HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 11-09Meridian City Council Meeting November 9,
2005
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M.,
Wednesday, November 9, 2005, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor, Tammy de Weerd, Shaun Wardle, Keith Bird, and Charlie
Rountree.
Members Absent: Christine Donnell.
Others Present: Ted Baird, Will Berg, Anna Canning, Len Grady, Bill Musser, Craig
Hood, Bill Johnson, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X Shaun Wardle X _ 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. It is Wednesday, November
9th. Welcome. You are here. I have not arrived. It is a regular meeting for City
Council and welcome. We will start tonight's agenda with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance:
De Weerd: I think I'm still starting my computer. Item No. 2 is the pledge of allegiance
and we will be led tonight by our newly elected Council Member Elect Joe Borton.
Would you like to lead us in the pledge?
(Pledge of allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Bro. Clark:
De Weerd: Thank you, Joe. I'd like to congratulate both you and Councilmember Bird
for their wonderful election that they ran and we will welcome you in January as our
newest Councilmember. So, welcome tonight. And is Brother Olson here? Okay.
Well, great. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. And Mr. Clark or Brother Clark will
be leading us. If you will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an
opportunity for a moment silence. Thank you for being here.
Clark: Our Father in Heaven, we humbly bow in prayer this evening, grateful to meet
together as a City Council and members of this great city. We pray that thy Spirit will be
here, that the thoughts and decisions that are made will be influenced by the Spirit and
we are grateful to be part of this great community and this great city, grateful to be part
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 2 of 57
of this wonderful country that we live in and for the freedoms that we enjoy and we pray
that we can always be appreciative and do our part to help this community and this
country to be strong and righteous and we pray for these things humbly in the name of
Jesus Christ, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda:
De Weerd: I would like to offer you a City of Meridian pin for joining us tonight and
leading us in the invocation. Thank you. Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: We have one addition. Under department reports we have had a request from
Planning and Zoning, Mrs. Canning, and we will make that Item B under Department
Reports. Item 11 is an ordinance which number will be 05-1194 -- or 99. I'm sorry. And
Item 16 is an ordinance which is 05-1120 and with that I move that we accept the -- the
computer turn on -- the revised agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion was to adopt the agenda as revised. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda:
A. Approve Minutes of October 25, 2005 City Pre-Council Meeting:
B. Approve Real Estate Purchase and Sale Agreement and Deed
for Thousand Springs Surplus Property:
C. Agreement for Professional Services Water Division Building
Project with Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc.:
D. Idaho Power Easement Agreement for the New K-9 Building:
E. Approve the Water Main Easement for Pioneer Building #2:
De Weerd: Item No. 5, Consent Agenda.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 3 of 57
Bird: I move we approve the Consent Agenda as published and for the Mayor to sign
and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Is there any discussion?
Okay. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Department Reports:
A. Police Department – Bill Musser
1. Re-Organization Items for Police Department:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 6-A, Department Reports. We have Chief Musser to give
a report from the police department.
Musser: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm here this evening to discuss a
reorganization that we have already started to initiate within the police department in
terms of the administrative staff. I have eliminated the captain's position at this point
and gone back to four lieutenants. As a result of doing some of the reorganization, I do
want to add in a new position at this point and I do have some salary savings from
some other personnel actions which have taken place this year, one of which resulted in
the approximately 11,000 dollars in salary savings at this point and I'm looking to use a
portion of that money, to be approximately 1,800 dollars, to initiate and put in place a
staff sergeant position to assist with the management of the patrol division, which is a
rather large operational division within the police department now. That would be a
rank of sergeant, which would be above the current sergeants that we have, and they
would assist with administrative duties, fleet maintenance, equipment inventory, repair,
maintenance, ordering, that type of thing, as well as scheduling and, in general,
assisting the current patrol lieutenant with running and managing that division. As a
result of some of the personnel changes, I also wanted to let the Council know that I do
need to replace one sergeant's position as well, which would be another promotion,
which will probably result in a corporal's promotion, then, because we look to the
corporals to promote for our sergeants and, then, I was also looking to do a temporary
assignment for a one year period of a corporal to code enforcement as a temporary
supervisor during that time period. I'm also looking for approval on a bonus for that
position for roughly three percent of the salary, which would be 1,610 dollars for that
one year period in a temporary assignment as the supervisor for code enforcement.
Overall, with what I have looked at and I have turned in a draft wage proposal to you,
the overall wage adjustments that I'm looking at would account for 6,610 dollars at this
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 4 of 57
time. Those are strictly off the wages. However, with the salary savings that we had
that I mentioned before on 11,000, there were the ancillary costs included with that,
which were the FICA, workmen's comp, PERSI and the related costs, and I have
checked with accounting on it, they did verify my figures, and I have also run it through
the HR director, who believes it can be done on the condition that this is a one-time-for-
this-year only approach and I would have to bring you back an enhancement for the
FY07 budget, so that we could establish this as a base. I'd stand for any questions if
you have any at this time.
De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions for Chief Musser?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Just for clarification, these numbers are not based on an annual basis, this is
for the remainder of the fiscal year?
Musser: Councilman Rountree, Members of the Council, at this time I have run these
out as an annual figure, as opposed to a -- from this date forward figure. I'd rather have
it be a little larger than smaller, so it was run from October through September in terms
of where we are at. There will be an amount to salary savings even included in the
numbers that we have here.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, just a procedural question. Do we need a motion to amend the
budget and accept these recommendations? Mr. Baird?
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that would make sense to make the
record, if that's your desire.
Wardle: Thank you. Madam Mayor, with that I will move that we accept the
recommendations from the Chief Of Police for the reorganization of the police
department, to include staff changes, as well as wage and position changes for fiscal
year 2006.
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 5 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve the request from Chief Musser on the
reorganization of the police department. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Planning & Zoning – Anna Canning.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 6-B, as amended, Anna Canning.
Canning: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I have two issues to
discuss with you tonight. The first one is kind of sad news. Brad Hawkins-Clark has
accepted a position with Gem County in the City of Emmett to be their Planning
Director. So, I'm losing my Assistant Planning Director. That's great for him, but I will
miss him dearly, and in that light I will -- my plans are to promote Craig to the Assistant
Planner Position. I'm not sure all of you have met Craig Hood. I know you all know his
staff reports, so I wanted him to come and sit in on the Council hearing tonight, just to
see how it runs. Plus, the only item on the agenda is his staff report, so that backs me
up tonight, too. The second item is a little more substance and I have provided a
memorandum to you. We have briefly discussed the fact that the Planning and Zoning
Commission has recommended four Comprehensive Plan Amendments up to you.
Given Brad's imminent departure and his roll in one of those, I felt it was very important
to talk to you all about scheduling those hearings. So, I'm going to go through them.
They are kind of in order of easiest to most difficult to schedule, so I'm going to go
through them briefly. The downtown design guidelines -- basically these are ready to go
whenever Council wants to hear them. They could be done quickly. You have been
apprised of what's in those design guidelines along the way and there was no public
testimony at the Planning and Zoning Commission on that item. So, those could be
scheduled rather quickly. The earliest from the clerk's office, if they knew tomorrow
morning, the earliest they could get it on is December 6. So, do you want me to -- do
you want to decide on each of these as we go through or just decide at the end?
De Weerd: Council, what would be your preference?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Anna, why don't you go through all of the projects and, then, we will just
quickly at the end --
Canning: Okay. And I do apologize for the late notice, it's just that I found out
yesterday, so I was in a -- the north Meridian area plan, you all expressed a desire and
staff concurs that a workshop on this one would be very appropriate. It's a large area.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 6 of 57
It's complicated. I would hope that you could conduct a workshop before the end of
November, because that's when Brad leaves the city's employment. I checked on the
availability of this facility and it is only available on Fridays through the end of
November. The one exception is the 5th Tuesday, which is the 29th. Planning and
Zoning Commission had tentatively planned on having some training here. We can
reschedule that. Really, this workshop is more important than that training and we can
fit that in or go to them as needed, so that would be --
De Weerd: Well, Anna, the 29th Councilman Bird and I will be in Omaha.
Canning: Okay.
De Weerd: So, that would not work.
Canning: I checked with the police department, but I was not able to hear back from
them on their room and availability. We could use the planning department room. The
only issue there is that it's not easily accessed by the public. They do have to walk
through the doors and get up the stairs. But that room is certainly available for the
Council whenever they want to use it and I can get --
De Weerd: I guess, Anna, because of the interest we would probably want to hold that
here, if Council can do a Friday, if the Fridays are the only dates in November available.
So, we can coordinate and -- through the clerk's office.
Rountree: You're looking at the 18th and the 25th?
De Weerd: The 25th is the day after Thanksgiving.
Rountree: Yeah.
De Weerd: I don't think you would have staff here.
Canning: Yeah. It looks like Friday, the 18th, would be probably the best bet, given
that the other one is the holiday after Thanksgiving.
Bird: Are we going to do it during the day?
Canning: We can.
Bird: Or during the night?
Canning: Whatever Council desires.
Bird: The Warriors are going to be in the championship football game that night. I'm
not going to be here.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 7 of 57
Rountree: Good point.
Canning: Do you want me to check on the availability during the day?
Rountree: That would be good.
Canning: Okay.
Rountree: Preferably the afternoon.
De Weerd: The afternoon of the --
Rountree: 18th. In my case. I don't know about the rest of you.
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Well, eight days out my schedule is booked and I can't move anything on
Friday, so --
Rountree: Going on a trip.
Wardle: No trip, actually. I'm not available at anytime on Friday, other than our
regularly scheduled 9:30 agenda meeting in the morning. If you guys want to go early.
De Weerd: We are not the one opposed to early, Mr. Wardle.
Bird: I have no problem with going early.
Canning: Another option might be a pre-Council on the -- next week. Do it before your
regular hearing.
Bird: On the 22nd?
De Weerd: No. On the 15th.
Bird: 15th? Yeah. Let's start her at --
Canning: Or the 22nd.
Bird: -- 5:00 o'clock.
Canning: 5:00 o'clock the 15th?
Bird: Have we got AspireOn coming?
Rountree: That's fine with me.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 8 of 57
Bird: That's fine with me.
Berg: 5:00 o'clock the 15th.
Canning: Thank you.
Bird: And you will buy lunch?
Canning: Sure.
Bird: From Goodwood?
Canning: Okay. I will do that. The next two amendments come forward to you from the
Planning and Zoning Commission with a different recommendation than you're used to
seeing. They recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, but only
as it accompanies a specific development application and annexation and zoning
request. So, in consulting with the legal staff, we felt that the appropriate thing -- or an
appropriate thing to do, if you want to honor that recommendation, would be that you
would take action tonight to defer scheduling the item for a Public Hearing and you
would again review this matter no later than February 7th, 2006. So, you would review
the matter for the sole purpose of establishing a hearing date and we just wanted to
make sure that we weren't setting it off indefinitely -- if they never came in with an
application, the Council still needs to take action at some point. So, the February 7th
date give them three months to get their applications in and we should know once they
are in the process approximately when they would come up to you. Now, the applicant
for the Conger Comp Plan amendment is not in favor of this process and I told them I
would make this clear to you. They do not want to submit the accompanying
applications -- they don't want to go to that expense if the Council is just going to deny
the Comprehensive Plan amendment anyway. But, again, this is not as -- that would
not be in keeping with what the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended.
De Weerd: Council, any comments on that item?
Canning: The second -- the other option before Council is that they would reject the
recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and just schedule the matter
for a hearing.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion, feedback for staff?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, question --
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: -- for Anna. Why would we have to reject the recommendation of P&Z in
order to schedule a hearing?
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 9 of 57
Canning: To -- they stated that they didn't want the Council to consider it as -- unless it
was with the accompanying applications and I actually --
Rountree: Okay.
Canning: -- attached some information for you regarding the discussion prior to the
motion and, then, the motion and, then, on this one it was a reference made into the
motion to staff's recommendation.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Question of legal staff. Is that -- if we were to do that, would that be in keeping
with -- with our ordinance or how we have done things in the past? Can we accept that
recommendation from --
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Wardle, this appears to
be a unique situation and the options that were outlined before you -- I guess to answer
also the question about why does scheduling it reject the recommendation. In fact, the
act of scheduling it without delaying it to allow the applications, would, in effect, be
rejecting that just by your saying you're going to go forward without that
recommendation, so --
Wardle: Okay.
Canning: And perhaps it would help Council if I explained why Planning and Zoning
Commission did it this way. They are limited in how often they can recommend these
forward to you, so they couldn't just sit on them until they got the applications; they had
to make a recommendation.
De Weerd: Well, I guess if they denied it, it would not be considered for another six
months.
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Just to run down here real quickly -- and, Anna, were you finished with those
items?
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 10 of 57
Canning: The last one is a little easier. It's that same recommendation, but the
applicant is in agreement with it, that that isn't a problem, they do intend on providing
annexation, zoning, and a preliminary plat application.
Wardle: Okay. Thank you. My recommendation for downtown design guidelines
amendment would be to find time when some of the MDC board or those that have
been involved in that process would be available in the month of December and the
Clerk and I can work on scheduling that, if that's -- that was not the project that you
want Brad to be able to present on; is that correct?
Canning: Correct.
Wardle: Okay. If that's okay with Council.
Rountree: That's fine.
Bird: That's fine with me.
Wardle: The next one -- I think we settled north Meridian area plan will be next Tuesday
at 5:00 o'clock. Okay. And my preference on both Comp Plan amendments would be
to hear them with the applications of the projects.
De Weerd: So, your recommendation is to defer the scheduling of this item until
February 7th?
Wardle: That would be my preference.
De Weerd: Okay. Other Council? Any comments?
Bird: That's fine with me.
Rountree: Is that a motion?
Wardle: That's a motion. Would you like to second?
Rountree: I'll second it.
Wardle: Okay.
Canning: Madam Mayor, if the maker of the motion just -- as long as we are clear, it
was no later than February 7th, just -- okay.
Wardle: Reviewed no later than February 7th per staff and Planning and Zoning
Commission recommendation.
Canning: Thank you, sir.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 11 of 57
De Weerd: Second agrees?
Rountree: I agree.
De Weerd: Okay. Do we need roll call, Mr. Baird?
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, did you have anything else?
Canning: No, ma'am. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. I just wanted to make note in our clerk's department we had a major
milestone. Our city clerk turned 50. Just wanted to congratulate you.
Berg: Can I retire now?
De Weerd: No, that doesn't mean anything as far as retirement. Just a great personal
milestone.
Rountree: That certainly was a sweet picture.
Bird: Yeah. He got a nice haircut.
Item 7: Items Moved from Consent Agenda:
Item 8: FP 05-065 Request for Final Plat approval of 74 building lots and 5
common lots on 19.72 acres in a R-8 zone for Sicily Subdivision by
Landmark Engineering and Planning – south of East Victory Road and
west of South Locust Grove Road:
De Weerd: We'd sing happy birthday, but we will not submit torture to our citizens.
Okay. Item No. 8 is FP 05-065. I will start with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, we have a -- my understanding is that the applicant is in
agreement with the conditions of approval for this final plat.
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 12 of 57
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Hearing that the applicant in agreement, I move that we approve Item 8, FP
05-065.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. A motion to approve Item No. 8. Mr. Berg, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Continued Public Hearing from November 1, 2005: PP 05-044
Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 60 single-family residential
building lots and 4 common area lots on 23.9 acres in a R-4 zone for
Bridgetower Crossing Subdivision No. 14 by Primeland Development,
LLP – north of West Ustick Road and west of North Linder Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 9 is a continued Public Hearing from November 1st on PP
05-044. I will start the Public Hearing with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this Public Hearing was left open for
the sole purpose of hearing from the applicant as to whether they are in agreement with
the conditions of approval and my understanding is they are.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: And she is nodding her head.
De Weerd: Just wanted you to state that for the record. Okay. Council, the applicant is
in agreement with staff recommendations.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve PP 05-044 --
De Weerd: Mr. Bird, do you want to first close the Public Hearing?
Bird: Oh, yeah, that's right. I'm sorry. I move we close the Public Hearing on PP 05-
044.
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 13 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item No. 9. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Now, Mr. Bird.
Bird: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve PP 05-044, Bridgetower Crossing
Subdivision No. 14 by Primeland Development.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item No. 9. If there is no 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: Thank you. That did include the Findings I'm sure.
Bird: Oh, yes.
Item 10: Public Hearing for Transfer of City Parking Lot to the Meridian
Development Corporation:
Item 11: Ordinance No. 05-1194 : Transferring City Parking Lot to the
Meridian Development Corporation:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 10 is a Public Hearing for transfer of the city parking lot to the
Meridian Development Corporation. I will open this Public Hearing with some
discussion of -- Mr. Baird, I guess I would ask that you discuss, perhaps, the next item
as well, Ordinance No. 05-1194 and something that you and I talked about, an added --
if you can kind of discuss that with Council in this part of our agenda.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it might be helpful if I started out just by
outlining the process and where we are in that process. Back in July this Council
passed a resolution declaring your intent to consider the possibility of transferring the
city's parking lot located on Broadway Avenue, transferring it to another tax supported
governmental entity, that being the Meridian Development Corporation. State law does
allow you to transfer real property that's in public ownership to other agencies without
compensation if you find that it's in the city's best interest to do so. So, as you go
through your hearing tonight, at the end you will be considering the ordinance that's
been noticed as Item No. 11 and there are draft Findings on there that indicate that you
have found it to be in the best interest and that you have found that it's underutilized.
So, if at the end of the hearing you feel otherwise, I would advise you to direct staff to
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 14 of 57
prepare a revised ordinance for consideration at a later date. And just by way of
process, there are two other ways that you can dispose of real property. You can either
trade it for other real property or declare it be sold at auction. What is under
consideration tonight and what's been noticed for the hearing is transfer to another
agency without compensation. I guess I would recommend that hearing proceed with a
presentation by the Meridian Development Corporation, since it's their letter that started
the process.
De Weerd: Okay.
Baird: And, then, take comments from the public and, then, have a deliberation and
proceed to your decision. The other item that I did want to point out before we go
forward, the draft ordinance in Section 3 does contain a provision that the deed would
be restricted, that the property remain in public ownership, and remain available for
public parking and anytime a conveyance is made to a private party, that ownership
would revert back to the City of Meridian. Meridian Development Corporation did not
agree with that. They proposed an alternative and I will let Mr. Bowman explain what
that alternative is. But the reason that we put in Section 3 is that -- the feeling that we
have is that the taxpayers purchased the parking lot and they are going to want to see
either that it remain a public ownership or see what they are getting for it, either some
return to the General Fund, or another parking lot somewhere in the city.
De Weerd: And I guess further clarification on that is when we discussed the letter, we
also had discussions to make sure that the parking was not displaced. If it was found to
have a different use, that the parking -- we would still replace that parking maybe
elsewhere.
Baird: Right. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, with that deed restriction, what it,
in effect, does is gives you the opportunity to review any future conveyance if the
Meridian Development Corporation finds a partner to develop the property in something
other than a parking lot and wants to convey it to a private party, they can come back to
us and ask the City Council to remove that deed restrictions. So, it really gives you sort
of a review of what happens to this lot in the future.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Baird. Clair, if you will, please, come forward. State
your name and address for the record.
Bowman: My name is Clair Bowman. I serve as the administrator for the Meridian
Development Corporation. My address is 4400 West Legacy Lane, Meridian, 83642.
Mr. Baird has done an excellent job of summarizing where we are today. What I can
add to that, I believe, is why MDC requested this transfer in the first place. The origin of
the Urban Renewal Agency, now called Meridian Development Corporation, began with
several of the members of this Council and the Mayor involved in deciding what the
priorities were that would trigger us to want to have an urban renewal agency. Two of
those stood out preeminently in all the discussions we have had to date. One of those
is to resolve parking issues, to handle public parking in the downtown core area, 20, 21
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 15 of 57
blocks area. A second is to stimulate the redevelopment of those blocks or of the
blighted portion of those blocks. MDC is currently undertaking a master plan process,
one objective of which is to tell us exactly where we start or where the next step should
be on each of those transactions. I believe and I think the MDC board believes that the
transfer of title for this ground to MDC is, indeed, the first step to have all of the parking
responsibility with one organization, with one organization that has some financing
capabilities to turn surface parking into structure parking at times when that is needed
or when it can be used to assist in the stimulation of downtown redevelopment. This
morning at the MDC board meeting, the board authorized the further development and
release of a proposal for the use of that parking lot to stimulate development in the two-
block area either -- on either side of Broadway between Main and Meridian Road. The
nature of that proposal that I will be putting together, along with legal counsel over the
next few days, is to offer that land to a developer who would be willing to use it as a
portion of another development to increase the scope and size, functionality of a
development that they might already be planning. I spoke with one of the developers
currently working on property adjacent to that parking. He's the one that has a building
approved on the corner of Main and Broadway at this point. The building that was
approved is a 21,000 square foot three story building with one story of residential on the
top floor. If, indeed, he had access to -- if he proposed and were the successful person
in getting to use this additional parking lot, he would nearly double the size of his
building to a 30,000 square foot building and add another floor of residential to it.
Those are the kinds of spin-off benefits that can be had by taking what is a very small
parcel of ground and leveraging it for supporting other development. I believe that's the
end of what I would say as background information. I do have a little bit more to say at
some point regarding the Section 3 in your proposed ordinance and an alternative
wording for that, if I could, but I believe there are other folks signed up to testify and you
may want to take that before you do that.
De Weerd: Okay.
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Baird.
Baird: I'm not sure that we anticipated rebuttal on this. It's certainly within your
discretion to allow that, but I would recommend that we hear the -- what's being
considered for an alternative to Section 3, so that the public can, indeed, comment on
that.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bowman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. The proposed Section 3 revision attempts to
retain some of the public commitment either to retain that lot as a parking lot or to take
any funds generated by the use of it in another development and acquire an equivalent
number -- acquire and develop an equivalent number of public parking spots in the
immediate downtown area. The language that the MDC board, minus the two City
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 16 of 57
Councilmembers on that board this morning, approved for me to present to you is to
reword Section 3 to read, quote: That as a condition of the conveyance the City
Council requires the Meridian Development Corporation to adopt a resolution affirming
that any and all revenue generated through the use of this parking as a parking lot or as
a contributed parcel in a larger development, be reserved for and used solely to acquire
and prepare additional public parking in the downtown core of Meridian. Yes, we could
live with the language that's in Section 3 right now. That requires another step, as Mr.
Baird correctly noted, to come back to the Council to release a deed restriction that you
might place on the property. We believe this alternative wording can provide the same
surety to the Council that we are not reducing public parking availability while removing
one additional step that we might have to go through that would take a little bit longer
for a developer. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Be happy to answer questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Clair. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Council? Okay. Thank you. I also have signed up Mark Freeman. If you
will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Freeman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Mark Freeman. My
address is 3550 West Birdie Court in Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Freeman: Good evening. I'm here tonight to testify both as a -- I guess as a resident of
the city, but also as an old town district property owner and business owner. You
probably all know that our business is located at 77 East Idaho, right next door to City
Hall here. I noticed the little legal advertisement in the paper. I think sometimes
lawyers are the only ones that read those. But I was able to decipher and determine
that it involved the parking lot that we occasionally park in, so I thought I would come
down and just let the Council and Mayor know, on behalf of the business owners in our
building and our customers and clients and other neighboring business owners that this
lot may be more important to the city than you might realize. When that lot was first put
there, there were a lot of different places to park and a lot businesses would allow
customers and clients to park, come and go, it was sort of a friendly relationship, but
that was based upon the fact that there weren't as many people and there weren't as
many cars, so it was really easy for Farmers and Merchants or any -- you know, the city,
even, to allow parking in their lots. Because of the growth in the city and the
development in the area, that's becoming more and more difficult. Examples of
shrinking parking, the development of Farmers and Merchants Bank behind City Hall
here is a wonderful -- wonderful thing for the city, but I think if you look at the number of
parking spaces it had an impact on local parking. The sale of the Valley Shepherd
Church across the street -- and if you look over there tonight -- I'm not sure if there is
something going on at the church or just folks here parking there, but that lot's got a lot
of cars in it and our building has an arrangement with the church -- a parking
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 17 of 57
arrangement we have had for years that will end with the new development, we
assume, because a private developer purchased that. There are a lot of folks that park
in that lot that don't have an arrangement with the church, but it's -- those areas that I'm
really concerned about as a property owner and citizen and for my customers and
clients and other business owners, that a lot in this area is crucial. I wasn't fully aware
of the -- I haven't seen the ordinance. I think the amendment is a good one. I think --
well, let me back up. If you look at that lot and you all come to City Hall a lot, you see
that there are a lot of times when there aren't many cars there, and there are days when
you can look at that lot and say, yeah, it looks like it's underutilized. But there is some
other days where you can look at that lot -- and I think what you're seeing is like a
window in the future. Today was an example. On Wednesdays the church, Valley
Shepherd Church, has something going on there every morning and you probably --
De Weerd: A Bible study.
Freeman: Bible study. And you can't park there. Well, you know, out of respect -- they
let us use their lot, we stay out of there when they tell us to. On those days this city is
full of cars and we use that lot, our customers use it, other businesses in the area use
that lot as well. So, if you look at that on a Wednesday, on a day like today -- when I
went out around noon to go to the Boys and Girls Club meeting where I saw you there,
Madam Mayor, there were probably ten or 12 cars in that lot. If you take the lot away,
it's going to make it more difficult for local business. If our customers can't get to it, it
makes it tough. I'm self-serving, I understand that, but I'm not here just as a one
business owner, there are other business owners in the area -- there is a lot of
businesses located close to that location. So, to me, it's crucial -- if the city decides to
go forward and transfer the lot, first of all, as Council indicated, you really can't do that
unless you determine it's underutilized. You have to make that decision first, because it
is a public use now. I think if you -- if you don't come to the conclusion it's underutilized
you can't transfer it anywhere. But if you determine it's underutilized and you decide to
transfer it to MDC, it's really crucial that the city retain an interest in it to make sure that
they have some say in where this next lot is going to be, because we can put lots in a
lot of different places and I think the MDC, you know, has an intent to do wonderful
things, but if they decide that the replacement lot might better located a couple of blocks
away from here, I think you would have a lot more business owners down here
complaining about what you're doing today. So, that's right to have some say. I'm not
sure -- maybe I just don't know the terms or I don't know enough about MDC, but -- and
I'm not sure where the downtown core area was. If the decision to relocate the lot was
going to be in one of these three blocks here, the new lot, I don't think we would have a
problem with that. But a public lot that's farther away is going to be difficult for the old
town merchants. That's pretty much what I've got to say.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for Mr. Freeman?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 18 of 57
Bird: Mr. Freeman, what I am getting from you is on Section 3 you think it should
probably stay the way our city attorney has written it up, instead of what was read by
the MDC, that the city should have final say on what -- you know, how it is taken care of
and there should be a deed restriction, that the parking lot remain ownership of the
public entity.
Freeman: Madam Mayor, Councilmembers, and Councilmember Bird, that's pretty
much in -- again, I haven't read it. I heard that, like the rest of the audience did, but,
again, my concern is where that new lot will be located. It's great if they can use those
funds and leverage them to do something, that's fantastic. If that replacement parking
lot occurs in this area right here, then, that would be super. But if it's outside that area,
that's the part that would be a concern for me.
Bird: Follow up, Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Bird: Mr. Freeman, what -- you say a three block area. We have another parking lot
that we rent and maintain over on -- by the Masonic Temple, I believe it is, isn't it? The
City has -- we have a couple over there. He being down here working down here all the
time sees much more than I do, but I have seen very little use of that parking lot across
the street, other than on Wednesdays. And, of course, we know that Bible study is
going to go away in a couple of -- a year or so, whatever the church moves, because
they have sold. I just -- I don't see it being utilized to the capacity that I'd like to see it
utilized. Our employees don't even use it. The banks, you know, used it when they was
doing the deal, but that was about it. I drive by there all the time and it's -- you know,
you're around it a lot more than I am.
Freeman: Madam Mayor, Council, Councilman Bird, again, my response to that is I
think what you see on a Wednesday you're going to see all the time. And there have
been times when that lot's been almost full on Wednesdays and when the church
changes hands -- and they are planning now to build. They are going to be out in less
than two years if their plan succeeds. Maybe, again, it's the lawyer in me, I look at the
negative impact on things and I think with a private developer owning this building, it's
not a negative thing, but they are going to want to use their property and it's very likely
that those arrangements will come to an end and that won't be available. The minute
that that's not available that lot's going to fill up. And the parking lots across -- there
was a time when I thought it was too far to -- and I'm sort of the old Meridian guy, I
guess. One of them. But I thought it was -- you know, that lot's too far to walk to. And
that's nothing. I mean that's a wonderful thing to have that close. But if -- there are
parking lots across the street. Being a downtown business owner, who does go across
the street occasionally at noon, it's not easy to get across. So, I think it's important that
we preserve not only the parking on that side, but on this side as well. So, what I'm -- I
don't want to dictate where, I'm just giving you my opinion, but I prefer to see that
parking lot be somewhere in this three block area that includes the block the church is
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 19 of 57
on, the block City Hall is on, and the block the creamery is on, I guess. Somewhere in
that area.
Bird: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other questions for Mr. Freeman, Council?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Freeman: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to
provide testimony on this application? Okay. Council, any further questions for Mr.
Bowman of the MDC or of our counsel?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I do have a question -- I want -- I'd like our counsel to clarify Section 3. I don't
believe he's in agreement with what MDC has come forward -- and I'd like him to
explain the reason he's not in agreement with it. And I kind of take it that Mr. Freeman
wasn't either.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird, if you will -- Clair, do you have that typed out that we could put on
the screen? Can you get that to Anna, so Council can see it as well?
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Baird.
Baird: While he's doing that, I will try to answer Mr. Bird's question. And I guess it's
probably not relevant to you whether I personally agree or disagree with Mr. Bowman's
restriction -- or language, I'm just -- all that I'm advising you is it's a significantly different
provision than what was drafted in the ordinance and because you will see that in its
entirety, I will read the section, Section 3, as it's stated. I think it should be self-
explanatory, but if there are any questions after I read it, I will stand for questions. So,
in the proposed ordinance, Section 3 provides that as a condition of the conveyance the
City Council has determined that the deed shall contain a restriction that the parking lot
remain the ownership of a public entity for the purposes of providing a vehicle parking
facility open to the public. So, that's -- that's the end of the way it's proposed in the
agenda. And I will provide, by way of explanation, that under that restriction the MDC
could convey it back to the city, they could convey it to another public agency, but it
gives you the comfort that -- I have heard direction and was directed to draft it this way,
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 20 of 57
that you would have control over that -- that use through -- into the future. And here we
have the proposed alternative and what it does is provides funds -- well, I don't want to
characterize it. I think Mr. Bowman did a pretty good job of it. It just directs where the
funds would go if it goes to other uses.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Question for Ted. I heard Mr. Bowman say that it would remove an additional
step for a developer. Is that -- would that be a consistent statement?
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilmember Wardle, that's correct.
If you adopt the ordinance as proposed with the deed restriction, a developer who
wanted to do something other than a parking lot would have to come back to you and
show you what they are going to do and where the parking is going to be and you would
have to be satisfied that the public is getting its return for that parking lot and that
parking is where you want it. So, it does give you that control, but the developer would
have to make that step to come back here and, basically, ask for your approval to
remove the deed restriction before that conveyance could be made.
Wardle: Thank you. Madam Mayor, then, just a comment from me and certainly I have
been an individual who has sat up here and said that one of the core missions, if not the
core mission for the MDC, is to provide public parking within the downtown area. And I
still think that that's a -- should be their number one goal. However, from the public's
standpoint, I think removing that additional step would not necessarily serve them, in
the sense that we are charged with making sure that -- that those -- that that
conveyance happens and so, personally, I would like to see Section 3 remain as written
within our ordinance, so that it can come back, so that the citizens can comment on that
additional conveyance.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Wardle. Any other comments from Council? Any
information needed?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Question or comment I need from Mr. Bowman.
De Weerd: Clair.
Rountree: There has been a parking study completed for the City of Meridian and
probably for the record, since that's one of the things that we have to decide on, is
utilization or underutilization, could you give us a summary for the record -- I know what
it said, but at least we will have it on the record for this item.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 21 of 57
Bowman: Yes. Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, the parking study explored the
21 blocks, starting at approximately Bower Street between Meridian Road and 2nd
Street and, then, north of the tracks and out to 4th Street and up to approximately
Carlton. In that total area they found, at maximum use, only about half of the parking
spaces were utilized during maximum use. However, in the southern end of that, which
is the area we are talking about for this parking lot, the utilization was as much as 80
percent in the blocks bounded by the railroad tracks, Idaho Street, Meridian, and 2nd
Street. Is that sufficient for the answer you wanted?
Rountree: Yes. That's --
De Weerd: Thank you, Clair. Anything else? Mr. Baird.
Baird: Madam Mayor, I'd just recommend at this point, if you have heard all the
testimony, that you close the Public Hearing and deliberate and decide how you want to
proceed on that ordinance.
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Bird: Is there anymore-public testimony?
De Weerd: Is there any further public testimony? Okay. Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move, then, we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 10.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion to close the Public Hearing on Item 10. All those in favor say
aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 11 is Ordinance No. 05-1194. I will ask the clerk to, please,
read this ordinance by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 05-1199. An
ordinance authorizing the conveyance to the Meridian Development Corporation certain
real property located at 55 East Broadway Avenue in the City of Meridian and legally
described as Lot 20 and 21 of Block 1 of the Meridian town site, Ada County, state of
Idaho, authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute and attest on behalf of the City
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 22 of 57
of Meridian the deed and other documents necessary to complete the transaction,
providing for a wavier of the reading of the rules and providing for an effective date.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. You have heard the ordinance 05-1194 read by title only.
Is there anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Okay. Mr. Baird.
Baird: Madam Mayor, I would recommend at this time that the Council have its
deliberations and make specific Findings, whether you agree with the language in the
ordinance that does indicate that it's underutilized and that you specify on how you'd
like Section 3 to read in the final version of the ordinance.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, discussion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: You know, not being down here all the time, like some of the business people are,
I have felt that it is not being used to its fullest and I, too, am like Shaun, Councilman
Wardle, I am for leaving Section 3 exactly like it is. That way it can always come back
to the City Council if it -- and it will be before the public. So, I'm for the ordinance and I
believe that it is underutilized, but I think Section 3 has to stay like it is.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bird. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I don't disagree with the intent of Section 3, but I don't think it
makes it particularly palatable to anybody who might be interested in providing public
parking in downtown Meridian, on the condition that they might be able to utilize that lot.
So, I think if we added to Section 3 that possibility, at least there would be a mechanism
in place that that could be considered. The way it reads now I would probably walk
away from even talking about consideration of something like that. So, I don't have the
words, but it seems to me that another sentence could be added to Section 3 that would
indicate that that was a possibility or something that could be considered.
De Weerd: Okay. And you don't have a suggestion?
Rountree: I don't have wording.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council --
De Weerd: Mr. Baird.
Baird: -- I guess the way it was drafted it sort of just implies that and I think I
understand what Councilmember Rountree is getting at and perhaps adding a sentence
that would state that any future use beyond these restrictions -- any -- it's really difficult
to try to draft in the middle of a meeting, but I will try to put something forth here. Any
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 23 of 57
other proposed use or conveyance beyond these restrictions should be reviewed by the
City Council of the City of Meridian for determination of whether the deed restriction
should be lifted. Is that the type of language that you're looking for?
Rountree: Yeah. Yeah.
Baird: If that is what your motion would be, I would actually direct that you direct us to
bring this back next week, rather than try to capture what I just said verbally. I think
we'd probably want to look at it from all angles and make sure we are not twisting it too
much. But I think I understand the intent of the comment.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Certainly I agree, I think that the language -- in my opinion, the step to come
back to the city would be for us to consider which additional parking options would be in
the best interest of the city and so if we can craft some language that would make it
appealing to whoever may want to go that route, then, I would certainly be in favor of
that.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I believe that's the consensus of the Council and I would -- so I would move that
we continue Ordinance 05-1199 until November 15, 2005.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to continue Item 11 to November 15th, 2005. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 12: Public Hearing: AZ 05-040 Request for Annexation and Zoning of
312.67 acres from RUT to C-G, L-O and R-4 zones for Volterra
Subdivision by Primeland Development, LLP – southwest and northwest
corners of North Ten Mile Road and McMillan Road:
Item 13: Public Hearing: PP 05-039 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 613
building lots (540 detached single-family residential, 9 commercial, 11
office) and 53 common area lots on 232.32 acres in proposed R-4, C-G
and L-O zones for Volterra Subdivision by Primeland Development, LLP
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 24 of 57
– southwest and northwest corners of North Ten Mile Road and McMillan
Road:
Item 14: Public Hearing: PP 05-040 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 205
building lots (134 detached single-family residential, 54 attached single-
family residential (patio homes), 13 commercial, 4 office) and 22 common
area lots on 80.36 acres in proposed C-G, L-O and R-4 zones for Volterra
Subdivision South by Primeland Development, LLP – southwest and
northwest corners of North Ten Mile Road and McMillan Road:
Item 15: Public Hearing: CUP 05-041 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for a mixed use development that includes
reductions to the minimum requirements for lot size, street frontage,
house size, setbacks and increased block lengths for Volterra
Subdivision by Primeland Development, LLP – southwest and northwest
corners of North Ten Mile Road and McMillan Road:
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 12 is Public Hearing AZ 05-040. I will open this Public
Hearing, along with PP 05-039, and PP 05-040 and CUP 05-041. And we will open
these public hearings, Items 12 through 15, with staff comments.
Canning: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Madam Mayor, this is the Volterra project and it is
located on most of the southern half of the section that's bounded by Black Cat, Ten
Mile, and McMillan. And as you can see here that's that area. And it's also the 80
acres on the south side of McMillan at the southwest corner of Ten Mile and McMillan.
We do have two preliminary plat applications. We did ask the applicant to submit
separate preliminary plat applications for that portion that was south of McMillan and
north of McMillan. That's why you have two of them before you tonight. We also have
the annexation, zoning, and Conditional Use Permit for a planned development. As you
can see, it's largely farm ground at this time. This is the site plan or a concept plan for
the entire property and I will try and hit some of the highlights. The applicant is
requesting annexation and zoning of a total of 312.67 acres. As part of that they are
asking for a C-G zone in the -- the west side of the intersection of McMillan and Ten
Mile. They are also asking for some L-O zoning that wraps around that C-G zoning on
the north property and, then, a small portion on the south property as well. And, then,
they are asking for R-4 on the remainder of the property. A portion of that is attached
single-family lots and those attached single family lots are here on the south side
adjoining the commercial property. There are in the north -- in the Volterra Subdivision,
which is the north subdivision, it includes 540 detached single-family lots, nine
commercial lots, and 11 office lots and that's on 232 acres. And, then, Volterra South is
134 detached single-family lots, 54 attached single-family lots with zero lot lines, and 13
commercial lots and four office lots on 80 acres. The applicant has also submitted a
Conditional Use Permit for the planned development. That PD includes request for
reductions to the minimum lot size, the minimum street frontage, the minimum house
size, the side setback, and the maximum block length for the R-4 zone. The planned
development also requests a use exception. They are asking for 17 percent of the site
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 25 of 57
to be zoned for office and commercial uses. That normally would not be permitted in
the area. The amenities for the development include tot lot areas, pathways, swimming
pool, clubhouse, and usable open space. The gross residential density is 3.56 dwelling
units per acre and the total square footage for commercial -- there is 84,000 square feet
of office space, 300,000 square feet of commercial, and 1,500 square foot for a
clubhouse for the residential portions. Also as part of this application staff has
recommended -- and I believe the applicant is in agreement to some conditions for a
development agreement. The first one to discuss is regarding phasing. In general,
they are kind of starting in this area toward the intersection of the two arterial streets
and moving away from that, moving west -- to the north and west and, then, moving just
west on the southern one. Staff understands that that phasing plan needs to reflect
market demand, but we are suggesting that prior to City Council's approval of the 350th
residential lot -- and this is both north and south -- that the 10.2 acre park, James Park,
that it be constructed and including the proposed swimming pool, the restrooms, the
water feature, and the tot lot for that park area. And, then, prior to the 550th residential
lot that the proposed three-acre park south of McMillan be constructed, including the
proposed plaza and playground equipment. The other development agreement
condition that staff is recommending is with regard to the nonresidential portions of the
property. We are recommending that each of those obtain conditional use approval,
given that we haven't seen details on the type of construction, and we are also
recommending that those be limited in bulk to -- to avoid having a big box retailer going
in that area, that they be more similar in bulk to the surrounding residential properties.
That would be determined by the Commission at those conditional use permit hearings.
Do have some elevations of the residential properties. And, then, we have a new
technology tonight. I can -- if this -- Council has questions on a portion of this property, I
do have all the preliminary plats also and we can zoom in on features or zoom out as
desired. So, we have that capability. I haven't shown the scanned ones up here, but I
can refer to the PDF files for you. Now move onto the Planning and Zoning
recommendation. The Planning and Zoning Commission heard the item on October
6th. They did -- they have recommended approval to the City Council. At that hearing
Becky McKay spoke in favor of the application. Paul Poorman and Gale Poorman
spoke in opposition. And Jerry Stephensen commented. The key issues of discussion
were fencing adjacent to open spaces, streets, micro-paths, and canals, phasing of the
project, design of the subdivision, traffic and upcoming roadway projects in the area, fire
department's requirement and the parks -- public versus private parks and sewer
availability and the Commission did make a number of changes to staff's initial
recommendation in regard to those issues. Staff is now -- I'll go through some of the
outstanding issues that we see before Council, although there are, obviously, more
people here to testify on this tonight than were able to make it to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. So, there, apparently, are other outstanding issues that staff is not
aware of. But let me go through the ones that we do know about. The staff report did
note that we were waiting for some calculations on open space. We are asking that you
modify condition 1.33 to -- so that we can get an accurate depiction of how much open
the space is that the applicant is proposing and it's 10.5 acres for Volterra South and
13.9 for Volterra. Regarding the sewer availability for this project, as was true of
Bainbridge, which is just north of this property; most of this area is currently not
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 26 of 57
serviceable by City of Meridian sanitary sewer system. Sewer service will be via the
future North Black Cat lift station. At this point the facility is being designed. However,
no funding has been approved for that construction and approval of this development
would be subject to the North Black Cat sewer system being available and improvement
to the wastewater treatment plant being completed. The next issue -- outstanding issue
is with regard to a school site. This was raised as part of the staff report. There is a
school site shown on the Comprehensive Plan in this section. This, as was evident, is
taking up most of this property. The Bainbridge Subdivision encompasses to the half
line section and, then, Kego Springs is -- has been submitted to you and will be heard
later and it kind of completes the rest of this section, except for a couple small
properties and, then, these five-acre lots down here. So, there is a question about the
future school site and the appropriate location of that. However, Wendell Bigham has
not commented that he needs a school site on this specific application. Fencing. The
applicant has not shown fencing. There was discussion -- we do not have a fencing
plan as part of the landscape plan. There was discussion about the new code
requirements for that fencing. The new UDC would require a six-foot open fence
adjoining these open space areas, particularly these parks, and, then, some of these
other smaller open space areas. The applicant would prefer to do a four-foot solid with
a two-foot lattice and to match what's on the east side of Ten Mile. However, we
changed the code in the UDC, because we were concerned about getting more eyes on
those larger open spaces and making them more visible to the surrounding properties.
The last outstanding issue -- there is an existing stub street coming in from the south
side of this property in Drawbridge Subdivision and we are recommending that this
applicant go ahead and connect that existing stub street to Drawbridge Subdivision. I
do need to note and in all fairness I have to tell you that Becky -- Mrs. McKay did not
learn about this until tonight or earlier today, but there is a land locked property just west
of Drawbridge Subdivision that we also do not currently have a stub street to that
property and Mrs. McKay has concerns about providing that stub street and I'll let her
detail those for you. Finally, it was just an error on the revisions that we received, but
we are still looking for a micro-path to the Kego Springs property in order to get school
children up there, because that's where we understand the new school is supposed to
go. But you will hear testimony on that tonight also. Regarding the motion, we did not
receive full size copies of the drawings that were -- the revised drawings that were
submitted, so we are asking that you keep with the dates that are listed in the staff
report. The conditions of approval still work with the preliminary plats for those dates.
They have addressed many of those concerns, but -- in this new one, but we ask that
you still reference those dates from the staff report. And with that I will answer any
questions.
De Weerd: Council, any questions for staff at this time?
Bird: Not at this time.
De Weerd: Okay. The applicant --
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 27 of 57
McKay: Becky McKay. Engineering Solutions, 150 East Aikens, Suite B, in Eagle. We
are representing the applicant on this particular project. This is a continuation of the
Bridgetower project. As you well know, Bridgetower Crossing is located south of
McMillan, east of Ten Mile and, then, it goes all the way down to Ustick. We are
currently under construction on phases 10 and 11 and we have approximately 14
phases total that's left in this project. So, we have moved through it very quickly, faster
than we anticipated. We also worked with the school district to get the Hunter
Elementary constructed in a timely fashion. Obviously, we were very excited that it
came on line prior to build out of our project. What you're looking at tonight we call
Volterra, because we have to give it a separate name, but we call it Bridgetower West,
and it consists of this property out to Black Cat -- oh, thanks, Will. It consists of
everything west of Ten Mile. Bainbridge, which the Council approved here probably
about four or five months ago, is located on our northern boundary and our project goes
from Ten Mile to Black Cat and, then, down to McMillan and, then, we have this 80
acres that we call Volterra South. The staff had us split this into two preliminary plats,
because we were separated by McMillan Road, the arterial, and they felt that would
make it clear, since it would be a separate final plat. This was submitted under the old
ordinance prior to the adoption of the unified code. We are proposing very similar to
what we have in Bridgetower Crossing, where we have a commercial area here and
here and, then, we have a commercial collector that wraps around that area and
provides access. We also have some access off McMillan Road, but all of our access
points are 440 or greater distance from the intersection. We wanted to, obviously,
continue the same type of concept that we have been so pleased within Bridgetower,
which is the continuous collectors. We matched up the collector roadway that we built
in Verona. Here is the Meridian community park here. Lochsa Park. We matched up
there. We have a continuous collector. No front-on housing. Comes all the way down
to McMillan and, then, links into the commercial area and, then, goes all the way out to
Black Cat and this is the half-mile here. This particular property here was a 60-acre
parcel. At one time we were looking at that particular property, but, then, we found out
that the Meridian School District was also interested in that for a middle school,
elementary combo site, so we stepped away from it. Mr. Turnbull did the same thing.
And, then, I provided a stub street to that property right directly into the collector
roadway, so that at some point in time this could be signalized at the half mile, just as
this has the potential for signalization. Your Comprehensive Plan designates this -- we
have got 230 acres as medium density residential. That's three to eight dwelling units
per acre. We have 80 acres that's designated low density up to three. You will also
show a multi-use pathway, so we installed a multi-use pathway here in Verona, along
the south boundary of the four and a half acres that we donated to be part of that city
park and we are matching up to ten-foot multi-use pathway. It will run all along the
north side of the collector and, then, all the way out to Black Cat. So, that would be a
full one-mile of multi-use pathway, added to your system and leading directly to that 30-
acre community park. Centrally located we have approximately a little over ten acres
here we call James Park on behalf of the James family who has farmed this property for
most of the 20th century and into the 21st and we will have a clubhouse, pool, parking
lot, a large water feature here. And, then, pathways running through that. The pod
concept that we used in Bridgetower, we have continued that, linking it, obviously, with
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 28 of 57
these micro-paths, so that we have pedestrian interconnectivity between pods. As you
can see, these micro-paths leading to each pod and, then, dumping down and focusing
on this central area here. When we get down here in the south -- southern portion, I
have what we call a non-continuous collector, comes down into this three-acre park.
We have a plaza with play equipment and, then, micro-paths that lead into that
particular area. We also have the large Idaho Power transmission lines that run here
parallel with the Settler's main canal, which also runs along McMillan. Therefore, these
lots we made very very deep. I think they are like 160 feet plus deep to, obviously, get
those offset from those transmission lines. We have attached patio homes that are
located here. The White Drain comes through Bridgetower Crossing. It crosses Ten
Mile Road. The Settler's Irrigation District has asked that we continue that open,
providing them access, and, then, it will dump into the Settler's Canal. And so that kind
of creates a separation between the attached and the detached units. We have some
office lots here and, then, some office lots that provide separation and buffering
between the commercial and the single family residential. As far as our density is
concerned -- as far as our density is concerned, this is very low density compared to a
lot of the projects that you're currently seeing. The Volterra portion in the north, when
we exclude the commercial area from our calculations and the office area, we have 2.76
dwelling units per acre. In the southern portion, excluding the commercial, the office,
we are calc'ing at three dwelling units per acre down here. So, we have kept our
density extremely low. Our average lot size up in the northern portion is 10,500 square
feet, I believe, and our lots range from 7,500 on up to 40,000 square feet in the north
portion. The south portion our average lot size is 8,088 square feet in this area and we
-- our lots range from 7,000 for the single family detached, up to 15,000, and the patio
homes that are located here around 5,000. So, we have provided a diversity in lot
sizes, which also will facilitate some diversity in home sizes and styles, which was the
same principal we used in our design of the Bridgetower project. We have homes in
here -- from patio homes that are 210,000, all the way up to homes that are 600,000 in
Bridgetower. The average home prices are in that 300, 350 range. That's kind of what
we are seeing. We have been working diligently with the highway district as far as to try
to come up with some type of a mechanism for us to make improvements at this
intersection, build it out to its full build out potential, the seven lane intersection on Ten
Mile and, then, I think it's five lanes on McMillan. The highway district has been open to
the idea and we just need to kind of get those negotiations a little further down the road,
but, then, we could, potentially, get some impact fee credits down and get this built out
and get that signal installed. One thing I would like to mention, because I feel it is very
important, is when we -- we were approved for Bridgetower Crossing we promised the
Council, we promised Mayor Corrie at the time that we would do everything we could to
help facilitate getting these arterials built up and do what we could for the community.
We worked with the school district, got Hunter Elementary there. That site was
purchased at the lowest amount of any of the school sites out in this north Meridian
area and Wendell was very pleased when we sold that out below cost to him and that's
one reason that Hunter was built first, because this was their most affordable site. We
built a collector to it. We have a parent drop off area that we paid for. We pay for part
of this collector, we will pay for part of the improvements in McMillan. The one
important thing we did was all of our right of way was donated. Whatever ACHD said
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 29 of 57
they were going to need for their future build, rebuild of these arterials, we added that
on our plat, we expanded it at the intersections to accommodate turn lanes, whatever
area they think -- thought they would need and all that was done at a donation. And
this was the only project of any large size in north Meridian that did that. So, I wanted
to go on the record for that, because they should be commended for that. We feel that
this is an excellent project. Staff is working right now -- I guess JUB Engineering is
designing that North Black Cat trunk. According to Brad Watson, in my conversations
here just the other day, they have made substantial progress on the design of that. He
believes that the lift station will take the most length of time for design. They don't
anticipate any progress on it as far as turning any dirt until probably 2007. Now, what
we have been doing is working on our site plan, knowing that that Black Cat was going
to be coming down the pike, we spent probably at least a year and a half -- a couple
years in our site planning and working with the applicable agencies and we are just,
basically, trying to get this so that our approvals are in place and, then, we know that we
will patiently be waiting for that trunk to be built and, obviously, the expansion of the
plant to take place. But I did qualify and indicate that that North Black Cat trunk cannot
come on line until your planned expansion does take place. So, we are fully aware of
that. We have 39 acres of open space in this project, which is about 12.51 percent. We
have asked for the planned development use exception. We are less than the 20
percent allowed. We are 17 percent. Our mix is about 82.5 percent R-8 -- or R-4. I'm
sorry. That would include like the residential and the open space. We have got 11.2
percent of C-G requested and six percent L-O. So, we feel that we have got -- we have
got a good mix. We are trying to create a good commercial core with these collector
roadways; these loop collectors like you see out there at RC Willeys. We feel that that
will provide a good means of access to the commercial area. We are not like some of
the commercial projects that you see wanting a whole bunch of curb cuts and, you
know, right up to -- very close to the intersection. We have been very cognizant to stay
a great distance from the intersections as not to provide any problems in the future. As
far as the traffic, this will generate, at total build out, about 9,700 vehicle trips per day.
Currently the level of service out in those areas, even this build out, will be B. Out at
Black Cat and McMillan and Ten Mile and McMillan a level of service C. We will be
building right turn bays into these projects and decels as delineated in our traffic study,
which we retained WGI to take care of. We have a really good project. We are excited.
We feel that we have done everything right with this particular piece of property and we
have done what we can to try to create some transitioning between the larger Black Cat
Estates lots and the lots that we have adjoining them. And my largest lots are the ones
that wrap right around Black Cat Estates and, like I said, it goes up to 40,000 square
feet. We went through staff's conditions. We are very close to being in total agreement
with the staff. The Planning and Zoning Commission did an excellent job of reviewing it.
Modified some conditions that worked well for the staff and ourselves. One thing I'd like
to mention is the issue of fencing. It was the hope of the applicants to be able to,
obviously, continue the fencing that they have in Bridgetower Crossing into Bridgetower
West. There was a debate at the Commission about the new Uniform Code and the
restriction of the four-foot height if anything was considered solid. On non-sight
obscuring is, basically, wrought iron or chain link. So, what we want to do is bring some
pictures in of what we do have at the Bridgetower, submit these for the Council to kind
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 30 of 57
of look at. This is one. You can see it's by a micro-path. It's called semi private, four-
foot vinyl, with a two-foot lattice. This was what we had requested along our micro-
paths and along our pedestrian walkways. We wanted to, obviously, show the Council
that you can see through this, that's why it is called a semi private. We do have a
privacy fence, which is on like the exterior, and that one, as you can see, the slats are
right up against each other and, then, the lattice is on top. But along our pedestrian
accesses and open spaces we want to utilize this. It was the determination of the
Planning and Zoning Commission to stick with the Uniform Code, even though this was
submitted prior to it, imposing the non-sight obscuring. Do you have any questions that
I could possibly answer?
De Weerd: Council, any questions for the applicant?
Bird: Not at this time.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I need some comments clarified. You made a number of comments about
Bridgetower, what it brought to the community. Am I to assume from those comments
that those same kinds of things will be in this development?
McKay: As far as --
Rountree: Right of way donation --
McKay: Yes, sir. It is our intent to continue. Yes, sir. Absolutely.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
McKay: Same type of homes, same style, you know, same value of homes, open
space, right of way donation -- yes, sir.
Rountree: You're getting all my questions, so thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions at this time?
Bird: Not at this time, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay.
McKay: Thank you.
De Weerd: We do have a number of residents that have signed up. When I read your
name and indicate for, against, or neutral, if you would like to provide testimony at that
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 31 of 57
time, please, come forward and we will accept your testimony. Otherwise, I will move
on to the next name. Gale Poorman. Against. Okay. If you will, please, state your
name and address for the record.
Poorman: Yes. Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is
Gale Poorman. I reside at 5230 North Black Cat Road. I am here representing my
family, neighbors, and residents of the Black Cat Estates who could not be here tonight,
but have given me proxy through their signatures on my petition. I would ask that those
present for whom I am speaking tonight stand at this time, please. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Poorman: We are requesting that the Meridian City Council deny the Volterra project
for the following reasons: Number one, density. The 2002 Meridian City
Comprehensive Plan designates the 72 acres abutting Black Cat Road to be low
density residential. That's this area. At that time the low density residential was defined
as two or fewer lots per acre. Volterra Subdivision proposes 2.8 lots per acre in this
portion and that violates the Comprehensive Plan. One hundred forty-four lots in the
medium density zone of Volterra will be smaller than 1/8th acre. Medium density is
defined as a maximum of eight lots per acre. Medium density is over in this direction.
The high lot density violates the plan. The plan also states the development priorities
should be given to particular areas of the city that are under used. Vacant lots closer to
the urban core should be filled in before huge tracts of open prime farmland are
subdivided. Number two. Transportation. Section one of the required findings from
zoning ordinance states that the proposed change in zoning will not created excessive
traffic. The existing road system is already congested and this development, combined
with others in this vicinity, will increase accidents, lengthen commutes and worsen noise
and pollution. Road improvements should include bicycle lanes and accommodations
for mass transit, as well as reduced speed for safety. Quality of life. Section E of the
required findings from the zoning ordinance states that the proposed change in zoning
will not change the essential character of our area. Our area is currently agricultural
land with fewer than 100 people in the entire section. We have clear views to the
horizon and to the mountains. Noise is minimal. Volterra's 700 homes, 10,000 vehicle
trips per day, and 2,800 people in less than a half a square mile, will drastically diminish
our area's rural character. Section F of the required findings states that the proposed
change in zoning will not be disturbing to existing neighbors. I'm here to represent
existing neighbors who say it will be disturbing to us. Traffic noise will have a negative
impact on our dwellings and, consequently, their market value. The required fences are
not being put into place and our mountain views will be replaced by rooftops. Our
nighttime views of the stars will be blotted out with streetlights and solitude will be
replaced with the constant roar of traffic. Adequate schools. The Comprehensive Plan
designated a future school to be located north of the proposed subdivision, but Meridian
School District has not yet purchased land for a school. The elementary schools in our
area are already over capacity. The applicant has no provision for accommodating the
thousands of additional students that it would bring in. Appropriate borders. The
Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 7, Goal 1, Objective D, Action 8, states that the new
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 32 of 57
subdivisions that abut to existing low density land uses must provide a landscaping
buffer or fence along this border. If approved, the applicant must provide this border to
keep construction trash, objectionable animals, and trespassers contained. Water
rights. Existing acreages have relied upon the good neighbor policy for use of irrigation
water and drainage ditches. We request that, if approved, the applicant respect the
water right of all users of the Scrivner Canal and at no time cut off water from this
lateral. That is this right along here. Sorry I'm so shaky, but I'm nervous.
De Weerd: That's all right.
Poorman: The applicant has proposed tiling over the drainage ditch that abuts the
southern border of this property, which drains water from Black Cat Estates and the
land to the south of the proposed Volterra Subdivision. This is unacceptable. The drain
water would not flow into it, nor could the ditch be properly maintained. The drain ditch
I'm speaking of runs approximately -- here is the Volterra development. It starts in
there, runs through Black Cat Estates, and, then, along the northern border of my
property here, which is eight acres south of Volterra. Access to this ditch must be kept
open for maintenance. Who will pay? Contrary to the planning staff recommendation,
many infrastructure improvements will be financed by property tax increases to existing
land-owners. The Comprehensive Plan states the developers must pay for upgrades to
fire protection, sewer, water, trash service, schools, gas, and roads that their actions
cause, yet there is no policy in place to collect impact fees. This Council should place a
moratorium on new subdivisions until the 2006 legislature has a chance to review and
implement and plan for assessing impact fees, so that existing property owners are not
forced to bear the brunt of the development with higher property taxes. I do have some
written comments that were submitted from my neighbors to me this evening, if I may
give those to the clerk.
De Weerd: Yes. Thank you.
Poorman: Thank you.
De Weerd: Mr. Berg, can you read the names into the record.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I have a Petition of Citizens
for Smart Growth signed by Roger Williams, Dave Penn, Mike Saren, Melinda Howder
-- I'm sorry if I pronounce your name incorrectly. Phillip Howder. Paul Bowman. John
and Liddy Bagley. And Jay Bowman. I have a letter from Mike and Janice Saren and
Larry Bowman.
De Weerd: Thank you so much. Okay. Thank you. Richard or Marie Chris signed up
against. Okay. Thank you. Michael Wosnia signed up against. Yes. Thank you.
Wosnia: If we could have the original projection that was up when we came in. The
large overlay.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 33 of 57
De Weerd: Sir, if you can pull that microphone closer. Thank you.
Wosnia: I'm not used to public speaking.
De Weerd: And once you get that up, if you will, please, state your name and address
for the record.
Wosnia: Okay. My name is Michael Wosnia. The address is 3356 West Grand Rapids
Drive.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Wosnia: And I'm here representing four people on my street and I have a couple of
issues. I'm not -- maybe it wasn't clear when I signed the document. I'm not totally
against the project, but there are a couple of issues of concern that I want to address.
Can I leave a copy with the clerk?
De Weerd: Yes. Please.
Wosnia: Thank you. Okay. The Drawbridge development is this little tiny development
down here at the southern end of the development that we are talking about. This is a
new development. There is only about five houses currently built. I think there is only
three that are occupied right now and I talked to the neighbors that I could find that are
living there. There is four of them and I'm here to speak for them. There is two issues
and so I don't get all confused, I'm just going to kind of read from what I have prepared
here. As homeowners in the Drawbridge development, which borders the southeast
portion of the proposed Bridgetower development here at the southwest corner of
McMillan Road, Ten Mile Road, we have two concerns over the development plans as
currently proposed. One. Irrigation district access. There is an irrigation district that
was mentioned by the previous speaker that runs across the lower section and, in fact,
part of the project is to relocate the White ditch, which currently cuts across it. It will be
relocated here also. There is a 95 -- total of 95-foot boundary between what will be the
property line division and the backyard of back -- my back fence and the fence where
the homeowners of the new project will begin and where the offices will begin. So,
there is a nice 95-foot barrier there. The easement for the irrigation district access to
the Coleman Lateral concrete ditch is a potential dust and weed source. As I
understand it, it's going to be left natural. Natural means no maintenance. So, we are
going to have a 95 foot span of dirt, weeds, dirt road, that people are going to pretty
much ignore and will be abandoned there and I'm worried about dust, I'm worried about
weeds and seeds blowing into our yards and what we would like to see is -- have that
area added to the common area of the development and let the developer sow some
grass and either pave the road or put some non-dusting material down on the road, so
that it won't affect us. In addition to the real physical effect, the un-maintained dirt strip
will simply become an unwanted eye sore. The second issue I wish to speak of is the
road access from Ten Mile. When I talked to the planning department a couple weeks
ago, they had given drawings from the previous meeting, which indicated that the --
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 34 of 57
there would be no connection between the Drawbridge development and the Volterra
West development. Right now there is a cul-de-sac dog leg and a barrier there for
possible future connection. Apparently after the last meeting -- and there was no one at
that meeting from the Drawbridge development, the planning department has changed
their mind and now intends to connect -- require the developer to connect to their
development in here. We object to that. This connection is redundant and
unnecessary and will only serve as a shortcut from Ten Mile for a few individuals, while
increasing traffic on Grand Rapids through the smaller Drawbridge area. There are 11
small children among the four current homes there now and there will undoubtedly be
more when the other five Drawbridge properties are sold and built and occupied. The
Grand Rapids Drive Drawbridge entrance that would lead to the connector is only 400
feet from the main entrance to Drawbridge, which is going to be right here. This is
where they are going to come in. This is only 400 feet from the Drawbridge entrance.
So, it's just going to be a shortcut for a few people that want to cut through there. We
request that the planning department reconsider the need for this connection and allow
the two subdivisions to remain separate for the safety and solitude of the Drawbridge
homeowners. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Wosnia: Are there any questions?
De Weerd: Any questions from Council?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, sir. Barbara Wosnia signed up against as well. You
would need to come up and speak into the microphone. If you will, please, state your
name and --
B.Wosnia: This is a first for me.
De Weerd: Thank you. And your address? Just for the record.
B.Wosnia: Oh, that's it. 3356 Grand Rapids. We are just now getting our lot. I pretty
much agree with exactly what my husband said. I'm concerned about opening up the
area in the back to the Drawbridge or the Volterra area because of the children and
since we are only nine houses on that lot in the shape of a light bulb, the kids won't be
able to go out there and play -- it could be a potential for accidents, somebody coming
around the corner too fast and not seeing a child. And I like the privacy. When we
bought the lot we looked for a place that was not in a big subdivision, that there would
be limited access to the street and that's it.
De Weerd: Thank you very much.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 35 of 57
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I have a question for you.
Wosnia: Yes.
Wardle: You mentioned that this is a new -- you just moved in. It's a new subdivision; is
that correct?
Wosnia: We are just now breaking ground. We bought the property -- the land back in
April.
Wardle: Okay. And the street -- the current public street that you're building the home
on, is there -- does it dead end into this piece of property?
Wosnia: Well, yes, for right now it does. It starts out like this and it goes around into a
big cul-de-sac, but there is a barrier here.
Wardle: Okay. So, there is a barrier that would indicate potential future --
Wosnia: That would open that up into the bigger section behind us.
Wardle: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, ma'am. Kathleen Roburn signed up against. Okay. Thank you.
Valerie Russell signed up against. Thank you. Shirley Russell. Against. Thank you.
Wayne Russell. Against. Thank you. Mike Seran. Against. Okay. Thank you, sir. do
we have that -- oh, yeah, we do have that as part of our record. Thank you. Council, if
there is any questions for this citizen. Okay. Thank you, sir. Jan Seran. Against.
Siren. Sorry. Carrie Call. Against.
Call: I'm Carrie Call and I live at 3327 West Grand Rapids. My problem is also with
connecting my subdivision into that one. I have three of the small children that Mike
talked about and when we were investigating -- we sold our home a year and a half ago
and we spent a lot of time and energy investigating different areas, whether to build or
to buy and if I wanted an area that was high traffic, I would have actually bought in
Bridgetower. But I did not opt for that. We wanted the smaller feel of just our smaller
little area and we were led to believe that it would not connect into anything and, sadly,
the stack 'em and pack 'em part of their subdivision happened to be directly north of us
and so while it's a small area that would probably use our road, it's a high number of
people that would. And I just -- a year and a half -- well, the year that we were -- we
rented a duplex while deciding where to go, we actually lived in an area that it was a
little duplex and the road was crossed off kind of like we are at right now and it opened
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 36 of 57
up into a subdivision and so firsthand I can tell you there is a huge impact when you
give people another option to drive. And I just don't want to see that happen on my
street.
De Weerd: Thank you. Donald Brown signed up against. Thank you.
Brown: I'm Donald Brown. 4595 West Ramblin Court.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Brown: And my area of concern is not anything -- what Mrs. Poorman addressed, but I
do understand the engineers and what they are trying to do, the concept, and I also
appreciate them donating land for Hunter and getting that up and running. But Hunter
was capped the minute it opened. That's not going to alleviate this situation, what we
have got going on now, because you have Ponderosa, which is currently overcrowded,
Sawtooth, which I know you're very familiar with, is currently overcrowded. And we
don't have any plans -- or there is no property -- excuse me -- that is being procured to
build any additional schools. Not only that, but they alluded to the intersection's
immediate impact are being taken care of in a very orderly manner, but if you extended
the scope of the impact out to include McMillan Road and Linder, which is a very busy
intersection and the only ancillary path to get to Sawtooth currently, if you have ever
driven that road in the morning or when the schools are out, it's a mess. The buses are
currently overcrowded. It's my understanding that there is several paths where they
have had to make several trips to pick kids up and the impact that this subdivision is
going to have directly on the kids right now is going to be detrimental, I think. You're
going to have situations where costs are going to increase because you're going to
have to add additional bus routes, the services are going to -- the costs are going to
increase, because of the police and fire that are going to be necessary. And I think that
that, as well as the transportation woes that we are going to have along 20-26 also
need to be addressed, because that's going to be the main feeder for this subdivision.
So, I would recommend that until something can be done as far as taking care of the
educational issues -- and I know Mr. Bigham is currently trying to procure some land,
but that hasn't been done yet. The bond didn't address any schools in this area, they
are for other sites, so another bond would more than likely have to be passed to build
these schools and to get the land and, then, the transportation issues. If they even
allow for widening the road and they have got the ground there to widen the road, if the
feeder roads aren't widened at the same time, you're going to have another Curtis Road
issue where you have got a severe bottleneck and that's going to back traffic up even
further. So, I think with all of those rolled together, a little bit more thought needs to go
into the plan -- how this thing is going to impact the whole area, not just the immediate
area. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Okay. Those were the names that were signed up. Is there
anyone who would like to provide testimony on this application who was not on this list?
If you will come forward.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 37 of 57
Butler: I'm a neutral party, so I don't know if you're at that section now. Perhaps not.
De Weerd: No. I didn't have you signed up, so you can come forward.
Butler: Thank you. Joanne Butler. 251 East Front Street in Boise. Representing the
person that owns the land immediately north of Volterra. This map shows it a little
better. This is Volterra here and Bainbridge here. And this area, a little less than 50
acres to the north of Volterra. And they purchased this land back last spring and at the
end of last winter the Christensen family was selling this -- our understanding is there
was a number of people bidding for this property and including the school district and
the school fell away and I understand that the owner of this property, who was left
standing, was the client -- our client who now owns this property and the owner of this
property and, finally, our clients purchased this property. The reason I'm here as a
neutral -- I am not opposed to this project. It looks like it's a very nice project, but I think
that there is a concern just in this particular area of town that the Council needs to be
aware of. And I guess I'm here mostly because of the conversation that our office had
with Wendell Bigham today in which it became very clear to us that the school issue is a
very big concern for the school district and possibly needs to be addressed before
things go much further. This is where Hunter Elementary is right now and -- which is in
a different section than where you see the school district -- the school indicated over
here. What we understand the school district may be looking for is a middle school and
an elementary school, which, as I understand it, takes up a good chunk of land. If it
was in this area it would take up the whole area. Now, we are -- our client has told us
they are very interested in working with the school district, but, certainly, at a small -- a
smaller site like this. The impact of placing a school on it would detract considerably
from any other use on this site and would prefer to work with the other neighbors in the
area. Now, it may be that -- and why I'm bringing this up is because our conversation
with Mr. Bigham led us to believe that the school was of the opinion that the city had
made decisions on Bainbridge and may be on -- and was going to make decisions on
Volterra, assuming that a school site would go here. What they -- the comment was
that the city had approved stub streets to this area, because it assumed that this was
going to be a school site. Now, I think the city knows that what the city did say in
Bainbridge and in Volterra in your staff report is that if this becomes a school site, you
would like to see a pathway stubbed there. But if it doesn't become a school site, in
that case you would like to see streets stubbed to the area. At this point it's, obviously,
not owned by the school district and it may be that the city is thinking, as its
Comprehensive Plan guidance points out, is that schools are appropriate in these
neighborhood center areas and that the school is thinking that's in the undeveloped
area of the neighborhood center is likely where the schools will -- the school would be
placed.
De Weerd: Ms. Butler, if can please summarize.
Butler: I will. I just think we need to understand that, clearly, the school district is very
concerned about this. We are concerned, because the implication by the school district
is that possibly they are looking for the city to carry some water as to, you know, putting
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 38 of 57
a school site here. We are more than happy to work with the owners of the property
here, but because of that concern of Mr. Bigham's possibly that needs to be addressed
and maybe at a time when he could be before the Council to address it a little more.
Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions for Ms. Butler?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I have a question of staff and, then, maybe one of Ms. Butler. Anna, to your
knowledge has the school district provided testimony, written or verbal, to us regarding
what Ms. Butler has just testified about?
Canning: Yes, he has. He's stated to us that it's his anticipation that he will have a --
my understanding is that it's just now an elementary school site in this area and that the
combined school they are considering in this area now. So, it would just be an
elementary site.
Wardle: Thank you.
Canning: Nothing written, just verbal.
Wardle: Verbal. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. So, Anna, there isn't a school site in Bainbridge?
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there was a private school discussed
as part of Bainbridge and that may be what you're remembering. There is still an
opportunity -- as you may recall, what the Bainbridge Subdivision proposed was a
collector road that starts about the quarter mile and, then, loops up to the half mile
along Chinden and they did not annex the property on the north side of that collector
road. It is shown currently as a neighborhood center and public uses are appropriate.
You would be putting an elementary school in between a collector road and a major
arterial -- and in this case, actually, a state highway. But there may still be an
opportunity there. There is an open -- there was no concept plan and it wasn't annexed
in this area. The other properties are -- the only other remaining property is this one
here, which is fairly small and similarly constrained by the presence of Chinden and,
then, these folks that are here tonight that live in this area.
De Weerd: So, Anna, in the school district's written -- and I can flip until I finally find it,
but what did their correspondence communicate?
Rountree: There is none.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 39 of 57
Bird: There is none.
Canning: There is none for this project.
De Weerd: Okay. So, we have heard from Ms. Butler, who -- and I don't see any
member from the school district. You have had some verbal discussion?
Canning: The school district attorneys are here. I don't know if they are prepared to
speak on subject or not.
De Weerd: I think he was here as a citizen. If you have something to say we will need
you to say it on the public record. But first you will have to state your name and
address to not say anything.
Freeman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council. Mark Freeman. Address 3550 West
Birdie Court, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Freeman: I happen to be the general counsel for the Meridian School District. I am not
here on their behalf. I'm not authorized to speak on their behalf. I came for testimony
on the other prior public hearing. So, I have some knowledge of some of these issues,
but I'm really -- unfortunately, I just can't share my opinions today -- or this evening.
De Weerd: Thank you. Thank you for that non answer.
Bird: That's a good attorney. Short and sweet.
De Weerd: That's not like an attorney. Okay. Is there any further testimony? Sir? In
the back. If you will, please, state your name and address.
Steinbach: Yes, ma'am. Max Steinbach. My address is 4924 North Black Cat Road. I
would like to speak on behalf of the Beach Lateral Water Users Association. May I
have the map, please? The one that resembles this subdivision.
Canning: That one, sir?
Steinbach: The previous one, please.
Canning: Previous one?
Steinbach: There we go. The Black Cat Estates right here maintains a water lateral,
which comes down McMillan Road here, which is on the north side of McMillan Road.
It, actually, starts just within a few hundred yards of the Ten Mile intersection. The water
comes down west on the south side of McMillan, crosses McMillan about halfway down,
and proceeds west, which irrigates all of this subdivision here. So far I have seen no
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 40 of 57
address to what to do with the water. We flood irrigate those five acre parcels. I see no
contingency to provide water. I heard the testimony that they were expecting six lanes,
possibly, on McMillan, so I am somewhat against this until we figure out exactly what we
need to do to represent our subdivision on water, because we actually maintain an
easement down that road right on the north side of McMillan Road. So, there is an
easement issue there as far as Black Cat Estates goes. And that's all I have, unless
you have some questions.
De Weerd: No, sir. They are required to protect your water rights, so --
Steinbach: I understand. However, there is no provisions here showing -- and I had
met with Settler's numerous times and there was talk about proceeding from McMullen
Lateral and bringing it back from the north, but as the ditch rider for our subdivision that
is one issue that I'd definitely like to have addressed from the Council before we
proceed with this project.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there any further testimony on this application? Okay.
Would the applicant like to come up for your response.
McKay: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I will try to address most of the
questions and concerns that were brought up. As far as the density that we are
proposing, as I indicated earlier, we are extremely low. When you consider the projects
that you have seen recently, as the prices of land rises rapidly, you're seeing a lot of
these densities increase. I have a feeling that this is going to be one of the last large
lower density projects that will be coming through here until we see some stabilization in
these land prices and that kind of bothers me a little bit. However, I did kind of take a
look at it. We have 238 acres of medium density. Medium density could be up to three
to eight dwelling units per acre. You guys are seeing some projects that are five
dwelling units per acre. So, on that 230 acres you could have 1,150 homes. We have
80 acres of low density residential, which can go up to three. So, say it was three, that
would be 240. So, potentially on this property in its entirety there could be 1,390
dwelling units. And I think that's within reason. I mean that's possible. We are
requesting 728. That is 52 percent of what the potential density could be. So, you
know, we are extremely low. As far as traffic, with the continuous collectors, they are
very very expensive, but we have been very pleased with them. Carry large volumes of
traffic. They allow interconnectivity through a section without sending traffic on the
arterials. By providing a development which has office, commercial type uses, and
single family uses, we are trying to create a situation where we have capture of traffic
for these types of businesses. We are seeing orthodontists and dentists and day cares
and assisted living. Those are the types of users that we are seeing coming into
Bridgetower now that there are getting to be more roof tops out in the vicinity. So, we
are spending a lot of money to try to make sure that we are doing what we can to
accommodate that traffic and not just dumping it directly on the arterials. As far as the
question of mass transit, mass transit requires densities I'm told in excess of eight
dwelling units per acre. If we go in excess of eight dwelling units per acre, then,
obviously, we would be violating the density that is mandated under the Comprehensive
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 41 of 57
Plan and not doing proper transitioning around these five-acre lots. Bike lanes was
brought up. We are building over one mile of ten-foot pathways. Those are used for
bicycle and for pedestrians. We have a lot of pathways throughout Bridgetower. I
never go out there that I do not see people riding bikes, pushing baby carriages,
walking, jogging -- they get a lot of use and we are maintaining that same consistency.
As far as the agricultural character that's out here, I understand their concern and as
you can see, though, this is not leapfrog development. This is a continuation of orderly
growth. This is just about filled up. This one's filled up here. Lochsa Falls has gone
very rapidly, too. So, this is a continuation of that growth. With fencing along the
perimeter, she mentioned a concern about construction debris. We are required and
mandated to install perimeter fencing. We will be doing that. Irrigation. We also agree
with the good neighbor policy. We have multiple irrigation facilities on this and I'd just
like to go through them with the Council real quickly. We have the McMullen Lateral.
The McMullen Lateral comes through this property and goes up and goes into
Bainbridge. I have met with Bainbridge's -- someone from Brighton, their engineer, to
try to coordinate the piping of that McMullen Lateral. We piped it in Verona. We have
the Beach Lateral that's coming off of the Settler's Canal and, as Mr. Steinbach
indicated, it's traversing down here and, then, goes up and serves Black Cat Estates. I
have met with Nathan Draper. He informed me that Max Steinbach was the gentleman
that I needed to coordinate with as far as any relocation and piping of that facility and
making sure that they are satisfied with what we are doing and how we are treating that
facility. We also have the Scrivner Lateral which comes up through this project and,
then, wraps through here. I understand that it does take some drainage. I talked to Mr.
James who has farmed this forever about these facilities, making sure that we get all
the knowledge that we can glean from him and from -- if I get to finish. I'm not finished.
Can I finish answering the questions?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
McKay: We will be working with all these neighbors to make sure that we have piped all
these facilities. We did the same thing in Bridgetower. Impact fees. ACHD and parks,
we pay those. Just the north portion is over two million dollars in impact fees. Sewer
and water extensions -- the city's not bringing them to our doorstep, we are going to
have to come down and get them and extend water, extend the sewer. They are doing
it out of the back of the plant, but my understanding is it stops right at Black Cat and,
then, from there on out it is our responsibility. As far as a stub street down here to
Drawbridge, it was an oversight on my part -- when we did our site-planning Drawbridge
didn't exist. So, on our drawings it wasn't there. I didn't realize that between the time
we drew it and the time we submitted Drawbridge was recorded. Therefore, it got past
me. ACHD dropped the ball, too. They didn't realize it was there. I asked the
neighbors when I did my neighborhood meeting do you want to extend it in. They said,
no, our preference would be don't extend it. And I said, well, the highway district did not
make me extend it. Then, your staff caught that and asked that we extend that into
Drawbridge and make that connection. So, I guess it's up to the Council. If we have --
if it was up to us we wouldn't extend it in. I don't see that it really benefits them, nor
does it benefit us. Anna indicated there is a five acre parcel here, maybe it would be
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 42 of 57
more appropriate to stub to that five acre parcel in lieu of stubbing to Drawbridge. I'm
just throwing that out for discussion. As far as this -- we have an 80 foot buffer here.
We will relocate the White Drain. We're, obviously, not going to create a weed patch, a
dust issue -- we relocated the White Drain in Bridgetower. We made sure that the
association maintains it. We don't want to create any problem. As far as the school
district, we did meet with Wendell Bigham with this project prior to submittal. Wendell
told us that he wanted to purchase some property for the multi-use site. As I indicated,
both Brighton Corporation and Primeland, once they heard the school district was
interested in it, they had no further interest in it. We do not bid up against the school
district. However, that particular gentlemen that bought it did overbid the school district.
Wendell told me he definitely wanted at least an elementary in there. He thought he
had another location for a middle school. We have a 40-acre parcel on the west side of
Black Cat. Mr. Varriale offered that up to Wendell if he was in need of a middle school
site or wanted a combo site there that would be an option for him. So, we have tried to
do, you know, what we can. The Linder intersection at McMillan, ACHD is working on
trying to get right of way from some of the adjoining properties. We are also proceeding
forward with Bridgetower 11 and 12, which will be donating our side of that intersection
that will be that two legs there and trying to facilitate, obviously, the upgrade of that and
I think Mr. Inselman has been working on that. We have got a good project here. We
have been -- we have got a good track record with Bridgetower and we are very proud
of what we have created and we believe this will be an asset to the community. We are
concerned about the school. We have been doing what we can, paying for things and
improvements to help with the school, as with the drop off area, parking area that we
created at the south portion of Hunter Elementary, that was our idea, not the school's.
That would alleviate traffic on McMillan. So, we have done I think everything we can to
try to plan this as best we can and I feel -- I feel good about it. Do you have any
questions?
De Weerd: Council? Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. Anna mentioned the land locked parcel and I believe it's to
the south and west.
McKay: Can you put the map back up, Anna? It has a private lane she said back to
this five-acre parcel here. This is the Drawbridge stub that the residents do not want
extended here. So, I guess one option would be to go back to the highway district and
say, you know, maybe this is more appropriate, this connection here to this side. There
is so few lots here. That cul-de-sac I think only goes in there about 150 feet. It's not
excessively long. I don't know if the staff has locked at that. It's pretty short. I guess
that's an option. Our concern is crossing that White Drain. That is under jurisdiction of
the Army Corps of Engineers, because it is a year around and it carries drainage water.
Therefore, if I put a bunch of road crossings, then, I got to calculate that displaced area.
If I hit over a half acre, which it doesn't take very much to wrap up a half acre, it puts me
into an individual permit, which is a long and lengthy and expensive process. So, we
have been working very diligently with the corps and try to keep under that half acre,
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 43 of 57
leave any of those natural waterways open, and not cross them or pipe them, if it all
possible.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, why -- well, Becky isn't standing up there. Why does staff believe that we
need a stub street from Drawbridge in?
Canning: The general policy of the city and ACHD is to connect stub streets when the
adjoining property develops, but it's also in our Comprehensive Plan for an
interconnected street system. I won't disagree with Mrs. McKay that maybe it's more
appropriate in this instance to, instead, provide that access to the land locked parcel to
the west. It would still be nice to maybe have some pedestrian access, so that if
children wanted to get to neighboring homes they could go across a foot bridge or
something.
McKay: Anna, I believe that's a common lot right there, that northwest corner of
Drawbridge.
Canning: It appears to have a drainage feature in it. It is a common lot. I don't know
how they have constructed it, if there is enough room. If a pathway could be
constructed --
McKay: Right here?
Canning: -- from there, that would facilitate that -- some pedestrian movement.
McKay: Right now there is the Coleman Lateral here. We will be piping that all through
our -- along the south boundary. And they will not require -- Settler's will not require an
access road over that Coleman, only adjacent to the White Drain.
Bird: Follow up, Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would prefer not to see a stub street there in Drawbridge, because I believe the
testimony from the residents in there was very valid and I think all you're going to do is
create a little speedway through there at times. So, I'd prefer to see your -- a pathway,
if staff would agree to that. And, then, we can look at putting one -- if ACHD and them -
- back into that five acres behind there, so that that isn't land locked.
Canning: Staff would agree that that seems like a good solution for this area.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 44 of 57
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: And that's certainly if ACHD agrees to that. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I've got a question for Becky. Becky, I was just reading through some of the
neighbors written comments and I see the term starter home. Could you tell me the
proposed -- what you feel the market will bear for the values of the homes in this
subdivision?
McKay: I think that's probably a question that Mr. Varriale could answer, because he's
in charge of marketing homes. Right? Do you want to address that? He didn't want to
talk.
De Weerd: Well, we can see that you offered him anyway, though. If you will, please,
state your name and address for the record.
Varriale: Frank Varriale. I'm at 3120 West Bell Tower. I'm managing partner of
Primeland Development. The question was --
Wardle: The question was what you feel the value of the homes will be, just in general.
Purchase price.
Varriale: Okay. Of course we are projecting out by the time sewer reaches and we get
under construction, we are out a couple of years. But currently, in today's terms, I
would expect it would be a continuation of Bridgetower as it stands. And our housing
there, in today's pricing, starts in right around 210, 215 for some of the patio homes, on
up to approaching 600,000. And the average price -- I'd say the majority of the homes
are hitting 290 to 325.
Wardle: Two eighty to --
Varriale: Three twenty-five. Do you have questions?
Wardle: I just have a follow up and this doesn't necessarily have much to do with my
decision on this application, but what would you consider Meridian's starting home
price? I guess my opinion of that from a couple years ago is different than maybe
reality today, so --
Varriale: Boy, I'll take a guess, okay? When we started this project five years ago I
think the -- kind of the upper medium price was about 160 and I think you were seeing
homes in the 130 range, was probably a starting price range. And the upper end was
maybe two to two fifty, you know, in general terms. And so you can see it's moved up
quite a bit and I think currently in Meridian it's pretty darn hard to find anything under
200. There may be some out there 190ish, but it's -- it's really difficult from what I know
in the marketplace. What we have seen in land prices and material prices and
shortages and demand has just skyrocketed values.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 45 of 57
Wardle: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions for Mr. Varriale? Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I have another question for Mrs. Bowcutt. There was an indication that there
were issues for maintenance on the White Lateral --
McKay: The White Drain?
Rountree: The White Drain. Excuse me.
McKay: The one we are relocating down here next to Drawbridge?
Rountree: Uh-huh.
McKay: Yes. That's the White Drain. Settler's is requiring that it be open channel.
They won't let us pipe that. We went through that battle with Bridgetower. In
Bridgetower we ended up leaving it open. We utilized it as a water amenity. We
provided a combo multi-use pathway, along with an access road. It doubled as both.
Rountree: And --
McKay: And it was grass. I think it's all grassed on the side. Obviously, we are going --
and the homeowners association maintains it. Settler's would not maintain it. So, we
had a very lengthy license agreement prepared by Moffatt Thomas that addressed what
we could and could not do and if we did not maintain it satisfactorily I believe they have
the right to go in and do any work, maintenance work, and, then, they bill the
association.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: So, from your comment I can assume or know that that's going to apply to
this development?
McKay: Yes. We want it to look good. I mean it's, obviously -- we have got to
accommodate it. We did that in Bridgetower and we have made it look as nice as
possible. And it's turned out nice with cobblestones and pathways and grass and
shrubs and trees. But we are subject to Settler's and what they let us do in that
easement.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 46 of 57
Rountree: Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions before she sits down?
Rountree: We like to see her get up and down.
Bird: We like to see her get up and down. She's young. She can do that.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, do you need further information from staff?
We have our ACHD representative here.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I don't -- I believe that you answered it, but the stub street going to the back five is
no problem with ACHD or -- he's nodding his head in agreement.
De Weerd: Or shaking it.
Bird: Shaking his head.
Rountree: What's your head saying?
Bird: Oh, staff -- while we are public, I just as soon state this. If staff is in agreement,
I'd just as soon see that stub street between Drawbridge and Volterra go away myself.
And I think staff is in agreement.
Canning: Yes, sir. With a pedestrian connection instead.
Bird: Sure.
De Weerd: Well, since Council likes Becky to get up and down, I do have a question.
Bird: But you're the Mayor.
McKay: I'm starting to sweat here.
De Weerd: Becky, I guess my question is -- I know that the portion of Ten Mile from
Ustick to Chinden is not on the five year work plan for ACHD and by having four corners
of commercial and a four way stop, while I think that this developer is the only
developer I know who has donated right of way, which thank you, we appreciate that.
You're not asking for credits for your impact fees and that's unheard of. But what -- in
discussions with ACHD, do they have a say of what this four way stop with the heavy
emphasis on commercial? I know you're still two years out before you can even start
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 47 of 57
with the building permits, because we won't have sewer there yet. What is the proposal
to move traffic through that intersection?
McKay: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's a good question. This is the
only situation that I have ever been involved in where one developer did have all four
corners. Mr. Varriale paid us to do kind of a schematic design of the full build out of that
intersection to the seven lanes on Ten Mile, northbound and southbound, and, then, I
think it was five lanes east and westbound on McMillan. We sent that over to ACHD,
got input from them, used those drawings to expand our right of way and taper it
outward as we reached the intersections on those final plats to make sure that we have
accommodated for it. Mr. Varriale has been down to ACHD meeting with Mr. Inselman.
I have met with him. We are trying to put it together so that when that commercial
corner does start happening, that we have that infrastructure in there, meaning a seven
lane intersection, five lane signalization, so that we don't have a substandard rural
fourway stop. So, we are very cognizant of the fact that the appeal of that intersection
is, obviously, you know, for commercial purposes, it's got to function and just like with
Lowe's and Winston, it was in their, you know, benefit to them that they went in, spent
this money up front, and rebuilt that Ustick-Eagle intersection there.
De Weerd: So, you would consider a public-private partnership --
McKay: That is exactly what we are doing and that's what we have always stated to the
Council since the very beginning, that we -- any public-private partnership that we could
enter into we would definitely take that seriously. Mr. Varriale also had his landscape
architect working on a design for the intersection, so all four of those corners will be
landscaped consistently with like pedestrian friendly benches, have little trellises,
planting pots, so that it's -- even though it's a huge intersection, like an urban
intersection, it will all be the same and have that comfortable feel. Community feel.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: While we are on that intersection, Becky, the thing that sells me on that
intersection is the front is not going to be the loading area. The intersection isn't going
to -- you have got it so that it's being -- it's coming in from the back and we have a back
road, so you're actually not crowding up the intersection and I think this is a great idea
and I hope it picks up along the area -- around the area doing this, because it does take
away the front load-age off the main road and I appreciate that. I think it's nice.
McKay: Thank you.
De Weerd: One last question. Since you kind of set -- you raised the bar when
Bridgetower came in. Certainly with the things that this developer has done in
Bridgetower in response to right of way donations, impact fees, working with the
schools with Hunter Elementary and, certainly, as I testified to the tax interim
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 48 of 57
committee, they are committed to looking at school impact fees. If something were to
pass in the interim, while the law was being developed and before construction were to
start on this, if something were passed would that be something that could be built into
this?
McKay: So, I think what you're saying is if this were approved prior to implementation
of say impact fee for schools, would this project be subject to it. Aren't those impact
fees applied at the building permit level, not at the project approval? So, therefore, yes,
it would apply. I think. I mean the city attorney may correct me.
De Weerd: Okay.
McKay: Any permits issued prior to implementation would, obviously, be --
De Weerd: Be excluded.
McKay: -- excluded. Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. I don't have any other questions. Thank you.
McKay: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, if you do not have any other questions, I guess the only
question I have remaining is one that no one in this room can answer, as the school
district is not here. I know that this developer has had a wonderful history of working
with the school district and so that isn't a major concern, but it does concern me when
we have nothing in writing and a lot of speculation.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I think it was a week ago or two weeks ago Wendell was here and went over the -
- with Steve Siddoway the area schools out in the north end. What people don't realize
is as soon as you -- 18 months after you get occupancy in a house over 50 percent of
your taxes goes to the school district. So, you are -- you are helping. I mean it seems
like -- it seems like we have old schools that aren't filled, but all the new schools always
are filled over capacity. It's a different deal. I think that this developer has a track
record will the school district of working with them and I think if it would have been a
major concern of Wendell's, that we would have had a written policy in here.
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, if I could comment on that real quick. Certainly it's, in my
opinion, the city needs to take those things into consideration. However, I don't think
that we need to base our decisions on this application or even set a precedent for future
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 49 of 57
applications that it's the City of Meridian's duty to procure school property for the district.
I don't think that's our charge.
De Weerd: I believe you're correct. I do think, though, that when we have -- we have
worked very closely with the school district on what their needs are in each square mile,
that you -- that that is a consideration and, certainly, that's why they are a commenting
agency. And, yes, they neglected making comment and so that is a concern. I guess
Mr. Bird did raise the discussion we had and, Anna, at that discussion Steve was going
to get Council a map of each of those. I believe that the next middle school comes on
in 2007 and so that -- and that is to help relieve Sawtooth Middle School, because we
have been looking at connectivity as far as sidewalks and how to get kids to that school.
But if we can have that, so that as we look at these areas we know when the schools
are coming on, and, certainly, in subdivisions this size we really do need to pursue
written comment by the school district, so that we have it on record.
Canning: Yes, ma'am. And I will work to make sure that we get that -- a copy of that
map from Wendell or have it available in PDF so we can do it on the overhead. And
just to be clear, we are clear that Wendell was not looking for a school site on this
property.
Bird: That's right.
Canning: There was not a question about that, so --
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. And I guess I realize that, but I think it's important, too,
as our public testifies, they have the privilege of seeing what we have seen, also what
the developer is seeing, so that they know where -- what we are basing our information
on, too. Okay. Council, what would you like to do at this point?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Just one quick clarification for staff and, then, I'm going to move to close this
hearing. Anna, if we choose to act favorably upon this application and remove the
requirement for the stub street connection where would that be? Which of the four
applications?
Canning: Mr. Hood will look that up.
Bird: Which one's the south one? That's the one --
De Weerd: Fourteen.
Bird: Fourteen? 05-040?
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 50 of 57
Wardle: Would it be Item 14, Anna?
Canning: Yes.
Wardle: Thank you. Madam Mayor, I move that we close the public hearings on Items
12, 13, 14 and 15.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to close the public hearings on Items 12 through 15.
All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 12.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item No. 12, AZ 05-040, annexation and zoning for
Volterra Subdivision and to incorporate all staff, applicant, and public comments.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item No. 12. Is there any discussion? Mr.
Berg, will you call roll.
Berg: There is Findings.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: There is Findings, I believe.
Berg: Are the Findings okay, Anna?
Canning: Oh. Yes, sir. Sorry. It's one point --
Berg: No. The Findings. Are the Findings okay for annexation?
Canning: Yes.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 51 of 57
De Weerd: Thank you.
Berg: I just want to make sure that --
De Weerd: I appreciate that. Okay. Item 13.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move we approve Item 13, PP 05-039 and to incorporate all staff and
applicant and public comments and to approve the Findings.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion is to approve Item 13. Is there any discussion? Mr.
Berg. Mrs. Canning.
Canning: If I could ask for a clarification. The applicant did request fencing that's not
consistent with what would be allowed under the UDC. We can approve it as part of
this planned development, but we need to have that from the Council.
De Weerd: And they did offer a photo that --
Canning: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Council -- or Mr. Wardle.
Bird: Ask the motion maker.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, in my motion that would include the option presented by the
applicant as an alternative for the required open view fencing.
Bird: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Anna, anything further?
Canning: That was all on that one.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 14. Mr. Wardle.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 52 of 57
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item 14, PP 05-040, to include all staff,
applicant, and public comments and to approve the fencing submitted by the applicant
and also to remove the requirement for a stub street connection to existing Drawbridge
Subdivision.
Bird: But to include --
Wardle: And to include a pedestrian path and potential stub street connection to the
land locked five acre piece if allowed by ACHD.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion? Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you. Item 15.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we approve Item 15, CUP 05-041, to include all staff, applicant,
and public comments, including the applicant's comments regarding the proposed
arrangement with the irrigation district on the White Drain.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: Madam Mayor? For the maker of the motion, does that also include the staff
recommended changes to condition 1.33 regarding the amount of open space?
Wardle: Yes, it does.
Canning: Thanks.
Rountree: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. For the record, do you just want to note what that was?
Canning: Yes, ma'am. It was 10.5 acres for Volterra South and 13.9 for Volterra.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 53 of 57
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further discussion? Thank you, Mr. Berg.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you. You know, I would also like to make a comment on the design.
You really preserved that intersection that we constantly get bombarded with access
requests and right-in, right-outs, and it's kind of refreshing not to have to deal with that
every time. So, appreciate that. We'd like to see how this commercial design works.
It's unique and it's certainly what we have been hoping to see.
Rountree: Could you just back the buildings up to the arterials, instead of the parking
lots? Try it. You might like it.
De Weerd: They have their buildings on the collectors towards the road and that's been
very attractive in Bridgetower.
Bird: I think this is very nice.
De Weerd: In fact, I think your office is even in it; right? Isn't your office in one of those
that backs to the collector? Very attractive.
Item 16: Ordinance No. 05-1199 : 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:
De Weerd: Okay. Council, Item 16 is Ordinance No. 05-1120. Yes, Mr. Berg.
Berg: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'd like to have the ordinance continue in
sequence, in case there is some other problems with some other ordinances tomorrow
and just -- or, excuse me, next week and just keep it as 1199.
De Weerd: 1199?
Berg: I think that was the next one in line.
Bird: That was the one that we continued on. Do we need to -- do we want to change -
- you want to go to 1199 --
Berg: I'd rather assign the numbers as they are approved, so in case something gets
delayed -- which I don't anticipate, but it's easier to keep track of as they get approved
and fall back to when you have a problem and you have to research it for a couple
years back.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 54 of 57
Bird: No problem.
Rountree: What's your wishes?
De Weerd: Okay. Whatever you desire, Mr. Berg.
Berg: Thank you.
De Weerd: Since you are the record keeper. Okay. So we have Ordinance 05-1199.
If you will, please, read this ordinance by title only.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 05-1199, an
Ordinance for annexation of property located in the east one half northwest one quarter
of Section 1, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, as
described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and territory situated in Ada
County, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate city limits of the City of
Meridian as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and determining the land
use classification of said lands from RUT to R-8 in the Meridian City Code, providing
that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County assessor, the Ada
County recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission as required by law and providing
for a summary of the ordinance and providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules
and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there
anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, hearing no comments, I move that we approve Item 16,
Ordinance 05-1199 --
Bird: Second.
Rountree: With suspension of rules.
Bird: Oh. Second. Sorry, Charlie.
Rountree: That's all right.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. The motion is to approve Item 16. 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.
Item 17: Canvassing the Votes for City General Election:
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 55 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Item 17 is canvassing the votes for city general election.
Rountree: Oh, boy.
Bird: Holy Toledo.
Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I think you have in front of
you a draft of the results from the elections held yesterday. It was an exciting time
and --
Wardle: Big turn out.
Bird: Big turn out.
Berg: People did use their right to vote yesterday and that's what we are hoping for and
we will anticipate even a bigger election in two years. In front of you is some results. I
do have the poll books and the tally books if you'd like to examine the precincts. I will
start them down the line so you can thoroughly look through them.
De Weerd: Okay. Do you wish to see the books?
Bird: You have to. Don't wish to, but --
Rountree: Got to. It's part of the job description. I think Joe has to look at them,
doesn't he?
De Weerd: No, he doesn't get to.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: After a thorough review of the results of the votes of the November 8th City of
Meridian election, I move that we canvass the votes, declaring Joe Borton and Keith
Bird winners in the general election.
Rountree: I will second the motion.
De Weerd: I will third it.
Bird: I'll fourth it. Joe fifth's it.
De Weerd: Is there any discussion?
Rountree: No.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 56 of 57
De Weerd: Okay. Item 17 has been approved. Council, I just -- pardon?
Rountree: Let's have a vote.
De Weerd: Oh.
Bird: We got to have a vote.
De Weerd: We've got to vote. Sorry. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Donnell, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Now it's official. You're official.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we adjourn.
Bird: One second. I need something first.
De Weerd: We have just a couple of items.
Rountree: We have seconds. Okay.
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: The senior center would like to apply for another Sage --
De Weerd: Community block grant.
Bird: -- block grant for another 100,000. They will need our backing and I told them
that I felt that that would be no problem, that the Council would be in agreement with it.
I hope you would agree with that, too, Joe, seeings how it will be on -- it's a block grant
for the senior center for 100,000. And they have got -- they have got most of the money
and the matching funds and stuff and they will work through -- want to work through Will
again like they did on the last one.
Wardle: I agree.
Rountree: Sounds fine to me.
Meridian City Council
November 9, 2005
Page 57 of 57
Bird: Is that okay with you guys?
Rountree: Yeah. Have them bring it forward.
Bird: Okay.
De Weerd: Council, just a couple things that -- AspireOn -- Phil Stiffler will be getting a
hold of you for one on one. Also, we'll be having a Pre-Council workshop on December
13th to go over what we have been doing in building in accountability and our position
accountability descriptions and those kinds of things. Also talking about rolls and
responsibilities of Mayor and Council as we bring in a new Councilmember and we have
one outgoing, it's a great opportunity to sit down and have those discussions. And I
would entertain a motion to adjourn and, then, I just have a couple of clean-up things on
the parade and stuff like that.
Rountree: My motion is still out there.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor of adjournment say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:57 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
_______________________________ ______/______/______
MAYOR TAMMY DE WEERD DATE APPROVED
ATTESTED:______________________________
WILLIAM G. BERG JR. CITY CLERK