HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 07-16Meridian City Council Regular Meeting July 16,
2002
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:35 P.M.,
Tuesday, July 16, 2002, by Mayor Robert D. Corrie.
Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Cherie
McCandless and William Nary.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Brad Watson, Mike Worley, Will
Berg, Ken Bowers, Tom Kuntz, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
__X Tammy de Weerd _ X__ Bill Nary
__X Cherie McCandless __X Keith Bird
__X Mayor Robert Corrie
Corrie: Okay. I will open the Meridian City Council regular meeting agenda for Tuesday,
July the 16th, 2002, at 6:30 p.m. I want to thank everyone for being here this evening.
Let's have roll call, please, Mr. Clerk.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda:
Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Item No. 2 is Adoption of the Agenda.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we adopt the agenda as noted, with the addition in the Consent
Agenda of Item M, which is the retail agreement, the -- yeah, Retail West, the
agreement with Retail West on the Ten Mile Exchange Survey -- Interchange Survey.
And on the Consent Agenda we'd like to pull Item E and make it 5-E and Item J, make it
5-J for discussion. With that I'd move that we adopt the agenda.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to adopt the agenda with the noted
changes. Is there any further discussion? Then all those in favor say aye. All ayes.
Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 3: Consent Agenda:
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 2 of 89
A. Approve minutes from June 24, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting:
B. Approve minutes from July 2, 2002 City Council Special Meeting:
C. Approve minutes from July 2, 2002 City Council Regular Meeting:
D. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval:
AZ 02-008 Request for annexation and zoning of 5 acres from RUT to L-
O zones for the proposed LDS Stake Center by Lombard Conrad
Architects – 2515 W. Ustick Road:
E. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: CUP 02-011
Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a sports bar with pool tables and
big screen TV’s in an O-T zone for Blumacs Sports Bar by Michael
McGuinness – 706 East First Street (N. Main Street):
F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 02-015
Request for a Conditional Use Permit to renovate existing office and
Convention Center into a private Jr./ Sr. High School for Cole Valley
Christian Church by Jeffrey L. King – 200 East Carlton Avenue:
G. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: VAR 02-008
Request for a Variance to add one additional sign on a large medical clinic
and radiology center building by Imaging Center Radiologists -- 2929
East Magic View Drive:
H. Development Agreement: AZ 01-027 Request for annexation and
zoning of 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Baldwin Park
Subdivision by Capital Development Co. – ¼ mile south of McMillan
Road, east side of Linder Road:
I. Beer and Liquor License Applications by John C. Box for Bill N-
Lynn’s Place, 229 West Franklin Road:
J. Will Serve Letter – W. H. Moore property:
K. White Drain Sewer Trunk Permanent and Temporary
Easement -- Quenzer property:
L. Resolution No. 02-379: Corporate Resolution for Use of Facsimile
Signatures:
Corrie: Next we have the Consent Agenda and we have Items E and J has been pulled
and to be put on 5-E and J. Anything further on the Consent Agenda? Oh, that's right.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 3 of 89
And the addition of the Retail West on the interchange -- Ten Mile Interchange Study
Report.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as amended.
Nary: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as
amended. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: All ayes. Motion to approve the Consent Agenda with the changes is approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 4: Department Reports
1. Planning and Zoning Department – Shari Stiles
A. Update on Preparation of Final Comprehensive
Plan / Resolution:
Corrie: Item 4 is Department Reports. Planning and Zoning Department, Shari Stiles,
update on preparation of final Comprehensive Plan and slash Resolution.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I just wanted to let you know where we were on the
Comprehensive Plan. We had hoped to have it up for a resolution tonight. We did get
the copy back from our consultant with changes made. However, there are additional
changes that need to be made, clean up typos, and problems with some of the layout of
the document. We will be meeting with them next week to make the final changes and
would like to ask if your meeting on the 30th, if we could have a special meeting prior to
the meeting that I guess you would have with the Planning and Zoning Commission on
the 30th, since it is the fifth Tuesday. Not going to have any?
Corrie: We already decided on the 2nd.
Stiles: Are you not going to have any meeting on Tuesday?
Corrie: No. We will have it -- the next meeting will be August the 6th.
Stiles: Is that when you -- you want to hold it off that long?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 4 of 89
Corrie: It's up to the Council if they want to have a special meeting for that week, we
could do that.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Shari, how long a meeting are we going to have? I don't want to hold it off any
longer than that.
Stiles: As far as I know it's a formality to adopt the -- what you have already approved
through the resolution. The attorney's office said they would like to have a complete
final document as it is going to be printed for -- from now on. So we just don't have that
available yet.
Bird: Could we have it the 23rd ahead of time, say 6:00 o'clock?
Stiles: We won't have it ready that soon. We are not meeting the --
Bird: The 3rd will be the soonest you could have it?
Stiles: To have it printed, because we are meeting around the middle -- either
Wednesday or Thursday next week with the consultant and then we will have to have it
printed.
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I have no problem with that, as long as everybody else --
Corrie: Okay. Who cannot be here?
Nary: I won't be here on the 30th. I mean I'd like to be here for it, but I mean I don't want
to wait until --
Bird: We need all of us to be here.
McCandless: It's on a Monday?
Corrie: No. On Tuesday. The fifth Tuesday. If we want all of us to be here, which I think
would be a very good idea, I -- and I'm like Keith, I would hate to put it off, but I think the
6th would have to be that.
Nary: Okay.
Bird: Can everybody be here?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 5 of 89
Berg: Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, if it's just a formality and that's what we
are talking about, you have a meeting that you have to attend on the 29th, that Monday,
at 8:30 at Compass on the North Meridian Planning Area, that maybe you could hold a
meeting either -- you could maybe hold it at 8:00 o'clock here on the formality of
approving a final draft; correct?
Bird: Mr. Nary I won't be here.
Nary: I won't be here. I mean I hate to wait, but I mean --
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: If the changes are not material, if they are just typographical and pictures, I
don't understand why we could not pass the resolution, unless the attorney needs to
have those typos fixed. Is that what's holding it up?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, what we wanted was the resolution to
have attached to it the plan that's adopted and so that in the city clerk's resolution file
that's the document that's attached to the resolution. Now just a typographical error
change, that's not a change of substance. If there are issues with regard to the layout,
that may be -- I mean it's however you want us to do it.
Corrie: Okay. I'll just make an executive decision here and go to the 6th of August and
we can all be here.
Stiles: Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. I will need a motion for that, Council, to table that until the 6th of August.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we table the final Comprehensive Plan resolution until August 6,
2002.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any other discussion? All those in
favor of tabled to the 6th of August say aye. Opposed no. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda)
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 6 of 89
E. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: CUP 02-011
Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a sports bar with pool tables and
big screen TV’s in an O-T zone for Blumacs Sports Bar by Michael
McGuinness – 706 East First Street (N. Main Street):
Corrie: Item No. 5 is the items moved from the Consent Agenda. We will take up E first,
Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for denial of a Conditional Use Permit for a
sports bar with pool tables and big screen TV in an O-T zone for Blumacs Sports Bar,
706 East First Street, North Main.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I had requested to have this item pulled. I simply wanted to bring before the
Council to delete on the Findings of Fact Item 7. What the Findings say is another
alcoholic beverage of this type in the Old Town area would not help foster a family
friendly atmosphere for the downtown area. I know that was part of our discussion and
it was a lot of our discussion. My only concern is in the Findings it says we don't really
have an ordinance that supports what that means, what family friendly means, and I
don't -- certainly don't want to give an opening to a district judge to find some reason to
overturn, plus there is plenty of other reasons in our findings to support that decision, so
I wanted to ask if we should simply delete No. 7 to tighten up the Findings a little bit to
make it so that it's less attachable, I guess, by another party.
Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion? Okay. If you want to make that a motion that we
can --
Nary: I would, therefore, then, move to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law with the amendment of the deletion of Item 7 of the findings for the denial of the
Blumacs Sports Bar.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing
none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: All ayes. Motion is carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
J. Will Serve Letter – W. H. Moore property:
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 7 of 89
Corrie: The next item is Item J. This is a Will Serve letter by W. H. Moore property. Mrs.
de Weerd.
De Weerd: This, as well as I believe three other properties, were items that we
discussed that needed changing on our land use map for our new Comprehensive Plan.
We had adjusted that land use map to reflect the changes that have been discussed at
Council and then we added it back in with the impression that these needed to come in
front of us for application. In looking at some of this correspondence, it suggests that
two of these are being built with -- at Ada County without those applications. I just
wondered what is the process we want to follow with this and -- with changing our area
of impact. Do we want them to apply and do a Public Hearing there? Is the Public
Hearing satisfactory just at Ada County? Do we need to -- if we are going to meet on
this application, can we not clean up the rest of the properties with Yorgason, the one
south of the freeway -- I can't remember whose that is. And Cavin? You know, what is
the process we want to follow here?
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: This Will Serve is for property that's in our impact area, except for --
De Weerd: That one piece.
Bird: -- just one little piece up there and that's the -- and I am under the understanding
that these others have been -- and I don't know what -- I'm like you, Tammy, I don't
know what the procedure is to get these transferred from Meridian's impact area to
Boise -- from Boise to Meridian. This is strictly a letter that says when we get the sewer
to you that we will let you hook up to it and then once we get within annexation area,
you will annex. This don't have any -- this letter here don't have anything to say about
the other being between Boise's impact area and our impact area.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess I just opened up the question of procedure and how we were to
going deal with the other ones. Also in this letter it suggests that because they have
agreed to annex as a condition of receiving city water and sewer, do they -- are we
asking them to annex first? Are we going to help them find an annexation route? Or are
we going to have the service out there without annexation and then we lose the
application fees, the right to inspect, and some of those issues that we had talked I
think over a year ago as those were major concerns. So this is the first we have really
had an opportunity to discuss it, so I just wanted to have these items on the table, so
we can follow a protocol for the other applications that could be coming if they are
required to apply.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 8 of 89
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We have already -- the South Slough we have extended it out there and once we
get it out there I for one have no problem serving the property if they give us a letter of
intent to annex when it's available to annexation. We do get the use of the hook-up fees
and the monthly and I agree with you, we don't get the building fees and stuff like that,
but it helps pay for the -- by the hook-up fees and stuff it helps pay for us to get the
sewer and water out there. So I, for one, am in favor of signing these agreements. We
have already signed these with a couple of previous subdivisions that we have had to
run up lift stations and stuff to serve up north of that area. So I for one am in favor of
doing that and I was a year ago when we discussed it.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: As to the new annexation -- well, I don't know if it's necessary anyway, because
under the new annexation law once they do hook to the service we can annex it
anyway. So I don't know if we need to put -- just to make it more muddled, I had a
conversation with Don Hensley from Boise city public works department and he had
also offered that -- maybe to answer Councilwoman de Weerd's question that there
probably is -- does need to be some discussion with the public works staff or us and the
public works staff of Boise to maybe resolve some of those issues that are along the
borders between two cities, that serviceability and which should properly be in Boise's
impact area and which in Meridian and vice-versa and I haven't had a chance to tell
you, Gary, but he had mentioned that to me that that really made sense to him and I
said I'd bring it to you to address that at some point.
Smith: Thank you.
Corrie: Well, I think what we need to do is we have to have our Council approval,
Boise's council approval for the exchange of the area of impact and also the Ada
County Commissioners. So I was trying to set up a meeting the 22nd of this month
between the Ada County Commissioners, us, and Boise and make that change that we
want to do that for that property up at -- Yorgason's property and also for this property
and then if you wanted to do the north -- the northeast corner of Ustick and Eagle you
could do that, but I would imagine the time that this gets all done the annexation will
probably be there before they would even want to build anyway. We will have the sewer
and water available by that time as well. So we can service it, I'm just concerned that I
don't want to get into a match with United Water where they can and then they get it
and they are not going to relinquish that at all, so --
De Weerd: Does Shari have something?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 9 of 89
Corrie: Are you waving at me, Shari?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, there is a process they need to go through. Boise city
does it through a zoning ordinance amendment; Cavin has already submitted that
request to Boise city for the northeast corner of Ustick and Eagle. He's also submitted
to us a miscellaneous application for the impact area change on his property, so we are
running through public hearings on both sides and then would need to meet with Ada
county once that's an official action by the Council.
Corrie: So we would need a Public Hearing on Yorgason and also W. H. Moore's
request, Shari, or can we --
Stiles: That's what we are telling the applicants in order to be consistent at least with the
surrounding areas and I think they should go through a process with the Public Hearing
and not just make it a meeting where you sit down with them and make some decision
out of the public forum.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: This has -- this letter has nothing to do with -- this letter has absolutely nothing to
do with whether it's in the Boise or Meridian impact. The biggest share of this land is in
the Meridian impact area. This is a letter to ask us to serve once we get the sewer and
water out there, which we will have out next year. That's all that is. The other process
we have to go through a different -- it's a different process altogether. This is a Will
Serve letter.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: So we have two different issues on the table right now. One is the Will Serve
letter, which I don't have an issue on, but I do agree with Councilman Nary that our
public works staff for Meridian and Boise should get together and find out who can best
serve these properties. That doesn't influence this one, but I do think that's necessary
before we meet with the county and the city of Boise, so we kind of have our ducks in a
row and on the second issue, we have four pieces of property that were affected on our
land use map, three of them that would be transferred over to Boise city's area of
impact and one which is Winston Moore's that would be transferred into the City of
Meridian. Those, as I understand it, need to go through an application process both
from Boise and Meridian and the county, so they will have three separate public
hearings.
Stiles: I'm not aware that Ada county does a Public Hearing, but --
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 10 of 89
De Weerd: Okay. So they need a Public Hearing in Boise and one in Meridian. As long
as we are consistent and we ask that of all the applicants, then that's how we should
proceed, but I just wanted to be clear that we do have a process and that staff should
get together to discuss the advantages and make sure our staff and Boise staff are all
on the same page as well as to how those properties could best be served. Okay. Well,
with that I will move that we approve the Will Serve letter for the northwest corner of
Ustick and Eagle Road through Winston Moore's property and ask the Mayor to update
his letter and the date from July 12th to July 17th and send it out.
Bird: I second that, but I'd like to add one thing. We need an agreement with W. H.
Moore Company regarding annexation when it becomes available.
De Weerd: With the new law I don't think --
Corrie: I'm sorry. Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, just a couple things. One thing to
remember is what the law is today may not be the law at the same time next year.
Nary: That's true.
Nichols: And since we are providing service outside the city limits, we can condition that
service on agreement to annex when contiguous and if that agreement is made and
entered into and recorded, it binds the property and I think at that point, even if the law
changes, we still have an argument that any change in the law cannot interfere with the
terms of the contract. The contract would still be enforceable and annexation would still
apply.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I would move to include that in my motion. Second agrees?
Bird: Second agrees. I believe that's the thing that we have out with those other two,
isn't it?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I would also ask that staff works on finding that annexation route,
so maybe in the timing we can actually do the annex and service all at the same time
and I don't know what the hold ups are. I'm sure there is a couple of challenges out
there, but if we can assist the applicant and make sure that we do this all at the same
time, we'd sure clear up some problems. And I'm sure you're trying to do that anyway,
Gary.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 11 of 89
Corrie: I will be happy to explain that. Okay. Anything else? Okay. Motion before the
Council. Any additions? Okay. Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Swear in two New Police Officers – Meridian Police Department:
Corrie: At this time we have the swearing in of two new police officers for the Meridian
Police Department and then followed by ICRMP awards for two other officers. So Chief.
Worley: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council. It's always a pleasure to bring on a couple
new officers and I'd like to have the two guys come up here right now and we will talk
about them just a little bit. First in the back here, Matt Shriver is originally from Texas,
but he spent most of his adult life in Idaho, graduated from Capital High School and
then went onto Boise State University as a criminal justice major, also spent six years in
the Marine Corps Reserve where he received the select Marine Corps reserve metal
and the Navy achievement metal. He, in August of 2001, completed his studies at Boise
State with a bachelor of criminal justice administration. Most recently he was working for
Sears, but he's now a member of the Boise -- or Meridian Police Department. Old habits
getting there, folks. Thirty-two years of saying that, you know it -- but we are very happy
to have Matt on board with Meridian. Brian Caldwell is originally from southern
California. After high school in Canoga Park started out to be a music teacher, was
enlisted in the Army National Guard in southern California as a combat engineer and
during the 1994 earthquakes his unit was activated to help with the crowd control and
that sort of thing with -- as a result of the earthquake. He spent some time working with
law enforcement agencies in the Los Angeles area and became hooked on law
enforcement as a career from that. Was accepted to Washington State University where
he changed his major to criminal justice and also did an internship with the Department
of Corrections and Probation and Parole in the Lewiston office and upon graduation he
was hired as a parole and probation officer in Lewiston where he's been employed up to
the time that he came to work for us and, again, we are very happy to have Brian on
board. So if I can ask the Mayor to come foreword and administer the oath. Oh, excuse
me, Mayor. One second. I forgot something. Let me give each one of you a chance to
introduce the people that you have here to support you. Matt.
Shriver: I brought my fiancee Mary and my stepfather Art, my mom Angela, and my
sister Joni.
Worley: Thank you. Welcome. Brian.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 12 of 89
Caldwell: I have my father-in-law Michael Brand and his wife Betsy and my father-in-
law's sister Sheila, but my wife is still up in Lewiston trying to gain employment down
here, so --
Worley: Okay. Welcome to you, too. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Thank you, Chief.
(Officers sworn.)
Corrie: Congratulations.
Worley: Thank you very much. Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, citizens of Meridian,
I'd like to present Police Officer Matt Shriver and Police Officer Brian Caldwell.
Item 7: Awards from ICRMP for two officers:
Worley: Mr. Mayor, if we can just move onto the next agenda item, I'd like Lieutenant
John Overton and Sergeant Wayne Fukes to come forward. These two gentlemen
recently attended a course put on by ICRMP that provides insurance coverage to most
municipalities for the state of Idaho and I'd like to ask the city clerk to come down and
make a presentation from that and explain a little bit of what this entails.
Berg: Thank you, Chief. It is my honor and privilege, because I am the risk manager for
the City of Meridian. ICRMP, our insurance carrier, provides a training program for risk
management and it isn't very often that they have police officers that attend this and go
through the whole course of personnel, contracts, policy, and loss control and liability
insurance. So it is important that not just one person in the city knows about all these
things, but quite a few, and our police department is a very high risk, exposed
department, not because of them, but because what they do. And so it is my honor to
present Wayne Fukes and John Overton and I want to read this certificate of
accomplishment. Presented to Wayne Fukes and John Overton who successfully
completed the ICRMP risk management program. This comprehensive training program
completed on May 2nd, 2002, is an in-depth study focusing upon the role of public
entity risk managers in Idaho. The program emphasizes human resource responsibility,
property and casualty insurance, loss control, claims handling, tort reform, Idaho State
statutes and contract insurance law. So it is an honor and I'm sure the chief really
appreciates you both completing this. Thank you.
Item 8: Introduction of Cindy Hill – Meridian Police Department:
Worley: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, the next agenda item was an introduction
of a new employee to the Meridian Police Department. I don't see her here tonight, but
let me just talk just a little bit about her. We have been in the process for about the last
year of hiring an evidence technician. As the Council is aware and for the citizens'
information, one of the things that we have tried to do in the past year is turn over some
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 13 of 89
jobs which have been being performed by police officers, but can be performed by non-
sworn personnel, turn those over to those non-sworn people to put police officers back
out on the street where they are providing direct service to the public. We have been in
the process for about the last year of attempting to hire an evidence technician. It's a
fairly specialized area even from the technician standpoint in that this cataloging and
keeping track of all the evidence that comes into a police department can be a daunting
task, because of court rules every piece of evidence that comes in, every movement of
it has to be tracked, everybody who touches it, has any contact with it, that has to be
logged and tracked for what we call the chain of custody. So it is a somewhat complex
process. In the process of one not completely successful attempt to bring some people
on board and find a candidate, we wound up re-advertising and going with a full-time
position and that gave us some benefits to look at some people who weren't necessarily
interested in the original part-time position. During this process we also became aware
that some other cities in the area had used some of their evidence people, not only in
the cataloging of evidence, but also as crime scene investigators, to actually go out and
process crime scenes, something that is, again, very often done by police officers, but
doesn't have to be. And in this process we were very fortunate to have apply and to
select Cindy Hill. Cindy has been in the area of criminal forensics for a little over 15
years. She at one time was the lead technician for the Boise city lab and most recently
was working for the state of Idaho. She will be starting next week and Cindy, in addition
to knowing quite a bit about the process of chain of custody, is arguably one of the best,
if not the best fingerprint forensics people in the state of Idaho. She -- at the budget
presentation this morning we showed a little video clip of her work being featured on the
Discovery Channel's New Detectives show for her work in a fingerprint comparison that
led to the murder conviction of Ben Cusmachev for killing his wife about five years. So
with that I just wanted to bring that to the Council's and city's attention that we are very
fortunate to get the caliber of people that we are getting now in the Meridian Police
Department. Thank you, Mayor and Council.
Item 9: Tabled from July 2, 2002: Discussion of water and sewer latecomer
agreements with Sundance Company for Silverstone Subdivision
project:
Corrie: Thank you, Chief. Okay. The next is Item No. 9, which is tabled from the July
2nd, 2002, meeting to discuss the water and sewer latecomer agreements with
Sundance Company for Silverstone Subdivision project. Brad, do you want to kind of
give us a rundown here and what we have on that.
Watson: Thank you, Mayor and Council Members. As you recall from two weeks ago, I
had sent a memo to you listing five issues that needed some guidance from Council. I
think we only good through about one and a half of those that night. The first one that
we seemed to talk about at length was the eligible cost on the water and sewer
latecomer request from Sundance Company. I did request in writing from them a more
detailed explanation of what a couple of those costs were and they responded also in
writing. I put a copy of that correspondence in your box this afternoon. It's not on your
computer, if that's what you're looking for. Essentially, the discussion revolves around
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 14 of 89
their claims for a construction manager and general conditions. Sundance's
correspondence lists what they include in the general conditions and construction
manager categories. Do you have that in front of you or do I need to run through that?
Corrie: That's the one I got this afternoon?
Watson: Yes.
Corrie: Yes. I have it. Does everybody else? Yeah.
Watson: Again, my question originally was whether those should be included in eligible
reimbursement costs. The only reason it came up is we have never done that before.
Most of the projects that we have done in the past were not of the magnitude of this
one. It appears from looking at this correspondence that -- from what I could tell, those
items are all needed during the course of a sewer and water construction project. Are
there any other questions or things I can clarify on that first issue?
Corrie: Any questions from the Council? Okay. Doesn't seem to be right now. Is it your
recommendation that we stay the way we have been doing it before, Brad? Or you want
to discuss this a little more later?
Watson: Well -- and I guess I should have a recommendation and all I can say is these
are the things that ordinarily would be included in a construction project of this
magnitude. The ordinance, if I can refer back to the ordinance, which I'm not sure if you
have the packet from two weeks ago, the only issue is the interpretation of the
ordinance and whether I'm getting sideways with that if I include it in the reimbursement
agreement.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: You know, Brad, I guess my recollection of the discussion and looking at the
ordinance, I mean I don't think what they are requesting is adverse to what the
ordinance says. I think it is just an interpretation issue. I guess my thought from two
weeks ago was I think what either you or Gary or maybe both of you said, it's just
something that's never actually been addressed before, it hasn't been brought up by
someone else, so it isn't that we are changing -- I think our concern always is are they
consistent with everybody and this is just something that we have never asked to be
reimbursed for before. I don't see any reason that -- at least in part of the discussion,
maybe at the end of the day in your discussions with them or while we are getting this
agreement hammered out, you're able to work out some of these issues, but I don't
think it's adverse to this, at least my reading of this -- or I don't think you would be
adverse in including it. I recognize what your testimony was the last time and what your
statement was, is that what your concern was, again, sending that back to the other
people that have to hook onto that, but if it's justified and you can show and they show it
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 15 of 89
to you that it's reasonable in light of the nature of the project, I think that's what you
would tell anybody else that has to sign a latecomers agreement, that was what the
cost of the project was, this is reasonable, it's in line with our ordinance, we agreed to it,
you want to hook onto the line, that's the way it is. You got to have water, that's the way
it goes. I will pay for it. So I guess that would be my view.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: How many other properties were going to be affected by this or participating
in it?
Watson: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor and Council Members, there are -- it
depends on what you look at, the sewer or the water, because they have different
service areas. There are dozens of property owners.
De Weerd: And have any of them developed or in the process of developing?
Watson: There are two projects in the process of developing, Sutherland Farms and El
Dorado.
De Weerd: Okay. And these property owners are being kept in the loop of this process
and what's being recommended and that sort of thing, so this won't be a surprise to
them as well?
Watson: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor and Council, one of the property owners is
very aware of what's going on and has, in fact, from what I understand, reached a side
agreement with the Sundance Company. But ordinarily in the course of preparing a
latecomer, because there are dozens and dozens of properties, we do not coordinate
with them or we don't contact them and tell them this is what we are working on, come
in and look at it if you want. There is no Public Hearing notice requirement, so no. I
think the second property owner is probably aware that there is a latecomer fee that will
be charged, because they couldn't even begin to develop a project until the sewer was
constructed, but as to participating and review of that, they haven't.
De Weerd: Can those property owners participate at this point so that helps minimize
any cost affected by this agreement would be?
Watson: I suppose that they can. My attitude on that is that because there are normally
dozens and dozens of property owners, if we select -- are selective in who we choose
to contact and involve in the process, then those that are never contacted -- it's just a
consistency thing.
De Weerd: Right.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 16 of 89
Watson: If there was a Public Hearing notice requirement, then it would make it easier, I
guess.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I believe that when we discussed this before, that the agreement had all already
been agreed upon by one of the -- by the second developer in or had looked it over and
was agreeable to that. If I remember, that was the letter we received, Brad, if I
remember right.
Watson: Council Member Bird, Mayor and Council Members, there was a letter from an
adjacent developer who I agreed -- who I believe agreed, at least in principle, to being
subject to the latecomer fee and what I have in front of me doesn't list a specific
amount. Maybe I don't have the right one.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I think this return letter here and -- in fact, I agree with you, Brad, I think -- you
know, you definitely did what we had asked you to go back and get, if there was a cost
and make sure it wasn't marked up, but I'm like Councilman Nary, that this is something
we probably haven't done, but I don't think that our ordinance tells us exactly -- it's so
clear that it tells us that it can't be done this way and I understand where the developer
is coming from, I mean he is out this money and I think he's entitled to return on his
money, he put the money up to get the sewer out there.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I'm no engineer or anything, but it appears to me that, really, the burden isn't on
you, other than your department ends up being the first line people to deal with it, but
the agreement has to be approved by us. The next person in who wants to dispute
whether or not that was reasonable -- and I think what we would be relying on is what
you're going to tell us, like in this issue about the construction manager, that's a
reasonable cost for construction. We have built this, that's what it cost us to do it, we
would have had to hire somebody, maybe we would have got a couple more low bids,
because we are the city, but this is reasonable in light of the market of what you can do
or what it would cost to build that project if we would have done it or they did it. Now
they as asking to be reimbursed for it. The next person that comes in and says I don't
want to pay that, they can come and talk to us and we can say, look, we already made
that decision when we agreed to that latecomers, those people put that line in
essentially for us, rather than us forking out the money for it they did, we agreed it was
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 17 of 89
reasonable, you want to be hooked to our water and sewer, that's the price you have to
pay. Period. And then, really, this isn't -- although, like I said, I know you folks get the
first call, but ultimately it's us. So, you know, we have to approve whatever the final
agreement is. If you can't come to an agreement, I guess if that eventually comes to an
impasse of some sort with Sundance, I guess you bring it back here and you make your
pitch and they can make theirs and we decide this is what we are going to do. But I
think that's probably the easiest way to go forward is really it's our ultimate call in
approving it and our ultimate call in telling the next party, tough luck, Charlie, pay it or
you can't do it, if that's what you want, you have to pay the price.
Corrie: Okay.
Watson: Unless there are more, I will prepare an agreement that includes these costs
and bring it back.
Corrie: Thank you. Agree, Council?
Bird: I agree.
Corrie: All right. You have got your marching orders. Do you want to --
Watson: That's fine. There are four other issues.
Corrie: Oh, I'm sorry. There are. I'm sorry.
Watson: I wish that was --
Corrie: I'm sorry. I did take all four at one time. So go ahead.
Watson: The second one is interest costs -- the construction loan interest cost from the
time that was initiated through September 1st of this year projecting out. Again, the
question on my part is whether this is allowed under the ordinance of a sewer
ordinance, I think it's item number three, a reimbursement agreement may provide for
interest to be paid to the sewer user. As I summarized two weeks ago, ordinarily this
has been interpreted to mean that the latecomer fee per ERU is increased each year
October 1st, according to either the prime rate or some other agreed upon percentage.
Sundance's interpretation of this is that the construction loan interest cost are eligible.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Brad, if we were to have to borrow money to put in a sewer and we don't get it
free, it's interest on the project, that's part of the cost of the project, isn't it?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 18 of 89
Watson: Councilman Bird, I would certainly consider it a project cost. That's not a
question on my part, it's just whether the ordinance allows us to do that and if it does
allow us to do that, then I'm going to apply it consistently to every other agreement that
comes after this.
Bird: Mr. Nichols has --
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, it's my opinion it was referred to in the
ordinance as interest after the latecomer agreement is entered into, because the
agreement is potential up to a ten year agreement and the previous interest issues in
the other agreements are so that the present dollar cost with some interest factor down
the road to someone that hooks up in the year nine pays present value plus interest.
That does not mean that the interest cost isn't a reimbursable cost, just I would read this
portion of the ordinance as saying that's interest on top of whatever number you arrive
at, however you arrive at it. That would be my interpretation of the ordinance. So, again,
the ordinance doesn't say you can't include interest cost, they approve the cost,
approve that part of their expansion of the system, then if the Council chooses to, it can
be included. It could be that no one's asked before.
Watson: Unless I hear otherwise, I'll go ahead and include this as an eligible
reimbursement cost. Okay.
De Weerd: Is that correct, Brad? They are only asking for the interest during
construction only or is it interest from the time they start construction until the end of the
ten years that you're allowed to collect or --
Watson: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor and Council, it's both. They include the
interest on their construction loan as their starting principal, plus each year that per
ERU would escalate.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I guess the only issue I would have -- and I think I agree more with Mr. Nichols,
but one of the things the provision says they can't be reimbursed more than a hundred
percent of what it cost them. The interest is something else and I think Mr. Nichols'
interpretation is probably the most conservative and yet it still benefits the builder to a
degree and may not -- maybe not necessarily as much as Silverstone wanted, but it is
benefiting them. If they build it today and you don't hook up for eight years, you still
have to pay whatever that fee we determined it would cost to hook up, plus the interest
for the eight years you didn't hook up, because you weren't a part of it. Isn't that what
you said? Is that right?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 19 of 89
Nichols: Councilman Nary, Mayor and Members of the Council, my view is if you choose
you can take the interest cost through the end of construction, include it as a
reimbursable cost, and then on top of that have a reasonable rate of interest, so that
down the road someone who pays is on the same footing -- in other words, he gets
back his cost, because if they were to build today and hook up today, he would be
made whole today and if he waited until year eight, then there is some interest --
forgone interest on that reimbursement, because he didn't have it to invest or do
something else with it.
Nary: That's what I just -- okay.
Watson: I think I understand. Proceed that way. The third item is the administration cost
provided for in the ordinance. It provides for a ten percent administrative fee to be
retained by the city for handling the latecomer agreement over the ten-year period.
Traditionally, it has been taken out of the principal. In other words, on a 500,000 dollar
latecomer agreement, if that was all paid back in the year one, the city would retain
50,000 dollars of it, the develop would get 450,000. That's the way it's been done on
every agreement that we have so far. Sundance's interpretation is that we calculate the
fee based on 550,000 dollars, they are made whole, they get back their entire principal,
the city tacks on ten percent to each latecomer. Again, I think this is an interpretation
thing and whatever we decide to do on this one is what I'll end up doing on all of them.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Although we haven't done it that way, I certainly think you can read the ordinance
to say that. It doesn't really tell us that it can't be an additional cost passed on, because,
otherwise, we are asking the builder to build something to the city's benefit, wait
potentially ten years to get all your money back, and at the end you're still out ten
percent, plus whatever cost -- I mean part of this is to serve their property, so part of it
they have to pay for. So I understand where they are coming from and I don't see any --
I don't think there is anything wrong with doing it that way.
Bird: I don't either.
Watson: Okay. Okay. Should I move on or --
Nary: Yes.
Watson: Okay.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council?
Corrie: Mr. Nichols.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 20 of 89
Nichols: Just a point for future reference. If you're going to add this fee on top, it would
be my recommendation that we change the ordinance and come up with some kind of a
fee that the departments calculate out that they incur as they collect these fees,
because when we take it out of the reimbursement, that's part of our contract and so
that's part of the agreement with the developer that they have made an agreed to live
with that. When we impose the fee upon somebody that's hooking up, we need to make
sure that it's not a tax and is actually a fee that has a relationship to the actual services
that's being provided.
Nary: I think that's great. That's a great rational that makes sense and that's fair to
everybody. Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: How soon could that be done? Because we have at least two properties that
are in the process of being in that situation as a latecomers fee. Will we be able to
collect a ten percent administrative fee without that new language?
Nichols: Councilwoman de Weerd, Mayor, Members of the Council, the ordinance
simply says the city may charge and may receive. It doesn't say that we have to. So as
far as these that are ready to hook up now and pay now and there may not be actually
that much to the administrative expense, but the departments that have to do this, the
finance department, can certainly give some kind of a cost figure of how much time is
spent doing this and based upon a reasonable reimbursement fee we could factor it in
per ERU and have it assessed that way. As far as changing the ordinance, it wouldn't
take too much to change the ordinance, we just simply take this provision, delete
sentence four, or change part of it to say may receive an administrative fee to be set by
resolution of the Council.
De Weerd: Is this also something we could put in the development agreement that has
not come through yet?
Watson: Yes.
De Weerd: It sounds like, Brad, you have some quick work to be done. Okay.
Watson: The next -- the fourth issue is the water latecomer fee. The only reason I'm
bringing this to you is that the cost for this water line extension was very high when you
compare it to the service area, which is relatively small. If you'll look at table three, it's a
couple -- well, do you all have the information from two weeks ago? Table three in there
it shows the water latecomer fee at different -- under different scenarios. I think what we
are looking at now, since we have gotten through the first three issues, is the bottom
right figure of 1,162 dollars per ERU. This is an extremely high latecomer fee per ERU.
I'm not sure that I have a question or even a recommendation on this one. I guess I just
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 21 of 89
want you to be aware that when and if an agreement came before you, and Sundance
is saying it is really high -- normally they are in the two to three hundred dollar range.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: Brad, perhaps we can revisit this after you have had time to kind of look at it
further, because this needs to be solved with the latecomers on the sewer or can this be
done separately?
Watson: This is the water latecomer agreement. The first three I think is enough to get
their sewer latecomer agreement signed by --
De Weerd: Well, we can visit this when you have a recommendation.
Watson: The fifth one -- the fifth issue has to do with the well site and, again, trying to
wrap this into a latecomers agreement is very difficult. We have never put a well into a
latecomers agreement. What they are asking for is reimbursement of the area that we
are using for our pump house and this is turning out to be kind of like sewer easements,
we never used to have to pay for one, but evidently we are in an era when we do that.
They are quoting us a discounted price of five dollars per square foot on 20,840 square
feet, for a total land price of 104,240 dollars. If I put this into the water latecomers
agreement it's going to escalate up to the point of adding 17,000 dollars or so to every
house they build in that area.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: Brad, what was in the development agreement? Usually well sites are
addressed in that. Were they not required to provide that?
Watson: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor and Council Members, I don't know that
they were required to provide it. Way back in the conceptual stages of this project I think
we agreed in principle or in concept at the time that we would try to wrap this land cost
into a latecomer's agreement, not knowing what the discounted price would be once we
got it. Once we tried to push that into a latecomers agreement, like I said, it just
becomes huge. Some of the options are spreading it out over a somewhat ill-defined
service area and the reason I say that is a well doesn't have a -- doesn't have a
boundary on it. It serves all over the place, depending on which wells are on. If we
brought something like that to you, it would be different than anything you have seen
before, but maybe Mr. Nichols needs to speak to this -- but somewhat -- because of
these boundary lines on a latecomer agreement. We can do a lot of things. The long
and short of it is they want something in writing that guarantees that they are going to
get paid back for this land.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 22 of 89
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary:
Nary: What I did hear you say, Brad, is we didn't require that they provide this well site
to provide water for their own property as a condition of approval? Like we would -- isn't
that normally the course for most of a residential subdivision and the like, that we have
well houses on --
Watson: Council Member Nary, Mayor and Council Members, I think it was required that
they provide that. What I don't know for sure is in the development agreement, was -- at
what compensation or -- if any. Normally, I think the developers of residential subs
where most of our wells are just donate it. I guess kind of a related question is if you do
do something that makes this a formal agreement, are appraisals needed? Do we need
to do something in order to execute such a document or agreement? I'd hate to work
something out, get it all the way to you, and then at the last minute be told that I should
have gotten an appraisal and I could have taken care of this outside the Council
meeting. The last few days it's been kind of hectic.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Brad, this five dollars a square foot, is it -- what -- like a Touchmark or areas like
that or what have we been paying for it?
Watson: Council Member Bird, Mayor and Council Members, like I said earlier, we
haven't paid for a well site up to this point. We are in negotiations with the Touchmark
people to purchase that well site, too.
Bird: Is this in line with what they are asking?
Watson: Gary says that they are asking for eight, but that is an existing well, the hole
was already in the ground, so I guess there is some value in that. It sounds like from the
discussion maybe I need to bring two, three, four specific proposals to you.
De Weerd: Yes.
Watson: A menu that you can select from and I will look at number four as well. I think I
have got enough direction on the first three to at least get started on the sewer
latecomer agreement fairly quickly.
Corrie: Okay.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 23 of 89
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess to bring something back, would Silverstone be subject to the well lot
portion of the latecomer's fee as well or are they asking to be excluded from that when
you start figuring total cost?
Watson: If we brought a water latecomer well land latecomer agreement to you, it would
have to have some benefit area, some service area. What I would probably do is take
Silverstone's proportionate share out and then divide the remaining cost over that
benefit area. So the short answer is, no, they wouldn't be, but they wouldn't be getting a
full whatever it was, 105,000 dollars back either, because their proportionate share
would be taken out of the reimbursable amount.
De Weerd: Okay.
Corrie: Okay. Brad.
Watson: Thank you very much.
Item 10: Ordinance No. : AZ 02-003 Request for
annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to R-8 zones for proposed
Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett – south of West Cherry Lane
and south of North Summertree Way:
Corrie: Looks like you have your work cut out for you here. All right. Item No. 10 is
Ordinance No. 02-964, a request for annexation and zoning of 3.84 acres from R-1 to
R-8 zones for proposed Amberstone Subdivision by Jim Jewett, South of West Cherry
Lane and south of North Summertree Way. Mr. Clerk, if you would read Ordinance No.
02-964 by title only at this point.
Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 02-964, an
Ordinance finding that said land to be known as Amberstone Subdivision located south
of West Cherry Lane and south of North Summertree Way and which lies contiguous
and adjacent to the city limits of the city of Meridian, County of Ada, state of Idaho, and
finding that the owner James Jewett has made a request for annexation in writing to the
Council designated -- said land be annexed to the City of Meridian, zoning designated
Medium Density Residential District (R-8) and declaring that said land by proper legal
description as described below be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of
Idaho, repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof, in conflict herewith
and directing the city engineer to add said property to the official maps of the City of
Meridian, Idaho, and directing the clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of
the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County Recorder,
Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho
pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 24 of 89
Corrie: You have heard the reading of the ordinance by title only. Is there anyone from
the audience that would like to have it read in its entirety? Hearing none, Council, any
further discussions? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on Ordinance No. 02-964.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: I move that we approve the request for annexation and zoning of 3.84
acres for the proposed Amberstone Subdivision with suspension of rules.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 02-964 with
suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 11: Ordinance No. : AZ 02-009 Request for
annexation and zoning of 1.00 acre from RUT to L-O zones for the
proposed Meridian Fire Department Locust Grove Substation property
by the City of Meridian – 3545 North Locust Grove Road:
Corrie: Item No. 11 is a request for annexation and zoning of one acre from RUT to L-O
zones for the proposed Meridian Fire Department Locust Grove Substation property by
the City of Meridian, 3545 North Locust Grove. If the clerk would read that by title only,
please.
Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 02-965. An
Ordinance finding that certain land to be known as the Meridian Fire Station
Department -- excuse me -- Meridian Fire Department Locust Grove Substation located
at 3545 North Locust Grove Road and which lies contiguous or adjacent to the limits of
the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho and finding that the owner City of
Meridian, Meridian Rural Fire Protection District has made a request or annexation in
writing to the Council and that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian and zoning
designated Limited Office District (L-O) and declaring that said land by proper legal
description as described below be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of
Idaho, and repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof, in conflict
herewith and directing the city engineer to add said property to the official maps of the
City of Meridian, Idaho, and directing the clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified
copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 25 of 89
Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and the State Tax Commission of the State
of Idaho pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section 63-2215.
Corrie: You have heard the reading of Ordinance No. 02-965 by title only. Is there
anyone from the public that would like to have it read in its entirety? Hearing none,
Council, if there is no discussion I'll entertain a motion on the ordinance.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I think on my last one I asked Mr. Berg to read all of the ordinance, but tonight I'll
just go ahead move that we approve 02-965, request for annexation and zoning of one
acre from RUT to L-O zones for the proposed Meridian Fire Department Locust Grove
Substation property by the City of Meridian, 3545 North Locust Grove Road and
pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902 with suspension of the rules.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Most has been made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 02-965,
Meridian Fire Department Locust Grove Substation. Any further discussion? Hearing
none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 12: Ordinance No. : AZ 01-027 Request for
annexation and zoning of 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed
Baldwin Park Subdivision by Capital Development Co. – ¼ mile south of
McMillan Road, east side of Linder Road:
Corrie: Item No. 12, Ordinance No. 02-966. This is a request for annexation and zoning
of 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for the proposed Baldwin Park Subdivision by
Capital Development, a quarter mile south of McMillan Road on the east side of Linder
Road. Mr. Clerk, if you will read that Ordinance No. 02-966 by title only, please.
Berg: Thank you, Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 02-966. An
Ordinance finding that certain land owned by J. Ramon and Marilyn Yorgason to be
known as Baldwin Park Subdivision located a quarter mile south of McMillan Road, east
of Linder Road and which lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of
Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, and finding that the owner has made a request
for annexation writing to the Council and that said land be annexed to the City of
Meridian and zoning designated Medium Density Residential District (R-8) and
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 26 of 89
declaring that said land by proper legal description as described below be a part of the
City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, repealing all ordinances, resolutions,
orders, or parts thereof, in conflict herewith and directing the city engineer to add said
property to the official maps of City of Meridian, Idaho, and directing the clerk of the City
of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map of the area to be annexed
with the Ada County Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and the State Tax
Commission of the State of Idaho pursuant to Idaho Code Section 50-223 and Section
63-2215.
Corrie: Okay. You have heard the reading of Ordinance No. 02-966 by title only. Is there
anyone that would like to have it read in its entirety? Hearing none, I'll entertain a
motion on Ordinance No. 02-966.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 02-966, request for annexation
and zoning of 77.9 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Baldwin Park
Subdivision with suspension of rules.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 02-966
with suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 13: Tabled from June 18, 2002: FP 02-005 Request for Final Plat approval
of 22 building lots and one other lot on 5.81 acres in an R-40 zone for
Cooper Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development LLC – on East
Wilson Lane, east of South Locust Grove, south of East Fairview Avenue:
Corrie: Item No. 13 is tabled from June 18th, 2002. This is a request for a final plat
approval of 22 building lots and one other lot on 5.81 acres in an R-40 zone for Cooper
Canyon Subdivision by Wildwood Development, LLC, on East Wilson Lane, east of
South Locust Grove and south of East Fairview Avenue. Staff comments.
Shari: Mr. Mayor and Council, this -- the final plat was tabled last time because the
development agreement and ordinance had not been approved. Those were approved
on July 2nd, 2002. We have received no response from the applicant opposing any of
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 27 of 89
the comments from staff or agencies. We would recommend approval of this final plat
with all staff and agency conditions.
Corrie: Okay. Any questions from Council to staff?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Is there any -- is the final plat representative here -- have any questions? Okay.
I'll entertain a motion, then, for the request for final plat.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for final plat of 22 building lots and one
other lot on 5.18 acres in an R-40 zone by Cooper Canyon Subdivision, to include all
staff comments and ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law and Decision of Order.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the final request for final
plat for Cooper Canyon Subdivision. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call
vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14: FP 02-012: Request for Final Plat approval of 35 building lots and 7
other lots on 4.67 acres in an R-8 zone for Berkeley Square Subdivision
by Wardle and Associates -- 1025 North Ten Mile Road:
Corrie: Item No. 14 is a request for final plat approval of 35 building lots and 7 other lots
on 4.67 acres in an R-8 zone for Berkeley Square Subdivision by Wardle and
Associates, 1025 North Ten Mile Road. Staff comments.
Shari: Mr. Mayor and Council, we have made our comments on this application. The
applicant has expressed opposition to one condition, that would be Site Specific
Condition No. 11 in regard to the pressurized irrigation well development fee. They are
proposing a reduced fee due to the fact that the lots are smaller than the typical 8,000
square foot lot. They are asking for a reduction from 730 dollars per lot to 124 dollars
per lot. They are also basing their calculation on the irrigable land on the lots on a
proposal that the setback between buildings be completely gravel, so that would mean
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 28 of 89
the five feet that is adjacent to the building on each building would be gravel, no
landscaping within that area. I will let the Public Works Department address whether
they agree with the reduced fee.
Watson: Mayor and Council Members, I have met with the applicant and I think we have
come to an agreement on what an appropriate reduced well development fee per lot
should be. I think. We are okay. Is there any questions?
Corrie: You're okay with what they are suggesting?
Watson: Yes.
Corrie: Is what you're saying?
Watson: Yes. It's a 20 percent reduction -- or it's 80 percent down to 20 percent
reduction of the standard R-4 8,000 square foot home.
Corrie: Okay.
De Weerd: So you're okay with 124 dollars?
Watson: It works out to -- there are a couple other arithmetic things that are not quite
right in the staff comments. It works out to 150 dollars per lot.
Corrie: Anything else? Representative Wardle?
Wardle; Mr. Mayor, Council Members, my name is John Wardle. My address 50
Broadway Avenue in Boise. As Mr. Watson stated, the fee we have worked out with
them is 150 dollars per lot, so we agree with that as well and I will stand for any
questions if you have any. That was the only issue we had with the conditions that were
in the staff report.
Corrie: Okay. Any questions from Council? All right.
Wardle: Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion on the request for
final plat and the staff comments.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for final plat of 35 building lots and 7
other lots on 4.67 acres for the proposed R-8 zone of Berkeley Square Subdivision, to
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 29 of 89
include all staff comments with the reduced well development fee to 150 per lot and ask
the attorney to draw up Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote,
Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 15: FP 02-013: Request for Final Plat approval of 27 building lots and one
other lot on 10.29 acres in an R-4 zone for Vienna Woods Subdivision
No. 6 by Skyline Development Company – east of North Locust Grove
Road, north of East McMillan Road:
Corrie: Item No. 15 is a request for final plat approval of 27 building lots and one other
lot on 10.29 acres in an R-4 zone for Vienna Woods Subdivision No. 6 by Skyline
Development Company, east of North Locust Grove Road and north of East McMillan
Road. Staff?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is another phase of Vienna Woods that has been
developed in Ada County per our agreement with the Ada County Commissioners in
negotiating our area of impact. Planning and Zoning takes no issues with this project,
but asks that all of the staff comments -- that they comply with all staff comments on this
project.
Corrie: Is the applicant for Vienna Woods here? Name and address for the record.
Johnson: Mr. Mayor and Council, Tucker Johnson, Skyline Development, 10464 Gabriel
Court. Generally concur with the staff report. Just a couple housecleaning items that I
noticed once I was able to get the packet earlier today. As with the previous phases,
item one, need to insert the word applicable city ordinances. This is a county
subdivision, so not all city ordinances have jurisdiction in terms of, you know, how to
measure a lot width and things like that, but for the most part it won't affect anything
substantial. The final plat as you saw it and viewed it is exactly how we are building it.
Actually, in this case we actually deleted one lot, so we are actually loosening the
density at little bit. Item three, paragraph three, it talks about needing building permits.
Technically building -- you don't issue building permits, you issue the sewer and water
fees. So my recommendation there would be that the word building permits -- prior to
any water or sewer fees being accepted. That's how we worked it out with the Public
Works in terms of those issues. Those are current when the sewer and water fees are
paid to the city and that's what we talked about with the city, the department will not
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 30 of 89
accept those applications for sewer and water hook-up until X, Y and Z and then
requiring us to put it in. Item five of No. 2 -- this is my last comment. Strike the words
minimum square footage. That sounds -- it's a county subdivision and the county zoning
ordinance is the applicable ordinance and has per the previous phases, to be
consistent, that would be stricken as well from these comments. So it's pretty cut and
tried, pretty straight forward in terms of -- it's the sixth time around, so it's not real rocket
science, but those are the extent my comments or questions and I'll stand for any
questions if you have any.
Corrie: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Mr. Bird. Okay. Thank you.
Bird: Thank you.
Johnson: Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. I will entertain a motion for the request for final plat on the Vienna Woods
Subdivision.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for final plat approval for 27 building lots
and one other lot on 10.28 acres in an R-4 zone for Vienna Woods Subdivision No. 6, to
include the changes in number one, to insert the word applicable where needed;
number three, to replace building permits with water and sewer fees, and, number five,
to delete item number -- or item two and ask the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts
and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to approve the request for final plat
for Vienna Woods Subdivision No. 6 with those changes. Further discussion? Hearing
none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 16: FP 02-014 Request for Final Plat approval of 82 building lots and 6 other
lots on 24.21 acres in an R-8 zone for Heritage Commons Subdivision
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 31 of 89
by Brighton Corporation -- west side of North Locust Grove Road, south of
East McMillan Road:
Corrie: Item No. 16 is a request for final plat approval of 82 building lots and 6 other lots
on 24.21 acres in an R-8 zone for Heritage Commons Subdivision by Brighton
Corporation, west side of North Locust Grove Road, south of East McMillan Road. Staff
comments.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, you have the staff comments that are dated July 11th,
2002. We received this afternoon some comments from the applicant's representative
opposing some of the comments. I'll go through those -- each one of those items. Site
Specific Condition No. 6, the site specific condition does read correctly as worded. The
preliminary plat did show a 20 foot wide alleyway. There was a twelve foot wide paved
area shown for the alley, with a four foot wide gravel area shown in the street section for
the alleys on each side of the paving that would have been the -- that would have
equaled the 20 feet. We were trying to follow what was approved at the preliminary plat
stage and with some experience we had on previous applications in final plats, we were
sticking to make sure that the plat does conform with the approved preliminary plat. So
that would be up to Council whether they want to delete that requirement to stick to
what was approved with the preliminary plat, which was a twelve foot pavement with
four foot gravel on each side. It probably doesn't make a specific difference to the fire
department, as they can reach it from the streets. They would be able to reach it with
the streets. They wouldn't have more than 150 feet. They were concerned -- I talked
with Joe Silva this afternoon and he was concerned with the fact that a lot of fires could
be started in the back towards the alley with the garages in the back, but there is not a
fire code ordinance that would require those to be in keeping with the 20 foot wide
alleyway. We have not heard from Sanitary Service Company. We tried to get with them
this afternoon to see if they would have any problems with -- I think the main concern
they had was with the recycling trucks. So if that's deleted we would like that to be
specifically acted on by the Council how that should read. Site Specific No. 7, the -- I'm
not sure where the three lots came from. The preliminary plat, Block 24, did reflect 22
lots initially. They have shown three lots at the end with a slightly different orientation.
One of those lots was partially outside of the current phase line and as long as we can
keep track of what that is and what's deleted and there is no net increase, we will -- as
long as the changes don't get to the point where we are not able to track them and
when the application was submitted it said it would conform with the preliminary plat
and our condition stands as it reads, unless modified by the Council. The first one is not
considered significant if that remaining lot outside of the phase or the remaining portion
of the lot is not added somewhere else. Site Specific Condition No. 8 on Block 11, there
was a lot added after the approval of the preliminary plat. Had the applicant's
representative merely talked to the staff and explained what was going on prior to
submitting their application we probably could have worked that out, but it was
submitted indicating conformance with the preliminary plat and, in fact, it was not. They
have indicated that they will be removing a lot on the southern boundary in a future
phase. Site Specific No. 12 we had no issue with. We would like to add in the second
sentence -- they are proposing to add that the said plan shall be implemented per staff
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 32 of 89
approval prior to the issuance of any building permit, to add per staff approval between
the implemented and prior. Site Specific Condition No. 13, the planting landscaping
plan, it was staff's understanding at the -- during the preliminary plat that due to the fact
that there was -- it was an unknown when the frontage on Locust Grove would be
developed as far as the office uses and the exception area, that that frontage would be
landscaped at this time and also that the landscape plan would be submitted to show
that landscape plan. It may be years and we don't know that at this point how long it will
be before that develops, but we would like to have the landscaping constructed along
Locust Grove in accordance with city ordinance, even though it is a -- it's an off-site
improvement for this phase, we believe that the requirement was intended to mean that
they landscape it prior to any lot within the preliminary plat subdivision that was
approved and we would like that requirement to remain, so we would not recommend
approval of the request on Site Specific Condition No. 13. The applicant's
representative under that same item has indicated that he wanted to add in the event of
weather restrictions the applicant shall be allowed to bond for all the required common
area improvements, including landscaping, the community center, and gazebo prior to
final occupancy of any unit. In any case, improvements shall be made as weather
permits. This is not something that we had typically allowed to be done after occupancy
and I believe the development agreement that we typically enter into does state that all
improvements will be completed prior to occupancy and that would include the
community center and gazebo. We naturally had to make some concessions on
landscaping if you're in the middle of winter and it's obvious that you can't plant or even
in the hot weather in the summer there is times when it will severely stress the
plantings, then we have allowed them to have a reprieve on getting those planted until it
was prudent. So I'd like to -- for the Council to be able to address that, specifically the
Locust Grove landscaping and the common area improvements, which would include
the community center and the gazebo. Site Specific Condition No. 18 was simply a
clarification that would show the net density as 5.83 dwelling units per acre. General
Requirement No. 3 on the lighting, they want the ability to install some street light
fixtures. I think that the requirement can stand as is, because they will -- if they propose
alternative streetlights, they will take an agreement with the city at a later date, that they
-- the Council will be asked to approve alternative streetlights. General Requirement No.
9, four foot sidewalks. We did show the separated detached sidewalk to be four foot
wide sidewalks per our ordinance and per the Conditional Use Permit. We would still
ask if there are pathways in common areas going through pedestrian walkways, those
types of things between common areas, that they be built at the five foot wide
construction. Fire Department Requirement No. 7 regarding on-street parking, they
have asked that Requirement No. 7 be deleted and I believe with the Council's approval
of the preliminary plat, they did delete the fire department's requirement to have
restrictive parking on one side. The fire department does request that the alleys be
posted to -- that they have no parking and be shown as a fire lane. If they are to be two
way alleys, they would like that to be on each end of the alley or if it's one way, they
could be just on one end of the alley. With that we would ask Council to act on the
requested changes and to otherwise approve it with staff and agency conditions.
Corrie: Any questions of staff?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 33 of 89
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay. The developer?
Wardle: Good evening. For the record, John Wardle with Brighton Corporation, 12426
West Explorer Drive in Boise. If you will indulge me just for a second so I can pass out
some things. I appreciate staff's comments and I think I can limit my points just to a
couple of issues here. On Site Specific Condition No. 6 we have always intended to go
with twelve foot alleyways and the question is whether the right of way width needed to
be 16 feet or 20 feet. On another project being built the highway district required us to
do 20 feet. They since changed or have maybe interpreted their standard a little bit
different. Their requirement is 16 feet. So we have assumed the additional footage in
the lot. I think it's pretty straight forward. We are just asking ACHD's standard, which is
16 feet for the 12 foot alley to be accepted. I gave to you a couple of loose sheets --
there is actually three of them. This relates to Site Specific Condition No. 7 and Site
Specific Condition No. 8. In front of you there is what the final plat looks like today and
what it looked like with the preliminary plat. In Site Specific Condition No. 7 we simply
re-oriented a couple of lots, so we did end up with a little area back there which is kind
of a no-man's land. These lots front out on one road, instead of two facing that way and
one this way. So we re-oriented that. We don't see that as a significant change. It
doesn't increase the density, it's just simply a re-orientation of those two lots. On Site
Specific Condition No. 8, specifically Block 11, the final plat, which is Block 17 in the
final plat, we did add a lot here and this -- I did discuss this with the staff verbally before
it was submitted. I did submit a letter to staff clarifying what we had done here, as well
as the subsequent e-mail and other verbal conversation. We did add a lot here, but we
subtracted a lot from another area. We aren't trying to sneak in an additional lot here. I
did submit to you tonight a revised site plan that reflects these changes. When we were
in the Public Hearing we did hear from the neighbors to the southwest that were
concerned about the lots in there and we went back and looked at them and there were
a few small lots and what decided to do is pull one lot out of there, spread the difference
between the existing lots, we are talking specifically Block 21 here, and move that lot to
another area. We don't want to get penalized for adding a little additional width in one
area, we just want to be able to move that lot to another area. And graphically just
wanted to show you what he have done, that we are not adding a lot to this project, we
just wanted the flexibility to move one lot from the area -- like I said, move it to this final
plat in Block 11 final plat. In terms of temporary construction fencing, we will work with
staff and we are okay with their approval. On Site Specific Condition No. 13, relating to
the planting plan and landscaping plan, this is along Locust Grove and specifically the
areas where we will have an office development. We did intend to put those
improvements in at the beginning of the phase, we talked about the phase may be
accelerated, but since they are not part of this plat, we don't feel it's appropriate for us
to have to do that improvement at this time. I can perhaps refer to Mr. Turnbull to
address that a little more. We did not include those in the landscape plan, because they
are not part of the plat. Coming out of the Public Hearing as well it wasn't our
impression that we needed to provide that landscaping to begin with. As for that last
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 34 of 89
part of that condition that we added which is underlined, it said in the event of weather
restriction, that language is specifically from the approved preliminary plat and
Conditional Use Permit and the Public Hearing. I pulled that directly from what was
signed off by the city. There was much discussion at the Planning and Zoning and City
Council meeting regarding these improvements. There is a significant amount of
improvements that are going to occur with this project at the very beginning. You have
got a community center, which will include a swimming pool, a gazebo, we have a three
acre park site, we just need the ability, since it's late in the year, that these -- that if we
are not done in time that the certificate of occupancy occurs, that we be allowed to hold
those -- you will be allowed to hold those bonds as a guarantee and as weather
improves we will finish them off. That language is directly from what was approved by
the city. And as for the rest of those, I think Shari has done a really good job of
explaining our position. We don't have any additional comments. I will defer to Mr. David
Turnbull, he wants to address of few things at this point.
Turnbull: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. David Turnbull, Brighton
Corporation, 12426 West Explorer Drive. I think John has covered it pretty well. I think
Shari has covered it mostly. I guess I'll just point out that the nature of the preliminary --
the difference between a preliminary plat and a final plat, if we are not able to do some
fine tuning when we come to a final plat stage, I don't know what the purpose of the
preliminary or final plat stage is. This is very consistent with what's done in other areas,
specifically the areas that were mentioned up in here and, you know, it's just a
reconfiguration of lots and that's consistent with what happens between a final plat and
a preliminary plat. As for landscaping on Locust Grove Road, I want to point out that in
our Conditional Use Permit we were required to do in our first, phase this area right
here, this park and gazebo, which we are going to also point out that we are doing the
community center in this first phase. We are also going to be improving some other
areas here and I was totaling that up today and it's a million dollars worth of common
area improvements. So we are going well beyond the normal standard, we are
essentially putting all the common areas in, with the exception of Locust Grove frontage
and we will do that in a subsequent -- at a subsequent time in the near future. If you
wanted to make it concurrent with the second phase, I would be happy to do that. We
will probably even do of before then, but we just have a lot of work to do with this initial
phase. There is a lot of common areas that we are doing. So if you have any questions
for me I will be glad to answer them. Otherwise, I would appreciate that you consider
the letter of revisions which we don't think are substantial, but they are important, that
Mr. Wardle submitted to you this morning. Thank you.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: And I don't know if Mr. Turnbull or Mr. Wardle can answer this, but you didn't
address that there was some disagreement on the staff of the four foot sidewalk and the
on-street parking issue and I didn't know if you were --
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 35 of 89
Turnbull: What was the --
Nary: Well, Site Specific Condition No. 18, net density, the staff comment here is the
3.93 or the 3.39, but it's actually -- 3.39 is actually 5.83.
Turnbull: Well, what the staff requested was a setback -- typically as a developer when
you express density you take the overall boundary and count the number of lots and
just do a simple division. Staff requested that we go back through and I think what they
do is take out all the right of ways and all the streets, all the parks, and so forth and
that's a separate what they call a net density calculation. It's not something that we
typically use on the development side, but it's just -- so we provided that. They asked
for it, so we provided that figure. So there is no issue there at all with that, I don't think.
Nary: What about the issue on the parking in the alley where the -- the request from the
fire department was --
Turnbull: We are happy to sign both ends of the alley no parking, plus fire lane access.
Nary: Okay.
Corrie: And the pathway five foot width?
Turnbull: Well, we have no pathways. All of the sidewalks are detached. There will be
four foot sidewalks. I think what Shari's comment was was if there was a separate
pathway that it be five feet, but there are none, so I don't think it's an issue.
Corrie: Okay. Any other questions from Council? Thank you.
Turnbull: Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. Any discussion from Council before I entertain a motion for final plat?
Hearing none, I will entertain a motion on the final plat request.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I'm going to move the approval of final plat for FP 02-014, the final plat approval
for 82 building lots and 6 other lots on 24.21 acres in an R-8 zone for Heritage
Commons Subdivision by Brighton Corporation, pursuant to the staff comments of July
11th, as well as all the modifications requested by the developer dated in their staff
comments -- or their position statement of July 16, that Site Specific Condition No. 6,
the right-of-way width for alleys be deleted, that we believe that a 16 foot right of way is
ACHD's requirement, that Site Specific Condition No. 7 also be deleted, changing the
frontage, just a slight modification on the preliminary plat; that Site Specific Comment
No. 8, Block 11 -- let's see. That that also be deleted pursuant to the -- pursuant -- I'm
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 36 of 89
sorry. I guess I'll scoot up. That pursuant to the developer's position statement,
Condition No. 8, Block 11, be deleted. Construction fencing, I think they were both in
agreement; is that right? And number three, the planting and landscape plan -- I guess I
don't see the point -- I think bonding for it as required with the condition regarding
weather is adequate. I don't see this is a significant problem with the plan from what we
reviewed in the preliminary plat, but if you want to follow, I don't see a problem of
following it with the developer's request in that particular one. It appears we are all in
agreement on Condition 18, number three, of the general requirements; number 9 of
the general requirements, and the developer is in agreement that the staff requested
that they -- in general -- the fire department requirement number seven, that they sign
both ends of the alleys that there is no parking and they be designated fire lanes, so we
make sure the fire department will have access and I think that was all the comments
and for council to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and
Order.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded with the approval with conditions set forth
in the motion. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 17: TE 02-003 Request for Time Extension for filing the final plat for
Waltman Court Subdivision by John Goade -- south of Troutner
Business Park, between Waltman Lane and Ten Mile Road:
Corrie: Item No. 17 is a request for time extension for final plat for Waltman Court
Subdivision by John Goade, south of Troutner Business Park, between Waltman Lane
and Ten Mile Road. Staff.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the property that we hope to have Corporate
Drive extend through to eventually cross the Ten Mile Creek and be connected to Green
Head and also to Waltman Lane. The applicant has requested a time extension on this.
The one year filing time period for the final plat. Staff would recommend approval to July
3rd, 2003, with all existing conditions of approval.
Corrie: Okay. Is the Waltman Court Subdivision representative here tonight? Council, do
you have a request extending time -- I'll entertain a motion on the request.
Bird: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 37 of 89
Bird: I would move that we grant the request for a time extension for filing the final plat
by Waltman Court Subdivision by John Goade, south of Troutner Business Park,
between Waltman Lane and Ten Mile Road, until July 2nd, 2003, with staff conditions.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made to approve the request for time extension. Any
further discussion? Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. All ayes. Motion is approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 18: Public Hearing: VAR 02-007 Request for a Variance for reduced
setback from ten feet to five feet on the side of a home with a dormer on
the second level by KW Homes – Lot 28 Block 4 of Packard Estates No.
3, 2641 E. Bernice Dr.:
Corrie: Item 18, 19, and Item 20 are Public Hearings. This is -- no. I'm sorry. We got 18
yet to do. I'm sorry. This is a request for a variance for a reduced setback from ten feet
to five feet on the side of a home with a dormer on the second level by KW Homes, lot
28, Block 4 of Packard Estates No. 3, 2641 East Bernice Drive. At this time I will open
the Public Hearing on the request for a variance and staff comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this property came to our attention several months ago.
The property had been built not according to plans, which required a lot line adjustment
to meet the minimum setbacks. They had reached an agreement with the adjoining
property owner to do the lot line adjustment and apparently money exchanged hands,
but no document was ever recorded. Since that time both properties or one of the
properties had changed ownership, maybe both of them, I'm not sure, but,
nevertheless, there was never a lot line adjustment to -- so they could meet the
minimum setback requirement. If you can see, I believe it's on your computers, that
shows a picture of the existing home, the dormer on the -- that would create the two
stories was not shown on the approved plans. Staff does not feel this application meets
the requirements for a variance, as there are -- none of the conditions exist that would
warrant a variance. It was all due to conditions created by the applicant. So our request
is to deny this variance request. Thanks.
Corrie: Okay. Any questions for the staff at this point?
Bird: I have none right now.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 38 of 89
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mrs. Stiles, how did they get a certificate of occupancy?
Stiles: You have a letter from Daunt Whitman, the building official, in your packets.
Nary: On the computer packet?
Stiles: I think so. It's dated June 6. Daunt Whitman states the certificate of occupancy
for KW Homes was issued based on the information provided that the land purchase
had taken place.
Nary: Thank you. Sorry.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: So at that time Daunt didn't ask for proof of that when the occupancy was
granted?
Stiles: Not that I'm aware of, no.
Corrie: Any other questions? Okay. This is a Public Hearing. Do we have -- the
applicant can testify first. We have five minutes and then anybody that wants to testify
on the Public Hearing has three minutes to give their part and we will time and we will
cut you off at five and three minutes. Okay. Is the applicant here this evening? Raise
your right hand. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Wang: Yes.
Corrie: Name and address, please, for the record.
Wang: My name is Kent Wang. On the plan to approve for the dormer, on the plan
exactly got approved for it, the dormer, but --
Nary: Excuse me. Could you give your name and address again?
Wang: 2146 East Bernice Drive. I forgot to bring the floor plan here tonight. On the side
there is supposed to have a notice of ten feet, you know, setback for the property line,
but when they come to -- the framer do the framing and the truss -- the truss company
and when they deliver the truss, it had another five feet and I didn't know that until after
the framing done and I -- at that time, you know, I go and talk to the builder next door,
John Conner, to buy the five feet and to have the 10 feet to meet the city -- you know,
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 39 of 89
but at that time we exchange the check and I forgot to go down to the city to record it
and ask for -- to obtain a judgment and I make a mistake, you know, and it won't
happen again and I hope the city, you know, approve for my request. On the plan they
do have a five -- you know, a dormer on that plan.
Corrie: Okay. Any questions from Council?
Nary: Mr. Wang?
Wang: Yes.
Nary: I guess I saw our building inspector said it doesn't show, but it did show that on
the --
Wang: It did show on the blueprint, you know, the five by six dormer. No, one -- just half
that, but when the truss company build the truss they, you know, make a mistake or
another four feet for me, so I have enough room to make another, you know, full bath in
there, so I just add another full bath on the dormer, but --
Nary: When did you have the transaction to purchase that other property?
Wang: At sometime last year July, but I forgot about, you know, to record it, the time I
change the agreement with the builder John Conner, to by the five feet from him.
Nary: You gave -- according to this application, Mr. Wang, you gave this person money
to buy that five feet of property and now what you're telling us is you forgot to go get a
deed and record it?
Wang: Yes. Yes. And he never been recorded -- the deed to -- and I never go to record
the deed, too, so when the house -- I sold and he sold and then he -- you know
homeowner want the five feet back, just because I forgot to record, you know, the deed
for the five feet.
Nary: And are you suing him for that or --
Wang: I'm not suing him, no. Well, I can get the very end the five feet, you know, but --
okay for a dormer.
Nary: So you want us to fix this problem that you messed up?
Wang: Yes.
Nary: But you're not taking any action against the person you paid money to buy
property to fix the problem?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 40 of 89
Wang: I think they get a lawyer to sue my homeowner. I think by Idaho law, I'm not sure,
but my friend tell me there is no way I can have a chance to win the case.
Nary: Do you have a lawyer?
Wang: No. My homeowner have a lawyer.
Nary: So you're just -- you built this house?
Wang: Yeah.
Nary: And you sold it.
Wang: Sold it to them.
Nary: So now if we don't approve this, you got to go tear that out and rebuild their wall?
Wang: That's the last chance, but I hope with the dormer -- right now in the same
subdivision in Packard Estates have one house, same thing, have a dormer, five feet,
right near by the property line and they do get a. -- you know, get an occupancy permit
to -- I make mistake, you know, I should record that deed, but, you know, I just ask for
one chance. Won't happen again.
Corrie: Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone that would like to issue testimony on this
variance request? Okay. Hearing none, Council, any other questions for staff on the
record for the Public Hearing?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd; Gary or Shari, was this caught at the framing inspection or at final
inspection?
Stiles: The memo dated June 6 says it was caught at the framing inspection.
De Weerd: And the applicant was told at that time and that's when you purchased the
property and --
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 41 of 89
Nary: This other one that he's made reference to in Packard Estates Lot 2 Block 1, what
was that about? I don't know anything about it.
Stiles: I'm not aware of anything either.
Nary: Okay. I guess we haven't closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Wang, do you have
more information about this Packard Estates Lot 2 Block 1 variance you say that was
granted by the Council?
Wang: One of my realtor lady tell me that you have one in the middle of the phase that
they call middle the room for one house is only five feet setback with a dormer and
another thing on the final framing inspector, I never had any note about a dormer too
close to the property line on June 15 -- whatever she's gone on common -- if I could
catch onto June 16, you know, I do just move back to five feet, you know, take out the
soaking tub will still meet the -- you know, the property line. But I never have any on the
-- you know, note. The inspector never leave any note, you know, say too close to the
property line.
De Weerd: So you're saying it was the framing inspection that the note wasn't made?
Wang: Never had any not -- nothing note to me saying I need to meet the, you know,
ten feet.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Wang , so you're saying that -- what Mr. Whitman's telling us is that he told
you that this was too close and you -- stop. Is that what you just said?
Wang: When you tell me to stop -- the framing inspection.
Nary: No. I understand that. He told you, though, it was too close to the property line?
Wang: Nobody.
Nary: Okay. Why did you go buy the five feet from the neighbor?
Wang: Because somebody tell me I need to meet the five -- I need ten feet to meet the
dormer.
Nary: Who was that somebody?
Wang: Just, you know, some builder there in the subdivision. They said, oh, usually they
require ten feet to meet the -- you know --
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 42 of 89
Nary: So you never told Mr. Whitney that you would purchase that property, that
transaction was happening, and you would do a property line adjustment? You never
told him any of that?
Wang: I don't tell anybody at that time.
Nary: So he's lying in this letter to us? Is that what you want us to believe?
Wang: Okay. All I remember at that time is when I got frame inspection, right? I don't
get collection on the note. I know on the building -- on the blueprint they require ten
feet, but I'm -- my mistake if you go to -- the truss company deliver the truss -- this five
by -- six by ten, six by nine, that's to prove the six, but later on the truss company
deliver a truss that's six by ten -- six by nine, that's four feet exactly, you know, four feet
too long, you know.
Nary: So, Mr. Wang, instead of correcting the problem or requesting a variance, you
tempted to buy the property, though?
Wang: Correct.
Nary: All right.
Wang: Going back to July, yeah, I know I made a mistake that time, so I go and try to
get the five feet from the next door -- the next builder.
Nary: And you have told us you did that, you made that transaction?
Wang: Told the lady sometime August. I think August or September. I just can't
remember the time, because I had another job I worked for a restaurant or just get too
busy and forgot to record it.
Nary: And so -- well, you're saying you forgot to record it, that tells me you have a deed
that you can record. What you said before is you don't even have a deed.
Wang: That's right. That's why I tell to give the -- buy the money to build -- I gave him a
check.
Nary: And you got nothing.
Wang: And we record -- no, we just -- you know, I haven't change papers saying, you
know, his name and my name and he will to sell me the feet, you know, on the --
Nary: Okay. I just want to understand what you did. So you gave this guy money, you
got no deed for it, you didn't record it, but you framed the house up anyway and sold it?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 43 of 89
Wang: No. I framed it long before. You know, I frame it long before, you know, can't
wait.
Nary: And when you did that you knew that it was a violation of an ordinance.
Wang: Yes. No. After our framing done, everything done, I know and that's why I go
ahead and go buy the five feet. But after I buy five feet I forgot to take out to city and
record the deed and get a -- obtain a judgment.
Nary: And your only evidence that we had granted some variance of that before is a
realtor friend of yours told you some other house in Packard Estates had variance
granted?
Wang: I not sure granted or not, but I know that one house in there only have five feet
setback just like mine with a dormer.
Nary: Mr. Wang, realtors tell people all kinds of stuff and they are not always accurate.
You never checked, you never did anything, other than just take the person's word for
it?
Wang: I trust them.
Nary: It sounds like they trusted you to take care of the problem before you were here.
Bird: Mr. Wang? Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Wang, you say from the other builder you gave him a check and he gave you a
receipt stating that this property --
Wang: It's a realtor help us print out paper saying his name John, you know, Conner
Construction and he sell five feet of the property, you know, from Lot 27 to my name
Kent Wang, KW Home on the Lot 28, you know, five feet. So I buy him -- you know, I
sign the paper and I give him a check, but, you know, I just forgot to record it and get a
deed from him.
Bird: And you are KW Homes? You are a builder, then?
Wang: Yes. I have the home -- he allow me to -- everybody make mistake, you know. All
I ask is just one chance. It won't happen a second time in my life.
Corrie: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions before
we close the Public Hearing? If not, I'll entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor, so moved.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 44 of 89
Nary: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second to close the Public Hearing. Any further discussion?
All in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Corrie: Discussion?
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: If I understand all of Mr. Wang's testimony, he's a builder, he builds a house,
somebody told him that it was too close to the property line, our building inspector said
it wasn't him, he says it was somebody, he doesn't know who it was; he knew the
trusses were too long, he built it anyway, he framed it up anyway and bought property
from the next door neighbor for 2,650 dollars, which he never got a deed for, never
recorded it, and he doesn't do anything about that at all, sold the property to somebody
else, who now is stuck with this and he'd like us to fix it. I'm sorry, I don't see that we are
obligated to fix it. I think Mr. Wang made this from one chocolate mess to another and
he needs to fix it. I don't think we need to vary our ordinance because Mr. Wang
botched this from the get go on how this was done and now wants no responsibility for
it, except for us to vary our ordinance for his benefit. I just can't see what in the world
we would do to grant something like that. We have been very strict on granting the
variances and there is no reason to do this just because all we would be doing is
encouraging Mr. Wang or anybody else to do whatever they wanted, mess it up poorly,
and then and come say vary your ordinance to make it fit for me. But I'd like to see what
everyone else has to say.
Corrie: Further discussion?
Nary: Maybe someone has a different perspective than I have.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess I have a little different perspective. When you look at the integrity of
our ordinance on variances, I just can't see anything in here that meets the ordinance to
grant a variance and that's what it comes down to. I know this puts the homeowner is a
real awkward situation, but this is something that the builder is going to have to rectify
and he will have to find that builder and find a way to do it. It doesn't meet the intent of
our variance ordinance and that's what we have tried to consistently base our decisions
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 45 of 89
on. However, we empathize with the homeowner. We have to -- we have to go by our
ordinances, so --
Corrie: Any further discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for the request for variance.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: That's what I mean that Council Member de Weerd said. I would move that we
deny the request for variance for a reduced setback from ten feet to five feet on the side
of the home with a dormer on the second level by KW Homes on Lot 28, Block 4 of the
Packard Sub No. 3 and for our council to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law and Decision and Order to that effect.
Bird: Second.
McCandless: Second.
Corrie: Okay. I heard a couple seconds. Motion made and seconded. Any further
discussion? Role-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Yes, Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: Can we take a five minute break?
Corrie: Okay. Let's come back here at five minutes until nine and we will adjourn until
that time.
(Recess.)
RECONVENED At 9:01 P.M.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 46 of 89
Item 19: Public Hearing: AZ 02-004 Request for annexation and zoning of
127.74 acres from RUT to C-G, L-O and R-4 zones for proposed
Sutherland Farm by Sutherland Farms, Inc. – east of South Eagle Road
and north of East Victory Road:
Item 20: Public Hearing: PP 02-004 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 308
building lots and 30 other lots on 127.64 acres in proposed L-O, C-G and
R-4 zones for proposed Sutherland Farm by Sutherland Farm, Inc. – east
of South Eagle Road and East Victory Road:
Item 21: Public Hearing: CUP 02-005 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Unit Development for residential, commercial and office park
development for Sutherland Farm by Sutherland Farm, Inc. – east of
South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road:
Corrie: All right. I will reopen the City Council meeting. The Public Hearing next is three
public hearings on Sutherland Farms. One is for a request for annexation and zoning
and one is for the preliminary plat and the other is a request for a Conditional Use
Permit for the Planned Unit Development. I will open all three of the public hearings at
one time. Your testimony can be for all three or where ever you want to go on that. To
save some time I have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine signed up
against, I don't have any signed for, but we will do the same rules as before, since there
are three things here we will give the developer five minutes on each one if he needs it,
if they don't that's fine. You'll have three minutes on the for or against testimony. So at
this time I will open the Public Hearing on Items 19, 20, and 21 and staff comments first.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for property that's immediately south of the
Sundance -- or Silverstone Subdivision. It's east of Thunder -- or Thousand Springs
Subdivision. It extends to Victory on the south and the Ridenbaugh Canal is adjacent to
the a portion of it on the north. The property north of the Ridenbaugh Canal here is not
proposed as part of a Conditional Use Permit. What they are thinking is is that when
this 80 acres develops adjacent to Silverstone, that it's likely that this could be included
as part of that development or may be even included as part of the Silverstone
development at some point, but they don't have any immediate plans for this
commercial portion. They would propose a pathway along the Ridenbaugh Canal. We
do show in our existing Comprehensive Plan that the Ridenbaugh Canal is a multiple
use pathway. They are proposing office uses adjacent to Eagle Road in this area and
then they have some townhouse lots, alley loaded lots, in the -- this is a regular public
street I believe here adjacent to townhouse lots. They are showing some open space
here. A pond feature with open space. There are five acre lots or more adjacent to them
in the southern -- south of the property and also in this area. They have been -- they
have made changes since the initial application to try to address some of the neighbors'
concerns. They have submitted an agreement with the -- one of the property owners
adjacent to them, Mr. Gale Sasser -- I don't know if I'm saying that right. Do you have
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 47 of 89
that in your packets? Do you have that on your computer about the memorandum of
understanding? The applicant had agreed to a restriction for single story homes on Lots
12, 13, and 14 of Block 9 and Lots 5 and 6 of Block 9. The Planning and Zoning
Commission also recommended that an eight foot cedar fence be built along the entire
length of the western and northern property boundaries. I believe that's of the Sasser
property. I think that needs some explanation. Eight foot fences are prohibited in all
residential zones, so I guess if the Council wanted to approve that as part of the
Conditional Use Permit they should consider that specifically in the Conditional Use
Permit. And also agreed to extensive landscaping with a mixture of evergreen and
deciduous trees. That could be misinterpreted and maybe needs some additional
clarification of what consists of a dense mixture. It says they will work together to
develop a mutually acceptable landscape plan. The applicant has also agreed to an
increased rear setback of 30 feet for Lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of Block 9. This planned
development will provide a variety of housing types. The applicant has removed some
of the lots that were initially shown adjacent to the park area to create a better view
corridor and to make it more open and more accessible to all residents within the
subdivision. They propose a bridge over the Ridenbaugh Canal. Ada County Highway
District will require bonding for construction of that prior to signature on the final plat. I'm
not sure if their bonding requirements were for half of the cost of that or for three-fourths
of the cost of that, since they do have property to the north of the Ridenbaugh Canal.
Maybe Gary Lee would be able to answer that. They will need to provide -- and I
believe it's shown on the plat -- with the temporary turnarounds at these stubs that are
over 150 feet in length. They would be coming back in -- and Gary can correct me if I'm
wrong on that -- about the Conditional Use Permit. They have only come in with a
conceptual plan on the office uses at this time. They would need to come back at a later
date to do a detailed Conditional Use Permit for a planned development for the office
uses. However, the commercial uses north of the Ridenbaugh Canal are not proposed
to be part of the planned development and would be zoned separately. It's a little hard
to see. It's real faint on the scanned document that we have for the plat. They are
showing their landscape areas. They have extensive landscaping along what would be
a collector type roadway going through here. In the future they are proposing that the
road that has been extended in Silverstone would be extended north through this
property to extend to the other parcel on the east. The staff recognizes the effort that
the applicant's representative has made in trying to accommodate the neighbors. It's
always hard when you come up to rural residential subdivisions that are five acre lots
and provider urban densities, but it's just not cost effective to try to develop with sewer
and water with five acre lots in an urban area of impact. It's a waste of property. I can
empathize with the people that have those lots and I'm not sure how many of them are
here again tonight, but hopefully that this can be designed and constructed and have
adequate buffers between the densities that will be acceptable to the neighbors. We
would ask that this project be approved for annexation and zoning and preliminary plat
and Conditional Use Permit for a planned development with the staff and agency
conditions and the recommendations with the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Corrie: Okay. Any questions at this time?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 48 of 89
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay. Is the applicant here this evening? Is the testimony you're about to give
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Lee: Yes, it is.
Corrie: Name and address for the record, please.
Lee: My name is Gary Lee with JUB, 250 South Beachwood in Boise, representing the
applicant Sutherland Farms. I think Shari has done a pretty good job of explaining the
project. I just wanted to briefly go over some of the highlights of the application request.
The total plot here is 128 acres, roughly, and the C-G zone that we are requesting of
about 11 acres lies just north of the Ridenbaugh Canal as currently adjacent to existing
city limits and a C-G zone there for Silverstone. The rest of the site is proposed to be R-
4 with a PUD that's 116 acres. Of that PUD area we have about 97 acres in residential
and about 19 and a half acres of office and we threw in multi-family, because it's a little
unknown at this time as exactly what we are going to do with that area, but we wanted
to allow some uses in there for future expansion for L-O type uses and maybe some
multi-family. So any discussion with staff they thought a PUD might be the way to go
and then as part of our development agreement we will agree to conditional use
applications for that site that lies west of the residential area. In addition, we needed to
come up with some estimates for the traffic counts when we do our traffic analysis for a
presentation to ACHD and as part of our application under the CUP we developed a
preliminary site plan of that area and devised some building footprints, we are assuming
they are two story buildings, then we added parking stalls to that and then generated
our traffic counts, so you have kind of a base map to work with in the future and not
have a surprise on a traffic issue. Same thing applied to the commercial general use
area to the north. We did some preliminary layouts for that as well trying to come up
with some reasonable number. But both of those areas will come back to you for a
Conditional Use Permit. The landscaping we provided about 13.8 acres total, 12 and a
half -- or about 12.2 is part of the area that's not street buffer and counts about ten and
a half percent of the total size to meet the PUD requirement. As Shari mentioned, we
did enhance the site with a neighborhood park that's about four acres in size and
included the city's pathway along the Ridenbaugh Canal. Through the preliminary plat
review process there were some concessions made. We eliminated some lots near the
open space in the center of the site just below the pond area. They had four lots there --
fairly sizeable lots. We took those out at the suggestion of staff and we didn't lose the
count, but we added them to the area just to the west, so our overall density stayed the
same. Speaking of that, we got about a three unit to the acre density on this project, so
it's not that high for an R-4 zone. We added some micropaths through a couple of the
blocks at the staff suggestion easterly of that common open space neighborhood park.
And there were some discussions with Mr. Sasser on his five acre piece, which is a
parcel that fronts on Victory Road. He's the gentleman that's building quite a sizeable
home right now and fairly high value and our client decided it was -- there was interest
to work with him and develop some landscape schemes and try to do some things there
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 49 of 89
that would help mitigate impacts on his property, mainly because his house sits so close
to the property line adjacent to us. Unlike some of the others along the Los Altos
Subdivision, those homes sit back quite a bit further and they have some extensive
landscaping available there already. There is just a couple issues on the staff
recommendations I wanted to briefly discuss with Council and the first one is on the
preliminary plat condition number 21 and that's on page three of the preliminary plat
document. Item 12. It talks about -- excuse me. It's not 12. Item 21 on the restrictions. It
includes language that says restrictions shall include single story, as well as peak height
of 25 feet or less on those lots and block adjacent to the border of the project. We have
an opportunity out here to build some basements, we have very low groundwater
conditions and we have some deep sewers and we'd like to maybe modify that
condition to say not to exceed peak height of 25 feet and just scratch the single story
portion of it if that would be acceptable to the Council. I think the effect is the same. The
idea was to keep the building height low. So that would help us out on some multi-story
units that could possibly go in there. Also on item 12 of the preliminary plat -- I got out of
sequence here. It talks a little bit about the phasing of the development and the last
sentence in there I'd like to request that it be deleted. What it says is all development --
all development, however, must be contiguous to a previously improved phase.
Because of the physical constraints on this site, we are going to start our phasing of the
residential development in Victory Road and move northerly and the reason for that is
there is a working horse ranch that lies kind of in the north long east-west portion of the
property and the piece below that -- if I had a pointer I'd show you. I'll just go point to it
right now. That portion that I just pointed to is an area that they feel they can start with
and still keep their ranch operating in the meantime. We have got three phases planned
for that area, phase one, two, and three, and we'd like to start there with our
development and go through the residential portion of it first. However, we still --
depending on what the market does in the next few years for commercial retail multi-
family, there may be a need or a buyer come along that wants to do something with that
commercial area and if we decide to take phase four up north of the canal it won't be
contiguous with phase three. We'd like a little flexibility there to construct that sentence
in there to where we wouldn't have to go contiguous with a previous phase. It would
help us out in our marketing scheme. So you know, the -- in order to develop that first
phase we have to extend sanitary sewer from Silverstone -- Silverstone Subdivision and
it's quite an extension, probably 1,500 to 1,800 feet. So we are going to have some
major infrastructure in place just to get to phase one. We also have to extend the water
from Eagle Road down what is known as Easy Jet Drive with a preliminary plat about a
quarter mile into that development. So we are going to have a lot of that already in
place, so that the city shouldn't have to worry about future phases continuing onto the
north. The bridge issue Shari touched on briefly that crosses the Ridenbaugh and what
we have agreed to with the Highway District is when we come into develop that phase
that's adjacent to that bridge for that stub street, which I think is Knapp Avenue, we
have agreed to develop this and to acquire construction bids for that crossing. And
ACHD will determine a letter of credit amount that we will have to post with them to pay
for our share. Now there wasn't any firm discussions on what our share is, but we
expect it's going to be half. But whatever the number is we will have to deal with that
with the Highway District. So that money will go into an account. When the property due
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 50 of 89
north of us develops, then they will throw in their share of the bridge and it will be
constructed and that way the connection north to Overland Road will be complete in the
future. I touched on the CUP for the office area that Shari had mentioned and I just
wanted to reiterate on that commercial use north of the Ridenbaugh Canal, that being a
C-G zone and we did have some lots designated on our preliminary plat and I think we
had five lots in there. We'd like to keep that lot count. It may -- the lots mentioned may
move around a little bit based on the uses in the future. But, again, it will be a
Conditional Use Permit for the Council. So with that I would conclude and if you have
any questions I would be glad to answer those or I could answer them after other
testimony.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Lee, what is that? What is that piece there?
Lee: The north-south piece that you're pointing to that is the wider --
Nary: Yes.
Lee: That will be a public street that connects to Copperpoint Way.
Nary: That's a stub and this is --
Lee: And that's a common access driveway for those five lots.
Nary: There is no stub -- this is just a stub now and there is no other access at this point
to these lots, except from -- well, there isn't one. This is a canal; right?
Lee: Right.
Nary: There will be no access at all.
Lee: There will be when that stub street goes through north on the east side. Way over
on the east. Yeah. Right there.
Nary: Okay.
Lee: It will be contiguous there.
Nary: That's the issue with the bridge. Okay. And then is there -- is there something up
-- this is where the Silverstone is. Where does this stub street -- does it stop right on the
other side of the stub street on that end or something or --
Lee: That's the very east end of Copperpoint Way in the Silverstone plat.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 51 of 89
Nary: Okay.
Lee: So it connects to that right of way.
Nary: Okay.
Lee: And that road, by the way, is slated to continue on east and it will intersect with
Knapp Lane at the mid mile section, so we have an east-west road and a north-south
road.
Nary: Okay. Thank you.
Corrie: Any other questions? Okay. Thank you.
Lee: Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. I'll remind you, you have three minutes. Is there
anyone here for the project to testify? Okay. We have some signed up that are against.
I'll go down the list here. Mark Azakowski? Is he here?
Azakowski: I have nothing to say at this time.
Corrie: All right. How about Nancy Hilton? Cassie Shelton. Is the testimony you're
about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Shelton: Yes.
Corrie: Okay. Your name and address for the record, please.
Shelton: My name is Cassie Shelton and I'm a homeowner at 2934 South Goshen Way,
which is in the Muir Wood Subdivision located right there. Yeah. I'm to the east. Yeah.
To the east of this neighborhood. It's been brought to my attention in recent meetings
with -- I believe it's been the Ada County Highway District and other entities that we, as
a neighborhood association, would like to blockade that entrance from our entrance into
their neighborhood, Sutherland Farms -- right there. With posts or some sort of barrier,
because what's going to happen is if there aren't any sort of protective measures taken,
one street, Muir Ridge Drive, I believe, will get all of the construction traffic and whatnot
for that whole neighborhood until it's been developed and the construction workers can
make and forge their own gravel pathway, usually new neighborhoods that are
constructed have a gravel entrance. I know ours currently does right now. That's not an
official entrance, but it's kind of a gravel path that the construction workers use. What's
going to happen is that that's not blocked off right there, at least until the neighborhood
is done, our entrance -- the entrance to our neighborhood Muir Woods is going to have
all of the construction traffic and everything until traffic patterns are in place, I guess,
and I believe that it was the ACHD's recommendations that protective measures be
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 52 of 89
placed there until the final phase was completed of this neighborhood and I wanted to
just make sure that that was in whatever note it is that you're looking at, because
previously that wasn't mentioned, so -- that's all.
Corrie: Thank you. Dave Barclay. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Barclay: Yes.
Corrie: Name and address for the record.
Barclay: My name is David Barclay. We own the property at 3465 Victory, right at the
entrance to your proposed subdivision. Several years ago we purchased the five and a
half acre plot there with the desire to -- there was an existing home and we wanted to
build an additional home, one for my wife and I and have our daughter and her husband
and our grand children live in the existing home. Silly me. I found out that this was not
permissible under your zoning laws and now from my perspective it is very frustrating to
see someone come in across the street and pretty much given a cart blanche from my
perspective. This whole system has been a very unfriendly experience as far as the
common person. From every meeting it appears that everyone wants to cater to the
developer. As a voter, as a property owner, it's been very very frustrating. Victory is an
extremely small road. I now find out they are going to start the construction from the
south on Victory and progress northward. I repeat. It is a very small road. The original
Planning and Zone meeting where everyone was available or given the opportunity to
express their opinions was at a time when I was unavailable myself and my wife told me
that there would be a second meeting where perhaps I might be able to attend. We
found out that that meeting transpired. Apparently there was a notice the day of the
meeting, but certainly not enough time for me to prepare -- for me to arrange my
schedule so that I could attend. And apparently at that meeting they made some
concessions with the other property owners, i.e., the eight foot wall, other concessions.
But, again, our property is right there directly across the street -- exactly. All right. We
thought perhaps we'd have a berm or something placed there that would block the
headlights and block the traffic and sound, but apparently that -- no one's discussed
that with us. We also were told that the water that's going to come along Victory --
apparently now that's coming from Eagle. And that was perhaps the only carrot that was
offered to me, at least in future development or future use of our property, is that there
would be a waterline there available for us in the event that we would then be able to be
annexed into the city or whatever for us to build a home. And, of course, that's not going
to happen now either. Of course, these are changes that apparently come to light, you
know, just in the last -- at this meeting here. In summary, it's been a very frustrating
experience and I know that the trend nowadays is for city councils to try to generate the
revenue and apparently this is a means of generating revenue, but the impact of the
people in the surrounding area is tremendous and, again, a very frustrating experience.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 53 of 89
Corrie: Okay. Any questions for Dave? Okay. Sue? Is Nancy Hilton here yet? Okay. Pat
Maley. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God?
Maley: It is.
Corrie: Okay. Name and address, please.
Maley: My name is Pat Maley, 12449 West Muir Woods Drive. My issue has already
been addressed once, but just for clarification sake, we live on the street that would pick
up a fair amount of traffic -- yeah. That one. From the east end of Sutherland Farms.
There was a presentation made by a group of Muir Wood homeowners to the ACHD
and in ACHD's consideration of their preliminary plat it's my understanding that they
placed a condition for the installation of temporary bollards across Hollendale, which is
where the mouse is right now and also across Knapp, at least on the north and I believe
on the south, until such time as Knapp Road is connected to Overland Road. The
reasoning for that is that the preliminary traffic study that was submitted along with this
indicated that in the p.m. rush hour Muir Ridge Drive would have one car about every
15 seconds. It's certainly not developed for that. It's not designed for that now. It's 37
feet curb to curb, a 50 foot right of way, has a 138 degree deflection curve that's right in
the pathway of that -- there is a place where the major entry into our common area, our
park, is located -- Muir Ridge Drive has an island in it and so if some child were to ride a
bike, a skateboard, scooter, or run out in front of a car, there is place for a car to swerve
and so we respectfully request, again, that you maintain the provision that we
understand is in the temporary -- the preliminary plat that would require the installation
of temporary bollards until such time as the Overland Road connection is complete.
Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you. Rodney Reyes? Am I pronouncing it correctly? Is the testimony
you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Reyes: Yes.
Corrie: Name and address, please.
Reyes: My name is Rodney Reyes. I live at 3465 East Victory Road. I live in Dave
Barclay's home. What -- to kind of recap on what he stated about living across the
street from that beginning subdivision there. As you all know, Victory Road is very small
and we have even had a case in the winter where we've had a car come into our yard
and take out a tree. Just to some type of maybe like what Dave said, a berm or
something. Nothing has been said to us on -- like he stated and that and I do have four
small children that like to play out in the front yard. My -- the road actually sits probably,
I don't know, four feet from my yard. I have dirt and then I have my grass and just kind
concerned about what they might do to help with that and with all the construction traffic
going through Victory Road.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 54 of 89
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I just have a question.
Corrie: Rodney.
De Weerd: Now does their entrance into the subdivision align with your driveway?
Where is it in relation to your front yard?
Reyes: My wife can answer that.
Corrie: Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God?
A.Reyes: Yes.
Corrie: Okay. And would you take that mike with you right there.
De Weerd: And if you will state your name and address for the record.
A.Reyes: Amber Reyes, 3465 East Victory Road. This -- we have a field right here. My
home starts right where this road and that -- our driveway is over here.
De Weerd: So that road would shine into your house?
A.Reyes: Into mine and my little girl's bedrooms when they would turn onto Victory
Road.
De Weerd: And do you have any landscaping -- any existing landscaping that would
help?
A.Reyes: We have two trees. One was taken out. So, yeah, we still have one existing.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
A.Reyes: Could I ask a question or do you want me to -- okay. Just from hearing the
gentleman speak right now, the sewer is already coming in off of Eagle Road. So my
question is why are they starting the first phase to the south. Right there. Why is it not --
if you already have the Thousand Springs Subdivision on Eagle and then you have Muir
Woods to the east, it would make sense to put a subdivision in between those two,
instead of coming off of Victory Road where you have five acre lots. Start your first
phase off of Eagle Road where you already have a subdivision adjacent to it. So I would
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 55 of 89
just like to ask maybe consideration of the first phase be changed to coming off of
Eagle Road. Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. Is Nancy back in or is she still gone? Is there anyone else that would like
to issue testimony at this time? Okay. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Roundy: Yes.
Corrie: Name and address, please.
Roundy: My name is Joyce Roundy. R-o-u-n-d-y. I live at 4178 Los Altos Drive. I guess
my question -- forgive me, I came in late and perhaps it was already addressed, but I
live where that -- see where the arrow is? I live on Los Altos Drive. It's Ranchos Los
Altos Subdivision. Shall I go point?
Corrie: Yes, please.
Roundy: Right in here. I think right in there.
Corrie: Okay.
Roundy: Our subdivision, as you may know, was built back in the '70s and we have
large lots. I mean the smallest piece of land that anyone owns in there is two acres.
Ours happens to be a two acre lot that butts right up against Sutherland Farms. The
people to the east of us have two acres. The people to the west of us have three acres.
The people across the street from us have three and a half acres. Now, granted, we
realize that we were built in a different era and we could not hope to maintain those size
of lots forever. I guess what we have requested in the past -- and I just don't know how
this turned out yet, is that we have some transition lot sizes, rather than quarter acres
up against us. To the east of Sutherland Farms, as you know, is Muir Woods and that
also comes up against Rancho Los Altos. I understand that that's Boise and what we
are considering here is Meridian and policies are different perhaps, but they did give us
at least some better transition sizes, a third to a half acre lots up against the large lots
of Rancho Los Altos. Yeah. Right where you're pointing there. Has that been
established, the size of the lots up against ours?
Corrie: I don't know. We will have to ask the --
Roundy: Asking a quarter acre. Is that what you're saying? I guess, then, I would put in
my request that they be larger than that to give us a better transition. Another question.
At one time the developer did indicate that they would be willing to keep the level of
homes along Rancho Los Altos to one story, rather than two and I guess I'm asking,
again, is that -- does that still stand?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 56 of 89
Nary: What is that change? So there is only -- they are 25 foot height, but it could be
two story, as long as it's within the 25 foot height requirement.
Roundy: Is the minimum height for one story 25 feet?
Nary: It kind of depends.
De Weerd: They are asking that basements to be included. That's why they didn't want
the two story requirements.
Roundy: Oh. I see.
De Weerd: They would build down, rather than up.
Roundy: Yes. Okay. It was the height. I know at one time they said, well, only one
restriction should be required of those lots surrounding us. My comment would be those
are very compatible restrictions -- those are compatible restrictions, because if you have
a larger lot you have more room to build on a single level. Thank you.
Corrie: Is there anyone else? Yes, ma'am. Is the testimony you're about to give the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Renke: I do.
Bird: Name and address, please.
Renke: My name is Caroline Renke, 3595 East Victory Road, and I'm just asking -- I did
send a letter to the City Council, faxed a letter in. You received that. And the concern is
our home is directly where that access road is to the south. The headlights would shine
directly into our living room, dining room. But builder has made -- the engineers have
made agreements to work the neighbor to the east, Mr. Sasser, putting up eight foot
fences and dense trees, they haven't said anything about even putting a fence to stop
the lights from shining directly -- the cars that are egressing to the south onto Victory,
those lights will come directly into our home if they turn toward the east. And we have a
concern regarding the development of phase one, that they are reaching the furthest
that they can to annex into the city and developing that without even knowing what they
are going to be doing, what the economy is going to be doing and to develop a density
of those homes and commercial. But they want to be sure and reach as far as Victory to
get that in and then it's easier to decide what they want to do in the future and that's --
and Victory is a very busy road and it's difficult for us to get out and turn east onto
Victory the way it is now with an access road facing us. I ask you to consider the traffic.
Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else? Tom?
Kuntz: Mayor Corrie --
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 57 of 89
Corrie: You're already sworn.
Kuntz: Tom Kuntz, the parks department. We just want to go on record in regards to the
park, the private neighborhood park that they have there. Our comments were
submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission as part of staff comments on May
15th. Our recommendation was to delete lots -- I believe it was 66 through 73 on Block
1. They deleted four of those, but there still remains three lots in the southeast corner of
that neighbor park. We just want to go on record that we still recommend that those
three lots be deleted, so that the park size would go from four acres to five acres, so
that in the future when we received a call from the homeowners association that states
that we do not want to -- pay to maintain this neighborhood park any longer, would the
city consider taking it over, our minimum park size is five acres. If those three lots were
to be deleted, not only would it enable us to take that over at some point if the
homeowners find that to be a burden, but it also would make a much better
neighborhood park if those three lots were deleted and we just want to go on record.
Thank you.
Corrie: Anyone else? Okay. If the developer can answer the questions that have been
brought up by the Public Hearing.
Lee: Gary Lee with JUB Engineers. I guess I will start with -- I'll do them in order. There
was discussion about the stub streets going into Muir Woods Subdivision and also
going to Los Altos, Hollandale Drive and Knapp Lane. It's true that ACHD had
recommended those stubs to be installed and the City of Meridian staff agreed. At the
ACHD Commission meeting they decided that they'd make a compromise and request
that bollards be installed on those two streets temporarily until the bridge is constructed
across the Ridenbaugh Canal and that road extends to Overland Road in the future and
the bollards could be removed. And as you have seen in your staff comments, they did
make that recommendation. I might just add a key note to this. The traffic study that we
had performed did not anticipate those roads being blocked, except for Knapp Lane and
it was our recommendation that it not go through at this time. So there was traffic
movement through Muir Woods Subdivision. That traffic analysis was reviewed by the
Highway District and approved and they indicated level of service on the intersections
affected were acceptable. The next item talks about -- I think Dave Barclay indicated --
had questions about the water on Victory Road. As far as a requirement of the City of
Meridian, we will have to install water along our frontage. When we extend that water
from Eagle Road through our development, it will be used for future phases and be
positioned along the public road that we have planned for and then when we get to the
first phase we will have to build the water along Victory. It will be a stretch to the
adjacent property frontage and will be available to anyone adjacent to it on either end.
