HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-06-25 RegularMeridian City Council June 25, 2019.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:12 p.m., Tuesday, June
25, 2019, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd.
Members Present: Tammy de Weerd, Ty Palmer, Luke Cavener, Genesis Milam, Anne
Little Roberts and Treg Bernt.
Members Absent: Joe Borton.
Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Caleb Hood, Bill Parsons, Stephanie Leonard,
Warren Stewart, Scott Colaianni, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-call Attendance:
Roll call.
X__ Anne Little Roberts __ _ Joe Borton
X__ Ty Palmer X__ Treg Bernt
__X___Genesis Milam __X___Lucas Cavener
__X__ Mayor Tammy de Weerd
De Weerd: And thank you for your patience. We apologize for starting a few minutes
late. But thank you for joining us this evening. For the record it is Tuesday, June 25th.
It's 12 minutes after 6:00. We will start with roll call attendance, Mr. Clerk.
Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance
De Weerd: 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 Larry Woodard of Ten Mile Christian Church
De Weerd: Item 3 is our community invocation. Tonight we will be led by Larry Woodard.
Larry is with the Ten Mile Christian Church. We appreciate you joining us. I would ask
that you join us in the community invocation or take this as an opportunity for a moment
of reflection. Welcome.
Woodard: Our Dear Heavenly Father, we ask you to guide the thoughts and wishes of
this Council tonight. May the decisions this Council reaches serve the best interests of
our community and its residents. We read weekly about the increasing number of new
residents moving to this area from California and we certainly feel this growing population
pressure. Guide this Council as they consider new building permits and other changes
in our community. As we drive around this community we see new construction going up
everywhere. May the workmen be safe as they dig trenches and raise new facilities. May
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 5 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 2 of 77
the decisions made tonight be thoughtful and helpful as our community expands. Be with
the planners, the engineers, and other professionals who have a hand in this process.
Thank you for blessing Meridian in ways we could have never believed a decade ago, in
Jesus' name, amen.
Item 4: Adoption of Agenda
De Weerd: Thank you, Larry. Okay. Item 4 is adoption of the agenda.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Don't see any changes being requested, so I move we adopt the agenda as
published.
Milam: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve the agenda as publish ed. Mr.
Cavener, is that to also remove Item No. 10?
Cavener: If Council's amenable to that, I'm fine with striking Item 10. I guess I left it on
there and if we felt that we needed to go back in, then, we could immediately adjourn, but
it doesn't matter to me. I'm seeing lots of stare s. So, yeah, Madam Mayor, my motion
did mean to strike Item 10 from the agenda.
De Weerd: Okay. And second agrees?
Milam: Agree.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. And I have a motion and second to adopt the agenda as
changed. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Announcements
De Weerd: Under Item 5, Announcements, I do want to remind Council that we have our
city's picnic on the 27th, which is this Thursday. Already. It's the end of June. It starts at
5:30 at Kleiner Park. Also a reminder that July 2nd the meeting -- City Council meeting
is canceled and to our public that City Hall will be closed on July 4th for Independence
Day. So, with that I -- oh, and to invite everyone to our celebration of Independence Day
at Storey Park and fireworks at 10:00 p.m. This is in partnership with the Meridian
Speedway. Always a great show. Council, any other announcements? Very good.
Item 6: Future Meeting Topics - Public Forum (Up to 30 Minutes Maximum)
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 6 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 3 of 77
De Weerd: Item 6. Mr. Clerk, any sign-ups for Item 6?
Johnson: Madam Mayor, there were three people signed in, but they indicated they were
here for a later project. I have spoken to them and there were no additional sign-ins.
Item 7: Action Items
A. Public Hearing on Proposed New Fee: The Compliance Engine
Administration Fee
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Chris. Item 7 under Action Items. We start with the public
hearing on the new proposed fee for the Compliance Engine Administration fee. This is
a continued conversation and I will turn this over to our Deputy Chief Joe.
Bongiorno: Thank you, Madam Mayor and City Council. So, this is a -- what you have
before you is the public hearing for a modification of a contract that we have -- currently
have with the Brycer -- with Brycer, who manages the Compliance Engine and as you all
have known by now, we use the compliance engine as a third-party vendor to track fire
sprinkler systems, hood cleanings, hood suppression systems, paint booth suppression
systems, all of the important things that keep our citizens safe when they are out in the
city visiting our commercial businesses. So, along with this we have -- are requesting a
contract change from 15 dollars and -- what the current fee is to 30 dollars and talking
with Council and -- sorry -- with our attorney and with Finance, the contract change
constitutes a fee and so that's a new fee and so that's why I'm here standing before you
today is to I guess introduced this new fee that would be part of that contract change with
the Brycer company. So, again, this would be a partial cost recovery for the fire
department. It's the first endeavor that we have been -- had with that. Talking with Todd
from Finance, they -- they agree that this is an acceptable amount to collect . It's in the
packet in front of you for the Compliance Engine fee. Out of that fee we would collect
$13.05 per inspection. So, it would roughly be about 29,000 dollars a year. So, it would
be a partial cost recovery. I know Council Member Milam had asked about what the full
recovery costs -- full recovery costs would be an additional -- it would be 28 dollars and I
think that would put us way out of line with what the rest of the valley is doing , the other
fire departments. Boise fire, Kuna fire, Eagle fire, Star fire, have all adopted the
Compliance Engine at the 30 dollar fee. So, this is going to be a consistency thing. So,
it's the same throughout the valley. When I took the job as the fire marshal that was one
of my goals was to keep us consistent in the valley, so we didn't have, well, Boise does
this, Meridian does this, Kuna does this. We are all trying to get on the same page. So,
we did do some open houses. Chief -- Chief Gervais from Boise fire and I had some open
houses to talk about the -- the fee increase with people. We did have one visitor that
showed up for one of our open houses. We did a couple presentations before large
groups. We got some feedback on that. With that we did change the number of
inspections. We narrowed it down a little bit and combined a couple of them to lessen
the impact on the people that would actually be paying this fe e and, then, we also sent a
letter to a couple different groups. The building -- BOMA -- the Building Owners and
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 7 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 4 of 77
Managers Association, looking for feedback from them and we did not receive any
feedback from them. So, with that I will answer any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, chief.
Bongiorno: Thank you.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Thank you, Joe. Question for you.
Bongiorno: Yes.
Bernt: We spoke about before in regard to combining, you know, multiple inspections,
maybe they are year inspections, along with their five year inspection, make that one
inspection to save them money. Were you able to accomplish that?
Bongiorno: Yes, we did. We changed in our groups -- again, consistency. So, Boise fire
and Meridian fire both have the same inspection plan --
Bernt: Right.
Bongiorno: -- laundry list and with that we did combine some items to lessen that impact
and, then, we also -- we also agreed for like the hood cleanings, because most
restaurants have to -- are required every six months to have their hoods cleaned. What
Romeo and I agreed to was just -- they just have to submit once a year that shows that
the hood's been cleaned and, then, during the off year if we happen to go in for an
inspection, we can just ask them can you provide me the invoice for -- so, that, again, it
has the amount of what we would have been doing. So, we -- we worked with it to lessen
the impact on -- on our business owners.
Bernt: Thanks, chief.
De Weerd: Any other questions or comments? Thank you.
Bongiorno: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. This is a public hearing on proposed new fees. Mr. Clerk, is anyone
signed up?
Johnson: Madam Mayor, there were no signups.
De Weerd: Okay. Is there anyone who wishes to provide testimony on the item? Okay.
Thank you. Council, there are -- any further information needed from Chief Bongiorno?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 8 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 5 of 77
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, hearing no more comments, I move we close the public
hearing.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in
favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
B. Resolution No. 19-2148: Adoption of New Fee - The Compliance
Engine Administration Fee
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: If we can move on to Item B, I move that we approve Resolution 19-2148
with the adoption of the new fee for the Compliance Engine.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Resolution 19-2148. Any
discussion?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Briefly. Chief, appreciate your work on this. This is one that kind of caught us
all a little bit off guard. Appreciate you and the Finance Department going back to -- you
know, I struggled for a minute about this being a partial fee recovery. There is a certain
element of life safety here that I think is appropriate that our taxpayers are having to cover
some of that cost, but I do think for us as a body it does move to the conversation as this
Council progresses about having more larger philosophical conversations about what is
appropriate for total fee recovery, a partial fee recovery, no fee recovery. Help with our
new work session that that's something that we can really start to wrestle with in the
coming weeks and months. So, I'm suppo rtive of the motion. I appreciate your good
work on that, chief.
Bongiorno: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 9 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 6 of 77
De Weerd: Yes, thank you, chief. Any further discussion? Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. First Amendment to Agreement with Brycer, LLC for the
Compliance Engine
De Weerd: Also related is Item C, which is the first amendment to the agreement with
Brycer. Any comments from Chief Bongiorno?
Bongiorno: Madam Mayor and City Council, this is just the approval for the Mayor to sign
the contract.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the amendment to the agreement
with Brycer for you to sign.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-C. Mr. Clerk, will you call
roll.
Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, yea; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: We are now in the public hearing section for land use items. If anyone is new
to our process this evening, I would like to just give you an idea what to expect. First, we
staff -- we start with staff comments and they will introduce the application that is in front
of Council for a decision. Following that the applicant has an opportunity to comment on
their development application. They have 15 minutes to do so. At the tail end of that we
will ask for public comment. There is a time limit of three minutes per person , unless
there is a spokesperson for the HOA, they have ten minutes and there is a little note -- or
a little box on the monitor that shows you your time and so you can also keep track of
that. I will ask you to summarize if you are still testifying and, then, give you a few -- a
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 10 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 7 of 77
few seconds to -- to wrap up your comments. After public testimony we will ask the
applicant to come forward and -- and do any wrap up comments. In addition to answering
any questions that might have been raised during the testimony. Council will have an
opportunity to ask questions of staff, the applicant, and any of those that testified. As well
I would like to note that Council does have the public record. They do have the minutes
from the Planning and Zoning Commission. They have agency comments and they use
all of this in their consideration for any action that they might take.
D. Public Hearing for Three Corners Ranch (H-2019-0006) by Sweet
Land Development, Inc., Located at 1890 E. Dunwoody Ct.
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 31.06 acres of land with
the R-4 zoning District; and,
2. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 45 building lots and
9 commons lots.
De Weerd: So, with that said I will go ahead and open this public hearing for Item 8-D,
H-2019-0006 with staff comments.
Leonard: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of Council. The project before you this
evening is for Three Corners Ranch, annexation and preliminary plat of 31 acres of land,
zoned RUT in Ada county and located at 1890 East Dunwoody Court. To the north is
single family residential subdivisions, Bristol Heights to the east, zoned R-1 and R-1-C
and Fuller Ranchettes here to the north. To the south is a single family residential
subdivision, zoned R-4, Vienna Woods, and a single family residential subdivision zoned
R-1-C in Boise, which is Bristol Heights as well. To the west is a single family residential
subdivision, zoned RUT in the county, Dunwoody Subdivision. The Comprehensive Plan
future land use map designation for this area is low density residential. The applicant is
requesting to annex 31 acres of land. The R-4 zoning district, consistent with the LDR
future land use designation. The preliminary plat consists of 45 building lots, one -- one
of which is an existing home here on Lot 19. The applicant received private street
approval from staff on this with gates at the entrances to the subdivision at East Barclay
Street here and East Dunwoody Court here. The subject site is 31 acres. It's an in-fill
property and it's located among several existing Meridian, Boise and Ada county
subdivisions as noted earlier. The site has five abutting stub -- stub streets that were
installed with the development of previous subdivisions, with the intention of future
extension. The site also has 50 foot frontage along East Dunwoody Court here to the
west. With so many potential stub streets connectivity and points of access have been
greatly discussed by residents, city staff and Ada County Highway District throughout the
process. ACHD commission did hear this project on March 27th and approved the plan
that's before you this evening. Lot sizes range from approximately 11,000 square feet to
96,000 square feet, with an average lot size of 22,000 square feet, which is approximately
half an acre. The gross density is 1.45 dwelling units per acre, which is at the low end of
the low density residential target density and the applicant is proposing to include a 1.26
acre neighborhood park here with a basketball court and some pocket parks throughout.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 11 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 8 of 77
They are also providing micro paths and pedestrian paths to the surrounding subdivisions.
The applicant is proposing access via West Barclay Street here and to East Dunwoody
Court here with a private street and it will be gated at least 50 feet back from both
entrances. Public street access is not proposed with this plan. However, residents and
visitors will be able to access the subdivision via these two entrances. The applicant is
proposing to extend two of the five stub streets, North Sweet Valley Road, to connect to
Shandee here at the northwest part of the site with a public street, which is West Guinness
Street. Shandee Drive provides access to the Fuller Ranchettes Subdivision, which is
that subdivision here, which currently has access to Chinden or State Highway 20-26.
Right here it has full access. That access is going to be restricted to right-in, right-out
when Chinden is expanded to five lanes and, then, later It will be completely -- or access
will be prohibited once it's extended to six lanes. The extension of this roadway does
provide access to the Fuller Ranchettes Subdivision. The closure of the existing access
point to Chinden would result in a dead-end loop with one point of access for Shandee
coming up here. Staff originally recommended an extension of West Guinness Street to
North Stafford Place to create an additional access point for residents and to increase
connectivity. The Commission did strike that condition. The Commission also modified
staff's recommendation to extend a private north-south street from East Commander Lane
to the north here -- to the north to be installed upon closure of Shandee Dr. -- so, Shandee
Drive to Chinden. The Commission is recommending approval with the conditions that
are in the staff report and then -- I'm not sure if in the interest of time if you want me to go
through all the folks that signed in opposition or f avor or neutral to -- there were quite a
few that signed in.
De Weerd: It's all part of the public record, so --
Leonard: Quite a few folks also commented and provided some verbal testimony. Some
of the issues that they brought up were support of ACHD's approved plan, opposition to
staff's recommendations. Concern related to safety and congestion resulting from
increased traffic through Three Corners, the Ambrose School, and Dunwoody Court and
concern regarding access via Dunwoody Court related to the unimproved roadway and
the rural nature of the road and extension of existing stub streets in general. Key issues
of discussion by Commission. Location and turnaround at the western boundary gates.
They recommended that it be moved back further to the east. Extension of West
Guinness Street to the east to connect with North Stafford. Extension of a north-south
private street from East Commander Lane to replace this pathway. Concern regarding
safety on Dunwoody Court. Closeness of the UCC commission decision. Request for
further discussion regarding amenities with staff . Provision of a third access point to
alleviate amount of traffic on East Dunwoody Court and the need to work with Dunwoody
neighbors specifically related to irrigation and safety concerns. Commission did change
some conditions. They struck the conditions regarding extension of West Guinness Street
to the east to connect with North Stafford. They modified condition A-3-D to include a
provision that deeded a north-south private street to be constructed on the closure of the
current access point from Shandee to Chinden and they added a condition to require that
the gate on the westbound -- or the west entry over here be moved further east to allow
for more of a turnaround. Outstanding conditions for you today are that the applicant was
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 12 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 9 of 77
required to modify the plat for the recommended changes and it has not presented that
to staff yet. The Council also needs to grant a partial waiver as the applicant proposes to
locate a portion of the Karnes Lateral here within buildable lots and the applicant did meet
with Dunwoody residents regarding the Dunwoody Court safety concerns and, then, also
irrigation. So, since the Commission hearing there have been ten records of written
testimony, most of which were received from the Dunwoody -- or from Dunwoody
residents in relation to concerns regarding safety and overall traffic mitigation. A couple
of neighbors in Bristol Heights did voice their -- were in favor of the ACHD plan and in
favor of gates, elimination of cut-through traffic by providing access via North Stafford
Place, so general agreement with them. Commission's recommendations. And, then,
comments from David and Luane Dean regarding their interest in pursuing a lower density
subdivision to add to Meridian and working with neighbors. So, with that staff will stand
for any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you, Stephanie. Council, any question?
Cavener: Not right now.
De Weerd: Thank you very much. Is the applicant here? Good evening. If you will,
please, state your name and address for the record.
Clark: Good evening. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street. Representing the applicant.
And I do have a little presentation here. Thank you , Stephanie. Well, it's good to be back
in front of the Council. This is an interesting project as Stephanie showed you. It's -- it's
one that has some kind of interesting questions about the connectivity issue. This is not
your typical developer situation as well. This is a -- this is a developer who actually lives
in -- the husband and wife who actually live in this northwest corner here. So , they care
a great deal about this project. It's very personal. They want to make sure that it's done
right. And that led to many of the decisions that we are going to talk about tonight,
including the density. As Stephanie mentioned, there are 44 new residential lots that are
being proposed with this application. Most developers wouldn't do that. They would
probably try to double that. And in this case they did not. They tried to transition from the
Dunwoody neighbors to the west to match the Barclay neighbors on the east . These
homesites do blend with the neighbors. I do think that it's useful to look at a little bit of
the history of the lot. This is called Three Corners Ranch, but you might be able to call it
Dunwoody Two. This lot was one of the original lots within the Dunwoody Subdivision.
While it wasn't developed with the original subdivision , the lot has always been identified
for future development and, in fact, this is from the Dunwoody CC&Rs. The CC&Rs
specifically identified Dunwoody Court as being a future access for this lot once it
developed. In terms of the pathway that we took to get to the design that's before you
tonight, as I mentioned, this is a unique property. Six potential stubs. It's not something
that I have seen on a property this small. This raised a very real concern with the concept
of cut-through traffic and you can see here that this entire -- you don't actually see it in
this picture, but it's something that I will talk about through -- throughout the evening.
Within this square mile block there is no collector network . Other than Bennington, we
are talking about local roads through the entire thing. There are also no commercial uses
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 13 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 10 of 77
or parks that can be accessed from the internal roadways, so there can be access via
pedestrian means. There are only front facing local streets other than Bennington Way.
As we discussed this with the agencies, there was a concern that this could very easily
turn into a mid mile collector with a straight shot all the way from Locust Grove to Eagle.
Again, with the exception of Bennington Way, these roads are all local. They should not
function that way. So, to address that issue, this is where the gates came from and this
is why I wanted to address this with you up front. Those gates are located at Dunwoody
and Barclay. They would end the temptation for folks outside of this square mile to use
this as a cut through. That doesn't appear to be a controversial issue at this point . ACHD
was in favor of that. P&Z is in favor of that and I think most of the neighbors are in favor
of that. But I do want to emphasize that the -- the sidewalks and the pathways are all
going to be open to the public and that was a condition of approval of the ACHD
commission action and something we were happy to agree to. So, pedestrian
conductivity is not affected by those gates it just gets rid of the issue of the -- of the de
facto collector. So, with that in mind I would like to talk about the P&Z recommendation
and focus on a couple of elements and try to keep this kind of a focus conversation
tonight. The first issue that we wanted to talk about was with regard to Condition A-3-A
and that deals with the location of the Karnes Lateral. So, this picture shows you where
it will be located. The current location is a little bit to the south , kind of angles below there
as you can see. In doing its analysis staff rightly pointed out that the irrigation easement
for Karnes Lateral would by code be required to be in a common lot, but that requirement
can be waived by Council and so we wanted to have a conversation about that. We think
a waiver would be appropriate and here is -- there is a couple reasons why. First you can
see that on the east side, if that were to be placed in a common lot it would basically be
-- it would be a dead end. In addition, these are very large lots that could easily
accommodate this within an irrigation easement and not affect any building envelopes or
building setbacks. So, our request, then, would be for Council to -- to grant the waiver on
Condition A-3-A to permit those irrigation easements outside of the common lots. The
next item was Condition A-3-D and this is the -- the north-south connection that I think will
probably be discussed a fair amount tonight. Up front I believe -- I don't want to put words
in staff's mouth, but as I understand it, staff originally made this recommendation out of a
desire to break up the block face in the event that Guinness were to connect all the way
over to Stafford. In other words, that block would have been too long. There needed to
be a roadway in there to connect it in order to break that up. Again , ACHD rejected the
condition -- or the connection all the way over to Stafford. P&Z recommended against
including that connection to Stafford. So, it doesn't go all the way over anymore, which
means that that block face is no longer long. There is no requirement to break up the
block face anymore. So, at P&Z the discussion, then, became more about connectivity
and why -- you know, if that north-south connection would add connectivity that would be
useful for the subdivision. So, let's look at the language. This is -- what you have in front
of you is what P&Z recommended. The specific language is to phase installation of a
north-south gate, make that concurrent with closure from Chinden -- or from Shandee to
Chinden. So, in a few years -- we don't know exactly when -- when Chinden gets widened,
ITD is going to cut off access at Shandee and, as Stephanie mentioned, there will be
emergency bollards there, but at some point that's going to happen. Under this condition
that would trigger the requirement to put in the north-south connection if that make sense.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 14 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 11 of 77
So, that, obviously, raises a number of questions. A, we don't know when that would
happen. If it's ten years out, is that an HOA obligation at that point? I mean we typically
deal with these things up front. But even if we set that aside, I think we have to ask the
practical use for it. So, what you have on the screen is our traffic engineer study of this
trip distribution. This shows what we have proposed without the north-south gate and in
that case traffic distribution is expected to be 30 percent less through Dunwoody, 70
percent east out Barclay. Now, remember this condition is proposed based on a closure
of Shandee. So, what would that mean? That would mean that if you went out that north-
south gate that you would be taking a circuitous route through Three Corners, through
the school campus, and you would be coming out on Locust Grove at a location that
probably might be backed up during the a.m. peak hours. Now, that is if they use this
new gate. And so we asked the traffic engineer to review that and provide an opinion
based on what -- on what the trip distribution would be after that's close d and based on
his analysis only five percent of the trips would go out that north-south connection.
