1985 03-07NOTICE OF SPEICAL MEETING
Notice is hereby given that the Planning and Zoning Commission
of the City of Meridian will hold a special meeting on March 7, 1985
at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at the Meridian City Hall, 72£ Meridian Street,
Meridian, Idaho. The purpose of said meeting shall be to conduct a
public hearing on the Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed
amendments to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and immediately after
said public hearing to conCtuct a workshop on possible changes to the
Zoning Ordinances in light of the proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendments. See the Notice of Public Hearing running in this issue.
Public testimony and comment is welcome and invited at the
Public Hearing but no public comment will be accepted at the work-
shop.
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
& CROOKSTON
Attorneys and
Counselors
P.O. Box 427
Meridian, Idaho
83842
Telephone 888-4461
DATED thisj.5 /'I day of 'Yebruary, 1985.
.Tack Niemann, ity ler
1
4 r
1
SPECIAL MEETING OF PLANNING & ZONING
MARCH 7. 1985
Special Meeting of the'Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission called to
order at 7:30 p. m. by Chairman Bob Spencer.
Members Present: Walt Morrow; Moe Alidjani, Jim Shearer; Tom Cole: -
Members Absent: Jim Johnson:
Others Present: Lloyd Howe, Ed Bews, Al Lance, Steve Anderson, Dave Lewis,
Jim Kiser, Dick Williams, Phil Davidson, R.D. Bischoff, Betty Bischoff.
Chairman Spencer advised this Public Hearing is for the purpose of deter-
mining if the Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan as proposed by the
Planning & Zoning Commission warrant further study. Chairman Spencer also
advised this Public Hearing would be conducted under the provisions of
City Ordinance #446. (Copy of proposed changes on file with these Minutes)
Chairman Spencer opened the meeting for Public Hearing:
Alan Lance, 1370 Eggers Place, Meridian, Idaho:
City Attorney, Mr. Lance do you promise to tell the truth,the whole truth
thoughout your testimony?
Mr. Lance, I do.
I would encourage the Planning and Zoning Commission to give the proposed
Comprehensive Plan Amendment as proposed by the City Planning & Zoning
Commission further study inasmuch as it would permit free enterprise to
operate within the City of Meridian.
Chairman Spencer, does the Commission have any questions of Mr. Lance?
Alidjani, Mr. Lance how does it effect free enterprise with the Plan
changes we have?
Lance, it is my understanding this would eliminate the single site des-
ignation with regards shopping centers, regional shopping malls within
the Comprehensive Plan. For a number of years we have had a single site
designation in the City of Meridian which in my opinion has thwarted
free enterprise and not permited the free enterprise system to work as
it should, I believe the proposed Amendments as proposed by the Commiss-
ion would permit sites who had bonfide tenants with bonfide requirements
met within the City to be at least given consideration by the -City
Council and the Planning & Zoning Commission without the cumbersome
system we presently have which would allow Comprehensive Plan changes
every six months. _
Alidjani, do you have any other problems beside the regional shopping
center site?
Lance, it is my understanding there are other recommendations made in
this proposal, I have not studied.them throughlyand I cannot respond
to your question. "`
P & Z MEETING . •
,MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 2
Spencer, any other questions of Mr. Lance?
No response from the Commission.
Mr. Steve Anderson 1713 Country Terrace, Meridian, Idaho:
Attorney Crookston, do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth so
help you god?
Anderson, I do.
Anderson, I have not read the proposed Amendments mut it is my under-
standing it may open the opportunity that other sites could be avail-
able in our Impact Area and I personally feel I would like for other
sites to be available for shopping center or that type of growth in
the Meridian Area.
There were no questions of the Commission.
Jim Kiser, 2700 Hillway, Boise, Idaho:
Attorney Crookston, Mr. Kiser do you swear the testimony you are about
to give is the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Kiser, I so do.
Mr. Chairman I have a small problem referring to this specifically as
when I was at the City Hall last Friday this application to amend the
Comprehensive Plan was not available, when the Notice of Public Hear-
ing was published it said specifics would be on file with the City of
Meridian. I understand it was made available for the first time today,
so it is rather difficult at -a Public Hearing when you request -test-
imony to respond to this specifically when we have not seen it.
Probably is not proper since we have-not seen it and we do not have
one as yet. The Public Notice had a general summary of what you are
planning to do. My understanding is tonite as to whether we are go-
ing to have further study of the Amendments you have proposed. If you
do decide there some of the proposals in the summary that I do not have
any problems with either amending or further study. The biggest problem
my clients have, my clients Glennbrook Properties, a subsidiary of R.T.
Nahas Company, and Mel Simons & Associates which is a regional shopping
developer out of Indianoplis, they jointly own what is commonly referr-
ed to as the Nahas shopping site. As I understand what you have proposed
under your own motion and going to try to determine that you need fur-
ther study on is removing the specific site designation for a regional
shopping center. You are going to have to study that from several aspects,
and I would request that you do if you so decide, I do not think we need
to study that, I do not think we need to have further study and I don't
think we need to have a hearing on some of the things that are in your
own proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments that I understand are to -come =
up on April 8, 1985. First when you talk about removing a specific site
designation from your Comprehensive Plan, to me that is self defeating
as to what a Comprehensive Plan is, comprehensive means all compassing,
-
I do not think you can have a comprehensive plan process if you are go-
ing open it up for a shopping center site, without ,a rEgio nil 'shopping
P & Z MEETING • •
`MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 3
site specific designation, without a designation you have no planning.
I think that violates the very principal of comprehensive planning from
square one. Second, in that it effects my clients directly, the Idaho
Code requires that you have, and that your Comprehensive Plan has zoning
districts, it would my contention that when in 1978, and again in the -
Amendments in 1984 and again in the Amendments in 1985 that this body
created a zoning district by designating the Nahas site as a Regional
Shopping Center site. When you did that and created what I contend to be
zoning district, if you now take that away, I disagree with the one stat-
ement I saw in there, that this does not harm anybody, thats not true.
I believe and I contend that would be a down -zoning of the Nahas site,
to take a specific site designation plan out of your Comprehensive Plan,
I do not think you can do that. Three, by removing a specific shopping
center site designation from your Comprehensive Plan it is a negative
its not a positive, I understand you peoples desire and Al Lance's desire
and everybody's elses to bring a regional shopping center to Meridian_, thats
what you want to do, I do not fault you for that but by taking out a
designation in the Comprehensive Plan , I believe you are sending out
very negative signals, I think you are self-defeating your own purpose
for example, we look at the negative signals you are sending out to the
clients my people are talking to, we are in the Comprehensive Plan, we
are the designated regional shopping center site, your plan as I under-
stand it is to pull that designation up and throw it away and kind of
open it up, the shotgun approach. When you do that look at what happens
when you send that signal to those people who my clients are working
with they go now wait a minute, the old Comprehensive Plan said you
guys are the regional shopping center site and now the City of Meridian
has yanked you, what does that mean, practically speaking what does that
mean you gave us the site, you -took it away and that is something we
have to respond to to the people in New York, Chicago and Seattle.
It is something we have to answer to them, they say you said you had
everything need but, it puts us in -a position where we have to explain
what you did, I do not think this is fair to us or fair to you.
The second thing is look at the other signal you send out to every-
body, this is what the City of Boise would like you to do, remove all
shopping center designations from the plan and then when you do that
Meridian appears not to have any designated site for regional shopping
center. I think it is a negative you send out, our desire and yours is
to be positive we want to try and draw these people in hereby removing
the designation out of the plan , I think this is sending a negative
signal to everybody. if you decide to send on for further study these
are some of the things I want you to look at.
Morrow, we are not taking away the designation we are taking it out of
the Comprehensive Plan and replacing it with Zoning, a Zoning classif-
ication that will be called a Regional Shopping Center Sone, so in
essence we are not in any way down -zoning your property, we are trad-
ing terms to make it easier for the City to handle.
Kiser, I think it is a distinction without a difference that causes us
some problems, that we would have to deal with that we normally would
not have to deal with. That is my observation at this point.`
P& Z MEETING • •
'MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 4
Cole, what we are trying to do with our changes, right in our Plan it
says it is comprehensive, general, represent a process, longe range, not
a product, a lot of of these points in here were not being general
because we say different things will be in a specific location. We -are
being specific this should be general process and a guide. We are trying
to make general and add a Zoning classification that is regional shopp-
ing zone period. Your site would automatically have that zone as they
are the one that is there now. Nobody else would have that Zone, that
means there still would be only one site available. This would eliminate
amending the Comprehensive Plan and w�could get down to 'specifics.
Kiser, I would like to comment on the first item you mentioned, where
you read the language about being a general idea, I agree with that up
until where you get to a point that Meridian has to plan around specific
items, if you are going to build a specific item you are going to have
to designate where that can go because obviously if there is a floating
area it would create traffic , sewer and water and other problems. In
other words you are going to have to be somewhat site specific as you
have planned around the specific thing. What you want to do is make
it general, the effect of making something as big as what we are talking
about general is you cannot plan around anything. Plan needs to be
specific.
Cole,the point I am making is there is other sites available and if
they can meet services and traffic problems does not mean that site
is not as good and this could be taken care of through a zoning process
without all the problems of Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Dick Williams, 3133 Autumn Way, Meridian, Idaho
City Attorney, Mr. Williams, do you swear this testimony you are about
to give to be the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Williams, I do.
Williams, as far as specifics again, there are many specifics in the
Plan that not only deal with the planning process but if you-look_in-
the back in the appendix and addendums when you get into sewer and
water they are very specific. They are there for a purpose.- We des-
ignated the Nahas site for a specific purposto. One of the things
we are faced with in any type of government ntity is cost. The Nahas
site was put in the Plan as it was the most cost effective site -in
the City of Meridian in terms of present costs, future cost and what
the burden is going to be on the taxpayer as -they are going to be
hit with any additional sites that come in and somewhat the Nahas
site because of the one percent limitation. I think you are making
a very grave error in making this change, it will send out negative
signals. If I did not know better I would think that John Price., perhaps
he did and Mr. Lance proposed this change, or else the Boise City -
Council did. I think you are aware everybody is down to a final thrust --
on a shopping center, it hopefully together this year in some form.
Taubman is saying it will, Price is saying it will,Nahas is saying
it will as well as a few other people. I think to send out negative
signals
•
.P& 4 MEETING
MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 5
U
to the developers at this time would be very detrimental to Meridian.
I disagree with some of the statements that we have impeded free enter-
prise, I think the City Council , as you all are aware of has not denied
anyone a site other than the Nahas site, if they come through with the
requirements. Eagle Road had a chance, they did not develop it, they
did not come through with the promises they said they were going to.
Upland Industries now has the opportunity , if they come through with
the tenants they can develop a site there. I do not think anyone has
denied anything. I think free enterprise gets mixed up when tax payer
get stuck with a large burden, I do not consider that free enterprise,
I consider that subsidy. I think at this time any changes you are go-
ing to make are not of a benfit to the City, you are making it for
symmetric reasons for ease at this point and time,you are really
cutting off your nose to spite your face
There were no questions of Mr. Williams by the Commission.
Chairman Spencer, went over the items included in Idaho Code 67-6508
it see if enough imformation was received by the Commission to make
a decision.
The Commission felt they had received sufficient information to make
a decision on this application.
Chairman Spencer closed the Public Hearing.
City Attorney, Crookston advised the Commission that under the Amend-
ment recently approved it was not necessary to prepare Findings of
Fact and Conclusions on this application.
The Motionwasmade by Morrow and seconded by Shearer to approve the
amendment for further study.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Workshop on the Zoning & Development Ordinance:
Chairman announced that the Commission would not be taking testimony
as this is a workshop.
The requirement of Certified Mailing at both P&Z and City Council
was discussed and the Commission was in favor of deleting the requir-
ment of certified mailing at Council level be deleted, with certif-
cation that they were mailed.
The time limit on filing of final plat after approval was discussed
as stated in 9-604 of the subdivision ordinance , it was the decision -_
of the Commission this needed clarified.
Splitting of property was .discussed as to requirement of platting
if property is split regardless of size of parcel. City Attorney is
to.sje.?-- if there is a solution to this.
P&Z MEETING • •
~MARSH 7, 1985
PAGE # 6
Need to take consideration the revisions submitted by City Engineer
in the street lighting'standards. It was agreed by the Commission
standards should be revised.
Changes in Zoning that have been approved since the Ordinance was
first initiated. Commission agreed these should be reflected in the
Zoning & Development Ordinance. Refer to Ordinance # 235, # 279, #294
#364, #366, # 380 and # 402.
Old Town Zone:
It was agreed by the Commission that some clarification was needed
in this zone as portions of the property were zoned commercial &
industrial prior to the Old Town Zone being adapted.
Being no further business to come before the Commission the Motion
was made by Morrow and seconded by Alidjani to adjourn at 8:45 p.m.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
BOB SPENCER, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
iemann/ City Clerk
Mayot & Council
P I Z Commission
Atty, JUB, Ward
Stuart, Mitich
Police, Fire
Kiebert, Hein
Statesman, Valley News
ACRD, NIMD, CDH
ACC, APA, ACZ
File (2),
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning Commission
of the City of Meridian will hold a'public hearing at 7:30 o'clock
P.m., on March 7, 1985, at the Meridian City Hall., 728 Meridian
Street, Meridian, Idaho, for the,purpose of considering whether the
amendmentsproposed' by the Planning and Zoning Commission to amend
the Comprehensive Plan of the City of.Meridian merit further study.
The Planning and Zoning Commission's proposed amendments to change
the Comprehensive Plan, in summary, are:
1) Generally, to remove some specific site designation's
from the Plan such that specific sites for development
would be dealt with by the zoning ordinances such as
removing the now existing desainations of a regional
shopping center at the northeast quadrant of the
intersection ofMeridian Road and I-84 and the
designation of community ;shopping center at Fairview
Avenue and the north end of East.First-Street; such
changes would include changes to the Policy Diagram
and text revisions;
2) To add effect on air quality to the development
standards for commercial activity centers;
3) To remove from the policies for a regional shopping
center the environmental impact analysis procedure;
4) To re -organize the section on commercial activity
centers and the language pertaining to each such type
activity and, to add old Town as a Commercial Activity
Center;
5) To remove- the regional shopping center and neighborhoo
shopping center from the arterial transportation
concept Pian and to remove the.two specific frontage
roads along I-84 between Eagle Road and Meridian Road
and Meridian Road and Ten Mile Road;
6). To remove the comment on the extension or straiahenin t
=.y J
of Locust Grove Road between Fairview Avenue and y? *g;<.
AMBROSE.
` FIT2GERALD Franklin toad;
�R ChOOK&ON
Attorneys and a. `■
CounstU4ia
P.O. Box 427
Meridian, Idaho
83842
Telephone SBO4461
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
3 CROOKSTON
Attomeysand
Counselor;
P.O. Box 427
Meddlan, Idaho
83842
Telephone 888.4481
•
7) To make the Rural Area portion of the Plan coincide
with the Area of Impact Agreement between the City of
Meridian and Ada County;
8) To remove Sanitary Services, Inc, and Boise-Ada Disposes
as the designated solid waste contractors;
9`) To; change the community Urban Service Planning Area
as shown on page 66 of the Plan to conform to the
existing Urban Service Planning Area;
10) To remove the reference on page 72 to the Ada Planning
Association membership;
11) To change the designation throughout the Plan
regarding the Interstate from "1-84N" to "1-84."
Thi;s_'hearing is being held pursuant to Title 67, Chapter 65
,Id(1ho,Cede, the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of
-t
Aieridian, and-the•yaderidian Comprehensive Plan. Any and all inter-
ested persons. mAy•�•testify or present documentaryevidence. A more
detai�_ed•listing and description of the proposed amendments
involved is on file in the; City Clerks office and is available for
ingpection.
DATED this/ day of February, 1985.
AMBROSE,
FITZGERALD
3 CROOKSTON
Attomeysand
Counselor;
P.O. Box 427
Meddlan, Idaho
83842
Telephone 888.4481
0
0
MEETING OF PLANNING & ZONING MARCH 7, 1985
Special Meeting of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission called to
order at 7:30 p. m. by Chairman Bob Spencer.
Members Present: Walt Morrow; Moe Alidjani, Jim Shearer; Tom Cole:
Members Absent: Jim Johnson:
Others Present: Lloyd Howe, Ed Bews, Al Lance, Steve Anderson, Dave Lewis,
Jim Kiser, Dick Williams, Phil Davidson, R.D. Bischoff, Betty Bischoff.
Chairman Spencer advised this Public Hearing is for the purpose of deter-
mining if the Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan as proposed by the
Planning & Zoning Commission warrant further study. Chairman Spencer also
advised this Public Hearing would be conducted under the provisions of
City Ordinance #446. (Copy of proposed changes on file with these Minutes)
Chairman Spencer opened the meeting for Public Hearing:
Alan Lance, 1370 Eggers Place, Meridian, Idaho:
City Attorney, Mr. Lance do you promise to tell the truth,the whole truth
thoughout your testimony?
Mr. Lance, I do.
I would encourage the Planning and Zoning Commission to give the proposed
Comprehensive Plan Amendment as proposed by the City Planning & Zoning
Commission further study inasmuch as it would permit free enterprise to
operate within the City of Meridian.
Chairman Spencer, does the Commission have any questions of Mr. Lance?
Alidjani, Mr. Lance how does it effect free enterprise with the Plan
changes we have?
Lance, it is my understanding this would eliminate the single site des-
ignation with regards shopping centers, regional shopping malls within
the Comprehensive Plan. For a number of years we have had a single site
designation in the City of Meridian which in my opinion has thwarted
free enterprise and not permited the free enterprise system to work as
it should, I believe the proposed Amendments as proposed by the Commiss-
ion would permit sites who had bonfide tenants with bonfide requirements
met within the City to be at least given consideration by the City
Council and the Planning & Zoning Commission without the cumbersome
system we presently have which would allow Comprehensive Plan changes
every six months.
Alidjani, do you have any other problems beside the regional shopping
center site?
Lance, it is my understanding there are other recommendations made in
this proposal, I have not studied them throughlyand I cannot respond
to your question.
P & Z MEETING• •
MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 2
Spencer, any other questions of Mr. Lance?
No response from the Commission.
Mr. Steve Anderson 1713 Country Terrace, Meridian, Idaho:
Attorney Crookston, do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth so
help you god?
Anderson, I do.
Anderson, I have not read the proposed Amendments but it is my under-
standing it may open the opportunity that other sites could be avail-
able in our Impact Area and I personally feel I would like for other
sites to be available for shopping center or that type of growth in
the Meridian Area.
There were no questions of the Commission.
Jim Kiser, 2700 Hillway, Boise, Idaho:
Attorney Crookston, Mr. Kiser do you swear the testimony you are about
to give is the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Kiser, I so do.
Mr Chairman I have a small problem referring to this specifically as
when I was at the City Hall last Friday this application to amend the
Comprehensive Plan was not available, when the Notice of Public Hear-
ing was published it said specifics would be on file with the City of
Meridian. I understand it was made available for the first time today,
so it is rather difficult at a Public Hearing when you request test-
imony to respond to this specifically when we have not seen it.
Probably is not proper since we have not seen it and we do not have
one as yet. The Public Notice had a general summary of what you are
planning to do. My understanding is tonite as to whether we are go-
ing to have further study of the Amendments you have proposed. If you
do decide there some of the proposals in the summary that I do not have
any problems with either amending or further study. The biggest problem
my clients have, my clients Glennbrook Properties, a subsidiary of R.T.
Nahas Company, and Mel Simons & Associates which is a regional shopping
developer out of Indianoplis, they jointly own what is commonly referr-
ed to as the Nahas shopping site. As I understand what you have proposed
under your own motion and going to try to determine that you need fur-
ther study on is removing the specific site designation for a regional
shopping center. You are going to have to study that from several aspects,
and I would request that you do if you so decide, I do not think we need
to study that, I do not think we need to have further study and I don't
think we need to have a hearing on some of the things that are in your
own proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments that I understand are to come
up on April 8, 1985. First when you talk about removing a specific site
designation from your Comprehensive Plan, to me that is self defeating
as to what a Comprehensive Plan is, comprehensive means all compassing,
I do not think you can have a comprehensive plan process if you are go-
ing open it up for a shopping center site, without a regional shopping
P & Z MEETING• •
MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 3
site specific designation, without a designation you have no planning.
I think that violates the very principal of comprehensive planning from
square one. Second, in that it effects my clients directly, the Idaho
Code requires that you have, and that your Comprehensive Plan has zoning
districts, it would my contention that when in 1978, and again in the
Amendments in 1984 and again in the Amendments in 1985 that this body
created a zoning district by designating the Nahas site as a Regional
Shopping Center site. When you did that and created what I contend to be
zoning district, if you now take that away, I disagree with the one stat-
ement I saw in there, that this does not harm anybody, thats not true.
I believe and I contend that would be a down -zoning of the Nahas site,
to take a specific site designation plan out of your Comprehensive Plan,
I do not think you can do that. Three, by removing a specific shopping
center site designation from your Comprehensive Plan it is a negative
its not a positive, I understand you peoples desire and Al Lance's desire
and everybody's elses to bring a regional shopping center to Meridian, thats
what you want to do, I do not fault you for that but by taking out a
designation in the Comprehensive Plan , I believe you are sending out
very negative signals, I think you are self-defeating your own purpose
for example, we look at the negative signals you are sending out to the
clients my people are talking to, we are in the Comprehensive Plan, we
are the designated regional shopping center site, your plan as I under-
stand it is to pull that designation up and throw it away and kind of
open it up, the shotgun approach. When you do that look at what happens
when you send that signal to those people who my clients are working
with they go now wait a minute, the old Comprehensive Plan said you
guys are the regional shopping center site and now the City of Meridian
has yanked you, what does that mean, practically speaking what does that
mean you gave us the site, you took it away and that is something we
have to respond to to the people in New York, Chicago and Seattle.
It is something we have to answer to them, they say you said you had
everything need but, it puts us in a position where we have to explain
what you did, I do not think this is fair to us or fair to you.
The second thing is look at the other signal you send out to every-
body, this is what the City of Boise would like you to do, remove all
shopping center designations from the plan and then when you do that
Meridian appears not to have any designated site for regional shopping
center. I think it is a negative you send out, our desire and yours is
to be positive we want to try and draw these people in here by removing
the designation out of the plan , I think this is sending a negative
signal to everybody. If you decide to send on for further study these
are some of the things I want you to look at.
Morrow, we are not taking away the designation we are taking it out of
the Comprehensive Plan and replacing it with Zoning, a Zoning classif-
ication that will be called a Regional Shopping Center Zone, so in
essence we are not in any way down -zoning your property, we are trad-
ing terms to make it easier for the City to handle.
Kiser, I think it is a distinction without a difference that causes us
some problems, that we would have to deal with that we normally would
not have to deal with. That is my observation at this point.
P& Z MEETING
MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 4
0
Cole, what we are trying to do with our changes, right in our Plan it
says it is comprehensive, general, represent a process, longe range, not
a product, a lot of of these points in here were not being general
because we say different things will be in a specific location. We are
being specific this should be general process and a guide. We are trying
to make general and add a Zoning classification that is regional shopp-
ing zone period. Your site would automatically have that zone as they
are the one that is there now. Nobody else would have that Zone, that
means there still would be only one site available. This would eliminate
amending the Comprehensive Plan and wecould get down to specifics.
Kiser, I would like to comment on the first item you mentioned, where
you read the language about being a general idea, I agree with that up
until where you get to a point that Meridian has to plan around specific
items, if you are going to build a specific item you are going to have
to designate where that can go because obviously if there is a floating
area it would create traffic , sewer and water and other problems. In
other words you are going to have to be somewhat site specific as you
have planned around the specific thing. What you want to do is make
it general, the effect of making something as big as what we are talking
about general is you cannot plan around anything. Plan needs to be
specific.
Cole,the point I am making is there is other sites available and if
they can meet services and traffic problems does not mean that site
is not as good and this could be taken care of through a zoning process
without all the problems of Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Dick Williams, 3133 Autumn Way, Meridian, Idaho
City Attorney, Mr. Williams, do you swear this testimony you are about
to give to be the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Williams, I do.
Williams, as far as specifics again, there are many specifics in the
Plan that not only deal with the planning process but if you look in
the back in the appendix and addendums when you get into sewer and
water they are very specific. They are there for a purpose. We des-
ignated the Nahas site for a specific purpose�to. One of the things
we are faced with in any type of government entity is cost. The Nahas
site was put in the Plan as it was the most cost effective site in
the City of Meridian in terms of present costs, future cost and what
the burden is going to be on the taxpayer as they are going to be
hit with any additional sites that come in and somewhat the Nahas
site because of the one percent limitation. I think you are making
a very grave error in making this change, it will send out negative
signals. If I did not know better I would think that John Price, perhaps
he did and Mr. Lance proposed this change, or else the Boise City
Council did. I think you are aware everybody is down to a final thrust
on a shopping center, it hopefully together this year in some form.
Taubman is saying it will, Price is saying it will,Nahas is saying
it will as well as a few other people. I think to send out negative
signals
0 0
P& Z MEETING
MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 5
to the developers at this time would be very detrimental to Meridian.
I disagree with some of the statements that we have impeded free enter-
prise, I think the City Council , as you all are aware of has not denied
anyone a site other than the Nahas site, if they come through with the
requirements. Eagle Road had a chance, they did not develop it, they
did not come through with the promises they said they were going to.
Upland Industries now has the opportunity , if they come through with
the tenants they can develop a site there. I do not think anyone has
denied anything. I think free enterprise gets mixed up when tax payer
get stuck with a large burden, I do not consider that free enterprise,
I consider that subsidy. I think at this time any changes you are go-
ing to make are not of a benfit to the City, you are making it for
symmetric reasons for ease at this point and time,you are really
cutting off your nose to spite your face
There were no questions of Mr. Williams by the Commission.
Chairman Spencer, went over the items included in Idaho Code 67-6508
it see if enough imformation was received by the Commission to make
a decision.
The Commission felt they had received sufficient information to make
a decision on this application.
Chairman Spencer closed the Public Hearing.
City Attorney, Crookston advised the Commission that under the Amend-
ment recently approved it was not necessary to prepare Findings of
Fact and Conclusions on this application.
The Motion was made by Morrow and seconded by Shearer to approve the
amendment for further study.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
Workshop on the Zoning & Development Ordinance:
Chairman announced that the Commission would not be taking testimony
as this is a workshop.
The requirement of Certified Mailing at both P&Z and City Council
was discussed and the Commission was in favor of deleting the requir-
ment of certified mailing at Council level be deleted, with certif-
uaGion that they were mailed.
The time limit on filing of final plat after approval was discussed
as stated in 9-604 of the subdivision ordinance , it was the decision
of the Commission this needed clarified.
Splitting of property was discussed as to requirement of platting
if property is split regardless of size of parcel. City Attorney is
to sae if there is a solution to this.
P&Z MEETING • •
MARCH 7, 1985
PAGE # 6
Need to take consideration the revisions submitted by City Engineer
in the street lighting standards. It was agreed by the Commission
standards should be revised.
Changes in Zoning that have been approved since the Ordinance was
first initiated. Commission agreed these should be reflected in the
Zoning & Development Ordinance. Refer to Ordinance # 235, # 279, #294
#364, #366, # 380 and # 402.
Old Town Zone:
It was agreed by the Commission that some clarification was needed
in this zone as portions of the property were zoned commercial &
industrial prior to the Old Town Zone being adapted.
Being no further business to come before the Commission the Motion
was made by Morrow and seconded by Alidjani to adjourn at 8:45 p.m.
Motion Carried: All Yea:
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVE .
P,
BOB ENCER, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
P & Z Commission
Atty, JUB, Ward
Stuart, Mitich
Police, Fire
Kiebert, Hein
Statesman, Valley News
ACHD, NIMD, CDH
ACC, APA, ACZ
File (2)
CITY COUNCIL and PLANIZING and ZONING
City of Meridian
• Ada County, Idaho •
ORDINANCE 446
VERBAL TESTIMONY of SPEAKERS at PUBLIC HEARING
SIGN-UP SHEET
TO SPEAK
YES NO
o. :>l.r il6 : 1F
�"i T, , .:�K!
PRINTED NAME
SIGNED
SIIGG/N�ED NAME
RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS
��hu& �J
�7�(��C�
OScr-arnrN,� s ��
4I 8�3 sk.,1� d � QO's�
TO SPEAK
YES NO
^+�
%3 Coad;R P/t�a�
i S
S
I q -Q I}� v-
X
oo
o
PLANNING AND ZONINGS APPLICATION TO AMEND —IIE '1EDT_DIAN C0_'1PZEHENSIVF PL's"I
Comes now the Planning and Zoning, Commission of the City of Meridian and
hereby applies for an amendment for the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, based on
the following information:
1. The specific details of the changes are as set forth below and the
request is made for the purpose of making the Flan general as it is
suppose to be where the commission feels it has become too specific
or is stated too specifically.
2. The property involved is all that property in the Meridian Area of
Impact.
3. The condition or situation which warrants the change being made in
the plan is that their are specific portions of the plan that are too
specific when the goal of the plan was to be a general guideline.
a. The public need for and benefit from such chances is so that the
Comprehensive Plan would not have to be amended everytime a specific
development was proposed.
5. No other solutions to the problem are presented in that the plan is
too specific in some areas.
E. There are no development intentions as the proposed amendments do not
pertain to development.
7. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendement would help guide the
Planning and Zoning Commission and the City of "leridian and -ould be
a general benefit to the community to avoid long drawn out
Comprehensive Plan Amendments. No statement is made as to who it
would hurt as it is believed that no one would be injuried thereby
as no land uses would be removed. It is not known how much it is
going to cost and the City of Meridian will pay for it if a specific
developer does not.
That the proposed changes to the r1eridisan Comprehhensive Plan are .set
forth hereinafter as ;:ollo:sa
1. That throughout the plan the desicrnation for t -ie interstate
should be changed. from I-4411 to T --^j.
2. On page 7, the Meridian Policy Diagram.There should be deleted
from the diagram the designations for the regional shopping center
and community shopping center and those designations
should be deleted from the legend contained on the policy
diagram.
3.
4
On page 16, item 2, paragraph d
"to" should be changed to "so."
i
in the second line the word
On page 19, in the list of performance and development standards
for locations of Commercial Activity Centers, "Effect On Air
Duality" should be added at the bottom of the list.
5. On page 20 and 21, the Commercial Activity Centers of a Regional
Shopping Center, Community Commercial Centers and Neighborhood
Commercial Center should be deleted and reorganized and include
therein "Old Town" as a Commercial Activity Center and those
items should read as follows:
"OLD TOWN: While Old Town is considered to be a mixed-use review
area as subsequently set forth, it should continue to serve as a
commercial and shopping area. That the policies contained for
Old Town under mixed-use review areas should be reviewed when
considering development and use proposals in the Old Town area.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTER: A neighborhood convenience shopping
center is generally defined as having approximately .30,000 to 209,
000 square feet of gross floor area and between approximately four
to eight acres of land. As the City of Mericlian continues to
develop, small Neighborhood Convenience Shopping Centers will be
required to serve the day-to-day living needs of area residents.
POLICIES:
1. Neighborhood Shopping Centers, rather than strip commercial
development, shall be provided for convenience shopping
services.
2. Neighborhood Shopping Centers should locate:
a) Near, but not necessarily at, the intersections of
collectors and/or arterial roads.-
b)
oads;
b) Within planned residential developments, when they are
an integral part of the original development plan; or
c) At no more than one corner of an intersection.
3. Neighborhood commercial developments within residentail
planned -unit developments should not necessarily have to
meet all of the standard commercial policies.
COMMUNITY COMERCIAL CENTER: e"? Community Shopping Center is
defined as having between approximately 100,000 and 400,000
square feet of gross floor area, and between approximately eight
to 30 acres of site area. In addition to the convenience goods
and personal services associated with a smaller Neighborhood
PAGE 2
.0 0
Shopping Center, a Community Commercial Center provides a
wider range of soft lines (wearing apparel for men, women
and children) and hard lines (hardware and appliances) and
provides a diversity of merchandise ---variety in sizes,
styles, colors and prices.
REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER: Meridian is encouraging the
potential development of a Regional Shopping Center. '@hen it
becomes a reality, it will have a significant impact upon
Meridian. Such a shopping center, will provide a ,•ride variety
of retail enterprises and supporting commercial uses (such
as office complexes, multi-famil}, residential units, medical
clinics, ::,otels and entertainment facilities).
IOL -CIES:
1. It is the policy of the City of .14eridian to encourage and
support the development of a Regional Mopping Center
within Meridian's Area of Ir. -.pact.
2. The evaluation of a Regional Shopping Center development
shall be primarily based upon its consistency with the
land use policies of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan."
6. The 711XED-USI; REVIEW A -EA o7EST OF '_:UNA/ IERT_DTAN ROAD, NOT?TH
OF I -84N P'2NJD SOUTH 07 WALT_4AN LANE should read as follows:
-=i.ED-PSE REVIEW AREA OF RUNA/.,1ERID -N TOAD, N=H 0'•.' L.R"
^.El ^,nT'.TA nr C+tn T.TRf➢N r.AMP
`.his area is relatively level in topography and will have
excellent access to the free--a_v interchange. As a site for
warehousing, light industry and related commercial activities,
this mixed-use area will provide an excellent location for
mixed -uses."
7. Under Policies, on page 22, the last paragraph, number two,
in the first line, the phrase "Linder" Acres should be deleted
and the first line would then read as follows:
"The integrity and identity of the adjoining residential."
8. On page 31, under Policies, paragraph 4:, the second line should
be deleted and should read as follows:
"the sar..,e time better serve a Regional Shopping Center,
Industrial.
9. Page 32, on the Arterial Tansportation Concept Plan, The
designations for Regional Shopping Center and Neighborhood
Shopping Center should be deleted and those designations should
likewise be deleted frost the legend.
PAGE 3.
PAGE 4.
0
0
10. Page 34, paragraph 8, the first sentence should be amended
to read as follows:
"The following transportation policies shall apply for
commercial activities:"
11. Page 34, REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER, should be changed to
INTERSTATE FRONTAGE.
12. Page 34, under INTERSTATE FRONTAGE the statement, "Development
along I-84 should include adequate frontage roads:" should be
listed.
13. Page 34, Paragraphs a. and b. should be entirely deleted.
14. Page 34„ under item Q, CHERRY PLAZA. should be changed to
COMMUNITY SI;OPPIIdGCENTERS and the statement thereunder
should read as ollows.
"Ample access should be provided, ho;.7ever, the number of access
points into the center should be located enough distance apart
so as not to cause traffic congestion and encourage traffic
accidents on the adjacent streets serving the shopping center."
15. Page 35, at the very top of the page, paragraphs d. and e.
should be entirely deleted.
16. On page 35, at the top of the pace paragraphs 9, 10, 11 and 1..
should be reorganized with the deletion of paragraph 9 and the
renumbering of paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 to 9, 10 and 11.
17. On page 35, paragraphs 1. and 2. need to be deleted and the
following put in its place with the rest of the numbers being
renumbered 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Number 1 should read as follows:
"1. The .Area of Impact agreements and ordinances should be
reviewed by any person desiring to develop or use property
in the rural areas as those agreements and ordinances
provide for whose comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances
apply to the Area of Impact that is outside of the
Meridian City Limits.
18. On page 37 under POLICIES (SOLID WASTE MANAGDIENT) paragraph 1
the first line should re.id as follows:
"Services as provided by the contract holders"
19. On page 52, under CAPITAL IMPRO17EMFNTS PROGRAM (CIF) item
number 2, second point, should be deleted and restated to read
as follows:
"Frontage Road from Eagle Road west to Kuna/Meridian Road"
10 0
20. Page 53, under OT= PROJECTS, number 2. should be deleted
and it should state as follows:
"Support and encourage development of Commercial Activity
Centers which are as follows:
1. Old Town
2. Neighborhood Shopping Centers
3. Community Shopping Centers
4. 'regional Shopping Centers"
21. On page 72, item 14, should be deleted and should he restated
to read as follows:
"The City of Meridian shares in the responsibility with the
Ada Planning Association as the continuing planning agency for
onsite disposal facilities within Ada County."
PAGE 5.