fence and the reason
we cannot build it to the quality that he wants is that's a large gap and you cannot put
any posts in the middle there, because there is a manhole. So, it has to be relatively
light weight of material to -- for the wall to be able to withstand the post on end. So, we
had a fence company design a custom made fence that was full secured with lock, it
was made with steel material, excuse me, and from our standpoint provided security
from anybody crossing through that, but also provided the swinging mechanism that
would allow anybody to access that manhole without tearing down a fence or existing
structure. That did cost quit a bit of money to put in and we were willing to do that. He
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 42 of 54
did not like the design element of it, nor did he prefer, again, the -- the minor -- he
wanted something more substantial. We chose to put that negotiation on hold until this
meeting. Mr. Morrisette has signed off with us and is -- he is the adjacent neighbor to
Mr. Feeley. He was satisfied with the wall, with the height, and, basically, wanted to
move on. Mr. Tomczak we did meet with. He also discussed the topical treatment to
the wall, but also requested significant amount of money to be put into his landscaping,
including sprinklers, a number of shrubs, trees, grass, and it just really felt like we were
being held hostage of something that we weren't really responsible for from the
beginning, which is the number of years that Ray had dealt with the prior developer and
the amount of money that it took to satisfy that landscaping need exceeded what we felt
was fair. We are also worried that applying topical treatment. Again, the neighbors
have expressed that they don't want to mismatch the wall. Essentially, a rainbow wall
between every neighbor. We are also worried that the maintenance issue -- the four
feet there is there to maintain the wall, if someone needs to go onto the property to
maintain the wall, if there is a crack, we don't want to have to go through the owner's
property to be able to do that. If there is a topical treatment applied and that
homeowner agrees to take care of it, that's great for the three, four, five years that that
owner owns that's property. If he sells it we are, then, left with, again, a maintenance
issue for the future homeowners of Bienville Square Subdivision, so that's the main
reason we have tried to stay away from topical treatment, is the future maintenance
questions that we are here, we cannot answer those or we don't want to speak on
behalf of the future homeowners that will have to enter that property, fix cracks, fix --
you know, reapply topical treatments, but -- and, finally, Mr. Grant also asked for some
decorative rock that matched the other rock on his property. We agreed to do some fine
grading, compact the soil, install the rock per -- per his specifications. He was satisfied
with that and he just wanted to wait as a good neighbor until the rest of his neighbors
were satisfied. So, we are really left with a gap in a wall that -- I'm not sure how to fix
that. It's -- it's an easement with a recorded document in place that really prohibits the
one solution that the neighbor wants, along with Mr. Tomczak, which we would still like
to sit down and talk with -- to figure something out with him that does not cause future
problems for the homeowners, as well as feel like the cost is an absorbent amount to
what we feel is fair, so --
De Weerd: Council, questions?
.Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Dan, you know, Ifeel -- I feel sorry for Idaho Mutual Trust getting in on this like
they did and I don't know how you got here, whether you were financing them and had
to repo it or what the deal was, how you got involved in it, but -- but in my opinion when
you -- when you step forward as a developer you got exactly what had been approved
and I realize it don't say that we wanted the decorative fence and we wanted this and
that -- I mean it -- it was there. The wall I understand was up when you guys took it
over and I -- I feel for you. But in the same token these neighbors set here, come to
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 43 of 54
hearings, and thought something was -- I wish they -- I wish they would have come
forward to our staff when this wall was put in wrong to start with. That's -- I mean we
are kind of way down the road from when this should have been brought up. This hole
in the wall has got to be worked out between you and the landowner on the other side
and the imgation people. I don't know if anybody has talked to Settlers. We got -- you
know, irrigation laws go ahead of any other law there is in the state of Idaho it seems
like, so something has to be done. And I feel for you guys for having to do this, but you
took something on, whether you wanted to or not -- had to and these homeowners
expect to get what they thought was approved. And, like I say, they should have come
sooner, so -- and I feel for both -- both parties. I really do. But something's got to be
worked out. I can understand why the gentleman wants security. He don't want a 20
foot hole left open there into some dark commercial development or something there to
come into his backyard. We got to work something out and I -- and I feel for you and I
feel for the neighbors. Definitely do.
