HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-03
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
~ednesday,ApriI3,2002
at 5:30 p.m.
City of Meridian ~astewater Treatment Plant
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
Meridian, 10
X Bill Nary
)< Keith Bird
2. Adoption of the Agenda: a/";iJI-o v--e./
3. Discussion of proposed Amendment to the Comprehensove Plan for
the City of Meridian:
c:;r/s-CCtIJ".ecL - /~ ajc~ /fpr/t /70
Meridian City Council Special Meeting I Workshop Agenda - April 3, 2002 Page 1 of 1
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 72 hours prior to the public meeting.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Wednesday, April 3, 2002
at 5:30 p.m.
City of Meridian Wastewater Treatment Plant
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
Meridian, 10
1. Roll-call Attendance:
x
Tammy de Weerd
x
Bill Nary
x
Cherie McCandless
x
Keith Bird
X Mayor Robert Corrie
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Discussion of proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for
the City of Meridian: Continue Public Hearing to Apri.1 17, 2002
workshop.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting / Workshop Agenda - April 3, 2002 Page 1 of 1
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 72 hours prior to the public meeting.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3. 2002
The special meeting of the Meridian City Council at the City of Meridian Wastewater
Treatment Plant, 3401 North Ten Mile Road, was called to order at 5:45 P.M. on
Wednesday, April 3, 2002, by Mayor Robert Corrie.
Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Keith Bird, Bill Nary, Cherie McCandless,
and Tammy de Weerd.
Others Present: Brad Hawkins-Clark, Steve Siddoway, Gary Smith, Bill Nichols, and
Will Berg.
Item 1.
Roll-call Attendance:
X Tammy de Weerd X Bill Nary
X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird
X Mayor Robert Corrie
Corrie: I will open the special meeting workshop for the Meridian City Council,
Wednesday April 3rd at quarter to 7:00. We will discuss the proposed amendments to
the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian.
(I naud ible)
Bird: We will be gone by then.
Corrie: I guarantee you that we will get out of here tonight. We will have roll-call
attendance of the Council, please, Mr. Berg.
Item 2.
Adoption of the Agenda:
Corrie: Before we get started, I have a little presentation to Gary Smith. One tells
me one thing, one tells me another. This is just like home.
Bird: Like having a daughter home.
Corrie: Gary, this is a gift certificate for you in remembrance of your mother. It's for
Du-Rite Nwsery. If you want to get a tree or something.
Smith: I was talking to Tom about that. Thank you very much, that is very nice of
you and I appreciate it.
Item 3.
Public Hearing: Proposed Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
for the City of Meridian:
Corrie: Which one of those two doesn't have their mouth full? Steve, are you going
'to be the lead on this one?
Siddoway: I think we are going to tag team, but I can start.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 2 of 45
Corrie: Okay. Tag team or whatever works is great.
Siddoway: Does everyone have their copy of the Comprehensive Plan March 2002
folder?
Bird: Sure do.
Siddoway: This was staffs effort to put together a comprehensive folder with
everything in one place. We tried to roll pin the changes the changes that were
enacted by the Planning and Zoning Commission and so that this would kind of be
the one stop shopping for the current proposal as it stands, and any outstanding
issues that we know of. The body of the text has been updated and Brad may be
able to give more detail to this since he actually did it. There are certain sections
highlighted in red that staff feels are - we need particular discussion, so I will be sure
to point that out. Second, inside the front flap of the notebook, the page that says
outstanding issues. We put two items in there. One is this map, which is the summary
of requested changes that is as of March 13th and was updated just prior to that at
the last Council meeting. The second item are the new mixed-use classifications
which CounCil asked staff to try to look at those mixed-use areas that are proposed
on the. recommended future land use planning map from Planning and Zoning
Commission, and actually take those and refine them into some addition categories
based on scale and intensity. We have taken a first cut at that and we need some
instruction. Then if you look in your back cover, we have a couple of, well we have
four background memos. We put these in here to cover items that have been hot
topics and just to provide you with the background information as to provide you with
information as to where we have been with these, where we are today. Number one
is Ed Starkey's report. Ed Starkey is an economist from Portland who came in
December. We had a serious of focus groups and talked about neighborhood centers
and the good, the bad and the ugly about that and had him give us a little economic
reality check. Item number two is the Comprehensive Plan summary that staff did
back in June of 2001, highlighting what are the big differences between the 1993
Comprehensive Plan and the new comp plan. Number three is one of those. The
neighborhood centers, which is already mentioned, we put together a memo that
summarizes what we are trying to do with those. The fourth item is the urban services
planning area which has been removed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. We
still wanted to provide you with the information, the memo form as to what that was,
what the intention was, and why it was on the map, because itcontinues to come up
as an issue to be discussed. With that, I think I will just turn it back and start
discussion and if you have any questions - we are here to answer and provide input,
since we have been through it since the start. I would like to have Council discuss
these issues, so we can find out what your concerns are, how we can help,
explanations we can provide you.
Bird: Mayor, I will start this out with a couple questions. In your opinion Steve, or
Braa, our new comprehensive proposed draft, are we going to eliminate, be able to
eliminate a lot of CUP's, by zoning areas and what goes in there? Seems like even
though we have it zoned now, something comes in even if it's under that zoning, and
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 3 of 45
we still have to have a CUP. I see CUP as the biggest bottleneck in the city's system
right now. It seems like about sixty percent of our work is CUP's.
Hawkins-Clark: I guess the main driver right for those now is the mixed-use area. if
somebody comes in and they own a parcel that falls in the mixed-use, it is pretty
clear it says they have to have a CUP, so that is why you are seeing those. And of
course a majority of those areas are at high volume intersections or along major
arterials, and that is what the market goes - this draft actually does not remove that.
The mixed-use map that Steve mentioned, any projects that fall in those areas right
now, the way it is drafted, the way the P & Z Commission approved it, would require
a Conditional Use Permit. I guess to answer your question, no, it does not reduce -
we don't anticipate will reduce, because it is required. One of those reasons is
because some of those mixed-use areas are infill. So you are probably going to have
some unique areas where you have residential on one side and some arterial
frontage on another, and there might need to be some kind of tweaking of hours of
operation in order to accommodate the adjacent residential. There may be some
standards there that wf? include in conditional uses that our ordinance just doesn't
have right now. That is the advantage of them as well as any kind of comments on
the building fagade or design, which we don't have that avenue through any other
means excepr conditional use. The other comment that we have received is of
course, to possibly change the process, not necessarily the requirement for
conditional use, I think it has been thrown out there to just have the Planning and
Zoning Commission that appeals it to this body. (Inaudible)
Bird: What do the other municipalities do? Do they have this many CUP's? Do you
guys know? You talk to the other planners and stuff, Boise or maybe Councilman
Nary can tell us on that. You look at last night, we had six CUP's out of our agenda.
Hawkins-Clark: I know in Eagle - Bill Vaughn in the zoning administrator out there,
and they have a separate design review board out there, of course and I think Boise
is similar. In some ways the load is taken up more by communities that have design
review boards, the load that you are feeling is probably felt more by those bodies.
And of course they don't have to deal with everything else. Those design review
boards are established primarily for just something like conditional use. They are not
dealing with variances and plats or anything else. I am not familiar wit~ (inaudible).
Siddoway: I don't know if they have mixed-use areas that require conditional uses.
Hawkins-Clark: I don't know, I know Eagle does have (inaudible)
Nary: Boise, I think the difference primarily is a philosophical one. Of all the years for
Boise, the Council has wanted to push that work down to the staff level as much as
possible so that way, everything didn't come to the Council. I think because, as we
have heard at the Planning and Zoning commission over and over again, the
developers, their biggest incentive is speed, by far. There was anything, number two
wasn't even on the map. Speed was their biggest incentive. That - to follow up a
'Iittle bit on what Councilman Bird said, maybe that is something to look at. That really
is maybe not in this document other than some text. It may be in the ordinances that
have to evolve from this document, but one of the things we have looked at and we
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 4 of 45
had talked a bit before the meeting regarding the cell towers. We talked about it in
the Planning and Zoning commission in regards to neighborhood centers. That if we
could figure out and define what we would like to see in these areas, we could
provide the incentive of speed at a staff level approval to be able to get something
processed faster. Kind of like we do (inaudible) processing. That way we can figure
out what these things are. And if it isn't within that scope, like the cell tower, like the
discussion regarding neighborhood centers, then there is a longer process because it
may be an infill project or it may have something unique that they want to do that isn't
within our very small definition of that area, but that might be the better way to go
because at least, it takes a lot of work at the front end because of more stuff that gets
pushed down to the staff level. I am going to assume that you guys are fairly busy
now. So, you know, it ends up putting more on your plate versus our plate, as to how
that gets done. But that is how it's done at Boise. They pushed that down to staff
level and we have a lot of planners. They have a whole lot of planners over at the
City of Boise that we don't have over here at the City of Meridian and so that's, I
guess from the council one of the things we are going to have to decide is if we are
going to make that typ~ of change, then we are going to have to make sure we
support that with staff to be able to perform those functions.
Siddoway: r qon't know about you Brad, but from my perspective I think we almost
spend more time on staff reports for conditional uses then on plan reviews for permit
uses, so changing them I don't think it will make the workload more necessarily.
Bird: I think that, I think you guys have a tremendous amount of time on CUP,
compared to a standard (inaudible) and I was wondering, what I was asking is there
anyway within this new comprehensive plan that we can cut some of that back. We
cut twenty percent of it out, that's twenty percent of your workload that you two can
find free time to do something else.
Siddoway: Well the question is, is do the CUP's provide a greater benefit to the
citizens of Meridian by the ability to tack on additional requirements that are not found
directly in the ordinances, cause those are the only things we will be applying.
Several times it seems like, I know you have no idea what the percentage, but a lot of
times conditional use permits go through strictly with ordinance requirements that we
would be applying anyway. In that case there is really no benefit to have gone
through the longer process. Some cases there is a benefit, you know the citizens get
a chance to comment, and so that's the balancing act is where do we, finding where
those areas should require CUP's so we get the benefit of that the hearing can
- ,
provide, and what areas should be staff level so that we get the benefit ofthe faster
process.
Bird: Steve, the thing I see is about seventy-five percent of the CUP's is agreement
between the developer and the staff, very rarely do we have a lot of public input if
any. Other then through the developer and the staff, so if there is some way we
could, I think right now for CUP's that the only testimony was from staff and the
developer, and it was strictly, I think it's like what councilman Nary said if we could
Clean up some ordinances we could probably solve a lot of those right there because
basically that one I'm thinking of was basically an ordinance problem. Clarification
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 5 of 45
we didn't have an ordinance that covered it so we had to have it. We had to rule on
it.
Siddoway: Let me give you, for instance, and this doesn't go directly with the
comprehensive plan but there has been a lot of interest in old town Meridian the fact
that we have everything pretty much requires a conditional use permit. There are
almost no permitted uses in old town, and that's a barrier. If someone could do a
permitted use out on Eagle road versus doing a conditional use permit in the heart of
our downtown, they are going to go where it's faster, easier, and more clear cut. So,
as you know through the MDC we are trying to set these design standards, with the
idea being with once those are in place we can make permitted uses. Then we can
apply those standards once they are adopted as an ordinance, but I think the key is
that ordinance, cause we can't just make them permitted uses without the standards
to guide them by.
Bird: I've talked to two or three people who were involved with the original planning
of the comprehensive plan, and their idea of conditional use was for schools and
potential areas and stuff like that and of course just what you mentioned everything in
old town. I could see some instance like schools or residential or industrial
residential o'r something like that, you have some areas that you do have to have a
CUP on. I think there is a way that we can get rid of some of these because I don't
see a lot of conflict in these CUP's that come to us.
