HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-07-18 Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting July 18, 2024.
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of July 18, 2024, was called
to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Andrew Seal.
Members Present: Commissioner Andrew Seal, Commissioner Maria Lorcher,
Commissioner Jared Smith, and Commissioner Matthew Sandoval.
Members Absent: Commissioner Patrick Grace, Commissioner Enrique Rivera and
Commissioner Brian Garrett.
Others Present: Tina Lomeli, Bill Parsons, Sonya Allen, Linda Ritter and Dean Willis.
ROLL-CALL ATTENDANCE
Brian Garrett X Maria Lorcher
X Matthew Sandoval Patrick Grace
Enrique Rivera X Jared Smith
X Andrew Seal - Chairman
Seal: Good evening. Welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for
July 18, 2024, and at this time I would like to call the meeting to order. The
Commissioners who are present for this evening -- 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're joining us on Zoom this evening we can see that
you are here. You may observe the meeting. However, your ability to be -- 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
any questions until the public testimony portion. If you -- if you have any process
questions during the meeting, please, e-mail cityclerk(a)_meridiancity.org and they will
reply as quickly as possible. With that we will begin with roll call. Madam Clerk.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Seal: All right. So, first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We have
two items on here. The -- the application for the Gateway at Ten Mile, which is File No.
H-2024-0010, will be opened for the sole purpose of continuing to another regularly
scheduled meeting in the future. It will be opened for that purpose only. So, if anybody
is here for the Gateway at Ten Mile we will not be taking public testimony on that this
evening. We are also going to move Item No. 3 to the end of the agenda this evening.
With that can I get a motion to adopt the agenda as amended?
Smith: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 2 of 53
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor please say aye.
Opposed nay? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
1. Approve Minutes of June 20, 2024 Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting
2. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Black Rock Coffee (H-2024-
0011) by CSHQA, located at 776 N. Cliff Creek Ln.
Seal: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have two items on the
Consent Agenda. We need to approve the minutes of the -- of the June 20th, 2024,
meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. We also have Findings of
Facts, Conclusions of Law for BlackRock Coffee, H-2024-0011. Can I get a motion to
accept the Consent Agenda as presented?
Smith: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All in favor, please,
say aye. Opposed nay? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
ITEMS MOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA [Action Item]
Seal: We will get back to that one. All right. So, at this time I would like to briefly
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 items adhere 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 have signed up
in advance to testify. You will need to state your name and address for the record and
you will have three minutes to address the Commission. If you have previously sent
pictures or a presentation for the meeting it will be displayed on the screen and will --
and you will run the presentation with assistance from the clerk if needed. 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 signed up in advance have spoken we will invite any
others who may wish to testify. When you are finished if the Commission does not have
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 3 of 53
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 generally do not call people
back up. 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 final decisions or
recommendations to City Council as needed.
ACTION ITEMS
3. Public Hearing for Blayden Subdivision (H-2023-0043) by Bailey
Engineering, located at the south side of W. Chinden Blvd. and west
side of N. Black Cat Rd.
A. Request: Annexation of 38.58-acres of land with R-8 (5.90), R-15
(1.83-acres), R-40 (16.71-acres) and C-G (14.15-acres) zoning
districts.
B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a multi-family development
consisting of 312 dwelling units on 16.71-acres of land in the R-40
zoning district.
C. Preliminary Plat consisting of 15 building lots, 7 common lots, 1
drive/parking lot and 3 other lots for future development on 35.29-
acres of land in the R-8, R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning districts.
Seal: So, at this time I would like to open the public hearing for Item No. H-2023-0043
for Blayden Subdivision. We will begin with the staff report.
Allen: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. Give me just a moment
here and I will get the presentation up. Alrighty. The applications before you tonight are
a request for annexation and zoning, preliminary plat and a conditional use permit. The
property consists of 35.29 acres of land, zoned RUT in Ada county, and is located off
the southwest corner of North Black Cat Road and West Chinden Boulevard, State
Highway 20-26. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this
property is mixed-use regional on the northern 25 acres and medium density residential
on the southern 20 acres. The applicant -- okay. So, the applicant is requesting to be
allowed -- are we good, Dean? Okay. I normally talk loud. That usually isn't an issue.
I don't want to blast your ears out and everybody else in the room. The applicant is
requesting to be allowed to use the abutting mixed-use regional future land use map
designation on 50 percent of the medium density residential designated area and you
can see by the diagram right here, the 50 percent the applicant is wanting to be applied
to this bottom portion right here. The comp plan does allow for such requests when
determined appropriate and approved as part of a public hearing with a land
development application. The applicant believes this extension of the mixed-use
regional designation on five of the ten acres of the medium density residential
F
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 4 of 53
designated area will allow for an ideal and suitable mix of commercial uses near major
transportation arterials. The applicant is requesting annexation of 38.58 acres of land
with 5.9 acres of R-8, 1.83 acres of R-15, 16.71 acres of R-40 and 14.15 acres of C-G
zoning for the development of 312 multi-family apartment units, ten townhome units and
four commercial lots. A holding area is proposed on the southern portion of the
annexation area for future development. A portion of this area is where the applicant
requests the MUR future land use map designation is extended with C-G zoning for
future development of a mid-box retail building and an office park as shown on the
proposed concept plan. Staff is requesting the applicant revise the concept plan for the
holding area to swap places with the mid box retail store and the office use and I don't
know if you can see -- it's kind of faint on this -- this drawing, but the mid box is right
here and staff is asking him to put it over here in the office use over here instead, so
that the retail store is situated along Black Cat Road and the office use is located
internal adjacent to the future single family residential uses for a better transition and
land uses and consistency with the concept diagram in Figure 3D of the Comprehensive
Plan. Staff also recommends a change to the zoning in this area from C-G to L-O for
the office park, which will provide a better transition and zoning and result in a
development that's more compatible with adjacent residential uses form wise, as well as
with the hours of business operation. Staff is also recommending changes to the
concept plan to include the following: The relocation of the plaza area on the south side
of Ramblin further to the south in a more central location for the future office park away
from the collector street for better integration and access. Details for the plaza and
open space areas in the commercial portion of the development on the north side of
Ramblin to demonstrate consistency with the mixed-use guidelines in the comp plan
that require such areas to be centers of activity and be activated with permanent design
elements and amenities integrated into overall development, interconnected with
meaningful points of interest, prioritization of pedestrian infrastructure, highly visible and
accessible and designed to enhance both the adjacent uses and the larger mixed-use
area. That's a little better picture of the concept plan. I should have had that up a
moment ago. A preliminary plat is proposed for 15 building lots consisting of one multi-
family lot, ten house -- ten townhome lots and four commercial lots, seven common lots,
one driveway parking lot and three other lots for future re-subdivision and development
consisting of one commercial and two single family residential lots on 35.29 acres of
land in the R-8, R-15, R-40 and C-G zoning districts. The subdivision is proposed to
develop in five phases with the multi-family residential development and townhomes in
the first two phases. The commercial on the north side of Ramblin in the third phase.
The commercial in the holding area on the south side of Ramblin in the fourth phase
and the single family residential in the holding area in the last phase. In order to ensure
some services are available for the proposed residents in this area prior to full build out
of the residential area staff is recommending a change to the phasing plan to swap
phases two and three and that is the residential right here and the commercial right
here. All of the existing homes and accessory structures and access driveways to
Chinden, Black Cat and Larry Lane, will be removed prior to development of the phase
in which they are located. Access is proposed via one new collector street, Ramblin
Drive, in accord with the master street map. Ramblin will run parallel with Chinden and
eventually connect to Rustic Oak to the west with development of Prescott Ridge
F
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 5 of 53
Subdivision and the school to the south. Ramblin will function as a backage road
providing connectivity and access to all properties fronting the state highway in this
area. ACHD is requiring a southbound right turn lane on Black Cat at the Ramblin-
Black Cat Road intersection. A traffic signal is planned at the Rustic Oak-Chinden
intersection for safe access from the state highway. A temporary emergency access
only is proposed via Chinden Boulevard until such time as Ramblin is extended to
Rustic Oak in the future. Permanent access is prohibited. Staff is recommending the
emergency access is relocated to the west boundary of the site in order to comply with
the noise abatement standards in the UDC, which prohibit breaks in the berm and wall
along the state highway. Cross-access, ingress-egress easements, are required to be
granted to the out parcel at the northeast corner of the site for future access and
interconnectivity. A 35 foot wide street buffer is required along Chinden and Black Cat,
both entryway corridors, and a 20 foot wide buffer is required along Ramblin,
landscaped in accord with UDC standards. Noise abatement in the form of a four foot
tall berm with a six foot tall concrete modulated wall on top of the berm is proposed at
the back edge of the street buffer along Chinden as required for residential uses
adjoining a state highway. A ten foot wide detached multi-use pathway exists within the
buffer along Chinden Boulevard. A ten foot wide detached pathway is required within
the buffer along Black Cat as proposed in accord with the path -- pathways master plan
and a ten foot wide pathway is proposed along the collector street for pedestrian safety.
The existing trees that will be removed from the site require mitigation in accord with
UDC standards. Concept elevations were submitted for the proposed townhomes as
shown. Concept plans were not included for the future commercial buildings. All
structures, except for single family residential detached homes, are required to comply
with the design standards in the Architectural Standards Manual. A conditional use
permit is proposed for a multi-family development consisting of 312 dwelling units on
16.7 acres of land in the R-40 zoning district. A mix of one, two and three bedroom
units are proposed in three story structures. Three different types of building floor plans
are proposed as follows. There are four of the Type A building, which contains a total of
30 units each, four of the Type B building, which contains a total of 24 units each and
eight of the Type C building, which contains a total of 12 units each. As previously
mentioned the multi-family development is proposed to be constructed in two phases.
The UDC requires common open space to be provided in each phase of development
consistent with the requirements for the size and number of dwelling units. Two
driveway accesses via Ramblin are proposed along the southern boundary of the site
with an emergency access via Chinden. Internal private streets are required to be
provided for addressing purposes. And let me go back to the site plan real quick. The
emergency access is proposed right here where my arrow is if you can see that and as I
mentioned earlier staff is just requesting that it be moved over here to the west
boundary. Compliance with the specific use standards in the UDC for multi-family
residential developments is required, which includes private open space, common open
space, site amenities, parking and landscaping among other things. A minimum of 80
square feet of private usable open space is required for each unit. Eighty-two square
feet is proposed exceeding the standard. Based on the area of the site and the square
footage of the proposed units, a minimum of 3.46 acres of common open space is
required to be provided within the development. A total of 3.58 acres is proposed
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 6 of 53
exceeding the standard consisting of half of the street buffer along Chinden, a dog park,
common area where clubhouse, swimming pool and tot lot are proposed and linear
open space that meets and exceeds the minimum area standards. Staff is
recommending revisions to the site plan prior to the Council hearing for the common
areas proposed along the southern boundary where the dog park, clubhouse and
swimming pool and tot lot are located along the collector street to be relocated to a
more central location within the development accessible by pathways for convenient
access and for more visibility of these areas from the multi-family units in accord with
open space and CPTED standards. A number of site amenities are required for a
development based on the size and number of units in the multi-family developments.
For developments more than one hundred units, such as this, the decision making body
shall require additional amenities beyond the four required for developments with 75
units or more, commensurate with the size of the proposed development, with at least
one from each category, i.e., the quality of life, open space, recreation and multi-modal
categories. The following amenities are proposed from each of the following categories:
Quality of Life. A clubhouse, which includes a fitness facility and a dog wash station
and a dog park with a waste station is proposed. From the open space category, four
community garden areas, plazas and five picnic areas, including tables, benches and
landscaping and a shade structure are proposed. From the recreation category a
swimming pool, children's play structure, tot lot, walking trails, pathways are proposed
and, lastly, from the multi-modal category, a bicycle repair station and enclosed bicycle
storage in the clubhouse. Staff is of the opinion the proposed amenities meet and
exceed the standards. Off-street parking is proposed in excess of UDC standards. A
minimum of 679 spaces are required, including guest parking and covered spaces. A
total of 693 spaces are proposed. Bicycle parking is also proposed for each building
and clubhouse in excess of the minimum standards. Conceptual elevations and
perspective drawings of views from Chinden were submitted for the multi-family
structures as shown. Written testimony has been received from the following folks.
Matt and Ashley Neukom and John Bartlett, the third, and Vicki Bartlett. They are
requesting denial of the project based on the development requirements in the CC&Rs
for Compton Subdivision No. 2, which require minimum one acre lot sizes within the
subdivision among other things. Brooke Neilson requests denial of the proposed multi-
family development due to the overcapacity of various schools and traffic flow in this
area not able to accommodate so much housing. Wade Ramsey, the HOA president of
Bainbridge Subdivision to the east, concern pertaining to traffic cut through -- through
Bainbridge to the commercial uses to the east on Ten Mile Road. Southbound traffic on
Black Cat Road and congestion during peak hours. Request for a traffic signal or
roundabout to alleviate congestion. Concern pertaining to safety of children traveling to
the nearby elementary school with construction of sidewalks on this property, but no
sidewalks along Black Cat for approximately 500 feet in between the subject property
and the school. The Bainbridge HOA board representing its owners opposes this
project until infrastructure improvements are made to accommodate the proposed
development and, lastly, Stephanie -- I'm going to pronounce this wrong, probably, but
Labastida -- opposed to the development due to the negative impacts on the quality of
life of residents in the Trilogy Subdivision to the east due to increased traffic volumes
and speeds and associated safety hazards for children who live in that area. Noise
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 7 of 53
congestion and increased activity in the area. Preference for this area to develop with
solely residential uses rather than mixed-use with commercial and desire for
commercial uses to be provided further to the west. Staff is recommending approval
with the requirement of a development agreement per the conditions and revisions
noted in the staff report. The applicant is here tonight to present. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to come forward? Good evening,
sir. Need your name and address for the record, please.
Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. My name is David Bailey with
Bailey Engineering. Office address is 1119 East State Street in Eagle representing
Trilogy Development for the Blayden Subdivision. Thanks for the time tonight and
thanks, Sonya, for the complete thorough staff report on this and then -- can I use this to
advance this? Use the keyboard or use the mouse? I'm not really technologically
challenged, but these always beat me up. There. It works. Okay. So, we are here for
the Blayden Subdivision tonight and just give a little back history on this, as we actually
started working on this project in 2020 -- in the beginning of 2020 and you will notice
that it has a 2023 number with the city, but in my office it has a 2020 number associated
with it. In that three years in between we were trying to get a layout that worked. We
worked with the staff, we made several submittals to the city, we have been through -- I
couldn't tell you how many pre-applications and meetings and reversals on this with the
city trying to figure out how we are going to make this happen. So, we got to this point,
you know, last year and here we are a year out, we had a few setbacks in between and
I think we have a great product here that's ready for the city to look at. I would point out
that in the meantime -- did we lose something there? Can we -- so, on this slide here
we can see there is a general area. The green area is stuff that's annexed into the city
already and so this and the Compton Subdivision to our south form -- and the nursery,
which is to our west, forms the -- an enclave now within the city limits, completely
developed around this with the Trilogy Subdivision, Bainbridge, the Church and the --
and the Baron multi-family project to the northeast, the single family and commercial to
the northwest or to the north of the site here and, then, we have the school site to the
southwest -- southwest there with the project. So, we are zoned mixed-use regional
and we -- so, we -- most of what we have been going back and forth with the city on is
how do we develop this site to conform with the mixed-use regional plan on this and
make sure that we have enough reserved for the regional needs of the area and comply
with the other restrictions we have with the site and the biggest problem we have -- if
you want to say that -- is -- is Ramblin, which is a backage road. It's -- it's a really great
road that -- that needs to be in there. It provides access between Levi Lane and -- and
Black Cat, so we don't have to have any other accesses on Chinden, which is a great
thing we need there. But it does split the site in half and make it so that there is no
piece of this site that is remaining that we could put a big box use on. So, we have
evaluated Lowe's and Home Depot and, of course, there is already Winco, Costco,
Walmart within the area around here, but we have looked at those two as well. Target
is actually a big box, the same size as a Home Depot, to put on this and so the -- the --
the uses that are available to us are the mid box, which would be Walgreens or a Bi-
Mart or there is other stores. Grocery stores don't really fit here and we have, in fact --
Flo
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 8 of 53
we have -- with the developer and the realtors talked to a bunch of these folks as well.
So, how are we going to fulfill the need for this mixed-use regional and we are also
struggling with the idea that we don't have the northeast corner of the property to plan.
So, we do have a conceptual plan for that and we have had discussions with the owner
of that property as well, but it's not something that -- that we see as near future, but we
do want to make sure we are reserving the area within this thing. So, the area and the
developer feels it's appropriate and we feel it's appropriate to -- to have a -- a significant
multi-family use within the site and the area that we are proposing that multi-family use
is the most appropriate for this site. We cannot put a big box there, because the
commercial road, Ramblin, as stated by ACHD, will never be signalized. So, we cannot
get access to that that we could actually -- we could leave it open, but it will never be
built with that kind of use on it in the future. In addition, it's across from the school on
this site, so we feel that the residential multi-family use is the best use for the site. We
are reserving over half of the site for -- or approximately half of the site for the
commercial uses that -- that we need -- we know need to go there. We are totally in
favor of moving that mid box adjacent to Black Cat and moving that office space to the
west and that area there and that looks -- looks like the city's cut sheets for this where
we have the -- the C-G use and the L-O use and, then, the single family use to the
southwest of the project. So, with that -- I won't go over all the numbers again. I think --
I think that -- that -- that Sonya did a -- did a great job of that and -- but I will -- do want
to cover a few other things. So, the city agency comments and conditions -- I don't
know what I got for time here.
Seal: About ten minutes.
Bailey: Excuse me?
Seal: About ten minutes.
Bailey: About ten minutes -- ten more minutes. Great. Thank you. I talk too much and
run out of time and I don't want that. So, of the city agency comments and conditions --
so, the conditions that -- that the staff is suggesting that we do on here, the -- shifting
the mid box and retail we are totally in agreement with that requirement and we
submitted a revised zoning map to support that. The -- the footprint that we are
showing there now is a Walgreens -- is the last one I put in there and that certainly
works in the other location as well and, then, office around that. Relocate the plaza in
the holding area on the south side of Ramblin further to the south and we are totally in
favor of that. That is actually a parcel that has an existing house on it, so that's where
we -- we put it. But we fully intend to come in with a complete plan for all of the
commercial at a later date and we will move that to be a more central -- centrally located
-- I think that's -- it's not actually showing on this -- on this map here. Will it actually
show up when I touch that? What's that? Where? I am. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Okay. So, we do have a -- I guess I will get into that that right now is there -- there is a
-- on the open space on this we have met all the requirements for the open space. We
have been very intentional about the open space within the multi-family and on
preserving it for the future and so we are showing here adjacent to the multi-family
11 1
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 9 of 53
there is two -- on the east side of that there are two office lots and a coffee shop on the
southeast side and in between there there is a plaza and on this big site plan that may
look kind of small -- it's sitting on there, but I would point out that that is actually 20
percent bigger than Generations Plaza across from -- across from the city here in the
northeast corner and the -- the landscape plan we have drawn here, it will be a similar
type improvement to the Generations Plaza that's right in the city -- city -- center of
Meridian. This is intended with the office buildings there to set the tone to tie the
residential to the -- to the multi-family. Excuse me. The -- the commercial to the multi-
family as is specified by the Comprehensive Plan and the cut sheets for this area. So,
we want to set that precedent that that's there and, then, we do want to provide for two
more open spaces -- gathering spaces within the commercial area that are a gathering
space and, then, another one to the south of this adjacent, probably closer to the -- to
the -- to the office space that -- that's on there in that end. But we would have to come
in with a different plan for that. So, that's relocate. We are -- we are okay with that.
Submit the details for the plaza as open space areas in the commercial portions,
demonstrate they will be integrated centers of activity and we are in agreement to do
that, it's just we are not in a place to do that now, with the exception of the plaza, which
we are -- have detailed and actually it gets built in the first phase of this project. So, that
plaza and the two office buildings -- and I think we have an error in our phasing plan,
because the -- the coffee shop is intended to be in the -- in the first phase. So, we
would have those amenities there and the plaza area fully constructed in the first phase
of the project. Next one is relocate the common areas in the multi-family portion of the
development where dog park, clubhouse, swimming pool are located -- to be more
centrally located and, again, we were very intentional about how this is set up to have
these central to that, but away from Chinden and to provide a separation. We do have
a 20 foot buffer from the commercial collector street to be landscaped. We don't think
it's a safety hazard. And, then, we are across from the school in this area here. So, we
feel that a separation from school to the apartments and the apartments to the school,
this is a great spot to do that and as far as centrally located, we would be talking about
150 or 200 feet difference if we just move this to the north and that does not provide a
barrier to movement by our residents to go to the -- to the common area. Also provides
that -- since that will be the leasing center and the center of business at the -- at the
apartment complex, that we have less traffic through the subdivision for that purpose,
having it here. So, we would like to keep that where it is. We think that's a great spot --
great spot for it and on the west end we tie into that linear space with the dog park,
which -- which makes both of those more useful in that area. Revised legal description
and exhibit maps for the L-O and C-G zone. We are in agreement with that and, then,
revise the preliminary phasing plan to reflect phases two and three being swapped and
-- and we are opposed to that condition. We will build a significant chunk, including the
plaza of the commercial with the first phase. We don't feel that there is going to be a
demand for any of the commercial -- anymore of the commercial for some time after that
and we are actively searching for tenants -- possible tenants for that and -- and looking
what we will do. We will probably come back with a significantly different plan at some
point. May include the corner on this, but we have reserved all that, so that it will be the
commercial in the future. But we would like to get the apartments built. We think this --
this is the final use of this area and -- and we would like to move forward with that as we
F12
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 10 of 53
go along. Talk through a few more of these. Oh. She talked about the layout of the
multi-family and that's the phasing plan we talked about. The holding area here -- and I
guess this is a good time as any to talk about the Compton Subdivision. So, within the
Compton Subdivision there are, in fact, five lots and this developer has these two lots
and owns another lot within the Compton Subdivision. The Bartletts own the six acres
to the south of Larry Lane and Mr. Neukom to the west of this five acres here. We are
fully aware that there is a restriction in the CC&Rs. We have talked to them about it
before. We messed it up one time and re-adjusted some lots for the purpose of keeping
existing homes there while we are working on the development, which we have since
corrected. We believe that this plan -- and we have consulted with the -- with the
attorney -- the developer's attorney on this. We believe that this plan is not in violation
of the CC&Rs and we believe that the appropriate forum to determine that is in a court
and certainly they have that. But we don't think that it's appropriate to say that we can't
make plans for the future of this property and that we can't propose something that's
consistent with the laws and conditions -- ordinances of the -- of the city to do that. We
are subdividing this into lots that are greater than one acre. We probably would not --
we have phase four and phase five on here. So, we would probably not even move
forward with any of those -- those plats until such time as this condition was resolved
with the -- with the neighbors in this area. And -- and so we -- we think this is fully
consistent with -- with what they are doing there and they -- they have a different
opinion on that and, as I said, we -- we -- we feel that the -- the proper place to
adjudicate that is in court and that we are presenting a plan that is very consistent with
what the city is asking us to do in this area and -- and we will either get there eventually
or we won't with that piece of it. In the meantime we think it's reasonable to develop this
in accordance with the -- with the plan we have proposed for the -- for the residential
portion of this and, then, for the commercial as well to the north and we can see better
things for this, but this is -- this is a good plan as is, if we could move forward with this
and we have users for this -- definitely would move forward in that direction. Let's see.
Again, this switching the mid box and office park we are fine with. So, traffic on this --
so we do have a traffic study. We have comments from ITD and from ACHD on this.
Improvements to Black Cat Road are certainly necessary. We are required by ACHD to
do a southbound right turn lane into the project at Ramblin for this. We also connect to
the west on this, which gets to the -- to the point of Mr. Ramsey I think on there is that a
lot of this traffic that wants to go east out of these apartments on to Chinden would go
out to Levi Lane and out to -- out to Chinden in -- in the long run and, then could go
south on Black Cat. That said, the improvements on Black Cat at the intersection of
Black Cat and Chinden and the roundabout at McMillan and Black Cat are in the -- in
the ACHD's five year work plans -- or at least portions of all of those are in the -- in the
five year work plan for -- so, we expect those improvements be done. If they were
required of this development we would do them. We will do the right turn lane. But we
expect the other improvements to get done to provide that connectivity, the sidewalks
and everything working properly on -- on Black Cat for this project. We do have a letter
from the school district. They do have slight overcapacity and overcapacity in one of
the elementary schools that they have there, that they do have some capacity in the
middle school and -- and the site on here -- middle and high schools, the site that's
shown on here is owned by the school district. They don't have any specific plans on it
13
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 11 of 53
yet, but that will be a middle school at some point in the future. So, we have been in
contact with them on that. We have also talked to them about road -- sharing the cost
of building that road in front of the school, so -- and providing proper access to the
property there, so that they can get into that when there is time -- time to do that. I did
want to get into some of these renderings. The townhouses are a small component of
this, but we feel they should be consistent and match with what we have there. This is
the apartments as seen from Chinden and the staff did have some concern about the
proximity of the -- of the project from Chinden. We do have quite a big buffer in there.
We will build another buffer with a berm. Then we have the sidewalks -- or, excuse me,
our parking lot in between that's hidden from Chinden. So, we feel that -- that this will
be a really great view from Chinden. We have the buildings -- you know, some of them
end on -- into that -- into that look there, so you are not looking straight out onto -- onto
Chinden from the windows of those. We feel it will be a good thing. We are fine with
moving that emergency access to --
Seal: Okay. Mr. Bailey, your -- your time is up, so if you could wrap up pretty quick we
would appreciate that.
Bailey: Just a couple quick more is the apartments. So, these are -- these are really
neat apartments and -- and we have shown -- shown these areas where we have these
plazas that are mixed in with the buildings, garden areas within that, you know, walking
and circulation throughout the apartments we really feel is -- is a really nice look and
some really nice looking buildings we have here. Large pool and -- and clubhouse --
interior workout center, clubhouse, amenities are significant with the project and that's
what I have. So, thank you much for your time. I would be glad to answer any
questions.
Seal: Thank you very much. Commissioners, do we have any questions for the
applicant or staff? Commissioner Smith, uh-huh.
Smith: Yeah. So -- so curious about the discussion of -- of open space integrated within
the -- within the development -- within that multi-family. Looking at some of the
renderings, even some of the -- kind of just at first glance some of those apartments feel
a little bit close together. So, I'm curious have you -- what other plans, if any, have you
considered over these years -- apologies -- over these years to maybe do things like
remove that -- reduce that buffer on the south side and integrate that open space closer
and inside of -- with what staff is recommending, have you tried rendering any site plans
with that? Have you looked into that -- expanding that internal open space?
Bailey: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Smith, I think -- just to repeat, you are talking
about moving the pool and clubhouse into the middle of the apartments?
Smith: Either that or perhaps reducing their size and in using that -- that area to expand
open space inside of the -- inside of the development as well. Removing some of the
apartments further apart with the additional square footage that you have.
14
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 12 of 53
Bailey: Having fewer apartments.
Smith: Not necessarily fewer, but potentially you have -- you have a square footage on
the south side that is current amenities and is open space. Rather than having that --
reducing that square footage and, then, using that extra square footage that you have
to, then, create additional open space between the apartments, expanding out the
footprint, creating additional space between the units. Not necessarily reducing the
number of units, but creating additional space between them, rather than having that
buffer on the south side. Does that make sense what I'm --
Bailey: Yes. So, as I said before, we have had -- I couldn't tell you how many layouts
we have had. We have had different buildings on here, different units, different unit
mixes. We have had to try to -- we have tried to do some single family residential on
the west end of this. We tried to do some commercial mixed on either end of this. We
have had fewer units. We have had some with more units. So, we -- we have had quite
a few pieces on this and -- and these particular units we -- they are separated, they are
-- they are -- they are not the minimum distance from each other back-to-back, so that
we can provide those -- those walkable, lighted corridors with those -- with those open
spaces and, then, within each of those blocks that -- that garden space that's within
those. So, it's -- it's not totally accurate to say that all of our open space is in the dog
park and -- and the -- and the community center to the south. So, probably -- you know,
I will throw out a number I will probably be wrong -- so, I would say over 40 percent of
our open space is within the apartment units and not within that dog park open space in
the south. But we do feel strongly that we necessary -- that -- that we separate the
apartments from the school area to the south and not have the -- the -- the clubhouse in
the middle and it does affect the -- the -- the layout of the project as far as the flow of
traffic and -- and parking within the project to do that as well. So, we -- we feel that this
is the best use. We have evaluated other -- other options as well.
Smith: Thank you.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: I'm just curious why do you feel like you don't want to have apartments where
the pool and the dog park are? So, there is a school across the street; right?
Bailey: Yes.
Lorcher: So, you don't want to have apartments abutting that street that are near --
closer to the school? Is that correct?
Bailey: Correct. And I'm just curious on the reasoning behind that.
Bailey: There -- there is a lot of traffic on that collector street for the school during
morning and afternoon hours that will be moving in and moving slow and -- and just a lot
15
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 13 of 53
of noise associated with that that we would rather have close to our clubhouse than
close to the apartments.
Lorcher: Okay. I do have another question. So, Ramblin -- Ramblin is the street that
comes off a Black Cat; correct?
Bailey: Correct.
Lorcher: And you -- you mentioned or Sonya mentioned that ACHD said there is not
going to be a signal there?
Bailey: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Lorcher, yes, we specifically asked that in the -- in
the meetings with the city and asked that of Mindy with ACHD and they said that it's not
eligible for a traffic signal. The traffic signal has to be at a half mile.
Lorcher: So, if I'm traveling south on Black Cat and I want to turn west into that
subdivision, I need to wait for traffic to slow down in order for me to do that; correct? I
mean there is going to be no light and there is -- it's only a two lane road at this point in
time.
Bailey: Correct. Yeah. And so we are -- we are certainly limited on the traffic there, but
that -- that will -- there will be a center turn lane at that point, because we will actually be
five lanes and, then, seven lanes at some point with -- with Black Cat in the long -- very
long term it will be seven lanes wide. It will be three --
Lorcher: So, according to the notes in the staff report Black Cat and McMillan -- excuse
me -- Black Cat and McMillan -- or Chinden is 2036 to 2040; is that correct or no? And,
then, the roundabout is 2028 for Black Cat and McMillan. I don't know when Black Cat
and Chinden are supposed to be. I mean there is already a signal there, but are they
building it more out than it is right now?
Bailey: They would be widening the improvements is what I understand is we have --
what year; do you know? Can you look that up? I was understanding -- you are -- you
are correct that the -- there were 2028, which is in the five year work plan for the -- the
roundabout at McMillan and -- and Black Cat.
Lorcher: Right.
Bailey: And, then, the road is improved on the west side -- or widen some right on the
west side there by Jump Creek and the other projects to the south of this and, then, we
would widen our side of it there. But I believe there is in -- within the five year work plan
work on the intersection so -- to make sure that the turn lanes are there, so it's not a
new signal. So, it's ACHD work, not ITD work on that intersection. Right now there is a
-- there is a signal there and it kind of widens out kind of quick, but there is a left turn
straight through, right turn, and a -- and a -- and a left -- left turn and they are -- they are
just not to standards.
F16]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 14 of 53
Lorcher: Okay.
Bailey: And a road in there. But that -- we understand that that will be widened -- what I
understood is that is scheduled to be widened all the way down Black Cat for support
for -- in support of that in that five year time frame also.
Lorcher: Okay. And West Ada has no plans right now to build a school, they just
reserve the site, is that what you are saying?
Bailey: Yeah. They own the site --
Lorcher: Right.
Bailey: -- but they don't have specific drawn up plans. I saw a sketch that they had
when they first got it, you know, that they have, but we have reached out to them and
they don't have -- they won't share with us any current plans for a site plan for the site,
but -- but it will be a middle school at some point is what they told us.
Lorcher: Okay. Yeah. I mean West Ada owned a parcel behind Settlers Park and,
then, recently they sold it to the City of Meridian for a community center, so just
because the West Ada owns a piece of property doesn't mean they are always going to
keep it based on the needs of the community and as it grows. So, it's good to know that
they have it, but whether they keep it or not, you know, who is to say in -- in the future. I
guess my only concern at this point is the road construction, but we could talk about that
during comments. So, thank you.
Bailey: Thank you.
Seal: Commissioner Smith, you have a follow up?
Smith: Yeah. I do have one additional question. So, it looks like you are 14 spaces
exceeding parking -- UDC standards. Is there a certain spot, like portion of the
development that you are anticipating that excessive -- like that -- those extra spots to
be or are they dispersed throughout the development, an extra spot here and there?
Bailey: So, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Smith, to understand -- we exceed the
minimum parking. That's what you said.
Smith: Yeah. And I'm just curious -- if you are -- if you know where that -- those 14
extra spots beyond what you need are expected to be within the development. Are they
for the multi-family? Are they for the commercial? Are they a little bit of everywhere?
Bailey: We split up the counts for the multi-family and the -- and the commercial. They
are -- they are counted differently. So, those extra spots that we have for the multi-
family are for the multi-family is what I understand. We like more than the minimum or the developer does.
17
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 15 of 53
Smith: Thank you.
Seal: Commissioner Sandoval, do you have anything?
Sandoval: No.
Seal: Okay. Anybody else, Commissioners? All right. Thank you very much.
Bailey: Thank you.
Seal: Do we have anybody signed up to testify?
Lomeli: Mr. Chair, we have one person. Wade Ramsey.
Seal: Good evening.
Ramey: Good evening.
Seal: Your name and address for the record.
Ramsey: Wade Ramsey. I'm the president of the Bainbridge HOA. I live at 44013
West Lost Rapids Drive in Meridian. We are the subdivision directly east of Black Cat
across from here. Ramblin would -- our concerns -- well, we are -- one of the
neighborhoods directly to the east of the Bainbridge Subdivision across Black Cat Road,
while we are mindful and supportive of progress and development, we do have some
concerns listed below. I will articulate those. They largely have to do with 700 cars that
are forced to go south on Black Cat. It is the case as they outlined that ultimately years
down the road some traffic will be able to go west to get out of the subdivision and
ultimately there will be a roundabout at Black Cat and McMillan. That's years off after
this is finished. In the meantime those 700 cars -- 650 cars are theoretically only going
south on Black Cat. Northbound access to Chinden Boulevard related to that -- as we
understand there is no northbound access onto Black Cat from Ramblin. While there
was some discussion about a turn lane, that's not our understanding from ACHD. There
will be a median that comes through is what we have -- we have been led to believe and
that's a concern for us, because it will push all the traffic south on Black Cat. That is as
you are -- as you ask that's a two lane road currently. That will force a lot of traffic onto
eastbound Vanderbilt. We are very concerned about that. That will become the main
route of Blayden residents wishing to travel to Costco, Walmart, eastbound on -- on
Chinden and the multitude of shops, restaurants, fuel stations, et cetera, along that Ten
Mile corridor. Vanderbilt is a residential street with a lot of pedestrian, bicycle traffic,
specifically children going to Pleasant View Elementary. We have lots of concerns that
there is no signal on Black Cat that is planned and, in theory, those kids aren't walking
to -- you know, they are not busing someplace else. They may be walking to Pleasant
View Elementary across that Black Cat Road and we have a lot of concerns about that.
Vanderbilt is not a direct road route to Chinden or Ten Mile. There is several twists and
turns to get north onto Tree Farm Way, West Lost Rapids Drive, and several common
18
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 16 of 53
areas, pools and parks are along the way. We have concerns about that and where
that traffic cuts through. Southbound on -- traffic on Black Cat is articulated. Currently
during peak hours there is substantial backups at the four way stop at Black Cat and
McMillan. It's four stop signs is what it is right now. There ultimately is a plan for a
roundabout there, but that may or may not be in the five year plan. Stoplights at least
completed -- at a completed -- or at least a completed roundabout would help alleviate
the issue somewhat. Sidewalk is interpreted in the plans. The sidewalk will only extend
north to Chinden and south to Larry Lane. Southbound this leaves only roadside --
roadside pedestrian travel, meaning school children specifically for approximately 500
feet with a current 45 mile an hour speed limit that is a substantial hazard obviously.
Those are our concerns. As the five members of the -- of the Bainbridge HOA board
representing 572 homes and over a thousand voters, we are opposed to the Blayden
Subdivision being approved until the infrastructure shortcomings noted above are
addressed. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you, sir. And I guess being president of the HOA if you have anything else
to add you have more time.
Ramsey: Okay. No. That's fine.
Seal: All right.
Ramsey: Our concerns are around the traffic piece and the --
Seal: Commissioners, any questions? All right. Thank you very much.
Ramsey: Thank you.
Lomeli: Mr. Chair, we have a Matt Neukom online that's raising his hand. If you would
like for me to allow him to speak.
Seal: Absolutely. Mr. Neukom, looks like you are -- you are muted right now, so I will
need you to unmute.
Neukom: Good evening, everyone. Can you hear me?
Seal: If you can speak up a little bit. I'm having a little trouble hearing you.
Neukom: Is this better?
Seal: Not really. Can we turn that up a little bit on our side?
Neukom: Let's try again.
Seal: Okay. Go ahead and we will listen the best we can.
F-19
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 17 of 53
Neukom: Okay. I'm doing my best. I'm happy to call in if there is a number that I could
call in at.
Seal: Actually, I can hear you pretty good right now.
Neukom: Okay. Thank you. My name is Matt Neukom. I live at 1520 West Larry Lane.
It's the parcel immediately west of phases four and five as shown in yellow on the plan
that I think is on your screen right now. I can't be there tonight, because I'm in Oregon
having a family vacation, but I did want to speak with the Commission about the
importance of this project to us. The gentleman from Bailey Engineering mentioned that
he has been on this project since 2020. We have also and we have provided the
Commission a letter from us, as well as some previous documentation regarding
development in our subdivision. In 2019 and 2020 the subdivision was planned for
Tara's Landing and we asked the Planning and Zoning Commission to have the
developer agree with us on the terms to -- to ensure that they met the CC&Rs. At that
time the Planning and Zoning Commission directed the developer back to us to agree
on terms. Now, we are asking the Commission the same thing with this development.
The gentleman from Bailey Engineering essentially said that he -- he wanted the courts
to decide if the development, not the CC&Rs -- it seems like they are forcing a lawsuit
and as private property owners and as individuals that really feels like the -- the
developer is strong arming us into a legal battle and we know the developer is -- there is
open arms -- or excuse me -- I think it's open door rentals and Corey Barton is the
owner of that. So, as property owners we don't know who else to ask for help, other
than the Commission. We -- I don't want to be in a legal battle with Corey Barton. We
have met with him a couple of times to discuss the terms of the CC&Rs and when we
met with him he wasn't in favor of it. We have included that documentation in the -- in
the Commission's -- the letter that we sent to the Commission. You can see it there.
We met with him in 2022 and they agreed with us at the time to conform with the
CC&Rs. So, we are -- we are really asking for your help to uphold legal rights that are
ours, that -- that we -- we need help upholding. We think the City of Meridian respects
legal rights and we are not opposed to development, but we are opposed to
development this way. I haven't heard any questions on the CC&Rs or on the letter that
we provided. In the letter we provided there was a copy of two letters from attorneys
that address the CC&Rs and their validity. So, again, we are asking for your help with
this and we are asking you to deny it. If you have any questions I'm happy to answer
them. The Bartletts are in attendance tonight.
Seal: Okay. Appreciate your testimony tonight. Commissioners, any questions?
Okay. No questions from us. Thank you, Mr. Neukom. Appreciate it.
Neukom: Thank you.
Seal: Madam Clerk.
Lomeli: Mr. Chair, no one else has signed up.
F20]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 18 of 53
Seal: Is there anybody in Chambers that would like to testify? I thought I saw
somebody earlier. Come on up. If you would address the Commission, please. Thank
you. Need your name and address for the record, please.
Blocovich: I am Mark Blocovich. I live at 4585 West Everest Street. The reason me
and a lot of these people out here moved into that spot was because it was out on the
fringe and I do heating and cooling, I have done a lot of multi-families, and as soon as
the multi-families moved in, then, traffic starts and it's very terrible. I also will not say
umm as much as the gentleman -- well, before me. My joke. Sorry. Bad joke. Bad
joke; right? I think everybody here is opposed to this a hundred percent and that's why
we are here. This is a terrible, terrible, terrible idea. Unless -- and, then, they say they
are going to make Black Cat five lanes. We didn't move out there to have Black Cat a
main thoroughfare and -- umm. Actually, I actually don't even know what to say. This is
a travesty in Meridian. We moved to Meridian to get away from this type of stuff. This
type of stuff keeps following us back, back, back. So, I hope you will listen to my plea
and not let this happen. Everybody in this room who is here does not want this happen,
except for that guy who says umm.
Seal: Thank you. Any questions? All right. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Anybody
else in Chambers? Madam, come on up.
Chidester: Thank you.
Seal: Need your name and address, please.
Chidester: I'm Kirsten Chidester. I'm on 4685 West Ramblin Court. My biggest
concern is I have been serving on the PTA board of my kids elementary school and we
are -- we are over -- overbooked -- oversized. I don't know how to say it. And we are
three years into the school. So, my understanding if the school districts own this land --
owns this land their goal is to build a middle school, what about an elementary? That's
where we are overcrowded right now and also I'm -- I'm confused about the traffic from
Ramblin Court. I understand it -- it won't have a signal, but even at this point we can't
get out during the busy times of the day, so something to, please, consider.
Seal: Okay.
Chidester: Thank you.
Seal: All right. Thank you very much. Anyone else in Chambers? No? If there is
anybody online that wants to testify, please, hit the raise hand button. Not seeing
anybody else. Oh, see a Don Brown.
Brown: Yeah. This is -- can you hear me?
Seal: Yes, sir. Name and address, please.
F21
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 19 of 53
Brown: Don Brown. 4595 West Ramblin Court. And backing up what Kirsten just
mentioned, I don't think any of the -- the studies that were done in anything that the
engineer addressed that dealt with the folks that are not only coming off of the Ramblin
-- our -- our existing road, but also that are coming from the Trilogy Subdivision and
cutting into Ramblin Court and, then, attempting to make left turns onto Black Cat is
nearly impossible and so you are forcing us to go to the right towards Chinden if we can
even get out. The thing that's going to happen is you are going to have people coming
from the -- excuse me -- coming from the apartment complex and making U-turns in the
middle of Black Cat or going up to one of the other crossroads up there and flipping
around to go back to Chinden, because they are, obviously, not going to want to drive
clear up to McMillan to get to the Walmarts, to get to Costco, but I didn't hear anything
from the engineer addressing the effects that that amount of cars and vehicles is going
to have on the existing traffic flow. So, I would like to see some traffic counts done and
actually some photos -- pictures of the traffic as it exists now, because there has been
times when we haven't even been able to get out of our subdivisions and, then, that also
is going to definitely affect the risks that the kids will take unknowingly with traffic and
you have got drivers that are impatient and that's -- that's a bad formula. So, I don't
think there is enough to address that portion of it and I would urge the Council to -- to
take that into account.
Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate that.
Brown: Thank you.
Seal: Is there anybody else online that would like to testify? Please hit the raise hand
button. Not seeing anybody. Last call. Anybody in Chambers? Sir, come on up.
Good evening. Need your name and address, please, sir.
Taylor: Greg Taylor. 4613 West Everest Street. Right now in the mornings there is so
much school traffic. If you try to get off on Ramblin to make a right-hand turn so you
can go west on Chinden you can't even get across. I come home when there is traffic. I
come down -- I'm going east on Chinden, so I go south on Black Cat and I have to go
east on Ramblin Court. I have to sit and block traffic right there, because there is a
center divider for traffic to let me get across. I can't even get into my subdivision, which
is Trilogy. There is so much traffic now that on any given day I can see cars 40, 45
miles an hour, since we don't have any stop signs in front of our house and we are in
the middle of the block -- I am not kidding. They are doing 45, 50 and there is kids and
they are cutting through our subdivision and that's just going to make it worse. It is -- it
is horrible right now with -- during the -- you could -- I have invited the police department
to come and sit and give tickets and they say they don't have time. That needs to stop.
We have too much traffic going too fast down our street in Ramblin Court -- going in and
out of Ramblin Court. You can hear them screeching their tires, all that trying to get
ahead. I think the traffic is going to be too much. That's all I got to say.
F22
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 20 of 53
Seal: Thank you, sir. Okay. Anybody else in Chambers want to come forward? Going
once. Going twice. All right. Commissioners, anything else you want to add before we
move on and close the public testimony portion?
Smith: Mr. Chair, does the applicant usually --
Seal: Oh. That's right. I was going to say we should probably ask the applicant to
come back up, shouldn't we. Come on up, sir. Thank you.
Bailey: Thank you.
Seal: I was getting in a hurry tonight. Sorry about that.
Bailey: I get it. I would want to be, too. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, David Bailey
again. Okay. So, I will be brief, though, with that in mind, is that we looked that up and
the roundabout is -- is 2028. So, it should be designed already down there and the
Black Cat widening is 2036 to 2040 as you stated -- is what is in the ACHD staff report.
So, back to that real -- real quickly is that we did, in fact, have a traffic study done by --
by Chhang Ream, CR Traffic Engineering, submitted to ACHD, submitted to Idaho
Transportation Department. Reviewed by both of them. We have comment letters from
both of them on the improvements that are required on this and the discussion behind
that and we are willing to do all the improvements they are asking for. If they need
more, you know, we are willing to do what -- what's needed in accordance with what the
highway district is -- is telling us we need to do. But right now that's the southbound
right turn lane. ITD had a preference for a right turn lane on -- from Black Cat onto
Chinden and ACHD said we don't want you to build that now, because we will improve
this later and it doesn't meet our -- our standards there. That said, Black Cat is, in fact,
a mile section line road that is an arterial street and has been planned for some time to
be an arterial street and to handle that, you know, 12,000 trips per day in the -- in the
long future of what's going to go on, you know, with that. So, there is no doubt that
that's -- that's what it's planned for. This will add traffic to that and I disagree personally
with the policy of not having the 660 feet. In fact, I got in trouble for getting in an
argument with Mindy over a traffic signal at Ramblin -- Ramblin on this -- on this very
project. But it is their policy and so they are not going to do that there. Levi Lane will be
a realty -- reality and it will probably be a reality connected through -- you know, prior to
us finishing the apartment complex on this is what I'm guessing it's going to be, because
there is just a couple properties to the west there in Prescott and Levi Lane being
constructed. We are not that far from the interchange there and -- and we believe that
that -- you know, that's definitely going to be -- for our residents we are concerned that
they can't get out and turn left on -- and get onto Black Cat. So, certainly is our concern
as well. That said we have to deal with -- with the cards we are dealt for this project and
this is an appropriate use and density considering the Comprehensive Plan and all the
streets that are planned for this area in the long run from that end. As to -- as to the
Compton Subdivision, I will just be really clear is that we -- we have looked at this very
hard and we believe we are not in violation of the Compton Subdivision's CC&Rs either
with the planning of this or with the showing of the one acre lots on this. We believe
F23]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 21 of 53
that's in strict compliance with them. We are not inviting a lawsuit from anybody. We
are following the rules that are put out within the CC&R to the best of our ability on -- on
that end of it and we have worked with -- with the neighbors and we will continue to
work with them as we go through this project. So, we don't want to fight either and we
don't believe that we are violating those -- those rules that are in the CC&Rs.
Seal: Okay.
Bailey: I would be glad to stand for any other questions you might have.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go ahead.
Smith: Regarding that Compton area, are there any subdivided lots that will be less
than one acre?
Bailey: No.
Smith: Okay.
Bailey: So, we are showing three lots actually total within the ten acres that's in the
Compton Subdivision and one of them will be the portion of the L-O and the -- and the
C-G lot and, then, the two lots that are along Larry Lane there are -- we show a -- a
future subdivision plan with lines in there, because your city staff requires that we
submit that -- a redevelopment plan for that area. So, that's all we are showing is -- is a
redevelopment plan for that area. Each of those lots is, in fact, greater than -- greater
than one acre and, in fact, the houses that are there are going to stay there. They are --
they are meant to stay within those one acre lots. So, there is two houses there that will
stay in those one acre lots until we get around to developing that or, you know, the
CC&Rs may go on forever and they sure hope they do and we sure hope they don't,
you know, so -- but -- but we are being respectful of what's written in the -- in the
CC&Rs.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go ahead.
Smith: As a follow up, I'm just -- the -- I'm reading the letter that's in the public comment
from -- that's attached from Perkins Coie. The reference is the CC&Rs and just for
context as -- the section that they cite says the Compton Subdivision No. 2 is to be
divided into residential areas of five acres or larger and any lots larger than one acre
may be resubdivided by the owners thereof into parcels not less than one acre in size
by compliance with the local and state regulations and laws. Is the -- so, what they are
citing is that resubdivide -- can be resubdivided into parcels not less than one acre,
which is what you are showing. Is the -- is the issue, then, whether that residential initial
24
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 22 of 53
division -- subdivision carries over to that resubdivision or -- I guess what is the -- help
me understand what the actual disagreement here then, because if -- even if the
CC&Rs continue, this seems like it's not necessarily the one acre issue, it's the -- is it
the residential issue then? Help me understand what the -- what the legal disagreement
is.
Bailey: That might be a good question to ask of them, because I don't feel there is any
conflict between what we are doing and that end of it and I think the comparison to the
Tara's Landing Subdivision is -- is different, because they were actually proposing to
subdivide those less than one acre and to go plat that as that. We are not proposing to
do that. So, there is probably a legal question and I'm not an attorney, but I love to talk
like I am, you know, but -- but I'm certainly not. But there -- there could be a question as
to whether that a residential applies to the five acres or to the -- or to the one acres after
you subdivide the way that's written. Maybe a court could -- you know. Or -- or
someone wants to rule on what that means or maybe that's what they are proposing is
they can't be other than residential. But it doesn't say anything about zoning, it says
about the use; right? So, we aren't planning any use that's not residential on this
property either with this subdivision. Okay? So, we are not asking for that use to be
available. And, then, I -- I don't know, I would assume that that may be their -- their
question, but we -- we -- we feel that we are in compliance with what -- the way we read
the CC&Rs and -- and would be glad to -- again, I'm not the attorney.
Starman: So Mr. Chairman?
Seal: Kurt, go ahead.
Starman: Commissioners, I want to add a couple comments for the -- from the city's
perspective. I don't want to encroach upon your response time, so, Madam -- Madam
Clerk, will you pause the clock for a moment? I don't want to encroach upon the
applicant's rebuttal time. I'm going to tackle this from a little bit different perspective and
be happy to answer any specific questions you have. I guess from this -- I'm looking at
this from the city's perspective as I advise you as the Planning and Zoning Commission
is that the way the city looks at restrictive covenants of this nature, these are private
contractual agreements between private parties and so the city is not involved, we are
not a party to those agreements, we don't enforce CC&Rs. So, really, it's a private
matter between the private property owners. So, from the city's perspective to the
extent there is a dispute that really doesn't impact what we are doing in terms of
eligibility for annexation or other entitlements. If there is a dispute it's not the city's role
to adjudicate what the -- or to interpret what the restrictive covenant might mean. That
really is the judicial process and so my advice and recommendation to the Commission
is to get all the information you want to take in and consider, but at the end of the day
when you look at it from the city's perspective, restrictive covenants of the nature we are
talking about are really private contractual matters between private parties and we really
ought not get too far into the weeds and I certainly would not want to -- in terms of some
of the specific questions that were being asked earlier about what the dispute might
F25]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 23 of 53
mean or how the language should be interpretive -- Interpreted, the city would never
provide advice to either party.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Yes. Go ahead.
Smith: Actually, that does lead into kind of another question I had for you regarding,
obviously, that the city's not adjudicating or enforcing or -- is it reasonable for the
Commission to take into account the -- I guess -- I guess let me start with kind of where
my head's at and, then, I will back that into the question. When I see, you know, there
is something that is potentially a lawsuit required or legal action required to resolve an
issue that could impact the future plan of the site, that kind of gives me some pause
regarding -- like does this actually look anything like what we -- what the site end up --
might end up looking like, how that feeds in the development. Obviously, I -- you don't
want to set a precedent to where you are encouraging people to threaten lawsuits to,
you know, prevent something from getting passed, but I guess is there room for the
Commission to take into effect -- or take into account that legal dispute and the impact it
might have on the overall development and whether it's passed, continued, denied, et
cetera.
Starman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Commissioner
Smith. So, I guess two thoughts there. First is that I really don't think you want to get
too far into the -- you know, an actual legal dispute or even the potential for such a
dispute. So, I would advise some caution there. But I do think to your -- in terms of
your general comments and your general concerns, I would say that from just taking a
step, back and looking at it from a public policy perspective, this is an annexation and
we -- one of the findings that ultimately the City Council has to make is that this is in the
best interest of the city. If you think this project is not likely to proceed timely and it's,
therefore, not going to be in the city's best interest and you can articulate your
reasoning for -- for that, I think that that could be brought into the discussion and could
be part of the -- part of your deliberation. If you think the annexation is not timely,
because there are impediments to development and it's going to lie fallow for some
period of time and, therefore, it's not timely, that would probably be a legitimate
discussion for deliberation.
Smith: Thank you.
Seal: Anything else?
Bailey: Mr. Chairman? Oh.
Seal: Oh. Okay. Go right ahead then.
Bailey: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. I really appreciate that. Thank --
thank you very much. And -- and we are not necessarily looking to, you know, push
26
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 24 of 53
anybody in there. But one -- one of the -- the things that I do want to point out is that
our -- our impression on you as are we good neighbors and good developers and it's
something that we always strive to do and so I think it's a great issue to bring up and I
don't -- I don't have a problem with the neighbors bringing this up or us discussing this
at all in -- in that manner, because we are trying to be good neighbors and good
neighbors look at the rules and we -- and we follow the rules, as well as cooperate and
communicate with the neighbors and will continue to do that and I do think that we can,
as presented tonight, build this project as presented; right? There is some questions
about what will actually end up being there, you know, and -- and when, but the project
as presented tonight is -- is what we intend to build.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, anything?
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go right ahead.
Smith: So, this -- I guess this isn't quite necessarily public comment related -- I was
saving some of this for the actual deliberation portion, but there is a question I want to
ask you related to this -- is I still don't fully have confidence in kind of the -- the multi-
family open space, just the -- the amount of -- looking at it looks like there is -- we are
just barely clearing the minimum private usable open space by two square feet and it
just feels with the density and the open space it -- it feels a little cramped to me and I'm
thinking about the -- not necessarily the things that were testified about tonight, but I'm
thinking about the quality of life for the residents at this -- at this parcel and I'm just
curious if this were, you know, continued or -- or if there is a future timeline -- I know you
guys have been working on this for years. Is there any feasibility you think -- and,
again, talking -- nothing about preference, but feasibility and potentially increasing some
of that open space between those parcels -- between those units, those blocks of
apartments for -- for -- you have to comply with some of those that -- the crime
prevention standards, the open space standards that -- that the staff pointed out.
Bailey: So, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Smith, we have worked this over quite a bit
and -- and -- and we think this is the one that provides all the required open space and
just a little extra. The -- the square footage you are just describing for the private open
space is on the -- specifically on the balconies or balconies were a little small and we
moved those up to 82 feet. I think there were a couple that were less than that for some
reason. But the open space provided for the -- for the apartments is -- both meets the
code and is -- and is really consistent with several of the other apartments that have
been approved or that we have gotten approved, actually, in the City of Meridian in
recent past. So, we are -- from my perspective -- our perspective we are not cramped
and -- and, again, we have been very -- very intentional about the placement of those
based on what the developer wants and needs for the quality of life of the residents,
because he is going to be running it, the people who need that quality of life, so that --
that's very intentional on that end of it. Probably would not want to go back to pushing
that into the middle of -- of the development and -- and we think that the open space
F27]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 25 of 53
between the buildings is -- is really a very good -- really a very good amenity for the
project. So, if I could just summarize real quick. So, we are agreeing with all the
conditions and asking you for a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the
annexation and -- and for the preliminary plat for this and the two that we are asking to
-- to not go forward with are the relocating the common areas within the -- this area and
revising the phasing. So, we -- we do want to build all that -- although we will agree to
revise the phasing to add the coffee shop into the first phase within this project. So, we
intended to do that.
Seal: I can hear the wheels spinning.
Smith: I think that's it for -- that's all the questions I have. Thank you.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Sandoval, do you have any further questions?
Sandoval: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go right ahead.
Sandoval: I have a question for the applicant. So, you say that the street buffer is part
of the open space. If that's correct, what -- what percentage of that open space is taken
up by that street buffer?
Bailey: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, I'm not sure I have that number off the top of my
head. It's half of the street buffer along Chinden, which contains a berm and a fence in
there. I don't know the number.
Sandoval: Thank you.
Seal: Anything further, Commissioner?
Sandoval: No. That's it, Mr. Chair.
Seal: Okay. Thank you.
Smith: Mr. Chair, I did have one --
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Smith: So, it seems like you implied this and I want to confirm. Is the developer
planning on owning and operating this post, instead of selling this property?
Bailey: I don't know all the details of that, but that's my impression, yes.
Smith: Okay.
28
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 26 of 53
Bailey: That's what he is doing at this point with the apartment project.
Smith: Thank you.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, anything further? All right. Thank you very much.
Appreciate it. And with that if there is nothing further I will take a motion to close the
public hearing for File No. H-2023-0043, Blayden Subdivision.
Smith: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for File No. H-2023-
0043. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? The public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: Who would like to comment first?
Lorcher: He seems to be deep in thought, so I will go.
Seal: Okay.
Lorcher: Chinden is a major corridor in our community and as Meridian continues to
grow west to offer different types of housing opportunities for people is going to be
important for the overall portion of our city, but Black Cat is not ready for it. For those
who moved out there for the fringe, I live in a community not too far from here thinking
that we were in the sticks as well and we are surrounded by other subdivisions because
that's how our community is growing and since I don't own that land past my own
property I have no say in what happens after -- unless I come to a meeting like this and
just kind of acknowledge it. But with that said, the fact that Black Cat between Chinden
and McMillan is not going to be built out until 2020 -- 2036 to 2040 and the roundabout
is not even scheduled until 2028. With a two lane road with Pleasant View being on one
side and everybody having to turn left or right onto Ramblin with no light to me seems
too much for the size of this property with no other access. You can't get in on Chinden.
You have to go on Ramblin. I don't know where the Levi Lane is or where that goes. I
think this could be the right development for this area, but not now. I don't think the city
is ready based on the infrastructure that we currently have in place. Whether West Ada
builds a school there or not -- they bought the land, they probably bought it 20 years
ago with anticipations and sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. So, holding
them to building a school, a middle school, an elementary school, that's up for grabs
based on the needs of our community and they will evaluate that on their time and the
city is not in charge of the schools. So, I think overall the -- the diversity of the -- the
apartments and the townhouses and the fact that you are willing to swap the office for
the retail is appreciated. I don't even see retail being on Black Cat so close to Chinden.
F29]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 27 of 53
That doesn't make a lot of sense to me either. So, at this point in time today I am not in
support of this project.
Seal: Okay.
Sandoval: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Sandoval, go right ahead.
Sandoval: So, mixed-use areas should be centered as outlined in the staff report. The
buffers as an open space in my opinion are dangerous or unusable. It's lacking the
infrastructure right now as Commissioner Lorcher stated, roadways and schools. I
understand the city doesn't have any control over these. I'm open to discussion, but I'm
of the opinion that as the application lays now we should recommend denying
annexation until the site plan is modified to align with the staff -- to align with the staff
recommendations and/or the scope and scale are modified to meet the current
infrastructure, because I'm in agreement 2036-2040 is a little too far out.
Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. Commissioner Smith.
Smith: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I -- it's funny, I think I will -- actually have him having
issues for almost the exact opposite reason that Commissioner Lorcher. I think, you
know, regarding the phasing and the timing of that, regarding the relative to the
roundabout, one being one year off I think is not the end of the world. I would,
obviously, that -- that 2036-2040 for Chinden is -- is a bit far off, but I think this -- there is
a bit of a reality that we have to grapple with as we continue to grow that there is a need
for greater housing and -- and with -- you know, the traffic that comes with that is -- is
kind of a -- something that we are hoping to mitigate and we can hope to time right and
time well, but there are a lot of different moving parts and that's -- that's always going to
be an issue. I think with the school capacities with how development fees are -- work in
Idaho, I think that's -- you know, I would personally love if that wasn't the case, but this
is what -- what funds those -- those schools. So, that -- that school capacity issue is
kind of a -- it's kind of a self-creation issue. You need to create more capacity issues to
solve them. My main issues are with -- and I know the developer has been at this for a
long time and working hard to make this site. I just -- I don't think the site plan is -- is
right for the area. I don't think the site plan aligns to the intentions of this -- of the city of
the -- I think staff pointed out a lot of the issues, especially the one thing that we kind of
didn't emphasize as much, but one of these standards discusses the CPTED standards,
which is Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design I think. As we develop new
housing I want to ensure that the housing is safe housing. I want to ensure it's livable
housing and I don't think this fully meets up to those standards. So, I -- I genuinely do
think in terms of -- of a lot of -- a lot of variables we are close and that -- that's one thing
I want to say and I do want to say to a lot of people here tonight is that -- that at some
point or another this kind of -- some development along these lines -- there is going to
be something here and I -- I, obviously, don't think that this is the -- the exact right
development at this time, but I encourage you -- I appreciate you showing up tonight
F30]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 28 of 53
and encourage you to remain involved, hopefully working with the developer to make
that the right fit for the area going forward. So, that's kind of where I'm at. Thanks.
Seal: Thank you. I won't pile on too much, but I'm -- being someone that uses Black
Cat frequently, I -- I share the concerns of -- of the folks that testified this evening, so I
would like -- actually like how it's come together. I wish things were a little bit more
complete as far as what was submitted tonight. There was -- there was a lot of changes
that need to be discussed and talked about. I -- honestly, I kind of like the multi-family
to be honest. I like, you know, the conceptual plan of it, the open space that's -- that's
provided in there. I think that's a nice element to it. You know. And I try to be as
optimistic as I can and, you know, think about people enjoying that shaded space that's
in between the apartments and things like that. So, I try not to think about, you know,
the nefarious back alleys, you know, element to it or anything like that. So, I mean for
the people that live there it's actually -- would be very nice. So, it would be nice to see
the -- the common areas more centrally integrated. There are -- there is reasoning
before -- you know, on both sides of that. I understand why you would want to have that
kind of buffer for the -- the noise and things like that that are -- that are on the street,
but I also understand why you would want to centrally locate that. The biggest concern
that I have is basically -- I mean you are -- you are going to take all the traffic that's here
and you are going to force it right out onto Black Cat. From there people -- while they
are waiting for the roundabout to hopefully maybe ease congestion, they are going to
get impatient and they are going to cut through Bainbridge. That is what they are going
to do. So, I see some traffic like that happening now and we are not -- you know, we
are not fully built out with what's currently developing, much less, you know, a
development this size. So, I really wish ACHD would speed the timeline for Black Cat.
It's really a sore point for Meridian from basically one end to the other. So, we -- every
time developments come up on Black Cat, it's -- it's a point of contention. It really is.
But, you know, they own the roads, we don't, so -- and like the schools, we don't own
the schools. So, if -- you know, if -- if ACHD says it's okay, then, it's okay. If the
schools say it's okay, then it's okay. It's theirs to run. It's theirs to operate. That said,
we don't have to necessarily agree with it either. But I think that I share the same
sentiments with my other commissioners where I think this is a good development. It's
a -- I think it's a good fit for the land that it would be on, I just don't think that we have
the infrastructure at this point in order to support it properly for the City of Meridian. So,
luckily, I can't make a motion, so I will gladly take one though.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher.
Lorcher: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I recommend -- I
move to recommend denial to the City Council for File No. H-2023-0043 for the
following reasons: The density of the project puts too much burden on the current
infrastructure and the site plan does not support open space and common areas
integrated inside the multi-family housing.
31
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 29 of 53
Smith: Second that.
Seal: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to recommend denial to City Council of File
No. H-2023-0043 with the specific reasons. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed
nay? Recommendation for denial moving forward. Right? Thank you, everyone.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
4. Public Hearing for The Gateway at 10 Mile (H-2024-0010) by KM
Engineering, LLP., located at NE corner of W. Franklin and N. Ten
Mile Rd.
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit for 390 multi-family units in the R-
40 zoning district.
B. Request: Preliminary Plat consisting of 31 buildable
Seal: All right. One down. So, we now have -- I would like to open the public hearing
for Item No. H-2024-0010 for a continuance. I would like to have the opportunity to
speak to the applicant before we do the continuance.
Hopkins: Good evening, Mr. Chair.
Seal: Just your name and address real quick, so we know who we are talking to.
Hopkins: Yeah. Stephanie Hopkins with KM Engineering. Our address is 5725 North
Discovery Way in Boise.
Seal: Just like to cover why the continuance at this point in time.
Hopkins: Thank you, Mr. Chair and Commission. Appreciate your consideration on the
request for continuance. We are requesting continuance because we have been
working with ACHD on an access point that they are -- they are not sure if they are
supporting or not yet essentially. So, we submitted a traffic memo from our traffic
engineer for them to review and they just haven't had a chance to -- or they have not
completed their staff report yet. So, I have been in communication with staff today and
they have come to a decision among themselves, but we need to get the staff report
finalized in order to continue forward. So, we would like to be able to present, you
know, their final recommendation, as well as our request to the Commission, rather than
come with kind of a half-- half application.
Seal: Okay. And I appreciate that, but this is for the additional access to Ten Mile;
correct?
F32
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 30 of 53
Hopkins: Mr. Chair, yes. We are proposing three points of access -- or three points of
access overall to Ten Mile. There was one point of access that we were working
through ACHD -- working with ACHD on.
Seal: Okay. And this is the same road that is rated as an F from data from three years
ago that we are talking about; correct?
Hopkins: Mr. Chair, that's correct. Yes.
Seal: Okay. That will be a concern.
Hopkins: Mr. Chair, we anticipate that and we are -- we will -- another reason that we
are requesting continuance is our traffic engineer was not available. We would like to
have a full team here to be able to answer your questions.
Seal: Okay. Commissioners, any questions on that? Okay. Thank you very much.
Hopkins: Thank you. I would like to note, too, if you are going -- or if you are going to
consider the continuance that the best date for our client -- they are going to be gone all
September. So, it would be the first meeting in October, which I know pushes it out a
fair distance, so --
Seal: I think that's okay and we will likely ask you to renotice. There is a lot of public
testimony on this, so --
Hopkins: I noticed that, yes.
Seal: -- we definitely want to make sure that everybody is going to be well informed.
Hopkins: Absolutely. Thank you.
Seal: Thank you.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair, do you need a motion?
Seal: Actually, we need a date.
Lorcher: October 3rd is the first Thursday of October.
Seal: October 3rd is the first one? Darn, I won't be here for that one. I'm sorry. That
date works perfectly for me. So, I will need a motion to continue File No. H-2024-0010
to the date of October 3rd, 2024.
Smith: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
33
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 31 of 53
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to continue File No. H-2024-0010 for the Gateway
at Ten Mile to the date of October 3rd, 2024. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed
nay? The file is continued.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Parsons: Mr. Chair, this is Bill.
Seal: Bill, go ahead.
Parsons: Did your motion include a renoticing of that project as well?
Seal: I am sorry, it did not.
Lorcher: We talked about it.
Seal: We did talk about it.
Lorcher: We went over it with the client to be --
Seal: You want to rescind the motion?
Lorcher: Do you want us to reflect that?
Starman: Mr. Chairman, you can do it one of two ways. You can do a replacement
motion. You can have a second motion now to -- to that effect. My understanding is the
applicant is -- is willing to do so. So, I just suggest a second motion just to confirm that
the expectation or requirement is to renotice the project at the applicant's expense.
Seal: Okay. So, I will take a motion on File No. H-2024-0010 to affirm reposting of the
application.
Lorcher: So moved.
Smith: Second.
Seal: Been moved and seconded to -- what did I say?
Lorcher: To repost.
Seal: To repost for application H-2024-0010 before the hearing date of October -- or for
the hearing date of October 3rd, 2024. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay?
Motion passes. Thank -- thank you very much.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
F34]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 32 of 53
5. Public Hearing for The Bruery (H-2024-0013) by Ball Ventures
Ahlquist (BVA), located at 1184 S. Silverstone Way
A. Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow a drinking establishment
occupying 1,829 sq. ft. within an existing 11,000 sq. ft. shell
building in the Eagle View Retail East Building with 5,287 sq. ft. of
fenced in outdoor patio area.
Seal: Let me see. Okay. And with that would like to open File No. H-2024-0013 for
The Bruery and we will start with the staff report.
Ritter: Thank you. Good evening, Chair and Commission Members. So, tonight we are
here for a -- just a second. Operator error. Yeah. Okay. Technical difficulties. Okay.
So, tonight we are here for a request for a conditional use permit to allow a drinking
establishment at 1184 South Silverstone Way, which is -- which consists of 1.0 acres
and its zoned C-G and this will be within an existing 11,000 square foot shell building in
the Eagle View Retail East building with a 5,287 square feet of fence and outdoor patio
area. So, access to this development is via Silverstone Way, which is -- which was
approved with the Rackham Subdivision. Parking requires one space for two -- every
250 square feet of gross floor area. This amounts to about seven parking spaces for
the tenant space and 21 spaces for the outdoor seating area, for a total of 28 parking
spaces. One hundred and forty-eight parking spaces for the entire building has already
been approved. The UDC requires two bicycle parking spaces for this development
also, so all of this was installed with the original approval of the Eagle View East retail
building. There is existing landscaping for the property already along Silverstone Way
and East Flatiron Lane, which was installed with the development when it was approved
and landscaping for the parking lot was installed also per the UDC, as well as the
outdoor plaza area. The building elevations for this development were also approved
as part of the approved CZC and design review, which is H-2019-0389 in 2019. So,
there is no exterior work, other than installing the fence around the outdoor seating area
proposed for this development. The fence is being reviewed under a separate CZC
application, which staff has already reviewed and which will be approved if this
application is approved. We had no written testimony for this development -- proposed
development and at this time the applicant is here to answer any questions you have
and maybe provide a small presentation.
Seal: All right. Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to come forward? Good
evening.
Allen: Elizabeth Allen. Planner at Ball Ventures Ahlquist. 1144 South Silverstone Way,
Meridian. 83642.
Seal: Pull the mic right down into -- there you go.
Allen: There is two mics. I don't know which one --
F35]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 33 of 53
Seal: That's okay. We can hear you in stereo now.
Allen: So, staff did an excellent job presenting the proposal. So, I'm going to keep my
presentation short to avoid duplicating information. So, I'm going to focus on our
development and, then, the -- the tenant. So, we are requesting approval of a
conditional use permit for -- or sorry. Special use permit for the Bruery and it's a
drinking establishment. How do I change this? Sorry about that. So, our Eagle View
Landing development is on the corner of Eagle Road and Interstate 84 and so at that
location we have a bunch of office tenants and, then, we have Top Golf, Power
Engineers. We have multi-family. Hyatt Place Hotel. And, then, in the retail building
we have Houston Hot Chicken and, then, Rock -- RockBox Fitness and, then, we also
have Sushi Brothers, which will be coming in and, then, the tenant space for the Bruery
is also located in that building and then -- so, that The Bruery -- so, they are a brewery
based out of -- called The Bruery. They are based in California and they started in
2008. So, they have one tasting room in California. So, this will be their second tasting
room in the United States, which is really exciting. So, we are excited to have them
here in the Eagle View Landing development. Their purpose and goal with their
brewery is to provide beer that is like nothing you have ever tasted before. So, they
have very unique beers that I think we don't have here in Meridian. So, it will be a good
-- good location for business owners, residents and the overall community to come visit.
And, then, I will stand for questions.
Seal: Commissioners, do we have any questions? Commissioner Sandoval, do you
have anything?
Sandoval: Sure, Mr. Chair. Are there two bicycle racks already in place just for two
bikes?
Allen: Chairman, Commissioner, so there is two bicycle racks located on that north side
of the building. You can see that in the image and we are going to be relocating those
out of the -- the patio space. So, we will still have the parking -- the bicycle parking
stalls.
Sandoval: Okay.
Seal: Yeah. I was wondering if you were going to go over on the bicycle parking as
much as you did the regular parking. Just kidding.
Allen: Don't get me started on parking.
Seal: Anything else?
Allen: No.
Seal: Okay. Thank you very much. We might make this really short. Is it -- Madam
Clerk, has anybody signed up to testify at all?
36
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 34 of 53
Lomeli: Thank you, Mr. Chair. No one has signed up.
Seal: All right. Anybody in Chambers want to testify? Going once. Going twice.
Anybody online please press the raise hand button. Okay. With that -- the applicant
has nothing further to add? Okay. Thank you very much.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go ahead.
Smith: Move to close the public hearing.
Seal: Do I have a second?
Lorcher: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for File No. H-2024-
0013. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? The public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: This one is pretty straightforward, so -- had a little bit of concern on just the
placement of it, but I mean it's already there. There is no public testimony from the
landowner there, anything along those lines. So, a lot of variety in this area for sure.
So, happy to see a little bit more variety coming in. If there is anything else? Or a
motion is always welcome.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Mr. Smith.
Smith: After considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony I move to recommend
approval to the City Council of File No. H-2024 -- sorry. I recommend --
Seal: It's a CUP. So, it will be --
Smith: I move to approve -- thank you. I will start that over. After considering all staff,
applicant, and public testimony I move to approve File No. H-2024-0013 as presented in
the staff report for the hearing date of July 18th, 2024, with no modifications.
Lorcher: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to approve File No. H-2024-0013 with no
modifications. All in favor, please, say aye. No opposed. Motion passes.
Congratulations.
F37]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 35 of 53
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
6. Public Hearing for Firenze Plaza (H-2024-0007) by Aaron Zuzack,
Browman Development Company, Inc., located at 3182 E. Mount Etna
Dr.
A. Request: Modified Development Agreement to modify the existing
development agreement (DA) (Inst.#2017-041827) to include new
owner's information and revised concept plan for the four (4)
commercial lots north of E. Mount Etna Dr.
B. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a 3,320 sq. ft. bank with a
drive-through for an automatic teller machine (ATM).
Seal: All right. And with that does anybody need a bio break or do you want to go
ahead and keep going on this? Okay. I would like to open File No. H-2024-0007, for
Firenze Plaza. We will begin with the staff report. You are back, Linda.
Ritter: Good evening again. So, this application is for a development agreement
modification for a new DA and a conditional use permit. So, this is for the property
located at 3182 East Mount Etna Drive and it's located in the C-C zone and it's 1.933
acres. So, the applicant is requesting a modification to the existing development
agreement to update the owner's information and revise the concept plan's elevation,
site and landscape plans to reduce the commercial square footage from 20,000 square
feet to 11,000 square feet, a reduction of 9,000 square feet. The applicant submitted
two concept plans with the DA modification. The current CUP is only approving the
drive through on the southern portion of the property for the proposed bank. Staff is not
in support of the other drive through, which would be this one on the northern property
and, therefore, does not support Concept Plan A. So, the applicant did provide a legal
description for the boundary of the new DA and staff did recommend some revisions for
this. One of the revisions of the concept plan is to show the entrance to the property at
the location that is currently there, because the utilities are already installed. The
current entrance to the property is along here along Mount Aetna. The applicant did
receive approval from the highway district to relocate that further west, but staff is not in
support of that, because the utilities have already been installed and, then, the -- we
asked them to -- again, we don't want that drive through on the northern property right
next to the proposed residential units that will be there. It was something that we talked
about at our pre-application meetings, but the applicant is allowed to submit what they
feel they would like to see for their proposal. So, the hours of operations for this bank
ATM will be -- it's 24 hours a day, seven days a week, because it is just an ATM where
people drive up to it to get money from the bank. Again, utility services were installed
with this development with the Firenze Plaza Subdivision. As with anything -- any stubs
not used shall be abandoned per the city requirements. Access, again, is from Mount
Etna via South Eagle Road. There is no direct access to the property from Eagle Road
and, again, the applicant is requesting to relocate the entrance to the property further
west. Again staff is not in support of that proposal. Parking for this required -- for this
38
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 36 of 53
proposed bank is one space for every 500 square feet of gross floor area. Based on the
3,182 square feet for the bank a minimum of six parking spaces is required. A total of
32 parking spaces are being proposed, which exceeds the UDC standards and a
minimum of one bicycle parking space is required for every 25 vehicles. So, therefore,
we are requiring two bicycle spaces for this and they have depicted a bicycle rack on
the landscape plan. There is existing landscaping along North Eagle Road, which is an
arterial. The applicant is proposing a 16 foot landscape buffer along Mount Etna and a
-- with a five foot detached sidewalk and the applicant also is proposing a 25 foot
landscape buffer along the west property line as a buffer to the residential uses with a
seven foot sidewalk. The applicant is also proposing a fence along the boundary to the
west and north of the properties. This is a perimeter fence that they are proposing for
the property and, again, building elevations were submitted for this -- the proposed
Chase Bank. The building materials consist of smooth face CMU panels, glass and
fiber cement. Staff has -- we did review the design, which complies with -- they appear
to comply with the design standards, but they will be required to submit a certificate of
zoning compliance, as well as a design review to be reviewed and approved
administratively by the city. We did receive written testimony on this. We received two
comments that were not in support of the bank at this location and so with this we ask
that -- our recommendation is approval of the modification and the conditional use
permit per the conditions and findings of our staff report, which is for the DA to not
recommend Concept A and to leave the entrance to the property in its existing location.
The applicant is here and they do have a presentation, so --
Seal: All right. Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Either one will work I have been told. I don't speak from there very often, so -- need
your name and address for the record, please.
Thompson: Absolutely. Mr. Chair, Tamara Thompson. I'm with The Land Group. Our
address is at 462 East Shore Drive in Eagle and we do have a PowerPoint if we can pull
that up. With me here is Aaron Zuzack. He is with Browman Development. They are
the property owner and the developer of this. So, we are going to tag team this if you --
if you will allow us, and I have -- I have some history on the project. I have been
working on this site since 2016. So, I thought I would just kind of give you a brief history
and, then, I will turn it over to Aaron to give the rest to you. So, our applications before
you tonight is a development agreement modification and a conditional use permit and
we will go into those in more detail and thank you to staff and Linda for her -- for her
report. I just wanted to give you a bit of history. So, this was the original application for
the property. It was the 40 acres on that -- on that corner of Eagle and Ustick. We
annexed and zoned that with a preliminary plat in 2017. I'm sorry. Our applications
were 2016. They were approved in February of 2017. But this is how that ended up.
So, of the 40 acres, 24 of that, which is roughly 60 percent, was zoned R-8 and, then,
the C-C zone for this -- for the -- the 16 acres, which is in the blue. So, what we are
talking about and -- well, let me just continue. So, then, what we have here is this was
our concept plan when we first did our annexation and preliminary plat and you can see
the way it has developed is -- is consistent with that. With our final plat we did all of the
improvements, so -- does this work? I don't know if that works. Good. So, you can see
F39]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 37 of 53
the -- the sidewalks along this road Montague here, all of the sidewalks -- both sides of
Mount Etna and, then, Cubola. So, all of the sidewalks and street trees were installed
for the entire 40 acres. All the public improvements. And, then, the large landscape
setbacks along Eagle Road and Mount Etna and this -- these four lots are the lots that
we are talking about tonight. So, of the total, the property is -- that we are looking at is
roughly five percent. Of the commercial area it's 12.5 percent. So, just to give you that
-- that context there. The preliminary plat was approved, again, in February of 2017.
The development agreement was recorded in May of 2017. Albertson's opened in June
of 2022 and all of these improvements were done with that and the final plat, then, with
all those improvements was recorded in October of 2022. Let's see here. Here is just a
few of the existing site photos that you can see. This one on the left is looking north on
Eagle Road and the one on the right is looking west on Mount Etna and that is in your
staff report. And here, again, is just the area in green is -- is what we are here for
tonight, that 12.5 percent of the commercial property and, then, just to show you the
preliminary plat and, then, the final plat. So, just wanted to give you some context of --
of where we have been and where we are going. During the entitlement process we did
do a layout on the residential. The residential has -- has never been submitted, other
than just zoning the property. It's currently still owned by Albertson's. The balance of
the commercial has been purchased by Browman and Aaron will discuss that, but we
just wanted to show you on that north property line -- if you can see here -- the -- one of
the conditions was to line those up, so when a preliminary plat does come in for the
residential those need to be lined up one to one, so that those northern -- the -- the
existing homes and the new homes will be comparable and so what I -- what -- the main
thing I wanted to show you here is what that does on that end for the cul-de-sac is it
really doesn't lend itself to have any houses there with the way that that cul-de-sac
needs to go with having those lots the same size on the one to one for the existing and
the new and, then, again, that's that side. So, I will turn it over to Aaron here.
Zuzack: Excuse me. Good evening, Mr. Chair and Commission. My name is Aaron
Zuzack. I'm the vice-president of Browman Development Company. Browman
Development Company is a family-owned, long-term owner and operator of retail
properties. We take pride in our developments. We are not a merchant builder or
developer that is looking to build and sell our properties. We manage everything in
house. You know, we are here to invest in the community and to provide the best in
class, grocery anchored, neighborhood shopping center. Chase Bank will not only
provide essential financial services, but also generate employment opportunities for the
community. The bank is synergistic with the existing development and our goal is to
complement the bank with an adjacent development on that northern parcel as well.
You know, we started our journey in involvement in Firenze Plaza over three years ago.
We purchased the property from Albertson's in early 2022 and since, then, we have
constructed and helped construct and finish the Albertson's and open it in June of '22.
We have also constructed four additional high quality retail and commercial buildings on
site. We worked very hard to enhance the quality of the development by bringing best
in class tenants and setting a new standard by enhancing the architectural design of the
development. I have personally spent a great deal of time ensuring that the design
theme of a shopping center, the architectural standards throughout the shopping center,
F40]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 38 of 53
are of the highest quality. We are excited to deliver to the community great tenants and
public spaces that can be enjoyed by the neighborhood and the community. The DA
modification process has really been a long road for us. We have been working on this
for well over 250 days. We -- we first had our pre-app meeting in early November with
the city last year and we have been fortunate to work with staff and appreciate staff's
thoughtful analysis of the application and we are in agreement with all of the conditions,
except for two concerns raised by staff during -- regarding certain aspects of our
proposal and, you know, first I would like to address the concern regarding the location
of the driveway. We are requesting -- oh. Thank you. We are requesting the relocation
of the driveway for a couple of reasons. Number one, we believe that the relocation of
this driveway will help divert traffic away from the building entrances in the proposed
development minimizing potential conflict between customers' vehicles and pedestrians
directly in front of these buildings and businesses. This driveway is our only access to
both properties. We have no other access to the property, other than from Mount Etna,
and it's currently 219 feet from Eagle Road. We are requesting to move it an additional
89 feet, which will be a total of 308 feet from Eagle Road. The relocation of the
driveway is actually going to provide an additional 89 feet of additional site distance for
vehicles leaving the property, so that they could see how -- better visibility of vehicles
coming on to Mount Etna from Eagle. In our experience, you know, direct cross-access
driveways on public streets can at times be challenging for drivers to navigate the
crossroad to access one site to the other, trying to get across multiple lanes of traffic.
So, having an offsetting opposing driveway can at times be easier to navigate. In
addition, the driveway relocation has been approved by ACHD and the relocation meets
all of ACHD's policies and development standards. ACHD stated in their Findings and
Consideration 3.11C that the applicant's proposal meets district policy and should be
approved as proposed. We respectfully request to modify Condition Al, 2.8 and 2.8A to
allow the development to proceed with the relocated driveway. The second concern I
want to address is city staff has expressed disapproval of the second drive through use
as shown on site Plan A for the north parcel and our development agreement
modification application proposal. While we respect their concerns, we are really only
requesting to modify the development agreement document to provide flexibility for
multiple site configurations and allow uses under the C-C zoning designation. The city
will retain full discretionary approval through the existing conditional use permit process
for any future drive through use on that north parcel. So, we respectfully request to
modify Condition A1.1A to keep both Concept Plan A and B in the development
agreement modification. In conclusion, I respectfully request that the Planning and
Zoning Commission's approval of our development agreement modification and
conditional use permit application for Chase Bank with the minor changes as I
presented. I'm available here to answer any questions and thank you for your time and
consideration.
Seal: Commissioners, any questions? I -- I do have a question real quick. Sorry.
Lorcher: No. You're good.
F41
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 39 of 53
Seal: Okay. Thank you. On the -- the Chase Bank and having the two different drive
throughs, I tend to agree to having too many drive throughs in one location is not a good
idea. If anybody wants to partake in Costco you will see why. The -- and -- and I have
been to several Chase Bank locations that don't have a drive through. Is that a
possibility here or are they just -- is that what they want in that location?
Zuzack: It is what they want in the location. I think, you know, the world has changed
since the pandemic and I think that it's imperative to have that amenity -- to have a drive
through ATM. It's a -- you know, drive throughs are challenging. You know, there is so
many different types of drive throughs. You can -- it's hard to fit every drive through in
one bucket; right? And in one box and -- and -- and that's why there is a conditional use
permit process; right? Because not every drive through can fit in the same category.
You can have, you know, de minimis drive throughs, like ATM's where there is not a lot
of stacking or you can also have drive throughs that are extreme stacking situations.
We don't know what the user is going to be on that northern parcel, but we want to
avoid going through the development agreement modification process again, because it
is a 250 day process when you start -- from start to finish between drafting plans up and
-- and going to the pre-application meetings and, then, actually submitting, it's a very
lengthy process that -- that is challenging, whereas, the city already has a mechanism in
their hand to use the conditional use permit process to have a discretionary approval of,
you know, accepting or denying a drive through.
Seal: Okay.
Thompson: If I could just add there, it really is just being transparent that we don't know
what that north parcel is going to be and just adding that flexibility there. It's not tying
the city's hands that -- that -- that they have to approve a conditional use permit for that,
it's just being transparent that we may ask for one in the future and we didn't want to
have to go through the development agreement modification process. So, that was --
that was the -- the intent behind that.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Anything else, Commissioners?
Lorcher: Mr. Chair? So, the northern -- or the southern parcel is going to be the bank,
Chase Bank, and so you don't have a tenant for the one that's closer to Albertson's:
that's what you are saying; correct?
Zuzack: We do not. So, we don't have a tenant for the northern building --
Lorcher: Building.
Zuzack: Yeah. Partial. And, you know, we -- we vision that to be either be a multi-
tenant retail style building, but, honestly, today we don't know.
Lorcher: Right. I mean your concept works as long as it's not like an In-N-Out.
F42
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 40 of 53
Zuzack: Right.
Lorcher: Because, then, you have got so much things going around in circles you are
not going to be able to handle anything. As far as the expenses are concerned to move
the utilities, is that something your organization is willing to take on?
Zuzack: Absolutely. Absolutely. It's part of the development process. So, it's
something that we fully know going into this process that all the costs are borne on the
development.
Lorcher: And ACHD gave you -- gave that -- gave you their blessing to move the
entrance to your commercial parcel 89 feet further back?
Zuzack: Correct. Yeah. The standard I believe for offsetting opposing driveways is 75
feet from each other and we exceed that at 89 feet.
Lorcher: And there will be a center turn lane in between or there will just be two lanes?
Zuzack: There is a center turn lane in between.
Lorcher: Okay. I'm good. Thanks.
Thompson: I'm sorry, I just have to say something. So, to the utilities -- the pipes are in
the ground, but they have never been used, so I just -- I think that's important that, you
know, there is -- there is pipes in the ground, but they have not been connected to
anything at this point.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Smith.
Smith: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess there is a question for staff regarding the -- if they
-- if they are willing to -- to pay for the -- the utilities and -- and the -- the moving of that,
that I'm fine with that. My only remaining question is that cross-access that was
discussed and I was wondering if you could speak to that.
Ritter: Yes, Commission. So, the cross-access was put in -- it was part of the approved
preliminary plat and final plat for Firenze Plaza Subdivision. So, that was something
that was required with that. We do require cross-access when we do plats in
commercial developments, that we get that cross-access for -- for people to not have to
go back out onto the main roads and that's why we require the cross-access and that
was the location that was approved with that development and that's why staff does not
want it to move, because there are -- even though things may not be hooked up yet, but
there are easement -- city easements there. The utilities are in there, so that is why we
didn't want it -- the access point moved.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
F43
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 41 of 53
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, go ahead.
Lorcher: For staff again. So, would they -- for the development agreement would they
ask for a variance to not have it directly across, so that it's more like an S turn? So, if
I'm coming out of Albertson's you are suggesting that I want to go straight across
whatever the -- the annex road is to get to Chase Bank, as opposed to coming out
turning left and, then, turning right again, is that what you are saying? Okay. I guess
it's not a question. It's more of a statement. A clarification if you will.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Smith: Looking at -- sorry. I'm trying to find the right page in the -- if I'm -- if I'm looking
at kind of this map -- if I'm going from Albertson's and I'm trying to go to Chase -- this is
a question for staff. I don't really want to cross that close to Eagle, to be honest. I
would prefer going -- is it Cubola -- is the -- the road parallel with Eagle to the west. Is
the lower road -- is there a possibility for us to act -- like I guess my question is has
there been some analysis done on the thought of letting them move this and, then,
when whatever is developed to their immediate west you are creating not a stub, but an
ability to cross-access with that development. So, someone coming from Albertsons
could go northbound into Cubola into whatever the parking lot is for that development
that would be there and, then, come in to Chase without having to cross immediately
next to Eagle, because that's -- I -- I -- I think that's just -- my issue is -- is I understand
the cross-access aspect, but I don't know that I would want to be going that -- straight
across that close to potential impact point.
Ritter: Commission, the access straight across there goes into the residential area.
That's the R-8 residential area there.
Smith: That is R-8 immediately to the west of the development?
Ritter: Yes.
Smith: Got it. I got it. Okay. Never mind. I retract. Sorry.
Thompson: Sorry, I -- I'm not following. So, the -- the area in red on here is the -- the
property that we are talking about, that -- can you see that? That red up --
Smith: Yeah. I was -- I was floating an idea that now I see doesn't make sense, so --
Thompson: So -- and I -- and I also want to say I'm not sure what the cross-access has
anything to do, because these are public roads, which ACHD has jurisdiction of, so --
so, I -- I wasn't following your --
44
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 42 of 53
Smith: Yeah. I guess I -- so, with the -- the caveat that it doesn't look like it's feasible,
my thought was allowing this movement and, then, for ability to kind of navigate a little
bit better from Albertson's, being able to go north on Cubola and, then, if there were an
ability to turn, then, right into that parking lot from whatever is developed there in the
future. Not feasible I see now. But that was -- that's kind of where my head was at,
so --
Zuzack: If you don't mind, you know, I actually think moving the driveway is going to be
easier for -- for -- for vehicles to -- to maneuver there and the reason I say that is
because if you are coming out of the Albertson's Center, you know, there is a lot -- a lot
happening right there at that intersection coming off Eagle Road and cars are coming
off of Eagle and you have to, then, try to jump two lanes of traffic, plus the -- the -- the --
you know, the -- the turn lane in the middle while all these vehicles are moving,
whereas, you can come out of -- out of the driveway into that center turn lane and wait
for vehicles to pass that are coming off of Eagle and, then, take a right into our
proposed Chase development. So, I think, you know, moving this actually is safer for a
number of reasons and that's one of them. The other is that if you are leaving the
Chase development, having that extra 90 feet of vision -- of sight vision you can see
vehicles, you know, that are coming on to Mount Etna easier and the third thing I would
say is that there are a lot of ways to access the site. You know, there is -- there is --
you can exit out of Albertson's a little bit further west in front of one of our other multi-
tenant shop buildings that we just built and, then, make a right and, then, you would be
able to make a left into the Chase site. So, there is a number of different ways to
access it and -- and so at the end I think moving it actually provides a safer
configuration.
Smith: Thank you.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher, anything?
Lorcher: So, the proposal is for the DA modification, which goes to City Council, is to
offer both options; is that what I'm hearing? Is that what we are voting on tonight?
Seal: Correct.
Lorcher: And, then, the --
Seal: Essentially we would need to modify -- we would need a modification to the
motion in order to allow for that. Staff has said that they do not want Option A included.
They -- or Concept A included. They would like that stricken. So, if we would like to
give them the opportunity to have Concept A and Concept B go to City Council we will
need to make sure that that's mentioned in --
Lorcher: The motion.
Seal: -- the motion. Uh-huh.
45
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 43 of 53
Lorcher: And as -- and it's your wish that both concepts be presented to City Council
and you will accept whichever one they decide on; correct?
Zuzack: That's correct. And -- and that in addition to modifying the conditions to allow
us to move the driveway, because Condition Al had stated that within 15 days prior to
the City Council hearing the applicant shall provide a revised concept plan that shows
the property access in the existing location. We would -- we would request to strike that
from the conditions of approval, so that we have -- so, that we can move the driveway
as proposed on the site plan.
Lorcher: Yeah. I think it's -- that's probably City Council's decision. And, then, the
second part is to allow the development agreement to offer two drive throughs; correct?
Isn't that the second thing we are kind of voting on? That's not -- that's not the CUP, is
it?
Seal: No. That's the -- I mean, essentially, the two things in contention right now are
either the Concept A or Concept B.
Lorcher: Uh-huh.
Seal: Concept A is the drive through or not a drive through.
Lorcher: Oh. Okay.
Seal: On the northern bound property and, then, the second piece is the -- moving the
-- the entrance.
Lorcher: Okay. All right. Thank you. Just needed to clarify.
Thompson: So, just to clarify, it's not Option A or B, it's Option A and B. So, in the
future whatever that ends up being, we don't have to come back for a modification.
Zuzack: A DA modification.
Thompson: Yeah.
Zuzack: Because there is already the conditional use permit process which will, you
know, vet the drive-through use.
Seal: Commissioner Sandoval, do you have anything to add or any questions?
Sandoval: No questions.
Seal: Okay.
Ritter: Commissioner?
F46
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 44 of 53
Seal: Go right ahead.
Ritter: I noticed that in the red line strike through for the modification you -- the
applicant had stricken through the R-8 zoning and I think that was a mistake. Your red
line strikethrough version that you sent in to staff. So, I think that was a mistake that
you guys struck out that the R-8 zoning on that document -- I just wanted to make sure
that -- that is left in the DA, that you are not trying to take that out.
Zuzack: We are not trying to make any changes to the residential zoning.
Ritter: Okay. So, the only thing that we are -- is just updating the owners and just the
four lots here.
Zuzack: Yeah. And frank -- I mean, frankly, all -- the only thing we were trying to
update exactly on this entire development agreement modification was just this -- this
two acre piece of the entire development. We didn't really -- we are not proposing to
make any other changes other than just the two acres.
Ritter: Okay.
Seal: Anything from the Commissioners? Really quick. Do we have anybody signed
up to testify?
Lomeli: Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do.
Seal: Okay. Thank you.
Lomeli: We do have Joy Livingston that signed up online. I don't see her name on
Zoom.
Seal: Do we have anybody online that would like to testify? If so, please, hit the raise
hand button. Quite a few people online tonight. Anybody in Chambers want to testify at
all?
Lomeli: Mr. Chair, Romeo Gervais.
Seal: Good evening, sir. Need your name and address for the record, please.
Gervais: Perfect. My name is Romeo Gervais. I live at 3019 East Fratello Street, the
residential immediately north of this project. As Tamara said, I guess I would like to
start with a little history, too. So, when I moved into this area there was goose hunting
in my backyard and geese falling out of the -- it was the county line. So -- so, it's
changed quite a bit in the years and -- and certainly to be expected I think with
development and growth of the city. As staff had mentioned -- and I think both staff and
the applicant had kind of addressed -- one of my big concerns with the DA modification
was the red line proposal in the documents online. I think -- I think it's been pretty well
F47]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 45 of 53
put on the record here that the intention is not to change some of the requirements, but
if you look in the records on the file on page three and four of the DA redline
modification, the applicant strick -- had stricken conditions 5-D, H, I, J and L and I'm not
in support of that modification. So, it sounds like everybody is in agreement that that's
not really part of the proposal, but just putting that on the record that those conditions
are tied to that R-8 zoning and, then, the interfaces between the existing residential and
the development, so -- the -- the other thing I guess I would mention is is I do support
staff's comments with the removal of the second drive through or C-1 if you will. Plan
sheet C-1. That drive through -- when we initially came in with this subdivision it wasn't
intended to be a -- kind of a neighborhood office if you will. It was kind of proposed as
doctor's offices, things like that. Kind of a lower use, 8:00 to 5:00, Monday through
Friday kind of use. Not necessarily opposed to injecting some of the retail or even the
bank. The bank maintains those same hours. Not really that opposed to a drive
through ATM. I think, once again, low usage, but as that site plan to the north -- or to
the north would potentially propose that additional drive through, I think there is some
use conflict that it creates or could create that I don't think was intended with the initial
development, if you will, with an office use. So, going from, you know, cornfield, estate
residential kind of in the comp plan when I bought my lot, to now a mixed-use -- at least
compatible R-8 with office now going to some mixed-use retail -- okay. But going all the
way to an In-N-Out probably not supported. Or definitely not supported by me. So, that
-- that would be a couple of different things there. Do support staff's comments with
regards to the access location. I have no opinion. So, whatever you guys so decide
with that I don't know that it's a big deal. The other component with the DA site plan
that I guess I would ask for is it's currently showing three different dumpster locations,
two kind of on the merge joint lot line, one up on the north closer to the residential.
Being so close -- it's 250 feet or so to existing residential I get worried about dumping
and things like that, so -- and I apologize, I'm probably going over my time, but I have a
lot of -- I do agree or appreciate the landscaping and the 25 foot buffer yards. But as
they did with the final plat, I would ask that they continue that or put in that entire
fencing around the whole lot now, as this -- when the Chase Bank comes in it's going to
create that use and, once again, I think is pertinent to the CUP for the Chase Bank
where it's impacting the residences right now. So, I would ask that that landscaping be
added there. And with that I guess I would stand for any questions.
Seal: No questions. But there are going to be empty seats on the Commission. I invite
you to apply with that. Thank you. I really do appreciate citizenry that pays attention to
the finer details and that was very detailed.
Gervais: Maybe part of my day job, Commissioner.
Seal: That's -- that's okay.
Gervais: Thank you.
Seal: Thank you. Madam Clerk, anyone else?
F48]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 46 of 53
Lomeli: We have a Mark -- I apologize, I don't want to mess his name up. Blocovich?
Seal: No? Anyone else? No? Anyone else want to testify? Going once. Going twice.
Anybody online? Haven't seen anybody hit the raise hand button. All right. With that
would the applicant would like to come back up for any rebuttals?
Zuzack: Yes, Mr. Chair. I think I would like to potentially explain I think the confusion
on the DA red lines. When we applied for this there was some confusion on whether or
not this should be a new development agreement, because, you know, we are one
owner inside of a master plan per se of Albertson's still retains ownership of the
residential, we have ownership of the retail shopping center and so when I red line to
the document I was trying to create -- I mean I provided our -- my comments, our
comments, to the city staff and I was trying to create it -- cater it more towards just the
two acres, because that's all we were trying to do is modify the two acres. So, I just
wanted to clarify that component to it of the confusion.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate the clarification. Commissioner Smith, do you
have something on that?
Smith: Yeah. I did have one question regarding the dumpsters that was brought up. I
figured since we are doing this might as well just see if there is an opportunity to clean
anything up. Regarding -- there is fencing proposed, et cetera, but regarding the
proximity on the -- the northernmost dumpster location, but also considering the fact that
west of this there would be additional residential property. Are -- are those set in stone
or are we envisioning potentially moving them away from residential properties? Is that
-- would that be kosher for us to -- would that be amenable for us to include some
language around that?
Zuzack: So, I think -- well, the dumpster for the southern half, the Chase Bank side, is
something that -- that's the location that fits very well and complementary to the
circulation of their facility. It's also, you know, relatively de minimis in terms of what's
being, you know, used there. You know, we also -- you know, to address the concerns
about illegal dumping, we -- you know, we manage everything in house. We have --
property managers are very diligent and that's something that we don't accept and if it you know, if there is illegal dumping we get rid of it as quickly as possible. It's
something we don't -- you know, there is a few things in our company that are really
important to us and that is one of them. As it relates to the site plan and the location of
the dumpsters on the northern half, that's something that I envision would be vetted
through the conditional use permit process when and -- when that does come forward
those locations would be heavily, you know, looked at in compatibility to the
development that we are proposing at that time. So, to answer your question, I think,
yes, there is some flexibility. We don't know who the user is. It's definitely not In-N-Out,
you know, so -- but we are -- we are -- you know, we are -- we don't -- we don't have a
user today and -- and at that -- when we do -- when we have that user that's when we
would, you know, present a site plan, you know, through that process and we could
work on it then.
F49]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 47 of 53
Smith: Thank you.
Seal: Quick -- one final -- oh. Kurt, go ahead. I just had a question on the -- is -- as I'm
conceptualizing the -- the property in general is would -- would you consider moving
Chase Bank north?
Zuzack: No. I think that's a -- that's something that they feel very strongly about that
they want to be at that location. It's -- it's predicated on the -- the deal moving forward,
to be honest with you.
Seal: Okay. That just would solve a lot of the issues that we are talking about
immediately, so --just had to ask.
Zuzack: Understood. Understood.
Seal: Kurt, you had something to add?
Starman: With your permission I had a quick clarifying question for the applicant and --
you had a screen -- you had one of your screens up just a moment ago that showed
your proposed changes to the DA language. Can you pull it up one more time real
quick? Perfect. I just want to clarify with the applicant. The -- near the top third of the
page where it inserts Plan A and B, that -- that's your proposed change; correct?
Zuzack: Yes, sir.
Starman: I just want to -- I just want to confirm I think -- and I think your colleague
mentioned this, but I think would that make sense to have Plan A or B? I agree that you
can't do both. It's one or the other; correct?
Zuzack: That -- that is correct. It's one or the other. But we would respectfully request
to have both plans included in the DA modification, so that we have flexibility to, you
know, have multiple options when it comes to the future development of that northern
parcel.
Starman: Yeah. Thank you. I appreciate that. I understand that one hundred percent.
I'm just saying from a grammatical and technical perspective to accomplish the goal you
just mentioned I think that language needs to say that consistent with the -- with
Concept Plan A or B. That gives you the possibility of one or the other, but you can't --
it's not possible to do both; right? It's one or the other.
Zuzack: That's correct.
Starman: Okay. So, we will -- we will collaborate with you between now and City
Council.
Zuzack: Perfect.
F50]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 48 of 53
Starman: Thank you.
Parsons: Mr. Chair, if I could just add -- at least give Aaron some assurances, since
he's bringing up the DA process. It really isn't that complicated and I'm sorry that it's
taken this long to get you here. But in my experience with DA modifications the City
Attorney's Office will prepare that document and if you are successful in achieving it
and/or concept plan, then, those will be -- both those concept plans would be attached
to the new DA that would be subject to the two acre parcel. So, we will have you
covered either way, Aaron, so it really should say or -- but, again, we can -- if the
Commission feels like they want to make that recommendation tonight we will certainly
change that as we transition to City Council.
Zuzack: Thank you for the clarification.
Seal: Okay. Commissioners, anything further? No? All right. Thank you very much.
Appreciate your time. And with that I will take a motion to close the public hearing for
File No. H-2024-0007 for Firenze Plaza.
Smith: So moved.
Lorcher: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for File No. H-2024-
0007. All in favor, please, say aye. Public hearing is closed.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: I will jump in real quick on this one. So, as -- as far as the Concept A and B, I
understand the reasoning behind keeping both of those in there. I understand the
desire to not have that, but I don't think that we want to cut them off at the -- at the
knees on that one at this point in time. There might be something that goes in there.
God forbid it actually be an In-N-Out. But I -- I -- you know, there -- there may be a use
case that goes in there that, you know, nobody's thought of yet that we all go, wow, I
really wish that could go in there. We just can't do it, because of, you know, something
that was excluded. So, I don't know what that might be, but I hope it comes to Meridian.
On moving the drives -- the -- the drive aisle there -- the drive -- the entrance, I
understand the idea that if we offset it that it becomes easier. That is one side of the
argument. But the -- kind of the reasoning behind having that direct access is you have
eye contact. So, when I'm going out and I'm coming in I have got eye contact with
somebody. I know what they are doing across the street for me. They know what my
intentions are as well. Where if you have three offsets in a very very short amount of
time, you are just going to have everybody going to the same place all at the same time.
So, I think that that is a consideration that we need to make. Generally speaking I'm
kind of supportive of staff as I have been educated over the years. I have my own
opinions and as I'm educated on things I learned that there is a lot of good reasons for
some of the regulations that we have that we haven't always thought of. So, that's a
F51
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 49 of 53
consideration for me on that. As far as getting to that, following Commissioner Smith's
logic, to be honest, if I had to go to the bank over there that's exactly the route I would
take. I would go behind Albertson's or to the -- to the west and I would come around the
other way, just so I didn't have to cut all the way across in order to get there, so -- I
mean, unfortunately -- fortunately or unfortunately, Albertson's put their entrances and
exits -- exits where they are. We do have, you know, specifics in the code that kind of
regulate that. So, I would -- I would be more apt to support staff in that decision. Other
than that, wish you all the luck in the world on this. Glad to see more development for
businesses coming into Meridian.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go right ahead.
Smith: Again for the second time tonight, I think I'm -- I'm exactly flipped of where you
are at, although I don't -- you know, I don't feel so strongly about it that it needs to be
some certain way. I do tend to support the moving of the -- of the -- of the entry -- entry
-- of that entrance to the property. I think that that makes sense to me. Again, with the
understanding that I'm more of a layman and I haven't probably had many of those
conversations. Just intuitively that kind of makes a little more sense to my head. But I
-- my thought around Concept A versus B -- my only thought is there is something that
were to go in there, they still could approach it with another DA mod, if I'm -- if I'm not
mistaken and I almost am wondering if the intention is to probably have something that's
not a drive through in there, if it's worth adding an extra step of scrutiny with a DA mod,
if they were to put another drive through in there. So, again, I don't feel super strongly
in either of these. I'm generally in support of the application either way, but those are
just some thoughts that kind of where my head's at at the moment.
Seal: Commissioner Lorcher? Commissioner Sandoval?
Lorcher: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Go right ahead.
Lorcher: Not knowing who the north client is going to be, I feel like is a hindrance to
make a good choice as far as whether or not to offer two drive throughs or not. I mean
one could be a dry cleaner, you know, or it could be -- I think there was a Jersey Mike's,
but it -- it could be a Subway. It could be -- you know, it could be anything; right? It
could be something high volume. It could be something very low volume. And I -- and I
-- that's the challenge that I have. But also understanding and acknowledging your
comments since the pandemic the way we manage our business and whether we eat or
we dine or we bank or whatever we do is -- is definitely more in our cars and I don't see
that going away anytime soon. So, I don't know, I'm -- I'm kind of torn on this one as
well. I think the best thing to do at this point is to provide City Council with as many
options as possible and I -- you know, I understand staffs concern for the -- the drive
through or the drive across the -- where it connects, but I also see the value of it being
F52
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 50 of 53
staggered. So, I would be more -- I would be in favor of what the DA modification to say
plan A or B to go -- to recommend for City Council.
Seal: Okay. Commissioner Sandoval, anything to add?
Sandoval: Mr. Chair, so to me it -- it actually makes sense to have the off -- offset, so
people aren't trying to jet across both lanes at the same time quickly. Again, I think
that's a good option to -- to move forward and as far as the north end of the site, you
know, it looks like it's going to be residential and if it is right now at least be the open
space, they will probably put, you know, adequate screening. It will be a consideration if
there is a drive through there. So, I think we should leave both Options A and B -- or B,
however you want to word it, to City Council.
Seal: All right. Thank you very much.
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Are you ready to make a motion?
Smith: I more have a question for Commissioner Lorcher just to make sure I'm on the
same page. Commissioner Lorcher, did you -- was your intention to keep -- so A or B,
but keep staff's recommendation to leave the drive aisle where it is or did you have --
Lorcher: I actually don't have a preference, so -- I mean if it's -- if it's a rule, then, we
should follow those rules. But, you know, grocery -- grocery store parking lots can get a
little crazy, especially with all the retail that they have around here, personally I would
do what you would do, I would go around the back and kind of come around, because I
-- I personally wouldn't want to shoot across. But that's -- that's me. And I don't like
turning left either, so -- or driving at night. So, you know, don't count me as like a
normal driver. But I mean I would -- if it was me I would probably like it staggered just
because that was more of a sight line away from Eagle Road. But if it's a rule in the city
that says we want that cross-access then -- and this is the only exception in the city,
then, we should follow that rule. So, I -- I don't know if there is other exceptions to it or
not, but --
Seal: Bill?
Parsons: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, in this particular case there isn't a
rule for that -- well, there is a rule for that access is that they take access from a local
street, which they are doing. So, them keeping the curb cut where it is or moving it is
not violating any rule and in our world and as you mentioned, Chairman, it's just best
practice to have driveways align. That's what we are trying to do. And since the utilities
are already there, you know, we want to be cognizant of our Public Works partners that
we are not putting -- making sure no one's encroaching or impacting those utilities that
are underground. That's why we are having the discussion with you on keeping the
curb cut. But there is no zoning ordinance rule that says he can't move that, because
F53]
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 51 of 53
he is still taking access from a local street. Now, on the cross-access issue, the
applicant owns the property, so, technically, there is no cross-access. He can't grant
himself access. He owns both properties. But when looking at the recorded plat, there
are CC&Rs in place that speak to how that cross-access is to occur in the development
and we don't get copies of the CC&Rs. So, I'm only bringing this up just to let the
developer know that if it does get sold in the future that's something that may have to be
addressed, if one of those parcel sells off and someone comes to the city and ask us
about cross-access we are going to be like you need to pull the CC&Rs and see how it's
spelled out. Just for the records and make it clear on that. So, long story short, is if you
want them to -- if you support their -- their request to remove that and the applicant's
provided you the guidance to do that. If you want to side with staff, again, they are in
front of you as a body tonight, so Council will have another bite at the apple to discuss
relocation and the two concept plans as you have already discussed.
Seal: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate the clarification on that. If there is no more
questions I'm more than happy to take --
Smith: Mr. Chair?
Seal: Commissioner Smith, go ahead.
Smith: I got one. I think it's just some context, I think, because this is more of a
recommendation and City Council can -- can take it or modify it or -- I think I will go with
kind of where -- it seems like the -- the room is at at the moment. So, with that being
said, after considering all staff, applicant, and public testimony I move to recommend
approval to the City Council File No. H-2024-0007 as presented in the staff report for
the hearing date of July 18th, 2024, with a modification to allow Concept Plan A or B --
or A and B or whatever that language is and to allow the applicant to go forward with the
offsetting of the driveway per their request.
Seal: Do I have a second?
Lorcher: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to recommend approval of File No. H-2024-0007
for Firenze Plaza with the aforementioned modifications. All in favor, please, say aye.
Opposed nay? Motion passes. Thank you very much. Appreciate all the time on this.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
7. Planning and Zoning Commission Elections
Seal: And with that we will go back to Item No. 3, which is the Planning and Zoning
Commission elections. I will be stepping down as chair and so we need to elect a new
chair and if that happens to be Maria, then, we will also elect a vice-chair and I'm not and I'm not it.
54
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 52 of 53
Lorcher: Not a lot of people here tonight.
Seal: Yeah. Yeah. I mean I have, you know, put thought into this and Commissioner
Sandoval is brand -- brand new and -- and still learning the ropes. You know, we have
some folks that have indicated that their time is going to be tough to fulfill on Planning
and Zoning as well. Some of those folks are not with us tonight as well. So, if I'm
making a recommendation or a motion, then, likely, I will go with the experience of the
Commission so far and that would be with Commissioner Lorcher as president and I
mean with that my next recommendation would be Commissioner Smith be the
assistant chair. That's kind of where I'm at with things and I'm more than welcome to
discuss all of that.
Lorcher: Are you nodding that that would be in agreement with you?
Smith: Yeah. I think that's totally fair. I'm anticipating being on this Commission for the
foreseeable future, so --
Seal: Good.
Lorcher: So, what do we do next? Do I get to make the motion for this? Do I get to
make a motion, Kurt?
Starman: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, any of the Commissioners can make a
motion, including the chair. So, whoever would like to make the motion -- I know
somewhat awkward if you are part of the motion. You can do that as well. There is no
prohibition against that. So, whoever -- whichever Commissioner would like to make a
motion that would be appropriate or would be fine and -- whether that's you, Mr.
Chairman, or someone else.
Seal: Okay. I will -- I would love to do this. It's -- then it's not all about me. I move that
Commissioner Lorcher is the next chair of the Commission.
Smith: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to elect Commissioner Lorcher as chair of
Planning and Zoning Commission. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay?
Congratulations.
Lorcher: Thank you.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: With that I will -- I also make a motion to elect Commissioner Smith as the vice-
chair for the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Lorcher: I second that.
55
Meridian Planning&Zoning Commission
July 18,2024
Page 53 of 53
Seal: It's been moved and seconded to elect Commissioner Smith as the vice-chair of
Planning and Zoning. All in favor, please, say aye. Opposed nay? Welcome to the --
welcome to the assistant chair position.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
Seal: So, good deal. And I don't know if there is anything that the two of you officially
need to do. Maria's already well versed in what needs to happen in pre-meetings and
things like that and so I will let her pass that education on to you in your -- your new
duties. Kurt, was there something you want to add?
Starman: No.
Seal: Okay. I saw you hit the button, so I'm quick draw on this one. With that I will take
one more motion.
Lorcher: Mr. Chair, I motion we adjourn.
Smith: Second.
Seal: It's been moved and seconded that we adjourn. All in favor, please, say aye. We
are adjourned. Thanks everyone.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. THREE ABSENT.
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:52 P.M.
(AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. )
APPROVED
Maria Lorcher, Chair 8-1-2024
ATTEST:
CHRIS JOHNSON - CITY CLERK
8-1-2024
F56