2011-12-06E I DIANA
I !~ l-1
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR
MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, December 06, 2011 at 7:00 PM
1. Roll-Call Attendance
X David Zaremba O Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Community Invocation by Pastor Michael Pearson with the Seventh
Day Adventist Church
4. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted
5. Consent Agenda Approved
A. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2011 City Council Regular
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of November 9, 2011 City Council Workshop
Meeting
C. Approve Minutes of November 15, 2011 City Council Regular
Meeting
D. Resolution No. 11-825: Accepting the 2012 Initial Point Gallery
Schedule
E. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient Agreement with Ada County Housing
Authority (ACHA)
F. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient Agreement with Neighborhood Housing
Services (NHS)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, December 06, 2011 Page 1 of 4
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
G. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient Agreement with Meridian Food Bank
H. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient Agreement with Meridian Boys and Girls
Club
I. Development Agreement for Approval: MDA 11-005 Walmart-
Overland/Stoddard by Walmart Real Estate Business Trust
Located Southeast Corner of W. Overland Road and S.
Stoddard Road Request: Modification to the Existing
Development Agreement to Amend the Conceptual
Development Plan and Certain Sections of the Text of the
Agreement in Accord with the Proposed Changes to the
Development Plan
J. Approval of Permanent Easement for Idaho Power Corporation
K. Lease Agreement Between The Kleiner Memorial Park Trust
(Lessor) and the City of Meridian (Lessee) to Allow Early
Possession of the Park for Purposes of Winter Maintenance
L. Request for Approval of a Sole Source Purchase of a Backup
"Sewerline Inspection Camera" for the Existing Inspection
Truck for aNot-To-Exceed Amount of $55,218.18
M. Award of Request for Qualifications (RFQ CW-01-2011) and
Resulting 21 Master Agreements with 15 Independent Firms ;
CH2MHill, JUB, Keller, HDR, SPF, CTA, LCA, Lochsa
Engineering, American Geotechnics, MTI, Strata, Civil Survey,
Keller, T-0 Engineers, GSI, and Hydrologic for Engineering
Services
N. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: SHP 11-
001 Second and Broadway Condominiums by Meridian
Development Corporation (MDC) Located at North Side of E.
Broadway Avenue Between E. 2nd Street and E. 3rd Street
Request: Short Plat Approval of Four (4) Commercial
Condominium Units within an Office Building in the O-T
Zoning District
O. Development Agreement for Approval: RZ 11-002 Southridge
Apartments by The Farran Group, LLC Generally Located
South Side of W. Overland Road Midway Between S. Ten Mile
Road and S. Linder Road Request: Rezone of 42.36 Acres of
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, December 06, 2011 Page 2 of 4
All materials presented at public meetings shall. become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
Land from the TN-R and R-8 Zoning Districts to the R-15
Zoning Districts
6. Items Moved From Consent Agenda
7. Action Items
A. Public Hearing: Proposed Sanitary Services Company (SSC)
Fee Adjustment .for Residential and Commercial Services
Based on Change in the Consumer Price Index and 2 New
Fees Approved (Pg. 5-8)
B. Public Hearing: Proposed 2012 Fee Schedule of the Meridian
Parks & Recreation Department (Pg. 8)
C. Resolution No. 11-826: A Resolution Adopting the Fee
Schedule of the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department to
Collect Such Fees; and Providing. an Effective Date Approved
(Pg. 9-11)
D. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) PY2010
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
(CAPER) (Pg. 12-13)
E. Resolution No. 11-827: Resolution to Adopt the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year 2010
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
(CAPER) Approved (Pg. 13-14)
F. Public Hearing Continued from November 15, 2011: AZ 11-001
Ten Mile Annexation by Janicek Properties, LLC; Fedrizzi Ten
Mile, LLC; and SJJV, LLC Located West of S. Ten Mile Road
and North of I-84 Request: Annexation and Zoning of 116.25
Acres of Land From RUT in Ada County to C-G Zone
Continued to December 20, 2011 (Pg. 14-31)
G. Public Hearing: RZ 11-004 Chesterfield by Liberty
Development, Inc. Located South Side of W. Pine Avenue;
Midway Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road
Request: Rezone of 1.48 Acres of Land from the R-8 Zoning
District to the R-15 Zoning District Approved (Pg. 31-45)
H. Public Hearing: PP 11-007 Chesterfield by Liberty
Development, Inc. Located South Side of W. Pine Avenue;
Midway Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, December 06, 2011 Page 3 of 4
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 148 Residential Lots and
Twelve (12) Common Lots on 28.2 Acres in an Existing R-8
Zone and a Proposed R-15 Zone Approved (Pg. 31-45)
8. Department Reports
A. Fire Department: Inter-Agency Memorandum of
Understanding with Ada County for Continuity of Operations
Plan (COOP) Approved (Pg. 45-47)
B. Fire Department: Approval of Award of a Pass Through
Agreement for "Continuity of Operations Planning Services" to
Ketch Consulting, Inc. and Authorization for the Mayor to Sign
Approved (Pg.45-47)
C. Planning Department: Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) FY2012 Budget Amendment for a Not-to-Exceed
Amount of $230,715.00 Approved (Pg. 47-50)
D. Public Works: Resolution No. 11-828: Adopting All of Volume
1 and the City's Section of the Volume 2 within the Ada County
Hazard Mitigation Plan Approved (Pg. 50-51)
9. Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 11-1499: An Ordinance (RZ 11-002 Southridge
Apartments) for the Rezone of 42.36 Acres of Land from the
TN-R and R-8 Zoning Districts to. the R-15 Zoning Districts by
The Farran Group, LLC Generally Located South Side of W.
Overland Road Midway Between S. Ten Mile Road and S.
Linder Road Approved (Pg. 51-52)
10. Future Meeting Topics (Pg. 52-53)
11. Amended onto the Agenda: Executive Session Per Idaho State Code
67-2345 (1)(c)(d): (c) To conduct deliberations concerning labor
negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is not
owned by a public agency: (d) To consider records that are exempt
from disclosure as provided in Chapter 3, Title 9, Idaho Code.
Into Executive Session at 9:37 p.m.
Out of Executive Session at 10:17 p.m.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda -Tuesday, December 06, 2011 Page 4 of 4
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing,
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
Meridian City Council December 6, 2011
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday,
December 6, 2011, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, David Zaremba, Keith Bird and Charlie
Rountree.
Members Absent: Brad Hoaglun.
Others Present: Bill Nary, Jaycee Holman, Caleb Hood, Sonya Watters, Bill Parsons,
Lori Den Hartog, Warren Stewart, Kyle Radek, Jeff Lavey, Mark Niemeyer, Allison
Kaptein, Colin Moss, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X David Zaremba X Brad Hoaglun
X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and start tonight's meeting. I would like to thank all of
you for joining us and welcome to City Hall chambers. For the record it is Tuesday,
December 6. It is a couple minutes after 7:00. We will start with roll call attendance.
Madam Clerk.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: Thank you. Item No. 2 is our Pledge of Allegiance. Tonight we will be led
in the pledge by Bryce Horning. He is with Troop 463 and they are sponsored by the
Verona Ward. Bryce, if you will come up front and you can give us instruction.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
De Weerd: Bryce, if I could ask you to come forward, I have a City of Meridian pin to
thank you for leading us in the pledge.
Item 3: Community Invocation by Pastor Michael Pearson with the Seventh
Day Adventist Church
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Pastor
Michael Pearson and he with the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. If you will all join us in
the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection.
Welcome.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 2 of 55
Pearson: Thank you. Let's bow our heads. Father in Heaven, we want to thank you for
the Meridian City Council and Mayor who serve us. We invite your presence this
evening on all deliberations, asking that you give us all hearts of service to the
community, to the United States, and to the Almighty God. We pray this in the name of
Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, amen.
De Weerd: And, Pastor Michael, before you sit down perhaps you can tell us about the
live nativity that's going on Friday and Saturday night. You just need to say it in the
microphone.
Pearson: Friday evening, Saturday, 5:30 to 8:30 we are doing our annual community --
for the community live nativity journey to Bethlehem where people of all faiths are
involved. If you want to come out and see it, it is something amazing and it's lots of fun
for all.
De Weerd: And you have a live camel on Friday night.
Pearson: We have a live camel on Friday night.
De Weerd: So, you all have to come out. Very good music and as Pastor Michael had
mentioned, .there are a number of different places of worship that are involved.. So,
thank you for joining us, Pastor Michael.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I would just mention that that is on Black Cat just north of Cherry Lane.
De Weerd: Yes. Thank you. We will see you Friday night. I'm there for the camel.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: A couple of notes to make on the agenda. Under five, the Consent Agenda,
Item D, that resolution is number 11-825. Under Item 7, Action Items, Item C, that
resolution number is 11-826. Item E is resolution number 11-827. Under paragraph
eight, Department Reports, Item D is resolution number 11-828. And under nine,
Ordinances, Item A is ordinance number 11-1499. And, then, we need to amend into
the agenda an additional Item 11, which would be an Executive Session per Idaho State
Code 67-2345(1)(c) and (1)(d). And with that I move approval of the agenda.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 3 of 55
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as amended. All
those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of November 1, 2011 City Council Regular
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of November 9, 2011 City Council Workshop
Meeting
C. Approve Minutes of November 15, 2011 City Council Regular
Meeting
D. Resolution No. 11-825: Accepting the 2012 Initial Point Gallery
. Schedule
E. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient Agreement with Ada County Housing
Authority (ACHA)
F. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient
G. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient Agreement with Meridian Food Bank
H. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year
2011 Sub-Recipient Agreement with Meridian Boys and Girls
Club
1. Development Agreement for Approval: MDA 11-005 Walmart-
Overland/Stoddard by Walmart Real Estate Business Trust
Located Southeast Corner of W. Overland Road and S.
Stoddard Road Request: Modification to the Existing
Development Agreement to Amend the Conceptual
Development Plan and Certain Sections of the Text of the
Agreement in Accord with the Proposed Changes to the
Development Plan
J. Approval of Permanent Easement for Idaho Power Corporation
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 4 of 55
K. Lease Agreement Between The Kleiner Memorial Park Trust
(Lessor) and the City of Meridian (Lessee) to Allow Early
Possession of the Park for Purposes of Winter Maintenance
L. Request for Approval of a Sole Source Purchase of a Backup
"Sewerline Inspection Camera" for the Existing Inspection
Truck for aNot-To-Exceed Amount of $55,218.18
M. Award of Request for Qualifications (RFQ CW-01-2011) and
Resulting 21 Master Agreements with 15 Independent Firms ;
CH2MHill, JUB, Keller, HDR, SPF, CTA, LCA, Lochsa
Engineering, American Geotechnics, MTI, Strata, Civil Survey,
Keller, T-O Engineers, GSI, and Hydrologic for Engineering
Services
N. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Approval: SHP 11-
001 Second and Broadway Condominiums by Meridian
Development Corporation (MDC) Located at North Side of E.
Broadway Avenue Between E. 2nd Street and E. 3rd Street
Request: Short Plat Approval of Four (4) Commercial
Condominium Units within an Office Building in the O-T
Zoning District
O. Development Agreement for Approval: RZ 11-002 Southridge
Apartments by The Farran Group, LLC Generally Located
South Side of W. Overland Road Midway Between S. Ten Mile
Road and S. Linder Road Request: Rezone of 42.36 Acres of
Land from the TN-R and R-8 Zoning Districts to the R-15
Zoning Districts
De Weerd: Item 5 is our Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: As previously noted, Item D is resolution number 11-824 and with that I move
adoption of the -- or approval of the Consent Agenda and authority for the Mayor to sign
and the Clerk to attest.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. If there is
no discussion, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 5 of 55
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 6: Items Moved From Consent Agenda
De Weerd: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 7: Action Items
A. Public Hearing: Proposed Sanitary Services Company (SSC)
Fee Adjustment for Residential and Commercial Services
Based on Change in the Consumer Price Index and 2 New
Fees
De Weerd: So, we will move to Item 7, Public Hearing for Item 7-A. Mr. Nary, who is
introducing this item?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess me. This is a public hearing on
the SSC fee adjustment. This is a contractual .adjustment annually and there are
actually new fees. Mr. Sedlacek from SSC is here as well, can probably give a very
brief synopsis of the fees. They have been advertised for tonight for a public hearing.
De Weerd: Okay. And, Mr. Nary, I guess procedurally this also went through our
citizen advisory committee, the SWAC?
Nary: Yes. Yes, Madam Mayor. The Solid Waste Advisory Commission of the city has
reviewed the fees. As I said, part of the fees are contractual adjustment annually that
are based on the Consumer Price Index. That isn't -- it's part of the fee request, but it is
contractually for the city to adjust that based on Consumer Price Index change. The
other one there are actual new fees that are what was advertised for the actual hearing
for tonight.
De Weerd: Right. And they did consider those new fees and have moved it up to City
Council.
Nary: Yes. They have recommended --
De Weerd: Okay.
Nary: -- recommend moving those forward for approval.
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Sedlacek. State your name and address for the record.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 6 of 55
Sedlacek: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, my name is Steve Sedlacek.
Address is 2130 West Franklin in Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Sedlacek: Tonight we have our annual -- our sometimes annual rate change. We have
an October 6th memorandum to be in front of you. We are -- based on our CPI
adjustment methodology that we have in our contract we are requesting a two percent
rate increase. That's going to 30 cents per house per month for residential customers
and, of course, there is a variety of commercial rates that get affected also. I don't know
if you want me to go into that methodology at all. We have done this many times.
Perhaps I should just skip to the two new fees that have been requested.
De Weerd: Well, I think in case there are people here that would like to hear how it is
figured that would be helpful.
Sedlacek: All right. We will go through it quickly. So, basically, our contract allow us to
adjust rates based on the Consumer Price Index annually. We get that information from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics and, then, we take 90 percent of the published value and
we apply that to our portion of the rate structure. Rates are based on two things. One
.our collection costs and number. two is the disposal .costs at the county landfill. We
segregate those two fractions. We do not escalate the county disposal fees, because
the county commissioners set those and if they go up that is a separate rate hearing or
a rate issue. So, what we are talking about is just our costs for fuel and labor, medical
coverage for our guys, you know, tires and batteries and all that stuff that we -- that we
consume to pick up waste. So, the CPI changes -- you know, you can see in Table Two
that there is -- basically, it's a 1.9 percent rate increase for most services. The roll off
services are higher because roll off services we have separate disposal from collection
costs on that. So, that's -- those are already segregated. And at this time we are not
sure if the county is going to escalate their landfill fees. I would expect them to be
changed next August when they get through their evaluation of their switching from
yardage to tonnage in terms how they bill people and that will cause -- that will cause a
rate change in Meridian, so -- but Idon't -- you know, I can't speculate on when or how
much that will be. I have no idea what the county commissioners will do. That's how
we go through our CPI adjustment.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Sedlacek: As far as the two new rates, one is for residential carry out service. Basically
we -- we have people call us on occasion -- not very often -- and they say, well, what
would it cost if I didn't put my trash out and you came to my garage and took all my cans
and took them to your truck and dumped them and brought the cans back. They just
don't -- people that don't want to put their cans out. We don't have a rate for that and
I'm not sure we want a rate for that, but it's been requested, so we threw a number at it
and this is not for people who are elderly or too sick to do that function, we will do that
for free for anyone that can't do it, but, basically, these are just folks that are used to
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 7 of 55
having a higher level of service I think. So, we have proposed a 60 dollar a month fee
for that. Now, that's for us to go up to the house every week and also the recycling
would be every other week. Other cities have this type of an arrangement. Boise does.
Some cities don't have it, so -- I don't expect very many people to sign up for this,
honestly. It's completely voluntary. And so we ran it through the solid waste
commission and they approved that and asked us to come to you for final approval, if
you -- if you so choose to have this type of fee in your structure. The second rate we
have asked for is a rate on a -- something called a turnaround compactor. These are --
there is two styles of compactors. There is one called a break away and called a
turnaround or aself-contained unit. A turnaround is simply a piece of equipment at a
store that is taking garbage from that store -- could be a Winco or a Walmart or Fred
Meyer, typically a larger store, and the way you haul -- the way you put that on your
truck, the spot where the garbage comes out is behind the cab, so we have to take that
container and roll it off the truck, drive around to the other side of it, put it back on the
truck, and we take it into the transfer station and we dump it and we take it back out of
the transfer station, put it down again, go back around to the other side of it and put it
back on the way it originally was. So, we -- so, we have a lot of manipulation that goes
on with this type of a compactor and it just takes a lot of time and so what we are simply
asking for is a differential rate between those who pick those compactors -- they are not
owned by us, they are owned by the store, that we get another 15 dollars per haul to do
all that manipulation and those are basically the two new rates that we are talking about.
De Weerd: Thank you, Council. Any questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I do have a question on -- I guess the mechanics of the first one. I'm just --
not that I'm a candidate for that service, but if I were would it involve the driver having a
key to my garage or a code to my garage and moving my car in order to get the can
out?
De Weerd: I don't think you're a candidate for this service.
Zaremba: But I'm just wondering what complications and what liability if they are
actually entering somebody's garage. Is this even wise to do?
Sedlacek: Well, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Councilman Zaremba, we will
not go into anyone's house or in anyone's garage. Those cans have to be visible from
the street. They can't be behind a fence where our guys will walk through a fence and
get attacked by a dog or anything like that. So, we are just talking about from the curb
to the house. Now, that could be a long private road where we will have to get a
release of liability from that owner, because if we drive the truck down there and it
damages the road -- and it will damage the road -- we are not going to pay for that road
damage. It's just -- the trucks are so heavy they -- they will damage road. That's why
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 8 of 55
we keep them on public roadways. But this would just be us walking up to the --
probably aside fence -- beside someone's garage and grabbing a can and putting it
back. There won't -- yeah, there won't be any -- we will never enter someone's
property. At least their dwelling.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, Steve. This is a public
hearing. Is there any member of the public who would like to provide testimony on this
item? Okay. Council, any further information needed from staff or Mr. Sedlacek?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Seeing no further questions or information required, I move that we close the
public hearing on Item 7-A.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the rate adjustments and the two rates as proposed
by SSC.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-A. Is there any
discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Public Hearing: Proposed 2012 Fee Schedule of the Meridian
Parks & Recreation Department
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 9 of 55
C. Resolution No. 11-826: A Resolution Adopting the Fee
Schedule of the Meridian Parks & Recreation Department to
Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date
De Weerd: Item No. 7-B is a public hearing on the fee structure for 2012 for the Parks
Department -- for the recreation and parks department. Like how I put you first, Allison.
Kaptein: Thank you. Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Colin
and I are here today to present to you our fee schedule for the winter activities -- for my
part and Colin is here to stand for any questions on some new field rental fees that we
have and I believe that you got this information in your packets, but I also have it up on
the screen in front of you. Those show the new fees and I think in your packets there
should have been a document with a -- the full schedule highlighted in yellow and
changes, if you have questions about that. So, if you have any questions we can stand
for that now.
De Weerd: Allison, perhaps -- I don't know if there is anyone here that has any
questions, but can you tell us maybe some of the changes that are on the fee schedule.
Or are these all new fees?
Kaptein: .The -- they are all new. fees, except for the team belly dance camp is an
increase and the paper making class is an increase and the belly dance class is an
increase. Everything else is a new schedule -- or, excuse me, new fee.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Allison or Colin? Colin, I would just
congratulate you on a -- just a wonderful tree lighting ceremony and I understand that
the Winterland Festival was also very well attended and --
Moss: It was extremely well attended. We had about double the number of kids that we
had anticipated, so --
De Weerd: There was probably kids that came to watch the parade.
Moss: It could be. It could be.
De Weerd: Any question from Council? Or, Colin, did you want to add anything?
Moss: I guess the only thing -- just a short explanation of some of the field rental fees.
We just -- you know, one of the reasons why we are -- we brought these new fees
forward is because, you know, with -- with multi-day events kind of being a little bit more
common these days, you know, renting afield -- like at Settlers Park is a great example
where an event would rent Settlers Park for the day. It doesn't -- it's not really practical
to charge them by the hour, which is our current fee schedule, because typically they
will either set up the night before or they will come extremely early in the morning to
start setting up and it's just -- doesn't seem fair to charge them from 5:00 in the morning
until 10:00 at night for a field rental and so what we have kind of done is established a
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 10 of 55
full day fee for certain fields and, then, at our bigger parks just established a rate for,
you know, this portion of the park. So, if you wanted to have a big event at Settlers
Park and you wanted to rent shelter number one and all the grass space, it's just one
flat fee, as opposed to, you know, renting out everything separately and, then, we have
established attendance thresholds where a certain fee would be -- would be required.
So, for example, the 300 dollar fee at Settlers Park would be required for events of over
a thousand people. If you have over 1,500 people, then, you would be required to also
block out shelter number two and three because of the additional attendance there.
And so it's really based on parking and, you know, if -- if there is such a large crowd
there and when we don't want to rent out other amenities, because there is just not
going to be enough parking, we wanted to come to, you know, a good fee that it's just a
lot easier to -- to work with event organizers when there is a flat fee for -- for some of
these parks. So, that's -- that's kind of the basis of most of those fees.
De Weerd: Thank you for that explanation. Any questions from Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: It .occurs to me on some of these events that are all day events or bigger
events, do we take any kind of a clean-up deposit or how do we make sure we don't get
stuck with a ruined park?
Moss: Well, we -- we don't take -- we don't take a deposit, but it is built into -- it is built
into our -- when they -- when they rent afacility -- I mean it's in the language anytime
somebody rents a shelter that they can be charged for damage. A lot of clean up is
build into the fee in the first place for what our staff time is to clean up, but -- but it is
built into the facility rental to go back afterwards and charge if -- if need be.
Zaremba: Great. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Thank you.
Moss: Thank you.
De Weerd: This is a public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to provide
comment on this item? I think all our high school students, if you come and provide
testimony I understand you get extra credit. Or maybe an automatic A. No, I won't say
that. So, any comment?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we close the public hearing on the proposed 2012 fee schedule.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 11 of 55
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on this item. All
those in favor aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I move we approve the proposed 2012 fee schedule of the Meridian Parks
and Recreation Department.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-B. If there is no
discussion, Madam Clerk.
Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
Bird: That's a resolution.
Zaremba: Actually, that is Item C and there is a resolution for that.
De Weerd: I'm sorry. The resolution for Item 7-C, which is 11-826.
Zaremba: I misspoke and I include that in my motion.
De Weerd: Thank you. Second agrees?
Rountree: Second agrees.
De Weerd: Okay. Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 12 of 55
D. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) PY2010
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
(CAPER)
De Weerd: Okay. Item 7-D is our CDBG and I'll turn this over to Lori.
Den Hartog: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I am back before you
on the second of our public hearings on the Consolidated Annual Performance and
Evaluation Report for our Community Development Block Grant funds. I presented the
original report to you on November 15, along with some highlights of the last program
year. Just wanted to provide some -- Councilman Rountree requested at the last
meeting some numbers for you based on what we had allocated last year and what we
had spent. We were under budget on our administration expenses. You will see that
we did not expend any funds during the past program year on the Five Mile Creek
pathway project. This was Segment H-1. That project is, however, moving forward.
We are looking to bid in January for that project, so we will be expending those funds in
the current program year. So, even though they weren't expended last year, we still
have the opportunity to use those funds and they will be expected and that number will
start going down pretty quickly within the new year. The Meridian Food Bank spent
almost all of their allocation from last year or 40,000. The Ada County Housing
Authority I had discussed with you last time, they finished out their funds from the year
before and only used 5,000 from this year. They are seeking alternative ways to
advertise their program in Meridian. That's -- those funds are used for down payment
and closing cost assistance for the purchase of homes by low to moderate income
buyers in Meridian. And the Neighborhood Housing Services, similar program to the
Housing Authority, it targets a little bit different segment of the population there, but you
can see that they have approximately just over 5,000 dollars remaining in their
allocation as well. So, again, those funds can continue to be used throughout the next
program year. We did not receive any additional comments during our comment period
on the -- on the CAPER, so I'd like to request that we close the public hearing, if we
have no one to testify this evening and if there are comments this evening I can
certainly incorporate those and after that I would request that we -- that you direct me to
submit the document to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for
their review and approval of it. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Is there anyone here to testify on this item? Okay. Seeing
none, Council, any questions for Lori?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: Lori, those funds that haven't been expended in those various grant items,
can those be reallocated to other items?
Den Hartog: They can be.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 13 of 55
Rountree: And, if so, what's the timelines to do that?
Den Hartog: They can be. One of the things we -- the one item that will be reallocated
is the administration dollars that are just under the 20,000 and I do have plans to
reallocate that to a project. The Five Mile Creek pathway, that Segment H-1, we are
doing phase one, which we are anticipating to use all of that 120,000 in order to
complete phase two. I have some other projects that have funds remaining as well. So,
I will be coming back before Council with an amendment. So, most likely we will be
making a recommendation to use those unallocated or unexpended funds to complete
that pathway segment.
Rountree: And what's the timeline on that?
Den Hartog: Probably by next spring, early summer, we will have a good handle on the
pathway cost and in addition our project manager for that project -- we have been
working on obtaining the last easements to get up to Fairview, so that -- the easement
section has been driving part of the location for that last segment to make -- to make
sure it reaches all the way to Fairview.
Rountree: And is there a sunset on the ability to .utilize those funds?
Den Hartog: There isn't. That's the interesting thing with this particular grant.
Rountree: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? I would entertain a motion.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we close the public hearing on the CDBG fiscal year 2010 grant.
Bird: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public comment period on Item
7-D. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
E. Resolution No. 11-827: Resolution to Adopt the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year 2010
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
(CAPER)
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 14 of 55
De Weerd: Item 7-E is resolution 11-827.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the resolution 11-827 and authorize the Mayor to
sign and Clerk to attest.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-E. If there is no discussion
-- seeing none, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
F. Public Hearing Continued from November 15, 2011: AZ 11-001
Ten Mile Annexation by Janicek Properties, LLC; Fedrizzi Ten
Mile, LLC; and SJJV, LLC Located West of S. Ten Mile Road
and North of I-84 Request: Annexation and Zoning of 116.25
Acres of Land From RUT in Ada County to C-C Zone
De Weerd: Item 7-F is a public hearing continued from November 15 on AZ 11-001. I
will turn this over to staff for comment.
Watters: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. First item before you
here is a request for annexation and zoning of 116.25 acres of land with a C-G zoning
district. The subject property consists of three individually owned parcels, totaling 116
acres of land zoned RUT in Ada county. The property is located at the northwest corner
of I-84 and South Ten Mile Road. The applicant requests to annex all of the subject
property with a C-G zoning district. A conceptual development plan is not proposed, but
a layout for collector streets within the site, based upon the transportation system plan
contained in the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan has been submitted that is
consistent with the plan. Staff recommended denial of the applicant's request to the
Commission based on inconsistency of the proposed C-G zoning with the future land
use designations of medium high density residential, mixed use residential, mixed use
commercial, high density employment and park for the overall property. In the
alternative, staff proposed zoning consistent with the future land use map that could be
supported. The owners of the SJJV and the Fedrizzi properties were in agreement with
staff's recommended zoning. However, the owners of the Janicek parcel were not in
agreement with staff's recommended zoning. The Commission recommended denial of
the subject annexation at the September 1st public hearing. Becky McKay, Engineering
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 15 of 55
Solutions, the applicant's representative, testified in favor of the application. No one
testified in opposition. Chris Penland commented on the application. And written
testimony was received from Brad Beau. He was concerned about the proposed road
alignment in relation to the approved concept plan for his property. Kevin Shreeve, he
was in agreement with the staff recommended zoning of HE and C-C for the SJJV
property. And Richard and Patsy Fedrizzi, they were in agreement with the staff
recommended zoning at C-C for the property. Key issues of discussion by the
Commission was the consistency of the proposed C-G zoning in regard to the intent of
the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan and the future land use designations for the
property. They did not feel it was consistent. The appropriateness of the C-G zoning
directly adjacent to the residential without a development plan. No transition in zoning
and uses. There were no changes to the staff recommendation by the Commission and
the outstanding issue for the City Council -- since the Commission hearing Becky
McKay, the applicant's representative, has been working with the owners of the Janicek
property to determine a zoning for the property that would be acceptable to the owners,
as well as in compliance with the Ten Mile plan. Last Friday the applicant submitted a
new request for zoning that now proposes TN-C zoning for the western 30 acres of the
Janicek parcel and C-C zoning for the eastern 44 and a half acres of the Janicek
property, along with C-C and HE zoning for the SJJV property and C-C zoning for the
Fedrizzi property. Written testimony has been received since the Commission hearing
from.Bradley Miller, Van Auker Companies, and Becky McKay. Because the applicant
has changed their request for zoning since the Commission hearing, staff is
recommending that Council remand the application back to the Commission for review
and a new recommendation based on the current proposal. Staff will stand for any
questions the Mayor and Council may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Sonya. Any questions at this point for staff?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant representative here? Good evening. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
McKay: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions. Business
address 1029 North Rosario, Meridian. I'm representing the Fedrizzis, Janiceks and
SJJV, LLC, in this particular joint application for annexation and zoning.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McKay: I will go ahead and start while she's loading that. It's been a long haul to get to
this point. It's taken us over two years and I see the finish line within our grasp and I
hope the Council does, too, because I don't think I have ever wanted an experience to
end like this one. It's been one of the most complicated and frustrating and challenging
applications that I have had if you count what transpired prior to application to the city.
The Meridian Comprehensive Plans -- I went back, looked through them, clear back to
1978, the first one. They all had one thing in common. They identified the Ten Mile
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 16 of 55
interchange as a future location for an interchange along the I-84 corridor. They all
emphasized that it was important to the city and that it had significant commercial
potential and after 33 years the Ten Mile interchange finally became a reality and I think
everybody's pleased about that. No one can argue with that. I need to give you a little
bit of background on how we got to this point, because we have gone through many
steps and different opinions throughout this whole process. In front of you right now
that's -- in yellow is what you see is the right of way takes. The interchange initially was
proposed to kind of be centered there on Ten Mile Road. It was my understanding, as
told from ITD representatives, that they needed shift the interchange to the west to
preserve an historical site and that the right of way take would shift west. So, to
accommodate the future overpass, this shifted -- is it pointing? Right through here
about 139 feet and, then, it tapers on off as -- ah. That little booger. Does it go back,
Sonya?
Watters: Yeah. Hit the back arrow.
McKay: Sorry. I always lift my pointer. It taper off as it goes to Franklin Road. One of
the things -- design features of that Ten Mile overpass was the fact that you have the
underpass road, which is going to connect the two sections, Brighton to the east and the
SJJV parcel to the west. In order to accommodate that underpass, the height of the
.overpass had to be -- had to raise up about 14 feet over -- over its historical height. So,
then, as they designed this it took them a significant distance to touch down to grade.
The location you see right here on the Janicek property, that was -- they were touching
down just before they reached that point and that would be the first signalized
intersection and the only access allowed from the interstate north to that point. So, one
of the things that we struggled with is these three properties involved had either no
access or severely limited access. What the state offered to them what they called farm
access road number four. That's what you see there with the little dog leg that goes to
the west in yellow. What that was going to consist of was just a 50 foot right of way
and, then, 22 feet gravel road. In our reports we questioned that as, you know, how are
we going to provide access to the interior of the section with what they were providing.
The SJJV parcel, the Fedrizzis, had no access whatsoever and so, then, the state came
back, they amended their complaint and they said, okay, what we propose is what we
will call west access road and we will provide between 84 -- 39 feet of access -- or right
of way with 28 feet of paving. Well, that doesn't -- the 28 feet of paving does not meet
any ACHD commercial collector standards. Now it doesn't want to change. There we
go. So, we got together and we said, you know what, the Ten Mile plan has a
transportation plan. What if we all -- all parties get together. Let's try to figure this out.
We don't want the state to throw money away on a substandard roadway that can't be
utilized for the proper development of the section. Why don't we come up with a
different plan and, then, everyone would benefit in the entire section. ACHD was on
board. The state was on board. Anna Canning with the City of Meridian came on
board. Everyone was in agreement. Let's solve this -- this issue. Now, on your Ten
Mile plan it shows this east-west collector there. That is the major parkway collector to
the interior of this section, because that's going to funnel all that traffic out to Ten Mile
and, then, out to the interchange. Based our estimates, that roadway at build out could
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 17 of 55
carry 30,000 vehicle trips a day. Of course, you know, this is in the future and at build
out. It was going -- it's planned to be a seven lane intersection in order to accommodate
those high volumes of traffic. It will have to be signalized. It would be a four lane
commercial collector with a median and two bike lanes and that is the major artery into
the section. ITD said, well, instead of building farm -- west access, we will trust fund
money with Ada County Highway District for the future construction of that roadway. If
the property owners provide right of way in order to facilitate the development of the
section, so that any one parcel could develop and, obviously, utilize the right of way, tap
the trust fund with the highway district, install a signal, build the collector and provide
the primary point of access. Because of the things we always struggled with -- and I
testified on the Ten Mile specific plan -- the flaw that I saw in it was that some properties
had to rely on others for access. I mean they had no access according to the plan and
so, then, it dictates that they develop in a specific order and as we well know, you know,
some properties may have to wait a long time, while others benefit. Here we would be
able to provide for everyone. We had -- we submitted the C-G zone, because we could
not agree with all the parties on what zoning they wanted. ITD's counsel, Mr. Kronberg,
was anxious, he wanted us to, obviously get submitted. He said I would like to see this
put to rest and we -- and we resolve all this and settle by the end of October. End of the
year maximum. So, in order to get the application submitted I just submitted the C-G,
knowing full well that we would, obviously, have to, you know, come together with the
staff and look at these different zoning designations. Through hours and hours of
meetings, analysis, reports from commercial experts, from traffic engineers, we came to
the zoning designations -- little booger. Oh. We came to zoning designations as you
see right here. Obviously, the staff's opinion worked into what we looked at. The
Fedrizzi parcel right -- oh, little booger. The Fedrizzi parcel there is five acres. It had
three different designations on the Ten Mile land use map. We agree with staff the C-C
is -- is acceptable. Mr. Fedrizzi is in agreement. The SJJV property is what surrounds it
here. It had two different designations. The staff said, you know, HE is most
appropriate there. High density employment next to the interstate. And, then, the C-C
adjoining Mr. Fedrizzi. The Janicek property, what's south of the primary collector, was
C-C. The rear portion -- you can see located here -- is segregated by another north-
south collector. That is also what I call kind of the secondary collector, because any
development within this section is going to need two points of ingress and egress to it.
So, one of the things that we, obviously, looked at was, okay, if these developed in
different orders where would they get their second point of access. So, along with the
right of way here, our plan was to provide right of way here, so that that could be
exercised. We did meet with Matt Schultz, who is handling the Baraya development.
That is still an active development. They got a time extension. Obviously, they -- they
designed their project prior to the Ten Mile area specific plan, but they do show that
primary collector. Meridian 118, as you can see, wraps all the way around us like this.
They have been annexed. They have exercised their development agreement and
those zones are intact and the funny thing is on their property, they had mixtures on the
land use map like we did. This was high density residential. They were zoned ME.
This was mixed use commercial. They were zoned C-C. Nowhere do you see any TN-
C within the Meridian 118 development. Now, the Janicek property, in looking at the
volumes of traffic and the close proximity to Ten Mile, it's going to be bearing the brunt
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 18 of 55
of the -- most of the traffic. It's also going to provide another access that would come
out to here and comes into the Carney property right across from Brighton. Oh, there it
is. So, you can see those are key to development of this section. Meridian 118 has no
vehicular access to an arterial at this time. They have been trying to negotiate, it's my
understanding, to get access to the west out to Black Cat, but this is key to their
development also. The Janiceks also will have to provide right of way for a large rotary.
That rotary we have worked with ACRD on the design of the rotary, the design of the
collectors as far as what they believe we need to size them for and so we also provided
a traffic study based on Ten Mile specific plan and looking at the zoning designations,
what type of traffic these collectors would have to accommodate. We believe that we
have an acceptable compromise here. If you look at your zoning district compatibility
matrix, it, obviously, has your different choices of zoning listed and the C-C is listed as a
possible choice, just like it was listed when the staff supported the C-C portion on
Meridian 118. We have agreed to the TN-C to the west. I think that -- and I did some
layouts on this and it made sense. You could have assisted living back in there. You
could have high density residential. It's segregated by the collector to the west. If we
go to the next one. Also it would create a buffer to Baraya if it were to develop as
initially approved. We would have a transition to the TN-C. But on this portion here I
have all the traffic coming past it and the signal -- oops. I hate this thing. I need a
button. We have all the traffic going past it. A significant part of the property is being --
being given up as right of way and they are getting the least intensive. use. They are at
the half mile mark and to me that doesn't make a lot of sense. I got 30,000 trips a day
at build out and I can't build any type of a commercial structure over 20,000 feet if I have
a TN-C zone. All of my buildings adjacent to streets have to be two story. So, if I have
a commercial user, then, Ican't -- just a single commercial user, I cannot accommodate
them, unless they are willing to build a two story building. I just think the TN-C is not
appropriate. This is a major interchange. The Ten Mile specific area plan has
guidelines and standards and so does your design review manual. When we initially
talked with Anna --
De Weerd: Becky, you need to summarize.
McKay: Yes. I will wrap up. When we initially spoke with Anna on this she said, you
know, part of the development agreement Iwould -- obviously preliminary platting and
some type of a conceptual designing to go along with that preliminary platting. So,
whomever purchases this property or if the Janiceks develop it themselves, they would
have to come back through with a plan. All we are asking tonight is to help us get
annexed, help us zone -- get this zoned to an appropriate designation that we can work
with, so that we can settle all this with the state and I think this is a good solution and a
good compromise and I hate to pass up the opportunity. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McKay: Can I answer any questions?
De Weerd: Council, questions?
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 19 of 55
Bird: Not at this time.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I do have one and it's -- it's not actually on the subjects that you have been
addressing, but it appears that if you look at the western property line there is a
roadway from the project to the west that just kind of ends there. Is there some thought
that that will connect across the property that we are talking about?
McKay: From Meridian one eight -- you mean this road here?
Zaremba: Yes.
McKay: Yes. I met with Meridian 118's engineer and their planner and they -- in their
application, their preliminary plat that's moving forward toward the Council, I had them
straighten that -- that stub street up so it would intersect more at a 90 degree angle.
Zaremba: But intersect with what? It looks like it just dead ends there.
McKay: It would intersect with this TN-C portion, so that when this were designed they
would -- they would connect -- the two would connect. There will end up being
connection -- a connection between the north-south collector and the roadways to the
west in Meridian 118.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
McKay: The rotary is shared by -- it changes. The rotary is shared by the property, so
everybody kind of fits together in this transportation plan kind of like a puzzle and we
have been coordinating with these adjoining properties that are not a part of our
application.
Zaremba: Thank you.
McKay: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further? Thank you, Becky.
McKay: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 20 of 55
De Weerd: This is a public hearing and I do have one member signed up on our
testimony sheet. Richard Fedrizzi.
Fedrizzi: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, my name is Richard Fedrizzi and
I reside at 3226 South Whitepost in Eagle, Idaho, and my wife Patsy and I are the
recorded members of the Fedrizzi Ten Mile, LLC, and I'd just like to express our
satisfaction with the proposed zoning and annexation and like to commend the Mayor
and Council for their continued support of growth in the -- in the valley. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Fedrizzi: Any questions?
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Fedrizzi: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you very much. Is there any other member of the public who would
like to provide testimony? .Yes, sir.
Schreeve: Madam Mayor, Council, my name is Kevin Schreeve and I am representing
SJJV at 360 East Montvue Drive here in Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Schreeve: And just simply want to express in behalf of SJJV our gratitude for your
consideration of the annexation of these properties, including SJJV's and just simply
want to extend our agreement with what Becky has presented and hope that you find
all the properties and the zonings appropriate to your liking and move forward with that.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Kevin. Any questions from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any further testimony?
Turnbull: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm David Turnbull, 12601 West
Explorer Drive.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 21 of 55
Turnbull: I'm partly here out of curiosity. I own some property across the street. I'm
partly here out of request. I have known the Janiceks and I have known Mr. Fedrizzi for
quite some time. I have never met SJJV, but I haven't had time to fully read through or
understand this application. As I understand it it's merely an annexation zoning request.
It doesn't provide a lot of details as far as concept plans and I know the Council has
been reluctant in the past to adopt -- to annex property without some kind of concept
plan and that's often the tug of war you get -- you know, the Janiceks aren't developers
and so they are probably hoping to attract a developer or a buyer that can provide those
details in the future, so maybe you have some tools in your development agreements
that can allow for that. I had a chance to read some of the staff and applicant's
communications to the Council and I'd just like to provide my perspective a little bit on
the Ten Mile area, some general and some specific to this property. In general a lot of
work went into crafting the Ten Mile interchange specific area plan and I think it's
important to note that that was conceived in a time of, you know, some unprecedented
prosperity and now we have had a real estate bust the likes of which we have never
seen. So, I know we know this isn't going to last, but I think we need to understand it's
not going back to the way it was before. So, I think that's important to understand.
There are a number of goals and objectives in the plan probably that will never be
realized. I know that there is some emphasis on live-work units and those have never
particularly succeeded. I mean Bound Crossing -- or not Bound Crossing, there is some
in east Boise that tried them and they didn't work. There is also some emphasis on, .you
know, residential over retail and I know that Bound Crossing did try that and Derrick
O'Neal told me he would never do it again. So, I think that those are, you know, kind of
interesting planning tools, but you got to realize in the context they only are successful
in very very unique places and I -- I don't think that Ten Mile is probably going to be
conducive for that. My point is it's a good thing to push the envelope, it really is, and I
appreciate that, but, then, you always take that in the context of what can be successful
in the marketplace and I think this Council does a very good job of recognizing reality
and recognizing that, you know, dealing with reality is -- and I think you do a nicer job of
dealing with realities, as opposed to some other communities, so I compliment you for
that. And, finally, I think it's important to realize that there are really three different
unique quadrants in this interchange area and it's -- I think it's important to keep them
somewhat distinctive, otherwise you're going to have a big battle or tug of war between
the types of users -- and you will probably get sporadic development, you know, one will
go here, one will go there and one will go somewhere else and you will never get the
momentum or cohesiveness that you're hoping for. Does that mean my time is up?
De Weerd: It means you can summarize.
Turnbull: Okay. Well, that's -- I could probably discuss those three different quadrants
in a little more detail, but I'll just summarize by saying I known Luanne and Brad for a
number of years. I think Luanne was instrumental in bringing the Catholic Church to
Meridian and Chinden. I think that's been a really positive thing for the community. I
understand your reluctance to provide zones without more details and maybe you do
have the tools to deal with that in development agreements and I trust this Council will
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 22 of 55
make a fair and pragmatic decision -- whether that's tonight or whether it's after future
consideration, as Sonya has mentioned. So, I will stand for any questions. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: David, I'll give you an opportunity to talk about those distinctions between the
three different quadrants.
Turnbull: Yeah. Sure. On the southeast quadrant, for example, that's owned by a
couple of individuals, one is John Arrillaga. John Arrillaga owns probably half of Silicon
Valley and I think that his plan there is focusing very much on that type of -- you know,
we did Boise Research Center and I think he's planning on a Boise Research Center
type of development. In conversation with them -- and I think that's something that the
city really needs to go after and leverage his contacts and his expertise there and, you
know, perhaps we can pull in some of that Silicon Valley business opportunity, but, you
know, he mentioned to me at one point -- he said that, you know, in the Silicon Valley in
San Jose there at the intersection of two major freeways he said .you're still looking at,
you know, one, two and three story building. So, if there is an idea that we are going to
get, you know, tall buildings and a lot of parking garages, that's probably something
that's not going to happen in any of our lifetimes. The property that we own is I think
naturally the sort of the retail epicenter of that intersection, because it is on the going
home side and it's the right-hand turn. I mean that's just the way the rules work. That's
where the major retailers like to go and so -- and, then, over on the -- on the northwest
corner you already have an application that is approved for a lot of high density
employment and, you know, some mixes of uses, but I think the anchor there is
probably the high density employment. So, I guess my point is if one's trying -- it
probably makes sense to target those areas, so that each one of them them has a
chance of success and that they can attract those users and gain momentum and so
that's kind of the way I view that whole area out there. Now, I would say, too, that we
have -- you will get an application from us to digest here in a couple of months, much
like when we've done any kind of new development -- like when we did Mill District at
Harris Ranch and nobody had done alley-loaded product in this valley for -- since the
north end, maybe, and we went to Celebration in Orlando, Florida. We went to Harbor
Town in Mud Island in Memphis, Tennessee. We went to the Kentlands in Washington
D.C. We went to Orenco Station in Portland. And we took tape measures and we took
photographs and we looked at things that we thought would work in this valley and we
saw things we were pretty sure wouldn't work in this valley, but we saw things here and
things there that we thought we could incorporate and, you know, what we came up
with, because of that market research and it was a very successful development that we
are proud of, we have spent the last several weeks making some similar trips regarding
our property on -- you know, we spent -- two weeks ago we went to California and we
traveled from Sacramento to San Diego and we looked at some amazing projects and
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 23 of 55
some of them we thought, boy, we wish could do this, but, you know, we are just a few
million people short and maybe 100,000 dollars additional median income for making
something like The Grove in Beverly Hills or Santana Road in San Jose work here in
Meridian. So, that's the realities we are dealing with. But in that process we saw some
really neat concepts that we think we can incorporate and you will see those coming
forth in our plan. In fact, I just had one -- Matt just had one e-mailed to us while we
were sitting here. So, we are working on that. But that's the kind of process we are
going through. Next we are going to Colorado to look at some others. So, you know,
think that that's something that Meridian city recognizes, they recognize the marketplace
and they recognize the need to provide the basis for a successful development,
because, you know, it takes -- let's face it, if something gets built you sure want it to
succeed, otherwise, you have got another problem on your hands.
De Weerd: So, no Rodeo Drive, uh? Geez.
Turnbull: Maybe my grandchildren will have that opportunity.
Bird: Or get the income up.
De Weerd: Any further questions from Council?
Rountree: No. Thank you, Mayor.
Turnbull: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Dave. Additional testimony?
Schultz: Good evening, Mayor and Council. My Warne is Matt Schultz, Schultz
Company at 5463 South Acheron in Boise.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Schultz: I'm here on behalf of the Baraya Subdivision. I heard my name mentioned by
Becky, so I -- I'm going to have to talk. I was hoping to --
De Weerd: You didn't have to.
Schultz: I know. It could have went either way. But I wanted to kind of comment on
things. I did get out to come just to make sure that everything was okay as it relates to
the Baraya Subdivision, which we -- it was June of 2007 since we got that approved and
annexed. We were the first annexation into the -- into this mile and we were part of the
Ten Mile plan.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 24 of 55
Schultz: It was probably a year later than we wanted, but we -- we got through it and
you guys approved it and it does match your plan. I did look at their application and I
did see what they proposed as a little bit of an addendum, if you will, and we don't have
any problem with that as -- especially as it relates in the far west side of them, how it
transitions better with some residential and we always knew that there was going to be
something more intense to the south, just didn't know exactly quite what. I always kind
of knew in the back of my mind it wouldn't quite end up like the plan, you know, as a
guideline, that it would be something -- something similar and I think this -- this could
work. I just want to comment more on some specifics. I never did see the final final
iteration of how that north-south collector intersected Baraya and if you look at it close
it's pretty -- pretty complicated geometry going on there with some roundabouts and
curves and things like that and you can't see it at the high level, but if you zoom in -- if
you zoom into here -- we never got a chance to look at how that might affect us exactly
right there. You know, it may look pretty small on here, but when you get down to it that
might take out a -- the back end of a -- you know, a four unit townhome. We are just not
quite sure. So, if you do decide to move on, you know, we would like you to maybe
condition it that we -- we look at the exact geometry there and make sure there is not an
adverse impact to anything that we do have preliminary platted already in that area and
we are just here to get along and, hopefully, work together to get something that
benefits everybody and doesn't adversely impact anybody on the same -- you know, on
the other hand as well, so with that, thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Matt. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Further testimony? Okay. Becky, would you like to
close this?
McKay: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. To answer -- kind of
answer --
De Weerd: Again, if you will just state your name.
McKay: Oh. Becky McKay.
De Weerd: Thank you.
McKay: I'll kind of try to answer Matt's question. As far as the geometry of the
proposed right of ways, obviously, that -- the rotary location and so forth, you know, has
not been solidified up there to the north. You know, we -- before the right of ways are
dedicated we kind of have to meet all together as a group again. Initially there was
roadway that ran along their -- the south boundary of that property. It didn't fit in very
well, because you ended up with two roadways parallel with the each other. So, as far
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 25 of 55
as the rotary location I'm not -- you know, we can't move it south, because it will get too
-- it will be too close to the other rotary, so it may workout best if it's just like a three
legged intersection on the north adjacent to Baraya. But we definitely will be
coordinating with them on it. As we have Meridian 118, they gave us their new layout.
We did adjust to match up to theirs on -- Sonya, can you go back to the last slide?
Watters: On your presentation?
McKay: Yes.
Watters: I'm having difficulties.
McKay: I'm glad I'm not the only one. That one works. Yeah. Yeah. They ended up
with a cul-de-sac. I didn't touch it. Meridian 118 ended with a cul-de-sac where -- that
was --
Watters: Sorry.
McKay: There it goes.
Watters: You might have better luck advancing it on your side over there, Becky..
McKay: Okay. There we go.
Watters: There. Now it's going.
McKay: Meridian 118 ended up with a cul-de-sac at this location and, then, eliminated
this section right there. There we go. No. So, we have been coordinating with them.
Obviously, when they get through the preliminary plat process, you know, here within
the next 30 to 45 days, you know, we will know more about at what points do we need
to intersect with them. I ask the Council not to remand this application back to the
Planning and Zoning Commission. The application submitted was a more intensive
zone of C-G than -- than the C-C, the TN-C, as is proposed now. It has always been
acceptable if you agree on a lesser zone that you don't have to go back to step number
one and start over, if you can find a compromise, which we have done many times. We
feel that the TN-C and the C-C -- all these zones they make sense. It's my hope that
somebody big comes in and buys these parcels and we see a large development out
there. That would, obviously, be the -- the best case scenario. But these parcels we
are providing for them to develop independently of each other if that's how it ends up.
We are providing the roadway network. This is the first time we have ever done this.
This is new territory for us, for the agencies. ACHD is going to accept these right of
ways without improvements. Obviously, contingent on whoever utilizes the right of way
or needs them first would go in and construct. This is by far the superior I think solution
to our -- to this situation and we can put everything to rest as far as these
condemnations are concerned and move forward and really start planning for this Ten
Mile area. The staff had a quote in the Meridian 118 or Meridian Crossing staff report
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 26 of 55
concerning the land use map of the Ten Mile specific plan and they said -- may I quote:
The lines on the land use map are flexible. These lines should adjust and evolve. What
we are proposing is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The C-C zone, the TN-C,
the HE, all of those are an acceptable zoning within those designations and the -- the
difficulty we have had with this -- and I will conclude -- has been that there are so many
different designations it's like a juggling act and so I think we have done the best we can
to request the most reasonable zones. If we stick a nonreasonable zone on this
property I don't think it can develop. I just -- the limitations of that TN-C up there at the
intersection, Ten Mile -- I mean a traditional neighbor, that's not the place for it. It
should be to the west in the interior and that's where we are providing that TN-C. I ask
the Council to, please, support this application and allow us to wrap it up, please.
De Weerd: Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Would you run through again your comment about the two story buildings
and what -- what is it that you prefer?
McKay: Yes. In comparing the TN-C with the C-C, the Traditional Neighborhood
Commercial and the community business district, the TN-C in the ordinance limits the
square footage for any commercial footprint adjoining astreet -- public street to 20,000
square feet and at the same time it mandates that -- or, I'm sorry, 20,000 square feet
with -- it mandates two stories if you adjoin a street. And -- let's see.
Zaremba: I think I'm getting it. And the C-C allows you greater flexibility --
McKay: Whereas the C-C -- the C-C gives us more flexibility. If somebody wants to
build a, you know, 20,000 square foot retail center, for example, I have to -- and they
want to be by the street where the signal is, where the major parkway is, I have to build
two stories. So, if they don't want like mixed use, say office or multi-family, integrating
the building, then, they couldn't build there. The TN-C talks about pedestrian oriented.
You can have pedestrian oriented in the C-C. Nothing says these development
standards can't apply to each zone and they do. I mean you have set forth the design
standards and each zone, regardless of zone, is going to have to design their site plans
accordingly. So, I guess that's what I'm getting at. The TN-C at your high traffic
corridor joining Ten Mile Road doesn't make a lot of sense from a planning perspective.
And the C-C is in the interior also. I mean I'm transitioning just like I think they
envisioned in the plan. Any other questions?
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 27 of 55
Rountree: Yeah. Becky, a couple things that are still not clear to me. What issue is it
that you're trying to solve for the transportation department?
McKay: Right now the condemnation -- the three different condemnation cases are kind
of on hold. They have been reporting back to the judge on what is the status. They
reported to the judge that we are working on an agreement or a solution where all
parties would end these condemnation cases, provide the right of way, ITD puts up the
458,500 dollars with ACRD, everybody -- ACRD accepts unimproved right of way.
Everybody comes together. And part of that process was annexing into Meridian. So,
the properties are in Meridian, they are annexed, zoned appropriately and they have a
development agreement. So, it was like a packaged deal. If this application is denied,
then, that puts us back to square one. You know, they -- it's -- if they -- if they don't
have some -- some type of zoning where they can feel like, yes, you know, we will go
ahead, we will dedicate the right of way, we can't facilitate the development of the
section. Meridian 118 can't even develop. What ITD was taking is not sufficient to build
a seven lane intersection and a -- a four lane parkway type collector. So, the Janiceks
are having to provide even more right of way under my calculations another acre just on
the east-west street, so -- and, then, we -- and, then, they need anorth-south
connection. Obviously, they would coordinate with Baraya. At one time Matt said that,
you know, if everybody else was going to dedicate these right of ways, that they would,
obviously, you know, coordinate that. It's in their best interest to get the collectors built,
too. So, that -- that's what we are trying to resolve. To end the lawsuits. And I have got
the property owners to agree and that -- you know, everybody has different opinions.
Sometimes it felt like herding cats. But it was all worth it if we can put all this together
and I feel that a development agreement is definitely the mechanism in which you guys
can add conditions that you feel comfortable zoning this. And it's in compliance with the
comp plan. Thank you.
Rountree: Madam Mayor. Again, Becky, in terms of a DA, how flexible are your clients
with respect to the -- how stringent a DA might be with respect to uses in a C-C?
McKay: Madam Mayor, Councilman Rountree, Idon't -- I don't believe we discussed
restrictions, you know, on different uses in your ordinance. We did provide them with
lists of the different zones, so they knew exactly they allowed as -- and what was
conditional. But we haven't specifically talked about that. They do understand that a
development agreement is required by the Council that there will be conditions that
apply to these properties, because the city is -- is, basically, annexing them with a
transportation plan, as you may call it, and, obviously, site specific site plans will be
required.
Rountree: I guess my question is there a willingness with respect to that question for
your applicant to sit down with staff and explore those opportunities or potentials?
McKay: Yeah. I mean we could sit down and go through them. I guess we would need
some direction on the staff as far as, you know, what particular use within the C-C
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 28 of 55
would not be appropriate. We are surrounded by C-C on the west and on the south.
I'm just trying to -- you know, if --
Rountree: I guess I just say that as opposed trying to do it here.
McKay: Yes.
Rountree: Because you know where that will go.
McKay: Yes. Yes. That's -- yes, sir. Yeah. If the Council -- if that's -- you know, the
Council would like us, you know, obviously, the development agreement is going to
have to be written up, sit down with the staff prior to legal writing that development
agreement and try to hammer some of these things out. Obviously, we are a willing
party.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary, have we written or prepared a development plan without a
concept plan before? This provides a big challenge.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, probably the broadest ones we have
had -- Southridge, we had some large parcels if you recall, that were undefined and not
the portion that's Center Cal, but the other portion of the Kleiner parcel, the portion on
the west side of Eagle Road was annexed without a concept plan. So, there was not
any -- basically anything on that parcel requires Council action to do anything, so -- so,
those are the only two I can think of. They are very general. It does take awhile to get
the language comfortable for both the city, as well as the applicant, but those are the
only two I can think of. And Southridge had some general concept of what would go in
those large -- I think mega parcels was the term they used back then. They had general
concepts of what were allowed or what limitations would be restricted for that zone. So,
which uses wouldn't be allowed is usually where we start. So, if you adopt a specific
zone, but you don't want certain uses that might be allowed generally, then, that's
probably the starting point for some of those as well.
De Weerd: I guess I would ask staff -- have you had ample time to evaluate the
change?
Watters: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, no, we just received the applicant's
request for a change in zoning on Friday. So, staff has not really had adequate time to
thoroughly go through it and prepare development agreement provisions.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any other questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 29 of 55
Zaremba: I would venture an opinion, but first let me say that I appreciate that there are
several property owners working together on your part of the project and I also
appreciate that you all our communicating with the property owners around you. I think
that always arrives at a better solution than individual pieces and I appreciate your
doing that. I will have to say I don't have particular heartburn with the request to have
C-C at Ten Mile. As Mr. Turnbull pointed out, we have a little different situation right
now than we had when this plan was originally adopted and there may very well be
some adjustments we need to make. We have had other applications in other areas
where a plat was even established and somebody's come back and said, you know, that
doesn't really work right now, we need to make some adjustments and we have listened
to those and I think agreed with many of them under the new circumstances. So, even
if our direction is that you're -- we are not going to rule on this tonight, but that you
would sit down with staff, I would venture the opinion that I have no problem with
discussing the C-C and I appreciate you're doing the TN-C on the west end and that's
my personal opinion.
De Weerd: Any further comments?
McKay: Just one comment. I guess if it's the Council's desire we meet with the staff, I
wouldn't like them to push this out too far, because the judge is leaning on the
attorneys, either settle it or set a court date. So, you know, we are -- they are getting a
lot of heat and if it falls apart, then, that's where it ends up is in the courts and that's
what I'm trying to avoid.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I think the sit down with staff is just how fast can a development agreement
be worked out when there is no concept plan and that may be up to you as well.
McKay: Okay. And we would be glad to research the other projects that Bill mentioned
that were annexed and zoned without a development plan to them to see what type of
language, obviously, the Council was comfortable with on those applications.
De Weerd: Anything further from Council?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I tend to agree with David, I'm really -- I'm pleased that
people are working together on this and trying to make it work and I think we need to
join that effort. I think there has been enough changes -- we could have the opportunity
to remand this back to planning and zoning. I'm not inclined to do that right now. I
would like to see some time spent with -- with recent information that we have been
provided and staff has been provided to think through that, do the pros and cons versus
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 30 of 55
what's in the comp plan, in the Ten Mile area specific plan, versus what's being
proposed as a compromise and, then, try to come to some resolution with tentative
development agreement language and that we can work through the -- the C-C zoning
in the one sector there that's being proposed. But I'm not able tonight to recommend
what you want recommended and what I would be recommending is not what you want.
So, I think if we can continue this item, Madam Mayor, would be where I would like to
go.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'm ready to make a decision on it. I'm like David, I -- I think that -- I think that we
have an ordinance that tells what the use is in C-C and while we don't have a concept
plan, we have passed DAs without concept plans before, while we don't like it, but I
think this is something that is a step forward out there at the Ten Mile area. I think when
Ten Mile was put in it was -- we were under a different economic base than we are now,
so I'm not in favor of sending it back another time. Either up it or down it.
De Weerd: Well, I think, Mr. Bird, those -- those other applications -- the change didn't
come in a couple days before the action was taken and without the concept plan I think
staff needs to have some time to really give it some thought and work with the applicant
to make sure your development agreement has the various assurances in it to make
sure that the surrounding property owners are also protected, so it's just --
Bird: Well, they do get time on the development agreement.
De Weerd: Those were all recommendations as well from the Planning and Zoning
Commission. So, anything further from Council?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, just on timing, our next week's meeting is our workshop
where we normally don't hold public hearings. The week after that on the 20th is a
normal meeting. We have canceled the meeting for the 27th, so if this is going to
happen in the near future it needs to be continued to the 20th and I guess my question
for staff and the applicant is can you work together on a DA to come back two weeks
from now? I see some head noddings.
Watters: I think we probably could. Would it -- if it would work for the applicant.
Zaremba: I see the applicant nodding yes, I believe.
Watters: I think we can make that work.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 31 of 55
Zaremba: Okay. In that case, Madam Mayor, I would move that we continue this item
to our regularly scheduled meeting of December 20th for the purpose of developing a
DA.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue this to December 20th. All those
in favor say aye. Any opposed nay.
Bird: Nay.
De Weerd: Okay. Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT.
G. Public Hearing: RZ 11-004 Chesterfield by Liberty
Development, Inc. Located South Side of W. Pine Avenue;
Midway Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road
Request: Rezone of 1.48 Acres of Land from the R-8 Zoning
District to the R-15 Zoning District
H. Public Hearing: PP 11-007 Chesterfield by Liberty
Development, Inc. Located South Side of W. Pine Avenue;
Midway Between N. Black Cat Road and N. Ten Mile Road
Request: Preliminary Plat Approval of 148 Residential Lots and
Twelve (12) Common Lots on 28.2 Acres in an Existing R-8
Zone and a Proposed R-15 Zone
De Weerd: Our next two items are public hearings on RZ 11-004 and 11-007 as a
preliminary plat for Item 7-G and H. I will open these two public hearings with staff
comments.
Parsons: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Tonight I will be
presenting the Chesterfield Subdivision project to you. The property is located on the
south side of Pine Avenue midway between Black Cat Road and North Ten Mile. You
can see here that the site is remaining vacant here. A little history on this property.
Back in 2004 Council acted on and approved a planned development and a subdivision
for this property. In 2008 they came before you and requested a time extension. At that
time they did not want to comply with current requirements in the UDC and staff had
recommended denial of that time extension. Council backed staff's recommendation
and denied the time extension and so that's why we are before you again this evening.
The applicant is proposing to rezone 1.48 acres from the R-8 zoning designation to the
R-15 zone and, then, concurrent application is for preliminary plat that consists of 148
residential lots and 12 common lots. For illustrative purposes I have this slide before
you. On the left-hand side you can see the old plat that was presented to you and,
then, in the right-hand corner there is the proposed plat, with the exception of lot layout,
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 32 of 55
these -- the new plat generally conforms to what was previously approved, just a few
more alley loaded with the old version versus the new, but the applicant is, again,
generally consistent with those requirements. With the new plat the applicant is
proposing to designate ten percent space and provide two site amenities in the pocket
park. During the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing there were some items of
discussion there and so the applicant's drawn up a new exhibit to kind of explain to
Council and also demonstrate to the neighbors that they are willing to -- to meet some
of those -- the applicant's willing to meet the Commission's recommendations and
comply with some of the concerns that they heard from the public and so what I have
done for you is on the left-hand side you can see I have highlighted the area that they
are proposing to rezone. That area is -- affects 12 lots. Really, the reason for the
rezone is so that they can mirror the alley load lots that were platted with Chesterfield
No. 1. So, from that point forward the applicant is remaining with the R-8 zoning
designation and that leaves approximately 136 lots that will be single family homes.
You can see how they mix up the open space lots. The periphery lots do generally
comply with the. site requirements that are platted around the property, so there is a
change there. And, then, during the hearing Commission wanted to make sure that the
tot lot and the pocket park was constructed with phase three and so the applicant has
indicated that they are willing to do that. I'd also point out that Commission had
concerns with the traffic flowing through phase, given the fact that phase one would
start at the. west boundary and moved .east and so as part of the. DA that staff is
requiring with the rezone, we have added a provision in there that says they will extend
Pine Street with phase two. The applicant also presented some elevations with the
application. Staff has conditioned them to comply with these elevations. I think if I can
move to the DA provisions really quick, the one -- the important thing to point out is staff
has conditioned them to -- or at least Planning and Zoning Commission is
recommending this as well, but they have also stated -- staff has also informed them
that they would have to substantially comply with those elevations, but the important
part here is that they would have to receive Planning Department approval before they
would get building permits. I think -- I think last year staff went through the Meridian
design manual and what we have been noticing is that some the residential homes
throughout the city have been lacking some necessary design elements on some
facades facing the street and common lots and so Council directed staff to move
forward and try to come up with some provision in the -- some guidelines in the design
manual to do that and I think the first DA provision does that. So, we want to insure that
homes constructed in the subdivision are quality homes and had the appropriate design
and comply with the design guidelines and the design manual. Also I wanted to point
out to Council that Commission -- due to public testimony Commission was also wanting
to limit the number of buildable lots in the subdivision and so that's why we proposed --
proposed DA provision number two, which restricts them to 148 residential lots and,
then, again, open spaces tied to that, as well as the amenities and, then, the one big
thing that was added in, because this is a rezone, is the Commission heard a lot of
testimony from surrounding neighbors about overcrowding of amenities in the
Castlebrook Subdivision and so Council wasn't inclined in adding amenities as part of
the rezone application. What they thought the best way to combat that was to have the
applicant create a separate HOA association -- homeowners association, so that they
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 33 of 55
don't have rights to those -- privileges to those amenities in adjacent subs. So, as a DA
provision, per the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, staff has
added DA provision number four there that basically conditions them to, you know,
create their own HOA and not be part of the combined HOA that's already currently out
there and, then, given the fact of the traffic concerns out there, the Commission
recommended a DA provision that Pine Street be extended through with phase two and
that's also tied to the DA. So, moving through the -- again, Commission did recommend
approval at the November 3rd Planning and Zoning hearing. In favor was Steve Arnold
and Shawn Brownlee and Guy Coldwell testified as neutral. He was the HOA president
for the Castlebrook Subdivision. A lot of folks came out in opposition. On your hearing I
have noted quite a few applicants -- at least ahalf adozen -- a dozen or so there. I
won't read you all the names, but it was pretty substantial and, then, also written
testimony -- a petition was sent in with seven signatures and, then, also Chris Verkirk
also sent in a letter in opposition, basically, stating that the pool amenity in Castlebrook
was, basically, overcrowded with the additional homes and they had concerns with this
subdivision coming online and using their pool facilities. So, key items of discussion by
Council -- or, excuse me, by Commission included poor subdivision amenities and how
could they separate the two HOAs, reconfiguring phasing plan in which the applicant
did, so one was getting Pine with phase two and, then, getting the tot lot and those
amenities with phase three. The applicant has agreed to that and, then, also the
neighborhood concerns with traffic. and, again, the subdivision amenities.. So, key
changes, again, like I pointed out to you, staff is recommending -- or at least
Commission has recommended additional DA provisions, which I have presented to you
and, then, in order to comply with -- meet the intent of those DA provisions staff has
went ahead and initiated some changes to some conditions of approval as well in the
staff report. Staff has received written testimony from the applicant since the
Commission hearing. They are in agreement with the DA provisions as well. Staff has
not received any other additional testimony from any of the adjacent neighbors or any of
the public I should say. With the applicant's willingness to go forward with the DA
provisions and provide a separate HOA for this development, staff is unaware of any
additional outstanding issues for you. With that I would be happy to answer any
additional questions you may have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Bill. Council, questions? Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor. Bill, would you put on a -- something like that. That's what I
wanted to see. Okay. So, the Pine Street extension that we are talking about doesn't
totally make the connection between Black Cat and Ten Mile at this point, it just extends
it farther than it is now?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, you are correct. The reason why Pine
Street stops there is that's where their property ends.
Zaremba: Okay.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 34 of 55
Parsons: And that's where they have -- the other thing to keep in mind is before
Planning and Zoning Commission the project was continued out three or four times and
the reason for the continuance was ACRD, as part of their staff report or
recommendation going forward on the plat, they were contemplating having the
applicant dip Pine Street down and cut through those lots with phase three there. So,
they -- they were almost -- they were contemplating having them extended to the
eastern property boundary and also put half a road trust for a bridge. The applicant has
worked with ACHD to remove those recommendations. Their commission has acted on
it. This is what's been approved by their commission and I believe the applicant's put
up a road trust for the remaining additional right of way when -- to ACRD when Pine
connects through when that property to the north develops. They are proposing to do
sidewalk -- extended sidewalk to the eastern boundary and I do think curb and gutter at
this point.
Zaremba: All right. Thank you. That would leave me with a question for the Fire
Department and maybe the Police Department as well. Pine Street is still a cul-de-sac
and we are generally disapproving of more than 50 homes without a second access and
I'm concerned that this for awhile is going to function as a cul-de-sac and there is a lot
more than 50 homes on it and I guess I would ask for an opinion from the Fire
Department.
Niemeyer: Madam Mayor, Councilman Zaremba, you are correct. That is our standard
guideline that we use when Chief Palmer is reviewing these applications. We would
want to hold true with that. I would encourage at this point Chief Palmer get involved
and meet with the applicant to discuss this and look for alternative methods or means
that we could use until the build out is done, if I'm following that correctly.
Zaremba: I mean I can clearly see that eventually there will be more accesses, but I'm
concerned about the near term.
De Weerd: There are a lot of homes on Pine and this on the south side of Pine; is that
correct?
Parsons: That is correct.
Bird: Between Pine and the railroad tracks.
De Weerd: So, I guess I can understand what the concern is, because -- and I
appreciate that Ada County Highway District was considering that road extension,
because that is really needed at some point and I guess my question, too, would be to
our Fire Department at what point that would be needed, because there is only one way
out.
Niemeyer: Yeah. Again, Madam Mayor, that threshold for the residential is the 50
homes when we start looking for that secondary access. Because at that point, if you
have one access blocked in and subsequently out of that, we have no access to that.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 35 of 55
So, that 50 home threshold we do try and maintain that pretty strictly so we don't get
blocked in or out.
De Weerd: I think that that access on the far south has less likelihood than the
extension of Pine. I mean where is it going to go? And I recall Mallard Landing is
exactly --
Rountree: Same way.
De Weerd: -- the same way. And since we got the majority of the phone calls and
complaints in that area, I know what the people that live in that area think, too. Any
further questions for staff at this point? Okay. Hi. If you will, please, state your name
and address for the record.
Arnold: For the record Steve Arnold, CK Engineers, 860 Headwaters, Eagle, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Arnold: I think instead of going into a lot of the details that were addressed by staff, we
have worked quite a bit with staff on -- on the issues that were brought up at P&Z and
the -- the concerns with the .neighborhood. We have added the provision and we
suggested the provision in the development agreement that limited this development's
use of the other amenities within the areas that were of concern. The existing amenities
that are in Castlebury apparently are being overused, so we suggested that we limit the
-- our subdivision, the development agreement, and the homeowners association to be
self contained. It will not be a part of the Castlebury Subdivision. But the extension of
Pine Avenue, it was always planned that it was going to stub, basically, where it was
proposed. ACHD will be extending it in the future as properties north and east of us
redevelop. A key note here, based on the previous approval with this preliminary plat
and I can tell you the developer for certain is wishing they went forward and complied
with the UDC and got the time extension approved, because staff has changed over at
ACRD, their issues has changed, and they have got some different requirements. But
we are complying with all the conditions ACHD set forward. We are going to be
providing curb, gutter, sidewalk to the eastern boundary -- and I would touch this, but
I'm afraid that I will mess it up worse than before. But we have met with them, we have
submitted a traffic study, a revised traffic study, dictating that the traffic within this area
and the existing streets can handle it. The issue about the fire is a new one. That
wasn't before a concern in the previous approvals, but I think if you had an aerial and
you zoomed out, there are additional connections out through Castlebury, besides just
Pine. There is either one or two extensions out there through the Castlebury
Subdivision that would provide secondary access to the site. One key thing to note --
and we -- back in 2007 the Public Works Department met with this developer and
constructed sewer and water in the existing alignments within the streets from Pine
Avenue to our southern most boundary to the micropath that we are proposing. The
alleyway has been constructed, which limited our ability and -- to develop those lots
between the alleyway and that public street. Hence the reason we submitted the
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 36 of 55
rezone application. The previous application was approved with a PUD. The first
amenity that was provided in this subdivision is further to the west. Significant size tot
lot. We were originally proposing a picnic table gazebo based on the concerns that the
Planning and Zoning Commission had and the neighborhood had at the original
meeting. We added an additional amenity which went above and beyond the
subdivision requirements for the site of a tot lot and we submitted that to staff for their
review and comment. I think we are in compliance with all of the staff requirements. I
stand tonight before you to say that we will comply with the provisions on the
development agreement and we will comply with all the conditions of approval in the
preliminary plat. With that being said I will stand for comment.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council? Yes, Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor, I agree there are -- if you go through the subdivision to the
west, Ithink -- I'm not sure whether it exists or whether it's planned, but there will be
other access to Pine. My issue with Pine is if something happened at Pine and Black
Cat, everybody along Pine is stuck. There is no other way out. Even if you have a
couple of ways to get to Pine it's Pine that's the cul-de-sac and we have a similar issue
on Linder south of Overland -- south of Franklin as well where there is a lot of
subdivisions that at the moment only have on way in and out and that's -- that's
uncomfortable.
Arnold: Shall I try to zoom?
Zaremba: Yeah. The show that was there does show that there are other -- there are
more accesses to Pine, which is good, but everybody needs to get down Pine to Black
Cat.
Arnold: Madam Mayor, Commissioner Zaremba, what you're not seeing here is that
there -- that there is multiple connections Pine, but there is multiple connections out to
Black Cat through Castlebury.
Zaremba: Okay.
Arnold: That would be -- the screen that I'm looking at just to the north and west.
Bird: Two of them. Two more.
Arnold: Just two.
Bird: Yeah.
Zaremba: That makes me feel better.
De Weerd: Any further questions?
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 37 of 55
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Thank you. I do have two people that have signed up on the public hearing
sign-up sheet. Jill Ball signed up against. If you would like to provide testimony,
please, come forward. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Ball: My name is Jill Ball and I live at 4100 West Hearst, which is in the Castlebrook
Subdivision, which is across Pine from where they are talking about Chesterfield, and
I'm in the last phase of Castlebrook and when we bought our home we had bought our
home with an amenity in Castlebrook, a pool, and at the time when we bought it we
were told that there was going to be two pools in there and, then, they later changed it,
because of things that had happened and we bought our home in 2007 and shortly after
we bought our home they annexed in Chesterfield, which is across Pine from us and we
weren't told because the builder outvoted us as a neighborhood and so he just annexed
in this other neighborhood and didn't not tell us and so our pool and our parks in our
neighborhood are very overcrowded and the pool is built with a filter that's for a
residential and not the commercial and so it's breaking all the time and they aren't fixing
it and it's a big problem for our neighborhood and so now they wanted to add another
148 homes and so the neighborhood freaked out and that's why everyone's in
opposition for it. Steve Arnold keeps talking about our neighborhood and saying that
there is multiple Black Cat entrances. There is not. There is one. There is three on
Pine, so the majority of Castlebrook comes out on Pine. Hardly any use the Black Cat
entrance because of where it's located. From my house -- I'm in the very back of
Castlebrook, so I come out on Pine, which is right across from where they are wanting
to build this other part of the neighborhood and Pine is going to be a problem. It's a cul-
de-sac and for the people in Chesterfield that's their only way out and he said that they
could cut through Castlebrook and come out on Black Cat, if that entrance of Pine and
Chesterfield -- I don't know what the Street is, but if that was blocked nobody in that
neighborhood could get out and go through Castlebrook, which he is implying could
happen and that couldn't happen, because of that street being blocked. There is a lot of
traffic problems and where Black Cat and Pine run there is a blind intersection and so
as a neighborhood we were trying to get them to fix -- like if you are going to add that
many more homes you need to fix Pine. The -- I don't know the man's name, but the
man who owns the parcel that is north of Pine and east of Castlebrook, he's not selling
and he's not going to sell in his lifetime. So, it's going to be a long long time before Pine
connects to Ten Mile. Along time. And they are wanting to have another 148 homes --
it's going to be a serious problem for the fire department, for the police department, for
all the people that are associated in that area. It's a traffic problem. We have so many
school buses that are coming through there and that's before they have built homes and
half of -- the first phase of Chesterfield hasn't even been sold yet. They are built, but
they haven't sold. They are sitting empty. So, they are wanting to build this many more.
It's going to be a problem. Any questions?
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 38 of 55
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Troy Behunan. Signed up against. If you will, please,
state your name and address and address.
Behunan: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council Members. My name is Troy
Behunan. I reside in the Castlebrook Subdivision. I actually live near the Black Cat
entrance into our Castlebrook Subdivision and just to balance off of what has already
been talked about by Jill Ball, there is only one Castlebrook-Black Cat Road and there is
really only two entrances into the main body of the Castlebrook Subdivision on Pine.
One is directly across from the Chesterfield existing entrance and that's at the very very
back of the subdivision. Just to give you an idea, when I bought my home a few years
back I had no idea that there was any kind of plans to incorporate a subdivision directly
across the street -- across the mid mile street across Pine and to give you a site and
scope of this project, there is already 268 homes in Castlebrook. I don't know what the
percentage is, but it's got to be very high of how many people use that pool in our
subdivision. It's consistently and constantly busy. There is a lot of people that do visit.
There is already a number of problems that already exist with the -- with the pool, one of
which -- and of major concern to myself and several of the medical profession --
professionals that actually live in our subdivision .are .also nervous about it, about water
borne illnesses and the pool is built at a residential standard. It constantly is needing
attention. There is vandalism problems already with the 260 homes that are using it
now and at some point we had to say how many homes is enough. If we were to leave
it up to the developer we would have five or six more phases added to our subdivision
without the need to build another pool or other amenities. That just isn't right. We are
talking upwards of 450 homes using one pool that is already undersized. So, I'm here
tonight just to insure that the condition that the Planning and Zoning has already
recommended to this body -- this is a decision making body and through the use of a
special use permit I'm here to see that that gets enforced and that it is in place, because
of the dangers that are already associated with the existing subdivision and also to
make sure that there is a provision in there that -- that there is some follow through, that
there is a mechanism in place to ensure that it's not just an approval that's given at a
hearing like this in front of a few people, but yet that there is some type of mechanism
installed into the development agreement or into the approvals of this body that if things
change afterwards that -- that something is done to accommodate that, notwithstanding
-- and I know my time is up and I will wrap it up and I will make it short, but the use of
Castlebrook Subdivision as a secondary access -- and I don't remember his name
offhand -- the fire department at a very minimum there would be at least a quarter mile
trip for anybody to go through the subdivision, like Castlebrook and use that as a
subdivision or as a secondary turnaround. There is a minimum of five turns for any kind
of emergency access or emergency vehicles or anything like that and, again, it's at least
a quarter mile through a residential subdivision that is fully built out. So, I would have
you -- I would recommend and like to suggest that something be done to accommodate
this overlengthed, oversized -- or overbuilt cul-de-sac and also to implement something
about the separate HOA. Thank you.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 39 of 55
De Weerd: Thank you, Troy. Is there anyone else who would like to testify? I do have
a second sheet that has Shawn Brownlee. Okay. Thank you. Is there any additional
testimony on this? Mr. Arnold, do you want to wrap this up? Mr. Nary, I guess while
Steve is coming forward I think it's important to note on HOAs that we have very little
influence on what HOAs can do and can't do. Would you care to comment on that?
Nary: Certainly, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Just I guess for the record's
sake, I think the recommendation by Planning and Zoning was that this simply -- this
subdivision would be separate and apart from the existing HOAs and that's all really we
have authority as a city to really do. We don't have the ability create either the
covenants, conditions, and restrictions of the different HOAs or what's allowed by the
different HOAs by their boards, but I think that was the only recommendation made by
Planning and Zoning Commission is my understanding, so -- and that's the only thing
within our real authority to do.
De Weerd: And, Troy, I guess I would just note that we can approve -- we can accept
P&Z's recommendation, but what happens after our approval is -- is a private matter.
It's not something that the city can be involved in. And so I'm just -- I have been on an
HOA board, it's a thankless job, but I just want to make sure that your HOA pays
attention, because it's -- that's something that we can't help with. It's. a civil issue. So,
just wanted to note that on the record. Okay. Mr. Arnold. Sorry.
Arnold: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, again, Steve Arnold CK Engineers.
860 Headwater. Going back to the entrances, there may only be one more entrance
through Castlebury, but there is another out through another subdivision north out to
Black Cat and, then, there is apparently another one out here to Cherry and I apologize
if this was an issue I wasn't prepared to discuss tonight. As opposed to traffic I -- you
know, I could sit here and bore the Council. I'm used to speaking about traffic-related
issues. I can just say that we have submitted a traffic study and both Pine, Black Cat,
all the intersections are operating at better than adequate levels of service, so I'll let the
traffic study stand alone on that. As opposed to the homeowners association and the
development agreement, I'm representing the developer tonight that's saying that they
will create a separate association for that property and it will be a stand alone
subdivision as Chesterfield. I think those will address the major concerns that the
neighbors have. I think we have provided a subdivision that was far better than what
was previously approved with additional open space, additional amenities. We are
complying with previous conditions, we are complying with additional conditions
imposed by the Planning and Zoning and we respectfully ask your approval tonight for
this subdivision. I'll stand for questions.
De Weerd: Council, questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 40 of 55
De Weerd: You know -- and, Steve, I appreciate that you guys did a traffic study and
maybe this is an Ada County Highway District question, but I have family members that
lived in Castleford -- in that -- Brook. In that subdivision across from the pool. So, I
know a little bit more about this whole ordeal than I would normally, but you can stack
those cars trying to get out onto Black Cat quite a bit at certain points of the day and --
and it is a concern in particular, since we have gone through something similar in
another part of our town. It needs to have good thought behind it before we put more
homes out there. So, just a point of discussion. It's one thing, a study, it's another thing
when you have to live it, so --
Arnold: Madam Mayor -- and I know when you sit at an intersection and you're used to
going through it within two to five seconds that sometimes 19 seconds, which is the
longest proposed delay time, appears to be a long time when cars stack and they're
used to not having any stacking -- you know, ACHD sets these limits and standards that
they impose on developments and that's what we design around, that's what we plan
around, and we believe that we have complied with all standards of the conditions,
along with all previous ones set. So, you know, sometimes it appears that traffic is
worse than it is, but I have been out there at peak hour and I haven't experienced it.
Maybe there was some different events that were occurring.
De Weerd: Go out there on black ice and it changes, too.
Arnold: I don't want to be anywhere on black ice.
De Weerd: Okay. If there is nothing further from Council -- thank you. Council, any
further questions for staff or applicant? Okay. Caleb.
Hood: Madam Mayor, I was just going to take just one quick second to apologize for
our technical difficulties this evening and let Becky off the hook. I realize she is not here
now, but I don't think it's her fault. We are having some problems here and so I
apologize for having to go low tech on some of this stuff and for it freezing up on all the
applicants tonight and for the Council. So, we will -- I would reboot, but I'm afraid we
would lose our live stream if we rebut the computer, so we are just kind of stuck. So,
again, sorry.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council, what's your pleasure?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we close the public hearings on RZ 11-004 and PP 11-007.
Rountree: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 41 of 55
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearings on these two
items. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I will venture an opinion. This subdivision is not necessarily a new subject.
We have seen it before and given it whatever approval has got it to this point. It's
typical of the other subdivisions around it, so that isn't any surprise. I certainly would
like to see Pine connected to Ten Mile sooner rather than later, but I do see that there is
another way to access and I -- granted, most of the people are going to use Pine, that
isn't real convenient to go the other way, but should there be something that happened
that blocked off Pine and Black Cat it is possible to get in. So, to that respect I believe it
does satisfy our requirements, in which case I would say that I'm in favor.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Rountree:. Is that a motion?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I have a problem. I think the other subdivision around there are R-8 and they are
asking to be an R-15 now. We have aPine -- a one access, basically. The way the
layout is is I don't know how we are going to get emergency vehicles in if there is any
parking on streets. I don't know why that wasn't picked up earlier, but it's -- in my
opinion Icould -- I could go for it if it stayed an R-8. I can't go for it with an R-15,
because Ijust -- unless Pine ran through -- it would be something else to look at, but the
density is too heavy for that one little street and we don't want to -- we don't want to be
shoving traffic through other subdivisions that's already busy.
De Weerd: Any further discussion? I don't have a motion, so it doesn't matter. You
can talk all you want.
Bird: I will try a motion if you want if somebody don't want to talk anymore. All sit here
and look at each other.
Rountree: Go ahead and take a crack at it.
Bird: I would move that we reject -- disapprove of RZ 11-004 for the reason that I feel
traffic flow is not ready for R-15 zoning.
Rountree: I will second.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 42 of 55
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to deny the 7-G, the rezone, and that's
-- okay. Discussion?
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I guess my question would be if it were to remain as it was
originally approved would the maker of the motion support the project?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I would support that, because we have already, basically, zoned it as an R-8 and
what everything is. I just feel that we are, basically, doubling the density in there. So,
yeah, Iwould -- if they come back -- or they -- they don't even have to come back if they
stayed at the existing zone, do they?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird, I guess the request is to rezone just less than one and a half acres
to the R-15 and that is just because it backs up to an alley and it's --
Bird:. That's right. It's just that one part and the other stays at R-8, but I don't want that
one part to even be R-15.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Just to clarify -- and I think this is what the others are saying, no vote means
that the previous approval still stands.
Bird: Yes.
Zaremba: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Yes, Bill.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that PDA has expired and there is no
way to get back to that -- that plat layout with the current R-8 zoning designation and
that's why we are seeking -- that's why the applicant is seeking the rezone. So, that --
that previous version of that plat -- they could get back to that, but they would have to
rezone a larger portion to R-15 to get that lot configuration for the alley loaded lots.
That would be the only mechanism to get them back to that configuration at this time.
Or you approve the plat and they remove the alley loaded lots and have single family
homes consistent to the R-8 standards. Also keep in mind -- and Mr. Nary can correct
me if I'm wrong here on this, but if the rezone goes away is there any way we could still
condition the plat that they segregate the HOAs or is that -- the rezone the only
mechanism we could do that?
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 43 of 55
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, to answer Mr. Parsons, that rezone is
the only method to create a development agreement requirement to separate that.
Otherwise, it is just part of the other approval, so --
De Weerd: So, you get a slight increase in density with some assurance of separate
H OA.
Nary: Yeah.
De Weerd: Essentially. Okay. So, if it's denied it reverts back to the previous
approval? No. It just goes away. They would have to -- it would be a separate
application coming back and, then, you can condition a separate HOA at that time.
Parsons: Correct.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Let me ask a dumb question, then. Why are we doing a rezone if the existing one
is gone?
Parsons: In meeting with the applicant -- sorry, Madam Mayor, Commissioner -- or
Council Member Bird. Right now those approvals have expired and in order to get --
they want to reentitle the property and in order to mirror the alley loaded lots that were
already constructed and developed with phase one, they have to rezone a small portion
in order to get to those lot sizes. So, with the R-8 zone the minimum lot size in that
zone for attached product is 4,000 square feet. Those alley loaded homes are I believe
3,500, 3,600 square feet. If they were allowed to move forward with the rezone to R-15,
the minimum lot size in that with the R-15 zone is 2,400 square feet, without any street
frontage requirements. So, that gives them that flexibility to do that, to mirror those lots.
De Weerd: I think, Bill, the question was if it expired is there even a plat to rezone or --
he wanted to know why it's being rezoned.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: If that -- oh, just the plat expired.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Didn't you say it was a PD, the
previous --
Parsons: Correct. The plat and the planned development both expired.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 44 of 55
Nary: Yes. So, the planned development may have expired, but the property is still
annexed is still annexed in the city and zoned in the city, it's just that the entitlement
approval has expired --
Bird: Okay.
Nary: -- just like a preliminary plat would have expired --
Bird: I understand now.
Nary: -- and so that's what they are trying to reentitle.
Bird: I understand now, so --
De Weerd: Clear as mud? If there is nothing further, Madam Clerk, will you, please,
call roll.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Oh. Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would propose a substitute motion that we -- given that discussion that we
approve the -- the item.
De Weerd: If you would just like to vote on it and --
Rountree: Okay. We can do that.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Rountree: I don't hear a second, anyway.
De Weerd: Good. Okay. Madam Clerk, roll call, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, nay; Zaremba, nay; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: Okay. The motion fails.
MOTION FAILED: ONE AYE. TWO NAYS. ONE ABSENT.
Rountree: Madam Mayor, I would move that we approve the request for the rezone of
the 1.48 acres from R-8 to R-15.
Zaremba: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 45 of 55
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 7-G. Any discussion?
Madam Clerk, roll call, please.
Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Item 7-H.
Rountree: I'm not sure. Did you close the hearings?
De Weerd: Yes.
Rountree: Okay. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I would move that we approve Item 7-H, PP 11-007, subject to staff
comments, receipt of comments from the Fire Department and completion of the DA
modification -- and DA modification.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. So, part of that motion to approve would
include a phasing on when the secondary access is required.
Rountree: With discussion with the Fire Department, yes.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: Okay. Issue passes.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. ONE ABSENT.
Item 8: Department Reports
A. Fire Department: Inter-Agency Memorandum of
Understanding with Ada County for Continuity of Operations
Plan (COOP)
~. Fire Department: Approval of Award of a Pass Through
Agreement for "Continuity of Operations Planning Services" to
Ketch Consulting, Inc. and Authorization for the Mayor to sign
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 46 of 55
De Weerd: Thank you for joining us. Item 8-A is under our Fire Department. I will --
both 8-A and B. I will turn these over to Chief Niemeyer.
Niemeyer: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you. If you will grant me, I
will do this presentation from my laptop. That thing is scaring me tonight watching
everybody go up there. What you have before you are two items that actually are
intertwined, but they are a little bit separate, so we will discuss each one of them
individually. The first is an interagency memorandum of understanding with Ada county
for a COOP or Continuity Of Operations Plan and we do have Doug Hartman with us
tonight patiently sat through and is here to answer any questions you may have from
the county side. These -- this is a COOP plan, Continuity Of Operations. It's a plan the
city does not have. It's an emergency planning and preparedness plan that can be
utilized and should be utilized in the event that we have a number of things happen or
could happen. City Hall shut down. An ice storm in which employees cannot make it to
work, et cetera, et cetera. There is a number of things that could take place. Now, this
plan and the fortuity of this plan was taken to our city emergency management
committee, who discussed the merits of it and all agreed that this is a plan the city
should have and currently doesn't. So, the memorandum of understanding essentially --
and Doug can certainly elaborate -- states that the county through the HSGP or the
Homeland Security Grant Program is going to fund this COOP plan and that the city will
receive the services for it. So, that is the initial. MOU that's before you in Item A. With
that I would certainly stand for any questions.
De Weerd: And Ada County is going through the plan. Kuna. City of Kuna is going
through the plan, too?
Niemeyer: I believe Meridian city, Ada county, ACRD, Kuna and -- Doug? So far.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for Chief Niemeyer?
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have none.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move that we approve the interagency memorandum of understanding with Ada
county for a Continuation Of Operations Plan, COOP.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: Second.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 47 of 55
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-A. Madam Clerk, will you
call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Niemeyer: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Item B is the approval of an award
of apass-through agreement with Catch Consulting. Catch is a firm that the agencies
mentioned just previously have used. We researched their satisfaction with Catch and
they all came back and said they did a great job. This is a firm that is used to giving
input and giving guidance to developing these types of plans. Not much more to add to
that, other than Catch will be the ones overseeing the plan and walking us through that.
So, the pass-through agreement we did take it through all the right channels with Keith
Watts and I believe Ted Baird reviewed that as well and they both agreed to it.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions?
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we enter into an agreement with Catch Consulting for our COOP plan and
authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-B. If there is no
discussion, Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. Planning Department: Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) FY2012 Budget Amendment for aNot-to-Exceed
Amount of $230,715.00
De Weerd: Item 8-C is our Planning Department. I will turn this over to Lori.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 48 of 55
Den Hartog: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just bringing before you a budget
amendment to include our program year 2011 grant award in the amount of 230,715
dollars. This is the amount related to the action plans for this current program year that
you approved in August. It takes a little bit of time for Congress to act and release our
funds, so even though we are a couple months into our program year, the funds have
now been released, so we just are bringing forward a budget amendment to include
those funds and to authorize expenditure of those when they become available in our
line of credit. And, then, I have a few other minor things I just wanted to bring to your
attention related to the program, since I'm here and I probably won't be back before you
for a little while. The baby is due January 9, so it will be awhile, hopefully. Maybe
sooner if we have our way, but anyway --
De Weerd: Wishful thinking.
Den Hartog: It is wishful thinking. The other thing I wanted to make you aware of was
that Congress passed the fiscal year 2012 appropriations for HUD, which will impact our
next program year that I would come before you next spring and summer presenting --
the appropriations that Congress passed in mid November included a cut to HUD's
budget, with an approximate cut to the CDBG program of ten to 12 percent. I talked
.with our. Portland field office, they don't know exactly what that's going to look like for.
our -- for the individual entitlement communities yet, but if it's at the upper end of that we
would be just above 200,000 for our allocation next year. I just wanted to make you
aware of this. We have talked internally about just bringing this to your attention and
perhaps getting your thinking about what -- you know, is there a certain threshold that
we want to think about reapplying or not reapplying for funding. So, I just wanted to
make you aware of that. We are certainly keeping our eye on that and we may come
back to you at a later date, perhaps in a workshop format to kind of discuss the pros
and cons of continuing and at different thresholds. So, just wanted to make you aware
of kind of what was going on with that. The cut wasn't any surprise. I think that's
certainly the trend that we have been seeing at the national level. So, that was one
thing. The other thing I wanted to bring to your attention was earlier this year the
Council had approved an agreement designating the Ada County Housing Authority to
act as its agent in the purchase of a dollar HUD home. That purchase was made
successfully by the Ada County Housing Authority. They paid the dollar, plus closing
costs they rehabbed the home for -- it was 30,000 dollars that they spent rehabbing the
home. They put the home on the market and it was on the market for less than two
weeks and they received an offer on it. They were supposed to close -- I haven't heard
final. They were supposed to close the week before Thanksgiving. The sales price was
just over 91,000 and it was aqualifying -- an income qualifying family. So, that's a
success story and the Housing Authority will be using those funds for their housing
programs in the community. So, I just want to say it was something different, we hadn't
tried it before, and the housing authority has taken on the risk associated with that. But
it seems like -- we are hoping to find out a little bit more about the family and to hear
about that success. And, then, the last thing I wanted to update you on -- we had
started the resident housing and community survey. That's been on our website and we
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 49 of 55
have reached out in a variety of ways to our community. That's going to close on the
16th of December and we have over 300 responses already. So, we are pleased with
the response rate that we have been seeing in the online version and, then, in the mail-
in version. So, those were just a few things I wanted us to bring to your attention.
Thank you.
De Weerd: I promise I won't say I'm shocked, so I won't. Any questions?
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: Thank you for all that and I may have gotten the answer to this before, but I
will ask again. On the HUD houses -- congratulations on that one working, by the way.
But do they have any kind of a deed restriction -- if they sell a house to somebody that
qualifies for 90,000 dollars, do they have any restriction that prevents them turning
around a month later and selling it for 200,000?
Den Hartog: I believe so. I believe it's a five year -- I believe it's a five year restriction. I
can follow up and check for sure, but I'm certain that there is a restriction on that.
Because there has to be also for the agency to purchase it as well there is a lot of things
that they have to comply with, but I believe that there is a deed restriction.
Zaremba: I will accept your belief. You don't need to follow up. Thanks.
Rountree: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I move that we approve the requested budget amendment not to exceed the
amount of 230,715 dollars CDBG grant monies.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: Easy for you to say.
Rountree: No, it's not.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-C. Any discussion? And
my comment was about the survey, by the way. Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 50 of 55
De Weerd: Thank you so much. And we want to hear the news when you have it.
Den Hartog: I will let you know.
D. Public Works: Resolution No. 11-828: Adopting All of Volume
1 and the City's Section of the Volume 2 within the Ada County
Hazard Mitigation Plan
De Weerd: Item 8-D is our Public Works Department, resolution number 11-828 and
Kyle.
Radek: Madam Mayor, Council Members, yes, this is a -- the resolution adopting all of
volume one and the city section of volume two of the Ada County Hazard Mitigation
Plan update. We presented this item on November 18th to City Council and had some
discussion. There was a minor change that we requested and we have reflected in your
packets in the initiative M5 and M6 and Council also requested that section five of the
resolution make it clear that any previous plan versions were void upon adoption of the
plan and that the language to make that clear has been included in the resolution by
Emily in legal and so I guess with that I -- as stated a few minutes ago, Doug Hartman is
here from Ada City County Emergency Management. who is the -- the driving .force
behind this plan and the -- you know, one of the main purposes of the plan is that it
enables us to seek hazard mitigation grant funding at the federal level for mitigation of
hazards and with that I guess I will stand for any questions you have and Doug is
available for questions and we are asking for adoption of the plan.
De Weerd: Thank you, Kyle. Any questions from Council?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
Rountree: I have none.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I'd move that we approve resolution number 11-828 for the Mayor to sign and the
Clerk to attest.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-D. If there is no discussion
from Council -- and I don't see any -- Madam Clerk.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 51 of 55
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 11-1499: An Ordinance (RZ 11-002 Southridge
Apartments) for the Rezone of 42.36 Acres of Land from the
TN-R and R-8 Zoning Districts to the R-15 Zoning Districts by
The Farran Group, LLC Generally Located South Side of W.
Overland Road Midway Between S. Ten Mile Road and S.
Linder Road
De Weerd: Thank you, Doug, for joining us. Item 9-A is ordinance 11-1499. Madam
Clerk, will you, please, read this ordinance by title only.
Holman: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 11-1499, an
Ordinance RZ 11-002, Southridge Apartments, for the rezone of a tract of land situated
on a portion of the northeast one quarter of the northwest one quarter and a portion of
the one quarter of the northeast one quarter of Section 23, Township 3 North, Range 1
West, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, 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 42.36 acres of land
from the TN-R, Traditional Neighborhood Residential, R-4, Low Medium Density
Residential, R-8, Medium Density Residential Zoning Districts to R-15, Medium High
Density Residential 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 rules and providing an effective
date.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard this ordinance read by title only. Is there
anyone who would like to hear it read in its entirety? Seeing none, do I have a motion?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I have move we approve ordinance number 11-1499 with suspension of rules.
Rountree: Second.
Zaremba: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9-A. Madam Clerk, roll call,
please.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 52 of 55
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent. call
De Weerd: All ayes. Motions carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 10: Future Meeting Topics
De Weerd: Item 10. I have one that I -- actually Caleb came up with as we discussed
the Chesterfield Subdivision and in -- in light of experiences with Mallard's Landing and
some of the subdivisions that are on that south -- southeast section of Franklin and
Linder and this -- this new one off of Pine raises it -- what is the threshold for numbers
of homes before you have an issue with egress and -- I am just curious about that,
because, you know, we -- it might be good as a city to have the discussion on that,
because I'm sure this is not unique, but might happen again in some instance in those
constricted areas and its -- the question needs an answer as to how houses can safely
be built before you get yourself in a real disaster scenario potentially? So, I would love
to see if staff can maybe work with ACHD or -- we don't -- we probably don't have that
many constricted areas in town, but it does concern me and right now we just don't have
the tools to -- to talk about it more than just a gut feeling.
Hood: And, Madam Mayor, I will bring that up probably as a workshop item. I mean I
could answer some of that -- I mean roadway classifications will get to your egress and
ingress requirements, so if its a collector it's built to handle more cars coming and going.
If it's just a local roadway they do have a threshold. Typically it's 2,000 cars per day --
vehicle trips per day for a local street and it's up to 8,500 I think still for a collector and
an arterial unlimited, essentially. You just keep adding lanes and keep widening it. But
we can -- I can bring that up with ACRD -- and, again, we will have maybe a little
workshop discussion on that and look at these two examples and maybe there is others
and see what that threshold should be and what it is currently.
De Weerd: Well -- and the concern, again, you see in the Waltman area that because
ACHD won't build the bridge, that they are waiting for development to happen to build
the bridge and it's hard to pencil those kind of things out, particularly if you see in what
we just saw the areas to the north of Pine and to Ten Mile there is not too much open
land left and who is going to bear the burden of having to build that bridge? It just -- it's
concerning. So, yeah, a future discussion at some point. I certainly don't expect it by
year end. Just -- just put it on your -- your growing list I'm sure of all things
transportation.
Hood: Okay.
De Weerd: Any other items for future meeting topics?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 53 of 55
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: If this is it will be on a quarterly basis. I was approached by fellow councilmen
and I also read the minutes from the meeting that I left early and I approached MDC and
they voted unanimously of the board that every quarter that the administrator will come
and give a five to ten minute update. While we want to stay divorced from each other, it
don't hurt to have an update.
De Weerd: Well, you have to be married to be divorced. So just separate.
Bird: That's the thing you want to do.
De Weerd: Well, very good. Thank you, Mr. Bird.
Rountree: And thank you and I do recognize the separation there, obviously. We are
not the same. But we do have a fiduciary responsibility potentially and it would be nice
to have on the record and in the public that there is some dialogue between the city and
Meridian Development Corporation.
Bird: And to be truthful with you, Council and Mayor -- and the Mayor knows this as well
as I do, if there is a problem the commissioners on the MDC aren't going to get called,
it's going to be the five elected officials.
Rountree: Yeah.
Bird: And so you should have an update I feel.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: I support that and appreciate that. I think not only -- I agree with -- we are
separate entities and it should be kept that way. But I agree that not only we as
responsible for the city, but members of our Planning and Zoning Department need to
hear what they are doing and I think that would be a good report to make to us publicly.
Thank you.
Item 11: Amended onto the Agenda: Executive Session Per Idaho State Code
67-2345 (1)(c)(d): (c) To conduct deliberations concerning labor
negotiations or to acquire an interest in real property, which is not
owned by a public agency: (d) To consider records that are exempt
from disclosure as provided in Chapter 3, Title 9, Idaho Code.
De Weerd: Okay. Yes. We have Item 11, an Executive Session. Do I have a motion?
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 54 of 55
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we go into Executive Session as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(b) and
(1)(d).
Zaremba: Charlie and David. Yeah. (c) and (d).
Bird: (c) and (d). I'm sorry.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Hoaglun, absent.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: (9:37 p.m. to 10:17 p.m.)
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: I move we come out of Executive Session.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye? All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Could I have a motion to adjourn?
Bird: I move we get out of here.
Rountree: Second that.
De Weerd: All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:17 P.M.
Meridian City Council
December 6, 2011
Page 55 of 55
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR T Y D - DATE APPROVED
`O~~Q,y,4HD AUCU ~~
3 ~~EST~
..iVl~ IDIAN CE L HOLMAN, CITY CLERK
IDAMO
9
e Ste'"