Minutes - 2008 - Design Review - 12/11/2008 - Regular
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
MINUTES
The Design Review Board met in regular session, December 11, 2008, Vice- Chairman Grubb
presiding.
1. CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairman Grubb calls the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL: The following members were present: GRUBB, BARNES,
WHITTAKER, BUTLER, NIBLETT, KOCI, COUNCIL LIAISON SHOUSHTARIAN.
ABSENT: MC CULLOUGH. A quorum is present.
3. CONSENT AGENDA.
. Consent Agenda items are considered to be routine and are acted on with one motion.
There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Design Review Board
member, City Staff, or a citizen requests an item to be removed from the Consent
Agenda for discussion. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be placed on the
Regular Agenda in a sequence determined by the Rules of Order.
. Any item on the Consent Agenda that contains written recommendations from the
City of Eagle shall be adopted as part of the Design Review's Consent Agenda
approval motion unless specifically stated otherwise.
A. Minutes of November 13, 2008.
B. Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-64-08 - Third Buildin2: Wall
Si2:n for Cool Hand Luke's Steakhouse and Saloon - Stonewycke Partners. LLC:
Stonewycke Partners, LLC, represented by Susan Bosworth with Young Electric Sign
Company, are requesting design review approval to add a third building wall sign to
the north building elevation of the Sonewycke building for Cool Hand Luke's
Steakhouse and Saloon. The site is located approximately 135-feet south of East
Shore Drive within Eagle River Development (Lot 12, Block 4, Mixed Use
Subdivision No.3) at 291 East Shore Drive. (TV)
C. Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-65-08 - Common Area
Landscapin2: for Adonai Subdivision - Dwayne and Stacie Lin2:el: Dwayne and
Stacie Lingel, represented by Talena Dovel with The Land Group, Inc, are requesting
design review approval for the common area landscaping within Adonai Subdivision.
The 5. 70-acre site is located on the east side of Park Lane Road approximately 1,200-
feet south of Beacon Light Road at 2440 North Park Lane. (TV)
D. Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-66-08 - Monument Si2:n for
Adonai Subdivision - Dwayne and Stacie Lin2:el: Dwayne and Stacie Lingel,
represented by Talena Dovel with The Land Group, Inc, are requesting design review
approval to construct a monument sign for Adonai Subdivision. The 5.70-acre site is
located on the east side of Park Lane Road approximately 1,200-feet south of Beacon
Light Road at 2440 North Park Lane. (TV)
1
E. Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-69-08 - Two Buildin2: Wall
Si2:ns. One Marquee Buildin2: Wall Si2:n. One Electronic Messa2:e Si2:n. and
Ei2:hteen Poster Cabinet Si2:ns for the Riverwood Cinemas - 02:den
Entertainment Group: Ogden Entertainment Group, represented by Craig Jamieson
with Lytle Signs, is requesting design review approval for two building wall signs,
one marquee building wall sign, one electronic message sign, and eighteen poster
cabinet signs for the Riverwood Cinemas. The 4. 179-acre site is located within
Gateway South Development on the east side of South Edgewood Way and south of
State Highway 44. (BC)
F. Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-70-08 - Master Si2:n Plan for
The River District - Lonesome Dove LLC/River District: Lonesome Dove
LLC/River District, represented by Craig Jamieson with Lytle Signs, is requesting
design review approval for the master sign plan for The River District. The site is
generally located south of the intersection of State Highway 44 and Edgewood Lane
(includes both the Gateway South Development and Lonesome Dove Development).
(BC)
G. Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-71-08 - River District
Townhomes and Common Area Landscapin2: within Lonesome Dove
Subdivision - Lonesome Dove. LLC: Lonesome Dove, LLC, represented by Chad
Longson and Cord Christensen, is requesting design review approval for the
townhomes and common area landscaping within Lonesome Dove Subdivision. The
site is located on the southwest comer of East Riverside Drive and Edgewood Lane at
1505 East Riverside Drive. (TV)
H. Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-31-07MOD - Modification to
the Master Si2:n Plan for Two Multi-tenant Retail/Restaurant/Office Buildin2:s
within Lonesome Dove Subdivision- Lonesome Dove LLC/River District:
Lonesome Dove LLC/River District, represented by Craig Jamieson with Lytle Signs,
is requesting design review approval to modify the master sign plan for the two multi-
tenant retail/restaurant/office buildings within Lonesome Dove Subdivision. The site
is located on the southwest comer of East Riverside Drive and Edgewood Lane at
1505 East Riverside Drive. (BC)
Grubb moves to approve the consent agenda, items 3A, 3B, 3C, 3D, 3F, 3G and 3H.
Seconded by Barnes. ALL A YE...MOTION CARRIES.
4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Findin2:s of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-69-08 - Two Buildin2: Wall Si2:ns.
One Marquee Buildin2: Wall Si2:n. One Electronic Messa2:e Si2:n. and Ei2:hteen
Poster Cabinet Si2:ns for the Riverwood Cinemas - 02:den Entertainment Group:
Ogden Entertainment Group, represented by Craig Jamieson with Lytle Signs, is
requesting design review approval for two building wall signs, one marquee building
wall sign, one electronic message sign, and eighteen poster cabinet signs for the
Riverwood Cinemas. The 4. I 79-acre site is located within Gateway South Development
on the east side of South Edgewood Way and south of State Highway 44. (BC)
Craig Jamison, 10331 Summerwind Drive, Boise, requested this item be pulled from the
2
consent agenda. Mr. Jamison, addresses the Board and asks for findings to be amended,
increasing the size of the reader board. Board discussion.
Grubb moves to approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for DR-69-08 -
Two Building Wall Signs, One Marquee Building Wall Sign, One Electronic
Message Sign, and Eighteen Poster Cabinet Signs for the Riverwood Cinemas with
the following modifications, item #6, at the end of the sentence, add the sign shall
not exceed 110 square feet. Seconded by Butler. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
5. NEW BUSINESS:
A. DR-I0-05MOD - Modification to the Master Si2:n Plan for a Multi-tenant Office
Buildin2: - 25 Properties. LLC: 25 Properties, LLC, represented by Jim Stroo with
Sign-A-Rama, is requesting design review approval to modify the master sign plan for
a multi-tenant office building. The site is generally located north of East State Street
approximately I 50-feet west of Plaza Drive within the Winding Creek Development
(Lot 11, Block 2) at 1005 East Winding Creek Drive.
Jim Stroo, 2510 W Main Street, Boise Idaho reviews the application. Staff member
Cerda addresses the Board. Board discussion.
Grubb moves to approve DR-I0-05MOD - Modification to the Master Sign Plan for
a Multi-tenant Office Building with the site specific and standard conditions of
approval as written. Seconded by Koci. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
6. REPORTS:
A. Design Review Board: Art Studio discussion.
B. Council Liaison: Nothing.
C. Staff: Add reappointment of Mark Butler to the agenda.
Mark Butler addresses the Board.
Butler: I would love to continue serving on the Board, I think my conflicts have been
minimal, my development work in downtown has come to a screeching halt, basically. I
have only had to recuse myself three times, I think Barb outlined that in her e-mail. There
was an issue of mouthing off to the Council awhile back which I personally believe was
an isolated incident, I don't excuse it, so I think it would be best for you all to talk about
whether you would like to have me to continue, with me gone so you can be as candid as
possible, and I promise I won't buy a copy of the recording. I just want you to know I am
very proud to serve with the City, I think I've served well and I would like that to
continue, so unless you have any questions, I think its best for you to be able to converse
as candidly as possible, and I would leave. Thank you. Mr. Butler leaves the meeting.
Vice Chair Robert Grubb states that the Board will now discuss providing a
recommendation to the council in regard to Mr. Butler's reappointment to the Design
Review Board. Grubb asks Council Liaison Shoushtarian if he could tell the Board why
this item was continued and sent to the Board for a decision.
3
****Please note that Council Liaison Shoushtarian's comments are not verbatim as
he does not sit near a microphone and therefore the recording is not clear enough to
transcribe.
Shoushtarian: Thank you very much for a asking me, I have been chosen to serve as the
liaison to the Design Review Board. So basically the responsibility for the appointment
falls on the liaison because Mayor and council count on the liaison for this information.
However I would like to see what you feel about it. One of the major things is how often
Board Member Butler has to step down for conflict of interest, is it fair for all applicants
who come in when Butler is not sitting on the Board and is a representative instead? I
don't know if you guys know or not but Board member Butler has accused me of exparte
contact with the Spoons people before. I just want to let you know I am not going to
mention the issue at the Council meeting I just want you to know it is nothing personal I
just want to do what is best for the City.
Member Niblett: Question for Council Liaison Shoushtarian. So I want to make sure I
understand you right, is it my understanding that you believe that member Butler has done
some things wrong?
Shoushtarian: No, I'm just saying that I have concerns for the applicant. Once they come
and he has lots of knowledge of codes and he can question them this is really good, but
once he steps down is this an advantage to one applicant?
Niblett: So, did I understand you right that there may have been some thinking that Mark
had some exparte communications?
Shoushtarian: No, I'm not saying that, this has nothing to do with exparte
communications. He has been stepping down.
Niblett: You feel that he has done that. And you're concerned that because he steps
down or the number of times he steps down is causing some conflict and it's unfair to the
applicant.
Shoushtarian: The applicant that he is not representing them or he has had exparte.
Because he questions them in here based on his knowledge of the code that he has but
once he has stepped down, most of us, I'm talking about myself, most of us don't have
that knowledge that he has of the code to question them. So I feel it is not fair to those
applicants, but I want to see what you guys think.
Koci: That seems like backwards thinking. I mean we all agree I think that he has tons of
knowledge of the code so to get rid of him all together then that jeopardizes everyone that
comes before the Board. Where as, when he left I think he said he has stepped down
three times in the period that he has been here. Three out of how many has he got to
speak to? I mean it's helped more than it's hindered the process.
Shoushtarian: But the thing is, is it fair to those people that he is not representing them?
Koci: Well it's either that or everyone that comes before us gets the lack of service I
guess without having Mark.
4
Shoushtarian: Well I can see the issue I mean even more as that how I look at it, not
necessarily all of council (inaudible). I mean if it was once of stepping down, but Mr.
Butlers business of consultant and as a property owner has some of these issues has more
than usual stepped down.
Koci: I think the architects would probably have more opportunity to step down or just as
much opportunity.
Barnes: Mr. Chairman, I guess I'm looking at it from a completely different stand point
that I'm getting the idea, the sense, the feeling is the Board is not doing their job if Mr.
Butler is not on the podium to give his interpretation of the code and I think that is a real
slap in the face to the rest of the members of the Board, some of us who have been here a
good long time still don't have the knowledge that Mark has and if this was happening, if
he had to step down every meeting or every other meeting, then we might have an issue. I
don't see that that's an issue and I think that all of us bring to the table knowledge and I
think to say that the very few applicants that Mark has had dealings with so that he has
recused himself are not being given a fair shake is a real slap in the face to the Board.
The other thing that bothers me about this is that I wonder how many other times other
Boards are being asked to decide to whether a reappointment should be made. I'm not
sure it's our job.
Whittaker: On that note that was just ended on and after reading some of the information
I received today I think it puts us in a bad position to sort of have to take sides on this
Issue.
Barnes: I do too.
Whittaker: And it's obvious that there is some conflict in regard to this decision and for
me personally I believe that I've decided to abstain from making any recommendation on
it. I just feel like it puts us into a position that we really didn't sign on to be involved in
and that is deciding who is making these decisions, so, I don't have any personal feeling
either way, I think Mark has done a good job, but I'm going to abstain from supporting
either side.
Grubb: My take on it is that stepping down, I've stepped down more times than Mark has
during my duration here. We all work, live, deal with the City, that's why the people on
this Board are here. I think the closer connection people have to this City the more
interest they have in making sure the decisions are right and care more about how they
interact and that does bring up the conflict of the buildings I build, the building Trent and
I would have to recuse ourselves from certain projects because we're both going to be
involved here in the City and Mr. Niblett, so the recusing I don't feel is an issue. We're
connected to so many different projects in one way or another and everyone has stepped
down when they needed to and I don't believe that the Board is swayed by one member
being out there. I believe that if they're representing somebody we're going to treat that
any way that it needs to be treated and they are individual votes. So, I have, on the issue
of conflict of interest and being too involved with the city's development, that he can act
on this Board. I'm not in support of that. I think that Mark does bring a lot of knowledge
to it and ideas that are not, you know they are outside of the box, come from different
angles, we've all agreed and disagreed on certain items, so I believe he is an asset to the
5
Board. So we have a couple choices for the Board.
Shoushtarian: During the past six or eight months I've had people ask me should they
use Mr. Butler when they want to go for their application because he is a consultant and I
said I don't know and they said well we want to make sure that we pass. So I have those
people they talk to me and I say I don't want to get involved with that because I am not
comfortable with that but I am just saying I have heard. The reason I brought this issue,
they ask me to not mention their name, but it has been a situation and also in response to
member Barnes I did not mean for a slap to anyone I mean you guys do a great job. At
council we are just a normal guy doing our own work and doing our job. It might not be
knowing all the codes and everything but we are doing our job as best as we can. I don't
think, it is not by any means but just because of his excellent knowledge of the code
(inaudible).
Niblett: Mr. Chairman, I'm sorry but I'm just not sure I'm understanding what your
concerns are, does anybody else? (Speaking to Shoushtarian) I'm not sure are you
concerned that when he's on the Board that the applicants are getting grilled too hard, that
he knows so much code that you're concerned about the applicant's ability to get
approved? And when he's not, is that a concern?
Shoushtarian: No, I think it's great when he's up there because he has the knowledge to
question, to go to detail on the codes.
Niblett: So you think it's great that he's on the Board?
Shoushtarian: But when he has to step down, do those applicants have an advantage?
Niblett: So you wish he was on the Board all the time?
Shoushtarian: He would not excuse himself, but the nature of his business, he has to be
stepping down and (inaudible).
Niblett: So, you're in support of his reappointment?
Shoushtarian: No, actually that, I'm just saying his knowledge is great in here but it it's
going to be a disadvantage to one group of applicants that he is representing
Niblett: So you're worried about the applicants that he's helped?
Shoushtarian: Right.
Staff member Cerda: Mr. Chairman, can I just add that the three applications, or the three
different things that he has had to abstain from, one of them, the 11 applications that
came through in Eagle Island Crossing because he is a part owner of the development
right next to it. That's one meeting, Corrento Bello, his company ran the original
applications through the process, so when it came back through for the landscaping,
which Mark's not all that knowledgeable in the landscaping, this was more of a thing that
Christine and Eric got in to, but when it came through to modify the landscaping, he
stepped down from that because he didn't think he would be able to make an unbiased
decision on it because he thought it was great when it originally went through and now
they were modifying it so that was one that he had to step down from. The other one that
he had to step down from here recently, was his church building that he redid and
6
whenever Mark steps down, although he is the owner of it, he's never actually
represented himself at the podium. And the other thing, again, just to you know, he is
knowledgeable in the codes, I mean if other people are out there asking if they should use
him, by all means, yes, use him because you know what, I mean because he scrutinizes
even his own projects to the enth degree, I mean when we meet and everything before he
submits his application, he's going, yeah I thought about this and I thought about that, just
to meet the codes. So, but I will tell you that Mark has told me that since all this has
come up, I mean, he's sold a bunch of his property, he's got a bunch up for sale, he is not
consulting anymore, he's not doing any work in Eagle, he's you know, he basically wants
to be done. He's got the Second Avenue store, he's got the church building, he really
wanted to sell the church building, but he might keep it now, but that's basically all he
has, he's done, but he would like continue to serve as a Design Review Board Member.
Barnes: I think the his record needs to speak for itself and if it's an issue of having to
step down too many times then I think we've probably got an issue with 3 architects on
the Board. And I just don't think this is our job to decide who is on the Board. I just
think we are being put in an untenable situation. You know, I've had some issues with
Mark, just at the very beginning, but we all know he's toned down and I just think, I just
can't imagine penalizing someone because they have the knowledge because if that's the
issue then we all have that issue. I mean we were all chosen for the Board for a
completely different area, we've got landscape architects, we've got architects, we have a
citizen at large, it's not our job to decide who is on this Board.
Grubb: Council Liaison do you have enough for what you need, or do you need us to do
something? Is that enough discussion?
Koci: I think from looking at the minutes, I can't remember the names of who it was,
someone, they left it last night or Tuesday night to us. They were good if whoever it was,
Huffaker maybe, oh Semanko, I think, he was fine as long as the Board talked about it,
the Board was good, City Council was good with it.
Shoushtarian: inaudible. The Council was not sure if the letter came from all the
members or if it just came from the chairman and that was the question. They wanted to
know if every single member felt the same way.
Koci: So, were not being asked to chose, we're just being asked if we agreed with the
letter that we said we submitted? Which we were all fine with signing.
Whittaker: At this point and time I've decided that I will not sign the letter, I'm just
going to abstain from making the decision on this whole issue, because I just don't feel
comfortable with it. So I'm not supporting either way, I'm just abstaining.
Grubb: I also agree with you that wasn't part of choosing council members and the Board
wasn't part of the process as far as I was aware we had a different job to do. So, I can see
your point and support that.
Niblett: In all fairness though, I think we need to communicate to the Council that we
were in agreement and had consented with Barb that the letter be submitted to the Mayor
at that point so that it doesn't appear that Barb had fabricated this, that we in fact as a
Board through e-mails agreed that that letter was sent. Now under further discussion we
7
have concerns, or some members do, I don't know that I share those concerns, I would be
willing to take a stance on it, but now we just need to make clear that through further
discussions some of the members find issues with this or concerns with this so I don't
want it to be communicated back
Koci: Not issues with Mark, issues with the process.
Niblett: the process, yes.
Grubb: So would it clear it up if we went on record indicating that the date the letter
went out we read it, understood it, and in one e-mail format or another at that time were
for that?
Whittaker: I had no problem with the letter at that time, after receiving further
information, hearing that there was just so much concern and so much everybody's just
not on the same page, I just no longer want to be part of making this decision.
Grubb: Ok. So does that sound like we are heading in the right direction, just address
that one letter, that one day and if the question is basically did we participate in that letter
as a council, group, we all participated in it. Does that take care of it?
Barnes: Mr. Chairman, I think we also need to go on record and explain to the Council
that you know, we stand by the letter, but it still is not our job to decide whether or not
Mark is reappointed. We support it, but we can not make that decision.
Grubb: I think, that's what I hope with Council Liaison, that's what you'll pass to the
Council in your discussion of that that this is the Boards feeling about bringing us into the
approval process of people and the reappointment of people, I guess is that the Board
feels that it is not our sole decision and go from there.
Whittaker: Mr. Chairman, I would like to say that I think that if this is going to be a
major issue in trying to get business done through this Board and the Council then that
needs to be considered because up until today I didn't realize there was near this much
controversy.
Barnes: I didn't either.
Grubb: In business getting done, you mean doing business in the City of Eagle?
Whittaker: No, doing business on this Board and acting you know doing our job that
we've been appointed to do, because up until today when I got this new information I
didn't realize that this subject was as controversial as it is turning out to be. So I think
that what I'm going to say is that if we can't do business here and all get along for the
benefit all the applicants then maybe it has be considered there has to be another person
who has qualifications to be on the Board which would be less controversial, I don't
know. I just didn't realize there was so much controversy.
Cerda: Mr. Chairman, if you'd like to keep it somewhat neutral, I mean if you'd like to
make a motion that you're all in support of Mark being on the Board, but you're not in
support of being the ones making the decision, you could do it as simple as that. And,
Sheri will if you would like her to will reflect a lot of this discussion in the minutes so
that the Council can have that.
8
Grubb: So, Member Whittaker is going to abstain, how does the rest of the Board feel
about making a motion?
Koci: I think we don't need to I mean if that message is going to be taken back one way
or the other whether Sheri sends it or Al sends it in conversation, just so that maybe it
should be send in written format.
Barnes: Mr. Chairman, I would like to see a written format of our discussion given to
Council, prior to their meeting, so that they can read it, just as we read minutes here and I
think that I think that will speak for itself because we have all been pretty candid.
Grubb: Alright, I guess we make a motion to have our minutes transcribed to the
Council for their review. Seconded by Barnes. ALL AYE...MOTION CARRIES.
7. ADJOURNMENT:
Grubb moves to adjourn at 6:45 pm. Seconded by Barnes. ALL A YE...MOTION
CARRIES.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
ll(~~
......SHARON K. BERGMANN
CITY CLERK/TREASURER
""'ll......",,
"-",, ~^GLS I",
.... O~ ........ '"
~._ e._
~ ~ '" O~A T Ii .. ... ':.
..~..., . ~
: ....... n..' ~-
: , \: o-~ .- -. :
. ....., ".-.-
: : u ,. v~: 0 :
... x."'". .... ..
~ · S r~ s.~-
.. w . ......... ...... ..
."..,. e. /. t-- .. ,,~
-:... ..."'C'ORPO~.. ,<:) .......
" S ....... ~ ......
'" 'l'A Tt 0 .....
##1, ,~\'
",......I..~
ERIC R. MCCULLOUG
CHAIRMAN
A TRANSCRIBABLE RECORD OF THIS MEETING IS AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL.
9