HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/2/2010 MinutesMeridian City Council
March 2, 2010
Page 33 of 76
De Weerd: Thank you for coming this evening to the neighbors. We appreciate your
support and your involvement.
Bird: They don't have to leave.
De Weerd: You know, you can leave, but you can stay. We are really entertaining.
Bird: We are going to be here a little while longer.
D. Public Hearing: TE 10-002 Emerson Park by Kuna Victory, LLC
Located at 2910 & 3030 S. Meridian Road Request for an 18-
month Time Extension to obtain the City Engineer's signature
on the Final Plat
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and move on to Item 8-D. It's a public hearing on TE
10-002. I will ask for staff comments at this time.
Wafters: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application
before you is a time extension request on Emerson Park. The site is located at 2910
and 3030 South Meridian Road, northeast of the south Meridian Road, East Victory
Road intersection. The applicant is requesting approval of an 18 month time extension
for the preliminary plat in order to obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat for
Emerson Park. The plat consists of 34 building lots and one common lot on 17.84 acres
of land, zoned C-G. Excuse me just a moment. My computer is doing funny things
again. Well, anyway. A little background on this project. An 18 month time extension
was approved by the planning director in December of 2009. A condition of the time
extension required submittal of a letter of credit for a proportionate share of the Black
Cat sewer trunk line construction as originally required with this development along the
project's frontage on Victory Road. The letter of credit was required to be submitted by
January 31st, 2010, in order for the extension to remain valid. The applicant failed to do
so and, consequently, the extension has expired. The reason the applicant allowed the
previous time extension to expire is because they disagreed with the condition requiring
the letter of credit and failed to request City Council review of the director's decision
within the allowed time period. The applicant requests an 18 month time extension to
obtain the city engineer's signature on the final plat, be approved without the
requirement for the letter of credit. Staff recommends approval of the time extension
request with the conditions of approval in Exhibit B of the staff report, including the
condition of approval for the applicant to submit the letter of credit. Staff will stand for
any questions that Council may have at this time.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions at this point?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Meridian City Council
March 2, 2010
Page 34 of 76
De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to comment? Good evening. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Oaas: Eric Oaas. 519 West Front, Boise.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Oaas: Madam Mayor and Members of the City Council. Eric Oaas here representing
the development entity of Kuna Victory, LLC, which is an entity owned by both -- by two
parties. Our company and another development partner of ours. Before I get started I
was really actually a little disappointed. I thought all these people were here to show
their support for us, but I guess not. The -- we really appreciate you listening to us
tonight and -- and at least being willing to hear us out. We appreciate stafFs report and
guess I would say this, that to begin with we -- we all are painfully aware of the sort of
the economic development issues that we are all facing today and our -- I guess our
conversation here with you tonight is really sort of -- it's sort of structured with that
thought in mind, that we are all -- we are all sort of in this together and we are trying to
do -- trying to do our part to keep economic growth happening and jobs happening and
property rolls -- tax rolls increasing for the city and that's the spirit that we are talking to
you about tonight. In our -- we have had some discussions with our development
partner on this -- on our application or our request for you tonight and we very much
appreciate staff recommending at least a 30 day period between now and when our
actual preplat application would expire. We have had some preliminary discussions
with our -- with our partner and because of the fact that -- that we cannot -- we don't
have any firm demand for any -- any economic development projects or development
activities I should say on this site, we are struggling really directly with the -- or the
requirement to put up 150 -- approximately 150,000 dollar letter of credit, because there
just isn't any -- there just isn't any activity to really support that and we just can't -- we
just -- realistically we haven't made a final decision and we will over the course of the
next 30 days. But it's highly unlikely that we would -- that we would -- or could put up
that 150 K LLC or LOC, because there just isn't the activity there to justify it. Now -- so,
from our perspective there is really -- there is really two decisions to -- to be made
tonight. One is that either -- you know, either the City Council would -- you know, would
support these -- the staff recommendation to -- to require us to put this up and in the
event that happens, as I said within the next 30 days we will make a final decision, but
in all likelihood we will have to let that preplat application expire. We want -- as sort of
alternative -- and we haven't talked to staff about this, so we are -- we are sort of -- sort
of stepping out in new ground here, but as an alternative we want to -- to sort of
propose another way of looking at this and that proposal would be that we would be
asking the city to, essentially, work with us on that 150 -- roughly 150 K letter of credit
and sort of take some risk with -- with us, if you will. And by that I mean we -- we would
-- we would be willing to -- to sort of take a step forward, step out on the limb, if you will,
and even though the demand isn't there for any tenants in that development, that we
would be willing to step forward, construct the building, and we think that -- we believe
that if we took that step, that, you know, quite likely there would be some tenants and
businesses that we could -- you know, that we could provide some opportunities for.
