HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-06-01 Regular Meeting Item#2.
Meridian City Council Regular Meetinq June 1, 2021.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:12 p.m., Tuesday, June
1, 2021, by Mayor Robert Simison.
Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt and Liz
Strader,
Members Absent: Brad Hoaglun and Jessica Perreault.
Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Joe Dodson,Alan Tiefenbach, Jamie
Leslie, Joe Bongiorno and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
X Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton
Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt
Jessica Perreault _X Luke Cavener
_X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison
Simison: Council, we will call the meeting to order. For the record it is June 1st, 2021,
at 6:12 p.m. We will begin this evening's meeting with roll call attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Simison: Next item is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us
in the pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
Simison: Our next item is the community invocation, which will be given tonight by Vinnie
Hanke with Valley Life Community Church. If you would all, please, join us in the
community invocation or take this as a moment of silence and reflection.
Hanke: Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, thank you, again, for the invitation to be
with you all and pray for you. God, we thank you for this evening. We thank you for the
privilege and freedoms to gather together to lead in the community. I pray for each
member of the City Council, God, that you might grant them wisdom to lead as servants
and to seek the greater good of the community that they lead. I pray for their constituents,
God, that they would honor them with respect. I pray for the community members tonight
as they speak. God, would you just give them a spirit of fellowship as we seek to be a
city that loves our neighbors as ourselves. We pray for the first responders, the teachers
and healthcare workers, God, who continue to serve our community. We ask all of this
through Christ's name, amen.
Page 7
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 2 of 76
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Simison: Next item up is the adoption of the agenda.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we adopt the agenda as published.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye? Opposed nay. The
ayes have it and the agenda is adopted.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
1. Approve Minutes of the May 13, 2021 City Council Joint Meeting with
West Ada School District
2. Approve Minutes of the May 18, 2021 City Council Work Session
3. Approve Minutes of the May 18, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting
4. East Ridge No. 2 Fire Easement
5. Edington Fire Access Easement Agreement
6. Final Order for Apex Southeast No. 2 (FP-2021-0032) by Brighton
Development, Located on the East Side of S. Locust Grove Rd.,
Approximately '/4 Mile South of E. Lake Hazel Rd.
7. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Prescott Ridge (H-2020-
0047) by Providence Properties, LLC, Located on the South Side of
W. Chinden Blvd. and on the East Side of N. McDermott Rd.
8. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Roberts Annexation (H-
2021-0013) by Rodney Evans + Partners, PLLC, Located at 1630 E.
Paradise Ln.
9. Addendum to the Development Agreement Between the City of
Meridian and Mark Bigelow (Owner/Developer) for 1450 W. Ustick
Page 8
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 3 of 76
MDA (H-2021-0016), Located on the Northeast Corner of N. Linder Rd.
and W. Ustick Rd.
10. Cooperative Agreement Between the City of Meridian and the Idaho
Transportation Department for Landscaping Maintenance (Project
No. A019(944), Key No. 19944), Located at US20/26, Locust Grove Rd.
to Eagle Rd.
11. City of Meridian Financial Report - April 2021
Simison: Next item is the Consent Agenda.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: No changes to the Consent Agenda as well. So, I move that we approve the
Consent Agenda, for the Mayor to sign and for the Clerk to attest.
Borton: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. Is there any
discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it and
the Consent Agenda is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
Simison: There were no items moved from the Consent Agenda.
PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics
Simison: So, Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up under Public Forum?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we have one sign up, Sally Reynolds.
Simison: Okay. If you would like to come forward for three minutes.
Reynolds: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Members of City Council. Sally Reynolds, residing
at 1166 West Bacall Street in Meridian, Idaho. So, recently I reviewed a petition forjudicial
review summary handed down by Judge Norton in favor of the City of Meridian and I
remembered a topic I wanted to bring before City Council for discussions at a later date.
You may end up addressing it internally or at a work meeting or not at all, but I would like
to state it on the record for information for the public. My request is that the direction for
public hearing state that if you are representing a group of people and are given ten
Page 9
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 4 of 76
minutes, that you retain your three minutes as an individual citizen to address concerns
with your own personal property. Here is the reason for the request. In the judgment the
question of standing was addressed, basically, and this is quoting directly from the
judgment -- LUPO only allows an affected person, defined as a person with a bona fide
interest in real property, which may be adversely affected -- affected by land use decision
to challenge the decision. In order to satisfy the requirement of standing the petitioners
must allege or demonstrate an injury, in fact, and substantial likelihood that the judicial
relief requested will prevent or redress the claim injury. The petitioners must establish a
peculiar or personal injury that is different than that suffered by any member of the public.
Proximity is an important factor of standing and a court is more likely to find standing
where the landowner property is adjoining the proposed development or adjacent to it,
closed quote. Two of us, Mr. Eastman and myself, live on adjacent land. But Mr.
Eastman's standing failed based on the fact that he -- he only addressed traffic concerns
in his testimony. We did not realize each person had to speak to each alleged harm, so
he was raising traffic concerns for everyone. While I did offer ample testimony about how
noise, lights, and odor would affect neighbors from the adjoining development, I was only
speaking on behalf of the larger group and never directly personally cited my own
property. The judgment reads: While Reynolds raised general concerns within the
neighboring commercial development that was actually approved, she presented no
evidence during cited testimony that her residence was directly impacted by noise, odor,
or lights from the development approved by the City Council. Reynolds failed to show
that the location of her property exposed her residence to a particularized harm from the
lights, odors, or sounds of the approved development. As a side note, I would like to state
that over the past year I have been sleeping with noise cancelling headphones, there is
a light that shines directly into my bedroom window throughout the night, and I have as
of recently two weeks called non-emergency dispatch regarding illegal activity going on
at the property. I don't say this to complain, I say it to show that reality and what a judge
says is reality can be completely different. Three years ago I know that if I had asked the
prior mayor and prior city council to grant me an extra three minutes to address my
personal property I would have been denied. Now, the more educated part of me wishes
that I had requested that, because if I had been denied I could have filed a petition on
that basis that my due process rights were violated to protect my own personal property.
But you live and learn from your mistakes and I hope that someone can learn from mine.
I would advise any member -- oh.
Simison: You can finish your comment.
Reynolds: I would advise any member of the public speaking on behalf of their group
request that their own three minutes be retained so they can illustrate how their own
personal property will be impacted by a future development. I also urge residents who
are close to a development to address every issue that will affect their property. If the
City of Meridian is serious about allowing residents the opportunity to address their
personal property rights, I request that that clarifying verbiage of citizens rights be added
to public hearing instructions. Thank you.
Page 10
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 5 of 76
Simison: Thank you. We will take that under advisement. Council, just a moment of
personal privilege at least from my perspective. I have not been asking when people say
they are there to testify on the HOA, asking others to raise their hand to showcase that,
I'm allowing everyone the opportunity to provide testimony in this format, that the HOA
representative does not preclude your right to provide testimony. That's how I have been
handling these just moving forward.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Is it appropriate just to make comment or is that --
Simison: Would you like a point of personal privilege?
Bernt: Yes, please. Mr. Mayor, personal privilege.
Simison: Okay.
Bernt: I just think that what Ms. Reynolds said is incredibly important and I think that --
think that as a body we will take that under advisement. I think Mr. Mayor has already
been handling that, but I think that we probably need to reach out to Planning and Zoning,
so that they are under the same guidelines as well.
Nary: We can do that, sir.
Simison: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, anything -- anybody else --
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, that was all.
ACTION ITEMS
12. Public Hearing Continued from May 18, 2021 for Shafer View Terrace
(H-2020-0117) by Breckon Land Design, Located on the East Side of
S. Meridian Rd./SH 69, Midway Between E. Amity Rd. and E. Lake
Hazel Rd.
A. Request: Annexation of a total of 40.48 acres of land with R-2
(10.66 acres) and R-4 (29.82 acres) zoning districts.
B. Request: A Preliminary Plat consisting of 50 buildable lots and 10
common lots on 39.01 acres of land in the R-2 and R-4 zoning
districts.
Page 11
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 6 of 76
Simison: Okay. Then we will move into our Action Items for this evening. First up is a
public hearing continued from May 18th, 2021, for Shafer View Terrace, H-2020-0117.
will ask staff if they have any comments that they would like to make as we move forward.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. This project was continued in
order for staff and the applicant to work with ITD on the northbound right turn lane on
South Meridian Road, State Highway 69, onto East Quartz Creek Street and immediate
versus long term needs for that. The applicant did offer to construct a right turn lane with
development of this site at the last hearing and they did submit a concept drawing of the
turn lane, which has been conceptually approved by ITD. Therefore, staff is
recommending a development agreement provision is added that requires the developer
to construct a northbound right turn lane on South Meridian Road, State Highway 69, onto
East Quartz Creek Street with the first development phase in accord with ITD standards.
And just to remind you, there are three requests for waivers that are associated with this
application. They are highlighted in your hearing outline tonight. Would you like me to
go through those or is that sufficient for you?
Simison: Council, would you like anything further from staff at this time? No? It sounds
like we are good.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Simison: Okay. Any questions for staff? Okay. I see the applicant is with us. Mr.
Breckon, would you like to make any comments?
Breckon: Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, yes, if I could I would like to just pull up the
sketch that we prepared that depicts the right hand turn lane. So, here is the sketch that
we sent to IPD. Meridian Road. North is facing to the right hand side of the page. Here
is East Quartz Creek Street and the Bernie Lateral on the south side and the right hand
turn lane is depicted in the blue color. That was tied into existing improvements and also
proposed improvements on the south side of East Quartz Creek Street. The green strip
depicts what we expect to be additional right of way dedication and dimensions here that
depict what would show the taper, as well as the decel lane to allow for a right hand turn.
The improvements along the edge here are the same as were previously shown and I
would stand for questions.
Simison: Thank you, Mr. Breckon. Council, any questions?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Jon, it looks like all of the existing plan was just compressed 12 feet -- everything
shifted east a lot -- are the ones that absorbed the 12 foot shift to accommodate the lane.
Is that a fair summary?
Page 12
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 7 of 76
Breckon: Yes. Mr. Mayor, Councilman Borton, that's correct. The right hand turn lane
was added, along with shoulder and, then, everything was shifted over accordingly to
allow for the turn lane.
Borton: Follow up, Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Is it -- is it contemplated to staff's comment about the installation of this, that it
would be complete and approved by ITD and prior to, for example, the first CO or first
permit? When would this need to be completed? How would we condition that in the
DA?
Breckon: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Borton, I -- I guess I presume that this right hand turn
lane would be conditioned as part of the first phase of the construction of the proposed
development. So, this would be included in the -- the construction documents and we
would work with ITD to refine it as need be, but it would need to go in right away or the
first phase.
Borton: Okay. Thanks.
Simison: Council, any additional questions? Okay. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, do we have
anybody signed up to provide testimony on this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not.
Simison: Okay. If there is anybody in the audience that would like to provide testimony
on this item, if you would like to come forward to the podium at this time and do so or if
there is anybody online that we would like to provide testimony, please, use the raise your
hand feature at the bottom of the zoom platform. Seeing nobody, Mr. Breckon, would you
like to make any final comments?
Breckon: Mr. Mayor, no, I would stand for questions. I believe we have talked through
all the items. Is there is any -- any other questions I would be glad to address them.
Simison: Okay. Thank you.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Either for Sonya or Legal. To that question I had asked about the trigger point
for completion of this northbound right hand turn lane, that it would be installed, completed
prior to blank. I'm thinking of construction traffic, even though it might not be a lot of
northbound, just so there is some clear metrics as to when it has to be done in the DA.
Page 13
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 8 of 76
Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess from a tracking standpoint -- I
mean it's either -- for the city it's either based on building permits like -- or before first
occupancy and so there has got to be some -- some significant point that would make
sense. You know, ITD, as they state in the updated staff report, don't have a timetable on
when that road widening may occur. It could be five years from now, it could be ten years
from now. So, if the desire of the Council is that -- that there be a right hand turn lane,
decel lane installed, it really is whether you want it on the -- the first building permit to be
issued or the last CO to be issued and I think that's the best way for us to track it I would
think, unless Sonya has a different perspective. Pardon me? Right. So -- yeah. Yeah.
So, first CO -- so, Sonya was saying -- so silently -- the first -- either the first building
permit or the first CO, that that's the -- a trigger point that they can keep track of that can
be managed. The other question is that the -- is this turn lane for the part north of the
canal and not the four houses south of the canal? Is that right?
Allen: Yes.
Nary: So, I don't know what the sequence of construction is intended. So, I don't know
if -- if -- again, if it's the first building permit or first CO of the buildings north of the canal,
so --
Borton: Got it. Thank you.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: From the --from the prior conversation and appreciate the applicant getting back
with ITD and being willing to add a safety feature like this and ITD was willing to
accommodate it and understanding it's a little compressed and everyone seemed to
cooperate to try and account for some added safety, if it -- if there wasn't an objection to
having it installed prior to the first building permit -- I mean it errors on the side of safety
to the extent there may be some construction traffic at the start that it could mean a little
bit earlier if that metrics is acceptable, the first building permit and it's measurable and
errors on the side of safety.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, I agree with Mr. Borton.
Simison: Okay. Council, what's your -- what's your desire at this time? Would you like
to close the public hearing? Leave it open?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Just to kind of close the loop on the waiver conditions that staff had alluded to,
the three that are in the report, it didn't sound like from the prior discussions that staff had
Page 14
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 9 of 76
any -- any overwhelming concern with them in light of the site. Some of the site
constraints that you have referenced seem to justify the requests here.
Allen: Yes. I got it. I got it. Give me a second. Mr. Mayor, Councilman Borton, yeah,
staff has no major concerns with that, if Council should wish to approve that. Thank you.
Borton: Okay. Thanks.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I guess my only question on that condition for Sonya was just for the --the waiver
to allow the McBurney Lateral to remain open if we feel like we have adequate fencing to
preserve public safety.
Allen: Is that a question of staff?
Strader: Yes, please.
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman, they have -- I believe it's wrought iron fencing along
there. If the applicant would confirm.
Breckon: Yes. That's correct. Wrought iron fence.
Allen: So, yes, that's sufficient for staff--
Strader: Thank you.
Allen: -- to meet the code requirement.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: If there is no discussion, I'm going to go ahead and close -- or make a motion to
close the public hearing on Item 12, H-2020-0117.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, I will second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Page 15
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 10 of 76
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I think this application, which we saw earlier, it makes good sense -- the zoning
and plat itself makes particular sense at this location. The added turn lane really was one
of the primary concerns that has now been addressed. So, I'm going to make a motion
that we approve H-2020-0117 as presented in the staff report of June 1 , 2021, and to
include the DA provision that requires the right-hand northbound turn lane on Highway 69
to be completed prior to the first building permit and to approve the waiver of UDC 11-6C-
3F to allow Block 3 to exceed 1 ,200 feet due to the existing site constraints as requested
and set in the staff report to approve the waiver of UDC 11-3A-6B, allowing the McBurney
Lateral to remain open and not piped. It will be fenced as previously discussed. And to
approve the waiver of UDC 11-3A-3, addressing the access points to collector streets as
set forth in the staff report.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, I will second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Before we vote I just
want to at least give my thanks to the applicant for bringing this needed safety
improvement to the road. I know they are not fun, but they are needed, especially as we
are developing along state highways, which have even less tools to actually see
improvements done in a timely fashion than ACHD. So, thank you for that. So, with that
clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, absent; Hoaglun, absent;
Strader, yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Simison: Thank you very much. Best of luck on your project.
Breckon: Thank you.
13. Public Hearing for Artemisia Subdivision (H-2021-0014) by
Engineering Solutions, LLP, Located at 1690 W. Overland Rd.
A. Request: Annexation of 25.67-acres of land with a C-G (General
Retail and Service Commercial) zoning district.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 9 commercial buildable lots
on 19.26-acres of land in the C-G zoning district.
Simison: Next item up is a public hearing for H-2021-0014. We are going to open this
public hearing with staff comments. I was not going to try that word right now.
Page 16
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 11 of 76
Allen: Alrighty. Just one sec here. Alrighty. The next application before you is a request
for annexation and zoning and a preliminary plat and this site consists of 19.26 acres of
land. It's zoned RUT in Ada county and is located at 1690 West Overland Road at the
northwest corner of Overland and Linder Roads. The Comprehensive Plan future land
use map designation is mixed employment, which is the 13.4 acres shown in gray there
on the center map and mixed use commercial, which is the brown 5.9 acres in the Ten
Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. Annexation and zoning of 25.67 acres of land with
a C-G, general retail and service commercial, zoning district consistent with the
associated future land use map designations. The proposed use will include sales and
service for commercial fleet operations for large commercial trucks and motorhomes and
vehicle accessory sales, an installation facility for customizing vehicles, parts develop --
excuse me -- parks department and reconditioning facility for used cars for Kendall Ford
Auto Center. The applicant anticipates the future uses and the six slots located along
West Overland Road and adjacent to South Spanish Sun Way to be retail and office
space. As a provision of annexation staff recommends a development agreement is
required to ensure future development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
the Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan. Because a conceptual development plan
was not submitted for the commercial and office uses on the southern portion of the
property staff is recommending the agreement is modified prior to development of that
area to include a concept plan that is consistent with the comp plan. A preliminary plat is
proposed consisting of nine commercial buildable lots on 19.26 acres of land in the
proposed C-G zoning district. Lots range in size from .51 of an acre to 9.7 acres, with an
average lot size of 2.01 acres. The plat is proposed to develop in one phase. One public
street access, South Spanish Sun Way, is proposed via West Overland Road and one
stub -- excuse me -- stub street, West Tossa Street, is proposed to be at the west
boundary for future extension in accord with the transportation system map in the Ten
Mile Plan. Linder Road is scheduled in the five year work plan to be constructed as a
new four lane 1-84 overpass and widened to five lanes on each side of 1-84, with a level
three bike facility from Franklin Road to Overland Road in the future. The Overland-Linder
Road intersection is listed in the CIP to be widened and signalized between 2036 and
2040. A ten foot wide detached multi-use pathway is proposed as required within the
street buffer along South Linder Road in accord with the pathways master plan. Detached
sidewalks are required along all streets with street trees. The Hardin Drain crosses the
northeast corner of this site and is proposed to be piped. And this is just a copy of the
ACHD preliminary lines map. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the
Kendall Ford site as shown. Two single story structures are proposed on Lot 1, Block 1,
with building materials consisting of ACM panels, which are aluminum composite,
corrugated horizontal metal panels, CMU in two different colors. Metal sunscreens and
canopies are proposed over some windows. Overhead doors are proposed on the north,
east and west sides of the building. Final design must comply with the design standards
in the Ten Mile plan and the design standards in the architectural standards manual. The
Commission did recommend approval of these applications. Becky McKay, Engineering
Solutions, the applicant's representative, testified in favor and also submitted written
testimony in agreement with the staff report. No one testified in opposition or commented
on the application. Key issue of discussion by the Commission. They were in favor of
the location of the proposed use and the site design. There were no changes to the staff
Page 17
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 12 of 76
recommendation by the Commission and no outstanding issues for Council. And there
has been no written testimony received since the Commission hearing. Staff will stand
for any questions. The applicant is present in chambers to testify.
Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Sonya, is there right of way dedication with this different than what would normally
be? If just the expansion of the road, meaning more right of way to account for overpass
facing?
Allen: I am not sure without looking at the report. It's covered in the ACHD report. If you
would like that answer I can look.
Borton: At some point. I presume we would have covered that and tried to address to
make sure that if there is going to be a future overpass that there is right of way
necessary --
Allen: Yeah.
Borton: -- for it.
Allen: Yeah.
Borton: Okay.
Allen: He is planning for that. So, it's covered in their report.
Borton: Thanks.
Simison: Counsel, any further questions at this time? Okay. Then I will ask the applicant
to, please, come forward. If you can state your name and address for the record and be
recognized for 15 minutes.
