HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 11-25Meridian City Council Meeting November 25,
2003
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.M., on
Tuesday, November 25, 2003, by Council President Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Tammy de Weerd, William Nary, and Keith Bird.
Members Absent: Mayor Robert Corrie and Cherie McCandless.
Others Present: Bill Nichols, Will Berg, Anna Powell, Brad Watson, Gary Smith, Kenny
Bowers, Wendy Kirkpatrick and Dean Willis.
Item 1. Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
__X Tammy de Weerd _ X__ Bill Nary
O Cherie McCandless __X Keith Bird
O Robert Corrie
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call the regular meeting for the City Council to
order. It's November 25th
at 7:30 and I'd like to welcome you all here with us today and
ask the city clerk to call roll.
Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Number 2, adoption of the agenda. We have a number
of changes. First, staff has asked items 3D, E and F to be pulled off the Consent
Agenda to the regular -- and added to the regular agenda under Item 5, to change nine
-- to consider nine before eight and that's all the changes I know of. Oh, and to add an
item under Department Reports under B, add a second item to discuss Tuscany.
Department Reports. Yes.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we adopt the revised agenda as noted.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as revised. All
those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 2 of 67
Item 3. Consent Agenda:
A. Approve minutes of October 21, 2003 Pre-Council Meeting:
B. Approve minutes of October 28, 2003 City Council Regular
Meeting:
C. Approve minutes of November 5, 2003 Pre-Council Meeting:
G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
03-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned
Development in a proposed C-G zone for proposed Silverstone
Business Campus by Sundance Investments – southeast corner
of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road:
H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR
03-018 Request for a Variance for a one-year Time Extension for
recording of the Final Plat for Olsen Bush Subdivision No. 2 by
R2 Development, Inc. – west of North Eagle Road and north of
East Franklin Road:
I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP
03-046 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a branch bank
facility with drive-thru lanes in an L-O zone for Idaho Central
Credit Union by Idaho Central Credit Union – east of South Locust
Grove Road and south of East Overland Road:
J. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 03-
024 Request for annexation and zoning of 17.5 acres from RUT to
R-8 zones for proposed Glacier Springs Subdivision by Tuscany
Development, Inc. – north of East Victory Road and east of South
Meridian Road:
K. Approve Beer and Liquor License Transfer from Chipotle Grill
at 2031 East Fairview, Suite 103 to Whitewater Saloon at 1646
North Meridian Road:
L. Agreement for Professional Services for NPDES Permit
Applications – CH2MHill:
M. Water Main Easement for D.L. Evans Bank:
N. Finance Report:
De Weerd: Item 3. Consent Agenda.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 3 of 67
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda with Item D, E, and F being changed to
5D, 5E and 5F on the Regular Agenda, and for the Council President to sign and the
Clerk attest on all proper papers.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda, with
the removal of 3D, E, and F to the Regular Agenda. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll?
Roll Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Item 4. Department Reports:
A. Planning and Zoning Department – Anna Powell:
1. Agreement for Services with Diane Kushlan for Zoning
Ordinance Update:
De Weerd: I would like to welcome our Boy Scout troop -- or Boy Scout member from
Troop 152. It's nice to have you here. We will go ahead and move to Number 4,
Department Reports and start with the Planning and Zoning Department Number 1,
agreement for services with Diane Kushlan with zoning ordinance update.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, I have been dropping hints, I
suppose, that I have been working on a contract for the zoning ordinance. Ms. Kushlan
and I were able to come to an agreement on the scope and I wanted to run it by for you
for approval for a draft document. This just gets us to the draft stage. It would be 6,000
dollars and, then, we will decide from that point whether she would have additional
services, but it is within the Planning and Zoning Department budget for professional
services and we ask that you approve it. She has been working with the City of
Caldwell quite a bit in the recent past and she's also working with Garden City on a
similar zoning ordinance update.
De Weerd: And, Anna, she's taking off on some of the work that's already been done is
that correct?
Powell: Yes. I will give her copies of all the draft standards that we have. She's using
a model ordinance that -- kind of taking our standards and moving them into that kind of
premade format. It will give a lot more format and structure and clarity for findings and
standards than we currently have.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 4 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Do I hear a motion?
Nary: For what?
De Weerd: To accept.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we join into an agreement Diane Kushlan for the zoning ordinance
update for the amount of 6,000 dollars, plus any change orders that would come
through. Is that right?
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to accept the agreement for services
with Diane Kushlan. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
B. Public Works Department – Brad Watson:
1. Selection of Consultant Rosters for FY 2004 Water
Projects:
De Weerd: Okay. 4B is Public Works Department, Brad Watson. Start with the
selection of consultant rosters for FY 2004 water projects.
Watson: Thank you, Madam President, Council members. I wouldn't ordinarily bring
something like this to you, but this is a little different from everything we have done in
the past. Normally, with a project we issue an RFP for a single project. This one -- with
so many capital projects on the water side of things this fiscal year, we chose to issue
one RFP to the consultant community and develop rosters for three types of projects,
minor water pipe pipelines, major pipeline projects and pumping facilities. We received
seven proposals and we have chosen a roster that should be with your packet for each
of those types of work. I think this will greatly streamline our process and allow us to
get a lot more done this fiscal year than we ordinarily would have. The other benefit,
not necessarily to the city staff, but to the consultant community is that they only had to
develop one proposal. I know these are really time consuming, you probably haven't
seen many of these, but these are the Clawson 50 page packets that they put together
for every project and it's not only time consuming for them, but it's costly. Wrap it all
into one project and we would just appreciate your approval of this roster and, as I say
in the memo, we will, of course, bring each individual contract to you for approval once
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 5 of 67
we negotiate a satisfactory scope of work with the selected consultant and that's all I
have, unless you have any questions.
De Weerd: Any questions?
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I guess I don't have a question, but a comment. I really appreciate the efficiency
of doing it this way, Brad. I think it is going to be an enhancement for -- and also save
some time as well in having to go through this over and over again. I think it's a very
good change.
Watson: Thank you.
Nary: Did you want a motion to accept that? Is that -- I noticed that in the memo.
De Weerd: Do you need one?
Bird: We need one.
Watson: Madam President, Council members, I would appreciate a motion, just to
approve these rosters, because we have made a selection of certain people and cut
certain people out and I would feel more comfortable entering into negotiations with any
of them if there was a motion approving those rosters.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we accept the proposals for major pipeline projects, small water
pipeline, and improvement projects and pumping facilities as determined by the city
engineer.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been move and seconded to accept the department's
contractors. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
2. Tuscany Lakes Subdivision No. 1.
De Weerd: Okay. Item Number 2 has to do with Tuscany Lakes Subdivision No. 1
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 6 of 67
Watson: Yes. Thank you, Madam President, Council members. You're correct. This is
Tuscany Lakes Subdivision No. 1. The plat is -- has been submitted to my office for
signature. During review, I did notice one change from the Final Plat that Council
approved about a year ago and in regards the right of way with -- on South Locust
Grove Road. The right of way width that was to be dedicated from centerline was 45
feet on the Preliminary Plat, as well as the Final Plat that City Council approved. The
plat submitted to me has a 35-foot from centerline right of way being proposed as
dedicated. The landscape common lot didn't increase in width it remained the same.
The lots that back up to South Locust Grove Road simply deepened by 10 feet. I
contacted Christie Richardson at ACHD and she e-mailed me a letter that should be in
the memo that I sent to the clerk's office only this afternoon. She is correct in that
Tuscany Village, when it came through for preliminary plat, ACHD asked for a 35-foot
right of way. It -- I believe it, actually, is across the street for a portion of the north end
of this -- of Tuscany Lakes project. Even with that letter, I still inquired of Mr. Nichols
whether I needed to bring this before you and he recommended that I do something
that we did on Victory Road, although that's a slightly different situation, in that the
ultimate right of way was designated as 45 feet or 48. They added an additional
common lot -- I think it was ten feet that could be dedicated separately in the future. I'm
here to get a little direction from Council on this matter. Matt Schultz from Tuscany
Development has -- is in attendance and can probably explain the whole scenario of
events better than I can, if it would please you to ask him any questions. Other than
that, I don't have any other information.
De Weerd: Okay. Brad, in that letter it says it's not yet a collector or arterial. I mean
what does that mean? Will it change in the future and maybe in the future they will need
this?
Watson: Madam President, I guess I cannot speak to the intent of her letter. I
understand what she's saying, but the letter didn't give me a real -- to use the
vernacular, warm and fuzzy when I read it, because it did leave a little wiggle room.
There is that word yet and Tuscany Lakes No. 1 is not specifically mentioned in the
letter and she does go on to say that with the Tuscany Village application across the
street and somewhat north, that ACHD changed their requirement to match what would
be a right of way for a three lane collector.
De Weerd: So, they are suggesting that a three lane roadway on this -- on this portion
of Locust Grove is adequate and that's why they are reducing the right of way?
Watson: Yes. That's my understanding.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions? Does the applicant have anything to add?
Please state your name and address.
Schultz: Matt Schultz. 660 East Franklin with Tuscany Development. Just real quick. I
appreciate Brad catching this. He is correct, that kind of midstream ACHD changed
how they -- what they want as far as right of way is concerned on some of their section
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 7 of 67
line roads. They used to operate -- at least I used to operate and everything was a --
pretty much at 48 foot on the section lines, but they went back -- I think they -- I believe
they have a master plan that shows with Eagle being a mile one way and Meridian
being a mile the other way, that those are the main arterials and Locust Grove is more
the minor collector, so to speak. We did change the plat. We incorrectly assumed that
if ACHD was okay with it, Meridian would be okay with it and Brad caught us and here
we are. We are not trying to get away with anything. We believe right now 25 feet is
adequate, give an extra 10 for future widening and then if worst comes to worst, if they
want to take another ten out of it, we have 33 feet of landscaping, there would still be 23
feet left. The trees would still be there. The fence will still be there. The subdivision is
built. It is an existing subdivision right now. Landscaping is in, and fencing is in on that
property line between the common lot and those building lots. I guess we are asking to
proceed as the plat has been submitted to Brad in acknowledging that we did change it
in midstream. I can't say in the future we'd ever do that again, because ACHD has
pretty much established new policy that we are always going to follow from here on out
and it's just kind of an unfortunate circumstance that caught ourselves in mid transition.
It happened on Messina Village, it happened on Messina Hills, and it happened on this
one where -- and solved them all a little bit differently. I think in this case the cleanest
way to do it is approve it as platted and if ACHD wants to come and take a sliver of our
common lot, they could do that like they do all over the place when they are widening
roads and there is room to do it, it's an extra wide landscape area, you could still have
your sidewalk and get 45. If they ever changed their mind or in 30 years traffic
changes, you know, we will see, but the developer's master plan is based on projected
densities. I know Tuscany is under projected densities. Same with our sewer flows.
You know, the whole section develops out in the same density and they classify these
roads accordingly. I know we are coming in under that, so maybe they are right in this
case, we will see. I don't know if that clarifies anything, but I will go ahead and move for
it. I have four on the agenda tonight, so I don't want to take too much time. Thank you.
De Weerd: Any questions? Okay. Thank you, Matt. Okay. Council?
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I guess, if I understand correctly, I don't think -- Brad's not necessarily looking for
a motion or anything, but more of direction of do we have a concern about this change
of ten feet. Is that right?
Watson: Council Member Nary, that's exactly right. At this point this plat, I believe, is
ready for me to sign and move on for recording -- well, to the Ada County surveyor and
recordation, and I'm just not quite ready to sign that without some direction from
Council.
Bird: Yes, because they are changing the Final Plat that we approved.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 8 of 67
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: And I don't blame Brad.
Nary: No, I guess, Madam President, I mean I don't blame Mr. Watson for bringing it to
our attention. Is this a -- is this plat in substantial compliance. It appears to me that it
is. I mean 10 feet -- 10 feet different that's now just still taken up with landscaping and
grass and is consistent with what ACHD at this point is requiring is fine. I think Mr.
Schultz is right, if a plat -- the way the plat is done, there is available roadway space if
they want that in the future and they'd have to buy it and deal with it and all that, but
they are saying that's all we want, so what else would we do? We would make them
make it ten feet wider for our purpose? That's not our thing. I don't see any reason that
they can't sign this plat. I think it's good that Mr. Watson brought it to our attention I
think it's appropriate here, but I think we have been adequately explained as to why it's
the way it is and I'm fine with it.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I agree with Councilman Nary to the point that I don't -- I don't want to put the
responsibility back on the staff when you have passed something like this, because all
the Council might not feel the same way about that at that time we pass that. That's the
thing I don't like is we get -- we are getting changes on final plats after we have
approved them and, then, they go back to the staff with changes on them and we
expect them to do it. I agree with you, I don't see any problem with this and I appreciate
it being brought back before us.
De Weerd: I guess I just have one question. I don't have a problem with this one, but
on our final plats do we get comments from ACHD?
Watson: Madam President, no, we don't. I solicited comments on this one specifically.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, thanks, and they are agreeing and that's why the applicant,
apparently, changed the Final Plat, so, yes, it doesn't seem like any of us have a
problem with it. We may in this particular area or as we work closer together with
ACHD, make sure what their right-of-way requirements are and make sure those are
what's reflected on the plat, so we know at Final Plat if we need to change something.
Because I agree, we should be approving what is going to be built and when ACHD -- I
guess when ACHD makes a change like this, they really should be telling the city. So, I
guess if we need to we could ask that a letter be drawn up just to notify ACHD when
something changes on the plats, we would like to be notified, so that you're aware of it
when it comes to you for signature as well.
Watson: Madam President, I can do that. I can talk with Bruce or Kristy and we can
work that out.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 9 of 67
De Weerd: Okay.
Watson: All right. Thank you.
Item 5. (Items moved from the Consent Agenda.)
D. Tabled from November 12, 2003: Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 03-015 Request for
annexation and zoning of 9.8 acres from RUT to R-8 zones for
proposed Sageland Planned Development by Quasar
Development, LLC – northeast corner of South Locust Grove Road
and East Victory Road:
E. Tabled from November 12, 2003: Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 03-020 Request for
revised Preliminary Plat approval of 41 building lots and 9 other lots
on 10.64 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Sageland
Planned Development by Quasar Development, LLC – northeast
corner of South Locust Grove Road and East Victory Road:
F. Tabled from November 12, 2003: Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 03-036 Request for
Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development with a private
neighborhood park in an R-8 zone for proposed Sageland Planned
Development by Quasar Development – northeast corner of South
Locust Grove Road and East Victory Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item Number 5. We moved Items 3D, E, and F from the
Consent Agenda to Item 5 and we will open those for staff comments. Anna.
Powell: Madam President -- I have a feeling I'm going to be very tongue tied tonight. I
apologize in advance. Madam President, Members of the Council, I asked you to
consider this on your regular agenda, because I guess I need a little more direction.
