HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 09-13Meridian City Council Meeting September 13, 2005
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:17 P.M.,
Tuesday, September 13, 2005, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle, and Charlie Rountree.
Members Absent: Christine Donnell.
Others Present: Ted Baird, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Bob Stowe, Bill Johnson, Len
Grady, Brad Watson, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Shaun Wardle ___ Christine Donnell
X__ Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
_X_ Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: I will go ahead and call the meeting to order of the regular City Council
meeting. It's Tuesday, September 13th. It's 7:17. Thank you for joining us this
evening. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll?
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 2 is the Pledge Of Allegiance. If you will, please, all rise
and join us in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Gordon Slyter, with Treasure Valley
Worship Center:
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. If you will, please, take this
opportunity to join us in the community invocation or use this as a moment of silence.
We will be led tonight by Pastor Gordon Slyter with the Treasure Valley Worship Center.
Thank you for joining us.
Slyter: Let us pray. Our Father in Heaven, we thank you for your good hand upon us.
So many blessing, Lord, that we enjoy, just the opportunity to live in peace, to
participate in democracy, just thank you for these blessings. And, Lord, here as we see
in Meridian the growth and opportunity that have abounded in these last years, thank
you for the blessings that come with that and also the challenges. Would you, please,
give this Council tonight wisdom as they face the challenges of providing leadership
and direction for our city. Lord, tonight we also remember fellow citizens in the southern
part of our nation, down in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, comfort those who have
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 2 of 51
lost -- whether it be material possessions or even the lives of loved ones, comfort them
and help those who are the helpers and help them rebuild we pray. So, now, Lord, we
place this meeting in your hands tonight and thank you in advance for your leading and
your blessing in Jesus' name we pray, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: Thank you so much for joining us tonight. Okay. Item 4 is adoption of the
agenda.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: We have some changes to the agenda. On the Consent Agenda we need to
omit Item D. Item C-2 of the Mayor's office needs to be placed as Item 18 to the end of
our agenda, which relates to Item 5 on our pre-council agenda, which was moved.
Items 11, 12, and 13 have requested to be tabled until October 4th. Resolution No. 05-
489 and Ordinance No. 05-1181. With that, I move that we adopt the agenda as
amended.
Bird: I second, but I have one question. Could we move the Mayor's deal to 17 and
move 17 to 18, the Executive Session?
Wardle: Certainly. I would include that in my motion.
Bird: Second would agree.
De Weerd: Okay. And I guess we will find out why my Item C was moved to the end of
the agenda. Right?
Wardle: Your item at the end of the agenda was related to Item 5 on the pre-council
agenda, which we tabled to the --
De Weerd: Okay. You don't want to just discuss it as that comes up?
Wardle: We agree to move it to the end of the agenda.
De Weerd: Well, I haven't asked for a vote.
Wardle: You can when you want.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further changes?
Bird: Well, 11, 12 and 13.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 3 of 51
De Weerd: October 4th? Okay. Okay. If there is no further changes, all those in favor
of the adoption of the agenda as amended say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of July 25, 2005 City Council Budget Workshop:
B. Approve Liquor License for Epi’s A Basque Restaurant – 1115
North Main Street:
C. Contract with Candy Weaver:
D. Contract with Aspire-On:
E. Addendum to Joint Powers Agreement with Meridian Rural
Fire District for Station No. 3:
F. Contract for Black Cat Trunk Sewer – Phase 3 with JUB
Engineers, Inc.:
G. Contract for the Meridian WWTP SCADA Phase 1
Programming with DC Engineering, Inc.:
H. Hosted Global Services Agreement with Active Network
Incorporated for Software Program for Parks and Recreation
Department:
De Weerd: Consent Agenda.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Wardle: I move that we adopt the Consent Agenda with deletion of Item D and for the
Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. If there is no
further discussion, Mr. Berg?
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 4 of 51
Item 6: Department Reports:
A. Planning Department – Steve Siddoway
1. Follow-up Discussion of Letter from Floyd Robinson:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 6 is our Department Reports. We will start with the
planning department. And, Anna, is not Steve, but Anna will be giving the report.
Canning: Yes. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Steve got pulled away to a
meeting up north today to substitute for Clair Bowman, so that's why he's not with you.
But I am capable of doing this update for you. As you know, Mr. Robinson wrote to you
and was concerned about access issues in the Blue Marlin Subdivision in this area in
particular here. You can see that as you come off of Linder into these subdivisions, that
is the only access. If there were ever to be an accident or some reason that Linder was
closed for this section, none of these homes, including these Ada County one-acre
parcels would have an alternative access to Franklin Road. There are two stub streets.
One is here and another is -- if I can find it. Right there. We had talked over a year ago
to the owner of this property, which is Rose Cottage Industries, and at that time they
were looking at -- I think they were considering selling the property, so they didn't want
to put any encumbrances on it at that time. Since that time Rose Cottage Industries is
selling to another entity and they have expressed a desire to work with the city on
providing an emergency access to that residential subdivision. This is just their
tentative concept plan at this point and you can see that they do plan on connecting
from Waltman Court to Muscovy Avenue. I talked with Jay Kaplan today, who is the
managing partner of the LLC that will be acquiring the property in October -- mid
October this year and he said that they didn't have any problem with it. All he was
looking for from the city was a drawing of where that emergency access easement
would go, a legal description of the easement, and, then, an assurance from the city
that they would work with him to relocate that easement or make it go away, whichever
one is appropriate, as he looks to develop his property and those seemed all
reasonable requests. What this emergency access would be is that this -- ACHD has
agreed to scrape the road and put down a road base, I believe, so that emergency
vehicles could drive on it and that's all it would be at this point. It would be -- not be
enough to encourage people to use it as a driving surface and I think we'd still have a
barricade or some sort of gate to prevent them using it as regular access. So, this
property is not likely to be fully developed until the roadway improvements are done at
the Waltman Court -- at this intersection here, so that Waltman has a good access to
Meridian Road. So, we foresee that this emergency access could be in place for a
couple of years before a public street would be in. And with that, if the Council could
just provide some guidance on how they'd like to proceed, if -- I think I could work with
legal department. It's probably the two departments working together to come up with
some agreement.
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 5 of 51
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I don't know what all direction you need, but I, for one, would move that we
instruct staff to work with legal counsel, ACHD, and the mentioned property owner to
work out the easement agreements necessary in order to provide emergency access.
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion is to instruct staff to move forward as instructed. There
seems to be some comment. Let's first vote on our -- I will ask you in a moment to
come forward. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Robinson, if you will, please, come forward. Good evening. If
you will, please, state your name.
Robinson: Floyd Robinson, 828 South Redhead in Meridian. I'm right there on the
map. Has there been any consideration of coming from -- I don't have a pointer.
De Weerd: Right there in front of you.
Robinson: Is this it? Okay. From that street to that street. Okay. That one's already
there and that one's already there. All we need is a little bridge right there and a way to
get to it.
De Weerd: It's that little bridge that costs a lot of money.
Robinson: Well, I can understand that, but we have been waiting nine years.
De Weerd: Sir, we are concerned as you are for the emergency access. This is the --
at this point because that will all be driven by development and that cost would be theirs
and this is the easiest way for -- and the least expensive way for us to get an
emergency access out of that area. So, at this point it is the most feasible. But,
eventually, that's is to be a connecting point.
Robinson: Thank you.
De Weerd: And I do believe that there is a house now in the way.
Canning: Yes, Madam Mayor, the subdivision that developed on the north side of the
canal did road trust for half the cost of a bridge, but the logical extension of that is both
south and, then, to connect west and there is a house right there where that road would
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 6 of 51
go south and it's a new house and it's a large house and the person, apparently, enjoys
living there. So, until such time as that person decides they don't want to live there, this
will likely -- the alternative access out of this subdivision will likely be through Waltman
Court -- or Waltman Lane.
De Weerd: And that is the dilemma we find ourselves in. That was approved by the
county, because that is in the county, and it -- at this point there is -- there is no
opportunity for the city to deny any kind of building permit or whatsoever when we have
a road idea in that area. So, we are -- we, like ACHD, are usually not even notified, but
we do want to get that emergency access in and this seems at this point the soonest --
the best opportunity we have.
Robinson: I thank you for your patience.
De Weerd: Thank you. Anna, if you will, please, pass along our appreciation to Steve
and ACHD for working together to find a solution on this. And thank you, Mr. Robinson.
B. Parks and Recreation Department – Elroy Huff
1. Award of Bid for Autumn Faire Neighborhood Park
Development to Hillside Landscape Construction:
De Weerd: Okay. There is no further item on that. Parks and Recreation. Doug, are
you -- Elroy -- oh, Elroy still is here.
Huff: Hiding in the back. See if I can make that work. Madam Mayor, Members of the
Council, I'm here tonight to give you an update on the Autumn Faire Seasons Park
issues that we had last time I was here. Just -- I don't know if Councilman Rountree
was here last time. He was gone, I think.
Rountree: Last week?
Huff: Was it last --
Rountree: Two weeks ago I was here and --
Huff: Okay. Sorry. Just making sure I caught everybody. Early in the spring last year
we met -- I met with the irrigation district about a pump station on that site and with an
irrigation lake, so we would have enough to be able to get across that park irrigation-
wise, in a timely manner. They -- there was some other things that came up there and
some developers come in and we asked -- got asked to go to a meeting and they were
looking at developing some property to the west in that they would have had a large
regional pump station that would have served that sub, including us. In some studies
since that time of that particular thing it has cooled off and it doesn't look like that the
development that the developers may have wanted to do to the west is ready yet to
happen. So, during the course of the summer, the irrigation district experienced some
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 7 of 51
lower pressure in that sub as more homes were built in the Autumn Faire and Trisha's
Crossing and they don't have enough pump capacity and their pumps are a long ways
away. So, what they wanted to do is finally come back to us and said, well, why don't
we share a pump station in our park, so we can have a booster station down in that
area and that put us right close to that. And so, anyway, we have had those two
conversations with them and when those developer guys were looking at that, they got
-- they'd like to have those pump stations built and turned over to them, so they kind of
jumped on that. But now in the last few days, since we had another meeting with them,
they have come back around and I'm currently working with them to get a pump station
in that site. It will boost up their sub and take care of their complaint problems and
serve us. I do not have that totally worked out yet. I thought that would have been by
now. In the course of the summer we decided if we are ever going to get this park built
we'd go put it out to bid, knowing that we'd have to cinch these things up. So, we are
still working on those. We did put it out to bid. We got two responsible bidders. The
bid was 224,000. It was more than what we had budgeted. I think we had that
discussion last time I was here. And I did talk with the contractor. He's asked me to do
that and see if he would -- how much work he would do for the money that we had in
the account. He did come back to me, we talked that over. He would do all irrigation
and green up and all these kinds of things, but it would not include any hard-scape on
the site. And our meetings on staff, we discussed what we should do. We know that
we have about a hundred and I think 13 thousand dollars budgeted for next year for the
restroom and a playground. And in order to get that park built, I think probably the best
interest that we could do is the contractor said he could wait a little while. The costs are
going up daily, but he said he could hold a little bit. And so we are looking at the
possibility of coming back after October 1st on our new budget year and asking for an
impact fee amendment to finish that, get that park finished and, then, take our 113 and
go right to the restroom construction. I just have to work out the irrigation details. I do
not know how much that will cost. I only want to pay our share of what a pump station
would be. They are going to put a big one in and we are going to try to get on in next to
it that serves our park site. That's where I'm at today.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none. Thank you, Elroy.
