2004 07-29L`
CITY OF MERIDIAN
C
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
X David Zaremba X David Moe
X Wendy' Newton-Huckabay X Michael Rohm
0 Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 -foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
Recommend Approval to City Council
5. Public Hearing: AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
Recommend approval to City Council
6. Public Hearing: PR 04-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
Recommend Approval to City Council
7. Public Hearing: CUP 04-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for reductions to the minimum requirements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed, Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locust Grove Road: Recommend Approval to City Council
8. Election of Chairman: Re-elect Keith Borup
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29, 2004
Page 1 of 2
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.
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures: Discussed
10. Staff Discussion: Discussed
A. Department Update: Discussed
B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Update: Discussed
C. Parking Study: Discussed
D. Downtown Transportation Management Plan: Discussed
E. APA Subscription Renewal: Discussed
F. Available Training Funds: Discussed
G. Tracking Volunteer Hours: Discussed
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29, 2004
Page 2 of 2
All materials presented atl'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.
0
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba . David Moe
Wendy Newton-Huckabay Michael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2: Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
me ►n C A-PPr®vcJ. to C/C/
5. Public Hearing: AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
, 0fnn� ik (0"w— � c -/e-.,
6. Public Hearing. P 04-017 Request or Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision,*
*Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
V1 � ��----�� , �
7. Public Hearing: CUP 04-015 Requdlfforo�1a�Conditi�onalG�Use Permit for a
Planned Development for reductions to the minimum requirements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locu�t,G G�Ye�Road:
�
,Mw&
8. Election of Chairman: K
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
\-s(_0
10. Staff Discussion:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29, 2004
Pagel of 2
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.
P b /6'
u I ' X)d hl�� - *44 L -s.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba David Moe
Wendy Newton-Huckabay Michael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
5. Public Hearing: AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
6. Public Hearing: PP 04-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
7. Public Hearing: CUP 04-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for reductions to the minimum requirements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locust Grove Road:
8. Election of Chairman:
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
10. Staff Discussion:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29,20D4
Page 1 of 2
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.
•
A. Department Update:
B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Update:
C. Parking Study:
i
D. Downtown Transportation Management Plan:
E. APA Subscription Renewal:
F. Available Training Funds:
G. Tracking Volunteer Hours:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29, 2Q04
Page 2 of 2
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 8884433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting.
0
> TX CONFIRMATION REPORT ** AS OF JUL 29 '04 21:52 PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba David Moe
Wendy Newton-HuckabayMichael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 044004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
vt cowi n-wLvi d— A-PproodJ— to c
5. Public Heap g• AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
S. Public Hearing. P 04-017 Request or Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
SubdivisionAy Lonnie Johnson — 4205p�North Locust Grove Road:
9-C OvYI YV�Q.1 V �' fort/ GIC ,
7. Public Heanng: CUP 0401 Requ a Conditiona �e Permit for a
Planned Development for reductions to the minimum requirements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locyst, Grove
Road:
y1 � �
�f D 1%01. ` C/�
8. Election of�CAyy
h„ainnan:
7.-j-1j.c1- Kj�tu- govoP
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
10. Staff Discussi�\SC�SSQ.C�..
Merldlan Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29.2004
Page I of 2
AA matwiaLs presented at public Meetings Shap becoanee Meftm
Anyone desldng auommodatlon for d�abilUes related to documents mWf
orhearings
Pleace cardaat the City Clerk's Office at hi864433 at least 46 hours prior to the public meeft.
DATE TIME TO/FROM
MODE
MIN/SEC PGS
CMD#
STATUS
25
07/29 2144 3810160
EC—S
00'55" 002
097
OK
26
07/29 21:45 PUBLIC WORKS
EC—S
00'35" 002
097
OK
27
07/29 2146 12084664405
EC—S
00'36" 002
097
OK
28
07/29 21:47 8841159
EC—S
00'35" 002
097
OK
29
0729 2148 2088940?44
EC—S
00'34" 002
097
OK
30
07/29 21:49 POLICE DEPT
EC—S
00'35" 002
097
OK
31
07/29 2150 8985501
EC—S
00'34" 002
097
OK
32
0729 21:51 LIBRARY
EC—S
00'43" 002
097
OK
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba David Moe
Wendy Newton-HuckabayMichael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 044004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
vt cowi n-wLvi d— A-PproodJ— to c
5. Public Heap g• AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
S. Public Hearing. P 04-017 Request or Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
SubdivisionAy Lonnie Johnson — 4205p�North Locust Grove Road:
9-C OvYI YV�Q.1 V �' fort/ GIC ,
7. Public Heanng: CUP 0401 Requ a Conditiona �e Permit for a
Planned Development for reductions to the minimum requirements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locyst, Grove
Road:
y1 � �
�f D 1%01. ` C/�
8. Election of�CAyy
h„ainnan:
7.-j-1j.c1- Kj�tu- govoP
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
10. Staff Discussi�\SC�SSQ.C�..
Merldlan Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29.2004
Page I of 2
AA matwiaLs presented at public Meetings Shap becoanee Meftm
Anyone desldng auommodatlon for d�abilUes related to documents mWf
orhearings
Pleace cardaat the City Clerk's Office at hi864433 at least 46 hours prior to the public meeft.
> TX ATION REPORT > AS OF JUL 29 '04 22:10 PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba David Moe
Wendy Newton-HuckabayMichael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
& Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 -foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
t corm wo-yi if -A -Provo -L to %,
5. Public Heari g: AZ 04011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
covr�rntan d Aroma � c(C.
S. Public Hearing. P 04-017 Reque or Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision Lonnie Johnson — 420,57 North Locust GrksQ-
Road:
7. Public WearinCUP 04 15 R dst v equ r a Condition Permit for a
lanned Development for reductions tothe minimumrements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locyst, Grove Road:
wm jL
8. Election of Chainnan:
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
10. Staff Discussi�SSR d,.
Merldlan Planning and Zoning Commiewon Agenda — July 29.2t1t14
Ah nmlenals ivesefted at Wft rnadW WW became Ropeq cram
Anyone dasddng eocommodadon for dmabsk" related domarwmt8 wWor haa&49
please oonteat Bre CRY Clertt's twice at OBS 4433 at West 45 hours prior to the pWft meeting.
DATE TIME TO/FROM
MODE
MIN/SEC PGS
CMD#
STATUS
01
0729 21:53 92083776449
EC --S
00'34" 002
097
OK
02
0729 21:54 208 388 6924
EC—S
00'41" 002
097
OK
03
0729 21:55 2088886854
EC --S
00'33" 002
097
OK
04
0729 21:56 ALL AMERICAN INS
EC --S
00'35" 002
097
OK
05
0729 21:57 208 895 0390
EC --S
00'34" 002
097
OK
06
0729 21:58 128300040
63--S
00'46" 002
097
OK
07
0729 22:00 208 387 6393
EC --S
00'34" 002
097
OK
08
0729 22:01 ADA CTY DEUELMT
EC --S
00'35" 002
097
OK
09
0729 22:02 8885052
EC --S
00'35" 002
097
OK
10
0729 22:03 CHERRY LANE
63--S
01'13" 002
097
OK
11
0729 22:05 IDAHO ATHLETIC C
EC --S
00'37" 002
097
OK
12
0729 22:06 867 0816
63—S
01'13" 002
097
OK
13
0729 22:08 ID PRESS TRIBUNE
EC --S
00'37" 002
097
OK
14
0729 22:09 2088886701
EC --S
00'37" 002
097
OK
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba David Moe
Wendy Newton-HuckabayMichael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
& Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 -foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
t corm wo-yi if -A -Provo -L to %,
5. Public Heari g: AZ 04011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
covr�rntan d Aroma � c(C.
S. Public Hearing. P 04-017 Reque or Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision Lonnie Johnson — 420,57 North Locust GrksQ-
Road:
7. Public WearinCUP 04 15 R dst v equ r a Condition Permit for a
lanned Development for reductions tothe minimumrements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locyst, Grove Road:
wm jL
8. Election of Chainnan:
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
10. Staff Discussi�SSR d,.
Merldlan Planning and Zoning Commiewon Agenda — July 29.2t1t14
Ah nmlenals ivesefted at Wft rnadW WW became Ropeq cram
Anyone dasddng eocommodadon for dmabsk" related domarwmt8 wWor haa&49
please oonteat Bre CRY Clertt's twice at OBS 4433 at West 45 hours prior to the pWft meeting.
** TX CONFIRMATION REPORT **
0
AS OF JUL 26 '04 16:3? PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
ufi)),G f or -m f ualu /vu/lcz.- ✓viymfl.6
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
I. (Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba David Moe
Wendy Newton-Huckabay Michael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 -foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
%VAQf of NnrFh Uaririion Rnorl oriA enr r0% e,;A^ s %Af--f I�s:..►, n..,,�.
DATE
TIME
TO/FROM
MODE
MIN/SEC
PGS
CMDt#
STATUS
0?
0?/26
16:06
3810160
EC --S
00'51"
002
04?
OK
08
0?/26
16:0?
PUBLIC WORKS
EC --S
00'33"
002
04?
OK
09
0?/26
16:08
12084664405
EC --S
00'34"
002
04?
OK
10
0?/26
16:09
8841159
EC --S
00'33"
002
04?
OK
11
0?/26
16:10
2088840?44
EC --S
00'33"
002
04?
OK
12
0?/26
16:11
POLICE DEPT
EC --S
00'33"
002
04?
OK
13
0?/26
16:12
8985501
EC --S
00'33"
002
04?
OK
14
0?/26
16:13
LIBRARY
EC --S
00'39"
002
04?
OK
15
0?/26
16:14
92083??6449
EC --S
00'31"
002
04?
OK
16
0?/26
16:16
2088886854
EC --S
00'32"
002
04?
OK
1?
0?/26
16:1?
ALL AMERICAN INS
EC --S
00'32"
002
04?
OK
18
0?/26
16:18
208 895 0390
EC --S
00'32"
002
04?
OK
19
0?/26
16:19
128300040
G3 --S
00'44"
002
04?
OK
20
0?/26
16:20
208 38? 6393
EC --S
00'32"
002
04?
OK
21
0?/26
16:21
ADA CTY DEUELMT
EC --S
00'32"
002
04?
OK
22
0?/26
16:23
8885052
EC --S
00'32"
002
04?
OK
23
0?/26
16:24
CHERRY LANE
G3 --S
01'12"
002
04?
OK
24
0?/26
16:26
IDAHO ATHLETIC C
EC --S
00'36"
002
04?
OK
25
0?/26
16:2?
88? 0816
G3 --S
01'12"
002
04?
OK
26
0?/26
16:29
ID PRESS TRIBUNE
EC --S
00'36"
002
04?
OK
30
0?/26
16.34
208 388 6924
EC --S
00'38"
002
04?
OK
32
0?/26
16:3?
2088886?01
EC --S
00'32"
002
04?
OK
ufi)),G f or -m f ualu /vu/lcz.- ✓viymfl.6
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
I. (Roll -call Attendance:
David Zaremba David Moe
Wendy Newton-Huckabay Michael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 -foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
%VAQf of NnrFh Uaririion Rnorl oriA enr r0% e,;A^ s %Af--f I�s:..►, n..,,�.
.MAYOR
Tammy de waerd
CITY COUNCIL MHMBLRS
NOTICE OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL
KeithWL. M. Nary
h gBird
MEETING WORKSHOP
Charles M. Rountree
Shaun Wardle
m* TX CO TION REPORT >
AS OF JUL 26 '04 1704
PAGE.01
CRY DEPARTMENTS
Fire
540 E. Nranklin Road
CITY OF
MERIDIAN
DATE TIME TO/FROM
MODE
MIN/SEC PGS
CMD# STATUS
01
0726 16:38 208BB40744
EC --S
00'39" 002
048
OK
02
0726 16:39 POLICE DEPT
EC --S
00'39" 002
048
OK
03
0726 1640 8985501
EC --S
00'38" 002
048
OK
04
0726 16-41 LIBRARY
EC --S
00'48" 002
048
OK
05
0726 16:42 92083776449
EC --S
00'38" 002
048
OK
06
07/26 16:43 208 388 6924
EC --S
00'48" 002
048
OK
07
0726 16-45 2088886854
EC --S
00'39" 002
048
OK
08
0726 16:46 ALL AMERICAN INS
EC --S
00'38" 002
048
OK
09
0726 16:47 208 895 0390
EC --S
00'39" 002
048
OK
10
0726 16:49 128300040
03--S
00'48" 002
048
OK
11
07/26 16:50 208 387 6393
EC --S
00'39" 002
048
OK
12
0726 16:51 ADA CTY DEVELMT
EC --S
00'40" 002
048
OK
13
07/26 16:52 8885052
EC --S
00'38" 002
048
OK
14
0726 1654 CHERRY LANE
G3 --S
01'15" 002
048
OK
15
0726 16)56 IDAHO ATHLETIC C
EC --S
00'40" 002
048
OK
16
0726 16:57 887 0816
G3 --S
01'15" 002
048
OK
17
0726 16:59 ID PRESS TRIBUNE
EC --S
00'40" 002
048
OK
18
0726 17:03 2088886701
EC --S
00'40" 002
048
OK
t -dr
YV1911C /VdY7Ct
- > nQrt 1
t:nv ttr ln�i�: r'�~•�:l%
•..,(.
/may
1, •-s ..
Z�1fii� x�°r
V/
', n,,,
.MAYOR
Tammy de waerd
CITY COUNCIL MHMBLRS
NOTICE OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL
KeithWL. M. Nary
h gBird
MEETING WORKSHOP
Charles M. Rountree
Shaun Wardle
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning
CRY DEPARTMENTS
Fire
540 E. Nranklin Road
Commission of the Ci of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at
ry Pe City
888-1234/fax 895.0390
Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, July 29, 2004 at 7:00
Parka &Recreation
11 E. Dower Street
P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will be discussing
888-3579/fox 898-5501
g
Planning & Zoning
agenda items which are on the Planning and Zoning Commission Special
660 E. Watertower Late
Suite 202
Meeting Agenda for following Issues:
884-553.3/fax 888-6854
Police
- Recommendat/on: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of
1401 E. Watertower Lane
888-6678/fax 846-7366
a 20 -foot strip of property, extending from the Creason
LatefW north approximately 810-1eet for Salisbury
Public Works
Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC - west of
660 E. Watertower Lane
North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road.'
