HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003 04-29 Joint Planning & Zoning
Meridian City Council and April 29, 2003
Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
The Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
was called to order at 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, April 29, 2003, by Mayor Robert
Corrie.
City Council Members Present: Mayor Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Keith
Bird, Bill Nary, and Cherie McCandless.
Planning and Zoning Commission Members Present: Keith Borup, David
Zaremba, Leslie Mathes, Mike Rohm, and Jerry Centers.
Others Present: Brad Hawkins-Clark, Gary Smith, Bruce Freckleton, Bill Nichols,
Nick Wollen, Mike Worley, and Will Berg.
Item 1. Roll call:
X Tammy de Weerd X Bill Nary
X Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird
X Mayor Robert Corrie
X David Zaremba X Jerry Centers
X Leslie Mathes X Michael Rohm
X Chairman Keith Borup
Corrie: Okay it’s 6:00 and this is the City Council Planning and Zoning
Commission Joint Workshop and Special Meeting on Tuesday April 29, 2003 at
6:00 P.M. at the Meridian Police Station Conference Room. At this time, I will
open the City Council part of the Joint Workshop and have roll call then we’ll
have Keith you can open up the Commissioners then we’ll start the agenda. At
this time, Will have we got the –
Berg: Yes.
Corrie: -- okay roll call of the Council please. Okay Keith.
Borup: I would like roll call for the Planning and Zoning Commissioners.
Item 2. Introductions:
Corrie: Introductions. Is anybody here that doesn’t know who’s here?
Borup: That bald headed guy over there.
Corrie: If you’re not here speak up.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 2 of 62
Berg: Does everybody know our attorney’s?
Nichols: Mr. Mayor I asked Nick Wollen to be here for a little bit. Some of the
Council Members may not know him but he’s one of the associates in our office.
He attends lots of P&Z Meetings. I asked him to be here for – he can only be
here for a short time and maybe that will be long enough tonight we don’t know.
Anyway, I asked him to be here.
Corrie: Well we’ll run a tight schedule and we can get out of here by 6:30.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Item 3. Discussion of Prioritizing Ordinance Changes:
Corrie: Okay at this time, our first item on our discussion is the discussion of
prioritizing ordinance changes. I will entertain our Planning and Zoning Planner
III Brad Hawkins-Clark if you would like to take this (inaudible) one priorities and
information which ever way you want to do it here.
Hawkins-Clark: Maybe I’ll move around for both is that appropriate.
De Weerd: You going to move to the head of the class?
Hawkins-Clark: We’re talking about the two-page list I guess that was attached
to the agenda. Would you like just kind of a run down from us as to what this is?
Corrie: Right.
Hawkins-Clark: Okay. Our first crack at what you’re looking at happened over
the meeting the start of the Strategic Plan process. A part of that basically forced
all the departments below yet where are what and we going exactly what are we
going to accomplish. This was taken out as kind of a sort of a piece of that.
Internally we’ve sort of broke down and prioritized into these two Tiers.
Obviously the dates are tweaking a little bit but our goal was – the date that you
see there was the goal for us internally to have a draft prepared, all researched
or some kind of amendment that you see here that the Legal Department would
have received our first draft and made their comments. We would have
integrated their changes and then actually set the hearing date. Our goal was to
thth
have all that done by April 15 with Tier one priorities and October 15 with Tier
two priorities. As you can see on the Tier, one I think we’re doing okay. We’ve
got several of these that are fairly well on their way. One of the questions you
may be wondering well how did we decide which ones to put into which Tier?
That was largely partly and mainly because of the number of problem children in
the code, I guess. The P&Z Commission has unfortunately not had the chance
to look at varying block length Variances but I guess you usually recommend it
though and seen it to a certain degree but the City Council has done a lot of
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 3 of 62
those. That’s one example we’ve kind of moved it up. We actually do have a
draft of that done. To kind of go down this list sort of point by point I don’t know if
you would like to do that Mayor.
Corrie: To go down –
Hawkins-Clark: Just kind of if there’s any sort of discussions about what we’re
changing or why we’re doing it we could do that.
Corrie: Would that be okay with everybody?
Hawkins-Clark: With the Air Quality Enhancement Ordinance has been before
the Council on the agenda for several times now. That actually is an amendment
that was brought to us in part by COMPASS to bring – to help bring the valley to
a certain standard in terms of air quality. It really has three main components,
covered loads, on site suppression of dust and track out. Start looking at mainly
construction commercial sites and some standards for those to help them to
reduce – it largely is at the what we – if the contractor pulls the Building Permit
we’re asking them to also come in and basically fill out an air quality dust
abatement kind of permit so that we know who to contact. It’s basically going to
be a complaint basis. If the neighbor has problems with dust coming in on their
porch et cetera and they call up, we have a reference point of who to contact. At
this point, it’s written in there as the general contractor. We would then basically
let them know there’s a problem et cetera here are our recommended standards
for you to comply with. These – the enforcement is largely intended to be at this
point you know fairly loose like that.
Centers: Will that be a surprise to the developer or do adjoining agencies require
this too.
Hawkins-Clark: Boise City has had for a few years maybe Public Work’s has had
that. The Association of General Contractors the Building Contractors
Association and the Ada County (inaudible) have all looked at it and made
comment. Their position is basically they don’t want to do anything that the feds
don’t require that they want to – that’s in a nutshell. Frankly it does kind of come
down to the City of Meridian whether we want to choose to take a little bit of a
lead on some of these because it is fairly, fairly new. The track out component
they’re pretty used by Boise City, as I understand am I right Bill.
Mathes: Is that the (Inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Right.
Mathes: Can we do anything about the soccer fields?
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 4 of 62
th
Hawkins-Clark: That one we have again on the May 13 City Council which I
guess actually it will be the first time that it would be opened up if the meeting
opens up but it’s mostly (inaudible). The Administrative Lot Split Ordinance has
been drafted. I think Bill Nichols has met with Wendy. She did quite a bit of
research. We’ve go that drafted and should be set for a hearing probably in late
June at this point. At least we’ve got all of our meetings set up for the first P&Z
Commission Meeting in June but this can potentially be the second (inaudible) if
that’s something that we can get done.
Borup: Could you elaborate on that for a bit?
Hawkins-Clark: On the administrative lot split? Yes –
Borup: Is that going to be done on staff level do you think?
Hawkins-Clark: Correct yes. It would allow a parcel that has been basically in
the same configuration since the adoption of our Subdivision Ordinance in April I
think it’s April of 84’. If somebody comes in and they have a piece of ground, it’s
annexed it’s been in the city in the same configuration since 84’ they would be
allowed administratively without doing a plat to split their property once. As long
as it complies with minimum frontage with lot, size.
Centers: You wouldn’t require an annexation?
Hawkins-Clark: No they would still have to (inaudible).
Borup: Did you look into including – would it be appropriate to have lot line
adjustments in that same time?
Hawkins-Clark: Actually we allow those right now administratively.
Borup: Lot line adjustments?
Nichols: There’s one essentially and that is the boundary if it’s a platted lot –
Borup: But a platted lot you can do a lot line adjustment.
Nichols: (inaudible) is we might have a subdivision up against a platted lot into
adjusting that (inaudible). We talked about cleaning that up to where we can
adjust the boundaries of the plat. The administrative lot split – you’ve had
situations like this come up in City Council with the medical facility. They came
up with the school district and SSC (inaudible) didn’t really have a way to deal
with it so (inaudible). We’re working on that.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 5 of 62
Centers: Brad excuse me again I guess my question was, was that the five-acre
parcel in the County the one to be annexed. Can they utilize this rather than
filing a plat?
Borup: To do a two and a half acre (inaudible).
Centers: Right like the Bleak Subdivision.
Hawkins-Clark: Well the RUT has a minimum of five-acre lot size so yes Ada
County would – if they want to do anything in the county they’re stuck. Yes, if
they want to annex potentially they could. We’ve got a set of (inaudible). They’re
still going to need to have a licensed surveyor prepare the record survey and you
know our City Engineer is going to be involved in the review. Basically, it shades
off a whole lot of time. The North Meridian Area Plan we won’t be able to talk
th
about it too much since it’s in process. That is continued to the May 15 P&Z
Hearing. The Sign Ordinance Amendment we had a committee of a couple of
sign company representatives. Commissioner Zaremba was on that committee,
Malcolm MacCoy was on that committee and a few others. There is a list of
changes that we have had problems with during sign permit processes that we
feel is really going to help to clean up the ordinance. It’s been in affect a couple
of years so we kind of anticipated that we would probably have a lot of tweaking
to do throughout the process. That’s basically what that tries to do.
Nary: So that’s the trouble (inaudible) we’ve had for some of (inaudible) soccer
field that’s out on Eagle Road and the one that’s over by Bear Creek. It’s very
crowded. Those types of Variances is that what that’s trying to prevent
(inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: There will be – right a couple of those. The Subway that was
looking for a much taller sign than what – they tried to rezone and get a taller
sign do you remember that? This was in front of the P&Z Workshop I believe
quite a while back. We met – yes, we met four I guess five times total. There’s
some – the sign companies have made several recommendations to us for ease
and of use of the code as well as what they feel would help them. Along I-84
bring in a little bit of larger sign which actually this didn’t do that – the approach
was at the interchanges to kind of expand the allowable height to go higher
around the interchange. We took a radius of I think it was 800 feet (inaudible)
from the center of the interchange to 800 feet around. Essentially anybody that
falls within that radius would be able to go with the sign that’s larger (inaudible).
That was part of – like I said there are several process changes. We need to set
that for a P&Z Hearing.
Zaremba: I think that was suggested by some (inaudible) one way to capture
business off of the freeway. Along the freeway corridor we already had the
existing ordinance that says that 300 feet either side of the right of way larger
signs where all we were doing is applying that same rule to expand the circle
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 6 of 62
around the interchange. (Inaudible) drive by if they didn’t know this business was
there.
Nary: About how much taller.
Zaremba: I think all we did was just expand what was already there for the 300
feet. That puts that 40 feet (inaudible).
De Weerd: So you just extended the area further than the height.
Zaremba: Yes I’m making a new rule this is just adding this area without the
intersection’s 300 (inaudible). Just expand the interchange (inaudible). The
other thing that was a big (inaudible) the existing ordinance allows 25 percent of
a freestanding sign of the one that’s on the building. The one that’s out the
parking lot by the street to handle moving (inaudible) and a couple of us have
been startled by a few people who have put in things (inaudible) colors and
flashing.
Nary: Wendy’s.
Zaremba: Wendy’s being the prime example. Our discussion and I’ve been the
one probably pushing it most is to say that if you have that kind of a sign it has to
remain stationary for five seconds. I think what we ended up with is that you had
one second to change it and then it has to remain stationary again for five
seconds so that it’s not a distraction. The Wendy’s on in particular that you’ve
got an intersection that’s confusing to begin with to have people – it’s doing it’s
job it’s attracting people but they’re just suggesting anywhere in the city that the
message has to remain stationary for five seconds. Then if you want to
(inaudible) away or whatever you want to do you have a second to complete that
but no flashing and no changes for five seconds.
Borup: How did they respond to that?
Zaremba: They were willing to go that their response was within the allowable
message – changeable message larger.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Zaremba: We made a compromise (inaudible) instead of 25 percent to 30
percent or something like that.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes I think it’s currently 20.
Bird: (Inaudible) itself but (inaudible) flashers and stuff like that (inaudible). I
know we had some problem out at Hollywood Video (inaudible) it had flashing
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 7 of 62
lights around their windows on the outside around their sign. (Inaudible) I think
something (inaudible) I think you look into it the way (inaudible).
Corrie: It’s nothing (inaudible) Jackson’s Service Station get that sign.
Hawkins-Clark: Before we had an ordinance.
Zaremba: I think that was before we had the ordinance.
Bird: They had it before we granted it.
De Weerd: (Inaudible).
Nary: I think it was before the ordinance (inaudible).
De Weerd: Yes, we only were under the International Building Code and sign
inspection and that was a lot.
Bird: (Inaudible) like David said it helps the business I mean you know they’re
leaning against everybody else along that freeway and (inaudible). The Mayor
and I voted (inaudible) for the McDonald’s sign to keep (inaudible) sign there.
That’s the name of the game is getting people off of there and (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Our struggle has been with enforcement at this point I mean it
says no flashing. Does that mean once every three seconds or 10 seconds?
Bird: What I was told anything that flashes (inaudible) privacy. I think it’s just
something (inaudible) just like you said you know you can enforce somehow.
Borup: Maybe that needs to be cleared up in the definition.
Bird: Mr. Nichols (inaudible) right Bill?
Nichols: Yes I just don’t want to confuse it with the Indecent Exposure
Ordinance.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Member)
De Weerd: Not a trench coat it’s a sign.
Corrie: I (inaudible) my trench coat (inaudible).
