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 --