2022-02-03 Item 1.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting February 3, 2021.
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of February 3, 2021, was
called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Andrew Seal.
Members Present: Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Bill Cassinelli,
Commissioner Nick Grove, Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Maria Lorcher
and Commissioner Nate Wheeler.
Others Present: Adrienne Weatherly, Kurt Starman, Caleb Hood, Jason Korn, Bill
Parsons, Sonya Allen, Joe Dodson, Alan Tiefenbach and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
X Nate Wheeler X Maria Lorcher
Vacant X Nick Grove
_X Steven Yearsley X Bill Cassinelli
X Andrew Seal - Chairman
Seal: All right. Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting for February 3rd, 2022. At this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The
Commissioners who are present for this evening's meeting are at City Hall and on Zoom.
We also have staff from the city attorney and clerk's offices, as well as the City Planning
Department. If you are joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that you are here.
You may observe the meeting. However, your ability to be seen on screen and talk will
be muted. During the public testimony portion of the meeting. You will be unmuted and,
then, be able to comment. Please note that we cannot take questions until the public
testimony portion. If you have a -- if you have a process question during the meeting,
please, e-mail cityclerk@meridiancity.org and they will reply as quickly as possible. If you
simply want to watch the meeting we encourage you to watch the streaming on the city's
YouTube channel. You can access it at meridiancity.org/live. With that let's begin with
the roll call.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Seal: All right. First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We do have
Meridian U-Haul Moving and Storage, H-2021-0085. That will be opened for the sole
purpose of continuing to a regularly scheduled meeting. They will open -- or it will open
only for that purpose. So, if there is anybody here tonight to testify for that particular
application we will not be taking testimony. Can I get a motion to adopt the agenda?
Grove: So moved.
Wheeler: Second.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 5
Page 2 of 74
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor, please, say aye.
Any opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
1. Approve Minutes of the January 20, 2022 Planning and Zoning
Commission Regular Meeting
2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Pine 43 Pad G (H-2021-0097)
by CSHQA, Located at 1492 N. Webb Way
Seal: Move on to the Consent Agenda. We have two items on the Consent Agenda. We
need to approve the minutes of the January 20th, 2022, Planning and Zoning Commission
and Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Pine 43 Pad G, H-2021-0097. Could I get
a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented?
Grove: So moved.
Wheeler: Second.
Cassinelli: Second.
Seal: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor say
aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
3. SolSmart Community Presentation
Seal: Okay. Our first action item -- we will move on to our Department Reports and we
have a presentation for SolSmart Community.
Hood: Good evening, Commissioners. We are going to do a joint presentation here with
Jason Korn. The city is participating in the SolSmart designation process. Jason is our
environmental programs coordinator and he is acting as the city's project manager in
working with a consultant on this designation and he will, again, walk you through and
explain a little bit more about what the program is in just a second, but part of that process
to become a designated SolSmart Community includes a comprehensive review of
current city code and, then, presenting that analysis to you with the findings and
answering any questions or comments you may have on that. So, a zoning review has
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 6
Page 3 of 74
been completed and the analysis was shared with you in the packet. So, if you haven't
already done so you should have access to that. Staff is currently evaluating some of the
findings from that review-- zoning review and contemplating potential changes to the way
we process solar applications in our code, the way we permit, the way we inspect and
potentially streamlining the process and if nothing more, if you have looked at the
analysis, making it clear how one would go about getting a permit. Maybe adding some
definitions and some other things at least to make it clear the process to install solar in
our community. So, that's a brief overview. I'm not planning on running through that with
you, but if you have any questions I will maybe let Jason go first and, then, we will stand
for any questions you have.
Seal: Okay. Thank you.
Korn: All right. Thanks, Caleb. So, as Caleb said, I'm the environmental programs
coordinator in the Public Works Department, so I do not get a chance to speak in front of
Planning and Zoning very often and it's probably my first time in five years with the city.
But one of my programs is sustainable city operations and we were approached by an
environmental consulting company late last year that was awarded a grant from the
Department of Energy to assist Idaho cities in achieving the SolSmart designation. We
presented that to Mayor Simison and he thought it was a good idea and aligned well with
our city's strategic plan goals relating to sustainability and dedicated staff resources to
work towards a bronze designation, which is I think the best we could get without going
through a major code rehaul and we have a short time period that we want to get this
completed by, at least submitting our package by the end of February, and so the
designation process is scoring points in various categories, including permitting and
inspection, planning and zoning and government operations and it looks like we have
enough points to achieve that bronze designation. There are a few prerequisites and one
of those prerequisites was a zoning code review and presenting it to our planning and
zoning governing board, which is you guys, which is why we are here today, so -- and
with that I will stand for any questions.
Hood: And maybe just before questions, just to be clear, we don't necessarily need any
action from you this evening. It is more for your information. Again just here to answer
potentially any questions you have. We may come back in the future if there are any
substantive changes or any changes that require your approval, but it's just more of an
FYI and, like Jason said, we are -- we are checking the box so we can get the credit for
informing you and engaging with you, so --
Seal: Okay. Any questions? All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Okay. With
that I will move on to explain the public hearing process. We will open each item
individually and begin with the staff report. Staff will report their findings on how the item
adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code. After staff has
made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case and respond
to staff comments. They will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant is finished we
will open the floor to public testimony. Each person will be called on only once during the
public testimony. The Clerk will call the names individually of those who -- who have
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 7
Page 4 of 74
signed up on our website in advance to testify. You will, then, be unmuted in Zoom or
you can come to the microphones in -- in chambers. You will need to state your name
and address for the record and, then, you will have three minutes to address the
Commission. If you have previously sent pictures or a presentation to the meeting, it will
be displayed on the screen and our Clerk will run the presentation. If you have
established that you are speaking on behalf of a larger group, like an HOA, where others
from that group will allow you to speak on their behalf, you will have up to ten minutes.
After all those who have testified in advance have spoken we will invite any others who
may wish to testify. If you wish to speak on the topic you may come forward in chambers
or if on Zoom press the raise hand button in the Zoom app or if you are only listening on
a phone press star nine and wait for your name to be called. If you are listening on
multiple devices, such as a computer and a phone, please, be sure to mute the extra
devices, so we do not experience feedback and we can hear you clearly. When you are
finished if the Commission does not have questions for you you will return to your seat in
chambers or be muted on Zoom and no longer have the ability to speak and, please,
remember we will not be able to call on you a second time. After all testimony has been
heard the applicant will be given another ten minutes to come back and respond. When
the applicant is finished responding to questions and concerns we will close the public
hearing and the Commissioners will have the opportunity to discuss and hopefully be able
to make a final decision or recommendation to City Council as needed.
ACTION ITEMS
4. Public Hearing for Meridian U-Haul Moving and Storage (H-2021-0085)
by Gurnoor Kaur of Amerco Real Estate Company, Located on Parcel
R8257510015 and at 1230 and 1270 E. Overland Rd., Near the
Northwest Corner of E. Overland Rd. and S. Locust Grove Rd.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow self-storage, ancillary
retail, and warehousing and vehicle and equipment with outdoor
display.
Seal: At this time we would like to open the public hearing for Meridian U-Haul Moving
and Storage for continuance. Correct. We will need to know when they want to continue
that to though.
Parson: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, next available is probably best for them,
after they realize they were bumped from this hearing because they did not post correctly.
So, as long as we meet -- they meet the posting requirements the next available would
be great.
Seal: Madam Clerk, do we know what it looks -- the next couple of meetings look like?
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, on February 17th there are two noticed public hearings for that
evening.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 $
Page 5 of 74
Seal: Okay. So, the 17th sounds like it if somebody wants to jump in there on that motion.
Grove: Mr. Chair, I move to continue file number H-2021-00852 to the hearing date of
February 17th.
Wheeler: Second.
Seal: It is moved and seconded to continue H-2021-0085 to the date of February 17th,
2022. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
5. Public Hearing Continued from January 20, 2022 for Verona Live/Work
(H-2021-0080) by J-U-B Engineers, Inc., Located at 3020 & 3042 W.
Milano Dr., Near the Northeast Corner of Ten Mile Rd. and McMillan
Rd.
A. Request: A Conditional Use Permit for 16 vertically integrated
residential units within four (4) buildings on 1.75 acres in the L-O
zoning district
Seal: All right. Move on to Verona Live/Work, H-2021-0080, continued from the 22nd of
January 2022 and we will begin with the staff report.
Dodson: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Good evening. As noted
this first actual project tonight is going to be Verona Live/Work conditional use permit.
The site consists of 1.75 acres of land, currently zoned L-O, which is limited office, located
across two parcels, 3020 and 3042 West Milano Drive in the general vicinity of the
northeast corner of McMillan and Ten Mile. The application before you tonight, again, as
noted, is a conditional use permit for 14 vertically integrated residential units within three
buildings within that -- or I should say on the 1.75 acres. The office future land use
designation is meant to provide opportunities for low impact business areas. These would
-- these uses would include professional offices, technology and resource centers and
some ancillary commercial uses may also be considered. Vertically integrated residential
project is listed as a conditional use within the UDC for the L-O zoning district. West of
the subject site sits one vacant L-O parcel, which is in common ownership with this
property and, then, on the -- to the north is one is -- this is the common ownership and
this is the additional L-O parcel to the west that has a medical office on it that I believe is
a pediatric medical office of some kind. Further to the west are two additional L-O lots
that have additional medical office buildings. Because of the common ownership of the
land of the north parcel here that's vacant, the applicant is showing an office building
directly to the west of this site. It's not part of this proposal, I'm just showing it for
reference. To the east and north of the subject sites are detached single family
residential. They are part of the Verona Subdivision. To the south is approximately ten
acres of C-G zoned property, which I will go back to this so you can see. That's at the
hard corner of McMillan and Ten Mile. The existing use on the actual hard corner, which
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 191
Page 6 of 74
is the only building out there right now, is a fuel service station and convenience store.
Directly to the south from this site, the largest parcel, has approvals for a -- it's about a
ten acre site and has approvals for 164 unit 55 and older multi-family development. Staff
anticipates that future residents of that site could utilize some of the future services
provided within the commercial spaces of this project should it be approved. Because
the proposed use is adjacent to a mixture of existing and planned uses that are residential,
office, commercial, et cetera, staff does find an appropriate use within the future land use
designation of L-O or I should say of office. Vertically integrated residential projects
incorporate commercial spaces and residential uses within one structure and most often
include commercial space on the first floor and residential on the floor or floors above.
Our UDC defines it as the use of a multi-story structure for residential and nonresidential
uses where the different uses are planned as a unified complementary whole and
functionally integrated to share vehicular and pedestrian access and parking. In this
project the applicant is proposing a small commercial space at the front of the building on
the first floor with the proposed residential portion of the units being both behind and
above the commercial space. Therefore, the applicant is proposing a two story concept
for these buildings with the vehicular access for each unit from the rear via a two car
garage. In addition, the applicant is proposing 24 additional off-street parking spaces.
The UDC -- or I should say the specific use stands for vertically integrated require one
space for every residential unit and, then, the commercial space at our general ratio of
one per 500. Because all the commercial units are less than 500 square feet, you could
do just two per unit, 14 times two is 28, they are meeting that simply with the two car
garage that is included with each unit. So, the -- the surface parking is in addition to the
minimum parking requirement. The proposal does meet all defined UDC regulations,
except for a couple of the drive aisles will need to be widened to 25 feet to accommodate
and meet code for two way drive aisles. Vertically integrated as noted is a conditional
use in the L-O zoning district, so the Commission should determine if this proposed
project, despite meeting the minimum code requirements, meets the intent of the
proposed use of vertical integrated and if the design that's proposed as desired in this
location specifically. Following the original publication of the staff report and some of the
concerns that were noted within, the applicant requested a continuance in order to meet
with staff and we did have that meeting. It was a productive meeting. The applicant
following that meeting submitted some revised plans, this being one of them. This is a
color concept plan that was revised. You should have seen my memo from January 28th
noting these changes and discussing some recommended provisions within -- and
conditions that I recommend changing. The revised plan shows the following notable
changes. First of all there is a loss of the two unit building to the interior of the site and
the inclusion of additional green space. So, this used to have two units, now it has green
space and a plaza, which I think is a great addition for any of the future residents and
users of the commercial spaces. They also revised the floor plan of the four unit building
on the north side to include an additional commercial space on the front of the units. So,
as you can tell this footprint is larger than this footprint mostly in the length, because they
added another commercial space on each one of the four units. So, now they have two
office spaces in the front. So, again, four of those were changed out of the 14. They also
are showing additional sidewalk connections to the existing sidewalk along the Milano
and Cortona Way, which is also something that staff recommended and a great benefit
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 Flo]
Page 7 of 74
to the project. They also revised the elevations as seen here to show -- well, first of all,
to include dedicated commercial entry door in addition to the internal shared access for
one. So, the previous elevations did not have an entrance door on the front, it was just a
shared door. So, now they are showing the commercial door here. They incorporated
some nonresidential style awnings that show area that would allow for some signage,
which they are showing conceptually here. The applicant also added taller windows on
the first floor facade adjacent to the commercial entry door to create more of a storefront
consistent with nonresidential buildings and not just residential. Staff does find that the
revised plans, as well as the elevations, are a great improvement from the original that
largely looked one hundred percent residential. In general -- in general staff finds that the
proposed revisions improve the project. I did have some recommended conditions to
change within the memo, I just put them on here for convenience for -- for the
Commission. As of this morning -- or I guess as of now there is only one person that
provided public testimony online. It appears to be the owner/operator of the pediatric
facility directly to the west. She noted concerns that the project does not mesh with the
existing office that she has, nor the existing residential area. She also had concerns over
increased traffic, a lack of parking and lack of green space for the -- for the tenants. The
staff -- staff does recommend approval with the noted conditions in the staff report and
these recommended revisions as noted in the memo. Following that I will stand for any
questions.
Seal: Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Shrief: Good evening. My name is Wendy Shrief. I'm a planner with JUB Engineers and
my business address is 2760 Excursion Way. We are here in Meridian, Idaho. 83642.
Thank you. We are really glad to be here this evening. We were going to be here
originally a couple weeks ago, but we have worked with Joseph on a couple revisions
and I think we have really strengthen the project. So, thank you, Joe, for taking the time
to go through our -- go through our renderings and go through our site plan. I think it's a
stronger project. I think we are probably a better fit after making some of those changes.
I want to go through and first kind of talk to you about the area that we are in. I don't know
if this is my -- can I move this myself?
Dodson: Yeah. I would recommend just using the arrow keys.
Shrief: First I want to talk about where -- where we are located. We are at the northeast
corner approximately of Ten Mile and McMillan. So, we are in what was -- previously
these were two platted lots from Verona Subdivision. It was originally zoned L-O for light
office, but the reason why I think this is a really good location for vertically integrated --
we are adjacent to some office uses, but, really, when you look at to the north and to the
west we are in a residential neighborhood. We held a neighborhood meeting for this
project and the second one for a future project. We met with the neighbors. I think what
people were really happy to see -- and I will show you our render -- our architectural
drawings in a minute -- was that this was a use where we were compatible with the
neighboring residential uses. This is an area where we could potentially, with L-O zoning,
come in with a much more intensive land use that would generate a lot more traffic. The
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 Fill
Page 8 of 74
neighbors were really happy to see that we were doing this type of live/work product
where we were -- it was a commercial use, but a much lower intensity of traffic, what could
potentially be located there and visually we really matched up with those -- those
neighbors to the north and the neighbors to the west. And I will show you the renderings
here -- here in a second. Let's see. And I -- and we do --we do show a single story office
building. It's a principally permitted use. It's not a part of our application, but we are for
reference showing this and we do meet all your parking standards for that as a standalone
land use. We are proposing three groups of townhouse style live/work buildings. As you
can see, one of the major changes that we made after working with -- with Joe on our
project where we are showing now kind of a centralized open space, we had originally
had two additional units. We thought that that kind of--that that detracted from the project
and so we -- we lost those two units and now have kind of a community gathering area
and some additional open space in that area. Let's see. Here is a copy of our site plan.
We--we really, if anything, were kind of over parked. Each of these individual townhomes
will have a dedicated private patio space and a two car garage and in addition we are
providing 20 plus parking stalls for -- for anyone who is -- who is visiting the businesses
and I will show you the -- the renderings and show you kind of what's part of the design
idea for this was -- these are really marketed towards someone with a professional office,
maybe someone who is younger starting in a business or someone at the tail end of their
career kind of wrapping up a business where you want to live near work and have a
professional office. So, this would be perfect for an architect, an attorney where you can
have clients come in. We -- we have changed our project a little bit. We now have a
dedicated commercial entry to these offices. They are right around 500 square feet. They
vary a little bit in space, but it's a -- it's a dedicated professional office, which is completely
separated from the residential. So, these are going to be -- and we have got some floor
plans -- so, these are two stories. Most of these are two to three bedroom homes. Really
nice for -- I live in a small house in the Boise bench in Boise and these are a lot larger
than the home I live in with my husband and two kids. So, this really is perfect for
someone who is working remotely and for someone who needs to have a professional
office where you can meet with clients, an accountant, an attorney where you don't have
to go meet at Starbucks, which I know a lot of people who work from home do when you
don't have a professional office at home. So, it's really great for people. I think either at
the one end of the spectrum where you are -- you are starting a business up, maybe you
have a very young family or -- or you have a business where maybe, you know, you
continue to your law office, you are working from home and you want to have a
professional office where you are not commuting and spending time away from your
family. So, some of the design idea behind that, I want to show you our colored site plan
that really shows how this ties together and I think if you look really -- so, this is I think --
especially in the kind of neighborhood we are in it's really visually compatible with -- with
the surrounding residential uses and we worked with -- with Joe to make sure that it's --
where we had envisioned maybe like a pretty low, you know, pedestrian -- foot counts for
these businesses, we really -- I think it strengthened the commercial element where we
probably have a wider range of commercial users that can move in and use these where
we have got additional room for signage, we have a -- we have a glass store front and we
have got a dedicated commercial access. So, I think that really kind of widened the range
of commercial uses that -- that would be suitable in this location. Again, we have gone
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F12
Page 9 of 74
through some -- some sizable revisions to our project where we -- just to kind of run
through those again -- where we -- we did lose two of the units and I think adding the
common gathering area open space, sort of a plaza in this area, I think that really -- that
helped to strengthen the project. We have also added some additional sidewalks, some
pedestrian connections and I think really improved our elevations after we went through
major design changes. So, we are here for any questions. We definitely are looking for
a recommendation of approval and -- and want to see if -- if you have any suggestions
for the project. We -- we think it stands on its own and it's going to be a really strong
project and it fits really well in this neighborhood. I know we -- we had those comments
that sounds like they came in from the -- the medical clinic nearby. I wish they would
have come to our neighborhood meeting so they could see a little bit more about what we
are proposing. I think when you first look at the elevations it looks maybe more like a
more traditional multi-family project, but when you look at one of these where you have
got three townhomes, this is not a building with 12 multi-family units, these are -- these
are townhomes with relatively low traffic and I think with a commercial use is very very
compatible with -- with the medical clinic that we are nearby. But we are here for any
questions and we have Dave Yorgason, who is one of the developers of the project, is
here also. Any questions?
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for the applicant or staff?
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner, go ahead.
Cassinelli: Yeah. Are these intended to be owner-occupied -- are these -- on the
residential portions or --
Shrief: Chairman, Commissioners, at this -- at this point we --we are constructing this on
two existing lots. We are not platting the individual units. They -- most likely they will be
constructed with a type of common wall where in the future that it will be an option to -- to
plat those as -- as townhomes. At this point we -- we are not. We are kind of-- the design
makes it conducive where this could be platted in the future for individual --for ownership.
Seal: So, to answer the question they will --
Shrief: No.
Seal: -- they will be rented.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: On that with -- with how this is laid out, then, is the intent to rent the residential
and the commercial separately or as one entity?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F13
Page 10 of 74
Shrief: Chairman, Commissioners, the intent really is for these to be rented out as a -- as
a single entity. I believe it would technically be possible to rent them separately. The
intent is that it's -- it's someone living in a three-bedroom unit and that this is a professional
office. I believe it is -- it's a requirement, Joe, that we -- that it -- we could potentially rent
them separately. That's not the intent.
Dodson: It's not a requirement, no.
Shrief: Okay.
Dodson: Vertically integrated code does not speak to that portion of it.
Seal: Quick question. The -- on the commercial square footage what's the difference
between the units?
Shrief: Chair, Commissioners, they are all a little bit under 500 square feet. We have a
couple of the units where we -- we added to them in this last revisions and we are right
below 500 square feet. If I can bring the floor plan up. It is small though.
Seal: Okay. So, 500 square foot and a few of them are larger than that?
Shrief: I believe that they are all under 500 square feet. Yes.
Seal: Oh.
Shrief: So, Chairman, Commissioners, this is really not meant for a retail space, this is
more professional office.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go right ahead.
Grove: Sorry.
Seal: No, that's okay.
Grove: So, when you -- on this -- this is something that I haven't seen in the past few
years come through. It's a different product type. What is the long-term outlook on
something like this and is this something that's new to Meridian or new to the area? What
are some examples or comps that we -- we can kind of understand where this is at,
because it's not built in with other mixed use pieces around it and it feels, in my opinion,
somewhat out of place and so giving some context around where -- where this is coming
from and having some comparisons to -- to know what we are looking at in the future, I
have some long-term questions, I guess, with what this looks like.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F14
Page 11 of 74
Shrief: Chairman, Commissioners, I -- this is the first time I have worked on this type of
project in -- in Meridian. I think a lot of this has been done in -- in Utah in a similar type
of area where we have mixed uses and adjoining residential uses. I believe there is some
of this in Boise off of Hill Road where you are kind of in a commercial corridor and it's --
and it's a mixed use and I think there is probably a couple different ways to do this type
of vertically integrated use and you may have a little bit of this coming in with your Old
Town where you are in an area where you were in a much more commercial area with
heavier traffic and you potentially have a storefront that's oriented towards more retail
pedestrian traffic. I think this fits really nicely where you -- you are off of a major corridor,
off of Ten Mile, off McMillan in an area where I think if we had a heavy -- a heavy traffic
use, say we were to have like an assisted living facility where you have people and there
is a lot of trips I think that would be less conducive to those neighboring residential areas.
I think what's really different about this is if you look at our -- where we are really
enveloped by residential uses and so I think with this -- kind of this hybrid with an upscale
three bedroom home with a professional office, I think it fits really nicely in where we are
between -- you know, kind -- kind of halfway between the adjoining medical clinic and,
then, we have got -- on two sides of our project we have residences. We are basically in
the middle of a subdivision.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: Thank you. I like creative solutions and I see what you are saying about it
being around like in the residential and trying to get that same look and that's why you
worked with staff in order to make it look that way. I like that, too. I see it -- I'm curious
about on the parking just a couple things. One is on the parking side, if somebody was
to specifically in that northeast corner of the lot there, it looks like there is six extra parking
spaces, four different units; correct? That's what it looks like there. So, it's -- you know,
if somebody had an extra vehicle and they wanted to park it there it could just cause just
a little congestion on that side, just something to think about, but that's been worked out
with staff, too, with some adequate parking there, but just something to think about on
that and, then, are there any amenities going into that landscape area at all?
Shrief: Chair, Commissioners, yes, there will be -- there is sort of a plaza gathering area.
We will have a gazebo and -- and some open space in that area. So, it's meant really to
be a community gathering spot. Each unit does have an attached patio, but it really isn't
conducive to community the way that we thought, like a gathering area would be.
Wheeler: Yeah. I like the idea of it being almost like a -- you know, in the commercial
world they also have what they call an incubator space for like industrial purposes and I
see this kind of almost like an office side and with a lot of people doing a lot of remote
work, consulting work, stuff like that, to be able to have some office attached like that that
they just don't go to the refrigerator and all of a sudden see work there, they have to go
through a door to get to it, maybe they, you know, can get a little bit of a break, too, from
their spot. So, I like that.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F151
Page 12 of 74
Shrief: And I -- Chairman, Commissioners -- and I think really during COVID it changed
so much like what work from home means and -- and I think we have realized how
important it is to have that separation. I know -- my husband and I both worked from
home during COVID and I had the kitchen table as -- as my workspace and I think if we
had had actually, you know, as a separate office and a way to finish up your work day
and go home, I think it's -- it's really really conducive to a lot of careers where you are --
you are working remotely, but, you know, possibly it's something where you are doing
some coordination, you have a sales element, you have a consulting element where you
have customers coming in and -- and that's the kind of thing you really wouldn't --
technically if you were doing a home occupation if you are an accountant you should not
have those people coming to your home and this -- I think with this zoning designation
and this land use it allows you to have, you know, an upscale townhome, a nice place for
your family and -- and to have that professional office attached to your home, which you
really can't do in a residential neighborhood, you technically cannot have people coming
in to your -- to your home office the way you could with a live-work unit.
Seal: Okay. Any other questions?
Yearsley: Mr. Chairman?
Seal: Commissioner Yearsley, go ahead.
Yearsley: So, I have two questions. I'm assuming that the professional offices are mostly
facing the street and -- and so they are going to have to park in the back and walk all the
way around to the front. Is that my understanding or will the professional offices be on
the back side? And the second question I have is what's to say that they just use this as
an extra bonus room as an apartment?
Shrief: Chairman, Commissioners, again, all of these are facing towards the street, the
commercial units, and we actually-- we -- we reoriented our plan to make -- to make sure
of that. These would not be approved as -- as an apartment. This is -- this is not a
dwelling unit, it would not be wired to have a stove. That would -- we -- we could actually
through -- through CC&R's for the project could specifically prohibit that. It is not --would
not be permitted as a second dwelling unit.
Yearsley: Well, I'm just saying -- asking is if someone's going to rent this place they just
make it a fourth bedroom or something, instead of a -- an office.
Shrief: Chairman, Commissioners, I don't -- I don't know if there would be a way to -- to
enforce it to be a professional office. I think most likely at this price point that would --
that would be the disincentive. I think you would be renting one of these because this is
one of the attractions is that you -- you have a professional office with dedicated parking.
I think that would be the -- the disincentive would be probably the price point. But I don't
think -- I don't think it would be prohibited for this to be a bonus room.
Seal: Okay. Anymore questions? All right.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F16
Page 13 of 74
Shrief: We are here for questions. If you have any other concerns or questions, please,
let us know.
Seal: All right. Thank you.
Shrief: Okay. Thank you.
Seal: All right. At this time I will take public testimony.
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, we have one person signed in, not indicating whether they wish to
testify or not. That's Bogdan Martsenyuk. Sorry if I murdered that. Okay. Thank you.
Seal: Okay. Anybody else online would like to testify, please, hit the raise hand. If
anybody in chambers would, please, raise your hand. Come on up.
Yorgason: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Dave Yorgason. I'm part of the
development team with the Verona Live/Work product and I just heard lots of questions
and I just want to make myself available for any questions you had.
Seal: Can you give us your address as well?
Yorgason: My address is 14254 West Battenburg Drive, Boise, Idaho.
Seal: Thank you.
Yorgason: You are welcome. And thank you for the thorough questions. These are great
questions. We have really thought this product through. We did a lot of market research
as well. My son recently moved here to Meridian. He lives in and rents an apartment in
Meridian. Recently graduated and is a tax accountant. This product is for people just like
him. It's for him so he could work out of his homework. Oh, by the way, he is an
entrepreneur. He also has a moving company and so he doesn't want all these little --
whatever, bookkeeping, whatever they do, he wants to have a separate computer. They
are expecting their first child in May and he wants to have a separate space for the baby
and all the crying and the noise that happens with that, which is exciting, it will be my first
grandchild, pretty happy for him, but that's not where mix and, you know, work and -- and
family life needs to have some separation. So, this would be an ideal situation for
someone like him and many others. So, we just fully intend to be professional office for
those types of users, like -- like my son or others we see moving there. With that in mind
just stand for any questions you have.
Seal: Any other questions? I mean I will -- I will come back to it, but I mean, essentially,
the -- I mean is there going to be some kind of covenant or something along those lines
to -- for things like parking? I mean if you have somebody that moves in there and they
have five cars, what's to prevent them from parking in, you know, the spaces that are
provided there and as well as the business use. That to me -- in my mind there has got
to be something that makes it some kind of code enforcement or something along those
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F17
Page 14 of 74
lines that makes it to where these are going to be utilized the way that they are being
presented tonight. So, how is that going to be --
Yorgason: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, great question. We actually looked at
condominiumizing -- a condominium plat for this thing, but it just doesn't fit. We are just
looking for your approval, really. Frankly, do you like this concept or not. There is a great
need for it in the city. Frankly, a great need across the Treasure Valley for products just
like this. But having said that, to your point about parking, there is almost twice as much
parking as what's needed for this site. You have to remember there is two car garages
for each one of these units also and as staff has pointed out, only one is required and,
that's fine, we have two for each unit, plus we have guest parking, plus we have the
parking for the commercial spaces. So, we think there is substantial parking for the site.
So, hopefully, that addresses your concern there. The staff report even addresses that
and I think our legend on the -- on the site plan also does a full count of the -- of the
parking what's required versus what's being offered. Again, it's quite a bit more. You
identified the uses. If you want us to put something in the -- in a supplemental CC&R's
we can do that. We are not afraid of that. We are not here to propose one thing and bait
and switch and give you something else. It is definitely intended to have office use out
front. I don't even think we have a closet like you would be required to have for a fourth
bedroom in this office space. That's not the case. It's an office. In fact, offices for desks
and like you normally would have for an office. So, in order to convert that out they would
have to go through a full change of the building in order to have that qualify for -- for that
and, likewise, I don't think it's a full bath downstairs. I think it's just a partial bath with a
sink and toilet, just as all you need for -- for your office use. So, it's not designed that
way. It is a new floor plan. It's never been built. It's a brand new plan that we have
designed specific to the site. So, we hope you like it. I think it's going to be a wonderful
addition to the city and, hopefully, your approval tonight.
Seal: Thank you.
Yorgason: You are welcome. Thank you.
Seal: Anybody else want to come up and give public testimony? Anybody online?
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, I don't see anybody with their hand raised.
Seal: Okay. We have only heard from the applicant. Is there anything you would like to
add? Okay. All right. At this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item
No. H-2021-0080?
Lorcher: So moved.
Wheeler: Second.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H-2021-0080.
All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F18
Page 15 of 74
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: I will start off. I think the challenge we might -- I will be having is because we
have nothing to compare this with here in the City of Meridian. I did notice that over on
Eagle Road kind of by that new big car wash and Wingers and Dick's Sporting Goods and
Hobby Lobby, if you go down some of those side streets you will see some work living
space. They have been there for about a year. They have not sold. I think one has sold
and the rest are still vacant. So, when the developer says we need this here, we haven't
had it before, it doesn't mean it won't sell, but it seems like our businesses and renters
have, you know, been able to work with something else. But that doesn't mean we
shouldn't try it. This has been a successful concept in other markets. This might be a
good place to give it a go.
Dodson: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go ahead, Joe.
Dodson: I just wanted to -- and no arguing -- I'm not arguing with you at all, but I have
approved some -- I guess TI's some for the -- that's the Brickyard is the one you are
talking about off of Eagle. So, businesses are going in there, but the biggest difference
between that product and this is that there is no interior connection between the
residential and the commercial like there is in this product. So, that's the same concept,
so to speak. It's vertically integrated, but there is not the interior connection. They are
actual separate commercial suites.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: I like the -- the exteriors on it, the way that it's going to blend in well as
somebody drives around the street there, takes a look at the residential homes they are
going to realize that these are a little bit different use, but it's going to blend in well. I like
that concept of it being that live/work area a lot, just because of the way that the work
from home -- there is a lot of consultants that work just in this area here, too. My -- my
concerns are based around the parking aspect of it. I can see the garages turning into
storage and the parking happening outside and, then, we are going to lose some of those
parking spaces for the distance walking from the -- you know, the block that's on the far
west, parking there and, then, coming all the way over. If there is -- but I don't see this
also as a heavy traffic use area for -- for these sites. Those -- that's a -- that's about the
main concern that I have with it. I like the aspect of it having like a gazebo or something
in there, because I can see some -- some think tank talks or meeting with a client or
customer out in that area, too, during nice days that we get here, but I personally like this
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F19
Page 16 of 74
kind of creative solution to using this land that doesn't have to deal with strictly retail or
shop or something of that nature. I like that kind of creative solution and I'm kind of
curious how -- and excited to see how it's going to turn out.
Dodson: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Joe.
Dodson: Thank you. Again, since I have heard parking come up, I did want to just clarify.
Milano Drive, which is the east-west road along the south boundary, that's a collector, so
there should not be any on-street parking there. So, they can't utilize any of that.
However, Cortona Way is a local street, which is the east boundary, that, my
understanding, does not prohibit on-street parking, so they could -- I guess that would be
where I would anticipate a customer coming to do their taxes or whatever, since that's
what they are going for, would park along the frontage there and not utilize the parking
on the interior. They could, obviously, as well, but I just wanted to put that out there, that
that should be available. I don't believe that that's marked as no parking on Cortona Way.
Seal: Okay. Thank you.
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, do you want to go?
Cassinelli: If I may on that. I'm just pulling it up on -- on Google Maps, Joe, and --
Seal: We can just barely hear you, Bill, so you might want to get a little closer to your
mic.
Cassinelli: Okay. Is this any better?
Seal: A little better. A little closer if you can.
Cassinelli: Any better now?
Seal: Yep. That's good.
Cassinelli: Okay. Joe, if I may, I'm pulling -- I pulled up Google Maps here and I'm seeing
no parking signed on Cortona and also it's a -- it's a separated sidewalk with a grass strip
there, so it doesn't really lend itself to somebody -- even if they could -- even if they were
able to -- to re-sign that and allow parking along there, you got -- there is no pathways
there, unless those were to go in. So, I have got a concern on that.
Dodson: Understood. Sometimes I'm wrong.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F20]
Page 17 of 74
Cassinelli: It's just what I'm seeing pulling up Google. I'm not over there right now, so I
think that would be --to my fellow Commissioners I think that would be critical. And, then,
I guess while I'm talking I will just -- I will put my comments out there. There is a lot of
things I like about this project. I think this is perfect for Old Town for some in-fill and even
in this area maybe further towards the hard corner up against the Jacksons, I just--where
it's at and the -- the walk up to the -- to the front of the buildings, I -- I just don't know if it's
in the right spot in this -- in this area, but there is a lot of things I really like about the
product and I think there is a -- I think there is a need for it and a demand for it, I just don't
know if I'm convinced that where it's projected to be is the right spot.
Seal: Okay. And I will jump in. I like the concept. I like the idea. I think there is a need
for it. I mean I know there is -- I'm -- the admin group that started here in Meridian, this
is kind of how they started, only they, you know, reversed it and started out of their garage,
because there wasn't a space like this. Successful business. And I mean I have a father-
in-law who is a retired attorney, which just means he takes clients at home now, that
would probably enjoy a space like this. Somebody on the retirement end of the spectrum
I would imagine would more -- would more than likely own versus rent. I can't imagine
them wanting to rent something to accomplish this. You know, ownership or something
along those lines to have that space to be able to do business out of would be good. And
there is a hundred things -- good things that this could fulfill here. The -- the issue that I
have with it are the people that are going to take advantage of it. I just see it as a nice
little tax haven where they can have their LLC and, you know, like Commissioner Yearsley
said, just kind of use that front space as an extra play area or something, you know,
something along those lines and the concern with parking is, you know, when you get
somebody that uses those garages for storage -- let's say they -- they start a business,
they are wildly successful, the next thing you know their garage is going to be storage or
even the commercial space would become storage and, then, the cars are going to be
parked outside and I mean so on and so forth. Kind of the same problems you are going
to have in a subdivision if somebody is trying to run a business out of there. So, I really
like the product. I do have issues that it's, essentially, attached to the rest of the house
where you can just walk freely into it. The smaller units -- I think the amount of square
foot -- square footage that's in there for the commercial space is just not adequate
personally. I -- I think that's just going to lend itself to somebody being able to work
remotely, but if they had a hundred percent remote business that would work for them.
But, again, if you have a hundred percent remote business, then, you know, an office or
a spare bedroom is going to do the same thing for you. So, anyway, I -- I'm a little on the
fence with this one, so -- I can see the need for it, but I'm afraid it's going to -- the way
that it's set up I think it would be easy to take advantage of it.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: Start off with some of the things that I liked about the project. In general I like
vertically integrated projects. I will get to the particulars later, but I -- I like mixed use. I
like doing those. I like unique approaches and dedicated parking. I agree that we have
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F21
Page 18 of 74
a residential need and an office need and I think probably a mixed use need, but I don't
like how this project is constituted in terms of the how the uses are laid out. The -- to me
as a -- if I were to be using this space as a client I wouldn't know where to go when I
parked and I think that if it -- it leads to confusion. It -- which leads to frustration. I think
that long term the -- I would -- long term I would like to see more examples, I guess, of
like how does this product actually look ten years down the road when needs have shifted.
We -- we know how offices operate. We know how residential operates and in certain
areas we know how mixed use operates over time. This to me is -- it brings a lot of
unknowns. It doesn't fit with what is around it in terms of use. A lot of mixed use works,
because there are other projects that it can tie into that it can be a part of and -- and so I
have some -- some real concerns there. I think the -- as L-O it's close to a major arterial
road on Ten Mile where you can build office and you don't have those customers going
through a subdivision to get there, so the traffic concern in terms of what residents would
have are -- are not as much as if this were in the -- if office was in the middle of a
subdivision, for example. So, it's -- it's at the front end. It -- it's the best place for office.
It makes sense for traditional office. There is already office complexes right next to it. I
-- I hate to lose anything that can -- where we have the opportunity to build needed office
space in the city. Five hundred square foot offices do not, in my opinion, help alleviate
that office need and so I -- I just have a lot of concerns and objections on what we have
here. I don't have any necessarily like modifications that I could make and so I -- I
personally can't get behind this project.
Seal: Okay. Thank you.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: Just a quick clarification on this here. I was taking a cruise on Google -- Google
Maps and I --and I -- I only saw the no parking signs posted on Milano, but not on Cortana.
So, it looks like they could park in front on this, unless it was something I'm missing and
that's -- and that's possible.
Seal: Yeah. I think Joe clarified that, that they can park there.
Wheeler: Yeah. That would be nice to get that clarified while that moved forward one
way or another, but --
Dodson: We did our own Google Map search and that's what we thought, too, is that
Cortona is available for parking, but Milano is not. We didn't see any no parking signs.
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F22
Page 19 of 74
Lorcher: It seems like we are a little bit split as far as whether we are going to approve
or deny. Do we want to maybe suggest a continuance with -- with more history of other
-- what did you call them? Comprehensive -- comparables, so that we can -- because
this is a new product and because we have never seen it before and what it would look
like in five years or ten years and how that would integrate and, then, possibly indicating
some CC&Rs that the garages are only used for cars, not for storage, and so to answer
some of the concerns as far as taking advantage of the space.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: I wouldn't be in favor of a continuance. The comparables would be nice for me,
but it -- it doesn't change the fact that it doesn't have the supporting uses around it to --
to really necessitate the -- this type of design and so I -- I don't -- I would like to have that
in general for this new product type, but, regardless, for me I would still have a very difficult
time approving this with -- without the surrounding infrastructure in terms of compatible
uses that are -- that would be in place to really make this work, so --
Seal: And I am -- honestly, I think the -- the live/work part of it I mean I like that. I -- I like
that it's a smaller footprint, although I think too small in the -- in this -- in those middle
smaller units. It is a little confusing as far as where you would park and where you would
come in. That said I -- I would feel a lot better about, you know, people utilizing the space,
honestly, if it didn't have a door that just opened up into your residence. That's kind of
where I'm at on it personally, you know, and I know there are people out there -- I mean
I was a consultant for several years, had my own business. I inhabited a -- you know, a
bedroom and, you know, it was -- I always had to meet at a coffee shop and things like
that. So, having a space like this would have been nice for sure. You know, I quit doing
that and if I was going to stay in there, then, it would have just become a play room. So,
I don't know, you know, how we get to the point of, you know, that space really being
utilized as a business, other than basically kind of cordoning it off from the rest of the
house where you enter and exit just like anybody else does. That's kind of where I'm --
I'm at with it. But that would require, you know, redesigning it, so --
Yearsley: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Yearsley, go ahead.
Yearsley: I -- I think I share a lot of your concerns. Ultimately as I see this, it's -- it's a
glorified apartment with an office -- a home office that you can work from home is -- is the
feel that I get for this. It's not -- you know, if -- if it were me and I was having my own
business I think it would be ownership. I wouldn't want to rent this, I would rather have
-- own the apartment and that's I think where -- where my rub is is the -- the ownership
part of this, so I -- I don't know. I -- I kind of sit on the fence. Ultimately I see it just as a
glorified apartment for the most part and not really an office use.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F23
Page 20 of 74
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? So, the great thing about being chair is
somebody else has to come up with a motion here, so --and I --you know, I -- I'm honestly
-- you know, I'm still on the fence about it. I'm more leaning towards like, you know,
probably either a denial or a continuation in order to let them take another crack at this,
because I think it does have legs. I mean if this were Old Town, something along those
lines, had great frontage to it, then, it would be a different story, but -- I mean there are
going to be a lot of people driving by it. That is a major residential area. There is going
to be a lot of other things that go in there, so I think the opportunity to have folks driving
by is there. I do agree with Commissioner Yearsley on the own versus rent. I think this
-- if this had ownership tied to it, then, that would be different as well. I mean if you own
it, you know, you cordon that off to where your -- your business -- you come in and out of
that door, the same door that your customers are going to, then, that would help as well
for me. But we have neither of those right now.
Dodson: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Yes, Joe. You sound a lot like Commissioner Cassinelli, so I'm almost ready to tell
him it's okay to speak every time.
Dodson: Commissioner McCarvel always got we -- you and I confused, so -- at least
when you were out. The -- usually when we get to this point -- I don't want to belabor this
more than what we need to. Lord knows I want my time back, too. But the -- we get to
this point we usually open up the public hearing again and hear from the applicant about
which way they would prefer. Obviously, not a denial. But it sounds like, just so I know
and for everybody on the record, that more commercial space, potential condo plat, and
clarification on parking would be things that could get you guys somewhere better. I don't
know. Not for everybody. I understand. But is that worth a continuance? Is it -- or is
that a condition -- those are the reasons for denial? I just want to make sure whatever
motion is made that it's very clear.
Seal: Understood. Commissioners, would you like to open it up to talk to the applicant?
Commissioner Yearsley? Commissioner Cassinelli?
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair, this is Bill, not Joe.
Seal: Thank you.
Cassinelli: In -- in kind of piggybacking off Commissioner Yearsley's comments about the
glorified apartments, when -- when we look back at the -- the -- the gist of this, this is a
CUP. This is going into what is already zoned as light office. So, in theory, we are looking
at changing light office to what really is 90 percent apartment and ten percent home based
office, which really -- which really changes it. Again, I'm -- I'm a great fan of some of
these live/work projects and I think in a -- in another -- in another place I would be willing
to -- to -- to throw something out, but it would be -- and -- and before I do maybe if another
Commissioner wants to take a stab at a continuous -- continuance, but I -- my -- my gut
feel is a flat-out denial on this one, just because of where it's located, not the project in
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F24
Page 21 of 74
itself, but where it's specifically located. But if somebody else wants to maybe jump in
there and -- and look at a continuance --
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: I would like to make a motion to open back up public testimony.
Seal: For H-2021-0080?
Wheeler: Sorry. You know, I'm kind of green at this stuff.
Seal: That's okay. That's okay.
Wheeler: All right. I would like to make a motion to open up public testimony for Item No.
H-2021-0080.
Seal: Do I have second?
Grove: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to reopen the public hearing for H-2021-0080. All
in favor say aye. Any opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Seal: Okay. Would the applicant like to come back up, so we can ask a few specific
questions. I will just lead off with you. You have heard our concerns and we would like
to -- because we are the approving body for this, I mean I -- I -- I think we would like to
see this in a different light. Is there the opportunity to provide for ownership versus
renting? Is there the opportunity to maybe reconfigure the way things are done in order
to ensure that businesses are going to be operating in there, because the concern was
raised that this is replacing what would, essentially, be office space, no residence. So,
yes, it's a really neat product, but we have got to make sure that it fits in the area that it's
in, so --
Shrief: Chairman, Commissioners, my client and I were listening very intently as you --
as you went through some of your concerns on the project and we would really appreciate
it if we could come back in a couple of weeks. We want to look at the CC&Rs, look at
how we can --we can seal that up with those business uses being required and we would
like to close -- close that. We want to look at -- we would potentially be interested in a
condition requiring us to have a condo plat prior to occupancy where we could start
construction. Meanwhile, we would concurrently have a condo plat that would run through
-- that would come through hearings prior to occupancy of these units. We are more than
amenable to having that condition of approval that we actually allow this -- this would be
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F25]
Page 22 of 74
owner occupied and that we go ahead and plat this. We also want to go in and -- and
come up with exhibits and address how exactly parking is going to operate out here and
we also want to look -- re-examine the amount of commercial space we are proposing.
So, we would like to do a revamp. Thank you for giving us some direction, but we would
like the opportunity to come back and take some of that direction to heart and give you
what you think works in this area.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anybody want to --
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: Question. These are fairly substantial changes I'm assuming on different parts
of this. How much time minimum would -- would you want before we start looking at our
schedule, just so that we have some idea of how far out we need to push this? You know,
is it two weeks, is it a month, what are we kind of looking at from a schedule standpoint?
Yorgason: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Grove, I actually don't see this as
substantial.
Grove: Okay.
Yorgason: Most this is text and conditions of approval. For example, requiring a condo
plat prior to certificate of occupancy is a condition of approval. But that's -- that's not
anything different than that. Some of these like floor plan changes, taking the door out,
and -- and making sure there is only single access to the front, so you don't have that
alternate access, as Commissioner Seal had referred to. This has never been envisioned
as glorified rentals. It's not what they are. Sorry that you thought they were. We actually
would like to make them for sale units, but we don't want to keep spending money on a
project if you just want to deny it. So, if there is a chance we will move forward then we
will make a really nice product for you. But if you just don't want it here, just deny it
tonight, please. Because I don't want to waste anymore money on this project. I will take
my money and put in some other city where they do appreciate our business. Now, I'm
not going to be a little more upset than that, I'm just a little surprised at some of the
comments tonight. This is going to be a beautiful product and the neighbors all liked it,
by the way. You don't see a lot of opponents here. All the neighbors liked it. And -- and
so with that in mind we -- we would appreciate continuance. I do think two weeks would
be adequate, if there is enough room on your agenda for that, and we can help work with
staff to what those revised conditions might look like to address the concerns tonight. We
can make a slight adjustment to the floor plan in that amount of time as well.
Seal: Thank you.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F26
Page 23 of 74
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: Dave, I would -- I would also just suggest also taking a look at the --the storage
area in the parking side where the -- there would be a restriction for the occupants to not
park outside, things like that, because that was also a concern, because we have seen
this happen in the past where there have been nice apartments with the -- with the
attached garages and they just become attached storage and, then, the parking stuff
starts becoming a concern and that's just -- that's just the normal temperature up here
seeing these kind of things, so just --
Yorgason: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Wheeler, I understand that. I see a lot
of apartment complexes where they have covered parking, non-covered parking, open
parking and the covered parking turns into a garage. I know that. And so we debated
that, if we should even have this as a garage or not. If we should -- that's not really
required. But it's an amenity. It's actually a -- a nicer addition to the community, to the
area. So, we will look at that. Thank you.
Dodson: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Joe, go ahead.
Dodson: I appreciate the applicant's vigor for two weeks, but I can't get new plans and
review things in two weeks with other projects and -- and the work that I have. I just can't.
And it wouldn't even, technically, meet code, which requires 15 days prior to the hearing,
which would be yesterday. So, I -- if we did the first hearing in March it's fine or any of
them in March,
Seal: Okay.
Dodson: I'm okay with that. I'm pretty sure we are very busy in the upcoming meetings,
so I know how that -- that works.
Seal: So, first week in March looks available?
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, both meetings are still open for noticing, which means that the
Planning Department may have more projects coming through. But currently there are
two scheduled for March 3rd, so this would be number three. There are three scheduled
for March 17th. So, this would be number four.
Dodson: And I have projects on both, so I will be here anyways.
Seal: Okay. So, it looks like March 3rd would be our target date for that for whoever was
going to make the motion. So, is that the sum of our questions?
Dodson: Yeah. Mr. Chair, I would just clarify again. Be very clear in the continuance
about what you want to receive from the applicant. It did sound like you guys do want to
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F27
Page 24 of 74
see revised floor plans. So, I just want to make that clear so there is no
miscommunication.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. All right.
Yorgason: Thank you.
Seal: Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Okay. At this time can I get a motion to
close a public hearing for H-2021-0080.
Yearsley: Mr. Chair --
Cassinelli: So moved.
Yearsley: -- if -- if we continue this don't we need to leave the public hearing open?
Seal: You are absolutely correct. So, I am also new at this. Thank you. Okay. If that's
the direction we are going, who would like to take a stab at the motion?
Wheeler: I will -- I will make a motion here, if that's good with you guys.
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: I would like to -- let's see here. I move that we continue file number H-2021-
0080 to the hearing date of March 3rd for the following reasons: For the applicant to work
with ownership -- what do we call that? What would you say that --
Seal: Owner occupied.
Wheeler: Owner occupied solutions, parking solutions and -- was there something else?
Was that mainly it?
Seal: Commercial space utilization. Redesign.
Wheeler: And commercial space utilization --
Grove: With revised floor plans.
Wheeler: With the revised floor plans.
Seal: Can I get a second?
Lorcher: Second.
Yearsley: Second.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F28
Page 25 of 74
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to continue Item No. H-2021-0080 to the date of
March 3rd, 2022, with modifications. All in favor say aye. Any opposed?
Grove: Nay.
Seal: Got that? Do we need to --
Weatherly: For the record, Commissioner Grove, was that a nay from you? Thank you.
Seal: All right. The continuance passes. All right. Thank you very much for that.
MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE NAY.
6. Public Hearing Continued from January 6, 2022 for Apex West
Subdivision (H-2021-0087) by Brighton Development, Inc., Located on
the North Side of E. Lake Hazel Rd., Approximately 1/4 Mile West of S.
Locust Grove Rd.
A. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 208 building lots (207 single-
family and 1 multi-family) and 34 common lots on 96.08 acres in the
R-2, R-8 and R-15 zoning districts.
Seal: All right. At this point we will move on to public hearing for Apex West Subdivision,
H-2021-0087, continued from January 6th, 2022, and we will begin with the staff report.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. The next application before
you is a request for a preliminary plat. This site consists of 96.08 acres of land. It's zoned
R-2, R-8 and R-15 and it's located on the north side of East Lake Hazel Road,
approximately a quarter mile west of South Locust Grove Road. This property was
annexed with the previous Shafer View Terrace and Apex Developments and is included
in their respective development agreements. The Comprehensive Plan future land use
map designations for this property -- there is three of them -- are low density residential,
medium density residential, and medium high density residential. You can see that here
on this map here on your left. The green is low density, the yellow is medium and this is
medium high. The proposed preliminary plat is shown on the left. It consists of 208
building lots, 207 single family lots, and one lot for future development of townhomes or
multi-family apartments and 34 common lots on 96.08 acres of land in the R-2, R-8 and
R-15 zoning districts for Apex West Subdivision. The subdivision is proposed to develop
in four phases as shown on the phasing plan on the right there. The proposed plat
includes a portion of the parcel to the east depicted on the plat as Lot 1, Block 5, and the
surrounding area and that is this area right here that we are talking about. The entire
parcel around that must be included in the boundary of the proposed plat or a property
boundary adjustment application must be approved to either include that area in the
adjacent parcel or to create a separate developable parcel. A portion of the lot cannot be
included as it would create an illegal split. Therefore, staff recommends prior to the City
Council approval of the subject application a property boundary adjustment application
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F29
Page 26 of 74
shall be approved. Three future development areas are depicted on the plat. Lots 32
and 43, Block 6, that's the two triangle ones here at the north end and Lot 1, Block 1,
rectangular parcel here at the south end, that are be --to be resubmitted and/or developed
under separate applications in the future. Access is proposed at the northwest corner of
the development from Quartz Creek Street, a collector street, from South Meridian Road,
from South Sublimity Avenue and South Apex Avenue, both collector streets, via East
Lake Hazel Road. Stub streets are proposed to adjacent properties for future extension
and interconnectivity. Qualified open space consisting of linear open space, open grassy
areas at least 5,000 square feet in area, eight foot wide pathways -- excuse me --
parkways and street buffers along collectors and arterial streets are proposed in excess
of UDC standards. Site amenities consisting of a swimming pool with changing facilities
and a restroom, two segments of the city's multi-use pathway system, totaling
approximately half a mile and a playground, are proposed in excess of UDC standards.
The three future development areas will be required to comply with the open space and
site amenity standards upon development. The McBirney Lateral crosses this site within
a 41 foot wide easement and the Watkins Drain runs along the west side of the site within
a 38 foot wide easement, as depicted on the plat. These waterways are proposed to be
piped --excuse me. The Watkins Drain, the applicant is actually requesting to leave open.
They submitted that request recently. So, that will require Council approval of a waiver
to that section of code to allow it to remain open. And the McBirney is proposed to be
piped. Conceptual building elevations in a variety of materials and colors were submitted
forfuture single-family residential detached homes in this development as shown. Homes
on lots along collector streets are required to incorporate certain design standards as
noted in the staff report, since they will be highly visible. Written testimony has been
received from Julie Edwards, a neighbor. She is concerned with the provision of the three
common driveways within the development and associated traffic congestion as
discussed at the Commission hearing for Apex East. Concern pertaining to parking in
relation to the alley access units and the adequacy of such for guests on the adjacent
public streets, especially with the common driveways proposed and parking issues
associated with those typically. Suggests some of the building lots be eliminated in favor
of provision of a guest parking lot in addition to the on-street parking and elimination of
the common driveways in favor of larger lots in those areas. School capacity concerns
from the proposed development and others in the area. Written testimony was also
received from the applicant Josh Beach of Brighton Corporation. They are in agreement
with the staff report, except for condition number seven, which requires all waterways on
the site to be piped in accord with UDC standards. The applicant, as I mentioned, is
requesting Council approval of a waiver to 11-3A-6B to leave the Watkins Drain open as
an amenity feature. Staff will stand for any questions.
Seal: Okay. At this time would the applicant like to come forward?
Wardle: Mr. Chair, Commission Members, Mike Wardle, Brighton Corporation at 2929
West Navigator in Meridian. 83642. Sonya's given you the -- the real depth of the
information, but I want to just add a little bit of flesh to it to illustrate some of the issues
that she talked about and, again, the only real issue that you will see in a few moments
relates to just a drain that is not really much of a waterway, but it's part of an amenity area
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F30
Page 27 of 74
that we would propose to receive Council approval for. I'm not getting the -- do we have
control, Sonya? Okay. As Sonya noted, it's part of the area that was annexed back --
actually by the city action some seven years ago and, then, two years ago we had a larger
area before you that rezoned some of the parcels and received preliminary plat approval
for the areas at the intersection of Lake Hazel as it's just noted there is A and W, which
is Apex Northwest and, then, Apex Southeast opposite that and, then, recent approval of
Apex East on the east side of Discovery Park. So, we are talking about, then, just the
parcel Apex West. All of this was done, of course, in -- in accordance with the
Comprehensive Plan and the underlying zoning as noted here, with the estate lots, the
eight estate lots to the northwest corner, being retained as R-2, with R-8 and, then, a
parcel in the future in R-15. Some of the details relative to the site. Shafer View, of
course, to the west was one of those farm subdivisions where the open space was
retained and there has been approval subsequently for the remainder of their properties
for a subdivision. So, what we have east of Shafer, of course, is the -- just some of the
features. The green diagonal is the Williams Pipeline corridor that will be at-- in the future
added as a pathway corridor and fully landscaped, connecting as it actually will to the
east and southeast to Discovery Park and, then, where ever it goes to the northwest in
the future with adjacent development. The Watkins Drain as noted, there are two
segments. We have actually -- we will pipe the area that's along the roadways near the
southwest corner of this parcel and you can see where it actually goes through the
property currently. All of that will be piped, but, then, when you get to the area where it
leaves the roadway section, that portion, as you will see in just a moment, actually
becomes part of a common lot, an open space area, and there is actually a -- let me go
back for a second. You can -- you can see in the middle of the drawing there is an arrow
that says city sewer access multi-use pathway. That -- the sewer is actually in that
alignment. It was installed several years ago to serve the Apex Northwest and the
southeast subdivisions that are under construction. So, that sewer access will actually
be paved as the pathway. Gives the city the access to maintain their sewer system,
provides access for pedestrians along a connection that will meet up with a ten foot
pathway on the west side of Sublimity Avenue, which is the road coming in from Lake
Hazel. Again, you can kind of see this area a little bit more where the green stands out.
as Sonya noted, it's just over 96 acres, R-2, R-8 and some R-15, 207 single family lots
actually depicted in the project as it's proposed. Forty-six of those are either alley, 36 of
them, and, then, ten are rear loaded that I will talk about in just a moment, with three
common lots serving nine lots -- as a common drive serving nine lots. We are well aware
that there is a lot of concern about those, but they are allowed under city code. We utilize
them and have successfully -- successfully utilized them in many of our projects and we
minimize to the extent that we can, but occasionally there are some corners that we -- we
do that. The Watkins amenity pathway corridor and sewer access is depicted in this open
space exhibit. The qualified open space as noted exceeds the city's requirement at just
nearly 17 percent of the site, with the amenities being proposed as the community pool.
You can see a little tag over on the east side where it depicts that site a little bit more and,
then, of course, the playground associated with that. The pathway along Mc Birney and,
then, the Watkins as well. Again, just dialing in a little bit more that shows a little bit more
of the character of the pathway through the McBirney piped corridor. The Williams
Pipeline up to the north it shows the future alignment and I would note that the Williams
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F31
Page 28 of 74
Pipeline folks are in the process now of starting to upgrade facilities, knowing that
development is coming and so they are working over near the intersection and particularly
through the -- the park area and the Gem -- Gem Prep School site that's under
construction. So, during the course of our development there will be upgrades to the
Williams Pipeline and, then, eventually that will be an open space sodded corridor. They
won't allow really in the -- in terms of trees or anything, but it will be just a nice 70 foot
wide greenway connecting all of the facilities from Discovery Park and, then, that would
also provide an access -- it would connect, then, to the -- the McBirney pathway, which,
then, connects over to the Watkins pathway. The information that Sonya noted from Ms.
Edwards that lives to the north of the Apex project, she had concerns about the alley
product and I'm going to jump in a moment and show you what that alley product actually
looks like and she had expressed concern about parking and so forth. But the alley
loaded lots, they are highlighted in the purple, are 120 foot deep lots and they all have a
minimum 20 foot parking pad at the rear. The lots over facing Apex Avenue on the east
side of that highlighted in red are 130 feet deep. Those lots -- or those dwellings will
actually face the product on the east side of that collector roadway at 130 foot deep. They
will also have a minimum rear loaded parking pad and just so that you will see what that
is, I'm going to just jump way ahead for a moment. This is a real life example of what we
have done in Paramount and in alley loaded product that we have -- in Paramount the
lots are 114 feet deep. In comparison in Apex West the alley lots are 120. The rear
loaded are 130. The street frontage -- because there are no driveways you have on-
street parking available along the frontage of those alley-loaded lots. A 20 foot wide alley
is flanked on each side by minimum 20 foot parking pads and if you have two or three --
and you can see a three car garage to the left, but you can see that -- in fact, the next
one you have got the big pickup on the right. So, those lots are actually six feet shallower
than the smallest lot that we have in our alley loaded product in Apex and I would note
that when we did this Paramount project it mirrors what we did -- what we pioneered in
the city -- Brighton did at Harris Ranch when we did all of the alley loaded products there
that required a minimum 20 foot parking pad, so that you did not have, you know, the
opportunity for, as you expressed earlier, the concern of people utilizing their garages for
storage and no place to park. That's not the case here. So, I'm going to go back for just
a moment and just look at the Watkins Drain. I did some review through the Google Earth
street view and couldn't see any water in any of it, so this is exactly -- these shots were
taken yesterday. Shafer View Subdivision on the left. Apex on the right. And that corridor
-- and you can see the existing city sewer access road that will become the multi-use
pathway. That area, then, down to and through the drain will be part of a common lot that
will be landscaped and we hope that there is some water that might trickle through there
occasionally, certainly during the summer irrigation season there will be some, but it's not
a -- really a significantly defined channel throughout most of it. So, again, we will be
asking the -- the City Council for a waiver to allow that drain behind those R-2 estate lots
to be maintained as an open waterway amenity with that multi-use pathway in the city
sewer access. With that we actually concur with staff's recommendation for approval of
Apex West with all of the city and agency comments, subject to that one item that we will
take to the Council. I would be happy to answer your questions.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions for the applicant or staff?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F32
Page 29 of 74
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: A question to -- my question for you on -- actually, on phasing of the roadway that
is to be built as a fire lane through phase one, two, and three, but would, then, be
converted to a road into the subdivision in phase four. Is there any possibility of moving
the construction of that to an earlier phase or is there a purpose for it being constructed
as a roadway in phase four, instead of earlier?
Wardle: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Grove, I'm going to have to ask my boss, because
I'm not really acquainted with that aspect. And, Sonya, I would -- could you bring back
up the phasing plan.
J.Wardle: Commissioners, for the record Jon Wardle. 2929 West Navigator. Just to
clarify, I may technically be his boss on paper, but that doesn't mean anything, so -- to
Commissioner Grove's question, the -- the phasing plan here showing the road in red,
Commissioner Grove, we -- we are working on a couple different things that -- part of the
reason we -- we can't do it at the very beginning is we do have that Watkins that we do
need to tile in the off season, so we -- we aren't conflicting with that, but we also are
entering into a CDA with ACHD to continue Lake Hazel as a five lane road through this
corridor. So, there is going to be a variety of improvements that need to happen there.
The emergency access is beneficial at the very beginning. However, we do have direct
access out to Locust Grove and we have two different ways to get to Locust Grove and
we have two different ways to get to Lake Hazel in the interim as well. So, it's not -- it's
not a complete dead end, we do want to have it there as quickly as possible, but it will be
problematic for us to do it at the very first phase of this project.
Grove: Okay. Thank you.
J.Wardle: Thank you.
Seal: Okay. Do we have any other questions? Okay.
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair, this is Bill. Sorry. I was trying to unmute.
Seal: Oh. Go ahead, Commissioner Cassinelli.
Cassinelli: The amenity that you are wanting to make use of the -- of the Watkins Lateral
is -- would that be -- is that an additional amenity or is that your third amenity?
J.Wardle: Mr. Chair, to make sure I understood Commissioner Cassinelli's question, he
was asking if the Watkins pathway and open space is an additional amenity or if it's tied
in with our overall amenity package. It's -- it's part of our entire package with all the
pathway systems, you know, that mobility piece of it and pathways. Just to note, these
are not the -- the city has a pathway plan and we have worked with Kim Warren about
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F33
Page 30 of 74
what that would be and, ultimately, the -- the city designated pathway would be the one
that would go through the Williams Pipeline. These are new additional pathways outside
of those.
Cassinelli: But the comment there -- and not wanting to pipe that is to keep it as a -- as
an amenity feature to leave it open. So, I guess my question is if -- if that were -- if that
were piped would that reduce your amenities? Is that -- that drain, keeping it open and
making it an amenity, is that one of your -- is that one of the amenities to meet the
minimums?
J.Wardle: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Cassinelli, the open space still counts. It's just a
question of whether we are tiling it or if we are leaving it open. So, there is really no
difference in terms of the amenity. It's still with the open space corridor. We just believe
that this part of it, along the Watkins that we are asking to leave it open, has actually an
opportunity to be something different than just a tiled piped waterway. So, our preference
is to leave it open. If the City Council decides that they prefer that it be tiled, the amenity
calculation doesn't change, it's still the same count open space and all of that.
Cassinelli: Okay. Thank you.
Wardle: Thank you.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: I have one last question. With the amenities for Apex, is this -- is Apex looked at
as an overall project or is Apex West, Apex Northwest, Apex East, like are all of the
directions separate or are they tied together in any way in terms of residents in one -- in
West are they able to use amenities in another portion of the development?
Wardle: Mr. Chair and Commissioner Grove, important clarification. We appreciate that.
No, it's all part of one. Unfortunately, when you do a preliminary plat you have to
distinguish it for file purposes and for the county's purposes. So, no, it's all part and parcel
and these folks will, in fact, utilize -- it doesn't really show up here, but we have that very
strong community core that's taking place at the northwest corner of Lake Hazel and
Locust Grove and that will all, again, tie together as part of that complete community. All
same covenants, same restrictions, same association fees and requirements. Thank you.
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead..
Lorcher: Mr. Wardle, based on the written testimony from Julie Edwards, she mentioned
that the common driveways with development associated for traffic connections as -- as
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F34
Page 31 of 74
was here in the hearings for Apex East, were those common driveways approved for
Apex East; do you recall?
Wardle: Mr. Chair and Commissioner Lorcher, yes, they were approved. We made one
modification when we went to the Council. That northwest corner that had been sited
where there were quite a few and it was on a secondary emergency access and so we
actually took one or two lots out of that corner, but the others that were part of that project
were reviewed and approved by the Council. So, again, we are bringing you something
that's allowed by your code. We don't try to overuse it, but there are places that we do
and in this case of the 207 -- or 208 lots, there are nine lots that will be on common drives.
Lorcher: Thank you.
Seal: Okay. Anybody else?
Wardle: Thank you very much.
Seal: Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Okay. At this time we will take public
testimony. Madam Clerk, has anyone signed up? No one has signed up?
Weatherly: No.
Seal: Okay. Anybody online that would like to hit the raise hand button or anybody in
chambers if you would like to come up. No takers? No one online? Okay. Unless the
applicant has something more to add or we have additional questions -- okay. Can I get
a motion to close the public hearing for Item No. H-2021-0087.
Lorcher: So moved.
Wheeler: Second.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H --file number
H-2021-0087. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Seal: Who would like to jump in there?
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal, I will start.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: I'm -- I'm in agreement with Mr. -- is it Beach's comments from Brighton
Corporation to pursue a waiver for open space for -- to have the Watkins open. I -- I don't
know if I'm unique in this respect, but closing every open waterway in Meridian takes
away what the nature of Meridian is like. So, if we keep piping everything in -- one of the
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F35]
Page 32 of 74
things that founded our city was our irrigation and piping it all in takes that away. So, the
more we can leave it open, then, we invite nature into our backyards and our home. So,
I'm definitely in support of this. I'm not a fan of the common driveways for the congestion
and services, but it was approved in Apex East and according to Mr. Wardle they are
fulfilling the city codes.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else want to jump in? Commissioner Wheeler, go
ahead.
Wheeler: I have a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question for staff. Is there
any requirements for -- like fencing or anything along that open waterway?
Allen: Chairman, Commissioners, I have asked the applicant to provide some additional
information prior to the Council meeting on how public service -- public safety is planned
to be preserved with that being open. So, I -- I don't know if they know that now, but I --
I did ask that of the applicant. A little short notice, so they probably haven't had a whole
lot of time to ponder that yet maybe.
Wheeler: Okay. Okay. Yeah. I'm -- I'm in agreement here that I like to see that kind of
an open waterway and I like kind of the views that will be there at least temporary over to
the -- to the east from that section, too, so -- thank you.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: I think this ties in well with the other portions of -- of the Apex project. Seeing
some of the zoomed out pieces where it -- how it connects with the other plan pieces or
under development pieces help -- especially with the -- the open space area on the east
side, seeing how that connected with like the --the Williams Pipeline corridor and I thought
everything looks good. It's really easy when applicant agrees with the staff report. I think
I would be fine with moving this forward. We don't -- I don't think we need to make a
change to the -- the staff requirements on this. We can make an encouragement, but it's
not our place to do the waiver. So, I think it would just be an encouragement if we want
to go in that direction, but I don't know that we need to condition anything. I could be
wrong. Does that sound right? Somebody? Okay.
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead.
Cassinelli: Quick question for staff. Sonya, is -- do the lot sizes on the alley loads and
the -- I think they are rear loaded product to the east and west of that alley load portion
down there, do those all meet the -- I'm assuming they all meet the R-8 lot size
requirements?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F36
Page 33 of 74
Allen: Chairman, Commissioner Cassinelli, yes, they do.
Cassinelli: Okay. In my comments I'm not a fan whatsoever of -- of the common
driveways. I would love to see them eliminated. I mean I get it. The developer is doing
it to maximize their density, all within code and guidelines on the project. I'm just not a
fan of it and I'm really shocked that there was not more public input, even though I -- you
know, there is not a lot -- a lot of homes down there yet I don't think, so probably not a lot
of -- a ton of neighbors, but I'm shocked with a project this size that there is not more --
that there wasn't more input. But all that said, I would be -- I would be okay with -- with
moving it forward as is.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Yearsley, do you have anything?
Yearsley: I actually -- my biggest concern is I -- I think the project is fine and everything.
I just -- I mean I just don't like that we just cram as many homes as we can into a
subdivision. I understand that, you know, we are trying to keep a price point down and
everything, but, man, there we just got small lots and medium-sized homes and I just
don't like the look and feel. That being said, it's -- it's my personal preference -- and I'm
not going to stand in the way of the project.
Seal: Okay. Yeah. That -- I mean can't say it enough. Common driveways -- I -- I drive
through one of your products that has a corner and -- and, you know, three houses on it
and when it's trash day it's like Mario Kart. It's -- it's horrible. I mean it's a really -- it's a
bad experience in a really upper end -- upper end subdivision, you know, that has space
to accommodate better than this does. So, where these are squeezed together more
tightly I can't imagine what that's going to be like. That said it meets code. I wish we
would do away with them, make them, you know, alternative compliance only or
something along those lines, because I have seen another one of your products where
you did the circular driveways that were common. Beautiful. Absolutely amazing way to
-- you know, out-of-the-box thinking with that. So, that said I will get down off my soapbox
and ask somebody for a motion.
Grove: I got it.
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: Mr. Chair, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to
recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2021-0087 as presented in a
staff report for the hearing date of February 3rd, 2022, with no modifications, but embrace
of the applicant's request to have a waiver for the open waterway for the Watkins Drain.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approve Item No. H-2021-0087 -- oh, do
I need -- yeah. Who would like to second that? Sorry.
Wheeler: Second.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F37
Page 34 of 74
Seal: Thank you, Commissioner Wheeler. Now, it has been moved and seconded to
approve Item No. H-2021-0087 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of
February 3rd, 2022. All those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
7. Public Hearing Continued from January 20, 2022 for Quartet South
Subdivision (H-2021-0088) by Brighton Development, Inc., Located on
Parcels S043432586 and S0434325410, at the Northeast Corner of W.
Ustick Rd. and N. Black Cat Rd.
A. Request: Annexation of 67.61 acres of land with the R-8 (48.83
acres) and R-15 (18.78 acres) zoning districts.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 229 single-family residential
lots, 2 multi-family lots with 140 townhouse units, and 42 common
lots.
Seal: All right. So, we will move on to Quartet South Subdivision, H-2021-0088, which
was continued from January 20th, 2022, and we will begin with the staff report.
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair, can I jump in?
Tiefenbach: Greetings, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Alan Tiefenbach,
associate planner here with City of Meridian. Okay. This is a proposal for an annexation
and rezoning and preliminary plat. The property is not quite 68 acres, zoned RUT, located
at the northeast corner of North Black Cat, West Ustick Road intersection. In July of 2020
Quartet Northeast, obviously, to the north and Quartet Southeast were approved north of
this property. This subdivision is a continuance of those subdivisions. Future land use
map recommends medium density residential, three to eight dwelling units per acre. The
applicant proposes to annex a total of-- again, just not quite 68 acres of land. Forty-nine
acres on the northern portion of the property are proposed to be rezoned to R-8 to allow
229 single-family homes. The southern 18.7 acres is proposed for R-15. That would be
to allow 140 single family attached or multi-family units, although the housing type has
not been determined at this time by the applicant. Jamestown Ranch, the court -- I made
a little map here. So, Jamestown Ranch, the Quartet Sub --the Quartet-- sorry-- Quartet
Northeast, Quartet Southeast, they are all north. The Klamath Basin, Staten Park and
Geddes Subdivisions are to the south and the Birchstone Creek Subdivision is to the
west. To the east is unincorporated property that's in the county. This I will be calling the
Naomi parcel as I talk about that later. This is -- this is designated for a mixed-use non-
residential. Further east here is the wastewater treatment facility. There is some self-
storage. It's important to note that here -- this piece of property is currently under review
with the Planning Commission -- or, sorry, with ACHD for a new maintenance facility.
There are -- let's see. There is presently four accesses to this property off of North Black
Cat and those accesses are going to be closed and, then, there will be new accesses.
One will occur from West Aspenstone, which is down here, and the other will occur from
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F38
Page 35 of 74
-- from Machado, which is up here -- which is around in the middle. Some of these
accesses to the north have already been improved -- already been approved as part of
the Quartet Southeast and Northeast. The internal streets will be built to ACHD
standards. The applicant submitted a traffic study for this application. ACHD responded
that the level of service at the North Black Cat and West McMillan intersection -- so, it will
be up to the north here, that's level of service F, and that sections of North Black Cat
Road and West Ustick Road also exceeded the ACHD acceptable level of service. Ustick
Road is listed to be widened to five lanes between 2026 and 2030. North Black Cat Road
is listed to be widened to five lanes between 2031 and 2035. The North Black Cat-West
Ustick intersection was signalized with turn lanes in 2021 . Eventually that's going to be
widened as well between 2026 and 2030. Per ACHD, the applicant is going to be required
to construct a dedicated eastbound turn lane on Ustick Road, which is down here. They
will also be required to construct a dedicated northbound right turn and a southbound left
turn at Aspen -- Aspenstone Drive, which is what you see here. The applicant's going to
be required to construct ten foot wide pathways along North Black Cat. Originally in the
staff report it talked about sidewalks. Since that time ACHD required ten foot wide multi-
modal pathways. There is two common driveways proposed with this subdivision. On
the right is the open space exhibit. A minimum of 15 percent qualified open space is
required, 15.4 percent is shown. This includes two larger parks of roughly 114,000 and
55,000 square feet and some smaller open space areas as well. Based on the 48.83
acre area proposed on our new code ten amenity points are required. Because this
project is more than 40 acres amenities are required from all of the separate categories.
There is four different categories listed in the code and, then, there is a note of what
qualifies for amenity points. The applicant proposes a community pool and changing
rooms, children's play structure and clubhouse. Although the square footage is not
indicated, staff scaled the clubhouse and it looks like it's greater than 5,000 square feet,
which would qualify it for more than six amenity points and this would qualify in the quality
of life category. A swimming pool and changing rooms are also shown, which would
qualify -- qualify for six amenity points and a children's play structure and all this would
end up being about 13 points. This is over the ten points that are required. But, again,
as I mentioned, because this is larger than 40 acres they are actually required to provide
amenities from all four categories and I don't under -- unless the applicant clarifies with
us, I do not believe that amenities have been provided from all those categories. Easy
enough for them to fix, but, again, they would have to meet all the categories. The subject
property is adjacent to the Naomi Farms property. That's the one I talked about was to
the east and that's designated for a mixed-use, non-residential. The purpose of this
designation is to designate areas where new residential dwellings would not be permitted.
What I have shown you here is the future land use map. Residential uses are confirmed
to be -- or have been determined to not be compatible in these areas. Again, as
mentioned earlier, the wastewater treatment plant is about 1,200 feet to the east, which
is what you see in green here. There is a future ACHD facility that will be built about a
thousand feet here and both of these would -- or very potentially have highly intensive
industrial usage, which could include noise, light, odor. The ACHD facility itself -- could
also have some pretty significant traffic impacts. At present the Naomi Farms property
could be annexed into the city and it would be designated for industrial. So, they could
do industrial uses. Right now I think there is sort of an informal RV storage type facility
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F39
Page 36 of 74
that's happening. It's covered RVs. Staff has recommended to the applicant that a better
transition should be provided between the subject property and the destination -- and
the Naomi parcel to the east. The applicant has responded that there may be a future
request for a future land use amendment for additional residential uses to the east and
that a buffer or transition via a road or something else could be provided as part of this
request. The applicant also states that the mixed-use non-residential designation is
intended to provide the transition to -- is intended for that reason, to provide the transition,
which is why this project, as shown, shows houses backing directly to the Naomi Farms
parcel. Staff has known that due to the increasing loss of industrial land and the impacts
that I mentioned with the wastewater treatment plant and the ACHD facility, we thought
that there actually should be a better transition. I might add that the applicant also has
noted that there could be a future request for a future land use map change in that area
to allow more residential there. Because of the -- the reasons that we listed, staff at this
point -- we weren't sure if we would support that map amendment, but whether or not the
Planning Commission or the City Council is inclined to support redesignating that area,
it's important to notice that -- that unless the applicant gets that property or unless the
current owner of the Naomi Farms are part of this application, we can't ascertain whether
an appropriate transition is based upon somebody else and what they might do that aren't
associated with this application. So, we certainly-- you know, the applicant contends that
the app -- the adjacent property -- that that transition will be provided whenever that
develops. Our position is, well, it's not developing, it's not part of this application and you
are developing, so you should provide a better transition for the houses, rather than
backing them directly onto the -- directly to the parcel. Certainly that's for the Planning
Commission and the City Council to decide what is appropriate. So, staff does have
concerns with higher density residentials, particularly maybe multi-family that would be
right along Ustick. As I mentioned, Council and the Commission should decide if there is
an adequate transition. The applicant has submitted elevations. These single family
homes are depicted as one or two story structures with attached garages and a variety of
architectural elements. They do seem to meet all of the requirements. However, we
would note that, again, as we mentioned, there could be a potential multi-family that goes
into the -- to the parcel to the south. Now, design review is required for that and also if
that was -- if that was proposed it would have to come to you as a conditional use. Still
staff would want to make sure that there was more -- that there was consistency
throughout this development. So, one of our -- one of our recommendations in the staff
report is that the architecture of any multi-family units would be generally consistent with
the single-family elevations that you are seeing here. So, again, in summary, staff does
believe that it meets most of the minimum requirements of the UDC and the future land
use map. There is a few -- one in particular -- I think I noted in the staff report -- along
the eastern boundary there is a very long block here. There -- there is some -- there are
some restrictions on how long you can have a block without a break. I believe it's 750
square feet and, then, there is some additional allowances that the Council can allow, but
this is a very long block. There is all -- they meet the density recommendations. They
are right at the 15 percent required open space. They are meeting their 4,000 square
foot minimums. Again, with a little tweaking that they would have to provide some
additional amenities -- or some amenities that come out of the different categories, which
is easy enough for them to do, but certainly as we mentioned we do have concerns with
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F40
Page 37 of 74
the existing issues with traffic, how long it's going to take for future improvements and
whether or not there is a good enough transition from this development to the industrial
uses to the east. With that if the Planning Commission is inclined to support this proposal,
staff has listed conditions of approval in the staff report and with that I would take any
questions or comments.
Seal: All right. Thank you. At this time would the applicant like to come forward.
J.Wardle: Alan, can I share my screen?
Tiefenbach: Yeah. Sure. Let me -- let me shut mine off. Let's see if I can do this. I think
I have to just turned mine off. You should be able to.
J.Wardle: You have to unshare your --
Tiefenbach: Oh. You're right. My bad. There you go. Give it a try now.
J.Wardle: Thank you. Commissioners, good evening. My name is Jon Wardle. My
address is 2929 West Navigator, Meridian, Idaho. 83642. Just share my screen with you
tonight. Appreciate staff taking an opportunity to go through and describe some of the
details here on the project and I want to get into some of them as well, so that we get a
full picture of what -- what we are looking at tonight in the application that's before you.
As Alan mentioned, we previously had approved last year or two years ago now a Quartet
Northeast, which was north of the Five Mile, Quartet Southeast, which was south of the
Five Mile and we are asking for annexation, rezone, and preliminary plat approval for
Quartet South, which would be south of what's now Machado. If it's confusing to you, it's
to us as well. That name's changed several times based on other approvals, but this is
Machado up here. This is Black Cat Road here and, then, this is Ustick down to the south.
We are requesting annexation, like I said, of nearly 68 acres and asking also for that to
be broken up into two different zones, R-8 on 48.83 acres, and R-15 on 18.78 acres. In
addition, just the details here for the project, we are asking for 229 single family detached
and alley loaded homes in the R-8 section and up to 140 single-family attached or multi-
family homes on the R-15 parcel highlighted in yellow. The overall density for the project,
when you combine both of those together, we are about 5.46 units per acre. The split
between the R-8 is 4.69 units per acre and R-15 is 7.45. But the blended density is 5.45
units per acre. We have also tried -- and this is important to note. We have also tried to
bring together a -- a variety of residential home options with a standard front load is all --
as well as the alley loaded surrounding a central park. One of the things that we -- as we
have developed now three age-restricted communities, we have put in the core of those
very large amenities where it creates a social connection. We feel really strongly about
that now as in all ages as well and so that's what's represented here is that there is a
large community center. Alan is correct, it will be over 5,000 square feet where there will
be an opportunity for a number of different programs in there to provide year around
socialization. Clearly, you know, people do like swimming pools as well and that will be
available here as we have been doing up in the northern part of the project as well. So,
just wanted to let you know that that central park area is designed to be a social hub for
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F41
Page 38 of 74
this community. So, even though these lots in some regard are smaller, we are offsetting
that with a very large community center that will mimic what we are doing in our Cadence
communities, but this will be for all ages. This, again, highlights the amenities that are
here with the clubhouse, community pool, a large playground structure. The -- the overall
combined open space here is 15.4 percent or ten -- ten acres of the entire site and I want
to split these apart. The R-8 area which, is the area to the north, which is denoted here,
has 18.3 open space. When we bring back the R-15 we are going to be adding more
open space to that. We haven't defined what that is currently, but we do need to comply
with those open space requirements for that R-15 designation. There will be a little bit of
a nuance, whether it's attached -- single family attached for sale or multi-family, but that
open space calculation for the R-15 will increase, as well as will the amenities for that
area. Pretty hard to zoom in on this, but Alan noted that because we are over 40 acres
that we need to get additional amenities from each of the categories and we are proposing
that those will be included as well. We have a number of non-required pathways and
sidewalks throughout the project. We will also, given the essential amenity area here, we
will be adding some features for the bicyclists, repair stations, that type of thing and so
we will be able to comply with all of the categories and all of the amenities for the project.
We did provide, prior to the hearing this -- a few weeks ago we did provide an update to
the overall preliminary plat. There were --we eliminated some areas that were of concern
to staff and made sure that we were complying with all the dimensional standards for the
project and that's what's reflected in the preliminary plat that was provided to you by staff
and also here in this exhibit. There are four items -- I -- I wish I could say that, like the
previous hearing where we were in complete agreement with staff conditions, we aren't,
but I would like to walk through those with you today. The four items are arterial frontage
improvements for Black Cat and Ustick. A future residential in the R-15. A question about
the alleys. And, then, the future land use map designations. We have talked about that
transition or buffer with the MUNR designation. So, the first one is the arterial frontages.
As -- as is typical when we develop an adjacent phase of those we make those
improvements. Staff has requested that we actually make the roadway improvements
right from the very beginning. I am the first to tell you that we -- we also are -- we want
to get roadway improvements done. This is problematic in this project at this point at the
very beginning. There is a couple reasons. I mean it does add some additional costs up
front, but more specifically we have a number of -- and you can see them diagonally --
some drains that come through the property. There is a large amount of piping that needs
to happen across the frontage and we also have the Quenzer family home, which is still
here, and their accesses and those type of things. Their home is very close to it. The
home will go away, but the timing of that is not at this point in time. That's why we have
phased this project the way we have, with the red area first and, then, green coming down,
making the connection to Ustick and, then, we would move over. Our hope is that we can
get in there earlier, but it's not feasible for us to do all of those roadway improvements at
the very beginning of this project and so we are asking that condition 1-B be deleted as
a requirement. It's not required by ACHD, but it is noted here and staff has made that
request and we are asking respectfully that that condition be deleted. I will note that we
-- when we originally proposed the -- the roadway improvements we did show those as a
five foot sidewalk. Their -- ACHD is in the process of transitioning their requirements for
the pathway accesses on arterial roadways. We are doing this right now in south Meridian
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F42
Page 39 of 74
where those are ten foot. We, in talking with staff -- with ACHD staff -- and it was noted
that, you know, we not be allowed to do five foot and we agree. We are going to do the
ten foot regional pathways on both -- on our side of the road. In fact, we are doing that
to the north with our existing projects as well, so we have a consistent ten foot along
there. At some point ACHD is going to be updating their policy manual for that, they are
just not there yet, but this will allow us to do that in the very beginning. The future R-15
residential -- like I said, we aren't quite sure what direction we are going to go, whether
these will be for sale or whether they will be a multi-family under complete rentals, but a
CUP is going to be required. We do need to come back to you to bring this back, so you
can review both elevations, compatibility as Alan mentioned, with residential styles, which
we will do and also the additional open space requirements. The one nuance here that
we are asking for -- staff had noted -- noted that a DA modification be required prior to
submitting the CU. We are just simply asking that that be modified so they can run
concurrent. There is a little bit of a timing sequence there, but we want the DA mod and
the CUP to run concurrent, knowing that you will review the CUP and City Council will
review the DA mod. But it's just kind of a chicken and egg on that. There was a comment
made about alleys not complying. You know, we have been over this a few times with
different projects with alley projects here in the city. What -- what the concern is is when
that alley makes a turn and it -- you can't view from one end as -- there would be like a
blind corner, but where these alleys you can view from a public street to the end and,
then, you can view the other way as well, we do believe we actually comply with city code.
The city actually has approved these for us in at least four projects. You know, we -- we
also agree that you don't want to have these L-shaped where, you know, you can't see
all the way through, but the fact that these intersect and you have an opportunity to look
from the other roads as well -- it's an item we have worked with the police on safety and
given that they have been approved before we are not quite sure why at this point those
are not viewed as acceptable. So, we are asking that condition 2-B be deleted as a
requirement. We believe they actually comply. And, then, the last issue is the -- the
future land use map and the -- a little typo there, but it should say mixed use MUNR, the
proximity to the Wastewater Recovery Resource Facility transitions, that type of thing.
You know, this mixed-use NR designation has a very long history. We are talking 20
years now that goes all the way back to the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and, believe it or
not, I actually had worked on a couple projects in this area in 2002 as we were working
through this prior to the city doing their first odor ordinance -- or odor study and so I -- I
do have history with this. The -- the -- the thing that is important to note in the city's
Comprehensive Plan is they do talk specifically about the mixed-use non-residential and
encouraging transitions, but the city is pretty specific about how that transition does occur.
When you look at the mixed use non-residential, there is two things that they note in -- in
your Comprehensive Plan. One is no new residential. Existing residential can stay. It
has a historic use. It can stay. But no new residential can be approved in the mixed use
non-residential. That's very clear. That's been --the city's been consistent on that. What
hasn't really happened around this area in terms of developing up against it is how the
transition occurs. We -- the staff has asked us to create that transition, but, in fact, the --
the mixed use non-residential provides for that transition to occur in that designation.
When you look at this little rendering right here -- and I just put them side by side. The
area on the outside shows residential butting right up against the mixed use non-
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F43
Page 40 of 74
residential zone and the way that the city had described this -- and this goes back to 2011.
So, this is the -- this is a graphic that has been consistent in all the comp plans from 2011
-- is that there are transitional uses on the mixed-use non-residential and, then, the more
intensive uses are moved away from it. So, this says -- you know, this is showing existing
industrial or it could be new industrial, flex, light industrial, transitioning to office or uses
that would be of a size and scale, as well as landscape buffers on there butting up to
residential. The mixed use non-residential is the transition between the intensive use of
the wastewater treatment facility and the residential around. The comp plan clearly shows
how that transition should occur and when an MUNR application does come forward the
city has the guide. It's in your Comprehensive Plan on how that should occur. Our issue
is staff has asked that we provide, for example, another road north to south. That's -- we
don't believe that that is needed. We believe that the transition really can occur back to
back as shown here where you could have offices and you could have a landscape buffer.
If the city abides by the Comprehensive Plan and your own guide there will not be heavy
industrial up against residential. The intention is that the transitional uses as stated here
and shown here would be -- would provide the transition. I also want to show up here
that industrial -- very small, but industrial up here in the corner is one of many zones that
could be appropriate within the mixed use non-residential zone. So, it's not -- I don't want
to, you know, preclude the option for somebody to do industrial, but this area has been
there for 20 years and it has not taken root. Maybe it will at some point, but the city has
the tools in their tool belt on how to deal with the transition. So, in summary, we request
the following conditions be deleted or modified: 1-13, which relates to the frontages, us
improving the roadways with our very first phase. 2-A, which is the -- I think 2-A relates
to a requirement for a road adjacent to our property and the mixed use non-residential
and 2-B would be the -- the alleys. And to modify condition 1-C, which clearly -- which
just states that instead of having prior to submitting, that the concept plan development
agreement could run concurrent with the CUP. We concur with the staff
recommendations for approval, including the city and agency comments, including our
modifications and we request that the Planning and Zoning Commission support and
transmit this to the City Council for their review and approval. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you. Are there any questions for the applicant or staff?
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal, I do have a question.
Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: So, if everything went your way where the land was annexed into the city --
that's what we are voting on tonight; right? Whether we are annexing in and the
preliminary plat. And, then, you go to City Council and you get that approved. What is
the time frame for Quartet South Subdivision phases to incorporate -- to actually have a
product for sale? What's your time frame?
J.Wardle: Commissioner -- Chairman Seal, Commissioner Lorcher, our time frame for
this is -- I don't believe that we would have any development that we would be able to do
in this first area, which is shown as red, until, you know, a year from now. We have, you
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F44]
Page 41 of 74
know, a few things that we need to work through in terms of design. So, my best case
scenario would be that we would have lots that would be available to be built on probably
May or June of 2023 at this point in time.
Lorcher: Okay. Thank you.
Seal: I have one question on the -- phase one, what's the secondary access that you
would have -- that will be provided for that?
J.Wardle: Chairman Seal, a great question. So, we have worked with Mr. Bongiorno on
this. It's kind of hard to see, but up here in the right corner there is a stub street that will
go into the Naomi Farms property. In the short term we actually will improve this over to
that access point to get the access out and Joe has reviewed that and he's approved that.
So, that would be the short-term emergency access with phase one. And, then, once we
get phase two done it's natural going down to -- to Ustick.
Seal: Okay.
J.Wardle: We also, just to note, we have -- with Quartet Southeast No. 1, which is on the
north side of Machado, we are building this roadway. This roadway will be finished this
spring. We are also building the bridge across the Five Mile Creek, which connects with
Quartet Northeast No. 1, which will also go out to Black Cat. So, we are starting to fill in
multiple directions where people can move through the site in case of an emergency.
Seal: Okay. Thank you.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: All right. Let's see if I can get started here. Can you go back a slide, please.
Thank you. So, this is a little bit different than what we had. Can you explain the mid line
section on east and west it looks like -- in particular on the east side where, by my count,
there were 41 homes in a straight line more or less and I just have some general concerns
with how long of an uninterrupted street that -- or uninterrupted row of houses. I see this
as a little bit different, but can you kind of explain how and why and all of the particulars
for that section.
J.Wardle: Commissioner-- or Chairman Seal, Commissioner Grove, it's a great question.
We --we are aware of the city's requirement for, you know, these long blocks. When you
look at just the right side or the east side of the road there is very few breaks, but if you
look on the west side of the road we do have one, two, three roads that are coming into
it and at each one of those intersections we are actually going to be constructing chokers,
so they will be -- the curbs will come out, so that they create a -- you know, a natural
slowing, so it's not just a straight through. We also wanted to create a little bit of
curvilinear to that road, so it wasn't a direct shot through that. So, with the traffic calming
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F45]
Page 42 of 74
as we have talked with ACHD in these locations, we believe that we actually are able to
break up that long section. Even though we have a large block on one side, we have
three roads coming into it on the other side.
Grove: I -- I see it from both the traffic's perspective, but also just from a visual. That's a
really really long stretch visually, even if -- if it is, you know, calming traffic, I have some
-- some hesitation with how that will visually look. You know, if you are at one end of the
cul-de-sac and looking down the other it looks a little different than what you would
typically see in a subdivision in Meridian and, then, with that on the slide previous it's
different than the slide current in terms of how that mid section has an alley or something.
Which -- which way are we looking and what are we supposed -- which one of those is
current I guess?
J.Wardle: Commissioner Seal -- yeah. Let me just go to this one right here.
Commissioner Grove, the application we originally submitted showed what we would call
these U-shaped alleys. I mean in working with staff that is not a solution that is -- that we
can do. I mean it's not -- it's not appropriate for -- for this. We -- we talked to -- even
though we have done it in some other places, those are private roads. We had some
more allowance. With the public roads we just felt like, you know, we needed to make
that modification. So, there was a revised preliminary plat and it was in Allen's application,
which is this one, it actually removes those U-shaped lots, it makes them wider and so,
you know, there are the same number of homes. We did actually add a common lot with
a pathway that would go out to the pathway system out onto Black Cat. One of the -- one
of the advantages -- and this goes to your question just a moment ago about the long
road. When we were going to do the alley we could be -- we could pull those homes out
closer to the street and so that would also visually kind of block that road up. But with a
front load they get pushed back some. So, that's kind of a trade-off there. But that's --
this is the correct one. Those U-shaped alleys are not -- are not proposed, but this plan
right here is. The -- the open space exhibit that was provided -- and Alan provided it your
packet -- is correct for this. These -- the pretty color rendering we didn't -- weren't able in
time to get that one updated for this meeting.
Grove: Thank you.
J.Wardle: Thank you.
Seal: Okay. Any other question? Oh, Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: I have more questions. I was just waiting to see if anybody else -- can you,
please, kind of address for me probably the -- outside of the 41 homes in a row, the -- the
biggest piece for me is probably ACHD's timeline for the arterial roads and what that looks
like. I mean the soonest it looked like was something like four years out and, then, the --
the worst case is 13 years out from today when they would have some of those roadways
upgraded to -- yeah. The full build out. With this many homes in addition to the other
ones that are coming on and already having some major issues out there in terms of the
service level, how -- how can you address this or how -- it's going to be a concern for you
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F46
Page 43 of 74
in selling the product or renting any of the product. So, how are you looking at that
problem?
J.Wardle: Chairman Seal, Commissioner Grove, as I mentioned we are strong advocates
to getting roadway improvements done and when I say strong advocates, we currently
are undertaking four different CDAs in south Meridian around the Pinnacle project. One
of those was at the request of the city for the city park. The other three are projects that
in working with the highway district we have been able to move those projects forward
and beyond -- way ahead of their schedule to do those things. We haven't been able to
get to that level of conversation with them. As I mentioned, our -- our short-term issue is
we have a wide variety of storm -- or not storm drainage, but surface water constraints
that we need to deal with before we can get really serious about the roadways out here.
It is a positive thing that the majority of the right-of-way has already been dedicated on
the west side of Ustick, at least south of Machado. We control or will be able to develop
the piece north of that and Ustick also is in a similar position. I am not committing today
that we will be able to accelerate those dramatically, but we do want to make those things
happen sooner than later. The nice thing when we do a cooperative development
agreement there is two time frames. ACHD has in their programs certain times when
they can allocate dollars, but they can also move those dollars forward if they can come
into a development agreement like we have done in south Meridian. So, we will pursue
that with them, but as you noted if we allow them to make the improvements, you know,
those full build-outs will -- will take some time. I do think that there will be some
acceleration or at least some interest in moving Ustick forward given some of those
connections that are going to happen farther to the west, but clearly Black Cat is in need
of some improvements as well.
Seal: Okay. Anybody else have any questions that would like to float to staff or the
applicant? All right. Seeing there is none, at this time thank you. Appreciate it.
J.Wardle: Thank you.
Seal: We will take some public testimony. Maybe.
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, no one has signed up online in advance.
Seal: Okay. Anybody in chambers like to testify? Anybody online raising their hand?
No? Okay. Unless there is additional -- any additional questions or anything -- all right.
I will take a -- would the applicant like to say anything in closing? I will give you the
opportunity, so -- you know.
J.Wardle: Commissioner Seal, Commissioners, again, we -- Jon Wardle for the record.
Again, appreciate the opportunity to -- to give this project to you, so you can evaluate it.
We are very interested in doing -- doing projects which will last and part of that is also
addressing the -- the infrastructure and we are committed to -- to making that happen.
Our -- my only closing comment was -- tonight is we just request that you evaluate the
modifications that we put before you on those roadway improvements, on timing of those.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F47
Page 44 of 74
Also that the transition for the mixed use non-residential is safe. It's -- it exists. The city
has the mechanism for that and just give us an opportunity to work through some of those
transportation issues without it being a -- a requirement. Again, we -- we appreciate the
city working with us and reviewing this. Also with Alan. I will tell you that Alan spent a lot
of time on this application. I think we started our conversations -- you know, we are the
3rd of February today and I think we started e-mailing back and forth in mid December
on questions. While I don't necessarily agree with some of the conditions that are there,
I do want to applaud him for taking the time to get into the details on this project. He
spent a lot of time on it and was also looking for our input and feedback on questions that
he had. So, I think we were able to resolve some of those and make the project better.
There is still a couple items that we are asking for your consideration on. So, thank you.
Seal: Thank you.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Oh.
Grove: I'm sorry. Can I ask two questions?
Seal: Absolutely. Go ahead, Commissioner Grove.
Grove: Two questions. First one is probably easy, just in terms of the -- all the Quartets,
are they the same in terms of how the Apex were connected? Are they all one? Okay.
J.Wardle: Yes. Commissioner Seal, Commissioner Grove, yes. Again, it's this -- this
naming deal on the plats. But this is all designed to be a single community, the community
of Quartet, and we will be developing across Black Cat in the future as well. So, that will
all be one full community and everybody will share in the amenities.
Grove: Okay. Thank you. Second is probably harder. With this, if we get to a point in
our deliberation, just so that we kind of have a heads up, are you in favor of continuance
or denial if we get to that point? I just have some major questions that -- I don't know if
everyone else will feel the same way, but just so we know what direction we are going
with some of our deliberations. Kind of giving you a heads up of where I'm at I guess.
J.Wardle: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Grove, it's a great question. Obviously, we -- we
would like to proceed in the process, but if the Commission has questions they want to
pose to us that we can answer or -- I mean we are open to that as well. But I mean,
obviously, we -- we would prefer not to come out of this Commission with a denial. We
feel like the -- the project isn't just a -- going to be just a subdivision. This will be an asset
for northwest Meridian and we feel like that there is an opportunity to -- to do something
great here. So, our -- our ultimate goal is not to leave this Commission meeting with a
denial, so if there were questions we would like to have those answered. If we could do
that tonight, great. So --
Grove: Last question. I promise.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F48
Page 45 of 74
Seal: Go -- go right ahead. You -- you just asked a good one there, so --
Grove: With the parcel in the farthest southeast corner of the project, what is that -- and
I guess what is -- what are we looking at there, because it has not been addressed very
clearly?
J.Wardle: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Grove, I'm glad you asked that. So, when we
designed Quartet South there was an existing road to the south that we needed to align
with. That was where -- oh, just lost the name of the subdivision. But to the south that
exists. So, we needed to align with that. It just happens to be -- you know, normally,
those points -- you like to get them at the quarter mile. So, 1,320 is the -- is the magic
number. But also, you know, ownership doesn't always fall that way. So, my guess is
when they developed that piece they got it, you know, where they could. So, we are
aligning with it. Honestly it doesn't have any use. So, it's going to end up as open space.
But we did include it with the R-15 designation. There is a potential, with that stated, that
if there is a use to the east -- and we made reference to that and I want to be clear that
we -- we have no ownership, we don't have any options or anything on the Naomi
property, but when that property develops to the east and if it's an office or something
that's compatible, there may be an opportunity for us to work with them and say, hey,
here is some extra land that, you know, if you need some room for parking or move a
building over there, but we can't develop it as it is. So, I'm glad you asked the question,
because it is just kind of hanging out over there for us. We would end up just developing
it as common area.
Grove: Thank you.
Seal: Any other questions? All right. Thank you very much.
J.Wardle: Thank you.
Seal: Okay. At this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item No. H-
2021-0088?
Lorcher: So moved.
Wheeler: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Item No. H-2021-
0088. All in favor? Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Seal: Who wants to jump in first?
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F49
Page 46 of 74
Seal: Oh, was that online?
Cassinelli: Yeah. It was Bill.
Seal: Okay.
Cassinelli: No one else was jumping in yet. Okay. So -- and, Commissioner Grove,
thank you, you hit a lot of fantastic questions there. First of all, right out of the gate here,
the traffic count on Ustick -- now, this is according to -- according to the -- the comments
of the draft staff report we got from ACHD. This is west of Ten Mile. I don't see anything
for -- well, I guess Ten Mile. I'm thinking Black Cat. Never mind. So, that works. That
study was done -- that traffic count was done --was four years ago. Since then they have
built a rather large high school to the -- to the west there and -- and based on those
numbers, these counts are exceeding the levels of service from -- from counts from four
years ago. Those are still all two-lane country roads out there and they have -- you know,
they indicated that -- that they want to have occupancy in about a year from now, maybe
a few months after that, but it's already exceeding levels of service -- service on -- in the
-- in the peak hours. There is other things with this project -- right now we all know -- we
are all very familiar with Brighton and the work they do, but what this is going to do to the
roadways, until these -- all these roadways get improved, is -- is not going to be a benefit
to this part of town. It's going to make it miserable. It already is in the peak hours and
this is only going to -- going to increase that. I have concerns with the overall density.
Commissioner Grove brought up that-- he hadn't even paid attention to that row of homes
on the east at minimum that has to be broken up. Maybe even in a couple of spots with
some common lots, a couple of pocket parks or something and, then, just the -- I mean
the goal is -- is to get as many as we can in -- in the --what's allowable in terms of density
and it's -- you know, I'm -- I'm just going to -- I will -- I will -- I will say it. This -- you know,
the projects that we are going through and what we are doing here, especially before the
roadways can handle it, is not making Meridian more livable. It's -- it's just -- it's -- it's not
as pleasant. We got to -- I think we need to look to that. I'm not saying that this is a dead-
in-the-water project, but I don't think this can go in until it's the -- this is the cart before the
horse. We got to get these roads improved. They don't meet standards now and there
is certainly not by the time some of these homes start getting occupied. So, I -- I a
hundred cannot get behind it until -- until these roads can handle what this is going to
bring.
Seal: Okay. Anybody else want to jump in?
Wheeler: Yeah.
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. For me I'm -- I'm similar to where
Commissioner Cassinelli is at. I'm concerned about the development on the -- the road
here. I know that that was also a concern of ours with the ACHD site that's a couple
parcels over to the east on that. We were a little concerned about the development on
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F50
Page 47 of 74
that, with that being a two-lane road access and things of that nature. I'm -- I would really
like good transitional pieces and I -- I don't know if that -- that -- that row of -- of homes
on the eastern side --just doesn't seem like a good transitional piece to a non -- was it a
mixed-use non-residential zoning and why there seems to be a little bit-- it's a little opaque
in what can be used in that area to have it just the same kind of a density and same kind
of homes that are also in the interior side, I'm not sure if that's a -- the kind of transitional
piece that would be the -- would fit that area well and I just wonder if there is just another
plan that might work there better than R-15, R-8 densities, given that it's next to a major
-- to a major arterial and also next to the mixed used non-residential area. It's hard for
me to support this as it is right now.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: All right. I have probably made some of my feelings somewhat known through
my questions, but I like large chunks of this. I think the open space, especially that central
amenity, it's a great feature, it's a great way to do some of this design, tying this in with
the -- the subdivision sections that have come through for--from the north. Great. I think
it's -- it gives -- I'm okay with the density. I'm okay with the product type. I think it's a
great look, great feel. It adds housing diversity to this overall project. I think the alley
load as demonstrated in the Apex project, you know, similar to here, looks great. I like
the look. I have been in those neighborhoods. I think they look great. Adding -- upgrading
the sidewalk on the arterial to -- to be a ten foot pathway, even though that's not yet
required, kudos. I think -- you know, not to harp on it, the arterial road is a major concern,
not something that you can immediately fix, but it's a major concern with this project, in
particular because it's not the first project in this area. It's coming in on the heels of a
whole bunch of other projects and so it -- it's getting weighted maybe a little harsher,
because it's already at a low service level and adding to that low service level, you know,
it's kind of -- it makes -- it makes it a lot harder for me. I think overall the -- the site -- it
needs a redesign, mainly because of the 41 homes on that east side. The -- there is a
couple of common drives. The one on the -- on the far west I'm not as concerned about.
The one that's shown in the southeast corner, that one's much different than all of the
other -- of the -- of this, what, five common drives that you have shown tonight that one's
the worst just in terms of layout and accessibility and what it would do to the general flow
of that section of the neighborhood. I -- I think that for me I would be in favor of suggesting
or requesting a continuance to -- to see how we can have them re-do the -- the general
site layout, so that it's more conducive to both traffic calming measures and general
aesthetics within the neighborhood itself, with special regards to the -- the east side. But
I think if you identify -- I'm guessing at this point, but I'm guessing if you identify that, it's
probably going to have a ripple effect across other parts of the development, so I'm -- I
don't have a quick fix on this one, you know, take out a lot and fix and it's better, I don't
know that that's necessarily the case here. So, I'm open to a continuance, but definitely
want to hear from everybody else on some of their general thoughts.
Seal: Well, I will -- I will jump in. The exceedingly long road in there is, you know,
definitely a concern. I mean I live pretty close to this and -- and we have Moon Lake,
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F51
Page 48 of 74
which is a raceway a lot of times. It's a really fairly straight piece of road and they have
a lot of problems with cars racing up and down there. So, to the point of involving police
officers in their endeavors. So, anytime I see a stretch of road like this in a subdivision
that's like that I have major concerns about it. The biggest concern that I have is that it is
right next to the mixed use non-residential and that we have had a lot of discussions in
the past about that mixed use non-residential and the fact that they do want to keep it
there. You know, we may be 20 years into it, it may be another 20 years before it
develops, but I would really like something to go in there that -- that fits that and I -- and I
think having that huge row of houses, you know, backed right up against it is not going to
make that real palatable for anybody that wants to go in there in order to try -- they are
going to have to put in a lot of different, you know, normal usage I guess, instead of the
mixed use. It's going to cut down their -- their use of it considerably in my mind. That's
the biggest concern I have with this is just the fit and the feel for that. I would -- I don't
want to hinder the development of that mixed use non-residential, really, in any way and
I just -- I feel that the transition that this provides is not adequate at all. I think there are
things that could be done in order to make it fit. I do agree that that mixed -- or, sorry, the
shared driveway at the -- at the cul -- in the cul-de-sac is just horrible. That is atrocious.
So, I mean I can't imagine living in there, the -- the accidents that would happen, the
congestion just in that cul-de-sac alone is -- I can't imagine living in there, so -- but, you
know, again, the mixed use non-residential is the biggest concern that I have in here. So,
how we make that piece more palatable for somebody to move in there -- and I just don't
think this is it.
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: A couple of things. I a hundred see a Brighton product at this corner and having
residential is probably the highest and best use. I will respectfully disagree on the
transition on the mixed-use non-residential. The applicant is applying for this parcel, not
the one next to it, and a lot of times we complain -- or people complain saying, well, I lose
my view or you don't have control of what happens on a parcel that you are not
developing. They are developing this one, so I'm actually okay with their transition. They
are fulfilling the needs of what the city is asking them to do and it would be the burden of
the mixed-use non-residential to do the transition based on what I have heard on code
today. But my highest concern about this is that the Black Cat and Ustick interchange --
the intersection is not to move to six to seven lanes between '26 -- 2026 and 2030. Ustick
won't be five lanes from McDermott to Ten Mile from 2026 to 2030 and Black Cat not to
five lanes from Cherry to McMillan from 2031 to 2035. Adding 800, 900 cars to a -- two
country roads that can barely handle what's going on there right now would be
irresponsible. So, I do think this is the right project for this area. Maybe in a different
capacity, but I think we are too soon.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Yearsley, would you like to add anything?
Yearsley: I -- I come back to my previous comments on the previous application. I just
-- I -- it seems like we are just trying to cram as many lots in as we can to meet a price
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F52
Page 49 of 74
point that we can and so I -- I -- I just -- I just struggle with these type of projects for that
reason.
Wheeler: Mr. Chairman?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: Would -- could we open up the hearing, just like we did with the other one, just
to kind of get a feedback a little bit? Would people be okay with that? Would be open for
that?
Seal: To open the public --
Wheeler: Open the public testimony again just to get some --
Grove: Mr. Chair, maybe a tiny bit more just discussion on --
Seal: You bet.
Grove: -- what we are opening it for and -- in terms of what some of our expectations are
going to be before we get there.
Seal: You bet.
Grove: Just going through the list of four points that the applicant brought forward in
terms of the staff recommendations, I think maybe we touched on -- on what those four
are and if-- if there is anything that we need to -- you know, as we move forward are okay
with those changes, not okay with those changes, things like that. I personally would kind
of like to see where we are at with some of those. To me I'm okay with all of them, with
the exception of 2-A. I don't -- I wouldn't want to address that one until a redesign is -- is
done. I -- they might inadvertently fix 2-A by doing a site redesign, so I don't want to
necessarily move away from that one. I'm okay with the other ones, though, so -- my two
cents.
Seal: Anybody else like to address those?
Wheeler: I mean everybody --
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: Yeah. I'm -- I'm okay with that, too. That's the way I kind of came down on it,
too, Commissioner Grove. I -- I guess where I'm leaning at a little bit more with just kind
of hearing some of our feedback here on the Commission and some of the concerns that
are there on the majority side is if we -- if there is a -- if there is like a continuance that's
given, there seems to be like there is going to be a lot of rework done on the site
particularly, and there is a lot of just concern over just basically this is a -- in a four-way
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F53
Page 50 of 74
intersection with two country lane roads anyway and so is a continuance just going to just
push out more that -- to get the same thing or -- or not? And that's -- that's -- I don't want
to -- I don't want to waste their good time on putting together something that's just going
to come back and we are going to say, well, the roadway is not -- and infrastructure is not
here and, then, it's -- it's not good timing on that and that's I guess where I'm kind of
between where I wanted to chat with them a little bit or actually talk a little bit more with
the Commission here to see -- I mean even if we were to do a continuous and they were
to do a lot of stuff, but the majority of us talking about the transitional pieces or doing
some things with that northeast -- or southeast corner, would it -- would pretty much
hoping to getting the project approved on that?
Seal: I mean one of the things that we do have here is that ACHD -- I mean one of their
conditions of approval, essentially, that we had put in was the fact that they have to
accelerate the improvement for Ustick Road, so I -- I mean that hasn't -- that hasn't went
in front of City Council yet for approval, but at the same time it was a long interesting night
when that came across, because we had a lot of conversations with them about Black
Cat and about Ustick and the fact that it is -- I mean most places are about five years
behind where we are at with development, just because, you know, nobody saw this
coming. So, that's kind of where we are with it. So, I think there are some opportunities
to -- for Brighton -- you know, for the applicant to, basically, kind of do what they have
done out in Pinnacle. You know, I -- I think for us to ask it is a big ask for sure. I -- you
know, when the Pinnacle application came in, honestly, I was kind of-- I had to step back
when I read through it, because it did some things that I have never seen done before.
Number one, there was a piece of land in there designated for a school. Number two,
they just said, yeah, that's fine, ACHD, we don't mind what you say here, we are going to
go ahead and build this out. So, that kind of knocked me back a little bit. So -- you know.
And the opportunity may exist for them to do that here as well. The mixed use non-
residential I'm still stuck on that one. You know, I mean we are not preserving a view or
anything along those lines, we are just making it some -- you know, that piece of land,
really, it just isn't palatable for anything along those lines. It will either stay non-developed
or we will end up just putting more residential in there. So, which we do not want to have
in there. So, we are already encroaching on the wastewater treatment facility in there
and I guarantee that there is going to be --there is going to --you know, there will probably
come a lawsuit out of all that, because it's going to stink, so we are there, you know.
mean the houses are going to go in and we will see what happens with it. So, you know,
I guess what I'm saying is I -- I don't know. I don't know if there is enough room in here
for this to be approved. I mean we have had, you know, several people weigh in that
were a no based on the traffic and a no based on the mixed use nonresidential and the
way that it's laid out right now, the really long road -- you know, there is just -- there is a
lot of no's with this. So, can the applicant fix it? I don't know.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F54]
Page 51 of 74
Grove: With the -- with the roads I think -- I don't think we can -- as you put it -- or as you
were saying, we can't condition them to do those fixes, but I think we could condition that
they work with ACHD on -- on getting those talks jump started, essentially. We can
condition that, but we can't condition that those agreements are -- that they come to
fruition. So, I think we can condition that -- you know, something along those lines, but
we can't -- we can't make them get an agreement that they have no control over. I
personally think that we could -- you know, we can ask the applicant what they want to
do, but my personal opinion would be to continue it to like March 17th at the earliest.
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: I work and live in that area of impact as well and I'm further west on Ustick,
closer to McDermott, and I do know that ITD has every intention to start their construction
project on Highway 16 starting the spring of 2022. Now, whether that's March or April or
May, it's still up for debate, but it's going to happen and so congestion on that end going
to the high school is going to be a huge impact of what's going to happen both at McMillan
and Ustick between Black Cat and -- you know. And -- and McDermott and even Ten
Mile. It's going to affect everything and so knowing that that's going to be a huge project
to add that freeway in, it will be surface streets for now and, then, maybe ten, 15 years
from now it will be an overpass, but all of those things tie in together in this three or four
square mile radius that we need to take in account as well.
Seal: Okay.
Wheeler: Were you going to say something? Go ahead, Nick. Okay. Mr. -- Mr.
Chairman?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: Would the -- what do you think about going ahead and just opening up the
public testimony again and let's go ahead and talk to the applicant again. Are you
guys --
Seal: Go ahead and put a motion out there.
Wheeler: Okay. All right. I would like to go ahead and make a motion that we open up
the public testimony for H-2021-0088.
Grove: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to reopen the public hearing for file number H-2021-
0088. All in favor? Any opposed?
Cassinelli: Nay.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F55]
Page 52 of 74
Seal: Okay. Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE NAY.
Seal: Here we are again.
J.Wardle: Okay. For the record Jon Wardle with Brighton. Commissioners, I do
appreciate the -- the deliberate approach on this. Two -- two things from our perspective
is are there some opportunities for us to do some design on this to address those
questions on transition, addressing that southeast corner where we have that fairly ugly
common drive. I think we can -- I think we can do that. But I think Commissioner
Wheeler's question was more prescient of even if we do make changes what is the
Commission's attitude towards the transportation piece, which seems to be a very
important piece and I -- again, I don't want to diminish that. There -- there is a -- a unique
difference between what we were able to do at Pinnacle and what we are able to do here.
I don't know that we have ever owned four corners of an intersection before. We have
one-fourth of the intersection here and there may be some right-of-way constraints, you
know, working up and down the roadway here, so I -- I just put that out there. That was
probably the one reason we were able to go in there and say, yes, we are going to do
this, because we control it. We controlled everything. There was not a right-of-way issue
and when you do a CDA the opportunity for condemnation is not on the table. So, that's
the one difference. So, can we address and can we bring back to you a design which we
think will be better? I think so. But will that design get us over the hurdle what you are
saying tonight about transportation and if we can't get over the hurdle I would like to have
that conversation tonight, because if we can't get over the hurdle, then, I think we are
better off denying the project and allowing us to figure out how we deal with transportation
issues than coming back with a design in six weeks and still being hung up on that
transportation question.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: Mr. Wardle, I -- I -- I would be in -- probably deny it because of the transportation
factor. Now, the fact that ITD is going to be building Highway 16 puts more pressure on
ACHD to speed up -- at least the McDermott to Ten Mile piece for Ustick. I don't know
about the Black Cat portion of it. So, we may see some dates change because of that,
especially with the development of The Fields Urban Renewal District that's going to be
going out there, as well as -- you know. So, there is going to be more homes. McMillan
between, what, Ten Mile and McDermott, is already filling in and they need different ways
to be able to get around. I think this is the right project with the redesign based on the
Commissioners, but until the ACHD piece, at least for me, it's too soon.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F56]
Page 53 of 74
Wheeler: Mr. Wardle, yes, I -- I'm with you on that, too, and that's why I wanted to ask
the Commissioners on that. Like I don't want you guys to go through time and energy
and say, hey, here is some false hope, right, and be able to make sure that that's there.
I kind of lean towards a very respectful denial because of the --that -- I think it's just going
to be a big rework on the side with --the transitional side for me to make it feel comfortable
and I think some of the other Commissioners and I think that that -- that traffic issue,
without you guys having to approve large stretches of road to make that -- and, then, all
of a sudden it becomes unfeasible and doesn't make sense in timelines. That would be
hard. I'm also concerned, like with Chairman Seal about the -- the mixed use
nonresidential piece that -- if there is a lot of residential that gets built up here we know
that we are just adding -- we are going to be adding people that are going to protest
whatever, sort of non -- nonresidential mixed use projects going to go in there or light
office stuff, you know, a commercial type of use, possibly even light industrial use, we are
going to be building, then, some people that are going to be difficult -- or not wanting that
project to go there. So, I really like what you guys have done for this valley and your
company itself, I just -- that's why it would be a very respectful denial for my side.
Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli or Commissioner Yearsley, would you like to weigh in on
that? Or Commissioner Grove.
J.Wardle: Commissioner Seal, can I just make one comment?
Seal: Absolutely.
J.Wardle: Because Commissioner Yearsley had made this question -- posed this
question about, you know, cramming lots in. We are looking at one little micro piece of
land holding that we have, both in the Pinnacle project and in this project. Not--the entire
project isn't going to be like this. These are different types of living opportunities. So, I
can guarantee you that our motivation when we put this plan in front of the city for review
was not to try to put in every single home we possibly could. We were looking at the
lifestyle, looking at the other phases we had developed to the north, which are larger lots,
and when we move over to the other side of Black Cat Road they will be larger lots as
well. It's just one different piece and I -- I know that Commissioner Yearsley appreciates
that. I just want to be really clear that we weren't -- our motivation was not to get as many
homes as possible, but we were looking at a lifestyle and also by adding the alley
elements, removing those garages off the front of these homes where we can have a very
livable community, so I just -- I think they understand -- everybody understands that, but
this is just one small piece of a much larger project.
Yearsley: Mr. Chairman?
Seal: Commissioner Yearsley, go ahead.
Yearsley: And -- and, Mr. Wardle, I -- I -- I don't mean to pick on you for this project, it
just seems like every subdivision that comes before us nowadays is --you know, they are
-- they are -- they are reducing the lot size, they are -- they are making it smaller -- I think
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F57
Page 54 of 74
a lot to hit a price point that people can afford, which is not their fault or not even your
fault, it's just a situation that I don't like and -- and so I apologize for taking my frustrations
out on this project, you know. That being said, I -- traffic is bad everywhere. I -- I -- I
personally don't think that the traffic issue will affect my decision. I -- I won't deny it based
on traffic. I know-- it's kind of a Catch-22, you know. If-- if we don't approve this because
of the traffic problems, do we deny all of the projects because we have got traffic problems
in the -- in the -- in this -- in -- in the valley and -- and when do we stop. I know ACHD is
working as best they can, the state's working to try to get more funding to the locals to
help do improvements and growth is happening exponentially. So, we are kind of hit in a
tough situation. So, I -- I wouldn't -- for me, personally, I wouldn't deny this project based
on -- on traffic.
Seal: Okay. Thank you.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Well, I -- I mean I think that touched on a good topic there, because I had the same
-- you know, very similar thoughts, as, you know, if we deny this because of traffic do we
deny everything in this area because of traffic. I mean you have already indicated you
want to be south of Black Cat Road, you know, does that quell development in that area.
You know, hopefully not. I mean there is a -- obviously a huge demand, but our
infrastructure is lacking, you know, and if we stop it here because of traffic, are we going
to stop it everywhere because of traffic. I can't say stop it or -- you know, do we
recommend denial because of traffic concerns in other areas. This area -- and I mean
maybe I am a little biased, because I do live close. I don't go to Black Cat and Ustick. I
-- I drive around the block when I need to, because at certain points of the day it's
impassable. It is -- it is really bad there. So, in order to get out of -- onto Ustick from my
subdivision I sometimes have to wait for traffic to pass from the light that's at Black Cat
and Ustick and, thankfully, there is a light there now, because it used to go from -- you
know, clear to Ten Mile. It was bad to say the least. So, that I -- I just wanted to put my
comment out there that that is a -- it's -- it's a bigger question. I mean at some point in
time ACHD is either going to catch up or we are going to have to say enough is enough
and I don't know if this is the point where we say that. That's the bigger question in my
mind that's kind of being floated. So, I agree with what Commissioner Yearsley said that
it is -- it is a bigger question and I don't know if that gets settled here tonight or not and I
agree, I mean that -- you know, generally speaking you guys put together a very good
product. You have done some things in the community that are amazing, you know, and
I appreciate that. That said, at some point in time we either have to catch up or we just
can't keep putting things in. Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: For me personally I -- the road piece would not stop me from saying yes to a
redesigned project. I think it is a major concern and I would like, you know, some of the
things that I said earlier to be moved forward in terms of making sure that whatever can
be done is accelerated with the push of the applicant. But for me a site redesign would
be enough for reconsideration and the roads would not prohibit me from saying yes if the
site was correct.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F58
Page 55 of 74
Seal: Okay.
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead.
Cassinelli: I'm just going to kind of ask my fellow Commissioners to look at the traffic
component. We are -- in a lot of -- a lot of proposals we look at people, you know, will
bring up a traffic issue, but, you know, when that development still meets ACHD's levels
-- levels of service we are within that and we approve those, despite the fact that we know
that, yes, it's going to increase traffic in an area, but it still meets their levels of service.
This already -- this -- this fails already without Quartet North and East I think are the other
two, without any -- any build out there and -- you know. So, we are looking at -- at
hundreds of homes and -- and -- and far more cars. And, then, the other issue is that that
traffic study -- those numbers on Ustick are four years old, 2018 -- May of 2018. We are
coming up almost on four years old. We don't have new numbers. We are just going to
-- we are -- we are absolutely strangling these intersections and -- and I have got to say
this is not -- this is not improving Meridian and I -- I think it's critical that we have got to
look at this and we have got to -- I would like -- there are a lot of redesigns I would like on
this project that Commissioner Grove is just talking about and I'm in agreement with him
on those there. I just don't think that this area and particularly this intersection and that
stretch of Black Cat is ready for this. I think that those roads need to get developed first
and, then, this will fit in there. But right now to me it's a square peg in a round hole and
so until we can get within the levels of service we are not there and it's going to make it
far worse. Those are my -- so, I'm -- I'm a denial on that based on -- based on that. I do
want to -- there are some other concerns I have, but that's my -- hands down my biggest
one.
Seal: Okay.
Cassinelli: Thank you.
Seal: Thanks, Bill. Yeah. Is there any other questions for the applicant or -- have we
belabored this -- all right. So, can I get a -- thank you again for the robust conversation.
Can I get a motion to close the public hearing again for H-2021-0088?
Lorcher: So moved.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Lorcher: Oh.
Grove: Should -- I guess before we close it, because we opened it in case we needed to
continue, are we closing with the intent to deny or -- because if -- I don't want to close it,
then, reopen it if we are going to continue. So, I feel like it's probably prudent if we have
that conversation ahead of time, so we don't have to keep going back and forth.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F59
Page 56 of 74
Personally I'm on continue, but I -- it sounds like I might be in the minority on this one,
so --
Cassinelli: Can we leave it open and vote? And make a motion and vote in an open
session?
Seal: It's a great question, but I think we have to close the public hearing before we can
vote.
Yearsley: I think if you vote as a -- make the motion to continue you can leave it open,
but if you --
Seal: Correct.
Yearsley: -- make a motion to deny or approve --
Starman: Chairman and Commissioners, I would agree -- I would agree with that
assessment. So, if you -- apologize for the echo, but I would make that assessment as
well. So, if you go either direction.
Seal: Okay. Well, yeah, I mean if-- if we leave it open, then, we leave it open to continue,
but I -- I mean I personally -- I think there is enough -- I just don't think it's going to fit here.
That's where I'm at. I mean traffic concerns MDNR, there is just enough with it that I just
don't think it's going to fit. I don't know that a redesign is -- a redesign definitely isn't going
to address the traffic concerns. I mean, essentially, you have half of us right now saying
no just based on that alone. So, me personally I would close -- if -- if it were me and I
weren't chair I would close it and move to deny and let that be hashed out at City Council.
Wheeler: So, do we need to second the motion, since we just finished up some continuing
discussion? Second? Okay. So, I will second the motion to close the hearing.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H-2021-0088.
All in favor? Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Wheeler: I have another motion.
Seal: Go ahead, Commissioner Wheeler.
Wheeler: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to deny file
number H-2021-0088 as presented during the hearing on February 3rd, 2022, for the
following reasons: The -- the site plan layout and traffic concerns.
Seal: And we are recommending denial.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F60
Page 57 of 74
Wheeler: Yeah. I think I said denial.
Seal: Right. But we recommend denial on this.
Wheeler: Oh. And recommend denial on this, too.
Seal: So, a second?
Cassinelli: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to recommend denial of file number H-2021-0088
for the reasons presented. All in favor say aye. Any opposed?
Grove: Nay.
Yearsley: Aye.
Seal: Want to take that one for the record? We will -- we will do a roll call on that.
Roll Call: Wheeler, aye; Cassinelli, aye: Yearsley, nay; Lorcher, aye; Grove, nay; Seal,
aye.
Seal: Which means that the motion passes for recommending denial.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO NAYS.
Seal: That was a tough one. Okay. At this time would everybody like a little bio break?
Cassinelli: I think this is the last one. It should be pretty quick.
Seal: Okay. So, we will -- we will take a five minute bio break. Thank you.
(Recess: 9:16 p.m. to 9:23 p.m.)
8. Public Hearing for Moberly Rezone (H-2021-0089) by Carl Argon,
Located on Parcel R0406010125, South of W. Broadway Ave. Between
NW 2nd St. and NW 1st St.
A. Request: Rezone 0.159 acres of land from I-L to O-T to allow a
duplex.
Seal: Okay. At this time I would like to open the public hearing for Item No. H-2021 --
wait -- H-2021-0089 and we will begin with the staff report.
Tiefenbach: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Alan Tiefenbach, again,
associate planner. Okay. This is a proposal to rezone from I-L, which is industrial, to OT.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F61
Page 58 of 74
The property is .16 acres of land, zoned I-L, located south of Broadway between
Northwest 2nd and 1st. Don't have any history. Been there for a very long time and the
plot is pretty old in that area. The subject property is a vacant lot. I'm going to show you
pictures, because I think it's a little easier on this one. So -- so, the property is a subject
lot consisting of .61 acres -- .16 acres zoned I-L, along northwest first, which is what you
can see here -- is predominantly single family, multi-family, and duplexes. Nearly all of
this is at least 50 years of age. Many of these are dating back to the early 1900s actually.
West of the property is a mixture of industrial uses, a food bank, a religious facility. North
of this property is single family attached. One of the properties about a hundred feet to
the north is already zoned OT. There are railroad tracks. That's what you can see on the
bottom right picture -- 200 feet south of the property. There is an alley that borders this
property at the back along the east. All right. So, the applicant proposes to construct a
duplex on the subject property once this rezone is concluded. Although the plan does
specifically mention multi-family being over retail, in this case because it's almost all
residential in this area staff does think it's appropriate to just have a duplex. The subject
property, as I said, abuts an alley and that's what you see on the right. It's alley -- the
proposal is for this to be alley loaded. That fence that you see there, that would be the
entrance into the property. Having it alley loaded would be consistent with the new
urbanist principles that they talk about in the Old Town, taking garages, moving them off
of the street, bringing the parking in through the back, trying to bring the buildings up to
the street. At present, although you can't -- well, maybe you can if you look really really
closely, there is a dumpster there that's blocking this alley. So, you can't get down there
presently, but what you can do is come down 2nd and, then, go down the one-way street
on Railroad and come up. I had some questions about how well you would be able to get
in there and I did what I call the Tundra test, which is my gigantic truck, and I was actually
able to maneuver it in there. So, you -- if you can get a Tundra in there you can get a
very large ship in there. So -- so, yes, it is accessible. Staff does support this application
and we do recommend approval. One adjustment we think that should happen, though
-- again, this is Old Town, so the intent is eventually that this should develop as in Old
Town. Even in the residential neighborhoods it should be a walkable community where
people are communing with each other and the -- what we didn't like about this duplex
design is the way this inset is where you have this -- the -- the two doors inside. It doesn't
really -- it doesn't really bring that idea to life. So, what we are recommending is that as
a condition of approval that there needs to be some kind of covered porch for both of
these. It could be combined. It could be for individual. But, again, the idea of Old Town
is -- especially one of the major principles is having porches and having front stoops
where people can stand and talk and associate. So, we think that there should be a porch
or some kind of outdoor sitting area. Other than that we support this and think that it is
compliant with the comp plan and with that I would answer any questions.
Seal: All right. Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward? Is the applicant
online?
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, I do believe he is online. One moment. Mr. Moberly, one moment.
Mr. Moberly, you should be able to unmute yourself and/or turn on your camera if you
would like.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F62
Page 59 of 74
Moberly: Let me get you moved over here to my camera.
Seal: We can just barely hear you.
Moberly: Okay. One second. I will switch my audio. Is that better?
Seal: Yes, it is. We got a little echo now though.
Moberly: Let me change audio. I will hop off my phone. I apologize. Okay. Can you
hear me on my computer okay?
Seal: Yep. Still got a little echo there.
Moberly: That is bizarre, because I'm on mute. One second. Okay. Let's try a headset
directly into the laptop. Is that better?
Seal: We can hear you, but we still have a little echo going on, but we will -- maybe we
will try and wade through this. Are the speakers feeding into your phone? Are you still
there? Okay.
Moberly: Can you hear me okay?
Seal: Yeah. Yes, but we still have a little echo here, so -- I'm not sure what's going on,
but there is a -- there is a second source --
Moberly: Well, I guess we will do our best to make this make sense. I'm not near my
phone, so I'm not sure what is happening, but --
Seal: It's not doing it now, so -- but you are going to have to speak up, so -- okay. Thank
you.
Moberly: Now I'm having a little trouble hearing you guys. It's only been three hours;
right? Let's do another two hours. Does that sound better to you guys?
Seal: Yes, it does.
Moberly: Okay. I can hear you now, too. Okay. So, no, I don't have a lot to weigh in on.
Alan and I have chatted. I'm great with the front porch. The one thing I would point out
is that our plans include a side loaded front porch -- or not a front porch. Sorry. Like a
little -- kind of a kick out barbecue area. Exactly right. So, we can talk about doing more
on the patio there if that's the desire. I don't know if it's my turn to talk or your guys' turn
to talk. Sorry.
Seal: Go ahead.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F63
Page 60 of 74
Moberly: Really just our thought is that the best use of this land is residential. It's
consistent with the goal of growing Old Town as a residential area and we think that the
lot supports two units pretty well, so my goal is to build a duplex, maybe think about a lot
split with townhomes, but I think that's kind of putting the cart before the horse a little bit.
Seal: Okay. And I forgot to have you state your name and your address when this started
here with the --
Moberly: My apologies. David Moberly. Address is 4408 West Saddle Ridge Drive,
Nampa, Idaho. 83687.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Was there anything else you wanted to add?
Moberly: Not really. We think that it seems like it's really the best use of the land, but
wanted to field any concerns you guys have mainly.
Seal: Okay. With that are there any -- any questions that we have for the applicant or
staff?
Lorcher: Commissioner Seal?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: When -- when you took your Tundra down the street were there any other two-
story buildings or was everything single story? Do you remember? I mean most of these
houses are, like you said, 50 to 100 years old and I don't know how many two stories
there would be back in those days.
Tiefenbach: Yes, ma'am. I -- I don't -- I will tell you I don't remember. However, it's
important to know that in the Old Town zone district you have to build at least two stories.
You can't build a one-story building. It's -- the dimensional requirements in OT require at
least two stories.
Lorcher: But all of these are single story.
Tiefenbach: That -- that I know of. I wasn't looking.
Lorcher: Okay.
Tiefenbach: I wasn't looking. I could probably try to go on Google Maps right now
and --
Lorcher: And I'm on there, too, and I -- I can only see it from --
Tiefenbach: I wasn't looking for that. I'm sorry.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F64
Page 61 of 74
Lorcher: So, I mean for consistency and -- and fitting everything in, would it be out of
place to have this huge two story brand new building among so many older homes on the
same street? Did you look at that as far as kind of like how it all blends together or is it
going to be kind of the brand new guy sticking out among all the old guys?
Tiefenbach: Certainly. I think -- sorry. Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Sure.
You are going to see this and this is going to be a new looking building. I mean this --
you know, it's staff's understanding that this is probably going to eventually start to
transition over. Most of these houses are a hundred years old.
Lorcher: All right. And, then, my final question is is that -- well, I mean if you see it
transitioning -- so, when I was reading the application or the -- the support materials, the
City of Meridian is requiring this parcel only to put in sidewalks.
Tiefenbach: That is correct. As -- as these properties develop every one of them will be
required to put in the sidewalk. We -- we think they are going -- maybe not all of them,
but they are going to develop.
Lorcher: Okay. Well, it's going to look a little strange for a little while, then, if only one
has sidewalks and the other ten or 12 --
Tiefenbach: It's a -- that's a very good statement and we have had that discussion about
why we don't have like a little fund that we can have them pay into to build the sidewalks.
Later there was some discussion and now the actual project -- oh, it was a project on --
the Locust Grove project where there was no sidewalk at all in the whole neighborhood.
There was a lot of discussion -- they are smiling, because they remember this one.
Eventually the decision from the Council was to allow an asphalt pathway versus a
sidewalk. But, yeah, this -- this discussion does come up about what happens when you
have nobody that has a sidewalk, you have got the first person that has to develop and
now they have got a sidewalk in front of their property. If we don't require them to have
a sidewalk and, then, this starts to turn around, then, we are going to sort of wish that we
did. But it's -- it's a Catch-22, yeah.
Lorcher: Okay.
Tiefenbach: It's a very good point.
Lorcher: And then -- so, when I hear the word Old Town I think, you know, historic
buildings. I -- and 50 years to 100 years old kind of qualifies for that. Are -- is the City of
Meridian going to let these all just go away for duplexes and brand new stuff or are we
going to try to preserve what Meridian was 50 and 100 years ago?
Tiefenbach: That's a tough question. I don't think we have a preservation ordinance.
Bill, can -- is there -- I mean we don't have a preservation ordinance that I know of. So, I
have the feeling that they are going to go away.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F65
Page 62 of 74
Parsons: Yeah. Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, yeah, to answer your question,
we will preserve where we can. There are certain properties in downtown that -- that are
on the historic registry, but we don't have a lot of them and it's part of that historical walk
that we have mapped out on the sidewalks, if you have ever taken it. It's actually a pretty
nice walk. But, again, the city is not going to force anyone to do anything on their property
if they have an existing residence they want to keep that or they may have the ability to
modify that in the future. What Old Town is is -- to your point, Old Town doesn't mean
keeping an old history, it means it's a mixed use zone. It's -- it's meant -- if you look at
the Comprehensive Plan it's intensifying the land use. Of course the intent is -- at least
the hope for the Planning staff is that someone will consolidate a bunch of properties and
come in with a whole entire redevelopment plan for a block, so you do get consistent
design, you get complete streets, you get sidewalks, you get all of those things that --that
we are talking about now. But on this particular case it's Old Town. The Comprehensive
Plan is Old Town, so that's the appropriate zoning that's allowed and to make sure that
we do get a certain intensification on the property is the purpose of why we want the two
story. We want to make sure that we just don't allow the single story, because you are
not maximizing the land use. But, to be honest with you, we are a little bit vulnerable in
Old Town. We don't have a lot of design standards for how the units look and so going
back to your point, yes, this is appropriate. Yes, there could be a potential of losing some
of those old -- those old homes. We were in front of Council asking about their desire to
implement different design standards for Old Town and they -- that wasn't high on their
priority list at this point. So, it's something that's on our radar, but not at the moment. So,
that's why Alan's bringing it up to you tonight is this will require design review before they
get a building permit and Alan wants -- as he was mentioning in his presentation to you,
he wants to preserve some of that heritage by recording the front porch and the stoops
and add some of that Old Town character back into the unit, because right now, you know,
if I'm looking at the design it is a little sterile in my opinion. I think -- I think the applicant
can do better. But, again, we will just have to wait and see what it -- what it looks like at
design review.
Tiefenbach: One thing I might add is -- so, this property is already zoned I-L now. So,
you know, that's --that's one question is is this more appropriate for industrial uses. Most
of the houses -- most of what's there is is houses. To kind of add on to what Bill was
talking about, this is recommended for Old Town. If you build in Old Town you have to
build a two-story building. You -- you could not -- the -- the actual code does not allow a
one-story building. You have to build a two-story building. So -- so, unless we keep this
industrial that's what's going to happen there when new buildings get built.
Lorcher: I guess my only other comment would be, you know, one of the reasons I joined
this Commission is because I -- you know, I love Meridian and what it represents and --
and our history that's here and I mean no offense to the -- to the applicant, because you
are doing -- you are taking advantage of a vacant lot, which is much better to have a
home or a building there than nothing, but if we take away our history we lose our identity
and if we lose our identity, then, we are just anywhere USA. We are no longer Meridian,
Idaho, which is why I always encourage us to keep our open space for our canals and
our laterals and a neighborhood like this, which is -- you know, has seen many a year -- I
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F66]
Page 63 of 74
live in -- I work in a hundred year old farm house and everybody tells me its economic
value is gone and I a hundred percent disagree. You know, I -- that house has stood for
a hundred years and there is no reason why it can't stand for another. So, I would love
to see the applicant take the suggestions from city planners to be able to make it more
curb appeal with the porches, but also to blend into the neighborhood as is, as opposed
to just putting duplexes up and down the street.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else want to jump in?
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: I have just got one quick question. Is this a zero lot line for the --for staff here?
Is this a zero lot line for the prop -- for the parcel?
Tiefenbach: If -- are we talking about through the middle?
Wheeler: Yes.
Tiefenbach: Yeah. This will be a zero lot line.
Wheeler: Okay. That's it.
Tiefenbach: In fact, I don't believe they have setbacks in the Old Town zone district.
Yeah. That's what I thought. Again, the intent of that is -- there is a zero line, but there
is no setbacks with the intent of bringing buildings to the street. I -- I -- I think that
Commissioner Lorcher had some really good points, because I'm a preservationist and I
actually really appreciate what you had to say. When I'm looking at these sorts of
developments I -- I'm pretty strong about making sure that they are tying into the gabled
roofs and the clapboard siding and the dormers and all that, so it doesn't look like your
typical flat top slot homes that you shove into a historic neighborhood, so I'm very
sensitive to that. You know, one -- one thing that you could do is require that the
architecture of this be consistent with architecture of the surrounding buildings, which
would be -- you know, if you just with a statement like that would give us enough teeth to
make sure that we had pitched roofs, clapboard sidings, dormers that, kind of thing to
make it look like that and during the design review we could do that. That's certainly an
option.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Cassinelli, Commissioner Yearsley, do you have anything to
add?
Yearsley: I have no comment.
Seal: All right. Somebody like to take a -- oh, wait. Never mind. Okay. Does the
applicant have -- would like come back up and address anything that's been said?
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F67
Page 64 of 74
Weatherly: Mr. Chair --
Grove: Public testimony.
Seal: Oh. Yeah. Sorry.
Weatherly: It's getting late. Mr. Chair, we do have people --two people signed in to testify
tonight. The first of which is Michelle Weland.
Seal: Good evening, ma'am. Please -- please state your name and address for the
record. Speak right into the microphone there.
Weland: Rebecca Weland. 625 Northwest 1 st Street. I have a 110 year old home. So
does my daughter on that neighborhood and we have fought hard to bring it out of the --
it was a bad neighborhood at one time. We have put money. We have put developing.
We love our neighbors. My biggest fight now -- what are y'all going to do with the people
that rely on the food bank that has to ride down that alley and get their food if these people
are trying to -- they -- so, they have to come in from the alley, what are they going to do
-- what are we going to do to our elderly that are sitting at the food bank trying to get their
food and they can't get out of their cars and go in. You know, that's my main concern.
And we just want to keep our neighborhood like it is. I homesteaded my house, so -- and
so did my daughter, because our houses are over a hundred years old, so -- but that's
just -- my husband's better at talking. I'm just -- I just don't want to see the little old ladies
that can't get their food at the food bank and Don Clark owns the food bank and I talked
to him today. The -- the parking lot between the food bank and Rides Unlimited is his --
is his property. So, he don't want people driving through his property to get in to their
apartment complex.
Seal: Okay.
Weland: That's all I have to say. I'm too emotional. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you.
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, Don Weland.
D.Weland: I would like to note also there is one other person. His name is Bogdan. He
was signed in on the other one earlier this morning -- or this afternoon.
Seal: Okay. Go ahead and state your name and address for the record.
D.Weland: Don Weland. 625 Northwest 1st Street here in Meridian. We are two blocks
or two units over from this proposed house. I can answer your question a minute earlier,
sir. Anything over here on 1st Street and 2nd Street there are no two story houses
whatsoever. Everything is all one story. One of our other concerns was on the picture
that you showed on the alley, the fence that you showed where there is the parking lot,
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F68
Page 65 of 74
that one right there that you see on the right, that short fence where it ends right there
does not go to the property. This is the property next to it. The fence that actually
connects is a little bit past that white little building where that telephone pole is. I have a
different one from Google Earth that shows it a little bit better. Also a concern of that is
coming in the alley. Like you just mentioned, you got your truck in -- where this actually
comes in is right across from Bogdan's shop and, then, right in the middle of that area is
a big power pole, which makes it very difficult to get in and out. So, that was our concerns
about that. Excuse me. Again, the biggest thing was keeping it all the same. You
mentioned for living areas. This is a light industrial. Our concern of changing it and
making it to where it can be a two-story -- I also work from home, so I have my own
business from home. It's a business and work. My daughter lives next to us. They run
a couple of their own companies behind that. That's a business there. Bogdan, who
owns the shop on the back corner, is a business and the food bank is a business. So, as
far as actual residentials, there is only a couple houses here that are pure residential. I
would agree with my wife that we would like to see it kind of staying the same the way it
is. In my own personal opinion I think seeing a two story in this area is going to stand out
like a sore thumb and it just doesn't fit right. So, that was our main concerns about that.
I would like to thank everybody for your time and God bless.
Seal: Thank you, sir. Madam Clerk?
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, I do stand corrected. Bogdan did sign in on another project. Come
on up if you would like to talk.
Seal: Good evening, sir. Just state your name and address for the record, please.
Martsenyuk: My name is Bogdan Martsenyuk and address is 150 West Railroad Street
and also 606 West 2nd Street. I am right behind the food bank. I own I believe three city
lots it's considered and I have a body shop right behind the other side of the alley where
you can see in the picture where he took and all my bays come out literally -- yeah, that's
all my bays come out into the alley. When I built the shop I didn't have much experience
and I regretted that they actually let me sit -- set -- you know, set it right on the alleyway,
because it's horrible to get into -- in and out of the bay. I just wish that they -- you know,
I didn't know any better. I hired a builder. I bought the property back in 2003. 1 knew it
was light industrial and that's the reason I bought it, because I wanted to, you know, run
a business out of there as the use and so I just -- I'm concerned that once, you know,
they start more access already, like she said, the food bank right now runs their traffic all
the way through the alley, they -- on the side they come out and hand the food out, so the
traffic runs through -- non-stop through the alley on Mondays -- Monday, Wednesday and
Thursdays and, then, I utilize the alley a lot, too, and, then, since I had the shop to get
the cars in and out, unloading them. I just -- I'm concerned that the residents who are
going to live there, they are going to be very unhappy and they are going to complain
non-stop to code enforcement and they are going to have -- really, the biggest concern is
they want to put the garage in the back and -- which is going to cause a lot of tension
between the food bank, between me and them, because the alley is utilized a lot. It's not
like one of those alleys that doesn't get used. Unfortunately, I would love to move the
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F69
Page 66 of 74
shop ten feet where I wouldn't have to use the alley all the time, but it is what it is. The
city has like a ten -- I guess an easement to my property because of that and they didn't
catch it and I didn't realize that it would be an issue. So, I'm against to have them access
through the alley and also I like the fact that we know about the property that was light
industrial and I'm against changing, you know, to Old Town, just because a lot of people
who live there they -- they bought it as a light industrial. The whole section of the
Broadway there is a lot of businesses, there is the school, you know, and I think that's --
there is -- that's a big reason that people like it, because of the industrial zoning. You can
have different options versus, you know, just a residential.
Seal: Thank you. Appreciate it. Madam Clerk, do we have anybody else on?
Weatherly: Mr. Chair, that's all I show and online the only one raising their hand is Mr.
Moberly.
Seal: Okay. Sir, do you want to testify? You are the only one in here. All right. Pretty
easy to pick out over there, so -- okay. At this point would the applicant like to come back
forward.
Weatherly: Mr. Moberly, you should be able to unmute yourself.
Moberly: Thank you. Mr. Chairman and council -- or excuse me. Commissioners. I want
to apologize in advance for earlier impropriety and also it's echoing really bad in my ears,
which is really distracting, so I apologize for disjointed sentences in advance. So, I just
want to say that I hear the concerns of the Welands and Mr. -- I'm sorry if I'm going to say
your name wrong, Bajnok. But what I would say is that we have two choices for this land
going forward. It's going to remain a bare lot or it's going to be a home and we think that
the building that we are going to build is going to add a lot of value to the neighborhood
and it's really going to be an attractive building. Our goal with the rear entry garage is
that there will be a 30 foot driveway, so the access to the garage won't be extremely tight
and also there should be zero cars ever hanging into the alley. What we want to do is
create a front-facing home that's beautiful, adds value to the neighborhood, without
impeding the flow on 1st Street itself. So, while a tenant or an owner could park there
with a two-car garage and a 15-foot wide driveway in the back, the idea is that there
shouldn't be streets -- or cars on the street and we were in agreement that the two-story
thing is potentially out of line with the neighborhood. Unfortunately, code doesn't allow
us to build a one story. So, this was kind of our approach to what can we do with this lot
to add value to the neighborhood and add value to Old Town Meridian as a whole, where
we are transitioning from older homes to some newer homes and, by the way, I have two
lots in Old Town and so I'm super aware of the concerns with changing the feel of the
neighborhood, but our goal would be that the home does fit in. So, we are super open to
adding front porch, design standards. We are not trying to throw up a cheap building, we
want to put up a nice building that does fit in the neighborhood and at the end of the
construction project all the neighbors would say, wow, this did add value to our
neighborhood. So, I don't know how to address the concerns with the food bank or the
auto mechanic shop, other than to say that with -- with the scale of quality of construction
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F70]
Page 67 of 74
in this home we don't anticipate lots of in and out traffic. This is going to be geared
towards professionals, potentially young marrieds that are both workers, who would
probably utilize the alley primarily at, you know, 9:00 a.m, 5:00 p.m. timelines around
work. So, that's kind of our thought. I want to say absolutely respectfully to the neighbors
and the community, I hear your concerns and my goal is really is to partner with you and
that at the end of this you would say, wow, we are happy that this happened, not frustrated
that it happened.
Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Okay. At this time can I get a
motion to close the public hearing on Item No. H-2021-0089?
Lorcher: So moved.
Wheeler: Second.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for H-2021-0089.
All in favor? Any opposed? Motion passes.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Seal: Okay. Who wants to jump in first?
Lorcher: I have a question for staff if I could, Commissioner Seal.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: So, the two story rule -- I'm sorry to keep harping on this. I'm still kind of the
new guy here. Who decided that? The city? The commissioners? The Commissions
or --
Tiefenbach: I didn't hear the last part of your question.
Lorcher: Who decided that Old Town has to be two story?
Tiefenbach: It's -- it's code. The Old Town zone district has a requirement for two stories.
Lorcher: And the --
Tiefenbach: Like setbacks or building heights, I mean --
Lorcher: Right. So, does -- the City Council decides that or the city planner? I -- I mean
I'm just trying to --
Tiefenbach: It's a regulation. If you -- it's just like if you build a house in R-1 -- if you build
a house in an R-4 you have to meet a certain amount of setbacks and you can't be at
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F71
Page 68 of 74
more than 35 feet in height. In this particular case if you build in OT you have to have at
least two stories.
Lorcher: Okay.
Seal: Sir, we closed the public hearing, so you won't have a chance to come back up.
Thank you.
Starman: Mr. Chairman, just to answer the question more directly, the ordinance -- or the
code was approved by the City Council.
Lorcher: And how long has this code been in place? Forever?
Starman: I think Old Town -- maybe 20 years or so. Bill would probably be the best
person to answer that.
Parsons: It's been two story ever since I have been here, so -- I have been here 15 years,
so -- and, then, if you recall a few -- a few months ago -- or six months ago we came back
with the ordinance to increase the height to a maximum a hundred feet in Old Town in
certain areas, but we left the two story in place, so --
Lorcher: Okay.
Parsons: -- yeah, that's -- that's been in play for a long time.
Lorcher: All right. Thank you.
Seal: Whose screen are we looking at right now? Alan, can you bring this up on Google
Earth? I just want to get a better idea of where the food bank is, where the business is,
all of that.
Tiefenbach: Let me try, because I'm not used to navigating.
Seal: Okay. Well, go up -- I was going to say something we would all have to have
access to.
Tiefenbach: Do you want street view?
Seal: No. Just an aerial would be good. That we can kind of --
Tiefenbach: Oops.
Seal: -- take a look at what's there and --
Tiefenbach: I guess I'm taking you there anyway. Let's see. There is East 3rd. There is
Broadway. There is the food bank there.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F72
Page 69 of 74
Seal: You need to share your screen.
Tiefenbach: Okay. Let's see. The property is right here, if you can see my pointer.
Seal: Okay. So, the -- oh, I see. So, the Meridian Food Bank -- okay.
Wheeler: And also across the street is also their parking, I believe, too. If I remember
right from the Meridian Food Bank.
Grove: Alan, could you zoom in just a tiny bit more, please.
Seal: There we go.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: I have some -- just kind of some insights from this bird's eye view here and I
just want to share them. It's not one way or the other on anything like that. We can see
that there is cars that are parked in that alleyway, so I don't know if there is something
that can be done that if this was to be built that there would be a restriction on vehicles
being left there or parked there, if that's something that can be done, staff?
Tiefenbach: Alan Tiefenbach. Associate planner. I would probably start with saying
there shouldn't be a dumpster in the middle of the alleyway.
Wheeler: Exactly. I don't know if there is something that we can -- we can do that -- at
least on the parking side. The other thing is that if you zoom in just a little bit more you
will notice that there is a power pole that's -- kind of lines up from that edge and so I'm
trying to see how somebody would come through that paved area parking lot, they would
have to go to the left because of the parking spaces that are around, do a hairpin turn
right and, then, do another left into a parking area. At least that's the way that I'm seeing
-- the way that that property would access for -- to the garage. I'm -- I'm wondering if the
applicant would be willing to flip that house 180 degrees, so the parking would come in
off of Northwest 1 st Street and -- and be able to access it with a little bit larger drive and
wouldn't have to use the -- the alley for the ingress-egress.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: I -- I just want to point out one thing, though. By flipping that 180 degrees you
completely lose all of the aesthetics of the front porch and all the -- yeah, the -- the
aesthetic aspects of -- of what we are wanting to get out of Old Town properties. So, it
would diminish the overall value of the area for that reason I think. Just two cents.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F73]
Page 70 of 74
Seal: Yeah. I mean just looking at this, my concern is, you know, it really is the access
to this piece right here. I mean we have the -- you know, the Rides Unlimited shop that's
here and I mean there is, you know, cars and trailers, all kinds of stuff in here. So, you
know, it's hard to be good neighbors when you have a truck and a trailer blocking your
driveway, so, you know, that said that probably shouldn't be there anyway, as well as the
dumpster, so -- I don't know. I -- I mean -- sorry. Earlier there was a -- one of the pictures
that Alan had up there showed a dumpster in the -- in the alley.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler, go ahead.
Wheeler: So, Commissioner Grove, yes, it would lose some of those aesthetics to swing
that around and I just don't know which one is -- it would give them up on the immediate
front; right? And -- and so I don't know which ones -- and what's the better trade here for
that. I do like to have, you know, tax producing property in the City of Meridian that's
going to bring in some stuff and some revenue for an entrepreneur on it. I like that idea.
And -- and I think that maybe with some light redesign or something that maybe that
frontage can be moved over over to the top of the garage and maybe that would bring in
something that aesthetically might be a little bit more, you know, visible, but I'm -- I just
have issues with -- you know, obviously, his two vehicles -- his two -- his duplex there
isn't going to cause the congestion on this alleyway. We already see vehicles parked
there and as shown earlier by staff at a dumpster that would be in the alleyway. So, that
-- that -- they are not going to congest this thing up anymore for the food bank to get their
food to their senior citizens and those that have need. It's -- it's the -- it's the access in
and out of there that's -- I'm just thinking it might be better coming in off the Northwest 1 st
Street. But how that all works and feels it's up to the Commission on that.
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove, go ahead.
Grove: My two cents on just that aspect I think is people who rent, buy, whatever that
location are going to know that going in, so they are going to decide if they -- if that's
something that they can live with or not. I think as something -- as this goes in we have
to be thinking about not just today, but what does this start to look like as other parcels in
the general area start to redevelop and what type of look, feel, desire do we have for
those residential components of the Old Town and what is it that we want to see five
years, ten years down the road, so that we don't have -- let's say, you know, a house
across the street or something decides to redevelop or two of them, we would like them
to have a consistency to it and so looking forward I think we have to make some of those
decisions now. It -- it is harder when it's just a single piece. I know that -- I mean I have
sat through hundreds of meetings over the last seven years for Old Town specific projects,
in business meetings and chamber meetings and community meetings, all kinds of things.
It's not easy and -- but I think as we look at downtown and some of the projects that are
coming online in the next 18 months, the Old Town general area is going to have a much
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F74]
Page 71 of 74
greater investment in -- in changing and so we are going to -- if we don't think forward on
some of that, it -- it's going to bite us pretty bad later on.
Seal: Go ahead.
Tiefenbach: Yeah. Mr. Commissioner -- Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. I just
wanted to mention, I guess -- and I think you kind of already talked about this. I
understand that there is -- there is a dumpster and there is cars parking there, but that
alley is public right of way. That's not a parking lot. That's public right-of-way. They
shouldn't really be parking in that to begin with.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Cassinelli or Yearsley, would you like to weigh in?
Yearsley: You know, I think for me the big question is is should this be downtown or
industrial, because you are -- you are kind of right on that verge -- you know, you have
got a lot of commercial uses or industrial uses right around that same area and even
farther down the street and -- and so, you know, we are, you know, redeveloping the
downtown and as, you know, the growth pressures continue, you know, I guess the big
question for me is what do we want it to be and -- and it's kind of hard to decide at this
point, you know, without having to -- you know, you start looking at all the different
businesses all the way down Broadway, you know, to that. So, I don't know. I -- I think
for the most part I think the project looks good and -- and everything and stuff like that
and -- and I -- I understand the code and that and so I'm -- I'm okay with the building and
with the conditions, so --
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else want to weigh in?
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Oh.
Cassinelli: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Cassinelli, go ahead.
Cassinelli: I will just kind of echo Commissioner Yearsley's comments there and, you
know, when I play around with -- with Google Earth there I'm -- I'm seeing a two-story
home a half a block up on 1 st and Broadway, so it's not as if there is none there. I -- I do
want it redesigned to get the front porch and Alan made comments earlier about how to
-- how to word that and how it should fit with the architectural designs, but, you know,
primarily that's what I would like to see and I -- I think it will -- it's -- I do -- it would be tough
having a two-story right there with zero lot lines, but that's what the Old Town
requirements are and I think if -- if -- you know, as we get some changes there I would
maybe like to see a little bit of setbacks on the side. But maybe -- I think that would be
my only comment.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F75
Page 72 of 74
Seal: Thank you.
Cassinelli: Yeah. There is a two story right there. And you have also got -- you have
also got height on the food bank. I don't know what the -- even though it's a single story,
but you do have some height on that.
Seal: Okay. Well, at some point somebody's got to make a motion here.
Cassinelli: Could I ask Alan to repeat his comments on the architectural -- how to word
that?
Tiefenbach: Alan Tiefenbach. Associate planner. I'm kind of thinking out loud and
looking at Bill, but there could be some language that says that architecture design and
materials will be generally consistent with the surrounding residences. That would give
me enough -- that just gives me enough to say you can't do a flat roof slot house --
although the duplexes are roughly sort of there, they are -- if you see what they are doing
-- let's see. I don't know where I am here. Let's see. If you look at what they are doing
it--they did show clapboard. They did show--so, they do have --they do have clapboard.
They have got the fish scale here. But, yeah, I mean if they -- they -- if they kicked out a
porch here and they put some -- put a covered element in there, they work towards some
-- some -- some dormers, maybe put some stone on the bottom or brick, they could make
it -- so, you know, it's just some simple language. I'm looking at Kurt to make sure he
doesn't wince -- some simple language that says that architectural materials shall be
generally consistent with the architecture of the surrounding residents -- would probably
give me enough to twist the thumb screws, so --
Starman: Mr. Chairman, I am wincing just a little bit, so I have a question for the planners,
which is I think the only item before the Commission this evening is to make a
recommendation to the City Council relative to a zoning change. So, I don't know that we
really want to go into the issues you are referring to. But I would invite your thoughts on
that. But, really, we have a very discreet item before the Commission, which is a
recommendation to the City Council on a rezoning request.
Tiefenbach: Alan Tiefenbach. Yes, we do already have a condition on the -- that's going
to happen -- the design review, though, in regard to the covered porch. So, I don't know
if this could be added or not. Where there is -- I know we typically -- it's tough to add a
condition -- and Bill could comment about that. We are adding a condition to a straight
rezone, because there is no DA, but we would have to do a design review and we would
be looking at this condition at the time of the design review.
Seal: Go ahead if it will let you, Kurt.
Starman: Okay. I think we are back in business. My apologies. So, maybe an in-
between solution could be to -- in response to the question and to Alan's response, it
could be when you forward your recommendation to the City Council it could be with --
that could be part of your recommendation is that the additional design review and
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F76]
Page 73 of 74
certainly we do have design review under city code today, so that's -- that can be
accomplished. But, really, I think the item before the Commission this evening is a
recommendation to the Council relative to a rezoning request. If you want to make part
-- if the maker of the motion wants to add a recommendation as to design I think that's
appropriate, but -- well, it's not just -- you know, not a decision that's really before the
Commission this evening.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. All right. Does that give you enough to make a motion?
Grove: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Grove.
Grove: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend
approval to the City Council of file number H-2021-0089 as presented in the staff report
for the hearing date of February 3rd, 2022, with the following recommendation: To include
in the design review that the architectural design and materials generally are -- used are
generally consistent with the general neighborhood aesthetics nearby.
Wheeler: Second.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval of Item 2021-0089
as presented in the staff report, with the modifications noted. All of those in favor say
aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
Seal: Okay. I need one more motion, please.
Wheeler: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Wheeler.
Wheeler: Like to make a motion we adjourn.
Seal: Is there a second?
Grove: Second.
Seal: There has been motion and a second to adjourn. All those in favor say aye. Any
opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:14 P.M.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
Item 1. February 3,2022 F77
Page 74 of 74
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.)
APPROVED
2 117 1 2022
ANDREW SEAL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK