HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-02-06Meridian City Council February 6, 2018.
A meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:00 p.m., Tuesday,
February 6, 2018, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Tammy De Weerd, Joe Borton, Ty Palmer, Luke Cavener, and Treg
Bernt.
Members Absent: Genesis Milam and Anne Little Roberts.
Others Present: Bill Nary, C.Jay Coles, Warren Stewart, Caleb Hood, Josh Beach, Jeff
Brown, Joe Bongiorno, Dale Bolthouse, Steve Siddoway, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll -call Attendance:
Roll call.
Anne Little Roberts X Joe Borton
X Ty Palmer X Keith Bird
Genesis Milam X Lucas Cavener
X Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: Okay. I'd like to welcome you to our City Council meeting. For the record it
is Tuesday, March -- March. February 6th. The day before the State of the City. It's 6:00
p.m. I will start with roll call attendance, Mr. Clerk.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: Okay. Item No. 2 is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you will all rise and join us
in the pledge to our flag.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
Item 3: Community Invocation by Justin Jordan with Real Life Ministries
De Weerd: Item No. 3 is the community invocation and we will be led by Pastor Justin
Jordan. He is with Real Life Ministries. I ask you to join us in the community invocation
or take this as an opportunity for a moment of reflection. Welcome.
Jordan: Thank you, Mayor. Let's pray. Lord, as we come before you tonight I am
overwhelmed with thankfulness for a great City Council and their leadership for this city
and all the people that are involved and just reminded us this afternoon just the great city
employees that we have, specifically the employees that have been working hard on
Eagle Road throughout the night and all day today. Thank you for them. And we pray,
God, that tonight would be a meeting that is beneficial to the community. The decisions
are made that is best for our city and that citizens would be heard and listened to and
wise counsel be sought and our community will continue just to grow, to get better, to be
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 7 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 2 of 101
a light to the rest of Idaho and the rest of the northwest and the United States. We pray
this in our son's name, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda A
De Weerd: Item No. 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: We have a couple of additions to the agenda. Item 8-A is the Mayor's Youth
Advisory Council update and Item 8-C, we are going to add an update on the waterline
break on Eagle Road. Some of the public hearings will be continued or vacated, but with
those two additions I would move that we adopt the amended agenda.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as amended. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 5: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum)
De Weerd: Item 5 --
Coles: There were no sign-ups this evening.
Item 6: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of January 16, 2018 City Council Regular
Meeting
B. Approve Minutes of January 23, 2018 City Council Regular
Meeting
C. W. Harris Water Main Easement
D. Silver Oaks Apartments Phase II Water Main/Meter Easement
E. Store -It Self Storage LLC Water Main Easement
F. Second Amendment To Agreement For Extension Of Domestic
Sewer Service Outside Meridian City Limits: 1035 E. Fairview
Avenue
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 8 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 3 of 101
G. Final Order for Final Plat Modification for Paramount No. 29 (H-
2017-0168) by Peter Harris Construction Inc. located west of N.
Meridian Road, north of W. Ensenada Drive
H. First Addendum to Development Agreement for Movado
Greens/Silverstone Apartments (MDA -H-2017-0104) with
Movado Development LLC located on the south side of E.
Overland Road between S. Topaz Way and S. Cloverdale Road
in the NE 1/4 of Section 21, Township 3N., Range 1E
I. First Addendum to Development Agreement for Movado
Greens/Movado Estates (MDA -H-2017-0104) located on the
south side of E. Overland Road between S. Topaz Way and S.
Cloverdale Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 21, Township 3N.,
Range 1E
J. In Accordance with the Previously Approved Cost Share
Agreement, Approve the Not -To -Exceed Amount of $220,177
for Historical Lighting to be installed by Ada County Highway
District's (ACHD) Contractor with the Construction of
Improvements on E. Pine Avenue.
K. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 1 to extend the contract
for "Landscape Maintenance Services" to Lawn Co. for the
Not -to -Exceed amount of $167,952.20.
L. Acceptance Agreements for Display of Artwork in Initial Point
Gallery
M. FY2018 Grant Carryforward Budget Amendment
N. FY2018 Annual Carryforward Budget Amendment
O. City Financial Report for December 2017 (FY18)
P. AP Invoices for Payment 1/31/18 - $593,259.95
Q. AP Invoices for Payment 2/7/18 - $480,429.12
De Weerd: Okay. So, we will move to that Consent Agenda.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 9 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 4 of 101
Borton: Move that we approve the Consent Agenda as published and for the Mayor to
sign and the Clerk to attest.
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Clerk,
will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 7: Items Moved From the Consent Agenda
De Weerd: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
Item 8: Community Items/Presentations
A. Amended onto the agenda: Mayor's Youth Advisory Council
Update
De Weerd: So, we will move right into our community presentations and -- and call up
the Mayor's Youth Advisory Council for their -- for their monthly update. Good evening.
Wade: Hello. My name is Elyssa Wade. I am the MYAC vice -chair. The first thing I
would like to talk about today is the January competition that we had. Our goal was to
get MYACers to bring friends into MYAC and get more students involved with their
community and at the end the student that brought the most friends would receive a 50
dollar gift card to The Village. Next we had some amazing guest speakers this month.
We had Andy Fujimoto that was talking about Rising Star versus Star Performer. What
makes people happy. Why people -- I'm sorry. The three keys to success was aspiration,
engagement, and technical ability. Our next was Jeff Reynolds, which he talked about
Ignite Youth, how to present that. His experience with the other people that did it and
Matt McCarter, he talked about why people die by suicide, what makes people happy.
Leadership. One very important thing that stood out to me throughout these guest
speakers was at the very end of Andy Fujimoto he gave us his personal contact if we ever
needed to talk to him, which I thought that that was very amazing for a guest speaker.
January 20th, 2018, we had our legislative breakfast, discussing our topic on organ
donation, which was supposed to be designated to students ages 15 through 17 to be
able to put their organ donation stamp on their driver's license or ID if consented by a
parent. January 20th we also had our MYAC tubing event, which turned out successful,
and we had many people come and enjoy that. This was at Eagle Island State Park.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 10 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 5 of 101
And, lastly, I would like to invite Ben Hutchins up to the podium to tell us about his role in
MYAC, as we are trying to get more students presented to City Council.
De Weerd: Hi, Ben.
Hutchins: I'm Ben Hutchins. I am the at large ambassador for MYAC. So -- I messed
that up. I speak for the charter schools, the schools in Meridian that aren't represented
by direct ambassadors, like the big schools, like Rocky. I'm for like Northstar Charter
School, Meridian -- the -- the academy. Sorry. I totally blanked on that. Yeah. Meridian
Medical. And my sister and I are both the co -at large ambassadors and we pretty much
inform the schools about what MYAC is about. We tell them about the upcoming events
and we make a presence for MYAC in the schools.
De Weerd: Well -- and, Ben, I think you -- you have recently -- you and Abby have
reached out to Central Academy, Meridian Academy Rebound, which we had I think a
couple of students from Rebound that attended the youth summit and with Compass
Charter, the other two charters of Meridian Medical Arts and the technical charter, you
have a lot of schools to cover.
Hutchins: Yes, we do. And it's really cool at the summit that we had, we had the students
from Rebound and we had just a vast amount of schools that we had covered and
throughout each meeting we have been having different schools showing up, which has
been really great. We have been getting MYAC's name out and it's been really great for
us.
De Weerd: Well, thank you for that.
Wade: Are there any questions? I'm free to answer.
De Weerd: Any questions some Council? No? You did an awesome job.
Wade: Good afternoon.
De Weerd: Thank you. Active kids. And we have Ignite Youth coming up that we are
encouraging young members of our community to sign up for. It's -- the gentleman that
came and presented -- Boise Ignite to the teens, he did it in the Ignite format, so he had
five minutes and 20 slides to present the idea and so we look forward to seeing what
great ideas are expressed this year. Okay. Well, thank you for joining.
B. Meridian Arts Commission: Concerts on Broadway
Memorandum of Agreement with the Meridian Development
Corporation and Budget Amendment for Spending Authority
1. Approval for Memorandum of Agreement
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 11 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 6 of 101
2. Approval for Net -Zero Budget Amendment for Spending
Authority of Funds Not -to -Exceed $10,000
De Weerd: Item 8-13 is from our Meridian Arts Commission.
Bodnar: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm here to present a memorandum of
agreement and, then, pending the approval of that memorandum of agreement a budget
amendment form for Concerts on Broadway and the Meridian Development Corporation's
contribution to that annual event. I don't know what else you need from me. It's an annual
ask and we already have their agreement. That should be included in your packet and I
just tried -- we are trying to put the budget amendment with the agreements as they
happen.
De Weerd: Okay. Are there any questions regarding this pass-through fund amendment?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Hillary, just for clarification, four concerts?
Bodnar: Four concerts. Yep.
Cavener: Great.
Bodnar: And they are going to be all in July and August this year, so --
De Weerd: So, you already have an idea who they are?
Bodnar: Yes. I should have brought that to you. We have got two new bands and, then,
two recurring bands. So, High Street will be back in this year. They are always a big hit.
One of the bands that was new last year, Jeffrey Castle and his Celtic Knight Band, they
were the closures of last year and they actually agreed to do some education, some
outreach to local schools. So Jeffrey Castle is going to go into I think a couple of different
schools and talk to some of their orchestra students and their band students and kind of
talk to them about his experience as a musician and, then, we have Avenue B, which will
be the first year we have had Avenue B here and I'm blanking on the last one.
De Weerd: Yeah. I can't help you.
Bodnar: It's a great lineup.
De Weerd: Very good.
Bodnar: And we had the Meridian Symphony Orchestra hosted their competition two
weekends ago, which Gretchen attended, and that's where we select our student
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 12 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 7 of 101
performers, our student openers from. So, she said there were like five or six different
amazing youth performers that could easily come in help fill those spaces. But we try to
usually just highlight one before each show.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions -- any further questions? If not, I would
entertain a motion.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Maybe a question for legal. Can we approve them together? Do we need to
approve the memorandum and the budget amendment separately?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Cavener, if you can
approve them separately.
Cavener: All right. I move we approve the memorandum of agreement with the Meridian
Development Corporation for Concerts on Broadway.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we approve this budget amendment from the Arts Commission for a not
to exceed -- not to exceed amount of 10,000 dollars.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve item -- whatever item this is. B-2.
8-B-2. Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 13 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 8 of 101
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Bodnar: Thank you.
C. Amended onto the agenda: Update on Waterline Break on
Eagle Road
De Weerd: Thank you, Hillary. Item 8-C is an update on a major event -- kind of a major
-- yeah, it was a major event last night. It's had our water division very busy last night
and today.
Bolthouse: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, yes, we have had quite a -- quite a --
coming up on 24 hours here with -- with a little bit of excitement in our water department.
I was driving home last night thinking about water disasters. I had got a call earlier today
and -- by my wife only to be notified that our washer had blown up and we had all kinds
of issues at home. So, I was thinking what else could possibly go wrong, other than the
washing machine when I got home. Well, that's a -- that's a dangerous question to be
asking. At about 10:25 last night we got notified from our SKADA system -- I'm putting in
a couple pitches for why we have these automated systems. Our SKADA system lit up
with all kinds of low pressure alarm systems to a variety of folks in our water department
indicating that, hey, we had lost pressure in a major zone in our city and we got that
reading in several wells and that immediately puts in the emergency response team for
our water department into action and so literally that entire group starts mobilizing and
heading towards -- towards the water department and if known where it's at. In the
meantime we started to receive some citizen calls that said, hey, there is a lot of water
out here on Eagle Road and -- and so the combination of the two directs our group --
several personnel responding and, to and behold, we found a water main break on -- on
Eagle Road. The actual section of the water break I guess you could say if there was
something fortunate about it, we were lucky in that it's a -- it's a cross -member main tie
that goes from east to west right at Florence Street and it is valved on both ends. So,
once we got there and through our GIS and Asset Management Systems, we knew
exactly where our valves are. We locate them. We turn them off. And within 45 minutes
we had the entire system isolated, shut down, and pressures were back up across that
zone and the rest of the city. So, utilizing some of those tools that we -- we ask for your
support every year, really -- really paid off here. There were a number of agencies that
responded, all at that time. So, when we arrived there was already police there blocking
the roads and keeping people from -- from getting into the -- the water that was flowing,
which was -- which was awesome. Fire responded. ITD was already there helping to set
up barricades and things. Dig Line is immediately called, because we know we have got
-- we have got an excavation, you know, coming and so it was really -- it was really an
awesome response by a variety of -- of individuals, not to mention our water and waste
water groups. So, a full 20 foot section of 12 inch water main completely split, if you will,
from stem to stern. That water line was installed in 1984. It's about eight feet deep below
the road surface right there. So, obviously, age is not necessarily a primary consideration
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 14 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 9 of 101
for PVC pipe at that age. But what we do find is that when we have this kind of
catastrophic failure, a lot of times it leads back to installation of that and, really, the
criticality of our inspection team today to make sure that it's installed properly, bedded,
and doesn't have the opportunity for any outside pressure influences or deflection in the
pipe, that over time can ultimately, you know, create a failure and without really knowing
-- it's probably speculative, but our experience tells us that that's a real probably cause of
this particular event. So, the road was closed and over the course of the night we dug up
the section, our water group, with our equipment and by 7:00 o'clock or so this morning
we had the line repaired, back in service, charged, cleaned, sanitized, sampled DEQ
notified, and we were, in essence, done with our part of it. And, then, it becomes a road
project. There were no customer impacts at all from this incident, other than low pressure.
So, when you have the release of that amount of water, pumps kicking on, you see a
pressure drop, but we actually didn't have a service outage, if you will, from any
customers. We did have this morning a few brown water calls. I think we had a total of
five that I'm aware of, which was surprisingly little for this kind of an event. So, we are --
we are pleased with that. We also had some peripheral impact. So, obviously, this
amount of water -- and we are still working on estimates, but it could be several hundred
thousand gallons that are released in a very short period of time. We did have water
flowing off Eagle Road and primarily to the south and west. There is a couple of
businesses there that the water flowed up against their foundation. One of them had
water in the crawl space. The other business actually has a basement and had some
water in their basement. Those -- we had kind of disaster clean up type services there
assisting them on getting those cleaned up already last night. We also had -- was notified
by Centuryl-ink telephone service in some of the surrounding area there was disrupted
and we are not exactly sure how our water influenced that, but it may have found its way
into some areas that could have created a challenge and they are still out there this
afternoon trying to pick their way through and find exactly the last last -- last customers
of theirs that are disrupted. So, last night, you know, after the water department got things
under control, we realized that we have got a significant, you know, project with road work
-- you know, Dennis and team starts down through and found L-2 Excavation to be our
lead contractor on the project. They engaged with Central Paving, Specialty
Construction, Curtis Clean Sweep and got a full team put together that have been now
working through the day to rehab that area and get it prepared for asphalt. So, most of
the day backfilling curbs, compaction, final subgrade, new asphalt prep and we are very
fortunate that there is even an asphalt operation running this time of year. It normally is
cold and they aren't operating, but there is some other critical asphalt efforts happening
in the valley and so we do have access to that and so that's going to -- that's going to be
very beneficial for us getting a good solution to this, although it will be probably tomorrow.
So, the probable schedule. So, where we are at. So, they are -- right now ITD has made
a decision that they would like to attempt to do a temporary fix right now for the -- for
tonight, filled it with gravel, compact it, isolate some lanes north and south, no turning and
things, and open it up and try to get through to 9:00 o'clock tomorrow morning in a
temporary situation, in which case, then, we will shut the road back down, excavate out
some of the gravel that has to come out and, then, the -- we will go through the blacktop
asphalt operations, striping, and hope, if things work really well, that it would be open up
tomorrow afternoon or early evening tomorrow with a permanent fix, at least for now. So,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 15 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 10 of 101
as these things -- as these things always seem to go, there was just tremendous
cooperation with a variety of the agencies from the Meridian police and fire department,
ITD, L-2 Excavation and I can't tell you how proud we are of our water and wastewater
teams who worked through the night to try to minimize the impact on our citizens. This
was the perfect storm, if you will, but we had some fortunate breaks along the way. So,
we will take those when we can get them. Want to recognize Dennis, who has been -- is
running on empty, but has -- has really been our point of contact throughout the whole
thing. So, we appreciate him and all of his work through the night. So, with that I would
be glad to stand for any questions and if I can't answer them I got an engineer and a
superintendent ready to do that, so --
De Weerd: And we certainly appreciate the constant updates from both police and
Dennis. You were excellent at communicating, so that Kaycee could really form the
messages to get out to the media. So, appreciate that. I know our police department and
I think, you know, Dennis, you might be a new media superstar or something -- no? Okay.
Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Not -- not a question, but a comment. There is -- there is sometimes obvious
opportunities or less obvious opportunities to be really, really proud of our city and our
employees and this is an excellent example of just how proud we all are of how you have
led and how the whole team led through this difficult situation. It's extremely impressive.
I think the coordination you described doesn't happen by chance. The fact that you're
prepared to have everybody ready to respond and know what to do and -- and everybody
covers their responsibility and -- it's phenomenal and the whole community doesn't
necessarily get a chance to see you in action and see kind of the guts of a city work so
well together, but this is the best example of that. So, we are proud in many ways, many
days, but this is a very clear shining example. So, thank you very much.
Bolthouse: Thank you. And I will carry that message back to all the parties that were
involved, so appreciate that.
De Weerd: Please do. Thank you.
Bolthouse: Thank you.
De Weerd: We thought an update would be important tonight. This is a major incident
and, surprisingly, the media -- not surprisingly. The media covered it well. But really
helped with the messaging to -- you know, this was a major inconvenience and a major
traffic issue, but our crews were out there on the -- on the pavement making sure that
they helped ease the flow, as well as possible. That facility carries 54,000 cars a day and
so we know it's going to be a major inconvenience, but this is one of those things that you
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 16 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 11 of 101
just hope to never see happen, but it's nice to see we were prepared when it did. So,
thank you.
D. Landfill Rate Increase Discussion
De Weerd: Okay. Item 8-D is a discussion that we have with our SWAC and Republic
and I don't know who is taking the lead on this. Don't know who drew the short straw;
right?
Cory: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I can get out of the way pretty fast on this
one. At the --
De Weerd: Steve, if you will just state your name for the record.
Cory: Steve Cory and I am chairman of the Solid Waste Advisory Commission.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Cory: And at the Solid Waste Advisory Committee meeting for the county last month I
was handed a letter in an envelope and didn't think much of it and, then, a couple of nights
later one of the employees of the county -- did you read the letter I handed you and I went,
oh, well, I will take a little better look at it. Anyway, it was on this subject and I hope you
have all been given a copy of it. We were made aware of Ada county's action, but realized
that it was an inappropriate communication method, that it should have come directly to
the city instead of through a citizen, and that notification from Republic was necessary on
this issue and at this time SWAC has not picked up the issue and we are more than happy
to do that at your direction when you feel -- if you feel that we need to be involved in it
and with that I'm going to turn it over to Republic to go ahead and address the content of
that letter.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Steve.
Fisher: My name is Dave Fisher, I'm the general manager for Republic Services here in
Idaho and --
Remling: Rodney Remling, the controller.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Fisher: And I would just like to say that I love your screen saver, it makes a great screen
saver. I'm glad it's not on our streets and we are not living that like we did last year. So,
our garbage men and recyclers out there are loving the weather we are having right now.
So, glad we are not having that conversation. I think -- I believe you do have a copy of
the letter. We received it January 16th, that informed us as of the 22nd that our effective
rate at the transfer station -- the Meridian transfer station was going to change and was
going to go to a per ton basis. From what we have been paying traditionally to this number
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 17 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 12 of 101
is just over 11 percent increase and in Section 22 of the contract between Meridian -- the
City of Meridian and SSC that we -- then that contract was assigned to us, there is Section
22 that allows for these type of price increases to our cost structure, that we can, then,
bring that to City Council and ask for help and a modification of the rate, so -- so, far any
questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: And, Dave, I don't know if it's a question for you or for the commissioners. I
read the letter and I'm struggling to kind of wrap my head around where the rationale for
the rate increase is coming from. It appears that because it's a convenience for our
community to utilize the transfer station, that they feel the need to charge more and -- am
I missing something?
Fisher: Mayor and Commissioner Cavener, there is a -- when that transfer station was
built there was a letter written by SSC that was kind of laying out what their intent was on
how the trash would be charged. Typically we are charged by the cubic yard and so there
is always that -- well, how many cubic yards are in the trailer or in the truck. There is a
little bit of a -- you know, a cooperation between the hauler or in the county on that. When
we purchased SSC we want to get a little more structure in that, because what we saw
before was that it was -- a little bit was up to the driver and we didn't want fluctuations
based on what the driver thought or I didn't know or knew, so we put a pricing structure
in where we now knew the weight of that trailer, so we took the weight of the trailer, divided
by a thousand pounds, to calculate the yards and so we were very, very consistent, very,
very up front about it. The county disagrees with that way of doing it, so we had that
disagreement this summer and so we suggested that we go to what had been our
effective rate, using that method, which was 22 dollars a ton and go to a per ton basis.
We asked them to do that. They responded back August 15th. They talk about that. And
there is some correspondence back and forth. We asked for 22 dollars a ton and this is
what their official response was that we got in January that, no, that is being rejected and
they want 24.50 a ton. So, maybe a little more history than you wanted, but that's kind of
where we are at on this.
Cavener: Madam Mayor, follow up.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Cavener: Is the -- I know you provide waste hauling to a number of municipalities in the
valley. Is it a consistent charge for all those same municipalities? Is it more from
Meridian? Is it less? Help get me educated on that particular piece.
Fisher: You bet. Mayor Tammy and Members of the Council, it's been consistent and it's
11 dollars per compacted yard, 5.50 for loose, and so the blue trucks that roll up to the
landfill are charged 11 dollars a yard and that's what we are using to calculate out of the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 18 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 13 of 101
Boise transfer station. We have a transfer station in Boise also and we have the one here
in Meridian and that's what the basis has been. So, this is the -- really, the first per ton
charge that has been levied and it's -- in the letter you will see it's not only for the Meridian
transfer station, but it's also the transfer station in Boise is going to 24.50 per ton. The
blue trucks going up the hill are still at 11 dollars per cubic yard.
De Weerd: So, Dave, did you take this to SWAC when you heard that they were going
to have a public hearing on it, so that we had at least an opportunity to go and weigh in?
This is out of the blue. Yes, it was delivered in a very inappropriate manner, but we know
that we all have to hold public hearings on increasing rates and it would have been very
appropriate for us to have been able to weigh in, understand the science that you just
explained to Mr. Cavener and at least had an opportunity to say we are in the middle of
our -- you asked for a rate hike this last fall. That's usually when those increases are
considered. We don't even have an opportunity to put this out to our citizens. It's just like
-- it's effective immediately, I assume?
Fisher: Yes. It was effective -- we -- we received notification basically January 16th. We
were not notified of any public hearing or any meeting to have a conversation about it.
We were handed the letter the same way that your SWAC chairman was handed -- was
handed the letter.
De Weerd: Did Ada County SWAC know about this as well? Mr. Cory?
Cory: No. No. They were not informed at all.
De Weerd: So, do we know how they put out the information about the public hearing?
Usually they publish. I assume.
Cory: All I can say is, no, we -- we received no information. So, I have no idea how it
was communicated.
De Weerd: Mr. Nary, is a rate increase even valid without a public hearing? Or post -- a
posted public hearing?
Nary: So, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we did some research as well and
there was an earlier discussion at -- I think at the Ada County Solid Commission, but all
the -- in reviewing the minutes, all the conversation was -- and I think it pretty much ended
with this -- this rate structure that exists today isn't sustainable, it will need to change, but
no clarity as to when or how that would be done or what the mathematics behind that
would be. It was -- it was just a very open discussion from minutes. Now, again, I know
Mr. Cory was there, but, then, we did research to look to see if any public notice had been
done. Yes, the county does have to follow the same requirements that we do in publishing
notice, having an agenda, public hearing -- a noticed public hearing before rates can be
increased. We could not locate a public notice of any kind in the Idaho Statesman, which
is their paper of record. So, in our opinion they haven't properly noticed this, which --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 19 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 14 of 101
which does mean that an objection could be made by Republic, by the city, by any
taxpayer as to this rate being charged without notice being provided.
De Weerd: Well, I guess, you know, going back to when the transfer station was built, it
was during air quality issues, emission issues, that -- this was seen as a -- a solution to
the number of trips that went up to the landfill and to reduce those and to -- to provide
better service and so that our citizens also didn't have to go up to the landfill, they could
take it to the transfer station as well and minimize the trips on the road. Have you asked
the county at least to have an audience to talk about this? I guess we could ask ourselves,
but certainly, Republic, have you made that request of them?
Fisher: Yes. And I have scheduled a meeting today with them. They said the first
available time was like the third week of March.
De Weerd: And in the meantime they expect you to pay the increase?
Fisher: Yes, Mayor, they do.
Nary: Madam Mayor, I would add one more point if you wouldn't mind.
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: The other -- the other concern I would have is -- Mr. Fisher is correct, our contract
with -- with Republic Services -- or originally SSC, does -- does mandate that we will,
then, if they do have a rate increase, the city shall, then, add to our rate increase to our
customers to make up for that gap. Our concern from the legal department is that if the
fee wasn't legally instituted, we, then, can't turn around and impose that on our citizens
either. So, I do think, you know, a response from the city has to be made as well, because
we can't substantiate that this rate was increased legally. Now, that's just a delay. They
can redo it. But that does delay the imposition of when the rate does take effect.
De Weerd: Do you have a cost that -- what is the cost that this new increases?
Remling: Yes, Madam Mayor, we run some numbers on that and so it's about an 11
percent increase on us and disposal, but it translates to just under two percent -- about
two percent for the residential customer, which is, you know, roughly what annual
increases have been running for the last several years. So, you're looking at that. On a
prearranged basis -- I don't have the percentage on commercial, but typically it runs about
the same.
De Weerd: And will you give me a real number? Two percent, what does that mean?
Remling: So, we are looking at about 30 cents on -- 30 cents per month for a residential
household. So, that's -- we are still working the numbers, but that's pretty close.
De Weerd: Thank you, Rodney.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 20 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 15 of 101
Remling: Yes, ma'am.
De Weerd: Any other questions, Council? Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I think we might be delaying the inevitable, obviously, but I think that it's important
that we have this discussion, both legally and I think it's out of respect and, you know, I
mean we are an organization that we have customers and citizens who care, so I think
it's our duty and to -- and, you know, to -- to ask questions and, you know, I think that we
need to do it. I think -- I don't know what the process is to -- legally to get Mr. Nary
involved or whatever, but I think it's important that we do it. Absolutely.
De Weerd: It just probably seems a little frustrating to SWAC and certainly we have been
working very closely with the county with this recycling issue and trying to understand that
and look at different alternatives and -- and this has never come up even in those
conversations. So, it -- I guess, Steve, in answer to you and your comment, if we are
requested to look into this, I would say that our Solid Waste Advisory Commission really
should take a look at this and you vet every increase and as citizen representatives this
is your dollars just as much as it's all of our dollars sitting up here as well, that I would like
to see that SWAC has a conversation about this and -- and that maybe our legal team
reaches out to request a conversation with the county -- at least to show us where the
public notice was and if we could request a conversation with them before it's expected
to be imposed to Republic.
Cory: We can do that.
De Weerd: And I hope you understand that we can't impose a cost to our citizens until it
has gone through the legal processes as well and that puts you in the middle. But I don't
think you should be paying an increase that is not official and it sounds like it is not official,
but we need to ask them.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Recognizing the awkward position that you guys find yourself in, I'm just curious
-- have you made a similar presentation to the city of Boise and what has been the
response from -- from their mayor and council as a result?
Fisher: We have not been to city council yet. We are talking to the public works staff and
working through the numbers with them and having the same conversations. So, we
made them aware of -- aware of it also.
De Weerd: And the impact on Boise is not as great as the impact on our -- our situation,
because all of our garbage goes to the transfer station first.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 21 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 16 of 101
Fisher: That is true, Mayor.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we have internally also reached out to the
city of Boise and Mr. Fisher is correct, we are still trying to coordinate a response. They
also want to respond similarly, because they have similar concerns as we do. The Mayor
is correct, the impact on them is slightly different than it is to the City of Meridian, but the
same issues have the same impact to them of wanting to make sure the county
understands what our concerns are, so --
De Weerd: And I agree with Mr. Bernt, that there -- this cost, you know, is probably at
some point going to be something that we pass through, but we should have the
conversation and we should be able to know the rationale behind it, so we can share that
with our citizens as well. It just doesn't work because the county told us to. Or maybe I
can use because Republic told us to. You're in a good situation today with recycling
anyway. You might as well just pile that one on, too.
Fisher: It's been a very pleasant three months, let me tell you.
De Weerd: We agree. Any other questions from Council? So, I guess next steps would
be a letter to reach out to the county and as you're having those conversations as well,
David, if you will keep our staff in the loop and to our Solid Waste Advisory Commission
that we will add one new topic to your growing list. You guys have never been so busy,
have you?
Cory: I do have a concern as to whether I'm making this a rather large position for a
citizen and whether that might be getting to the point where discussions about someone
within the city structure may need to be present in the future.
De Weerd: True. And Boise has it in public works. Humm. There you go, Dale. We will
have a conversation. Okay. Well, thank you. We appreciate your time here tonight and
we will try and -- and unravel this together and I am sure -- this is not a new topic. It has
happened many years ago. It just I think caught everyone unawares and we need to work
on how we can improve that conversation, but also how we can substantiate the -- the
increase.
Cory: Thank you.
Item 9: Action Items
A. Final Plat for Blakeslee Commons (H-2017-0164) by Bungalows
Meridian LLC located on the south side of E. Ustick Road
between N. Locust Grove Road and N. Eagle Road
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 22 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 17 of 101
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item 9-A is a final plat on H-2017-0164.
Beach: Good evening, Madam Mayor. If I may, I'm going to defer to the applicant. There
is a couple of conditions in that staff report that they do not like and are asking to -- to be
modified and I will pull up the e-mail directed from the applicants so you can see what
she's requesting and, then, I will -- if you like, Madam Mayor, the project is south of Ustick
Road. It is the Blakeslee Subdivision. This is the first final plat for that subdivision. This
project is somewhat narrower homes. I can go through it, I guess -- you can see those
-- basically what these conditions are. Typically we have a condition that all common lots
be fenced. The applicant is requesting that because of the nature of the development
being 55 and older, they like the open feel. There is a large common lot within that
subdivision that fronts on the majority of the homes. It's very central. Their thought is
that they would like to keep that open. Staff has suggested to the applicant that there is
the option for alternative compliance to the fencing code, which would potentially allow
them to keep some of that open. It doesn't necessarily need to be presented tonight as
an alternative compliance, that's an administrative application. Their concern was that --
that not being part of the condition as crafted by staff wanting to make sure that was still
on the table and so I believe their request tonight on that specific -- which would be
condition number six there with the B, meet this section of code, 11-3-A7A7, or seek
alternative compliance or seek approval of alternative compliance from staff. The other
condition is number 19, which is a condition of the Public Works Department. There was
a typo in that condition that listed lot 23, instead of lot 2-3. It was caught by the applicant.
They were just hoping for that minor change there. Having said that, they have been in
communication with the Public Works Department and that easement that is being called
out is no longer being required by the Public Works Department, they found another way
to serve or achieve their goal there and you can ask -- Warren Stewart here can clarify
that if you have any questions, but those are the two conditions this evening that the
applicant has requested to be modified. And stand for any questions you have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Josh. Council, any questions? Okay. Is the applicant here?
Would you like to make any comment? You have to comment at the podium on the
record. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Walsh: Madam Mayor and Council, I'm Pam Walsh. Would you like my address?
De Weerd: Yes, please.
Walsh: 2218 West Woodlawn Avenue, Boise, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Walsh: As I have stated in -- and I don't know if you have the plat pulled up and are
familiar with it, but this is a 55 plus community, so our objective was to bring the
community together, have open space that they can mingle, socialize, walk through, you
know, have their -- their dogs together there and so we have no issue with fencing off the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 23 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 18 of 101
micro paths on both ends of the park as you enter it, but the homes actually -- the
backyards, which are only 12 feet wide, back up to that park area. So, our desire was to
keep that open, so that as adult -- adults, they would have real ready access to use that
park. The other issues we had are there are some real small sliver lots that are common
lots that are adjacent to homes. There is Lot 2, Block 3, and Lot 2, Block 4, that we would
like to keep open to the home that's next to it, rather than fence that off from that home
and they will be landscaped, but it would be nice to just have that property flow. The plat
-- because of the size of the lots, it's a little tight, you know, as -- as it is, which is what
the 55 community desires in this lock and leave lifestyle of having everything taken care
of, so that's where we would like to go with an alternative compliance to the planning staff
and present that. We have some neighborhoods that are in Pacific Northwest that fit that
kind of neo urban or urban design that they have implemented this kind of design, not
only in the active adult communities, but in a lot of their in -fill communities where things
are very open for neighbors to meet and mingle versus drive in their garages and not see
one another.
De Weerd: Thank you. So, will these be individually owned or --
Walsh: They are all individually owned.
De Weerd: So, if the owner goes in there and wants to put up a fence --
Walsh: It would be in our CC&Rs that they could not.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Is it anticipated this is a -- one of those communities where the -- the landscape
is all maintained?
Walsh: Yes. The homeowners association will maintain all the landscape on the
individual homes. We will do all the planting as we build the homes.
Cavener: Front and back?
Walsh: Front and back. Uh-huh. So, all the common space and the -- the property side
yards, everything will be maintained by the homeowners association.
De Weerd: Awesome. Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Madam Mayor. One question. The applicant -- just to confirm -- are these roads
going to be private or public?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 24 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 19 of 101
Walsh: The roads around the -- the main perimeter are public. The only roads that are
common drives are the ones that are down in the southern portion of the plat. You can
see there is one, two, three, four, five drives that are common drives. So, those are
private. And those are alley load homes. So, those will be fenced. They actually come
out their front door and greet their neighbor 24 feet apart or 20 feet apart.
Bernt: Madam Mayor, follow up. And those will be maintained by the homeowners or by
the HOA?
Walsh: By the HOA as well. Uh-huh.
De Weerd: Any other questions? Thank you very much.
Walsh: Thank you. We look forward to building out a new, beautiful 55 community for
Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you. Josh, anything further?
Beach: No, Madam Mayor.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Josh, are you supportive of that -- that request?
Beach: I am. I think, you know, with the -- the insight that it is a 55 and older community,
the landscape is all going to be maintained by the HOA and I think that -- that's not
typically what we -- what we do, but there -- I don't see a large concern with -- with the
type of community that it's going to be.
De Weerd: Yeah. It certainly seems if it's maintained by the HOA it would be consistent
and you're not putting obstacles in the way as well. Okay. If there is no further questions
or comments, I would entertain a motion on this item.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I move that we approve Item 9-A, H-2017-0164 to include the alternative
compliance on the fencing as requested by the applicant.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 9-A. If there is no discussion
-- yes, Josh.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 25 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 20 of 101
Beach: Madam Mayor, there was the other condition in there as well to eliminate the
condition that they have a public utility easement being created between Lots 2, 3 and 4
and 5, Block 4. So, I just wanted to make sure that -- to include that or to eliminate that
condition if that's your desire.
Borton: Thank you, Josh. Include that in the motion.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
B. Public Hearing Continued from January 23, 2018 for Pond
Subdivision Shop - VAR (H-2017-0169) by Schultz
Development located at 2980 N. Meridian Road
Request: Variance to UDC Section 11-2A-6 to keep an
existing accessory structure in a required front yard setback
C. Public Hearing for Winco Wells Subdivision (H-2017-0153) by
Dan Zimmerman, TAIT and Associates, Located at 2600 East
Overland Road
Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 7 building lots on
18.75 acres of land in the C -G zoning district
De Weerd: Thank you. And thank you. Item 9-B and C, the applicant has requested to
withdraw the application. Josh, can you discuss this?
Beach: Happily, Madam Mayor. The Pond Subdivision that was before you a few weeks
ago, a discussion about an accessory structure that was in this -- the front yard, we have
-- working with the applicant to come up with a different solution for that, so they don't
have to apply for a variance. They are going to do a property boundary adjustment to
meet the setback requirements. So, they have opted to withdraw their variance
application. The second one, 9-C, is the Winco Wells Subdivision. They have asked to
withdraw. We have not actually received a good response as to the reason for that
withdrawal of the application. So, I'm not really able to answer that or a reason for that
request. A representative is in the house if you want to ask them directly.
De Weerd: Sure. Where is -- oh. Here we go. Thank you. If you will, please, state your
name and address for the record.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 26 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 21 of 101
Zimmerman: Dan Zimmerman with TAIT and Associates. 707 North 27th Street in Boise.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Zimmerman: Unfortunately, I have -- I have been directed not to comment on this, so --
De Weerd: Okay.
Zimmerman: -- sorry, but I can't provide any more information.
De Weerd: Well, we appreciate you being here tonight to tell us that.
Zimmerman: All right. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, I will need a motion to -- on this withdrawal.
Borton: On each?
De Weerd: Yes.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Move that we accept or approve the withdraw of the application H-2017-0169.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the withdrawal of -- of the application
for a variance. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
De Weerd: And on 8 -- on 8-C as well.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 27 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 22 of 101
Borton: Move on this as well to accept and approve the request to withdraw the
application H-2017-0153.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
D. Public Hearing for Linder Mixed Use (H-2017-0095) by Trevor
Gasser, Located at 5960 N. Linder Road
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 5 Acres of Land with a
C -C Zoning District
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-D is a public hearing for H-2017-0095. This is -- I have opened
this public hearing. There is a request to be rescheduled to February of -- February 27th.
This one, as well as the next one, which are unrelated, but I think this was a posting error.
So, it -- it has to be continued.
Coles: That's correct, Madam Mayor. If I may chime in here. Items 9-D and E, there was
an issue with the radius notice that is required in our code to send our radius notice to
property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. That did not occur on these two
projects. We found that out on Friday or we did the investigation and figured out -- we
couldn't confirm that it happened, so for that reason these two items -- and Mr. Nary can
chime in as well -- need to be rescheduled to that date. I have been in contact with both
the applicants, explained the situation, and have confirmation that they understand what
happened and to move forward with the February 27th date.
De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Nary, do you need to add anything?
Nary: Just, Madam Mayor, for the record, it will be renoticed, so they are not continued
public hearings, they will be renoticed to a new date.
De Weerd: So, they will be new public hearings.
Nary: Yes.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 28 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 23 of 101
Palmer: So, this was our mess up?
Coles: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Palmer, correct, it was
-- we failed in the clerk's office to send out the notices for these two projects.
De Weerd: Okay. Well, our apologies to anyone who might be here for this public
hearing, as well to the applicant. We will hear this on the 27th. And I wish I could say we
would still take your testimony, but we can't. So, it's -- yes.
E. Public Hearing for Harper Ridge Subdivision (H-2017-0151) by
McMaster Limited Partnership, Located at 3885 E Copper Point
Drive
Conditional Use Permit Consisting of 124 Multi -Family
Dwelling Units on Approximately 10.68 Acres in an Existing
C -G Zoning District
2. Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of 16 Multi -Family
Building Lots, 4 Common Lots and 2 Other Lots on 10.68
Acres in and Existing C -G Zoning District
De Weerd: Same with Item 9-E then. And we don't need any motion, because they are
not real. Okay.
F. Public Hearing for Caven Ridge Estates West (H-2017-0156) )
by New Cavanaugh, LLC, Located on the East Side of South
Meridian Road, South of East Victory Road
Preliminary Plat Consisting of 67 Building Lots and 9
Common Lots on 14.42 Acres of Land in the R-8 Zoning
District
2. Amendment to the Development Agreement to Modify the
Conceptual Development Plan to Include More Building Lots
for the Development of Patio Homes on the Portion of the
Site West of South Standing Timber Way
De Weerd: Okay. Item 9-F is a public hearing for H-2017-0156. I will open this public
hearing with staff comments,
Beach: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this application before you tonight --
will say originally was for a rezone for a preliminary plat and for a development agreement
modification. The applicant has withdrawn the application -- the application for a rezone.
So, the site consists of 14.42 acres of land, which is, again, zoned R-8, located on the
east side of South Meridian Road, south of Victory Road. This property was originally
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 29 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 24 of 101
annexed in 2006 and included in a preliminary plat that has since expired. The
Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for the property is medium density
residential, which is three to eight -- approximately three to eight dwelling units per acre.
The applicant requests Council approval of an amendment to the existing development
agreement to include an updated conceptual development plan, which includes 20 -- 20
more building lots with -- than were previously proposed. A preliminary plat is proposed
that consists of 67 building lots for single family residential detached homes, nine
common lots on the 14.42 acres of land. The minimum lot size is 4.4 -- excuse me --
4,448 square feet, with an average lot size of 5,713 square feet. The subdivision is
proposed to develop in four phases. Since the Commission hearing the applicant has
submitted a revised plat in accord with the Commission's recommendation that depicts
reduced lot depths for Lots 35 and 36, Block 1, to allow for a wider street buffer along
South Meridian Road and to accommodate the walls required for noise abatement
adjacent to state highway and the existing driveway via State Highway 69 that is proposed
to be used for emergency access. Two of the micro lots were also relocated to provide
better pedestrian connectivity. Access is proposed via a local street from South Standing
Timber Way. A direct lot access to Standing Timber and South Meridian Road are
prohibited, except for emergency access. A 35 foot wide landscape buffer is required
along South Meridian Road, which is considered an entryway corridor. Segments of the
city's regional pathway system are required within the street buffer along South Meridian
Road and along the north boundary of the site adjacent to the Ridenbaugh Canal. There
is an existing segment of the multi -use pathway on the adjacent property to the north
along Meridian Road, but there is an approximate 40 foot long section that is missing.
The Commission recommends, as a provision of the DA, that the applicant construct this
off-site improvement with this development, if allowed by ITD through a license
agreement. A total of ten percent or 1.45 acres of qualified open space and site amenities
consisting of two segments of the city's multi -use -- multi -use pathway system and internal
pathways are proposed in accord with UDC standards. The development will also be
allowed to use the amenities in the Caven Ridge East project, to the east of the site.
Commission recommendation were approval with conditions. Summary of the
Commission public hearing were Wendy Shrief and Brady Lasher in favor. There were
none in opposition. Did not receive any comments. Did not receive any written testimony.
And there were no key issues of discussion, aside from those previously mentioned by
the Commission. Issue discussion by the Commission were consideration of the
applicant's request to not be required to construct a sound attenuation wall adjacent to
the common area a Lot 27, Block 1, along Meridian Road. The applicants request for a
reason solely for the allowance of reduced side yard setbacks from five feet to three feet
and concern regarding homes being so close together. Commission changes to the
staff's recommendation were the Commission approved the applicant's request to
withdraw the rezone application. The applicant's request the Commission recommends
a change to the staff recommended DA provision that requires the off-site extension of
the multi- use pathway along South Meridian Road to include a language with approval
of the adjacent property owner or ITD as applicable. There are no outstanding issues for
City Council. I did not receive any written testimony since the Commission hearing and
with that I will stand for any -- any questions you may have.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 30 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 25 of 101
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions at this time?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: A couple of quick ones. The first one, I -- there is not a scenario where you ever
do an off-site improvement without the permission of the property owner. Isn't that a
condition in any off-site improvement?
Beach: I think in this case it's -- it's an ITD right of way.
Borton: Right.
Beach: And we typically just have them get a license agreement to -- to construct that
pathway from -- from ITD and -- because we already have a pathway in there I don't see
a large issue with them granting that -- that easement. You can have it be --
Borton: Right.
Beach: -- based on their approval, instead of it being -- being required or work with them
to achieve this.
Borton: Madam Mayor? One other question. With the addition of the lots, the number
of lots is still permitted within the R-8 zone. The side yard setback is really the driving
force to try to go R-15, but it's not necessary?
Beach: Correct. I believe the discussion from the Planning and Zoning Commission
where they were uncomfortable with the R-15 just for the fact that they wanted the -- the
narrower side yard setback of three feet versus the five.
Borton: Madam Mayor. So, it's staying compliant with the R-8 standards that already
existed on this annexed property in the five yard -- five foot side yard setbacks? Okay.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Josh, one of the key issues of the Commission was the applicant's request not
to be required to construct the sound wall. I didn't see if there was any resolution to that
request from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Can you educate me where the
Commission landed on that?
Beach: I wish I could better. I'm covering for Sonya this evening. So, it looks like the
language here -- the Commission changes to staff recommendations are that -- I
apologize. That's for the -- the multi -use pathway. I don't know where they landed on
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 31 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 26 of 101
that. Typically that's something that we want to know. There is a common lot there,
instead of a residential lot, but our code requires that there be a residential zone, that
there be a sound wall. So, I think the -- without knowing exactly where the Commission
ended on that, that's where -- obviously, that's where staff -- staff fell in a
recommendation.
Cavener: Thanks.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further at this point? Is the applicant here? Good evening.
If you, please, state your name and address for the record.
Shrief: Good evening. Wendy Shrief with JUB Engineers and my business address is
250 Beechwood Avenue in Boise, Idaho. 83709.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Shrief: Thank you. It's good to be here with you this evening. We are in full agreement
with the staff report and staff -- and we worked primarily with Sonya Allen. They have
really helped us to shape the project. I think we have a better project here this evening
after working with your planning staff. We are in agreement with -- with the
recommendations that were made by Planning and Zoning Commission. We debated
and -- whether to extend the sound attenuation wall across a common lot that was not
directly next to residential. We agreed it was -- basically it's in your code, so we have
agreed to go ahead and put that sound attenuation wall in along that common lot. We
also discussed that off-site improvement with extending that pathway and -- and we asked
for there to be -- for it to be noted that if -- if we were able to obtain permission for that
right of way, because that was our primary concern it was not -- the extension of the
pathway that is being able to obtain that easement for -- for that pathway extension. But
we are -- we are in agreement with that condition. We are here with -- with what's a
relatively straightforward subdivision. We have already been annexed in the City of
Meridian. We have R-8 zoning. What we are proposing is in full compliance with -- with
the R-8 zone. This is going to be a nice, upscale subdivision. We have kind of a mix of
lot sizes. Some of our lots -- it's different from what was originally part of the concept plan
for this area. We are going to be putting in some patio homes and we have some
examples of a couple builders who have done patio homes in Meridian and what those
homes will look like and will be in compliance with those submitted elevations for those
buildings. We are proposing 67 building lots on 15.68 acres. So, we are in full compliance
with the code. We are asking to modify the development agreement to allow us to do this
type of different -- this different home type. We think it's -- especially in the south Meridian
area, it will be nice to have that difference of housing types in that south Meridian area
where it's primarily single family, larger lot, larger family homes. So, these will be kind of
an alternative with upscale homes. One of them single story, smaller footprint. So, that
was sort of the -- the reasoning behind that request. We have worked closely with staff
to -- we basically worked through all of our conditions. We don't have any additional
requests for you here this evening, but I'm here for any questions.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 32 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 27 of 101
De Weerd: Council, any questions? We see the elevations.
Shrief: And they are in the back of the staff report. I think we have submitted a number
of them. So, these are all elevations from local builders who specialize in -- some of
these, when we were originally going to ask for the R-15 zoning with the reduced setback,
were builders especially from small lots, that these are some of the single story we are
proposing a variety of housing types and styles.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Shrief: Thank you very much.
De Weerd: This is a public hearing and so, Mr. Clerk, do we have sign-ups?
Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. We had one additional sign-up this evening. Steven
Yearsley, against, wishing to testify.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will state your name and address for the record.
Yearsley: Good evening, Mayor and Council. Steven Yearsley. I live at 2961 East Lucca
in Meridian. It's kind of -- it might seem counterproductive that I actually approved the
subdivision and, then, come and actually say I'm against the application. When we met
with the City Council -- or Planning and Zoning, we had to approve this, because it met
all the conditions and rules of an R-8 zoning. However, in the DA agreement, if I
remember right, the property is set to a number of lots per the DA agreement. This
subdivision sits adjacent to the canal above Red Feather. So, it is actually a view corridor
for people coming -- leaving Meridian. It is going to be very visible to people to see and
having those lots so close together, having the offset being so close, that I don't think it's
going to look very -- very pretty for people driving down Meridian Road. I like the small
-- there is the bigger lot sizes. The lots that were initially platted the way it was platted, I
think that's the way we should leave it and so I formally request that you deny the -- the
DA modifications to allow the increased lots. And, then, regarding the -- the -- the -- or
the fence along the Meridian Road, we recommended that that be extended to the
property line to the end, so we had that. So, if you have any questions I would be happy
to answer those.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Yearsley: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there any further testimony?
Okay. Council? Oh, does the applicant have any closing remarks -- yes. Sorry.
Shrief: Mayor and Council Members, in rebuttal I would just --
De Weerd: If you will just state your name again for the record.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 33 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 28 of 101
Shrief: Wendy Shrief with JUB Engineers.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Shrief: I guess in rebuttal we -- the request we have before you is fully compliant with
-- with the R-8 zoning district. We have -- we have already been annexed into the City of
Meridian. This is a development which had some earlier subdivision plats that have been
approved and there was a concept plan where I believe -- and it's too bad Sonya is not
here this evening -- that concept did not actually specify the number of lots. Sonya went
through and counted lots on that -- on that concept plan. So, there was not an explicit
number of lots that were approved by Council when -- when that concept plan was
approved with the previous addition of the plat. So, we -- just to be on the safe side did
-- did submit the development agreement modification to put a new -- have a new concept
plan attached as a part of that development agreement, but we -- we are fully compliant
with -- with the zoning district R-8 and with your Comprehensive Plan and we think that
we are bringing up a different, better product and something that's needed in south
Meridian to have that diversity of housing types. But we -- we are doing standard R-8
residential lots in this area.
De Weerd: Okay.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
Bernt: So, thanks for coming this evening. Thanks for your presentation.
Shrief: You're welcome.
Bernt: One question. Would you agree that you're adding more lots to -- compared to
what was in the original development agreement?
Shrief: Correct. In the -- Mayor and Council Members, in the original development
agreement there was a concept plan attached to the development agreement and that
concept plan had fewer lots than what we are proposing. So, yes, we are.
Bernt: Would you -- so, right around plus 40'ish lots?
Shrief: We -- there is an increase of 20 lots from the previous concept plan. And there
was that -- there is an original plat -- it was Cavanaugh Subdivision with a different
developer, different project. That was the original concept plan and I believe that was
further amended with -- with Cavanaugh Ridge. So, we are coming in with a new concept
plan to attach to that development agreement.
Bernt: Thank you for that clarification.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 34 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 29 of 101
De Weerd: Yeah. I don't understand that explanation. It says that the preliminary plat
expired. So, there was a preliminary plat. There wasn't a concept plan, there was an
actual plat; is that correct?
Beach: Madam Mayor, my understanding is that there is -- yes, there was a plat.
Typically what we do is we tie the plat to the development agreement. So, you're right, it
was a concept plan, but it would also have been -- if the plat expired it would have been
-- de facto becomes a concept plan in the development agreement. But, yes, it's indicated
by the staff report there were 47 lots approved for that plat and they are asking for 67.
De Weerd: Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we close the public hearing for H-2017-0156.
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on Item 9-F. All in
favor say aye. Okay. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I guess I will just start off with my thoughts and opinions on this -- on this
application. I believe that this is an area of our city where, you know, there is actual view
lots and -- and because of that I think that we need to protect the view lots in this particular
area. Because of that I am against amending the development agreement to include an
updated conceptual development plan, which includes 20 more building lots. I just don't
think that's a prudent decision for this area of town and that's where I stand with my
opinion on it.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor -- and while we are talking, maybe we could go back to the before
and after and I have got a question for Councilman Bernt. When you say view lots, do
you mean do you have a view from the lot or a view of the lot?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 35 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 30 of 101
Bernt: It's -- it's situated -- in my opinion I believe that it's in an area where it's elevated
and so I believe that the least amount of density possible in that area. So, I'm in full
agreement of -- of the original plat that was -- that was agreed upon originally, the
development agreement originally, I just don't want to add to it. I don't think we need to.
I don't think it -- I completely agree with Commissioner Yearsley's explanation of why.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I'm trying to find the lots. Where were they added to? Are they just skinnier?
De Weerd: Do you have the previous -- this is the previous. Do you have the current?
Palmer: There we go.
Beach: Madam Mayor, if it helps I'm happy to pull up a Google Earth shot, so you can
kind of see what the topography looks like.
De Weerd: That would be great.
Beach: So, this is looking north on Meridian Road. The project is in this area. I'm not
sure what orientation you'd like to get to so you can see --
De Weerd: Can you still -- can you continue to move it to the left? Okay. So, that's in
the area where the house -- the existing house was? The home was? The Cavanaugh
home?
Beach: So, it's back over this way. Correct.
De Weerd: Okay.
Beach: So, away from Meridian Road.
De Weerd: Okay. Can you now show the -- the lots again?
Beach: Absolutely.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I struggle to see what view would be lost by the additional lots or preserved. I
live just upstream from this and -- I mean it's the flat area at the bottom of the ridge. That's
where all the -- I believe where all this is. Because that noticeable incline is south of the
proposed area, I believe.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 36 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 31 of 101
De Weerd: I'm sorry. Sorry -- I'm sorry. We can't accept --
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Palmer: It definitely goes uphill, but it's -- I'm -- it's not a -- in my opinion, noticeable
enough to incline until further south of this property where it really does go up there, that
the Meridian Road adjoining streets -- there is no view of anything that isn't already above
ground.
De Weerd: Josh, in that area that says phasing plan, those are the apartments?
Beach: That is correct, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: So, the apartments pretty much block at least the area along the canal or this
linear thing and, then, it's really this view shed of these larger lots that -- that do have
certainly -- I think in 2006 when this plat was done, R-8 had different dimensional
standards than it does now, so, you know, it's really hard to say this fits the vision then,
because it doesn't. The vision then -- an R-8 was -- if I remember correctly, it was a much
bigger lot size and had different setbacks as well.
Beach: Correct, Madam Mayor. We -- if you remember just about year, year and a half
ago, we changed these standards again for the lot sizes and they got even smaller. So,
you're correct.
De Weerd: Yeah. So, to say it fits the vision is kind of a stretch.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: If we didn't want to allow for differing from that vision why did we change it?
De Weerd: Well, I'm just telling you what it was then and that's a decision that this Council
makes, but the -- I don't know if the changing of those dimensional standards were to go
retroactively back to every plat that hadn't been final platted, so that's the only response
I can share.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I mean looking at the design change, one, it's -- adding the additional lots is not
going to take away anyone's view of anything and in fact -- I mean looking at it, especially
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 37 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 32 of 101
those ones close to Meridian Road, it lines them up more, as opposed to just kind of
having them all squampus directions. If anything, if somebody wanted to look between
them, it's something -- they have a better chance if they are proposed than the existing.
I mean it's zoned for it. You know, there is not big mansions going in here in either plan.
It's consistent with what's there. In fact, it's better. I mean I live in CBH. Those look
better than what's connected to the east. Higher quality. Looks like a better development
to me. I don't see any reason why there is a lot of argument against it. It looks like it
should be a simple one here.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I respectfully disagree with Councilman Palmer. I think that adding 20 lots to this
already jammed packed -- you know, I think that it -- it completely changes the look of the
-- of the development. I mean just -- just looking at it myself, I mean we are not here
today to decide whether or not what the existing -- or what the prior plat needed to look
like, what we are here discussing is if we are going to allow 20 more lots and in my opinion
20 more lots is just too much for this -- for this area. I think it's just too dense. What they
choose to do in the future, if this is -- you know, if this is denied or if this is approved, I
don't know, but if it is denied what they -- if they have to go back to the drawing table and
come up with something else, then, that would be a different design plan.
Palmer: Madam Mayor
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. Mr. Nary, how does this work when it comes to entitlements
under the -- is it because it's different than what was agreed on in the development
agreement that we can say, heck, no, we won't go? Or what -- what do we have to make
this decision here?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Yes. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Palmer, so a
development agreement is merely a contract between the city and the developer as to
what they agreed to build on that site. It is not required of the city to agree to a change
and the finding you simply need to make is it's not in the best interest of the city, it's not
consistent with what you have previously approved and they haven't presented enough
evidence to you to make the change agreeable. So, I mean it really is a discretionary call
on the part of this Council on whether or not it is either consistent with your vision that
you had in the original development agreement or that the change isn't consistent with
what you envisioned for that area and, therefore, they don't have a right to change the
development agreement for that purpose, so --
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 38 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 33 of 101
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. Mr. Nary, would you say that this is -- this change would, then,
make it inconsistent with what we have approved in the area?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I mean ultimately that's your -- your call,
not -- not mine. But I mean it really is -- this is a challenging area. The Tanana Valley
that was originally approved 12, 13 years ago was a large development, almost 700
homes, and this is now pieces and parts of it over time. So, it really is -- it is incumbent
on this Council to decide yourselves based on today's factors and what's in front of you
today on whether this is consistent or inconsistent, because, again, it's changed so greatly
over this time period of what was envisioned originally, you really have to look at kind of
relative to what's there today and whether you believe it is consistent with what's existing,
not necessarily consistent with what was previously approved.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. Then, Council, is this consistent with what we have approved in
the area? I think if anything is inconsistent in that it's not dense enough. Plenty more
dense around it. So, we have to justify the findings that it's not in the best interest of the
city being that it's not consistent with what we have approved in the area.
De Weerd: Well, no, not really. They have an entitlement right now and that entitlement
is defined in the development agreement and it's for a certain number of lots. That's why
they are in front of you today is to propose a new preliminary plan with an increased
number of lots. So, really, the -- the preliminary plat, even though it had expired, the
development agreement allows for a certain number of lots and a certain zone that at the
time considered larger lots than is defined today. So, it fits the vision of the city at that
time and the owners of the property in that area if they were to ask what was approved in
this area that is what they would have seen.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: To argue with you a little bit, I think that if they were -- they would have to ask
whether they are adding 20 lots or a hundred lots. If they were adding a hundred lots,
then, our job is easier to say, no, that is not consistent with what we have approved in the
area. But whether it's one lot or 20 lots or a hundred lots, they have to ask the question
and we have to make a decision and at 20 lots it is consistent. It is reasonable. Annex
the property.
De Weerd: And that is your decision.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 39 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 34 of 101
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: If memory serves, I think I was on Council when this was approved originally. I
think that original plat back in '06 was appropriate, because it was designed as part of
that annexation and that concept and those restrictions placed on the development
agreement captured the benefit to the city specifically and I think those characteristics
and those benefits remain today. So, in light of the magnitude of the requested change,
I'm not supportive of it.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: For right or wrong, when our public comes and provides testimony, it's always
beneficial. You have -- I don't know if you're chairman anymore, but a former chairman
of the Planning and Zoning Commission comes to speak out your ears perk up maybe a
little more. I appreciate Commissioner Yearsley's comments about protecting the view
and it definitely caused me to perk up and take a look at that. Is -- is that worthy of
consideration. I live around that area as well. You inevitably take notice about what
growth may or may not look around your neighborhood and this is an area that I have
always looked at to wonder what it inevitably would be and -- and I struggle to say, oh,
that's -- that's an area that has a view for travelers leaving town that we need to protect
and I'm struggling to wrap my head around that, because, frankly, as I leave town to drive
to Kuna I see homes on top of the ridge already and when I look to the west I see an
established neighborhood and I think that we as a community talk a lot about transition
and I think that this use is an appropriate use of transition to go from -- in some -- some
larger lots, more traditional single family homes to the east and, then, you have the multi-
family to the north. So, appreciate Commissioner Yearsley's feedback and perspective.
To me I don't see the -- the warrants, though, changing the plan that is before us here
tonight. But I see that the applicant's here. So, Madam Mayor, if we are willing --
Shrief: I would request to be able to --
De Weerd: I'm sorry, the public hearing is closed. The Council can open it up if they want
to accept additional testimony, not just from the applicant, it would be open for all
comments.
Palmer: Madam Mayor, given that -- at least we did have somebody in the audience to,
I move we reopen the public hearing on this item.
Cavener: Second.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 40 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 35 of 101
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to reopen the public hearing. All those in favor
say aye. Okay. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. If -- so, you're the applicant. I do want to see, first, if there is any public
testimony and, then, I will ask, because you always have the last word. Okay. Is there
anyone who wishes -- state your name and address for the record. Good evening. If you
will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Reynolds: It's Sally Reynolds. I live at 1166 West Bacall Street in Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Reynolds: Sure. And so I don't live around this area, I'm north Meridian, but I just wanted
to say I do agree with the sentiments and the logic that Commissioner Bernt has put
forward as far as when -- when residents and when the city see one concept plan, just
like Madam Mayor was saying, that is the concept plan and there is an intent and there
is a certain expectation that goes along with that and I understand, I am a real estate
agent, I understand how lot development works. I understand how things pencil. I
understand, you know, that is how they make their living. But at the end of the day these
are real people moving into real homes and they do want yards. They really want some
space for their families to spread out and while I know that it is more lots, it's not
necessarily a higher standard of living, I guess. The only thing that I can say for the
people who eventually live there, there will be more cars, you know, 40 more cars. There
will be more children in the schools and I know that that's things that this Council has
heard over and over again. So, I would just like to remind, you know, Council of that and
also say that in my mind 40 -- or 20 -- going from 47 to 67 amounts to a 50 percent
increase. So, percentagewise that is a pretty large increase to be asking for this small of
an area. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Reynolds: Stand for questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any other testimony? Good evening. If you will, please, state
your name and address for the record.
Shelton: Andrea Shelton. 2498 East Cyanite, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Shelton: I loved the first plat. I think it's wonderful. There is room for a pool. There is
bigger lots and that canal that goes through there is beautiful in the summer and it is
raised above. You can see the apartments on the northwest corner of Victory and
Meridian and they will overlook that. They will be above that. So, that they can actually
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 41 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 36 of 101
see the mountains and the view. Please don't squish more houses in there. It's beautiful
the way it is, so --
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bernt: Now you can talk.
Karnes: Thank you. Sam Karnes. 5556 South Graphite Way, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Karnes: I won't talk about anything you talked about, obviously, since I left the room, but,
yeah, those -- they have a view there. It's pretty obvious from the picture. That's what I
was responding to. I have to drive home that way every day, because the traffic is so bad
on Overland when I get out of the Axiom gym I can't make a left there. So, I go down
Meridian and, yes, it goes uphill and, you know, in fact, there is a beautiful old house,
which I believe was built in like the '50s or '60s, that's now being surrounded by
development, but it's -- I believe it's in that clear spot right in the middle right there and,
yeah, that's why they built it there. It has a beautiful view. Anyway, that's all I wanted to
say. Yeah, there is a view and I appreciate your being concerned with that, Councilman.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council -- usually we don't have someone return up to
testify, but with your permission after this gentleman we can ask Mr. Yearsley back up. I
will ask you at that time. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Minert: Ryan Minert. 2859 South Andros, Meridian. 83642. And I'm the applicant and I
think there is some misconceptions. This is in a hole. It's down very low. It does not start
going up the hill until we hit the next property owner, who is not part of our plat. So, we
are -- we don't have views. And it's very similar to what these apartments are. There is
a need for patio style homes. I know that it was said that, you know, there is -- we are
squishing them in -- homeowners won't want that. Well, there is a need. There is a
market for it. There is people that don't want to take care of big yards and so that's the
market that we are going to try to hit. We are not hitting. We do have -- and I do have
the property on the other side, Caven East. That's where we have bigger homes, we
have a pool, we have big common areas, that's where those buyers theoretically will be
going. You know, this just serves a different market. So, I just wanted to basically clear
up maybe some misconceptions and we are really not going up the hill. The home is in
that -- the home they were referring to, the Cavanaugh home, is in that -- by the blue --
between the purple and the blue there and that's being fixed up and will be sold as a
home. That's the highest part. But we are certainly nowhere near that. It climbs
significantly once you leave our property. So, anyway, thanks.
De Weerd: Appreciate the clarification there.
Bernt: Madam Mayor, I have got a question for the --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 42 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 37 of 101
De Weerd: Sir.
Bernt: Sorry. No. You're fine. What's the next phase? What's the other property you
own?
Minert: It's Caven East. It was approved a while ago.
Bernt: Did you say phase one? Is that what you're talking about?
Minert: Phase one and all the colored area. That's Caven East. Phase one is already
developed. Phase two includes -- and I don't have a way to point on here.
Bernt: They can point for you.
Minert: Phase two includes phase two east and phase one east. Phase two east goes
up the hill and we have got really big lots there right next to a park.
Bernt: Do you own phase one where it says center?
Minert: Yes.
Bernt: Okay. And what type -- is that going to be similar --
Minert: That is already being built and there is, you know, 10,000 square foot lots, you
know, I mean they are pretty good size. Two different types. We have view lots on the
upper tier. That's Palermo. You can't really see it on -- I don't know if you can point to it.
The upper street has bigger view lots and, then, what I call our standard lots are down
below, but those are where families are coming and we are building a three acre park.
You know, that's what we are marketing to, you know, families to move in there and the
other side is geared more towards empty nesters, you know, patio home style. But to
hear that we are blocking views -- if you're standing on the property that's really not the
case, so --
De Weerd: And I don't know if it was the view thing or not. At least not for me. But it is
-- the change is pretty excessive in terms of the number of lots and, yeah, I -- the views
getting hidden behind the apartments were not one of those things for me, but the
dramatic increase in the number of lots certainly was and I appreciated the elevations
and your further explanation of where this really lies on that piece of property. Mr.
Yearsley. I'm sorry. Where? Oh, I'm sorry. Come on -- good evening.
Webb: Good evening. My name is Wendy Webb and my address is 2299 East Lodge
Trail Drive. I used to jog along that path, so I know it really, really well. It is flat in the
area where they are planning on building there. My concern is about developing
sustainable neighborhoods and in my research sustainable neighborhoods have a lot of
green space. So, when I think about adding so many more homes in there, I feel like we
will lose a lot of green space and 20 years down the road I want this neighborhood to be
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 43 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 38 of 101
safe to jog through. I want sustainable neighborhoods of green space. That's what I want
as a resident of the community. To me that means if you put in a patio home that you
add a lot more common area that's green space to make up for the setbacks between the
homes and so it concerns me that we are not adding a lot more green space to
compensate for the amount of residents that will be in that area. That's my concern.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Webb: Thank you.
Yearsley: Madam Mayor and Council, Steven Yearsley at 2961 East Lucca, Meridian. I
was a little nervous and which is kind of surprising, but I was kind of nervous talking to
you before. In the comprehensive code we changed recently talking about the southern
rim and trying to preserve open space, trying to view -- preserve openness for people to
see, not people looking from their lot out, for us looking at the lots. If you look at that,
there is a canal that runs just behind the apartments. That canal sits ten to 15 feet higher
than all the other ground around that. So, that is the southern rim. This property is
considered the southern rim and that's where I -- I have my heartburn is you look down
Eagle -- you look right down Victory Road, you look up, you see those homes above the
canal and so what we are going to see with those 20 additional lots is a sea of homes
instead of having space in between those homes. That's where I come -- that's where I
have my heartburn with this lot. If this was down on the lower side of that canal, in the --
in the flat area where you couldn't see it, I wouldn't have any heartburn with it at all. But
where we are looking up at it and driving down that road, is that something that we want
to look at day in, day out, a sea of homes, without much change, much differences, with
very little lots, very little room between the homes? We -- we approved Sobie, which is
right next to my subdivision and that's the way it is. You have large two story homes with
five feet on either side and they are -- all it is -- all you do is see homes. You don't see
any differences and so that's where I -- I'm concerned about is in the future looking up at
that, you know, and seeing that view and I don't believe that that's what we want our city
to look like. So, thank you.
Shrief: Mayor and Council Members, again, Wendy Shrief with JUB Engineers. So, thank
you. I think this is the first time I have ever reopened a hearing that -- I just wanted to
bring a couple things up. First of all, we are going to have the -- we are proposing the
standard ten feet between homes you have in your R-8 zoning district and we will have
-- there is a ten foot combination of berm and attenuation wall along Meridian Road. So,
this is going to be very similar to other subdivisions where it's going to be obscured from
Meridian Road, so I think that concern about the view corridor, we are going to have a
combination of a wall and a berm all along Meridian Road. What -- what I would like to
propose -- it sounds like there were -- with the R-8 zoning we were granted when there
were different dimensional standards back when this development was originally
approved when this was annexed. We would like to have the opportunity to continue the
hearing and come back and re-examine those dimensional standards from the original R-
8 zone when this property was originally dimensioned, come back with a site plan,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 44 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 39 of 101
emphasize our open space and green space and look at those dimensional standards
that were in place when this property was annexed at that time.
De Weerd: And I appreciate that. One thing I think when they looked at the dimensional
standards, the hope was to give greater creativity opportunities to as testified to provide
maybe some of that in open space, so that you can create a feeling of taking advantage
of the amenities and maybe still getting the same numbers in there, but having
opportunities to do something different. What you showed was not something different
and I agree that there is a demand. I have heard it from several of our senior advisory
board members, they would like to see greater opportunities for smaller lots and,
hopefully, someone else taking care of their yards. But if you also might consider that in
-- in what you're looking at.
Shrief: Okay. So, Mayor and Council, that is our request to continue to -- to continue and
to come back with that plan and to revisit the dimensional standards for when this property
was annexed and -- and also I want to look a little bit at the area and how some of this is
developed. I think when this was originally approved subdivisions in the area, such as
Silver Water, which have come in with a mix of lots, they have actually brought in some
lots that are much smaller that we are proposing, but I want to look at that -- kind of that
shot in history when this was originally annexed and what was the plan for that area and
how has that changed and what were the dimensional standards back then and we will
come back with probably a prettier plan for you. But we appreciate the opportunity to do
that.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
Bernt: Madam Mayor? Seniority.
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Do you think you need -- is 30 days sufficient?
Shrief: If I could get two weeks that would be great.
Cavener: Okay.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: See, this is what I like and this is what I appreciate is when, you know, smart minds
get together and come up with plans that work. I have experience on the Planning and
Zoning Commission and I know it's possible. I saw it day in and day out where -- where
smart people got together and came up with plans where it just worked. I have no doubt
that you will come back with a plan that better serves this area, that's maybe a little bit
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 45 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 40 of 101
less dense, but more creative. I appreciate your -- I appreciate your willingness to do
that.
Shrief: Thank you.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Unless anyone else has anything to add or offer, seeings how we have got the
public hearing already open, I move that we continue this public hearing to February 20th,
2018.
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue Item 9-F to February 20th. All those
in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
G. Public Hearing Continued from October 24, 2017 for 2017
Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment (H-2017-0113) by City of
Meridian ECR, administrative changes and certain policy
statements
1. Request: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment for the
purpose of 1) updating the text and policy statements
(Goals, Objectives and Action Items) contained in the plan;
2) add text that identifies the Southern Rim; and 3) update
the current version of the Existing Conditions Report (ECR)
De Weerd: Item 9-D is a public hearing continued from October 24th on H-2017-0113. I
will turn this over to Caleb.
Hood: So, Madam Mayor, with your --
De Weerd: Or Brian.
Hood: -- with your Council's permission -- yeah. Is it okay if we present from -- we will
just go right down the line here. Warren is actually part of this team, too. So, if you're
okay, though, I think we will just present from the staff desk if that's okay.
De Weerd: We won't hold it against you that Warren is part of it. Are you turned on?
McClure: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm here tonight to continue speaking
to you about this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. This is a staff initiated
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 46 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 41 of 101
amendment, as you mentioned, began on October 24th. You gave us some direction and
some more to do and so we have come back to explain the process to you now. Caleb,
Warren and I will all discuss this --
De Weerd: Brian, can you pull that a little closer to --
McClure: Is that better?
De Weerd: Yes.
McClure: We have three items to cover tonight in two groups. Before moving on I'd like
to emphasize that these groups -- and even the specific elements in texts in these groups
are not a package deal. You can choose which elements or text to approve or not. This
first group, which I will be covering, is the same as presented on October 24th, so I
apologize in advance. This includes a yearly review of Comprehensive Plan policy
statements and department text and the updated existing conditions report. These are
what we consider to be administrative changes, approving these will help us to prepare
for work on the new Comprehensive Plan. We have not received or heard any comments
or concern with these items. The second group and third item are proposed policy and
text changes to the Comprehensive Plan related to the rims. This topic is where our
conversations focused at the last hearing and Caleb and Warren will have some of the
updates on this later on. What's included in the review. There are too many changes to
go through one by one, but here are a few examples. Generally these revisions reflect
things that already have or are occurring. Red strike through is text proposed to be
removed and green underlined text are proposed additions. First example reflects that
Public Works has completed their sewer master plan model and the second just shows
some updated numbers to fire department staffing. Again, we will get to the rim text
changes later. Here are a few proposed changes to policy statements. The goals,
objectives, and action items of the plan. Again, there is too many to go through one by
one, but these generally are actual operations or things the city is already doing.
Examples on the screen are very typical, as most of these changes are just responsible
department priorities and clarifications. Anything red is removed. Green is new. Existing
conditions report is the second item we will be discussing. The Comprehensive Plan is
split into two documents, both of which are needed to meet state code. The first
document, which is the Comprehensive Plan, includes a future land use map is future
looking. What is it we want to be when we grow up. The second document, which is an
addendum to the first, is the existing conditions report. This describes who we are today.
The new existing conditions report -- the new photos, more photos, updated tables, new
tables, new charts and reduction of overall text. Number of pages, but a higher ratio of
graphics and it's really kind of meant to be flipped through. The infographics slide on the
screen is a summary of information in the ECR and the graphics on the screen reflect
Meridian only, but the ECR will compare that against the Ada county, Canyon county,
Boise, Nampa, Idaho, and the U.S. as a whole. Here is a few more graphics, just to
highlight what's in the ECR. Of note I guess poverty levels in media are lower than local,
state, and national rates. Meridian is aging. The median age continues to increase and
the older percent of the population is increasingly a large portion of the overall whole and
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 47 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 42 of 101
housing costs, increasingly larger portion of total household income. This is especially
true for those renting homes and apartments. Lastly here are a few additional items for
your consideration and as proposed. We didn't get these into the original application, but
they were covered at P&Z and with Council October 24th and they have not changed. In
summary, staff would like to change all occurrences of the Wastewater Treatment Plant
to the Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility in both the text and the policy statements
and, then, for policy number five, .05.03A, Public Works had originally requested this
priority item to be lowered. Subsequently Legal and SWAC requested that we leave it
alone and Public Works concurred. So, we are asking, basically, to leave it alone in
regard to the priority. And, lastly, some of the information on parks with the ECR, what it
is we included in the packet has -- was -- parks requested some additional updates to
that afterwards, so they have been changed in the ECR before it went to Planning and
Zoning and City Council, but I'm just making a note that they weren't in the original
application. That's it for this section. I'm happy to take any specific questions if you have
them. Otherwise, I can turn this over to Caleb.
De Weerd: Council, any questions on this part?
Hood: So, Madam Mayor, Council, thank you. Before I get into my -- my portion of this,
I do want to just emphasize a couple of things that Brian brought up. First, I want to --
and I think we talked about this maybe in October, but you're going to hear a lot of the
same things we talked about in October tonight. But I do want to just thank Brian and to
appreciate him for the work he did, particularly on the ECR. If you haven't looked at that
document, it's pretty fantastic and the work he did to -- not graphically, but just coordinate
the census website, talk to COMPASS staff, find the information and, then, make it pretty,
so you can actually read it and understand it, it's a pretty cool document. So, again, you
have other things to consider, but at the end of the day, if nothing else that ECR and
probably the administrative changes, if you can at least move those forward would be
great. He's put a lot of effort into that and we use it for marketing materials and other
things, too, that we would like to officially start using it, so, anyways, onto really why I am
here before this evening. So, again, just a little bit of background. Over the last 12 to 15
months or so you have had some projects, particularly in south Meridian -- and I'm not
going to define south Meridian, other than being south of 1-84. But you have had some
projects and some public comment at those proposed projects about the southern rim
and densities in particular and based on some of those comments staff was indirectly
directed to work with a small group of those property owners to develop some policies
and piggyback, if you will, what we just presented, the administrative changes, and the
ECR that we were already in the process of working on and get some policies related to
the rim to consider. So, that's kind of just a real quick -- and I know -- obviously, that
was a year or 15 months' worth of history in 30 seconds, but that's kind of what brought
us to submitting the application with what I'm going to talk about, rim policy. So, we had
that first meeting, the first public hearing, on October 24th. You continued it at that
meeting to tonight, February 6th. You did ask us to come back in December with just a
quick update on how we were going to kind of tackle these tasks and we did that as well.
As well as for Public Works to evaluate sewer impacts and do that additional public
outreach. So, what have we done? Since the 12/6 meeting we had a meeting -- or,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 48 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 43 of 101
excuse me, since the October 24th meeting we had a meeting on December 6th with
three members of the Southern Rim Coalition, their representatives. Three Building
Contractors of Southwest Idaho representatives and three city staff people. Essentially
there was no real concurrence on that meeting. I thought it was productive, but there
wasn't a whole lot of agreeance that came about from that meeting or that even the
concept of including text in the plan from the BCA's perspective into the Comprehensive
Plan. But it was a good opportunity for at least the two sides -- three sides to all sit to
down and hear each other out on that. Like I mentioned, then, on 12/12 we did a quick
just outreach plan to Council that we provided to you and, then, on January 3rd we held
a public information meeting here in conference room A -B. Letters went out to property
owners that had two acres or more within the rim areas and I will show you a graphic here
in a second of what that means. As well as the homeowners association and we also
posted it to the clerk's office on NextDoor. We had 31 people sign in at that meeting with
about 36 in total -- not everybody tends to sign in, but we had about 36 and that doesn't
include staff and, again, we had four or five staff people present as well. So, Planning
and Public Works staff gave a similar presentation that you're hearing tonight. We kind
of did the whole dog and pony show and, then, we had some boards set up on either side
and we answered questions after the more formal kind of PowerPoint presentation. We
did have comment sheets available that were provided to anybody in attendance. We
actually even e-mailed a couple of them after the fact. We only received six sheets and
some of them even just provided the e-mails back to us, but six comment sheets returned
to us by when we were asking for them by the 10th of January. It was a split response.
Total six, three were generally in favor and three were against. We also -- I also provided
the memo that you have in your pocket for tonight dated February 1, to that same what I
call the party of nine. Three members from BCA, three members from the Southern
Coalition and staff. So, they have that as well. Since, then, we have also received a
petition online and I believe the clerk has either a link or somehow has linked that to your
packet, so you can look at the petition in searchable documents. I'm sure you will hear a
little bit more about that, but that's also in the packet part of the record for this. So, that's
a quick recap of just the things we have done. I will let Warren kind of talk what he's done
here in just a minute. But that's kind of -- since the last public hearing what's taken place.
So, I want to spend -- again, you have heard this before, but I want to -- I need to go
through it again. So, this is the meat of the proposal. We are back in the plan itself here.
The comp plan. So, here are what the rim areas look like on the map. These new exhibit
maps depict the rim areas that would be included in the comp plan. These overlay areas
would not be depicted on the future land use map. So, this is a separate stand-alone
exhibit in the comp plan that's cross-referenced and some of the policies I will run through
here in just a second. The area shown here were drawn the same way on the original.
North of Chinden. Here is Spurwing. Text was written. And the areas are within a quarter
mile of the rim on both sides. So, before I go -- before I go too far in more of the changes
to the map, I do want to just reinforce what the comp plan is and does and what it isn't as
well. So, it's a generalized guide for how our community should grow. It's not a blueprint
for that growth. It's a broad visionary document, not a one size fits all policy. There is
discretion involved. The appropriateness and intent of a project and if or how specific
policies within the plan are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. So, essentially, as you
will see on the next slide, language is in shoulds and not shalls. We do encourage, you
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 49 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 44 of 101
know, these types of things, but it's not explicitly required. That being said, we do -- staff
and I think you do, place a lot of value on the text within the Comprehensive Plan. So,
it's a balancing act. Again, it's not shalls, but we do emphasize these things and are
looking for general compliance. But it is, again, kind of case by case as well. Okay. So,
then, back into the -- the text of the plan. Before I highlight everything on this slide, I do
want to talk about the purple here for just a second. In the memo that I referenced earlier,
dated February 1, 1 put a note in there that when we had our meeting with the BCA and
the Southern Rim Coalition representatives, that everybody was in general compliance or
agreement with -- on the third bullet, the clarification that not already annexed and zoned
in the city. That's new language. I don't think anybody disagrees with that clarifying
language, but the BCA asked and I will -- they are not in favor of any of this text. So, they
didn't agree to that change, because the premise of even having this text they don't
necessarily agree with it and I will let them speak for themselves, but that's, essentially,
the clarifying language is that was meant just as a clarifier. It really doesn't change how
we would have applied it or not. Staff always presented it this way. If you are already
annexed and zoned, this isn't retroactive to you. We thought it would help clarify that.
So, if it moves forward tonight, I would ask that it read this way, but, again, are all parties
on board with how this reads? No. So, I'm sorry if I misrepresented that in my memo.
So, the first bullet -- this text removes the density step allowance within the rim areas.
So, right now the city will consider a one step or down density for most residentially
designated properties without doing a future land use map amendment. So, the step is
not a given. It is something that can be requested by an applicant, but the applicant must
justify that step and gain Council concurrence. Usually, first staff concurrence and, then,
Council -- ultimately Planning and Zoning and Council concurrence. Just a quick aside
on this and you will see some of this language even in the petitions and some of the other
things that are out there. We are going to take a serious look at this step when we get
into a new comp plan. So, that's not -- you know, the step citywide -- not the step in the
rim, but the step citywide. Is this -- it is -- and we kind of talked about this in October, it's
antiquated at this point. It was put in place during a time when state law only allowed us
to modify our map twice a year. Once every six months. However, this policy has
withstood the test of time and lives on and it's been helpful in some cases, but it really
hasn't and I don't want to get too far off track -- hasn't provided some of those assurances
that may be adjacent property owners were expecting when they look at the map. It
allows a wide range of residential development to occur because of the ranges you get
with a step up or down from whatever your based designation is. That range is just -- it's
crazy. So, anyways, we will look at that more with a new comp plan. But this one would
limit that for now within the north and south rim areas as depicted in the first slide that I
showed you. They couldn't step up. So, if you're in -- in the overlay area, there is no --
there is no stepping up. If you're low, you're low. If you're medium, you're medium. There
is no going from low to medium, so -- without doing a future land use map amendment.
That is still a tool that anybody has in their tool box, can apply for. If you're the property
owner you don't like a designation, you can file a map amendment with the city and go
through the process to change the map. So, it's not set in stone. None of this is ever set
in stone. We modify development agreements. You modify the comp plan. It's a living,
breathing document, but it is a guide and there is a lot of work that goes into putting it
together, so -- so, that's the first bullet. Really, what it would do is, again, within those
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 50 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 45 of 101
areas depicted you couldn't even request that step up. Your residential -- if -- if you're
residential in those areas that is the range your -- your project would need to develop to
without going through a map amendment. But feel free to stop at any time so this makes
sense, but I know you have heard most of this before. Bullet two. Again, I will just
highlight. This is should language, not shall. This -- this statement sets the context for
additional policy statements, the goals and objectives that I will show you here in a
second. Meant to encourage developers to think about the rim as an asset and allow
their project appropriately. Who defines appropriately? That is everybody. So, we are,
again, setting -- saying, hey, is there -- almost your last discussion you had, is this an
asset that should be thought about when you're laying out this property? Is there a view.
If so, what can we do about that? Should we lay something out with open space or our
streets or whatever. So, we don't -- we, as staff, don't really have any way to enforce this
policy, but we ask the developer to explain how they are complying or meeting the intent
of it. So, the third bullet, then, on this is right now all residential uses north of Chinden
and within a quarter mile of the Phyllis Canal or that rim are supposed to be one half to
one acre. So, this policy has existed for some time, but, in reality, if you go out there you
don't have all half to one acre lots within a quarter mile of that rim that drops off to the
Phyllis Canal. So, like I was just saying, it's a guide. It's not a blueprint. It doesn't mean
exactly a quarter mile. All lots have to be a size. So, just, again, want to set that concept
-- that concept up. So, your future land use map color or your residential density really
trumps this text, because you have projects in the Tree Farm, for example, that are
medium density. That trumps any policy like this that says half to one acre lots generally.
So, staff evaluates projects, again, on a case by case basis. I will probably just leave it
at that. Transitions are the other thing that definitely factor into that. This is the other
main part of the proposed rim text and these are the goals, objectives, and action items.
So, the comp plan contains background, think ECR and some of the other administrative
changes that we are having, but also contains real policies, goals, objectives, action items
and this is what is typically referred to most frequently in a staff report, you know, see
action item 3.01-03A. That's -- that's the reference you're getting most of the time in a
staff report. So, this is that -- this is an addition to that table in Chapter 3 of the comp plan
that staff would most likely say is a project doing these things. But, again, they are policy
statements, they are meant to encourage, not require, and without reading them to you, I
will assume the font is large enough everyone can read it. Essentially what they are trying
to encourage is preserving views, orienting developments to make use of those views,
using open space to benefit neighborhoods with views, and encouraging open vision
fencing to limit obscuring views. So, these are all goals we seek to achieve with lots of
options and examples for a variety of development types. Again, not a blueprint. So, just
a couple of more exhibits and, then, I will turn it over to Warren. So, this, essentially, is a
hybrid. Again, we aren't putting this designation on our future land use map, but it shows
what it would look like if you overlaid the two. So, this wouldn't be in the comp plan, but
just to show you what it -- essentially, what it would look like. The rim area is cross-
hatched here. I will just -- just a quick aside. We have had some -- I have had some
conversations with some folks about -- particularly if you look at the -- below the rim in
this case. I mean the Phyllis Canal really -- I mean it's -- it's definitely lower and some
have asked, well, why would you limit -- there is no view there. I mean you're on the river.
You're in the low lands, but why would you limit the -- now, you're really talking about
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 51 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 46 of 101
densities. There isn't a view to speak of there, but it's more about kind of that transition
there potentially. But, again, would staff apply down below half to one acre lots as a hard
and fast rule? Probably not. Is it -- it doesn't have that same value, if you will, if you're
up on top and especially the first block or so along -- along the rim looking out over the
river. The same -- in that same vein we had conversations about Chinden and you also
just talked about it, but the last project was on the state highway as well. Ten foot
minimum sound and noise mitigation wall along Chinden. No one is getting --there are
no public views from Chinden Boulevard here. We are building a wall, because we said
noise is an issue from the highway, put up a wall. So, if you're talking about public value
here from Chinden anyways -- and there is going to be public streets, more than likely,
running through, you can't -- you can't see -- you can still see over the wall, obviously,
you can probably see Butte and the foothills and things. But, again, it's obscured, if you
will. So, I just want to kind of -- some of the conversations I have had with people about,
well, what -- yeah, there is a value if you're right on the rim, but, really, very few others
would derive any value. So, I have gotten some of those -- those questions or concerns
about this. So, here is -- is just an aerial view. I probably won't spend too much time on
this. But just, again, remember the green areas are the low density. Those are the ones
that will be limited to no step. You couldn't step up if you're green. But we have got -- I
should have done this calculation. Brian may even have it. But we have got a large
portion of this that's already developed. Spurwing. Tree Farm. You know, really it's west
of Black Cat and even some of that is imminent. There is really not a lot of opportunities
for this -- for these policies really to apply in this area, so -- yeah. I see some of you still
looking at the screen, but I'm ready to move on if you are. Okay. So, the south end. So,
same kind of deal. Show you what it would look like over the top of our future land map.
Again, this is only an illustrative exhibit. It isn't proposed to be actually put in the plan.
But would show you how many residentially designated properties are affected and how
many low density residential properties are even affected. So, here is that same -- since
they are the same scale, just with the aerial instead of the future land you map. So, you
can see some of the properties already developed out. Some of them are developed in
the county with some redevelopment potential and some that are largely undeveloped or
being farmed right now. So, with that, again, this was originally heard on the 24th and
the other reason to continue it was for Public Works to evaluate the impacts of the -- the
proposed text I just ran through on sewer. So, with that I'm going to turn it over to Warren.
Stewart: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, at that same hearing in October that
Caleb talked to you about, we also presented some information on how land use and
densities impact Public Works infrastructure and I was asked to come back with a little bit
more information and so that's why I'm here tonight. I will go through for the benefit of
those who may not have been there that night and give you a little bit more -- a little bit of
background and, then, I will talk a little bit more about sort of the issues and concerns that
we would promise to come back to you with. So, land use density has a significant impact
on Public Works infrastructure. The sizes that we -- of the pipes and the main lines and
pumps and things that we use are dependent upon how much usage they are going to
get or how much demand there is going to be for that infrastructure. So, developing a
good plan and, then, staying fairly consistent with that plan saves the city a lot of money
in either over or under investing in infrastructure if that plan changes. So, getting this
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 52 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 47 of 101
fairly well dialed in -- now that's not to say it has to be perfect, but getting it fairly well
dialed in and, then, staying somewhat consistent with that plan is important to ask.
Otherwise, we either overbuild or under build and either one can, essentially, waste
money. Every utility has a point at which the utility has a break even -- the densities are
either sufficient to cover the cost of long-term maintenance operation and replacement.
For many cities across the nation they have been -- they have studied this and found that
that -- that break even point for most utilities is somewhere between two and four dwelling
units per acre. You have to have that kind of density in the order to generate enough
revenue per mile of pipe to eventually maintain that, operate it, and the big ticket item is
to replace it when it gets old and needs to be replaced. We have looked at that for the
City of Meridian. Our breaking point for the City of Meridian appears to be somewhere
around 2.7 to three dwelling units per acre right now and that's kind of, you know, based
on some information that we looked at a few years ago also had that -- that, again, as a
part of this effort and that's kind of the break even point for us. However, I will say that
some -- some areas of small, larger or lower density areas don't have a significant impact
on that number, provided that they are not extensive and that they are not significant to
the relative size of a drainage basin. So, our water system has got wells all over the city
and doesn't have a centralized treatment area. Because of that our water system is not
as affected by these changes that might take place. But our sewer system, because we
have a central place where the sewer is treated, we have to start that infrastructure and
sizing that infrastructure from the plant and work outward. We have some drainage
basins in the city or areas that drain into one main trunk line that are very large and small
areas of lower density development within that trunk sewer shed we call them have very
little impact on those mainline sizes. However, if you've got a trunk sewer shed that's
relatively small and you make changes to the density in that area, that can have a
significant impact on the size of that pipe. So, for instance, just to kind of give you some
perspective. If you look at this map, the purple lines in this map represent the drainage
basins of the sewer sheds for the City of Meridian. If you look, essentially, west of
Meridian Road, you will see that this -- the little purple areas are relatively small. So,
changing densities in those areas can have a dramatic impact on the size of those pipes
in that area. Whereas, going to the east, the sewer sheds in that area are much larger
than and so changes in those, essentially, land use densities can -- will have a much less
-- or they will be much less noticeable on the pipe sizes. So, I wanted to give you some
perspective. There is -- it matters what portion of the town you're in. It matters how big
the drainage basins are with regards to the impact that these changes have. Just to kind
of give you a little bit of perspective with this. Most of you are familiar with the project that
we are doing right now going down Meridian Road with a new trunk sewer and through
the Simplot property, across Victory -- or Amity Road and onto the south. These changes
that we are talking about here, if we implemented those changes, would, essentially, on
that trunk sewer that we are in the process of building and the future segments of that,
we would be able to change one segment of 24 inch pipe to 21 inch pipe for a thousand
lineal feet. Now, that may not sound like a lot, but that's a pretty substantial downsize in
the pipe for a fairly significant distance, which saves the city a lot of money. We would
also have another section where we could take the ten inch pipe that's there and we do
see up to eight inch pipe for an additional thousand feet. So, these land use changes can
have an impact on what we invest in those areas. If we invest -- in other words, if we take
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 53 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 48 of 101
these changes and we implement them and we put the smaller pipes in the ground and,
then, we decide later on that, well, maybe we would rather go back to a higher density, I
just want Council to be aware that can be extremely difficult to do if those pipe sizes are
already in the ground, if not impossible in some instances to go back and what that will
mean is we will have overinvested in that sewer system. So, again, the message is decide
what to do, be fairly consistent with what we want to do, because significant changes in
what we do have a dramatic impact on whether we have invested too much or too little
with regards to our sewer infrastructure. One of the other questions that you guys had
asked me to come back with is what are the funding options. In other words, if, in fact,
you have a situation where you might have low density lots, less than two dwelling units
per acre, and we can't -- at our current single rate tier or single rate structure for rates,
we don't cover the cost or we can't recoup enough cost to cover that, what can you do?
I talked about back then about maybe going to a tiered rate structure. That's one avenue
that you could look at in order to potentially allow the lower densities and still create a rate
structure where they would pay for that eventual long-term replacement. As I looked into
that more and more, tried to find other alternatives, I honestly didn't find very much
information on any other alternative. So, I think one of the things that you could consider,
potentially, if we wanted to, is some sort of a tier grade structure, that you could sort of
increase that for the lower density -- increase rates for lower density homes, so that they
-- you could generate enough revenue over the long term to eventually pay for the long-
term replacement. I did want to just sort of mention that this is -- this is a -- long-term
infrastructure replacement and -- is a big issue throughout the country right now. It's an
issue that we want to make sure that as the Public Works Department we come back to
you here in the next few months and give you a lot more information on, because I think
long-term planning for infrastructure replace -- replacement is going to be significant. We
have cities back east that haven't planned well and are facing monumental challenges
right now trying to figure out how they are going to replace aging infrastructure and they
either are going to have to jack up rates or reduce services in order to make that happen.
I recently read one -- it's a major city, but a major city back east that has over 400 mainline
breaks a day and I can't even imagine what we had out here in Meridian Road -- or in
Eagle Road 400 times a day and the kind of money that they are, essentially, throwing
away, because they haven't thought about this long term and don't have the funding to
replace that infrastructure. So, something to consider. I want to make sure you guys are
aware of that, that you have that in the back of your mind. Summarizing, you know, a few
-- a development that may be 40 or 80 acres and has a few half acre or even one acre
lots and a portion of that, but their overall density in that development approaches 2.7 to
three dwelling units per acre, that's not a problem. Especially in a large drainage basin,
that's going to be okay. But if we -- if we do take and make significant areas of our -- our
city, these larger lots, I think we need to look seriously at what we need to do in order to
plan for that long term or we could be in a situation where that could cause us some
problems and some difficulties. And with that I will stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Warren. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 54 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 49 of 101
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Warren, I appreciate your request and your comments about being fairly
consistent moving forward. Can you share with Council -- city employees for the most
part are fairly consistent in them being in their positions, but this body is -- in a perfect
world consistent for at least two years, but even two years from now there could be four
new people sitting up here. Can you share with us as a department how you plan taking
into consideration that we, as a body, may not always be fairly consistent in who is sitting
up here?
Stewart: Well, thank you, Councilman Cavener and, Mayor, thanks for giving me the
opportunity to talk about this. But I don't know that we -- obviously, we have no control
over that, but my hope is that this planning effort that we are going through right now and
creating a vision will sort of help drive that consistency, because as a Council you don't
all change all at once. So, hopefully, as this plan is implemented by -- or a plan is
implemented by this particular Council, that will stay fairly consistent over time. We
realize that there is going to be some modifications here or there, but that's why we are
here and we hope to be able to provide you with the information to hope you understand
that land use planning and changes to these plans do have an impact on Public Works
infrastructure and they can mean that we can either overinvest or under invest. So,
keeping that in mind -- it's your decision. I mean as a Council you have the ability to make
those decisions. But I think what's -- for me what's important is that you understand the
implications of that. That if you decide to make a change, you understand that that -- that
that has implications to our Public Works infrastructure and that can -- that can mean that
we either have to reinvest additional money in an area that we thought we were sufficient
in or that we may have put in bigger infrastructure than was necessary.
Cavener: Thank you.
Stewart: I don't know if that answers your question.
Bernt: Absolutely.
De Weerd: Well, I think maybe I will ask it in a different way is what can Public Works do
to keep that information in front of the elected body, so the decisions that are made make
sense to what has been modeled. So, therefore, if you take it -- I don't know by square
mile or what have you, but to constantly keep that information in front of us as to where
we are at and -- because I imagine it's net density, not gross density, or vice -versa. Yeah.
Net.
Stewart: Yeah. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think we, obviously, can do a
new master plan every five years and we make that master plan available for sewer and
water. You're certainly welcome to look at that anytime you like. I think the one thing that
helps us keep consistent is every time there is an application that comes through the
process we model that for comparison against what we had planned in the master plan.
If, for instance, we had planned for a particular density and an application comes through
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 55 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 50 of 101
that seeks to increase that density significantly and we model that and we say, you know
what, we don't currently have the infrastructure to support that kind of density, we will let
you know through that application process. Now, unfortunately, the other way around
doesn't always happen. In other words, if our infrastructure was sized to accommodate
the higher density and you go lower, we, of course, are going to be able to serve that. It
does mean that some of that infrastructure may be, basically, underutilized, but I think --
De Weerd: Warren?
Stewart: Go ahead.
De Weerd: Warren, do you look at it, though, on a cumulative basis when you model --
do you model just that specific subdivision or do you also compare it to what else has
been done in that -- along that line that you're modeling and see -- maybe you have a
greater density than was anticipated in one development and a lower one in another
development, do you take that into consideration or do you just do your model on that
application?
Stewart: So, every five years when we update the master plan, we actually take all of the
development that's come in and recalibrate the model for the existing development and,
then, we do projections based on what the current land use plan is. So, we take the land
use plan that has been adopted by the city and we put that in our model and say, okay,
this is zoned this much, we are going to assume that it's this many dwelling units per acre
and we run the model to predict or project what those mainline sizes are going to be in
the future and, then, we truth that up every five years -- well, we actually update the model
on a continuous basis with whatever comes in. But every five years we will take a more
comprehensive look. So, in other words, if there is an area that was on the land use plan
that's way out that changed from one kind of density to another one, one iteration of the
plan will take that into consideration to the next. You still have a situation where you could
end up with us coming back -- it's happened already in the city. I mean, obviously, years
and years ago the city was planning for certain mainline sizes. We did a project in Eighth
Street Park just last year where we went through a significant portion of that and we had
to do a parallel main, because they made a guess at that time that the main line size
needed to be a certain size and we have, obviously, outgrown it. So, we had to put in a
parallel main in order to accommodate the growth in that area. We are trying to minimize
that, because that's very costly to go back and do that after houses and everything else
are already built up, but -- I don't know if that helped or not. Hopefully it did.
De Weerd: It does. Council, any other questions for Warren at this time? Okay.
Hood: So, Madam Mayor, before I wrap up, just -- or change the slide anyways, just to
clarify. So, as I mentioned before on some of the other exhibits we are not proposing --
staff is not proposing with this any changes to the future land use map. So, on here you
see some other layers that show sewer sheds, but, again, those wouldn't show up or with
the cross -hatched rim area. So, just no changes to the future land use map at all
proposed with -- with this group and I also just want to piggyback or comment on one of
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 56 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 51 of 101
the questions that was asked of Warren and, really, just reinforce, yes, Public Works is
definitely impacted and part of and needs to be in the know of what we are doing with
land use changes and development. All departments are impacted by changes in land
use and what I really want to -- I mean fire, police, parks -- maybe not IT so much, but,
basically, every department is affected by changes up or down in density. They are
definitely, you know, affected probably the most, but, again, everything is based on how
many households we have; right? So, all that just to plug our -- the upcoming effort for a
new Comprehensive Plan. Everybody needs to be involved. The public, all of our
departments need to be part of coming up with that and understanding the implications
for any changes and so I will get off my soap box and get back to the -- the task at hand.
It's not just, oh, we do appreciate our relationship with Public Works and do work with
them to try to minimize those or at least understand the impacts, but same could be said
with fire and parks and --
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Caleb, I -- you couldn't have said it better, in my opinion. You know, everyone is
affected. Every department in this city is affected. Every citizen in this city is affected.
And I hope -- and on the record I'm going to say it out loud, as loud as I possibly -- I hope
that people will be involved -- not just those who are on the southern and northern rims,
but everywhere in between. This is -- this -- honestly, this decision -- the decisions that
we will be making for this Comprehensive Plan coming up is probably one of the most
crucial things that we have discussed in a long time and, hopefully, we all listened to what
Caleb said and -- and are prepared for this discussion and I can't wait, it's going to be
fantastic, but it's going to be very important for the future of Meridian.
Hood: Thank you. So, what's on the table right now? Within the rim area -- so, let me
just kind of boil it down and everything you have heard -- at least for my part of the
presentation. Put Brian's stuff aside, because this really doesn't summarize his stuff, but
within those rim areas -- again, the same cross -hatch, north rim, south rim, cross- hatch,
no step would be allowed. No step up would be allowed in those areas if you're residential
today. The other impacts. For areas that have both of the following bullets. If you have
a low density residential designation -- I'm going to go back. That's the darker green here.
For those properties that are low -- designated low density. Sorry, it should be both --
both of the green shades there. And aren't already developed, zone entitled, or have
applications that are already in process, you -- the impact would be instead of today,
where you could develop up to three dwelling units per acre, you would only be able to
develop to a maximum of half acre lots within those areas. So, it does -- there is -- there
is another level of effect for properties that have a low density residential designation that
are under developed or undeveloped today. So, that's -- that's the reality of -- of -- the
implications, if you will, of the text changes. So, what's before you in the options as staff
sees them? You can approve -- and all three phases of this, if you will, and Brian covering
two and Warren and myself covering the other one with the rim -- approve just the
administrative changes in the ECR, but deny the rim policy additions or changes. I think
we need to have a little bit more of a conversation if you choose Option B. Would you
need that direction. So, let's -- let's talk about that if you're leaning towards that, because
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 57 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 52 of 101
that's where the motion goes. See approved proposed changes with any specific
changes. Maybe you like all of them, but you don't like the way this reads or you don't
like that policy or whatever or simply deny them all. So, you see staff's recommendation
there. Also put it in the memo for tonight. We are approving at a minimum the ECR and
administrative changes and we are going to ride the fence on this one. We can do it. It's
possible without too many negative implications. There may even be some positives. But
at this point in time staff usually come with a recommendation on this one -- or, again,
kind of straddling that line in the gray area and we are going to leave the rim up to you
all. Is it something we should adopt and begin implementing at this point in time. So, that
ends our portion of the -- I know we kind of already did the Public Works portion, but I'm
sure Warren would stand for any other questions or Brian or myself before you open it up
for general public testimony, Mayor, but that's our -- our update presentation.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions at this time? Okay. Mr. Clerk.
Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. We had a few sign-ups this evening to provide
testimony.
De Weerd: Oh, Mr. Clerk, I think, Council, if we could, take a five minute a break, just so
you can check your phones or take a walk down the hall.
(Recess: 8:39 p.m. to 8:47 p.m.)
De Weerd: We are going to go ahead and get this started. Give you a few minutes to
-- so, I will ask Mr. Clerk to go ahead and start down our sign-up list.
Coles: Very good. Thank you, Madam Mayor. The first on our sign-up list this evening
is Denise LeFever, wishing to provide testimony.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
LeFever: Denise LeFever on 6706 North Salvia Way and, yes, that is in the north rim.
De Weerd: Thank you.
LeFever: I came before -- Madam Mayor, Commissioners, I came before you guys back
in October and I did not object to the plan administrative text and I still don't and the ERC,
I don't object to it. As a matter of fact, I think Brian did a really great job. I concur with
that. That's a nice looking piece. What I did object to is the lack of notice and I do
understand that it is legally correct. So, what I did object to is this impacted over 200 --
200 properties that were in that area and it impacted property owners that had rights there
that didn't necessarily get noticed individually from it. So, I want to come before you and
say thank you for kicking it back and allowing that opportunity to have those meetings
and have those conversations and notice the individuals. Thank you, Brian. Thank you,
Caleb. You guys worked really hard on that, did a splendid job and I know it was a lot of
extra work that you had to do because of it. But at the end of the day I do not object to
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 58 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 53 of 101
what's going on in the rim. I'm neutral to it at this point. I think everything that needs to
be done was done and I appreciate that. Overall I do object to the Comprehensive Plan
and the way of noticing by the newspaper. I think that the Comprehensive Plan is
important. I think there is a lot of energy and effort that goes into that Comprehensive
Plan and future changes to the Comprehensive Plan that impact over 200 lots, I would
like to see more notice. So, as far as this proposal goes on the rims, I'm neutral to it.
Thank you for your time.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. Denise, thanks for coming and letting us know and hanging out
with us for a while. What -- you would like more notice? We agree that the newspaper
is a joke, but the state requires us to do that, so we do. But what -- what types of notice
would you like to see?
LeFever: To the same effort that you would do in a comprehensive change, especially
when it impacts people that own properties that have development rights. It was clear
that the developers were caught off guard by this change, so I just think there needs to
be a higher level when you go back through and make these comprehensive plans that
impact that many lots, because there is no signage, there is nothing there. You post
signs. You can go back through, do public notices, if you can get them on the radio.
Mayor did a wonderful job -- Mayor Tammy did a wonderful job when I was at BVEP. She
announced that the Comprehensive Plan was coming up. Doing notices that -- bigger
swaths. Caleb went back through and did a wonderful job doing it like a mini town hall. I
just think it needs to be at a higher level. Thanks for asking.
De Weerd: Any further questions? Thank you, Denise.
Coles: Wendy Webb was next on the list in favor, not wishing to testify. Marilee Andrews
was in favor, not wishing to testify. Gary Andrews in favor, not wishing to testify. Torrey
Mew, no indication. Andrea Shelton in favor, wanting to testify.
De Weerd: Good evening.
Shelton: Andrea Shelton. 2498 East Cyanite, Meridian. I just want to say that -- to begin
with I love this place. I love this place. We were born and raised here. We love Meridian,
Idaho. We don't want to live anywhere else. The possibility of changing the text to protect
these rim areas is near and dear to my heart. I love not just the view, I love the space. I
love having a place that I can breathe and I know that there is a lot of older people that
may like just no yard. I love my yard. I love my gardens. I love my pets. I also think that
we are making huge impacts on our schools, on our roads, on every aspect of our lives.
So, protecting possibility, some of the future use of these rim areas to me is wonderful. I
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 59 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 54 of 101
also love that you guys are considering putting this into the text and all that was done. I
attended your meeting. It was wonderful. And I thank you for doing that for all of us. We
love Idaho and we love Meridian. So, that's all.
De Weerd: Thank you, Andrea.
Coles: Ben Shelton also signed up in favor, not wishing to provide testimony. Katelyn
Shelton in favor, not wanting to testify. Stacia Morgan in favor, not wanting to testify.
Dave Yorgason against, wanting to testify.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Yorgason: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. My name is Dave
Yorgason. My address is 14254 West Battenburg Drive, Boise. And, first, I want to say
thank you for continuing the hearing and allowing the process to move forward as it did.
As has already been stated, there was actually -- as I attended the open house that the
city provided in early January, I noticed several landowners -- might have been a couple
developers, really. There are just landowners who are directly affected by this change -
- or this proposed change who expressed appreciation for the opportunity to be part of
the process, because they weren't even aware of what was going on. They were caught
by surprise, I believe, and so they appreciated that and I do know there is at least one or
a couple who have provided some written comment to you. I know of one who wished
who could be here tonight. He's in the lower part of the south rim, if you want to think of
it that way, not on the upper portion. But it is directly affected by that. Secondly, I want
to thank the staff for putting together a meeting we had with the -- with the neighbors.
Give me an opportunity to understand the perspective and their goals and what they are
trying to accomplish. I appreciate that. Because there is a few things that were kind of
concerning, but aside from that I think it was a very productive and a professional
discussion we had. As you probably know I have developed subdivisions in the valley for
over 20 years, mostly meeting the high end subdivisions in in Meridian, but also Boise
and Eagle. In fact, more work in Eagle than probably the other two. I have dealt quite a
bit with issues that we are talking about here, working with neighbors and transition, large
lots, those types of things I'm very familiar with some of the expressed concerns. Having
said that, I am opposed to this proposal and I have at least three reasons why. First,
some of the language as stated identifies things -- words like optimizing or maximizing
view sheds and, then, after that it goes on and it gives a long list of inclusive things -- kind
of what I will call a wish list of pocket parks, trails, open space, large yards, large side
yard setbacks. It goes on to say residential lot, streets, and open spaces must be oriented
and designed to, quote, maximize view sheds. First of all, I don't know if view shed is
really defined. Second of all, if it is I don't know where it is. Third, I'm not aware of any
view shed easements that are on properties. So, if there are some, a comp plan change
isn't needed to enforce an existing view shed easement that's in place. Having said that,
if there aren't any in place, what this sounds like to me is the city is granting view shed
easements over existing owner's property for the benefit of some existing properties. In
other words, you're taking value from one homeowner and giving it to another. One
landowner to another and that's just an observation. So, maybe that's the city's intent.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 60 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 55 of 101
But that's a concern. In other words, you're devaluing someone's piece of property for
the benefit of someone else's. I am concerned with requiring large lots, community trails,
and/or open space adjacent to existing landowners for the benefit of them. Though they
don't have to pay for it, they get to use it. You don't have to -- it will be in private property,
typically common area open space. They don't have to maintain it, but they get the benefit
from it. Those are all concerning things. Again, maximizing view sheds sounds pretty
subjective. I'm concerned with that language. I will be real quick and finish up. Half acre
to one acre lots is a concern -- would you like me to finish up, Madam Mayor? I will. Half
acre, one acre lots is very concerning. It's very expensive to install and also expensive
for the city to maintain. Thirdly -- and no step up. I'm concerned with the no step up rule.
I believe that's in place, because you don't receive it automatically -- a developer doesn't
receive a no step up, but, rather, you are granted if it's earned and that seems like that's
something the city would want to have is encouraging developers to be more flexible,
more creative, and, frankly, more upscale and if you do those things, then, you might be
granted a step up, otherwise you're not. And so I'm concerned with those. So, having
said that, it's my opinion -- and I think the goal is to preserve, protect, and maybe even
enhance existing properties around and that's kind of concerning. So, my
recommendation would be to go ahead and move forward and adopt the noncontentious
or the administrative changes that staff has proposed, but not move forward with the other
specifics to the south rim area and I can address any questions you have at this time.
De Weerd: Thank you, Dave. Any questions from Council?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Dave, recognizing you only have three minutes and I appreciate the breakneck
speed you took us through -- you mentioned in the -- in the group meeting -- the group of
nine I think was -- you heard some things that were concerning. I just wanted to give you
an opportunity to maybe extrapolate a little bit more of that for us.
Yorgason: Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council Member Cavener. When I was there,
again, as -- cordial. I didn't really feel bitter or angry feelings. When I heard things such
as -- again, not a lot of comment, but just to be fair here, desires to have influence on
what the entrance -- entrances to a subdivision looks like, for example. Wanting more
open space, more -- specific open space at the entrance to a subdivision. They were
very complementary to the Hill Century Farm Subdivision, how wide open spaces that it
feels and looks -- okay. That's nice, but it's also their subdivision and I think the
developers should have a little bit more latitude on what they do for their own subdivision
and not have adjacent neighbors tell me as a developer how to create my entrance to my
subdivision. So, specifically entrances to subdivisions was one observation. It's not in
the code here, but economy may be like -- lead to some concerns down the road.
Cavener: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 61 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 56 of 101
Yorgason: Thank you.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. Dave, can you elaborate a little more on -- again, touch on the
-- you only have three minutes -- your -- your points about view sheds. Is that something
that exists in the industry elsewhere? Is it -- what -- you kind of touched on what I think
you were talking about -- if somebody were to, then, build that's outside of it and potentially
obstruct what we may have inadvertently created or -- or helped somebody assume would
be a right to a view, that -- how that could be problematic?
Yorgason: Madam Mayor and Council Member Palmer, maybe a couple answers. First
of all, when I develop foothills subdivisions -- have done a couple -- in the middle of one
right now in the Boise foothills -- and there are no view shed requirements in the city of
Boise. Where the requirement comes in is when I, as a developer, want to protect what
I have for my existing homeowners and so I will put height restrictions on houses. I will
put height restrictions on the landscaping even. By the way, none of that's addressed in
this text here. And so if we are trying to protect somebody's existing view, as a developed
I try to do that to enhance the value of my lots, so I can sell the lots or homes for more.
My experience is if a city wants to try to impose some restrictions, as maybe you are
suggesting here, then, it, then, becomes the city's responsibility to enforce it as well and
so, then, when we get down to things like, well, if a developer -- or a -- for that matter, a
homeowner comes in and plants trees or puts a different fence in or whatever it is, that
might restrict the view, then, it now becomes potentially the city's responsibility to enforce
that through your code enforcement. But if it's not in your code, it's just in your comp plan,
you really might not have much of a leg to enforce and so that leads to some confusion I
believe to the public to think we have our view and, then, someone comes back in later
five, ten, whatever years later and changes it or puts it a taller home or whatever it might
be than what was perceived might be out their backyard and all of a sudden they are
going to be upset at the city, because they thought they had something protected that
really wasn't. The city attorney is thinking over here.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: So, Caleb's introductory comments -- and you're certainly aware of the role of
the comp plan, as opposed to making a specific code amendment, which isn't part of the
discussion, but if -- and, again, focusing this conversation just on this rim discussion, I
think I agree -- I think everyone agrees that the administrative changes in the ECR are to
be approved as is. So, on this third leg of the stool, understanding that the comp plan is
a guide and that we are using the word should and we are trying to articulate general
intention of concepts that we would like to incorporate into a project and this language
doesn't alter the existing land use designations in either region, which, to a large extent,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 62 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 57 of 101
have already -- and always been planned to be low density residential, a good chunk of
it and our sewer master plan has incorporated those designations, assuming no step up,
assuming that they are going to go forward as is and that these changes still can allow a
step up and really doesn't negate any actual flexibility you have now -- if anything, it seems
like it might focus the Council's attention and maybe a developer's attention that these
might be some principles that are really important to the city, you can articulate a reason
why a map amendment should go along with an application to justify a step up, the project
is appropriate, all of that would still get approved perhaps anyway. So, I'm not totally
certain I capture the -- the disagreement with -- with the language on the north and south
rim, understanding there still is all that flexibility and opportunity to do everything that you
already can do.
Yorgason: Is there a question there, Madam Mayor? I will be glad to maybe try to respond
to it.
Borton: Yeah. Madam Mayor -- and I don't know if it's a question, but I appreciate the
input. But the reason that I wasn't as -- as concerned and -- it's primarily because I see
this still allowing the development community and the landowners to do what they do
yesterday, they could do tomorrow if this went forward. There is a heightened attention
pointed to certain concepts, if the city thinks these are important and see how that
was --
Yorgason: Madam Mayor and Councilman Borton, if I could just answer -- respond.
Borton: Sure.
Yorgason: A couple things first. Couple things. Half acre to one acre lots. That is
different. What we do today. So, that is added cost. My experience is two to three times
more cost for that area -- that we are talking about a quarter mile on both sides, so a half
mile wide of the rim. For a long distance. Recognizing it's not every parcel in there, but
there is --
Borton: Right.
Yorgason: -- a lot of acreage -- I have been told it's over 2,000 acres we are talking about
that -- that's in this swath. I don't know that all 2,000 acres affected, because some of
them are already entitled, but having said that, that's a pretty big area and so to develop
those -- and, again, I will reference the lower bench area, the lower -- I call it bench, but
the lower area below the rim -- specially if you're one lot away from the rim, just one lot
away, now you're down -- personally, you ought to be able to get a home on rim. Unless
there is certain slopes and you might have it a little tiered up or something, but you're not
going to get it right to the top. That just doesn't -- you have the slope anyway. Having
said that, you have a larger backyard -- so maybe it's one lot away, but once you're at
that point there is no view -- there is no way a home gets built that tall is my point. Now,
if that's true, then, the rim is actually not that tall. That isn't what we are really trying to
protect. It's not that tall. But we are hearing that it is. And the second point is where can
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 63 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 58 of 101
you see this rim? You cannot see it once -- you cannot see the whole thing once the
developer has put in along the main arterial roads the landscaping that's required for a
subdivision. So, we put in our five foot or whatever tall berm, trees and fence on top of
that. You look -- cast across to the south rim, down looking up, and you won't see the
whole thing. There is no way you can, because of the landscaping along the arterials and
so you will see it in a couple of key locations at intersections, like maybe Amity and Locust
Grove, for example. But you will see it in a couple spots where the rim kind of crosses
near the intersection, you won't see the whole six or seven miles of it, that just wouldn't
happen. But to your specific point, the view shed restrictions for a whole quarter mile long
is -- that's really excessive. That's way more than what Eagle does and they are way out
of control, let's put it that way, with regard to transitions and I have done as many
subdivisions in Eagle as probably any other developer has, so I can say that with certainty.
Having said that, the transition point, the half to one acre size lots and in this no step up
requirement, is no longer allowed with this change. Now you get standardized
subdivisions. You will have encouraging of flexibility do -- do better than the normal -- do
better than code and we may give you the step up is the way I think it is today. Your staff
can -- you have to ask and have it earned, I will say it that way, in order to have it received.
And so I don't believe with this change no step up will be removed as an option for the
development community. So, those are the changes; right?
Borton: Madam Mayor? But -- unless I heard you wrong, the -- that process -- the step
up -- you can get to the same end result, it just is an additional component of the
application. A map amendment as well.
Yorgason: Madam Mayor, Councilman Borton, are you suggesting do a map amendment
to change the -- with an application process? Instead of doing a step up you actually
have a secondary application to change the comp plan to be medium density or whatever
the change might be; is that what you're saying is the option?
Borton: Madam Mayor. If that's -- if I stated that correctly from staff's -- that might not be
desired. It's expensive. There may be reasons not to do it, but it's not prohibited, it just
requires some additional layers; is that fair?
Yorgason: Madam Mayor and Councilman Borton, I understand now what you're saying
as far as the path to get there. Of course, I have never done one.
Borton: Okay.
Yorgason: I have never done one. But I just see that as -- a half acre and a one acre lot
in the view shed as part of -- I mean those are big deals and try to -- maximizing and
optimizing words in this laundry list of wish list of things that are buffering between existing
homes, I'm really concerned that --
Borton: I won't beat it to death. I really appreciate the discussion, but the devil's advocate
on that is -- what in value is -- if something like this was the desire of the Council, right,
the landowner and the development community wants to know it earlier the better. If this
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 64 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 59 of 101
is truly what a council likes to see, for example, in this area, that could be expressed as
late as a City Council meeting, which isn't necessarily ideal. But the conversations that
you just described where in a particular project -- here is a reason why, you know, there
might be a logical basis for a half acre lot here and here, but not here, because of this
topography and here is what we are doing, it seems like this would afford staff and the
applicant that type of flexibility to have that conversation, where because we are using
shoulds and they are suggestive elements, they are not mandatory requirements, if there
is an opportunity to have the discussion early on in the process, the developer, landowner
is not surprised when staff says let's talk about view shed, even if it's not defined, but that
conversation early seems to be beneficial and it seems like, you know, to your point you
articulated very well, good reasons why there might not be an acre, half acre lots
throughout a particular project within the shaded area and staff made reference to the
north rim doesn't have -- quite frankly and probably for good reason. It seems like the
conversation you describe would happen with these amendments, just earlier on in the
process, and doesn't necessarily hamstring or certainly limit developer's opportunity.
Trying to accelerate the conversation.
Yorgason: Madam Mayor and Councilman Borton, I hundred percent agree. I always
prefer to have communication early on in the process to make sure that we are not
wasting everybody's money and time in the process. If the Mayor and Council wants to
protect the south rim -- and, of course, one of my questions is are we protecting from the
view up or the view down. You know, are you protecting existing views of people that live
on the rim looking out, which is the view shows -- suggested earlier about methods -- we
are creating easements for these -- default easements -- maybe not a legal easement. In
essence that's what you're granting without actually doing -- going through the benefit of
the process of it. So, is it the view up or the view down -- you know, top down are we
trying to protect, because those really are two different things. And so if there is a -- if
this is something the city really wants to have, maybe it's a workshop, some discussion
around it, I have a lot of experience in working through that. I know I'm not the only one
in the development community. We have always reached out to work with the city if there
is some goals the city wants to accomplish, but the way this is written today about
maximizing and optimizing and having a wish list of things is concerning. Thank you.
Borton: Okay. That's helpful. Thank you.
De Weerd: I appreciate the -- the questions you asked, but also maybe you could give it
also a little perspective over time, we have had developers consider doing developments
in -- in some of these areas that do seem to have a higher value for those executive
developments, because it does give greater amenities for the success of that kind of
development and in asking developers why they don't do it is, because they want to
ensure that their -- their developments are protected and those investments are secured.
So, in setting a vision for these key areas that have some of those opportunities, I guess
we want to articulate and make clear that here are the opportunities and your investment
would be -- your investment would be protected to a certain degree and I guess your
questions prompt certain things, but I -- I do think that the whole reason that we went
down this road is to answer some of the questions that we continue to hear from the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 65 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 60 of 101
residents in those areas, as well as those willing to invest in those areas, wanting to know
their investments are secure.
Yorgason: Madam Mayor, I wouldn't disagree with anything you have said. I think that
all makes sense. Again, kind of how some of this is written is what's a little more
concerning.
De Weerd: And I get that from some of the questions you ask and I think those could be
further explored and defined. So, thank you for your testimony.
Yorgason: You're welcome. Any other questions if you have them. Stand for more
questions.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Yorgason: Thank you.
Coles: Next on the list was Susan Karnes in favor, wishing to testify.
Karnes: Good evening. My name is Susan Karnes. I live at 5556 South Graphite Way.
I'm here representing the Meridian Southern Rim Coalition. May I have ten minutes to
represent the almost 300 signed petitions we have in support of these special
amendments?
De Weerd: Council, is there anyone in opposition of that?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I guess I'm not opposed, but I -- I guess Mr. Yorgason was here representing
an organization and wasn't afforded ten minutes, I -- if we would have granted ten minutes
to Mr. Yorgason to represent the BCA, I would feel more comfortable about representing
-- giving this group ten minutes.
De Weerd: Well, Mr. Yorgason didn't ask for it. He certainly could have. And we spent
probably more than ten minutes in the exchange. So, unless there is opposition I will go
ahead and grant that.
Karnes: Thank you. First of all, I want to thank Caleb and Brian and Council for the
wonderful working relationship the coalition has enjoyed working on this special
amendment and comp plan amendment. It's been a steep learning curve for us and we
certainly came in with a long wish list and we received a great education in the difference
between code and the comp plans and I appreciate that. This evening I'm here to speak
specifically to these amendments. Just to give you context, there has been -- for those
who belong to the Southern Rim Coalition, there has been, in their opinion, a clear record
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 66 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 61 of 101
of step ups along the southern rim. The residents of the southern rim invested in a lifestyle
using the future land use map as their guide for --future land use map for their future land
use. Many residents want and enjoy larger lots and residents of the southern rim do not
perceive or accept R-4 as low density and I just present this as a point of information,
Madam Mayor and Council, because low density, of course, includes R-2 and R-4, but
for the existing neighborhood identity -- and I'm taking the swath along say Lake Hazel
from east of Eagle on toward Meridian Road, a lot of those are rural or semi -rural large
acreage parcel -- or larger estate lots and so for, you know, a density of four doesn't seem
like low density to them. So, this is the future land use map and I am just going to point
out to you the context of what I mean by why there is a perception of so many step-ups.
Let's take this area outlined in red and you can see that it is, basically, Amity and Locust
Grove, Eagle, Lake Hazel here and this is the way the future land use map looks. There
is a lot of gray and there is a lot of low density and this is what people perceive to be the
plan. This is what they have expected. This is on which they have based their buying
decisions and, then, as you can see this is what comes along. There is a step up to R-4.
There is a step up to R-4 and I won't agonized by going step by step, but this is the current
situation and so the coalition, in listening to our membership base, acknowledged their
concern about the great number of step ups and I think this vicinity is a nice portrayal of
their concern. I want to make it clear we are not opposed to development. We are not
opposed to high density development. We certainly recognize the city has a need for
affordable housing. This discussion tonight is specifically about these special
amendments. We have tried to work within the process. Unfortunately, the way that
development applications work, residents are put in a more or less reactive and
oppositional stance. We go to neighborhood meetings. We hear an application details
and, then, we go to P&Z and we testify and we come to Council and we testify and we
always I think come across as being negative, but we are the ones who have invested in
this city. We are the ones who feel passionate about this is our home and we want to be
heard and so I feel that in the context of all of these step ups many residents who belong
to the coalition are beginning to believe that Council really doesn't want what they
perceive is true low density, R-2, and they also desire a clear and updated vision for the
southern rim that embraces its unique assets. We appreciate the fact there is going to
be a new comp plan. We really appreciate the fact there is going to be a new future land
use map. But we are in a race against time to protect what little we have left. So, we feel
there is a rationale for approving these special amendments. As Councilman Borton has
pointed out, there is a great deal of flexibility for individual discretion with applications that
will come before you. A successful precedent is in place for the north rim. We feel the
amendments comply with the Comprehensive Plan. We feel they comply with the future
land use map and we feel strongly that development is outpacing the timeline and so we
cannot wait for the new comp plan. We feel, however this may be imperfect, imperfect
action is better than perfect inaction. We feel that this is not only about step ups, it's about
also a critical shortage of large lots in Meridian's housing inventory and it also addresses
the concerns and desires of Meridian constituents. Let's take a look at housing. This is
an MLS report broken down by lot sizes. You can see the first column is under quarter
acre and, then, quarter acre to half acre. These are single family homes sold from
January 1 st, 2017, to the present and you can see that we have an extraordinary amount,
over 80 percent, on very small lots. You know, what people want to say lots we consider.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 67 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 62 of 101
So, let's break it down. Those are existing homes. Let's look at what is new homes. We
have, for the same time period in Meridian, according to MLS, 850 new home builds.
Thirty-three percent of them were on less than .15 acre lots. Fifty-two percent were on
up to a quarter acre. We have 15 percent under a half acre. Ninety-nine of those 129
homes are on less than a third acre. We have had five builds of a half acre to three-
quarter acre, or less than one half of one percent of total new builds in Meridian. Three
of those were in Sky Mesa and I will point out to you a portion of those lots is sloped and
that slope is nonbuildable per a development agreement. So, they are not flat lots. And
for three-quarters of an acre and greater there were no new homes built according to MLS
data. We, in an effort to try and enumerate support and express it to Council, created two
change.org petitions. The first one was approved special amendments protecting
Meridian's southern rim. We have 256 that were signed online and this evening I
presented to the city clerk 31 additional hard copies. We have heard from residents in
central Meridian and north Meridian about their concerns about step ups and these are
the kinds of comments that came with the petitions. Our children need space to play in
their own backyard. Families want decent space with room to live without seeing,
touching and hearing their neighbor. Please approve neighborhoods with half acres. The
growth in Meridian is adversely affecting the way of life we have chosen to enjoy for many
years. I'm signing this petition because no matter how hard we work and how many
meetings we attend, our city representatives seem to always give developers step ups
when it comes to what land is previously zoned. We have another petition. Limit
residential density in Meridian. This was an effort not only by the Southern Rim Coalition,
but other neighborhood groups across the city to try and measure residents' emotions
and opinions concerning step ups. I wrote two letters to the editor. One was published
in the Meridian Press. The other was instead of published as a letter to the editor was
published as an op ed piece in the Idaho Statesman and as of this evening we have more
than 900 of that petition signed. So, I think there is widespread support by your residence
to protect and preserve and set aside low density and by low density I mean these half
acre to one acre lots are generous lots. Again, here is someone that I think summarized
quite nicely. Meridian is a desirable location for a number of reasons. The city is at a
crossroads where growth will determine its future. The wonderful qualities that have
attracted many to Meridian can be ruined if growth goes forward unchecked. So, our
rationale is we feel these amendments reflect key community values. Managing growth
to achieve high quality development ensure a good quality of life for all current and future
residents, protecting our self identity. Yes. Okay.
De Weerd: So, Council, any questions?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. Mrs. Karnes, thanks for coming and being as active a participant
in the process as actually probably more than anybody in the couple of years that I have
served here. So, appreciate it. I'm curious. How many projects have you come and
testified against in Meridian?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 68 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 63 of 101
Karnes: I have come and testified against East Ridge Estates and I came and testified
not against, but for revisions to Sky Mesa. That's my memory. Two.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. And I remember also the Winco project in north Meridian.
Karnes: The coalition testified.
Palmer: How many of the projects that you have testified against have passed?
Karnes: Well, there -- I mean Linder Crossing, the coalition testified for certain revisions.
It's still an active application. East Ridge Estates was approved. Sky Mesa East was
approved.
Palmer: And -- Madam Mayor? Do you feel like Council listens to what people say, what
testimony is brought? Do we -- do you feel like we actually consider those things or that
these protections are necessary to stave off the evil City Council?
Karnes: Madam Mayor, Councilman Palmer, I think that there is a substantial -- probably
majority portion of our membership that feels that Council has not really listened to
residents, that Council favors developers. I think some of that is misguided or
misperceived, but it is difficult to not be able to rebut rebuttals, because sometimes there
are misstatements of fact that cannot be corrected by us. It's difficult to see a developer
questioned about a certain street configuration we have requested and to hear the
developer answer that it can't be done, knowing that less than a quarter mile away there
is a street climbing the exact same slope and the same grade and that developer's word
is taken as expert witness. It's discouraging that Council cannot come out and familiarize
itself with these settings, that we have to kind of paint a picture for you and I think that we
hear it's very difficult to come and speak in three minute increments. The individuals. A
lot of people don't understand the process either and that's a big part of our mission. So,
I would say you have a mixed record. As far as I'm concerned, I have found Council to
be very accessible. I have had wonderful meetings with individual Council Members.
Staff has been stellar in every way and very even handed. I mean I don't feel they favor
us. I don't think they favor developers. They just lay it out. So, my personal experience
has been positive. But discouraging at times. Yeah. I mean I think there are tweaks that
could have and should have been made to developments I have spoken about that, you
know, was discouraging to see that they were approved without perhaps a little more
thought and research and investigation.
Palmer: Madam Mayor, if I may. And if we could pull up where it shows the hashed out
-- either of the rims. So, my question for you is into the specifics of it, where we both live
in the rim area. I am trying to remember exactly where your house is. I'm sure you're on
the top. I'm down on the bottom and the other side of the tracks, the other side of the
canal.
Karnes: Yeah. I have been peering into your backyard. Oh. Okay. Go ahead.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 69 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 64 of 101
Palmer: And so my question for you is including this where -- you know, it's half a mile
wide, it's a quarter mile on the bottom of it, often below the canal. What are your -- what
are your thoughts on the necessity of extending this to the -- below the rim?
Karnes: I think there is an incredible need for true -- what I would call true low density,
R-2 lots, in this community. I think that if the city does not set aside and protect large lots,
then, you're going to -- as Councilmember Bird said in a hearing -- become known as an
R-8 city and I think we are much more diverse than that and I think there is clear language
in our comp plan that allows for estate lots, but I don't see that they are being preserved
or the land being protected and -- and that goes back to your question about do the
residents think they are being treated fairly. There is the perception -- when the comp
plan says Council can approve step ups, we are relying on your discretion. We are relying
on your judgment. We are relying on your -- your forethought and your vision. We are
not the only stakeholders. You know, there are a lot of stakeholders. But the residents
feel they are important stakeholders. They want to be heard.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? So, below the rim you feel that it's necessary that the half to
one acre lot size would be preserved below the rim?
Karnes: We would rely on Council's judgment. I mean as has been pointed out,
developers can come forward with an application and establish a true and compelling
need or necessity or reason for putting higher density in. You know, we would rely on our
elected officials to make those judgments.
Palmer: Thanks.
De Weerd: Any other questions? Thank you.
Karnes: Thank you.
Coles: Christie Herwy signed up in favor, not wishing to testify. Sam Karnes also signed
up in favor, not wishing to testify. And Sally Reynolds signed up in favor, wanting to
provide testimony.
De Weerd: Thanks for sticking with us. If you will state your name and address for the
record.
Reynolds: Sally Reynolds and I live at 1166 West Bacall Street and that's in Meridian,
Idaho. So, although, as you know, I'm in the northern part of Meridian, we also feel that
we want to preserve Meridian's unique identity and so I'm going to be speaking more from
the point of a real estate professional. I have had my license for about five years. And
there is -- this area has exploded so -- so much. I would say that 75 percent of my clientele
is from out of state over the last couple of years. I won't say which state. I'm sure we can
only guess. But it's from out of state and particularly the people who come here, it's really
interesting, but they -- they cite all the reasons that we love Meridian why they come here.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 70 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 65 of 101
They say lower cost of living. Less traffic. Less pollution. Friendly political environment,
believe it or not -- as far as they think that this is what they used to have where they used
to live 40 years ago and that's why they are drawn to it. In the same vein, these people
come to me and they say we want a five acre lot, because that's what they envision Idaho
as being. We want an acre lot. I have had some clients for over a year to two years trying
to find them large parcels of land. I have somebody I have been working with for a year
right now and all -- and they just -- a quarter acre, because there being such large homes,
even on a quarter acre -- he says I can still see my neighbor brushing their teeth. So,
there is definitely a demand for it and in the southern area we actually have preliminarily
started a subdivision, which will be coming in a few years. We would like to do one acre.
Lots by word of mouth. This already has 75 percent of the lots reserved by word of mouth
only. So, there is a need for it and I -- I would say that this is the right place for it. Idaho's
topography in this area is very unique. When people come and they -- say they are from
Washington, they are from Colorado, they are from California and they say we want a
view, right, because they want a view. They are used to that in Washington and Colorado
and California. There are as little hills in their topography -- they have -- used -- that they
are used to and I say, okay, well, your choices are the northern rim, Eagle, you can go up
to EI Paseo in Boise. We have got the southern rim and maybe if you go out west a little
bit those are your views and you can see that with all of the water that developers are
putting in, because they also want a water view, if that makes sense. So, this is a
wonderful area to keep -- to preserve these estate lots and like Councilman Borton said,
there is latitude within these amendments to give you discretion if you feel that a step up
is really warranted, which there is a history of doing in the past. You have done it. You
can do it again. To Councilman Palmer really quick, I do think that Meridian city listens
to residents. The one thing that I would say is that not -- the 300 foot notice there, just
for the reason that you extended this hearing, 300 feet you do listen to the people who
are here, but sometimes people don't get the notice and that was one case with us. We
went before Planning and Zoning and Commissioner Bernt was actually at that. He can
testify that a developer stood up and we stood up and we were against him and he -- we
had no idea and I went up to him afterwards and I said I am so sorry we blindsided you.
I just had -- we had no idea this application was coming in and he said, oh, yeah, no. So,
we completely collaborated. He redid his application. It's beautiful. We supported it. It
was great. But, you know what, my house was just outside that radius. So, I think -- I
think you guys -- I think you do listen to the people who are here. Thank you.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I got a question for you. I'm glad you're here. Nice to see you, Sally.
Reynolds: Sure.
Bernt: You being a real estate professional, just -- just a question. I hear a lot -- the
demand for larger lots, estate size lots, half acre lots, acre lots plus. If the demand were
such, why aren't developers developing half acre or acre lots if it's such a demand? If
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 71 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 66 of 101
you -- like, for example, if I were a developer and I knew that there was, you know, the
possibility that you could develop a parcel of land and 75 percent of the lots are sold, why
aren't they building them?
Reynolds: Yeah. So -- okay. So, I'm not a developer, so you can -- you know, you can
ask a developer. Here is my -- here is my best shot at that from what I know of -- from
what I know. I would venture to guess that the more high density you have the more profit
per lot you have.
Bernt: Right. I get that.
Reynolds: And then -- right. And so if they are not building it -- so, they -- they will have
more land and be able to -- to do that.
Bernt: So --
Reynolds: But it artificially also inflates the price of the land.
Bernt: Right.
Reynolds: I mean if you support free market.
Bernt: So, I mean I totally get how that works, but my -- I mean -- but if you really had --
and I'm not trying to be argumentative nor do I feel this personally, I'm just trying to wrap
my arms around it, because it doesn't make sense to me. But -- but let's just say that
those who -- those customers who would be able to afford those large acres, I mean they
would -- they would -- they would pay more for.
Reynolds: Right.
Bernt: And if they are willing to pay more for them, then, I -- I just don't understand why
-- I just don't see -- I guess from an outsider looking in I just don't see the demand. What
you're saying and what other people are saying I don't see there is a huge demand.
Reynolds: So, if they were out there and they could charge more for them, that's not
saying that they could charge more for them on par with the lots that they could charge
at higher density. Yes, they could charge more, but the market price will only demand so
much.
Bernt: Right.
Reynolds: So, you're not going to get on par and that's why when developers are up here
and they are saying it won't pencil in, that's what they are talking about.
Bernt: Right.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 72 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 67 of 101
Reynolds: They are saying I couldn't -- you know, it's -- and in the end the people who
walk away are the landowners, they have made more on their land, because they got a
step up to approve a bigger profit and, then, the developers got a bigger profit and then
-- and the land actually wasn't worth that much at the time and so it also is an artificial
inflation of -- I mean just from an economic standpoint alone and, then, housing prices go
up, because they have to charge more and, then, we are just in a really bad cycle. So --
yeah. And one other -- if I could address one more thing Councilman Palmer said. On
the lower rim, if that's okay. Okay. Just the lower rim protections, they would like to see
their -- one example is Reflection Ridge. It came in and all the houses since are so close
together, you can't see the lower rim anymore and so it just took that beautiful landscape
away from lower Meridian, because the houses are so close together, so --
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: So, I live in Green Valley. So, I look up at Reflection Ridge and I'm sure I will
get eye rolls, people won't believe me, but -- so, when I take people on tours of my Corey
Barton home, I -- I show them the view out my back window from my bedroom at
Reflection Ridge, because it is far cooler looking to me, then, out the front towards the
foothills, because they are the most beautiful homes built there in Reflection Ridge and
every home that is in the elevated positions of Reflection Ridge -- now there is six smaller
ones out on the bottom, they are closer together that aren't really on the rim, they are just
on the canal. But the ones that are actually on any bit of the, every single one of those
has a view. Every single one of them. Because the way that they built it -- and they are
far from half acre lots.
Reynolds: Yeah. And they -- and they did. I mean they maximized that view for all of
them, which they did beautifully, it's just us looking up at from the distance, it looks very.
different. So, I'm glad you have a good view of it. That's wonderful. I'm glad you enjoyed
that view. So, the only question the coalition had -- and, staff, if they could look into it
was how many acres does this -- that are not developed does this affect and so I don't
know the answer to that, but it might be something that Council wants to take a look at.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bernt: Thank you, Sally.
Reynolds: Uh-huh.
De Weerd: And, Mr. Bernt, I would love to answer your question just from the feedback I
get is you don't see larger acre -- or larger lots because they want to make sure their
investment is protected. For example, we approved a half acre lot subdivision up north
of Lochsa Falls -- no, not Lochsa Falls, but Saguaro and, then, just to the east of it was
proposed an R-8. Fortunately it was -- it was denied, but they went for the step up and
-- and no one lived in those half acre lots yet, but that -- that impacts investment and they
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 73 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 68 of 101
have no guarantees that that's not going to happen. So, that's why you don't see a whole
lot of large acre lots. Mr. Yorgason, do you want additional time? Because Mr. Cavener
did make sense in saying you do represent an organization, so I would offer you some
additional time if you had additional comments.
Yorgason: Madam Mayor, for the record Dave Yorgason. I am a land developer. I can
answer that question all day long if you want to talk about land developers and why we
do and don't do certain things. I'm also a licensed realtor, just like the other testimony. I
can tell you that as of a week ago -- I haven't looked since then -- there was only two lots
in all of Meridian multiple listing that are less than 100,000 dollars, regardless of size.
There is just a lot shortage. I can talk about the market until the sunrise. I'm not going to
do that. I feel like every time I saw this presentation of ten minutes I just couldn't sit any
longer. I have more knowledge in my head than I can stand, probably, just because of
my experience and my presentations of economic analysis to the building community,
which I did just recently. So, my only testimony -- additional to what you just asked for
additional time, is I'm just here to stand and answer your questions. I think I made my
points. I'm not going to ask any further prepared testimony, but I appreciate your
willingness to grant that.
De Weerd: Any additional questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
Palmer: Madam Mayor? Seniority.
De Weerd: Oh, is that the -- an older guy.
Cavener: I love the respect I get.
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Thank you.
De Weerd: The senior guy.
Cavener: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Dave, the Mayor kind of shared a perspective as
to why we don't see large acre lots in Meridian. Do you agree, agree and provide
additional thoughts? Disagree? I'm curious from your perspective the reason.
Yorgason: Madam Mayor and Council Member Cavener, it's my experience -- and go
and include my father's experience back in the 70s, I can add a lot of years' experience
to this comment. A two acre lot does not sell for twice the price of a one acre lot. A one
acre lot does not sell for twice the price of a half acre lot. Neither is a half acre lot twice
the price of a quarter acre lot. Your bump ups are anywhere between ten and 20 percent
-- maybe 25. That's the most you are going to get in those increments. So, if you have
twice the size of land, you go from a quarter acre to a half acre -- I will just start with that
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 74 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 69 of 101
one. A quarter acre lot today sells for -- I'm just going to make up a number -- a hundred
thousand dollars. You don't sell that half acre for two hundred thousand. You might get
it for a hundred and a quarter. You're not going to get it for 150. Now, as I say that, that's
general market conditions. There are all kinds of factors that go into lot prices. I'm
actually aware of Sally's development. I have seen the signage out there. I'm masterfully
-- I have done lot reservations for a lot of years. I know how to get lot reservations. But
tying up a piece of property with lot reservation actually is nonrefundable and so it's not
really much of a commitment. Though I don't want to discount what she said. I do know
there is interest in larger lots. I can also tell you that that trend is declining due to changes
in demographics in our society. Increases in millennials and baby boomers want to down
size. So, we are seeing a less -- and that trend will continue for at least the next five to
seven years, by the way, just due to demographic changes in society. And so there is a
demand, but not for twice the price and not for even 50 percent more of the price for larger
lots. That's my experience. And I have only sold, for the record, over 3,000 lots in my
career.
Palmer: That's a lot of lots.
Yorgason: Thank you. And they are all medium to high end. None of them are low end
developments.
De Weerd: Well, maybe anecdotal, but I do know that the business that my husband is
in just added a whole bunch of executives and they are living in Eagle, because they can't
find a decent size lot in Meridian.
Yorgason: And Madam Mayor -- sorry.
De Weerd: And that's hard to accept.
Yorgason: Madam Mayor, I'm not disagreeing with any of what you just said. I agree
with what you said. I know there is a desire. The question is where should they be? I
know the comment was made just early -- I made the comment -- the reference trying to
squeeze my testimony into just a few minutes, but if we are trying to protect the views,
just those folks that live on the rim and grant them a view shed easement or corridor,
whatever you want to call it, that's one thing. If it's within the low density areas, specifically
up in the upper rim area where it may be more clustered together, if that's what the city
wants, I'm here to say I will -- and I know there is others will work with you to help
accomplish that, because that's a vision, a goal of the city and try to enable that. But the
lower land areas, off the rim, really struggling with that one. Just saying -- but the upper
areas where there is some pocketed areas, meaning low density already defined on the
comp plan, I see some value there. I really do. Especially as there is demand -- you're
hearing from others outside of the building community. This is a demand. I get that. So,
again, I'm struggling with how it's written, but I see that maybe some intention or some
direction where the city wants to go and maybe some of the context is there, but the way
it's written and the wish list of things and the ands -- requirements, I get the vision, their
goal, ideas, but to an applicant and to the community who looks at these things and to
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 75 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 70 of 101
staff who relies upon these things, they tend to become strong statements in a staff report
that's used, then, as -- as discussion.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Dave, did I hear you say that you were, then, perhaps supportive of the rim view
designation, but it should be of a different dimension and more narrow?
Yorgason: Madam Mayor, Council Member Borton, this is me speaking, not the BCA.
But as me speaking, because I have worked -- and I will just give you one anecdotal.
When I went through and approved the subdivision which is now known as Ashbury, I
went to all the backyard neighbors and talked to every one of the neighbors in their
backyards and in their homes and said what do you want and as I talked to them and tried
to see what transition is appropriate -- and this is one of several that I have done, by the
way. Once you get past the first home you can't see past that first home, whether it's flat
or even tiered down, because it's just the way it works, especially with the bigger yards,
they are even further back behind. As the whole -- if you want to call it the north rim,
Eagle might call it the south rim, whatever you want to call it, I guess, as that all developed
-- Banbury is what started the whole thing up there and it was several years later before
there was an actual other subdivision called Wedgewood and Castlebury and Spyglass,
which we did Castlebury, by the way, and we just transitioned or worked through the
process, but it took a long time for the market to be willing to pay for that price for a lot.
Those are all -- most all of them were below a hundred thousand, by the way. Just
perspective. And so clustered areas are -- are appropriate. You have already defined
them, frankly, in your comp plan as low density. And maybe the step up is the real beef
that we are talking about, the other two pieces of requiring the half acre to one acre or
requiring the -- the view sheds they talked about, maximizing, optimizing. Those are --
those are the bigger hurdles as far as being wide open and be honest with you there.
Borton: Okay.
Yorgason: Hope that helps.
Borton: It does. Madam Mayor? So, it's -- your last comment, it sounds like the -- the
least concerning list is the -- the elimination staff level -- to the step up component -- not
the amendment that would come with it. But the -- excuse me -- the view corridor, it's
dimensions in all our -- at least I initially saw them as illustrative, somewhat like the big
brown circle that we used for the neighborhood centers; right? Just to kind of give us and
everyone a general idea of the --
De Weerd: Or park.
Yorgason: As you should have.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 76 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 71 of 101
Borton: Yeah. You know, that's kind of how the --
Yorgason: Madam Mayor, Council Member Borton -- and maybe it's shifting entirely up
on the upper rim and maybe it's not quite as wide or -- I'm not saying I have the answer
right now, but I could see some -- maybe some analysis by staff or existing landowners
might be appropriate to kind of figure that out, but that's -- that's -- when you start talking
about transition I think that's been my experience in the half dozen or more that I have
done. Hope that helps.
Borton: Okay. It does. Thank you.
Yorgason: Thanks.
De Weerd: Any further questions? Thank you, Dave.
Yorgason: You're welcome. Thank you again.
Coles: No other sign-ups, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. The only one in the room who hasn't said anything. Welcome forward.
Welcome up. Welcome -- well, welcome. Come on down.
Conger: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Jim Conger. 4824 West Fairview
Avenue. So, kind of just following up on what David indicated -- and I will -- kind of the
lower area for certain we don't quite understand. I could be here speaking on behalf of
my streetlight contractor, he owns ten acres just west -- between Locust Grove and Eagle
Road on Amity. He's directly across the street from Hayden Homes and, then, Hubble
Homes on Estancia. So, his development -- you know, he's farming. There is no plans
that he will open it in the near future. But taking a look at that property you would have
80 percent, if not 90 percent typical development, which would be deserving of Amity
Road at that point across from the Estoncias in the world right there. And, then, in the
back part, which you would never see, because right -- the landscape buffers that Dave
Yorgason kind of indicated, you won't see past Amity Road when you're driving, you will
have single and two story homes and 70 foot wide lots or probably 8,000 square foot lots
or 7,500 and, then, you would have this half acre or acre lot requirements on the back
three acres of the ten acre parcel. So, I think what that comes full circle to is -- is back to
the low density designation and in, really, the affected area. So, the low density, which
is the three dwelling units -- and I think it's important -- a slide you saw earlier from Mrs.
Karnes was the R-4 and the R-8 as she was popping them up across there and I know in
our last public hearing we had a long little first session and Caleb did -- what is the comp
plan. It drives the density. The zoning doesn't drive the density, it drives the land use
and the use -- the specific use. So, when you're seeing the R -8s and the R -4s, that
doesn't necessarily mean that changed the comp plan of three units -- of the driving
acreage per acre. So, I think that's a little -- a little misleading. But if we are talking half
acre lots and acre lots, obviously, a half acre lot at most you will be at one and a half units
per acre. So, if that's what I'm hearing tonight more than the viewshed, is are there
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 77 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 72 of 101
pockets that we can have larger homes. You heard Dave say he would sit on something.
I would sit on a committee. What it feels to me like is instead of putting a broad brush,
which, for the record, is -- what you have in front of us -- and I'm just talking the south rim
-- is 6.3 miles long and it's 2,400 -- 2,380 acres. Yes, it's not all affected. Then why are
we putting a paint brush over it? How many acres is it and are they the appropriate acres?
So, is there a way for us in the Comprehensive Plan that's going to start being worked
on, to actually get the city's vision and dreams for certain areas. There is lots of us that
would spend many afternoons driving with staff around to understand which parcels
matter. But why would we simply take a paint brush over 2,400 acres, which probably 70
percent of it's not affected anyhow, and let's create a zone instead -- or in the comp plan,
it's not a zone, of ultra low density, which is your one and a half and under, if that's the
desire. That, then, you would have to look a homeowner -- or a landowner in the eyes
when you're -- when you're taking the land down, which may be what everybody does
and that's what a comp plan is for, but the giant paint brush --
De Weerd: Mr. Conger --
Conger: Yeah. I'm done. I was taking Dave's -- I was taking Dave's -- rest of his two
minutes, but -- yeah. As far as impact is schools, police, fire, all our great things, parks,
they will benefit with the building permits. It's not the opposite. Bigger lots aren't helping
the sewer treatment plant and they aren't helping schools and parks, period, to that.
That's it.
De Weerd: Okay. Any questions from Council? Thank you. Oh, yes. I was mistaken.
He wasn't the last one. You are.
Yearsley: Let's hope. Steven Yearsley. 2961 East Lucca, Meridian. I -- I kind of had
issue -- well, let me back up. I find it kind of interesting that the previous application that
we just heard is within this southern rim -- southern rim boundary, but yet we weren't too
concerned about the view corridors. Not that it matters. But I find it interesting -- half
acre lots are a large lot. We had a lot of land -- I thought when I was grown up I wanted
-- and I have -- you know, I struggle to maintain it just at that point. And so I think I
struggled initially why people wanted smaller lots and, then, I saw neighbors struggling to
maintain their half acre lots, just because they didn't want to. I think with this -- we ought
to consider, instead of add a condition from -- let's try to bridge that range just a little bit
better to -- to make it a little bit more palatable with that. Also in 2040 they are figuring
over a million people. I think a million three, which is about to double the size of the
valley, which is hard to fathom. This southern area that we are looking at in the future
land use map is so -- is highly under representative of what that density will end up being.
I was -- and I was critical of it, then, that the Kuna and -- potentially being another Eagle
Road if it's not managed correctly. You know, given the growth that we are anticipating
to see, I think you're going to have a lot more density out there than -- than people imagine
and so making the future land use map for utilities is going to be -- and making sure that
we have that and I think trying to reserve specific areas in that area is -- is good. I talked
to a friend of mine, they were looking at some potential banker lots just south of Eagle --
south of -- and they were not wanting to put septic -- they wanted to put septic systems
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 78 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 73 of 101
in a lot, which at that point he's like -- isn't worth it for an acre lot. So, I think the cost
becomes prohibitive for a lot of people on one acre lots. So thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Let's chat about it, uh? I think his initial point was -- was important -- the previous
application where there was -- clearly we weren't sure, but there was clear opinions that
there was no view in that particular piece of property that was included in there. But there
is -- there is clearly properties within the -- as been said, the paint brush stroke, that half
acre, one acre, attempts to preserve view, any -- any number of the things that we are
trying to fix, aren't going to be solved or don't need to be solved or there wouldn't be any
kind of issue, but because it got lumped into to the -- hey, you fit within that half mile width,
there you have it. So, I think that we can all agree that there is something that can be
done, but I feel like this is not the best mechanism. To Mr. Conger's point about let's
change the map, let's go in, go find particular parcels or we can say, hey, Mr. Property
Owner, this is going to affect you, here is an idea we have got, here is what your neighbors
are looking at, wanting to have half acre to an acre lots here on the property that you own,
thinking about changing the map for you, what do you think and let us know. I think it is
a much more appropriate method of making this decision than, hey, you're near the rim,
above it or below it, you're in. I'm sure I will have more later, but I'd like to hear someone
else, too.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I mean I would be -- I would be open to the discussion of -- so, I don't remember
who said it earlier, but someone said are we protecting, you know, the view up or the view
down and I thought that was a pretty, you know, interesting statement and a discussion
that we may need to have, especially in that southern exhibit where -- I mean that's a --
that's a lot of land that's being protected. You know, I'm not saying that's a good or bad
thing, I just think that's something we need to talk about, you know. Are we going to
protect -- are we going to talk about the actual rim or -- or, you know, all of that area below
the rim as well. I think it's something we need to talk about.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Really valuable discussion. Great considerations I think that have helped shine
a light on -- at least try and focus the discussion. The way it's left with me is -- is I would
support adopting tonight the -- the administrative changes and the ECR, the existing
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 79 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 74 of 101
conditions report, and, then, the -- within the south rim area, the one sentence prohibition
-- the addition to number three that prohibits the automatic step up. The remainder of the
language in Chapter 3, page 21, as well as the goals, I think there has been a lot of vague,
legitimate concerns brought up with how you define it, how you apply it, as much as it
would be nice to be -- make it valuable and clear to landowners and developers and
neighbors, I don't think we are there yet with this particular language. So, it's -- it's one
small component of the southern rim as depicted. I'm not as concerned with the -- the
broad brush paint brush dimensions of it, because it doesn't -- it's not a zoning designation
and it's similar to the dots and other kind of broad brush applications within our future land
use map. So, with that understanding that's one provision I would be comfortable with
acting on that I --
Bernt: Which one is that?
Borton: The last portion of the first bullet in Chapter 3, page 21, that includes in the north
and southern rims as depicted in Appendix E where no step up is allowed. That goes
along with the discussion starting with staff's comments that, again, it's not a zoning
designation and it's not an absolute prohibition on different land uses within those two
rims. It does focus the attention a little bit more -- there is specific grounds that would
warrant it.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton, are you -- okay. Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. And Mr. Borton, I think putting in the -- the no step up
requirement could be -- better accomplish when an individual parcel or property is -- is
discussed and sectioned out for setting that kind of thing up, as opposed to including
across, again, the whole paint brush, because there very well may be dozens or hundreds
of acres within that that would make perfect sense for the step up without having to go
through the traditional expense and process and time of changing the map. But to make
sure that those properties where we are saying, okay, this is going to be the larger parcel
situation, those are the ones where we are also saying no step up there. But any of that
kind of thing -- the whole thing.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: A couple thoughts and -- first, this is why I love public hearings. You know, I'm
sure like many of you I spend my weekends engrossed in this information and, you know,
we more or less have some thoughts about maybe where I'm leaning before we get to
City Council and, then, we hear from different stakeholders here in the public that provide
very competent testimony that influences and brings perspective maybe that I didn't --
didn't have before I arrived here this evening. I tend to agree with Council Member
Borton's recommendation, specifically to the step up piece. I think that our rims are an
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 80 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 75 of 101
asset and perhaps a higher threshold is warranted in those areas. I appreciate Mr.
Yorgason's comments tonight about the view shed and specifically I think on the southern
rim, looking -- I guess for that -- for the -- on the southern part of the southern rim looking
up, what threshold that has to -- to be protected. I think clearly having our southern rim
residents be able to have an unobstructed view of the foothills, likewise, our residents on
the northern rim being able to have a view of the river and the foothills when that makes
sense, I -- I guess I'm not quite completely sold on the inverse of that and I don't know if
the appropriate mechanism is further conversation. I think it was suggested at a workshop
session around. Maybe some of these elements. I would maybe be opposed to that --
or I would be most likely supportive of something along those lines. I think for the most
part what staff has presented for us today makes a lot of sense with maybe a couple of
tweaks if they can't be resolved this evening, could be resolved at a closer date and time.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Could we get the rims again? So, Madam Mayor, this is what, you know, we
have been staring at and how can we look at the lower portions of this six mile stretch
below the canal and say there is -- there is no way anywhere in there a step up wouldn't
be assumed that, yeah, that makes sense.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: If I may. So, I -- I guess Council -- I would be happy to answer that question
from my perspective and I think that it's probably inappropriate for us to make a broad
generalization based on a -- on a map that's here in front of us. The fact of the matter is
-- is that the rims are an important amenity in our community, that's something I believe,
that's something we have heard from our citizens and I think requiring a higher threshold
makes sense for these particular areas, in my opinion.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Does that include -- are you saying below the rim as well, this -- this big, you know,
area of land below what would be considered below the rim?
Cavener: Madam Mayor? I think it's a two-step process, really, for me. I think that we
as Council need to be more willing to address it when a step up is requested that's really
benefiting our community. I can appreciate the rhetoric that comes from some of our
citizens believing that it's automatically considered and on our discussion many times at
the Council level there isn't -- there isn't a lot of debate about if a step up is warranted.
So, I can appreciate where our citizens are coming from. So, I think, one, Council needs
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 81 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 76 of 101
to be more vigilant and explain to the public why we are supportive of a step up as a
whole. As it relates to -- specifically to the rim, again, I think that on both the north and
the south side, because it is an important amenity, that having an extra step or a higher
threshold, as I mentioned, is warranted and makes sense for those particular areas. Like
I think we would if we had other assets in our community, like you have seen in other
municipalities across the country, it's a unique geographical amenity and should require
a higher threshold.
De Weerd: Well, certainly, Council, you can act on all of the areas or one, two, or three
and if you need further definition of some of the items, any -- any detail to staff would be
helpful to know what to work further on or we can bring back additional information.
Looking for your direction.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I think one final pitch for the -- the lack of information we have about the space
within that. The hashed area is -- you know, without us having an opportunity to look at
even a Google Earth view of close up hashed out of, you know, the whole space, it's --
it's too hard to put a restriction on those properties or make it more expensive or harder
to develop on those properties without really knowing what exactly is there. I mean at the
quarter mile from the ledge -- just because you happen to be within a quarter mile of the
ledge you have got additional restrictions on your property on what you can do with it, so
-- not because you -- hey, you have got -- you have got a property with a view, you have
got property with the right slope where you're in -- in a good position to be able to develop
that in a certain way, it's because you're within a quarter mile of the ledge that that's what
we gave you.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I don't know if there was a question there or just more waxing poetic, which I
appreciate, even at 10:15 at night. I think Council Member Palmer, though, brings up a
good reason and maybe this will kind of lend to a question that I have for legal.
Councilman Palmer brought up some good points that is worthy of further discussion and,
again, maybe additional stakeholder testimony or feedback. I think it sounds like that we
are -- it sounds like we are all supportive of the existing -- approving the existing conditions
report and the administrative changes as a whole. I guess the question for Legal is can
we -- can we separate at least those two out and, then, make a motion to approve both
of those and, then, we could have a further discussion about the third piece related to
amendments after --
Nary: You know, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Cavener, yes,
you can -- you can do that.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 82 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 77 of 101
Cavener: To maybe move us along, I think we will keep our conversations going, we can
continue to wax poetic if needed, but I would move that we would approve the ECR and
the proposed administrative changes.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion?
Cavener: Madam Mayor? And I'm talking a lot. My apologies. I just wanted to add one
thing, because I didn't get a chance to -- to touch on the ECR and the administrative
changes. I just wanted to commend Brian for his great work. I had the opportunity over
Christmas break to read through that and take it and show it to some other elected officials
in municipalities in Idaho and across the west and specifically the ECR was something
that many of them just were fascinated with. Thanks for the digital copy. I have got it
laminated and hung up in my office. I think it's something that really you should be proud
of, Brian. So, thank you for your great work on that. I didn't get a chance to say it earlier.
I didn't think we would still be here at 10:15, but I think you have had -- or done a
remarkable job of representing our community with that.
Bernt: Do you really have it laminated and stuck on your wall?
Cavener: Yeah. It's great. Have you seen it? It's amazing. Sorry, Madam Mayor.
De Weerd: It's -- it's good to get excited about. Okay. A motion is in order. Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Palmer: Madam Mayor, I had a question at this time. No statement. How would it work
in -- Councilman Borton and Cavener's scenario if your property was split -- your half
outside the quarter acre and half inside, will there have to -- would you have to -- I don't
know how this works. Do you have to split your property to do something with it or just
make sure that your project is half compliant with the rim issue and half not or -- what do
you do there?
Hood: Madam Mayor, I will take that one. So, as was stated before, there is language
actually in the beginning of the Comprehensive Plan and particularly as it talks about the
future land use map, it does not follow property lines. So, there is some flexibility to
slightly tweak those designations even within there. And, again, as was mentioned, the
cross -hatched or rim area, if it shows up, isn't even on the future land use maps. So, it -
- we define it, so there is some definition to it, but it's not a hard and fast -- if you have 51
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 83 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 78 of 101
percent and 49 percent -- we work with that property owner to go, okay, we are going to
apply this to you here or, no, we are not. So, without an exact scenario I can't tell you the
answer, but the short answer is the director has discretion in that to say, yes, for this
reason we are applying this, even if it's a small portion of your property this applies to
you, because it's all on a bluff or whatever the case may be. So, there is some -- again,
this is the higher level -- it's just a guide -- I shouldn't say just. It's a guide. It's not
prescriptive. So, there is some leeway in there to be convinced one way or the other if it
should apply or not.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? Caleb, so, then, would finding individual properties and
designating them as that be a simpler situation than leaving it up to the director?
Hood: Madam Mayor, Council Palmer -- we have a new director. So, on the back end it
probably would be, but identifying those and defining those -- I mean that sounds like a
chore to me. So, we could do it that way or come up with slopes -- and I know Boise --
well, they used to anyways. You know, ten percent slopes are not -- that's how this
applies, when your property has slopes in excess of this, you're classified as that, and
here is how you -- you know, when these types of policies apply. It's not a real good fit
for Meridian, at least not right now. We are not saying we couldn't go there and do that
or some version what you're talking about. Honestly, I think if this were to be applied
common sense will play into it to some degree. I mean just -- if I can, Madam Mayor, I
think this answers the question, but to use your last scenario about below the Phyllis
Canal, half acre lots, there is really two things going on here. It's not just about the views,
it's about having larger lots and even though -- if they don't have the view, it's still about
preserving larger lots somewhere. At least that's some of the rationale here. So, again,
there is some discretion when we look at it and go, okay, well, what's going on next to
you? Are they R-8 lots or are they R-2 lots? Or RUT lots in the county still and that
transition. Was it an appropriate transition. So, I know I didn't explicitly answer your --
because I really can't. What's easier? I don't know. We could do it that way. I don't
know that I like that idea of lot by lot, identifying them. But it's possible.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: So, then, Caleb, or -- if I understand -- so, if there was a property that was
sandwiched between two R -8s next to the apartments, right at the bottom of the rim, then,
it might be a scenario where the director might be asked to say, okay, you might be 50
feet -- long way from a quarter mile -- you might be 50 feet from the edge of the rim, but
common sense would say this doesn't make sense for half acre lots, so we are going to
let it anyway, even though it's well within the quarter.
Hood: So -- Madam Mayor. Here is how that plays out. Yes -- essentially yes. Although
staff still calls out the policy and says, listen, this property is technically within this area.
However, because of the other circumstances being surrounded by apartments and R-8,
we don't think this should apply in this case. Ultimately it's your call. You can say, no, it
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 84 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 79 of 101
says that we want half and it makes sense to us for some other reasons, but -- not just
the director, by the way, it's usually the assigned staff, but we consult each other. But
that's kind of how it plays out.
De Weerd: And maybe there is a better place for it. We -- we do have a motion on the
floor. We don't? Did we already vote on it? Oh, my God.
Nary: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: I think I need to go to bed. Yes, Mr. Nary.
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, so, I'm a lawyer, so I don't really wax
poetic. But to answer maybe Council Member Palmer's earlier question, if you were to
agree to what is on the screen, these three changes, one being the south area, no step
was allowed language, that doesn't change anybody's property right, because you have
no ordinance in effect to affect that. If you want to change that language in the comp plan
to say no step up is allowed or no step up was allowed unless authorized by code, no --
or step up -- no step up is encouraged unless authorized by code, that, then, pushes it to
where the code, which is really where the rubber meets the road, that's what the court
evaluates. Your code follows your comp plan. The process in your code is what the next
conversation is going to be. Just think of it as when we have sometimes things that are
staff level or director level approval, we sometimes have things that simply require
Council's finding and approval and occasionally we require a variance. So, they -- as a
specific requirement. Council Member Borton raised it earlier. Do you do a comp plan
amendment or is it something less than that. So, that's, really, the next step, which isn't
before you tonight. So, all they are asking -- and if you're not comfortable that this
language is really where you want, you want something a little softer, maybe clearer, that
it's discouraged, but not prohibited, that's certainly something we can move it a week or
two out and bring back some different language. But I just wanted to address that one
point, maybe, because it is 10:20. This won't change anybody's property today, because
we still have to have a code that matches up with what your policy is and we haven't got
to that yet and you still have that option to have that conversation.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? But there is no way that, you know, I could be okay with -- well,
it's in the comp plan, but we are not going to address that later, we are not going to -- I
mean the comp plan -- either we pay attention to it or we don't. So, I mean to say that
this -- this won't have any effect, because it's 10:25 and we want to get out of here, it's
not a big deal, Councilman Palmer, let's move on. Unless I'm totally misunderstanding
what the comp plan is -- question mark?
Nary: Madam Mayor? So, no. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm not saying
let's move on, what I'm saying is your -- your statement was is this going to change an
individual member's property rights of the property today. The answer is, no, it does not,
because it is only the comp plan. The language does drive what the code has to read
when we get to that code. So, if the language is too prohibitive to you or to the rest of the
Council or too restrictive, even though we may address it in code in how the process is to
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 85 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 80 of 101
change it, we can change the language and that's not a problem, but I just wanted to tell
you that, again, if you were to approve this as it is written and on the page, it doesn't
change anything. You have to -- you have to still have to approve it, you still have to have
a code. So, that hasn't changed. I'm just saying if you think this is too strong, too
restrictive, if that's the Council's direction, we can bring you different language and, then,
the code will follow that.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: There may be discussion that follows, but I move that we adopt the text change
on the screen, item -- under the first bullet point -- or three within the north and south rims
as depicted on Appendix E, where no step up is allowed and the remainder of the changes
be tabled and probably incorporated and more discussions either through a committee or
the broader comp plan process.
De Weerd: And which part of that do you want a work group to look at?
Borton: Well, Madam Mayor, that -- it might be addressed a number of ways. There is
valid and good discussion as to support some of the concepts that the additional language
tries to capture with view sheds. There is a lot of great question and concern with how
that could be misapplied or create confusion, so none of which -- none of it seems to be
ripe for any adoption today. None of this page -- I think those concepts need further
vetting to be useful or helpful and that may happen whether it's in a separate committee
-- I'm not making a suggestion that way. The larger -- the discussion is going to continue,
basically. The manner in which it continues I'm not sure. So, it would be that single
sentence.
De Weerd: Okay. So, will you restate your -- your motion.
Borton: Certainly. That the text change incorporated and I guess the conclusion of
Appendix E -- the first bullet or three within the north and south areas as depicted on
Appendix E where no step up is allowed. That's it.
De Weerd: So, you're, essentially, leaving out the -- the second bullet?
Borton: Correct.
De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second?
Cavener: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. Any discussion?
Borton: And, Madam Mayor, the third bullet is left out, obviously, as well.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 86 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 81 of 101
De Weerd: Right.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: All right. So, to help the simple one here, so if this is -- if we do this, if we approve
this motion, what happens next? Or what does -- what effect does this have?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, so we would bring a resolution adopting
that as now another part of the comp plan and, then, we would craft an ordinance to
create what does that -- what does that mean. And, again, the discussion has been both
ways, so I don't have a clear direction tonight. If no -- no step up is allowed under any
circumstance or a step up is allowed under some circumstances, depending on what they
are. I mean part of it Caleb spoke about in relation to the reality of what the adjoining
properties are. That's a policy choice. But what's the code going to say in relation to --
for the property owner? Is it telling the property owner it's zero prohibited? I'm not hearing
that. But is it allowed in certain circumstances and what's the process in which to do that.
Is it a comp plan amendment? Is that the direction we are going? Then that's what we
would recommend. If it's something less than a comp plan amendment, then, we probably
need to make sure the language is clear enough in the comp plan to reflect that it doesn't
require a comp plan amendment just to do one thing.
Hood: Madam Mayor? Can I maybe state that a little bit differently or maybe with a little
bit different angle, really, what this would effectively do. And we need to talk about if there
is any code changes necessary if this motion passes or not, but, effectively, what it would
do is we would talk with that property owner and say if you want to step up, we would
recommend you file a comp plan map amendment to get there. We would still take in
their application, but based on this policy we would recommend denial of that application,
so -- and we may recommend denial of their comp plan map, but they really should have
that package deal together to say I'm low, I want medium, here is my map amendment to
go along with my plat and annexation, that's what we would effectively require with this
change in our -- in our Comprehensive Plan. Would we prohibit -- I mean we had this
discussion I think in October. Would we prohibit or require somebody to actually submit
that map amendment? Maybe, maybe not. But it really doesn't look good for them if they
don't. So, that's, again, the effective change of that. That's kind of what -- how I see it
being implemented. This really kind of makes it more clear to me or developers -- property
owners, low is low, medium is medium, medium high is medium high, so --
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: So -- but which is it, Caleb? Is it we will recommend denial, because they are
within the area or your project might make sense, so we might not?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 87 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 82 of 101
Hood: Well, Madam Mayor -- again, Council Palmer, there is just too many variables for
me to answer that phrased that way. Right? I mean it's site specific. But generally
speaking, if somebody came in with a project that was four dwelling per acre and they are
low on our map, you're not -- you're swimming upstream already. Staff generally doesn't
support that, because we have policies now that say you're low, zero to three. Two and
three. That -- but it's a guide; right? But we would still probably recommend it out of your
project. If you didn't have -- and justify why you're not stepping up, but changing the map
to say I need to go to medium and justify that. Oh, I have R-8 around me and apartments,
maybe we can support that. You're surrounded by that? Okay. Let's change the map
then. But I can't -- I'm sorry, I just can't answer your scenario that simply. There is a lot
to consider in that.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? And that's the problem with the paint brush. I mean why not
say within the north and southern rim as depicted in Appendix A where -- maybe -- or
where a step up may not be allowed. If we are going to say is not allowed -- well, there
is a million scenarios in which it very well may be, so may not be allowed -- we have the
exact same -- whether it may not be allowed or is not allowed, we are still going to treat
an individual application the same way; right?
De Weerd: Is there any further discussion? You have another way of asking it?
Borton: Yeah.
Palmer: I -- Madam Mayor, I guess I just can't wrap my head around why we would put
in the Comprehensive Plan and telling developers, okay, this is what you got to abide by,
we are going to say where no step up is allowed, unless you sell it to us on why -- why it
should be allowed, without a map amendment.
De Weerd: That is so hard to answer without having a specific application. I think that's
what Caleb is saying, that this is not totally black and white. A Comprehensive Plan is
-- is not your set of regulations and codes, it's -- it has more gray area. Are we ready for
the question? Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, nay; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE NAY. TWO ABSENT.
Hood: Madam Mayor? I'm sorry, I know it's late, but I think a few minutes here may save
us hours and hours in the future and in the near future when we look at the comp plan.
So, essentially, what you just did -- and, Brian, would you mind going to the slide with the
options -- was a hybrid of two. We need some direction on kind of -- at least some scope
of what we are talking about here as we go through the comp plan -- this new comp plan.
Is everything on the table? Are we starting from scratch? Is it -- you know, Warren and I
have been talking and a lot of where we thought we were going to be spending a lot of
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 88 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 83 of 101
our time is kind of what was alluded to I think in Mr. Yearsley's testimony back towards
the county line and in 2011 and we see some low densities maybe being different in the
near future or maybe we have it right. We weren't really planning on -- but that's where I
need some direction -- land use studies. Are we to work with our study to talk about --
with our consultant that we are looking to hire in the next few months and is that something
we want to really focus in on is do we have enough low density, in particular, in south
Meridian -- and I don't even know where that's at. Does that go from Meridian Road all
the way back to Cloverdale and our area of impact or what. But I need just some -- I need
some direction at some point or else we are going to be all over the place with the
comments we get back. So, I need to kind of frame the question what's on the table, what
shall we talk about? Is it -- is it views and maybe defining view sheds and maybe even
going as far as code that says --
De Weerd: You know, Caleb, maybe it would be a good idea -- next week we have our
joint meeting with the City Council and our Planning and Zoning Commission. That might
be a good conversation to have that.
Hood: Okay.
De Weerd: Let Council kind of contemplate some of the questions that really came out
of the discussion tonight and stew over it -- maybe be more articulate of exactly what we
are looking for to help understand or define and having P&Z in on that conversation would
be very beneficial and it will give you an opportunity to really frame the questions that you
have, too. Does that make sense? Okay. Anything further from Council? Okay. Thank
you for sticking with us this evening. We appreciate that.
Item 10: Department Reports
A. Parks and Recreation Department: South Meridian Regional
Park Naming
De Weerd: Item 10 under Department Reports. So, we have our Parks and Recreation
Department.
Siddoway: And you're going to bring up my presentation for me. Madam Mayor,
Members of the Council, it's late, we are all tired, I will try to be as brief as possible for
you. The first presentation I'm here to make is to -- I was hoping it would be a little fun
for us. We get to name a park. We get to name a great new park in south Meridian and
we are excited to -- to have that conversation with you and choose a name. To
foreshadow the ending, it will come as no surprise, because it's come up twice in the last
month on the public record here at Council -- that the recommended name coming before
you is Exploration Park. Having said that, the questions that I have heard from Council
as that's come up during Mike's presentation, during Jo Greer's presentation, is more
around, you know, what happened to the name Discovery Park. Were there other names
considered? Has there been a thoughtful process? So, what I wanted to do tonight was
give you some of the process and background and lead up to how did we get there and,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 89 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 84 of 101
then, have that discussion of what the -- what do we want the name to be. So, I won't
spend a lot of time here, but our phase one design concept is based on a discovery theme.
That's been, you know, the idea of it for the last -- oh, at least 14 months since we have
presented that to Council. There is a destination playground, splash pad, sand and water
play and on down the list, but this discovery theme and what we are calling learning
landscapes and the idea of, you know, when is a playground more than just a playground
when you can you learn from it, is still very much alive and well. So, where we started
with the commission last summer on this discussion was, okay, we have been talking
about the name Discovery Park since this discovery theme had come forward and so the
name Discovery Park or Meridian Discovery Park was really where we started. The
commission discussion at that point was that they felt that there were too many discovery
naming conflicts, particularly the first one and that is that there is a Discovery Park --
Discovery State Park at Lucky Peak in Boise. So, within the Treasure Valley there is --
there is a Discovery Park. They felt like that in and of itself was a deal killer in moving
forward with the name. I think just about all of them, though, would agree that Discovery
Park rolls off the tongue easier than Exploration Park -- Exploration Park does. I don't
know -- I don't think there is anyone that would disagree with that. The quote that I think
I took from John Nesmith as the commissioner was, you know, Discovery Park is an
awesome name. Too bad the name is already used. So, that's -- and if Council feels that
Discovery Park as a name -- that it's okay that there is a Discovery State Park at Lucky
Peak and we want to have our own, you know, that's something we can talk about. But
for the commission's sake, in making a recommendation to you, they felt like the fact that
it was already used in the valley was a deal killer. So, we went to brainstorming. What
other names could we use instead of Discovery Park. The result of that process had five
names going forward. Highland Park. Falcon Ridge Park. Innovation Park. Adventure
Park. And Exploration Park. We, then, did develop some concepts around them. So,
the first round looked at these name options. Highland Park. It's up on this ridge that we
are talking about. It has great views. So, we could celebrate the -- the nature of where
the land is. I'm going to go through these kind of fast. Falcon Ridge Park was based on
the idea that we have a relationship to the Birds of Prey area south of Meridian -- south
of Kuna and we could play off of that idea and celebrate that. Innovation Park was a
recommendation from one of our commissioners that was trying to look -- explore other
ideas that could develop this idea of Discovery or Exploration. Adventure Park. Same
thing. And, then, Exploration Park was the fifth of those. Of those they picked three to
move forward. Exploration Park they felt like was the name that tied best with the
discovery theme of the park. Innovation Park they also felt had a good tie to the STEM
or STEAM ideas. But as you will see later, they felt like the concepts surrounded maybe
tied more with the technology, industrial type park than with the kind of park we had. And
Highland Park they liked because of its vistas, great views, and the upper bench. They
cut from this list the Adventure Park. They felt it was too close to Adventure Island
Playground, which we already have in Settlers Park and they also cut Falcon Ridge Park,
because there is a Falcon Ridge Charter School in Kuna not far from there. So, then, we
started taking those three names and looking at different logo options that could be
developed around them. For Exploration Park, for Innovation Park, and for Highland Park
and this was what I call Round 2-A. Then we picked kind of some favorite images off of
those and say, well, let's take the same three names and use them with -- with the images
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 90 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 85 of 101
here. So, here is Highland, Exploration and Innovation Park with a first logo type, a
second logo type, and a third logo type, because, really, you could use those names with
any of those that you felt appropriate. None of them were quite jiving for them with the
actual graphics, but at that point they said, look, we like Exploration Park. Let's choose
the name Exploration Park, but continue to explore alternative graphic options and bring
it back to them as their third round. So, this was their -- their third round. All of these say
Explanation Park at this point. One is based on maybe what -- you know, what had been
part of Falcon Ridge Park where you could have a steel structure and cutouts. A
sandstone rock with a Peregrine falcon. Option three is really just another alternative of
option two. And, then, option four was this idea of steel cylinders with -- with cutouts. So,
there you can see the four options that they were looking at specifically in relation to
Exploration Park. Now, option four was the one that started getting the most attention
and interest and it was based on this image that they felt like there is a lot of cool things
that you could do with these cylinders, with steel cutouts and, obviously, this would work
with whatever the name is, but there was a lot of interest in this as an idea. It may or may
not be lit, as these are, but the idea was that this could work -- you could adapt this to
different areas of the park. If you had had a different -- future area, you know, in phase
three or something that is based on, you know, a butterfly garden, you could have butterfly
cut outs on a pole in front of it or you could -- if you have one that's exploring the solar
system, you know, you can do planets and stars and -- it's kind of very flexible and
adaptable as an idea. So, Council feedback. Discussion. Decision. The
recommendation from the commission to you tonight is for the name Exploration Park. I
do know that there is a fair bit of interest still in the name Discovery Park and the feeling
that it rolls off the tongue easier or do you like another name and, then, we would also
like -- if you ask the direction of the art and signage using the steel cut out bollards,
because they are still kind of working on developing that idea further if you like that
direction. And with that I will stand for questions or discussion.
De Weerd: Thank you, Steve. That was very thorough. We appreciate that. Council,
any feedback, questions, comments?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I will be the first to throw a wet blanket. Steve, I think I have been pretty vocal.
I'm not a fan of Exploration Park. I think it is hard to say and maybe it's because since I
have been on Council we have talked about this park, we have always used Discovery to
refer to it as kind of a working title. I don't want to take away any of the work that the
parks commission put into this and to the Mayor's point you provide a very thorough
explanation of the steps the commission went through to come to a recommendation. I'm
just not a fan of their recommendation, which is my personal opinion. I would support
Discovery Park. I would support right now referring to it as south Meridian park and going
back and coming up with a different -- I mean I don't want to -- I'm not saying -- just
because I don't like Exploration Park that we need to necessarily come up with a final
decision tonight.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 91 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 86 of 101
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. I agree. I mean if it's got to be one of these, I think Discovery
Park is the one, despite that it's common, because it's good. But with the sign designs, I
do like all of the sign designs. I think if it was to be this column style we would have to
figure out how to light it for sure, because it looks cool. But love where those are going.
I can't -- can't wrap my head around falling in love with any of the names.
Siddoway: Is the name Discovery Park not a deal killer for either of you that there is a
Discovery State Park at Lucky Peak?
Cavener: Madam Mayor? To address the question, it's not for me, I think that -- I didn't
know that the state park at Lucky Peak was called Discovery Park I think until Mike had
mentioned that to me. While we have a Discovery Center in downtown Boise, I think
many of the elements that you have kind of vision cast about this park lend itself to the
same kind of similar mission that the Discovery Center was founded on, which is learning
through doing and I think that that lends itself to what we are trying to accomplish with
this park. So, it's not a deal killer for me. I don't know how the city of Boise would feel
about it, but I think for our park it would -- it would make a lot of sense.
Siddoway: And to be clear, it's not a city of Boise park, it's a state park so --
Cavener: I meant Discovery Center. Yeah.
Siddoway: Oh, Discovery Center.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Exploration Park is for me at least perhaps the best name yet. If it were to
continue I guess there is -- I don't know if there is time to make it continue, but in light of
the background and the explanation and the pros and cons of the other names -- and I
agree with Councilman Palmer, these steel cut outs are pretty cool. Should be lit and --
if those were explored further, but -- is there a drop dead date you're trying to get -- I know
you want to announce it. You could get feedback -- Madam Mayor? Did you get feedback
from Councilman Little Roberts or Milam?
Siddoway: They have not.
Borton: Have they weighed in? No?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 92 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 87 of 101
Borton: The name's fine with me. Sorry. I'm done.
Cavener: I don't know if Council Member Bernt wanted to chime in. I just had a
suggestion and I don't know how far it would go, but I don't want to step on his toes as a
former parks commissioner if Council Member Bernt had any --
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I definitely -- I like the name Discovery Park, but we discussed this. I -- Exploration
Park is fine. I mean -- since, you know, as a past commission member of the parks and
recreation commission I -- there is a lot of discussion and there is a lot of thought that
goes into what they do and so I would respect that decision, if that's what they wanted to
use, but if there is no disagreement about using the Discovery name on Council or the
Mayor's part, that would be my number one choice, to be honest with you, but if that's not
an option and we feel as a Council that that's not an option, then, Exploration Park is a
fantastic name as well. Let's go explore at Exploration.
Siddoway: I think the commission would accept, you know, whatever direction the
Council wants and, then, take that and develop it into signage options for you. Right, they
are, you know, working on the Exploration name, because that's -- well, I just gave you
the history, but -- I know that they would take your direction and work on options from
there.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Just a thought for consideration amongst the Council. A couple of months ago
Mayor's chief of staff came and talked about ways to engage the public and giving them
opportunities to weigh in. This may be a suitable opportunity to allow the public to -- to
weigh in. We have got three names from the commission somewhat vetted. We have
got a name that sounds like three of the four Council members like. I recognize that we
want to announce it tomorrow, but --
De Weerd: Don't have to.
Cavener: -- create a survey website -- I think it also builds some excitement for our
residents that you -- every time the city has named a park, well, here is your chance, you
can name it. And I don't -- and maybe we also solicit nominations. I mean I'm -- I'm kind
of shooting from the hip right here, because it's late, but could this be an opportunity to
allow our public to weigh in on what the name of the park is?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 93 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 88 of 101
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I see Sally like grinning ear to ear. They are both back there giving --
De Weerd: What, Discovery?
Palmer: -- being able to do their own input.
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, I would be glad to repeat that for the record.
De Weerd: You don't need to.
Palmer: You were paying for it. They always come up with the names or -- I mean it's
always the people on the commission and, then, Council saying, hey, here is the name
or the Mayor letting us know what the name is. What the -- Pocatello did it with their flag
and they -- and it was something really cool. They ended up with some craziness, but it
was something really neat. I think -- a chance to throw it out and --
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I do think it plays with the theme of the park, too, is it's -- you know, it's kind of
an experiment. What our public want to name the park, so -- if you're looking -- Madam
Mayor, sorry, if I may. If you're looking for a recommendation from the Council, I would
recommend Discovery if you need a name. But my higher recommendation would be
turn over to the public and let them decide.
Siddoway: And how -- would you turn it over as like a Facebook poll or how would -- what
methods?
Cavener: Madam Mayor? I think that a Facebook poll would be fine. A poll -- I think in
the past you had used polling on the city website. Again, I think there is a lot of different
ways that we could go about it. I would yield to Kaycee and IT and Shelly to say we think
this is the best way to have our public participate. And, Madam Mayor, I'm not trying to
write your State of the City speech, but, boy, would that be a cool announcement to make
tomorrow, is we want the public to decide what you want to name our park. I think people
would applaud. I know I would.
Siddoway: And, Madam Mayor, if I may -- which names would you take forward?
Obviously, these two, Exploration and Discovery and Innovation? Throw in Highland?
You want four?
Borton: Craig Steele? Madam Mayor, Craig Steele Park?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 94 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 89 of 101
Cavener: Steve -- and, again, I think that -- again, I'm treating that -- yes. The answer to
your question would be, yes, I would -- I would take all the names.
Borton: They might want to come up with their own. Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Oh, my God. Mr. Borton.
Borton: We started from scratch, that concept, and it makes sense. I'm not opposed to
it, but we have had the commission now go through the laborious effort of vetting and
pros and cons and --
Siddoway: Joe, we can't hear you.
Borton: They have gone through this process at great length to set the pros and cons
and give good reasons why some names might not be the best, even though maybe in a
vacuum they are good names, so -- ask people to go back and start over, in light of all
the work that has been done. Unless we think the names are terrible, which I don't think
anyone does, so --
De Weerd: I like Exploration.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: And to Councilman Borton's point, take the names that they come up with,
maybe even two or three more that they have considered, and just throw those ones on
there and not make it a -- come up with your own, just here is what your board came up
with, what do you like.
De Weerd: Could even add an other, just to Mr. Cavener's -- and if they come up with
one that just is like, whoa, why didn't we think of that. Leave it to their— Imagination Park.
There you go.
Borton: Madam Mayor? You got to be aware of the unintended consequences. If you
have six names and the winner gets 18 percent and now you have got 80 percent of your
community that doesn't like the name of your park. So, you're going to have to vet how
you're going to do it and narrow it down and have finalists and -- to do it right, if you were
to go down this path, it's -- do it right.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 95 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 90 of 101
Cavener: I agree with Council Member Borton. It sounds like -- if I remember, but there
is three names that -- for the most part that the commission wrestled with, they were
Highland, Innovation, Exploration --
Siddoway: And, then, Discovery.
Cavener: And, then, I would add Discovery. And there is four and ideally one will receive
more than 26 percent of the vote. Maybe Council Borton will be hitting refresh and voting
and refresh and voting to insure that his --
Brent: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: We will try and make only unique users. Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I'm in agreement one hundred percent with Mr. Borton. I think that he brought up
some great points -- as that's what I was thinking as well. I would be -- I think it's great to
-- I am definitely not opposed to, you know, community involvement in -- on any level.
However, when it comes to these things, I think we should just make a decision and --
and, you know, go along with the recommendation of the commission and make a
decision tonight. That would be my opinion. But it -- I guess it maybe leaves it up in your
-- because you got two twos, so I guess you're a final vote.
De Weerd: I haven't heard a motion.
Cavener: Madam Mayor, are you looking for a motion from the Council on this?
De Weerd: I am looking for a decision of some sort.
Cavener: All right. Well, it's almost 11:00. We have still got more work to do. So, I will
-- I move that we -- I guess let me start again. Madam Mayor, I move that you work with
City of Meridian staff to establish a fair survey method that would allow our public -- our
citizens to name their park, using the three names vetted by the parks commission and
include Discovery Park on that list.
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to put this out to vote of the public. Any
discussion? So, you have Exploration, you have Discovery, Innovation and Highline -- or
Highlands.
Siddoway: Highland.
De Weerd: Highland. Okay. Any discussion?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 96 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 91 of 101
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. --
Cavener: For discussion sake -- and I think -- obviously, we have got staff that can figure
out all the logistical details. My motion is more just to kind of summarize of where I think
we should go and will yield to you and park's staff to establish the appropriate sideboards,
timing, et cetera, and ensure that the public has enough time to weigh in and we promote
it.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, nay; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt nay.
De Weerd: Aye.
MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. TWO ABSENT. MAYOR AYE.
De Weerd: So, we will take it up and vote for the people. Okay.
B. Parks and Recreation Department: Kleiner Park Memorial
Plaza Fees and Policy
Siddoway: Thank you. I have one more presentation. Can you bring it up? Kleiner Park
Memorial Plaza. It's on the left. There you go. Thank you. Madam Mayor, Members of
the Council, this last item is to get your direction on what we want to notice as the fees
for the Kleiner Park Memorial Plaza and also just a brief three points on policy we want
to bring back to you. To be clear, we are not asking for your final approval motion tonight,
what we are asking for is your direction, so we know what to notice. It will still have to be
a noticing process and a public hearing after your direction tonight. Quickly we have an
-- we have had an existing memorial program for the last 15 years at Tully Park. There
is a memorial tree lane along Bud Porter Pathway in Tully Park. It has 12 by six granite
plaques. The cost for the tree and the plaque is 290 bucks. But that program is full.
Every tree in the park is named. There is no more trees to do. We also have an existing
program at Generations Plaza with the brass plaques on the wall around Generations
Plaza. The cost of those brass plaques is a hundred bucks. They are four inches by two
inches and that program is still available, a little over half full. As you know, we have a
program underway with the partnership with MYAC. MYAC's elected this as their
participatory budget project for last year. It's currently under construction as you can see
in the top photo. There is Memorial Plaza pavers. Thanks to the great weather we are
having staff have been out there the last two days starting the installation of the actual
pavers ahead of when we thought we would be in there this spring. I don't need to get
into the dimensions with you in detail, but there they are for the plaza. I will point out the
very bottom bullet that the center tree has been selected as a Magnolia butterflies tree,
which we think will be very beautiful and you can see the picture there at the bottom. So,
this new memorial program, the construction funding, as I mentioned as part of the MYAC
participatory budget. The question is what should we charge for each of the bricks. The
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 97 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 92 of 101
first thought is we need to make sure we are recouping our -- our direct costs. So, the
brick itself is about five bucks. The engraving on that brick is 25 bucks. The mobilization
fee to get the company out there to engrave, is 135. An average of four hours of staff
time to both work on it with the applicant is pretty standard. That would be 80 bucks.
That totals 245, we rounded it to 250. So, if a one at a time scenario -- if we are recouping
all of our direct costs, that would be 250 bucks. Now -- so, 250 bucks per paver covers
the direct cost. Last time we were talking about other fees there were questions raised
by Council of are you factoring in costs for recovery of maintenance and I don't have an
exact science for you to say how much would it cost to maintain this over the next 50, 100
years, how many will we have to replace, will we have to replace any. I don't know, but
for discussion sake we -- we suggested, you know, if you even wanted to go there, you
know, of one and a half times multiplier or if you also are interested in recovering not only
direct costs and not only maintenance recovery, but the initial 20,000 dollar construction
cost applied over the number of bricks there, then, you would add an additional 125 bucks,
making them 500 dollars per paver. Now, the next question we usually get at this point
is -- oh, that's the next slide. The commission has discussed this and made a
recommendation for you to consider. They -- they thought we ought to be focused on
recouping all the direct costs of having a four by eight paver of 250 bucks or a double
sized eight by eight paver at 400 bucks. They also suggested a promotional period
leading up to the first Memorial Day this year where we would drop that price to 150 and
250 in order to encourage the initial influx. They also recommended considering making
this an annual thing. I don't know that an annual sale would be that good, because you
would just wait and can get it, then, I think. But something -- something that they
discussed and to consider. So, the question I usually get at this point is, well, what do
other memorial programs charge. So, there is -- I have two for you. The Idaho Fallen
Firefighters Foundation bricks in the city of Boise, their bricks range in cost from 100 to
200 dollars. The Veteran's Memorial Park Patriot Walk bricks, a four by eight brick and
an eight by eight brick is the same size that we are talking about for ours, are also 100
and 200. Twelve by twelves are also -- say they are available, but no price was listed.
Those were specifically for businesses or corporations. Now, we have had some
additional staff discussion since then, both with the Mayor, amongst ourselves, that 250
dollar direct cost is based on mobilizing for every brick. We could set up a scenario where
we get multiple bricks in before we go out and -- and engrave them, in which case we
could split that cost among multiple bricks. So, if we split that cost between at least four
pavers, that direct cost would drop to 145 bucks. So, for round numbers you could
consider some alternate standard pricing of 150 bucks and 250 dollars for the eight by
eight. Seems more in line with what other memorial bricks cost. And so for your
discussion the commission's recommendation is the 250 and 400 for the two sizes. If we
are willing to think about, you know, aggregating multiple ones before we go out, I think
that this idea of dropping that price to 150 and 250 has some merit and if you want to
consider some of those other options I guess that's on the table, too. And with that I will
pause here and ask for a discussion.
De Weerd: Thank you, Steve. Council?
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 98 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 93 of 101
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I -- I personally like the alternate standard pricing and doing maybe like a semi-
annual time period where we go out and install a bunch of bricks two times a year, which
would alleviate a lot of the cost. If I'm looking at -- I have two grandpas that I would like
to honor in this memorial location and I could get two at the alternate standard pricing as
-- you know, for almost the price of one with the commission's recommendation and so if
you're doing it that way, I think you will find it will create volume. I think more people will
do it. Therefore, invite with the alternate -- alternate standard pricing. We are still
recouping all of the direct costs, it's just that we are doing multiple at the same time. So,
think it makes sense to do that, for sure. That would be my thought.
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor. A couple questions. Has the plaza portion already been built?
Siddoway: So, the photo that you saw -- if I back up. That part right there is constructed.
The tree is not installed yet. The landscaping is not in. And the bricks are going in this
week.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? So, what -- what takes four hours of staff time?
Siddoway: Oh. The -- the coordination with the -- the applicant. There is quite a bit of
back and forth, both with them on getting the -- the language that they want finalized and
approved and, then, in ordering the -- the memorial plaza out there. It seems like it could
get streamlined to be less, but as I was asking, you know, how long do these take in
general, that's the feedback that I got.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? I don't -- I have never put a paver down, so I don't really know
how this works. Can you pull it up and put it back easily enough if you were to -- say you
sold 50 in a period of time, you're going to rip 50 up, go take them to the engraver
themselves instead of having to pay them to come out and do it and put them back or is
that just -- that doesn't work?
Siddoway: Yeah. It would be more expensive to do that. It's actually more cost effective
to just mobilize them once for 135 bucks and engrave 50 bricks right on site.
Palmer: Okay.
De Weerd: Steve, could you maybe have two different programs, one if they want to
expedite it it would be the 200 -- it would be the cost that the commission chose, but if
you are willing to wait to be part of a larger order you could have the reduced price.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 99 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 94 of 101
Siddoway: Yeah. And, honestly, that's where I was headed next on the -- the policy
discussion. One of the things that we -- there is three points that I wanted to discuss that
we have learned -- discussed with the commission. There is general consensus there.
We think there would be benefit to saying, look, we installed the bricks that come in twice
a year. We are thinking May and October, you know, right before Memorial Day and
then --
De Weerd: And Veteran's --
Siddoway: -- I guess we are Veteran's Day. Would be October and, then, we got them
fairly well spaced throughout the year. We think that simplifies things quite a bit for us
and we would recommend doing that. The other thing that we have learned is we need
a sunset clause with the agreement that we have with these people that purchased a
memorial. The other was that we have looked at in Boise and other cities have them, the
typical language that we have seen is that, you know, this brick that they are buying or
whatever it is is guaranteed for the life span of the facility or amenity, meaning that if in
the future the park just has a complete face lift, there is not a commitment that one 100,
200 years from now it can't be removed, but for the life span of that plaza, you know, it
would -- we would -- you would keep it up. And, then, the third one is to avoid some really
strange things that you can get on some of these bricks. A really like what -- what Boise
has done for all of theirs. They have a first line, second line, third line where they have
an approved set of phrases -- there is a lot. There is 54 approved phrases about anything
that you could want. It's not just in memory of or in recognition of. But -- and we can
bring those back to you with the policy recommendation, but we want to have the wording
limited to where there is an approved phrase on the first line, the name of the person and,
then, the appropriate dates as the third line. That would be our recommendation for
keeping some consistency with these bricks within the memorial. So, back to your first
point of the installation, which is why I jumped to this slide. We would recommend that
that would be our proposal in order to be able to support that alternate standard pricing
as a realistic option.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: A couple questions. One, did the parks commission have the chance to review
the alternative standard pricing?
Siddoway: They have not.
Cavener: Then just a follow up question. If this is something that the commission
discussed or if it's worthy of Council discussing, the Meridian Senior Center has a brick
memorial program. It looks like their bricks are -- four by eights are 100 and eight by
eights are 250. Just don't know if we want to have two competing brick programs. If
that's been contemplated, if the parks commission was aware of that, if there was any
thoughts at having kind of two brick memorials in the same park.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 100 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 95 of 101
Siddoway: You mean like pricing in the same or --
Cavener: Either pricing the same or -- I don't know if somebody is going to take one brick
over another, I'm just -- they are a partner and it -- maybe we are stepping on their toes
a little bit with the program they have been doing. I don't know if that was contemplated
by the parks commission or not.
Siddoway: It was not.
De Weerd: It wasn't, but it also was part of the -- the program that came to the Parks
Department and the parks commission as a result of the participatory budgeting and the
establishment of that memorial plaza. That's kind of the context of it. I would think that it
would not be a competition to the senior center's program. That is their fundraiser for
their nonprofit, but also this is a more expensive one and in the public eye, instead of
inside the building. So, I think there is enough of a difference that it shouldn't compete
against each other, but it's a good point.
Siddoway: I would just like to say that Mike Kleiner was here last week. He and I got
together for about a half day and did a tour. We got -- we specifically went to see the --
the new memorial plaza site, because that was one of the things he was really interested
in seeing. We took him out there. We stood there and looked at it. He was very pleased
with the way it's been sited, the way it works with the Rock of Honor and takes advantage
of the views out to the pond. So, I just wanted to share that with that we did have Mike
Kleiner here last week to come look at it and he was quite pleased with the direction it
was going.
De Weerd: And -- and I think that is one of the other things that really came up during
the Memorial Plaza discussion is this is one of the visions that the Kleiners had is looking
for additional ways that you can memorialize your loved one and that -- that is some of
the context behind the Julius M. Kleiner Memorial Park.
Siddoway: I was just going to say, it is a memorial park and it fits where its proposed and
they were also particularly excited to hear about the tie back with the youth and how
MYAC came up with it and brought it to us, so --
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: The alternate standard pricing makes good sense to me. The promotional period,
as you proposed, makes good sense and the bi-annual installation dates seem to make
great sense. So, great work.
De Weerd: And if someone wants to expedite it, having the higher costs because there
is a true cost, is an option. At least you give the option.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 101 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 96 of 101
Siddoway: And if there is general consensus with that -- we will see if there is, but one
point I would ask is if you like the alternate standard pricing as a standard pricing, but
also like the promotional period -- I didn't put what the promotional price would be up here,
but, you know, 100 and 200 dollars, maybe, for that, you know, one time, but I guess I
would ask if that's what -- if that's what you would like.
De Weerd: I'm going to get ten.
Siddoway: What's what?
De Weerd: Sorry.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I guess, Steve, with the -- the -- it sounds to me like the alternative standard
pricing allows the city to recoup its costs and that the promotional -- and the additional
discount during the promotional time that wouldn't necessarily be the case.
Siddoway: Unless we get enough to even split them further.
Cavener: So, I would just say let's do the alternative pricing and that comes -- that's the
promotional price. We do it twice a year. That's the price. And, then, to the Mayor's
point, if somebody says I want one in February, then, they can pay the commission's
recommended pricing. That way the city is not in the red for doing this program.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Thank you, Councilman Cavener. What was running through my head is there
is no way where you can lose any money on this thing. Participatory budgeting has had
a tendency to cost more than it was allotted. So, yeah, don't lose any money.
De Weerd: They are not recommending these prices.
Borton: Madam Mayor, I second Councilman Cavener's motion.
De Weerd: Okay.
Cavener: Great. It was a motion.
Borton: It sounded like it.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 102 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 97 of 101
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the fees as presented and to bring
them back to go through the process of official adopting.
Siddoway: Understood.
Borton: Just direction.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Siddoway: Understood. Thank you. We will get it noticed and be back for a hearing on
the fees. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, Steve. I love that tree. Butterfly Magnolia.
Cavener: All right. What's next?
Item 11: Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 18-1764: An Ordinance (Movado Greens
Subdivision H-2017-0104) of the City of Meridian granting
annexation and re zone of two Parcels of Land located in the
NW'/4 of the NE'/4 of Section 21, Township 3 North, Range 1
East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; Establishing and
Determining the Land Use Zoning Classification of Said Lands
from C -G (General Retail and Service Commercial) Zoning
District to R-15 (Medium 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 for An Effective Date
Cavener: Okay. Item 11-A is Ordinance 18-1764. Mr. Clerk, will, you, please, read this
by title.
Coles: Thank you, Madam Mayor. City of Meridian Ordinance No. 18-1764: An
Ordinance (Movado Greens Subdivision H-2017-0104) of the City of Meridian, granting
annexation and rezone of two parcels of land located in the NW'/4 of the NE'/4 of Section
21, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise meridian, Ada county, Idaho; establishing
and determining the land use zoning classification of said lands from C -G
(General Retail and Service Commercial) Zoning District to R-15 (Medium 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
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 103 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 98 of 101
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 for an effective
Date.
De Weerd: You have heard this read by title. Do I have a motion?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: If nobody would like to comment, I move we approve Ordinance 18-1764 with
suspension of rules.
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Mr. Clerk.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 12: Future Meeting Topics
De Weerd: Item 12, future meeting topics. Certainly there is the State of the City
tomorrow. State of our City tomorrow. We can brag about our citizens and our employees
and our business community. It starts at 4:29 on the dot. The Fire Department is having
their promotional and pinning ceremony on February 12th from 6:30 to 7:30 at the Public
Safety Training Center and remember the joint P&Z and City Council meeting next week
immediately following -- well, starting at 6:00 following our workshop. So, anything
further?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Madam Mayor, I would love it in the future we have an agenda where we get to
discuss the future of excess lands -- properties that the city owns.
De Weerd: Okay.
Cavener: Didn't we say that we were going to do that? Okay.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 104 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 99 of 101
Item 13: Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-206(1)(f): To
communicate with legal counsel for the public agency to discuss the
legal ramifications of and legal options for pending litigation, or
controversies not yet being litigated but imminently likely to be
litigated.
De Weerd: I worked with our Council President. Okay. Item 13. Do I have a motion?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we move into Executive Session per Idaho State Code 74-2061(f).
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn into Executive Session. Mr. Clerk,
will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, absent;
Bernt, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: (11:23 p.m. to 12:07 a.m.)
De Weerd: I would entertain a motion to come out of Executive Session.
Borton: So moved.
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
De Weerd: Do I have a motion to adjourn?
Cavener: So moved.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: All those in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda February 20, 2018 — Page 105 of 601
Meridian City Council
February 6, 2018
Page 100 of 101
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:07 A.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYO EERD DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
C. JAY CC