2005 11-29 SpecialMeridian Planning and Zoning Special Meeting November 29,
2005
The Special Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of November
29, 2005 was called to order at 6:23 p.m. by Chairman David Zaremba.
Members Present: Chairman David Zaremba, Commissioner Michael Rohm,
Commissioner David Moe, and Commissioner Wendy Newton-Huckabay.
Staff Present: Anna Canning, Bill Nary, Brad Hawkins-Clark, Josh Wilson, Michael
Cole, Craig Hood, Bruce Freckleton, Steve Siddoway and Will Berg.
Others Present: Dave McKinnon
Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance:
Roll-call
___O___ Keith Borup ___X___ David Moe
___X___ Wendy Newton-Huckabay ___X___ Michael Rohm
____X__Chairman David Zaremba
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda:
Zaremba: Since we only have one item on the agenda, we will assume it is adopted
and we will move on to the training and questions / answers session with City Staff.
Anna or Brad?
Item 3: Training and Questions / Answers Session with City Staff:
Hawkins-Clark: Well actually what we did is, we kind of divided up the questions
between the four of us Anna, Bill, Steve and I. We have of course other resources in
the audience, but in terms – we just sort of broke them up to help us preparing for it and
luck of the draw our City Attorney came out with number one.
Nary: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission the question that I have is the first
one is, why does the growth of schools, fire stations and accessory impact fees or other
things in the tax structure, legislative choices (inaudible-------------------------). Currently it
is OPEC that has (inaudible-------------) legislative decision as to what impact fees can
be applied to it currently in the State of Idaho. Basically, it can be applied for schools
and for cities to use and they have to (inaudible--------) essentially have some longer
lasting permanency to them so, cities tend to use them for parks for that purpose; the
Highway District can use it for roads and road improvements because they have to
have at least the life of 10 years for that to be usable. We are looking at some potential
for our city to assess impact fees and we are going through a study process now –
selecting someone to do this analysis and going through the process of assessing
impact fees for public safety types of uses. The police are a little harder because they
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 2 of 52
generally don’t build hard structures, other than the one police station they don’t
normally it’s our (inaudible-----------). They may or may not have as much impact as the
police because there’s not (inaudible----------) so it can be an effective tool. Nampa and
Caldwell over the last year went through this exercise to add impact fees (inaudible------
---------) heard from the public safety part of the general fund. So, the Fire Department
is a little bit better because you can at least build stations. Even their vehicles have
more life than police vehicles do if you get more than 10 years out of it. We are looking
at that. The legislature has not at this point had impact fees to be applied for schools.
(Inaudible---------) probably a discussion point I wouldn’t be surprised. Schools
(inaudible------------) paying for itself isn’t really how that discussion gets handed to the
legislatures and our growth impact schools. I wouldn’t doubt that they will have that
discussion, but I don’t have any insight today as where that movement goes. I think
that is what property tax discussion comes about and how that impacts the bottom line
for schools and other services that the government provides. I am sure impact fees will
get discussed again and obviously the development community has sometimes the
opposite view. I mean, there is sometimes a discussion that you folks have seen many
times where (inaudible-------------) part of it is the cost of business and part of it is current
residents. That is why in impact fees that are done for parks there is a portion of the
impact fees that goes for purchasing or improving park land or any portion that you are
going to buy or purchase all of the park land, your park land, which I assume have to be
(inaudible) with the loan there’s a portion (inaudible--------). So, a very long answer, but
it’s a legislative choice. Some of those choices may change and we are looking for
some other avenues to add impact fees as another source of (inaudible).
Canning: (Inaudible)
(Inaudible speaker and discussion)
Nary: I would guess – I don’t know the exact answer to that, I would guess it probably
hasn’t been a significant issue statewide as it has been to this county in the last five
(inaudible------). It is predominantly made up of legislatures outside of urban areas.
The impacts to their communities is generally significantly different with impacts of
urban areas and because of that, sometimes you do see some lag. What is really
driving or impacting a city such as Boise, Meridian, Nampa, Coeur d’Alene, Twin Falls,
Pocatello because some of the legislatures don’t have those issues in (inaudible) and
Burley and those types of cities at all, so that is tough in educating them and trying
impact statewide an issue that is predominantly found only in small pockets. Many of
the things that you will see in the legislation sometimes will pass state laws that only
impact in cities of over 100,000. A few years ago that was only one city in the whole
state and I think still is only one city but (inaudible---------) the reasons for that is
because again to push it and trying to solve some problem issues, but also trying to
deal with the majority of (inaudible---------) don’t have those issues.
Canning: (Inaudible----------) that was because there were issues at the time.
(Inaudible------------) school district (inaudible--------------) show that they are very
efficient.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 3 of 52
Newton-Huckabay: Then you could have that problem in a rural community where you
may not (Inaudible--------------).
Nary: (inaudible-----------) – school funding, but it is a state function, not a local function
but a state function and so they decide how the (inaudible--------------) will be done, how
the funding was divided (inaudible--------------) has just not been something that
philosophically they had chosen to move to some level of local control of that. I don’t
think, I don’t know that that’s the only answer but I think that’s part of the reason why it’s
just something that hasn’t moved over into that. Again, (inaudible---------------) I
remember 15 years ago when they passed the state (inaudible------------) I mean there
was a tremendous discussion over those (inaudible-------------) that would mean the
state no longer had the (inaudible) shift in how the mentality or thought process into the
(inaudible-------------). (Inaudible--------------) done that way in like you said a small
community. This state (inaudible---------------) 100 percent in the figure (inaudible----------
----) the ones that control how many is funded statewide. (Inaudible-------------).
Zaremba: Well and you also have to realize it’s a push back from the development
community anytime you want to raise a fee and the development community is big
enough to be able to help legislatures (inaudible------------) so they hold some sway and
that’s not local that’s everybody. Wherever you go it’s always been the argument you
know if I build a house I want to be able to sell them the (inaudible-------------).
(Inaudible-------) sales anywhere to actually put the impact fees in and to make them
sufficient (inaudible). My personal feeling is the advantage to impact fees is any other
form of taxation and specifically property taxes (inaudible--------) houses occupied – first
built and occupied you get a tax bill the year after that and then have a year to pay it or
something like that. By the time it cycles through the system the city actually gets the
money for occupied piece of property that’s two years later. If those people needed a
fire truck or school or a road in the first two years that they lived there impact fees are
the only way to get it done (inaudible). I’m sorry Steve, I know you have –
Siddoway: I was just going to say (inaudible) coming later but I’m just going to talk
briefly about the impact fee portion of roads. One of the (inaudible) two lane (inaudible-
--------------------------------------------) impact fees work is the development that pays those
impact fees so the (inaudible---------------) sold and the buildings are built and the
congestion comes first. They pay their impact fee as they build and then as the entire
square mile builds out (inaudible--------------) next to it. (Inaudible---------------).
Zaremba: (Inaudible) urgent for what it costs to add three lanes to it. They cannot
physically do that. The (inaudible) road doesn’t have a base under it so they actually
are tearing the old road out and building a new five lane road plus curb, gutter and
sidewalk and they’re only collecting for three new lanes. They are not collecting for the
(inaudible) those are the old two lanes and to rebuild a new five lane they are only
collecting it which is why it works out to 40 percent of what it costs them to do a mile for
only like 40 percent of it. That means that the cities and the transportation task force
and the others go through a process every year trying to tell ACHD that’s our top priority
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 4 of 52
when in fact, we’re consistent with falling behind in what (inaudible) if they can only do –
if we just started with this year and said okay, here’s 100 percent of what needs to be
done this year and we’ve collected impact fees on 100 percent of it but we can only
actually build 40 percent of it. Next year we can’t build next years we have to build 40
percent of last years. The year after that we’re going to build another 20 percent of two
years ago plus 20 percent of a year ago. Every time we’re asked to say what are our
priorities for Meridian and what we’re building we’re talking about something that should
have been built four years ago. It’s a struggle to say what our priority is when we ought
to be talking about the new stuff that’s coming up. One of the questions I was going to
ask was – I don’t know if you’re aware Bill and I don’t know. Is there anything in the
legislation that actually authorizes ACHD which is unique in Idaho and pretty well
unique in the United States I don’t know of any other countywide administration that
covers the cities as well (inaudible----------) that money to ACHD to say we need these
projects done. If we had our own highway department we would be struggling with
funding. Can we struggle with the difference between what they collect or are we
prevented by the legislature from doing that?
Nary: I don’t know how we would – based on the way of the formula and I certainly
can’t tell you the formula (inaudible). I mean, I think the reason for the 40 percent
(inaudible-------------------------). So, I can’t see how we can justify and acting on an
additional fee for a service we don’t (inaudible----) have accounted by (inaudible) back
on the same (inaudible-----). They developed a formula based on what is the proportion
of share for the new development and then we’re going to (inaudible-----) I don’t think
we could sustain.
Canning: It would be better to argue that they’re proportionate (inaudible).
Nary: Yes and I don’t think that’s where ACHD wants to go. I think they have been
beaten up a lot on impact fees and I don’t – I mean I think they have the formula to a
point (inaudible -------) figure out what everybody can live with and thinks is at least
adequate (inaudible------) the problem is that we see all the time especially (inaudible----
--) is that if the building rate proceeded at what would in their mind be a totally normal
building rate that as those houses get built in this 800 home subdivision as those
building permits get acquired and the fees get paid and the money gets collected and
as the houses get built and the road kind of comes over behind the development. I
think that’s what they have intended. The problem that we see is that the building rate
is rapid and it’s so far ahead that where you thought you might have the last house built
in the subdivision and the last stripe painted on the road within a year of that last house
it’s now three years or four because you built that subdivision out three times faster
than (inaudible-------------). All of you have sat on this commission long enough to have
seen projects that you have anticipated and the builders sitting in front of you saying oh
yes this is a seven year project or 10 years to build the (inaudible------------) and three
years from now they’re full. They are buying the piece across the highway because
they need to build some more. I don’t think that’s going to change right now but it will.
Then you know you’ll still always be a little behind but you won’t be so far. You are
exactly right that the Transportation Task Force that’s always a challenge. Once you
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 5 of 52
finish the 01 ones we wanted first before we worry about what we’re going to do in 06
so they haven’t finished everything yet. I just think it’s just a rapid amount of growth
that (inaudible--------------).
Hawkins-Clark: (Inaudible----------------) you know some other communities we know
these effect these dedicate the right of way so then they own the land right then and
there (inaudible---------) they never get all the property owners that are adjacent to the
roadway on that mile that are developing at the same time (inaudible------------) property
and they have deeds to them but then they don’t necessarily have (inaudible----- they
just build a whole mile at once. So, I think that is an advantage (inaudible-------------)
struggle of catch-up at least they are able to do a full mile at one time.
(Inaudible Discussion)
Hawkins-Clark: How can / does the city limit growth? Probably obviously probably the
better word to manage in terms of the philosophy. It certainly is philosophy. I think
historically Meridian has probably used two things. One is public facilities sewer and
water and the other is annexations. While I don’t think they proactively thought of
annexations in that way as a tool that could be used to (inaudible------------------------------
---) in Meridian has used (inaudible---------------------) California for example I think put
the building permit cap. You know they say no more than 500 building permits are
going to be issued per year period. (inaudible----------------------------------------).
Zaremba: (Inaudible-------------------) initiative let’s put that in I don’t know if it would be
500 a year but they established a point systems. So that when people came to apply
they knew they were going to get 6,000 applications a year so they said we’re going to
take these applications and we’re going to have a point system. If you build and give a
city park to the city you get so many points. If you build and give a school to the city
you get so many points. I mean the roads were a given you had to do the roads plus
any intersection that you impacted between there and the interstate. You got points –
you got points for affordable housing and points for all sorts of stuff and whoever got the
highest points got the allotment for the year. They could bank in allotment for three
years if they wanted to build you know if they thought they were going to get another lot
next year and build them all at once. The facilities are in place and given to the city and
works pretty well.
Canning: Typically those communities that have (inaudible------------------). They still sell
them but they’re not affordable.
Zaremba: They are very expensive but the services are there the minute the residents
are there.
Moe: (Inaudible--------------) in every meeting you know we go to (inaudible----------). I
realize that they are having to look for land to be able to build and what not and the
developers are helping them in (inaudible-----------------) and others aren’t. But at what
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 6 of 52
point does this commission or what does the city say time out on the growth because
we’re running out guys?
Canning: Well the school district has so did the highway district they had said
(inaudible--------------------------------) you can’t do this when are you going to start saying
that (inaudible-------------------------------)
Zaremba: (Inaudible--------------------) nearest school to you we’ll bus you some place
else. We’ll get you in.
Canning: (Inaudible-----------------------------------) for Fire and Police it’s only part
(inaudible).
Newton-Huckabay: Well I think that’s the biggest concern though.
Siddoway: You have to set standards for which (inaudible--------) and what would be
(inaudible--------------------) is supposed to be one of the tools (inaudible-----------------------
--------------------------------------------). What is that (inaudible-------------------) and develop
part of (inaudible) for every public facility (inaudible------------).
Zaremba: On behalf of the Fire Department we say you can’t build more than 50
houses until there are two accesses. There is precedence for having some things that
trigger limits and how that limit can be relieved.
Nary: And the other thing that’s probably obvious what your plan your Comprehensive
Plan (inaudible---------------------------------------) that’s why we’re choosing this is because
we already said that’s what we want to have near and so when somebody else you
know when the neighbor that thinks it was all supposed to have (inaudible-----------------)
that’s your other tool that you have to do that. As we look at the process I don’t think
back in 2000 or 2001 we ever imagined that we would be pushing out of this one as
rapidly as this seems to go and I think we’ve seen the (inaudible) with this map which
we thought was (inaudible) long long time and we’re already hitting this.
Zaremba: We were a city of 30,000 (inaudible----------------------------------).
Hawkins-Clark: (Inaudible) but I also started to say that the case law in Idaho has really
been focusing (inaudible) what’s the rate and how do you put it? I don’t’ know maybe
there are supreme case law on actual limit tools but I think it’s –
Nary: Not yet.
Hawkins-Clark: -- in terms of a real proactive limitation it’s not there in the state.
Nary: I think people use the m word a lot. You know lots of times they could use the
moratorium or word or that’s what you can use (inaudible----------------). There are two
methods of moratoriums (inaudible------------------) have a treatment plant that’s full.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 7 of 52
That’s a pretty good emergency but that we’re overwhelmed or we just think we’ve
grown too quickly that’s not an emergency. I don’t see a court upholding that. There
really hasn’t been (inaudible----------------------) in our legislature reports of trying to put
limitations with caps other than annexations. Even as Brad said in the beginning
(inaudible-----------------------) has always been is as you start turning those folks away
you’re not sure what’s going to keep coming back. If you keep telling them to go away
and we’re not ready we’re not ready when you’re ready they may have gone
somewhere else. They may have moved on and you would like to grow now maybe
they’ve (inaudible---------------------------------------------).
Zaremba: (Inaudible-------------) and now we have all those septic systems out there.
Nary: Right and there is no real adequate way to subdivide or re-develop or any of that.
Zaremba: (Inaudible--------------------------------) growth but it could steer growth. If we
had the assumption that we wanted density to stay near the core and stop buildings at
the margins. We want to (inaudible) the infill and get stuff in the middle what would be
the legality of having a system of building permits fees then add a multiplier to them.
For instance you said the building permit is x and we’re going to multiple that by some
distance from let’s say city hall is ground zero. If you’re a half a mile from – if you’re
building within a half a mile from city hall we’re going to multiply the normal building fee
by half and you only pay half. If you’re one mile from city hall we’re going to multiply it
by one so you pay the normal fee. If you’re two miles from city hall we’re going to
double and if you’re three miles you triple.
Canning: (Inaudible------------) adequate public facility ordinance (inaudible-------------)
the closest stuff from those lines starts to look not like a center growing (inaudible--------
--------) station is over here. It gets very complicated because what’s infill for the sewer
treatment plant (inaudible-------------) growth infills from the sewer treatment plant so the
last stuff (inaudible--------------) so that stuff can be fairly close (inaudible-------------).
Nary: Another issue I guess is (inaudible----------------) these are supposed to be
uniform related to the cost (inaudible--------------------) why would it cost you more to
build this or for us to review these plans if you build it? (Inaudible) we have to justify is
what is that relationship fee –
Zaremba: -- even if it costs more to provide police and fire out on the (inaudible) than it
does in the middle?
Nary: And that’s what we would have to be able to identify is that there’s some rational
relationship as to why that fee is related to what they’re requesting. Again it’s not a tax
so it has to be related to that. Like Anna said you know when we look at it where are
most treatment plants in the city. They’re not in the core they are way out. So from a
service standpoint it depends (inaudible----------------) what she said related to the fire
station there’s going to be one level related and police there is going to be another. I
guess, maybe that will be the discussion (inaudible------------------) group when it gets
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 8 of 52
done or how do we make that fit into the current statutory structure (inaudible--------------
--) effective I don’t know.
Hawkins-Clark: Number three we probably already touched on it. (Inaudible---------------
---) Steve touched on it as far you know how the impact fee structure is set up that you
need it then cities in some ways compare the same way (inaudible--------------).
Nary: You know I can remember during the election in 2001 they got that common lot
(inaudible----------------------) look around at the cities that don’t grow and used to be a
really easy example and it has changed significantly in the last five years but Caldwell is
like that. I went to college in Caldwell and the population in Caldwell is the same in
1978 when I went to college as it was in 2001. It didn’t change significantly in all those
years (inaudible------------) and then when I’ve asked those folks do you want to live in
Caldwell? I mean is that a place that you find to be a vital community and you want to
be a part of and at that point people said no I really don’t. I like what’s here but I would
like nobody else to come live here. Well that doesn’t work. You have to have both.
When you have growth it brings the positive things you know any of you that have lived
here for a long time you remember when Meridian was not a place you could go out to
eat. You could go get (inaudible----------------) entertainment you could go buy shoes,
you could go buy clothes you could go do anything here on a Friday. There was just
nothing else but a grocery store and a drug store and those kinds of things.
Newton-Huckabay: We had a drive in (inaudible----------------).
Nary: But there wasn’t a lot of opportunities for things. Most of the folks when you talk
to them they like those opportunities they just don’t like the (inaudible--------------). Now
again, growth has it’s challenges there is no doubt but it isn’t all that it brings a lot of
pluses and positives and I know you folks have all seen many people stand up here and
say I live in Lochsa Falls and now it’s too crowded. Let’s see that house is too tall. He
hadn’t lived there very long and those are the kinds of things –
Newton-Huckabay: You know and that is tiring. I’m here close the gate.
Nary: Yes and there’s’ not much you can do about that.
Zaremba: In Newport Beach in Orange County California we used to call it the last man
(inaudible------------). It was even in the newspapers that way. Everybody that moved
there wanted to be the last one that moved there. We got to stop this growth. I’m here
stop it.
(Inaudible discussion)
Siddoway: What tools, methods, partnership does the city use / foster with ITD and
Ada County to insure the needs created by Meridian’s rapid growth are getting priority
consideration in regards to road construction / improvement projects? There are
specific types of partnerships the cities uninvolved in that (inaudible----------------------).
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 9 of 52
(inaudible) built on 8th
Street near Meridian Middle School (inaudible-------------------)
partnerships for downtown (inaudible--------------------) and partnerships main methods
are just (inaudible--------------------) Meridian watching now and (inaudible-------------------).
Zaremba: (Inaudible------------------------------) impact fees for transportation (inaudible----
----------------) Locust Grove overpass where we did come up with or we are promising to
come up with (inaudible--------------------) may have six cities (inaudible--------------------)
that’s the cheapest way to solve traffic problems (inaudible) that’s not our objective we
(inaudible--------------------) is x million dollars more than our cheapest. (Inaudible----------
----------) Eagle and Boise for us to give you everything you ask for just because you feel
like it. If we want - and that’s why Steve now is getting into all the partnerships
(inaudible) point on their part. We don’t want them doing gold plated roads in Eagle
and having us pay for it. Eagle doesn’t want them doing you know more expensive
projects in Meridian and they’re contributing to it so there has to be some way if we
want more than the minimum or if we want landscaping down the median down the
middle or other things like that then Meridian has to step up and say we’ll find a way to
help with that.
Siddoway: One thing I’m doing right now is trying to investigate partnerships. It
happens (inaudible--------------------). I’m going to present those reports – I’ve found that
the Garden City renewal agency has been quite successful at leveraging their urban
renewal projects (inaudible--------------------) right of way construction. I’m trying to look
at what kind of partnerships have been done and what have been most successful
(inaudible--------------------).
Hawkins-Clark: You might also point out there is a standing committee for Meridian that
is called Meridian Transportation Task Force that has a representative from COMPASS,
a representative from ITD and a representative from ACHD that meets have met
annually and I know Steve’s efforts is to try to get them all done. As far as the standing
group.
Canning: So Bill curiosity question. How much longer do you think ACHD will
(inaudible--------------------)?
Nary: I don’t see it going away really (inaudible--------------------).
Canning: Since it’s (inaudible--------------------).
Nary: Yes I think that was a big run at it which I think I guess I would think maybe not
the opposite (inaudible--------------------) but I think Meridian’s relationship of partnership
of ACHD has generally been very positive from the city. Certainly, (inaudible---------------
-----) last year with them and over every issue. Steve said the majority of the projects
are happening in Meridian because that’s where the growth is, that’s where the need is.
Meridian is truly benefiting from some good relations that they have and their
recognition of that’s where the need is. I mean I think it’s generally working out. We
haven’t run into too much of them to date saying well you want – we want the five dollar
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 10 of 52
version you want the hundred dollar version you can pay (inaudible--------------------).
That hasn’t really been their philosophy in dealing with the city. I mean, we haven’t
really run into those issues. I think the Council and the Mayor are very comfortable in
saying did Boise pay for those improvements? Did Boise pay for those other things? I
don’t think they did so I’m not sure that we’re obligated to pay for that. I think it’s more
like Steve said it’s looking at what can we do to move this further quicker? It isn’t that it
isn’t going to happen it’s just that what can we do to move it up a little bit sooner and
you know find the creative ways to do that. I don’t necessarily think it always has to be
just funding but it can be more of other cooperative things. We’re here – even just parts
of those like you said. Offering to pay for design is fairly inexpensive relative to the
project sometimes then the right of way costs but at least it gets it moved up and it does
get their attention to want to partner. I think it’s been pretty positive. I don’t see ACHD
going away very much because I think the downside is the way the state – the way the
statute is set up it’s not practical once you’ve formed it to dissolve it. There is no
method really that has to go to something else. It goes to the – from the permit from the
current county to ACHD, back to the county commission, back to something else. It
doesn’t go back to the city. They have to resolve all the assets that they have –
Zaremba: It’s more efficient to have one administration for you know (inaudible) seven
different administrations.
Nary: -- if you ask most of the cities would you prefer to manage or make anymore
roads I think most would say no. I really don’t want to have to you know do we want to
buy seven sets of snow plows, seven sets of graters; no it doesn’t make much sense.
You would end up partnering or finding some way to cooperate (inaudible--------------).
Again, I don’t know that most of the cities would prefer to have their own street
department at this point. If that’s the way you’ve always done it like every other county
in the state or other city in the state it’s probably fine. If you go now from nothing to
building a street department in one budget year I don’t know that we have anymore
parts. I don’t know that we have anymore anything else.
Siddoway: Which is the point where all the cities want ACHD to build all the roads in
their city but not to the point where they want to take over building the roads for them.
Nary: Right or maintain them.
Siddoway: Yes.
Zaremba: Well and I think having seen the position (inaudible) goes a long way
towards making our presence with ACHD known that –
Siddoway: I think our relationship with ACHD is as good or better than (inaudible).
Okay what’s the status of the Ten Mile Interchange GARVEE bonds? Bill (inaudible---).
This summer we finished it’s called the access study where it is the first step in private
and federal money. That access study approved by FHWA at the end of July. That was
a huge first step. An even bigger step, came in well it’s been building all year back in
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 11 of 52
February. We wrote an application to the federal government for federal – for
appropriations earmarked by the federal government for a Ten Mile Interchange. Over
the summer the new transportation bill has been developed and passed. In that
transportation bill the Ten Mile Interchange received 19.6 million dollars earmarked
specifically for that project and can not be spent anywhere else. At the same time,
because I figured that would pay my salary for a couple years.
Nary: Good for you.
Siddoway: At the same time that we were going through this statewide transportation –
*End of Side One*
Siddoway: -- and GARVEE projects statewide are part of that Ten Mile Interchange is
one of them. The access study for the Ten Mile Interchange coming out of a pretty
aggressive schedule showing it to be under construction in 09. We were pushing hard
for that timeline. Toward the end of that process the earmark came through and we
were successful in getting the project approved for not a 2010 but a 2008 construction.
It may take a couple years of construction not only for 09 but 2008 (inaudible) on the
books to start construction. To that end, the next step is the (inaudible) process then
working hard all summer with the property owners offering money. It’s kind of a long
story in the end they found a way to pull (inaudible) our local funds to operate. That’s
(inaudible--------------------) to their attention. They two weeks ago hired a firm to head
up the environmental and start the engineering work for the Ten Mile Interchange.
They’re going to be kicking off their process toward the end of the year with that two
year process (inaudible--------------------). There are folks at ITD district level that are
scared to death of a timeline frankly, because it’s an imperative task for them.
(Inaudible--------------------). At the same time we’re trying to figure it out how the whole
interchange should effect the big orange gob of mixed use regional around Ten Mile.
So in the next couple of months we’re going to be kicking off the Ten Mile (inaudible)
Meridian sponsors and have to figure out at finer grain (inaudible--------------------) what
land uses should be there and how we transition from existing residential uses. Where
do the access points belong? How do we figure out an internal collector or even what
road system that belongs there. What types of uses belong?
Zaremba: Frontage roads maybe. A freeway frontage road or something.
Siddoway: Those are all questions that we’re going to be exploring. Specifically
(inaudible) ITD has a consultant for the engineering work on the interchange where
(inaudible) in that process as well and they’ve already (inaudible). In other words, full
steam ahead. It is going to go fast and I may need copies for everyone of – right now
there are six options. This is out of the access study that we finished this summer for
the layout alignment of the interchange. It’s not set and won’t be set until they go
through the full environmental process. (Inaudible) some ideas of what they could be.
The first page is a standard diamond on off ramps and then (inaudible). The next page
is what they call an offset diamond. It’s still a diamond but they’ve realigned Ten Mile
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 12 of 52
Road to deal with existing subdivision (inaudible) site distant issues with the hill on the
Ridenbaugh Canal. The third page is for a modified southeast loop which tries to avoid
the existing residential subdivision and southwest corner by putting both the on ramp
and the off ramp in the southeast corner. The next one does exactly the opposite
(inaudible) these houses built along there they’re going to be impacted tremendously by
this new interchange lets us buy them out and build over (inaudible). Page Number six
is called an offset single pointed urban interchange. It’s a lot – it’s a bunch of flyovers
that (inaudible) called the on off ramp at a single point. There’s another one that didn’t
get put in as part of this package and it’s just a standard single point interchange where
they come off and they meet right directly in the center. So far the most interest has
been in the standard diamond or the single point urban interchange that meets in the
middle. Don’t know which it will be. That’s what the whole federal environmental
process is all about is looking at all the issues and determining which is – these are
some of the base line ideas of –
Newton-Huckabay: So it would meet in the middle and then you would just have one
stop light.
Siddoway: One stoplight. It really helps facilitate the north south traffic movement
along Ten Mile. Rather than having separate stoplights at the two on off ramps you
have a single one but there are factors that go into that. They are most efficient when
all the directions are fairly equal so they have (inaudible) how they’re doing and make
sure it’s (inaudible). But this shows a lot of promise right here. It also happens to be
one of the most expensive options almost double the standard diamond.
Newton-Huckabay: Because of the bridges?
Siddoway: Because it’s almost all in structures. It’s more expensive. It actually
requires the least amount of right of way because horizontally it doesn’t really go out
that much it just – and it becomes a lane and goes up to the bridge then meets in the
center. It requires the least amount of right of way but it has so much structure to it that
it’s one of the most expensive.
Borup: Wouldn’t it have the greatest amount of (inaudible)?
Siddoway: The least amount. For close signals that are trying to operate for two way
traffic you don’t – you’re too close to function at any type of an efficient movement.
With a single light you can actually move better. You know everyone’s coming to one.
Whether it will be or not I mean (inaudible).
Newton-Huckabay: So the 20 million dollars is enough to build it?
Siddoway: No.
Newton-Huckabay: How much does it cost?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 13 of 52
Siddoway: The standard diamond was estimated about 26. The single point urban
interchange about 45 or so and then that’s just for the interchange and I can’t
remember if any of the cost for the extra lane on the freeway is figured in that total but I
can go back and look. Only the things the feds are pushing for is they’re saying look,
you put in an interchange at Ten Mile our level of service on the freeway drops between
Meridian and Ten Mile because logically people are wanting – more people are going to
drive on that side to get to the Ten Mile Interchange rather than get off Meridian.
Therefore you need to add an extra lane. That’s great except that the Meridian Road
overpass won’t accommodate another lane underneath it as it’s currently built. We’re
trying to come up with a package over time that builds the Ten Mile Interchange,
rebuilds the Meridian Road interchange and adds an extra lane. The 49 million dollar
certainly doesn’t cover all of that it’s (inaudible) project but it’s all going to be
(inaudible).
Rohm: Don’t use the contractor (inaudible).
Siddoway: Any other questions on the (inaudible).
Zaremba: It’s neat to see that there are actually drawings happening.
Siddoway: There are drawings there. There is a lot of that –
Zaremba: Tangible feel that it’s going to happen.
Siddoway: There’s an adoptive access (inaudible--------------). It’s moving forward. It
accrues on the transportation improvement program for three years from now which six
months ago I would have never dreamed that that time would ever be adopted for 2008
construction.
Zaremba: Can we have a placard on it that names it the Steve Siddoway Interchange.
Siddoway: I think it will be the Mayor de Weerd Interchange if anything. Okay what is
the status of the continuation of Pine near Nola? Pine near Nola has been recently
reclassified as an arterial road. Prior to this year it was not it was a collector road.
What the reclassification does for us is it allows ACHD to charge impact fees that would
go toward the cost of that. (Inaudible) impact fees are that they only go towards arterial
roads. They – ACHD is not likely to build it on their own. They know the development
is coming along we’ve been (inaudible) build it for them. What’s holding up
development and building it though or what has been is the fact that it’s not currently
impactly eligible. It is not in the current capital improvement plan or CIP for short. We’ll
talk about CIP quite a bit. CIP is ACHD’s 20 year plan. Only projects that are in the 20
year plan are eligible for impact fees. We’ve been very fortunate recently to get
developers that have stepped up and build projects like the Ustick Eagle Intersection,
Eagle Road near Silverstone and projects like that have been built by developers. Pine
on the other side of Eagle Road is another example. Developers have paid for those
roads but they get reimbursed by ACHD on the back end after building it as
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 14 of 52
development comes into the area and pays their impact fees they get reimbursed. The
development builds ahead of schedule we get reimbursed over time on the back end as
impact fees come in. The development between Nola and Eagle Road wants to do the
same but right now they’re not eligible to get reimbursed for (inaudible).
(Inaudible discussion)
Canning: So that project you’ll hear it January 19th
. I think – I mean it was worth
waiting for. I finally turned to them and said is it really worth putting this on hold for a
year? 1.3 million or something like that.
Siddoway: Yes at least that. Current construction costs for a mile of road are running
between three and five million dollars a mile. Getting closer to five million but the way
(inaudible) costs are going up and it’s (inaudible).
Zaremba: That’s in addition to right of way. You’re just talking about the pavement
right?
Siddoway: I think it’s the whole thing.
Hood: Steve can you explain maybe a little bit – you mentioned the CIP and projects
there in the 20 year plan are only eligible if you use impact fees for those projects. See
what happens with these North Meridian – because I know that basically none of the
roads in North Meridian are around the CIP yet they are all paying into this impact fee
pot. What happened to the traffic impact zone basically it would be you know they
would take four square miles and the money generated in that four square miles can
only go towards improving the roads of those four square miles how is that set up with
the fairly new (inaudible) ordinance with. What about if meridian’s best buddies with
ACHD and Kuna is on the outs can we take Kuna impacting monies and spend them on
a (inaudible) or how does that work?
Siddoway: Yes there are four impact fee zones. It runs along basically along Eagle
Road north south and along the freeway east west to make it simple. So, Kuna’s
projects, Kuna’s impact fees can and do build South Meridian Roads and Eagle,
Middleton and Star impact fees do build North Meridian Roads but North Meridian
Roads also are known for the impact fees also build Eagle and Star projects as well.
It’s all pulled together.
Newton-Huckabay: So this project on the 19th
we’re actually going to bring that road
through? How did they get around the CIP then?
Siddoway: They don’t – there is a CIP update going on right now. The CIP is updated
every three years. This happens to be the year they are updating. It will be adopted –
well they are pretty far into it right now. It won’t be adopted until 06. There is a meeting
tomorrow night that I’m going to at ACHD on the schedule.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 15 of 52
Newton-Huckabay: And it’s on there.
Siddoway: What’s that?
Newton-Huckabay: And it’s on that?
Siddoway: Yes. It’s not on there until it’s adopted technically but it’s on there. The
draft is showing it clearly as a need. I’ve been told that 99.9 percent it’s there the same
with a lot of the North Meridian Area roads that aren’t in there currently. For example,
Dave Turnbull has expressed desire to build a project at the Meridian McMillan
intersection next to Paramount and next to the school that’s coming in 2007 but it’s not
eligible for impact fees. It’s not in the primary plan. When they did the CIP three years
ago we never dreamed that North Meridian would look like it does today. Everything is
now flagging – we’re going to see all those projects showing up in the North Meridian
and become eligible for impact fees. My role right now is just to track all of these areas
that I know there is interest in plus others and just say just make sure they’re flagging.
The CIP is the – ACHD really makes it technically based period. They really try not to
let politics or they don’t – for example our priority list that we came up with for the city
has no bearing whatsoever on what goes into the CIP. That’s used for (inaudible)
program not for the CIP. The CIP is the technical analysis of needs and those that flag
is the (inaudible) 20 years may get in those that don’t, don’t.
Zaremba: One of the things that has (inaudible) in the past is that ACHD has been
basing their projections of 20 year needs on Compass’s model.
Siddoway: That’s where I was just going to go.
Zaremba: Oh okay I’m sorry. Didn’t mean to spoil your –
Siddoway: No go ahead.
Zaremba: - and Compass’s model notoriously under predicts. They – it all sounds very
reasonable when they explain it to you what they deduct from the possibilities but the
result is that the Compass model doesn’t show the need that even we as
Commissioner’s know we’ve approved more projects than Compass thinks they’re
going to have in the next 20 years.
Siddoway: When I learned that this is strictly a technical analysis that became very
important to me to say we need to make sure we have good data going into this –
Zaremba: What’s the technical?
Siddoway: - this garbage isn’t (inaudible) you know. So, Brad and I spent some time
this summer going through the – our cities broken down into what they call TAZ’s Traffic
Analysis Zones. Within each of those zones they have a certain number for households
and employment. We went through the whole city and flagged those areas that we
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 16 of 52
thought were low, others that we thought might be high and we sent that over to
Compass. Compass wasn’t ready to do a full update of their model but we sent it to
Gary Inselman over at ACHD and he agreed to have their consultant use it on the
(inaudible).
Canning: It looks like our Compass numbers are off again. When the Tempographics
Advisory Committee started to do the population projection numbers for communities in
motion it was over – it was almost three days ago. They say they – the control total
they gave us to work with is proving to be (inaudible--------------------). We started
looking at like – I’m on – I was on that committee and fought for every single building
permit I could coming my way. I got half the building permits that the entire county is
coming to meridian and it’s still not going to be enough. I fought to get every last single
one I could out of that control total but that control total is just way off (inaudible). It’s a
20 year projection now we could get all of them in five years or we could slow down.
We don’t know.
Siddoway: What raised this issue to the forefront of my awareness was there was
another potential partnership to build Overland Road between Ten Mile and Linder. The
developers’ interest in doing part of it was its not flagging. It didn’t flag in the current
CIP at the year. It’s not eligible for reimbursement of impact fees. We started asking
why and it came out that the – because the Ten Mile Interchange was included in their
analysis. It wasn’t that they didn’t put that in. The Ten Mile Interchange was in but the
TAZ’s around it on the south side were very low and (inaudible). Once (inaudible) that
didn’t fly I guess they just decided to take it (inaudible). Downtown Traffic Plan timeline
schedule to be done. Last month we made a presentation to the Ada County Highway
District they did adopt the plan. It is now their adopted plan. It’s no longer a question of
what will they build. It’s now a question of when will they build it. They have adopted it
as the preferred alternative. Funding is the big issue and I can tell you that in the draft
five year work program that’s going on right now they’ve split the project into two
phases. The first phase is from the freeway to Franklin. The second phase is from
Franklin to Fairview. Phase one is programmed to be done and have design in 07, right
of way in 08 and construction in 09. There is a decent chance that – I’m going to be
watching for a way to do this but if some other project slips somewhere in the county
that we can pull some funds to do the design this year. We may be able to bump that
timeline up a year to get it constructed and underway. That’s my goal. What’s adopted
right now – well it’s not adopted yet but what’s proposed for the plans right now is
construction 09 for phase one. For phase two which is the section that comes through
that comes by here what they show is design in 2011, right of way in PD which is
intended to be 2012 but PD means Preliminary Development. It’s just outside their five
year work program horizon. Then construction is unfunded. It’s that unfunded
construction that we’re going to have to wrestle with and that’s what I’m exploring some
partnership opportunities to get that into the funding category.
Zaremba: The advantage to actually having it on ACHD’s scope as eventually being
built the way that Meridian wants it is that when projects come to the Commission or the
staff then eventually the Commission when can now say we know this section of
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 17 of 52
Meridian is going to be five lanes. We know this section of Main is going to be
something or other so that the arguments we’ve made over the last year or so with
people that want to develop how close you can develop to the right of way. It’s now in
writing that it’s going to be this wide of a right of way so we can say no you can’t
develop into that. That gives us some strength in preserving that area or preserving
what will eventually be the right of way for it.
Siddoway: It’s a little discouraging to think it might be 2015 before we actually see it
built but that’s the reality of when there will be funding.
Zaremba: The one thing that I would worry about and this goes to back to several
years ago when there was in fact a plan to put an interchange at Five Mile and the
Interstate at the same time that they were talking about the Y reconstruction.
Somebody said well we shouldn’t be tearing both of those up at the same time so they
let Five Mile slip and it eventually disappeared. I worry that the timeframes that you
have given have Waltman and the southern – Franklin to the freeway of this project
happening at the same time as the Ten Mile Interchange. Even if it means tearing them
both up at the same time I would not let anybody say oh we ought to have one of them
slip so that we’re not tearing them both up because one of them will disappear.
Canning: Eagle Road would become –
Newton-Huckabay: Yes but we’ll have Locust Grove by then.
Canning: That’s true.
Zaremba: Yes Locust Grove will be in. And I said –
Newton-Huckabay: So it will have no net gain.
(Inaudible discussion)
Siddoway: Ten Mile currently has no access to the freeway so it’s really just the
construction headache of when Main and Meridian are under construction. That would
be with or without Ten Mile.
Canning: Right.
Zaremba: So don’t let anybody suggest that one of them should slip and not to do them
both at the same time.
Siddoway: To end with, I made copies for you of – at the end of October the City
Council approved a prioritized list of projects that came from the Transportation Task
Force and they juggled a few around and approved a final list. This list has been sent
to ACHD, Compass, and ITD as our order of priority for projects at least for this year.
You’re welcome to take one of those. Then I made a copy for you of all the Meridian
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 18 of 52
projects that are in the current five year work program as opposed to the one that’s –
we’re going through an update right now and that one’s not finalized yet but as far as
what’s in the five year work program we’ve been working under throughout this year.
These are the projects and their costs.
Zaremba: Thank you.
Newton-Huckabay: Thanks Steve.
Canning: Okay and then to answer my questions we’ll change directions and
(inaudible) that way. I think the easiest way to maybe describe this is we’ll pretend like
we’re a little piece of property and we’ll go through the transitions for being in the county
to being in the city to being inexpiable and serviceable by the city. I think that will
maybe structure this a little bit. Let’s pretend we’re one of these parcels that’s just
south into the white. We’re in the winter white land okay so we’re in Ada County. We
had fire service because the Rural Fire District doesn’t change. So, what we have is R-
R zone and if you turn to page 6 this is from the Ada County code. It’s an older version
so a few things may have changed over the years. In R-R zoning Rural Residential
zoning you have two options. You have (inaudible) lot subdivision or you have a non
farm subdivision. (Inaudible--------------------). The non farm subdivision is a whole
different area. The page just before there’s a little graphic for the RUT cluster
subdivision it’s got a star. This basically you can imagine the same thing for a non farm
subdivision. You have a cluster of houses and then you have a larger 75 percent
dedicated open space. The other one you can think about is Dartmoore. Do you
remember that one that Kingsbridge came off? That’s a non farm. That’s an older one
but that’s how they look a cluster development with big wide open space. Okay the non
farm subdivisions – the ordinance was rewritten in 2000 and quite a few things
changed. There was always an emphasis on clustering. It was added that you could
be doing it to create open space and trails and that was mostly for the Boise Foothill’s
area and then also to preserve prime agricultural land which had been the primary
purpose before that. They add land continue farming and things like that. On 287
though going down to the standards that I’ve kind of highlighted there you get two units
per 10 instead of one unit per 10 so for every 10 acres you have you have got two units.
If you have 30 you have six. If you have 40 you still have six. If you have 35 it doesn’t
mean you get seven you still just get six. That’s the way it’s supposed to be.
(Inaudible--------------------) we have basically smaller lots. We have a maximum of one
acre. They are supposed to be between three quarters of an acre, a half an acre to an
acre. (Inaudible--------------------) you can go up to an acre only if they have irrigation
water. Okay we’ll keep on going because the one that really gets tricky here is you
have to have an adequate water supply. If you have 10 or more residential lots that
means a community well that’s a big ticket item. If you go to the next page on 288 on
number four you must connect to community sewage disposal system. That’s a huge
item that’s a very expensive item. You can do basically one through five in the R-R
district but it’s very expensive. Usually what happens if they’re anywhere close to the
city they start begging the city for water and sewer? (Inaudible--------------------) the only
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 19 of 52
time that I know of that the city has consented was because they threatened (inaudible-
-------------------). I don’t know if Bruce (inaudible--------------------).
Borup: Black Rock.
Canning: Black Rock - are we sending sewer down?
Cole: Yes.
Canning: Sending the sewer pipe.
Zaremba: A pipe to receive the services.
Canning: Yes. We are servicing a non farm development outside the area of city
impact mostly because we didn’t want United Water coming into what will be the future
City of Meridian territory. It was (inaudible) and defend your territory.
Nary: (Inaudible) and Vienna were like that.
Canning: They were not non farms though. So just give me a little bit and we’ll get to
that.
Moe: You made a statement that you said was outside of the area of impact?
Canning: Yes it is outside of the area of impact and we are providing it with city
services.
Zaremba: That was going to be my question or my clarification. Even though it’s
county if they are inside the area of impact but not inside our annotation line they have
to build their sewage system to our standards.
Canning: Okay we’ll go to that one next.
Zaremba: I’m getting ahead of you? I’m sorry.
Canning: Yes I wanted to say one of the questions was what are the fundamental
development rights inside and outside the county (inaudible) under the county and
outside the area of city impact. Really that’s all you can do outside of the area of city
impact is a non farm development or 10 acre lot neither of which is terribly popular at
this point. The non farm because of the expense 10 acres – most people can’t afford to
buy 10 acres when land is going at 100,000 dollars an acre. It gets to be very pricy. So
the next one we’ll talk about is we’ll move just inside that area of city impact so we have
an area of city – we’re inside the area of city impact but sewer lines are a couple miles
away and you don’t want to pay to have sewer to your – bringing sewer to your
development and you can’t be annexed anyway. What options are available for you?
Well there’s something – as soon as you’re put into an area of city impact you’re zoning
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 20 of 52
changes from rural residential to rural urban transition. That’s the RUT you see all over
our zoning maps is that. Those I have (inaudible) for you on 2-B-1. There is the
purpose statement. It’s pretty clear that for the area of impact agricultural uses can
continue and rural (inaudible) any – the design standards are intended to allow
redevelopment of that property at higher densities when urban services are available.
That new agricultural uses new ones should be limited to those that don’t cause a lot of
impact to surrounding properties like cattle feed lots things like that are (inaudible---------
-----------). What are your options? One you’ve got a five acre lot you can do with
standard five acre subdivision. A lot of them have occurred in the past. I don’t think
I’ve seen one since I’ve been here that’s come through that door. No one has
(inaudible) five acre lot subdivision. Virtually because we made it a lot harder and I’ll
get to that. You do have that option of five acres or this RUT cluster subdivision. This
is very similar to the non farm. You take a small portion they can be one acre lots if
they’re going to be on individual septics or they can be smaller if they’ve got a
community sewage disposal system. Again, the price on these disposal systems is just
astronomical compared to the benefit of doing this new lot sub we’re not saying that.
Also shortly after this was done Central District Health stopped really approving septics
on one acre parcels so you have to do a community septic which isn’t as bad and you
can use your future development area for you (inaudible). Some of them have done
that. I have seen one of those come in since we’ve been here. (Inaudible------------------
--) that’s what’s allowed by –
Zaremba: Do you see the RUT’s and things like that?
Canning: Yes.
Zaremba: We don’t but you see them?
Canning: No I see them. I comment on – I get everything and I try to comment on all of
them either yes go away we don’t care or yes we have a lot of concerns. I’ve never
seen them address our concerns our act on what we asked for but we do comment
from time to time. Now –
Zaremba: It’s like the letter from Wendell Bigham.
Canning: Yes it kind of is. Now the question comes how does our Comprehensive Plan
effect that development? Now before I was talking about zoning and as you know
once you’re zoned you’ve got your right to whatever that is basically. The Ada County
does implement our Comprehensive Plan. They have adopted our Comprehensive
Plan as applying within the area of city impact. So if you came in for that residential
subdivision and you were in one of our commercial areas hopefully they would turn you
down because it’s not consistent with our Comp Plan. Now there’s another very
important element of our Comp Plan that you guys don’t hear us talk about very much
with you because our services are always available or will be made available or
something along that line. It was – there is a small section of it in the printed one that
you have and then it was redone as a resolution and added to (inaudible--------------------
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 21 of 52
). The important thing here is the City of Meridian has said to Ada County basically
that’s who this was amendment was for is that we don’t want your community sewage
disposal systems. We don’t want anything to do with them (inaudible--------------------)
doing all the ones around time he’s serving time right now. He skipped out on a lot of
contracts and has left a lot of people with – the attractive thing about the systems he
was proposing he promised to manage them as well and that’s where he tend to fail
was in the management but then he failed to hire sufficient people to manage them and
basically (inaudible--------------------). Anyway, what the City of Meridian has said is we
don’t want your community sewage disposal system. Anything in our area of city impact
we want sewered by the City of Meridian. That has been very different from any other
community. One, like Eagle they don’t provide their own services they have a sewer
district that does that so that sewer district (inaudible). The City of Boise has continued
to provide services outside the city limits in southwest Boise even though they’ve
complained for 20 years about it and complained about what the county proves that
uses their sewer system so that’s the other kind of weird one is when you extend your
sewer system even though you’re not in the actual ones approving the development.
That’s what Vienna Woods and Edinburgh were. The city felt the need in that case like
they felt like they’ve made that commitment to those property owners so they went
ahead and provided that service even though they couldn’t annex them at that time.
That’s the only subdivisions we’ve done them to.
(Inaudible discussion)
Zaremba: But in most cases they sign new agreements that as soon as there was a
pathway to annexation they would.
Canning: In most points the city has that on theirs and (inaudible). It’s been – the city
learned from the mistakes of Boise City and said we’re not going to do this on
(inaudible) we want this control and this is how we will control where and how these
things occurred. It’s been a great tool. It really has been a wonderful tool for managing
what occurs in Ada County. Now the property owners get really frustrated because they
are really kind of stuck. There is not much we can do until we get there. We’ve been
getting there pretty darn fast really especially (inaudible--------------------).
(Inaudible discussion)
Canning: I think I addressed your question Wendy.
Newton-Huckabay: Yes the other only other was if it’s eligible to be annexed into the
city can they still develop in Ada County.
Canning: And the answer is no on some things. PUD’s plats and I used to think it was
CU’s but it isn’t. It’s just PUD’s and plats. If they want to do a plat they have to be
refused annexation first or if they want to do a PUD they have to be refused annexation.
(Inaudible--------------------).
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 22 of 52
Hawkins-Clark: (inaudible--------------------) goes to the county that are next to the city
limits the county may apply for (inaudible--------------------).
Canning: Yes and they’re doing one right now. They’re doing a cell tower.
Hawkins-Clark: (inaudible--------------------) they actually required that applicant to come
talk to us and apply for annexation.
Canning: And that’s in our area of city impact agreement. Now the blueprint for good
growth has talked about this issue a lot. One of the big focus points has been this
public – adequate facility (inaudible). The other one is how do we address this issue of
what development incurs in cities and what developments can incur in the county and
how do we do this. Right now we’re tentatively talking about two kinds of lines. One
would be where services would be available in five years and where the city ultimately
wants to go and what could you do in those different areas depending on how long it
was going to take sewer to get back there. I think we’re still looking at something when
a non farm development or cluster – because they are really kind of (inaudible-------------
-------) provide an open space around them so that they don’t complain (inaudible---------
-----------) for those hookup fees that those (inaudible). That’s another big one. The city
is here by the way (inaudible--------------------) septic system. We’re here now and you
need to abandon that. That would be the other thing to say putting aside from
(inaudible). We’re having the developer that’s going to do the other property pay for
that for those. (Inaudible--------------------) we’ve been fortunate in that (inaudible-----------
---------) all of our sewer under water and therefore can (inaudible--------------------).
Newton-Huckabay: Well how does it – for example that Avamore? That is a fairly
dense development in the county.
Canning: I didn’t talk about those. That’s a planned community. If you have control of
what sits under 40 acres or more you can basically create a new little town. (Inaudible).
Zaremba: They could even incorporate it as a city if they wanted to.
Canning: Yes it’s difficult to incorporate as a city for the same reason you mentioned
before. It takes about four years before those taxes start coming in (inaudible) to do
right at first.
Newton-Huckabay: We don’t have enough open space in our area of impact didn’t the
county now that would be a real threat here though.
Canning: There are some areas that four square miles to the rest I was just a little bit
concerned (inaudible--------------------).
Newton-Huckabay: Out in the –
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 23 of 52
Canning: Part of the reason they want to get that in our area of impact. There are
developers between – there are developers that had optioned up very large tax not
quite contiguous. They were you know a piece here a piece there but they added up to
about 1,000 or more acres between Ten Mile and Meridian. I was a little bit worried
about that one. I think there’s has fallen through. One of us is going to be there soon.
They don’t want to go to the expense of putting in their own sewer treatment (inaudible-
-------------------). At this point, I’m not seeing the real threat of playing communities the
way that Eagle does or Star or Boise city. They are much more threatened by them.
*End of Side Two*
Hawkins-Clark: - basically say here’s your timeframe you know here’s how you’re going
to pay for all of your services. Here’s your (inaudible) they’ve got – it’s a pretty intense
application.
Newton-Huckabay: Well the benefit – I mean the pay off at the end must be worth it.
There’s that Avamore that’s huge and then what Hidden Springs – isn’t that what
Hidden Springs is?
Canning: Yes the payoff is huge it’s just the – it’s just how big of a hole we want to dig.
You start here and that’s when you option the land. You pay to option it. You pay for all
these studies. You’re paying interest to hold the land and then you’re paying to develop
the land and then you get to start selling. How long are you willing to be in debt before
you break even?
Newton-Huckabay: Yes but you can amortize your startup costs over the beginning of
the project and not show a profit – I mean if you have enough capital.
Canning: That could be seven years. It’s just a lot – right.
Newton-Huckabay: It’s like growing a winery.
Canning: Yes that’s a good analogy. It’s just your sunk for a long time but it pays off if
you have the capital and you don’t have any place better to invest it then it pays off. It’s
just not many people have the capital that’s needed to do a (inaudible------------------------
----------------------).
Hawkins-Clark: (Inaudible) I would – I mean if you’re relatively confident that some
municipality is going to get you services in five to six years why would you want to go to
those expenses. Now when you’re talking (inaudible) longer time.
Canning: Well and plus the way Eagle is set up you can’t get past those five acre lots
to get them sewer anyway. (Inaudible--------------------).
Nary: (Inaudible-----------------------------------) lots of money already but they’re buying
land that is pretty cheap because it’s not accessible to services. It’s not very close to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 24 of 52
them to the communities and that’s why they (inaudible--------------------) buy that cheap
and let it ride for that five to seven or eight years. It might take them (inaudible).
Canning: Hidden Springs was (inaudible) for a year. (Inaudible--------------------)
Paramount I mean because David Turnbull was able to option up nearly all that section
(inaudible------------------) 10 or 20 acres at a time (inaudible--------------------) it’s difficult
for it to be (inaudible).
Zaremba: I asked Brad Miller one time (inaudible--------------------) how far out ahead do
you have to be thinking and he said now he’s buying property on the other side of
Middleton.
Newton-Huckabay: So the only real cost or detriment to a city though with a Planned
Community is that just the opportunity cost to revenue loss from impact fees? What
would be the big –
Canning: No, say one part right south of us it effectively blocks us from ever going
further south because you can’t get your (inaudible--------------------) definitely a –
Newton-Huckabay: So in essence you’re creating a bubble right in the middle of your –
Canning: Yes in your services. So, depending on how (inaudible--------------------) area
of city impact. Ours I don’t think you could see it. We would have to be willing to
extend sewer to them so that they could develop. The only place I’ve seen maybe that
request coming through is (inaudible--------------------).
Zaremba: Probably not tonight but sometime I would find it instructive to sit down
(inaudible--------------------) somebody comes in and says I have to do four-plexes I can’t
afford to do three-plexes are they blowing smoke through their ears? I mean it’s just –
how do they make that decision and what is it based on? Jerry Centers used to be
able to counter that with some facts and figures but –
Canning: Yes you know occasionally my husband will do a cost (inaudible------------------
--) and he shared one of those with me. Its a couple years old now but I can see if he’s
done one recently (inaudible--------------------).
Zaremba: I don’t want any proprietary information I wouldn’t mind if it was an old one.
Canning: No he did – well it’s just that you would have to update the custom height and
the (inaudible--------------------) but I’ll see if I can get one from him and he might –
Zaremba: The tradeoffs that they make in deciding what works and what doesn’t and –
Canning: Yes. I think you would be surprised how very costly it is to actually do a
development (inaudible--------------------) walk in the door every day. I used to work in a
planning consulting office where you had to scrap for every 30,000 dollar or every
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 25 of 52
60,000 dollar (inaudible) they just walk in the door and plop this stuff down on your desk
because that’s the cheapest thing they do is hire the planner. It’s nothing compared to
everything else they do. It’s rather remarkable.
Nary: (inaudible--------------------) my perspective from sitting up there is that what is
your margin you need to make your (inaudible) and as you see very, very well off
developers in front of you their ability to develop and make that margin that they feel the
most comfort level with is different than a very small, three lots, four lots, four acres
developer that we see many of those folk that their margin of error is pretty small. They
don’t have a lot of room to ride out this. They can’t wait five years for this to get
developed. They make a very educated guess on what their market is or what they –
you know one of the things you folks see many times what they like to build. I mean
their comfort level of building versus what their market is and what they think they’re
trying to attract. You will get a larger developer a Winston Moore, Brighton Corp. that
can afford to take lots of chances and give some properties and sell some that
predevelopment price because they have a huge cash flow that they can afford that
versus a very small developer that that’s how their making their living. That’s how
they’re going to be able to pay their own mortgage this year is they need to be able to
make sure they can turn these properties over within six, eight or ten months. All that
predevelopment cost like Anna was saying follow the infrastructure the roadways, and
the sidewalks and gutters and streetlights and all those things. Those are the folks that
are you know I mean not to (inaudible) but they are the ones going to make sure they
find their mailboxes at Lowe’s because they’re going to go save a few bucks on those
things versus somebody else who just doesn’t care about loads of detail. (Inaudible-----
---------------).
Zaremba: (Inaudible) advise the mailbox manufacturer –
Nary: And those are the things that you know as we get larger and that’s the kind of
conversation that occasionally I have with the Mayor and the Council is as we as the
city grows and we see – you see a lot more now than we did five years ago of either
infill or redevelopment types of properties smaller ones that are – that you don’t see the
large development companies doing. They are really small but it’s one guy who’s doing
three lots here and he’s got to do five lots next year and those kinds of things that you’ll
see much more of that. Those are trickier because they’re trying to fit what they know
how to do or what they would like to do or what they can afford to do into that little
piece. It has to fit that’s where a peg is in that hole. Those ones are much more
challenging. Those are the ones that are going to be a lot harder for all of you to sort of
wrestle with because you have neighbors who thought that was a park or thought that
was something else until someone told them (inaudible) something different. Those are
the ones that you folks will have to wrestle with and you’ll see that much more.
Newton-Huckabay: That’s already started I think.
Canning: Yes we had – Craig and I had a guy in today that you know we had to tell him
you have to do this much we know. You may have to do this and he just said no I’m not
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 26 of 52
going to take that risk (inaudible--------------------) you can’t tell me I don’t have to do that
if I don’t have to rebuild that road. If I’m going to be stuck with any of that I’m not even
going to take the chance. He said (inaudible--------------------) 10,000 dollars to take that
chance to get it up to Council. I think it’s 10,000 dollars (inaudible--------------------) he
just said (inaudible) I’ll go to Boise. We think we were being nicer than them but that’s
what we were all thinking.
Nary: From a staff level and from your folk’s level I think that’s going to be the
challenge the more you see. As we grow on that map and suddenly that map has a lot
less white two years from now or three years from now you’re developing internally
you’re not going to see Brighton Corp or (inaudible--------------------). They’re not quite
as cash rich to be able to do that and so those are the ones that are much more
challenging because they can’t. (Inaudible) you know when you deal with some of
those larger ones (inaudible--------------------) road over here and a house over there or
you know a little bit more setback. To those folks a few thousand here, 10,000 here
that’s not that a big of a deal (inaudible--------------------) to make five million dollars is not
a big deal. (Inaudible--------------------) you can’t afford to spend another four thousand
dollars that might mean it’s too big of a portion of your profit that you’re going to make.
Moe: Well they’re going to (inaudible) prior to even coming in and talking to P&Z staff
or anybody to get that project going. They’re already going to know what they can
spend and can’t spend on what they’re doing.
Canning: Yes some of them it’s scary.
Moe: We deal with those all the time on commercial projects right now.
Canning: Some of them know. Some of them don’t have a (inaudible). I know some of
them walk in the door and start showing me this and I’m like so have you penciled this
out yet? (Inaudible--------------------)
Zaremba: (Inaudible) for 20 years and they see other developments so they say let’s
develop it.
Nary: We drew it on the back of this paper.
Canning: So we try to get them hooked up with somebody who can help them as fast
as we can.
Zaremba: Well it would be interesting at least for me to have a better understanding of
what they’re telling us.
Canning: Yes maybe I can even get –
Zaremba: When they say something is or isn’t economically feasible.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 27 of 52
Canning: I’ll see if I can even get Joe to explain (inaudible).
Rohm: One of our (inaudible--------------------).
Canning: Yes I might be able to get him to come to let’s say Garden City. (Inaudible----
----------------).
Newton-Huckabay: Number 12.
Zaremba: Just someday if we have another workshop I would like to add that to it.
Rohm: Before we leave this area on annexation there are parcels that are adjacent to
other parcels that aren’t within the city. Is there any movement to bring those enclaves
into the city?
Canning: The direction we’ve been given is that one the city won’t force annex anyone
in general. If they are over five acres they can’t force annex them. If they are under
five acres they generally will not do it except under one situation. If it is a whole
subdivision where one of the units the septic system starts to fail and so that person
has to go onto city sewer they are saying now – we haven’t done this yet but they are
saying now (inaudible--------------------). What they don’t want is what happened in Carol
where you get one here, one there and one there. They did that on that one because
the city needed to get the trunk line through so they – I’ve been told that never will that
happen again and that if one comes in then the whole subdivision comes in. It will be
interesting.
Newton-Huckabay: Which one is that?
Nary: Part of the reason – Carol Sub is the one that goes from Ustick – Leslie goes
from Ustick to Eagle and it’s that small portion basically the southwest section of here.
Newton-Huckabay: Oh okay.
Hawkins-Clark: It actually touches both Ustick and Eagle.
Nary: But far one of the worst circumstances that happened from that is – besides
services is the trash service. It is absolutely insane to the trash company to know. All
they actually have to live on is who has a green can and who has a blue can in front of
the house because there is no way for them to tell which is a county house and which is
a city house.
Rohm: Well I –
Zaremba: Police and fire and everybody else has to –
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 28 of 52
Nary: Well you see most of those don’t get as impacted from a service standpoint
because of cooperative – I mean you have a fire district so you always have fire service
and police have cooperative agreements. They sort it out later. If you call 911 the
nearest cop shows up and they’ll sort it out later who might have to write the report,
where it goes and all that. The trash is the one that’s a hassle.
Rohm: The city services of sewer and water (inaudible) added to a lot for it to be
annexed into the city though. I mean it has to be available as in let’s just take a parcel
of land that’s requesting annexation, the City of Meridian does not pay for the cities – or
the water and the sewage in that development it is paid for by the developer and
donated or dedicated to the city. Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if there’s an out parcel
that is surrounded by city it could be annexed into the city and let them maintain their
own city or their own water and septic system and when they want to quote unquote
develop and attach to the city sewer system at their expense let them do so but in the
meantime they are receiving all city services other than sewer and water and aren’t
really paying for any of that don’t you think?
Canning: If they are annexed they’re paying for it.
Rohm: But if they’re not annexed they are getting those services without paying for
them.
Canning: Exactly. That’s the issue Boise City has with all their stuff. The only time that
I know of that the city has annexed without the requirement that the property – well
actually that wasn’t septic was it that was just animals. That was Simunich. We told
Simunich he could annex and keep his animals but there was no house on it so there
was no septic system. (Inaudible--------------------) well Leisure Lane. We have a bunch
of houses on Leisure Lane that were annexed at some point that are all on septic. They
are the only ones that I know of.
Rohm: Well I just –
Zaremba: Well we have an advantage Central District Health – anybody who wants to
do a septic system or repair an existing septic system has to get a license or something
through Central District Health. What happens with these enclaves is someday their
septic system is going to fail and they will go to Central District Health and Central
District Health says is there sewer within 300 yards of your property. If the answer is
yes you cannot redo your septic system you must hook up to the city and the city says
to do that you have to annex. At some point, when their septic system – we almost
don’t have to force The Enclaves because they are going to come to us someday.
Canning: Right.
Nary: And that has been the philosophy to this point.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 29 of 52
Canning: Yes now they may choose to go – there has been some discussion of let’s
just go (inaudible--------------------).
Rohm: (Inaudible) city limit and anything inside this boundary is going to be in the city
limits.
Hawkins-Clark: And it’s far more cleaner. A lot of people say that’s the way to go.
Canning: But there’s – you can’t do anything over five acres so we’re not going to get
all –
Rohm: No but –
Newton-Huckabay: Yes I think you’re talking about like the one that subdivision that
came in that attached to Bridgetower that had that one long piece of property. The
gentleman was here saying I don’t want to be annexed into the city. Everything around
him was and he was just out there by himself now.
Rohm: Actually not anything specific. I was in this same role in Payette and we went
through the process of (inaudible) our city limits all the way around the entire city and
anything inside that circle was annexed in a described fashion. We took this section of
town and this section of town and then this and we brought everything into the city that
was less than five acres. That was quote unquote receiving city services even though it
not necessarily was connected to city water or sewer.
Canning: The downside of that on the larger properties is that we have no (inaudible)
anymore. (inaudible--------------------) what’s allowed by that zoning so there is no more
of this, “Geez, it sure would be nice if we could get a city park” or “Boy, it would be nice
if you could put up that fence,” because your neighbor is complaining.
Rohm: In reality that’s the reason I asked the question is there must be some
advantages to the city to wait based upon the (inaudible) and the stick that you’ve got
available to you at such time that that annexation is requested.
Nary: Because the answer to your question is legally could you do that absolutely?
Legally there’s not an issue. There’s a process to do that you can do involuntary
annexation I hate to use the word forced annexation but involuntary annexation. You
can do all those things but you lose the advantage of them applying to you. You lose
the ability – the only real stick that you have many times is the ability to annex them or
not. You have the ability to choose not to let them annex and they don’t – and I guess
we can move to question 12. What happens when you deny them? Well for many of
those properties they are stuck because what they want to do can’t fit into the county
ordinance of what can be done on the property. Like Anna said, they have to come and
ask first and on certain types of applications they have to come to the city. If they get
denied they can develop under the counties rules or many of those what they want to
do doesn’t fit in that. Or they need septic and they are within 300 feet they have to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 30 of 52
have sewer and water to do what they want to do. The county doesn’t have any of
those things. They can’t build a well they can’t afford to build their own (inaudible) so
they are kind of stuck. When you want to develop and the city says no because it
doesn’t fit what we want you don’t want to cooperate, you don’t want to be nice to your
neighbors, you don’t want to build a fence, you don’t want to build a buffer, you don’t
want to do any of the things that would make your project more appealing to us than
tough luck for you. We don’t have to annex you. If we just annexed them to clean up
the boundaries then we wouldn’t have that ability as much. We would just be stuck with
what are principal permitted use, what are conditional uses are we going to argue over
one of these things every time. Those are the ones in the last I guess four years that
I’m aware of (inaudible) appeal to the district court over land use decisions where
properties have been annexed that didn’t have the plans in place that we – that are
preferred. It didn’t turn out like they thought when they brought it back the city said no
we don’t want that. We’ve annexed you we’ve given you some rights that you have and
now we have chosen not to agree to what you want to build there and those are the
ones that they go to court for. That’s kind of the carrot and the stick answer like you
were saying. You could do it but it’s just that maybe isn’t in the cities best interest to do
that.
Rohm: Thank you that’s a great explanation.
Hawkins-Clark: (Inaudible) that the state changed the legislation in 2000 or 2001 so
unlike when you were in Payette we can’t do it for five acres or more they did change
that after.
Canning: Mostly because of the people in Boise that organized it.
Hood: Unless they are getting services already right? They are (inaudible-----------------
---).
Nary: There is an interesting question and we’ve been looking at that internally
because the statute is written poorly, shockingly that’s written very clearly as to what we
think it means. There is a portion in the statute that I think says what Craig just said
that it is implied consent once you have hooked to service that we can annex you as
long as you’re contiguous in the other (inaudible). The way it’s written it’s very unclear.
There’s some other language in the same sentence that makes it appear that implied
consent might be a little more than just service but it’s not very clear. We’re looking at
that because of this very question and so we’re at least trying to get a comfort level.
You know Idaho doesn’t have a long history of land use decisions because there just
isn’t much of it statewide. Most of it is in other places and so we have to look at other
states or other places in Idaho to get kind of a sense of comfort level. And the other
one and the reality is that all of you know is involuntary annexation is more of a political
issue than a legal issue. You know how much of those people do you want to tick off to
annex into your city to cause the – I mean right now they can yell and scream all they
want but they can’t vote (inaudible--------------------). Eventually they do but I think the
other issue though becomes and I think that’s something maybe you have brought up to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 31 of 52
Mike, is part of the issue becomes is these people are gaining the benefits of your cities
lifestyle, planning, services they provide, parks, jobs, trails, pathways, you know
businesses, commercial developments they gain all the benefits to that and they don’t
pay for any of it. It really becomes an issue more politically and philosophically for the
Council to decide at what point do we think you know their objection to it is not as valid
as the benefits they seem to be getting and that the rest of (inaudible) paying for it. It’s
just at what point does that become enough. To this point the Council has made a
decision to say you know what they’re going to need it some time. We’ve got plenty of
business as it is we can wait. Their septic will fail, they will want to redevelop, and it will
happen, it’s not going to be 20 years from now it’s probably going to be three. It’s not
that big of a deal. We have plenty to do (inaudible--------------------). I think because our
growth has been so rapid that that particular choice hasn’t been a problem. If we were
a community that was dying for development there might be a different change in that
policy decision. The next question was is what’s the recourse of the property owner
that disagrees with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment once approved by the City
Council? You know not a whole heck of a lot. Realistically, you know we had a lot of
people in 2002 that didn’t necessarily agree with every color and block that went on that
map. A lot of them said this is my house what are you doing making it what I don’t want
it to be. It’s a map, it’s a goal and it’s a guideline. As many of you have had to say I’m
sure to people you can live in your farm forever we don’t care. If you choose to do
differently that’s what we want. We would like that instead. That makes sense in the
bigger picture of everything to us. If you disagree with you it you don’t have – that’s
what the public hearing process is for. That’s what the Council ultimately makes the
decisions based on. Is there an appeal? I’m trying to think of individual – I can’t think
of cases of individual property owners appealing a Comprehensive Plan –
Newton-Huckabay: What about a group of property – say for example, like we did there
at Eagle and Victory. We recommended approval to mixed use community. All the
neighbors around it were enraged because it should have been R-4. Do they have any
recourse because they – the city changed the Comprehensive Plan?
Canning: And where that’s a specific request for a Comp Plan Amendment is more
appealable than (inaudible)?
Nary: (Inaudible) when basically someone wants to come and amend the Comp Plan to
allow their development to occur.
Canning: Yes.
Nary: To allow their type of development. I guess most of the case flow that I’m familiar
with the courts have given great difference to the cities to decide what their long term
land uses are. One of the things and that’s probably a little bit of the disconnect
sometimes with the people in the room when you folks are discussion comprehensive
land use map (inaudible) is all you did was give somebody the ability to ask. Right now,
without that change they can’t even ask for that. It doesn’t fit therefore; it doesn’t get
passed to Anna’s desk. All you did if the amendment goes through is let you ask. It still
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 32 of 52
has to fit it still has to be compatible with the neighbors. It still has to fit in the big
scheme of things. It’s just another use that may be considered among many. Most of
the cases that I can think of that deal Comprehensive Plan’s usually deal with the
process. How did they make those decisions and what did they base it on. Is it based
on – they look at you know concepts of did we give opportunity to be heard? Was
there deference to the whole land map as a whole did we – was there findings and
testimony that we tried to evaluate the differences between these uses and buffers and
all those types of things? That’s all the court is looking at because they’re not – I
guess I’m not familiar with in Idaho of a case where the court said you know they
decided to allow multifamily housing in an area that previously was commercial and we
just think that’s just wrong and they can’t have that there. They give deference to the
city to decide how they would like to grow and where do we like to be.
Newton-Huckabay: Then there’s a misconception by the public that the Comprehensive
Plan is some kind of binding promise in essence.
Nary: It is and it isn’t.
Newton-Huckabay: Do you guys see that when people come it’s almost that you can’t
do that it’s illegal I mean they don’t come to the point of saying that but is understanding
what people – for example when the overlay was proposed I mean –
Hawkins-Clark: The Highway 16?
Newton-Huckabay: Yes. The implications that people perceive that to have I didn’t
really understand. That’s where a lot of this strives from is well it’s – because in my
mind and it was the Comprehensive Plan it’s not a legal document it’s not an ordinance
it’s not a –
Canning: And it’s some of those people who are out of state investors from California
where the state has mandated that the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance
have to (inaudible------------------------------------------) by heart but what we’ve done –
Nary: I don’t do that.
Canning: What we’ve done in the UDC is to put that every opportunity that we could in
finding that it’s consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. What that has helped to do is
to get that (inaudible) then it would have on its own. You would have to make that
(inaudible--------------------) findings and I don’t know how we’re doing that.
Nary: (Inaudible) law to me because it’s required but it’s not the law. It’s not – you
aren’t bound by that. You choose to deviate from that then that usually gives you some
leeway and some latitude and all that. I guess around this table and Brad probably only
remembers but I don’t know how many people in a few years ago before the little
orange square for the Wastewater treatment plant came about there used to be an
asterisk there for a park. They wanted to build a transfer station for the SSC trash
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 33 of 52
people and a bus barn there. Every single person walked up there said there is an
asterisk there it’s supposed to be a park. It’s illegal for you to do anything else it’s
supposed to be a park. I don’t know how many times it was said this is just a guide. It’s
just an idea of what we would like. It doesn’t have to be exactly on that piece of ground
but you’re right it’s just a disconnect that people get. They don’t understand –
Newton-Huckabay: Because what I want to be able to say to a member of the public is
to me you’re saying it’s like a goal statement. When we set down and wrote these
goals one, we thought we were going to develop a little bit slower than we are and two
some priorities have changed so we need to change that piece of our goal because that
goal isn’t really relevant there anymore. Because that gets really frustrating because
people really act like you’re doing something illegal but it’s –
Zaremba: And I think one of the other fears and I think somebody even expressed it
one time. I forget exactly what the project was but it might have been along Chinden an
area that is farmland and they thought was going to be farmland for the next 20 years
designated on the Comprehensive Plan as a neighborhood center or something
commercial. Their fear is the County Assessor is going to take that and say how this is
prime commercial property here is your tax.
Canning: Well it’s interesting. It apparently is very real here because we found out that
those folks on the South Eagle but just north of Victory there that Comp Plan
Amendment. The County Assessors had been telling them they were going to start
assessing them at a commercial rate since they were on Eagle. Brad called over and
said hey wait a minute we have this shown as residential on our Comprehensive Plan
why are you assessing them at commercial. Well because it’s Eagle Road. I just
thought that was abominable. They shouldn’t have to go defend the status of their
property as residential when it’s shown that way on our Comprehensive Plan.
Zaremba: And the current use is residential.
Canning: And the current use is residential. I just thought that that was (inaudible).
Newton-Huckabay: Now that would be a legal issue that they would have.
Canning: And I thought that well those folks are asking for a change in that so we won’t
push it but otherwise I would have asked Council to bring it up with the County
Commissioners because that just shouldn’t be happening (inaudible--------------------).
Nary: (Inaudible------------------) that’s a bigger question and that’s a question that I think
you as the commission always have to I guess keep (inaudible) most of the people in
your audience when there’s over 10 people here and none of them are developers or
engineers or planners of those folks and there are more than 10. (Inaudible) nine of
them don’t know what you’re talking about most of the time. They don’t understand
(inaudible--------------------) ordinances and how those interplay. They just don’t. They
know it’s part of their backyard and they don’t like it. So all you can do from a
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 34 of 52
commission standpoint is try to educate, educate and educate in time of this is what
we’re talking about, this is what our issues are and this is what we have to address.
This is the only way you can address that. Is it going to get through? Yes half of them
it probably will. Many times, you are able to focus their attention to say folks you have
lots of issues out here but really these are three rural (inaudible) are concerned with so
could you at least tell us what you think about these things. That helps educate them
as to what you are trying to address because they just don’t. There’s no way cheap to
do it. The mayor shared a letter with me yesterday. She received an anonymous letter
in the mail from a Meridian resident, no return address, no signature that is complaining
about the used cars next to McDevitt Park on Eagle Road and said why are my taxes
paying for a used car lot. Well his taxes aren’t paying for that because that’s not in the
City of Meridian. It’s not our car lot. We can’t enforce against that. That’s not ours.
That person has no idea that McDevitt Park isn’t in the city it’s in the City of Boise.
There’s not much we can do to educate that individual but that tells you every day I
know Planning gets it we get it somebody calls, somebody writes us somebody sends
us an email about something has absolutely nothing to do with the city. Yet they think
we’re the city we must. I think all you can do is try to educate folks all the time about
this is what we’re doing folks, this is what it’s about, this is what the issues are. That’s
the best you can do because you’re not going to get through to all of them anyway.
Newton-Huckabay: You said nine out of 10 people in the audience. I’m thinking well
four out of five commissioners don’t know what’s going on either. That’s why I was
laughing.
(Inaudible discussion)
Nary: Give yourself more credit.
Canning: I guess 14 is mine I forgot to read. You know the Mayor has asked me for a
monthly report and it’s on my to do list. If I could just get my (inaudible) then I would
have some time to get these things done.
(Inaudible discussion)
Zaremba: You remember we used to get a monthly statement of building permits and
stuff like that.
Borup: You don’t get that anymore?
Zaremba: I’m trying to remember when the last time I’ve seen them. I haven’t seen
one for –
Cole: Actually if you get on the Meridian website it’s an updated draft now of building
permits.
Nary: So the answer is go find it yourself.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 35 of 52
Rohm: Tell him you’ll email it to them.
Newton-Huckabay: I don’t think the Public Works folks get on the record enough so
why don’t you give that report every month.
Zaremba: That’s better than printing it on paper.
Canning: I’ll try to do something that talks about the things you don’t see like Final
Plats which you don’t see anything of and Council sees those but (inaudible) and –
some of the other stuff I don’t’ think you really care about but maybe you do. Like
temporary uses or accessory uses (inaudible).
Newton-Huckabay: I’m more at thinking about like for example I don’t know what
happens to you guys all the time but this happens to me is somebody will come
sauntering up to my cubicle during the day and put their arm on and so, what are they
building on such and such. I get the deer in the headlights look. I go you’re one of the
four commissioners without a clue kind of thing. It happens a lot.
Canning: I’ll try to get you project name, address where it is.
Zaremba: I don’t know if there’s a way to track it or even to quantify it. I’m thinking
pipeline there’s a lag time between things being approved and then actually being dug
into the ground. I mean we can see something is being built and we can see the
applications in front of them but I lose track of what that gap is. I mean we have
something like what 5,000 buildings approved that haven’t started broken ground yet or
something like that.
Newton-Huckabay: And you don’t remember.
Zaremba: I’m just wondering if anybody else would be curious to have kind of a running
estimate of what’s already been approved that we can’t see.
Canning: Mike keeps track of that. At least down (inaudible--------------------).
Zaremba: Sometime after city council approval.
Moe: I think he’s going to say we go online and –
Cole: No sir. I mean that would be easy enough to track some numbers yes.
(Inaudible) Final Plats or building lots approved by Council building permits.
Zaremba: City Council has approved the Final Plat but a building permit has not been
pulled yet?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 36 of 52
Cole: Yes I could definitely put a spreadsheet together that would breakdown
something like that.
Hawkins-Clark: Mindy used to actually do that all the time. I think she stopped but she
has a boiler plate for it I know that. Then the last two years Craig has produced the – it
shows all the number of preliminary plat lots approved right and broke it down to
residential and commercial.
Canning: We’ll be doing another one of those soon.
Hawkins-Clark: Number of acres that are annexed.
Hood: What it doesn’t do is break it out I mean that’s city wide, city approved projects
so it wouldn’t say you know Lochsa has eight of their 12 phases.
Zaremba: I don’t necessarily mean detail I just want the – what’s the volume? What’s
the concept?
Canning: Yes.
Newton-Huckabay: It also gives you a catalyst to ask a questions because you’re going
okay I’m looking at this I don’t really – what is this number really mean kind of a thing.
It’s just – because you do kind of sometimes feel like you’re making a decision in a
vacuum at least I do.
Hawkins-Clark: But I’m wondering if that same report could be quarterly or something
like that or even semi-annual.
Canning: Well yes I was going to structure my monthly report so that it becomes easier
for Craig to do the annual (inaudible------------------) it is a really good fun project. I keep
on wanting to do it.
Hood: Probably those commercial ones are the ones that are going to be more visible.
The first phase of a final plat once that first phase kind of goes in the internal ones are
really – most people don’t know that they’re on phase seven, eight or nine. It’s the first
initial breaking ground that (inaudible--------------------) now on Fairview. It seems like
there’s always a new pad going in.
Canning: That’s mostly what you’ll get is the numbers on the commercial one and then
I can put – I’ll give the specific projects on commercial stuff because I think that’s more
interesting (inaudible--------------------) or I can just give you – you know the commercial
numbers aren’t that significant. It’s probably (inaudible--------------------) applications this
month (inaudible--------------------).
Newton-Huckabay: I’m saying let’s just start with something that we can red line and
say I don’t really look at this information but I was curious if I could get this information.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 37 of 52
I mean if we get a foundation that we can build on at least we would have somewhere
to start and be able to filter out relevant versus irrelevant.
Canning: Okay I’ll work on that. The mayor asked for one and Katy with the statesman
has asked for one so it’s creeping up my priority list. Her and Katy had the same idea.
Nary: Okay 16. Are you done with 13?
Canning: No I didn’t talk about 15. First of all they do listen to 90 percent of your stuff
probably. You should never feel like your (inaudible--------------------). I can try and start
doing some sort of feedback (inaudible--------------------). Usually it’s either a wholesale
reversal of your decision. They very rarely just pick and choose portions of it you know
take out a condition that you added or something like that (inaudible). If they are going
to disagree with you they disagree with you completely generally. (Inaudible---------------
-----).
Nary: Try reading those minutes.
Canning: Yes.
Newton-Huckabay: One example that I have there was out there by the sewer
treatment plant one of the things that we had said was or the commission
recommended was that you couldn’t’ have a C-G but you couldn’t have a gas station or
something like that.
Zaremba: The development on the corner of Ten Mile and –
Moe: The city approved it and then it came back through.
Zaremba: We said C-G was okay but we excluded gas station and a convenience
store.
Newton-Huckabay: The city reversed that and we never knew that so then we’re talking
out our ear in another hearing and it was one of you two says (inaudible).
Canning: We can, Craig can you (inaudible--------------------).
Newton-Huckabay: So that’s why I’m talking about –
Zaremba: That’s a good example because that was a major issue from the people that
came to testify. We were pretty close to unanonomys in agreement as I recall.
Canning: (inaudible--------------------) they wanted to be able to get gas is what
happened in all honesty.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 38 of 52
Newton-Huckabay: The thing of that is you know if the city is going to say we really
have to have the ability to put some gas stations in north Meridian which I totally agree
with and it isn’t going to do us any good to –
*End of Side Three*
Newton-Huckabay: -- public testimony and say we’re going to recommend no gas
station there and then half of those people aren’t going to go to the City Council
hearing.
Canning: Sometimes there is no way of knowing. I mean sometimes – if there is a new
issue I have no idea how Council is going to react to something. That’s why people
come in for pre-apps I tell them the say thing. Okay on this issue I’m pretty sure they’re
going to do this and I would really – I wouldn’t go there because you’re not going to get
through.
Berg: The consistent thing is it’s inconsistent. You don’t out guess the Council.
Canning: No but you have a general inclination of how they’re going to go.
Zaremba: But we want to be supporting their work. We don’t want them to be
recommending things that are dead before they get there.
Nary: One of the things that I think has helped some in the last year is before where
the Mayor – especially the Mayor I mean the Council is a little different. Again, you all
realize what pushes their buttons is different than what pushes your buttons. Especially
as elected officials – it’s a different ballgame completely. Part of the thing and why I
guess I think there is a much better connection is because there is better dialogue and
communication. You folks can’t communicate with them other than through your
meeting minutes which you know (inaudible--------------------) it depends on the issue but
they also have more communication I mean not only now that they have Planning Staff
and the Mayor talks to Anna quite a bit or the Planning Staff to get feedback and the
feel of why did they do that? I mean, maybe their initial gut for the Council and the
Mayor was well that doesn’t seem to jive with what I’m thinking when I entered this
project so what was the rational they were using. Also you have not just the Planning
Staff there that’s very regular the Public Works Staff that’s there in front of the Council
you also have your Legal Staff that’s there. All of then are able to communicate then
well here’s kind of what it was. Now again, they have different reasons for why they
choose to do stuff. They don’t disagree very much. I agree with Anna. I don’t think
they disagree very often. Sometimes I mean it is generally its wholesale there is a
different reason there is a different rational of either denying it. You know they’ve
certainly denied some things you folks have approved they certainly approved some
things you folks have denied. If you stack them up as to how many probably not very
many. I really don’t believe it’s very many. There may have been ones that were kind
of heated and again it just sort of depends on what pushes the Council and how much
reason can it be. The other thing, and maybe that’s part of this report is sometimes
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 39 of 52
what they brought to you and what you didn’t like then they made some adjustments to
that. They make those commitments in front of the Council you know that they’re willing
to make some adjustments or changes to do what Council likes. What you may have
wanted and what you may have recommended denial because you didn’t like that
you’re willing to now do it. They’ve approved something and you may only hear back
well they approved that. Yes well they approved it with the stuff you really wanted in the
first place anyway. Maybe that’s some of that communication that you folks can get
back because you don’t always know that they really did listen to what you said they
just got them to do it.
Hawkins-Clark: Or ask us to put into the formal recommendation that we prepare to
them if there is something that you really want Council to know.
Nary: Meaning the editorial (inaudible--------------------).
Hawkins-Clark: (inaudible) no really I mean that’s part of what it’s about.
Canning: You’re leaving.
Zaremba: Well and one of the other parts of that is I think it’s really important for the 5th
Tuesday meetings to have a meeting with City Council and us. There theoretically were
four of those this year one of them being today.
Canning: I have to do a list of questions for City Council for well (inaudible------------------
--).
Zaremba: Well I would just like an opportunity to sit down and brainstorm with them.
Canning: And I will bring that – there’s an opportunity for me to bring that to their
attention and I will really hit home on it. I think all of us need to be able to sit down and
talk to City Council. We’ve all been feeling that this last year (inaudible--------------------).
Nary: (inaudible--------------------) decided since I mean even if (inaudible) you folks have
that Council – I mean Will did a stat for them the Council had 76 meetings last year.
They still took a few weeks off occasionally. So you get to this 5th
Tuesday and I’ll tell
you it is like pulling teeth for them to say it’s one – you know one of three Tuesdays this
year we aren’t meeting so I would like a break. That’s what’s tough. The (inaudible-----
---------------)
Zaremba: The other thing is that in addition to the 76 meetings they had as a Council
every one of them is liaison to some department. Every one of them is liaison to some
regional commission or board. They are nearly full time and not been recognized for
that. I agree. It’s hard to get them to pull teeth but I just feel for our ability to work hand
in hand with them we need to get some of their philosophy.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 40 of 52
Canning: We need to be able to do more with Pre-Council’s too. If they’re willing to
come in and do a Pre-Council (inaudible--------------------).
Nary: I think it’s something if we could find a different way – yes I mean maybe there’s
a different way to approach it then the 5th
Tuesday. That seemed like a good idea a
couple of years ago and that’s again, we’ve been fortunate in the last couple of years to
get one of those a year not even close to three or four but maybe through a Pre-Council
or maybe through a lunch meeting instead of an evening meeting maybe that’s an
opportunity. It’s tough when you have (inaudible) we’ll have three Council Members
who have full time jobs. Like you said, with all the other things they have to do one
more meeting sometimes is tough.
Rohm: I like that Pre-Council Meeting. I can be here at 5:00 or I don’t know what time
their Pre-Council usually starts.
Canning: It’s usually 6:00 and I know it’s a little tough for you and David but (inaudible--
------------------).
Newton-Huckabay: We should carpool.
(Inaudible discussion)
Zaremba: Well I’m not saying that as a complaint I’m just saying it because we want to
be supportive and work together. That seems to be a mechanism of doing it to be able
to sit down and brainstorm once in awhile.
Nary: I can start quickly into 16 and 17 and maybe then we can move to 18.
Newton-Huckabay: Yes I think that’s –
Nary: 16 and 17 are similar to me in regards to what the question really is is. Is it fair –
what is the best interest to the city when you talk about annexing and is it fair to look at
this project in relation to other projects as your rational? Is this in the best interest of
the city today or not? Again, case law doesn’t really give us much guidance. The best
interest of the city is based on whatever your record is. But, as Brad even said earlier
the cities have the exclusive power to choose to annex or not. No court that I’m aware
of is going to require a city to annex a property they choose not to. What I usually tell
the Council is make your record clear. It’s fairer to the applicant to have some idea of
why you don’t like it but you’re not legally required to tell them more than we don’t like it.
You don’t have to do more but it’s fair and it’s reasonable to give them some idea of
why this doesn’t fit for you today. Because you don’t necessarily want to tell them go
away and never come back you want to say go away and bring back what we would
like. It’s fairer to give them some idea of what that is. Does it make sense to look at it
like in this question we talked about the Linder Road property? That’s been denied by
the Council but may be reconsidered the southwest corner of Ustick and Eagle. Are
those things that you can look at the surrounding properties and look at that? Actually
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 41 of 52
that’s a discussion the Mayor and I and I think probably Anna had with the Mayor
recently is the Mayor feels that’s probably more important now then ever for you folks
and for the Council to see the big picture. It is very difficult to look at an aerial photo
that is five years old and is surrounded by grass and it has an overlay of a project that
looks like 400 homes surrounded by fields and to try to make sense of that when really
those fields have 800 homes on them already. So it’s not the impact that the five
neighbors who live in the corner of these don’t like it are impacted because it really
generally blends and fits and all those other things but it’s just the way we’ve been
presenting them that made sense when they were larger tracks, bigger pieces that
weren’t surrounded –
Canning: Slower pace of development.
Nary: Yes it was just a different way. A few years ago the planning director from Boise
said you know I mean over in Boise a big project for Boise is 50 homes. That’s a big
project for them. A big project for us is 900 homes. That’s a big project. He asked me
about Paramount when Paramount was coming through to get approved and at that
point it was the largest one we had ever had. He said how did you guys ever approve
that? I said well I think we had like two people come and complain. I mean the
(inaudible) it was all new problems. He’s got one neighbor dissatisfied big deal. It’s not
that complex to deal with from that perspective of a Public Hearing. Now it’s not quite
that easy. Now there is more development and you do need – you folks need to and
the Council needs to see the interplay of how the other developments fit. Why does this
make some sense? Again, not because they get to borrow from that. We’ve had that
before where there – you would see developers come and say well I don’t need as
much green space here because there’s a big one over here that’s somebody else’s but
that’s good enough. Well that isn’t good enough they really need to stand alone but it is
fair for you to want to ask what’s around it, how does this fit with everyone else, how
does this fit with all the bigger picture of what that map is supposed is to look like
eventually so you’re not making a decision in a vacuum. Those are perfectly
reasonable questions to ask. I think you should be asking that and the staff can get that
information for you and show you what’s around it. Where are the schools going to be?
Again you may not use that as your reason to deny it but you may want to have a sense
of well schools are going to be here and the road system is this way and here is where
the road is going to be built. Again, the people in the audience they don’t know.
They’re thinking you’re agreeing to a 600 home subdivision with a two lane country road
next to it and they don’t realize that it’s on the five year work plan and that’s going to be
a five lane road generally by the time this gets built. The impact fees are going to pay
for that, it’s going to happen and that’s how it’s going to be. Those are things that are
fair to ask. Again, what’s the best interest of the city, what you reasonably think is in the
best interest of the city in the long term and your best guide could add as the map.
That was what was determined at the point that it was passed and until it changes that
is best interest of the city. It looks something like that. It generally fits those patterns
and that’s okay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 42 of 52
Canning: And can the surrounding properties which is I think is kind of what (inaudible--
------------------) if that project goes in can the surrounding properties also develop
according to the Comprehensive Plan or is what their doing blocking future
development on the properties. (Inaudible).
Zaremba: Well we had that discussion I think it was Locust Grove where there was a
certain quantity of non-residential allowable and we were already exceeding that when
some application came in for an office building.
Nary: Same issue with the Seventh Day Adventist Church on Black Cat. We pushed
very hard to have access for those rear properties just like Anna was saying so the
ability for those to develop and meet those Comprehensive Plan densities and
guidelines and build out still are trying to be met. You can – you don’t necessarily have
to say well you don’t – you can’t (inaudible) till all your neighbors come to build too but
can at least your build or what you’re wanting to build allow those other ones to happen
in the same manner we would like to happen or saying lose the opportunity (inaudible---
-----------------) activity or stub streets or whatever.
Newton-Huckabay: There was a situation not too long ago and it was one of the
examples I put on here that Linder road property and –
Zaremba: South of Franklin?
Newton-Huckabay: Yes. I was real frustrated on that one because I was traveling
during the first meeting that was continued it came back through. Basically, it was said
this really isn’t going to develop – isn’t good to develop without the other property
owners around you developing and I don’t – you can’t really do that can you? You
can’t say you can’t develop your property because your neighbor to the north and the -
your neighbor to the south doesn’t want to go in with you?
Nary: No but again, it’s kind of how you say it. It wouldn’t probably make much sense
to say, you can’t develop until your neighbors develop. We just prefer your property
come in with the rest. Well that’s not reasonable. They don’t have to buy their
neighbors and they don’t have to – but the question really is, is if you allow this to
develop in this manner can the other surrounding properties develop – you know are
they stuck. Is it going to be compatible is it going to fit? Sometimes and especially like
that one long skinny pieces are really really tough to develop in a vacuum. The one
that I was thinking about was Kodiak which was the little tiny skinny development piece
on Highway 69 next to Bear Creek that was really tiny. When he first brought it to the
commission and said here’s kind of generally what we would like to do the commission
said okay well that might be okay that’s fine. They didn’t make a commitment they said
well that makes sense. When he finally drew it to paper and tried to put a road in and
tried to put some open space in and tried to make it workable into what he liked to build
and what he could build and what he wanted he got turned down two or three times
because it just never could fit. Eventually he sold it to Bear Creek because he couldn’t
develop it himself. That’s the challenge of those little tiny pieces. It’s not – it wouldn’t
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 43 of 52
be necessarily reasonable again, it’s not very clear in the law as to what your bases has
to be. You’re never obligated to annex property you don’t want to annex but it’s not very
reasonable or fair to anybody to say we just – we’re going to wait to the property next to
you develops. I think you just have to look at it like we said how does this relate to the
others, how could the others develop, would this really pretty much limit any other
opportunities there because until the rest of them develop the connectivity or the ability
for them to have some buffer or some differences between these properties or some
setbacks it just won’t work. It’s just too small. That’s okay I think that’s reasonable.
Hawkins-Clark: I guess it is important to differentiate between the annexation
applications and property that’s already annexed, which Milliron which already had the
R-4 zone all they did was wanted to plat it and Cole’s which already had the C-G. You
are required to give you reasons in writing for those.
Rohm: For annexation or Preliminary Plat?
Nary: Those were annexed.
(Inaudible discussion)
Rohm: If you’re denying annexation you don’t have to give – we can just say we don’t
want it.
Nary: Right.
Canning: You know it’s not just being fair to –
Zaremba: The reason for the other ones is we don’t have jurisdiction they’ve been
annexed.
Canning: Right but it’s not only helpful to the client or the applicant that’s being denied
but (inaudible) if you don’t give us any clue we don’t know what to tell people. It
becomes – if we don’t know where everyone is headed then we can’t give them very
good direction at the beginning of the process and you have to do more work when it
gets to you. The more information you can give us the better.
Nary: In a developer perfect world they would always like to win but the next best thing
would be they at least had some reasonable expectation of what the outcome is going
to be. That’s the problem. It just feels like it came out of left field and you know the
staff especially was encouraging that. Then the commission or Council says we don’t
like it. We just don’t – it doesn’t fit we don’t like it. That makes it awfully tough – it hurts
their credibility in dealing with the developer because now when they’re saying we think
it should be this - the developers thinking how do you know.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 44 of 52
Canning: That happened with Irvine. I don’t know if you all know they denied
(inaudible) what happened. Kevin Amar shows up the next day why did they deny me.
It was like I don’t know.
Nary: Like Brad said Milliron was different. Milliron was annexed. All the concessions
and there wasn’t a lot of them but the concession we got in Milliron was really them
trying to maintain good will with the Council because they knew if they really wanted to
play hardball they could but tomorrow they need something annexed and tomorrow
they’re at the other end of the stick and they don’t want to be there. They’re trying to be
fair.
Zaremba: Well I remember the look on his face when somebody objected. He said it’s
already an R-4 this is what we’re proposing.
Nary: Yes. In the hallway you’re telling me (inaudible--------------------). In the hallway
the developer is telling me you’re going to tell the Council we get to do this. I said yes
legally you can but tomorrow you’re going to need them remember so you don’t want to
necessarily play that hard unless this is the only property you’re going to develop in
your life here. There is that give and take that’s necessary. That I think Anna is 100
percent right. Any guidance you can give them even though it’s not necessarily
required is helpful. If you go any too far certainly that’s both the Planning staff and our
staff’s responsibility to tell you that’s probably enough. That’s enough information to
make the record clean enough so we’re clear you don’t have to tell them anymore. I
think any of that’s very helpful. Mostly from just the practical customer oriented
customer service perspective not you know an annexation (inaudible).
Zaremba: Well I think it’s – one of the things that I say about developers is is the best
thing we can be is fair and make it a level playing field. They should have expectations
of what our response is going to be to certain things. It should be similar to a similar
expectation on another project so that it’s a level playing field.
Canning: And they don’t mind if you have high expectations.
Zaremba: Yes as long as we apply them to everybody.
Canning: As long as you apply them evenly yes. They will spend more money if they’re
fairly sure that they will get approval rather than spend less money with a risky
outcome.
Zaremba: And that a competitor needs to spend the same amount of money to get their
project.
Canning: Right. If you want to move on –
Newton-Huckabay: Actually I just want to ask Mike a question on this issue. I perceive
that there are going to be more and more of these little pieces of property starting to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 45 of 52
come through because that’s not – there are not a lot of huge pieces of property left.
Given the fact that you can’t say well you know I would really like you to wait and
develop with your neighbors is it appropriate then at that point to say to the developer
we’re just not seeing how this property can develop efficiently without – or effectively
without your neighbors developing. Can you maybe suggest some ways that you could
see the property around it developing so that your pieces – you can develop your piece.
Obviously that’s not a binding –
Canning: And let’s use (inaudible). Sometimes I do ask for that. Sometimes I get it
sometimes I don’t. I will ask for that. If I can’t see it and I’m pretty good at seeing these
things. If I can’t see it I say help. I cannot see how your neighbors can develop. It
would help me if you could lay out something that (inaudible) half the time they come in
with (inaudible--------------------) it wouldn’t be inappropriate for you to say exactly that
instead of saying can you (inaudible--------------------) table you to our next (inaudible------
--------------) so you can do that. Rather than get him to talk get him to draw it out. That
happened on –
Zaremba: And give it to staff first.
Canning: Well – yes. It doesn’t take – it either works or it doesn’t.
Newton-Huckabay: Because I would be more inclined to say you know what you
develop that strip of property right there with 14 houses right in a row because knowing
what’s going to come in next to you is going to put 14 houses right in a row on the other
side and that’s going to look good versus –
Canning: Exactly. And all it takes is the Planning Commission doing it once or twice
and then when I say geez I sure would like a concept plan for this are you going to give
it to me now or do you want to tabled at Planning and Zoning Commission and have
them ask you for it. It has (inaudible--------------------).
Nary: (inaudible--------------------) and it’s kind of like when we were talking about the
property down on Linder. Make sure if you choose to do that, that you make it clear to
them we’re not committing to approve your project we’re just trying to figure out how to
make it work if you want to bring it in the way you’re talking about it we need to see a lot
more before we can do that. But you can choose not to do it. We spend and I’m sure
Commissioner Moe remembers on that particular project he spent about five minutes
saying understand you choose to do it there’s no commitment on this end of this
Commission to approve it and then you didn’t approve it. Because you don’t want them
coming back and saying, I did everything you asked me to and now you’re telling me
no. What you’re telling them is before I can consider a yes I need more information. I
need to be able to look at that big picture. That’s my responsibility as a commissioner
so I want to see that. I’m not committed to this project until I see all of it and then I’ll
decide if it fits and it makes sense and it allows the other properties to develop. If they
choose not to and they say you know what, we’re not going to spend another 3,000
dollars of our planner to go do that. We’re not going to do that so just take it as it is
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 46 of 52
deny it or approve it then move on. That’s your call. That’s perfectly fine too. I just
don’t want to leave somebody with the impression that if we go and jump through the
hoop you just asked me to you’re going to approve me because (inaudible).
Canning: And on that Linder subdivision they did show redevelopment plans to the
property of the south and that nearly (inaudible--------------------) showed the north and
that was the real issue. How does that long skinny one to the north (inaudible-------------
-------) that’s a long skinny weed patch after time is all that is.
Rohm: And (inaudible--------------------) downside to that is that long skinny patch to the
north is holding the balance hostage in a manner of speaking and I take exception to
that as an individual land owner knowing that their parcel is –
Zaremba: The key property.
Rohm: Is a key to the development of the balance and say –
Canning: And what I told Dave was yes that’s true but you have two choices. One you
either bring that one in so you can get the density you’re looking for or two you
recognize that that ones not coming (inaudible--------------------) against a half acre lot
just (inaudible--------------------) something like that but if you can’t address how that
north property redevelops then you’re redeveloping adjoining acre lots instead of
(inaudible--------------------) 5,000 square foot lots (inaudible--------------------) that’s how I
see that issue. You’re right they can’t hold them hostage but if they don’t want to play
then you have to deal with that.
Hawkins-Clark: (Inaudible) best interest.
Nary: And also that I guess is sort of the benefit of where our community is growing is
land is way too valuable to have a really big spike strip. It just isn’t worth having that.
(Inaudible) off your back yard is to leave it so that you can (inaudible--------------------). I
think the land value is so high here right now that it’s just not realistic that people are
going to do that very much. That was a little fuss (inaudible--------------------).
Zaremba: Well land value isn’t high until they stop talking about acres and start selling
(inaudible--------------------). Then you know it’s high when they won’t tell you what the
acre price is. It’s this much a square foot.
Canning: They are starting to sell the residential properties per square foot. It’s scary.
Number 18 we can move onto that one because I don’t know the answer – well I know
the answer I don’t know the question to 19 but I know the answer is 69 is that right.
Hawkins-Clark: 42.
Canning: 42 thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 47 of 52
Nary: I thought it was move to Emmett was the answer.
Canning: 42 is the answer but I don’t know what the question is. 18.
Rohm: Actually I think you’ve already answered that.
Hawkins-Clark: Yes we just talked about that.
Canning: Well I want to add something though. This gets to what I think that you
sometimes struggle with is what’s – how is your role different from staff and maybe how
does your role differ from City Council and where do you fall (inaudible--------------------).
We have to just look at code and the Comp Plan and so that’s our job. We’re operating
without the benefit of any public testimony. If you receive compelling public testimony
you should never feel like you’re not supporting staff or somehow feel guilty about
(inaudible) against what staff originally recommended. Our job is a very narrow focus
and you guys have a much broader focus. You have to (inaudible--------------------) and
you have to decide whether it feels right. That’s the big thing that I don’t – especially if
there’s some discretionary review like (inaudible--------------------) as much discretion as
the city attorney (inaudible) but most of our stuff is you know annexation and CU’s.
State code says you can add whatever conditions you want to a CU. As long as they’re
on site you can pretty much do whatever you want. Don’t ignore that it doesn’t feel right
you know.
Zaremba: But can we say that out loud. Sometimes I want to say this stinks but –
Nary: I think what Anna is saying is you know what’s interesting too about commissions
is all cities – well most of the cities I’m aware of the commissions have people of
particular expertise and experience that they want on that or architects or you know
building backgrounds. Every one of you has a different level of experience or expertise
that you bring and that’s intended. That’s why – that may be the reason that the Mayor
selected you over somebody else. If you brought something different to the mix of
people and the intention was to have a mix to again take that balance between what the
staff is saying this is what our code says this is what the code and the Comp Plan says.
This is what we think and this is what the public thinks. You guys can decide and apply
your experience to that. That’s perfectly fine to say this doesn’t feel right to me
because Keith talks about building things a lot because that’s what he knows so he can
apply that level of expertise with that. That’s what it’s supposed to be. You’re not there
to be anybody’s advocate. The staff advocates for certain things that the developer
advocates for certain things and the public advocates for certain things. You don’t have
to be that advocate. You get to balance all those different things in making your
decision. That’s perfectly fine you’re not there to pick sides. You’re there to try to
balance all those different things in looking at the code and the Comp Plan and then
making a decision. So you know what doesn’t feel right that’s okay. You want to
articulate that. I think generally the staff or the legal staff is going to say well you might
want to be more specific of what you mean by that but that’s okay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 48 of 52
Rohm: Just because I was the one that wrote this last question. I think that the
discussion of (inaudible--------------------) brought quite a bit of clarity to (inaudible----------
----------) don’t have to annex anything that doesn’t feel right. Then the balance of the
applications whether it’s a Preliminary Plat or otherwise can fall by the waste side if
you’re not going to consider annexation. (Inaudible--------------------) that makes sense
(inaudible--------------------).
Nary: At the end of it you recognize that when you folks pass it on the Council has a
whole different set of reasons, rationale, experience and the political part of that. Those
constituents that are standing in front of them they have different reasons why they do
things and that’s okay too. That’s part of the way the process is supposed to work. You
folks don’t get elected and you don’t have to worry about that part of it. Council does
and they have to balance those things.
Rohm: I think a real good case where the political side was able to use this planning
groups action and way off on us if you will is on Eagle Road on the west side north of
Franklin when that parcel wanted to go in as commercial and it was zoned industrial
and we as Planning and Zoning recommended to the Council to change the zoning to
commercial and the Council could then refer back and say we did this under for a
recommendation by our Planning and Zoning Commission. It was a way that they could
make something happen and it’s not like it was a political decision for them they were
just acting on the recommendations of others. That’s the way I read that.
Newton-Huckabay: But not my recommendation for the record.
Rohm: Oh I remember that.
Canning: I think it’s great when you disagree with us. (Inaudible--------------------).
Hawkins-Clark: And I would add I think it’s great when you disagree amongst each
other. Not that you have to but really that’s part of the duty of the democratic process.
Zaremba: And I do appreciate it when we have differentiating opinions.
Nary: And you know it’s a great message to the public. As a public in general when
they don’t understand exactly how the process works thinks it’s all a big rubber stamp.
Some developer walks in here and everybody just rolls over and gives them what they
want. None of them saw how much time and effort Anna and her staff went to get it to
this point even for you to see it and what it looked like when they brought it it didn’t see
your debate and your discussion and what you may have gotten them to see to or
agree to to do things and the same thing when the Council does the same thing. At the
end they just see something building and say oh, they just approved another thing. No
they went through a lot. I think even you said in one of the discussions we had with the
press I think maybe a quote in the paper saying you know do we control growth? We
control growth a lot. Do we manage it do we prevent it but you folks and the staff do a
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 49 of 52
lot to control what it looks like and what the outcome is and those kinds of things and
that’s great.
Canning: I counted up that we have seven points in the process where we (inaudible)
that’s just a Preliminary Plat (inaudible--------------------) you and Council were the last
two but staff – we read off on them before they ever get to you guys as much as we can
and try to get (inaudible). I think in general (inaudible--------------------) would say that
you could (inaudible--------------------) not uncommon for Planning Commissioners to
(inaudible--------------------) on the feel rank kind of stuff and to have the more political
decision coming out of City Council. (Inaudible--------------------) residential projects
(inaudible--------------------) one of the five that’s up there. (Inaudible--------------------)
between when we write that staff report and when you make your decision. We’re
talking to one person and then in adamant a couple of in adamant objects but you guys
get 20 more bits of testimony before you have to make your question.
Hood: Can I just – one (inaudible--------------------) not in the best interest we can pretty
much deny anything. Would you recommend it – the way I kind of take Conditional Use
Permits is you can condition the heck out of them and make it fit basically rather than
saying deny just because it doesn’t feel right. There are usually conditions you can
make that we can put on that to make it feel right. Those conditions may say well that’s
too much and we’re going away and if that deny them but you don’t say (inaudible). Is
that where you would maybe leave the condition? Because there may be those
projects that they don’t feel right as is but maybe there are six or seven or 10 things that
they condition it.
Nary: I think I guess on a Conditional Use if you can feel comfortable that you can
condition the project to meet your goals and meet what your expectations are I think
you should. I think that’s the – that’s why they exist is to provide those conditions. I
think there were some occasionally projects that no matter what you conditioned it just
won’t work. You couldn’t condition it enough or the conditions feel so out of step, or
inconsistent or too onerous or just uncomfortable for you. That’s okay too. I don’t think
you’re going to see that very much. I think most of the time you’re going to be able to
put adequate conditions that you’re going to feel comfortable that will meet the needs of
what you folks think, what your public thinks, what the people that testify with the
neighbors what your experience has been. I think most of the time you’re going to find
that I think that’s okay but you probably will run into something you’re thinking no matter
what we do I just don’t think this works. It just doesn’t make any sense.
Canning: Meat packing plant in the middle of downtown. There’s this –
Zaremba: Well why not? Let’s see what conditions can we put on it?
Newton-Huckabay: See my concern with that though is then it starts to come back
around in consistency and somebody’s going to come up and say well you allowed that
for two properties down and why are you – now how come I can’t have (inaudible---------
-----------) we start dulling out a whole bunch of conditions on a Conditional Use Permit
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 50 of 52
to make it fit. I mean obviously two or three is fine. Aren’t we going to run into that
problem because the last thing I want to do is sit up here and contradict myself because
I don’t remember everything.
Canning: Well you can always ask staff you know or you can say staff we’re thinking
about adding a time limit condition can we come back next week (inaudible-----------------
---). I think he had two requests for light office at the same time.
Newton-Huckabay: And that’s very helpful.
Canning: We told him okay you’ve done this, this, and this and we try to give you a
heads up if we have some idea where the conditions might be going and that was
(inaudible) was an obvious one. You know (inaudible--------------------) we try and get
through everything (inaudible--------------------) something to have it redesigned
(inaudible--------------------) other than trying to design it up there because we all know
that that doesn’t work.
Rohm: It doesn’t work very well.
Newton-Huckabay: But you know we’re (inaudible) die for trying I’ll tell you that right
now.
Nary: You know sometimes – and that’s what I think I know all of you struggle with at
times it’s like trying to put the genie back in the bottle because when you started the
discussion you just thought if you would do this little thing would that work and then
commissioner Moe would think oh well maybe this one would work too then all of a
sudden you spend an hour redesigning the project. At the end of it you’re still feeling
like you know I’d rather they came back. You would have been better off saying here’s
eight things you go figure out if you can make this work for you then come back in two
weeks and that would make more sense then (inaudible) and all those things. Those
compatibility – you know you brought a great point is compatibility is really project
driven. It may make sense or maybe at least for the discussion to say well we have
three other projects that we did that and we either didn’t require that or we did. Again,
this project has to stand alone it has to (inaudible) with its neighbors not just because
the project that’s a mile and a half away didn’t have to have time on when their
deliveries could be or when their store could be open but this one does well because
this ones neighbors are different. Where it sits is different it’s a different location. It’s a
different – again it’s still individually driven and that’s okay but ask if it was comparison
is reasonable.
Hawkins-Clark: And that issue of compatibility is – I don’t think I ever told Anna this but
on this new staff report format the one thing I’m most uncomfortable with it is that our
findings are at the back when in fact that’s the whole basis that even before you get – to
start putting conditions you need to look at the findings and meet those. Then start with
conditions.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 51 of 52
Zaremba: Well in the old one –
Hawkins-Clark: I mean it’s easy to forget those things when in fact that’s really – that’s
laid out for you what you should base your decision on.
Zaremba: In the old format the findings sort of did come first. They weren’t labeled
findings they were more discussion but I agree with you. We got to that part first of the
issues that the planner was thinking about.
Canning: Well there’s – and if you get through there’s that analysis leading to the
decision part and that should be talking about the findings as well in there. That’s just
the analysis all (inaudible--------------------) I didn’t like about the old format is that half the
findings were so redundant and germane that you really had to (inaudible) through
those findings and until you knew what was – you didn’t – that’s clear to me where the
staff report but if you didn’t know that you would miss it. That’s why I wanted to move
the – highlight the analysis section just as this is the analysis and you do (inaudible------
--------------).
Moe: But on the new format and I brought this up a couple weeks ago too the one thing
that I’m struggling with and I’ve even been asked a few of the applicants and what not is
where we’re – although it’s nice to have the motions in that report I’m being questioned
as to gee they’ve already written out your approval or your denial –
Canning: No you get all both options. We don’t give you just one.
Moe: Right.
Canning: And it says to be considered after the public hearing. That’s why we don’t
give you one we give you both because just to counteract that. It’s just that – no this is
just wording for (inaudible--------------------).
Rohm: (inaudible--------------------) don’t go on forever when I make a motion.
Zaremba: A 30 page motion.
Canning: You guys are way better. If I could get city Council to (inaudible------------------
--).
(Inaudible discussion)
Canning: I want to tell you one other thing before you all leave. With Bradley being -
I’ve tried to make lemonade out of lemons so I am restructuring the department to have
some structure. Right now you know there’s no structure. There’s just me – what I’m
doing is I’m going to make Steve in charge of what we’re going to call a Comprehensive
Planning division. Craig is being promoted to the Principal Planner Position and he will
be the (inaudible). He will be doing the current planning so he will do all the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Special Meeting
November 29, 2005
Page 52 of 52
Commission hearings and then he’ll substitute for me at City Council so you (inaudible--
------------------). He will be in charge of all that you do (inaudible--------------------). I got
in my work plan for this year to do a little more training for you. This was a great idea
and I think this was probably one of the more effective training sessions I’ve (inaudible--
------------------).
Moe: You did a great job.
Newton-Huckabay: we’re going to be dangerous now.
Canning: We will try and get –
Zaremba: We have said that we’re going to miss Brad very much but we do all wish
you well. I certainly have appreciated your report for the many years that we’ve sort of
worked together. I just wanted to say that first. To thank Brad for all his help and
service. Thank you.
Hawkins-Clark: Thank you very much you all do good work. We have a lot of headway.
Zaremba: Okay the chair would entertain a motion to adjourn.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Zaremba: We are adjourned. Thank you all. This has been very helpful and thank you
Brad.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:42 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED:
______________________________ _____|_____|_____
DAVID ZAREMBA - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED
ATTESTED:_____________________________
WILLIAM G. BERG JR., CITY CLERK