Suite 200
898-5500/fax 898-9551
Public Hearing: AZ 04-01 Request for Annexation and
- Building
Zoning of 9.8 acres from RUT to R-8 and CN zones for
660 E. Watertower Lare
proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson -
Suitt 150
4205 North Locust Grove Road:
887-]211/fax 687-1297
Sewer (WWTP)
Public Hearing: PP 04-017 Request for Preliminary Plat
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
approval fOr 28 single-family residential and office building
888-2191 /fax 884.0744
lots and two (2) common lots on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8
water
and CN zones for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by
2235 N. W. 8th Street
Lonnie Johnson - 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
888-5242/ fax 884-1159
Public Hearing: CUP 04.095 Request for a Conditional
Use Permit for a Planned Development for reductions to the
minimum requirements for lot area, rear building setbacks,
street side setbacks and minimum street frontage for
CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433
CITY CL931(—g{X 868.421A I1VA" R65t)URCCS—PAX 894.8723 FUN.tNGIi a UTILITY aa.t.ING—IHS 887.4813 MAYVIi'S OFFICE—MX 884.8110
post L)
CITY OF
y
4l
IDAHO Bb<
7 He.��;rar'. V �y: since
1993 a_
MAYOR
Tammy de Weerd
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOTICE OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL
William L. M. Nary
Keith Bird
MEETING WORKSHOP
Charles M. Rountree
Shaun Wardle
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning
CITY DEPARTMENTS
Fire
Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City
540 E. Franklin Road
888-1234/fax 895-0390
Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, July 29, 2004 at 7:00
Parks & Recreation
11 E. Bower Street
P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will be discussing
888-3579/fax 898-5501
Planning & Zoning
agenda items which are on the Planning and Zoning Commission Special
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 202
Meeting Agenda for following issues:
884-5533/fax 888-6854
Police
Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of
1401 E. Watertower Lane
a 20 -foot strip of properly, extending from the Creason
888-6678 /fax 846-7366
Lateral north approximately 810 feet for Salisbury
Public Works
Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC — west of
660 E. Watertower Lane
North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
Suite 200
898-5500 /fax 898-9551
Public Hearing: AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and
- Building
Zoning of 9.8 acres from RUT to R-8 and C N zones for
660 E. Watertower Lane
proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson —
Suite 150
4205 North Locust Grove Road.
887-2211/fax 887-1297
- Sewer (WWTP)
^' Public Hearing: PP 04-017 Request for Preliminary Plat
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
approval for 28 single-family residential and office building
888-2191 /fax 884-0744
lots and two (2) common lots on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8
- Water
and CN zones for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by
2235 N. W. 8th Street
Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
888-5242/fax 884-1159
Public Hearing: CUP 04-015 Request for a Conditional
Use Permit for a Planned Development for reductions to the
minimum requirements for lot area, rear building setbacks,
street side setbacks and minimum street frontage for
CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433
CITl' CLERK-Fkx 888-4218 HU;11AN RESOURCES—FAX 884-8723 FINANCE & UTILITI' BILLING—FAx 887-4813 b1AY0R'S OFFICE—FAX 884-8119
i
ow
ow
i
proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson -
4205 North Locust Grove Road.
Election of Chairman:
Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
Staff Discussion:
A. Department Update.-
B.
pdate.B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Update:
C. Parking Study:
D. Downtown Transportation Management Plan:
E. APA Subscription Renewal:
F. Available Training Funds.-
G.
unds.G. Tracking Volunteer Hours: 00tttt'111►111j
DATED this 26th of July, 2004.
,•��' or- M®�'°°°°�
SEAL nMa
0•J 4
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.
l6 f -l•f a.�-,r .•aJ •� o
C
h
I
CITY OF
IDAHO �p
SINGE
7993
MAYOR
Tammy de Weerd
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
William L. M. Nary
Keith Bird
Charles M. Rountree
Shaun Wardle
CITY DEPARTMENTS
Fire
540 E. Franklin Road
888-1234/fax 895-0390
Parks & Recreation
11 E. Bower Street
888-3579/fax 898-5501
Planning & Zoning
660 E. Watertower Lane
Suite 202
884-5533/fax 888-6854
Police
1401 E. Watertower Lane
888-6678/fax 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
- Sewer (WWTP)
3401 N. Ten Mile Road
888-2191/fax 884-0744
- Water
2235 N. W. 8th Street
888-5242/fax 884-1159
NOTICE OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL
MEETING WORKSHOP
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Meeting at City
Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Thursday, July 29, 2004 at 7:00
P.M. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission will be discussing
agenda items which are on the Planning and Zoning Commission Special
Meeting Agenda for following issues:
Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of
a 20 -foot strip of property, extending from the Creason
Lateral north approximately 890 -feet for Salisbury
Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC — west of
North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
Public Hearing: AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and
Zoning of 9.8 acres from RUT to R-8 and C N zones for
proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson —
4205 North Locust Grove Road
Public Hearing., PP 04-017 Request for Preliminary Plat
approval for 28 single-family residential and office building
lots and two (2) common lots on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8
and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by
Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
Public Hearing: CUP 04-015 Request for a Conditional
Use Permit for a Planned Development for reductions to the
minimum requirements for lot area, rear building setbacks,
street side setbacks and minimum street frontage for
CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433
CITY CLERK—FAX 888-4218 HLAIAN RESOURCES—FAX 884-8723 FINANCE & LITILITN' BILLING—FAX 887-4813 MAYOR'S OFFICE—FAX 884-8119
N
a
i
"it
e
.NS
_tt
x'y
<,,.g'
u
�
1+.1@'d7
C
,pz.
,q
x
...
k
r
r�r
a �'
vE 'Sir ' , t 4 ,yep
W
'
9fj+c. 9.. ".
x
City of Meridian, Idaho
Planning and Zoning Commission
By -Laws
Adopted July 29, 2004
1. OFFICERS. The Commission shall elect from among its members a Chairman and a
Vice -Chairman.
2. DUTIES OF OFFICERS. The Chairman shall conduct all meetings of the Planning and
Zoning Commission in an orderly manner, and shall assist Planning and Zoning Staff in
establishing the agenda for future Commission meetings. The Vice -Chairman, in the
absence of the Chairman, shall conduct meetings of the Planning and Zoning
Commission in an orderly manner, and shall assume the office of Chairman if, for any
reason, that office becomes vacant during a regular term.
3. TERM OF OFFICE. The Chairman and Vice -Chairman shall serve for a calendar year,
from the first meeting in January to the last meeting in December. Commissioners may
serve no more than two consecutive one-year terms in the same office. Thereafter,
Commissioners are eligible to be elected to the other office immediately, or to the same
office again after one year out of office. Service of less than a year shall count as a full
term in office only if such service has been eight months or more.
® 4. REGULAR ELECTION OF OFFICERS. Elections will be held at the first regular
meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission in December of each year, for terms
beginning the next January.
5. VACANCIES AND SPECIAL ELECTIONS. If the office of Chairman becomes vacant
for any reason during a term, the Vice -Chairman shall become Chairman for the rest of
the term. If the office of Vice -Chairman becomes vacant for any reason prior to
November, an election to fill the remaining term shall be placed on the next available
agenda. If the office of Vice -Chairman becomes vacant during November or
December, the office shall remain vacant for the remainder of the term. Special
elections may be held at other times for reasons determined by the Commissioners.
6. ELECTION PROCEEDURES. For regular elections, the office of Chairman shall be
elected first, and the office of Vice -Chairman shall be elected thereafter. For all
elections, Commissioners may nominate any eligible Commissioner including
themselves. Voting shall be accomplished by writing the name of one nominee on a
piece of paper, and passing the paper to the City Clerk for counting. The nominee with
the most votes is elected. In case of a tie for most votes, a run-off vote between the
tied nominees shall occur in the same manner. Voting shall continue until one nominee
is elected or one withdraws. The City Clerk shall announce the results.
Jul 29 04 10:48p M. Dean Willis
2088559152
p.l
M.D. WILLIS, INC.
P.O. BOX 1241
EAGLE, IDAHOHO83616
Invoice
PHONE (208) 855-9151
FAX (208) 855-9152
DATE
INVOICE NO.
L7/3/2004 2747
BILL TO
MERIDIAN, CITY OF
33 E. IDAHO AVE.
MERIDIAN, ID. 83642
ITEM DESCRIPTION
MDAPP APPEARANCE FEE - 07/ 03./ 04 P&Z
QN
RATE
AMOUNT
-
MDORG MINUTES .07/01/04 - P&Z
2
20.00
40.00
MDP APPEARANCE FEE - 07/06/04 - CITY
34
3
6.00
204.00
COUNCIL
20.00
60.00
MDORG MINUTES - 07/06/04 - CITY COUNCIL
MDAPP APPEARANCE FEE - 07/23/04 - CITY
61
3
6.00
366.00
COUNCIL
20.00
60.00
MDORG MINUTES - 07/13/04 - CITY COUNCIL
56
MDAPP APPEARANCE FEE - 07/15/04 - P&Z
Q'
6.00
336.00
MDORG MINUTES - 07/25/04 - P&Z
20.00
80.00
MDP APPEARANCE FEE - 07/20/04 - CITY
67
1
6.00
402.00
COUNCIL
20.00
20.00
MDORG MINUTES - 07/20/04 - CITY COUNCIL
14I
MDAPP APPEARANCE FEE - 07/27/04 - CITY
6.00
84.00
COUNCIL
3
2 0.00
I
60.00
MDORG MINTUES - 07/27/04 - CITY COUNCIL
07/29/07 - P&Z WILL BE ADDED TO.00
56
6.00 I
3315
MONTH
iNEXT
MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO M.D. WILLIS, INC.
f Env # 82-0490768
Total
$2,048,00
JUL 29 '04 23:03 2088559152 PAGE.01
A. Department Update:`�,�� g$
B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Update: \-6 `�C Cjsst, -J
C. Parking Study:
D. Downtown Transportation Management Plan: t�'suoSS,l.P�
E. APA Subscription Renewal:
F. Available Training Funds:
G. Tracking Volunteer Hours:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29, 2004
Page 2 of 2
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.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING SPECIAL MEETING
AGENDA
Thursday, July 29, 2004, at 7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
1. Roll -call Attendance:
X David Zaremba X David Moe
X Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Michael Rohm
O Chairman Keith Borup
2. Adoption of the Agenda:
3. Consent Agenda:
4. Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 -foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
Recommend Approval to City Council
5. Public Hearing: AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
Recommend approval to City Council
6. Public Hearing: PP 04-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
Recommend Approval to City Council
7. Public Hearing: CUP 04-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for reductions to the minimum requirements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locust Grove Road: Recommend Approval to City Council
8. Election of Chairman: Re-elect Keith Borup
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda —July 29, 2004
Page 1 of 2
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.
0
9. Discussion on Hearing Procedures: Discussed
10. Staff Discussion: Discussed
A. Department Update: Discussed
B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Update: Discussed
C. Parking Study: Discussed
D. Downtown Transportation Management Plan: Discussed
E. APA Subscription Renewal: Discussed
F. Available Training Funds: Discussed
G. Tracking Volunteer Hours: Discussed
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda — July 29, 2004
Page 2 of 2
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.
Merldian Planning g and Zonina Special Meeting July 29, 2004
The special meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to
order at 7:00 P.M. by Vice -Chairman David Zaremba.
Members Present: Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay, Commissioner David
Zaremba, Commissioner Michael Rohm, and Commissioner David Moe.
Members Absent: Chairman Keith Borup.
Others Present: Jill Holinka, Jessica Johnson, Anna Canning, Brad Hawkins -Clark,
Wendy Kirkpatrick, Bruce Freckleton, Steve Siddoway, and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll -Call Attendance:
Roll -call
X David Zaremba X David Moe
X Wendy Newton-Huckabay X Michael Rohm
Chairman Keith Borup
Zaremba: Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to welcome you to this special meeting of the
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for July 29th, 2004. 1 will begin with roll call
of attendance.
Zaremba: And we have news from our chairman that he will not be here, since this is a
special meeting, not a regularly scheduled one, I would clarify that he did know about
the meeting and he has notified us that he has a scheduling conflict and will not be
here.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda:
Zaremba: The next item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. May I have a
motion?
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move that we adopt the agenda as written.
Rohm: Second.
Zaremba: We have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda. All in favor say aye.
Any opposed? Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 3: Consent Agenda:
Zaremba: There are no items on the Consent Agenda.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 2 of 44
Item 4: Recommendation: VAC 04-004 Request for a Vacation of a 20 -foot strip
of property, extending from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 -
feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 by Woodside Properties, LLC —
west of North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road:
Zaremba: So, we will go straight to Item 4. Item 4 is a recommendation, it's not actually
a Public Hearing. For those that are interested, we will not take public testimony on
Item 4, but after we have made our recommendation to the City Council, they will have
a Public Hearing on it. Is there a staff report?
Hawkins -Clark: There can be, if you would like one.
Zaremba: Briefly. Thank you.
Hawkins -Clark: It's short, the staff report. I believe you should have received a few
pages of background information there. Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 was recently
approved by Planning and Zoning Commission, so you're well familiar with the area
that's located here, the south side of Ustick, north of Woodbury Subdivision. The South
Slough runs along the south part of it and here is the preliminary plat. Actually, I don't
believe this is correct, because there wasn't a stub street here, but generally this is what
was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and this roadway shown here is
Venable Lane. And my apologies for the clarity on this, but we wanted to show you the
specific legal graphically -- the legal description for what they are proposing to vacate
graphically shown and that is basically this shaded area that's located here on the north
side of Salisbury down to the South Slough. The entire length of Venable Lane is about
1,800 feet and the application tonight is for about 815 of that and, again, we are only
talking about the 20 feet on the east side of Venable, the western half is privately
owned. The staff report basically just highlights the fact that because it's a substandard
width and the highway district won't accept the 20 feet, that's one of the reasons that we
believe that, the vacation should be supported. The second one is that there is no
chance of connectivity to the south. The South Slough is there, as well as houses in
Woodbury, so -- I'm sorry. Oh, Waterbury. I'm sorry. Yes. Waterbury Subdivision.
And, then, the third reason was the Flack Drain, which is a pretty good size facility, runs
-- starting about this point, runs north and much of that drain's channel and easement
are within that private Venable Lane, so in terms of being able to actually get a public
street to work in there would be difficult. So, as you may recall, this is a little bit of a
change from staffs original position. We were really pushing for this mid mile to
become a collector, to become a local street, and we still very much support in the
future this area here on the north, this 900 to 1,000 feet could -- would still be a good
place to have a mid mile point, but for this section that is proposed tonight, given that
there would be little traffic, little density down there, we would support the vacation, so --
Zaremba: Okay. Any discussion among the Commission?