Bureau: Well, thank you, Mr. Bird, and I completely agree with you. The gap in the wall
I think -- you know, the direction that both parties have taken with some sort of gate --
swinging gate is the appropriate direction to head in. Really, then, it just comes down to
what it looks like and we can continue to work on that. Again, we are limited to the type
of material and the weight of the gate, as long as the neighbor is aware of that and
understanding to that fact. We can design it however they want it to look. I actually
asked Mr. Feeley to -- to come up with some designs that he felt would be -- would be
decent and that was towards the end of our negotiating, so I did not see that. But we
would be open to look at that. And as far as Mr. Tomzak's request for some sort of
treatment to the wall, whether it be stain or topical treatment of some sort, we are open
to that, it's just the issue of the maintenance and if we can iron out some sort of
agreement that will stay in place beyond his ownership and beyond our ownership, that
that -- that maintenance will be the responsibility of the party that is enjoying the benefit
of it, then, we would be agreeable to that as well. As far as the other property owners
that have signed off, they really felt that -- that they are satisfied, they don't want us on
their property, they would like to just use the property for themselves, do with the wall
that they would like to do, and so we would ask that those agreements be honored and
remain in place.
De Weerd: Any other questions or comments?
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor? A question, Dan. So, what you would like -- whatever action
we come up with, those portions of the wall where you have already signed off for -- or
the resident has signed off agreement, you consider that to be done and then -- so, we
are just dealing with the folks who still have some disagreement with what they want to
see done or what you're proposing in trying to resolve that, is that -- am I understanding
that correctly?
Bureau: Yeah. I guess to back up a little bit, our understanding is that all the neighbors
are happy with the height. They like the fact that it's bigger than it was. So, we'd ask
that you would allow for the -- my measurement when I was out there from the bottom of
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 44 of 54
the ground, which I understand is a berm, but I just measured from the grass to the top,
was six foot six inches. So, we'd ask for you to allow for the height to remain the same,
that whatever treatment is done to the wall is purely on the face of the wall, not
necessarily a capstone, because it is designed with a rounded top, tearing off a layer is
not only manually challenging, but also may damage the integrity of the wall. So, with
the remaining neighbors what we'd ask is -- like with Mr. Tomczak, that his request be a
design that -- that changes the face of the wall, rather than doing a top that would be
appearable to the rest of the neighbors who don't want anything done to the wall.
Hoaglun: If I might inquire further. Did you -- do you have any estimate of a topical
treatment, what that would cost?
Bureau: Well, it depends on the treatment at hand. If it's a stain it's one cost, if it's a
stucco type it's another. So, we -- we have looked at some avenues, but always kind of
got caught up with that -- you know, how does this wall -- how is this cinder block wall
going to adhere to the treatment, what type of treatment is even appropriate for it, those
type of things we are not really sure. We don't want to just spray it with a layer and,
then, have it all just start flaking off, even if it looks good for the first year. So, that's
some items that need to be researched and looked into. And we are willing to do that.
