HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 7, 2006 C/C Minutes
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 28 of 90
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. If there is no further discussion, Mr. Berg, will you call
roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Item 14:
Continued Public Hearing from January 17, 2006: CPA 05-004
Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the text and
future land use map of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan for the North
Meridian Area and to expand the area of city impact boundary:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 14 was continued from January 17th and Mr. Rountree is
reclusing himself. Recusing.
Rountree: I'm not reclusing myself, I'm --
De Weerd: You're reclusing -- you're reclusive. This item was continued to accept
additional testimony from ACHD, to allow response additionally to the ACHD comments
I will turn this over to staff.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm going to just start off with what I
would propose as a way to continue this Public Hearing tonight. You can certainly
comment on that and change if you'd like. But what I would propose is that I will hand it
over to Mr. Siddoway to go through the ACHD comments and respond to those, in that
the first hearing we -- staff presented a number outstanding issues. We have since
updated that. That list is before you. The first page is -- are ones that you had going
into the first Public Hearing, so those have not changed. What we did was add four
additional ones to kind of summarize the Public Hearing that you heard that night.
Many of them were kind of regarding groups of people testifying about the same thing.
So, that's why four of those come up before you tonight. And, then, we can -- you can
move forward from there. But I just wanted to point out to you that you do have that list
of -- you have the ACHD comments with Steve's response, which he will go through
shortly, but you also have a list of outstanding issues before you from the last Public
Hearing. And with that I will hand it over to Mr. Siddoway.
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, thank you. This item was
continued at the last hearing to allow ACHD time to review the proposed policies and
the circulation map and provide comments on it. Those comments were received and
you should have a copy of them. I have added my own notes to that. I will run through
them briefly. The first one suggests that instead of adding roadways to an arterial list in
the text, that we have been trying -- to keep it updated with the correct functional
classifications. They are recommended referencing the most up to date functional
classification map and we would agree with that and, in fact, proposed that at the last
hearing as one of the changes that staff does support. Similarly, the second item talks
about specific changes to the list of road projects and instead of making changes to the
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 29 of 90
table to try and keep the road projects list current in the Comp Plan, I would propose
that we simply delete the table and amend the text to reference the appropriate
documents. The next item talks about McMillan Road. McMillan Road is in the center
of the north Meridian area. It has been talked about for several years as a community
oriented transit boulevard. The discussion of such came up during the original north
Meridian area planning process when Mr. Wardle was bringing it through. ACHD
simply points out that the road is constrained to three lanes. It's not likely to become a
major arterial and that Ustick may be a more appropriate corridor for transit. I would
also point out that there are -- there are many commercial activities that have been
recently approved along McMillan. I think that the designation as a community oriented
boulevard should likely stand, but we could add the note that Ustick is also an
appropriate corridor for future transit. And I do know that in Valley Regional Transit's six
year funding plans, they do incorporate transit along Ustick. So, I think it is an important
note to say that we need to accommodate transit along Ustick, but given the direction
that -- and the discussions in the past with Council about McMillan, continuing the idea
of McMillan as a more community oriented boulevard may make some sense. The next
one talks about pedestrian safety and as currently written the policy would suggest that
-- that pedestrian crossings should be accommodated at the quarter mile and the half
mile locations. ACHD rightly points out that those pedestrian crossings need to only
occur where there is a signalized intersection, especially on an arterial, which are
typically five lanes. I would recommend that we change our policy statement to reflect
ACHD's comments on that matter. On the next page they get to the auto circulation
map specifically. They have two specific changes that they would request and as staff
we would support both of them. The first is that west of Black Cat Road there is a
collector stub that should be extended north to the north property line to the extent of
the area that we are proposing to take in as Meridian area of impact. So, this line
should be extended up as a preferred collector route. Similarly, on the east side of
Black Cat that one would also be extended north up to the north boundary of the
proposed area of impact. Staff is supportive of both of those additions. The next -- the
last two are raised more as questions. The first is a question to ask. On this collector
map there is no collector shown mid mile from Ustick north between Ten Mile and Black
Cat. And they ask if we believe one would be needed there. Staff does not believe one
would be needed there, because of the wastewater treatment plant that exists in that
area. The last one talks about the lack of collectors in the very southwest corner of the
proposed area of impact near Can Ada Road and Ustick. There is a short collector stub
in this area that could certainly be extended further into that section. The reason why it
was not continuous is because if you look on the land use map, this area is intended for
very low density and it was not anticipated that a full collector would be needed.
However, we could certainly extend that into the -- further into the area to provide
access to the future neighborhood center activities here. We could also show one from
the south down to Ustick that would stub in much like all the existing ones in this area
that would bring traffic down to Ustick in that area. Those -- that summarizes the issues
raised by the Ada County Highway District and our staff response to them. You do have
them there in writing and I would stand for any questions.
De Weerd: Council, any questions for Steve?
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 30 of 90
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Borton.
Borton: Steve, on the -- north of Chinden between Linder and Ten Mile --
Siddoway: Yes.
Borton: -- is that a collector that you go to the area of impact boundary as well? You
reference the other two. Unless I'm looking at that wrong.
Siddoway: Right in here?
Borton: Yes.
Siddoway: Is this the location, Mr. Borton?
Borton: Yes.
Siddoway: There is already development in here. I believe that's -- is that Spur Wing?
Yeah. Spur Wing and Spur Wing golf course is already developed in that area and so
that one would not extend through that project.
De Weerd: Okay. Any other questions? Okay. At this point we did keep the Public
Hearing open for the ACHD response and to also accept any public testimony that was
also in response to the ACHD document. Is that correct, Council?
Baird: Madam Mayor that was my recommendation. I do recall Councilmember Borton
was a little concerned about that restriction and so I think the way we left it was we
made it clear that everyone who had testified had been heard on the record and would
not need to repeat that testimony tonight. But I just -- I don't think that we specifically
limited it only to the ACHD report. Am I correct in that recollection?
Borton: That's what I thought.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, did you have additional comment?
Canning: I do have the motion here, if you'd like me to read it back. Mr. Wardle moved
that we continue the Public Hearing to February 7th and Mayor de Weerd said the
motion is to continue this to February 7th to receive the transportation related report.
Then, the motion was carried, so--
De Weerd: Certainly, Council, you can entertain public response to the ACHD report
and any new testimony would be entertained at that time as well. Sound good? Okay.
Is there any public who would like to offer testimony in regards to the ACHD comments
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 31 of 90
that the City of Meridian received? If so, please, come forward. Sir. And after this
comment, I will ask for any new testimony, if you were not able to testify during our last
Public Hearing. If you will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Endicott: Madam Mayor, Councilmen. It's Herb Endicott. 1450 West Ustick, which is
the northeast corner of Linder and Ustick.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Endicott: The way the plan has been going, they have been putting a lot of commercial
buildings in the middle of the mile. I'm a retired electrician and most of the signals from
Overland to State Street I installed and if you will remember correctly, they were
installed on one mile increments, except at -- where the freeway was. When that was
first put in the traffic moved real well. There was, you know, signals at an hour -- at a
mile apart and the traffic moved real nice and, then, you started putting businesses in
and putting signals within a half mile or even closer than that when you get down to
Eagle where they go into Eagle there at the river and it really impedes the traffic flow.
It's nothing like it used to be. I would like to see the corners on one mile stations be
commercial instead of in the middle. I think it would be a lot safer for the students that's
going back and forth to school. That Sawtooth school is within a quarter of a mile of
Linder and Ustick. There is no sidewalk. The kids have to walk on the pavement or
right on the shoulder and there is no barrow pit when you get down to my property. The
shoulder has been widened for the kids. There is no barrow pit. The water runs into my
field and it -- cars pull over to the side, kids have to step off, they are up against a fence.
It's just not safe to do things the way they have started doing it. I'd like to see the
commercial use going to the corners and it would make it a lot easier to get in and out of
traffic. Where I live I have lived there for 33 years and in the past the kids could go out
and bicycle about anytime of the day, you could get out on the road. The last four or
five years I'm glad my kids are growed up, there is no way I would let them ride up and
down that road, except for maybe an hour or two in the middle of the day when there is
not much traffic as there is in the morning and the evening. It's just to the point now that
you cannot get out on the -- close to those intersections. They are going to have to put
signal lights in. When you put -- a developer develops the corners and whatnot now,
the county has them put in money for a signal and that's a good thing. And we do need
signals on the one mile corners and that is where we ought to have all of our
commercial developments. Keep them out of the middle of the one mile stretches,
because, then, you end up putting more signal lights in impeding traffic. And we just
heard that they want to make Ustick a major traffic route. That's one of the things that
I'd like to see done. Thank you. Any questions?
De Weerd: Thank you. Any Council? Thank you. Okay. I do have a sign-up sheet
and if I call your name and you would like to provide testimony, if you will step forward
at that time. Sherry Ewing. You can come up anytime you want. Joan Frath. If you
will, please, state your name and address for the record.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 32 of 90
Frath: Madam Mayor and Councilmembers, my name is Joan Frath. F-r-a-t-h. And I
live at 631 Lawndale Drive, Meridian.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Frath: But the property that I am speaking about is located at 1680 West Ustick Road,
Meridian. It's on the northwest corner of Ustick and Linder. The same area that the
previous gentleman, Mr. Endicott, was talking about. I'm the personal representative for
my dad's estate and his name was Warren Watson, Senior. In the last probably three
plus years since my dad has passed away, we have made numerous attempts to rent
the property. I have talked with many many people. They love the property. They want
to rent the house. But when they -- after they have looked at it and they are standing
around outside, they are very concerned about the traffic. It's too loud. There is too
much traffic. They don't want their kids out there. It's my understanding that we are
currently zoned transition slated to go residential in the Comprehensive Plan. I would
like to see that changed to commercial or commercial slash mixed use. If we don't
change that we are going to be in a position where we virtually are going to have a very
difficult time selling our property. It is currently for sale. However, nobody wants to
build residential on that road. Tonight I was on the property and going home at about a
quarter after 5:00, our driveway, as you pull out, you almost get killed every time.
People just run you down from that corner. And as I headed south back into town to my
home, I counted 32 cars lined up at 5:15, then -- and they were heading north at the
corner there at Ustick and Linder and there were at least as many on the other roads at
that intersection. It's just my opinion that that -- based on the amount of traffic and
based on the fact that nobody wants to live directly on that corner or any corner, for that
matter, then, the use for that should be commercial or commercial and mixed use. Any
questions?
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Frath: You're welcome.
De Weerd: Okay. Wanda Butler.
Butler: Good evening.
De Weerd: Good evening.
Butler: My name is Wanda Butler. I live at 526 West Blaine Avenue in Nampa. But I
am here speaking as my sister did on my dad's property at 1680 West Ustick and I can
tell you right now I moved up from Houston -- that corner frightens me. I cannot get out
of there. Fortunately, my dad built a nice wide driveway and I have become very adept
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 33 of 90
at turning around, so I can drive out of that driveway, rather than trying to back out. It is
absolutely the most unsafe thing I have ever seen. And I would request that you
seriously consider, as Mr. Endicott requested and as Joan requested, that those corners
become commercial -- commercial slash mixed use. It just makes more sense for
safety and viability along that corridor. Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you. There is a Hugh Endicott or Elliott or -- okay. Herb. David
Cadwell.
Cadwell: David Cadwell. My address is 1412 East Lewis in Boise. I'm working with Mr.
Endicott. I'm the developer working with him on his property. Bruce Poe spoke a
couple weeks ago with regards to the development that we are looking to do out there.
The one thing that really attracted us to that site initially was just how connected it was
to the Treasure Valley and, then, hearing the comments about how Ustick is planning to
be a main arterial, it makes it even better. But I mean if you look at Ustick, how that ties
into, really, the central part of Boise through north Meridian on out to Nampa-Caldwell
and just how well it connects those areas, in addition to Linder and how that's the next
bridge crossing, obviously, west of Eagle, that can take you into Eagle, Star, Middleton,
and those areas.
De Weerd: I guess it depends on if Ustick in Boise is three lanes or five lanes.
Cadwell: Well -- and if it is five lanes, it definitely would be a lot better, yeah. Anyway,
what we were looking at doing is some service oriented office type uses, with a retail
component out front. On all cases it really would be geared towards the user, like the
office user who wants to service the Treasure Valley as a whole. You know, like real
estate offices, title companies, mortgage offices, those type of users that really need
that access, exposure, accessibility to the Treasure Valley. And, then, the retail
component is really some of the quick service type retail users. Like your take-and-
bake pizzas, your drycleaners, your take-out food for whatever reason, you know, you're
prepared meals that you can get on your way home when you're running late, and those
type of uses, which I think are pretty significantly different than the type of uses that will
end up in the neighborhood commercial down the street halfway -- about a half mile
east of us. It just seems like for a neighborhood commercial to be successful, it has to
be really geared towards the destination oriented type users, whether that's office or
retail. It really has to be a place that people want to go spend time and they want to go
to, they want to sit down, go to the restaurants. After the restaurant, walk up to the
coffee store, the coffee store or the ice cream store or, you know, any variety there, but
it's not something that you try to stop quickly on your way home. So, I think we are
really gearing ourself towards a different tenant mix and different synergies than what's
provided -- or could potentially be provided in the neighborhood center. Questions?
De Weerd: No. Thank you.
Cadwell: Thanks.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 34 of 90
De Weerd: Ty Sindon.
Sindon: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I'm a neighbor with the Endicotts.
De Weerd: If you will also, please, state your name and address.
Sindon: Oh, yeah. I'm Ty Sindon and I'm at 1515 West Ustick Road and that's the
southeast corner of the intersection they are talking about.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Sindon: Okay. I agree with everything that they are saying, that the traffic along that
corridor, if you want to call it that, Ustick Road is just terrible. They say it backs up 30
some cars. It backs up -- it backs up a mile -- it backs up a mile to -- if you're on Linder
-- I mean if you're on Ustick at that intersection, it backs up to Meridian Road and
further. So, that's more than 33 cars. I mean that sucker flat backs up. And it backs up
the other way. And so we are sitting in our driveway and like my grandson says: Oh,
no. Traffic. But -- so, you know, I think commercial probably would be a good idea on
those corners because of the traffic. I can't -- I have a hard time seeing anybody living
residential right -- right on those corners. But I'm not a planner. I thought I was a
planner. Everyday I wake up and I say should I try to sell my property residential or
should I try to sell my property commercial? And I'm just tired of that. You know, every
day I'm just going -- I'm looking in the mirror. I'm not a planner. I retired -- I'm an
aviation planner, but I'm not this kind of a planner. And this is a more dynamic process
and I appreciate everybody that's involved in this, because this is a really dynamic
process and it's something that I was pretty naive about. So, I support the -- some
commercial on the -- and support my neighbors on that intersection. One kicker is that
I'm just a few dollars away from accepting an offer from a developer who is residential
and there is a developer that's developing -- or is going to develop -- where is that
intersection?
Baird: Use the mike, sir.
Sindon: Right here?
Baird: Use the mike.
Sindon: They make me nervous.
De Weerd: You can pull it out of the stand.
Baird: Like a rock star.
Sindon: Get down. Okay. This developer -- this is my property right there. Southeast
corner. The Kelloggs three properties to the east of that. Two of those brothers have
signed offers. The third one is in the process. And I'm the ten acres on the corner,
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 35 of 90
about to accept an offer from a developer and he's a residential developer. So, I don't
know what that does. But that is an extremely extremely busy intersection. Have you
all been there about 5:00 o'clock?
De Weerd: I would say depending on what time and how much time you have to sit
through that four way stop, depends on how long the cars seem to sit there. So, if
you're in a hurry, the cars are two miles long.
Sindon: Okay. That's alii have.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir. Chris Penland. Do you also live on that corner?
Penland: I don't.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Penland: But I am speaking to it.
De Weerd: Thank you. You need to wait and talk into the microphone. I'm sure glad
we made this transportation related testimony.
Penland: My name is Chris Penland and my address is 250 South 5th Street, Boise,
Idaho. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm here in support of converting 1450
West Ustick to mixed use community. Last year the City of Meridian requested
Thornton, Oliver, Keller, commercial real estate, to conduct a market study of the
existing and planned retail space in Meridian. To assess the market we analyzed the
retail expenditures in Meridian, which is the household spending, divided by retail
square footage. Now, higher retail expenditures indicate a lack of retail supply. The
result of our analysis highlighted a significant market discrepancy in Meridian. Total
expenditures was 680 dollars per square foot or 131 percent above the average in the
Treasure Valley. This indicates there is insufficient retail supply to service the existing
population of Meridian. More importantly, it explains that residents are spending their
money outside of the area. The typical retail tenant is 1,200 to 1,500 square feet. And
here in the survey, acquire availability in the north Meridian area of 1,200 to 2,000
square feet. You have the same one in your packets and it's empty. There is no space
whatsoever for the average tenant. The result, this lack of supply is a function of
economics. There is a shortage of retail space and this shortage has pushed prices to
valley-wide highs at Ustick marketplace. While Starbucks and other national
corporations may be able to pay this, 90 plus percent of your local tenants cannot. In
the context of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan, this site compliments the neighborhood
commercial to the east. Various commercial sites have different characteristics. It is
not like comparing apples to apples. This intersection is an inherently different site from
neighborhood commercial or the intersection at McMillan and Linder. For example,
there are four directions of traffic present and 40 percent more traffic than the planned
neighborhood commercial to the east. This allows tenants to require intersections that
has the increased traffic, exposure, and customer counts to locate in the north Meridian
Meridian City Council
February 7. 2006
Page 36 of 90
area and service that population. This does not distract from the neighborhood
commercial, but, rather, compliments it and provides a convenience owing to location,
as opposed to the destination nature of neighborhood commercial. This City of
Meridian has generally slated high traffic intersections and every intersection along
Linder Road for commercial applications, except for Ustick and Linder Roads. This is a
viable commercial site with 63 percent more traffic and potential customers than
McMillan and Linder. Furthermore, it will have a higher lane count and signalization
prior to that intersection. From a practical standpoint, residential development may be
challenged here. Ustick and Linder Road has 76 percent of the traffic counts of
Highway 20-26 and Linder, 76 percent of the traffic of a high traffic, high speed corridor.
Placing any residential development directly adjacent to this type of activity may not be
in the best interest of the city. Lastly, allowing for commercial applications at this
intersection would be smart for growth and provides a buffer to congestion of traffic and
families. Thank you so much.
De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions?
Bird: I have none, Mayor.
De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. This is a Public Hearing and those are the names that
were signed up to testify. Is there anyone else who would like to provide testimony at
this time? Okay. Mrs. Ewing? Okay. Mr. Turnbull.
Turnbull: Madam Mayor, David Turnbull. 12601 West Explorer Drive in Boise. It's
apparent that we are not talking just about transportation issues today; is that right?
De Weerd: It became very apparent, didn't it?
Turnbull: I didn't plan on saying anything --
De Weerd: But the Council opened the door, so--
Turnbull: Well, if you're going hear it -- I didn't plan to testify today, but there is some
things that have been said here that I think have some merit and some that, in my
opinion, probably need some further discussion. I wanted to point -- could you zoom
back in on that last slide, Anna? Anna would probably kill me, but I happen to agree in
part that this is inappropriate for residential development here. If you take a look at this
little corner down here and see that little -- whatever it was, five acre parcel that has a
cul-de-sac with an access road that's too close to the arterial, it doesn't work very well.
And this was done a number of years ago. It's not what you want to see on those
corners. However, just throwing up more commercial zoning without some kind of --
well, let's just say style on every corner through here I don't think is what the city is
going to want to have either and I, actually, discussed this with Anna just a week or so
ago about maybe these are areas that are ripe for the TN-C zone. If you're going to
allow those corners to be -- to go to some kind of commercial, then, maybe they ought
to be held to some kind of a standard that would be architecturally and other respects
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 37 of 90
an amenity to the city. So, while I agree that those are inappropriate for single family
residential development, I think that they maybe need to be stepped up and not just
more toad stool offices just placed on every corner, because you're going to have a glut
of those and I think that it's an opportunity to let those corners ripen and provide some
real unique and mixed use development -- mixed use residential development in those
areas. That's unsolicited testimony, but I think that the one fear that I have for Meridian
city is that as it grows, that the growth be done right, that it be done appropriately, that
it's something that's attractive, that, you know, Meridian city doesn't have a design
review process and heaven knows we don't want to add a lot of bureaucracy to the city
processes, but there needs to be some mechanism and maybe it's the TN-C zoning that
provides those kind of standards that will give Meridian city the kind of commercial
development at those corners that it would desire. Any questions I would be happy to
answer.
De Weerd: Council, any questions?
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: On this particular intersection is a TN-C option practical, in light of the fact that
this is already residential or --
Turnbull: On this corner?
Borton: Yeah. The one that we have been talking about.
Turnbull: Well, right now you have just got a designation at that corner. There is
nothing that actually exists there right now. That's just designated for residential. I don't
know what's the designation on this corner right here. Residential. I know that Anna is
pretty specific about wanting to maintain the viability of that neighborhood center there
and I think that that's a valid concern that you need to address, but I don't think what
you want to see is something like this little cul-de-sac right here being replicated on this
corner up here. So, it's going to have to be some kind of combination of commercial
and high density residential in my view that you could probably do within the new TN-C
zone; is that correct, Anna? No? You can do both in the TN-C; right?
Canning: Yes, you can, but it wouldn't -- you mean if it were changed to a mixed use
designation?
Turnbull: Well, yes.
Canning: Yeah.
Turnbull: There is a minimum of six acres to a TN-C zone, I believe. Is that right?
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 38 of 90
Canning: Yes. It's six. But if you did all the corners it's -- it's your hearing. I didn't want
to get into a back and forth.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Bird.
Bird: That northwest corner, we have approved some -- some residential in there, in the
northwest. In fact, there was a boundary -- that was the one that had the fence on the
wrong boundary or something.
Canning: Yes, sir. I believe you're seeing it here. The actual corners have not come in
yet. It was this -- this project and this property line are the ones that were in question.
Bird: Yeah. Okay.
Canning: But one of the gentlemen did testify -- we have seen a pre-app on these two.
They are trying to acquire this third. We have also seen pre-application conferences on
this property, on this property -- in all likelihood if a developer were to be interested in
this area, they would be looking to develop both of these properties and that's typically
what we see. We are not seeing many of these five acre ones. They are not -- they
don't seem to pencil out for the developer. So, they are combining parcels and coming
in with a larger package. So, I don't think that the five acre development is a real
concern.
Turnbull: Madam Mayor, I would like to add a couple of other things. I think it was
Chris Penland from Thornton, Oliver, Keller mentioned the lack of services in this area.
Lack of services will -- or the services will follow roof tops. If you go north to McMillan
Road there are corners up there that are already zoned commercial. They haven't been
built yet, because we haven't reached that critical mass yet to warrant the retail
services. I think it was mentioned that this intersection would be signalized, the Ustick -
- where did you go? Right there. That this intersection would be signalized first. I,
actually, just was in a meeting with ACHD, Frank Varriale and the other two property
owners on the other two corners on the McMillan-linder intersection. We are actually
entering into an agreement with ACHD at this time that would improve that intersection
and signalize it probably within the next year. So, that one's going to move forward.
We are also in discussions with ACHD about McMillan and Meridian Road, working with
the school district to signalize that intersection and widen it to the ultimate intersection
design and, then, I know Frank Varriale down on Ten Mile and McMillan is talking with
ACHD about the same thing. I think that's the critical part of -- the critical first step in
this north Meridian area plan is to get those intersections widened and signalized. I
happened to be going to a basketball game at Sawtooth Middle School today, my son
was playing basketball, I made the mistake of -- instead of going down Chinden and,
then, going south on Linder, I went down Eagle and took a westward route on Ustick
and it was backed up a half a mile at the Meridian Road intersection. The Under Road
~,~
"
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 39 of 90
intersection just had a few cars backed up, but Meridian Road was about a half mile
backup.
De Weerd: You must have been running late.
Turnbull: I missed the first quarter.
De Weerd: And it just seemed longer.
Turnbull: Thank you.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, can I make a couple comments on
particularly the Thornton, Oliver, Keller study that was done? We did have a study done
to see how much nonresidential land use would be appropriate and Thornton, Oliver,
Keller did do that assessment for us. Would like to point out that we have provided
twice as much commercial designation as that study found appropriate. So, this would
be additional commercial designation, twice beyond what they felt was appropriate. We
felt that the numbers that came back were low for the area. So, we did put quite a bit
more mixed use and commercial designations in the north area. There was also a
statement made that every other arterial intersection had commercial on it and that's not
true. You can see from the larger map that there are arterial sections that are fully
residential and -- or half residential in some cases. And, again, I -- we are trying to
make a go of that neighborhood center. We have been working to get Venable Lane
established as a strong collector. We have been diligently arguing for a denser
development at the center of that section, so we can support that commercial
development. And you have approved those plans already and we are committed to
that. The uses that were proposed for that corner are exactly what we would like to see
within that neighborhood center. A pizza place where you can take it home, you know,
all those kinds of neighborhood serving commercial uses is what we would like to see
there. So, I'll make my pitch for my last mid mile neighborhood center. It's about the
only one we have got. We are really trying to make it work. We moved at the urging of
individuals like Mr. Turnbull, we have moved almost all of the other commercial corners
to the arterial intersections, instead of the half mile, but we are trying to make a go of
this neighborhood center and if we pull it all toward the arterials, it probably won't ever
work.
De Weerd: Anna, I guess I would have a question in regards to -- as we talk, the
neighborhood centers and retail, I do know that you did work on what is the appropriate
level of retail, but as we also look to balance the dispersement of our traffic and the
patterns, where do you foresee employment centers, that employment bases would be
attracting to -- I guess help traffic not always just flow to one area of the valley, that you
can see a better balance in employment centers. Do you see any employment center
opportunities in north Meridian?
"4,
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 40 of 90
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't know that that was -- I don't
recall that that was ever discussed in depth. There are some fairly large office places
that could accommodate it. You see there in Paramount. There is a large mixed use
designation here. Also on the other side of McDermott Road. Depending on the type of
employment base, the wastewater treatment plant would still be a viable area for that.
And, then, most of this seems to -- on Chinden, because of the narrow depth, though,
does seem to be going more retail oriented, although this large property is mixed, could
perhaps support some additional employment base.
De Weerd: And I guess as we look at public transit corridors and those kind of
considerations, I guess those are the kind of considerations I believe we need to take
into account, too, and helping capture trips, so they are not all going to one particular
area of the valley.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Steve, can I lob a question your way? Some of the remarks by Mr. Cadwell
and the citizens here seem to ring true with regard to the traffic issue. Taking the
neighborhood center concept away, do you have an idea of just the impact on traffic
with mixed use commercial on this corner that we have talked about versus residential?
I mean it's horribly backed up now. Do you see the neighborhood center at the mid mile
alleviating that or this commercial -- mixed commercial alleviating that or what are your
thoughts?
Siddoway: First of all, the statements that were made about the traffic backing up along
Ustick are true. I travel that way every day and we do have a very strong need for
signalized intersections in that area to help that traffic flow. In this new five year work
program that ACHD just adopted two, three weeks ago, it does include plans to
signalize Linder-Ustick and Meridian-Ustick and we are happy to hear that there are
developer initiated advance construction projects on the intersections along McMillan as
well. That said, as a commercial generator at that -- if you put commercial property at
that intersection, it would be an attractor of trips. Houses are typically the -- looked as
the generator of -- the producer of trips and the retail as attractors and they move back
and forth. I don't know specifically a traffic count number to throw at you if that area
were to go commercial versus residential. The concept of keeping the commercial from
the arterial intersections and moving them to the half mile would be that they are still at
an intersection here, it's an intersection of an arterial and a collector. By placing them in
the mid mile, they are more able to serve all the surrounding residential uses without
having to cross the large arterials to get to the various -- the other side of the
businesses that might been there. It's also adjacent to the city's largest park, Settler's
Park, I believe 56 acres, and could see some benefit there to have services adjacent to
the park and the games and things that will be going on there. So, by keeping the
turning movements for commercial activities away from the arterial-arterial intersections
and locating them on the half mile, it should help those arterial-arterial intersections
Meridian City Council
February 7. 2006
Page 41 of 90
move traffic more efficiently, nonetheless, because of the high traffic counts that that's
why you have the pressure to develop them commercially. So, I don't know if that fully
answered your question. That was my attempt to do so.
Borton: No, it -- Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Borton: It does, you know, but, then, you hear the remarks and discussion of Ustick
being a major thoroughfare and it sounds as though regardless of what happens on the
corner or the neighborhood center Ustick's going to be packed, quite frankly.
Siddoway: That's a fair statement. You still will experience high traffic volumes
regardless of whether the commercial activity is here or here. You will still have high
traffic volumes along Ustick. It's more a question to me of how well it serves the
surrounding neighborhoods.
De Weerd: And right now you have traffic backed up, because you have a four way
stop sign.
Siddoway: Correct.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes.
Wardle: Just a follow up on that -- on that comment. We heard testimony from Mr.
Turnbull that a developer-initiated signalization is happening just north of here. Steve,
as our transportation planner, in your experience in the city, have we seen more
intersection signalizations funded by commercial developers or have we seen more
funded by residential developers in partnership with --
Siddoway: I think we have more funded by ACHD. But I don't know if -- commercial?
Commercial developers would outnumber the residential developers for funding signal
projects.
Wardle: Thank you.
De Weerd: I think it all depends. Frank Varriale and Buse are largely residential and
they are putting those improvements in as they promised, as they developed
Bridgetower Subdivision. So, in north Meridian it's a pretty large balance. Mr. Turnbull
also is a residential developer that has some commercial, but in the north Meridian area
the people that we see that are stepping up to the plate to fund these on the larger part
are residential developers. Is there any additional public testimony? Sir, if you will,
please, state your name and address.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 42 of 90
Watson: Yes. My name is Warren Watson, Junior. I am part of the -- my sisters and I,
the property on 1680 Ustick Road. I did want to point out one thing or a couple of
things, if I might. It looks like what we are trying to create on Ustick Road is, basically, a
Cherry Lane again, with the middle of the mile service station and office buildings and
that's fine, but you got to realize that the traffic -- not everybody lives there where that
service station is now or is going up. The car wash and the service station. And
businesses there. So, you're going to have traffic that's from the west converge on that
one single service station, that one -- whatever it is on this corner, whatever it is on that
corner there at Venable Lane. And you have more traffic than you need right there.
And if you look at Cherry Lane, you, indeed, do have the service station in the middle of
the mile and you have one on the corner, which, actually, has more traffic at the
Maverick, not treating one over the other, than the service station in the middle of the
mile. It serves that subdivision very well. And probably people going west. But nobody
is going to go east and turn across traffic. So, it really only makes sense for the corners
to also be commercial and adopt a plan where the buildings aren't just haphazard, there
is some type of architectural quality to them. But I think you can have commercial there
and you can have commercial in the middle, just like you do on Cherry Lane. That's alii
have.
De Weerd: Thank you, sir.
Watson: Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. The north Meridian plan is much more than just Ustick and Linder,
but is there any additional testimony that the public would like to otter at this point?
Okay. Council, do you have any further questions or information needed from staff at
this time?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Just a point of clarification from counsel -- or from the attorney's office. Mr.
Baird, as I remember, as we began this hearing I believe you mentioned that we wanted
to accept all public testimony, acknowledge all written testimony, and, then, leave the
hearing open for deliberations. Is that your preference?
Baird: I believe that's what I said. I think Mrs. Canning has a particular plan outline to
deal with the outstanding issues. Did you want to maybe present that at this time?
Canning: You do have a list before you tonight. There is about 20 outstanding issues.
Would you like to go through them one by one? Would you like for me to recap those
issues? I am open to suggestions from the Council as to how they would like to
proceed.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 43 of 90
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Council, my preference would be that we go through each of these issues one
by one, come to some sort of an agreement or disagreement therein of what we would
like to see and at the end of our discussion come with a final plan that the staff can,
then, put into writing that will be adoptable and reviewable by the Council. Does that
sound like a fair plan for this evening or --
Bird: Fine with me.
De Weerd: Sounds good to me.
Wardle: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. Anna, we will go through them one at a time.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the first issue is with regard to the
north -- the southeast corner of McDermott and Chinden. As you will recall, staff gave
an update on the issues regarding the extension of the mixed use interchange
designation just right here at the corner, to come over and to meet with that low density
residential designation and I believe it's Peregrine Subdivision and you heard quite a bit
of testimony that way from the property owners and also from Peregrine wanting some
sort of buffer. There is a -- there is testimony about a buffer being required as
development occurs and whether that would be sufficient, so that was the first issue.
De Weerd: Any questions on that? Mr. Wardle?
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I don't have any specific questions. I think what we are looking
for is to Anna go for some sort of a consensus and, then, move to item two? Is that
fair?
Canning: Yes.
Wardle: Okay. So, I will start with my personal opinion. After hearing testimony from
the neighbors -- the residential neighbors and from the developer or property owners, I
should say, I heard the willingness for both parties to work together to create a buffer
and so I would be in favor of extending that -- that mixed use zoning and incorporate
testimony from both sides to work together.
De Weerd: Okay.
Borton: I agree.
Bird: I have no problem with it.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 44 of 90
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: Moving on to number two. The second issue was the future planning for the
State Highway 16 corridor. The Planning and Zoning Commission motion to the City
Council included the following statement: The City of Meridian supports a collaborative
public-private partnership with property owners, the Idaho Transportation Department,
Ada County, Canyon County, and other affected parties, to identify preferred alignment
for the future State Highway 16 extension. Staff just asked that City Council provide
some policy guidance, in particular who would be assuming the lead role. Would we be
participating with ITD as the lead or would Council like to see city staff provide the lead?
So, just some -- some more information from Council, so that we can flush out that
policy statement for future work.
De Weerd: Anna, could you tell us what the recommendation of ITD is?
Canning: We have not received a recommendation from ITD, although I believe they
have started to -- maybe Steve can help me out. Have they started work on that,
identify that corridor? Yeah.
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I did -- at the same time that I
contacted ACHD to submit comments for this hearing, I also contacted ITD, both by
phone and bye-mail. They did not submit formal comments for me to respond on how
you would feel about that. What I can say is that the State Highway 16 corridor
planning is in the state transportation improvement program. It's intended to start
design work as early as this year, but it's contingent on the GARVEE funding being
approved by the legislature. So, right now it's on hold, there is no specific activity going
on right now. It is on their screen as a project. They want to move into design for, but
it's pending the GARVEE legislation.
De Weerd: And through the Communities in Motion process, the preference has been
to preserve that corridor to the extent possible, so that adequate planning and
appropriate considerations can be made.
Siddoway: Yes.
De Weerd: Council, questions? Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I think staff's looking for some direction as to what role the city
should take in that. Certainly I agree that Highway 16, if supported, obviously, by the
Idaho Transportation Department, makes the most sense for that transportation
corridor. I guess from a staffing objective I would like -- because the project will be
funded I would assume in the majority by the transportation department, either through
GARVEE or another entity that once that decision and once those -- those decisions by
that board have been set, that, then, we as a community can take a more aggressive
role. But I really do think that we need the decision to come from the highway district in
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 45 of 90
regards to timing and certainly have a position on the staff level to maintain -- or to
monitor that activity.
De Weerd: I guess Steve or Anna, what kind of specifics do you need? Is it that the
City of Meridian would like to -- you're looking at level of partnership in terms preserving
the necessary right of way for the transportation corridor, as well as for the anticipated
interchange designated or anticipated Interchange areas.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think all we would like is just
clarification on whether this is a priority for the Mayor and Council, for us to take the
lead on this project. If I attempt -- or I anticipate that ITD will be coming forward with a
project that we will certainly be involved in. It's just a question of is this a -- do we need
to incorporate this into a strategic plan to follow up with city being the lead and -- I just
wanted to get it clarified, because -- because of the way it started, it kind of -- there was
some expectations, perhaps, on the folks that were there, that the city would shortly be
knocking on doors and trying to organize this study. So, as staff we need a little
clarification from Mayor and Council on what you envision.
De Weerd: That we would take the lead?
Canning: Yes, ma'am.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: From my perspective you can't -- I don't think we can take the lead. I don't
think that's really an option in this case. I think that a policy on the Highway 16 corridor
and its preservation, the city should support it -- absolutely support it. And I guess for
guidance to staff, not necessarily to take the lead, I like one of the remarks you put in
there about through that process that ITD, the state, the GARVEE issues would lead.
The staff maintains that interest in advocacy role for those citizens within the area of
impact and how this new corridor is going to impact them. I think that's a better position
for the staff to be in and to be mindful of. Those citizen concerns will top the list as this
thing goes forward. That would be my perspective of the policy and direction for staff on
that.
De Weerd: So, that would be to designate this as a priority corridor and a preferred
alignment for the City of Meridian to Highway 16 and to be a partner -- play an assisting
role in the study of that corridor, but to take the lead in a transportation-related project --
state project seems awkward at best.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 46 of 90
Wardle: I certainly don't think that the City of Meridian has the funds to take the lead on
this particular project, so I suggest we assist in every way possible.
Canning: Okay. I think you have consensus on that item and I can move onto the next
one. The next one was the land uses near the future State Highway 16 Ustick
interchange. It was this little interchange, mixed use designation. It was suggested by I
believe Trisha Nelson from Compass that we overlay an interchange -- a typical
interchange and see how it fits in there and we did and that does -- area does need to
probably be expanded about 500 feet north. So, if it kept its existing width, east-west
width, but, then, extend 500 feet north, right up to the subdivision, that would be an
appropriate area to accommodate the future interchanges and some development near
them.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, any comment? Okay.
Wardle: I agree with that.
Canning: Okay. Item No.4. This is perhaps a bit awkwardly worded. It's just -- we
assume that Council will want to keep in the commitment that says that we are -- or the
policies that say we are committed to regional planning and cooperation, I guess there
was some question at the time, because of city of Eagle and their expanded area of
impact boundary and also for discussions with Kuna. This was included by Mr.
Hawkins-Clark, so it's been part of the staff report for awhile and -- but I would assume
that the city would still want -- City Council would want to support regional cooperation
and planning. Unless I hear otherwise, I will -- I got one nod of the head.
Wardle: I agree.
De Weerd: Anna, I guess for the record, too, it was reached through mutual discussion
with staff and the two respective mayors, supported by their council, that designated the
area north of Chinden and west of Linder, with the exception -- with the exception of
Almaden Subdivision, that that area to the bluff would be included in Meridian's area of
impact and so with that in mind, I think that's been our understanding, with the exception
of what this Committee of Nine did, but that's the way we believe we are moving
forward. Council, any -- does that represent your thoughts as well? Mr. Borton was the
only one who wasn't here during that time and he nods and the other two don't do
anything. Okay. Well, thank you, Mr. Borton. I appreciate that. Okay. Hearing no
disagreement, let's move forward.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the next item was a letter from
Patricia Nelson at Compass. We did go through that in detail. There was a few of them
that we considered further. One of them was the mixed use interchange that I just went
through a moment ago and I believe Steve covers them in -- later in the outstanding
issues from staff and he's double-checking on that. So, I think we can skip this one for
now. Okay. Other outstanding issues from public comments. Area north of the Phyllis
Canal. You do have three letters in your packets of two individuals which wish to be
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 47 of 90
included in the area of city impact and that's Peggy Everest and Sherry Ewing. And one
that does not and that's Orm. So, I wanted to point out that those are in there. It -- the
legally noticed area of city impact change just does reflect the colored boundaries to the
north as you see them now. I think I can move on. It was just an -- it's an issue, but
perhaps it's an outstanding issue for a further application or further discussion, but at
this point in the game we can't amend the map to include them without going through
the entire process again. So, I would -- I would anticipate that we can move forward.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: And just by future application, you're referring to discussions which may
happen between the City of Meridian and other cities to the north or certain applications
by the property owners -- I mean all of those factors could lead to an addition in the
future; correct?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Wardle: Okay.
De Weerd: And that would include city services.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the next one is the area west of
McDermott. We did receive a letter from Wendell Bigham requesting additional school
sites be noted on the future land use map. Right now we only have one school site
noted. He has requested three new elementary schools, so it would be an elementary
school in every section, which is, basically, his development pattern for the north
Meridian area. And, then, he's also requested one middle school and one high school
for the area. Staff has a few concerns in that this isn't exactly like all the other sections.
We do have a large portion of it designated for very low density residential and it
explains also that the step up provision doesn't apply in that area. So, it would remain
very low density residential. So, we do have questions about the need for both a middle
school and high school in those four sections.
De Weerd: Anna, I don't know, have you also discussed with Wendell the idea of doing
that on the north side of Chinden with the middle schools and high schools, so Star --
which would be, essentially, in Star's area of impact, that would serve more the north
side?
Canning: I did not have an opportunity to talk with him about that. But, yes, those -- a
middle school and a high school would be drawing from more than four sections of area,
so it would be attracting people from the Star area and it may, indeed, be more
appropriate for Star to have its own high school, rather than a third Meridian High
School. Or fourth. Or fifth. I forget what we are up to, so --
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 48 of 90
De Weerd: And I guess that's what would be a consideration is it's always important to
have a community that relates to their high schools, that on the north side it would be
more associated with Star. It would serve that area, but it was just an item to throw out
there for your consideration.
Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the schools are very floating in
nature, as described by the Comprehensive Plan. If we were to put a school
designation in each section, you could assume that -- and if Mr. Bigham really feels he
needs both a middle school and a high school somewhere and, then, maybe that's what
that school represents through his testimony and participation in the public review
process. But if we at least designate a school in each section, that certainly gets him
involved.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Given that we have received comment from the school district on this particular
application and we have been asking the school district to communicate their needs to
us and your mention that, really, this is a concept plan, I think that we should
incorporate these. If the school district feels that they need that at build out, we should
at least plan for it today and potentially revise that at the school district level in the
future.
Canning: Okay. Okay. Moving on to item number eight. This was with regard to the
sewer treatment plant area. Although the Planning and Zoning Commission was asked
to consider a change to the boundary of the mixed use wastewater treatment plant
designation boundary, they did choose not to. You have received written testimony
from Brent Rasmussen and you received some verbal testimony at your last hearing
regarding changing an area just -- see how steady I can hold this. You will see that
Drawbridge Subdivision is the green residential properties, so the request is to change
some of the mixed use wastewater treatment plant to -- it was to -- actually, to mixed
use residential or commercial, although they wanted mixed use community, although
they did want to do low density residential with some commercial opportunities along
Ten Mile Road. I think we have discussed this before. We did do the noise and odor
study and they do fall pretty much within the bounds of our sewer treatment -- or mixed
use area. Staff would recommend staying with the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation.
De Weerd: Council?
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 49 of 90
Wardle: Anna, you have got some commercial across the street; is that correct? Is that
the purple section?
Canning: There was some approved in Bridgetower. The commercial was not the
problem, sir. The commercial is currently allowed in that designation. It's the residential
that's not allowed. They are asking for a residential use, which we don't allow in the
mixed -- in the wastewater treatment plant designation.
Wardle: Okay. Thank you.
De Weerd: Okay. Council?
Wardle: Madam Mayor, I guess I'm fine leaving it as is currently. One of the things that
I will say -- and, you know, we have done a number of studies. If we are going to see
some development in that area -- I know we are expanding the sewer plant currently,
but we need to look a little closer at what really will fit within that, so that when we have
applications come through we can -- rather than simply deny most of them, unless they
are commercial, we can consider additional options based on some of the findings we
came -- or we had come out of the study that we have done, so --
De Weerd: What does that mean?
Wardle: Well, that means leave it as it is, but, you know, it's still a big area on the map
that we really don't have a handle on what we are going to do with it and we got to get
there at some point for the property owners that live there and those -- and the residents
that are around that. My opinion is we need to come to a little better than we have
today.
De Weerd: Well, this says we need it.
Canning: Is that a consensus on that item? I'm sorry, I wasn't looking for nods.
De Weerd: Uh-huh.
Canning: Okay. The northwest corner of Chinden and Linder -- right there. There was
a letter of concern from a property owner north of the mixed use area. You also have a
letter regarding the southeast corner. They appear to be in support of the proposal in
the southeast and, then, one of the neighbors to the north was concerned with the
mixed use designation at that corner property. Would you like me to zoom in on that
one? If you ever want me to, just let me know, so -- yeah?
De Weerd: Yeah. You're making it clearer, Anna.
Canning: Look at that. I found it after all. So, the mixed use designation is this kind of
long piece along the Chinden property and, then, you do have some one acre lots to the
north of there. Would like to say that you do have an application in the process that --
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 50 of 90
it's, again, one of those buffer questions, similar to the Peregrine and integrating the
residential to commercial.
De Weerd: Now, Anna, that mixed use, though, would allow transitioning from the
larger lot subdivisions into a retail or a commercial type of use?
Canning: In this case, because of the shape of the property, about all it allows for is a
road as a buffer, with some landscaping.
De Weerd: Council? If you don't have an issue, then, we just move on.
Canning: Shall we leave it as is?
Bird: Yeah. Let's move on.
Canning: Okay. The next is the northeast corner of Ustick and Linder. I think you're
well aware of that one.
De Weerd: Now, where is that?
Canning: I guess I've made my pitch several times, but the only thing I would add is
that this was not brought up at the Planning and Zoning Commission and a lot of the
testimony you heard tonight said that all the corners should go that way, but, yet, there
is only one -- really, one property that's being considered for that designation. It may be
more appropriate as a future Comprehensive Plan amendment, rather than this
opportunity, since -- since it wasn't part of the Planning and Zoning Commission's
recommendation and that doesn't mean things can't change, but -- I guess I feel some
commitment that the -- to the Planning and Zoning Commission that they should have
had some say on this, since it wasn't that someone is asking you to do something that
the Planning Commission didn't want to do, in this case it wasn't raised at the Planning
and Zoning Commission.
De Weerd: Okay. Council, if there is nothing --
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: On this one corner I have problems dumping residential out that close to the
corner. I think there is something better than residential. Mixed use or commercial I
would entertain more than just straight residential, because I think you're really asking
for traffic problems starting up with. Because you know the first thing that's going to
come in here is an R-8 request and you know how many road trips that is.
De Weerd: Steve, do you have a collector type of recommendation that -- was there
any kind of recommendation as far as what -- if there is a collector system that would
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 51 of 90
best serve this, so that what Mr. Turnbull has pointed out, which we have all noted in
other applications, is something we don't want to see happen again. Certainly agree
with that. But we haven't been seeing that on the corners.
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the collector system for this square
mile pretty much already exists. There is the Venable Lane collector that goes in
adjacent -- in the center of the neighborhood center as proposed and the school site
and into the Cedar Springs Subdivision. And Baldwin Park is on this side. There is also
a collector shown into Baldwin Park from Linder, a collector stub from the north and a
collector stub stubbed in from the -- from the east. The property at the northeast corner
does not directly abut one of those collector roads and would have similar access
issues in relation to the corner and the traffic there, regardless of whether that access
was being provided for residential or commercial access and commercial access could
potentially have even more trips coming through any access that was provided there.
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor, my take on this issue -- I'm going to agree with Councilman
Bird for a number of reasons. One of the strongest arguments in my mind that really
wasn't raised, but we do have a -- we are doing comprehensive planning and we are
looking a number of years out, but one of the reasons I think that we get elected to
these seats is to solve problems in any capacity that we can. In my experience, in
development applications that have come before the city to get a signalized intersection
and to get some sort of a partnership with the county highway district and to get that into
place beforehand, I think it makes good sense not -- only to -- to plan for it, but also to
zone that commercial and make better use of those -- in my opinion, the north part. So,
that's my opinion.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I would agree with most of what Mr. Bird said, most of what Mr. Wardle said.
But what's important with what Mr. Wardle just brought up was that opportunity for that
partnership with the mixed use commercial on that corner, in light of what that corner is
and is going to become in the coming years. I see the same concerns with residential
designation there. Mixed use commercial makes sense in light of what -- the comments
that we heard at the prior hearing and the comments provided today.
De Weerd: I guess, Council, I would ask that you also consider maybe on the northeast
corner as is being discussed, is the suggestion that Mr. Turnbull had made. I would
agree with Steve in whether that is commercial or residential, if you're just looking at the
one little lot, you're going to have a problem regardless of what use you put there. As
you saw on the McMillan and Ten Mile area, the kind of the loop system, it provided a
circulation and, I'll tell you what, my daughter walks in that area, too, so I have seen the
pedestrian traffic all up and down that -- that area, as well as the traffic and so it is a
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 52 of 90
concern, because there is a middle school there and there is foot traffic and those feet
are kids that don't always pay attention to where they are going or how their friends are
going. So, regardless of whether it's commercial or residential, there needs to be a
concern of where that traffic goes in and out and I guess ultimately I hear everyone kind
of saying the same thing, but all my comment is it doesn't matter what that's designated,
you're going to have concern about access in that area and how the traffic is going to
impact the kids that are walking in front of whether it's a business or whether it's the
back of a fence of a subdivision, it's going to be important where those cars are coming
out of whatever is there.
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: That's very true and I agree with you and I think the plan that was out at McMillan
and Ten Mile with the back load is very great. That's something that when the
application comes through we can see that it happens. Right now we are just asking for
a designation of what do you want on that corner, not where it comes in and out. And I
agree with you on that.
De Weerd: So, are you -- are you designating more than just the request for that one
piece of property?
Bird: I just said that corner. I would prefer it to be commercial. I didn't say where it
would come out on the -- in the middle of an intersection or where. That's something
that when the applications come in we can -- we can diwy up on that at that point and I
agree with you a hundred percent. Where they come in and out, it's got to be a major
concern of ours.
Baird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Baird.
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I want to follow up on something that
Anna mentioned briefly and that has to do with how this discussion is deviating from the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and the ordinance, when you're
considering amendments to your Comprehensive Plan, it says that if what you pass
changes in a material way from what was recommended by the Commission, you have
to provide further notice and hearing. The reason for that is you have got people in the
room tonight who want to see one thing or are asking for one thing and the people who
were here before or who were at the Planning and Zoning Commission and heard that
recommendation, may not be aware of the changes being considered. So, I guess what
I'm going to ask is if you feel that this is -- that the changes being asked for this corner is
a material change from the -- from what the recommendation of the Planning
Commission -- and I think it is, you either need to re-notice this part or put it off for the
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 53 of 90
next six month cycle. I think what I'm saying is along the same line as what Anna was
saying. Does that make sense?
De Weerd: Does that make sense, Council?
Bird: It does to me.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Ted, is this -- is what we are going through right now the -- aren't we just merely
kind of getting a soft consensus of what all of our concerns and thoughts are, which is,
then, going to be compiled at a later date and at that point would that be a Public
Hearing that the final approval could be done that you're talking about?
Baird: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, and Councilmember Borton, the way I
read this is that if your direction tonight would be to make a material change, that you
could set over the hearing and provide an additional notice. Now, I'm saying that while
I'm reading the ordinance here. I don't know if that's going to mess up anything that --
with what Anna has got going. I know we have got timelines or deadlines here and it
might make more sense, rather than to -- you know, what was anticipated is that a
consensus would be taken, we'd continue it to a date certain without having to go
through additional notice. I think it would just put it out further if we had to do some
more notice. So, it could be done, but it complicates things.
Borton: Would it put it out too far?
Baird: That we'd have to ask the planning director.
Canning: Right. It's -- there is -- you do have development applications that are making
their way through the process that are anticipating this -- approval of this
Comprehensive Plan amendment. But that -- I'm not sure it's too far. I would like to
take the opportunity to inform the folks, especially those that have invested in that
neighborhood center, believing that there wouldn't be commercial along that --
competing commercial along that street, so I think it would be an opportunity to at least
advise them of what -- the discussions that have been going on and --
De Weerd: But I guess Ted -- Mr. Baird, I guess what I hear from both you and Anna is
the suggestion if you think that a material change to the recommendation from Planning
and Zoning should be made, they have two choices. One, to go ahead and designate it,
go through the appropriate public noticing, or to make the notation of a desire to have it
changed and it can go through the next Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle, which
is in June, as I understand it. But it would have to have an application for that specific
area.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 54 of 90
Canning: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I would like to point out that this
property currently isn't annexable, so it's probably going to be some time before they
could develop -- that wait to go to the Planning and Zoning Commission isn't probably --
it won't slow them down, given that they currently don't have an annexation path.
De Weerd: It sounds like a path is on its way, though. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor. Anna, what type of noticing requirement are we talking about?
Canning: Well, that's the interesting thing. When you're talking about this whole area,
because it's so large, the state code allows a different method of noticing. If the change
were just going to be in this area, we would probably want to notice similar to what we
do on a more defined Comprehensive Plan amendment, to notify all the property
owners within -- the adjoining property owners within 300 feet. But we would also have
to go back and also notify through public service announcements and additional ads in
the newspaper, things of that sort.
Baird: And, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, to add one specific to all that
general public service announcement, the publication in the paper has to be at least 15
days before the hearing. So, in order to get the mailed notice, the newspaper notice,
the public service, you're probably looking at putting this out three to four weeks at least
to reset the hearing, I think. Or as you did mention, Madam Mayor, the other option is
to recommend it for the next cycle.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Understanding that there are certain time pressures on this entire process, 15
days or three weeks doesn't seem unreasonable to me to -- to have this discussion.
We've had input. I think we have a -- some sort of a consensus and I -- to put that off
for an additional number of months and, then, go back to the cycle doesn't make a lot of
sense to me, but I could be persuaded.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: I tend to agree. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me and although this is the
first amendment I'm involved in, it seems odd to make a designation a residential
knowing that we are just -- we don't really mean it in a sense. We are sort of delaying
what we really intend to do, because the statute requires a six month delay until the
summer to actually do what we intend to do now. So, I agree with Mr. Wardle that it
necessitates a little additional delay, inconvenience and expense to get it done right at
this time, I'd prefer to that do and have it set out for the three or four weeks necessary to
do the --
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 55 of 90
Bird: Fine with me.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: Okay. Moving on. And I guess there was a property owner on the southwest
corner that also wanted to be commercial, but because he was on the south side of the
line they couldn't even consider it at the Planning and Zoning Commission. So, the
whole residential may be transitional in nature at this point. Okay. Text regarding
arterial planning. I think Steve has already updated you on that and you have that in --
oh, I missed Champion Park. Okay. There is a -- we are missing a mixed use
designation adjoining Champion Park. Okay. As we go -- okay. Right in that location
just next to the Winston Moore project on the corner of Ustick and Eagle, there was two
parcels of land that were approved for nonresidential use and we just wanted to make
the Comprehensive Plan consistent with those nonresidential designations. So, we are
proposing a community mixed use designation on those properties. And that's, in
general, what we have done with the existing uses on the land use map, is to go ahead
and reflect where they are not residential. So, with a nod to do that are we okay?
Okay. Okay. Now, the text regarding arterial planning. I think we have addressed
those, but prior to the hearing and made those available on the web.
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Item 12 on your list there -- the text
regarding arterial planning in north Meridian. Right now it's inconsistent in the way it
addresses Eagle Road as the significant corridor that affects north Meridian. It was left
out of one section since, technically, it is out -- just outside of this north Meridian
planning area for most of its length, but certainly is a key consideration and it's effect on
the interaction between transportation and land use. So, this is simply suggesting
adding some language to reflect the importance of Eagle Road in this area. Agreed?
Bird: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Bird.
Bird: Steve, what kind of language? Because we go back to another road that we
really don't have any jurisdiction over.
Siddoway: It's under the section called arterial planning in north Meridian. The other
two that are mentioned are US 20-26 and State Highway 16 future extension. It leaves
off Eagle Road and I just wanted to add it, because the other two are state highways as
well.
Bird: Oh. Okay. Clear.
Siddoway: The next item, 13, text regarding public transportation. This is simply a
suggestion -- a suggestion that the existing policy language that says transit stops
should be available at certain activity centers be changed to apply to all centers, not just
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 56 of 90
those along McMillan Road. Right now it specifically addresses McMillan Road as
having transit centers, but where ever we have these neighborhood centers designated
it should have the same policy.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Steve, is that -- is that consistent -- Communities in Motion or Blueprint for
Good Growth, that concept?
Siddoway: It is the -- the ideal transit scenario in Communities in Motion would include
a future transit on all of these arterials in north Meridian.
Borton: Okay.
Siddoway: Item No. 14, if we are ready to move on, I'm assuming silence means
agreement. Item No. 14, ACHD comments, we started off by going through those, so
the recommendation here would be to accept ACHD's comments as -- with the -- as
noted with staff comments and you have copies of those in front of you and we went
over them in detail at the beginning of this hearing. The only issue in that whole thing
that you may want to provide some additional weighing in on is that collector down in
that southwest corner, whether you think it should be continuous all the way down to
Ustick Road. This one right here. Or whether we just extend it into the area a little
farther, given its low density residential designation. My recommendation would be to
extend this slightly in farther towards the center of that section and to bring a stub in
part way -- I don't know that it has to be a continuous collector design. If you look at all
of our existing built out areas at even higher densities, those mid mile collectors that go
part way into the section seem to suffice.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I would agree with Mr. Siddoway's recommendation.
De Weerd: Okay. And there is no other item on the -- the staff comments in response
to ACHD's -- the two page letter from Steve. Okay.
Siddoway: Okay.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Siddoway: Number 15. We covered that with the ACHD comments. This is things like
dropping the table of road projects from the Comp Plan itself and simply changing the
text to reference the appropriate documents and we would recommend doing so.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 57 of 90
De Weerd: Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor and Members of the Council, item number 16 was with regard
to just -- there are a number of specific policies that read very much like standards in
the ordinance and we just -- or in the plan and we just wanted to make it clear we
wanted to get back with you -- it must be getting late. I seem to have no tongue. It's
tied. We will get back to you with a list of those policies and see which ones that the
Mayor and Council would like to see incorporated as standards within the Unified
Development Code. So, with the nod from you, that should be sufficient on that one.
De Weerd: And that's a lot in response to what Mr. Turnbull had testified on earlier.
Canning: Then moving onto outstanding issues from the -- the first part hearing. There
was about four groups of concerns. One was the property at the very end of -- if I can
remember what corner -- Ten Mile and Chinden, there is a very small property there.
Right at the end. And they had proposed a mixed use neighborhood, that designation.
You may recall I expressed some concerns in that getting folks into there and out of
there may be difficult. It would be the only commercial property on that side of the
street. So, staff was not supporting that.
De Weerd: Council?
Bird: Anna?
Canning: Yes, sir.
Bird: There is no way that can tie into that road going out, is there?
Canning: No, but --
Bird: I agree with staff.
Canning: It's very constrained in this area. We looked at some development proposals
for this area tying back there and it's just -- the configuration of the size of the parcels
are a great challenge right there.
Bird: It looks like you're putting -- you're going to have two roads onto 20-26 within an
eighth of a mile and I don't think ITD is going to allow it anyway, so -- I mean I support
staff on that one, in case you --
Canning: Okay.
De Weerd: Okay. There is nodding heads.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 58 of 90
Canning: Yeah. I think we have already addressed number 18. And, then, that elusive
northeast corner of Linder and Ustick, I think we have already addressed that one. That
would leave -- the last one is Mr. Spreggle and other property owners along McDermott
continue to express their concerns of how this plan affects their development rights near
the McDermott corridor. Staff doesn't have a recommendation at this time. There is
some frustration about the timing of sewer services to the area and that has more
relation on the development potential of their property at this point than the actual plan
does.
Borton: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Borton.
Borton: Anna, I think item 20 sort of ties into item two on your list when you talk about
what the city's role is with regard to this corridor and to the extent the city plays a role
and staff plays a roll and be mindful and advocating for seven weeks, individuals could
be within the area of impact. I think Mr. Spreggle's concerns and other concerns of his
neighbors can be addressed to the staff, advocacy, and their policy is Item number two.
Canning: Okay.
De Weerd: I guess to add to item number two is maybe a degree of urgency for the
planning of that corridor. So, that these -- these concerns are addressed. And
certainly --
Canning: Okay.
De Weerd: -- our voices do need to be heard during the GARVEE discussion to make
sure that this is a funded plan.
Canning: And, then, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, sorry, just when you
thought you were done, going back to number five, I skipped over that one to give Steve
a moment to prepare, so he's ready to go back to that Item No.5, the letter from
Compass.
Siddoway: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, there are several specific items in
there, but I think I can summarize it down to just a couple. One is just voicing support
for not extending services into the McDermott area until ITD has required right of way
for that 16 -- I don't believe that required any changes to us currently in there. One
change that I would support -- it notes that there is encouragement for park and ride lots
at the interchange of Highway 16 and 20-26 specifically. There are potentially other
interchanges in the area, for example, the Highway 16 Ustick, they just simply request
that we encourage such park and ride lots and facilities at all interchanges and not just
one specifically. So, I would support that change and would just look for your
agreement.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 59 of 90
De Weerd: I guess there was one thing in her letter that was of concern in restricting
along this corridor the access to every mile.
Siddoway: That's my next one and I do think that this probably does warrant some
discussion. They talk -- our proposal talks about a vision for Chinden being a 45 mile
per hour corridor and we certainly do want that to be a -- to function well for moving
traffic. Compass is pointing out that they actually envision it at even higher speed at 55.
Discussions recently through Communities in Motion have talked about Chinden as a
grade separated expressway that would not provide access likely even every mile. My
suggestion at one of the last Communities in Motion meeting was that perhaps that
grade separated expressway design could function from Caldwell through to what will
be a major intersection at Highway 16 and Chinden. But between Highway 16 and
Eagle it seems like it should be a surface facility and provide those -- the accesses at
the mile and the half mile, as we have been currently designing for. And I would just
look for your direction on that matter.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: I see nodding heads. Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: And I agree, you know, come back and looking at having a grade separated
facility, on and off ramps at the current configuration. I don't think it's feasible and we
have been planning for something different, so I would support your recommendation.
Siddoway: Okay. Thank you. And, finally, they just do point out gaps in the proposed
frontage and backage roads along 20-26. I believe that we have adequately addressed
that specifically. They talk about the fact that there were no backage roads or frontage
roads shown along the north side of Chinden. We have now gone back and amended
the circulation map to show those backage roads where ever there is a nonresidential
designation on a land use map. So, we have addressed that. And as for the existing
gaps along the north or south sides, we would still expect a policy to require connection
and interconnectivity through that area that is residential, it just doesn't have to be
designed as a collector type roadway, but there would need to be connectivity.
De Weerd: Okay. Any comments, Council? Okay.
Siddoway: Okay. That is all I have.
De Weerd: Thank you, Steve. Anna, anything else?
Canning: No, ma'am.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Wardle.
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 60 of 90
Wardle: Having had lots of comments and I think we have worked through most of the
issues, I'm going to ask Mr. Baird in my motion I would like to restrict any additional
comments other than those which we feel are a material change at the intersection of
Linder and Ustick. So, do you have any language that would help me do that?
De Weerd: Mr. Baird, before you comment, I would like also an additional comment. Is
item number one, the agreement from Council on extending the designated area from
residential mixed use a material change as well?
Canning: Did you want comment from staff, Ma'am?
De Weerd: Yes.
Canning: Sorry. That was a specific issue of discussion and, actually, as it went
through with -- in the Planning and Zoning Commission, it was actually moved over
further. We misunderstood the testimony of Mrs. Waterfield and those folks along with
her, that they wanted it pulled back. There was some misunderstanding and that's why
it got pulled back.
De Weerd: Okay.
Canning: So, that was a very very specific issue of discussion at the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
De Weerd: So, that would not need to be. Mr. Baird.
Baird: And also Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as long as we are checking,
let's look at number three. Does staff feel that the 500 feet is material or was that
flushed out at the Commission level?
Canning: That was a specific request to look at how that would impact that and make
the change appropriately. So, that was discussed at the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
Baird: So, Madam Mayor, it looks like the only material change that's being
recommended for consideration is that one Eagle intersection and in answer to
Councilmember Wardle's question, I would word it just like that, that you continue it to a
date certain for the specific purpose of hearing specific change at that intersection and I
would recommend that you state specifically what you would like to see there, so that
they can put out the proper notice. So, in addition to continuing this to a date certain,
it's probably got to be March 7th. I would want to make sure that's okay with both the
clerk and with the planning department. You would move that the proper notice
pursuant to Idaho code will be given, both newspaper publications and other notice
types.
De Weerd: Okay. March 7th. And so, Anna, does the March 7th work?
Meridian City Council
February 7, 2006
Page 61 of 90
Canning: The clerk may be better able to provide that information. It sounds like it
should. Does it have to be noticed twice, Mr. Berg, or just once? With the 15 days, so
we would be fine.
De Weerd: Mr. Berg, for the public record will you, please, speak into the microphone.
Berg: Madam Mayor, we can make that work.
De Weerd: Thank you. Our clerk gets really grouchy if they can't read the record.
Wardle: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: I move that we continue Item 14, CPA 05-004, and instruct staff to notice the
hearing specific to Idaho -- or pursuant to Idaho Code and specific to the material
change in Comprehensive Plan amendment from the Planning and Zoning Commission,
the change from residential to mixed use on the corner of Linder and Ustick Road.
Borton: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. The corner of Ustick Road on this list it mentions the northeast
corner. Are you talking about --
Wardle: Madam Mayor, to clarify, I would include corners, the northeast and the
northwest.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Bird: How about the southwest and the southeast?
De Weerd: That's not in this plan.
Bird: Oh, that's right. I don't have that. That's not north. That's right.
De Weerd: Okay. So, any discussion? Okay. Mr. -- okay. I will go ahead and call for
a roll call.
Bird: Before I -- I got a question. He didn't say the Public Hearing -- he said continued.
You meant the Public Hearing, right?
Wardle: Yes.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, absent; Wardle, yea; Borton, yea.
Meridian City Council
February 7,2006
Page 62 of 90
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
De Weerd: Thank you.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, before we move onto the next item, I
just wanted to get more direction on what you wanted to see at your next meeting. Do
you want us to -- there was some discussion at the beginning and I just wanted to make
sure that I understood correctly. You want us to summarize all the changes or just
incorporate them -- the appropriate ones into the document and have it available for
viewing prior to that date?
Wardle: Madam Mayor. I would like to see all the -- since we are talking four weeks
now, I'd like to see all the changes available, including the amendment that we just
made with the Council after hearing the testimony, chooses to incorporate the
Comprehensive Plan amendment at that time, that we have all the documentation we
need to do it.
Canning: Okay.
Wardle: Is that clear enough?
De Weerd: Sounds very clear to me, Mr. Wardle. Okay. Maybe we will see you later.
Thank you for joining us this evening. We will move onto Item No. 15. Okay. We will
reconvene in five minutes at 10:30.
(Recess.)
De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and call this meeting back to order and I apologize,
this meeting has gone so extra long for those of you who have stayed on with us. We
have had a request from the developer on Items 19 through 22 to continue their Public
Hearing, rather than to wait through two more development applications, so if you're
here for those, you waited through to this point, but to give it due consideration, they are
in agreement to continue it to February 21 st and I certainly hope you don't feel too
inconvenienced for being here. Okay. Thank you. That way we don't wait -- make you
wait until 11 :00 or 12:00 or-
Item 15:
Public Hearing: RZ 05-020 Request for a Rezone of .17 acres from R-4
to 0- T zones for operation of a barber shop for Fred's "Reel" Barber
ShOD by Fred Pratt - 1127 North Meridian Road:
De Weerd: Okay. Item 15, Public Hearing RZ 05-020. I will open that Public Hearing
with staff comments.
Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the Fred's Reel Barber Shop
proposal and it is a rezone request. It's located on the west side of North Meridian
Road, south of Washington Street. Right there. And they are proposing an Old Town