HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-02-01~E IDIZ IAN~-
~J
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR
MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, February 01, 2011 at 7:00 PM
1. Roll-Call Attendance
O David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
2. Pledge of Allegiance (Pg. 1)
3. Community Invocation by Dave Duron with Meridian First Baptist
Church (Pg. 1)
4. Adoption of the Agenda (Pg. 2)
5. Consent Agenda (Pg. 2-3)
A. Approve Minutes of January 18, 2011 City Council Regular
Meeting
B. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of Karyn
deKramer in Initial Point Gallery, March 25 to April 22, 2011
C. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of Kevin Flynn
in Initial Point Gallery, June 17 to July 15, 2011
D. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of Sandra L.
Shaw in Initial Point Gallery, November 4 to December 2, 2011
E. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of David R. Day
in Initial Point Gallery, February 25 to March 25, 2011
F. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 10-003
Borup Property by Neilson, Inc. Located at 2250 N. Meridian
Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 0.22 of an Acre of
Land with a C-G Zoning District
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 1 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
G. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 10-
004 Fast Eddy's Ten Mile Station by Steve Eddy Located at 750
N. Ten Mile Road Request: Variance to UDC 11-4-3-39.C, Which
Requires an Unenclosed Vehicle Washing Facility to be 100
Feet from a Residential Zoning District
H. Addendum to Development Agreement for Approval: MDA 10-
009 Volterra Subdivisions (North and South) by Primeland
Investment Group, LLC Located North Side of W. McMillan
Road, Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road
Request: Modify the Recorded Development Agreement
I. Purchase Approval for Capital Replacement of the Wastewater
Divisions Wheel Loader. Replacement Loader from Western
States Equipment Co. for a Not-To-Exceed Amount of
$96,335.00 Which is the Result of RFP #PW-11-10217.
J. Approve the Bid Amount of $365,115.75 from Brown
Construction for the Victory Road Sewer Connector Pipeline
and Authorize the Mayor to Sign the Agreement
K. Task Order No. 10220 with Brown and Caldwell for
Construction Stormwater Management Program FY 2011
Consulting for the Not-To-Exceed Amount of $51,000.00. This
Task Order Would be Pursuant to the Master Agreement Dated
November 28, 2006
L. Amended Agreement for Hook-up to the City of Meridian's
Sewer/Water System Outside the City Limits: Diamond View
Assisted Living, LLC, 3570 E. Amity Road, Meridian, ID 83642
6. Community Items/Presentations
A. Sanitary Services: Spring Cleanup Week (Pg. 4-5)
7. Items Moved From Consent Agenda (Pg. 6)
8. Department Reports
A. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 11-771: Appointing Andrew
Mitzel, a Youth Member, to the Parks and Recreation
Commission (Pg. 6-7)
B. Planning Department: Fee Waiver Request for Mr. Lee White
for the Property Address of 1750 N. Ten Mile Road (Pg. 7-8)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 2 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
9. Action Items
A. Public Hearing: AZ 10-004 Pecchenino Annexation by City of
Meridian Public Works Department Located 1955 N. Ten Mile
Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of One (1) Acre of Land
from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density
Residential) Zoning District (Pg. 8-17)
B. Public Hearing: AZ 10-005 Ada County Highway District
(ACRD) Ten Mile Annexation by City of Meridian Public Works
Department Located Southwest Corner of W. Ustick Road and
N. Ten Mile Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 1.50
Acres of Land From R1 (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-
. Density Residential) Zoning District (Pg. 17-20)
C. Public Hearing: MDA 10-011 Silver Oaks Apartments by Silver
Oaks Apartments, LLC Located Approximately 1/4 Mile West of
Ten Mile Road, North of W. Franklin Road Request:
Modification to the Development Agreement to Reflect a New
Development Plan and Increase in the Number of Residential
Units Within the Development (Pg. 20-28)
D. Public Hearing: CUP 10-014 Silver Oaks Apartments by Silver
Oaks Apartments, LLC Located Approximately 1/4 Mile West of
Ten Mile Road, North of W. Franklin Road Request: Conditional
Use Permit for aMulti-Family Development Consisting of 369
Units on 24.61 Acres in an R-15 Zoning District (Pg. 20-28)
Adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, February 01, 2011 Page 3 of 3
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
Meridian City Council Meeting February 1, 2011
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:08 p.m., Tuesday,
February 1, 2011, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Brad Hoaglun, and Charlie
Rountree.
Members Absent: David Zaremba.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Pete Friedman, Sonya Wafters, Bill Parsons,
Warren Stewart, Mike de St. Germain, Mark Niemeyer, Steve Siddoway and Dean
Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Thank you for your patience this evening. We welcome you. For the record
it is Tuesday, February 1st. It's 7:08. We will start tonight's meeting with roll call
attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us in the
pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Dave Duron with Meridian First Baptist
Church
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by
Pastor David Duron and he is with Meridian First Baptist Church. If you will all join us in
the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection.
Duron: Father, we thank you for today. We thank you for the privilege of convening like
this in an evening and the freedom in our country to do so. We realize, God that you
have blessed our country and the freedom that we have to gather together, even like
this, and beseech your help and thank you for the help that you have given our city and
our country. We ask that you would give wisdom to our leadership and the business
that transpires tonight, to your glory, Lord, in Jesus' name, amen.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 2 of 28
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda
De Weerd: Thank you for being here with us this evening. Item No. 4 is the adoption of
the agenda.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Just a quick addition in the agenda for this evening. Under Department
Reports, Item 8-A, that resolution number is 11-771. And with that, Madam Mayor, I
move adoption of the agenda as printed.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agendas as printed. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of January 18, 2011 City Council Regular
Meeting
B. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of Karyn
deKramer in Initial Point Gallery, March 25 to April 22, 2011
C. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of Kevin Flynn
in Initial Point Gallery, June 17 to July 15, 2011
D. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of Sandra L.
Shaw in Initial Point Gallery, November 4 to December 2, 2011
E. Acceptance Agreement for Display of Artwork of David R. Day
in Initial Point Gallery, February 25 to March 25, 2011
F. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 10-003
Borup Property by Neilson, Inc. Located at 2250 N. Meridian
Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 0.22 of an Acre of
Land with a C-G Zoning District
G. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAR 10-
004 Fast Eddy's Ten Mile Station by Steve Eddy Located at 750
N. Ten Mile Road Request: Variance to UDC 11-4-3-39.C, Which
Requires an Unenclosed Vehicle Washing Facility to be 100
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 3 of 28
Feet from a Residential Zoning District
H. Addendum to Development Agreement for Approval: MDA 10-
009 Volterra Subdivisions (North and South) by Primeland
Investment Group, LLC Located North Side of W. McMillan
Road, Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road
Request: Modify the Recorded Development Agreement
I. Purchase Approval for Capital Replacement of the Wastewater
Divisions Wheel Loader. Replacement Loader from Western
States Equipment Co. for aNot-To-Exceed Amount of
$96,335.00 Which is the Result of RFP #PW-11-10217.
J. Approve the Bid Amount of $365,115.75 from Brown
Construction for the Victory Road Sewer Connector Pipeline
and Authorize the Mayor to Sign the Agreement
K. Task Order No. 10220 with Brown and Caldwell for
Construction Stormwater Management Program FY 2011
Consulting for the Not-To-Exceed Amount of $51,000.00. This
Task Order Would be Pursuant to the Master Agreement Dated
November 28, 2006
L. Amended Agreement for Hook-up to the City of Meridian's
Sewer/Water System Outside the City Limits: Diamond View
Assisted Living, LLC, 3570 E. Amity Road, Meridian, ID 83642
Weerd: Item 5, our Consent Agenda.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move approval of tonight's Consent Agenda, along with the addition in 8-A of
resolution number 11-771 and that the Mayor be authorized to sign and Clerk to attest.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. Madam
Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, absent; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 4 of 28
Item 6: Community Items/Presentations
A. Sanitary Services: Spring Cleanup Week
De Weerd: Item 6 under Community Presentations we have with us today Steve
Sedlacek with SSC. Welcome.
Sedlacek: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I'm here tonight to talk
to you just briefly about some information that the Solid Waste Commission has
discussed in the past. Councilman Rountree is on that committee, ex-officio member.
All right. Now that we are all turned on, the issue is curb side yard waste collection.
When we converted to the automated collection system last year 2010 we committed to
doing a spring clean up week for the homeowners in Meridian. The concern was in the
spring people are pruning their trees and doing yard work and there will be spring -- an
issue where there might be too much waste during aspring -- during springtime. So,
the commission has considered -- that we have agreed to do a week of collection at no
cost, just as an add-on feature to the program and that week will be April 4th through
the 8th, so for the first full week of April, and it will mimic the fall leaf collection program
where you can put out all the organic material you want, bundles of brush or grass or
leaves or whatever and if it's in cardboard boxes and Kraft bags or segregated into a
can, we will pick it up, we are going to take it to our transfer facility and mix it with our
organic material and take it to the landfill where it will be ground up as mulch, basically.
So, tonight I just wanted to tell you about that. I want you to know it's happening. Get
any comments from you if you have any. The public information will be headed out to
the public in their bills this next week, I believe, the 5th and the 20th, so we will start on
the 5th, so I guess if you have any negative comments about that we would have to
change right away.
De Weerd: Better know now, uh?
Sedlacek: Yes.
De Weerd: Yes. Council, any questions?
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Steve, just to be sure -- because when people think of spring clean up, I
mean they are thinking cleaning out their garage and, you know, the shop, the shed,
whatever. This is just yard waste, organics, it doesn't get into putting --
De Weerd: Couches.
Hoaglun: -- couches --
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 5 of 28
De Weerd: Refrigerators.
Hoaglun: Yeah. Microwaves. Whatever. Can you clarify that?
Sedlacek: Absolutely, Councilman Hoaglun. We had that discussion about what type
of clean up it should be. Should it mimic like what we do after Christmas where we
have an unlimited week of anything you want or should it be an unlimited week like we
do for fall leaves -- actually, that's almost a month now -- and have it be organic based
-- focused.
De Weerd: I didn't know you did that after Christmas.
Sedlacek: Absolutely.
De Weerd: I could have put my couch out there?
Sedlacek: No.
De Weerd: You said whatever.
Sedlacek: We have to be able to pick it up with the trucks.
De Weerd: Oh. Okay.
Sedlacek: Okay. So, we went back and forth on that issue. We did decide that the
issue as it came up in the public meetings that we had when we converted was this was
an issue related to yard waste clean up and so we are making it a yard waste week.
Now, this will be the first week we do it. We are happy to take input from the public and
the Council and the Mayor and we can switch it to a different type of collection next year
or -- you know, this is certainly a manageable issue. We can change it. So, this is our
first shot at it. But, yes, it will be an organic yard waste type collection.
De Weerd: And that's clear in your literature?
Sedlacek: Absolutely.
De Weerd: Good. Any questions?
Rountree: No. I have none.
De Weerd: Well, we appreciate that you did add that extra time, so that people with
sizeable yards have another opportunity to rid themselves of the winter stuff.
Sedlacek: Absolutely.
De Weerd: Thank you. Appreciate you being here.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 6 of 28
Item 7: Items Moved From Consent Agenda
De Weerd: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 8: Department Reports
A. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 11-771: Appointing Andrew
Mitzel, a Youth Member, to the Parks and Recreation
Commission
De Weerd: So, we will move into our Department Reports. Council, in front of you you
do have a resolution number 11-771, appointing Andrew Mitzel as the youth member to
the Parks and Recreation Commission. We have conducted interviews. I know that our
parks director and two of the parks commissioners interviewed Andrew as well and they
brought the recommendation to me to -- that they would love to have Andrew as their
youth member. Council, this is through the end of August. We anticipate, if he
successfully serves until that point, to renew it again for a whole year, but we would
need to have your okay at that time. So, I would open it up to any questions or, Mr.
Siddoway, do you have any comments?
Siddoway: Just briefly. We did interview Andrew. He is currently an undergraduate at
BSU. He lives in Meridian. He's a native to Meridian. Went to Meridian Middle School.
Meridian High. He has agreed that he can serve here and we believe he will be a good
fit for the commission and we have recommended approval of his appointment.
Thanks.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve resolution 11-771, appointing Andrew Mitzel to the
Parks and Recreation Commission.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the resolution in front of you. If
there is no discussion, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, absent; Hoaglun, yea.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 7 of 28
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Planning Department: Fee Waiver Request for Mr. Lee White
for the Property Address of 1750 N. Ten Mile Road
De Weerd: Item 8-B. I will turn this over to Pete with our Planning Department.
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The Planning
Department is requesting two fee waivers for Mr. Lee White of 1750 North Ten Mile
Road. Last year Mr. White applied for an accessory use permit, essentially, for a home
occupation, but that permit was denied by the Planning Department staff. Regrettably,
we didn't clearly explain his -- the Council review process to him, therefore, he missed
the deadline to come before you and seek redress on that decision. Because of that
staff feels that Mr. White should at least have an opportunity to apply for that accessory
use permit again, as well as Council review of the likely outcome of that application.
And, again, we are requesting that you waive the fees for those two applications for Mr.
White.
De Weerd: Thank you, Pete. Now, I understand Council waived the fee for the
application and, then, when -- when staff denied it there would have been another fee to
appeal the decision of the Planning Department. So, this would waive all of that; is that
correct?
Friedman: That's correct, Madam Mayor. Council will recall -- I believe it was in
December of last year Mr. White came before Council and requested a fee waiver for
that accessory use permit application fee, which Council granted. He, then, submitted
his application, which the Planning Department denied and at that point we more
effectively communicated the appeal process or the Council review process to him.
There would have been a review fee of 692 dollars. Because of the lag and the timing
and so forth, he was denied his permit; he was not able to come before Council. So,
given that we would -- we are requesting that the Council waive again the accessory
use permit fee, as well as the Council review fee. So, he would make -- if Council
waives the application fee he would make his application for the accessory use. If all
conditions were similar to last year's the result would probably be the same and, then,
he would seek to come and bring that decision before you.
De Weerd: So, Pete, can Council consider waiving both set of fees? Because,
otherwise, you almost have the same outcome.
Friedman: That's the request, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. I just wanted to be clear on that, instead of the definition of insanity.
Council, any questions?
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 8 of 28
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve -- oh, oh. That's not good on computers. I move
that we approve the request for fee waiver as explained in the planning director's
memorandum of January 21st, 2011, Item 8-B.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: Now, that I have caused all kinds of disturbance here. I think I do have a
motion and a second to approve the waiving of all fees and if there is no discussion I will
call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, absent; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Action Items
A. Public Hearing: AZ 10-004 Pecchenino Annexation by City of
Meridian Public Works Department Located 1955 N. Ten Mile
Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of One (1) Acre of Land
from RUT (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density
Residential) Zoning District
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I will go ahead and move into Item 9-A, which is a public
hearing on AZ 10-004, and I will ask for staff comments at this time as I open the public
hearing.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. This is a
recommendation for approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission on the subject
application to zone -- annex and zone one acre of land from RUT in Ada county to an R-
4zoning designation in the city. The subject property is located at 1955 North Ten Mile
Road and currently is surrounded by R-4 zoned property in the city. At this time there
are no development plans for the site. Future development will be contingent upon the
provisions contained in the UDC, currently whatever is in effect at the time that they
propose development on the site. I would also point out to Council that the purpose of
annexation is really to facilitate a Public Works program or infrastructure in front of the
property. As you know we are looking to get the re-use -- reclaimed booster station on
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 9 of 28
line and we need to get that infrastructure down to the Ten Mile interchange and this is
one of the properties that is -- that is needed to facilitate those improvements. Also with
this annexation staff is not recommending a development agreement. There will be a
separate hook-up agreement between Public Works and the property owner. The
property owner is Mr. Pecchenino. He is in the audience this evening and he has
granted permission to the city Public Works Department to act on his behalf regarding
the annexation application. During the hearing -- of the P&Z hearing it was discussed
regarding some RV storage occurring on the property. At first blush it appeared that
that was an outdoor storage facility on the site with the number of trailers that were
stored on the property. After speaking with the property owner it was determined that it
was really -- they were storing those vehicles for friends and family, so it wasn't really a
paid facility. However, the UDC still requires that that -- those vehicles be screened
from a public street and those standards are outlined in the parking standards of the
UDC. Public Works has been working with the property owner. It is our understanding
-- planning department's understanding that the fencing will be in place and highlighted
in that agreement -- that separate agreement that I discussed earlier and those things
are still being worked out. But that agreement will come back before Council for
approval, so you can anticipate seeing that. I did prepare a slide for you this evening
showing you how much fencing is to be installed on the site. It is highlighted in white.
Under the current UDC standards that fencing has to be a six foot solid fence and it has
to be adjacent to where West Hatch Court comes in. You can see that cul-de-sac along
the north boundary. Where it runs along that portion of the property it needs step in ten
feet per the fencing standards of the UDC. Testifying at the hearing on the application
was the Public Works Department, Mr. Warren Stewart, and, then, also staff received
written testimony from Theresa Pecchenino. Basically, her a-mail addressed the RV
storage on the site. No additional testimony has been provided to staff. The applicant
has provided some photos for you to review this evening. He would like to discuss
some of the fencing requirements the city currently has in place with you. Other than
the fencing issue staff has no other knowledge any of other outstanding issues before
you this evening and would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions at this point?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: Bill, I have read your description. I just need to understand the why and
have made several assumptions, but would you explain the why we are doing this. Or
maybe Warren.
Stewart: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree. It, basically,
stems from the fact that the Department of Environmental Quality has a requirement
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 10 of 28
that there be a hundred feet of separation between any domestic well and any re-use
main line.
Rountree: Okay. My assumption was correct, then. Thank you.
De Weerd: We have to be trained on these button things. And my glass of water. Any
other questions from Council at this point?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Pecchenino.
Stewart: Madam Mayor, as the applicant for the project I probably ought to make a few
comments before Mr. Pecchenino comes up. Is that okay?
De Weerd: Oh, that's right. The city is the applicant here. Well, I always like to have
our guests go first. Go ahead.
Stewart: Thank you. Just by way of a little background, as we sort of alluded to, the
city is putting a re-use main line down the Ten Mile corridor to serve as a main line to
serve the interchange, as well as additional properties along the Ten Mile as our re-use
program expands. There is, basically, a couple of these that you will hear tonight that
are sort of in the same situation where we have domestic wells that are within the one
hundred foot separation requirements and as such we have been negotiating with these
individuals to bring their properties into the city through the annexation process and to
hook up their services to the City of Meridian and we have been working with the
Peccheninos on that effort and have basically -- this is the first step of that in bringing
forward this annexation. As has been eluded to, there will also be an agreement that
will come before you in the near future, which will outline the water and sewer hook ups,
the fact that we will be recommending that the fees for those be waived and the city will
reimburse the Peccheninos for those connections. Also, the screening -- the fence
screening for the RVs, we will be providing that or recommend that the city provide that,
as they are -- we are the applicant, we are the ones that are initiating this. It is for the
city's benefit. But those will be part of an agreement that will come before you before
the actual ordinance. And with that, I guess, I would stand for any questions you have.
think Mr. Pecchenino has some questions, again, with regards to the fencing
requirements and would like to address those with you at this time, but I will stand for
any questions that you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 11 of 28
De Weerd: Okay. Now, you have changed your mind. Okay. Well, I do have both of
the Peccheninos -- Pecchenino. I love that last name. You both signed up in favor of
this application; correct?
Pecchenino: Yes.
De Weerd: Very good. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Pecchenino: Michael Pecchenino. 1955 North Ten Mile Road, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Pecchenino: I was going to come here to request a variance to the fence code to be
able to construct that side fence in a straight line that -- you see the pictures there.
Number one is looking east from the neighbor's yard and picture number two is from the
neighbor's yard looking west. As you can see we area on a cul-de-sac. The existing
fence is in a straight line and I was just merely trying to save the city a little money by
building a straight fence versus the way you have it up there.
De Weerd: Okay. Can you not build his fence the way he would like to?
Stewart: I will leave that question up to Bill, I think.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the current -- up here on the slide
here I have tried to portray what the current UDC, standards are as far as fencing and to
give you a quick answer, I don't like to use the word no, but under the current code
requirements the answer would be no. I mean it needs to step in that ten feet and it
really comes down to an esthetic issue I think. When we talked about it at staff with the
director it was her determination that if we lax this standard here we are setting a
precedence out there. If you recall there was a gentleman that contacted the Mayor's
office I would say maybe two months ago that wanted some relaxation from the fencing
standards adjacent to a common lot and that request filtered down to the Planning
Department and we were -- at that time Planning Department had made a stance on
that that we would want to keep that fencing in place and so that's the direction that we
have been given to present to the Council tonight is that we really should stick with the
standards that we have in the UDC.
Pecchenino: Can I ask a question, please? At what point does that ten foot easement
begin? Is it from the road or from the nearest edge of the sidewalk? Because I know of
a residence in Meridian that has a side fence, this property is located at the corner of
Ustick and Locust Grove, the northwest corner, and their fence is ten foot from the white
line of the shoulder line. Now, would I be able to put -- be able to build ten feet from the
pavement or is it going to be from the nearest edge of the sidewalk, which is measured
on this?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, may I address Mr. Pecchenino?
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 12 of 28
De Weerd: Yes, please.
Parsons: Thank you. Mr. Pecchenino, it would be measured from your sidewalk.
Pecchenino: Why is that fence on Locust Grove ten feet from the road?
De Weerd: Well, sometimes people don't actually follow the rules and they don't get --
Pecchenino: So, are they in violation?
De Weerd: Well -- and oftentimes our code changes after --
Pecchenino: It looks like a pretty new fence.
De Weerd: Is it? Are they in the city?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, without knowing the property and without
knowing the circumstances Ican't -- we can't address that.
De Weerd: We don't know. But just because someone else might have done it wrong
doesn't give -- especially when we are the applicant, it doesn't give us permission to do
it wrong, too.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Question for Bill. Bill, could we go back to that slide? We have the deal up.
I'm trying to figure out -- it talked about the ten foot setback on corner properties and,
then, the side yard fences have a five foot -- or shall be allowed where the -- can you
explain to me -- I might be confused here. Side yard fences that follow the side yard
property line shall be only allowed where the side setback is five foot or greater. Can
you -- I'm not sure I understand that correctly.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Member Hoaglun, Council Members, if I could have
Bill get the aerial back on, so that -- to kind of explain the situation. I think the reason
this confusion came on that one, Council Member Hoaglun, was what we tried to do in
the UDC with that illustration is illustrate typical situations with corner lots and the
provision under number three of that -- of that UDC section was street side or street
yard fences needed to be set ten feet back. The -- you know, the operating thought
when the code was developed was primarily for those corner lots, so you didn't have
fences coming right out to the edge of the sidewalk on corners and creating both, you
know, an unsightly situation and so forth. Mr. and Mrs. Pecchenino's property -- it's not
a corner lot per se, but it does have two street yards, one being Ten Mile Road and one
being the cul-de-sac of Hatch Court. So, with the presence of Hatch Court there it really
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 13 of 28
does create a street yard, if you will, and what we have done with this illustration is we
have given as much of the benefit of the doubt as we can by really kind of saying, okay,
we will consider most of that a side yard until you get to, rather, the bell of the cul-de-
sac, because that's primarily where most of the street is, rather than saying the whole
thing is a street yard and the fence would have to be set back ten feet along that whole
property line. In our discussions with Mr. Pecchenino, of course, he initially said, well,
wait a second, I have got a shed out there, I don't want my shed outside the fence. So,
in trying to apply our codes fairly, this is the solution we came up with while still being
able to, in good conscience, say we have met the intent of our street side setback for
fences.
De Weerd: But, Pete, aren't those setbacks primarily because of a vision triangle or a
vision issue on those corner lots? I don't know how many -- the vision aspect is not an
issue, nor do you think you're going to have a lot of traffic that walks on that sidewalk
that's going to be squeezed between a fence, a sidewalk and moving traffic, which is
really what the safety issue is going to be. That doesn't apply in this one either. There
should be a consideration perhaps for a variance of some sort.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, I think the Mayor raises good points, you
know, again, in our administration of the code we try to be flexible and we try to be
creative where necessary. If a variance -- I mean a variance, Mayor, is correct. A
variance is the appropriate vehicle, if you will, to seek the remedy for that fence setback
situation. Staff is not sure we could make the findings for approval, but that's, you
know, only a recommendation. But the variance would come to Council and they could
make the determination on -- on the variance itself.
De Weerd: If we were to be the applicant again.
Nary: Yes. Without the variance.
De Weerd: Correct?
Friedman: If we were to be the variance -- yes, we could be the -- have an affidavit of
interest from the property owner.
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Yeah. We can make it in the motion of the annexation of getting rid of it. It looks
like a trash collector to me the way they go in like that. All the trash will be blown into
those little joints like that, so -- but we can take -- I don't think we need a variance, we
can do it in the annexation, can't we? That's in force right now?
Nary: No.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Member Bird, I would defer to Mr. Nary on that
question.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 14 of 28
Nary: Madam Mayor -- well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, okay, then, it's my
error, Mr. Bird. You can approve a variance or an alteration of your code as part of your
annexation. The problem that you have here -- and that's where I think where Mr.
Friedman is alluding to is you have a code that, basically, is to prevent people from
building a fence right adjacent to the sidewalk and you have a number of places around
town that that's occurred and that's the reason this code exists now is that you have like
fencing that immediately abuts the sidewalk on what is, essentially, the -- this portion of
the property. So, it's something that you have put into code and I think they have tried
to work around that. They can -- they can consider alternative fencing, but in the
discussions to this point with Mr. Pecchenino they haven't been able to come up with
something for -- that both the city and Mr. Pecchenino have been comfortable with as
alternatives, other than a variance. The problem with the variance is a variance
requires it's a dimensional standard or an impossibility based on the configuration of the
property or the topography of the property and as Mr. Friedman said, it may be difficult
for staff to make the findings because there is no reason you can't build the fence this
way. The only reason is a preference and esthetic. If Mr. Pecchenino was coming in
today to have this fence built by himself, the staff would be denying it, the same as we
are telling you now, because it doesn't comply with our code. They can look at
alternatives, they can discuss it, which I think they have, but they haven't been able to
find an alternative type of fencing for this area. So, that's why to this point to mitigate
that the city's agreeing to waiving the different fees and paying for this fencing, but the
only thing the city is -- or the staff is requesting is comply with our code requires that
small setback to make sure it isn't butted right up against the frontage of the sidewalk.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council, just one point of clarification in that area also, in our,
you know, thought process, that would be an area where there would be a gate anyway,
because that's going to be the access into and out of the property for the various
recreational vehicles and trailers that are being stored there.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Question for Mr. Pecchenino. The picture I'm looking at -- it looks like there is
green space between the sidewalk and the fence.
Pecchenino: There is. There is roughly --
Hoaglun: How much space is that?
Pecchenino: Two feet from the edge of the sidewalk to the existing fence line. So, it
does not actually abut the sidewalk.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 15 of 28
Hoaglun: Okay. And the sidewalk is a standard three foot -- this might be for planning
staff, Madam Mayor. Five foot -- I'm sorry. Five foot. So, you have seven feet from the
edge of the gutter, basically, back to the fence, approximately. Okay.
Pecchenino: I'm not sure what Pete was saying about the gate, but the gate does come
in, not out towards the cul-de-sac.
De Weerd: So, it opens into your property?
Pecchenino: Yes.
De Weerd: Did you have anything further?
Pecchenino: No.
De Weerd: See, you didn't have to say much. We said it all; right?
Pecchenino: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there any additional testimony on this application? Council,
any further information needed?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Any additional staff comments?
Friedman: No, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, Council, I would entertain a motion to close, if you are so
inclined.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move we close the public hearing AZ 10-004.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 9-A. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor, I do have a question for legal counsel.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 16 of 28
De Weerd: Okay.
Hoaglun: Just to make sure I understand, Mr. Nary, we cannot grant a variance to the
fencing requirement at this particular meeting, that would have to be required in a
separate application, is that my -- do I understand that correctly?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Hoaglun, that's correct,
because that requires a public hearing and that hasn't been noticed for tonight. All
that's in front of you is an annexation.
Hoaglun: So Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move approval of AZ 10-004 with staff and applicant comments and that this
project move forward and the fencing issue can wait until another time.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve this item. Any discussion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Question for Mr. Nary. To bring a variance on the fencing forward, seeing how we
are the applicant, would have to be brought by Meridian Public Works Department, is
that -- am I not right?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Bird, I think that was
the intent is that ideally we have an agreement that we have drafted with Mr.
Pecchenino that should resolve all of these issues. If that agreement -- we could
finalize and everybody is agreeable, then, we would bring that agreement back in two
weeks with the annexation ordinance. If we can't reach an agreement, then, the
recommendation would, then, be to do an application for a variance and the application
would be the city's, since we have been the party to this point, but I think as Mr.
Friedman said, we would need an affidavit of interest from Mr. Pecchenino, which,
obviously, he would likely be interested in.
Bird: Yeah. I didn't think he would have to do it, that's what I was asking, Bill.
Nary: Right.
Bird: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 17 of 28
De Weerd: Thank you for that clarification. Anything further? Okay. Madam Clerk, will
you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, absent; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you. And if you want an explanation of what just happened you can
ask staff.
B. Public Hearing: AZ 10-005 Ada County Highway District
(ACRD) Ten Mile Annexation by City of Meridian Public Works
Department Located Southwest Corner of W. Ustick Road and
N. Ten Mile Road Request: Annexation and Zoning of 1.50
Acres of Land From R1 (Ada County) to R-4 (Medium Low-
Density Residential) Zoning District
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-B is a public hearing on AZ 10-005. I will open this public
hearing with staff comments.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Again, this is a
recommendation from Planning and Zoning Commission from their January 2nd, 2011,
hearing as Mr. Stewart eloquently explained to you it's another annexation request to
run purple pipe down to the interchange and service that corridor. In this particular
annexation request there are three properties -- three parcels all owned by ACHD and
given the fact that this property has multiple nonconforming uses or non-conformings on
the site, staff is recommending a development agreement with this particular annexation
request. Would point out that this property will only be facilitated with water. City
engineer has waived the requirements for sewer primarily due to ACHD at some future
point with that widening of that intersection they anticipate possibly selling the property
off. They could see a potential future -- future commercial use on the site, so they are
requesting that the Public Works Department run a commercial water service line to the
residence and hold off on sewer until it redevelops in the future. Items of discussion at
the hearing were, indeed, the nonconformities and so with that DA -- with the
recommendation of a DA this is what we are currently recommending before you in
Planning and Zoning and also recommend no changes to these DA provisions. So, DA
provision number one deals with addressing future access. Two has to deal with -- one
thing I failed to mention was the fact that the site is currently operating with a
construction business on the site and so we put a DA provision in here that if the
property is either sold, redeveloped, or abandoned it could never be reestablished
unless through the proper process. Because sanitation sewer is not being extended at
this time we have a provision in there that whoever purchases the property in the future
will be responsible for installing sewer and constructing sewer to the site. And, of
course, the other nonconformity on the site has to deal some structures that are in the
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 18 of 28
setbacks. If we were to zone this R-4 this evening some of those existing structures
would be within the required setback of the R-4 zoning district, so we pointed that out
and let folks know that we recognize that and that they need to go away at some point.
And the other issue has to do with lot dimensions and that's really what will happen is
we will process a property boundary adjustment. One of the small parcels is really a
small sliver and so it doesn't meet the dimensional standards of the R-4 zoning district
and so the purpose of this DA provision is to clean up that and create two lots that could
be compliant with the R-4 standards. We realize we can't do anything about the
nonconformity as far as the building setbacks, but as far as the lot -- dimensional
standards for the lot size we could do something with that with the PBA and so that's
what we have recommended in the DA provisions. Speaking in favor at the hearing was
the City of Meridian Public Works Department again. Warren. Staff did not receive any
additional testimony on this, nor was any written testimony received. To staffs
knowledge the only nonconforming issue -- or the only issues before you this evening is
really does the city want to annex the property with the abundance of non-conformings
on the site and that concludes my presentation and with that I would be happy to
answer any questions you have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Any questions from Council? Warren, do you have
anything you would like to add?
Stewart: As you are aware, this is very similar to the one that we just did in that there is
existing residential wells on the property, which are within a hundred feet of our
proposed line, so we are asking the -- to annex this property, to hook it up to the water
right now and part of the agreements there -- part of the discussions that we have had
with ACHD is that we would provide commercial water service. Because the sewer
service could be extended to this property without tearing up the street in the future, it is
essentially -- they have asked that we waive that provision to extend the sewer. I have
suggested that we would be -- as far as the city engineer is concerned that I would be
willing to do that; because we would like to know how it's going to develop before we
actually extend that service there and determine how that's going to be done. I think it's
going to be a positive thing for that corner in that we will clean up some of the property
issues associated with this little parcel, instead of having these three parcels and one of
them being a very small little sliver, we will actually make something useful out of that
and with that I would stand for any questions that you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have one, Mayor.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: It seems inconsistent that we would annex and annex it as an R-4 and, then,
turn around and provide a commercial water service to it. If, in fact, that's our intent, we
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 19 of 28
probably should be looking at some other kind of a zoning or just provide a residential
water service at this point in time.
Stewart: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Rountree, certainly we
could provide a residential water service to both the sites. ACHD has expressed the
desire that they -- they think that this property will eventually be commercial, that it
would be advantageous. We also know that Ten Mile -- one of the reasons for that is
that Ten Mile Road right now is soon to be rebuilt and especially that intersection is
soon to be rebuilt and whatever services that we provide right now we would like them
to be what will be there in the long term. We don't know how that's going to develop.
With the sewer service we have a little more flexibility in that the sewer service can be
extended in a future date without tearing up the new road. So, we have -- you know,
basically, in order to get ACHD's cooperation we have talked to them and entertained
the idea of providing a commercial water service. Basically, what that means is we will
extend an eight inch main outside the property -- or to the property line, then, put in
residential meters, I believe, at this time, but that we will have the ability to, essentially,
provide commercial services in the future. I don't know if that answers your question,
but --
Rountree: It did. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. I don't see -- is ACHD here to comment? I didn't think I saw
them. Council, any questions? This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like
to offer testimony on this? Council?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Any further comment from staff?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, specifically to address Council Member
Rountree's question, the Comprehensive Plan designates the property residential at this
time. and the surrounding zoning is all R-4, that's the genesis of our recommendation for
the zoning. So, I'm not sure -- we can certainly address your concern about the
commercial. One thought Bill and I were just discussing is the Comprehensive Plan
does contain a provision that at the Council's discretion on parcels less than three acres
located on arterials you can designate it for office and office use only. So, if that would
increase your comfort level about those commercial water hook-ups that may be a
possibility worth examining in terms of what we bring to the property in terms of its comp
plan designation and it's zoning. Again, residential is nonconforming use in an office
zone, but we have enough nonconformities there right now that -- so, I don't know if that
addresses Council Member Rountree's concern.
Rountree: You know, Pete, thank you. I'm not necessarily concerned, it was just a
question that if we are -- we are zoning it residential, yet we are accommodating
commercial, why didn't we just zone it commercial and be done with it, because we are
going to see it again.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 20 of 28
Friedman: Council Member Rountree, Madam Mayor, Council Members, I -- that's a
good point. The one thought I have, though, is since ACHD will not be the developer of
this, we really don't know what we are going to see when that property -- so, this gives
the Council an opportunity to have another review of what the commercial development
on that corner would look like if they do come in for a rezone.
Rountree: That's true. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further from Council, I would entertain a motion to
close this public hearing.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close the public hearing on AZ 10-005.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on 9-B. All those
in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve AZ 10-005 as stated by staff and applicant.
Hoaglun: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve 9-B. Any discussion? Madam
Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, absent; Hoaglun, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. Public Hearing: MDA 10-011 Silver Oaks Apartments by Silver
Oaks Apartments, LLC Located Approximately 1/4 Mile West of
Ten Mile Road, North of W. Franklin Road Request:
Modification to the Development Agreement to Reflect a New
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 21 of 28
Development Plan and Increase in the Number of Residential
Units Within the Development
D. Public Hearing: CUP 10-014 Silver Oaks Apartments by Silver
Oaks Apartments, LLC Located Approximately 1/4 Mile West of
Ten Mile Road, North of W. Franklin Road Request: Conditional
Use Permit for aMulti-Family Development Consisting of 369
Units on 24.61 Acres in an R-15 Zoning District
De Weerd: Item 9-C and D are public hearings on MDA 10-011 and CUP 20-014. I will
open these two public hearings with staff comments.
Wafters: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. The first application
before you is a Conditional Use Permit request for amulti-family development in an R-
15zoning district. Another application, a development agreement modification, to nullify
the existing development agreement and approve a new development agreement based
on the new development plans as proposed. The site consists of 24.61 acres, is
currently zoned R-15, and is located north of West Franklin Road, approximately a
quarter mile west of North Ten Mile Road. A little history on this property. It was
annexed in 2005 with a development agreement and platted with one large multi-family
lot, the subject property, and one commercial office building lot to the south. A
Conditional Use Permit planned development was approved for a multi-family
development consisting of four-plex structures with 280 dwelling units. A time extension
was later approved that included a new design concept with row houses and
condominiums. A subsequent conditional use permit modification changed the
development plan back to four-plex structures, with the addition of 12-plex and 16-plex
structures. Infrastructure consisting of sewer, water, utilities, storm drainage, gravel
road base, and some concrete work exists on the site. The current Conditional Use
Permit request is for approval of amulti-family development consisting of 25 two and
three story structures, with 92 one bedroom units, 185 two bedroom units and 92 three
bedroom units, for a total 369 dwelling units on 24.61 acres of land at a density of 14.99
dwelling units per acre. A total of 5.62 acres or 22 percent of the site of open space is
proposed, along with the following amenities: A 2,931 square foot clubhouse. A 1,404
square foot fitness center. A pool. Spa. Tennis court. Picnic area. Playground.
Community garden. And pathways. Surface parking covered and uncovered and eight
parking garages are proposed in accord with Unified Development Code standards.
This property is proposed to develop in three phases, with the first phase including
construction of the clubhouse and associated amenities central to the development,
along with the remaining portion of North Umbria Hills Avenue. The site plan depicts a
stub street, West Perugia Street, to the Kennedy Lateral at the west property boundary
for future extension in compliance with the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan,
which designates a collector street through this site. A road trust exists with ACHD for
half the cost of construction of a bridge across the Kennedy Lateral as required by the
development agreement. There are two different elevations proposed for each building
type, with variations in architecture, roof design, color, and construction materials for
variety. Construction materials consist of a variety of siding materials, including board
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 22 of 28
and batten, lap cement board, and shake siding with stone veneer accents and
composition asphalt shingles. Each elevation incorporates three different types of
materials for variety. A total of three different color combinations are proposed for the
structures. Design review approval has been granted by staff for the proposed
structures and site design. And I will just run through these elevations. This is building
type one, the two story 12-plex structures, two different variations. Building type two is
three story, 18-plex, two different variations. Building type three is a two story 16-plex,
two variations. And building type four is three story, 24-plex, two different variations.
Building type five and six are duplexes with garages underneath. Two story structures.
This is the clubhouse. Fitness center. And, then, that's just a copy of the proposed
landscape plan for the project. A develop agreement modification is requested to nullify
the existing development agreement and approve a new development agreement based
on the new development as proposed. The Commission recommended approval of the
Conditional Use Permit at their January 6th public hearing. Becky McKay and Graye
Wolfe testified in favor of the application. No one testified in opposition or commented
on the application. Written testimony was received from Steve Moore from the Ten Mile
Christian Church. He was generally in agreement with the proposal, he just had a
concern that the other half of Umbria Hills be constructed with the first phase of
development. Key issues of discussion by the Commission. Commendation of the new
site design and building elevations. They thought the applicant did a good job with the
proposed plan for this development. They did change DA provision 1.1 B. They moved
to strike that provision as the Council had waived the requirement to the the Kennedy
Lateral with the final plat for Umbria Subdivision. Written testimony since the
Commission hearing. Becky McKay submitted testimony in agreement with the staff
report and there are no outstanding issues for City Council. Staff is recommending
approval on the development modification application with the provisions in the staff
report. Staff will stand for any questions the Council may have at this time.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Sonya, the -- in the packet there is a letter from the church talking about
paving the other half of the road. I'm assuming that would be part of the -- their
development in phase one?
Wafters: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Hoaglun, yes that will be
part of the first phase.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 23 of 28
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Would the representative like to come forward.
Hi, Becky.
McKay: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Becky McKay,
Engineering Solutions, 1029 North Rosario, Meridian. I'm representing the applicant on
this particular project. This is an unusual project that -- it's gone through a pretty
lengthy evolutionary process. Initially when this was approved in 2005 it predated the
Ten Mile area specific plan, predated the Unified Development Code. I know that -- my
understanding was the Council struggled with it, because it was designed with 70 four-
plex units, which had one elevation.
De Weerd: They are ugly.
McKay: I agree with you. And it ended up getting through the process. They went
ahead back in 2006 and went into engineering design, final plat, and about a million
dollars worth of infrastructure was installed on this particular piece of property. The
sewer, the water, gravity irrigation, most of the pressurized irrigation, a small portion of
the concrete and, then, the base. A time extension came back before this body in 2008
-- oh, I skipped a spot. The initial developer basically allowed the project to go into
foreclosure and it was going back to Banner Bank. Mr. Wolfe stepped in, he was the
original owner of the property, and, basically, took that position. Then a -- he had a
different developer come to him who had a new idea of doing row houses, some
townhomes, condominiums, had a mixture of Cape Cod, Mediterranean, and Prairie
style multi-family dwellings. The Council went ahead and said we will approve that time
extension and we are going to attach these elevations with it. That particular developer
determined that the project at that time was not economically feasible and so he ended
up walking away and it went back to Mr. Wolfe. He came to us and we looked at it,
consulted with the architect came up with a new idea to mix in some apartment
buildings into that particular site plan. Obviously, we have the existing infrastructure
that limited what we could do and we came up with what we thought was a better mix of
multi-family units. We did get the approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission
for that conditional use modification and, then, Mr. Wolfe proceeded to kind of step back
and consult with experts in multi-family marketing development in the state and out of
state. We took about 12 to 15 months to analyze this project and it was determined that
based on the four-plex component and the density around just a little over 11 dwelling
units per acre. This project would not be viable. There is no four-plex market. It -- you
know, it was a hot market, a lot of them were 1031'd into and we are seeing a lot of
them being dumped on the market, foreclosed upon, and that's just I'm told is a dead
product at this time. So, in our analysis we came to the conclusion, based on these
experts that if we were going to have any type of a viable multi-family project we had to
have about 15 dwelling units per acre. Now, the property is zoned R-15. However, the
development agreement as far as the density that was approved was limited to the
11.35 dwelling units per acre. So, in this new plan we came up with what we felt was --
was areally good mixture. We have two story 12-plexes, three story 18-plexes, two
story 16-plexes, three story 24-plexes and we have the two story duplex units which
have an underside garage. Each of these buildings we had provided two elevations.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 24 of 28
We worked closely with Pete and Sonya trying to make sure that this came as close to
the Ten Mile specific plan as we could get it based on the limitations of the existing
infrastructure. They were supportive of our efforts and I'd like to thank them, because
they were very instrumental in making this come together. We also worked with Public
Works, had lengthy discussions with your -- the inspector out there. That infrastructure
has never been finaled out. The contractor who installed it at the time is no longer in
business and so we did go out, we did an extensive as built survey to determine what
was existing in the field, analyzed the plans and identified what needs to be done out
there to complete this project. Public Works has worked well with us and -- and I think
they will be glad to see this finally take off. As far as the amenities are concerned, we
retained the same amenities as initially proposed, the clubhouse, it's about 2,900
square feet. There was a swimming pool proposed. We added a spa. There was a
tennis court. A playground. We added a picnic area. We also had a fitness center.
And, then, we added a community garden. Above the clubhouse there will be one
dwelling unit for like a manager, so they will have someone on site at all times. Mr.
Wolfe has teamed up with a group of professional multi-family developers, they have
been excellent to work with on our part and we are convinced that this is a viable
project. It is their intent to build this first phase, which will include a mixture of these
different buildings, plus the amenities as proposed in our community center. It is their
hope to -- as soon as the weather improves will go out there and complete that
infrastructure that's there. It will require that we provide some civil drawings to your
Public Works Department, obviously, identifying which of those services we will be
abandoning and which one we will be keeping. We will have to do some new taps. So,
we will have approved plans that will govern that. You have gone from like 70 buildings
as originally proposed. We have 25 multi-family buildings and we have nine parking
garages. So, the open -- overall open space is very extensive. I think we have about
13.69 acres of open space in this 24, 25 acre site. We meet all of the parking
requirements. We accomplished that by providing a park plan and doing analysis that
took us multiple weeks where we were taking the number of units in each building and,
then, identifying pockets of parking within close proximity. One of the things that we
had to add in order to boost our number of units was additional parking, so we created
some intermittent parking areas that have like an enclosed garage on one side, open
parking on the other, and that gave us the additional parking that was necessary to
boost these units to where they are. We -- I did consult with the Ten Mile Christian
Church all through this process. In speaking with the pastor he's excited about this
project. He said he is supportive of the increase in density. He said they have a lot of
facilities that these people can utilize, such as day care, they have like an elementary
program, they have youth services. He said I believe this will be complimentary to the
church and we are excited about it. I also consulted with the developers to the north, I
think it's a project called Chesterfield Subdivision, it's single family, just north of the
railroad tracks. They were supportive of the project. They said, obviously, any activity
in this area will be welcomed, because activity tends to breed more activity. Through
this redesign process we did work with Ada County Highway District. A traffic study was
approved on this project. They determined even though we were increasing the number
of units, because Ten Mile and Franklin Road intersection is being completely rebuilt,
the interchange will be on line sometime this summer, that there was no need to do any
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 25 of 28
type of new analysis or addendum, because it was determined it had already been
studied. Turn lanes have been determined and the increase traffic would be negligible.
We feel that there is a real need for this in Meridian. The Selway project, for example, I
think they said that they are like 96 percent -- they have a 96 percent occupancy. It's
been very successful. There was an article the other day in the Idaho Construction
magazine that basically said a lot of these apartments are running between 90 and 98
percent occupancy rates and that the need for multi-family in the Treasure Valley is
increasing. So, we feel that we can -- we can, obviously, meet this need. As far as the
Ten Mile specific plan, it has this area designated to medium high density residential,
anywhere from eight to 15 dwelling units per acre, so we fall within that range. I think
the close proximity to the interstate is going to be a definite plus. People can leave this
complex, jump right onto the interstate, go anywhere in the valley. They can go west
over to the satellite -- the community campus -- college campus and the other BSU
satellite campuses and we feel that this is going to be a good addition to this Ten Mile
area. One thing I did want to note to the Council, we do have drawings -- architectural
drawings. Mark Sanders did a wonderful job on our elevations. When we go from
these -- these drawings -- or building drawings that were submitted, we are going to roll
into actual construction drawings and he indicated that some of the buildings may
lengthen ten feet or less, because there is always a little bit of deviation from what we
call like a conceptual to actual building construction drawings. I wanted to mention that
to the Council. I have already spoken with Sonya about it. She said, you know, she's
not concerned, you know, we will report back any modifications that we make to her and
we have so much open space that it's not like we are going to drop below what the
requirement is under the UDC. We meet all the requirements of the UDC and we feel
that -- that, obviously, this is superior to any of the other plans out there and this is an
economically viable project and we can get out there and complete that infrastructure
that's been deteriorating for years and missing manholes and all kinds of other issues
that came to light. Does the Council have any questions that I could answer?
De Weerd: Becky, I guess what is -- what is happening on Franklin between this project
and the Ten Mile and Franklin intersection?
McKay: As far as improvement?
De Weerd: Putting an extra lane, a turn lane, what -- what in terms -- this is a lot of
traffic and I don't recall what you said was the first phase impact, but that section of
Franklin is not on the plan. I think -- Pete, is that an unfunded section at this point on
the five year plan?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I apologize, I can't answer that.
That's Caleb's province and I don't have the in-depth knowledge of ACHD's work
program that he does. I can certainly find out and get back to you.
De Weerd: Do you know, Becky?
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 26 of 28
McKay: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we -- we received a staff report from
Ada County Highway District. The plan is to built turn lanes to facilitate the additional
traffic in this project. Now, I think some improvements were installed by the Ten Mile
church and, then, some of the improvements, obviously, left -- remain unfinished,
because they were the responsibility of this project. The turn lanes are the
responsibility of this project to go in an finish paving the other half of that roadway is the
responsibility of this project. Currently Mr. Wolfe has a letter of credit on the file with
Ada County Highway District to assure that these improvements will be installed. So,
ACHD has looked at this and said based on the traffic generation this is what you need
to do to accommodate it. So, we will be widening that section of Franklin with those turn
lanes. As far as being in their five year plan, I'd have to check the ACRD report and see
what they stated in my site specific. I don't recall that it was.
De Weerd: Yeah. I think there is some contingency for it.
Rountree: I don't think it's there.
De Weerd: Yeah. Okay. Council, questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Becky, on the transportation line, I know your preliminary plat shows the --
currently would be a cul-de-sac, but it has what's apparently going to be an extension
that will cross the lateral and continue onto the west. I just want to verify that that's
correct and suggest for the DA -- as you develop the DA that that cul-de-sac and that
access point be delineated in the field with a sign so that folks know that in the future
there is going to be collector to the west off of that access point, so we don't get any
confusion about what may or may not be occurring there.
McKay: Councilman Rountree, that's a good idea. Yes, that is already dedicated,
because it was done with the plat predating our involvement. There is supposed to be a
connection there. There is also a trust fund with Ada County Highway District --
Rountree: The bridge.
McKay: -- for a proportionate share of that bridge. So, yes, signing that would be
acceptable.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
Hoaglun: Anything further, Becky?
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 27 of 28
McKay: No. Unless you have any other comments or concerns that I could address.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there someone else who
wishes to testify this evening on this issue? Okay. With that, Council, any further
questions of staff?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none. Mr. President, hearing no more testimony or information needed,
move that we close public hearings MDA 10-011 and CUP 10-014.
Rountree: Second.
Hoaglun: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on MDA 10-011
and CUP 10-014. That's roll call; right? No. All those in favor say aye. No opposed?
Passed.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Hoaglun: Council?
Bird: Mr. Vice-President?
Hoaglun: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve MDA 10-011 with staff and applicant testimony.
Rountree: Second.
Hoaglun: There is a motion to approve MDA 10-011. Madam Clerk, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, absent; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Bird: Mr. President?
Hoaglun: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve CUP 10-014 with staff and applicant testimony.
Rountree: Second.
Hoaglun: Motion is to approve CUP 10-014. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call the
roll.
Meridian City Council
February 1, 2011
Page 28 of 28
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, absent; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Hoaglun: That brings us to the end of our agenda for this evening.
Rountree: Hopefully the third time is a charm.
Bird: Yeah. Make it go, Beck. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we adjourn.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:20 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR T M De WEERD DATE APPROVE, ,,:~
/ B ' / ~1 1`' °'s _ ~ X45
ATTE :~ ~~~;~ ~ ~ fl,:;~ '~
J Y E LM '
arm ~ ~:~
~>,
.~' ~~
~~~
t
~~, ~. ~,~
9 ife ..
d i