Again, it's -- again, just -- we are only going to own this property for another two years,
hopefully, as far as the residential portion. We hope to be able to build houses and sell
them out. We really want to protect the homeowners that are going to take this over in
the HOA that is going to be responsible for that wall. So, that's - we have multiple
people in mind when -- when negotiating these type of things, so --
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it sounds like you need a couple of
things that you may not be able to have all of that tonight, because it sounds to me like
you're going to need some resolution to the issue of the opening in the fence and
whether or not there is an issue with the irrigation district or how you're going to -- either
close that off or not close it off or have some finality. If -- if part of the desire of the
applicant here is to at least close off the -- at least three property owners that have
agreed to whatever resolution they have, the city doesn't have that as part of the record,
so you're probably going to want some proof of that to make that part of your record if
you're going to do that. If they need a maintenance easement, which they would likely
record, so that future homeowners, both the HOA on the Bienville side, as well as the
property owners on the other side, have some satisfaction there is a continuing
maintenance easement that's allowed, so they can continue to maintain whatever
treatment they come up with for the wall for those property owners that aren't resolved
yet, that's probably something that you would put in your directive, but, again, you may
want to see that before you finalize your decision. And, then, second -- and, lastly, you
probably -- because you have had a number of different discussions between the
property owners and the adjacent neighbors and the Council on what -exactly what
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 45 of 54
treatment is appropriate, it appears from the testimony that the stumbling block at the
moment has been whether or not topical treatment of any sort was necessary, whether
it's sand blasting, the stucco, something else, and at this point the discussion has sort of
stalled on whether or not anything like that is going to be done. If the desire of this
Council is that that be further explored, so you have some finality what you direct, if
you're going to grant this modification, you may, again, want them to have that
discussion outside of this hearing process, so that you have some finality on what the
parties can agree to. Three people have already agreed to something, you have three
people left that haven't agreed to something yet, and the stumbling block may or may
not have been overcome by your -- by the testimony for tonight. If it has, then, you may
want to continue this, get all of those pieces, so that we can make it clear that the
property owners that have agreed to such are resolved, the property owners that are
remaining can resolve their issues hopefully with -- with the bank without you folks
having to dictate what color, what shape, what texture, things that usually you don't do
and that there is the easements in place that are necessary and the issue of the
irrigation district is done. So, those are things you might want to consider in trying to get
this resolved. I know there is more testimony from the applicant, but those are the
things I was saying that you may want to put your -- put your mind set around in going
forward with this, so --
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions from Council? Comments from the
applicant?
Bureau: Yeah. The last, I guess, request I have is that since most of the items in
question either have to do with the back side of the wall or -- or the -- the spacing that
does not have a wall, that there is going to need to be some time and effort spent to
come to some sort of agreement on that. What we do have outstanding is the -- again,
the occupancy for the subdivision. We have four homes that are nearing completion,
we have a home that's going to be introduced in the Parade of Homes that we would
like to be able to have part of that. So, the bigger picture is we have this occupancy
issue that we -- we would request that the occupancy be granted for the subdivision and
that some sort of agreement needs to be made on the side that a good faith effort is
going to be made with the neighbors to resolved these issues, we are more than willing
to do that. However, holding up the -- a 12 million dollar project over some items that
are really out of our control, is just going to cost a lot of money and possibly damage the
community further than what it's already been damaged. So, we would ask that there
be some sort of consideration made with the occupancy of the homes, as well as future
homes while we work out these issues with the neighbors.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Dan, I -- you got -- you say you got one home there that's going to be in the
Parade of Homes -- when is the Parade of Homes?
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 46 of 54
Bureau: Well, we have four homes currently under construction. The Parade of Homes
house will begin construction scheduled beginning in February and it is --
Bird: It's scheduled to be done or --
Bureau: Begin construction. The Parade of Homes is actually in April.
Bird: I was just going to say, I thought it was --
Bureau: May.
Bird: Unless they have changed in the six years I have been retired -- it was always in
April or May.
Bureau: Yeah. It's in May.
Bird: And -- and we -- we are not holding up any building permits?
Bureau: Correct.
Bird: What we are holding up is occupancy.
Bureau: Yeah. The ability to sell the home.
Bird: And you say -- when are you going to be ready to get occupancy for the first
house?
Bureau: Beginning of February.
Bird: Okay. That gives you a month to work out these items. I agree a hundred
percent with our attorney. I -- what we approve right -- if we was to approve this tonight,
all we would do is make some money for a lot of attorneys and in the first place I don't
want to leave something for homeowners to inherit. I don't want some -- I don't want the
existing neighbors to have to live with something that they didn't think they would. I
think you can work it out. I think you got a month before you need the occupancy, your
construction is going on, as I understand. You got -- you got the wall application. And
you got the closure. You need to get with Settlers to find out what you can do over that
man cover and you got a month to do it. I would -- personally I would approve one
occupancy for your Parade of Homes if this isn't settled out. I would not vote to
approve, as it stands now, anymore occupancies until this thing is settled and settled
finally -- final that is good for everybody concerned, yourselves and the existing
neighbors and the people that will be buying the property. I don't want them to get a
headache, too.