De Weerd: Okay moving on.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 8 of 62
Hawkins-Clark: (Inaudible) we can happily say it’s done and published. That is
on two weeks City Council Agenda I think. Ada County Commissioners are
coming over –
th
Corrie: The 13.
th
Hawkins-Clark: The 13 so that along with the Comp Plan will be discussed at
th
the 13. The area of impact boundary adjustment is and Gary could correct me if
I’m wrong but I think this in some ways started with when the City Engineers got
together between the City of Meridian and Boise City to look at the shared
boundary between Boise and Meridian and sort of evaluate the ability to sewer
certain sections of that boundary. They came back after that meeting with five or
so areas where it made sense from the sewer service ability standpoint to say
this actually should go to Meridian and this actually should go to Boise. There
are a few areas also that the subdivision Muir Woods for example down south of
Overland is I mean 90 percent of the subdivision is in Boise City but about 10
percent is in our area of impact. According to the boundary that’s set –
Nary: So it’s actually served by Boise City?
Hawkins-Clark: Yes it’s served by Boise yes.
De Weerd: That’s all right I’ll (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: So that was sort of where that started. Since we’ve looked at it a
little bit further and found that there are some other you know a few other areas
where it makes sense for one of the two cities to take it on. The understanding
now is for example if it’s in Meridian, it should go to Boise City. Boise City
essentially won’t take any action until Meridian moves on it and likewise Boise
City will need to take the action because they’re the ones that are going to
(inaudible) it’s currently in their area of impact. There is a couple of others well
there’s one fairly sizeable 42 acre (inaudible) I’m not sure what language that is
but it’s a 42 acre parcel then it’s kind of on the east side of the Touchmark
Project that’s actually Boise City right now. There’s a stretch there that the
Ridenbaugh Canal would make the most of these – what Public Work’s and I feel
like would make the best boundary. Right now the Ridenbaugh it just the area of
impact boundary kind of goes on one side of the Ridenbaugh and the other you
might as well make the canal boundary. It’s too big to really look at boring under
and pursuing things like that just to serve a few acres. There are several sort of
cleanups in that area south of Overland it might make sense for the City of
Meridian to prepare application to release property to Boise City. This is the city
initiated we’ve got most of the mapping I think looked at. Some conversations
have pretty much already taken place with the staff over there.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 9 of 62
Zaremba: Isn’t Boise City moving their half of the (inaudible) also. I would
assume once the two cities act it has to go to the County right because they’re
the ones that (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: They are right.
Zaremba: And with those – if Meridian initiated and Boise initiated get to Ada
County at the same time?
Hawkins-Clark: That’s a good question. We haven’t really worked out that
timing. A renegotiation meeting with the Ada County Commissioners has to take
place and I’m sure they would prefer for it all to happen.
Borup: Technically, Boise City doesn’t have to act on it do they? It would just be
out of our area of impact and it would stay in the County. I don’t know does it?
Zaremba: Well the parts they’re giving up they will have to act. The parts they’re
receiving.
Borup: Oh I didn’t know they were giving up anything.
Bird: Yes they’re going to give up something. Boise’s got 13 acres in the
(inaudible) Crystal Heights.
Hawkins-Clark: Crystal Heights right.
Bird: (Inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Anyone else on that one?
Borup: Is that supposed to be set for do you know what month?
Hawkins-Clark: We don’t have that nailed down. I guess that was some of what
our hope at staff was to kind of come out of this meeting was to kind of get you
as the decision makers your feedback to us. Kind of, say well we feel that this
should be put ahead of this and this is more of a priority.
Zaremba: I would say if it was based on the engineering studies and not based
on politics, it’s almost a slam-dunk it’s probably (inaudible). I’m personally not
speaking for all of the Commissioners but I would be willing to take the experts
opinion on how that change ought to happen. I’m not sure that needs to be a
long hearing.
Corrie: I think Brad (inaudible) is pretty cut and dry. I mean everything on that
he said that’s there’s and (inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 10 of 62
Zaremba: If the decisions made based on engineering you know gravity sewer
goes this way and this way from the hill, this is Boise and this is Meridian.
Corrie: That was the County Commissioners main stay was that’s the way
(inaudible) sewer.
Zaremba: I don’t see that being a particularly long discussion.
Nary: Yes I think these particular ones don’t really have any political mess to talk
about other than (inaudible). These things are more (inaudible).
Zaremba: For P&Z that could definitely be (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Bird: (inaudible) that goes through like (inaudible) on the hill there on Cloverdale
and (inaudible). It runs through, comes down and drops over the Van Auker’s –
Hawkins-Clark: In the Van Auker’s there yes.
Bird: -- goes down in the drainage. I bet you go out there it’s not much farther
than a quarter mile (inaudible) it’s not much farther than that. They’ve already
got a quarter of a mile this side of Cloverdale. (Inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: One area that could have some political overtones to it is the
area on the east side or west side of Eagle Road where Boise City is already
annexed and they’ve built some office buildings on there between Ustick and
McMillan on the west side of Eagle Road. That line up there was established in
97’ and there remains some kind of strange areas in parcels that Bruce and I
were talking about the other day. Maybe if I’m hearing you right maybe we
should leave some of that. I mean certainly we would (inaudible) than just do it
all (inaudible). We want to just to the engineering related to this. Of course, we
have the south boundary that there are some areas too. Lee Centers here when
he called it, it used to be Powder River yes. That raised a whole another
question about the area of impact down there. Our thinking was to just deal with
the shared boundary between Meridian and Boise now. (Inaudible).
Bird: Brad what backs up onto Ustick between Ustick and McMillan on the west
side. In there by where the Ustick Baptist Church was built, you should talk
about (inaudible) everything. Meridian (inaudible) – when we lost all the
Centennial High School and everything that was lost in the late 80’s early 90’s
that was – I mean that (inaudible) for two or three years (inaudible).
Borup: I think they could bring it up in the meeting and take a look at it. At least
decide whether we want to perceive with that or leave it for another time. I think I
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 11 of 62
would like to see that at the same (inaudible). If nothing, else just as well be
familiar with it or are there some things to work out on that?
Hawkins-Clark: No I mean the application that we’re preparing would just you
know have a map attached at each of these eight or nine areas along the whole
share boundary would show movement at the line. That of course we need to
decide what for anything that we would receive later, what we would designate it
as in the Comp Plan. In some ways, that’s a little bit, more work but we could
change it to single-family residential, higher density, office, or anything that would
take. We can do that.
Zaremba: Would it make sense to just designate it as what’s already next to it?
Hawkins-Clark: Probably in most cases.
Zaremba: Whatever (inaudible) was expanding a little bit just that same concept
(inaudible).
De Weerd: Are all the property owners going to agree with that?
Hawkins-Clark: I don’t know if all – I mean certainly the Muir Woods and the two
that are already in most of the city limits kind of they’re caught more. I don’t
believe we’ve contacted the property owners on a couple of the ones that I’ve
(inaudible) on. I don’t think we have.
Nary: Brad, remember what you were talking about you’re (inaudible) I mean
there is an issue that Commissioners (inaudible) maybe the system wanted to do
right now, because it’s so (inaudible).
Zaremba: Yes it’s written up in a way that it’s separable I guess is the word.
There are eight items and we can pass six of them with two of them off or
something instead of having to put the whole thing on.
De Weerd: And as long as the property owners are notified.
Hawkins-Clark: Sure.
Zaremba: On the south and does Kuna’s area of impact touch ours out there or
is there some kind of gap that we’ve seen?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Zaremba: So there’s not an issue there?
De Weerd: It depends on how they amend their –
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 12 of 62
Corrie: Our area is (inaudible) and everything else they don’t really want it either.
It’s no mans land right at this point. Until we get a sewer system that, the both of
them work together that’s going to be a very difficult area.
Hawkins-Clark: The G there this has already been through the P&Z Commission
I wasn’t at that meeting but that was passed the loopy.
Corrie: What is a loopy?
Hawkins-Clark: The loopy we could call it that Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act.
De Weerd: And when is the first hearing?
Bird: They’ve already had it.
De Weerd: They’ve already had it?
Borup: All I did is just added two more zoning classifications as allowable uses in
there – or as Conditional Uses.
Nichols: I think it was three divisional areas where churches could do
Conditional Uses.
Borup: Yes that’s all it –
De Weerd: So now it comes to us and when will that be in May?
Hawkins-Clark: It’s been set but yes, it will be in May I don’t know when. H, the
Variance Block Length Amendment is actually fully drafted. Dave finished that
today. We’re still sort of looking at it at a staff level. Basically what he’s got in
there right now is approach to sort of set an average block length and they would
kind of be tied to zones. For example in R-2 where you have 18,000 minimum lot
sizes in your blocks or 10 houses in a row with 100-foot minimum frontages you
have 800 feet right there. It’s going to be – it makes a little more sense probably
in a real low density zone to have you know larger blocks versus you know an R-
8 to allow 25 homes on the same block. It’s tied to density and it kind of goes
with an average. It separates the perimeter block line from the internal block
lines so –
Zaremba: So that the perimeters can be longer.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes. You know ACHD’s –
Borup: That’s the thing that’s never made sense to me.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 13 of 62
Zaremba: Yes with ACHD’s requirement for minimum access .70 so feet it’s
been killing us. Boise City doesn’t even have a block length.
Bird: Dave do you or Brad you’re going to make this within the (inaudible) staff
amendments are you guys going to be able to do the variances of blocks by this
ordinance? I mean they’ve always got to find a (inaudible) come back but I just
don’t see any sense of (inaudible). You’ve always given us a recommendation I
think we’ve always wanted recommendation and you can give us the
recommendation (inaudible).
De Weerd: Yes and the (inaudible).
Bird: If they don’t like your decision they’ve got that final thing (inaudible). It’s
just like CUP’s (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: I know it’s not under drafted that way right now but we can
certainly (inaudible) because right now it can just –
Bird: All the other Council and Mayor feels or the Planning and Zoning
Commission might feel that what you can do at staff level on something like that
is very, very good.
Borup: Now I thought you were doing an ordinance change for part of it too to
allow –
Bird: That’s what I understood.
Borup: -- it’s an automatic increase so it wouldn’t be a Variance unless they want
to go beyond the door right Brad?
Nary: And maybe we (inaudible) I guess I don’t feel as comfortable for the staff
to make the Variance decision because to not have to obey the City Ordinance
should be the Council’s call. What I would prefer is the door plural in the
definition to be clearer and more practical so that we don’t have to have Variance
requests. I think Variances should come to Council. We should have all the
Variances because the definitions are unclear and it really doesn’t attempt what
we’re trying to do. Maybe I’m different then the Council Members but I think that
approval to not have to obey the City Ordinance should be the Council’s
approval.
Borup: I agree with Mr. Nary. The idea is an ordinance so it’s practical and you
don’t have all the –
Nary: Yes we want to get away from having Variances sign the Variances and all
of that and block length Variances. We don’t want Variances. Variances of the
State Code I think are pretty clear what you need to have. I think the problem
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 14 of 62
that we’ve got with these is we’ll really almost sort of winking at the fact that it
really doesn’t bend but it’s the only way to get it through parking lots so that’s
what we really need to fix. I don’t think we want – (inaudible) Variances at staff
level not that we want this to have to be Variances.
De Weerd: So just a better definition and clearer lines to that what few we do
see –
Nary: It’s truly a Variance if it fits under the State compliance.
Borup: If it’s coming through as a Variance and you approve it every time or 99
percent of the time –
Nary: No every time.
De Weerd: Every time.
Nary: I don’t think we’ve ever doubted one.
Bird: I don’t think we’ve ever turned one down –
Borup: So then it definitely should be changed.
Nary: Exactly.
Borup: Well you may have one that –
Nary: Not yet.
Borup: Not yet huh?
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Borup: And that was when they had no definition in the ordinance.
Nary: Actually, we’ve turned down other Variances just not for the block length
because it wasn’t very clear or practical in the application. We’ve turned down
lots of sign requests that’s why we’re doing this.
Zaremba: I like the idea of having block length defined by the zoning. Maybe it’s
different for different zones. The one thing I would say is get to the denser zones
are we looking for shorter block lengths. The shorter block lengths really make
more walkability and the more people I mean the denser we’re making the
project and more people we’re talking about. I think we would be fine by a
shorter block length.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 15 of 62
Borup: Yes I know you were saying 100 blocks from the building (inaudible).
Nary: The other thing I guess that I would suggest in looking at it both from the
staff level and Commission (inaudible) is Boise doesn’t have such a requirement.
That isn’t necessarily better but I also don’t see a whole lot of subdivisions in
Boise that have 50 houses on a block. Somebody could figure out that doesn’t
work so without even having such a requirement that it becomes such a logistical
part (inaudible) that work and doesn’t see the impact that we’re going to
(inaudible) maybe Dave’s not here (inaudible). I guess there was (inaudible) we
still have to approve the plat so he brings in some block that has 40 houses on it
may not approve it anyway (inaudible). I don’t know maybe that’s one thought
too (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: That’s definitely an option. The Fire Department in terms of
public health and safety concerns is I believe where Boise City Fire Department
largely sets the block length just by virtue of what they consider to be –
Nary: They use (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: -- proposed lengths the turn arounds.
