Loading...
2015 10-15Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting October 15, 2015 Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of October 15, 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 Hilll, Andrea Pogue, Sonya Watters, Bill Parsons, Joshua Beach, Berle Stokes 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 we would like to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for the hearing date of October 15th, 2015, and let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda Yearsley: Thank you. Next item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda. We do have one minor change. Action Item A, the public hearing for PP 15-018 is requesting continuance to November 5th, 2015. With that can I get a motion to adopt the agenda? Fitzgerald: So moved. Oliver: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 3: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of September 3, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting B. Approve Minutes of October 1, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 2 of 50 C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 15 - 016 Stinker Station at Paramount Commercial by CSHQA Located 1410 W. McMillan Road Request: Conditional Use Permit for a Drive-Thru Establishment Within 300 Feet of Another Drive- Thru Establishment; and Extended Hours of Operation (24 Hours a Day / 7 Days a Week) for the Convenience Store, Fuel Facility and Drive-Thru Restaurant in the C-G Zoning District Yearsley: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and on there we have the -- approve the meeting minutes of the September 3rd, 2015, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Approve the Planning and Zoning -- or the minutes -- meeting minutes of October 1st, 2015, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. And the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law of application CUP 15-016, Stinker Station. Any comments or changes to that? With that I would entertain a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Wilson: Mr. Chair? Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I move that we approve the Consent Agenda. McCarvel: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Yearsley: So, at this time I'd like to kind of go through the process of what we going to -- how are going to be here today. We are going to -- we are going to open each item one at a time and start with the staff report. The staff will prepare -- submit -- state their findings regarding how the items adhere to the Comprehensive Plan and the Uniform Development Code with staff recommendations. Next we will have the applicant to come forward to present their case for approval. The applicant will respond to any staff questions. The applicant will have up to 15 minutes to do so. After that time we will open it to the public testimony. There is a sign-up sheet in the back anyone wishing to testify. If there is others we will still take testimony after that. Any person wanting to come forward will be given three minutes. If they are speaking for a larger group, like an HOA or more people in the audience and if there is a raise of hands, they will be given up to ten minutes. But those people who they are speaking for will not have an opportunity to come forward. So, just to make sure everyone is aware of that. Then we will -- after that the applicant has an opportunity to come forward to respond to the comments from the public. They will have ten minutes to do so. After that we will close the public hearing and the Commission will have opportunity to discuss and deliberate and, hopefully, make a recommendation to City Council. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 3 of 50 Item 4: Action Items A. Public Hearing: PP 15-018 Sundial Circle Subdivision by Conger Management Group Located 2250 W. Whitelaw Drive Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of Eleven (11) Single Family Residential Lots and One (1) Common Lot on Approximately 2.54 Acres in the R-4 Zoning District Yearsley: So, with that I would like to open public hearing PP 15-018, Sundial Circle Subdivision for the sole purpose of continuing that to November 5th, 2015. And is -- is there a reason why the applicant has asked to be continued or -- from staff? Beach: They neglected to post the site in time for this meeting. Yearsley: Okay. So, that makes sense. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: I would move that we move PP 15-018 to November 5th -- is that correct? Yearsley: Yes. Fitzgerald: For further consideration. Oliver: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to continue public hearing of PP 15 -018. All -- to November 5th, 2015. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. B. Public Hearing: CUP 15-018 Blimpie by Shelley Uzzel Savage Located 1535 N. Main Street Request: Conditional Use Permit Approval for a Drive-Thru Establishment in a C-C Zoning District Within 300 Feet of an Existing Drive-Thru and Within 300 Feet of a Residence Yearsley: Next on the agenda is public hearing for CUP 15-018, Blimpie, and let's begin with the staff report. Beach: Good evening, Chair, Commissioners. This is a conditional use permit for a Blimpie restaurant at 1535 North Main Street. The applicant Shelley Savage owned the franchise for the restaurant that's further south on Meridian currently and she will be moving. The reason this is coming before you this evening is that it's within 300 feet of an Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 4 of 50 existing drive-thru, as well as within 300 feet of a residential use. These are the site and landscape plans here. The applicant has indicated that this will be a one way drive aisle here. This is the exit lane for the drive-thru. The applicant has requested alternative compliance to construct patio seating close to the sidewalk, kind of a nod to our downtown and kind of create an urban feel. So, this is the -- the site plan on the left here and the landscape plan on the right. There will be, like I said, one way traffic going through the drive-thru here, as well as exiting here, but this will be a two way drive aisle. The -- one of the conditions in the staff report is that the -- the applicant obtain reciprocal cross-access from the property to the south, which is the -- the building that Molly Maids is in. In order for this -- this current design to work they need that access. The applicant -- there is some existing large trees here on site. They will be removed as part of the application and the applicant will need to work with the city to mitigate for those -- for those trees. This is the -- the aerials -- excuse me. The aerials. The elevations for the building. The applicant has done a good job in designing the building. Staff is in support of this conditional use permit and I will stand for any questions. Yearsley: Are there any questions? Would the applicant like to come forward? Please state your name and address for the record. Steele: Good evening, Mr. Commissioner, Members of the committee. My name is Wes Steele. Steele Architecture. P.O. Box 245, Eagle, Idaho. 