HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-05-24E IDIAN~---
IDAHO
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR
MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, May 24, 2011 at 7:00 PM
1. Roll-Call Attendance
X David Zaremba O Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
2. Pledge of Allegiance (Pg. 1)
3. Community Invocation by Pastor Burton Roberts (Pg. 1-2)
4. Adoption of the Agenda (Pg. 2-3) Adopted
5. Consent Agenda (Pg. 3-4) Approved
A. Approve Minutes of May 10, 2011 City Council Pre-Council
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of May 10, 2011 City Council Regular Meeting
C. Award of Bid & Award for the McMillan Road Water Main
Construction Project No. 10230a to Knife River for aNot-To-
Exceed Amount of $159,485.06
D. Task Order 10011C with Civil Survey Consultants, Inc. for Well
10B Pumping Facility Design for the Not-To-Exceed amount of
$59,210.00
6. Community Items/Presentations
A. City Scholarships Presentation (Pg. 4-6)
7. Items Moved From Consent Agenda (Pg. 6) None
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, May 24, 2011 Page 1 of 4
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.
8. Action Items
A. Public Hearing: CPAM 10-002 McNelis Subdivision by Ten Mile
Center, LLC Located Northwest Corner of N. Ten Mile Road
and W. Ustick Road Request: An Amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to Change the Land
Use Designation on 13.85 Acres of Land from Mixed Use -
Community (MU-C) and 20.04 Acres of Land from Office to
Mixed Use -Non Residential (MU-NR) (Pg. 6-13) Approved
B. Public Hearing: RZ 11-001 McNelis Subdivision by Ten Mile
Center, LLC Located Northwest Corner of N. Ten Mile Road
and W. Ustick Road Request: Rezone of 18,522 +/- Square Feet
from L-O (Limited Office) to I-L (Light Industrial) and 16.24 +/-
Acres from L-O to C-G (General Retail & Service Commercial)
(Pg. 6-13) Approved
C. Public Hearing: MDA 11-002 McNelis Subdivision by Ten Mile
Center, LLC Located Northwest Corner of N. Ten Mile Road
and W. Ustick Road Request: Modify the Existing Development
Agreement to Reflect the Proposed Rezone; Modify uses
Allowed on the Site Consistent with the Unified Development
Code (UDC) for the Respective Zone Except for those
Specifically Prohibited in the Agreement; Update the Owner
Information; and Remove the Requirement for Conditional Use
Permit Approval of uses on Lots that Abut Ustick Road, Ten
Mile Road and/or the Nine Mile Creek (Pg. 6-13) Approved
D. Public Hearing: MDA 11-004 Kingsbridge by Boise Hunter
Homes Located East Side of S. Eagle Road; Midway Between
E. Victory Road and E. Amity Road Request: Amend the
Kingsbridge Recorded Development Agreement (Inst.
#105092050) for the Purpose of Excluding the Property
Preliminarily Platted with the Kingsbridge Subdivision (File
#PP 10-007) AND Create a New Development Agreement to
Include the New Project Boundary, Building Elevations, Clarify
Subdivision Amenities/Common Open Space (Pg. 13-28)
Approved with Conditions
E. Public Hearing: VAR 11-001 Kingsbridge by Boise Hunter
Homes Located East Side of S. Eagle Road, Midway Between
E. Victory Road and E. Amity Road Request: Variance
Approval to Deviate from the Dimensional Standards of the R-2
Zoning District (Pg. 30-41) Denied
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, May 24, 2011 Page 2 of 4
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.
F. FP 11-004 Kingsbridge Subdivision No. 2 by Boise Hunter
Homes Located East Side of S. Eagle Road, Midway Between
E. Victory Road and E. Amity Road Request: Final Plat
Approval for 36 Residential Building Lots and 6 Common Lots
on 18.86 Acres in an R-2 Zoning District (Pg. 28-29) Approved
9. Department Reports
A. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 11-786: A Resolution of the
Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian, appointing
Blaine Johnston to Seat 2 of the Meridian Historic Preservation
Commission (Pg. 41-42) Approved
B. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 11-787: A Resolution of the
Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing
Board Members to Seats 8 and 9 of the Meridian Development
Corporation (Pg. 42-43) Approved
C. Police Department: Line Item Reallocation Request to Acquire
Funding to Hire a Third Party Agency to Develop a Strategic
Business Model for the Future Public Safety Training Center
for a Not-to-Exceed Amount of $46,000.00 (Pg. 43-44)
Approved
D. Police Department: Budget Amendment: Additional Funding
for Investigation Expense fora Not-to-Exceed Amount of
$9,000.00 (Pg. 44-45) Approved
E. Amended onto the Agenda: Legal and Planning Department
Report: Delegation to Boise City/Ada County Housing
Authority of Agency to Purchase U.S. Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Dollar Home (Pg. 45-49)
F. Amended onto the Agenda: Legal Department: Resolution
No. 11-788: A Resolution Delegating Authority to Purchase
Dollar Home from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development; and Providing an Effective Date (Pg. 45-49)
Approved
G. Amended onto the Agenda: Legal Department: Memorandum
of Agreement Designating Boise City/Ada County Housing
Authority as City's Agent to Purchase HUD Dollar Homes (Pg.
45-49) Approved with Conditions
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, May 24, 2011 Page 3 of 4
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.
10. Future Meeting Topics (Pg. 49-50) None -Adjourned at 9:27 p.m.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, May 24, 2011 Page 4 of 4
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.
ridian Ci Council Meetin Ma 24 2011
,~ Me tv
A meetin of the Meridian Cit Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, May
g Y
24, 2011, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Ma or Tammy de Weerd, Brad Hoaglun, David Zaremba, Keith Bird
y
and Charlie Rountree.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Pete Friedman, Sonya Watters, Bill Parsons,
Jeff Lave Scott Colaianni, Lori den Hartog, Bill Johnson, Robert Simison, and Dean
Y~
Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba 0 Brad Hoaglun
____
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
._____
X Mayor Tammyde Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I would like to welcome you to the City Council meeting. We
a reciate ou joining us this evening. For the record it is Tuesday, May 24th. It's 7:00
pp Y
p.m. We will start with roll call attendance.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: The next item is our Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join me in
the Pledge of Allegiance to ourflag.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.}
Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Burton Roberts
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor
Burton Roberts. He is retired and we are certainly pleased to have you with us tonight.
If ou will all join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a
Y
moment of reflection. Welcome.
Roberts: Thank you, Mayor. It's always a privilege for me to be here. I volunteered to
be on the list called the emergency person or the substitute or whatever it is. When
the can't find anybody else they try to find me. But it's a privilege for me to be here
y ., ..
and one of the reasons its a privilege for me to be here is because I really do believe in
m heart that God hears when we pray and he not only hears, but he answers and as I
y
was preparing my heart this afternoon being here, I found myself thinking of our Mayor
and each one of the Council and praying at home for you and knowing that tonight
,,~., what I wanted to do is basically just come and say, Madam Mayor, may God bless you
richly --
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 2 of 50
De Weerd: Thank you.
Roberts: -- and give you the stren th and coura a that
g g you need to continue with this
very important roll that you have in our communit and to bless each one
. Y of the Council
and, of course, Bill Nary. He needs a lot of hel .
p
De Weerd: Yes, he does.
Roberts: And we are so thankful for all of those in our cit that work f
y or us, for all of the
city staff, I say God bless you, may God continue to rich) bless in
y every way and
strengthen all of our hearts together and, then, the thou ht that crossed m mi
g y nd as I
watched the evening news was so thankful that we don't live in tornado count
ry and I
wanted to say, Father God, bless those communities that are so drasticall overcom
with th Y e
e powerfulness of a storm. God bless those families, those that have
experienced loss. Bless all those that are laboring. Bless them, stren then us as a
g
community and help us to look beyond our borders and see the needs of others that we
might find in our hearts the ability to say our God is a rest God and he continues to
g
bless each one of us. Bless in everything that is said and done in this meetin toni ht.
W g 9
e ask all these things in Jesus' wonderful and mighty name, amen. Bless ou.
Y
De, Weerd: Thank you for being here
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda
De Weerd: Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: There are a couple of things to change. The Consent A ends has no
g
changes, but --
De Weerd: Do you have your mike on?
Zaremba: I think so.
De Weerd: Okay.
Zaremba: The light's lit.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Okay. In Item 9, Department Reports, Item A, that resolution number is 11-
786. Item B, the resolution number is 11-787. And, then, we need to amend the
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 3 of 50
agenda to add three items, an E, F and G. Ewe need to
add a Legal and Planning
Department report and this is about the dele ation to Boi
g se City-Ada County Housing
Authority agency to purchase a U.S. Housin and Urban
g Development dollar home.
Thats Item 9-E. 9-F we need to add is also a Le al De
. g partment report and this is a
resolution number 11-788 and that is a resolution dele atin
g g authority to the -- to
purchase the dollar -- the dollar home from the U.S. De artment of '
p Housing and Urban
Development and to provide an effective date. Then we also ne
ed to add an Item 9-G
and that, again, is the Legal Department and this is a memorandu
m of agreement
designating Boise City-Ada County Housin Authorit as the cit 's
9 Y y agent to purchase
the HUD dollar homes. And with those amendments I move that we ad
opt the agenda.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Anythin further?
g
Zaremba: I don't believe so.
De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor of the approval of the a enda as chan ed sa a e.
g 9 YY
All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of May 10, 2011 City Council Pre-Council
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of May 10, 2011 City Council Re ular Meetin
g g
C. Award of Bid & Award for the McMillan Road Water Main
Construction Project No.10230a to Knife River for aNot-To-
Exceed Amount of $159,485.06
D. Task Order 10011 C with Civil Survey Consultants, Inc. for Well
10B Pumping Facility Design for the Not-To-Exceed amount of
$59,210.00
De Weerd: The Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: There are no changes to the Consent Agenda. I move that we a rove it as
pp
printed and authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 4 of 50
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to a rove the Co
pp nsent Agenda. If there is
no discussion by Council, Madam Clerk, will ou call roll.
Y
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, ea' Hoa lun a
Y g bsent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Community ItemslPresentations
A. City Scholarships Presentation
De Weerd: Well, Council, our first item under the Communit Presentations w
Y e have
our city scholarships. Certainly we appreciate those that were involved in the ratin s
and we had a g
good number of applicants and certainly the involvement b those that
Y
are awarded and will be recognized this evening goes to show how these oun eo le
h Y gp p
ave had a positive .impact on our community and I think each of the students --and in
a few minutes I will ask you to come forward, but I'd also like to thank the families.
Having a very busy daughter as well in my household, I know how much su ort the
pp Y
need from the families and friends. We appreciate the families bein here su ortin
9 pp g
their graduating senior and good luck in that upcoming colle a term. But I would like to
g
present some information about each of those before I go down to the odium to
. .. p
present dust to -- just a certificate of appreciation. Robert over there in the corner will
meet you outside afterwards and give you details of how ou can collect our
. Y Y
scholarship. We write the check to the school of your choice and the will bill us but he
. Y ,
will give you those details outside. And I would also like to resent ou with a Cit of
p Y Y
Meridian pin and I'm sure you will wear it to each of your classes, so ou remember
. Y
where you re from. But if you will indulge me, I would like to tell ou about the four
. Y
students that are recipients of the scholarships this year. Our first one is Mattie Mun er
. 9
of the Mountain View High School, will pursue pre-med studies, ho efull at the
p Y
University of Washington. Now, I wouldn't say hopefully, because I am a Cou ar and
g
that is a Husky and there is no love between those two. I just had to mention that. The
goal is to be a pediatrician. Mattie has been involved with Cam River Run since its
p
beginning. Camp River Run is for children with terminal illnesses. She also has been
involved with other organizations, like the Idaho Food Bank, has volunteered at a local
retirement center. Brady Fuller of Meridian High School will pursue a microbiolo
d gY
egree at a school yet to be decided. Either University of Idaho or Universit of Utah
. Y
on his way to medical school. Brady has a very active volunteer histo datin back to
. rY g
2007 for a variety of organizations, including Grandparents As Parents, the Budd Walk
Y
and most recently I know hes been working doing to some clean-u work alon Ea le
p 9 g
Road. Mary Ann Secrist also of Meridian High School, will pursue a s cholo de ree
p Y 9Y 9
at one of our schools here in the Treasure Valley, either College of Idaho or BSU. Ma
Ann ~ ~ ~
has been involved in Trio -- Right? Okay. Invisible Children, Teens A ainst
9
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 5 of 50
Tobacco Use, and, hopefully, we will see ou on June 3rd -- ' '
? Y is it June 3rd, Robert?
June 2nd. We are having a celebration Frida ni ht before movi
. Y 9 e night on teens taking
a stand against tobacco use and we will give ou details on that if we
Y can recruit you --
and many other organizations where she has served in both leadershi
p rolls and given
back to our community. And Hannah Larsen, our third reci lent fr
. p om Meridian High
School, is looking to become a nurse and tans to attend the Univer ' -- '
p sity University of
Idaho or Idaho State University. I'm not sure which. In addition to '
being involved in
school groups, Hannah has volunteered for the Idaho S ecial OI m ics a
. , , p y p swell as the
World Special Olympics, participated in multiple MS walks and servin as
. g team leader
at Meridian High School. Has spent time volunteerin for the Meridian Food Ban
g k. I
would like to thank you on behalf of the City of Meridian, the communit of Meridian f
wh Y , or
at you have given to our community and I always get emotional when I talk to
students, so I apologize, but having young people involved in our communit reatl
Yg Y
enriches not only the experience that you have, but the ex erience of the adults that
p
also get to see our youth that care and that's such an im ortant messa a in our
. p 9
community that you are dust as bought into this community as anyone else and I love
the legacy that you leave in our community. It's deeply felt and it's reatl a reciated
9 Y pp
by each of those organizations that you guys donate your time to. So, if the four of ou
will Y
please, come forward, I will meet you at the podium. Okay. A ain, I would like to
9
thank each of the four of you and since my daughter is at Meridian Hi h School I
g
certainly see that most of them are very active in their community. So, thank ou to
Y
each of every one of you. And Mattie --who is Mattie? This just sa s on the certificate:
. Y
In recognition of your high level of community involvement and academic merit and
outstanding leadership potential. I have to do this at a microphone. It's not because I
think I'm important, it's because Dean will get mad at me if I don't and ou alwa s want
Y Y
your stenographer to be very happy. Mattie, we appreciate all you have done in our
community and we wish you great success in your upcoming .career in school and
congratulations.
Munger: Thank you.
De Weerd: And Hannah. All right. If you want to come up front. I will also sa this
. Y
says in recognition of your high level of community involvement, academic merit, and
outstanding leadership potential, I present this to ou with rest honor and wish
Y g you
success in your upcoming endeavors.
Larsen: Thank you.
De Weerd: I don't have to ask who Brady is. That one is kind of a no brainer. If ou will
Y
step forward. Brady, we present this to you in recognition of your high level of
community involvement, academic merit, and outstanding leadership potential. A ain, I
9
would like to offer you great success as you move forward into your college career and
present this to you with great honor.
Fuller: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 6 of 50
De Weerd: Last, but not least, Ma Ann. In reco niti
rY g on of your high level of community
involvement, academic merit, and outstandin leadershi
g p potential, I present this to you
and wish you great success and to all of ou we ho a th
Y p at you come back after your
term in college, we hope that your --the road returns back t ' '
o Meridian and you can lead
in our community -- maybe some day run this meeting. So con ratulations.
And 9 Thank you.
I will say that these youth scholarships are funded throu h
g the generous sponsors
of the State of the City. This is somethin that we do eve
g ry year with the proceeds that
we get over and above what we collect and as ou can see -- as ou h
Y y earl and as you
can see from the young people that were with me u front our future I '
p ooks to be in very
good hands. We wish those young people great success.
Item l: Items Moved From Consent A enda
9
De Weerd: Okay. There were no items moved from
the Consent Agenda.
Item 8: Action Items
A. Public Hearing: CPAM 10-002 McNelis Subdivision b Ten Mile
Y
Center, LLC Located Northwest Corner of N. Ten Mile Road
and W. Ustick Road Request: An Amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to Chan a the Land
g
Use Designation on 13.85 Acres of Land from Mixed Use -
Community (MU-C) and 20.04 Acres of Land from Office to
Mixed Use -Non Residential (MU-NR)
B. Public Hearing: RZ 11-001 McNelis Subdivision b Ten Mile
Y
Center, LLC Located Northwest Corner of N. Ten Mile Road
and W. Ustick Road Request: Rezone of 18,522 +l- S uare Feet
q
from L-0 (Limited Office) to I-L (Light Industrial and 16.24 +l-
Acres from L-0 to C-G (General Retail & Service Commercial
C. Public Hearing: MDA 11-002 McNelis Subdivision b Ten Mile
Y
Center, LLC Located Northwest Corner of N. Ten Mile Road
and W. Ustick Road Request: Modify the Existing Develo ment
p
Agreement to Reflect the Proposed Rezone; Modi uses
Allowed on the Site Consistent with the Unified Develo ment
p
Code (UDC) for the Respective Zone Except for those
Specifically Prohibited in the Agreement; Update the Owner
Information; and Remove the Requirement for Conditional Use
Permit Approval of uses on Lots that Abut Ustick Road, Ten
Mile Road andlorthe Nine Mile Creek
De Weerd: So, we will move into Item No. 8 under Action Items and we will o en u the
thr p p
ee public hearings on 8-A, 8-B and 8-C for CPAM 10-002, RZ 11-001 and MDA 11-
002. I will ask for staff comments at this time.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 7 of 50
Wafters: Thank you, Madam Ma or, Members of the
Y City Council. The first application
before you tonight is an amendment to the Com rehen '
p slue Plan future land use map to
change the land use designation on 13.85 acres of land
from Mixed Use Community
and 20.04 acres of land from Office to Mixed Use Non '
residential. The second
application is for a rezone of 16.24 acres of land from L-0 '
,Limited Office, to C-G,
General Retail and Service Commercial, and .43 of an acr - '
e from L 0, limited Office, to
I-L, Light Industrial. The final application is for a develo m
p ent agreement modification
to update the zoning and uses allowed on the site in accord wit
. , . h the rezone, except for
those uses specifically prohibited in the a reement. U date th '
g p e owner information and
remove the requirement for Conditional Use Permit a royal of uses on
. pp lots that abut
Ustick Road, Ten Mile Road, and/or the Nine Mile Creek. The '
overall site consists of
34.07 acres. It's currently zoned I-L, L-0, and C-G and it loca
ted on the northwest
corner of North Ten Mile Road and West Ustick Roads. The ma ou're loo '
. p y king at here
shows the current zoning of the property and surroundin ro ernes, '
g p p This is an aerial
view of the subject property. The proposed rezone is consistent with the r
p oposed map
amendment to mixed use nonresidential and this is 'ust a ma showin th
. 1 p g e proposed
zoning and this is a future land used map. The industrial and commercial zonin
.. g will
assist in providing a transition buffer between the wastewater treatment Ian
p t and
existing residents to the east and south. The ma amendment is consiste '
p nt with the
mixed use nonresidential future land use designation of other ro ernes surroun i
p p d ng the
wastewater plant, which does not allow for new residential uses. Just a li
the
background. At the time this property was annexed in 2004 the future la
nd use map
designation of this site, along with other properties surroundin the wastew
g ater plant,
was mixed use wastewater treatment plant, which did not allow for new residential uses.
In 2005 with approval of the North Meridian Area Plan, the land use desi nati
g on for this
property was changed to Mixed Use Community and Office. In 2009 the name of the
Mixed Use Wastewater Treatment Plant designation was chan ed to Mix
g ed Use
Nonresidential, so that it could be used in other areas of the cit as well not 'ust f
Y ~ or the
area surrounding the wastewater treatment plant. The applicant has submitted a new
conceptual development plan and building elevations with the rezone a lication to be
pp
included in the amended development agreement. The ro osed amendments
p p to the
development agreement are consistent with the map amendment and rezone re
. quest.
Because the city now has design standards for develo ment, staff is su ortive of
p pp the
applicants request to remove the CUP requirement for lots abuttin Ustick Ten Mile
g ,
and the Nine Mile Creek. The current development a reement restricts hours of
. 9
operation for uses in the I-L and L-0 districts from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 .m. unless
.. p ,
otherwise approved through the Conditional Use Permit. This restriction will car ov r
ry e
to the properties proposed to be rezoned to C-G, except for those ro ernes alread
pp y
zoned C-G on the corner of Ustick and Ten Mile. The hours of o eration on those lots
. p
shall not be restricted. This is a conceptual buildin elevation that the a lican
9 pp t
submitted with this application. The Commission recommended a royal of thes
pp e
applications at their April 21 st public hearing. Tamara Thom son testified in favor of the
p
application. No one testified in opposition or commented. Written testimon was
submitted fr Y
om the applicant Tamara Thompson in response to the staff re ort in
p
agreement with the conditions. Key issues of discussion by the Commission the
appropriateness of the rezone to C-G as proposed versus a lesser intense commercial
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 8 of 50
zoning district. The Commission did not make an
y changes to the staff
recommendation. Written testimony since the Commission hearin w
g as submitted by
Tamara Thompson in response to the staff re ort still in a re
p g ement with the conditions.
There are no outstanding issues for the Cit Council. Staff will
Y stand for any questions
the Council may have at this time.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Rountree: I have none right now.
Bird: I have none, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Would the applicant like to make comment? Good ev '
ening. If you
will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Thompson: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, m .name is Tamar
Y a Thompson,
Landmark Development Group, and I'm here re resentin the ro ert ow
p g p p y Hers for the
McNelis Subdivision and just to clarify, the ownershi entit has chap ed
p Y g ,but the main
members of the -- of the property are still the same. So, even thou h the chan e
g y g d the
entity name -- it used to be Falcon Creek, LLC, and now it's Ten Mile Center LLC s --
butthe ownershi i o
p s, essentially, the same as far as the members of the -- of that. The
amendment for the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the other ro erties th
p p at
surround the sewer treatment facility. I believe this just cleans it u so that it's all mixe
p d
use nonresidential. You can see the other brown areas that surround the sewer
treatment plant. Those are all mixed use nonresidential. And, then the rezone from -
L
0 to C-G gives a greater flexibility of compatible uses. The real estate broker
s have
determined, by means of demographics, market studies, that uses such as et su I'
veteri p pp ies,
Harlan, flower shop, garden center, dance studio, dry-cleanin ,office su lies
g pp ,
restaurants, bank, eye doctor, equipment and tool rental -- that these are all needed in
the area and many of those cannot be done in the L-0 zone. So what this do
es,
changing it to C-Z -- or, I'm sorry, C-G, gives a greater flexibilit of uses we can still
Y do
the office, but we can also do some of those other retail uses. And then with the mixed
use nonresidential, that can't be more than resident -- or, sorry, retail cannot be more
than 50 percent of the building area, how that zone -- or that desi nation is defined.
. 9
Some you have touched on it a little bit, but our intent is not to chan a the hours
g of
operation in the C-G, that the current development agreement has the L-0 there is
some hours of operation limitations and our intent is not to chan a that. So that's wh
g y
we are proposing to keep the hours the same. And, then, the other chan a is 'ust that
9 1
the Conditional Use Permit is not necessary, because there is a desi n review rocess
g p
now within the city. And I think Sonya covered everything else, so I don't need to
reiterate what she said, but if you have any specific questions I would be ha to
ppY
answer that.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 9 of 50
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Tamara.
Thompson: Thank you.
De Weerd: We did have three people si ned u . When I cal
g p I your name if you would
like to provide testimony at that time I would ask ou to com '
y e forward. Jackie Crane
signed up against. If you would like to provide testimon if we c
y an have you on the
record, please. Thank you for joining us. If ou will lease s
Y , p tate your name and
address for the record.
Crane: Okay. My name is Jackie Crane and I'm at 2820 N
orth Inglewood Place in
Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Crane: And my main question is -- I'm not exact) sure I '
. y think that young lady
explained it, but dust exactly what is light industrial? What does that --
you know, could
somebody clarify that forme, please?
De Weerd: Yes. I will ask staff to give ou a definition. Do
Y you have any other
comments orquestions --
Crane: Well, my main issue is traffic. I don't know what the r '
t affic plans for that
intersection is, but right now it is so crowded at certain eriods of tim
. p e that if we --when
I think of industrial I think of trucks and that t e of thin and that int '
Yp g ersection is a mess
right now and that's my main concern.
De Weerd: Okay. Sure. We will have staff comment on what is an
allowed use in
industrial and also that intersection is scheduled for --
Rountree: 2012.
De Weerd: -- in 2012 for an intersection light, so that --
Crane: No expansion, just a light?
Rountree: It will be expanded.
De Weerd: Pardon?
Rountree: It will be expanded to six by six, so you will have --
De Weerd: Yeah. As well as the road from Cherry to Ustick.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 10 of 50
Rountree: That's in 2014.
De Weerd: And that's 2014. Yeah. So, they are not doing a temporary intersection,
then. It will be a full intersection improvement. Pete, do you know?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't know specifically what the
programmed improvements are. Sonya, what were the comments from ACRD, if we
have any? I don't believe -- I don't believe we have any temporary improvements
associated with this particular application, because we also don't have any specific
ground up development proposed at this time. These are merely changes to colors on
the map, if you will. There is not a --there is not a proposal to actually come out of the
ground and build anything right now.
De Weerd: Those road improvements are on a scheduled plan, so that is very
favorable and positive.
Crane: Okay. Thank you. And the light industry, what --just exactly --
De Weerd: Yes.
Friedman: If you don't mind my reading directly from the code. It's probably easier than
relying on my memory, but in the city zoning regulations we do have two classifications
for industrial. One is heavy industrial, which is more the noxious type of uses, it
promotes a lot of glare and smoke and noise and things like that. And, then, we have
light industrial. Right now there are no heavy industrial areas even designated within
the city. However, light industrial we have quite a bit and it is intended to allow for light
manufacturing, fabrication, industrial R&D, research and development. We have other
uses associated with that. Do you have truck traffic? Yeah, probably so. Some of the
best illustrative examples I can provide are -- if you think about the areas that area east
of Fire Station No. 1 on Franklin Road where you have everything from printers to
automobile shops to light manufacturing, that's pretty much the I-L zoning district and
that's what it looks like.
Crane: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, sir. Also signed up is Les Marbury, signed up against. If
you would like to provide testimony or -- okay. Okay. Thank you, sir. Janet Wilder
signed up against. Okay. Thank you. Is there any other member of the public who
would like to provide testimony on this application? Tamara, do you have any closing
remarks? If you will just state your name once more forthe record.
Thompson: Tamara Thompson, Landmark Development Group.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 11 of 50
' to 'ust reiterate thatwe are not changing the I-L zone. The I-L
Thompson. I dust wanted ~
o zone. You u s can't see what I point at, can you. So, the --
is -- is currently that t p g Y
' sta in the same. That's currently zoned I-L. We are not making any
the top area is y g in the
with that. So the areas that are in purple and pink on this are stay g
changes ,
in as far as zonin that we are changing is just the L-0 to the C-G
same and the only th g g .
' vide a reater de ree of flexibility and provide for a combination of
and thats dust to pro g g .
' uses to meet the real estate market demands. I think -- dust because it
compatible land
' the Plannin Commission, I think I will touch just a little bit on the other
was stated in g
and wh those weren't picked as far as the commercial goes. There was
zones y
' r ardin C-N and C-C and in looking at the matrix for the zones, the I-L is
discussion eg g
m atible with the C-G zones and if -- if the limits of the I-L -- if you can -- the
more co p
here on the west side of Burley that we could -- we could expand or reduce that a
use
bit without havin to rezone those properties, because light industry is approved in
little g
-G zone but it's not in those other two that I mentioned with the C-C and C-N.
the C ,
So with thatwe would respectfully request your approval tonight. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank ou. Council, any questions forthe applicant or staff?
Y
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I'm fine.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank. you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: If there is no further testimony, I move that we close the public hearings on
Items 8-A, B and C.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 8-A, B,
and C. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Given the explanation of the concerns that were expressed by the public, I
think that I heard that they pretty much were taken care of and the I-L zone already
exists on the zoning map, it's just that corner of the .property, given that we are going to
benefit, ho efull , in the near future, starting next year, with a fully rebuilt intersection
p Y
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 12 of 50
' -- ears followin that a fully rebuilt Ten Mile, at least from
and the year following or two y g . .
ve that we a rove Item 8-A, CPAN, and with the conditions
Ustick to Cherry Lane, I mo pp
outlined by staff and the applicant.
Bird: Second.
ion and a second to a rove Item 8-A. Any further discussion
De Weerd. I have a mot pp
from Council? Oka .Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
v
II-Call: Bird ea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
Ro ,y
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Item 8-B.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
e: I move that we a rove Item 8-B, RZ 11-001 for McNelis Subdivision.
Rountre pp
Bird: Second.
ve a motion and a second to approve Item 8-B. If there is no discussion
De Weerd. I ha
by Council I will ask for roll call, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, ea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
Y
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd : Item 8-C .
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
hat we a rove Item 8-C, MDA 11-002, McNelis Subdivision, subject
Rountree. I move t pp
to staff and applicant comments.
Bird: Second.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 13 of 50
' econd to a rove Item 8-C. Hearing no discussion,
De Weerd. I have a motion and a s pp
Madam Clerk.
- 'Bird ea' Rountree, ea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
Roll Call. , y Y
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
r 'oinin us this evening. Items 8-D, E and F are public
De Weerd. Thank you fo t g
- VAR 11-001 and FP 11-004. I will open these items with
hearings on MDA 11 004, ,
staff comments.
' uncil Members. Staff is respectfully requesting that each of
Friedman. Thank you, Co
' o ened and acted u on separately. In addition, the applicant has
these applications be p p . ,
ublic hearin on the variance, if it's the Councils pleasure, be
requested that the p g
nda to be heard last. That way Council would open the public
adtusted on the age
' veto ment a reement modification, take testimony on that, act on that,
hearing on the de p g
t ou could act on, because it's just a public meeting not a public
then, the final pla y
both of those a lications could stand on their own. The variance has no
hearing, and pp
the Council's decision on -- on the disposition of those two applications,
bearing on
so --
D. Public Hearing: MDA 11-004 Kingsbridge by Boise Hunter
Homes Located East Side of S. Eagle Road; Midway Between
E. Victo Road and E. Amity Road Request: Amend the
Kin sbridge Recorded Development Agreement (Inst.
9 .
#105092050) for the Purpose of Excluding the Property
Preliminaril Platted with the Kingsbridge Subdivision (File
Y
#PP 10-OOl) AND Create a New Development Agreement to
Include the New Pro'ect Boundary, Building Elevations, Clarify
J
Subdivision AmenitieslCommon Open Space
Oka . Well I will entertain and take comment on Item 8-D, the public
De Weerd. y ,
hearing for MDA 11-004.
Thank ou Madam Ma or, Members of the Council. As Pete stated, this first
Parsons y Y , , .
' item toni ht will be a development agreement modification. Currently that
hearing g
' 'zoned R-2 and was annexed in 2005 and was known as Kingsbridge back in
protect is
as well. Earl -- or late in 2010 Council actually approved a new preliminary
that day Y
for the remainin 38.31 acres and that s, basically, the preface for the new
plat g
nt a reement before ou this evening. Staff is trying to bifurcate the two DAs
developme g Y
allow Kin sbrid a hase one to be subject to the original DA and have future
and g g p
ses two and three be subject to the new DA. Here is the concept plan that was
pha t .
ted to ou Burin that hearin .You can see how the two protects will meld as
presen y g g
division in the future, ho efully. And, then, what I want to address before
one sub p
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 14 of 50
' new items in the DA. So, basically, what we are trying to do
Council tonight will be the
DA future hases two and three, is we are trying to incorporate a new
with the new p the
' incor orate subdivision amenities that were proposed with
project boundary, p
h buildin elevations to a new development agreement and also
preliminary plat, attac g
' ' final DA .revisions that need to be rolled into the new DA as well.
clarify and identify orig p
bounda basicall covers the new preliminary plat that you acted
So, here is the actual ry, Y
'maril covers 38.31 acres. It was preliminary platted with the first
on in 2010. It pri y
but since those a royals had expired, we are basically left with the new
Kingsbridge, pp , , .
' tat or three lots that ou see here.- Here are the subdivision amenities that
preliminary p Y
were ro osed with the preliminary plat and the new amenities that they are proposing
p p his evenin is
before ou this evenin . The only reason why I bring this up to you t g
Y g
e the revious amenities that you see on the left-hand side were ones that were
becaus p
with the relimina tat, phases two and three. In working with the
approved p rll p ,
undin ro ert owners in the county it came to the applicant s and staff s attention
surro g p p Y nd
he weren t real) amenable to a walking path along that buffer and the north a
that t y Y
bounda If ou will let me indulge you here, if you look at the map on the left-
eastern ry y
side ou can see the 30 foot landscape buffers along the north and the east
hand y .
ounda and that was basically meant to be a buffer between the county residences
b ry
future Kin sbrid e. And so in working with the applicant and going through the
and g g ,
ordinance staff was able to come -- work with the applicant and come up with some
w amenities that would bee ual in --for lack of a better word, a swap. So, basically,
ne q .
what staff has ro osed is to swap amenities and so what we have done in lieu of that
pp
'v foot edestrian athwa alon the north and eastern boundary, we have requested
fie p p Y g .
the a licant to rovide a tot lot and they have agreed to that. And, then, if you also
pp p
recall there is a 1.58 acre ark that's located internally to a subdivision and that has
p .
me er etas that were tanned along the northern and southern five foot detached
so p g p
idewalk. And so in workin with the applicant we -- I was working -- staff worked with
s g .
them and asked if the were willing to add a picnic shelter and they said they would and
Y
the a reed to add that amenity in place of the six pergolas that were planned for the
y g ~ 'hthe
nei hborhood ark. And, then, something else that came about when working wit
g p
a licant was leavin the McDonald lateral open. If you will allow me to go through that
pp g
conce t Ian a ain on the left there, along the north and eastern boundary there is
pp 9
another irrigation facility there and the landscape plan on the south -- or, excuse me, on
the ri ht shows that easement a little bit better. So, if you can see my cursor here, that
g that
easement follows this boundary, turns southeast and, then, goes south along
ro'ect bounda .And so, basically, in dealing with the applicant, speaking with those
P 1 rY
ad'acent homeowners, it appears that that was really a landscape buffer and in order to
J .
real) achieve a natural looking amenity and a natural buffer there between the
y with
residents staff felt it a ropriate to work with the applicant, have that designed
pp
natural rasses and more of natural landscaping and leave that ditch open, so that it
g .
looks like more of a natural water feature than dust a tiled ditch and manicured lawn.
We thou ht that was an amenable compromise to what they had proposed with the
9 .
revious relimina plat. The applicant was in agreement with that. I would point out
p p rY
with Council that the amenity swaps, the picnic shelter and the tot lot will have -- will be
constructed with hase three and, then, along with that open ditch that would probably
p
come in with hase three as well. So, with phase two we would only be getting the
p
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 15 of 50
' 'time. Now here are the proposed elevations. These are
neighborhood park at this .
' that were attached to the approved preliminary plat that you
similar to the elevations
' in a reement with these elevations and requests that these
acted on in 2010. Staff is g .
II. And then also in looking --doing my evaluation of this
be attached to the DA as we , .
ri final DA and looked at the preliminary plat conditions that
project I pulled up the old o g
d three and I went through each individual DA provision in the
we had for phases two an
' ' t which ones were completed and which ones needed to be
original DA and picked ou
' DA and that's what I have tried to highlight for you here this
rolled over into the new , , . .
' with a s uare bullet is, basically, a DA provision in the original
evening. So, anything q
' black arrow is the ro osed language that we are -- ,had before
DA. Anything with a p p
' DA. So DA rovision number two basically reiterates the 25 foot
you tonight in the new p
' eter lots. It wasn't clear in that original DA if that was meant for
setback along the perim
erimeter lots that weren't abutting a common lot. And so staff
all perimeter lots or only p .
' A rovision staff has tried to craft some language to basically tie those
-- with the new D p
25 foot rear setback that do not abut a 30 foot common open lot. So,
perimeter lots to a
ou one more time, this landscape plan on the right-hand side in the
if I can indulge y
if ou can seem cursor here, there is four lots that do not abut a 30
southeast corner, y Y
and so what that DA rovision is stating is those lots are the only lots
foot common lot p
'ect to that 25 foot erimeter setback -- rear setback condition. DA
that will be subs p
' ' er nine is basicall , u rades to the Dartmoor Subdivision irrigation
provision .numb Y pg
n't know if Council has been called in -- been involved in this or not, but
system. I do
ns is that intersection where Dartmoor -- the entrance into Dartmoor abuts
what happe
Road that floods out if we have a significant rain event. And so that was a topic
Eagle ,
' ck in the hearin in 2005 and so those folks wanted to make sure --and
of discussion ba g
' velo er made commitments to those -- that subdivision that they would
the previous de p
im rovements. The wa it's written in the original DA, it states that the
upgrade those p Y
r develo er would not et a building permit until -- for phase two until those
applicant o p g
redone. Well now we have new owners -- basically a different project --the
upgrades a ,
e different ro'ect, different owner, so in order for them to really pull a
same nam , p 1
' mit we need to modi that condition and what staff is proposing is we would
building per fY
hem to ull u to four buildin permits prior to doing the upgrades. The applicant
allow t p p 9 .
tin for more than that, but I'll get into that once I get to their response to the
is reques g
ort. And in DA rovision 13 in the original DA is basically -- that's definitely a
staff rep p
' rovision but it basicall ,essentially, requires a drainage plan approval for
quirky DA p Y
moor HOA resident. Staff wasn't sure or clear if that had been reached --that
the Dart p .
ement was met with those folks, so we felt it prudent to at least roll it over for now
agre
w Council to act on that, whether or not that's a prudent DA provision or keep it
and alto
' here or strike it from the new DA. But we thought, again, that was appropriate to
in t
' there without havin conclusive evidence that that was completed. So,
stay in g
sicall in summa these are the DA provisions that staff is proposing for the new
ba y, ry,
It basicall addresses future home designs. It addresses timing for the
DA. y,
division amenities the timin for those amenities. It also requires -- it also states
sub g
how man buildin ermits will be issued prior to the upgrades to the Dartmoor
Y gp
ivision. It talks about ettin approval from the Dartmoor HOA president for the
Subd g 9
rains a Ian and it also further clarifies that 25 foot rear setback along the perimeter
d g p
tall did receive comments late this afternoon from the applicant. In that rebuttal
lots. S
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 16 of 50
' uested that DA rovision number four be stricken and also to
the applicant has req p
tuber three to chan a it from the fourth building permit to the
modify DA provision nu g
' tall has not -- to staff s knowledge there are no other outstanding
12th building permit. S
evenin . We have not received any additional testimony from
issues before you this g
' hbors. A ain staff is recommending approval of the DA with
any of the adjacent neig g ,
s stated before ou this evening. And with that I would be happy to
the DA provisions a Y
answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Any question from Council?
Bird: Not at this time, Mayor, I don't.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
two uestions and let me deal with the pathway first. Was that
Zaremba. I have q
in to an other athwa s in our pathway master plan or is this a
pathway connect g y p Y
stand-alone and didn't go anywhere?
President Zaremba, Members, Madam Mayor, it was basically just a
Parsons.
' 'ion amenit . It did not connect to a pathway. If you recall when they came
subdivis y
relimina lat we had a -- staff had arecommendation -- or the parks
through with the p ry p
ommended that we extend a ten foot pathway through the middle of
department had rec
' ' ' n alon the south side of the neighborhood park, but Council agreed to
the subdivisio g
to on the south side of the Ten Mile feeder canal. So, at this point to
allow that to s y
answer our uestion, no, it was not part of the city's pathway network.
Y q
k ou. The other uestion -- the original phasing plan was agreed after
Zaremba. Than y q .. .
' cussion with the nei hbors, which I believe would be the Dartmoor Subdivision,
much dis g .
' nt was to make sure that traffic went on the new road that this development
and the ante
Id be buildin and make it less attractive for people to use the road that goes up
wou g
the middle of Dartmoor, if I'm picking the right spot, and I just want to make sure
through
that the new phasing plan doesn't change that objective.
ns: Councilman Zaremba, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, that was
Parso
concern back in 2005 and it was a concern during the hearings in December
definitely a
. If ou look at the landsca a plan on the right-hand side there that the applicant
of 2010 y p
d accordin with ACHD, is for achoker -- a choke down here. So, right
has propose , g
see hase two line and hrase three line, you will see where actually the
where you p p
r the roadwa chokes down. So, that was an agreement that they worked out
ca rtway o y
r traffic from cuttin throu h there and, then, using that road through
to try to Bete g 9
Dartmoor.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 17 of 50
Parsons: You're welcome.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Bill, would you put up the DA provisions again? You have indicated that staff
was recommending the allowance of four building permits, but the way that's written it
only allows three and, then, the fourth one can only come after they have met the
provisions for the irrigation pond, et cetera, et cetera. So, if the intent is to allow four,
we ought to allow four without conditions and, then, after the fourth one they have to
meet something. Is that what you wanted to do?
Parsons: Council Rountree, that would be correct.
Rountree: Okay. So, that needs to be reworded, I believe. I heard that you indicated
the applicant is requesting that fourth one be eliminated and I can understand why. Did
you do -- did you discuss the fact that that storm water retention plan needs to be
submitted to the city and it needs to be approved through the building permitting
process -- it seems to me that would be the appropriate hand, as opposed to a
homeowners association, unless they are certified engineers.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Member Rountree, Members of the Council -- and
Bill will have to help me out if I'm not -- part of that DA provision kind of carried over
from the settlement agreement, but also we have a develop agreement 13, which is not
up there, that requires that the homeowners association sign off on it, but also we are
including that it remain part of the new development agreement and it be verified prior to
signature on the plat. Yeah, I share your concern that they are not -- unless they are
civil engineers. I'm not sure -- again, this was a carry over from the original agreement
and we felt that because of the importance that was placed on it at that time, that it
seemed logical to carry over at this time. Now, that was only our logic.
Rountree: Well, you cause me to ask a question of our legal counsel. So, it sounds like
some of these provisions are a result of a settlement agreement between I assume the
homeowners association of Dartmoor and the previous developer, which would go with
this property or how does that work?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Rountree -- and
Planning can help with this, too. We had an issue when the original Kingsbridge came
through -- the second time that Kingsbridge came through and part of the resolution of
that issue was a development agreement with the city, but also a settlement agreement
with --with the surrounding property owners of Dartmoor. I think we have incorporated
some of the elements of that agreement, if I recall, into the development agreement, but
there are other parts that are not part of our agreement, so --but that's still applicable to
this property owner as far as I understand and I think when it went to the Planning and
Zoning Commission the first time in January that was an issue and so the Planning and
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 18 of 50
Zoning Commission sent them away to try to resolve those issues and I -- I didn't -- I
wasn't at the next hearing of Planning and Zoning, but I think that's the result of where
we are at now. Is that right, Bill? That's my recollection. But I think there is -- you're
correct, Councilman Rountree, there is a separate agreement that's not part of the cit
y
that they are also bound to as well.
Rountree: Okay.
Parsons: Councilman Rountree, Members of the Council, Madam Mayor, Mr. Na hit it
rY
on the head. We have -- we kind of have two conflicts here. We have a recorded DA
with the original and, then, we have a separate settlement agreement. When I took the
new Kingsbridge project before P&Z it was always interpreted from the cit 's office that
Y
we could not enforce that settlement agreement. However, somehow some of the
provisions in '05 that were with the original Kingsbridge, some of those provisions in the
settlement agreement did get wrapped into the recorded development agreement and
this happens to be one of those. I did research that this morning and I did find out
verbatim that this language is a DA provision in the original DA and it's also verbatim
language in the settlement agreement. So, even if we modify it here tonight or strike it,
the applicant still will have to go back to Dartmoor or amend that settlement a reement
9
with them or get some sort of approval or sign off from them and so that's kind of where
my thinking was, is, yeah, we can take it out of our DA, but we won't be takin it out of
g
the settlement agreement, if that helps clarify anything for you, Mr. Rountree -- or
Councilman Rountree.
Rountree: And the DA that this comes from is recorded -- signed and recorded, so it's
contractual?
Parsons: Yes, sir.
Rountree: I will think about it.
De Weerd: I guess I would maybe take Councilman Rountree's concern and ask our
legal counsel a what if question. So, what if the city approves that facility and the
Dartmoor Subdivision doesn't? What kind of conflict does that put -- that kind of puts
the city in the middle, doesn't it?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council --great question. I guess the only thing
we -- the only thing the city can do is what we have done so far. I mean -- and I don't
recall the specifics back in '05, but we must have at the time with the developer felt that
whatever those conditions that was part of their settlement were, obviously, conditions
relevant to the city. So, all we can do is enforce that. If there is a disa reement and
g
you re talking about specifically about like that provision where it says that Dartmoor
HOA president shall not unreasonably withhold their approval -- is that the --
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 19 of 50
Nary: --language?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
ilit to basicall -- because it's .our agreement, not
Nary: You know, we have the ab y Y
scenario out the developer came forward and said
theirs, if, for example, playing that
is the en ineerin that makes this work, they are being
here is what I presented, here g g ,
' ecision as a cit to decide whether or not that s the case.
unreasonable, thats our d Y
obviousl come and testify about it and the Council
Wed have a hearing, they could, y,
onditions are satisfied and they can go forward. If that
could at that time decide if the c .
' Dartmoor that's between Dartmoor and them, not with us.
puts them in a pickle with ,
clarification. An other questions, Council, for staff
De Weerd. Okay. Appreciate that Y
at this point?
Rountree: Not right now.
licant like to comment? Good evening. If you will,
De Weerd. Okay. Would the app
lease state our name and address for the record.
p Y
'~ ouncil Scott Nori uki, 3106 Ridgeway Drive, Boise, Idaho.
Noriyuki. Madam Mayor, C Y
De Weerd: Thank you.
in me toni ht. I want to address a couple of the initial
Noriyuki. Thank you for hear g g
' thwa s ust from a clarification standpoint. The intent between
items regarding the pa y , ~ .
ert owners and now to be developed project was to create a
the original perimeter prop y
a edestrian athwa that wasn't part of the greater city
buffer. Therefore, placing p p Y
' st im act those eo le that we were trying to create a buffer
system would, essentially ~u p p p
' came about the ne otiations with the city and opted for the tot
for. So, thats where we g
re usable and the covered picnic area. Regarding traffic
lot, which is probably mo
ee we have obviousl ,worked on that. There was a lot of
through Dartmoor, you cans Y
a lot of desi n renditions, to come up with the most appropriate
neighborhood meetings, g
' e most traffic on East Kingsbridge Drive through Kingsbridge
and effective way to ke p .
come u with. This is also a result of working with ACRD.
and this is what we have p
ved b them. Re arding the settlement agreement versus the
And it is currently appro y g
reement that's been a very discussed item throughout this entire
development ag ~ f
oint is s ecificall toward Dartmoor s HOA president approval o
project. I guess my p p Y .
nderstand the on final intent and concern and that was within the
our drainage plan, I u g
ith the stub streets stubbed into Dartmoor, there was some grade --
phase one portion w
)exit issues where some of that site drainage was rolling into
some grading comp y
ntl hase two and three, which we are under control of, is not
Dartmoor. Curre y p
rtmoor and code re uires that one hundred percent of drainage be
contiguous to Da q
' Our tans have been approved by -- reviewed and approved by
contained on site p
' as well as ACRD current) ,and we have no storm drainage that will leave
Public Works, Y
' of our ro~ect. So, that was my rationale for wanting to remove it, because
our confines p ~
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 20 of 50
it's really not applicable anymore at this oint and it 'u
. p ~ st creates another layer and
potentially another concern for us. That's m rationale on that. An
. .. Y d, then, regarding the
off-site gravity irrigation piping on Ea le Road that on final '
g g commitment that was made
by the city -- or, excuse me, by the on final develo er and m
9 p andated by the city and
Dartmoor. Kind of a unique provision. I don't understand a lot
of the history, why it was
triggered at the point of the first permit within hase two howev
p er, we have been left
with that condition. Currently I have res onded re uestin a ' '
p q g dditional permits, but
between my formal response and now there has been a lot of di
scussion on how that
affects us from a financial standpoint and t in to achieve sale '
. rY g s, as well as dust a
practicality standpoint of we are proceeding with develo ment ri ht now
p g and we
anticipate we are going to have finished lots and be able to roceed with
.. p sales prior to
irrigation being turned off. So, that's going to create a conundrum for us to a
certain
degree. So, what we are proposing is in readin in here even with the ca
g p on permits,
we are required to put up surety. So, we are putting up the uarantee financial) with a
g y
letter of credit, so that we can proceed with our plat recordin and we will hav '
g e finished
Tots. So, what we want to propose is that we abolish the -- the ca on ermi '
p p ts, which
gives us flexibility and a better chance to get off and runnin in this market ou h
. g , y ave a
letter of credit, we also make a commitment that we will com lete it in the off
p season.
Typically we shut off -- water is off in September, so we have of between Se t
. g p ember
and April when they turn on. In the event we don't com lete it b that A ril 15th date
p Y p ,
then, we understand you could cap us. But always be clear ou have the ultima
. Y to
hammer, because we will have to post surety for the incom lete items. And with th
p at
said I stand for questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Scott, you just mentioned a proposed modification to the third DA a reement
9
with respect to a letter of credit and that you would be doing work on the off season but
you didn't give me any time specific -- obviously between October and A ril 15th but of
p ,
what year would you anticipate that being?
Noriyuki: Oh, I'm sorry. This fall. I plan on doing it in 2011.
Rountree: 2011, 2012?
Noriyuki: I naturally want to push myself out to April 15th, in the event we have an
y
issues with approvals and irrigation district and ACRD right of way.
Rountree: All right. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions?
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 21 of 50
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Noriyuki: Thank you.
De Weerd: I do have people signed up on our sign-up sheet. When I read our name
. Y ,
if you would like to provide testimony at that time, I would invite ou forward. Donald
. Y
Hendrickson, signed up as neutral. If you would like to provide testimon lease come
Y~ p ,
forward. Thank you for being here. If you will, please, state our name and address for
Y
the record.
Hendrickson: Donald Hendrickson. 4240 Bott Lane. I'm on southeast corner of this
property.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Hendrickson: I hadn't heard a lot about this whole deal until I received this in the mail
and Kingsbridge and Vision First kind of left me in a real mess. They purchased art of
p
my ten acres back in -- it was about 2005. They purchased 7.2 acres of my ten acre
parcel. So, I have about two and a half acres left. And they had promised to do a lot of
things for us and they never came through. As a matter of fact, I was oin to sell the
9 g
house to them, too, and they defaulted on that and left me hanging on the da we were
. Y
supposed to receive the check at the title company. They were also -- I have the -- I
believe it is McDonald Lateral dissects my property and they were supposed to move
that over to my west boundary and they -- they really made a mess out of my ro ert .
P p Y
If they don't move that canal, they have deeded me land that belongs to the irri ation
g
company and I don t know what all the complexities are there. They were supposed to
develop that whole ten acres at one time. So, I got some real questions of what the
Y
are doing here. I dont know what they are doing on my west boundary for one thin .
g
They were supposed to put up fencing on that west boundary in a berm like they did on
Zaldia Way. There is probably about --
De Weerd: Pete or Bill, can you point out what property he might be talking about?
Bird: Right here.
Hendrickson: It's directly on that southeast corner.
Parsons: Sir, can you see my cursor?
Hendrickson: Uh-huh.
Parsons: Up there, this larger lot here. Or you can even draw on the map. Let me
come up and assist you.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 22 of 50
Hendrickson: Okay. Here I am right here. This propert ri ht here. Oka . This
Yg y
property right here. Now, there is a -- the lateral comes off -- this canal, there is -- I
think the Ten Mile feeder goes right along -- right along this south bounda I have of
. rY g
a -- the McDonald Lateral goes right through my property about like that. So kind of
dissects that. My -- I have got little chunks on both sides of this here. The were
Y
supposed to put in a fence and a berm here --vinyl fencing on top of the berm like the
did v ~ Y
o er here on Zaldia Way over here when they developed this. I havent heard
anything about that. But they were supposed to move this lateral ri ht here over to her
g e
to draw any -- because the lateral comes across the middle of my ro ert from the Ten
P p Y
Mile feeder and they were supposed to move that whole thin over to here and run it
g
directly north and south. I haven't heard anything about that. These eo le real)
p p Y
screwed me up.
De Weerd: Now, staff, I guess my question for you is this part of our develo ment
p
agreement or is this -- this is probably a private agreement between you and the
original --
Hendrickson: It was Ken Elliott, Kingsbridge, Vision First, there were all kinds of names
in there. These people had about three or four different names and I don't even know
who owns -- I think it was Vision First was su osed to bu this 7.25 acres. That nam
pp Y e
has changed since I last seen it. I don't know who really owns that -- that other 7.25
acres. Coldwell Banker has it for sale. It's been up for sale since 2006. They defaulted
on my agreement to sell.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, I don't think we are going to be able to help you answer that,
but perhaps you can talk to the current applicant. The applicant has changed.
Hendrickson: I know that -- yeah. And it's --this is things that they had promised me.
De Weerd: But they have changed.
Hendrickson: I know that -- I don't know if they are bankrupt, I don't know what
company is bankrupted or where they want, but they left me in a mess. I mean I -- me
and my wife went in there to pick up a check from these people in December 2006 and
they never showed up and left us hanging. We had made plans to move to Montana
and they never even bothered to show up and, then, wanted the money back on a
deposit. I had to fight them for a year for 25,000 dollars for 12 month, run up some
huge legal bills with them, and, then, ended up having to give most of that move back,
Y
because they -- they had some trick words in the contract that my attorney did not pick
up. They were good. She was a real estate attorney and she got caught.
De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 23 of 50
Rountree: No, I don't. My heart goes out to you, but we are not lawyers and I'm not
sure we can solve your problem.
Hendrickson: I do want to know -- I want clarification what's going on on my west
boundary.
Rountree: We can get that.
Bird: That will bedecided --
Hendrickson: And I want a minimum of a fence and a berm. I don't know if it's there or
not.
Rountree: We will certainly ask the applicant about that corner.
Hendrickson: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Margie has signed up as neutral. Okay. Jackie Crane. Signed
up as neutral. James Hunter in favor. Good evening.
Hunter: Good evening, Madam Mayor and, Members of the Council. My name is Jim
Hunter and -- of Boise Hunter Homes and don't have a lot to sa ,other than what staff
Y
has presented and Scott has talked about. I just want to make sure everybody
understands -- we have nothing to do with the old development company.. We are
totally arms length from Vision First. We just bought it recent) . We are Boise Hunter
Y
Homes and it sounds like this gentleman had a sad situation going on, but we had
nothing to do with that. So, I just wanted to make sure everybody clearly understands
that.
De Weerd: I think it was understood. It was very unfortunate, though.
Hunter: Yeah. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. And I assume that Clint Boyle was part of the applicant
team, so he also favors the application. Is there any further testimony desired to
provide on this item? If we could get the applicant to, please, respond to -- good
evening. If you will just restate your name.
Noriyuki: Thank you. Scott Noriyuki. 3106 Ridgeway Drive.
De Weerd: Thank you, Scott.
Noriyuki: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't believe I have anything else
additionally to add as far as -- aside from the intent of the property -- our western
property line adjacent to this gentleman's property. It is -- these will be backyards of
very large lots. Those particular lots --those four lots are going to have the 25 foot rear
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 24 of 50
setback requirement, which is above and beyond the typical R-2 zoning requirement.
So, there will naturally be an extended buffer between the two properties. We have no
plans to berm. However, I do anticipate as houses are built and people purchase these
houses, I do anticipate at that point people will potentially install fencing. We do not
plan on installing fencing upfront at this point.
De Weerd: I guess, staff,. is there not a perimeter fencing requirement?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there is not a specific fencing
requirement for that. We do have a landscape plan that does not show fencing on
there. If it's the pleasure of the Council to incorporate that either into the -- actually, the
development agreement would be the best time to incorporate that and any other
conditions that you might feel are appropriate.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: One of your concerns was the elimination of -- I think the fourth item on the
development agreement. Would you be -- I guess for our comfort, as well as trying to
minimize the legal wrangling between a development agreement, which is contractual
with the city, and a settlement agreement, which is contractual with the homeowners
association adjacent to you to language that the applicant will comply with the
settlement agreement with Dartmoor as it relates to Kingsbridge by Boise Hunter
Homes. I believe that will eliminate your irrigation issue, but there are other things out
there that you have agreed to in a settlement agreement, you agree to do those?
Noriyuki: Yes.
Rountree: The other thing -- it seems to me with respect to the third item, you indicated
you'd like to see that be specific to the letter of credit.
Noriyuki: Yes.
Rountree: And that letter of credit be to the City of Meridian and that it would have a
date certain on it barring any unforeseen climactic or permitting issues, to be done
between the period of October 2011 and April 15, 2012?
Noriyuki: Yes. With the additional request to remove any caps on building permits.
Rountree: Okay. And I guess the question as it relates to fencing, whether it's on the
east or north or south boundary, would you be open to a requirement for perimeter
fencing, which is typically been a requirement of subdivisions, as I recall, and I thought it
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 25 of 50
was a requirement, but -- but just to get some uniformity in the design of your
subdivision, which -- I'm impressed with, it's a very lovely subdivision, so --
Noriyuki: Thank you. I'm always looking for flexibility. We do have design
requirements within the CC&Rs and the ACC guidelines for consistent type fencing.
Considering the market and considering how many lots we have here, I would prefer in
that particular area if we can have the opportunity to install that fencing at the time that
we are building each independent house, in an effort to stretch costs out. We are going
to be spending atremendous -- excuse me -- amount of money on common lot fencing,
which is required that we put that up. We will adhere to code that requires as you pull a
building permit you have to have at least temporary fencing along the perimeter to
insure that we don't have any trash or debris, those types of items. We will naturally
meet that commitment. I'm just asking for a little bit of flexibility for my client financially.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. So, I understand you correctly that your CC&Rs will contain
a design type and so you have something of a uniform nature, because you do have
multiple ownerships on sides and --
Noriyuki: Yes.
Rountree: It's kind of aggravating to the owners on the other side to have a cedar fence
and a plastic fence and a --whatever kind of fence --
Noriyuki: That's critically important to us as well.
Rountree: Okay.
Noriyuki: We have two types. We have white vinyl privacy fence and, then, we have
black wrought iron fourfootfence.
Rountree: Thank you.
Noriyuki: Thank you.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Scott, my concerns is on the fencing also. I don't know how we let it pass through
without getting in the DA. With the fencing your CC&Rs are going to require, but you
just told us you have two different types, so you got vinyl on this lot and wrought iron on
the next lot. It don't look too good. Why -- would you be acceptable, as you sold the
lots and started the houses, to build the fence along the back?
Noriyuki: Of the four specific lots?
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 26 of 50
Bird: I'd like to see it all overthe whole subdivision.
Noriyuki: I think those are the only ones, actually, that are exterior, not up against a
common lot buffer. So, the common lots that wrap the northern, that wrap the southern,
and the bulk of the eastern --
Bird: You're right.
Noriyuki: They already have a requirement that I will be installing that. Specific to those
four lots I -- I have looked at my client and he's inagreement --
Bird: You will put the fences up there as you go?
Noriyuki: Yes.
Bird: So thatwe have a continuous same fence.
Noriyuki: Yes.
Bird: So that the neighbors don't have to look into two different types of fencing?
Noriyuki: Yes.
Bird: Okay.
Noriyuki: And just to clarify our two fencing types, we are using the black wrought iron
as the common lot buffers between the common lots and the buildable lots. Only four
foot, so we have got open vision and it's not a safety concern. But when it comes to the
private lots, their backyards, their side yards, white vinyl.
Bird: Okay.
Noriyuki: So, there is consistency.
Bird: But you are in agreement to do those four lots?
Noriyuki: Yes, sir.
Bird: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Any other questions from Council? Thank you.
Friedman: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Friedman.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 27 of 50
Friedman: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members, Councilman Bird. Just so that
we are clear from our end on when we have to go to enforce this development
agreement, I'm at least understanding Council Member Bird's intent. Also wanted to
just clarify that right now those lots are planned to be developed with phase three, which
will be the final phase of the subdivision. So, just a clarification on the timing for
Council's consideration.
Bird: I'd like to see it done in phase one, but I don't think they can probably do it in
phase one. And it isn't going to affect phase one or anything like that, so -- when they
do it.
Noriyuki: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from Council or staff? I would entertain a motion to
close.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close Item 8-D.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 8-D. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item D with the following comments: That item three
in the development agreement be modified to eliminate the reference to the number of
lots, but that it reflect that a letter of credit will be provided to the city in the amount of
125 percent of the cost of the activity described there and that that work will be
constructed between October 2011 and April 15th, 2012, barring any unforeseen
permitting issues. That the item number four in the development agreement be
modified to read that the applicant will comply with the settlement agreement between
the Dartmoor homeowners association as it relates to the Kingsbridge by Boise Hunter
Homes Subdivision and that the four lots in the southeast corner of the development
require that along with the building permit for the building of the homes, that they also
receive a building permit for fencing and that fencing be installed with the construction
of the homes. And subject to staff and applicant's comments.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 28 of 50
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve this item with the changes as
noted in the motion. Any further discussion from Council?
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Pete, I guess my question to you is I would imagine with this great new GIS
system we will be able to track the fencing requirements per building lot; correct?
Friedman: Madam Mayor, I certainly hope so, from everything I have heard about this
new system. But we will endeavor to somehow build in some redundancy so that we
can track those.
De Weerd: Well, make sure that -- I'm sure the adjoining property owner will --will keep
an eye on that as well.
Friedman: They are not even letting me near the new system. But we will certainly -- in
all seriousness we will make sure that we do track thatforyou.
F. FP 11-004 Kingsbridge Subdivision No. 2 by Boise Hunter
Homes Located East Side of S. Eagle Road, Midway Between
E. Victory Road and E. Amity Road Request: Final Plat
Approval for 36 Residential Building Lots and 6 Common Lots
on 18.86 Acres in an R-2 Zoning District
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, the next item, then, we have in front of you is
Item 8-F on final plat 11-004. Staff comments, please.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I won't bore you with the
details of where the plat is located. I think we are all aware of it by now. But, basically,
again, you have acted on this. Before you is the preliminary plat. The proposed final
plat is, basically, 36 residential lots with six common lots. A majority of the -- a
percentage of open space with this phase of the plat will be approximately 2.8 acres. A
majority of that will be the interior 1.5 acre park. The remainder of that will be basically
landscape buffers along the street and, then, that common lot buffer along the northern
boundary. So, before you can see the phasing plan here that shows that here is the
landscape plan that the applicant is proposing. In the left-hand corner it does detail the
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 29 of 50
fencing proposed along the common lots. So, that was required and attached to the
conditions of approval for the final plat that they comply with the fencing ordinance in
the City of Meridian. Staff did receive comments from the applicant this afternoon as
well. There are some changes requested before you this evening. So, the first one has
to do with site specific condition of approval number 14 and that's basically been
corrected in the DA modification. That's --what staff tried to do was attach that specific
DA provision for the irrigation improvements with the final plat, because it needed to
happen with phase two and so since Mr. Rountree -- or Councilman Rountree has
modified that condition, we will change that in the -- if it's your pleasure we can also
change that condition in the final plat to mimic what Councilman Rountree has specified
with the development agreement modification. And, then, in regards to the standard
conditions of approval number one, number three and number five, they are related to
Public Works comments. I have coordinated with Scott Steckline in Development
Services. He did received the applicant's comments and he is in agreement to making
those changes to those provisions as well. So, really, there are no outstanding issues
with you. All the other conditions the applicant is in agreement with. Staff has not
received any additional testimony on the final plat and with that I would be happy to
answer any additional questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Comments from the applicant? Any comments from the public?
Okay. Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: As this is not a public hearing, we don't need to close it, so I move that we
approve Item F, the final plat 11-004 for Kingsbridge Subdivision to include all staff
comments.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-F with the noted changes.
If there is no discussion by Council, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 30 of 50
E. Public Hearing: VAR 11-001 Kingsbridge by Boise Hunter
Homes Located East Side of S. Eagle Road, Midway Between
E. Victory Road and E. Amity Road Request: Variance
Approval to Deviate from the Dimensional Standards of the R-2
Zoning District
De Weerd: Item 8-E is a public hearing on VAR 11-001. I will ask for staff comments at
this time.
Parsons: One moment, Madam Mayor. The computer is thinking. While it's thinking I
t started. Madam Ma or Members of the Council, the application before you now
will ge Y ,
is that variance request. The question itself encompasses roughly 38.31 acres as
stated with the development agreement modification. The applicant is, basically,
re uestin to deviate from the dimensional standards of the R-2 zoning district. In
q g
articular that would relate to the side yard setback requirement. In this particular case
p .
staff is of the opinion that a blanket variance is not an appropriate mechanism to deviate
from that zonin district. In your hearing outline this evening we have tried to relay
9
those sentiments as they relate to the variance findings as well. I did want to note to
Council that in the staff report the blanket variance was stated for all 72 lots. About 5:30
this evenin I did receive an a-mail from the. applicant in response to the staff report and
9
he sent over an exhibit that detailed which lots were to --that he wanted the variance to
cover and which lots were to remain subject to the R-2 standards. Unfortunately, it
looks like the computer is froze up on us and I can't get to that exhibit. If you give me a
chance I mi ht be able to get the overhead projector going and get that exhibit on there.
g
But, essentially, what you have is -- if you remember the plat, all the perimeter lots --
that's rou hl 27 lots, would stay consistent with the R-2 standards and that would leave
9Y
a roximatel 45 lots that they want to be subject to the 7.5 side yard setback.
pp Y
T icall with two story homes in the R-2 zone you would have to provide a 15 foot
Yp Y
setback. If ou had a flat facade or step it in the second story seven and a half feet, if
Y ,
ou wanted to modulate that building. Basically, what it looks like is that -- whats
Y
trans fired is the applicant's come forward and proposed approval of a preliminary plat
p
and it appears that they might not have taken into account the design of the homes or
the lot confi uration prior to designing their home. So, that seems to be the preface for
g ~ •~
re uestin a variance. It's staffs determination, as we have pointed out, its supposed
q g
to be more oriented towards a lot by lot, case by case -- basic lot specific basis. And so
technical) the applicant would have to apply for a variance for every single lot in order
Y .
to deviate from that standard, not just be granted a blanket variance. In previous
meetin s with the applicant it was discussed to go through the PUD process or possibly
9
rezone the property and they chose to go forward with the plat as is and subject to the
R-2 dimensional standards. So, in getting the applicant's testimony today -- of course
staff is recommending denial. He's requesting that Council approve his request.
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get you their applicant's comments in time, as they came
late after the print date of the hearing outline notes. But basically the gist of that is,
basicall ,he's detailed some hardships on why he thinks Council should approve the
Y .
variance. I will let the applicant go into that -- into more detail with you on that. But,
a ain, That in closing staff is recommending denial of the variance, just on the basis
9
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 31 of 50
that we can't meet the findings and also for the fact that variances aren't meant to be as
a blanket -- on a blanket basis. It has to be lot by lot, case by case basis. Given the
fact that this property is vacant, it's flat land, there is no natural features that impede
develo ment of this site, in compliance with the R-2 standards, staff has recommended
p
denial. A ain, there are no other outstanding issues before you with the preface of just
g
the variance isn't an appropriate mechanism to proceed with the deviation and with that
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Any questions from Council? Okay. Would the applicant
like to comment? For the record, if you will state your name and address.
Nori uki: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Scott Noriyuki, 3106 Ridgeway
Y
Drive, Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Nori uki: Bill, is there an overhead we can -- thank you. Hopefully we can get this
Y
exhibit up just to kind of give everybody a flavor for the specific lots that we are
re uesting the side setback variance. Wonderful. Okay. So, all of the lots -- the
q
erimeter lots in the yellow we are not requesting any variance or relief from the side
p
setback requirements. All the ones in the pink we are. We are not asking for any
reduction on the first floor seven and a half foot side setback, we are strictly asking for a
reduction in the second story side setback to reduce it from 15 feet to seven and a half
feet. I realize that there may be an appearance to a certain degree that this was a
failure in planning or an afterthought. It's, actually, a culmination of several items that
we feel are hardships. Some are previous to submittal of our application, some are
during the entitlement process, and we have some concern ones following our
entitlement and our continued negotiations and work with phase two -- or, excuse me,
hase one existin residence. As I believe you will recall, there was quite a bit of
p g
hardship with the phase one existing homeowners and the state of affairs with the HOA
and the CC&Rs and their financing. With that said and not to be long winded, we --they
have put together an advisory committee that meets with us oftentimes and we discuss
eve hin from ACC guidelines to CC&R requirements or modifications to finances.
~ g
One of the key items that they have strongly requested from us is to remove the
allowance within the CC&Rs to allow for exterior RV parking and what they are
requesting is that all homes cannot have outdoor parking. So, with that said we want to
offer enclosed parking. On an 80 foot wide lot, when you take away the 30 feet after
those side setbacks and you're trying to build a structure that has two, maybe three car
garage, plus an enclosed RV parking, it just -- plausibly it -- it doesn't work
mathematically, unless we have got just a small section with a front door and we'd like
to have a better elevation. Also we'd like to better design flexibility, so that we can
satisfy any and all of the potential buyers that we are going to have. So, those are the
initial ones, but in addition to that, this project has got a tremendous history and a lot of
concessions we have made that are a bit of a hardship or clearly a hardship. The
number one being our agreement and commitment to this settlement agreement and
provisions set forth with adjacent owners to keep the perimeter lot substantially larger
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 32 of 50
than the R-2 minimum. With that said, if you calculate the average overage above
12,000 square foot minimum, we ended up with approximately 250,000 square feet
above and beyond what we would have to do by simply conforming to code. With that
said, that equates to roughly about 20 potential lots that we could have built, but we
have lost. In addition to that, we have six lots -- perimeter lots that have been identified
as sin le story only. This was another agreement that we carried through, being
9
nei hborly, and negotiations. That s naturally going to reduce some of our design ability
9
and maybe may turn away some potential buyers. Essentially we are restricted on
those lots. So, from that standpoint we are up to 26 lots with issues or pure losses.
Additionally, the -- excuse me. Additionally Boise Hunter Homes has put in -- either in
contribution financially or improvements, 30,000 plus or minus dollars towards the
phase one HOA and the state of affairs as far as getting systems turned back on,
etting landscape maintenance out there, fixing pressurized irrigation pumps, making
9
sure that the clubhouse is orderly and being taken care of and not freezing in the
wintertime. So, we are looking at this as kind of a snowball effect, where maybe one
inde endent item ma be is not viewed clearly as a hardship or potentially was identified
p Y
earlier on. But as we have stepped through this process and we have made these
commitments and these negotiations and continued negotiations this has become a
hardship and I'm respectfully requesting your support on this. With that I stand for
questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Scott. Council, any questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: As I recall, many of the legal hardships involved in this were due to the fact
that originally this and Dartmoor were all one property and Dartmoor was established
under the county's ability to cluster settlements, to put the number of homes that could
have been put over the whole acreage were clustered and the rest of was guaranteed to
be open space for like 20 years. And I understand that as it was separated and new
owners took on the open space and tried to develop it, it caused a lot of legal problems.
I don't believe that meets the intent of the hardship in our code. The hardship is
physical attributes of the property, like a canal that snakes through it or a cliff that runs
through the middle of it or some other thing that physically prevents you from doing it
and it's my opinion or my recollection that the provision in our code to allow hardships
doesn't -- doesn't include legal hardships and before our fire representative leaves I'd
like to ask a question. Bill Johnson -- he left. As I understand it, the setbacks, to begin
with, were generated by the fire department and sorry to catch you --
Johnson: I'm suffering from some allergies --
Zaremba: Yeah. I'm sorry. My question is as I have been involved in various
committees that have been writing or rewriting codes and stuff, the issue with setbacks
-- usually fire department's concern, in order to get equipment into second story fires
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 33 of 50
and stuff like that, you -- you need more space, as I understand it, and I guess I need an
opinion from you about setbacks.
Johnson: Yeah. In the department we do like to have more setbacks between houses,
because to reach a second story window we have got to throw a ladder up and usually
we are looking at ten to 12 feet up, we need five to six feet to get the ladder at the right
climbing angle, so we can safely work and you start shrinking that down and, then,
throw a fence in between and all of a sudden we are looking at three, four feet, we can't
even get the guys around there to get up to make access in through those windows on
those sides. So, you know, cutting the setbacks down to zero lot lines, that type of stuff,
really isn't in the best interest of fighters accessibility and ability to do our job. So,
hopefully that answers your question, Councilman.
Zaremba: Thank you. It does.
Noriyuki: Could I clarify that we are not -- we are not requesting any zero lot lines. We
will adhere to the first floor side setback, which is seven and a half feet.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
DeWeerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Scott, I, too, am quite concerned on -- regarding the fire. My biggest concern is
when you have windows up there and the first thing that's going to blow out in a fire is
your window and, then, you jump, but --when you're too close. In your designs is there
a reason that between houses that you have to have a window there? Not that -- all
rooms upstairs should have an escape window.
Noriyuki: If I could, I would prefer to defer that to my client, because he's got a better
understanding of the --the actual design and the architecture.
De Weerd: Well, we will ask for that comment. Any other questions at this point for
Scott?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
DeWeerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I think the intent of the setback is as Councilman Zaremba indicated, is fire
protection and protection of property and life. And one of those things that we have
dealt with in other areas and the way we have dealt with it is either providing adequate
water supply on some of the smaller homes and some of the smaller subdivisions, but
also requiring fire sprinkling. I don't know if you have entertained any of those kinds of
things in your homes previously, but that would be something that might mitigate the
setback issue, but -- and result in an increased safety for the occupant, as well as the
property. The other thing is this is an R-2 subdivision and in my mind that was the
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 34 of 50
intent of you all when you purchased it, that was the intent of the original developer, and
that is not a subdivision where houses of the magnitude that you're talking about, are
juxtaposed to the people who live there and the people who visit there, as if they are
stacked on one another. So, space, I believe, is as much a part of your design in that
kind of a subdivision as the design features itself on the homes, so I have a problem
with both of those, to be honest with you. I mean that's just where I'm coming from.
And, then, I have a tough time making the argument to -- to meet the arguments that we
have to meet in order to allow a variance and I'm still open to try to find that, but at this
point I haven't. So, keep talking, I guess.
Noriyuki: Thank you. I appreciate that. Take all the time I can. Once, again, I want to
go back to the collective effects of all of these negotiations and these design criteria or,
rather, constraints, as well as entertaining and seriously considering the input from the
people who actually live within Kingsbridge phase one and their involvement and
knowledge. We have had two independent neighborhood meetings specific to this. I
believe as you can see there is not a lot of concern, that's because our communication
is very open and forthright with them. They are supportive of this. They understand
what we are doing. It makes sense to them. They are very accustomed to what the
product type is going to be and they are supportive of that. However, I want to go back
to all of these hardships, the key ones being naturally these very, very large perimeter
lots, specifically if you go over and you look at the eastern property boundary, in order
to achieve support and get through the process we were held -- we were held to that
criteria on the eastern property line specifically and the northern and, once again, in the
R-2 density we could have achieved an additional 20 lots, theoretically. With that we
have had a huge hardship from our standpoint, which is -- I realize it's legal and it's
negotiations, rather than topography, but .it's still a real factor that's affected us and
created a hardship.
De Weerd: But as you look at the points of law that Council needs to find, economic is
not an argument. Economic hardship is not in our criteria that I recall. And that's --and
that's what you're appealing to. I would imagine on a case-by-case basis you can look
at your setbacks and address the concerns from the fire department for access to the
second floor on that life safety issue and whether you locate the house at an angle to
gain more -- more access to that second floor window or what have you, but to do a
blanket variance based on an economic hardship -- it doesn't fall within the findings that
we can base a decision on. Now you see what they are trying to -- it's -- you can't find
it.
Noriyuki: Agreed. And Iguess -- not to be persistent or redundant, but I guess if we
could just look at it from an additional respect of maybe above and beyond an economic
reality, more from a standpoint of we have been constrained from all sides in our
design, rather than being able to be on a vacant flat piece of property that we are
accustomed to, we have had these exterior constraints around the entire property
boundary and these commitments that have genuinely driven this design. There hasn't
been a lot of room for us. So, I guess I feel like we have made these big concessions
which have squozen -- squozen? Is that a word?
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 35 of 50
De Weerd: That was a good word.
Noriyuki: Thank you. Yes. Has affected the interior lot.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Imean Ithink -- I think all of you have
really hit it on the head and I guess maybe I would say it differently than Mr. Noriyuki.
mean all of these -- all of those constraints -- and I recognize that this current developer
is not the original developer, but all of these are self-imposed. Imean this is part of a
negotiation process and all of our processes are -- are negotiated between property
owners and that's why we provide notice and that's a discussion point at the front end of
the process and so all these constraints that your current client purchased were all self-
imposed as a means to get approval for the project. So, under the state statute for
variances that's not a consideration that the Council can take. The undue hardship is,
as Council Member Zaremba stated, related to the characteristics of the site. Not the
site you negotiated to be constrained, but the site topographically is constrained. The
message or the concern I would have is that we -- we create a lot of public process for
people to have input on what they would like to see happen and, then, ultimately, the
Council decides what's acceptable to the city and the other provision about creating a
special right I think is what the staff report is saying is -- would be granted is because
the message we would be sending is negotiate anything you want and whatever doesn't
comply with our ordinance we will just vary it and that's -- that's concerning to me to try
to defend that, that we direct people to go out and negotiate and talk to neighbors and
get that type of input and whatever doesn't fit our ordinance, then, come in and ask for a
variance and, then, we will simply grant it and -- and I don't think the state statute
supports that. I don't think. that's what the state statute was trying to set up. I would
agree with the staff that the state statute doesn't specifically prohibit blanket variances,
but it talks about variances in a very individualized context of running with the property
based on that property's individual characteristics. So, we are not talking about a plat of
land of size, we are talking about individual parcels. So, I think we would have some
difficulty establishing what Mr. Noriyuki is asking in regards to an entire plat and the
number of parcels and not the individual ones, but also to meet the requirements of the
statute in relation to granting a special right or by not showing any real hardship related
to the site specifically, other than what was agreed to by the developer. Just my
thoughts.
De Weerd: Anything further from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Noriyuki: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 36 of 50
De Weerd: Thank you. This is a public hearing. Is there any additional public comment
on this item?
Boyle: Good evening, Mayor and Council Members.
De Weerd: Good evening.
Boyle: Appreciate this opportunity to be in front of you. I feel like I had to get up here.
It seems like there has been a drought and now there is a few drops of water finally
coming in, so --
De Weerd: Can you state your name and address. Not that we don't remember who
you are.
Boyle: It's been so long I almost forgot how to do this. Clint Boyle with Landmark
Engineering. Business address is 332 North BroadmoorlNay in Nampa.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Boyle: Thank you, Mayor. Appreciate the comments tonight and this has been a
difficult one for Mr. Hunter of Boise Hunter Homes. Essentially, I wish there were more
developers like him out there that pick up messes that have been left behind due to fall
out of -- of the economy and now he's striving to do some clean up here and bring a
nice project into the city from something that has left a lot of property owners in the city
discouraged it sounds like. The variance is a difficult one. I understand that information
from the city attorney about the blanket variance, so if I could just drill down to Lot 33,
Block 4 -- no, I'm just -- I'm just getting kidding. Actually, in all seriousness --
De Weerd: We were ready to look at --
Boyle: You were ready to look at that specific lot and maybe we could look at the
difficulties that it has. This particular project --the difficulty that the developer has, quite
frankly, is that the lots around the perimeter are large as this development went through
due to surrounding properties and whatnot. Were he to have a blank artistic slate with
an R-2 designation and come in with those minimum lot sizes across the entire project,
he would have 20 more lots. With the street configurations the way they are. If he
hadn't done those perimeter lots and just had the standard R-2 zone that's granted to
any developer coming in that has a blank slate.
De Weerd: I think Scott --
Boyle: Scott covered that?
De Weerd: -- covered that.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 37 of 50
Bo le: And so that -- that was one issue that I think is a little different than what you
Y
mi ht have from a standard subdivision coming in with an R-2 zone. This project
g
actual) started out in its past history in the county with the designation of R-3 that didn t
v
fit within any zoning and, then, that R-2 is kind of what it got wedged into, so to speak. I
uess this evening -- and I understand the fire department as well. We certainly want to
g
comply with fire code and -- and their requirements. I know different zoning
desi nations in the city have different setbacks as well. So, I don't know that it's
g
unnecessarily a fire code issue, but we certainly want to comply with their requirements.
I sim I at this point -- because it sounds like the Council is having difficulty fitting this
pY
into any sort of justification on the variances -- would be to request maybe some
discussion from Council. We have talked with staff about some alternatives. Some of
those related to -- to PUD or rezoning. Maybe it was rezoned to an R-4 zone, but the
development agreement was amended again to specifically require R-2 size on the lots
and the development layout like you see in front of you, but, then, to give us some
flexibility in the setback and maybe we just say the minimum setback is a seven and a
half foot, but it's .under an R-4 zoned property on these interior lots. Just looking at
some options to see if the Council would even entertain that, so we don't have to come
back if it's completely off the table or if it is an option maybe the developer has some
options if he really feels like he is going to have some difficulties with his -- his home
style. He builds a great home, if you have ever been through any of Mr. Hunter's homes
they are very nice. Homes that I think the city would be proud of and he's just trying to
fit some of his models on -- on these lots and when you end up with 15 feet on either
side, carving 30 feet out on the side setbacks, makes it difficult for him. But if we could
maybe just get a few comments on that to see if that's even on the table, that would be
great. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I certainly am not adverse to considering an application to change what we
are viewing in pink. I believe that's the color. To R-4 if that would change the
requirements. Personally, I would far rather see that than grant a variance. I find
variances difficult -- if we have rules or we have an alternate rule that actually would
accommodate what you're trying to do, I'd rather change the designation and not make
it a variance. Personal opinion.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Question for Bill or Pete. How are we with respect to open space? Are we
right on the necessary amount or are we over? If we are how much?
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 38 of 50
' n: I'll defer to Bill on that. He's got a more familiar -- you know, in order to
Friedma
nd a royal the relimina plat, which we did, it obviously did meet the
recomme pp p rY
' ' ualification re uirements for open space. So, at least we know we meet the
minimum q q
minimum. Bill could probably show you the specifics of that.
ns: Madam Ma or Councilman Rountree, Council Members, the preliminary plat
Parso y ,
ition a royal of that re uired 5.32 acres of open space and that s tied to that. As I
cond pp q
mentioned earlier in my presentation, this phase two will have 2.8 acres, so you can
ntici ate a little bit more o en space with phase three as well. So, it should be -- it
a p p
should suffice. We should be -- like Pete mentioned, it is -- it was found to be in
com liance. I'd also mention that the application's proposed two additional amenities
p are
that weren't re uired by code, so -- with a tot lot and those types of things, those
q
amenities -- three amenities where they only had to provide two. So, that s something
to think about as well.
Rountree: And I can't read the dimensions on this graphic. What are the dimensions
average on those lots? Interiors.
Parsons: Oh. Councilman Rountree, I can answer that question foryou. Those interior
lots are -- meet the R-2 standards, which is 80 feet of frontage. Some vary slightly, but
at least it would be eight feet to comply with the R-2 zoning standards. Those lot sizes
are roughly 12,000 square feet and larger.
Rountree: And how big is the large parcel in the middle of subdivision that I assume is
the pocket park or the small park that they are talking about?
Parsons: Yeah. That neighborhood park is 1.58 acres.
De Weerd: Well, isn't the side setback on an R-4 five feet per story? So, isn't even the
side on an R-4, isn't that ten feet? I don't know.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, if you would give us a second we will look that up.
De Weerd: Okay.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, an interior side yard setback is five feet in the R-4 district.
Rountree: And the second story is an additional five feet?
Friedman: No. There is no --
DeWeerd: No?
Bird: Justafivefoot--
Friedman: Just a five foot --
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 39 of 50
De Weerd: That changed, didn't it?
Rountree: It changed.
Friedman: Yeah. That's the interior yard.
Bird: We have never had it by story since I have been on.
De Weerd: Maybe when I built my house I had to set it back because of the bonus
room.
Friedman: Madam Mayor, Council Members, just for clarification, there is a lot of
numbers that have been thrown around and I just think one thing that should be noted is
-- that was alluded to was the change from the R-3 to the R-2. The only dimensional
standard that changed when those zoning classifications changed were the street width
--the lot width of the street. The setbacks have always been the same, so --this was a
point of discussion at the Planning Commission on the preliminary plat and it came up
again tonight and I would just like to set the record straight that the setbacks themselves
have not changed with that change in the zoning.
De Weerd: Council, any further information needed?
Rountree: I don't need anymore information.
Bird: I don't.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is no further information needed, do I have a motion to close
the public hearing?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I move we close the public hearing.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 8-E. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I'll preface my motion by saying that I don't have any particular objection to
this coming back in some other form, if it means a rezone for a portion of it or some
other thing. Following that my motion is that I --
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 40 of 50
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba, maybe we could just have discussion comments before the
motion.
Zaremba: Oka . I will hold that off and I will, then, make my comments, which are I
Y
don't have a problem having this in another form, but I dont see this qualifies as a
variance and, in addition to that, I'm not too thrilled with a blanket variance.
De Weerd: Any other comments? Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, thank you. I agree with what Mr. Zaremba has said. They
asked for our consideration of a variance and I -- again, I can't make that connection. I
can understand where they are coming from in terms of wanting to get the value out of
those lots and fi ure out some way to make it work. I hear our ordinance, I understand
9
wh the ordinance is the way it is. I don't know if it could be something less. I heard the
Y
applicant indicate that they would have CC&Rs that would provide that extra space -- or
that s ace that they were asking for free of obstruction in the form of RV. I think an
p
ar ument could be made that if you make that space larger you probably have an
g .
inducement to make people want to use that space for more stuff other than a potential
fire ladder supports. So, I think I would entertain something other than a variance
re uest with this applicant. I don't know what kind of time they are looking at, but it
q
seems to me is something less reasonable and what is that something less in terms of
setback, I don't know. Though I am very concerned about the fire response, obviously.
And public safety. My position on the hearing is that I can't -- can't support the variance,
but I certainly could support sitting down and trying to craft some kind of a solution,
whether it's an amendment to our ordinance or -- or maybe looking at some type of
rezone that would make it work. But to me the rezone that would make it work takes it
out of that realm of R-2 open space design quality that R-2 intended to accomplish, so --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I, too, agree that while I absolutely don't want a blanket variance when you're
talking about life safety, I would certainly entertain a solution, if it could be worked out
between staff and the applicant, like Councilman Rountree said -- and Zaremba both --
if we have to rezone it we can take a look at that. I know the applicant surely knew what
the plat was when he bought the property, so it was no surprise to him that -- and he
knew what model homes he was building. So, I would -- I can't support a blanket
variance, but I could certainly support something on a change, if they can work
something out. I would definitely support something like that. My biggest fear is that a
seven -- going to a seven and a half foot setback, that's great, that's foundation to the
property line. A lot of second story homes stick out two to three feet out from the
foundation by the time you get to the second story, a lot of them do. So, now you're
back down to three and four foot and we got too many of those out there already.
That's my thoughts on it.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 41 of 50
e Weerd: I think the bottom line is there is -- there is a willingness to work with the
D
a licant but the variance a lication is not the right vehicle. We dust cant find the
pp ~ pp
le al findin s. So I think if staff can work with the applicant to find the appropriate
g g ,
mechanism to --and I'm sure ou have explored this, but it seems that there is certainly
Y ,
an understandin from Council on what the issues are and the challenges. We don t
g
want to chan a the inte rit of the subdivision. I have no doubt that the applicant has
g gY
worked Ion and hard with the homeowners association to maintain the overall vision
9
and ou're t in to work within some of those constraints. But if we can get our heads
Y rY g
to ether on this again, see if we can find another way to approach it.
g
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'd also like to add that I certainly am not here to stop an economic development.
In m words, this is economic development for us and I don't want to stop it, In the
Y
same token I want it done right. And I'd love to see something worked out so that you
guys can continue on, which you do do a good product. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, as we have all acknowledged, this comes without prejudice
as they say, but I move we deny the variance application.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to deny Item 8-E. If there is no discussion,
which we have heard much, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Department Reports
A. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 11-786: A Resolution of the
Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian, appointing
Blaine Johnston to Seat 2 of the Meridian Historic Preservation
Commission
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-A. Council, in front of you you have resolution 11-786. In
front of you is an appointment for Blaine Johnston to seat two of the HPC to April of
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 42 of 50
2013. And so I would entertain any questions on this appointment orwould ask for your
confirmation.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve resolution number 11-786.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the appointment of Blaine
Johnston to seat two of the HPC. Is there any further discussion -- or any discussion?
Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Mayor's Office: Resolution No. 11-787: A Resolution of the
Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian Appointing
Board Members to Seats 8 and 9 of the Meridian Development
Corporation
De Weerd: Under 9-B, Council, in front of you is a resolution on 11-781. As you're
aware I came in front of you about a month ago to request the seats -- currently the
MDC board has seven. We added two of the allowed seats to bring it to the maximum
of nine. We conducted interviews with the chair of the MDC. We do have one of the
appointments in front of you that resides in the Urban Renewal District and has a lot of
energy. In fact, it was exhausting after the interview she has so much energy. She's
got a lot of enthusiasm and ideas for -- that she can bring to the MDC. The second
member has been attending the last several months meetings of the MDC. Also has a
lot of interest and ideas that the chair of the MDC and I feel that these two appointments
can add great value to the Urban Renewal District. We are appointing these to August
of 2011, as they are new seats and we want to get them in a regular rotation, so that all
seats don't come open at the same time and I would stand for any questions.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Do you have names assigned to those descriptions?
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 43 of 50
Na :Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, on your packet is one with the names
and it's -- I think the earlier one didn't have it and, then, we got the information from the
Mayor's office, so it's on there now.
Rountree: I'm 'ust asking -- it would be nice to have them on the public record.
1
De Weerd: Jennifer Pike is one and Dan -- I don't recall his last name.
Bird: Just a second, I'll get it.
Nary: I'll get it in one second. Dasalone.
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Dasalone. Okay. Will you spell that, Mr. Bird?
Bird: Yeah.
De Weerd: Any questions that I can help Council with?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 9-B, resolution 11-787 appointing Jennifer Pike
and Dan Dasalone to Meridian Development Corporation.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second confirming the appointments to the MDC
board. If there is no discussion, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. Police Department: Line Item Reallocation Request to Acquire
Funding to Hire a Third Party Agency to Develop a Strategic
Business Model for the Future Public Safety Training Center
for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of $46,000.00
De Weerd: Item 9-C is under our police department and I will turn this over to our chief.
Nice to see you still here with us.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 44 of 50
Lave : And smilin . Madam Mayor, Council, the first item on the agenda under the
y g
olice de artment re ort is for converting not to exceed amount of 46,000 dollars from
p p p
ca ital to rofessional services line item in our budget. So, this is just really the
p p
accountin ur ose of moving money from one budget to another and the purpose of
gp p
this is for the strate is business plan for the public, safety training center. I believe I
9
have s oken in front of Council on this in the past. I will tell you that when I did speak
p
with Council two weeks ago I made a comment that we may be able to get a price
reduction. The current contract is for 40,600 dollars. I did ask them to remove a couple
of items that would have allowed us to -- to do add on's and so if we are going to do
that that will be in a separate item. So, still would like to keep that 46,000 dollar
transfer over, but currently we will be asking to spend 40,600 dollars. Any questions?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
DeWeerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Hearing none, I move we approve the line item allocation -- reallocation request
for 46,000 for the police department.
Zaremba: Second.
DeWeerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
DeWeerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
D. Police Department: BudgetAmendment: Additional Funding
for Investigation Expense for aNot-to-Exceed Amount of
$9,000.00
DeWeerd: Item 9-D is also the chief.
Lavey: Madam Mayor, Council, this item I also spoke about two weeks ago and this is a
bud et amendment. I do believe this is an emergency request. This has to do in
g ,
regards to the homicide that occurred in the Walgreen s parking lot and we have been
asked to provide some additional forensic testing involving the firearm and gun shot
residue. Currently our state crime lab is incapable of doing those tests. We have to use
a private lab. And we are requesting a budget amendment in the amount of -- not to
exceed 9,000 dollars that will be placed into our investigative line item and the caveat to
this is that the Attorney General's Office, who is currently handling this case, has agreed
to pay the expert testimony at trial if needed at a lost of 12,000 dollars. So, with that
being said I will take any questions.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 45 of 50
De Weerd: Thank you, chief. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: No.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve the budget amendment for additional funding for investigation
expenses not to exceed 9,000 dollars for the police department.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve this item. If there is no
discussion, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Lavey: Thank you.
E. Amended onto the Agenda: Legal and Planning Department
Report: Delegation to Boise CitylAda County Housing
Authority of Agency to Purchase U.S. Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Dollar Home
F. Amended onto the Agenda: Legal Department: Resolution
No. 11-788: A Resolution Delegating Authority to Purchase
Dollar Home from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Develo ment; and Providing an Effective Date Approved
p
G. Amended onto the Agenda: Legal Department: Memorandum
of Agreement Designating Boise CitylAda County Housing
Authority as City's Agent to Purchase HUD Dollar Homes
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. There is three additional items on our agenda, Council.
9-E is from our Legal and Planning Department. I will turn this over to Lori. I'm never
quite sure where to address it.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 46 of 50
Nary: Ladies first.
De Weerd: Ladies first.
Den Harto :Thank ou, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. And I will defer to Bill
g y
as we o throu h. We had an opportunity arise approximately two weeks ago for a
g 9
dollar HUD home that was available in Meridian. I believe Mr. Nary discussed briefly
with ou some of the staff discussions that have occurred last week and it was clear and
Y
staff was in a reement that the city didn t want to be directly involved in the purchase of
9 .
that home. It involved a number of complications and part of the reason this as arisen
and art of the reason I'm here is it was identified in our Community Development Block
p
Grant consolidated plan for the city to purchase a dollar HUD home when it became
available. Those homes rarely become available. Any homes that HUD obtains
throu h the foreclosure action they put on the market for six months at a fairly reduced
9 .
rice. They are often sold then. If they are not sold during that time they are offered to
p
the local governments for a dollar plus closing costs. The caveat to that is we had met
with the Ada County Housing Authority prior to last Council meeting and they had
identified that they have worked with the city of Boise and the city of Boise has
designated them to act on their behalf in these types of purchases. We had had some
-- a little bit of conflicting information out of the HUD office in DC, but we have done
some additional research and we have done some additional meetings and
conversations with Ada County Housing Authority -- the end result of that being is that
the ut in a bid for the home riot to the closin of that opportunity and that was last
Yp p g
week Wednesday, May 18th. So, they put a bid in on the home for the dollar plus
closing costs and they understood that we may not move forward and designate them.
They had ten days to cancel their bid. We are still within the period for them to cancel
their bid. So, we are here before you tonight to propose a resolution that officially
designates the Ada -- the Ada -- I cannot say their name -- the Ada County Housing
Authority to act on our behalf in the purchase of this home. The city will never expend
any funds, the city will never be on the title of this home. The housing authority will do
all of the necessary rehab, they assume all of the responsibility, the idea being that they
move forward and either sell the home as an affordable housing unitto a qualified low to
moderate income family or utilize the home as an affordable rental unit in Meridian. The
housing authority has a great desire to have more of a presence in Meridian, they were
very excited about this opportunity, so we are looking forward to more ways to partner
with them. So, the next item was the resolution and, then, the second -- or the item
after that, excuse me, was a memorandum of agreement between the city and the
housing authority that explicitly spells out their responsibility and the city basically
saying thank you very much and go on your way. So, with that I'm happy to stand for
questions. I don't have before you a signed copy of the memorandum of agreement
between the housing authority and us. Their executive director has been out of the
office today, but in talking with their staff there is just a few minor nonmaterial changes
that we will probably be making and I will let Bill perhaps address how we need to
handle that and move forward.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nary.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 47 of 50
Na :Madam Ma or, Members of the Council, yeah, I mean Lori stated it correctly. I
ry Y
mean what we tried to do is work through the issue with some conflicting advice and we
feel this is the best protection for the city in designating the Ada County Housing
Authorit as our a ent, but also them agreeing to basically take the responsibility and
Y g
liabilit of the urchase. As with all things legal, there is always a wrinkle or two and
Y p
Mrs. Watson made a couple of changes --just cosmetic changes to the agreement, but
didn't run it b her legal counsel to verify that legal counsel didn't have any concerns.
y
So, I uess my -- my suggestion is if the Council is comfortable with the general idea
g
that the would become our designee for this purpose, the city would not be liable for
Y
anything in regards to the purchase, anything in regards to the closing costs, or
an hing in regards to the repair or maintenance or anything with the home. If we need
Yt
to work on some details -- because we have a two week gap and there is a time limit
here in which they can keep this bid open, keep this bid alive to purchase this home, if
the Council is comfortable with that, if there is any substantive changes, then, I think it's
oing to die. I don't think we can -- I don't think it would be reasonable to go forward.
g
But if they are really dust cosmetic issues, if the Council is comfortable in directing the
Mayor to sign or the Council President to sign once we get the final notes from their
counsel, then, I think we can go forward, as long as we are all comfortable that it may
not look exactly like this, but it won't look substantially different than the agreement
that's in front of you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. I guess, Council, we have on Item 9-F is a proposed resolution 11-
788and you have that in front of you.
Bird: Do you want a motion, Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, please.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve resolution number 11-788.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the resolution as proposed in front
of you. Any discussion? Madam Clerk, roll call, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 48 of 50
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: And, Mr. Nary, in regards to the memorandum of agreement, is there
specific action that needs to be taken on this in approving it without the changes that --
theminortweaks that need to be made?
Nary: Yes, Madam Mayor. Because we have got this gap, if the Council is comfortable,
I would suggest that the motion be thatthe Mayor or Council President can sign the final
version once the housing authority had signed it and there are no substantive changes
to the document that you have.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: The one I have got, Deanna Watson has already signed it.
Nary: Yes. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Bird, she did --
shedid make the cosmetic changes, signed it, sent it back to us, we fixed those in the
text and, then, her counsel called this afternoon and said I haven't looked at it yet, so I'd
like to have time to look at it. So, you're right, you do have one that's signed, but he's
asked us to hold off approving that agreement until at least he's looked at it.
De Weerd: So, if you're comfortable, Council, that -- to approve the memorandum of
agreement in front of you, as long as there are minor -- if there are minor, no
substantive --
Nary: Right. No substantive changes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Okay.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 9-G, the memorandum of agreement between
the Ada County Housing Authority and the city's -- as the city's agent to purchase a
HUD home, authorize the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest, subject to having no
substantive changes provided within the next two weeks.
Bird: Before I second that --
Nary: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 49 of 50
Bird: --would we --
De Weerd: You would need to second it before you discuss it.
Bird: Okay. I'll second it then.
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Bird.
Bird: Motion maker, did ou also intend to say that the Acting Mayor also would be --
Y
Rountree: I just work on the assumption that the Mayor is the Mayor, depending on
who is filling those shoes at the time.
Bird: Well, I do, too, but he told me different, so --
Rountree: If that needs to be clarified, that's the intent of my motion.
Nary: I think it's clear. That's fine.
Rountree: Okay.
De Weerd: Authorize signature.
Bird: Yeah. I agree.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Zaremba, did you have a question?
Zaremba: That was my question.
De Weerd: Same question. Okay. Okay. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 10: Future Meeting Topics
De Weerd: Council, we are at Item No. 10, future meeting topics. Any topics to
considerforfuture topics -- orfuture agendas?
Bird: Not at this time.
Rountree: I have none.
Meridian City Council
May 24, 2011
Page 50 of 50
Zaremba: Not forme.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Move we adjourn.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: We are adjourned.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:27 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
~~
MAYOR TA De WEERD
~1~-TI NCB lV~~gY02
ATTEST: j~
JAY
DATE