Stiles: My name is Shari Stiles. I'm with Engineering Solutions. 1029 North Rosario
Street in Meridian. Thank you, Mayor Simison and Council Members. I'm here tonight
representing Idaho Auto Mall, LLC, on this annexation and zoning and preliminary plat
application. I won't repeat what Sonya has very adequately -- adequately covered in her
staff report. I will just add a couple of things. Just one note. There will be no vehicle
sales or major auto body repair at this location. It will be strictly for the servicing and --
and the -- and the other uses. Reconditioning cars in the fleet operations, accessories,
that kind of thing. So, just --just so you know, that-- it's not going to be a sales lot. Idaho
Auto Mall and Kendall Ford chose this particular location because of its proximity to the
Page 18
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 13 of 76
Ten Mile interchange. That was a big draw. Visibility from the freeway. And another big
draw was that they were located right just west of Camping World, which uses the Ford
chassis and -- on a lot of their motor homes that -- that if they want accessories added or
need warranty work or services done, Kendall Ford would be there available to do that
work. We are going to be consolidating all of these light services into this one location.
We have multiple locations throughout the area that perform these types of services, but
they wanted one central location that they could do that. Right now they have moved
their company's headquarters. They are -- into Meridian. They have purchased a lot and
a building off of Copper Point Way in Silverstone Subdivision and all of their -- their
corporate headquarters is now in the City of Meridian. We are hoping to get it all at the
same location, but some of the design constraints and the timelines didn't mesh, so -- so
they are glad to be able to locate that facility as well. Just one note on Sonya's report.
The Hardin Drain has now been piped. We went through Nampa-Meridian Irrigation
District and obtained a license agreement with them and wanted to beat the irrigation
season. So, that drain has been completely piped and as well the irrigation pipe to the
property to the west has been completely piped and -- and approved by the adjacent
neighbor there that's on the rural agricultural property right now. You have had careful
attention given to the architectural design of this center. The architect Adam Garcia was
working diligently with the staff and the design guidelines for the Ten Mile Specific Area
Plan to make sure the architecture meets those guidelines. Initially we had one building
and, then, they broke it into seemingly two buildings and reoriented a building, so the
mass from the interchange wouldn't -- wouldn't seem so great and -- and we are really
excited about this facility and it's over 90,000 square feet. Infrastructure and building
costs initially will be 20 million dollars. They are just excited to add to Meridian and the
neighborhood. We had two neighbors appear at the neighborhood meetings and they
were both in support of the project. We have asked for building permits to be allowed
prior to actual recordation of the plat for you to decide and the facility and the length of
the time it will be to do the site prep work and -- and get the initial facility. The other lots
will come as they get users for those lots and -- and come up with a -- a more specific
concept for each of those areas. In summary, we are in agreement with all the staff and
agency recommendations. Oh. And one more thing I just forgot. To answer your
question, Councilman Borton, we are dedicating 60 feet from centerline on Overland
Road for this property. That's basically an expressway width. It is the widest width we
have ever been requested of ACHD on a roadway within the city limits of Meridian. So,
there has been ample right of way dedicated for that. With that we are really excited to
expand Kendall Ford's positive contributions to the City of Meridian and I will stand for
any questions you may have.
Simison: Thank you, Shari. Council, any questions for the applicant? All right. Thank
you very much.
Stiles: Thank you.
Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up on this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, only the applicant signed up.
Page 19
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 14 of 76
Simison: Okay. If there is anybody in the audience who would like to come up and provide
testimony on this item, please, do so at this time or if you are one of our attendees online
and you would like to provide testimony, please, use the raise your hand feature on the
Zoom platform. Seeing no one coming forward or raising their hand, would the applicant
like any final comments? Shari, would you like any final comments, since no one's
provided testimony? Okay.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I know we don't normally allow issuance of a permit prior to recordation of the
final plat, but any concern in this one for that to occur?
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess without talking to the building
department, I mean you are right, normally we wouldn't do that, because, again, there is
some other issues, but if the Council wants to direct that -- that you are okay with that, if
it meets the building officials' metrics or whatever they feel the most comfortable with, I
think that would be okay. I -- again, I don't know whether either Mr. Freckleton or Mr.
Zahorka have some specific things that they require before they do that, so --
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Thank you for that -- framing that well. I don't know if the applicant has a thumbs
up or a concern -- a question with that -- those sideboards. It looks like maybe you did.
Stiles: Shari Stiles. Engineering Solutions. You are asking about the building permit?
We -- we would like to get the -- it's eligible for one permit right now. It's an illegal parcel.
It hasn't been divided. So, similar to other commercial projects within the city I know I
have been granted building permits prior to actually recording the final plat, but realizing,
you know, we have got to have all the fire safety and, you know, meet all the conditions
for public safety issues, you know, any signage that needs to be put in, but they are really
anxious to get started. It's been a long process. Not with you.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I think we are all saying the same thing. So, if -- if we were to approve it with
those sideboards that our building -- you know, subject to approval by our building
department, it's exactly what you are saying, but it still gives us the comfort that nothing
gets messed up.
Stiles: That we would be great. I'm sorry.
Page 20
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 15 of 76
Borton: Okay. No worries. Thank you.
Stiles: Thank you.
Simison: Thank you.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: If there is no discussion, I'm going to make a motion to close the public hearing
on H-2021-0014.
Strader: Second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The
ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: Love seeing Kendall Ford grow and continue to invest and make Meridian home.
So, that is greatly appreciated for sure and this -- this application at this location seems
to be spot on. I think the -- so, I'm going to make a motion that we approve H-2021-0014
as presented in the staff report of June 1 , 2021, and to allow the issuance of the building
permit prior to recording the final plat, subject to the approval of our building department
as described by legal.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, I will second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not,
Clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, absent; Hoaglun, absent;
Strader, yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Best of luck to Kendall
moving forward.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Page 21
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 16 of 76
14. Public Hearing for Linder Village (H-2021-0034) by CSHQA, Located
at 6308 N. Linder Rd.
A. Request: Modification to the Use Area Plan in the Development
Agreement (Inst. #2019-028376) to allow financial uses in the area
currently designated for specialty retail and restaurant uses.
Simison: Okay. Council, next up is a public hearing for Linder Village, H-2021-0034. I
will open this public hearing was staff comments.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The next application is a request
for a development agreement modification. The site is located at the southeast corner of
North Linder Road and West Chinden Boulevard and is zoned C-C and R-8. The
applicant proposes to amend the existing development agreement to update the use area
plan to allow for a financial institution in the area currently designated for specialty retail
and restaurant uses at the northwest corner of the site. No other changes to the uses
shown on the plan are proposed. Substantial compliance with the approved use area
plan is required as a provision of the development agreement to ensure a minimum of
three land use types, commercial, which includes retail restaurants, etcetera. Office,
residential, civic, which includes public open space, parks, entertainment venues, et
cetera, and industrial are provided within the development, consistent with the guidelines
in the Comprehensive Plan for the associated mixed use community future land use map
designation for this site. The conceptual development plan and site circulation plan have
also been updated to reflect the proposed reconfiguration of the site layout in the area
where the financial institution is planned. The adjacent building footprint to the east now
includes a drive through. The pedestrian circulation plan depicts reconfigured pathway
locations consistent with the new site design. The proposed change to include financial,
along with the retail and restaurant uses, will still ensure a mix of land uses are provided
as desired in the mixed use community designation. Because the proposed change
increases the types of uses planned for this area, which is desired, staff is supportive of
the requested amendment to the development agreement. Staff is recommending
approval of the requested modification. Written testimony has been received from
Norman and Julie Davis and they are not in favor of the proposed change to the use area
plan to include financial institutions. They prefer a restaurant and specialty stores in this
location, since there are two other financial institutions within walking distance of this site.
And, lastly, a letter was received from Sally Reynolds. She is against a TCO, temporary
certificate of occupancy, being issued for Winco before the Chinden and Linder Road
improvements are complete, as the development agreement requires all improvements
required by ITD and ACHD associated with this development to be completed within the
time frame required by those agencies in accord with the STARS agreement and
consistent with the traffic impact study prior to issuance of the first C of O within this
development. And just a note that this issue is not the subject of this application.
However, a TCO has already been issued by the building department to allow shelf
stocking and set up of the store, which will expire on June 14th prior to the store opening.
Staff will stand for any questions.
Page 22
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 17 of 76
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for staff?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you. Just a couple questions about that last comment and I understand
it's not the subject of this application, but it did come up. So, if they wanted to actually
open the store prior to the road improvements being completed would that come back
before City Council?
Allen: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, Council, it's -- it's not allowed currently by the
development agreement, so those improvements would need to be complete prior to
issuance of their certificate of occupancy. There -- there may be a temporary occupancy
issued for like not--you know, the landscape buffer along the -- Linder Road and Chinden
possibly, if they aren't able to get that done. That's something that we regularly do. But
the road improvements are required to be complete.
Strader: Got it. It's just a follow up. So, there is a temporary CO that's been issued, but
that's not sufficient for the store to actually open for business, so to be clear?
Allen: No. They are planning to open on the 21 st, I believe, of June and it's set to expire
on the 14th.
Strader: Sorry. But it's temporary -- sorry, Mr. Mayor, didn't mean to step over you. But
-- so, it's temp -- so, it's a temporary CO, but the trigger for the store to actually open for
business is a full CO and that has not been issued.
Allen: That's correct.
Strader: Thank you. That helps my understanding.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council -- or Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, so it would be to follow up on Councilman
Strader, since I don't want to mix it into the record of this, but since you asked the question,
I have been in contact with the building department, development services, and -- and the
economic development team on the process of the store opening and so if the Mayor
would like or the Council would like us to kind of bring that forward next week to answer
those questions, like the roadway and the improvements, we could certainly do that.
Because we do know there has been some concern expressed out there about that and
we have been working really closely. There is a lot of timing that has to occur. Also a lot
of timing that is not necessarily the applicant's responsibility either. So, we can have that
Page 23
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 18 of 76
conversation next Tuesday if you would like and that way it doesn't get mixed into this
conversation about this specific item.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I think if we need to have that conversation we can. It sounds to me like if -- it's
pretty simple to me. If they want to open for business and modify the DA before they
have completed these improvements, staff just told me they have to come back before
us. That's fine for me personally.
Nary: So, let me make it clear. Yes, to modify the DA. If it's compliant with the DA with
what they are doing, then, that's normally a staff level decision. I just didn't know if the
Council would want to note, since you have had some public outreach about it, so --
Simison: All right. Council, any further questions for staff at this time? All right. I will ask
the applicant to, please, come forward.
Marsh: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, for the record Jim Marsh, CSHQR Architects.
200 Broad Street in Boise. Thank you for having us and pleased to present you for this
development application modification request. I believe Sonya has covered the item well
and we are in agreement with the staff report. We do have representatives from ICCU
and ICCU's architect, as well as a representative from the property development. And at
this time I would just stand for any questions that you might have.
Simison: Council, any questions for the applicant?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you. Did you guys try to, you know, find other specialty retailers? How
did that process look? Do you feel like the market is -- well, give us a flavor for why this
change now.
Marsh: Yeah. I mean a lot of this is -- as we developed the concept plan -- this was a
few years ago. As things have changed, those -- the tenant mix and stuff has changed
as well and I can bring up the landowner developer, property development representative
to give you a little bit better breakdown if you would like, but right now we are really
pleased to have a lot of specialty retail coming in as restaurants as well, small restaurants
and some local restaurants. So, I think we have a really good strong mix. Part of the
piece that -- that we are really concentrating are -- are kind of our gem of our whole
development is the very center core of the development, which is the library and, then,
the -- kind of the market main street plaza shops right north of those and that's where we
are really concentrating some of those real kind of boutique types of uses into those
Page 24
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 19 of 76
areas, but we have been real pleased with the mix of restaurants and retail that we have
already had that come on board.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: If you don't mind if you -- there is a lot of public interest in this development.
There has been for a long time. If you are able to disclose who some of those specialty
retailers or restauranteurs are, I think that there would be a lot of interest if you are able
to discuss that.
Marsh: Yeah. Why don't I have Dave McKinney come up, who is with -- he can describe
some of those that he is working with --
McKinney: Council, my name is Dave McKinney. I'm with DMG Real Estate Partners.
2537 West State Street, Boise, Idaho. 83702. Would you like me to address other people
you were talking to or --
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. If you are able to describe, you know, the specialty retailers and others
that are coming in? I think part of the concern is that there was a very specific plan, at
least from my review, that was -- you had kind of given -- you are pivoting a little bit. I'm
curious how you are -- how you are meeting that original intention of having specialty
retailers and in restaurants and kind of a mixture of that sort of those different uses.
McKinney: Sure. First of all, when we started talking with the banks, you know, at this
location, we were thinking that was specialty retail. Retail banking. Now in talking with
staff it was determined that it was more financial use or office use. So, that's why we are
here tonight. Other uses that we have -- other people that we have signed leases with
stretch from restaurants, sit down restaurants, family style restaurants, more quick service
restaurants. We do have a lot of drive through uses now with COVID. Other retailers,
other than Winco, we have talked with Pet Category. We have talked with Home
Improvement. You know, quite a few different uses. Now, is there something specific or
-- I could give names, but, you know, what -- it is somewhat confidential, so --
Strader: I don't think we are asking you to disclose anything confidential, but it just feels
like there was one direction that it was going and now this feels a little bit different. So,
just wanted to give you an opportunity to talk about the vision now for this development.
McKinney: We think the vision is pretty close to what we have always talked about. It's
a mixed use development. We will have residential, office, civic. We do have the library
lease signed also. In fact, I believe we have a building permit ready to go with that. So,
Page 25
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 20 of 76
we think it's consistent with what we have always talked about. We are making some
enhanced pedestrian area and plaza area that we think is really exciting that people will
really enjoy and so I think we are consistent with what we have always talked about.
Simison: Council Woman Strader, anything else?
Strader: I'm good now.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. McKinney, I -- I appreciate again wanting to respect the confidentiality of
your -- in the process of working deals and we don't want to -- want to step into the mud
on that. But I think what -- what Council Member Strader is getting is probably the same
place that I'm at, which is that I think we all left a number of years ago really excited about
this plan and I think what Council Member Strader is trying to get to, is where I am, too,
is helping me understand how what you are doing gets to the intention of what Council
supported when this was last before us and what I'm hearing is you think that the bank,
even though you view that as financial, you have viewed that as specialty retail and I'm
just trying to figure the nexus with that.
McKinney: Well, that's what we thought, but we were informed that, no, that's more of a
financial institution and that we still would like to do a financial institution and so we now
have it under contract to do for ICCU to take that space. That's why we are here tonight,
to make sure it's okay with everyone.
Simison: Okay. Thanks. So, Dave, I don't know if this is a question for you or the
architect, but recently sent a letter to ITD concerning -- if they are going to use -- do CFIs
or not moving forward. Do we -- you know, there is one envisioned here. That's why we
have this nice giant buffer on the northwest corner. If they come back and say, yep, CFIs
are gone, traditional intersections are what we are all about in this area, does -- how --
how or would this northwest corner potentially change in your mind, if that were to be the
case? Is there a broom up there that you would want to come back and put in something
else in the future? Are you thinking about that or is this just lost at this point in time?
McKinney: I think what we would do is just enhanced landscaping, gateway signage,
make sure that the presence on the -- at the intersection looks really nice. We are trying
to do that anyway, but as you know in -- in ITD right of way we need permission to do that
and -- but as far as building a building or something in that area, that's not in the plans.
Simison: Okay. Council, any additional questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you
very much. This is a public hearing. Mr. Clerk, do we have everyone signed up to provide
testimony on this item?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we would one. Sally Reynolds.
Page 26
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 21 of 76
Simison: Okay.
Reynolds: Mr. Mayor, Members of City Council, Sally Reynolds. 1166 West Bacall Street.
If you will permit me just a personal -- a doctor unexpectedly paralyzed my vocal cords
today at 2:00 o'clock and I used up a lot of -- of that talking on my last three minutes. So,
excuse me if I -- for the whole team speech. So, I have been actively involved --
Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Sally, do you want some water? Would that help?
Hoaglun: No, I'm good. I have some. It's just -- it just needs to come back. So, I have
been actively involved in this application and I attended the neighborhood meeting on this
particular change. I knew when this development was approved that the developer would
make lots of requests to modify the development agreement and this is the first of those.
So, I'm grateful for the city code that requires the public to be notified when substantial
changes are requested. Now, while this change merited another public hearing, in my
mind it is not a change that materially alters the development. Sure, the residents would
really prefer more restaurants over another bank. We have tons just in that square mile.
Like the Davises said, to just opened up in the last month and there is actually an ICCU
already in the parking lot right across the street at Fred Meyer. We have got two, you
know, car washes and now we are going to have two ICCUs. But I realized the developer
cannot control the demand for land and those residents we cannot dictate exactly what
businesses we would like to see in a development. So, because the change is another
use that would fit within the mixed use community, like staff said. I'm not in a opposition
to the application. But I do fear that this is the first of many to come and I would like the
Council to consider the question when a development is approved how closely to the
approval do we expect the developer to stay? How many and what kind of changes are
too many? Sure, when they are brought over one by one by one over months and months
they may not seem big. But I would urge Council to consider the past public hearing of
an application and any past modifications that the developer requests, including changes
that may not merit a public notification, such as, like they said, the completion of
landscaping, which may be -- be delayed in this development and any other requirements
for COs. I did want to make one -- because I did provide that testimony on the TCO, I
actually am fine with the TCO that has been issued. I feel good about that. It's not a TCO
that allows it to open to the public and when I reached out to the building permit he -- the
person who issued that he read me the parameters and I think it's completely fine that
they have stockers and everyone in there. I mean if they want to -- if they want to stock
everything and the roads get done and they take that last cone off and flip on the lights to
Winco, fine, I am completely fine with that. So, my question on the certificate of
occupancy is mainly for public safety, just that those roads be complete and I have
realized that there are things that the applicant cannot control on roads, there is a lot of
moving parts, but they can control when Winco opens and when that traffic starts flowing.
We have not seen any calming measures on Bacall and Bergman. They might have
them, I haven't been updated as to where they are at with ACHD and that's in the
development agreement as well and I will not -- for the record I will not be here next week
to speak to that if it is set. And I will stand for any questions.
Page 27
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 22 of 76
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam -- or --
Simison: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Mr. Mayor. Old school? Wow. Sorry.
Simison: I know old habits --
Borton: That's a great question. So, to answer your concerns, which is spot on that you
have them, I think the frequency of the DAs and the magnitude of the DAs -- so, when
you see two or three -- if you were to see two or three successive requests, you know,
one bite at a time to modify a DA, that causes great concern. Each one causes greater
concern and, then, any individual request that strays too far from the original approval
and the basis for -- this is a big project that we had really robust discussion as to why it
was approved as what it was and so I think that will take some pretty high scrutiny to
justify modifying any component of the DA. It's a complete package as is and that's
exactly what we expect. So, it's difficult to make changes. I think it's intentionally difficult.
So, this one very well may make sense. But if that gives some answer to -- we are all
very aware that we all signed a contract for a particular reason and that's exactly what
the city expects to see.
Reynolds: That's wonderful, Council Member Borton, Mr. Mayor. Councilman Borton, I
really appreciate that comment and that does provide some extra comfort to me and I --
also to the public, who was so involved in this application.
Borton: Good.
Reynolds: If I could ask one question, just off of something that the developer said, he
said there was a building permit for this building already. So, I am very hopeful -- have
they recorded the final plat and I will say this with the caveat that I want them to record
the final plat. We all do, because they were only allowed one building permit before they
could start building and we want the library and we want the restaurants and we want the
banks --we want it to start going and it's just been -- so, I'm hoping that they recorded the
final plat. Has that changed, Bill, since last time we talked? Yea. Okay. I would like to
say the residents are -- at least some of the ones that I know -- I'm not going to speak for
a group again, because that got me in trouble, but the ones that I know will be very happy
to see that construction started on the other amenities that the residents were promised
back there. That's great. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Page 28
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 23 of 76
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, one of the things for Ms. Reynolds -- or all the
other public that watch this, planning staff is really good in your staff reports to give you
that history. When it got approved. When changes were requested. What was done.
What decisions were made and -- and this Council has -- this Council has always been
good at asking the same question Council Woman Strader asked tonight is why this
change? What's changed in the market? Why is it different. But just so Ms. Reynolds
and the other neighbors know, I mean that's a fairly common portion of staff reports is a
history of the property and what's gone on and what's been requested. So, that -- that's
always captured there, too, so --
Reynolds: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Nary, thank you. I really appreciate that. And, yeah, I'm neutral
on this application. So, thank you very much.
Simison: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to provide testimony on this
item? Okay. If you would like to come forward. And if there is anybody online that would
like to provide testimony, please, use your raise the hand feature at the bottom of the
Zoom platform and we can have you unmute yourself. All right.