Bureau: I appreciate your comment.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 47 of 54
Bird: Thank you.
Bureau: I guess if -- if the Council would -- to specify the -- the items to be discussed or
-- I'd like to propose the items which would be the wall itself, the four feet that -- or
between the wall and the property owner's property and that's it. And as well as the
gate -- the opening. The reasons most of the talks stalled with Mr. Tomczak is it
included much more landscaping that was not within that portion, as well as plants and
shrubs that we don't feel we are necessarily responsible for. He's more than welcome
to put the trees and shrubs in if he'd like, but we don't want to pay for trees and shrubs.
So, I -- that's kind of the one area I'm worried about getting hung up on again is what we
are responsible to put in that four feet, whether it's grading and the gravel, which is what
was outlined in Mr. Parsons' staff report, which we are willing to do, grade it, compact it,
and put a finish gravel and maintain the weeds. If that's -- if that's what everybody
agrees upon, we can definitely work out the wall issue. I think that's not an issue. It's
the additional money and labor to landscape and irrigate Mr. Tomzak's backyard that we
got hung up on.
De Weerd: I think staff has mentioned that that would have been acceptable
regardless, that that would be the requirement. The wall has to be decorative, so -- and
I think that's probably what you need to work with with those that have not signed an
agreement on what is acceptable. So, if they don't want you on their property for the
rock and the maintenance, then, that's an agreement that you work out with them. I
don't think that's anything the city wants to get in the middle of. But what you do have a
requirement for is to rock it -- or to grade it, rock it, which is finish it off and, then, to
maintain it. So, on the fence, to help with the weight, certainly you need to get
permission with the imgation district, but can you put another panel to take the size of
each of those gates, minimize them so they are not so heavy, so you can consider other
options, I guess, would be another option to talk about. But that certainly, again, is
between you and the property owner you affect and what the imgation district would
allow. But I think Mr. Nary did say we should know what is being agreed on, so that can
be written into the findings or into the agreement, so it can go back on, looked up if
there is questions in the future.
Bureau: Okay.
De Weerd: Any other comments from Council?
Zaremba: I was just looking ahead. Would we want to move this to like February 2nd?
The February 9th meeting is a workshop.
Bird: That would be fine with me.
De Weerd: Yeah. Council, I guess, Council and --
Zaremba: It isn't quite the month that Councilman Bird was saying, it's like three weeks,
but --
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 48 of 54
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Would it be something that -- for you and the neighbors to discuss -- you
have three weeks to bring at least a status report back. Council can look at what the
status is, what the advancement of the discussions, and we can talk about the
occupancies at that time.
Bureau: That would be acceptable.
De Weerd: Is that -- Council, so continuing this until February 2nd?
Bird: Madam Mayor? With that I would move that we continue MFP 09-003 until
February 2nd, 2010.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue this item until February
2nd. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. Thank you all for your time.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. Public Hearing: CPA 09-006 by City of Meridian Planning
Department: Request to Amend the Text of the Meridian
Design Manual to Edit Clerical Errors and Add Text Defining
the "Downtown Core" and Clarifying Compliance with Unified
Development Code (UDC) Standards for Meridian Design
Manual Text Amendment
De Weerd: Item 11-C, CPA 09-006, is a public hearing. I will open this public hearing
with staff comments.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The request before you
is a Comprehensive Plan text amendment. It's actually for the design -- Meridian design
manual that you had proved in 2009. That new design -- as I mentioned, that new
design review process went into effect in 2009. Since then, with the exception of that
document, staff has found several clerical errors that need to be cleaned up and that's
what we are proposing in this. The other added verbiage that we are proposing to -- to
place in the document is to, basically, describe the downtown core area of the Meridian
-- of Meridian and also add some language that clarifies that the manual is to be used in
conjunction with the parking requirements of the UDC. Staff felt that these changes
were necessary to facilitate -- to better facilitate the design manual and give future
developers and property owners a clear vision of how they are to use the manual in
conjunction with the UDC. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval at their December 17th hearing. Planning Department is in favor of the
project. Staff did not receive any written testimony or comment on the application and
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 49 of 54
Commission did not recommend any changes to the documentation -- to the document.
