Loading...
2022-09-27 Regular City Council Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 6:00 PM Minutes ROLL CALL ATTENDANCE PRESENT Councilman Treg Bernt Councilwoman Jessica Perreault Councilman Luke Cavener Councilman Joe Borton Councilman Brad Hoaglun Mayor Robert E. Simison ABSENT Councilwoman Liz Strader PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE COMMUNITY INVOCATION ADOPTION OF AGENDA Adopted PUBLIC FORUM – Future Meeting Topics ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Hearing for Resolution 22-2343: A Resolution Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date 2. Resolution 22-2343: A Resolution Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun 3. Public Hearing for Prescott Ridge Residential (H-2022-0058) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, located at 3770 & 4184 S. Linder Rd. Approved A. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2021-132713) for the residential portion of Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan. Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Borton. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun 4. Public Hearing for UDC Text Amendment ZOA-2022-0001 by City of Meridian Planning Division Approved A. Request: UDC Text Amendment for a text amendment to amend certain sections and add new code sections to the City's Unified Development Code pertaining to the regulations through Chapters 1-5. Motion made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun 5. Public Hearing for Existing Conditions Report 2022 CPAT (H-2022-0049) by City of Meridian Approved A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the 2019 Comprehensive plan to adopt the Existing Conditions Report 2022, as an addendum to the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan). The Existing Conditions Report addresses some requirements for a Comp Plan under the Local Land Use Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code. The Report includes descriptions, maps and analysis for a variety of demographic indicators, services and land coverage information. The purpose of the Report is to serve as a community resource and to document and set a baseline for existing conditions that Ideally help to inform future decisions. Motion made by Councilman Hoaglun, Seconded by Councilwoman Perreault. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun ORDINANCES \[Action Item\] 6. Ordinance No. 22-1995: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 6-3- 2(A) and 6-3-2(A)(6), Regarding Qualifying Behavior for Disorderly Conduct and Adding Meridian City Code Section 6-3-2(C), Regarding Citation Signature for Disorderly Conduct; Repealing any Conflicting Ordinances, and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun 7. Ordinance No. 22-1996: An Ordinance Annexing the West Half of the Northwest One Quarter Of Section 15, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, More Particularly Described in Exhibit “A,” Rezoning 0.98 Acres of Such Real Property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High- Density Residential) Zoning District; Directing City Staff to Alter All Use and Area Maps As Well As The Official Zoning Maps And All Official Maps Depicting The Boundaries and The Zoning Districts of The City of Meridian in Accordance with this Ordinance; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed With the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, As Required By Law; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; And Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun 8. Ordinance No. 22-1997: An Ordinance Annexing the East Half of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, More Particularly Described in Exhibit “A,” Rezoning 125.59 Acres of Such Real Property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) To I-L (Light Industrial) Zoning District; Directing City Staff to Alter All Use and Area Maps as Well as the Official Zoning Maps and All Official Maps Depicting the Boundaries and the Zoning Districts of the City of Meridian in Accordance with this Ordinance; Providing That Copies of this Ordinance Shall Be Filed With the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, As Required By Law; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; and Providing an Effective Date Approved Motion to approve made by Councilwoman Perreault, Seconded by Councilman Hoaglun. Voting Yea: Councilman Bernt, Councilwoman Perreault, Councilman Cavener, Councilman Borton, Councilman Hoaglun FUTURE MEETING TOPICS ADJOURNMENT 7:45 p.m. Meridian City Council September 27, 2022. A Meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:01 p.m., Tuesday, September 27, 2022, by Mayor Robert Simison. Members Present: Robert Simison, Joe Borton, Luke Cavener, Treg Bernt, Jessica Perreault and Brad Hoaglun. Members Absent: Liz Strader. Also present: Chris Johnson, Bill Nary, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Brad Purser, Scott Colaianni, Kenny Bowers and Dean Willis. ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE Liz Strader _X_ Joe Borton _X_ Brad Hoaglun _X_Treg Bernt X Jessica Perreault _X_ Luke Cavener X_ Mayor Robert E. Simison Simison: Council, we will call the meeting to order. For the record it is September 27th, 2022, at 6:01 p.m. We will begin tonight's regular City Council meeting with roll call attendance. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Simison: Next up is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you would all, please, rise and join us in the pledge. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) COMMUNITY INVOCATION Simison: Next item is the community invocation, which will be delivered by Randy Rodes with reSURGE Church. If you would all, please, join us in the community invocation or take this as a moment of silence and reflection. Rodes: Thank you, Mayor, for this privilege of being here. Lord, we thank you tonight for this meeting. We praise you for your great love for this whole community and, Lord, we pray for wisdom for every decision that is made, that all of those decisions would be made with righteousness, with purity and with the good of this entire community in mind and we know that's the intent of every one of these Council Members. So, we thank you for them, Lord, and we pray your blessing on this time in Jesus' name, amen. ADOPTION OF AGENDA Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 2 of 39 Simison: Thank you. Next up is the adoption of the agenda. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I move adoption of the agenda as published. Borton: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as published. Is there any discussion? If not, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it and the agenda is adopted. 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 Resolution 22-2343: A Resolution Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Okay. Then we will move into tonight's Action Items. First up is Item 1, public hearing for Resolution 22-2343 and I will open this public hearing with comments from Mr. Purser. Purser: Mayor, Council, appreciate letting me be here today. I start off with just want to tell our city clerk and our -- our city attorney thank you for their help in getting this noticed and work on the resolution and everything that's before you that we are -- so we are able to be here today. The changes we are making today are -- are -- are pretty simple when you break them down. They seem like a lot in number. We have 135 total changes. One hundred and twenty-nine of those are really -- are from our Public Works Department. They are water meter fees, water meter replacement type -- type of things. Those fees reflect the cost changes that we are seeing and is simply adjusting our fees to meet the -- the pass through cost going on to whomever may order, you know, the meter, the -- the pipe or-- or whatever it is that -- that they are -- they are seeking to -- to -- to get. Beyond those 129 fees that leaves, you know, six. Two of those are removals. There is a dog removal and we are getting rid of a CD or a DVD -- don't give people CDs or DVDs anymore typically with public works -- public, you know, information requests. So, getting rid of that. And, then, we have four relatively new fees related to animal control, Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 3 of 39 addressing dogs -- vicious dogs, livestock, and -- and the cat and we have gone through, you know, what's behind charging those fees, but in summation that is really what is in front of you. The vast majority are pass through and, you know, for our addressing animal control Items. With that I will answer any questions you may have. Happy to do that. Simison: Thank you. Council, questions for Brad? All right. Thank you very much. Okay. This is a public hearing. Mr. Clerk, did we have anyone signed up to provide testimony in this item? Johnson: Mr. Mayor, we did not. Simison: Okay. Is there anybody present that would like to come forward at this time and provide public testimony on this item? And if you are online you can use the raise your hand feature. We just have one staff member, so hopefully -- Mr. Radek is listening, because a lot of these impact their department, but, if not, do I have a motion to close the public hearing? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we close the public hearing for Resolution 22-2343. Hoaglun: 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 and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 2. Resolution 22-2343: A Resolution Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Next up is Item 2, which is Resolution 22-2343. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: You are looking for a motion; correct? Simison: Yes. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 4 of 39 Perreault: I move that we approve Resolution 22-2343, a resolution adopting new and increasing fees, authorizing city departments to collect such fees and providing an effective date. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Resolution 22-2343. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, absent. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the resolution is agreed to. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 3. Public Hearing for Prescott Ridge Residential (H-2022-0058) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, located at 3770 & 4184 S. Linder Rd. A. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2021-132713) for the residential portion of Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan. Simison: Next item up is Item 3, a public hearing for Prescott Ridge Residential, H-2022- 0058. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Parsons: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, before we get into the land use applications I just want to introduce all of you to our -- our newest associate planner Stacy Hersh. She is not new to our department. She's been with the city for over seven years, but she's been working as an assistant city planner for the last three and a half years. So, we are happy to have her aboard and we are looking forward to her bringing forward high quality projects to you. So, if you don't know Stacy, she's here and -- and we thank you for all that you do and we are happy to have her aboard. Simison: Thank you, Bill. And welcome, Stacy. Look forward to seeing you on Tuesday nights. With that I will turn this over to Sonya. Allen: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. Give me just a moment here. Alrighty. The first land use application before you tonight is a request for a development agreement modification. This site is zoned R-8 and R-15 and is generally located on the east side of North McDermott Road, south of West Chinden Boulevard. This property was annexed in 2021 with the requirement of a development agreement as part of the Prescott Ridge Subdivision. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation is medium density residential. The applicant is proposing to modify the existing agreement for the residential portion of the Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan for the development. Since the time of annexation the phasing plan for the Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 5 of 39 overall development has changed. The northern 15 acre medical campus portion of the site was shown on the phasing plan as phase one in order to create a legal lot to convey to the purchaser of that property. Acquiring the outparcel at the northeast corner of the medical campus enabled the applicant to do a property boundary adjustment to create a legal lot for development purposes to convey to the new owner, so that they can develop their site separately and at their own timing. The proposed modification will remove the medical campus from the phasing plan of the residential development. Other changes to the phasing plan include the following: Phase one was expanded to include the location of the pressurized irrigation pump house. The large green space in the center of the development is now part of Phase 3 instead of Phase 6, which will allow the large park and associated amenities to develop sooner and the updated phasing plan shows larger phases overall to expedite the development process. Phase one still includes construction of the constructor -- excuse me -- collector street, Rustic Oak, from Chinden Boulevard to the southern boundary of the property, which is important for emergency access and connectivity. No changes to the text of the development agreement are proposed. Patrick Connor, the applicant's representative, submitted written testimony. He is in agreement with the staff report. Staff is recommending approval of the request. Staff will stand for any questions. Simison: Thank you, Sonya. Council, any questions for staff? Seeing none, is the applicant here? State your name and address for the record and be recognized for up to 15 minutes if you would like. Connor: Thank you. My name is Patrick Connor. Address is 701 South Allen Street, Meridian, Idaho. I think Sonya did a great job explaining it. This is a development modification. We are amending the phasing plan. We were able to make the 15 acre hospital portion of it a legal lot and that is now a separate ownership. They are submitting their own CUP and development -- development agreement modification for the phasing plan in their development agreement here in a few weeks, I believe. So, as she said, a lot of the -- the phasing has changed. The phase one got larger to include the pump station and, then, just generally you are making the phases a little bit larger to account for the increased time for review time and construction time. So, it's a pretty straightforward request. I stand for any questions you guys have. Simison: Thank you. Council, any questions for the applicant? Okay. Appreciate it very much. I will ask if there is anybody that would like to provide public testimony on this item. Again we have nobody in the room and just staff online. So, Kyle, if you would like to provide testimony, please, raise your hand. Seeing no one coming forward or raising their hand, would the applicant to make any final comments? Applicant has waived any final comments. So, Council, do I have any motions? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 6 of 39 Perreault: I move that we close the public hearing for Prescott Ridge Residential, H- 2022-0058. Borton: Second. Simison: 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 and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I will be the motion maker tonight. I'm good with that. I move that we approve application H-2022-0058, a development agreement modification to the existing development agreement for the residential portion of Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan. Borton: Second. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Item 3, H-2022-0058. Is there discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, absent. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. Thank you very much. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 4. Public Hearing for UDC Text Amendment ZOA-2022-0001 by City of Meridian Planning Division A. Request: UDC Text Amendment for a text amendment to amend certain sections and add new code sections to the City's Unified Development Code pertaining to the regulations through Chapters 1- 5. Simison: Next we will move on to Item 4, which is public hearing for UDC Text Amendment ZOA-2022-0001. We will open this public hearing with staff comments from Mr. Parsons. Parsons: Thank you, Mayor. I will go ahead and get things pulled up here and get into the presentation here. Next item -- Mayor, Members of the Council, next item on your Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 7 of 39 agenda is the 2022 draft UDC changes. As you all know, we do meet with a UDC focus group throughout the year. We keep track of all our changes and meet with that group, vet all of these changes so that when we come forward to you we have pretty much vetted all the issues out and had consensus from a large body of people that make up that group. This application was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission at the August 18th hearing in which the P&Z Commission did vote unanimously for the proposed changes and there aren't any changes for you this evening from staff's recommended changes that are before you tonight. On the graphic before you this evening I have highlighted some of the areas that I want to touch base on as far as the overall larger changes to the code. A lot of -- some of these are -- typically we have clean up. When we have code that we hear from our applicants that don't work well or even our citizens and, then, we add new changes to try to mimic what's occurring in the valley or nationwide as trends and add new code changes for you to act on and that's why you have 12 pages of code changes in front of you. Typically that's not our intent, we like -- but as you get a large group together you tend to have broader and broader discussions on a whole host of different code changes and that's what these -- that's what's come about as part of this process. So, I have to say this is probably one of the most rewarding ones that I have worked on so far, because I felt like we were very comprehensive, we thought everything out, made sure that we brought forth something that is enforceable and easily understandable. So, first item -- and, again, I have highlighted the ones that I want to touch base on. If there is anything that the Mayor or Council wants me to discuss tonight I'm happy to do so as well. But, again, these are some of the bigger ones that we talked about. So, in -- in our world -- in planning I think this body is familiar with having -- we get a lot of residential development. It's mostly single family or it's multi-family. There is nothing in between. And what we are starting to see more and more of and what we have realized is that in our code we have a -- a gap, if you will. We have what we call home occupations and we have vertically integrated. So, we have -- we allow for people to operate businesses out of their home and we allow people to build mixed-use buildings. We have commercial on the first floor and residential above, but we had nothing in between. So, we were having people that came -- come forward with some applications and they kind of skirted in between both of those uses and we are like we don't quite have that defined very well. So, how do we want to bridge that gap? And so we came up with the strategy of having a tiered approach to our mixed-use building. So, you are going to have your home occupations, which is your single family home with 200 square feet of your house and your living and you are -- you are -- you are classified as a single family home. Then you are going to have this live-work building, which is up to 3,000 square feet, with the bottom being commercial and residential above and, then, you are going to have vertically integrated, which is that third and highest tier, which is your larger mixed-use buildings, like you are seeing under construction in downtown today. We felt that was a good approach to go and -- and have that tiered approach, like we do with a lot of our other residential developments. So, again, we canvassed the country and looking at different cities' codes and coordinated with our building department on these standards and so we feel like we have it nailed down pretty well on what home occ is, what live-work will be and what vertically integrated will be moving forward. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 8 of 39 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Are we asking questions after each section or are we waiting until the end? Parsons: It's up to you how fluid you want to keep the conversation. If you want to wait until the end and, then, go back we can do that and just get through the presentation or we can have an open dialogue as I present. Whatever your -- Simison: Ask as we go. Perreault: I'm sorry? Simison: Ask as we go. Perreault: Okay. That would be my preference. May I ask a question? Parsons: Sure. Perreault: Thank you. Thank you, Bill. So, two -- two quick questions. Where did the 1,500 square foot max on the residential area come from? Is that commonly accepted in other areas of the country? Is -- if you could share where that size came from and, then, this doesn't specifically state the intention is that they would be two story and residential would be on one floor and commercial would be -- or nonresidential would be on another floor. It doesn't say it has to be two stories. But you had just mentioned one would be up and one would be down. So, can it be a single level and still meet this criteria? Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, good -- very good question. So, part one of your question where did the standards come from. They came from the -- the International Building Code that we have adopted. So, I worked with our building official and this is how they define it and we felt that was an appropriate purpose of that. To your second question, there is no two-story requirement that I recall. Well, let's -- let's wait until we get to the specific use standards and see if we have that criteria, but I'm not sure if it's in there or not, so we will put a pin in that and, then, we will come back to it as we get down to those specific use standards. This right now is just focusing on the definition and how it interacts with the -- the various zoning districts. So, you can see here we have had to amend the schedule of use tables and all the different zones. So, here we are adding it to the commercial zone or residential zoning districts, allowing it in some of the commercial districts as a principally permitted use or conditional use. Obviously, we don't want them in industrial uses, because they are not a compatible use and, then, we are also allowing it in our traditional neighborhood districts. So, for -- in this example if they were to go in the Old Town zone, any of these zones here under the traditional neighborhood they would have to be two story minimum per the code. So, there may be cases. But, typically, yes, we do see them as two story. Here is one that Caleb presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission, so I don't know if the Mayor or City Council is aware, butACHD is in the process of, essentially, getting rid of bike lanes on collector and arterial roadways in lieu of having ten foot sidewalks along those roadways. So, we are Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 9 of 39 getting people off the travel lanes and having wider sidewalks essentially. So, we are trying to get ahead of the curve, so to speak, and, then, add that to our code and make it codified, so we can support whatever changes they have forthcoming for their -- their commission. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Mayor, Bill, on that -- to that point, when we have setbacks of say 25 feet or whatever is required, depending on the street and, then, there is a ten foot sidewalk, does that go into that or -- because I thought we went from sidewalk to frontage. How does that work? Parsons: Mayor, Council, it -- it depends. So, if it's a -- sometimes when they widen the road they may not have enough right of way and they have to attach the pathway. So, in that particular case the buffer would be measured from the back of the pathway. If it's a detached pathway, then, it can be included as part of the buffer width and, then, it would be measured from the curb or ultimate right of way location as anticipated by ACHD. Hoaglun: Okay. Thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Yes. Maybe just sticking with the -- with the pathway bike lanes. Bill, I know in Planning and Zoning there was a little bit of a discussion about, you know, electric scooters and, you know, that's a topic this Council has discussed at length before. I just want to make sure that I'm -- I'm correct in -- in how our code is set up, which is if you are -- if you are going to go under 20 miles an hour or if you are -- if it's -- yeah. If it's under 20 miles an hour we want them on the pathway. If it's over 20 miles an hour we want them on the road. Am I remembering that correctly? I know that this came up at P&Z and there was going to be some discussion I think between the P&Z meeting and tonight. I just want to make sure that I'm correctly understanding what is the appropriate use of these electric scooters. Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, I know -- I remember that discussion. I watched the YouTube video as well. I don't -- I think it's -- I don't know if it's something in our code or if it's ACHD's code, but I know Caleb was going to look into that and get back to everyone. So, I don't -- I don't have any definite answer for you this evening on that specific topic. Simison: I don't know if Mr. Nary -- I thought that that was only related to when we were doing the --when we had the program moving forward. I don't know if that was something Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 10 of 39 that we would put in actual other language someplace else. I don't know if you know or -- or the captain knows. Nary: I -- I believe you are correct and maybe Captain Colaianni knows. But I think that was the conversation we were having when we were talking about scooters as a business opportunity in Meridian. I don't think we have codified that anywhere else that I'm aware of. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, I have got just one additional question in this section if it's -- now is an appropriate time. Simison: Yep, go ahead, Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thank you. So, Bill, help me with this. The -- the first one right out of the gate, revising the definitions of adult entertainment. So, I think I'm understanding what staff is wanting to achieve, which is to provide better clarity in the language. Here I guess is the crux for me is I don't want to support any of this type of industry in Meridian and I worry about us creating new definitions if we are creating a wider scope of which a business would be able to open in Meridian and so help me understand the purpose of this and if -- if -- if the Council Members' overall goal is to prevent these types of businesses from being in our community, what's the appropriate steps for us to take? Nary: Mr. Mayor, I didn't know if it was Bill you were asking, but I can answer that one. Cavener: Sure. Nary: We cannot prohibit this type of business in the community. So, they are allowed, but you can decide where they go, and that's basically what the UDC does. It determines where a business of this type could go and so they are only in, essentially, industrial types of -- of areas. So, they aren't going to be in a residential neighborhood. But we -- we cannot -- we cannot prohibit them entirely. There is -- there is actual case law on that subject matter. So, that's -- this is just trying to align with what the state already defines as adult entertainment and -- and Council Member Perreault asked about alcohol service and the state also defines what alcohol service -- can it be done at an adult entertainment, which is why for a period of time you saw some of these places where they didn't serve alcohol, they served alcohol next door. So, people would go back and forth between the two businesses, because they couldn't serve alcohol in the place where the -- this -- this activity was occurring, so -- so, to answer your question, no, we can't prohibit them. This is just aligning with what the state code already defines as what an adult entertainment business is and we were just trying to eliminate conflict. Cavener: Okay. Thanks, Bill. And Bill. Parsons: So, water right -- water conserving design standards. I think this body's heard a lot at -- during the public testimony about water conservation. I know it's big -- it's a big topic. Mayor had actually brought that up in the state of the city address this year as well Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 11 of 39 and so we are trying to incentivize that a little bit more, encourage applicants to look at doing that and if you do that, then, you get a --get a reduction in some of the requirements as far as the required planting materials and the width of the buffer is how we are going to incentivize that. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you, Bill. Can you go into a little bit more detail about what the -- you know, how the applicant would be benefited by doing the water conservation versus not? Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, think about the -- the one thing that -- even with the recent updates to our open space standards we even require them to do less turf as part of those buffers along the street. We want people to do attractive enhanced buffers. We want people to have clear defined landscaping. It needs to be integrated in part of the overall design and so the intent here is if you don't have to water you don't have to -- I don't know how many of you drive by a subdivision and you see sprinklers over spraying the sidewalks and going all over the street and they are not really hitting a hundred percent on landscape and other jurisdictions code enforcement would cite you for that, because you are wasting water. We don't have that regulation here. So, by you doing something that's water wise and eliminating the turf, you can actually do a drip system, which uses a lot less water to -- for those plants and you put in more drought tolerant plants, so that you have to water less. That's the benefit. And you get more boulders and rocks and those types of things like you see in -- in the southwest. Here is -- here is one of all of our favorite topics, multi-family parking. I think all of you keep hearing about that, too. And I can tell you we have made a lot of strides and a lot of changes over the last couple of years to try to address some of those concerns and you still continue to hear those today. So, I have two options for you. So, when we were at Planning and Zoning I had -- and this was quite the topic of discussion with the focus group, too. What is that perfect balance of parking for multi-family? And so based on those discussions I went ahead and went back, we looked at-- staff went back and looked at the parking standards. You know, we don't -- if three bedroom -- and a lot of times we hear concerns with the three bedroom units, because we always have presumed there is going to be three roommates living together, so you are going to have three cars. So, on first blush was, you know what, all right, let's just make three and four bedroom units three parking and the group was fine with that, but we also discussed potentially just having a flat rate like two per regardless of the bedroom count and so usually I was anticipating Council Woman Strader to be here to ask me what does that ratio play out to be. So, I did crunch some numbers for you to give you -- so, if we went through the two per unit option you would -- and I'm -- I analyzed it against a 300 unit apartment complex. So, it's -- it's -- I made up a development application and I gave 300 units at two per unit. It came up with easy math, 600 parking stalls. Half of those had to be covered and, then, one per ten dwelling units for the guest spaces, so you have a total of 630 parking stalls on that two per unit ratio. Now, on this plan that I have here, I gave -- I assigned 50 studio apartments, 125 one bedroom, 150 two bedroom and 25 three bedroom and I calculated Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 12 of 39 that for you and I added the guest parking, it came in at 641. So, you netted 11 more parking stalls with this proposal versus having an easy math of two per unit. Covered parking was actually less, 281 covered versus 300 with the two per. So, it's -- it's pretty much the same ratio however you spin it. So, our recommendation tonight, either you want the two per or are you satisfied with what we have proposed in -- in this exhibit tonight. So -- and we can have that discussion now or afterwards as well. Just curious as to what you guys think about that. And this kind of coincides with the next one, too, which is vertically integrated. We kind of bumped up those standards a little bit. We were a little light on some of those -- those standards. It was one -- one per dwelling and, then, we assessed a different parking ratio for the commercial portion of the -- the project. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. So, Bill, if I'm understanding you correctly, the first figure you gave, 630, is two spaces per unit, plus guest parking -- Parsons: That's -- Perreault: The second figure you gave is using this chart here; is that correct? Parsons: That's correct. Perreault: So, we currently have a requirement of three parking spaces per dwelling unit in the three and four bedroom apartments in multi-family, is that what I'm reading? Parsons: No. Mayor, Members of the Council, we currently have for four plus bedrooms it's three. For two and three bedrooms it's two per. Perreault: So, moving the three bedrooms to the four -- okay. Parsons: Three and four units. Correct. Perreault: In your conversations with many of the builders that are on the UDC committee, did they have concerns about the two covered parking spaces or garages with a three bedroom -- with actually accomplishing that? Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, there was no -- there was really no discussion around the amount of covered parking. It really came down to the parking ratios and what is that right mix and so, you know, we talked about the increase in rents -- I think you have all heard of it. Increased rents means you need more roommates, more people living in apartments, which it kind of makes the problem worse and so, obviously, we can't fix everything, but this is our attempt to try to at least require a little bit more. Now, with that caveat you will look at note number five there, what we are doing -- no longer doing is we are not requiring commercial parking standards for the clubhouse if it's built in conjunction Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 13 of 39 with the multi-family. A lot of the discussion came around we -- the group felt we solved the problem by adding the guest parking, because by doing that in this -- in this particular instance, the one I just read to you, you get 30 more parking stalls. So, therefore, you have created overflow parking essentially for -- for guests in that -- or even if someone has parties or events in the complex you have provided that additional parking. That's why they felt the ratio was right. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, say along those lines that the apartment complex decided to label all of the spaces as guest spaces and the residents couldn't use them, they had to be left as visitor spaces. If -- you know, let's say you have -- in -- in your scenario there was 125 one bedrooms and let's say half of those have a couple in them that each have vehicles, but they only have one or one and a half spaces. Why not just require the three and four bedroom units to only have one covered space and, then, there is a lot more open spaces for other units who have additional residents? Was there any conversation -- I guess my concern is just -- like it's really hard to get two carports or garages into a complex, so it may discourage developers from doing as many three bedroom units and we don't want to do that, because a lot more people are living in apartments as long-term solutions to their housing. So, I'm wondering -- that's why I was asking that question, because it creates less flexible parking in the complex as a whole and -- and that may -- may or may not solve the issue. Parsons: Mayor, Council, I -- I think you bring up a valid point. We didn't really talk about that, but certainly it's within your purview to change that to one per if you want it to be consistent with other code or leave it two per the way it's written, so -- so, it sounds like my math is off a little bit, because I probably should have required two -- a little bit more covered parking. So, it -- I would -- I thought it was one across the board. So, my apologies. It is two for three bedroom units. So, it's probably-- it is slightly higher covered parking, too, with this ratio than the two per. With the standards that the -- the Option B that I have it's two per with one -- one being covered. So, it is the same across the board. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I -- I would be inclined to say let's just leave it at one covered carport space or garage even for the three and four bedrooms, just so the -- you know, a lot -- a lot more complexes are requiring people to use the garage for parking and not storage. You are more likely to have somebody that tries to use that garage for storage if they are in a larger unit, because they have more stuff usually. Yeah. I just -- I don't know. I guess I have concerns about the developers actually being able to provide two covered carports, which takes up a lot more physical space than an open parking space and, then, additional garages, which will take up more space and -- and maybe make some of the Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 14 of 39 properties smaller in-fill type of properties less flexible, because they are going to have to add that extra -- those extra structures. Just a thought. Parsons: We will move on to the streets. Or any other comments? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: Yeah, I just -- I want to make sure, Bill, I understand the clarification that clubhouses are not subject to commercial parking standards. So, we are treating them that they are not a standalone, so they don't have to meet commercial deals. But is that where they can put the guest spaces, one per ten dwelling units, they can put them there? So, there might not be any on-street parking in front of those types of things? But that number, then, can translate over to that clubhouse or fitness center or whatever it is? So, I was just trying to mentally go through, because I know in some places -- and is this only for multi-family development or is it for any residential development? Parsons: This is for multi-family. You can see there there is a five here -- underlined five here that points you to that note. So, it's for multi-family. Hoaglun: Okay, Mr. Mayor. Yeah. I -- I think that will work. It's -- it's one of those things you try to think it through and go, okay, what -- are there unintended consequences here by doing that. But I think the -- the number is still the number, it just might be in a different location. Parsons: And -- and keep in mind a lot of the -- a lot of the multi-family developments require a conditional use permit. So, we -- we have those conversations when we meet with applicants during the pre-application meeting process. We let them know you better have some -- some healthy parking numbers. We are proud of parking here and we want you to include that on your site plan. Don't come in with the bare minimum, because it usually doesn't go well. So, the next topic that I wanted to share with you was private streets. I know we have had a handful of those and we have had some public comment on private streets as well if you have had a chance to look at the public record from one of the applicants and so if you recall we had that Skybreak project in front of you a few years back and we realized we had an issue with the private streets, that it could only be in zones that did not require street frontage. R-5, R-40 zones to be specific. And so that's something that was on my list -- put on my list after that hearing and so this is that attempt to say that you can take advantage of that in the other districts. I know one of the comments, looking at the public record from Mike Wardle, specified as saying R-2, R-4, but if you look at the definition section of our code for residential districts it calls out R-2 all the way to R-40. So, we -- we have it covered here. So, this would open it up for others to apply for private streets in the other districts if they chose to. Now, keep in mind we are not changing the applicability -- or at least the purpose statement of the code. Really, the intent of the private streets is not to get you out of doing public streets, it's -- it's limited circumstances. We -- the city really would prefer to have public streets over private streets. But the option is there if they choose to. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 15 of 39 Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: That's been something we have wrestled with, though, and -- and I mean it's something that if we want to discourage and -- why do we want to allow it in code? Developer is going to apply. You can't say no. It gets all the way to Council and that seems very late in the game for us to come in. The dimensions are different. Very late in the game for us to comment and say no private streets. Why wouldn't we, for clarity purposes, continue to prohibit it in certain districts? Parsons: We can. That -- that's your prerogative. But what we have -- at least from the focus group they felt that that satisfied the requirement. They are more concerned with it and they were concerned with this next section here about the number of dwelling units that could be served. Again, they felt 50 was -- you wouldn't -- if you only did 50 homes you wouldn't have enough homeowners to have adequate cost to maintain the private roads. So, a hundred was that threshold number. So, that's why we went ahead and -- and changed some of that based on some of that feedback we had. Again, if Council doesn't feel it's appropriate, we certainly don't have to implement the change, but the rationale was based on what we have heard from -- feedback from the UDC focus group, and -- and their experience with doing gated communities, they felt that it should be allowed in other districts, because why wouldn't you want estate lots -- larger lots with gated communities. You see that pretty typically and this kind of forces -- in their opinion it forced somebody to up zone a property that -- in order to get what they wanted. So, we are trying to eliminate some of that confusion for--for not only the applicants, but also for residents that come to the hearing. R-15, it's multi-family. No. It's R-15 because they want gated street -- private streets. That's kind of the purpose -- the -- the logic behind it. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Somewhat we got into that issue actually on that last one. They pick a zone for the streets. So, is there a reason -- is there -- over on the topic -- any value in having a minimum number of lots in order to utilize private streets or is that an issue --the problem doesn't come up? Because that's the concern; right? If it is too small, actually, we know the costs that are coming down the road for those folks -- will be mad and come to the city in 17 years when the private streets fall apart, so -- anyway -- Parsons: No harm. No foul. But, yes, we don't typically -- again, I don't know if someone would do that if there was a minimum. Borton: Yeah. Okay. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 16 of 39 Parsons: There are -- there are some smaller gated communities, but they are -- like you said, they are bigger homes on lots that were -- probably they can afford to keep up and maintain the -- the roads. Borton: Okay. Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Thank you. Along those same lines, it seems to me every time we have a conversation about allowing for public streets we have a conversation about parking on the streets and fire. So, I'm wondering if the fire department shared any thoughts with you on -- on that. I agree. I don't want to increase the -- or encourage the use of public streets and because we always seem to go back to these two issues. Fire trucks getting in there and parking. So, it -- has -- was there any consideration made -- of course, you know, the development and building community probably isn't going to want this limitation, but was there any consideration made of limiting the height of the units along the private streets in -- in a, you know, a PUD where only private streets exist? So, they can only be single story, because now we don't need to put a -- take a ladder truck in there to -- you know, if we have a fire issue or something along those lines. Parsons: So, Mayor, Members of the Council, Chief Bongiorno was part of the focus group. He did chime in and gave me comments on this. He's looked at all these and signed off on it. So, if you look there it -- the code requires them to get fire department sign off. So, they are going to -- he is going to make sure that he can adequately get in there and access that and make sure that it meets code and that's -- he's always part of those reviews and he's always quick to respond to applicants and let them know what they need, so -- these are minimums. As you know, the minimum width of a private street is 24 feet, but, again, the fire marshal has discretion to require more and we can as well. The director can require more, too. Specifically if someone wants to design it for on-street parking, then, we are going to get a wider street with parking on one side and, then, we are going to have them sign the other side no parking, so we know we can get emergency personnel in there. And currently the way the code reads now you can only have up to 30 homes on a single access and we are saying you can have up to 50 on one gate. So, that's -- that right there is a -- is a violation of the fire code and that's why we are trying to clean up this section of code, let them go up to a hundred and provide two accesses and two gates. I can tell you part of the -- and, then, again, you can see here the cul-de-sac length isn't consistent with code, so we changed that. And, again, Chief Bongiorno was all part of that and gave comments. So, his comments have been taken into account and added to this section. If you had a chance to look at Mr. Wardle's comments, he said the same thing about allowing more homes there and -- and I have had very frank conversations with the development community that at some point we want to look at our PUD standards and, really, that's why we added that language change where it said a greater number of dwellings may be approved with a planned unit development. That was a direct conversation with the development community that that's the correct avenue to get more, like you did on the projects for direct -- Paramount Director and the one at Lost Rapids next to Costco over there and Bainbridge North development there, that was Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 17 of 39 all part of a PUD process and even Hill Century Farm where they got up to almost 200 units on a private gated street. So, that's the appropriate avenue that they could seek if they want more than a hundred, until we have a chance to redo the PUD standards and we have been in meetings with some of the development community to talk about moving that forward ahead of staff's timeline. I think the development community may want to bring that forward and talk about those changes with you. Simison: Bill, was there any conversation about how the development committee wants these to function? You know, I think in -- in -- in Tuscany we -- we have got, you know, the -- the R -- the -- the middle area right there where we have got private streets that are, you know, horizontally connecting between -- you know, it meets the definition here, but they -- they function as regular roads in that -- through that area and we -- we also have the -- the area that's up there at Ustick and Eagle. Do we want them to be gated? Do we want them to be driven by the public as a general means of maneuvering through an area? I guess that's -- that's my basic question is how do we want private streets to function? Because it's -- on one hand they are being paid for by other people and they are not taxpayer dollars. Was there any conversation or thought? Parsons: Mayor, Council, the only conversation that came around getting adequate dues to pay for it -- the long-term maintenance and that's where that number came from. What you don't see here is the entire code section. So, there is multiple ways that you can apply for a private street. So, you can -- in -- in your example with Tuscany, they got approval of a private street without a gate, because they front on open space, a MEW. The same thing with the -- the project on Eagle Road. They front on MEWs, so townhomes, so, therefore, they didn't need to gate it and they could still apply for a private street. So, we have to go back to the purpose statement of the code and say how do we want it to function? And we -- and as staff we don't want private streets. It's not good for the community. We want connectivity with surrounding developments. But in the example of Skybreak, where you have topography, you have a golf course, you don't have anything really developed around you for connectivity, in those limited circumstances that seems to make some sense to do that on a case-by-case basis and that's why this is set up the way it is. It's case by case. I don't want to think the Council is overruled just because the director approves of a private street. Ultimately you get to see the plat, you get to see the annexation request and that's all part of the process. But as far as functioning, we want it to function -- if you recall Skybreak, we want it to function like a public street. We at least want sidewalk on one side or at least have logical pedestrian connections. So, you can have some multi-modal transportation happening where kids just aren't playing in the streets or neighbors have to walk in the street to -- to enjoy the neighborhood. And I think you guys were very stern on that and you required them to -- on that particular project put in sidewalk on one street. Right now the code does not require sidewalk on a private street for a residential development. It only requires it in a commercial development on one side of the street. Again, it's a big topic. It is something that's important to some of the developers, not necessarily all of them as you know. Not everyone does private gated developments. Here is one I didn't highlight, but just wanted to let you all know, since there were some public testimony on the topic from Melissa Bernard, talking about that Ustick area and Eagle about nightclubs and restaurants and everything -- again, that's Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 18 of 39 not really the purview tonight, but just bring your attention to that public testimony. But based on some of that feedback that we heard -- that transpired on a previous project out there, we felt it was prudent to change the parking regulations for drinking establishments. So, we have mimicked that or changes to align with our restaurant parking standards. So, it's one per 250 square feet of gross floor area for the building. Again consistent with the restaurant standards. So, we are trying to -- Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Parsons: -- align with code. Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: And, Bill, on that, how do we -- how do we know that the changes happen? If it's a permitted use and they change and it's -- it's -- it's -- I have seen in a strip mall where they went from an insurance agency to now there is a -- a bar in there and restaurant type thing, pub, and, boy, it changed the dynamics greatly and added a tremendous amount of vehicles. So, how do we know when that change is made and how do we follow up and enforce that? Parsons: Well, there is a couple things -- Mayor, Members of the Council, a couple things. One is if they are changing occupancy they have to go through a tenant improvement package through our -- our building department. Hopefully they will contact us first, but that's not always the case. A lot of times they will submit a TI, I will assign it to a planner and all of a sudden the planner would be like, no, this is a change of use. You need to process a planning application and as part of that they have to provide us a detailed parking ratio for the entire development and, then, they have to tell us all the tenants in that building, so that we can analyze that to make sure they are meeting the correct parking ratios and if they do we sign off. If not, we can't sign off on the permit. Next one is the secondary dwelling unit and this has to do with attainable housing, of course, in our community. I think a lot of you have heard a hot topic in -- in the valley about having affordable housing and different housing choices. So, this is one where I looked at many different codes. I wanted to make sure that I got it right for the City of Meridian and we have been seeing an increase in secondary dwelling units and we are going -- we are also going to be updating our software and our application process to allow people a separate permitting process through ourAccela software and project docs, so that we can track these a little bit better in the system, so we know that someone is actually applying for an ADU is what -- we call it secondary dwelling, but others call it accessory dwelling units. It's all the same terminology. So, currently we have one bedroom, 700 square feet, meet the parking regulations. What I'm proposing here is that we increase that to 900, allow an increase in bedrooms from one to two. Or it can't be larger than 50 percent of the existing -- the primary structure on the property. So, we give them an order, you get up to 900 square feet period, or smaller if it -- whatever is more restrictive and, then, you still have to meet the parking standards of the code. So, there is -- there is no relief from the parking. So, in this particular scenario, if someone wants to come in, apply for this and they didn't meet the parking regulations, we couldn't approve the permit. We would Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 19 of 39 have to deny it and they would have to appeal to you and come ask you to -- or submit for variance or something to that effect to get out of the parking ratio requirements. So, we will see how that plays out. I think most of the UDC focus group liked the changes here. The biggest thing is -- is, again, this was done in conjunction with our building department and we did add constructed in accordance with the adopted residential building code. So, I don't want the Council to think this would allow someone to move -- put a manufactured home on the property or build a tiny home on a trailer and call it a secondary dwelling. That's not the intent here. The intent is it's -- it's a building on a foundation and connected to city services, meeting the definition of a dwelling and meeting all residential building codes and that was quite a bit of a topic of discussion at Planning and Zoning Commission, too. Nary: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mayor, Members of the Council, I could also add on to what Bill just said. We also have a different section of code that doesn't allow manufactured homes, even on a foundation. So, that there is a specific code section that calls out manufactured homes separate from recreational vehicles. So, you would have to amend that code as well, which currently isn't part of this mix, so -- Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, on Item D, currently having code that a secondary dwelling unit may be located within the primary dwelling unit, has there been any situation where somebody just adds a door to their basement and now their basement becomes an apartment and they don't have to come in for a permit for that, they don't -- you know, they are not adding a structure, they are not doing an addition to the property, so -- and they are not changing the plumbing or the electrical, but now all of a sudden they have got four vehicles instead of two or whatnot. Is -- is that -- that seems to me like it would -- could be a fairly common scenario where people are using an upstairs or a downstairs and they are just adding an additional exit to the home. Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, certainly that's happened. We are complaint driven. So, if we don't know about it or they don't know they need a permit, then, yes, that could technically happen and it has happened. We have had situations where people have tried to convert their basements, but they applied for a permit and, then, we had to stop them, because, one, we would classify that potentially a duplex or a secondary dwelling. So, if they were going to go -- exceed -- what we have tried to do is create our application process -- have the applicant explain what they are submitting. Is it a single family detached home? Is it a -- is it a duplex? Is it a triplex? Is -- being more up front on their application submittal, so we know what they are actually applying for. But, yes, we have had -- since instances where people add a door or you can even look Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 20 of 39 in our GIS map and see people have two addresses for their property and never came to the city and did anything with us. But we don't know about that. It could have been done -- permitted years ago, maybe didn't even have a zoning ordinance in effect at the time. It could have been done in the 70s. That -- you are always going to have outliers like that. Certainly that can happen. Simison: Just out of curiosity, Bill, are we actually seeing basements being built in Meridian these days? Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, we see that more and more actually. Stacy would know more. She looked at all the permits. Simison: Is that happening in certain parts of our community because the water table as we grow into different parts, it becomes a little bit less of an issue? I'm just curious. We are up on the bench, for example, you know, I -- Parsons: Yeah. Simison: -- look at the homes that are up there in The Keep, I assume that they have the ability, because they are -- don't have the same water table. Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, that's what we are seeing, too. Yep. That's up in that higher area they are getting those daylight basements like you said. They take advantage of those views and maybe they don't have as high groundwater. Simison: Okay. So, you are saying there is a chance? Okay. Thank you. Parsons: There is a chance. Again, here is the specific use standards that go along with that, but you can see here the -- the earlier discussion you had with Council Woman Perreault regarding the live-work, there is nothing that says it -- it has to be two stories. But certainly could add that if you want. Here is -- here is an interesting change that we are changing some of our processes for Commission and Council, believe it or not. So, as you know we get a lot of alternative compliance requests. This body has seen a lot of development agreements to come before you before a conditional use permit is processed and you have asked why don't you do your CUP and, then, come back and see us or we want to see the CUP come back with the DA and so we -- we heard what you said and we have amended code -- at least what we have on the books now does that. So, one, the first change there is if someone submits alternative compliance concurrent with their conditional use permit, Planning and Zoning will be the decision making body on it, not the director. And, then, part two of that is that you guys will be part -- when a conditional use comes forward and is submitted concurrent with annexation, plat, alternative compliance, anything associated with that development group modification, it's going to go to P&Z as a recommending body and, then, you guys could act on the CUP and the DA at the same time as requested. And, then, the third part of this is that we are starting to see right of way vacations happening with ACHD a little bit more. You guys have typically been a recommending body, but all the state code requires Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 21 of 39 is that you provide -- the city provide a letter to them. So, we are basically just aligning our ordinance with state code and no -- no longer require that right of way vacations come to you to take action on. ACHD will submit the application to staff and we can provide them with those comments as part of their application process, rather than having to come before you to take that up with -- with the Council. But those are the -- the three process changes that I have for you tonight as well. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, just to be clear on the conditional use category, it's not really changing what Planning and Zoning is doing currently, because the alternative compliance would go to the director and, then, they would hear the CUP. So, that's their -- their role is not changing at all. It's just want to -- it's -- it's the timing of everything. So, the CUP has to come concurrently with these other types of applications, not an -- you know, an MDA and, then, a CUP goes to Planning and Zoning, but doesn't ever come to Council. That's the whole purpose of it? Parsons: Correct. Mayor, Members of the Council, that was the intent here. If you recall, we had that project -- they were trying to do two or three drive-throughs on one property and you guys denied that and like, well, we don't know if this works or not. We need to know if the CUP make -- analyze that with the CUP to see if we can approve this. So, you didn't feel comfortable acting on that DA and you told them go back and bring it all forward together and so during the pre-application meeting process I heard you very loud and clear on that and I think you have said that on a couple of occasions on some of the DA mods that you have processed recently and so we have been encouraging applicants to follow that process before we have got it codified, just to make sure that we are -- we get that information to you, that you want CUPs to come to you when they are submitted concurrently with the DA mod. Right now what we have been trying -- what we have done is the DA mod will come to you and, then, two weeks later the P&Z is acting on the CUP, so that all the timing aligns with the developer and we found out that that might not always work for the city. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, process question. Refresh my memory. If -- let's say -- there was an application a while ago over by Fast Eddy's on Eagle where there was a section that was going to be multi-family and they just -- they just held it out as one individual lot and, then, they -- they were going to go ahead and develop all of the single family and the townhomes and, then, later down the road they were going to do a CUP for the multi- family and that's --you are not saying that they have to bring the CUP with the annexation, you are saying that they can come -- they can do the CUP at a later time in that situation where they set aside a lot for the multi-family, they are going to do it later. Do they have Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 22 of 39 to do a DA modification to -- do they have to do a DA modification in the -- in that kind of situation? Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, it depends. It depends on how we draft the contract. So, in that particular case of that project you acted on a concept plan with the -- with the annexation. So, if they come forward with a CUP that's consistent with the DA and that concept plan and the DA, no, it's not coming to you, it's going to go to P&Z and they are going to act on the conditional use permit. If something in the contract, the DA, said come back with a detailed CUP and amend the DA for multi-family, then, yes, then at that particular scenario they would have to do the CUP and a DA mod concurrently. So, then, P&Z would become the recommending body on the CU and you guys would become the decision making body on the DA and the conditional use permit. So, we are -- we have got you covered either way and unless Council doesn't want to look at CUPs and let the code kind of -- what the code did it enact -- it empowers the -- the P&Z to approve conditional use permits. Simison: Anything else, Bill, or -- so, Council, is there -- Parsons: Yeah. I think that's about -- I didn't know if Council had anymore discussions on those particular procedural changes, but if not, you know, I -- I have kind of highlighted everything that I wanted to bring up to you this evening. Again, the public record had a couple pieces of testimony from Mike Wardle and Melissa Bernard. I highlighted on what they were concerned with. So, at this point I think we have had a pretty good robust discussion. I will just stand for any questions and just ask, you know, again, let's think about multi-family and how you -- parking, going back to that topic. Do you like what I have currently? Do you want to -- do you want me to pull up Option B so you can see it before you take any action on that? And, then, also the carport discussion, whether or not requiring two car-- carports per three and four bedrooms or one. With that I will stand for any additional questions. Simison: Council, any additional questions for Bill at this time or -- Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: -- if our one person in the audience wants to provide testimony. Is there anybody from the public that like to provide testimony on these items before us this evening? And let's see who we got online. And Kyle is still the only one online. So, Council, your questions for Bill. Or discussion amongst yourself. Bernt: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Bernt. Bernt: Just a comment. Honestly, you know, it's amazing what -- what has to happen and occur and that -- for us to get to this point. You know, there is a lot of discussion you know, we run into different bugaboos during applications that make us think and -- Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 23 of 39 and it's this type of process that really puts Council and -- and Planning and Zoning, other decision making bodies in a position to just make it easier and more consistent for the -- the -- the applicant. So, I -- I think you guys did a great job on this. It's -- obviously, there is a lot of thought that was put into it and big shout out to your committee that -- that really spent a lot of time thinking this over and -- and -- and going over it multiple times in order to come up with an end product that makes sense for all of us. So, at the end of the day it's consistency and that's what we do best in our -- in our city and I just want to thank staff and all those who are -- who participated in this to -- to get these changes to where they are today. So, thank you. Parsons: Appreciate that. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: My thoughts were kind of similar to that. I mean I -- part of a big lift like this is the process utilized and we have really focused on having that group provide the input and discussion that led us here. So, knowing none of these decisions and recommendations are from any one particular focus area or group, that collaboration is really important. We will perpetually tweak this. We really will. That's the design. So, I didn't come in seeking any changes in what was presented and I didn't hear anything that seemed to necessitate it and understanding the work probably starts again tomorrow for the next round. So, I'm comfortable with it and super proud of the group effort and do what you presented. Simison: Council, anyone else? Any questions or comments or things to revisit? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: Just as Bill stated, really, for me the only outstanding thing would be just discussing if there is a requirement for two -- should be a requirement for two carports and/or two garages or combination in this multi-family section. You know, it doesn't sound like the UDC committee discussed that specifically and I wonder if it just didn't quite click, you know, because those -- in the committees there is so much detail to discuss and -- and you don't always get to everything. So, that's something that I would like to see maybe reviewed a little more, unless -- unless the Council wants to just agree to the one -- one covered requirement. But, I -- I do have concern that they will -- might be -- we are already seeing a lot fewer three -- three bedrooms as a ratio to the studios and the one bedrooms than we were even, you know, two or three years ago. We are fitting more studios and one bedrooms in, because you can --you can fit more units into one structure and it doesn't mean there is fewer cars, though, just because we put a studio or a one bedroom in there necessarily, you know. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 24 of 39 Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: To respond to that point, would it -- would a middle ground be perhaps having, you know, three units allow one in covered carport or garage, but four units still require two? Does that kind of meet in the middle a little bit and still encourage a three bedroom unit, but the four truly is a more intense? That seems to -- makes good sense to me, too. Is that doable? Parsons: Mayor, Members of Council, that's doable. Borton: That's a good point. Simison: So, just because I'm intellectually curious, why do we -- is there a reason why there is one covered -- one required cover to begin with? Was that a standard that was put in 50 years ago in this city or recently or otherwise? I'm -- I'm just -- don't know why -- why there is even a requirement for any covered parking. Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, it's a good question. I was not -- not part of the original UDC focus group on why we required cover parking. I think -- a lot of times I think it's just probably keep it down or give people some options, because we do have inclement weather and so it's nice to have that and not snow on people's vehicles and give people options. Simison: I think it's a great amenity to have, I just don't know why there is a requirement for it to exist, because you would think the people would want it, as compared to a requirement. I was just curious. I didn't know where -- if anyone knew how or why it existed and I don't -- I try to think around the valley about places that don't have them and nothing comes to my mind. I just didn't know if it's just an expected standard amongst all development that you will have covered parking. So, just curious. The only other thing that kind of caught my attention, but it's not in here, I don't know if it belongs in here, but you mentioned it, Bill, so blame it on you -- was that we don't require sidewalks on one side of private roads. Is that something that maybe would be in the next iteration of conversation with the UDC? I'm just curious if there is a reason why it should or shouldn't. You know, if they are gated is it not required, but if they are accessible by the general cars, then, they should be required? I'm just curious if that's --and, again, blame yourself. You mentioned it. Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, certainly we can take the approach to require it now. I mean we are --we are here talking about code changes, so -- and we are talking about private street standards. If you want to include that you can include that now and just say we can amend the code to say rather than sidewalk is on one side -- if it's commercial, then, we can just say it's required in a residential district, too. Or you can say you want it on both sides of the street. Or we can add it to the list and talk about it with the focus group. I don't want you to have a knee jerk reaction either, just because I Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 25 of 39 brought something up. It's -- it's good to -- to route that to the group and get some feedback, too. I don't want to undermine that process, because it is valuable. As -- you ask a planner -- I remember Alan very -- he was very stern on pushing for that sidewalk. He didn't care if it was a private street, he just wanted to make sure there is at least some walkability to it and had -- had sidewalk on one side of the road and that's where he landed when he presented the project to you on that particular issue. I know in other -- for example, in the Brighton developments where it has occurred there has been sidewalk along the street, too, to enhance that. To me it makes some sense, but, of course, there is always costs involved. Simison: Whether Council wants to consider it now -- I would at least put it on a list in the future if they don't want to do it now, because they can always require if it's -- they deem it necessary or prudent during each development application if it comes up. But at least that way it can be discussed in the future with the group. That's at least what I would put on the list for the future. Because I can see -- I do understand the reasons why -- personally I don't know if I ever would, but I -- I would be open to the conversation at least personally. But if you can access it generally without any restrictions, like in Tuscany where you drive through it, but I think that that's a scenario where sidewalk would make sense, but I'm trying to think -- I don't know if they do have sidewalk there. I'm going to go investigate that on my way home, because I'm just curious. No. Parsons: Mayor, Members of Council, I think they have the sidewalk in the MEW, so may not have it -- they may not have a sidewalk on that one side, but if it's public streets they should have had -- Simison: Just the private -- the private side. I'm trying to think if they do it's not much of a sidewalk. Maybe a three foot sidewalk. Parsons: Well, not to belabor the discussion a little bit, because I think you bring up some valid points, but the other option is when there is a certain number of homes should sidewalks be required? If you have ten homes do sidewalks make sense? Maybe not. They are bigger lots. Maybe they want that 20 foot wide road or 24 foot wide road, you don't need it as much, but when we are getting to a hundred homes it makes some sense to have some sidewalks. So, it's kind of that economy of scale thing; right? You -- what that magical number is I don't know at this point, but I'm looking forward to the discussion. I will definitely take some notes and -- and determine how to move forward with that change. Simison: Well, there is two other subdivisions that really come to mind where this has played out in the past and it's become an issue. Kentucky Ridge and Dunwoody Court. Both of those -- well, I know that wasn't the application, but that was the road where you are going to build onto the back of a private road or a county road that never had sidewalks required and you got to go back and figure out how to reapply it so that you create that standard moving forward and I don't know -- even if it's a secondary access to -- you know, through a private street to --to be gained when you just don't require anything. But, again, future UDC conversation from stepping down into the list. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 26 of 39 Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Is there any other questions from Council on this topic? If not I'm going to make a motion to close the public hearing on the UDC Text Amendment ZOA-2022-0001 . Hoaglun: 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 and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Borton: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Borton. Borton: Good discussion. Great work and with -- with the one adjustment that we talked about with three versus four units in the multi-family and the covered parking that Council Woman Perreault had addressed, with that one edit I will make a motion that we approve this text amendment 2022-0001 as amended in the September 27th hearing. Otherwise as presented by staff. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second. Is there discussion on the motion? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: That's just -- real quick -- and I pondered it and since I'm -- I feel some responsibility as the oldest member of the Council up here to talk about the covered parking and this --this harkens back to the old days. You know, when the covered wagons came out they were that, they were covered and they had canvas on top. Well, as they came to the community and they still used the cover wagon, but they started using more freight wagons and those freight wagons weren't covered. So, the canvas makers required that at least every --for every freight wagon there had to be one covered wagon. So, that's just carried on since then. So, I -- I hope you enjoyed that history lesson. Simison: Kenny, do you concur? Bernt: There is only one other person here that would know. That's Kenny Bowers. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 27 of 39 Simison: Is there further discussion on the motion? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman -- Mr. Nary. Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, just so you understand, you will get -- you will see this one more time. We will work with Planning to put it into the final form of the code and, then, you will get it on a future agenda, so -- Simison: Okay. All right. Then with that ask the clerk call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, absent. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 5. Public Hearing for Existing Conditions Report 2022 CPAT (H-2022- 0049) by City of Meridian A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the 2019 Comprehensive plan to adopt the Existing Conditions Report 2022, as an addendum to the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan). The Existing Conditions Report addresses some requirements for a Comp Plan under the Local Land Use Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code. The Report includes descriptions, maps and analysis for a variety of demographic indicators, services and land coverage information. The purpose of the Report is to serve as a community resource and to document and set a baseline for existing conditions that Ideally help to inform future decisions. Simison: Thank you, Bill, and the entire team. I know it was a group effort to make this happen. Give them our thanks and I will look forward to the next round of conversations. But you are not done for the night. So, with that let's move on to Item 5, which is the public hearing for the Existing Conditions Report 2022, CPAT. H-2022-0049. We will open this public hearing with staff comments. Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council. The last item on the agenda -- at least for planning applications is the Existing Conditions Report 2022. So, I am presenting this on behalf of Brian McClure and --and Caleb Hood, the long range division. They did excellent work. I have to commend them for all the hard work that they did, too. But all of you know -- as -- as you may know, the Existing Condition Report is -- is an addendum to the Comprehensive Plan. So, it's part one of a part two -- or two documents. One is the policies and conditions and the other ones -- or policies and the guidelines are Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 28 of 39 a division of the community. The other one is the existing conditions report, which tells us where we have been over the last several years. In 2000 -- right now when we updated the Comprehensive Plan in '19, we adopted the 2017 version as part of that. We didn't -- and step two was to come back at some point and update this document to be that companion document. I can tell you back in '18 we did amend the ECR, so that was the last update to this particular document. I handed you all out a flyer that -- that Brian actually put together. It will kind of coincide with the slide show presentation that I have. I won't go into all the details that Brian put into it, but at least wanted to get that in front of you just to blow your mind on what you have done over the last 20 years in Meridian. I mean it is just amazing how much this community has grown since 2012 -- 2000. It's unreal. And the work that Brian did was phenomenal. So, really, the -- the purpose of this meeting tonight -- or our discussion is, one, to basically adopt a new Existing Conditions Report and this particular slide shows you what -- what needs to happen. So, Page C needs to just change -- strikeout 2017, include 2022, and the same thing for pages one through three. It's -- it's really that simple. Just adopting this new ECR. Now, this is where Brian should be here stealing all the thunder, but I will go ahead and just try to share some quick numbers with you here and -- and coincide with you. So you can see here as of January 2022 this is what our population is estimated at. So, just think that's eight months ago, nine months ago we probably exceeded more than that by -- at this point. You can see the population changed between 2000, 2010 and 2020. So, we have consistently been having -- 2022 -- 2000 was a large increase. Twenty-five thousand people moved here between 1990 and 2000. Forty thousand between 2000 and 2010 and 2010 to 2020 42,000 people in Meridian. That's -- that's amazing. So, you can see Brian's put -- put together this graphic here. That's a 36 percent increase between just before 2010 and now. That's -- that's a tremendous amount of growth as you all know. You hear it all the time at the public hearing process. You can see that we -- we are continuing to age in our community and Brian shared that with all of you as well. Education. You can see 90 -- 96 percent of the population is -- is having high school diplomacy -- high school diplomas and, then, you can see -- I think one thing to note -- that Brian's noted out is the increase in the amount of females that have gotten higher education in our community. Forty-one percent. That's a huge increase there. Next item is unemployment. I know this is -- is important to all of us and you can see how many jobs we added over the last ten years. So, you can see our -- our unemployment trends here. They were high probably because of the pandemic and, then, you can see how we are averaged out over the last ten years 3.7 percent. I think what's interesting on this graph is the percentage of jobs between 30 and 54, how that's gone down. And, then, Brian's broke down the industry that are -- that are occurring and what's increased over the last few years here as well. So, you can see healthcare is a large employer in the community. Retail, of course. You can see the increase in that. Construction has increased. Not -- no surprise given the amount of development we have occurring in the -- in the city. And I don't know what all other represents, but that's a pretty large segment as well. Here is our average household size and family -- average family size. So, they have decreased, but the average family size has increased. Housing. This is a big topic. Again, you can see here that we are starting to get a more balanced approach between our multi-family and our -- our single family. It's changed quite a bit from eight percent to 18 percent. So, you guys know that, because you hear about all the growth and you can Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 29 of 39 see we have provided 20,000 new units in the last decade. Twenty thousand. And, then, this is where the attainable affordable housing component comes in. You can see that 43 percent of the renters are paying more than 30 percent of their income towards rent and 22 percent of homeowners are paying more than 30 percent towards their house payment. Poverty statistics. You can see that here as well. It's good to see it decreasing. Although slightly. And so concluding my presentation, I will just basically go back to that third slide, propose those changes before you on what we need to strike out underlying the 2017 date and add the new 2022 date. With that I will conclude my presentation and stand for any questions you may have. Simison: Thank you, Bill. Council, any questions for staff? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: A couple of questions. So, on the number of new jobs that were added, it says total new Meridian family wage jobs. What is the wage that, then, constitutes the difference between anew job and anew family wage job? Is there an amount that that's based off of? Parsons: Council Woman Perreault, I don't have the answer for you on that. I don't know if anyone else up there knows what that threshold is or not, an economic -- for family wage jobs. Perreault: Is that something the Department of Labor -- like who defines that? Parsons: I wish I had an answer for you. I don't. I apologize. But I can get you one and, then, circle back with you. Simison: Yeah. I -- I can't say what number they are using. At one point in time we were trying to define family wage as being able to, you know, use the price of a home and a -- a wage that allowed you to meet the median price of a home payment I think at the 40 percent of your income level. But, obviously, with the prices of homes changing and I can't say where that ended up or -- Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: -- what was -- yes, Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. I think this is a really great question. It did come up in Planning and Zoning and -- and Brian shared the statistics he used is data from the American Community Survey data, which pings it at 3,333 dollars a month. I maybe take a little bit of exception with that number, but at least for our Council's benefit, that is the basis that Brian used. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 30 of 39 Simison: Thank you, Councilman Cavener. Perreault: I think those are the surveys that the Census Bureau sends out to collect all their data on the off years. Yeah. One more quick question, Mr. Mayor, if I might? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: The housing expenditure section, the income -- the percentage of income, is that -- is that information that's from the Census Bureau -- from the -- the last census? And how do they exactly know what the incomes of the renters are? Parsons: Yeah. Mayor, Members of the Council, I -- I don't have an answer for that question either. I apologize. Perreault: That's okay. Parsons: But we can get you an answer. Perreault: Thank you. Cavener: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Maybe a comment and, then, a question for you, Bill. First, appreciate this report every time it's updated. I know Brian is not there, but this and our citizen survey that we talked about two weeks ago, for me are two of the most important documents that I use to refer when I make a decision kind of thinking about our community. So, I appreciate the work that --that goes into this. My -- my question is about the mix between multi-family and single family and certainly anytime a new annexation comes to Meridian there is always some occasional conflict and it seems to be accelerated when it's multi- family and from your perspective as kind of a subject matter expert, what is the right mix? Are we --we are bringing in too much multi-family right now? Are we bringing in too much compared to the single family? Is there a health mix that the department likes to kind of see in a -- in a hypothetical world? Parsons: Mayor, Members of the Council, it varies for everyplace that you live. I have had discussions with Brian over the years about what that healthy mix is and I think we are closer to that. Typically we like to see one to four. Cavener: Okay. Parsons: But if you recall we -- our comp plan also includes -- includes a diversity of housing. So, it doesn't always have to be just multi-family and single family. We want to make sure that it's -- it's diverse period. Not just lopsided one way or the other. And that's -- typically that's what we have been seeing. It's either single family detached homes or Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 31 of 39 these larger multi-family developments, because that's what the market. Seems to be -- the developer seems to be chasing the market to some degree. They keep getting data that tells them that there is a need for these --this housing and not potentially for the other ones. But that doesn't mean that when we have conversations with the developer or an applicant that we are not pushing for that higher diversity or a greater diversity in developments. But I can tell you what I have seen over the last -- although you guys are -- what our comp plan or what we usually stay silent on is whether or not it's owner occupied or rental units. We don't get in -- that's not the purview of us in our -- in our world. We -- we just make sure that it adheres to the comp plan and the code and what I have been seeing recently is we have got a lot of townhome developments out there, but because there is market for rent, they are building the townhomes and renting the townhomes versus selling them as ownership. So, that -- that gives me some concern, because we are hoping to get that diversity in homeownership and rentals in the community and, then, if we keep kind of catering to one or the other it kind of skews the numbers a little bit. But to get back to your point, I mean, again, my understanding having conversation with Brian -- again, one to four ratio seems to be healthy for a community. Cavener: Mr. Mayor, quick follow up if I may? Simison: Councilman Cavener. Cavener: Thanks, Mayor. Bill, is that something that, you know, the Planning Department is kind of tracking on an ongoing basis -- on an annual basis? Is it more of a -- it's kind of a gut level assumption, kind of based on what you have seen, or how is the department kind of keeping tabs on that -- on that mix? Parsons: Yeah. We -- we certainly are doing a better job of that now. So, we have -- over the last couple years we have leveraged our GIS system, which is our mapping -- Cavener: Yep. Parsons: -- very heavily and you guys get all of the dashboard numbers. So, we have an internal tool that we can use based on all the permit activity where we can run that report and have a handle on what's -- what's being permitted and all that activity, so we can gauge a little bit more accurate -- or we can actually gauge it with certain accuracy. You never get a hundred percent accurate, but at least we can tell that story a little bit more and that's what Brian did all of this work here to share that with you, because he was able to pull some of that data and -- and share that and update these numbers for you. Cavener: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 32 of 39 Perreault: Bill, to that end it's interesting that you stated that -- that the developers are trying to meet market demands and in my experience that hasn't been as much the case as it is that -- that the residents are having to just be comfortable or -- or adjust to what builders are willing to build, not so much that they are -- it's -- I don't think that the -- the consumer demand is what's driving what's being built. I think it is -- it's costing more for land and they are needing to do greater density for -- to make up the difference in the land cost. So, they are building denser products, but they get less per unit in that -- in that regard from a profit standpoint, so -- and, then, the public, then, has fewer options, like you were stating, and so the public's just having to get -- to -- to just live in what they can find, because there has been such a shortage and so personally I think that it's really being driven more by factors outside of both groups. You know, that there is just not a lot of control in either group what is happening. It's more of just like what can we do, because there is such a desperate need for inventory. That's --just wanted to throw that out there, because I wish it would be -- I wish it was a situation where, you know, developers could just say, hey, this -- you know, there is a -- the consumers would like this kind of product and we are going to build it. It's more like, well, the consumer has to buy what they can find, because there isn't availability, but -- Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I think Council Woman Perreault is correct. You know, it's -- everyone is adjusting to the market and, you know, a family wants to buy a home and they want a single family home and want to have their, you know, land and a nice yard and those types of things for the dog to run around, but a developer is adjusting to the market, because they can't afford -- it's so costly they want to adjust to the market and make sure they can offer homes for people to buy, but to keep it within the range that people can afford they are having to adjust and make smaller lots and tall skinnies and all these different products that we see. So, you know, I -- I'm always of -- of -- careful to make sure that while we want to see a diversity of housing -- and I think that's good, because there is a lot of different demand out there and -- and different -- different needs and desires, but at the same time we have to make sure we don't try to do something that the market is not going to have happen. Then nothing's going to happen. Just because we -- we don't control the market and -- and to me -- I have said this before -- we don't have skin in the game. I mean from a standpoint of investing money into the system and seeing a return, we -- we do to some degree when it comes back to us in the form of taxes, but how the market moves forward is going to be what the consumers want, what they can afford, what the builders can do for that affordability ratio and so it -- it's kind of -- we all kind of have to do a dance here to make sure our goals are met, but at the same time knowing what the market's doing and how people are adjusting to that and -- and ultimately sometimes I -- I think we just -- we might get too locked into our goals, as opposed to, well, this is what the market is doing and this is the demand that's out there, because we won't be able to change that. It -- it is what the market is. So, just always something I want to be cognizant of and -- and are we trying to ask the market to do something that it's not going to do, because it's -- it's bigger than any -- any one entity out Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 33 of 39 there, whether the developers, government or -- or consumers. So, just my two cents on that. Simison: And maybe just to add one thing. I don't know if we have gone through and done this, but much of what's yet to be annexed into the future and developed in the -- in the southwest part of our community does not have a lot of multi-family zoned for it. Yeah, we just happen that -- we happen to be in the parts of our community right now where development is occurring where multi-family is envisioned and part of the plan and I'm not going to say -- I -- I could not even guess how many acres of land is currently still out there available for multi-family and how many units that that could potentially or not produce, but I -- I think -- if I looked at the city as a whole, you know, overall our numbers are probably going to skew more towards single family long term and this will go a little bit further that direction, unless a future council decides to make a different determination about, you know, the zoning and comp plans in those areas and modify those ratios. But a large area of southwest Meridian does not have multi-family in it and that's probably 50 percent of our to be developed land in the future. So, it's always a snapshot in time to a certain extent. Just an observation. No other value there. Council, any additional questions for staff? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I just want to say thank you, Bill and Brian and Caleb, for putting together this fantastic graphic. It's a lot easier than reading all 126 pages of the report and, hopefully, this will get posted on our website, because it's fantastic. Thank you. Simison: This is a public hearing. Do we have anybody in the audience that would like to provide testimony on this item or online? Seeing no one raising their hands, do I have a motion to close the public hearing? Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I move that we close the public hearing for H-2022-0049. Perreault: Second. 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 and the public hearing is closed. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Hoaglun: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 34 of 39 Simison: Councilman Hoaglun. Hoaglun: I promise I won't talk about covered wagons now. After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to approve File No. H-2022-0049 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 27th, 2022. Perreault: Second. Second that motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve item H-2022-0049. Is there discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, absent. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries. Thank you, Bill, and, please, give Brian and Caleb -- but maybe Brian the congratulations next time we see him in a couple months. Okay. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. ORDINANCES [Action Item] 6. Ordinance No. 22-1995: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 6-3-2(A) and 6-3-2(A)(6), Regarding Qualifying Behavior for Disorderly Conduct and Adding Meridian City Code Section 6-3-2(C), Regarding Citation Signature for Disorderly Conduct; Repealing any Conflicting Ordinances, and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Next up on the agenda is Item 6, which is Ordinance No. 22-1995. Ask the Clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's an ordinance amending Meridian City Code Section 6-3-2(A) and 6-3-2(A)(6), regarding qualifying behavior for disorderly conduct and adding Meridian City Code Section 6-3-2(c), regarding citation signature for disorderly conduct; repealing any conflicting ordinances, and providing an effective date. Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard this ordinance read by tile. Is there anybody that would like it read in its entirety? Nary: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Mr. Nary. Nary: Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, I just wanted to kind of go back for one second. This ordinance, if you recall, we had a conversation a few months ago with Lieutenant Caldwell regarding this desire for downtown and trying to deal with a lot of the problems Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 35 of 39 we were having with the various bars and restaurants downtown. That element of that ordinance had alcohol -- or intoxication as an element there. Our newest deputy attorney Tishra Murray has done some research for us, found some case law that doesn't allow us to use that as a condition in and of itself. But the behavior is -- is the conduct that is being prohibited here and so that's what it's focused on is the conduct of the individual, not the condition of the individual. But also the key factor which was the officer could cite the person based on their observation, rather than a third party. That was the biggest problem in enforcing disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct is you had to have a complainant and oftentimes people don't want to do that. So, if the officer observes the behavior, the officer can issue the citation or-- or the arrest on their own observation and not somebody else having to sign a citizen's arrest. So,just a few minor tweaks from the last discussion. I just wanted to make sure that was on the record. Simison: Thank you, Mr. Nary. Are we trying to get this in place in time for this Saturday's events and does boxing apply? Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, it has to still be published. So, it won't be published before this weekend, so it won't be in effect yet. Simison: Okay. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I have a question about that. So if -- what -- what -- is there a standard that the -- standard is not the word. Are there criteria that the officers need to meet in order to issue that citation? Like you might -- we have -- it's not common, but there are situations where somebody might have low blood sugar or have other physical issues that display -- the behavior displays like they might be intoxicated, but they are not. So, is there -- is there some proof that's required by the officer to make that arrest? Nary: So -- yeah. So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, Council Member Perreault, if you look at the ordinance itself, it basically says any person shall conduct himself or herself in a violent, noisy or riotous manner. So, it's looking at the conduct of the individual of what they are doing. Now, if they have a defense, after they have cited -- or they go to court, they get arrested or whatever, their defense is I was having a medical reaction to something, that's certainly an affirmative defense they can assert and the -- the prosecutor can decide, okay, I'm not going to hold them accountable for this behavior that was observed, because their condition was beyond their control. But that's a defense they would have to assert that they were doing that. Because the officer is not going to know. If they are acting violently towards another person they are not going to know that there is a reason for it beyond that. So, again, it's not trying to deal with alcohol intoxication, it's dealing with behavior. Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 36 of 39 Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 22-1995 with the suspension of rules. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve the Ordinance No. 22-1995 under suspension of the rules. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, absent. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the item is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 7. Ordinance No. 22-1996: An Ordinance Annexing the West Half of the Northwest One Quarter Of Section 15, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, More Particularly Described in Exhibit "A," Rezoning 0.98 Acres of Such Real Property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) Zoning District; Directing City Staff to Alter All Use and Area Maps As Well As The Official Zoning Maps And All Official Maps Depicting The Boundaries and The Zoning Districts of The City of Meridian in Accordance with this Ordinance; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed With the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, As Required By Law; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; And Providing an Effective Date Simison: Next item up is Item 7, which is Ordinance No. 22-1996. Ask the Clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's Ordinance 19 -- oh, sorry. An ordinance amending -- I'm going to start over. Ordinance 22-1996, an ordinance annexing the west half of the Northwest One Quarter of Section 15, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise meridian, Ada county, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit "A," rezoning 0.98 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High- Density Residential) Zoning District; directing city staff to alter all use and area maps, as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 37 of 39 Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anybody that would like it read in its entirety? If not, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: So, none of these show that there is a waiver of the reading rules necessary. So, do we need to make that suspension on these? It's typically within the description that requires it. Simison: Mr. Nary? Nary: So, Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, so -- and you may not have been here that night, Council Member Perreault. Some of those are leftovers in old ordinances. They are not required by statute. So, we can pass an ordinance whether that language is in there or not. Perreault: Oh, great. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 22-1996. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Ordnance No. 22-1996. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, absent. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the ordinance is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. 8. Ordinance No. 22-1997: An Ordinance Annexing the East Half of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, More Particularly Described in Exhibit "A," Rezoning 125.59 Acres of Such Real Property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) To I-L (Light Industrial) Zoning District; Directing City Staff to Alter All Use and Area Maps as Well as the Official Zoning Maps and All Official Maps Depicting the Boundaries and the Zoning Districts of the City of Meridian in Accordance with this Ordinance; Providing That Copies of this Ordinance Shall Be Filed With the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 38 of 39 Commission, As Required By Law; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; and Providing an Effective Date Simison: Next item up is No. 8, which is Ordinance No. 22-1997. Ask the Clerk to read this ordinance by title. Johnson: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's an ordinance annexing the east half of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise meridian, Ada county, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit 'A," rezoning 125.59 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to I-L (Light Industrial) Zoning District; directing city staff to alter all use and area maps, as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date. Simison: Thank you. Council, you have heard this ordinance read by title. Is there anybody that would like it read in its entirety? Seeing none, do I have a motion? Perreault: Mr. Mayor? Simison: Council Woman Perreault. Perreault: I move that we approve Ordinance No. 22-1997. Hoaglun: Second the motion. Simison: I have a motion and a second to approve Ordinance No. 22-1987. Is there any discussion? If not, Clerk will call the roll. Roll call: Borton, yea; Cavener, yea; Bernt, yea; Perreault, yea; Hoaglun, yea; Strader, absent. Simison: All ayes. Motion carries and the ordinance is agreed to. MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. FUTURE MEETING TOPICS Simison: Council, anything under future meeting topics or do I have a motion to adjourn. Hoaglun: Move to adjourn. Simison: Motion to adjourn. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed nay? The ayes have it. We are adjourned. Meridian City Council September 27,2022 Page 39 of 39 MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:45 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON 10-11-2022 ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM 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 an active land use/development applications are not permitted during this time. By law, no decisions can be made on topics presented at the Public Forum. However, City Counicl 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. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC FORUM SIGN - IN SHEET Date : September 27 , 2022 Please sign in below if you wish to address the Mayor and City Council and provide a brief description of your topic . Please observe the following rules of the Public Forum : • DO NOT : o Discuss active applications or proposals pending before Planning and Zoning or City Council o Complain about city staff, individuals, business or private matters • DO o When it is your turn to speak, state your name and address first o Observe a 3 - minute time limit (you may be interrupted if your topic is deemed inappropriate for this forum ) Name ( please print ) Brief Description of Discussion Topic W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Resolution 22-2343: A Resolution Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 27 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 1 PROJECT NAME : Resolution 22 - 2343 Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 22-2343 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEW AND INCREASING FEES; AUTHORIZING DELETION OF FEES FROM FEE SCHEDULE; SUPERSEDING ALL PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED FEES AND FEE SCHEDULES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RECREATIONAL PROGRAMMING AND SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING FEES; AUTHORIZING CITY DEPARTMENTS TO COLLECT SUCH FEES;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,pursuant to Idaho Code section 63-1311A, following publication of notice on September 17, 2022 and September 24, 2022, and public hearing on September 27, 2022, the City Council of the City of Meridian did, by formal motion, approve new and increasing fees as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, certain fees charged by City are decreasing or are no longer necessary, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That the new, and increasing fees set forth in Exhibit A are hereby adopted and shall be included in the Citywide Fee Schedule. Section 2. That the deleted fees set forth in Exhibit A shall be removed from the Citywide Fee Schedule. Section 3. That the Finance Department of the City of Meridian is hereby authorized to incorporate into the Citywide Fee Schedule the changes set forth in Exhibit A. Section 4. That, following the Finance Department's incorporation of the changes as set forth in Exhibit A, the Citywide Fee Schedule will supersede all previous fees and fee schedules previously adopted, with the exception o£ a) fees adopted for recreational classes and programming offered and administered by the Meridian Parks &Recreation Department, and b) fees regarding solid waste and recycling, which fees shall be adopted and/or modified by separate processes and fee schedules. Section 5. That the various departments of the City of Meridian are hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of fees set forth in Exhibit A. Section 6. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect on October 1, 2022. ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 1 ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, his 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 2 EXHIBIT A Old Fee New Fee Fee Description Amount Amount City Clerk Fee Updates CD or DVD with public record information Remove Fee from Schedule $1.00 ea $0 Police Department Fee Updates Cost of services necessary to capture a dog at large in Meridian and impound it at the Impound fee - Dog IHS facility. $50.00 Cost of services necessary to capture a dog at large in Meridian and impound it at the IHS facility,where the dog has bitten a person or another animal, and/or is reported to be vicious. Impound fee—vicious dog or bite case $75.00 Cost of services necessary to process cat into shelter,where cat is captured in Meridian. Impound fee—cat $15.00 Cost of services necessary to capture livestock or large animal in Meridian and impound it at the IHS facility. Impound fee—livestock $150.00 Fee to impound a Meridian dog at the IHS Dog Redemption fee facility.—Remove fee from schedule $10.00 $0.00 Public Works Fee Updates: Water Meters: 3 inch Meter C2 $2,111.34 Water Meters: 3 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $1,434.69 Water Meters: 3 Inch MeterT2 $1,461.31 Water Meters: 3 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $996.03 Water Meters: 6 inch Compound Meter C2 $6,334.00 Water Meters: 6 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $2,788.39 Water Meters: 6 Inch Meter T2 $5,121.66 Water Meters: 6 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $1,886.74 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Meter 2.5 FHT Swivel and screen $282.69 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 3 Qualified Licensed Professional Engineer (QLPE) Review(Any project reviewed per the provisions of Idaho Code 39-118 (2d.). The QLPE review fee includes only the engineering drawing sheets, and does not $298.70 include cover sheets, standard details or per sheet Engineering/Development Services note sheets.) (*a) $307.66 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $869.61 $1,034.65 1 1/2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $887.26 $1,061.78 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch C-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $1,407.45 $1,550.91 Water Meters: 1 1/2 Inch Meter(Irrigation)T2 $953.77 $1,075.91 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch meter C2 $1,385.87 $1,572.11 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $594.16 $718.30 1 1/2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $678.41 $752.00 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch T-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $975.36 $1,099.83 Water Meters: 1 inch meter $187.22 $216.11 Water Meters: 1 inch Meter(Reclaimed) $196.73 $225.37 Water Meters: 2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $869.61 $1,034.65 2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $887.26 $1,061.78 Water Meters: 2 inch C-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $1,615.07 $1,795.48 Water Meters: 2 Inch Meter(Irrigation)T2 $1,172.83 $1,306.35 Water Meters: 2 inch meter C2 $1,593.48 $1,741.13 Water Meters: 2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $594.16 $718.30 2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $678.41 $752.00 Water Meters: 2 inch T-2 Meter (Reclaimed) $1,176.60 $1,300.91 Water Meters: 3/4 inch meter $141.72 $160.70 Water Meters: 3/4 inch Meter(Reclaimed) $159.27 $185.70 Water Meters: 3/4 inch meter(short) $141.72 $160.70 Water Meters: 4 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $1,288.39 $1,509.61 4 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $1,306.04 $1,531.35 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 4 Water Meters: 4 inch C-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $3,465.34 $3,806.35 Water Meters: 4 inch compound meter C2 $3,443.01 $3,806.35 Water Meters: 4 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $899.95 $1,055.26 4 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $917.51 $1,077.00 Water Meters: 4 inch T-2 Meter (Reclaimed) $2,741.19 $3,105.26 Water Meters: 4 inch Turbo Meter(Irrigation)T2 $2,682.68 $3,072.65 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 1 1/2" $554.06 $738.10 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 1" $315.03 $400.96 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 2" $587.09 $792.49 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 3/4" $308.74 $392.25 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 1 1/2" $275.45 $395.85 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 1" $172.55 $248.15 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 2" $334.95 $481.25 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 3/4" $111.30 $160.65 Water Meters: Backflow Test Port Valve $11.50 $14.75 Dual Port MXU (*b) (*b) Charge is half the cost of a dual MXU for dual meter installation in a single common meter vault. (Full replacement cost of a dual Water Meters: port MXU is$241.13) $100.00 $120.56 Water Meters: Hydrant Meter H2 $1,455.33 $1,621.57 OMNI Hydrant Meter H2 Register Water Meters: w/Measuring Chamber, Complete $1,256.60 $1,007.43 Water Meters: Single Port MXU $171.98 $206.89 Water System Repair Fee: 1 inch Angle Valve $123.21 $124.81 Water System Repair Fee: 1" FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $104.46 $117.91 Water System Repair Fee: 1" Comp x 3/4" MIP U-Branch Brass $68.46 $88.51 Water System Repair Fee: 1" IP 250 PSI Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $0.88 $0.95 Water System Repair Fee: 1" IP Compression x 3/4 MIP Brass Fitting $41.98 $47.96 1" x 1" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $59.18 $67.58 Water System Repair Fee: 1.5 " IP 250 PSI Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $2.07 $2.32 Water System Repair Fee: 1.5 inch Angle Valve $292.40 $332.82 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 5 Water System Repair Fee: 1.5" FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $213.88 $241.43 1.5" x 1.5" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $128.94 $147.16 Water System Repair Fee: 10" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $23.88 $36.08 Water System Repair Fee: 10" Repair Coupler $291.37 $618.42 Water System Repair Fee: 10" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $145.58 $186.06 Water System Repair Fee: 10" LPS (Long Pattern Sleeve) $207.90 $220.14 Water System Repair Fee: 12" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $33.64 $50.80 Water System Repair Fee: 12" Repair Coupler $345.54 $732.55 Water System Repair Fee: 12" Repair Coupler LPS (Long Pattern Sleeve) $279.59 $296.15 Water System Repair Fee: 12" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $152.51 $195.20 Water System Repair Fee: 2 inch Angle Valve $361.96 $388.83 Water System Repair Fee: 2 inch gate valve for hydrant meter $228.39 $309.72 Water System Repair Fee: 2" FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $312.81 $353.12 Water System Repair Fee: 2" IP 250 PSI Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $3.48 $3.81 2" x 2" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $173.72 $198.28 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4 FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $67.20 $75.90 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4 inch angle valves $81.51 $82.85 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4" IP 250PS1 Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $0.56 $0.60 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4" Road Base Material - per yd $17.80 $20.11 3/4" x 3/4" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $29.60 $33.82 Water System Repair Fee: 4" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $4.56 $6.87 Water System Repair Fee: 4" Repair Coupler $131.92 $270.14 Water System Repair Fee: 4" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $51.23 $63.99 Water System Repair Fee: 4" LPS (Long Pattern Sleeve) $64.52 $68.34 Water System Repair Fee: 6" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $9.26 $14.02 Water System Repair Fee: 6" Repair Coupler $186.76 $372.81 Water System Repair Fee: 6" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $61.62 $79.08 Water System Repair Fee: 6" LPS(Long Pattern Sleeve) $108.08 $114.46 Water System Repair Fee: 8" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $15.91 $24.05 Water System Repair Fee: 8" Repair Coupler $224.35 $471.70 Water System Repair Fee: 8" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $83.36 $106.81 Water System Repair Fee: 8" LPS(Long Pattern Sleeve) $173.71 $183.98 Water System Repair Fee: Adapter 3/4" MIP x HT $10.65 $8.50 Water System Repair Fee: Adapter 2 1/2" MNST x 2" MIP $83.82 $81.38 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 6 Water System Repair Fee: Bushing 1" x 3/4" $4.51 $4.90 Water System Repair Fee: Bushing 2" x 1" Brass $17.52 $18.94 Water System Repair Fee: Bushing 3" x 2" Brass $42.41 $47.21 Water System Repair Fee: Cast-Iron Valve Lid $17.65 $20.16 Water System Repair Fee: Fire Hydrant Assembly $2,300.52 $3,090.61 Water System Repair Fee: Grade Ring-Bottom 2" $40.97 $35.36 Water System Repair Fee: Grade Ring-Top 4" $48.72 $42.53 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant-6" Extension $614.29 $742.54 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Break-Away Kit $299.34 $363.84 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Meter 2.5 FHT Swivel/no screen $94.11 $143.15 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Meter Gate Valve Handle 2" $34.50 $40.60 Water System Repair Fee: Lid Only- 24" Manhole Cover $151.07 $155.79 Water System Repair Fee: Manhole Ring $191.15 $213.93 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 1 inch $532.66 $593.37 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 1.5 inch $1,626.78 $1,782.45 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 2 inch $1,890.25 $2,187.79 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 3/4 inch $319.90 $376.98 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 1 1/2" Close Brass $7.39 $8.18 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 1" Close Brass $3.77 $4.19 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 2" Close Brass $11.26 $12.51 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 3/4" Close Brass $2.55 $2.87 Water System Repair Fee: Non-Traffic Meter Tub 36" $128.48 $149.13 Non-Traffic Rated 42" Meter Tub/Tile for Water System Repair Fee: Single/Double Services $167.96 $181.30 Water System Repair Fee: Non-Traffic Rated Standard Lid & Ring $146.47 $240.89 Water System Repair Fee: Residential Meter Lid and Ring $134.02 $161.63 Water System Repair Fee: Silt Sand- per yard $12.34 $27.70 Water System Repair Fee: Sod sf ft $0.32 $0.34 Water System Repair Fee: STORZ fitting-4.5 hydrant nozzle $239.94 $233.06 Water System Repair Fee: Traffic Rated Lid 20" $130.02 $153.20 Water System Repair Fee: Traffic Rated Meter Tub 42" $150.33 $169.43 Water System Repair Fee: Traffic Rated Ring 20" $125.02 $213.66 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box- 16"Top Section $34.54 $44.10 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box- 26"Top Section $62.70 $78.32 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box-36" Bottom Section $55.00 $68.96 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box Extension Riser 1-6" $44.21 $60.19 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 7 E IDIAN 'aAHO AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Resolution 22-2343: A Resolution Adopting New and Increasing Fees; Authorizing City Departments to Collect Such Fees; and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN RESOLUTION NO. 22-2343 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER A RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEW AND INCREASING FEES; AUTHORIZING DELETION OF FEES FROM FEE SCHEDULE; SUPERSEDING ALL PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED FEES AND FEE SCHEDULES, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RECREATIONAL PROGRAMMING AND SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING FEES; AUTHORIZING CITY DEPARTMENTS TO COLLECT SUCH FEES;AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,pursuant to Idaho Code section 63-1311A, following publication of notice on September 17, 2022 and September 24, 2022, and public hearing on September 27, 2022, the City Council of the City of Meridian did, by formal motion, approve new and increasing fees as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, certain fees charged by City are decreasing or are no longer necessary, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY, IDAHO: Section 1. That the new, and increasing fees set forth in Exhibit A are hereby adopted and shall be included in the Citywide Fee Schedule. Section 2. That the deleted fees set forth in Exhibit A shall be removed from the Citywide Fee Schedule. Section 3. That the Finance Department of the City of Meridian is hereby authorized to incorporate into the Citywide Fee Schedule the changes set forth in Exhibit A. Section 4. That, following the Finance Department's incorporation of the changes as set forth in Exhibit A, the Citywide Fee Schedule will supersede all previous fees and fee schedules previously adopted, with the exception o£ a) fees adopted for recreational classes and programming offered and administered by the Meridian Parks &Recreation Department, and b) fees regarding solid waste and recycling, which fees shall be adopted and/or modified by separate processes and fee schedules. Section 5. That the various departments of the City of Meridian are hereby authorized to implement and carry out the collection of fees set forth in Exhibit A. Section 6. That this Resolution shall be in full force and effect on October 1, 2022. ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 1 ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, his 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED: Robert E. Simison, Mayor ATTEST: Chris Johnson, City Clerk ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 2 EXHIBIT A Old Fee New Fee Fee Description Amount Amount City Clerk Fee Updates CD or DVD with public record information Remove Fee from Schedule $1.00 ea $0 Police Department Fee Updates Cost of services necessary to capture a dog at large in Meridian and impound it at the Impound fee - Dog IHS facility. $50.00 Cost of services necessary to capture a dog at large in Meridian and impound it at the IHS facility,where the dog has bitten a person or another animal, and/or is reported to be vicious. Impound fee—vicious dog or bite case $75.00 Cost of services necessary to process cat into shelter,where cat is captured in Meridian. Impound fee—cat $15.00 Cost of services necessary to capture livestock or large animal in Meridian and impound it at the IHS facility. Impound fee—livestock $150.00 Fee to impound a Meridian dog at the IHS Dog Redemption fee facility.—Remove fee from schedule $10.00 $0.00 Public Works Fee Updates: Water Meters: 3 inch Meter C2 $2,111.34 Water Meters: 3 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $1,434.69 Water Meters: 3 Inch MeterT2 $1,461.31 Water Meters: 3 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $996.03 Water Meters: 6 inch Compound Meter C2 $6,334.00 Water Meters: 6 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $2,788.39 Water Meters: 6 Inch Meter T2 $5,121.66 Water Meters: 6 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $1,886.74 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Meter 2.5 FHT Swivel and screen $282.69 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 3 Qualified Licensed Professional Engineer (QLPE) Review(Any project reviewed per the provisions of Idaho Code 39-118 (2d.). The QLPE review fee includes only the engineering drawing sheets, and does not $298.70 include cover sheets, standard details or per sheet Engineering/Development Services note sheets.) (*a) $307.66 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $869.61 $1,034.65 1 1/2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $887.26 $1,061.78 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch C-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $1,407.45 $1,550.91 Water Meters: 1 1/2 Inch Meter(Irrigation)T2 $953.77 $1,075.91 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch meter C2 $1,385.87 $1,572.11 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $594.16 $718.30 1 1/2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $678.41 $752.00 Water Meters: 1 1/2 inch T-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $975.36 $1,099.83 Water Meters: 1 inch meter $187.22 $216.11 Water Meters: 1 inch Meter(Reclaimed) $196.73 $225.37 Water Meters: 2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $869.61 $1,034.65 2 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $887.26 $1,061.78 Water Meters: 2 inch C-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $1,615.07 $1,795.48 Water Meters: 2 Inch Meter(Irrigation)T2 $1,172.83 $1,306.35 Water Meters: 2 inch meter C2 $1,593.48 $1,741.13 Water Meters: 2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $594.16 $718.30 2 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $678.41 $752.00 Water Meters: 2 inch T-2 Meter (Reclaimed) $1,176.60 $1,300.91 Water Meters: 3/4 inch meter $141.72 $160.70 Water Meters: 3/4 inch Meter(Reclaimed) $159.27 $185.70 Water Meters: 3/4 inch meter(short) $141.72 $160.70 Water Meters: 4 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $1,288.39 $1,509.61 4 inch C-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $1,306.04 $1,531.35 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 4 Water Meters: 4 inch C-2 Meter(Reclaimed) $3,465.34 $3,806.35 Water Meters: 4 inch compound meter C2 $3,443.01 $3,806.35 Water Meters: 4 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly $899.95 $1,055.26 4 inch T-2 Measuring Chamber Assembly Water Meters: (Reclaimed) $917.51 $1,077.00 Water Meters: 4 inch T-2 Meter (Reclaimed) $2,741.19 $3,105.26 Water Meters: 4 inch Turbo Meter(Irrigation)T2 $2,682.68 $3,072.65 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 1 1/2" $554.06 $738.10 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 1" $315.03 $400.96 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 2" $587.09 $792.49 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly 3/4" $308.74 $392.25 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 1 1/2" $275.45 $395.85 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 1" $172.55 $248.15 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 2" $334.95 $481.25 Water Meters: Backflow Assembly Repair Kit 3/4" $111.30 $160.65 Water Meters: Backflow Test Port Valve $11.50 $14.75 Dual Port MXU (*b) (*b) Charge is half the cost of a dual MXU for dual meter installation in a single common meter vault. (Full replacement cost of a dual Water Meters: port MXU is$241.13) $100.00 $120.56 Water Meters: Hydrant Meter H2 $1,455.33 $1,621.57 OMNI Hydrant Meter H2 Register Water Meters: w/Measuring Chamber, Complete $1,256.60 $1,007.43 Water Meters: Single Port MXU $171.98 $206.89 Water System Repair Fee: 1 inch Angle Valve $123.21 $124.81 Water System Repair Fee: 1" FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $104.46 $117.91 Water System Repair Fee: 1" Comp x 3/4" MIP U-Branch Brass $68.46 $88.51 Water System Repair Fee: 1" IP 250 PSI Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $0.88 $0.95 Water System Repair Fee: 1" IP Compression x 3/4 MIP Brass Fitting $41.98 $47.96 1" x 1" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $59.18 $67.58 Water System Repair Fee: 1.5 " IP 250 PSI Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $2.07 $2.32 Water System Repair Fee: 1.5 inch Angle Valve $292.40 $332.82 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 5 Water System Repair Fee: 1.5" FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $213.88 $241.43 1.5" x 1.5" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $128.94 $147.16 Water System Repair Fee: 10" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $23.88 $36.08 Water System Repair Fee: 10" Repair Coupler $291.37 $618.42 Water System Repair Fee: 10" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $145.58 $186.06 Water System Repair Fee: 10" LPS (Long Pattern Sleeve) $207.90 $220.14 Water System Repair Fee: 12" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $33.64 $50.80 Water System Repair Fee: 12" Repair Coupler $345.54 $732.55 Water System Repair Fee: 12" Repair Coupler LPS (Long Pattern Sleeve) $279.59 $296.15 Water System Repair Fee: 12" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $152.51 $195.20 Water System Repair Fee: 2 inch Angle Valve $361.96 $388.83 Water System Repair Fee: 2 inch gate valve for hydrant meter $228.39 $309.72 Water System Repair Fee: 2" FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $312.81 $353.12 Water System Repair Fee: 2" IP 250 PSI Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $3.48 $3.81 2" x 2" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $173.72 $198.28 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4 FIP x FIP Brass Curb Stop Valve $67.20 $75.90 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4 inch angle valves $81.51 $82.85 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4" IP 250PS1 Poly Pipe Per linear Ft. $0.56 $0.60 Water System Repair Fee: 3/4" Road Base Material - per yd $17.80 $20.11 3/4" x 3/4" IP PE Compression x Compression Water System Repair Fee: Grip Coupler $29.60 $33.82 Water System Repair Fee: 4" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $4.56 $6.87 Water System Repair Fee: 4" Repair Coupler $131.92 $270.14 Water System Repair Fee: 4" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $51.23 $63.99 Water System Repair Fee: 4" LPS (Long Pattern Sleeve) $64.52 $68.34 Water System Repair Fee: 6" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $9.26 $14.02 Water System Repair Fee: 6" Repair Coupler $186.76 $372.81 Water System Repair Fee: 6" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $61.62 $79.08 Water System Repair Fee: 6" LPS(Long Pattern Sleeve) $108.08 $114.46 Water System Repair Fee: 8" C-900 Pipe Per linear Ft. $15.91 $24.05 Water System Repair Fee: 8" Repair Coupler $224.35 $471.70 Water System Repair Fee: 8" Wedge Restraint Gland Pack $83.36 $106.81 Water System Repair Fee: 8" LPS(Long Pattern Sleeve) $173.71 $183.98 Water System Repair Fee: Adapter 3/4" MIP x HT $10.65 $8.50 Water System Repair Fee: Adapter 2 1/2" MNST x 2" MIP $83.82 $81.38 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 6 Water System Repair Fee: Bushing 1" x 3/4" $4.51 $4.90 Water System Repair Fee: Bushing 2" x 1" Brass $17.52 $18.94 Water System Repair Fee: Bushing 3" x 2" Brass $42.41 $47.21 Water System Repair Fee: Cast-Iron Valve Lid $17.65 $20.16 Water System Repair Fee: Fire Hydrant Assembly $2,300.52 $3,090.61 Water System Repair Fee: Grade Ring-Bottom 2" $40.97 $35.36 Water System Repair Fee: Grade Ring-Top 4" $48.72 $42.53 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant-6" Extension $614.29 $742.54 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Break-Away Kit $299.34 $363.84 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Meter 2.5 FHT Swivel/no screen $94.11 $143.15 Water System Repair Fee: Hydrant Meter Gate Valve Handle 2" $34.50 $40.60 Water System Repair Fee: Lid Only- 24" Manhole Cover $151.07 $155.79 Water System Repair Fee: Manhole Ring $191.15 $213.93 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 1 inch $532.66 $593.37 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 1.5 inch $1,626.78 $1,782.45 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 2 inch $1,890.25 $2,187.79 Water System Repair Fee: Meter Setter 3/4 inch $319.90 $376.98 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 1 1/2" Close Brass $7.39 $8.18 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 1" Close Brass $3.77 $4.19 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 2" Close Brass $11.26 $12.51 Water System Repair Fee: Nipple 3/4" Close Brass $2.55 $2.87 Water System Repair Fee: Non-Traffic Meter Tub 36" $128.48 $149.13 Non-Traffic Rated 42" Meter Tub/Tile for Water System Repair Fee: Single/Double Services $167.96 $181.30 Water System Repair Fee: Non-Traffic Rated Standard Lid & Ring $146.47 $240.89 Water System Repair Fee: Residential Meter Lid and Ring $134.02 $161.63 Water System Repair Fee: Silt Sand- per yard $12.34 $27.70 Water System Repair Fee: Sod sf ft $0.32 $0.34 Water System Repair Fee: STORZ fitting-4.5 hydrant nozzle $239.94 $233.06 Water System Repair Fee: Traffic Rated Lid 20" $130.02 $153.20 Water System Repair Fee: Traffic Rated Meter Tub 42" $150.33 $169.43 Water System Repair Fee: Traffic Rated Ring 20" $125.02 $213.66 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box- 16"Top Section $34.54 $44.10 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box- 26"Top Section $62.70 $78.32 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box-36" Bottom Section $55.00 $68.96 Water System Repair Fee: Valve Box Extension Riser 1-6" $44.21 $60.19 ADOPTION OF FY23 CITYWIDE FEE SCHEDULE PAGE 7 E IDIAN.;--- Planning and Zoning Presentations and outline Page 4 City Council Meeting September 27, 2022 Item #3: Prescott Ridge Residential Development Agreement Modification Changes to Agenda: None Item #3: Prescott Ridge Residential (H-2022-0058) Application(s):  Development Agreement Modification Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site is zoned R-8 & R-15 and is generally located on the east side of N. McDermott Rd., south of W. Chinden Blvd. History: This property was annexed in 2021 with the requirement of a DA as part of the Prescott Ridge development. Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential (MDR) Summary of Request: The Applicant proposes to modify the existing Development Agreement (Inst. 2021-132713) for the residential portion of Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan for the development. Since the time of annexation, the phasing plan for the overall development has changed. The northern 15-acre medical campus portion of the site was shown on the phasing plan as Phase I in order to create a “legal lot” to convey to the purchaser of that property. Acquiring the out-parcel at the northeast corner of the medical campus enabled the Applicant to do a property boundary adjustment to create a legal lot for development purposes to convey to the new owner so that they can develop their site separately at their own timing. The proposed modification will remove the medical campus from the phasing plan of the residential development. Other changes to the phasing plan include the following: 1) Phase 1 was expanded to include the location of the pressurized irrigation pump house; 2) the large green space in the center of the development is now part of Phase 3 instead of Phase 6, which will allow the large park and associated amenities to develop sooner; and 3) the updated phasing plan shows larger phases overall to expediate the development process. Phase 1 still includes construction of the collector street (Rustic Oak) from Chinden Blvd. to the southern boundary of the property which is important for emergency access. No changes to the text of the development agreement are proposed. Written Testimony: Patrick Connor, Applicant’s Representative – in agreement w/staff report Staff Recommendation: Approval Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0058, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 27, 2022: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2022-0058, as presented during the hearing on September 27, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0058 to the hearing date of _____ for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) Item #4: 2022 UDC Text Amendment (ZOA-2022-0001) Application(s): UDC Text Amendment Location: Citywide Summary of Request: The proposed text amendment provides a broad range of changes and additions to multiple code sections. The most notable changes include new definitions; multi-family and vertically integrated parking standards; new live/work standards; private street standards; and changes to the decision-making authority table in Chapter 5. Commentary associated with proposed changes are part of the table that explain the reason for the modification or addition to the code. Since parking associated with higher density projects continues to be emphasized during public hearings, staff has prepared an option B for the Council to discuss that differs from that in the staff report. Staff recommends that the Council include their preference in their motion. All of the proposed changes went through an extensive and collaborative review process over several months between City staff and the UDC Focus Group. In summary, City Staff believes the proposed changes will make the implementation and use of the UDC more understandable and enforceable. th Commission Recommendation: Approval at the August 18hearing. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on August 18, 2022. At the public hearing, the Commission voted to recommend approval of the subject ZOA request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing: a. In favor: City of Meridian Planning Division b. In opposition: None c. Commenting: None d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Caleb Hood 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. Electric vehicle use (e.g. scooters, bikes, and motorcycles) on the 10-foot multi-use pathways adjacent to public streets b. Limiting the conversion of commercial space with a live/work residential project c. Multi-family parking standards – option A vs. option B d. Secondary dwelling standards 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. None Written Testimony Since the Commission Hearing: Mike Wardle Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number ZOA-2022-0001, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 27, 2022, 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 ZOA-2022-0001, as presented during the hearing on September 27, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number ZOA-2022-0001 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Item #5: Existing Conditions Report (H-2022-0049) Application(s): Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Summary of Request: The City of Meridian Planning Division has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment. The purpose of this amendment is to adopt by reference the 2022 Existing Conditions Report, as an addendum to the 2019 Comprehensive Plan. The Existing Conditions Report (ECR) is necessary to fully comply with section 67-6508 of Idaho Code, otherwise known as the Local Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA). The 2017 version of the ECR was adopted under the City’s previous Comprehensive Plan and would be replaced with the 2022 version. th Commission Recommendation: Approval at the August 18 hearing. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission heard this item on August 18, 2022. At the public hearing, the Commission voted to recommend approval of the subject CPAT request. The Commission did not have any concerns or changes to the report. There was no public testimony provide during the hearing. Written Testimony Since the Commission Hearing: None Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2022-0049, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 27, 2022, 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-2022-0049, as presented during the hearing on September 27, 2022, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2022-0049 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Prescott Ridge Residential (H-2022-0058) by Engineering Solutions, LLP, located at 3770 & 4184 S. Linder Rd. Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0058 A. Request: A Development Agreement Modification to the existing Development Agreement (Inst. #2021-132713) for the residential portion of Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 27 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 3 PROJECT NAME : Prescott Ridge Residential ( W2022 - 0058 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name �IJN L% 2 I ? 3 42 2 ! 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT C�I w IDIAN -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .►A H O HEARING September 27,2022 Legend DATE: let TO: Mayor&City Council Ie Project Lneafxm R- RL R- 1 FROAM: Sonya Allen,Associate Planner R- R- 208-884-5533 MU SUBJECT: H-2022-0058 UT Prescott Ridge Residential RUT R- LOCATION: 2940 E. Overland Rd., in the SE 1/4 of R-_ R- Section 17,T.3N.,R.IE. R-8 k-0 R ® R-8 UT RU I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Modification to the existing Development Agreement(Inst. 2021-132713)for the residential portion of Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan. II. SUMMARY OF REPORT A. Applicant: Patrick Connor,Providence Properties,LLC—701 S.Allen St., Ste. 104,Meridian, ID 83642 B. Owners: Lionwood Properties,LLC— 1513 E. Rivers End Ct.,Eagle,ID 83616 Providence Properties,LLC—701 S. Allen St., Ste. 104,Meridian, ID 83642 C. Representative: Same as Applicant III. NOTICING City Council Posting Date Notification published in newspaper 9/11/2022 Notification mailed to property owners within 300 feet 9/8/2022 Page 1 Applicant posted public hearing notice on site 9/13/2022 Nextdoor posting 9/8/2022 IV. STAFF ANALYSIS The Applicant proposes to modify the existing Development Agreement(Inst. 2021-132713)for the residential portion of Prescott Ridge Subdivision to update the phasing plan for the development. See existing phase plan and proposed phasing plan in Section VI. Since the time of annexation,the phasing plan for the overall development has changed. The northern 15-acre medical campus portion of the site was shown on the phasing plan as Phase I in order to create a"legal lot"to convey to the purchaser of that property.Acquiring the out-parcel at the northeast corner of the medical campus enabled the Applicant to do a property boundary adjustment to create a legal lot for development purposes to convey to the new owner so that they can develop their site separately at their own timing. The proposed modification will remove the medical campus from the phasing plan of the residential development. Other changes to the phasing plan include the following: 1)Phase 1 was expanded to include the location of the pressurized irrigation pump house;2)the large green space in the center of the development is now part of Phase 3 instead of Phase 6,which will allow the large park and associated amenities to develop sooner; and 3)the updated phasing plan shows larger phases overall to expediate the development process. Phase 1 still includes construction of the collector street(Rustic Oak)from Chinden Blvd. to the southern boundary of the property which is important for emergency access. No changes to the text of the development agreement are proposed. V. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed modification to the DA with the change to the phasing plan described above as shown in Section VI.B. Page 2 VI. Exhibits A. Existing Phasing Plan PHASE BUILDABLE rP CP-P _ y ei LOTS � 44 3 41 y 4 43 n 5 41 6 37 m PHASE 7 39 8 46 L7 w I .. 9 14 Oa l7 x P pC 9 TOTAL °C c BUILDABLE 37C a LOTS f i PHASE u PHAS 7 I R• pg Q _I 117 R' r` r EN OI X E E!IN6 xo Y PHASE .3 rP' 1 OF 1 IJEEFT RASE 1 Page 3 B. Proposed Phasing Plan LG75 LOTS ,G7 7E n � 1 � 79 n I 5j x 5 ib 2 4 !4 7 ,4,A► � 1075 � i6 x r 5 111 � C }ow _ rl OF 1 lip r,sdr r.MIC Page 4 Item 22 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS Ll PRESCOTT RIDGE MODIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Requested change: Update to Phasing Plan with the Residential DA. Rationale: 1. The 15 acres of C-G (Medical Campus) legal lot status was made possible with the acquisition of an outparcel and a lot line adjustment. This no longer requires the Medical Campus lot to be part of the Phase 1 of Prescott Ridge and thus allowing the Medical Campus to develop on its own timeline. 2. Phase 1 was expanded to include the location of the pressurized irrigation pumphouse as the previous Phase 1 did not encompass the area. 3. The updated phasing plan shows larger lot phases overall. The rationale for this is an effort to counteract the longer than expected plan review times and potential delays in lot production. Initial Phasing Plan PHASE BUILDABLE ar Dift- LOTS 1 65 2 44 3 41 4 4.3 5 41 6 37 >0 PHASE I 7 39 3 46 Lu 9 14 Ln PHASE9 TOTAL BUILDABLE 370 0�E ui CL LOTS u In LU PHASE 8. HAS E 7 J I I LCK p Ld Ikm r N G I N f F t I N 0 CL PHASE 1 OF 1 PHASE '1 c 300 600 900 Plan SraJe:V=300' Proposed Phasing Plan I BUILDABLE 0011M0N d3 P1••IASG SOTS -QTS r 7 107 2B 2 71 7 -j I I 3 78 11 E D i # 53 5 2 1 Lf] f 5 46 2 m 6 14 1 I_ TOTAL m G m � - x BUILDABLE 369 54 n z x LOTS "' La r HA- k Lid 6 eff IL 4 a I - ..Iti,[fnW,Tff,T ` PHASE 5 PHASE 4 km cur 1—f—F,4t I ENGINEEA I N G k J � 5]2�HORTH�I•l_OY=fiV N'A� f( �iOvt�2.S1639[v39 t � \ f in•.cnmlP[en• � 1aF1 I R _ Y R SMC,IAM�eR f� PHASE � { I + 0 300 600 900 f l l i r Pla"Scale;V-300, W IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for UDC Text Amendment ZOA-2022-0001 by City of Meridian Planning Division Application Materials: https://bit.ly/ZOA-2022-0001UDC A. Request: UDC Text Amendment for a text amendment to amend certain sections and add new code sections to the City's Unified Development Code pertaining to the regulations through Chapters 1-5. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 27 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 4 PROJECT NAME : UDC Text Amendment ZOA - 2022 = 0001 Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E COMMUNITY N -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING 9/27/2022 DATE: ' 16 44 55 0 TO: Mayor&City Council 26 FROM: Bill Parsons, Current Planning Supervisor 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: ZOA-2022-0001 — 2022 UDC Text Amendment Legend �. LOCATION: City wide AOCI County — 69 Line Future Road I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Meridian Planning Division has applied for a Unified Development Code (UDC)text amendment to update certain code sections AND add new sections throughout Chapters 1-5,Title 11 of Meridian City Code. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: City of Meridian Planning Division 33 E. Broadway Ave, Suite#102 Meridian,ID 83642 III. NOTICING Planning&Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in 8/3/2022 9/11/2022 newspaper Public Service Announcement 7/29/2022 9/8/2022 Nextdoor posting 7/29/2022 9/8/2022 Page 1 IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS (Comprehensive Plan) A. Comprehensive Plan Text(https:llwww.meridianciU.or /g compplan): 3.01.0113 -Update the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code as needed to accommodate the community's needs and growth trends. Many of the requested code changes associated with this text amendment are meant to serve community needs, support current growth trends and maintain the integrity of the plan. 3.04.01B—Maintain and update the Unified Development Code and Future Land Use Map to implement the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. City staff keeps a running database of code revisions throughout the year. The Department is tasked with keeping the code current and relevant. Staff believes the proposed changes encompass the vision of the plan and is largely supported by those who participated in the process. V. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE ANALYSIS (UD The proposed text amendment provides a broad range of changes and additions to multiple code sections. The most notable changes include new definitions;multi-family and vertically integrated parking standards;new live/work standards;private street standards; and changes to the decision-making authority table in Chapter 5. All the proposed changes to the UDC are included as part of the public record. Staff has purposely not attached the table of changes in the staff report to minimize the size of the report and improve the review quality of document for the public, Commission and Council. Commentary associated with proposed changes are also part of the table that explain the reason for the modification or addition to the code. All of the proposed changes went through an extensive and collaborative review process over several months between City staff and the UDC Focus Group. In summary, City Staff believes the proposed changes will make the implementation and use of the UDC more understandable and enforceable. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed text amendment to the UDC based on the analysis provided in Section W and V, modifications presented in Exhibit A and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Section VIII. B. The Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission heard this item on August 18,2022.At the public hearing,the Commission voted to recommend approval of the subject ZOA request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: City of Meridian Planning Division b. In opposition:None c. Commenting: d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Caleb Hood f. Other Staff commenting on application:None 2. Key issue(s) public testimony a. None 3. Key issue(s)of discussion by Commission. Page 2 a. Electric vehicle use(e.g. scooters,bikes, and motorcycles)on the 10-foot multi-use pathways adjacent to public streets b. Limiting the conversion of commercial space with a live/work residential project C. Multi-family—parking standards—option A vs. option B d. Secondary dwelling standards 4. Commission change(s)to Staff recommendation: a. None 5. Outstandingissue(s)ssue(s) for City Council: a. None B. City Council: Enter Summary of City Council Decision. Page 3 VII. EXHIBIT A. Proposed Table of Text Changes—Click to review the proposed text changes VIII. FINDINGS 1. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS: (UDC 11-5B-3E) 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 a text amendment to the Unified Development Code,the Council shall make the following findings: A.The text amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds that the proposed UDC text amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies and Goals, Section IV, of the Staff Report for more information. B. The text amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; and The Commission finds that the proposed zoning ordinance amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare if the changes to the text of the UDC are approved as submitted. It is the intent of the text amendment to further the health, safety and welfare of the public. C. The text 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. The Commission finds that the proposed zoning ordinance amendment does not propose any significant changes to how public utilities and services are provided to developments. All City departments,public agencies and service providers that currently review applications will continue to do so. Please refer to any written or oral testimony provided by any public service provider(s)when making this finding. Page 4 Proposed UDC Text Amendments UDC Section Topic Reason for Change Proposed Change 11-1A-1 Entertainment, adult This definition is outdated and Entertainment, adult. Adult entertainment shall include a place of business or commercial Legal has requested that the establishment providing or selling, as a substantial or significant portion of its stock or trade live or Planning Division update the re-recorded entertainment activity, goods, services or media of a sexually prurient nature meaning- definition to align with state code. any image, depiction, communication or product that in context is obscene lewd lascivious or indecent including: A nude or substantial) nude ersons including persons dancing, stripping, or exhibiting or modeling lingerie, bikinis or similarly styled garmentsm Bpersonal contact of a sexual nature between persons or devices• or C adult stores distinguished or characterized by their emphasis on such matter or which sells or displays for sale devices designed to stimulate sexual arousal b contact with the skin or bodily orifices. Terms used herein shall be defined as set forth in Idaho Code section 18-1514 and 18-4101.Adult entertainment shall be defined in title 3 chapter 10 of this ^^a^ excluding adult stores having only a segment or- section devoted to the sale or- display of: emphasis on matter- �sc-Fibingj or-Felating to adult entertainment; and/O.F 11-1A-1 Heat island Adding a new definition of heat Heat island. In urban areas the absorption of solar radiation from low reflectance materials that leads island to coincide with the to a gradual increase in temperatures versus rural and undeveloped areas. landscape buffer requirements in UDC 11-3B. 11-1A-1 Live/work residential Adding a new definition to the Live work residential 12roiect, A structure used for both residential and nonresidential uses where: 1 project UDC to differentiate live/work the structure includes a dwelling unit 2 the nonresidential square footage exceeds the area allowed residential projects from home for home occupations and is less than 1,500 square feet and 3 the structure is designed to integrate occupations and vertically residential occupancy and work activities including complete kitchen and sanitary facilities and integrated residential projects. working space used by one or more occupants of the unit. 11-1A-1 Muliiuse Pathway ACHD is moving towards multiuse Multiuse pathway. A passageway, typically 10-feet in width, that is designed to provide walking, pathways instead of bike lanes bicycling and other nonmotorized recreational opportunities between areas and facilities. and sidewalks on arterial roadways. May need to amend after ACHD's policy is amended. 11-1A-1 Riparian area Adding a new definition to the Ril2arian area. A native vegetated area along waterways such as flood plains and streambanks that are UDCm distinctly different from surrounding lands because of unique soil and vegetation characteristics that are strongly influenced by the presence of water. 11-1A-1 Urban tree canopy Adding a new definition to the Urban canol2y. The layer of leaves branches and stems of trees that provide shelter of landscaping, UDCm hardscaping, and other improvements beneath when viewed from above. 11-1A-1 Vertically integrated Make it clear that home Vertically integrated residential project. The use of a multi-story structure for residential and residential project occupations are different from a nonresidential uses where the different uses are planned as a unified, complementary whole and vertically integrated residential functionally integrated to share vehicular and pedestrian access and parking. This term shall not project. include "accessory use home occupation" or "live Iwork residentialproject" as herein defined. Table 11-2A-2 Allowed uses in the Add live/work residential project to Use R-2 R-4 R-8 R-15 R-40 residential district the table as a use. Laundromat 1 - - - A A/C Live/work residential project 1 = _ = C C Manufactured home park - - - C - DATE: 08/11/2022 1 Table 11-2B-2 Allowed uses in the Add live/work residential project to Use C-N C-C C-G L-0 M-E H-E commercial district the table as a use. Laundry and dry cleaning P P P - - A Live/work residential project i P P C C Mortuary C P P - - - Table 11-2D-2 Allowed uses in the Add live/work residential project Use 0-T TN-C TN-R traditional neighborhood to the table as a use. Laundry and dry cleaning P P P district Live/work residential project 1 P P P Mortuary C C - 11-3A-5 Bikeways a Multiuse Update this code section to Multiuse pathways shall be constructed in accord with the city's comprehensive plan.the Pathways require a 10-foot wide MUPs to Meridian Pathways Master Plan aid the Ada County Hhighway 4District mMaster sStreet mMaap and replace the requirement for on- Roadways to Bikeways Master Plan. street bike lanes when required by ACHD. May need to define bikeway OR remove entirely. 11-3A-17C Sidewalks and Parkways Align this section of code with C. Detached sidewalks or multiuse pathways shall be required along all arterial and collector streets. ACHD policies as noted in 11-3A- The Director may waive this requirement to detach the sidewalk where: S. 11-313-7C may need amending as well. 1. There is an existing attached sidewalk or multiuse pathway; 2. The sidewalk is less than three hundred (300) linear feet in length and between two (2) adjoining properties with attached sidewalks or multiuse pathways. The Director may waive this requirement for a portion of the street frontage where there is a utility box, mature tree or other impediment that prevents installation of a detached sidewalk or multiuse athwa . 11-3A-19B.2 and 3 Structure and site design The current standard appears to be 2. Site design. guidelines switched for lots with frontage on a public street vs. lots within mixed a. Extend or improve streets, drive aisles, cross access easements or similar vehicular and pedestrian use areas. Building facades in mixed use areas should be closer to connections provided from adjacent properties. the street. This section conflicts b. For lots with frontage on a public street, a minimum of€eFty{40) thirty f30) percent of the buildable with 11-3A-19B.3 which allows frontage of the property shall be occupied by building facades and/or public space. Within mixed use parking & drive aisles next to the areas, and for large multi-building developments, buildings may be placed away from roadways if a street. minimum of thiFty-(30 fort 40 percent of the buildable frontage is occupied by building facades Exempt I-L zoned properties from and/or public space. having to disperse parking throughout the site like a 3. Parking lots. commercial development. City staff has been processing multiple a. For properties greater than two (2) acres in size, no more than fifty (50) percent of the total off alternative compliance requests street parking area for the site shall be located between building facades and abutting streets. This to these standards because of the require ent may be reduced or waived at the determination of the director in industrial districts I-L dimensional standards and here there is an operational need to separate a secure outdoor storage yand from the parking area. many of these sites required a secured yard. DATE: 08/11/2022 2 11-3B-2C Landscape plan The current applicability C.All applications for a conditional use permit (CUP), preliminary plat (PP), final plat (FP), combined applicability statement does not include preliminary and final 12lat PFP short plat SHP certificate of zoning compliance (CZC), applications for combined administrative design review (DES), or planned unit development (PUD). preliminary&final plat and short plat applications. 11-3B-5 Water conserving design With the increase in the concern 0.Water Conserving design. To qualify for the exceptions for water conserving designs as set forth in of water usage, City staff is this chapter, the applicant shall demonstrate the following: looking to incentivize landscaping that utilizes the water conserving 1.The design includes water conserving trees of this section, use of native or drought resistant shrubs, design in the UDC. perennials or ornamental grasses,water conserving plants, boulders, rocks, decorative walls and/or permeable hardscape materials such as pavers and flagstones, and that are visually distinct (size, texture, or color) and clearly visible from the adjacent travel roadway or drive aisle. 2. The design includes plants that can thrive in climates with approximately ten (10) to twelve (12) inches of annual rainfall. 3. Lawn and turf areas shall not comprise more than fifty (50) percent of the total landscaped areas and shall consist of water conserving grasses, including, but not limited to, buffalo grass, blue gamma grass, compact fescue,Xerilawn, turf type tall fescue and/or rhyzomotuous tall fescue. 4. Herbaceous and/or perennial ground cover shall be drought tolerant and able to withstand dry conditions once established.As a guide, refer to the recommended plants in the city of Boise parks and recreation "Water Conservation Guidelines". 5. Excluding lawn and turf, no area larger than three hundred seventy-five (375) square feet may be covered by a single ground cover material without additional hardscape or design feature of no less than one hundred twenty-five (125) square feet. 6. The required street landscape buffer widths in Chapter 2 may be reduced up to fifty (50) Percent. Required landscape aFeas shall he at least forty (40) per-cent covered with vegetation at maturity. 7. Required landscape areas shall be at least fort 40percent covered with vegetation at maturity. DATE: 08/11/2022 3 11-313-7C Landscape buffers along ACHD is moving towards multiuse C.Standards. Standards for landscape buffers along streets shall be as follows: streets pathways, not sidewalks on arterials. The changes account for 1. Buffer size. See Chapter 2, "District Regulations", of this title. either sidewalk or MUP and explain how the landscape buffer is accounted for.As ACHD amends a. Measurement. policy, this standard may need (1) All street buffers with attached sidewalks shall be measured from the back of sidewalk or multiuse amending further. pathway. Where ACHD is anticipating future widening of the street, the width of the buffer shall be measured from the ultimate sidewalk or multiuse pathway location as anticipated by ACHD. (2) All street buffers with detached sidewalks or multiuse pathways shall be measured from the back of curb. Where ACHD is anticipating future widening of the street, the width of the buffer shall be measured from the ultimate curb location as anticipated by ACHD. Detached sidewalks and multiuse pathways shall have an average minimum separation of greater than four (4) feet to back of curb. b. Easements. Where the buffer is encumbered by easements or other restrictions,the buffer area shall include a minimum five-foot wide area for planting shrubs and trees. c. Width reduction. In a development where the required street buffer width results in an otherwise unavoidable hardship to the property, a written request for a buffer reduction may be submitted through the alternative compliance process in accord with Chapter 5, "Administration", of this Title. The request shall demonstrate evidence of the unique hardship caused by the required street buffer and propose a specific alternative landscape plan that meets or exceeds the intent of the required buffer. In no case shall the width be reduced to less than ten (10) percent of the depth of the lot, except in the Old Town district.A reduction to the buffer width shall not affect building setbacks; all structures shall be set back from the property line a minimum of the buffer width required in the applicable zoning district. 11-3C-5A6 Parking standards for all Add a note to encourage/allow 6. Design for standard vehicles.All required parking as determined in Section 11-3C-6 of this Article other uses not specified oversized parking stalls as shall be designed for standard and/or oversized vehicles. Compact stalls are discouraged, but may be directed by the Council. used for any parking above the number of required parking spaces. Table 11-3C-6 Required parking spaces Revisit the parking ratios for Studio 1 per dwelling unit for residential use (MF) multi-family developments. This continues to be a topic of 1 1.5 per dwelling unit; at least 1 in a discussion at public hearings. covered carport or garage Staff may propose that a minimum standard of 2 parking 2 2 per dwelling unit; at least 1 in a covered spaces per unit regardless of the Dwelling, multi-family345(triplex, carport or garage number of bedrooms.Add a note fourplex, apartments, etc.) 3 per dwelling unit; at least 2 in a covered to clarify that clubhouses are not 314+ carport or garage subject to the commercial parking standards. Guest 1 per 10 dwelling units spaces Notes: 5 The required number of parking spaces associated with a nonresidential structure approved as an amenity for a multi-family development (i.e., clubhouse, fitness center, etc.) shall be exempt from the parking standards required for nonresidential uses as listed in subsection B. DATE: 08/11/2022 4 Table 11-3C-6 Required parking spaces Require more parking for Vertically integrated residentia14 Studio 1 1 per dwelling unit for residential use vertically-integrated residential 2/3 11.5 per dwelling unit (Vertically Integrated) projects 4+ 2 per dwelling unit 11-313-7C Landscape buffers along ACHD is moving towards multiuse C.Standards. Standards for landscape buffers along streets shall be as follows: streets pathways, not sidewalks on arterials. The changes account for 1. Buffer size. See Chapter 2, "District Regulations", of this title. either sidewalk or MUP and explain how the landscape buffer is accounted for. a. Measurement. (1) All street buffers with attached sidewalks shall be measured from the back of sidewalk or multiuse athwa . Where ACHD is anticipating future widening of the street, the width of the buffer shall be measured from the ultimate sidewalk or multiuse pathway location as anticipated by ACHD. (2) All street buffers with detached sidewalks or multiuse pathways shall be measured from the back of curb. Where ACHD is anticipating future widening of the street, the width of the buffer shall be measured from the ultimate curb location as anticipated by ACHD. Detached sidewalks and multiuse pathways shall have an average minimum separation of greater than four (4) feet to back of curb. b. Easements. Where the buffer is encumbered by easements or other restrictions,the buffer area shall include a minimum five-foot wide area for planting shrubs and trees. c. Width reduction. In a development where the required street buffer width results in an otherwise unavoidable hardship to the property, a written request for a buffer reduction may be submitted through the alternative compliance process in accord with Chapter 5, "Administration", of this Title. The request shall demonstrate evidence of the unique hardship caused by the required street buffer and propose a specific alternative landscape plan that meets or exceeds the intent of the required buffer. In no case shall the width be reduced to less than ten (10) percent of the depth of the lot, except in the Old Town district.A reduction to the buffer width shall not affect building setbacks; all structures shall be set back from the property line a minimum of the buffer width required in the applicable zoning district. 11-3F-2 Applicability Allow private streets to develop The provisions of this article shall apply to any properties that are located in a residential district. in all residential districts. Private streets are currently not allowed in the R-2, R-4 or R-8 district because these districts require public street frontage per the dimensional standards in Chapter 2. DATE: 08/11/2022 5 11-3F-4 Private street standards Clarify that one gate for every 50 All private streets shall be designed and constructed to the following standards: dwelling units and proposed A. Design standards. developments should not exceed more than 100 dwelling units. 1. Easement. The private street shall be constructed on a perpetual ingress/egress easement or a single Additional units may be allowed platted lot that provides access to all properties served by such private street. In instances where the through the PUD process in subject property is being subdivided, the preference is that the private street be a lot within such Chapter 7. subdivision. 2. Connection point. The private street shall connect to a local or collector street. The private street shall not connect to an arterial street.Where the point of connection of the private street is to a public street, the private street connection shall be approved by the transportation authority. 3. Emergency vehicle. The private street shall provide sufficient maneuvering area for emergency vehicles as determined and approved by the Meridian Fire Department. 4. Gates. Gates or other obstacles shall be allowed subject to the following standards: a. The proposed development shall be for residential uses. b. The proposed development shall have no more than fAy one hundred (100-5-9) dwelling units.A greater number of dwelling units may be approved with a planned unit development. One gated entry shall be provided for every fifty (50) dwelling units: c. The proposed development shall not restrict pedestrian and bicycle access along the private street. The proposed development shall provide unrestricted access to pedestrians and bicycles at a minimum of two (2) additional points within the proposed development. d. The proposed development shall not restrict access to existing or planned multiuse pathways as shown in chapter 3 of the Meridian Pathways Master Plan. e. The applicant shall provide access to the gate for emergency vehicles as determined and approved by the Meridian Fire Department and Public Works Department. f. To allow sufficient stacking distance, the gate shall be located a minimum of fifty (50) feet back from the ultimate edge of right-of-way to the connecting public street. S. Culs-de-sac. No private street that ends in a cul-de-sac or a dead end shall be longer than five hundred fo r hundred f; (5004-5,9) feet. 6. Common driveways. No common driveways shall be allowed off of a private street. 7.Street network. The overall street network within the surrounding area shall allow for properties to connect at regular intervals in order to promote connected neighborhoods and traffic flow within the mile section. Table 11-3G-4 Site amenities and point Add a multi-modal amenity Site amenity Point Value value similar to multi-family developments. Multi-Modal Amenities Charging stations for electric vehicles installed with a business center, 2 clubhouse or fitness facility DATE: 08/11/2022 6 11-3G-5B General standards for With the recent update to the B. Improvements and landscaping. common open space and open space standards, there was site amenities section of code that was 1.Common open space shall be suitably improved for its intended use, except that natural features inadvertently removed from code. such as wetlands, rock outcroppings, natural waterways and riparian areas, open ditches, and laterals may be left unimproved. 2. Common open space shall comply with the applicable landscaping requirements set forth in Article 11-313, Landscaping Requirements, of this Title. 3.At a minimum common open s ace areas shall include one deciduous shade tree for every five thousand (5,000) square feet of area and include a variety of trees shrubs lawn or other vegetative round cover. 11-4-3-10 Drinking Establishments Increase parking standards for A. The facility shall comply with all Idaho Code regulations regarding the sale, manufacturing, or this use. distribution of alcoholic beverages. B. The drinking establishment shall not be located within three hundred (300) feet of a property used for a church or any other place of worship, or any public or private education institution, nor shall the drinking establishment be located within one thousand (1,000) feet of an adult entertainment establishment; provided, that this limitation shall not apply to any duly licensed premises that at the time of licensing did not come within the restricted area but subsequent to licensing came therein; the expansion of an existing establishment may be allowed with the approval of a conditional use permit as set forth in section 11-5B-6 of this title. C. For properties abutting a residential district, no outside activity or event shall be allowed on the site, except in accord with chapter 3, article E, "temporary use requirements", of this title. D.At a minimum one 1parking space shall be provided for every two hundred fifty 250 square feet of gross floor area. Upon any change of use for an existing building or tenants ace a detailed parking plan shall be submitted that identifies the available parking for the overall site that complies with the requirements of this title. DATE: 08/11/2022 7 11-4-3-12 Dwelling, secondary Change code to support this A. Permitted. One (1) secondary dwelling unit is permitted on the same property in conjunction with housing choice.Add another and clearly subordinate to a single-family dwelling. element of attainable housing. B. Owner occupancy. To create and maintain a secondary dwelling unit, the property owner shall reside on the property for more than six (6) months in any twelve (12) month period. The applicant for a secondary dwelling unit shall demonstrate that either the single-family dwelling or the secondary unit is occupied by the owner of the property. Owner occupancy is demonstrated by title records, vehicle registration,voter registration or other similar means. Secondary dwelling units shall not be subdivided or otherwise segregated in ownership from the single-family dwelling unit. C. Maximum size. Secondary dwelling units shall be limited to a maximum of seven nine hundred (-7900) square feet or no more than fifty (50) percent of the primary dwelling, whichever is less, and anetwo (472) bedrooms in constructed in accord with the adopted residential building code. D. Location. The secondary dwelling unit may be located within or attached to the primary dwelling; a detached structure; or above or beside a detached structure, such as a garage. Detached secondary dwelling units shall be located to the side or rear of a primary dwelling. No ,,.,Rion of the secondary dwelling unit Sh-All be le-e-Ated- in front of the pFimaFy dwelling unit. E. Parking. Required parking for the property shall be as set forth in section 11-3C-6, table 11-3C-6 of his title for single-family dwellings, as determined by the total number of bedrooms on the property. The conversion of a covered parking area (garage/carport) into a secondary dwelling unit is not allowed unless the required parking can be provided elsewhere on site. F. Entrance. Only one (1) entrance door of either the single-family dwelling or the secondary dwelling unit shall be located facing any one street. G. Design. The secondary unit shall be consistent in design with the single-family dwelling, including roof pitch, siding, color, materials, and window treatments. H. Prohibitions. Manufactured and mobile homes, and recreation vehicles shall be prohibited for use as a secondary dwelling unit. 11-4-3-16 Entertainment Strike C. from the specific use , chap establishment, adult standards as this is no longer 1-0- A4 this Gede. applicable. DATE: 08/11/2022 8 11-4-3-27C Common open space design Clarify which sections are eligible C. Common open space design requirements. requirements for ALT and when common open space adjacent to collector and 1.The total baseline land area of all qualified common open space shall equal or exceed ten (10) arterial streets qualifies. percent of the gross land area for multi-family developments of five (5) acres or more.When multi- family is aDDroved concurrently with single-family, the minimum open s ace requirements in 11-3G-3 shall apply to the gross land area of entire development. 2.All common open space shall meet the following standards: a. The development plan shall demonstrate that the open space has been integrated into the development as a priority and not for the use of land after all other elements of the development have been designed. Open space areas that has been given priority in the development design have: (1) Direct pedestrian access; (2) High visibility; (3) Comply with Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CTED) standards; and (4) Support a range of leisure and play activities and uses. Irregular shaped, disconnected or isolated open spaces shall not meet this standard. b. Open space shall be accessible and well connected throughout the development. This quality can be shown with open spaces that are centrally located within the development, accessible by pathway and visually accessible along collector streets or as a terminal view from a street. c. The open space promotes the health and well-being of its residents. Open space shall support active and passive uses for recreation, social gathering and relaxation to serve the development. DATE: 08/11/2022 9 11-4-3-27C 3.All multi-family projects over twenty (20) units shall provide at least one (1) common grassy area continued integrated into the site design allowing for general activities by all ages. This area may be included in the minimum required open space total. Projects that provide safe access to adjacent public parks or parks under a common HOA,without crossing an arterial roadway, are exempt from this standard. a. Minimum size of common grassy area shall be at least five thousand (5,000) square feet in area. This area shall increase proportionately as the number of units increase and shall be commensurate to the size of the multi-family development as determined by the decision-making body.Where this area cannot be increased due to site constraints, it may be included elsewhere in the development. b.Alternative compliance is available for the standards listed in C1 and C2 above, if a project has a unique targeted demographic; utilizes other place-making design elements in Old-Town or mixed-use future land use designations with collectively integrated and shared open space areas. 4. In addition to the baseline open space requirement, a minimum area of outdoor common open space shall be provided as follows: a. One hundred fifty (150) square feet for each unit containing five hundred (500) or less square feet of living area. b. Two hundred fifty (250) square feet for each unit containing more than five hundred (500) square feet and up to one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of living area. c. Three hundred fifty (350) square feet for each unit containing more than one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet of living area. S.Common open space shall be not less than four hundred (400) square feet in area, and shall have a minimum length and width dimension of twenty (20) feet 6.In phased developments, common open space shall be provided in each phase of the development consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. 7.Unless otherwise approved through the conditional use process, common open space areas shall not be adjacent to collector or arterial streets buffers unless separated from the street by a berm or constructed barrier at least four (4) feet in height,with breaks in the berm or barrier to allow for pedestrian access. 8. Buffers : One hundred 100percent of the landscape buffer along collector streets and fifty 50 percent of the landscape buffer along arterial streets that meet the enhanced buffer requirements below may count towards the required baseline open s ace. a. Enhanced landscaping as set forth in Article 11-313, Landscaping Requirements: b. Multi-use pathways: c. Enhanced amenities with social interaction characteristics: d. Enhanced context with the surroundings. DATE: 08/11/2022 10 11-4-3-27 Multi-family development MPD wants a specific code section G. Police access under exigent circumstances. Multifamily developments with units that take access via to address access into MF secured common corridors shall install and maintain a keyless entry system, or suitable alternative to buildings with secured common provide police access to the common corridors under exigent circumstances. The keyless entry system corridors. or alternative shall be subject to review and approval by the Meridian Police Department. 11-4-3-34H Storage facility, self-service Making this section clearer when H. The facility shall have a second means of access for emergency purposes as determined by the Fire secondary emergency access is Marshal. required. 11-4-3-41 Vertically-integrated Add additional design criteria to A.A vertically integrated residential project shall be a structure that contains at least two (2) stories. residential project support this use in other zoning districts. B.A minimum of twenty-five (25) percent of the gross floor area of a vertically integrated project shall be residential dwelling units, ineluding outdoor patio space on the same floor as a residential unit may count towards this re uirement. C.A minimum of ten 10percent of the gross floor area of a vertically integrated project shall be used for nonresidential uses asspecified in subsection E below. DQ The minimum building footprint for a detached vertically integrated residential project shall be two thousand four hundred (2,400) square feet. Ems. The allowed nonresidential uses in a vertically integrated project include: arts, entertainment or recreation facility; artist studio; civic, social or fraternal organizations; daycare facility; drinking establishment; education institution; financial institution; healthcare or social assistance; industry, craftsman; laundromat; nursing or residential care facility; personal or professional service; public or quasi-public use; restaurant; retail; or other uses that may be considered through the conditional use permit process. FR None of the required parking shall be located in the front of the structure. G.A minimum of fifty 50 square feet of private, usable open s ace shall be provided for each residential dwelling unit. This requirement can be satisfied through porches, patios, decks and/or enclosed vards. Landscaping, entryway and other accesswa s shall not count toward this requirement. In circumstances where strict adherence to such standard would create inconsistency with the purpose statements of this section the Director may consider an alternative design proposal through the alternative compliance provisions as set forth in Section 11-5B-5 of this Title. 11-4-3-50 Live/work residential Add new specific use standards to 11-4-3-50 - Live work residential project rp oject incorporate live/work residential project that aligns with the A.A live work structure shall not exceed 3,000 square feet. adopted building code. B. The nonresidential area shall be limited to the first floor only and not exceed fifty 50percent of the gross floor area of the structure. C. The nonresidential area shall be used by the occupant of the dwelling. No more than five 5 employees shall occupy the area at any one time. D. Parking standards shall comply with the vertically-integrated residential project standards. E. The allowed nonresidential uses in a live work project include: arts entertainment or recreational facility artist studio and personal or professional service retail• other uses may be considered through a conditional use permit. DATE: 08/11/2022 11 w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Public Hearing for Existing Conditions Report 2022 CPAT (H-2022-0049) by City of Meridian Application Materials: https://bit.ly/H-2022-0049 A. Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the 2019 Comprehensive plan to adopt the Existing Conditions Report 2022, as an addendum to the Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan). The Existing Conditions Report addresses some requirements for a Comp Plan under the Local Land Use Planning Act, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code. The Report includes descriptions, maps and analysis for a variety of demographic indicators, services and land coverage information. The purpose of the Report is to serve as a community resource and to document and set a baseline for existing conditions that Ideally help to inform future decisions. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN IN SHEET DATE : September 27 , 2022 ITEM # ON AGENDA : 5 PROJECT NAME : Existing Conditions Report 2022 CPAT ( W2022 - 0049 ) Your Full Name Your Full Address Representing I wish to testify ( Please Print ) HOA ? ( mark X if yes ) If yes, please provide HOA name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 STAFF REPORT E IDIA 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT r a H O HEARING 9/27/2022 44 I 0 DATE: ' 55 TO: Mayor&City Council 16 26 FROM: Brian McClure, Comprehensive Associate Planner 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2022-0049 -, Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Legend �. for the Existing Conditions Report 2022 .AOCI LOCATION: Citywide r County — 69 ■ Line Future Road I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Meridian Planning Division has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment (CPAT). The purpose of this amendment is to adopt by reference the Existing Conditions Report 2022, as an addendum to the 2019 Comprehensive Plan (the Plan). The Existing Conditions Report (ECR) is necessary to fully comply with section 67-6508 of Idaho Code, otherwise known as the Local Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA). The 2017 version of the ECR was adopted under the City's previous Comprehensive Plan and would be replaced with the 2022 version. II. PROJECT OVERVIEW The Existing Conditions Report is one part of two that make up the Comprehensive Plan.The"Main" plan, or"Volume I",is the Comprehensive Plan itself which is forward focused and includes all of the guiding policies.The ECR which is an addendum, or"Volume II", seeks to define who we are and where we've come from in order to help inform the text and policy of the Comprehensive Plan(the Plan)in future activities and decisions. As described in the Plan,the ECR is needed to address a number of State required components of the LLUPA. Of the 17 required components, only Implementation and Property Rights are not addressed in some fashion within the ECR(these two are addressed in the main Plan only). The proposed CPAT modifies two areas of the Comprehensive Plan;the List of Adopted Plans and Studies by Reference table (Page C), and the Plan Purpose and Scope section(page 1-3). Other references for the ECR are either described generically without a year, or as a citation for related context. Other references not specifically described remain relevant but are not proposed for modification. Pagel In total there are twenty references to the Existing Conditions Report in the Plan. These occur in every chapter of the Plan,but only two in the intro are being amended to specifically reference the 2022 version. A source reference to the 2017 version of the Plan on page 1-7, Planning Successes,is not proposed to be updated since the information is context for the 2019 Comprehensive Plan process. A. Specific Changes in stfike thfougk and underline format 1. Page C,Existing Conditions Report(2017) 2022 2. Page 1-3,The Existing Conditions report includes background information and analysis about the built and natural environment in Meridian today(as of 2017 2022),trends, and a strategic plan for the future. Note: The above revisions will also be reflected in the online Comprehensive Plan,but there are no page numbers in the online version. III. APPLICANT INFORMATION A. Applicant: City of Meridian Planning Division, 33 E Broadway Ave, Suite 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642 B. Owner: Not applicable C. Representative: Not applicable IV. NOTICING Planning & Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date Notification published in 8/3/2022 9/11/2022 newspaper Notification mailed to property owners within 300' N/A N/A Applicant posted public hearing notice sign on site N/A N/A Nextdoor posting 7/29/2022 9/8/2022 V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS (Comprehensive Plan) As referenced in the Plan, the LLUPA states "Prepare,implement, and review and update a comprehensive plan,hereafter referred to as the plan. The plan shall include all land within the jurisdiction of the governing board.The plan shall consider previous and existing conditions,trends, desirable goals and objectives, or desirable future situations for each planning component." Since the Plan itself is generally forward looking, the ECR is essential to address existing conditions, and also to understand trends or changes over time. It is expected that understanding who we are today, and where came from, may help to inform future decisions. Specifically,the Comprehensive Plan provides the following text in reference to the Existing Conditions Report: Page 2 The Plan is intended to work in concert with the City's ordinances and specific area plans. It is based not only on the concerns and expressions of the community, but upon the analysis in the Existing Conditions Report that is adopted concurrently as Volume II of this Plan. The Existing Conditions Report includes background information and analysis about the built and natural environment in Meridian today(as of 2017), trends, and a strategic plan for the future. Together, the Existing Conditions Report and the Comprehensive Plan together address all of the elements required in the Local Land Use Planning Act of Idaho. There are no other specific policies addressing the ECR in the Plan, only references to the ECR when it may provide additional context for other topics and decision making. VI. DECISION A. Staff: Staff finds that approval of the proposed CPAT application is in the best interest of the City and recommends the P&Z Commission recommend to Council adoption. B. Commission: The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this application on August 18, 2022. The Commission did not have any concerns or changes from Staff's proposal and recommended the application forward to City Council for approval. There was no public testimony_provided during the hearing. C. City Council: Enter Summary of City Council Decision. Page 3 Item 22 E IDIAN;--- AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: PRESENTATIONS Ll VII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS As of August 8th, there were no additional comments for the public draft either by internal City Departments, or submitted only by other agencies or the public. VIII. FINDINGS A. Required Findings from the Unified Development Code 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the other elements of the comprehensive plan. The Planning &Zoning Commission finds the amendment maintains consistency by updating relevant information critical to the State required elements in Idaho Code §67-6509. 2. The proposed amendment provides an improved guide to future growth and development of the city. By maintaining and keeping the Comprehensive Plan relevant, the Planning &Zoning Commission finds that the proposed Plan provides an improved and more relevant guide to future growth and development with the City. 3. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with the goals,objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning &Zoning Commission finds the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan as the intent is to "ensure that the Plan remains relevant and represents current stakeholders, reflects market and demographic trends..." (page 1-5 of the Plan). 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with this Unified Development Code. The Planning &Zoning Commission finds the proposed amendment is consistent with the Unified Development Code, as no policies in the Comprehensive Plan are modified, and no development proposed. S. The amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses. The Planning &Zoning Commission finds the proposed amendment will be compatible with existing and planned surrounding land uses as no changes are proposed to the policies within the Plan, or to the Future Land Use Map. 6. The proposed amendment will not burden existing and planned service capabilities. The Planning &Zoning Commission finds that the proposed Plan will not burden existing and planned service capabilities as no changes are proposed to the policies within the Plan, or to the Future Land Use Map. 7. The proposed map amendment(as applicable) provides a logical juxtaposition of uses that allows sufficient area to mitigate any anticipated impact associated with the development of the area. This finding is not applicable as no amendment is proposed to the future land use map. 8. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City of Meridian. The Planning &Zoning Commission finds the proposed amendment is in the best interest of the City as it provides updated existing conditions and trends to provide more accurate context which may then better inform future decisions. Page 4 Existing Conditions Report EXCERPTS, HIGHLIGHTS, AND ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS 22 POPULATION AGE ill[-e-n 11 0 0 1179635 MEDIAN AGE MEDIAN AGE INCREASE SINCE 1990 mate � • 33944 Change by % of Whole, Over Time 25.0%Population Percent by Arrival Period — 20.0% - — c 0 15.0% a o Population, 10.0% 2010 to o 2020 0-01 5.0% • 1 I l 0.0% a a a a a V + O V �o Ln +' O O O O O ' • • • O O O O O N M V Ln before 21 10 ■ 1990 02000 2010 r 2020 (SYMBOLS READ LEFT TO RIGHT • - •n's total 2020 Population w. added between 20 1 and 2020. Total Population Change by EDUCATION (25+) Decade High School or Bachelors or Graduate or 2020 Equivalency Higher Higher 2010 40 1 111 1990 ■ 2,938 96.4% 41 . I %4 13.7% : 1 ■ 4 CL 1 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 Change by Gender, 2014 to 2020 Population lit by ' - -6.0% -4.0% -2.0% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% Less thanFemale H.S. H.S. Only or (or equiv.) Some college 01 • Associate's Male Bachelor's Graduate Male Female 7 33 E Broadway Ave., Ste 102 E IDIAN:--- Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: (208) 884-5533 www.meridiancity.org/compplan Existing Conditions Report EXCERPTS, HIGHLIGHTS, AND ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS 0 2 2 HOUSING LABORFORCE & EMPLOYMENT 1-Year Unemployment Tr Average Q Q Q Household 2 * 82 Low Average High Size X[2 1 • . ®[?I • . 11-1 © LIOS/0-1i Average M Q Q Q d 1 1 • 1 1 1 Familygze N N3 * 30 Size 1 • • Sector Employment A family is any two or more people residing together,and related by birth,marriage,or Retail Trade 3,860, 90%) adoption.A household may include families and non-families,or even single individuals. Health Care 3.31 Prof. Services 2,880, 17 Dwelling Units by Type Construction 2,720, ; • New Units in 10 Years, Total of All Units ; .. 2012 to 2022 through 2022 MF: 33% MF: 18% Total New jobs,% Increase 6,807 units 9,227 units —0-years, Totalt MeridianNew • • r 11) SF: 67% SF: 82% I 1Total 14,064 units 40,795 units New Meridian129670 ❑ Single-family 0 Mult-family Family Wage Jobs Housing Expenditure MeridianLabor Force by Age Groups of households with expenditures that exceeds 30% of 0 Household Income younger �� ■� Renters 1W 4 3.8•, Owners f jobs, older - .- .•.� 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% POVERTY STATUS BY % OF GROUP . . Meridian Labor Force . of jobs) Less than All Others High School 20.4% Equivalency t � JProf. Services Under 18 3,360 Retail 6.8/ High School . , J " ' or Equivalency Support3,610 Accommodation rs ��� • Manufacturing 9 o :0 Total Population Bachelor or 2.0% Higher 33 E Broadway Ave., Ste 102 E IDIAN;---- Meridian, ID 83642 C� Phone: (208) 884-5533 www.meridiancity.org/compplan HBill Parsons, Planning SupervisorSeptember 27, 2022City Council Existing Conditions Report 2022 0049-2022- Introduction Existing Conditions Report 2022, Cover Photo in the adopted by reference tableComprehensive Plan, most notably throughout the 2019 2017 version is referenced –elementsbut policy and property right all ECR addresses 15 of 17 elements;–6509-Idaho Code 6717 of the elements required under Required to address all Comp Plan. One part of two that make up the –Comprehensive Planan addendum to the Existing Conditions Report (ECR) is  Background Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval on August 18, 2022–Conditions ReportComprehensive Plan text amendment to reference the 2022 version of the Existing –Updated Existing Conditions Report 2022Today!Existing Conditions Report hasn’t been updated since, despite significant change–New (current) Comprehensive Plan adopted.December 17, 2019Most of the data is 2016 and older–Existing Conditions Report 2017 adoptedFebruary 20, 2018 Purpose for the future.), trends, and a strategic plan 20222017 (as of built and natural environment in Meridian today background information and analysis about the The Existing Conditions report includes 3-Page 1•(2022)(2017) Existing Conditions Report (List of Plans and Studies by Reference)Page C •format.underlineand through-strikeSpecific Changes in –versiontext changes referencing the 2017 twoMake –To adopt the 2022 Existing Conditions Report:Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment (CPAT) WHAT’S CHANGED?located in the Existing Conditions Report.Sources and dates for all subsequent slides Population Population Change Population Groups Over Time 65+, almost 10% since 2000•since 200050 to 64, by more than 5% •others:increasing more rapidly than However, some groups are have increased by raw total.Overall, all populations groups Meridian Continues to Age Education or higherhave a graduate degree 13.7% or higherhave a bachelor degree 41.1% EquivalencyHigh School or 96.4% Overall Educational Attainment Labor Force & Employment Labor Force & Employment Origin for Meridian Employment Destination of Meridian Labor Force Housing increased by 0.05Average Family size has •sized has decreased 0.04Average Household has •in 10 years, but…Housing size has changed little Household SizeLittle Change to Family and Housing family-33% Multi•family-67% Single•years show a mix of:-Aggregated new permits in 10whole (MF: 8 to 18% of whole)stock as percent of overall family -change in single to multimore than 10% In 10 years, permitted in the last decade20,000 new unitsMore than Dwelling UnitsSignificant Change to Total Housing Expenditures Less on local business•Less on quality of life•economy.that generally leaves the local mortgage companies, is money More money towards rent and expenditures.afford to spend on housing what a typical household can 30% is a very general rule, for Housing Expenditures Poverty Status be living in poverty.the less likely a household is to Generally, the more education equivalency are far more likely Those without a high school years-2.8% over 10Poverty down for children by years, overall-Poverty down by 2.1% over 10 Recommendation View of the Valley from Downtown Meridian.Questions instead of the 2017 version.reference the Existing Conditions Report 2022 Text amendment as proposed by City staff, to 0049 Comprehensive Plan -2022-Approve HStaff Request: Population and Employment Center of the Treasure Valley Extra Resources dex.html?id=99576f3ff07245e79a29d9183896a3efhttps://gis.meridiancity.org/portal/apps/webappviewer/inPlanning Map: e6608d064245bbd38ae553abec50https://gis.meridiancity.org/portal/apps /dashboards/5ab6265879&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity&cr=1https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=Laserfiche Project:  w IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 22-1995: An Ordinance Amending Meridian City Code Section 6-3-2(A) and 6-3-2(A)(6), Regarding Qualifying Behavior for Disorderly Conduct and Adding Meridian City Code Section 6-3-2(C), Regarding Citation Signature for Disorderly Conduct; Repealing any Conflicting Ordinances, and Providing an Effective Date CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1995 BY THE CITY COUNCIL: BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, HOAGLUN, PERREAULT, STRADER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-3-2(A) AND 6-3- 2(A)(6),REGARDING QUALIFYING BEHAVIOR FOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT AND ADDING MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 6-3-2(C), REGARDING CITATION SIGNATURE FOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT; REPEALING ANY CONFLICTING ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Meridian finds that the following ordinance will serve the public health, safety, and welfare of the people of Meridian; 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 6-3-2(A) shall be amended as follows: Qualifying behavior. T* shall be a violation of this seet o for- any per-son to Any person who shall conduct himself or herself in a violent, noisy, or riotous manner, or in any way which commits a breach of the peace of another person(s), and/or to who shall conduct himself or herself in a manner that endangers the health and safety of another person(s) and/or who conducts himself/herself in any other manner as specified in this section, is guilty of disorderly conduct; and a violation of this section shall also include, but shall not be limited to, the following: Section 2. That Meridian City Code 6-3-2(A)(6) shall be amended as follows: Willfully fleeing or attempting to elude a peace officer after being lawfully ordered to stop by an identified peace officer, or interfering with any police officer or authorized official of the City, in the performance of duties connected with enforcement of this section. Section 3. That a new provision of Meridian City Code shall be added, section 6-3-2(C), to read as follows: C. Citation signature. Any peace officer empowered to enforce this provision of this Code is authorized to issue a uniform citation upon his/her own observation of a violation without the necessity of a citizen complainant's signature on the citation. By signing the citation, the peace officer empowered to enforce this provision certifies that he/she has reasonable ,grounds to believe that the person cited committed the offense contrary to law. Any citizen or person in whose presence an alleged violation of this provision occurred may also sign a uniform citation, which is to be witnessed by peace officer. Section 4. That all City of Meridian ordinances, or resolutions, or parts thereof, which are in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed. DISORDERLY CONDUCT ORDINANCE PAGE I 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 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, this 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED: ATTEST: Robert E. Simison, Mayor Chris Johnson, City Clerk DISORDERLY CONDUCT ORDINANCE PAGE 2 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 publ ' c . William L. M . Nary, City Attorne SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO . 22 4995 An ordinance amending Meridian City Code Section 6-3 -2(A) and 6-3 -2 (A)(6), regarding qualifying behavior for disorderly conduct and adding Meridian City Code Section 6-3 -2(C) , regarding citation signature for disorderly conduct; repealing any conflicting ordinances , and providing an effective date . DISORDERLY CONDUCT ORDINANCE PAGE 3 V IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 22-1996: An Ordinance Annexing the West Half of the Northwest One Quarter Of Section 15, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, More Particularly Described in Exhibit "A," Rezoning 0.98 Acres of Such Real Property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) Zoning District; Directing City Staff to Alter All Use and Area Maps As Well As The Official Zoning Maps And All Official Maps Depicting The Boundaries and The Zoning Districts of The City of Meridian in Accordance with this Ordinance; Providing that Copies of this Ordinance Shall be Filed With the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, As Required By Law; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; And Providing an Effective Date ADA COUNTY RECORDER Phil McGrane 2022-082500 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=4 BONNIE OBERBILLIG 09/28/2022 09:13 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1996 BERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, BY THE CITY COUNCIL: HOAGLUN,'PERREAULT,`'STRADER` AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST"ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 15,TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,RANGE 1 WEST,BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A, REZONING 0.98 ACRES OF SUCH REAL PROPERTY FROM RUT (RURAL URBAN TRANSITION)TO R-15 (MEDIUM HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)ZONING DISTRICT; DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO ALTER ALL USE AND AREA MAPS AS WELL AS THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS AND ALL OFFICIAL MAPS DEPICTING THE BOUNDARIES AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH" THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY TREASURER,THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AND THE `IDAHO 'STATE TAX COMMISSION, AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City of Meridian received a written request from property owner Lynn L. Moore to annex and rezone the land described in the legal description attached'hereto as Exhibit A and the map attached hereto as Exhibit B ("Subject Property"),which exhibits are incorporated herein by reference; WHEREAS,the Subject Property is contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho; WHEREAS,the City of Meridian is authorized by Idaho Code section 50-222(2)to annex the Subject Property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby annexes the Subject Property. SECTION 2. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby rezones 0.98 acres of the Subject Property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R-15 (Medium High-Density Residential) Zoning District. SECTION 3. That City Staff is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 4. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance and its exhibits with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this Page 1 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE—BLACK CAT INDUSTRiAL PR•JCCT(R-15)H-2021-0064 ordinance. SECTION 5. That all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 6. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,IDAHO,this 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 27th day of September, 2022. MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON, CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) ss: County of Ada ) On this 27th day of September ,2022,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State,personally appeared Robert E.Simison and Chris Johnson known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively,of the City of Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) Notary Public Commission Expiration: 3-28-2028 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE—BLACK CAT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT(R-15)H-2021-0064 Page 2 `� LEGAL DESCRIPTION 0 r A` T H E Page 1 of 1 LAN D GROUP August 30, 2021 Project No. 121102 EXHIBIT A BLACKCAT ROAD-MOORE PARCEL ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in the West Half of the Northwest One Quarter of Section 15,Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Section Corner common to Sections 9, 10, 15 and 16 of said Township 3 North, Range 1 West, (from which point the West One Quarter Corner of said Section 15 bears South 00'43' 09" West, 2657.25 feet distant); Thence from said Section Corner, South 00' 43' 09" West, a distance of 1117.31 feet on the West line of said Section 15 to the Northwest Corner of that Parcel shown on Record of Survey Number 639 of Ada County Records, said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence South 89°16'46" East, a distance of 176.25 feet on the north line of said Record of Survey Number 639; Thence South 00'43'09"West, a distance of 263.50 feet on the east line of said Record of Survey Number 639; Thence North 75'41'51"West,a distance of 181.32 feet on the south line of said Record of Survey Number 639 to a point on the west line of said Section 15; Thence North 00'43' 09" East, a distance of 220.92 feet on the west line of said Section 15 to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 0.98 acres more or less. PREPARED BY: py LAN THE LAND GROUP, INC. , T R S� a. '7880 2 9-1-2 )21 OF ,pP� James R. Washburn 'sR.WA 462 East Shore Drive, Suite 100, Eagle, Idaho 83616 208.939.4041 thelandgroupinc.com i I I IUNPLATTED , S00°29'24"W 2655.16' 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N00°29'04"E_ ` — — — j N00°29'23"E 606.72' — —� — N00°29'04"E 1327.72' 1327.72' 1 I � a m o I 110.00, � zc') C 1 // m cnL- C) I 1 � wmz I zm � D I n z 1 m / C m po I z - I I � �_ cn N � DO I ADO � Do m m I I o I / o I m m m n 7J I N I / p N CD C:) CD N N I / NIT I z I NDI co 1 0 til I 1 ' o - - I � I / I I � I 1 ro D .4 / 1 co 1 I / n m I w I I m m o - N I o I I I I I I g I I I I I opo I m I c I In z z oo � o m I z w � w o z I 1 m rn m N m p c7 I p � Cn 1 N m ' m w T co m cm CD C? z I 0 I oho 00 INC N m I co a T d7 C) I N ° NJ m m a � W a z I - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — C - - C — — - — — Q rh ^N u N — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — o cn 1 I I 7C ' a of m i CoDn � c, 80 I l + 0 a l x 1 I Cl I r 11 I C.1 I I � y CD' I I m I � I I 0 I C4 I I z I I I r I � I I I C p I I INJo N Qo I O cn Cl -n n I _ _ o z cn I S00°46'01"W 454.28' w I m m ccn z o o 8 = m x c m 0 z I cn m co o w 2 I ' c7-1 oo° Q 1 co I < n N.) z m N z y I ' I o rn co m <Do cn m = D I O CD o ` cn � I Oo �' w co _ o I o � m0 v W n Z I I �� � Iw �I m D p Imo I p rn W 1 m m 110 0 � � I p „ I ao � rn � cnN I 00 �- - - - � _ N _ !� - I D Dcn 1 a' S00°43'16"W 460.21' 0 454_28' o — co 240.01'- — — — — — — — — — — _ _ _-1088.68'' — _ S00°43'09"W 1328.57' I S00°43'09"W 1328.69' ,') S00°43'16"W 2656.35' a, L:��- 220.92' cn 1 0 1 co SOUTH BLACK CAT ROAD N �cnn � cnm _263.50' m 0 W m D Q° z " S00°43'09"W zornp po ® s o • � C m cQ CD o W F, o a ^� DO n cn T m m T T m r CO C OC C OC OC O O = �, z = z z z z z � c p o p o 0 0 o Q. cn z y w m � can D oo ■ ■ O 7o m D D n2 co D rn 1 G m cn oo cn 1 O W < n D D C n O N P z =S L cl m •� L m D r- O z > • ■ -0 N -0 z � D m = c z r m C - m vs to o CL. �_ O ,� = CD I I o M T . y C= ca O C � ' I o yCD y o V ic rm w I n o � N W \ I I 13 a o /\ > O O N 0 m 7m0 D Z C:) Cn Cn CD O 0o c z > M Z z D = W r m D rz r m p m Z Co 4 CD Z C) z m p m m m m v z Z m O m r z z m m 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 . F • om William L. M . Nary, City Attorney SUMMARY OF CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 224996 (Black Cat Industrial Project (R45) 11-2021 -0064) An ordinance annexing the West Half of the Northwest One Quarter of Section 15 , Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit "A," rezoning 0 . 98 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to R- 15 (Medium High- Density Residential) Zoning District; directing city staff to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, The Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances; and providing an effective date . A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary. [Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B . ] ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - BLACK CAT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT (R- 15) 11-2021 -0064 Page 3 V IDIAN� AGENDA ITEM ITEM TOPIC: Ordinance No. 22-1997: An Ordinance Annexing the East Half of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, More Particularly Described in Exhibit "A," Rezoning 125.59 Acres of Such Real Property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) To I-L (Light Industrial) Zoning District; Directing City Staff to Alter All Use and Area Maps as Well as the Official Zoning Maps and All Official Maps Depicting the Boundaries and the Zoning Districts of the City of Meridian in Accordance with this Ordinance; Providing That Copies of this Ordinance Shall Be Filed With the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, As Required By Law; Repealing Conflicting Ordinances; and Providing an Effective Date ADA COUNTY RECORDER Phil McGrane 2022-082501 BOISE IDAHO Pgs=4 BONNIE OBERBILLIG 09/28/2022 09:13 AM CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO NO FEE CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 22-1997 ERNT, BORTON, CAVENER, BY THE CITY COUNCIL: B HOAGLUN, PERREAULT,STRADER AN ORDINANCE ANNEXING THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,--RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, 'ADA COUNTY, 'IDAHO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A," REZONING 125.59 ACRES OF SUCH REAL PROPERTY FROM RUT (RURAL -URBAN TRANSITION) TO I-L (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT;DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO ALTER ALL USE AND AREA MAPS AS WELL AS THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAPS AND ALL OFFICIAL MAPS DEPICTING THE BOUNDARIES AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS ORDINANCE; PROVIDING THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE FILED WITH THE ADA COUNTY ASSESSOR, THE ADA COUNTY TREASURER,THE ADA COUNTY RECORDER,AND THE IDAHO STATE TAX COMMISSION,AS REQUIRED BY LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS,the City of Meridian received a written request from property owners Kayla Leah Rich and Jason Rich, wife and husband; and Chester Properties, LLC to annex and rezone the land described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit A and the map attached hereto as Exhibit B ("Subject Property"), which exhibits are incorporated herein by reference; WHEREAS,the Subject Property is contiguous to the corporate limits of the City of Meridian, Idaho; WHEREAS,the City of Meridian is authorized by Idaho Code section 50-222(2)to annex the Subject Property; NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby annexes the Subject Property. SECTION 2. That the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby rezones 125.59 acres of the Subject Property from RUT(Rural Urban Transition) to I-L(Light Industrial) Zoning District. SECTION 3. That City Staff is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 4. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this ordinance and its exhibits with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, the Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE-BLACK CAT INDUSTRIAL PROJLCT(ri,)H-202I-0064 Page I SECTION 5. That all ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 6. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,IDAHO, this 27th day of September, 2022. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 27th day of September, 2022. MAYOR ROBERT E. SIMISON ATTEST: CHRIS JOHNSON, CITY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO, ) ) ss: County of Ada ) On this 27th day of September ,2022,before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for said State,personally appeared Robert E.Simison and Chris Johnson known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively,of the City of Meridian,Idaho,and who executed the within instrument,and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) Notary Public Commission Expiration: 3-28-2028 ANNEXATION ORDINANCE—BLACK CAT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT(I-L)H-2021-0064 Page 2 `� LEGAL DESCRIPTION 0 r A` T H E Page 1 of 1 LAN D GROUP April 5, 2022 Project No. 121102 EXHIBIT A BLACK CAT ROAD-CHESTER PARCEL ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION A parcel of land located in the East Half of Section 16, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Section Corner common to Sections 9, 10, 15 and 16 of said Township 3 North, Range 1 West, (from which point the North One Quarter Corner of said Section 16 bears North 89'24'22"West, 2641.42 feet distant); Thence from said Section Corner, South 00' 43' 09" West, a distance of 1328.57 feet on the East line of said Section 16 to the North 1/16th Corner common to said Sections 15 and 16,said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING; Thence South 00' 43' 09" West, a distance of 1328.69 feet on the East line of said Section 16 to the East One Quarter Corner of said Section 16; Thence South 00°43' 16" West, a distance of 99.88 feet on the East line of said Section 16; Thence North 89' 16' 53" West, a distance of 347.44 feet; Thence South 00°46' 01" West, a distance of 454.28 feet; Thence South 89° 16' 53" East, a distance of 347.82 feet to a point on the East line of Section 16; Thence South 00°43' 16" West, a distance of 460.21 feet on the East line of Section 16 to a point on the centerline of Interstate 1-84; Thence North 80° 32' 51" West, a distance of 2658.94 feet on the centerline of Interstate 1-84 to a point on the north-south mid-section line of said Section16; Thence North 00° 29' 23" East, a distance of 606.72 feet on the north-south mid-section line of said Section 16 to the Center Quarter Corner of said Section 16; Thence North 00' 29' 04" East, a distance of 1327.72 feet on the north-south mid-section line of said Section 16 to the Center-North 1/16th Corner of said Section 16; Thence South 89° 23' 16" East, a distance of 2635.98 feet on the east-west 1/16th line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 16 to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described parcel contains 125.59 acres more or less. L LAND / PREPARED BY: THE LAND GROUP, INC. '7 S�S�n 0 Q, 1 V V v r4-5-202 0� James R. Washburn 0E 0 SR.WA 462 East Shore Drive, Suite 100, Eagle, Idaho 83616 208.939.4041 thelandgroupinc.com i I I IUNPLATTED , S00°29'24"W 2655.16' 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ N00°29'04"E_ ` — — — j N00°29'23"E 606.72' — —� — N00°29'04"E 1327.72' 1327.72' 1 I � a m o I 110.00, � zc') C 1 // m cnL- C) I 1 � wmz I zm � D I n z 1 m / C m po I z - I I � �_ cn N � DO I ADO � Do m m I I o I / o I m m m n 7J I N I / p N CD C:) CD N N I / NIT I z I NDI co 1 0 til I 1 ' o - - I � I / I I � I 1 ro D .4 / 1 co 1 I / n m I w I I m m o - N I o I I I I I I g I I I I I opo I m I c I In z z oo � o m I z w � w o z I 1 m rn m N m p c7 I p � Cn 1 N m ' m w T co m cm CD C? z I 0 I oho 00 INC N m I co a T d7 C) I N ° NJ m m a � W a z I - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — C - - C — — - — — Q rh ^N u N — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — o cn 1 I I 7C ' a of m i CoDn � c, 80 I l + 0 a l x 1 I Cl I r 11 I C.1 I I � y CD' I I m I � I I 0 I C4 I I z I I I r I � I I I C p I I INJo N Qo I O cn Cl -n n I _ _ o z cn I S00°46'01"W 454.28' w I m m ccn z o o 8 = m x c m 0 z I cn m co o w 2 I ' c7-1 oo° Q 1 co I < n N.) z m N z y I ' I o rn co m <Do cn m = D I O CD o ` cn � I Oo �' w co _ o I o � m0 v W n Z I I �� � Iw �I m D p Imo I p rn W 1 m m 110 0 � � I p „ I ao � rn � cnN I 00 �- - - - � _ N _ !� - I D Dcn 1 a' S00°43'16"W 460.21' 0 454_28' o — co 240.01'- — — — — — — — — — — _ _ _-1088.68'' — _ S00°43'09"W 1328.57' I S00°43'09"W 1328.69' ,') S00°43'16"W 2656.35' a, L:��- 220.92' cn 1 0 1 co SOUTH BLACK CAT ROAD N �cnn � cnm _263.50' m 0 W m D Q° z " S00°43'09"W zornp po ® s o • � C m cQ CD o W F, o a ^� DO n cn T m m T T m r CO C OC C OC OC O O = �, z = z z z z z � c p o p o 0 0 o Q. cn z y w m � can D oo ■ ■ O 7o m D D n2 co D rn 1 G m cn oo cn 1 O W < n D D C n O N P z =S L cl m •� L m D r- O z > • ■ -0 N -0 z � D m = c z r m C - m vs to o CL. �_ O ,� = CD I I o M T . y C= ca O C � ' I o yCD y o V ic rm w I n o � N W \ I I 13 a o /\ > O O N 0 m 7m0 D Z C:) Cn Cn CD O 0o c z > M Z z D = W r m D rz r m p m Z Co 4 CD Z C) z m p m m m m v z Z m O m r z z m m 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, 224997 (Black Cat Industrial Project (I-L) H-2021 - 0064) An ordinance annexing the East Half of Section 16, Township 3 North , Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described in Exhibit "A, " rezoning 125 . 59 acres of such real property from RUT (Rural Urban Transition) to I-L (Light Industrial) Zoning District; directing city staff to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps and all official maps depicting the boundaries and the zoning districts of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance ; providing that copies of this ordinance shall be filed with the Ada County Assessor, the Ada County Treasurer, The Ada County Recorder, and the Idaho State Tax Commission, as required by law; repealing conflicting ordinances ; and providing an effective date . A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho . This ordinance shall be effective as of the date of publication of this summary. [Publication to include map as set forth in Exhibit B . ] ANNEXATION ORDINANCE — BLACK CAT INDUSTRIAL PROJECT (I-L) H-202 l -0064 Page 3