LaFever: Hi. Denise LaFever. 6706 North Salvia Way. As far as this application goes,
I'm concerned with the practice of -- we have a credit union right across the bank -- and,
by the way, that is my bank and I like the bank and I go to that one quite frequently. But
we have one right across the way and we have a new one proposed there. I'm concerned
about what is the plans for once we go back through and abandon that building? Is it
going to become blight? What is the plans for that? You know, that's an impact on the
city, especially since we are moving toward --you know, their advertisements for the bank
is a bank in your pocket. You know, we are moving towards online. And so right in that
area we have the Zion bank that just opened in that area. You have ICCU credit union
across the way. You got Beehive just around the corner. And there is another one that
just opened next to Saltzer. I can't remember what it's called. Icon or something like that.
I don't remember the name of the bank. But you already have so many in close proximity.
I was kind of, you know, mixed about the Village --you know, the Linder Village. I testified
on that. But I was excited about the fact that we were going to have more services for
residential, more services for restaurants and other great things for people to go and do
things with. Another bank I'm not quite as excited about and less excited unless they
were going to come forward with a plan how you are going to make sure you don't have
blight on the one building that's over there and I understand their excitement, it's going to
have left-hand turning lanes. I mean left-hand control lights, both sides of that
development. Like I said, I'm neutral. I'm just extremely concerned about the blight. I
am concerned about how that building is going to be repurposed across the street.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Cavener: It's nice to see you in living color.
LaFever: What did you say?
Page 29
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 24 of 76
Cavener: I said it's nice to see you in living color, Denise.
Simison: Is there anybody else that would like to provide testimony on this item at this
time? If you would like to come forward, please. And if you can state your name and
address for the record and be recognized for three minutes.
Wolstenhulme: I'm Dusty Wolstenhulme and I am a project manager -- project manager
for real estate development for Idaho Central Credit Union and I'm the one who wants to
put a branch here and what I would really like to do is give our local members in this area
better access and not just the easy turning lanes off the streets, but our existing location
we tried really hard to shoehorn it into a small location and -- and what we are finding is
our memberships are coming out of the drive up, coming head on with a lot of traffic
coming out of Taco Bell and we don't have the right of way, because we are coming in
from the left side, while the Taco Bell folks are coming in from the right and they are able
to get out and our members aren't loving the access they have. We will do our very best
to find a good buyer for the other location. We will maintain it. We will take care of it. It's
not going to become an eyesore. We just would really like to build something here that
takes good care of our membership. I would also like to state for the record we are -- we
are not a bank. The difference between a bank and a credit union is we are a not for
profit financial cooperative of our members. We take care of our members. We are not
out for some big investors or board -- board appointees from some big cooperative of
investors somewhere, we are out for the little guy and that's what we are doing here is
taking care of our members -- our average members.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Just a comment. Thank you so much for that clarity on the two locations right
across the street and for the background on your thought process. I'm a customer and
appreciate your company and glad you are in our community here as a local business.
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Dusty, appreciate you being here. I, too, am a ICCU member. Got my little
green card in my wallet. I have noticed that a lot of your projects -- I think of the location
on -- on Vista, the project that's coming along on Ten Mile, seemed to have a little bit of a
larger footprint than what I'm used to seeing from ICCU branches. Is that kind of your
new model? Is that kind of your gold standard moving forward or is it just we happen to
see some larger projects in different segments of the valley?
Wolstenhelme: I think it's because we -- we keep doing what our members like. Our
members like to be able to get in and out. Our members like to come see us. We tried
really hard to build the technology and we have some of the best technology in the state
Page 30
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 25 of 76
for getting -- like our sweet member over there said, about getting your financial institution
on your phone and that should be able to happen. But if somebody is ashued that and
they didn't call us and they didn't get on the internet and do a face-to-face video
conference with one of our people and they didn't get on their app, they drove somewhere
and waited in line and parked and dealt with all of that to come see us, we do our very
best to make sure they can, because they really want to, you know what I mean? And a
lot of financial institutions are getting smaller and a lot of financial institutions are getting
rid of their physical locations and a lot of financial institutions are getting rid of safe deposit
boxes and they are getting rid of drive throughs and they are getting rid of people and
putting in ATMs that replace people and that's not what Idaho members want in their credit
union. They want good service and they want to be able to come sit down with somebody
who knows their name and cares about them and if you have been in an Idaho Central
Credit Union you will know that's the difference between us and your nearest fat cat bank
with a big cigar. We are going to know who you are. We are not Pete from the old Disney
shows. We are your local friends and neighbors who are taking care of you.
Simison: And, Councilman Bernt, I can't wait for this.
Bernt: I don't have anything to say,just thought that that was a pretty good plug for ICCU.
I mean -- sort of fun.
Simison: Thank you, Dusty. Is there anybody else that would like to provide testimony
on the item at this time? And nobody online to raise your hand? Okay. Well, if the
applicant would like to come forward and make any final comments.
Marsh: Thank you again. Jim Marsh, CSHQA. I think the last sets of comments from
ICCU probably said it best on most of this and although a lot of times when we get
development and modifications, DA mods come in somebody is asking for something that
wasn't quite forecasted from years ago, but when --when we do have these and we work
with great clients like this, there is also that opportunity that these DA modifications are
actually going to bring an improvement and heighten the development and the aesthetics
to those developments. So, it's not always necessarily a negative thing when we come
in for requests on those, but we are trying to actually enhance developments as well. But
if you have any other questions feel free to ask anything you might have.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: If you could -- just a couple of things. Ms. Reynolds mentioned that she hadn't
seen calming measures on Bacall or other areas throughout the Paramount Subdivision.
If you could mention that or have a response to that. And if number--the second question
that I have as it relates to the -- and it's not related to this particular application that we
are discussing right now, but if you could remind me what street -- to what street are you
-- are you improving on Chinden. I don't remember if that was Linder to Locust Grove --
I don't -- I don't remember. If you could remind me.
Page 31
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 26 of 76
Marsh: Sure. To start off with the street calming pieces -- and I might have to have some
help from staff, too. But for the most part we --there are some pieces in there, just getting
the road narrow. Some of the street calming measures that would be nice to have -- I
mean they are all within ACHD's jurisdiction to approve those standards and right now I
don't believe there is anything --there is no traffic bumps or those kind of traffic measures.
I think if anything it's just basically narrowing the street for -- to slow traffic. I would have
to go back to our civil engineer to probably get more specifics on that. But, yeah, that has
been something that we have had that -- those discussions with ACHD on.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, follow up.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: But no ultimate decision has been made, just conversations with ACHD is what
you are saying?
Marsh: As far as I know and I apologize that I don't have -- I don't have a ready answer
for that.
Bernt: Okay.
Marsh: But, yeah, no, that has been a point of conversation with ACHD.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, follow up. I think it's just really important those -- those folks over in
Paramount -- I know that one of the things that -- one of the -- one of the concerns that
they had during the application process when it was approved previous and so I think that
they would really appreciate some finality to that as well.
Marsh: Okay. I do believe that Dave is better versed on this.
McKinney: Mayor and Councilman, Dave McKinney. We are improving from Linder on
Chinden all the way to Meridian Road in the first phase and, then, the second phase we
will tie into where ITD left off at Locust Grove. That's next year. And, then, made some
widening to Linder and, then, also we built the entire road that you see -- if you have been
out there, you see the -- we call it West Plaza Drive, which runs from Linder and it will be
signalized all the way to Fox Run and, then, up to --
Bernt- Mr. Mayor, follow up.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: So, just -- and I appreciate you, Dave, for reminding me. What you are saying is
from Linder to Locust Grove or Meridian did you say? It's going to be widened.
McKinney: First phase is Meridian.
Page 32
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 27 of 76
Bernt: Okay.
McKinney: Then there is a second phase to Locust Grove.
Bernt: Okay.
McKinney: So, when ITD improved from Eagle Road west, they actually stopped and,
then, tapered, okay, and when we improve from Linder to Meridian, we will taper, you
know, past Holy Apostles church and so forth and they will tie together, slow break, and,
then, in the second phase next year we will complete the actual widening from a taper to
widening. Like that was always the plan.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor. I don't remember that. I just -- for some reason.
McKinney: Yeah. It's part of the STAR agreement.
Bernt: Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
Simison: Mr. Clerk, did we have Mandie that was going to speak as part of the applicant
team?
Johnson: And, Mandie, with your -- she's with the applicant team -- had her hand raised
and wanted to be acknowledged.
Brozo: Yeah. Mandie Brozo. CSHQA. 200 Broad Street. And just the concerns of the
traffic slowing on Bacall, we have taken into consideration working with the traffic engineer
to slow all the traffic going across West Plaza Shop Drive, not making significant through
traffic connections from Linder Road or Chinden to the residential subdivision to the south.
Along all of the roads that we are able to we have narrowed and provided slower
intersections, bump outs, landscaping around each of them, to kind of make that, you
know, consideration to slow people down as they start traveling into the existing
subdivision. So, from the developer's standpoint of what we have control of, we have
made those considerations to help slow traffic down, not make the thoroughfare, not make
it into a continuous connection from the major highways down and do what we can to
slow people down before Bacall.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you very much, Ms. Brozo. Just so I can understand one of your
comments that you just made, are you saying it's within your control not to complete the
connection to the roads to the south on Bacall until the end of your development and
what's your intention?
Page 33
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 28 of 76
Brozo: Well, those part of the -- I believe the existing construction that they are doing
right now along West Plaza Shop Drive structure. They do have -- like I was saying at
the intersections, the bulb outs that slow traffic down before they take that turn down onto
the residential -- future residential subdivision and, then, extend onto Bacall.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Sorry, I'm -- maybe I'm just not quite -- not quite getting it. So, I understood that
you are narrowing -- you are doing traffic calming on the parts of the property that you
control. Are you able to not make that connection to the south until the end of
construction? Is that what you are trying to say? Until all these shops are open or -- or
are you going to go out and make that connection, but you feel like you are doing all the
traffic calming within your parcel? Just help -- help me understand what you are saying.
Brozo: We are trying to make sure that we don't make a straight run from Linder -- from
Chinden all the way through to the South Bacall -- at Bacall. Where we have West Plaza
Shop Drive bisecting the lower side of the site from the residential to the commercial, we
have our traffic calming measures and, then, as you move down into the residential
subdivision we are also including those same traffic measures to slow it down. There you
go. As we kind of come through and connect to the existing residential.
Strader: Thank you.
Brozo: You can kind of see from this concept plan -- you can see where Chinden comes
down, but we have turned traffic across to the west, so they can't actually get all the way
through. So, they can't use that as a straight shot from Chinden down to the residential
and we have used kind of a sweeping line to help slow traffic down at all those
intersections. We have narrowed them down, like I said, with the pedestrian bulbs,
landscaping, and things like that, to help just calm the traffic. As far as what they are
doing in Bacall, I was not aware of any kind of agreement for us to, you know, redo their
streets. We are -- I'm concerned with kind of our Linder Village portion part plats and
what we are controlling with the future residential and the commercial. Did that help
answer your question?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I think so. I think it just opened up -- perhaps opened up some additional rabbit
holes to go down. I guess I would ask staff to -- if it's possible, Mr. Mayor, maybe too
follow up -- not having been on the previous city council -- in terms of if there were DA
provisions that there were improvements required actually on Bacall. I'm not aware of
that. But that might be a good thing to double check.
Page 34
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 29 of 76
Brozo: And part of our improvements are part of the final plat that has been improved, so
we can show the roadway improvements for West Plaza Shops Drive and what we have
done for the calming of the traffic along there.
Simison: Council, any -- does the applicant have any final comments in addition or
Council have any questions for the applicant?
Marsh: Thank you.
Simison: Okay. Thank you.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Maybe I will just kick us off on a discussion before we actually close the public
hearing. You never know. We run into hot water sometimes closing it. Appreciate the
presentation. I'm not like going to lose sleep at night about the change for, you know, the
Idaho Central location. I don't think that's totally inconsistent with the intention for this
property under our future land use map and everything. I guess I -- I would just caution
the applicant DA modifications to this property are clearly a pretty big deal. I think you
have heard that from most of City Council at this point and I just think if you could do a
little bit of a better job -- maybe if you have future requests to paint a picture for residents
to get excited about what's coming and, you know, kind of get them pumped up about it,
about what they are going to get here, instead of just the minutiae, I think that's a good
thing and I guess just a general comment. I see Brighton's in the room as well, that we
are really focused on the pedestrian safety aspect of this and so, you know, I would love
for us to double check what -- what requirements need to happen when on these traffic
calming pieces and, hopefully, we can just focus on that going forward. I am in support
of it. I don't know if anyone else has any comments, but those are just my main concerns.
I think people need to, you know, really come prepared and -- and sensitive to the public
about this.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor, I tend to agree with Council Member Strader. No -- no heartburn
over a well built credit union bank, financial institution in that corner, but I think your point
is -- is well heard. Previous councils, previous planning and zoning commissions,
previous applicant work, public testimony really resulted in what I thought was a really
good plan and so I am always going to be a little skeptical or hesitant to make those
changes to the plan. I think I'm supportive of this request. But I like, Council Member
Strader, is your encouragement of the applicant to do a little bit better job of engaging the
neighbors and the public around what they are doing and demonstrate to them the
Page 35
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 30 of 76
benefits, not just for the neighborhood, but for our community as a whole. I think that's
good advice.
Simison: Any further comments?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I move that we close the public hearing.
Cavener: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The
ayes have it. The public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Unless there is further discussion -- I don't sense any. After considering all staff,
applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve file number H-2021-0034, as
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of June 1 st, 2021.
Cavener: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and second. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not
Clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, absent; Hoaglun, absent;
Strader, yea.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Thank you and we look
forward to getting that library moving forward real real soon.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
15. Public Hearing for 2021 UDC Text Amendment (ZOA-2021-0002) by
City of Meridian Planning Division, Located at 33 E. Broadway Ave.
A. Request: UDC Text Amendment for text amendments to update
certain sections of the City's Unified Development Code (UDC)
pertaining to the Landscape Requirements and Common Open
Page 36
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 31 of 76
Space and Site Amenity Requirements in Chapter 3; Multi-family
Common Open Space Design Requirements in Chapter 4; and
Various other Amendments in Chapters 1-5 and 7.
Simison: Okay. Next item up is a public hearing for 2021 UDC Text Amendment, ZOA-
2021-0002. We will open this public hearing with staff comments.
Parsons: One second here, Mayor, as I get things pulled up here for all of you.
Simison: Why don't we go ahead and take a three minute recess while we get things set
up real quick.
Parsons: Appreciate that. Thank you.
(Recess: 7:33 p.m. to 7:38 p.m.)
Simison: All right. Council, we will go ahead and come back from recess and as we
stated, we opened the public hearing and turn this over to Bill for staff comments.
Parsons: Thank you, Mayor, Members of the Council, pleasure to be here with you this
evening. As you recall, I was here last week going over the first round the UDC changes
before you and tonight is -- is part two of that. Obviously, with a larger -- more topics to
discuss this evening, put it -- put it that way. So, if you have had a chance to look at the
public record and the staff report, you can see we are basically tip to tail changing many
sections in the UDC with this current round of changes and many of them have been
spearheaded with different groups. As you know, I manage the UDC focus group and our
planning manager Caleb Hood actually spearheaded the open space and amenity
committee, which Council Member Bernt was a member of. So, before I kick off into all
of the changes this evening I just wanted to extend my sincere appreciation to all of those
that were part of that -- that process. I know it can be very tedious, it takes over many
many months. There is always a give and take. There is winners and there is losers and
-- but at the end of the day the goal is we all have consensus and we all kind of move
forward and agree to champion the changes that are presented to you and ultimately get
codified through this body and through all the other -- everybody else's actions. So,
hopefully what I'm providing to you this evening does that for everyone that participated
in this process. So, as I mentioned to you tonight's presentation will coincide with
essentially five exhibits. Exhibit one is something that came forward as part of our code
enforcement division. I know Councilman Cavener has a passion -- has a passion for RV
parking in our community and so he has continually brought up this topic on multiple
occasions, but really exhibit one tonight is really to clean up some definitions in our UDC
and -- and also provide -- you know, try to clarify where recreational vehicles can be --
basically any vehicle where it can be parked on the property. Lacy Ooi, who is the code
enforcement supervisor, is here to basically go through these changes with you. So, it is
a tag team tonight. She is going to do exhibit one and, then, I will carry the torch for the
remainder of the changes. But I thought it was important to note that we will let her go
ahead and answer any questions you have with these proposed changes and that way
Page 37
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 32 of 76
she can get to her evening and, then, we can continue our business with the other
exhibits. So, I'm sure the Council's had a chance to look at all these changes. I won't go
through all of them line by line with you, but you can see the first page here we are going
through some definitions, clarifying -- Lacy can probably let you know some of her
experiences with litigation -- litigating some of these cases and so that's where a lot of
these changes come from, working with the attorney's office and making sure that we
have our definitions right, so that we can enforce our code better. This one's probably --
Councilman Cavener, this is the one that I had mentioned to you. This is where I -- again,
I want to extend kudos to Lacy and even the city attorney's office for even trying to tackle
this issue, because it's not an easy one to handle. A lot of us have different opinions of
what we can do on our property and that's what we are all about. But at the same time
we want to make sure what we have in the books is enforceable and it's understandable
by -- for people and I think Lacy's done a great job of explaining that and defining that
better in our code. And, then, again, this kind of coincides --and, then, the other coincides
with the improvements that you need to have parking in front of your home. So, with that
I will turn it over to Lacy and see if she has any context for you and, then, you can ask
her any questions with -- regarding these proposed changes.
Ooi: Am I on? Okay. I'm Lacy Ooi and I'm a little more versed this time to come with
some information for you guys. So, I'm just going to give you my background as to why
the changes, other than appeasing Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: All right. All right. It's going to be one of those meetings.
Ooi: So, bringing this forward just to try to resolve years of discussion that we have had
and I think between the Mayor's Office and Council and the Police Department we get
this a lot and just trying to come up with something that's reasonable. So, currently on
parking standards, any recreational vehicle, including motorhomes, campers, utility
trailers and boats are not allowed on the front of a residential property, which includes
their driveways. All these vehicle types must be stored behind a solid screened fence.
Many people bring these vehicles home before and after a trip and find it difficult to be
able to prepare or clean their vehicles given the standards as written. The best option for
these citizens is to attach their trailer or boat to a vehicle or park the recreational vehicle
on the public roadway, which they are allowed for 72 hours before moving them. In some
areas this causes congestion and diminished visibility in the neighborhoods, but is within
the parking regulations, therefore, it's allowed. This standard requires a violator to be
notified by mail with a reasonable time frame to comply by removing the vehicle from the
property or screening it behind a solid six foot fence. The violation is listed with a
misdemeanor penalty. Code enforcement is oftentimes placed into a revolving cycle
when trying to enforce the standard. We notify the owner, sometimes with a verbal or
hang tag warning first, and, then, a written notice of violation, which usually gives a ten
day compliance, which is what has been suggested to be reasonable and, then, return to
the property to see whether the vehicle is moved from the property. Oftentimes we find
the owner waited until the day of the deadline, moved the vehicle onto the roadway and
will leave it there for a bit and, then, place it back into their driveway until we respond for
a new complaint. Because the violation is corrected each time the vehicle is moved from
Page 38
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 33 of 76
the property we are forced to continuously respond each time a new violation is created.
Due to the cycle of enforcement our current code does not give us anymore authority than
an effective HOA. This parking standard is not equally enforced, as we generally respond
to this call type reactive to a complaint. Many newer neighborhoods have CC&Rs that
regulate this type of vehicle within their subdivisions. We are oftentimes utilized to enforce
the -- the CC&Rs per the request of the HOA or a property management company. When
they receive the complaints or complete routine drive throughs in the area, they will give
us a list. Older areas without CC&Rs request service less frequently. Therefore, those
areas are created a new neighborhood norm where a large percentage of the homes
have either one boat, trailer, or recreational on their street yard. When code enforcement
responds to older areas it usually creates friction within this -- with the citizen that has
had their vehicle on the property for several years and now feel like they are getting picked
on. When code enforcement receives a complaint we utilize a philosophy of enforce in,
enforce out, attempting to gain compliance for similar violations within the area. Enforcing
this code on privately owned residential properties is the most common confrontational
response we receive within code enforcement, oftentimes creating a dangerous situation
for our officers. Code enforcement, Council and the Mayor's Office have received
complaints from citizens regarding this parking standard. They feel like the regulation
should be changed, therefore, I'm requesting these amendments to the parking standard
as written. When I looked up stats for 2020, we had received 173 separate calls for
parking standard violations, which included 200 vehicles in those enforcement calls. With
the new code as written it would be a 59 percent decrease. One hundred and two of
those calls would become compliant and only 71 would still create calls for service. The
other 45 of those violations was simply moving a vehicle from being on the grass or
unimproved surface onto their driveway would resolve in the additional 45. With only 53
of those calls for service remaining or vehicles involved in them, included more than one
vehicle or in addition to having the vehicle, plus being on an unimproved surface, possibly
with a vehicle with registration, inoperative, something that would still be handled under
different regulations. So, those standards don't change, we would still be able to change
them if there was multiples unregistered or inoperative or unlicensed vehicles in the
driveways. We also added the 16,000 pounds, instead of what was previously written
would have made them -- anything that was over 12,000 pounds couldn't be on your
driveway, which almost a standard 350 is registered at 12,000 pounds. So, this gives us
a more reasonable gross vehicle weight rating that would be enforceable as well. I stand
for questions.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Lacy, I appreciate your work on this. I just was curious of the amount of calls
that your department received, if you were able to track what percentage of them came
from a property management company versus an individual citizen.
Ooi: I didn't even try to do that.
Page 39
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 34 of 76
Cavener: Okay.
Ooi: It's not easy to pull the data in the current system that we have, so I would have had
to look at individual calls, like I did to actually get the information that I gave you.
Cavener: Okay. Thanks.
Simison: Council, further questions on this -- Lacy, are you done with your --
Ooi: Yes.
Simison: -- comments on this area? All right. Then, Bill.
Ooi: Thank you.
Simison: Bill, you can take it from here.
Parsons: Thank you, Mayor. I will transition. So, my goal is--tonight is, again, go through
each one of these exhibits, pause at the end of each one of them and, then, just ask
questions for each one of those different sections. That way we don't get everything -- all
the record confused as to what we are talking about. It's very clear for us staff to go make
changes if necessary. As we talk about these items this evening. So, the next round of
changes it would be what I call in exhibit two and these are the changes that primarily
came through me and working with the UDC focus group. As you are aware, the UDC
focus group is made up with area residents, stakeholders, design professionals,
developers, city staff. So, there is -- there is a plethora in expertise that goes into sitting
on this and coming up with these proposed changes. Not all of them come -- come to
you the way we intend. Some of them get removed and, then, shelved and, then, looked
at again, revisited as we come up with better solutions, but for the most part the ones that
I brought last week to you were ones on this list, but, again, at your request I expedited
those and removed them from this table. So, again, tonight I won't go --for this particular
exhibit I won't go through all of the proposed changes. I'm just curious as to whether or
not the Council has anything that's piqued their interest on this list. I'm going to highlight
a few of these for you. One, we are going to actually increase the height of the -- of the
schools in residential districts. We are seeing that some -- some of these -- sometimes
we get taller schools than what our zones allow. So, allowing them to go taller without
having to go through a needed application processes seems to be prudent, especially if
we have a two story school. Hospitals are going to be allowed -- or a conditional use in
the M-E zone. Installation for extension of time extension for installation of landscaping,
this is coinciding with our building official and also some of the changes that we have
heard from our UDC focus group. What's -- what's happening is -- if you had a chance to
look at the Planning and Zoning Commission you have probably seen the discussion on
this particular item, but really what's happening is we were having people that need to get
in their homes faster than the developer can complete the subdivision improvements and
we understand that sometimes things are out of our control. There may not be enough
building supplies. There may be a short hand of qualified contractors to do the work and
Page 40
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 35 of 76
so timing -- there is always a finesse to getting the timing right for these developments
and so we were able to come up with some of this language to allow some residents to
get into their home as we continue to work and, then, hold what we call a surety, which
is, basically, guaranteed money for those improvements. So, we are just defining that
process a little bit better in code as we are moving forward based on some of the feedback
that we have heard from the group.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I just had a quick question about the surety. It -- you know, things are going
gangbusters now, but things could change and maybe the world falls apart and we have
a bunch of unimproved things. Is the amount of the surety sized and held in escrow to --
is it sufficient to complete all of the landscape improvements or how is that sized?
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Council, great question, Council Woman Strader. So, essentially,
the way the code is written is we break up surety into two different types. We have a
warranty surety and a performance surety. For planning we deal with performance surety.
So, we request the applicant to provide -- there is an application and fee and as part of
that process they submit detailed bids for the itemized work. We ask for that to be
itemized and, then, we times that by 110 percent. So, we add ten percent on top of those
costs to handle that inflation, if you will, if we have to cash it and, then, the developer can
either put that up in cash, letter of credit, or bond and, then, we hold that for the duration
of the project and do not release that until the project is complete and we go out and do
that inspection.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: And so it's actually a bond, it's not that they are -- proof that they are bondable.
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the -- yeah, it's an actual bond that we get verified
by our Finance Department.
Strader: Great. Thank you.
Parsons: Next page here I want to bring your attention to our multi-family parking
standards. So, you can see here we are increasing or adding some changes to that. So,
we are defining how many parking spaces are required for a studio apartment and, then,
also defining how many are required for guest spaces and this name -- this number came
from -- directly from the city of Boise's code. It seemed to be a good number. I have
tested this against some other multi-family developments and it doesn't seem to be too
onerous for the group to be able to provide additional parking for guests. Flex space. On
this particular one we are actually going to allow loading docks in commercial zones,
Page 41
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 36 of 76
provided that they are not visible from a public street. Before they were prohibited and
we are starting to see more momentum in our M-E zone, which is our mixed employment
zone, which does encourage industrial type uses similar to what Kendall was doing this
evening on their property and so we want to be flexible with that and make sure we attract
the right business, but we want to make sure whatever you do is still attractive and not an
eyesore from the public street. Here is one that was a big deal to Planning and Zoning,
was just basically public hearing signs and just basically solidifying our code as to what's
required for proof of posting. I would note -- mention to the Council that at one point the
city was toying with the concept of us taking over posting a property. After meeting with
this group we all agreed that it may be more liability for the city to take that under at this
time than just leave it status quo and so we did take that portion of it out of it, but we did
strengthen -- the applicant is supposed to provide still a notarized statement and, then,
even a map depicting where they are placing the sign, so that we can share with the
public that the site has actually been posted per city requirements. Next item -- something
new that I have requested to be added and something that you will see probably in the
near future is we are currently integrating Project Doc software as part of the planning
process and as part of that software package we will have the ability to have the applicant
upload revised plans prior to them coming to you, so that we can have a memo or staff
report modified or something that says we reviewed the plans before you see it and so
what I have tried to do with this particular verbiage in the code here is just give us more
time to do that. So, currently we -- we have always had a condition of approval that when
we want to revise plans we require that to be to us ten days prior to the public hearing in
order for us to look at that and get that in part of the public record. We have noted -- we
realized that's not long enough and so we are asking that to be extended. We are
codifying it now. It was never codified, it was more of a condition of approval, but now we
are codifying that and now if Planning and Zoning Commission recommend changes to
you and those are to happen between the Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council hearing, the applicant will have the ability to upload that, it will get uploaded into
Iaserfiche and we will be able to give you that information a lot quicker and the public will
be -- can see that faster as part of the public record as well. So, I think that's a pretty nice
innovation that we are trying to bring, not only to you, but also our public. We are still
working and testing on some of -- testing that -- that software out, but I'm hoping at some
point we can share that information with you in the near future. Again, the next one
coincides with the TCL process and how that works. Just some more tweaks to define
that. And, then, the last item on here is the density formula for a PUD. So, as you all
know we don't have density requirements for any other districts -- zoning districts in our
code, it's all comp plan driven. So, we saw this as a holdover from that and so we are
just taking that out to make sure it coincides with the rest of the code. So, in a nutshell,
that's what -- what I had been working on with the UDC focus group and I will stand for
any questions you may have regarding this exhibit.
Simison: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions on this section?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Page 42
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 37 of 76
Borton: One thing that jumped out, Bill, was as to the 15 days, you used the word shall,
that it shall be continued, as opposed to may. That's both ways, so is that -- do you mean
shall or -- if it shows up in 13 days and it's pretty innocuous, not in contention, you are
okay with it's prohibited to be heard? I mean this language wouldn't allow us to go
forward, even if we were able to and even if the public didn't object and --
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor and Members of the Council, that -- I think that's a valid point. In
planning's world we like the word shall, because we want it black and white for all of us.
But, again, I almost like the suggestion of may and I think that -- I think the UDC focus
group would probably appreciate that, to be honest with you, because they -- that -- that
may -- it does -- like you said, maybe it's not a contentious project, maybe there is not --
that we are all on the same page, it's just more of a formality and that we can react quicker
to it. So, giving all of us the flexibility to do our jobs I think is a good -- I think it's good to
change that and maybe give us that flexibility. That's what we have done in the surety.
We have said may. We don't use shall. But if that's the pleasure of the Council I'm more
than happy to change that.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: If that's the intent. I didn't think you were going to be agreeable as quick on that
issue, because I could see the intent that you wanted to have a firm message that don't
be late, don't get your -- your amendments to staff and, then, to the public so they can't
be analyzed in detail prior to the hearing. So, I get the intent of the shall. Giving you
discretion to say may still might work, but --
Simison: Council, if I could put out something to get your legal mind around something.
If you look at the first part of that sentence, though, if revised plans are required. So, are
required and may, does that really seem to align typically -- and I mean if provided plans
are considered by the director, the applicant may provide those. I mean --
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Just trying to get my head around -- when you say are required, I'm wondering
why are they -- I'm asking the question kind of more to like why are they required? What
is -- what is contemplated the requirements in the first place as -- and, then, we may or
may not hold you to a date, whether or not we think it may or may not be contentious or
not, so that's what I was really trying to look at.
Borton: So, to be clear, it's the last shall that I'm talking about.
Simison: I know it is, but I'm asking in conjunction with the first are required. You know,
that's where I'm kind of going to. Why are we requiring them in the first place? That's the
question I don't know. That's --
Page 43
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 38 of 76
Borton: Mr. Mayor, I would think as Planning and Zoning said, this looks great, except
you want some modifications in the plat and the applicant says sweet and we will do it
and we will get it to staff in time for the Council meeting and you want to take a look at it.
I mean that scenario happens at times.
Simison: Is that a requirement or is that you kind of want it?
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor-- Mayor, Members of the Council, I think-- I think a good example
was even last week where we wanted changes and we didn't get them and the applicant
still has a right to come forward with the plan that they want to show. I mean that's the --
that's the reality that we live in sometimes, you know. Is that -- is that the right process?
From staff's perspective, no. We want to come and bring you -- we want to make sure
our conditions are adhered to and we get revised changes. I mean a lot of times we might
say lose lots, because you have too many on a common lot or the Commission -- or we
want more consolidated open space or we want you to add an amenity and we want you
to see that. We want you to see that what we have asked for and what the Commission's
asked for have been -- been satisfied and so we don't try to monkey up that record as we
transition between the Commission and the Council.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I think that question that the Mayor brought up is the word required, not to get
too deep on it, but if those types of changes aren't technically required they are requested
or recommended --
Parsons: That's a good point, too.
Borton: Does that hit on what you are getting at?
Simison: Yeah. I mean if we are requiring -- I'm trying to tie the two concepts together in
what is really being done here. If it's that important that we say you have to do it, I think
we should tell them when they have to do it by, as compared to saying you have to do it,
but when you do it we are up to interpretation on when you really should do it.
Borton: Mr. Mayor, I think -- I think it all stays the same. If you have to do it you shall do
it 15 days prior period. Now, if you fail it's the last shall becomes may. Now, if you fail to
do so, you may be continued -- you might not.
Simison: I think that works. That gets to the intention.
Borton: Yeah. That's the last shall in the last sentence is -- would become may, but
everything else stays. So, the mandatory requirement to do what's requested doesn't
change.
Page 44
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 39 of 76
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, I think that -- again, that goes back to
some of the -- and I can give you that context of that discussion with the group is that's
some of their reservation of codifying this is because it may not always be required or,
you know, it -- so, to them they don't want to slow -- the developer doesn't want to slow
down the process. They want their -- their time in front of the Commission and they want
their time in front of City Council and as you know time is money. But, again, our -- we
are tasked with doing the job right and bringing you good projects and so that's why,
again, I added this as a change. If, again, we could add -- you can change shall to may,
I'm very comfortable with that. I think it gets -- still keeps to the intent as part of this
condition or you also have the ability to strike it all together, because we don't have it
codified. Again, it was -- it was kind of my -- my way of trying to appease my team that
has to work on this and make the -- make sure they keep track of all the work that comes
in the door and gets -- and give them adequate time to do their job is kind of where I'm
coming from as their supervisor.
Nary: So, Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Borton, so when they aren't
happy with Bill's answer, then, they usually call me and so I think what staff is wanting is
what is your desired direction from the staff. I mean this can go all the way to the point
of the staff will recommend denial, because they will not make the change that staff feels
is important to the code or to the project, to we won't recommend -- we won't recommend
approval, but, again, you can move it forward and the common thing we tend to hear is,
you know, between Council and Commission could be approximately five weeks. I have
to go back to my architect, redraw this plat, that all cost money, when I'm going to come
to this Council to argue that I want the original plat. So, now I have to go spend money
on something else, because the Commission made a recommendation that you are able
to -- to reject. So, I think that's the balance we are looking for is there are certain things,
obviously, in code that are required and that clearly we cannot even accept the application
if it's not done that way. There are other things that staff and the applicant work together
to try to get a good product in front of the Commission and the Council and there usually
are one or two occasional sticking points on amenities, location, building location, sizes,
directions that there may be some sticking points and they may have from the -- from the
applicant's perspective sound, legal, business reasons why they want it the way they want
it and they disagree with staff's perspective or the Commission's perspective. So, that's
where the question of required I think really is critical to the staff's review. If the -- if -- if
the staff says we want a tot lot, instead of climbing rocks, is that required or is that
recommended? If the staff says we want a roadway versus a private lane, that may be
required in code or maybe our interpretation of code. So, I think that's the direction we
are seeking and if I'm speaking out of line, Bill, please correct me, but I think that's
sometimes where the rub comes. It's more of the -- the details towards the end of the
project. We have worked out a lot of these things and, then, you get to -- I want to have
this, not that. I don't want that at all ever. You know, those are the ones that -- again, is
that -- and, again, the common -- the common request I get from their attorneys are that
Page 45
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 40 of 76
costs me money and we are going to be standing there arguing we don't want this, so
why am I going to pay for it. Now, if the Council makes me do it, yeah, we will go draw it,
because that's the way it works. But until the Council says we got to do it, I don't want to
spend the additional dollars in time, because maybe I can't get it done in now two and a
half weeks, so I can get it to city in 15 days or I will get continued or it might get continued.
Those are the rubs that I -- that I end up having to deal with, so -- and, then, talk with Bill
and say what can we do here to make this work?
Simison: Well, Mr. Nary -- and when I read the -- add a new provision that specifies when
revised plans are due to staff review, you know, to me the -- it almost seems not in
alignment with the proposed language, because, really, the -- does it matter who it comes
from when, other than we just want to have time to look at it under any circumstance? Is
that the -- Bill, what we are really trying to get to, is any new plans you want them within
a certain time frame, no matter what, no matter why, whether it's because the applicant
wants to change it or someone else asked for a change. Is that the crux of the issue?
That's what I read it in the third column, as compared to the --
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, that -- that's the problem I'm trying to
solve here with this code change is -- you are right, it's -- it can be all three. It could be
what staff wants, what the Commission wants.
Simison: What the applicant wants.
Parsons: What the applicant wants. Sure. They could say -- you know, they-- oftentimes
with my experience I have seen it where they might not have done exactly what the
Commission wanted or staff, but they have tried to do something that met the intent and,
then, we are like, okay, let's -- let's analyze it. Okay. We can get on board with that. Not
exactly what they asked for, but it still works if you get us closer to what we were asking
for and we compromise that way, too. So, I see your point here as far as the shalls. But,
again, if it doesn't have to be codified, we don't need to include it, we can strike it, but
liked the idea of Mr. Nary's suggestion of give me some direction on what -- how you want
us to communicate to the applicant. What's your expectation if staff or the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommend changes to the plans, what's -- what is your expectation
that they get those to us, so that we can get you the right information, not only for us to
do our job, but also for the public. They want to see it, too. And I know you guys hear it
all the time. They want to know those plans. They want to see the revised plans. We
get it all the time.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I think the word that was used is intent and in my -- in my opinion I believe -- I
believe that the intent is always -- you know, there is always good intent for sure and I get
sometimes the applicant makes some -- you know, sometimes I would say that -- that,
you know, the applicant actually listens to the -- you know, the residents and they make
Page 46
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 41 of 76
last minute deals and it may not be their -- maybe vice-versa and maybe the residents
don't quite -- you know, didn't have a chance to see the revisions and the next day is the
scheduled public hearing and so I totally get it -- I totally get it, but I think it's important
that everyone has a fair chance to review the document. I think that that's really important,
whether it's -- whether it's us or whether it's the -- the -- you know, the homeowners who
have concerns or not or -- and so I don't want -- the word shall maybe -- that's pretty
directive and maybe highly recommended. I don't know exactly what word we can use,
but I think that it makes sense for the process. I think -- and it -- at the end of the day I
get that there is a -- there is -- money is time and I totally understand. I get it. But at the
same time I think it's really important that we get it right. That's the most important thing
is we get it right and, thankfully, at the city, you know, we -- we have great, you know,
development partners who, you know, this doesn't happen a lot, but when it does it seems
to be a little bit of an issue. But, again, I don't want to make it sound like there is bad
intent. I don't think -- I have never -- it's -- I can't think of a time I have ever thought to
myself, ah, tricky. I don't -- I don't think I have ever -- I remember a time that it's ever
happened. I think the intent is great, I just think that sometimes we get busy and the
process gets a little rushed.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I think if we change the second shall to may, I think it does give a lot more
flexibility; right? So, first it was required, which is a strong word. This assumes it was
required and, then, if someone wants to move forward, then, they are rolling the dice and
they may be continued and that's an outcome that could happen if they don't, you know,
provide it in advance and I feel like that gives -- I hope that would give staff a lot of
flexibility, but at least, then, it--there is a clear expectation set and they can communicate
clearly. If it's required, then, that, hopefully, would set the right expectation at that point.
Simison: It's -- I believe, if I was rewriting this, I would say revised plan shall be provided
X amount of days prior to the scheduled hearing for review. If plans are not received
within the established time frame the project may be continued. I mean that's really the
crux of what we are trying to get to. The question would be what is the time frame?
Fifteen days? Ten days? I think you could not be as strict in the wording to get to what
we want to accomplish and I would be fine with ten days, but why -- why 15? Why ten?
I don't know. I don't do the work. Will you take that feedback, Bill. May.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Parsons: Mayor, Council, I think I -- I heard you loud and clear. I almost like your
language, too, Mayor, so, yes, I can certainly get that changed if that's the direction of the
Council. Ready to move on I take it? All right. So, exhibit number three has to do with
some changes to our landscape ordinance, which is 11-3, Chapter 11. Or excuse me.
Title 11, Chapter 3, Article B. This is not quite a rewrite, but just basically going through
the ordinance and cleaning it up and trying to define that we really want to start having
Page 47
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 42 of 76
enhanced street buffers along arterial roadways -- more than just arterials, but along our
street buffers. Mostly collectors and arterials. So, you will see a lot of strikeout,
underlined changes. For all of you that haven't gone through this process before,
underlying means it's new text. A strikeout is the old text being removed and replaced
with new potentially. But what I really wanted to point to your attention was really the --
probably the biggest change that came about to this -- there were some modifications
from Planning and Zoning Commission to this body and that has to do with my work and,
really, Brian McClure's work with the city arborist to try to nail down some appropriate tree
species for our community. All of you probably know Matt Perkins, he's passionate about
urban forestry and he will be coming before you on an urban forestry plan moving forward.
But that's where a lot of this -- this -- again, this got sent out to a lot of different experts,
design professionals to provide commentary on it, more than what my expertise is. All
do is try to enforce it and understand what we want to achieve here. But what we have
added here since the Planning and Zoning Commission -- here is all of these tree species
and I'm not going to pretend to know -- I know how to pronounce all of them, but you can
see there is quite a few here. So, there is only -- these are some preferred species for
the city and, then, there is also preferred -- a lot of you may not know that we do have
waterwise conserve -- conservation in our landscape buffers, too, and so he has gone in
and struck out all of the previous trees and he's given us another new updated list to
include as part of this effort. And, again, I have to commend him for getting that to me
and getting this added. Quite a few trees here that we can -- can utilize as part of this the waterwise concepts. And, then, that kind of coincides with some of this verbiage --
ties back into kind of his revised list and, then, we also have a -- what we call a Treasure
Valley tree selection guide. That's found on our website and that has all of the various
tree species that do well in this region as well. Kind of explains the characteristics of
those trees. And, then, I also want to get down to the other crux of at least the meat of
this discussion tonight is really landscape buffers and just trying to enhance how those
look along the street buffers. So, Matt -- I -- I have to really commend again, Brian, he
did a lot of this and wrote a lot of these standards, I'm just kind of carrying the torch for
him this evening. But he went ahead and proposed a lot of changes to clarify that a street
buffer along a road is more than trees and lawn, it needs to be enhanced, it needs to have
boulders, perma bark, a mixture of shrubs, ornamental grasses, you know, just a variety
of plant materials to really look enhanced and attractive and this also coincides with some
of the changes that I will be discussing with you in the open space standards. It sends
you back to this section of code and that's why we -- we dove in on this and made those
changes to coincide with the open space changes and so what Brian has done, he's kind
of defined what this -- to look at and how much limited lawn you are supposed to have as
part of that buffer, but as part of this effort he also provided us some nice figures. So,
essentially, all of this new text that you see here coincides with these figures in the code
to show a developer or an applicant how they can achieve an attractive buffer along the
street and, again, when we get to the open space standard you will see where buffers
count towards that open space. That has not changed and that is current -- it is currently
in code that we allow those to count.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Page 48
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 43 of 76
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Is this the right section to talk about the fee in lieu concept or --
Parsons: I'm going to get there, too. We are transitioning to that one. But I wanted to do
-- I think that's a discussion that I do want to have with Council this evening. And, then,
again, we are just chatting -- a lot of this is existing code and just, again, improving on
verbiage and removing old language. So, again, not a lot to really discuss here as far as
code changes with you, just more clean-ups. But here is one where, you know, we are
always in front of you asking about land -- land use buffers when we have residential up
against commercial -- or commercial up against residential and the applicant has the
ability to ask for a waiver. Well, the way that code is currently written it says trees touch
at maturity. Well, on this particular change we want the trees to touch at five years. So,
that's -- that -- what that means is you are going to have more trees in that buffer for a
denser buffer. So, a lot of the landscape plans that you see before you on the screen are
showing that maturity -- landscape plan showing at maturity. So, this is something that
will be within your purview as we come forward with, you know, if the applicant wants a
reduced buffer that's something we will have to take into consideration, whether the buffer
is large enough to accommodate additional trees. Is it -- is it wide enough. Is there
enough area to plant trees in that area. So, something to take into consider this evening
-- consideration this evening. And, then, going back to Council Woman Strader's
discussion leading into the in lieu fee, so I know this body is very aware of -- and this
came up at Planning and Zoning Commission, too, is we are starting to see a lot of farm
ground getting eaten up and a lot of these farmers have beautiful mature trees on their
property and usually when you have a large development over multiple acres it's pretty
easy to mitigate existing trees, but when you start getting these in-fill properties, it's
getting more and more difficult and the most recent one I can think of is Lupine Cove,
which is a five acre development off of McDermott Road, which had over 1 ,300 -- or
almost, excuse me, 1,900 caliper inches to mitigate. A five acre development cannot
accommodate that many trees on it with 30 homes on it and so we are trying to work with
the Parks Department to come up with other ways to mitigate trees. You guys are always
part of the budget process. We always got enhancements to our parks, always changing
out trees in downtown. Matt Perkins and myself actually reached out to the city of Boise
to try to understand their system. They do the same thing here. So, for the most part our
code does align with a lot of the different jurisdictions in the community. What we don't
currently have in place is this fee in lieu and, essentially, the way it works in the city of
Boise is they basically charge you 200 dollars per caliper inch you are going to mitigate
and, then, basically tree bank that and use it to enhance their parks or add trees
elsewhere throughout their community. I was hoping to have some of that further vetted
for you this evening, but I didn't feel it was important to take this out yet. I think this is --
again, I don't want to spend a lot of discussion on this tonight, because I think it really
should be -- this is something that I think parks should probably champion for you more
than the planning department, although it's in our code. The city of Boise's fees is in a
completely different section of their code than even their zoning ordinance. But I told Matt
that I would have somewhat of a -- I would have a discussion with you this evening and
just take the temperature of the Council and see if that's something they even want to
Page 49
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 44 of 76
entertain moving forward. Is that something that you want planning staff and parks
department to work on and bring back something as part of the fee schedule in the future.
As you know, our fee schedule is coming up in front of you here soon with the budget.
We want to make sure our food -- our fees are in alignment with our services, but, really,
these -- these are a lot of the -- the meat of the changes tonight is really the street buffers
for this -- this particular exhibit it's the street buffer changes and, then, how we mitigate
trees elsewhere in the city. So, with that I will just conclude my remarks and stand for
any questions on this particular exhibit.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: So, with the fee -- it's an interesting idea. I guess one of the things I was thinking
about -- it seems like it's worth exploring. I guess part of the challenge is it may not be
as simple as just replacing something; right? So, I have been getting for some reason a
lot of calls lately about trees and -- all the tree folks are talking together and giving me
calls. But there have been, you know, some cases where there is a special species of
bird in a certain tree, there are also just really old trees that provide a lot of shade, a lot
of carbon sequestration -- I mean there is a lot of different benefits that come from trees.
So, I guess I was curious about this concept as kind of like our method of alternative
compliance. Like if there was a level of discretion where staff could say, okay, maybe the
arborist or parks says it's really not practical in this case to preserve certain trees, then,
they could approve it as a method of alternative compliance. That made more sense to
me than -- the way it was written here it made it seem like automatically someone could
just pay and there could be additional reasons or considerations with certain trees. I
guess I didn't see a level of discretion here, so I guess I would ask you to sort of react to
that concern.
Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, I think that that's a lot of the discussions we
had. You hit it spot on. We have in the past used the arborist's discretion to allow trees
elsewhere, but in the past we have had a lot of parks coming online, like Kleiner, which
could use a lot of trees. We have had Reta Huskey Park. We have had Keith Bird Park.
I mean a lot of these -- Heroes Park got expanded and added trees. So, we have had
the opportunity -- opportunity to do that and, you're right, that is the mechanism that we
could use right now is alternative compliance to do that and that's where I want to --that's
where I'm at tonight, where I'm not comfortable with saying we should be charging a fee
for this until we fully -- fully understand what that is and continue to use that alternative
compliance method where maybe the applicant can work with the -- that's why I think it's
important that the Parks Department bring forward that plan to you and share what their
vision -- vision they have for their urban -- urban forestry guide or whatever, I forget what
Matt used for the terminology. They are just sharing their vision for the department and
what they plan on doing in the future and kind of marrying up this process with what they
plan on doing in the future and settings some of these trees elsewhere in the city. I think
there is a lot -- a lot of value to do that, to be honest with you. So, again, if the Council
would like to explore this more -- we certainly don't have to approve something like this
Page 50
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 45 of 76
this evening, we can -- we can strike it or we can keep it in as a placeholder until we do
define something and just know that we are not going to enforce it until we actually have
something in place to do so.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I -- you know, the -- the only other place I can
think of that has a fee in lieu is the downtown parking and, of course, that's tied directly
to a parking facility being built, so that was the intent of that and that's pretty common.
So, I -- I know Mr. Baird from my department was the parks attorney in Boise a while back
and I don't know if he had a part of that, but there is no harm in putting it into place,
because until we actually establish a fee we can't collect it. So, I think there is some
research that needs to be done on how these are establishing and what do you base
them on and -- and is the Council comfortable with -- with saying, well, instead of you
having to put-- replace a tree on your property, you are going to replace a tree somewhere
else or where ever we decide that to be and so I think we are -- I will need to do a little bit
more research into that, but, again, I don't have a concern if you want to put it in, so it's
aware that that's out there, because until we pass a fee we are not going to do it anyway.
Simison: Just two cents to throw into this, is kind of like impact fees that you pay for parks
are part of your tree replacement program on any property you do. I understand trees
may be viewed a little differently, but what about a farmland mitigation in lieu of fee?
Where are you going to replace the farmland that you are doing. You can take this to
whatever level you want from that standpoint. So, personally, I don't know I'm a fan of
this and I would not put something in our code unless we are going to do a fee, because
I think it -- I don't know what message it sends just by leaving it out there. So, I would at
least ask for greater consideration before we just add it without a plan or purpose or a
thought. And while we are on this section, since we added a bunch of trees, I saw one
-- can we take out the Ohio Buckeye tree from our list? Just throwing it out there. I don't
know if we really need that one. Sorry, Chris.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Think it would be okay with leaving it in just for further discussion, but there is a
lot here that we need to discuss. Maybe some -- some of our development partners have
some thoughts about this and some residents I know, some -- some folks that were on
the open space committee that are here as well, maybe they have some thoughts on it
as well. Be more than happy to listen to what they have to say.
Parsons: Mayor and Council, I will go ahead and proceed and that way we will -- maybe
we will circle back at the end of the discussion, if you wouldn't mind. Any other questions
on this section? All right. Now, we are going into some of the rewrite of our open space.
Page 51
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 46 of 76
Yeah. There is a lot of meat here, if you want to use that -- coin that phrase there, but I
think this commission -- this body, the Council, realize -- understands that in the last five
years we have been trying to do something with open space standards. I have brought
numerous proposals to you. We have made some minor tweaks, but this time, after the
adoption of the -- the plan we -- we heard from the residents and we heard from you that
we need to look at our open space standards. I wanted to let the -- the Council know that
Council Woman Strader reached out to me with an e-mail today, asked me to kind of vet
these -- some of these open space standards and asked me if I would look and share
with you some of the developments that are out there that would meet these standards
and, then, look at other jurisdictions throughout the valley to give you that insight as to
what they are requiring for open space. So, what I'm going to do is probably just go
through a lot of these changes with you and, then, share that -- that feedback and that
information with you. I won't probably share a lot the developments in the community with
you. I think we have experts here that do this for a living that can probably testify on --
from the public comment that I received in particular to this change, they have some
discussions with you tonight on this topic, this particular exhibit, so I will let them go ahead
and give their perspective of whether or not the proposed changes are achievable or meet
the vision of the plan. But what I can tell you is there is -- there is a lot of time and effort
that went into this and hopefully you guys -- again, I concur with some of the proposed
changes tonight. So, really, we wanted to align our open space and site amenities with
our Comprehensive Plan, which we have done here, trying to align that a little bit more
based on the vision from the feedback that we heard and what we are trying to do here
is really just increase the quality and the quantity of available space and the amenities.
We want to give the developer flexible, but we want to make sure that we give them
enough tools to do that and, hopefully, some of the testimony here tonight you will see
that. We have done that or at least got to that goal. A lot of -- the other particulars --
difference between this change and the next exhibit, what we have tried to do here is I
have actually -- we have actually split out the multi-family standards from this section of
code and better defined it in their own section of code. So, we have tried to bi -- bifurcate
those two standards, so it's clear. This is really for residential and, then, the specific use
standards for multi-family had their own open space requirements. So, you can -- you
know, the current code is to ten percent. A few years ago we did come forward with a
proposed code change that when you had 16,000 square foot lots in your development
you only had to provide five percent, that is staying on the books. Probably the biggest
change tonight is really this table that's before you and how we are going to require open
space based on the zone that you request for development. Now there have been some
slight tweaks to this from Planning and Zoning Commission to you this evening. I realized
after the Planning and Zoning Commission that we did not have any TN&R or TN&C
zoning addressed in this matrix, so that was added to the 15 percent criteria. So, here in
the R-2 zone we are going to require that if we have an R-2 development, ten percent
and, then, as you increase in the zone in the density, the idea is you get more open space
as you increase the density. That's really the premise of-- of the change here tonight. All
of us had difference of opinion on the committee as to what that number should be, but,
again, these are the changes that are before you tonight and I know some of the
applicants in attendance tonight -- or not the applicants, but some of the public testimony
today will be asking you to probably modify some of these open space numbers here.
Page 52
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 47 of 76
One thing that was brought up is what if you have multiple zones in a development and
that -- you can have that. We often see R-4 and R-8 developments and so, basically, we
are going to take that aggregate and, then, divided by the number and get a baseline,
just like an average between the two and come up with a number. Here is how we kind
of justified some of the open space standards and how the applicant should demonstrate
-- a lot of this verbiage that you see in section two here is really incumbent upon that
applicant to tell us that in their narrative. I'm going to tell you some of these -- these
standards are subjective. They are left up to interpretation, not only between us, staff and
the applicant -- and we spent quite a bit of time discussing that as part of that open space
committee and we felt that -- we were all in consensus that the applicants can do a better
job of telling us how this open space is supposed to be utilized and how they -- what
demographic they are trying to serve. I think -- from my standpoint I think that helps us
as staff to clearly communicate what the development is trying to achieve, not only share
that with the P&Z Commission, the Council, but also the public, so they know how we
derive to our recommendation to both of you, both the Commission and the City Council.
The one -- the one item -- the one thing that I do appreciate about the changes tonight is
defining how -- you know, some of these proposed changes are better served by showing
you it in a graphic than showing you in text and I know some of the representatives here
tonight want to talk about some of these changes with you, particularly this one in front of
you where we have 50 percent -- 50 percent of the homes fronting on the open space.
That was quite a bit of a topic of discussion not only at P&Z, but also during the committee
meetings. A lot of the development community felt like that was -- the 50 percent was a
little high and so we did receive public testimony and there will be a presentation tonight
where the development community is actually asking you to lower that to 30 percent. In
some cases go down to 20 percent if there is an intersecting pathway and it's -- it's
important to note that some of these photos that are in this -- this text amendment or
these texts -- or at least in this part of the exhibit, they are actually from actual
developments in Meridian. This one here is in Hill Century Farm, if I'm not mistaken, the
one on the left, and the other one is part of Paramount Director where all the homes are
fronting on open space. So, again, just defining what you can count as -- as open space
and, again, more graphics to go -- kind of coincide with what that verbiage means, which
I think is good. Everyone -- a picture says a thousand words; right? Here is where we
come back to the buffer width and how some of that would be enhanced going back to
what we have talked about in the previous exhibit and how you would make -- you know,
if you do those certain things you get to count one hundred percent of it.
Simison: Bill, if we can go back to that -- or just -- why does it matter front -- fronting or
backing on the house? Can you explain the rationale, why there is a -- why is that a
differentiator?
Parsons: Well, if you look at -- if we can go up, there is a couple different reasons for it.
One is we want to make sure -- it really comes down to having your eyes on open space
and that can be handled in many different ways. You could have the fronts of the units
on the open space, you can have open fencing on the back of the open space. What we
want to do is not wall it off and you got to have it open from the street. I think that's really
the -- what the goal is, but for whatever reason I think the idea is just to have people's
Page 53
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 48 of 76
eyes on it, create that sense of neighborhood community when you have people orienting
the front doors on open space, it just seems to be more inviting. But there is -- there is
multiple reasons why we do it, but for whatever reason this particular 50 percent, the
consultant that we worked with proposed that number, found some examples. I can tell
you we spent quite a bit of time discussing it. A few of the committee members actually
wanted to remove it, because they weren't quite sure what that meant. But, again, I -- I
have seen some of the language has been proposed by the applicants -- or not -- excuse
me -- not the applicants, but some of the committee members as part of the public record
and I tend to agree with them. I like the idea of-- maybe 50 percent isn't the right number,
maybe 25 percent is, as long as you have an intersecting pathway. I don't know if that
answered your question, Mayor, but the intent is really to keep eyes open on it and just
make it more inviting.
Simison: Yeah.
Parsons: Make it to the street.
Simison: I see it on one hand, but I'm like -- if it was my house -- we spend all of our time
in our backyard. We never spend time in our front yard, so our eyes would never ever be
on that space. Now, maybe it would be different if it was in front. I don't know. But that's
kind of what --what is the defining factor, other than a design choice, because that's what
it really seems to be is a design choice, as compared to be a practical standpoint. That's
-- you know, we -- you know. Anyways. Okay. Just wanted to see what the rationale was
and I'm hearing just because someone recommended a number to us.
Parsons: And my record -- yeah. In my experience with it is typically it is alley load; right?
You would have an alley -- you don't really have a front yard, so you -- you have compact
housing, so you want this grand open space for people to front on and use it, because
they don't have a lot of yard when you have alley loaded homes. Okay. Thank you.
Parsons: But I will let -- again, I will let some of the public testimony share their ideas and
what they want changed there as part of those. And if I remember -- I recall a few years
ago actually came forward with a fencing standard change to where we would -- in certain
cases we wouldn't even allow fencing or require fencing if that was the case. It would be
homes clustered around open space and just made it feel like it was part of a -- more of
a cluster development and open space, rather than individual yards, but, again, like you
said, Mayor, that's -- that's personal preference. Again a lot of these are just more taking
certain sections out of the code and just clarifying them and others, so not -- not a lot of
changes here. Here is one that -- particularly waterways that are part of an open space.
I think you guys have seen this on a number of occasions where it can't count more than
25 percent, you got to have it in conjunction with an amenity so that it counts. Again, you
can see an example of that. And, then, really another modification or at lease a big
change to this section of code is the site amenities. I think it's pretty amazing how -- how
much we have expanded that list and now we are kind of -- we are -- we are actually
proposing before you this evening to do that as part of a point system. So, now the
developer -- or anyone wanting to develop their land can either come in with one grand
Page 54
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 49 of 76
amenity or multiple amenities, it just depends on what they want to present to you as part
of their -- their development. It's almost like a menu. You get to pick and choose what
you want as part of your development. Again, this was something that was -- was highly
talked about and rightfully so. It's -- when you look at this list of amenities here you can
see here each one of them have a point value, but who is to say one is more valuable
than the other. One could be an important point to somebody else. Somebody may love
having a clubhouse and somebody may find a multi-use pathway more beneficial to the
community. Again, this -- this point system was something we discussed at length and
don't know if it's the right number or not, but, again, this is where we have landed based
on some of the feedback that we got. But you can see we have extensively extended this
list and I have actually took some of these amenities and applied them to the multi-family
standards as well to give some greater flexibility to those as well. But I wanted to pause
there and --and, then, again, I will kind of--this section of quality of life amenity standards,
this is basically looking at all of those and, then, further defining how those are supposed
to be developed on the property. The standards, if you will, that coincide with those
particular amenities. We wanted to make sure whatever we were -- if we were going to
give you a point for it, we wanted to make sure that there were specifics on how they were
supposed to be developed on the property and we don't currently have that in code. So,
it's nice to add that and define that a little bit better in the code. But with that that really
concludes the proposed changes here and I will stand for any questions. Oh. Actually,
wanted to touch bases back with what I said in my opening remarks about other
municipalities and what they are doing. So, if you recall -- I will go back up to that exhibit
here. Now, in Meridian this is what we are doing. This is pretty common. I have seen
this in other codes in the valley. So, Boise, if you do a standard subdivision, there is no
open space requirements. If you do a PUD you are providing ten percent. Eagle, 18
percent and 15 percent of that has to be active open space. And Kuna no standard open
space for standard subdivisions. PUDs ten percent. And, then, lastly, I had a chance to
look at Nampa, nothing for a standard sub. It talks about open space, but it doesn't have
a number. But in Nampa if you do a PUD minimum 15 percent.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Thanks, Mr. Mayor. Bill, just to reiterate, can you share with us again -- I heard
18 percent for Eagle, with 15 percent active?
Parsons: Yeah. Shall be active.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor. What is -- sorry, Mr. Mayor.
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: What's active open space?
Page 55
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 50 of 76
Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, I -- that's their definition. I don't enforce their
code, but I'm sure there is probably a definition in their code that defines what that is.
Again, we have other experts in the -- in the audience that do business in other
municipalities and maybe they can give you insight what that means.
Simison: Must include running water.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: This kind of fits not only the single family, but the multi-family, I guess. I wanted
to understand the rationale and kind of what the work was that came out of the open
space committee. So, it looks like with the zoning, as you go up in zoning, which makes
sense. It's more likely you are going to have density. You are going to go up, you know,
from ten percent. These folks have yards. Bigger yards now you are -- you are requiring
more open space. What was the rationale behind setting the cap on the multi-family at
15 percent in light of the R-15 at 15 percent?
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Woman Strader, I -- I can hold
off on that question until we get to that section and share that with you if you want to dive
into that, but I think the crux of it is is when we -- we sat down with the open space
committee and we were toying with changing -- taking the two standards and we wanted
consistency and that's really what it comes down to. What I did is -- when we met with --
we had a sideline -- we had some meetings after the UDC focus group with a handful of
committee members that volunteered to meet with us to talk about open space for multi-
family and they were concerned that the multi-family developments were requiring more
open space than this section of code and so when we met with them, they had
spreadsheets and we talked about what the intent behind -- again, going back to that --
the intent of the code was and we were realizing that although we were saying 15 percent
open space in residential, in multi-family we were requiring ten percent, plus we were
requiring more common open space based on the square footage of the unit and in most
cases it was going -- it was in excess of 15 percent and so what we agreed to as
committee members, what we agreed to saying that you could have more than 15 percent,
but the intent would be the minimum is 15 percent if you hit all of that other criteria and I
will expand on that, because that was something that was discussed at the Planning and
Zoning Commission and they didn't quite like my verbiage, so I went and tweaked that for
tonight's discussion to clarify that point a little bit more for you. That's why I said if we can
hold off until we get to that exhibit five, provide that clarification for you. And, then, as far
as your question about developments that are meeting these standards currently, one
that I can think of is TM Apartments, TM Creek Apartments over there off of Ten Mile and
Franklin. I did -- we did that phase two project and I believe they had in excess of 22
percent open space, if I crunched the number. Under the code that I'm proposing this
evening it would be max -- minimum 15 percent or they may exceed that if they chose to.
In this case I would imagine they are going to choose to do that, because they are -- they
are able to.
Page 56
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 51 of 76
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Yes, Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thank you. That's really helpful and I know we are -- we are having
conversations kind of open and we will see where it goes. I guess part of what I was
trying to ask with my request related comparable analysis with other cities is to sort of
understand what other communities are doing and I think it's great to know what the other
communities here in the Treasure Valley are doing. I also think it might be interesting to
pick one or two, you know, kind of who do we want to be when we grow up examples and
--that might be hard to find agreement on, but maybe to just get some examples nationally
as well of what's worked for people. Like I would be curious, like Boulder or a place like
that, kind of what their standards are. But, yeah, I went back and looked through a couple
of examples myself and I have seen a lot of really fantastic developments that have well
exceeded the 15 percent and so just wanted a flavor for why we -- how we pegged that
15 percent as kind of our high watermark. Have a little bit of a flavor for that now. I'm
sure we will hear some public testimony and, then, just wanted to understand following
the UDC focus group and in the UDC focus group what was the engagement with -- not
just the development community, but the community as a whole, whether it's, you know,
groups of interested neighbors or folks that commented on the Comprehensive Plan, what
kind of opportunities have there been for public input.
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, I can't speak to that. I didn't really
spearhead the open space committee section, but I know they were invited -- I don't -- I
know Sally was part of that committee and hopefully she shared that with -- with everyone
out there, so they were getting an understanding of where we were going from the
standpoint of open space and site amenities, because, again, we did hear -- we did hear
everyone loud and clear, but did we do a formal rollout and have town hall meetings to
discuss all of that? No. But what we did do is we did send out an open space survey and
we took those results and kind of landed on that and build from there and that's how we
got to where we are tonight.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Is it -- it doesn't have to be right this moment, but I think it would be great if we
could take the results from the survey and kind of ground back how we think that's meeting
what we have heard at some point. It doesn't have to necessarily be this exact meeting
or this moment, but I do think it would be really important to try to connect back, okay, this
is what we heard, this is how we think we are meeting what we heard and sort of show
that direct connection between the feedback from the community and how we are trying
to meet that concern.
Simison: Bill, just a question. The R-8, R-15 are both at 15 percent. I'm sure this came
up as why not 15, 12, ten and eight, for example, instead of both the 15?
Page 57
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 52 of 76
Parsons: Mayor and Council, I wish I had an answer for you, Mayor, on how. I -- I didn't
-- I wasn't able to attend all of the open space committee meetings, so I'm not sure that
that was one that I wasn't able to attend. Maybe Councilman Bernt can give you some
context on that. I know at one point when we started out we were actually five, eight, 12,
15 and next you know I showed up at the meeting and it was changed. So, I think there
was just more consensus that we should still stay with ten percent and, then, work our
way up from there and that's where the group landed on it, to be honest with you.
Anymore on this topic? Any questions? All right. Perfect. And I will transition to the last
exhibit of the evening and, then, we will open it up for public testimony here. So as I
mentioned to you previously, this has been separated out now. Before what was
happening -- if we had a multi-family development in the commercial districts, we weren't
applying UDC 11-3G-3 standards to multi-family, because it wasn't in and R zone, but if
we had a multi-family development in an R zone, we were double dipping, we were
actually making the applicant comply with 3G standards and complying with the common
open space standards in 11-4-3-27. So, we realized we needed to get that clarified. So,
what we did is -- as I mentioned to you, we have basically bifurcated these two and -- and
made it clear in the common open space that multi-family is subject to its own open space
regulations. So, again, tying back -- again, for consistency, we have tried to tie in the
purpose statement back to the Comprehensive Plan, which is, again, identical language
to what we had in exhibit four and, then, remembering everything and, then, really, the --
the gist of the changes for you tonight is how we get to that open space and what we are
going to require. So, currently, what we are doing anything -- over five acres we are going
to require a baseline at ten percent open space. Again, they are going to have to
demonstrate how they are meeting these standards through -- through their design and
through their narrative and, then, also this is what I was alluding to earlier where I said
anything over 20 -- anything over 20 units will have to now provide a 50 by 100 area --
minimum area for a consolidated open space as part of the development and, then, as
the development size increases we are going to leave it up to staff and/or the Planning
and Zoning Commission to determine if a 50 by 100 area is large enough for a multi-
family development with 300 units or should that central open space be increased, be
commensurate to the size of the development and I think that's pretty consistent with
other language that we have in the code. That leaves it up to our discretion and also the
Planning and Zoning Commission's discretion to determine whether or not there is
adequate open space and, then, of course, if they can't meet the standards, then, it would
be eligible for alternative compliance. You could get a project downtown where it's in-fill
and may not be able to get all that open space and we want to certainly make that flexible
for in-fill projects moving forward. And, then, in addition to the baseline -- this isn't
anything new to code, this is typically what we have in code just in a different -- presented
a different way in a different section, but, essentially, you have to provide a certain amount
of common open space per the square footage of the residential unit. These numbers
have not changed and so -- and, then, here is the certain dimensional standards from
which they comply. So, when you take all of this together there is the very real possibility
that you are going to exceed 15 percent open space and so based on the discussions
that I had with Planning and Zoning Commission I went back to the drawing board and --
and wordsmithed it. So, basically, what I'm saying is if the development committee meets
all of those requirements -- complies with all the requirements of the subsection, the
Page 58
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 53 of 76
minimum qualified open space for the overall development shall equal 15 percent or may
exceed. So, essentially, the minimum is going to be 15 percent, but the applicant will
have the ability to have more if they chose -- if they choose to. And I would let you know
that I -- so, what I did this afternoon -- I looked at this standard and I took a five acre
development with 50 units proposed on it and it came out about 15 percent open space.
Now, I took another development that was a hundred units -- 112 units on five acres and
it was over 18 percent open space. So, the reality is you are going to get more open
space, but there is a chance that someone can say I only have to provide 15 percent. So
that -- that's a real possibility and that's -- and that's some of the discussion that we had
as part of the group. So, hopefully, that verbiage makes sense to all of you. I try to leave
it flexible. But, again, the intent here is that you still have to do all these things, but the
minimum is going to be -- you are going to be capped -- the overall development, if it
exceeds all of those criterias, would be 15 percent and, then, here is some of the open
space standards that I changed. I have been seeing a lot of dog parts as part of
developments, not only residential, but multi-family, so I thought that was a good add. I
like the idea of that commercial outdoor kitchen where people can barbecue and create
that sense of community. I thought this was a great quality of life amenity. And, then, a
lot of our multi-family developments are starting to get multi-use pathways, so why not --
along our creek corridors, so why not allow fitness courses as well. So, I thought that
was a good amenity add. Here I also thought a picnic area -- again anytime we can get
people congregating on open spacing and building that sense of community and getting
to know their neighbors I think it's important to a development. So, I thought that was a
good add as well. And, then, one thing that you saw as part of the common open space
standards were this concept of multi-modal amenities and certainly as we develop these
multi-family developments along our transportation corridors, we have to be ready -- I
mean our transportation network requires multi-use pathways, it requires bikepaths -- or
bike lanes as part of the road improvements, so why not add those as amenities if-- if the
developer is willing to add bike stations, park and ride lots, transit stops -- I have seen
that quite in few of our multi-family developments and even Boise has just recently
changed their code to allow charging stations for electric vehicles. So, I thought that was
also a good idea to kind of mimic what we are doing in the valley and kind of be proactive
here. So, I still think there is some value add for having these multi-modal amenities as
part of multi-family developments. With that everything else is pretty much status quo in
code and I'm happy to stand for any questions on this exhibit five as well.
Simison: Council, any questions on this section? Bill, just on -- how many amenities --
can you explain the expectations in the amenities on the numbers? You know, just two
cents on the charging stations. To me I think -- I look at charging stations as a -- and I
guess it's all a business decision at some point in time. Do you want to reward people for
doing a smart business thing? Does that really meet the intent of the character and quality
of the development that we want to see? Just curious. So how -- yeah.
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor and Council, this is not a point system. So, essentially, amenities
are based on the number of units and the higher you go the more you provide. Keep it
simple. That way we have not proposed any changes like that. So, for example, if
anything's over a hundred units you are going to -- it's going to be whatever Planning and
Page 59
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 54 of 76
Zoning Commission wants to see in it. So, if they have more -- if they have -- typically we
see five or six amenities with our larger developments and we -- we usually tell the
Commission that seems to be sufficient for a development of that size, but they are more
welcome to add more if they choose to.
Simison: Council, any further questions? All right. Thank you very much. Well, this is a
public hearing. Mr. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up in advance?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we have a few. First was Jonathan Wardle.
Simison: Okay. Mr. Wardle, if you would like to come forward and you will be recognized
for three minutes.
Wardle: Good evening, Mayor and Council. For the record my name is Jon Wardle. My
address is 2929 West Navigator, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. And I do work for Brighton.
We have been involved in this process -- in fact, I was going back to look through my
notebook today. The first open space committee group we had was May 18th, 2020, and
there were at least seven work sessions that were held as a group, as well as some other
discussions. Do I have control of this, Bill? Okay. I did provide a letter to you today.
apologize it was late in coming. I was out of town when the Planning and Zoning
Commission met earlier in May, but I wanted to generally say I -- we are in support of the
changes here. This was noted in the -- in the Comprehensive Plan process of making
updates to this and I think it was -- it was time well spent, needed for some changes to
make sure that we are elevating amenities in our community on a go forward basis. As I
noted my letter here, staff took a lot of time on this and I know that there were some other
extenuating circumstances and all of that, but I want to commend staff for the time it has
taken to pull together the things that the community has asked for into a document that
can be discussed tonight and perhaps continued onward into the future as we look at
positive things in the community. The item that I wanted to discuss specifically -- and it
was noted earlier was the requirement for 50 percent of the open space be front-on
housing and there is also another section that actually says a hundred percent and I
thought the best way to do that was simply to go back and look at a community that's
already established and the community I looked at was Paramount. I made a table here
in the slides showing the different areas that I evaluated and this was pretty much all of
the common areas in Paramount from the clubhouse all the way down to some small --
small common areas you will note that they all would qualify for the 50 by 100 requirement
for a grassy area, but, actually, none of them would qualify or meet that requirement for
50 percent open -- 50 percent front-on and -- and even worse is that none of them would
meet the hundred percent. The best way to show you that was to kind of go through
some aerial photos, which I -- which are in your documents as well. This highlights the
areas that were in Paramount that I looked at and, then, I broke it down by section. This
first one, the clubhouse, I said does not qualify and, then, I put a maybe. It actually could
qualify under the linear open space, because it does open down below, but if you take
away that linear connection it would not qualify, even though it is -- let's see here. It's
over three acres in size. The next one that would not qualify as Crosby Park. It's actually
3.32 acres. The perimeter is 1,800 feet. There is 753 feet of front on, so there is homes
Page 60
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 55 of 76
that are looking onto this across a road and all the homes around this one -- and, in fact,
in all these common areas in Paramount have an open metal fence behind. So, there is
complete visibility into these parks, but it wouldn't meet that criteria and you can look
through all of these, which are in the memo I sent to you today, but not a single one of
these parks would qualify under this condition and it -- I don't think it was intended to be
that way. I think it was -- was something that was proposed by the consultants and until
I started digging into it I realized, boy, if we look at Paramount, we couldn't meet any of
those requirements for front-on housing. Should front-on housing be required?
Absolutely. I think there is a place for it--for visibility, not just a narrow neck, but expanded
area on that as well. And my I guess request to you in my e-mail was that it be 30 percent
front on. The city already has a code where the fencing that -- on all common area must
be open if it can't be visible from --from the street and so anywhere we would have these
large triangle areas, it's open metal fencing anyways, these backyards are looking into
them. It's highly desirable. It could be reduced I think maybe down to 25 percent if you
provided another point of access. I think there is some areas in Paramount where we
maybe missed that. Crosby Park is a good example. Large triangle, but the only way
you can get to it is you have to walk all the way around, unless you can sneak through
your neighbor's house and I can tell you where that is, but you have to walk all the way
around to get to it if you were on the other street and I'm on Fox Run, so I have got to
walk around to get to it. It would be nice to have some additional pathway access points
and maybe that's a way to maybe reduce that front-on housing. In general --
Simison: Jon, if I could get you to conclude.
Wardle: Yeah. I'm going to conclude right now. In general, like I said, these conditions
-- the changes are very good. We just think there needs to be modification to this front-
on requirement and request that it be at 30 percent. I would stand for any questions that
you might have.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Wardle: Okay.
Simison: Well, I'm going to ask a general question just out of curiosity, just because we
haven't seen them. How would you go about effectively putting everything on front-on
typically? What's that--what--what does that--what would that look like in a community
where you did have that? I have just been trying to like picture it in a realistic environment.
Wardle: So, I have three examples. The one we did most recently was in Paramount at
Cadence at Paramount. We have a couple of areas where there is common space in
between these small lots, which are all alley loaded that are fronting onto a common area.
It does work really well in that scenario where you have an alley and that front yard is that
common area. We have two other communities, however, where I don't know that circling
it with just a road made the most sense. One of them was Heritage Commons. You come
into Heritage Commons, very large park. It's underutilized, because it is surrounded
completely by four roads. But it is -- has complete houses looking on top onto that green.
Page 61
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 56 of 76
But except for the occasional Memorial Day or July 4th, it's not used as much as you think
it would be. The third one is in Bainbridge. Bainbridge we changed it up a little bit. We
actually put a pool there and a playground area. It is completely surrounded by roads.
The homes all look onto that one. That one's better, because we had more amenities in
there, but, again, you do feel a little odd going into the middle of this playground area in
the middle of roads. There is one case in Lochsa Falls they have a large roundabout.
They actually have a couple of frisbee golf stands in there. It's not used. It's beautiful.
But it's not used. And so I think is there a time and place for it? Yes. But, generally, these
larger spaces that are isolated by roads are underutilized for what we do. That's just my
opinion. But those are three examples in Meridian right now with how I think we -- and
those are all projects, with the exception of Lochsa Falls, that we did.
Simison: So, it's not more complex than it sounds, it was either you had to put a road
between the homes and the park or you got to alley load to get the front door right there
on the green space --
Clark: Yes.
Simison: -- to accomplish it. Okay. Thank you.
Clark: Thank you.
Simison: Council, any other questions? Okay. Thank you.
Strader: Mr. Mayor, question for staff maybe.
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thanks. Was there a desire for the front yard concept or the frontage concept
with the open space, was that -- was that in part trying to address it being centralized?
Do you think that was a part of the reason for that requirement? Was it visibility? What
do you think was driving that specifically?
Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, that's a good question. I -- I don't know where
that came from, to be honest with you. I don't know if the committee members were
present more than I were a lot of times, so -- I tried to chime in and help out where I could
give insight, but, yeah, I'm not sure. I'm not aware of any discussions around that
particular code change.
Strader: Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. And, Bill, just kind of sticking on this real quick for one second. I'm
just trying to find -- I keep going back to Renaissance Park, which, you know, everything
is -- we have half backloaded, but it's on an arterial. We don't allow front loading on
arterials, so, in essence, open space in this scenario, if it's on an arterial, we are really
not going to allow it to a certain extent, because you can't do it unless we go change that
Page 62
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 57 of 76
portion of our code to turn our houses for a collector. Is that a collector that -- this is a
collector, not an arterial. This is a collector road. It doesn't allow fronting, so --
Parsons: Council, that is correct. We do not allow -- well, we allow front-on housing on
the collector, you just -- you can't have your driveway there. But, yeah, I think that's one
of the presentations you will see tonight from Hethe and his crew. Same thing is every
city park is that way. You have backyards backing up to city parks.
Simison: Okay. All right. Didn't mean to get ahead of our testimony. Mr. Clerk.
Johnson: Next is Laren Bailey.
Bailey: Okay. Again, my name is Laren Bailey. Work address 4824 West Fairview
Avenue in Boise, Idaho. Tonight I'm here representing DevCo, Conger Management
Group, and BlackRock Homes. I'm going to start the presentation and, then, Hethe is
going to kind of finish it. One of the -- I don't want to waste time with this, but we had kind
of assumed maybe each portion of the code that was getting updated, you know, with the
four or five sections -- maybe we would have time to speak on each one, so three minutes
is going to be real quick here, so I hope you will ask me some questions so I can follow
up. So, first, I want to talk about the impacts of open space and how that increasing the
open space is going to affect the community. More open space increases the cost to
each lot to develop. The cost will be passed on to the buyer. Increased HOA fees and
maintenance costs, landscape maintenance is the single most expensive line item on
HOA's budget. So, obviously, increasing open space is going to increase those
homeowner dues. Decreasing property tax revenue and impact fees, increasing open
space from ten to 15 percent will result in approximately a seven million dollar reduction
in taxes per year. Increasing open space from ten to 15 percent, again, we will -- over
the -- the lifetime of the remaining developer property in Meridian will be a 25 million
reduction in impact fees. Other groups are affected by that that aren't just the city, include
ACHD, schools, and other county services. So, we are proposing really a minor change
here in the R-8 and R-15. We would like to see 13 percent, rather than the 15 percent.
Thirteen percent is still going to be a 30 percent increase in the amount of open space in
neighborhoods. So, that's -- that's a 30 percent increase in those HOA dues and 30
percent increase to costs. Real quick just wanted to touch on that front -- front-on
housing. I wanted to just show you a few of the prominent parks in Meridian that would
not meet the standard today. As Jon said, you have got Paramount, you have got Settlers
Bridge, Champion Park is all ringed with backyards. Woodbridge. Bear Creek and,
obviously, Havasu as well. I just wanted to run through few of those. Our solution -- you
know, Jon threw out 25, 30, you know, I think in that range is a reasonable number. It
would provide for the good visibility that the city desires, but still would allow for a creative
design and it's consistent with many of the amazing neighborhoods that are already in
Meridian. Another item -- this is -- this is one sentence. We like the open space quality
standards, but there is one sentence in there that we think is difficult and it's open and
grassy areas that are crooked or jagged in shape, disconnected or isolated, do not meet
the standard --
Page 63
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 58 of 76
Simison: I had flexibility. He got another minute, minute and a half.