Barclays trips remain the same. Dunwoody's trips are reduced by about five percent. So,
it begs the question if it's only five percent that would be using it, is it worth the cost from
a practical perspective. We do not think so and so we would ask for a deletion of that
condition and the requirement of the north -south connection. And I would just add as an
aside that if Council is in agreement with that, the findings regarding the private road
would also need to be updated and staff I'm sure can point you to that issue. But it would
be finding -- the Roman IX-CB and C. Okay. Last one. This is conditions A-3 -- and
actually it's A-3-D and 4-A. So, this condition talks about sidewalks on both sides of the
public street. So, what we are talking about when we have the public street -- there is
only one, it's Guinness on the north side of the development and this kind of illustrates
what we are talking about here. You can see that this -- where the sidewalks would go is
this short section of road, the Guinness connection from Sweet Valley to Shandee. You
can see on the east over here is the pedestrian pathway that we are proposing. What we
would like to see is for that pedestrian pathway to have a crossing here at Shandee. Folks
stay on the north side of that road and, then, connect into the existing neighborhood
pathway. If we -- if we put sidewalks on both sides, what you would see is you would
have a crossing here, you would have a sidewalk going along here and, then, you want
folks to cross again to go up to that neighboring pathway. We think it makes a lot more
sense in this circumstance to just do the sidewalk on the north side and, then, kind of
direct that pedestrian traffic. So, the request there is to modify conditions A-3-E and 4-A
to allow for sidewalk just on the north side. So, I will finish up. But I want to focus -- and
I want to focus on answering your questions , but I do want to address one item that I'm
sure you're going to hear about in addition to these items , which is just the safety of
Dunwoody Court. Again, as I mentioned, the residents of Dunwoody bought subject to
CC&Rs that did say that that road would be used for future access. Dunwoody Court is
not a private cul-de-sac, it is a public road that is maintained at public expense. ACHD
reviewed Dunwoody Court in connection with its approval of this plan. Those findings
show that there is a 50 foot right of way with 30 feet of pavement. As you know, 30 feet
of pavement is wider than the standard ACHD -- the current ACHD standard. ACHD
looked at the project, looked back at the original approvals and stated that this was
approved with a rural street section with two travel lanes and I want to point out and,
quote, paved shoulders for pedestrians. In other words, the wider street section was
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 15 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 12 of 77
intended to help accommodate pedestrians and critically A CHD determined that no
improvements are required in connection with this project. I also think it's important to
look at this by the numbers. These are the numbers that are based on ACHD's trip
generation figures. So, Three Corners lots -- or, excuse me, Three Corners Ranch with
its 45 lots would send 128 vehicle trips per day through Dunwoody, because
approximately 30 percent of that total traffic generation goes west. Dunwoody itself with
16 lots generates 151 vehicles per day. That in total is 14 percent of the capacity of a
local street under the current ACHD standards. Now, we heard the -- the Dunwoody
neighbors' concerns. As Stephanie mentioned we did meet with them last week to talk
about it. Went out site. Marcel Lopez and I met with a group. You know, we -- if the
Dunwoody neighbors would like to see sidewalks, then, we have offered to work with
them on a task force to try to identify federal, local, state funds that might be available for
that type of an improvement. But to be clear, there is no rough proportionality, no
substantial nexus between this project and the need for off -site improvements and that
was the conclusion that ACHD arrived at with regard to the streets. So , just to summarize.
These are the items that we would ask the Council to -- to look at in particular with regard
to a motion. Again, a waiver on the -- to allow the irrigation easements, rather than putting
them in a common lot. To delete the condition with regard to the north-south connection
and to modify conditions A-3-E and 4-A dealing with the attached sidewalk on Guinness.
And with that I would be happy to answer any questions that the Council might have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any question?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. Clark, appreciate you being here tonight. Speaking on your first bullet here,
Condition A-3-A, how does the developer intend to educate the buyers about this impact
to their lots?
Clark: Madam Mayor, Council Member Cavener, so irrigation easements are -- are fairly
standard within -- within plats, so they would show up on the plat. But I understand your
-- your point about that. Most people don't look at the plat. In addition to that, we would
-- I would suggest that those would be identified in the CC&Rs and that there would be a
provision referencing those irrigation easements to help make sure that there is a belt
and suspenders approach to that.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: A question for staff. Stephanie or Bill, we have had a couple of these requests
come through in the past few weeks. I can't recall -- it's been a long week for me, so my
-- my apologies. What -- what has Council recommended for those other two? I feel like
we have had two projects in the past three or four weeks that have had something similar
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 16 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 13 of 77
and I hear what Hethe's saying, but I feel like that we have required more. I just want to
make sure that if that's the direction we go that we are consistent. I apologize.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, we recently were in front of you
with the same applicant for the East Ridge Subdivision and they had a slope easement
and they had an irrigation easement and you were informed that the irrigation district
wanted their easement protected, of course, and, then, the applicant was here testifying
that it would be in their CC&Rs and through that they would restrict sheds and
landscaping, trees and those things being part of that. So, that's -- that was one outcome
as part of that project.
Cavener: Thank you, Bill.
Milam: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Milam.
Milam: I seem to recall something else more as well in marketing, make it known to -- for
the real estate agents letting potential buyers know, because we just had this discussion
about how most people don't read the entire CC&Rs either. So, having -- having that in
there -- I'm guilty, so -- and, then, you try to do something and you find out you can't or
you get in trouble, because you have put something within the easement area. So, I think
it's important to really make sure that people find another way to let people know ahead
of time, other than putting it in the CC&Rs, because generally when they are given those
they are at closing with a pile this high of papers to sign and the agent is doing this.
Nobody sits there and reads the CC&Rs unless they get them ahead of time.
Clark: Unless you're a real estate lawyer with a bad habit, but yeah.
Milam: Huh?
Clark: Unless you're a real estate lawyer with a bad habit of reading that stuff.
Milam: And you don't care how long the closing takes you.
Clark: No. Council Woman Milam, your point's well taken. One other point that I would
make, though, is that these are significantly large lots. So, to suggest --
Milam: Right.
Clark: -- that folks are likely to do things within the last 20 feet of those lots I think is fairly
unlikely.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 17 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 14 of 77
Cavener: One more as respect to A-3-D. You have a slide that showed those
connections. One more. Madam Mayor, Hethe, where was the -- where is the gate
proposed on Three Corners Drive? I know there is one here for Dunwoody, but isn't there
another one that's proposed with the close out of Shandee?
Clark: Madam Mayor, Council Member Cavener, so that -- you're getting right to the rub
of this -- of this condition. So, currently there are two gates that are proposed. There is
one at Dunaway Court and there is one at Barclay. So, at the -- at the Planning and
Zoning hearing there was a discussion about should we connect these two streets,
Shandee and Stafford, and the recommendation was no, which is what ACHD also
approved. And, then, there was another question, which was based largely on the block
face and this -- this kind of illustrates it. So, if Guinness is connected all this direction --
all this length, then, you would potentially have to have a north-south street to break it --
break that up. So, that's where it initially came from. It became a question of conductivity.
So, the conductivity -- if it were to go in, then, that north-south gate would basically be
here at Shandee. It would be aligned there and it would only be installed once the
connection to -- to Chinden goes away and so that's why we have shown this as, okay, if
-- if the connection to Chinden goes away it's emergency bollards only and folks are not
going to be heading to Chinden anymore. The only thing that they are going to be doing
is heading out to Locust Grove. They are going to be going through this route, up through
the Ambrose School and, then, coming out at Locust Grove where it's probably backed
up during the a.m. peak.
Bongiorno: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. -- Chief Bongiorno.
Bongiorno: Bongiorno.
De Weerd: Mr. Bongiorno. I love saying that name.
Bongiorno: So, I also have a question. As it stands right now, the entrance to Three
Corners Drive is over what the fire code allows for access. If Chinden gets shut off, have
you verified that the alignment will allow for bollards and a fire engine to make that climb?
Because I have been in contact with the people down to the east a little farther and it's
pretty steep, because they are actually changing the grade of Chinden. So, my concern
-- I support the north-south connection that staff has recommended until it can be shown
to me that my fire engine can get from Chinden Boulevard to -- up Shandee -- Shandee
to make that climb. Because as it stands right now, once that's shut off we are going to
be well over 30 houses, which is what the fire code calls for. So, as -- as it stands I agree
with staff, we need another connection, because we don't have the two points of access
that we should have.
Clark: Madam Mayor, Chief Bongiorno, I would make two points. First, we spoke with
ITD earlier this week on the 20th -- or, excuse me, of last week. They confirmed that they
would be putting in bollards at that point. So , that means that there would be two points
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 18 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 15 of 77
of connection. They would be coming off of Chinden and they would be able to come
through the bollards and, then, they would be able to come through the -- the -- the
connection from Sweet Valley.
Bongiorno: Okay.
Clark: So, there would be two alternatives at that point.
Bongiorno: Well, I would want to make sure that that grade -- I would want to see what
the grade is, because fire engines can only make a certain amount of grade.
Clark: Yeah. Madam Mayor, Chief Bongiorno, one thing that Mr. Conger just reminded
me is that this pathway here over between Stafford and Shandee can be built to
accommodate emergency services as well, so that would provide another option.
Bongiorno: That would be it, too.
Clark: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Any further questions for the applicant at this point?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Forgive me if you did answer this. I got distracted for a second re-reading the
conditions, but does your traffic study contemplate an exit to the south into Vienna
Woods?
Clark: Madam Mayor, Council Member Palmer, so this project has been through a
number of iterations and one of the ways it started was with kind of a ring road that went
all around the subdivision and basically connecting everything up and what folks were
concerned about and what we were concerned about was that the more connections that
you had the more likelihood of it becoming a de facto collector cut through would occur.
So, we did look at every one of the connections, including Vienna Woods. Based on our
analysis, the majority of the traffic is going to go west to Locust Grove or it's going to go
east to Eagle and when we do not see a benefit of -- or a significant benefit of going
through Vienna Woods and ACHD agreed with -- with that cut off. So, the -- the proposal
that's before you is just the two, the connection at Dunwoody and the connection at
Barclay.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Clark: Thank you.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, before we have the members --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 19 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 16 of 77
De Weerd: Bill.
Parsons: -- of the public come up, I would -- I would like to at least clarify for the record
staff's position for some of the roadway connections, because it wasn't stated accurately
by the applicant. So, first of all, we require the north-south segment of the public street
roadway for the fact that we wanted neighbors that lived in the subdivision to be able to
take their kids to school on a local street and not having to go out to Locust Grove. That
was the -- the importance of the street connection. Not to break up the block length. That
was one issue. But the other was to have vehicular connectivity to that school. We don't
want people going out on arterial roadways to go to school when it's right there, the
shortest route is to take a local street and get there. The other issue is -- that we are
having is if Shandee is closed off in the future, it's a fire department concern, but it's also
a concern for staff, because now that entrance from Locust Grove through Three Corners
all the way into Shandee is a dead end cul-de-sac and our -- our UDC standards don't
allow cul-de-sacs over 450 feet. So, by -- by approving this -- or by the recommendation
that came from Planning and Zoning Commission, we are basically de facto approving a
cul-de-sac that's thousands of feet long, which isn't supported by the UDC and that's why
staff's position was to extend the public street over into the project in the Bristol Heights
Subdivision. That's why we recommend -- that's why staff recommended that so hardily
-- why we push so hard for that connection. We realize -- we agree with the applicant.
This is an unusual circumstance when you have six stub streets to a property, but this is
kind of when you have low density meets six stub streets it doesn't always work and that's
why we are trying to compromise, we are trying to work -- we understand the hurdles, the
issues, we are -- we have to look at the long term public interest and in our minds
connectivity -- more connectivity is always better for us, because at some point the
neighbors are going to get upset with having to get on Chinden and Locust Grove and
Eagle Road to get to their neighbors on the other side of Locust Grove, because there is
no -- there is no connectivity and that's why we are pushing for that, just -- just our two
cents on it. The other issue is the sidewalk waiver. There is nothing in code for you to
waive a sidewalk. Our code requires sidewalks on public -- both sides of public streets.
These lots have double -- are double fronted and our code prohibits that and so our
recommendation is to have the sidewalk on the south side of that street coming out of the
Three Corners Subdivision, along with a ten foot common lot with landscaping, so we
don't create that situation and we have to stand firm on that recommendation for you this
evening. Now, looking back at the waiver, I appreciate the exhibit that the applicant put
together. That at least helps us understand what their desire is for this evening. I think
where the Karnes Lateral runs along the north boundary of those lots, certainly this
Council can place a restriction that fencing beyond the interior edge of the easement ,
rather than the exterior edge and that way the entire easement is located along the road
and the Karnes Lateral folks can have access to that easement. Where it turns and heads
south along the billable lots, that's something where the applicant is going to have to work
with the future homeowners and determine what they can with that portion. But just
throwing out some ideas and just clarifying the record for you as why we were pushing
for the north-south connection and more east-west connection to this development.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 20 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 17 of 77
Clark: Madam Mayor, if I could. And, Bill, I certainly did not want to misstate staff's
position. With regard to the -- walking to the school concept, the only school on this block
is Ambrose School. It's largely a regional school. Most people are going to be driving
from outside. But if they are coming from Stafford over here, I would hope they would
walk. I think that would be a better -- a better outcome. With regard to the dead ends,
again, we have -- have -- we think we have more than mitigated for that with allowing for
emergency access across this pathway and, in addition, confirming with ITD that there
would be bollards and emergency access at the end of Shandee. With regard to the
sidewalk, we are asking for a waiver of standards and we would ask you to consider that
in connection with your motion and with regard to the irrigation, again, these are -- these
are significant lots, so there is plenty of room to accommodate those, so --
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: One more that popped up. Just because -- I don't think I have ever seen this.
This -- the things that we heard from staff about the applicant required to modify the
proposed plat per the recommended -- recommended changes and they did do so.
What's going on? Where is the hiccup in this?
Clark: Yeah. Madam Mayor, Council Member Cavener, so we got -- we didn't get the
staff report ten days ago, so this is something that we wanted -- and we wanted to discuss
the north-south connection with you and then -- and, then, go to the drafting of that once
we know the Council's position on it. So, that's certainly -- certainly something that we
can provide to the Council to confirm that we have satisfied what your requirements are.
De Weerd: Okay. Anything further from Council? Thank you.
Clark: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. This starts the public testimony part of this hearing. Mr. Clerk, will you,
please, let us know who signed up to testify.
Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. There are 25 unique sign-ins for this. Twelve
indicating they wish to testify. On your desktop you have a link, you can see the names
of the people that have signed in and their position. But the first person indicating they
wish to testify is Jeff Wilding.
De Weerd: Good evening thank you for joining us if you will, please, state your name and
address for the record.
Wilding: Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council. My name is Jeff Wilding and I reside
at 1842 East Dunwoody Court. Okay. When I purchased my home on Dunwoody Court
about six months ago, one of the key factors in our decision was the country look and the
country feel of our neighborhood and that quiet cul-de-sac. In looking at the undeveloped
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 21 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 18 of 77
property behind my new home, I recognize that one day that would likely be developed.
So, I drove through the neighborhoods and surrounding vacant area and found several
stub streets that have been referenced already this evening and they have even been
marked future extension into that undeveloped property. I, then, learned that the access
road leading to the undeveloped area from Dunwoody was actually a private lane used
for access to the land that was being farmed and to the Dean's home. I felt quite
comfortable at that time that we wouldn't have more traffic coming through Dunwoody
Court. I would like to make just a couple of points and, then, illustrate with a few -- few
pictures. The ACHD in their approval has not taken advantage of multiple stub streets
that were left open and -- and designated for expansion into the proposed development
area. These stub streets should be utilized to lessen the impact of all. I also wanted to
point out that as Council stated earlier, that there are paved shoulders on Dunwoody
Court and there are not. I attended the ACHD meeting where the developer's plan was
approved. I was very disappointed to observe Commissioner Goldthorpe sit seemingly
disinterested or maybe even asleep and at the end of testimony made a motion to accept
the developer's plan as presented, even though it had only been a plan for less than 24
hours and had not been reviewed by any residents. Although Commission President
Arnold was highly opposed to the plan with safety concerns, the motion was seconded
and approved. This is irresponsible government at best. I e-mailed Commissioner
Goldthorpe expressing my displeasure and asked him several questions. I suggested in
my e-mail that he wouldn't have the courage to e -mail me back and I was wrong. He e-
mailed me and said thanks for attending the meeting. To my knowledge there has been
no independent traffic study conducted to prove the developer's theory that there will be
no north-south traffic out of Three Corners Ranch. We only get their side of the story and
that seems to change quite frequently as you have experienced tonight. This new
neighborhood should have as many access points as possible. In the last Meridian
Planning and Zoning Committee meeting city staff recommended -- and I quote from the
minutes: That all the stub streets should be extended and connected per the original site
plan, including Sweet Valley Drive. Close quote. And they should be gated to eliminate
cross-cut traffic. To make Dunwoody safe would require hundreds of thousands of dollars
in improvements. It would cost less to extend stub streets and install gates, rather than
to put in sidewalks and drainage for an area nearly a half a mile of Dunwoody Court.
Putting the stub streets in would reduce the number of homes the developer could build,
so that's why they don't want to do it. They are more concerned about their profit than
they are about the safety. I do have just very quickly just some pictures. I don't know if
you guys have access to those. Can we get those pulled up?
Johnson: They are in front of you.
Wilding: Oh. Okay. Thank you.
Johnson: You should be able to right click.
Wilding: So, thank you. So, this -- I will promise I will be really fast. This is on Dvorak
Street. This is in Vienna Woods neighborhood. You can see here that there are -- there
is plenty of room to come in through that --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 22 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 19 of 77
De Weerd: If you will just identify the pictures and quickly go through them.
Wilding: Okay. All right. Thank you. So, this -- this picture is of Dvorak Street. It's in the
Vienna Woods neighborhood. It's wide. It has sidewalks. It has lighting. This -- boy,
that's a sensitive mouse. Sorry. This picture is on Sweet -- North Sweet Valley Road or
Avenue and it has the sign still there today. It says it will be used for future extension.
And I did see that in the plan --
De Weerd: Okay. The next picture, otherwise, I will have to ask you to --
Wilding: All right. Next picture is Shandee. Direct access. This is a picture of Dunwoody.
Court even with cars parked on -- on two sides of that street --
De Weerd: No narrative, just pictures, please.
Wilding: Okay. There is a picture of Dunwoody Court and this is a picture of the access
that would be coming into Dunwoody Court. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir.
Wilding: Sorry for taking too much time.
De Weerd: Council, any questions? Thank you.
Bernt: I have one.
De Weerd: Oh. Mr. Wilding, there is one question.
Bernt: Madam Mayor. Where is the Sweet Drive? Where is that located? This --
Wilding: That's coming out of Three -- Three Corners Ranch over by Ambrose School as
you wind through, that's the one that actually stubs into the proposed new development.
Bernt: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Wilding: Thank you.
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Joe LaGue.
De Weerd: Good evening. Thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name
and address for the record.
LaGue: Happy to. I'm Joe LaGue. I live at 14435 West Guinness Drive in Boise. Mayor
de Weerd, Council Members and all present, thank you for the opportunity to speak to
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 23 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 20 of 77
you here tonight. I am president -- president of and representing the Bristol Heights
Neighborhood Association. Also in attendance --
De Weerd: Excuse me.
LaGue: Yes.
De Weerd: You want to give him ten minutes.
Cavener: Representing --
De Weerd: As president of the HOA, yes. Thank you, sir.
