2021-02-16 Regular
City Council Regular Meeting
City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho
Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 6:00 PM
Called to Order at 6:15 PM
Minutes
VIRTUAL MEETING INSTRUCTIONS
Limited seating is available at City Hall. Consider joining the meeting virtually:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84814090172
Or join by phone: 1-669-900-6833
Webinar ID: 848 1409 0172
ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE
PRESENT
Councilwoman Liz Strader
Councilman Joe Borton
Councilman Brad Hoaglun
Councilman Treg Bernt
Councilman Luke Cavener
Mayor Robert E. Simison
ABSENT
Councilwoman Jessica Perreault
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics
The public are invited to sign up in advance of the meeting at www.meridiancity.org/forum to
address elected officials regarding topics of general interest or concern of public matters.
Comments specific to active land use/development applications are not permitted during this
time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at Public Forum. However, City
Council may request the topic be added to a future meeting agenda for further discussion or
action. The Mayor may also direct staff to provide followup assistance regarding the matter.
ACTION ITEMS
Public Hearing process: Land use development applications begin with presentation of the
project and analysis of the application by Planning Staff. The applicant is then allowed up to 15
minutes to present their project. Members of the public are then allowed up to 3 minutes each
to address City Council regarding the application. Citizens acting as a representative of a
Homeowner’s Association may be allowed up to 10 minutes to speak on behalf of represented
homeowners who have consented to yielding their time. After all public testimony, the applicant
is allowed up to 10 minutes to respond to questions and comments. City Council members may
ask questions throughout the public hearing process. The public hearing is then closed, and no
further public comment is heard. City Council may move to continue the application to a future
meeting or approve or deny the application. The Mayor is not a member of the City Council and
pursuant to Idaho Code does not vote on public hearing items unless to break a tie vote.
1. Public Hearing for Mark Enos Annexation (H-2020-0119) by Mark Enos, Located
at 2972 E. Leslie Dr. Approved
A. Request: Annexation of 1.05 acres of land with the R-2 zoning district.
Motion to approve made by Councilman Cavener, Seconded by Councilman
Hoaglun.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun,
Councilman Bernt, Councilman Cavener
ORDINANCES \[Action Item\]
2. Ordinance No. 21-1916: An Ordinance Adding a New Section to Meridian City
Code, Section 7-2-2(B)(8), Regarding Prohibited Parking in Front of Mailboxes;
Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date
Motion to schedule for future discussion made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded
by Councilman Cavener.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun,
Councilman Bernt, Councilman Cavener
3. Ordinance No. 21-1917: Repealing and Replacing Meridian City Code Section 4-2-1,
Regarding Definitions Related to Nuisances; Amending Meridian City Code Section
4-2-2(c), Regarding Trees in Public Right-of-Way; Amending Meridian City Code
Section 4-2-3(d)(2), Regarding Abatement of Nuisance Trees; Adopting a Savings
Clause; and Providing an Effective Date
Motion to schedule for future discussion made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded
by Councilman Cavener.
Voting Yea: Councilwoman Strader, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun,
Councilman Bernt, Councilman Cavener
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
ADJOURNMENT
7:05 pm
Item#2.
Meridian City Council February 16, 2021.
A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:15 p.m., Tuesday,
February 16, 2021, by Mayor Robert Simison.
Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt, Brad Hoaglun
and Liz Strader.
Members Absent: Jessica Perreault.
Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Alan Teifenbach, Mark Ford, Joe Bongiorno and
Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton
_X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt
Jessica Perreault _X Luke Cavener
_X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison
Simison: All right. Council, we will call this meeting to order. For the record it is 6:15 on
Tuesday, February 16th. We will begin tonight's regular City Council meeting with roll call
attendance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Simison: Next item is the Pledge of Allegiance. So, if you would all rise and join us in the
pledge.
(Pledge of Allegiance recited.)
COMMUNITY INVOCATION
Simison: Next item is our community invocation, which will be delivered by Troy Drake of
Calvary Chapel Meridian. If you would all, please, join us in the community invocation or
take this as a moment of silence and reflection. Pastor Drake.
Drake: Mr. Mayor, Council Members. Lord God, thank you so much for this place that
we get to live in and it's a free city and a free state and a free country. We appreciate all
those who went before us to make it so. It's a great sacrifice for many to enjoy what we
have. So, we thank you, God, for those who protect us, whether it's the firefighters, police
officers, anybody that responds to things to keep us out of harm's way, we appreciate
them and ask for safety for our city tonight. Also, Lord, we are thinking about those who
may be ill or fearful of being ill, God, we just pray that you would protect our city, the --
the citizens from -- from, you know, just any more of sweeping illness here and -- and,
you know, the people who need help would -- would find it. Lord, we are also just praying
Page 34
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 2 of —
for unity in our community and, Lord, it's divisive times and I just pray that we would desire
in our community unity amongst us, even in our expression of disagreement in many
things, Lord. Ultimately, God, I just pray that people would put their hope in you and that
you would rule in peace over -- over this city. So, thank you so much for that. And, lastly,
Lord, I just want to pray for our Mayor and, you know, what he's -- his vision and what
he's trying to do and the Council Members, those who work hard for us in this building
and we just appreciate them, God, and I pray that you would give them a lot of wisdom
and that you would help them in the decision making of the business affairs of the city.
And so, God, again, we just appreciate you and appreciate this time that we can gather
here, in Jesus' name, amen. Thank you for the opportunity.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Simison: Good night. Council, next item up is the adoption of our agenda.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move adoption of the agenda as presented.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any
discussion on the motion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The
ayes have it. The motion is agreed to and the -- and the agenda is agreed to.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
PUBLIC FORUM — Future Meeting Topics
Simison: Mr. Clerk, do we have anyone signed up under public forum?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not.
ACTION ITEMS
1. Public Hearing for Mark Enos Annexation (H-2020-0119) by Mark
Enos, Located at 2972 E. Leslie Dr.
A. Request: Annexation of 1.05 acres of land with the R-2 zoning
district.
Page 35
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 3 1 -
Simison: Okay. Then with that we will move on to Action Items. Our first item is a public
hearing for H-2020-0119. I will open this public hearing with staff comments and turn it
over to Alan.
Tiefenbach: Good evening, Mayor, Members of the Council. Alan Tiefenbach, associate
planner, with the City of Meridian. So, this is an annexation and zoning. The site consists
-- consists of about an acre of land. It's zoned R-1 in unincorporated Ada county. It's
located at 2972 East Leslie, which is south and west of the East Ustick, North Eagle Road
intersection. The adjacent land use. The property is bordered by the city limits on two
sides. To the north is R-15. To the east is R-2. Unincorporated Ada county is to the west.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends this for a low density residential. This is a
proposal to annex and rezone one acre of property to R-1 to obtain city services. The
property is in unincorporated Ada county and it's served by individual well and septic. The
applicant states -- the applicant desires to construct a detached accessory building for an
approximately 1,750 square foot shop, RV garage, and upstairs living area. The
applicant's been unable to obtain a new septic permit from the city due to the location and
limitations of the existing system to accommodate an additional bathroom. They want to
have a living area above. The applicant has determined it would be cheaper to annex
into the city and connect to city water and sewer rather than upgrade the septic system.
If the applicant chooses to use the upstairs living area as a secondary dwelling unit, it's
subject to specific use requirements. This includes the living area being less than 700
square feet, at least one additional parking space required, and the property must be
occupied by the property owner at least six months out of the year. The Comprehensive
Plan is supportive of these types of accessory dwelling units. There are
recommendations to support the construction of these and to increase the diversity of
housing options. This annexation and zoning went to the Planning Commission at the
January 21 st hearing. There was no discussion and they unanimously recommended
approval. Very simple annexation and rezoning and with that, Council, I will stand for
questions.
Simison: Thank you, Alan. Council, any questions? Okay. With that is the applicant with
us?
Enos: Yes, I'm here. This is Mark Enos.
Simison: Mr. Enos, you are recognized for 15 minutes.
Enos: Okay. Yeah. I don't-- I don't think I have anything to add, unless there is questions.
Simison: Okay. Perfect. Council, any questions for the applicant? Okay. This is a public
hearing. Is there anybody who signed up to testify on this item, Mr. Clerk?
Johnson: Mr. Mayor, nobody -- nobody signed up in advance. There are three people
online, however.
Simison: Okay. If there is anybody that would like to provide testimony on this item,
Page 36
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 4 of —
please, use the raise your hand feature on the Zoom call at the bottom and we can bring
you in or if there is anyone present and --that would like to provide testimony. I am seeing
no one come to the podium and no one raise their hand. I will give the applicant, if they
would like to make any additional final comments that have come up within the last
minute.
Enos: Not -- not at this time.
Simison: Okay. Then, with that, Council, do I have a motion or discussion?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Move to close the public hearing on Item 1, H-2020-0119.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor, I second the motion.
Simison: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Is there any
discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Planning and Zoning Commission did a good job of reviewing through this. The
couple questions I had were addressed in the Planning and Zoning hearing. So, with that
I move we approve Item 1, H-2020-0119 as presented.
Hoaglun: Second the motion, Mr. Mayor.
Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not,
Clerk will call the roll.
Roll call: Bernt, yea; Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, yea; Perreault,
absent.
Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Thank you very much, Alan,
for being here and Mr. Enos. Have a good evening.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
ORDINANCES [Action Item]
Page 37
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 5 of —
2. Ordinance No. 21-1916: An Ordinance Adding a New Section to
Meridian City Code, Section 7-2-2(B)(8), Regarding Prohibited
Parking in Front of Mailboxes; Adopting a Savings Clause; and
Providing an Effective Date
Simison: Next up is ordinances. The first item up is a first reading of Ordinance No. 20-
1916. Not used to ordinances where we have someone come up and speak. Do we
need to have it read by title first or --
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, we could certainly read the title for the first
reading. I think Lacy wanted to simply explain where these came from and why they are
in front of you. Normally we would have had this conversation ahead of time, but the
police direction was to simply get it scheduled. So, I think Lacy just wanted to explain it.
But certainly reading the title first is fine.
Simison: Okay. We will ask the clerk to read his ordinance by title.
Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's Ordinance No. 21-1916, an ordinance adding a new
section to the Meridian City Code, Section 7-2-2(B)(8) regarding prohibited parking in
front of mailboxes. Adopting a savings clause and providing an effective date.
Simison: Okay. You have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anybody that would
like it read in its entirety or any explanation of the ordinance?
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Yes, Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Sorry, I didn't need the whole thing to be recited. I did just have a couple of
questions about it.
Simison: Would you like -- you are not there yet. We do have Lacy here to provide some
details. Would you like our her explain it first?
Strader: Sure. Sure.
Simison: Okay. Go ahead.
Ooi: Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Council Members. I'm here to discuss adding this new
ordinance. Due to the pandemic this addition to the parking regulations has been
suggested due to the increase of essential packages, including medications through the
USPS service, for the groups more at risk, have been asked to give us the ability to restrict
and enforce people parking in front of mailboxes to assure delivery in a timely manner of
these essential packages.
Simison: Okay. Council Woman Strader, does that help answer any questions you have?
Page 38
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 6 of 19
Strader: Kind of, but I actually did sort of want to follow up with a question.
Simison: Mr. Nary, is this really appropriate or should we bring this back next week for a
staff report. I'm just not used to having conversation in the ordinance section of our
agenda. So, I'm learning here.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I recognize this is a little unusual. I wasn't
aware today that they had never-- I knew they hadn't presented anything. I didn't realize
they had never presented anything to the Council prior. It is perfectly appropriate,
because this is an action item. So, for the conversation -- the reason we -- I asked Chris
to add this as a first reading only is so that we would have the ability to have the
conversation --
Simison: Okay.
Nary: -- and, then, you can set up a second and third reading next week.
Simison: All right. I just wanted to make sure we were doing this in appropriate fashion.
This was I think a Council request as part of this conversation anyway. So, go ahead,
Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Okay. Thank you. I guess I wanted to understand the magic of the ten feet of
the mailbox and I started thinking if we are in a more densely populated area with a lot of
mailboxes and the homes are close together, if it's ten feet each direction out from the
mailbox, are we creating a situation potentially where we are going to have a lot of parking
challenges. Just wanted to understand how--the interplay between the request and what
it actually might sort of mean for our parking.
Ooi: I think it's just the size of the vehicle. We did ask the U.S. Post Office if they had a
standard recommendation. We looked at some other codes and that's what has mostly
been adopted to give enough room for them to turn in and out of the mailbox. A lot of the
higher density areas are going to have community boxes where the people are already
moving to one area and it wouldn't -- it wouldn't be each individual house. For residential
areas that are streetside I don't see that being a problem. There could be a problem in
courts and that's the reason that we added regulations of hours and allowing Sundays
and federal holidays not to be regulated.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: I'm not sure if it's appropriate, but just for the discussion I guess. I struggle a
little bit with approving a change to an ordinance without feeling like the need is truly there
that it's not temporary from COVID and -- and that this makes sense from a community
development parking standpoint I guess is just where I'm at and I apologize if we wouldn't
normally have a discussion during the ordinance. I'm not trying to upset the applecart, I
Page 39
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 1 of —
just -- it -- I just -- I don't know. I'm not -- so, I'm not there on this ordinance. That's just
where I'm at right now.
Simison: Okay. Thank you. I will be honest with you, I thought this was already a law.
Anywhere I have ever lived you are supposed to leave ten feet parking away from your
mailbox to begin with. So, I was -- I was surprised when I found it wasn't even an
ordinance in our city -- or in our community.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: I like you thought this was already part of the law in Meridian. But I guess my
question is -- you touched on these kind of community areas where everybody's
mailboxes are located and I used to live in a community that had that, but the parking
stalls are -- are right in front of them and so I hear a lot from -- from code enforcement
about challenges around enforcement and so I worry about what type of challenges this
makes for enforcement and, then, two, do we inadvertently create violators of people that
are parking in front of their mailbox to pick up their mail and -- and how you as code
enforcement will be able to rectify that, because my assumption is if I'm parking in front
of these community mailboxes I'm immediately violating code, but that's the location that
has been set aside for me to pick up my mail. So, any insight you can provide in terms
of enforcement around that would be helpful.
Ooi: The community boxes are drop boxes from the back, so the mail carrier actually has
to get out and deliver from the backside of those anyway. I -- so, I think that maybe there
would need to be an exemption in place if it -- we wanted to look into it being more in
depth to exclude those from enforcement. The second part of that question being --
Cavener- Enforcement of -- sorry, Mr. Mayor. Talk us through concerns about
enforcement. Again, if I -- if I work for the post office and somebody is parked in front of
the mailbox I assume I have got to call and does the postal worker, then, have to wait for
code enforcement to show up and does that deter, then, people actually calling in violators
and what your response would be to those types of calls.
Ooi: I think it's most similar to parking in front of a driveway. So, our driveway ordinance
doesn't allow for someone to park in front of their own driveway either, but we don't go
seeking those. We wouldn't recognize them. I think that it would be something that would
be an education based warning system. We probably wouldn't stop unless we received
a complaint. We do and have for years received complaints for people parking in front of
mailboxes and at this point our only enforcement is to mark them for a 72 hour violation
and, then, return three days later to see if the vehicle is still there. So, I think that it would
just be one of those codes that we would respond to when we received the complaints,
that it was in front of someone's mailbox is not their own. Most of the ones that are
residential do share with a neighbor. So, hypothetically, if you are parking in front of your
mailbox you are preventing, yeah, the delivery of your neighbor's packages.
Page 40
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 8 of 19
Simison: Council, any further questions or comments at this point in time?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Strader: I guess a procedural question for Mr. Nary. If Council goes through with the first
reading and it gets scheduled for a second and third combined, does that automatically
trigger a public hearing along with that or is that something Council can request?
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, so a public hearing is never required. It's
generally a request or a practice. So, if the Council would like to have that scheduled for
public hearing what I would suggest is we only set it for a second reading and have the
public hearing. So, there is an opportunity for change as desired. But certainly if that's
the Council's request we can do that.
Cavener: Thank you.
Simison: Council, any further questions or comments?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: This was something that I was supportive of and had raised and it was -- it's -- at
its simplest most narrow focus was the senior citizens not getting medicines. I -- I have
heard those calls and complaints and that's -- that's who is going to be calling and if they
are denied their ability to get some medical care by mail -- that was probably the most
pointed example where you would have someone calling right away. So, that's -- that's
the origin of -- of what this is trying to remedy. I'm sure if it goes forward at some point
and we proceed we will have data on educational opportunities to those that might violate
versus citations versus who is complaining and it very well could be refined as it proceeds
down the road after its application. But that was the pointed focus of it, which I thought
was something that could be acted on relatively quick.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Yeah. I like the fact that there are exceptions to this, not on a Sunday or federal
holiday. If it's Sunday afternoon and someone's having a birthday party in the
neighborhood and the cars are lined up, it's not a violation, there is no -- nothing -- no
enforcement action will be taken. But yet if it's during Monday through Saturday, 8:00 to
5.00, someone has somebody legitimately blocking their postal box, they can -- they can
call and seek rectification of that. So, you know, with -- within limitations I can certainly
understand the need to -- to have that open and available, especially as Councilman
Page 41
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 9 of —
Borton pointed out, there is some very serious ramifications for -- for some if it's not
delivered properly and on time. So, yeah, I'm a little more open to these --these changes.
Ooi: Can I readdress?
Simison: Go ahead.
Ooi: If we had the code on the books it would give us the ability to go knock on a door
and ask someone to move their car. If this isn't a regulation we can't ask that courtesy of
someone at this point. So, just like blocking a driveway, it's not in our best interest to call
in a tow truck and move a car if we can get ahold of someone. But at this point we don't
have the ability or we are just arbitrarily asking for courtesy. So, it does give us that ability
just to remedy the issue without necessarily issuing a citation, but to have the situation
fixed.
Bernt: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: For the most part I think that this ordinance makes sense. I think that if -- if it's a
community mailbox area, like the code enforcement officer mentioned, you know, they
can get to those mailboxes through the back side. So, I don't know if it's necessarily going
to be a huge issue there. But if it is the pleasure of the Council to have further
conversation and discussion in a public hearing setting, the Mayor and I can discuss that
a little bit. That would be --
Simison: Council, anything further at this time?
Borton: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Borton.
Borton: With that it would just stay on for a second read next week?
Simison: I would assume a second reading and we will discuss what else -- I was getting
-- you know, it seems like we are going a little out of order, so I just want to -- I don't want
to commit, I want to work with the Legal Department on how this would -- should move
forward appropriately if we are going to have public input and a process in a way that
makes sense.
Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, we can tentatively schedule it for a second reading for next week,
but we probably need to see -- making sure that we can provide adequate public notice
to be able to -- to comment. So, it might need to get bumped a week. But let us -- we
can explore that in the morning. So, we could tentatively set it for a second reading next
week and if there is issues throughout notice, we can bump it one more week after that
to a second reading on the first meeting in March.
Page 42
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 10 of 19
3. Ordinance No. 21-1917: Repealing and Replacing Meridian City Code
Section 4-2-1, Regarding Definitions Related to Nuisances;
Amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-2(c), Regarding Trees in
Public Right-of-Way; Amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-
3(d)(2), Regarding Abatement of Nuisance Trees; Adopting a Savings
Clause; and Providing an Effective Date
Simison: Okay. All right. Thank you very much. So, yes, up next is the first reading of
Ordinance No. 21-1917. 1 will ask the clerk to read this ordinance --just reading by title.
Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is an ordinance repealing and replacing Meridian
City Code Section 4-2-1 regarding definitions related to nuisances; amending Meridian
City Code Section -- Section 4-2-2(c) regarding trees in public right of way; amending
Meridian Code -- Meridian City Code Section 4-2-3(d)(2) regarding abatement of
nuisance trees; adopting a savings clause and providing an effective date.
Simison: Okay. Council and public, you have heard this read by title. Is there anyone
that would like this read its entirety? Or would anyone like to make any information
available about this ordinance. Lacy.
Ooi: Mr. Mayor. Lacy Ooi, Meridian Police Department. The adopted proposed changes
were suggested to us by the Ada county courts, requesting a definition for what we
currently listed as a dismantled vehicle. We didn't have a definition. Looking into what
we currently had on the books we currently call what we intend to be a dismantled vehicle
a junked vehicle. So, this would just be a change of definition title, changing a junked
vehicle into a dismantled vehicle, leaving it to be better clarified and less subjective when
we stand in court. The other section was that during the proposed change of previous
nuisance code numbers were taken out of the system and they would just be adding those
numbers back into the sections.
Simison: Okay. Council, any questions or comments?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: I don't know if it's a question, but just some comments. I have got some
concerns with what's proposed here. We are looking at 4-2-1(a). Number two. To me
the fact that we are talking to somebody who's missing a windshield wiper as a dismantled
vehicle -- I really worry about just the precedent that we set. Not to think that code
enforcement is going around being the windshield wiper police, but I just -- I'm always
one that is really sensitive to the heavy hand of government and worry about really a lot
that's included in lines one and two and even line three, I just -- I see scenarios where
people purchase a vehicle with the intention of facilitating repairs or reconditioning or
getting an antique vehicle of some kind and what we see is that neighbor wars -- you guys
get pulled into those and you become the referee and it becomes tit for tat and I just -- I
Page 43
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 11 of 19
see this open a lot of doors for somebody who is mad at their neighbor to get you all
involved. Specifically also on line two you talk about trying to avoid things that are
arbitrary. Again, I don't know what an adequate fender is versus an inadequate fender
and how you would enforce that. Number B, again, graffiti, reading that, if I have got a
sketching in concrete of when we moved into our home I assume I would be in violation.
If in the tree out in front of my house I wrote LC plus AC with a heart around it I would be
in violation. I know that's not the intent behind that, but as -- as read those are some real
concerns. So, I -- I'm just-- I'm letting you know at this particular point this isn't something
that I'm going to be supportive of and so I don't know how we can achieve what you or
what the clerks are wanting to achieve without overly burdening our residents with -- as
a code.
Nary: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Mr. Nary.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, this is the current ordinance that's already on
the books. So, if the question is you want us to repeal it entirely, that's your only option.
All this is doing is changing from junk to dismantled and part of the rationale is when the
courts were concerned -- I won't speak for code enforcement, but I know there are issues
sometimes that people don't think it's junk, because they are going to repair it or they are
going to restore it, but the neighbors are complaining, because it's parked in the street
and so that's the part of the problem we are trying to remedy. So, I don't think we have
gotten calls from people that have a lawfully parked vehicle on their property that doesn't
have windscreen wipers on it. It's usually parts of cars that are laying all over the place
and many times in the street. So, that's I think most of the calls. I mean I know some of
them are on private property, but they are in an area where it requires they be stored
behind a fence and not in the driveway.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Mr. Nary, I mean you know my feelings again about some of our overhanded
code around vehicles parked on their own property. If a vehicle is inoperable and parked
on a street that's handled within 72 hours. I -- personally I don't think anybody would say
if my truck -- and I learned this this week when it snowed. My pickup truck was missing
a windshield wiper. I do not classify that as a dismantled vehicle. I don't think anybody
would classify it as a dismantled vehicle, but if approved we would classify a dismantled
vehicle as a vehicle that is missing a windshield wiper and if that means that we need to
repeal and start fresh, I'm supportive of that. Quite frankly, I think that is a good
conversation for our Council to have.
Simison: Council, just for the record -- and I apologize that neither the Council President
nor I were present for the agenda last week. I won't allow future ordinances to come
before you unless there has at least been a department report, so we can have a
Page 44
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 12 of 19
conversation. I'm not going to say they are showing up on the same agenda, I don't like
doing this conversation in the ordinance section. Quite frankly, when we get to this point
in time it should be perfunctory, not discussionary. So, Mr. Nary, if you can help make
sure we do that in the future.
Nary: Absolutely.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Is Lacy going to address the other sections about trees in a public right of way
and nuisance?
Ooi: No.
Hoaglun: Because I have a question about that one.
Nary: I think Matt Perkins is on for that.
Simison: Yeah. We have Matthew Perkins, who is our city arborist, who is online, that
can -- if you have a question go ahead and --
Perkins: Mr. Mayor and Council Members, thank you for -- for having me. I'm happy to
be here to discuss this matter. So, my main concern with the way that the ordinance was
previously written was that the -- the adjacent property owners are responsible for
maintaining and in all the care of trees within the public right of way at their residences.
That's -- that is fine. I have no intention of trying to -- to take that over. My concern is
purely from a safety aspect, because to me as the city arborist I'm supposed to be here
as a resource for the public to help them understand how to correctly care for those trees
that are an asset to the public. It would be very easy for anyone to go out to a public
property tree and administer a hack job to the tree, which would, then, render the tree into
a hazardous condition that would be a safety problem for any -- anybody in the public.
So, my interest would just be in trying to help educate -- be here as the city arborist as --
as a community resource to help people understand how to better care for those trees in
a manner that won't cause any public safety issues. I will stand for questions.
Simison: Mr. Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor. Yeah. Thank you for that, Matthew. I was just curious --just needed
more understanding of this. So, if you have a tree that's in the public right of way -- and
I'm thinking of a subdivision that has common areas and whatnot and sometimes those
trees get grown and they have got branches coming into somebody's yard, do they need
the -- do they need to talk to you -- your office before trimming any of those branches that
are hanging into their yard?
Page 45
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 13 of 19
Perkins: No, not necessarily. So, my objective is not to, you know, interject into every
single case of a tree being pruned. This all kind of stemmed from actually the nuisance
tree code, which is written, where, you know, like you said, if a -- if a neighbor has a tree
that's on a -- on the public property and it's causing a problem and say code enforcement
gets called out to -- to address the situation and the code enforcement officers may not
have the expertise to determine whether or not a tree is posing a hazard or not. So, in
that case they call me and I come out and I look at the situation and I act as an interpreter,
basically, to help them understand what the corrective action should be in that case. But
it's not just for -- you know, for every little -- little dinky pruning job, it's -- it's mainly just to
prevent -- worst case scenario what -- what I dream about is say you are driving to City
Hall in the morning and you are coming down Main Street, many of those trees on Main
Street are considered actually, you know, right of way trees and so the responsibility for
pruning those trees -- especially north of Carlton of the post office there, big trees that
over -- you know, overshadow the street and create a corridor that I would just hate to be
driving to work in the morning and all of a sudden see those trees hat racked and that --
that's -- that's the main thing that -- that I'm concerned about.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Just to follow up. Matthew, it sounds like that Section E is really the controlling
part for all of this. Obstructs the free passage of pedestrian-vehicle traffic. Fails to provide
vertical clearance of eight feet, 14 feet over street, those types of things. That are listed
there that really are -- make it a nuisance tree. So, somebody -- a tree in -- in a common
area hanging into a neighborhood -- into a neighbor-- into their yard is not going to trigger
any -- any issue with -- with that, since it's not a nuisance tree. It's a nuisance to them,
but it won't impact the health of the tree, it's just trimming some branches to keep it out of
their yard.
Perkins: The ordinance already calls out that, you know, it's unlawful to -- to mutilate or
improperly, you know, prune or cause damage to a tree or to put chemicals on it or
whatnot. So, yeah, this is purely just --just to kind of create symmetry between my -- my
job as the city arborist as it's -- as it's listed in the ordinance and the nuisance code.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Matthew, a question about how -- how does the public know if they have a tree
that's in the public right of way? I think that our citizens -- vast majority will do the right
thing, but I could see, again, somebody not knowing that. So, how are -- how is the public
informed? How do they know if they have got a tree that's in the right of way?
Perkins: That's a great question. It really is. And I have actually been working on an
urban forest management plan that will be proposed for acceptance at least through
Page 46
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 14 of 19
Steve Siddoway, the director, and -- and I'm trying to lay out all of these -- all of these
options where my -- one of my main roles and duties as the city arborist is to work on
education and community outreach and whatnot. So, my -- my objective is to continue
on with community education classes and volunteer projects that involve the public to
come in and put me in a position where I can educate them on -- on these instances. So,
I'm also hoping to beef up our website, so to speak, so that there is a little bit more
information there regarding -- regarding the -- the trees here in Meridian.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Matthew, I guess a two parter. Part one, when would that plan that you just
referenced is anticipated to be completed. And I guess part two is how many trees,
approximate, are private trees that exist within a public right of way in Meridian.
Perkins: That's an excellent question. So, I have only just completed the very first draft
version of the -- of the plan and it has not been determined whether or not it is going to
be something that will, you know, maybe just be an internal document or if it's actually
going to be something that will be presented to -- to Council for -- for approval. To your
second question, currently the City of Meridian as the --as the code is written, we maintain
all of the trees within our city parks and within our city owned properties, like police
stations, fire stations and community centers and home -- home -- HomeCourt and City
Hall and a section of the entry corridor there called -- oh, I forget it's technical name right
now off the top of my head. But basically from Main Street to Carlton from -- from the
railroad tracks and, then, also you skip down and, then, all of those trees in front of the
Meridian Speedway in that entry corridor there, so -- so, the -- the inventory program that
I have that I have been managing all our trees with, I currently am responsible for
managing 5,200 trees, approximately, and those are just the trees that the city is
responsible for. That does not count all of the right of way trees throughout the rest of the
city or any public property trees at all whatsoever.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: I guess the answer is we don't know how many.
Cavener: Kind of-- kind of what I was figuring. Okay. That could be overly burdensome
if-- if it's a -- if every citizen is following the law and all decided after a big windstorm they
have got to do some pruning, I can see that be a heavy burden on the department if all of
those homeowners are now contacting Matthew all at the same time. We don't know how
many that are going to be impacted. So, maybe a conversation for another day.
Perkins: Yeah. An emergency response plan is going to be part of that urban forest
management plan that I'm working on. Currently as the ordinance states that that
responsibility for maintaining those trees in public right of way are -- is up to the adjacent
property owner. ACHD technically that right of way is theirs, but I believe their ordinance
Page 47
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 15 of 19
says -- states the same thing. Again, like I said, my main concern is just from a safety
point of view, because, you know, I would like to prevent trees from becoming pruned in
such a manner that would, then, actually make them become a hazard to the public.
Strader: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Council Woman Strader.
Strader: Quick question. Maybe a silly question. I don't know. But -- so like if there is
that weird -- I only know it is like a hellstrip, which is kind of inappropriate. We call it.
There is this strip of land in between like this, you know, the sidewalk and the road -- I
actually had a tree die in that area in front of my house and, then, I ended up cutting part
of it and -- and so would that be a public tree? Like would I have needed to call you to
get advice or -- how far does this go?
Perkins: Yeah. That's a good question. You know, this -- I could see how this could be
a bit of a can of worms that we have opened up here. But as the ordinance is written now
that tree would be fully your responsibility to -- to prune and/or remove, so -- yeah. But
would you have to get permission to remove a dead tree? Not necessarily. But it would
probably be in the public's best interest -- I mean for me -- and so I mean refer to -- say
Boise has a -- has a similar ordinance, only theirs is much more broad reaching. Nampa
has actually adopted an ordinance where their city arborist does do a lot of that outreach
and you have to get permission from the city arborist to -- to do anything to any of those
public -- public owned trees and I could see how that would definitely be burdensome to
a one man show such as myself. But, like I said, it's not my intent to try and interject on
every single case and mainly this stemmed from my fear of having any of our large mature
trees, you know, within our downtown corridor or -- or any of those trees pruned, you
know, in such a manner that would actually end up, you know, causing the trees to
become a hazard or have to be removed without any real good intent, so --
Simison: So, Mr. Nary, just -- since this -- we are not in the same sort of Robert's Rules
that I'm used to to divide the question, but I do feel like we have ventured into single --
you know, we have expanded beyond the scope of the state legislature single issue items
and I don't know if we should bifurcate these two topics, if there is more discussion needed
-- even more information on the trees versus the -- the issues related to the definitions.
So, I kind of want to throw that out to Council where you -- where we are right now on this
issue. If this is something that we should separate out and have greater discussion and
information presentation on these various issues. I would love to get Council's -- because
I'm not getting a clear sense of what we all need to have and this could -- I see this rabbit
hole going on all night.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, Emily's on the call as well and she's the one that crafted the ordinance,
so she has the context. But it may be best that we pull back this ordinance entirely and
have a conversation and, then, decide at that point are we -- because it's all one code.
We are here just fixing all the same code.
Page 48
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 16 of 19
Simison: Correct.
Nary: But there are different portions of that code. So, it may be best if we have a future
departmental discussion on this nuisance code and, then, we can decide are we creating
one major -- one rewrite or a -- only a partial rewrite.
Simison: I don't think any of this is time necessary immediately to move forward.
Nary: No.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Yeah. Mr. Mayor, I completely agree. Like the Mayor mentioned earlier, for the
first time ever in the history of, you know, him and I working together, we weren't at this
planning meeting last week, we were at an all city meeting preparing for our all city
meeting and so we were at a different meeting and so we weren't aware that these were
put on the agenda until after it was published and so I do believe it's important to have a
discussion regarding these ordinances prior to reading the ordinances. I think it's pretty
important to hash out the details and to make -- you know, answer questions and have
discussion. So, I would recommend putting these on a future workshop so that we can
discuss further prior to reading of the -- of the ordinances. That would be my
recommendation, going -- talking about these two ordinances and going forward as well.
Simison: Okay. Council, if it works for you all, then, we will schedule appropriate times
-- come back and have greater information, walking through the proposed changes and
discussions on what that means.
Nary: Mr. Mayor, just so I'm clear. On both the mailbox parking, as well as the nuisance
code?
Simison: I think it doesn't hurt to do them all.
Nary: Okay. Thank you.
Simison: And we can -- we can put the mailbox one more rapidly, since that does have
some more necessary emergency -- or I don't think emergency, but real life
consequences.
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: Question for Mr. Nary. Since these are action items, do we have to take action
to do something with them?
Nary: So, yeah, we probably should put on the record at least what the direction is next,
Page 49
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 11 of 19
which is to bring both of these items back as separate discussion items at a future
meeting. I think that's -- that's adequate. As long as the consensus of the Council is to
do that.
Hoaglun: Do we need that in a motion, Mr. Nary?
Nary: Yeah. I think to make the record clear, yes.
Hoaglun: Okay.
Simison: Do I have a motion as such, Mr. Hoaglun?
Hoaglun: Yes. Mr. Mayor, I would move that the ordinances under Items 2 and 3,
Ordinance No. 21-1916 and Ordinance No. 21-1917 be withdrawn from tonight's agenda
and brought back at a later date after further discussion.
Cavener: Second.
Simison: Okay. I have a motion and a second. Is there a discussion on the motion? If
not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. We will bring
these back in appropriate fashion over the coming week and/or month.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
FUTURE MEETING TOPICS
Simison: With that we have identified future meeting topics. Are there any other future
meeting topics?
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: Not a topic, just -- I wanted to thank you and commend you. You heard from
the city attorney about the work that has went on in the city over the past 11 months and
I thought your e-mail that you sent to our employees that were kind of hopefully on the
downhill slide and coming back to work in a somewhat normal fashion was really
appropriate and I think it's a good opportunity for us to -- Mr. Nary's presentation was a
good reminder to me that just to take a moment and thank you and all of our city
employees for their ongoing flexibility. I can't think of a single frustration or complaint that
I have heard from the public about operating with city services over the past 11 months
and I know that doesn't happen by accident. That's as a result of your leadership and the
buy in from our -- our employees. So, I just wanted to thank you and thank all of our
employees for their great work over the past 11 months.
Simison: Well, thank you and you will get an opportunity to do that once again in eight
Page 50
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 18 of 19
days for all the employees. So, with that do I have a motion?
Bernt: Mr. Mayor, one last thing.
Simison: Councilman Bernt.
Bernt: Just -- I don't want to get into a discussion, but I definitely wanted to make a
comment in regard to current legislation that's -- that's on the table with regard to property
taxes and so I encourage you -- every City Council Member that's sitting at the dais or
home, you know, participating virtually to look through the proposed legislation and -- and
-- and if you have concerns reach out to your legislative representatives and -- and also
county commissioners as well and so I think it's extremely important that we all get
involved. The development community is already involved. The realtors are involved.
There is a lot of decision making bodies that are involved. This has a significant impact
on not only our city, but all cities across Idaho. And so, again, I don't want to get into a
discussion, but this committee hearing is scheduled for Thursday at 3:00 p.m. So, I think
it's important that we rally up the troops and make sure that, you know, those who are
sitting on the committee are heard from us and from others and -- and our legislators who
represent us in the four districts, you know, that are in Meridian are also heard as well.
So, that's what I wanted to say.
Cavener: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Cavener.
Cavener: It may be appropriate -- I will leave it up to you and the Council President to
maybe have a reoccurring item on our workshop between now and the end of the
legislative session, so we are noticing these types of conversations as appropriate and if
we need to discuss things further or if there is an action that wants to -- needs to be made
by the Council we have at least noticed it. I think Council Member Bernt brings up a lot
of good points and I know in the past we used to have an agenda item where the Council
discussed pending legislation and it may be worth at least exploring having that as a
conversation topic for the next few weeks. I will leave it to you and the Council President
to see if it's warranted and if not it's okay. But just a thought.
Simison: Thank you. With that --
Bernt- Point taken, Councilman Cavener.
Simison: With that do I have a motion?
Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor?
Simison: Councilman Hoaglun.
Hoaglun: I move we adjourn.
Page 51
Meridian City Council
Item#2. February 16,2021
Page 19 of 19
Cavener: Second.
Simison: Okay. I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All in favor signify by saying
aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. We are adjourned.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:05 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
3 / 2 / 2021
MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK
Page 52
Future Meeting Topics — Public Forum
Signing up prior to the start of the meeting is required.
This time is reserved for the public to address their elected officials
regarding matters of general interest or concern of public matters and is
not specific to an active Land Use/Development Application.
By Law, no decisions can be made on topics presented
under this public comment section, other than the City Council may request
that a topic be added to a future meeting agenda for more detailed discussion
or action. The Mayor may also direct staff to further assist you in resolving
the matter following the meeting.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC FORUM SIGN-IN SHEET
Date: February 16, 2021
Prior to the commencement of the meeting a person wishing to address the Mayor and City
Council MUST sign in and limit their comments to the matter described below. Complaints
about individuals, city staff, business or private matters will not be allowed. Testimony or
comment on an active application or proposal that is or will be pending before Planning and
Zoning or City Council is strictly prohibited by Idaho law. Each speaker will have up to three
(3) minutes to address the Mayor and Council, but the chair may stop the speaker if the
matter does appear to violate guidelines, varies from the topic identified on this sign in sheet
or other provisions of law or policy.
Print Name Provide Description of Discussion Topic
Planning Presentation and Outline for Land Use Public Hearings
City February 16, 2021CouncilMeeting
FLUM
Changes to Agenda:
Item #1: Mark Enos Annexation (H-2020-0119)
Application(s):
Annexation and Zoning
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of an acre of land, zoned R-1 in unincorporated Ada County,
located at 2972 E. Leslie Dr (south and west of the E. Ustick Rd / N. Eagle Rd. intersection).
Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: Property is bordered by the City Limits on two sides. To the north is R-15 zoning, to the east is R-2,
unincorporated Ada County at the south and west.
Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Low Density Residential
Summary of Request: This is a proposal to annex and rezone 1 acre of property to R-2 to obtain City services. The property is in
unincorporated Ada County, and is served by individual well and septic. The Applicant desires to construct a detached accessory
building for an approximately 1,750 sq. ft. shop, RV garage and upstairs living area. The applicant has been unable to obtain a new
septic permit from the County due to the location and limitations of the existing system to accommodate an additional bathroom. The
Applicant has determined it would be cheaper to annex into the City and connect to City water and sewer than to upgrade the septic
system.
If the applicant chooses to use the upstairs living area as a secondary dwelling unit it is subject to specific use standards. This includes
the living area being less than 700 sq. ft., at least one additional parking space required, and the property must be occupied by the
property owner at least 6 months out of the year. The Comprehensive Plan is supportive of secondary dwelling units. There are
recommendations to support the construction of accessory dwelling units and increase the diversity of housing options.
This annexation and zoning went to the Planning Commission at their January 21, 2021 meeting. The Commission recommended
approval.
Staff Recommendation: Approval
Possible Motions:
Approval
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend to Approve File Number H-2020-0119, as
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of February 16, 2021, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed
modifications to conditions)
Denial
After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to Deny File Number H-2020-0119, as presented during the
hearing on February 16, 2021, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial)
Continuance
I move to continue File Number H-2020-0119 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following
reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance)
7/tem 77
E IDIAN
'aAHO
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Mark Enos Annexation (H-2020-0119) by Mark Enos,
Located at 2972 E. Leslie Dr.
A. Request: Annexation of 1.05 acres of land with the R-2 zoning district.
Page 3
Item#1.
E IDIAN:--
IDAHO
C�
PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION
Staff Contact:Alan Tiefenbach Meeting Date: February 16, 2021
Topic: Public Hearing for Mark Enos Annexation (H-2020-0119) by Mark Enos, Located at
2972 E. Leslie Dr.
A. Request: Annexation of 1.05 acres of land with the R-2 zoning district.
Information Resources:
Click Here for Application Materials
Click Here to Sign Up to Testify at the City Council Public Hearing
Page 4
i
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET
DATE: February 16, 2021 ITEM # ON AGENDA: 1
PROJECT NAME: Mark Enos Annexation (H-2020-0119)
PRINTED FULL NAME For Against Neutral Want to Testify
YES OR NO
1
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1s
Item#1.
STAFF REPORT C�
W IDIAN --
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING 2/16/2021 Legend
DATE: 0
1ffPraject Laco=for E_USr-1-C R�=
TO: Mayor&City Council
FROM: Alan Tiefenbach,Associate Planner --- E#tCA pp
208-884-5533
Bruce Freckleton,Development
Services Manager61
i
208-887-2211 �
W
SUBJECT: H-2020-0119 r Z
Mark Enos Annexation -
LOCATION: 2972 E. Leslie Dr. ---- -----
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This is a proposal to annex and rezone 1 acre of property to R-2 to obtain City services. The property
contains an approximately 2,450 sq. ft.house, is presently zoned R-1 in unincorporated Ada County,
and is served by individual well and septic. The Applicant desires to construct a detached accessory
building for an approximately 1,750 sq. ft. shop,RV garage and upstairs living area. The applicant
has been unable to obtain a new septic permit from the County due to the location and limitations of
the existing system to accommodate an additional bathroom. The Applicant has determined it would
be cheaper to annex into the City and connect to City water and sewer than to upgrade the septic
system.
II. SUMMARY OF REPORT
A. Project Summary
Description Details Page
Acreage 1.0 acre
Future Land Use Designation Low Density Residential
Existing Land Use(s) Single Family Residential
Proposed Land Use(s) Single Family Residential
Lots(#and type;bldg./common) 1
Phasing Plan(#of phases) 1
Number of Residential Units(type 1 house,possibly 1 secondary dwelling unit
of units)
Density(gross&net) 1 du/acre
Open Space(acres,total N/A
[%]/buffer/qualified)
Amenities N/A
Page 1
Page 5
Item#1.
Description Details Page
Physical Features(waterways, Finch lateral parallels the northern property line
hazards,flood plain,hillside)
Neighborhood meeting date;#of November 13,2020,2 attendees.
attendees:
History(previous approvals) None
B. Community Metrics
Description Details Page
Ada County Highway District No comments
Access(Arterial/Collectors/State Property is accessed from N.Eagle Dr to E. Leslie Dr.
Hwy/Local)(Existing and Proposed) (local).
Traffic Level of Service N/A
Stub Street/Interconnectivity/Cross N/A
Access
Existing Road Network E.Leslie Dr
Existing Arterial Sidewalks/ No buffer—E.Leslie Dr.is an existing local street. There
Buffers is a sidewalk on the south side.
Proposed Road Improvements E.Leslie Dr is an existing road with sidewalk
Distance to nearest City Park(+ 0.75 mile to Julius M.Kleiner Park
size)
Distance to other key services
Fire Service No site-specific comments on this proposal.
Police Service No comments
Wastewater
• Distance to Sewer Directly adjacent
Services
• Sewer Shed Five Mile Trunkshed
• Estimated Project Sewer See application
ERU's
• WRRF Declining Balance 14.06
• Project Consistent with Yes
WW Master Plan/Facility
Plan
• Comments • Flow has been committed
• No proposed changes to Public Sewer
Infrastructure within Record.Any changes or
modifications,to the Public Sewer Infrastructure,
shall be reviewed and approved by Public Works.
Water
• Distance to Water Services Directly adjacent
• Pressure Zone 3
• Estimated Project Water See application
ERU's
• Water Quality No concerns
• Project Consistent with Yes
Water Master Plan
• Impacts/Concerns • No proposed water infrastructure is shown in the
application but the narrative stated this property
needs to connect to City water and sewer.
Page 2
Page 6
»m q.
C. Project Area Maps
Future Lan d Use Ma Aerial Ma
Legend > Legend . � �
��lL,�, E U�| ■D ��-: E-,-3r - U ST|CK-R :
vu\
/ ER£� 4m . r/m
E a
'a
_ / W
m . \n
ideTntd| ` 4
!\ �^ �
mt
Zoning Map Planned Development Ma
Legend Legend
leiPrnjeolEaci-fion E u | RD | lEaafKwn E U STIWR
. . cityLinift
— Planne-, Paros Ew 4D
�
—
R
T 22 | «
w LU
m
m 2TiiLi
, � ]
-
_
-----
§ _ 4 j ---
L .E-
Page 3
�77
Item#1.
III. APPLICANT INFORMATION
A. Owner/Applicant/Representative:
Mark Enos—2972 E. Leslie Dr. Meridian,ID 83646
IV. NOTICING
Planning& Zoning City Council
Posting Date Posting Date
Newspaper Notification
published in newspaper 1/1/2021 1/29/2021
Radius notification mailed to
properties within 500 feet l/l/2021 1/25/2021
Public hearing notice sign posted
1/8/2021 1/30/2021
on site
Nextdoor posting 12/29/2020 1/26/2021
V. STAFF ANALYSIS
A. Annexation:
The proposed annexation area is contiguous to City annexed property and is within the Area of
City Impact Boundary. Staff typically requires a development agreement as part of the annexation
approval to ensure the site develops as proposed by the applicant.As the intent of this annexation
and rezoning is to connect to city water and sewer for an existing house and new accessory
building, staff does not find a development agreement necessary.
B. Future Land Use Map Designation(https://www.meridiancity.or /g compplan)
The Future Land Use Map(FLUM)designates the property for Low Density Residential(LDR).
This designation allows for the development of single-family homes on large and estate lots at
gross densities of three dwelling units or less per acre. With one existing home on one acre,the
proposed rezoning is consistent with the FLUM.
C. Comprehensive Plan Policies (https://www.meridiancity.or /g compplan):
(Staff analysis is in italics after the cited policy)
• Encourage diverse housing options suitable for various income levels,household sizes, and
lifestyle preferences. (2.01.01)
The property contains an existing single-family residence. The applicant intends to construct
an accessory building which includes an approximately 650 sq.ft. "bonus"room with a
bathroom. This could be used as a secondary dwelling unit which increases the diversity of
housing options.
• Remove regulatory barriers and develop design criteria that support the construction of
accessory dwelling units and micro homes where appropriate. (2.01.01K).
As mentioned, the bonus room in the accessory building contains a bathroom, a wet bar, and
is within the 700 sq.ft. requirement to allow it to be used as a secondary unit in accordance
with the specific use standards per UDC 11-4-3-12.
Page 4
Page 8
Item#1.
• Permit new development only where it can be adequately served by critical public facilities
and urban services at the time of final approval, and in accord with any adopted levels of
service for public facilities and services. (3.03.03F)
The subject property is located directly adjacent and west of the City Limits. Water and sewer
mains are located in front of the property along E.Leslie Dr. Fire service can be provided to
the property in less than 4 minutes.Meridian Police and Fire expressed no concerns with this
request.
Ensure that new development is connected to the City's sanitary sewer system(no septic
systems). (4.09.01A)
The impetus for this annexation and rezoning is for the applicant to obtain City water and
sewer service in order to construct an accessory building with an additional bathroom.
D. Existing Structures/Site Improvements:
There is an existing 2,450 sq. ft.house on the property,which was constructed in 1976. This
house will remain. An approximately 1,760 sq. ft. detached accessory building is proposed to be
constructed at the rear of the lot. Based on the site plan submitted by the applicant,all existing
and proposed structures meet the minimum 20' front setbacks, 7.5' rear setbacks and 15' rear
setback.
E. Proposed Use Analysis:
Single family residences and detached accessory structures with a secondary dwelling unit are
allowed and accessory uses in the R-2 zone district.
F. Specific Use Standards(UDC 11-4-3):
If the upstairs"bonus room"of the detached accessory structure is used as a secondary dwelling,
it would be required to meet specific standards in accord with UDC 11-4-3-12. This includes
owner occupancy of the main structure,maximum size limited to 700 sq. ft. (650 sq. ft.
proposed),located to the side or rear of the principle structure, and provided with at least one
parking space(ample parking is available in the rear yard).
G. Dimensional Standards(UDC 11-2):
As mentioned above,both existing and proposed structures meet all required setbacks. The height
of the accessory structure is indicated to be 23',well within the maximum allowed height of 35'
in the R-2 zoning district.
H. Access(UDC 11-3A-3, I1-3H-4):
Existing access occurs from E. Leslie Dr. The applicant has been informed that the driveway to
access the new accessory structure will be required to be paved per UDC 11-3C-5-B1.
I. Parking(UDC 11-3C):
At least four parking spaces exist for the present structure(two driveways,two garage). If the
applicant intends to use the accessory structure as a secondary dwelling unit, an additional
parking space will be required per UDC 11-3C-6.
Page 5
Page 9
Item#1.
J. Sidewalks(UDC 11-3A-17):
There is existing sidewalk on the south side of E. Leslie Dr. There is no sidewalk on the north
side of E. Leslie Dr.No additional sidewalk is required with this proposal to annex and zone to
obtain city water and sewer service.
K. Landscaping(UDC 11-3B):
No additional landscaping is required with this proposal to annex and zone to obtain city water
and sewer service.
L. Waterways(UDC 11-3A-6):
The Finch Lateral,a seasonal ditch,parallels the property along the northern property line. The
applicant does intend to pipe this lateral as part of the annexation and rezoning for the existing
single-family residence. Given the nature of this application request, staff does not believe
requiring the applicant to tile the ditch is warranted.
M. Fencing(UDC 11-3A-6, 11-3A-7):
Any new fencing will be required to meet the standards of UDC 11-3A-7.
N. Utilities (UDC 11-3A-21):
Water and sewer is available at E. Leslie Dr in front of the property. The applicant should be
required to abandon the existing well and septic system and connect to city services as a condition
of the annexation.
O. Building Elevations(UDC 11-3A-19 I Architectural Standards Manual):
The applicant has submitted concept elevations of the proposed accessory structure. The structure
meets the height requirements of the dimensional standards per UDC 11-4-3-12 and reflects a
pitched roof and dormers comparable to the character of the primary structure. Once the property
is annexed into the City no other approvals are required from the Planning Division. The
applicant is required to submit plans to the building division for review and approval prior to
commencing with construction of the detached accessory structure.
VI. DECISION
A. Staff:
Staff recommends approval of the requested annexation and zoning with the comments noted in
Section VIII. and per the Findings in Section IX. A development agreement is not being
recommended with the subject annexation request.
B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on January 21, 2021. At the public
hearing,the Commission moved to approve the subject annexation and zoning request.
1. Summary of the Commission public hearing:
a. In favor: Mark Enos
b. In opposition:None
C. Commenting: None
d. Written testimony: None
e. Staff presenting application: Alan Tiefenbach
f. Other Staff commenting on application:None
2. Key issue(s)of public testimony:
a. None
3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission.
a. None
Page 6
Page 10
Item#1.
4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation:
a. None
Page 7
Page 11
Item#1.
VII. EXHIBITS
A. Site Plan(date: 7/20/2012)
L
_ 541 y
u
Op Lk
L
L
L �
L L
L
Lys y id
y y
� y 1
y 1
1L Q
s I L
S11 II L
y
L y
y
L y 1
l y _OIL
1 L
1 L
I L
L y
L y
L y
L �
L y
y �
y I
61TE PLAN
SALE 1" � I>'
Page 8
Page 12
Item#1.
B. Elevations(date: 7/20/2012)
C]n130
®®®® 13131113
�i ANT rieo�-
El
mfl m�
REAR
Page 9
Page 13
Item#1.
C. Annexation Legal Description and Exhibit(date: 9/14/2020)
&am
i Iq u I ri E= R i?I G
Septem Mr 714,Z020
Project No.2o-143
EKhlWtA
Legal Description for
Att oration and Raom to R-2
Lot 5�Block x of Carorm Subdh6slon
A parcel of land being all of Lot 5, Black 1 of Carol's SubdiVADn(BDok 3$of Plats at Pages 3164 through
3105,records of Ada County,Idaho)and t"northerly Z5,00 feet of East Lespe Udvt;adjacent to said Lot
51 BIOCR 1r situated€n the[northeast f f4 of Sectiar+S,Township 3 North,Range d East,B.M,Ada County,
Idaho and being mare particularly described as follows;
Beginning at the Northwest corner cif said Lot 5,thence following the northerly boundary of said Lot 5,
N77'26'30"E a distance of 182.50 feet to the Northeast corner of said Lot S;
Thence leaving said northerly fine and following the easterly line of said Lot 5,5 SMV47"E a distance of
247.90 feet projected to the eenterllne of East Les Ile Drive;
Thence following said centerline,5B151313W a distance of IS1.93 feet;
Thence leaving said centerline end follovring the projected westerly€ine of said Lot 5,NOB°01'4M a
distance of 233.49 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Said parcel contalns a=I Of 1-005 acres,more or less,
Attadwd hereto is Exhlblt B and by this reference Is hereby made a part of.
OF %
L. lmbv
9 .1 L4-yob
9233 West Skate Street * 11oise,Idaho 93714 • 209.639.6939 &mengllp.cwn
Page 10
Page 14
Item#1.
SienviNe Square
Subdivision _
187,
• �,�IUNT OF MaINNING
Lot 5,Block I Lat 4
0 Carol's 5ubdivivor
R 1294540050 ni
Annexation Area; 1.005f AC_
Lat # Current Zanfng: R-1
Proud Zoning,K-2
r+
I
h SBA- 3"4 1 S 'Om—_
Y
LEGEND N4*SL LAB'°s
ANNE{A7I0N REZONE ODUNDARY 12459
EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAT LINE � �
ROAD CENTERLINE #
AWACENT LOT L34E
f1 -I�#- off
0 so 120 18(]
Plan Scale: 1"=60'
I N# GINEERINO
9233 WgT7,%TEMEET
OW.low WU
rNr�o���a9.ea Exhibit B
kmerui�.mm
Annexation and Rezone to R-2
CWTE: SGPRlmbFf2w
WQE{i: 2n-14.1
SHEET; Lot 5, Block 1 of Carols Subdivision -2972 E. Leslie Dr,
1 OF I NE 1/4 Set, S, T3N-, RIE-, S.M.,Ada County, Idaho
Page 11
Page 15
Item#1.
VIII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS
A. PLANNING DIVISION
1. Existing well and septic system shall be abandoned and the applicant shall connect to City
water and sewer service.
2. All driveways shall be paved in accordance with UDC 11-3C-5-131.
3. If the accessory building is used as a secondary dwelling unit,the applicant shall be
required to comply with the specific use standards listed in UDC 11-4-3-12.
4. Future development shall be consistent with the minimum dimensional standards listed in
UDC Table 11-2A-4.
5. The applicant shall construct all proposed fencing and/or any fencing required by the UDC,
consistent with the standards as set forth in UDC 11-3A-7, as applicable.
6. Off-street parking is required to be provided in accord with the standards listed in UDC Table
11-3C-6 for single-family detached dwellings based on the number of bedrooms per unit.
B. PUBLIC WORKS
1. Sanitary sewer and water services were extended into this subject property at the time
mains were installed in E. Leslie Drive. Applicant shall be responsible for the payment
of water and sewer assessment and meter fees.
2. Any existing domestic well system within this project shall be removed from domestic
service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8 contact the City of Meridian Water
Department at(208)888-5242 for inspections of disconnection of services.Wells may
be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation if approved by Idaho
Department of Water Resources.
3. Any existing septic systems within this project shall be removed from service per City
Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9 4 8.Contact the Central District Health Department for
abandonment procedures and inspections.
IX. FINDINGS
A.Annexation and/or Rezone(UDC 11-511-3E)
Required Findings: Upon recommendation from the commission,the council shall make a full
investigation and shall,at the public hearing,review the application. In order to grant an annexation
and/or rezone,the council shall make the following findings:
1. The map amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
Commission finds annexation of the subject site with an R-2 zoning designation is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan LDR FL UM designation for this property.
2. The map amendment complies with the regulations outlined for the proposed district, specifically
the purpose statement;
Page 12
Page 16
Item#1.
Commission finds the size of the existing house and lot will be consistent with the purpose
statement of the residential districts and if the accessory building is used as a secondary dwelling
unit, would meet the recommendations of the Plan to provide a diversity of housing.
3. The map amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare;
Commission finds that the proposed zoning map amendment should not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare. Commission recommends Council consider any oral or written
testimony that may be provided when determining this finding.
4. The map amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services by any
political subdivision providing public services within the city including,but not limited to, school
districts; and
Commission finds that the proposed zoning amendment will not result in any adverse impact
upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing services to this site.
5. The annexation(as applicable)is in the best interest of city
Commission finds the proposed annexation is in the best interest of the City if the property is
developed in accord with City/Agency comments in Section VIII.
Page 13
Page 17
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item#1. January 21,2021
Page 5 of 84
Holland: Can I make a motion or do we need to hear from the applicant?
Weatherly: Madam Chair, Commissioners, my apologies for all the technical difficulties
we are having right now. To pick up where we left off, I cannot locate anybody from the
applicant's --
McCarvel: Okay.
Weatherly: -- team online. If they are online and you wish for them to talk I would just
asked for them to raise their hand, so I can identify them.
McCarvel: Okay. If the applicant is here for H-2020-0074, if they could, please, raise
their hand to be noticed by the clerk. Okay. I would say a motion is in order.
Holland: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Holland.
Holland: I move we continue Item No. H-2020-0074 for TM Center to the hearing date of
March 18th to allow staff more time to work with the applicant on supporting materials for
the application.
Grove: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2020-0074 to the date of
March 18th. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Okay. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
3. Public Hearing for Mark Enos Annexation (H-2020-0119) by Mark Enos,
Located at 2972 E. Leslie Dr.
A. Request: Annexation of 1.05 acres of land with the R-2 zoning
district.
McCarvel: Next item on the agenda is H-2020-001 -- I'm sorry. Dash 0119, the Mark
Enos Annexation and we will begin with the staff report.
Tiefenbach: Good evening, Planning Commission. Can you see my presentation and
can you hear me? Thumbs up. Great. Alan Tiefenbach, planner with the City of Meridian.
Again good evening. This is an annexation and zoning. The site consists of an acre of
land. It's zoned R-1 in unincorporated Ada county. It's located at 2972 East Leslie, which
is south and west of the East Ustick Road, North Eagle Road intersection. The property
is bordered on two sides by the city limits. To the north is R-15. To the east is R-2.
Unincorporated Ada county to the south and to the west. Comprehensive Plan
recommendation is for a low density residential. This is a proposal to annex and rezone
Page 18
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item#1. January 21,2021
Page 6 of Q4
of one acre of property to R-2 to obtain city services. The property is in unincorporated
Ada county and is served by an individual well and septic. I will put this site plan up here.
The applicant desires to construct a detached accessory building of approximately 1,750
square foot. That's what you see here on the north and that would be for RV garage and
upstairs living. The applicant has been unable to obtain a new septic permit from the
county. They want to add a living space above. They have been unable to obtain a septic
permit for the addition due to the location and the limitations of the existing system. So,
where the system is located where there is a ditch they can't expand the system easily.
The county has recommended that the applicant annex into the city. The annex is -- the
applicant has determined it would be cheaper to do this than to try to upgrade the whole
system. That's the reason for this annexation. If the -- if the applicant chooses to use the
upstairs living area as a secondary dwelling unit, it's subject to specific use standards,
which includes the living area being less than 700 square feet, one additional parking
space, and the property having to be occupied at least six months out of the year by the
primary occupant. Comprehensive Plan is supportive of the secondary dwelling unit.
There is recommendations in the plan that support the construction of accessory dwelling
units, as well as increasing the diversity of housing. So, again, the only reason for this is
for the applicant to be able to obtain city services, so they can build this second building.
With that staff recommends approval. If you have any questions.
Cassinelli: Madam Chair, this is Bill.
McCarvel: Yeah. Do you have any -- yeah. Sorry. I was muted.
Cassinelli: Can you hear me?
McCarvel: Yes.
Cassinelli: Okay. I'm just -- I'm curious on the -- the condition for owner occupied for at
least six months out of the year. Is that city code on that?
Tiefenbach: Correct. I think the intent of that is so that somebody remotely doesn't just
try to Airbnb everything out and to make sure that there is somebody on site that if it is
used for a secondary dwelling unit there are some eyes on the property and it's not all
just a renter. So, yes, that is the city code. Six months out of the year.
McCarvel: Any other questions for staff? Okay. Would the applicant like to speak? If
you are in the -- on Zoom, please, raise your hand. Oh, there we go. Adrienne, do you
see him?
Enos: Am I unmuted now?
McCarvel: Yes. Oh. There you go. Okay. Yes. Please state your name and address
for the record.
Page 19
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item#1. January 21,2021
Page 7 of U4
Enos: This is Mark Enos. Address 2972 East Leslie Drive in Meridian and, no, I don't --
I don't have anything to add, unless there is specific questions.
McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for the applicant?
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Mr. Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: Just really quick. Mr. Enos, how are you accessing that secondary dwelling?
Do you have a driveway you are adding to your lawn?
Enos: Sure. On the right side of the property there is already a gravel driveway that
accesses the back of the property.
Fitzgerald: And that's on your property?
Enos: Yes.
Fitzgerald: Okay. Perfect. That just--that was a question for me. Thank you. Appreciate
it.
McCarvel: And do we have any -- anyone signed up to testify on this application?
Weatherly: Madam Chair, we do not.
McCarvel: Okay. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to testify on this?
Please raise your hand. Okay.
Seal: No one in chambers either, Madam Chair.
McCarvel: So, I think at this time if I can get a motion to close the public hearing for Item
H-20 -- sorry. Lost them.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Mr. Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: Can I -- I make a -- or I move that we close public hearing on H-2020-0119,
Mark Enos Annexation.
Holland: Commissioner Holland second.
McCarvel: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor
-- and second on -- all those in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries.
Page 20
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item#1. January 21,2021
Page 8 of 04
MOTION CARRIED: ALL YES.
McCarvel: Any other discussion on this? It is pretty straightforward.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, this is a pretty simple one. I -- I appreciate they -- they are
wanting to add an additional dwelling unit. I think there is space there and if Ada -- if Ada
county can't serve them for a new well and septic, then, I think picking up the city services
is appropriate. So, if anybody has a problem let us know. If not I will make a motion.
McCarvel: Always in order.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I
move to recommend approval to the City Council file number H-2020-0119 as presented
in the staff report for the hearing date of January 21 st, 2021 .
Holland: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve H-2020-0119 to recommend
approval. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Congratulations.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
4. Public Hearing for Schnebly Annexation (H-2020-0115) by Richard
Schnebly, Located at 2690 E. Franklin Rd.
A. Request: Annexation of 0.75 of an acre of land with an R-2 zoning
district.
McCarvel: Next item on the agenda is the Schnebly Annexation, H-2020-0115, and we
will begin with the staff report.
Allen- Thank you, Madam Chair. Oops. Can you all hear me?
McCarvel: Yes.
Allen- Thank you. I'm sorry. I thought I was muted. Thank you, Madam Chair, Members
of the Commission. The next application before you is a request for annexation and
zoning. This site consists of .63 of an acre of land. It's currently zoned RUT in Ada county
and it's located at 2690 East Franklin Road. The Comprehensive Plan future land use
map designation on this property is commercial. The applicant is proposing to annex .75
of an acre of land and that goes to the section line of East Franklin Road as required by
rezoning, with an R-2 low density residential zoning district. The reason for annexation
is that the existing septic system on the single family residential property failed last -- late
last year and the applicant had to hook up to city water and sewer service. No new
development or redevelopment of the property is proposed at this time and the use will
remain residential for the foreseeable future. As a provision of hookup to city services
Page 21
7/tem 77
(:>
E IDIAN*-----,
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 21-1916: An Ordinance Adding a New Section to Meridian City
Code, Section 7-2-2(B)(8), Regarding Prohibited Parking in Front of Mailboxes; Adopting a Savings
Clause; and Providing an Effective Date
Page 22
Item#2.
C� fIEN ,
IN4,
IDAHG-.
MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL
Request to Include Topic on the City Council Agenda
From: Police Department Meeting Date: February 16, 2021
Presenter: Lacy Ooi Estimated Time: 10 Minutes
Topic: Ordinance No. 21- : An Ordinance Adding a New Section to Meridian City Code,
Section 7-2-2(B)(8), Regarding Prohibited Parking in Front of Mailboxes; Adopting a
Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective Date
Recommended Council Action:
Council Review and Mayor Signature
Background:
This addition was suggested due to the increase of package delivery during the Covid-19
Pandemic. This would help postal workers deliver packages in a timely manner.
Page 23
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 21-1916
BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER,
BY THE CITY COUNCIL: HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER
AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION TO MERIDIAN CITY CODE, SECTION
7-2-2(B)(8), REGARDING PROHIBITED PARKING IN FRONT OF MAILBOXES; ADOPTING
A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian seeks by this ordinance to prohibit parking in
front of mailboxes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Meridian finds that the following ordinance is
necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MERIDIAN, IDAHO:
Section 1. That a new section, Meridian City Code section 7-2-2(B)(8), shall be added as follows:
7-2-2. - Prohibited parking.
Except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic, or in compliance with law or the
directions of a police officer or official traffic control device, no person shall:
B. Stand or park a vehicle, except momentarily to pick up or discharge a passenger or
passengers:
1. In front of a public or private driveway.
2. Within fifteen (15) feet of a fire hydrant.
3. Within twenty(20) feet of a crosswalk or a bike/pedestrian curb ramp, except at an
intersection where a traffic control signal is in operation.
4. Within thirty(30) feet upon the approach to any flashing signal, stop sign, yield sign or
traffic control signal located at the side of a roadway.
5. Within twenty(20) feet of the driveway entrance to any fire station and on the side of a
street opposite the entrance to any fire station within seventy-five (75) feet of said entrance
when properly signposted.
6. At any place where official traffic control devices posted at the direction or under the
authority of the City or Ada County Highway District prohibit such stopping.
7. In any portion of more than one (1) designated parking space.
8. Within ten feet(10') of a mailbox, during the hours of 8:00am and 5:OOpm, on any day that is
not a Sunday or a federal holiday.
Section 2. That all ordinances,resolutions, orders, or parts thereof or in conflict with this
ordinance are hereby voided.
ORDINANCE PROHIBITING PARKING IN FRONT OF MAILBOXES PAGE 1
Item#2.
Section 3. That this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and
publication.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 16th day of February,
2021.
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 16th day of February,
2021.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Robert E. Simison, Mayor Chris Johnson, City Clerk
STATEMENT OF MERIDIAN CITY ATTORNEY AS TO
ADEQUACY OF SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 21-1916
The undersigned, William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby
certifies that he is the legal advisor of the City and has reviewed a copy of the attached
Ordinance no. 2 1- of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and has found the same to be true and
complete and provides adequate notice to the public pursuant to Idaho Code § 50-901A(3).
DATED this 18th day of February, 2021.
William L.M. Nary, City Attorney
ORDINANCE PROHIBITING PARKING IN FRONT OF MAILBOXES PAU;2 Page 25
Item#2.
NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY
OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. § 50-901(A)
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 20-
An ordinance adding a new section to Meridian City Code, section 7-2-2(B)(8), regarding
prohibited parking in front of mailboxes; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective
date.
First Reading:
Adopted after first reading by suspension of
the rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code
City of Meridian § 50-902: YES NO
Mayor and City Council Second Reading:
By: Chris Johnson, City Clerk Third Reading:
ORDINANCE PROHIBITING PARKING IN FRONT OF MAILBOXES PAU;3 Page 26
7/tem 77
(:>
E IDIAN*-----,
AGENDA ITEM
ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 21-1917: Repealing and Replacing Meridian City Code Section
4-2-1, Regarding Definitions Related to Nuisances, Amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-
2(c), Regarding Trees in Public Right-of-Way; Amending Meridian City Code Section 4-2-3(d)(2),
Regarding Abatement of Nuisance Trees; Adopting a Savings Clause; and Providing an Effective
Date
Page 27
Item#3.
C� fIEN ,
IN4,
IDAHG-.
MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL
Request to Include Topic on the City Council Agenda
From: Lacy Ooi, Code Enforcement Supervisor Meeting Date: February 16, 2021
Presenter: Lacy Ooi Estimated Time: 5 minutes
Topic: Ordinance no. 21- Repealing and replacing Meridian City Code section 4-2-1,
regarding definitions related to nuisances; amending Meridian City Code section 4-2-
2(c), regarding trees in public right-of-way; amending Meridian City Code section 4-
2-3(d)(2), regarding abatement of nuisance trees; adopting a savings clause; and
providing an effective date.
Recommended Council Action:
Adopt the proposed changes to the nuisance code (or move forward to second reading)
Background:
The current wording of the definition of"dismantled vehicle" in the City of Meridian Nuisance Code
has presented some challenges in noticing and prosecution of nuisance cases. The proposed edits
to this definition will clarify that term, and make it more objective in its application.
This ordinance will also renumber the definitions; in a previous amendment of the nuisance code,
the numbers were inadvertently removed.
Finally,the ordinance will clarify the language in the nuisance code regarding trees in the public
right-of-way, and make the language consistent with the provisions of Meridian City Code section
13-2-11, regarding the City Arborist, specifically,the City Arborist's responsibility to manage trees
in the public right-of-way.
Page 28
CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 21-1917
BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER,
HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION
4-2-1, REGARDING DEFINITIONS RELATED TO NUISANCES; AMENDING
MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 4-2-2(C),REGARDING TREES IN PUBLIC RIGHT-
OF-WAY; AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 4-2-3(D)(2), REGARDING
ABATEMENT OF NUISANCE TREES; AND ADOPTING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Meridian finds that these updates to the City
of Meridian Nuisance Code are in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare;
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,ADA COUNTY, IDAHO:
Section 1. That Meridian City Code section 4-2-1 shall be repealed, and replaced with
language to read as follows:
4-2-1: DEFINITIONS:
A. DISMANTLED VEHICLE: Any vehicle, or parts thereof, which:
1. Cannot be safely operated under its own power;
2. Is missing any one of the following: foot brakes, hand brakes, headlights, taillights, horn,
muffler, rearview mirrors, windshield wipers, or adequate fenders;
3. Has been declared salvage, or has been physically damaged to the extent that the cost of
parts and labor minus the salvage value would make it uneconomical to repair or rebuild
such vehicle; or
4. Is otherwise in a wrecked, inoperative, or dilapidated condition.
This definition shall not include dismantled vehicles lawfully stored or parked pursuant to the
operation of a lawfully conducted business, industry or commercial enterprise.
B. GRAFFITI: Any inscription, work, figure, symbol, drawing, mark, or design that is marked,
etched, scratched, drawn, or painted on any real or personal property or improvement,
including, but not limited to, walls, fences, gates, pavement,buildings, rocks, trees, bridges,
streets, sidewalks, and/or signs, whether such property is public, private, temporary, or
permanent, without the consent of the owner of such property or the owner's authorized
agent, and which inscription, work, figure, symbol, drawing, mark, or design is visible from
any publicly accessible location.
C. NUISANCE: Anything which unreasonably injures or offends the health or senses; obstructs
the free passage, comfortable enjoyment, or customary use of public or private property; or
creates an actual or potential safety, health, or fire hazard. Nuisances shall include,but shall
UPDATES TO NUISANCE CODE DEFINITIONS PAGI{ 1 Page 29
Item#3.
not be limited to, the following conditions designated as abatable nuisances and as general
nuisances:
1. ABATABLE NUISANCE: Nuisance conditions that may be abated by the city in
accordance with the provisions of this chapter, specifically including, without
limitation, the following nuisance conditions:
a. Nuisance weeds.
b. Graffiti, on any surface.
c. Snow or ice on any public sidewalk abutting or adjoining any privately owned
premises.
d. Vegetation, other than trees, that impedes or obstructs a public sidewalk or
roadway.
2. GENERAL NUISANCE: Nuisance conditions that may lead to criminal charges
without any prior attempt by the city to obtain abatement thereof, specifically
including, without limitation, the following nuisance conditions:
a. Nuisance materials on the ground, except that this definition shall not include the
incidental leakage of nuisance materials from registered vehicles lawfully moving
or parked upon a public right of way; the lawful application of pesticides or
herbicides for purposes of controlling pests or weeds; or activity otherwise
specifically allowed by law or by written permit issued by the city or other
governing authority.
b. Personal property on any portion of a public sidewalk, except as specifically
allowed by law or by written permit issued by the city or other governing
authority.
c. One or more dismantled vehicle(s),where such dismantled vehicle is not enclosed
in any structure or otherwise concealed from public view pursuant to title 11 of
this code.
d. Stagnant or impure water which causes or creates an offensive, unhealthy, or
unsanitary condition.
e. Refuse, vegetative decay or any decaying substance, garbage or filth of any kind
which is exposed to the elements and which causes or creates an offensive,
unhealthy, or unsanitary condition.
f. Discarded matter which has no substantial market value, is exposed to the
elements, and is not enclosed in any structure or otherwise concealed from public
view, including, but not limited to: rubble, litter, asphalt, concrete,plaster, tile,
cardboard, paper, scrap wood, scrap metal, tires, broken glass, and/or other
dilapidated or deteriorating personal property.
g. The accumulation of and/or failure to lawfully dispose of solid waste on any
commercial or residential premises.
h. Any building or structure that is so dilapidated or is in such condition as to
menace the public health or the safety of persons or property due to increased fire
hazard or other hazard.
i. Any nuisance condition not otherwise enumerated in this chapter.
D. NUISANCE MATERIALS: Hazardous, noxious, dangerous, or offensive materials,
including, but not limited to, oil, gasoline, fuel, antifreeze,paint,pesticides, or herbicides.
UPDATES TO NUISANCE CODE DEFINITIONS PAU;2 Page 30
Item#3.
E. NUISANCE TREE: Any tree or part thereof which, by reason of location or condition:
constitutes a hazard to public safety; obstructs the free passage of pedestrian or vehicular
traffic; fails to provide a vertical clearance of eight feet(8') over a sidewalk or fourteen feet
(14') over a street; obstructs public street lighting; harbors pests or disease.
F. NUISANCE WEEDS: Undesirable plant growth, whether living or dead, which:
1. Is over eight inches (8") in height;
2. By reason of size, manner of growth, location, or dryness, constitutes a safety, health, or
fire hazard to any person, building, improvement, crop, or other real or personal property;
3. By reason of size, manner of growth, or location, impedes or obstructs a sidewalk or
roadway or any portion thereof, or
4. Is designated as a noxious weed by the state of Idaho.
This definition shall not include cultivated grasses and pastures, though such vegetation may
be declared a nuisance where otherwise appropriate.
Section 2. That Meridian City Code section 4-2-2(C) shall be amended as follows:
C. Private property owners shall be responsible for maintaining any and all die trees upon
public rights of way adjacent to such private property. It shall be unlawful to perform
maintenance of, or remove, a tree upon the public right-of-way without first obtaining the
approval of the City Arborist for such work. Where a p4lie tree upon the public right-of-way
is a nuisance tree, the owner of record of the adjacent private property, as reflected on the most
recent assessment roll, shall be presumed to be responsible for creating, causing, committing,
maintaining, and/or allowing such nuisance. It shall be unlawful for any person to damage,
mutilate or destroy any public tree; attach any device or structure to a public tree; or store, spill
or dump substances, whether liquid or solid, which may be harmful to any part of a public tree.
Section 3. That Meridian City Code section 4-2-3(D)(2) shall be amended as follows:
2. Abatement of a nuisance tree shall include tree removal, pruning, and/or removal of
branches, debris, roots, stump, and/or soil, at the direction of the Code Enforcement Officer. It
shall be unlawful to perform maintenance of, prune, or remove, a tree upon the public ri hg tof-
way without first obtaining the pproval of the City Arborist for such work.
Section 4. That all City of Meridian ordinances, or resolutions, or parts thereof, which are
in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed.
Section 5. That this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and
publication.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 16h day of
February , 2021.
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 16th day of
February , 2021.
UPDATES TO NUISANCE CODE DEFINITIONS PAGI?3 Page 31
Item#3.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
Robert E. Simison, Mayor Chris Johnson, City Clerk
CERTIFICATION OF SUMMARY:
William L.M. Nary, City Attorney of the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereby certifies that the
summary below is true and complete and upon its publication will provide adequate notice
to the public.
William L. M. Nary, City Attorney
SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 21-1917
An ordinance repealing and replacing Meridian City Code section 4-2-1, regarding definitions
related to nuisances; amending Meridian City Code section 4-2-2(c), regarding trees in public
right-of-way; amending Meridian City Code section 4-2-3(d)(2),regarding abatement of nuisance
trees; adopting a savings clause; and providing an effective date.
UPDATES TO NUISANCE CODE DEFINITIONS PAGE,4 Page 32