Huff: Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Item C is the Mayor's report. In front of you are -- is my
reappointment --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I believe this -- we moved this to Item 17 or are we going to keep it to --
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 8 of 51
Wardle: Item 2.
Rountree: Item 2.
Bird: Oh, Item 2. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Mayor. Go ahead. You guys got to quit
whispering down on that end. I can't hear you.
De Weerd: Okay. I would -- well, I'm trying to reappoint you to a board. Are you trying
to avoid this?
Bird: Keep talking.
De Weerd: In front of you are two names to reappoint to the Meridian Development
Corporation board. That reappointment is because their terms are up. I believe they
are three year terms. And the reappointment is for Clarence Jones, who has been with
this urban renewal project since the conception and Councilman Keith Bird, who has
also been on this board since it was first established. I will need a motion to approve,
unless you need any further explanation.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I'm going to make a motion to approve and certainly thank Mr.
Bird for his efforts on the MDC board and certainly acknowledge Clarence Jones' efforts
from the very start of this and also we heard I believe a couple weeks ago that Mr.
Jones has a formula to cash flow a parking garage, which I think is a wonderful thing.
So, with that I would move that we accept the recommendation to reappoint Clarence
Jones and Keith Bird to the MDC board.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd; Okay. Motion to approve the reappointment of Clarence Jones and Keith
Bird to the MDC board. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Council, we have moved Item No. 2 to the end of the agenda. I would like
to also share with you, although none of you were able to join us this morning, I did
read a proclamation proclaiming today as recovery awareness day. We had some
speakers with us this morning at the police department that talked about some of the
substance abuse issues that we have in this valley and in our community and certainly
we were celebrating their recovery. But it's also a reminder that there are some issues
that are probably those that we don't want to talk to publicly about, but we need to. We
do have an alcohol problem, as well as a drug problem in this valley, and the more we
can raise the awareness of these issues and how they affect us, not just in our
workplace, in our neighborhoods, but also in our crimes committed in the family and
domestic violence areas as well. So, certainly we had between 40 and 50 people
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 9 of 51
gather this morning. Two Representatives, both Representative Kathie Garrett and
Representative Shirley McKague were there. We appreciated their attendance and
their diligence to some of these efforts. The reason I'm bringing this up is, next week I
will be bringing to us an ordinance for your consideration on pseudo-ephedrine. I will
be getting that out there. It is something that our attorneys have drafted. It's being
considered valley-wide by all of the mayors, the city councils, and the commissions --
the county commission in our valley, to make a statement about some of the problems
associated with pseudo-ephedrine and the product that is delivered from that, which is
meth. The second Item I'll bring to you next week is on a detox center that's being
processed through the county through the sheriff's department and what the city's -- or
what they have requested the city's participation in that detox center. It certainly was an
item of discussion this morning and certainly a very supported issue in raising the
awareness of recovery efforts and the importance to our community. So, I will be
adding that to our agenda next week and I will be getting you the paperwork this week,
so you have a chance to read -- review those in advance. As well, I hope that one of
the council-members will be able to join a meeting next week following Council's
discussion on the detox center with the sheriff's department and the Ada County. I have
a previous commitment out at the Department of Corrections. I'm not being
incarcerated, but I do have a previous commitment out there and so if one of you can
represent the city, I would appreciate that. And I will get you that information as well.
Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
De Weerd: So, I will move on into our agenda. Item 7 we did not have items moved
from the Consent Agenda. We did have an item removed from the Consent Agenda,
but that was removed and does not require any action tonight.
Item 8: Request for Waiver of Fees for a Fence Variance for Don Hobbs in
Silverleaf Subdivision:
De Weerd: Item 8 is a request for a waiver of fees for a fence variance and, Ted, are
you or Anna covering this? Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we have let Mr. Hobbs know that he
needs to present his own case for the request for a waiver to City Council. In
anticipation of the Council's usual question as to whether staff is in support of the
waiver of fees, staff still -- has generally only supported a fee waiver when we feel that
the cost of providing the service that we do to the applicant is covered by other fees.
Usually they are just waiving a portion of the fee that seemed in excess of what it would
take to process it or if there has been some error on the part of staff in processing a
previous application, then, we can be in support of a fee waiver. Neither of those has
occurred. This is a request to locate a six-foot fence immediately adjacent to a
sidewalk -- not that you're acting on that one today, but just so you know that that's what
it is. So, it would be a variance and that would come to you for approval. That's the gist
of it.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 10 of 51
De Weerd: Is this an unusual case? And Mr. Hobbs, will you, please, join us and state
your name and address for the record.
Hobbs: Don Hobbs, 2683 West Chinden, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you very much.
Hobbs: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, a little history of this. The city and the
developer actually laid out -- I guess you say the developer laid out the acre that I have
retained and the city approved it, but I have -- the objection of staff was that I wanted a
fence close to a sidewalk. Well, it's almost surrounded by sidewalks. The streets are --
I have four streets that are coming right into my parcel and there is not going to be any
concern about emergency access, because they are going to be able to come from four
directions, plus I have a fire hydrant across the road. So, I'm well protected I think. I
have here some handouts, if I might, and I will give you a little better idea of what this
looks like.
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Baird.
Baird: If I could just remind the Council that the issue tonight is merely whether the fees
shall be waived. I would urge you to not engage in any discussion about the merits of
the request itself. That would be rescheduled at a separate hearing.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Hobbs: Well, the reason I think the fees are justified is -- you received a letter from the
developer and I think you have a copy of that, Land Pro Development, and I can read
from that, if you have it in front of you. It says: I'm writing this letter in hopes you
endeavor to get your fence approved by the City of Meridian. It is addressed to me, but
you have a copy. As the owner of the property surrounding your home in Silverleaf
Two, we do not object to your wish to have a six-foot fence in your back yard that abuts
Tango Creek. We understand that when you sold your property to Liberty Development
your desire was to install a six foot fence. That's why Liberty Development's hope is the
City of Meridian will grant you a permit to build your fence along West Tango Creek. If
there is anything further I can do, please, do not hesitate to call. Now, one of the
problems here is that the staff has interpreted my back yard as my side yard. If you can
look at the photographs -- I don't know, it's -- how much you want to get into this, but if
you look at the photographs -- well, there is a plat there and you can see that the
streets almost completely surround the property. You have Tango Creek at the bottom
and, then, you have all the vegetation right up close to the sidewalk. The city
ordinances state that if I want a six foot fence it has to be ten feet from the sidewalk. If I
put one ten feet from the sidewalk it's going to be inside all these shrubs and
vegetation, they will be on the outside of the fence adjacent to the sidewalk, instead of
in my back yard. Then, if you look at the photographs, the first page shows what the
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 11 of 51
staff is calling my front yard and that shows that I have a large area here that -- where
they ran the big pipe under there for the irrigation, 48 inch pipe, and you have a big
square cover there, that's, actually, the side yard. And, then, you can see the other
areas there, all the bare dirt in the background and that's considered my front yard,
according to staff, the way they are interpreting the city regulations. But you turn to the
second page of the photos and the one top on the left, that's, actually, the front view of
my house. And, then, on the right is the back yard and the two bottom ones show --
especially the right bottom one, shows standing on the patio and looking back across
into the street and if somebody is driving up with a vehicle they are shining their lights
right in your face when you're sitting in your back yard. And we have a nice waterfall
there, we have little lights around there --
De Weerd: Mr. Hobbs, If we can -- we will get into the detail of that in the variance
itself, but if you can -- I believe that your request is because of the unusual situation
surrounding your property and it was caused by the approval of the property -- and I
shouldn't be putting words in your mouth, you're requesting a fee waiver and that's what
they would be determining tonight.
Hobbs: Yes. Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Is that correct?
Hobbs: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay.
Hobbs: That's exactly the way I feel, that the city approved it the way it was designed. I
had no control over it. In fact, the original design put the line right through my waterfall,
the back property line, and I convinced the city at one of the meetings to at least move it
back a few feet, so that I could save my waterfall. And it's just a situation where it just
doesn't fit not to have a fence that's tall enough to be some kind of a privacy fence
there. So, I feel a fee waiver is very justified. Even the developer feels that way and
has written so in his letter.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, just a question of Anna. In general. I'm not quite following
exactly what happened. Is this an existing home which was then -- the property was
subdivided and re-platted in a new subdivision? Is that what we are talking about?
Canning: Yes. Centennial Development purchased the property I believe from Mr.
Hobbs and they left his home as a large acre parcel within the subdivision.
Wardle: Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 12 of 51
Rountree: Madam Mayor, further clarification from Anna. So, I assume that the request
has gone to the planning and zoning and the fence committee and it's been rejected to
put a fence --
Canning: No, sir, I did not --
Rountree: -- on the back of the sidewalk.
Canning: We heard from Mr. Hobbs probably two weeks ago. About then. And the
question was whether or not he should try and get into the fence waiver process. It
would have -- had he submitted one, which he has not, it would likely have been
denied, because it just doesn't fall into the ones that typically get approved. So, it would
have likely been denied and, then, come to you on appeal. So, rather than having him
rush to get that application in, we just suggested that he go with the waiver procedure.
Or, I'm sorry, the variance under the new code. There is no fence waiver in the new
code. Sorry.
Rountree: Madam Mayor? Help me understand the process we have now. I can’t
remember --
Canning: As of Thursday -- as of Thursday we will allow as of right the ten-foot side
yard -- which is, basically, the only fence waivers we ever approved. So, we just wrote
those in and allowed those. So, the fence waiver procedure is gone. It would just be a
standard variance and you would have to make the findings for a variance.
De Weerd: So, the request is to waive the fee of applying for the variance.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I mean he subdivided this and, you know, the preliminary plat. Why is he asking
for -- why are you asking for a fee variance or elimination on your variance? I mean
everybody has to pay a fee to come in and I don't see where the city, by approving this
subdivision, put a hardship on you in that park. It didn't make you have to put a fence
around there. You were the gentleman that sold the property to these developers. I
don't see why you're asking for a waiver of the fee. And maybe you can clarify that for
me.