Meridian City Council
March 2, 2010
Page 35 of 76
Today, as you know, businesses are just not willing to take that step forward and -- you
know, and take a real risk and buy and build a new building, because they just don't
know what's going to happen. If we, on the other hand, give them -- give them a
building to potentially move into, it makes it an awful lot easier. We, however -- we,
however, can't -- we can't take that entire risk on our own and pay the 150 K -- roughly
the 150 K in -- in off-site improvement costs and what we would like to -- the city to do is
to -- one of two things. That if -- if, in fact, we -- we have to walk away from the preplat
and the city needs to move forward with the sewer anyway, that maybe there is another
way of looking at that 150 K that the city potentially could have to come up with and one
way to -- one way to -- one of two things is what we would propose. That -- that the city
defer the 150 K into five equal payments over the next five years. So, 30 -- 30 K per
year over the next five years, that way we are not having to carry that additional burden
today or the city would defer that 150 K to the end of the development -- or the
reimbursement agreement that we currently have in place and if the amount that we
would have been reimbursed doesn't cover that 150 K, we would pick up the difference,
pay it at that time, as well as any accrued interest. So -- so, at the end of the day what
we are saying is we are asking you to work with us and allow us to sort of -- to take a
risk -- take a risk, step forward, put up a 10,000 square foot building that's going to
increase the city's tax rolls and we think -- we think that it will attract -- attract some
businesses, but at the end of the day we are just -- we are just not able to -- to do both,
to take the risk on the building and to pay that 150 -- roughly the 150 K in off-site
improvement costs. So, it's a -- I know it's throwing a lot at you without your having
opportunity to see this ahead of time, but -- but at the end of the day we are -- you
know, we are just -- we are looking for you to partner with us, rather than just flat out
require us to pay this 150 K today. So, I will stand open to answer any questions. I'm
sure it's a little confusing.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Eric, did I -- maybe it went over my head, but, then, it isn't hard to do, but you're
asking for 30 days to work with the staff and, then, have a decision made, is that what
I'm understanding? Either that or we partner with you now.
Oaas: Yeah. Councilman Bird, the staff has recommended that -- that we would have
30 days in which to put up this 150 K letter of credit and that's -- that's, essentially, the
recommendation that they are making to you tonight. What I'm saying is that rather
than making that decision, we are asking you to, essentially, look at that -- to look at that
150 K in a different way and allow us to defer that over a -- over a five year period or to
defer it at the end of the reimbursement period and whatever we would not have been
reimbursed we would make up the difference at that time with any accrued interest.
Does that make sense?
Meridian City Council
March 2, 2010
Page 36 of 76
De Weerd: Mr. Oaas, you haven't talked with staff about these options --
Oaas: No.
De Weerd: It would -- I think what Mr. Bird was getting at is if -- if these options you're
looking at them to consider probably needs to be vetted through staff first and, then,
come back without the -- the expiration to extend that until staff can come back with a
recommendation and we can hear it again then. I don't know, Council, it seems like that
would be probably the best way to look at this. We can continue this public hearing, ask
you to work with staff, and, then, come back at a date certain.
Bird: I would agree on that. But I think we got to include our Public Works staff, as well
as Planning and Zoning, because that, as we all know, is a very important area out
there and I certainly want their input. And how long do you suppose we do it --
De Weerd: Pete, do you have --
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, yeah, I concur with both comments made
tonight. Obviously, given the newness of this information, Public Works hasn't had a
chance to analyze it and make an informed recommendation for you since we had
originally recommended that in approving any time extension that the letter of credit be
submitted in 30 days, I guess it would seem reasonable that if we continue this perhaps
to your first hearing next month that we give time for Public Works to analyze the
proposal and, then, formulate a recommendation back to Council if that's your pleasure.
De Weerd: So, that would be April 6th. Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Not to confuse the issue, but I would add a couple other things to consider in
what you would work out during a continued period. If I am understanding right, this
was already expired; is that correct?
Friedman: Yes and no. What happened was -- Madam Mayor, Council Members,
Council Member Zaremba, the -- when the extension was applied for and it was granted
it was a staff level extension and it had the letter of credit requirement on there, that the
applicant did not choose to request the Council review in a timely manner, so it may
have expired, but what we said is if you can get -- because what we really need and
would like to get before Council and they said, fine, if you can get an application for a
time extension in before the date that had for that to expire, which I believe was January
31st, then, in essence, we have kept it alive by making that request for the extension, so
since the second extension application was filed in a timely manner, it pretty much has
stopped the clock and given us all time to -- time for us to make our staff report and
recommendation and now it seems like you will continue the hearing, everything is
Meridian City Council
March 2, 2010
Page 37 of 76
pretty much on hold until we can formulate a recommendation back to you and you can
act on the time extension, whether conditionally or not.
Zaremba: Follow up. Yes. I think I understood and you reconfirmed how I thought
about it. So, that leads me to question -- if, eventually, an extension is approved is that,
then, 18 months from the day we approve it or 18 months from the original expiration?
Friedman: It would be 18 months from the day you approved it.
De Weerd: That's consistent with what we have -- yeah.
Zaremba: All right. I'm just not asking in this particular application, but all applications.
De Weerd: Right.
Zaremba: Okay.
Friedman: Well, I may have spoken too hastily on that. I would need to research that
for you. We can have that for you at the next meeting.
Zaremba: Okay.
De Weerd: I think that is what we have done in the past. Follow up?
