The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2023-06-23 Mike and Malissa Bernard Charlene Way From:Mike and Malissa Bernard <MMBERNARD1@msn.com> Sent:Friday, June 23, 2023 1:32 PM To:City Clerk Subject:For Public Comment for Proposed UDC Text Amendment ZOA-2023-0001 External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Dear Clerks’ Oﬃce, Please a?ach to comments. Have a great weekend! ? Thanks for everything that you do! ~Malissa Dear Mayor Simison, City of Meridian City Council, and Planning and Zoning Commission, This is in reference to the Proposed UDC Text Amendment ZOA-2023-0001 for the City of Meridian. I am set aback somewhat by some of the UDC being adjusted to align with State Statutes and other changes to the code as guided by Legal and Staﬀ, and perhaps UDC Commi?ee, which is indeed Development-interest top heavy, and I thought I would add a ci?zen’s point of view. We, as a City, can forge our own laws and requirements for commerce, residen?al, industrial, and other items that diﬀer from State laws on the books. I feel in 11-2B-3A.3 Standards re. Addi?onal height not to exceed twenty percent (20) should not be approved by the Director only, and this should come before Planning and Zoning and ul?mately the City Council to give the Ci?zens and business owners that may be impacted nearby a voice in the ma?er. 11-4-3-2 Arts, entertainment, or recrea?onal facility, indoors or outdoors, with the requirement of a condi?onal use permit for outdoor ligh?ng. While this deals with ligh?ng, the code has impac?ul outdoor facili?es in very close proximity to residen?al, as in 100 feet, and outdoor event or ac?vity centers can be as close as 50 feet from residen?al districts? This is far too close to peaceful residen?al and there needs to be a greater distance. Just because it is allowed and coded doesn’t mean it is fair or just to neighborhoods. Furthermore, the hours of such of 6:00 AM to 11 PM will lead to the disturbance of peace of parents pu?ng their children to bed for school the next day, and one can kiss sleeping in one’s own bedroom in one’s own home with reasonable quiet goodbye with this code. There should not be a code to promote the business interests’ wants by adversely impac?ng what should be the ci?zens’ right to enjoy their own deeded or rented proper?es. Residents in place or planned to be in place should always take precedence over any new yet impac?ul business venture. As to the City Council Review process in 11-5A-3 (F) and 11-5A-4: I feel any individual or party regardless of an X-amount of feet parameter should retain the right to duly pe??on their City Council, elected by district, for a Council Review. The 100-foot line is too stringent and gives ini?al applicants too much upper hand in their pursuits while poten?ally impac?ng Residents or the nearby Business owner. This change in code robs the opportunity of DUE PROCESS FROM CITIZENS and BUSINESS OWNERS. Any ci?zen, ci?zens group, business owner or group of business owners should have the right to ini?ate the City Council Review process by ﬁling 1 the applica?on, paying their fee, paying for no?ces, retaining legal counsel of their own, and be able to appear before the Council for their proceeding in the City Hall that they pay for, regardless of what is considered as bona ﬁde, which can be subjec?ve to interpreta?on in-house to appointed staﬀ, and via that subjec?ve route the complaint is not heard in front of our duly elected representa?ves. The Council Review applicant(s) risks/risk losing a suppor?ve Council Review decision, and if there is no issue with the Council re. the original applica?on, then the original decision will be upheld. I ﬁnd the Council Review op?on is not o?en sought as it is, but the right to ask for one should not be so adversely limited to those paying taxes in Meridian. As to 11-3A-3A, I think this may be a bit of an issue and this code should be viewed on a case-by-case basis. I know how collector streets work, and how local streets are supposed to work, and how standards and therefore safety measures are frequently waived, yet this code could force local streets to behave in every way as a collector street, adversely impac?ng neighborhoods with much heavier traﬃc than the streets are designed for as local streets with closer set access points that could be more dangerous. In most cases the interior COLLECTOR street should carry the traﬃc as it is designed for heavier use. It would be perhaps careless to assume the local street is up to the task not only for the adjacent property use but for the addi?onal traﬃc near it, such as high-intensity, high-density residen?al and heavily used and heavily traﬃcked commercial interests seeking paths of least resistance and high rewards while neighborhoods with local streets pay the price. I understand this is in code already, but it cannot always be applied with such a broad brush. Thank you. Sincerely, Malissa Bernard 4025 N Dashwood Pl Meridian ID 83646 208.599.3058 2