Nary: It seems like we do tend to get bogged or focus on the apparitions and I think
that they are all like that and I think councilman Bird is exactly right. If you really
looked at all the projects that we have reviewed, whether at planning and zoning or
council for the last year, I would really be surprised if more then twenty percent really
had a tremendous amount of change to what was proposed that was agreed upon by
the developer and the staff. There's tweaks and there's things that and I think how to
attack that I think sometimes is to try, maybe it's what going on with the development
corporation with the old town is maybe the experiment to try, cause you know the one
thing you can't do is. I don't think we have the time right now to try and get this plan
up in place. Say lets take the whole philosophical approach apply it to the entire city
and lets try to create that (inaudible) in the process, but we can take a portion of the
town and how about we create, lets do that for whether it is old town, whether it's the
area by the freeway, whether it is the north Meridian area. Whatever area we want to
do, we can target an area and say look we are going to do exactly what. we are
talking abqut, with this area we are going to create these standards, we-are going to
create these permitted uses, so that we can back track those processes of people
that would like to build the things that we would like to have. Get the public input find
out what people would want to have in those particular areas, identify those things
and not try to bite off the whole all at once but take a little piece of it and target a
particular area. As we get more comfortable with being able to identify to do that we
can expand the circle bigger and apply it to another area, and eventually we will be
able to do that, we will feel comfortable that we will be able to do that in all parts of
town. I think if we try to bite off to big of the chunk at first it's going to seem
'overwhelming and second no one is going to want to take on that task. If we target
like I said whether the north Meridian area or something else that would make some
sense I think and it would help both sides cause I think, like I said, there are a lot of
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 6 of 45
things that people don't have a complaint for and I think what happens, it's very, very
normal for a council to look at it and say boy we never guessed anybody would have
a problem with this so you know it may feel apprehensive to just want to eliminate
CUP's cause here's something that came along we didn't expect to have a lot of
public input, we had a lot of concern about it. But we don't need to drive the train
that way just because one project didn't fit the mole, we need to figure out how we
are going to define that a little bit better rather then just focusing on the apparitions
that come along cause most of them are resolved.
Corrie: Let me add one thing here that Council might want to think about to, is if we
do that and it comes down to where the ordinance is met. What do you think about
having it go rather to planning and zoning first then having it come to Council again
for a CUP it has been brought back from the old time that the planning and zoning
makes the decision and if they don't like it they can appeal it to the council, rather
then going all that time. It takes about three months to get a CUP, that's another time
consuming thing, where the council could say that P and Z could make that decision
and if they don't like it t~en it can be appealed to council. That would cut a lot of time
out, but I think its premature to do that until we do what Councilman Nary says.
Siddoway: Well I don't know if it's premature to do that. I think what Councilman
Nary is saying is you can actually eliminate some CUP's all together if you have
those design standards. Even before that's done you could implement what you're
talking about and that's eliminate the second step unless it's appealed,
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, either way you go you need to have a mechanism that is
going to (inaudible) because it may seem like it's a (inaudible) thing, but if you are the
neighbor who's fence backs up against it or you know you are going to be impacted
by it some way or another. You do need to have a mechanism, whether it's the
appeal from P and Z or it's an appeal for the staff decision that they have a process
to go through.
Hawkins-Clark: I'm just doing a quick count, there is somewhere between 25 and 28
designations of mixed-use, every one of these right now have our conditional use.
There're only about eight of them that are adjacent to' existing uses of some kind.
Eight or nine of them - City limits uses. The vast majority of them, bare open ground
that the chance of some kind of opposition is no, and of course we all have the ability
to know - generally when we are going to see somebody come in and opp0se and
when we aTe not. Just looking at that you can almost go through there in terms of the
first step towards the ordinance change, and say that the ones that are in fill, that are
adjacent to city limits will probably anticipate somebody is going to come and say that
the hours of operation should stop at ten p.m. or you know I think we need to have
some kind of conditions. On a lot of the others - you know within a year and half we
could potentially we could some ordinances drafted.
De Weerd: But you know, even that - our problem is that we have a lot of pockets
and we are only going to get more and if we continue to have the CUP process only
'penalized in your field, you will continue to see pockets develop because they are not
going to want to do that. It's just like Steve was saying with old town they can go
outside, it's easier to go outside, your not going to hassle with the infield - again you
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 7 of 45
get back to the design standards if there is some concerns, you have residential
abutting then you have a neighborhood designation where you have those into your
standards or you have hours of operation and you know the neighbors do know that it
backs up to neighborhood commercial or what have you. That to can be put into
conditions because what I'm concerned about is you are going to totally - in essence
almost force them out to the trench and we are going to have county pockets
everywhere. I don't think our police department is going to be real thrilled about that.
Bird: Impact areas and city limits will get the pockets to - if you do that - and I agree
with you on that Tammy. I also think when we get to old town there are a lot of
people that have lived there most of their lives, don't want to move and don't want to
see a change. A lot of the downtown people that own buildings don't need the
money, don't want to spend the money. I don't think that is driving us out, I don't
agree with Steve as much as that's driving the city outside, they are looking at bare
ground outside and location - I think one thing we discussed this morning is
transportation, is (inaudible) bottleneck downtown. Until we can get parking
downtown where peopl~ can come and be quick traffic friendly - you can park and
go. We're going to have trouble attracting businesses down there. David Eberle had
some great ideas because he'd seen what happened from 1967 to 1985 in Boise. I
think that if we, could - over the last four years, I think the Mayor will vouch for this. I
betyouwe've had twenty CUP's that have been real controversial. That the staff and
the developer couldn't work out, and you talked about time limits and stuff. That can
be done at a staff level - you don't know if somebody is going to put a building up
next to - a retail outlet next to a residential area - yeah at ten o'clock we don't have
those lights either flooded down or gone, that's common sense that's staff, the
developer should have common sense on that.
Siddoway: We lack the ordinances right here in this meeting. The ordinances to
enable us to require that.
Bird: I agree but that's where we're probably lacking the most, is in writing
ordinances.
Siddoway: Maybe if I could relate that to the comprehensive plan specifically. The
only way the comprehensive plan relates to this the conditional use Issue is in this
mixed-use areas. On the zoning side there are conditional uses that are required to
schedule (inaudible) control in certain zones. The problem that I'm hearing is when
something.isa permitted use in the zone in the schedule of use, butthe comp plan
requires it to be a CUP regardless. So we start out with this and we do have areas
where if you build on one of these colored areas you are doing CUP regardless.
Maybe we can try and take, ordinance wise, chunks out of this one at a time. When I
look at this my first thought is I see three different types of areas, not just based on
this scale but actually on - we have truly infield parcels that would need certain types
of standards - we have neighborhood centers -'- which regardless of their scales - we
have three different scales of even neighborhood centers, but neighborhood center
~ype mixed-uses which need their own types of standards, and then we have these
big regional ones which are located around the interchanges and Eagle road that are
regional mixed-use areas which would be a separate type. You know maybe we
adopted today requiring the mixed-uses with a goal - with an action item to adopt
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 8 of 45
performance standards and the ordinances that allow these to be removed from the
requirement from doing a conditional use regardless. If you do the neighborhood
center design standards and then we pass an ordinance - let's say that we don't
have to do a conditional use as long as you're following the standards. Anyway.
Bird: Mr. Nichols? Are we talking about too many ordinances that's going to
bottleneck us, or is this peaceful from the legal standpoint?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bird and Council. I think what you are looking at is
a very comprehensive ordinance review, much like (inaudible). You want to make
the design standards specific enough that the applicants look at that ordinance and
say I know I have to put split block (inaudible) along this street with a certain amount
of buffer (inaudible). Either you get into that kind of detail and in the ordinance so
that they know kind of what they have to do to avoid the scene. Also, so staff can
say I've got to take this through my checklist (inaudible). It's just like a vision that
really (inaudible) ordinance change to eliminate seeing some of these things. Then
again, I think they probqbly already have their checklist of things that they go through
when they look at these site plans (inaudible) hours of operation. The rest of the
building (inaudible) versus the parking lot so we have to be looking at security and
lighting issues. after dark and all of those kinds of things. It may not - I think it's a lot
ofwo~kbut I think it's one of those things where you put that work up front and save
everybody a lot of work and a lot of time.
(I naud ible)
De Weerd: On permitted uses versus CUP's, do you find people are pitfalls when
you get into a permitted use that you would like to ask but you can't because it's
permitted that you would otherwise have for a Conditional Use Permit?
Hawkins-Clark: You know, I haven't either. It doesn't come up frequently.
De Weerd: Are the standards pretty much the same if you read a staff report with all
of the conditions would you see a variance between what you're asking?
Hawkins-Clark: You mean-
Siddoway: -- potentially sometimes but rarely. (Inaudible) the hours of operation. We
couldn't pu.t something like that in just a permitted use. That shows up fairly 'often if
it's adjacent to existing Urban Renewal (inaudible).
De Weerd: Well and if that shows up often that's something we need to change in
the ordinance. Then they can apply for a variance if there's a problem. Then they
would have to go through Public Hearing to do that. That protects the neighbors.
Siddoway: But by and large the landscaping that we ask for, the setbacks that we
require in the Conditional Use are pretty much straight ordinance.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes I think probably the only other item is and we actually - that it's
a philosophical issue and it's how much in the way of building and design does the
Meridian City Council Special Mel;oLlng
April 3. 2002
Page 9 of 45
City of Meridian want to build in (inaudible). Right now there's virtually none. I mean
it doesn't say you have to have this much percentage of windows facing a public
street. Then nothing in terms of pitch or - a lot of the standards (inaudible). If that is
not important I think that is probably one of the bigger things (inaudible) in permitted
uses we have no backing. The landscaping (inaudible) it would just be the actual
building.
Bird: Mr. Mayor - Brad, I for one don't believe that I want to go out and design a
building for a consumer that's putting the money in it, and each building - you know
being in the business that I'm in I wish they were all glass. There are certain deals,
you know that just aren't feasible. These developers make money be having a
marketable product so they are going to build a nice looking building. You know for
an industrial building block up six to eight feet and then a steel building, I think is
very, very attractive. We have them in the city and I think they look very, very nice.
In fact some of them look nicer then some of these block building we got. Then look
at the Mountain View High School out there with this (inaudible) colored brick, I mean
that is absolutely going to be fantastic beautiful, but that's about a very expensive
process that the average private person isn't going to do. So I think you let them
guys, they have to sell their product.
Nary:, Mr. Mayor? You know with the City of Boise the design review process has
been pretty successful, I think it's worked out pretty well. But I also to be honest I
guess just as an outsider in viewing it, I don't know how, and again it's the same thing
its about ordinance. It ends up being a review of colors and flowers and trees and
fences, and its not a tremendous amount of - it's done some good things but I think
what's happened is that it's created the culture that we need to be concerned about
how these things look and the developers are just doing it anyway, I think councilman
Bird is right. Most of the time depending on what they are doing, since it doesn't deal
with, Boise doesn't deal with homes it only deals with commercial businesses. Well
you are trying to make a fairly attractive building that's just the current state on the
architectural business right now, that's the current state of building right now.
Nobody wants to build a nice office building that has professional doctors, lawyers,
and accountants or whatever and then have a tipped up steel building, they are going
to make it look nice cause that is how they attract people for it. So I don't know if it's
necessary, it certainly is a component that can be added on in this type of change, is
that if we are going to create these standards we certainly can create, I mean with
Boise design review it's a public citizen committee that's volunteers and that they are
the one that review those things that way it takes some of the staff time' away a little
bit. They'review those deals, they have architects on there and other citizens and
that make take some of the staff time away and still allow some public input and
again someway meet the standards. I think most of the time - I don't know how
many projects we can say in the last couple years there really has been a super big
concern about what the design was. You know - I mean Commissioner Hatcher
always had a big concern about the design, but in general I don't think it's been a real
problem. I don't think we have looked at some elevations, and thought wow 1 wish
.they had more windows here or I wish the roof had a different design to it, I think
most of the time it has been fine, it hasn't been a big issue - but do you folks think it
has been?