83616. I'm the architect for the project, representing Shelley Savage. We have reviewed staff's comments and findings and we are in agreement with those and we are here to answer any questions you may have. Yearsley: Are there any questions? Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Has the cross-access easement discussion happened or where are you all on that discussion? Steele: Yes, it has happened. The landowner to the south did a -- I'm not exactly sure what their project was recently with the city and there was a cross-access put in at that time and, yes, we have had two meetings with the adjacent landowner and they are in agreement with this plan and we will get that -- that agreement modified as a part of the CZC process. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Any other questions? Thanks. Steele: Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 5 of 50 Yearsley: Give us a few minutes, we will get the sign-up sheet. I guess before that, is there anybody wishing to testify on this item? I have people signed up, but I think they are actually signing up for the other one. Is there anybody wishing to testify on this one? Okay. I don't think we need to bring the applicant back for this one. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: I move we close the public hearing. McCarvel: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on file number CUP 15-018. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Yearsley: Comments? McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I think it looks like a great building. It looks like they have left plenty of room for their drive-thru and I think that's the only issue here before us tonight, so I -- it looks like a great project to move forward. Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: I agree. I don't see anything wrong with the architecture. I like the architecture. I think it will be a nice addition, as well as the drive-up. I don't see obstacles, any problem with that as well. Yearsley: Thank you. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 6 of 50 Fitzgerald: I would agree. I think they did an exceptional job on the architecture. I think it will blend in well. The landscape plan fits well into the downtown corridor. I think it's good. Yearsley: Thank you. All right. I agree. I think it looks good. I like the -- actually, the outdoor seating in the front to kind of get what the downtown core is looking for, so I think it will be a good amenity. With that can I get a motion? McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I move that we approve -- after considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve file number CUP 15 -- 15-018 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 15, 2015, as stated. Oliver: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve file number CUP 15-018. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. C. 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 (4.93 Acres) and L-O (1.62 Acres) Zoning Districts (Item Vacated from 9/17/15 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting) Recommend Approval to City Council with Modifications D. Public Hearing: PP 15-016 Easy Jet Subdivision by Reginald Jones Located 2750 S. Eagle Road Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of Three (3) 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 (Item Vacated from 9/17/15 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting) Recommend Approval to City Council with Modifications E. 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 Sixty-Four (64) Residential Dwelling Units in an R-15 Zoning District and Office Uses in an L-O Zoning District (Item Vacated from 9/17/15 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting) Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 7 of 50 Yearsley: Before we start I just kind of want to -- I guess maybe lay the ground rules. If we can -- and I know there is emotions running high for this project. If we can be polite and kind to everyone. If we can keep the -- the clapping and the audience comments to a minimum if possible. You know, we'd like to -- we are going to hear everyone who wants to come up, everyone will get a chance. A couple of things. Again, because of the amount of people we will need to hold everyone to the three minutes or the ten minutes, depending on if you're speaking for a larger group. We would ask that those people who you are speaking for not come up and, then, after the applicant has a chance to rebut the comments we are not allowed to take any additional comments from the public. So , I understand how that can be frustrating sometimes, but I -- but by the law we are not allowed to take any additional comment after that time for a rebut from the audience. So, with that I would like to open the public hearing on RZ 15-012, PP 15-016, and CUP 15- 017 for the Easy Jet Subdivision and let's begin with staff report. Watters: Thank you, Chairman Yearsley, Members of the Commission. The next items before you are a request for a rezone, preliminary plat, and a conditional use permit. This site consists of 5.4 acres of land zoned R-4, located at 2750 South Eagle Road. At the southeast corner South Eagle Road and Easy Jet Drive. Adjacent land uses and zoning. To the north is East Easy Jet Drive and office uses, zoned L-O. To the south is a rural residential home and a kennel, zoned RUT in Ada County. To the east are single family homes in Sutherland Farms Subdivision, zoned R-4 and to the west is South Eagle Road and single family homes in Thousand Springs Subdivision zoned R-4. A little history on this site, this project. Back in 2002 a conditional use permit for a planned development was approved which conceptually approved offices and high density multi-family housing on this property as a land use exception in the R-4 district and what that means is that multi-family housing and offices, which typically aren't allowed in the R-4 district, was allowed as an exception in the R-4 district as a provision of the planned development at that time. So, as it sits this property could go forth and develop with multi-family and offices without the rezone that they are proposing. The rezone that they are proposing is what staff recommended they do just to clean up the zoning out there consistent with today's standards. So, I just wanted to clarify that. So, again, this received conceptual approval back in 2002 and detailed approval of the planned development through a conditional use permit was required prior to development. So, that's what they are doing here tonight. There were no restrictions on the number of units, square footage of structures, building height, or number of stories that could be constructed. Of the 11 office and multi-family lots that were approved for such uses, only the subject parcel, preliminary plat of four lots remains for such uses. The other seven lots were approved through two separate conditional use permit modification applications to develop with single family homes and a self -service storage facility. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is mixed use community. As you can see here on this map this is a small section of the future land use map for this area. All of the brown area is designated for mixed use community uses. The applicant has submitted an application for a rezone of 6.55 acres of land from the R-4 to the R-15, 4.93 acres in L-O, 1.62 acres zoning district consistent with the mixed use community future land use map designation and the use is approved with a planned development. A preliminary plat is requested as shown there on the top for three multi-family building lots, two commercial office building Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 8 of 50 lots and one common lot on the 5.41 acres of land. Two accesses are proposed via Easy Jet Drive. You can see my pointer here. The first one is right here and the second one is right here and one's an office development and one's a multi-family development. Cross- access between the properties is proposed. No access via South Eagle Road is proposed or approved. Staff recommends a cross-access easement is provided to the property to the south on the L-O zoned property in this location right here for future interconnectivity and to reduce access points on Eagle Road in the future. A minimum 25 foot wide landscape buffer is required along Eagle Road as shown on the landscape plan on the bottom there and a ten foot wide buffer is required along Easy Jet on the L -O zoned portion of the site. A 20 foot wide land -- land use buffer is required on the L-O zoned property to the residential property to the south and that would be in this location right here. A solid vinyl fence with a lattice top exists along the southern boundary of the L-O portion of the site on the adjacent residential property. A solid vinyl fence exists along the east boundary of site. That's generally in this location right here and chain link fence exists along a portion of the north boundary that will be removed. No new fencing is proposed. Sidewalks exist along the street frontages of this site. Staff recommends a pedestrian pathway stub is provided at the south boundary of the multi-family portion of the site for future interconnectivity between developments. A conditional use permit is requested for detailed approval of the office and multi-family development as required by the previously approved planned development that conceptually approved offices and multi-family development on this site and is required by the Unified Development Code for multi-family developments in the R-15 district. The office portion consists of two 4,986 square foot buildings that front on Eagle Road. Again that is these two buildings right here. The multi-family portion consists of 64 residential dwelling units with a mix of one, two and three bedroom units in one two story and two three story buildings. The two story structure is located at the east end of the site adjacent to the existing residences in Sutherland Farms Subdivision and that is this building right here. A 1,620 square foot clubhouse with a fitness facility, a children's play structure, and a large grassy open area are proposed as amenities. It's kind of hard to see on this plan, but right here where the red dot is is the clubhouse, play structure, and the open grassy area here. Approximately a half an acre of qualified outdoor common open space is proposed, along with 80 square foot of private usable open space for each unit consistent with the Unified Development Code standards. Off street parking is proposed on the site for the office and multi-family development in excess of UDC standards. Garages and carports are proposed for covered parking, as well as open spaces. An additional 46 spaces are proposed above the required number. This is a pedestrian connectivity exhibit showing the existing sidewalks, as well as the proposed walkways throughout the development and stubbing to the southern boundary also. Conceptual building elevations were submitted for the multi- family structures as shown and the clubhouse, but not for the garages, carports, or office building. Those will be reviewed at a later date with the certificate of zoning compliance application and they are required to comply with the design standards and guidelines in effect at the time of development. Construction materials for the multi -family structures consist of horizontal hardy plank, lap siding, and vertical har dy board, board and batten siding with rough sawn stained wood detailing in a combination of three colors on each building. And this is the two story structure there and this is an example of the three story structure. Materials for the clubhouse consist of the same types of siding with the addition Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 9 of 50 of stone accents on the columns. Staff recommends stone and masonry accents are applied to 50 percent of the available wall length at a minimum height of 24 inches on the facades of the multi-family structures and clubhouse visible from the street to match the front elevation of the clubhouse and compliment adjacent residences and that the multi- family stairwells are integrated with the building design and have internal circulation, rather than the open stair wells proposed in accord with the design standards. There has been a substantial amount of written testimony submitted from adjacent homeowners for this project, which has been included in the public record for your review. A response to the staff report was received from the applicant in clarification of a few items, which they will address in their presentation. Otherwise, they are in agreement with staff's recommendation. Because the proposed development is consistent with previously approved planned development for this site and the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code with the conditions in the staff report, staff is recommending approval of the subject application. Staff also recommends adding one additional condition of approval that wasn't in the staff report that requires some type of vinyl fencing to match the existing fencing in the area along East Easy Jet Drive adjacent to the common areas to enhance safety for children playing in the open lawn and playground areas. Staff will stand for any questions the Commission may have. Yearsley: Thank you. I have a couple of clarification -- just to make sure I understand. So, based on the -- I don't know how I want to say it, but based on what's going on, the R-4 zoning is allowing -- they could actually build the apartments in the R-4, but the city has asked the rezone; is that correct? Watters: That is correct, Chairman Yearsley. It's more of a cleanup issue with zoning. We just don't do things like that anymore, the land use exception, but they can go forth today and develop that way once they have received detail conditional use approval. Yearsley: Okay. Any other questions? Would the applicant like to come forward? Please state your name and address for the record. Bachman: We are getting the PowerPoint up. For the record, my name is Lisa Bachman, I'm with JUB Engineers. I'm representing the applicant tonight. Also with me I have -- I'm going to try to arrow down here. Watters: Lisa, just hit your arrow at the bottom left corner of the screen with the pointer. Bachman: Okay. Watters: The pointer will make it work a little better. Bachman: Lisa Bachman with JUB Engineers. 2 50 South Beachwood Drive, Suite 201, Boise, Idaho. 83709. Also with me tonight I have Kristi Watkins. She's a planner that's been working on this project. She can help answer any questions should they arise. We also have Scott Wonders here. He is the design engineer and he can answer any engineering questions that we might have. So, the topics tonight -- I'm just going to cover Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 10 of 50 three -- three quick things. I don't want to reiterate anything. I think staff has done a really good job at summarizing the application and I know that we are probably going to hear quite a bit of testimony tonight, so we will kind of allow that to happen and, then, we can respond in the rebuttal. But there are a couple points I'd like to make at the beginning. So, first I'm going to go over the letter that we wrote about the conditions of approval having to do with accent placement and also the stair wells and, then, I'm going to make two additional points about the project in general and, then, I will stand for questions. So, regarding the conditions of approval, accent placement. So, page 22, Conditions 1.1.10A and 1.1.10B -- and I'm just kind of going over this for the record. It refers to the building elevations and adding stone masonry accents as staff had indicated, applied to 50 percent of the available wall length at a minimum height of 24 inches on all street-facing elevations. We are fine with that condition. We just wanted to make sure that there is some flexibility on where -- you know, we could do four feet in one area and, then, maybe none, so that we can really break it up and make it look as esthetically pleasing as possible. In talking to staff about this -- and it doesn't seem to be an issue, it seems like they would work with us on that in the CZC process -- as long as at the end of the day we are providing the same amount of mass that the city has requested. The second question for clarification -- or I guess request for modification would be regarding the covered decorative stairwells. Page 22, condition 1.1.10E refers to integrating the stairwells internal to the building. Again, kind of understanding the intent is to provide the most esthetically pleasing elevations. We would like to propose allowing the stairwells to be open, but designed as attractive entryways. We have provided kind of an example of what that might look like here. We have circled it in purple. You know, put in some -- like a welcoming entryway, provide those protections and making it feel like a welcoming entrance. The applicant has indicated that by closing it in it would kind of have an unintended consequence, if you will, about just making it feel closed in and welcoming and a little bit musty was the word that they used. So, I just wanted to pass that along and see if there is something that we could work out on this -- on this condition, so that we can meet the intent of Meridian's design manual, but at the same time provide for safety and a welcoming entryway on the apartment buildings. Other than that we are okay with the rest of the conditions of approval. So, like I said, there is two points I would like to kind of go over tonight. I have some sub points under that, but the first is we truly believe that we are providing a high quality development. We have improved the project based on neighborhood concerns as well. A little bit more about the high quality development. It's mixed use. As staff has indicated, the implement of the city's Comprehensive Plan, it complies with city code. It fits in with the Eagle-Overland area, businesses, mixed use, housing, offices. W e believe that we are providing nice living space for a variety of folks, empty nesters, retired people, people looking for convenient living close to services, walkable. We are also providing a lot of open space and amenities. As staff has pointed out, we are providing about a half acre of open space and amenities. Whereas we are only required to provide about .37 based on the number of units and city code. So, we have gone above and beyond there. I won't I guess list everything, but one of the cool things I think is part of this project is the courtyard area between the commercial and the residential area. I think it's a nice kind of transition from the commercial to the residential, but at the same time sort of integrates it together and allows both -- both uses to use that amenity. Another aspect of our development is that we have plenty of parking. I know Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 11 of 50 that was a concern of the neighbors. Vehicle parking. We have provided a table here. Required parking would be 145 spaces and we are providing 189. That's an additional 44 parking spaces than what is required. Also bicycle parking was an item that staff had brought up in the staff report and since that we have updated the plans and provided the breakdown. So, a total required would be 12 bicycle parking spaces, We are actually providing 30. Twenty for the residential area and ten for the commercial area, because we believe with all the walking and biking going on in the area we really want to provide the facilities needed for that. That wo uld give us an additional 18 than what is required. One more thing on the high quality development aspect. We believe our elevations are attractive, with stone accents and the condition of app roval that staff has required, you know, we are going to -- we are going to comply with that and I think it will really dress up the buildings. We are going to have earth tone colors, match surrounding styles in the area. Again, we are going to have the landscaping around the foundations and throughout the development to really tie everything together and make it nice. And that second point I wanted to make about us improving the project based on neighborhood concerns, as many of you may have noticed initially we were on the agenda in September and, then, we decided, in talking with staff and seeing a lot of the written testimony that we kind of needed to go back to the drawing board and make some changes, so we did do that and leading up to that we actually had two neighborhood meetings, where one -- only one was required. We felt like it was important to communicate and at least be open with the residents about what we were proposing, to be really clear about that, and I think we have done a good job at at least letting them know what we are proposing and keeping them apprised of what's happened. We have also done follow-up communication and e-mails with neighbors and taking phone calls. So, we -- we haven't -- we haven't closed off communication and we have tried to keep that open. Our initial proposal included 76 units, and two commercial lots. It included three three story buildings and one two story multi-family building placed around the parameter of the property. But currently tonight what you're seeing after we went back to the drawing board and made so me adjustments, we are proposing 64 units with two commercial lots and more open space as a result. Only two three story buildings this time. One two story multi-family building with the taller buildings placed further away from the roadways and not adjacent to the Sutherland Farm development. The two story would be adjacent to actually Nephrite Way and, then, Sutherland Farms development. One -- I actually want to clear the air real quick. One more thing. The question of density. You may have seen a lot of that come up in the written testimony, so just to kind of clear the record about that. The developed portion of the residential area within the project boundary is 4.25 acres. It comes out to 64 units for an R-15 zone. It might be off by like a hundredth point or something like that. Now, if we were going to get technical, you know, sometimes when -- when we do zoning it goes out to the center line and, in fact, in this case we are going out to the center line with the zoning designation, which would be 4.93 acres and so if we calculated off of that we could -- I'm not saying we could do this and we want to do this, but, you know, any way you slice or dice it you can, you know, do the math in different ways and that's kind of one of the reasons why we went back to the drawing board in the first place, because we were under the impression that we could use the full site, including the commercial area, to calculate density. So, we thought it was better to just tone it down and reduce the units and kind of Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 12 of 50 go along with this -- this formula, even though it's not real clear in the code, but it's left for some interpretation. So, I'm done talking. Do we have any questions? Yearsley: Are there any questions? Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: I just want to make sure that we are clear that you agreed with pretty much everything that the staff recommended, but the last item was recommending putting the vinyl fencing up, you're in agreement with that as well? Bachman: Correct. Yes. Oliver: Okay. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Bachman: And the modification on the stair wells. Oliver: With the modifications to open them, rather than keep them closed? Bachman: Correct. Oliver: Okay. Yearsley: Any other questions? I actually have a couple. Has ACHD reviewed this application? Bachman: Yes, they have. Yearsley: And did they approve it or get comments or -- can you explain -- Bachman: They approved it and they didn't get any comments on it. It didn't require -- it didn't even have enough traffic to trigger a traffic impact study and the improvements -- the improvements have already been made out at Eagle Road and Easy Jet. It's already been signalized. All the frontage improvements are done along Ea sy Jet and Nephrite Way. Yearsley: Okay. Bachman: And they have improved the driveway locations as well. Yearsley: Okay. So, they are saying that they are okay with the amount of traffic being generated by this subdivision? Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 13 of 50 Bachman: Correct. Yearsley: Okay. Bachman: May I add to that, Chairman? Yearsley: Absolutely. Bachman: Okay. So, the neighborhood had requested traffic calming in the past along Easy Jet and ACHD had conducted a study to see if it would be warranted. They actually did it on a day where they had a lot of yard sales going on and even then it didn't warrant any traffic calming. Yearsley: Okay. Bachman: And that is written in the ACHD staff report. Yearsley: Okay. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: If I could just ask one more question. From the subdivision going north there is a -- from where you're going to build to the north there there is a subdivision. Is there any connectivity between where you want to build to that neighborhood where residents can get to a walking path along that area -- along the canal? Bachman: To the north. I think I would need to look at a map. Do you have a map? Well, there is Easy Jet Road that kind of separates the project and, then, to the north they would have to cross Easy Jet to get to the sidewalk. Oliver: Which means they would have to actually go either into the subdivision or go onto Eagle Road to get to it? Bachman: Right. They would have to walk along the -- the sidewalk. Oliver: All right. Thank you. Yearsley: I had one more question. I'm trying to remember what it was now. I guess I can't remember, so -- Bachman: Okay. Yearsley: Sorry. Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 14 of 50 Bachman: Thank you, Chairman, Commissioners. Yearsley: So, there was a gentleman here that had a PowerPoint presentation that he was going to do. I wonder if we might be better to bring him forward first. Now I need your name and address for the record, but are you speaking for a group or are you by yourself? Thompson: I'm speaking for myself. Yearsley: Okay. Thompson: Okay. My name is Dr. Thompson. My wife Sandy and I live at 2853 South Nephrite Way. We have lived at that location for ten years. We have joined the other petitioners on the previous petition to -- to have many changes made, but I want to comment on three aspects of this project. The first it is the potential for an alternate ending up as a HUD project. Should the current owners of the lots in the proposed development ever pass title to all or a portion of the building to other owners and subsequent to a downturn in the economy convert the units to Title H HUD housing, it would introduce the possibility of further degradation of nearby property values and the potential for an increase in crime. Given the etiology of the current federal, state, and local government to increase diversity in communities, this might seem remote at present, but altogether likely in the future. The second thing is the building height and this is where I want to show you -- okay. There is supposed to be a button down here, Sonya? Watters: Bottom left-hand corner. If you get the pen there and press it with the pen. Thompson: Okay. Got it. Watters: One more time. Press it a little harder. Thompson: Okay. There we go. Okay. I -- I took several pictures in the last few days of what things look like and the reason for this first slide is to show the existence of an under construction two story office building in the medical complex, just to show a sense of -- of what that looks like in -- in height. That isn't too bad in the way that it's -- that it's presented. Then the next is a view of the medical buildings that are there just north of the proposed development and a shot looking over at the corner of Eagle and Easy Jet, just to kind of give you a -- give everybody a sense of -- of what the property looks like. My assumption in bringing these is that the entire commission has not probably walked that property. That may not be true, but that's an assumption upon which these are based. Now, a concern for us is the -- is on the north side of -- excuse me -- 2799 Nephrite, which is the northernmost and westernmost property that abuts the -- the proposed developed property, as you can see there is a low -- there is a low fence of the vinyl -- vinyl type. The owner of -- the property owner has a wood -- wood fence that's rather typical of the area. This low fence presents a potential for -- for increased crime should someone choose to take advantage of something like that and this -- Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 15 of 50 Yearsley: Your three minutes are up. Thompson: Oh. Okay. Yearsley: So, if you want to just summarize and, then, finish up, please. Thompson: Okay. The whole point is that there is -- this is some property that needs a lot more careful consideration than what's been written in the -- in the proposal in the staff -- in the staff conclusions for -- for this project and just to state it firmly, it's a totally bad idea and my wife and I are totally opposed to it. Yearsley: Thank you. Can we, please, keep the clapping down. We are trying to get through this as quickly as possible and so -- we understand your -- your frustration with the project. Next one is -- I got Carlene Sterling. Does she want to testify? Okay. Susan Aldrich? So, what I'm going to do is I'm going to kind of take a step back. We have the sign-in sheets. They will go into the record that you guys were opposed and I'm just going to open it up to those who want to -- instead of me trying to read everybody's name, those who wish to come forward, please, raise your name and I will call you to come forward. The one -- the lady in the black sweater. Name and address for the record, please. Carter: Hi. My name is Bonnie Carter and I live at 2740 South Afleet Avenue on the corner of Easy Jet, Tristram and Afleet. I concur with the residents statements about this project. I have read several of the letters. I have talked to several of my neighbors and I concur with all of what they are going to say. This is not a quality project in conjunction with the Sutherland design plans and should not be approved as such. I also concur with the HOA positions that were written up and submitted to you as well. For further details you can refer to my August letter that I have submitted and got receipt of -- gotten confirmation of receipt on. I do want to ask the committee developers, however, to explain or to show where the apartment as a maintenance or offices will be located, because it appears that there is no allowance for these two buildings, nor is there space of guest parking or maintenance crews to conduct their activity. And absent an answer I would just like to assume that they have not allowed for this. We did not read this in an y of the submissions, so I will just say that at 4.94 dwelling units per acre that would equate to the 62 units, instead of the 64. As such the buildings would not need to consist of additional structures for manager and maintenance storage near the open space. Two ground floor apartments at the entrance of Building A or Building B be incorporated for the manager and maintenance -- storage. These units have adjacent parking for both and this to me would be a good option to free up some of the existing op en space at the opposite end of the development. Thank you, Commissioners. Yearsley: Thank you. And the applicant will have an opportunity to comment about the manager space, so -- at the end. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 16 of 50 Yearsley: Yes. Oliver: I was wondering if it's possible as they come up to testify if they could identify whether they are speaking for theirselves or a group. Yearsley: Okay. If you would do that next time. Who wants to be next? The gentleman in the gray beard. Not commenting on age by any means, but -- Gabrielson: Just mature. Yearsley: That's right. Gabrielson: My name is Erik Gabrielson. I live at 4231 East Easy Jet Drive. My wife Carol and I have lived near the corner of Easy Jet and Trist ram Way. Easy Jet is a main street through Sutherland Farm and we are less than a block away from Hollandale, which connects our subdivision with Muir Ridge Drive. Our immediate concern with the building of the proposed apartments is the increase in the traffic that will be generated by this complex. It is not unreasonable to assume that there will be at least two cars per apartment unit. With 64 units that would be a total of 129 cars. It is not -- it is also not unreasonable to assume that there will be at least one trip th rough the subdivision each day. That alone will be a huge increase in the traffic in our subdivision and in Muirwood as well. if apartment residents are going to the grocery store or just heading toward Boise on Overland, they will come down Easy Jet, turn on Hollandale, and, then, down Muir Ridge Road to Cloverdale. People don't like the long wait at the light at Overland and Eagle, so unless they are going onto the freeway or heading north on Eagle or heading west on Overland, they tend to choose alternate routes, which would take them through our subdivision. The fact that two accesses to the development of Easy Jet Drive also raises questions for peak traffic hour. With our traffic -- current traffic that intersects from Easy Jet and Eagle is often congested as people wait to make the turn onto Eagle. Apartment residents who have difficulty going west on Easy Jet would choose to head east through the subdivision to access Victory or Cloverdale and utilize the entrance to the business park on Pine Bluff also. There is a tremendous amount of building currently underway on both sides of Eagle between Victory and Amity. The traffic on Eagle will increase. This occurs the congestion on Easy Jet and Eagle will increase our peak traffic hours. We are very concerned that the big increase in traffic from the complex could adversely affect our property value and affect our quality of life. We also have many children in our neighborhood who ride their bikes and scooters to Pepper Ridge Elementary, which is on the east side of Cloverdale Road. It is very likely that these children will encounter increased traffic as they come down Easy Jet, turn onto Hollandale and over to Muir Ridge. I was very surprised to see that there were no concerns from the Meridian Police Department concerning this additional traffic on this Easy Jet Drive. There is no doubt in any of our minds that there will be traffic problems arising from the fence of a development. I think the impact has been grossly understated and this is my own opinion. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 17 of 50 Yearsley: Thank you. Next? The gentleman here on the end. Again, name and address for the record, please. Neilson: My name is Robert Neilson. I reside at 3508 East Quin Drive in Meridian. As mentioned earlier, the developer held two neighborhood meetings. At the first on February 24th, the developer's representative described what was planned for the site, took questions and listened to the residents' concerns. A second neighborhood meeting was held on June 10th. I was disappointed to learn at that meeting that no changes had been made in response to the residents' concerns. Instead, the develop er's representative described why each of the residents' concerns were unfounded. I would like to tell the rest of the story about just two of these concerns. The developer's representative cited a study finding that multi-family housing does not affect neighborhood property values. This is a study by Obrinsky and Stein. Reading the study showed that it was actually a compilation of findings from six separate studies on the Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Sacramento and Austin metropolitan areas. A more complete description of the findings than what was given to us at the neighborhood meeting is that neighborhood values typically do not decrease when