And with that I'd stand for any questions Council may have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? I have no questions. This is a public
hearing. Is there anyone who would like to offer public testimony on this item? Council,
seeing no public testimony and if you have no questions for staff, I would entertain a
motion to close this public hearing.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we close the public hearing on CPA 09-006.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close this item. All those in favor say aye.
All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we approve CPA 09-006.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 11-C. If there is no
discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Ordinances.
A. Ordinance No. : An Ordinance Amending
Title 11 of the Meridian City Code Regarding Zoning and
Subdivision Regulations Codified at Title 11, Entitled The
Unified Development Code, of the Meridian City Code
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 50 of 54
De Weerd: Item 12 is an ordinance proposed as 10 dash -- oh, wow. It's ten. Can you
believe that? 1439. Madam Clerk, will you, please, read this ordinance by title only.
Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 10-1439, an
ordinance amending Title 11 of the Meridian City Code regarding zoning and
subdivision regulations, codified at Title 11, entitled the Unified Development Code of
the Meridian City Code and providing for a waiver of the reading rule and providing an
effective date.
De Weerd: You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there anyone who
would like to hear it read in its entirety? Thank you. I see none. Council?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 10-149 -- or 139. I'm sorry. With suspension of
rules.
De Weerd: It's 1439.
Bird: 1439.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Hearing none, Madam
Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 13: Other Items.
A. Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345 (1)(fl - To
Consider and Advise its Legal Representatives in Pending
Litigation (c) - To Conduct Deliberations Concerning Labor
Negotiations or to Acquire an Interest in Real Property; Which
is Not Owned by a Public Agency
De Weerd: Item 13 is an Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(f) and
(c).
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 51 of 54
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(c),
(1)(~•
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: May I have roll call, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:39 p.m. to 10:13 p.m.)
De Weerd: I need a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Bird: So moved.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Motion to Amend Agenda to add Purchase of land for Future Meridian Well Site.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would move that we amend tonight's agenda to add an item regarding the
purchase of land for a future Meridian well site. I'm not understanding why that's two
different motions.
Nary: One is an amendment to the agreement -- contract amendment to our agreement
with Mr. Ownby.
Zaremba: Okay.
Nary: And, then, the other is a real estate purchase -- by and sell agreement to
purchase real estate. So, it's two different agreements.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 52 of 54
Zaremba: Okay. If Mr. Nary's voice got on the recorder, I will say those are the two
agreements that we need to deal with.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion
carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Motion to Approve Amendment to Real Estate Agreement with Dale Ownby.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I first move that we approve a contract amendment with Ownby and
Company and this one does not have a cost, it's just a change in the contract.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's an extension of his current
agreement.
Bird: I was going to say, it's the length, isn't it?
Nary: Yes.
De Weerd: Yeah. It's just a time extension.
Nary: Yes.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. I will ask Madam Clerk to, please, call the roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Motion to Approve Purchase of Real Estate Land Handled by Dale Ownby.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 53 of 54
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move that we approve the purchase of specific real estate handled through
Dale Ownby in the amount of 160,000 dollars and out of that approve the issuance of
the first 10,000 dollars as earnest money tomorrow and for the Mayor to sign any
necessary documents and the Clerk to attest.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: Thank you. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk,
will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, we are at the end of our agenda and we have a fading
Council Member.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Before I make my motion to adjourn, I want to thank you and your office and
particularly Shelley for putting on the reception in Brad and my selfs honor #onight.
Highly appreciated. Thank you very much. And relay that to your staff.
De Weerd: She's very good at spending other people's money --
Bird: You bet.
De Weerd: -- and that was yours.
Bird: With that I move we adjourn.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:16 P.M.
Meridian City Council
January 12, 2010
Page 54 of 54
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
I i2(oi2olo
MAYO MY De WEERD DATE APPROVED
~~~~\\ ~y ®~~~ ~ EST:
c3~ ~~'~rF® ~?
JAYCE . HOLMAN, CITY CLERK
SEAL =
~~•~ ~~~'
:,~ 9Q ""ST 1ST , ~ ~~•`
oQ. `~~.
. q