Hobbs: Certainly, Mr. Bird. For one thing, when this was addressed, one of the city
council-members said let's -- because I brought up the fence issue, I want a privacy
fence in the back, because it's just in the middle and all the streets coming together and
there is just no privacy there at all. It's just so exposed. And one of the council-
members suggested that we handle it right then and staff said that won't be necessary,
we will just cover it with a permit. So, it didn't discuss it and we tried to find that in the
minutes, couldn't find it in the minutes, so whether it was discussed at a break, I don't
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 13 of 51
know. But I definitely remember that that was discussed, because I wanted to address
it at the time, which would have been the most appropriate time when the subdivision
was being approved, to approve the fence at that time. But it didn't get done. So, that's
why I felt we should have handled it then and, then, there wouldn't even have been a
permit, let alone any kind of a request for a waiver.
De Weerd: Did that answer your question?
Bird: That answered my question.
De Weerd: You know, at the time the fence issue was raised, it just -- it was not brought
out what side setbacks and side yards and front and back would change because of
this and so at the time it was said you can work out those details. Then, the platting
occurred and we realized that the details now necessitated something different that staff
couldn't do at their level, as I understood it.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I don't see a compelling case here for a waiver of the variance fees. I think if
-- if, in fact, a fence is desired in that location, it would require a variance. We run into
these kinds of strange things as it relates to existing properties being consumed and
incorporated into plats all the time and we don't and the developers don't and the
individual property owners don't fully anticipate or comprehend what the end product is
going to do in terms of access and frontage, but our ordinance was in place at the time
this subdivision was platted. I assume. I don't know when it was platted. And it does
not allow fences to be placed on the back of sidewalks. So, I don't know that I feel any
reason to support the request to vary the -- or to waive the variance fee.
Bird: Is that a motion?
Rountree: That's my opinion.
Bird: I will second that.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Seeing no further discussion, I would move we deny the request to waive
the variance fee from Mr. Hobbs.
Bird: Second.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 14 of 51
De Weerd: Okay. There is a motion to deny the request for waiver of fees as stated in
Item No. 8. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg. No. Okay. Do we need roll
call?
Baird: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, nay; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT.
Baird: And, Madam Mayor, I would suggest that the clerk keep one copy of the
handout, but -- as an indication that what was presented to you tonight was not relevant
to the fee discussion. I would suggest that we hand this back to Mr. Hobbs for
submission at such time that the matter would come to you on the merits.
De Weerd: Okay.
Baird: So, it is in the record, but I wanted to --
De Weerd: So you can use these later.
Baird: -- make a point that you did not consider that information regarding the fees
tonight.
Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from August 23, 2005: AZ 05-032 Request
for Annexation and Zoning of .56 acres from R6 to L-O zone for West
Carol Street Professional Center by James and Carrie Jewett – 1560
Carol Street:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Hobbs. Item 9 is a continued Public Hearing from
August 23rd on AZ 05-032. I will open this Public Hearing -- this continued Public
Hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Yes, Madam Mayor, it is a continued Public Hearing. The site didn't get the
posting done in time and that was the reason it was continued, so you have not had any
introduction to this project, which I will do now. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council,
this is West Carol Street Professional Center. It's located at 1560 Carol Street and it's
on the corner of Locust Grove and Carol Street. The application is simply one of
annexation and zoning. There is no accompanying project for this one. It's -- the
annexation area is .56 acres and they are requesting to go from R-6 zoning in the
county, which is a residential zoning, to L-O in the City of Meridian. The applicant
intends to remodel the existing home into an office and use the shop and storage for
uses related to the office. And you can see here the existing home and they do plan on
remodeling and expanding the structure. This is Locust Grove. This is Carol Street.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 15 of 51
This is the existing shop. And, then, parking would come in by the existing shop and,
then, to the -- on the east -- west side of the office building here. They have taken
many of the existing trees and relocated them to the north property line. It is a heavily
vegetated site as proposed. This property is designated for low density residential on
the Comprehensive Plan, but it does meet the merit for asking for an office use. It does
have frontage on the arterial street. Even though it's not taking access from that
frontage, it does have frontage on Locust Grove and the Comprehensive Plan
amendment states that at the discretion of City Council, areas with a residential
Comprehensive Plan designation may request office uses if the property has frontage
on an arterial or a section line road and is three acres in size or less. And so that does
apply in this instance. We also have some elevations. This would be from West Carol
Street and, then, from -- it says Linder. That should be Locust Grove. The Planning
and Zoning Commission did recommend approval at their July 21st hearing. There
were several neighbors, to be specific, that testified in opposition to the proposal.
Those included Keith McRoberts, Charles Stewart, Gilbert Tooning, Lynn Tooning,
Jennifer McRoberts, Debbie Woodall, Dan Woodall and Jay Jones. The key issues of
discussion were whether or not it was an appropriate land use for the area and the
traffic. The Commission did make two changes to the staff's initial recommendation.
The first change requires the applicant to provide a vehicle cross-access to the property
to the north, so they would extend this drive aisle and have the opportunity to have
cross-access to this parcel. And I could show you why that becomes important, as you
see their only access is on Locust Grove. So, we would have some -- if this were to go
office, we would have some opportunity to pull that traffic off of the arterial road and
bring it in on a side street. They also made one additional change and that was there
was a request for alternative compliance on the west boundary, as well as the north
boundary, did not have a 20-foot land use buffer between the residential and the office
use. Instead, they have provided alternative compliance through heavier vegetation.
The question came up about the existing shop. If that shop is removed, then, the
Commission wanted to keep the 20-foot wide buffer along the west property line. Right
there. Okay. The outstanding issues before Council -- there is one from the applicant
and that's regarding this northern property line. As I mentioned before, they have plans
to expand the building up to ten feet, but a 20-foot landscape buffer is required.
However, we received a notarized letter from this property owner stating that they
intend to develop the property as commercial at some point in the future and that they
would not object to a reduced buffer being on this northern property line. Given that,
the staff would feel that that additional ten feet is there -- the proposed ten feet is
sufficient that there is enough room for all the additional trees that they are relocating
from other areas of the site. And with that I will end staff's presentation.
De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? If you will, please, state
your name and address for the record.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 16 of 51
Jewett: Jim Jewett. 516 South Capitol, Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Jewett: With staff's additional comments regarding the -- the non-objection to the
alternative compliance, I guess I'm in total agreement to the staff report, then, if that
would be an added change. So, I'll really just speak briefly -- because I know the
neighbors would like to speak -- on why I'm doing this. You know, we -- I live in
Meridian and we do -- a lot of our business is between Eagle and Kuna and generally in
this middle part of the county. Right now our office is in downtown Boise and we find
ourselves fighting the traffic going that way and fighting traffic coming back home every
night and we desire to have an office close to where we live. It's for our own office. It's
-- we sell real estate and we develop real estate. Currently have an internal staff of five
and an external staff of five. And it's our desire to be somewhere -- like in downtown
Boise we -- our office is close to restaurants and some shopping, so we walk to our
lunch and this would give us the same ability here with the shopping that's around there
and the restaurants that are around there and even the downtown not being that far
away. So, that's why. We looked and we looked and it was hard that -- and we want
ownership, we don't want to rent, we want to own our building. And we don't need a
large building. But the shop was appealing to us, because we store signs -- we don't
want to store them outside on the -- along side of a building, we'd like to store our real
estate signs and our marketing signs and our subdivision signs away when we don't
use them. So, the shop provides a nice utility use for that. And, of course, the location
for us was good. So, that's our desire of why we want to convert just to an office for
ourselves. Some of the issues you will hear tonight, which we talked about at P&Z from
the neighbors was traffic. But it's traffic that was generated along Locust Grove, not
traffic I'm going to be generating. Our traffic will be coming in the morning, not leaving
in the morning like a normal homeowner would leave in the morning. So, our additional
use I don't think will impact that traffic at all. We will be going the opposite way. The
fact of the matter is that me and my wife and some of the other employees don't have to
get on Eagle Road and try to get on the freeway every morning. It will actually help
some traffic somewhere else, although very minutely. But getting off Eagle Road in the
evening sometimes I have to get off Eagle Road and try to get over and turn at Chevron
and that's sometimes very difficult. So, I think we will be a good neighbor to the
neighborhood. I know the issue is this is the only entrance for the neighbors -- Anna,
could you go to the vicinity map. It is the only entrance to these neighbors and I
understand that and we don't want to be a negative neighbor. The one neighbor here
asked if we possibly could put a different style of fence along that boundary, maybe a
split base of concrete or block wall, instead of a vinyl fence, and I believe staff indicated
that would still be within their fence ordinance. I would be agreeable to make that
change to help out the neighbors, but I don't think our use is going to be very intrusive
on the neighbors. I realize the neighbors have had some issues with the Fred Meyer
parking lot and the Walgreens' lights and as I indicated in the P&Z, it's hard for me to
deal with issues I wasn't involved with and I didn't know it was an issue regarding when
they chip seal Locust Grove that some of the striping on Locust Grove to keep that
intersection open was un-visible, but as I drove by recently, it is visible. I don't know if
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 17 of 51
it's been repainted on or if it's just showing back through, hopefully, to keep that
intersection clear, so the owners can get -- the owners of these homes can get in and
out. The other issue was there is a sight visibility issue right here, but -- and, Anna, if
you can go to the aerial, it's already -- but ACHD come back in from a previous owner,
so I bought it. We will be removing that immediately, so that this -- trying to make a left
or right-hand turn, you don't have this hedge row basically blocking your view. So, with
that I would stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: Jim -- Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: Mr. Jewett, would you restate on what the fence there on the west boundary you -
- you would be willing to go block?
Jewett: I would be willing to go split face block --
Bird: At what height?
Jewett: Well, he'd like it to be six foot all the way to the sidewalk. I'll go whatever I'm
allowed to go. I don't know if I'm allowed to go six foot all the way to the sidewalk, so --
but I would be willing to go as far as I'm allowed. We did try to provide some extra
landscaping to buffer him from these headlights. He's concerned about turning in and
out and I understand his point and if we can landscape this up to try to protect his -- his
bedroom is right in this area. I believe it faces this direction.
Bird: Follow up?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: Well, I take it if it's going to be an office you're probably only talking 7:00 to 6:00 of
being open. I realize in the wintertime headlights will be coming in, but most of the time
he's --
Jewett: Our general hours are 7:00 to 6:00.
Bird: And you don't have people going in and out of there at night.
Jewett: No. I think the conditions of approval were 7:00 to 10:00, were my limitations.
We would have a cleaning crew come in in the evening.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions, Mr. Bird? Any from Council?
Rountree: I don't have any right now.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 18 of 51
De Weerd: Thank you.
Jewett: Thank you.
De Weerd: We do have a number of people signed up and when I read your name and
if you'd like to provide testimony, we would invite you to come up at that time. Charles
Stewart. And there is no indication for, against, or neutral.
Stewart: Madam Mayor, City Council, Charles R. Stewart, 1870 West Pine.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Stewart: I will be speaking for my wife and I -- lifetime residents of Meridian and we are
opposed to the rezoning and annexation of this property. I have one question -- well, I
guess maybe it doesn't pertain. Okay. One concern is our property values -- this
business will not increase my property values and it may hurt it. We feel that it isn't
going to help the value of the property for the first thing you see when you pull in our
subdivision is the business that takes access off from our residential street. The
ordinance that made this type of annexation legal, I assume, possibly, at the time was
not thought of as an arterial -- not having the access off the arterial. I mean -- excuse
me. One of our main concerns is the traffic and in the mornings and in the afternoon,
for about 30 minutes in the morning is -- stacking occurs on Locust Grove for the light
on Fairview. It comes back past the entrance to our subdivision and not only the left
turn lane, but also the straight-ahead traffic at times. The lanes out there, even if you
could see them, it wouldn't make a difference to these people, because they need to get
over in line, they feel, to make their left-hand turn, they don't think -- if they sit over in
the -- in this area like they are supposed to and, then, slide in, somebody will pass them
on the left. I have some pictures there that I took this morning. It's approximately 7:45
and it shows this. If you come -- if you're making a left turn from Locust Grove into
Carol Street when these people will be coming to work in the morning, it is just
absolutely impossible, because I sat there through three light changes this morning just
testing it and the line never emptied out during the time I'm sitting there to make -- for
me to make my left turn there and they would not leave me an opening to pull through,
if -- even if they did, there is the straight through traffic coming by on the far side that
you just can't hardly take a chance on pulling through the opening. So, I finally got
through after three light changes. The protected area that we normally pull into to make
our left turns, these cars that are closest to us, the one -- the top right picture, that was
back -- the straight ahead line was backed up clear to that point.
De Weerd: Mr. Stewart?
Stewart: Yes.
De Weerd: If you would summarize your remarks. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 19 of 51
Stewart: One other problem is there will be trash and recycle trucks coming in our
subdivision for that one home, one business, they will have to come in our subdivision
and go clear around the circle to leave or make a back around turn at the first
intersection, which is very dangerous with a truck. One other thing is the lot size, it's
described as .56 acres. I realize that for annexation purposes, it has to go from center
line to center line, where, actually, the lot is 67 by 183, which will lose five feet off of the
Carol Street side, making 62 by 183, which is .26 acres. And for a 4,000 square foot
building and ten parking spaces, which two of these are proposed to be within the shop
to make it legal, it shows why alternative compliance is necessary. The Ada County
Highway District said there will be no parking on Carol Street, it will all have to be on
site. So, thank's very much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions?
Bird: I got a question.
De Weerd: Mr. Stewart.
Bird: Madam Mayor? Mr. Stewart, would you like to give your address again for the
record. I think you give the wrong one.
Stewart: I'm still down -- 34 years in the wrong place. 1870 West Carol.
De Weerd: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Bird. He knows where you live. That's really
frightening.
Bird: Been neighbors for 38 years.
Rountree: It works both ways.
De Weerd: Del Ray. Okay. Are you signed up against, for the record? Okay. Thank
you. Jennifer McRoberts. If you will, please, state your name and correct address for
the record.
McRoberts: Jennifer McRoberts. 1490 East Carol.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McRoberts: I have two statements. One from a neighbor who could not attend the
meeting and I'll read hers first. And she is Wanda Watson at 1432 South Carol. To
Whom It May Concern: In addition to my objection letter dated June 2nd, 2005, I would
like to add the following comment: In the recent meeting regarding the property listed
above at 1560 Carol, there were many residents of the Doris Subdivision, in attendance
for the purpose of objecting to the application made by Jim and Carrie Jewett. Each
resident took time from their schedule only to have the developer at the hearing motion
for the hearing to be postponed due to improper notice of the meeting. I am sure that
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 20 of 51
as a developer he must have known what the requirements for notice were. Was this
some kind of ploy to waylay those residents who actually live in this subdivision and
strongly object to this? I have a feeling this is the case. I am unable to attend the next
meeting scheduled on this subject due previous out-of-town commitments, but certainly
want my objection heard. Please alert all board members that in addition to any
neighbors who may object in person at your meeting, I have also sent this objection to
be read. Wanda Watson.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McRoberts: We as neighbors in the Doris Subdivision find it increasingly difficult to
address Meridian City meetings. We have submitted a petition representing the
majority of residential neighbors most adversely affected by the proposed annexation
and zoning change to a business at 1560 South Carol. We have also submitted letters
with valid concerns outlined about why the change would negatively impact us. We
know you can't control the additional traffic problems this would create, but you can
consider the impact. We know you can't control the negative impact on property values,
but you can consider how it will impact us. We know that you know this is a residential
area and the homes were purchased as residences. This requested change only
benefits two people, the buyer and the seller. It was very condescending at the
Planning and Zoning Meeting for one member to state he wouldn't want to buy the
home as a residence because of its location. There are many homes that are not in
ideal locations and zoning regulations are not changed to accommodate the sale of
these homes at a business rate. At the Planning and Zoning Meeting we heard that
there is an approximate 40 percent vacancy rate in business locations in Meridian. This
shows an attitude if we build it they will come. This translates into quantity over quality
and now we have a business owner who wants to change the residential area, instead
of going into one of these vacant business locations, some of which do have storage
areas as the shop on this property. The proposed building of 4,000 square feet is two
and a half times the size of the existing building and it looks like a prison barracks or a
Quonset hut. It's a very unattractive building. The developer will be storing barricades
in the existing shop, in addition to signs, and normally these are not transported by
passenger vehicles. This does not indicate light office usage. So, despite all we have
presented, staff comes up with approval, Planning and Zoning and here, even allowing
deviations from code concerning setbacks. All these facts would lead us as residents to
believe that if the title developer issues at a city meeting, then, acceptance is
guaranteed. I hope this isn't the case. But if it is, we would like this body to consider
our request. We would like a smaller and more esthetically pleasing building or just
remodel the interior as some residents were led to believe when questioned about
changing the CC&Rs by the buyer. The existing shop is less than five feet from our
property line. We would like the stone wall, consistent with the wall put up by
Walgreens on the property line and we would like it at least seven feet tall. Not only for
esthetics, but for our privacy. Lighting and signing should be minimal and unobtrusive --
and I'm closing. Barricades cannot be stored in the shop and no equipment or vehicles
larger than a pickup to access the property, because barricades are not hauled away by
pickups. We would hope that the 25 residents residing in Doris Subdivision and like
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 21 of 51
living there, would not be casually dismissed by this body. This developer has other
options. Thank you.
De Weerd: Ma'am, I'm sorry, I do have a question. And I don't ask this to be
condescending, okay?
McRoberts: Okay.
De Weerd: Is you have requested that a vehicle no larger than a pickup enter onto this
property. Do you have those restrictions in your CC&Rs for the residential properties in
the subdivision as well?
McRoberts: We have restrictions about businesses in there. No, we don't have vehicle
size in there, but if this is going to be okayed as a business and he's going to be storing
barricades in there, then, I don't want huge trucks hauling barricades in and out.
De Weerd: Okay. We will try and get clarification on what will be transporting those as
well.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Mrs. McRoberts --
De Weerd: I'm sorry. Mrs. Roberts.
Bird: I got a question for you, too. What do you consider barricades?
McRoberts: What I consider barricades are what they put up to block when they are
building on roads, that type of thing. The cement barricades. That's my vision of
barricades.
Bird: The cement ones. That's what I thought. Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Keith McRoberts.
K.McRoberts: My name is Keith McRoberts. 1492 South Carol. Hopefully, that's the
same place my wife lives.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: That's a good thing.
K.McRoberts: At the Planning and Zoning meeting one of the members mentioned that
he wouldn't want to live in that house, so it may as well go commercial. Well, he can
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 22 of 51
say that about our place now, because it would depreciate the value of our place and
who would want to buy it. It would be harder for us to find, when we sell, somebody to
buy our place as a residence with commercial now almost surrounding it. One of the
Council -- not council members, but Planning and Zoning members also said that he
didn't believe that it wouldn't hurt that much in property values. Well, when we was
looking for a place we didn't -- we weren't looking for a place to where we had a front
view of the back of a drugstore or an office building on the side of us or a Jackson's
station, whatever comes next behind us. That isn't what our preference was for a
house when we were looking for a house. It would be hard pressed to find somebody
to buy a house with that surrounding them. I know he mentioned that he had no control
over what problems we had with lighting from other businesses or around, but we were
told that the lighting -- when we were complaining about the lighting situation going on
through the drugstore, we was told that light shades could be put on and wouldn't cause
any problems that suited everybody, but when your house is almost underneath the
light, those shades aren't worth anything. They don't do any good for us, unless the
shades were almost to the ground, because in our bedroom we don't need a light
unless we are reading. Another point I would -- on the -- also we do approve a lot more
of it with the taller fence, with the block fence, seven foot tall, as far out as we can get. I
know that you can't go possibly all the way to the sidewalk with that height, but he was
talking about only certainly hours, but without a gate there, cars coming in there 24-7,
they don't care about hours of an office. You have a lot of traffic come in that doesn't
realize that there is no exit, other than the one that they just came in on, so they just
turn around. They gives them a place to turn around and we get the headlights right in
our bedroom window. Thanks.
De Weerd: Thank you. And Dan Woodall signed up against.
Woodall: I'm Dan Woodall, 1950 West Carol. I agree with my -- with the people that
spoke previously. The traffic on Locust Grove is very very bad in the morning. Cars
coming in are as much a problem as cars going out. I know you don't control that, but,
please, consider it. The McRoberts bought a beautiful house and they made it more
beautiful. It has a wrought iron fence. Welded. They have gone to incredible expense
to make a wonderful house there. If we could put up the picture of what he wants to put
next door. That's a tin roof. It doesn't fit in our neighborhood. It's going to look like
some kind of McDonald's. I really don't want to turn into my neighborhood and see that
every day. It is inappropriate. I assume that when you made the ruling that you could
put offices in residentials on the section line roads, that you were assuming that it would
be an office that was just a remodeled house and that it would look like a house. That
wouldn't be so bad. This is atrocious. This -- this is not right. That lot needs to stay
residential. This does not need to go commercial. This is not an appropriate use. And
that's really all I have. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Woodall. Is there anyone else who like to provide testimony
on this application? Okay. Would the applicant like to respond?
Jewett: For the record, Jim Jewett again.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 23 of 51
De Weerd: Thank you.
Jewett: Property value and the ability to sell one's home that would be next to -- again,
markets change from time to time and right now on our real estate market I guess you --
the property values in this price range are just escalating very quickly. Very alarming
sometimes. So, I really -- it's hard for me to say that there is going to be a loss of value
or even the value won't just continue to rise, because that's just the market in Meridian
right now. Markets do ebb and flow. I can't forecast the future. I just don't believe that
our use of what we want to build would adversely affect -- you know, a lot of people look
at L-O as a good neighbor, because they are not there at night. They are not there on
weekends, so you don't have that additional issue of evenings and weekends.
Comments about the style. You know, we have talked to that neighbor the couple times
he's asked us and we have, we have looked, and we just can't -- I and my architect
couldn't come up with a scheme for remodeling the facade without just really changing
a lot more and I will just go through what we are doing on this design. Basically, the
way the house is now, it's got a straight gable roof that runs across this length of the
house and, then, there is a gable like this off the front of the house. So, what we are
doing is leaving the roof in place, taking out the existing roofing and putting a metal --
patina green metal roofing. It's a very nice looking roof. It's very commercialized, yes,
but it's used a lot. And, then, we are taking some vertical walls, parapet style, along the
ends to cover up the existing gables. There is a gable right here now that faces Locust
Grove. We are just vertically going up the wall and stuccoing those, basically, instead
of your typical office where you see it's all hip and this gives it a little bit different
character. And, then, we put in the styled down shading that are more urban style, they
don't shine away, they are very low intensity and away from the building. It's just really
to light the building and the walkways. And, then, creates a little metal sun shades for
the windows to get a little bit more detail. So, it's really some -- some very minor subtle
changes that really does change the look of the building, but we felt that it changed it in
a positive way and with the landscaping that's proposed, you know, we feel like it would
be positive for both the neighbors and the surrounding commercial buildings as well. I'd
like to talk a little bit about some of the P&Z comments, because there was some
quotes here -- I think the question that I posed is, obviously, the people who owned the
property didn't want to stay there anymore, they wanted to move into a subdivision
where they could get away from Locust Grove. And I guess the question was who --
you know, what, would be the use? Would it turn into a rental where you just had
renters in there or would it potentially be requested to go some other -- maybe a higher
density residential. And I believe the P&Z comments was that they felt that this type of
use would have been the least intrusive that could have come forward, that in times
forward somebody could come through with an even higher commercial intensive use
versus the L-O, which would have more of a 24-7 operation. I think the word Wendy's
was even used as an example of something that could be there in the future. Not
today, but in the future. So, I guess the question that was posed there was is the
highest and best use residential? And I think the answer was no.
De Weerd: A Wendy's couldn't be there.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 24 of 51
Jewett: Not today.
De Weerd: No. Even with a step up you couldn't get a Wendy's there.
Bird: Not with your current Comp Plan.
De Weerd: I'm sorry. It just bothered me.
Jewett: Okay. Then there was also comments about access onto an arterial. Anna, if
you could go to the -- yeah. Thank you. Either one of those will work. I guess -- and I
hope maybe ACHD can comment on this, but I guess the acknowledgement of P&Z
from most of the neighbors was they acknowledge that these properties here they
acknowledge were going to be -- eventually go commercial, but just not this one, which
I don't quite understand if these go commercial, why not that one. But if these go
commercial there is an access point right here that goes on that road that goes around
Fred Meyer. The idea would be that you would line up your access road. There is also
an access point right here into the Fred Meyer parking lot. So, you want to line up your
accesses on Locust Grove to not take -- everybody take access off of Locust Grove.
So, in this particular case not taking direct access off on Locust Grove is a plus, not a
minus. There was talk about traffic and I don't know what my options are as an L-O, but
we would certainly be willing to stay with the wheeled cart and wheel it out like the
homeowners do. I don't think we would generate that much traffic. We would need
dumpsters, but I don't know what our requirements are as a conversion to L-O.
De Weerd: If you could, please, summarize.
Jewett: I don't have any stone barricades. I have some of those little ones you see with
the little stripes on it when we extend roads through a subdivision and it was -- we take
them down occasionally. Most of the time they never come to our shop, but they may
for a week or two, but that's the only barricade that we have. I don't own any of the big
stone ones, so --
De Weerd: What kind of vehicle do you transport them in?
Jewett: We have a pickup truck with a dump bed on it. It's a Ford F450 pickup. That's
the biggest pickup we own. I guess I just -- again, I stated earlier I agree with the block
wall, if that would be what they wanted. And with that I would stand for any questions.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Jim, did you have any neighborhood meetings before you brought this application
forward?
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 25 of 51
Jewett: I guess we attempted to, but I guess we were told that nobody wanted to come.
Bird: Okay. And, then, on the roof, I don't know what the CC&Rs in the existing
subdivision go, but I'm sure it's not metal roofs. I'm sure they are not allowed to have
metal roofs. I would -- would be willing to look into putting another type of roof on there
that is in -- that conforms to their CC&Rs.
Jewett: Yes.
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: Any other questions? Jim, I guess I do. They had mentioned the square
footage and I believe that was in Anna's opening remarks, but can you tell me what the
current square footage is and if you are altering it, what the proposed square footage
would be?
Jewett: Of the building or the lot?
De Weerd: Of the building.
Jewett: The current square footage of the building is about 2000 square foot right here.
We wanted to propose to go up to between 36 and 4,000 square feet.
De Weerd: And how would you be doing that? I mean are you, then, extending to the
north or are you going an additional story?
Jewett: No. It would be just an extension. This outline here would be the future
expansion. The existing building is right here. This would be the future expansion right
here.
De Weerd: Okay. And you did cover the trash collection. I guess I can understand
what the citizens and the neighbors are saying. My daughter has a friend that lives in
that subdivision and trying to get into that subdivision is -- you take your life into your
hands. It's a nightmare, ACHD. And I don't know what the solution is, but this is
certainly -- if those lots along Locust Grove provide an opportunity to divert some of that
traffic out of that road, that certainly would be seen as something that would be better
than it is. But it is very difficult and you mentioned you don't want to be driving on Eagle
anymore. I think turning into that subdivision can be just as scary.
Jewett: I'd like to hear what ACHD has to say about that one.
De Weerd: I don't know if he has turned into that subdivision and I'm assuming you
have.
Jewett: I have. Yes.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 26 of 51
De Weerd: And with the -- this being a county sub, currently BFI picks up their traffic --
or their trash. Our provider, SSC, would pick up yours. And so, you know, they would
have to go into the subdivision and turn around. There is no other way to do it. They
couldn't collect it off of Locust Grove.
Jewett: No. I don't believe they could do that.
De Weerd: So -- but that would be a concern. I don't have any other questions. And,
Council, no further questions? Thank you.
Jewett: Thank you.
De Weerd: Staff, was there anything further --
Canning: No, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion.
Canning: Madam Mayor, I'm sorry, there is one thing. You do need new findings to
reflect whatever other changes you made here, but also to acknowledge the ten-foot
buffer on the north, if that's the way you're inclined to go.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I do have a question on that. On that first for Lieutenant Stowe
there. That seven-foot tall block wall, any problems that you see?
De Weerd: The height would.
Bird: The height was seven foot.
De Weerd: Yeah.
Bird: And it's a block and that's what they have requested in that one. I think he
agreed.
De Weerd: I think our ordinance is succinct.
Stowe: Mr. Bird, Madam Mayor, Councilmembers, the seven foot wall coming out to the
sidewalk would definitely create a site problem and we would at least require that it be
set back -- I think it's 20 feet. Yeah. And as far as the block wall goes, that make up of
the wall wouldn't matter to us. The extra foot in height really doesn't have effect on us,
it's just that sight when we come in and being able to see and also the sight for any kind
of drivers coming in and out of that area will need that setback.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 27 of 51
Bird: Okay. Thank you very much.
De Weerd: Anna, with a step down in the height, how far can that, per our ordinance,
be from the sidewalk?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the new ordinance establishes the
full height for the wall could occur at the setback. I believe the L-O setback is 20 feet
under the new ordinance. I'm pretty sure it is. But I don't have it memorized right now.
But I'm 90 percent sure it would be 20 feet. The commercial zones, which L-O is a
commercial district, do allow for an eight-foot height. So, the seven-foot would be okay.
If it were on the other property line it could only be six feet. But the commercial districts
do allow for a taller fence.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, could that -- in the 20 foot setback, could you drop it -- and this is for the
Lieutenant, too. Could you drop it down to three or four feet, give it a little bit of a --
Canning: You're saying drop it to three feet? It's four foot open or three foot solid and,
then, at the setback line can you go to --
Bird: And that would be sufficient for the police department, too? Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions from Council for staff? Okay. Okay. Do I
have a motion to close?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 9.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 9. All those in favor say
aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I --
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 28 of 51
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: -- heard a lot of things that we hear all too frequently in issues that, typically,
at least most of them get worked out when you have a developer and an adjacent
residential area sit down and work through their issues. I have heard some give on the
part of the developer tonight and we have heard some give on the part of the residents
in terms of what they would be willing to accept. My preference would be to -- if we had
to reopen the hearing and direct the developer and the residents to sit down and see if
they could come to some general agreement. Not necessarily compromise or not
necessarily consensus, but at least they had an opportunity to work through their issues
with one another. And, then, bring whatever resolve back to the city. Without that, I
guess this is an annexation request, the area is actually not part of the City of Meridian.
My crystal ball says to me that probably this whole area at some point in time will be
commercial. At least along Locust Grove. But I'll make the statement I make a lot of
times about annexation. I'm not in any hurry. So, if this isn't annexed right now, I'm
okay with that.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further comment?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: To go along with Charlie, I'm not in any hurry to run out and annex either, but also
I have no problem if somebody requests it. But I also like the idea of opening up the
Public Hearing -- and this is not -- you know, no guarantee that it's going to pass or fail,
but I believe that the applicant should try to sit down with the neighbors at a meeting
and talk it out. We -- the successful ones that have come through us has always been
able to do and I'm sure there is things that can be worked out. I don't think the
neighbors are a hundred percent against the project and I don't think the applicant is
wanting to be hardheaded about meeting with them and working out some kind of
compromise. So, I would -- if Mr. Rountree and Mr. Wardle both agree, I would move
that we would reopen that and continue it, with that specification of the applicant and
getting a meeting with the neighbors within two weeks.
De Weerd: That was a motion?
Bird: Well, no, I'm -- if these -- if the other gentlemen are -- I could go either way.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I would agree. The things that I heard specifically were building style, roofing
type, architectural complementation to the adjacent properties, in addition to the fencing
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 29 of 51
issue, were the two major ones that I had heard -- would agree to open -- reopen the
Public Hearing and direct those specific things to be addressed.
Rountree: Second his motion.
Wardle: Second.
De Weerd: It was a motion.
Bird: Okay.
Rountree: Second.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle, thank you. Mr. Rountree. Okay. Any further discussion on the
motion to open the Public Hearing and ask that the applicant meet with the neighbors to
have discussions on some of their concerns and come back to Council in two weeks; is
that what your motion was?
Bird: Uh-huh. Continue the Public Hearing to September 27th, 2000.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: This item is, again, open for Public Hearing. It has been continued to
September 27th?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Bird: I believe I'd also offer up, if they don't have a location, I'm sure you can find -- you
can get ahold if Will or -- and this room would be available some evening for Jim if he
could do it.
Item 10: Public Hearing: MI 05-009 Request for Miscellaneous application for
approval to remove the Preliminary Plat, Final Plat and Development
Agreement requirement for a 20 foot landscape buffer on the southern
boundary of the property for Olsen Bush Subdivision No. 2 by R2
Development, Inc. – west end of East Lanark Street:
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you all for joining us tonight. Okay. Item 10 is a Public
Hearing on MI 05-009. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 30 of 51
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for a modification to
Olsen-Bush Subdivision Number Two. It's the west end of East Lanark Street. This is a
miscellaneous application and they would like to remove a condition of approval from
the preliminary plat, the final plat, and the development agreement. And that condition
is with regard to the 20-foot landscape buffer you see on the south boundary of the
subdivision. You can see that area there. There was a requirement for a 20-foot heavy
vegetated landscaping and at the time of the subdivision approval there was quite a bit
of concern by the property owners up on Franklin that look down into the property
regarding the vegetation -- or regarding the proposed subdivision and as part of that
subdivision you did approve it, but had the 20-foot landscape buffer -- it's, actually,
specific, says a landscape setback area along all the property's southern border with
tree plantings that will grow to a height in excess of 20 feet and not more than 40 feet,
and which shall not be more 25 feet apart at the time of planting, shall be six feet in
height when planted. So, it was a very specific provision at the time. But since then R-
2 development, which was either the applicant Olsen-Bush or is another LLC of Mr. Van
Auker, but they have purchased this property, the seven acres directly south of the
development and also since that time the Comprehensive Plan has designated this
whole area as commercial and we have seen a number of these small houses starting
to convert toward little office remodels in that area. So, there has been quite a bit of
change in the surrounding property since the time the original subdivision was
approved. So, given all those things, staff agrees with the applicant that the 20 foot
wide landscape buffer is probably not necessary at this time and is recommending
approval.
The only outstanding issue that's before Council -- I forgot to ask Mr. Baird about this
beforehand -- is we are not quite sure what's next. There is no required Findings, so
you don't have any before you, so it would be a decision and order and, then, I don't
know if you just direct staff to do the development agreement amendment. Okay. And
with that I'll end staff's presentation.
De Weerd: Was that a question for Ted?
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Ted.
Baird: With regard to the development agreement, all that we would need is your
direction to process the amendment and with regard to the preliminary plat and the
development -- or, I'm sorry, on the final plat, I haven't thought that all the way through.
Usually, it's the planning department that does that.
De Weerd: I don't know. I think if they were conditions at the time, they should
continue to be.
Baird: Well, I tell you what. If the City Council does decide to grant this request, we
would just request that you direct us to bring back all proper papers to effect whatever
direction you make.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 31 of 51
De Weerd: Nice save. Would the applicant like to provide testimony? Yeah. We want
to know why you keep changing things. If you will state your name and address for the
record.
Miller: My name is Brad Miller, 3084 East Lanark in Meridian. I'd just like to state that
I'm glad the Mayor does not vote on these issues. As Anna said, we -- originally when
we came through for this subdivision -- this is 14 acres right here. We did not own this
property and there were -- all of these, I believe, were inhabited by the owner-
occupants and Mr. Barham owned this seven acres right here it was he and Mr.
Ballentine in this home who were -- really wanted to see that landscape buffer there.
We have since acquired Mr. Barham's property and Mr. Ballentine's property has been
converted. That's the brick front house that's been converted into an office use. So, we
anticipate that at some point in the future the best use for this land would be to combine
it with this subdivision. We are not sure we are going to do that or not, extend those
lots or not, but we would like to -- right now we have bonded for that -- we built the one
John Deere building here and we bonded for the landscape buffer, but we'd like to see
that condition be removed, since it doesn't seem to serve any purpose right now.
De Weerd: But that is prime wine country.
Miller: It is?
De Weerd: The grapes there are abundant.
Miller: Mr. Barham's grapes?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Miller: Yeah. We rent that house out.
De Weerd: That was going to be our vineyard in Meridian.
Miller: Really? I think that's all I have to say, unless there is questions.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Does that same stipulation or agreement condition extend to the east?
Miller: No, it doesn't.
Rountree: So, there at the stub street?
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 32 of 51
Miller: Correct. That was Olsen-Bush Subdivision Number Two. The other portion was
Subdivision Number One. R-2 development, which was Ron Van Auker or Ron Yonke,
it was the two of them, purchased that from Mr. Olsen and Mr. Bush and, then, did
number two. So, we were not responsible for its subdivision. Are you confused about
that?
Rountree: I'm just fishing here on the subdivision to the east. Do you have any
landscape requirements in that subdivision?
Miller: No. No. Our office, actually, is on --
Rountree: I know where your office is.
Miller: Yeah. Right there. We have got these two lots right here that we own and, no,
the only subdivision -- or the only landscape requirement that I know that we have,
Councilman Rountree, is just right along the front. We had the Evans Drain --
Rountree: On Eagle?
Miller: What's that?
Rountree: On Eagle Road?
Miller: No. On Lanark. We have the subdivision -- or we have the landscape across
the front. We have got the Evans Drain that goes along the back and there is
landscaping there on either side of the road.
Rountree: So, that was subdivided and platted before we had a landscape ordinance?
It's been there forever.
Miller: I think it was subdivided and platted before it was annexed, to the best of my
knowledge.
Bird: Yes.
Rountree: You're probably right.
Bird: That was a county sub originally.
Miller: I believe you're correct. But since we moved in this office we have acquired
that, subdivided that, we have acquired that, we have acquired that piece right there,
and we have acquired all of these, except ACHD owns that, so -- and these have since
gone commercial uses and this whole area here is in transition. I believe -- and I could
be off by one or two homes, but I think the only owner-occupant that lives there is Bill
Curtis, who lives right here.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 33 of 51
Bird: He's still in there.
Miller: Yeah. He lives there. I think all the rest are rental or office uses.
Rountree: I guess where I was headed is it sure would be nice if you'd do something on
Eagle Road, but I'm not going to condition my actions based on that.
Miller: Oh, with landscaping?
Rountree: Yeah.
Miller: Well, just as a little side note, I think we will at some point -- you notice what Ted
Sigmont has done with his building right here. He's got the Everton Mattress. He's put
a nice facelift on that. And I think Ron's thinking about doing an office building right
here. If we did do that, we have got a berm up there that's a little bit too high. I think
we are going to cut it down and we would landscape nicely along that frontage at such
time that we do develop that.
Rountree: Great. Thank you.
Miller: Thanks.
Canning: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: That is an entry corridor.
Miller: Right.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that does bring up the point on these
vacant properties, as they develop we do look to implement our landscaping standards.
So, if these lots came in, we would require them to plant -- if it's not already there, to put
the entryway corridor landscaping. And the new code also -- assuming this does go
industrial, the new code does still require a 20-foot land use buffer between non-
industrial uses. So, there are still provisions in the ordinance to buffer non-industrial.
It's the way it's set up in the future is just industrial buffers, non-industrial, and, then,
commercial buffers residential. So, if those lots were extended or if something came in
on this property, there still would be a requirement for a landscape buffer to any non-
industrial use.
De Weerd: And I assume since Mr. Miller was on that committee, that he helped craft
that.
Canning: It was probably one of those days where we waited until he left the room and,
then, hastily made arrangements.
Rountree: Would they do that?
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 34 of 51
De Weerd: He could get out of that landscape buffer requirement if the adjoining
properties are to change use as well.
Canning: If they were to go industrial. Now, the likelihood on Franklin seems to be that
they will go commercial, so he would still have some landscape buffer requirements
between the commercial and the industrial use.
De Weerd: All right. Brad, I guess I do have one other question. And Charlie
mentioned this stub and maybe I wasn't paying attention, but do you anticipate bringing
that stub south to Franklin at some point?
Rountree: Gary just left.
Miller: Oh, Gary's gone. Madam Mayor, if you go over there right now you will see that
we scraped a road in there. Because getting out on Eagle Road is -- you take your life
in your hands.
De Weerd: That's public record.
Miller: That's okay. But if you notice, if you were to drive there, there is a house that
sits right here. If you go right on the side of their driveway you will see there is a road
that goes right down there, a dirt road. And so, yes, we would like to at some point
extend that, but if we were to extend it now right up here, it would cut into their
driveway. So, right now it just goes -- there is a curb cut there already, but it does go
down -- it's kind of nice.
De Weerd: That would be very important.
Bird: Come down there right on the west side of --
Miller: Yes. Exactly.
De Weerd: You know, I'm not the road district, but that would be very desirable.
Miller: Oh, absolutely. And when we -- the subdivision, that was a requirement. I think
it's called east -- or, no, it's called Olsen -- I think it's called Olsen. But it will extend up
at some point. I would imagine we will probably draw a line across here and this will be
commercial and this will be industrial, I would imagine. And there is really not a good
use for this, other than combining it with that.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Miller: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 35 of 51
De Weerd: Okay. Council, if you have no further questions, I would entertain a motion
to close the Public Hearing.
Rountree: So moved.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Do I have a motion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we direct staff to follow through with amendment to the
development agreement and such changes that are needed in the final plat to approve
the request to eliminate the 20-foot landscape buffer on the southern edge of the
subdivision.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the request and have the attorney draw up
the appropriate paperwork. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you for not calling this Porky Pig Two or Wrinkleneck or something
like that.
Bird: If you would have been on last week's, we would have got you out of here a half
hour earlier. Right, Shaun?
Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 05-015 Request for an Annexation and Zoning of
59.30 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Crossfield Subdivision by
Packard Estates Development, LLC – 955 West Ustick Road:
Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 05-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 246
building (244 residential units, 1 daycare & 1 pool / locker facility /
restroom) lots and 26 other lots on 59.30 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for
Crossfield Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC – 955
West Ustick Road:
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 36 of 51
Item 13: Public Hearing: CUP 05-022 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for single-family residential units with a request to
allow for reduced setbacks, reduced lot size, reduced frontages, reduced
house sizes and block lengths in excess of 1,000 feet in a proposed R-8
zone for Crossfield Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC
– 955 West Ustick:
De Weerd: Okay. Items 11, 12 and 13 have been requested to continue to October
4th. Is this because of improper posting or shall I open these and continue?
Berg: You need to open them, Mayor, and it was a request from the developer to
continue it to October 4th.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, then, I will go ahead and open Items 11, 12 and 13, public
hearings AZ 05-015, PP 05-017, and CUP 05-022.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move we continued public hearings 11, 12 and 13 to October 4th, 2005.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 14: Public Hearing: Proposed Planning Department Development
Application Review Fees:
De Weerd: Item 14 is Public Hearing on proposed planning department development
application review fees. I can see that these are heavily contested. Anna.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I was going to dig out my previous
memo I gave to you. Given that there is no testimony -- or no public here, I know you
have had those items for several weeks. Would you like me to go over them? If so,
give me one more minute. If not, I'll move ever so more quickly.
De Weerd: Council, do you want a brief presentation or what is your desire?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird, if you want to get out of here, you can answer.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 37 of 51
Bird: If everybody feels comfortable with the fee increases, I have no problem with the
fees, and as long as Anna's comfortable with it, I have no problem with it. I'm ready to
pass on it -- close the Public Hearing and pass on it.
Canning: I do need direction as to whether you want to include the overhead fees or
not.
Bird: Well, I think that's part of the fee, isn't it? Overhead is part of the cost of
business.
De Weerd: That is the only piece of public information -- or public feedback that we
have received on these proposed fees; is that not correct?
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I was just going to bring up the overhead addition to the fee
and we have not discussed -- we have discussed this in general and in the increase
fees planning department has added an additional overhead. I would like to hear, for
the record, the rationale behind an additional fee on top of a fee.
Canning: The overhead fee on top of a fee?
Wardle: We have fees and you're including in it -- or suggesting a potential additional
fee on top of the actual fee itself.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, perhaps that was never clear in the
discussion. I had based my fees on the time that we spent on the application and, then,
I used our base salary fee, not including overhead, and calculated fees. At the
suggestion of Mrs. -- of the finance director, I -- she wanted me to include the cost of
overhead in the multiplier, instead of just the base fee and that was something I had
mixed feelings on. One, yes, it does recover those costs, but, two, part of our client is
always not just the developer coming in, but what I think of as the Comprehensive Plan,
which represents the rest of the City of Meridian. And so I felt a little uncomfortable not
absorbing some of those overhead costs. So, I have provided you what the cost would
be with and without. It would not be an additional fee, it was just two ways of looking at
it and you could see what the difference in the result was with those. So, we would just
collect one fee. It just includes the labor rate that includes overhead. Does that make it
more clear, Mr. Wardle?
Wardle: Yes. It makes it somewhat clear. I think that -- the question before the Council
is which of these two fees -- or which of these are we going to implement?
Canning: Right. Which fee schedule would you prefer? And, then, I just broke out
what the overhead cost was, to make it easier to understand and compare.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 38 of 51
Wardle: Okay.
De Weerd: Any further questions? Okay. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: No questions.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a motion to close?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item 14.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 14. All those in favor say
aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Do I have a motion for action? Don't all jump at once. You're the ones that
--
Bird: We are letting Shaun do it.
Rountree: Shaun's got all the --
Bird: Shaun's got all the knowledge.
Wardle: Let's see if you like my suggestion. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Might not all agree. I move that we direct planning staff to -- do I need this by
resolution or ordinance? I'm sorry.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the agenda item that's before you now
is the Public Hearing. Depending on the outcome of your motion for the hearing, we will
move to Item No. 15, the specific resolution. So, the way this is, it's a two-step process.
Wardle: And just for clarification, there are -- as the motion is -- or as the resolution is
drafted, there are two fee schedules which we need to decide on now; correct? Okay.
So, my position would be to accept the proposed planning department development
application review fees without the additional overhead fee.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 39 of 51
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the proposed planning department's
development application review fees without the inclusion of the overhead cost.
Bird: I'll second that for discussion.
De Weerd: Okay. Discussion.
Bird: Madam Mayor, if I could ask one question of my fellow Councilman here. Why do
you feel the taxpayers should pick up the overhead when the applicant don't have to on
these fees?
Wardle: I believe that was directed at me, so --
Bird: Yeah. You know, I just --
Rountree: I can't answer that. You better.
Wardle: I'm concerned with the rationale that we are making within the fee and I have
seen this in some other governmental departments which I deal with, where we add a
fee and, then, we add an addition to that fee something that becomes subjective in
certain administrations. And so my concern is not the fee schedule itself. My concern
is more the -- the proposed rationale for making this -- making this assumption and that
just for the record I -- the fee schedule I believe that we have will bring us in line with
the rest of the valley. So, I'm not necessarily in disagreement with the actual fees
column.
Bird: Madam Mayor, can I --
De Weerd: Yes. Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I'm certainly not against either way, I just -- I know that in the private business
-- in your own private business that when you figure in the cost, you figure the overhead
cost. Here we do have the taxpayers, which -- Planning and Zoning, actually, is not a
tax -- it's not part of the General Fund. I realize that -- I think a lot of it -- and I agree
with you, Shaun, to the point that if we did these fee changes on a yearly basis, we
could probably feel more comfortable of adding in that. You know, I hope we can stay
pretty close to everybody, but we need to look at these on a yearly basis, so we are not
hitting them with such high percentages when we finally do, ten years later down the
road, look at it, you know. And that's on all our fees. So, I have no problem with what
your motion went this time, but I think we need to really -- I think the Mayor needs to
really sit down with the department heads and financial and see why -- you know, what
they feel as a complete deal, if we need to have the overhead figured in and I think we
do. But I would certainly -- I'm certainly not going to stop my vote affirmative on this.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 40 of 51
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I'll just weigh in. It seems to me odd to separate a fee and, then, an
overhead. To me it's fee. And I would hope in the future that any fee proposed would
reflect the cost to the city and that that cost be born by the applicant, not by the
taxpayers. So, as a way to move forward, I think we are okay and I think we are
probably close on some of this stuff, but I think in the future, as we look at fees, I don't
see fees as a revenue producer, but a cost that we charge in order to provide a service
and that, you know, that includes overhead and everything else. So, just as a way to
approach it in the future.
De Weerd: Council, I guess what I'm hearing is that you would like to see the overhead
folded into the fee calculation.
Bird: It should be a part of the fee.
De Weerd: Then why was it separated?
Canning: Well, Madam Mayor, I guess -- I'm sorry if I added confusion by adding this
as a separate column. It was just -- I was unclear on the city's philosophy, I suppose,
towards including overhead in a fee calculation. That was all. I never meant for it to be
considered as a separate fee. We are just going to have one fee schedule that will
have the total proposed fee. It was just a way to break it out for Council to more easily
understand and I, obviously, failed in my attempt to do that. I apologize.
De Weerd: So, you were just showing the formula as --
Canning: Yes. That was all it was intended to be was A, plus B, equals C, and I just
broke out B was all that I was doing there. So, I apologize for the confusion it seems to
have caused.
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Baird.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the intent of the legal department, if the
direction is to include overhead, that we would provide you with a final version of the
ordinance that would merely contain, like Anna just said, one column of what you
decided the fee is. I think that part of the reason we did the spreadsheet this way was
to show the public how we arrived at a grand total, basically.
Bird: Yeah, but the only problem is just -- excuse me, Madam Mayor. We just made a
motion that that first column, without overhead, is going to be the fee, if we pass it.
De Weerd: Then don't pass it. That's your choice.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 41 of 51
Bird: This is -- there is going to be developers and stuff out there that are going to
come in and are seeing this and, oh, you know, if they pass it without overhead it says
here I'm going to pay 131. If they pass it with the overhead, I'm going to pay 163. Well,
we just made a motion that we are going to pass it without the overhead. Well, if we
pass it without the overhead it's 131. I agree with what you did, Anna, very much and I
think it's very nice to have it out there for the people, but we got to word it a little
different. You have got us confused. And that isn't hard to do at times, but --
Canning: And the only document that had it broken out that way was the newspaper
publication and if I were passing the buck, I'd say something about the attorneys at this
point, but I won't. Everything else that you have received and all the other public record
just has the one column, but you have two separate sheets for everything. So, there is
some difference in -- the stuff that I gave to the Process Improvement Group never had
just the overhead broken out, it always just had two separate fees schedules, basically.
But rather than publish two separate fee schedules, we went with the latter, which
seemed like a good decision at the time, but --
Bird: Now, the PIG group that you did, tell me -- explain to me again what you give
them? You give them one without overhead and one with overhead?
Canning: Right. Two completely different fee schedules.
Bird: Okay. Now what do they think -- what do they think -- this motion that we just did
would be?
Canning; Well, we are looking for Council to approve one or the other of the fee
schedules. And the motion that was made was to approve the first -- the fee schedule
without overhead, but you haven't voted yet, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Now, you have all of us confused. What is the recommendation from
your group? If you have shown them two separate documents, are they supporting the
fees without the overhead or the fees with the overhead?
Canning: I have never received complaints about either. Mr. Turnbull -- Mr. Turnbull
recommended approving it without overhead.
Bird: Well, yeah, I can believe -- I would -- if I was out there I'd be asking that, too.
De Weerd: But there was no comment from the rest of the committee in opposition?
Canning: No. And I have not received any notice from anyone else that they are
opposed to the fee schedule. The only bit of testimony I have received so far was from
Mr. Turnbull.
De Weerd: Okay. Is that -- has that provided clarity for you, Council?
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 42 of 51
Bird: I'm very clear. But I'm clear with the motion.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I guess my question of staff now would be what is the true cost going to be for
us to administer the services? Is it the final number that currently says total proposed
fee with overhead?
Canning: Yes, sir, it is.
Wardle: So, that's what it's going to cost us to provide services?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Bird: Madam Mayor, before we go any further, let's go down to the comparison.
Canning: Comparisons with other cities?
Bird: Between us and Boise. Go down the comparison.
Canning: I think it's actually up, but --
Bird: Up I mean. I'm sorry.
Canning: There we go. This is with overhead. The comparison with --
Bird: And we are 16 on the first item.
Canning: The blue indicates that Boise city is less. The red indicates that Boise city is
more. And it's difficult, because there are all ranges on both sides, so it would have to
definitely be more or definitely be less for me to color it and that's why some of them are
not colored.
Bird: I understand that. Okay.
Canning: So, as you see, if we use Boise city as a comparison, the accessory use in a
residential district is less in Boise, but home occupation is more. An accessory use not
in a residential district is more. Administrative design review is more. Alternative
compliance is more. Certificate of zoning compliance is more. Certificate of -- another
certificate of zoning compliance would be more. City Council review or appeal is less.
Comprehensive Plan map amendment is less. Comprehensive Plan text amendment is
more. Conditional use modification is more. Additional inspections for CZC are more.
Planned development is less. Combination plat would generally be less. Final plat per
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 43 of 51
lot fee is less. Final plat modification is less. Preliminary plat is less. Then going to
page two. I think I'm going to stop reading, unless there is one you want me to -- so,
there is a fair amount of blue and red on both sides, though.
Bird: Yeah.
Canning: One of the -- well --
Bird: What is the most used fee, Anna? What type are the most used fees, do you
know?
Canning: Annexation, preliminary plat, certificate of zoning compliance, and final plats
are the most used.
Bird: We are pretty competitive there.
Canning: I think we are pretty competitive. The big thing was our ordinance was
changed to not require a lot of your review. It's got a lot more staff level review, which
doesn't show up here. So, that's a huge savings to someone. Just the fee for the
conditional use is not a big deal, but the fee in the six months is a big deal to them and I
think that that's another move forward that does not show up in this fee resolution.
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, with that I would withdraw my motion.
Bird: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further discussion before a motion is made?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I would move that we approve the new proposed department development
application review fees and direct staff to publish one fee, inclusive of all the costs to
the city for the service.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the proposed fees with the overhead. So,
the third column, and to publish that in total.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 44 of 51
Wardle: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you please --
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Sorry. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would ask that somewhere -- and probably in the development application
or packet for that or the ordinance or whatever, that we define the word fee. So, the
applicant fully understands that it's not necessarily meant on the part of the City of
Meridian to be a revenue generator, but to actually cover the costs of the process. And
it may very well be there. And, then, further, that we don't ever see fees broken out by
overhead or something else, because that something else, in my opinion, is still
overhead.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Or, if, in fact, we are going to generate revenues with it, that we specify that.
Bird: No. We can't.
Rountree: But I don't think we can.
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Baird.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the state statute limits us to only collect
our costs and the way this was broken out was designed to give you options on whether
you wanted to recover part of your costs or all of your costs and the motion that's before
you covers all of your costs. And in defense of the way it was published, I think that's
the way the public had to see what was before you, the considerations that you're
making tonight, they needed to see all of those columns.
De Weerd: Which is a different way than we have done business in now folding the
overhead into it and those were important public considerations and laying out how
those fees were developed. So, as you look at the policy of folding in the overhead into
our fee calculations, which I'm sure we are consistent, but we will work on that, Council,
and make sure as we update our fees annually that you have a consistent calculation.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 45 of 51
Bird: One statement -- and I'm sure Anna's -- and I appreciate the way Anna did that. I
agree with Mr. Baird that that probably was the right way to publish it, even though I
didn't think so. All I can say is I know -- and Mayor just stated that we would get a
uniform way of doing it, but I know our costs can be justified if we have to -- if we have
to stand up for it and I'm positive we can do that and that I feel comfortable -- when we
can do that, then, I feel comfortable. Very comfortable. And I feel very comfortable with
these fees. I don't care where Boise is at or Nampa is at or anybody else, I know what
we need.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any further discussion?
Rountree: Question.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 15: Resolution No. 05-489 : Approving and Adopting the
Planning Department Development Application Review Fees Under
the Unified Development Code:
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. So, Mr. Baird, on Item 15, we will need to --
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, in order to have these in effect on our
proposed effective date of the 15th, I would ask, in order to fulfill your approval on item
No. 14, that in a motion to approve the resolution in Agenda Item 15, you make the
same statement, that we provide you with a final version of the resolution containing
only the final column, including what we have defined tonight as including overhead,
which for future and ever more will be the way we will be defining fees.
De Weerd: Forever more. Okay.
Bird: And, Madam Mayor, that would -- Ted, that would take care of Charlie's deal of
having it published, because the resolution is publicly published; right?
Baird: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, we don't normally publish a
resolution like we do an ordinance. However, in discussing this with the City Clerk, I
think it was our intention to publish the fees after they were acted upon.
Berg: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Berg.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 46 of 51
Berg: It's been our office policy to publish resolutions that involve fees for the public to
be aware of those fees. I know that it doesn't have to be, but we go beyond that to
make sure that we are up and aboard with our public with the fees that we approve.
Bird: Thank you.
Wardle: And -- Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I believe the other direction from Councilman Rountree was to within our fee
packet include the definition of fee and our interpretation of what those are meant and I
think --
Rountree: Consistent with state statute, et cetera.
Wardle: That can happen at the department level when we --
Bird: Yeah.
Rountree: I mean if it's just a reference to state statute, where it's defined, I --
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: With that I move that we approve Item 15, Resolution No. 05-489, approving
and adopting the planning department development application review fees under the
Unified Development Code, to include one published fee, which, again, includes all
costs to the city, the third column, which was published, including the overhead.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. We have a motion to approve with the changes as stated or
consolidation as stated and a second. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. If I could read just the title
of the resolution, so you would understand the resolution. A resolution approving and
adopting the planning department development application review fees under the
Unified Development Code and approving an effective date, which is September 15th.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 47 of 51
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 16: Ordinance No. 05-1181 : FY05 Budget Amendment:
De Weerd: Item 16 is Ordinance No. 05-1181 on FY05 budget amendment. Mr. Berg,
will you, please, read this by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 05-1181, an
ordinance of the City of Meridian, Idaho, amending Ordinance 04-1100, the
appropriation ordinance for the fiscal year beginning October 1st, 2004, and ending
September 30th, 2005, appropriating additional monies that are not to be received --
excuse me -- that are to be received by the City of Meridian, Idaho, in the sum of
7,552,575 dollars and allocating additional expenditures and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. I don't think
our audience member wants to hear it read it its entirety.
Nary: How long is it?
Rountree: How long is it.
Bird: If he does, he can get up and read it.
De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to approve.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve Ordinance No. 05-1181 with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve Item 16. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 17:
C. Mayor’s Office
1. Reappointment of Clarence Jones and Keith Bird to the
MDC Board:
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 48 of 51
2. Appointments to Economic Development Corporation:
De Weerd: Item 17 is a consolation of Item 5 from the pre-Council agenda, as well as
Item 6-C-2 on the Economic Development Corporation. This is a corporation by
ordinance that is necessary to do industrial revenue bonds. It defines in the ordinance
the board make up. This board in front of you -- or recommendations are -- would be
the Mayor, the Council President, and these three positions. Dale Newberry has
received several IOB's sponsored through the city and is very familiar with the process.
Chris Klein in the incoming president with the Chamber of Commerce and Cheryl Brown
as the representative of the city's economic development efforts. Were there questions
or discussion on this item?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: To follow up from the pre-Council discussion, the reason that I added this item
to our Council agenda, was simply to make Council aware of a committee which has not
been active for some time, that we were going to reactivate it and, then, appoint these
individuals and allow some time to comment before the actual appointment on the
consent -- or in the Mayor's report. So, that was my intent for the pre-Council agenda.
De Weerd: And, Council, this board hasn't existed, because there has been no need
for an IRB. We did have Tri-City Meats that approached the city, wanted to look at this
mode of financing. They have since, just recently, notified us that they would be using a
different financing mechanism, but we did -- we have had some interest and as the
interest rates go up this becomes a more desirable form of financing. So, in light of the
recent reversal of not needing the immediacy, if you don't want to take action on it
tonight, that's fine, but I do think we need this board in place, so that we are ready to go
if there is an industrial employer or manufacturer that needs this type of financing.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: And I believe by ordinance they meet only when they have to or once a year, if I'm
right. On your appointment, who is the one-year? These are staggered appointments.
De Weerd: I don't care.
Bird: Cheryl?
De Weerd: You bet.
Bird: Okay. Who is your two-year?
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 49 of 51
De Weerd: Probably Chris. And, then, Dale is our --
Bird: Three year?
De Weerd: I think he adds some great value to it.
Rountree: He's got the institutional memory.
De Weerd: Yes, he does.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would move that we -- on our Economic Development Corporation, that we
approve the appointments of Cheryl Brown, Chris Klein, And Dale Newberry, along with
noting that the president will be the Mayor, Tammy de Weerd, and the secretary will be
Shaun Wardle, the City Council President.
Rountree: And the term limits.
Bird: And the term limits will be Cheryl for one year, Chris Klein for two years, and Dale
for a three year term.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve the appointments as recommend, with the
appointed terms as noted. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Council, before we have our motion to go into Executive Session, I do want
to -- since we have our police and our Planning and Zoning all in one room, there have
been sign issues again brought to my attention and we just need to be consistent and
there seems to be a lot of temporary signs everywhere and so since that has been
brought to my attention, I thought I should mention it before we leave tonight.
Rountree: We could have open season on them.
De Weerd: And before there is open season on them, would you, please, see if our
code enforcement can start. Otherwise, they will pose a different problem for our
officers. Shooting in the city limits.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 50 of 51
Item 18: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(a(c))&(f):
De Weerd: Okay. I would entertain a motion to adjourn into Executive Session and if
the motion maker can also, please, indicate who they would like to come into Executive
Session with us. Or I will.
Rountree: Is that Bill Nary?
De Weerd: Yeah. I believe that our attorney -- on some of these we should have -- we
will start with Len and Anna and our legal counsel -- and, I'm sorry, Brad. Okay. And
Brad, too. We have gotten used to Len.
Rountree: Because he stayed so long.
De Weerd: So, that would be what we would start out with.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we go into Executive Session per State 67-2345(1)(c)(f) and
have staff in attendance of Mr. Nary, Mr. Watson, Len, you -- okay. Len as well. Okay.
And Anna.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second?
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION.
Rountree: I move we come out of Executive Session?
Bird: Second.
Meridian City Council
September 13, 2005
Page 51 of 51
Mayor: Okay, all those in favor?
ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor: I would entertain a motion to adjourn.
Bird: Before we make that motion let it be know that no decisions were made in
Executive Session.
Mayor: We don’t need to say that.
Rountree: Well, we did.
Mayor: No, we didn’t.
Bird: So moved.
Rountree: Second.
Mayor: Okay, we are adjourned.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:34 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
_______________________________ ______/______/______
MAYOR TAMMY DE WEERD DATE APPROVED
ATTESTED:______________________________
WILLIAM G. BERG JR., CITY CLERK