Meridian City Council Special Meellng
April 3, 2002
Page 10 of 45
Siddoway: The answer is no, but let me just - my thought is in the interest and not
getting bogged down on this one and, if I were to make a proposal, it would be this to
adopt a comprehensive plan with the requirement of the conditional use permits
today but with an action item to look at these ordinances that can speed up the
process for one and maybe the process that maybe the Mayor suggested that gives
P and Z final say unless it's appealed as second and then use these Old Town
design standards that we are in the process of hiring someone to do as a test to see
how well it works in adopting an ordinance with design standards and then changing
uses to permitted uses instead of conditional uses. You know I think it would be a
good test to see if we could do this for the rest of (inaudible).
De Weerd: You know Steve, I think that on what we are discussing, a lot of it
includes what we dealt with when we wrote the landscape ordinance. You know
trying to build in standards and then also looking at specific areas that you maybe
want to have a little bit higher standards in your entry way or (inaudible) or certain
parts of town and those are the things where you can have a little bit more standards.
I think a lot of it is developers would like to know what the expectations are, you know
they just want to know what the rules are, we'll play by the rules.
Siddoway: They want to know if they follow the rules they will be approved and if it's
clear enough, '1 think most of them will do it.
Corrie: We had a situation last night which they were following the rules but that
wasn't what we wanted.
(Inaudible)
De Weerd: That was a gray area.
Bird: That is the gray area.
De Weerd: That was the gray area because it was a drainage field also used for
public space and that would be amenity and you know it all depends on how you
interpret it. Is that a true amenity, not in my opinion but-,-
Bird: Our rules say (inaudible).
Nichols: Mr. Mayor just a couple things, the hearing last night (inaudible) for some
developers just getting the minimum is all they want to do. So we need to make sure
that while you're it minimum (inaudible) the second issue I would say is the non
permitted uses versus the conditional use. My experience, I come from a community
where they really didn't have conditional uses (inaudible) but they had permitted
uses, and if you fell into one of those permitted use categories you could do whatever
you want and so you have to be really careful about permitted uses that have design
standards or something that allows that to happen.
'Bird: There are certain developers that (inaudible) and there are certain house
builders that wlll (inaudible) but then you have successful ones. You know they have
to market their product and if you are going to pay ten dollars a square foot for office
Meridian City Council Special Meellng
April 3, 2002
Page 11 of 45
space, are you going to have a nice looking one at ten dollars, or go over to this one
over here that doesn't look to nice, don't have the required exits or more exits than
they need, and all this kind of stuff. Good heating and air conditioning -- no you are
going to go over here. The ones with cheap corners don't stay around long.
Nary: I don't want to focus on just the isolated cases. We make those decision
(inaudible) another is the Wendy's. They are a good developer and that was a good
architect and all that, but Meridian - our ordinance as current, and the issue that
became such a big deal with that project, was that escape lane out of their driveway.
Their response was Meridian doesn't require an escape plan, so we just built one. It
says fifteen cars stacking in it, we don't care if people have to wait half an hour to get
out of it. Because we have the flexibility have the CUP and say no, we want to have
an escape out of that, we are going to make you do that - that was the only reason
we could do that. So we can catch those things that we don't have enough ordinance
for. But I don't want to say that Wendy's isn't an example of not to do it, Wendy's is
an example of saying when we could catch that, we need to come back and revisit
those ordinances and c~eate things after the fact. But what happens sometimes is we
somewhat stifle ourselves because we run into problems with speed bumps and then
we just think we don't want to do that. But I think as long as we stay on top of that,
come back to' readdress those concerns. I did want to bring up one other thing,
though, at least that is food for thought. With the City of Boise, they have that
process we were talking about, which give a lot of teeth to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and allows them to have the final say. That is a philosophical choice,
and I don't have a problem with that choice, but there are issues that become
problematic, more and more with appeals than there used to be. People hire
attorneys, nothing wrong with that, attorneys have to make a living, too - but people
hire attorneys for anything. For sign variances, for landscape problems, they hire
them for everything. So it may seem like it may resolve a lot of issues to allow it to be
done at the Planning and Zoning level, and it may not. It may end up that people will
just appeal because people hire attorneys in conflict. One of the problems that we
have had at that City of Boise is trying to define those standards a little better for
appeals, because, what has been the problem with, and Mr. Nichols could probably
concur with this, is that we have a case on point that (inaudible) from the City of
Boise on appeal with the Foster's Warehouse, and the. Historic Commission, and that
case speaks directly to appeals and what can the Council do in regards to appeals
versus an new hearing. Currently here, in Meridian, it is a hearing. We are still at the
technically, fact finding stage that is not an appeal. So whether we receive .input in
between that, we can identify that and we certainly need to identify what input we
have received, but that case that is directly on point, only on point in regards to the
appeals process and how much information can you get, and how do you disclose
that and deal with that and can it taint the group and it becomes very problematic in
trying to do that. For the last three or four months, they have been in a redraft stage,
to redraft the appeals process from Planning and Zoning to the City Council of Boise.
They have had to sent it back for rewriting twice. They have had a citizen committee
that came up with a whole new ordinance versus what the staff had proposed
originally. It has always been a problem in trying to figure out how do we do this as
an appeal.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 12 of45
Siddoway: Are the volume of appeals high? Do many projects actually end with the
final decision of the design review committee?
Nary: I would say percentage wise, probably; majorities do end that way. That is the
problematic ones that has increased over the years on appeals. It is just food for
thought, it doesn't mean we should do it, but understand, trying to create a good
appeals process that isn't cumbersome as well. And allows people to have legitimate
input to it. It is real tough. That has always been the problem. If its an appellate
body, if the Council is considered an appellate body, (inaudible) are they just
reviewing a record and making a decision and are they reviewing a record, gaining
more input, which is maybe new input and then sending it back? I would basically
(***End of Side One***) -- food for thought that as we evolve in this process, although
I like idea of allowing a lot of decision making to be done on the front end that can be
done and only having to then filter through the ones that just have to be decided at
Council anyway. Understanding there is going to be, from the Council, a different
discussion of how do we do that? How do we review that fairly so that when they get
appealed, the whole issues doesn't turn around like in the Foster's Warehouse case
over the process -- that 'has nothing to do with the substance, its all process.
Hawkins-Clark:' At the risk of not knowing what Shari would say, I have been thinking
of doing this for a while, I think that it would be pretty easy to go over the last two
years, look at all the conditional uses, and pick out what conditions have been pretty
consistently applied that have been new, and I think, like that we can pick out a trend
we could bring back to you.
Bird: I agree.
Hawkins-Clark: And say this is the last two or three years, you had mentioned four
years, and if you really felt we had some periods with - I don't think it would a difficult
task, but it would take time. It just really might informative. We have never done that,
and then we could have the basis in the meantime, still go through with this. If its just
P & Z level, I think a lot of developers would be tickled pink to know their time has
been cut in half.
Bird: I agree with you, Brad, I think that if we go back -I like that idea - go back and
look, I think we will be shocked of how little staff and developer disagreement there is
in that CUP. I am serious. I think there will be some shock. Sure, there will be twenty
that you can pull out, I can name about twenty right now that were big ugly hearings.
Controversial items that you are going to have always, you will have a few of them, I
would like to see that done. I know we need to get on with this, I for one, would like
instead of having to revisit this Comprehensive Plan in six months down the line, I
would like to see these done if its possible. Then you can incorporate it with the new
Comprehensive Plan so we are not down changing it six months from now or a year
from now.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, it may be possible to go ahead and
'Ieave these areas, explicitly the Conditional Use Permit, (inaudible) that Conditional
Use Permit does not require (inaudible). One of the things that you have to do once
you adopt the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is to then have any and all
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 13 of 45
ordinances necessary to work it out. So I would think - another thing, is that in Idaho,
Comprehensive Plan that it is important but it is not as important as the zoning
ordinance. So to the extent that the ordinance overrides the plan, the ordinance
would control it. So I think we can go ahead and leave these things in as requiring
Conditional Use Permits and at the same time, work on the ordinance and make it to
where there is kind of an opt out of the Conditional Use Permit process by these
things that give you an opportunity to require more open space (inaudible) some of
the kinds of things that we might able to work in and then the developer has the
incentive to up the level of his development in order to (inaudible).
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. I agree with that but I still am concerned with how much of
this is not necessarily mixed-use but Conditional Use Permits. Some of this just
makes sense. I like the designations and mixture of uses, but why some of it,
especially in the industrial area would have to go through a CUP even until we rewrite
- it is just -
(inaudible)
Corrie: I think that is a good idea, you are going to kill a couple birds with one stone.
(inaudible)
Nary: Mr. Mayor, to follow up on what Bill said, too, I mean, nothing happens very
quickly. But as we evolve those ordinances, I think Bill is exactly right, that is what
controls if there is a necessity, whether it is through the text change, to provide that
support for why these ordinances are - so there is a connection, a marriage between
the Comprehensive Plan and the ordinance. We can always do that, always come
back later and change the text without having it be that complex or be that difficult
and always bundle the land use map changes and the like with the planning staff
changes as they are allowed. So I think we can always fix those things that aren't
exactly right - the ordinance has control, we just want to have the support to do that
in our Comprehensive Plan. We can always take them back.
De Weerd: I am sure Shari will be disappointed she missed this, politely, but the
mayor will back you up when it gets to that point that her appointment maybe not very
timely. (inaudible) Do we want to go thought and hit the first section 'people had
you have to get pretty deep into this book before you really get anything of
substance.
Nary: I didn't notice any redlines.
Bird: I was going to say-
De Weerd: Do you want to first, hit any areas that have goals and objectives - there
may not be redline in it, but you may want to look at the goals and objectives and
make sure everyone is on the same page with those. Because that is where your
'action items are. I think the first one is on page 25. I know number five is again
getting back to developing incentives that encourage utilization of your development
Meridian City Council Special Meellng
April 3, 2002
Page 14 of 45
and coping with infill -- (inaudible) knew what an incentive was. Anything on that
page?
Nary: That is what we are talking about, just figure out what those incentives are.
Siddoway: We have time, and time is a big one. You said that already.
Nary: I didn't hear a lot of things after time.
Bird: Time is money.
De Weerd: Are we getting into cliche's?
Corrie: So you are on page 25, right there?
Bird: Mr. Mayor, you know, if you look, I think this should be a priority; I don't know
how you do it. But if y~u look within our city limits, we have so many enclaves, half
acres, two acres, a lot, that is not city. I don't know how we encourage people to
come in? Most of them are bare lots, there are a few that you know, they usually
come in is wh~n their septic tank or their well goes bad and they need the water and
sewer. .1 think that should be a priority, not that we should stop other development, to
a degree, but that should be a priority to get those enclaves inside. I know every
Council has worked on this.
Corrie: (inaudible)
Hawkins-Clark: I was just going to say, that is in the next six months, on my own
plate to bring to you a map that identifies what those are. Particularly the ones that
are five acres or less. There have been some changes in this last legislative session
on how annexations are processed and it is a little bit off, but you will be seeing soon,
a list of what those are, what services are available, what process would be
necessary in order for the city to annex them, if you so chose. And what the
advantages and disadvantages would be.
De Weerd: An inventory of sorts. You be give a (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Right. Essentially an inventory.
Corrie: The Council is going to have to come to a decision on this, because if we
wait until they want to come in, you will continually have more of this, and the Council
will have to bite the bullet and do this, decide (inaudible) if we would do this. It is not
a very popular thing to do, with a lot of people, but it is going to have to be done or
just forget it. They are not going to come in until they are ready. A lot of times they
wont be ready - I know some people right now, they are not paying taxes on that
land other than farming, and they are right in the middle of everything else. It is
something we are going to have to think about very deeply of each person because it
is coming. What you are saying, what you are doing, is going to give us the reason
to do something. I know that isn't everyone's opinion, but that is something you are
going to have to search your souls for.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 15 of 45
Hawkins-Clark: But we would simply just be bringing the facts, obviously, we would
just present that you have the choice to go parcel by parcel, and say does it make
sense to annex? It is going to take some work in Public Works as well to check on
serviceability.
Siddoway: And my understanding of the new legislation is that we still have the
power to annex property that is an enclave residential, five acres or less. I believe the
new legislation took out the ability to force annex commercial enclaves even if they
have city water and sewer.
Nichols: You have in the new legislation, three categories. Category A is residential
enclaves, (inaudible) parcels (inaudible). If you have a commercial property that is
an enclave and (inaudible) city water or sewer you can annex. If you have an
industrial or commercial parcel that is not receiving city water and sewer, and it more
than five acres (inaudible). There is three categories, the first (inaudible) the second
category, you don't need the property owner's consent if you have at least fifty
percent of the owners (inaudible) and the third category (inaudible) there is also an
exception, for example, a subdivision (inaudible)
Bird: ,Mr" Nichols, is it legal? I know the city of Meridian, in the time I have known
them, anytime anyone outside the city has hooked up to our water and sewer service,
has signed an agreement that if they were contiguous or that they would
automatically annex. Is it illegal if we sent someone out there to shut off the water
and sewer?
Nichols: Mayor and members of the Council, I believe that would probably be breach
of contract issue. If we have extended the lines or given the water and sewer, if they
are then contiguous and they don't agree to annex?
Bird: Yes.
Nichols: That written agreement that says they will annex, binds their property so
even if they sold it four or five times. The other thing that was in this legislation was
any seller of property has to look, residential seller, has to look to see if there was a
written consent to annex at anytime and disclose that to a buyer. 'So if the third
person down the line buys this house and is receiving city water and sewer services,
he has to pe first of all, be told that this is on city water or sewer and secondly that
there is a written agreement to annex so that that buyer buys that property knowing
that when they are contiguous, the city will require them to annex (inaudible) some
actually signed the consent (inaudible)
Nary: In those situations, the majority of those people who were annexed, were in
those consent areas that the prior developer went and developed that subdivision,
had already done the agreement and they had bought it, but they didn't have specific
separate information. They were not told separately, but it is in their CC & R's. It was
'already in their deed, and they (inaudible) and they were upset about it, but they had
already consented.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 16 of45
Bird: That was my question, if we had that agreement in place, and they did not
agree - could we legally turn off the water and sewer? They have forfeited on their
side.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, I don't think we can shut off their
water and sewer, I think we (inaudible). The problem with some of the anti-
annexation (inaudible) was that they did not really recognize what happens in those
agreements. Some of them want (inaudible) have not taken into consideration
whether (inaudible) the owner of the property already consented (inaudible) and
there may be some problems with the legislation (inaudible) but as the law stands
now, (inaudible) most enclaves and most adjacent properties five acres or less
(inaudible)
Bird: If, when these agreements, is there anyway these agreements can be hooked
to the titles so that they show up on title searches? Are they done that way?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor and. members of the Council, Will records these agreements.
Bird: So they are an attachment to the title?
Nichols: The 'agreements contain the legal descriptions, and if the agreements are
recorded, the title company doesn't pick them up, that is not our doing, we recorded
them. The problem that came up on some of the annexation was this -- I didn't realize
this until I got to closing, my real estate agent never told me about this, I never saw
the document -- and the last home I built, I knew it was in the city of Nampa, but I
had to ask the agent for the preliminary title report to review it ahead of the closing or
if I had never asked for it, I never would have seen it. The title company provides it to
the realtors. This new bill requires the agent disclose all this to the buyers, give them
a chance to back out. (inaudible)
Nary: I don't know if Central District Health will allow us to shut off the sewer based
on a person being subjected to being annexed. You can shut it off if they are not
paying for it, but I don't know if you can shut off in this - I think we want to do like Bill
said (inaudible).
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, one more thing before we get off this. When we get to the point
of annexing some enclaves, we need think about how we would sell (inaudible) one
of the things we have to speak to are public safety issues. If the - the idea ofthe city
limits is the outer boundary and everything inside is city, city ordinances apply, city
police respond to an emergency, those things. We need to keep that in mind, when
those folks are approached, they are going to have a hearing on the zoning of the
property (inaudible) please understand (inaudible) we have to try to sell (inaudible). It
has been a problem in Nampa (inaudible) we have some of those areas in city limits
and we have police officers who don't know if it is in the county, or is this in the city?
Corrie: Usually they sort that out later.
Nary: Different perspective on that, having sat through those hearings at Boise, the
enclaved folks, as well as the people on the fringes, that wasn't much of a seller to
Meridian City Council Special Meellng
April 3, 2002
Page 17 of 45
them. The perspective for most people is that when I call 911, somebody shows up.
Most of the time, they didn't care. Same thing with fire. So when they tried to focus
on that perspective with people, that didn't sell it very well with them because their
only concern is if I call 911, is someone going to show? They already are. Are they
going to get delayed if there is a question of it being city or not? With a lot of the
cities here, there are joint powers agreements. 911 will make sure someone gets
sent there - there may be some confusion. Generally dispatch doesn't have a
confusion, they know who to send. Its just if it's a county response, the county officer
might be in Kuna, might be closest and it might take a while but if it was an
emergency they would send a Meridian car anyway. So understand that may not be
enough of a seller to people. One of the things that was compelling to a lot of the
public was, especially with enclaves, clearly the people that Jive within enclaves are
gaining the benefit of city services. They are getting the benefit of city parks,
businesses that have developed over time, employment opportunities. It is a stronger
seller to other people in the community, they have paid that bill for those things that
those folks in the enclaves are gaining the benefit for, and haven't paid for. That did
seem to encourage ~ lot of people who were in support of those types of
annexations. Their recognition, that you do use our parks, you do use the
development, the commercial and all those things. That convinced the rest of the
communityth~t this does make sense to make that fill.
Corrie: Anything else on the (inaudible)? Okay, I think we will be on page 26.
Questions? Okay - 27?
De Weerd: It goes to 40. Unless there is anything in between.
Corrie: Page 40 is redlines. Anyone want to take a break? Why don't we take a five
minutes break and be back here at five to seven.
(Council breaks)
Corrie: I guess we can start with page 40 redline and let you guys - these are what
staff has discussed, so you can tell us what you have.
Hawkins-Clark: So you would like on each of these, to hear a summary from us
~re~- .
De Weerd; Mr. Mayor, just real quick before we get into it. I,want clarity as we go
through this, we probably won't tackle the land use map tonight. Is that correct? Just
wanted to make sure you guys knew that. I mean we love to have an audience.
Nary: Lucky guess, two weeks from tonight, here.
(inaudible)
De Weerd: Sorry.
Hawkins-Clark: Number two under the objectives is simply a clarity - farmland,
delete. It doesn't seem that it would be a city objective to preserve farmland.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 18 of 45
Certainly some enclaves, it makes sense but this is an urban impact area that we are
within, and that was mainly a - we don't really have any objectives at this point, any
ordinances. So that was just a - the rest of that action would read just as it is, I am
taking that out.
De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. I guess being part of that group, and I know it's a stretch
thinking back a couple years ago -
Corrie: Which group?
De Weerd: The services, I think it was open space service. It was necessarily to
preserve farmland although you always kind of want to see some kind of preservation
until you grow out to it but that was also in a transition on claiming it a belt way or
something of an open space. Distinguishing between communities and those kind of
things. So yes, farmland may not be the appropriate term, but a transition between
the county and urbanized areas, or even the buffer between cities. How do you
accomplish that? I thin~ that might have been some of the essence of what this was
trying to do.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, would the intent then to be to delete it from that, but have a
different objective that talks about that transition from rural to the urban areas or
something like that so that it preserves the intent - but it doesn't to preserve
farmland, you are right, it doesn't make much sense in a Comprehensive Plan unless
we have a farm zone that I have missed.
De Weerd: Bob's Farm Park.
Nary: Right. But to have an objective that talks about dealing with those transitional
areas, rural and urban.
Siddoway: I think the intent of transition wasn't just between rural and urban, it was
between urban and urban. There was quite a bit of discussion in that group about the
fact that there was an agreement, I can't remember where anymore, but there was an
agreement in place to maintain a buffer between Meridian and Boise.
Nary: It's called Eagle Road.
(inaudible).
Siddoway: It was to be an actual open space buffer.
(inaudible)
Bird: Good tax base on that east side of Eagle.Road.
Siddoway: the only other thing I think was a discussion that might have been in
'preserving farmland outside the impact area by requiring having development inside
it, but I don't know if that belongs in our - if that were not there, that might be more of
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 19 of 45
a county issue. Our city Comprehensive Plan is just dealing with our impact area, I
agree, it probably doesn't make sense to preserve farmland within our impact area.
Hawkins-Clark: It is a policy in the Comprehensive Plan which technically could be
pointed to in an argument at some point down the line if someone wanted to. Not that
it is in the ordinance, but they could say, this is the policy, this is why we don't want to
annex, or I don't know. If it is mainly a buffer strip between other areas, then I guess
we can put that in there but
Siddoway: Preserving farmland in the Treasure Valley is a good thing, preserving
farmland in our impact area, probably not.
De Weerd: It is not really the goal of the city. That should be the responsibility of the
county, but not of the city.
Nary: Or having something else that says something about dealing with transitional
areas between different zones or between impact areas or urban or the neighboring
city or something like that. Some sort of language regarding that would probably
make sense.
SIddoway: You would strike farmland from this one and add a separate objective to
address that.
Bird: The farmland -- I think the open spaces take care of that. You are not going to
preserve farmland. What we don't realize is most of these farmers around here, in
Boise or Ada County, unless they are a real big (inaudible) they are up in years, they
are getting ready to retire. The sons and daughters can't make it, you can't make a
living farming anymore. On the average like you used to be able to raise a family on
eighty acres, you can't even pay the electric bill. So they are the ones really pushing
these developers to sell ground, because that is their retirement. That is their
retirement, that ground. So I don't think we need to put farmland. I think the way staff
has asked for open spaces is a very good idea. I hope we do keep some open
spaces.
(inaudible)
Hawkins-Clark: Mr. Mayor, just to clarify, to get a sense of consensus, do you want
us to go ahead and change this? We are essentially assuming this isthe way, when
you come to your point of making a motion, that we are reflecting these tonight?
Bird: We would be there all night making that motion - Nary would be doing that one.
Nary: I think Mr. Nichols would attest, trying to figure that out later was very
cumbersome for the attorneys to do that.
Siddoway: Do you want to take a crack at an additional one to address the
transitions?
De Weerd: Yes.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 20 of 45
Bird: If we just encourage open spacing, why do we need to singularly address that
area? I am throwing it out for argument, so reply.
Nary: I think a lot of times, the public, maybe that is something that is really
commonly discussed now, but the term transitional zone is a term that is used a lot in
the Planning and Zoning area, so I don't think there is anything wrong in having it as
a policy or an objective that we are going to evaluate that or create those, we are
going to look at those - some text that says we recognize there is a necessity to have
transitional areas between different uses. Then supporting that is going to be buffers
and ordinances that support those types of things. Finding compatible uses and
trying to put - then again looking at permitted uses type things and we may be able
to get to the point that we say we are going to find uses that are compatible and
create that in the zoning tables and maps. Something like that as a policy I don't think
is real harmful because I do think that seems to be the discussion that Councils need
to consider and Planning and Zoning staff needs to consider, transitional zones. That
is not really a zone bu~ a recognition that there has to be something between this
industrial use and residential and commercial use and residential or whatever.
Siddoway: Mr. Mayor, I think we have addressed that somewhat with our landscape
ordinance and buffers between land uses. I think what Tammy was talking about, the
intent of this group, wasn't talking about buffers between uses, it was talking about
what happens on the edge of our impact area? Between us and Nampa, between-
De Weerd: Just like between us and the woman who testifies each public hearing
that she was on the other side of McDermott, and she lives on a five acre piece, she
has cows and pigs and goats and all this stuff. This is rural to her, she is in the
county. She doesn't want to be looking across the street at a high-density urban
area. She recognizes that that is city but is there a way that you can transition it? Or
as you come from the north and south into Meridian from Eagle. Or from the east
west from Boise into Meridian, how do you have your identity that you are now
leaving Boise and entering Meridian? A lot of times they have an open space
beltway type of area that you preserve or you create it through larger lots. There are
different ways you can do it. Or that is where you have your pathway, your belt and
you do it that way. So it is more than preserving your identity from your urban
boundaries to either another urban boundary or a rural boundary. .
Bird: So ~hatyou are saying Tammy is basically, in our impact area, you want some
kind of an open space pathway between our impact area and everybody else's
impact area. Transitional-
De Weerd: Even like that or a transition with less density.
Siddoway: If you look at the map that is proposed, we have tried to reflect that with
some exceptions that -- you will see that the density is in the center. And the fringe, if
you look out on the edge, most of that fringe is in that low density green color, trying
'to think about the transition from urban to rural along that boundary.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 21 of 45
Nary: Except in that boundary there on the east, which would be kind of silly to have.
Wal-mart is our gateway on the east side. But that is okay, because that is what
most of our development in that part is.
De Weerd: Or you have a nice greenbelt to where you have a path in there.
Bird: I see where you are coming from Tammy, but don't open spaces create that?
Why do we have to go with the farmland -
De Weerd: No, I am not talking farmland.
Bird: Open spaces would take care of it.
De Weerd: No, don't think farmland. Don't think farm anymore.
Siddoway: We struck that.
Corrie: I have a fear - I don't want us to do - is do another Boulder Colorado, where
they surround themselves in (inaudible) and everything dies inside. The costs went
sky high :"'" 'you can't build on the outside because its all green and that is the
(inaudible) plan and people can't Jive in Boulder unless you make $500,000 per year.
I understand what Tammy is saying but you want to be careful about that. You can
make your transition, make your identity but you don't want to do it all in a pathway
around town either.
Siddoway: My question would be, does this map reflect the transition that you would
like to see? I know we are not specifically talking land use map tonight, but question
would be should the edge be that or something different?
Corrie: I think he is saying, open space forces that standard.
Bird: Some areas, you get up into the northeast corner of ours, Boise is already right
to us with R-4's or R-8's. Well I think our developers, because of it being there, are
going to want to keep the same idea as they come through. In fact we have already
let two in there doing that. I think, yes, I would like to see us keep some open spaces
and stuff, but I think you are -I think this land use is pretty decent myself. I personally
think it is pretty decent around the edges.
De Weerd: All I am saying is it should be a stated goal that you would encourage to
maintain some kind of transition or efficient use of open space or pathways to
distinguish rural to rural or urban to rural, urban to urban, or urban to rural.
Bird: That is the good saying, urban to urban, rural to rural. You bet. That is the way it
should be, we should draft it.
Corrie: And hope the purpose of rural stays rural even when (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Item number 14 was a letter submitted by COMPASS who as part of
their goal of course is air quality, so Charles Trainor (inaudible) submitted that
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 22 of 45
language about adopting a dust abatement ordinance in conformance with the
prototype that was developed by COMPASS.
De Weerd: I think its great and I think we will be developing the prototype - poor
David will.
Bird: I think you have got to hope that prototype is sufficient for what we need and I
am sure that Gary and Mr. Nichols will look at it because this dust abatement is going
to be one of the biggest most costly items in construction and development before
too long. Boise is already seeing - yes so we ought to have a plan in place before
long.
Hawkins-Clark: (inaudible) she worked with EPA and DEQ and its just a little less
stringent that EPA's model is.
(inaudible)
Nary: I am trying to think, what they took - the whole issue was on the dust. Keeping
it in, getting it out. (inaudible) I can't remember, I thought they left it out. (inaudible)
the dust issue. I think,
De Weerd: My brother-in-law is a builder in the Tri-Cities, and they have huge
regulations over there. You get a windstorm, builders run to their lots to start
watering. If they get fined, (inaudible)
Bird: It really is a great deal, I will tell you, ACHD is the one who should really push
this because you look in the winter time and stuff that the mud and stuff that is put on
their roads, and I think you are going to see trucks coming off muddy fields, just like
you have a concrete wash down area, you are going to see tires on trucks. The
Mountain View school is being done with the construction management company. If
you get in the mud out there and get on the roadways that are already paved, you
have to wash them before you come on.
De Weerd: Well this is a big one. (inaudible).
Siddoway: So you want to keep it in.
Bird: It ha~ got to be there.
De Weerd: How come we keep seeing Old Town thrown in there in every section?
Who did that? Did you Steve?
Siddoway: No. This was simply compiled from the notes of the meetings, literally
verbatim.
Hawkins-Clark: Pretty much. The one thing in some ways, if you just want to talk
actions, the best document is the last one in the book because, at the end of every
chapter there are three or four pages of objectives and actions. But all of those
objections and actions are summarized in the very last appendix.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 23 of 45
Unidentified: Do they show (inaudible) as well?
Hawkins-Clark: No they don't. But I will say, we have recommended, for instance,
some of the Old Towns ones are recommended to be stricken. Because they are
duplicated. But we didn't go into the end of the chapters to do that, we just did it in
the appendix.
Nary: Would it make more sense to use the appendix right now?
Bird: We need to go through these red things first.
Hawkins-Clark: I just wanted to point out that some of these you see on the ends of
the chapters are going away in the appendix, and we will reflect that appropriately.
Siddoway: The thing to do is to go through the red items in the body and then go
through the stricken items in the appendix and that should cover it.
De Weerd: I have in this transportation section, collectors is probably one of the
areas of discussion but as we started seeing especially on Highway 69 and some of
these state hi'ghways that are surrounding us, we need to be really serious about
planning growth. I know Larry gives frontage roads, but it is like David Eberley said,
today, are you doing this to access commercial or are you having that road to move
traffic. There are certain roads out there that are there to move traffic and so we need
to strongly push frontage roads.
Bird: I think the frontage roads in this, I know the mayor agrees with me on this, a
couple developers we have talked to, we have asked them if there was any way
within their deal that they could get some frontage roads so that they are just
dumping at one place (*** End of Side Two***) We are really trying to push, I don't
know how much authority we have to do that. Maybe Mr. Nichols can address that,
but I don't know if we have authority to do it, but we can sure suggest it.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, since ACHD has road authority, and on
some of these our state highways, Highway 69 (inaudible) it creates a problem
(inaudible) on regulation (inaudible) after some sort of landscape design ordinance,
you have a pretty wide strip along, landscaping along Eagle Road. and lights, it also
(inaudible). They know they have got to give up a certain amount of space but then
they can also sell it to clients and sell them those lots. But you are not going to risk
your life going (inaudible)
Bird: That is a good idea.
Nary: I don't know what the cost would be. The cost of maintaining the landscaping
is probably a trade off to saying lets have the (inaudible).
Nichols: I will say (inaudible) Council, I just came back from California (inaudible)
that there is no landscaping (inaudible).
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 24 of 45
Bird: You can still have your landscaping but not quite as wide, but if they put in a
frontage road, they put in some landscaping, narrow the landscaping down, to me,
that is a very good idea.
McCandless: Are you talking about a developer putting in a frontage road? So then
that would be a private road?
De Weerd: No, it would still be an internal road to their project but-
Bird: But then we could - instead of having a 50-foot landscape we have 20-foot with
a 30-foot road or whatever.
McCandless: Why would it have to come under ACHD?
Corrie: It does.
(inaudible)
Corrie: David even looked at that.
Siddoway: Mr. Mayor, I don't mean to be the one, the lone sole swimming against
the current but I am not convinced that frontage roads are the answer, I am not
saying they are not, because I am not dead set against them either, but they can be
ugly and they take up land. You can sometimes accomplish the same thing by just
limiting the access points and requiring internal circulation. I think the limited access,
the goal is to keep the roads for traffic, for movement of traffic, without lots of curb
cuts and lots of interfering traffic and turning movements and things. If you can
somehow maintain the same limited access points, with internal circulation or even
coming in a lot and doing almost a frontage road is better in my mind than just
coming off and having big expanse of road. The landscaping we are talking about
that we may want between the frontage road and the highway, who owns it, who
maintains it? It is going to belong, its going to be in right-of-ways, either be ACHD or
ITD and are they going to maintain that landscaping?
Bird: You can bring that part it - Steve, let me tell you something, think just down
Eagle from the railroad tracks to Fairview, on the west and east side, if you had a
frontage road on the west side and east side that came down and got on . at Pine
where there is a light, think how much easier access would be and how much less
congestion there would be on Eagle road. You try to get off of that yellow one, you try
to turn and go north or get on at Commercial or Lanark, try to turn back and come
north -
Siddoway: I am not saying we need to restrict the access, because I think we have
to.
Bird: Then you can have frontage roads.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 25 of 45
De Weerd: You can do it a number of different ways. Not necessarily run it parallel.
But yes divert it to different aspects of it and circulate it. It doesn't have to be a
parallel line. Like the ugly ones - but it does need to be something that if you are not
going to encourage it, you will never get it and it will be too late and the last man in is
the one that gets really affected by the poor planning.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, Steve has a good point. One of the
problems is limiting access on a state highway. That is the State's responsibility.
Some of the time (inaudible) hold a deed of right of access on that highway
(inaudible)
Siddoway: We need to address it, I think we all agree on that, question is, what if you
have a highway, you put a frontage road here, or do you come off of it to the frontage
road here and have - so that you don't have this ugly strip between two roads.
Bird: You can do it any way that is feasible. I think you got to - Overland would be a
- I tell you, north Meridian development group, Chinden Boulevard is going to be
good one to look at putting a frontage road down. I am telling you. If you have one
access at, in the middle of each mile, with a light, it is the only way you will get on at
all.
De Weerd: And I am not saying a road and road, you can have a row of buildings
between the - have the buildings closer to your major road or whatever, but we just
have got to (inaudible)
Siddoway: That is all I am saying.
Bird: But you have got to come off and collect in one area.
Siddoway: And limit the access points.
Bird: And limit the access points. And I think north Meridian is going to be the ideal,
along Chinden, is going to be the ideal place to champion this if we can.
Corrie: Okay, anything else?
Siddoway: Page 53 now?
Hawkins-Clark: This one was a specific request from ACHD staff, I don't remember
Gary at the Meridian Transportation Taskforce, I don't think we talked about it, but
Waltman Lane, the list of changes that City Council approved to send onto
COMPASS for their long range destination 2020 plan said, supporting Waltman as a
collector. But ACHD disagrees, they do not want it - they see Central - whichever
one is closest -
(inaud ible)
Hawkins-Clark: Partly that but I think partly the intersection. The intersection design,
I don't think supports - (inaudible) So, this is basically a pre-component, see we need
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3. 2002
Page 26 of 45
to confer, and myself I need to confer with ACHD. Given how far along in the process
they are, there is an open house tomorrow on the Waltman intersection.
Bird: You don't want this in?
De Weerd: As a collector.
Bird: As a collector. Waltman is south of-
Siddoway: Right where Meridian Road and East 1st split, its that one that cuts off of
East 1 st and goes into the residential.
Nary: Oh.
Bird: Goes down by Waltman Place - cuts off Meridian Road just before you get to
East 1 st - Main Street.
(inaudible)
Hawkins-Cla'rk: I think the risk is if Mr. John Goade doesn't put in the bridge across
the Ten Mile, as part of his project, that is what gets you from Waltman, it would get
you up to Central and then you can go out to the 'Y'. Corporate, I am sorry, yes. But
if this bridge doesn't go in, then everyone is forced to go into Waltman.
Bird: We did not require that as a deal, him putting the bridge in, in the development.
Smith: Mr. Mayor, ] think the bridge has to go in, someday. Because there has to be
second exit for Mallard Landing. There is only one way out of there now and its-
Bird: Gary I don't disagree with you at all, but I don't believe Mr. Goade should have
to foot the bill.
Smith: I am not saying that. (inaudible)
Bird: I think it is an ACHD deal and they can foot the bill for once.
Smith: I agree, I just think it needs to be-
De Weerd:' Yes, they plan those roads and then -- who put one access in for all of
those houses?
McCandless: ACHD.
Corrie: You rest your case.
Bird: I am one hundred percent in agreement but 1-
De Weerd: Say no more.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 27 of 45
Siddoway: We approved it that way didn't we?
De Weerd: Not me.
McCandless: Not me either.
Bird: Not me.
Corrie: I wasn't there.
De Weerd: Now the only one still here.
Hawkins-Clark: So Waltman is coming out, so there is discussion, as a collector, but
we need to watch this development happen there, that we don't overload it. The
bottom of page 53 then, under the path system is regarding the bike lanes on
collectors and ACHD, they don't always support that, it will depend on each collector
design and right-of-way width. So we are recommending leaving them in the plan but
adding a note that new collector bikeways are subject to ACHD approval.
Siddoway: We want to put those in, at least I do, wherever we can.
Bird: What?
Siddoway: Bike lanes.
Bird: Oh, Steve, come on.
Siddoway: On collectors, not arterials.
Bird: I think they are the most dangerous things going. I absolutely - Gary
Richardson would not talk to Ron and I after the first meeting we had down there.
Nary: Was that good?
Bird: I think they are pretty dangerous. Personally I would not want my children riding
in those bike lanes. '
Siddoway: You would rather have them riding on the road without one? .
Bird: No. Yes - on the sidewalk. I would sooner see them going down the road
facing traffic. The way I did it for years. Those bike lanes are like this, and all those
kids have to do is weave out of there once and bang - you've got a kid. Or someone
opened a car door. I am - that is why we need a greenbelt. So they can go riding.
Siddoway: I can find you research that shows that bicycle I car accidents are
exponentially more frequent with bikes on sidewalks than riding on the street. Cars
don't expect them to be coming on sidewalks.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 28 of 45
Bird: I agree with that point with you. We were trained to ride facing traffic - just like
you walk. You don't walk with the traffic, you walk against it. Then they can see you.
That is the way we were trained to ride bikes - I rode all over Nampa. We didn't
have bike lanes.
McCandless: Bike lanes scare me to death when I am driving.
Bird: That is my fear too - I don't like bike lanes when I am driving. I hug the center
of the road.
Corrie: ACHD can swing left and right on this, whether they approve or don't approve
bike lanes. You get three Commissioners there that like them, (inaudible) and then
change again and they aren't going to get any approvals for bike lanes.
De Weerd: In Europe, they have their bike lanes running along side the sidewalk.
Yes there is a distinguishing strip and in some cases it's just a line. But it is a wider,
its not a five-foot side walk that they are riding on. As you get toward intersections,
they do curve it toward the road so that - people are more bike savvy in Europe than
they are here.
McCandless: 'That bothers me, when you get to the intersection, the bike lane stays
where it is, and you are looking back wondering if someone is coming, wanting to
turn.
Bird: I am trying to think of the place they built one that I travel all the time. I just
wonder.
McCandless: Pine and 8th is one.
Bird: You are right. They take the bicycle lane right into it. I would sooner tell my
kids to ride facing the traffic next to the sidewalk, on the road. And you put a curb.
Nary: I certainly think we need to encourage the alternative transportation, but I don't
know if a bike lane is the safest method to do that. I think we have to have something
because I am scared riding on Ustick and I see someone riding a bicycle, not only
because there isn't a bike lane - but there isn't a bike lane, but the road isn't wide
enough, there is no shoulder for these people and it is incredibly dangerous. I don't
know why anyone would ride down Ustick on a bicycle because you are,going to get
hit. But it is not any safer on some of the main streets. If you had Fairview Avenue,
there isn't a bike lane - if you had a bike lane there, I don't think its whole lot safer
just because the bike lane is there. I think it gives a false sense of security
sometimes to folks. They think I have this little buffer lane, but yet with our culture
here is not as adept to bicycles and using bicycles there. I think it gives the bicyclists
a false sense of security and the drivers are not reacting to them as if it is a lane of
traffic. People cut across that bike lane and never look. They look for a car. They
never look for a person. I think we need to figure out a way to encourage alternative
transportation. I wouldn't say discourage bike lanes, I don't want them taken out. But
I think we need to recognize that if we are really going to encourage that type of
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 29 of 45
usage, we have to find a better alternative than just a bike lane down Overland or
down Fairview or something like that.
Siddoway: My only response and then I will shut up, is that our approach is that they
do not belong on overland or Franklin or Fairview. Take them off the arterials, put
them on the lower volume collectors.
Bird: How about Pine?
Siddoway: Pine is a collector but it is almost an arterial the way it is designed.
Hawkins-Clark: We wont ever see three miles to four miles, actually, six miles when
its extended to Eagle, but we will never see a straight collector like (inaudible) ACHD
will allow.
Nary: It is almost to Fairview.
Bird: It will be when we' are done.
De Weerd: So what do we want to do with this?
Bird: r am like Bill, I think we ought to encourage alternative transportation, I don't
have any like the mayor said, ACHD is going to have the final say. Right now you
probably wouldn't get bike lanes at all, but after the election maybe they will do three
or four. You have to go however you have.
Siddoway: Just make them subject to ACHD.
Bird: They have the final say anyway.
De Weerd: We would encourage them detached off the sidewalk.
Corrie: Did you know that I need a page 53?
Hawkins-Clark: Oh, sorry, did we miss that? This one is somewhat related, talking
about collectors. This is referring to - where is our collector diagram here?
Siddoway: It is on 66.
Hawkins-Clark: 66, yes. 66 is figure 6-8, that might help give you a sense of where
this is coming from. If you are going to keep this in, obviously these streets need to
be labeled, but they are not labeled right now. What this comes down to is, if
developers come in and they own a piece of ground that is where one of these
collectors is reflected, which are essentially at the half-mile, then they are going to be
required to construct wider than your normal standard fifty-foot right-of-way street. It
is still getting some discussion at ACHD because J-U-B Engineers did a study where
they tried to identify where certain collectors should be. This figure more or less
represents what J-U-B came up with?
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 30 of 45
Bird: This is their study basically?
Hawkins-Clark: It is pretty much. ACHD has not formally adopted the results of the J-
U-B study, but I don't think they are going to. I don't know if you were in there today,
they are basically wanting to go on a case by case basis.
De Weerd: This will escalate the price of that land.
Hawkins-Clark: It all gets down to the line for that. Its really - I don't know if you call
it Kuna, Kuna is in a fight with ACHD about these collectors because they really want
to see them at the half-mile. They believe that is the answer to relieve arterial
congestion is to get these at the half mile. As the notes say, the second bullet, they
must be continuous through the whole mile but doesn't preclude the integration of
traffic calming measures nor - then we added something over here. Nor does it mean
they have to be straight. The idea is you can go through, you might curve, you might
jog, but you don't get halfway in and you are stuck. You have to be able to get
through, like a Chateau kind of thing. You don't really think of Chateau from Ten Mile
clear through as a collector but you can get through -
De Weerd: 'A lot of people do. (inaudible) I hope they put stop signs. Stops signs,
yeah right. Greg told me he is going to go steal a couple.
Corrie: Yes, I talked to him the other day and they are thinking about doing the study
right now to make those collectors and we might get a stop sign. Finally after five
years.
De Weerd: We are going to get a stop sign?
Corrie: Yes I think so. And Tully park, that is rapidly becoming a collector.
De Weerd: What do we want to do with this?
Hawkins-Clark: Essentially if you agree with keeping this in, it means we agree that
putting that street at the half-mile is a good idea but ,it, is obviously means they are
designed differently than Chateau from the start. Even Pine. So page 72 is
essentially adding in they don't have to be straight. The first time kind' of implied that
and developers had a problem with that, that it had to be straight.
De Weerd: Can we go to page 59? It is just in there, level of services at the Parks. It
says it has been determined that an average five to seven acres of park space is
realistic. The Parks master plan says something different, so -- Well, I think five to
seven acres is impractical. You need to make it realistic.
Siddoway: Do you know what that number is, or do we need to check?
De Weerd: I think its four to five.
Nary: Or should we make a reference to Parks - (inaudible)
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 31 of 45
De Weerd: No.
Bird: Four.
Nary: Wouldn't it make more sense to reference the Parks Comprehensive Plan?
Bird: That is probably it. Which we haven't adopted yet.
Siddoway: Well this does, it gives a general overview.
De Weerd: And I say four to five to stay within the numbers they have talked about.
Siddoway: Okay, change five to seven to four to five.
De Weerd: I would love five to seven but it is not a practical idea. I know it is
supposed to be a vision and a dream, but it would really be a dream.
Hawkins-Clark: Page 7~ is pretty much all taken from COMPASS's recommendation.
It is laying out - we have the three transit centers there on the future land use map at
Ten Mile downtown and Eagle. So this page 73 would essentially accompany - that
thesewould be the polices to go with these three spots.
Bird: This was not discussed at the P & Z hearings - was there a reason or was it
just not brought up or what?
Hawkins-Clark: Well, the map has always reflected those from the beginning.
COMPASS submitted these later, these concepts.
Nary: Seems like in the public hearing process we have had here, I think there has
been some discussion about that - we have had something, but not a lot. I thought
we had someone talk about -
Bird: We may have but-
Nary: It wasn't a tremendous amount but I thought we had at least one person-
(inaudible)
Nary: I doh't think (inaudible) the comment was more of we need to think about that,
we don't know what is going to be there, know what kind of transit system is going to
be - but I don't think this says anything too-
Bird: Let's all say that what has happened is we have spotted those three places.
Corrie: (inaudible) page 6. (inaudible) I already did that twelve times. That is all
right, I was wrong because I didn't have one of the pages, so -
Nary: As the case they didn't give you all the pages. On this first one, Steve, now I
know this was the street connectivity, open space, pathways and density was what
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 32 of 45
those groups had come up with as a compromise to the whole idea on the
neighborhood centers and all that. But I guess I don't remember in the discussion
that they talked about any particular density. Other than it was talking about a little
higher density of the close in neighborhood centers, is that the intent of saying why it
would be no less than an R-B? Because it sort of loses the whole sense of what that
neighborhood center concept was to be. Is that the reason?
Siddoway: The neighborhood center concept has always at least eight dwelling units
per acre within that quarter mile radius. It wasn't - you are right - the density was
never specified. It was just an attempt to clarify.
Nary: What does it mean? If you just say density, what does that mean?
Siddoway: Just to point out, this was done independent of the mixed-use
classification map. If this gets adopted as is, this would actually conflicting. What is
written here in red is was what was proposed as part of the neighborhood center
concept. Orange. Eight dwelling units per acre is what was always required under
the neighborhood center concept as the minimum density for that quarter mile radius.
In the mixed-use classification map, we have actually gone a different direction. So
the question is, what do you believe should be required? If you look on the mixed
use mapthe yellow neighborhood centers that are the mixed-use neighborhood, say
they were three to eight, so three-eighths, the upper limit, not the minimum on this
mixed-use map. On the greenish ones. The mixed-use community neighborhood
centers, there could be as low as three or as high as fifteen units per acre. This was
just a first cut, but I would point out that if we do adopt that, as eight, we need to
change it in the mixed-use definition. Or if you like the mixed-use definition, you
should reflect it there.
Bird: Don't you believe that higher density around the neighborhood centers will
make them more successful and less problems? Who wants to build a $400,000
house next to some neighborhood center?
De Weerd: More incentive, too
Siddoway: And it gets more rooftops next to the commercial area which makes the
commercial more viable. '
Bird: I think that, not below eight, the R-B, but I would encourage like the R-10's and
up to the R-15's. .
Hawkins-Clark: I think the thing to remember is that we are not just talking apartment
complexes. There are myriads of things you can do, cottage homes, patio homes,
rows, four-plexes, yes.
Siddoway: I would also point out that R-B and eight dwelling units per acre are two
very different things. R-B at 6500 square foot lots is like three and a half to four units
'per acre. So eight dwelling units per acre is double what you see in a typical R-B
zone.
Meridian City Council Special MeBlIng
April 3, 2002
Page 33 of 45
Hawkins-Clark: The second red on that page, that was provided by the Building
Contractor's Association. That was Shari who wanted to make sure it was clarified in
these neighborhood center areas, that its - they don't want it to be public open
space. They want to be able to have the opportunity for just private otherwise you
run into the conflict with our parks Comprehensive Plan which is going for the larger
bigger, 25 to 30 acre community parks and the whole maintenance issue.
Siddoway: The impact fee is really the biggest one. We are requiring public open
space, they should get impact fee credits for it. If it was private, that is not the case.
Bird: I disagree. They are not going to be putting in a regional park, I don't care how
big they put in. They will put it on four or five acres at the most for an amenity to help
their subdivision, helps their development. I don't - I believe in the open space
should be provided and I am not for reimbursing at all for impact fees.
De Weerd: This could be a plaza, it doesn't have to be a park.
Bird: Why should they get reimbursed for park impact fees? It is an amenity that
helps that developer.
De Weerd: The open space must be provided it doesn't have to stay at the private or
public.
Siddoway: We would just strike the word public.
Bird: I still don't like giving back impact fees.
Siddoway: We don't. By striking this, you don't.
Bird: They are recommending that.
De Weerd: No they are not.
Nary: No, they are saying they are requiring itto be a (inaudible).
Bird: Just strike public. And strike the last, the discussion part.
Siddoway: Right.
Bird: I am sorry.
Hawkins-Clark: Again, on this neighborhood centers on this next red section. A
specific area plan, unless it has been adopted, neighborhood centers must be
developed under a planned CUP application. Then this part to be deleted. A concept
plan must be presented first then subsequent preliminary plat and zoning
applications, et cetera. It is a - it gets back to the time issue. If you require a concept,
it is a disincentive really. If they can conform to the - they want to just be able to
come in with the application right away and they don't want to have to have a
concept.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 34 of 45
Siddoway: The proposal in this case is to delete the red, not add it.
Nary: That provides that incentive that we talked about, the speed.
Bird: So actually, we (inaudible).
Nary: Yes.
Corrie: How about that -
Hawkins-Clark: This last bullet would be new, this was not discussed at Planning
and Zoning Commission. Commercial uses and neighborhood centers will have build
to Jines - those if you are not familiar, we are all familiar with setbacks, so you cannot
build past the setback line. The build to line would mean that a line is established so
that you have to bring your building up to that line. The whole idea is to create a
pedestrian atmosphere, so that if you are in the - particularly in these centers where
we are looking for some activity, the plazas, to encourage that atmosphere of wanting
to be along the street. If you had a parking lot when you are walking down the street
and then C1hundred feet back of the building -- it is less atmospheric.
Nary: It is a new urbanism idea, building the buildings next to the sidewalks and
having parking behind it.
Hawkins-Clark: it would just be for the commercial uses, so we may want to - since
we haven't - our neighborhood center ordinance would have to deal with that more
specifically on where that is.
Nary: Is it really necessary in the policy guide, or that just an ordinance?
Bird: I just really feel - why does it have to be in the policy (inaudible). I could see
some neighborhood parks where you have different build lines and it make go
around. The Spectrum is a very good example of how you go in there and they made
some really nice walks to this - walk around you hav~ all the shops and everything,
and they intermingle. Hyde Park is unique but they have the same build line. They
look at a park, the same build line. Everybody doesn't want to have the same build
line and I don't think we should make that a policy.
Siddoway:' I think this would set the tone or direction for that ordinance. There could
be some interest in else but-
Hawkins-Clark: We could just say will be encouraged to have build lines. That would
give flexibility.
Nary: But if you are going to pick that particular concept to highlight, why aren't we
with other concepts, the other types of incentive things we are going to create for the
'ordinance. Rather than picking and putting this one in the policy, I would rather not
have them. We would put them in the ordinance, because that is what we are really
looking at.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 35 of 45
Bird: Make a note to make sure that gets in the ordinance, in the action things we
talked about.
Hawkins-Clark: Page 87 is just including the section from the map, information from
the map in the text. So if you don't want to discuss the land use map tonight -
De Weerd: Let's leave that-
Bird: Let's leave that for the land use, if that is ok with you, President. That would
also affect page 89.
Siddoway: One thing that should be point out on these acreages on 89, the part that
is misleading here, these are accurate for the land use designations that show up on
the map, but what isn't reflected is the dots that float. The regional parks.
De Weerd: The floating dots.
Bird: The parks, yes.
Siddoway: The parks and schools. Wendell brought this up to me first, then Tom
Kuntz did also. He says, Wendell says, we will have way more than 362 acres in
public schools when this whole impact area is built out. We started crunching
numbers and said, you know you are right. What that number is, look at public
schools, which is this color, you come over here, say that one, that one, that one, that
one, et cetera, add those up and that equals that number. But these little schools
symbols, all of these areas, don't have acreages associated with them. They are just
a symbol. So we may need to tweak this still to reflect more accurately the number of
acres that are going to be in those uses.
Bird: You don't know where the high school is going to be, and that takes what, 40
acres? Grade school takes 15 acres, middle takes 25 or something like that. You
know they are going to be up there but you don't know where they are going to be.
Siddoway: Right so they are just symbols at this point. They will definitely have
significant acreage associated with them but they are not showing up on this table
yet. Because we simply did a calculation in Arc View based on - tell me how many
acres are in each of these uses. It told me and I wrote it down. But.jt is not just
capturing those that are just symbols.
Hawkins-Clark: Should be easy, the school district has clear standards for each
school.
Siddoway: It isn't going to be too hard, I am just saying we need to update it.
Nary: To follow up on that point, too, and I just hate these floating dots as everyone
knows. But if we choose to use them, we need to be sure that that dot, on that space
doesn't mean anything. But it would be a lot easier because we didn't really have it
Meridian City Council Special Me~L1ng
April 3, 2002
Page 36 of 45
clear enough in the old plan to be able to say, turn to page three, it tells you, that
green dot does not mean a park is on that corner. That is what it means.
Siddoway: There should be some sense of assurity - I think it should have a zone of
tolerance or something like that. Within - I would say, yes that symbol doesn't mean
that school is right there, but there will be a school in that section.
Nary: That is fine - just define that as well. That doesn't matter. I just want to be able
when someone is standing there saying where is my park, like this last one. Where is
the park that is planned at this site? You can say no, if you look on page three it tells
you that that was not what that was intended to read. It only meant that we would
have a park somewhere in the two-mile radius. (inaudible) No, I don't offhand, but I
just wanted - to follow up on the same thing with the schools, if we are going to
define that that 362 acres really only talks about existing schools, not proposed, we
are going to explain there are proposed sites on the map, that is what those mean.
We should have a place to explain all those proposed things are simply proposed.
Siddoway: A disclaimer about floating symbols.
De Weerd: In big letters by the floating symbol, please.
Nary: Speaking of disclaimers, since lawyers like to do that a lot, 91 is the same
conceptual map of neighborhood incentives that we talked about before. I think it
would be helpful again, and maybe it looks like a disclaimer to people but to
understand that this is a concept, it is not the concept. It is going to be driven by what
is brought forward and these are the general concepts we are looking for and the
ordinance is going to reflect those incentives. Again, so someone doesn't look at this
and say wait a minute, you don't have an elementary school here - they are not all
going to have elementary schools. Something to explain this is a concept, not the
only concept we are talking about. A different color, a different shade of green.
(inaudible)
De Weerd: Just like his cake comment yesterday.
Corrie: 94, yes (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Yes, lets see, number two on 94 is regarding the possible
employmeht Genter in the northwest quadrant there. So that, this is a strike, initial
planning reviews suggest that a feasible location for such a center would be the
southwest corner of McMillan and Ten Mile Roads. Probably too specific for a guide
like this. It was thrown out there early on by someone but David Turnbull does own
some property there and I think he (inaudible).
Bird: I think between him and Ed Bews, they own a lot of that. What is to say that
that is a feasible location?
De Weerd: You can just say that it is encouraged.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 37 of 45
Bird: That is what the main thing says, the city encourages. That is the way it
should stay.
De Weerd: (inaudible) employment center-
Siddoway: You know if you agree with that statement, then there is a question for
you next week - do you want to show it on the map or is it just a statement?
Nary: It is a statement until someone brings it in. and then we would be looking at
the annexation and zoning for it and then we would have the language that supports
it at the appropriate time.
De Weerd: Just important to encourage it. Say these are desires and goals of our
community.
Hawkins-Clark: Four - identify areas for industrial developments with adequate
public services. Do you remember where that came from?
Bird: I don't know why that would be in there.
Hawkins-Clark: Trying to think of where that came from.
Nary: Is that talking about - I mean it is a pretty general comment, that is the whole
concept of planning anyway, but is it trying to flush out like the industrial park type of
- (***End of Side Three***)
Siddoway: -- relates to it and it is more of a discussion for next week but Shari has
brought up the issue that right now on our map, we have only general industrial as far
as industrial land use designation. There may be a need to differentiate between
light industrial and the general industrial we would interpret as heavy industrial. In
other words, if someone comes in with a heavier industrial factory, there are certain
areas that you would not want that. There may be other areas where that is okay. If
you don't want that period, maybe make that light industrial. But right now it is all
general industrial and there may be an argument for diyiding that into light and heavy
or general industrial.
Nary: Like in these areas adjacent to residential areas, here they are not.
Bird: A good location I think is right down here on Ten Mile where that new
interchange is going. I could see that from Black Cat to Ten Mile from Franklin down
to the interstate as being light and heavy industrial, very heavy. When you get the
access to the freeway, on and off, I can see that one area, I don't see a lot of
residential value, I think that is a place that is Meridian's one chance of having an
industrial park, I think you do have to have a Iin.e between light and heavy industrial
Nary: So maybe amending four to say evaluating, the creation of various zones in
industrial or something like that would be something you want to have.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 38 of 45
Siddoway: Right now as far as zoning goes, we only have a light industrial zone. On
the Comprehensive Plan we only have a general industrial designation, we may need
to think of that.
Nary: Varying shades of gray. I don't know if I would leave four the way it is, I think it
is identical to five. I am saying that if we are going to - if we want to say, we want to
create varying industrial zones like having manufacturing versus something else.
When we talk about Utility Subdivision, we are talking about, although its classified
industrial, the majority of it is a parking lot. It is really not the classic industrial
manufacturing type of thing or even a transit type of thing or even a transit type of
industrial where you are having trucks and things that are coming and going and
dropping off products and things like that. So maybe that is a better use of four is to
identify that maybe we would want to evaluate an ordinance creating a variety of
industrial zones and pick some location or whatever. It is just a concept idea, a policy
decision. We still have to do an ordinance anyway, but may be that is a better use of
four. I agree, I think four and five sound the same to me. We need to delete four and
make five four or take f~ur and recognize that we want to evaluate different types of
zones.
Siddoway: 'The next question is, can we just refine it at the zoning stages
(inaudible)? '
Nary: We may want to refine it on the map, but at the minimum we want to refine it in
the text, that we are going to create different zones. At least the map reflects that
those are the areas we identified as industrial. Now we may want to have a zone that
determines which is light and which is heavy and which are manufacturing and which
are not, which ones are parking lots?
Hawkins-Clark: Will likes the idea of keeping four.
Berg: We were just talking about four and five, I though four sounded better than five
- they were like (inaudible) but then I agree that maybe-
Nary: Having a policy statement is saying we are talking about creating a variety of
industrial zones.
Hawkins-Clark: Which would essentially be a new number five.
(inaudible)
Nary: Well, I hate to use words like heavy - like saying forced annexation, I like
voluntary annexation, something softer.
Siddoway: General.
(inaud ible)
Nary: She doesn't like the term heavy.
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 39 of 45
De Weerd: No, I said I don't want heavy.
(inaud ible)
Bird: Say Ron Yanke was to move his steel fabrication plant over here and stuff, you
have to have an area all by itself for that. You wouldn't want it - you can put a JABIL
in - yeah, you don't want to mix something like that in with a - or a window
manufacturer or a glass installation place or something. They have to be separated
from a high tech deal. You don't want it all- you have to have those -
Nary: Heavy seems to make some acceptable sense, I understand what that, but
maybe that isn't the right term. That is something we can refine later. Light makes
more sense.
De Weerd: Okay, lets move on.
Siddoway: In summary, keep number four, strike number five and replace it with
creative writing industrial zones.
Bird: Then We will reflect on the map.
Siddoway: We still have to go through that next step.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, use the word various (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Number three, under the goal two, is about the area of impact issues
that the Blaha Case brought up with Eagle in 2000. So this is trying - and I don't
know if you have any comments Bill, on that, but we thought that would best to take
out.
De Weerd: Can't you put something to talk about working with Ada County within our
area impact to have orderly growth and allow the City to comment on development
applications. And somewhere in the Planning and Zoning recommendations, I see
they took out (inaudible) and I want to make sure that gets back in. I read it in the
paper.
Bird: What was the Blaha case?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, it kind of depends on who you ask. I
think one of the ways is to seek and have Ada County draw up (inaudible)
subdivision ordinance for development within Meridian's area of impact. So that those
things are consistent (inaudible) so the urban service planning area is not detracted
from but expanded (inaudible). You could have some issue on water and sewer and
if the city was to lose the right (inaudible) which was to impose these subdivisions
that make sense. (inaudible) Blaha case is really simple (inaudible) area of impact
(inaudible) which said that new growth had to approve the subdivision in the area of
'impact (inaudible) Approved really meant modeling. Eagle didn't have a legal stand
(inaudible ).
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 40 of 45
Siddoway: Let me take that one step further. Anna Powell is no longer at the county,
but when she was there and when we were working on the landscape ordinance, she
had suggested to me that we could actually amend our area of impact agreement
and ask the county to adopt the landscape ordinance for any projects that they
approve within our impact area. That way when they are annexed, they comply
already with those standards. That could go with any number of ordinances, not just
the one we were talking about at the time.
Bird: Just like what Will said about our subdivisions.
Nary: That is what the City of Boise has.
Bird: Is that what Boise does?
Nary: But they don't like this, this comment thing has become a real burr to deal with
as well for Boise, because the Boise City Council has said, you know, since it is just a
comment, and the County is free to ignore it. They didn't really want to take up hours
and hours of Council meetings for something that really doesn't have any impact. But
yet some folks on the Council have said, those folks that do live in the county, will
eventually be part of the city. So they should have the ability to give comment and
we can give it back to the county. If county ignores it, they ignore it. so it has been
hardtoput a handle on how to deal with it, and Bill is right, the case says really, it is
just a comment, so how much commenting do we want to have? And maybe the
better avenue is to do that - to seek with the Commissioners, an amendment to the
area of impact agreement, include those things, adopt our ordinances.
Bird: Do we need this in here? I don't think you would say coordinate.
Smith: I'm sorry?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I would suggest we coordinate with
Ada County to amend the city and county area of impact agreements to require
Meridian land use standards for all development in our area of impact.
Hawkins-Clark: That would cover us for landscape ordinance, subdivis)on ordinance-
Nichols: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, at least one sentiment I want to
suggest is that we actually prepare an ordinance before the county, and if they will
agree to th'at, that it say Meridian Area of Impact Subdivision Ordinance, so that the
county adopts it but its all of our standards. They have adopted it as an ordinance not
by referring to ours, but actual adoption.
Bird: That is a good idea.
(inaud ible)
Hawkins-Clark: Sounds like we need to move in the back, move that to - I think its
intermediate now, which is a two to four year, we have immediate, intermediate and
long term, in the very back. Immediate is one to two years.
Meridian City Council Special Meellng
April 3, 2002
Page 41 of 45
Bird: Don't even come up with one to two years. How about three months?
Nary: Reflection may change by next January.
Hawkins-Clark: Page 95 - Mayor, are you ready to move on? Okay, 95, number nine
is essentially reflecting Utility Subdivision wording that you know all too well. I guess
we didn't actually put the wording in there, but if you remember it, it is something like
will encourage - the City may allow industrial to be adjacent to the Waste Water
Treatment Plant. May allow -
Nary: Immediately adjacent to-
Hawkins-Clark: That's what it was.
De Weerd: Why does he have anything past eight?
Hawkins-Clark: We wouldn't before, but now that it is actually approved, someone
has to put it in there. You just approved it.
De Weerd: It was for the 1993 Comprehensive Plan.
Hawkins-Clark: It was an amendment to the '93.
Bird: It don't have anything to do with the new one we are adopting. (inaudible)
Unidentified: Well, if you agree with it, you should probably-
De Weerd: Well, I don't. They did it. I just - let's just stop at eight. Why do you have
to say anything?
Hawkins-Clark: There will be some who assume that since it was just passed for the
'93, it will move automatically into the new plan.
Bird: All we did was change the text. But that was in the '93. Now we ,are involved in
the complete new one, and if we want to change that text back to whatever, we can
do it.
Nary: That is exactly right. That is all we told them, all we were doing, amending the
'93.
De Weerd: Because there was an application in front of us.
Siddoway: Regardless of whether or not that specific wording goes here, I think we
do need to decide what does go there. For the land use map or for -
Nary: And that may be a land use map discussion because the concern is these
folks based on that map, which talked about mixed uses and such, I think most of
them misunderstand that mixed-use would have allowed the type of development that
Meridian City Council Special Meeung
April 3, 2002
Page 42 of 45
is being proposed, that I think it is a discussion that needs to be had. If we are going
to make - again, since we have also included that we are going to maybe identify
what is light industrial, what is heavy industrial, what does that mean? I think it is not
a bad discussion to have, to say what exactly is our long-term plan around this plan?
Is the intent to have or create some buffers? We have a buffer here on the north.
Weill guess it's the south, where the storage units are. What is the rest of this area?
What is envisioned if at all, if anything, what is going to be there? And then have text
that supports what our intent is. Whether it is the same thing as (inaudible) or
something else. I think its not unreasonable because its something that long term,
with three sides of this area having residences on it, probably should think about
what we want it to say.
De Weerd: I thought we were doing the north Meridian area plan and we are leaving
that vague for the plan to fill it in, this falls within that area. there has been talk about
specifically having a work group sit down, look at this area and plan it out. I think to
be consistent with the rest of the north Meridian area, you can be vague.
Siddoway: If it was me, I would not ignore the north Meridian area in this plan just
because that one is out there. I think we make a decision -
De W.eerd: But you are not giving real specifics there.
Bird: I think there is mention of an overlay, was a suggestion, right Tammy? I think
we have to look at this map too, but we better - we have suggestions that the
developers will do this, put their money out, and I think we need to take a look at the
north Meridian plan as an overlay to this plan. I seriously do. Not that we should
ignore this one, but this one is going to be very important, because that is the boys
who have the money to do the playing.
Nary: My only thought is that if we are going to - and I think we I wouldn't say
committed, but we have given a lot of signals to the folks in this area that this map is
not maybe going to look like that anymore. It is going to look something more like this
requested change. Not exactly that but more that what that one is. We need to have
some text to support that. Other than that I don't care what the text is, but I think we
need to have something because its not unreasonable for the developers of that
corridor, two months ago, you changed this, if you are going to change it back, then
at least we should have the opportunity to have input about it. Sol think we should
have something making some references about it. But maybe 'again that is land use
map discussion.
De Weerd: It should because that is what those people were here to tell you, and we
shouldn't be talking about this right now. You can reference back to this particular
thing.
Bird: We will discuss this next week, I think Mayor, when we have our map. I am like
Tammy, I don't see why we need this number nine at all.
Smith: One thing that is really important, is that we protect our environment that we
have right now in the city. We get complaints as it is (inaudible). Land use beyond
Meridian City Council Special Meeting
April 3, 2002
Page 43 of 45
this corner and there was a considerable amount of time put in to resolving what was
being proposed there on that previous application. I hate to see all that tossed on the
side. There was a lot of discussion, a lot of thought, that is what I am concerned
with, and how it is going impact us. John Shawcroft is familiar with Lander Street and
the amount of expense they go through and we deal with that too, just to control
odors, because of the environment around that plant.
Nary: There was a reason the West Boise Treatment Plant is where it's. (inaudible)
because there is not a lot of houses around.
Hawkins-Clark: I assume you are comfortable keeping just the discourage residential
in close proximity and then - keep that?
Nary: If we do anything, lets do it in relation to the land use map and make sure we
have supporting text. But other than that, I don't think we need to worry about it.
Hawkins-Clark: So as a result of the 1 yth,S discussion, we will reflect it in the text.
Whatever that discussion results.
De Weerd: 'Although I don't really mind the sentences in nine, I just don't think we
need to replace it with what was recently voted on.
Siddoway: You could almost keep nine.
Nary: The other says we would consider, and it is actually less that this. This actually
gives more encouragement to development than what we adopted.
De Weerd: We want a green floating dot.
(inaudible)
Siddoway: That would make Gary happy too.
De Weerd: I like that.
Hawkins-Clark: Okay, item four there. Basically this gets to the concept of do we
want to see on the land use map - granted the P& Z Commission went back and
forth about those, the movement of the urban service planning area. This does not
necessarily say to bring back that line. This just says, does the city want to
conceptually say, here is sort of an area, two miles, four square miles, five square
miles that we are encouraging growth. Essentially that happened with the White
Drain Trunk. Even though it wasn't on the map. And it's happening with the extension
of the north Slough across Eagle Road. But do we want to show it? South Slough,
right. Do we want to show it on the land use map so that when developers come into
the city for the first time, they look at the map and say this is -
Bird: Go back to the old adage that, if you show this is where we are going to
prioritize for the next six months or year or three years. That land price goes like this.
The same thing that ACHD don't like, where they are buying right-of-way. All the
Meridian City Council Special MeE;oLlng
April 3. 2002
Page 44 of 45
sudden it shoots up. In the first place, you know, we are having a lot of impact here,
with what is going big right now. Overland Road and Eagle. Look at Silverstone, look
at the one Winston just passed. We have one coming in on the old (inaudible) place.
Just - I hate to prioritize anything because all you do is help the price of land go up in
that area to unreal.
Nary: Realistically, the priority that I think we create is not in the growth. We don't
control the growth unless we are the ones footing the bill for the growth. We control
the growth in the things we control, which is the sewer and the water and fire
services, police services. That is what we control. So to me the priority we are setting
is what we set in our sewer plan. We can put the sewer out there and if they don't
want to build there, then there is no way we can do anything about it. But realistically
that is not what happens. We provide the sewer and most people want to build there
- that is how it works. But I don't think we need to put it in the plan. I think we
prioritize what we control. We control these other things, we don't control - we really
don't control growth, we control things that we have.
Hawkins-Clark: There are areas that we can incentivize. Is that a word? You can
incentivize growth. And essentially that is most-
Nary: Sure, most of it is that sewer.
Hawkins-Clark: -- capital improvement (inaudible) is what that is doing. So it's just-
Bird: But you are prioritizing - you are not just setting in one area? Like Bill said, we
control ourselves by how we get the sewer out there, when we get the sewer out
there and that is about the only control basically we have and -
Siddoway: Then we control what it looks like in terms of lot sizes and stuff like that.
Bird: Yes, and stuff like that when they are going in with their application.
Nary: And then the next step, the incentive things we were talking about for certain
areas, then maybe we will - then again we are not controlling the growth. We can
make people build stuff unless we are going to foot the bill for it.
Siddoway: So delete number four?
Nary: Yes'.
Corrie: (inaudible) motion if you want to.
Hawkins-Clark: the appendix is not redlined but it essentially does have proposed
changes that are this text and I guess if you want to leave that for us. Most of those
are trying to delete duplications
'Siddoway: Redundancy.
Meridian City Council Special Meellng
April 3, 2002
Page 45 of 45
Bird: Yes, like Tammy brought up, Old Town is in there five hundred times and its
duplication, a lot of it.
Siddoway: Some of it is for the Historic Preservation Commission.
De Weerd: Did you get the two new members on that?
Corrie: Yes. Lila Hill is still debating whether she wants an architect on there - I cant
find one so I told her we are going to have to go with what we have got so (inaudible)
and I can't get anybody - nobody wants to commit to that much time. The two people
which added to the (inaudible) was (inaudible).
De Weerd: Isn't Malcolm an architect?
Siddoway: Did you get an application from Tony Hickey, do you know? For the
Historic Preservation? He called me and I referred him to Anita.
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we adjourn.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: 'Motion made and seconded to adjourn, all those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:50 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)