PZ - Applicant's Response to Staff Report 3-19
Charlene Way
From:Penelope Riley <penelope@rileyplanning.com>
Sent:Sunday, March 15, 2020 10:15 PM
To:City Clerk; Bill Parsons
Subject:H-2019-0133 Applicant's Staff Report Comments
Attachments:Lupine Cove H-2019-0133 Staff Report Response.pdf; ATT00001.txt; ATT00002.htm
Dear City Clerk and Mr. Parsons:
Please find attached the applicant's comments in response to the Lupine Cove Staff Report scheduled to be
heard by the Meridian P&Z Commission on March 19, 2020.
I will deliver an original hard copy and color prints of the updated open space exhibit to the City of Meridian on
Monday morning, March 16, 2020.
Thank you!
To
help
prot
ect
your
priva
cy, …
Penelope Constantikes
Principal
P.O. Box 405, Boise, ID 83701
208.908.1609
1
05
PLANNING SERVICES P.O.Box 83
Boise,ID&3701
March 14, 2020
Mr. Bill Parsons, Planning Supervisor
City of Meridian Community Development Dept.
33 E. Broadway Ave., Suite 102
Meridian,ID 83642
RE: LUPINE COVE SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT
H-2019-0133
STAFF REPORT COMMENTS
Dear Mr. Parsons:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the staff report for Lupine Cove Subdivision
in advance of our March 19, 2020, Planning&Zoning Commission hearing.
DENSITY TRANSITION
e
_w_
SUBJECT SITE
�{ 4% _
The staff report supports the proposed zoning designation of R-8 as indicated by the MDR(Medium
Density Residential) Compreheisive Plan Overlay for the subject site. Above is a Current Zoning
snapshot obtaining from the City of Meridian current web based zoning map.
Staff is concerned that there is a lack of transition from the proposed subdivision density to the
Apple Valley Subdivision to the south- an old Ada County Subdivision with large lots between 4
and 5 acres.
LAND USE PLANNING - DUE DILIGENCE - INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 2
The Project Team notes that immediately adjacent to this site to the north there are 14 lots approved
with the Aegean Subdivision Preliminary Plat. The subject site is 7 acres and would yield a ratio of
14:1 for this site as it exists currently. Between the two development sites there is an 85-foot
separation due to the presence of the Five Mile Drain and the McFadden Drain.
10
(,YP)rr! i
17
I I
Rory.5
f- t. 14 - -
I iW'E,nI IT-)Vies'tl Fr- 3 t
I BACK OF LOTS t
I 51DE YAR (TYP)
s 1S € #
-
I
i
Staff reports that there is a 5:1 and a 3:1 ratio when comparing the proposed Lupine Cove density to
the existing Apple Valley Subdivision and that the transition ratios create an impact for the adjacent
subdivision. When reviewing the ratios between Apple Valley, and Lupin Cove and Aegean these
ratios are:
• Lupine Cove - 5:1; 3:1; 1:1
• Aegean—4.5:1; 3:1; 4:1; 4:1; 4:1
The illustration below shows these ratios across the shared boundaries with Apple Valley
Subdivision. The density ratios proposed with Lupine Cove are consistent with those proposed with
Aegean Subdivision regardless of the zoning designation on the respective parcels.
I +u I i
z H
` _ __---_ __ _ Illsss f "; 3
h,
_ -,. ____ -....... iLti'tYtEY i)k of
i
I
LAND USE PLANNING - DUE DILIGENCE • INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 3
It is worth noting that the separation between the south property line of Lupine Cove Subdivision
and the homes along Beckly Lane is in the vicinity of 400 to 500-feet including the 30-feet of
unopened right-of-way along the north boundary of Apple Valley Sudivision.
STUB STREET TO NORTH
While cost sharing of the engineering and bridge construction are a consideration,there are other
components to consider. Below is a snapshot from the preliminary plat submitted with the Aegean
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application showing future development anticipated with the original
Weaver parcel(subject site).
�•..��+ (NDf A PART)
The area to the east of the image above within the Weaver parcel appears to be anticipated to be a
lot for the existing home.
= t -
E
z
xav
LAND USE PLANNING DUE DILIGENCE • INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 4
This potential layout for the western portion of the Weaver parcel does not include a stub street to
the south or a connection to McDermott, but instead creates an enclaved development.
A stub street to the north(Patimos)with a connection to McDermott invites trip loading in the
proposed Lupine Cove Subdivision because it becomes a shortcut for Aegean traffic desiring to
travel south on McDermott. That in itself is not the issue. It is a question of the quantity of traffic
that becomes a hardship.
The TIS for Aegean was developed and approved without any definitive connection to the south and
Aegean Subdivision provides a `residential collector' traveling through the site farther north, closer
to the Five Mile Creek, and out to McDermott Road, as is appropriate with transportation planning.
Aegean Subdivision is located on 62.7 acres and will be composed on 215 lots. At full buildout
(anticipated in the TIS as of 2022) a trip generation of 2,046 vehicle trips is projected. The
distribution provided in the TIS for destination expects 35%of the trips to travel south on
McDermott. Phase 2, which will be adjacent to the site to the north is projected to generate 1,018
vehicle trips per day. Thirty-five percent(35%) of the Phase 2 traffic represents 356 vehicle trips.
.5 ft
x [ y
yJoe
n
i
BLOcK
¢.�a s BF,CD
Asa
ALIGNMENT OF PATIMOS STREET AND LUPINE COVE LAYOUT
The alignment of Patimos Street in Aegean aligns with Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 1, of Lupine Cove.
The stub connection with Aegean will remove 3 lots from Lupine Cove and represents an 11% loss
of lots.
Stacking distance for vehicles shortcutting through Lupine Cove for access to McDermott is an
issue. According to standard engineering practices each vehicle in a stacking scenario consumes
between 22 and 25 feet. The distance, center line of Patimos at Lupine Lane and the edge of
pavment at McDermott adjacent to the site, is about 150-feet which will allow for about 6 vehicles
to stack. Based on build-out estimates in the TIS, 35% of the AM peak hour is 56 vehicles and
combined with the 28 vehicle trips generated in the AM by Lupine, an estimated 84 vehicles will be
attempting to enter McDermott southbound requiring a left turn movement.
LAND USE PLANNING • DUE DILIGENCE ■ INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 5
U.
Qu
62 S_F.
a
'E
150'from center line of Patimos to edge of pavement - - — -
Using the same 35% for trips southbound on McDermott coming just from Lupine Cove there
would be considerably less southbound trips. With no stub street to the north,no more than 10
vehicle trips would be queued to enter McDermott southbound at one time.
Finally,the project team with Aegean Subdivision has been transparent about their desire to remove
the stub street to the south beginning in June of 2019 as has the project team for Lupine Cove. The
benefit of the stub street is minimal at best given the cost of the bridge crossing-both engineering
and construction, and the loss of lots. The cost of engineering and construction of the bridge will
approach$100,000.00 or possibly more. Lupine Cove represents 50 of the 85-feet of the Five Mile
Drain. If cost sharing is established Lupine Cove will cover a minimum of$58,000.00 of the
crossing. With the sewer in McDermott at 30 or more feet deep, connecting will be costly and adds
to the site complications.
We understand that connectivity is an important element of land planning but just as no two sites
are identical, connectivity is not always advisable or beneficial. We believe, along with the Aegean
Subdivision project team,that in this particular instance, the extension of Patimos south across the
85-foot Five Mile Drain is not justified given the overall cost of engineering and construction,the
traffic pattern changes not anticipated in the TIS, and additional traffic for the residents of Lupine
Cove. Recent articles in the Idaho Statemen and other news outlets in SW Idaho speak to the
dollars for road maintenance and construction being at a premium especially with these very large
scale developments being proposed in areas like east of Kuna. Southbound trips on McDermott
have already been factored in the TIS for Aegean and yielded no expected exceeding of ACHD's
minimum operational thresholds or requirement of turn lanes entering or exiting the site.
The required stub street to the south appears to be in conflict with the density mandate for
residential density transition argued in the staff report. If the Apple Valley Subdivision is a stable
area where redevelopment is considered part of a long range horizon-long enough to warrant a
reduction in density,then a stub street appears to be unnecessary.
Finally,the ACHD Staff Report provides criteria for continuation of streets. Below is a discussion
of these critera.
LAND USE PLANNING • DUE DILIGENCE • INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 6
• The stub street will not reduce vehicle miles traveled for the residents of Lupine Cove. A
more efficient travel route for those Lupine Cove residents that desire to travel north and
west or east,to enter McDermott rather than route through Aegean and the other
subdivisions on the north side of the Five Mile Creek.
• Using the stub street for access to points north for the Lupine Cove residents would actually
increase vehicle miles traveled.
• Bike and pedestrian connectivity would be shorten by a minor amount but$100,000.00 for
bike and ped access seems excessive especially since McDermott will be improved with
pedestrian facilities with the construction of Aegean and Lupine Cove.
• School access for the new schools to the west will not be possible from McDermott Road
adjacent to or near this site.
• It isn't obvious what enhancement to the provision of emergency services would occur with
construction of this stub street.
• Since McDermott is now classified as a Collector Street,this stub street will not reduce
access to arterial roadways.
• There is potential for intra-neighborhood circulation,but it will not facilitate circulation to
schools, neighborhood commercial centers, or transit stops.
LUPINE COVE OPEN SPACE
Staff identifies several issues with the Lupine Cove Open Space provision. Below is an updated
open space exhibit for the Commission's consideration. Ten color hard copies have been provided
with this letter for the convenience of Meridian staff.
En.&+ 3-7-?v
YUPArE COVE 9UA�IIVISION
ZIP
�`�vi 8L� o*Ia.aaw-m.nn��arouviw�e•• :L
�: �a�keE /����`ot� cps T'•—:_ _
}
... ' -----------
-
-
Or
v7'KOW
54
gap
LAND USE PLANNING - DUE DILIGENCE • INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 7
There are several characteristics of this particular parcel that should be noted including the
folowing:
• There is a high volume artesian well located at the southwest corner of the site and provision
for this water is essential for the protection of the northwest parcel in Apple Valley
Subdivision.
• The site has only 286-feet of frontage on McDermott Road (336—50-feet of the Five Mile
Drain easement), irregular shape and retention of the existing residence.
Staff identified the lack of improvements to the Five Mile Drain and McFadden Drain as grounds to
deny the application including a lack of imagination in the treatment of the NMID easement area.
There are several obstacles to incorporating improvments to the easement as stipulated by Greg
Curtis with the NMID in a phone call with Mr. Curtis in November of 2019, and the Meridian
Police Departments Policies.
• The easement area on the south side of the drains must be accepted by the City of Meridian
as public and a part of its Master Pathway Plan in order for NMID to allow any
enhancements.
• A pathway along these drains will go nowhere.
• Any type of amenity in the easement area would have low visability from the street for all
but a portion of the drain easement. Simply installing an open vision fence along the drains
might be insufficient for public safety given the length of a pathway, especially along the
McFaddon Drain section. According to the Police Service comments on Page 3 of the Staff
Report "...all amenities must be in an open area in order to allow for natural observation
opportunities. Pathways and landscaping should not create hiding spots or blind spots that
would promote criminal activities."
The project team initially proposed a pathway along the drains as an amenity for the subdivision
and would be please to provide a pathway amenity. Staff had concerns with public safety. To
incorporate a pathway,this would require the City of Meridian to accept this pathway as public and
as a part of their Master Pathway Plan. The project team would be more than happy to include an
amenity along the drains in the easement should the City incorporate this area into their Master
Pathway Plan.
The pond is proposed to be both an amenity and a necessary facility. In the revised open space plan
the pond area in now 23.7%within the open space area it is located. The pre-development flow into
the Five Mile Drain is due to the high volume artesian well and utilizing this water for an amenity
seems appropriate. The pond will also provide storm water storage in the event of the rain or snow
event that requires additional storage.
Guest parking provided in the preliminary plat has been deleted. Given the size of the parcel and
the awkward shape the team believed that quest parking would be a welcome feature. The basket
ball half-court and the hopscotch template incorporated into the temporary turnaround at the
southeast corner of the site would be paved whether incorporated into a turnaround or as separate
discrete amenities. By including these facilities within the turnaround the non-permeable surface in
the site is minimized. Reducing the street section from 36 to 33-feet also added some additional
open area to the over all total.
LAND USE PLANNING - DUE DILIGENCE - INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 8
Open space as proposed with the updated exhibit now stands at 11.7%
TREE MITIGATION
This site is veritable forest of trees. Staff s analysis is correct in that based on tree mitigation
materials submitted with the application a high level of mitiagation would be required.
To better understand staff s concerns and to analyze the trees located on the site, a line-by-line
evaluation was done to identify the locations of trees indicated as being subject to removal. At least
130 of the trees slated for removal do not appear to be necessary for removal. These trees are
located in the following locations:
• Landscape buffers.
• Just inside the easement along the drains and especially along the Five Mile Drain portion.
• Inside proposed lots along lot lines where they will not impede construction of homes.
• In open space areas.
• Along the south property line there is a very dense row of pine trees with only 11 identified
as dead or diseased compared to about 100 that are healthy and should remain especially for
the buffer function they provide.
Attached is the list of trees by location/number. Those trees identified as candidates for remaining
are highlighted.
A representative of the landscape architect met with Elroy Huff on site to evaluate the trees. The
project team did follow up several times with Mr. Huff regarding strategies for mitigation and were
referred to planning staff. There was email discussion with staff about mitigation and an
Alternative Compliance application which we understand should be submitted with a final plat
application. To submit an Alternative Compliance application at this point in the approval process
is, we understand, premature.
It appears that with some additional analysis the volume of trees needing mitigation will be vastly
reduced. The project team will work with staff and the City Arborist to bring the mitigation efforts
for the site into a more management amount.
In conclusion:
1. The Applicant would be happy to participate in a development agreement for the proposed
Annexation and Zoning Application with the City of Meridian.
2. The street name proposed with the subdivision is a place holder. A Street Name Application
will be submitted to the Ada County Street Naming Committee prior to Final Plat
Application.
3. Landscaping along the micro-path in Lot 7, Block 2, would be easy to incorporate.
4. Relocating the sidewalk along McDermott Road as indicated by staff is easy to incorporate
and the Applicant would be happy to provide that change.
5. The Applicant would be happy to coordinate tree mitigation with the City Arborist along
with providing a more detailed analysis of the trees on site as discussed above.
6. Lot 6, Block 1, will include the community mail facility. If an additional amenity is needed
in this area, the Applicant would be happy to provide an additional amenity.
LAND USE PLANNING • DUE DILIGENCE - INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
Page 9
7. The pond in Lot 13, Block 1,has been discussed above and is now in compliance with the
UDC.
8. Unless the City of Meridian includes the Five Mile Drain and the McFadden Drain as a part
of the Master Pathways Plan the Applicant is required to follow NMID direction with regard
to the use of the easement area.
9. Staff indicated that the project exceeds the amenity requirement. The project team would be
happy to discuss amenities—provided and requested,with Staff.
10. Fencing along the entire north boundary of the buildable lots is acceptable to the Applicant
and will be incorporated into the landscape plan.
11. Incorporation of articulation in the rear elevation of homes along McDermott Road is
acceptable to the Applicant and will be implemented as requested.
The Applicant and project team respectfully request approval of the preliminary plat for Lupine
Cove. As modified by the discussion above and other than requesting that the stub street to the
north be removed for the reasons cited above, staff s concerns can be accommodated.
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
Best regards,
RILEY PLANNING SERVICES LLC
Cor�LST�Fi�t�jlC�S
Penelope Constantikes
Principal
LAND USE PLANNING - DUE DILIGENCE • INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS
LIJ Lij
U Q
O �
> w fY r
zY � w`�Y�7wWwWwWWWwwwwwwWWWWwWWwWWwWWWWWwwWWwWWwwllJWWwwwwWSllwWwwW
fl Q O � Q J J Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
=0 •' (1)00v1v5mci.aaaaaaatLaa[�.aa.tlaaarLatLa.aaa0.[1.c1.a.W afl.aaaC1LL4.Q.a.0.0.El.a.aLi.aII.o.tLafL
W
O
W W
l U
m Z
V O at+')-Nr V m [V t7bO NN 01 K7�1'a ND1 O?�D N WoN CO)
CNT f0 f067 t0�Cb�C�nT�o'J O'7 C O O iN tV ON0005 Nib
T r W J r r T T r r r r r r T r r r r r r r r r r r r P r T r T P r
U
H
Z D 0 NMV u]WhW mO NMITM W1,-WM0-N
-grcf) H W W Imo.W m0 NMst W W1`W M0r NMst to W ti W M 0�Tm04�M0r4 tp � MMMMMMMMMMMMMc7M C+}Mt*T(*I fry cry cry[+)MrntryNMMM<Mt MM0[ry1c-?Wc?0maM 0mM00P?0cryM0M00c")0R3 0to NS'7 cN°)cNry Nc'7 N(ry Nt"3 SNary NCory NMo Nco'7{Mory Mco+S TM
W41;1;17r�r{r�. li1.I' m mWrnTTT9TTTT e rTTTTP
w FM oT Ta Po To P_0 _0T0r ro orTaT_0 -0ro 0�]
T r r P r T r
W
WW �» > D�Z)Qt d J
p 0000 OCOQp U UUUmQ Q CL
O`f in 000 QQQQ O 000 a
W W 010 w ¢Q J J J W w W W w w w w } }}}Q Q
U- Ww ? 0L0E� �Wwwo coon aa.aa W(�www�W�W 0
NwX� yLLW- ,e `1 ZZZwwWLLIilWWWWww----
� zzzz z zzz�>tl> 0
OaO-¢�¢FF¢zxac��¢ JOOOzzzzzzZzzZzxDDx 0 00001a� U) > i
cl)U)Ou_OWwOaumeLu >LOaaSx=Q2aaacLada�a-�-�-� =�xx=zu5Q55 w o <
VJ q0 WWWWWwWWt
O ZZZZ ZZ
D-1 M M r Cl) a n U tl (L t
Q 7- 0 W
o z Z_ 2 co
`ni�bin'vo- 'v_ io"v- ro- o- Q Ix
W�9050r[Vf3](V c0"CD[n6]fO�rrrMNmtDr�rr20r-Lo-r- V RV uj U
_ x a z mz
Q
U z z Ow0)C)co va)r�v'
w w (A U Fl
o rr} w w- io co 7o Io i�- W W
ZCL NMc%�NMrr Lf)<t R- U
a F Q r
Z w Q U Z V z 0
QN OTNMetW f01�W QSOrNM<t to f0tiW0arNMV�,j _ P _
W W s M U!W I-m O r r r r r N N N N N c V N N N N M M M M M Q N M t o f 0 1�co m W I s
W ar+. W i s s s s t s i e i i i s s + c s t t s s s F >j j a F W
N N NNNNNNNN[VNNNNNNNNNNNtV NNNNNNNNNNtY Q ��}' [f7 CryCry c�1M Mt
wa �000aooa0000000a0000000aoa000000000O X a 000 QWoa00000t
F 0 r r T r r r T r r r T P r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r F W r r r r r r r r r F {LI F r T T T T T T
t i
Eq
tp
LO
w w w w w
ZZZZZZZZZzzZzZzZZZZZZZZD=l ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzZZZZZZZg U------------ ----»— --- ----- -- ------ w
aaaaaaaaa.aaa�—aba�ar�aaaa.�-»�ciaaLLaa�r�cicic�a�aa�ciaaaao.an.a� a
Ln
w
� O
U w d
r - p p p- r Z 0
tAh to r (D CD w DO CKJ h n LO d'm 1- to h
rr cn to 0)fl-r CD in to r� tO CD E-CO �to Ca LO Ln f'-to C4ar CO CO h-0)CO Cn
Z
Ix 0
J 0
V ti7 CO h m Q O r N M r w Ofl-w m o a N m It to(O h m m O r N Ch V'Ln[D h M M CD N M t ko o t-w O)O r N M V'Lo
M Cl) Cl)M Cl)�t`S V�Y V'd''V R V"V'V to Ln In Ln(r)Lo(n Ln to to(D(D to(0 t0 to w to w�h h h T il-{-h h h 00 W co co CD 00 � 0
ty
[1MMM[h o7(J MM MM M MM M M MMMMMMMM M M cn MMM M MMMP7 MM['7 MnJ i7 P7 l+JM Mil M tt7 L*7 t7 t*)M 0
g O Q O Q O O q Q O Q Q Q q q q q p O q q q q O 0 0 q O Q O O g q q q q q q q q q O q O O q O q O q o a Q 0
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 1- w
(L' L
� L
w
Z L
0 L
i
F_ L
0 L
Z t
w L
a
-j w ¢
a t CL � w c
a a ¢ 2 - ¢ `�iL'1
�.._ v 0 w Y 5 L
�UwWww> �#r.ww2wwwwww www wwLUwtuw ww< r > }Z > Q)
3 U U U U(Y U U EY 0 0 0 U U U U U U 000000 U w an w Ir re w w w Z o ¢ Z
��w��J������ZZZZZTTOf of��crtr� �zt¢--' zwwwwa�aQaa<wm U� C i
Laaaa=aa_aaaaaa_____aaa�aaaaaaaaa�¢��_zzzz=�aaaa¢zceYdgo :
nu3u3v)tnUtntt� tAtgtAuitl3cnt!)ctn aaacnrnrnLLu rnuJu�u�v�u�LLcrY-,U�UaaaaaUw¢¢¢¢ -,000�z w i
W a
a 2 W
J _ J
U to
7D aN---0)fl-rgilD f�tA Nr`OD f-f--r-
tr r re--¢to to O In t-M Or T LD W to W 0 Lo N it tl7 G0 CO GD CDN N rn ra CO t?V"T'=0)N= �
Q r NM�tf1(o h CO Q Q Nth'IrLO CO hmO N M Q htX
u)ED3 to Ca NMV'Ln tO h-g001O NC'7 tF)tOhC40)OrNM
Arrrrrr NNNNNNtV NNMC�)ih t�7MMMMthM�'V'C Syy d'y V st of(.o to In tf')L1i Ln tl)tn yj Ln tD (O(D tt)
$ c�ciMMt�r')cfitr5c$rat+5 �t�r5dsr'tMc%icic�Mc%)mmr)t+'r�r',(�Mc%;c4r5cSc5rSc�c}ic�c�i�r5c�3e�thc})� (�(�� ��cfa
000a00000nooT ToaT Ta Tooaaaaoaaodcaooaannn000nannnaaaooaa000
Charlene Way
From:Penelope Riley <penelope@rileyplanning.com>
Sent:Friday, March 13, 2020 2:43 PM
To:Bill Parsons; Bill Nary; Ted Baird; Andrea Pogue; Chris Johnson; Charlene Way;
Adrienne Weatherly
Subject:Re: Lupine Cove Staff Report for 03/19/2020 P/Z MTG
Attachments:ATT00001.txt; ATT00002.htm
Bill:
First of all, we request that you remove Lupine Cove from the Consent Agenda for the March 19, 2020,
Planning & Zoning Commission hearing and place this application on the regular agenda.
While I was hopeful that I would be able to provide detailed comments by the end of business today, there is
some much material to cover that a 24 hour (business day) response does not seem to be unreasonable. As
such, a full response will be provided to the City by 8:30 AM on Monday, March 16th.
We appreciate your assistance with this.
Thank you!
To
help
prot
ect
your
priva
cy, …
Penelope Constantikes
Principal
P.O. Box 405, Boise, ID 83701
208.908.1609
On Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:50:28 +0000, Bill Parsons <bparsons@meridiancity.org> wrote:
Attached is the staff report for the proposed Lupine Cove annexation and preliminary plat application (H-
2019-0133). This item is scheduled to be on the Commission agenda on 03/19/2020. The public hearing will
be held at City Hall, 33 E. Broadway Avenue, beginning at 6:00 pm. Please call or e-mail with any questions.
Penelope - Please submit any written response you may have to the staff report to the City Clerk’s office
(MeridianCityClerk@meridiancity.org) and myself (e-mail or fax) as soon as possible.
Bill Parsons, AICP | Planning Supervisor
City of Meridian | Community Development Dept.
33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: 208-884-5533 | Fax: 208-489-0571
Built for Business, Designed for Living
1
All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law,
in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law.
2