So there will be water there. There will be landscaping along Victory Road. That's been
a concern. The ordinance requires I guess a 25 foot buffer on Victory, as I recall. I
brought along a copy of an aerial topography map that we had prepared for the
preliminary plat and I'll pass this out. It kind of gives you a better representation of
where the houses are in relation to our entry road.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 58 of 89
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: So, Mr. Lee, while we are looking at that plat there, that thick black line, that was
the 25 foot setback?
Lee: Yes. Along Victory.
Nary: Is it the landscape buffer that's a berm or is it a landscape buffer that's just flat? I
think the concern was about lights and all those types of things.
Lee: Well, I don't recall exactly what was on the landscape plan and maybe Shari does,
but it can be bermed if that's what the Council would like to see. I don't see a problem
with that. It seems to be the norm of most developments.
Nary: That's what I thought, too, but I just thought I'd ask.
Lee: But not always. But it could be bermed. I don't see any real reason not to. So that I
think addresses the road offset issue. As you can see, the outbound lane on that street
coming out of Sutherland Farms, the headlights are going to come out and it will direct
southerly along the fence line of the pasture. So traffic turning east there may be some
lights that could reflect on their houses as it turns. Most of the traffic in our study
indicated going west. So it shouldn't be impacted that much. We talked about the Knapp
and Hollandale Drive and the level of service; by the way, on Muir Woods Drive and
Cloverdale as a result of this development, they have a level of service C in the morning
peak hours and a level service D in the p.m. I think prior to development they were both
level of service C. So there is some impact, but not enough to warrant any change. We
talked about the berm on Victory Road. The entrance alignment. The sewer that the --
the sewer to this property has to come through Silverstone. The sewer in Thousand
Springs right now is not deep enough to service this property, nor is it in the proper
drainage area for the city. So we have to bring the sewer up through -- from Silverstone
through Sutherland Farm, it's fairly deep, and it's designed to service not only this side,
but all the properties across Victory Road to the south and down Victory Road as well.
So it's fairly deep and that's the only way we can get it through the project. And as I
explained earlier, that we wanted to maintain the ranch operation and reserve the ranch
facility and start our residential phase on the south. And we discussed the height of the
homes along Los Altos Subdivision. We'd like to restrict that to 25 feet, if possible, if you
would be willing to do that. The lot sizes along there that are orientated on the
preliminary plat, most of them are in the 10 to 12 thousand square foot range, so that
they are larger than the R-4. And Mr. Kuntz's comment about park, we did eliminate four
of the seven lots in there. We wanted to maintain at least three lots in that area to try to
help our density overall. We'd like to have something a little higher, but it just wasn't
working out with the amount of transition that we were doing from the smaller lots in the
interior to the larger lots on the exterior. As you can see from the plan it still leaves us a
pretty good open view of the park and eliminating those three lots along the east side of
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 59 of 89
the park I don't think would really greatly enhance the view. Plus it's a home on a park
that's neighborhood maintained. There is an irrigation pond there. It's fairly sizeable. We
will have to maintain that facility for our irrigation system. I'm not sure if it went to the
city what would happen to that park -- or that pond. So there is some uses there we
need for the development other than just the park. I think I addressed most of the
comments that were brought up. Do you have any questions?
Corrie: I believe we had -- I didn't hear about why the first phase on Victory Road and
not Eagle.
Lee: Well, the Eagle Road portion is slated for that office area. As you well know, there
is a lot of office facilities coming in on Eagle Road with Silverstone and also El Dorado
and the developer right now doesn't have a buyer who wants to build some office
space, nor a multi-family. If he did I'm sure he would to start there as well. So we are
wanting to declare our presence with the development by starting in a market that we
know will sell fairly quickly and that will be the residential area and those are the large --
some of the larger lots in that southern area as well that are 8,000 plus square feet and
lots ten and 12 thousand square foot lots are along the border. So from a market
strategy and also keeping the operation of the ranch going in the interim, we wanted to
do our first three phases on the south end. It's an economical thing for them to do.
Although they still have quite a bit of off-site cost they are going to have to bear in that
first phase. Did I answer that --
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Lee, is this an out-parcel right here?
Lee: Yes, it is.
Nary: And the homeowner that you have the agreement with, Mr. Sasser, they are over
on this part?
Lee: They are to the east of that finger on the south on Victory Road. Right there.
Nary: Okay.
Lee: Three five acre parcels which front on Victory Road right there next to each other.
Nary: And who owns the -- so this isn't owned by Sutherland Farms or anything?
Lee: No, it's not.
Nary: Okay.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 60 of 89
Lee: The closest neighbor we talked to them about the access in there and ACHD has
made the requirement to provide them access to our commercial collector road.
Nary: One other thing. On this -- on Eagle Road I know there is a buffer requirement as
well. Is that -- does this buffer here look like that or is it taller? Isn't this 25 feet on both
sides?
Lee: It should be 35 feet. I'm not sure how it got put in the way it is on that picture.
Nary: That's just a drawing, but it's the same on both sides?
Lee: Same on both sides. Yes. I think that's the landscape plan we are looking at. Can't
tell for sure.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: The entrance off of Eagle, what phase is that in?
Lee: That will probably be in -- well, the actual entrance will be built in phase four. There
won't be any platting, I don't believe, along that road; we are just going to plat the
roadway itself to get our second entrance.
De Weerd: So what are you -- I don't have anything that shows me what phase four is,
so how much of that area off of Victory is built out before you get phase four in?
Lee: The design that we have right here -- I think there is 112 lots that we counted in
that area that we will do, but there is a stipulation in your staff comments that we have
to build that access out to Eagle Road at the 101st building permit.
De Weerd: Okay.
Lee: That gives us our second emergency access as well.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Lee, I'm sure it was already said, but was this is green space here and green
space here? Is that what that is?
Lee: Yes.
Nary: How much -- what is the point of that? It seems so small.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 61 of 89
Lee: Well, it is and I think that the only reason it really turned out that way is the design
of the town homes, the dimensions that we thought it required in the longitudinal length
of the lot. That was a leftover area and we didn't want to have a whole lot of people's
back yards backing up against that collector street, so we left that landscaped area.
When those limited office space facilities come in there will be landscaping
requirements along that front as well so it will all blend in.
Nary: Couldn't you put these three lots in there?
Lee: Well, that area is a low spot in the property and we had hoped to use it for a storm
water facility. And it's adjacent to that commercial and limited office area and I'm not
sure how it would fit in there effectively. We'd like to have a couple lots against the park.
I think there is higher value in that. Those are fairly sizeable lots, too.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: So you will have open space in what phase?
Lee: Let me grab this other map.
De Weerd: So, then, you have how many people living there before you have open
space? I guess that's a way to do a planned use development, not to have any open
space until your final phase.
Lee: Well, looking at condition -- I think there is a condition in there that we have to
build that park so we have the roadway entrance is the wording. I don't know if Shari
remembers exactly what condition that is. I remember reading that earlier. Certainly
we'd like to get through the first four phases, because that's the area that we are trying
to separate from the horse ranch operation, but it could be included in the phase that is
phase five when we start really getting into the horse ranch operations and all that. And
that would make sense to put it in there, although it's going to be kind of removed from
where phase five is.
De Weerd: Where is phase five?
Lee: It's just west of the open space. The park. Phase five is for the townhouse units
and that loop street just east of the townhouse units.
De Weerd: And what is phase four?
Lee: It's the balance of that southerly piece that goes down the southeast corner. Right
in there.
De Weerd: Oh. Can you put it in in phase four along with the street?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 62 of 89
Lee: I could -- well, I guess I could make that suggestion. We want to build that street all
the way out to Eagle Road, because that's going to put us over the 101st home anyway
if we take that much more in. And there may be as far as phase five, if that is part of
phase four, those lots that front that east-west collector street. In the CUP application.
There you got it. The 101st permit. Same with the roadway. We have to come in. I
thought I saw that earlier. I just couldn't remember where.
De Weerd: Well, it talks about permits and not phasing.
Lee: Right. I guess that makes sense.
De Weerd: So you could be in phase six and not have a building permit on either of
those.
Lee: Okay.
De Weerd: On the street or the open space.
Lee: Could be. I think that 101 number was arrived at as an emergency access more
than anything else. When we do phase four we will have to build the road. And it may
make sense to go ahead build the park then, too.
De Weerd: So rather than stating number of occupancy permits, you would feel
comfortable with stating a phase?
Lee: Yeah. I think it would end up being the same thing as the number.
De Weerd: Now the drawing you gave us with the property owners across the street,
this one house right across from your entrance definitely will be impacted by the cars
coming out of that subdivision. You have mitigation of some of the neighboring
subdivisions. Could you help them with maybe a couple trees in that front to help filter
the headlights?
Lee: Well, the headlights that you're going to get I guess would be the ones turning east
and the number on the traffic study during that time frame is pretty small. As I
remember, it was less than ten during the peak p.m. hours. I don't know if that's a
significant impact to them or not. But it's something we could certainly work with them
on and maybe think about some sort of buffer there, as long as it's not extravagant. But
I wouldn't think the impact wouldn't be that great from the numbers.
De Weerd: Well, studies have been known to be wrong.
Lee: Yeah. That's true, too.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 63 of 89
De Weerd: I don't know how you study the behavior of a driver, so -- now Shari also had
mentioned on your landscaping to clarify the dense mixture -- the mixture of the trees
and that berm that's supposed to provide some density. Did you have a landscape plan
that suggested plantings and -- I guess, Shari, that can be worked out with staff.
Lee: I think that's the agreement with the Sassers that you're talking about.
Stiles: Their memorandum of understanding says it will be agreed to -- mutually agreed
to between Sassers and the applicant.
De Weerd: Okay. That's all I have.
Corrie: Any questions? Yes, Gary.
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council Members, just for the record, this subdivision will be
subjected to a latecomers fee for sewer service through the Silverstone Subdivision and
there may be a -- depending upon the coverage, a well development latecomers fee
also. Those values have not yet been determined, as you're aware, but they will be.
Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you, Gary. Okay. Any other discussion?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I know the applicant had mentioned that water would be run down along
Victory, so -- for future development. Sewer needs to be stubbed to the property line as
well. So future development south of Victory would have stubs off that sewer and water;
is that correct, Gary?
Smith: Council Member de Weerd, Mayor and Council, I can't remember the exact
layout of our master plan, but if the master plan requires the area to the south and east
to be served through this area, then it will need to be -- it will need to be stubbed to the
boundaries of the subdivision and we will require that on the basis of our master plan as
their development plan is submitted.
De Weerd: So anyone south of this property should check with you and the master
plan, but you would have water available?
Smith: Yes.
De Weerd: Is that what I understand?
Smith: Yes. Water will be stubbed to the boundary of the subdivision.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 64 of 89
De Weerd: Okay.
Corrie: Any other questions? I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing at this
point.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor, so moved.
Nary: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Sutherland
Farms preliminary plat, request for annexation and zoning, and Conditional Use Permit.
Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. All the ayes. Motion
carried.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Corrie: Discussion?
De Weerd: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion on the request for annexation and zoning of 127.7 --
is that .74 of .64, Shari? One says it's .64 and the other says it's .74. I guess you can
correct that in the minutes there from the thing. So 127.74 acres from RUT to a C-G, L-
O, and R-4 zones for proposed Sutherland Farms by Sutherland Farms, Inc.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I'd move the approval of AZ 02-004, request for annexation and zoning of 127.74
acres from RUT to a C-G, L-O, and R-4 zones for the proposed Sutherland Farms by
Sutherland Farms, Inc., east of South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road,
pursuant to all the staff comments and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning
Commission. I don't think there is anything else on the annexation. And for Findings of
Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order to be prepared.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to request annexation and zoning. Any
further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, nay; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Okay. Motion is approved.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 65 of 89
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAY.
Corrie: Item No. 20 is a Public Hearing, request for preliminary plat approval of 308
building lots and 30 other lots on 127.64 acres in a proposed L-O, C-G, and R-4 zone
for Sutherland Farms.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Before I make a motion I guess there was some discussion on this particular
issue. I think most of the testimony was regarding the preliminary plat and not the
annexation, but I think -- I think the developer has addressed the majority of them or will
address the other ones that are remaining, since I do think the Reyes and the other
folks on Victory Road raise a legitimate point. There may not be a lot of cars today, but
there is going to be a lot of cars in the not too distant future turning out of that
subdivision on Victory Road and so I don't think mitigating that with some trees is an
unreasonable request. I think that's very reasonable and fair. And the phasing issue,
you know, no matter where you start someone doesn't like it, so I don't know that there
really is a whole lot to address with that. I think there is always some business reason
for starting on one place or another. I don't think there is really a whole lot we can do
with that. The issue on the lot sizes, I think the lots are at least a little bit larger, they
could be a little larger than that, you know, I guess it's open to debate, but I don't think
it's an unreasonable amount. The limitation from the height without the story wording is
probably fine. We will be hassling over that for years anyway. I think that the parks
department request, though, on those three lots on that park, I really think I'd agree with
the parks department. Having lived very close to a park that small, three houses right
on top of it I think are a little troubling. I think the parks points are valid. You know, I
guess I'm a little concerned about those three lots there. They have already eliminated
four to make the park a little bit more of a usable open space. I guess I'm a little
concerned about the ability -- I guess the discussions were for me, I don't know if
anyone has that same concern about having that there. I think the rest of that open
space is not really usable. That little tiny green space is not really anything of any note,
and the other place, obviously, it's a swale, so there is not really as much, so I think to
make that a much better situation, I guess it would be my preference that they take
those three lots out and that be one big piece as the park, instead of that one piece and
put the houses on top of it. But I don't know that the other concerns that -- I think the
other issues that we have talked about, the bridge and the bollards to prevent the
access are -- I think everybody is in agreement with, so I think the other thing to
address that I guess I just have a concern about those three lots on the park.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 66 of 89
McCandless: Unfortunately, I'm going to continue being consistent when I vote against
putting numerous subdivisions on roads that are too small to handle them. Victory Road
certainly is and South Eagle Road is no less either. And I just think we should enlarge
the roads, get the infrastructure in there before we start urban sprawl. And I will vote
against it for that reason.
Corrie: Okay. Any comments?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I guess since that's a homeowner’s association park and so I don't have any
opinion one way or another on the three lots. You know, I would agree that if the city
were ever to take it over, that it would not be considered without -- with those lots in
there and so that's something that the applicant has to keep in mind when they develop
that, if that would ever be a request, if you put those lots in there, don't count on asking
the city to take it over. And maybe that needs to be a note on the plat, so the
homeowners association understands that. I do think there needs to be some mitigation
with the property owner across the street from that entrance for a little screening. We
would need to put in a variance for the height of the eight foot fence or allow the eight
foot fence where it's been noted and, you know, I have concerns as Council Member
McCandless has on streets, but the street counts and the information that we have
doesn't give me any information that says those streets aren't adequate at this time.
ACHD has given them a level of service and I'm not tracking anything there, so I can't --
I would sure love to second-guess them, but I won't. And so, Mr. Nary, good luck on
your motion there.
Corrie: Any other comments?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay. I sense -- I will entertain a motion, then, for the preliminary plat.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I guess I'll just see what happens. I would move the approval of PP 02-004,
request for preliminary plat approval for the 308 building lots and 30 other lots on
127.64 or .74 acres in a proposed L-O, C-G and R-4 zones for proposed Sutherland
Farms by Sutherland Farms, Inc., east of South Eagle Road and East Victory Road,
pursuant to the staff comments, recommendation of the Planning and Zoning
Commission and in addition to the testimony tonight that the applicant will assist in
mitigating the light spillage from this subdivision on the adjacent property across Victory
Road, that they will -- let's see. I think that was -- I think that was really the only issue of
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 67 of 89
concern with that. And that they eliminate the three lots that are currently on the park
and that -- other than that, all the other comments, as well as the comments from the
applicant, and that Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order
be prepared.
Corrie: Motion has been made. Do I hear a second?
Bird: I'll second it.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Discussion, Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: Also on the preliminary plat did you want to note the peak height?
Nary: Oh.
De Weerd: Instead of the two stories, the 25 foot? And, as well, the order of phasing?
Nary: In regards to the park?
De Weerd: In regards to the order that it needs to be in. Item No. 12.
Nary: Yeah. Let me see. Which one was the one for the height? Oh. Number 21 of the
site specific requirements, that we could delete the language saying single story, but
keep the language that says peak height of 25 feet or less and -- did you say the --
De Weerd: Yeah.
Nary: Site-specific requirement --
De Weerd: On the phasing schedule.
Nary: I guess I don't really know what the -- about the contiguous issue?
De Weerd: Yeah.
Nary: That it needs to be contiguous to a previously approved phase? I guess I don't --
at this juncture, based on just what was asked, I don't really want to -- I'd rather that it
be contiguous, at least at this juncture until we know a lot more about what it is they
actually want to develop. They can always come and ask to amend it. But at least so we
know it's going to be developed, because I think the concern -- I agree with Mr. Lee,
that he's spent all this money to bring the sewer line and the water line down here,
you're going to finish developing it. There is a big hole in downtown Boise that's got a
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 68 of 89
crane in it that's not getting developed very quick and so I'd rather it be contiguous until
they have at least some idea of what they want to do differently and they can always
ask to do it differently, then. So if that's okay by the second?
Bird: That's fine with the second.
Nary: Okay.
Corrie: Any other discussion?
De Weerd: No.
Corrie: Okay. Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, nay; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAY.
Corrie: All right. I will entertain a motion on the request for a Conditional Use Permit,
005.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I move the approval of CUP 02-005, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Unit Development for residential, commercial, and office park development by
Sutherland Farms, east of South Eagle Road and north of East Victory Road, pursuant
to staff comments and recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and
for Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order to be prepared.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded. Any further comments or
discussion?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: It seems to me like we have had some comments on the open spaces that
need to be built as well. Did you want to make that contingent on building permits or
phasing?
Nary: Well, the problem I guess I have with the phasing is the phasing is decided by the
developer, so I guess I don't want to get in an argument that we figure on phase four
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 69 of 89
and they figure on phase three and I don't know that we could really enforce that. The
development permits are a mechanism to enforce that, because that's at least
something we have control over the outcome of how that gets issued, but phasing is
simply -- in the final plat stage they can come back and develop the ground the way
they want to build it and they are going to build it based on market and I think it's just
hard for us to enforce it if we do it based on that and I think that using the building code
is the tool the city has to do that.
De Weerd: Can you -- for a phase -- a phasing -- phase four or 101 building permits,
whichever is sooner?
Nary: Well, I think he said they were the same thing. I think his testimony was that they
would be built -- by the time they got to building 101 homes that would be phase four.
They wouldn't be 101 homes and not build a park, so -- unless you want to -- it's
difficult, I guess, from a marketing standpoint to try to force when is that park the right
time to develop. The figure 101 is at least something that is agreeable and was realistic
on the amount that was being sold, so -- yeah. I think it's on the CUP -- or on the
preliminary plat, but I think -- it's on the preliminary plat.
De Weerd: It has the eight-foot fence.
Nary: Yes. It has the eight-foot fence as a condition, so -- so I don't think there is really
anything to change in the recommendation.
Corrie: There was a second?
Bird: Yes. Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded for the request for Conditional Use
Permit. Any further discussion? Roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, nay; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: Approved three-one.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAY.
Item 22: Public Hearing: AZ 01-015 Request for annexation and zoning of 34.60
acres from RUT to I-L and L-O zones for proposed Utility Subdivision by
Falcon Creek, LLC – 3365 North Ten Mile Road:
Item 23: Public Hearing: PP 01-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 11
building lots on 34.60 acres in proposed I-L and L-O zones for proposed
Utility Subdivision by Falcon Creek, LLC – 3365 North Ten Mile Road:
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 70 of 89
Corrie: Okay. Item No. 22 and 23 is a Public Hearing. This is on the Utility Subdivision
by Falcon Creek, 3365 North Ten Mile Road. And at this time I will open the Public
Hearing on both the annexation and zoning and preliminary plat. And will invite staff's
comments first. Same way with the Public Hearing, the developer has five minutes and
the other people on the sign-up sheet are -- where they are now -- would have three
minutes.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I just still have one comment and I'm sorry that most of the neighbors left,
but on the Sutherland Farms, we realize that traffic is an issue, but we have some major
business parks going in, in that area. If we don't put housing there, we are creating
even more traffic, because people won't live near where they work and that has been a
goal of the Council is trying to get that kind of situation and get people living around
where they are working and, boy, Cherie, if I could figure out how to get roads first, I
would be beating that door with you. Unfortunately, ACHD I think is in the same
situation, we are always behind the dime.
Corrie: Or the nickel, as the case may be. Okay. All right. Thank you. Staff.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this property was the item of the discussion in a previous
application that was before the City Council for request for a text amendment to the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan. This application does still fall under the existing
Comprehensive Plan and not the new Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has changed
the proposal to request a light industrial zone for two lots on the northern boundary of
the property where they are proposing that the -- a waste transfer station and the
Sanitary Services Company be permitted to go in. I'd just like to remind Council that a
Conditional Use Permit was not submitted as part this application, so any conditions
that you might place on this would have to be included in the annexation and if that
includes some of the details of any site specific details they have provided, that you
have -- that you specifically note those so it is included in the development agreement.
As a result of a request for a Comp Plan text amendment, the City Council did approve
a text change to allow -- to add one sentence that said limited light industrial uses may
be considered in the area immediately adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant.
However, no map amendment was approved at that time. With the request for light
industrial zoning immediately adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant and the
remainder of the property left at L-O, the current Comprehensive Plan does not
currently support that zoning. The one-acre park that's previously shown on the plan
has been removed. This cul-de-sac has been shortened from the cul-de-sac originally
shown. Also they have provided flag lots to provide access direct frontage and street
access to this lot and also this lot. They have submitted elevations for the Sanitary
Service office maintenance building and waste transfer station. The Planning and
Zoning Commission did recommend denial of this application due in part to their
determination that the use did not constitute light industrial use. Meridian city code does
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 71 of 89
define that light industrial zone as encouraging the development of manufacturing and
wholesale establishments which are clean, quiet, and free of hazardous and
objectionable elements such as noise, odor, dust, smoke, glare and that are operated
entirely or almost entirely within enclosed structures, uses incompatible with light
industrial not permitted and strip development is prohibited. This was from the staff --
the staff report dated June 10th, 2001. The applicant has -- the representative has
submitted a letter dated June 7th, 2002. There has to be an error on this date, June
10th, 2001. It has to be 2002, I think. We do have a letter from the applicant's
representative outlining some additional considerations for this project. They are
discussing things that would be appropriate in a mixed-use classification of MU-WTP.
That classification does not yet exist. They have proposed that all developments
proposed in the MU-WTP area will require approval as a planned development through
the conditional use process. The uses that they are proposing would include normal
residential uses -- actually, this is from a work session the City Council discussed this.
Existing residential uses may remain. Professional office uses were acceptable.
Warehousing uses, flex space uses, office/warehouse uses, business park uses, and
mini storage. We would not have a particular argument with that should that actually be
put into our zoning ordinance and designated as such within the zoning ordinance. The
only issue we may have -- I know we have included in the Comprehensive Plan, but we
would need a better definition of what a business park was, if that were to be included
as a permitted use. Unless you have questions for me, I will let the audience speak for
themselves. I know the applicant's representative is here and she is ready to answer
any of your questions. I believe one request that the staff would have, should you
choose to approve this annexation and zoning, is that all of the uses require going
through a conditional use permit and that the uses allowed in the development
agreement be very specific as to the type of uses that will be permitted with a
Conditional Use Permit. That's all I have, unless you have further questions of me.
Corrie: Okay. Any questions of staff?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay. Is the applicant here this evening? The representative? Okay. What we
have here, usually we have five minutes for a Public Hearing and we are using two of
them, so you have ten minutes. You don't have to use it if you don't need to. Raise your
right hand. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Ford: Yes.
Corrie: Name and address, please.
Ford: Good evening, Honorable Mayor, City Council Members, for the record Ashley
Ford, Hubble Engineering, 71 South Allen Street in Meridian. I'm here tonight
representing Falcon Creek LLC, the applicant on the subdivision and SSC, the
applicant regarding the transfer station. Tonight we are before you with a request for
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 72 of 89
annexation and zoning of lots one and two to I-L, zoning of lots three through 11 to L-0,
the approval of Utility Park Subdivision and approval of the development agreement for
an office with four shop areas and a waste transfer station on lot two. As Shari
mentioned at the April 17th, 2002, work session, the Council recognized that this
property needed a special land use designation due to the approximately to the
Meridian waste treatment plant. The Council directed staff to create a new land use
classification, a Mixed Use Waste Treatment Plan to the site. At the work session the
Council discussed the type of uses that would be appropriate to the new mixed-use
classification. Shari has outlined those for you. I-L does not seem an appropriate land
use within the land use classification. The Council also indicated that the proposed L-O
zoning would be an appropriate transition buffer between the I-L for the northern portion
of the site and the residential subdivision to the south. We do understand there are a
number of concerns that the Planning and Zoning Commission and city staff have in
regards to a transfer station for the site. Staff is concerned regarding the design of the
transfer station's lack of means to secure the northern elevation of the building. Color
photos have been provided to staff and I believe Shari has those in the presentation
and they show other transfer stations that are located in Idaho. Typically these facilities
do not have closing doors and if they were placed on this transfer station, these doors
would remain up during normal business hours. The only reason for such facilities to
have doors is to provide security measures. With the proposed security fencing that we
have around the site, we are requesting not to put one on the facility. The orientation of
the building is such that it's facing away from the residential uses and towards the
treatment plant. Now as staff mentioned it's several hundred feet away from the
residences. We realize there are concerns in regards to noise, odor, and litter and the
potential impact to the surrounding neighbors. Steve Sedlacek of SSC is here tonight
and has taken noise readings at their facilities at Franklin Road, locations near the
subdivision, and the Latah County transfer station. A copy of these results should have
been included in your packet and I will get Steve the opportunity to address these
findings in a few moments. Landscaping and berming will help buffer any noise
transmission on the site. A detailed landscaping plan showing the height of the berm
and the type of landscaping has been submitted with this application. The applicant is
requesting Council to keep in mind a fully landscaped berm will provide -- will be
provided on the southern part, which will have mature landscaping by the time the
transfer station will be built in five years. Trees are excellent for breaking up noise is
common to this Commission. Solid walls are where you have issues with the noise
bouncing off the wall and bouncing up and out. It is also likely buildings in the propose
office portion of the project will already be constructed, thus providing even more of a
sound barrier between the residences and the site. The compactor for the transfer
station is located within the building and is enclosed in a concrete encasement to help
buffer the noise radiated. But this also help keep out any sort of debris, trash, litter from
leaving the facility. The compactor is an electric motor, which is very different noise wise
from a hydraulic motor. Noise should be the equivalent to that of a waste treatment
plant and, like I said, I will have Steve maybe elaborate a little bit more on that. In
regards to the issue with litter and odor, both DEQ and Central District Health will
require a litter and odor control plan before any permits for this site will be issued. Also,
it should be understood that the waste is compact somewhat to that of a brick. A
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 73 of 89
summary of the solid waste industry regulations has been provided for you and your
staff report and, again, I will let Steve comment on that. The next item of concern is
regards to the landscaping and fencing of Lot 2, Block 1. Shari, can you put up the
detailed site plan. Is there not one in there?
Stiles: Let me check. Just a second. Sorry.
Ford: Okay. No problem. For the Sanitary Service site, the applicant is requesting to
landscape only the portion of Lot 2, Block 1 that will be developed at this time, which is
roughly right in here. There are not any uses planned on the western portion of the
property. If and when expansion of the site occurs it will be most likely ten to 15 years in
the future and will be required to go through the CUP process. The applicant asks that
the Council realize that there is such a large amount of landscaping and that they are
trying to be a good neighbor by providing more than the required landscaping along the
southern boundary and providing the temporary landscape buffer that runs north-south
midway through the site. The portion that is not landscaped will be maintained by
mowing, so that portion of the property does not become unsightly or noxious. We do
plan on providing security fencing within the boundary of Lot 2. We do understand staff
has concerns with the fencing not being visually appealing and that the fencing will not
be able to be seen once the landscaping is mature. A diagram of the typical fence and
berm has been provided to the Council, I think an 11 by 22 was provided to you today. It
shows a six foot high security fence placed within the property boundary with 12 -- 12
and a half feet of berm with lawn on a three-to-one slope, which will provide an
estimated height of four feet. A tall evergreen will be provided with a mature height of
20 feet and then an additional 12 and a half feet of berm to the parking line. The next
item of concern is regarding the environmental impact statement. Staff recommends
that the applicant be required at a minute to provide an EIS assessment for the site and
the purpose of its uses. The applicant contends this is not necessary for the following
reasons. First, the federal regulation for the EPA, DEQ, and Central District Health, will
meet or exceed any requirement associated with an EIS and the federal regulations for
these agencies do not require an EIS for a transfer station. The activities associated
with a transfer station will occur within concrete walls in a building and any discharge
will be contained in a sand and grease trap, which will be regulated by DEQ. The
applicant will not be discharging any material into either creek abutting the property.
Again, lists of these regulations have been provided to Council. The applicant is in
agreement with staff's recommendations of the hours of operation. However, we would
like to modify the condition to include: With the exception of departing commercial
trucks. These trucks do have commercial pick up which necessitates leaving the facility
at 5:00 a.m. in the morning. The next issue is in regard to the required pathways along
the Nine Mile Drain and Five Mile Creek. The parks department requiring a ten-foot
pathway outside the western property line, the properties right along the Nine Mile Drain
and File Mile Creek. Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District has an agreement to make a
new waterway. The main issues we see are the following: First, the pathways will be
outside of our property boundary. We understand that the city and the district do have
an agreement to put pathways along canals and ditches, but plans would have to be
submitted six months in advance to be approved. Second, the Five Mile Creek is the
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 74 of 89
only designated pathway within the Comp Plan. We did compromise with staff of the
Planning and Zoning Commission and agree to construct a pathway. The Nine Mile
Drain does not have a pathway, or does it go anywhere. Staff was in agreement that
this pathway did not make a lot of sense. Inglewood Subdivision to the south does not
have a pathway and there were considerable questions by staff if there were an
adequate easement. Therefore, we request the release of this portion of the condition.
While we agree to construct the path along Five Mile Creek, the parks department is
requiring a ten-foot pathway. However, there are many examples to the city that there
are only five-foot pathways and you can select the verification of what is being required.
We realize the neighbors have concerns that this development will change the rural
character of the vicinity. However, any development will generate more traffic than what
is there already. The site is not surrounded by residential uses on all sides, which needs
to be understood. There is a treatment plant to the north and agricultural land use to the
west. The applicant is proposing L-O, which will provide a significant buffer between the
proposed industrial use and the residential use. I'd like to reiterate that we are
approximately 800 feet from the nearest residential use. It is the belief of the applicant
that these issues have been addressed to the best of our ability and that the applicant
has worked with the City of Meridian to find acceptable uses for this site. Staff, the
Commission, and the Council have agreed that residential uses are not what is
envisioned. The Council did recognize that unique circumstances are placed on the site
with regard to being next to a sewage treatment plant and thus changed the Comp Plan
text accordingly. A certified traffic study was submitted to ACHD for development citing
traffic numbers generated by the uses, including the transfer station. ACHD has
approved this application. The transfer station will take access off the proposed local
road within the development. The subdivision does abut two minor arterials which
ACHD agrees can accommodate such a development. There was a consent at the
Planning and Zoning Commission regarding the site lying in a flood plain. This site does
lie within the 500-year flood plain and we have received verification from the Ada county
engineer that this use is permitted. All in all, if the applicant does not agree -- does not
abide by any of the conditions of our approval, they have the City of Meridian and the
federal and the state and the local agencies that can shut them down. Before I give
Steve a chance to come up with concerns, he can explain further the noise study and
the agency regulations, I would like to request one item from the Council. Steve's facility
has burned down. Basically, SSC needs to move forward with a new site. We request
approval of the annexation and zoning, preliminary plat and a transfer station by a
development agreement. However, if you can't approve the transfer station this evening,
we ask approval for the other applications. We feel that staff can recommend approval
of those as well and be happy to answer any questions.
Corrie: Any questions? Okay. Perhaps Steve can come up on rebuttal at the end.
Ford: Okay.
Corrie: Okay. This is a Public Hearing. I have a few here that signed up for it. Is there
anyone for the subdivision? Steve Sedlacek. You can have three minutes of that time if
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 75 of 89
you'd like. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
Sedlacek: It is.
Corrie: And your name and address, please.
Sedlacek: My name is Steve Sedlacek, 723 West Franklin. I'm the business manager
for Sanitary Services. I just wanted to hit a few points. Actually, it's -- don't have much
time, it's getting late tonight. The first question I had for Council tonight was, as Shari
accurately pointed out, the P&Z Commission said to us last month that basically they
kind of liked the layout of that subdivision, I-L on the north, and putting in the mixed
office use, but they said, quite frankly, that Sanitary Services is not allowed in an I-L
zone and I suspect that it's because of the Section 11-7 in the zoning ordinance that
says you cannot generate odor, noise, glare and some other items. Although in Section
11-8 of the zoning ordinance it says that permitted use in an industrial zone is a solid
waste transfer station, a contractor's yard, those are the things that we are going to do
on this parcel and the reason why we have come to you and told you exactly what we
are going to do is so that everybody knows -- you know, we are not hiding anything from
anybody, we don't want to get it zoned in a certain way and then start building different
types of buildings, we just want to be open and up front with everybody. So that's why
we have requested, since these are permitted uses according to the zoning ordinance,
we have requested that they not be conditionally permitted. I do have to seek a
Conditional Use Permit from DEQ that is enforced by the health districts. I guess
another point to make, Ashley had mentioned that we were going to build a transfer
station in five years. We don't know that. We don't know if we are going to build a
transfer station. This is a tool that we are going to need to service this community,
perhaps, if we have to do long haul transfer of waste out of this town. Now it might be
that we need it and it might not, I'm just not sure. But I'm going to tell you up front that
this is a thing that we might have to have. Secondly, I guess the first question I'm
hoping you will answer tonight is can we get an I-L zone and if the answer is no, I guess
the rest of my discussion is sort of mute, but let me go through it anyway. We did do a
noise study -- there were some questions that the neighbors have about noise, basically
what we did was we came up with a noise survey that we have handed out to you. We
used the Latah County transfer station as a surrogate and we took noise
measurements. Basically we found that 800 feet away, which would be the nearest
residence, you're not going to be able to discern the noise from the traffic on Ten Mile
and Ustick. Indeed, the neighbors are impacted by noise and it's noise from traffic and
that traffic is going to get worse when Bridgetower goes in and Lochsa Falls and
whatever besides Sanitary Services that goes into this parcel, traffic is going to get
worse and I don't know what to do about that. And my times about out, I guess that's
my comment right there, so I'll leave it at that. Thank you.
Corrie: Is there anyone else that would like to testify in favor? Okay. We have Janet -- is
the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,
so help you God?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 76 of 89
Wilder: It is.
Corrie: State your name and address.
Wilder: Janet Wilder, 3340 North Ten Mile Road.
Corrie: Okay.
Wilder: I just had a few comments about waste transfer stations. I was curious as to
what they were and so I made a trip down to Twin Falls to look at their transfer station
there. I found it out in their industrial area. There were no houses around it. It had
Amalgamated Sugar was to one side of it and Monroc was across the street from it. I
don't remember what the other businesses were, but in back of it was open space.
There were no residential. We were down there -- my daughter went down with me and
it was probably 4:00 or 4:30 when we were down there, so we weren't there at the
busiest time, but it still was noisy. There was something inside the building that you
heard clanking. I don't know what it was, but it was noisy and we were to the street, I
don't know how far away it was, but I found it noisy. We did stop at Wendell on the way
back and it serves I guess Wendell and Gooding, it's out between Wendell and
Gooding, clear out in the country and nothing around it, but a salvage yard or graveyard
for cars across the street from it and they did have rubbish piled up in a berm, they had
a bunch of refrigerators and appliances piled outside the building and another brush pile
that was piled up real high with brush and pallets and things in it. So I certainly don't
want to see that in the neighborhood. I don't think this is the place for a waste transfer
station. There are too many neighbors. Recently you turned down Blumacs Bar in Old
Town Meridian for basically the same reason, just didn't fit in the neighborhood. I would
ask you to use the same consideration here. Another concern that I have is medical
waste, what sort of hazards are they going to pose for the neighborhood. Let's see. I
guess maybe that's it. So thank you.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: Mrs. Wilder?
Wilder: Yes.
McCandless: Would you object to the trucks being out there without the transfer
station?
Wilder: From what I understand from people that work on the trucks, have anything to
do with the trucks themselves when they are empty, that they are very smelly when they
are empty. I have -- I know someone that is a mechanic that has worked on them and
they just shudder when they have to work on them, because they do contain an odor
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 77 of 89
and so for that reason I probably would be opposed to the trash trucks being there. I
think there are some other uses. The office use and that probably wouldn't be
objectionable, but there is rodents, you know, that are going to come with smell and
trash. Seagulls. Now that's the other thing at the Twin Falls station that we saw were
Seagulls present. So, you know, my answer would be, no, I guess, that I wouldn't want
to see them there.
McCandless: Thank you.
Wilder: Okay.
Corrie: Okay. Charles Crane. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Crane: Yes, it is.
Corrie: Name and address, please.
Crane: Charles Crane, 3610 West Ustick Road. I'm the human that lives west of this
where it's supposed to agricultural. I'd like to characterize this neighborhood as a family
neighborhood. There is a new grade school going in on the south side of Ustick that's
almost completed now. There is families all over across the street. My house I have a
family, I have a child, and the new Bridgetower Subdivision is going to be families. So I
don't like to hear this being characterized as an industrial garbage dump. This is a
family neighborhood and I disagree strongly with them calling it something else. I'm a
little jealous of the Sutherland Farms developers to hear the developer working with the
neighborhood voluntarily putting in parks and worrying about fences and berms without
neighborhoods trying to force that out of them. I'm a little jealous of that. I would like to
see a lot more details on this if it does proceed. The landscape plan for one is not very
detailed. I was looking through the city's landscape ordinance and I need a clarification
from the Council. The pathways and the greenbelt, I was looking at classifications for
uses and you have a class one through five on the land use intensity classifications and
in class one we have single family homes and parks. I was wondering what
classification the pathway greenbelt would be? Would that be considered a park for this
classification as intensity?
Nary: Yes.
Crane: Yes, it would be? Okay. And then in the city ordinance class five, which is the
most intense use, recycling, light industrial listed. So according to the city ordinance, if I
read it properly, if you have a class five use next to a class one use, you need to have a
35 foot landscaping zone on that more intense use and their landscaping plan shows no
landscaping over on the borders of my property. The most recent one I saw at Planning
& Zoning has no landscaping at all. So I would like a lot more detail if this is to progress
at all, since there is not a CUP. The one person that hasn't been represented at the
meeting is the residence that's very close to this, the Ten Mile transfer -- or the storage
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 78 of 89
unit has a live-in manager there. She did express some nervousness. She didn't want to
come to the meeting, because her boss is involved in Bridgetower and she doesn't want
to lose her job, but she was very concerned being very close to where this is, right
across the Five Mile ditch. Okay. Thank you.
Corrie: Any questions? Thank you. Cheryl Hennings? Is the testimony you're about to
give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Hennings: It is.
Corrie: Okay. Your name and address, please.
Hennings: My name is Cheryl Hennings and I live at 2696 North Morello here in
Meridian. Seven months ago I spent two enjoyable days meeting all of the people in my
subdivision as I went door to door collecting petition signatures against what was being
propose for the property at the corner of Ten Mile and Ustick. One of my new neighbors
signed the petition, but informed me that what I was doing was useless and would make
absolutely no difference. I was shocked. He just shook his head as I left. Well, nothing
has changed since those two cold days in January, except when I went around the two
days it was really really hot. My neighbors continue to support efforts to have this parcel
zoned in such a way that the integrity of our part of town not be compromised and my
skeptical neighbor still shakes his head and now smiles at the same time. We maintain
that industrial as it stands is not appropriate for this land. Mixed use or less would give
us peace of mind that each and every request would have to meet conditional use
criteria. This vulnerable piece of property needs the utmost development protection.
This is the wrong location for a waste transfer station and recycling facility. Communities
throughout our state have located their waste transfer stations well outside of their
towns, not in the midst of existing residential development. And for good reason.
Despite the optimistic statements given, there will be debris, there will be noise, there
will be odor, more than we already have. We already live with cows and the treatment
plant and that's plenty. And there will be a significant increase in large truck traffic.
Meridian neighborhoods are protected from noise pollutions in her own ordinance.
Please protect this piece of property, the surrounding neighborhoods, and the
community from inappropriate development. Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you. I can't read this -- the first name is George. Name last?
George: John George.
Corrie: John George. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God?
George: It is.
Corrie: Okay. Name and address, please.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 79 of 89
George: John George, 3070 North Turnberry Way. I'm also a board member of the
homeowners association for Dakota Ridge, approximately 1/8th of a mile west of the
proposed site. Pretty much the facts that I have to bring to your attention have been
mentioned. Let me emphasize on the trash truck traffic. At the Planning and Zoning
Committee meeting we figured as a group there would be approximately 100 trips per
day -- 100 trips per day within a five-year period. The safety issue with Ponderosa
Elementary School going in, again, I'd like to emphasize that. Children going home on
their bicycles, walking along the roads with that increased traffic is a big concern. The
stench -- basically I don't care how you camouflage it, it's a dump. We as an association
do not want this facility built. We ask that you deny admitting I-L zoning. Thank you very
much.
Corrie: Thank you. Mark Reese. Is the testimony you're about to give the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Reese: I do.
Corrie: Name and address, please.
Reese: My name is Mark Reese. I live at 3081 North Dakota Ridge -- sorry. North
Turnberry Way in Dakota Ridge. I deny from many reasons. It seems to be that's a very
illogical thing to put a dump site in an industrial area and not mix in a place where
people live, so urge you to think carefully and deny. Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you. Mark Madsen. Dana Borquist. Is the testimony you're about to give
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Borquist: Yes, it is.
Corrie: Name and address, please.
Borquist: Dana Borquist. 3125 West Gallant Court in the Hartford Subdivision. It's a new
Hubble Homes subdivision. First of all, I'd like to say when we went to the Hubble Home
office asking what was going to be potentially built in that new -- in that field to the west
of us, they told us a nice city park. We dealt with Hubble, but I'm not associated with
Hubble, but I can't say for sure, but I'll bet you anything if you go in there tomorrow and
ask the gals that work in that office, they will tell you a park is going to be built over
there and that's all. It's really misleading. I am definitely against this waste transfer
treatment center going in in this area. I know that the applicant needs this business, I
know that we all need it as consumers, but this is not the right place for it and if you look
at all the beautiful homes that picture showed and then the yellow building, it just does
not go with the neighborhood. I understand we live close to the wastewater treatment
center. However, if the zoning shown is proper -- and it sounds like it is and they are
trying to change the zoning that's already in place, you can have storage units or offices
-- plenty of people will have their business there as far as warehousing or things like
that, it's not going to be a problem to find potential customers. I would also like to
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 80 of 89
publicly thank the Planning and Zoning Commission for listening to us and denying this
request or saying they are against it. I don't know exactly the right terms to say, but it
kind of shows that if people get together and have a cause that sometimes they are
heard and I appreciate that and I appreciate your time in this matter. I would just like to
ask you to honestly to sit down and think if you were living in our neighborhoods if you
would want this in your backyard and I know the answer would be no. Again, I would
like to thank you for your consideration in denying this for the applicant. There are many
other places I think that is proper. They might have to spend a little more money and a
little more time finding those places, but they do exist. Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you. That takes care of the ones that signed up. Is there anyone else
from the public that would like to issue testimony? Yes. Is the testimony you're about to
give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Cody: Yes.
Corrie: Name and address, please.
Cody: My name is Charles Cody. I live at 3691 West Niemann. That's in Dakota Ridge
Subdivision. And I have a couple concerns by this type of operation. I find that this is
the first time in my experience of anywhere I have lived that this type of operation was
trying to move into an established neighborhood. Usually the complaint is the neighbors
moving into these places knowing that this operation was, in fact, there and they had no
complaints. Most of the neighbors have made it very clear how we feel on this and for
the health reasons and such and such. I have a couple of points that I would like to also
make. First of all, Steve did make a statement here tonight that he wasn't trying to hide
anything and I think that's pretty much true, because you just can't hide a dump. The
birds will seek it out, the rodents and the stench and the noise. Then there was a cover
up -- and everybody realizes once you let a cat out of the bag -- it's easy to let the cat
out of the bag, but it's awful hard to put it back and who is going to have to patrol for
this? Once these things are in operation you have a tendency to forget about the
controls and forget about the neighbors and it progressively gets bigger and bigger and
they talk about a recycling center here also and they don't want to talk about the noise.
With every recycling center I have ever went to all the operators have earmuffs on.
Well, I don't understand that. If it isn't going to go into the neighborhood, why would
they be concerned about noise? Then they discuss about a path, they wanted to pave a
path and make it look nice. A path to where? Who is going to walk a path in a dump
area next to a waste treatment plant? Maybe the homeless or the dope dealers. I don't
know. I sure certainly wouldn't want to find out. Well, that just about has it with me. I just
feel that this is not a healthy situation to put in a neighborhood. It doesn't have their
problems. I sympathize with Steve and his operation. As has been stated here tonight,
we do need it, but also, again, as has been stated, this is not the place to put this type
of operation. Thank you.
Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Council, questions while the Public Hearing is
still open?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 81 of 89
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Is Mrs. Stiles here?
Corrie: Oh, I forgot. Steve, you do have five minutes here after we are -- for some of the
questions that the people have brought up. I apologize.
Ford: Ashley Ford. Well, you have listened to me talk a lot and we could get Steve back
up here, but he has given me some of his notes and let me be the bad guy up here.
One thing that I did forget to note in my presentation was that we were going -- we are
not going through a CUP process, but, yes, we are asking that the Council consider this
as a part of our development agreement, which is essentially going to be the same as
going through a conditional use process. Staff has even made the statement in the staff
report that we had submitted all the requirements of a CUP application, the landscape
plan, the elevations, et cetera, and so hopefully if you look at your annexation, if you do
decide to agree to approve that tonight, then we can work out the details and put it in
the development agreement. It is a legally binding document. Regarding the trash, you
know, I guess there is trash at some waste transfer stations. This one will not. Yes,
residents can come and drop off their trash to this waste transfer station, but it won't be
left at the gate like some of these other stations are allowed to do. Steve has a lot of
pride in his business and will not allow that. Also we are subject to conditions of
approval, so at anytime if we are not complying with the conditions of approval of
Meridian staff and Planning and Zoning, they and all the other agencies, that our
permits can be pulled, plain and simple. So you can make that a condition of approval.
Regarding the landscaping on the southwest border along Mr. Crane, we will meet any
landscaping requirements of the ordinance. Plain and simple. We will meet that. If that's
your requirement, we will be there. Regarding traffic, like I said, we meet ACHD
standards. A hundred trips per day, that's really nothing on minor arterials, as we all
know. Minor arterials can hold up to 15,000 vehicle trips per day. We know that this
portion of Ustick will be made into four lanes. When that will happen I don't know, but
we know that that -- it is classified as a minor arterial, that is the purpose of those
arterials is to take the traffic. I heard many residents say this is a dump. This is not a
dump. This is a waste transfer station. Basically it's trucks -- it's smaller trucks loading
the trash into -- compacted trash, like a brick, into larger trucks. It's in the facility. It's
confined to the facility within concrete walls. That's what needs to be understood. In
regards to Steve's comments, transfer stations are mostly in rural areas. Unfortunately,
there are few rural areas remaining in Meridian. They are looking at all zoned property
in Meridian. We don't collect medical waste. There is a small amount in residential
waste -- the residential waste stream, there is no impact to the public and others. There
have been no complaints from the current facility and they are only 75 feet away from a
4-plex and, once again, we will have to meet all the regulations for odor and noise and
litter, with all the agencies, DEQ, Central District Health, et cetera. And I'll be happy to
stand for any questions.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 82 of 89
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Ms. Ford, I'm curious. An issue that was of some concern to the Planning and
Zoning Commission was the definition of light industrial and how this facility as a waste
transfer station -- I don't know that there was discussion in regards to the parking lot for
trucks. Since this is a waste transfer station, we have the definition that talked about
hazards and objectionable elements, such as noise, odors, dust, and that it is operated
entirely within an enclosed structure. What I heard you say earlier is that you don't want
this to be an enclosed structure, you want it to be open on one side.
Ford: Open on one side, that's true, but the transfer takes place within a concrete --
within concrete walls which is further back into the facility.
Nary: But I think what's contemplated by the ordinance is a building.
Ford: If that's a make or break situation on this, we will put a door in it. What we are
trying to explain is during normal business hours that would be open due to the trucks
moving in and so forth. So that would be Council's call. We will comply with conditions
that you place on us. Waste transfer stations don't have that third door, but --
Corrie: Any questions?
Ford: Thank you.
Nary: Mrs. Stiles, I was just curious, I guess. I wondered if we were going to fight this
battle forever, but under the new zone in the new comp plan, if they started all over
again once that is finalized, wouldn't this fit within those -- what's contemplated there? I
think it was fairly left wide open. Couldn't we basically be back having the same
discussion again?
Stiles: Well, the uses that were proposed for that Mixed Use Wastewater Treatment
Plant area were the ones that are listed in Ashley's letter of June 7, 2002. Those are the
ones that were discussed with the professional office use, warehousing, flex space use,
office warehouse use, business park use, and mini-storage.
Nary: I guess my question is is that if we were to deny this application based on the
reasoning that the Planning and Zoning Commission used that it didn't fit the light
industrial zone, once the new Comprehensive Plan was in place it would, in theory, fit in
that -- in the zone that's contemplated for that area at that point, so we would still be
arguing about the conditional use, but we wouldn't be arguing about zone; is that
correct?
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 83 of 89
Stiles: I think there are light industrial uses within those uses I just discussed, but some
of those would fit within that light industrial use, yes.
Nary: Thank you.
Corrie: Tom.
Kuntz: Mr. Mayor and Council, just to go on public record in regards to the preliminary
plat, the parks staff recommends a pathway -- ten foot wide pathway with a 30 foot
easement buffer along the Nine Mile -- excuse me -- Five Mile Creek, because it is a
main corridor -- pedestrian corridor that will link up to Tulley Park, will link up with
Bridgetower, will link up with Meridian Road, which is currently linked with Tulley Park
now. It's important that we have landscaped easements so that people will use it, but
we also feel like there needs to be a pedestrian pathway along the Nine Mile to service
the subdivision south of Ustick Road to link up with the Five Mile Creek Pathway. Also
in comments we have asked for the developer to bond or put in place monies to help
pay for a bridge, pedestrian bridge, that would go across Nine Mile. And those
comments are all contained in the Planning and Zoning prior meetings. Thank you,
Mayor.
Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: Okay. I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor, so moved.
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless moved. Do I hear a second?
Nary: Second.
Corrie: Okay. Motion has been made and seconded to close the Public Hearing. Any
further discussion? All in favor?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: Staff has said something that it looks like the applicant would like to respond
to. I think the applicant should have that chance.
Corrie: I'm sorry. I didn't even see you. Okay.
Ford: Thank you. Make this brief. Regarding the ten foot paved pathway, we were going
to do that along the Five Mile, we agreed to that, we just want clarification as to why it
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 84 of 89
needed to be ten feet. Regarding the Nine Mile, regarding the bridge, this is the first we
have heard of a bridge. And, second, regarding the Nine Mile -- the conditions of staff,
they have made the recommendation that that can go away, because it doesn't lead
anywhere and it doesn't make a lot of sense for the site. So we are in partial agreement
with that condition. Like I said, I just wanted some clarification from Tom Kuntz on the
nine feet. But the bridge, this is news to us and we request that that be deleted.
Corrie: Tom?
Kuntz: Mayor and Council, the ten foot wide hard surface pathways is a standard that
we have adopted. There is other developments that we can show to verify that to the
developer. The bridge issue, there is nothing new. If you go back through our comments
to Planning and Zoning, I can show the developer that the bridge was an issue and is
an issue. And, again, we -- the parks staff feels like the link to the Five Mile Creek
pathway along the Nine Mile is important for those subdivisions, Dakota Ridge,
Inglewood to the south, so that the kids don't have to go to the intersection and go up to
the Five Mile. Now that link may not have to be ten foot wide, we certainly can discuss
that issue, but those comments, again, were made twice to the Planning and Zoning, so
there is nothing new.
Ford: And just one last comment. The comment regarding -- I haven't seen the memo,
so -- we came in on this project a little bit later, so that might be my miscommunication. I
apologize for that. But, second, we would like just to reiterate that the Nine Mile
pathway does not go anywhere to the subdivisions to the south. It would end right into
Ustick, so that's just what I'd like to get on the record. Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. Any other discussions?
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Just to make note, Mr. Kuntz's comments are here on -- dated April 17th to the
Planning and Zoning Commission and it talks about the ten foot wide path along the
Five Mile and Nine Mile drain and then that they have to provide a letter of credit for one
half construction of the future pedestrian bridge over the Nine Mile Drain and there isn't
a finding by Planning and Zoning Commission, they recommend denying it, so there
isn't any finding by them to consider that, so --
Kuntz: Mr. Mayor, the other memo is dated October 11th, 2001. Thank you.
Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion? Okay. All in favor of the motion say aye. Okay.
Ayes motion is approved. The hearing is approved. And discussion, comments. Okay.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 85 of 89
Nary: Mr. Mayor:
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I have heard this application a lot and unlike many of the applications that we get,
I think from -- if you look at what we saw last year and what we see now, you wouldn't
recognize it as the same application. So I do appreciate the attempt and the work that
has gone in to try to make this work and trying to do everything they can, which would
be as far away from these homes as it could be. If it's contained within a building, it
probably is not going to have the impact that people think as the transfer station will in
Twin Falls or somewhere else. The landscaping is better than what we get around an
office. I mean there is a tremendous amount of work that's gone in to try and get this to
mediate the problems that have been addressed for the last eight or nine months. But
sometimes I just can't -- no matter what you do, I don't think you can make this work. I
just don't think we will ever not listen to people that hate this project in that spot and
that's my concern. And the problem is now Hubble Homes told us a year ago we think
it's great, we love it, and now I have really no doubt what the gentleman says that
probably someone told them it was going to be a park. They have been saying it's
going to be a park for last the nine years in that spot, even though it hasn't been
proposed to be a park for about eight. So the problem is is that now we are building
homes that those people that have bought those homes have no idea that's what was
going to be there and it's the same problem we had. If this was built a year ago those
homes aren't there, now they are. The more and more this gets delayed -- and that's
not anyone's -- it's SSC's fault, it's not the developer's fault, it's anybody's fault, it just is.
But it just -- I just have a hard time saying this is going to work. I recognize they have
done everything they can. I don't fault them for anything they have tried to do and this is
just one of those places that it just -- just aren't going to convince those people that live
there that this can work. It just is that difficult to want to annex this property and do that.
And, again, I know we can fight this battle again, because I think the Mixed Use
Wastewater Treatment Plant zone will allow for this use again and I understand all
those things and I don't have a concern that SSC can't manage their property, because
they manage all their property well, their contract is with the city, the people that enforce
it is us. But I just -- I guess I just feel in my gut that annexing this property and putting
this there is just -- it's just a rock we don't want to turn over.
McCandless: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. McCandless.
McCandless: As hard as it is, Steve and Bill run a wonderful, great business. They
really do. I wish you all knew how well they run that. You know, sitting up here it's
awfully hard to not listen to the people that live out there. I wish I could tell you where a
better place is for you. I can't. I don't know. But I sort of agree with Bill Nary. I don't
know what else to say. It's one of the hardest decisions I have ever had to make.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 86 of 89
De Weerd: It's always hard for me not to comment. I was against the text change
amendment to begin with. I live out in that area. I don't see a problem with the waste
treatment plant or a transfer station next to our sewer treatment plan. It's one of those
things of what other kind of compatible use can you have and I have kids that will go to
Ponderosa, too. That's not what bothers me. I think that what they have done is, just
like Councilman Nary said, they totally turned this application around and, actually,
that's the beauty of the public process is -- I know I have seen the faces here a number
of times and they are the reason it looks like that, but, too, I think that it's kind of at the
point where I don't know if they could do anything more to still make it appeasing to the
surrounding neighborhood. This is a very residential area and people moved in there
knowing about the sewer treatment plan and they are living with it. I can't compound
that, whether I personally would agree that this would be a good use or not. I do think
that our city is going to have to work with one of the service providers in trying to find a
place for it and a place where we can have temporary sewer or something that will
serve it in an industrial area, because that is the appropriate use for it, is a heavy
industrial area and not a light industrial area. And even with the new language that I
didn't support, this still doesn't fit with that new language. So I don't know what else to
say, other than the integrity of SSC is beyond reproach. They are a top notch company.
We saw the company and I think many of you did before they took it over. They have
put a whole new definition of this company and really cleaned up its image. I'm not
concerned about them, even as long as they are owners, but, unfortunately, some
things change and I can't say anymore.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I would say one other thing and probably not very popular, but no one ever that
sits here is popular all the time. You know, I think for most people I think we recognize
that's a single lot, there are other spots, we'll just find somewhere else. The impact to
the rest of our city would be that potentially we are going to have to pay higher costs for
trash, because they are going to have to put it in a spot that's further out of town to be
able to do the same thing where you want. So, understand, that is the impact it has and
that's okay and that's something that's part of life, too, but that is the impact and that is
something that we have to weigh as well, but, you know, like I said, I think it's just one of
those things that just no matter how many ways you try to dress up this pig, it still looks
like a pig. Sorry. We have been here all day --
De Weerd: We have been together all day long, you know, and we are starting to
really --
Nary: It's just one of those things. Sorry.
Corrie: Any other comments?
Bird: I have none.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 87 of 89
Corrie: Okay. I don't usually say anything, but I'm going to this time. Tammy mentioned
that if it doesn't pass tonight that the city needs to help find a spot for these people,
because at the present time the properties are outrageously high for anything of this
nature right now and Mr. Nary is absolutely right, if they have to pay an enormous price
for land, you're going to have to pay more for the trash hauling business and, again,
they are a tremendous company, they have turned a 360 as far as collecting trash and
being good neighbors as a business. So which ever way this vote comes out, I will do
my best and I'm sure the Council will, too, if they vote negative on this, that we find
them a place and at least get some sewer and water to them where they can put it in a
different place. So I think that that being said, I think the Council knows where I'm
coming from and what I would -- how I would vote. So we will see how they vote and
whether I do or not. So I guess with that being said, we call for the question -- and I
think we have -- we will have a vote. Okay. I need to have a motion for the request or
annexation on Utility Subdivision.
Nary: Oh, I will do it, Mr. Mayor. I would move that we deny AZ 01-015, request for
annexation and zoning of 34.60 acres from RUT to I-L and L-O zones for the proposed
Utility Subdivision by Falcon Creek, LLC, pursuant to staff comments and the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and for council to prepare
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? Hearing none,
roll-call vote, Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Corrie: Four ayes. You don't have to hear what I had to say. All right. I will now entertain
a motion for the preliminary plat.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I move that we deny PP 01-017, request for preliminary plat approval of 11
building lots on 34.60 acres in a proposed I-L and L-O zone for the proposed Utility
Subdivision by Falcon Creek, LLC., pursuant to the recommendations of the Planning
and Zoning Commission and staff comments and the testimony here tonight and for
Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order to that effect.
De Weerd: I second it.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 88 of 89
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion?
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd.
De Weerd: I probably don't have any discussion on the particular motion, but I do have
a comment.
Corrie: Okay.
De Weerd: When this text change came through, I think we sent the application -- or the
applicant a mixed message and also, you know, these neighbors have invested a lot of
time in this and, boy, the applicant has invested a lot of time with it. I don't know when
Council approved the text amendment what they had in mind, but what they approved
was this application that was in front of them, so I guess I'm a little confused as to the
turn around and that we need to be a little bit clearer on expectations when we ask
people to invest a lot of their time and effort, whether it's the neighbors or the applicant.
Like I said, I have seen these faces in here and you have invested a lot of your time and
the applicant has invested a lot of their time and money to try and make this work. So I
think we need to start doing a better job in letting people know the directions that we are
going and I'm not just saying that because I voted no, but I am concerned that it has
gone on to P&Z, to City Council, after that point and it's a mixed message that we had
out there, so --
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Corrie: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I think I've probably heard this more than everybody, but -- and the text
amendment was my motion at Planning and Zoning and my motion here, but in my
opinion we have never given anybody the impression that this was a done deal, that
this was an easy road. We said over and over and over you need to convince those
people that live there that this can work and as much as they tried -- and I have said it
over and over, too, they have tried, it just isn't going to work. But we never, in my
opinion, ever gave anybody the impression that this was going into effect. We agreed to
the text amendment because there wasn't anything to prohibit it, but we have said
unless you can convince the people in that room right here, the same people that are
just like you that this is a good deal, it won't happen. This isn't going to work. So I don't
think we sent a mixed message. I think we said the process requires it and we would
follow the process and said when we get to the end of the day we will see what
happens and this is what happened, so --
Corrie: Okay.
De Weerd: I will call for the question.
Meridian City Council Meeting
July 16, 2002
Page 89 of 89
Corrie: The question has been called for. Mr. Berg.
Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Nary, aye; DeWeerd, aye; Bird, aye.
Corrie: All ayes. Request for preliminary plat is denied.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Corrie: Okay. That concludes the City Council agenda for July 16th. Council, I will
entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing -- or close the --
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I move we adjourn.
Bird: I second it.
Corrie: All in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Corrie: See you at 9:30 in the morning.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:30 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
/ /
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE APPROVED
ATTESTED:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK