2021-05-06 Building Contractors Association of Southwestern Idaho Inc.=U��SPACiO/{g�or
s
I � zBCA
O�s���hwestefi�a
May 6, 2021
BUILDING CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION
OF SOUTHWESTERN IDAHO, INC.
"A Tradition of Building Excellence for Over 60 Years"
Bill Parsons and Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Meridian
33 East Broadway Ave
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: UDC Code Changes: May 6, 2021 Planning and Zoning Commission
Dear Commissioners and Mr. Parsons,
6206 N Discovery Way, Suite A
Boise, Idaho 83773 AfFWW d Ah
(2081377-3550 ®NMB
(208) 377-3553 fax TM^°°,�^�wi°.N
Website: www.bcaswi.org
E-mail: bca@heritagewifi.com
The Building Contractors Association of Southwestern Idaho (BCA) wishes to express deep sorrow
and sympathy for the passing of a dear friend and colleague, Lisa Holland. Lisa was a shining light to
so many that knew her, and we feel the void from her sudden and tragic loss. We will all miss her
kindness, compassion, friendship, and dedicated service to this community. Again, we express our
heartfelt sympathies to the Planning and Zoning Commissioners.
We recognize one of the items on the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission agenda is
changes to the Uniform Development Code (UDC). We appreciate Mr. Parsons recently giving our
members a high-level summary of some of the most important changes. As changes to the UDC
directly impact how our members do business in the City of Meridian, we appreciate being included
in the discussions to determine how the code applies and it's impacts to the building community.
Though we are still reviewing some of the proposed changes and look forward to more discussions
in the future as this code continues to change, we express our support for the process to determine
these proposed changes. We recognize the countless hours from City staff and from volunteer
members that served on various committees to reach these proposed changes. Many of the proposed
changes are welcome improvements. However, some of the proposed changes are significant and
raise some concerns:
Open space requirements: Increasing the required amount of open space by up to 50 percent
more than current requirements (from 10 to 15 percent) will 1) continue to adversely effect
the affordability of homes in the city, 2) greatly increase the required HOA dues to pay to
maintain the open space (or the rents for for -rent products will increase), and 3) will reduce
the taxable land in the city, which will cause an increase in property taxes on current
residents. We are experiencing unprecedented housing unaffordability and substantial
increases in open space at this time is very concerning. The new approach of a sliding scale
that requires more open space within higher density developments makes sense to many of
our members. We believe the city needs to further reduce the required open space for low
density developments in order to actually realize some of these developments in the city.
Bigger backyards, especially for R-2 zones, do not need as much active open space within the
subdivision. One alternative solution we request the city consider is a reduction in the open
space required in R-2 and R-4 Zones.
2. Some open space not qualified toward minimum open space:
• irregular shaped open spaces Sec 11-3G-3A-2. Some development parcels are
irregular shape and may result in an irregular shaped common lot for open space.
Additionally, better and more creative designs will yield an irregular shaped common
area. And is "irregular shaped" defined? We don't understand how the shape of a
common lot should determine whether it is counted. We request the reference to
not counting irregular shaped common areas be deleted.
• In 11-3G-3B, requiring a higher percentage of the front yards of homes to front open
spaces takes away one of the most desirable preference in the market and takes away
design creativity. We agree that open space should be open to streets for visibility
and safety, however, many homeowners love backing up to a park or open space. As
an alternative or compromise, we request the city consider changing the
requirement in 11-3G-3B to be 25% of the common area be visible/front housing.
• Ponds: Water features are very attractive, are expensive to install, and can enhance
the environment and surrounding wildlife. We don't understand why the city wants
to disincentivize water features. We request the city consider counting 100% of
water features as open space.
3. Amenities: In Table 11-3G-4 Site Amenities and Point Value, we recognize there has been
substantial effort to create this list of amenities and point value. There will be varying
opinions on how much each amenity is worth to the city and we appreciate that some
amenities will now be given a higher value as they not only cost more to install, but they truly
do add more value to the community. The BCA does not have a formal opinion on the values
listed for each amenity, however, since this is a very new concept and we recognize
improvements and adjustments may be needed after implementation, we ask the City to be
open to future changes to this table as we all work through the actual application of it.
4. Some of our members, including Conger Group, have provided comments and through
analysis to the impacts of these many proposed code changes. We appreciate their efforts,
support their detailed analysis, and hope the City will sincerely consider these well thought
out comments. As the BCA continues to review the impacts from the city's proposed code
changes, we may have additional comments from our members.
Thank you for considering our comments on this very important issue to our members. We
appreciate the good working relationship with the City of Meridian and look forward to continued
positive relations in the future.
Sincerely,
Rod Givens, President