De Weerd: I don’t know I think our Police Department will find that some of the
straight a ways the longer they are the faster the cars go. We’ve seen that on a
number of roads. Those are all considerations.
Borup: In the past that hasn’t been the block length that it’s in the (inaudible).
You can have four or five (inaudible) still all on one block.
De Weerd: Right it’s more the straight part.
Centers: (Inaudible) one issue about how you get a reading (inaudible).
Borup: I think ACHD has that same concern.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes they highly disagree with it the (inaudible) way up front.
They don’t have an established existence I don’t think.
Borup: They just don’t want the long strip over there.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes I think the only other thing I would point out on that is the
commercial and industrial zones I believe it was removed all together. That
came up on Winston’s El Dorado Subdivision of a piece. Where was he going
stub to Van Auker’s piece over there to the west? We had asked for two to meet
our ordinance but we ended up with just one at a half mile so that there would
only be one connection (inaudible). Like you say that could be dealt with during
st
the plat itself. The Fence Waivers Amendment is May 1 and that’s basically
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 16 of 62
probably you’ve already seen it but that’s also moving in away from having a
separate Fence Variance Committee that meets together. Gary is getting tired of
going to those meetings so we wound up (inaudible).
Nary: So is Cherie. As soon as we said you were going to get her off the
Commission, she stopped going.
De Weerd: Good (inaudible) friendly ordinance change.
Hawkins-Clark: Basically it’s just – I mean it still allows for an appeal of course.
De Weerd: I think that’s a high priority.
Hawkins-Clark: You think it’s high priority.
Nary: (Inaudible) been inactive already.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Borup: They’re still meeting.
Bird: Evidently Mr. Nichols has seen it.
Nichols: We actually redrafted this one a long time ago. I think the last
comments on it were from former Director Stiles and then we got some more to
finish the revision to it. It’s just a matter of getting into a process here.
Borup: I’ve been lobbying for this since six months after I was on the committee I
don’t know how many years ago.
***End Of Side One***
Hawkins-Clark: No it’s just the process stage. It says the City Clerk has to go
post every property personally. The Accessory Use Permit Ordinance
Amendments there’s a pretty sizeable change. It involves home occupations and
it involves accessory buildings. I guess those are the two big ones. Within those
– we decided to break out the daycares and that home occupation kind of
separate from other accessory dwellings and Accessory Uses. It has a really
different set of standards and different said of criteria all together in terms of what
a home daycare occupation has to meet for fire and other things versus other
kinds of occupations. We separated that out. We kind of just completely
reorganized it. It does talk about accessory dwelling units on the properties,
which we don’t have right now at all in our code. Right now if somebody has –
for instance if they want to take care of their aging parents the code says -- then
they want to just put them on a building behind their house today that says that
that second dwelling unit has to be the exact – it has to meet the minimum lot
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 17 of 62
size of the primary one. If you had a R-4 you had an 8,000 square foot lot the
only way you could put a second one on there if you have a 16,000 square foot
lot in order to do it. This kind of it really is geared more towards this segment of
the population demographics that kind of help to allow obviously within reason a
property to be able to put an actual dwelling unit which means it has a kitchen, a
bathroom on their property.
Borup: As freestanding a detached.
Hawkins-Clark: A detached freestanding obviously the sewer and water services
are going to have to be hooked up to it but it would allow that based on the
minimum lot size and they’re still thinking minimum square footage is (inaudible).
Nichols: It also applies to ones that are attached classing mother-in-law
(inaudible) situations or any (inaudible).
Borup: That’s allowable right now isn’t it mother-in-law apartment?
Hawkins-Clark: Well it depends on what you – we don’t define mother-in-law but
if you actually just take your garage –
De Weerd: That was good.
Centers: Well what you see the need for that did you have requests in most
subdivisions that’s not going to fly.
Hawkins-Clark: Well yes the CC&R issue –
Centers: Yes.
Hawkins-Clark: -- that’s just up to them.
Centers: Did you have –
Hawkins-Clark: We were getting – we have received I mean I haven’t counted
them indefinitely probably a dozen over the last couple of years. People that call
up and you know I want to be able to house somebody.
Nary: That’s the ordinance that you guys looked at and said what’s the guideline
exactly (inaudible).
Centers: My concern is to open up a can of worms if you hadn’t had that many
requests. If you have, it’s not going to be allowed (inaudible). On the Accessory
Use Permit they can – you’re still zeroing in on fire alarms it’s only applicable to
fire alarms?
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 18 of 62
Hawkins-Clark: Yes we’re proposing for the six to match State Department of
Health and Welfare.
Nary: That’s exactly what I was going to ask is seven is (inaudible) state to
license and all that so it seems kind of silly to have that six number in the larger
category.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes.
Nary: That’s silly.
Hawkins-Clark: Try to match that up. I mean this all kind of plays off well I don’t
know it’s been three or four years ago there was a committee that was formed by
the city to look at the daycare issues.
Nary: Is that for just the licensing or –
Hawkins-Clark: For the licensing issues.
Bird: For licensing.
Zaremba: I think on the extra building I can see the reason for doing it to have
senior parents that you need to care for or like the mother-in-law (inaudible).
Can we specify in the ordinance that this is not to be rental housing that the
occupancy must be related. Can that be in the ordinance?
Nary: It’s in Boise –
Nichols: (Inaudible) places it required some sort of joint hardship. I think that it
would be (inaudible) as currently worded the draft says it’s an owner occupied
house with an accessory dwelling unit. You don’t have rental A and rental B
you’ve got owner and rental.
Zaremba: But it still could be rented to somebody unrelated.
Nichols: You could (inaudible) circumstance but it has to be an owner occupied
house with a (inaudible).
Borup: Otherwise what do you do when the parents die, Tier it down?
De Weerd: Well we have a couple of those situations one off of Meridian Road.
Hawkins-Clark: Where there are currently two dwelling units on a single lot?
Borup: Boise has all kinds of –
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 19 of 62
Nary: They’re (inaudible).
Borup: What?
Nary: That’s where that says you can only have one unit.
Borup: Yes (inaudible) in town and anything over 50 years old has a lot of
doubled units on a lot?
Hawkins-Clark: Well we had a lot of discussion about it. The other couple of
requests that it’s related to is the handicapped if somebody’s unable to largely
live independently but still needs somebody close by.
Borup: And they want detached?
Hawkins-Clark: Well yes like Bill said some of attached.
Borup: Some of attached.
Hawkins-Clark: The Off Site Sale Ordinance I believe that was the one that was
issued by Mr. Chaplain. What we have found on that is that they’re actually at
least of the larger jurisdictions in this valley I mean there’s – they don’t have
guidelines for (inaudible) published in an ordinance. Largely if somebody wants
to do a three or four day or even up to a week off site sale from their primary auto
dealers where they have their dealer’s license (inaudible) somewhere else’s. It’s
just reviewed administratively. The administrator P&Z Administrative views it as
a reasonable use and the timeframe is just what’s set by code. They just allow it
as special guidelines. That’s – we would still need to change our ordinance to –
yes to –
Nary: Well that’s for license (inaudible) not for everybody with private parking
with a for sale sign on it this is for a licensed dealership.
Hawkins-Clark: A licensed dealership.
Mathes: Does that have to do with alcohol also? I mean (inaudible) some place
and selling them –
Nary: Different process.
Bird: Yes it’s a different process.
Borup: Have there been some requests?
Corrie: Yes we’ve had them already yes.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 20 of 62
Borup: Like one of the big parking lots –
Corrie: Like at the Intermountain Arms where three auto dealers put their used
cars there and Bodily wanted to do that one time and the State came down and
said you can’t have this unless Meridian okays it. We couldn’t have it because of
the ordinance so I carried the flack and said you can’t do it. My phone rang all
night and all morning but we need to do it some way to make it legal.
Borup: You might as well get them (inaudible) they always do in the fairgrounds.
Corrie: Have they ever allowed fairgrounds down in BSU parking lots yes.
Borup: Everywhere but Meridian.
Corrie: Yes exactly that’s what they came to me and said why not. I said I
couldn’t give them an answer other than it’s against the ordinance.
Borup: Is that still working on the draft?
Hawkins-Clark: Yes it’s – we probably would since we’re putting that one on at
the end of June though since it’s so simple and we don’t really – the main
questions on that is how long we’re going to do it for. That’s really, what’s
probably going to be everybody’s discussion. I think right now it’s at seven days
max. That – I’m sure we’ll get input from the dealers on that.
Corrie: Most of them I talked said that it was three to four days max. Three at
the most usually a weekend Friday, Saturday, and Sunday then they’re gone
Sunday night.
Bird: (Inaudible) RV for seven days.
Corrie: Well they probably will but that’s –
Borup: Yes they need three days if they bring them in and bring them out it’s
probably not unreasonable that’s (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: So what’s the (inaudible). Old Town Rezone did anyone happen
to attend last weeks workshop open house. I did have vacation for three days.
Yes, it was a house full I guess. As I understand, the main concerns are coming
from those that currently already have commercial and industrial of their property.
They considered (inaudible) concern about having the (inaudible) Broadway folks
that have on the south side of Broadway that have industrial zoned out to be
changed to an Old Town they consider (inaudible). There are a few others that
you know have commercial on Main Street closer to Cherry also in opposition.
Some residences their main concern is that commercial non-residential uses can
come into their area to their neighborhood. Really, this just begs the question I
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 21 of 62
mean ties into the MDC and what is the vision for the whole core of Meridian.
This is basically just an application to bring the zone into compliance of the
th
Comprehensive Plan. She has Old Town going out 4 basically on both sides.
Centers: If the existing use is residential and they want a daycare you’re still
going to have to get a CUP.
Hawkins-Clark: A daycare in that example yes.
Centers: Basically a use under that in residential (inaudible).
st
Hawkins-Clark: Yes we’ll have our Pine, 1, Meridian corridors that they
wouldn’t. There is some concern you know do we do the design standards first
so that there are some guidelines in terms of what structures would look like
before they had on the actual rezone.
Borup: You’re talking new structures I see not conversions on existing houses.
Hawkins-Clark: On design standards?
Borup: Yes.
Hawkins-Clark: No it would – has drafted apply to refurbishment and re-facing.
Borup: Required re-facing or not making –
Hawkins-Clark: No just, if they want to excuse me refurbish the building then it
would need to be done to the design standards rather –
Bird: Same things you have to do right now on our Landscape Ordinance. If you
build them up before the Landscape Ordinance (inaudible) put in a new sidewalk
(inaudible). The thing I liked about the workshop and I’ve heard it four to five
times is this is the first time downtown we’ve had people that’s got their money
invested down there (inaudible). Not one of us (inaudible) and these guys were
going to have the parking (inaudible). I did not get as much (inaudible). I think
the workshop (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Well we talked about –
Bird: I think we’ve got a list of those people who’s got their money invested down
there. (Inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: We do have two separate processes going on. One is the
design standards open house and we didn’t’ get any negative from that really.
Bird: And how do you know which one to go first on?
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 22 of 62
Zaremba: I would think you would go on the design first.
Bird: And I bet – maybe think back and say no I think we better go here.
De Weerd: I think if the goal is to ease the CUP requirements because that is
certainly the goal of the MDC Board and City Council you almost have to have
the design standards of a place first to ease that so you know what you’re getting
before you get a CUP.
Bird: Yes but Tammy then you’ve got (inaudible) into. If you’re rezoning it so –
De Weerd: And that might be a lot of it is your Old Town zone has to have clear
expectations or clearly defined uses allowed so that you can take the CUP off of
there. Because that’s the ultimate goal as far as you know as I understand it
from the MDC and the City Council perspective is we want to get rid of that CUP.
Borup: In Old Town.
De Weerd: In Old Town.
Rohm: You have to (inaudible) daycare within Old Town that by definition qualify
if in fact they make application. With the presumption that as long as they
adhere to the setbacks and the various other things within the ordinance they
would be able to proceed but then they have adjacent properties that oppose it
and it doesn’t move forward or it gets denied.
Bird: There are certain things you can – we understand you can take CUP’s off
of (inaudible) schools daycares is the other one. There are a couple three of
them. The basic ones that we’ve got – we’ve got everything in Old Town now
basically CUP’s.
Rohm: So no sign of a craft store.
Bird: (Inaudible) you know daycares, schools stuff like that you’re always going
to have CUP’s.
Borup: So this will take care of those little craft stores and small businesses.
Rohm: I have a little bit of a problem with that though. Just if it’s like a craft store
is acceptable to you, you, and you but I don’t like kids so I’m going to speak out
against a daycare when in fact, the applicant has made every effort to comply
with all of the intents within the ordinance. They’re denied almost without cause.
In my mind, that’s an unfair application of zoning.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 23 of 62
Centers: Well they’re hearing you talk about that Mr. Rohm is when you say
denied without cause we had numerous neighbors objecting.
Rohm: Yes.
Centers: With cause (inaudible).
Rohm: And Jerry that’s true but you know as I saw it the one neighbor was
bullying the balance of the neighbors.
Borup: That neighbor didn’t even live there.
Rohm: Yes and that made it even have the home the house was on.
Nichols: It’s something that’s going to come in front of us that hasn’t come in
front of us (inaudible).
Rohm: Oh I’m sorry.
Bird: Yes we can’t talk about it.
Rohm: This one was not content.
De Weerd: Was it withdrawn?
Nary: Was this the newer one or are you talking about the one from the –
Borup: It was denied.
Rohm: I apologize that was not content to bring up a –
Borup: (Inaudible).
Nary: (Inaudible) and they withdrew it. It’s not the one you guys denied they
withdrew it.
Rohm: And I don’t know where it went after we were (inaudible).
Nary: Two months ago.
De Weerd: No. Did you guys deny another one? Well point well taken. I guess
what we need to learn from this is some of these uses maybe need to be more
tightly defined so that the CUP process isn’t needed. The very contentious ones
that we traditionally like to have through CUP and maybe at some point we
should have a conversation on what that should be. In the interim I think a tightly
defined use or standards would help eliminate that and it can be done at staff
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 24 of 62
level instead of at P&Z and at City Council and really extend the time element on
those.
Hawkins-Clark: And there is something called performance base of zoning that
doesn’t try to list every single use in the world in your schedule and whether it’s
conditional or prohibited. It goes a completely different route and just sets up
actual performance standards and says okay it doesn’t matter what your use is if
you can do it under this decibel level and if you have this many vehicle trips per
day and you have this kind of truck traffic. It sets up basically a matrix of uses
and it just throws out the whole use table. If you meet the standards, you know it
happens administratively if you don’t it goes to hearing. I think that might be
something that we should look at especially for Old Town. It seems like the goal
is to overall reduce the CUP level. It certainly I think it is a disincentive to the
investment down there. I guess the takes care of the Tier 1. These weren’t
listed A through L in necessarily in order of priority but as you can see they’ve all
been in a sort of – that one point started or another. You know they’re at one
point of the process so the question before you all now is we want some of these
Tier 2 to move up to start working on some of these Tier 1 and stop doing
research and move a couple of these Tier 2 up or some of these other activities.
We can certainly do that otherwise what I’m hearing is we’ve got basically, we’ll
just move these on as listed up here as soon as possible. The Commission can
discuss if you want to have a Special Meeting on some of these that are separate
just to hear ordinance amendments.
Zaremba: That is the question I expressed. I think it’s been very helpful the way
you’ve been (inaudible) and I’m happy to see that all the priority ones is getting
attention to be being resolved. One of my special bugaboos is the Tier 2-H
industrial zone. I assume by that you mean the difference between Chapter 7
where it defines light industrial. Chapter 8 where there is no schedule of use for
light industrial. Is that what that subject is? I would more or less like to see that
be next in the (inaudible) somewhere that’s important actually setting up a
general industrial zone and the light so that there is really a distinction.
Corrie: That’s been a real problem the last nine years too. One thing we need to
look at pretty soon is the enclave too. We’re getting more and more of those.
Borup: Is this the five-acre (inaudible)?
Hawkins-Clark: Right.
Zaremba: I might be inclined to add one or maybe expend one with the
downtown Design Standards but it wouldn’t hurt us to have citywide businesses
because there are cities that have design review boards. It would be nice to
have something like that that had some (inaudible) in it. That’s just a personal
opinion.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 25 of 62
De Weerd: Yes since we’ve gotten all kinds of complaints on that old building
next to our park.
Corrie: I hear that.
De Weerd: Brad I guess if you’re asking on Tier 2 I think probably your A
downtown design standards is the closest one to move up into Tier 1. Since it’s
so closely related to the Old Town Rezone I would suggest that that be moved
into Tier 1 and have one of the other ones dropped down that isn’t as far ahead.
It looks like most everything is pretty much drafted in the Tier 1 is that correct?
Hawkins-Clark: That is correct yes you’re right.
Borup: Can’t you just move A up into there you were talking about that anyway.
I mean because it might want to be (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Yes. Our contract with the University of Idaho urban design
center on those design standards is probably another good reason to move it up
because we’ve already extended it once. Her scope of work was targeted to
have them done three or four months ago.
Nary: Just to follow up real quick on what David said. I certainly (inaudible) a
good decision we had about design standards I just don’t know what priority of
things that’s got to start somewhere. It started in Old Town I was hearing that the
future (inaudible). Maybe we could make that (inaudible).
De Weerd: Rick Hatcher and he’s out of town.
Bird: Who Rick Hatcher?
Borup: He’s the one that wanted –
Nary: Yes he was really for it.
Borup: Some of the experience I’ve heard with Boise’s I haven’t heard real good
stories.
Nary: Well I think the use is pretty limited and so if you really (inaudible) it
doesn’t have much impact. I think it’s good to start somewhere and having it in
Old Town then at some point in the future expanding them, you want the larger
area the least commercial areas and that’s fine. (Inaudible) it’s a pretty big
element to take one.
Borup: Well we’ve discussed in the past on some design review at Planning and
Zoning or P&Z Meetings. I’ve been having to do that for a long time. I’m not
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 26 of 62
sure – and we tried to sometimes I don’t think we’ve had anything real bad come
through other than I’m still thinking of one that I’m still functioning.
Centers: (Inaudible)
Borup: No I love that one.
Centers: That’s my problem with the design review board is –
Borup: Well one person – no there’s a Schuck’s store down the street that has
you know a few little windows in the front. We told them they need to change it
and he says I’m sorry we’re not going to that’s the way our national design is.
Maybe we shouldn’t have approved it but maybe we need to just take a little
stronger role in that but that’s going to do in every situation it’s already zoned.
We don’t see it it goes to the Building Department and that’s it. I’ve heard stories
on Boise like they were arguing telling people you know differentiating between
whether it was cedar or fir siding that went on the building which –
Nary: I didn’t say it worked I just said they had it you know.
Bird: There’s one thing about it if everybody by our new landscape ordinance in
five years we won’t be able to save the building anyway. It’s true.
Nary: We’re going to amend this.
Bird: The worst thing we’re going to have is when buildings are like right over
here built side by side and each of them has their 100 trees themselves and this
guys trees about to fall over on this guys roof and this guys trees are falling on
this guys roof.
De Weerd: We’re regressing here.
Nary: How do you feel about that Keith?
Bird: That’s the one ordinance I’m sorry I ever even voted for.
Borup: I’ll write that down.
Bird: In this design review I don’t want to be – I don’t want to see us tell
somebody how they can build a building. Everybody’s got their own taste in
buildings and what they want I’m sure Mr. Borup wouldn’t like me to design every
one of his houses they probably wouldn’t sell very fast.
Nary: (Inaudible) impressed.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 27 of 62
Borup: That is happening. Developers are doing that now. I think the city can
find some.
Zaremba: I think the thing I find myself bringing up is if and when somebody
provides and elevation and we say gee this a huge bland wall. I usually say can’t
you (inaudible) or you know –
Bird: I don’t see anything wrong with that.
Zaremba: -- so far people have said oh yes we can do that but we don’t really
have any (inaudible) to require that.
Bird: You passed the – you vote on whether what it looks a steady thing to you.
Corrie: McDonalds has a – they’re going to all look alike. You go to Hailey it
doesn’t look like a McDonalds. Albertson’s they build the same store everywhere
but not in Eagle. You have to have some kind of a thought process anyway
because if you don’t you’re going to have everything look alike in the next town,
the next town and it’s different it should be in a way. Now with (inaudible) that
could be or a stripe and something else.
Borup: Something could be done. I think one of the best looking buildings that
we’ve seen in this city in the last five years is the George’s Bicycle Shop thing
right downtown. That’s a lot of credit from (inaudible) that the backside
happened because of a neighbor complaint. I actually think he did way more
than he needed to for something facing the parking lot.
De Weerd: I guess to get back to what’s in front of us. By moving A up into Tier
1 it sounds like B, I and K are set for late June. The other ones I guess we’ll see
in July probably the first hearing.
Nary: Brad on those Tier 2 ones the Itinerant Merchant that you (inaudible). I
guess I’m curious as to – I mean it sounds like there are two different issues
here. One is a licensing issue and some it’s a use issue and that’s why it’s under
(inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Yes.
Zaremba: Tell me what we’re talking about door-to-door salesman or a hotdog
vendor.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes that’s probably not the right word.
De Weerd: Just your temporary vendor?
Hawkins-Clark: It’s temporary merchants is really probably a better word.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 28 of 62
Zaremba: Like booths in Dairy Days.
Hawkins-Clark: Your Ag farmer’s market person wants to set up for six weeks or
eight weeks in the summer time at Albertson’s parking lot. Yes. Rose, flower,
food, peddlers, cell phone sometimes they set up booths like that. Yes. I don’t
know the background to be honest with you. We had a license for a number of
years.
Berg: Yes we did have a – what it was, was a temporary business license
(inaudible). You’ve got to remember this ordinance was in the olden days with
box cars or freight car would come in and load the furniture and then start selling
it out of the box cars. That’s how far back it went. We’re trying to and (inaudible)
chamber trying to get a little more structure as what other businesses want to see
in a temporary business license because that’s (inaudible). It doesn’t deal with
peddlers or solicitor’s we have (inaudible) that deals with that pretty strict
background check required (inaudible). We have firework’s we have (inaudible)
profits and (inaudible) that types of stuff. This is just a temporary business where
they sell out of a back of a car or part of a parking lot. This is seasonal and we
just don’t have anything to cover it. We have things that say do you have
permission from the property owners (inaudible) zoning. We’re just trying to
shoot out of our pockets trying to control it but we don’t really have anything
established.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes it’s a challenge for our department to really know what we
base a zoning certificate off of. Even if they go into a commercial zone and they
say well here’s my letter from the landlord that says that I can be in their parking
lot for six weeks we don’t have anything that say well you need to be this far back
from the sidewalk and your signs are like this. What happens with – is there
shouldn’t we – maybe a fee of some sort of property tax issues potentially
involved there?
Nary: Wouldn’t it be part of a zoning issue for the property owner on whether
that’s allowed and maybe that’s (inaudible) allowed to have to businesses
operating (inaudible). Just because it’s out of a van and not a kiosk, it shouldn’t
really make a whole lot of difference. If they couldn’t operate a coffee stand out
of a kiosk in the parking lot, why should they have a cell phone stand out of a
truck? What different – it shouldn’t make any difference. Leave the zoning issue
to the property owner’s problem. The issue for the merchant is the licensing so
we know they have insurance and somebody to contact or if somebody has
some concern they get ripped off or something they might have something to
(inaudible). Well that’s the licensing (inaudible). I guess that’s in my mind and
maybe I’m missing something but it seems like that’s where the two different
issues are.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 29 of 62
De Weerd: I think to add to that issue though too Bill is the competition thing.
You’re business owner who’s invested in the storefront and the building codes
and everything else to establish his business and then someone moves into the
parking lot next door to him and is selling the same product out of their car. They
have no overhead. There’s an unfair sense of competition.
Nary: I think that’s tough luck.
De Weerd: Well that’s what the business community is talking about.
Nary: Well I understand what the business community is but I think it’s tough
luck. I don’t think we can have an ordinance that impacts that kind of
competition. Those really are and we had the same discussion in Boise between
Chipalla selling Mexican food in a restaurant and Chilongo selling out of truck on
the street. That was Chipalla they didn’t want somebody selling the same food
out of the front of their restaurant tough.
Bird: I don’t blame it either because they’re paying some taxes. How much
taxes are being paid on that –
Nary: I understand.
Bird: -- that portable thing. I’ve been in the portable business –
Nary: I understand but constitutionally tough. That’s what competition is.
Bird: I understand that’s competition Bill and it’s the same thing that we found
going back through our attorneys. It’s hard for private to go against the public.
When the private doesn’t have to make – or when the private has to pay taxes
and all this stuff.
Nary: But they’re not competing against each other. I mean realistically if
somebody’s going to go buy a cell phone out of a truck in the Wal-Mark parking
lot instead of going into the store they’re not the same people. They weren’t
going to go and buy that anyway. The person that goes and buys a taco out of
the Chilongo’s truck wasn’t going to go sit in Chipalla’s and eat dinner anyway so
they’re really not competing against each other. Government isn’t there to
legislate to give an advantage to one over the other that’s what –
De Weerd: This is the dialogue we’re trying to have.
Nary: -- that’s what I think is unfair.
