The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPZ - Public TestimonyAugust 21, 2015 Meridian Planning Division Attn: Barbara Shiffer Meridian City Hall 33 E Broadway, Suite 102 Meridian, ID 83642 RE: EASY JET SUBDIVISION APPLICATION (RZ 15-012, PP 15-016, CUP 15-017) To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed Easy Jet Subdivision. I am opposed to this development application as it is proposed. Elements of the development plan are not consistent with the key community value in the City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan to "enhance Meridian's quality of life for all current and future residents". There are also conflicts with action item 3.05.02A (require neighborhood and commercial areas to create a site design compatible with surroundings) and action item 3.05.02F (require new urban density subdivisions which abut or are proximal with existing low density residential land uses to provide landscape screening or transitional densities). These conflicts result from the proposed unit density (number of apartments) and scale of the subdivision, which will also cause parking and traffic issues. The application calls for one 2 -story and three 3 -story multi -family buildings with a total of 76 units on 4.15 acres, for a gross density of 18.31 DU/acre, which exceeds the maximum density for the requested R-15 zoning. The developer is using the total area of the development, 5.4 acres, to achieve a claimed gross density of 14.1 DU/acre. If this is allowed under City Code, I would suggest it is inappropriate for this location and that the allowed number of dwelling units should not be calculated including the land used for the two commercial buildings. This would result in a maximum of 62 dwelling units on the 4.15 acres which is more compatible with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan for the Mixed Use Community (MU -C) designation for this property, which has a residential density guideline of 6 to 15 units per acre. Three-story multi -family buildings are out of scale with the surrounding residential properties. 88% of the residential units within 300 feet of the proposed development are single story (49 of 56 residences). The three-story buildings will be 39'4" high, which is almost five feet higher (4'9") than presented to residents at the developer's neighborhood meeting. Residents were concerned that the 347" height described at that meeting was out of scale with the neighborhood so making these buildings even higher makes the scale issue even worse. (See site plan and legend on page 50 of the application, which was the basis of the presentation at the developer's neighborhood meeting.) The plan does not provide a significant transitional density with the surrounding residential area. If one looks at the Fields at Gramercy multi -family housing development as an example of transitional density, one finds three story buildings that are surrounded by two story buildings, which themselves are surrounded by single family homes before the development interfaces with the existing residential area. Scale is an issue not just with appearance, but also with property values. At the developer's neighborhood meeting, he cited a study finding that multi -family housing does not decrease neighborhood property values. However, a more complete representation of the result of that study is that neighborhood property values typically do not decrease, and may in some cases even increase, when the multi -family housing_is attractive in appearance and of a scale compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. I suggest that three story buildings are not a compatible in scale with one story homes. I have also heard that the developer's business plan is to sell each building (lot) to individual investors, but requiring that they use the same property manager. This is a potential issue since when each building has a separate owner, the individual owners may each have a different idea regarding maintenance of their building with the potential mid- or long-term result being that some buildings are well maintained and that others are not. This would affect the attractiveness of the development, albeit long after the developer has gone. The surrounding neighborhoods are also concerned that sufficient parking be provided for the multi- family housing because if it is not, apartment residents will park on residential streets in Sutherland Farms and Sutherland Downs. Easy Jet is posted as no parking, so any excess vehicles will park in the surrounding residential areas. Ironically, CC&Rs require that residents park in their garages and driveways; street parking is for visitors. So, if there is insufficient parking provided for the multi -family housing, perhaps as a result of subleasing bedrooms, apartment dwellers will be parking on residential streets where the residents themselves are not supposed to park. There are also traffic concerns with the number of vehicles that will go in/out of the multi -family housing and the commercial buildings. The only access/egress is from Easy Jet as a curb cut is not permitted on Eagle Road since it would be too close to the signaled intersection at Eagle Road and Easy Jet. The significant increase in traffic is expected to create issues at the signaled intersection. It will also result in a significant increase in traffic using Easy Jet and residential streets to exit/enter on to/from Cloverdale and Victory. These will decrease the quality of life in the existing residential areas. So what does one do to make the proposed development more compatible with the existing residential area? I propose the following: (1) Require a unit density calculation for the multi -family housing that does not include the land on which the commercial buildings are located. This would result in a maximum of 62 dwelling units on the 4.15 acres occupied by the multi -family housing for a maximum gross density of 14.9 dwelling units per acre. (2) Require that all of the multi -family buildings be 2 -story with a maximum height of 29'4". (3) Require significantly more parking spaces than the code specifies and require a covenant in the commercial unit lease/sales contracts to prohibit the businesses from posting customer parking only signs. (4) Improve the landscaping buffer between the development and the residential area, especially for the adjacent home on Nephrite that has just a few trees and narrow grass area as a buffer. (5) Require a mechanism that ensures a high level of maintenance for all of the buildings. Requiring these changes to the plan would significantly reduce adverse impacts to the surrounding residential area, as well as provide an alternate housing opportunity for Meridian residents. Yo ruly, Robert M. Neilson, Jr. 3508 E Quin Drive, Meridian, ID 83642 [r9 Aug 24, 2015 3458 E Quin Dr. Meridian, Idaho To: Planning and Zoning Committee Members Subject: Easy Jet Subdivision Rezone Application 1. Please reject this proposed apartment complex as it is written. A three story design is not acceptable to adjacent homeowners. Insist that a plan be resubmitted limiting the height to one and, or two stories. Smaller units or duplexes would be a much better `fit' for the surrounding neighborhoods. 2. If an apartment complex is approved by the City of Meridian, an annual fee should be assessed to the owners or management of the apartments for the maintenance of the nearby parks. Apartment residents would surely want to use the common area with it's gazebo in Southerland Downs and the great park in Southerland Farms. Payment of such a fee would give the rental citizens a sense of ownership and promote better harmony for all of us who are living together in this great community. Respectfully submitted, �lJ �71, Rex N Langley Sally K Langley 08/21/2015 16:01 Eye Associates To: Meridian City Planning Zoning 33 E Broadway Ave #102 Meridian, ID Re: Parcel: 51121325865 (FAX)2083753154 August 17, 2015 Primary Owner: Jones, Reginald Zone Code: R-4 Total Acres: 4.739 Instrument Number: 112079545 Property Description: PAR #5865 of NW4SW4, SEC 21 3N 1E, #325861-B Address: E Easy Jet Dr, Meridian, ID 83642 (southeast corner of Easy Jet Dr and Eagle Road) Primary Owner: Reginald A. Jones, Nampa, ID 83686 J U B Project #: 10-15-049 P.0011001 The property owner of the project site, referenced above, is proposing to rezone the property from R-4 (Medium -Low Density Residential) to L -O & R-15 (Limited Office & Medium -High Density Residential) with a conditional use permit for multi -family housing. The proposal includes dividing the property into seven lots (4 residential and 2 commercial) —this will facilitate selling off the property in the future to several different owners. The owner has hired J -U -B Engineers to push the project through the Planning and Zoning process. We, the owners of adjacent properties, are opposed to this proposed proiect and request that the Meridian Planning and Zoning retain the original zoning: Name and Address Signature G f'ND>r � ate dU S . Rk. th , A,. , -(-D [b'5UL(3, 4A, VWJ City of Meridian, Idaho Attention Planning and Zoning Board 33 E Broadway Meridian, ID 83642 Greetings, :u My husband and I are writing in regards to the planned Easy Jet Complex Project. We invested in a home in the Sutherland Farm subdivision because of its beautiful appearance, friendly neighbors, great grounds keeping, a park, walking paths, and close access to our daughter and family. We were informed, before our decision to purchase this home on Groom Way, that the vacant property in question was to be developed in the same manner to match the existing property. Ours is a wonderful community for safety and well-being . We, as neighbors here watch out for each other's needs and safety. The patio homes in Sutherland Downs and the small business buildings add beauty and add to the general appearance of ours. As well, Thousand Springs, Muir Woods are beautiful areas and add to the general appearance of this area of Meridian. We share space well, and have pride in our investment in our properties. The development planned for the apartment complex on Easy Jet and Eagle Road is so overwhelming in its size and elevation. This is a totally different type of community dwelling for this area. It has an imposing appearance compared to our surrounding area. We also feel that the traffic impact for school buses, children walking to school and also the impact on the area schools will be monumental. Have there been any other considerations for developing this particular piece of property in a less imposing way to blend with existing property? Also, in the future, It could likely happen that an individual apartment complex of the four planned could be sold to a party who lives in another state. We respectfully ask for a reconsideration of the project planned and no more than a 6 in the Zoning number. With great concern we respectfully ask for your reconsideration. Sincerely, John and Rebecca Tucker 2712 S. Groom Way Meridian, ID 83642