The motion regarding this plat -- this was in regard to the fact that we were concerned
about cut-through traffic. The motion was to incorporate a 10-foot landscape island as
a traffic calming measure. The applicant has attempted to do that in a number of ways,
but never widening the right of way, so we have kept it a 50-foot right of way, but tried to
include traffic calming measures in an island. It has become clear I think to both the
applicant and staff that this is an impossible task to have a landscape island that serves
any kind of traffic calming function and have that within a 50-foot right of way. You can't
get the fire trucks around it adequately. There is a possibility we could make it kind of a
bominate island, one that the fire department could drive over. We haven't gotten a
chance to workout details on that. I guess the question is -- that's not much of a
landscape island at that point, it's just concrete. I felt during the hearing process that
the Council wanted them to increase the right of way to accommodate that island. Is
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 10 of 67
that the way you want to go? Would you be okay with just a concrete island in the
middle of the street that -- if we can workout the details with the fire department, so that
there are two options as I see it now?
De Weerd: You know, not having read the minutes to it, it seems to me like we asked if
that would accommodate and got the impression that it would, but I believe that was the
intent.
Powell: You asked it 50-foot would accommodate a traffic island.
De Weerd: If what was on there would accommodate the ten foot landscape island.
Not a concrete one, and I wouldn't imagine that they would want a concrete island in the
middle of their nice development.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I think I chimed in a lot on this particular one and I don't think I ever contemplated
a concrete wall in the middle of the road. I think we talked about an island, a visual
barrier -- we ask, my recollection is the same as Council President de Weerd, that we
did ask if there was adequate roadway to do that. It wasn't to sacrifice the island for the
roadway, but to sacrifice the width of the roadway for the island, because the island was
there to create that visual -- visual barrier there, so that people knew it was coming.
They knew they had to get around it, they would have to slow down to be able to get
around it and I thought Mr. Forrey was okay with that. No, I don't really -- it wasn't my
intent that it be just a concrete blob in the middle of the road, it was, actually, a
landscaped island.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any further comment?
Powell: No. That will suffice. Thank you.
De Weerd: So, what kind of action would you like Council to do at this point?
Powell: I guess it would be appropriate to table it -- I'm looking to see if we are talking
about a week or two weeks. We are having an awful hard time coming to an agreement
on this. I think that to put a landscape island in there, they will have to, as we said,
widen the right of way in portions and they are concerned that they will be losing lots,
and that's been their reluctance all along, but that was my recollection from the hearing.
De Weerd: Yes so, table it to the 9th
of December? Okay. That's two weeks.
Powell: Yes.
Bird: Madam President?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 11 of 67
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we table Items AZ 03-015, PP 03-020, and CUP 03-036, Sageland
Planned Development by Quasar Development until December 9, 2003.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to table the Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law for approval for AZ 03-015, PP 03-020, and CUP 03-036, to
December 9, 2003. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Item 6. Motion to Reconsider the Motion to Postpone CUP 03-047
Observation Point Subdivision to December 9, 2003 for Decision:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 6 is a motion to reconsider the motion to postpone CUP 03-047,
Observation Point Subdivision to December 9, 2003, for decision.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I need a question answered by legal here, if it's okay. We denied this or tied with
a denial and what do we need -- if I want to make an approval motion, do I just go
ahead and make it, because, basically, that motion is dead.
Nichols: Madam President, Members of the Council, procedurally, when the motion
failed because of a tie, no decision was made. Then, the Council moved to table this to
the December 9th
meeting, which I found out later is, technically, a motion to postpone
to a date certain. You first have to move to reconsider the decision to postpone it to
December 9th and, then, if you decide to reconsider that motion and take it up now,
then, you would make a separate motion with regard to the application itself.
De Weerd: Thank you. At this point I would entertain a motion to reconsider the motion
to postpone.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we reconsider the motion to postpone CUP 03-047,
Observation Point Subdivision, which was to December 9, 2003, for decision to
November 25, 2003.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 12 of 67
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to reconsider the motion to postpone
-- boy, I got your disease there -- CUP 03-047 to today. All those in favor say aye. All
ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Item 7. Continued from November 18, 2003 for Decision: CUP 03-047
Request for a Conditional Use Permit to demolish existing home and
rebuild one single family residential dwelling for caretakers quarters on lot
2, block 2 of Observation Point Subdivision in a R-4 zone by RF
Construction – 500 East Victory Road:
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve CUP 03-047, Observation Point Subdivision with staff,
applicant, and public testimony included, with a 14,000 square foot house -- 1,400. I'm
sorry. That would really -- 1,400 square foot house and with all the -- I was trying to
help you along, and all the previous findings that we had -- or testimony that -- about
the landscaping and the side entry on the garage and that stuff and have the attorney
draw up the proper Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve CUP 03-047 with all staff
comments and applicant's testimony. Did that also include that they would not develop
the rest of that lot -- okay. That's all in testimony. Is there anything else, staff that
needs to be clarified?
Powell: The only issue I might ask you to clarify, Madam President, Members of the
Council, is the -- Craig Hood did a memo dated that 18th
regarding -- in the bolded text it
would be landscaping along Victory Road, staff -- in addition to the landscaping along
Victory Road. Staff recommends that Council require the applicant to either sod or
seed and maintain, mow and remove weeds on the undeveloped portion of the subject
lot. It hadn't been in the previous conditions of approval, so --
De Weerd: Okay, and I think the applicant agreed at the meeting.
Bird: He testified regarding that he would take care of that.
De Weerd: Okay. That would be included in all staff comments and testimony. Mr.
Attorney, is there enough for you in this motion to make some good findings for us?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 13 of 67
Nichols: Madam President, we always make good findings. The question is whether
they are correct. What I would ask is that we not be expected to have this on the 9th
,
but, rather, have it on the 16th
, because we will want to get them out to staff to review
well ahead of the time -- the deadline for the clerk. Typically, we try to have these on for
the 9th
, but if we could have the extra week, it will help us a lot, as far as getting the
draft. I think there is enough we can make a good stab at it. I think we can get it there.
De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Is there any further discussion?
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Well, as those who know me, I don't usually change my mind very often and --
but on this particular one, as I stated last week on the record, my main concern here
was the precedent that we were setting for ourselves. In reviewing that and rethinking
this and where we are simply maintaining the existing grandfather use on that property
and, essentially, just improving that and not expanding this, courts have been very
supportive of that type of action that they are attempting to do here and not an
expansion. This isn't an expansion, so I -- in rethinking that, it seems reasonable, then,
to go ahead and do that, because it's not putting the city in a different situation for future
developments, because courts have supported this type of action, so that's the reason
I'm going to vote the other way.
Bird: Mark this down. Mark it on the wall.
Nary: That's why we keep minutes of these meetings.
De Weerd: He did not say he was wrong.
Bird: He didn't admit he was wrong, no.
Nary: No. I just said I rethought it. I didn't say I was wrong.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Okay. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll?
Roll Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Item 9. FP 03-062 Request for Final Plat approval for 40 single-family residential
building lots and 7 common lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear
Creek Subdivision No. 7 by Bear Creek, LLC - west of South Meridian
Road and south of West Overland Road:
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 14 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. Item Number 9, which we moved ahead of Number 8, is FP 03-062,
request for final plat approval of 40 single-family residential building lots. I just wanted
to hear Councilman Nary say he was -- he reviewed it and reconsidered it again. Sorry,
and seven common lots on 13.85 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No.
7 by Bear Creek, LLC, and ask staff to comment.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, the proposed final plat is in
substantial conformance with the approved preliminary plat. There are no outstanding
issues with regard to the lots, regarding frontages or minimum square footage. The
only issue of concern which we will struggle with for years is the fact that this one
originally -- this one will always be Subdivision No. 7, it's the following one that will
probably always be Subdivision No. 7, but it will -- it will, actually be No. 8. It's very
confusing.
De Weerd: So, we have a 7A and a 7B.
Powell: Well, except for 7A will be seven -- let me back up a little bit. I'm sorry. They
submitted the next subdivision that you will see to our office for Final Plat, so we noticed
it as Final Plat number -- Phase 7, but they decided that they wanted the city engineer
to sign this one first for marketing reasons. They submitted this one as seven also.
Because we already had a hearing on the previous number seven, that will have to be
changed by hand to Number 8, but there is a likelihood of a confusion lasting longer, as
you can tell by my conversation today. In regard to this one, there are no outstanding
issues and staff is recommending approval.
De Weerd: Thank you, staff. Does the applicant have any comments? Do you agree
with all staff comments? Okay. Please state your name and address.
Schultz: Matt Schultz, 660 East Franklin with Bear Creek, LLC. I'd like to apologize for
the confusion that was caused by my bosses, but they -- we do want to do both projects
next year, but we definitely want to do this number seven first and the county engineer
won't let us record them out of order and so I told my consultant to switch them and he
submitted everything and here is what we have and, hopefully, we can see our way
through this and approve this as seven and the next one as eight and we are looking for
their continued success with the subdivision and that's it. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions? I won't ask for comments. Okay. Do I hear a
motion?
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I would move the approval of FP 03-062, the request for final plat approval for 40
single family residential building lots, seven common lots, on 13.85 acres in an R-4
zone for Bear Creek Subdivision No. 1 -- or No. 7, by Bear Creek, LLC, west of South
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 15 of 67
Meridian Road, south of West Overland Road, for the attorney to draw up the
appropriate papers, including all staff comments and the applicant's comments.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve FP 03-062 and ask the
attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Mr. Clerk.
Roll-Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 8. Tabled from November 5, 2003: FP 03-052 Request for Final Plat
approval of 12 building lots and 9 other lots on 10.92 acres in an R-4 zone
for Bear Creek No. 7 by Bear Creek, LLC – South Stoddard Road and
West Victory Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item Number 8, which, really, is Number 9, it just follows
this Bear Creek thing, tabled from November 5, 2003, FP 03-052, request for final plat
approval of 12 building lots and nine other lots on 10.92 acres in an R-4 zone for Bear
Creek No. 7 and ask Anna to comment.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, this project is -- this plat is also in
substantial compliance with the approved Preliminary Plat. They actually came through
with a revised Preliminary Plat specifically on this site, so it is very close to the
approved preliminary. There was only one outstanding issue on frontage, they were
short a couple feet, but as I -- I think they can accommodate the additional frontage
around the cul-de-sac, so there are no outstanding issues that I'm aware of on this plat
and we recommend approval.
De Weerd: Okay. The applicant has no comment and must be in agreement with all
staff comments?
Powell: That is my understanding, yes.
De Weerd: Okay.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I'd move the approval of FP 03-052, the request for Final Plat approval of 12
building lots and nine other lots on 10.92 acres in a R-4 zone for Bear Creek No. 8 by
Bear Creek, LLC. South Stoddard Road and West Victory Road, for counsel to prepare
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 16 of 67
Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, Decision and Order, and including all staff
comments and the concurrence of the applicant.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve FP 03-052, with the
attorney to draw up the appropriate paperwork. Mr. Clerk.
Roll Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols?
Nichols: Madam President, Members of the Council, and applicant, we will make some
sort of reflection in the title to the findings that it's to be known as Bear Creek No. 8 in
the findings themselves.
Powell: That would be helpful. Thank you.
De Weerd: And the files will also note that accordingly?
Nichols: We will try.
Item 10. FP 03-063 Request for Final Plat approval of 42 single-family residential
building lots and 1 common lot on 12.06 acres in an R-8 zone for
Paramount Subdivision No. 2 by Paramount, LLC – east of North Linder
Road and south of West Chinden Boulevard:
De Weerd: Item Number 10, FP 03-063, request for final plat approval of 42 single
family residential building lots and one common lot on 12.06 acres in R-8 zone for
Paramount Subdivision No. 2 and ask for staff comments.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, this is the second phase to come in
for Paramount. The subject area is shown in the red ellipse. The final plat does
substantially comply with the approved Preliminary Plat. I would like to point out that
there is an error in the staff report. In the first paragraph on the gross density -- for a
moment I thought I was working for the city of Eagle. Instead of .28 dwelling units per
acre, it should be 3.48 dwelling units per acre and where it says net density .23, that
should be 4.35. The numbers she provided were acres per dwelling unit, not dwelling
units per acre. She transposed them. Staff recommends approval of the final plat.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is the applicant here? Have any comments? He agrees
with staff's comments and the changes. I would entertain a motion.
Bird: Madam President?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 17 of 67
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve FP 03-063, the request for final plat approval of 42
single family residential building lots and one common lot on 12.06 acres in an R-8
zone for Paramount Subdivision No. 2 by Paramount, LLC, east of North Linder Road
and south of West Chinden Boulevard, to include all staff and applicant comments and
to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve FP 03-063, to include the
staff comments reflecting the dwelling and net densities and ask the attorney to draw up
the appropriate paperwork. Mr. Clerk.
Roll Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Item 11. FP 03-064 Request for Final Plat approval of 28 multi-family residential
attached building lots, 3 office/commercial lots, and 10 common lots on 11
acres for The Courtyards at Ten Mile by Doug Campbell and Thomas
Bevan – northeast corner of West Pine Avenue and North Ten Mile Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 11 is Final Plat 03-064, request Final Plat approval of 28 multi-
family residential attached building lots, three office commercial lots, and 10 common
lots on 11 acres for the Courtyards at Ten Mile and ask staff to comment.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, this Final Plat is in substantial
conformance with the approved Preliminary Plat. I have both of them here. It
encompasses basically all of the Preliminary Plat. As you can see, they are -- they are
platting both the commercial and the residential portions I do need to point out one item.
They -- the four-plexes sit across a lot line and the four-plexes actually sit on a piece of
property that has an 80 foot frontage and an 8,000 square foot minimum and that's how
the staff report got written for up for minimums that's actually two lots, though. What
has been come through here has a 40-foot minimum and a 4,000 square foot lot
minimum. They are exactly consistent with the plat that was approved. It was just an
error on staff's part as noting those within the staff report -- the former staff report. If the
Council is comfortable with that -- basically, interpretation of staff's staff report, the plat
is in compliance with the approved Preliminary Plat.
De Weerd: Now, I notice that the applicant is not attending tonight, but he has reviewed
the staff report as -- before this amendment. Did you call and talk to them and this is
all --
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 18 of 67
Powell: Yes, and they had, actually, originally, written those minimum, the 8,000 square
foot and the 80 foot, because I think they were looking at their large buildings, so they
knew that it was an issue of concern. They didn't complain about it. I mean they
wouldn't want us to put an 80-foot frontage requirement on them. I'm not sure of what
your question was, Madam President.
De Weerd: Just if they are okay with the change.
Powell: Yes.
De Weerd: I didn't mean to make it difficult.
Nichols: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Anna, can you tell me, specifically, which comment that is, so that I can note
that, please?
Powell: In the original staff report?
Nichols: Well, whichever -- if we have got a supplemental staff report that corrects it,
fine. If there is a problem in the original, I need to --
Powell: It's detailed in our plat staff report.
Nichols: That's all I needed. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Well, since the applicant is not here, Council?
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If we are not going to have any discussion, I will move that we approve FP 03-
064, the request for Final Plat approval of 28 multi-family residential attached building
lots, three office and commercial lots, and ten common lots on 11 acres for the
Courtyards at Ten Mile by Doug Campbell and Thomas Bevan. Northwest corner of
West Pine Avenue and North Ten Mile Road and to include all staff and applicant
comments and for the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
and Decision of Order.
Nary: Second.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 19 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve FP 03-064, with all staff
comments, applicant comments, and ask the attorney to draw up the appropriate
paperwork. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Item 12. Continued Public Hearing from October 14, 2003: MI 03-009
Request for modification of condition to leave the Onweiler Lateral open
and construct a 10 foot wide paved multi-use pathway and place a 5 foot
chain link fence along the south bank of canal for Silhouette Subdivision
by Silhouette LLC – east of North Meridian Road and south of East Ustick
Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 12 is a Continued Public Hearing from October 14, 2003, MI 03-
009, request for modification of condition to leave the Onweiler lateral open and
construct a ten foot wide paved multi-use pathway and place a five foot chain link fence
along the south bank of the canal for Silhouette Subdivision and open with staff
comments.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, this plat was originally -- the
Preliminary Plat was approved on February 19, 2003. The Final Plat was then
approved in October of 2002 and there was a condition -- it's a general condition of the
city that all irrigation ditches, laterals, or canals, exclusive of natural waterways that they
tiled per city ordinance. The specific waterway in question is the South Slough. It runs
at the north end of the Silhouette Subdivision. When the property to the east came
through with their subdivision, they, basically, said we will either tile it leave it open,
whatever the city wants or whatever Silhouette Subdivision is doing. We have known
that this application has been in the works for a while. These folks have asked that
instead of having a five-foot pathway over the tiled South Slough, that it be a 10-foot
pathway adjacent to the untiled slough and, then, they'd put up a chain link fence
between the pathway and the slough. The whole purpose of the modification -- or this
application is to understand which way the city wants to go, if they want to waive the
tiling requirement and, then, have the ten foot multi-use pathway. It is viewed as an
alternative route for the irrigation ditch. I don't know if you remember the waterway that
runs down at the south portion of this property. The question was if we get it there, we
got to get them across the street, and, then, get them up to this area. As both these
subdivisions go in, then, it becomes a surface pathway system, so it will connect from
this public street, it will go over to this public street. I believe that's Linder Road.
Meridian Road. Excuse me. Does that give you enough information for now?
De Weerd: So, basically, it's whether it's a ten foot or --
Powell: It's either a 10-foot --
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 20 of 67
De Weerd: -- tiled or not tiled.
Powell: The benefit that we get -- or what the developer is saying is if you allow me not
to tile it, I will increase the width of the pathway.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant here? Would you like
to comment? You need to wait until you're on the record and I do need to swear you in.
Sergeant: Ron Sergeant.
De Weerd: Please raise your right hand. Your left hand will work. Is the testimony you
provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Sergeant: Yes.
De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address.
Sergeant: Ron Sergeant. 4915 West Camas, Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Sergeant: My only comment I had on here is the report said that it's a five-foot chain
link fence. Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District has requested a six-foot chain link fence,
so --
De Weerd: Okay.
Sergeant: Any other questions?
De Weerd: No. Is that your only comment?
Sergeant: Yes. That's the only comment.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to testify on
this application? Okay. Any discussion? Okay. I would entertain a motion to close the
Public Hearing.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we close the Public Hearing on MI 03-009 for Silhouette Subdivision.
Nary: Second.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 21 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item
12, MI 03-009. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
De Weerd: Any further staff comments?
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, no, not really. I mean it's just a
question of which the City wants to see. I mean, in general, as planners we -- I like to
see that the canal ways stay open. With the requirement that we currently have with
Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, they are not going to be real pleasant. I mean a six
foot chain link fence and a narrow corridor with a ten foot pathway, may be okay for
now, but, hopefully, sometime in the future we can maybe find a way to make those
attractive or maybe not have fences. It might be 50 years, so who knows. At least it
preserves that opportunity.
De Weerd: Well, I do think that Nampa -- I don't want to get on my soap box about
having a pathway plan and set standards and all of that again, so I won't. I think that
Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District have requested over the years a solid master plan,
so they know where we are -- the directions we are going and maybe some of that will
solve -- or ease some of their concerns or some of the legal liability issues and we can
move forward to have better pathways. Any discussion?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the MI 03-009, the request for modification of conditions
to leave the Onweiler Lateral open and construct a 10-foot wide paved multi-use
pathway and place a six foot chain link fence along the south bank of the canal for
Silhouette Subdivision by Silhouette, LLC. East of North Meridian Road and south of
East Ustick Road and to incorporate all staff and applicant comments, public testimony,
and for the attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision
of Order.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve MI 03-009, with the noted
change from the five-foot chain link fence to six foot and ask the attorney to draw up the
appropriate paperwork and on MI do we have roll call vote?
Berg: Yes.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 22 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg.
Roll Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
Item 13. Continued Public Hearing from November 12, 2003: PP 03-026
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15 building lots on 4.15 acres in
an L-O zone for Stokesberry Subdivision No. 2 by Properties West, Inc.
– west of North Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 13 is a Continued Public Hearing from November 12, 2003, PP
03-026, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15 building lots on 4.15 acres in an L-O
zone for Stokesberry Subdivision No. 2 and we will open with staff comments.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, this is a replat of Carol Subdivision,
three lots within that subdivision. They are -- you can see them highlighted in the dark
area there. What they are proposing to do is to have, I believe, 15 buildable lots, so it
would be substantially breaking up a mass of those buildings as to what was previously
approved. Instead of three larger office buildings, you will be seeing 15 smaller ones. I
think this has been a consistent change you have seen throughout the city over the
recent times and it wouldn't be inconsistent. The public testimony -- or at the -- to
summarize the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, Daren Fluke testified in favor
of the application, he is the applicant's representative. There was also testimony from
three of the public regarding the much smaller building size. The key issues of
discussion did include landscape setbacks versus a landscape lot and I can go over
those briefly, if I can get it to come up. The landscape ordinance specifies that this
common landscape buffer, as required from the arterial road, should be in a separate
lot. On many of the commercial projects we have seen this as an easement on the lot,
rather than on a lot itself. Staff is supportive of this change. We just wanted to bring it
up at the Planning and Zoning and Council, so that you understood that that was a
change from the exact ordinance. Parking was also discussed and, then, the building
elevations. They were able to resolve most of those. There was no major change to
staff recommendations. Outstanding issues are, one, regarding requirements for a
noise screen study and I will get into that in a moment, and then, the second issue was
the landscape lot, which I already brought up. Let me go ahead and move on to the
noise issue. In the recommendations on Page 6, items included under F -- F1, 2 and 3,
we did take the exact requirements for ITD and show those to you, so that you would
understand what they are. The applicant has since followed up with ITD and you have -
- that letter should have been provided to you today as a handout. It wasn't in your
packets. Basically, ITD is saying this is a major road, we are now requiring noise
screens, which is, basically, a noise survey. They say if you don't -- if you want to
approve this without having the applicant get this survey, then, this -- not only the
developer needs to write a letter stating that they will never ask for noise abatement
features of any sort and they would ask that the city do that as well. That's where that
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 23 of 67
issue stands. I did fax this over to Mr. Nichols earlier. I didn't know if this was a -- didn't
know if the city could waive their right to ask for 50 years from now, ask for a noise
abatement on Eagle Road, because circumstances have changed. As staff, we couldn't
think of any reason why the office uses would require a noise abatement, but I didn't
know how comfortable the city was writing a letter saying that you would never ask for
them. I need guidance on that. I think that's the only real issue with regard to this
preliminary plat as proposed. It does come forward with a recommendation for
approval. The Planning and Zoning Commission did not get a chance to discuss the
ITD issue. Did I say that right? Yes. We have not discussed it in a public forum yet.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: This is either for Anna or Mr. Nichols. If we write this letter on this Stokesberry
Subdivision, which I have no problem doing, because it is an office and I can't see why
the noise abatement would hurt, but what does that -- does that keep us from writing --
or wanting noise abatement anyplace along Eagle Road. As I understand it, it kind of
does, if I'm reading this right.
Nary: Madam President, maybe while Mr. Nichols is pondering that I could ask a
different question.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nary.
Nary: You know, this is really pretty typical. You ask the government to explain itself
and you get something even stupider than when we first looked at this. I mean this
doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but do we need ITD's approval? We considered
deleting this condition, so I'm wondering do we even need ITD's approval and if we
delete this condition, because their explanation now is more absurd than what we
thought it was to begin with, is that going to matter to this project? Because I think I
was the one that talked Mr. Bird out of not deleting it until we understood it better and
now I think the explanation is ridiculous, so why don't we just delete it and does that
really matter?
Powell: I believe what you're asking, Councilmember Nary, is to delete the conditions of
approval that are in there currently?
Nary: I think there was one condition there of compliance with ITD's request and Mr.
Bird, I think, when we had previously discussed this, had moved to delete it and I
foolishly talked him into not doing it until we got a better explanation. Now, I don't like
their explanation, I think it's silly. I think we should just go back and delete it, as long as
that's not going to impact the developer from being able to go forward on his project. I
mean this is silly. I mean we can't waive forever on whether or not a noise -- you know,
some noise abatement may be necessary a year from now, five years from now, ten
years -- that's silly. It's a silly request for them to want a letter from the city to bind us
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 24 of 67
forever on this particular piece of property, but do you know -- does anybody know if it
would impact their ability to get a building permit, go forward on this project if we just
delete that condition?
Powell: You know, the applicant might have worked with ITD a little bit more on those
specific approvals. I think you do have to get an encroachment permit, but they already
have the encroachment, so I don't think they would be tied to it for that reason. I think
what this letter is saying is kind of, yes, go ahead and delete it, but we want you -- we
request that you write a letter and they don't say you have to write a letter. It just says
that they request that you write a letter, so that would seem to say you could delete the
conditions of approval, go ahead, approve it anyway, and not write the letter.
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols, do you have anything you would like to add?
Nichols: Madam President, Members of the Council, if you delete the conditions, the
applicant still has to comply with ITD to the extent that ITD has jurisdiction over the
particular issues. So -- but what it does by removing the condition is you're just -- you're
not going out on a limb with regard to future councils with regard to any particular issue
that might affect this noise issue.
De Weerd: Okay. There was one other pending item, other than this noise report, and I
think that it would be really helpful to have minutes of our previous meeting, so we
could follow this a little bit more closely. Is that possible, Mr. Clerk? I don't know if any
of the rest of the -- I hate to rehash things and it would be nice to be able to review it
prior to and not have to count on my scribbles to understand why we held it over as
well.
Powell: Madam President, I believe the minutes were finalized at about 4:00 o'clock
this afternoon. I didn't have time to review them before the --
Berg: They have them in their box.
Powell: Did they have them in their box? Okay.
De Weerd: Thank you. My wish is your command.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: What was your specific question? I found the page where we reopened the
Public Hearing Page 29 of 63. We have the minutes actually right here, so --
De Weerd: I think there was something other than just the noise thing, too. Oh. Okay.
We can just ask the applicant to come up and --
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 25 of 67
Nary: Madam President, just before Mr. Fluke comes up, what's indicated on Page 29
of 63 of our minutes of November 12, 2003, was that I had made the motion to reopen
the Public Hearing for the limited purpose of finding out further information from the staff
as to what this condition by ITD is. What impact that may have on the developer, as
well as giving the developer the opportunity respond to what that impact they believe to
be, but for that purpose only and that was just what I just read straight from the minutes.
De Weerd: But if you go a little further, it's for discussion purposes that one other thing
was that on the easement, if that's made into a lot, what impact it would have on those
buildings for setbacks.
Nary: Okay.
Powell: The setbacks are always measured from the property line, so it is a great
advantage to the applicant to have that as an easement, rather than a lot line. If it were
a lot line, they could request through a PD that they be able to build on that lot line, but,
then, from the building code standpoint, there are special -- there are restrictions for
buildings that close to a lot line, so they'd have to meet additional building code
requirements, likely. I think it is clearly an advantage. I think if we did not -- if we did
require a separate landscape lot and, then, a setback from that lot, I think it would wipe
out pretty much all of those lots back onto Eagle Road there. I don't think you would
have a big enough buildable area.
De Weerd: And was that not staff's recommendation?
Powell: No. Staff's recommendation is they are fine with the easement as it is. I think
the intent was to get that landscape buffer -- I think that the landscape ordinance
primarily had residential subdivisions in mind when it required that the landscape be on
a common lot, but I think for commercial properties we have routinely suggested -- at
least the applicant has requested, anyway, that that could be within an easement, rather
than a separate lot.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Does the applicant have any comments he would like to
add to what we have already said? Is the testimony you provide tonight truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Fluke: It is.
De Weerd: Please state your name and address.
Fluke: Daren Fluke, 250 South Beachwood in Boise.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Fluke: I guess I don't have much to add, unless the Council had questions, I concur
with the noise study, it's essentially ITD wanting to cover their back, so that future
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 26 of 67
subdivisions don't come in and ask them to build a sound wall. If we were to do the
noise screen and it said that noise levels were going to be at something above 65
decibels in the future, then, they would make us build a noise wall. They are not going
to build it in any event, so we have already given them a letter stating that we will not
ask for that, we would be happy to do it again, if you want to make it a condition. As far
as the landscape issue goes, Anna is correct in stating that if this were a lot line,
instead of an easement line -- in other words, if that were your landscape easement,
which is 35 feet, if that were made into a lot, we would have a 20-foot setback from
there and that would render these unbuildable. This is the ingress easement right here,
a cross-access easement, so that is your building pad right there and right now their
exists on this lot about a five foot berm and extensive landscaping and so what we are,
essentially, asking is for the building pad to come up to the toe of that berm, more or
less. There is a little bit more room in there than that. If we had a -- I mean right now
we would be 35 feet off road. If we had had a 20-foot setback, we would be 55 feet off
the roof and wouldn't have a buildable pad.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? Thank you. Okay. This is a
Public Hearing. We did keep it open for just those two items. Is there anyone who
would like to testify? Any questions for staff? Okay. I would entertain a motion to close
this Public Hearing.
Nary: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing for Item
Number 13, PP 03-026. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT
De Weerd: Discussion? I think Mr. Nary's already spoke his mind. Mr. Bird.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve PP 03-026, the request for preliminary plat
approval for 15 building lots on 4.51 acres in an L-O zone for Stokesberry Subdivision
No. 2 by Properties West, Incorporated. West of North Eagle Road and north of East
Fairview Avenue and to delete on the recommendations sections F completely and for
the property line to be an easement as stated by staff as being approved with them and
for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision
of Order and to incorporate all applicant, staff, and public testimony remarks.
Nary: Second.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 27 of 67
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve PP 03-026 with all staff
comments, testimony, and ask the attorney to draw up the appropriate paperwork. Mr.
Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, aye; de Weerd, aye; Bird, aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Item 14. Continued Public Hearing from November 12, 2003: PP 03-028
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 52 building lots and 8 other lots
on 17.5 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Glacier Springs
Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Inc. – north of East Victory Road
and east of South Meridian Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 14 is a continued Public Hearing from November
12, 2003. PP 03-028, request for preliminary plat approval of 52 building lots and eight
other lots on 17.5 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Glacier Springs Subdivision and we
will open with staff comments.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, when you last visited this project,
Glacier Springs adjoining Observation Point Subdivision, you directed the applicant to
come back to you with a revised plat that matched the R-4 zoning requirements. They
have submitted that. I believe that was the only issue still on the table and I apologize I
wasn't at that hearing, but they have submitted that, staff has reviewed it, and staff has
no concerns. They did lose a building lot in making that adjustment.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, I guess I do understand they lost a building lot, but on the
park, is there any issue on that? Is that really usable space with the drainage
incorporated there? And is there enough vision into that -- that lot that there is no safety
concerns?
Powell: We have not received anything from the fire department stating that that was of
concern. Peeking behind me at Wendy, because I don't think she -- she was the staff
planner on this, so -- so we have not heard anything. This was a straight subdivision,
so the required landscaping was the five percent. I believe the applicant can give you
exact numbers. We, generally, don't count the pond area. We probably made him do
separate calculations excluding that, so we will -- can testify to you on that point.
De Weerd: And I think Councilman Nary had asked about any amenities in there.
Powell: It is straight subdivision, so there is no amenities proposed and I think the --
President de Weerd, you're bringing up a very good question that staff is struggling with
these drainage lots and open space and -- but in the case of a straight subdivision, the
five percent is kind of a visual open space more than it is an amenity open space, so
that's been kind of an interpretation. Anyway, going through time and perhaps we need
to get with the City Council and Planning Commission to modify that, but, generally, we
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 28 of 67
review the required five percent open space a little different than we do an amenity
open space.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant here? Is the
testimony you provide the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Schultz: Yes, it is.
De Weerd: State your name and address.
Schultz: Matt Schultz, 660 East Franklin with Tuscany Development. It's good to be
here this evening. As staff reported we have -- went back to the drawing boards after
our last hearing and made this a straight R-4 subdivision. I personally went through it,
we looked at the areas of concern that President brought up and Mr. Nary brought up
and Mr. Bird brought up about open space, the pathway lot and all that. We did submit
-- at least I instructed my consultant to submit a revised landscape plan showing the
revisions we had made. How I approached this was I did the landscaping that I wanted
to do and I counted it. I didn't kind of work it backwards and get it down to the exact five
percent. We have I think about ten percent open space, only 5.4 is countable and
usable per the city's code and ordinance, they don't allow you to count the first 25 feet
along the roadway, we are not counting the pathway along the drain. However, since it
is a pretty large area back there in the back corner, it's a very shallow and very usable
open space, even though during a hundred year event there might be some water in it,
it will be a dry grassed area that just happens to be a little bit depressed. It's not a deep
area. It will be shallow and we will look at it as we do our engineering design, but we
are going to try and minimize the depressed area and maximize the flat area. As you
can see, the contours are back towards the back more now. They did before
encompass the whole area and there is -- we did on the landscape plan -- you can't see
it on the preliminary plat, but we have put a little meandering sidewalk back in there, a
couple benches, to look back on that open space that's the drain and there is some
beautiful trees back there and it is a real natural habitat that I think people will enjoy. I
believe the city will require us to pave a little -- at least an access road over the top
down through the middle there and there will be a turnaround, so if somebody wanted
to drive back in there they could. If the police wanted to take a little quick jaunt, we are
going to put a little turn around back in there, so it will be a paved pathway in addition to
a little sidewalk meandering off of it off towards the back. We have tried to do what we
could with this little area. We have widened the landscaping on Victory by I think an
extra 25 feet, so it's way beyond. We are going to salvage a couple of large big trees
there and open up the frontage there. I think the average lot square footage is around
10,400 square feet. If you -- I'm sure you remember, we do have a development
agreement, which we are agreeing to establish a 2,000 square foot minimum home size
and also, for the record, I don't know if this goes with the development agreement or
not, we did meet with the adjacent owners to the east and talked about fencing and
berming along that and we had agreed to a two to three foot high berm with a five foot
vinyl fence on top of it in conjunction with the tiling of the drain and they were asking me
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 29 of 67
how do they know that that's going to happen and I said, well, you can take my word
and we will put it on the record and we are going to get it done, and so, with that, I think
we have got a good subdivision that's going to compliment Observation Point. It may
not be exactly the same, but I think it's a high quality subdivision in a great area and
with that we ask for your approval.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Nary: No.
Powell: Madam President, we still seem to be missing the revised landscape, though.
Nary: It's with No. 7, I believe.
Bird: 7B.
Nary: Yeah. 7B. Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I guess just one comment before we close the Public Hearing. You know, I think,
obviously, we have had this discussion I think a few times with planning and I know -- I
think Mrs. Powell is absolutely right, we have had occasions and concerns that the five
percent -- just having five percent open space isn't always enough, that we have to be
more definitive of what that means. I think as a Council many times we have had to sit
up here and really -- since we trust what the developer tells us that's going to happen. I
think we said that the last time. I was looking here at the minutes while Mr. Schultz was
talking. I think we said that the last time, I don't think it's any different. I think Mr.
Schultz has, both on this occasion, as well as others, been very accommodating trying
to meet the needs that we have expressed on open space and density and the like. I
don't see this one any different, so I'm not really concerned Mr. Schultz did say on the
record back on November 12th that they would submit a landscape plan, that they
would work to make it into a very nice park like sort of atmosphere, we were looking at
making it into a usable green space. He committed to doing that and, really, until we
are more definitive, we have to trust that, and I do, I don't see a reason that we
shouldn't. We do need to probably as a Council and with planning have that discussion
about what do we do in the case of people that maybe need a little more definition of
what we mean by usable open space, but this isn't the project to really make that
particular pitch on, this is something I think that Mr. Schultz has already made that
pretty clear and he's done that in the past, he's been here before, he will be here again,
and he certainly doesn't want to come back here and have a nice cement and grass
mosquito breeding ground that has us looking at him on something else, so he's not
going to do that and I don't have a concern about this one and I think we need to
probably look forward in the future to doing a little more with our ordinance.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 30 of 67
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. It is a Public Hearing and we did keep it open for just
the new preliminary plat. Is there further testimony? Raise your right hand. Is the
testimony you provide the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Sackett: Yes.
De Weerd: Please state your name and address.
Sackett: Gary Sackett, 2008 Peppercorn, Boise. Just some clarifications. I think the
developer has done a nice job working with and trying to be cohesive with the area and
I commend the efforts that he's made throughout here. I just had some questions. Does
this new plat reflect the road -- them asking you to move the road, the entrance? It
does, indeed? And, then, at the front of the subdivision we have in Observation Point a
sidewalk that goes along there. Does it connect -- do we continue that? We have kind
of a meandering sidewalk. Does it --
De Weerd: Yes. They have to connect.
Sackett: -- connect to that? And then the one request that we would have is during
development if they could barricade Loggers Pass, so that construction doesn't come
through Observation Point while they are moving dirt and doing all their work there. I
think that was a requirement that Meridian Greens asked that we do for them to make
sure we weren't using the area while we developed and we were wondering if that
would be an appropriate remedy.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions? Okay.
Sackett: That's all I have. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Anything further? Okay. Would you like to close the
Public Hearing?
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close PP 03-028, Public Hearing request for preliminary plat approval
of 52 building lots and eight other lots on 17.5 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Glacier
Springs Subdivision by Tuscany Development, Incorporated, east of -- north of East
Victory Road and east of South Meridian Road. That has been changed, I believe, to
an R-4 zone.
Nary: Second.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 31 of 67
Nichols: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Anna, would you put in the record the date on this revised preliminary plat,
please?
Powell: 11/6/03. Wait a minute. Excuse me.
Nary: 11/17/03.
Bird: Yeah. 11/17.
Powell: Thank you. The received stamp says 11/17.
Bird: It's going to say revised down there, too, Anna.
Powell: Yes. We have it. Sorry. Goes with the tongue-tied today, I guess.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing no other comment, I will make a motion. First of all, I want to restate --
and I think I'm speaking for all the --
De Weerd: We have to close.
Bird: Oh, we got to vote on that.
De Weerd: Can I first close the Public Hearing?
Bird: Did we vote on it?
Nary: No.
De Weerd: We just -- your motion was to close the Public Hearing.
Bird: Yeah. It was originally.
De Weerd: And it was seconded. That was discussion on closing the Public Hearing.
Bird: I'm just trying to hurry this along.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor of closing the Public Hearing on Item 14 say aye.
All ayes. Motion carried.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 32 of 67
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion?
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing no discussion, I will move that we approve PP 03-028, the request for
preliminary approval of 51 building lots and eight other lots on 17.5 acres in a proposed
R-4 zone for the proposed Glacier Springs Subdivision by Tuscany Development,
Incorporated, north of East Victory Road and east of South Meridian Road and to
incorporate all staff, applicant, and public testimony, which -- some of the things that
was included was a 2,000 minimum house and for the attorney to draw up the Findings
of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve PP 03-028, with all staff
comments, noting the changes as stated in the motion, and the attorney to draw up the
appropriate paperwork. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 15: Public Hearing: RZ 03-010 Request for a Rezone of 4.47 acres from
R-4 to R-8 zones for proposed Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties,
LLC – 1115 North Ten Mile Road:
Item 16: Public Hearing: PP 03-025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15
building lots and 5 other lots on 4.47 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for
proposed Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties, LLC – 1115 North
Ten Mile Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 15, Public Hearing RZ 03-010, request for a rezone of 4.47
acres from R-4 to R-8 zones for the proposed Woodside Creek and I will open this
Public Hearing with staff comments. Oh. Can I open both? I will open both and open
Item 16, Public Hearing PP 03-025, request for preliminary plat approval of 15 building
lots and five others lots on 4.47 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Woodside Creek.
Anna.
Powell: Madam President, Members of the Council, this is Woodside Creek. It's
located on Ten Mile Road just north of Berkeley Square and south of Rod's Creek
Subdivision. The school -- elementary school lies just to the west of the subject
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 33 of 67
property. There is a copy of the preliminary plat. It's a fairly straight forward
subdivision. At the Planning and Zoning Commission zero members of the public either
testified in opposition or expressed concerns about the proposed project. No one
testified in support of the project either. The key Commission changes to the staff
recommendation was that the plat must be revised to feature two access points or the
applicant must receive a waiver from the fire department. So, they currently weren't
proposing access to Ten Mile Road. There are a limit number of -- just 15 -- building
lots on this -- within this subdivision, but that was the recommendation as it came
forward from Planning and Zoning. With that, I will leave it for questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Any questions? Okay. Is the applicant here tonight?
Is the testimony you provide the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help
you God?
Cook: It is.
De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address.
Cook: Richard Cook. 1800 West Overland Road, Boise. Briggs Engineering. Here
tonight representing the client Jeff and Kathryn Wood, I believe it is. Somewhere in
here I have a letter from Deputy Chief Joe Silva with the Meridian fire department and I
furnished staff a copy of that letter, where they have approved this subdivision without
the secondary access. That condition was removed from his previous letter. The other
thing I'd like to point out on the preliminary plat is that we have taken this sewer
easement that goes through Lot 11 here and we are eliminating that and we will be
connecting our sewer to the stub that is in New Cliff Creek Avenue right here. Or not
new, but North Cliff Creek Avenue, and that will eliminate the necessity for taking this --
what had been proposed as a 15 foot wide easement and making it a 20-foot wide
easement through here, and the change that we made to the preliminary plat to satisfy
Deputy Chief Silva was that we eliminated the sidewalk going around this open area
and widen our street section out to a full 33 foot wide street section with a 42-foot right
of way. So, we are in compliance with all the ordinance requirements and the desires of
the Meridian fire department and I think that covers it. Oh, one other thing I wanted to
mention, too, is this is an existing home and it will be accessed from the interior of the
subdivision and the landscape buffer, this 25-foot buffer, has to go around that house
and that has been noted on -- during the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and
with that I will conclude my remarks and answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for Mr. Cook?
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: And maybe it's in here, Mr. Cook, and I just didn't see it, but for the access road,
obviously, it has to go through Berkeley Square. I mean how are people going to know
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 34 of 67
how to get there? Is there some shared sign agreement? Is there some shared access
thing? I guess I'm a little unclear and I guess I didn't notice in there, how are people
going to know it, that that's how you get there? Because I drive by this all the time and I
couldn't see how people get in there.
Cook: We are going to set up a great big huge fireworks stand here and set off rockets.
I don't know. That has not been addressed. I can only imagine that we will probably
end up approaching the folks that have a control over Berkeley Square Subdivision and
see if we can do a joint sign out on Wave Street that accesses out onto Ten Mile to
bring the public's attention to Woodside Creek.
Nary: And I guess part of the reason I asked that is because it would appear to me you
need an off-premise sign to have access and I don't know that it would be allowed. So,
I guess I'm -- I guess the frustration for me is, obviously, as you and your client
designed this, you know there is no access on the roadway to this, it has to go through
another subdivision, so why wouldn't you at this point figure out how do I let people
know where we are at, so that we are not going to have a variance request three
months from now and your hardship is, well, what do we do, we approved this
subdivision and we are landlocked in there, and we don't have any other way for people
to know where we are and I'll ask you that when you come back with a sign variance,
too.
Cook: Mr. Ken Reeves, who is with the developer on this particular project, is here this
evening and I think he may have an answer for you on that sign.
Nary: Great.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Cook: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Raise you right hand. Is the testimony you provide the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Reeves: Yes. You bet.
De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address.
Reeves: My name is Ken Reeves at 1607 Latah in Boise and our thought was in
marketing this -- first of all, it's already pre-sold. We are not having to get exposure in
marketing as far as builders are concerned. It comes down to the visibility off of Ten
Mile, that frontage out there. Our thought was we may have to get a variance for a sign
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 35 of 67
to be able to put it on the property off the berm area, so it does have that visibility on the
inside with directions how to get into it. So, other than that, we didn't feel we needed
anymore exposure or signage to be able to accomplish what we needed on it. Does
that make sense?
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Reeves: Does that answer your question?
Nary: Well, I guess it answers my question that you have thought about it, at least, so --
and I appreciate that. I mean just because it's pre-sold, I assume that the people that
are going to live there might have guests that come there that won't know where it is,
so, you know, you're still going to need some visibility and I guess my only frustration
about it, which there isn't a solution tonight, is that should have been part of this whole
package. How you're going to get people there is no different than any subdivision has
to figure out where the signs are going to go or how this is going to be visible and you
have a unique circumstance in that your only access to your subdivision is through
somebody else's property and there is no frontage on the roadway to make that visible
and so it's -- that's a fairly unique circumstance and I guess my -- like I said, my
frustration is you're going to probably need a variance to do that and I guess I would like
to have seen it all at once, rather than in pieces, but --
Reeves: Okay. Going through this process, can we ask that of you folks tonight, to do -
-
Nary: No.
De Weerd: No.
Nary: No, you can't.
De Weerd: An application. But, Mr. Reeves, did I hear you say you would put it on the
berm on your own property?
Reeves: Yes. That's, really, what we were planning on doing.
De Weerd: In your landscaped area.
Reeves: On that basis we don't need a variance.
De Weerd: No.
Nichols: Madam President?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 36 of 67
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Madam President, I'm not sure to what extent, you know, signs are permitted
within the landscape buffer in accordance with the landscape ordinance, but, Mr.
Reeves, the entrance road into the subdivision has the same street name as that side
road off Berkeley Square; correct?
Reeves: Yes.
Nichols: So, Council, I think part of the confusion is probably people that live in there
would say turn into Berkeley Square and take the only right that you can take and you'll
find us.
Reeves: That's the one benefit, it's not complex, the neighbors can get -- the street
signs. It's pretty straight up forward on this one as far as --
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Yeah. I just want you to understand, Mr. Reeves -- and it's not like I'm trying to
be difficult, I just recognize that you probably have a little more issue that maybe we
should have had now and the problem is, as we have dealt with before on variances,
the hardship that's here is partly created by the way you have designed your
subdivision and so that not -- that's not necessarily something that we can give you
credit for if you create your own hardship and that's my only concern is that we really
should have had this whole package together. I think you probably will be able to work
it out, but -- and if I'm mistaken on the sign ordinance, I mean certainly the planning
staff will give you the right answer, but that was my only thought is that you might need
a off-premise sign on someone else's property and that's probably not allowed, so --
Reeves: Okay.
Nary: -- without a variance.
De Weerd: Anna, can you address that?
Powell: Yes. It would be considered an off-premise sign and would require a variance.
I am as equally opposed to variances and just as a general comment, we don't have a
requirement that they put up a subdivision sign and with so few homes, it really may not
be appropriate, it may be more confusing to have a separate subdivision sign sitting
there by the Berkeley Square Subdivision sign. I imagine 20 years from now these
folks will just think they live in Berkeley Square Subdivision. I mean that may be a little
confusing for them, but, you know, they will tell their friends go to the Berkeley Square
Subdivision, turn right, and that's how you get there. The only real concern is when
they are trying market them and get people in them in the first place, but the temporary
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 37 of 67
signs aren't -- that prohibition for temporary signs are -- they are more lenient -- the
restrictions are more lenient. There you go. So, I think that they would be able to get
that advertising done in the model home type for a limited period.
De Weerd: So, I guess if you need a sign, you need to work with staff or you might
consider not having a sign.
Nary: Thank you.
Reeves: Is there any other questions?
De Weerd: No. Do you have any questions?
Reeves: No, I don't. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there any other testimony? Is the testimony you
provide the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Homan: Yes, it is.
De Weerd: Please state your name and address.
Homan: My name is William Homan and I live at 3265 West Park Creek Drive.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Homan: Madam President and City Council Members, what I'm here tonight to do is not
to delay any progress, but had a question and the question is there is an irrigation ditch
that runs along my property line and also the Woodside Creek property line and I guess
it runs right along here. Since I purchased my property, I have maintained all water
rights and what I was asking if there is a way that I can maintain access to that, after --
I'm going to assume that they are going to bury that or could bury it or something like
that, and I was wondering if there was a way that I could maintain access to that water.
I have checked with the Meridian-Nampa District. The way the water feeds, it feeds in
from the Eight Mile drainage and that is the same water that it is included in my water
right.
De Weerd: And so Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, did they say that you would have
access to the piping that they bury -- to what they bury?
Homan: Would they -- well, I don't think they are planning on doing the burying of
those.
De Weerd: It is a user ditch.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 38 of 67
Homan: I have checked with them several times, once before probably -- let's see, I'm
trying to think of the dates now. '96, probably '98, and, then, recently this year as well,
and, actually, they are saying that the property owner here -- this is my property -- is
responsible for gaining any access to that in the future, running forward, and so what
I'm here today is -- is I'm asking if there is a way that I can maintain to have access. It
runs right on my property line, there is a fence right there. Actually, there is not even a
fence at this corner of my lot and I have access there, but I just want to know if I can
maintain access.
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Homan, a couple questions. You currently use water out of that ditch?
Homan: Yes.
Nichols: There is a state statute that says when somebody does something with their
property, they can't mess with the ditch and your access to it that you have had, your
historical use. So, I'm sure that the developer will work with you to accommodate the
tilting of that ditch and how there might be access for the water that you apply to that
lot. Do any of your neighbors pull water out of that ditch?
Homan: To my knowledge, in '96 that was the last time -- I think, '96, '97 -- might have
been -- oh, it was '98. It was the second time. Everyone in the subdivision was given
an option to waive their water rates and there was a fee that they paid to do that and
there is a term for it.
Nichols: I believe it's probably a petition to be excluded from the district.
Homan: Right, and, to my knowledge, everyone else, at least concerning Woodside,
these neighbors here that I have done that. They have waived their right to it. They
didn't wish to have or seek out -- so, at this point, to my knowledge, I'm the only one
that's even eligible for access to that at this time, but I'm not the expert in that area.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Homan, do you flood irrigate out of the ditch?
Homan: In certain areas I can.
Bird: Or do you pump it out with a --
Homan: I can flood irrigate. In this portion of my house -- it can come in -- where it
comes in is right about here and, then, it can, actually, water this whole section of my
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 39 of 67
yard here. If Meridian District would allow me to set up something on -- actually, on my
property to use a small pump, I'd like to do that as well.
Bird: I was just going to say, that's illegal, I think.
Homan: I haven't been doing any of that, but it floods over into the lower half of my
yard.
Bird: But you do flood irrigate out of it?
Homan: Uh-huh.
Bird: Okay. So, that's the only way you can irrigate out of that ditch is flood.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Homan: So, I guess one question I had. Do I talk to --
De Weerd: We will have the applicant respond.
Homan: Oh.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Homan.
Cook: Richard Cook, Briggs Engineering. In response to Mr. Homan's question, we are
going to be putting in a pressurized irrigation system for this development and it won't
be a problem to extend the line over and include him in that pressurized irrigation
system, so he can have full access to it.
De Weerd: So, you will have better access than you have now. Thank you. Any further
comments?
Cook: No. Other than I was just a little bit curious on the sign issue. You know, I really
-- I don't think it's going to be an issue, because, you know, for advertising the
subdivision is up for sale, we can, you know, use a temporary and I don't really think we
are going to need a permanent sign, but on the design issue, I don't know how else we
could have done it, because we can't access Ten Mile Road and we have to have a 25
foot wide landscape buffer along Ten Mile, so we have no direct access to Ten Mile, so
this is the only way we could access the subdivision.
De Weerd: So, you didn't really create your own situation.
Cook: Well, it was the only way we -- we had no options. That was -- there was no
other way available to us to access the subdivision.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 40 of 67
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Cook, just so I guess our record is clear, it sounds to me like what you're
saying on the water that you're going to change, essentially, the way the delivery comes
in to create this pressurized irrigation for the subdivision and so if you're going to build --
extend the line for Mr. Homan's property, then, since you'd have to maintain it's
historical way of doing that and you want to change that, you're not going to charge him
to do that, then?
Cook: No, we aren't.
Nary: Okay. Great.
Cook: No. Okay.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any other comments before we close the Public
Hearing?
Nary: No.
De Weerd: Any other testimony? Okay. I'll entertain a motion.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close Public Hearing RZ 03-010, rezone 4.47 acres from R-4 to R-8
zones for the proposed Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties, LLC, 1115 North Ten
Mile Road and also Public Hearing PP 03-025, the request for preliminary plat approval
of 15 building lot and five other lots on 4.47 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed
Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties, LLC, 1115 North Ten Mile Road.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close Items 15 and 16, RZ 03-010
and PP 03-025. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Further staff comments? Okay.
Bird: Madam President?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 41 of 67
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve RZ 03-010, the request for a rezone of 4.47 acres
from R-4 to R-8 zones for proposed Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties, LLC,
1115 North Ten Mile Road, incorporate staff, applicant, and public testimony and for the
attorney to draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve RZ 03-010 with all staff
and applicant comments and ask the attorney to draw up the appropriate paperwork.
Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we approve PP 03-025, request for preliminary plat approval of
15 building lots and five other lots on 4.47 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed
Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties, LLC, 1115 North Ten Mile Road and to
incorporate staff, applicant, and public testimony, also to include in the ditch that Mr.
Homan's property in Parkside will be furnished at no cost pressurized irrigation system
to his property line and for the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and
Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve PP 03-025, with all staff
and applicant comments and testimony, with the change as noted and the attorney to
draw up Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order. Mr. Clerk.
Roll-Call: McCandless, absent; Nary, yea; de Weerd, yea; Bird, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. We will take a ten-minute break before our next item and we will just
reconvene at 9:30.
(Recess.)
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 42 of 67
Item 17: Public Hearing: CUP 02-004 Request for Revocation of a Conditional
Use Permit granted by the City of Meridian for John Nesmith for Meridian
Automotive – 505 North Main Street:
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and bring us back from our recess and open up the
Public Hearing on Item No. 17, CUP 02-004, request for revocation -- oh-oh, I have
Anna's thing. You know. Okay. I'll just open it and ask for staff comments.
Nichols: Madam President, if I may, because this involves an application -- or a request
to revoke a Conditional Use Permit, I'd ask that you swear staff in before the hearing in
this one.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, I can swear you both in at the same time. Is the testimony you
provide the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Powell: Yes.
Kirkpatrick: Yes, it is.
De Weerd: Thank you. Do they have to state their name and address?
Nichols: As they initiate their testimony, yes.
De Weerd: As you initiate your testimony, please, state your name and address.
Kirkpatrick: Wendy Kirkpatrick, 660 East Watertower, Suite 202, Meridian, Idaho.
83642.
De Weerd: Thank you, Wendy.
Kirkpatrick: And I think you all should know, I was here about a year ago and I'm
Wendy Kirkpatrick. I'm a city planner with the planning department and, let's see, I'll
start going through the staff report here. Meridian Automotive is located at the
intersection of Main and Bower Street and here is a site plan of the project. Basically,
we are here for the -- or staff is here supporting the revocation of the CUP application
approved in 2002 for the expansion of the Meridian Automotive building. I'll go through
-- I'll run through a brief history on the CUP permit. In 2000 -- actually, May 7, 2002, a
Conditional Use Permit was approved for Meridian Automotive's expansion, which
encompassed the construction of the western most building on the subject property and
this CUP, which was approved in 2002 superceded the CUP which was granted in
1997. And I'm not going to go into it, but there is a long history of the city taking action
against John Nesmith, the owner of Meridian Automotive, because they have not come
into compliance with the CUP which was approved in 1997 and to resolve that they
went ahead and approved this new CUP in 2002 to encompass all of the things that had
not been completed in 1997 and, essentially, wiped the slate clean and give the
applicant a chance to come into compliance with the Meridian city code. There are a
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 43 of 67
number of conditions of the 2002 CUP, which were added or modified from the original
CUP to bring the applicant in compliance. These include bringing landscaping up to
standard, paving the parking lot where cars are stored near the Union Pacific right of
way, a permit for the sign, sidewalk needs to be installed on Bower Street and the
western most building, which was constructed in '97 does not currently have an
occupancy permit and does not meet current building and fire code. A condition of the
CUP for -- which was approved in 2002 stated that if all conditions of approval were not
approved, the CUP would be revoked. That's why we are here this evening, and to go
through some of the procedural things that brought us here this evening. On October
10, 2003, the City sent John Nesmith a letter notifying him of the City's intent to revoc
the CUP. On October 23rd John Nesmith responded to the City's letter requesting a
hearing to contest the revocation and that's why we are at this hearing this evening. I'm
going to go through some of the conditions that have not been completed by the
applicant. Let's see, the building that we are -- that we will be referring to is the
western most building, it's titled existing building to remain and it's a little bit confusing.
In the CUP it's phrased as an expansion of the automotive building. It, actually, is not
attached to the existing Quonset hut building you see off of the main street, it is a
separate building, and I'll go through the conditions that haven't been completed and I
also have some photos showing that these have not been completed. So, we have the
sign permit that has not been obtained for the existing Meridian Automotive sign and
this is the sign in question. We have landscaping that has not been installed in
accordance with the approved landscaping plan. And there are a couple different areas
where they have not come into compliance. Trees and shrubs were not installed to our
specifications or to the approved plan on the southern edge of the property. The
landscape buffer has not been installed on Main Street. And trees and shrubs have not
been installed along Bower Street. And I have a photo -- this is actually just showing on
Main Street where you can see that there haven't been trees and shrubbery -- or that
landscape buffer installed off of Main Street. This next item, the storage area and
parking area located in and near Union Pacific Railroad right of way has not been
landscaped and paved in accordance with the approved landscaping plan. And you
can see this parking area has not been landscaped or paved. Okay. This one deals
with facade improvements and landscaping that need to be completed prior to the
occupancy of the western most building and I gave you all a couple of handouts before
the hearing this evening, which I want to enter as -- enter as Exhibits 13 and 14. The
first of these is a memo from Daunt Whitman, who is the city building official and the
memo was sent to me Monday, November 24, that's why you're just getting it this
evening. And this concerns the lack of an occupancy permit for -- I'll go ahead and
show the building -- the lack of an occupancy permit for this building and this is when --
and Exhibit 14 refers to this. When this building permit was issued originally it was
issued for a storage building and the applicant, whom I understand from previous
applications and action taken against the applicant, the applicant has an arc welder and
has been actually running an automotive shop out of this building, which was not
permitted through the original building permit, so the building is not sprinklered. If they
were to run these types of activities out of the building, the building code would require
it to be sprinklered. And Daunt Whitman's memo addresses that and so does the
original building permit they received in 1997. So, this is the shop that's in question.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 44 of 67
And another condition, sidewalks have not been constructed on Bower Street as
required by the approved landscaping plan and this is some of the area along Bower
Street where you can see it's still dirt, they haven't constructed sidewalks. And that's
the end of the photos that I have. Go ahead and put the site plan back up. So, that
concludes this part of my presentation where I run through the conditions that have not
been met. I think it's, actually, a pretty black and white matter. The conditions of
approval for the CUP approved a year ago stated that if all conditions were not
improved, the CUP was revoked, and there are a number of conditions that have not
been completed and in my opinion the most serious of these is that the building has not
received an occupancy permit and is not -- has not been constructed to a standard
where it would enable them to have the activities in the building, including the welding
and auto shop that are taking place in the building. Are there any questions of staff?
De Weerd: Wendy, can you tell us what improvements have been made since 2002?
Kirkpatrick: Some landscaping has been put in. I believe some landscaping has been
put in along Main Street and along the Union Pacific right of way. Not -- it doesn't meet
the standard -- it doesn't meet the approved plan, but some landscaping has been put
in and I believe also the fencing along -- along the storage area near the Union Pacific
right of way is new. And I wasn't working here at that time, so I won't have a clear
chronology of some of the improvements that have been made, but that's my
understanding.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Anna, did you have anything to add? No? Okay.
Would the owner please --
Nary: Can I ask a question of staff before --
De Weerd: Oh. I'm sorry. Yes.
Nary: Wendy, the way it's phrased in here about the welding operation, what evidence
do you have that they are using it as welding?
Kirkpatrick: From what I understand Daunt -- Daunt Whitman has actually seen them
gone -- has gone and done an inspection of the building and saw them welding in the
building.
Nary: Because his report doesn't say that. His e-mail says if they are welding it has to
be compliant and it's not. There is no report from code enforcement that they have
been out to the site and inspected it and find it to be out of compliance.
Powell: Madam President?
De Weerd: Please state your name and address.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 45 of 67
Powell: Anna Powell, 660 East Watertower, Meridian, Idaho, 83642, Suite 202, the
planning director for the city of Meridian. I believe that the memo from Daunt states that
the cutting torch and welder that were present at the time of request for occupancy and
I think he's stating there that he saw them there.
Nary: Well, I can have a baseball bat in my house. It doesn't mean I play baseball
inside. So, I mean did anybody go over there and see this activity occurring?
Powell: Planning staff does not have any knowledge of it. We'd have to ask Mr.
Whitman.
Nary: Okay.
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Nichols, did you have something?
Nichols: Madam President, I think it would be appropriate to just include in the record
all of the exhibits that Ms. Kirkpatrick outlined on page seven of her staff report and
include Mr. Whitman's memo, which would be No. 13. The copy of the building permit
application would be No. 14. And the plan review dated October 11, 1997, from Code
Consultation Services of Idaho would be No. 15.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is that sufficient, you're noting that, or do I need to specifically
note it?
Nichols: Well, you, as the presiding officer for the Council, have to include in the record
whether or not you accepted or admit those exhibits to the record.
De Weerd: Okay. Well -- thank you. We will admit the exhibits presented to us in our
November 25th or our packet from Planning staff stamped -- or date stamped on
November 21st that had a list of exhibits, Exhibit Items 1 through 12. And, then, also
the additional information that we received today noted as Item 13, which is the building
permit application -- or, I'm sorry, 13, which is the e-mail from Daunt Whitman to Wendy.
Fourteen, the building permit application. And, 15, which is the plan review from CCSI.
Nichols: Madam President --
De Weerd: And we will just add that to the packet on page seven of the staff's packet.
Nichols: Madam President, it also asks that you include in the record the copy of the
notice of hearing as an additional exhibit, which would be No. 16. That's provided as
part of your packet as well.
De Weerd: Okay. The notice of the Public Hearing is admitted as Item 16 that is also in
our packet of information.
Nichols: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 46 of 67
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nichols.
Nary: Madam President, can I ask one more question before Mr. Nesmith comes up?
De Weerd: You bet.
Nary: On some of these things like landscaping, many times people bond for that. Was
there no bonding or anything on this particular project?
Kirkpatrick: From what I understand the applicant was discussing with the city bonding.
They have not completed that bond for the landscaping. There is some
correspondence going back and forth between the city and the applicant regarding the
bond.
Nary: Okay. Do you have any of that information for the record?
Kirkpatrick: I have not included it in your packet. I do have that folder with that
correspondence.
Nary: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Any further questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Would Mr. Nesmith step forward? Please raise your right hand. Is
the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so
help you God?
Nesmith: Yes.
De Weerd: Thank you. Please, state your name and address.
Nesmith: John Nesmith, 505 North Main Street, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. In response
to -- one of the reasons why I wanted to revoke -- or not contest the revoking of this
CUP is to, I guess, clarify some things. I had to go through the CUP process in order to
know whether or not I could even do the project that I was proposing to do. I guess I'd
just like to go through the list of issues and maybe I can clear up part of the issues. I
have had a -- quite a time getting, I guess as previously discussed in other aspects of
this Council meeting, that there is issues with downtown Meridian with drainage issues,
sewers, and stuff like that and that it has taken me, admittedly, probably, because I'm
doing it as a developer and not hiring it professionally done, I have hired an engineer,
but they were contracted to work with ACHD to get the sidewalks done and that has
taken a very lengthy time and several plan reviews to get that accomplished and I
guess as of now I brought with them -- I just got them tonight, the current plans that are
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 47 of 67
supposed to be approved to be able to get to the water drain down the Bower corridor
into the drain thing that they got in the middle of the street, but -- and they also do not
want to -- I have Scott Reidel's number at ACHD that you guys can contact if you want
verification of that, that they also do not want the sidewalk still built for another three
months, because they are going to have to lower the drain in the middle of the road in
order to actually be able to drain water, because there is an elevation issue and we
can't drain the water, because I guess it's just -- there is not enough fall between point A
and point B. So, they want to lower the drain and they wanted me to construct the
sidewalks at that time, I guess, to lessen the impact of the whole construction process
and blocking the road. So, in order for me to get water to landscape the front of the
property, I wanted to, in my infinite wisdom, wanted to use the sidewalk corridor to
plumb water up in there, so I wouldn't rip a perfectly good parking lot up to get water
there and -- so, in other words, I wasn't able to complete any land -- well, the landscape
plan as it was set because of that. I have installed and it could be checked by the City
of Meridian, the water department, an irrigation meter and it is sitting there waiting for
this project to continue and be furthered on. It's got a pipe stubbed up, so I have water
to use, so I can irrigate the front portion of the property. I guess I somehow like would
get their record, because if there has been a constant defending my sign that was
remodeled, there is not a need for that last time we went through that. Actually, there
was not a sign permit for the one that's on the building and it was my -- the gentleman
at Planning and Zoning said it wouldn't be an issue, I just physically haven't paid the
permit fee to do it, but it is not the drive-by sign on North Main that is in question, it is
the sign that's on the building, just for sake of clarification. The sign that was on North
Main was remodeled and refaced, reduced in height, and I was told at that meeting that
there was no issues with that sign. The storage area that has not been landscaped or
paved, obviously, there are issues from me not landscaping it. I have also talked to
Anna and I guess there has been a change in the way Meridian Planning and Zoning
Department regards storage lots and they are now going to permit a more economical
way of -- of coding that to where the dust abatement is handled in such a way that they
are happy, but it was not going to require me to pave it and that is one of the things, you
know, due to the downturn of the economy and uncertain economic times, but it's,
obviously, a substantial -- a lot of money difference between paving and using
reclaimed or recycled asphalt, which was originally approved by Planning and Zoning,
but denied by City Council. I guess I'd like to clear up the statement from Daunt. I have
had some, I guess, problems with poor communication in that department. He was in
contact with my architect at the time and we were trying to get an occupancy permit and
we, actually, had a heck of a time -- I honestly believe I was being ignored and not
taken care of the way that it should be. I did get a visit from Kenny Bowers -- and he's
in attendance, which should clarify the fire classification and it was a surprise visit and I
-- and this dates back in the '97, '98 area, that there was an issue with not wanting to
have welding equipment or cutting equipment back there. In fact, in the gap of --
between the two buildings had several cylinders that have welding gas in them and
when Kenny went want by -- I have known him for a long -- you know, several years
and he said that he would rather see the welding cylinders moved, the welding
equipment moved out of the shop and not be used and I complied and when he came
back by -- and this has been five or six years ago when they spot checked it, it has not
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 48 of 67
been there from then and it has never been there since then, as far as welding
equipment. So, hence, I think -- I think Daunt's memory or -- I don't know what the
issue is, why he e-mailed that over, other than, to be honest with you, possibly to create
me more problems, because there is definitely issues with Daunt and personality issues
with -- you know, having a problem with my project. So, I think the occupancy is
accurate. We are just purely exchanging parts and storing cars. The use has changed
from '97 to now. It is -- obviously, I wrote down that I would be working on cars and I
would be storing cars. It has changed. We are working on a lot more cars, the ratios
have changed, you know, probably flip-flopped. But as far as when we built it, the
firewall was put in, it was built in accordance to the current building codes and I do not
believe that there is any problem with the way that it's being used as far as the way that
it was designed and built, because we have a barrier between the two buildings on
purpose, so we wouldn't have to sprinkler the building and we had extensive talks about
that, so I guess in conclusion what I would like to do is, obviously, answer any questions
that have -- that you -- that the Council may have. But I would like to request some
additional time to get the sidewalks completed, like I have attempted to do, and that
way I can also -- what I had discussed with Anna was to submit either an application to
revise the CUP, because I still want to do the landscaping and I still want to use the
railroad corridor. With the uncertainty of the economic times I wasn't sure if I wanted to
complete the building addition at this time and I -- like I said, I would still like to do all
the things -- all the other improvements and I would like to, actually, just extend an
additional six month to get the sidewalks done and completed, because of the winter
aspect of it. I should have completed plans. ACHD told me that they were going to
complete the drainage in the next three months, which I would be immediately -- got a
contractor ready to go to work. In fact, if you could zip back on your plan as far as on
Bower Street and show a slide on that, the one that's facing Main Street. Actually, you
can probably see them there. We were stopped by ACHD. Actually, we have already
done the saw cutting and when you -- facing Main Street you can also see the saw cuts
going across the road, but we are stopped because of the drainage issue and the
elevation issue, they stopped us right before they started excavating. So, I believe
even though the timeline has extended, I really don't believe that there has been an
impact on anybody by not getting this done as timely as I should have and I don't
believe that -- I believe it will also have an impact as far as -- because I won't -- I will
actually be in a noncompliance because of the use of the railroad property, so it will
create more issues by revoking the Conditional Use Permit and so I would ask to have
a time increase to get that solution worked out, so I can work with the city and in get a
financially feasible solution for me that works for our company and the city as well.
Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Questions, Council?
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 49 of 67
Nary: Mr. Nesmith, one of the things that's on here was the sign permit and what you
have said is that it's a different sign than what's in the exhibit.
Nesmith: Yes.
Nary: But you know 18 months ago that you didn't have a sign permit.
Nesmith: Yes.
Nary: And you said you just hadn't paid for it.
Nesmith: It was -- I did contact -- honestly, it was -- I was spinning -- you know, not only
running a business and doing the things that you do that, I just, honestly -- I had talked
to the gentleman at P&Z, it was just a matter of paying the money like I did for the fence
permit and everything else that we had done and, honestly, I don't have an excuse for
why I didn't get it handled, I just need to pay the permit fee.
Nary: You know where they are.
Nesmith: I know where they are. Exactly and I need to get it done and there is --
Nary: And you have had notice of this since June.
Nesmith: Uh-huh.
Nary: And now we are in November and you still haven't done it. Why would we think
that you need more time to do that?
Nesmith: On the permit side?
Nary: Right.
Nesmith: I -- you know, honestly, I guess -- I thought the picture was larger than the
permit, I guess, as far as -- because I knew I had -- I did also -- I forgot I did post a bond
for the sidewalks and there should be a copy of that in your -- at least there was a copy
of that in my packet that I got, so -- but I guess that was -- issue was -- I guess it was a
bigger picture then. I guess I wasn't focusing on that, not that it is something that needs
taken care of, but I just didn't focus on it.
Nary: I looked at these other -- you have talked a lot about the sidewalk, but unless I
missed what you said, I didn't hear a lot about the landscaping. Is the sidewalk tied to
the landscaping?
Nesmith: Yes. In order to get water to the front of the -- because it's all been paved
and where the water meter is, it's -- in fact, I had -- well, my option to put in a -- so I
don't have to pay by the gallon to water the -- or at least pay sewer to water the plants, I
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 50 of 67
put an irrigation meter in that is on -- located on Bower Street and needs to proceed up
-- actually, well, it would proceed up Bower and then up to the middle of Main Street in
order to get water there, so I could irrigate it.
Nary: And you have some evidence, besides what you're telling us, about the problems
with the sidewalk and why the landscaping can't be completed until the sidewalk's
completed. Do you have some evidence to that? A letter from the highway district? A
letter from somebody saying, don't put a sidewalk in here right now? Something?
Nesmith: No. I guess that is my -- I guess is, quote, unquote, being the developer, that
was my issue as far as trying to make it as economically feasible as I could to not do
things twice. In other words, not put a trench across the parking lot to run water and,
then, also put sidewalks in.
Nary: Now, I'm assuming, Mr. Nesmith, you understand if we revoke your Conditional
Use Permit you can't operate your business there.
Nesmith: Well, from what I understood from Anna, that we would -- it would go back to
the previous CUP, but I don't know all the --
Nary: No. I guess if my business was riding on it, I guess I might hire somebody to get
it done or knows, you know, how to get this accomplished and I guess I'm curious why
you didn't.
Nesmith: I honestly thought I did at Arrow Engineering and in trying to get -- no, that's
Gibson and Associates, that's the architect that I hired to get this done as well.
Nary: So, are you telling, then, under oath, then, that this building is not used for
welding or any other fire code types of concerns that's been expressed by the planning
department --
Nesmith: Under oath --
Nary: Let me finish my question. Then, it's only used for storage pursuant to your
application from 1997.
Nesmith: Under oath, this is used for storage and auto repair. No welding.
Nary: Well, it's not for auto repair, it's for storage. That's what your application says
from '97. It's for storing vehicles that are waiting to be worked on. After work is
completed vehicles will be stored in the facility. On an occasional basis it will be used
for -- work will be performed on vehicles when not in use for storage on an occasional
basis. What is occasional, then? You told me auto repair. That doesn't sound
occasional.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 51 of 67
Nesmith: At the time that was -- but like I said at the time now the use has changed. In
other words, obviously, still I have -- if you want to get technical, I have two people
working in four locations, that means 50 percent of the time you're going to have
storage.
Nary: And there still is no occupancy permit for that facility.
Nesmith: I can't get one. No.
Nary: Because it's not storage?
Nesmith: I can't get one, because I was not -- because I didn't get the sidewalks
completed, even though I posted a bond, because, then, they tied -- it was a very
confusing issue, because, then, they tied the current CUP and then they got into
legalities because I had completed it and then -- so I spent time and effort fighting -- or
not fighting, but trying to resolve legality issues, when I should have been spending time
trying to get the project finished. But they tied the current CUP requirements -- in other
words, if I hadn't completed all the current CUP requirements, they won't give me an
occupancy permit, which didn't make any sense to me, but that's why -- that's the
explanation I was given.
Nary: Now, the staff's testimony was that you have not, actually, bonded for these
things and Condition 12 says you shall bond for these things. Which is it?
Nesmith: Well I bonded for the sidewalks and I have a copy right there that shows that I
did.
Nary: Okay. But --
Nesmith: But I did not bond for the whole project.
Nary: Okay. But I'm looking at Condition 12 of the Findings of Facts that were approved
back in 2002. It says the applicant shall provide surety for all required improvements,
including paving, landscaping, irrigation, facade improvements, sidewalks, fencing, et
cetera, prior to formal approval of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law or, at a
minimum, prior to obtaining building permits in the amount of 120 percent for an
insurance bond or 110 percent for a letter of credit for a cash bond. Have you done
that?
Nesmith: No. But I have not applied for a building permit either. In other words, my
thought was if I applied for a bond I would also be doing that in the process of asking for
a building permit to do the building remodeling or expansion. It was very confusing and
frustrating and I would like to somehow -- honestly, I guess I need some direction from
the Council and I would like to somehow -- even though I haven't been very timely, but,
you know, be able to -- I wanted to be able to finish the '97 CUP, because I was being
held responsible for it. I don't know. It very much confused me. They wouldn't give me
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 52 of 67
an occupancy permit, because I was being held -- in other words, I needed to do the '02
CUP in order to get an occupancy permit, which I should have been able to get one
after I posted a bond for the sidewalks, because that's the only thing that I needed to
finish from the '97 to be done. All the landscaping was done for the '97 CUP, to my
knowledge and I guess I would answer questions if you had that.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Nesmith, I believe the reason we come in and redone the CUP in 2002 was
because we were so far behind on the 1997 CUP, that -- it wasn't just sidewalks left in
the 1997. We questioned you at quite length in 2002 about this, made sure that you
understood all the findings, all the stuff. You were very positive with it. You were going
right out and get it done. I don't know. It just seems like we -- I don't know what we
have to do to convince you that when you come in and get a Conditional Use Permit
and have all these plans to do something, you got to go do it. I mean everybody that
gets one of these has to do it. It's just -- we are not picking on you. I mean you stood
here and testified in 2002 on May 7th that, you know, you agreed to all these conditions
and findings and now having your -- and how many months later we don't have them
done. But that's what happened in '97, too. I wasn't on the Council in '97, but I sat here
-- I was getting ready to run and had come to every Council meeting and I sat here and
listened to this testimony in '97, the same thing. You go out and do it in 2000, 2001,
2002. It hasn't been done. So, we come back in with another one. Now, you're going
to have to go get another one. And it's like Mr. Nary says, if we -- if we pull this, revoke
this, you can't run your business over there and your business has got to come first.
You need to get the CUP in order. Or not do -- you know, not get one. I mean, you
know, just not -- redo the thing or something. But, man, when you get one of these you
have got to -- you have got to live by the conditions like everybody else does. When we
make these conditions, we try to make them agreeable to both staff and to the applicant
and you agreed to all these things and now you're wanting to back out or wait or
something else and we have give you over a year. I don't know. I just, you know -- and
this is the second time we have had it.
Nesmith: I guess -- can I state -- I guess there is a -- I guess maybe it's a mistake on
my part. I was told that I had to go through the CUP process in order to be able to
know whether or not I could do what -- what I was thinking about doing. In other words
-- and there doesn't seem to be a process as far as an applicant that if you go -- in other
words, propose an idea -- in other words, it has to go -- in Old Town it has to go before
City Council to be approved, because you can't ask P&Z in order to know whether or
not you can even do a project, whether or not I agree with what the findings are and I
guess that may be what part of my -- I question what part of the problem is. In other
words, I had to kind of propose all this, go through all the issues and, then, we had just
a slight twist, some economy uncertainty that made me go, well, you know, I want to do
part of it and, then, you know, midstream, and, then, back out on just the building
remodel. I didn't have a problem with all the landscaping and all the other issues and,
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 53 of 67
then, obviously, I wasn't very timely. But that's why I went through the process is
because I was told I had to in order to know what I had to do.
Bird: You truthfully -- you do have to go through it, but if you're going to go through it
and spend that money and do that stuff, I mean we give you six years from '97. We
give six years and you haven't completed 40 percent of what are the findings. I don't
know if you have completed that percent and, you know, if you're going spend that kind
of money and stuff to come in and go through this process, you should be ready to go,
whether it's -- you hire somebody to do it or you do it yourself, you should be ready to
go. I mean I know you're a good businessman, run a good business, but, you know, I
feel you're jerking our chain, if you want to know the truth. I feel you are abusing the
city process and we don't -- we have never let any person that I have -- the six years I
have been on the Council we have not let people get away with CUP -- not doing them
like we have you. We give you six years to do this and, like I said, you have not done it,
John, and you know that, as well as I do, and it's -- I mean we can sit and put all the
excuses we want up there, but I guarantee you, I have heard a lot more and I just -- I'm
having a hard time buying it.
Nesmith: Keith, I guess I respectfully disagree on some aspects, but I don't -- and I
guess that is on the completion of the original CUP, because, you're right, on the current
one there isn't really anything accomplished because we didn't really even start the
project, but I was trying to, as you said, encompass and try to do a clean slate and start
over. I did make some errors in judgment initially when agreeing to the sidewalk
projects and stuff without really knowing the full scope of what I needed to do. I really
did. And that was my mistake and I had no idea what it took to, you know, not only cost
wise, but manpower wise and who to hire and what to do and I did ignore it and not go
about it the right way. I did really attempt -- when we did the current CUP made an
effort to hire the right people and to get it accomplished and, unfortunately, it took longer
than what I expected to get the sidewalk project done and I guess that's what I focused
my efforts on, so I could be in compliance with the major, I guess, requirements of what
the city wanted to do as far as landscaping and sidewalks and that type of thing, you
know. But I agree with you, I didn't make -- originally, I guess, is where I made my
errors in judgment, because I mean the developers that now do sidewalks in a -- in like
a -- like all the ones that we see, cost wise to develop the large land chunks probably
spend as much as I am on 180-feet of sidewalk. I don't know. I'm not a developer. I
don't know the exact numbers. But I'm investing 27,000 dollars in 180 feet of sidewalk
and I had no idea I was agreeing to do that and I guess there was initially some, you
know, resistance to that when you really found out what I agreed to do and that was,
obviously, my issue, but that I know is the issues that we are dealing with, but I really I
guess -- I'm not trying to blow smoke, I want to resolve the issues, I want to move on
and move through this stuff and get on with my life and not be talking to -- you know, as
far as these issues. I really do.
Nichols: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 54 of 67
Nichols: Mr. Nesmith, you have in front of you some plans and you referred -- you
pointed at them or touched them when you talked about the sidewalk plans. Do you
intend to use -- submit those as an exhibit that show the extent to which you're
prepared to put in the sidewalk or --
Nesmith: I didn't know if you wanted them, but I do have copies that I could submit of
those plans, yes. I did not know if you wanted to see them.
Nary: Well, it's your evidence. You do what you want. I mean we have to make a
decision on what -- the evidence we have. You can give it to us or don't. I don't care.
That's up to you.
Nesmith: I guess I just wanted to show you the progress of the current state of plans.
Nichols: Mr. Nesmith, you're going to have to go back to the microphone if you're going
to speak, though, because we have to have the tape.
Nesmith: Okay. I guess I'm submitting this plan as the current revision according to
ACHD of the requirements for the Bower Street addition for sidewalks.
De Weerd: So, those will be stamped in as Exhibit No. 17.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Nesmith, just so -- I guess I'm having a hard time following. What you're
telling us is that all of this landscaping, the landscaping along the railroad right of way,
the landscaping along Main Street, and the landscaping on Bower Street, are all tied to
the sidewalk on Bower Street. You can't do any landscaping on any part of this
property until you build the sidewalk on Bower Street?
Nesmith: I have no pressurized irrigation. None. I got to get water to it if I want it to
live.
Nary: And you have never once asked to modify this -- these conditions because of
that?
Nesmith: I guess I didn't. I didn't know I could.
Nary: And you submitted this landscape plan that we are talking about as referenced in
these findings, you had a landscape architect prepare that and he didn't tell you there is
no water for any of it? I mean you submitted a plan. That's what they are saying you're
not in compliance with is your own landscape plan that you submitted.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 55 of 67
Nesmith: Well, I guess assuming that I was able to get the process done -- in other
words, the sidewalk project done, then, the water wouldn't have been an issue, so there
wouldn't have been an issue with getting the plan done. In other words, just I didn't
think that the chronological issue with getting the approval through ACHD was going to
be that lengthy. That was my assumption.
Bird: Madam President, if Mr. Nary's done, I have got a question or two.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mr. Nesmith, you seen -- the sidewalk on Bower Street has all to do with all the
landscaping, because of getting the water to it. Now, how are you going to run the
water down Bower Street and get it up Main Street -- you're going to have landscaping
up there and stuff. I understood it was stated -- I don't know whether it was by you or
by staff, that you didn't want to cut through your parking lot; is that right?
Nesmith: Uh-huh.
Bird: I don't think ACHD or anybody is going to let you go up underneath their sidewalk
on Main Street.
Nesmith: No. I didn't have to do that. In other words --
Bird: Why can't you get the water up to the north?
Nesmith: Can you -- maybe go to the screen or something on the Main Street deal?
Backwards.
Bird: Yeah. There we go.
Nesmith: Well, if you -- the meter is right there. You go up the sidewalk and then the
sidewalk part that I'm installing here would go right up here. In other words, the
sidewalk is right -- the existing sidewalk is here. In other words, the landscaping isn't --
you can go right underneath the portion that you're tearing up.
Bird: Okay. I understand that.
Nesmith: And, then, you can just proceed over, and I can -- there is an elevation issue
here, so if I didn't want to trench across here, I could bore -- because this is quite high
and this is low right here and you can easily bore right underneath that pavement to get
to that.
De Weerd: So, is there a reason you can't lay the line and where the sidewalk is going
to go and cover it?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 56 of 67
Nesmith: No, there isn't. I mean I guess I was -- I was just trying to do things once, you
know, not tunnel it and then tear it up and then redo it is all, because you got the
freezing issue, so you got to have your waterline substantially down, from what I
understand and so that was just my own decision to do -- you could do that and then
repatch the asphalt across where the sidewalk is going to go. Correct. But I was just
trying to -- as far as construction goes, you know, just do it once.
De Weerd: They are two separate processes anyway.
Nesmith: Well, when you tear up and excavate, because it's all paved here and we got
to cut back --
De Weerd: Did you say you already did that?
Nesmith: The only thing they did is saw it and then we got stopped --
De Weerd: Oh.
Nesmith: -- because the drainage issue. In other words, it's just a little saw cut that's
about an eighth of an inch wide. Otherwise, I probably would already be running water
lines and digging it, because -- if the asphalt got tore up.
De Weerd: I guess my issue here, John, is we were told we were fools to have
approved this in 2002 without asking you to do the things -- requiring you to do the
things that you were supposed to do in '97 and you stood in front of us and asked for us
to have faith that you would get them done and you would get them done in the time
period that we were allowing you and it is 18 months later and none of it's done.
Nesmith: I guess the final product isn't --
De Weerd: And so now you're asking us to give you another half a year, where you
already had a year and a half and didn't get anywhere. You know, we -- I think we kind
of really hung ourselves out there when we did this a year and a half ago, because we
wanted to have faith and you told us that you would do it and we went on that faith and
it's -- I don't know, I almost think I hear my kids in front of me telling me why they
haven't cleaned up their room, they have all kinds of excuses and you're admitting that
you delayed it too long, but, you know, the consequences were laid out a long time ago.
You knew what you were risking.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Have you got an estimate from any -- a total estimate of what it's going to cost to
justify this CUP?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 57 of 67
Nesmith: The --
Bird: I mean in dollars. Is it going to cost 100,000, 200,000, 10,000, 5,000,
approximately, or what?
Nesmith: For --
Bird: For everything to do the CUP.
Nesmith: As it is, yeah, I did. Two-hundred-forty thousand.
Bird: Two hundred forty. Like Madam President was saying, we were told we were
stupid for approving it in 2002 when you hadn't done '97's and now you're asking us to
keep going on here. What kind of a time limit? Six months? You can get that done in six
months now. You have had 18 months and haven't got a thing accomplished, but you
can do it in six months?
Nesmith: The -- I guess what I wanted -- not the building, because that's, obviously,
unrealistic, but the sidewalk project and get the water line and landscaping
improvements, I can get that done. What I wanted to do within that six months is redo, I
guess, the CUP and something after getting -- because what I had to do was get the
CUP done, so I could get cost estimates to know how much it cost me, so what I guess
I wanted to do is try to do it in a phase, if you will, so I could do all the landscaping and
everything and, then, later do the building if I so desired.
Bird: That's a great idea, but I can tell you, I have been in the construction business 42
years and you could have an estimate on that whole job and you could have it the day
you come in here for a CUP, a good estimate. You had a good architect. Mr. Gibson
could have got you an estimate price within five minutes and we give you six years,
John. It isn't just a year. We give you six years, another Council, and, then, this -- the
three of us, plus Cherie went out on a limb. And it's eighteen months later and we
haven't seen a thing done. And like I said earlier, I think you're trying to pull the wool
over the city's eyes. I hate to see anybody not be able to operate their business and I
know you -- and I know you're a good businessman and -- but I still think you're
hoodwinking us. I think -- I mean I want to -- I'd like to see some contracts entered into
to do that stuff and all this stuff and get it done or -- I don't know where to go from here.
I'm really -- I'm disappointed, if you want to know the truth, after 2002 when you come in
here and -- like Madam President said, you know, we took you at your word, we asked
you if all the findings and everything was okay, are you satisfied to it and everything and
you said, yeah, and you'd get right on it and here it is 18 months later and we are
revoking it. I don't know, I'm really disappointed and embarrassed, if you want to know
the truth.
Nesmith: Well, I guess I apologize for that. It was not my intention, truly. Mr. Gibson
did not -- you know, I guess it's irrelevant whether or not it took five minutes or two
weeks to get the estimate, but I guess what I would want to know is -- I guess what I
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 58 of 67
wanted to -- there is some issues on landscaping that are not able to be completed,
because there is an issue with the sidewalk deal, there is a right of way issue. The
building is built into Bower Street right of way and Bruce knows those things. I had to
enter into a right of way agreement and, then, there was extensive issues on how wide
they wanted the street and they had to decide on how -- like far into it is. And, actually,
here after there isn't any room to do this landscaping as agreed on, because it's all
going to be sidewalk and building. In fact, the existing landscaping that was done right
here is going to have to be deleted. But, you know, I would be willing to, I guess, you
know, work with Planning and Zoning and phase it. The only thing that I don't have -- I
guess the issue with the -- this is -- the paving was a substantial cost increase over the
P&Z's original issue with, you know, being able to use reclaimed and if we could use
reclaimed asphalt, that could be done and accomplished quite easily and I could get
everything else done, other than the building reasonably sure and I would do whatever
you needed to do to have surety of that.
Bird: I think Anna said that the reclaimed was okay with her, didn't she? Anna?
Nesmith: Other than the fact that the Findings of Fact say paved, not -- so, we have to
be here in order to fix it is the issue. In other words, so if I move forward without you
guys making a -- or Members of the Council making a ruling that I can undo that paved
word, I have to go to the letter of the Findings of Facts. I don't have a choice. In other
words, if I --
Bird: That's one item. How about the other dozen items that's the finding?
Nesmith: Well, actually, we have -- actually, have -- I mean according to their list, we
have about five.
Bird: I just threw out a number.
Nesmith: Yeah. I know. I'm sorry, Keith. I guess I -- like you, I want to get this behind
me and move on.
Nichols: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Mr. Nesmith, on the plans for the sidewalk improvements, they are dated the
21st of November and it references an ACHD revision dated November 21st. Do you
have a letter or anything from ACHD that says those plans are approved?
Nesmith: No, sir. I have -- those plans need to be submitted to Scott for approval and I
just got them today. But as far as I know, there was an inlet-outlet deal as far as all of it
is an issue with -- with the elevation, because there was no drainage on Bower Street.
From Main to where you needed to dump it in, they weren't able to drain water, you
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 59 of 67
know, there wasn't enough fall to go into the inlet of the deal -- of the culvert or
whatever it is.
De Weerd: Do you have any correspondence from ACHD that can back up what you're
saying?
Nesmith: Scott told me that you could call him, but I did not think to get anything in
writing. But I would -- I could give you that, but he did say if you had any questions, that
-- you know, to call, but I didn't --
De Weerd: Is there a way to indicate how long you have been working with them on this
project to get it done?
Nesmith: I don't know. That's a good question. I don't know. I started on it after we got
the CUP done with James Gibson and I don't know if he could write me a statement --
but, in other words, after we redid the CUP is when I moved forward on -- and said, hey,
okay, let's get going on this project and get it done.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Maybe I'll ask even a more direct question, Mr. Nesmith. I mean you don't have
any letter from ACHD from May or June of 2002 saying don't build this sidewalk yet, we
want to do this? You don't have any correspondence from them?
Nesmith: Not that -- that just -- honestly, that just happened. In other words, he just
told me that. In other words, we had been dealing with right of way issues, drainage
issues, they initially had me putting in a vault in the road to drain the stuff into, because
there wasn't enough room and, then, they decided against that and then -- I mean,
honestly, I had an engineer doing some of the corresponding and maybe Arrow would
be able to -- Arrow Engineering could supply some of that, because I hired them to
handle that, you know, so they really weren't talking to me. I just talked to Scott,
because they stopped the -- in fact, I had a permit to do it and, then, they stopped it,
because -- I guess because of this issue, because lowering the deal, but I just found
that out a week ago or so.
De Weerd: It seems like -- Bruce might have information regarding the situation on
Bower and at some point we can ask Bruce to come up. Now might be a good time
and, then, we can ask Mr. Nesmith any further questions. So, if you'll go ahead and
have a seat while I ask Bruce to come up. Is the testimony you provide the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mills: It is.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bruce. Please state your name.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 60 of 67
Mills: Bruce Mills, Ada County Highway District, Garden City, Idaho. I am not intimately
familiar with all the issues on this project. However, I do know that on Bower Street I
have conversations with Scott Reidel of our staff and what Mr. Nesmith said is true, that
Bower Street -- the storm drainage line in Bower Street is very high and it's very difficult
to be able to drain into that line. In fact, I believe our maintenance crews are going to
be coming forward and doing a project in the next couple of months. Maybe John can
verify the timing, I don't know, but I don't remember all the details, but I do know that
ACHD is going to come along on Bower Street and we are going to put a new storm line
lower than the existing one is now and when that's completed, then, Mr. Nesmith will be
able to drain his property into Bower Street and I believe that work is going to be
scheduled in the next couple two to three months. I don't know the exact date,
unfortunately.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Bruce, what kind of a project -- how long is this project? Is it a month or a week
or two weeks or what to do on Bower Street that -- you guys' work. Do you have an
Idea?
Mills: Councilmember Bird, I believe it's probably maybe a two-week duration. It's not a
long project. It's just a short stretch to fix the problem we have.
Bird: Thank you.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Mills. So has this situation -- the knowledge of it in trying to resolve this
situation, has it existed for 18 months; do you know?
Mills: Councilmember Nary, I don't know. I have had a conversation with Scott when
we were trying to see if we could make the drainage work on the higher existing storm
drain line maybe a month and a half, two months ago, but I don't have any knowledge
of how long he has been in the permitting process with ACHD.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Yeah. Madam President. On the plan that Mr. Nesmith submitted, there --
apparently some dates -- or ACHD letters referenced in the plan that date back to 2001.
So, there is -- it looks like the plan has been revised three times in reference to different
letters from ACHD and that's on the face of the plan. Is that the typical way, Bruce, that
they submit a plan and you guys submit your comments back to the engineer for
drawing changes or do you know?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 61 of 67
Mills: Madam President, Mr. Nichols, that is the proper way to do it, to start out and,
then, every time that there is a revision then that is dated on those plans.
Nichols: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bruce.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I have got a question and I don't know who can answer it. Why wouldn't we have
seen that at the CUP in 2002 if this -- if the notes go back to 2001? I mean you guys
are a lot smarter than I am. Can any of you answer it for me?
Nary: Don't know.
De Weerd: I think don't know works.
Powell: At this point -- excuse me, Madam President, Members of the Council. At this
point, no, we don't know. It could have been that the sidewalk improvements that --
staff doesn't know.
Bird: Madam President, let me throw out a deal.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We could sit here -- we could sit here until 1:00 o'clock in the morning arguing and
debating this. As I said earlier, I hate to see anybody be out of their business. But, in
the same token, I think we have been hoodwinked long enough. Staff, would you have
any -- if we was to delay this two weeks, give Mr. Nesmith time to get some estimates
together and some dates that he can -- people start doing all this stuff -- we know the
sidewalk and stuff is not going to happened for a little bit, until -- but I mean that's not
the only finding that he hasn't done. I mean I'm having a hard time finding something
he has done.
Nary: I think they did the trash enclosure.
Bird: The trash enclosure.
De Weerd: But is there --
Bird: And we, if the Council so desires, we can change that from paving up there on the
railroad property to what Anna said is fine, the reclaimed oil. I would have no problem
with that. But this gives us two weeks and, like I said, I hate to see anybody lose their
business. I know Mr. Nesmith and his brother are very good business people, but I'm
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 62 of 67
tired of being hoodwinked. So, if he doesn’t come in with a good plan that satisfies you
guys in two weeks, it's revoked as far as this councilman is concerned, if the other
Council buys in on this.
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols? I guess I would ask -- I think it's probably a very reasonable
suggestion to bring in a time frame, cost estimates. Can we ask for a bonding for the
improvements as a part of this activity or this process?
Nichols: Madam President, Members of the Council, I think that as a condition for
continuing the Conditional Use Permit versus revoking it, that you can impose
reasonable conditions that are designed to insure compliance with the conditions. If, in
fact, the building -- metal building is not being used for any kind of hot work or doesn't
violate fire code, then, issues don't currently present a public safety issue. They do
present a compliance with the zoning code issue. So, if Mr. Nesmith comes back with
cost estimates, for example, and you tell him that he has a certain period of time to do
those things and order to insure that he will do them he has to post a bond or a letter of
credit equal to the 120 percent or the 110 percent of those estimates, then, I think that
would be a reasonable finding in connection with any non-revocation, if that's what you
chose to do. Or you could simply even defer your decision to see if he's -- you know,
those sorts of things. So, if you want to continue it for two weeks for him to submit
additional evidence that the Council can consider in its decision, that's appropriate.
De Weerd: So, that additional evidence can be a statement from ACHD on how long
you have been working with them and submit a time frame for the improvements that
need to be done, cost estimates, and contracts of the work to be done.
Nichols: Yeah. Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nichols.
Nichols: Perhaps a more problematic issue is the issue of landscaping and landscape
plan that's shown along Bower Street in that if that's an impossible condition to meet,
then, he needs to be prepared to come up with alternative compliance on the remainder
of the site, which may require a revised landscape plan or at least some changes to it.
Maybe not revised, but some changes. So, he needs to be prepared to address
alternative compliance in the landscape plan if it's impossible to put landscaping on
Bower Street, something in writing from ACHD that details the time lines that are
involved, including what Mr. Mills testified to, maybe even what their construction
schedule is and when they have got it slotted to be constructed. All of those things
would be appropriate for you to have evidence of before you make your final decision.
De Weerd: He could work with staff on ironing out some of that.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 63 of 67
Nary: Yeah. I guess I would agree with what's been discussed. The only thing I would
suggest is rather than two weeks is to have three. With the short week and a holiday, I
don't want to come back in two weeks and say we didn't have enough time. But, you
know, I guess my only comment, Mr. Nesmith, is part of what I heard you say was they
are picking on me and Mr. Whitman doesn't like me and I think some of this is
motivated. Put that aside, because this is ridiculous. I mean Mr. Bird is absolutely right,
18 months is absolutely ridiculous. Not only are we giving you one chance to bring in
evidence to prove what you're saying, what Mr. Mills has said, and to show us that you
really put your money where your mouth is, your good faith is really truly going to
present when we come back in three weeks. But, secondarily, we need to consider
filing criminal charges against you. If you can't do this and comply with the sign permit
requirements, then, we should give you a ticket and you should go explain to a judge
downtown and maybe go pick up trash on the weekend instead of wasting our time.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary?
Nary: What?
Bird: Madam President?
Nary: It is a criminal violation to violate our city code.
Bird: Madam President?
Nary: So, we should enforce that by giving him a citation. If he doesn't want to comply,
then, he can go downtown and explain it to a criminal court why he can't comply. We
prosecute these people all the time. This is ridiculous. We shouldn't be here 18
months later after you promised us you'd complete it and if you don't like it, then, we
can consider revoking it and we can also consider criminal charges. It is a crime. Get
this done.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I agree word for word with what Mr. Nary said, too. And I think Mr. Nesmith
does, too. John, does this give you -- if we go to the 16th, you understand what we are
wanting; right? You get with Wendy or Anna and you come in with a plan the 16th that's
going to satisfy us. And I will make a motion here to continue this. And, if not, we won't
go past the 16th, if you don't have a plan. I won't. I can't speak for the other three. But
I won't go past it and I'm like Mr. Nary, if you're out of compliance, you should be written
up just like everybody else is. And it is a deal. So, with that -- as long as you
understand that, Mr. Nesmith, what I'm saying. You understand? He's shaking his --
yes.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 64 of 67
Powell: Before you make your motion, just to make sure that I understand. Does that
also -- does that plan for completing those improvements include a landscape -- a bond
for all the work that is yet to be included?
Bird: Yes, ma'am. And this is to be worked out with your guys at the staff. If you're not
a hundred percent in agreement with it, then, we probably aren't going to be. Okay? Or
I'm not going to be I should say.
De Weerd: And I think there is no reason why the sign thing can't be solved before,
then, as well.
Bird: That's right. I think there are a lot of things that need to be solved before the 16th
of December. And there better be a good secure plan -- and I mean a plan. Not
somebody getting up here telling me something. Anyway, with that I would move that
we continue Public Hearing CUP 03-004, the request revocation of a Conditional Use
Permit granted by the City of Meridian for John Nesmith for Meridian Automotive, 505
North Main, to December 16th, 2003.
Nary: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to continue Public Hearing CUP 02-
004, to December 16th, 2003. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Council, just wanted to remind you about the parade.
Nary: Yeah. What are we going to do?
De Weerd: We are going to have go-carts by Boondocks on December 6th. And our
city clerk has asked about what the desires are on the meeting for December 23rd.
Personally, I would prefer not to have it. Is that what this note was?
Berg: Yes. Madam President, just because of the holiday season and not knowing
everybody's schedules and being out of town, I just wanted to double-check what's
going on, because I would rather prepare Public Hearing notices for the proper dates,
than to be having to do special notices to continue things or -- and in the past we have
done several things, depending on how the days fall and we have canceled meetings
right before Christmas and we have also canceled meetings because of people being
gone in between the two holidays, too.
Powell: Madam President, I had asked about this earlier, because the agenda for the
one previous to that is pretty light, they were pretty easy issues. Is there any possibility
we could renotice those forward? Because I really think there would be time.
De Weerd: Are there meetings already scheduled for the 23rd?
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 65 of 67
Powell: Yes. There are three conditional use permits scheduled for the 23rd, which is
the last I saw. But the hearing previous to that had a lot of -- I think final plats, things
that typically go quite quickly.
De Weerd: Okay. Notices haven't been sent?
Powell: I was told they were already.
Nary: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: I guess I would -- I would suggest that if we can reschedule things from the 23rd,
that that's probably a good idea. I'd hate to cancel the meeting today, not knowing
between now and then -- when we have -- but we'd have two weeks without a meeting,
which we did last year, but in case there is some need to have a meeting on the 23rd,
I'd rather leave it vacant, and we can cancel it later if nothing comes up on our agenda
that needs to be done, otherwise -- but if we could move the things that are maybe
going to be -- and we could cancel them.
Bird: We don't have to decide tonight.
De Weerd: Right.
Bird: Let's see what comes up. You might have some that we need to get done the
23rd.
Nary: Right.
De Weerd: But we have a meeting on the 30th; correct?
Bird: And the 30th we will be going.
De Weerd: We are not?
Nary: It's the fifth Tuesday of the month, so we wouldn't normally meet anyway.
De Weerd: Yeah. I guess a concern would be any old business for the --
Bird: Something we need to get taken care of.
De Weerd: -- current Council, so that we don't have too much going into the first
meeting of January. I guess that -- like Councilman Nary suggested, that might be too
much. I could leave open the 30th, than, on the 23rd, because we are leaving town, so
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 66 of 67
-- and I don't know if the mayor will be back and, then, you all have to be there on the
23rd. Okay.
Nary: So, I think, Madam President, the bottom line is we'd like to not have -- we'd like
to have the meeting on the 23rd available, if we don't schedule anything, if we could
avoid scheduling things at this juncture, that would be what we would prefer.
De Weerd: Yes. Good summation. Yes. Mr. Smith.
Smith: Madam President, you will have to advise if this is in order or not, but can I ask
you a question on an agenda item in the pre-Council meeting? Is that appropriate or
not?
De Weerd: Yeah.
Smith: I guess I'm --
De Weerd: I don't know. Let me hear it first and, then, I'll answer.
Smith: Okay. Okay. I guess I'm confused a little bit about the agenda item for Billy
Bowles and how that came about. I thought I heard her say tonight that she just had
sewer problems today and, yet, it was on the agenda as an agenda item, which was set
last week sometime, I guess.
De Weerd: She requested to be on there to talk about her experience and the possible
experiences we will be having in the future. You know, this was an example of
something that we should be looking at down the road as far as policy with three people
on one line and that sort of thing. That was -- originally, you know, I didn't know she
had issues today either.
Smith: Okay. Okay.
Nary: I think she was asking for a long-term solution because she didn't want to be on
the line. She wanted, essentially, the City to hook her up somewhere else.
Smith: Okay. I apologize.
Nary: I think that's what that was.
Bird: Madam President?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: When you brought that up, Gary, I want to know when the City Council and Mayor
made the statement that she could go get a second mortgage on her place. I want to
know who -- we, to my knowledge, have never --
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 67 of 67
Smith: The City Council didn't and I told her that I talked to Bill. And I did after the
Council meeting Bill and I talked and Bill suggested that we -- that I mention to her the
possibility of approaching her mortgage company for a second mortgage or loan to
facilitate the repair work.
Bird: Well, she kept saying Mayor and City Council and I'm going --
Smith: No.
Bird: -- I'm going, man, I'm not -- my memory isn't -- I haven't lost my memory, have I,
you know.
Smith: No. Right. No. I didn't --
Bird: I didn't remember talking to her.
Smith: No. It wasn't brought to your attention. It was after the Council meeting and I
just talked to Bill about it.
Bird: That's fine, but I didn't -- but you guys -- you know, it's on public here that it's the
Mayor and Council.
De Weerd: Well, Gary, really, was just visionary. We knew her sewer would back up
today.
Bird: Yeah.
Smith: Unfortunate chain of events.
De Weerd: Yeah. Very much so.
Smith: One of the things, Madam President, that -- in the process of this situation, I
talked to Boise City and talked to John Tennison, their city engineer, about it. He said
that Boise City sets aside -- I believe he said some of their revenue sharing funds that
they get each year, they just get a certain number of dollars based on their population. I
think that's how it's allocated. And they set that money -- they set a certain amount of
that money aside to help people that have financial hardships in meeting their
responsibilities for the city, I guess. I don't know if that's a possibility in our city or not.
De Weerd: Well, it certainly might be somebody that we want to explore as we find out
more about Old Town and as we proceed forward with urban renewal. We might find
more situations like this and, Gary, you know, we might also look at granting
opportunities as well to do some of that if you have a staff member that might have an
opportunity to do a little research in that.
Meridian City Council
November 25, 2003
Page 68 of 67
Gary: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: It was a good piece of information. I didn't know that the City had done that
in the '80s. So, if I don't hear any further discussion, I would entertain a motion to
adjourn.
Nary: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All those in favor say
aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. It's 10:50.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:50 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
_______________________________ ______/______/______
MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR, CITY CLERK