HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-06-07E I DIANA
ir~AHo
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR
MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, June 07, 2011 at 7:00 PM (7:04 PM)
1. Roll-Call Attendance
X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
O Mayor Tammy de Weerd
2. Pledge of Allegiance (Pg. 1)
3. Community Invocation by Larry Woodard of Ten Mile Christian
Church (Pg. 1-2)
4. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted (Pg. 2)
5. Consent Agenda Approved with Noted Correction to Item 5C (Pg. 2-5)
A. Approve Minutes of April 18, 2011 City Council Special Joint
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of May 17, 2011 City Council Regular Meeting
C. Approve Minutes of May 24, 2011 City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes Will be Amended to Reflect that Councilman Brad
Hoaglun was Absent at This Meeting
D. Professional Services Agreement with Tom Phelps/Kings of
Swing for Musical Talent for Concerts on Broadway for the
Not-to-Exceed Amount of $1,500.00
E. Professional Services Agreement with Meridian Symphony
Orchestra for Musical Talent for Concerts on Broadway for the
Not-to-Exceed Amount of $500.00
F. Sole Source Procurement of WebCTRL Sensors, Controls, and
Software from Automated Logic
G. Sole Source Purchase for Sensus Water Meters and
Authorization for Advertisement of Purchase in Local Paper
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, June 07, 2011 Page 1 of 5
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.
H. Award of Bid and Agreement for the Waste Water Treatment
Plant (WWTP) Filters Building Construction Project No. 10160a
to Ewing Company for the Not-to-Exceed Amount of
$1,069,086.64
I. Agreement Adding Task Order #2 to Master Agreement for
Professional Services with Access Idaho to Enable Electronic
Payment Transactions for Application and Service Fees
Collected Through Accela
J. Development Agreement for Approval: RZ 09-006 Southridge
West Commercial by Cabra Creek, LLC Located at the
Northeast Corner of S. Ten Mile Road and W. Overland Road:
Request for Rezone of 9.33 Acres From the R-8 Zoning District
to the C-C Zoning District
K. Final Order for Approval: FP 11-003 Waverly Place by
Mountain West Entrust IRA FBO Robert Mortensen IRA
Located 2510 Magic View Drive Request: Final Plat Approval of
25 Building Lots and Three (3) Common /Other Lots on 4.9
Acres of Land
L. Final Order for Approval: 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
M. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and
Order of Denial: 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
N. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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)
O. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: MDA 11-
002 McNelis Subdivision by Ten Mile Center, LLC Located
Northwest Corner of N. Ten Mile Road and W. Ustick Road
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, June 07, 2011 Page 2 of 5
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.
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
P. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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
Q. Resolution No. 11-789: 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)
R. Resolution No. 11-790: Approving and Effectuating Bylaws of
Meridian Parks and Recreation Commission as Amended on
May 11, 2011
S. Resolution No. 11-791: A Resolution of the Mayor and the City
Council of the City of Meridian Authorizing the City Clerk to
Destroy Certain Semi-Permanent and Temporary Records of
the Meridian Fire Department
T. Budget Amendment for Outside Legal Counsel Fees
6. Items Moved From Consent Agenda None
7. Action Items
A. Public Hearing: AP 11-001 Southridge Subdivision Gravel
Mining by Idaho Sand & Gravel Company Located South of W.
Overland Road; Southwest of the Ridenbaugh Canal and East
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, June 07, 2011 Page 3 of 5
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.
of S. Ten Mile Road Within Future Development Areas of
Southridge Subdivision Request: City Council Review of the
Director's Decision to Deny the Conditional Use Permit
Modification to Allow Audible Back Up Alarms on Construction
Equipment Used on the Site Approved with Conditions
(Pg. 5-28)
B. Public Hearing: VAC 11-001 Jayker by SWG Brighton, LLC
Located North Side of Chinden Boulevard, East of N. Tree
Farm Way Request: Vacate a Portion of the Plat (Lots 1; 8-15,
Block 15 & Lots 1-32 Block 16) and the Associated Public
Utility Easements Platted with Jayker Subdivision No. 1
Approved (Pg. 28-32)
C. FP 11-005 Spurwing Orchard by SWG Brighton, LLC Located
North Side of Chinden Boulevard; East of N. Tree Farm Way
Request: Final Plat Approval for 38 Residential Building Lots
and Four (4) Common Lots on 12.98 Acres in an R-15 Zoning
District Approved with Conditions (Pg. 32-37)
D. MFP 11-001 Gateway Marketplace No. 2 by The Land Group
Located Southeast Corner of E. Ustick Road and N. Eagle
Road Request: Approval to Remove the 10-Foot Wide
Landscape Easement Platted Along the Eastern Boundary and
Conditioned with Gateway Marketplace Subdivision No. 2 (File
#FP 07-020) Approved (Pg. 37-39)
8. Department Reports
A. Planning Department: Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program Year 2011 (PY2011) Pre-Draft Discussion
(Pg. 39-52)
B. Planning Department: Continued from May 17, 2011: Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MDA 11-003
Meridian Vision by Kevin McElroy Located at Northeast Corner
of N. Meridian Road and E. Carmel Drive Request: Amend the
Existing Development Agreement (Instrument No. 107067262)
to Include a New Site Plan and New Elevations Approved
(Pg. 52-63)
C. Parks Department: Budget Amendment for New Bleachers for
Mo Brooks Field in Storey Park for the Not-to-Exceed Amount
of $38,825.00 Approved (Pg. 63-64)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, June 07, 2011 Page 4 of 5
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.
D. Parks Department: Budget Amendment for Julius M. Kleiner
Memorial Park Add-Alternates for the Not-to-Exceed Amount
of $131,880.00 Approved (Pg. 64-65)
E. Public Works Department: Budget Amendment for Water
Service Main Replacements: Request to Move $56,000.00 from
Professional Services-Water into Service Water Line/V1later
Main Replacements Creating No Net Change to FY2011 Budget
Approved (Pg. 65-66)
F. Public Works Department: Budget Amendment for Northwest
4th Street Water Line Replacement for the Not-to-Exceed
Amount of $50,000.00 Approved (Pg. 66-68)
G. Legal Department: Budget Amendment for the Youth Work
Life Skills Program for the Not-to-Exceed Amount of
$11,828.00 Approved (Pg. 68-71)
H. Legal Department: Budget Amendment for Additional Funding
for the Historical Society Intern Position for the Not-to-Exceed
Amount of $1,110.00 Approved (Pg. 71-73)
9. Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 11-1484: An Ordinance (RZ 09-006 Southridge
West Commercial) for the Re-Zone of a Tract of Land Situated
in the West 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 23, Township 3
North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and
Providing an Effective Date Approved (Pg. 73-74)
10. Future Meeting Topics None Discussed (Pg. 74)
Meeting Adjourned at 10:49 PM
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, June 07, 2011 Page 5 of 5
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
Meridian City Council Meeting June 7, 2011
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:05 p.m., Tuesday, June
7, 2011, by Council President David Zaremba.
Members Present: Brad Hoaglun, David Zaremba, Keith Bird and Charlie Rountree.
Members Absent: Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jacy Jones, Anna Canning, Bill Parsons, Jamie Leslie, Rich
Dees, Kyle Radek, Steve Siddoway, Lori den Hartog, Luke Cavener and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call
X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
Mayor Tammy de Weerd
Zaremba: All right. Good evening, everybody. Welcome and thank you for waiting a
few extra minutes while we concluded some earlier business. I will open the regular
City Council meeting for June 7th, 2011. It is about five minutes after 7:00 and we will
begin with roll call attendance. Madam Clerk.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
Zaremba: All right. Item 2 on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance. Please join me.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Larry Woodard of Ten Mile Christian
Church
Zaremba: The next item on our agenda is the community invocation. Tonight this will
be presented by Larry Woodward of the Ten Mile Christian Church. Thank you, Mr.
Woodward. And if you would, please, join us in the invocation or take this as a moment
for silent reflection on your own. Thank you very much.
Woodward: Thank you. Our dear Heavenly Father, we thank you for this group of men
who lead our community. We thank you for our Mayor. She is gone tonight, but I ask
that you bless both -- all of these tonight, David and Brad and Charlie and Keith, as they
ponder issues that will affect our community in the future. You know, we are one of the
friendliest communities for families in the United States and we are proud of that and
these men are --those are the ones that have led us to this point. We just pray that our
community will continue to be a safe place to live for both the elderly, families and
children. I would be remiss tonight in not asking for a blessing for our police and
firemen and EMTs and all the city workers that make this a wonderful community. I just
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 2 of 75
say in conclusion that you give them wisdom tonight as they go through their agenda, in
Jesus' name, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda
Zaremba: Thank you. Item 4 is the adoption of the agenda.
Hoaglun: Madam Mayor?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: A couple notes on tonight's agenda. Under the Consent Agenda, Item 5-Q,
that resolution number is 11-789. 5-R is resolution number 11-790. And 5-S is
resolution number 11-791. And, then, under ordinances, Item 9, 9-A is ordinance
number 11-1484: So, with those notations, Mr. President, move adoption of tonight's
agenda.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second adopting the agenda as amended. All
those in favor say aye. Any opposed? That motion carries unanimously.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 5: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of April 18, 2011 City Council Special Joint
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of May 17, 2011 City Council Regular Meeting
C. Approve Minutes of May 24, 2011 City Council Regular Meeting
D. Professional Services Agreement with Tom Phelps/Kings of
Swing for Musical Talent for Concerts on Broadway for the
Not-to-Exceed Amount of $1,500.00
E. Professional Services Agreement with Meridian Symphony
Orchestra for Musical Talent for Concerts on Broadway for the
Not-to-Exceed Amount of $500.00
F. Sole Source Procurement of WebCTRL Sensors, Controls, and
Software from Automated Logic
G. Sole Source Purchase for Sensus Water Meters and
Authorization for Advertisement of Purchase in Local Paper
H. Award of Bid and Agreement for the Waste Water Treatment
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 3 of 75
Plant (WWTP) Filters Building Construction Project No. 10160a
to Ewing Company for the Not-to-Exceed Amount of
$1,069,086.64
Agreement Adding Task Order #2 to Master Agreement for
Professional Services with Access Idaho to Enable Electronic
Payment Transactions for Application and Service Fees
Collected Through Accela
J. Development Agreement for Approval: RZ 09-006 Southridge
West Commercial by Cabra Creek, LLC Located at the
Northeast Corner of S. Ten Mile Road and W. Overland Road:
Request for Rezone of 9.33 Acres From the R-8 Zoning District
to the C-C Zoning District
K. Final Order for Approval: FP 11-003 Waverly Place by
Mountain West Entrust IRA FBO Robert Mortensen IRA
Located 2510 Magic View Drive Request: Final Plat Approval of
25 Building Lots and Three (3) Common /Other Lots on 4.9
Acres of Land
L. Final Order for Approval: 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
M. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and
Order of Denial: 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
N. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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)
O. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 4 of 75
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 andlor the Nine
Mile Creek
P. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: 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
Q. Resolution No. : 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
(MUNR)
R. Resolution No. :Approving and
Effectuating Bylaws of Meridian Parks and Recreation
Commission as Amended on May 11, 2011
S. Resolution No. : A Resolution
of the Mayor and the City Council of the City of Meridian
Authorizing the City Clerk to Destroy Certain Semi-Permanent
and Temporary Records of the Meridian Fire Department
T. Budget Amendment for Outside Legal Counsel Fees
Zaremba: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda.
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: A couple items in the Consent Agenda. Under 5-C the approval of the
minutes for May 24th. Just anote -- a change that will have to be made to that. It
shows early on that I am present and I was absent at that meeting. On the votes it
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 5 of 75
shows that I am absent, but just in the roll call it shows I'm present and I was not. And
also as noted 5-O is resolution number 11-789, 5-R is resolution number 11-790, and 5-
2 is resolution number 11-791. So, with that, Mr. President, I move approve of the
Consent Agenda with the changes and for the Mayor to sign and Clerk to attest.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you call roll, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: Thank you very much. That's unanimous.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 6: Items Moved From Consent Agenda
Zaremba: Item 6 is items moved from the Consent Agenda and there were no -- none
of those.
Item 7: Action Items
A. Public Hearing: AP 11-001 Southridge Subdivision Gravel
Mining by Idaho Sand & Gravel Company Located South of W.
Overland Road; Southwest of the Ridenbaugh Canal and East
of S. Ten Mile Road Within Future Development Areas of
Southridge Subdivision Request: City Council Review of the
Director's Decision to Deny the Conditional Use Permit
Modification to Allow Audible Back Up Alarms on Construction
Equipment Used on the Site
Zaremba: So, we are on to Action Items, Item 7 on our agenda, and Item 7-A is AP 11-
001 and I will open the public hearing on AP 11-001 and I would like to make a
comment. For those of you who don't attend our meetings regularly let me explain a
little bit about what we are doing tonight and what the procedure will be. We are
opening the public hearing on AP 11-001, which is the Southridge Subdivision gravel
mining by Idaho Sand and Gravel Company. The location of the property that we are
going to talk about is south of West Overland Road and east of South Ten Mile Road.
Actually, southwest of the Ridenbaugh Canal. This is a City Council review of a denial
by the planning director of a modification request by the applicant Idaho Sand and
Gravel. Their request was to remove an earlier condition that was placed on them and
as a condition of their Conditional Use Permit, which you will hear referred to as a CUP
-- that means a Conditional Use Permit -- and that condition requires them to eliminate
the audible backup alarms for their equipment used in their operation. The planning
director has denied that request for a modification and we are here to take public
testimony on that request only and not on the operation itself. The CUP that was issued
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 6 of 75
was pursuant to our ordinance and granted after public hearing by the Planning and
Zoning Commission. The decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission was final
and the matter was not appealed to the City Council. This Council cannot rescind the
CUP. We cannot change that. We can only decide tonight whether the request by the
applicant to remove the backup alarm restriction is reasonable and compatible with the
neighborhood. So, here is the procedure. The city staff will provide a staff report and,
then, the applicant will get 15 minutes to state their reasons for their request. We will,
then, take public testimony that will be limited to three minutes per person, unless we
have a representative of the neighborhood who wishes to speak on their behalf. That
person will, then, get ten minutes on behalf of the neighborhood, but the neighbors will
have waived their right to their own testimony on behalf of that representative. After that
testimony is concluded the applicant will, then, get five minutes to respond to anything
that has been raised during the public testimony and after that the City Council will close
the public hearing, deliberate, and make a decision. So, there is our procedure in a
nutshell. I wanted to make sure everybody understood that. And with that I believe I
have opened the public hearing and we will begin with the staff report. Madam
Canning.
Canning: Thank you, President Zaremba. Just a brief summary in addition to what you
have already mentioned. As you stated, this is an appeal of my decision to deny the
modifications to the Conditional Use Permit to use audible beepers. On January 20th,
2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit for
construction of a gravel mining operation at Southridge Subdivision and the duration of
that approval is approximately 18 months. The applicant at that hearing represented
that heavy machinery would be equipped with nonaudible warning devices or beepers.
Now, the circumstances around that statement were -- were when they were requesting
nighttime operation hours, but the manner in which that statement was made the
neighbors all believed, as did staff, that that would be true all the time, that there would
be nonaudible beepers at all times. So, in mid April after the operation started the
planning staff received complaints from nearby property owners regarding noise from
the gravel crushing operation and the backup beepers. Staff then -- planning staff then
notified the operator of the conflict with the restriction on the beepers. The applicant,
then, filed an application for director approval of a Conditional Use Permit modification.
The number of items that I can approve on a Conditional Use Permit modification is
limited and one of the specific limitations is if it was a topic of discussion at the hearing I
can't modify it. So, I denied the application because it was beyond the scope of
administrative approval specified in the UDC and because the conditions were a topic of
discussion at the public hearing. The applicant, then, filed a request for Council review
or as we call them appeals of that denial. We have received a number of written
testimonies. We have testimony from Todd Lakey, who is the applicant representative
tonight, as well as two noise studies that the applicant has provided. We have also
received testimony in opposition from Keith Ebeling and Nancy Darr and it wasn't in
specific reference to this application, but we have also received comments Scott
Nichols, another neighbor. So, the outstanding issue before City Council is should the
use of audible warning devices, beepers, be allowed with the approved gravel mining
operation. And with that I will answer any questions Council may have.
Meridian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 7 of 75
Zaremba: Thank you. Any questions?
Bird: I have none at this time.
Rountree: None right now.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. Then we are ready for the applicant's presentation.
Good evening. If you would, please, state your name and address for the record,
please.
Lakey: Good evening, President Zaremba. Thank you. My name is Todd Lakey, I'm an
attorney here on behalf of Idaho Sand and Gravel. My address is 3649 North Lake
Harbor, Boise, Idaho. President Zaremba and Members of the Council, it's a pleasure
to be here with you tonight. I guess I'd like to start with a little bit of context in this case.
The director provided a little bit of that as well, but this is a very focused application as
you mentioned. We are limited -- this application for modification is limited solely to the
issue of the backup alarms. We submitted our regional application in December of last
year and as part of that original application we included a request to operate 24 hours a
day. That would be on a case-by-case or a contract basis. As you know, some of the
public works road contracts require nighttime operations. We wanted to be able to
participate in those contracts. No confusion at that point. That was the -- that was the
application. Things were moving forward. Staff recommended approval of that
application with a couple of modifications. They took out the -- the 24 hour operation on
a contract basis as far as their recommendation of approval and also limited our request
from the three years to the 18 months that is now. In reviewing the case the staff
proposed in their findings and found that there would not be excessive noise as a result
of our application. Any confusion resulted from that hearing and that statement that was
discussed earlier and specifically, just to clarify, there wasn't a condition imposed
regarding the backup alarms, the confusion results from that statement that was made
by the applicant's representative at the time. The context of the statement was they
were discussing a 24 hour operation, at the end of the discussion there was a question
about backup alarms and in response to that question the applicant's representative
stated that our equipment doesn't use backup alarms. So, we are here in an effort to
be responsive pursuant to staffs request to clarify, I think is the appropriate term, the
backup alarm issue. Our equipment does use audible backup alarms during daytime
operations, just like any other operation. The safety requirements and practices of the
industry require that. OSHA and MSHA are applicable regulations and they require that
we utilize the audible backup alarms during daytime operation. There is an exception
that provides for a signaler or a flagger or that type of person, but that's really an
exception that should be used on a rare basis. It's not, from our perspective, for regular
operations. That's the type of person that would be there if it was an unusual backing
situation or the audible backup alarm had failed. It's not a safe practice to regularly
place a person behind a piece of heavy equipment. They are trying to keep up with the
equipment as it moves back and forth between the stockpile and the truck or up and
down the slope behind that piece of equipment. Safety requirements, from our
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 8 of 75
perspective, mandate that we have those audible backup alarms. I want to talk a little
bit about the practical impacts of the audible backup alarm on our equipment. You -- or
I should say the Planning and Zoning Commission imposed limitations along with the
recommendation of staff our daytime hours are limited. We are limited to 6:00 a.m, to
6:00 p.m. No weekends. No holidays. The trucks as far as our design of the site -- the
trucks move in a forward loop, so they travel in, they move around, and they travel
forward on the way out. So, the trucks themselves -- it would be extremely rare if the
truck utilized its backup beeper. They don't like to backup and they are designed to
move forward. So, the vast majority of the time. on our site, we have a single front-end
loader that is operating on that particular site loading any trucks that may be coming on
site. So, during the vast majority of the time under which we are operating in this
Conditional Use Permit that backup alarm on that loader is only slightly audible from the
site and from the subdivisions to the south. Myself, I wanted to test it, I went out and
listened at the entrance to the site. It was -- I could hear the backup alarm, but it was
difficult over the background noise. You have got the freeway, which is fairly close.
You have got the new Overland Road. You have got background wind. You have got
the occasional plane flying over. Or even conversation that you carry on at the time, it's
difficult to hear that backup alarm over that background noise. I then went and listed at
the two subdivisions, Val Vista and Aspen Cove, and it was even more difficult to hear
that backup alarm from the front-end loader with the background noise, particularly if
you're carrying on any kind of conversation. We took staff out and did a site visit under
those same conditions and they confirmed what we had found when I did the site visit.
We, then, also conducted those sound studies and submitted those to the City Council
and those confirmed our findings as well. That backup is only slightly audible. The
sound study that was conducted on May 27th, 2011, found that the audible backup
alarm increased the average decibel level at those subdivisions to the south by four
decibels and under the scientific evaluation of those four decibels it's, quote, slightly
perceptible, end quote, to the human ear. So, again, the vast majority of the time that
we are operating it's slightly audible to the human ear. You have to listen carefully.
Granted, now we move on to the crushing operation. Those, as I stated, are more loud.
They provide a higher level of sound. But the crushing operations occur on a very
limited period of time. The crushing folks move in and they crush and they move out
and the stockpile is what provides the operation for the vast majority of the time in this
Conditional Use Permit. The additional equipment involved with crushing are a couple
of bull dozers pushing the material to the crusher. The crusher itself is louder than the
audible backup alarms that are on the equipment. The sound study that we conducted
in relation to the crushing operations found that the entire crushing operation, backup
alarms included, increased the decibel level at those southern subdivisions by ten. So,
a ten decibel increase to just under 60 decibels -- it was about 56, 57 decibels. And if
you look in that first sound study it provides examples of what those sound levels are. A
normal conversation at one meter away is 60 decibels, so it's just under that noise level.
If you're indoors, obviously, that reduces it further. But the issue is not crushing, the
issue is the backup alarms that are occurring during that -- that crushing period, with the
crusher being louder than the backup alarms. Our use of backup alarms is very
reasonable in light of the safety considerations, the limited duration, hours of operation,
and weekday operations that we have and, in addition, we have the current and planned
Meridian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 9 of 75
growth for the area that's occurring, it's going to have extensive construction operations
going in the area. So, I'm going to talk a little bit about the character of the area.
Council Members, I'm going to try and use the Elmo here. Anna, if you might -- there
we go. You can see -- I will point with my fingers. Here this side north of Overland
Road, that's the operations we just recently concluded that are very similar to what we
are doing here. We are reducing the base elevation on an approved project. That
involved crushing, excavation of sand and gravel, and trucks coming and going. This
project is now on this side of Overland Road in this area here. But, again, a similar
operation. This area -- the whole area is part of the Ten Mile interchange specific area
plan that the city has adopted. Although Aspen Cove and the subdivision -- the other
subdivisions to our south are not in the city, that specific area plan does apply to our
property and does establish the character of the area. That specific area plan calls for
extensive construction and development activity, which will, obviously, involve backup
alarms as that -- as the specific area plan moves forward. The specific area plan calls
for various types of development from commercial, industrial, office, single family, multi-
family, schools, churches, hotels, et cetera, et cetera. The specifics provided in the plan
account for a thousand acres of development dedicated to business and job creation.
Three hundred and fifty thousand square feet of retail and commercial space, up to ten
thousand residential units and the additional arterial and collector systems that go along
with that. So, Members of the Council, that, essentially, means this activity is going to
be happening in the area with backup alarms, with construction noise, all of that, but a
lot of that activity is going to be occurring without being subject to the limitations that we
have to operation under the Conditional Use Permit as far as the limited duration, the
limited hours of operation and the other conditions that are imposed on our project. I
will also show you in the site plan -- this is specific to our site. We are accomplishing
something on this site that the developer is going to do anyway as part of the
development of the project. Here is the site plan. Council Members, this -- the entire
site is roughly this area here on the site plan. The dark area contained on our
application is the specific project area. On our site it's divided into three areas. Here is
Section A. This, again, is in the site plan that we submitted. Section B in the middle
and Section C on the end. This is a diagram of Section A. That shows what the
developer would be doing if they were developing the property. Those are ten foot
contours or squares on that particular site map. So, as part of the development the plan
is to remove about ten feet of base elevation in the form of material and sand and gravel
from that particular area. If you look at B it's anywhere from -- approximately 20 feet
average of material that's going to be removed as the project develops. And, then, C,
anywhere from 20 to 30 feet, plus these two additional ponds as part of the
development. So, that's part of the approved project that the developer is going to
move forward anyway. Again, if they were doing that they are not subject to the same
Conditional Use Permit restrictions that we are. It's better to get this done before
additional development occurs. We go in, we do it before the additional development
occurs. We are subject to those limitations and restrictions of the Conditional Use
Permit. We prepare the property that's already approved for development and supply
material that's needed for the public and private projects around that Ten Mile
interchange, all subject to those conditions of the Conditional Use Permit. Back to the
issue. Backup alarms are the issue. The regular operations on the site, the vast
Meddian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 10 of 75
majority of the time you're looking at, essentially, afront-end loader backup alarm that is
barely audible from the subdivision to the south and even on site with the background
noise that occurs in the area. The crushing is limited, but it's not unreasonable,
considering safety and the character of the area and the actual sound levels and
impacts from our operation. Any effort to limit our use of the audible backup alarms has
a negative impact on our operation as a whole from a safety perspective, but also from
a financial perspective, but most importantly, the safety perspective. The backup
alarms will be part of an extensive construction, development, and growth activities
occurring in the area for years to come, but we fit with that character of the area. Much
of that construction, again, occurring without the conditions that we have to operate
under. So, with that, Council President and Members of the Council, I would ask for
your approval on our requested modification to clarify that audible backup alarms can
be utilized in the Conditional Use Permit as we submitted in our letter to the Mayor and
Council. And with that I would stand for any questions.
Zaremba: Thank you, Mr. Lakey. Council, any questions?
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Mr. Lakey, you stated, I believe, that your noise analysis indicated -- at least
atone location at one point in time the backup alarms increased the background level of
noise four decibels?
Lakey: On average I believe.
Rountree: On average. And in another instance it increased the sound level by ten
decibels. Could you explain to me what that means?
Lakey: Certainly. Councilman Rountree, the increase in the four decibels was -- that
sound study was focused solely on the backup alarm that is being operated on that
front-end loader. That was the only noise it was measuring. The background noise and
that backup alarm is part of regular consistent operations. The ten decibel increase was
a measurement of the crushing operations occurring on the site and the background
noise. That's the difference. You have a limited period of time of crushing, which that
first study applied to, and, then, the vast majority of time the second study and the four
decibel increase.
Rountree: And at what distance were those measurements taken?
Lakey: The locations, (believe -- the distance, let me see if it specifies that at the
beginning. Just a moment. At the first study, which is a study, Councilman Rountree,
that was conducted as part of the crushing operations, the site measurements were
taken in a couple of locations, actually. The first one was 792 feet, 906 feet and, then,
the entrance of Overland Road -- it doesn't give a distance there, but if you look at the
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 11 of 75
points on the back, those site distances are -- you can compare the distance with those
in the subdivision. If I can look at the average, I think they used the -- the 60 decibels,
which is the ten decibel, approximate, increase was 906 feet from the site average.
And, then, Councilman Rountree, the noise study for just the backup alarms didn't
provide specific distances, but related to similar locations in the previous study.
Rountree: And can you explain to me what an increase of three decibels is equivalent
to in terms of noise energy?
Lakey: Councilman Rountree, a doubling of background sound is -- would add three
decibels, according to that study. The four decibels, as was stated in the study, is
slightly perceptible to the human ear. The ten -- ten decibels would -- would beaten
fold increase in the sound energy.
Rountree: Thank you.
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Mr. Lakey, the rock crushing operation, does that move from place to place or
is it in one location typically?
Lakey: Councilman Hoaglun, it -- it will move as the operation delves into particular
areas of the site. It's done in phases. As to specific locations for their proposed
crushing I don't know. I might defer to Mr. Russell if you would like that. I don't know if
they have that specifically planned.
Hoaglun: Now -- Mr. President, to follow up. You showed us the A, B, C schematic and
where are they now? Are they in the A area that the operation is happening right now?
And if I recall correctly, A is farthest -- that's closest to Overland Road and C would be
closest to the -- to the residents?
Lakey: Correct. Correct. And in looking at that -- and I'll look back to Mr. Russell to
make sure I'm accurate. I have walked the site. But in relation to the pit that exists
currently approximately in this area? So, those two dark circles for the future ponds for
the development, that's the location of the current pit that the material was crushed in.
Hoaglun: Okay. And that -- if I recall -- Mr. President. Mr. Lakey, that's part of the C --
Lakey: Correct. It looks like it straddles C and B.
Hoaglun: Okay. And that's closest to the residents at this time?
Lakey: Correct.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 12 of 75
Hoaglun: And I also didn't understand -- well, understood that the operation -- mining
operation is done on the other side of Overland. Was this both sides of the road, is that
part of the 18 months or was it just this side of the road that's an 18 month operation?
Lakey: This application was just for this side of the road for the 18 months.
Hoaglun: Okay. And my last one I have for now, Mr. President and Mr. Lakey, was --
can you run through the exceptions for backup alarms again? Exceptions are allowed.
Lakey: An exception is allowed, Councilman Hoaglun, in the provision of a flagger or a
spotter, somebody that would stand behind and provide some type of signal in regards
to the vehicle that's backing up. Our concern is that that's an exception to OSHA and
MSHA requirements, not the general rule, and it should be applied as such. You
typically have an individual following a piece of heavy equipment around, it poses a
significant safety risk to put somebody behind a piece of heavy equipment if that
equipment is -- is moving back and forth between a stockpile and a truck or moving up
and down a slope that may be part of the crushing operations, you're putting that
individual at risk if that's your consistent operation. We see that as an exception to be
used in rare circumstances.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Zaremba: Thank you. A couple questions of my own if I may. In the OSHA
requirements is there anything that would prevent you from turning the audibility of the
backup alarms down by four decibels, make them slightly quieter? I realize they have to
be alarming to anybody that's within 20 feet of them, but is there a way to make them a
little less alarming farther away?
Lakey: Sure. President Zaremba, the -- I think initially they may have been operating at
a high decibel level. You have to operate at a certain minimum. I don't know what that
is myself. But I do believe that Mr. Russell asked the operators to turn that decibel level
down to the -- the lowest extent that we could.
Zaremba: About how long ago was that done?
Lakey: I'm not sure if that was before the crushing study or after.
Zaremba: You need to repeat what he said, unless he wants to come up and testify.
Lakey: I understand. President Zaremba, it was about midway through the crushing
operation.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. And of the 18 months that this CUP covers, how much of
that is left?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 13 of 75
Lakey: I believe Anna stated that we were approved in January of 2011. So, we are
four months into it.
Zaremba: Thank you. Any other questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Staff, anything further to add at this point?
Canning: No, sir.
Zaremba: Thank you very much. We will now take testimony from the public. Many of
you have signed up on the list. I will go through the list in the order that you signed up.
However, if any of you are a representative of a neighborhood, please, let me know. As
a matter of fact, let me ask that first. Is anybody representing a group or are you all
going to speak individually? I see one hand -- two hands raised. Okay. When I call
names if the two people that raised their hands are your representative, please, decline
to testify in their favor and we will give each of them ten minutes to speak. So, let me
start at the beginning, then. Scott -- I believe it's Scott Nichols. You are one of the
representatives. Good. Thank you.
Nichols: Good evening.
Zaremba: Would you, please, state your name and address for the record
Nichols: Yes.
Zaremba: And I will ask that of everybody. Hopefully I will remember to repeat it.
Nichols: My name is Scott Nichols, representing Val Vista Subdivision. First I want to
tell you thank you for the opportunity to be here. I'd rather be here than digging post
holes. Second, I hate dueling testimony, especially with -- with issues like this. When
we came before you six months ago, five months ago, with regard to Southridge
Subdivision, we did testify in favor of the gravel mining operation and I want to reiterate
we will support this gravel extraction and regrading. For Val Vista Subdivision where we
reside it is a benefit to our -- the adjoining property. It's unfortunate that we didn't
understand the MSHA regulations. We did understand or believe -- falsely believe that
MSHA would allow those backup beepers to be turned off and a strobe to be used and
that's -- part of the reason we supported the gravel extraction and regrading. Knowing
now that MSHA requires those backup beepers to be in place, we still support the
gravel extraction. I can tell you that Idaho Sand and Gravel has been very good. I have
heard backup beepers once. They were not invasive and I do border the property. I
border the project area. My neighbor Steve Prisbos called me. He couldn't be here
tonight. Fortunately, he's in Hawaii. Steve is immediately adjacent to the project and
asked me if I would testify on behalf of the project and their ability to continue to use
backup beepers and reiterate on his behalf that they have been -- they have been really
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 14 of 75
good about the operational constraints, limiting, you know, either where the equipment
is backing up or when it's backing up and as Mr. Lakey and Ryan have indicated, the
trucks pull through, the trucks pull out, there is no reason for them to back up, but the
larger cats that push into the crusher -- you know, if they are doing that later in the day
-- they haven't been in there before 6:00, they haven't been in there after 6:00 or
weekends and really Isaw -- honestly, I saw the mountain of gravel grow and it was -- I
didn't even know it existed. Did you see that mountain of gravel in your backyard? I
said what mountain of gravel. I mean it has not been a big deal, but it will be a benefit
to us in the long run. So, from that standpoint we are -- it's unfortunate we are back
here again today, but we would recommend to approve the variance and let's just get it
done as fast as we can and I'm sure with the economy the way it is we are going to be
here asking for an extension of 18 months. Also keep that in mind, that this is a final
grading plan that we can come back and even talk about that in the future, because it's
--the economy is not turning around, so -- thank you. Any comments, questions?
Zaremba: Thank you. Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Actually, I believe will take the other gentleman that said he was representing
a group. If you would come up next, please. And would you, please, state your name
and address for the record.
Ebeling: My name is Ebeling -- Keith Ebeling. I live at 2150 Aspen Cove Drive. And
I'm opposed to their changing their -- this appeal and I think there is -- there is two
issues here that need to be concerned. The first is when Idaho Sand and Grave made
their presentation they stated very specifically that they were qualified as -- because
they had done other gravel pits, other gravel mines, other similar projects to do this
project and they were qualified to do this and make the right decisions to do this. In the
testimony that they gave -- and I want to read something from it if you haven't read the
minutes. There was questions asked by Commissioner Rohm: And the front-end
loaders, every time they back up, they have beepers on them and you can hear that
beeper for miles and whether they are doing it at 8:00 a.m. or 5:00 a.m. or they are
loading trucks in the middle of the night or extended hours, that sound is very prevalent.
That was his statement. The Idaho Sand and Gravel representative said: Backup
beepers, of course, are important safety mechanisms. Rohm: I know that. The Idaho
Sand and Gravel representative: But with that concern Idaho Sand's equipment uses
visual backups. They have blinking lights instead of beepers. They don't have beepers.
Now, what about the English language tells you that they didn't -- they weren't going to
use beepers? And now all of a sudden here is an experienced group of people who
have done this many many times, now they either have one of two things. They have
got a guy up there who don't know what the hell he's doing or they are not telling the
whole truth about this thing. Now, let me -- let me read the next sentence here that the
Commissioner said. Let's see. Where is it at here? Thank you. He said that's the
answer I wanted to hear. That's a great answer. Thank you very much. I think that
type of statement at least convinced two of the Commissioners to vote for this special
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 15 of 75
use permit. Another one, Mr. O'Brien, voiced his concern about living a mile away from
a sand pit down on Amity and Meridian and he could hear the sound of that pit a mile
away. So, both of those people I think were convinced and maybe other ones because
of what was said here. Now, after they said this they went out and they used the
beepers and my wife come to the first meeting, because I didn't make it, because we
weren't informed. I'm the president of the Aspen Cove Subdivision association, our
property abuts up against this development, I wasn't notified, so I didn't know there was
a meeting and I had other obligations at the time. I also didn't attend any of the
neighborhood meetings that they set or could find anyone in Aspen Cove that attended
those meetings. I'm getting a little bit off of the -- the beeper situation, but the point I'm
trying to make is I think there was some attempt to cover up the fact that they were
going to use beepers when they really planned to use beepers. Now, when I contacted
OSHA about the beeper thing, I said here is the situation and I told them what the deal
was and the guy I know that used to be with OSHA said they have to use beepers,
Keith. And I said well what about spotters. Oh, he says spotters are -- are an
acceptable alternative to beepers, but he said they won't do that and I said why won't
they do that. He said they won't do that because of the cost and the inconvenience.
So, now we are not down to being good neighbors. I'm not talking about safety, we are
talking about bottom line and that's a whole different concept here. And I'd also like to
point out something that Mr. Lakey said. He said that the rock crusher was drowning
out the beepers. And that's true, it did, because when they started out the beepers
were so loud in my house I could hear them inside my house, and I'm a quarter mile
away, with the windows closed. And Bob from Idaho Sand and Gravel came by and
visited me, took me on a drive and we went out to the site and low and behold I couldn't
hear those beepers when we were sitting in his truck a hundred feet away and I said,
Bob, what happened. He said we found out that there is three levels of density -- or
volume on those beepers on those two particular caterpillars and we turned them from
high to low. I said I can't hear them. When I told my friend that used to work at OSHA
that, he said that's a direct violation of the OSHA law. He says the beepers have to be
louder than the ambient noise of the project. In other words, they have to be louder
than the rock crusher. Now, I have got something here, if you will just allow me to do
this. I want to play this just real quick. That's the sound of the rock crusher on my deck
at my bedroom window and I'm a quarter of a mile away. You can't hear the bloody
beeper over the top of it. The beepers were louder than this until they turned them
down. I'd like to look at one of you gentlemen and ask you -- I know we are talking
about beepers -- how would you like to listen to this for two and a half months nine
hours a day and we still have two more sessions of this. In September they are going to
do this again for another two and a half, three months and again in March, April, and
May of next year. Now, I'm all for improving the area. I didn't say anything when they
were up there doing the rock crushing and we had to put up with the dust and all the
inconvenience that went on with it, because they were digging out ponds and getting
ready for the development. Now, what they are doing is we are making money out
there and that's -- that's good, people should make money, but they shouldn't make
money at my inconvenience and the inconvenience of my neighbors and I have to
almost shout on my deck when that rock crusher is running and those beepers are
going for my wife and I to carry on a conversation and I'm not the closest home to that --
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 16 of 75
that site. This is really a sad situation that we weren't at least notified and involved in
the original hearing and I think that this business of saying we don't have beepers was
just another way of getting it by the Commission, saying what they wanted to hear, so
that they could get this situation approved and, then, they went about and did exactly
what they wanted to do and, you know, they have been in noncompliance for two and a
half months and they haven't been using those beeper once. I don't understand how
this works. If I'm breaking the law, it looks like I ought to have to stop or somebody
would put me in jail. Maybe they have got a get out of jail free card. I don't know. But
this is -- this is what this situation has gotten down to. Now, they were definitely in
violation of the OSHA law when they turned those beepers down below the ambient
noise from the crusher. I appreciate them doing it, because didn't -- all I had to listen to
then was the bloody crusher. But this is a serious problem for the people that live in
Aspen Cove. Now, I know Scott and his friends, they want to see the level of that thing
reduced, so that they can get their --abetter view of the mountains, but I also know that
Scott in that meeting said -- and I quote you, Scott. That he was relieved to hear that
they wouldn't be using backup beepers, because a lot of his neighbors were concerned
about the sound of backup beepers. Now, if you gentlemen have been around a
construction site you know how piercing and how aggravating that sound can be. Now,
they use the rock crusher from 8:00 to 5:00, they are going to be using those loaders
from 6:00 in the morning until 6:00 in the evening and I think this is unreasonable to
have to put up with this. So, in conclusion, to wind this thing up, I think at the outset
they knew what they were saying when they said they didn't have beepers. They said
what they had to say to get the permit. Now that they got the permit they can do exactly
what they want to do and I'm not having an argument with Idaho Sand and Gravel. Bob
came over to my house, I think he's a hell of a nice guy. He told me -- he said, Keith, I
want to be a -- I want to be a neighbor. I said, Bob, I think you're nice a guy, but I don't
want you for a bloody neighbor. You make too damn much noise and I -- if you was
anybody else I would run you out. But I don't have the deep pockets, I can't afford to
have an attorney come up and give a presentation for me. I can't afford to have sound
tests made from -- oh, and by the way, one of those sound tests they took was right in
my backyard and Bob shared with me that that was the loudest sound tests -- one of the
loudest sound tests they had. And, again, I'm not right up against it and if there was
some crushing need for gravel around this country I would say, well, let's go for it, but I
see where they are mining 1.2 million tons out in Eagle and there is going to be plenty
gravel around to fix our roads, so I think it's -- in my way of thinking this, that there is two
decisions that you can possibly make. One is tell Idaho Sand and Gravel do what you
said you would do. If you got to do it with cameras, buy cameras. If you got to do it with
spotters, use spotters. If you can't do it that way, revoke your special use permit. And I
want to thank you for the opportunity to make this presentation and I hope in my own
mind that you support your staff's decision, because I think your staff has done an
excellent job. They are professional and courteous people and I really appreciate the
support they gave us in this effort. And I'd also like for you to approve my -- about three
of my neighbors wrong. I -- there are 30 some homes in the Aspen Cove area and I
visited most every one of them before I came here.
Zaremba: Sir, I do need to ask you to conclude.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 17 of 75
Ebeling: I'm going to wrap -- this is it. This is my last breath. And the -- in visiting these
homes I asked them if they had ever attended a meeting and all that blah, blah, blah
and they said -- and three or four of them said, Keith, why are you wasting your time
doing this? I said what do you mean? They said they are not going to pay any attention
to the little guy, they are going to listen to the big developers, they are going to listen to
the multi-million dollar corporations with deep pockets. I said I think you're wrong. And
I hope you guys are going to prove me right. So, thank you very much for your
consideration in this matter and I hope I don't have to listen to those bloody beepers the
rest of the summer. Thank you. Are there any questions?
Zaremba: Thank you. Any question?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rountree: Mr. President, I do have a question.
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: You indicated -- you started talking about beepers and, then, you -- that you
could hear them and, then, when the crusher is going you can't hear them and they
turned them down and we got off onto OSHA and the issue that we are trying to deal
with is beepers. We can't force OSHA rules. We can't tell Idaho Sand and Gravel to do
any of that. But you really didn't spend any time telling me that beepers are an issue
now that the sound has been turned down. Are the beepers still an issue?
Ebeling: Well, I can still hear the beepers, yes
Rountree: Okay.
Ebeling: And I can't hear the beepers on that crushing operation, because they turned
them way down and as soon as OSHA comes up they are going have to turn them back
up, because that's in violation of what they are doing, even if I have to call OSHA they
will turn them back up.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I have a question and that was on the crusher noise. You were talking about
that. How often is the crushing in operation?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 18 of 75
Ebeling: The last time it was about two and a half months and they operated 8:00 to
5:00 every day, five days a week. They started in the early part of March, they ended
the second week in May. Bob tells me they are going to come back in September and
they will be there from September through probable about two and a half to three
months. They are going to come back again in -- in April or -- March or April of next
year for two and a half to three months.
Hoaglun: Okay. And, then, crusher, Mr. President -- and is it Mr. Ebeling?
Ebeling. Ebeling.
Hoaglun: It operates 8:00 to 5:00. If -- and the materials operations -- extraction
operation is 6:00 to 6:00. Do you hear the beepers when the crusher is not in operation
right now?
Ebeling: I haven't heard it lately, no. I don't know if they are moving stuff out of there or
not.
Mr. Hoaglun: Okay.
Ebeling: I haven't seen any trucks go out of there -- I can't see -- all I can see is that
mountain of sand coming over my neighbor's house.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Ebeling: I can't see where those trucks are being loaded.
Mr. Hoaglun: Okay.
Ebeling: By the way, it's a real beautiful site when you're coming into our new gateway
interchange, that you guys did such a good job with, when you come onto an on ramp
it's a real beautiful sight to see that hundred foot thing of sand sitting up there. I thought
for a minute I was in Butte, Montana.
Hoaglun: We hope that changes soon.. Thank you.
Ebeling: Thank you.
Zaremba: Thank you. Okay. I'll start through the rest of the list and, again, if either Mr.
Ebeling or Mr. Nichols spoke for you, please, just raise your hand. Next name on the
list is Don Wilson. And, again, if you would, please, state your name and address for
the record, please.
Wilson: Good evening. My name is Dan Wilson.
Zaremba: Oh, Dan. I'm sorry.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 19 of 75
Wilson: That's okay. I also live in the Aspen Cove Subdivision, 2271, and I think Mr.
Ebeling has covered a lot of things, but I wanted to offer a possible alternative. I used
to work in the construction industry and --
Zaremba: Can you stand a little closerto the microphone. Thank you
Wilson: Stage fright. I used to work in the construction industry and we were called on
to make some -- what is it called -- value engineering innovations and I was just
wondering if there was any way that Idaho Sand and Gravel could consider and maybe
use their acoustical consultants to look into orienting the operation, so that they wouldn't
be focused so much toward us, because as it is now that mountain of sand provides a
backdrop to reflect the sound power generated by the crusher and the beepers. There
are ways that maybe the plant could be rearranged in the future to maybe turn that
around so that it's radiated to the north or something like that, because we are down
wind. When the wind is blowing and they are running, it is -- it's really tiresome and the
nature of the beepers is to cause alarm and I submit that even though it didn't raise the
sound more than four decibels, you have to consider that that was a pulse type of
sound, really strong, background to maybe 12, 14 decibels. This causes stress. It's
meant to cause stress, because they want people to get out from under the wheels. But
I would like maybe to open the dialogue to looking at another way to address these
issues and consider bounding the sound northwest or something. But, at any rate, just
throwing that out there for thought. And I thank you for your patience and time.
Zaremba: Thank you. Any questions?
Rountree: No.
Zaremba: Thank you, sir. Gary A. Liddell. And your name and address for the record,
please.
Liddell: Yes, sir. My name name is Gary Liddell. I live at 2118 Aspen Cove Drive. I'm
sure you're familiar with the address -- in fact, the schematic that's currently on the
board, my property is about two and a half acres -- approximately where that number
2143 symbol was on that -- on that schematic and the bend in that road where that dot
is. I understand this is limited to the issue of the beepers and, you know, if you make an
omelette you got to break a few eggs. I understand this construction is going to occur
and like Val Vista, they are willing -- this big sand hill or the noise, if there is going to be
a benefit in their elevations we all know that some of that is going to occur. I think it's
going to be five or ten years before that Southridge Subdivision I think starts doing
anything that they contemplated when they began that property, so I don't think we are
going to have a mass amount of beepers and trucks moving things around. We are all
a little bit tired of the noise after the Ten Mile project. We could hear the piles pounded
and -- not terrible. You live with it. We got a new road. But these beeper, as Dan
Wilson stated, pretty articulately I think, they are meant to cause alarm. When I'm in the
garden in March and April I'm constantly aware of the rock crushers. The beepers are
Meridian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 20 of 75
penetrating and they have been reduced. I tend to believe Keith Ebeling's view that it
probably will not last that way, they will be turned up again. I did read the minutes of the
January 20th meeting. It doesn't seem to be any confusion. I think Mr. Densmer that
presented before the zoning commission was a civic engineer -- civil engineer practicing
and certified in several different states. He was quite clear that the backup cameras
and sound device -- something other than an audible sound devices could be used to
accomplish the safety that was required. So, I just generally want to say that the word
barely audible and slightly are absolutely ridiculous. I understand Mr. Lakey is an
attorney. I think some of that is influencing his choice of words. These are loud
beepers. They are pulsing. I would ask the second -- Mr. Wilson's opinion on creating
a wall and I wanted this to -- when they did the freeways and everything else they put
up pretty expensive sound walls to project some of the noise and reflect it upward. I
have wandered myself why they couldn't put the sand hill between us and the rock
crusher, instead of having it as a backdrop acting as an amphitheater. And there is an
elevation issue here at Aspen Cove. There is a series of ponds --the lower elevation is
drainage of noise, acts a lot like a fluid. It -- in an amphitheater it just comes up to
Aspen Cove Drive. So, these four decibel things kind of like the fellow's cell phone that
went off in the hearing. Is that barely audible? Is it disturbing? Is it unexpected? It's
that kind of a noise. It's not the biggest thing in the world. I'm not trying to tell you guys
it's a life or death issue, but it -- it's just disturbing and I know that --
Zaremba: I do need to ask you to conclude, sir.
Liddell: Okay. You probably have ordinances that don't allow chickens in people's
yards and roosters and I'd like you to consider us at least with that same courtesy about
the noise. Any questions?
Zaremba: Any questions?
Hoaglun: Mr. President, real quick. Is the backup alarm noise more prevalent early
morning, late afternoon, as opposed to other times of the day?
Liddell: It greatly depends on the ambient noise or conditions. If the wind is coming
from the north or west -- west or southwestern winds would be predominate that when
it's coming come from the west it's louder. You know, it's also relative. I mean I'm used
to the Meridian Speedway on Saturday nights. I think this is the tenth garden I have put
in my yard that -- when we moved here we had dairies and farms and you kind of
expect all that. When you're building a Ten Mile overpass we expect it, you know, 8:00
in the morning until you're out in your yard at noon, 10:00 o'clock, early afternoon it's -- it
varies.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Liddell: I think the density of air, humidity, direction of the wind, all those things have
some kind of effect, which mitigates somewhat the scientific study with four decibels to
ten decibels and the word slightly. I think if you can get somebody in here to turn a rap
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 21 of 75
music station on to a certain loudness would it bother you or not. It depends. Depends
on your preference.
Hoaglun: Thank you. Appreciate it.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Liddell: Thank you very much
Zaremba: I can see that Mr. Lakey is taking notes and I'm sure he will address the
excellent idea of repositioning the pile the next time there is a question when it is his
turn at the end. The next name has been written over a couple of times. I don't think
it's crossed out, but let me guess. I believe the last name is Meyers and the first name
may either be Michael or Mabel. Is that close to anybody? Were you aware that you
were signing up after Keith Ebeling? Okay. We will go through the rest of the list and if
somebody feels like they have been left out we will have an opportunity for you to speak
at the end. Next one is Bill Weiss. W-e-i-s-s. Have you been spoken for? Okay.
Phyllis Weiss. Has been spoken for. Don Smith. If you're here make sure you raise
your hand, so that I know that you heard me. Okay. Chris Smith. Okay. Those are all
the names that I have on the list. If there is anybody else here that wishes to provide
testimony or comment this would be the time to come forward, please. And, again,
would you, please, state your name and address for the record.
Kleffner: Mike Kleffner. 2304 Aspen Cove. So, I have a front row seat to the gravel pit.
I'm right up on the border. I would like to just point out a couple things. One, when they
did start with the graders, the backups were very loud. But after they turned them down
it did seem to be reasonable in comparison to the crushing. So, you could still hear
them, but it wasn't as bad as the -- when they initially started. So, I do have a concern if
they go back and somebody makes them turn them back to the full loudness. That's
going to be pretty loud, especially right behind my home they are I believe going down
25 feet in depth and that's about ten feet from my property line, so that will be pretty
loud, essentially for eight hours a day when they are doing the initial push up to the
grinder. And as I was watching that -- one of those cats is backing up pretty much all
the time for eight hours a day. So, that's the only comments I had. Questions?
Zaremba: Any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you, sir. Anybody else care to speak? Okay. We will turn the
opportunity back to the applicant Mr. Lakey. And, oddly enough, I again need you to
state your name and address for the record.
Lakey: Okay. And, President Zaremba, not odd at all. Todd Lakey. 3649 North Lake
Harbor, Boise, Idaho. 83703. I think as I have clarified, the crushing itself is limited to --
from 8:00 to 5:00. The loading and hauling is the 6:00 to 6:00 operations that may
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 22 of 75
involve the backup alarms. It's difficult to apply generalizations about backup alarms on
construction sites to a site specifically. That's why we went out and visited the site,
that's why we conducted the site specific studies, because of all of the different things
that affect the noise levels at a particular site. And those were incorporated in the noise
studies. Recognize that attorneys can be advocates -- an advocate and choose certain
words, but in this case slightly audible came from the scientist, not the attorney. My
words were difficult to hear, those kinds of things. And that's, again, based on my
personal experience as well. This is certainly a responsible company. You can thank
them in large part for that nice Ten Mile interchange that's out there and the operations
that they have conducted at this point. There was no attempt to -- to cover up anything.
The application itself was clear that the strobes, the lighted backup alarms, would be
used in the nighttime extended operations that we were requesting. The confusion and
the lack of clarity came from that incorrect answer that was given in the context of the
24 hour discussions. But I understand where that confusion came from based on that
statement. I think it was telling that Mr. Ebeling mentions that he can't hear the backup
beepers now. So, during regular operations, as we found, they are not significantly
audible. During the crushing operations we recognize that that is a louder operation
and involves more noise, but it's limited in duration, it's limited in scope, and it's -- the
backup alarms are necessary as a safety measure, despite any additional cost of hiring
people to be out there. It doesn't make sense to put somebody behind a piece of heavy
equipment consistently when it's moving around rapidly from place to place. So, I think
you're looking at crushing and not crushing as far as some of the complaints that were
raised. But ultimately Mr. Ebeling referred to this as a construction site. This area will
be a construction site for years to come based on the planned growth -- not for this site,
but for the area in general, as I mentioned previously. We have done some things to
help mitigate the noise. The loader itself. only backs up to the west the way it's
designed, so that the backup alarm is pointed away. We are willing to try to do some of
those things in regards to the pit operations as well. We are limited with the elevation
and the slope and how we approach those things. If you're moving into a hillside and
moving up close to that property line there are limitations on what you can do. Perhaps
some berming around the edge. We can try to implement some -- some practices
where if at all possible that the cats can backup a certain direction. But those are things
we have to work through with that particular area that's being crushed. So, we are
willing to look at those things. They have done that with the loader. They have done
responsible things like paving the access road that wasn't required -- a good portion of
that to keep the dust down. The crushing time was selected to be during the spring,
because it helps keep some of the dust down. So, they have done kind of responsible
things on this application. I think it is worthwhile to listen to some of those positive
comments in support that recognize this is a limited period of time we are talking about
and it provides that larger benefit to the area and to the development that's occurring
out there. And the fact that as we have taken steps to turn things down and operate as
responsibly as we can, that there has been a difference that's been noticed out there.
So, with that, Mr. President and Councilmen, I would stand for any questions.
Zaremba: Council, questions?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 23 of 75
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: There has been testimony that at some point in time, apparently, the
beepers have been reduced in their sound levels by some means. Is that a true
situation?
Lakey: I believe that's correct. That was during crushing. I can't testify as to, again, the
appropriate decibel levels for those pieces of equipment and the backup beepers.
Rountree: And that was on the dozers?
Lakey: Yes.
Rountree: And that will remain?
Lakey: Councilman Rountree, I -- that's our intention, but, again, I can't testify as to the
-- the OSHA and MSHA compliance with that. We have taken that step in an effort to
be reasonable.
Rountree: So, you have no knowledge whether that's in or not in compliance with
OSHA requirements?
Lakey: Give me just a moment.
Rountree: Okay.
Lakey: Councilman Rountree, in speaking with Mr. Russell, they were turned as loud as
they could go. They were dialed down, but are still in compliance.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you. Mr. President?
Zaremba: Yes.
Rountree: When you spoke to the possibilities of reorienting some of the operation and
actually giving an example of an effort to do that with these loaders,you used words like
we will try and we will look at. I don't find a lot of comfort in that. Is there a commitment
there? Certainly there is a lot of material out there and I know it costs money to move,
but there are ways to mitigate some of those direct shots to some of these
neighborhood locations.
Lakey: Councilman Rountree, there is a commitment to do that. What I want to be
careful of is making specific promises that this will work, we will do that and we will do
this. There is a commitment to make an effort and implement those things that are
reasonable that -- that will work that will help mitigate the sound impacts. I can't specify
Meridian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 24 of 75
what those would be. I threw out some potential examples, but there is a commitment
to follow through with that and implement those that we can reasonably do.
Rountree: And would your client be working with -- I think it was Bionomics who did
your noise analysis for looking at the potential impact of some of those aspects and
activities?
Lakey: We can work with them. They provided some suggestions in their noise
studies, so we can consult with them in our efforts, yes.
Rountree: Thank you.
Zaremba: Any other questions from Council? Thank you very much.
Lakey: Thank you, President Zaremba.
Zaremba: I'm sorry. Before you leave any questions from staff?
Canning: No, sir.
Zaremba: Discussion or comments. Okay. Thank you, sir.
Lakey: Thank you.
Zaremba: Or a motion to close the public hearing?
Bird: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, regarding the testimony by the applicant at the Planning and Zoning
hearing, did you take it as an exception to not have backups or did you take it as a
neighborhood took it as being all the time?
Canning: President Zaremba, Council Member Bird, I was not present at the Planning
and Zoning Commission, but I did review all the minutes and it was clear to see that the
-- that the way it was stated that the applicant -- or that the neighbors could have clearly
understood it to be that there was never going to be back up beepers. But if you read it
with the mind set of the applicant in that they were talking about nighttime operations, it
was pretty clear as well. I mean it was definitely one of those things that just --
depending on what perspective you had going into it you could read it either way and
that's why I didn't feel comfortable changing or approving the modification.
Bird: Okay. I understand that.
Canning: I did not feel there was deceit in the presentation that was given
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 25 of 75
Bird: Okay. Thank you.
Zaremba: Actually, I would ask another question of Mr. Lakey if I could. I'm sorry.
Lakey: I'll do my best to answer, unless Mr. Russell is better and I will refer to him
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. Somebody made the observation that in spite of the fact
that the current CUP is for 18 months, that this may actually go on for like five years.
The A, B and C phases that you showed, are those all going to be complete within this
18 month period or are there more phases later?
Lakey: President Zaremba, that's a good question. We started out with an application
for three years, expecting to be able to complete the project and reclaim it in three
years. In discussions as staff evaluated and went through the application, they were
more comfortable in putting an approval on for 18 months, so I'm not sure if we can
excavate all of this property within that 18 month period. Our plan is after the 18
months is to come back and ask for some additional time. The current approval
requires that it be completed in 18 months, but I'm not sure it can be done within that
time. We were looking more at the three years. We are required to complete it as per
the current application, so we have to come forward with a new application for an
extension. But that's -- we haven't talked about five years, it was an initial three years
we were looking at.
Zaremba: Thank you. Appreciate that
Lakey: You're welcome.
Zaremba: Council?
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move that we close the public hearing on Item 7-A.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in
favor say aye. Any opposed? The hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 26 of 75
Hoaglun: It was referenced that chickens and roosters -- I'd much be rather handling
chickens and roosters. Which we did. You can have chickens, you can't have a
rooster. Because of the noise. But anyway. These are the most difficult decisions to
make I think that come before City Council. Issues of noise, neighbors not getting
along. Those are always the tough ones, because you have to decide winner-loser,
when, really, you want it to work out that we can find a common ground to make things
work. As was stated earlier, this issue is about the beepers. It's not about the mining
operation, it's not about the crushing operation, it's just about the beepers. And that is
what we have before us tonight. And I don't envy the neighbors who have to live there
and put up with that operation. It would get tiresome at times. But the issue of the
beeper, narrowing down to that as I look at it --and as I have questions and, then, trying
to get the answers from people on is there certain times that it's more prevalent than
others, what has occurred now that the beepers have been turned down and it appears
to me that with the beepers turned down that the noise has greatly reduced and the
impact has been greatly reduced. It's not to say the operation as a whole is not
burdensome on the folks there in terms of dust and noise of trucks and crushers, but in
terms of the beeper, it is something that they have done to make it more liveable and
what more can we ask of the applicant, you know, I -- I wanted to find out were there
particular hours, was it the 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. that was most difficult when people
are home, getting ready for work, what have you. I didn't hear that, so I don't see a
need to say, okay, we are going to assign people, make them from this time period to
another time period to have -- to have people out there, because there is a worker
safety issue, heavy equipment and having workers walking around, especially during
certain times of the year when it's dark, even with flashlights and everything, it's -- it is a
safety risk. In weighing all that and looking at the beepers and beepers only, I would
move that we allow the use of audible warning devices for the approved gravel mining
operation at the Southridge Subdivision.
Bird: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Would the maker of the motion include
that those audible devices be turned to the lowest OSHA approved setting?
Hoaglun: Mr. Chairman, I would, with the comment -- there is one thought that if it's
found not to be in compliance with OSHA, I -- and it gets turned back up -- but that's a
whole different motion. What do we do then? But, yes, I would include that they be
turned to the lowest level allowed by OSHA in their operation.
Zaremba: My discussion on that would be that we can't make any condition that's
illegal. So, if OSHA comes along and says you have got to turn them up, it doesn't
make any difference what we say. So, I appreciate the amendment. Does the second
agree?
Bird: I agree.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 27 of 75
Zaremba: Okay.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: You haven't opened it up for discussion, but a couple points. One, the
characterization of the noise increase by three decibels is -- is a slight increase and, in
fact, that's probably true to the human ear in terms noise energy, but in terms of noise in
convenience, that instantaneous increase is something that's irritating and I fully
appreciate what the residents said. I know it's irritating. It doesn't necessarily exceed
any standard, it doesn't exceed any particular criteria either in the city or the county, but
it is a nuisance. In fact, an increase of three decibels does equate to a doubling of the
sound energy. I would liken that to a very simple analogy that if I had two alarm clocks
sitting here and this one was ringing and it was ringing at 70 decibels and I turn this one
on and it was ringing at 70 decibels, you would not hear 140 decibels, you would hear
73 decibels. So, it, in fact, may not be perceptible sitting there, but if you're at a
distance and you're not used the hearing those alarm clocks and if it's an alarm clock
and an air horn, you're going to hear the air horn, even though it might be at the same
energy level. So, I understand that inconvenience. So, your concern is not going
unheard. I have, however, heard the discussion and the constraints that we are under
this evening with respect to the beepers -- I have heard that the beepers have been
turned down and will stay down with the blessing of OSHA or will be turned up at the
demand of OSHA, but I did hear a commitment on the part of the applicant that they
would attempt to and work out arrangements with their operations in such a way as to
orient the noise or possibly move material that would provide some buffering, if not
some -- obviously it's not going to be complete, but that's -- that's simply not possible.
But putting some solid surface between the residents and the operation or orienting
those operations in such a way as they -- noise is deflected away, as opposed to
amplified by the large mountain of gravel and sand should provide some relief. I just
wanted that said and I also wanted to ask the maker of the motion if he would include in
this motion the commitment on the part of the applicant as stated here this evening and
that that be part of the motion and part of the action that we might take.
Hoaglun: Yes, Mr. President, I'd amend my motion to include that. Thank you,
Councilman Rountree.
Zaremba: Second agrees?
Bird: Second agrees.
Zaremba: Okay. Any further discussion? We have a motion and a second on the floor.
Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Meridian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 28 of 75
Zaremba: All ayes. That motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: Thank you all very much for your testimony and for coming this evening. We
are hoping this project goes swiftly and can be done on time. All right. That wraps up
Item 7-A.
B. Public Hearing: VAC 11-001 Jayker by SWG Brighton, LLC
Located North Side of Chinden Boulevard, East of N. Tree
Farm Way Request: Vacate a Portion of the Plat (Lots 1; 8-15,
Block 15 & Lots 1-32 Block 16) and the Associated Public
Utility Easements Platted with Jayker Subdivision No. 1
Zaremba: We are now onto Item 7-B, which is also a public hearing. This is VAC 11-
001 and I will open the public hearing on that. It is Jayker by SWG Brighton, LLC. And
we will begin with the staff report.
Parsons: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. The application before
you tonight is for a vacation. It includes two requests before you this evening. Before I
get into that, the property is located on the north side of Chinden Boulevard just east of
North Tree Farm Way. The outlined portion here in front of you shows what's actually
being vacated tonight -- a portion of it anyways. And I will move on to the application.
So, the request again includes two -- one would be vacating the recorded plat -- or
recorded lots within this plat and also the associated easements with those lots. What
you see highlighted in pink before you represent the lots and the common lots that are
an easement that are proposed to be vacated as well. Later on this evening you will be
acting on a final plat to basically replat what hopefully is being vacated this evening. I
would make a motion again this vacation is needed to proceed so the applicant can
proceed with the new final plat and, again, that will be before you this evening. You can
see the portion in the black that's on the right-hand side of your screen -- is what is to
remain intact with the new plats around this. Also -- excuse me. I did want to make
mention that the applicant is working with Public Works Department on the new sewer
easements. That exhibit was attached to the staff report. It's my understanding that
Public Works has approved those realignments and that those would happen on a case-
by-case, lot-by-lot basis and so they are in support of the vacation application as well.
We have also received the necessary relinquishment letters from the appropriate
service providers. They are in support of the vacation as well. And so based on the
fact that we will be getting new easements with the new plat, the sewer lines will be
rerouted on a lot-by-lot basis. And the fact that Public Works had to approve that sewer
plan. Staff is recommending approval of the vacation. The applicant has provided
some written testimony on the application. They are in agreement with staff's
recommendation. To staffs knowledge there aren't any other outstanding issues before
you this evening and I would be happy to answer any additional questions you may
have.
Meridian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 29 of 75
Zaremba: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions?
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Either Bill or Bill. Either side. Help me understand the process here. We
have -- we have had a draft plat --
Parsons: Mr. President, Councilman Rountree, we have a recorded final plat.
Rountree: We have a recorded final plat.
Parsons: Correct.
Rountree: So, we are looking at abandoning the final plat and, then, looking at placing
another final plat or are we going to be looking at abandoning a final plat and looking at
a draft plat?
Parsons: Councilman Rountree, we will be looking at -- we will be abandoning a final
plat and looking at a new final plat, not a draft plat. And the reason why we are
proceeding this way -- if I can give you some of the background behind the discussions
with the applicant, is primarily that the applicant wanted to reconfigure the lots. At first
they wanted to process the lot configuration with property boundary adjustments. In
order to do that they would have had to vacate those easements regardless and, then,
staff would have had to have processed multiple property boundary adjustments, so it's,
basically, the Planning Department's recommendation that they just come in, vacate
that portion of the plat that they want to resubdivide in final plat, that way we can
accomplish two birds with one stone. Essentially get a new plat, remove the
easements, and get the easements back in place with a new final plat subject to new
conditions of approval with the new final plat.
Rountree: I guess my question is the new final plat will have never been subject -- I just
answered my question. But there has never been a preliminary plat or a draft plat
subject to public hearing.
Parsons: Councilman Rountree, the project was preliminary platted with the Jayker
Subdivision, so there was originally a preliminary plat, you're correct, and then, they
came in with phase one as a final plat. The kind of unique situation here is they had a
recorded plat. The UDC doesn't adequately address how to process a final plat when
you already have a recorded plat. So, those are some of the discussions that we want
to have with the final plat in decision before you this evening.
Rountree: Okay. And that's -- I asked the question not that make this last any longer
than it need to, I just don't want to have to see it again, because we didn't do something
right.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 30 of 75
Canning: Correct. Councilman Rountree, the final plat that you will see after this
application is in substantial compliance with the approved preliminary plat.
Rountree: Okay.
Canning: You don't need to see another preliminary plat.
Rountree: The connection's been made.
Canning: And perhaps for some of the Council Members that aren't aware of it, plats
never go away, unless they are vacated. So, even if we processed all the lot line
adjustments, the records for somebody's property might read, you know, the east ten
feet of Lot 5 and the north 15 feet of Lot 25 and the east -- I mean it would just be very
awkward. So, that is why we have proposed this vacation of the recorded plat and,
then, you will have a new final plat to look at tonight.
Rountree: That actually makes sense to me.
Canning: Okay.
Zaremba: Any other questions? Okay. This is the applicant's time to come forward
and, again, as with other public hearings the applicant will have 15 minutes and, then,
other people who have signed up or wish to speak will have three minutes each, then,
the applicant will get five minutes to respond. Will you, please, state your name and
address for the record.
Wardle: Yes. Mr. President, Council Members, Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation.
12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. Excuse me. If I can only take a minute and a half.
Bird: We will let you.
Zaremba: Wonderful.
Wardle: Staff has done a good job of both addressing the issue so that there is a lot of
clarity when we come out with the second application and this package, but it's also an
item that we took before the Ada County Highway District, because we already have
recorded streets. We took it to the county surveyor, who has to approve all lot issues
and subdivisions and it was concluded by all that this was the appropriate means to do
this. The streets don't change. The common driveway locations that are noted on that
original recorded plat do not change. What really is changing are some of the very
unique and somewhat irregular lot lines on primarily the quad lots that are served by
those common drives. Most of the other lots stay, essentially, the same. We, in fact,
are vacating 39 residential lots and we will re-record 38 residential lots. So, we have
actually lost one in the process. Be happy to answer questions on this one or wait until
you take the second application, but we support staff's recommendation.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 31 of 75
Zaremba: Thank you. Questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you very much. We do have two people who have signed
up and as I call your name if you would come forward if you wish. Linda Lazaris. I don't
see anybody moving. Oh, here she comes. And would you, please, state your name
and address for the record.
Lazaris: Certainly. Linda Lazaris and I live at 9948 West Targee Street in Boise and
my brother and I own the West Wing Estates property that is to the east of the plat that
they are talking about. The only concern that we have is we just wanted to make sure is
with the -- the vacation and the changes to the proposed plat that the issues in the
development agreement that were initially stated for our access into their streets, their
stub streets, is not changed at all. So, I just wanted to make sure that that stays the
same. I think he answered my question when he said the streets don't change, but I
just would like it to be on the record that those stub streets that were stated in the
development agreement are still in place.
Zaremba: We will have him specifically reconfirm that.
Lazaris: Okay. Thank you.
Zaremba: Thank you. Any questions? Okay. Gary Henkel.
Henkel: Good evening, Council Members. Gary Henkel. 9109 Burnett Street, Boise,
Idaho.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Henkel: As my sister stated, we are just concerned about the -- maintaining those stub
streets, keeping those intact that were originally proposed in the -- in the original
agreement there, so --
Zaremba: Great. Thank you.
Henkel: Thank you.
Zaremba: Any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Zaremba: All right. Those are the people who have signed up. Anybody else care to
the speak or testify on the matter? All right. Mr. Wardle, would you return, please. And
state your name and address for the record.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 32 of 75
Wardle: Mike Wardle. 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. With regard to the
comment made, there is no change. There will be stubs provided. This property
actually does not yet abut that of --corner to the commentors and in the preliminary plat
that this Council approved in September of last year for the remainder of that property,
stubs were provided and they will continue.
Zaremba: Great. Thank you. Any other questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Zaremba: Any questions or discussion from staff?
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close the public hearing on Item 7-B.
Bird: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All in favor say
aye. Any opposed? That carries unanimously.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 7-B VAC 11-001.
Bird: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: All ayes. Motion carries unanimously.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
C. FP 11-005 Spurwing Orchard by SWG Brighton, LLC Located
North Side of Chinden Boulevard; East of N. Tree Farm Way
Meridian Ciry Council
June 7, 2011
Page 33 of 75
Request: Final Plat Approval for 38 Residential Building Lots
and Four (4) Common Lots on 12.98 Acres in an R-15 Zoning
District
Zaremba: Next item on our agenda, Item C, is final plat 11-005, Spurwing Orchard by
SWG Brighton, LLC, and we will begin again with the staff report.
Parsons: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. Here is the plat that I
alluded to, Mr. Rountree. As the applicant stated, the applicant is reducing the number
of lots from 39 to 38, but they are planning four additional comment lots. The circles
that you see before you here represent the quad lots and those are primarily the reason
for the reconfiguration to realign those curb cuts. The open space for the subdivision
will also diminish slightly, approximately 7,575 square feet. But overall the project still
provides 38 percent open space, so it far exceeds what the UDC requires as far as a
ten percent requirement. The request for you tonight, as I mentioned earlier in my
previous presentation, there are some new caveats here that we need Council to act on
tonight and I will go into those real briefly. I will go into more specifics with you now.
The first has to do with the circular driveway that the applicant is proposing. On the
graphic before you here I have it highlighted in red. The applicant is, again, proposing a
circular driveway. North Jaykers Road along that northern boundary is a future collector
street or is designated a collect street and in the UDC that requires Council waiver to
allow access to that roadway. Keep in mind in the staff report we made some analysis
that this is not necessarily a direct lot access for those lots. If you look to the east there,
if you can see my cursor here, you could see that the lots actually front on a local street.
So, those common driveways, it's staff's opinion that this common driveway is merely
acting as a circular driveway, not direct lot access for these parcels. So, it's our
recommendation that Council approve that curb cut or that circular common driveway.
I'd also point out that ACHD has also provided comments or a-mail -- or the applicant
has provided comments from ACHD and they are supportive of that as well. The next
issue has to do with the expiration date and I think Councilman hit this nail right on the
head. We don't necessarily -- as Mrs. Canning's pointed out, the new final plat
conforms -- substantially conforms with the preliminary plat. However, we have a
recorded final plat, so under the UDC that plat's recorded, the expiration dates have
been satisfied per the UDC. Now, the applicant's coming back, vacating recorded lots.
However, it's not necessarily tied to the expiration dates of approval of that previous
preliminary plat. So, what staff is recommending tonight is that if Council recommends
approval of the final plat this evening, that the new final plat that you're acting on be
subject to tonight's hearing date recommendation. So, in our recommendation staff is --
if it's approved staff is recommending that the 24 month time period starts from tonight's
action. So, basically, the applicant would have until June 7th, 2013, to receive city
engineer's signature on the plat. Staff did receive written testimony from the applicant.
They did provide some testimony in regards to one condition of approval and that that
condition number four, bullet number one, which staff has recommended that they
provide a five foot interior lot line public utility easement. The applicant has proposed
some separate language. They want to have flexbility to develop some of those quad
lots with attached product. Staff is supportive of their language and, basically, all we
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 34 of 75
are recommending Council to do this evening is add to that condition as determined by
city engineer. I have it referenced in your hearing outline this evening. Because
attached product is also proposed, staff is recommending an additional condition or
approval with the final plat that basically states prior to the issuance of a building permit
any future attached homes shall obtain CZC and design review approval from the
Planning Department. So, we are recommending that in addition to what the applicant
would like to change. So, to really quickly summarize what staff is asking for -- no really
outstanding issues before you this evening, but just to summarize what actions we need
from you, one is we need you to clarify that circular driveway to North Jaykers Way,
modify the condition as proposed by the applicant, and, then, also if you wouldn't mind
including in your motion that that expiration date starts from the date of Council's action,
which would be this evening. To staffs knowledge there aren't any other additional
outstanding issues before you this evening. Again, staff is recommending approval of
the final plat. This concludes my presentation. I would be happy to answer any
questions you may.
Zaremba: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Would you explain the -- or maybe the applicant can, the --the circular drive
on Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 it looks like. Pretty small scale. It almost appears to me that Lots
2 and 3 would have a circular drive and four and five would not or would they all be part
of a circular roadway through there and what kinds of provisions would they have in
their CC&Rs to handle neighbor disputes, because I can see all kinds of fun things
happening there. So, maybe the applicant can answer that.
Zaremba: Did staff wish to offer a suggestion first? If not, we will ask Mr. Wardle to
come forward. And, please, state you name and address for the record.
Wardle: Mike Wardle, 1201 West Explorer Drive. Council Member Rountree, this
particular series of four lots basically is the same as if you look just immediately to the
south of those four you will see two of the quad lot sets. All of those lots are served by
a common drive and so there is a maintenance and operation requirement that will tie
each of those four to their unique situation. Now, the one to the north that you're citing
specifically, that common drive currently comes in from -- oh, I haven't memorized the
name of the street. Lonicera Way. And up until now, then, they all had to come back
out that direction, but it just appeared that there would be better circulation. Nobody will
be backing into the street, but they will be able to pull out of their individual lots and they
can go either way. They can either come in through that new curb cut or they can come
in from the other direction and, then, depart. Again, this was worked out with ACHD
and because it is not a direct lot conflict with that collector street it was not deemed an
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 35 of 75
issue. So, this is what -- this was not unique to these four lots only. It's the same that
applies to all of the quads and provisions are made for that kind of a -- I suppose
dispute resolution that you cited.
Rountree: What kind of widths are we talking about?
Wardle: The width of the --
Rountree: Particularly as you get into lots -- access for Lot 2 and Lot 3.
Wardle: If you're talking about the width of the drive --
Rountree: Please.
Wardle: Twenty feet. Which is fire department regulation.
Rountree: Okay. Okay.
Wardle: And actually already in place. If you were out there today you would find
them --
Rountree: I can't do that. Sorry. I would love to be able to do that, but
Wardle: If you have ever driven through that project, Mr. -- President -- Councilman
Rountree, you would find that those common drives actually were constructed with the
original project and they don't change. I mean they are not changing location or utility
access or anything of that nature. It's just some of the lots at the back were somewhat
interestingly shaped. Be happy to answer more questions if you have them, but just to
note for the record, we have worked with staff in proposing some language change that
is actually already within the code for some discretion by the city engineer on easement
requirements and we do concur with the proposed additional conditions for the CZC and
design review, which we understand would be at the administrative level.
Zaremba: Thank you. Any other questions?
Rountree: Mr. Chair?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: You indicated the streets and whatnot are already in and apparently some of
the drives. Will you be, as part of the redevelopment and replatting of this, have to --
and in those cases when you do have to change the stub outs for sewer and water?
Wardle: Mr. President and Council Member Rountree, actually, the stubs -- the sewer
stubs that go into those common drives or those quad lot areas do not change.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 36 of 75
Rountree: Okay.
Wardle: We have only had to add a couple of sewer stubs where we reconfigured some
of the lots that were not of that character, just because they did not fit a couple of the
new lot lines. So, there is only several of those.
Rountree: Okay. And you will be doing that?
Wardle: Pardon?
Rountree: You will be doing that?
Wardle: That is correct.
Rountree: Okay.
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun:
Hoaglun: Mr. Wardle, since we are on a new final plat for the record, as you indicated
earlier that there is no change in the street design. The stub streets remain where they
are and there is no changes in that; is that correct?
Wardle: Council Member Hoaglun, yes, that is correct.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Wardle: Uh-huh.
Zaremba: Thank you very much.
Wardle: Thank you.
Zaremba: Gentlemen, this is not a public hearing, but we do need to take action.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 7-C, final plat 11-005, with staff comments with
respect to that curb cut on North Jayker Way. Condition No. 4, on bullet one, adding
the language as stated by staff. And including an expiration date of the final plat of
June 7th, 2013.
Hoaglun: Second.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 37 of 75
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: All ayes. Motion carries unanimously.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
D. MFP 11-001 Gateway Marketplace No. 2 by The Land Group
Located Southeast Corner of E. Ustick Road and N. Eagle
Road Request: Approval to Remove the 10-Foot Wide
Landscape Easement Platted Along the Eastern Boundary and
Conditioned with Gateway Marketplace Subdivision No. 2 (File
#FP 07-020)
Zaremba: Item D is MFP 11-001, Gateway Market Place No. 2 by The Land Group.
And we will start with the staff report.
Parsons: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. The next application
before you is a final plat modification. The subject site consists of 17.34 acres, is zoned
C-G and is located on the southeast corner of South Eagle Road. This final plat came
before you in 2007. As a condition of that final plat the applicant was to depict a --
basically alandscape -- ten foot landscape easement along the eastern boundary and
so now the applicant is moving forward with site development. There is a future grocery
store planned for the site, which should happen very quickly and so, basically, what I
have done with this exhibit here I have referenced what the easement is or the depiction
is on the final plat and, then, the condition itself just basically depicts that easement. I
would point out to Council that the UDC does not require any land use buffers between
commercially zoned property, so the property to the east of this subdivision is also
zoned C-G, so there is no conflict there. And, then, also the UDC doesn't -- the
applicant isn't necessarily wanting to exclude their requirement for that buffer. At a
minimum the UDC requires a five foot buffer. Here is what the applicant is -- more than
likely will propose with their CZC and design review application. This is that buffer that
we are talking about, particularly where that easement is located right now -- or
depicted. Typically with final platting we don't require an actual landscape easement, it's
just typically a buffer depicted on the plat. So, somehow that easement was also
referenced incorrectly on the plat.. So, that's another reason to basically clean up this
issue as well. So, what you see here is you can see -- in this depiction here, you can
see where the supermarket is planned and, then, along the eastern boundary you can
see the loading docks and, then, that buffer. So, the application isn't necessarily
wanting the minimum, at this point they basically want to narrow it down to eight feet,
basically, where the loading dock is and, then, transition it wider as they meet the drive
aisles to the north and south of the development. The reason why the rider there is
there is future connection plans for the uni -- subdivision to the east and as part of that
requirement that was to be a private street there. So, I think the intent is to blend in with
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 38 of 75
their landscape buffers to the development to the east, so that's why they are keeping it
wider. The other reasons for the width is there is substantial amount of easements in
that area. That precludes the planting of trees in that easement, particularly an
irrigation easement. So, in order to meet the intent of the ordinance, the applicant is
leaving a wider buffer so that the trees will be on the periphery of that easement and,
then, that would allow them to narrow it down to that eight feet and do shrubs and
ornament there. The applicant -- I did receive written testimony from the applicant.
They are in agreement with staff's recommendation. So, basically, staff is
recommending approval of the final plat modification. Basically, one, to strike that
condition of approval, which specifically can site specific condition number 11 on the
final plat and, then, also the applicant will have to work with the Ada county assessor's
office to remove that depiction from the plat. To staffs knowledge there is no other
outstanding issue before you this evening. This concludes my presentation. I will be
happen to answer any additional questions you may have.
Zaremba: Thank you, Bill. Any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none, Mr. President.
Zaremba: Mr. Bird, were you saying, yes, you have a question?
Bird: No. I have none, Mr. President.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. In that case, if the applicant has anything to comment,
please, come forward. And, as always, state your name and address for the record.
Thompson: President Zaremba, Members of the Council, Tamara Thompson.
Landmark Development Group. 2462 Sunshine Drive in Boise. I'm here representing
the landowner and I think Bill covered everything very well, so I don't want to just
reiterate what he said, I'll just confirm that there will be a landscape buffer on that east
property line, it just needs to have some -- it doesn't need to be the ten feet in all areas,
but it is -- it will go no smaller than eight feet and it's 18 to 21 feet in other areas. I will
stand for questions if you have any.
Zaremba: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Zaremba: We have none. Thank you. Again, this is not a public hearing, but we do
need to take action.
Bird: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 39 of 75
Zaremba: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve MFP 11-001 with staff and applicant comments.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: That carries unanimously.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: We have been in one meeting or another since 5:30 this evening and I'm
going to take the acting Mayor's prerogative of declaring a recess. We will reconvene at
five minutes after 9:00.
Recess: (8:55 p.m. to 9:05 p.m.)
Item 8: Department Reports
A. Planning Department: Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program Year 2011 (PY2011) Pre-Draft Discussion
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. We will reconvene the City Council meeting for June
7th. It is five minutes after 9:00 and I appreciate everybody taking a break and coming
back on time. We are onto Item 8, Department Reports, and we will go to Item A,
Planning Department.
den Hartog: Thank you, Council President Zaremba, Councilmen. We are here tonight
to talk about the Community Development Block Grant, the 2011 annual action plan.
We are in the pre-draft prioritization stage. We have a number of applications submitted
during our process from starting the end of April through May. So, I'd like to go through
a little bit about what we have been through and what we have done and what the
recommendations are this evening. We are looking for either concurrence on our
recommendation or direction otherwise if the Council has additional input. We will be
coming back in two weeks on the 21st with the draft annual action plan based on the
information that we move forward from this evening. For this coming program year we
are -- our estimate is 230,709 dollars for our entitlement amount. This is a 16 and a half
percent decrease from last year. If you were aware of the Congressional budget
hearings for fiscal year'11 they did decrease the overall CDBG funding. This decrease
was based on our highest year -- this past year was our highest allocation of
approximately 274,000. As always public services are capped at 15 percent of the
allocation and our administration costs are capped at 20 percent. We had a workshop
Meridian Cily Council
June 7, 2011
Page 40 of 75
at the end of April and invited past subrecipients and potential future subrecipients to
come to the city, hear about our programs, and see how they might be eligible to apply
and submit projects. People submitted applications in June -- or, excuse me, in May
and we will move forward with an internal city working group to rank and score those
applications. Projects were scored on the goals and outcomes, the need that was
proposed to be addressed, have the organization plan to carry out the project, the
capacity of the organization to carry out the project and how the project did or did not
meet the goals or -- and objectives of the city's consolidated plan. We are moving into
the fifth year of our consolidated plan. It is a five year plan. So, based on the
recommendations we have a number of goals and objectives that we have achieved
over the last four years and some that we are still looking to achieve during this last
year of our plan. We have five applications submitted for the public service category.
The total funding for the applications that were submitted was just over 98,000. 'The
available funding for program year 2011 is just over 34,000. The working group
recommended two applications for partial funding under this group. The first was to the
Meridian Food Bank. The group's recommended funding amount was 24,600. This
was a high priority need for the city work. We have worked with the Meridian Food
Bank in the past, they have the capacity to carry out the goals and objectives that they
clearly stated and they are filling a definite need within the community. The second one
that we are recommending for funding was the Boys and Girls Club, a scholarship
program for extended programs and recommending that funding amount at 10,000
dollars. Excuse me. The Boys and Girls Club program -- they offer a number of
different services before and after school and those are outside of the regular programs
that they provide and these are additional programs that are for a fee. So, that money
towards scholarships for kids who perhaps can pay the annual fee to the club, but can't
afford to pay for the additional programs at the club. The other applications that we
received were the foreclosure prevention and innovation program. This was submitted
by Neighborhood Housing Services. The funding request was for just over 15,000
dollars and that would have gone to support a staff person and Neighborhood Housing
or a partial staff person at Neighborhood Housing Services to go forward with that
program. The other one that we did not recommend -- we had two others that we did
not recommend funding for. The first was the Catch, Incorporated, and that's the
charitable assistance to community homeless. Some of you may be familiar with this
program. Currently it started with the city of Boise. It's operating within the city of Boise
and there is a Catch of Canyon county. The program is rapidly housing of homeless
persons. They work in coordination with the faith based community. Those churches
pay for rental assistance up to six months. What Catch does is they provide intensive --
intensive social services to connect people to the things that they need within the
community. Part of -- or the funding that they were requesting goes for apart-time staff
person. Catch has been working with the Meridian School District. At this time we
didn't feel that their capacity was to the level that we could move forward with it this
year. We certainly understand the need and why they made the request this year and
there definitely is a need and we probably will continue to explore that with them. They
are here this evening to perhaps talk with you further about their program and some of
the things that they do. Excuse me. The last one in the public service applications was
the Meridian Senior Center. They submitted an application for computers and computer
.Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 41 of 75
classes at the new facility. The funding request was for just over 3,100 dollars. The
primary -- two of the primary reasons this did not move high in the ranking was it didn't
meet a consolidated plan goal and if we purchased equipment with that grant dollars,
there is a great deal of tracking and staff time that has to go -- move forward for about
five years with that. So, that was one of the primary reasons -- thank you -- that we
didn't -- that that priority level wasn't higher for that particular application. Moving on to
the non -- nonpublic service applications. There were six applications submitted for a
total funding request of 310,000 dollars. Available funding for this program year was
150,000 dollars. The working group recommended five applications for funding at
varying funding levels. The first two you're familiar with, both Neighborhood Housing
Services and Ada County Housing Authority submitted for a down payment assistance
program, 20,000 dollars for down payment for Neighborhood Housing Services and
15,000 dollars for Ada County Housing Authority. The reason Ada County Housing
Authority's is less this year is we have 35,000 remaining from our current program year
and I know that they have been a little bit slower. They are definitely working to try to
expend those funds, but we definitely want to -- we had a great deal hanging out there if
they hadn't been able to move forward with those. The first one was the Meridian
Development Corporation facade improvement program. This is one we have tried
before and we are hoping to have some success with this time around. It is a goal in
our consolidated plan that we haven't yet been able to achieve, so it's one area that we
were hoping to achieve in our last year. The fourth one there was the Meridian Parks
and Recreation. This is the final segment in a pathway segment that we funded for a
number of years. This current year we were getting from -- it's the segment between
Pine and Fairview and it's this last remaining trunk that we were hoping to finish with
this year. And the last one is the Meridian Playground Project for the all abilities
playground. This is a cooperative project. There is folks from the Meridian Elementary
School and the Boys and Girls Club that have been working on this playground project
and we have the principal of Meridian Elementary here to answer any questions about
that, so he can kind of provide you with a little bit more information about what that is
about. We don't have a funding level recommend for this program yet. We are still
working through some questions and the school district has been very responsive in
those questions. One thing we did want to be clear about is that the program would be
open to the public. It is on school grounds, but it wouldn't be blocked off. So, it would
be open to the people in the neighborhood as well and not just during school hours.
And the last one was a project submitted by the Meridian Development Corporation for
a Nine Mile Creek flood plain feasibility study. And this study was to determine the
possibility of daylighting and new culverts and there is some additional things related to
the flood plain. Part of the reason this didn't move forward or move higher in the priority
ranking is -- has to do with how we fund projects through the block grant. If we have a
study it has to eventually result in an actual construction project and we don't get credit
from the federal government until we have a constructed and completed project. There
is a great deal of good that could come from this feasibility study, we just don't know
that the grant funding the study is the most appropriate forum to kick that off. So, what
we talked about with Meridian Development Corporation is if the study can be funded
some other way, not through the grant, that potentially some of the construction could
be funded by the grant dollars in the future. So, that's where that one fell, excuse me, in
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 42 of 75
the rankings. So, with that we do have a number of individuals from the different
organizations here to answer any additional questions or even just provide you with a
little bit more information. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Thank you.
Zaremba: Gentlemen, any questions of Lori?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none right now.
Zaremba: Okay. I would ask one of Mr. Nary. This is not a public hearing and we do
have a public hearing scheduled for two weeks from now on this very subject. Is it
appropriate to have applicants testify if other applicants are not here?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council
Zaremba: Is your microphone on?
Nary: It is now.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I guess I would ask Ms. den Hartog is the
intent of tonight for the Council to give direction for a draft and, then, have public
comments? Because it does seem a little awkward to have some applicants and not all
here to give testimony and, then, the Council to form some direction from that. It seems
more appropriate that, really, the dialogue should be between the Council and you and
if there is clarification, maybe that's something that the applicant could provide
clarification, not sort of as a pitch, but more as -- so the Council has some
understanding to, then, give you direction. Would that seem more appropriate?
den Hartog: Council President Zaremba, Mr. Nary, the applicants -- I have been in
communication with the applicants, they were aware of this item being on the agenda
this evening. If you have any specific questions I want to clarify what particular projects
are about. I think the applicants can answer any questions that you might'have. We do
have a public the hearing on the draft in two weeks, which will be formed based on what
happens this evening.
Zaremba: Okay. On that basis I'm willing to ask questions of any of the applicants.
Does anyone on the Council have questions? Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Just in looking at the nonpublic service applications and the recommended
funding levels and I understand Ada County Housing Authority -- Lori laid that out very
well. The all abilities playground, if someone was here to --
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 43 of 75
den Hartog: Yes.
Hoaglun: -- to respond to some questions I'd like that.
den Hartog: Council President Zaremba and Councilman Hoaglun, we do have
Principal Myers here. If he would come forward.
Myers: Good evening, Councilmen. Thank you for your time and, again, thank you for
your question.
Zaremba: Thank you. Could I ask you to state your name and address for the record?
Myers: I'm Marcus Myers, I'm the principal at Meridian Elementary School at 1035
Northwest 1st Street, right across the street. So, I do have -- and if it's appropriate for
me to hold it up this way in which to be able to do that. This is the architectural and
engineering representation of what we are looking at in regards to that. The property
itself -- if I can hold it up this way. I apologize. The property itself sitting here is the
Boys and Girls Club and, in fact, it's directly adjacent. We share a parking lot area here
with the Boys and Girls Club and this is the existing structure of Meridian Elementary
School here. The reason for the project and the purpose for grant writing it and for the
fund request in regards to that is there is a high number of needs for students with
mobility issues, disabilities, that includes wheelchair bound students, it includes blind
students, deaf and hearing impaired students, learning disabled students and within the
downtown area, especially those indicated by the -- by the grant area in which we can
apply for, that, basically, is the Meridian Elementary School boundary. It's also the
largest boundary in which the Boys and Girls Club serves. We send every day about
230 students over to the Boys and Girls Club and participate in the activities that the
club does offer and so we do have a strong partnership with the club. The idea for
project was in regards to that partnership with the club. We made it purposely adjacent
to the club, so that they could have access to that, not only during the school year, for
the before and after school programs and during the school day, but also during the
summer the Boys and Girls Club uses our facilities extensively during the summer and
we have a great partnership with them in regards to that and serve over -- I think the
last count was 250 students over the summertime. So, they would be able to use this
program as well. It would also increase the ability of the Boys and Girl's Club to be able
to offer services for students with disabilities. Currently the building in which they reside
doesn't necessarily offer that in a playground structure in the area, they are more than
welcome to use our playground, however, our playgrounds at Meridian Elementary are
not -- they are ADA compliant, but, however, they don't have things like -- you can see
the design of this is basically ramps for students on wheelchairs. That material itself is
soft enough so that students who aren't wheelchair bound, that do have mobility issues
can get canes and can actually crawl up and down these materials safely. This material
here indicated -- it is a wood chip ADA compliant material that you can get a wheelchair
across. However, it is also proposed that we use the rubber type flat material used in
our park down the street as well, so that wheelchairs can get there. This is a paved
area and a structure around, basically, for students in wheelchairs and it provides
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 44 of 75
sensory as well. There are bumps and dips and hills and valleys that are safe for
students in wheelchairs. Additionally the -- much thought was put into this with Breckon
Land Design who also designs other abilities playgrounds throughout -- I think
throughout the valley here and throughout Idaho. And so much thought was put into --
in regards to sensory areas and issues. Also you can see that it's designed in stages,
so that as funding is received that we can build within stages, so the request itself is not
one large immediate sum. The total bill for this is about 125,000 dollars. The team has
raised approximately 2,100 dollars in grant writing so far and, basically, we are looking
at developing this within stages and you can see it includes not just the playground, but
a barbecue and picnic areas for community events in combination with the Boys and
Girls Club and, then, also community block gardens, so the community can come in and
actually plant those -- you know, plant vegetables and fruits and those areas and, then,
also work with Boys and Girls Club over the summer in regards to having that ability and
to harvesting that and using it for events. Councilmen, any questions?
Zaremba: Questions?
Hoaglun: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Yes. You talked about phases. What are you looking at for first phase in
terms of cost and what do you want to achieve with that first phase?
Myers: Absolutely. So, our first stage would be the initial land design and
groundbreaking with that and, then, the first phase is this initial larger area structure that
you have -- that we see here in front and, then, the concrete pathway around. This
second phase is this second sensory area. This is a soft surface play area and it has
playground access areas that are sensory based, much like musical tones that students
can hear and, then, areas in which they can sensory and feel and manipulate objects
throughout the playground and it is all wheelchair accessible. So, phase one is the
larger phase. Phase two is right here and, then, phase three is the community garden
and barbecue picnic areas.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Myers: Councilmen, other questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Hoaglun: Just a quick comment. As an alumnus of Meridian Elementary, I -- this
project is intriguing, so something to take a look at.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 45 of 75
Myers: Thank you. And thank you for hearing this. It's a student comprised of about
percent free reduced students who, you know, the government deems about three out
of ever four students are considered impoverished by the federal government and so we
do what we can in regards to this and currently we serve over 120 students on -- who
do have some sort of a disability of one way or another and so it would impact them
greatly. So, Thank you.
Zaremba: I would say that the success of Adventure Island in Settlers Park would
certainly indicate the need for this and I appreciate your presentation. One drawback is
that when you present to the City Council we need to have a copy of that for the public
record. If you don't want to give up poster, do you by any chance have a digital copy
that you could a-mail to the clerk.
Myers: Absolutely. In fact, we have a website in which this is available and I can send
that directly as a pdf to the clerk.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. Lori -- oh, I'm sorry. Any other questions on other
subjects from the Council?
Hoaglun: If Lori could just -- back to the previous slide, I think that showed the other
applications that -- and my question on this for Lori was the fact that we are limited to 15
percent of the total budget and the two totals there, the 34,000, equals the 15 percent
or pretty close?
den Hartog: Correct.
Hoaglun: Thank you.
den Hartog: Council President Zaremba, if I may, I know we have in the audience a
representative from Catch, who may like to talk to you about what they have been
working towards in the city and perhaps some needs and if there is any questions that
arise in terms of how we rank that particular application I can answer that, but we have
someone here.
Zaremba: I think that would be interesting to hear, if you care to come forward. And,
again, please, state your name and address for the record.
Morris: Greg Morris. 3521 West Tulara Drive in Boise. Mr. President, Members of the
City Council, thank you for the opportunity to share briefly with you. I will try to keep my
comments very brief. I also have with me this evening the regional director of Health
and Welfare Mr. Ross Mason and Jeannie Buschine from the Meridian School District.
So, just real quickly I want to -- under the national goals of the CDBG program one of
the goals is to provide safe and sanitary housing and among the national objectives of
the CDBG program are to benefit low -- low to moderate income persons, aid in the
prevention or elimination of slums or blight, and meet an urgent need. What Catch does
is re-house homeless families with children. It's not just the general homeless person.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 46 of 75
We explicitly target -- exclusively target families with -- with school age children and in
the two years since we have had this ongoing dialogue with the City of Meridian -- in
fact, actually, one of my earliest meetings with Mayor de Weerd was in Orlando, Florida,
when Catch was receiving a national award from the National League of Cities and
CH2M Hill. Since that time Catch has been nationally recognized by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services and I could go on. As Lori mentioned, we --
we replicated the program in Canyon county thanks to support from the city of Caldwell
and the city of Nampa and as she also mentioned back in 2006 the Boise City mayor
and city council approved for actual funding this program through general fund and we
were able to rally the community around that. But in the two years since we began the
conversation the need in Meridian has exploded, especially that among homeless
families with children and the Meridian School District reported this last school year 425
homeless children and keep in mind that there are no emergency homeless shelters in
Meridian and so what Catch has proposed is to utilize as a primary referral agency the
Meridian School District to refer families directly. But in the city of Boise we receive
quite a few referrals from families with children who are living with in a homeless shelter
there, who homeless episode originated in Meridian. We also receive a lot of referrals
from the Salvation Army's home in Nampa, which also receives individuals and -- I'm
sorry -- families with children whose homeless episode had originated in Meridian. So,
the purpose of the application that we sent this year -- this was the first -- the first year
we have applied for CDBG funding -- was to -- was to really help get a program off the
ground here in Meridian and I actually met with members of the Mayor's staff last week,
so very short notice, but they requested that we get some firm letters of commitment
from the potential community partners that would be rallying their support around a
project if you chose to fund it and -- and I can tell you tomorrow morning at 10:00 o'clock
the Meridian School District is hosting a meeting, we have invited faith leaders from
over the valley -- I'm sorry. Well, exclusively Meridian faith leaders from congregations
here in the Meridian area. The United Way of Treasure Valley is posed and ready to
also help us. They were able to support the start-ups in both Boise and in Canyon
county and several local businesses. There is a lot of wonderful businesses here in the
Meridian area that when given an opportunity give back in this way they would step up.
So, our meeting is tomorrow and we are going to be asking for letters of commitment
before the public hearing, which will be in two weeks, as Lori mentioned. So, just real
quick, of the City of Meridian were to invest in Catch it would leverage almost double the
amount from the rest of the community. In the city of Boise I know for every dollar the
city invests we get almost three dollars back from the community in the form of
charitable contributions from local churches and businesses and individuals. If -- if not
this year we would not be able to get this program off the ground and begin helping
some of families with children. I do want to state real quick -- it just kind of occurred to
me tonight as I was watching the presentation earlier -- technically, if it's not too late, it
is possible that this application could fall under the nonpublic service applications. The
only thing that would need to be changed would be the applicant. Instead of Catch, Inc.,
we have a very close relationship with the Ada County Housing Authority. In fact, we
are in their building and they executive director is on our board. So, I know that they
have in the past expressed an interest in helping Catch any way they can. So, it's
probably too late in the game to change the applicant, but the rest of the application
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 47 of 75
would still hold true and the city of Boise is actually currently considering moving some
of their invested dollars to the housing authority to benefit the Catch program in an
indirect manner. So, that would be a possibility that maybe we can discuss at a staff
level later. And with that I want to really thank you for your consideration of this project.
We really feel it's an important one. I know that you all are considering a lot of amazing
projects and as it is, unfortunately, the case, most years you have a lot of great projects
and simply not enough funding to go around and we just appreciate your consideration.
As I mentioned, Ross Mason, the director of Health and Welfare is here this evening, if
you'd like to hear from him, as well as Jean Buschine real quick, just to share with you
the statistics from the Meridian School District.
Hoaglun: Mr. President, one quick question just so I'm on the same page, because
sometimes the definition of homeless may vary slightly from agency to agency,
depending. Could you give me the definition of homeless for your -- your organization?
Morris: Sure. And you're correct, there are -- and depending on whether you're talking
to HUD or Health and Human Services -- and maybe Jean would be able to answer the
question as it relates to the Meridian School District definition, which is the one -- but I
think the families that we are talking about are folks that are homeless without -- without
any other place to stay. I think their definition is a little bit -- a little bit broader, but for
our purposes -- I know in Boise and in Canyon county we exclusively work with families
that are currently living in shelters or living in their cars, if they are coming from a
referral agency, like the Department of Health and Welfare. But the reason that we
exclusively work with that is because we get a lot of calls from folks that are doubled up
or living precariously housed, but that -- because we have just limited resources we
want to make sure we are working with families that have exhausted all other resources,
so --
Hoaglun: Thank you.
Morris: You're welcome.
Zaremba: Thank you for the information and since you took the trouble to come I would
be happy to have you come up.
Mason: I will be brief. My name is Ross Mason, I'm regional director for the
Department of Health and Welfare, 1618 Linkershim -- and I do live in Meridian, even
though I work in Boise and Caldwell. In my role I see a lot of different things and we
offer a lot of services through the Department of Health and Welfare. We offer food
stamps for people who are hungry. We offer mental health services for the mentally ill.
Developmental disability services for those who are handicapped. Daycare for children
who might not have day care otherwise. We do not offer housing. It is a huge gap and
as I proceed in this -- in this position I find homelessness becoming a larger and larger
issue, with no easy answers and no central place to answer those -- those questions
and attack that problem. Catch is a wonderful program, I wholehearted support it. It
has community wide support in Boise and in Caldwell in Canyon county and that
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 48 of 75
support includes private business, churches, the Department of Health and Welfare,
obviously, and a variety of individuals as well. So, I would certainly urge the Council to
look carefully at funding for the program. It is a wondertul program, I wholeheartedly
support it. Its success rate in Canyon county is about 95 percent. We have helped
more than 40 families, 150 children, in just two years and this is a -- Canyon county was
a place where most people didn't really think there were a lot of homeless. In my
experience it's far worse than sometimes we like to acknowledge, sometimes we even
are aware of. So, whatever support you can provide is most gratefully welcomed and I
will stand for questions if you have any.
Zaremba: Thank you. Any questions?
Rountree: Mr. President. What -- you spoke of Canyon as being a pretty successful
program.
Mason: Yes, sir.
Rountree: How are they funded and to what level are they funded?
Mason: Well, I don't have the exact dollar numbers. I think Greg might. But the funding
comes from a variety of sources. There was a small amount of money that came from
the department in the form of case ,management for one of the staff at Catch. There
was funding -- Catch funding that came from Simplot and I think one of the banks -- I
believe Mountain West -- am I correct, Greg? And a couple of other companies. I don't
have those right in front of me. There was a -- there was some money from two
churches I believe. I can't -- I think it was the Mennonite church and one other one.
And Greg help me. Other funding sources?
Zaremba: You need to repeat what he said if you would, please.
Mason: There was a federal grant that came from -- housing grant out of the city of
Nampa. And we also, by the way, got I think 3,000 dollars from the city of Nampa to
assist in that regard. And, of course, there is a lot of in-kind services as well that are
provided by churches and individuals and companies. There are several apartment
firms that provide housing for our families and do so for free. So, basically, what it does
is it gives the families inside a house, an apartment, it gives them some permanency, it
gives the kids stability, and that makes them much more successful and, frankly, we
don't see them at our door at the Department of Health and Welfare after they enter the
Catch program.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Mason: You're welcome.
Canning: Councilman Zaremba?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 49 of 75
Zaremba: Yes.
Canning: May I -- oh, we have one other from Catch, don't we.
Zaremba: Yes. Please. This is very informative, so I appreciate the information.
Boschine: Okay. My name is Jeannie Boschine and I live at 668 North Gray Pebble
Way in Eagle and I supervise the school counselors and I am also the homeless grant
liaison. It is required by school districts to have a person dedicated to managing the
collection of data around homelessness and so I'm the individual. 1998 we identified 13
students in our school district that were homeless. We are not done yet. We will
probably be done tomorrow. But we have over 225 this year. Of course, we had fewer
students in 1998 than we do now. We have almost 35,000. So, it's about a little over
one percent of our students are homeless or experience homelessness during a school
year. You asked about the definition and that is a really good -- it is very different and
more generous than a HUD definition. So, it is -- when a student lacks a fixed adequate
or permanent nighttime residency and that could be they live in emergency or
transitional shelters, hotels, motels, trailer parks campgrounds, cars, public places or
they are doubled up with friends or relatives, but when we have people that are doubled
up we make sure that before we label them as homeless they have to be having no right
to live there and can be asked to leave at anytime. The numbers of students last year
that were in shelters were 23, hotels and motels 13, unsheltered or cars or
campgrounds ten, but the majority were doubled up and 258. But, again, they are very
precariously housed to be asked to leave and are often very mobile. They, you know,
rarely can stay a whole school year, which means that they have to either choose to
leave that school and be in a situation where they start all over again and have to
establish not only social, but academic goals and -- or we transport them, which is
another thing that we have been doing. So, that's where Greg and I connected is we
have had a lot of students live in shelters downtown Boise and we have been
transporting them back and hoping that they will get into the Catch program and we
have had some successfully in that program. Once they get into a shelter in Boise
Catch will look at them or they live in Nampa in a shelter. And, again, we have had one
family that actually got permanently housed. So, with that -- I don't know if that's
enough information, but I just want to also extend -- you know, I don't know if you have
time at 10:00 o'clock tomorrow to come to our school district, but we would love to have
you come and listen to the whole presentation. We have a lot of great community
partners. One of them Dan Clark from Valley Shepherd Church of the Nazarene. He's
a very good personal family friend. Very excited about this. I know that I spoke to a
minister at the Methodist church, also very excited about this program. I think our
community will get around -- you know, wrapped their arms around this and -- and I like
it for a lot of reasons, but I like the social worker piece, that this family is not just going
to be given money and no accountability or no help that got them into that situation and
so this is more than a solution, it is a change in their life and just have been so
impressed with the results from Boise and from Canyon county. So, with that -- I don't
know if you have any questions of me.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 50 of 75
Zaremba: Any further questions?
Hoaglun: No. That was very helpful forme. Thank you.
Rountree: Thank you.
den Hartog: Thank you. Director Canning. Thank you, President Zaremba, Members
of the Council. I wanted to just provide a little bit more information on how we select
some of our candidates and because our ward is so small our administration budget is
likewise very small and we moved the CDBG administrator to a part-time position, so
we could make sure we weren't exceeding those administrative funds. Part of our
concern with the Catch program is that administratively it would take a lot more time
than some of the others. So, I just wanted to offer the idea that if the Catch program is
something that the Council is -- wants to consider, it may be more appropriately funded
and just out and out easier to fund through the general plan, rather than through our
CDBG funds. For the amount they are asking it would just take a lot of administrative
time and effort. More than we have, quite honestly. Thank you.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Lori, the idea that Greg expressed in terms of the nonpublic service
application through Ada County Housing, is that something that we can explore and -- it
seems to me like that's a pretty reasonably approach.
den Hartog: Council President Zaremba and Councilman Rountree, I -- regardless of
the applicant, if we are considering funding of a staff person to perform the -- the social
services that they are looking for, I think it still would qualify as a public service. So, I
think it still falls under our cap. I'm happy to explore that opportunity with Greg and with
the Housing Authority a little bit more to see if there is a different way that we could
classify it. My initial thought would be we could not reclassify it as a nonpublic service.
Rountree: Well, I guess my question and desire would to see it explored. Let us know
-- and as we move through this through the public hearing process we can make the
decision on where we can use the limited funds.
den Hartog: Absolutely.
Zaremba: I do not recall from previous years or previous discussions that we have ever
supplied staff time. I have always been assuming that this was grant of money and
although we monitor their program to some extent to make sure that the money goes
where it was requested, I wasn't aware that we have ever supplied any staff time. So,
this would be unusual; is that correct?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 51 of 75
den Hartog: Council President Zaremba and Councilmen, that is correct and that was
one of the things that we took into consideration as a group when we were reviewing
the applications. It would -- it would be different than what we have done in years past
in terms of how we have provided assistance and how we have distributed the grant
funds. This would be a new direction and part of that is exactly what Anna had stated
that it does create additional administrative work both from our Finance Department and
for myself and so that was one of the considerations that we had just in terms of what
HUD requires in terms of tracking and time and all of that. So, it's possible, but it is
different than what we have done in the past. That's correct.
Zaremba: Thank you. Any other discussion? Consideration the whole list, any priority
changes for Lori to think about in the next two weeks or shuffling of amounts to
suggest? Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would just as soon wait until we have the public hearing to make up my mind,
see what the public has to say.
Zaremba: So, for the time being the list that she presents tonight is a good one to go
forward with and what we would discuss at the public hearing?
Bird: I think Mr. Rountree asked a question that -- or heard a follow up to that and I --
which lagree with there, so --
Rountree: I think in -- I think in general all of these are -- you know, they all tug at you
pretty hard and it's tough to make that decision and when you -- particularly the public
service application area, it's -- we are very familiar with several of these and they have
been extremely successful and we have seen a lot of positive results out of them. I can
see this one is -- it's been presented to us this evening and that's certainly one of those
that we -- we need to take a hard look at. We are a city known for -- for families and this
gets to the heart of that. One thing I would suggest that you all look at is given the
limited amount of money is there something less than the approximately 20,000 that can
still result in something and, then, I think as a Council if this is something that resonates
with us, that we follow up with the suggestion that Director Canning is -- can we see
something in the general fund to pursue this as well. So, I don't think we are done with
it at this point. At least I'm not. And I would suggest that you be here in two weeks and
-- and let us know.
den Hartog: Council President Zaremba, just one additional comment. With that
direction in the draft plan that I will present in two weeks, I will include all of the
applications that we received, not just the ones that we had initially recommended for
funding, so we will have the opportunity at that time, if you see fit, to shift around those
dollars if need be based on the testimony that we receive at that time. So, I'll include all
of them.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 52 of 75
Zaremba: Thank you. And your work leading up to this point has been massive and
very much appreciated, so thank you.
B. Planning Department: Continued from May 17, 2011: Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: MDA 11-003
Meridian Vision by Kevin McElroy Located at Northeast Corner
of N. Meridian Road and E. Carmel Drive Request: Amend the
Existing Development Agreement (Instrument No. 107067262)
to Include a New Site Plan and New Elevations
Zaremba: All right. Next item is Item B, which is also the Planning Department
regarding Meridian Vision MDA 11-003.
Canning: Thank you very much, sir. You may have noticed that one of your findings
was pulled from the Consent Agenda and put on as a -- essentially a department report
and here is why. You approved an amendment for a development agreement on April
26th for an updated site development plan and building elevations for Meridian Vision.
Following the hearing, but prior to approval of the findings the applicant notified staff it
was not financially feasible for them to build the elevations they presented to Council.
So, we struggled a little bit with what to do and we decided that the best option was to
hold the findings and give you an opportunity to look at the revised elevations that they
are proposing and make a decision based on those. So, they have submitted those
revised site plan and building elevations for review. They gave them to staff and it was
our determination that they weren't substantially consistent with what they -- what you
all approved. So, we are bringing them to you tonight to look at. So, the revisions to
the site plan consist of the elimination of the courtyard between the two buildings, so
you can see the courtyard. This is the approved site plan and this is the revised site
plan. So, there is the courtyard. And the elimination of two parking stalls on the east
side of the southern portion of the site and five stalls on the northern portion of the site
and I think you can see those pretty clearly outlined in red. The building elevations
have also been revised to reflect approximately a 50 percent reduction in the amount of
stone veneer on the face of the building and if you look at this -- if you look at these
elevations you will see the stone veneer is used as a wainscoting -- wainscoting on
almost every elevation on the original submittal and, then, it drops back to the corner
pieces on the new submittal. So, as I mentioned before, staff found that they do not
substantially comply with what you all approved the other day, but that's not the
question before you. The question we need to ask you is Council needs to determine if
the revisions are acceptable and should be included in the findings and subsequent
amended DA. If Council deems that the proposed changes are acceptable, staff has
prepared findings for approval at this hearing that include the revised plans and those
are the ones posted on the agenda. If Council deems the proposed changes are not
acceptable, staff has also prepared findings for approval at today's meeting that include
the original plans approved with the development agreement modification and the clerk
has those available. So, it would require an amendment to the agenda and action on
those revised findings. Another option, if you feel it's more appropriate, would be to
require a new public hearing for review of the proposed changes if you deem that
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 53 of 75
appropriate. So, we have given you a few options. This is an unusual situation. We
were trying to avoid approving findings and having them turn around and submit another
development agreement modification for your consideration. With that I will answer the
questions I'm sure you have.
Bird: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Thank you. Mr. Bird.
Bird: Anna, this is, basically, a new application, isn't it?
Canning: In many respects, yes.
Bird: I mean, you know, the -- the building elevations don't bother me that much, but the
site plan -- I mean they have changed -- they have taken out parking, they have taken
out -- you know. It's a complete different application and you got neighbors and stuff
around there -- I lean towards having a public hearing so people can give input if they
had -- if they have -- so desire.
Nary: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Was that Mr. Nary?
Nary: Yes.
Zaremba: Okay. Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. President, Mr. Bird, I -- before Mrs. Canning answers I was going to say that's
kind of the level we left with from the staff level. You had a public hearing, the site plan
that was approved was changed, so the applicant sort of kind of caused this pickle, but
they would -- they would prefer not to go and have another public hearing and I
understand why, but it was the staffs desire, both planning and my staff, that, really,
that's the Council's decision as to how significant a change you believe this is. I don't
believe we had public comment before, but it doesn't mean we wouldn't have public
comment if the site plan changes. How significant the site plan change is really
ultimately a decision by the Council. Here you have, as you have identified, Mr. Bird,
you have had changes in parking, you had changes in the layout of the property, you
have had changes in the building elevations. So, you know, staff has some ability to
exercise discretion up to a point and I think the planning staff and my staff felt this was a
point where, really, it's the Council's call and I had told the planner that one of the things
to advise the applicant was that it was the Council's decision. If they required another
public hearing, to make sure the public didn't have an issue, then, that's the process
they would have to follow and we would send it back for another public hearing. That
would delay it probably another month or so, but, again, if the concern is that the
public's input is going to come back later to say, well, gee, I didn't come to the Council,
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 54 of 75
because I thought it was going to look like this and, then, you approved something else,
I would have come and talked about that, that's certainly a legitimate concern, Mr. Bird.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I somewhat agree, I guess, in terms of it being a new project. From what I
see I'm concerned about the loss of parking. I'm not sure you can make what you have
there work with eliminating an additional four or five parking spots, particularly for what
might occur north of the proposed building site. I assume that's the outline that's
darkened and not dashed.
Canning: Yes, sir. I believe that's a proposed future building. So, they would have to
come in for a new CZC and provide parking for that facility when that was constructed.
And the hatched marked -- the hatched area you see -- must be getting close to 10:00
o'clock. I can't speak. Is across-access agreement to extend up towards the old Harts
building.
Rountree: Uh-huh. Yet we don't have a subdivision, we don't have separate lots here,
so it's all one development. A question for you, Anna, is that is the design that's
proposed, even though it's different than -- than what the applicant originally applied for,
is that consistent with our design guidelines? It seems to me it might be.
Canning: Council Member Zaremba, Council Member -- or President Zaremba. Sorry.
Council Member Rountree. Staff has not indicated that it is not, so I'm assuming that
they -- that they looked at that and reviewed it and that it is. My inclination would be
that it is. But I have not heard one way or the other specifically.
Rountree: And, then, as far as the open space requirement, they are proposing not to
have the plaza that would ultimately be between the buildings. Would it be possible to
show that as something that they would do in the future when the economy is better and
they would be developing that northern part of the lot? And to me that's something that
if that's the case we would want to have a public hearing to get that kind of information
on the record.
Canning: President Zaremba, Council Member Rountree, you certainly could keep that
within the development agreement and ask for it to be developed at a later phase.
believe that certainly the intent would be to build the parking later and I -- you could add
to the open space as well.
Zaremba: I was going to ask a similar question about the plaza and I agree with the
thought that maybe it could be attached to the second phase building as a requirement,
but a -- refresh my memory on the UDC. Is that -- or could it be a required amenity and
what -- what is the cutoff? It's something like five acres of property. When do we start
requiring amenities and is this a required amenity?
Meridian Ci[y Council
June 7, 2011
Page 55 of 75
Canning: Sir, we stopped requiring amenities in 2005. So, I'm almost positive this
annexation came through under the UDC. So, it would have been an offer made at the
time of annexation that was included in the development agreement. I'm pretty sure it
was not a planned development, but I don't have all the old files with me. I can look
really quickly. I do have something.
Hoaglun: Mr. President, while Anna is looking for those, my thoughts on this -- the
building elevations don't bother me. It appears that it's -- it's a matter of taste, not
whether it complies or not. It might look better with more stone, might look fine with --
with just the corners done. In looking at this and trying to think, from a neighbor's
perspective, the building itself has not moved that will be built. The parking lot is the
same location. It has not been adjusted to any property lines, closer or farther, except
for taking away the parking spot. And, then, there is an amenity out there between this
building and a future building that possibly could be required to be in there, but certainly
there will be landscaping of some sort out there. So, I guess I'm not of great heartburn
on -- on these changes, since they are not substantial of moving buildings around and
impacting site lines and property lines that -- that people might -- might have testified
about here previously. So, that's just my two cents on this.
Zaremba: So, here is another question and maybe it's for Mr. Nary. Can we considered
this an insignificant change, but add a couple new conditions tonight?
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, this -- this finding is for a modified
development agreement. So, yes, it depends. You can -- you can certainly in your
concern in whether or not how significant the changes are, can certainly have that
discussion with the applicant on other mitigating factors, but I guess I would caution you
that the more we do that the more it really sounds like another hearing and -- I mean if
it's -- again, it's your folks' discretion on how much is appropriate to change and how
much is inappropriate -- some of the dialogue I have heard is can you require the
courtyard as part of another phase or require the future parking as another phase.
That's certainly with a dialogue with the applicant, to, then, consider that that potentially,
then, is not a significant change, because it's going to look like it ultimately was
proposed, it's just not going to look like it right away, it's going to look like it's part of a
future development. That's probably the extent of what I would consider to be
negotiation, only because I think if you get much beyond when are you going to build
this and what's it going to look like ultimately, it's going to really sound more like another
public hearing is probably more appropriate to have that dialogue, but -- so, yes, you
can, not too much I guess would be the answer.
Zaremba: You actually did answer my question.
Rountree: Like a lawyer.
Nary: Waffle words I think was Mr. Rountree's --
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 56 of 75
Zaremba: Yeah. Are we at the point where we are -- can ask the applicant or do you
have more to say?
Canning: Oh, certainly. I was just going to say the application date is 2006 and it was
approved in 2007. So, it was under the unified development code and- amenities were
not required.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. Is the applicant here? I would ask a couple questions.
Canning: He's fallen asleep in the back of the room.
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
Hoaglun: Mr. President, the lights have gone out in the foyer, so --
Zaremba: I have noticed that. Yeah. Somebody is trying to close us up. And if you
would, please, state your name and address for the record, please.
McElroy: I'm Kevin McElroy and I practice at 1012 North Main Street here in Meridian.
Talking about the changes, essentially, it wasn't really so much a matter of strictly
economics, but the fact that I intend to subdivide the -- the two into two separate lots
and, then, sell the northern lot. -Part of the problem I felt was by doing so I would
encumber -- by doing too much development between the two buildings I would
encumber them and probably have to tear out a great deal of it anyway. The few
parking spots in question is on the north side, it would be in the new developed area,
they may not view that as being exactly what they wanted, they would tear it out
anyway, it would just be wasted money doing it. What the proposed -- or the new
proposal that we have given you more than meets the minimum parking requirements
for the size of the building. In fact, it more than met and the line that you see delineated
east to west is essentially where I would divide the property. So, I'm just trying to
develop my property as I see it and, then, sell the -- the area there. Of course we would
have a real cooperation between us, because we want to develop aunified -- you know,
if I'm going to sell to someone, I want to sell it to a business that will be complimentary,
you know, both physically so we can have good ingress and egress into the property.
But also the business -- maybe another doctor or dentist, something that would be
professional. But I didn't to encumber them with some of these improvements. The
plaza idea was a visual interest thing that we came up with initially, but the more I
looked at it it was like maybe that's not what they'd like to do and I want to do something
that would be coordinated between us. The plaza might just be torn out eventually
anyway. It wasn't a real advantage to develop it now and economically it's not an
advantage to me right now either. The -- that was essentially it. As far as the stone
work, I wanted to build a building that looked nice and, of course, the design element of
having different stone, a different construction materials, is to have a good looking
building. As I looked at this wainscoting on the bottom of it I was talking with my
architect about it and said, well, we are going to be putting planters up against the
building, in two or three years it's all going to be hidden. What's the use of building all
Meridian Ciry Council
June 7, 2011
Page 57 of 75
this good looking stone there and it's going to be covered by plantings. That's silly.
Why not put the stone up on the building, so that people driving by will enjoy it. I mean
the point is to have a good looking building so everybody can look at the building; right?
It's not the structure it's for interest. So, I cut the stone down by half, which is true, but
we have a much better looking building. That was the only interest about the building
was just make a better looking building. Questions?
Zaremba: Thank you. Just to take a stab at my own opinion on it, the elevations look
fine to me. You know, I can understand your reason for changing that and that to me
isn't significant. The news that you're planning to split the property and that makes
other changes in what you're designing is pretty significant to me and that would push it
to a public hearing for me. Just one opinion.
Canning: Sir, he is not asking approval at this time. He'd have to go through a platting
process.
Zaremba: But it changes the nature of what can or cannot happen. I mean it throws the
plaza out and that was one of the reasons that I agreed with the original. I thought the
plaza was important.
McElroy: Basically, the plaza -- I'm sorry.
Zaremba: Yes.
McElroy: May I comment? If it's behind a screen it's basically for something that's not
for the public to walk into from the outside, it's between our two buildings. It's just a
pleasant place for us to have a picnic area and have some place that's kind of visually
interesting between the two buildings, but it's not really for the public's view or the public
use.
Zaremba: Well, most likely employees would gather there or go out there for lunch or
something like that. I mean that's typical of --
McElroy: Between the buildings we could, you know, certainly come up with a pleasant
area, I just didn't want to put stone down and, you know, build something nice and, then,
have it have to be modified, because part of the problem is you have to put in utilities
and everything else and there is going to be changes done anyway and it's going to tear
it up.
Hoaglun: Mr. Present?
Zaremba: Well, I appreciate that. What I'm saying is for me that makes a significant
change. Others -- Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I just wanted to ask on the plan you have, the entrance is the double brick -- it
looks like squares coming up and that's the main entrance and, then, you do have a
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 58 of 75
plaza off -- off that side that is, essentially, remaining from -- that would be to the
northeast corner.
McElroy: Well, that's just a secondary entrance. That's required. We have to have an
entrance anyway and that at least gives us access to that entrance and, then, we can,
then, expand off of that into a plaza or a meeting area, whatever, you know, we do
between the two buildings, but it gives us at least access to it.
Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you.
McElroy: Initially we were going to put in plantings, of course, and they could look
esthetically pleasing. I don't want to have people looking out on bare ground and have
nothing to look at, but I didn't intend to make the whole plaza -- initially it could come
along.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Again, a question for Anna. The parking as being proposed with this
modification is consistent with required parking for this square footage?
Canning: Sir, do you know the square footage of your building?
McElroy: Twenty-seven hundred -- 2,700 square feet.
Canning: So, it would be approximately, what, 14 parking spaces required.
Rountree: There is plenty then.
Bird: And they got 16.
Rountree: Yeah.
Canning: Yeah. And typically we -- we require about half of what is necessary, but they
do meet the minimum parking requirement and perhaps -- we trust that businesses
know their parking needs and provide the appropriate amount of parking.
Rountree: Another question with respect to this new information that it apparently will
be at least brought forward as a subdivision, are there things in the -- that are in the DA
that accommodate that or are there things in the DA that need to be added, such as
cross-access agreement requirements and those sorts of things?
Canning: I know that we have cross-access requirements and that's why it's shown in
the -- the hatched area and I did want to say that it would not be uncommon regardless
of the subdivision to see something such as the plaza included in the development
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 59 of 75
agreement. Just because the applicant wants to subdivide it doesn't mean that that
can't go in in a future phase or be a shared amenity between the two property owners.
There are certainly mechanisms that they can make arrangements for if they subdivide
the property.
Rountree: And, again, that's not -- not my issue, my issue is to make sure that we have
continuity through there for not only you as a landowner, but somebody adjacent as a
landowner and we don't get into these disputes that all of a sudden now somebody is
going to want access on Meridian Road and it's not going to happen.
Canning: All three properties have required cross-access agreements.
Rountree: Okay. Okay. I'm fine with the -- with the elevation change. I agree. I think
it's consistent with our design guides and I -- it still looks like a nice building.
McElroy: Thanks for considering it.
Hoaglun: Mr. President, a question for Mr. Nary. To move forward -- since this is rather
unusual -- we are being asked to -- if we agree with the changes, revised site plan, we --
we -- this would be a motion to amend the existing development agreement to include a
new site plan and elevations and that's all we are looking at? Or to deny.
Nary: Yes, sir.
Hoaglun: Approve or deny.
Nary: And you have both findings in front of you
Hoaglun: Okay.
Rountree: Mr. President, I'm just going to throw this out, because I think we are there.
The one thing that seems to be going through mine and I know yours, David, is the offer
originally of the courtyard. I would suggest that we might consider language remaining
in the DA that the courtyard be considered in future phases as the property is
subdivided and on approval of both owners in the future. In other words, it could or
couldn't happen, just to keep it alive. I mean I can understand the new owner not
necessarily wanting to take that on. It might not fit with their business. But I think it's a
grand idea. It was a good idea to start with and just to keep it alive somehow, because
in -- I hope you can sell it and I hope you get a building on it in another year, but I don't
think that's going to happen. So, some way we need to perpetuate this idea.
Bird: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Bird.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 60 of 75
Bird: You know, if he's going to subdivide it and stuff, that kind of takes care of my
concerns over the site program, because I'm like the rest of you guys, the elevations
look fine to me. It's -- the only thing I -- it's tough -- it's tough to tie the -- tie that building
-- tie that plaza in there. I don't know how we can do that and still give him an open
market to sell. If there is a way we could. Maybe not have it a necessity, but asking to
do it within the DA. And I don't know if we can do that in a DA or not. I'm just throwing
something out there. I mean I'd like to see it in, but if another business comes in that
isn't -- that it don't fit into their plans, why would we make them take their building
somewhere else and cost him a sale of his land? So, that's the only thing I was
thinking.
Rountree: I guess I'd just ask Mr. Nary is there some waffle words that we could do
that?
Nary: The lawyer's bread and butter, Council Member Rountree.
Rountree: Yes.
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, you know, I -- you know, I really -- I don't
think we can accomplish all of what your desire is. I mean if we -- if we put it in as a
desire that's certainly information, but certainly doesn't -- there is nothing that the city
can hold anybody accountable to and lunderstand -- I understand both sides why you
would like to have it and why you don't want to necessarily hinder this future potential
subdivision requiring it. If we put in those kind of words it's certainly nice, it doesn't
mean anything. It won't be enforceable. So, I mean if you'd like to have a plaza there
you can tie it to the next phase of this development or future subdivision or future
development agreement modification, but, then, it's going to be required or -- I don't
know if Mrs. Canning would feel comfortable -- she won't be here to enforce this, so she
probably wouldn't mind. But if there was language -- I mean if there is language in there
that at a future phase the Council would consider a plaza between the two buildings
with that rendering that we have as a consideration for future modifications, then, a
future Council could make that decision. It's not necessarily required, but they are going
to have to bring it forward as part of that, but we will probably have to bring findings
back, because we will probably have to spend a little bit more time than right now to
figure out how the wording would make sense that the current applicant would be
comfortable with as well. Because, again, if we -- we can come up with lots of
language, but if Dr. McElroy doesn't really want to do it, he just won't sign the
development agreement and we are kind of back at square one. But we could certainly
put in language that it would be a consideration of future modifications, but it's not
required.
Rountree: Well, having you explain that to me, I would ask the good doctor if that's
something he would consider in a DA? Okay.
Nary: He said he would.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 61 of 75
Zaremba: From the audience he said he would.
Rountree: From the audience he said he would and, really, that's, again, all I'm after is
it was -- it was a good offer, it was a good idea, it may not be a marketing tool in the
future, but let's keep it on the table for future consideration, not make it mandatory and
when they sell it they say, you know, we'd like to see something that we all can enjoy
here, but if that's not something you want to do in developing your piece of property, we
don't have to.
Bird: That's -- I can go along with that.
Nary: And Council Member Rountree, you know, we certainly -- like I said, we can put
in language that is clear that it is simply an option the Council would consider at the
point of a modification of a future development agreement or a future subdivision of the
property, but it's not mandatory for that consideration.
Rountree: That's works forme.
Zaremba: As I'm understanding your suggestion, that would be a Council option, not an
application option.
Nary: Mr. President, Member of the Council, it would be a consideration for whatever
the next project that comes forward that would -- that you would have to see that the
Council would consider that as part of the consideration for modifying the development
agreement, but it wouldn't be mandatory and we would make it clear it wouldn't be
mandatory to do. It's just the way I think, as Council Member Rountree stated, it's a
way to keep it on the table that is something you would like to see, but you're not going
to require it. So, all the future Council would be dealing with is they are going to have a
provision that says, well, where is this plaza and you're going to say, well, it wasn't
mandatory, we couldn't make it fit, here is why and they could make that decision that
they are willing to amend the development agreement without it or they are not willing to
amend the development without it and that would be a future Council's call.
Zaremba: Okay.
Nary: And I think as long as it's not mandatory Dr. McElroy wouldn't be handcuffed by
that provision for a future buyer.
Canning: President Zaremba, I did want to make it clear that if it comes through as a
subdivision you can't add a plaza to the subdivision, you won't have that ability. Or as a
CZC. So, it would only apply if they come back for another development agreement
modification. I do want to make one pitch. If your -- if you feel that this application
could be approved without another hearing, because you're continuing this idea of the
plaza, then, I would suggest you continue the idea of the plaza and make it mandatory.
We are not requiring them to go through a second development agreement modification
for tonight's discussion. This -- to remove the plaza all they would need to do is another
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 62 of 75
development agreement modification in the future. So, that's my short-timer pitch for
what I heard was you wanted the plaza. If you want the plaza, keep it in there for now
and -- I mean require it with the second phase of development, but keep it on the site
plan.
Rountree: That wasn't what I was saying, again, I'm just saying keep it out there for
consideration. Whether they do it or not -- so I guess at this point we have complicated
it to the point where I would say --
Bird: Forget it.
Rountree: -- forget it
Bird: Me, too.
Zaremba: Well, I would say that that was closer to the one I was meaning. That was
pretty close. I don't know if we are ready to move on, but one more question. Would
splitting that into two lots change the setback requirements between those two
buildings? I mean does that change the nature of -- it would still be about the same,
because they are similar zoned between the two?
Canning: Right. And, actually, I don't think they have any setback requirements in the
C-C or C-G, which would have no setback requirements.
Zaremba: Okay.
Canning: Really what dictates development of this site is that -- the flood plain on the
property. So, there is limited area for development when you get the buffer on Meridian
Road. The likelihood that would be much different than the box shown on there to the
north are -- it might be a smaller block. That's about it.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Unless we got further discussion, I would move that we approve MDA 11-003 to
include a new site plan and new elevations.
Hoaglun: Second.
Bird: Now discussion.
Zaremba: Mr. Bird, discussion.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 63 of 75
Bird: I would ask the good doctor to make sure that if -- if there is any possible way to
have the plaza when he develops -- whether he does -- but he's not tied to it.
Canning: And just to clarify the record, sir, that -- the maker of the motion, that was for
the revised site plan and the revised elevations as presented tonight?
Bird: Yes.
Hoaglun: Yeah. Second agrees to that.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. We have a motion and a second and, Madam Clerk, will
you call roll, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, nay; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: Motion carries, of course. Three to one.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY.
C. Parks Department: Budget Amendment for New Bleachers for
Mo Brooks Field in Storey Park for the Not-to-Exceed Amount
of $38,825.00
Zaremba: Thank you all very much and we are now ready for Item C, Parks
Department. Mr. Siddoway.
Siddoway: Thank you, Council President.
Rountree: Is the Elmo out of focus? Because everything I'm getting is --
Zaremba: Mine's out of focus.
Rountree: -- tonight is just blurry.
Bird: I thought it was my eyes.
Rountree: No.
Bird: No. Mine's okay.
Zaremba: There we go. That's clear.
Rountree: That fills the screen.
Canning: It's still a little blurry.
Meddian Ci[y Council
June 7, 2011
Page 64 of 75
Siddoway: It's a little more readable, even if it is still blurry. Mr. President, Members of
the Council, I have two budget amendments for your consideration tonight. The first
item is for new bleachers in the Mo Brooks field in Storey Park. I was before the
Council some weeks ago discussing the issues of the existing bleachers that are out
there, so I won't belabor that, but we do have an unsafe situation with the existing
bleachers that are out there. We did have an analysis of them done by Insight
Architects and used that information to help us prepare actually a budget enhancement
that we anticipated to bring forward for our FY-12 budget. During our director's
meetings and discussions there -- it was discussed that this really is more of an
emergency situation where we have an unsafe situation and we really ought to bring it
forward as an amendment and try and get that done this summer. We did look first at
keeping what was out there and trying to -- to retrofit it. Doing so was -- was more
costly for us. The total on that one was 63,550. We, then, changed gears and we
looked, instead, at, basically, starting over, scraping what's out there, putting down
some concrete and bringing in two 21 foot long bleachers and using that in place, so
that they meet current ICC code for bleachers. Total on the amendment request is
38,825 and I will stand for any questions.
Zaremba: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
Zaremba: All right. We need an action to approve this or disapprove it, one way or the
other.
Rountree: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve Item 8-C, the budget amendment for Parks for Mo
Brooks bleachers in the amount of 38,825 dollars.
Bird: Second.
Zaremba: I have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you call roll, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
D. Parks Department: Budget Amendment for Julius M. Kleiner
Memorial Park Add-Alternates for the Not-to-Exceed Amount
of $131,880.00
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 65 of 75
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. Next item is also Mr. Siddoway, the Parks Department.
Siddoway: Thank you. This budget amendment is for Kleiner Memorial Park add
alternates. Over the course of the project over the last year and a half we have held
several items in reserve for potential funding towards the end of the project if funds
were available. With increased costs in steel and related items, the -- the funding just
isn't available from the park trust to -- to fund the add alternates that were held in
reserve. There are several of such add alternates, but few in particular I feel are
important enough and warrant consideration for funding. They are an additional park
shelter, a picnic shelter near the splash pad and playground and the second is the
arboretum trees and gravel pathway. These -- this budget amendment would -- would
cover the cost of those. It would be our intent to move forward with providing those
funds this summer, so that they could be completed along with the current park
construction. We did anticipate the need for -- for funding in our CIP. We -- we have
160,000 dollars in the CIP for Kleiner Park items. We had talked last year about
whether to fund just an open amount and it was decided that we would not -- we
actually withdrew the enhancement last year and said we would come back before
Council when we had a specific request. We have those specific needs identified at this
time and would request those funds for your consideration. The funding source for this
would be park impact fees and I have verified that the park impact fees are available
with the Finance Department and I will stand for any questions.
Zaremba: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none. Mr. President?
Zaremba: Who said that? Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I did. I move that we approve item 8-D, park budget amendment for Kleiner
Park in the amend of 131,880 dollars.
Hoaglun: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you call roll, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Siddoway: Thank you.
E. Public Works Department: Budget Amendment for Water
Service Main Replacements: Request to Move $56,000.00 from
Professional Services-Water into Service Water Line/Water
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 66 of 75
Main Replacements Creating No Net Change to FY2011 Budget
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. We are moving on to Item 8-E, which is Public Works
Department with another budget amendment.
Allison: Council President Zaremba, other Council members, I'll introduce myself, David
Allison, staff engineer for Public Works. This is the first time I have been before you.
Zaremba: Welcome.
Allison: I have two items here, E and F.
Zaremba: All right. Let's do them both.
Allison: For E we are requesting that we reallocate 56,000 dollars from the professional
service part of our budget to waterline replacement. Overall it's a no change to the
balanced budget. This came about because of a -- we reallocated or -- excuse me. We
reprioritized the project from fiscal year 12 to 11, had the money to do that project and,
then, in the midst of that ACHD had moved up another project that took that funding
away from what we had originally proposed. We would like the 56,000 dollars moved
into our waterline replacement projects. The project that it would be funding is east
state street between 2nd and 5th. We would like to get ahead of the split corridor
project that's coming up. We also have the chip seals coming in 2014.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. Actually, let's deal with that one first before we go onto
the other one. Any comments, questions?
Rountree: I have no questions.
Hoaglun: No comment. Ready to make a motion?
Zaremba: Ready.
Hoaglun: I move approval of the budget amendment for a water service main
replacement in the amount of 56,000 dollars. That will be moved from professional
services water into -- into service water line, water main replacements.
Bird: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: Thank you. Unanimous. Approved.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 67 of 75
F. Public Works Department: Budget Amendment for Northwest
4th Street Water Line Replacement for the Not-to-Exceed
Amount of $50,000.00
Zaremba: And let's go to Item F, then. Thank you.
Allison: Thank you. For Item F we are looking to allocate 50,000 dollars from the
professional services into the water line service replacement as well. This would also
beano change to the overall balanced budget. In this particular case we had an
increase in asphalt costs from the beginning of the project to the end. Our contractor
came in and we approved a change for that. Where we are at now is that this is a cost-
sharing project with Ada County Highway District. We will be -- at this point I have
41,323 dollars that will be billed to Ada county that will be reimbursed to us. It was a
cost-sharing project as their storm drain laid over top some of our water lines and so
they --they are paying to have that water line -- those storm drains moved, as our water
project progressed through that. In the meantime, because of the -- the previous Item E
funding, we had a short fall to cover those changes and so we are requesting the
50,000 dollars be moved in the interim until Ada county is able to reimburse us that at
the end of the project. Any question?
Bird: I have none.
Zaremba: Just to confirm the professional services original budget has enough to do
both of these two items?
Allison: Right now we have about 493,00 I think remaining --
Zaremba: Great.
Allison: Definitely.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Hoaglun: Yes, Council President, I signed that and looked at it and asked that same
question, so --
Zaremba: Thank you, sir.
Hoaglun: -- if it wasn't so late we could make it even harder on David, but, you know,
his first time here we will just go easy on him. But, Mr. President, I move approval of
the budget amendment for the Northwest 4th Street water line replacement in a not to
exceed amount of 50,000 dollars.
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 68 of 75
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: Thank you very much. You did well on your first presentation. Very
successful.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
G. Legal Department: Budget Amendment for the Youth Work
Life Skills Program for the Not-to-Exceed Amount of
$11,828.00
Zaremba: Next we have the legal department. Mr. Nary.
Nary: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. The first budget amendment
I have in front of you is one we are very excited about. This is a project -- a program
that's really come into fruition of the last month and a half or so in discussions with
Madam Mayor prior to her leaving town. We have been finding a number of applicants
-- we have been having a boom year for applications in different job positions around
the city. There is, obviously, a difficult time out there in the economy and there is a
large unemployment rate in Ada county and so we see a lot of applications of people
that have five, ten, 15, 20 years of experience in the job market. What we are also
finding is there is a lot of younger people that are not able to enter the job market very
well. A lot of jobs that we are finding in Ada county that used to be predominately held
by teens or young adults are being -- are having 25, 30 people hired for the same jobs,
because the economy is such as it is. So, we had an epiphany I guess in your
resources as could we pilot aprogram -- we have a lot of youth in our community that
are out there actively seeking employment and have been unable to find jobs. We
thought we could pilot a program that would touch our youth in the community and allow
an opportunity to meet some needs we have internally in the city. We find many times
during the summer months that we are sometimes strapped with personnel, people are
gone on vacations and a variety of different things and there is a lot of juggling that goes
on in departments in trying to cover front counters and phones and there is a lot of
filings and things like that that don't get accomplished. The human resources thought
we could maybe meet that need that the city already has and we have actually a
number of departments that have expressed the need for this type of service throughout
the summer between Human Resources, the City Clerk's office, the Mayor's office,
Planning and the Fire Department that there is a need that could be filled by folks in this
type of category. So, the intent between Human Resources staff, myself, Crystal
Ritchie, our Human Resources manager and Erin Montemurro, our Human Resources
generalist, was to create a program for teens. I talked with Mr. Cavener, who is the
advisor to the Meridian Youth Advisory Council, if they had, you know, a number of
those students that are still out there looking for jobs and trying to get employment and
are having some struggles. We have some positions, as you know, in the Parks
Department that we hire some teens for, but even some of those we have pushed more
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 69 of 75
towards adults. The water park attendance, for example, the first year we hired them
we hired -- we hired a lot of teens and a few adults. We found that wasn't very effective
to have a lot of teens trying to enforce those regulations, so we started hiring more
adults, so, again, we were sort of boxing out some of the teens. So, our intent would be
with this program is -- it would be teen oriented, the teens would apply for the jobs, they
would fill out applications, come in for job interviews, we want them to get that life
experience that they are not having an opportunity to get right now. The intent is do the
pilot this summer to see how this would work in the various departments with a different
-- a couple of different resources that we have of Meridian students and see if this can
really work, if it can make some sense for departments and make sense for teens and,
then, we could find a way to really create this avenue. We had a program like this when
I worked at the city of Boise, they called it Jump Start and what they did was once they
kind of piloted it and got if off the ground, they marketed every year to the local high
schools in trying to find, again, positions within the city through the summer that could
be filled by teens and that would be our desire. If this works, then, we would expand
this to the high schools, the local high schools in the city to, again, provide an avenue
for folks. I mean this isn't for everybody. Working in an office environment is not all --
all teens can fit in that kind of environment. But we found it worked pretty successfully
in Boise. We had Jump Start interns probably the last eight years I was there, we had
Jump Start interns in our office every summer providing office assistance and, again,
covering for different things that we found in the summer we were sometimes lacking.
So, the cost of this program is really a net zero. We have a vacant position in Human
Resources we have had this entire budget, we plan on eliminating it in FY-12. So, we
have a position we haven't filled we have actually went out twice to the marketplace to
fill, we couldn't find anybody adequate to fill it, we decided to expand the role of our
administrative assistant and she's taken on that quite well and she works full time, she
covers both Human Resources, Legal, and IT in all the varieties of different
requirements for admin work that's needed for that. So, we don't have a need for an
office assistant. So, in talking with Mayor de Weerd we felt maybe this is an opportunity
to pilot this program and we will see how it works. If it's successful we will be coming
back next spring to see about funding this, either in FY-12 as a budget amendment or
as an enhancement for FY-13, with a full package of -- of a program with you as to who
-- how we are going to market this to the various schools and those kind of things. But
we really wanted to pilot it. I apologize that it seems like it's alittle -- a little small or a
little short, because it's really been ashort-term discussion with us to try to put this
together. But we are very excited. We think this could be something that could be a
real connection again with the community, with kids, and the city in finding avenues for
them to work and not just park positions, but other ones. We have, again, found
occasionally interns in our IT department that worked quite well in the city environment,
but we haven't used many in other roles in the city. So, we felt that this was an
opportunity and we wanted to ask if we could do it. Sorry for the long explanation at
10:40, but --
Zaremba: Thank you. Any questions?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 70 of 75
Hoaglun: Two quick questions, Mr. President. Bill, rate of pay and how -- what's the
application process and the hiring process?
Nary: Thank you, Council Member Hoaglun. The rate of pay is $7.50 an hour. So, just
slightly above the minimum wage of 7.25. It's below our other levels. It's really
commensurate with some of our seasonal employment. We were going to use paper
applications, because it's a little bit quicker and faster to get that in. If this is approved
our intent is tomorrow to, then, market that out, both internally in the city, as well
through MYAC and any other source that we can get people's applications in within
about a week. We have already departments that have expressed a need, so that we
can get interviews done by the end of next week and get people placed into
departments as quickly as possible, but we have 15 to 20 hours a week, for example, at
the fire department, they said they would have a need for this position. We have at
least one day a week in my office. We have one day a week at least committed in the
Mayor's office and at least one day a week committed in the clerk's office and we also --
the other thing I'd like to do next year is because of the shortness of time and where the
funding is coming from currently, we weren't able to use Public Works as another
avenue for people to work in. I didn't want to go through the rigamarole to try to do that
in this sort of window, but that would be our desire as we expand this and make this
work, that we would also use Public Works as another resource that we just aren't able
to do this year. But paper applications, interviews by probably next week, placement
the week after that. We have got a schedule that we are going to build with the different
departments, so that we will know this person is working there this week, you know, we
know kids are pretty flexible and have needs in scheduling with activities and events
and things like that. So, hopefully, we will have a number of different positions with a
number of different hours, we are going to have a number of different kids that can fill
four hours here, eight hours on this day, fill in on this date, get them all trained up and
stuff and, hopefully, get them really out into the departments within about two weeks.
Zaremba: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Bill, I see here on your program that you would be an intern -- or intern hours
as up to 32 hours a week. Are we getting in a position where we have to pay benefits
and --
Nary: Council Member Rountree, no. Under our policy they have to work 40 hours a
week to get benefits anyway.
Rountree: Okay.
Nary: And because of the short-term duration PERSI isn't impacted or anything like
that.
Rountree: Okay.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 71 of 75
Zaremba: Mr. Nary, I just would suggest to maybe add into the interview process -- if
these are being considered for receptionist kind of positions where they may be
answering the phone, a portion of the interview should be over the phone, whether it's a
longer discussion when you're inviting them to come in for the personal interview, but
we would want to get some sense of how they sound on the phone. Just a thought.
Nary: Council Member Zaremba, that's a great idea and I will share that with Mrs.
Ritchie tomorrow and we will certainly incorporate that as part of the -- as part of the
process.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Bird: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If we don't have anymore discussion, I move we approve the budget amendment
for the Youth Work Life Skills not to exceed 11,828 dollars.
Rountree: Second.
Bird: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
H. Legal Department: Budget Amendment for Additional Funding
for the Historical Society Intern Position for the Not-to-Exceed
Amount of $1,110.00
Zaremba: Okay. Next Item H -- 8-H is also the Legal Department.
Nary: Thank you, Mr. President, Members of the Council. This is an Historical Society
intern. You recall in 2010 the Historic Preservation Commission spending authority to
allocate a portion of their funding -- it was up to 1,000 dollars -- for an intern to work for
the Historical Society. That was for the summer of 2010 and the intern they hired was
able to accomplish -- there was a lot of database entry work that they were doing, a lot
of old documents that they were updating putting into a database, so that the
handwriting wouldn't get lost, the readability of those documents wouldn't get lost. The
intern worked throughout the summer and exhausting the 1,000 dollars. We, then, went
to this fiscal year, we changed that position from an intern with the Historical Society
that was a contracted position to an actual part-time employee position with the same
1,000 dollar funding. From January to date the intern position has absorbed almost -- a
little over 700 dollars of the 1,000 dollar allocation. What the historical society was
finding is that they have a lot more work than they realize and a lot more skills that they
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 72 of 75
can use this intern to do a variety of different things that is not just data entry, they are
looking at potentially updating their current walking tour brochure is -- it has
photographs and text and it's created in old format, so reproducing it is a little more
troubling and difficult to do, so the desire is to create a new one. Well, the intern can
take the photographs, as most teenagers can, do desktop publishing types of work than
other people, so the intern can do that work. There is a desire to do some social media
from the Historical Society, so setting up Facebook pages and things like that isn't in the
skill set of the people in the Historical Society, but it is in the skill set of their intern. So,
the desire was is to expand some of the workload of the intern's position, but we only
have 270 dollars left allocated towards that. The only thing that's a little awkward is I
have notified the Historical Preservation Commission of it, but there main meeting was
an abbreviated meeting, because they hosted the business -- no, the Business After
Hours program, so we didn't have a discussion in May with them about this. I did advise
them, but because of finance's requirement that we bring all of the budget amendments
by this week and their meeting is Thursday, that we would put this back in front of them.
If they choose not to do it, then, they would have spending authority that they are goirig
to choose not to elect to use. In my off-the-record conversations I think they are fine
with it all. They think the work is necessary to get done, but I don't have their prior
approval, it's going to be their ratification of this authority, but with finance's direction I
couldn't do it differently. So, I wanted you to know it's a little backwards from how we
have done it before, but it is trying to get the same expanded duties accomplished over
the rest of the summer.
Zaremba: Any questions?
Bird: Mr. President?
Zaremba: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve the budget amendment for additional funding for the Historical
Society intern position not to exceed 1,110 dollars.
Hoaglun: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea„ Hoaglun, yea.
Nary: Thank you.
Zaremba: That motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: And, Bill, would we want to have it on next week's agenda to get a report
back about what the society did or are we satisfied to --
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 73 of 75
Rountree: That would be good.
Bird: They are going to take it.
Rountree: I'm sure they will.
Nary: Mr. President, Members of the Council, I will add a department report for next
week and just update you on their meeting and this discussion so that you're aware.
Zaremba: Two minute discussion.
Nary: Yes.
Zaremba: They did. They didn't. Thank you.
Bird: I want to see that.
Item 9: Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. : An Ordinance (RZ
09-006 Southridge West Commercial) for the Re-Zone of a
Tract of Land Situated in the West 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of
Section 23, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,
Ada County, Idaho and Providing an Effective Date
Zaremba: I won't be running that meeting. Okay. We have come to Item 9-A. Madam
Clerk, will you, please, read this ordinance 11-1484 by title only.
Jones: Thank you, Mr. President. An ordinance RZ 09-006, Southridge West
Commercial for the rezone of a tract of land situated in the west one half of the
northwest one quarter of Section 23, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise meridian,
Ada county, Idaho, as described in Attachment A and annexing certain lands and
territories situated in Ada county, Idaho, and adjacent and contiguous to the corporate
limits of the City of Meridian, as requested by the City of Meridian, establishing and
determining the land use zoning classification of 9.33 acres of land from the R-8,
Medium Density Residential Zoning District, to the C-C, Community Business Zoning
District, in the Meridian City Code, providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed
with the Ada county assessor, the Ada county recorder, and the Idaho State Tax
Commission, as required by law, and providing for a summary of the ordinance and
providing for a waiver of the reading of the rules and providing an effective date.
Zaremba: Thank you. You heard this ordinance read by title only. Would anybody care
to hear the entire ordinance read? Seeing none, we are moving on to Item 10 and --
Bird: Mr. President?
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 74 of 75
Zaremba: Oh, I'm sorry. We need to vote on this, don't we. Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we approve --
Zaremba: Thank you very much.
Bird: I move we approve Ordinance No. 11-1484 with suspension of Rules.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: Okay. We have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, yea.
Zaremba: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 10: Future Meeting Topics
Zaremba: Item 10 is future meeting topics and, Bill, I vaguely remember some
discussion during our agenda meeting that we might -- I forget what we said we might
bring up during future meeting topics. It slipped my mind. If it slipped yours, we will
skip it.
Nary: Sorry, Mr. President, it slipped my mind as well. I'm sorry. I don't recall.
Zaremba: It must not have been that hair raising, so --anybody else have anything they
care to offer?
Bird: I don't.
Zaremba: There is another motion that would be in order.
Hoaglun: I move to adjourn.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: We are adjourned. Thank you very much.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:50 P.M.
Meridian City Council
June 7, 2011
Page 75 of 75
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
~~msn
MAYOR TA f De WEERD
~~ a~ ~~
DATE APPROVED
A
~,~: v o .,,, o-
L. H ~I ~Y~`~L'Ej?K ~~'
-~, i ~ > 5
~> r r , i !' ~ ~~
1 .~ ~ ,,
n ~~ "~dL+~, :a ;.
r~ L}: ' Y s'r' 3~'
X11 ~ ~rp;.9~.>d'~_