LaGue: You bet. Also in attendance is one of our three association directors, Mr. Ted
Dawson. Director Scott Phillips was unable to attend. As a board we believe that we
have significant responsibility and we are committed to protecting the best interests of our
community, our association, our neighborhood's appeal and the broad interests of our
members. Accordingly, also present from Bristol Heights and most importantly is a
representation of our residents here tonight. I will also be offering my full testimony in
writing, so they may be made part of the public -- written public record. At the conclusion
of my testimony I will acknowledge those Bristol Heights residents present and ask for a
show of hands of those supporting the position and remarks I am presenting. I would like
to once again recognize extraordinary work of the City of Meridian, the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the city's planning staff for their administrative -- administrative
precision and thoughtful analysis applied as a matter of routine. Madam Mayor, we are
very appreciative of the leadership and exceptional dedication that you have brought to
the city for so many years. It's been quite an era. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
LaGue: We realize that the work you do will often present challenges in the pursuit of
building a great city. Tonight's proceedings, while they may show signs of passion,
concern, even differing views, we are here once again to address business among many
stakeholders in Three Corners Ranch. Accordingly, it is desirable that we collectively
experience a productive evening of deliberation and reasonable outcome. It was evident
from the sign-in sheet at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on May 16, given
the results captured in the staff report, that there was confusion as to the position that the
attendees came to represent. Were they in favor of the applicant's proposal? Were they
opposed? Or were they in favor or opposed to planning staff's recommendations? I can
assure you that the accuracy of those recorded statistics are suspect. The minute s
suggest that the majority favored the applicant's proposal and opposed staff's
recommendation. What is curiously atypical in this case is that rather than being residents
versus developer at this hearing, is that this constituency now needs to persuade -- or a
portion of this constituency needs to persuade the City of Meridian that those that live
here have the knowledge, experience and vested interest, desire to see the developer's
plan approved. This is what you at the city level want us to do , make a good faith effort
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 24 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 21 of 77
to work it out first at the ideal level, among the existing residents and developer. We have
tried to do exactly that. For all surrounding neighborhoods and residents , the city and
others, there is no perfect solution for this in-fill development. But to summarize the
various stakeholder neighborhoods and the sch ool's position, I offer my observations.
Three Corners to the northwest will accept a public street connection to West Guinness
Street to Sweet Valley to enable ingress-egress for the Wilson Ranchettes. Shandee to
Locust Grove via East Three Corners Drive. Three Corners is opposed to connectivity
that will enable cut through traffic from arterials and collectors. The Ambrose School to
the northwest is very concerned about the traffic that public connectivity will enable from
Eagle Road to Locust Grove particularly in light of the school's future expansion plans to
the north across East Three Corners Drive. A large volume of continuous student
pedestrian traffic and safety being the key. The residents of Wilson Ranchettes on
Shandee to the north, recognizing their quiet neighborhood, will at some point lose routine
access to Chinden. They simply want to have reasonable avenue to come and go without
the impact of unnecessary transient cross-traffic from the arterials, Eagle and Locust
Grove. Vienna Woods to the south. At the moment Vienna Woods is very content to be
flying under the radar in what appears to be likely -- to be a likely outcome that Dvorak
stub and East Handel Street remain closed to connection to Three Corners Ranch.
Vienna Woods is the one community to emerge with the least adverse impact. Dunwoody
to the west, the most vocal opposition to the Three Corners Ranch is being voiced by the
Dunwoody neighborhood. I believe I can speak for all , inasmuch as we have great
respect for the well being and safety needs of all surrounding residents , Three Corners
Ranch and the impact it could bring. There is some element of inconvenience and even
some element of burden that everyone will endure along with the benefits of developing
Three Corners Ranch. What is key is that the impact be reasonably distributed and
equitable to and for all. The Dunwoody Subdivision had signed up for this eventuality
about 20 years ago. I will elaborate. What follows is an excerpt from the amended
declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions and easements for Dunwoody
Subdivision as recorded April 22nd of 1999. Article Two of the declaration states in part:
By accepting a deed to a lot within Dunwoody Subdivision each owner shall conclusively
-- shall be conclusively deemed to have waived any objection to the exclusion of said Lot
16 of Block 1, that's Three Corners Ranch and consents to the resubdividing and
development thereof in accordance with the zoning ordinance then in enforce and effect
and applicable to Lot 16, Block 1, including such resubdividing and/or development as
shall require that access to Lot 16 of Block 1 will be provided by the public rights of way
within Dunwoody Subdivisions. That's East Dunwoody Court. When purchasers take title
-- purchasers take title to lots of within recorded -- with recorded deed restrictions, such
as the noted declaration, they are acknowledging and agreeing to be mutually and
contractually bound by the content and scope of the declaration. Accordingly, there is no
disputing the fact that each owner within Dunwoody Subdivision agreed in writing upon
taking title to their lots that East Dunwoody Court, the public street, that at some event in
the future be called upon to provide access to the 31 acre parcel known as Lot 16, Block
1. Said parcel is now intended to be resubdivided as Three Corners Ranch. Finally, we
have Bristol Heights to the east. That would be my tribe. At 544 residences Bristol
Heights Subdivision is the single largest and most populated in the entire square block.
At present we are enduring progress and development efforts on three of four-plex
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 25 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 22 of 77
apartments and storage units to the south , Chinden expansion and right of way
acquisition of our common area to the north and Three Corners Ranch to the west. If ITD
was to begin the inevitable expansion of Eagle Road, Highway 55, to our east flank, well,
we would be complete. In an effort to make efficient use of your time , Bristol Heights
brings you organized representation tonight. On May 13 the Bristol Heights
Neighborhood Association convened a special meeting of its members and adopted a
resolution. I have already made that resolution part of the public record by written
testimony regarding this application. As noted before, my remarks effectively represent
the mandate of 98 percent of the homeowners of 544 homes within Bristol Heights. That's
533 to be precise. In support of the applicant's plan there is a level of compromise on
behalf of Bristol Heights to accept West Barclay Street being stub connected to the gated
east entrance of Three Corners Ranch. This will add some traffic to our community, yet
that is considered to be reasonable and acceptable. Active members of Bristol Heights
Neighborhood Association and other surrounding neighborhoods have worked to pursue
an acceptable street configuration with the developer. It is believed that this has been
achieved by exemplary neighborhood -developer cooperation. The public connection to
North Stafford Place, a condition that was prudently and appropriately struck by the
Planning and Zoning Commission, would have been inequitable and fiercely opposed by
Bristol Heights. As I informed the commission of my testimony last month, Bristol Heights
has invested several hundred hours of members' time related to Three Quarters Ranch
development. Additionally, the financial expense to secure consensus contains a comma,
this is an important investment in our community's future and we are anticipating a
favorable return on that investment. As a Marine I was trained to always returned a piece
of gear in as good or better condition than it was issued. When I complete my service to
Bristol Heights Neighborhood Association it is my objective to return the community to my
replacement in as good or better condition than delivered to me. There is a group behind
me that seems insistent on that. I will now ask for my friends and neighbors and others
to stand or raise their hands in a show of support from my remarks and our position.
Thanks very much. Council Members, we ask you to, please, move to approve the Three
Corners Ranch application as proposed by Sweetland Development and finalize a
reasonable development agreement. We believe that they have got it right. Thank you.
I will gladly answer any questions from the Council.
De Weerd: Thank you for your testimony. Council, any questions?
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: No questions, but a comment. That was -- that was great, I mean as far as like,
you know, the organization and your presentation in regards like your -- your -- your
acknowledgement with, you know, those who are opposed or approve your -- your
statement, that was probably the most organized HOA representation I have heard since
I have been at Council for a year and a half.
LaGue: Madam Mayor, Council Member Bernt, thank you much.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 26 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 23 of 77
Bernt: Well done. I'm not saying -- I'm not saying I agree or disagree, I'm just saying the
presentation was on point, sir.
LaGue: There is -- there was one point that was brought up by the deputy chief earlier
tonight and it's worth making a comment on. We have two bollards -- we have bollards
that allow access to the north of Stafford Place right now and when Chinden is blown up
and put back together again there will be an opening in the sound wall for the emergency
egress and ingress for that -- for the fire engines to be able to get through and it works
well, it will work well, it should be something that can easily be replicated over on
Shandee. There will not be a sound wall over on Shandee, because it doesn't meet the
requirements for that. I don't know if they plan to do berms or whatever, but with respect
to the grade, understandably, yes, that you would be able to get in and out of that. It
would far be our preferences Bristol Heights Homeowners Association that long before
we talk about connecting emergency egress and bollards through Stafford Place to
connect all the way through to Guinness and Shandee, that we exhaustively look at the
option with ITD for an emergency access to the north from Chinden. That allows Meridian
Fire apparatus to come through Meridian to get into Meridian to service Meridian, as
opposed to having to go through Boise to our development. Not that it's a big territorial
issue, but it's just you get the picture that way. So, that, too. Bollards can come out pretty
quick. These guys are good at it. Any other questions?
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any further questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: It's customary I always -- somebody who serves on an HOA board, there is a
special place in heaven for people who serve on HOA boards. Appreciate you being here
tonight.
LaGue: Thank you.
De Weerd: I think there are some that think otherwise, which I have served on one, which
is how I can say that.
LaGue: Madam Mayor and Council Member Milam, with respect to CC&Rs, if your people
have to read those or not read them at their own peril, it's just unfortunate that they do it
the way they do in title -- title closings. I agree with you. It's terrible. Again, thank you
very much.
De Weerd: Thank you so much.
LaGue: Thank you so much.
De Weerd: Okay.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 27 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 24 of 77
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Benjamin Tippets.
De Weerd: We appreciate your enthusiastic applause, but I would ask that you hold that
back, please. Not that I don't mind, but -- thank you for joining us. If you will, please,
state your name and address for the record.
Tippets: My name is Benjamin Tippets. 1938 Eastern Dunwoody Court.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Tippets: Madam Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Benjamin Tippets and
I have -- I -- our neighborhood has requested that I represent our neighborhood , so I
would request that I have ten minutes to present today. Now, I am --
De Weerd: And you are with -- with what --
Tippets: Dunwoody Court -- Dunwoody Subdivision. I apologize.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Tippets: Okay. So, I have the unique opportunity or task to represent two different
interests this evening and I'm going to wear two different hats and I will tell you when my
hat -- one hat is taken off and the other hat is --
De Weerd: That doesn't mean you get ten minutes for each hat.
Tippets: No. No. No. No.
De Weerd: Okay.
Tippets: I would rather stab myself than do that. So, Madam Mayor and Members of the
City Council, the first hat I'm going to put on tonight is a member of the Karnes Lateral
board. So, my name is Benjamin Tippets. I'm a member of the Karnes Lateral Board. I
would like to give a brief statement regarding the status of the irrigation that supplies both
the proposed Three Corners Ranch, as well as other surrounding neighborhoods. The
Karnes Lateral board had received an engineering -- an engineer drawing from the Civil
Site Works for the Dean property, project number 17013, dated 12/19/2018. This plan
was reviewed by the Karnes Lateral board and was approved in February of 2019. A
licensing agreement was provided with -- with Mr. Dean regarding this plan. At the
Meridian City Planning and Zoning meetings concerns were expressed regarding the
irrigation and the conditions of approval of the proposed development plan, including a
meeting between the developer and Mr. Mark Miller, who was a resident Dunwoody Court.
I was not in attendance at that meeting. It did happen between Mr. Miller and the
developer's representative. But through a private conversation with both Mr. Miller and
Mr. David Dean I can confirm several statements that were made. These would include
that the location of the piped ditch had been moved from the original plan -- and I have
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 28 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 25 of 77
the original plan in front of me if you would like to look at it. That the points of diversion
or the irrigation boxes along the ditch would not be connected to the existing individual
irrigation systems. That the individual water right owners will be responsible for making
the connection between the irrigation box and the existing irrigation system and that
because the development would be on private -- on private property that each water right
user would not have full access to the privacy gates to their irrigation boxes. Due to these
concerns a conversation was initiated between Mr. Jim Rosett i, who was a ditch rider for
Karnes Lateral board and the developer's representative. The proposed solution to these
concerns included -- and this was written in an e-mail and I just want to list these, so we
make sure that we all have them all. Number one, solid lids on all boxes. Number two,
has to allow locks on boxes where Mr. Miller gives Mr. Tippets and Shandee will be able
to access water boxes of 1-9, 1-8, and 1-7, respectively on -- on current approved plans
and I would like to add to avoid a little bit of confusion , that I suspect he meant box five,
six and seven, because there is not a box eight or nine on the proposed plan. Number
three, leave the pipe in the lateral -- in the lateral in its current location along the north
boundary of Mr. Miller's property. Number four, a 15 foot easement can be located on the
north side of the property where it's adjacent to Mr. Miller's property. Number five, they
would provide a two inch knockout on box number 1-9, which is actually box number 1-7,
to allow Mr. Miller to connect and access the water and I will have to give a follow -up
regarding stubbing of pipes to the current location where he draws water is it's difficult to
tell how deep his current pipe runs. The next, Miller -- Mr. Miller would be allowed to draw
water from the new box with a sump pump and number next , connecting a 12 inch
irrigation pipe to box number 1-8, which is actually box number 1-6, for the Tippets
irrigation water shown on the current approved plan. The water board has -- had agreed
that these standards rectify the concerns previously raised. One issue that we were not
sure how to handle and that has been brought up, that a portion of the ditch as it currently
lies is going to be within the boundaries of Mr. Dean's property and a portion that -- within
the boundaries of Mr. Miller's property. We have a licensing agreement with Mr. Dean,
but not with Mr. Miller. Currently as we receive counsel regarding this issue we will follow
the Idaho water law and with due respect. Are there any questions regarding the Karnes
Lateral board?
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Okay. Just give me the bullet points now, boom, boom, boom, what you just said.
Tippets: There is an approved plan --
Bernt: I heard a bunch of jargon that were --
Tippets: I need to stick to the facts.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 29 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 26 of 77
Bernt: Just -- just talk to me like I don't have a clue what you're talking about. Talk to me
like that.
Tippets: Actually, no one does when it comes to water.
Bernt: Perfect.
Tippets: There was an approved plan and the meeting between Mr. Miller and the
developer's representative. There were several statements that were concerning.
Bernt: Madam Mayor. Who was Mr. Miller?
Tippets: Mr. Miller lives at 1906 East Dunwoody Court.
De Weerd: So, a resident of the subdivision --
Tippets: Resident of the subdivision. Correct.
De Weerd: -- you represent.
Tippets: Right.
Bernt: Okay.
Tippets: Right. So, there was an approved plan. There was a meeting between Mr. Miller
and the developer's representative. There was some concerns about the statements that
were made that would be a violation of Idaho water law. Those concerns were rectified
by the developer's representative as far as we know. We do not have a presented
updated plan for approval yet that we will review and approve if deemed appropriate.
De Weerd: So, you need an updated plan?
Tippets: We would like an updated plan in writing that we can review and accept it.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. Tippets, you indicated you have a copy of the previous approved plan?
Tippets: Councilor Cavener --
Cavener: Luke is fine.
Tippets: Luke is fine. Okay. Luke, I do have a plan if you would like to look at it.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 30 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 27 of 77
Cavener: If we can put it on the screen so everyone can see it. Again, for a -- sorry.
Madam Mayor. If you want to hand it to our clerk, so we can all see it. Madam Mayor,
while Chris is doing that, is it possible to pull up on the screen the current proposed
easement on there so we can see that as well? I know we can't go picture in picture,
but --
De Weerd: This is what you were asking for?
Cavener: Yes. But this is -- this is what's proposed, but has not been submitted to you
guys.
Tippets: We have not seen an updated plan yet. Yes, that's correct.
De Weerd: And what they are going to show us is the previously approved plan?
Tippets: This is the previously approved plan that was approved in February of 2019.
De Weerd: And your -- your -- this approved plan is not what is being suggested or
proposed?
Tippets: The approved plan in 2000 -- in February of 2019 was in contrary to the
statements that were made by the developer's representative at the meeting with Mr.
Miller and the developer's representative has indicated that they are willing to follow the
approved plan as it has been presented and they will provide some updates that we can
review at the Karnes Lateral board to ensure that it is following water law.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. So, please, continue.
Tippets: Luke, do you have questions regarding this plan?
De Weerd: Do you still have continued questions?
Cavener: No. Madam Mayor, Chris just put up the -- the approved plan and so I'm -- I'm
just trying to be able to wrap my eyes around it.
Tippets: I have some reading glasses if you would like, because the writing is very small.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Tippets: I may have to use them also.
Johnson: Madam Mayor, I can copy this if you would like.
Cavener: We don't need to have everybody hold up because of me. So, let's just -- if
you want to continue and, then, the clerk can make us some copies.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 31 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 28 of 77
De Weerd: Go ahead and continue.
Tippets: Are there any other questions regarding the Karnes Lateral board and irrigation?
Okay. I now take off my Karnes Lateral --
Bernt: Just a comment just to make sure that before you go forward that -- that -- that
you and the developer are going to be in line in regard to what the new proposal is versus
what was -- what was approved in February of 2019.
Tippets: That is correct.
De Weerd: We will ask the representative to comment on that at the end.
Tippets: Thank you. I now remove my Karnes Lateral hat and I'm going to put on my
concerned citizen. So, my name is Benjamin Tippets. I'm a resident of Dunwoody
Subdivision and I stand before you today to express my concern of the design of Three
Quarters Ranch Subdivision as it is currently proposed. I am not opposed to the internal
design of the proposed subdivision. In fact, I believe that the design of the subdivision
will be consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods and will be a great addition to this
area of Meridian. I am opposed to the proposed access points to the subdivision. This
opposition is based on public safety. As a physician and as an expert in public health , the
proposed design compromises the safety of the residen ts of Three Corners Ranch, as
well as the residents of Dunwoody Subdivision. There are six access points to Three
Corners Ranch, four of those which include the Dvorak, Barclay, Stafford Place and North
Sweet Valley Avenue, meet the design and safety standards required for a medium
density zoned neighborhood as outlined in the City of Meridian Public Works Design
Standards 2016. The two remaining streets, Shandee and Dunwoody Court, do not meet
the standards. The United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Safety
Administration has stated this, quote: Accessible sidewalks or pathway should be
provided and maintained along both sides of the streets and highways in urban areas ,
particularly near school zones and transit locations and where there is frequent pedestrian
traffic. Research -- or end quote. Research has shown that approximately 4,500
pedestrians are killed every year in the United States from crashes with motor vehicles.
That is death only. But these numbers do not include temporary or permanent injury or
disability as a result of an auto-pedestrian accident. Research has shown that providing
walkways separated from the travel lanes prevents 88 percent of the walking along
roadway crashes. The Dunwoody Court has been proposed to be the primary access
point to Three Quarters Ranch, along with Barclay. This will increase vehicular traffic by
up to four to five hundred vehicle trips per day. With the current proposed Dunwoody
plan, Dunwoody Court would be forced to change from a rural to an urban street without
sidewalks, without lights. Dunwoody Court will no longer be a safe corridor for pedestrian
traffic. Now, this is not my -- only my professional opinion, nor the U.S. Department of
Transportation and the City of Meridian Public Works Design Standards, it's also the
opinion of the previous committees that this plan has been presented. Now, you have
been told that ACHD and the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Committees have
approved this plan with conditions. So, you are clear and understand the concerns of
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 32 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 29 of 77
these committees, I would like to provide a few, but not all, because we don't have time,
of these concerns. Commissioner Seal, quote: The report that reflected Dunwoody
doesn't need any kind of development in order to support this is a horrible idea. I don't
put a lot of faith in ACHD saying that something is not warranted. End quote.
Commissioner Olsen. Quote: I think my main thought is the safety of Dunwoody. As we
contemplate what needs to be done here this is a good subdivision. I like the density.
But I think we have to do something about Dunwoody. I don't think we in good conscience
can pass this without doing something. Commissioner Cassinelli. Quote: Dunwoody
can't handle it. It's dark. I have driven there at night in the winter and it is dark, without
curb, gutter and sidewalk and if this part of the original Dunwoody development -- and in
this part of the Dunwoody development why can't we condition the developer to improve
Dunwoody if this is going to be one of their access points . The streets of Vienna Woods
can handle it. Any street going out by Sweet Valley, those roads can handle it, but I don't
believe that Dunwoody is equipped to handle it as the road is equipped now it can't handle
it. If Dunwoody Court is used as the primary access point, it would be required to meet
the same safety standards as other access points that are currently available for the same
access. This would require -- it would require the placement of lights, sidewalks, curbs
and gutters. It's unreasonable and unrealistic to require the current homeowners of
Dunwoody Subdivision to carry the cost of these provided infrastructure improvements.
As I have listened to the proposed plan and testimony of the city of Meridian -- the citizens
of Meridian it comes down to the matter of convenience versus safety. Is it inconvenient
to have an increased amount of traffic pass through any of these neighborhoods? Of
course it is. Are their local streets that are more or less convenient to access arterial
streets? Yes. Do each of these local streets that are currently connected to the lot
previously known as Lot 16, each have the essential safety features of a safe , urban
street?
De Weerd: Mr. Tippets, you need to --
Tippets: The answer is an obvious no. So, I would -- I would encourage you to consider
safety in your decision tonight. Thank you. I would be happy to answer any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I guess maybe one. You represent your homeowners association; correct?
Tippets: I do represent the homeowners association.
Cavener: The homeowners association, is it -- is it a matter of cost that -- if -- if a
developer were to come to your neighborhood and said we will put in sidewalks if you
give us the land or is it you don't want to give up your land for sidewalks either?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 33 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 30 of 77
Tippets: That's a difficult question to answer and one that we have battled with throughout
the entire time. We believe that there are other streets that currently meet the se safety
standards and those should be considered first.
Cavener: All right.
Tippets: If -- if they decide that Dunwoody is the access point, it needs to be a safe street.
Cavener: And Madam Mayor? Is it your assessment now that the street you live on isn't
safe?
Tippets: It is safe for a rural street. When Dunwoody Court was developed it was
developed as a rural community. It's zoned as RUT and as it stands now with the limited
number of traffic we believe that it is safe. As it -- as it transitions to the traffic that is
funneled through from an R-4 zoned neighborhood, it will no longer be a safe street.
Cavener: Appreciate your input. Thank you.
De Weerd: Any further questions? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Tippets. I am going to call a
ten minute break and I will ask staff during this time if you can pull Kingsbridge Crossing
as that's connected through a county subdivision to a major arterial and I would love to
hear what we required of that subdivision -- of that developer. Okay? So, we will
reconvene in ten minutes.
(Recess: 7:37 p.m. to 7:48 p.m.)
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call this meeting back to order if we may. I know
we are very entertaining to hang out with, but if we would like to move this meeting along.
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Mona Tippets.
De Weerd: Good Evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the
record?
M.Tippets: Absolutely. Thank you. My name is Mona Tippet s and I live at 1930 East
Dunwoody Court. I just wanted to say that I am opposed to the development plan itself
as it is currently planned. I do like the density and the gates that might prevent cross-
through traffic. I do not like the design and lack of using the designated stub streets to
access the property. There are a few concerns I want to share tonight. At the Meridian
Planning and Zoning meeting Mr. Hethe Clark gave a similar presentation as he did
tonight. He referred to the Dunwoody CC&Rs and referred to the parcel of land to be
developed as Lot 16 as part of the Dunwoody Subdivision. Supporting the cause for
changing the Dean's private driveway that connects to the Dunwoody Court at the
entrance to Three Corners Ranch. He's also mentioned that night and tonight that in 2013
Mr. Dean chose to file for an exclusion from Dunwoody Subdivision and that was granted
and that, quote, all covenants and restrictions no longer apply or are binding on Lot 16.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 34 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 31 of 77
He also failed to mention that in 2014 Sweet Valley Avenue stub street was agreed in
writing to be extended in the future as his personal land was developed. This agreement
was specifically referred to in the ACHD report. The use of this street as an entrance to
the north would provide a natural connection from Three Corners Subdivision to its sister
community at Three Corners Ranch and, therefore, should be used. And it is confusing
to me, but they are not using the streets that already have the safety measures in place
when they have been planned to be used as entrance roads for Three Corners Ranch
and we as a subdivision Dunwoody, have met several times over the last nine months
with the developer expressing our concerns. We have proposed ideas and alternatives
to try to come to a win-win situation and have been ignored. There have been several
members of ACHD and Meridian Planning and Zoning committees that have voiced high
concern and disagreement with using Dunwoody Court as an entrance to Three Corners
Ranch. As a result, there were three conditions of approval of the plan from Meridian
Planning and Zoning specifically related to Dunwoody Court. The first is the developer
representatives were required to meet with the residents of Dunwoody to discuss ideas
about making Dunwoody safe for additional traffic and for the residents. On June 18 th
we did, indeed, meet with the developers. At that meeting we were told that the developer
will not financially contribute to improving the safety of Dunwoody by adding sidewalks or
other improvements. They told us they would help create a volunteer task force of our
residents to research funding options. Their contribution would be some time, although
what amount of time they would contribute they do not commit. We are concerned this is
a timely process with little -- little results, because this is a several hundred thousand
dollar improvement project that only needs to be done with the addition of this
development and in the end Dunwoody will still be left unsafe. Their condition of approval
was that the additional gate entrance on the north side -- that an additional gated entrance
was to be added to the north side to help alleviate the traffic burden of Dunwoody Court.
We told the developer -- we were told the developer disagrees with the recommendation
and the cost of changing the plan and adding a new gate was not warranted.
De Weerd: Mrs. Tippets, can you, please, summarize.
M.Tippets: Yes. The other one was to move the entrance of the gate closer to the homes
of Three Corners Ranch and they told us it, again, was a recommendation that they
disagreed with and a three point turn allowance was sufficient.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Kendra Neely with Three Corners HOA.
De Weerd: Good evening. Thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name
and address for the record.
Neely: Sure. My name is Kendra Neely. I represent the Three Corners Subdivision board
and my address is 1800 East Golden -- Golden Oak Court, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 35 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 32 of 77
Neely: So, as the applicant mentioned, what's at issue right here is just the roadway
plans. The bulk of the development has been approved by all the parties involved and,
really, the only thing that's left is what to do with the roads. There is, basically, three plans
on the table you could say. The ACHD approved plan, the P&Z plan and, then, the staff's
recommendation plan and I just thought it was important to, again, clarify who supported
each plan. ACHD, the developer, and over 93 percent of the residents support the plan
that was approved by ACHD and I -- two things I wanted to note about that percentage.
One is that in that percentage we haven't included Vienna Woods, because they were
basically unaffected by this plan, but if you would include them in that percentage would
be much higher. The other thing I wanted to note is that the neighbors in our own
subdivision who said they didn't approve the plan that was proposed or ratified by ACHD,
when we asked them why it was because they said we just don't want traffic through our
neighborhood and that's -- a lot of the people who are trying to oppose the roads or
oppose the plan, it's not that they have an alternative that's better, they just want to shut
it down and have no traffic. So, when we went back to those people and presented the
three plans that are available, a hundred percent of the time they said they wanted the
ACHD plan, even the people who originally voted against it. So , this is a really unique
situation in the sense that I have the utmost amount of respect for staff , respect for
everyone who has worked on this and I appreciate it -- everyone's efforts, but the hard
thing is to understand why when you have some -- a developer, ACHD, and over 90
percent of the stakeholders on board, why -- why is there something being recommended
that's different than that? I tried to look at the staff report to find the basis for that, because
I was initially told it was because they thought there was a mixed bag of people in support
of this plan and that's the reason why we as a neighborhood went and actually voted,
because one of the problems that I have seen in the last few meetings is the people who
are in support of this don't feel the desire to get up and talk to support what the developer
has already recommended. The other thing is the people that are in support have abided
by the recommendations to not provide duplicate testimony. So, one thing I want you to
keep in mind is for every person who opposes this statistically there is at least 14 people
who could be standing beside them saying we want the ACHD plan. Like for you -- for
your own sanity it's good that 600 people are not going to get up to repeat themselves,
but, by contrast, the people that oppose you will see a lot of them where there are several
in one household getting up and talking and sometimes I think that gives the idea that
there is more opposition than there really is. So , when we looked at the staff's report
something that struck us is we couldn't find the basis for staff's recommendations. They
-- they rely on the Meridian city -- the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, but it clearly
states that its purpose is to integrate the concerns and expressions of the community.
So, we have over 90 percent of our residents expressing their concerns and staff's
recommendations would actually fly in the face of that. There is also a quote that says
work with transportation agencies and private property owners to preserve transportation
corridors and they were using that section to support their recommendations to change
the ACHD plan. We already did that. We worked with ACHD and we worked with all the
residents to come up with a plan that everyone could -- or the vast majority of people
could buy off on and so there is another place on the staff report that says we need to
connect -- staff replaced the Sweet Valley in order to minimize the cut through route. Well,
that connection is what creates the cut through route. There are several other examples,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 36 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 33 of 77
but the point is that I would encourage you to actually look for a nexus between the
provisions that are quoted and what's being recommended. I think the true conflict at
every level has been that the developer slash ACHD slash homeowner's plan with the
roadways conflicts with this idea of connectivity and even though it meets a bunch of the
policies, you come up against this issue of connectivity and what do we do with that? But
ACHD they knew that they had a bias in favor of connectivity as well , but one thing that
we discussed in that meeting is why do you have a bias in favor connectivity? There is a
reason. And when we looked at all the reasons that they were listed to us , for example,
it increases pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, that's already achieved by the bike path.
You don't need to connect Stafford to Three Corners to achieve that. Or it reduces the
need for additional access points to the arterial street system. You don't need to connect
those two in order for that to happen. The other thing that was talked about at length at
the ACHD hearing is the very real risk associated with cut-through traffic in and of itself,
but especially in this high risk zone, because Three Corners comes out and it dissects a
campus. There is campuses that are going to be on each side. So, even now people are
using one side of the road to park and you have kids darting and parents darting across
that street. When you come out directly across from you is another campus and a church
being used as a campus. So, cut-through traffic is -- it's not just like our standard concerns
about, hey, we don't want this traffic coming through our neighborhood, there is a huge
concentration of issues at the end of that cut-through traffic. Not to mention the fact that
Chinden backs up past the Ambrose School regularly and I know we submitted that video
to you and that was during an off time that that was taken. So , I would just encourage
you in the strongest possible terms to listen to the community. I think it's virtually unheard
of to go and have a whole square mile where people came together and made their
concerns as expressions as clear as they are and I just want to encourage you to listen
to those and listen to -- and think about the intent behind the Comprehensive Plan and
the intent behind connectivity and just realize that it isn't met by connecting Stafford to
Three Corners. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions from Council? Thank you.
Neely: Thank you.
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Troy Bergstrand.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Bergstrand: Yes. My name is Troy Bergstrand. I reside at 1970 East Dunwoody Court.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bergstrand: Thank you for the opportunity to speak before you all. I would just want to
reiterate the concerns of the residents of Dunwoody Court primarily of safety and I hope
to illustrate that through a very simple example here and that is getting our kids off to
school. Currently there are 14 homes on Dunwoody Court right now that share that --
that street and our kids walk down that street to get on the bus as it joins onto Locust
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 37 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 34 of 77
Grove. Some families choose to drive their kids down to the end of the street. Some
kids' families deliver their kids all the way to the school. We have four schools that are
served for us. You got the high school. It's to the west. Middle school to the west.
Elementary school is there to the south. All of it has to go out through Locust Grove
through Dunwoody Court. Now we add in the new -- new subdivision and -- and before
and after house ratio is now wonderful. So , we have four times as many kids going to
school and twice as many parents delivering their school -- delivering their kids, four times
as many folks going to work making the traffic situations there. So, for every new kid and
every new car that's a four times four -- 16 times greater incident that there could be -- or
greater chance that there could be an incident; right? If you consider traffic coming the
opposite way that's another four times -- 64 times we are increasing the chance of an
incident. You think about families coming and parking near Locust Grove to hold onto
their kids until the bus gets there. Now we are -- we are taking this already narrow road
and we are making it even more narrow and folks are trying to get out and come -- and
possibly come back in from morning -- morning errands and that just elevates the risk all
the more. So, we just want to make clear that this is a safety concern, it's not a -- a made-
up thing. It's a very -- a very realistic thing. And it is not just a Dunwoody thing, it is also,
according to the representatives of the applicant, their expectation is that the new
subdivision families would be sending their kids down Dunwoody to -- to the same bus
stop and so it directly ties their subdivision to ours in this -- in this concern.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Johnson: Next is Mauri Lewis.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Lewis: Good evening. I'm Mauri Lewis. I reside at 2000 East Dunwoody Court. First of
all I would say that, Mayor and City Council Members, thanks for taking the time. I have
a video I would like to have Stephanie play it. A little bit of a different view than we have
already talked about. We have a -- I'm kind of a -- excuse me -- kind of a visual guy. So
go ahead. I'm just going to kind of let it play. It's sped up for time. That's why it looks
funny. She doesn't walk like that normally. Okay. I just wanted to give you another visual
of what the street's like when there is no curb, gutter or sidewalk and I personally feel in
the majority of homeowners -- and I don't feel that this is a safe conclusion, we are
opposed to the current plan for Three Corners Ranch, because of the infrastructure lack
of support. We -- we think it's important that -- that you think about this closely and
carefully, because there is a lot of people involved. There is a lot of people that it could
impact based on how it lays out for us. We knew going in there that we had a real -- a
real rare situation. Also I'm not opposed to development. I'm not opposed to any -- I'm
not opposed to this development at all. I just want it to be smart. I just want it to be smart
and I want everybody to share the burden of traffic. That's all. It's as simple as that. So,
any questions?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 38 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 35 of 77
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Help me understand something. So, I -- I live in a -- in an R-8 Corey Barton
neighborhood with hundreds of homes and the biggest driveway -- there is a few homes
that have three spots, most of them have two, mine has two and we don't have half as
many cars parked on the street as -- as Dunwoody does. What -- why are there so many
people parking on the street when all those -- every single driveway in your video was
empty?
Lewis: Thanks, Mr. -- thanks, Mr. Palmer. We -- we were just illustrating what could
happen in a day where there is a function going on in someone's home or there is a youth
group meeting or there is -- whatever -- whatever the case may be. There is no place to
park on the street except for right on the street. There is no curb, gutter, sidewalk for the
kids to move over to and walk on. It's just kind of -- it's kind of sketchy and -- and that's
just -- that's an extreme example, but there are times when people are visiting and they
will park on the street and they will park on a corner that maybe is blind as you come
through this -- as you come through and I'm just worried about that being amplified with
more traffic volume with just two accesses to the subdivision.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? So, you brought the cars out to the street for the purposes of
your video?
Lewis: Those were people that live there and representing, basically, an illustration of
what happens when there is a function at either -- at any level. This is what it looks like.
And, then, we had another video where we were just on one side of the road, but we didn't
show that.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? Just -- so it's a hundred percent clear, it wasn't just a time that
you picked to go out with your drone, it was an organized, okay, we are going to put our
cars on the street, so I can get this video, what --
Lewis: To illustrate, yes.
Palmer: -- what could happen.
Lewis: Right. The illustration of how narrow it really is when people are parked on both
sides of the road and I will say back five -- well, 15 years ago maybe, ten years ago, we
-- they chip sealed our road, we used to have a walking path lane painted and a center
line painted for traffic. If you go to Larkwood, which is our sister sub, they are still painted
with lines. We don't have that. We have to guess, okay, well, I got to get over here. It's
really kind of ambiguous compared to doing theirs the same. So, it's just another thing
that we have to deal with. If somebody comes down the road you got to get over and the
person driving that's never been in it before knows that there is two lanes, but there is
also supposed to be a walking lane on one side of the road, but it's not painted to
designate that.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 39 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 36 of 77
De Weerd: Thank you.
Lewis: That's it. Any other questions?
De Weerd: No. Thank you.
Lewis: Okay. Thanks.
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Lori Lewis.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
L.Lewis: I'm Lori Lewis and my address is 2000 East Dunwoody Court.
De Weerd: Thank you.
L.Lewis: Okay. So, Madam Mayor and City Council Members, so thank you, again, for
-- for -- for all you do, actually, for -- for Meridian. I love living here. I'm an Idahoan and
-- and I actually moved from Boise to Meridian and I love it, so -- so thank you. I know it's
a lot of work. We have heard a lot of really compelling testimony today, some really
interesting points of view and as you're determining your response to the proposal in front
of you, I would really like to urgently -- and even maybe go without saying, but urgently
ask you to be very thoughtful and really think long term, because the decision that you
make tonight is going to impact communities well beyond the life of anyone in this room
and so it needs to make sense. I would also ask that you would take into account the
material planning considerations that have been presented today. Those that affect the
community as a whole versus the individual interests of -- of certain people. The material
planning issues, things like citizen safety. I mean we have heard lots of testimony,
especially from the Dunwoody neighborhood in terms of the safety concerns that we have.
You saw the video we put together. I mean that is a really -- that's a -- well, it is -- but I
mean it's -- that was -- we are very upfront and honest about that. We -- we put that
together so we could illustrate what happens very regularly on our -- on our street. A lot.
So, it's not that we were trying to be underhanded or anything. But I mean -- I mean how
many of you have even gone down Dunwoody? Okay. All right. So, you have. So -- so,
I mean that's what we wanted to do is be able to show you the visible. Okay. Also the --
so, the fact also that we heard expert testimony from Ben Tippets, who is a doctor in the
community, as well as a master's in public safety. He went through a lot of statistics
regarding safety and, really, the -- the big concerns there. We have talked about the --
the other material planning issue around traffic generation and the inadequacy of the
infrastructure. You have seen pictures. You have seen the video. We and -- and
Shandee are the only two streets that don't have the infrastructure to support that -- that
level of extra traffic and ACHD expects that they would have 415 additional trips per day.
The applicant says that 30 percent of those will go through Dunwoody, but yet we have
yet to see any of their engineering reports that substantiate that. We know that through
Dunwoody it's a faster connect to Locust Grove. It's about -- I mean it's like less than a
mile to get to Locust Grove. So, we think it's going to be higher than 30 percent. At the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 40 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 37 of 77
end of -- at the end of the day, you know, we -- we elect our leaders in the communities
to represent us. Our families, our friends, our -- you know, moms, dads, et cetera and we
trust that you are going to make a decision based on -- to make us -- help us be safe and
secure and protect our rights, build connections and tie the community together and it
requires a well architected plan and I will tell you this plan does not make sense. It just
doesn't make sense. Okay. Sure. It doesn't -- there is a lot of loose ends and, in
conclusion, I just want to actually quote what Bill Parsons said in the -- in the Meridian
Planning and Zoning hearing. He said brilliantly I will say -- that if this is not the time to
develop this property maybe we wait and determine whether or not we extend all the stub
streets in the future and wait for a different plan.
De Weerd: Thank you.
L.Lewis: Do you have any questions for me?
De Weerd: Thank you.
L.Lewis: Okay.
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Darin Jurgensmeier.
De Weerd: Good evening. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Jurgensmeier: My name is Darin Jurgensmeier. I'm at 1778 East Dunwoody Court,
Meridian, Idaho. Mayor and commissioners, thank you for your time and for your
consideration of these applications. Just as those who have passed applications for
construction in the past, you have to look at the future and how this will affect future
developments and the residents in Meridian and I appreciate that responsibility. Those
who approved applications in the past approved stub streets to this location. There are
five stub streets and there is one private lane. Dunwoody is that private lane. Looking at
the future of how this will affect as well, we need to look at when Chinden expands as is
mentioned, Shandee will be blocked off. When Locust Grove expands, which is already
in the plans, Dunwoody Court will be blocked to a right-in, right-out. So, as the main exit
to the east, you will have a right-in right-out. So, the concern over what does it add to
give that north entrance, which allows access to the Three Corners Road is another exit
to the east. There has been a lot of discord between the Planning and Zoning decision
and the ACHD decision and those who have been based primarily on the access to this
community. After about an hour of open deliberation, the Planning and Zoning committee
came to the recommendation of that north street, which the developer disregarded and
didn't show good faith in changing the plat before you today. The ACHD had four
commissioners present. Three of them began an open discussion , which was cut short
by the fourth who brought up the vote to pass the application. Two of the other
commissioners immediately said, you know, I think we should table this, we should have
revisions and have this brought at another time , because I feel it -- it doesn't meet the
ACHD policies and the third said, you know, I think it's very difficult to develop from the
inside out. It's easier to develop when it's an outside in plan. He said I don't know that
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 41 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 38 of 77
we are going to be able to come to a good plan in this location and he voted to pass it.
The other yes vote came from a commissioner who had attended over the phone and had
not participated, but voted yes. So, I do believe that there can be a good plan for this and
I believe that we should wait until there is a good time. I don't believe that it's your
responsibility tonight to try and reconcile the disagreements is between Planning and
Zoning and the ACHD in trying to fix this plan tonight. I think it's your responsibility to just
recognize this is not a good plan and wait until there is one brought before you. Thank
you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Jurgensmeier: Questions?
De Weerd: No questions. Thank you.
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Tyler Lewis.
De Weerd: Good evening.
T.Lewis: Madam Mayor, Members of Council, my name is Tyler Lewis. I live at 6059
North Karen Drive. I actually was asked to represent our HOA. We technically don't have
an HOA in the Fuller Ranchette neighbor.
De Weerd: No. I thought how many HOAs are out there.
T.Lewis: There is a lot.
De Weerd: My goodness.
T.Lewis: We technically don't have one, just because our neighborhood was formed in
1960. So, we -- we did go around and collect signatures. We did submit that as our kind
of testimony and, then, got asked to come speak for them tonight on behalf of -- kind of
where we are at with the Fuller Ranchettes, which is the property to the north. So, I kind
of will jump into that piece. I do -- I am directly personally affected, but I will kind of talk
about the neighborhood piece first. Shandee, just like Dunwoody, is a private or a public
road. It is a rural road. There was some concern originally of being shut off to Chinden.
That is -- so, there is -- we are nice to see that there is a road put in there . When the
neighborhood came -- when we all came together to have a conversation about this , it
was put in place that we were worried about the same thing everybody else is is cut-
through traffic, especially from Chinden into this neighborhood. That was our number one
concern. Number two concern is being shut off from emergency services. Being an
emergency services person I -- we identified that quickly with ITD that there will be
bollards from Chinden. The interesting statement from ITD is its proposed that it be shut
off. Proposed being in that -- in part of a ton of COMPASS committees through my entire
career I know that proposed sometimes can mean the same thing, but I don't know if any
of you guys remember the Five Mile extension project of 55, that was a proposed project.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 42 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 39 of 77
Well, proposed can come and go. So, the shut off piece for Shandee is not, as it says
today, proposed when they go six lanes, because all of six lanes are proposed at this
point. They don't know at least the information when I was researching that I got . So,
our concern there is if we do connect the Stafford Drive to Shandee to Three Corners,
Shandee Drive will become the main access in and out of this whole deal, which, then,
brings an entire list of issues that we have just like Dunwoody where that's no curb and
gutter, sidewalk street. But when we looked at this we all kind of decided that we are
going to have to have some share in this. So, that's -- originally we liked the ACHD plan
that had just an emergency access, left our access piece there. We all realized that
everybody's going to have to own in this. There's 40 -- about 40 homes going into the
development. There is another 40 in Three Corners. There is 27 developable lots in our
neighbor -- in our small community. We quickly realized that this -- we would need to own
part of this traffic pattern. That's why we were in favor when they added the road from
Sweet Valley to Shandee, one, it gives us our access, but until -- or if that is never cut off
we will be dealing with the traffic from Three Corners going out and going to Chinden.
So, we are trying to take the burden of that piece on, as well as, then, having the
neighborhood be split 20-20, Bristol Heights into Dunwoody as well. That was kind of --
when we came together we all -- we realize that we are going to need to own a piece of
this. I don't know if my time is up or if I will have the HOA timeline here. Another three
minutes went up here. So, I don't know how you want to handle that piece, but --
De Weerd: How much more time do you need?
T.Lewis: I don't need a lot here. My biggest thing is --
De Weerd: We will give you two more minutes.
T.Lewis: Yeah. The biggest thing I guess is just the connectivity piece, that north-south,
connecting that piece that staff's recommended immediately removes the whole purpose
of having a gated community here to cut that traffic off from going from Eagle Road to --
to Locust Grove with cut-through traffic. It's still fully connected and I think the developer
showed it. It's still only -- I think two additional turns to come back through Stafford to get
to Locust Grove through the Three -- through Three Corners Ranch neighborhood. So,
we currently stand in favor of the -- the plan as approved by ACHD and the P&Z. Without
the P&Z's recommendation of that north-south addition in the neighborhood. That would
just put that much more, unless that is, obviously, cut off, then, it's not going to be a big
-- a big deal. We are just afraid that that will never happen and we wouldn't want that --
we wouldn't want that north-south built until that fully was shut off from -- from Chinden
-- Shandee were shut off from Chinden. So, we stand with that piece as P&Z made
amended to us.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
T.Lewis: Thank you.
De Weerd: Appreciate it.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 43 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 40 of 77
Johnson: Madam Mayor, next is Brian Granvall.
De Weerd: Good Evening.
Granvall: Good evening. My name is Brian Granvall. Unlike the P&Z meeting there is
no D in it and -- and I live at 1741 East Sabalious Street. I am on the board of the Vienna
Woods HOA. So, if you can change the time -- minute there. I won't go too long, though.
And I represent the homeowners of the Vienna Woods HOA, which is directly to the south
of the proposed plat and to address my -- my friend from Bristol Heights, yes, we are
trying to fly under the radar a little bit, but I do feel that we need to address our concerns
as well. One of the original designs, as Councilman Palmer brought up, was to open up
the access at Dvorak and create what, in effect, amounts to cut-through traffic from this
new subdivision to -- to and through -- actually through Vienna Woods, because there is
no destination within Vienna Woods. There is no retail. There is no frontage. There is
nothing. There is only Locust Grove to the west and McMillan to the south, which you
would have to cut through two more subdivisions. I can show you here . Do I have access
to this? Okay. So, right here is the proposed access from Three Corners Ranch to this
rectangular subdivision, which is Vienna Woods. This very convoluted traffic pattern
going to Locust Grove. This one goes into Bristol Heights and somewhere out this way,
which I never go, ends up at Eagle somewhere out here and, then, these two subdivisions
to the south are Edinburgh and Austin -- Austin Creek and those end up down here on
McMillan. Opening up this access is something that the Vienna Woods HOA is very much
opposed to for the sole purpose of the fact that the only reason to do that is to create cut -
through traffic and to create connectivity for that subdivision and it serves only one
purpose and that is to avoid traffic through Dunwoody Court or Bristol Heights. There
are, as people mentioned, many sidewalks and bike paths through our neighborhoods
that are open through this new proposed subdivision. So, there is pedestrian and bicycle
connectivity through there. One of the -- one of the things that was mentioned -- I haven't
heard it mentioned yet tonight, but one of the things that was mentioned at the P&Z
meeting was that on the Locust Grove frontage road there is no safe passage north-south
across the front of Dunwoody and as I mentioned in testimony, then, there is a 56 foot
easement by ACHD from Locust Grove back up to the properties, including sidewalks,
that as you can see here up by the Ambrose School and down here -- it's kind of hidden
by the trees, but it's -- it goes clear back to here. Through these trees here there is a very
wide sidewalk. It's -- you know, you can -- you can ride bicycles both directions on the
sidewalk north-south. So, the safety aspect of having folks walking to the Ambrose
School or walking down to the elementary school down below is mitigated by the addition
of that across the front of Dunwoody should ACHD decide that that's a huge safety issue.
That's about all I have in terms of our position and we are in support of the ACHD plan
and the developer's plan as it stands, with keeping Dvorak closed off. Be happy to answer
any questions.
De Weerd: Thank you. I don't see any questions. We appreciate you being here.
Granvall: Thank you.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 44 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 41 of 77
Johnson: Madam Mayor, your last sign in is Mark Miller.
De Weerd: Thank you for joining us. If you will, please, state your name and address for
the record.
Miller: Mark Miller. The one referred to previously in the previous testimony at 1906 East
Dunwoody Court. I'm just here to oppose the plan, although I'm not actually sure which
plan I'm opposing, because there is so many plans that are uncertain right now that have
been presented, I don't even know what to tell you I'm opposing , because I don't even
know what is actually being presented. This has been a typical situation with this
particular development as things have smoke and mirrored and moved and moved
around at every single development. Things get presented at the last minute where
people can't even address them. You will notice in previous -- and you can ask the staff
if you want to -- there are numerous conditions of approval and things that this developer
was required to submit that he has not submitted, including what affects me is the
irrigation plan and the -- and the water Karnes Lateral plan that's still assumed to be up
in the air and I'm a homeowner and the Karnes Lateral is on my -- on my plan. If you can
put up the plan there. I also wanted to bring up the fact that -- I had some pictures here.
There are four lots that are currently, according to city, deed restricted. However, they
have been released, just like Lot 16, for development. They are acre lots behind the
Dunwoody lots and I'm asking you to, please, be careful, if you put this all into private
streets what happens to these four lots and your responsibility has to do with land use
and appropriate land use and development in a city that's growing and needs new homes.
Those would be one acre lots and I'm asking for the fact that since Mr. Dean has six stub
streets going into Lot 16, which was also a deed restricted lot in Dunwoody Subdivision,
that this committee -- that this Council require him to put in a stub street to at least -- a
couple of these lots on the south side, so that we can develop those lots in the future and
have access. That a condition of approval be that we allow -- be allowed to access
through this private driveway if it is approved and allowed to develop our lots, so that we
are not landlocked and make it impossible for us to even develop. You will notice those
are there. They are currently deed restricted, but the HOA has already approved building
-- making those into residential lots, because of now the fact that Dunwoody is not
agricultural anymore, but it's becoming more urban and that's the problem with what's
going on there. The other thing I wanted to show you is that -- please notice that the
Deans owned all of the property, not just the property in question, and had selectively just
to -- I wanted to, like Mr. Palmer, point out the obvious -- he pointed out the obvious on
the video. They owned all this property. They first developed a subdivision that has now
ten minutes of additional testimony from what I believe is the daughter of Dave Dean
representing one of the other subdivisions. So , just take into account that the testimony
that's come is relative -- relative to the -- to the developer, at least I believe so. Maybe
somebody needs to confirm that. And, then, it -- can go to the next slide -- slide please.
I need to -- and I have the issue with irrigation. So, these connector roads should have
gone through there. In fact, ACHD required the Deans when they decided where that
arrow was to put their house, at the bottleneck of both of these -- the developing properties
that they would have to sign a fitness form that says a connector road is going to go
through there. That is the connector road that you connect this new subdivision to Locust
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 45 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 42 of 77
Grove, not Dunwoody, which is an unsafe road, which has also been said by Locust
Grove. The last thing I want to tell you is that I was -- one of the conditions of approval
of the -- of the Planning and Zoning was for the developer to meet with me. He personally
did not meet with me, he sent a subordinate that had no ability to work with me . Please
-- I hope the staff can declare that there is multiple things like that that they did not, then,
comply with. I had a meeting with them. He couldn't make any decisions. He could -- all
he did was tell me he was going to move the irrigation canal 50 feet away, build a box,
and, then, require me to configure all of my irrigation to connect to his.
De Weerd: Mr. Miller, can you summarize?
Miller: Yes. I also -- I called up my Karnes Lateral -- the ditch rider said to call Jim Rosetti.
I called. He said, please, call the -- advice from attorney. I called Bryce Farris, who I
talked to about the situation and he said, actually, since the Karnes Lateral is on your
property he is required to have a license agreement with you personally before he can
touch the land or touch the lateral and I'm asking as a condition of approval that we
postpone any approval here until he gets a license agreement that's required by Idaho
law with me before we touch any of the lateral at that point , so I can know what's
happening with my irrigation water.
De Weerd: Thank you. And good job. You didn't even take a breath there.
Miller: Sorry. Yeah. Sorry.
De Weerd: I was breathing for you. Council, any questions?
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Talk to me about these four lots that we haven't discussed up until now.
Miller: Everybody kind of ignores those lots.
Bernt: Are they legit lots or what's --
Miller: Those are called open space lots. There is -- if you want to pull up a bigger plan
of Dunwoody I can show you as quick as I can. Do you see the -- if you look at Dunwoody,
to the left of Dunwoody there is a big -- to the left. Go left farther with your arrow. Just a
little bit left. See that big area there to the left of Dunwoody? That little in space, that will
also get in-filled. Those are open space lots of Dunwoody and we are restricted in terms
of development for 15 years, just like Lot 16 was. The owners of those -- of those lots
are the homeowners of Dunwoody that are right next to them and their plan is to develop
them and that's allowed. The other open -- there is two open space lots in Dunwoody
that have already been released from the deed restriction. That's the one on the corner
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 46 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 43 of 77
of North Locust Grove and Dunwoody and another one in another open space lot where
they were released to --
Bernt: Madam Mayor? Can you show me those? Can you point to what you're talking
about?
Miller: Yes, I can. I don't know how to -- oh, sorry. So, this lot right here was an open
space lot designated by deed restriction and it was released by Dunwoody to be a
buildable lot.
Bernt: That's a newer house?
Miller: This lot also here is a lot from Dunwoody that was deed restricted as an open
space lot that now has a house on it.
Bernt: Yeah.
Miller: What's that?
Bernt: I'm agreeing with you.
Miller: Oh. Sorry. Okay. This is the sub -- this subdivision -- these are all four open
space lots. They are actually separate parcels that were taxed on and the -- if you look
at the plat -- original plan there is a 15 year moratorium. You can confirm with staff that
that moratorium is now over and was over for -- also for Lot 16. The homeowners
association has already met and voted to release these two development s and it makes
only sense that we don't have to fit townhomes in this little spot , since this is now all open
space, large acre lots. My proposal is that we, please, work with the developer to extend
his street here just down this way, so that these four lots, as well as his four acre lots, can
also be developed. I'm even thinking we are willing to help pay for the road, since I don't
think I expect him to pay for our road for us, but I do think it's interesting that there are six
stub streets that -- Vienna Woods, Bristol Heights that were all required by the city to stub
into him that the developer had to pay for, so that his open space lot would be accessible.
I'm only asking for the same thing fo r me and my lot and I'm also asking there is -- there
is a restriction that we don't press -- press forward until a license agreement is with me
about the irrigation, but I hope that answers your questions about -- here you can see the
house that blocks the -- just like this -- somebody said the obvious, the house that blocks
the street coming into here. It's easy to put in a street through here and make this -- in
fact, this is -- the whole area of Three Corners was going to be a business park with tons
of traffic in and out, in and out all day long and so with the school there is actually less
traffic than there would be and you can actually build a tunnel underneath the street ,
because nothing's been developed over there, so the kids can get by and go across the
street without hitting a car, just like most campuses do when there is traffic issues. Sorry.
Other questions?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 47 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 44 of 77
De Weerd: Okay. So, I -- who owns the four lots that are between Dunwoody and the
proposed development?
Miller: Different individuals own those lots. Those -- those are owned by different
Dunwoody residents, but they are separate. They are separate parcels -- separate tax
lots.
Bernt: Separate.
Miller: Yes. Separately taxed. They have a different number and they are taxed
separately.
De Weerd: And why would you want them to build a road?
Miller: Well, no, I'm just saying --
De Weerd: But they access from that road that they want to connect through Dunwoody;
right?
Miller: Say that again? I'm sorry, Mayor.
De Weerd: They would have access to that road that is being proposed as the entrance
into the subdivision.
Miller: No, because it's a private road and they have already told us they wouldn't give
us access.
De Weerd: So, you're saying that they would be landlocked?
Miller: Yeah. There would be no way to get to the backs of the roads, unless -- I suppose
you could put a little driveway by every single house for 15 feet and somebody could live
behind somebody else's house. I don't think that's really a great use of land.
De Weerd: Every single house is the owner of the lot behind it ?
Miller: Every single house for the lot behind it. I'm not sure I'm understanding your
question.
De Weerd: So --
Miller: Yes. Yes.
De Weerd: Okay.
Miller: We are just asking --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 48 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 45 of 77
De Weerd: So, really, they are allowed to subdivide their lots --
Miller: Yes.
De Weerd: -- from one to two.
Miller: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay.
Miller: Well, they will be. That -- that's what the homeowners association has approved
that -- and I'm looking -- I don't know if it's tomorrow, but no matter what you say, as this
becomes less agricultural in ten or 20 years these are lots in the City of Meridian that
need to be developed and it will be a poor use of land if they are made so they can't even
be used in a reasonable way. I don't know. Maybe you -- I don't know. That's -- I just --
take into consideration the owners of those lots , since you took into consideration the
owner of Lot 16 when you made all the stub streets into their lot. I'm just asking for the
same consideration.
De Weerd: How old is the subdivision? Dunwoody?
Miller: Since 19 -- 1991.
De Weerd: 1991.
Miller: So, 28 years. I think that's what it is.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you.
Miller: Any questions about the irrigation stuff?
Bernt: Madam Mayor? That's already come up. We have already discussed that.
Miller: I just want to make sure I can answer it, because I'm worried that the presentation
-- the questions to the developer may be not accurate, so I'm happy to answer after that.
So, I'm happy to answer after that if you --
Bernt: Madam Mayor? He's already -- we already -- we have already talked about it. It's
going to -- it's going to get discussed when he comes up.
Miller: Thank you very much for your time.
De Weerd: Bill, was this part of the county when they had these cluster developments?
Parsons: Yeah. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, yes, that's kind of what the
county did through their PUD process back in the '90s when they set aside a certain
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 49 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 46 of 77
amount of open space and put a 15 year moratorium on certain lots until -- and then --
so, I had this discussion with Mr. Miller and -- at the P&Z hearing this came up and as you
mentioned, Mayor, all of these lots are held in common ownership. So , the owners that
have the houses in front of these lots own the back lot. So, from our standpoint, although
they are not in the city, if they were to annex into the city we would look at that as one lot
to develop, not two separate lots. They would have to come and annex and redevelop
and provide services to those properties as well and they have access to Dunwoody and
that's why we did not look at providing a private street connection or utilities to those
particular back parcels and that's what we shared with the Planning and Zoning
Commission when we were there as well.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. That -- that is the end of those that signed up to testify.
Are there any additional -- yes, ma'am. Good evening. If you will, please, state your
name and address for the record.
Heiner: Thank you. Linsy Heiner. 1778 East Dunwoody Court.
De Weerd: Thank you, Linsy.
Heiner: Thank you for your time. I think the reality of our street on Dunwoody -- it's --is
the best thing you could do is drive down the street and see what it looks like. There is a
lot of blind corners. It's narrow. It has a lot of big trees that in the winter provide a lot of
shade and a lot of ice and so it's just -- and also buses don't come down our street. They
used to send a shorter bus down, but now they don't even do that. So, our kids -- I have
four kids ages three to 12. So, two of my kids walk to the bus at Locust Grove and one
rides a bike to the middle school at Heritage. So, he rides his bike every day. So, I just
wanted to point that out, as my sons are here with me. One of my -- my younger son said
about his older brother: I just really want my brother to be able to ride to school safely.
So, that's why I'm here as a mom -- a concerned mom and I also will say, yes, I'm a mom,
I am not -- we are not -- none of us are professional videographers. So, we tried our best
as a neighborhood to just show the reality of our streets and we worked together, but, you
know, keeping kids controlled while we are trying to make a movie, maybe it didn't show
-- you know, we only had a limited amount of time, but we are trying to show -- and it is a
reality that on a weekly basis there are families in our neighborhood that have youth
groups come and there are that many cars. That is a reality. That is not fake. That is not
contrived. That is a reality. And there are kids still that need to have a pathway and they
don't currently have one. So, to quote from the musical Hamilton, take a stand with the
stamina God has granted us. I know this discussion around the development has been
long and thank you for your time and consideration on this. It's a very important issue
that affects our entire community's future. When they brought up the statistic of 14 people
standing here would represent that one person that was speaking, just because we are a
smaller group we need to remember that in America I asked you to consider that we don't
trample on the minority, in this case a relatively small neighborhood. Thomas Jefferson
said that the minority must possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect and
to violate would be oppression. As community leadership we need to take a stand .
Several people have talked about how the ACHD and the Planning and Zoning meeting
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 50 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 47 of 77
went. This process -- I won't go into more detail, because it's been discussed, but this
process has been rife with expediency and ignoring safety. Concerns with ACHD
commissioners and a plead for further discussion was ignored. Recommendations by the
Planning and Zoning Commissioners are not being taken into account. Development
shouldn't create problems. The developer's current plan does not provide for adequate
connectivity for the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City's Comprehensive Plan
for connectivity. The current plan embraces a reckless disregard for not only connectivity,
but safety. In short, it proactively creates problems. Let us set aside emotion . No one
wants their neighborhood to change. That's agreed . No one wants cars on their street.
That's agreed. But we cannot set aside safety. Government's first duty and highest
obligation is safety. Any questions?
De Weerd: Thank you. No. But I agree with you.
Heiner: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. Good evening.
Moore: Hello. I'm Monte Moore. I have lived at 1921 East Dunwoody Court for 23 years
-- 26 years. I'm getting old. I didn't realize I needed to sign in when I came in. So, please
forgive me.
De Weerd: That's all right.
Moore: Madam Mayor and City Council, I just really appreciate being part of this process
and that we live in this community where this happens. It's just a fascinating and beautiful
thing and I appreciate your time. I appreciate every person who has testified tonight. I
think it's been a great meeting and it's been trying and -- Winston Churchill said the
political system stinks, but it's the best thing I can think of and I think the system is so
great. So, I just have a quick point. Was there a slide that was e-mailed today Dunwoody
destinations? Yeah. There it is. So, I just wanted to reference -- this is kind of
anticlimactic, but I wanted to reference the applicant's assertion that traffic is primarily
east and west and the reason they chose Dunwoody is because there is going to be a lot
of traffic to the west and so I noticed -- you know, I, my wife, and, then, I started to ask
my neighbors and we are not going to live in Three -- in Three Corners, but we represent
people who live in the area and I started to ask people where they go when they leave
Dunwoody and so I got 23 respondents and -- how do I advance -- let's see. Does that
work? Yeah. Twelve percent of trips out of Dunwoody for their estimation go to the west.
Fifteen percent go to the north. Twenty-seven percent go to the east and forty-six percent
go south. So, I just wanted to point out that the assertion that south is irrelevant in this
development I don't believe is accurate. Even if we are all biased, I can -- I can tell you
-- myself I work near the Eagle Road exit. My wife primarily goes to the Eagle Road area
to shop. I have asked several of my next door neighbors who have businesses that are
to the south. Are there any questions?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 51 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 48 of 77
De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? It's nice to see you still smiling at the end
of the evening.
Lozano: Thank you.
De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Lozano: My name is Adam Lozano. I Live at 14567 West Barclay Street.
De Weerd: Thank you. And if you will just say that one more time. I don't know if Dean
really -- I didn't catch it. But your name one more time slow.
Lozano: Sure. Adam Lozano.
De Weerd: Thank you, Adam. Okay. Go ahead.
Lozano: Thank you for your audience, Mayor and Council. I wanted to ask if you would
make prevention of cut-through traffic a top priority to guide the decisions you make
regarding the proposed development. I don't think you need to be a traffic expert, all you
need to do is come take a walk around where I live to see the people who live in that area
drive very differently from people who do not -- who are passing through or may be cutting
through. Also it takes a very shallow examination to see one of the few things that all of
the neighbors of the proposed development agree on is that they don't want more traffic
and the reason they don't is for the safety of the people that live there. I understand there
is, you know, several safety issues to be considered. There is a lot of regulations we
need to consider that are here for our benefit. But, again, I would ask that you make
prevention of cut-through traffic a primary objective for the reason that the community of
people that live around the proposed development , we will have to deal with the risk of
the cut-through traffic every day, every day -- every time we drive, every time we walk,
every time we bike on the streets of our neighborhoods. That's it.
De Weerd: Thank you, Adam.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: After you have been to these meetings for a few years that there are certain
terms of -- like we just start kind of using them and the -- the common I guess definition
of cut-through traffic that we use -- or that we hear a lot is if there was -- if a subdivision
were to be built, for example, without gating it, there would certainly be an opportunity for
cut-through traffic from Bristol Heights through your neighborhood and likewise through
Bristol Heights from your neighborhood. In this case I think you're asking for the
prevention of cut-through traffic to be the biggest emphasis and I think what's being
proposed certainly does that. There definitely still has to be exiting and entering traffic,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 52 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 49 of 77
because no matter who lives here they have to be able to get there and get out. Where
would you ideally -- I guess whose neighborhood should they go through if it's not yours?
Lozano: I don't mind sharing the road we live on with the Three Corners residents. I just
don't want to share it with everyone that doesn't want to wait for the light at Chinden and
Linder, right, where everyone is on Eagle who is -- you know, it's backed up at Chinden,
so I will just take a left here and I don't know it real well, but, boy, I better make up for the
time I'm missing. So, who should -- who should take it? You know, all of us should. We
are all neighbors. We are all -- we are all residents. We share the road with our new
neighbors. That's great. We just don't want to share it wit h everybody else that doesn't
drive like their kids live and play there, too, in an uncontrolled way. Yeah. I think the --
the county proposed plan or agreed plan or supported plan or whatever we want to call it
with the gates, it does a reasonable job of limiting the traffic of people going from main
road to main road through a subdivision. Did I answer or --
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
Lozano: -- adequately?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Palmer: Maybe. Again, they would -- they would -- they would be your neighbors.
Understanding there is -- there is definitely a difference in the roads and there is no
sidewalks on that road. There is in the other adjacent subdivisions, but the -- the creation
of this subdivision would not create traffic that doesn't -- that's currently going other ways,
it would not take those cars and, then, be able to siphon them to you, this would just be
an extension, essentially, of your neighborhood and some -- really, I'm just rambling is
what I'm doing. I'm trying to -- I'm trying to find where the best route to send the cars
would be and so everyone just kind of says don't send it through mine. Where do they
go?
Lozano: I'm not saying that they -- anybody that lives in Vienna Woods or Dunwoody or
Three Corners Ranch want to come down Barclay, great, because you got kids that live
there, too. It's people that don't live there. It's people that are driving on Locust Grove or
Chinden or Eagle to get to a different destination who don't want to wait for a light at a
major intersection and take any turn they can to avoid the light , then, they drive way too
fast, because they are trying to find a way through and they are trying to make up time.
As far as sharing the road with the -- with the rest of the community that live within my
square mile, great, I don't mind. It's the people outside who forget that it's a country road.
Unless I can put a limitation on teenage drivers from our own community with delusions
about their driving abilities and cars.
De Weerd: Thank you. Any further testimony? Yes, ma'am. Is -- oh, Justin is here.
Jessome: Hi.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 53 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 50 of 77
De Weerd: Good evening.
Jessome: I'm Renee Jessome. I live at 14473 West Barclay. So, I am right on that street
with the big 70 percent of the traffic coming through. You know, no one wants 70 percent
of the development coming through their -- their neighborhood, their street, but we feel
like really this is balanced and we do support the plan as submitted in the Ada County
Highway. We feel like the Three Corners took the traffic from the north and we are going
to split the traffic east and west. We feel like the gated community does help to block the
cut-through from far away and -- and just the people in our in -- in our block to -- to be
around our streets. What -- I have a question actually. Maybe Mr. Parsons can answer.
Is Dunwoody a fire lane? Is that designated a fire lane, 27 foot wide? What's up?
Dunwoody, is it a fire lane? There is no parking?
Parsons: Madam Chairman -- or Mayor -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, it's a
public road.
Jessome: It's a public road. So, you can park on both sides.
Parsons: There is no parking signs on that street at all from my -- with my understanding
and that's --
De Weerd: We are not aware of any parking restrictions.
Jessome: Okay. We appreciate this community is walkable and, you know, if we want
the kids to go to that private school we can have the kids walk from our neighborhood. If
you're in the block you're probably walking. One thing I did want to say about Barclay is
my kid also bikes to Heritage and you can't bike on the sidewalks, you have got mailboxes
right in the freaking sidewalk. So, he bikes on the streets, like most people do. Thanks.
De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any further testimony?
Aeschbacher: So, my name is Brett Aeschbacher and I live at 1896 East Golden Oak
Court and one of the things I guess I want to point out is the Deans -- I have always
admired. Born and raised here. Been here my whole life. I have watched all the
development. I know growth. I know what happens. One thing I want to make sure that
everybody understands is that they are going the extra mile. Everybody keeps talking
about Dunwoody, how it's unsafe and it's this and that. He knew it when he bought the
property, okay? They also stood up here and said that I think she's representing the
developer as -- I'm sorry Kendra Neely who spoke on behalf of Three Corners. It has
nothing to do with them being related. She spoke on behalf of us. So, one thing I guess
I want to -- I guess I keep hearing from this gentleman who wants to have Dave provide
access to these four lots is that they complain about growth and they complain about
traffic, but, then, they say we want to be able to develop these lots. Those don't go hand
in hand. I grew up on an acreage down off Garrett Street. I never once had people park
out on the public roadway when I lived on an acreage . You have an acreage with 400,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 54 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 51 of 77
300 foot of driveway, people park in your driveway. They don't park out on the street. So,
with that being said that's about all I have.
De Weerd: Thank you. Justin, we would love to talk with ACHD for a few minutes.
Lucas: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Just for the record my name is Justin Lucas. I'm here
tonight representing Ada County Highway District. My business address is 3775 Adam
Street in Garden City, Idaho.
De Weerd: Thank you. You have heard a lot of discussion about the stub streets into this
-- this parcel and I'm -- I'm curious as to why ACHD is -- I understand through Bristol
Heights and I appreciate the testimony by their HOA and their residents. That's a -- that's
a collector -- that's a major collector and makes sense. Putting cars through rural -- a
rural designed road -- it's a public road, so I do understand that. Without any requirements
to provide for the safety aspect for sidewalks or -- or any further improvement on that
road, can you help me with what the thinking is in -- in that recommendation and that
approval?
Lucas: I will do my best, Madam Mayor. As usual I will guide you to the ACHD staff
report. It contains the commission's official recommendation and determination and
decision on this specific application. As you have heard it was discussed at length at the
ACHD commission. The commissioners, as they always do, carefully consider the
testimony provided and they came to the conclusion that you see in the staff report. You
know, in areas like this, just to provide some insight on developing areas, where you have
subdivisions that have developed at different times with different standards and you have
this final piece of land that happens to be right in the middle, it's difficult. The -- this isn't
that typical. You see a lot of land use applications and it's not often you see a piece of
land that has this many stub streets right in the middle of a square mile that has never
been developed before. It also is complicated by the fact that you h ave -- some of the
subdivisions were developed in the county. They are not urban subdivisions, but as the
-- as you stated, Madam Mayor, they are public streets. These are streets that have public
use. They are public -- full public access. There is no restriction on access to any public
street under the jurisdiction of the Ada County Highway District and as -- as is often the
case you have adjacent property owners who have access to that street frontage we call
it requesting to develop. The question of improvements on existing streets that are
outside of the -- of the development boundary, we call these off-site improvements and
they are very difficult for the Ada County Highway District to required, because it's very
difficult to require a property owner to develop sidewalks and other things in front of
someone else's property that they have no control over, there is oftentimes landscaping,
potential right-of-way impacts and other things that the property -- the developer has no
ability, unless they are negotiating with each of those property owners individually, it's
extremely difficult to require that. If that were to be required that requirement would have
to come from ACHD commission and they -- in this specific case they chose not to do
that. I can't provide you with insight into all of their thought process, but in this specific
case they analyzed this and chose not to do that based on the impacts that are projected.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 55 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 52 of 77
De Weerd: So, why did they choose to go through this subdivision and not the subdivision
that is northwest of it, which had -- or even south of it, which have completed curb, gutter
and sidewalk -- improved streets?
Lucas: Madam Mayor, they -- I think the commission responded to the application that
was submitted. The applicant worked with ACHD staff to try and develop a solution in
this difficult situation that was acceptable. The commission carefully considered the
solution that was provided at the -- through the public hearing process and they -- that's
what they determined. Beyond that it's hard for me to really get too far into their heads
and I'm very hesitant to do that, because what is written in the staff report is really what
the determination of the commission is.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Justin, just for clarification, we heard a lot of testimony tonight about Dunwoody
being a country -- country road. Country street. Is that a definition of ACHD and, if so,
what does that refer to?
Lucas: No. Madam Mayor, Councilman Cavener, we don't really refer to streets that way.
It's oftentimes citizens will describe a street that way when it does not have curb and
gutter and sidewalk. There are many streets that don't have curb and gutter and sidewalk,
especially streets -- yeah, there is streets that don't have these facilities and It's -- it's kind
of interesting in these situations, there are oftentimes places in this exact situation where
you may have one or two of the members of the subdivision that want curb an d gutter
and sidewalk and, then, you have a whole bunch of them that don't want curb and gutter
and sidewalk, because they like the look and feel of the street. So, ACHD's hesitant to
put curb and gutter and sidewalk on streets like this without the -- basically the full support
of the -- of the neighborhood and so that's the -- I'm not speaking specifically to this
neighborhood. I don't know their -- their -- their -- each individual opinion on curb, gutter
and sidewalk, but from my experience working with neighborhoods similar to this, it can
often be a controversial topic.
Cavener: Thank you, Justin. Appreciate you being here.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions for Justin? Thank you.
Lucas: Thank you.
De Weerd: So, Bill, for -- gosh, a couple of centuries or decades -- sure seems like
centuries -- the county was approving these cluster developments where they allowed
land -- a certain percentage of rural land to have less than required five -- five acre lots
for the reason of having greater density at a later time, but allowing a certain piece to
develop. The problem we had is the county never adopted our city standards and they
always locate the -- the acre lots abutting the arterial -- so, then, the back property will
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 56 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 53 of 77
have to develop and go through it. This is another example of -- now I asked you to pull
up Kingsbridge. That was also a cluster development where Kingsbridge developed
around it and we needed to have connectivity through that subd ivision. What did we
require at that time?
Parsons: It's interesting, Madam Mayor, because when you -- I knew -- I was anticipating
that question tonight, so -- we oftentimes have these same discussions with the
developers where as part of annexations, if we feel it's in the best interest of the city we
tried, through the development agreement, to have the developer to work with the
Dunwoody -- or with the county residents to see if they can compromise and come back
with some off-site improvements that everyone can agree with and Kingsbridge was one
of those situations where they were developing in the city. If you recall they came in with
a lot of greater density than what the city wanted. We sent them back to the drawing
board, denied them, they worked with their residents, got agreements from the residents,
revised their plans, and as part of that development agreement -- again through that DA
they were amenable to adding the curb, gutter and sidewalks to the county subdivision to
Eagle Road, adding some upgrades to the irrigation system and also adding some fencing
and that was mutually agreed upon between the developer and the homeowners in that
subdivision. And, then, also subsequent to that development agreement there was other
agreements that the developer entered into with those private property owners separately
from the city's process that they may concessions to them as well. So, this is one of those
similar -- similar situations. The one thing that -- that wasn't discussed -- and I just want
to share it with the Council, is when this project originally came into the city it had a rim
road that connected all the stub streets, but still gated off these and lots and so as part of
that -- with the change that ACHD worked with the applicant on, it was a different plan
than what Stephanie and I had to analyze for our staff report. So, we paused on it. We
continued to -- got the revised plan and made a recommendation to our Planning and
Zoning Commission, but to me I understand there is an expense to sidewalk, I understand
there is an expense to street lights, but, again, if you're willing to build miles of road,
what's -- what's the issue with trying to work with the residents and build some of that
sidewalk and improve some of those safety concerns. The other thing that was discussed
at the commission hearing was whether or not traffic should go to the south through
Dvorak and that's certainly within your purview. If you feel -- the commission was
concerned about safety as well and they struggled a little bit on whether or not to send
people to the north to another road or to the south and so certainly it is within your purview
to say that the access to Dunwoody could be the emergency access bollard and
pedestrian connection and, then, provide that secondary out or that other gated access.
Through Dvorak it still gets them to complete streets as you mentioned, Mayor, and
provide the safer route for not only vehicles but kids and bikes. It's just some options to
think about as you deliberate. But long story short -- I know I'm a little long winded
sometimes, but it was done through a development agreement and certainly that's what
we had before you this evening is an annexation. We are requesting -- recommending a
development agreement as part of that. Again, the key words was it was mutually agreed
upon between the homeowners and the developer.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 57 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 54 of 77
De Weerd: Right. Can you also -- and I should have asked this to Justin, but one of the
residents of the Dunwoody Court said at some point with the widening Locust Grove be
restricted to right-in, right-out; is that correct?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, that's -- my understanding is it would
never be restricted to right-in, right-out.
De Weerd: Okay.
Parsons: Justin can certainly add some light onto that. I don't think -- that was something
that was brought up by public testimony, but I don't think ACHD ever stated that was the
case.
Lucas: Madam Mayor, Justin Lucas, just back up here at the podium. It's -- no, I don't
believe ACHD has any plans to restrict Dunwoody Court. It is sufficient distance from any
adjacent intersection and to my knowledge when we widen this section of Locust Grove
we would intend to keep that public street as a full access point.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Would the applicant -- if there is no further
testimony, would the applicant like to respond.
Clark: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Hethe Clark, 251 East Front Street. Okay.
Got some work to do here. So, I will try to address the comments that we have heard.
Again, as has been noted, this is in-fill and it's in-fill with a bunch of stubs on it, so it means
that we have got to make a number of hard decisions and those decisions are not always
easy. We spent a lot of time with these neighbors. As you saw tonight, Fuller Ranchettes,
Three Corners, Bristol Heights, Vienna Woods, all these neighborhoods are in support of
what came out of a process of compromise and discussion with the agencies. This has
been -- on the part of Marcel and Jim Conger has been an incredible amount of PR work
that they have done and I hope that the Council appreciates that. I only spent a couple
hours at a meeting and they spend dozens and dozens and dozens. So, they -- we have
done everything that we can to try to address every concern. With regard to the Karnes
Lateral questions, I will hit that first. If -- if you want a summary of Idaho water law, it's
don't cut somebody off from their irrigation and don't mess with their property and go onto
their property without permission. We understand that. We have -- the Karnes Lateral
did review our initial plans. They have been modified, as Mr. Tippets mentioned. He
accurately read the bullet points that we had proposed to the Karnes folks. We fully
expect that all of that will be approved in the next few weeks. That is standard operating
procedure. When it comes to irrigation, we have to build according to the approved plans
that Karnes Lateral will approve. There is just no going around that. It's their property.
We can work within their -- within their easement and that's what we fully anticipate doing.
With regard to Dunwoody, there was a suggestion that the -- there was an exclusion that
I misrepresented. Obviously, CC&Rs are not your -- it's not your job as a city council to
enforce CC&Rs. I'm fully mindful of that. But it's come up quite a bit and I just want to
make sure that we are all clear on what's happening there. So, there is a two-step process
that's described in the CC&Rs. First, Lot 16 would be excluded and, second, it would
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 58 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 55 of 77
develop and use Dunwoody Court. The exclusion is not -- does not mean that it loses the
benefit of -- or the notice to folks that it would take access through there. I think more
importantly -- or for these purposes tonight is that on the question of the open space lots
-- and, Stephanie, can I have my slide deck back? So, Dunwoody is an old nonfarm
subdivision from 1990 and what we are talking about that Mr. Miller mentioned where
these lots on the backside of these parcels, I agree with Bill's analysis of this, that that is
generally looked at as a -- you would sub -- you would do a minor subdivision within your
own property and provide your own access, because you have common ownership of it.
I would only add that the CC&Rs do require common ownership. So, it's not like they can
be split off unless this -- I suppose unless the CC&Rs are modified, but they haven't --
they -- they are required to be in common ownership. But it does, of course, beg the
question if the HOA doesn't want the traffic from these 44 units, would they really want to
change their CC&Rs to add traffic from development on the backside of each of these
lots. It seems inconsistent to me. Okay. So, let's move on to the -- I think the real
question, which is the question of the off-site improvements. I have my own video of
Dunwoody Court, which I'm not going to bore you with. It doesn't look like that one I will
tell you that much. It is a public street . People should not be parked on both sides of a
public street. People should not be riding their bikes down the middle of a public street.
It's pretty obvious, you know, what we were looking at there. I do want to emphasize a
couple of things there, though. Again, this is a 30 foot paved section. ACHD standard
for a local street is 27 feet. So, it's wider than your standard local street and that was
because -- that was to allow, according to the ACHD staff report, for a pedestrian area on
the side. That's why it was striped before. The opinion of ACHD is that this does not
require safety improvements. Again, it's a local road. Local roads have capacity of up to
2,000 trips. Our calculation shows that it will be at 14 percent capacity at full build out of
Three Corners Ranch. We are not talking about it being overwhelmed by traffic, even
though that's the way that it's being portrayed. It doesn't change the character of the
street and it is wider than ACHD local street standards. Now, we are offering -- and I have
already met with the Dunwoody folks to talk about what kind of improvements might go
there that might address their concerns. There certainly is low hanging fruit . You know,
the low hanging fruit would be to put that stripe back and we are more than willing to make
those arrangements with ACHD and pay for that. Other low hanging fruit would be to put
no parking signs on one side of the street. Now, in contrast to what was stated before,
anything less than 33 feet is parking restricted on one side under ACHD standards. So ,
there should be no parking on one side of the street. Again, we are happy to coordinate
those pieces and we are also happy to work with the Dunwoody folks if they want to look
at -- at funding resources for sidewalks in the future. But requiring this applicant to pay
hundreds of thousands of dollars for improvements that ACHD says are not warranted
would not be correct and would not meet the U.S. Supreme Court standards for exactions
and, let's be honest, a 44 lot project won't pay for those kind of off sites. What we are
talking about with Kingsbridge was a much more dense project and you would have to
look at a redesign to be able to pay for that sort of thing. Question of why Dunwoody.
Again, it's near the mid mile along Locust Grove. It's the most direct path to Locust Grove.
As ACHD stated, there is no intent to restrict it and as I have mentioned it is well -- well
within its capacity and -- and, again, ACHD has said no safety improvements are required.
So, again, we are asking you to revisit the P&Z recommendations and for your reference,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 59 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 56 of 77
if it's helpful I have a physical print out of the items that we would -- we would ask you to
consider in a motion and I will hand that out and then summarize. So , again, the three
items we are providing --
De Weerd: Did you give one to the clerk?
Clark: Oh, excuse me. Sorry. So, again, the three items that we were asking the Council
to revisit -- the waiver for the Karnes Lateral so it's -- allow it to be in an irrigation
easement. Deletion of the north-south connection and, then, looking at the requirement
of sidewalk on both sides up at Guinness Street. And with that I'm happy to answer any
remaining questions.
De Weerd: And just for those in the audience, what we received is what you have on your
screen. Okay. Council, questions?
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: As Bill had mentioned, we cannot waive the sidewalk requirement for both sides
of the street for that north street that runs east-west; correct? There -- because we can't
or is there an alternate suggestion you have?
Clark: Madam Mayor, Council Member Palmer, no, the -- we are asking the Council to
consider waiving that requirement. There is -- it's a fairly binary question. Is it there or is
it not. Because we are proposing to put the sidewalk on the other side of the road .
De Weerd: I think the -- the staff is -- is pointing out that that is not consistent with our
ordinance.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? Meaning we couldn't if we wanted to?
De Weerd: Mr. Nary.
Nary: That's correct.
Palmer: Madam Mayor? So, knowing that we couldn't if we wanted to, is there -- what
else would you have us do?
Clark: Madam Mayor, Council Member Palmer, no, this was a request to look at a waiver
of a standard. That's all. So, if -- if it's the Council's position that you don't have the
authority, then, we understand you don't have the authority.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you. Oh, Hethe, I do have one
question. The roads within your subdivision will be public as well or private?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 60 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 57 of 77
Clark: Madam Mayor, they will be private as they will be gated off.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Just wanted to make sure. Okay. Council, can I have a
discussion before you close the public hearing?
Cavener: Madam Mayor, I think that's probably best.
De Weerd: I think so.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: While we are at it one more question for staff. Is there additional items you would
-- would need from the applicant before an approval would make any sense tonight?
Parsons: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think you heard testimony this
evening that there should have been a revised plan before you already and we never
received that. So, if you want a clean record and you want the findings to reflect what
your approval is and have the conditions appropriately, then, yes, we would ask that we
continue this out, get a revised plan, make sure the findings and the conditions are
accurate, so that we have a complete record if that's your desire to do something different
than what ACHD condition has acted on.
Palmer: Thanks.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Robert.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, I would be more comfortable with the revised plan, as well
as having the final word regarding the Karnes Lateral, that we have full information on
that prior to moving forward.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Quick comment. I know that in-fill development applications are always
complicated and I think we all know why. I generally think that this application is -- this
application is generally -- I don't have any issues with -- with the development itself. The
only question and concern I have is with the Dunwoody Court Road. Mr. Clark mentioned
low hanging fruit and -- and mentioned maybe like a couple signs -- no parking signs,
maybe a stripe. I think that smart minds need to get together to talk about something a
little bit higher than that low hanging fruit -- or lower than that low hanging fruit. I think we
can do better. I don't know if we necessarily have to have curb and gutter, but I do believe
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 61 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 58 of 77
that if you are going to ask us to approve this application , I think, then, you're using
Dunwoody Street as a way to get in and out, I think it's tough to put an exact number,
whether it's 14 or whether it's 30 -- I have no idea. The traffic guys do the best job they
can. I don't know if it's an exact science. But we need to do better than -- than a stripe
and we need to do better than signs, because at the end of the day -- I don't care if it's
one child or if there is 50 children, I don't care if it's church related or if it's a local party or
whatever the case may be, our purview is to keep everyone safe and, you know, Meridian
-- we -- in Meridian we do have some, quote, unquote, rural roads were -- that are off the
beaten path per se and I think that in order to accommodate these type of developments
I think that there is -- we just need to think creative -- you know, a little bit creative and --
-- and to do something that we are all -- where both parties can come to an agreement
some how, some way. So, that's where I'm leaning. I know there are some places in
busy streets where you have like a cement or like an asphalt type bump along the side
where it separates the road from where kiddos and people walk or travel , maybe -- and
that -- that can't be too expensive. Certainly not going to be hundreds of thousands of
dollars. Maybe that's a great alternative. Something needs to happen on that street in
my opinion. Just to give you a heads up. I just want you -- I want to set an expectation.
I don't want there to be any surprises. If there is one thing that I respect about the
development community and I try to provide it about development community is
consistency and so I don't want you to put a lot of effort into this and come back and have
it be a complete surprise when Councilman Bernt come -- you know, says this and if this
gets continued, but it's just my concern and I just wanted you guys to know that.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I tend to agree with Council Member Bernt. First, I think it's important to note
there was a whole heck of a lot of creativity done on this project. I think it is very creative.
I think that there are a lot of really strong attempts to make this in-fill project work. That
said I think, Council Member, you hit the nail on the head in terms of Dunwoody Street or
Dunwoody Subdivision. I -- clearly it sounds like we need no parking signs there now. I
think a striping absolutely needs to return and I applaud your recommendation of some
type of concrete barriers. We heard from representatives of the neighborhood. They are
not in a position where they want to provide sidewalks in their neighborhood . Don't even
want to provide the land for sidewalks. So, that really handcuffs what the development
-- the developer is able to do. I think we have an opportunity here. We have heard from
staff. We have heard from at least one Council Member that says they feel comfortable
with seeing the applicant come back with the proposed plat, get some answers from the
irrigation folk, meet with the neighbors, see if there is any common ground to be found. I
heard a term from somebody who testified tonight that has stuck with me and that's
productive deliberation. Sometimes we on the City Council have really unproductive
deliberation. But sometimes we get really lucky and have really productive deliberation.
And I -- I believe that the neighbors and the applicant can work together for some
productive deliberation and come forth with something maybe not everybody is going to
love, but it's -- but it's leveling up in terms of the application . So, I for the most part, am
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 62 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 59 of 77
supportive of it. I need to be supportive of the request from the applicant in terms of the
proposed changes. I think that we can do a better job, though, when it comes to the
impact on that one particular issue.
De Weerd: I would also make another suggestion and that's in the City of Meridian our
police, our code enforcement, our planning teams have worked hard together to identify
areas of our community that have safety concerns, because of a lack of lighting, and I
heard someone talk about how dark that area is and -- and maybe it -- we can't because
you're in the county, but to have the conversation about the lighting in that area and maybe
Lieutenant Colaianni, since I saw him pulling the microphone close to his mouth , might
have something to add to that.
Colaianni: Yeah. I have tried to stay silent all night on this and I have actually been
looking at this, Mayor and Council Members, for the better part of three hours and rubbing
my head. This is a difficult one. I, too -- and a lot of this has already been repeated.
Excuse me, I have allergies. A lot of this has been repeated time and time again tonight ,
but my job -- my perspective is this: The police department -- the Meridian Police
Department's sole purpose is to preserve and protect life and property. That's what we
are here for and we do it through at least three ways, education, prevention and at the
end of the day, if that doesn't work, enforcement and as I look at this there is a lot of
difficulties, because whatever we talk about on Dunwoody, that is in the county and it's
under the purview of the sheriff's department. If we annex and develop this that area is
under the purview of the Meridian Police Department. If we go east it becomes the Boise
Police Department. There is a lot of moving pieces there and some frustration that can
build with HOAs and such, depending on the decisions that are made and so there is a
lot of complexities to this. But at the end of the day when I look at developments in the
City of Meridian, it doesn't matter if it's a hotel, a subdivision or apartments, we look at
the same thing. We want to save movement of traffic. We want sidewalks. We want
pedestrian connectivity. And we want people to move through the community without
being hurt or hit. There is some challenges if we have traffic go to the north and people
turn westbound on Chinden, we run a high risk of broadside accidents. If we send them
south and east they could go through these subdivisions -- there is a lot of turns in there
and Dunwoody, as everybody's mentioned tonight, no sidewalks, dark, there is -- those
are difficult things to grapple with with all those jurisdictions and a unique -- unique piece
of this property. We will do what we can, but there are a lot of players in this mix when it
comes to the police side as well and what we look at.
De Weerd: I appreciate your comments, lieutenant. Certainly I also appreciated Justin
coming up and making comments. This connection does make sense. It does -- it is
concern from a public safety standpoint. The size of the road is -- is wider than many of
the roads in our community. However, there is no sidewalk, there is no safe place for the
pedestrian movement and bicycles and it's dark. So, I would encourage, since it sounds
like Council would like to have the revised plat, would like to have the plans for the Karnes
Lateral and ask the developer to meet with Dunwoody residents and -- and see what there
can be done to make Dunwoody a safer road. I, too, like the development and I
appreciate the developer looking at this in terms of trying to minimize the amount of traffic
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 63 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 60 of 77
that could go through there by making private streets and investing in a gated community.
I think that was above and beyond. So , I would applaud your efforts in that. There is
concern about Dunwoody at -- both to what the neighbors -- neighbors said and also from
previous experiences. We try and learn with each development and each different
scenario that comes along and staff already pointing out some of the things that we did
in Kingsbridge. I think maybe when I'm no longer sitting up here that institutional
knowledge won't be here, but staff will be able to catch it and at least -- at least give the
heads up to our number one priority is public safety and it would -- we would be not
standing up to our responsibility setting up something that would not be safe and I do
understand, Mr. Clark, about offsite improvements. But, too, we are not in a hurry. We
don't have to approve everything and especially something that might set up a dangerous
scenario. So, that's my two cents.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: I would echo Lieutenant Colaianni. Yes, Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: Yes. Well done. Thank you for your comments , Lieutenant Colaianni. I just -- I
charge the developer and the applicant and the folks on Dunwoody Court -- let's figure it
out, you know. Let's just figure it out. Sit down, hash it out. I know Mr. Conger well.
Great guy. Great developer. I know he is going to do what's right. I know that, hopefully,
you know, you guys can come to an agreement, something that makes sense for your
community. So, I hope when -- when you come back that we have a -- we have a solution
to this and I have faith that that will happen.
De Weerd: So, our next meeting is in two weeks.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I'm going to throw this question out maybe for the applicant. I know that I will
get some eye rolls, but I love special meetings. If the applicant is able and willing to meet
with the public in the next week, maybe we have a special meeting next Tuesday for this
issue. I don't know if that's too aggressive of a timeline. I want you to know that I think
-- I'm willing, I think the Council would be willing to meet specifically for this. You guys
can get things addressed in the week. If n ot, you're looking at July 9th at the earliest. I
know that's a rapidly growing agenda, as much as I know everybody loves special
meetings.
De Weerd: Hethe, do you want to make a comment?
Clark: Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street. So, I don't want to over promise and under
deliver in terms of making something by Tuesday and, then, we have a conflict on the 9th.
So, it would probably have to be maybe the following week.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 64 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 61 of 77
Johnson: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: The 16th?
Johnson: Madam Mayor, the 16th is rather full. In looking at the draft I would recommend
the 23rd, but it's your decision.
Cavener: So, I guess, Madam Mayor, just a thought. If -- with the understanding -- I
mean I want to keep the public hearing open. I want to allow the public to have the
opportunity to testify, but I guess fair warning to the public, if they plan to bring the same
testimony that they brought tonight it will be a very lengthy meeting for everybody in
attendance.
De Weerd: Well, if Council were to continue it for specific items, the testimony would be
limited to only those specific items.
Clark: We have a conflict on the 23rd as well.
De Weerd: The 16th would work. We will make it work.
Clark: Okay. The 16th. Thank you.
Cavener: Council? Madam Mayor?
Cavener: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: Looking for my notes. I move that we continue the public hearing for Three
Corners Ranch, H-2019-0006, to July 16th and leave the public hearing open for specific
testimony related to safety features of Dunwoody, comments about the plat and -- and
commentary specifically related to the proposed Karnes Lateral.
Bernt: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to continue this to July 16 with the
specific items has noted. Safety to the road on Dunwoody, the plat -- the revised plat and
Karnes Lateral.
Parsons: Madam Mayor? Sorry.
De Weerd: Mr. Parsons.
Parsons: Just for clarification when you say revised plat, in our staff report we had talked
about the landscape buffer along -- that public street being extended along the north
boundary along with the sidewalk. We -- Commission wanted the north-south street to
align with the Fuller Ranchettes or whatever that street is. Yeah. Fuller Ranchette
subdivision. Are you -- are you still wanting to see those -- that revision for additional
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 65 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 62 of 77
private street north and south or just landscape improvements and improvements to
Dunwoody?
Cavener: Madam Mayor, my motion referenced the public testimony about the -- the
proposed plat that staff had asked for. So, I guess I wasn't including in terms of additional
discussion about those items from staff , but that we were continuing the public hearing
for those three specific items and, Madam Mayor, I would leave it to staff to determine
what updates to the staff report that they deem necessary to -- to add if needed for Council
to review.
De Weerd: I haven't heard Council make any changes to the requirements you were
waiting for on the revised plat from the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Unless
Council has any -- anything further on that.
Parsons: That's all we needed. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay.
Parsons: Perfect.
De Weerd: Okay. So, the motion is to continue this to the 16th. All those in favor say
Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. That was very overwhelming.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you for all joining us. We will recess for five minutes before we
take our next agenda item.
(Recess: (9:38 p.m. to 9:45 p.m.)
E. Public Hearing Continued from June 11, 2019 for 2019 UDC Text
Amendment (H-2019-0049) by City of Meridian Planning Division
1. Request: A Text Amendment to update certain sections of the UDC
pertaining to notification of violations and definitions in Chapter 1;
residential dimensional standards and allowed use tables in Chapter
2; ditches, laterals, canals or drainage courses; outdoor lighting;
outdoor storage; traveling living quarters; landscape standards;
parking standards; qualified open space and variance processing in
Chapter 3; specific use standards for educational institution, indoor
shooting range, multi-family development and restaurant in Chapter
4; public hearing, fees, variances and alternative compliance in
Chapter 5 AND other miscellaneous sections, by City of Meridian
Planning Division
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 66 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 63 of 77
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and -- and reconvene this meeting. We are now moving
to Item 7-E, which is a public hearing continued from June 11th regarding our UDC text
amendment. So, I will turn this over to Bill.
Parsons: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council. Hopefully we -- as you recall I was
here with -- discussing with you these items back on the 11th of June. You guys had
continued this project out for two weeks to take a chance -- take an opportunity to look
over all 17 pages of the changes and come back with some -- either some questions or
some discussions that we could have around some of the proposed changes. So, the
table that I prepared for you this evening does clean up the -- some of the changes a little
bit, so that you can understand them better, because a lot -- the previous version you saw
had a lot of changes from Planning and Zoning Commission, so there was a little
disconnect on what transpired there. So, I went through -- back through the table, cleaned
up this table for you so you can see some of the strikeout-underlining changes and some
of those things that weren't relevant for you to read through as part of the strikeout -
underlining changes I removed those, so you can see that -- how it would read if it's -- if
and when it's published through code. I didn't go through a lot of the code -- as I
mentioned to you at the previous hearing code enforcement are bringing forward some
of the changes, so I didn't go through a lot of their changes. In our opinion those are
things that we feel should move forward and get taken care of to help them do their jobs
better, but from staff's perspective I think we had some members from the community that
wanted to delay some of these UDC changes until the Comprehensive Plan was done
and so what I did for you this evening is I went through these proposed changes and
highlighted all the items that we felt were clean -up items, that we should go forward on
those, it has no bearing on the approval -- adoption of a new Comprehensive Plan. These
are things that we just need to get on the books for you and for us, so we can efficiently
do our jobs better. So, if you would like, I would take a few minutes to do that and go
through those changes or if you're ready to jump in and just start your -- firing away your
questions or any comments on any of the proposed changes I will just stand there and
you tell me how you would like to proceed with tonight's changes.
De Weerd: Council, you had asked for more time to digest and you would come back
with questions. So, perhaps that's the way we can approach it.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: It's okay. I have had ample opportunity to kind of review different variations
and versions. So, I have had most of my questions addressed. I noticed this looks a little
bit differently, though, than the version that was in our packet. So, Madam Mayor, if you're
okay and Council, maybe you can hit a high level review, these are the pieces that are
clean-up, these are the pieces that could potentially be delayed, just so that Council -- we
got a -- and, then, Madam Mayor, if Council has questions as we are kind of going through
that they could do that at each opportunity. Does that make since?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 67 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 64 of 77
Parsons: Yep. I will try to stay brief and concise for you. How does that sound? And we
can get you out of here this evening.
De Weerd: That would be awesome.
Parsons: Thank you. So, again, the items highlighted in green are the clean-up items
that I put together for you this afternoon. A lot of them are just definitions and we have
these areas -- like, for example, with the linear open spaces, those are in other areas of
our code, but we don't really have it defined, so we just want to make sure to put a nexus
that our definition matches up with something else in our code. So, it's just -- again, that's
what we mean by clean-up. We are going through that and making sure that there is
some -- if there is a conflict or if something's changed in code or a different jurisdiction,
we want to make sure our code matches their standards as well, so -- the next one, again,
this was a request of a developer just to make it clear for side loaded garages. Again, it
doesn't impact the Comprehensive Plan, it's just basically a setback and getting a garage
closer to the street. Next item we have for you is -- again, it's -- it's just numbered wrong
in the code. So, changing it from a number to a letter for the hours of operations in the
C-N, L-O and C-C districts. So, again, it's just more of a numerical item, rather than any
substantive changes to the text of the code. Next item that we have on here for you, as I
go through this, is outdoor storage. Again, this is a clean-up, just helping us understand
the intent of the code, so we can enforce it more clearly with our customers. So, we are
taking out some -- some verbiage and making it cleaner. The second item from the bottom
is -- we have renamed our tree selection guide. So, again, a clean-up. There is a new
book that we are using -- a new tool to help us do our job , so we just want to make sure
our code matches the new title of that document and, then, as you recall our last -- about
two weeks ago I talked about us giving greater flexibility to reducing buffer sizes
depending on who is the authority -- the decision making body on -- on that particular
application. So, to me this is one that certainly needs to get cleaned up because of the
different application types that we work with. Next item are just including new figures in
our signing ordinance, so just making it clear when you can get bigger signs when you're
adjacent to the freeway. Our graphics are outdated, so, again, clean-up has really no
bearing on the Comprehensive Plan. The item -- this is one that legal's directed us to
move forward on with changes to the variance process and making it clear that you can
approve those through a waiver process. It no longer requires a variance. That came
about as -- from some projects that you recently reviewed and approved and so we are
marrying that up with state code and that's also noted at the very bottom of the page there
were no -- accesses to highways will no longer require a variance. We will treat those
more like a waiver or a request from the developer contingent upon ITD's approval and
share that information with you, so you will -- that will still be within your purview to
approve those or deny those accesses, it just doesn't require that variance process as it
aligns with state statute. The public hearing extension, as you recall -- as we get around
the holiday season sometimes we can't get our commission recs to you in an orderly -- in
a timely manner. The 45 day window creates an issue for us, so most -- last time -- last
year there was a couple times where we had to continue a project just so that we could
stay within compliance with this 45 day window. So, we are making it more consistent to
extend that from 45 days to 70 days to get some greater flexibility as well. And, then, the
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 68 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 65 of 77
last item, our notice abatement standards are referenced in Chapter 3 of our code as
alternative compliance and this is really just moving this to this table to link it to that other
section of code and keep all of our -- our alternative compliance requests consistent on
one table. So, those are the items that we have as part of the clean-up. All the other
items that I haven't highlighted, if those are things that you don't feel are necessary to
move forward and could wait until the comp plan is done, certainly staff is happy to hold
off on those and maybe revisit those at a later date with a future of UDC update. Any
questions?
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: I know that one of the -- one of the changes in regard to open space is going to
be postponed for a little while until after the Comprehensive Plan is complete. However,
did staff have a chance to meet with the BCA or a representative from the BCA or folks
from the development community in regard to striking a deal in regard to that ?
De Weerd: Making a deal?
Bernt: Striking a deal would be like talking about it -- I mean it's like -- there was already
discussion. I mean did you come to an agreement.
Parsons: Mayor and Council, I think this -- this -- the changes that you see before you
are the deal that we kind of worked out as we went from -- maybe before -- you know, we
met before we went to P&Z. We compromised on some changes and, then, as we -- as
I shared with you last week or two weeks ago , these were the changes that we kind of
compromised on now for some -- some fixes to our code to help us administer it better.
But I think the biggest rub from the BCA and the development community was just staff's
position of just removing the landscape buffers from counting towards the open space
and so this version that you see before you, that's been added back into the code, so
nothing is changing that -- that will stay the status quo and, then, as we get through that
Comprehensive Plan update that's when we have got buy-in from the development
community and the BCA that they are willing to work with staff and overhaul our open
space and our amenities ordinance and probing back something that's a little more
comprehensive for this body to take under consideration.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: And you said last time that we would look at the open space -- primarily the
open space and design standards that you really want to bring back for -- certainly a more
in-depth discussion with stakeholder groups.
Hood: And, Madam Mayor, if I can, Bill, Madam Mayor and Councilman Bernt, so the one
conversation -- and I believe we were there for most, if not all, of the steering committee
meeting. That's the only real conversations that's occurred since two weeks ago when
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 69 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 66 of 77
you all discussed, which we did as part of our last Comprehensive Plan steering
committee meeting discuss generally open space and site design standards and so the
talk is to establish that committee and we will be looking for names and volunteers. I
know there is at least one in the audience and some that may not be volunteered, but we
volun-told to be part of it. Kicking that off later this fall. So, we can kind of hit the ground
running while the comp plan is going through the adoption process, already have a
meeting or two underneath our belt to understand where we are going to be going with
developing site design standards, open space and amenities. So, that all will be done
later. But in two weeks we couldn't have got this done. I mean there have been -- this is
-- this is a pretty heavy lift. It's just going to include people from all points of our community
bringing them to the table. We limit the number -- we can have 50 people on the
committee, but when you get the right people and it's going to take a series of meetings
to get this right.
Bernt: Madam Mayor, follow up. Just to clar -- I didn't -- I didn't -- I choose the wrong. I
did -- I did -- further this is going to be like a big deal to me. I should have -- you know, I
may -- I should have used the word agreement. Like -- you know, like discuss. That
probably would have been better. Collaboration. There we go.
Hood: Well -- and again, Madam Mayor, Councilman Bernt, just a little bit -- Bill mentioned
it, but this isn't the version that staff originally proposed. The Planning and Zoning
Commission had some changes and tweaks and so, really, it does reflect some more
middle ground, if you will, stepping back in favor of this bigger effort that's forthcoming. If
I can just real quick while I have the microphone. I guess I would couch this a little bit
different than the way Bill did. I -- because the open space -- so, the one we have got it
on now, 11 -3-G, 3-D, I wouldn't classify them all as clean-up, but I really don't see any
correlation between the Comprehensive Plan and what staff has proposed here. If you
feel differently that's fine. I -- staff's recommendation is still to move forward with all these,
maybe with the caveat of this qualified open space one, holding off on that. The rest of
these, though, the comp plan guides, but this -- a lot of the stuff in here really just helps
us do our job better. But if you have -- you have hesitations on that, none of this is urgent
and, again, we are not pounding our fist saying you have to or else. Okay. Do our job
now. No. We will be fine. If any of these don't feel right, let's push pause on them. But
our recommendation is move them all forward.
Bongiorno: Madam Mayor, if -- over here. This side. If I may, I'm with Caleb. We have
a parking problem and this will help solve a lot of the problems. So, I would -- I also would
like to see it moved forward as well.
De Weerd: Thank you, chief.
Colaianni: Sorry, I was sending an e-mail to Emily. Yes. What Joe said.
De Weerd: What Joe said. Wow. Never say yes to a question you didn't hear. That was
good advice from my mom.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 70 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 67 of 77
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Since we are on parking, I had a question on 11-3C-4A, parking clean-up.
Is that -- that is not street parking; correct?
Parsons: Council Woman Little Roberts, is that the vehicle -- the RV parking? Or the
assigned -- the code enforcement change that came forward? You said 11-3C --
Little Roberts: Yes.
Parsons: -- 4A? This one here that talks about --
Little Roberts: Yes. I noticed about -- I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't like in front
of your house street parking. This is temporary. Because that's the only space in our
neighborhood people have to load their boats, trailers, park, and later you're off and
running.
Parsons: Yeah. That's -- that's off-street parking.
Little Roberts: Which is a whole other story.
Hood: And just this one really, again, channeling code enforcement a little bit. Is
somebody taking plates off a registered vehicle and placing them on an other wise
unregistered vehicle, it's just a -- the plates have to belong to the vehicle. You can 't just
have some plates on the vehicle.
Little Roberts: So, that it's all tied together. I was just limiting out the location. So, thank
you.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I'm not sure where Council wants to head tonight. Beside s home. There is
some pieces that I'm not supportive of adopting tonight and there are some other parts
that I think need some additional discussion. The two pieces that cause me a little bit of
concern that I guess I would prefer either a discussion from Council tonight or in the future
are these elements where it removes Council authority to -- I can't remember the term
that we used -- person in charge or leader or whatnot. I think they are well intended, I
just want to make sure that Council has a chance to review -- maybe to review that,
discuss together and render a decision. The other one that I struggle with is our -- and
Bill and I talked at great length about this -- about our parking requirements for multi-
family and the simple reason being is that we see this time and time again , an applicant
meets the requirement for parking in multi-family and they get to Planning and Zoning or
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 71 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 68 of 77
they get to City Council and we asked for more and I think that we have got a development
community that responds in kind and if we -- if we want to raise what the minimum is,
because that's what our expectation is, I think that's -- that's a larger conversation for
Council. What is it that we are truly asking as the minimum so that the development
community can respond in kind. So, those are a couple that I'm a little hesitant to change
or to adopt. I think those two, in my opinion, kind of require some greater conversation
from the Council.
De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Nary, I guess if Council wanted to pull certain sections off of
this for further discussion, there is nothing that would prohibit the rest of them moving
forward?
Nary: That's exactly correct, Madam Mayor. I think that was Mr. Parson's intent was to
take the ones that he and Planning and Mr. Hood didn't think were problematic or
controversial, but, actually, were things that have already been directed or we are already
doing to some degree and parcel them out separately and, then, giving us the opportunity
to get more meatier discussion on the ones that have more of a concern and have a little
bit greater impact.
Cavener: Madam Mayor, an additional piece. For Council and staff's benefit, I'm -- I'm
well aware sometimes that there is things that are of great interest to me and only to me
and so I don't want Council to feel like that we have got to go through a narrative of having
a discussion about something. If the rest of the body feels opposite of mine I think it's
unfair to staff that we -- as we have heard from a citizen group now, we already spent
plenty of time in these meetings and so if -- if the City Council already feels differently
that's -- that's okay. That's what collaborative discussions are all about. So , no hard
feelings if the body would rather go another direction , but I guess I just would encourage
you -- if you do want to go another direction we should also be vocal about that so that
we don't subject everybody to additional meetings and, you know, agenda topics if our
minds have already been made.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: I agree with Councilman Cavener. I think those are two things that we
could have a more in-depth conversation, especially regarding parking and what -- what
we are thinking, so that we are giving clear direction and I think at 10:00 o'clock is probably
not the time to start another discussion that could be lengthy.
Cavener: Madam Mayor? I'm happy to make a motion, I just would also just encourage,
you know, Council -- staff has done a good job of giving us time to review this stuff. I
know we are all very busy with reviewing the budget and with a lot of things going on right
now, I just want to encourage that when we say schedule these things, that we do spend
some time going back through refreshing ourselves. I know that I'm guilty sometimes of
-- we kick something off two weeks and I get here an hour before the meeting and it's like,
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 72 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 69 of 77
oh, I got to -- I got to jump back into that one particular thing. So, let's -- let's be respectful
of staff's time and invest a little time on our back end so we can be more efficient when
we are here in these meetings on these particular items. So, Madam Mayor, I move that
we adopt the changes that are highlighted in green -- the UDC changes that are
highlighted in green, with the exception of any item that contemplates removal of authority
from City Council to be given to someone else. I'm going to look for staff to make sure
that makes sense to you all or if you need some greater clarification. I see a small
grimace, so I don't want to cause any consternation.
Palmer: Second.
Cavener: Sorry, I didn't mean to include my commentary in the motion.
De Weerd: Did you want to include the parking?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Cavener: The second one that -- I am comfortable with modifying my motion to include
parking with the exception of multi-family.
De Weerd: Okay. To remove the parking for multi-family --
Cavener: Yes.
De Weerd: -- for further discussion.
Cavener: Yeah.
De Weerd: Okay.
Cavener: Madam Mayor, thank you. Appreciate the clarification. I, too, am getting a little
rummy.
Hood: Madam Mayor, if I can just -- just clarify. I just want to make sure everyone's
reading that table correctly, because there aren't any proposed changes to multi -family.
Now, we did talk about it and we -- I hear you and just, by the way, you're not the only one
that believes we should look at that some more. I know our Planning and Zoning
Commission -- at least some of them are frustrated with that, too. And the development
community a lot of times are -- it's a moving target. I never know if I have enough or not.
So, we hear that and it is on our list of things to look at further. But just to clarify, the table
there has changes the other parking requirements and multi-family are like -- we don't
have a better solution at this time. So , we weren't posing any. We were proposing to
cleanup some other uses that weren't multi-family at this time, so --
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 73 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 70 of 77
Cavener: Madam Mayor, if I may. Caleb, agreed. I guess this is always the case for me
that when we open up Pandora's Box I like to kind of dig in, which is why we are having
some conversations about other code enforcement issues here in the next few weeks is
these things that are -- percolate to the top and often if we don't act on them when they
are top of mind, we -- then we have other issues that become top of mind. So, I wanted
to shine a light on that in my motion, so that there is an opportunity for us to have that
conversation as a body with staff about what potential changes and I'm not saying it needs
to happen next week or something needs to happen this month, but that -- there is clear
direction from Council, to the Mayor and to staff about some of the items that we want to
have addressed in the relatively near future.
Hood: So, Madam Mayor, if I may follow up with Councilman Cavener a little bit on that.
How much do we read into some of the draft changes we have now with some of the
other uses that aren't multi-family, but are similar and there may be some relationships to
what our multi-family standards may become -- you know, do we start from scratch or do
we start with some of the other changes that we have in some of the conversations we
had public testimony on, some of the -- you know, 55 and over community already, so I
don't know how to read into that. Do you not like it? Or is it just because multi-family
aren't proposing to change is the only reason you aren't adopting now standards to 55
and older age restricted housing? You know what I mean? Like I don't -- I'm not quite --
kind of to your point, we almost had that, in my mind at least, to a finish line and, then, we
could really dive in and get our hands dirty on multi-family, but if you see a correlation
between what we are requiring in age restricted housing and multi-family and single family
even or whatever and you want to come look at that all at the same time , I get that.
Cavener: Sure. And, Madam Mayor, great -- great question. Good feedback. Appreciate
the pushback on that. I guess there is not anything that would preclude us from having
those conversations as well though; right?
Hood: Absolutely. And I think I made that comment last time -- Madam Mayor. Sorry.
That you could make changes now and if you want to change them in six weeks we can
change them again, you know. I don't want to do that, but I'm just saying hypothetically
you could if it turns out it doesn't work, additional changes are necessary, we can change
city code.
De Weerd: Well, this conversation is interesting, but we still have not closed the public
hearing. So, I took your motion and, then, I thought, no, I didn't even get a close of a
public hearing and, who knows, we may have a public member who wants to provide
comment?
Cavener: Just trying to strike a deal with Treg. That's all I'm trying to do.
De Weerd: Oh, my gosh. So --
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 74 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 71 of 77
De Weerd: -- hold that and --
Cavener: I will withdraw my motion.
De Weerd: Okay.
Cavener: And move to close the public hearing.
De Weerd: Okay. First would you like to provide testimony? Okay. Thank you.
Parsons: Madam Mayor, I'm sorry to belabor the conversation, but it is important and I
appreciate Councilman Cavener's pause on directing some of that authority to differen t
bodies, but looking at the proposed changes to the -- there is only two areas that -- where
we have done. One is the landscape buffers between commercial and residential uses.
So, certainly can remove that. And the other one is ditches, laterals and canals where
we are saying that the decision making body can waive the tiling of canals. So, I'm happy
-- I mean certainly we can move forward with those and just put it back that the Council
still has the authority to do that or just scrap it all and bring it back later I guess is my --
for further clarification from -- from Council.
Cavener: Madam Mayor? So, appreciate that. I guess I was mistaken. I thought there
were multiple instances as proposed where those changes were made. I thought I had
four or five listed and I'm not sure if that's because those -- those are the only items that
are highlighted in this green document and if that's the case I'm comfortable with it , then,
as presented.
Parsons: Yeah. So, Mayor, Members of the Council, see, I'm looking through this -- so,
here is the one right here, if you can see my -- it's hard to see my cursor. There is no
arrow, but 2-A it says here we have changed it from City Council to decision making body,
maybe we waive the requirement covering the ditch, that's the one I see here, which is
on page four. The page numbers didn't change from your version until now. Lighting
wouldn't have any effect on the Council. There is the last item on page nine here where
it says decision making body was Council, unless Council would review it at a public
hearing. So, certainly if you want we can just remove this one all together, unless you
would like authority being granted at different -- by different -- but other than that I can't
-- I don't recall -- actually for the access we actually gave you more power. I didn't like
that. It said decision making body and actually said, no, I want the City Council to make
-- so, in Item 3-H-3 here we changed it from decision making body may consider, we said,
no, we want City Council to be the ones that approve the changes to access to state
highways. No other body should have the right. So, that's why I'm -- I'm not sure where
you saw it throughout the document here, but those are the only two items, skimming
through this, that I see where we have made some -- some changes that may give you
some pause.
Cavener: Madam Mayor? Bill, I may have -- I very well may be wrong and just confused
from my -- my Sunday night notes versus where we are today.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 75 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 72 of 77
Parsons: Well, if I hear you, are you good with those changes to move forward? Okay.
Cavener: I am at this point. I'm satisfied with that. I don't know how the rest of the body
feels, just want to make sure that --
De Weerd: I think Ty was seconding your comment just a couple of statements ago,
so --
Cavener: Okay.
De Weerd: Do I have a motion?
Cavener: So, Madam Mayor, I move that we adopt --
Palmer: Close.
Cavener: Oh, thank you, Council Member Palmer. Madam Mayor, I move that we close
the public hearing on Item 6-E, public hearing for UDC Text Amendment H-2019-0049.
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All those in favor
say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
De Weerd: Okay.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I'm a little gun shy, but I move that we approve the proposed UDC text
amendments that have been highlighted by staff in green.
Palmer: Second.
Cavener: Wait. Oh, Madam Mayor. With the exception of the landscape or has that part
already been removed? I'm sorry, guys, I'm --
Palmer: As proposed.
De Weerd: Okay. So, I have a motion and a second. Discussion. Any -- any clarity over
there, Bill?
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 76 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 73 of 77
Parsons: I need some clarity, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. So, is it your
intent that the code enforcement changes go along with this? Or are you wanting to pull
those? We have two pieces here. We have code enforcement in gray. The green are
clean-up and some of the -- as Caleb said, all of them are -- I was under the impression
you wanted all of them to go forward except for that landscape buffer change.
Cavener: Not getting any direction from anybody else, Bill, I'm satisfied with that. I -- I
am comfortable with the particular piece that's related to code enforcement, so,
essentially, if you need my motion to be approving all UDC text amendments with the
exception of the element related to the open space, I'm good with that.
Parsons: Landscape buffer reduction, yes.
Cavener: Perfect. Yes.
Parsons: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. How about a second?
Palmer: Yes.
De Weerd: Okay.
Cavener: I'm making it hard on you guys. I'm sorry.
De Weerd: It's 10:15. If there is no discussion, Mr. Clerk, will you call roll.
Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, absent; Cavener, yea; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea;
Bernt, yea.
De Weerd: All ayes. Motion carried.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 8: Ordinances
A. Ordinance No. 19-1831: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City
Code As Codified At Title 11, To Create A New Residential Self-
Storage Use That Includes A Definition; Specific Use
Standards And Specifies Conditional Use Approval In The R-15
And R-40 Zoning Districts; And Providing For A Waiver Of The
Reading Rules; And Providing An Effective Date.
De Weerd: Item 8-A is Ordinance 19-1831. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, read this by title.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 77 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 74 of 77
Johnson: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Ordinance amending Meridian City Code as
codified in Title 11, to create a new residential self -storage use that includes a definition;
specific use standards and specifies conditional use approval in the R-15 and R-40 zoning
districts; and providing for a waiver of the reading rules and providing an effective date.
De Weerd: You have heard this ordinance read by title. Since there is no one left I won't
ask if anyone wants to hear it read in its entirety, so, Council, what's your pleasure?
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mrs. Little Roberts.
Little Roberts: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Ordinance 19-1831 with
suspension of rules.
De Weerd: Do I have a second? Do I have a second?
Palmer: Second.
De Weerd: Thank you. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8 -A. If there is no
discussion, since there wasn't too much before I got a second, I will ask Mr. Clerk to call
roll.
Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, absent; Cavener, nay; Palmer, nay; Little Roberts, yea;
Bernt, nay.
De Weerd: Oh. Okay. The motion fails.
MOTION FAILED: ONE AYE. THREE NAYS. TWO ABSENT.
De Weerd: Do we need to have some discussion on this?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I'm happy to provide brief discussion. I didn't support this at the time.
Bernt: Me either.
Cavener: It's not something that I supported at this particular juncture.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 78 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 75 of 77
Bernt: I don't mean to prolong this meeting. It's not the intent and all kidding aside, I
didn't support this, I voted the same way -- was the last week or the week prior with -- with
Councilman Cavener. I feel like this opens up a huge can of worms going forward in
regard to future development and using, you know, storage units as an amenity. I'm okay
with it being -- with it being at R-40, but I think R-15 creates maybe a little bit too much
residential for me to support it, so --
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: It's not what I thought it was and I was in support of it. I don't know why when I
glanced at the agenda before it was something else on my mind. So, are we in a position
where we should -- just the motion failed, so we didn't deny the ordinance.
De Weerd: Would you like a fully seated Council to make the decision?
Bernt: My vote is going to be no regardless, so --
De Weerd: So, I would accept one of two motions, either to continue this until July 9th or
another motion either to approve or to deny.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: Is it appropriate to make the exact same motion that just failed?
Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, so this ordinance was prepared at the
direction of the Council. You voted in favor of this two weeks ago , which also, then,
prompted the applicant to apply to do this in their subdivision -- apply to modify their
development agreement. So, it has put some wheels in motion. You can either move to
approve it -- again, because we would put it back on the agenda, because I don't know
-- I don't have nothing else to do for you tonight.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
Nary: Or you can move to continue it.
Bernt: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bernt.
Bernt: You know, Council Member Cavener and I were in the minority. We are just being
consistent with our votes from a week or two ago. This was voted -- I don't know if it
would be fair to the applicant, who is -- I get why you -- you would want to change your
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 79 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 76 of 77
vote and to continue it. I would understand if that -- if that would be the -- in all fairness
to the applicant that his -- their -- their application was approved and so -- but I guess
that's my explanation of why I voted no and why it would make sense, because of the
original vote to the application, it would be make sense to continue it.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I move -- sorry if I mess this up. I move we approve Ordinance 19-1831 with
suspension of rules.
Little Roberts: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve Item 8-A. Mr. Clerk, will you
call roll.
Roll call: Borton, absent; Milam, absent; Cavener, nay; Palmer, yea; Little Roberts, yea;
Bernt, nay.
De Weerd: And I vote no.
MOTION FAILED: TWO AYES. TWO NAYS. TWO ABSENT. MAYOR NAY.
Palmer: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Palmer.
Palmer: I move we continue Item 8-A to July 9th is our next meeting?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Little Roberts: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to continue Item 8-A to July 9th. All those in
favor say aye. Any opposed? The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Item 9: Future Meeting Topics
De Weerd: Any item under Item 9?
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Meridian City Council Meeting Agenda July 9, 2019 – Page 80 of 542
Meridian City Council
June 25, 2019
Page 77 of 77
Cavener: Just a plug for Council. We are getting closer and closer to our budget
workshop. I'm sure all of you have been busy writing your book, writing your questions.
I'm just as guilty. We need to get those questions to staff as soon as possible. So, If you
haven't done that yet, please, try and wrap up your review in the next day or two and get
those questions to staff, so that the Finance Department and our directors can have time
to be able to provide the most accurate response as possible.
De Weerd: Thank you. You took the words right out of my mouth. So, with that I would
entertain a motion to adjourn.
Cavener: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Cavener.
Cavener: I move we adjourn our meeting.
Little Roberts: Second.
De Weerd: I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. All ayes.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:23 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
MAYOR TAMMY E WEERD DATE APPROVED
/ G0�Q�{tATtii, `J /
ATTEST:
��
1 / C ih. of
CHRI JOH S ITY CL RK IDIAN�w
'OAHO
SEAL