2005 07-14
~,: ,.
~~
i
~~`; i
r~ ~:xi
x~ , :~:JM
~~~~'' CITY OF MERIDIAN
~ ~
I a.
~~.
za
~ ~ ~ ~
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ~,
~ :~ SPECIAL MEETING /WORKSHOP ~
'' AGENDA
~I Thursday, July 14, 2005 at 7:30 P.M.
Y yy
.<~~~ Meridian City Hall
` ~" City Council Chambers
~~
r 33 East Idaho Avenue ``
~; .::~~
T :'.~
Meridian, Idaho
'~
!r i
~~'~ ~:' 1. Roll-call Attendance:
Keith Borup David Moe ~F~
-:
Wendy Newton-Huckabay Michael Rohm
.
&~~ `` Chairman David Zaremba
~~
xi,
~
~
-
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
,~
'
~: 3. Review of the North Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment
„,
_, ,
~- ~.~1
Application: ',
,, ;:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting /Workshop Agenda -July 14, 2005 Page 1 of 1
All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings
please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
s
..
,.
:4' a
`<*
.,};
;t-
t
' r :r
~ t '
" 3 'i
,F
{ _
•'r
l
•,~
.'J
T_.:_
T
~ ~ .f
h _ _
'x'~
i
y.,'
J
C `T'Ci
bi ~~~ ! ~
::
_~
1
s; .
~ `~` MERIDIAN PLANNING AND Z®NING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING / V1IARKSHOP
AGENDA
~:'`~~~ Thursday, July '14, 2005 at 7:30 P.M. i
n~l Meridian City Hall
City Council Chambers
33 East Idaho Avenue
~, .,.
'` `' Meridian, Idaho
~:
.~ <:
~.;~.:.~
F.
r= ~<
~' ' "'~ 1. Roll-call Attendance:
~~f
,_.; Keith Borup (~rriJ~d I~~t-~ X David Moe
`.~ Wendy Newton-Huckabay ~ Michael Rohm
,,.;_
~'~' ' __,~_Chairman David Zaremba
~.: <.
~ ~~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda: /~ p~ r d yei
~.
,~
~, 3. Review of the North Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment
`"~ Application: ~I~ SSA
~:.>_ 5 (x,1,1
., i
~',,;
:;
_~,
.. ~
~~ _~
~ ;=
F 5
~t
%: 7
,~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Commtsslan Spacial Meeting /Workshop Agenda -July 14, ZOQ5 Page 1 of 1
~ All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring acxommodation fordtsatNlides related to documents and/or hearings
'R:~ ~ please contact the City Clerk's Office at 88g-4433 at least 48 hours prior to th® public meeting.
,.. ,:
..
! ~-f, . ~, ~P~~§ `43'
..
~S'.. ~~'Jo >~~ f r'd'•~' '~ .Y,a,
~~"~. Fn " A ~kSY'?tea r~'k~U.'~#' a ~~;. ~+'~„{'r#i
~~ Y ` .. ,} 4^•`" 1F 7 { as yrt~• .:•wX ~~:..1 <'e
'a~~o N;f
A
i • r .
. • •,F...
.
i
cY
1 ~
1.:;,
U
M /
t A R .}
<
~ ~Y.
~ ~C 4.
.
i
s
~
•
m
~
~
's s.==~•
v
,,
L
.
Y
,.
'~'+•'~j•f~1~4r .
~t~`.ai' 7X'~'.
.~ in§ '7~".
t yy
,~j ,~.~
:~v'~ ~.F.~~ ~~~s'1' ,rf~~§' J4-~
.... .
.. .
4 ,it.'.'n'?C4:~ ','•.,r °..+,. s:., ,~' ;*.e ~
.~., is ~ I 'f` . [~`.:: lk'~ •.`Yya` •';='+~ _ l•'x: ~ v~Sh
,.
-;.
: -
:
f
•
n
i,
a~ .
66
<
.rl'•
;
a
t::
.: o
i
.s. ~'.:'~....~~
s• <,
<+g
"8vr
.
'•,~.•..
..sy..
Y; ~_
'.
''2..
';~<
~
`
t.
~
{
~,~
';
a~
i
vf
§firf~
~'
;
.
~1
~~ f+.
Y)[
~~~,. ._rr.;.
~ .
L
au ^wt, '
~
+
'
~
~
y
:
i
i ,
~
,.x
' :~
- n:
.
~.
r= -`^
~
'
"
•
i
.
,.. -
,
I ,
,
.
r -
h
' r7~.
.. 1 {
n. _
i ~ z.
'•~..
..
.; r
`
.
.
..Y k.•:
:~
.
` `
~
t
'Ktti+3.e~~ydYrn'g~.. ~r
x,ra~t~ =
a-Fi'M~s ~ak~'i ' '' Fi~"r
a~
• . y ,~,.
7 :.~ r~9 ~^iN~,Rk4 y~.~
~.y~
" :
;~
,~
~
:
•~
=
••'
s.
i
`
~ .
'••,,.
:3r.
~
.
.
.1f' ¢': ;.i.` '''~..
" ~ l 2 ~ •!. § 1
m t :~.~; t r~r' !.
= ~i"' •.;±„U` Y° _
. i
11 t
~ cat
~ .
~°
}'
5 ~. i
i
1t
Y, :
r~.l .' ~ I a
. 4 ; F Y r-.
.i
~ya
ri i1 Yt....S- S ~5 ,
t
ya.. i
.
.
h
~
~~ .
5 ~~ v
~ ~ ~.
l +4 a `
S N
3 F
-
, I t - f
~ t Fa~ 1' i'~"~
d a 1}n"A;::i Sri
S AX :.5
l 'et:`i ` 'Y.
t
Y.
i I ,
.
r
, i ~
~ a
~IL
•
' 6 r
•.
~ s~ .4s: ~.
~
~ '
~
v
' y~.yy ~~y~~ y~.~,
;:dus..~,u~iyprR~,....
_ ~'j '!".. r t 4q}~u v~:xf4 ""4'•~+~' W l~+ek'14M.,xy..
a
.~.'. ~ :
~ 1S ~'S .
~ f
~T;
. 4~~~f§ ~aF'~~w'~'#iQ,F~&~`~C. ~S.~a. w,k
..,
S-sr.:
~.R
d .
r ~
`.'cf. .1'
/I +5 "*"~.~.',.: is ~~~'~% r~: =~j~'
i }.1' < ~I a;i§. a':E: mad , :9~ "i3 9r<','^r•,~ III
t~
%#4s+f
.£.
~i
r .'yam I I :'id; .'~iF..'f•,~ r ~'.}, ps;F'+.' . ~,.
As`;r',,::
d t '. `fir ~~
ii ~ ~4 '~
r ,x:
, 1
.
~ ,
{
v
'~
.
'' ~
.
. ~
,`
:..;: i. ~: y,:,..:~.s sirs 1 ....... ~'a~i'
,rs
`~~ i ~'
QQ ~,~'' CITY OF L Igo ~~-f, r
C~Yl. eY1G~1~Y! -~- ~.~~~
IDAHO
T
~,
cF"~E„ o
u" TREASURE V Nil' SINCE
1993
MAYOR
Tammy de Weerd
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Keith Bird
Christine Donnell
Charles M. Rountree
Shaun Wardle
CITY DEPARTMENTS
Fire
540 E. Franklin Road
888-1234 /fax 895-0390
Parks & Recreation
11 W. Bower Street
888-3579 /fax 898-5501
Planning
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 202
884-5533 /fax 888-6844
Police
1401 E. Watertower Lane
888-6678 / 846-7366
Public Works
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 200
898-5500 /fax 898-9551
- Building
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 150
887-2211 /fax 887-1297
- Wastewater
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
888-2191 /fax 884-0744
-Water
2235 N.W. 8th Street
888-5242 /fax 884-1159
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING /WORKSHOP
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting /Workshop
at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on
Thursday, July 14, 2005 at 7:30 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission will be reviewing the North Meridian Area Comprehensive
Plan Amendment application.
The public is welcome to attend the special meeting.
s
~F `ryq .~
;, ~; ~?j,
>. ~ ~P #
DATED this Sth of July, 2005. ~ ~~ /~ A
WILLIAM G. BERG, J - LERK~' < ~ .~;
B 3
~~ ~ i
Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission Special Meeting /Workshop -July 74, 2005
Ail materials presented ~ public meetings shall become the property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone desiring accommodation for disabildi®s related to documents and / or hearings,
please contact the City Gerk's OPtice at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83(42 (208) 888-4433
CITY CLERK -FAX 888-4218 CITY ATTORNEY / HR -FAX 884-8723 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING -FAX 887-4813 MAYOR'S OFFICE -FAX 884-8119
Printed on recycled paper
F
'~r
„~1
'~
~/~.~c ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~
~~
~.:.a,
CITY OF ~I~+'° ~~ _
~...~~1~ '`~
~YI~IG~" ~~~
~ IDAHO ~
yec ~~
'V~~ ~TNEASUftE VPL~Y 8
79 3
MAYOR
Tammy de Weerd
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Keith Bird
Christine Donnell
Charles M. Rountree
Shaun Wardle
CITY DEPARTMENTS
Fire
540 E. Franklin Road
888-1234 /fax 895-0390
Parks & Recreation
11 W. Bower Street
888-3579 /fax 898-5501
Planning
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 202
884-5533 /fax 888-6844
Police
1401 E. Watertower Lane
888-6678 /846-7366
Public Works
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 200
898-5500 /fax 898-9551
- Building
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 150
887-2211 /fax 887-1297
- Wastewater
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
888-2191 /fax 884-0744
- Water
2235 N.W. 8th Street
888-5242 /fax 884-1159
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING /WORKSHOP
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning '
Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting /Workshop
at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on
Thursday, July 14, 2005 at 7:30 P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission will be reviewing the North Meridian Area Comprehensive
Plan Amendment application.
The public is welcome to attend the special meeting.
DATED this Sth of July, 2005.
'r,C~.-
WILLIAM G. BERG, J
Meridian City Planning & Zoning Commission Sp®cial Meeting /Workshop -July 74, 2005
All materials presented at public meetings shall become the property of the City of Meridian.
Anyone d®siring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and / or hearings,
please contact the City Clerk's Otfr'ce at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
CTTY I IALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433
CITY CLERK -FAX 888-4218 CITY ATTORNEY / tilt -FAX 884-8723 FINANCE & UTILITY BILLING -FAX 887-4813 MAYOR'S OFFICE -FAX 884-8119
Printed on recycled paper
`~F
r rti~(
j~ • •
..i
~~ ~
CITY ®F ME1~IAl~T
r ~ MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING /WORKSHOP
~~ - ~ ~^ AGENDA
~;.~ ,
£;
'-'~ Thursday, July 14, 2005 at 7:30 P.M.
:.
°'"`` Meridian City Hall
~~ . '.4^^.:.
~`'~~ City Council Chambers
-~~~` , 33 East Idaho Avenue
Meridian, Idaho
»-~_~ 1. Roll-call Attendance:
~w m
~~ ,.:,
~~~~~' Keith Borvp David Moe
;' ~'' Wendy Newton-Huckabay __r___ Michael Rohm
~,,,
'~` Chairman David Zar®mba
~~,
_., ..
:'~=~ 2. Adoption of the Agenda:
~~`~~ 3. Review of the North Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Application:
~~'<-~
~.._
~::
~: ,
~;, ,__
~~~`'~ Meridian Planning and Zoning Comm~ion Special Meeting /Workshop Agenda -July 14, 2005 Page 1 of 9
Ali materials prosented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
L '~L~ Anyone desiring axommodation for dlsabliides related to documents and/or hearings
please contact the CUy Clerk's Office at 688-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the pubUc meeting.
,~
':~~
~`
Y,
Meridian Planning and Zoning Special Meeting/Workshop July 14, 2005.
A special meeting/workshop of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of July
~. ~;`
~' '~ 14, 2005, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman David Zaremba.
::
~,.~ Members Present: Chairman David Zaremba, Commissioner Keith Borup,
:;
~~ ~~< Commissioner Michael Rohm, and Commissioner David Moe.
~:; . .
„ ::,
~;~
' Members Absent: Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay.
~y .
_' Others Present: Tara Green, Anna Canning, Brad Hawkins-Clark, and Dean Willis.
~'" ~ Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance:
Roll-call
~° X Keith Borup X David Moe
,:
`~~ ''' Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Michael Rohm
Y,, , X Chairman David Zaremba
;~.
Zaremba: Good evening, everybody. Welcome to this Special Meeting/Workshop of
~' the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for July 14th, 2005. We will begin with a
~~' F -
~~<: roll call of Commissioners.
~, _..
~~
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda:
~~
~ '.! Zaremba: Second Item is the adoption of the agenda. Since we only have one item
~ ~~
and we are not likely to rearrange it, I will consider it adopted, unless I hear some great
' ob'ection.
.j
.~~ Rohm: Makes sense.
Item 3: Review of the North Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment
`~~ Application:
~~.' Zaremba: Okay. And, then, the real purpose of the meeting is Item 3, a review of North
Meridian Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This is not ofFcially a Public Hearing,
which theoretically means there would not be comment from the public, but since it is a
y}.t.."~ workshop and there are not a whole lot of people here, I don't see any problem being a
~~:;
little bit informal. If somebody has something they simply must add, if you would raise
~g your hand, I will try and recognize you and work you into the conversation. And let's
`~'' begin with remarks from the staff. Brad or Anna, who is starting? Brad. Thank you.
z~
t
'::w~ Hawkins-Clark: I'll start and Anna is going to sit here brain dead for a little bit, I guess.
I'm only repeating what she already told me earlier, so --
Moe: That would now be on the record.
1
3 f
w1
F.'. Y~fi ~j7'r' - _
F,~~r
.I ~
y'`
1
#;
4~
1
_
?f i d
i
~: A;'
_
r
.' .,r)<
_
{
t ~
~ ,. "~
.y ~:
Meridian Planning & Zoning Speci~eeting/Workshop
`' ~ ' July 14, 2005
Page 2 of 33
Hawkins-Clark: Well, I guess I will just sort of casually walk through this. I mean if -- we
are happy to use this as just a dialogue between you and staff and however else you
-~'<~ want to handle it, but I had put a little bit more content to the agenda sheet that I hadn't
`~ given you and so thought maybe -- I'm very in mind that you were very clear at your
~t meeting last week that you wanted to be out of here at nine zero zero. So, we will try to
':~~' move through this as quickly as we can, but in terms of just what is this, reviewing the
~.. ` application, I think, Commissioner Moe, you might have been the only one that wasn't at
`~ our workshop -- I think Commissioner Rohm and Zaremba were at our workshop, so
there might not be too much need to do that, other than to say that the Comprehensive
- Plan amendment application, we have, you know, our city process that we are going
through and there are, as you know, only two opportunities in a year to do map
= amendments and we have received two other Comprehensive Plan amendment
`i.. applications from private parties, just so you know, and I think we are proceeding on the
schedule that we should, because of the city initiated ours first, but there are these two
"'~ other parties waiting in the wings that when this goes through, I thought if you could be
'~~ thinking about that and, Anna, too, as far as how we want to move those on. 1 think in
;`r the past we just had, you know, a set of hearings that have only been Comprehensive
Plan amendment applications, separate from your regular agenda, and that's probably
what we can anticipate, but we would have, potentially, at that first meeting we would
~_ have the north Meridian hearing and, then, we would have these other two.
~~ Zaremba: Refresh my memory. The most recent one would have been the project on
Eagle and Pine. They were asking for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. I'm
assuming the City Council took our recommendation to approve that or what happened
~" with that? And when is six months from then?
Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. Actually, the state statute says six months from your
recommendation to the City Council, so -- which would be next week would be six
''~ months, believe it or not.
=, Zaremba: That was six months ago?
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah.
~~e Zaremba: I was thinking two months.
~:~• ~~ r
~~" ~~: Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. But, yes, the City Council did approve it.
y`r.£~-.
:, ~-;J Zaremba: Okay.
'~' Canning: Even if they had approved it, the six months language kicks in. The state
requirement only limits how often you can recommend approval for a Comprehensive
Plan amendment. It does not regulate how often the City Council can consider
Comprehensive Plan amendments or approve them.
t ~ ,.
:~ .. .,.
..>: .
= w[i+w s.+e r :.... ` "~ r~ s ~ 3 ~ f ' ~ ~id'W[3~3 ~~4 .#r{~T ^w:~` ~ d"
.._ .. ,-r
..
. ,. .. ,
~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Speci~eting/Workshop
~;. July 14, 2005
f ~:<~ Page 3 of 33
;~ Zaremba: Okay.
:;
Canning: And I thought we would just wait for an agenda where there was nothing on
the agenda and a week where there is --
Zaremba: Where we don't have any applications for development and --
~~ Canning: And, then, we could do it at that one.
Zaremba: Yeah. That's August 33rd; right?
°~ i Hawkins-Clark: Right. Okay. So, we got those applications kind of hanging out there,
just so you know. Then, the area of city impact application, if you recommend approval
~~ of north Meridian amendment and it goes onto City Council and they approve it, then,
an application would continue with Ada County to negotiate the changes to the area of
city impact that are in this.
Zaremba: So, the timing on that one is that we probably would want to beat Star's i
impact hearing on -- in September before the county? Star is -- '~,
Hawkins-Clark: Right.
~^;~ Zaremba: -- asking for some of the same area that we are talking about. I think. Aren't
they? Is that what I'm interpreting here?
Hawkins-Clark: No. They -- Ada County is hearing Star's for the areas that are not
under dispute with Eagle, because the city of Eagle and the city of Star have some
~,_ overlapping areas where they both have asked for an area of city impact.
~ ; Zaremba: We are likely to have a dispute with Star and Eagle over the area between
Chinden and the bench, too, aren't we?
,v; Hawkins-Clark: That's not expected, because staffs understanding, anyway, is that city
of Eagle has agreed that the area between the Phyllis Canal and Chinden, that they
-.:i would -- probably that they are not going to dlspute that. So, they, actually, don't have
an application and yet -- but we do have a couple property owners here tonight and
r~~ that's one of the things on the agenda further down, but who are interested in being
added to Meridian's area of city impact that is north of the canal and Eagle has not said
that they are comfortable with that, at least to my knowledge. This last Tuesday,
actually, Eagle City Council, as just as a discussion item on their agenda, talked about
that area north of Chinden that was in their request. You know, their original
`'`' applications they did want to go to Chinden, but their City Council backed up Mayor
`~ .i Merrill, who had met with Mayor de Weerd and talked about that area and said that
probably makes sense, but Meridian requests it, because frontage on both sides of
~``~ Chinden and probably the biggest reason is sewer, you know, just -- Meridian --
:'~
s.
,
,
' ~ d ~ ,
~, _
i
~.F~K .. . fir... '
n ~ *~?:
.y
8 S
L
y.+F ~ {,
r
~'
~
'
~ r t.
~~C 3~ 1
:,P*v. _ ,:+
'>::.y`
C,
r ,~
.p
j ;3} i
x>.,r,
~- ~ ,
;,
,;,
~. ,:;<
t. .
~
~
~ ~
~
.
nx.. ~
K y
~..
j
~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~eting/Workshop
~° < July 14, 2005
`~ Page 4 of 33
'.1`~, Zaremba: Sewer and fire and I think the zip code goes there as well, not that that
°~," couldn't change, I guess.
k Hawkins-Clark: But your point about Star, they, to my knowledge, have not -- they
'::' haven't requested -- yeah. No. The city of Star's area of impact, their September 1st
~~` -`~~ hearing at Ada County, at least the map that I have, they do not go east of -- where are
,-
:~:~ we at here? Star -- well, yeah, there would be, because here is McDermott.
`- Canning: There is no overlap on the south side of Chinden on that little trunk that --
~"
=- between the Phyllis Canal and Chinden toward the west side of the property. My
understanding was that they had dropped that from their request at our request,
r because it was in our fire district. So, I don't think that that area is in dispute anymore.
Zaremba: So, that means we are not under any time constraints to have an attitude
~" before anybody else's hearing. We are just up to making our own decision; right?
l Okay. Well, sorry to interrupt.
{-; Hawkins-Clark: Besides the fact that -- yeah, Imean Ijust -- you know, the state does
allow cities to overlap and all that. Imean the Council can approve, technically
overlapping areas of city impact. I don't know that they have ever done that, but it is
} t~~~ possible. I think they have kind of stayed away from that, but --
Zaremba: Okay.
°`A Hawkins-Clark: So, I thought maybe I would just go through a few of the -- starting on
page three of the packet -- I guess not page three of the packet, page three of the sheet
titled Comprehensive Plan amendment application. The page number is at the bottom.
Zaremba: Three of ten?
- `!^ Hawkins-Clark: Three of ten. Yeah.
~ - s~ Zaremba: Okay.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. And in the middle of that sheet we have got what staff feels is
probably the three main requests that would be in this application. A is to expand the
~~ ";~ impact boundary north of Chinden to the rim and, then, west to McDermott Road to
t
~''~' Can-Ada. And B, designate the land use -- new land uses and policies within the
expansion areas and, then, amend existing land uses. And C, to create a new
~,-.:
~'' " circulation map and those -- and, then, some new transportation policies that would
_. ~" ; address alternative transportation, as well as, you know, our vehicular transportation.
So -- and, again, this is where staff is moving with this. You, as the Commission,
':'~ please, if you have things that you think we should be looking at, you want us to add, us
` ~ to research, please, give guidance. The area of city impact boundaries were -- that are
`'` ~' in this application were given to us right on up by Mayor and Council, essentially. In
~1~~.
,-i part because of requests that Meridian received from property owners in those areas.
. ,,, <.
~°. ~ ~. .. ,. +4 s..+ye.;`.;~:.~ x~ ":1.. . '. Y4 .... - ..?;...:.? ~" ... t ; . ''i~ ~ ,.:,. .. ~ ~ I i _:9.;~°~: L ~, ~s.~ ? ~i+dFi^xc~ii:~~. f 'bi ~..., xK.,~ ,Xg...
.. ,. -.- r. ,.~_. ..
s . , p h
~ ~.. ~.... .:tS ~ .~~. ..~.. .., Y.'T _ ~fY.~i .:.~ f ., .. iia.t ,.. ..~ ~M' ... '~ .,~4a Y ... n. '~.~(•. .'~,'3.
A
-r
~= -
.}
,_
~;
- ~ ;~
~. ^
5
S~
`~.
~i
~ .v
~ s Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning Specla~eUng/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 5 of 33
Canning: That is particularly true for the north area. I think the west area there is some
`~~ question -- they wanted staff to look at it, but I'm not -- I have never gotten the feeling
' that Council was adamant one way or the other about whether we are included. So,
E .:,.
6?''~t think that that would be an area of -- for the planning and zoning Commission to
consider and have perhaps more thoughts on whether or not it should even be included.
I think we just recognize that it was four square miles out there that nobody has ever
~`;" talked about and there was a time somebody thought about it in one fashion or another.
Moe: Just a couple of questions. Because I wasn't at the -- the other workshop and
whatnot, I will be the one that's ignorant here somewhat. North to the rim, I assume, is,
~'~~ then -- the Phyllis Canal is right at that point, then; correct?
~' Hawkins-Clark: Correct.
Moe: Okay. And, then, from that point we, then, are to the river beyond to the north;
correct? I mean the river is north of that point; right?
"'~ Hawkins-Clark: Correct.
Moe: Okay. I'm just trying to make sure I remember where we are at.
Hawkins-Clark: I would say that's a good point for me. I don't have enough copies for
~~~ the public, but there is -- oh, here.
"~;~ Moe: Okay. This is good.
~~~ ' Hawkins-Clark: It's pretty small, but maybe help you get a sense for the area.
Moe: Yes, it will. It's perfect.
w ~ Hawkins-Clark: Okay. So, yeah, there is one change to that map that was presented at
~,~ the worksho m Ma Excuse me. Is -- if ou look at the corner of Linder Road and
;~. P Y• Y
"" :', Chinden and just go north from there. If you look at this 11-by-17 map, that was on the
digs this evening, and you compare that to this eight and a half by eleven that I just
~ `r '~ handed out, you will see that at that corner there is a little chunk taken out. The
"~-~ Almaden Subdivision, two and a half to five acre lots, county subdivision, we removed --
~ ~' several of those property owners have expressed concern and really do not want to be
c :; in Meridian's area of city impact and in many ways it probably does make more sense,
~ ' ~ ~ ~ then, to be in Eagle anyway, eventually, because of the -- you know, the large lot sizes
and there is an identification geographically with them. So, also in the application, after
~~ `~ that point there was several assumptions that are listed there. Land use assumptions
'` ~'' and transportation assumptions that we have been making for the last few months. I
'fir
r won't go over each one of those, but did want to point out that if you -- I think those are
§~ " fairly important, so if you think that one of those really stands out to you that should not
~.,=,
y `~ i~ it t f ~ ~tr~: ; 1
~ C. . ~I'i ~ '~~ jX4:T• .S~ ~~'rf:y'H,'yNy,~XriAh~_,~~
., i I ~;, i~ ..
sue,. .. .. Y 1. i •.I ; i~ G , `-i~:.`r .x
r±M1 nw ~_~.t ~;1'. ~t...1` 3. ~.,~YM .. } ~2Y~} ai ~ ~ i~a, ,i~yT1'- f~1N:
.. }i':.
!~#
~~ ~' Meridian Planning 8~ Zoning Specia eeting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
~, ;;~ Page 6 of 33
be a key assumption as a part of this plan, it would be important to let us know early.
So, I think if you're okay, we will just spend a little time actually looking at the map itself.
Zaremba: I might comment or give a personal opinion about the western boundary that
~~~~ we were talking about. It's -- moving Meridian's area of impact over to Can-Ada follows
the county line. I'm trying to think of what the logic would be for that four square miles
to be attached to anybody else. It can't be attached to Caldwell or Nampa, because it's
not in Canyon County. Theoretically, Star could eventually spread there, but --
`2 Rohm: Yeah. I was going to ask that question. Is that the legalities of it, which a city
--~=~ can't expand beyond county borders?
Borup: I don't believe so.
~ :;;~ Zaremba: Commissioner Borup has joined us and are you saying it is all right for a city
;,w- to cross county lines?
Canning: Yes, it is. And it is in the Star fire district. That's the other consideration.
Zaremba: The four square miles that we are talking along -- between McDermott and
Can-Ada are in Star Fire District.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. I was told by city of Star staff that they -- they have no interest,
they have -- their council has not expressed any interest in going south of Chinden at
this point. You know, I mean as Council's change, who knows, but, you know, at this
point city of Star doesn't have sewer even south of the river. So, you know, they have
got -- they would have a long way to go and to demonstrate to Ada County that they
have the authority to provide urban services, you know, so -- and, also, in terms of the
fire, at least our fire chief told me that if -- if a city annexes into a fire district that is not
'`_"' their own, that other fire district traditionally recognizes that -- that since it's now
annexed into a neighboring jurisdiction, that they release those from their district, from
the fire district.
Zaremba: That's both a service and a taxing issue, I would assume.
t'.`. Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. In terms of bonding and the rates at which -- right. Yeah.
~`..,, I -- that issue is being dealt with right now between Eagle and Meridian on the north
side of Chinden. So, we may want more as time goes by, because of that example, but
~.~. -- but I think Anna brings up -- and it is a good point, that it is a different fire district out
'r there, but --
Rohm: Currently.
Hawkins-Clark: Currently it is. Right. All land needs to be designated in some rural or
Y ' urban fire district, so -- yeah. But it is a little bit strange. I mean you have these four
-`~ square miles that, you know, are out there bounded by Canyon County on two sides
i4 1 + , d
1~ ,..: _: ~.y"k .:ry f r'~~.~~.4 r1...4n. ~~. ~., ~. - <~ _. ,.: n..l'~, ~ ..'~`~`~>~£YF.. i~~.._~'7=~
. .. .... ... .. ... .... ~ a ..,.h
;F
r .-
,*
Ir
y ':rte --..~
~~
~,, .# ,
_~~~,~
~~. _ ~ ~:
,
rT
.~
,~., ._
~. ,
~~
u,' S t
~
e ti ~
~~ }r.
~ ~3 ,
~~ ~ '
~~ ~~: ~
~at_ ~r_ t a~
"' '` ~, .~~~ ~.a
C G~\
y~ ~ ~. ~ II
f
~
~:
L'
~~
1 ~~f
f
~~ ' ~~F .
ti..
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~eting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 7 of 33
and a state highway on the -- on one side. So, the larger planning question is, you
know, is it appropriate for it to always just remain Ada County and never be annexed
into anyone's impact area. So, those are kind of discussions that police --
Rohm: From my perspective, the growth that we have seen in the north area of impact
has been so significant that it's not beyond comprehension that that expansion will
continue and probably go right into that four square miles at such time that it is sewered
and just a continuation of the growth that we have seen.
Zaremba: Yeah.
Rohm: I wouldn't be surprised.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Our Public Works Department is under contract with JUB
Engineers as we speak to do a sewer study of that four square miles. So, at this point
Ada County would not accept an area of city impact application, if you will, or
negotiation, until we can clearly demonstrate that we have the ability service it. I don't --
Anna may correct me, but I don't think -- they don't require afull-blown study, but they
do need something committing from the City Engineer that, yes, if we are going to give
you this in the area of city impact, you need to demonstrate to us that you can service
this. So, that's the reason for the study, which isn't anticipated to be complete until at
this point November. So, that, in and of itself, if you were to recommend that we
proceed with these four square miles, in here, it may be a timing issue there, because
we would need to show Ada County that we can provide sewer out there. Yeah. Out
here.
Zaremba: Do we have the opinions of -- well, I guess the only opinion that hasn't been
mentioned would be the police department. I was at a meeting today where the
comment was made by the police department about how difficult it is to serve two sides
of a freeway and if McDermott is going to be that type of a transportation system, the
police department may wish we were not looking at those four square miles.
Hawkins-Clark: Very good point, in terms of getting our police department's input on
this whole process. We had not received anything from them yet.
Zaremba: Yeah. Just a thought. I mean to me it seems logical, but we know as the
valley grows, a lot of this area is going to fill in. The only other option would be to say
that there is some mechanism to preserve a green area and it isn't ever going to be part
of a city, but at present there is not a mechanism for that either, other than voluntary
and, you know, people -- I guess they sell development rights to the nature conservancy
or something like that.
Canning: And that's what I was going to say. The state has enabled the use of transfer
development rights, so that is a tool to consider. How well it would go over in Ada
County or with our Council I don't know, but that is something that you can't --
n ni
~~
4~~N 1 ~ .7 r}~ { 1 ~~ii
} ~
~~~ ` ~ z` t
E.y ~ J'~ ~...
~.:. ,y ,t y'4.
H'~ y } a '4 p 2 gg~~'1,.
~~x,Y.Ar~t."' ~ .rek~ ar~n~.~~~at~;tNti
s 5
l " }
1,r ~
s , ~i~+~`rY. c
".x~ a ; ~
Mi a~ 'fit ~ t~~~ ~
h
~~. s
~#; ~ ~
C~''~~ ~= 3 7 ~' b r o ?~,,'S4
? :~ °
' z ~ <~ ~,.
'`c __,y Y
a„ F t ~ ~ ~,
+ ~
h y ~ , #
.~
..
Y i ~~ ~
~,(
~ + ~~
~~;1`r~rf'S:S~ ~cP~'!~i~ ~°`+.--~. 5. ;sue ZT*J-«.:ti ~ - ~ ~~.~...
('
r~ r {
: .i ~~~ ~ ~ s~:, rs Geri ~ ~~a~~~n" -c~
Ft w.N L Y ? k~#1 S ~:s
~i ~ I' ~ 1 Y
~ .% v
'~~, ~0, ~.~~6.~ l~ y~ ~ ,,, x. -
~ ~r~' I-
1
i ~
:$y ~ 'L s C a ~~~ 2>r~~4rY 'fir -
w ~ ~ ~t . ..
~t s t
~'a F {; v
i r
`~~' 7 4
+~ ~! ~. +
:,r
+; t~
~` ~' ' 2~'~' ;i cx ! ~ ~-eta -
s •~ vi. .t p `.~~'~`~ a
Fs ~ ~ .~
~ z ~
~ ~ {{ZZ
~''~ - '- j r . - Y, i rr .,~'' .. - ..
... t ~+
~ ~
_- .. »u ,..... ~ .~.. i -
~,,•-~
"~~
l Meridian Planning & Zoning Special~feeting/Workshop
Y~>~' July 14, 2005
{ ~"_ Page 8 of 33
~-
~:r ,,
Zaremba: Or having us decide on behalf of all the people in those four square miles
~ :: that that's what they are going to do and I'm not sure that's the right thing. I wouldn't
~= " want to take that attitude.
~.,
- Canning: Well, yes, we should probably do -- it would be appropriate to do more public
.~~ participation before you did that. But that could certainly be something you recommend
_r.~~ in the study as well, if you don't want to go that way, in including it in the area of city
impact, you could recommend putting it in a referral area or something like that or
sending area for transferred development rights and direct staff to work on the transfer
`~~'~ of development rights program for that area. You'd have to set up a receiving area as
gat: ~;; well.
$;
j Zaremba: I don't know about the others, but I guess my opinion would be if -- if, on the
~~~ one hand, the assumption is that area will develop to urban uses, it makes sense to
~~N~~ have it be part of Meridian. If it's going to do something else, then, it doesn't need to be
F`~ ` part of Meridian.
~:
Canning: And those are the things you get to decide. That's why they pay you for the
;. ~:~
big bucks.
„.=;i~
~'~ Zaremba: Thank you so much. I missed my paycheck. Did you get it?
~'
~~ ;-,1 Rohm: Well, it just seems to me that going with what we have seen over the last
s~~ number of years, that this north of the freeway development all the way to Chinden has
?' taken on the development that it has, that as these other square miles to the east fill in,
"= that's the natural progression, and as long as the JUB study proves out that it's cost
~, ..~
~, ' effective to expand sewer and water to those four square miles, it just makes sense that
. wni ilrl ha nnnrl rlAValnnmant nrni inri frnm my narenartivr~ anvwav Sn that hPinn cai('1 -
~}
~ ~~'
+~ Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. It's very much a question, as Anna mentioned before, not as
much of -- we didn't get as much feedback from private property owners in that area.
And there are -- there is a cou le of dai o erations out in these fours uare miles.
~` You know, there is a tree nursery. Some churches. I mean it's clearly dominant ag
~' uses today, but, you know, just -- I think the dairies and, then, there is a small cemetery
-- I mean there is -- you know, just as far as the land uses that are out there today. And
,~-; I think the -- maybe this idea transfer development rights, since this valley hasn't seen it ',
=y°' that much, that may be something if you want more explanation about how those work
` "°' and how they operate, you know, it may be a candidate. But I think tied with that,
~, ,° maybe we could just go into Highway 16, because we -- you know, we are -- even if you
do recommend that this be part of the area of city impact, our recommendation is that it
~, .~.
~::~ remain preserved until we know the alignment of Highway 16.
~_
Rohm: I can tell you at the last workshop I worked at that specific station to those four
~' -' square miles and a number of the people that were in attendance were property owners
~ ~~~; within that area and I got the feeling for sure that they were very supportive of being
~;
.z j.
J
~~
,-
~,t
~:
n`.
t
<' ~ f ~,
w~ r
I ~`` °°
x -
i; ,,
`.' _
-
r ~
}
Y~~ -0
~
Y
"~ -' ~
i t.
I -
~~~ .
~F'.V ~ ~
` ~F'
` -
~~
- l
~
'.~
'~` n, ~. -
i.
>. !.
f.~~. =.,: ~~
~ T
~, .. Meridian Planning & Zoning Specialloreeting/Workshop
-~ -~~'- July 14, 2005
,~.
~" j - Page 9 of 33
. -i included in our area of impact and could see the potential advantages to them as
:::~:'~ property owners to be part of our city. So, I thought that was interesting.
~,
q,:
'~'' ` Zaremba: Yeah.
~°
;; Borup: Mr. Chairman?
Zaremba: Commissioner Borup.
Borup: Probably the question I would have on this is why aren't we looking at the area
south of here, from here to the freeway?
Moe: That's --
q_ ~_ Borup: I mean is it considered too large of an area to look at? I mean I think a good --
~~` a good part of the city that's being developed now was in our impact area 20 years ago.
=~~ Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner to clarify --
~~ : °i^ Zaremba: I'm not sure which area --
Borup: These are four square miles. The other -- from there to the freeway.
Vim; ~ Hawkins-Clark: Here is Ustick Road.
Borup: Right.
~:r, ,. .
~:
Hawkins-Clark: And that's Canyon County.
~' `y' Borup: Right. I know.
.,k;
~.~;F~_
Zaremba: But we already said we can cross county lines.
Hawkins-Clark: Right. And the city of Nampa has planned that it's in their
Comprehensive Plan and they have land use designations on it --
Borup: It's in our area of impact?
'~':~ Hawkins-Clark: It is.
'~~-~ Borup: Okay.
Hawkins-Clark: It's in Nampa's area of impact.
Borup: Well, then, that answers that question. Has that just been recently?
,,,,
-~:a
~;t,
"! ,ik~. ~.JT d, !~ r- ~t, 4~3;. ti'~~ ..:{»' - ;:f ",.5' .'~yy S>s;~i'yy~
~__ t;
-
~~ ,`-
M :;
{
~' ~
i = r
4
F:
.. ,.
~ W:
^
~~
F, q
~, _?~
a
~
L
1
°T'~ Meridian Planning & Zoning Special'JE~eeting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 10 of 33
+~ Hawkins-Clark: Yes, it is.
~~~ Moe: This sheet doesn't show that, though.
~;
;,-~ Borup: I thought like a year ago Nampa had not done that yet.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Right. Compass -- yeah, this data came from Compass and
_ _ think they did not receive updated Canyon County information when this map was
created, probably.
. Rnn~n~ Okav_
~ _t Hawkins-Clark: Oh, yeah. That's right. Okay.
~ :~
Borup: And the reason I brought that up is mainly -- or I mean one of the big things for
me was the Can-Ada -- I mean the McDermott trunk line and how far to the west would
~~' ~~ that service.
~;.~F~ Hawkins-Clark: And Nampa city is currently under contract to build a very sizable lift
~: ,j
~~. ;: station in their north area. It's about 90 percent designed and it would, essentially, be
~ ``~~~~ engineered to handle all that area.
s;~ ~;
~~~'
Borup: Clear to McDermott.
Hawkins-Clark: Correct. Within that area of city impact boundary.
Rohm: Has there been some communication between the city of Nampa and City of
Meridian along that McDermott corridor from Ustick to the freeway? I see where our
map indicates that it's designated as highway corridor on the east side of McDermott,
but is Nampa progressing along the same lines as they have, they so designated in
their area that that -- it's --
Hawkins-Clark: That's a very timely question. Steve Siddoway and I actually did just
~~~ meet with Paul Raymond, who is the public works director for the City of Nampa,
_~~ yesterday, as well as Norm Holmes, their Planning Director, and at least from those two
,,
~`: ~ staff positions, city of Nampa is not -- they are comfortable with the McDermott
~:
4w' ali nment. For them the bi er issue is the interchan eat I-84. That would be a whole
~,~ 9 99 9
other discussion, but mainly suffice it to say they have the Idaho Center and the auto
~~;>' mall and the BSU campus, you know, all around that Star, Can-Ada area, and that
N.
~'=, campus is expected to have 12,000 students at build out and, you know, the Idaho
'' ~ Center and just as that place continues, if you get more big box -- they are concerned
''~ , about overloading the Garrity interchange.
~;:~,
;__-> Rohm: So. they'd orobably surJOOrt the McDermott interchange.
~ i
Hawkins-Clark: Well, they actually prefer Star.
B ~~
s.a,,ut~,
`~,
Y
'A~
W' ~ }
C:
' }
r
.
Y" - F' ;•,
>~,~;.
3'
s
'
e.- ~ j
~:~
y; ,_
~;
~~~ Meridian Planning & Zoning SpecigNUorkshop
July 14, 2005
Page 11 of 33
~rF Zaremba: They would like one at Star-Robinson. ~,
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah.
Rohm: Is that just one mile east of Garrity?
Hawkins-Clark: Correct. As Brad said, the things that are in that mile between Garrity
and Star-Robinson are likely to generate a lot of activity.
~' Rohm: Well -but you get what -Star is one mile east of Can-Ada and you get the
federal dollars every two miles and any other interchanges are at total local expense.
Zaremba: Actually, that's the state of Idaho. ITD does that.
~~ Rohm: Is that what it is?
a,', Zaremba: When I first started hearing people say that the federal government wouldn't
'; put interchanges closer than two miles - I have lived in a number of places where they
'~~'' are closer than two miles and I went down to the federal highway administration and '~
t r `:
asked them where is that rule and they said it's not our rule. They -every time there is
a request for access, which is how you get an interchange, they go out and they study
~~ how far away the next one is and where the lanes would interweave, but they have no
~
pre-set conception.
+
3
S; t;,:: Rohm: Well, I'm glad that you cleared that up, because -
Zaremba: And ITD -
¢~:~.~ Rohm: Okay. Well -and it's probably pretty fair as a general statement that you
develop every other mile and, then, if, in fact, needed, you fill in the one in the middle.
..F;,
Zaremba: And, actually, ITD's two miles is a rural finro miles. Theoretically, they will
allow them closer than that in urban areas. The Federal Highway Administration has no
~.;`
~;. such rule. They look at each one individually.
.
~:..
Rohm: Oh, man.
Hawkins-Clark: But to get to the point of your question, Commissioner, yeah, Nampa is
~, ,
;,;.~ supportive - at least staff is. They have not designated a preservation comdor, so to
<~ speak. But in terms of what -would they fight the City of Meridian if we say McDermott
is our preferred alignment. At this point we don't expect to.
Rohm: Thank you. That was the point of the ques#ion.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah.
f1, , 7
.
t
f
r i
.. ~ _.. .. : r. J
2
I
i
a
A"' ~ -
c . , '-.4
b
_ y r r£ --
n
~q,, ?r
'~,r ~r
~~
~
° Meridian Planning & Zoning Speciaeting/Workshop
~^
~ ~
~ ~
`J.4 July 14, 2005
Page 12 of 33
t
5
f~
~ ~ Zaremba: But I always have more information than you want.
,sf~,
{.
~~i ~' ~
~
Rohm: No. No. I appreciate it.
~
~' Hawkins-Clark: So, I guess while we are talking on that, was there any other questions
~~ from the Commissioners about the ur ose of that on this ma this cross-hatched
P p P~
-
. '~ ~ area? I guess one clarification, as you can see, we -- right now it's mapped at a half
,~ ; ~~~ mile either side of McDermott and just so you know, we chose that from a conversation
'~~' t. with Sue Sullivan at ITD and others, who made the point that when they go and do an
"~
.' environmental impact study, which they are required to do with -- if they build it with
~
?# . ~~~ federal money, that they are required, as part of that NIPA EIS process to look at a
r . ~. ;
~ _ ~}`` broader spectrum than just one specific little lane, if you will. I mean they do have to
x,.. ~ ~~'< ~ take into consideration everything from geology to historic structures and uses, to flood
planes, to seismic zones -- I mean it's an intense list of things they have to look at. And
,, so it could be that that future alignment weaves a little bit or whatever. So, that's the
'; -~'~~ reason for that being designated where it is. A few of the -- maybe I'll go -- on the
a~'~ '` ~ `, number three, the first item, there was existing area of city impact land uses and those
nom` _~ are probably pretty obvious to you, but if you were to compare our -- our adopted
~$
"' ~ ~
; you will see that -- a couple of main
Comprehensive Plan today with this proposed one
,.
_
;~ ~~: ,
is there is no half moon shapes on there. The neighborhood
things to point out. One
s" ~ ~-~ ,
centers -- today, these three intersections on McMillan Road, here at Meridian, Linder,
~` ` ~ ` ~ and Ten Mile, all have already been zoned C-G, at least atone of the corners, as part of
either Paramount or Lochsa Falls or Bridgetower through the planned development
process. So, we sort of factored that in and, then, also looked at what's the likelihood of
~~ -t, ' ~ this new interstate, you know, generating some commercial interest and, obviously, it's
~ ~ usually pretty high and so we may see some commercial demand up in here at one of
~, ;,
:..~ these. We have also -- just to go back a little bit, we did designate these floating
~, :,
,,
~~
..
interchanges, so -- at Chinden and Ustick, so we were, you know, anticipating that the
.
~ amount of commercial office type uses that would go into both the C-G and those areas,
~~ -: ~ =: ~ may be enough to meet the demand in this area alone and -- but, again, this is a draft
~" ,~ . ~' and it's up for discussion and if you want to go with the half mile, but we felt that, you
;~' ,~~: ~ ~ know, there -- there was a lot of discussion, particularly Commissioner Rohm and
~~. Zaremba and Borup now at that last round, about the half mile issue, and we did leave it
~3 , .
~~.^ ° °'"`' ~ on at Ustick between Meridian and Linder. The neighborhood center is still designated
~~ ` ~" ~
~~, ;
' there, both on the north and on the south, and it's also still on there over at Heritage
2
' ~` Commons area on Locust Grove. Now having said that, it doesn't mean that some of
those principals of the neighborhood center, in terms of interconnectivity and public
open space and pathway, can't be incorporated at the corners.
`~ ~
~~
Zaremba: That's what I was thinking. The push back has been from the development
~, ~ ? ,, - community to say they don't think the retail and commercial portions are viable on the
~' ` ~ ~
~~ ~ ~. half mile. They would rather see them on the section line roads. But that doesn't stop
} ~ '~~~ .' us from saying, okay, we are going to -- we are just going to move this theory a half mile j,
` over. We are still going to have the concentric ring of diminishing uses or -- I forget how
'~.:; -
L ~ we call it, but I have never seen that as being terribly opposed to the original
H
$~~ 3~ '
C~
` t~ T
H~
1 d~ 1]~~
f
/ n -i.y~,
4S}~
}'~ ^'~Y
~ -
~1 Y -
~~r ~
at ~:i ~, . > . ~
~r~ r.sD# ~ ` 4 ~~ dt M' e.$#~ •7 '~ 'iii:' ~'"''~ ~ -
* ,~ ~ ! +~ ~ ~ '~~ Yi :.~ ~ ~y.i ~r~~~ it Y #
~t Y »er tJ~°.. y vkx'= K 2 i ~-. ~'r ~r~ 7 .~ ,ems ~'
3 y };~
- 'fir ~~ .:. i ~ f j ~~` i ,~ °7 :~ j4 ~1 `~ 7t~ N~ '~,~f ~~ °r .
c ~ ~k 4 #,~ r ,er ~ ~ a a ~ :~r .a i~~,~ o+ e
~ ~ ~ ~ y., ~. - - - '
- ~y-f ?fit Knr;~'mu.~ 'v': }+~'i'C'~',.f s,`~r ~.'FaM~ ~ Ski ° t ~ i ~'rrH ~..J~~ f',~'~~'.,
f ~ _ rr t+: .T'x ~+',k ..: ~t n' ?fir ~
3 }r' , fM
a~.c ~~4 2 ~"h ~ ~ '~~F 3~4 7r ~ yt_ rkd ~ *Y ~;~ W ~ r s. ~ ~~ '
g, ;# 1t - b~- $ ~~'~l 5~t a' ^`. .fix r fY~ ~~'?
' ~ ~ _ ..
N, _ .
~ ep_ i
~,.~ 7y, ~: ;~ w ;t' ry zii ~~t~ „his 1 ~~r ~~~;,i~~r~.~.
rf,+ w ~ -IX ;+a '~ ~' b ~ ,~ ~: a `~ Srrg~ ~=L~if ~. ~
~ ~ u
k ~ `r r t Y t 3 H~~ ~~ ~~ ~si :aa 44.5 '~~r ~~~ ~~A . f _ i:~:- t~. ,
' ,
' ~ ~ F
~ ~ ~ c ~. r ti, - I~ v,(c ~ ry~±~~ A,,n j 3` r-1'~i~,?~(g~'~r y,~{ j -
.4 ~ ~ ' }'jc ~ ~~~~~k~~ ~ Y:_.Y .';7 f]'~,'~^~.~;~{'C ~~r~'~^.Y'F-F~l~{ F~i~1~~J!V.?!t«''~'$'~4R•~.{-..
.~ .. .. ~
.._
:.- ~ .. _ .
_ k~,y4~~ i .. - i~ l ° '+yr.:~k~ i,.~. ~S A~i.'~ -?`iY'~ t'~'1'}'^"a'`a,'~,~ l1^-.:. -.
~ ` a 'Z
,,
. .. ., , ..
„, ~ ~.
'g, r{'~! i r ~- rf<i :~rs3 ~$~'~''.~ frt~/ ~°~t'i` -a~,+"y ;. p r ;a .~t~~ ~ ~ ,. ~ e" ,r ~
t..
r w°cr^ _
:~,e.e,-~f ~ ~ ~ti,d _.k ~; ~1 7 ~'~,wA+'H;}~,~,;.,+~'1~~5~?ti~v tql •ifw~~'_ ~•L '~+'<Yk ~i ..1`~'~``~.
' r L_t - [ -
Q ~. ~ } 11 f y ~ i 5 ~ ~. e V ? ." ~s'r~ n R? ,1" ~.+r ~ ~ -
Y ' t >z 1 s
~°. k ~ ~ x ,~ r ~ r~ ~ S' '` 4 ~~ ,K~ft. 4~_FY'~ f ~Q ' i` 7 _
.1 r. y
ty -AS r a x r rrh~ ~}`~i"'Z'YC ~: ; ~, ~ .1 _t~ l~~ t,.3q ~ t, z ~ ',i~iS '-.~.-.'4
,_ _f ... _ . , .. r_ t,..~2e.JS _.. . , ..3 i„_„~_-~.,.'tisv~::a ..... `~~~.M_~ w ~ .nr_. >,ma~ w .. ....
~.,:.
$' ~;:
. ; ~
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia eetlng/Workshop
July 14, 2005
~``-'` Page 13 of 33
~~ ~~
~;~ Comprehensive Plan that had them on the half mile, where it's -- I think we can have the
~~ , concept and move them to the miles.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. And we would -- at this point that is our intent. I mean to keep a
lot of principals in there.
~:~ Zaremba: Yeah.
Hawkins-Clark: So -- the large one on the current Comprehensive Plan, on Chinden we
<y had -- there was one designated here between Ten Mile and Black Cat and there was
~~ another one designated between Locust Grove and Meridian. The one on Locust Grove
~: and Meridian, we actually -- excuse me -- retained about half of that neighborhood
s center in just -- they had it follow the existing parcel lines. The other half we changed
',`i from mixed use to medium density residential and that, in part, follows an active
~';=~ application, the Westborough application up there, that's on that Jericho --
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
~; ;:-
;.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. The other one on Chinden today is, as I said, between Black Cat
rtTj
~ and Ten Mile, that's Brighton Corporation's application is a part of that, the Bainbridge,
~ that City Council approve a few months ago, and they -- if you may recall, held out
":A about 60 acres at the corner of Ten Mile and Chinden, which was not part of their
~.;_x annexation, so -- and some of that mixed use did shift over to this square mile in
~~_,.` Paramount. There is a mixed strip there today that's got mixed community, I think.
Yeah. Mixed used community. There is a 40-acre parcel that's not a part of Paramount
-'' today, right on the southeast corner. Paramount does control a little bit of that, but there
1 ~~~ is also some that they don't, so, anyway, those mixed use policies would probably
~; ,
°-
t
largely remain the same as today in terms, you know, it's not just straight strip
~, commercial across there, but that's where we kind of reallocated some of that mixed
s= use area. Also that intersection, Linder and Chinden, here at the north, there is -- it's a
?£> little bit of a funky piece to work with, because it's so shallow. There is an existing large
''--`~ lot county sub and, then, a -- some kind of a farm ag building there now and, then, only
`A ~ about 350, 400 feet and so if you assume, which is probably a fairly safe assumption,
that that intersection is going to be widened at some point and may even have, you
`~.,~
rtr:;- know, a grade level access, you know, ramps, things like that, you know, like an urban
~:~l~ interchange or something, then, you know, you are going to chew up some of that
~~ '`i corner. So, we put amixed-use neighborhood on it, it's a key area, you know, it's one of
the main -- going to be a large volume intersection. Residential just didn't seem
~,.. appropriate, so -- they could still put residential, but -- oh, yeah. And, then, on the east
side of Linder Eagle area of impact is anticipated to also have some commercial there,
~ ~: ~ so -- don't know if there is any other areas in our current area of impact to point out. We
«_
~~ ~.
~
reflected on this map the -- all of the land uses that -- applications that have been
. .
approved, you know, current zoning is now shown on there. Tried to put schools where
:'~~ the school district has land. Oh, the wastewater treatment plant, it's about 450 acres
~'
~
' are in the MUWWTP District and -- this map is such small scale, but at the north end
.-,
_
~~~<;,,
here, Drawbridge Subdivision is being built today, it's 18,000 square foot lots. It's our
~'N;
;
~ x..
~ ~
~
r
~~ - - _
~
r ;~_
iif-~ .d~j?F ,.
~ ~~~Ya' fl~ ~ ~ 'p.
7a ~~+~~
r : "F"°;
Y
~~'~., f rT~ ?~
=~•~
~ ~`
3d r
~~~
,
'~~ C"
,~ f ,
~
.4.
f-
Y'! i
f N
4
~,
tt~~
4R "K
~
''~~` ~~~~" ~.ri.b t43%~~
't . F
~~«~ yy.,
*-
!-.
'R~.ti i1.iY~ ~
ti
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special'~"eeting/Workshop
~~
~~
.^
f
a f
n
~
~+ nn
~"~ ~
~
u~~
~ ~~
~
ti
t
~.
July 14, 2005
Page 14 of 33
estate lot subdivision in north Meridian today. That is one of these five acres across
from Bridgetower. The one behind it is -- was designated in the mixed use and we --
staff has had some communication with them. We changed that to allow for the low
density residential, again, part out of equity, since they are neighbors, you know,
immediately to the east already have been approved that way, but no access as well, so
-- so that is one change. The rest of it we did keep, so there would be no new
residential permitted in that area. There was several comments that we received at the
May open house from folks who have property in this area, who are, frankly, frustrated
and, you know, concerned that they can't get any new residential and the viability of
commercial and industrial uses, which is, basically, what our policy says they need to
have, is not very good, in their opinion. So, the question is, you know -- you know, do
you want to consider changing that -- obviously, the Public Works Department needs to
have some pretty key input into this and we have not met with them so far to get that
conversation. There is a noise and odor study that was done that -- of the plant and,
you know, it shows sort of the impacts of both noise and odor and it, interestingly
enough, follows pretty closely what we have designated here where it sort of gets to a
point of acceptable levels. You know, for humans anyway. But there is a little -- a
possibility that on this west side we shave some of that mixed use area off and allow it
to go to a residential, so --did you want to add anything on that?
Canning: Brad is also asking for -- as part of this study, we are going to request funds
to do a market absorption in the north Meridian area of nonresidential uses and one of
the key things for this wastewater treatment plant area -- it's always been that they don't
have good enough access to I-84, thereafter, it's not appropriate. Well, if we assume
that that Highway 16 extension goes in, then, all of a sudden they have pretty great
access to a highway and I-84. So, it will be interesting to see the results of that. And,
also, just to know whether we have shown enough commercial and office in the north
Meridian area or if we need to get some additional areas in there. And, then, I think the
only other commercial area Brad forgot to talk about is the four square miles right at the
corners. That's kind of a potential little neighborhood center there as well. We made it
very small on the -- Star, on the other side of Chinden, designates a commercial area,
so we have kind of mimicked that on the south side of Chinden.
Zaremba: The study you're talking about to see how much commercial use could be
absorbed there, are you including the four square miles on the west in that?
Canning: Yes.
Zaremba: It just seems to me, along a corridor like that, if we also preserved frontage
roads and things like that, that could be major commercial and industrial development. I
meant that's just an opinion, but, again, from having lived places where I have seen this
happen.
Hawkins-Clark: The market analyst that spoke to, you know, he said these market
absorption studies are pretty broad and it's not like you define here is your -- like a
~~ e _bl ~ 1. .:~N ~~.ai~t`; `f"'i`~R~` "~'~~'i~ ~sdic i ~'7= ~t ~ ..
- ?-Y -
~ Y'. - .,.~ r'e { ~ ,~ r' Y r~'-'~'i. ~'ak ~w~,~ ~c ~»~:'yfi 3`''~~xr.~'~k~^"
Y } t
~ ! (o- 4 k 5~ , 1 T' y '~ ~ L~.~
-i~ .a ~,,~,.r,~~yy~x y •4 ~ n ~;•~ti,~i 5,; ~t~bw ><L.,-~.li,~~
~'f ;~ '. - ~~ h. t1i.'~'A {'f~f~ ~ ti-T,"~,. ~d ~'~~„~'' ~ ~^.' ~'o'+rR ,3't'J ~~',i-A 4s~R. ~ '^yp',r MEa ~:
zeta` ~~` y I ? '~ S
~~~x'y ~J;Y 'may? ~..Y~ 3t'+t~?i±A[+~fi~,h s~§~~'r`t ~
t ~ f R ~r~~t~+3t£'~sr~.'~ ~ it ::~~'~ ~'~4'~f ~+'~i.~ ~.,,~ .4~~b? F" ~-~i '.-4.
i _ .. .. .. .' . "
~ - _ t X, ~ `• as ,~ _r. t}~ c~,~` ~{„"T'*"1~i+itfyth,;`Ft
t 77 r ~ `~ r [,.~ ~
.~ n + ~ ,~
a~
S~ ' '~ p~rt.k+ _t~yq [a ~3.4 cri~'~7,.~~t rw `VGA '?~.t. 3~~.~~ t'L:~r.N~~°"tom' ~~° .:
~.. ~~I ~ F ~. 1. Y' ~ ~().Gi~M.~jf`Q~/'Y ~ SC S M`%rM~ i. ~~ # Yr ~, _
'", '` ~~.~ 1 ~ . V
E`P~}' t ~ 4 w~. to t a'~S 44 + 4 ~ ~~~;~y~'-'~yy i y'..
fy~~ ,:K i J ! ~ ar,,h~.ti tit ~,~.'~, .H ~' E~~~ ~3.,'#'~r~ I "f ~ ~~
~~,~ ,,~ __. ~~ r.,r~- r
Y ~ _ i'"~ + 1,::.` {( 1'. f hE -t:{ ~ ~~Y i 4^i' 2X"<. i~~l`I ~'~ ~~~.R~tt. i ~. _
! t IN _ Yr Y l ~'(ti~ 'It
gbh ;s'rGi Y+, ~ ~~ y,° A~4NYYTi 5~. ~'~~ hY lh
+
~~' ,. *' ~ i ~~ tt + N t i A:c. f `71.k b'~ ~t 4 tl ~y~ ~` ~~i {y?q!~'?r~b ~.a :}~' {S'c.~ j ~.- ."{ k.,~ i
~i~~ ~'b ~Y ,yt~ 1tiY~~~'X{r~r ~ Y v.~`f~~ r~P#"~~~6cg"s it 7.. a1,s,~ :'t. ~.
,~ ~ ~ w 3, ~~ii ~:
~s j
r e a w ` ~- ~ ~~ Unhkv s` ~ ~ ~f '~ e 4 ~ ,4~ij„"`~'tt s k ~ ~~ _
+~.~ i ., n ~.., a .r pp -G w3 ~~ ' F N.Y ~ F~ k 71 ~ L ~ Y
{
y-% 4 ,IR2-
4 - ~~ / sY• ~ E
~''~ .~ ~ ~' 4 s ~ z rr. ~~v ~'~ #kt~:ri
~>:~ >` F~a;` a~ a ~ ~' ~~`"~'f?"-~*,fu } ~ ~ x r ~i~ tS~v' {~qa'i ~ 3y` t
~~{•+/ r ,yy ,~E y
L °~t 1 ~ ifs ± - xt ~ t ~ ~',Yt~}~i~~-ij R ~~i~» ~ ~3+" 1 `fit. `'+t i _ ~ f ..
,r~. 'f 4. ~ r 7"
c,
j.
Y
fµi.
S
,:~3
t
n`eg5...
~~ .: .
~ ~
M
~"~
1 ~,
•; ~
~ ~
~~
~ ,
.
~ `x r , '
1,~
4.. f,- .i'.
_: y'.
T!
~
_ _ „
r~
$,.:~ _
~.
>
,>,
;
,z.~ ,
i Y~
~
. ~ ~~
~
~; ,,
~
-,
~-
z ~
'~ t
~"~ .
-i
~~
~
r~ x
~
a~
~ ~
>;
~ .
: ~:
~Y,. s,
~ * ,'
..~ ,
t~ .
~ 5
~
~~
~
~~;
,
k}
n
p~L
~; n
~ -
~
.
_ 1.
~ l
~f <':
:
-
~ w
Y
S - '4,' -
:.. yr
r 7F
~'? 941a~
'
<
~-
~a
f '~ a
}p~+_
'
.
~~ ~ r
~
'~ ' y _
~~
r
~
'~
s - i
,
.~~, .
~. _
" r
di ~
~. ~~:
.~.,
3, . ,I
,i ~' .- H.'tA -
d
,
~~,r:.
~~;
~-
yNY,`
~.. ~ ~}; N
~_.
~
~~_ ,
f.
:~~
4
).
~~-
_
.~.
,~
~~ . .
s
~ ';
,fi . , ~
~
Y
. + ~ T "~
~ ~
i ~~
{5
~
r
1"d
~~2Fs
~, 2 ~ '14 i
Gt
^~{
~
1~
h `
.~$ ~
~~ 'a~k 7
~
n= SS
Y
~. ,
~f~ ~ F ~#
~~ .~
~, _ t ~~.S
~~,
{
• 1
. t 1
,
~~
'i
~
~`~
~`~ .. ~ ..
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~eting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 15 of 33
transportation study, you know, I mean there is a lot of sort of influences that they look
at regionally. But we will certainly ask them to look at this area in particular.
Zaremba: Well -- and the subject has come up before. One of the applicants one time,
I forget who, in trying to get a residential into the area next to the wastewater treatment,
was telling us that we had far too much set aside for commercial. And not being an
expert, of course, the logic of their numbers, he made it sound logical. But, again, as
Anna said, if -- if there is going to be access to an interstate type roadway within a mile
and a half of this, we could actually make it more attractive by making sure that that
portion of Ustick is wide and amenable to trucks and we can make it happen.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. That's a great point. We were just talking about that before this
meeting and it hadn't really struck me yet, but if this interchange -- if this -- if Highway 16
gets built and they put an interchange at Ustick and if it's two miles spacing, just like I-
84, yeah, you're correct, this area becomes only a mile away, and may help us justify
some of that area.
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
Hawkins-Clark: Two or three other key areas to look at -- or talk about in terms of
nonresidential. Along Chinden -- the north Meridian area plan that did not get adopted
that Wardle and Associates put together, as you may recall, actually showed just mixed
use regional across here and they -- you know, that group of folks thought that a state
highway, you're just going to naturally see -- do you really want residential against that.
You know, we -- right now this plan designates a small little area about ten to 15 acres
at the half mile across from Brighton's project that was approved that I mentioned
earlier, the Bainbridge, and this is based on some initial discussions with the property
owners who have control of about 300 acres in this area. And they, actually, originally,
came to us showing much more commercial, but after further research, they paired that
down. So, that commercial area does reflect their interest and kind of what they would
like to see. Do you have any feedback for us on other areas along Chinden, particularly
you know, at -- at the intersections where, you know, Ten Mile and Black Cat come in,
bearing in mind that the influence of this interchange down the line is going to be pretty
strong. Right now there is this mixed use at -- at Star, in part, to match what the city of
Star has shown, which they have shown commercial on the north side there, as Anna
mentioned earlier, but what's shown here underneath the corridor as low density
residential is really not very feasible, but you know, part of my thinking was, you know,
how much time and energy do you want spend on designating land uses and an area
that the whole goal was to preserve it. I mean there was some logic to say just don't put
any land use designation under there, you know. And particularly if it's something non-
residential.
Zaremba: I think I have expressed my opinion and it's not -- it's not etched in stone, but
it's a direction that I lean, along Eagle Road and Chinden Road and the areas along the
interstate and future McDermott, is if it becomes to be the same thing. My feeling is if
you picture those areas as having an awful lot of traffic and most of that traffic not
' 4 }. 1;r -
r. - .=fir , < ~ ~ yr _ n t3'i" -. e::.
~~, 3 ~~;~ +d9't k.. y et'R~c~'~~ rrlc~''ry ~s ar 5~'~ }y ,„i~';r ~V~'#~fi]~'4.~t~ t' ~s '.. ~s .: .~ ::k~,
~y~ 1 i~ r L ~ A'
k t
x l-~ _.t -fi r
a>t'~v ~ :. yu~ k-ef j x~"1'~4~'IL+~'3"~,. ~'~}, ~5}~4. r r-> ri~,:7 ~,s1'~ ri!'Y ~~'~gx t ~+ -'. _,}
-! F, t
11 J Li
I. I.y ~ .~~~r
~.
14"~~`s S'`^r ~ -e~k ~ '`y ~I'~,z~`7k 7lm+t.'3~. ~' _ ~4~~1~Y ~vir,,`~.Y ~'T.'3't~e~~~?'~. a',~.r#a~ ~~4 i~
- ~ - 5 Tai ! .~ ~,~ ~-m ~ „~. ~;. P~ ~+rc ~,
' rp n ~ :~
~^~m :-~k it:~t.1 X.~~„t ~.-'~",['~~+r'S °.~ ~'-k2 lr~t~ e r-';l~e"~~'w i~r, 2"f'ti, .S~~Frt~'.: -
:..
~, r r t -,~ * '~~,-'~ 7+r ~
,~' q ' 7
i r S i
as ~.1 n t, ~ { `?-.~~ ~ (rki(;~~ ~. '~ ~+~~~ •'+ ] q` '! i .. - ,
~etd .~~ .[~ , t't jx ;~ri~,},~~~~'~, ~~bta. ti..a.7. 'a~-0c 3u.~.~:t F'!'"x s}`~~`' ''~`~ r~ iY}~'= ,I ~-! `,'.~ r ,. ~ e~'.
- ~ } 1„il` ~' S~~ ',t rh 1.. t" ! N~~ ~ r .t~ ~'~ ~' 11 1 K ~ -
M ~ ~ r ter.
lei ,t Ss„ ~' l ~ 7 ~! ~~ YY7:b ~ - -
~:'~14 - s ~" "ta'~',~ ~`~~~~~1.,. rr~~ - ~ 8~~~'~'f'r~hti'I~~T,F,'~ip ~ a ~ ~~~~'~'~
~~ r +. r. r,•.~<-~ ~°~~~,~~ilyit~+4, s. ^".Sa'a7~ `§ki `~~~~4 ~i~' , yli3?h/" r~ ~sl:~~~ ~.
' - •/-'r
jj~. .........
rY~~r
H } ,.
~
-
~
# ew
3
^~
,
~
Y 4
f,. +t
,
.
~
~~
<.
~
.~,~~~-
~
~~
~ :
~~~w
~,
~
~- k ~
~~
,~,
~,~
ti ~ ~x
~~
`
~
~~
~ ,.„~
.~,
f
,
_ -
. i
~
K. ~~
~
j. ~~
~
y
T
~
;
~r _ti
~ ~`
tt. $q
,
~Ft
W
.
4
~, ,
~~~
,tip
_
+
.
_
d,~
~.
Y.
~, { - ~~: '
~~
~7
- y~ f;
~
-
~
N
~ ~ k
a ~~
t
'~.~ ~ ~
a
„~ "
b..~
ty
~~
ix~}
4 {
Xi
~` F '
~ i-,~
~~
,
;~{
T xy~~
1~
'.
ti
_a
*~
r
~. ><
,' .~Y
~.
~~
'
~
~....
k' ~f
C
~
'F~
1
t
~`
- I _
` r
"~
_ 3
el ,, iF
` ~ t f+~k
Y ,
~
~ , i
ww~~
V';
n
Z
~:
.. Y
~
!
,r ~
i~ '<
.
.' r r
r,
fi
Iz~;
T
{J
l
1E
~~
``
,A~
Y~
~i
'
~} t ~
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~eting/Workshop •
July 14, 2005
Page 16 of 33
actually being Meridian traffic, if they are coming through here anyhow, we ought to
figure out a way to make them stop and spend money. So, I tend to agree with the
Wardle study that says that along the Chinden corridor it's going to be a busy enough
traffic area that it may not be attractive to have residential right against it and the city
can take advantage of maybe getting some money out of the people that would pass
along it, to give them reasons to stop and leave a few dollars here. So, I -- you know,
again, to some extent it's market driven, but I certainly would not have a problem with all
of Chinden developing commercial within an eighth of a mile of Chinden and, then, I'd
go back to residential. That's just an opinion and, like I say, it's not etched in stone, it's
just --
Hawkins-Clark: Sure. Well, Ithink -- I mean that would be a significant change if -- you
know, to this map if you -- I would appreciate more discussion, if that's a direction you
want to give us, because --
Rohm: Well, only with the caveat that there is not multiple ingress-egress onto
Chinden, that there would be frontage road internal to that commercial development, so
that the flow isn't impeded by development and you still have the ability to maintain
traffic speeds at 50 or 55 on Chinden as it goes through that -- that area.
Zaremba: Ithink with Lochsa Falls didn't we require only one access and aback-age
road or something like that? I don't think we allowed them access to Chinden.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. That's correct. Yeah. And maybe Anna wants to talk a little bit
more about the -- you know, the UDC, the Unified Development Code, was -- had a new
section added after your hearings about state highways and access and --
Canning: Commissioners, we are trying to limit access at the half miles, with backage
road and, then, you all did get to comment on it and your recommendation was for right-
in, right-out only at the quarter mile, but the Process Improvement Group has
recommended right-in, right-out, left-in. So, the only thing they have taken out is left
out. Ithink that the quarter mile access points will get severe opposition from ITD and I
suspect -- you know, this is my mind reading game that I do with the Council, but I
suspect Council will limit the quarter mile access. So, we have some in place to look at
that. But with regard to putting all of it mixed use, I would caution you that all of a
sudden it starts to look like Eagle Road or starts getting demands similar to Eagle Road
and you want to look at what's across the street as well. Here you have an established
one-acre lot subdivision with expensive homes. Very expensive homes on the north
side of Chinden. In this area -- you can't see it on the overhead, but the parcel pattern
in here, unless someone acquired every single parcel, piecemeal development of that
would be darn near impossible. So, you would having continual request for direct
access to Chinden. So, that actually occurs all along here. So, I would give you a
cautionary note in that area. And, then, again, look to what's across the side of the
street. These folks followed our kind of half-mile thing -- thing -- sorry. Neighborhood
center concept and put a little commercial there. Obviously, Brighton Corp held out that
60 acres in the hopes of putting commercial development at this corner, but is that
4 q~ {
Yip: _
't,r 1 °it
so- t irl Y}+~ ~,t~ ~
by-t~ t x xi
z 7 ~ " ~~ ~s F egt~ T ~',T
~ ~ ~ G ~ i.! ~l' ~~~~~~~ ~ rte..
Cr~ cif _ _ , ~ ~~ j ~~(. !~~'~
", 'v ,~ ~
'~ ` ~a~ >^
F- 1 t 1 M
s k
t. t '~ ~ f '~ ~ ti +
~,, } to
p ~ r7i r 4< F .:~ 5 7'~'~i*S~t. dYY++A~i~1V F~~~p+ ?~.
~.
f ~ f*
~,5 _,yJ
r ~ ~ ~~ ~~
~- ~~ _ ..~
! '~
` J sc
Y , 1',d »~RS 3 p~ ':I~,.Ff r9~* „'~ j~ A' r.. .:aye
t' SS ~ 1,.
1
~ 4c }
~ ,
P,~ *a5?~ 'die- ~ Yt
~~Aa
u z .41.;`6'`~j T' > ~~~¢k4~ ~ tS~, ~ pA.tdF b - _
~~ ~ t a ~ ~ _
'' =h, tK ~~ ^~~' '~^
i ~ ~ ~ 1Y4. ~~rv. _
i~ l
ry
y 1,
,~,~ ~ ~ r ~ ~x ~
R'v
e
~ ~! ~
~~ ~ r a- t
~ 5 ~
1 ~(d ~i ?_. ~ ~ _ 4 ' ;Z'=,{~ ,
f ~
~~
l {~
.rage-
~
~~4 a
~
,~.R ~.
~`
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~eting/Workshop
'>'` July 14, 2005
r;~. ' _ ~ Page 17 of 33
~ ~
~'~ appropriate. If there is residential here, a large lot residential there, medium lot
~~ `', residential there, is this an appropriate location for commercial and -- or in this case
should it switch to -- shift to the half mile. Those are considerations.
.i
~ ~ Rohm: Yeah. I don't think that any of us want to see another Eagle Road. It's so
<~_ congested that it almost defeats the purpose of the lanage that's available, just because
~-~ ;;.
of access from the quarter mile and other access points. And if, in fact, Chinden
~;.
'~~' `" develops to minimize that, maybe we just go with cross-access agreements and you still
`~ end up with just half-mile access to Chinden and you just don't -- you don't grant a
~` ` ~ ~ ° development with access. I don't know -- you know, we will just have to see how that
~ ~~ goes, but I sure don't think we want another Eagle Road.
i
'~~~ Hawkins-Clark: Would point out that this Lochsa Falls mile we actually have already no
-- we have formally accepted an application, but it has been submitted for this 40 here
at the corner of Ten Mile and Chinden and, then, there is the school and Lochsa already
has office approved here. So, this mile is, for the most part, spoken for. This mile, as
~_'~ Anna just mentioned, you have that piece there that Brighton has, and, then, the mile
where Paramount is, we have already designated mixed use. And, then, the last full
~-~y mile is just between Locust Grove and Meridian Road and there is also mixed use there
and so, practically speaking, the only place we would really look to add new mixed use
{y- would be in -- you know, in this mile -- Section 27, so --
_ Moe: Yeah. As I look at the map, that's basically where Brighton Corp's looking to do
,-R~ something around the corner or whatever and that's about the only area that I think is
`` left, because you do have enough mixed use to the east. I think that would be great.
Hawkins-Clark: Another thing that we are somewhat bound by is assuming that the City
'~ of Meridian wants to support it, is the Blueprint for Good Growth that's going on right
F' now. It's a regional plan that the city and county have spent hundreds of thousands of
~ >` dollars on and so far we say we want to abide by it, but one of the principles of that plan
' is that if you take a city's planning area, they are designating a certain number of
~,_F` ~' population, a certain number of households, and a certain number of employment within
,;_:
~` each area of city impact and, you know, this is the model that they are using and they
u ? are saying here is -- here is, basically, what you have to work with based on this control
,j total, you know, at 2030.
`" Zaremba: They are giving an actual number limit or they are giving a percentage of -- a
balance?
`~ Hawkins-Clark: Well, yeah, I mean the cities, obviously, have their -- can play with
those, but I mean there is -- they are saying here is the basic ratios. Yeah. And so for
Meridian, you know, we have to remember to take in our whole planning area in this
~~ Blueprint for Good Growth process and by the time you start factoring in the alley for a
`'` corridor, Silverstone, EI Dorado, Eagle Road, we start to get a little bit pinched with
where we put mixed use in commercial, frankly, in terms of that -- those numbers right
now. So, I mean I just point that out, that we -- as long as we -- if we want to honor that
i rr.
~ ''
~;
} .,
~,
i
~,
rt
4 F`.-_
;f
~~
',
- ~..>:
:
~
~. i
~
} ~ ~t {'~
~
~~
a
y,
L.
~~
C
~f
15~~
r.
, -......
of Meridian Planning & Zoning Special~Cl'eetingNl/orkshop
,~ July 14, 2005
Page 18 of 33
~`~ process, we should at least have to -- you know, we will have more information on that
in the next couple of months, but right now what's shown here is about as much mixed
use as that plan is going to accommodate.
4.
~., ~ Rohm: That's interesting.
k~,~
F `3 Hawkins-Clark: Let's see. A couple other things, since we have got about 15 minutes
~ "~ here. Let's put this up. The first page in your packets tonight was a sheet called North
` ~
'
; Meridian Area individual area of city impact expansion. For lack of a better term, it just
'
,,
~
says lower rim area, and the reason that that is in there -- a couple of the folks that have
attended tonight, this is why they are here. The property -- again, here is -- here is
Chinden. This is our more regional map, so here is the Phyllis Canal that -- basically on
~ ~
~ the rim here. And, then, you have this area between the Boise River. As we
mentioned at the very beginning, this is -- this is an area that Eagle city currently has in
their proposed area of city impact that has not been yet approved by Ada County, but
~;~~~ their City Council has approved it. The request is for the city to consider including some
'~°'' of this area in our area of city impact application to Ada County and their -- their
L` ~ property is approximately 390 acres. If you add up all the acreage in between the river
~~ ~ ~~ and the canal from McDermott, you know, over to Linder, it's just under 1,500 acres.
~~; ~k.
-~..~.
So, their portion is about 28, 30 percent of what -- of that whole area. You know,
' ~
„r clearly, this is just an absolutely beautiful area down in here, of course, as you go down,
a lot of it is in the one hundred year and five hundred year flood plane. If you can go
;, down the street you will just see -- I was just trying to point out some of the facts of who
~`~"
~~ has jurisdiction in there. Some of the public street connectivity, flood plane issues, et
cetera. The sewer question is one that we can't answer right now. At least in detail,
~~ because there hasn't been a study. But Eagle city is -- as part of their application, doing
~` a study in that area, which I understand is expected to be done reasonably soon, and
~~ `==`
~~ ., that would tell everyone -- you know, give a much better idea about sewer-ability down
4~a
.~~
there, but -- now, one thing that's for sure, if you come to Meridian you're going to have
~~ "~ to pump up and over the rim, so -- and we all know that. The other issues about, you
know, does it -- their statement to us was this -- you know, this property is Eagle -- I
~ , ; mean it's Meridian area of city -- or area code, they feel like -- very much a part of
~' ''' Meridian in terms of shopping and a trade area, you know. There is no way to get
`_,
- across the Boise River, obviously, in this area, unless you go out to either Star or
~~:.
;,
Linder. So, pretty much everybody goes up to Chinden and, then, you either head east-
{
~:
west or into Meridian, so --
`r ''
:`~ Rohm: Do the City of Eagle's city limits currently cross the Boise River at any point?
~ ~z Hawkins-Clark: Not west of Linder, but east of Linder they do.
R _
z,.
' Borup: Clear to Chinden.
.~ '~
~,.,, Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. They go up to Chinden.
..
4 ~ Zaremba: At Banbury and that stuff along there I think is all Eagle.
:`: ,~"
,!
~~ -
-~,
' Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~eting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 19 of 33
~,~ Rohm: Okay. Okay. I'm just -- but not west of Linder. Okay.
Hawkins-Clark: That's my understanding. Yeah.
Rohm: And I guess another question -- well, if they have already crossed east of
Linder, then, do they have separate sewer facilities on the south side of the Boise River
°-~ from that which they have on the north? I'm not sure how that -- I guess that's how that
~- would work. You have two different sewer treatment plants or do they cross the river
`! with --
~`~ Hawkins-Clark: I don't know in that particular instance, Commissioner Rohm. But I
mean, you know, there is examples of boring underneath rivers, of course. I mean
there is everything, I mean aerial crossings and -- you know. Not that we would want to
do that, but -- but Eagle sewer district, they have a memorandum agreement with Boise
~~~. city, you know, to pump in that area that's along Chinden, to pump their waste to Boise
~~:
.;
city, who actually treats it.
Rohm: Oh. Interesting.
Hawkins-Clark: You can see on this map where Eagle's area of city impact, they have
designated these uses over here.
Zaremba: I was going to ask a similar question. What we have are two barriers,
essentially. The Phyllis canal and the river. You could make an argument for stopping
your area of impact at either one of them and I was thinking, similar to Commissioner
Rohm, all tight, if we were to serve all the way to the river, how is Eagle dealing with
how they cross the Phyllis canal and serve the south side, since they are basically north
of it, how are they serving the south side. We have the same question. We are south
of it, how do we serve the north side of it. But it depends on which barrier you pick. I
mean the river is a barrier and, you know, I certainly am in favor of having anybody in
Meridian that wants to be in Meridian, you know, but it's nice that they'd rather join us.
Rohm: And I don't know if it's appropriate, but I would like to know their logic, why they
would prefer Meridian over Eagle, if any -- would you like to make comment?
Zaremba: Does anybody care to comment? You do need to be on the microphone, sir,
and state your name and address, please.
Ewing: I'm John Ewing, 1500 EI Dorado --
Zaremba: Pull the microphone closer to you. Thank you.
~ Ewing: John Ewing. 1500 EI Dorado, Boise, Idaho. I wasn't really prepared to speak
~,
`~ for the two girls, but the property that they are here on is their parents rights now, the
`r Aldape Ranch, and the public been --
~~ _.-... ~• ~i.~ .4i :-r ~:.. '. -e. ,-.° '. _I ~ ~i ~ ~._ I ...i'~~~ 7,.; v,L. ^iVY.tX~S~Fi'3~~ f3~``1~:?~~*K~'"~~*~.'
w.
~;
b, .F,
a~ ~_
~, ~r;
S -
~ s .tr
_
y 4.
r
~~
~1 ';
~-
~.
W 4
~~
T'~-
~
i
~
~~
a ~
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special'IEI'eeting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 20 of 33
Zaremba: Can we have you transfer to the hand-held microphone? I'm sorry. That
seems to be causing some problems.
.,
~ ~~
.y,~
t
{r.
Nk~~ i
F Y?
t. i~
.
.
~'ti;` .
~, _
.
~5 -
t
~
_ ,~~
~,
~~ ~~
_
x ~f
~ ;
>"ti
'
`
v ,
4
y
.,.
,~
~~ ,.
~H
y£
,
~;-
f
~, . y 4
4i J
~
~~r
.~~~
e~
; '~
.
~
~{
"2'}7 =. ~rf
~~~ ,
~~,
-~
~~ s
~~
,~,~
~
~~. ~ ,
:
,~
r~,r
.'Yi
~
r
;
r
~
-~'s# F
pp~~•l _
y? ~
,,.~
~~
4~ I
~1
~ ~~
~ r
~i
Jt
~. f F.
~;
r~" } c
:
~ 5 r r, '
r~
: ~~
~
~~ ~
w'S
Y ~
it h
t~ei ~?. SI an
k '
_
7r: _
irr
`~
w~ ~
_ 1'
i
(
.~'+ .
d
u.
~~
~r
~Lc ~+T rri .~
_ Y~
` ~~
~~ r
v
t..
~k c,.. ~. -
-..
x.
Ewing: Well, anyway, I think that the main reason is they have always been part of
Meridian. Her parents have lived in Meridian, went to school in Meridian, they have a
Meridian address, Meridian phone number, and it does seem to just be a natural thing
to have -- have them still be in Meridian. Where the new proposed subdivision that is
going to hopefully go into Meridian is just above the Phyllis canal, just going straight
back. Seems to be a natural thing to be in Meridian, even though the sewer does need
to be pumped up. I believe that probably getting sewer up is as easy as getting it
across the river. Their east boundary is Spur Wing Golf course for part of their properly
and, then, you know, that would lend itself to a very nice subdivision down there they
feel. The other thing is -- and I think it come up in one of the workshops, either Peggy
or Sherry had brought up that they do have river frontage back, you know, on their short
north end of their property and it was even talked about maybe, you know, putting some
of that ground down there as a park right on the river and I don't know -- you know, I
think that that's probably the only place that -- well, I know that's the only place that
Meridian comes close to the river. Another thing is that there no real access down
there, other than coming from the south end. There is -- you know, I see there is a
proposal for McDermott going through, which is a couple miles west and, then, Linder is
the next one with, you know, quite a bit of property between there. I think this whole
thought process of when their neighbors up on top have wanted a pretty elaborate
subdivision up there and a roadway and everything and that's a natural place to get
access down there and continue the nice subdivision atmosphere down there on river in
that farm ground. We have had a little conversation with the neighbor to the west and,
like so many people in that area, Dr. Orme is older and retired right now and his first
comment was is I don't want anything to change. You know, he doesn't want anymore
growth in Meridian or Ada County or state of Idaho. Although after visiting with him, he
knows that he's not going to get his wishes and, you know, he supports going into the --
shared with me that he would support going into the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. So,
I believe right now -- you know, I mentioned the phone number, the zip code and
everything. I think that they are in the Meridian fire district, too. So, they are already
getting, you know, services from Meridian. And so I don't know if I did a good job of
speaking for the girls, but would you like to add anything? No. Did I answer the
question or did I just ramble on like I usually do?
Zaremba: You answered my question.
Borup: Just a clarification for mine. I think I understand it. You're saying you'd be in
favor of going clear to the river?
Ewing: Yes. That's -- and the Aldape property does go clear to the river.
Borup: So, it's south -- north of the canal down below the rim?
R ~F
~rrt is YS 4 '< f- L: l ,~ '~,Y `' ,4`p xJ` ~~ y _ -.
~, r F''r ~ •: ~ c f~Gf_ ~~w R-~~' '"' ,fi'. > f~ t~zN d'~'r~ ~t;~ ~~ ~:} a• .'~
y~ ~ ?I1~
„x It'. .~ 'FV ~ f.. 7b -4 '1 ... ~~Y!
!y~
% ~. - .'vim ~., x ~~5'~~~~~ 'r~i ~`-i.~t n ~~ ~ Rk '~ ry'` ~~.,~;tf ~ ..
,5 ~ .p ~~~}A '• ~r(k ~itglrsr~ 'v'~'-:~ rrt~.~~~k ,.`.~~F ~,~~ r 'r^t
~I •3{ ~ -~' -z S tt'.~yi~ ~~ :. 4~5`t~r~hF, fih~ > i r_:: " ;;~~.
~5 2 c,
,yr ~ ~
c "T' tk, "h ~ + t3'~ 3 r.; cYh, t' ~,~5 f KI S~fi1~ ,y~ a~,; -t~ d
.y ~ r ~ ;+~ ~'%i,~:!Wy,iF~..~~~y {!~ A'~"'~Ft-it`'~g ti-.~ryh i~S ~i;',~ ~'°!, ^f5 ! x. 'f`.:~Y. 1
_' .. 3 { J ~ d h j. 4 -:1C si Sr .' Jk} ~ i'W' ~`~ t" "Trtl' a *4,` ' -
< ',
> n ~rii ^ ~ t"i f ~ r ' Kr } ~ r
{Ir'h^ si`-P~4' y, ,L '~, 4~ x rsd ~ t ~~' a+ a t~ ~'iz
~~ar"EH ~:d ~~/ti ~' ~~~~xc' R~':'7~#'~+, e61C"'`i~ q~~,y,~~~ o }~ T3,• ~''~f
~^ ti ti t. '-~ }~(2~t~s~.~~'~~`~'~. ~'~E '~ti` ~'~a-~ ~'4 {'7. ]~~~.'i,~~l pii-P µ , `~r' fF
w. ,
~'a r i4.' r r r ti n '~ ..i na ~ ~r q
r . _ o ~ ~, .~ i ~ ~ ,~ a ~i ~.~ ~ ti -
~~~,~ i~.,~ ~~~ ~µt -~'~" "j1f'kor~ ~~ .kir. 1 a'~~~F .`~Q3 ~~"~~. ~ ^~..l ~4f ,! i:- ~
~~f~ yk v r ~~ Z ` ~',i ~~F~"7r1td~~; t ~~..{ ~} ~ t' ~~ -~~.-) , ~ ~:" - ,. .':.
a~ ?.
'.-t- z ~ a
a i~ 41 ~ ~~ ~ , , ~ 'e7krt~ frt. ~'~ ~~~~g ~
A'}d -.7, ti.r c ,~~~'~. f '~~.~'. '~':r' r~~,ra ~~ .KC ~~''~~~-, y k+~ti. zi. Lf~y`~"~ ~r - .. ..
~ r ;`~ 7, ]. ~t~Ci~`~'~^~#.' 9r-~i~i ~~~ ~~ ti.,~V"^~. 4 5 ,,y" 7i P! `- ~i;^,, fir-.:
ti
Meridian Planning & Zoning SpeciallEl~etlng/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 21 of 33
Ewing: It's all north of the canal. Yes, it is.
Borup: Okay. I'd particularly like the idea of a park on the river.
Rohm: Well, I like that, too.
Zaremba: Neat idea. Yeah. Thank you, sir.
Rohm: I guess I -- my question of staff would be was there a particular reason why staff
;.~.<~:
~`"~~ did not consider the inclusion north of the canal? Is -- just because city of Eagle had
~«'~ already kind of had their eyes on it or --
Canning: Partially. The expansion of the area of city impact was really prompted by --
at the request of property owners that suggested taking it to the rim. So, that's as far as
we went. The City Council, in general, and the Mayor, had wanted to support requests
for annexation. So, this one has come up fairly recently, compared to the other ones.
But it was a disputed area between Star and Eagle, I believe, but Ada County gave it to
Eagle. But our fire district, the rural fire district has always been very concerned that it
is in their fire district and the way -- this whole fire district issue is a little interesting,
because Eagle fire district is not a part of Eagle city, yet, when Eagle city annexes, the
Eagle Fire District claims that they, then, have jurisdiction over areas that the city of
Eagle annexes. My understanding is that our rural fire department has -- I don't know if
they have taken it to court, but there is the legal issue of this in some formal manner, is
what I understand. So, I don't know where it is in the process or anything like that. So,
they are trying to get back all the areas that - in the Eagle Fire District that were -- that
are their rural fire district, really. So, they have always been very concerned about this
area and it's important to them that it stays in the rural fire district or in the city fire
district at some point for their funding. We have the only fire district that is both a rural
and a city fire district and share resources. So, the rural fire district is entirely
dependent upon the areas that are outside the city, but are inside their fire district and
as other fire districts come and take that away, basically, they are losing all their taxable
ground. They are going out of existence. So, it's a big concern to the fire district. So,
certainly, for that reason it would be important. Also, the library district follows the river.
There are a number of other districts that follow the river and are not quite as important
sometimes, but there are other ones. Now, I think I'm rambling. Sony.
~~ Zaremba: Oh, I certainly would support aligning all of those -- you know, aligning our
~~ area of impact with districts that relate to us. I wasn't aware that the zip code went that
far north, but that makes sense as well. Not that the postal service is right about
everything, but if they at sometime determined that this is an area that's easy for them
to service, then, it would seem like police and fire might think in the same boundaries. I
could see including it in our area of impact. Any other opinions?
~'' Moe: Oh, I would definitely agree and for the point that it already has been pretty much
Meridian, thereafter, I would rather just see it stay that way as well. I guess the only --
the only point I make, the area that we took out that is on -- at Linder, that area, you
;~~ ~ ".
,:r
~ c2 +~r.
~~
. '
~
~ ~ r
s a
~ ~ ~ ~~
f
c.
~
~
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~
.
;,
4~',~~
~a
a ,
it >
~~~ >~
~l'c~t
~
~
r
}
, x
SY. ~
~ ,F
4 s ~ .Y
`~
e~''
~ 3 ,`
~
~
t b_
J~
{ 5:..
~r•
~+d~t 1 ~ ~,
l
~~, r
~~
~
~ ~
~
'
';;cy h
~
' ,
~
.
,'
~
~'
ty, '-fit;'
'
`l.,
' ~ _
~
~
~
~
v
f, i
~
~ f
_~2l"~ raYr.Y
F• y
r
t 4 f 3
'} .y;~~. ~.^t
7
~:~
_3
~s
Meridian Planning & Zoning SpeciaTlEl'eeting/Workshop
~; -'. ! July 14, 2005
~,. - Page 22 of 33
~ ;
~ ~ know, that those homeowners, they are the ones that do not want to be in Meridian
~ l:
'~~ ~-1 itself, I mean it would be nice to have been able just basically to follow Linder down to
;.
~;,3
~" the river and, then, take it across. I mean -- but, again, I would definitely like to see us
E' L`~~ go to the river, if, in fact -- I mean based upon the report here, it seems like everything is
Meridian's.
` Canning: Commissioner Zaremba, it's getting close to 9:00 and we only have two other
T^_~ people in the audience that didn't speak. You might just ask them if they wanted to --
'kh Rohm: You're welcome to.
` Zaremba: We have to have you speak on the microphone, though. We would like to
;~_.
~``~ have your input. Thank you. State your name and address, please.
h.~ )~-
~_
~'. Spriggel: My name is Robert Spriggel. My wife Judy. We live on McDermott Road --
west side of McDermott Road between Ustick and McMillan. We are just interested in
~, what's going on and just trying to find out what the take out is for that half mile and
~`~~ what's the impact going to be on us in the future. We own this small property there,
'~ about 16 acres. So, it's a learning thing for us right now just to find out what's going on.
Rohm: Were you folks at the last --
a''
~.
~y°
;~
-.:
~,
~~
~.
~.,
FY.
:,
{~
A;-, ~..
x~, _~.
n$: ..
Spriggel: No.
Zaremba: The open house.
Spriggel: Did not know about it.
Rohm: Oh. Okay. Thank you.
Spriggel: That was another question. Is there a method to notify property owners in the
area or --
Rohm: I think all of these meetings are noticed in the newspaper, but I don't think each
individual property owner, when the scope is this big, gets personal notification.
Zaremba: I think there was some effort to notify people for that open house, wasn't
there?
Hawkins-Clark: There was, Commissioner, and I have added the Spriggels to our list,
because Judy called and requested I think, so -- we have maintained a list for anyone
who is interested, but have not, correct, notified everyone. That meeting, everybody
who owned -- I think we had to make apoint -- we had to make a cutoff point
somewhere. I think we chose 30 acres or more were notified.
~.
~'
f."
t
P.
£'
~'.
~, _.
~'.
2Y:
is
r
~ ' ~~ ,
4
r
T
t
4 f~ ~
i Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~etingNVorkshop
~.,
~i=c'~ _ July 14, 2005
_ -a Page 23 of 33
~~ Spriggel: And just what I have picked up here, it sounds like the proposed Highway 16
'~ coming down McDermott Road, it sounds like first that that is the preferred road,
b~~ possibly, and it sounds like it's going to be a fairly major highway with limited access.
~~;:
~Y So, I guess what I don't understand or need to ask is if you own property that only has
access on that road, how would you get access or what becomes of your property if you
can't get onto this new highway? And one more question. How far out is that? Are we
talkin then ears, 20 ears, or five ears?
M 4® 9 Y Y Y
'`~ :~~ Rohm: Those are all pretty good questions.
Zaremba: Ten is probably the closest, 20 might even be -- Anna.
~:
~{ ~~' Canning: Let's see. We will try the big question first. The timing. It does seem to be
;.
part of the push of the governor to get his north-south road, so I think there will be
emphasis on that. Probably be between 2010 and 2020 is as far as I'm willing to guess,
`~ but probably on the closer side of that, I would imagine. Regarding the access, that is a
~ ,,,, challenge and probably what will need to happen is that as the properties either north or
~~ ,:, south of you develop, we will require a frontage road be provided parallel to Highway
fi 16, either -- either to allow -- either right next to the right of way, so that it's just road --
~. frontage road and, then, Highway 16, or to allow some development in between. But
'~ `'~ we will just require those stubs as they go down. So, you'll probably have to wait until
~S ,
the property -- intervening properties either going north or south develop. If you're right
''' "'"' smack in the middle of the section, you're kind at the mercy of folks, so -- where you're
~ .r at, so -- or it could go east or west, you know, there is a possibility there. But it is one of
t~~"~ those cases where you probably have a wait for the intervening properties to develop.
Spriggel: The highway is to be somewhat like a freeway or a five lane or --
h°:: Canning: It is -- I think right now we are assuming it's at least five way limited access
.; freeway, so there would be access a Chinden and at Ustick. And, actually, as ITD does
;; their studies, they may be proposing to construct frontage roads for those properties
~-~r along McDermott. I -- they don't know yet. But that could be a part of their work
;~~~ :~-~ - program.
Spriggel: Thank you.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rohm: Thank you for coming.
Zaremba: Are there other issues you wish to have opinions about or have we touched
most of them?
-: Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. I guess to summarize a couple of your key ones, you are at this
~~-,.' point in support of keeping the four square miles in. I heard a general consensus on
j~ that.
~M
~,
~7, ~ ~ ._
°sv~ ,a~„
h
~;
t
{ t
v~
~
k
~. 7.
~''?', '~ NfrI.K ~.
t~ 1,..
~
~M~LTl.~.R
# ~S ~ .
~h t
i
,~~
Rtf~ '~ 'CI
~
~i ~
~k ~,
~ L
~_
~_
~_
`
.
~
y
~~ ~p~ -
L ~:-'- _
~F~'a a' h
~aiir s~ i~~s ,
i ~~ _ '~~
"~ L
2
~
yy
Y - ~
.:y.
1 . .
S
~' ~~K
~,r Y
.
~ily~
^~
~
'~
;~y
~~T
~Yf~~
~
' P' _
~~~
~~
JJ
1:~~
re fem. _
~> ~
i
i4.
~.
~
,
. - fig-
Meridian Planning & Zoning SpeciallGl~eting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 24 of 33
Zaremba: I believe we have consensus leaning that way, yes.
Hawkins-Clark: And the McDermott alignment is something the Commission is in
support of.
Zaremba: For Highway 16.
Hawkins-Clark: For Highway 16.
Zaremba: As opposed to -- it's probably too late to do it anywhere else.
. ~ Hawkins-Clark: Well -- and the idea of dividing the communities, too, I think is just --
~A ` And we will certainly approach the police and that, but I mean if -- as you well know, I
-~.~ mean on the few instances where the police department has been asked for specific
.:,;
comments -- I mean even on applications in our area of impact, they -- they are
~,.
~~~~~ stretched so thin they would prefer to annex even those, so --
j
' -~ Zaremba: Well, at some point I suppose the solution is to have a sub station out that
~. ,
'' way or something, I guess.
~:.
~~. ~~ ~ Hawkins-Clark: Taking the boundary to the river. I heard general support. The request
~`a -- certainly these -- from my standpoint, you know, it does not make sense to include
'~' just one property, I mean we would want to include that whole chunk.
~';`,
Zaremba: Basically from Linder to Can-Ada? The river from Linder to Can-Ada?
Rohm: I personally like that idea a lot.
Borup: Especially if we are talking about a park down there.
Zaremba: That could be very attractive.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. I mean just to clarify, Star, their application that's on September
1st, is over to McDermott. So, I don't think we would go as far as any further west than
~~:;: that. Of course, even that -- I mean I think it's very -- I just definitely want to point out
' that -- that I'm 95 percent certain Eagle, you know, would -- they will oppose it, just so
;< you know. I mean that will be a point of discussion, but Star -- and maybe even where
~. T,
~~..: g y g p, you know, is maybe even another more logical
i~~ ~'` the Hi hwa 16 ali nment ends u
~~ ~~~ lace. I think Anna mentioned that. So, the difFicul with that, of course, is we are not
~~' p tY
~' ~~ going to know that for several years, so --
Borup: So, basically, what you're saying, just extend the area that's north of Chinden
~ now, just extend it to the river.
~~,~' Rohm: Right.
_ {' 3 -~, Y~ ~"~~
~-
t' - ~ ...
'!T
S. `
t
~';. s;
~ _
dq I +F ! i ~ 8 ~8
!~ F ~~. S`~ jj~°.3 f + ~ y.t 3. ..~( 3 It .1 .s~ ~' {~} ln~ aS A.. ,~ rh..
~.
t
~i ,
~Y
ti. .'t.:
"t'"
.1`
.,+: €
~ ~~ 1~
Meridian Planning & Zoning SpeciallE~eting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 25 of 33
;; '? "
Zaremba: Okay.
"'~ Rohm: We'd like to see you consider that for sure.
~...
x:
~i Moe: Yes.
r y
,_ l Borup: Now, while we are on Highway 16, has there been any discussion of the tie-in
from Ten Mile, other than a pencil line on a map? I
;: '~
~'=~ Canning: I'm not sure I understand the question. There would be a new intersection,
- there would be a new interchange at McDermott is what they are proposing.
;.
Borup: Oh. McDermott and the freeway.
s
ae' ;-
-~"::` Canning: Yeah.
~ ~ Borup: Okay.
4,`~',
wr i'r
`' ~w Canning: And that would be the one that Nampa might contest, asking to drag it more
}~`
toward Star.
~:
'`~ Borup: So, that would eliminate the tie in from Ten Mile that was discussed previously.
'`:'
Canning: Correct. Ten Mile would be their own interchange and just --
~.
~~ ~= Borup: So, you're talking about having the road swing over?
=.
Rohm: I'm not opposed to having both Ten Mile and McDermott.
~:
~~, ~ ~ Borup: That's what Anna just said.
., .
~f
~~~; Canning: Yes. That's the proposal.
~ ~; .
x' ~ Borup: Ten Mile would still happen first, right?
y~
~ Canning: Right.
=,~~
~'~' ~ Zaremba: But the issue Commissioner Borup is raising is there have -- there has been
discussion that the extension of Highway 16 would be Ten Mile and I --
~ ~~~
"~''~~ Borup: Well, the ones I have seen earlier would be west of Ten Mile, but, then, there
=' would be a tie-in to it.
~~,.'"
::; Zaremba: Yeah. Or coming down Black Cat and having a coat hanger over to Ten
''"" Mile. I think we are substitutin t in to focus attention on McDermott for all of that.
~_.
,'
,~~i_ r
R'~3„
j
~.
~".
.:-
~.
;,
~~.
t
!3 ~ c•"s` . "+.; ~ r 'M1 ~ I ~;# a f' ~ :r "";'.yam. '*`"~' 3 ; aw%~;-',.: - a
~.:: ~~;'r'i 6 2 f .~"~.~. 5 .~~. f ,.t t' ~~_~ ~ .W ~~ A •,,.1.+'1. ~3.`.`7~~ . . :/....i h:rY
n
C : ~ .. .-
r°.
~~
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia eeting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
"t ~ ` Page 26 of 33
Borup: Much better idea.
',
Zaremba: Yeah.
{;
~~ Canning: All of those discussions have pretty much gone by the wayside. I think with
~~ >~< the passing of the GARVEE bond proposal, we focused on a separate new interchange
.t;
.°i for Highway 16 extension.
Borup: Don't have all that interior mile right of way to worry about.
Moe: Right.
r
Zaremba: It would be tough to get the right of way along Ten Mile or Black Cat to do it.
'' °+ Hawkins-Clark: And a general point, looking at more mixed use, possibly based on
In ~~ absorption. And just to clarify again, we -- assuming that the City Council approves it,
.~ we have asked for this market study or I guess Anna just needs to approve it. So, that
~' ~ { would tell us, at least enerall from one market anal st, what kind of this area would
take on, but I think that we had talked about, you know, that Chinden corridor and at
~ ~. least in the one square mile adding more, but do you want to give us more direction
~ ~'~ there?
Moe: Well, I know that Commissioner Zaremba said he'd just as soon see quite a bit
-'
~.~4 more there.
~- .
~a ;
Zaremba: I'm not stuck on it, but I'd load it up with as much commercial as we can sell.
~<~.: ~,
~~=`-' Moe: I'm not so sure that I'm opposed to the way it is, other than the fact that I am sure
~.~_
~. that we are going to see something between Ten Mile and Black Cat on the south side
_..::
F with Brighton Corp's development there. I think at that point that's enough, but that's my
<<~, opinion.
~~- Borup: And I'm probably closer to Commissioner Zaremba that I think, you know,
~<;'~ whatever the market will bear. I'd like to see some of that market driven, but I feel very
strongly about Chinden and the access points, that it needs to be limited to the half mile
~~ and with frontage or backage roads. So, you know, I don't think we would want some of
the problems we have on Eagle. And this is the time to do something about that.
;;
~ >~ Zaremba: Amen to that.
~,~;w
~~ ~ ~~' Rohm: Yeah. I think we all agree on that.
Borup: Okay.
Rohm: That we don't want a repeat of Eagle on Chinden and as long as we do that --
~:_: ;.
#"*
~~~ fr 'f `r
.
~,
~
¢ ,{.,
~° ~
{
~~'
, }
~
$ ~
k-
.. +' ~ ..
s °
;:
s
.
r E
~(
`
ti ~
y ~~'~
~
r,~
r
t ~ ~~ iW
'S.
$
_
4 f
t,
.~
+~~ x
~~~~
`~~k~
. i
.
. ' Y
k
~i*"TY""'
y~
~~~ ~ t
4
~yy,n~',~/RI '4
t
{
f
t..:
iT'
~,Y~
'
;~y
ri
~}. ~ ~ a
~ 4(
~
'T
~ ryF
~
J
_._~ti
Y
h,1 ~}!
h ~ ~?~ r -
~7 " 7 :i..j i~
~ i
4 S.
h;
..
~~~~
'? ~
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~etingNllorkshop
July 14, 2005
~~':r', Page 27 of 33
~.:' °?:
~_~ ._
~~~;
~~ .` Zaremba: And access points is the biggest part of it.
~~
Borup: And if we limit the access points, then, the developers need to decide if it's a
~~~
~A.,: viable project for them to have commercial there or not. So, what I'm saying is to have
flexibility on the Comp Plan designations that it can change as demand may change.
~`
{~ Moe: Brad, did you not say, though -- don't remember the name of it, but for good
~',`` growth?
-~~~~
~,~ , Hawkins-Clark: Blueprint.
~:,;_
`~ ~ Moe: Okay. That, basically, we are nearing the point enough mixed use for that plan
.. the way it's designed.
:,°
~,
-~-u-- Hawkins-Clark: Correct. That is what Compass and their modeling has come back with
~~~' so far. That's what I was told last --about three weeks ago.
-~
Moe: Okay.
~,-
Zaremba: I could see when they consider the cities that are around the perimeter of the
~~
`a °
~ Treasure Valley, I can see that that could be a logical -- you know, to state, okay, here
'
~ s what you ought to do. Meridian being right in the middle of all this
is your mix and that
f' and being the receiver of all of their traffic, is a little different animal and I'm -- of course,
'~ ~ ` I don't know what the numbers are and how restrictive they are, but I -- you know, we
~` °' could be the commercial center for the whole valley and that would be far out of whack
Y~~ with their numbers, probably. But we have an opportunity for Meridian that -- you know,
.~ not that I want to make it us against the other cities, but I would want to know how
- limiting they want to be. I think Meridian has an opportunity to be a commercial center
~~-~.~ ~ for the whole valley and that may throw those numbers off. Again, a personal opinion.
Moe: Actually, I think that's a very good point. That's a very good point. ~
~ Hawkins-Clark: I think one thing you have not seen -- was there anything else on that
°'~ point? I mean -- this is, obviously, an ongoing discussion, but --
Canning: I just wanted to point out that a huge problem we have with our Comp Plan is
~~ ' ;
~ ~- that the developers see mixed use and think commercial and you all are doing exactly
= the same thing, which is fine, but if it's -- if you really are thinking of commercial on ~ :;.
~~;.;;' Chinden -- now, maybe we should consider it a commercial designation, rather than a
mixed used designation. That's all I was going to say.
-~ Rohm: I think that's a great point. It certainly clears things up a lot when we receive
~~~' applications.
~; ,I
w~:....
,~.
r.-
~-
~~
;:
,_
}
~
:
~4
~~
4
l~
~~ r ~'
r -
e~' ~ _
A~'
'~ . _
_-
'
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special
I~eting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
~' r
.,', Page 28 of 33
A~ ' ~ Canning: We have mixed use and if what they really want is commercial, then, let's call
...
it what it is.
~- Moe: But at the same time, I think there has been some developments that have come
~f ~~
through that they have wanted to do more commercial within the mixed use and we
x~~ have been able to explain to them, no, we do want to see the mixed use. I look at the
~ ;,~ project there on Eagle and Pine, you know, they were wanting to go a lot more
~~~=;~ commercial and we did require to do more mixed use in there.
t.-A' Canning: I just wanted to make sure you had the conversation, because I was hearing
the two used interchangeably, so I wanted to make sure.
Zaremba: I think what I would like to explore, among us or among you, or whatever, is
sticking with the mixed use and traditional neighborhood theory, but maybe along
~° Chinden, instead of making it radial, so that you maybe have a commercial and, then,
down to retail, down to office, down to multi-family, down to single family in an
'' expanding circle, that we make that lineal. All along Chinden the first 300 feet from
;~ Chinden is commercial, really commercial, and, then, the next 300 feet -- you just take
"`~ your expanding circle and make it lineal, so that by the time you're a quarter of a mile
from Chinden you're into multi-family and then -- I mean it's the same concept and
P' within a larger area it's mixed use. Just a thought. I mean it --
~~~~ Rohm: That's what I envisioned.
Zaremba: I think all of those things do need to happen. I'm just not sure -- you know,
~' I'm not sure that Chinden lends itself -- I'm not sure I would want to live in a residence
on Chinden. It's going to be a busy street. But I think incorporating all those mixed
. , uses within some distance from it is something to explore.
'' `' Hawkins-Clark: Thinking about it from a transportation design standpoint, which we
:?:
°`' didn't talk about tonight, but which is part of this application, in terms of where are
~''`" collectors going to go, our new collectors, you know, there is some logic to that in terms
-~ of rennin our Chinden fronta a or back-a a road, you know, and, then, havin ma be
~k 9 Y g 9 9 Y
another collector system that runs through there, you know. There is various patterns of
w` development that planning purists have come up with over the years and, you know,
~'' ~' some of them are more concentric and some of them are more boxy looking and --
~:
M? ~~ Zaremba: Well, my inclination would be to stick with the circle idea at other
}~"'~~ intersections. Ustick -- you know, along Ustick I -- the same circle idea would appeal to
~* ~' me. I just see Chinden as a different -- something different, I guess.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. In terms of residential, I mean there is numerous examples, of
_ course, of residential doing quite well on state highways. I mean you can drive down
Eagle Road and you get almost into Eagle -- you know, into Eagle and I don't know that
they are losing dramatic property values down there just because they are next to
Highway 55.
r.
r ~ ~`
~
.
t:
i:~:,.
,,
~ ~ -.
f
r,~:
r
~
_
`c,` e{
e .^
s
`
.a
~~~.
Meridian Planning ~ Zoning Special l~eetlng/Workshop
July 14, 2005
,~:; =;`
Page 29 of 33
~~,~.
„f_
~, ;;
Zaremba: That's true. The buffers are pretty.
Rohm: Yeah. They have just taken that 300-foot and put it into a forest.
~,= _
~`' ,, Zaremba Yeah. It's a berm.
~'`~ Rohm: It's a berm.
I
~:
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. Eagle -- yeah. Well, you know, on Chinden I mean you have
~ k` Yorgason's project, Castleberry or whatever it's called, you know, on the north side of
~;;:r Chinden there. Eagle does have a 75 foot wide buffer requirement to help
~~` accommodate that, but -- okay. The two things, I guess, to point out before we move
onto the next steps here, the draft policies that will actually be heart and soul of the text
~:
=' amendment, you haven't seen yet. Frankly, probably the most significant ones are
_
~~ `{~
, going to be related to the preservation corridor. You know, a lot of the rest of them are
{..
`~
`~
going to be almost identical. But, in particular, how do we -- as the folks here tonight,
-': ~
` you know, those people that reside -- if this moves on, you approve it, City Council
M1 `
,
=-
.~~:
~
~
approves it, and we are basically saying to ITD as a city, this is where we prefer this
:
.
«~ ~~ alignment to be. So, you have in that area -- I don't know what happened to our map,
~`~ but in that area -- in that crooked area there are 95 -- again, following in there, there is
``~' 95 parcels of record, 74 property owners. Twenty-six of those parcels are zoned R-R,
which means ten acre minimum and 69 of them are zoned RUT, which means five acre
%~ minimums. While the majority of the land area is, obviously, in the bigger parcels, the
:~ vast majority of them are actually small. The median parcel size in that area -- I just
~
:,.,_ love doing these numbers. 4.8 acres. So, I guess what I m getting at fis we need to
~~~'`~
,~~ come up with some policies that deal with this area in helping us to preserve it and, you
;~
~'''~' know, there is a couple different approaches we can go with. One is we would actually
~"'~ say in our Comp Plan, dear Ada County, we want to have an area of city impact
~ :, agreement with you, but we want to amend it and we are asking you to -- instead of
'~ allowing one house per ten acres or one house per five acres, we are asking you to say
one house per 30 acres or one house per 40 acres -- you know, sort of control it more
on a density -- now there is maybe -- there is legal issues, things there, because they --
'~~` there is a right that people have to do something with their property that you can't take
~`;,:
~_ ..~, away, unless you either buy it or, otherwise, legally, you know, preserve it. There is
,:~ many different types of preservation methods for corridors. Unfortunately, ITD being so
fiscally strapped, you know, a lot of those do have to do with money and -- but I guess
:-~> I'm just pointing out that we haven't come up with the specifics and if you have thoughts,
}~~ not that we are going to talk about all that tonight, but we -- that's one key point of
~'''~
:; ; discussion in terms of how we do that.
`~ Borup: Basically, you're saying no development until ITD decides on the alignment. Is
E =~ that basically it?
~`
Hawkins-Clark: Within the scope of the law. I mean --
w.,~:;
~~~:
~~.
r ~,
`,
~ ,
~'~ k Y
~~wL~ ~ 1a.- .
~ T,
F ^~
.s
~
~~K~
~ y
S
~ d;
~
,
u
~ ~ ' t~'
~
,~,'; ~ ~ ~-y. ,
~~
~ ~`
~ ;'s
mot` ~
r- -
h ~
~S?~ }
~ f
£ '~#y
r
\c!f~~t~
,. Sys
~~~~~~ C r '-`
,y
' M1,
.' r `
~ a
4S
.~~wy
~
~
t?
y~_
~~ ~~
.~
"
'F=
~~'
~
;
?fir
~-Y -
1
,,,j
Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia eeting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 30 of 33
~f:~`. Borup: Yes. No. I understand that. But that's probably what we are trying to
"' accomplish.
Hawkins-Clark: Sure. Exactly. I mean ITD -- I think the City of Meridian should work
with ITD to help them limit the amount of money it's going to cost to purchase that land
,... and --
<:~ ' Borup: Exactly. And that's why people always complain about planning from 20, 30
years ago, because those type of things weren't done. You know, this is the time to do
that and I feel real strong about right of way preservation or in this case it would be
limiting development until that's decided. Once it's decided and the right of way is
determined what they need, then, it's whatever needs to -- whatever can happen.
~.
~.
,~-~
u,
r
:r
a•:
~:
*..
~,
s
Zaremba: The comment I was going to make is the issues that we face with trying to
preserve McDermott as a corridor and make it ITD's default choice, even though they
say they aren't going to make a decision until they have studied everything, we would
face those same issues ten fold if we wanted to focus on Black Cat, probably 20 fold if
we wanted to focus on Ten Mile. I mean the three possibilities -- I mean if you started
back ten years or 20 years ago, Ten Mile was the logical choice. Well, since nothing
happened during that time, the choice moves and, yes, we do need to do something to
help the property owners. I mean we can't just say, no, you can't do anything with your
property. That's not fair. Something does have to be done. But that's not unique to
McDermott. We would have had to have done that anywhere else we did it and, as
Commissioner Borup points out, at this point the cheapest place to do that is
McDermott, because it's almost -- you know, it's out of fiscal realm to probably to do it at
what -- on the places that would have been a good choice 20 years ago.
Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. If we --
Zaremba: So, it isn't that this creates a unique problem, we would have had this
problem no matter where we were trying to steer this.
Hawkins-Clark: Yeah. If we knew the exact alignment that would, obviously, help
things a lot and it would impact fewer people and, you know, there is things like just
excessive setbacks that you can do, you know, to keep people out of the actual right of
way itself, but when it's a mile wide, setback really isn't a method. So, there needs to
be some other options. So, that's one big area that you haven't seen that we will do
some more thinking on and get something back to you. The other key piece that you
haven't seen is a collector map and some transit -- a little bit more detail on transit and
some policies there. So, one question for you is knowing that you haven't seen those
two things and we haven't talked about them, how -- would you like to schedule another
workshop? Are you comfortable that just getting those two things in a formal application
and setting them for ahearing -- how would you like to proceed?
Zaremba: Commissioners?
.,
,~
y~
-~~,r ~ ;~
=~- ~
.
~.
x
~; ~ n ~lTf.,:~
r ~ ~
S•~ (ryry" ~~{~ {~ ~"1
~sM1M~~
}
-i~~a4~.~ ~
J
R'ri C;.-t~ _
-~'
r R
~
i ]'.
~
~
`5: ~' i
F u
}; ~
~,.,~~d„Y~e1 ~'YiC~
~
t f ~
..
~
rk ~~ ~x~r. _
ih
~~k~
i
~
~
i a
t
~7',e`+Y'1' i~~
'
~J
4.•
Yi ~ 1-
Li~.,
+~ ~g.+ ~ .. ... -
.
r id .
r. ~
~i~r~M
~ 4
~-~ x7 ix ul
~
5~'r rt~'~a~
,,
S ti
r
r $;
'
i~T
rr
,t
"~ Meridian Planning & Zoning SpeciallG~eeting/Workshop ~"
July 14, 2005
Page 31 of 33
-~
Moe: Probably myself would probably like to have another workshop and be able to see
`~"~ that. I would anticipate -- are we, then, anticipating making the changes to the river and
j a few other things with this plan at that point?
Borup: Well, I think that was the consensus from the Commission.
Moe: Yes.
Borup: The other information that would be coming you said would be the
transportation information and --
Hawkins-Clark: And the policies related to the preservation corridor.
Borup: Okay. Aren't those -- but most of things could be presented at the beginning of
a Public Hearing, though.
Hawkins-Clark: They could. I think it's just how much would you like to talk about it
before you get into a Public Hearing setting.
Zaremba: My instinct probably would go with Commissioner Moe. I like to be more
prepared at a Public Hearing and I probably would be in favor of having one more
workshop, even if it were a short one, just to feel more prepared before we went into the
Public Hearing.
Borup: That makes sense. That's probably one we could do prior to a scheduled
meeting even.
Zaremba: Possible. Yeah. Have apre-meeting for a half hour or something.
Moe: I think that would be workable.
Rohm: Yeah. I like that idea. Come in at 6:00 and we will have a workshop from 6:00
to 7:00 and, then, start our regularly scheduled P&Z meeting at that time.
Borup: Staff would probably like that better, too.
Zaremba: Yeah. The one question I would ask -- and I'll betray the fact that I moved
here after the interstate was built. There are certainly people around that would
remember the process that was gone through in deciding the alignment for that and
what happened to the property owners that suddenly had an interstate going to run right
through the middle of their property. Is there any way to tap that knowledge? I don't
even know if that's a logical question, but I mean this is -- it's not a new subject, it's just
a new location.
Hawkins-Clark: Right. Yeah. I mean my first thought is probably be better to go for a
jurisdiction that has dealt with it more recently, you know, because there has been --
1
r. `~.. , .
r.
~.
i _
~;
t - ~~
~-
_~
w,
~,
`.' Meridian Planning & Zoning Specia~eting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 32 of 33
there is new tools that have come into play over the last 30 years that we can use,
probably, that they didn't have when the I-84 was going through, but --
Borup: In this case we are talking about a section line road, just increasing the right of
way, isn't it?
Hawkins-Clark: Not necessarily.
Rohm: Well, that's why a half mile --
,;~ Borup: You're saying impact studies could designate it somewhere else, other than on -
.: ~ -all right.
~;'''1 Canning: ITD is forced to look at more than one location, but the practical fact is that if
we preserve a corridor right on McDermott, all of a sudden in their ERR is going to
make -- it's going to make it look really good to be right on McDermott, because we
~' preserved that corridor. So, ITD has acknowledged that they have to look at either side,
'~` but that the decisions that the City of Meridian makes regarding this will have a great
deal of influence on the eventual results or those studies.
''s Borup: But the study is not going to show that it makes more sense to run it a third or a
quarter mile in from the section line --
Canning: They have to look at that.
Borup: Right. Okay.
': >-;aw Canning: But if there is a corridor preserved right at McDermott, then, the likelihood of a
" ~ ~:~ third of a mile off McDermott in the approved location is nil, I mean. Or minimal.
Borup: Okay. Well, I mean that's the difference between this -- or what I saw of this
`-~ and the freeway. The freeway don't believe followed an existing road at all. Wait a
`; minute. Or did it. Was that the old highway?
Rohm: The only part that I remember is from Meridian Road into Boise and Overland
was the route that my family always took into Boise from Meridian on in and the freeway
`"" surplanted that. Well, Franklin was Highway 30 --
Borup: And I think in the way of -- clear to Mountain Home was out there passed
Micron and that road was I think how we headed onto Mountain Home on.
Rohm: Did the freeway go through Meridian first and, then, finished out at Boise? Is
~ what -- and you get off the freeway at Meridian and, then, you had to either go north to
=~ Franklin or south to Overland and -- to finish the route into Boise? I think that's what
_ happened. Because I can remember that we would get off and drive Overland on into
Boise back in the '60s or whenever that was. Along time ago.
~:,
,.
f.
~,
~.,
ft ~ {
4
:~
F,
'
.
i
1
Meridian Plannin & Zonin S ecial'fOreetin Mlorksho
9 9 P 9 P
July 14, 2005
„~-~~ Page 33 of 33
,; , ,
-`-~~ Borup: It might have still been a highway, but it was different than asection -- it's
~:~~`' obviously not a section line road, was -- I guess was the only reason I even brought that
up
f'`' Hawkins-Clark: We will have it all figured out at your next meeting.
~;
:~ Moe: All right.
Hawkins-Clark: Okay. Well, we will go ahead and incorporate some of these changes
into the map, get some more information to you on the policies, do some research on
maybe somebody who was involved with I-84 and maybe even Eagle Road, which
~;;
would be more similar to McDermott and, you know, see if we can get some lessons
learned for you and we will seta 6:00 o'clock workshop, hopefully within the next month, ~~
:Y' before either your first meeting in August or your second meeting in August; is that --
`^i
Rohm: Works forme.
Zaremba: Works for me. I know the second meeting in August, Commissioner Newton-
Huckabay will not be here. She will be here for the first meeting, if that makes a
difference. I think she'd like to be included.
`'`~ Hawkins-Clark: We will shoot for that.
=;y Zaremba: Anything else we need to say or do? I would entertain a motion to adjourn.
~::
~' Rohm: Mr. Chairman?
~:
Zaremba: Commissioner Rohm.
',.•:~~ Rohm: I move we adjourn.
~* Moe: Second.
~~.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
''r~~ MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:32 P.M.
~'~' (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
~i
~,;;
~~:-
fi :,}cy
r ~e,i, ,
w
~~~ ~• ~'.
4 •~ ~q°~ bt ~~C i .
~ i'
,, ~i
2 ~.
3 ~ ; •M1 ~
'~, ~~ ,_~~ a''~'g"~
a°
~;~' '~ ,
3 I~i~ ' x•.' ~.
S ~,
I~
ix
is
Ir
t;
i. :~.
~~~.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Speciall~feeting/Workshop
July 14, 2005
Page 34 of 33
APPROVED:
~~ ~
DAVID REMBA -fC IRMAN
ATTESTED:
~ U ~~~ ~ ~
DATE APPROVED
\\~~,,, ~I 11111111,,,1'/
~ ~~,~ ~ c > > ,~'~
ERG JR., CITY LE ~ j,
~.
R'
ti' t
i
~.
r
r.;~'.
i.
s
r.
i
r
S~'
¢.,
k-:ti,
~;, f:
it
`r,i
~~~
r_ r,
.. 31@~
:1,4.
~!
„~,
Ytit ;.~,,
sa.
_~_. .:~;
.;.~,.
';~;t
Vii;-.~i~
Y-~":~.
~:;'..
'Ti'i;. ,
'A~i
.9 ~ •
:.
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING /WORKSHOP
_; s
~ ' ~ North Meridian Comprehensive Plan Amendment
~.~ July 14, 2005
~:~
-_.
~~1 1. Review of Applications
- CPA application (two private applications being held to be heard with
ra
~r ~ ~ NMCPA)
~v.'
`~ - AOCI application
~:
~ 'r 2. Purpose and Scope
~~
'~'"~' 3. Highlights from Future Land Use Map
t
"'~''~ ~ - Existing AOCI land uses
.
`~ - MU-WWTP area
s~ ,.`
:=:~ - Proposed AOCI land uses
~{ _
North Rim Area
~ - SH16 Preservation Corridor
`~;~ 4. Draft Policies
;:'~ 5. Next Steps
r
~, ~
F. ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~ ~ i
~-, -
~== ~~
a
~ ~ ~ r ~ i
~~ ~ ~
0
U~tl
u'. ~ ~ II
~, ~_~
.L. '"~ri n 1 .L_l ?~_ dI ..I.
u ~_r ~ l I - - ~ ~~
~~ ~ a- ~
~~~ -.
~ ~ ~'1-~-~- -'~-r _
~ i
`I
i - ~ C
1 i ~ `E ~~ ~~~ 4~ ~~~ m6
,_ ~. ~ ~~=
~ b ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~~ e
e
/i
~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~
'~ ~ ~ ~~a~~~~
i ~,, S
-„ ~' ~~J®®~I 11®711
+~y
r -__ ~ i - _
~
lil~ ~/' ~' ~
f~,)~
~~]
~~ _
~ ~ 1
r
,
_
i, -~ ~ j I .~~j ~_ ~ o ~
~d
~~, ~~
~
~~ g _ ~ ~
~ ~
l-~
~ _
-
~
f ~
~
~ Z ,
J
SIP
~I
_ `
~~'
W J~
¢F/ ~
/
1 J ~
a
_ Y 8
~ ~ ~ '_s~ ~ ~ ~
s;.
L _
~
~
-- -
,4r I ,~
.:
--~~'
-
- ~
; ; -
~ 1 - -._ ~ ~
p `' ~ \ i
( c
I~ /~} ~ ~~ J ~ I~ ,
_ /
r -
- - -
~ F
-
~ - ~ -
`f
1
~ ~
/Fpm
1
1
~ ~.
i ~ _ ~•
i~ ~~ ,1 ~ ~
- '; -
~ M
I
~~ '~
`. ~ -
/ - ~ J
---
~-
~,
~. ~ ,
~ " ~ ~
i ~ U
I ~
I~-~_~ ~\.~\ ~
~
~ -
~
S
~ r
~
~
Y--
I -
- --
-
i
~~
- ~
~
~
`~
i -
~
~ ~ r i
i i
r I ~
~
/~ ~ J 1
y
~ ~ ~
~~ ~
`
at \ s ~~\ --
~
~~~ .,
~
, ~~_ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s /
j ~_l~ 1 ~~ ~
~~
~ F1,~ ~ I ~
a
c
I~~ I t~ n ,, ~ ~. r ~ ai -
E f; ~ ~ L ~ ~~
A ~
~..
l
~
U ~~
~
~
I I r~
4\
I _~ J
I
I
11 ~ - ~ ~
+ `
~
~
,~ _
t
1
r
~ _ _
~' ~
I I
/ ~'
Fx~o~ I
i
~~
~
~ E
i-_
i
F ~ -
. -
i- l B ~, Y
Tara Green
From: Brad Hawkins-Clark [hawkinsb(~meridiancity.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 12:14 PM
To: greerrt@meridiancity.org
Subject: FW: New Map
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Green
Attachments: mercomp B.pdf; NMA CPA Application Cover.doc; NMA CPA Application Corrtent.doc; N
Phyllis Comparison.doc
~_
~,;,~,
',~'
mercomp B.pdf NMA CPA NMA CPA N Phyllis
(955 KB) ~plicadon Cover.doc rplic~on Contentdomparis4n.doc (38 K
Hi Tara,
Attached is the REVISED map for the PAZ Commission and the application stuff for
tomorrow's workshop. Please copy to the folks I mentioned in my a-mail yesterday.
Thanks agai n,
Brad
=+1~ -----Original Message-----
`~"' From: Ross Dodge [mailto:RDODGE@compassidaho.org]
~,'~ Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 11:32 AM
;:; To: hawkinsb@ci.meridian.id.us
~~ Subject: New Map
;r `
?`'~- see attached
~.fi ; .
.t -.
~ :::
1
NORTH MERIDIAN AREA CPA
INDIVIDUAL AOCI EXPANSION (LOWER RIM AREA)*
DISCUSSION OF KEY SERVICE PROVIDERS & OTHER FACTORS
June 2005
Factor Discussion
Public Streets/Connectivity Linder is the only street adjacent to this area that serves N of the river.
However, four (4) other public streets between Linder and McDermott
extend N of the rim; they just don't cross the river. It's likely that the
existing road network S of the river could be interconnected and likewise
for the area N of the river. All of the Alda a roe is S of the river.
Flood Plain Approx. 90% of the land between the rim and SH44 is either floodway,
100 year or 500 year floodplain (FP.) Nearly all of the land between the
rim and the river is 500 year FP, while most of the land between the river
and SH44 is 100 year FP. So, it could be argued that the more
developable property from a floodplain perspective is between the rim
and the river. Although Flood Control District #10 discourages
develo ment in the 500 ear FP as well.
Star 8~ Eagle Impact Areas The City of Star has included portions of the area between McDermott
and Black Cat, north of the rim, in their adopted Area of City Impact and
Land Use Map. So, there would be some overlap with Meridian if this
area were added. Ada County has not yet adopted their Comp Plan or
approved their Area of City Impact boundary. However, it is scheduled
for hearing in September.
The City of Eagle has included all of the area between Black Cat and
Linder, north of the rim, in their proposed Area of City Impact. So, there
would also be overlap with Meridian if Ada County approved their current
proposal. Ada County has not yet scheduled their application for a public
hearing.
Note: Ada County and the State of Idaho allow cities to overlap AOCI
boundaries.
Contiguous Block If the City considers including the Aldape property in the AOCI, we
should analyze the entire area to achieve a logical boundary. Otherwise,
it's too fragmented to plan effectively. The total land area between
McDermott and Linder and between the Phyllis Canal and Boise River is
approx. 1,400 acres. The Aldape land holding is approx. 390 acres, or
28% of the total. More investigation and surveying would be needed
regarding how the adjacent property owners feel about the AOCI change
before roceedin with the re nest.
Trade Area Difficult to fully determine without a market study and/or survey, but
traffic flow N of the river naturally migrates to SH44, which is oriented to
Star and Eagle. There was some public comment at the open house
which indicated eo le S of the river ident' more with Meridian.
Sewer Costs unknown at this time, but gravity systems are likely to flow north,
away from Meridian. Need a cost comparison between boring under the
river vs. um in over the rim.
Fire The Meridian Fire Department's district boundary extends to the Boise
River on the north.
Irrigation Phyllis Canal is boundary between Settlers and Eureka irrigation
districts.
Schools No difference. JSD #2 incor orates entire area.
Postal Service USPS uses Boise River as a zi code bounda
*Area is generally bounded by Phyllis Canal on the south, Boise River on the north,
McDermott on the west and Linder on the east.
~t~>
t ~;
NORTH MERIDIAN AREA
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
APPLICATION
r ~ ~_
~~ ; July 2005
~~~ ~ Application Organization & Content
This Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) application proposes to amend the 2002 City of
J' Meridian Comprehensive Plan (hereafter referred to as "Plan"), adopted on August 6, 2002
and amended by Resolution 03-401 and Resolution 04-454. The proposed changes affect both
r~: the text and map components of the Plan (as further defined below). The application contains
'~ `'
>, ,~
_~ the following sections:
ir. ~
r~ 4~ ~ A. A hcation Overview rovides back round, ur ose and assum tion in ormation
, Pp ~ (P g P P P f )
,,.,
~~-
B. CPA Application Questions (answers the questions required in the application forn2)
C. Idaho Code (briefly reviews Idaho Code requirements for changes to Area of City
;,~. Impact boundaries)
r, .,.
~~=.__: ;
D. Proposed Area of City Impact Map (graphically depicts the existing and proposed
` n ~ boundaries for tke Meridian Area of City InZpact)
E. Area of City Impact Justification (discusses. the 'three topic areas that Idaho Code
~`~ t, requires cities to address before Ada County cane. approve a boundary expansion)
sF•; F. Transportation/Infrastructure Text Changes (redlined amendments to Chapter VI of the
`;~ 2002 Comprehensive Plan)
C l k~+ ,+-
<.
G. Circulation Plan Map (a new figure proposed to be inserted into Chapter VIJ
I I. Land Use Text Changes (redlined amendments to Chapter VII of the 2002
Comprehensive Plan)
v ;- -.}~`
t I. Amended Future Land Use Map (a figure proposed to replace existing Figure VII-2 in
=3~
~~
._, Chapter VII)
s
t i.•':~'^Ni.
~:~
Each element listed above is inter-related with the subsequent element and the application
is most effectively read and understood in that manner.
A. Application Overview
i ` y' 1. Background
~- h ~ The genesis of this CPA application was in 2001, preceding even the adoption of the
current 2002 plan. While Meridian's overall growth rate in the 1990's was unprecedented
,, :-~. (approx. 230% increase in population between the 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census), only a
North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
~''y1 Page 1 of 10
-'i;L>~
4
s 3!,___: ...
... > J ;
small fraction of that growth occurred north of Ustick Road. Over 90% of subdivisions
created in the 1990's were located south of Ustick Road (mostly west of Meridian Road).
However, when the White Trunk Sewer project began construction in 2001 (extending
from Ten Mile Road to Locust Grove Road, between Ustick and McMillan), it would
eventually open up over three square miles of largely undeveloped county land to urban
scale development. This precipitated the acquisition of large land holdings by developers
and subsequent annexation and subdivision applications to the city. With some concern
about the provision and readiness of public infrastructure to serve this area, several
residential land developers hired Wardle and Associates, a local private planning firm, to
facilitate abroad-based planning effort that included mostly public agencies and technical
staff. This effort came to be known as the North Meridian Area Plan (NMAP).
After more than 18 months of workshops, interviews and planning, the NMAP was
submitted to the city as a CPA application. A public hearing was held before the Planning
& Zoning Commission in May 2003. While there was broad support for the plan's
content, staff believed the administrative challenges associated with the plan as submitted
would make implementation difficult. For example, the plan was written as a stand alone
document with no cross-references to the adopted plan. With consent of Wardle and
Associates, the application was withdrawn. Na formal recommendation was made by the
Planning & Zoning Commission, but they did strongly encourage staff to incorporate
many of the NMAP goals and policies in any future CPA application.
During her 2004 mayoral campaign, Mayor de Weerd made the NMAP a high priority,
calling for that plan to be revived and this time lead and initiated by the City of Meridian.
The Planning Department staff began meeting with various stakeholders to formulate a
timeline and method to more directly involve private property owners in the area. The
mayor and City Council-also directed staff to explore an expansion to the Area of City
Impact (AOCI) boundary to the north and west. In May 2005, an open house was held at
5awtooth Middle School to present the general purpose of the plan and to receive
feedback from the public on land use and transportation concerns and ideas. Below is a
comparison of the two NMA plans:
A arc~e ~. ity o
Assoc........ i
\l~hli~,u~t ~ T Private Public
G~~~gra~hic area 10 sq. miles Approx. 16 sq. miles
Area u~ lrnpacl ~ No change Proposed expansion
Transportation ~~~~~~~~~'~ Yes No
Funding a Part?
North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
Page 2 of 10
">
`
y '
~'~
- Relationship to Communities in Motion and Blueprint for Good Growth: Finally, it
` should be noted that two regional planning efforts are underway at the time this CPA
.~ :~:
~~ application is being submitted. Communities in Motion (CIM) is the Regional Long-Term
~`- ~ Transportation Plan of COMPASS and Blueprint for Good Growth (BGG) is a 2025 land
'
' use and public infrastructure plan being co-sponsored by ACRD, Ada County and the six
'' ~
"' cities of Ada County. It is not the intent of the City of Meridian to supercede or
compromise either the process or recommendations of these plans. In fact, the city has
-`~= been an active participant in both the CIM and BGG steering teams and has contributed
funding to both plans. So, given the long-term nature of those plans and that neither plan
is intended to provide area-specific detail, Meridian believes this application will
`h '~
:~r compliment and honor the outcome of both the CIM and BGG efforts.
~. Consultants for Plan: While the Planning Department is performing most of the work for
this application, we have contracted with two different firms to provide additional
documentation. The first is Thornton Oliver Keller, a real estate brokerage, who is
~` conducting a market analysis of the North Meridian Area to help determine the absorption
rate and demand for office, retail and industrial uses. Results of this study are expected to
`~
~ help guide the city in designating areas for new non-residential uses. The second contract
A'
: is with Washington Group International. They are updating the 2001 Traffic Impact Study
,.:.,
~' of tine 12-square mile area in North Meridian, focusing particularly on 5-year estimates of
n~..;*' intersection improvements needed to accommodate new traffic generated in the area. Both
of these studies are expected to be complete by mid-August.
2. Purpose
s}~ In summary, this CPA application includes three general requests:
:~~ a) expand the AOCI boundary north of Chinden Boulevard (to the rim) and
=: west of McDermott Road (to Can Ada Road);
"'~' 3~Y ~ b) designate new land uses and policies within the proposed expansion
areas and amend existing land uses in the current AOCI; and
c) create a new circulation map and associated transportation policies to
- address multi-modal forms of travel in North Meridian.
~'r~<. In addition to the obvious intent to amend the Plan, this application is also being prepared
~`~ ~ as part of the City of Meridian's application to Ada County to expand the AOCI
~~}~': , boundary. Ada County requires cities to provide a detailed map with land use designations
`~~ ~ '''r'ay for any new land being added to the AOCI. If approved, the Future Land Use Map
associated with this application would be sent to Ada County to fulfill that requirement.
3. Key Assumptions
.; ;
~''~
Below are some of the key land use and transportation assumptions behind the
' ' ~` development of the CPA application:
_,},
~.
Land Use
- All existing zoning, preliminary plats and planned developments will remain
unchanged.
:; North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
? Page 3 of 10
~.~
~.~" : ..:
f
~~;
1 M •
- The plan will give detail to the work in process for the CIM and BGG plans
- The City of Meridian desires to manage growth and annex new land only when it is
clearly demonstrated that all urban services will meet targeted levels.
- A mix of services and job types will be available in North Meridian.
- Overall density of housing will be at least 3 - 3.5 dwelling units/acre.
- Lower density housing (less than 2 dwelling units/acre) is expected north of Chinden
Boulevard along the rim.
- Higher density housing is desired close to service centers and along transit corridors.
- The existing mid-mile Neighborhood Centers in sections where commercial zoning
has been approved at the corners will be removed.
- A majority of residents in the two new areas of expansion (north of Chinden
Boulevard and west of McDermott Road) support the AOCI change.
Transportation
~ - SH2O-26/Chinden will be a limited access highway that retains a speed of at least 45-
55 mph.
- Future SH16/Emmett Highway extension will generally align with McDermott Rd.
and will dramatically affect land uses.
- ITD won't know the final alignment of SH16 for at least 2 %a - 3 years. Until the
alignment is known, it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian to protect this
corridor from urban growth..
- Anew limited access highway (SH16) will create an incredible opportunity and a
{~ physical barrier for the community.
~~ ~, - A grade separated`interchange is anticipated at SH16/SH2O-26 (wherever that
alignment ends up being located).
Multi-modal centers will be encouraged near these interchanges
- Future bus routes will be focused on the arterial grid and will primarily serve
neighborhood centers
- Ultimately, all arterial intersections and many half-mile intersections will be
signalized
B. CPA Application Questions (from Meridian's CPA application form)
1. Specific defmition of the change requested.
The changes proposed in this application fall into three broad areas:
a) Expand the AOCI boundary north of Chinden Boulevard (to the rim) and west of
McDermott Road (to Can Ada Road).
The City of Meridian is proposing to expand its AOCI boundary in two different areas
- one is north of Chinden Boulevard/SH2O-26 (hereafter referred to as SH2O-26) and
the other is south of SH2O-26. The area north of SH2O-26 begins at the northwest
corner of N. Linder Road and SH2O-26 and extends west to McDermott Road. The
north boundary is currently proposed to be the centerline of the Phyllis Canal. Initial
discussions have taken place with the City of Eagle regarding Almaden Subdivision,
North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
Page 4 of 10
~,:;
;<
;~~:'
;,.v.~
4 ~ ^Y t~u-e
3~
~~
~: t
r;
;, $~
~~
A : ,
~~
~~s ' ~~
~. ' ,
~;~ :~
~ ~t
4
~
t
,
b r`':
~•
~
~~~
`
~
~ :,
~~,
,
~~~
~r
{~
~t_ r4 .
4 t'
$~
~
t
. ~ ..~.> ,
~~ ; t ~
`~
,..
r~ ~,.
~
k ~
~
~F,
i
~w
~~
r'` .3<~:
`¢>
~<° ,~,~
~r ~.
~,~ ;~
~~~ ~~
. ~
~ ~t
;~•
.~; y
~YIl.
~
~
"~
~~
.'
4
~ ~
~
~
r ~
~,., ,F
.s
~; ~ ,~~J
~~.
.~
~~
1:~_
. , ~ ~
~~
~'' is 1
~ r ' f3a
.
~~rF..,?~ ~
,
} t
r
_`
!Y
~~
~: ~~i~`-r ,- r.. ~.a
L
~,
~~,~'. .~. J I'Y~~t ~ . it
,l ~
it}
•
approximately'/ mile north of SH2O-26, and an 11-acre parcel abutting the canal.
This area is currently excluded from Meridian's AOCI application.
This area is approximately 825 acres in size and includes 135 recorded properties. The
land falls within Township 4N, Range lE and includes portions of Sections 21, 22 and
23. Several large parcel owners have already approached the city requesting to be
added to Meridian's AOCI. Noteworthy land uses in this area include the Spurwing
Golf Course, Jaker's Wholesale Nursery and other estate-type housing.
In 2004, the Public Works Department contracted with JUB Engineers to complete a
sanitary sewer study of this area (including the Almaden Subdivision area). That study
demonstrated the City of Meridian is capable of providing sewer service to this area,
assuming a new lift station is built north of SH2O-26. Meridian's domestic water
service can also be extended to this area (although no formal study was done). This
area is already within the boundaries of the Meridian Rural City Fire Department.
Finally, at the May open house, a property owner located between the Phyllis Canal
and the Boise River expressed interest in being added to Meridian's AOCI. Prior to
this meeting, the city had not considered expanding north of the rim. The attached
Future Land Use Map does not currently reflect this area. However, staff recommends
the Coimnission and City Council review this request as part of the public hearing
process. There is approximately 1,400 acres of land between the rim and the river and
between McDermott Road and Linder Road. The subject property is approximately
390 acres, or 28% of the total "below rim" area. Staff prepared a brief analysis of this
area, including key public service providers (see attached).
The area south of SH2O-26 begins at the southwest corner of McDermott Road and
SH2O-26 and extends southwest to' the corner of McMillan Road and Ustick Road. It
includes Sections 29 - 32 (four square miles) within Township 4N, Range 1 E. Existing
agriculturaUrural type uses dominate this area and include churches, a tree nursery,
dairy operations and a small cemetery.
The Public Works Department is currently under contract with JUB Engineers to
complete a sanitary sewer study of this four mile area. The study is expected to be
complete by December 2005. Initial findings show that Meridian should be able to
serve the area, taking into account treatment plant and potential lift station
improvements. Initial findings also show that Meridian should be able to provide
domestic water service. New well sites are proposed in each square mile, although the
need for these is yet to be determined. This area is currently within the boundaries of
the Star Fire District. However, the City of Star is not currently seeking any AOCI
expansion south of SH2O-26 and, if annexed, it is anticipated the Meridian Fire
Department would service the area. A new fire substation is expected.
b) Designate new land uses and policies within the proposed expansion areas and amend
existing land uses in the current AOCI.
North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
Page 5 of 10
3 ~' Tj ~ {~s KtF\k y"I N3~~~~J#'C'??~ ~X~~~.r~~.. 1 i'~?a:dr 7 [~'~"i~~h'C ~' ,~,,. ,_.
`~~y.,,ii'~ ,~ ' 1 a ,{ % ,mow '~ ~ 't <. tk r ,
s~•Ja 7rr 7 "y+_' i y, ~: c rkY ~~ i~,47 ~ ~ tc gggg. tY b~.?. :1° _
~ Y a
~7 ~ 'r~ t y~ r ~ YYT ~Tt ~ 3 ~~o ~paY 3~e!'luti!. n 4~~
A.,w . { a -S "G
~~ ~ ..
c34+~.a - ~., t r ;;y :Y ' '``,L Y_ti ~ °~ 3~`, k"%: -a~,~(' r,.°~:"K. ~'~f' , _.
z '~
Ita~Yv T•:. ~ „{ 2 4~~.~ } J~.1 1~ IF .~;~~ JA;. F7i)~+w $ f
y ; 3t~ -
Nr A.£ .: +,j«~ yr.~ ~'"~ ~ J j~~'.htd 'S' lei "ijr~'~ f ~" (- t i'x'~ r~ ,f~,t+, gyp. "t ~, J ~k.I. !r' ate'
k ~ ~ F ~
~L S ~a. ~ ~ 'l 3 Tt.-~~S ~ryJ`~E - ~~,,,~*Y'4 ~fi~ r~ ~c "y 'c.~r:~.` 4
~ l
,~. s ,mot ~a~sx y#~~°~~ ~ h~+h,~~" ~, ~~t
w ' ~f
~- - ~ ~ S ~~
i 2~ .. k ~ .~y-, a ` „l a..tst ' '~i } ..7 it>i w F ' f ~ ',4+rrd ,y~, t ,
~" f ~r -. ~.~~~. n'~a~ , ~° ~ L3 1'~ R'' y~ ~,~~`->~+.t~ ~~'~r~ i ~'Sre 5~~~ ~ , ~;`,
is ~~ ~ S b d "?~k' y.
~' a L ~ ~ ~ _
~ r u d u-..
S f ~ T '- - ~' l ~ f~'xC e # f t`' `„~.~ t 5 ~nf *$~~ ~~~ , r~ raj t' ~ L ..
rx~, r ~ t ~ f~ .,r .t 4 ~ -r, w t~ ~ ,,, a,r fk ~7~ ~ _
t `J'.~ ~. . ~4 \#r "E`~ § a '~;'~ ~ ,{1~`~' ~ 'K'F'x?. ~' f~..~.,h', ;Y' ~h~~ ~ ~~v ~`,r"~ G;n h"^-C'°'~`~?'~'~„ ,~ _ .. ,Z...
y r``ch:~ l~ ~~; r ~ 4 ~r,} ~ r.F~ ~~~~~~t~7 r '~';r ; x ~. 1:~-~`~ - "!.u.~. ~y~{'~'.
4 u { ~ ~ ~ ~J r ~ a
~ ., ~ .l Qb'y't Sir i 1 }:~ _'4'
~L.
x^+# ~y)rW `t~v.)c.U., {> i ~,y~;fz ~ 1 .,J} S i,~. ~ry~7 1 -
~'y1f l - •?}a ~fi~~ tYq~`tt'~''•.0'3~~}~~i ~y~`F?'~}~-7Ei~ 'I~~~~~i~+'~}~~l'Il ~' ,~ t
~_
-
'
t ~ uh 1
~ ~ r "
?
y 6
~
E S
„
r
ry, ~ ~ ,~; r.. n 1?.h ~~
n , i .
1
r
y~,
j
'7
r i~x
;~
~~ r
~:.'y ,iA,':
I J=ti
~~ ~ -`~
:~ h;
,;.
a
o~-#
:;; -:::~
s
Rj_:
_! {LL
~. ,,:~
~<<;
r-~~,
~a~~ ~"
1 k';
~<S
;;:
~~>
~j:
'y
~;
:
;
~•
~ .:~: ~
.;" r:
~;: .
~;.
;~.:
•
The Amended Future Land Use Map (see attached) shows new land use designations
for all properties in both of the areas described above. This map also reflects the new
zoning districts and land uses in the North Meridian Area approved by City Council to
date since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the new land use policies are
taken directly from the Wardle and Associates NMAP application. We've also added a
new section pertaining to policies specific to the SH16 preservation corridor.
c) Create a new circulation map and associated transportation policies to address multi-
modalforms of travel in North Meridian.
6~ Figure VI-8 in Chapter VI of the current Plan is a "Future Collector Streets" map
C ~~_
,~,~ which generally shows where the city anticipates new collector roadways. This
application proposes to expand the scope and detail of this map. The map in Section G
~~ depicts new collectors and signals in both the existing and proposed AOCI as well as
transit corridors. Finally, in concert with the Idaho Transportation Department's
~ anticipated interchange at SH16 and SH2O-26, guidelines for amulti-modal center
near this interchange are also proposed. (See Section F of this application for more
detail.)
2. Specific information on any property involved.
As noted in Section Bl .a. above, there are numerous existing uses in the proposed and
existing AOCI. Given_the number of properties affected by this application, detailed
information is not being provided on specific properties. Further research on targeted
areas can be provided do the Commission or Council upon request.
3. The condition or situation which warrants a change being made in the Plan.
,: ~.
Staff believes there are three primary conditions that warrant a change to the Plan:
a) Rate and Type of Growth :Since August 2002 (adoption of the current Plan), the City
of Meridian has witnessed unprecedented growth, much of which has occurred in
North Meridian. More than 8,000 new building lots have received preliminary plat
approval in the North Meridian Area alone. In 2004, 25% of all new residential
building permits in Ada County were issued within a six square mile area of NMA.
That figure was 14.6% in 2003. The North Slough Sewer Trunk, extending from Ten
Mile Road to Locust Grove Road between McMillan Road and SH2O-26, began
construction in late 2002. This project came on-line ahead of schedule and enabled
more development.
e
While a majority of the new development conforms with the adopted Future Land Use
Map and Meridian services are being provided per master plans, the pace of growth
has brought changes not anticipated in the 2002 Plan. Several large Planned
Development applications were approved for land use exceptions which allowed non-
residential uses at the arterial intersections instead of neighborhood centers at the half
mile as anticipated in the Plan (i.e. Bridgetower Crossing, Lochsa Falls, Paramount).
North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
Page 6 of 10
xa,~_'':
Also, now that new school and park sites, housing densities, and street patterns have
~A ~~~~ - '. been approved, the Plan should be updated to reflect these growth patterns.
b) SH16 River Crossing and Extension to I-84: Governor Kempthorne's "Connecting
Idaho" plan (the Garvee bond project), signed in Spring 2005, included a proposal for
~ an extension of SH16 from SH44 to I-84. This new roadway has broad implications
r;
` ~ ~
: for the NMA. This project was anticipated in 2002 and the existing Plan includes
,1
~~ ~ policies which encourage a Ten Mile Road alignment. Both the private NMAP and
~: ~ Washington Group International's 2001 NMA Traffic Study also anticipated the SH16
~" '~ ~` extension. However, with the Garvee bonding one step closer to reality and with ITD
including SH16 study funds in their 2006 budget, it warrants the City of Meridian
updating its Plan to be more proactive in planning for this significant project.
The following reasons support a change from Ten Mile Road to McDermott Road as
fi~~~
,.,~; the preferred alignment (and help to justify a change to the Plan):
'; ~ 3
,~~ Instead of dividing our community at Ten Mile Road, the state highway would
be located at the edge of our Area of Impact--which would separate Meridian
from Nampa and Ada County from Canyon County (south of Ustick Road).
^ The obstacles to preserving right-of--way and limiting development or existing
curb cuts along McDermott are fewer than Ten Mile Road.
'> Large existing parcels -there are fewer parcels to negotiate future right-of--way
~'' ~ purchase and the roadway impacts fewer property owners in the McDermott
,: corridor.
„~,~ r ,`~~, A McDermott alignment fits the logical progression of interchanges at two-
mile spacing along I-84 (i.e. Meridian, Ten Mile,. McDermott, Garrity)
c) Requests for Area of City Impact Expansion: Since adoption of the existing Plan, the
Mayor and City Council have received requests from individual property owners
outside the existing AOCI to receive urban services. Meridian City Code requires a
~'x ~ property to be within the AOCI and Urban Services Planning Area before annexation
and service extensions can occur. So, the AOCI boundary must be adjusted to consider
ti-fir t
4 ~~ ~'~
any of these requests. Amending the Comprehensive Plan is the first step to expanding
this boundary (prior to negotiating the boundary with Ada County). While properties
outside an AOCI have some development rights, sound planning calls for urban and
suburban development to utilize sanitary sewer and municipal water where feasible.
Since Meridian is the nearest city to the interested properties and probably best suited
` : ~ to extend urban services, staff was directed to include the AOCI expansion in this
CPA application.
"~`~` 4. The public need for and benefit from such a change in the Plan.
< <
The answer to this question begs another question - `which public' is being talked
'~ about?" The public consists of a broad array ofinterests -often competing interests.
Agriculture, recreation, business, residential, and other interests have different
~` perspectives on this question. There may also be competing objectives between the
`-~; present and future needs of the community. Comments for and against the AOCI
-;,~.:
~~~
North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
Page 7 of 10
,~,
F
expansion and Plan amendment were received at the May open house. The most effective
'~
planning weighs all interests and the Commission and Council must decide which plans
;.;" 3,
:V: further the interest of Meridian and the region as a whole. Below is a discussion of both
potential benefits and drawbacks to amending the Plan as proposed.
~:~;
Potential Benefits: One of the primary functions of an AOCI is to designate and
accommodate urban scale development (e.g. higher populations, higher residential and
commercial densities, alternative transportation, etc.). Existing and prospective city
residents and developers benefit from a Plan that designates locations for principle land
uses and reflects uses already approved but not built. Utilities and other service providers
`_' benefit from being able to predict and anticipate densities and future demands for their
respective service. Property owners adjacent to the AOCI and city limits benefit by being
;' able to participate in setting the direction and type of growth around their property.
:~ r If development is expected north of SH20-26 and west of McDermott Road (which it is
unless permanent, legal tools/easements are put in place to guarantee the open space), it is
the responsibility of Ada County and cities to plan for these areas. This is especially true
~;: ,~ as land speculation and development pressure increases due to nearby services. The
,:` ~ benefits to preceding growth with updated comprehensive plans include more efficient use
of tax dollars and coordination. of sewer, water fire, police and other services.
~_
Potential Drawbacks: There is, of course, an inherent conflict between some rural and
urban uses. If Meridian expands its AOCI and urban development extends into the new
areas, the existing agricultural operations (e.g. nurseries, dairies, farms) that intend to
conduct business into the future will experience conflicts. Many of these concerns were
:~~
; noted on the summary sheet of the May open house. These property owners would prefer
~={' to remain outside any AOCI and be buffered and protected from urban influences..
"~` ` ~' ~ 5. Documentation that no other solutions to the problem are presented by the current
policy of the Plan are possible or reasonable.
The existing Plan notes that the SH16 extension may happen and, if so, would likely be
aligned with Ten Mile Road. Since that time, the amount of new development approved
on both Ten Mile Road and Black Cat Road has lead the city to believe McDermott is the
most appropriate corridor for this facility.
~, ~ ~~
6. Development intentions for any land involved.
~` ,;
It is anticipated the City of Meridian will acquire land for public parks, easements for
sewer trunk lines and multi-use pathways and various domestic well sites within the
~.': ~' subject area. However, specific locations have not been identified at this point.
F.`
7. Any other data and information needed by the Planning and Zoning Commission in
~~' evaluating the proposal, such as who does it help, who does it hurt, how much is it
going to cost and who's going to pay for it.
~.; ;; North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
' '` '~ Page 8 of 10
~ ` ~,~: ~.
,;
F~,,
z: ~
~~
~~~
~.- ~
3 _
~
y~
'.Tj--. C
'~
~1
~
~~ n ..
. _ ~, t
~~'~
3. n~ ~
~,
~
A
~
,~ ~~
~~
. ~ r~
r:
~w~
~_~
.
~ ~~
7„b
~. ~
k.~ '. `H~
~;
r . ,; s
i
x
~
r
j
S
To date, no other information has been requested by the Commission. Regarding the
question of who benefits and who is hurt, see Question #4 above. Several property owners
voiced opposition to the AOCI being expanded.
If approved, the main costs of implementing the AOCI expansion and making the
amendments to the plan will be administrative expenses that are largely built into the
Planning & Zoning Department's budget. The Public Works Department has not currently
budgeted for the extension of the Black Cat Trunk to the north side of SH2O-26. Any costs
associated with this project would be borne by private developers.
C. Idaho Code Overview (AOCI)
Requirements for Renegotiation: Idaho Code Section 67-6526 sets out the requirements for setting,
negotiating and renegotiating AOI boundaries. In particular:
1. Boundaries remain fixed until renegotiated. [Section 67-6526(d).]
2. Renegotiation must follow the same provisions for adopting an AOI originally. [Section 67-
6526(d).]
3. Where a county does not approved the city's desired AOI, the city has resort to either a
committee of nuie [Section 67-6526((b)] or the district court [Section 67-6526(b).]
4. If there is an overlapping AOI boundary with another city, the cities are required to
negotiate a recommendation to the county. In the event either city disagrees with the AOI finally
adopted by the county pertaining to the overlapping area, it may request an election be held, funded
by the county, for persons owning'property in the disputed area. [Section 67-6526(c)]
5. In setting an AOI, the county or district court is required to consider three (3) factors
[Section 67-6526(b)]:
a. trade area;
b. geographic factors; and,
c. areas that can reasonably be expected to be annexed to the city in the future.
Trade Area: Trade area can be defined as the area needed to provide a city an economic base in
which to support its self. This base is not only the area of the city and the AOCI but also
involves the areas surrounding a city that brings people into the city for services. Historically,
Meridian has been associated with a large trade area extending north to SH2O-26, west into
eastern Canyon County, south past Lake Hazel, and east to the Boise City limits.
An informal survey of residents north of SH2O-26 revealed that this area identifies with Meridian
more than any other jurisdiction. There is no river crossing between Linder and Star, so residents
in this area are forced to travel south for services. Also, the 2001 WGI Traffic Study projected a
vast majority of new trips to SH2O-26 being generated from south of SH2O-26 and it could be
expected that any commercial uses on the north side of the highway would benefit from Meridian
customers for this reason. It is logical that both the north and south sides of SH2O-26 are planned
1Vorth Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
Page 9 of 10
1 it ~~ w
I
<f ~
1 • ~ f 4 _ b
cam 'ry ~.«~.s~~1;~~r- ~-~`~*!~~, ~~~ ~~
4 k1 z
w
Y C ~ .~~ ~ti Y.o-
v t.
k J t 7(- > R"
~'
4~
~~~
n:y\~ i
t ~'
fS . F i i~* ,i 'M1 ~ y'Si,~ l i 4 T54~3 . .
F {.
t
C t v., yl. •.
~j ~ ~ >.. ,
r{`
r ~
,t ~ r f ~ ~ +. ~1 42
w i m ,,,
~ < i
f ` t z H~$:
~(F 4 h, Kl>~~~`r ~
Sf H a t ~Y',~~~2H' #
Y 1 _..S f ,~ ~. `.
~ _T 4F_ /~ ~ 2 ~ A YI X~~
Y
{ ? Y, A
~~~ + 4
,-lt a r
x.- ~~Y x f t ~ ~:
i1 ~F
i'
v~ t~'.rt4 « a
~
.[
4~ ~i'FL ii~^j
W
~
{
;
4
~
n
~
j 1 ~.
~i~
R J. dF F?
`
!
,yj~
F' F~ ~
S
s
i ,~ k,.
._
~ ~.
'
.~~
-~,2L+
~ ~ h.
4 •~ ~ f ~ _
h~ - , -
s .!~.' ~w ,y,-~ ~
,r <. !
x
fi u~, ~.,. '.y'
.,,
~
,~,~~ } }
yt.t +1.:a ~ s.~
~ ~:
. N ..
l ~ , ~:p
i~ y
M
i" ~ i<i
f.~_ n
4
I~4 ]f .
~.^.~_~
i~
`° " ' ~~~ under one jurisdiction and use one set of development ordinances, especially for the four miles
„~ .. between the two river crossings.
~~
. ,~
,s ' Public comments were received at the May open house that Star Road functions as a natural
,~~ „ ^~
~,~ ., ;, boundary between Meridian and Nampa, with properties west of Star Road associating with and
"feeling" more like Nampa. This boundary is especially emphasized south of Ustick Road where
°~ ~ ~ ~ ~ McDermott becomes the county line and Star/Robinson Road is entirely within Canyon County.
"' k ` ~ r. However, for this area north of Ustick, the trade area question becomes less clear. Staff expects
>i r~ t that a survey of property owners in this area maybe necessary prior to submitting an application
~' ~~ " ~ to Ada County if the Commission and Council approve the expansion.
,~t ~___r
~` ~` x ]~y~~ -•-: Geo~~hic FaCtOYS: Among the geographic factors supporting Meridian's proposed AOCI are:
~_F
~`-~' ~~'~ '' current capacity and capability to provide essential public services as well as planned
`' •", N~ ~ ~ improvements; transportation system corridor and services; and annexation trends and requests. -
~'~° A detailed analysis of the following essential public services is being developed for any potential
„ ~~ "
~.>~ , .:
. - . r ~~. - negotiation with Ada County for the AOCI expansion:
~~ ~ Sewer
~..~ ~, ~ _
^ Water
'' ~'~ .Police
r ,
~. ,~ ~ :~'~ Fire and Emergency Services
.: •~ ~, Library
~t ..' '~~ Schools
~4 ^
~, - ~ r ;.: Parks and Recreation Facilities
,~ . Irrigation Systems
,,~
~'"~ ; ~` Solid Waste
,;.::
~~ Electric Utility
~~ ~~~ Public Transportation
... h! ~
~~~- f4
< ,~~ Annexation in the Reasonable Future: Meridian's existing city limits extend to SH20-26 at four
~, y,~', different points within Sections 25 - 27 (T.4N, R.1W), between Black Cat and Meridian Road.
W .~ ~~,~ :~ ,~ ; Several parcels on the north side of the highway are currently contiguous at these points. On the
~'` ` west side, the city limits extend as far as '/ mile west of Black Cat Road on Ustick Road and a 1/2
~"~~` ~ ~ " mile west of Ten Mile Road on SH20-26. A path of annexation west of McDermott Road is
. ~ , •;
t "~' dependent upon several intervening property owners between the existing city limits and
,. ~~`~ McDermott. The main obstacle in determining this path is the unknown alignment of SH16. The
'~ "" ~ ~ '~ draft Future Land Use Map designates a preservation corridor for this highway and the draft
] . ~ •s~ 3 .
h ~ ~'~' • ~ policies propose no urban scale development fora '/ mile west of Black Cat Road until the
. ~,
~~ ' alignment is identified and the federal government has approved the location. So, if this policy is
~; ~ adopted, it may present a delay in property owners being able to secure a path of annexation.
~i; ~.~. , ri ~ "' (See Section H for further discussion of this issue.)
~.~;
~.
,v
`,TF
l f =
. ~-?`J.
~ ~ fia._tG~.~,
y1
~7 ~. ~
r - Y{ "
~ k ~
t
;' ~ ti
ar a
y, 4 "~
~~ ~.-., North Meridian Area CPA Application (Draft)
„rw ~ ~ Page 10 of 10 -
r ~ £~'~;
~~
~ x
~ ~.
k
•i
"
-., .
] - ~,' ~}, ,.. . 42. ,~ , tk~ ~ ~ o-,~e ~ .x..%31 ~"t4 ~i'2+ '~ .~ x~ Z ~ti ~
~rV' ~ 7 +'S`•L ! TWA z ~ ; ~i .~
l`~
- Sys - <. c~ ~ 3 r 5 a s
„i~'] ;G1 : Vj 19c`~ ''~ x ~~~ iL ~. ~ ~->ti -tY~`•r~ ~~~ ii it~.( ~r £ "F~~~
S ~. ~"
yha.~~t ;. ~ !fy St,7„~k i~.*`" ~ F~~3 ~'#%a`~'~'" {Vt~*~-
~„ ~ ~ ~ ~ f r c. .. ~ F
t .. ]g f i ~ t 5 i, ,.,-.n} vs 'Y t mot., } 4'.r f `~ :-''~'i y ~ :~
'~'I 'EsM '~ #4rrr'f., ~r~dk~`' 3`'.L~f'`t,rr.tt „3 uH~,r~ st r t s?,
$ ~
~ ~ r:
-~~' ~~ 5'~"8~~~~ ~ ~~Y~ Aft .,
~~}Y~~ r a a4 Y6 ~* ~ +'~ 'fi y ~ 4r ~`+.. e
~~: ~ t~Y~'~l ~ - .. ~ ~yr'4~W~ 'f? f. ."i '~ • ?~~12~ ~ - ~ ,~Ye L ,: T~ "~ ~j`~'.. XF•~ ,5 1~ 7`5~`:~ _ ~ -
. S. - "xi` ,~' ° _ 5 ~ .- 3 ;" o'r'r~•4 : C t,F~'Cf x l q, ~~ 'ad',,~' ~ -fir`-~ ' .. - _
~ t k w r s 4.~ Y w y ~ -rc c Y, ~ u ~_ ~~ ~ ~+.~~. 1.3i ''p~
1 ,~F4".-d:f"i Y- '. ~`' f!" ~~A-', iy~5 1 '!.. _.a iFF»-4'+4 w~A^. ~'~ ~~~ .x
I•!~i1F.` 4 V •
o- x ~i w.~:~ ~,,~ s- ~
~k , .~; ~ x [ ~~"{ ~ ~ r i~'7 k t ~~~~i?l. '~ ;~. ~ t~l kkh !X~~~~l~I~ ~~."11r-~
* - . - _ -
YG~~y a ~ 1 ra x.r ~ _r] r i LCsy~~~r~- t ~.{A~W ""4 ~~~
~ t y ~ r f ,~
- C" h , ~ ". ~ ~~:4 S k• ~. ~, r ~ r 17,E ~ t '-
~ tt. -~. vhy~e~'}'; +w `~nA~c~.` ~t?~1 in ~X tt d~ K5 ~~LRyi'.~F1.y~y~f~, 4s ,- ,..~
~ ~~~ J ~" ~ 1, t~ ~ ~ '~ ~ i~ `~ 1'S: ''-~' ~ _ ~ ~ ,ark
~. ~~ .fin „<r ``< ' .gym ~ a `a~`~"~d~~~c.~ ~ ~ "~,:
c 1
i.': <~ ~ A~i y 1.
~~}r
5.~wxy• ~~ ~ 4,~ ~ ~] RR g+n~Ta~~ r~1.y R-¢.~'! ~'~~'y;.
yrw-s.,~ - ,s.~~~~<d*«.:'c, 4,.,,s"!;r~, ,."'ct.f~Y'.._:'1~ t , ;,'t~.'#i`~."',4R2~i~°>~"`:ri4"~'i. .`r, k;
"~ CITY OF MERIDIAN
Planning & Zoning Department
660 E. Watertower Ln., Ste. 202, Meridian, ID 83642
'. (208)884-5533 Phone / (208)888-6854 Fax
:4~
n}~'
~y.. ,.
fal.
n
~~`-
t.
5~ ~~=
n::
~~~
i
s~: ,
~...: .
~~ :.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION
APPLICANT: City of Meridian Planning & Zoning Department PHONE: 884-5533
ADDRESS: 660 E. Watertower Lane. Suite 202, Meridian, ID 83642 FAX: 888-6854
OWNER: N/A PHONE:
ADDRESS:
FAX:
GENERAL LOCATION: North Meridian Area (as further defined herein . Generally
Phyllis Canal on north, Ustick Road on south, Locust Grove Road on east, and CanAda Road on
west (with some exc tions~
LEGAL DESCRIl'TION OF PROPERTY: See above. (If approved by the City Council,
a more detailed description will be drawn up.)
PRESENT ZONE CLASSIFICATION: Various (both City of Meridian and Ada County
zones affected)
``' VICINITY SKETCH: A vicinity map and/or site plan at a scale approved by the City showing
property lines, existing streets, easements, and such other items as the City may require (35
copies). See attached map(s).
I hereby certify that the information contained herein is true and correct. I also certify that I will
ensure all required public notices are published per Idaho State Statute.
SIGNATURE: DATE:
,,;
1
~~4~~~ ~ ~F_; .4sf~
~~~~~~ ~ ,
3~~{{~~ ~~~~ y!~
p~'aw, .r>p~'
r."~q,ev o J,, ~ p
s``~` `
~~~ .g°~~
.uN};,
,; - ,.
„~ x ~~
S ~~ r
~~~ f';
~~ ~ F`
~ ,fir p~
,~~ !r.
~~~ 1~c4
$~y}'~ s ~ ~-~ yy
~ j ~,k
~~I ~J'""1~1"~h ~~`.yu.^ 1
r
k ~' i
R ~+~.~
::t
t~
d ~',}'-:
~ y. "
JI
f ~~ S ~ ~ ~ i
~~.
"~ ._ r.
i.' _
~'~ ~f~
1'w ~ n,"'
~j~~~ r Y ~
... -;,~
,~~i ~ ~-
F ,'-~; THE APPLICANT WILL SUBMIT A LETTER FOR A PLAN AMENDMENT WHICH
~; ;' WILL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING:
~'~ 1. Specific definition of the change requested.
~..<` f 2. Specific information on any property involved.
~J
r'
~; : 3. The condition or situation which warrants a change being made in the Plan.
.~
~~~~~~
~~ >-~'~" 4. The public need for and benefit from such a change in the Plan.
t_
4
5. Documentation that no other solutions to the problem are presented by the current policy
`~ of the Plan are possible or reasonable.
~::
'~ 6. Development intentions for any land involved.
~ `~
7. Any other data and information needed by the Planning and Zoning Commission in
'` ~w~~ evaluating the proposal, such as who does it help, who does it hurt, how much is it going
~~~~ to cost and who's going to pay for it.
~, ~ NO APPLICATION WILL BE CONSIDERED UNTIL THE REQUIRED
INFORMATION IS COMPLETE.
t>~:
~~ ,.
2
~,
~,
_ - _:r ~`"
~~ ; ,~~ _
~~ t,; ~.
4 ~.
r`
~ Y
f ~y ~
i~~ `~,kt i. 4f 9
r
W~q~ 1
J ~y?r' ~~
*r
{, ~"
Y( ,iii~.c ~ +' ,~
r ar~~~~°.~;
~'i~d3*x'rd.;~~
4er.-Jc-~ ~ ~.~;~~ ..
~~. i
t,~. ~'
m~.< ~ i
~' ~ F 1 ~.
sew 3~f ~~ ~ ~``' -
a ~,
,~ ~ s~~k r
~...d
~~Y „ s. , ~r>,
w •..rt
't~~z~#~~~'~~~
r,,,~;~,u, ~.~;;~ ti
•Y
~ f
~~ 't ;1-
~'~ ~ r }
t ~ ~y{{L 4
~~4~~~~'
~'Jf^ ~sr" ~ A ~
4 ~' ~~.'