Borup: But that’s on one of the purposes to this is to make sure that like you said
that there’s a person in charge of contact and how about insurance. Insure that
they’re being insured.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 30 of 62
Bird: Who do you have giving the insurance to Keith you don’t give it to the city.
Why would the city be on it it’s the property they’re going to be on is the one’s
that needs the insurance.
Nary: No, they have to give proof that they have insurance that’s what licensing
is.
Bird: But we don’t have license insurance we don’t have (inaudible).
Nary: That was what we were talking about.
Borup: That’s a reason to have it then to make sure someone just can’t come in
and open up the trunk of their car.
Berg: (Inaudible) is also addressed in the four percent fee that was collected that
came right off their report that they gave to the State Tax Commission.
Borup: Four percent to the city?
Berg: Yes. The idea of that was to put them on a level of what they were selling
vegetables (inaudible) Albertson’s versus on the corner. I can say that was the
(inaudible).
Borup: Was it ever – is it still on the book?
Nichols: It got lost in the recodification. The 99’ recodification somehow that got
dropped out. I think that’s when it got (inaudible). There is still a reference in
part of the clerk’s duties I think or licensing for Itinerant Merchants but it’s not
referenced any place else.
Zaremba: (Inaudible) knows what it is?
Berg: Well I don’t have anything to license it to. I did collect that on several
vegetable stands years ago but that was about the only thing that was a
temporary business on our streets. We didn’t have a vendor’s license or
anything of that nature out on the streets. That’s something that’s looked at for
the economic development and the meeting of the Chamber they’re trying to get
the budget views of the businesses. (Inaudible) find out what all the competitions
are (inaudible) for not having one and having one, we’re trying to resolve it.
Hawkins-Clark: So am I hearing that you want your staff to continue to work on
this?
Corrie: We think so.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 31 of 62
Hawkins-Clark: At least draft it get it before for a hearing.
Zaremba: It sounds like your own personal opinion would be to someway try to
protect our regular, everyday, year long businesses that are here and permanent.
Not to totally exclude these others but to not give them advantage over other
businesses. Yes, give it some thought. If that means a four percent fee or a 10
percent fee, prove where they live –
Borup: City of Meridian (inaudible).
De Weerd: Is that the (inaudible).
Zaremba: Separate from that do we have any vendor I guess we’re calling it –
do we have vendor (inaudible) the hot dog cart?
Hawkins-Clark: That’s why we did – they kind of fall through the cracks as far as
our current code and we really don’t know what to do with them.
Zaremba: It hasn’t come up?
Bird: (Inaudible) license from the Central of Central District Health.
Hawkins-Clark: The Home Depot you know that kind of situation they have that
hot dog stand out front there.
De Weerd: D & B he has the best.
Bird: (Inaudible) Central District Health.
Berg: We just make sure they’re complying with the zoning requirements. One
was that they didn’t take up any more space that was required for their parking
spot that was the big thing to deal with fireworks. You put a fireworks stand in
the middle of a parking lot how many parking spaces does it take up. Is the
parking lot limited already to be used with the building so Planning and Zoning
(inaudible) work on the issue before we just turn our back and just try to do it like
it’s going to have a regulation on it.
Borup: You would figure there would be a lot of cars going to Home Depot for
business.
Berg: Hey some buildings only (inaudible) parking spaces that they require so
that’s what P&Z needs to work on maybe a design or where it’s set on or
whatever. As far as Peddler’s or solicitors, which are people that go door to door
our police, are pretty strict on making sure that we’re protecting our residents.
They have to have a background check we need to take four to six weeks to get
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 32 of 62
the FBI background check stuff so anybody that’s fly by night (inaudible) goes by.
We want (inaudible).
Zaremba: If a solicitor came to my door is there something I can ask to see?
Berg: Yes we need to see a license.
Corrie: Yes and they’re starting to come around.
Berg: I mean we have Massage Licenses too just so you know I mean people
that have established and got the City Massage License they’re probably wanting
to go to different people’s houses they’re required to have it. We have several
different licenses we just (inaudible).
Zaremba: We’re looking forward to kids selling Girl Scout cookies.
Berg: That goes on a non-profit thing I think (inaudible). Well hopefully
(inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Zaremba: Can I ask you a question about B the non-conforming uses and
structures?
Hawkins-Clark: B okay.
Zaremba: I don’t know if that’s where it would be included but we had some
discussion in our Commission Meeting one time about abandoned buildings and
things that had a purpose but they’re no longer being used. Is there any way the
city can do anything about the things that are stopped being used for their
purpose and suddenly become a blight or not suddenly but over time if they’re
abandoned long enough to become a blight.
Bird: Are you (inaudible) one.
Zaremba: No what I actually had in mind is in Boise. It’s not here but –
Borup: Maple Grove.
Bird: Maple Grove I think the Mayor –
Nary: No that’s a car lot.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 33 of 62
Zaremba: I mean just what if the house next door to you is abandoned, then
there was a fire and then you know three years later they’ve done nothing about
it. The owner doesn’t live here –
Nary: If it’s an abandoned and they (inaudible). If it’s a boarded up house that’s
secure, no one gets in it and no ones problem.
Nichols: Gary don’t we have the uniform code for (inaudible) isn’t that one of our
codes? The code is on the books in almost every city. The problem is typically a
(inaudible) because maybe the property is outstanding for taxes, the county
doesn’t want to take it back because they don’t want to be the one to Tier it
down. The city doesn’t want to take general fund dollars and Tier it down. It’s a
unique situation where we actually (inaudible). Nampa started doing that a little
bit to some (inaudible) stuff and then they got some urban renewal funds to do it
–
***End Of Side Two***
Nary: -- yes that was one of the ones that took a long time to get that torn down
for exactly the reasons that Bill’s saying. You can do it but the problem that we
found in Boise is that if you secure the building I mean (inaudible) and it’s not
broken into and it’s just a boarded up house you know if you want to have a
board on your house, it’s yours. As long as it’s secure, you know. Just because
it’s ugly or an eyesore I mean that was the problem with the Smith’s Food King
on Maple Grove and Fairview is that it was secure. It was ugly but there’s
abandoned stores all over town that aren’t being used but they don’t bother
anybody. They’re not blight no one notices the fact that they’re (inaudible) for a
period of time they just took the sign off. You know is that really a problem? It’s
not a police problem it’s not a hazard or any of those kinds of things. You can
own a building and board it up it’s yours that’s all right. That’s your property you
can do that. That’s the balance that you have to find is how to deal with and
(inaudible). It’s not dangerous.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes the – we listed here is more dealing with your so-called
grandfather rights clause.
De Weerd: So what you’re doing for the Rezone in Old Town was in essence a
lot of this non-conforming use in the industrial area on Broadway. If you were
living as a house and you wanted to sell it as a house, you couldn’t sell it as a
house because the bank wouldn’t loan it for a house use because it was an
industrial zone and it’s not conforming. This would not claim that.
Hawkins-Clark: Well I mean it would right now we actually tie it to ownership
change which correct me if I’m wrong that could be viewed as somewhat
unconstitutional.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 34 of 62
Nichols: The current code says if there’s a non-conforming use the property
changes and the non-conforming use goes away and that’s not the law
(inaudible). A non-conforming use as long as it’s not an abandoned old piece of
property in town that’s had (inaudible) years continue to have a (inaudible).
Zaremba: Old horse.
Borup: Boise’s got little things like that all through town I mean all through –
you’re always going to have that.
Bird: (Inaudible).
Borup: Yes I would come back just to see (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Yes these other ones the enclave annexation project is we have
started some research on that it’s just a matter of when we anticipate getting on.
We’ve basically started a list of those county properties that are currently five
acres or less. We have one list some of them are actually all ready on city
services. For example on Linder Road right north of the tracks there’s a row on
the east side of Linder Road of six or seven houses one acre lots in there.
They’re still counting they’ve never been annexed
Borup: They’re on city services?
Hawkins-Clark: Those I’m not sure about. Are some of them?
De Weerd: But they’re annexed.
Borup: But they were annexed.
De Weerd: Yes they were annexed the day care and that house.
Bird: That house goes yes –
Nary: It seems like an annexation (inaudible). It’s a very contentious issue.
Nichols: When we get to that point of actually looking seriously annexing
enclaves – what the several communities (inaudible) to do it. All you have to do
is read – and I’m not talking about our neighbor (inaudible). You can read
through the minutes of the legislative committee. The latest one was Rexburg.
We have to be very careful about how we do it but there are two issues that
always come up. One is taxation without representation talking about the Boston
Tea Party earlier that always (inaudible). The other issue is what is the benefit
so that’s really -- the selling point has to be here’s the benefit if you’re annexed.
Why this is beneficial and –
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 35 of 62
Borup: Beneficial to who?
Nichols: To the property owner.
Borup: Normally they’re already getting all the benefits that’s why they don’t
want to do it.
Nichols: Well that’s I mean that’s the argument for –
Borup: The city.
Nichols: -- taking in the enclaves. Every year in the Legislature there has been
in the last several years there’s been a bill to require voter or owner consent of
some fashion regardless of whether they were surrounded by city property –
De Weerd: Because of the few (inaudible) and they are (inaudible). It’s not just
Boise.
Zaremba: Well the major response to that would be to cancel the Cross Service
Agreements on the emergency services. Say that Meridian services won’t
respond to a county piece of property even if it’s in Meridian City.
Bird: We have to we’re part of the rural.
Zaremba: You can’t cancel that?
Bird: Yes they get the (inaudible) fire is better (inaudible) in the emergency
county anyway.
Corrie: And if the county sends the city car, it’s got to go.
Worley: I’ll tell you that we are probably a lot in service even (inaudible). There
are so many enclaves keeping track of them is completely impossible. They go
to make a traffic stop they can’t control where it happens. If they wind up making
an arrest and it happened to be in the county, only the lawyers can tell us where
our liability is. I have (inaudible) on going discussion with the sheriff trying to give
us county jurisdiction in known areas that are city occupied just to protect us.
That is still going on. We have a lot of activity that happens and the law
enforcement and police service provides the people who are not paying taxes
(inaudible).
Bird: I think that we want (inaudible) like Boise. What they should have done is
they forced that annexation issue they should have just went out and shut off the
sewer and water to those people for a while.
De Weerd: They still should have.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 36 of 62
Borup: They never should have annexed without it.
Bird: What?
Borup: They should have allowed the sewer to go out I mean do like Meridian
that’s the way.
De Weerd: Yes I agree.
Bird: We’re doing the same thing though –
Nary: Some of the south ones they have south of Overland they have to do it
because they have failed systems out there and it’s a health issue so they could
extend it. Some of them they didn’t right but some of them they have to.
Nichols: One of the things that we should look at in terms of annexing
(inaudible). Currently in the code, require that within the city limits you have to
connect the water to sewer. One of the things it should consider when an
enclave annexation (inaudible) non-conceptual annexation is whether those uses
have domestic water well and septic system should be allowed to continue until
one or the other phase. They’re not required to go spend the money to have a
plumber to hook up to city water and sewer services so they’re not just paying for
in property taxes they also have this out of pocket (inaudible) water and sewer
situation (inaudible). That maybe one way that we can alleviate some of that
concern is to either phase it in or give them a certain period of time of when it
sells –
Borup: Isn’t that the way it usually is when the property changes hand?
De Weerd: Not in Rexburg.
Bird: No.
Nary: That’s the way it is in Boise. When the property sells or when it’s just
(inaudible). They’ve extended out the time period just to –
Borup: I thought it was like Meridian, Meridian has done some that way.
Nary: It has been seven years. It has to be seven years of annexation unless it’s
sold. They gave them some time but it wasn’t a just total fail.
Centers: It’s recorded on the property (inaudible).
Nary: Right but that was (inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 37 of 62
Borup: So was this on for – nothing’s on that yet.
Hawkins-Clark: That’s right.
Borup: This has been something I’ve been interested in for five or six years
every time I look at a map.
Nichols: The only other caution is you never know what the Legislature’s going
to do. There’s always going to be and it seems like there’s always going to be an
anti-annexation group. We have it was a like a six to five vote in the bill on a
house committee this year. One Legislature switches and goes to house
(inaudible).
De Weerd: Because of the technicality.
Nichols: Yes and one of those house members they voted to kill the vote
(inaudible) had a whole bunch of those forced annexed votes (inaudible) so you
have to look at some of those things. If we’re going to do it then we may need to
st
move fast because July 1 next year we might not have the ability to annex our
homes.
Borup: Of any size you’re saying?
Nichols: Any size because the Legislature can change the law next year that
says either get the owners consent, you have to have an election where the
renters that live there say yes and the owners say no that’s some reason
(inaudible). In terms of where this is at and the priorities –
De Weerd: I think this gives us an opportunity though to show how it can be
done and done correctly. I know that during that jury, Garrett Nancolas Mayor
and (inaudible) Caldwell testified and he explained their process. They said well
they all could have been done that way. I think you just have to show the
standard of what you can do and do it right so that you don’t have – you still
probably won’t please everyone but as long as you have that due process and
I’m not talking about any other circumstances that you give on some of the facts
and we’ve heard and testimony. That’s – you know that you are allowed to
continue on your septic and well until it either fails or it changes hands or
whatever is that we just do it in a fair and efferable way. We can set the
standards and show the Legislature how it can actually be that. There is an
opportunity there too. Maybe it would have been a real nice cheery place but I
think those are the cautions that you really need to – good noticing you know fair
to the hook-up requirements and the cost that you’re passing to those people that
you’re annexing and those kinds of considerations.
Nary: You should always remember that 2000 was (inaudible) exactly as it was.
They still said it didn’t’ matter. It didn’t matter they signed the CC&R’s that said
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 38 of 62
they had to (inaudible) it didn’t matter. There will always in writing there will
always be people that (inaudible) follow the law (inaudible) three years later. I’m
for it I’m the same as Keith I think it’s something that we need to do. It just
doesn’t make sense to have (inaudible) but I agree with you we need to do the
best we can but recognize that no matter what we do there (inaudible).
Bird: I think the decision is really by the time you take out your rural fire district
which they (inaudible) outside the city limits was it 1.75 mill levy and your county
stuff I think you’re going to save some taxes by going into Meridian (inaudible).
In our area and I think you can sell this to people but I’m like Bill and Tammy we
have got a real problem. I mean it’s an old town we’ve got enclaves in Meridian
in Old Town that’s a lot. (Inaudible) I mean you look at that map –
Freckleton: There are two houses (inaudible).
Bird: Yes you’re right.
Freckleton: They are not considered (inaudible).
th
Bird: Yes then you go up in the 1100 block up in there there’s a couple of lots
that aren’t in there. The other (inaudible) comes in because (inaudible) fields.
Nichols: So am I being stopped (inaudible)?
Nary: Tough luck buddy.
Bird: You’re out of their jurisdiction.
Corrie: They can go across if they’re being chased.
Centers: Sometimes in my opinion you have spend money to make money.
What would be other than the expense hook them up to sewer and water?
Borup: Because all you’re getting is a monthly fee.
Centers: What?
Borup: Because all you’re getting is that monthly sewer fee that’s not – that will
take a long time to pay back. You’re saying waive the hook up fee?
Centers: Yes you would get it back and the PR would be you know I don’t think
you would have any – but I don’t know the cost.
Nary: Now the ones you need to educate to me is not just the property owner
who is being forced into being annexed into the city but the property owners
around especially in the oldest enclaves with the city. I want his neighbor to
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 39 of 62
know that this guy isn’t paying him for the police car to come to his house but he
is because they all need to know. You know when I had this discussion with
(inaudible) a few years ago I said if you’re going to make people vote make them
all vote. Let me vote too that that guy that’s getting my police service that he can
pay for it because he is getting a benefit of the city. The folks that are living
within the city limits and get the benefits of parks and the access to Settler’s Park
and everything else is combined in the recreation program, the police and fire
services all of these other benefits of business. They shop at Wal-Mart they
shop at Winco all the other things the city has brought in the jobs that are coming
in the new subdivisions that are here and the newer homes that are available. I
want all those people to know what the benefits are so that they can also tell the
their neighbor no you need to be here. That’s the education that I think – that’s
one of the education pieces that was missing in Boise was those other people
that recognized it really people were getting a benefit you know. The only other
people that ever get abreast or ever really beat the drum is the ones getting
annexed saying that it’s not fair to me rather than their neighbors who are saying
wait a minute it’s not fair to me to let this person continue without paying. That’s
the education I think we really need to pride is what they are really receiving what
everybody else has probably paid for. Again, it’s like Tammy just said on the
issue hook him up to the sewer. The problem is, is that the rest of the uses are
having to pay for them if we do it. We’ll get it back eventually but they’re going to
have to (inaudible) first so rather than doing that we need to educate those folks
and then everybody is getting a benefit.
Borup: All these properties don’t have residences on them some of them are just
bare ground.
Nary: Yes.
Corrie: And some of those owners of the property wouldn’t sell until they die.
We all know who that is.
Nary: Actually, they won’t sell till we die.
Corrie: Yes they’ll out live us.
Hawkins-Clark: Well maybe a baby step on this is to at a minimum start – we
can submit an application for those that are already on city services. The
subdivision that’s at the right at the north of the southeast corner of Meridian
Road and Ustick.
Borup: Yes.
Hawkins-Clark: There’s a cul-de-sac there. I think isn’t that subdivision Bruce on
sewer and water?
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 40 of 62
Borup: Yes it is.
Freckleton: Yes.
Borup: I thought that already got taken care of.
Hawkins-Clark: No it’s not annexed.
Freckleton: East Brook Village.
Borup: Heron Brook oh yes.
Hawkins-Clark: At the southeast corner of Meridian Road and Ustick.
De Weerd: Really.
Bird: Yes that one right there on the corner.
Freckleton: We’ve (inaudible).
Borup: Oh that’s what it was we wanted to do it before but we didn’t have any
contiguous –
Hawkins-Clark: There’s that one –
Borup: -- as soon as it was, we would take care of it and we didn’t.
Hawkins-Clark: There are a couple on Pine.
Bird: We could have run up the street like we did for Settler’s.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Nary: On the other side.
De Weerd: I guess it would probably be helpful –
Borup: But especially those yes.
De Weerd: -- it would be helpful to staff as I hear Brad is there anything in Tier 2
that has more importance than others so they can start focusing their directions
on what best to put their energies in over another?
Hawkins-Clark: I think that one E through –
Borup: Yes he’s (inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 41 of 62
De Weerd: And then E and H have been mentioned. I is coming up anyway in
the North Meridian Plan isn’t that Brad?
Nary: Well G seems like an ongoing type of thing. Cleaning up the schedule of
use (inaudible) is that kind of an ongoing type of thing Brad?
Hawkins-Clark: Well our vision for that one was to be much more substantive
than what we’re doing but rather just doing a little couple, church here and you
know J makes you really looking at the whole schedule and even what I
mentioned earlier about performance baseline.
Borup: Brad is anything in the Tier 2 even getting calls or inquiries on from the
public?
Hawkins-Clark: I would say B on the Broadway issue, which may be partially
cleaned up with the Old Town Rezone. We’re staffed and now that we’re fully
staffed, I mean some of these we may be able to do that we just haven’t been
able to get to. Probably I think you’ve hit on them if we move B and E and H and
G and H –
Freckleton: Brad there has been quite a bit of inquiries on the parking structure.
Hawkins-Clark: In downtown or just (inaudible) oh yes right like restaurants,
banks, and other yes.
Zaremba: What do you call that is a number determined for discussion on that
one? In thinking ahead to eventually maybe having some kind of a transit
system in the city, there are cities that have standard parking requirements. If
you build a building this size or you have this use here’s how many spaces you
have. Then they say on top of that if instead you provide a transit stop you can
forego half of your parking spaces or something like that. Encourage them not
only one they won’t need parking spaces hopefully but to encourage them to
install something that makes transit easier can we have some discussion about
whether we want to go that direction or not or put something like that into the
parking (inaudible).
Nary: I hadn’t – we had an alternative transportation meeting last week in Boise
and we had a bunch of the different providers there. You know it amazes me we
had the discussion last week I guess at Council from Treasure Valley Transit.
We have some of those vendors that have stops at their location and yet don’t
want to participate in the program at all. I think we need to do something to
provide incentive to people to participate because it amazes me that some place
like St. Luke’s that would have a (inaudible) money and secondarily have a stop
on their site so that their patients can get their through alternative transportation,
their employees can get there for a part of transportation. When they asked
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 42 of 62
them for some funding to help keep the route, there they said no thanks we don’t
have any money. Well you know that’s bologna they might as well just move the
site somewhere else so that somebody else can benefit from it because if they
don’t want to help pay for it then they don’t need to have that benefit but it does
hurt their patients and I really want to help their patients. That – some providing
some level of incentive to those things and parking is probably the only real
incentive you can trade off for logically.
Zaremba: Space and the maintenance is an expense that they –
Nary: And maybe that’s – you know at least something that’s (inaudible)
because I think something to provide these alternatives are going to be very
helpful. Again, it is coming it’s coming more sooner now than it used to be so it
really is something to provide something for people that want to participate in.
Bird: Alternative transportation is open. Doing something like this would
definitely give some people security. Like St. Luke’s you know I just can’t believe
all they’re hurting is the patients in alternative assistance. They’ve got to get to
the hospital you do that and if you (inaudible) some incentives like you just
(inaudible) say you know we’ll let you have six less parking spaces for your
restaurant if you have an alternative bus stop. At least it’s a start.
Corrie: Good proactive stuff.
Hawkins-Clark: I think the big question we’ll get on that is can you tell me when?
Nary: As soon as we have more of these.
Bird: Hopefully it will be sooner than later. It’s got to be.
Corrie: We’ll get it in wages.
De Weerd: Well and they can show participation in Valley Rid or ride sharing or
something like that. They should have some plan in place to have certain
incentives. I really like that.
Zaremba: And is a place to tie those in?
De Weerd: I think so.
Hawkins-Clark: Maybe what I’ll do is reorganize this actually so instead of doing
– Will just brought this to attention instead of doing a Tier 1 Tier 2 we really need
to have those already in the hearing process. Those are kind of – those in a way
will go off the sheet and then those that have you know a lot of research and
drafting already done and then those that are completely new. We’ll just redo
this and get it to you. It shows you kind of a reformatted because I think the
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 43 of 62
more we talk about it the more we really have three different kinds of projects
they’re not just here.
Borup: Brad you had asked earlier on how to present them at least to Planning
and Zoning. I tried it two different ways. I think one time try to save everything
up and come with a great big list I think I’ve preferred before we’ve just done one,
two, or three at a time. As you get them ready let’s, get them on the first agenda
that’s open. It’s probably easier for us to digest than a whole list and probably
easier for staff to get two or three ready at a time rather than trying the whole list
too. Does everyone agree with that I mean a preference? I mean if there’s only
one as soon as you got one available it’s done go ahead and do it.
Centers: Just at a Regular Meeting instead of Special?
Borup: Yes like probably the second meeting.
Hawkins-Clark: Just take off maybe a couple of the regular apps and extending
and filtering.
Nary: Well yes especially at the Commission level well you never thought
controversial this is still a lot of (inaudible) that goes on and having a discussion.
If you put too many of them it’s kind of –
Borup: Well we don’t have time it’s got to be a Special Meeting if there are too
many.
Centers: Well in most cases you’re not doing notices to homeowners you’re
doing newspaper notices right?
Hawkins-Clark: Right.
De Weerd: But what I would like to see is sat least you know they only buy off a
couple of them but that you have an ongoing chart to kind of show what’s coming
up. Kind of tracking – I know we get back to this tracking thing but too often
things either fall off the radar or things get reprioritized and it’s helpful for staff I
know to know what is more important than another. That’s what’s helpful about
the conversation tonight is there having a chance to get that direction from the
people who have to deal with the ordinances as well as staff probably more so
staff. It’s – at least you know if someone gives you a call and says well I don’t
agree with this you can say well it’s being reviewed right now I would suggest
you give your comments to so and so.
Nary: Well the list thing that you did Brad is really good. I think we have every
quarter at least to know where we are at which ones have kind of dropped off
and are in the pipeline and there and where the other ones are coming. It’s really
going to help answer those questions that we (inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 44 of 62
De Weerd: And the (inaudible).
Borup: Well yes as soon as one of them is ready let’s get it on we don’t need to
wait for even a second one if it’s ready.
Hawkins-Clark: The is there anything that somebody’s thought of or in reading
through the ordinance or in hearing that you think we are missing all together?
You can give it some thought but you know to email us or give us a call or
whatever.
Borup: Did you come back and review that old laundry list sheet? It was titled
that’s what the title of it was.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes I put that under activities. There are a lot of minor things in
there but –
Nary: I’m going to assume in the Comp Plan there’s a whole bunch of them in
that whole last section talks about amendments that need to be done to really
update that. I think this addresses quite a few of them. I don’t know if that’s all of
them obviously your other (inaudible).
Borup: I was thinking a lot of those on that are probably handled in here too
aren’t they.
Nary: Yes I think a lot of them are but I don’t – I mean that’s another guide he
uses.
De Weerd: Well I certainly know pathways and pathway standards are a big
issue. I know both our Planning and Zoning Department and the Park’s
Department continues to be challenged by what standards these pathways
should be built to and if the pathway is even should exist at all. They have to
connect and they should be on different sides of the ditch. There are a lot of
things that have been starting to come up and this one is a huge one. I would
like to see it pass priority over some of these others that we didn’t mention. I
would hope under G in the schedule of use control if and I don’t know if looking
specifically at what requires a CUP during that review can also be looked at.
There are some areas that may not really require the CUP or should have maybe
a different process to it if that could be part of that process under G.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor one of the items on the other activities is not just
comprehensive so an amendment appliqué is the map amendments. Where the
State Statute says we can only amend our map twice a year wherever
(inaudible). One of the things we talked about was maybe setting some
deadlines. If you’re going to apply for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
then your deadline dates are this date and this date so that you consider all those
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 45 of 62
map amendments one time and make those within the required time. Instead of
you know the first one in gets there’s and the second one in gets there’s and then
you know three through 10 have to wait six months before we can go again.
Setting some deadlines for apps –
Borup: We discussed that on the last one that came through about putting two
date – I mean pre-setting the dates then everyone knows. Isn’t that what Boise
does?
Nary: Yes, we bundle them. We bundle them and then they do the –
Borup: Where they say you know every June and December or whatever to be
the hearing date so everyone knows the public knows that’s what the plan is.
Nary: Planning and Zoning hears them all the time but they don’t bundle them
and forward them to the Council until the date.
Borup: Oh you’re saying they can hear them anytime they just table them until –
Hawkins-Clark: Yes the code – the State Statute says the P&Z Commission can
make a recommendation.
Borup: Right I understood that but we haven’t even been hearing them.
Nary: Right but Boise hears them all the time and bundles them all together.
Borup: They don’t even put them on the agenda.
Bird: (inaudible) before the Council get’s heard.
Hawkins-Clark: Right we have.
De Weerd: They can’t make a recommendation until a certain time.
Borup: So that one – maybe that makes more sense that we can hear them
whenever they apply as long as they understand they won’t be board at a –
Nary: Right.
Bird: We need to set a few dates like Bill said --
Corrie: Well I think June and December would be excellent dates.
stststst
Bird: -- July 1 and December 1 or July 1 and January 1.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 46 of 62
Borup: I had no idea if there’s a time you can get more applications than others
or not.
Bird: Then they can hear it all up to that point.
Centers: That makes more sense to me.
Bird: That makes great sense.
Nary: We’ll need to look at the statute and (inaudible) make sure we’re fine. I
know that the Commissioners (inaudible) meeting.
Borup: See my understandings staffs been saying to a couple people no you
have to wait and we haven’t been hearing them.
Nichols: I think part of that though is there’s another code that says that within
45 days after the recommendation has passed one of them you have to have a
hearing at Council.
Borup: So we don’t make recommendation.
Nichols: So you would hold the recs until – but I think I guess what I had in mind
was somebody knowing up front if I applied today I can’t get a decision before
this point.
Nary: I just – we don’t want it all jammed into May you know hearing after
hearing after hearing. I think they hear them all the time and then they wait till
May to forward the recommendations forward. I don’t know the process itself but
it –
Borup: I know that’s what the people went through before when we were doing
our –
Nary: Yes, we would pre-set those dates and then the notices –
Borup: They kept saying no you have to wait six months and it was 18 months
before we ever did anything and all those people waited 18 months.
Hawkins-Clark: Well that’s just a policy I think issue in that we don’t need to any
ordinances.
Nichols: You just have to be able to have something in fairness to somebody.
To say you have to have a map amendment to do that and you know here’s
when that’s going to happen how does that affect what you need to do.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 47 of 62
De Weerd: Yes and try to avoid late December and (inaudible) January so
maybe May sounds good. May and November?
Bird: May is –
De Weerd: Yes May and November.
Nary: Well yes, as long as you let the people know ahead of time so that they
have some idea. You know we don’t get – in Boise, we don’t have a tremendous
amount of Comp Plan Map Amendments. There are lots of Comp Plan language
amendments, which we wouldn’t have thought. The map ones we don’t get a
significant number of them (inaudible) but thinking the Comp Plan that we passed
last year, we’ve left a lot of flexibility to that same thing. Unless it’s a significantly
huge change from residential to commercial or something like that, we really
don’t get a tremendous amount of those.
Borup: A lot more than we do.
Nary: What’s that?
Borup: A lot more than we do we just don’t do it.
Nary: Right.
Borup: It was six years on the last one. I don’t think there was an amendment till
the last Comp Plan –
Hawkins-Clark: 99’.
Borup: Up until the Wal-Mart thing.
Bird: 93’ to 99’
De Weerd: So, what can we say is the process of updating then we start –
Nary: But now we try to build in more flexibility so that we don’t have to do a Map
Amendment. The residential ones we have lots of flexibility. We have all of
these mixed-uses and a lot more ability we don’t have to make any amendments.
Zaremba: Let me see if – clarify for me the schedule. We’re saying that they
would be heard by the Council in May and November. Do we want to set it 30
days before it would the applications cease for that period? There’s got to be a
processed involved in getting it staff and getting it to the Commission to make it
to that May November meeting.
Borup: It would be a normal timeline wouldn’t it?
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 48 of 62
Hawkins-Clark: Well I think we would probably just publish – I mean you know a
schedule along with our hearing schedule that is kind of just a sub description for
just Comp Plan Amendments.
Zaremba: And the schedule should just come –
th
Hawkins-Clark: Yes they’re just – we already have till the 15 of the month is
our cut off now. We would just set up yes.
De Weerd: So you could hear them anytime but the recommendations would be
made on these months to City Council.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes somebody comes in the door and they know that if they
nd
apply you know May 2 that they’re not going to potentially get their application
heard at the May City Council Hearing.
Nary: November. That way at least and between Boise and Nampa we’ve got
two big jurisdictions with these quite often (inaudible).
Hawkins-Clark: Unless there’s anything else or ideas hiccups. That’s really
helpful.
Nary: I looked at – I noticed the new notice stuff up front, it’s nice. A lot more
visibility a lot more information so that’s good.
De Weerd: And people are asking about it because I used to have people say
what is that time and what’s that all about so that’s nice. Mr. Mayor if I can I
would like to just again I know our new director started work today and I would
just again like to applaud Brad and his role as director as of September. This is
just an example of how our work has been really organized and prioritized.
We’re actually making a lot of leeway in your department and appreciate all your
hard work and direction. Thank you.
Bird: We all agree Brad.
Corrie: I appreciate Tammy doing that. I was going to but from the Mayor’s
Office, I really appreciate what you’ve done. I asked you to take this job I knew it
was going to be a hard one. We did a lot of discussing but again from my office I
really sincerely thank you. I know that you’re going to work well with Anna so
we’re looking for a lot of rethinking of Planning and Zoning now.
Hawkins-Clark: Thank you.
Corrie: Anything else.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 49 of 62
Borup: Is there time for one little –
Corrie: Keith absolutely.
Borup: If there is new business. This is just along the line for maybe Planning
and Zoning to get an idea of direction in City Council likes to go on a couple of
things. There were two that you turned down last month. Me, an afterthought I
think the one made sense but the one that we didn’t understand so there must be
some information we didn’t have that on the little half acre lot subdivision on
Ustick and Meridian. I never did read the –
Nary: They were basically they were subdividing their field moving their house
back. They were going to leave their house as an enclave –
Borup: Oh is that what they did?
Nary: -- and they were subdividing their pasture.
Bird: That was exactly what they were doing.
Borup: Was that presented to us?
Centers: We didn’t understand it that was –
Borup: No we didn’t.
Zaremba: There was a little corner out of the piece they presented to us and –
Bird: No, no –
De Weerd: No that’s not Bleak.
Bird: Past that one.
Corrie: Black Cat.
Borup: No that’s a little two-lot thing.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor we had two of them where we had parcels in them. One of
them was Dan Woods and that out parcel was not owned by the same outfit.
This one we’re talking about is the one that’s –
Borup: Across from the Watertower there.
Nichols: and the person that owned that property –
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 50 of 62
Bird: Wanda Palmers.
Corrie: Oh okay.
Bird: The one we turned down.
Nichols: Basically said I want to leave my house out and I want to do the rest.
You subdivided the rest of them and the Council didn’t give the developer the
option of going back to see if they would consent to annex –
De Weerd: And they didn’t want to.
Nichols: -- and he said does the contract (inaudible) tell me yes or tell me no but
tell me.
Nary: Give them one more time to discuss it.
Borup: Well I did hear that part. There’s nothing wrong with the project.
De Weerd: No.
Nary: It was just (inaudible) enclave.
De Weerd: Yes the enclave.
Borup: I don’t think – that information I don’t believe we had.
Zaremba: I knew there was a little piece missing out of the project.
Borup: We did have it?
Bird: And that’s the owner of the property and they would not do. We gave them
every opportunity to go back and talk about it. They wouldn’t.
Zaremba: (Inaudible) this piece wasn’t included. We didn’t ask who owns it.
Corrie: I think they wanted to get out of that.
Freckleton: What you had was a consent of owner and they consented to letting
their field being subdivided. It was one of those things where you kind of put two
and two together (inaudible).
Borup: Well I think we probably had the information there but I don’t think it sunk
in with us.
Freckleton: It was (inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 51 of 62
Borup: Well then that makes sense.
Centers: Well we take everything back now don’t we?
De Weerd: All those things you said.
Borup: That was the one we just didn’t understand.
Nichols: Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Yes.
Nichols: And it brings up an example of one of the ways that the Commission
and Council can influence and try to reduce the number of enclaves. That is to
find out if there’s obvious, there’s an out parcel there to ask the question who
owns it? Is it in common ownership even if it’s not in common ownership the
people would own that lot you know and maybe the family partnership owns the
pasture and the patriarch owns the house. It doesn’t make sense to annex this
piece but leave this one out and create another enclave. One of the things into
play is the option the developer has in the pasture (inaudible) and that property
owner will not receive that tremendous price break unless the annexation and the
development is approved. It’s this sort of thing where you can say it’s not in the
best interest in Meridian to create another enclave.
Borup: It all makes sense. I thought it was a little stronger than – I know a
situation five or seven years ago that staff said if you don’t annex the old farm
house but the rest of that pasture we’re not going to recommend it. It never even
– they wouldn’t even attempt.
Nary: Then we just had one last week that was the same thing but the out parcel
was not (inaudible). We didn’t consider it but we did ask the question. It would
create an enclave but they didn’t have any empower to prefect it.
Freckleton: I think it’s something staff (inaudible).
Borup: Well especially that – we would definitely like to know –
Bird: (Inaudible) very helpful yes. I just felt this one that came through with Dan I
asked the question – I felt that his property was part of the property. (Inaudible).
Borup: There was at one time.
Bird: I know it was at one time but it had been sold off. They bought the
(inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 52 of 62
Borup: They were one of the people that said they would never develop that in
their lifetime.
Corrie: Guess what?
Bird: Guess what they want to retire.
Item 4. Discussion of Process of Applications:
De Weerd: We still have one agenda item one more.
Corrie: What’s that?
De Weerd: The process of Applications. I just thought I would bring that out. I
don’t know it was part of the emails going around about the application process
and I think when Keith and I talked about the agenda this also opens up maybe
looking at what all can be decided at Planning and Zoning level and not have to
go on to Council unless it’s appealed. It was just to open that up for discussion
and see what people were thinking.
Borup: That’s been discussed a couple of times at the workshop a year or so
ago. I think that kind of results in that workshop where City Council said they
wanted it all.
De Weerd: I don’t think the decision was ever made. There was never any –
Borup: No but the impression we left there with is City Council is we want it all
vote it on.
Centers: That was two years ago.
Hawkins-Clark: Two years ago.
De Weerd: Bring it on huh?
Zaremba: Well not to overload the Council but they are the elected
representatives, which we are not, appointed by the elected (inaudible). Once
it’s been through staff they’ve been through us most of the legal issues have
been determined. The last decision is more a political decision and I support the
Council making those.
Nary: I think Brad’s identified a lot of those tonight in the other discussion things
that we talked about with staff.
Borup: I can’t remember what we talked about.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 53 of 62
Corrie: There was a CUP at Council that thought maybe that the Planning and
Zoning could take all CUP’s and make a decision. If they didn’t like it, they could
appeal to Council.
Borup: (inaudible) what Boise does.
Nary: Right the only difference I think we would not want to do like Boise is
Boise appeal ordinance the Council decided about a year ago that they –
***End Of Side Three***
Nary: -- where it’s a re-hearing. If they’re going – if they don’t like the decision
you folks make at Planning and Zoning and they want us to hear it then we can
hear it all when we’re here and that’s why. That avoids a whole lot of issues that
a lot of the case law has out there about what can you hear before hand and how
much information can you get from other sources. It becomes very, very
cumbersome to try to deal with. I don’t think it works as well to not hear it but
(inaudible).
Borup: (inaudible) appeal would be essentially just a second hearing?
Nary: Right that is exactly.
Bird: That is exactly right. I thought that – I’m like the Mayor I (inaudible) for you
guys to do with the CUP’s and then they didn’t like your decision it could come to
Council. 75 percent of the time you’re going to take care of it.
Corrie: Does that take an ordinance to do that Bill? I think it would wouldn’t it?
Nichols: Mayor and Members of the Council I think it would. I think you might
also want to differentiated between the CUP’s which are stand alone applications
and those which accompany Preliminary Plat’s and annexation and zoning.
Bird: True, true, true.
Nichols: Simply because to approve a CUP at Commission level subject to
approval of a plat and annexation and zoning need (inaudible). Certainly, the
stand alone ones or maybe even those just in connection to the Rezone might be
adequate to have your decision.
Borup: But it’s not an extra hearing to send them all off to City Council when
they’re all together anyway.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes.
Borup: We might as well keep those all together.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 54 of 62
Nary: Right.
Bird: ON the stand alone ones like Bill said that is an extra hearing and there’s
no reason you guys can’t make that decision like I said 75 percent (inaudible).
Borup: There’s really not that many.
Zaremba: The only thing I would add would be who could appeal. If we deny it,
can we appeal? If we approve it, can six members of the audience who were
against it appeal?
De Weerd: They can through the mediation – through the oh that’s for
annexations.
Zaremba: What would you find who could appeal.
Nichols: I think that you have to be really careful about limiting who can appeal
those decisions to those elected representatives (inaudible) issue. I would say
that you don’t limit it too much because if you do then that whole scheme of
(inaudible) suddenly could change. A lot of times what happens is that your
(inaudible) says well where you screwed up is you didn’t have another hearing. If
you allow the second hearing to occur and –
Zaremba: But who crosses that second hearing I guess to be questioned.
Nary: The former method in Boise was (inaudible) the applicant any affected
party alone. The only require was that they had to testify or provide written
testimony either one. Maybe they were out of town and provide written
testimony. They had to at least show something –
Zaremba: At the first hearing?
Nary: It also allowed the Planning Director and the Planning Director had
(inaudible) as well. They disagreed say the committee – the one where those
would come up the most was when the Commission sort of (inaudible) a little bit
of both. The Planning Director would feel because the partner Commission
(inaudible) that was against what the planning staff didn’t want with something
that (inaudible). It doesn’t happen very often but it also again I think what Bill’s
saying it gave pretty much everybody a lot of opportunity in that way. The worst
thing in the world I mean the worst thing in the world is to go through all of this in
judicial court and they send it back because the Council didn’t hear it. It wasn’t
that big of a deal. We spend a lot more time in money just getting that final
decision back so (inaudible).
Mathes: What’s the timeframe that (inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 55 of 62
Nary: I’m sorry.
Mathes: Timeframe how many days (inaudible).
Nary: Right it used to be 10 I don’t know if it’s changed it used to be 10 days.
Hawkins-Clark: 28.
Nary: Well that’s the district court but to appeal –
Hawkins-Clark: Oh you’re talking about (inaudible).
Nary: Yes I think it was 10 I don’t know if it’s changed.
Corrie: Would you be willing to do that?
Borup: We have to hear it anyway.
Corrie: Well yes.
Borup: The difference is, is the findings would be done – I guess that is one
more deal for us isn’t it. Then we have to act on the findings.
Nichols: Well actually probably the only thing that you’re really going to find is
different is that the findings have to be prepared and you have to approve them.
That’s really the only difference.
Borup: We used to do that anyway.
Nichols: So I don’t think it’s a major change.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Hawkins-Clark: Well and we’re talking about staff preparing findings here soon
too which most of the jurisdictions that you when you get the staff report you
actually have the findings there from day one. Not just the findings that you see
today but the findings that the notice was done correctly, that so and so testified.
If we include that in our staff report I think it’s – we hear a lot of complaints that
the three month process for CUP’s. I can’t tell you how many times we hear that
(inaudible).
Borup: It kind of makes sense for some of these little – yes if someone wants to
start a little momma pop clothing store or whatever they’re doing having to go
through all that.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 56 of 62
Bird: (inaudible) by having to get CUP (inaudible).
De Weerd: And I tell you what we appreciate the work that you do. By the time it
gets to us, you have – often times we don’t even get the neighbors so you really
are effective at that. I think this is the next step and I guess this ordinance would
be moved into Tier 1.
Hawkins-Clark: This yes this is just a change of two paragraphs or something I
think.
De Weerd: I think this would – I know you’re meetings go long enough but you
still have to hear them. We appreciate we get out that much earlier.
Corrie: Well yes not so much that I mean that’s a good selling point yes. If I
were on the other end of a CUP, I would rather have it that way as well.
Borup: I think that’s the biggest thing is the time.
Corrie: That’s that biggest thing because I mean that’s what I’m getting in the
office all the time. I have to swig three months, which is ridiculous whenever you
just (inaudible). We have to wait so long when we can get them done and it’s not
that big of a deal.
Centers: Well and we’re trying to promote business (inaudible).
Corrie: Well we can go ahead and we can work on that and then get it done.
Like Tammy says you, guys are great. You sure help us out a lot. I notice that
our meetings are getting smaller and smaller because you’ve already taken the
blunt of everything. We appreciate that for a turkey we can’t beat that.
Centers: No I would like a shirt once a year.
Corrie: I think we can work that out (inaudible).
De Weerd: You have a budget.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Nary: I would concur with the same thing. I read your guys’ minutes and you
really do help resolve 99 percent of the issues. We have few issues sometimes
occasionally on big patches of grass and this playground and those types of
things but most of it’s done. Most of the neighbors are satisfied and most feel
like they’ve been heard and they don’t have to come back again and that’s great.
That’s exactly the way it’s supposed to work.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 57 of 62
Borup: The other thing that I’m looking forward to is a new neighborhood
meeting. That’s already passed (inaudible). Well that was the words I wanted – I
pushed for strongly encourage.
Zaremba: But didn’t we word it strongly encouraged and the Commission may
require it?
Borup: Right and the Commission may require it. I’m looking forward to the next
meeting where we have 30 people in here they’re all complaining and they
haven’t had a meeting. We’ll probably just stop it right there and table it.
Centers: I think we could have done that before Keith.
Borup: Yes we never thought about it.
Centers: Say hey we’ll postpone this then until you talk to the neighbors.
Nary: Most of the good developers know because they’re so used to it from the
surrounding areas are going to do that. It’s the ones that will have to learn that
that will make it a little harder.
Borup: It depends on the size of the project.
Nary: You know you (inaudible) for a month because you have to go talk to the
neighbors about it.
Borup: I think we’ve only had one in the last year that probably should have
been – and she knows (inaudible). We didn’t we went ahead but we got a point
across.
Centers: Well and that was news to me that the city hall is available for a
neighborhood or community meetings. I didn’t know that.
Borup: This room is too isn’t it?
Centers: Is it rented or is it –
Nary: The city hall (inaudible)
Berg: (Inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Zaremba: the only thing I would add on the application process and this is
something I’ve mentioned before I guess but not to the whole group. I know
we’re trying to make it easier for the applicant to condense the time. I keep
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 58 of 62
asking the question does staff have enough time. If somebody gives you an
application for something you have to send it out to all sorts of departments, wait
till you get their responses back then sit down and write up your remarks for us
which we very much appreciate. We often get those the day or two ahead. If we
could make the cutoff whatever schedule there is if we could make the cutoff for
the application two days earlier then therefore we get the report two days earlier.
I know it extends the time. When somebody makes an application tell me what
the delay is now. I brought an application to you today you would tell me it’s
going to be on what schedule?
Hawkins-Clark: Five to six weeks.
Zaremba: See an extra day or two would –
th
Hawkins-Clark: Yes it’s the 15 –
Borup: Are we booked up into July already?
Hawkins-Clark: Oh well yes depending on the month. Published process is you
th
submit the 15 of every month is the cutoff.
Zaremba: Well except that they’re handing you stuff three days before. I’m
talking about when they stop handing you new stuff.
Hawkins-Clark: Oh you’re not talking about just a standard complete application.
De Weerd: I can tell you what we do at Council.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Zaremba: What I’m trying to do is say there is actually a cut off time.
Centers: I don’t think you can legally do that can you Mr. Attorney deny them for
bringing in supporting documentation for an application. We get it the night of the
hearing and well that’s very frustrating.
Corrie: You can (inaudible).
De Weerd: You can set –
Borup: Well if some of the staff needs to review it we have continued it.
Corrie: If we get something in that night that completely changes what we’ve had
my recommendation to the Council is we’ll delay it for the next week until we
have time to look at it. That pretty well stops a lot of people.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 59 of 62
De Weerd: Council has basically said if it’s not in our packet, we won’t consider
it.
Nary: No if it’s just a little clarification –
De Weerd: Unless it’s really confusing.
Nary: -- then I don’t have a problem with that if it’s a five page document they
want us to read saying why we think they should do that –
Zaremba: We could continue more things than we do I’m sure.
Mathes: A lot of ours (inaudible).
Centers: You accept the letters from neighbors?
Nary: Sure testimony.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Borup: Brad what did you –
Nichols: Mr. Mayor Mr. Berg is going to have a terrible time transcribing this.
Berg: We won’t be transcribing it.
Borup: This needs to be transcribed. I was just thinking of that –
Nary: This is transcribable.
De Weerd: They will put inaudible there.
Corrie: Is there anything else.
Freckleton: I (inaudible) help staff is when the motion comes down to the
Commission if they’re asking for specific items to be changed brought back to
them if they will tell the applicant (inaudible) prior to the next hearing. That’s to
give – yes, you’ve done a great job on that. That gives staff the opportunity to
review it and be prepared prior to the meeting.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Freckleton: I think so. It’s (inaudible) and what kills us is when we have to try to
think up new conditions or comments on the fly sitting at the table. I don’t
(inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 60 of 62
De Weerd: Oh well you need Brad at your meetings because he does.
Borup: If we’re still talking about the application process how – what’s the time
from the transmittals to the agencies and back to you? How long do they have
for a response.
Hawkins-Clark: Will would probably better answer that. The Clerk’s Office is the
one that does all the transmittals.
Berg: Normally they’ve got 30 days.
Hawkins-Clark: 30 days.
Berg: Because we have such a –
Borup: And do you have ongoing stuff at the same time or if that time was cut
down would the whole process be cut down?
Berg: Cut it down to 30 days?
Borup: Yes.
Berg: Well we’re trying to get comments from other agencies.
Borup: I know well that was the one thing that I can remember –
Berg: (Inaudible) for staff our departments it’s the other agencies that are
important too. We’re meeting ACHD’s timeframe which –
Borup: Maybe that’s part of the problem. That was one thing that what’s his
name said when he was talking about that was get everything through email so
there wasn’t papers to have to carry and send it you know email everything out to
all the agencies. Have you looked into that?
Freckleton: One of the things (inaudible).
Berg: Yes the rough draft – you’re saying maps too aren’t necessarily –
Borup: Emailable very well.
Berg: Maybe they could transfer – present the application in email form.
Borup: Well maybe he didn’t email everything I’m not sure I just remember that
from that workshop we had where we talked about –
Berg: But emails can get lost if you (inaudible).
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 61 of 62
Centers: I would like the Council to know that our meeting on Thursday has nine
CUP’s that we might be sending you either on the appeal process or approval.
That’s the most I’ve seen on one agenda and how about you Keith?
Borup: I think so.
De Weerd: Wow.
Bird: Nine CUP’s.
Centers: Nine individual ones not connected to an annexation.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
Borup: 18 items on our agenda.
Corrie: That means we’ll have a –
Berg: How many are continued.
Mathes: Just the one.
Borup: Just the one but the first three are –
Centers: One was tabled.
Borup: So we only had 14 items really. The first three are just the beginning
stuff.
De Weerd: Don’t you miss that Bill.
Nary: No.
Centers: We miss him.
Borup: We’ll be out of there before 11.
th
Zaremba: This has been very helpful and I look forward to the next 5 Tuesday.
Corrie: That was going to be my question did you like this round table site
discussion and kind of get it on the table and see what we can do.
Nary: I like it a lot. It sounds like (inaudible) we all seem to object from that.
Centers: I think it’s necessary.
Meridian City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop
April 29, 2003
Page 62 of 62
Corrie: Well if it’s necessary you guys can look at that and say –
De Weerd: Do we need to (inaudible) turkey or something like that.
Centers: A shirt and a turkey.
(Inaudible discussion amongst Members)
De Weerd: I would go for the extra pound.
Corrie: Anything else?
Mathes: I would go for a ham.
Corrie: Okay if I hear nothing else I will entertain a motion from anybody that
we’re ready to adjourn before the sun sets.
De Weerd: Second.
Corrie: Motion has been made and second to adjourn the City Council Planning
and Zoning Commission Joint Workshop. All those in favor say aye. Opposed
no. Ayes have it at quarter till 9:00.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:45 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
/ /
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR DATE
/ /
KEITH BORUP, CHAIRMAN DATE
ATTESTED:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK