HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-01-11 Julie Langlois
Chris Johnson
From:Liz Strader
Sent:Tuesday, January 11, 2022 9:17 AM
To:City Clerk
Subject:Fw: H-2021-0086
For the record, thank you, have a great week!
Liz Strader | City Councilwoman
City of Meridian | City Council Office
33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: | 208-546-9501
Online Meeting Scheduler: Click Here
Built for Business, Designed for Living
From: Julie Langlois <julie@rustler.farm>
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2022 5:31 AM
To: Treg Bernt; Joe Borton; Liz Strader; Jessica Perreault; Brad Hoaglun
Subject: H-2021-0086
External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments.
Comprehensive Plan 2.01.02D:
Encourage a variety of housing types that meet the needs, preferences, and financial capabilities of
Meridian’s present and future residents.
After watching two years of city council meetings and listening to developers at neighborhood meetings I often
hear, as Becky stated last week, that staff, “Wanted me to bring density up.” I understand that density is different
than dimensional standards, but they are related. The only R-2’s that I can recall in 2021 were those for
transitional properties bordering large, established county properties (which is often required by the city for
approval). R-2’s do not seem to be encouraged by staff, P&Z or city council.
And here we are again with a developer asking to reduce dimensional standards. If the City of Meridian wants to
meet the Comp Plan standards, then why are developers not encouraged to include housing types at the other end
of the spectrum? Our “robust comp plan” is only as good as the city holds developers to its standards.
I heard at the last city council meeting that it is difficult to slow down development without giving the development
community more warning. In the last two years I have heard residents repeatedly warn of the school problem
1
during council meetings. This is not news to anyone, least of all the development community, it is a problem that
has been brewing for years. Meridian has lost its Comp Plan stated vision to plan for exceptional educational
opportunities for its families.
HB 389 and the urban renewal district tax reduction changes clearly advantage developers. The legislature has
essentially reduced property taxes on new homes and urban renewal districts which puts more of the tax burden
for schools on current residents; no wonder people vote no. If developers are serious when they say they believe
new growth should pay for itself, then they need to go back to the legislature and have those laws
changed. Otherwise their words ring hollow.
If the city can’t come up with another solution, then perhaps we can slow down the process by reducing the
number of city council meetings. Our development community needs to take some responsibility for the mess we
are in and share the pain. Please consider the impact of maintaining the status quo.
I sincerely appreciate all your hard work on behalf of our city, it does not go unnoticed or unappreciated. And
please let me know if I have made any errors in my assessments.
Sincerely,
Julie Langlois
2