Loading...
2015 09-01Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting September 3, 2015 Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of September 3, 2015, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Steven Yearsley. Present: Chairman Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Patrick Oliver, Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald and Commissioner Gregory Wilson. Others Present: Machelle Hill, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Joshua Beach and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance: Roll-call ___X__ Gregory Wilson __X__ Patrick Oliver ___X_ Rhonda McCarvel __X__ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Steven Yearsley - Chairman Yearsley: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I would like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission for the hearing date of September 3rd, 2015, and let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda Yearsley: First item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. Just wanted to note that Action Items A, B and C, the Easy Jet Subdivision to be heard, is not going to be heard tonight. It has been pulled and will be reheard or re-advertised for October 15th. So, any of those that are here for the Easy Jet Subdivision, we will not take any testimony on that application tonight. So, with that change can I get a motion to approve the -- or to adopt the agenda? Wilson: Mr. Chair? Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I move we adopt the minutes -- Yearsley: Agenda. Wilson: The agenda. Excuse me. The agenda. Oliver: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as presented. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 2 of 24 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 3: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of August 20, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Yearsley: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and that is for the approval of the minutes of the August 20th, 2015, Planning and Zoning meeting -- commission meeting. Any comments on that or corrections? If not, I would entertain a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: I would move for approval of the Consent Agenda as presented. McCarvel: Second. Yearsley: I have motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing: RZ 15-012 Easy Jet Subdivision by Reginald Jones Located 2750 S. Eagle Road Request: Rezone of 6.55 Acres of Land from the R-4 to the R-15 (4.82 Acres) and L-O (1.73 Acres) Zoning Districts B. Public Hearing: PP 15-016 Easy Jet Subdivision by Reginald Jones Located 2750 S. Eagle Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of Four (4) Multi-Family Residential Building Lots, Two (2) Commercial / Office Building Lots and One (1) Common Lot on 5.41 Acres of Land in a Proposed R-15 and L-O Zoning Districts C. Public Hearing: CUP 15-017 Easy Jet Subdivision by Reginald Jones Located 2750 S. Eagle Road Request: Conditional Use Permit for a Multi-Family Development Consisting of Seventy-Six (76) Residential Dwelling Units in an R-15 Zoning District and Office Uses in an L-O Zoning District Yearsley: Before we go any farther I kind of want to explain how this next -- how this Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 3 of 24 procedure will go. We will open each item one by one . We will start off with the staff report. The staff will present their findings regarding how it adheres to the Comprehensive Plan and the Uniform Development Code, with staff recommendations. Then we will have the applicant come forward and present their case for approval of their application and respond to any staff and applicant -- or staff and commissioner comments or questions. The applicant will have 15 minutes to do so. After that we will open the -- open it up to public testimony. There is a sign-up sheet in the back, anybody wishing to testify can sign up and we will call you up for the testimony. Those wishing to testify will be given three minutes. If you are speaking on a larger group and there is a show of hands, they will be given up to ten minutes. Once the public has had a chance to make their comments, we will ask the applicant to come back up to answer comments from the public and to respond to the comments and he will be given up to ten minutes. After that we will close the public hearing and not hear anymore testimony and, then, the -- we will discuss and deliberate and hopefully make a recommendation to the City Council. D. Public Hearing: PP 15-015 Trilogy Subdivision by Conger Management Group Located Southeast Corner of W. Chinden Boulevard and N. Black Cat Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of One Hundred Forty-Four (144) Single Family Residential Lots and Nine (9) Common Lots on Approximately 28.16 Acres in the R-8 Zoning District Yearsley: So, with that I would like to open the public hearing on PP 15-015, the Trilogy Subdivision and let's begin with the staff report. Beach: Good evening, Chair, Commissioners. So, this -- this application for preliminary plat called Trilogy Subdivision is a -- located at the north -- sorry -- the southeast corner Black Cat and Chinden. As you can see here. There is a zoning map on the left and an aerial map on the right. The property was rezoned or annexed and zoned -- annexed and zoned in 2006 with the R-8 designation. As you can see here there is several -- several things going on here. To the west there is a -- the Rambo Subdivision, zoned RUT in Ada county. To the east is a county residence zoned RUT. Bainbridge Subdivision, zoned R-8. So, that would be -- there is kind of a small parcel there northeast of the property along Chinden that's in the county. If you're not following me there. And, then, to the south is the Bainbridge Subdivision and the -- a county subdivision called the Rambo Subdivision as well. So, as I said, this came before you in 2006. The applicant at the time requested 145 single family lots -- let's see. A hundred and forty-five single family lots, 12 common lots, four private street lots and one future right of way lot on 28.17 acres. The -- this application before you this evening is 144 single family lots and nine common lots on 8.16 acres of land, again, in the R-8 zoning district. The gross density of the proposed development is 5.11 dwelling units to the acre and it's consistent with the medium density residential land use designation. One thing I would like to mention is the minimum lot size proposed is 4,000 square feet, with an average lot size of 5,027 square feet. The applicant is aware of the some proposed UDC text amendments that will be coming forth from staff in the next few months and so has proposed the 4,000 square foot lots would not meet our current code. They are anticipating that that -- those changes will Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 4 of 24 be made and understands that they will have to be attached single family homes if that -- those changes are not made to the code. Does that make sense? And they know that at final plat it will have to meet whatever the code is at the time and so my understanding is that they will wait and see what happens with that before they come forward with the final plat. A couple of -- a couple of issues that we would like to bring forward. The north and south side of Block 4 exceeds the maximum block length requirement. This block is constrained by limited access by Chinden Boulevard to the north. In lieu of the public street connection the applicant has provided the pedestrian connection to the multi-use pathway, as you see on the top there. Right here. Excuse me. Right here there is a multi-use pathway along Chinden proposed and, then, the pathway will be connected here. Due to the length of those streets we have reached out to ACHD and received some preliminary comments about the length of several of the blocks and ACHD has yet to give staff the full comments and so we are still waiting on a full explanation of whether they would be in support of some of these traffic calming measures that staff has proposed along these long streets here. So, there are -- there are three streets proposed to be extended with the development. Staff is reco mmended that the applicant redesign North Exeter Avenue, which is this street here, to remove the common lot on the west side of Exeter and allow future development of parcel R7330160010, which is this parcel here on the west side. It's currently in the county. So, that future development of that property will allow access off of North Exeter, given the requirement for a landscape strip along Black Cat, there would not be much opportunity to provide access any other way. The applicant has proposed to set aside 2.86 acres or 10.2 percent of the property for open space. There is two large common lot areas that are centrally located within the subdivision and see with my pointer there is this one here and this long one running east to west here. Staff is in support of this preliminary plat application and I will stand for any questions you may have. Yearsley: Are there any questions? McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Josh, is -- so, every -- all of this is emptying out on that one street there and going west to Black Cat? Beach: So, this is -- this here is Ramblin Court. McCarvel: Uh-huh. Beach: This is the one you're talking about? McCarvel: Yeah. Beach: And there will be a stub connection here to Bainbridge and here to Bainbridge. So, there is three -- Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 5 of 24 McCarvel: But those go out through other subdivisions? Beach: Correct. McCarvel: Okay. Thanks. Yearsley: I have one question. Those other stub streets -- can I ask you -- and I don't know if you guys know -- where they are in the process of development? Are they a long ways out or soon to be developed? I know the aerial map is pretty -- you know, kind of old, so it's kind of a see what's going there. I see some of the plats, so I was just kind of curious to what -- what's the timeline for those additional access points? Beach: It depends on the development of Bainbridge. I'm not a hundred percent sure how far they are with -- with their build out at the moment. Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, you can see here in the aerial that they have a phase one completed, which is located in the southwest corner just south of the current Ramblin -- or Rambo Estates Subdivision. To my knowledge phase two does not even provide a stub street to any portion of this development. Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: So, as Commissioner McCarvel alluded to, there is only one entrance in and out of this development until such time as additional phase s are developed with the Bainbridge Subdivision. Yearsley: But also just so -- I want to point out, it states in the staff report also that they -- there is a condition in there that they only allow 31 lots before another secondary access is -- Beach: Correct. Yearsley: Okay. Beach: The comment from the Fire Department. They won't allow that until such time as there is additional access points. Yearsley: Okay. Any other questions? Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Josh, what kind of calming measures are you talking about with ACHD? Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 6 of 24 Beach: So -- thanks. Yeah. So, Chairman and Commissioners, after speaking with Stacey Yarrington at ACHD, she had indicated that, you know, typically they -- they don't like to do calming measures, but if that's -- if that's what it takes in the past they have done several different things, but she did not indicate what they would be in support of and so we are still waiting for her comments. Fitzgerald: Did you guys provide anything like bricks or something that would -- something like rumble strips or something like that where you -- okay. There hasn't been any -- Beach: Yeah. They would have to be the ones that would suggest that. You know, in the past there has been several different measures that have been used, but they would have to be in support of those. Fitzgerald: Okay. Beach: And so the condition would work -- you know, for the applicant to work with ACHD to come up with a solution for that. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Yearsley: Any other questions? With that would the applicant like to come forward. And, please, state your name and address for the record. Conger: Yes. Members of the Commission, Jim Conger. 4824 West Fairview Avenue. Thank you for letting us be in front of you tonight. I do want to thank Josh and Sonya. Both have worked very hard through this process with us as we moved -- as Josh indicated, this project was approved in 2006. We are one lot less. We got rid of a couple alley -- alley things, which made the lots bigger as far as why lost a lot. The open space is the same. One clarification, however, on the -- the 40 foot lots, which is -- is more in this region, that's the same as the previous layout. So, we are not hedging a bet on changing -- changing codes or anything of that nature. The previous approval was 40 foot lots have to be attached. If the UDC changes we don't have to be attached. We think for the neighbors and for our development, with the changes in the UDC code of not requiring the homes to be attached is a benefit. If that doesn't happen we are fully prepared to build them attached as we were in 2006. We have the same owner as 2006. Obviously why it lapsed is the great rescission that occurred in '6 and '7. We simply ran out of extensions and the project went away. We brought back the same project. We think there is some better -- the values of these homes without the alley and a few other things are going to be better. The UDC code, which I sit on that committee, lucky enough to be asked, why we are detaching these is it will help with the values of some of these homes if they are not attached versus attached. It's just simple economics and I think that's why and I think that's why the city is on board with that. We are providing a little better product for detached homes in the R-8 zoning. So, we suspect that will -- that will go through. If it doesn't go through, again, we aren't hedging a bet, we are fine with the current UDC and we will be even better with -- and so will the neighbors with the new UDC. Kind of working Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 7 of 24 through -- just to show you -- this was our previous plat. We had the same open spaces here. This one is a little bit bigger now. The parking didn't meet anybody's code. It kind of went through the first time, but the private alleys with ACHD and everything, just didn't -- the parking did not function properly. This is the same. Our buffer from Chinden is the same. Our large lot and lot counts against the Ramblin Court -- of the existing neighbors is all the same. We have simply lost some lots in that area and lost a lot. I actually thought we lost two, but I guess we have only lost one. I will address the connection points in a second. Kind of working through it. Our street patterns are identical. I do want to address the block lengths. Our block length isn't because we want the block lengths longer, your code doesn't allow us to go -- go to Eagle Road, so the only thing we can do is a pedestrian ramp. So, it's making it sound like we want lon g block lengths, but what else can you do against Chinden. That's all you can do. Now, we had a condition from your staff in the staff report that says we will have to have , basically, some traffic calming measures at these intersections. We are fine with that condition. We are working through with ACHD at the current moment. What -- and, Commissioner Fitzgerald, to answer that, they -- they will be more choker mechanisms, similar to Harris Ranch and some of the others. I wanted one -- an additional choker near that park, because that is where people are going to be crossing the intersections as well. So, we are just working through chokers and what ACHD exactly wants. But we will -- we will have that. This is the only road that matters, because it goes out. This road we will do the chokers. We are committing to the chokers. You have a condition for the chokers. There is some sort of traffic calming. But that's not a through street and it's not going to have the same impact as that center road. So, we are definitely on board with the traffic calming. Have no problem with the way the condition is written and working with ACHD on that. They definitely will not let us do brick, so -- raised items. They don't like speed bumps. They don't like what -- you know, basically vertical differences. We will have to do it horizontally and pinch people down. Kind of going through -- I think the positive part of the -- positive part of our project from 2006 should be for the neighbors. We have deleted one lot. We have gotten rid of some smaller, narrower alleys -- alleyway lots. But I think the most positive thing -- deference from 2006 and to ask -- answer the other Commissioner Yearley's question is, you know, phase one that Bill alluded to is underway. Phase two, as you can see, is underway. This is a little more current map. They couldn't do this, which is their phase three, but that would have pinned them to not having a secondary access, because we weren't built. So, it's a little bit of a chicken and the egg program. We kind of got to get built. They kind of got to get built. But now with their phase two, that spine I just drew right here, they will now be able to come up and do their phase three, which is where that's slated to occur. Our access point -- ultimately our secondary will come out at that point. We have -- from a Public Works standpoint -- and I will even do it in blue -- is there about right there. We run out of water pressure anyhow and so does the rest of the world until we start connecting and getting secondary water, which helps both developments. So, as far as traffic, it's kind of tied with Public Works and water. Everything has got to get a secondary access at some point, which is sooner than later, to get it out. So, yes, our first phase will come out on Ramblin Court, public ACHD roadway, kind of built to take some of this traffic. Yes, Black Cat is congested. You will hear it tonight. We do sympathize to that. I don't know -- this project is not going to solve traffic coming back at Black Cat. Our secondary, obviously, once we are here, it will be a little Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 8 of 24 bit easier to get out on Black Cat. Ultimately when Bainbridge gets -- gets to this part of their world that is not currently under construction -- I suspect it's not very far away, whatever that means. In the development world to me that's two or three years. This now is a much different project in 2015 than it was in 2006. We were the first one out here with an approval. We would have definitely been pinching it at the fire department's number of secondary accesses and we would have shoved a much greater amount of homes out to Ramblin before we every had a real secondary connection. It's a different world now, but we will have the secondary and that will help the whole transportation process. I think my only issue with -- with the staff report is -- this doesn't show it very well. I will show it right here. Is we have a condition to place a sidewalk in the common area of Ramblin Court. Staff indicates that as these bigger lots redevelop that will leave a gap in the infrastructure system. I guess we are -- the only thing we are saying against the staff report is we are asking for condition nine -- it's Roman numeral IXA15 -- to be deleted. Again, that's IXA15. That sidewalk -- there is no homes over there. We can't legally do a sidewalk from this point on, because that becomes private property. This is in the right of way, so there is the right to go do a sidewalk in the public right of way, we would be tearing out Ramblin Court's common area, which doesn't make any sense. Typically speaking when I do sidewalks in the other HOA's common areas I never get it put back to the satisfaction, because it's almost impossible, but nobody is walking on this sidewalk. The homes are not on that side of the street. Typically speaking when we have single loaded streets there is typically not a sidewalk on that side. Even with the highway district we don't get those requirements. So, that isn't leaving a gap in future infrastructure. Ramblin Court is a cul-de-sac. It will always be a cul-de-sac unless you buy two very expensive homes and tear them down. That doesn't gain -- I'm for putting in sidewalks and I'm for spending that money. For me that isn't a 3,000 dollar deal. So, I'm not fighting over money here, it's just that sidewalk will never get used. It will tear up their common area. They are not going to like me for tearing up their common area and, then, we will have drainage issues and there is other cases I could tell you out there. We are improving, you know, where they come in -- and, actually, I'm overselling this whole thing. I apologize. That's not even our property. So, I'm being asked to do this little area. That will be developed and should have sidewalks, but it will have businesses and what -- they think that will be commercial. So, this little stretch of sidewalk -- I'm sorry, that will be 2,500 dollars to me. So, it's not a money deal, it just doesn't make sense to tear up the HOA's common area. So, I think before I beat that to death and say too much on it, yeah, that was just -- the five foot concrete sidewalk, which is condition roman numeral IXA15, I respectfully request that one be deleted. Past that I definitely stand for any questions and await rebuttal I guess. Yearsley: Any questions? I have one going back to the sidewalk. If you would go back to that last -- there. Now, are you putting in a sidewalk from your entrance down to Black Cat? Conger: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, no. That property is not owned by us and would be an off-site condition, which, typically, doesn't get put against developments. That property will develop and have a requirement for a sidewalk. What we are definitely doing -- where our road comes in here, so we will have sidewalk coming into this intersection right here. The future development will put that in at some point. But that would be an off Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 9 of 24 site and would be typically not -- not put against a development of this nature that's really not walking in anywhere. Black Cat doesn't have sidewalks yet. This entire parcel, which will develop, is currently looking at plans -- will develop and put sidewalk at that point. But the stretch I'm talking about, which is now really this -- this stretch right there, just goes east to nowhere. I guess if the neighbors speak tonight and want the sidewalk, I'm going to stand down and put in the sidewalk. If we hear that from neighbors. I guess I'm willing to give that option. If it's important to the neighbors I would put that in. We are not fighting it to fight it, we just don't think it will get used, so if the neighbors want it we would take back our objection to putting it in. Yearsley: Okay. Any other questions? All right. Thank you. Conger: Thank you for your time. Yearsley: I have a couple of people signed up. Is it Marilyn Brooks? Would you like to speak? Absolutely. Please state your name and address for the record. Chidester: My name is Matt Chidester. My address is 4685 W est Ramblin Court. Thanks for the opportunity to speak here tonight. Really appreciate your efforts with this. I speak as a father of a few young children and one of the concerns that I have is the developer, when we met before, didn't seem to know of a plan for schools in the area. I don't know if there has been studies done for this or what has been planned, but there doesn't seem to be much of a plan. Schools my children are starting to go into are already pretty crowded and pretty -- pretty full and so I don't know -- that's one concern that hasn't been addressed with us. But my primary concern with this and why I would vote against the way it is currently set up -- not the development itself, that's going to happen, it's their property, but it's the access to Ramblin Court. Currently as stated -- as they have talked about having a certain number of homes built that can access that road and, then, there used to be a secondary access. The problem right now -- like the developer said, that -- that Black Cat Road is an extremely dangerous road. The traffic often backs up almost to Ramblin Court or more and you add cars to that already that's already a danger. It's a bottleneck already and adding our road with 140 more homes being able to access that without the infrastructure, that's a really dangerous subdivision -- or point of Chinden and Black Cat. Go there and sit there for an hour during rush hour and see how many people risk their lives trying to get across that point. It doesn't make much sense to not already have a secondary access point in and the access point through Black Cat just creates a bottleneck, along with Bainbridge developing that as well. And so not having those things in place when this begins just really feel like it's going to be a danger coming off of Black -- our street onto Black Cat, as well as to Chinden Boulevard. You know, the access to the east, there is a light already at Tree Farm that's already been set up. That light is already sitting there with nothing connected to it. You know, you would think that that -- that would be a quicker way to access things and so, anyway, that's -- the concern is traffic and safety of our family. That's all I have. Yearsley: Just really quickly I have one question. That piece of sidewalk that they were talking about, are you for it or against it? Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 10 of 24 Chidester: I don't have a feeling strongly either way. Yearsley: Okay. Just -- Chidester: That's a good question and I don't see much of a point of it personally. Yearsley: Okay. Chidester: So, that's not a real concern of mine. Yearsley: All right. Chidester: Thank you. Yearsley: I guess we will go back to Marilyn. Would you like to come forward. Again, name and address for the record, please. Brooks: Marilyn Brooks. 4655 West Ramblin Court. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I think Matt said a lot of things that I have to say. I would like to plead with you to eliminate that access off of Ramblin Court. We have a nice little, quiet cul-de-sac. I am concerned about safety. We have grandchildren, children -- the neighbors have children. I have a disabled son who rides his disabled bike on Ramblin Court. He, obviously, can't ride it down Black Cat, none of us can ride on Black Cat safely. I just -- again, there is no light at Black Cat and Chinden. The light is at Tree Farm. I really think the access should be from there. I would like to point out there -- we are not the only ones that have been in this position. Through the street Grand Rapids that's south of McMillan and Ten Mile, Bridgetower wanted to tap into them and they have been able to be maintained as a dead end cul-de-sac street and that's what we would truly like. I think it's really a safety hazard. As Matt pointed out, there so much traffic. If they were to come in and subdivide all of that construction traffic is going to be going in and out of Ramblin Court. As the developer pointed out, we have no sidewalks, so where we walk is in our street. Where we ride our bike is in the street. And I just plead with you to, please, not allow that access off of Ramblin Court. Yearsley: Thank you. One question, again, I'm asking everyone. That little stretch of sidewalk, are you for it or against it or do you care? Brooks: I don't think that's going to help, because the access is begun and be coming from Black Cat. The big trucks will be coming from Black Cat and that sidewalk is going to be farther to the east, so -- Yearsley: Yeah. Well -- and I just -- you know, if we are going to put it in now is a good time to put it in. That's why I'm just asking if you -- you know, just wanting to kind of get your opinion on what your thoughts are. Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 11 of 24 Brooks: Well, I would go either way, but I don't see that it's a real benefit. Yearsley: Okay. Brooks: Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Yes. Oliver: Could I ask the staff to go back to the -- that shows the actual Court -- Beach: Ramblin Court? Oliver: Ramblin Court. Beach: Is this good enough? Oliver: The other one back there. Oops. There. Thank you. Yearsley: Okay. Is it Elmer Brooks? Okay. If you're going to talk I need you to come forward and name and address, please. E.Brooks: Elmore Brooks. 4655 West Ramblin Court. As far as a sidewalk, I'm not sure how they would be building the houses, whether it would be the back of their homes, which would abut Rambling. Yearsley: Yeah. What happens, as I see it, is he would put that sidewalk in when the other development to the west of him develops, he would put that sidewalk in, so you would actually have a full sidewalk to the street at that time and the question is do you put it in now or do you not was the question. E.Brooks: Well, my only question would be whether the houses would be back of their homes or the -- Yearsley: They would probably -- E.Brooks: -- or which way would they be facing? Would they be facing Ramblin? Yearsley: No. No. That would be more of just an access for you guys. E.Brooks: Yeah. So, I don't really agree with that, so -- Yearsley: Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 12 of 24 E.Brooks: Okay. Thanks. Yearsley: John Madison. Matson. Sorry. Matson: John Matson. 4775 Ramblin Court. Same thing as the other neighbors. You know, traffic is our primary concern, having that one access point coming out onto Ramblin. I did a little digging on a 2006 traffic impact study for the same subdivision. It looks like it would add an additional -- or the study found it would add an additional 1,397 vehicles a day. I would guess we get 40 trips a day coming through our neighborhood now. So, it's quite a bit more traffic coming out that one -- of course, that would be all 144, not -- not just the initial 30. But the other interesting part was that they estimated that 65 percent of that traffic would go south down Black Cat, which means most of those houses are going to exit Ramblin, even if you have the additional accesses coming out there. So, other than that, I mean it's mainly a traffic thing for me. I agree with Matt when he said, you know, they are going to develop their -- it's their property, they can do what they want, but we are real concerned with all that traffic flow coming down our small street. That's all I have. Yearsley: Thank you. Matson: Sidewalk, I don't care. It's kind of orphaned over there. Yearsley: All right. Matson: The one thing is we do have pressurized irrigation across there. That street they put in will orphan that eastern half from the water at that point, so we will have to kind of work that out if it was to go through there. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Matt's already come up. Don Bruce? Bruin? Brown. Brown: Don Brown. 4595 West Ramblin Court. Basically we are -- I will address the sidewalk. I think that the sidewalk is more pertinent to be going west, getting it out to Black Cat, because what you're going to have, as presently illustrated, is you're going to have the kids from this part are going to have to catch the school bus right there at that intersection and back in this back section there is going to be a fence, maybe some landscaping -- it doesn't matter, because nobody is going to use that sidewalk. So, it would be more important to have the one from the proposed entrance to Black Cat and with that said, just to parrot I think what everybody is concern about is -- is currently we have situations where -- particularly in the rush hour we have difficulty getting out onto Chinden. You're taking a 50 mile an hour Black Cat and trying to go into a 50 mile an hour Chinden with a lot of traffic and as a father of a teenage driver I worry every day as she goes out there and what I can see is if you add that many more cars to the situation, which the last traffic count, which was from 7/7 of this year, there were 17,000 vehicles going by that entrance. As you get Bainbridge developed, as you have this subdivision developed, it's just going to add to that and I can't see, you know, our little road bearing that many folks coming through, because regardless of what -- if there is secondary Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 13 of 24 access points what's going to happen is that this gets backed up, we are trying to get out, they are trying to get out, even when those secondary access points are buried people are going to be racing through the neighborhood to try to get to a situation that they can get to a light and get out. It just makes sense. But with the Tree Farm not being available for who knows how long, you know, they are just -- they may not even get to phase two of Bainbridge this year. If they are to start that -- say next year Bainbridge is going, the other concern we have is you're going to have construction vehicles and where are they going to go? How are they going to come down? What they are going to do -- because they can't stack up out on Black Cat, is they are going to come down our cul-de-sac, they are going to turn around, if they can, and line up along the edge of our street. Construction vehicles are going to do that. The guys working on the houses are going to be parking in there and we could be looking at a long term deal as far as not only inconvenience, but it's going to be a safety issue, because we do have kids in that neighborhood and they are going to all have to catch the bus. You're going to have kids in the new subdivision, even if it's only 30 houses. They are going to have to come out and catch the bus. The schools are already overcrowded. We have got a 12 year old at home and trying to get her to middle school, but they are overcrowded, they have got waiting lists, and there is no proposals for schools. So, with that I will close. Thanks very much. Appreciate your time. Yearsley: Thank you. I do not have anybody else signed up. Would anybody else like to come up and testify? Please come forward. Again, name and address for the record, please. Combs: Sue Combs. 4598 West Ramblin Court. Thank you very much for letting me speak as I'm not signed up, but I have the same concern as everybody else does. I have grandchildren and we have the very end of the cul-de-sac, along with Mr. Brown, so I'm also begging you, please, please, not make that entrance from -- from where the development is into Ramblin Court. I'm just not -- I don't see it -- it working for everybody that's in that particular -- that lives in that area of Ramblin Court. There is five houses. It's a beautiful area. I mean that's why we bought a long time ago and I have probably lived there longer -- or less than the other people that have spoken. But it's -- it's disturbing to me. It's disturbing to my husband . I have five daughters, I have grandchildren, and this is -- we have big pieces of property for a very specific reason. We like our privacy, as I'm sure all of you guys do, too, so we are private people. It's going to change the dynamics -- the dynamics of our lives, so, please, like I said, please, consider not putting that entrance into Ramblin Court. And thank you so much for letting me speak. And I don't really care to put the sidewalk in. It -- to me it serves no purpose, so -- Yearsley: Okay. Combs: Take the money and put it towards another entrance. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? With that would the applicant like to come forward? Conger: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Jim Conger again. We are definitely sympathetic and definitely hearing the neighbors. In our neighborhood meetings Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 14 of 24 -- and it was very similar to the 2006 public hearings in our neighborhood meetings of just a month ago. It -- traffic concerns, Black Cat, I mean it's the same thing, unfortunately, when we develop around Locust Grove and Meridian Road is the growth starts going west and Black Cat starts becoming a lot like a Locust Grove. Again, I think everything you're hearing tonight somewhat falls into a little more of an ACHD jurisdiction area, because the -- I mean it's a public road, it's a public right of way, the traffic count still -- as bad as Black Cat is don't -- don't warrant the improvement that ACHD will at some point put in. Not what neighbors want to hear, but Bainbridge, our project, all the impact fees we pay at 2,480 dollars a house and things of that nature, all add up to millions and millions of dollars that will be needed to actually do the improvements to Black Cat. So, again, chicken and the egg -- I, unfortunately, said that twice tonight. But you kind of need to grow to fuel the impact fees to fuel the road improvements and with that the sympathy I have is they are just becoming into an area that's -- that's the next wave of development for Meridian in the north. And, again, we request approval and I think, if you follow suit with the neighbors, delete the sidewalk and we appreciate your time. Yearsley: Any questions? I do have one. One comment was made -- and I don't know if it's even -- you know, what -- they are talking about your children -- you know, access from your subdivision to Black Cat for bus routes. Personally I think that's where the sidewalk needs to go is between your subdivision and Black Cat and I don't know if we can recommend off-site conditions or not and I will maybe defer to staff if that's something that we can recommend or not or -- Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission , the applicant does have a current development agreement modification with this application, so that is one of staff's recommended conditions as part of the DA. Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: Amended DA. So, certainly, you can keep that as part of the -- your recommendation to going forward to City Council and the applicant will have the option to take that issue up with Council if you so choose to keep that recommendation in play. Yearsley: So, that's your recommendation -- current recommendation -- Parsons: Current recommendation as part of the DA modification is to have that sidewalk be constructed -- Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: -- as an off-site improvement and certainly this was an issue that was brought up in 2006 as well. So, this isn't new to this project. This was a similar situation as what -- as to what staff brought up back in that staff report. A little bit of history. The Council at the time did not require the sidewalk. The applicant at the time -- I don't know if it was Mr. Conger or not, but -- Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 15 of 24 Conger: It was. Parsons: If he recalls he did agree to widen the road, Ramblin Court, a little bit and, then, he road trusted for a portion of that road that's how the condition played out. Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: So, just FYI, it was never required as part of the DA back in 2006, but now that he's opened up that development agreement again staff felt it prudent to bring up the same issue and keep that same requirement as part of our recommendation this evening. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Conger: May I ask a question? What condition is that? Because I don't reca ll reading that condition. I don't recall reading that. Yearsley: I think it's not -- it's not under our purview, it's in the development agreement, which it is a Council level agreement, which we don't act upon. Conger: Okay. No, that may be true, but it wasn't in the previous development agreement. Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, it was worded incorrectly, but the intention, in reading through the record, was that it was meant to have those street improvements on the north side of Ramblin Court. In the staff report I believe it said west. On the west side, which -- Conger: There is no west side. Parsons: Yeah. There was no west side of the road and that's why we decided we would try to correct it this time around and ma ke sure that the verbiage was correct in the development agreement. Yearsley: Okay. Parsons: And that's where we fell. Yearsley: Okay. Conger: We will discuss that at Council. Yearsley: Absolutely. So, I'm going to ask the question and -- could you develop without that access? Conger: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, no. No. Development starts with a phase one. It always starts with a phase one and as it grows backwards you get to your secondary and Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 16 of 24 third connections. You -- you can't delete an entry at the other end of -- I mean it's your starting point. It's where the water is. It's where the sewer is. It's your starting point of the development. Yearsley: Okay. I -- I figured that, but I thought I would at least pose that question. McCarvel: As this -- sorry, Mr. Chairman. As this develops you're going to have those first few houses using the Ramblin Court and, then, as you get back into the -- I mean if I was living back there I would probably want to use the access that's going to be further south going out through that other subdivision. Conger: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner McCarvel, I think that's an excellent question and I mean to address that. In the original traffic studies of ACHD, which every traffic study lists how many -- they really listed how much traffic this development will -- I mean it's ten units -- or ten trips per home. It's against it -- what they did say was 40 would go south on Black Cat. Certainly the intention for a majority of that is to go out through the Bainbridge site to Black Cat, which is the 40 percent going south and what happens with traffic patterns, as you already know, but I will say it for neighbors and for us just to say if Black Cat is congested all the way past here, people are not going to go and wait for that congestion, they are going to go the alternate route, which is what ACHD is banking on, because, then, that will force traffic to go another circulation pattern and that will give them three or four more years to collect impact fees before they have to do improvements to Black Cat. So, actually, growth and secondary connections will eventually solve the problem temporarily again and, then, create more impact fees for the future improvements. But, yeah, we anticipate most of our traffic going here for Black Cat. If they are going north I mean they still will come out here -- I mean I would be lying if I didn't say that. And, then, ultimately, the second Bainbridge -- if you're going to Eagle Road, that's where you're going to exit and you can see that's a collector road in the Bainbridge plat because it's a collector. We are one hundred percent local roads. So, we are having a discussion tonight about traffic, going to a neighborhood and doing things of that nature, it's very important to understand all our streets are local. We aren't even a collector, we are certainly not an arterial, we are local roads, because the traffic in all of ACHD calculations doesn't warrant anything more than a local road. So, we are local. Mr. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Conger: That's the smallest you can get. Yearsley: Yes. Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: Mr. Conger, I just got a question. So, phase one, how many homes are you going to build in phase one? Conger: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Oliver, it will be around 31. You know, typically we may do 40 lots or something of that nature, whatever fits the pattern, and, you know, some may be nonbuildable or we will have solutions by then. Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 17 of 24 Oliver: So, the area where you pointed out where you would feed out the Bainbridge down below and go south -- Conger: Uh-huh. Oliver: -- so, the area where you pointed out where you would feed out to Bainbridge, down below and go south that is what phase? Conger: Well, that's phase three or four. Oliver: So, we are talking how many years before that happens? Conger: Oh, several years. Oliver: Okay. Conger: Several years before that happens. Oliver: So, in the meantime you will have phase one done and everything for several years will be going out onto that court? Conger: Without a doubt the first wave of homes is going out on -- going out to Black Cat through that public road of Ramblin, yes. Oliver: And looking at the east where Bainbridge will eventually build -- Conger: Uh-huh. Oliver: -- that leads out to Tree Farm, that it -- we don't know when that will be built? Conger: East out to Tree Farm, yeah. That would be -- well, when we connect to south, obviously, we will have our stub to Bainbridge when they eventually bring that phase to us. That is the most unknown of any of it. We know we are going to go south in a fairly timely manner for land development. I would be guessing on the eastern to Tree Farm is that two years or is that four years. We don't know that answer. Because the arterial gets put in, but whether that's one of their phases that's unknown at this point. Oliver: You would probably know the answer to this, because of the development out there, that Meridian School District -- or West Ada County School District is -- is growing at a tremendous rate. I have heard that -- that the Bainbridge Subdivision has also plotted for a school -- an elementary school out there. Have you heard that or not? Conger: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Oliver, yeah, I have heard that same thing. I couldn't tell you at what point they are in their funding and things of that nature, but the school district does that for a living on a daily basis and they understand the growth Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 18 of 24 coming. But, again, it's -- we are now into your -- Meridian, basically, with services -- we don't like the word, but it has growth rings and we are at the next growth ring and with that comes the challenges of these roads that are two lane, these schools that are starting to get overcrowded, you have to have overcrowded schools before you can get a new school. Oliver: And I assume that -- my understanding is that Ten Mile is being developed at a -- in five lanes and that is to help get to the interstate quicker, so I would see more people using Ten Mile than using Black Cat. It seems natural that it would be using more people going to Ten Mile than using Black Cat as an arterial to go where they are going to hit the freeway anyway. Conger: Yeah. Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Oliver, yeah, I think we have already seen parts of that with that Ten Mile interchange of Ten Mile becoming a little -- Ten Mile has had a fair amount of construction in this last year and especially up near Fairview or Cherry, that -- you know, that forces it to go over, but I think the concept of what you're saying -- and we are starting to see some of that when it's construction free it's going to be a busier street than Black Cat, just because of the nature. And it's got the Fred Meyer at the end of it -- at the north end and I mean there is a lot more reasons why traffic is on that for sure. Oliver: Thank you. Conger: Thank you. Yearsley: Any other questions? Conger: Thank you all for your time. Yearsley: Thank you. Can I get a motion to close the public hearing on PP 15-015, the Trilogy Subdivision? Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald: Fitzgerald: So moved. McCarvel: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Yearsley: So, any comments? I will go first, actually, then. I will have to admit I like the Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 19 of 24 layout better this time than I do the last time. I think it's a much better thought out, better layout. I do like the inclusion of the pathway on that northern roadway and having the pathway along Eagle -- or Chinden. To the residents, you know, it is unfortunate that growth has come to your door. I do understand the rural nature and how growth does creep up on us and, you know, Mr. Conger is correct, I mean he cannot develop without access to the subdivision, just because the way growth is happening. I don't quite know what else to say. I do think that that sidewalk to the west should actually be put in and I actually kind of like the idea of the sidewalk to the east. I understand that the residents may not like it or want it, but, you know, as growth occurs, you know, it might be nice to have it there. But I am not going to make this motion. It's -- you know, the residents have spoken that they don't seem to care about it, so I will let you guys decide on what you want to do with that. I do believe -- I believe the philosophy that traffic is like a stream, it follows the path of least resistance. There is only 31 homes allowed to be built in the subdivision before he gets a second access, so -- and in talking about coming down to the Bainbridge Subdivision to the south, I think a lot of your traffic is going to go that way. I honestly do believe that it will follow and be able to get out there and when that other side goes to Chinden there with the lights, I think you will start seeing a lot of that. So, initially you're going to have some traffic congestion and some -- some growth. I mean it's an inevitable evil I guess you may want to call it. With regards to the school, we have no control on the schools and if we were to stop growth because the schools are overcrowded we would never grow and so we have to try to manage that growth and work with the school district to manage that growth, but it's not under our purview to deny a subdivision based on the schools. So, with that I'm in favor of the project. I think it looks good. I do understand your concerns and I live in a subdivision to the south that has the same problem, we can't get out of our subdivision either because of growth . It's just something that happens. So, that's what I have. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: I appreciate Mr. Conger's efforts to putting chokers in the subdivision. I think it would definitely help. Make it a little bit better for the residents there. The e ntrance, unfortunately, it is not the best location, but I think if they could put in sidewalk, depending on how the residents feel about not putting it in, a little bit longer into the subdivision going out to Black Cat, I think that would help as well. I think the subdivision works and it seems to flow pretty well. The faster they can get that other section built, the next phase, to get out to Bainbridge the better it is. I would approve that. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: And I agree with both of your comments. I think it's a well laid out project and it's gotten better in the last nine years. I think eventually when the section of Tree Farm is done all the traffic will go that way. I think everybody is going to want to get to the light as Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 20 of 24 quickly as possible and that will be where it goes and it's going to be a li ttle bit of challenge for the neighbors I know. My comment -- and I will play Devil's advocate a little bit on the sidewalk side. I think the one to the east, if we didn't put it in, I think it maintains their -- their lifestyle a little bit in that rural kind of the cul-de-sac setup that they have. The challenge going east -- I mean west, I'm sorry, is when that property develops it's going to limit how they access that road, too, and so you do have an issue with how that's going to develop as well and so you're kind of removing the -- the buffer on the road, because there is concrete -- I guess curtains right on that road, if you can see them, and so you kind of have a rural feel that we are going to take that away and, then, kind of limit how development is done on that next -- next development in the corner, so I -- I mean I think there is something to be discussed there maybe. I do like the chokers. I think that's great. And I think the project is well laid out and -- I mean it is public access, public right of way, and so you do have to utilize it as such. So, I think the developer and the applicant have done a good job and I think there is some giving -- there is some give and take back to the neighborhood, so -- Yearsley: Just kind of -- can I comment on that sidewalk? Given how close you are to Black Cat and to the proposed entrance, my guess is ACHD is not going to allow another entrance off of that road, so -- Fitzgerald: Unless it's commercial. Yearsley: Yeah. And, then, that may be true. But as Jim Conger said, sidewalk is cheap. So just a thought what I see. McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: Yeah. I like the subdivision as a whole. I think -- the sidewalk issue I think definitely from that road to Black Cat I just think for the kids using -- because that's going to be the natural bus pick up I would assume and I think from, you know, just to have those kids off the street a little bit getting the bus between Black Cat and that road I wou ld say. That part at least. Wilson: Mr. Chair? Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I'm not going to rehash any of the statements made. I am in support of this project. I appreciate the questioning, particularly at the end that clarified a couple of issues. I would also be open to that sidewalk being put in. Yearsley: Thank you. So, with that I would entertain a motion on this project. McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 21 of 24 Yearsley: Commissioner Yearsley. McCarvel: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of file number P P 15-001 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of September 3rd, 2015, with inclusion of IXA-15 in regards to the sidewalk. Yearsley: Inclusion or exclusion? McCarvel: Inclusion. Yearsley: So, you want to keep it? McCarvel: Yeah. Yearsley: Okay. Fitzgerald: Only to Black Cat? McCarvel: From Black Cat to -- Yearsley: That condition is from their road to the east. It's in the DA agreement that it's the other way, so it would be making -- recommend -- McCarvel: Exclusion then. Yearsley: Okay. And, then, recommend the DA agreement to have the sidewalk to the west. McCarvel: Yes. Yearsley: Is that -- all right. Parsons: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Yes. Parsons: Sorry. Just clarification. As we understand you, you don't want sidewalk that goes from the intersection to the east into the development, you want the sidewalk to go from the new intersection west to Black Cat? You want that po rtion constructed as part of the -- or part of your recommendation, part of the DA, but excluding the east portion? Yearsley: Yes. Beach: So, from Exeter to Black Cat. Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 22 of 24 Yearsley: Yes. Beach: Along this section here? Yearsley: Yes. Beach: Okay. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve file number PP 15 -015. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Other Items A. Planning Staff Presentation and Discussion Regarding Updates to the City of Meridian Land Use File Yearsley: Next item on the agenda is staff -- planning staff presentation and discussion regarding update to the City of Meridian land use file numbers. Let's begin with staff. Parsons: Thank you, Chairman, Members of the Commission. I just wanted to give you -- let you know that the planning department has been working with our city clerk's office and our IT department -- several years ago -- and there is a memo that kind of outlines what we are proposing here, but several years ago the city did embark on a new database system, if you will, that, basically, allows us to be more transparent as part -- as part of the city not only to the public, but also as far as communicating with other city departments. They can go in there, we can see their comments, they can see the plans and we get as part of that project -- or part of having that system we realize when we first implemented it it -- we had too many work folders, we had too many projects that we had to create as part of that database system. So, the city had graciously -- or at least the Council has approved through numerous budget amendments has allowed us to get the IT staff in order to revamp our database, so that we could streamline the process and make it easi er not only for staff, but also the public and so as part of that revamping the planning department will be simplifying the application process. So, we call our database system Accella. So, in Accella we will have two applications. We will have an admin istrative level application and a hearing level application. What that will create is a different agenda for you to review as you see it, then, coming forward and these changes are proposed to happen very quickly, within the next month or two and so the slide before you this evening represents how you currently see projects as they come before you on the current printed agenda, which Machelle prepares for you. So, each time we -- currently the way it works is we assign a different item number for each pro ject or each application. So, if it's a rezone we give it 4-A. If it's a plat 4-B, but it's still all the same project. Well, moving forward with our new record types, having just an administrative or hearing level application, we will have a new project number, as you can see here on the exhibit on the right here. So, here, for example, your hearing level application, if there are concurrent Meridian Planning & Zoning September 3, 2015 Page 23 of 24 applications that are together, they will have one project file number, which will have an H in front of it, symbolizing that it is a hearing level item. It will stay with what the project name is and who the applicant is and the location, but under that one item you will have all concurrent applications and it will be noticed similar to what you see now, just be labeled I-1,I-2, I-3, depending on how many applications are associated with that project file. In our opinion this is the simpler process for you to make your motion. You can certainly disapprove one project number and that includes all those sub current applications. So, it should be easier in your motion and easier for us and the public to track moving forward, because a lot of times currently if the public was to go in and access our Accella database, if they didn't know there was four different appli cations associated with that, they might not find every single one of them and so for us this is really housekeeping, but we did want to get this in front of you and let you know there will be changes to the agenda, nothing to be alarmed with, it's just re ally housekeeping and something simple -- to simplify the process. I will conclude my presentation and I will stand for any questions you may have regarding the changes that will be coming down the road. Yearsley: Are there any questions? Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman, just one. And just to clarify, Bill. So, you can say we are going to allow the rezone, but we are not going to do a preliminary plat. So, you can separate out your votes if you want to, if there is a request to annex something or allow a rezone, but not -- cut the preliminary plat? Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, apparently, yes, you would still have to do a partial approval. Fitzgerald: Okay. Parsons: You can approve this, but not approve item II or whatever. Fitzgerald: Okay. Parsons: And state your reasons. Or say we approve H2015-001 -- Fitzgerald: Subset one? Parsons: Yeah. Exactly. Fitzgerald: Okay. Parsons: Don't know how it's all going to work yet, but we just want to at least get these changes out in front of you, but I think it would -- it will certainly simplify things. It's no different than what you do now. If you don't approve something and -- Fitzgerald: It's a lot more to --