Moe: No.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 3 of 44
Zaremba: We have no Public Hearing to close, so I'm ready for a motion on the
recommendation.
Moe: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I move that we forward to City Council recommending
approval of VAC 04-004, request for a vacation of a 20 foot strip of property extending
from the Creason Lateral north approximately 810 feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2
by Woodside Properties, LLC, west of North Meridian Road on the south side of Ustick
Road, with all comments from staff for the meeting date of July 29th, 2004.
Rohm: Second.
Zaremba: It has been moved and seconded to recommend to the City Council. All
those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 5: Public Hearing: AZ 04-011 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
Item 6: Public Hearing: PP 04-017 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 28
single-family residential and office building lots and two (2) common lots
on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria
Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205 North Locust Grove Road:
Item 7: Public Hearing: CUP 04-015 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
Planned Development for reductions to the minimum requirements for lot
area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks and minimum street
frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson — 4205
North Locust Grove Road:
Zaremba: Next I'd like to open three public hearings that are Items 5, 6, and 7 on the
agenda, AZ 04-011, PP 04-017, CUP 04-015 and we will begin with the staff report.
Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission, this application is for Alexandria
Subdivision. There are three applications. The first one is for the annexation and
zoning of 9.8 acres. It's currently located in the county and has RUT zoning. They are
requesting C -N zoning for a proposed commercial component, which is on the eastern
edge of the subject property and they are proposing R-8 zoning for the remainder of the
subdivision, which will be residential. The second part of the application is a preliminary
plat for 28 building lots and this includes the four commercial lots, which will be zoned
C -N and also the existing home, which will be on a lot in the subdivision, which will be
zoned R-8. And there is also a CUP for a planned development and they are
requesting the planned development to obtain reduced setbacks, reduced lot sizes, and
reduced frontage and they will be providing 10.2 percent open space as an amenity and
® s
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 4 of 44
also two gazebo and picnic areas there in the two open space lots of the subdivision. I'll
go back to the vicinity map. This property is located -- it's too bad we don't have a
Comprehensive Plan map. It's located in one of the -- the neighborhood centers that
have been designated through our Comprehensive Plan. This is sort of at the northern
part of the neighborhood center and so the designation is officially mixed use
neighborhood center, which is one of the -- which is the lowest density of the three
neighborhood centers called out in our Comp Plan. There are three different types.
This is the lowest density. And I wanted to go ahead and just briefly address an issue
that should be noted. There -- in the Comprehensive Plan there is a cap of ten acres on
commercial uses, but July 13th, 2004, City Council approved Brockton Subdivision,
which had a commercial component and with the approval of that subdivision, the
acreage has gone up so we have now 11.21 acres of commercial uses in the
neighborhood center. So, it's been exceeded and Council went ahead and let that
happen at that previous hearing and that was, again, July 2004. And if this application
is approved it will further exceed that. But I just wanted to give you that background
information. Staff feels this project still meets the intent of the Comp Plan. The
commercial uses and the proposed C -N zoning meet the intent of the Comprehensive
Plan for that area and I also wanted to note that the R-8 portion of the subdivision, while
the entire property -- the entire residential component of the project will be zoned R-8,
including the large lot with the existing home. The density is actually relatively low, it's
below -- it's -- actually, it's almost four units per acre. It's lower than typically we'd like to
see in a neighborhood center, but that's because of the large existing lot with the home
and we are assuming that at some point that will be redeveloped and the density will go
back up. The remainder of the subdivision is fairly dense small lot, almost patio lot type
-- type home layouts and I will go through -- they are planning for a detailed conditional
use for the commercial component and they have some elevations they have submitted
for the commercial part. Just to give you an idea what that looks like. And, let's see,
one more issue I wanted to go through briefly, but because of the proposed road
section, there are several parking issues. Our -- Joe Silva, our deputy fire chief, has --
is recommending that there be no parking allowed in the court and no parking allowed
on Green Haven, which is that road that runs east -west in the southern part of the
subject property until that road -- until that road section is completed with the
development to the south. So, there will be no parking until that road section is
completed. And, then, parking on one side of the street will be allowed for the
remainder of the subdivision. So, staff is recommending approval of the proposed
project. We feel it meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and these smaller lots
and patio home size type lots are going to add to the diversity of housing types for the
City of Meridian and we support the project. Do you have any questions of staff?
Zaremba: Commissioners?
Moe: Yes, I do, as a matter of fact.
Kirkpatrick: Okay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
a
July 29, 2004
Page 5 of 44
Moe: Wendy, on the staff report it -- the last sentence in the application summary it
talks about an R-15. Is that just a typo in there?
Kirkpatrick: That's a typo. There is no R-15. That is a typo.
Moe: Okay.
Kirkpatrick: Sorry I missed that. Oh, initially, while we are going back and fixing things,
in my surrounding properties I had inverted east and west when I was doing the
description, so where it says east it should be west and where it says west it should be
east.
Moe: Okay. And the only other thing -- and I would just say that because I'm fairly new,
okay, that is basically we are showing that C -N zone, but on the plan I was noting it L -O.
assume L -O is --
Kirkpatrick: With their original submittal it was L -O and we encouraged them to do C -N,
because it's actually more compatible with that neighborhood center designation.
Moe: Okay. And, then, one other question. In regards to the parking for the court, are
we speaking of street parking?
Kirkpatrick: Right. That's just on -street parking. So, no on -street parking allowed that
in court.
Moe: And I'm assuming that it's just going to be by signage only to avoid that?
Kirkpatrick: Usually, we do signage and, then, the curb is also painted red and the fire
department regulates that.
Moe: Okay. Thank you.
Zaremba: Would the application care to make a presentation?
Wardle: Before I commence, let me hand out some colored exhibits that will help.
Commissioners, for the record my name is Mike Wardle. My residence is 4910
Knollwood Avenue in Boise. This is, actually, the last project that I have designed in
Meridian, but do you -- do we have -- okay. We are going to put on these same exhibits
that I provided to you. We had them in Powerpoint form as well, but the project that we
are talking about, as noted on that first sheet that you have in front of you, lies just south
of the recently approved Razzberry Subdivision. Since this particular graphic was put
together there has been a lot of change out there. The entire area behind this proposed
subdivision is now fully improved lots for the Copper Basin Subdivision. The streets are
in, utility stubs, and they are starting to build homes back there. My previous activities
in this area were the Heritage Commons project to the south, Settlement Bridge to the
northeast, both of which have been approved and well under construction at Heritage
Meridian Planning &Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 6 of 44
and just under construction at Settlement. But I'm pleased that the character of this
very small and fairly tight piece of ground, as staff has noted, does conform to the
Comprehensive Plan in that it does provide actual commercial zoning, whereas in
Razzberry Subdivision they have an L -O and in Heritage Commons they had the office
uses by exception and not by zoning. And so it really affords the opportunity to get the
mix of uses, not just offices, but appropriate retail uses scaled to the character of a
neighborhood. If we can look at the next slide, Brad, I'd appreciate it. The next sheet,
which is simply the site plan in simple form. And I guess I wanted to make one
comment about the parking issue. As soon as I do the form disappears. The reason
that the parking is an issue here -- there will be, actually, more roadway improved than
what shows, but it will not be a fully improved roadway, it will give all the necessary
frontage and access way and so there are some constraints initially and when it talked
about no parking, as I read the staff report and the recommendations, it relates to the
turnaround area, but not necessarily to the street, which would probably be parking on
one side and there would be parking on one side of the other streets and these streets
match those that came out of the adjacent subdivision as approved in Razzberry. What
really stands this project apart is that even though it's small and fairly formal in its
appearance, with the exception of the two center lots on the turnaround stub street,
every lot within this project has direct access to what will be a very highly amenitized
open space area. Also would note that the large home that -- this is the home of Lonnie
and Karen Johnson that live back here and it's their property that's being developed.
That home will remain. There is a large barn and a swimming pool and the home.
There are three other lots that would be developed in and adjacent to that, but each of
these homes will have access to a fairly enclosed area that will have on one side what
we would call a grand tot lot, because we expect that these homes will be more related
to, you know, the 55 and older and the empty nesters, but because they have
grandchildren we needed to have facilities that would be appropriate for that use. And,
then, on the other side there would be an enclosed -- a covered picnic area. So, it really
affords a very closed, but accessible amenity for each of the residents within this area.
And these are, obviously -- could be highly -- well, the quality of the homes are
expected to be very very high, but they are smaller lots, with the intent that there is a lot
less maintenance to do that afford a little bit more freedom and flexibility as people
change their lifestyles from one where they spent a lot of time in the yard to where they
might spend a little bit less. The last slide and the last sheet in your packet simply
shows the landscape elements in a little bit more detail and kind of the intent for the
intensity of that improved area behind those lots and as it also relates to the commercial
at the front. Mr. Johnson is here, if you had questions. Joe Canning, B&A Engineers,
who has done the design here as well. We would be happy to answer questions, but in
conclusion would simply express our desire that you adopt and approve the annexation
and zoning, the planned development, and preliminary plat application with the
conditions as noted as recommended by staff. And I would be happy to answer
questions or anybody else would as well.
Newton-Huckabay: What goes on Lots 1, 2, and 3? Are those on the west side?
Wardle: On the backside over here?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 7 of 44
Newton-Huckabay: Yeah. Are those houses?
Wardle: Oh. Those are home sites as well. Those are home sites, but they just
happen to be -- this street had to lineup with the street coming out of Razzberry
Subdivision to the north and as a result there was some pasture area outside of the
Johnson's home that has the opportunity to have probably one fairly large home and,
then, two other homes as well. So, there will be three homes west of that road, aside
from the Johnson's.
Newton-Huckabay: All three of them have a common driveway?
Wardle: Two of them would share a common drive. Wouldn't necessarily have to, but,
actually, the way it is, one of them is a flag lot, the other has direct frontage to the road
-- the other two both have frontage to the road, so there has been no design of them,
but they all have the appropriate required frontage.
Newton-Huckabay: Okay. Thanks.
Zaremba: Let's see. I saw somewhere in the presentation some elevations for the
commercial buildings.
Wardle: Yes.
Zaremba: And I guess my only question is since -- I wasn't real sure which direction
some of them were facing, so my question is assuming their entryways are facing the
parking lot, the two buildings that are actually on Locust Grove, the side that faces
Locust Grove hopefully won't just look like the back of a building. Is there some
treatment to those?
Wardle: Mr. Zaremba, obviously, at the point that buildings are brought forward for
design, it would have to go through the appropriate process to look at siting issues and
so forth, so I'm assuming that that opportunity still exists in the future to be certain that
that doesn't occur.
Zaremba: Okay.
Wardle: But that's a good point to put in the record. If no further questions, I appreciate
the chance to visit with you this evening.
Zaremba: Thank you. This is the opportunity for any public comments, anybody that
cares to say one way or another their comments about this project, and if you will come
up and announce your name and address and, then, state your comments, please.
Rambo: My name is Stacy Rambo and I live at 1760 Star Lane, just west of this
proposed project. And I just need some clarification, just from lack of knowledge. It
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 8 of 44
was my understanding from talking with the other residents that this was going to be
light office professional up front, but am I hearing that it has the possibility of being
retail?
Zaremba: That's a good question.
Rambo: Like a video store --
Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission, they are planning for C -N zoning
and we can limit it through a development agreement, they could do it through their
CC&Rs, but if we want to have those uses restricted, we should address that now,
because potentially they could have retail in a C -N zone.
Rambo: If that's a possibility, then, that's what I want to speak against.
Kirkpatrick: And if there are, you know, specific uses, say like a gas station or
convenience store that we are concerned about, we should go ahead and address
those now. And we may want the applicant to speak to that also.
Zaremba: After everybody has a chance to talk, the applicant will come up. He makes
notes and he will answer questions like that. But since they originally applied for an L -O
zone, which is only offices, I suspect he would be satisfied if we said it is a C -N zone
restricted to L -O uses, but we will ask him that.
Rambo: Okay. Sounds good. Just to put a basis back onto that, when Razzberry just
to the north of that was going on, both Planning and Zoning and City Council -- and I
apologize for not having those with me, because I thought it was going to be office, light
office -- both mentioned that they strongly agreed that that area right there would be
professional light office and I would like to see that continue, especially with the
residential intersection with Star Lane just right to the east of it. It's going to be -- the
traffic with the retail merging with the residential is going to be -- it's tough enough as it
is right now. I'd hate to see the added conflict at that point in the roadway, so --
Zaremba: Thank you. Anyone else care to comment?
Graham: Laird Graham. I live at 1491 North Locust Grove Road, just on the south side
of the project, and I also had a question about the zoning, very much along the lines of
what she just brought up and I guess we determined how we are going to address that
going forward tonight. And so I'll wait to hear on that. I'm a bit conflicted on it, because,
obviously, I have an identical property and I'm not exactly sure the ramifications of
restricting one or the other might be for me. It's a little bit hard to determine that, you
know, right at this time, so -- but I am interested in that topic and I had it here to talk
about, but we will just defer until the applicant has a chance to speak to it.
Rohm: I'm curious, what is your position? How would you like to see it go, so we are
clear on that.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 9 of 44
Graham: I have been under the impression it was going to be light office and we still --
we live there and we intend to stay there and we would prefer to see the activity cease
at office hours, normal office hours, 5:30, 6:00 o'clock, allowing for some after hour
activity as might happen for like late appointments and so on and so forth. But when I
was reviewing the application a couple days ago and was looking at the -- the narrative,
it used the term mixed use neighborhood. Is C -N and mixed use neighborhood the
same -- the same thing?
Kirkpatrick: Mixed use neighborhood is a Comprehensive Plan designation and the C -N
zoning is compatible with that Comprehensive Plan designation of mixed use
neighborhood.
Graham: Okay. The mixed use neighborhood -- you know, some things that caught my
eye were grocery stores, drug stores, coffee, sandwich shops and so on. And to
answer your question, as I stand here tonight -- and I'm sure my wife feels this way --
that that's not the kind of activity we would like to attract to the area while it's still our
home site. I would be interested in seeing Reederman Street or Avenue, which cuts in
front of the applicant -- the property owner's home and stops just short of ours, not be a
through street. I would prefer that it be only as long coming from the north as necessary
to serve the three lots that are just to the east and the north of the existing home site.
The reason for that is I would like to discourage traffic. For 13 years we have lived a
thousand feet off of Locust Grove Road and now we are bringing the traffic closer to us,
which we understand is happening.
Rohm: Would you mind using the pointer that's up there and -- just so that I know
exactly where you're talking about.
Graham: Right there. Our home is right here. And I would like -- I would like to see this
street not go through. I would like to see it stop.
Rohm: Not go through --
Graham: Right. Right in this area. I'm thinking that the folks that live here, they
naturally, anyway, will go out to a street that comes up here and out the exit. These
folks here have no need to come around here. But, at the same time, it is going to allow
for, you know, traffic, whether it be people lost or whatever, to be circulating right
through here and if that didn't go through that would stop that circulation.
Newton-Huckabay: How would the people get to the homes on the south, then? They'd
have to come through --
Graham: Here. They will come down Green Haven, out Madison Avenue, and out to
Locust Grove. And these people here -- I mean they won't want to use it. These people
won't want to use it. I guess I don't see a current necessity for it and would like to see it
not built, at least not at this time.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 10 of 44
Rohm: Not to speak counter to your position, but, generally speaking, I think that this
Commission and just subdivision development supports roads that will circulate
throughout the development and get from point A to point B internal and external. So,
my personal position would be that that would -- that would stop short of meeting that
desire if you were to cut that road off and not be able to access Razzberry Sub to the
north. That just seems that way to me. That's the reason why we require stub streets
from one subdivision to the next, so that you can have that availability, but -- to respond
to your query.
Graham: Well, you probably see my point that I would refer not to have that traffic
circulating near my home when it's not necessary. There are -- anyone in the
subdivision has full access to Razzberry up Green Haven, across Madison Avenue, or
going north on Reederman.
Rohm: Well, I can appreciate your position.
Graham: Okay. Or, if that weren't possible, to maybe have some traffic calming
devices, like speed bumps in there, that would discourage people from wanting to travel
that way.
Zaremba: Would it help you for the time being -- I'm assuming there will be some time
where you consider converting your own property to a project similar to this, but for the
time being to have a barricade that would prevent anybody from missing that corner and
going beyond into your property?
Graham: That might not be a bad idea. It's my pasture and so it's not like they would
be heading into my yard or my house. So, you know, if it was done, you know, in a
manner that looked compatible with the surrounding landscape and so on, that would be
fine. That's really not so much my concern, as it is just to have traffic moving around.
Zaremba: One of the difficulties, as Commissioner Rohm was pointing out, both the city
and the ACHD are very much in favor of connectivity and -- not planning what your
development is going to be, but in visualizing what the future of the two properties south
of this current one might be, they may consider that an important access. This has
already been through an ACHD hearing.
Graham: Right. Is it possible to consider it for not develop -- not completing the street
now and completing it later?
Zaremba: We will have to ask the applicant. That's usually a cost issue and I'm sure
it's cheaper for them to do all at once than to bring the equipment back for a couple
hundred feet later, but we will ask.
Rohm: Another point to that discussion -- and you had mentioned traffic calming. One
of the things that when you have a short street such as this, the traffic is naturally
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 11 of 44
calmed by the fact that it's not a long street. We try to limit blocks to -- what's the --
within code what's the footage of a single block, Wendy?
Kirkpatrick: A thousand feet is the maximum.
Rohm: And this is like -- looks to be like three or four hundred feet. So, the point being
is there is already traffic calming built into this design, based upon the length of the
block, because you have got -- where it ties into the property to the north and, then,
obviously, where the subdivision ends to the south. And so, you know, there is already
some of that built into this design, based just on the length of the block and just trying to
Graham: Sure. I understand. I don't know exactly how long that street actually is, how
far it goes into Razzberry, but perhaps -- Razzberry is only another three or four
hundred feet wide, so it couldn't be any longer than that, I guess
Rohm: Right. Well, it's just one lot depth into Razzberry before there is another street,
so you have got the width of this subdivision, plus one lot. So, we are -- not even come
close to the thousand foot and so that in and of itself provides significant calming.
Graham: I have a question as to where the sewer hookup is for Alexandria, coming
from Razzberry and where it will be dropped or where the property to the south would
hook up, if, in fact, it wanted to at some -- if it developed -- redeveloped at some point in
time.
Freckleton: Mr. Chair?
Zaremba: Uh-huh.
Freckleton: The sewer design -- everything is going to come through and out at this
location. It will sewer north into Razzberry at this point. The sewer main, as they have
it shown, is on the south side of the common property line across the bottom.
Graham: And is there enough fall left by the time it gets to our property to sewer our
property without a lift station? Is that assured?
Freckleton: That's kind of a tough question to answer at the table here tonight. Not
having a survey to look at of your property and that sort of thing, I can't really answer
that question.
Graham: Okay.
Freckleton: Perhaps the engineer for the project could give you some ideas of the
depths and that sort of thing.
Graham: Okay. That's all I have. Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 12 of 44
Zaremba: Thank you. Good questions.
Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission, I just wanted to go ahead and
readdress some of the issues associated with the C -N zone and I wanted to point out
that several of the uses that the public is concerned with in a C -N zone would be
conditional uses. If someone were to put in a restaurant, that would be a conditional
use, it would go through the public hearing process. Any retail would be a conditional
use in C -N, it would go through the public hearing process. An automobile service
station would also be a conditional use going through the public process and, actually,
any drive-thru would automatically be a conditional use and go through the public
hearing process. So, hopefully, that will alleviate some of your concerns on that.
Zaremba: Well, I think you have clarified -- my suggestion was going to be that we say
it is a C -N limited to L -O uses, unless they do a CUP and you're saying that's already
covered.
Kirkpatrick: Have to do it anyway.
Zaremba: That's the way it happens anyhow. Okay.
Rohm: Can we, then -- can we approve it up front, though, with the limitations on what
can be put in, so they wouldn't have the availability of a CUP at a later date for
restaurant -- and I'm not saying that that's the motion that would be made, but just as a
question. Can you limit that up front or is it best to just take it at the time of application?
Zaremba: We have on other projects -- often we were adding to a list that the applicant
had already provided of what things that normally are allowed in the zone, they would
prohibit and we have added to lists like that and in this case the developer has not
offered such a list, but we could make one.
Rohm: And maybe the best thing is let the developer speak to that and, then, we will go
from there.
Zaremba: But it is possible.
Newton-Huckabay: I would think that it would -- that would be unnecessary. If you're
going to have to have a Conditional Use Permit for any retail use in there, why not give
the citizens that live around there the opportunity to decide -- you know, contribute at
that time and not limit what their choices might be.
Zaremba: I think our reasoning in the one case that I'm thinking of where I know we did
this, there was quite a bit of public concern about a gas station specifically, which would
have been allowed in the zone that was --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 13 of 44
Newton-Huckabay: Well, that was zoned C -G. Are you talking about out there by the
wastewater --
Zaremba: Yes. Yes. And we, just as a guidance to the applicant, said there is no point
bringing a CUP for a gas station, because it's not going to pass. But we made that part
of the -- and I guess the question would be here if we identified some things that there is
no point in presenting a CUP for, we certainly have the right to do that, but --
Kirkpatrick: Yeah. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I, actually, want to make
sure we brought that up. If they are approved for a C -N zoning, a professional office
would, actually, also be a conditional use. So, that's something that through the
development agreement we could allow them to do professional offices without going
through the conditional use process. So, I would recommend that you go ahead make
that allowance, so it's not overly difficult for them to do those professional offices.
Zaremba: Okay. Anybody else care to comment? All right. We will ask Mr. Wardle to -
Moe: You'll need to come back up --
Rohm: I think Mr. Graham wanted to --
Graham: Laird Graham, 4191 North Locust Grove Road. In staffs presentation earlier
they referred to exception for the commercial acreage to allow the -- to allow it in this
project and my question is does that preclude our property or the property to the south
of us from having any of that commercial acreage? Because it sounds like you're max'd
out plus now. Or would you make an exception in that case, too. Typically.
Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission this neighborhood center is
actually the first one we have had where we have met the maximum allowed acreage
for commercial uses, so this is kind of our test case, but with Brockton they allowed
them to go over the 11 acres. We don't know what will happen with this project at
Council and we don't know what would happen with your project coming through, but we
have exceeded the cap at this point. But I can't tell you what Council would decide. I
think they would be looking at, you know, does this use fit, it is compatible with the
neighboring uses, does it fit the intent of the neighborhood center, but no guarantees.
Graham: Thank you.
Zaremba: Mr. Wardle.
Wardle: Yes, Mr. Chairman, Commission Members, Mike Wardle, for the record. Its
interesting the discussion that we have on every project, essentially, is the same. This
one is unique in the sense that this is, as staff has noted, the first opportunity to see the
character of a mixed-use neighborhood center come to fruition in Meridian. When we
went through the as yet un -acted upon, un -adopted North Meridian Plan, we dealt with
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 14 of 44
similar concepts looking for ways to make the neighborhoods more diverse and provide
services closer, so that people in this particular case wouldn't all have to go down to
Fairview Avenue for services or up to Chinden and -- either McMillan or -- Chinden --
well, Chinden and Eagle Road and McMillan and Eagle Road for services, but some
services of a discrete nature really do belong in neighborhoods. The more traditional
neighborhood concept design suggests that you start to mix your uses and by doing that
you create a neighborhood, rather than just another subdivision that has virtually all the
same housing, all the same demographics, same economic status. The other thing that
the neighborhood center concept in the Comprehensive Plan strongly suggests and
requires is the connectivity and as has been noted here, this is not and never will be a
through situation. This doesn't connect to even out of Razzberry in a long sense where
it would ever serve as any kind of a cut through. That road needs to connect, it needs
to form the element of a neighborhood, so that there is no need to backtrack or go
through another neighborhood to get to your property with the inability to communicate
within the neighborhood by having to go back out and around because of the cut-offs
and barricades. The other thing that's interesting, we have proposed the narrowest
streets allowable under ACHD standards that still allow any parking on them at all and
the irony, having looked at this issue literally across the country, east coast, west coast,
and almost everything in between, is that even ACHD standards are above and beyond
the standards that are being adopted in the most forward thinking projects in this
country that allow parking on both sides of streets narrower even than what we are
proposing here. The point is these streets will be as calmed by their own character as
you can possibly do them and there is no -- I just would doubt that you would ever see
on any of the streets in here the need to take any calming activity such as a speed
bump. Now, that's an action that ACHD deals with, but it's not a predetermined issue,
it's if you found that the neighborhood did connect and suddenly people were looking for
a shortcut and started buzzing through another neighborhood, they will start looking for
these solutions, but that's not something you predetermine. As to the retail, there will be
a development agreement and let me just read through very briefly the list of uses that
are allowed in this particular zone and, then, the ones that are conditional. Allowed
would be accounting services, administrative services, which, frankly, is kind of an
interesting thing, it calls professional offices as a conditional use, but accounting
services and administrative services are both allowed, so I suspect that those are off-
setting. A bakery store is an allowed use. A child-care center -- a church is an allowed
use. Excuse me. A child-care center is a conditional use. A clinic. A medical, dental,
or optical clinic is an allowed use. A convenience store is an allowed use. A
laundromat. And a library or a museum. And, then, they have a catch-all of planned
commercial development and, then, a neighborhood shopping center. Some of the
uses that we will not probably put into the list out of the conditional uses that would be
possible under the zone would be, for instance, a drive-in theater, not likely that we are
going to include that in the development agreement. Let's see. A bar or an alcoholic
establishment is not going to be an allowed or even a conditional use in the
development agreement. And a gas -- a service station will not be. But what we don't
want to do is preclude the opportunity for the right types of services to be discussed in
the future by limiting it beyond what the C -N does, other than those just noted. The fact
that they have to -- many of them have to come back means that there will be an
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 15 of 44
opportunity to discuss them, but to say that we would never have anything but limited
office in this area means that all of the services that may be appropriate for a discrete
neighborhood like this would have to be trips down the road at least two and a half miles
to the south or several miles to the north and east. I think it is a good project. The
zoning for that C -N is not a general commercial zone, it will not be a negative, and the
uses discussed can be incorporated into the development agreement, so that there
would be some additional assurance. I think you had one question about the sewer and
I will ask Mr. Canning of B&A Engineers to come and discuss that.
J.Canning: Yes, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, my name is Joe Canning
with B&A Engineers. The address is 5505 West Franklin Road in Boise. And I can't
answer the neighbor's question exactly. I do know what the sewer is doing in our
project. It is coming from Razzberry Crossing. We are extending the sewer lines at
minimum grades through our project and, as I recall, at that southwest corner, that road
intersection, I believe the sewer is approximately six feet deep. It's not deep. As we
extend from there back toward Locust Grove, I believe at the end at the commercial
area we are about three and a half, four foot of cover, something like that. So, it's not
excessive depths in this area. So, if someone is looking to put basements in, we have
some problems. But I would also like to point out that the way our project is laid out we
are actually sharing water and sewer with the neighbor to the south, so we think that's
quite an advantage to this particular layout. Razzberry Crossing, of course, has an
interior road that goes to about the middle of the project, no opportunity for connection
of any other property, really, to that one, other than the stubs that are being provided to
this project. I'm not -- regarding mapping on the neighbor's property, I'm not sure
exactly the elevations that are over there. I have been on the site, looked at it, it's
approximately flat. I'm sure grade's about the same way. The southeast corner is going
to be the high spot, northwest corner is going to be a low spot. So, at least the land is
as great as possible for that sewer line, so -- but I -- it's not overly deep.
Moe: I think I read in here somewhere -- was staff requesting information on storm
drainage as far as retention areas and whatnot for this development?
Freckleton: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Moe, I believe that question has been resolved.
In the applicant's narrative they talked about how they are handling their storm drainage
and it will be in the common areas, in the common open space areas. It will be shallow
depression where they will handle their storm drainage.
Moe: Thank you.
Freckleton: So, we are satisfied.
Moe: And, then, only one other question. It was brought up in regards to the parking in
the court area. Is that -- is that correct, that they will be able to park at the street on one
side?
Kirkpatrick: I'm sorry, can you repeat that? I was talking to Brad back here.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 16 of 44
Moe: I'm back to the parking in the court area. Is it a fact that the road leading in, that
there will be parking allowed?
Kirkpatrick: I want to check that with Joe Silva, because I'm not certain of what his
intention was. I think -- I think it's also fairly narrow through there and I want to make
sure we can get the trucks through.
Moe: I agree.
Kirkpatrick: It's something we could have as a condition to have that clarified before
Council from the fire chief.
Rohm: Good idea.
Moe: Thank you.
J.Canning: Thank you.
Freckleton: Mr. Chair, if I could ask a question of Mr. Canning before he gets sat down.
Zaremba: Sure.
Freckleton: Joe, I just was wondering if you could maybe provide some details on -- on
the southern boundary you're showing sewer -- in Mr. Graham's property you're
showing an existing 30 -foot access easement. I'm just kind of wondering how you plan
on handling the -- having the public sewer in there if you're going to be getting a public
-- public utilities easement from Mr. Graham for that and, then, how are you going to
handle the drainage off of that 12 -foot of asphalt that will be on the other side of the
line?
J.Canning: Yes, Mr. Chair and staff, the plan is -- there is an existing 30 -foot easement,
ingress -egress easement that runs along that south boundary. Half of the 30 feet is on
this particular project's land and the other half, of course, being on the neighbor's land.
What has been discussed with the neighbor so far is that simply convert that 30 -foot
existing easement to public road right of way. So, in other words, 15 feet of his property
would be dedicated to the public, 25 feet on our side we would go ahead and provide
full width improvement on our side. So, there is really no need for an easement there,
because it would be public right of way. Now, obviously, that's up to the neighbor to go
ahead and grant that to the highway district and I'm sure part of the process will be
getting this project approved and, then, getting that finalized. And regarding the storm
drainage along that south road, we have been working with the highway district on that
and it appears as if the best solution is going ahead and installing a curb on the south
edge of that road at this particular point in time. There really isn't enough room to put a
barrow swale in, we don't really like what they look like anyway, so it appears as if the
best solution is go ahead and install a curb and gutter along that side and not sidewalk.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 17 of 44
There is not enough room for the sidewalk on the south side. But at least installing the
curb and gutter and, then, go ahead and collecting that and putting it into our storm
drainage system.
Freckleton: Okay. Thank you.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
J.Canning: Thank you.
Zaremba: I'm looking at the fire department comments and on page 14 of the staff
report, item 11, starts out no parking allowed on Green Gable Court, which would mean
that the fire department's impression is that not just the hammerhead, but the whole --
the whole thing is not parking, so that -- I think we would -- we would deal with it as if
that's the existing condition and the applicant can discuss that with the fire department
and the City Council. Was there a place in here where we needed to reference a
development agreement? I don't remember seeing --
Kirkpatrick: Chairman, Members of the Commission, Brad was researching this while
we were speaking. We can actually do this through the planned development and
address it as a use exception.
Zaremba: Okay.
Kirkpatrick: So, we can do that rather than through the development agreement.
Zaremba: Okay. Okay. Anymore questions for the applicant?
Moe: Mr. Chairman --
Zaremba: Shall we close the hearing?
Moe: I'm working on that.
Zaremba: Okay.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to close the Public Hearing.
Zaremba: All three hearings?
Moe: Yes. All three. Excuse me.
Rohm: Second.
Zaremba: There is a motion and a second to close the public hearings on Items 5, 6
and 7. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. The hearing is closed.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 18 of 44
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Any further discussion or questions for staff?
Rohm: Well, I think I'd like to just speak to the Conditional Use Permit for people in the
audience that don't participate in this process that often. A Conditional Use Permit is
just that, it's based upon conditions being accepted by those neighboring properties and
-- and they don't even really have to be people that are neighbors, they can be down the
street and there is always an opportunity for testimony for those pieces of property that
want to be developed as a conditional use. So, even as we finish up tonight, those
projects as they move forward you will have an opportunity to speak to any conditional
use application at that time and your comments will always be welcome. So, I wanted
you to have that assurance that that's the way the process works.
Zaremba: Yeah. I would only add to that that when it is a CUP there is notice given
that such a thing has been applied for. The same kind of notice you probably got for
this meeting. Street signs and letters to anybody that's within 300 feet -- or yards -- feet.
And published in the agenda and I believe in the paper also.
Moe: Okay. Well, having said that, Mr. Chairman, I move that we forward to City
Council recommending approval of AZ 04-011, request for annexation and zoning of 9.8
acres from RUT to R-8 and C -N zones for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie
Johnson, 4205 North Locust Grove Road, to include all staff comments and conditions
of the hearing date July 29th, 2004, and received by the clerk July 26, 2004.
Rohm: I will second that.
Zaremba: Okay. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. All opposed?
Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move we forward to the City Council recommending approval of
PP 04-017, request for a preliminary plat approval for 28 single family residential and
office building lots and two common lots on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and C -N zones
for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie Johnson at 4205 North Locust Grove, to
include all staff comments and conditions of the hearing date July 29th, 2004, received
by the clerk's office July 26, 2004.
Rohm: I will second that as well.
Zaremba: Okay. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. All opposed?
The motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 19 of 44
Moe: Okay. Mr. Chairman, I move we forward to City Council recommending approval
of CUP 04-015, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a planned development for
reductions to the minimum requirements for lot area, rear building setbacks, street side
setbacks, and minimum street frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision by Lonnie
Johnson, 4205 North Locust Grove Road, to include all staff comments and conditions
of the hearing date July 29th, 2004, and received by the clerk's office July 26th, 2004.
Rohm: Second that.
Zaremba: All right. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any
opposed? This motion carries as well.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 8: Election of Chairman:
Zaremba: Thank you all. Our meeting is going to continue with a bunch of in-house
items and, of course, it's an open meeting, open to the public, but this was the last
public hearing, there will no further public testimony, just discussion among ourselves.
Thank you all for coming and your interest in the process. The next item on our agenda
is election of chairman and I would like to do a little bit of discussion before we actually
perform the election. I have noticed by going through the notes that I could not find any
procedure that this Commission already had in place for performing elections and I have
passed around some suggested bylaws. I will ask legal counsel for this, but it is my
opinion that according to the state regulations, that this Commission can make our own
bylaws and it says elect a chairman and other officers. I'm suggesting that we elect a
vice-chairman as well, and what I would like to have confirmed is that these bylaws are
solely up to us and don't necessarily need to go through anybody else's review or
approval, as long as they don't conflict with state law.
Holinka: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, yeah, I believe as long as there is
no conflict with state law -- and I read through them and it doesn't appear that there
wouldn't be any problem with adoption of such bylaws.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Rohm: Do they have to be read like multiple meetings before they can be adopted or is
that --
Zaremba: Since it doesn't really affect the public, my opinion would be no, but, again,
I'll defer to legal counsel. Jill.
Holinka: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I'm actually not entirely sure, but I
would tend to believe that it's something that doesn't -- it's just internal procedures for
this Commission to follow, that as long as it's presented at the public hearing -- or the
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 20 of 44
public meeting tonight, that it's been noticed on the agenda, that there would be no
problem with going ahead and adopting those procedures tonight.
Zaremba: Okay.
Rohm: That's a great answer.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you. And, again, this is something that I typed up just as a
suggestion and not necessarily the final word. I certainly -- we are discussing what says
City of Meridian, Idaho, Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws proposed July 29th,
2004, and if anybody wants to make any comments or changes or throw it out entirely
or do something different, I'd propose it as a topic for discussion, leading to our eventual
-- I included a sentence in there about special elections, which today's election, actually,
would be, since we would elect a chairman whose service would begin today and end in
December. And part of the reason that I'm suggesting that we align it with a calendar
year is that I think it makes it easier with some of our own appointments, but also in the
back of my mind many -- many people who have been on the City Council or the current
Mayor included, have been former Planning and Zoning Commission members. An
election that would move somebody out of the Planning and Zoning Commission and
into City Council happen in November, so having elections -- our own elections in
December for terms starting in January would coincide with that. That was my thinking
there. And I'm suggesting a vice-chairman for situations like tonight. Our current
chairman Keith Borup has been extremely faithful and reliable in making almost every
meeting as long as I can remember, but there are instances. And I think it would be fair
to have a designated vice-chairman whose sole duty is to step in.
Rohm: And I think that's appropriate as well. I think you have done a good job putting
this list of bylaws together, Chairman.
Zaremba: All right. If there is no further discussion, I would entertain a motion to
change the word from proposed to adopted and to adopt this as is.
Rohm: Do we need a motion to that effect, I guess? I'd move that we adopt the bylaws
as presented.
Moe: Second.
Zaremba: It has been moved and seconded. All in favor say aye. Okay. Any
opposed? All right. These are our newly adopted bylaws as of July 29th and we will
use that to conduct our elections.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Therefore, we will elect both a chairman and a vice-chairman this evening. I
will accept nominations for the position of chairman.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 21 of 44
Rohm: Mr. Acting Chairman, I'd like to move that we -- I'd like to nominate Keith Borup
as our chairman.
Zaremba: I would like to say that I spoke with Keith either the last meeting or the
previous meeting and he is happy in that position and told me that if he were nominated
he would be happy to continue serving. So, even though he's absent tonight we would
not be backing him into something he doesn't want.
Rohm: I appreciate your comments on that.
Moe: Do I get to, then, go, then --
Newton-Huckabay: Can I ask a question here? When the Mayor brought this up was
the whole point of it she said we need a new chairman. Was that not her words?
Zaremba: I don't think she was trying to get rid of the current chairman.
Newton-Huckabay: No. No. No.
Zaremba: I think she was trying to have a process that has some turnover. And,
actually, I didn't mention it before --
Newton-Huckabay: Right.
Zaremba: -- but she -- the reason that I put in that we would serve no more than two
consecutive one year terms -- the Mayor told me the other day that the park commission
has done that with themselves. The idea is to have some turnover, but --
Newton-Huckabay: I guess that's what I was trying to communicate, although not
effectively.
Zaremba: Yeah.
Canning: Mr. Acting Chair, if I might expound on that a bit. When the Mayor served on
Planning and Zoning Commission and for several years prior to that I think that the
general rule of thumb was that the -- the chair position did rotate to extend that
leadership opportunity to several individuals. So, quite -- her expectation is that the
chair position will change on a regular basis and she has been encouraging all the
commissions to move toward that. Your bylaws, however, I do understand do not
require it, but I just -- just so you know that she's made that pretty -- that position pretty
clear throughout the city.
Zaremba: Okay.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, having the discussion, I would like to make the point that I think
Mr. Borup has done an excellent job since I have been here, but, at the same time, I do
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 22 of 44
believe that change is good at times, so, therefore, I would like to nominate Dave
Zaremba for chairman of the Commission.
Zaremba: Commissioner Moe, I appreciate the honor and I will have to say for personal
reasons at this moment I would decline. That does not mean that I would not
reconsider it in December should it come up or even consider being the vice-chairman
at the moment, but at the moment I would appreciate declining being the chairman.
Moe: Okay.
Rohm: Basically, with the adoption of the bylaws as written, we are going to have an
opportunity to go through this process again in December --
Zaremba: Yes.
Rohm: -- and I think as long as we have the wishes of the Mayor and the city as a
whole in mind as we go through this process, we can address that at that time and it
seems appropriate to go ahead and finish the process of making our chairman for the
balance of the year and, then, we can address changing leadership in December.
Moe: I would concur.
Zaremba: That was my feeling as well. Is there a motion to close the nominations for
chairman?
Rohm: I would like to move to close the nominations for chairman.
Moe: Second.
Zaremba: There is a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: Okay. Our process was that we would do a handwritten vote, but since there
is only one nominee, I believe we can establish that Keith Borup is re-established as our
chairman for a term beginning now until the end of December. I would entertain
nominations for the office of vice-chairman.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I would like to nominate Dave Zaremba for vice-chairman.
Rohm: Second.
Zaremba: I would accept that nomination and welcome any other nominations as well.
Rohm: I move that the nominations close for this position.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 23 of 44
Moe: Second.
Zaremba: There is a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? That
motion carries as well and also means that we don't need to take the handwritten vote.
Thank you all very much. I will serve as vice-chairman until December.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 9: Discussion on Hearing Procedures:
Zaremba: That being established, the next item on the agenda, No. 9, is discussion on
hearing procedures.
Canning: I had something with feta, so I had to have a mint and now I'm stuck with a
mint my mouth. I'm sorry.
Zaremba: We can chat for a little longer.
Canning: Well, unfortunately, I had hoped that by now we would have those -- at the
last joint meeting between the Council and the Commission we talked about new
hearing procedures and the result from that meeting is that we go -- carry forth -- I'm
sorry.
Zaremba: I maybe able to fill in. As I recall, the idea was that we would move forward
on the agenda essentially items that are a slam dunk and delay items on the agenda
that were going to cause more discussion, is that --
Canning: Yes. And it required redoing the resolution on hearing procedures. The city
did adopt a number of years ago a resolution that spelled out in amazing detail what the
procedures were for hearings on each type of item. And I did make those amendments
quite sometime ago. I got them to Bill Nary for his review and Bill Nichols and,
unfortunately, Bill Nary has not had the time to go over them. He had promised me he'd
have them to me a couple weeks ago and, then, I think -- you may or may not know, I
think he's been having health -- back problems, so he has been out the last couple of
weeks, so I don't have that resolution to show to you right now that it's ready to go. The
City Council, though -- this is almost as awkward as the last one and I apologize. It's
my job to relay this information to you sometime, so that's what I'm doing, but the City
Council does use the three-minute timer for every hearing. They had a meeting last
week where they didn't use it and it was a remarkable difference in the length of the
meeting just on one item that it took, but in general they use it on every public hearing
item. This wasn't a particular hearing item. Mr. Zaremba actually was there, so --
Zaremba: I probably spoke longer than three minutes.
Canning: Yeah.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 24 of 44
Zaremba: Actually, if you add up every time I spoke I'm sure it was quite a bit longer.
Canning: And I think the concern is that it needs to be consistent implementation of the
three minute timer, to not just use it when there is a controversial item on that item only
or on that hearing only, is to use it consistently at every hearing for every item or every
Thursday that you come here for every item that's on it. So, that it's -- the appearance
of fairness is really the important aspect of that. And for some people if they have sat
through a hearing where people got to testify two or three times on lengthy matters and,
then, when they get up they only get to testify for three minutes and they are being
timed, it does have real appearance of not being fair to them and so I would just -- I
guess the -- at the joint meeting the Council wasn't as forthright on the matter as I think
that -- as their private discussions with me have been and they really would like to see
the consistent implementation of that three minute timer.
Zaremba: I think I support that I idea. I did not time tonight, although I know Keith, I
think, uses his own personal watch, which has a timer on it, because I sometimes hear
a beep go off.
Newton-Huckabay: He has a timer over here.
Zaremba: Oh, there is a timer? My feeling is, though -- and this may have been
brought up at the joint meeting -- I feel it should be something that's actual visible to the
audience and particularly to the speaker. That -- whether it sits here in the middle of the
dais or it's over by the presentation or something that -- that is visible to the speaker, so
that they know how much time is elapsing and how much they have left.
Canning: I believe that Will ordered one this week. There was a budget amendment
done for that item and I believe it is on order right now.
Zaremba: Okay.
Rohm: I think that there are times that there is a noted exception, as in if one individual
is speaking on behalf of a homeowners group or something where if he didn't speak on
their behalf each and every one of them would take multiple three minutes and it would
be to our advantage, I believe, to allow someone in that position to go over a three
minute limitation.
Canning: And, Commissioner Rohm, we did talk about that at that joint meeting and
that is in the resolution that if you're speaking on behalf of a group that you do get that
extra time. I think that's --
Newton-Huckabay: What's the ratio on that?
Zaremba: Yeah. Did we quantify the extra time?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 25 of 44
Canning: Yeah. I think it was five minutes. It's not -- it was either five or ten. Its not as
much as they would get speaking individually, clearly, but it was -- I think it was ten
minutes.
Zaremba: That sounds familiar to me, ten minutes. That would certainly be fair.
Canning: And that's enough time to make your statement.
Moe: And I assume that's in the hearing procedures, so -- or when we would open the
meeting that the public would know that?
Canning: Yes. And we -- as part of that package that we sent to Mr. Nary -- and it's
hard to put demands on your boss sometimes, so I apologize for not having it to you,
but as part of that we also did a new kind of hand out for folks up front. I don't know if
you have ever noticed the handouts that we do do and we kind of redid that and it
explains more of the process in a little plainer terms and tries to make it -- simply the
hearing process for the folks that are attending and commenting. The only other item
regarding the timing is I think that the -- where I see that the problem comes up the
most is the asking of questions before the testimony is actually done and that may be
something you want to consider as well. It's going to get trickier on the timing or maybe
when the visual timer is there it will be a little more apparent, but it's -- it's a fine line that
you walk. You have to feel as if you have enough information from them and I know it's
-- it isn't easy sitting up there. I don't envy you, the decisions you have to make staring
at those folks sometimes, but it is -- we just need to have that appearance of fairness
and for some applicants if you -- it's just that sometimes it's the mere length of time they
are standing up there, even if you're asking the questions, if it goes on for a half hour,
45 minutes, an hour, it just does not have that appearance of fairness that we need to
be concerned about.
Rohm: So, you're saying that the testimony, as well as any questions that we'd have of
them has the same limitation?
Canning: No. No. No. No. Let me rephrase that. It's just that sometimes we start to
ask questions before their testimony is actually done.
Rohm: Oh. Okay.
Canning: You need to let them finish their testimony, you need to let everyone testify,
and if you still have questions, then, you can bring someone back up to answer
questions, but you really need to let everyone testify --
Rohm: Before we ask any questions of anyone that's testifying?
Canning: It's your discretion, of course, but I think it has more of an appearance of
fairness if you let everybody testify and, then, if you still have questions at the end, to
ask the questions then. Similar that you do to the applicants. You know, you let all the
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 26 of 44
folks testify and if there is questions that come up, you bring them up at the end to
answer those questions and it's a good role for you all as well. There may be an
answer -- something that gets answered by someone else and, you know, let them and,
then, save your questions.
Rohm: As long as we are on this subject, Wendy and I attended a thing over in Nampa,
what, three months ago --
Newton-Huckabay: Commissioner --
Rohm: That's right. Dave was there.
Canning: Dave was there, too.
Rohm: There you go. In any case --
Canning: And I haven't seen you all since then, have I?
Rohm: Well, the point is is they actually talked about a different presentation system, as
opposed to staff presenting the project up front and, then, letting the developer respond
to staffs presentation, actually, have the developer present the project themselves and,
then, let staff comment based upon their differences as they go through the
presentation. And that's as I remember it. Is that how you --
Moe: Yeah.
Rohm: And in --
Canning: And every time we send commissioners we get this question. I have an
answer for you, since we have gone through this before. Our legal counsel has strongly
advised us not to pursue that format for a couple different reasons. I think he's
concerned about -- well, it's interesting, because Mason really favors it, because he
thinks it is more fair that the applicant do the pitch job.
Rohm: Well -- and I think that that was their point.
Canning: Right. And it --
Zaremba: Well, yeah, the way they expressed it at a meeting I went to is we give the
appearance that we are actually promoting the project, as opposed to being a neutral
analyst of the project.
Canning: And his concern is more at the City Council level, because a lot of the times
you guys get the issues out of the way to the point that, geez, if I -- if we let the
applicants do the presentation at City Council they'd be ten times longer, because I
don't know if you have seen me in Council, but I don't say much and, you know, we fill in
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 27 of 44
things as we need to, but the level of detail compared to these hearings is fractional, I
suppose, is the best way to say it. So, in that instance he's just concerned that it would
go on way too long, because if you give them 20 minutes, they are going to take the full
20 minutes to pitch their project. So, we are going to have a change in legal counsel
come September, October, so, you know, it may be something we want to take up with
the city's new very own -- not to say that we are not happy with our current attorneys,
but it may be something that we can bring up with them and I will -- I'll write myself a
note to bring that up again, especially in this one, I don't -- I know City Council doesn't
want to go that route, but it isn't to say that we couldn't adopt different hearing
procedures for you. Now, that would require different -- that would require changes to
that resolution I was talking about, so maybe I'll bring it up with Bill Nary before we
finalize those and bring it all back to you guys. I can just put it on one of your regular
agendas if you'd like.
Newton-Huckabay: Can we -- do we limit -- why do we not -- if we are going to limit the
public, why do you not limit the developer to, obviously, not three minutes, but a
reasonable time -- I think you're going to send a message that the Commission's
apathetic to the public's concerns by saying the developer, you can talk for a half hour
and have interchange with the Commission and staff, but the public, you get three
minutes, you cannot have exchange with staff or the Commission, therefore, you're
giving the perception, in my opinion.
Canning: I believe the limit on the developer was 15 or 20 minutes.
Newton-Huckabay: So, are we going to use the timer for them as well?
Canning: Yes. By all means. And that --
Newton-Huckabay: Does the not question them rule during their testimony apply there
as well?
Canning: That was mostly who I was doing it in regard to, because that tends to get the
most questions is the developer and that --
Newton-Huckabay: I'm sorry, I though you were talking about the public.
Canning: No. That's because I was obfuscating. I wasn't -- I was treading a fine line. I
don't know what to do. Obfuscating is not quit speaking the truth. But it's just -- it's --
sorry, they are making fun of me here and I'm having a hard time concentrating. But
that's to my -- and I haven't been to a commission meeting in so long and I apologize,
but my experience in the past has been that's where the problem seems to be is that the
developer does seem to get the lion's share of attention and that's where we need to be
careful on asking questions that maybe will get answered later. You still look very
concerned, Commissioner Newton-Huckabay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 28 of 44
Newton-Huckabay: I just -- I -- you know, I don't know enough about how this process
works yet, so when you're talking ambiguously, it's a little hard for me to follow.
Canning: I apologize.
Newton-Huckabay: And I know there is, you know, whatever political issues or, you
know, department issues, you know, but I'm not privy to any of that or part of any of that,
so I just want to try to understand straight forwardly what the expectations are, so that
I'm not wasting your time, the public's time, and the developer's time and my time.
Canning: Fair enough. I apologize. It does depend on the issue, but my experience
over the years has been that it tended to be more for the applicants and perhaps
Commissioner Zaremba would be best to answer that, but --
Zaremba: I'm not sure I have an answer.
Newton-Huckabay: I mean I'm fully in support of some kind of standards, because that
is the one thing that I see a disparity in and I look out here and I see a lot of people that
look very frustrated when they are sitting here and that's what I would like to avoid, you
know, and I have been out in that audience sitting there frustrated before, too, for that
very same reason.
Zaremba: I wouldn't have any problem putting a clock on the developer as well. The
applicant. And including if they brought -- sometimes there is a tag team of two or three
people, they all need to fit into that time. _
Newton-Huckabay: Uh-huh. I agree.
Zaremba: It's not 15 minutes each if they brought the engineer and the owner and stuff.
Canning: And that was clarified in the resolution as well.
Zaremba: Okay.
Canning: I will -- once we get a final draft of that, I will put it on one of your regular
agendas and bring that back to you.
Moe: I guess that's probably why I have a little bit of a concern of changing the format
and letting them go first, basically to try and pitch their project and whatnot, for the
simple fact they are going to just start rolling and selling and the time is going to go by
and, basically, the first question I'm going to ask is -- you know, of staff, well, where do
we sit? Now, realizing that I'm going to have already gone through the paperwork
before the meeting and whatnot, but, still, you know, we somewhat are relying on staff
to kind of give some feedback. I think the way it is now, some of the issues have been
resolved prior to, you know, testimony and whatnot, you know, through staff and
whatnot, so I'm -- I'm not sure that we gain anything by change. That's just --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 29 of 44
Canning: And do you mind the less formal -- I'm not addressing you by Commissioners.
Do you mind the less formal discussion? I will revert if I need to.
Zaremba: I am hoping this would be a round table informal discussion.
Canning: Okay.
Zaremba: Everybody is welcome to chime in.
Canning: Okay. Good. I think that the staff presentations aren't overly biased one way
or another. I mean this is definitely a pro -development city. You know, we don't come
in with a lot of recommendations for denial and projects don't leave with a lot of
recommendations for denial. So, it's -- there are some communities where that's more
the norm and I don't know if that's where this process might be more applicable -- I'm
not sure. Or maybe in ones where staff isn't capable of doing a very good analysis.
But, you know, I'm proud of my staff and I'm proud of their analyses and I think that they
do a really good and fair and objective job of evaluating the projects in reference to the
zoning ordinance. As being on the other side, sometimes your project is so huge that
there is no way you can get through it in 15 minutes and I always appreciated when
staff took the time to hit the details, the technical details to explain it in the technical, in
the correct terms that you're used to hearing. The applicant may not be able to do that.
But for them to be able to describe just the technical aspects of the application left me
the opportunity to talk about some of the intent of the design or the feel that they wanted
to go or talk about what kind of community we were trying to do and it left more room
open to talk about something other than that nuts and bolts. I mean staff should just be
doing the nuts and bolts. But, you know, I'm guilty when it gets to City Council. If it's
really a nice looking building, I'll say -- and these are really nice looking elevations,
because they are and it doesn't mean that staff can't have an opinion. That's not -- you
know, we have to base our findings on the zoning ordinance, but it doesn't mean you
can't have an opinion on a nice building or something like that or this is a nice project
and -- but I do think that they do a good job and I think it's good the way it is. If you
really wanted to change it, we can talk, but I like it the way it is.
Rohm: I think that the proposed methods and time limitations are all good, but I would
always want to have the opportunity to call anybody back up and ask questions,
whether it would be the developer or one from the audience that had provided
testimony, because, you know, until we are grounded in our position, I'm not ready to
close anything down.
Canning: And that is not limited whatsoever. There is always giving you the opportunity
to do that.
Newton-Huckabay: But we are limiting the public to only testifying one time. Like, for
example, the gentleman, he got up twice tonight. That would not be --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 30 of 44
Canning: Correct.
Newton-Huckabay: -- allowed. But we would tell people that.
Canning: Correct. And their communication should also be with you. I wasn't in the
last hearing, but I did overhear -- I have to admit I was listening, but I was not in the
room for a reason. For those of you who don't know, I married Mr. Canning, who was
the engineer on that project, so you won't see me in the room with him ever on his
projects. Brad does those, just so you know. He -- if there is a concern on one for B&A
Engineers, you need to talk to Brad, he handles all those. Okay. That aside, I was
listening, though, and I did notice that he asked staff questions and they should be
addressing you. If you want staff to answer the question, you should indicate to staff
that they may go ahead and answer the question or you can ask staff the question
yourself, but there really shouldn't be a repartee between the testifiers and staff, it
should be directed to you, but --
Zaremba: Well, as a novice meeting chairman, I'm responsible for that, although you
probably didn't see that I was visually acknowledging staff when I wanted them to
answer something.
Canning: No, I wouldn't have. I could not see -- I assumed that was what was going
on, but --
Zaremba: Yes.
Canning: -- there is that -- and it's not a big deal on a little hearing, you know. It's never
a big deal on a little hearing, it's when you have 50 people in the room and they are all
shouting questions at staff, then, you can't get control of the room is the problem. And,
yeah, we had one Tuesday night, it was a little out of control, and people were trying to
ask staff questions and the Mayor just had to say, no, you need to -- you need to
address us and we will talk to staff if we want to, basically, so --
Rohm: I'll be interested to see how Conditional Use Permits that are being challenged,
how those roll out, because as they testify and, then, there is the rebuttal, if you will, by
the developer, then, at some point in time it might create other issues or other issues
may arise from that discussion and I'm not sure how that will play out, but I -- some
developed conditional uses are so controversial that to limit an individual to a single
testimony may not be appropriate.
Canning: We are going to also start sending out a flier with the written -- you know, the
notice of hearing and it will have means -- it will be kind of a coaching sheet on how to
best let your concerns be known and, really, the best way is written testimony is what it
says. If you can't get it in three minutes, write it down, because, then, the whole thing
goes in and, then, summarize those points.
Rohm: Maybe that's the best answer.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 31 of 44
Zaremba: Well -- and steer them towards having a spokesman and -- I think that's a
good idea.
Canning: Yeah. It has all those.
Moe: But having said that, if, in fact, the rebuttal came -- or, you know, the developer
came back, answered the questions and whatnot, I'm assuming that if you had -- if there
was one person in the audience that had been fairly vocal and had a point to that and I
anticipated that he would have another question, am I able to go ahead and call him
back up to see if he has any other comments or are they the last word?
Canning: No. You know, I mean these are guidelines, all of this, but as far as question
and answer goes, they will just be guidelines, so -- and I can see that there would be
one, like if you were trying to negotiate a compromise between two neighbors --
Rohm: That's exactly what my point was.
Canning: Yeah. Well, you may want to be able to ask question and answers or if the
timing is appropriate, sometimes it's good just to call a break and say you guys go meet
and figure out if you can work this out and we will come back in ten minutes and you
can tell us --
Rohm: That would be a better answer.
Canning: So -- and it might just depend on, you know, if it's 10:00 o'clock and you're
ready for a new soda or something, so -- but that's -- if you're trying to negotiate a
compromise, that may be better. Or, worst case scenario, come back in two weeks with
your compromise solution, but, you know, we'd rather see you get them done that night,
if you think they can get it done. But if it's something that's going to take awhile to
negotiate, then, just table them and have them come back with something, but --
Rohm: To that end, I'm thinking that you hit on something that would be more time
effective if at such point in time there seems to be a compromise necessary. Maybe it's
-- we should just say we are going to take a recess for ten minutes and reconvene and
those issues -- as opposed to us trying to control the communication, let them just work
it out themselves and, then, present their solution, rather than us -- because I think that
sometimes the procedure itself -- the process gets in the way of the answer.
Canning: Exactly. And if you needed to, if -- like say it was the first item on the agenda
and you knew there was three vacation applications after -- that followed it or something
like that, there is nothing to say you can't table an item to a different place on the
agenda. So, you could table it until you resolved the vacation applications and, then,
come back to it. That gives them, you know, 20 minutes, a half hour, whatever to try
and come up with some ideas. So, there -- you know, it's just like anything. If you know
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 32 of 44
the Robert's Rules of Order, you can make it work for you. But, you know, you can do
that, you can table to another place on the -- or another point on the agenda.
Zaremba: We actually did that a month or two ago with a project that Dave McKinnon
was proposing and there was a section that needed some wording worked out. We did,
we delayed it like three or four items and, then, brought it back.
Canning: And I can -- oh, the cell tower ordinance. And I can guarantee you they'd
much rather be delayed three or four items than three to four weeks.
Rohm: No doubt.
Zaremba: Well -- and I think the break is a good idea. Traditionally we have taken our
breaks at the end of a specific hearing, but there is no reason why we couldn't take a
break in the middle of one if it looked like it would help resolve something. That's a
good idea. I like that one.
Canning: Anything else? I will bring that back to you.
Zaremba: Okay.
Canning: We will get that all -- nag, for lack of a better term.
Zaremba: Well, in that case, I think we are ready to move onto Item 10.
Newton-Huckabay: Well, is the use of the timer effective immediately or does all of that
not change until this proposed --
Zaremba: Well, it's actually always been true, it's just --
Newton-Huckabay: I mean are we going to start enforcing it now?
Moe: Oh, I would imagine so.
Rohm: I think we should wait until we get the clock.
Moe: We'll have to wait until the chairman is here and discuss it with him.
Zaremba: Well, he does time. I know he times them, but I --
Newton-Huckabay: Well, times -- I know he times on the controversial ones.
Zaremba: I would be more inclined to get real picky about it once we have the visual
clock that the audience can see.
Rohm: Absolutely. Absolutely.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 33 of 44
Zaremba: The day we have that I'm ready to be firm about it.
Newton-Huckabay: We'll get a long hook.
Zaremba: Yeah.
Newton-Huckabay: Pull them offstage.
Zaremba: Switch the microphone off.
Canning: Bruce did remind me that if you do take breaks before you make a decision
on a project, you just need to be careful not to talk about it while you're lingering in the
hallway or anything like that.
Rohm: We wouldn't ever do that.
Canning: Are you ready to —
Item 10: Staff Discussion:
A. Department Update:
B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Update:
Zaremba: Yeah I think we are ready for Item 10 and I'll let you control the speed we go
through the lettered items.
Canning: Thank you. Again, I was listening, so I -- you know, I can't pretend like I
wasn't listening. There was a discussion on CUs and it comes up a lot of -- the current
ordinance requires a CU. You should be aware that we are trying to get rid of a lot of
CUs in the new zoning ordinance, so --
Zaremba: I hesitated to bring that up.
Canning: Yeah. I know. I did, too, but it's like I would -- I feel like I should bring that up
to you, that a use as it's defined, may not be defined that way under the ordinance, it
may be defined differently and it may be a principal permitted use and one of the real
goals of the new zoning ordinance is to make more uses allowable uses, so just keep
that in mind. If you really have concerns about a particular use, ones that should be
CUs are still going to be CUs, I mean things like -- what's a good one, Dave?
Zaremba: Gas stations.
Canning: Bars. Bars. There is a good one. Things like bars will still continue to be
conditional uses. Ones like that. But there are others, like the retail store -- or
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 34 of 44
professional office probably won't be CU -- I mean I can guarantee you it won't be a CU
under the new ordinance. I mean that's just what -- we are really trying to move away
from those things. The update is going really well. The PIG group is great and a week
ago Thursday a bunch of them showed up and I told them how great they were,
because they all showed up and what a great job they were doing, I really appreciated
their commitment, and none of them showed up today, so --
Zaremba: I'm sorry, I missed today as well.
Canning: It was like do I need breath mints? Should I take a shower earlier? I don't
know. It was just kind of an odd day. But they have been making great strides through
it, taking very careful care, though. The input they have had is really producing, I think,
a phenomenal document. We have got some great changes to all the zoning districts
as far as dimensional standards, height standards, building in a lot more flexibility. A lot
of the conditional uses you will probably see in the future are ones that just because
they want an exception -- it's almost more like when you see the planned developments
now, if they want to go higher or they want to operate their business for longer than
what's allowed by code, then, they will be coming to you for conditional uses on that,
rather than by use all the time. It's going to be kind of more performance based than it
is use based. So, it just depends on -- you know, if you have a retail store that's open
from 8:00 to 5:00 in a C -N zone, then, it's no different from an office being operated 8:00
to 5:00 in a C -N zone, but if you have a retail use that wants to operate from 5:00 in the
morning until 10:00 at night, then, that's when you might see the conditional use for it, is
for those extended hours of operation next to residences. So, it's kind of the way we
are going as far as the specific use standards. The dimensional standards, we got
some great advice from folks on minimum lot widths and frontage and setbacks and
high and all sorts of things for all those districts.
Zaremba: Well, part of the discussion there was you take, for instance, an R-8 zone
and, then, you work out mathematically the setbacks and the roadway and this and you
end up in an R-8 zone you get 3.98 dwelling units per acre and I think some of the
thrust was that instead of being that picky about the setbacks and the lot sizes and the
house sizes, we are going to establish a minimum. There is an R-4 zone. If you want
an R-8 zone you must have between five and eight dwelling units per acre. You can't
have four or three. And that means you can't do the dimensional standards, because
they can't make that work. So, we put a cap on both ends. If you're an R-8 you've got
to get between five and eight -- I think that's the thrust we were doing, wasn't it.
Canning: In the neighborhood centers it was. That was the only place where we put
the minimum density, as I recall. The others were still maximum density.
Zaremba: Oh, I thought we were doing that every place.
Canning: There is still that opportunity.
Zaremba: Okay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 35 of 44
Canning: Just need to be there to pitch it.
Zaremba: Next week. Next week.
Canning: All right. Any other questions on that?
Zaremba: I would comment -- we are getting some very good input. The one thing we
need to watch is that almost everybody in the room is a developer of some sort, except
for one or two of us, and that -- I mean their input is very helpful, because they know
what they can sell, in relation -- I mean we have some ideas about what we'd like to see
Meridian develop as and we talk about it and they say, well, nobody will buy that. You
know, we won't build that, because we can't sell it, you know, so that modifies the
discussion a little bit and there has been some very good input and give and take.
Canning: Well, actually, we just have two developers, just Brad Miller and Turnbull. But
we have a lot of people that make their living in --
Zaremba: In the development community we have architects and planners and --
Canning: Right. And we have a lot of -- yeah, and we have engineers --
Zaremba: They are development related.
Canning: Yes.
Zaremba: Yeah, I didn't mean they were the developers.
Canning: And the time frame -- well, we are really shooting to get the draft done by the
end of August, so if they keep on showing up, I think we might be able to make it,
maybe. I worked back. I have been hoping to get this adopted by January 1 st and to
do that I absolutely have to have something done by August to try and make that. I'm
still setting that as my goal. I haven't given up on it yet, but -- I'll just put it that way. But
it will be early 2004 -- or 2005. Excuse me. We'll get it done one way or the other. I'm
going to strap them all to the chairs and not let them leave for three days or something
like that if I have to. We'll figure it out.
C. Parking Study:
Canning: The next one is the parking study and Wendy has been working on that, so
I'm going to let her --
Kirkpatrick: I think I have already tried to recruit several of you to help with the parking
study. We have a consultant with Carl Walker and Associates, they are out of Tempe,
Arizona, and they are coming into town August 11th to help us do a parking inventory
and it's a relatively small contracted thing, it's a 6,000 dollar contract, but part of the
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 36 of 44
reason why they are taking the time to take on the smaller project is because they kind
of see this as, you know, some seed money. They know we have a lot of development
coming out here and they want to get involved with the City of Meridian and they are
going to help us do an inventory and projections on our future parking needs and they
want to give us the tools where we can update ourselves and keep using for the next
couple of years as we are developing. They are going to be -- we will be doing a
parking count the morning of the 11th and, then, that evening from 7:00 to 9:00 we are
going to have a meeting mostly members of the Meridian Development Corporation and
you also are all invited and they -- the point of that meeting is they want to get some
anecdotal background information on what's going on downtown, so that they can put
that information into their study, something that they wouldn't have seen when you were
just out that morning doing the parking study, but the projects that we know are coming
through and changes we see happening. So, you all are all definitely welcome to help
with the parking study. I think I have already recruited Commissioner Rohm and
Commissioner Zaremba to help with the study and we will do that for two hours and,
then, we are going to have lunch afterwards and -- it should be kind of interesting, you
know, I believe, so --
Zaremba: I don't -- I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt.
Kirkpatrick: Oh. And, then, we should have the completed study probably about six to
eight weeks after they come out, so that will be early this fall. And we will bring -- I can
go ahead and do a presentation and let you all know what the results were.
Newton-Huckabay: What does that entail, the parking study?
Kirkpatrick: Well, it's looking at what -- what our current -- you know, what our current
parking inventory is and looking at how -- and we are focusing just on downtown, old
town Meridian. So, we are looking at what our needs need to be in the future, like are
we at the point where we would need a parking garage or is that five years down the
line, ten years down the line, where our -- you know, where are our weak spots, where
can we improve things. Sometimes there are things you can do relatively inexpensively,
like just through signage you can improve parking and accessibility to retail areas. So,
they will give us kind of an evaluation of where we are downtown and what we need to
be doing. And this is also going to dovetail with the downtown vision marketing strategy
and the transportation study for downtown.
Newton-Huckabay: I'm going to ask another I think a really ignorant question, but you
just count parking spaces, is that --
Kirkpatrick: Yeah. If you actually are out there volunteering, we will -- we are going to
divide it into blocks and, then, we will go out and we will count spaces and also, you
know, how many spaces are occupied during that time. And we chose Wednesday
10:00 to noon, because that's sort of a peak — a peak time and for downtown Meridian.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
S
July 29, 2004
Page 37 of 44
Peak Average time. And, luckily, during the summertime the Nazarene church isn't
doing their big Wednesday meeting, so we won't have that to skew our count. So, it's
like what a typical like high point would be.
Newton -H uckabay: Okay.
Zaremba: A side issue, but I don't recall where we were going to meet.
Kirkpatrick: Oh, we have to come up with our meeting -- I know we are ending up over
at Smoky Mountain. We have got that part figured out. But we will probably meet at the
planning -- at our office. But everyone who volunteers I'll call and we will get all of that
coordinated.
Zaremba: Okay. Thank you.
Kirkpatrick: Any other questions on the parking study? Okay.
D. Downtown Transportation Management Plan:
Siddoway: The downtown transportation management plan is moving forward. We
have been through the -- let me back up. There has been this ongoing issue of how do
we manage traffic downtown. Everyone agrees that there is a big problem downtown.
There is too much congestion, it's difficult to make left-hand turns, it's difficult to get
through and what is the solution. The one solution that has been proposed so far is a
couplet and there is two very polarized sides on the couplet debate whether we should
have a couplet downtown or not. We have never really investigated if there are other
options. The only thing that's been debated is should there be a couplet or not and this
study is intended to help us answer the question of how do we manage traffic downtown
and how do we do it in a way that balances the needs for downtown to be a destination,
pedestrian oriented, and all of the things that are in line with the vision and the market
strategy that we just recently adopted and meet the needs of through traffic, because
we can't just ignore that either, we have got to address both. We sent out an RFP, we
received several proposals back. Three firms were interviewed. The Hudson company
had teamed up with Theron Peers, a transportation, consultant in Utah, and they were --
the Hudson company, if anyone doesn't know, is the firm that did the downtown
marketing strategy. They were selected by the committee as the top choice for the
Transportation Management Plan. We have been in contract negotiations with them for
a few weeks, getting all the contract issues worked out. We now have a final draft. We
are working out a memorandum of understanding with the Ada County Highway District,
because they are participating in this project with the City of Meridian as a 50 percent
partner. The selection committee included two people from the city and two people
from ACHD. They are providing half of the funding for the project and will be engaged
throughout the whole thing, so that when we come out on the back end of this with an
answer, we will have something that meets the city's desires and that ACHD will buy off
on. We have the initial scoping meeting set between the steering committee and the
consultant team for August -- I believe it's the 17th, if that's a Tuesday, and we will be
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 38 of 44
setting forth the specific timeline at that time. But, generally, it is a six-month process
and we should be very engaged as a series of public meetings, lots of transportation
modeling, and hopefully we will get -- it's a process that's designed to build consensus
as much as possible. We know we are not going to make everyone happy, but the
process is really geared to maximize the objective thinking about the goals that we are
trying to reach and minimize just the emotional turf wars, if you will. So, I'm very excited
to get it started. We should be starting here in the next few weeks, like I say, and within
a month from now we should be deep into it and you will be hearing about public
meetings, would certainly encourage you to attend, we will try and keep you updated as
to how its progressing and I think that's all I have. Thank you.
Newton-Huckabay: Can I ask a question? These like benchmarks of what cities have
done to solve those kind of problems or how do you, you know, come up with your
modeling -- or in the public arena is that even feasible as it would be in a business
arena?
Siddoway: I'm sure they will bring whatever expertise they have had in solving these
types of issues elsewhere. Every city is a bit unique in how the adjacent roads all align.
We have an issue here with very few north -south connections over the railroad. The
railroad is a very large impediment to north -south. We also -- you know, there is the
issue of could we alleviate traffic downtown by getting a Ten Mile interchange and
looking farther out. But to answer your question, yes, they will bring their expertise from
having dealt with these issues elsewhere, but it's a very -- going to be a very contact
sensitive solution that's going to be tailored to us. I don't know that there is anything we
can just borrow from another city. The modeling assumptions will be based on national
averages --
Newton-Huckabay: That was verbatim, I think.
Canning: He clearly didn't know what I meant to say. I mean I think that, you know,
when they -- when they do the models, it determines, you know, how many people are
likely to turn left, how many people are likely to turn right, how many people are likely to
go through and I think for those types of things they do look at the uses that are
downtown and look at just national averages and I believe those are what go into the
model making and that's where the consistency comes through, not on -- on the specific
layout of our two possible couplets versus two other possible couplets. But part of it -- a
large part of it is that all the former transportation studies for the area have only been
transportation studies. This is a transportation and land use study. It's looking at both
and considering both and particularly considering the needs of the downtown as being a
to destination, not a through destination. And a prime example, right outside the door
on a hot day trying to get to Smoky Mountain Pizza, you wait five minutes to get across
the light. I mean it's not pedestrian oriented. It has just never been a consideration
before and this document should address both the transportation concerns of ACHD
and the land use concerns of the Meridian Development Corporation, the planning staff,
the city as a whole in making this the heart of the community.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 39 of 44
Newton-Huckabay: I just didn't understand how that kind of process worked. I would
guess that a lot of that is in how you market your plan as you come up with it, but I don't
know. I mean you're the professionals, I'm just --
Canning: If you have an arterial down the middle of the street you're never going to get
a downtown feel to it, I mean it's just --
Newton-Huckabay: No, I agree with that.
Canning: It's got to be somewhere in between and what this is trying to do is figure out
in between -- in between there where -- what that right amount of traffic versus
pedestrian ease is.
Newton-Huckabay: I won't ask any more questions. Sorry.
Siddoway: Part of the how is, we first set out the criteria of what we are trying to
achieve and that's in terms of the vision for downtown, the types of markets that we are
going after, the types of businesses we are trying to attract, the type of environment that
we are trying to build and how we need to accommodate the traffic needs as well for
both land use and transportation goals. Then, we come up with alternatives. I think we
are shooting for somewhere around four to six alternative scenarios. Do nothing, will be
one and see how that plays out. A couplet, will be one. I'm sure widening Meridian
Road, will be one. And I'm sure there is going to be others that I don't even know yet.
We, then, will do some -- some simple modeling to just see which ones flat don't work
versus do. We actually have three types of modeling going on at different stages of the
process. Compass has a regional model that we have access to that's based on
average daily trips and they are currently finishing a peak hour model. The firm Theron
Peers has been involved in the development of that model and knows it inside and out.
There is also two programs they are going to be using, one called Sim Traffic and one
call Syncro, and those will be used to actually model turning movements, stacking
depths, everything based on anticipated volumes and destinations that they can plug
into the regional model and anticipate turning movements, as Anna was saying. So,
there is a lot of -- there is some science to it and there is some art to it and hopefully it
will be a good marriage between the two.
Moe: And we are anticipating the do nothing method is not an option; right?
Siddoway I would assume so.
Moe: That's good to hear.
Siddoway: But it will be a baseline against which we can compare.
Moe: Exactly.
E. APA Subscription Renewal:
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 40 of 44
Canning: The next two items are -- should be rather quick. Just to check, are you all
receiving APA material? Wendy?
Newton-Huckabay: I get Leslie's stuff.
Canning: You get Leslie's stuff. Okay. But they haven't changed the name?
Newton-Huckabay: Not so far, no.
Canning: And, David, are you getting --
Moe: I'm getting Jerry's.
Canning: You're getting Jerry's? That's kind of sad, isn't it. One of the things that's
probably starting to show up or should start showing up soon is the renewal notices.
Have you already gotten one of them? Just —
Zaremba: I think I did.
F. Available Training Funds:
Canning: -- put them back in my box is what you need to do and I'll make sure those
get paid and make sure the correct names get on them as well, but don't pay that out of
your own pocket by any means. I have that money set aside for those renewals and
you've probably gotten quite a few things on available training or books or other things
and I'll be happy to purchase those items or send you anyplace that -- where my budget
fits into it and you guys haven't taken advantage of it this year. I know a couple of you
are new and you went to the one, you went to the one training, and that was great, but
over time those opportunities are available. I don't think I have enough to send each of
you on a big training -- or big out-of-town --
Newton-Huckabay: Are any of those in Cancun?
Canning: Yeah. I found one. It took me a year and a half, but I found one in Palm
Springs, so --
Newton-Huckabay: That will work.
Canning: Yeah. There are opportunities available, so if you see one that you find
interesting, if you see a book that you'd really find interesting, I can buy that for the
Commission and you can, you know, check that out for as long as you need and we will
just keep it here as kind of a lending library for Commissioners, but be happy to get
those things for you, so don't --
Newton-Huckabay: Do you have one of those started already?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 41 of 44
Canning: I do have books at my office that you're welcome to check out if you'd like. Or
borrow as the case may be. I have actually started -- I bought a couple books just for
the developers to check out, so -- one's called density by design and I just keep on
handing it to them every chance I get. That was all I had on those two items.
Canning: With the acting chair -- now vice -chair's permission, I had two other items that
I forgot to put on there.
Zaremba: Okay.
H: Vienna Woods -Edinburgh Annexation
Canning: Just an update on the Vienna Woods, Edinburgh annexation. We did have a
meeting with them here and Craig Hood prepared most of the materials for that and just
kind of gave them a rundown on the annexation procedure, so we have started that
process. Just thought you'd like to know. It probably doesn't impact you as much as
say the transportation plan would, but if you start hearing about the city annexing those
subdivisions, that's what's going on. We are doing that. They currently receive city
services, so we are -- they are now contiguous and we are annexing them.
Zaremba: Are we doing anything to clean up the enclaves?
Canning: The illegal split enclaves, no. We didn't take advantage of that opportunity.
Zaremba: So, you're not annexing enclaves?
Canning: Not right now. Oh, annexing enclaves in general?
Zaremba: Yeah.
Canning: There is an item in the strategic plan that says we will -- that will -- how does
that read? That we will do a certain number of annexations and I think the original
intent was to work on annexing enclaves. And, in all honesty, with the amount of work
we have to do, it just is hard to make it a priority. This will be interesting; because this is
the first annexation we have done, you know, non -voluntary annexation. This will be
helpful. It was important to do and it will be helpful to get our kind of feet in the water on
how to do these things. I think we have kind of figured out a general approach and,
actually, one of the enclave property owners is the one that suggested it. We started to
ask around the development community how they would feel about just providing those
legal descriptions on those enclaves, if there is an illegal out parcel, and they have said
that they are willing to do those. So, that at least gives us the legal description that
when we want to annex them that we don't have to go pay to have that done. So, we
are inching there, Mr. Zaremba, but we are not -- I have to admit, we are not running
there, though. Hopefully, we will have an opportunity to do more of that type of stuff in
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 42 of 44
the current upcoming year, because we got two new positions funded for this upcoming
budget year, so that --
Zaremba: That did get approved?
Canning: Yes, they did, and we were very happy about that.
Zaremba: Does that mean we have an official transportation planner now?
Canning: Not yet. We still just have a lowly Steve Siddoway. He is close, though. And
we did ask for an associate position and, then, an assistant position. The idea on the
associate position is that they would replace the duties that Steve currently does as far
as processing applications to free up his time to be a transportation advocate for the
city, to attend the plethora of transportation related meetings that occur every week and
to really be an advocate for what the city wants as far as transportation to be consistent
and an ever present face in the -- in their face. Yeah. So, he will take on that position
come October 1st and the Council actually gave us pre -approval to hire them -- one of
those positions will become effective September 1st and, then, the associate city
planner will be October 1 st, just because I don't have any place to put them before then.
We will be moving across the hall -- and if I can negotiate the terms according to how
they originally said they'd give it to me, but we will be moving across the hall, so we will
be just right across from Public Works. Still in the same building. The assistant planner
position, for those of you who know Kristy, I did promote here, she will be moving into
that position and, then, we will hire a new administrative assistant for the office. And we
will probably fill that within the City Hall. We are just releasing it to current city
employees for right now and, hopefully, we will be able to fill it there. And I think that's
about it. Oh, the MDC is getting their administrator. That likely hire date is October?
Probably the end of August, early September. So, that will be good, because then
Steve will be no longer doing that job, too. So, Steve right now is a planner, he's the
unofficial transportation planner, he's the unofficial MDC administrator and he's a little
stressed out.
Zaremba: And in your spare time you --
Canning: Yeah. And in his spare time he's -- he's having --
Siddoway: A baby.
Zaremba: Well, congratulations.
Canning: That was all I had. Was there anything that the Commission wanted to —
G. Tracking Volunteer Hours:
Zaremba: What is tracking volunteer hours?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 43 of 44
Canning: Oh, I skipped that one, didn't I?
Zaremba: Item G.
Canning: I think I asked some of you for a tally of how many volunteer hours you had
done. I think this was in April or May or something like that and some of you responded
and some of you didn't. Currently, the Mayor -- I just figured this out last week.
Apparently, the Mayor wants you all to keep a running kind of tally of how many
volunteer hours you spend. I would like to help you do that in however way can I. You
all spend so many hours that to try and keep track of them seems like a volunteer job in
and of itself. So, if there is something I can do to help you keep track of those hours, I
would be happy to do it, but the reason the Mayor wants it is solely for the purpose of
being able to recognize your contribution to the city. It's only for that basis. So, I -- third
awkward moment for the evening.
Moe: I'm not sure some of us really want to know how much hours we are spending.
Zaremba: I wouldn't show it to my wife. Well, is that something that you would want us
to just keep a tally and once a quarter say it was X number of hours or monthly or --
Canning: I think she wants it monthly.
Zaremba: Okay.
Canning: If you just want to drop me a note and I'll compile them and get them to her.
Zaremba: Do we want to start at a specific time? First of April or -- I mean first of
August or --
Canning: Sure. If you want. I mean she did ask awhile back and it's just -- and, you
know, probably if you have a fairly good idea of your average time it takes, then, that
would probably suffice, too. I mean if you do it for three months and you find out you
spend -- I can't even take a guess at how many hours you spend a month, but just if it's
60 hours a month and it looks like it's consistently that way, then, that would probably
work, too. Like I said, whatever I can do to help you out, I would be happy to. We could
probably keep track of just the meeting hours and if you wanted to keep track of the
outside hours, we could figure that out, if that helps at all. I don't know if it does.
Zaremba: I think we can do that.
Newton-Huckabay: Volunteer hours? Is that preparing for --
Zaremba: Yeah. Including not only the meetings, but the time you spend preparing for
it.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
July 29, 2004
Page 44 of 44
I would include, for instance, going to the
other prep work you do to make yourself a
each meeting, plus the meeting. Is that fair?
0
training session that you went to and any
better Commissioner, plus the studying for
Canning: Yes. By all means. And if in your role as a planning commissioner you take
on other duties, like Dave's doing that PIG group, Process Improvement Group. Sorry.
That those hours also. Or if you're an alternate on some transportation commission,
then, those hours as well. You probably don't get to count dreaming about projects all
night, though.
Moe: Mr. Chairman, I move that we adjourn.
Rohm: Second.
Zaremba: I have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion
carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Zaremba: We are adjourned at what appears to be 9:12 p.m.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:12 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED
KEIT BORUP - CHAIRMAIq APPROVED
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR,
\ Of
M
O
- SEAL =
a
r,
o E; .Bet�tttt
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
APPLICANT
REQUEST Election of Chairman
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
July 29, 2004
ITEM NO. S
COMMENTS
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
•
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
APPLICANT
REQUEST Discussion on Hearing Procedures
July 29, 2004
ITEM NO. 9
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Date:
Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
•
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 29, 2004
APPLICANT ITEM NO.
REQUEST Staff Discussion
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER:
Contacted:
Emailed:
COMMENTS
Date: Phone:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
10
•
•
VAC 04-004
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 29, 2004
APPLICANT Woodside Properties, LLC ITEM NO. 4
REQUEST Recommendation - Request for a Vacation of a 20 foot strip of property, extending
from the Creason Leteral north approximately 810 feet for Salisbury Subdivision No. 2 - west of
North Meridian Road and south side of West Ustick Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See attached Staff Comments
No Comment
No Comment
See attached Comments
OTHER: See letter from B & A Engineers
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
•
•
AZ 04-011
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 29, 2004
APPLICANT Lonnie Johnson ITEM NO. S
REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for Annexation and Zoning of 9.8 acres to R-8 and L -O zones
dor proposed Alexandria Subdivision - 4205 North Locust Grove Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
COMMENTS
See attached Staff Comments
OTHER: See letter from B & A Engineers
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed:
Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
n
t.
r
{,
tj
M � ,
t
a
"4}
�"� .,
"`� � " 3 � 1' +-}� I'`�•f21't�rv`«'b" t"t ��$
R "C
� .� i 1 � i�?; 1' S
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING July 29, 2004
APPLICANT Lonnie Johnson ITEM NO. 6
REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 27 single-family residential
and office building lots and two common lots on 9.8 acres in proposed R-8 and L -O zones for
proposed Alexandria Subdivision - 4205 North Locust Grove Road
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: See attached Staff Comments
x
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
`
CITY WATER DEPT:
hx-.`
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
,.k
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
W
IDAHO POWER:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
"_ ..
OTHER: See attached letter from B & A Engineers
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
€
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
•S �'."'.. 1 •
a ` `t !- k' $.'�t"3R' SiY4�' y_'# �a q * ¢ 1�.`S
tt�1'
4 S .. O# t Y
� t iwR
r `ti
oto
•}Q;
i :. > ' v.
�. .. Lbg
N,iv $�i
d
q f t
YP F.ri, FiT 4S •i . y..•;`.�
� ` •-.. ': ��. 4a3,'
. �rv'n7.M _
y,.. .-.� n{k �_.4 y, R t. f
, t
4
i [.
t.
i
U
"k, "F,
9j2.xxt'�'
xt,
?j
4
e
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
APPLICANT Lonnie Johnson
•
July 29, 2004
ITEM NO.
CUP 04-015
REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for
reductions to the minimum requirements for lot area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks
and minimum street frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision - 4205 North Locust Grove Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
COMMENTS
See attached Staff Comments
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER: See attached letter from B & A Engineers
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
w =
�Fe3
i
9
9, `
e
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING
APPLICANT Lonnie Johnson
•
July 29, 2004
ITEM NO.
CUP 04-015
REQUEST Public Hearing - Request for Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for
reductions to the minimum requirements for lot area, rear building setbacks, street side setbacks
and minimum street frontage for proposed Alexandria Subdivision - 4205 North Locust Grove Road
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
CITY SEWER DEPT:
CITY PARKS DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
SANITARY SERVICES:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS' IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
COMMENTS
See attached Staff Comments
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
OTHER: See attached letter from B & A Engineers
Contacted: Date: Phone:
Emailed: Staff Initials:
Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
i