Bailey: Thank you. Appreciate that. We feel the statement it's too arbitrary and it leads
to a lot of disagreements between staff and -- staff and applicants. We think the sentence
-- if it could just be deleted it would solve a lot of problems. We don't disagree that, you
know, sometimes open spaces need to be -- you know, they need to be a priority, we
agree with that, but we think, you know, if there is a question it should be left up to Council
to decide if it's -- if it's adequate or not. Parkway driveway width. It was determined that
the driveway should be always counted as 26 feet wide. We think there should be an
option for a two car garage that should be 20 feet wide, instead of always only allowing
26 feet to be deducted. And, then, lastly, we have got open water areas, we have got
stormwater detention facilities. Currently the proposal is that only 25 percent of that would
be able to count towards open space. We feel like ACHD's requirements for drainage is
that they have to drain within 24 hours and if it's a nice green space, such as Vienna
Woods, should be able to count -- at least -- we were proposing 75 percent of that should
be able to count towards open space.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Bailey: Oh. Excuse me.
Bernt: Laren -- so I'm familiar with Vienna Woods. So, we ate talking about that big open
space in the middle of Vienna Woods is actually a storm drain?
Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bernt, yes, that is the case. That is a recessed detention
facility.
Bernt: Interesting. I didn't notice. You are right. It's good.
Bailey: Yeah. I used to live over there.
Bernt: Yeah.
Bailey: You never know -- you would never know.
Bernt: Right. No. Mr. Mayor, follow up.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: But wouldn't you agree that that's not the norm, Laren?
Bailey: Well, I don't -- I'm not going to say the norm, but I think that good design is good
design and poor design is poor design and so I think that things can be designed well and
taken care of, but to just say across the board we are only going to count 25 percent
throws out the opportunity for good design.
Page 64
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 59 of 76
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: So, what's your solution, Laren?
Bailey: Well, I think, again, like anything, it needs to -- I mean it needs to have Council's
discretion. Is it a good project or not. Is it a good option or not. But I think 75 percent is
more fair, especially when you can do something as nice as Vienna Woods. Only counting
25 percent I think is, you know, pretty low -- pretty low number.
Bernt: So, what -- Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: With my experience when I was -- even when I was on P&Z, I remember this was
even a hot topic back then and -- and I would -- I would have to say -- and I think that you know, I never knew this, but I think even Woodbridge where I live there is this the the open space that's behind the pool is actually -- and there is never any water on that
-- on that field ever. I have never seen it. There is other spots that have it, but I think that
there are some instances where -- you nailed it on the head, Laren. Good design is good
design. Truly I -- you and I are in one hundred percent agreement with that. But the
problem is is I would say most storm -- storm -- you know, water detention facilities aren't
that great of design and when there is not water in them they look terrible and so -- and
that's the issue that we face with Council is the select few developers who choose on their
own, you know, will and choice, to have the --you know, to --to --with their design provide
those type of storm detention facilities and the problem with that is that we are faced with
a situation where, according to our code and I think that we are well aware of, you know,
following code and, you know, past discussions on -- on applications and what -- what
that looks like and what it doesn't look like, but we are sort of caught, you know, that --
where we don't have enough teeth to make sure that we are approving good design.
Does that make sense?
Bailey: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bernt, I would agree with that. I think the problem,
though, is if-- if you say it's only 25 percent can count, that means I can still do 75 percent
that's garbage; right? I mean we can still have the crappy storm drainage. I would -- I
would argue maybe it needs to say up to 75 percent and, again, leave it to Council's
discretion if it's a nice facility that's not -- I agree with you, I don't want it to be a sandbox
that the cats are using as a litter box. I don't like that design either. But I think there are
opportunities to do things that are nice and well thought through and to just say, well,
because some of them might be bad we are not going to allow any of them, I think that's
short sighted.
Simison: So, Laren, what--what percentage, if you were guessing, of a project is a storm
drain retention facility?
Page 65
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 60 of 76
Bailey: You know, that -- that's really hard, because a lot -- I mean we try and put
everything underground we can. If the soils are good we are going to put it underground,
because we don't want to see it either. But there is times where that's just not an option.
There is times where soils don't work or just the location just doesn't work. That's more
of an engineering challenge or call. So, it's really hard to say, you know, this one or that
one works better or worse. Where you run into trouble is where you get -- especially you
are going to start seeing south of town you are going to get into the salt rock, which you
probably don't have a lot in town in -- in Meridian -- haven't had in the past and in some
of those cases you just have to do a pond above ground, you can't do anything below
ground. But, again, I believe there is ways to -- to design property that would still look
good, there is also a way to make them look terrible. But -- but I think to just cut it off at
25 percent you are taking opportunity away to do something creative or inventive or nice.
Simison: I guess where I was -- what I was going to suggest, but you didn't give me a
good answer, was maybe we dropped down the open space, but we don't count any of
them, because, really, I mean they are a function for another purpose, not a function for
open space. You know, there -- it's like a pond. A pond is good when it's got water in it.
When it doesn't have water in it it's just a hole in the ground. So, you know, what can you
use when and why. But the same thing can be said for a pool. You don't use a pool year
around, you use it for nine months out of the year or three months out of the year, maybe
four. So, I get it, there is various factors, but -- Council Woman Strader, did you have a
question?
Strader: Mr. Mayor, I did. Thank you. Housing affordability is important. I think we know
that. I think it's also important for us to listen to the residents of Meridian and hear their
comments that they gave us through the Comprehensive Plan process. One thing that
caught my eye -- I guess if you could follow up, maybe not in this meeting, but it looks like
Eagle is requiring 18 percent open space. That's a lot more than 15 percent. And I
recently was looking for an apartment for a family member there and I noticed that their
rents were dramatically different. So, I guess if maybe there could be some follow up or
if you have some comments on, you know, housing affordability as it relates to open space
-- I guess I'm just not convinced that it's a direct linear relationship.
Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Council Woman Strader, so Mr. Clark and I just looked this up in
Eagle's code while we were setting here. So, the difference between Eagle's code and
Meridian's code is Eagle counts -- it's 18 percent, but they count everything. We don't
have this 50 percent of an arterial buffer. We don't have linear open space requirement.
We don't have, you know, some of the -- some of the requirements that Meridian has.
Meridian has tried to put rules on it and I get that and I'm not against that, but what Eagle
has done is said, well, everything counts. So, all that roadway frontage counts. Anything
-- you know, we have got -- we are doing one in Eagle right now that is up against -- it's
got a creek and a pathway and things and -- and they are allowing us to count all of that.
Some of it is riparian area that really isn't usable by anyone, but it's wildlife habitat and so
we are -- we are counting that. So, that's the difference in the two codes. I think, really,
if you sat down and really figured out the actual square footage, they are probably very
close to apples to apples. I think we are all thinking, well, Eagle is 18, we need to be 18
Page 66
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 61 of 76
and have all these requirements. Well, then, you are really going to be like 25 and so
that's the point we are trying to make. I know it sounds like maybe we are -- we are
splitting hairs, but I think -- I think you are right, the rents aren't different, because it's
roughly the same number.
Strader: Thank for the insight.
Simison: Council, any further questions?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Laren, early on you touched about the open space and the cost being passed
along to the homeowners association and you guys build pretty quality stuff that people
are choosing to live to. Do you get a lot of negative feedback about HOA dues from your
-- from your residents? And let me give you some context; right? So, I grew up in Old
Town and we had a homeowner's association and our -- I think our family's HOA dues
were like 40 dollars a year. We had -- to call it a patch of grass is a gross overstatement.
I mowed the lawn as a kid. It took me eight minutes, I got paid eight dollars, it was the
best job I ever had in terms of compensation. But inevitably the HOA, because it wasn't
usable, theyjust paved it over and so to me that's --that was my first kind of context about
open space until we moved to the south side and so help me get a flavor for what you
hear from your residents. My assumption is is that this open space, green space that's
usable, is something that people are choosing when they are looking at where they are
going to live. They are -- they are wanting that type of space. So, maybe give us a little
flavor about what you hear from your residents.
Bailey: Mr. Mayor, Mr. -- Councilman Cavener, so we do -- you know, as we are building
a development we are in charge of the HOA through the -- how many ever years that
development is going on. So, we hire a management company to handle that to be that
interface and collect dues and do all those things. So, we do see firsthand those
comments from our neighbors and homeowners and, like I said, the number one expense
-- if you go look at the balance sheet --
Bernt: Right. Always.
Bailey: -- 80 percent of it's --
Bernt: Not even close. There is not even a close second.
Bailey: Yeah. Yeah. Nothing else even comes close. So, as you add open space that
cost just goes up proportionately. It's not -- I mean I don't think it's hard to understand
that that's -- that's the case. What we hear a lot from homeowners, especially ones
coming out -- from out of state, it's dues here are higher than what they are -- they were
used to, which surprised me. I would have figured in California it would be much more. I
Page 67
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 62 of 76
think part of it's a labor issue and I think part of it is, you know, we have to -- we have to
irrigate a lot more than I think some other places, especially people coming in Washington
and Oregon aren't used the irrigation aspect of it. They are not paying for that there and
so I think those costs are higher. But year over a year those costs just keep going up.
It's not something that's static and this is what it's going to cost. Every year it's going up.
Simison: Council, any additional questions? Okay. Thank you, Laren.
Bailey: Thanks.
Simison: And, Hethe, you will get your own time. You are on three minutes.
Clark: I will talk fast. It's good to see everyone. Hethe Clark. 251 East Front Street. I'm
working with Laren tonight to provide some comments on these -- on these amendments.
Again, just want to compliment everybody on all the work that's been done. We are
hoping to be a productive part of the conversation to just try to get this right. So, with
regard to the qualified amenities, we are certainly happy to see a more robust point
system. We think that's a great idea. What we would like to do is just provide a couple
quick comments on that and it really comes down to some of the subjective elements of
the amendment and that really comes down to the fact that it includes maximums for
these points and you have to ask yourself what does that mean if it's a maximum of those
point values. You know, all we know right now is that points can be taken away for a
number of reasons that include size, quality, ease of maintenance, durability, integration
with other amenities and year around usability. So, very similar to some of the points that
the Mayor just made with regard to swimming pools. So, example, sports fields, they can
get up to five points, but a sports field, if it doesn't integrate with other amenities, you
know, if it-- if it has to be mowed and maintained all the time, you can't use it in the winter,
seems that it would be subject to being deducted under that instance and we would just
like to understand, you know, how that would be, what -- what that would mean. You
know, other examples would be something like, you know, the fitness facility. You can get
four points for a 5,000 square foot -- or a maximum of four points for a fitness facility.
What's the difference between a 5,000 or a 10,000 square foot fitness facility or a park
and ride if you provide 40 parking spaces, is that the maximum, or is it that if you can do
the minimum of 20 do you get the maximum points? You know, ultimately we think that
the -- the amenities should either qualify or they should not. So, we are -- our suggestion
is let's get rid of the maximum label. Let's just be a little bit clear on -- on what qualifies
as that type of amenity and, then, remove the -- what I have been calling the demerit
system from this. You know, either it qualifies or it doesn't. We think that that will give a
lot more predictability to the process and, then, obviously, you, as Council and P&Z would
have the opportunity to comment on the specific package that's being suggested. On a
similar note, you know, we were thinking about regional parks and kind of went back and
forth on this. You know, a suggestion that we wanted to make was that perhaps with -- if
you are proposing a project that's near a regional park, that there would be a reduction
on the amount of amenity points that are required. Still need to require at least one
amenity, but a reduction of say 30 percent we think would make sense. That would help
promote housing and density near regional facilities.
Page 68
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 63 of 76
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I don't want to interrupt, you will get your time. I promise.
Clark: Okay.
Bernt: I'm actually going to give you some more time, so you should thank me. So, if you
are -- because I like -- we -- this was a big discussion point when -- when I was on this --
you know, a little bit of horse trading involved with regard to amenities next to regional
parks and so in my -- and I don't disagree with what you are saying, I think it actually sort
of makes sense to some degree. So, what else would you do? So, if we are going to
allow you to have less amenities because there is a great park down the street, what
would you do as the developer or the -- or the -- the presenter in your case or whatever
to -- I mean what -- what would that horse trade look like do you think? And I don't need
--just give me some examples in what do you think that looks like.
Clark: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, Council Member Bernt, I was thinking about this this afternoon
and, you know, what does this look like. You know, you want to have -- we want to be
encouraging in-fill near areas that have the facilities that we have built that we want people
to use; right. So, we wouldn't want to say, hey, you have six acre in-fill, you just get a 30
percent reduction and now suddenly you don't have to provide any amenities. So, you
know, from my perspective you got to have at least one amenity that would be provided
and it could be anything from this list. You know, it could be, you know, a public art
installation, but people are going to be coming out of -- what you would want and the
reason you would buy near to that regional park would be so your folks could come --
come out of your project and go use that.
Bernt: But what would --what would you give -- if you were saying less, but we are willing
to give X?
Clark: Well, I think that when we are building near these regional facilities, one thing I
think we would want to see more is more density. We would want to see more people
living near those -- near those areas and that's one of the reasons why we would want to
concentrate it. You know, in terms of specifics, you know, I think we would have to -- you
know. Yeah, it would be very much subjective.
Bernt: I get it.
Clark: So, with that I did -- Laren and I put together this chart of the specific items that
we thought it would be good for folks to have in front of them as we go forward here and
I will just kind of summarize a few of these, because I think I might be able to add a little
bit to the prior conversation. So, again, with regard to the amenities, the suggestion is to
remove the maximum concept and the demerit system. I think just -- does it qualify or
does it not and let us move on. And, then, on this same comment on the regional parks.
Page 69
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 64 of 76
With regard to the minimum open space requirements, again, our suggestion is 13
percent for R-8 and R-15. On the shape of open spaces, you know, we are living in a
post House Bill 389 world. You know, in-fill is going to be -- it's always been important,
but it's going to be even more important now and with in-fill there is going to be crazy
shaped lots and crazy shaped open space and so I think an across the board
disqualification just based on space doesn't make sense. As mentioned, we do believe
the 30 percent for front-on housing is appropriate.
Simison: Hethe, if you can wrap up. We have given you that extra minute and a half and
I think we have already gone over these, so --
Clark: Appreciate it. I think the last thing I would say, Mr. Mayor, then, is on the -- the 75
percent for the stormwater detention facilities, just one thing to add to that, you know, a
couple of great examples of that are in Tuscany. Across the street from Sienna
Elementary there is a great one. There is one over on Tiber. But I would point you to the
language of the code speaks to the -- as long as the standards of 11-3D-11 are met and
those are landscape standards for stormwater and so -- and they speak to it being
landscaped and having trees and all that sort of thing. So, I think that the answer to the
question is actually already in your code. So, with that I will go ahead and wrap up and
call it a night.
Simison: Council, any questions?
Clark: Thank you.
Simison: Which was the second one in Tuscany that you were referencing?
Clark: Tiber. It's a little bit-- it's a couple blocks south next to one of the community pools.
Simison: Okay. Because there is also ones that are just an open field -- or an open piece
of property that don't do anything for anybody as well. The across from Sienna is
beautiful.
Clark: Yeah. The one -- like Laren mentioned, it's all about good design and that's what
we want to incentivize.
Simison: Thank you. Mr. Clerk?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we have no additional sign-ups. We do have people on -- one
personal online and people in the room as well.
Simison: Okay. Is there anybody that would like to provide testimony on the item? If you
would like to come forward now or use the raise your hand feature on Zoom and we will
bring you in or unmute you. I keep saying that. Come on up.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, I thought we were going to close the public hearing.
Page 70
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 65 of 76
Reynolds: Come on. Third time is a charm; right? Mr. Mayor, Members of City Council,
Sally Reynolds. 1166 West Bacall Street. A lot to cover in three minutes, so I'm just going
to go through bullet points and, then, you can ask me questions. So, I was a member of
the open space committee. I think I only missed one or two meetings, if memory serves.
So, it was kind of a long process and I am trying to give you the best background I can
with my memory. So, I will just go through these. Number one. I support the open space
schedule as proposed with a small exception on the multi-family. I don't think that 15
percent is too big of an ask. It was a really good compromise with everybody there. As
we did a study of subdivisions that were already in existence most of them met 15 or
exceeded 15 percent and that was even presentations given by some developers on the
committee. And most of those subdivisions are what you would call quality
neighborhoods in Meridian and so I think that 15 percent is, as Susan Karnes would say,
setting the bar high and, you know, that's -- that's what we are trying to do in Meridian.
That's who we are trying to be when we grow up; right? I'm really proud of the points
amenity system that we have. Really supportive of it. I think that it makes for a lot of
creativity. I do agree with the letter from BCA that says let's see how it's going and review
in a year, because it's something really new and we don't know how that's going to flush
out. So, I say come back in a year and see how it's going. So, the point of the trees --
agree with everything Mr. Mayor said. I don't think we should include verbiage that we
aren't ready to employ. I don't love the idea of fee in lieu schedule for trees. I think it sets
a dangerous precedent and I will just -- a quick example, there is already some like horse
trading in the code about like -- and I will just use Winco as an example that we were
talking about earlier tonight. They were supposed to be capped at 60,000 square feet,
but if you have more open space you can go up to however many square feet and so we
have got things in the code trading square footage for open space already. So, you start
adding trees to that -- I just don't know how complicated that gets. Storm drains. If it's in
the code I think we would see much better storm drains already in Meridian. I'm in favor
of counting it at 25 percent. If a developer comes before you and can say this is exactly
what we are going to do, because that piece of land has an extremely large piece of the
storm drains, then, have to make a case for 50 percent, go through alternative
compliance, I don't see any reason why not. Frontage. Okay. You might be surprised.
We don't know where the 50 percent frontage came from either. So, that might have been
a meeting that I missed as well. But personally I am not supportive of the 50 percent
frontage. I would be supportive of decreasing it to 30 percent. I do live in Paramount
where most of it, like Jon said, is all backed and our parks are very, very, very well used.
Lochsa is not. To the point of Vienna Woods, they have trunk or treats around there. I
mean it was a storm drain, but that is well used, so I think it -- some of it depends on the
residents. To the survey that you were asking, if my memory serves -- and it was a long
time ago -- I think there was a survey that I think there was less than a hundred responses
and a lot has happened in a year. So, I would say especially with the market I would
support Council Member Strader's idea to circle back to the public and do it again, not as
a way to guide future discussions, but just to see if what we have done meets what the
public wanted. Just want to say a reminder of alternative compliance is there to allow for
creativity and innovative development. I think there are some developers in Meridian who
do that really well and there are some that use it to skirt the UDC and I think that this
Council can tell the difference between the two. So, I will leave it at that. As far as the
Page 71
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 66 of 76
parks going next to high multi-family or whatever, you know, that's one I do have a little
bit of an issue with, because the developer is going to get a better price for their land at
the expense of something that the city has done and maintained; right? And that project
is going to -- it's going to pencil better. So, I don't feel like that's something that somebody
should be profiting off of. I think that there could be some, as Council Member Bernt said,
horsetrading, but I would hope that they could come up with some amenities to replace
that open space. Maybe we say, hey, it's not open grassy space, because we have got a
park right next door and, hey, the city is providing that for you, so what can you come
back with in terms of amenities. I just got back from Seattle at 2:00 a.m., actually, last
night and I was in two high rise buildings where I saw one had a private movie theater for
the residents and -- as an amenity in a multi-family. I mean it only had 12 seats, but you
could rent it out and it was really cool. And they also had a private spa, which I don't know
if we are at that point yet, but, you know, the movie theater would be really cool and there
are some great things with Doordash and Uber Eats and providing a refrigerator for when
your groceries are dropped off and it's in the refrigerator down in the -- you know, little
area. So, there are really some creative things we can do with multi-family and I would
just be slow to say -- let's just say we built next to a park, so we are good. Three minutes
are probably up. So, the last one is multi-family. I would like to see it at 18 percent and
just because -- and if not at 18 percent, then, some language, like I said, to go with some
of those creative amenities and I do think that there should be a definition in the code
right now, as Bill said, it's just open, you just say there is multi-family and it's subjective
how many amenities they can provide. So, I think that that should be defined in code.
Are we saying over a hundred is two amenities? Over 500 is three? I'm not really sure.
So, with that I will close and stand for questions and I will echo everyone else's
sentiments. The meetings I thought were productive. We had some good discussion. I
really appreciated everybody who sat in on them and I learned a lot and I think that
everybody had some valuable contributions to it. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Sally, congrates on the hat trick. Question for you. We heard a lot tonight
about increasing open space for higher density use. I haven't heard a lot of conversation
about reducing open space for some lower density use and I don't know if that was
discussed or contemplated at the committee and if there is any feedback or findings you
can share with us.
Reynolds: Yeah. So, personally -- personally -- okay. R-2. Ten percent. I'm going to
say personally if that went down a little bit -- personally I would be okay with it. I don't
think that there are residents out there who would be and maybe that's something we can
put in our survey, only because the RD designation is kind of gone. That lower rural
designation for residential -- the lower density residential, that designation has gone off
of the comp plan -- off of the comp plan and I think that in the comp plan we are saying
Page 72
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 67 of 76
preserve our farmland, preserve our heritage and some of that feeling is the open spaces;
right? So, I think that the reason the ten percent is there for the lower density and this is
just my opinion, this could be completely wrong, is because I think as residents we are
scared that we are not going to get enough in other places. Does that make any sense?
That's -- and that's pure conjecture on my part. That's kind of how I feel.
Cavener: Appreciate you sharing that, Sally.
Reynolds: Yeah.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Thanks a lot, Sally. I didn't quite catch the very beginning of your comments. I
didn't want you to feel rushed. If you could just go back through your comments about
the table with a minimum open space requirements. Do you feel like in general coming
out of that open space committee you feel supportive of this table and it sounded like the
multi-family you think is low. Did -- are you supportive overall? How strongly do you feel
about that multi-family piece?
Reynolds; Overall, but the table that's there I'm supportive of it. I mean 15 percent -- I
mean in a perfect world, yeah, we would have loved to see 18 or 20, that's kind of what
the residents were saying and we compromised with a 15. So, I'm supportive of it as far
as a compromise and the ones that are there I feel good about. The multi-family I do
think it should be 18 and I don't know if we want to do a sliding scale with the number of
units, but it just feels like we are getting a lot of density in Meridian and if there is going
to be so much density, you know, 15 or 18 percent of such a small area really doesn't
even come out to be that much when you are looking at the footprint depending and I'm
not a developer, so I can't speak to, you know, how the project's all flushed out and
whatnot, but I would like to see a little bit further study on multi-family and what is that --
what are some of the applications that are being built right now, what do they have, what
do they look like? And I mean if they are all at 15 and they look great, then, great. Or
maybe we say it's 18 and you do get credit, you can get it reduced if you have some cool
amenities, but that is where I'm at with multi-family. I'm not a hundred percent supportive
of that. I would like to see that pushed that direction a little bit.
Strader: Thank you.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Interesting thought about the multi-family portion of it. I would like to know how
when -- Bill, when you were doing your calculations were you using some type of a
formula, you know, maybe for -- you know, Sally's mentioned it tonight and others have
Page 73
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 68 of 76
mentioned and I was -- I was thinking it, you know, having a formula based -- based upon
how many units, not necessarily like an exact amount. I don't know. Just something to
think about.
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Council, Councilman Bernt, that's how we -- that's how we do it
now. We -- we don't have a formula, but, basically, it's -- if you are between a certain
square footage unit you times it by X amount of square feet and that's how you get the
number of common open space that you provide for a multi-family development. The
changes that we are talking about tonight would add that base line amount of ten percent.
In addition to that if the development is overfive acres. And what's --what Sally's referring
to is the fact that we are putting a minimum cap at 15 percent, unless the developer
chooses to do more. I think that's what her beef is with. We -- I can tell you based on a
lot of the developments I have tested out there it's coming out 18 to 20 percent for multi-
family it really is, based on -- on that formula. I'm hopeful that most of the development
community or those who want to come do business in Meridian will want to provide more
open space than that 15. But, again, that's some of the discussions that I had with some
of the open space committee members and they were comfortable with at least saying no
more than 15 percent or at least cap them at a minimum if you hit all of that criteria. But
they were more willing to provide more if they had to, they just didn't -- again each project
is different. It's -- it's hard to develop a code that says everything fits in this box, because
that's why we have alternative compliance and that's what that tool is meant for. It's meant
to do something innovative. Not to get you out of code, but to do something that wasn't
contemplated in code and still meet the intent of the code and the Comprehensive Plan.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Shout out to Susan Karnes. Miss her. When I --when I was first elected we didn't
start off on the right foot, her and I. I'm not going to lie. I don't think she was my biggest
supporter. But over the years she became a dear friend. I hope she's -- God bless her.
God bless her husband. You know, I know that they have moved, but I miss her. She's
-- our discussions. That's how discussions need to be, like you find someone who you
completely disagree with on every level and after a half an hour of looking someone in
the eye, finding something in common and building on that. I think that's so important.
And that was Susan Karnes that I miss her.
Reynolds: Mr. Mayor, Council Member Bernt, I definitely agree. I do as well and she had
a good way of bringing everyone to a win-win and a good compromise.
Bernt: She was great.
Reynolds: Being respectful.
Bernt: A thousand percent. If I may, I have, Mr. Mayor, one question for Bill on that multi-
family. How much, Bill, do you think it would change? Because I know we are doing it
Page 74
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 69 of 76
on square footage. But number of units is really like bodies in the building; right? And
that's families. So, do you think that that equation would change much if we were saying,
hey, numbers of units are not necessarily square footage for open space? If that makes
sense?
Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, yeah, it's a good point to look at, but
don't think I have ever seen it that way, to be honest with you. But, of course, I haven't
gone out to every code out in the nation to see what they have done. I don't know how
that would -- would shake out. I don't know what number to apply for a development at a
hundred units versus 50 and say you should provide an acre of open space. Well, I'm
not sure at this point if --
Reynolds: Mr. Mayor, Council, just a question. Thank you. Thank you so much. And I
-- one last comment if I might. As it is I think that -- I mean the definitions that we dug into
and the amount of time that we did spend going over things, I am really proud of the
direction that this code is moving. I think there is more work to be done, but I'm really
happy with the changes that -- most of the changes that have been made so far and I like
to commend everybody -- who worked on that and I would love I hope that other cities do
take note of what we are doing and maybe they will follow us. So, thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Denise, come on up.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, if Denise agrees with that last statement we are having a party after
this Council meeting.
LaFever: Hello for the third time. My name is Denise LaFever. 6706 North Salvia Way.
And as some of you know, this was a really big subject for us during the Comprehensive
Plan and it was an area that we took exception to, Susan Karnes and Sally and I and --
we were really adamant about that. I'm really happy that they have spent the time to go
back through and spend some time on it and I'm happy for Sally and Julie to spend time
going through and sitting as residents. I do have some concerns. One, I'm opposed to
all the things that DevCo recommended, with the exception of the 30 percent front. We
will lay that out there. I have one issue here that's really big for me and that's 11-3G-4B3,
which is the alternative compliance. I have had issues with that on the open space and
in the multi-family. I have watched so many of these Council meetings and sat through
these and testified over a long period of time and I can almost tell you a lot of people
come up and talk about schools, roads, and open space. It's real disheartening when
you spend all this time talking to individuals and they have a plan in front of them and they
think that's what they are going to get and, then, alternative compliance happens and now
you have the development -- Carmen -- Cameron -- Cameron in charge of making those
changes that don't align with what the people that came to the public meetings had to say.
So, I'm just not okay with that. I have bigger issues with that. I also agree with what Sally
said moving from 15 to 18 percent and I'm really concerned about the process that
happened with multi-family. The meeting was pushed to a separate meeting in which
developers and ex-Mayor Tammy were involved in and excluded the full committee.
Going on to some other --
Page 75
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 70 of 76
Bernt: What did you just say?
LaFever: What's that?
Bernt: I didn't hear your last statement.
LaFever: During the multi-family it got pushed to a separate meeting. Okay? And during
that separate meeting that -- it was done with the developers and ex-Mayor Tammy. It
was not the full committee. It wasn't vetted with the full committee and I take exception
to that. Julie's in the audience and I know she doesn't want to come up, but I would really
like you guys to hear what she has to say as a member on the committee. I read her
letter and I was really concerned about what she had to say. Those are a lot of the
concerns that we felt when we went through the Comprehensive Plan. The other areas
that I have concern about is the restricted height change. If that's all about schools, then,
say that. Lock it down and restrict it to all about schools. My other concern is frequency
of UDC changes. I think we should do that less often and not every single time we want
to make a change. There is -- this is a pet peeve of mine. I have said it more than once.
The lack of transparency for the UDC focus committee or the UDC advisory committee.
I like to see that come as an agenda item, shown as a meeting, actually people could
show up and sit through it and listen to it. It's an invisible, nontransparent meeting. The
UDC is the cornerstone for how Meridian develops out. It's also the cornerstone for the
codes. I just really think it needs to be transparent and I'm still not sure of who the current
list of the -- the committee and who are resident -- if Ann is still doing that. I know it was
hit and miss when it was Susan there. The last one is -- is -- as -- as some of you know
I testified about due process once before when we changed it to public meaning cutting
off at noon. Here we are today and Bill had made changes up until this afternoon. I
wanted to go see if that was, in fact, the case and I looked. The C-C common space and
site amenity document was, in fact, changed on the public site. It was done at 6/1/21,
4:41 and 33 seconds p.m. today. This doesn't allow your public time to really digest and
see what those changes are. So, if we are going to have it at noon I think we should have
it at noon all the way across and not make these last minute changes. Once again, if
Julie doesn't come up and testify, I really urge you to go back through and read the letter
that Julie put on file. I -- I have a real passion that residents and the community members
need to be able to have a voice here and it's not all just about development and, yes,
love commercial development, I will be honest, but I do think that people have to have a
voice here. They live here and at the end of the day they are your property taxpayers and
they are footing the bill. So, I would really like to see you guys come back with another
approach and make sure that these meetings and these committees are not stacked, that
the residents do have a say and that their concerns are not just pushed forward or, oh,
we have got to hurry along or whatever the case would be. So, I really urge you, while
Julia is in the audience, to bring her up and talk to her about her experience that she had
on the committee. Thank you.
Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Page 76
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 71 of 76
Simison: Is there anybody else in the public that would like to provide testimony at this
time? Okay. Seeing no one that's willing to provide -- or wanting to provide testimony,
Council, you have heard some conversations today and this is a public hearing and I'm
not exactly sure -- honestly, a few -- from everything we have heard today I think there is
a lot -- a lot in here and, quite frankly, and there is -- I'm going to -- I'm going to pull out
my Mr. Cavener hat. There is a lot that the community needs to know that they don't
know about. For example, the very first thing we talked about with parking and driveways.
You know, I think those are some pretty big changes that have not been effectively
communicated with the community and before any further action should be taken, in my
opinion. You know, the --this is all about-- if everything in this document--well, I shouldn't
say everything. In my opinion this is all about subjective -- subjective standards about
how we want to have our shared values in our community and I think it's important that
we get those shared values out in front of our community when we are going to make
changes, which some of that -- these can be very big changes from that standpoint,
regardless of who enforces those changes or how that goes, they are changes. So, I
don't know what your feelings are about how we move forward and where or what we
should do, but I would love to hear some thoughts on appropriate next steps since we are
in an open public hearing.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Appreciate you bringing it up. It kind of leads maybe to -- at least my question
to get the conversation started. Is there an immediate request or desire from staff to have
some action on this in a certain time frame? Recognize a lot of work has already went
into this. Want to make sure that we cross the finish line the right way. I just don't know
if there is a timeline expectation for staff about this.
Parsons: Mayor and Council, Councilman Cavener, it's up to you guys. I mean, really,
you know, as Ms. LaFever brought up, you know, here I -- you know, I want to make sure
-- all the changes that got modified from Planning and Zoning Commission until now were
things that were discussed at the hearing. It was actually going back and looking at
exhibits and making sure we are getting it right, because we do take it serious. I mean
when we change a code we are changing it for the city. We are not changing it for the
developer, we are not changing it for Council, we are not changing it for me, we are
changing it because we want to get it right and the last thing I want to do as a staff member
is get something in effect that's going to create more problems for us and so those
changes that you saw today -- one was a cleaned up version. I thought with all the
strikeout, underline changes it might get confusing to read through those documents,
because there is so -- there are so many edits to read over and I thought it might be
something you guys wanted to look at. So, I just went ahead and sent that to the clerk at
the end of the day to make sure you had that as part of the record. But overall, again,
the -- the purview is yours. If you think these are things that you want further addressed
and further vetting and shared with the community, then, absolutely, continue it out. If you
feel like you have enough information to make a decision tonight, give me some clear
Page 77
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 72 of 76
direction, I will make the edits happen, coordinate with Legal and we will get the ordinance
approved and passed within a couple of weeks. I'm flexible either way for you. I just --
just know this was important, not only to us, we -- we started this process in the fall, we
are here in the spring, early summer here and we don't have resolution to it and I think
that's -- that's where staff wants to be. We want a resolution, either we like what we have
or we pause and get it right until we have the right information for you, where you feel
comfortable with the changes.
Cavener: So, Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: So, to that point, you know, you -- you read the information that staff presents
and having this presentation from Council or from staff, feedback from -- from the public
to kind of take that all into --without maybe having to make a decision tonight is something
I would be supportive of and I appreciate with the last round having the opportunity, after
all this has been presented, to go and meet with staff and kind of talk through and help
me kind of see where staff is coming from and weigh that against the public was helpful.
So, selfishly, I would like to repeat that process again and have a little time to digest and
to the Mayor's point to allow maybe a little bit greater request from the public, if they have
got feedback on any of this, to invite them back and share that information with us. It's a
small crowd tonight, perhaps there will be more people that feel as strongly as I do about
parking trailers or boats in driveways or open space and they have the opportunity to
come back and share that.
Simison: And, really, for me where I look at it -- I look at this in two very different buckets.
We have the bucket that can impact everybody in this city tomorrow if it's passed and we
have the bucket that's going to impact how we move forward and make decisions as we
continue to grow and develop and, yes, that can impact our community feel and character,
but it's not going to impact how we -- everybody the day it's passed, you know, what we
decide for ten, 12, 15, 18 percent open space has no bearing on the person living in
Tuscany today, tomorrow, the next day. So, that's really where I would want to make sure
we at least, as a community, understand the changes that we are proposing. They are
going to -- to me it's like a law change. I mean that's what it is. I mean -- and we need to
make sure that they are aware of law changes and how they impact them versus open
space is a little different. That's a touch point. That's -- do we feel like we have got this
right now. Now, are you prepared for this change to your community character tomorrow.
So, two cents.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Yeah. It feels like the parking one, especially, is kind of like that third rail. I think
that we -- we maybe want to highlight or bubble that out there for the community to get
feedback specifically. But I -- I just think with all these changes I would love to see
Page 78
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 73 of 76
something -- and it's tough to simplify all these changes, but I would love to see something
maybe come out, like just a summary of what we are considering in some type of a town
hall format or some way to connect back. Maybe publicize it in a way that it's not the full
Comprehensive Plan, we don't have to have like ten different meetings throughout
Meridian, but I would love to have this highlighted a little more for people, so we get a
little more feedback from the community personally and I think there has been a lot of
good exchange of information here and it would be good to chew on it a bit and take a
few more swings at it personally.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I'm pretty close. There is some concerns and some things I just want to wrap my
arms around just a little bit more. Go over my notes. And also I would like to look at
Julie's e-mail. I skimmed through it, I didn't -- I didn't read it as closely as I should have.
So, I want to go back and read Julie's e-mail as well. I think she deserves that. But, most
importantly, this is -- I think we are all in agreement that this is a really important -- I mean
this is a -- this is finality to many months of preparation and deliberation and time and
effort, not only made by staff and -- but -- but in -- but, you know, our friends, the
development community, but citizens who have volunteered their time and -- to give their
opinion and, quite frankly, we have two Council Members that are absent tonight that
would bring fantastic perspective as well. So, for that purpose I think it makes a lot of
sense to continue this.
Simison: So, Mr. Nary, since this is not land use, let's pretend like we continued this for
a month and found a way to go out and get additional community feedback in some
fashion. What limitations, if any, are there in seeking feedback, having dialogue through
a town hall or through a survey on NextDoor or anything?
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, that was a great question and, again, because
this is a legislative action, it -- it definitely needs to be funneled into the public record
somewhere. So, whether it's a public hearing or a public meeting, if there is notes kept,
minutes kept, those types of things, they probably should make it to the public record.
But feedback from your community members, feedback at the grocery store, feedback all
of those things, are certainly welcomed. You are allowed to do that. I mean, again, when
the Council is making a decision and you are going to make a decision on what Joe told
you at the grocery store, then, please, tell us what Joe told you at the grocery store. So,
we are at least clear where you are getting your information from, but it is -- it is -- you are
welcome to accept whatever information however you want to get it. So, a survey is fine.
Atown hall meeting is fine. Coffee with the Mayor is fine. Whatever method to get public
feedback. I always encourage them -- and please write it in an e-mail and send it to us.
We would like to have it just for the record so people can see. But they are not limited to
that. They don't have to only do it that way.
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Page 79
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 74 of 76
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: I agree with all the comments. I didn't, quite frankly, even contemplate deciding
tonight, knowing that we are going to get some input from the public and community and
whoever happened to show up and -- and there is just a lot to consider and think about.
So, if it's a next date at least for us to consider as a continued public hearing on this to a
date certain, and, then, the Mayor's office provides some outreach to the community
through social media at least, maybe a plan of -- if it's a town hall or a Coffee with the
Mayor or something more robust, at the very least we have got some ability to do some
outreach.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, one thing that Council has done in the past
when you have a very large project like this, is to break it into chunks, so that way -- we
spent about two and a half hours on -- on all of it tonight, but, you know, is it more
beneficial to all of you to have a focused discussion or focus survey or a focus
concentrated period to, then, talk about just the open space or the other changes that
affect the code and code edits and not cutting, because, again, like some people said, if
you get three to four minutes, but you are trying to talk about stuff that was presented for
an hour, that's pretty challenging and they are all varied greatly. So, that might be a way
to help all of you get the information in pieces that are more digestible to, then, make a
decision and direction at some point.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: So, maybe we start July 6 and, then, we do it again July 13th and break it up half
and half. I think that gives an opportunity for outreach, whatever that looks like to you,
Mr. Mayor, and your office and it gives us an opportunity to break it up, so we are not
having -- you know, I mean -- I know we all love talking about UDC code, but maybe --
you know, so bring it-- separating it in two different nights would be -- I think what Bill said
makes sense.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. Nary pointed out it may be a little challenging coming off of a holiday week
that first week, so maybe staggered it from, what, the -- maybe the 10th and the 23rd or
something along those lines. Staff I think can -- I guess, Mr. Nary do we need to continue
it to a specific date certain or can we say we are going to continue it and Mayor and
Council President can determine an appropriate date in the future.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, because it is legislative it is just an agenda
setting, so you can set it -- I just recognize this sometimes, but Tuesday immediately after
a three day weekend is a challenge both for staff and the public.
Page 80
Meridian City Council
Item#2. June 1,2021
Page 75 of 76
Johnson: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Clerk.
Johnson: Just want to point out you do have a special meeting on the 29th. You have
scheduled for one application that was continued and, then, July 13th you have two
Council reviews now of a land use project Planning and Zoning approved. So, that might
be a long evening on the 13th.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: What does the 6th look like, Chris?
Johnson: At this time there is no notices we put have out. We have not hit that deadline
yet. So, it's possible something could be coming forward from Planning, but right now it's
open.
Bernt: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, I don't -- I -- I'm okay with just continuing it to the 6th and if we
need to -- if we need more time after the 6th we will do it again.
Simison: Yeah. If it's -- we can only accommodate all what -- you know, give direction on
one or two items on the 6th, we can see where we are based on conversations we have
had at that point in time. So, with that do I have a motion?
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we continue Item 15 to July 6th.
Cavener: Second.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to continue Item 15 to July 6th. Any discussion
on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it
and the item is continued. Thank you very much to those who came to speak.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Cavener: We have groupies in the house.
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
Simison: That's right. Council, anything under Future Meeting Topics or do I have a
motion?
Page 81
Meridian City Council
Item#3. June 1,2021
Page 76 of 76
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: I move that we adjourn.
Cavener: Second.
Simison: Motion and second to adjourn the meeting. All in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed nay. The ayes have. We are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:10 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
6 / 15 2021
MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK
Page 81