Zaremba: Well, it's a separate question and, actually, it's just a comment, I guess.
would be happy if there was a way that we could work something out, but I'm very
protective of the reason behind the letter of credit and there is a couple other similar
things, performance completion bonds and just giving us cash to hold -- I mean there is
several different instruments by which we make sure that we don't -- that we and our
taxpayers don't get left holding the bag for something that we were promised and -- not
that I doubt you, but you sell the property and the next guy says, well, I don't want to do
this and if we find a way around the letters of credits and the other things, we have a lot
of people out here that are in the same situation that are going to come back to us and
say this is expensive to do and, like I say, I don't have a problem if there is a way we
can work out something that works, but we do need to protect the citizens for the reason
that this requirement exists in the first place and not open up a can of worms with
everybody else who is your competitor, we need to be fair to everybody. As long as we
can meet those requirements I'm happy to listen.
Oaas: Councilman Zaremba, I think the -- it seems -- and correct me if I'm wrong, but I
think it used to be a surety or a letter of credit only; is that correct?
Freckleton: Sorry. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Oaas. The city used to
be able to accept bonds or letters of credit as an instrument for surety. We several
years ago -- I think it was with the UDC changes that we removed the bond as an option
for the reasons that they are very difficult to exercise. Essentially with a bond you're
Meridian City Council
March 2, 2010
Page 38 of 76
dealing with an underwriter and the underwriter makes the decision or determination
whether they are going to cash the bond. They are problematic for that reason. And so
in the UDC the letter of credit is the -- is the instrument for surety.
Oaas: And that's --
Freckleton: And cash. Cash works, too.
Oaas: Well, yeah, they are really kind of the same, but thank you.
De Weerd: Well, Council, if it sounds feasible to continue this discussion, certainly
would -- it looks like Mr. Oaas and staff are ready for those discussions. I would
entertain a motion to do so.
Zaremba: And, Madam Mayor, just a feeling. Does this need to be continued for a
month or would March 23rd -- how much pressure are we putting on people to work this
out?
Friedman: Since Public Works will be primarily involved with this and they have
indicated that March 23rd seems to be a reasonable day, we could continue it to March
23rd.
Zaremba: Okay. Madam Mayor, I move we --
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba, just let me take a look at -- I think the 23rd --
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Is that where we moved our discussion? Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: I was going to say, that's the night we were going to have a discussion about the
solid waste collection and it may be a fairly lengthy meeting.
De Weerd: Yeah. I would suggest April 6th.
Nary: And also your purchasing policy is back on there, too.
Zaremba: All right. That works forme. The 6th, is that what you said?
De Weerd: Yes.
Zaremba: Okay. I'm not flipping my calendar fast enough. All right. So, I move that we
continue public hearing TE 10-002 on Emerson Park to our regularly scheduled meeting
of April 6, 2010.
Hoaglun: Second.
Meridian City Council
March 2, 2010
Page 39 of 76
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue this item. All those in favor say
aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Oaas: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Councilmen.
E. Continued from February 23, 2010 MFP 09-004 Southridge
Subdivision No. 1 by Linder 109, LLC, Meridian Library District
and Joint School District No. 2 Located at Southwest Corner of
West Overland Road and South Linder Road Request for
Modification to the Street Sections Shown on the Final Plat to
Include the Addition of Detached Sidewalks Along Spanish
Sun and Spanish Fork Streets; and Modification to the
Roadway Improvements Along the South Boundary of Phase 1
to Reduce the Amount of Asphalt and Concrete Curb
De Weerd: Okay. Under Item 8-E is a continued -- was continued from February 23rd.
MFP 09-004. I will ask for staff comments at this time.
Wafters: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the next application before you is a
modification to the approved final plat for Southridge Subdivision No. 1. The property is
located on the southwest corner of West Overland Road and South Linder Road. Some
highlights of the request and staff recommendation following. The applicants request
approval to construct the northern half street section of Heavy Timber Drive, plus an
additional 12 feet with an interim gravel shoulder, instead of the full street section as
shown on the construction drawing approved with the final plat. As you can see on the
overhead here, this is the approved street section for Heavy Timber. It was a condition
of approval that the subdivision improvements shown on the construction drawings be
constructed with development of the final plat. Therefore, staff does not recommend
approval of the requested modification that would allow for only a portion of the street
section to be constructed at this time. The second modification, the applicant requests
approval to construct five foot wide detached sidewalks with eight foot wide landscape
parkways along South Spanish Sun Way and South Spanish Fork Way, instead of ten
foot wide attached sidewalks as previously approved. Staff is recommending approval
of this proposal for the following reasons: The first, the proposed design is consistent
with the previously approved street section for Spanish Fork Way south of American
Fork Drive. And, second, the UDC requires a minimum of five foot wide detached
sidewalks with eight foot wide landscaped parkways along collector streets as proposed
by the applicant. So, staff is supportive of this modification to the final plat. And this is
the proposed street section on the overhead here. The next request by the applicant is
a clarification that the following items are required to be completed with the first phase
of development as depicted on the master plan. Included in the development