HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 09-02MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD AUGUST 18, 1997:
(APPROVED)
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 19,1997:
(APPROVED)
1. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT COUPLET STUDY: PUBLIC INPUT:
�01114 Lei Leffilk KIMRRi"Mill • rm.*]1 i i:c
3. TABLED AUGUST 6, 1997: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH:
(CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND , � CONCLUSIONS
OF
•Ri •� • • iii')
�': � A i'•. ice• ♦ � � 4.. l
6. TABLED AUGUST 19, 1997: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SHERBROOKE
HOLLOW B «, B P R COMPANY: UNTIL
SEPTEMBER
7. TABLED i Ai G 9 1997FINALPLAT •R CROSSROADS NO. • BY
RAMON AND MARILYN YORGASON:(TABLED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 16,
1997)
iFINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST ON THE LANGLEY DITCH BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION:
(APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION)
9. ORDINANCE #770 - GENERAL CITY ELECTION \ POLLING PLACES:
(APPROVED)
t PUBLIC REQUEST FOR a REZONE OF R- TO
ROGERC-G BY FAIRVIEW AVENUE: (APPROVE
FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION; CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A
REZONE ORDINANCE)
NIP] lime
III am 61 mi III
12. PUBLIC HEARING: FOR i VARIANCE TO THE 20 FOOI
LANDSCAPE ) I.. B ♦ BY ROGERr • E. FAIRVIEWAVENUE:
ATTORNEY TO PREPARE M OF s AND CONCLUSIONS
OF R.
13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-0 BY
CHERRY LANE BAPTIST CHURCH - 2150 W. CHERRY LANE: (APPROVE
FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION; CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE REZONE
ORDINANCE)
14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VACATION OF GENTRY WAY IN
AMENDED MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES, DRAINAGE
AND IRRIGATION EASEMENTS BY DICK MESSERSMITH - PUBLIC RIGHT
OF WAY ADJACENT TO LOTS 12 AND 13: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE
VACATION ORDINANCE)
15. PUBLIC HEARING: IDAHO COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FOR THE
MERIDIAN SENIOR CENTER:
t •qua .1111
17. STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT FOR SUMMERFIELD NO. 2 SUBDIVISION:
(APPROVED)
18. DON HOWELL: CHERRY LANE VILLAGE FENCE LINE: (CITY ATTORNEY Tf
PROCEED IN NEGOTIATIONNAMPA MERIDIANIRRIGATION
l TION
DISTRICT)
• . Ar' � z. A • a • �� t � •�
20. REQUEST EXTENSION OF TURTLE CREEK SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY
PLAT, TURTLE CREEK NO. 1 FINAL PLAT, TURTLE CREEK NO. 2 FINAL
PLAT: (APPROVE FOR 6 MONTHS)
21. WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: (APPROVED)
♦..fid.: � ;g '� �,.' h�'`�
23. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER:
1. ZGA ARCHITECTS SPACE PLAN CONTRACT: (APPROVED)
2. LAND APPLICATION OF SLUDGE (APPROVED)
B. SHARI STILES, PLANNING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR:
1. LUMBERMAN'S RELOCATION TO NW LINEMAN COLLEGE:
2. PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT:
(APPROVED)
3. PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 1 CC&R'S: (APPROVED)
C. MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE:
1. APPOINT SHARI BAKER TO PARKS & RECREATION
COMMISSION TO REPLACE WALT CASEY: (APPROVED)
2. APPOINT MARV BODINE TO PARKS & RECREATION
COMMISSION TO REPLACE VERNON CROFT: (APPROVED)
3. APPOINT MARK NELSON TO PLANNING & ZONING
COMMISSION TO REPLACE RON MANNING (APPROVED)
24. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 2 1997
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Robert
D. Corrie at 7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Walt Morrow, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree, Ron Tolsma
OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Susan
Berner, Marie Nanni, Darrell Taylor, Dale Newberry, Hartsel Phelan, Loren Ross, John
Wardle, Ehno Tiddens, Gwen & Brent Alger, Don & Ardyce Howell, Glenn Warden,
Tammy deWeerd, Thom & Faye Juul, Steve Moore, Terry Smith, Lori Jones, Paul
McLeod, Fern Van Paepeghem, Ray & Jana Brinlee, Doug Leno, Ivan Longetieg, Rich
Allison, Steve Youngerman, Renea & Ford Griggs, Darwin Buchanan, Ed Parse, Jack
Sweet, Dana Kaufman, Tod Anderson, Lawrence Ross, Randy Fout, David Runion,
Clint Henry, Tom Eddy, Don Howell, Jon Steele:
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD AUGUST 18,1997:
Corrie: Are there any corrections or alterations to those minutes? I will entertain a
motion for the acceptance of the minutes as written.
Rountree: So moved
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that the minutes of the special meeting held August
18, 1997 be approved, all those in favor? Opposed?
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 19,1997:
Corrie: Are there any corrections or alterations of those minutes? 1 will entertain a
motion for approval.
Rountree: So moved
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded we approve the minutes of the previous meeting
held August 19, 1997, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: At this time Charlie do you want to make that presentation?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 2
Rountree: Sure, as a result of the efforts of the committee with the Meridian Parks and
Recreation Commission for the March for Parks the City and the Commission has
received a certificate of excellence from the National Parks and Conservation
Association and it presents the 1997 March for Parks best events award to the Meridian
Parks and Recreation Commission. In recognition of your outstanding achievement in
raising community awareness of the importance of American parklands. This 20th day of
August 1997. We will get this set up in City Hall so folks can come and see it. We also
have a letter from those folks that is actually addressed to the Parks and Recreation
Commission, Commissioner Tammy deWeerd. The National Parks and Conservation
Association is pleased to advise you that the Meridian Parks and Recreation
Commission the Treasure Valley Volksclub are the joint winners of the 1997 March for
Parks best event award. Enclosed is a certificate of excellence noting Meridian Parks
and Recreation Commission's contribution to this outstanding community effort. During
the month of September 1997 a check in the amount of $250 will be sent to the
Treasure Valley Volksclub for presentation to Meridian Park as part of the prize. Please
accept our congratulations and we look forward to working with you on the 1998 March
for Parks program. Sincerely Karen White acting program manager. Thank you
Tammy.
Corrie: I might before we get started with item #1, item #6 and item #7 has been
requested that both of those be tabled to September 16th meeting, that is the
Sherbrooke Hollow Subdivision and also the final plat for Crossroads No. 6. So if there
is anybody here for that, that doesn't want to stay I just want to let you know those will
be tabled.
ITEM #1: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT COUPLET STUDY: PUBLIC INPUT:
Corrie: May I see a show of hands of those that would like to speak this evening?
Okay, I guess we will just start over here and just go around the room as you had your
hands up and have your input on this couplet program.
Terry Smith, 713 E. Kingsford Drive, Meridian.
Smith: I am submitting a petition on which there are 76 signers. Those signers are
business people, they are property owners, citizens, employees and they are all asking
you the City Council to leave and then tomorrow evening at ACHD they are asking
something very simple and very clear cut, uncomplicated leave First Street as it. My
few comments here don't necessarily represent comments of the signers but we do all
agree on one thing and that is leave East First Street as is. Yes there is more to it than
just leave it as it. We want solutions, all citizens of this community want solutions to
traffic that has been growing and it has been no secret that it has been growing.
Increasing traffic through down town Meridian was recognized in 1982 as a problem and
the community sought out a real solutions. The real solution was banding together and
presenting testimony to encourage the removal of Highway 55 from Downtown Meridian
on East First and moving it to Eagle Road. But before doing that we had to have an
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 3
interchange and this community put together a very strong effort to help with finding a
solution a real solution. In the late 80's we had an economically decaying downtown.
The Community again came together and this had to do with E. 1St Street again. They
provided for with two different projects one with partnership funding the other with a
community development block grant to help slum and blight and to prove the economic
health of downtown Meridian. These projects help provide safety, a pedestrian friendly
atmosphere, traffic calming, more parking, landscaping, irrigation for that landscaping,
provided for a more aesthetic downtown with some symmetry to it with lighting that was
one light not out 5 or 6 feet further than another with actually curbs, gutters and
sidewalks which most of the downtown community lacked and which is still lacking on a
street that is being used as an arterial now, Meridian Street. That is still a very sub-
standard street perhaps worst than what East First Street was in 1991. We can look at
solutions, real solutions to solve our current traffic problem. I have served a number of
years on the Functional Classification Transportation Committee. In that committee,
recommendations have been repeated year after year for some real solutions.
Unfortunately real solutions take money, real solutions don't happen next year or the
next year. So that is why, the reason that the recommendations from that task force
haven't provided for the funding or the result has not been an overpass on Locust
Grove, an overpass at Linder, an Interchange at Ten Mile. Widening improvements on
Overland, Franklin and Meridian Road. AT this point we are saying no to one way
streets, they will dump commuter traffic morning and evening on street. This isn't a
solution, this will destroy our pedestrian friendly economically healthy downtown. Why
have Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and now even Boise found is favorable to their
communities to return to two way streets. They are trying to reclaim areas that created
low rent districts as a result of one way streets. Planners I have talked to say one way
streets are the most efficient, effective way to move traffic faster, but they also say don't'
allow one way streets in your downtown. Especially in a community where we have a
unique circumstance where you have two roads to choose from currently. A solution
would be to develop another road or at least improve Linder. In Ada County business
owners, property owners pay a heavier load of taxes than do citizens. Impact fees are
paid by new business and remodeled businesses that help go to improving roads. Even
a development in Downtown Meridian just off of East First Street, a remodel project they
are asking those developers to pay $107,000 in impact fees. Any informed citizen
should be aware that retaining businesses that are downtown and in fact encouraging
other businesses to locate downtown is going to be beneficial to them no matter how
many miles they live away from East First Street. I just ask that the City Council take
these comments and others into consideration and make the correct decision to a real
solution and that real solution isn't going to be something that can be decided tonight or
tomorrow night by ACHD. Thank you
Corrie: Who had their hand up next?
Ivan Longtieg, 817 West Franklin, Boise.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 4
Longteig: I am an attorney in Boise, 25 years ago I would have said I was an attorney in
Meridian because I was. I am here on behalf of my long time friend and client Jay
Johnson who owns a piece of commercial property at the corner of East First and Pine.
He has asked me to share with you some of his concerns tonight. What we are
concerned with is the traffic problem, we have gridlock is what it amounts to. And the
problem needs to be solved and we are fortunate enough to have several alternatives to
solve it. First of course we could always do nothing, that has been a favorite solution of
many governmental bodies but 1 don't think it is going to work here. The problem is not
going to go away it is going to keep increasing. So we are going to have to do
something to it and there are really two apparent solutions out of the several that have
been suggested that I think will attract the most attention. One is the creation of the one
way couplet with the traffic on East First Street moving south, the traffic on the Meridian
Street moving North. And the second and I believe the one that should receive the
favorable attention of the Council is two way Traffic on Meridian Road. On the one way
issue I think there are several disadvantages to it. One is of course that the one way
couplet system is an efficient way of moving traffic. It is so efficient that businesses tend
to fall by the way side as the streets become a raceway. It actually leads or can lead to
increased traffic load as citizens will come up the wrong way on the way and have to
circle around and get on the other real street to get where they are going. The Council I
don't think needs to be reminded that its sole constituency is not the automobile driver.
It is the small businesses that I think are the heart and sole of any community. Those
small businesses want and they are here tonight to tell you I believe that they don't want
one way streets that is would hurt their businesses. The LID the agreements were
signed about 6 years ago the purpose there was to make East 1st Street pedestrian
friendly and warm and comfortable to the citizens and I think it has had that effect. Now
with 5 years still left to pay on the LID we are considering the one way system that it
effectively undo all of this good. Mr. Johnson has told me he is aware of four or five
pending capital investment projects on East First which would not go in if the one way
couplet were recommended or put in by ACRD. Boise is getting away from the one way
system, look at Bannock street one way for many years, now it is a two way street and
traffic is moving smoothly on a lot of it. I think the two way road on Meridian Street
would work the best. A three lane preferably a five lane road. Meridian Street needs a
lot of improvement anyway if it were to be half of the couplet. So why not go a little
further and make it a first class automobile moving street. Two lanes meets the direction
of the turning lane. Give it the assignment of carrying all of this traffic. 1 think there
would be fewer tax payer dollars spent at this time and it would solve the problems for
now. Five years from now we can look at it again and see if we truly have to have a one
way system. Hopefully there are going to be some more freeway accesses to get away
from the one way system. But I think that a serious consideration on the part of the
Council now and a recommendation to the ACRD that they go with the two way system
on Meridian Street is going to show the public that this Council is dedicated to the on
going vigorous growth of the community and not merely the movement of traffic. Thank
you.
Rich Allison, 1108 West 4th Street, Meridian.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 5
Allison: 1 have taken the time to hopefully understand the issues that are before us.
And the primary issue of course today seems to me one way streets as a choice or
widen Meridian Road because it wouldn't make sense to widen first street since it dead
ends to Cherry Lane anyway. The first thing I would like to address is the fact that what
we are going to do is we are going to take an additional today and within 6 months
when they start the reconstruction of Franklin we are going to take all of the traffic off of
Meridian Road and we are going to put it on First Street and you are going to see
initially what it is going to be like if First Street were in fact a one way street at the hours
of 4 to 6 in the evening. We have already got gridlock at First street at Fairview. Now
you are going to add another 4,000 to 5,000 cars in the evening and going to another
dead end street just like it is today. In the future what you are talking about is taking
another about 40% because all of the traffic plus in the future that they are adding is
also going to dead end into Fairview. That is something that you will get to see very
shortly with the additional traffic off Meridian Road when they reconstruct Meridian Road
next year with the Franklin Road project. That was the first issue I wanted to address.
The second thing, many of us that have been around here a long time who like Terry
Smith have served on transportation task force with Walt Morrow have recommended
widening Meridian Road. We have from time to time talked about one way streets. It has
never been a recommendation to my knowledge of our group which I served on for I
don't know maybe 8 or 10 years or more it has been a long time. For us that have
invested on First Street and I am a real estate broker, commercial real estate broker for
20 years, have recommended people invest on First Street. I have recommended
people upgrade the businesses like Jay Johnson or others who have buildings on First
Street that were in deteriorating condition. Who in his case probably spent $200,000
the one next door spent at least $200,000 and on and on and on. Be it Faye Buchanan
or whoever else is in this room that have spent money on First Street. Now suddenly
you are going to tell us you are going to take our two way traffic away, our traffic count,
reduce our property values and put us back into the position we were before we spent
all of this money. It seems to me an arbitrary decision on the part of ACHD not arbitrary,
let's put it this way. It is a cheaper decisions on the part of ACHD to make it one way
streets. It would probably cost another million to $2 million to widen Meridian Road. But
as we move forward when we develop north of Ustick and North of McMillan which is
currently in our area of impact. And we continue to add traffic we are not going to have
a solution. If we widen Meridian Road to five lanes like Fairview we will have a solution
that will last a much longer time than creating one way streets particularly since First
Street dead ends in Fairview. Thank you.
Steve Youngerman, 704 East First Street, Meridian, Harry's Bar & Grill.
Youngerman: After reviewing the two alternatives that have been presented it is clear to
me that the one way street option is a bad idea from a lot of perspectives. Many of
those have been brought forward tonight. I will tell you I operate a successful business
in Meridian, and I like it here. I believe in this town and its future. I have more than
doubled the amount of employees that I have had in the past two years. Tomorrow
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 6
work begins on my second business and I wouldn't be investing the amount of money I
am investing in this business if I didn't think that meridian had a bright future. I think that
Meridian's future stays with the pedestrian friendly downtown idea. I don't think that
downtown Meridian needs to be a wide spot in the road for commuters to get between
their homes and their work. I think that is exactly what it will become if we do the one
way option. To kind of get something straight ACHD their business is moving
automobiles their business is not economic planning or development. This plan will
move automobiles, there is no doubt about that. But to say that one way streets will
encourage economic development is like saying if you divert the Boise River it will water
your garden. It will get everything wet but when you get done there is not much left.
They tell us it is the easiest, cheapest and quickest option. It has been my experience
that easy, cheap and quick is rarely the best. One of the biggest complaints that I hear
has a business owner is the lack of services in Meridian. People are sick of travelling to
Boise for everything they want to do. The one way plan doesn't give any incentive for
business people to locate in the downtown Meridian area. But it does give incentive for
people in their cars to go spend money in Boise. Mayor Corrie I remember a couple of
months ago that you when asked about commercial development in town you lamented
that we have, we are off balance. We have a lot of residential development, we have
commercial development. That commercial development is good for the tax base. Well
the one way streets don't build our tax base but they probably build that commercial tax
base in Boise. We need a plan for the downtown that is a public and private partnership
that encourages people to relocate in the downtown. The renaissance that is kind of
taking place right now. That renaissance needs to be nourished. Small towns all over
this country have lost their downtown to strip mall developments and urban
developments and they never get them back. There is never any identity to those towns
anymore. The successful communities have done things to nurture that downtown area
and one way streets aren't a part of that. That is all I want to say.
Corrie: Others from this side?
Susan Berner, 906 E. 1st Street, Meridian.
Berner: I would like to thank the City Council for their conscious deliberation to the
problem currently facing us regarding the heavy traffic on First Street and Meridian
Road during the rush hours in the morning and afternoon. My mother Marie Nanni and I
are both concerned, taxpaying citizens dedicated to preserving the way of life we have
come to appreciate and love in the City of Meridian. We are committed to our
community both in facing our problems and helping to solve them. Marie and I own
Paisano's Italian restaurant at the corner of 1st and Pine streets. We selected this site
for the location to make money, be a part of our community and add to the economic
development of our city. We have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into our
business and cannot financially just pack up and move. We feel strongly that our traffic
problems are commuters on their way to and from work, during only two peak period
times of the day. We feel strongly that the City Council elects to consent to the one way
couplet design that many small businesses will move out of the downtown area and no
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 7
new ones will move in. We feel strongly that Meridian is a friendly town first and
foremost. We must take all precautions to maintain that image. We feel strongly that
our downtown area will die financially and attract unwanted businesses while lowering
surrounding home values. Many City's across the nation have experienced exactly that
and we only have to look to our own capital city to see that point. They have spent years
and much effort in trying to revitalize the downtown area only to incorporate two way
roads again. We feel strongly against losing anymore parking. We feel strongly that the
City should abide by the contracts they signed for the property owners back in 1991. We
feel strongly that the one way couplet will double the majority of the traffic problems on
First Street and Meridian Roads during the peak hours. Therefore Marie and I would like
to suggest the only possible solution and alternative that would preserve the best for the
majority of our citizens. We would like to see that Meridian Road be widened to a
minimum of three lanes preferably five lanes with one lane being a turn only lane and
adding sidewalks. This will allow traffic to move more efficiently going north and south to
their destinations maintain the integrity of our downtown area. Maintain the surrounding
home values and keep safety at a maximum. The next step should to be petition the
Idaho transportation department and the federal government to build a freeway
exchange at North Ten Mile Road for the majority of the growth is taking place and
commuters to the west will have access to the freeway. Marie and I thank you for
listening to our input tonight and we will keep all of you in our prayers while you
deliberate the decision that will maintain the beauty and integrity of our city without
resorting to what we feel will only be a Band-Aid solution at this time, but have far
reaching economic implications in the very near future. Thank you.
Ehno Tiddens, 213 East 2nd Street, Meridian.
Tiddens: So far all you have heard from are 7 or 8 small businesses located on East 1st
Street who are the only interest is the dollar not moving traffic. I would like to think I am
speaking of the 25,000 other people who what to solve a traffic problem. We need traffic
relief on E. 1 st Street to Fairview and now. Something has not been brought up yet is the
time element on this. For the project they are speaking of widening Meridian Road
(inaudible) bulk of the traffic. They will be leaving E. 1 st Avenue as is which a lot people
that signed that petition probably don't realize what that involves leaving E. 1st Street as
is. What it means is widening Meridian Road to carry the load of traffic. That project
cannot be funded for 7 or 8 years on widening Meridian Road, leaving 1st Avenue as it
is. And also that project costs $3.5 million which cannot be funded for a long time. The
project the making E. 1st Street one way can be completed within one year at a cost of
$1.8 million which at Ada County highway district has already paid for that project and I
think we should take advantage of it. This thing of E. 1st Street three lanes dead ending
into Fairview is a bunch of hooey. If you look at it right now we have got a lane turning
left or straight ahead, we have a lane turning right. Three o'clock this afternoon I came
off the interstate highway into Meridian. There were solid cars all way from the stop light
at Franklin Road to Idaho Street and I don't know what it was beyond that. It was
bumper to bumper and I can just imagine with someone travelling around looking for a
place to locate and building a home would think if they came off the interstate highway
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 8
into Meridian and saw bumper to bumper traffic right through the center of town with
only one lane available would they, I wouldn't I don't know if you would or not but I
wouldn't think of moving into Meridian and seeing something like that. I would go over to
Nampa or some place like that. It is a very poor impression on people. Something
needs to be done right now and really as far as I am concerned there is no logical
alternative for right now. We have no choice, the one way couplet is the only answer.
The couplet is not a Band-Aid method. I have heard a couple of businesses men say it
is Band-Aid method it is just a temporary situation. Well it just so happens that right now
the peak traffic on East First Street or 20,000 vehicles a way. It is project in the year
2015 that E. 1St Street will have to carry 32,000 vehicles a day. The one way couplet
will do it until 2015 so it is not a Band-Aid temporary method. It is 17 years from now. If
needed Meridian Road in the future can be widened, can be widened and carry most of
the traffic in the future that can be done. A lot of changes can be made. I think it is just
comparable to you cannot stop expansion and growth in a city just as you have to
increase the sewer, the water system, the park system and so forth you have to
accommodate transportation too. The only like I say the only interest I have is moving
traffic. I don't own a business and dollars don't mean anything to me. Thank you
Fern Van Papaeghem, 830 E. 1St Street, Meridian.
Van Papaghem: I am interested in the dollar, I have got to have it. I have got my
husband in a nursing home and it costs money. I have got to have an income and you
take out the traffic and there goes our businesses so I am not for doing the one way
streets in Meridian.
Renee Griggs, 1426 N. Tina Marie Avenue, Meridian.
Griggs: I didn't come here tonight to testify about this issue. However, 1 do not own a
business and my interest in this community is its overall well being because this is my
home. The dollar as this gentleman says is not my main concern. My main concern is
that we grow as a community and that we stay committed to watching that things that
happen in our community to make sure. If we let the businesses go to Boise they are
going to keep developing the mall, they are going to keep developing Boise and we will
lose those businesses that come in and develop here. I personally am thrilled when
Fred Meyers came to town, I am thrilled when little Payless Shoe Source over here is
coming in because that is one less trip to Boise that I have to make. The more
businesses that come into Meridian the happier I am. But if you or ACRD passes this
and the businesses move out of Meridian then that will hurt our tax base and that will
hurt our community. These people who have businesses on this street have a right to
expect this City to look out for their best interest because we are all in it together. I feel
like even if this five lane expansion on Meridian is the only other alternative if they have
$1.8 million to start it maybe ACHD or whoever is in charge of that could suggest a
bond election or something to help promote those funds more quickly so that could
happen sooner rather than 7 or 8 years down the road. I really don't feel like threatening
the small business person on E. 1St Street is the way to go in this instance. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 9
Jack Wortsen, Jack's Barber Shop, Meridian
Wortsen: I just moved in and my parking goes the wrong way to start with this one way
thing. It is going to cause a problem for the land lord that owns the building and I tell
you right now I wouldn't have moved my shop there knowing that it was going to be a
one way place. Because I already, you go anywhere back east anywhere you go you
see one way, you see tattoo parlors, you see graffiti you see all kinds of messed up
because it becomes a roadway and away goes this community. I am thinking about
learning tattooing (Inaudible) because (inaudible).
Corrie: Is there anybody else that would like to speak on this issue that hasn't already?
John Wardle, 1450 E. Fairview, Meridian.
Wardle: The only reason I came is being one of the Meridian Businesses that started a
long time ago I belong to about four different chambers. I have seen out at Eagle with a
change in their traffic pattern almost killed the downtown part of it. I have seen Caldwell
years and years ago before traffic patterns and things like this completely kill a
downtown area and take years and years to come back. I am so excited now with the
new things that we have happening on East 1St with Mrs. Nanni's place, the new
restaurant the things coming back. I think it is exciting. I think if you go to the one way
situation that is going to change. You will change the different diversification of the
business. I think by working through Chamber and working through other things a little
more thought can be brought in to help the situation out before a final decision is made.
Thank you.
Darwin Buchanan, 1303 East 1St Street, Meridian.
Buchanan: I don't know that I can say anything that hasn't already been said or just
repeat what you have heard already. Except for the fact that all the people or a lot of the
people like us that live on the West side of East First Street have a heck of a time
getting across the street to the post office. I sure would like to see a cross walk
somewhere between Carlton and Fairview. That is all, thank you.
Ed Pierce, Lumberman's, 1526 Bridgestone Court, Meridian.
Pierce: I think pretty much everything has been said about the damage to businesses. I
just basically need to say that I am opposed to the one way also. If it does move traffic
and you are coming in and you are plan on moving to Meridian and you are driving
through a one way and you see all of these empty buildings I don't think I would want to
move into this town either. That is all I have to say.
Terry Smith, US Bank, Meridian
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 10
Smith: (Inaudible) this photograph taken almost 50 years ago and you look at the
picture and you say (Inaudible) ACHD tomorrow evening that meeting was changed
from 1:00 in the afternoon to 7:00 p.m.
Corrie: This picture (inaudible) Anyone who hasn't spoken?
Jack Sweet, 3001 N. Meridian Road, Meridian.
Sweet: I have been involved in business and 1st Street for 20 some odd years. I think
most of the people on the Council would remember what this downtown looked like not
too many years ago. A bunch of merchants and other enthusiastic citizens made a
tremendous effort to support revitalization, redoing the main drags and sidewalks
because we had dirt, weeds, we had lots of old buildings. The community responded
particularly the business community in a real positive, desirable way. In fact they
invested millions of dollars in this street. If you look at it starting with the Heritage
building I think they were probably the first to do a major remodel and then you can go
from one building to the next whether it was Dick Marks or whether it was our place at
Intermountain or the bank or all up and down the street. To a lot of people it is kind of
their very existence and I think it would be so destructive for the gains to create one way
situation that I think would be a bad move. I am sure I just arrived here I can't add
anything to what I think has probably all been said. I would be opposed to it in any
case.
Corrie: Anyone else? Council, any discussion or remarks anybody?
Bentley: We have all been milling over this for some time and I am sure everybody on
this Council has flipped flopped back and forth with their feelings changing on this issue.
No matter which way we go whether we go one way or whether we five lane Meridian it
is going to affect businesses. The problems that can occur with the five laning of
Meridian Road would mean an identical Fairview changing Meridian Road into Fairview.
I don't know if this community is ready for that, ready to support that. The downtown has
been revitalized due to the work of the people that run the businesses down there. We
also have the question, we know what the Eagle bypass did to Eagle town, the center of
Eagle's business down there. Is five laning Meridian going to do the same thing to E.
1 st They don't, we don't have the off ramp situation at hand. We are trying to work out
meetings to get this thing off the ground. I think everybody here would like to see that
Ten Mile off ramp, but that hasn't been approved, hasn't been discussed in a permanent
forum to where we can actually say it is scheduled. I wish we could but we can't. It is
really a tough decision to make. I have seen the affects of one way streets in Boise, the
plusses we have is we don't have one way cross streets. But there again we are
looking at impact and the impact is going to be to everyone no matter which way it goes.
As one gentleman said come next spring everyone in this town is going to see what it is
like to have 5 to 10 year traffic going down First Street when Franklin was closed. It is
going to be a mess until they get it done.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 11
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I think that part of the reason that we are making this decision now
has been brought about by our instructions to ACRD as a City under former Mayor
Kingsford and that Council and this Council in that ACRD is to structure their projects
within our community so that they are accomplished with the least amount of
interference and traffic congestion to our citizens as necessary. Prime example is
Cherry Lane. We held that project off for an extra year so that the two miles of that road
could be rebuilt at the same time. So we only inconvenience our citizens for time for one
year. This issue here before us as a Council with respect to how we treat downtown
Meridian has been brought about by those same instructions with respect to the rebuilt
of Franklin and East 1st, Walt, Meridian intersection. That project is scheduled to start
after the 1 st of October. Councilman Bentley is very correct when he says that within a
matter of a few months we will see what the projections of the traffic flows are going to
be. Because basically everything that normally takes that route through Meridian is now
going to go on East First. I have asked ACHD to have continuous traffic counts so that
we can monitor the amount of traffic on East first and then project as to a specific year
in the future in terms of growth. What it amounts to right now is we are making a
decision as to which way ultimately will tie into Franklin Road if we choose one or the
other. And I think there are only two options. One is the one way couplet and the other
is the five lane on Meridian Road. The economic study pointed out some highly
undesirable aspects of that road being five lanes. Probably is not in the best interest of
the community. There were certain businesses in the presentation to us by Mr. Eberly
that were spelled out as businesses that probably would be casualties of a five lane
road on Meridian Road. So what we are attempting to decide here tonight so we don't
have to tear up something that we have done in a fairly short period of time is probably
what is the best solution long term to the traffic problems and getting through Meridian.
With respect to Ten Mile Interchange yes that is something that we have been asking
for and had on the work lift for 6 or 7 years now. There has been no discussion, there is
no format that we are aware of that has a program for a time that would be implemented
unless there is a major, private, public partnership such as the Micron interchange in
Nampa which would require substantial development in the Ten Mile area. It all has to
be federal funding, who knows when that is going to come, could be 15 years from now.
Same with the overpasses in terms of (End of Tape) standards that we have set up.
They are being done somewhat piece meal by industry as it begins to expand into our
area. With respect to the works that are currently within the five year work program and
ACHD through their current commission has taken the stance that they are going to try
to build the things that are in the five year work program. None of these things that we
are talking about here tonight are within that five year work program in terms of the
expansion of Meridian Road. ACHD has indicated through their testimony that yes by
reversal of the lanes and by reversing some traffic signals and by reversing the angle of
the parking one way streets could be implemented in a reasonably short period of time if
that was the desire of Council so it seems to me like our decision as a Council is to
decide in the short term which avenue that we wish to go so that we can facilitate the
expansion of Franklin Road and those intersections and not have to tear them up at
some point in the future for a change of pace. So it is a long term decision that we are
making here tonight.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 12
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, at one point in time I thought I had recognized a solution, I think I
still do from the standpoint of traffic from the standpoint of economics in the business I
was hopeful that the economic analysis that was done would reflect on that somewhat
and provide some guidance. It did but then it left kind of a caveat in this thing which
further perplexes me. It indicates that local governments cannot control the property
owners the businesses and the public's perception. That these issues can be as
influential as actual zoning policies within the City. What that means to me is that even if
a solution has the right answers and can solve your problem if the community's
perception is a bad thing then it is going to be self fulfilling. That is the quandary that I
have right now, it seems like a good share of the business folks in the community have
the perception, a very emotional tie to the fact that a one way type of system would be
devastating to them. At this point I am still torn, I am not so sure that the solution might
now lie in working more with ACRD and their request of us to make a decision now as it
relates to the design and future construction of Meridian Road. Possibly getting back to
Mr. Smith's statement about a long term real solution I believe were his words, and
defer not necessarily the decision to do something on Meridian and or Franklin but to
get the community now after ACRD spent months having public workshops and not
getting a whole lot of input. That appears that they have now come to a point where
there is a great amount of interest to work towards solutions and spend some more time
looking at potential solutions within the City. I still lean towards the one way couplet as
a solution for the traffic situation.
Tolsma: Whether than agree with Mr. Bentley, I didn't flip flop on this because I have
been against one way streets from the get go. The, I don't know what the monetary
aspect is of getting the interchange at Ten Mile Road, but I worked with Terry Smith
when he first started in on the Eagle Road project. With the community and the support
that Mr. Smith put together at that time we got the Eagle Road project put in. It didn't
take them very long to do it. I think if they went the same route today and got the
community support and the people behind everybody I think you could probably get the
Ten Mile Road interchange in. Listening to ACRD when they told us that it is not the
north south traffic that creates the problem in town, it is the east west traffic that creates
problems. Well if the Ten Mile interchange was in there would be a lot lest east west
traffic to go north south on Meridian Road and E. 1st Street. So my thoughts are that
there is a better way to do this than bandage this up with a one way couplet in
downtown Meridian. I think that if the citizens got together with their advisory groups
and their task force and same thing we did on Eagle Road I think you could probably
put a little pressure where it needed to be on the Federal highway administration and
ACHD and probably get the Ten Mile interchange in and solve a lot of problems that we
have here in downtown.
Corrie: Council, do you want to make a decision this evening? Or do you want to make
a recommendation to ACRD for tomorrow?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 13
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, even though it is a difficult decision our job is to give a
recommendation to Ada County Highway district and their commissioners. So we have
taken that task upon ourselves some several years ago. So it seems to me that we in
fact ought to make a recommendation of sort. Having said that I am prepared to offer a
motion in support the one way couplet concept for downtown Meridian and I would add
to that motion that we delay any implementation of the one way couplet until such time
that further chance to study and make sure that in fact is the avenue that we wish to
follow.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow and second by Mr. Rountree to advise for the one
way couplet and to also talk to ACRD to delay as long as they can, am I correct?
Morrow: That is correct Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Is there any further discussion?
Bentley: Now am I understanding your motion that at a later date will make another
decision on which way we are going to go with this?
Morrow. Mr. Bentley, the point of the motion would a that we are endorsing the one way
couplet so that allows the Franklin/E. 1 st project to move forward. My person in delaying
as long as possible the implementation of that is so that it gives us a chance as a City
and ACHD if in the event as Mr. Tolsma says that the Ten Mile Interchange is only a
matter of a few years away. The numbers that were given to us by ACHD through this
study and the volumes are indicated that those traffic counts were with the two
overpasses and with the Ten Mile interchange in place. There has been testimony here
tonight talking about business groups putting together a business plan for dealing with
the traffic. I think that obviously at some point in the future and that point maybe 4 or 5
years down the road. We know that the funding is not going to be here before then for
anything with respect to Meridian Road. It may be that ultimately the one way couplet
has to be instituted 3 to 5 years depending on population growth. But it doesn't have to
be instituted next month or five months or 9 months from now. So the intent of the
motion is to move forward with the construction of Franklin and East 1st Street and to
allow for more discussion time with respect to the one way couplet. It is the intent of the
motion not to give ACHD the direction to start 6 months from now or 9 months from now
to implement a one way system.
Bentley: So in essence we could change our mind
Morrow: That could be the case.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 14
Bentley: The one thing that I want to add to that is that I think that ACHD if we, if the
City did go with implementing the one way couplet that ACHD would pursue in the
interim the right of way to make Meridian Road five lanes.
Morrow: Again, you are talking massive amounts of dollars that aren't there. That is the
primary expense. As you currently are aware of the stuff that is on the five year work
plan already has what impact fees that are getting paid by those folks adjacent to those
roads pretty well dedicated (inaudible) road expansions. I don't know that you could
direct ACHD to begin to purchase that right of way.
Bentley: I just don't know how if we changed our mind against the one way couplet how
we could pursue going after the right of way at a later date without the cost being really
exorbitant.
Morrow. Well Glenn, I don't disagree with what you are saying but you also need to be
buying right of ways for Linder, Locust Grove and those in terms of expansions of those
streets and those overpasses which is part of the solution to this problem. As I see it
those are decisions of ACHD needs to make because it is them that have the dollars.
Rountree: Given the intent of the motion is to advance Meridian Road and Franklin road
primarily I would suggest that we put the motion in that form that we recommend to
ACHD that they advance Meridian and Franklin Road as designed which currently
accommodates for a future one way intersection on Meridian Road leaving open the
discussion of further solutions but not necessarily endorsing a one way couplet.
Morrow So you are indicating that to advance the issue is that if (inaudible) would be
obviously if Meridian road is to be five lanes that needs to be incorporated within the
design of the redo of Franklin East 1St and Meridian as I understand that is correct Mr.
Little and Mr. Roselund? (Inaudible).
Rountree: We don't have the time frame for when that is going to happen. Intersections
can be redesigned and are all of the time. Development at that intersection could be
done in such a way that right of way widths could be held back to accommodate five
lanes if somebody (inaudible) that was required. I guess all I am saying is that leaves
the door open for consideration of both the one way, the two way on Meridian Road, Mr.
Tolsma's suggestion of trying to do something to advance some other arterial and
interchange work. Getting an opportunity for the community to have further involvement
which obviously they desire. Get Franklin and Meridian Road off dead center and finally
construct it. I
Morrow: So your desire then is to change the motion to indicate that we are moving
ahead with Franklin or endorse moving ahead with Franklin, East 16t, Meridian rebuild
as designed which incorporates the capability of the one way couplet but yet not
committing to the one way couplet in the short term. I don't think I have a problem with
that because basically both motions accomplish the same thing.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 15
Rountree: I guess the only thing I would request there and I would pose this to the
community that they need to get in there and work with this thing. We as a Council need
to get that direction because all of it is going to hinge on what the zoning is going to be
like in that part of the community.
Morrow: The issue with respect to the economic report or the economic analysis that
was done is that there is some highly negative aspects and basically what the
community has to do is find alternate ways for traffic around downtown if in fact there is
not going to be a one way couplet system. A Fairview on the Meridian Road is not
acceptable to me at all and that is essentially what the economic study calls out as a
very strong possibility of happening. That is not something that is beneficial as far as I
am concerned.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Morrow: Mr. Rountree why don't you withdraw you second
Corrie: Just a minute, let me run this one. You are going to make my job a lot easier if
you go with Charlie's recommendation because if you go one way couplet as a
recommendation to ACRD it comes out a two to two tie 1 will not go with it. I will not go
with one way on E. 15t Street. I think we need to have (inaudible) very plain to ACHD
that the one way is not the way that the City wants this to go and they need to work with
this and perhaps find a solution to this but still have that Franklin E. 1st Street project
and Meridian Road brought to completion. I haven't said anything here all night but I
can't sit here any longer because I want you to know how I feel about this and if it
comes out to a two to two I will break it and we will have to go back to the same thing
again. Charlie, if you want to (inaudible)
Rountree: Is that a threat?
Corrie: That is not a threat I just want to make sure that we know where everybody is. If
you want to take your second away Charlie and then we can go back to Mr. Morrow and
we can redo what the Council so desires.
Rountree: I gladly withdraw my second.
Morrow: 1 withdraw the motion, I wish to restate the motion. The Meridian City Council
endorses the design of Franklin and E. 1st Street, Waltman and the rebuild of that road
to proceed immediately as designed and that we defer the delay until further input. Any
institution of a one way couplet in the near term.
Rountree: Second
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 16
Corrie: Okay the motion has been made and seconded, you heard the motion, any
further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed?
ITEM #2: TABLED AUGUST 5,1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION:
Corrie: Mr. Morrow?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, in talking with David Turnbull he is waiting for us to resolve the
issue with respect to our new irrigation ordinance. He requested that we table this to
October 7 awaiting that ordinance to be adopted. I would move to table to October 7.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to table item #2 to October
7, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
00
ITEM #3: TABLED AUGUST 5, 1997: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH:
Corrie: Would the representative from the church please step forward?
Dale Newberry, 11908 Peconic Drive, Boise.
Newberry: Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, since August 5th meeting we took your advice of
holding an open with our neighbors. I think the ideas presented here tonight as a result
of that meeting will show the wisdom of your action then. In addition to that public
meeting we have also had several separate meetings that have taken place with
individual neighbors. We have had many people from the neighborhood and the
community contact us supporting the services such as athletic programs, the
recreational programs that we anticipate having available. We are concerned with the
growing community also, we are not dealing with the cars so much as we are with
people's values and where their children are going to be raised and what kind of
environment. As a result of the meeting and after listening to our neighbors we
addressed their concerns and came up with several solutions that those who were there
agreed would help. I would like our architect Dana Kaufman to come up and explain the
changes that he has made to our plans an the modifications that he has made on our
ground work to accommodate those concerns.
Dana Kaufman, 14 12th Avenue S, Suite 210, Nampa
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 17
Kaufman: I also have some new site plans and elevation (inaudible). As alluded to
earlier we did have a meeting with several of the neighbors, we advertised the meeting
and several came and we had quite a lively debate. Out of that we tried to address
some of the concerns of the neighbors. With that we did relocate the building 15 feet to
the east which is away from the adjoining property owners. We were able to create a
landscape strip on that west side that would help buffer the houses. Also locating the
building 15 feet further to the east cuts down on shadows, site lines and also we
addressed the desire to hide the building or conceal the building a little bit more through
the open space at this corner where this lateral has the right of way. There were some
concerns about you would see this building when driving down the street. We have also
addressed some lighting concerns, we have included Ballard lights along the perimeter
of the project to help in security measures. Also these lights will not be taller than the
fence that currently exists there. So the shining of the lights will not go on the other side
of the fence. We have included some lights in the parking lot to help illuminate the
parking lot. We were able to maintain the prayer garden and create some landscaping
for this homeowner. We were also able to landscape the south side of the building
which was also another concern of how that might look in somebody's back yard. We
have also, if you look at the elevations that we, that I passed out. On that south side we
have also included some panels of a contrasting color to help break up this south side
fagade and just for your information here is the type of panel that we will use on that. It
is not your regular type of metal building panel it is a textured panel as you can see.
Those will be incorporated on that south side to give us a different appearance. We
also added brick, if you look at the rendering over here we have also addressed brick on
threes sides of the building to help tie in with the existing facility. That was a concern on
how (inaudible) from Cherry Lane, We don't believe that we will see the building at that
level too much from Cherry Lane because of the landscaping that we are required to
put in the parking lot. We hope that you pay more attention to the street then looking off
the left to see the building. I think that with those recommendations, we also provide
scale models of the two adjoining property owners to give you a sense of scale
relationship to the building and the entire site and how that building will fit on the site. If
you have any questions I am here to answer them.
Rountree: Just again for my own information, what is the elevation of the addition?
Kaufman: It is 29 feet to this peak and 21 feet to the eve. There is also the existing
grade slopes approximately 2 % feet. So these homeowners will be actually 2 '/2 feet
higher finish floor level then this building. So effectively our building is 27 feet versus 29
in relationship to their house.
Corrie: Other questions? Any other comments Dale?
Newberry: (Inaudible) you can see by our artist drawing that this is a very good looking
building. From the back side the corner that was the main concern then like Dana said
we moved it over thereby it also reduced the height or the elevation respective to their
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 18
houses. It gave more distance between them and then that enabled us to put in all of
this landscaping over here to make this a pleasant view.
Corrie: In all fairness is there anyone in the audience the last time that has some
problems with that, would you like to speak?
Thomas Juul, 1438 N. Tina Marie, Meridian
Juul: Mr. Mayor and City Council, gentlemen thank you for hearing my testing tonight.
This is a very difficult one for me because it was my intention tonight to be testifying on
behalf of the Cherry Lane Christian Church. I was prepared to tell you that we had
reached an agreement on the matter before you. Although it was an agreement that I
was not totally happy with it was one that I felt I could live with. I felt we had come to a
meeting of minds and this project could proceed. During our meeting on August 25th we
made it abundantly clear to the church representatives that we supported their project
and that we were looking at ways to make it happen. 1 think the changes they have
made have definitely been an improvement and we are wholeheartedly behind them.
But although we support it were looking for ways of it to have the least impact on our
neighborhood. We made some suggestions and proposals that we felt were fair and
undemanding. We negotiated these proposals in good faith and made further
concessions. We negotiated, we came up with an agreement in principle which we
were lead to believe would be accepted by their board of elders. Mr. Dees told us and
he is an elder of the church that some of the other elders were out of the country but he
felt that the agreement that we made on that evening could be ratified with the
remaining elders and that he would leave word for us this past weekend. One point of
the agreement was that the lights and this is an example of what we are dealing with
there. One point of the agreement was the light on the south end of their building was to
be turned off. We were told that this did not have to go before the elders and it would
be taken care of. As we were leaving to go out of town on Wednesday we asked only
that it be turned off before our return on Sunday. We were having guests come back
with us and that the light affects the guest room even more than our own bedroom.
They agreed. Pastor Moore visited our home that same evening and we showed him
how badly the light affected us and he agreed there was indeed a problem and that it
would be taken care of. When we returned home late Sunday night with our guests the
light was still on. I called Mr. Dees Monday morning and informed him that this term of
our agreement had not been met. He was not aware that the light was still on but that
he was meeting with the elders that day and that it would be taken care of, it was not.
Tuesday afternoon that is today, my wife called the church again to inform them that the
term of our agreement still had not been complied with. This is at 3:00 this afternoon.
She was told by Pastor Moore that the elders had met today and that in lieu of providing
us allowance for landscaping as agreed in principle so that we could hide the building
and possibly recover some of our depreciated property value they were going to move
the building an additional 7 '/2 feet from what they originally told us and do the
landscaping on their property themselves which will break up the lines on the building
but it will not hide it has far as I know because I don't know what kind of landscaping is
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 19
going in there, they haven't discussed that with us. I feel it is important to interject here
that the day after our meeting with them we received word from a realtor with whom we
have been working with on the impact that this building will have on our property value.
This building could possibly cause the reduced resale value of our property as much as
$26,000. That is 20% of my property value. I don't have the actual numbers here with
me because we did not have time to get everything put together. This was a verbal
conversation we had with our realtor and she has been working with brokers and
appraisers to try and come up with an actual figure. Even after finding that we did not
call the church to renegotiate because we felt we had made an agreement with them
and that we would bite the bullet and stick to it. I think that is called integrity. What we
agreed upon in principle was that they would give us a $3000 allowance to landscape
our backyard. It would hide the building from view, draw the eye down into the yard
away from that building. We made it quite clear that we viewed this as an allowance and
that if we could have the job done for less money we would and the church would reap
the savings. We also told them that we could go to bat for them so that they would get
any credit due for the trees that were planted on our property. We felt that the spirit if
not the leiter of the code was being met. Of course that final determination is up to the
Council. From the very first moving the building was a suggestion that the residents of
Haven Cove and the Vineyards had made several times, including this final move to 15
feet away from the fence. Each time it was rejected off hand as being impossible. Now
after workable solutions have been reached with all of the affected parties they
suddenly find that they can move the building and we feel that this totally negates any
previous agreements that were made. We feel that to change the agreement at the last
minute virtually at the last minute demonstrates that the Cherry Lane Christian Church
and their architects have negotiated with the surrounding residents in bad faith. We
feel that they are going to do whatever it is that they are going to do without regard to
the surrounding community. That even after agreements have been made the
neighborhood has no assurances that these agreements will be upheld. We therefore
respectively request that the City Council table this matter and require that this issue go
to binding arbitration before it proceeds any further. Thank you for your time.
Corrie: Any questions? Is there anybody else that was in that neighborhood that talked
to them?
Renee Griggs, 1426 N. Tina Marie Avenue, Meridian.
Griggs: We have really been frustrated over this whole issue because every time we
have made a suggestion it has been just totally flat denied all the way down the line.
When we spoke to them at this one meeting and we started talking about moving the
building again so that there could be landscaping behind the building we felt that they
were moving in the right direction. However, even though, first of all this isn't to scale
because our house is way bigger than their house, I don't know what their scale is but
this isn't correct. We felt that first of all this square footage here will be approximately
this size even though they keep saying it is the size of a two story home and that
sounds pretty benign. But it is like 12 two story homes all in one spot. That is a lot of
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 20
difference and they have their beautiful little picture over here that they had their artist
render. Granted we have been talking about their warehouse structure and from the
front it doesn't look like a warehouse type structure but from the rear it still looks very
much like a ware house type structure. They are going to put these little panels on the
back to try and break up the back a little bit. Which pleased us, but we haven't been
able to come to any guarantee of the type of landscaping, would it be like little low
laying shrubs or how many trees, what kind of trees. They haven't been able to discuss
this with us yet, everybody is a maybe and I think and we don't know. We hope that we
are on the right track with the church. We hope that we are headed in the right direction
with these concessions that are being talked about. But we still don't have any
guarantees and they haven't worked with us in good faith in respect to keeping their
word and making sure that we trust them. Because at this point we have no reason to
trust them. We want to know what kinds of trees are going to go and what spacing they
are going to go and how tall these trees are going to be and how much they are going to
break up the exterior rear of this building. Because again with this particular thing the
Juul's will be immediately, this building is immediately behind them. In their back yard,
right now they have a pretty open landscape situation where you do you look off at the
mountains and that is nice. But when this building goes in that will be gone and all that
will be left is this fence and this building. We think that it is fair, they are going to have
to move their sprinkler system, they are going to have to do some very major
landscaping to bring the focus down from that building to their yard. They will lose a lot
of money in the value of their property. We will also, however I don't feel, my husband
and I don't feel that we are as directly impacted since we are not directly behind them,
but this is still going to be our view. Again, we feel like hopefully we are working in the
right direction but we have no guarantees from them. We don't know the details and we
think that to approve it at this point without any binding arbitration we can't support that.
can't feel that this won't impact our property values, it has to. Again I had our letter
read at the last meeting if it was a home going up behind us we would still lose the view.
But like Mr. Bentley said we have a wonderful view but if you don't own the property
between yourself an the view then you don't have much of a view. 1 can accept that but
what goes up between us and our view really does have an impact on our property
value and our basic enjoyment of the property. We are not asking that they not have
their family life center. We are just asking that this situation be arbitrated so that the
impact can be lessened on the homes immediately involved and I did bring into
Planning and Zoning 100 signatures and this wasn't 50 households, this represented
100 households who said this isn't what they felt like they wanted for an existing
neighborhood. Those people are still in support of us trying to lessen the impact of this
particular proposition. All along we have said that we don't oppose them having a family
life center we just oppose having them have it as proposed. I would just ask that there
be some sort of arbitration take place so that all parties can walk away with a win win
situation. I was not at the last meeting, my husband and I were out of town but
somebody mentioned that they asked Mr. Crookston if everything met code and they
thought that he said no. 1 didn't know, I just found that out recently and I don't know if
that was correct or not correct. If they didn't meet code, what things didn't? Does that
sound familiar?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 21
Crookston: I recall it, I did not answer that question. I don't know how a structure meets
code or what a structure has to do.
Griggs: I just hope that you will take these things into consideration thank you.
Corrie: Are there any other neighbors that were involved with this?
Ford Grigg, 1426 N. Tina Marie, Meridian.
Griggs: At our last meeting we held with the church was a week ago yesterday of which
was a good meeting. There was a lot of well we think we can do that, sure, we should
be able to do that, etc. There wasn't any details so we have been waiting and they said
they would come by before the meeting. It was just before the meeting like I haven't
even been home from work yet and I haven't met with them or seen what type of shrubs
etc. So they had quite a while to come back to us and I guess where I am coming from
is I would like it just tabled at least one more month until we can work out the details
exactly what they are doing. They presented some items to you guys, we were behind
them we couldn't see what paneling etc. We would like to have a full understanding
before it is okay. I think we are moving in a good direction for the community. Our
feeling is we don't want it there at all. They want something good for the community put
in a ball park or something and anybody can walk on and use. But we are trying to work
with them so they can have their family life center but we would like to fully understand
the landscaping etc. and have them respect our opinion and totally give us the package
and let us agree upon it etc. before we move on. Thank you
Todd Anderson, 2492 West Willard Street, Meridian.
Anderson: I was at the meeting that we discussed about the building. I think it was a
really good meeting we accomplished a lot of good things. My opinion though is 1 don't
live directly next to the place. It does look very nice from the street but it doesn't show
the existing building that really crams up there. It is a tight fit onto the property and my
feeling is that if we were able to work with the church a little bit more that they, they
mentioned they weren't planning on building until next year in the spring. I feel that
maybe if we could table it a little bit longer that we would be able to make enough
strides that everybody will be happy with the outcome. As it stands right now I would
say if we had, table it another month 1 think that would be the appropriate action.
Corrie: Are there any other neighbors?
Tammy deWeerd, 2090 West Chateau, Meridian.
DeWeerd: I just wanted to say a few words on behalf of the addition this would be to our
community. I have spoke to the church officials and have learned what their plans are
and that they are offering to open up this family facility to the community. Right now our
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 22
community is starved for a safe place for our kids to go. These kinds of facilities are
exactly what our families and children need to go to. That is something that we can go
to during the short winter days, during bad weather and all of those kinds of things. I
wish that they were building it behind my house because I won't have any say on what
obstructs my view. But it is, I think it is very encouraging that the church is willing to
work with the neighbors. It sounds like that kind of interaction will not stop regardless of
what you do. I wold like to say this is an addition, it will be a great asset to our
community having this family life center and having it open to the community on a
regular basis. That is something that they did communicate to me.
Corrie: Council?
Bentley: It seems since our last meeting there have been some good faith efforts met to
meet and they are working out these details. It looks like they are getting (End of Tape) I
think they need to possibly table this again and let them finish working to see if they
can't get the finished details worked out on their landscaping and whatever other issues
they may have.
Corrie: Anyone else?
Tolsma: I have been wondering here when I have been listening to the testimony and if
possibly a development agreement like we use on the subdivisions and stuff like this
might not be in order. So everything is written down on paper and so that everybody
knows who is on first. That way everybody has an understanding and everything is
black and white of what is happening and what is going to happen.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor I believe that it is under normal circumstances appropriate for the
developer or presenter whoever the case may be to respond to comments that are
brought by the general public in testimony. I would like to hear a response from Mr.
Newberry as a representative of the church to the comments that have been raised in
the testimony.
Newberry: Thank you, I thought I was going to a bypassed here. First of all our public
meeting went very well. There was one couple that was affected that didn't make that
meeting. We had a separate meeting individually with them. At that meeting we
presented with their concept of what was fair in the neighborhood of $10,000 to them for
recompense. Towards the end of that meeting it was reduced to $3500. These are the
details that didn't meet their demand. So to be accused of bad faith negotiation really
strikes hard, it is not true. There were no commitments made at that time, we talked
about suggestions, we talked about possibilities yes. These are the things that we
wanted to do. Rather than put the landscaping here we elected to do it around the
building where it does the most good. As far as the trees and types these things are all
(inaudible) by P & Z, by Shari Stiles and the regulations that you have set up. We
intend to comply with them fully. We want to dress that corner up as we show and we
think this will do exactly what we talked about. I don't think it is in bad faith at all
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 23
(Inaudible) is going to be a very nice looking corner. We don't feel like we should be
tabled any further, you should go ahead and make a decision. Steve Moore also would
like to address a few issues to do with our (inaudible).
Steve Moore, 820 S. Black Cat, Meridian.
Moore: I was at and I appreciated the direct question abut what was done Mr. Morrow
in terms of dealing with our neighbors. I was at the meeting a week ago Monday night.
That was an extra meeting actually. We had a meeting that we announced publicly, we
sent out mailings, in fact the course of this I guess is one of the reasons why we are a
bit frustrated with the suggestion again to table again or go to arbitration. We have gone
I have been in this community for 21 years as a minister, I have never seen a church
that has gone to the lengths personally, I don't know of a church that has gone to the
lengths that we have gone to, to communicate with our neighborhood on any other
project. In fact in retrospect here is what we have done. The law requires that we send
out an announcement to everyone within 300 feet of our property. We did that we then
came to Planning and Zoning commission there was a petition of 100 people against us
at that point in time. None of which those 100 people ever came to us personally with
their questions or clarification they just came with petition. A number of those people
live beyond the 300 feet proximity which in one sense is neither here nor there, but it is
a fact. We then had that tabled we dealt some more. Since that time because of your
wise counsel we have sent out and by the way we had already had a public meeting
three families, three households came out of all of those. This is after the petitions had
been signed, three families came. Then we came to the City Council meeting last
month. Again the same people that are here testifying tonight are the ones that testified
then. We then sent out as you counseled us another notice. We sent this out to again all
of these people within 300 feet. The same thing, same people essentially came there
were seven people at the meeting from the same households that are here tonight and
testified against us. One other family that their one concern was lighting and they have
been very supportive. That is where it is with communication with our neighbors. I think
you heard an example of the kind of idea of negotiation here tonight when you heard
Ford say we don't want the building why don't you build a ball park. The idea it was a
matter of public record the letter that Renee Grigg submitted last month to the Council
here. I have looked at that letter and there were four specific things on it and it has been
said of us, it has been very difficult as Dale said to have our integrity accused to listen to
some of these accusations about not being a good neighbor. We feel we have spent a
good deal of money on this. We have moved the building, that was one of the
accusations they will not move the building. We have moved the building that was one
of the accusations. Another the second point that was made in that letter and in fact one
of the things was to place it closer right inside our sanctuary at this point. To place the
building right here, if we did that we thought about that a long time ago. We thought
about that a year ago when we began to dream this possibility. If we did that it would be
illegal it wold impede on fire and safety codes, it would, we have a significant ministry to
handi-capped people in our community. If we put that building there imagine the
distance to get into our worship place. It is unthinkable to us as a congregation to offer
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 24
worship and exclude handicapped people and make it difficult for them to come. It
would be a huge distance to get into the sanctuary to worship. This is pari of the reason
for placing it back here. These sort of things we have talked about, and in our minds we
have responded already to everything that has been asked. Frankly when the Griggs
left the meeting they made comments about this is good, this is exact quotes were
"thank you", "the trees are what we want", and as Dale said to negotiate about what kind
of tree that is already decided as we understand it by the City code and we are happy to
abide by the requirements that the Planning and Zoning commission placed upon us.
So I don't know if that answers your question about background from our perspective on
negotiation for this and we really feel like we need a decision on this.
Corrie: Dale do you have anyone further on your side? Council, do you want to hear
anymore? What is your pleasure at this point?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, rather than getting it back and forth issue here, I think clearly we
have an issue of he said she said whatever and we are not going to go anyplace with
that. I think the point of my discussion Mr. Juul in response to binding arbitration that is
not something the City can require. So it is clearly outside the question. So from my
perspective I don't want to see this tabled, I want to move forward. At the very least we
are going to have to have new findings of fact and conclusions of law. If there was a
table for 30 days or even two weeks involved that would put the final action on this
some time in November which clearly given normal building seasons and normal time
lags just isn't a doable deal. I don't also think that it is good business to strain things out.
I think that we get paid to make the tough decisions and make them in a prompt
manner. So from my perspective I am not willing to table as suggested by Mr. Bentley.
Corrie: Any further discussion?
Rountree: I think both sides have been stated.
Corrie: Nearing that I will entertain any motion that somebody would like to make and
we will run it up the flag pole.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings
of fact and conclusions of law for the conditional use permit for a family life center for
Cherry Lane Christian Church.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to instruct the City Attorney
to draw up new findings of fact and conclusions of law for September 16 meeting, any
further discussion? Nearing none, all those in favor? Opposed?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 25
ITEM #4: TABLED AUGUST 19, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 — COMMISSIONS,
BOARDS AND COMMITTEES:
ITEM #5: TABLED AUGUST 19, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 — TRAFFIC SAFETY
COMMISSION:
Corrie: Mr. Crookston, I believe is still investigating our discussions at our planning
meeting is that correct Mr. Crookston?
Crookston: That is correct.
Corrie: Hearing that I would, I guess we need to have a motion for that to continue to
the 16th meeting.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move to table items #4 and 5 to our September 16th
meeting.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we table items #4 and 5 to the September 16th
meeting, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #6: TABLED AUGUST 19, 1997: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SHERBROOKE
HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK COMPANY:
Corrie: There was also a request that we table this to the 16th of September.
Bentley: So moved
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that this be tabled to September 16th meeting, all
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
i�11011.611
Corrie: That was also requested to be tabled to September 16tH
Bentley: So moved
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 26
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we table that to September 16th, all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #8: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST ON THE LANGELY DITCH BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION:
Corrie: Is there a member of the audience here from the Brighton Corporation? Council
what is your pleasure on this one?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of
law.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow second by Mr. Rountree that we adopt the findings
of fact and conclusions of law. Any further discussion? Roll call vote
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Entertain a motion for the decision.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, it is decided pursuant to the above stated findings of fact and
conclusions of law this application for a variance from that portion of 11-9605 M of the
revised and compiled ordinances of the City of Meridian which require clean out boxes
to be separated by a maximum of 400 feet is hereby granted.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded on the decision as read, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: ORDINANCE #770 — GENERAL CITY ELECTION/ POLLING PLACES:
Corrie: I believe Council that there were a couple of slight changes in that ordinance
that City Attorney had. Mr. Crookston would you explain that and maybe we don't have
to (inaudible).
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 27
Crookston: Basically the primary change that I made in the title there was no statement
that the ordinance had an effective date, that is the primary thing that I found and
desired to have changed.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor question, Mr. Crookston does that mean that at the end of the first
sentence an ordinance of the City of Meridian proclaiming a general city election to be
held on November 4, 1997 designating the polling places, designating the registrar and
deputy registrars and ordering the City Clerk to give notice of such election.
Crookston: It should then state it should be a semi -colon and it should state and
providing an effective date. There were some other changes but that was the primary
one.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt Ordinance #770 as amended providing
the semi -colon and the wording and providing an effective date with the suspension of
rules.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve Ordinance #770
with suspension of rules, just a little off here. Is there anyone from the audience that
would like to have Ordinance #770 read in its entirety? What this is, is an ordinance
proclaiming the general City elections to be held in November the 4th I just added the
phrase. I hate to be redundant but we did need to put the providing the effective date,
that is all the different change on that. Is there anyone here that would like to have that
read in its entirety?
Crookston: There were a couple of other minor changes.
Corrie: (Inaudible) Roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Berg: Just for your information, normally this is a resolution each year or each odd year.
But because we added a new precinct we had to adopt this by ordinance.
Bentley: Are we going to have the electronics?
Berg: Are you referring to punch cards? I am still working out with the County Clerk
David Navarro concerning that. Right now Boise is first in line with the use of their
county facilities for their 90 precincts and Eagle is second with their one precinct I think
is all they have right now. And we are negotiating so it doesn't delay any further that I
still have to wait there until midnight with my punch cards.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 28
Corrie: How come Eagle got in front of us?
Berg: Eagle has had it done, they were already done by the County.
Bentley: (Inaudible) it would still be faster than the last time.
ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE OF 1.4 FROM R-8 TO C-
G BY ROGER MICHENER — 519 E. FAIRVIEW AVENUE:
Corrie: At this time 1 will open the public hearing and invite the representative for the
rezone to step forward.
Lawrence Ross, 1684 E. Braymere, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Ross: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council my name is Lawrence Ross 1 am a business
partner with Roger Michener in a 10,520 square foot retail strip center on Fairview
Avenue. I quite honestly think we have been able to resolve most of the issues on this
project with staff through the Planning and Zoning hearing and with Shari we kind of sat
down and worked through some of the details. Most of which were kind of some
concerns a neighbor Loren Ross had to the west of my property. We have been able to
resolve all of these issues with a retaining wall, a block wall or a block or concrete
retaining wall with some over above standard landscaping. All in all I think everything
else has been resolved. We have had to work though with the Highway District on
some access issues. Part of our request is for a five foot or reduction of the 20 foot side
yard setback for a commercial zoning adjacent to a residential use which is in this rear
corner. This is probably a little more accurate of a site plan than what you have as far as
the location of the first trailer house. We have been required pretty much by the fire
department to maintain access completely around our property for fire protection. So it
pretty much imperative that we have that alley between the two buildings. So we
basically established a 15 foot side yard setback with the concrete wall with additional
landscaping. That has been satisfactory to Loren as far as appeasing him and his
residential use there. I think it provides a very good screen, probably more so than a 20
foot side yard setback with a wall and additional landscaping. Other than that all the
other neighbors are in favor of it. I would be happy to answer any questions you might
have.
Corrie: Council any questions? Anyone from the public that would like to issue
testimony on this request for rezone? Council, discussion.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, question of staff, Shari and Gary you are satisfied with respect to
the necessary conditions and the input from the applicant?
Stiles: As far as the rezone I have no problem with the rezone.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 29
Corrie: Any further discussion? I will close the public hearing.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt findings of fact and conclusions of law
as prepared for us by P & Z.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the Planning and Zoning, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma —Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Entertain a motion on the decision.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, the property set forth in the application is to be approved by the City
Council for the zoning amendment requested under the conditions set forth in these
findings of fact and conclusions of law. Including that the applicant or its successors,
interests, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives enter into a
development agreement and that the property only be developed under the conditional
use process. If the applicant is not agreeable with these findings of fact and conclusions
of law, is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement that the property
only be developed under the conditional use process the application for the zoning
amendment should be denied.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree on the decision as read,
any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare a rezone
ordinance.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to request the City Attorney
to prepare a rezone ordinance, all those in favor? Opposed?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 30
ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A MULTI -TENANT RETAIL CENTER BY ROGER MICHENER — 519 E. FAIRVIEW
AVENUE:
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask the representative to once
again come forward.
Lawrence Ross, 1684 E. Braymere, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Ross: I don't think I have anything additional to add that I didn't say in the last public
hearing.
Corrie: Any questions? Thank you, is there anyone from the audience that would like to
issue testimony at this time on the subject of the request for a conditional use permit?
Hearing none, Council discussion?
Morrow: Question for Shari and Gary, do you have anything further to add with respect
to the conditional use permit?
Stiles: No I don't
Corrie: At this point I will close the public hearing.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of
law as prepared for us by P & Z.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to have the approval of the
findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared for us by the Planning and Zoning,
roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree —Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Decision?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, the City Council of the City of Meridian is to approve the conditional
use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with
the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or similar conditions
as found justified and appropriate by the City Council. That the property be required to
meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code,
parking, paving and landscape requirements and all ordinances of the City of Meridian.
The conditional use should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant by the City.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 31
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree for the decision as read,
all those in favor?
Bentley: I have a question for the Counselor, do we have to wait for the approval of the
ordinance?
Crookston: We don't have to because the property is already annexed.
Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 20 FOOT
LANDSCAPE SETBACK BY ROGER MICHENER — 519 E. FAIRVIEW AVENUE:
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the representative again
Lawrence Ross, 1684 E. Braymere, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Ross: One issue of order, I don't know how we plan on resolving, is we are also item
#16 on the list, I don't know if we want to go right into that after this one. But I have kind
of stated the importance of the variance as far as fire codes and everything else earlier
and I don't want to waste anybody else's time by restating it so I have nothing further to
say.
Corrie: Does the public want to issue testimony on this variance? Shari do you want
(inaudible) Council? I will close the public hearing, Council decision?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings
of fact and conclusions of law for the variance to the 20 foot landscape setback by
Roger Michener at 519 E. Fairview Avenue.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to have the attorney draw
up the findings of fact and conclusions of law for the variance. Any further discussion?
All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Council do you want to drop to item 16 and take the late comers agreement?
Morrow: I don't have an objection Mr. Mayor.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 32
ITEM #16: LATECOMERS AGREEMENT FOR ROGER MICHENER:
Corrie: I guess this is a request for a late comers agreement, this isn't exactly a late
comers agreement.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I believe what we are after here essentially is by virtue of the letter
is the approval of the Council for Mr. Michener to enter into a late comers agreement
with the City and we would instruct our City Attorney and City Engineer to prepare that
document.
Corrie: I just wanted to make sure (inaudible)
Morrow. That is a motion
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to have the City Attorney
draw up the late comers agreement for Roger Michener, any further discussion? All
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-0 BY
CHERRY LANE BAPTIST CHURCH, 2150 W. CHERRY LANE:
Corrie: Is there a representative from Cherry Lane Baptist Church this evening?
Randy Fout, 2062 N. Gladewater, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Fout: Mr. Mayor and Mr. Councilmen, I would just real quickly like to bring you up to
date on page 12 of the facts and findings as to what our church has done to comply with
the Planning and Zoning restrictions. I will do that as quick as possible. Number one
talks about the drainage system which was required by the City when did our parking
lot. We have had an engineer look at that and confer that we are on the right track. Now
what we are doing is filling the level to the point where the ground water no longer
stands. We have added material since our first meeting with Planning and Zoning we do
have existing material to be added on site right now. We feel like in number two that will
take care of the odor and mosquito problems because there will be no water standing
any longer at that point. The stability of the fence issue there in number two. Prior to our
construction of any parking lot that fence had fallen down at least once. And I believe a
couple of times before we did anything to it after we did the work it fell down again. We
then required our contractor to come back in, he put in some longer posts and more
concrete. To my knowledge it has not fallen down since then. So we have dealt with that
issue and would continue if that is still a problem. Number 3 there we have since our
meeting planted trees, we now have 27 trees on site. And our nursery I believe has
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 33
talked to your office about the plan there, we have 27 trees planted we have other trees
that are waiting to be planted. Number 4, the building inspector has been contacted,
the fire alarm system has been updated and fixed, it had a small problem. The fire
department is contacting AEI as of this week to meet with them to inspect that. The
electrical inspector has been there and there is one outlet that didn't work and we are
fixing to satisfy him. After those two things are done the certificate of occupancy will be
issued to us. So that is what we have done, are there any questions?
Corrie: Thank you, is there anyone from the public that would like to issue testimony on
this request for rezone?
David Runyon, 2100 West Lucerne Street, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Runyan: As I reviewed their application of rezone the main thing that stuck out in my
mind is it seemed like they were planning on moving from this building soon. In fact I
have heard that they have purchased a piece of property and planned to indeed
relocate. The thing that stands out in my mind is why would they ask for a rezone well
perhaps to increase their property value which I understand would benefit probably
resale value of their property. My concern is that when they leave the new tenant that
comes in will have an easier time of converting that space to an office area. That is one
concern, the other concern I had is existing lighting on the building now, the church
there are two flood lamps one at each apex of the church that have no diffusers or
anything on it and they shine directly into the back of my home. I am on Cherry Lane
immediately across from their parking lot. It has been a thorn in my side ever since we
moved in and realized that was a problem. I suppose that if they had come to the City
Council with a specific building plan that they wanted to do or remodeling that they
wanted to do I understand that it is zoned R-4 and that previously were allowed in R-4
zone and that zoning has been changed. I would then agree that it should be changed
to L -O. But as it stands I see no plan for any kind of building that they are going to put
on their site. And I see no reason why we should change the zoning to R-4 just to
improve their property value. I see that it would be a detriment to the neighbors and I
see that there would be a possibility that would have further lighting problems with any
new structures that are put in. So for these reasons I request that the City Council
request the application for rezone. Thank you
Corrie: Thank you, anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony at this
time. Hearing none, would you like to (inaudible)
Fout: Just a point of clarification I think it says right in the facts of fact that our intent is
in the long term to relocate because of space requirements. That was not a secret, we
have not purchased any land at this point in time nor do we have any land in mind to
purchase. So we don't know when that is going to happen. Our purpose for rezoning is
to make our building more sellable to a variety of things. Not just a church which would
be allowed and that would certainly be our number one choice, but to some small
offices.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 34
Corrie: Anyone else from the public that wishes to testify? Council, discussion. At this
point I will close the public hearing. Any further questions?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, if there are no further questions I would move that we adopt the
findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared for us by P & Z.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law as prepared by Planning and Zoning, any further
discussion? Roll call vote
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow— Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Motion for a decision?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor it is recommended that the property set forth in the application be
approved by the City Council on the zoning amendment requested under the conditions
set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law. Including that the property only
be developed under the conditional use permit process. And that the ordinance
rezoning the property not be approved by the City Council until the previously required
improvements to the property have been completed by the applicant and that the
applicant obtains a proper certificate of occupancy to the building on the property. Or
that the grant of this application be conditioned upon the applicant complying with and
meeting the previously required improvements to the property, the applicant obtaining a
certificate of occupancy for the building on the property. If the applicant fails to comply
with and meet the previously required improvements of the property and or fails to
obtain a certificate of occupancy on the building on the application for rezoning the
property pursuant to this application be denied and that the previously existing zoning of
R-4 low density residential district be maintained. That if the applicant is not agreeable
with these findings of fact and conclusions of law and is not agreeable with the property
only being developed under the conditional use permit process and the conditions
imposed hereunder the application for the zoning amendment should be denied.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree on the decision as read,
any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 35
Morrow: Point of clarification Mr. Runyon, what this basically means is that at some
point in time should this property be sold and they wish to develop office or whatever
then the process has to go through the conditional use process and you and all of your
neighbors within a 300 foot radius would have an opportunity for direct input at that
point in time. So these findings of fact and conclusions do take into account your long
term (inaudible).
Bentley: One other point Mr. Fout can you take a look at the lighting and if it is indeed
intruding try to rectify that.
Henry: Clint Henry, I was just going to say there is only one light on the building that
would be on during the night. The light in the front of the building, as I understand from
neighbors that have complained before is always turned off. So it is not on over night.
So it would just be the light that faces the east. One other thing I was going to say is
there is a certificate of occupancy on the building before the last addition. I don't know
why the new certificate was not taken care of but that is the one we are talking about.
Crookston: Would you state your name and address please?
Henry: Clint Henry, 2864 West Parkstone, Meridian.
Corrie: Do we need an ordinance for rezone?
Crookston: Yes
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I Wold move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare a rezone
ordinance.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to have the City Attorney
prepare a rezone ordinance, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VACATION OF GENTRY WAY IN
AMENDED MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION AND PUBLIC UTILITIES, DRAINAGE AND
IRRIGATION EASEMENTS BY DICK MESSERSMITH — PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY
ADJACENT TO LOTS 12 AND 13:
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask that the representative of the
vacation of Gentry Way come forward.
Tom Eddy, 290 N. Maple Grove Road, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 36
Eddy: Mayor and Council, this is a street that has never been improved, there are no
utilities and when they constructed Eagle Interchange is was blocked off from Eagle
Road so it is a dead end street. Like I said it has never been improved and the two
owners want to combine the two lots so they can have some room to do something with.
Corrie: Any questions of Mr. Eddy? Anyone from the public that would like to issue
testimony on this request for vacation of the Gentry Way public right of way. I will close
the public hearing.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare an
ordinance for the vacation of Gentry Way in Amended Magic View Subdivision.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to instruct the City Attorney
to draw up an ordinance for vacation of Gentry Way public right of way, any further
discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #15: PUBLIC HEARING: IDAHO COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT FOR THE
MERIDIAN SENIOR CENTER:
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite you to
Glen Ward, Magic View Subdivision (inaudible)
Ward: (Inaudible) that you are going to shut off my irrigation ditches is that correct.
Corrie: Wait I think we are (inaudible) that is the one we just closed.
Ward: All you asked for was the vacation of Gentry Way, you didn't say anything about
the irrigation.
Corrie: That is right
Ward: In other words that is not going to be shut off.
Corrie: I don't think so, no, he just asked for the vacation of Gentry Way (End of Tape)
Morrow: (Inaudible) irrigation law that allows them by vacating that right of way of
depriving him of his irrigation water.
Corrie: So we didn't take the irrigation water on that away from you at all. That is still
(Inaudible)
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 37
Ward: So he can't close that ditch?
Corrie: No, the delivery of water is still coming down to you.
Ward: Thank you.
Corrie: Okay, now we are back on #15, the block grant, where is Shari? Shari you are
on.
Shari Stiles, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Stiles: In April a staff member from the Idaho Department of Commerce came out and
did monitoring on this Meridian Senior Center grant. And as part of that monitoring they
do require a second public hearing to inform the public about the status of the project.
To date the seniors paid themselves for a storage area to enclose the freezer units that
are owned by Central District Health Department. That project would have cost them
roughly $17,000. They also had an emergency exit constructed with a ramp where they
previously had a dead end corridor and that was $1,960. The fire sprinkler and alarm
system which they have needed for quite some time has been completed. The total
contract amount for that $55,023.15 of which the City has been reimbursed $49,142
from the block grant. We still have a remainder of $2,858 to collect on the grant.
Besides the money that has been put in by the seniors roughly $20,000 they have over
100 hours of volunteer service. The initial contract was over $60,000 and they got that
contract amount reduced by $3600 just for painting the pipes. So they had a significant
volunteer effort there. The remaining work to be done is basically just paperwork for
close out. The system has been tested and accepted. The changes made to the scope
of work about the only thing that is not being done is some of the change out of some of
the handles on the doors and also some other handicap accessibility bars to go around
the center because of the significant increase in the cost of what they have constructed
that is going to have to wait for a little while. The budget did not change as far as the
grant amount and it was all spent on construction. The budget has changed as far as
the local contribution to that project and roughly the $20,000 they put in. The schedule
has changed significantly from the first the application that has gone in, it is almost two
years behind schedule and that was related to some of the architecture work that was
going to be donated that didn't end up happening. The location and objectives of
beneficiaries have not changed. That is about it, any questions? Thank you
Corrie: Anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony on the block
grant? Hearing none I shall close the public hearing. That doesn't require anything on
our part.
ITEM #17: STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT FOR SUMMERFIELD SUBDIVISION:
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 38
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, question for Gary Smith and or City Attorney if they have read this
street light agreement and is it acceptable?
Crookston: I have read it and it is acceptable to me.
Berg: It is in the same format as the one previously last month that we accepted pretty
standard but they did add another street light to that subdivision.
Morrow: That being the case Mr. Mayor I would move that we enter into the street light
agreement with Gary Voigt for Summerfield subdivision authorizing the Mayor to sign
and the Clerk to attest.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that we approve the
agreement for Summerfield Subdivision street lights and the Mayor sign and the Clerk
attest, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #18: DON HOWELL: CHERRY LANE VILLAGE FENCE LINE:
Corrie: Don, I guess you had some questions and we need to get some things squared
off here.
Howell: Thank you for the opportunity to come. The City of Meridian was going to
legislate the LID for our fence line which would include a new fence and some
landscaping and so forth. There are some of the homeowners are concerned about the
timeliness of this implementation and we would like to get a status report and possibly a
time frame for that implementation.
Corrie; City Attorney we had that discussion, do you want to kind of let the Councilmen
in on some of that?
Crookston: I would like to know Gary's answer to Don's questions, if you don't mind
Gary?
Smith: I sent two letters to Don one was, the latest was on August 4th concerning the
irrigation district license agreement and the information that I received from the City
Attorney John Fitzgerald II the Assistant City Attorney concerning who needed to be
involved in the encroachment agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. That
information was transmitted to Don on that date by letter. I don't think I have heard
anything since that point from Don. The plans have been completed, the specifications
were done, vinyl fence has been added as an alternative. It is my understanding that the
LID Ordinance needed to be revised to include the vinyl fence because it was not part of
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 39
the ordinance originally and I was instructed by the City Attorney that needed to be
done as a revision to the ordinance the LID ordinance if the vinyl fence was going to be
added as an alternative.
Howell: Once we found out that it would impede or complicate things we have decided
to forgo anything to pursue the vinyl. To just go with the wood originally as was
presented.
Smith: The preliminary plans were submitted to Nampa Meridian Irrigation back in May
and I haven't heard anything from Nampa Meridian on this so I don't know where the
association is with the fence. How you want to proceed, it is my understanding it is not a
City project we are facilitating the LID project by designing the facility, that is putting out
plans and specifications so that it can be bid. The irrigation district is requiring the
encroachment agreement. From a legal standpoint I don't know of any other approach
to the project. The City can't sign off as a part of the encroachment agreement because
it is not as I understand it is not a city project. That means according to the assistant
City attorney each property owner involved in the project has to sign the encroachment
agreement. I think that was my last verbal conversation with you Don that was what
had to happen. I haven't heard anything since then.
Howell: That is what I understood, my question was if we have an LID and just by
nature of the LID the majority of the homeowners wanted this that is why we pursued
this but it is a majority it is not a total (inaudible). By virtue of that if every homeowner
has to enter into a contract with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District would this allow any
individual homeowner to have the veto power and negate the whole LID?
Crookston: That is a very good question. I think that the City needs to work with Nampa
Meridian itself to try and get this accomplished. Because if one homeowner doesn't
sign Nampa Meridian will not allow it.
Howell: That has been my understanding.
Crookston: I think that possibly the City needs to take some action in regards to Nampa
Meridian to see if we can't get that done and there is no way to tell what is going to
happen until we do make that effort.
Howell: (Inaudible) City of Meridian does approach Nampa Meridian Irrigation District
we have some other issues that we have compromised on as a bunch of homeowners
just to help the forward progress of this. If you are going to enter into some kind of
negotiating with them we would still like to have some discussion with them on the
location of the fence line of what they have led us understand where they want it. There
is a gap there between what they would want and what we would want. There are some
privacy issues that we don't feel like have been addressed. We see other exceptions
apparently to us up and down Cherry Lane that we would like to exercise some of those
(inaudible) and haven't been able to.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 40
Crookston: I would like to have a written document from you stating what you have
done and what you would like to see done. Also in my discussion this afternoon with the
Mayor 1 was wondering whether or not and thinking of you Don and possibly other
homeowners that it was desirable to have the fence abut the sidewalk is that correct?
Howell: Our desire would be 3 to 5 feet. So there is somewhat of a landscape are so it
is not totally sterile as far as having right on the sidewalk. But from what we understand
that we are liable for, it is part of our property. If we are indeed liable for maintaining and
what happens on it we would like to have to be able to control it more. As far as
approaching me individually we have never formally organized and so I am approaching
you as an individual homeowner and while I might have somewhat of a consensus of
some of the homeowners there are other homeowners and block captains we sort of
have formulated a communication web. They are here and if possible could they have
an opportunity share some other ideas and opinions to. Like I say I am just one just to
make sure you are aware of that.
Crookston: I think that would be very appropriate, I guess that is up to the Council.
Howell: And also I would be glad to entertain any other suggestions that the Council
might have for helping us implement this, any changes or additions. I think most of you
are aware of some of what we have been up against the past year or so working on this.
Lots of factors that Wayne in particular is aware of working with the now defunct Cherry
Lane Village Homeowners Association. I would just appreciate any input.
Corrie: If someone would like to help us out here we can go ahead and make some
suggestions to Nampa Meridian.
Leno: My name is Doug Leno I am a homeowners of 3369 Sugar Creek Drive. The
matter before us concerns the appearance of Cherry Lane Subdivision, its image in the
community and their property values therein. Many of you know that for over two years
the homeowners along the fence line have struggled with deteriorating its existing fence
and the maintenance issues associated with that. Abundance of bare ground and
weeds, confusion regarding who owns the maintenance itself whether that be the
homeowner or the irrigation district and gaps between those two responsibilities. As 1
mentioned deteriorating property values. We have also received comments from
homeowners in the interior of the subdivision who are also concerned about their
property values. Most of you know that the official if you will association of Cherry Lane
has failed. Those of us that are on the fence line along Cherry Lane have informally
organized and we are very desirous of a positive community image. We are concerned
about the appearance of the fence line, that privacy that is afforded by the fence line to
the homeowners, the consistency along the Cherry Lane corridor. The liability of the
homeowner and the risks associated with maintenance and trespassing and as I
mentioned before property values. As you know we have organized informally and have
approached the City with the administration of an LID. This is a task that we believe is at
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 41
this time represents the best chance for success of consistency along the homeowners.
Not all of which are in 100% agreement. We have struggled with designs as you know
and we are at this point ready to see some progresses I am sure many of you are. My
comments this evening are directed in two specific areas. First of all I would like to urge
City action to move forward as quickly as we can with this LID. Because many of us
have been waiting as I mentioned for two years and I am sure many of you are tired of
seeing our weeds as well. Number two I would like to request city assistance in as Don
mentioned in the placement of the fence and the setback which is allowed by the
Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. There are two areas that I am most concerned about
that are relative to the fence line placement. The first is consistency, if you imagine
driving down Cherry Lane from downtown Meridian towards Black Cat Road and if you
were to view the different fence setbacks and landscaping and so forth you would find
some are landscaped some are not, but all are between zero and roughly five feet
setback. Some of the access boxes are nicely framed. There has been maintenance
that has been designed into the subdivision with pressurized irrigation already watering
the areas between the fence and the sidewalk and there is minimal liability to the
homeowner because of all of this planning. When you come to Ten Mile Road and the
Cherry Lane area that we are speaking then we are asked to view a 20 foot setback
with associated homeowner liability of the area between the fence and the sidewalk.
The associated maintenance problems therein involving homeowner access to the area
even though the homeowner is responsible for the area. I understand the recent
construction of the tiling of the ditches and so forth has brought some new issues to
light relative to the irrigation district's desires with regard to protection of their own
easement and their own access to their ditches. However the issue of consistency is a
very important one to us and I believe it is to the City as well. The other area of great
concern to me is that of privacy. As you know the widening of Cherry Lane and the
associated tiling of the ditches has resulted in some areas particularly those areas close
to the new Albertson's store have resulted in the road actually raised above the level
that it was before. Recent construction by (inaudible) has also introduced the problem
of lighting in that general vicinity. So we have an additional privacy issue from the
lighting of the Albertson's parking lot and also just the fact that people walking along the
sidewalk can have a full view over the top of the existing fence into the yards of those of
us that are in that section of Cherry Lane. As I mentioned my desire is to request
assistance from the City in obtaining a different setback. One that would ensure both
consistency along the Cherry Lane corridor and the privacy of those individuals along
that area. We believe that this would facilitate the community image, we believe that it
would increase or I should say protect our property values. It would solve the
homeowner maintenance issues and the associated liability with regard to access
versus responsibility.
Corrie: Thank you, anyone else want to speak? Does that give you some ideas
counselor of what we perhaps need to do?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 42
Crookston: Yes, Don, do you know discussions with the homeowners whether or not
they are agreeable to allow Nampa Meridian to come onto their property if they have to
repair that piping?
Howell: Yes, from what I understand (inaudible). My understanding is they are quite
willing (Inaudible) further to the south then if and when they have to have access we
understand that is potentially part of the chance that we take. But the chance (inaudible)
feel (inaudible) exercise that option rather than have it inaccessible.
Crookston: Do they understand if Nampa Meridian comes in and let's say has to dig up
a portion of that pipe the don't necessarily have to repair what they dig up. Do you
understand that. Because Nampa Meridian has an easement and (inaudible)
Rountree: Is that how their easement it written out?
Crookston: 1 haven't read the easement for quite some time but I imagine it is and
Nampa Meridian does not take are of those easements
Howell: (Inaudible) when they get enough phone calls they do mow that, they have
mowed it several times this past summer.
Smith: Mr. Mayor, I think this whole question goes back to a question of Nampa
Meridian's authority on all of their easements that pass through the City of Meridian.
Wherein they require this encroachment agreement or license agreement any time you
are within their designated easement with the legality of that jurisdiction or authority I
think is at issue here. I agree with the homeowners wholeheartedly that it is an awful lot
of work to go to move a fence ten feet which is what Nampa Meridian is telling us on the
ground and verbally is as far as that fence can be moved toward Cherry Lane Road.
They want that fence two feet off of their clean out boxes that are there. That Ditch
owned by Nampa Meridian or maintained by them has been piped for some time. I don't
believe it was piped as part of the Cherry Lane road expansion project. The Settlers
Ditch was.
Leno: (Inaudible)
Smith: That is right, the one closest to the fence though I don't think was piped as part
of the project. I think it has been piped for some time.
Rountree: That is not true, there is another ditch that is tiled in there. There are three
that are parallel and it was tiled three or four or five years ago.
(Inaudible)
Rountree: There is a black plastic corrugated (inaudible) three parallel pipes.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 43
Smith: Anyway, I get back to the same issue at hand is the legality of Nampa meridian
Irrigation District to demand or require the easements that they say they have within
which you can't operate unless you have a license agreement or an encroachment
agreement. I think that is an issue that is everywhere development is occurring within
the City of meridian. You have a few developers for one that I can think of meridian
Greens developer that had challenged.
Leno: And that is my understanding as well and so the reason that I am here is to ask
for assistance from the City to approach Nampa meridian on behalf of this LID given the
complication of one homeowner not signing and causing the whole LID to fall apart. We
are asking that if the City could see the virtue and consistency and privacy agreements
that they might see fit to help us approach Nampa meridian Irrigation district which we
have done individually and collectively and failed already in this very matter. We have
gone to them and said we would like our fence out here and here is why and they say
no. So I understand perfectly well where you are coming from.
Smith: I think also Mr. mayor and Council that to the East of this project we are not
dealing, I don't think we are dealing with Nampa meridian I think we are dealing with
Settlers. Two different entities and two different attitudes.
Leno: That is correct, only in a portion of the area closer to the new Albertson's there is
a Settlers Canal and then there is a Nampa meridian delivery canal that was recently
tiled. So I could have gotten that backwards it could be Settlers going one way and
Nampa meridian coming the other way. There is a big redirection box
Smith: There is a very large diversion structure where Eight mile Creek crosses under
cherry lane Village.
Leno: Then Settlers comes across at an angle or one of them does.
Smith: Nampa meridian comes across on an angle. Settlers is paralleling Cherry Lane
Road from the east all the way.
Leno: From that diversion system there is a delivery ditch that is Nampa meridian that
goes back east towards Ten mile Road. So you are absolutely right it is partially a
Settlers issue as well. We have not, at least I have not talked with Settlers. It is only
Nampa meridian that I have talked to. Every time their requirements are based on
previous experience they always mentioned somebody who has built a swimming pool
on top of a ditch or some terrible thing that has happened. I guess we could sign an
agreement with you and then you could say we could have access. But when it actually
comes to implementation they don't want to come in and dig up a tree and they don't
want to have a second generation homeowner if you will building a shed on top of it and
so forth and all of these things we understand. I just think it is worth asking the question
again and that is why I came tonight.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 44
Corrie: Council, do you want our counselor to help and run interference here as best we
can.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, it seems to me the only way, the points are well made. The property
does look bad it does directly impact their property values from the City standpoint
Cherry Lane looks great except for this section of Cherry Lane. So it seems to me that
we could wisely and justifiably so some of the tax payer dollar in instructing Mr.
Crookston to see if we can't move this forward. It appears to me that we are perilously
close to the point of impasse and if we don't get moving forward the project does
(inaudible).
Rountree: I would say that we move forward with the idea in mind that the fence will be
built and either (Nampa Meridian will get on board or if they don't it will be built. But I
don't think we need to defer this for another six or eight months.
Morrow: I would like to see it brought to a conclusion.
Corrie: Okay Counselor, it is the will of the Council to help them post haste. I think Mr.
Rountree's comment let's see if we can't get that fence at 2 to 3 feet from the sidewalk
to give them some privacy until we get it straightened out.
Smith: Does that mean that Wayne is going to contact Nampa Meridian Irrigation District
or are we just going to proceed with the project and locate the fence five feet off the
back of sidewalk and see what happens.
Corrie: I think we are going to have Wayne
them first and see if we get anywhere with
up on the sidewalk with a variance.
if I understand it correctly Wayne approach
that. I know that ACHD put the fence right
Smith: Mayor that was a different situation and Nampa Meridian wasn't involved in that
one I don't believe. I think that was a different ditch, that is a Settlers ditch again.
Leno: Is it Settlers ditch that is also involved with the Sunburst Subdivision?
Smith: Yes, Settlers ditch extends from the west side of Castle Falls all the way past
Golf View and then north. That is the Settlers ditch.
Leno: It would seem to me that as much as I agree with your sense of how this may turn
out because many others besides myself have approached the irrigation district. It
would just seem to me that if the City were to act on our behalf that the irrigation district
might have some what shall I say interest in community relations and its relationship
with the City. Obviously my lack of experience is showing here, nevertheless that would
be my desire that we give it a shot.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 45
Crookston: I might say that I don't know when the next Nampa Meridian election is but if
there is anybody interested in being on that board let's get them out there and
everybody go to that election and cast their ballot.
Rountree: All you have to do is be a resident in the district not a water users.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, if I might answer Gary's point I think the issue here is from my
perspective is let's give it the courtesy of the one last try and get the no in writing and
we will press forward with whatever we want to do. Either they are going to participate
or they are not going to participate and let's get it in writing. I think we all know the
answer is that they are not, but let's go to the table one least time and then we will press
forward.
Leno: Could I interject one last comment and that is suppose the answer does come
back no there still remains the issue of privacy along that area just across from the new
Albertson's. I would like to request from the City that there may be some assistance or
even just advice on how to actually raise the landscaping of that area so that our fence
is not down the hill if you will. Given the setback restriction that the irrigation district is
imposing that being 2 feet from north or the access box. The way that area was
landscaped by ACRD there is a slope from the sidewalk down several feet to the
properties themselves. If we put the fence Where they ask us to we still have a serious
privacy concern among the few houses there in that general area. I would ask for either
some advice or some help in raising that fence. Do you have any suggestions?
Rountree: Move the location closer to Cherry Lane.
Leno: I agree but given the Irrigation District's requirement that is not an option. What
am wondering is Why can't we, I have 20 yards of dirt sitting there ready to be smoothed
out so that we can raise the level of that fence.
Rountree: It is your property you can do whatever you want.
Smith: I might say that on previous discussions that we have had in response to
elevation of fence on the back yard Wayne has said that we are by ordinance allowing
the top of the fence to be 6 feet above top back of sidewalk. So you could raise the level
of your ground to that point.
Corrie: (Inaudible)
Crookston: Give me that list of things that you have (inaudible)
ITEM #19: PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY REPORT:
Corrie: That has been requested by Keith Bird to give you that report on the 16" of this
month.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 46
ITEM #20: REQUEST EXTENSION OF TURTLE CREEK SUBDIVISION
PRELIMINARY PLAT, TURTLE CREEK NO. 1 FINAL PLAT, TURTLE CREEK NO. 2
FINAL PLAT:
Corrie: Shari, you (inaudible).
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council this is just a letter from Gary Lee that should be in your
packet. We have gone far beyond any extension time that was approved. They would
have had to have their plat recorded by September 20 of this year which was what the
variance was granted to. I really didn't know how to proceed, are they asking for a
variance on their variance. It has been a long time and apparently they are ready to
begin doing something out there now. There have also been some other issues that
have come up as a result of looking back at the proposal and Mr. Steele is here tonight,
he may be able to answer any questions you may have. Staff doesn't like these
extensions. We don't have any objection to the project but it greatly increases our work
load when we are having to go back three years to see what the conditions were and
how policies may have changed. I guess we are looking for some direction from Council
on where do we go.
Steele: Mr. Mayor and Councilmen, I am Jon Steele the developer. You have granted,
been generous in the past and granted extensions for Turtle Creek preliminary plat and
the final plat. This has been a complicated development to bring to fruition. We have
started construction, we have started cutting streets. We are moving ahead, the staff
has been generous to work with. The project is a very beneficial project to the City of
Meridian. It is in close proximity to Tully Park and I believe is going to be very beneficial
to the City in terms of joint development of the pump station in Tully Park. There have
been some issues that have come about just in the last couple of weeks. The plans
have been redlined and have been revised by JUB and resubmitted. There have come
to light that I need to obtain several more permits, several more easements. Those have
all been obtained, submitted to Nampa Meridian an easement on an adjoining piece of
property for tiling about 700 feet of Settlers irrigation canal was obtained today and
submitted to Settlers Irrigation. Section 404 permit to cross Five Mile Creek and hook
into the sewer across Linder is ready to be picked up tomorrow by Mr. Lee my engineer
who had a previous commitment could not be here tonight. Because this project is in
two irrigation districts both Nampa Meridian and Settlers I have had to negotiate
construction agreements with both irrigation districts. It has been quite a lengthy
process. There is also on the property what is called Five Mile stub drain and I have had
to obtain the agreement of Settlers Irrigation and the Bureau of Reclamation to abandon
Five Mile stub drain. It has been a long process, however the end is in site. Our
construction schedule that will be discussed at the pre -con and hopefully we will be able
to have our pre -con in the next couple of weeks will call for paving to go in yet this fall.
It is close, it is going to be tight but my contractor MASCO believes that it can be met.
So I would not be coming before you to ask for an extension if I were not making
substantial progress. If you have been by lately you will see that the roads are cut, it is
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 47
taking on the appearance of a subdivision. There is substantial amount of working
going on. I believe come November we will start to see the beginning of some
foundations go in Turtle Creek Subdivision.
Corrie: Council, any questions of Mr. Steele? Thank you, any further questions or
discussion of Council?
Rountree: Comments from Gary?
Smith: I believe the development plans have been revised and resubmitted. The
easements for Settlers and we received a copy of that easement today, it is signed by
Mr. Steele but I don't believe it was signed by Settlers yet. The Corps of Engineers
permit to cross Five Mile Creek with the sewer was I think that has always been part of
the plan but it is my understanding that is in the process of getting approved. I think
they have complied with all of our requests as far as the development plans are
concerned.
Corrie: Counselor do we have any problems here?
Crookston: You have a decision as to whether or not the Council desires to grant
basically a variance. That is what he is asking for so he does not have to come back
and file a new plat. It is totally up to the discretion of the Council.
Bentley: So are you saying he has to come back and file another variance?
Crookston: No I am not saying that, he has asked for the continuance of his plan so that
he does not have to file an additional request because he is within the time period
before the last extension expires. He is asking for a continuance of that grant where the
Council agreed to let him not file his plat within the appropriate time period. That is
about to expire I think it is in the end of this month is it not? So that is, it is just totally
within the discretion of the Council. Basically you are renewing or he is renewing his
request to have that ordinance requirement that he have the plat recorded within I think
it is two years initially and then he had two continuances and he is now asking for a third
continuance is that not correct Jon?
Rountree: I guess if the technical aspects of the subdivision are still consistent with our
subdivision ordinance and it has to my knowledge not changed since 1990, 1993 or
1994 what are the technical problems with continuing the (End of Tape)
Stiles: (Inaudible) subdivision except for the fact that there has been an illegal split that
we can't deal with unless it is made a part of this plat unless the Council wants to waive
the requirement for somebody to comply with the subdivision ordinance as far as
platting property.
Rountree: What is the split?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 48
Stiles: When the property was initially annexed they left out the five acre piece that was
sold to the Slagle's at that time. The plat also left an out parcel where the existing home
is, the brick home. The home itself was a legal lot at that time, the remainder of the
property was one parcel at that time. Property is now five pieces of property where it
was once two. So and now the Cairn's have sold the property the 2.5 acres along with
the house to someone else but they are not eligible for any kind of a building permit
whatsoever without being part of a subdivision. Once this subdivision is platted there is
nothing for them to subdivide from. So that is the only issue that I would like to have
taken care of and I know Phil Kirby indicated that was not a problem that (inaudible)
Steele: That was the result of the Cairn sale of a 2.5 acre parcel that they lived in not as
a result of a sale that I performed. That is owned by Mr. Martinez and I consider it
reasonable to include his lot within the subdivision.
Stiles: That won't create any problems for you?
Steele: I don't believe it will be a problem.
Stiles: Have you approached him at all?
Steele: Haven't talked to him about it but he is a reasonable fellow and I don't think that
will be a problem.
Rountree: Has that been annexed?
Stiles: Yes, and I believe the improvements, your development plans do the sidewalk
improvements go just through his property but not through the five acre parcel is that
right?
Steele: Right, just through his 2.5 acres.
Stiles: So it would only make sense that roadway dedication take place at the same
time so that the sidewalk is consistent, that is the only problem that I had with the
project.
Steele: That is one that I think we can remedy simply by submitting an amended plat.
Stiles: Gary asks if he has to submit an amended plat does it have to come back to
Council?
Morrow: Question for Shari, refresh my memory, in a new plat submittal what are the
filing fees?
Stiles: Preliminary plat $300 plus $15 per lot I believe.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 49
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, as a point of discussion it seems to me that we are stretching here.
I don't have a problem with the fact of the extension of the plat but I do have a problem
from the standpoint this is the third time around essentially on our ticket. I think if we are
going to grant an extension it is a clearly a time extension of not one year but something
more like 6 months. And that we request or the price of granting that is the payment by
Mr. Steele and his company of $300 filing fee or extension fee to compensate our staff
for some of the work that has gone on having done this twice before. If you will at this
juncture these extensions are somewhat of a free lunch. I think it is time for that not to
happen. So from my perspective I guess that it is an incentive to Mr. Steele to get
moving and get done. But also we as a City and a taxpayer are entitled to (inaudible)
some of our cost. I think in fact if we are going to grant the extension it ought to be
conditioned upon the resolution of the illegal split as mentioned by Ms. Stiles and the
payment by Mr. Steele and his company of a $300 fee for the extension.
Corrie: Any discussion on that one?
Morrow. I will make that a motion that we grant the extension for the final plat for Turtle
Creek No. 1 and No. 2 and that we require Mr. Steele and his company to pay a filing
feel of $300 for that extension and that the resolution of the illegal split as discussed by
Ms. Stiles and Mr. Smith be (inaudible)
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Staff?
Stiles: I just wanted to clarify on the submittal Turtle Creek No. 1 final plat, is that going
to be required within 6 months or within one year of the six month extension? Or is that
going to be (inaudible)
Morrow. Well according to the letter from Gary at JUB a time extension on behalf for the
following Turtle Creek subdivision preliminary plat, Turtle Creek Subdivision No. 1 final
plat, Turtle Creek Subdivision No. 2 final plat. I think the intent of the motion is 6 months
from expiration date. September 20 is the date we have in our letter so it would be 6
months from September 20h is the end of the extension.
Stiles: So they would need to submit the final plat for No. 2 by next September or
March?
Morrow: By March 20th
Stiles: So the final plat for Turtle Creek No. 2 needs to be submitted to our office by
March 201h?
Morrow. That was all three things that were requested in Mr. Lee's letter.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 50
Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
Steele: (Inaudible)
ITEM #21: WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
Corrie: Turn off schedule for 9-10-97. This is the inform you in writing if you choose to
you have the right to a pre -determination hearing tonight at 7:30 p.m. September 2,
1997 before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person and be judged on the facts
and defend the claim made by the City that your water, sewer and trash bill is
delinquent. You main retain counsel. This service will be discontinued on September
20, 1997 unless payment is received in full. Is there anyone present who wishes to
contest their water, sewer or trash delinquency?
Smith: Mr. Mayor, we have, Will Berg received a letter of request for a citizen a user to
approach the Board of Equalization for a decision on a water bill. She called me today
and said that she had received a turn of notice. Can we put her on the non -turn off list
subject to a decision from the Board of equalization?
Corrie: I think that is Thursday or Wednesday.
Morrow: I think that is only fair, she has filed the paperwork (inaudible).
Smith: Her name is Niki Cook, address is 2087 W. Snyder Drive. I don't have an
account number. I requested that this person not be on the turn off list. Thank you
Morrow. I would move that we approve the turn off list with the exception of Niki cook of
2087 W. Snyder that she be exempt pending the resolution of the Board of Equalization
of her issue.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and second to approve the turn off list except for Niki Cook until we
get the exemption request, all those in favor of the motion? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: The amount was $38,950.68.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I have a question, on this new format , this second column has R's
and some have B's can you tell me what those designate?
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 51
Corrie: Resident and business
Bentley: Thank you, what are the rest of them?
Corrie: I don't know, I asked that same question but I didn't ask what the others are.
Maybe that could be repeat. R is renter, B is business and the others are homeowners.
ITEM #22: APPROVE BILLS:
Tolsma: So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the bills, all those in favor? Opposed?
ITEM #23: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
Corrie: Gary Smith?
Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council, the first item is a proposal from ZGA
Architects to provide some space planning work for the relocation of public works and
building department and Planning and zoning department. I think you have a copy of
their proposal. It is basically broken down into space planning services and the
construction document services as far as cost and scope of work is concerned. Their
schedule would be October is` based on hopefully the completion of the remodel that is
going on now in the old high school.
Corrie: Any questions or discussion on Gary's request?
Morrow: I have none Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the space planning proposal as
submitted to us by ZGA.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to approve the proposal by
ZGA, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Crookston: You need a motion for the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement.
Morrow: So moved
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 52
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded for the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest, all
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council. The second item is a letter from John
Shawcroft, Waste Water Superintendent to Mayor and Council concerning land lease
for bio -solids application dated September 2nd. Do you all have that letter? I talked with
John a little bit today concerning this letter and to give you a little more information.
Presently with the James farms group we have 20 acres that we leased last year at a
cost of $7000 which is approximately $350 per acre. Last year we hauled right at 4
million gallons of sludge. I asked how much of this sludge could be applied to the 40
acres that he is proposing and he responded that approximately % of that or
approximately 2 million gallons could be applied to the 40 acres. The 40 acres that Mr.
Johnson owns is immediately adjacent to our west property line. That property is
accessible from our property from the City's property. So there would be no equipment
on public roads, it would all haul from our property directly onto Mr. Johnson's. I guess
that is about all of the information that I have for you outside of John's letter.
Corrie: And Larry James is up at the end of this October?
Smith: Yes
Corrie: Council you have a choice here it looks like, is there any discussion?
Morrow'.. If there is no discussion I am prepared to move to approve the contract
between the City of Meridian sewer department and Mr. Frank Johnson in the amount of
$15,500 (inaudible) October 1, 1997 to September 30, 1998.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to accept Mr. Johnson's offer for the waste water
treatment plant sludge to be applied at $15,500, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Shari?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council Ed Pierce from Lumberman's is here tonight he is the
manager of Lumberman's. They are going to, they desire to relocate to the NW Lineman
College. I met with Mr. Pierce out at the site and indicated the improvements that would
be required as part of their certificate of occupancy and also as part of their getting a
building permit to do some remodeling. The site currently has got a little bit if
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 53
landscaping. It doesn't have the number of off street parking spaces that would be
required. It is directly across the street from residential property where we have had
some problems in the past. So I indicated to Mr. Pierce that there would need to be a
sidewalk put in, 20 foot planning strip, and that the off street parking would need to meet
the ordinance. His response was that if improvements needed to be made perhaps
they wouldn't relocate there and perhaps move out of Meridian. So I felt it best if he
would come and talk to the Council and you could let him know your feelings about that.
I do think it is important that as opportunity arises that we do bring some of these
properties up to ordinance requirements particularly with some of the problems we have
had in that neighborhood. I understand that the property is not owned by Lumberman's,
Boise Cascade owns the building and the underlying property still belongs to the
railroad. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't have to comply. But Mr. Pierce may
have some additional information for you. At least he can get your thoughts directly and
if I am out of line.
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Pierce for waiting and being so patient. Let's hear your side of
this.
Pierce: Our situation now is we are in two locations, we are on E. 1St Street and we are
leasing space. Originally we were subleasing from the NW Linesman school and the
building belonged to Boise Cascade and the properties all belong to the railroad. We
have overgrown where we are at and there is no way for us to expand where we are at
on E. 1St Street. Boise Cascade has come to the conclusion that they don't want to
lease the property anymore they want to sell the building. They want to sell the building
and get out of it and we would have to renegotiate a lease with the railroad. So we can
never own the property. But as far as the landscaping I am sure we would do Whatever
we need to do to landscape it. We would shield that area, we could put slats in the
fence and shield it from the people's view across the street. Somehow we can provide
the yard is twice as large as what we have now. So we can figure a way of parking our
employees within the lot. But as far as the sidewalk and that type of thing there is no
sidewalk down that street, there really isn't any (inaudible) there are no sidewalks on
either side of that street all the way down. So I don't know where you can figure out to
put it. Flight now it would be our main store so we would definitely clean the area up.
We would repaint it, like I said we would do Whatever landscaping that needs to be
done. But basically (inaudible) have to put the improvements of a sidewalk in, we are
still negotiating with Boise Cascade on the price of this property. It might be cost
prohibitive we will look someplace else. But we do have to relocate because at this point
we can't continue the way we are at in two locations. Like I said Boise Cascade does
not want to lease anymore they want to sell the building and get out of there. So that is
the situation we are in.
Corrie: Have you talked to ACRD and their requirements here?
Pierce: I don't know what steps I was supposed to take, no we haven't.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 54
Morrow: If I might offer these things. Here is a prime example of a business expanding
in spite of whatever may happen on E. 1St and downtown Meridian and now we are
really getting down to the nifty gritty (inaudible) the harsh reality of it is that you have a
leased facility with respect (inaudible). The reason in my mind that this is important is
because as we all know Meridian has preserved that rail road corridor. There is a big
future long term in terms of whether we as cities get to buy the corridor or whatever. In
this particular case these folk can buy the building they can't buy anything with respect
to the dirt. So in terms of improvements they in fact ought to be somewhat minimal.
Landscaping and fence slating and so on and so forth is fine. With respect to curb and
gutter and sidewalk there is more than ample precedent by action of this Council has
taken an the former Council has taken exempting improvements of curb and gutter and
sidewalk and those types of things in Old Town based on the line of thinking that there
are no specifications that ACHD has for the rebuild of those things. The attitude of the
Council's has been that at such time that old town ultimately is allowed to redevelop in
whatever it is going to develop in at that point in time then those get rebuilt by virtue of
LID'S or (inaudible). Again this is an issue of dealing of reality as opposed to some of
the things that we heard earlier this evening. What we as a Council have to make the
decision is as Mr. Eberly has pointed out is what is it we are willing to do to foster the
business (inaudible) and make the thing work. I would suggest to you that Pierce is
absolutely correct that from the standpoint the cost of old dirt in my own experiences in
downtown Meridian is greater than the cost of clean dirt. So unless we as a City are
willing to make some concessions with respect to those things happening no matter
what folk would like to see happen down town from a practical standpoint it isn't going to
happen unless you can equate the cost of the two dirts. Right now the cost of clean dirt
is substantially less expensive than the cost of downtown dirt. So here is the first
opportunity to move forward with something that allows the business to stay in
downtown Meridian and the reality is that it is not contingent upon street decisions or
anything else. It is contingent upon the real economic facts of what price we are making
that dirt by what requirements we are requiring those people (inaudible). Mr. Pierce's
supervisor is absolutely correct it is less expensive to go to clean dirt than it is to
perhaps buy the building, not have title to the dirt and then have to put in substantial
improvements. Given the fact that we have granted those exemptions in two or three
instances that I can think of within a few blocks of here it makes sense for us to do that
here.
Rountree: I have a question for Shari or maybe somebody else, if you do relocate that
business to that property is there going to be a conditional use permit required?
Stiles: It is in the light industrial zone it is not in the Old Town zoning.
Rountree: So to get an occupancy permit then?
Stiles: In order to get a building permit they need a certificate of zoning compliance and
can't do a certificate of zoning compliance if they don't comply with the ordinance.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 55
Rountree: They have indicated that they are willing to clean it up and landscape it and
put in fence slating. (Inaudible)
Stiles: What we specifically have been approached with is the people in the
neighborhood they have read the ordinance, they know that when there is an industrial
use adjacent to residential use there is a 20 foot planting strip requirement. I know one
person is going to be on the phone immediately if they start moving over there with no
20 foot planting strip there.
Pierce: If I could add something here, it has been a lumberyard before, that is what it
has always been. We are not changing it. As far as what we are going to do inside it has
been converted to an office at one time and we are just knocking out walls. We are not
even doing anything to interior. The exterior is going to stay the same. We wanted to
add like a (inaudible) but basically we are not going to change anything. Like I said it
has always been a lumberyard that is what it was built as.
(Inaudible)
Stiles: Yes there would be, they are taking out walls
Pierce: Taking out walls that have been added in. Actually we are going to open it up,
we took the plans when it was originally built to the architect. All he did was just show us
where we have to take out walls to make it go back to its original state on the inside.
Morrow: It could have easily been built before a building permit was required.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Pierce: It has been all opened up and there have been offices put in there and they
have built walls here at the Linesman School, closed off areas so they could classrooms
and we are going to open it up again.
Corrie: It is really a tearing down permit not a building permit. I guess the ordinance
does require it is that right Mr. Crookston.
Crookston: The reason you have to comply with the ordinances because it is a change
of use from what it previously was.
Morrow: Let me ask this question, we are talking about a site of property, has that
property been subdivided? We are talking about three businesses that have been going
on there and very candidly BMC's door shop was BC's door shop and it is in
continuous operation. It is part of the same original plat of ground or lease ground and
this is being talked about there is currently lumber being sold from the front portion of
this facility. Which is consistent with what has gone on for the last 20 years that I am
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 56
personally aware of. So the only thing that is different about this property from what it
was originally intended was where the lineman school portion is.
Crookston: The difference is there is a new occupant at the property.
Morrow: They are currently occupying a portion of it.
Pierce: We are in it currently, we were subleasing it from the linesman school, they were
leasing it from Boise cascade.
Crookston: I would have to research that someway to know whether that is a new
occupant or not. Change of use doesn't necessarily mean, let me restate that, change
in use by definition is not necessarily the requirement that the physical use be different
even a change in ownership is a change in use.
Pierce: So you are saying if we stayed and leased it we wouldn't have to do any of that
stuff. But since we are buying the building we would have to make these
improvements.
Crookston: That may be
Corrie: Would you have enough time to check with Boise Cascade and see about
buying it and then in the mean time (inaudible) and try to get the two together here.
Pierce: We are (inaudible) and that is part of the negotiation if we have to do these
upgrades. We are looking for a long term commitment but if we have to make all of
these changes on the land that we are never going to own and put that much money
into it we will just go put money into land that we are going to own.
Morrow: That is where the dilemma comes between clean dirt and old town dirt
Corrie: I guess it comes down if it goes to court can you defend it?
Pierce: We have been in there for over four years I think approximately on the other
side of it. All we are doing is taking the fence down the middle that we put in and just
taking over the whole yard and we have been in part of the building, we have been in
(inaudible) all this time too.
Crookston: But you would be a new owner if you bought the building and I believe that
would be a change in use. That is something that I would have to look at.
Bentley: (Inaudible)
Crookston: That is basically the idea. I don't disagree that it is dumb but that is the way
our ordinances read.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 57
Pierce: Right now it is kind of our secondary yard, if we move our (inaudible) it is going
to clean the whole place up, it is going to be a lot more presentable, it is going to be
better for the community in the long run.
Bentley: I don't think anybody is going to argue with that.
Rountree: (Inaudible) how do we make it work for both of us.
Morrow: I guess the bottom line Charlie is that is exactly the question because the issue
is that right here is a perfect example of the discussion that went on earlier this evening.
If we are going to make downtown work we have got to make the businesses capable of
working down there irregardless of how the heck you are going to get in and out of
downtown. If we can't make it work, if (Inaudible) and here right now is a perfect
candidate, either we figure out a way to make these things work or they leave the area.
Rountree: (Inaudible)
Morrow: We have done something in terms of traffic circulation that has driven two
places vacant and the reality is that we weren't able to deal with the issues to make
them break even with the cost of the dirt so they went for new dirt and go to an industrial
park probably and have easier access and a whole lot of other positive things. From our
standpoint we are getting something here that is beneficial to the City because we are
getting some economic activity and we are very candidly in my opinion should they
leave Boise Cascade would be hard pressed to find anybody to sell those buildings to
and make the system work. So that is what I see going on here. I guess with respect to
Wayne's comments and Glenn is right also that we need to develop some way of
making this stuff work.
Corrie: We are going to have to make some ordinances changes.
Morrow: Whatever it takes.
Rountree: Well do we change them or (inaudible) do the appropriate variances and get
the level of commitment that the folks are willing to make in terms of landscaping and
area clean up, presentibility. Anything you clean up down there is going to be an
improvement.
Corrie: True and you can do it by variance I think.
Morrow: I think the other thing in terms of What they need is that they need an answer
posthaste because of those types of negotiations nobody is willing to set and wait 30 to
45 to 60 days for variances or conditional uses. We have had this discussion before
about trying to lease industrial parks Where our staff has recommended that we do
conditional use permits (inaudible). The reality is that nobody can wait for that process
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 58
to go on. So my point is that we need to do something tonight in terms of giving them
an indication that need to press ahead (inaudible). It is a bit of a risk on our part.
Corrie: It looks like we can tell them to go ahead and do that and give us a variance
request (inaudible) I don't see any other (inaudible) with your ordinances. So if the
Council wants to give that okay to you then you can get your variances we can go along
with those.
Bentley: I think we need the City Attorney to do the research and see how we can put
this together.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Pierce: Well we have some plans drawn and we want to get going on moving in as soon
as possible. We would like to be in there by this winter.
(Inaudible)
Borrow: Very candidly what we ought to be thinking philosophically is that if ground is
zoned for one usage and somebody wishes to change ownership or whatever it ought in
fact ought to be as simple as getting a building permit as long as it is an approved use if
by the zoning (inaudible) then in fact that is the procedure that they need to go. I am
sensitive to Shari's comments about updating and clean up. What we have to figure out
where you draw the line particularly with older properties and being in old town because
this issue is going to come up time and time again (Inaudible).
Rountree: 1 don't have any problem looking at variances on this particular project. I
don't suspect that Lumberman's will operate any differently there then they do
everyplace else and they have presentable operations. So I don't know that there is a
great risk and I would certainly favor trying to get them located at that site (inaudible)
get some landscaping in there and make it presentable to your future customers as
opposed to a vacant building down there growing weeds and vandalism problems. It is
one step to ultimately get that site to what we envision those old site to be. The next
donor may take it up or if you get an LID (inaudible)
Pierce: I guess if that was the case going up and down the street, there is nothing to
hook onto at either end.
Corrie: Does that give, (inaudible) ask for a variance. Just see Shari for that (inaudible).
Shari anything else?
Stiles: I had one other item that wasn't on your agenda. Packard Subdivision
Development agreement has been dragging on and on and I thought it had been on the
agenda previously. It kind of was it came up as a topic and we just indicated that the
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 59
Counsel and I needed to get together and go over that document and we finally did that
July 29th. You should have a copy of that in your baskets today.
Morrow: (Inaudible)
Stiles: We have reviewed they have signed it and returned it.
Crookston: Shari and I worked on it.
Morrow: So the deal is you would like a motion to approve the development agreement
authorizing the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest, you got it.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and second, all those in favor? Opposed?
INWAZT;WWRIFTIVETV
R
Stiles: The CC&R's were also submitted back in June of 1996 and I couldn't find any
indication those had ever been approved by Council. The City Attorney did look at this
today, he has made some changes. It is 42 pages long and that is why it wasn't put into
your packets, if you really want to look at them you are welcome to. But could they be
approved based on the City Attorney's approval of them?
Morrow: As far as I am concerned that would be okay. I would move that we approve
the CC&R's for Packard Subdivision subject to final fine tuning by City Attorney
Crookston and P & Z Director Stiles with consent of the owners of Packard Subdivision.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion?
All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Gordon: Just one comment Mr. Mayor, last week we moved the entire detective division
over to 217 E. Pine. They are in the building now so if you would like to take a swing by
and take a look at them you are more than welcome to. We didn't do any changes to
the building at all, no structural additions or deletions. We are using the temporary walls
only at this time. Also the minimum amount of phones to allow them to do their job.
They are in (inaudible)
Corrie: Do you want to do this?
Gordon: Yes sir we could, this is the School Resource Officer agreement.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 60
Corrie: This was looked at by Mr. Crookston and the only change that he had and this
was the same as last year except they added another officer. Is that he made a reserve
officer to be of campus and he put it should be off campus. We didn't have any problem
(inaudible). With your approval
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move that we have the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest to the
resource officer agreement.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we sign and City Clerk attest to the Resource
Officer agreement, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Wayne?
Crookston: Yes, I researched Saturday a question what does Mayor and Council mean
and I also researched whether or not the City can pass more restrictive ordinances than
are allowed by a statute. I do not have an answer yet.
Corrie: Anything else?
Crookston: No
Corrie: Mr. Morrow?
Morrow: I don't have anything.
Corrie: Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: (Inaudible) I have nothing
Corrie: Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: I have nothing
Corrie: Mr. Tolsma?
Tolsma: What about this barbecue out at the Waste Water Plant?
Morrow. That is coming up on Friday and everybody is invited and you have to RSVP.
(Inaudible)
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 62
Morrow: I would move that upon receipt of the written resignation from Mr. Manning that
the appointment of Mark Nelson to fulfill the remainder of the Manning term on the P
and Z to be approved.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve Mark Nelson
upon the written resignation of Ron Manning for the Planning and Zoning Commission,
all those in favor? Opposed?
Corrie: You had in your packet the request to modify the Ada Planning Association
Articles of Agreement. What they are doing here is they are adding upon termination of
this (inaudible) disbanding all property of the association shall be distributed to general
members in proportion to their contribution to the (inaudible) in which dissolution occurs.
This was a request that this be a resolution to fill in the blanks, you will get one those as
well. If you would like to do that tonight or you can look at it and look at it in two weeks.
(Inaudible)
Morrow: I don't have a problem so let's do it tonight.
Corrie: Okay we will make the resolution and fill in the number (Inaudible)
Morrow. We need to make it a resolution?
Corrie: (Inaudible) Entertain a motion to accept the resolution and fill in the blanks here
Whereas the City of Meridian
Morrow: Mr. Mayor can we have the City Clerk Berg tell us about that?
Berg: I really think that it needs to be an agenda item for the public to see as
Resolution number whatever and brought up so if there are any questions the public
can look at it.
Rountree: So prepare that for the next meeting.
Berg: Yes we will get it all filled in for you.
Corrie: The only thing I have left is the Executive Session.
ITEM #24: EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Bentley: So moved
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 61
Corrie: I have a couple of things, Shari Baker was asked to replace Walt Casey as a
member of the WARD on the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission. I would so
appoint her and ask for your approval of Shari Baker to be representative from WARD.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, question of the Council since I serve on that board or Counselor is it
appropriate for me to vote in her confirmation?
Crookston: No
Morrow: Then I would asked to be excused from voting on this.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the appointment of Shari Baker to
the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission to serve in the capacity of a
representative of WARD.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded, any further discussion? All those in favor?
Opposed?
• • t AN l
Corrie: I have a second one to replace Vern Croft the member at large the Chamber of
Commerce committee has asked that Mary Bodine's name be put in to replaced Vern
Croft, his medical doctor has asked not to do it anymore. He would be one the
replacement for the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission in place of Vern Croft.
Morrow: (Inaudible) the chamber understands that they do not have a dedicated seat.
Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the appointment of Mary Bodine to fill
(Inaudible) Vernon Croft's term.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded for Mary Bodine to fill Vern Croft's remaining seat
on the Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission (End of Tape)
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: (Inaudible) Recommendation of Mark Nelson for the Planning and Zoning
replacement of Ron Manning. I guess Jim has left, we interviewed Mark together and
both agreed that he would be a pretty good replacement. Did you all have his
(Inaudible) my recommendation would be for Mark Nelson to be appointed Planning and
Zoning Commissioner to replace Ron Manning who at this point has not given me his
letter of resignation but he did it on the phone.
Meridian City Council
September 2, 1997
Page 63
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to go into Executive Session, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Corrie: We are back from the Executive Session, it is not 12:10, no decision was made.
I will entertain a motion to adjourn.
Rountree: So moved
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and second, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:10 A.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
'\\\\ti\!PBfiPptP
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CIV CLERK / A�
BEAL
i 43C 5 'lip