the multi-family housing is attractive in appearance and is of a scale compatible with the surrounding neighborhood . I contend with the application with a density of 15.1 dwelling units per acre and three story buildings are not compatible with the neighborhood where 88 percent of the homes within 300 feet are single story homes. At the nearest residential property, which will be 40 feet from the corner of one of the three story apartment buildings, a person with an average height adu lt will have to look up over 30 degrees to see sky over the top of that building. In addition, findings on property values average over a neighborhood do not necessarily describe what happens to the property buildings of adjacent homes. We were also told the traffic is not an issue, since the same study showed that single family housing generates more automobile trips per household, 9.57 trips per housing unit on a weekday than apartments do, 6.72 trips. A more complete analysis using these data showed that the maximum 17 single family homes that would be allowed under R -4 zoning on 4.25 acres, would generate 162 trips per day, while the 64 apartments would generate 430 trips per day or almost three times what would be generated by single family homes. And note that this does not include the traffic generated by the two commercial properties proposed. Clearly traffic on Easy Jet, traffic through the surrounding neighborhood and Easy Jet traffic using the signalized intersections at Eagle Road will increase significantly. The key to reducing concerns with the proposed subdivision are lowering dwelling unit density and lower building height. I would recommend the following two changes in regards to unit density and building height. Eliminate the third story on the three story multi-family buildings and specify a maximum building height of 29 feet, four inches, and reduce the density of the multi-family housing to near the mid point of the six to 15 units per acre guideline in the Comprehensive Plan for m ixed use community, using the -- in the calculation the 4.25 acres that the residential use occupies and not the 5.4 for the entire development. Yearsley: Can you -- Neilson: Thank you. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 18 of 50 Yearsley: Thank you. Next. Lady in the black sweater or jacket. Valenti: My name is Kathy Valenti. I live at 2607 South Teddy Avenue in Meridian and I'm speaking for myself. I'd like to thank you for allowing me time to speak and to voice my thoughts. I echo the concerns of my neighbors in regard to this proposed project in terms of increased traffic, unsightly apartment buildings, with different owners, safety, lowering of property values and use of our private park and our private walking path by the apartment dwellers. A new concern arose when we received the latest plans for development a few days ago. Suddenly the landscaping on the south side of the proposed development is all but gone and there are spaces saved for a future road and pedestrian pathway to the south, which was addressed in this meetin g, that there will be some interconnectivity. The roadway and pedestrian path are defined as providing future interconnectivity, apparently between this planned development and future developments. My greatest concern is that this acreage will also be de veloped with clear pathways to Easy Jet for even drivers and pedestrians into our subdivision, into our private park that we pay for and on Easy Jet and Publisher, along established residences. The proposed apartments will create an additional financial b urden on the residents of Sutherland Farm and I am a resident, so I will feel that. I have the added worry about an overwhelming population of apartment dwellers using our resources, the park, and our walking path and clogging up our residential streets. So, I would like the developers, the speakers, to answer these two questions in her comments. First what do you have in mind for development of the acreages south of our subdivision. Second, will any proposed development include a park area at least as big as ours, with the same or better amenities, such as a children's playground, picnic areas and a large open area for games. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Next? The one in the middle. The front -- lady in the front. Morton: Good evening. Thank you for your time and attention. My name is Glenda Morton and my husband Robert and I dwell at 2066 South Nephrite Way in Meridian in Sutherland Farm. I'm speaking for myself. I am an owner and a property manager of an apartment complex by the name of the Redwood Apartments in Boise, Idaho, and I have served that complex for 19 years and I want to talk a little bit about the appropriateness of dropping a heavily loaded multi-family complex in the middle of nothing but subdivisions. The complex I'm associated with in Boise has apartment buildings all around it. It's all multiple family complex. First of all, in general apartment dwellers are younger -- this is in general. Single individuals or young families and the dichotomy of this group of society and the more established homeowner group is drastic and apparent and to heavy load the young adults into a small, compact area will undeniably be problematic for Sutherland Farm, Sutherland Down, Muirwood, and other surrounding neighborhoods. The negative impact to the homeowners is based on a different mind set of the younger group. Their focus is a freer lifestyle that includes partying, honestly. Tailgating. Much more socializing. Functions for their children of young families. Good things, but different. In the case of students they often study, sleep, attend classes and work in every 24 hour period and the nature of their lifestyle dictates a need to come and go with great Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 19 of 50 frequency. In general there is a lesser sense of respect and responsibility for the home and the community they live in. With all due respect to tenants, they did not save for, invest in, pay property taxes on or work to maintain their home or their surroundings and, consequently, they are not nearly as vested into their lifestyle as the homeowner that has sacrificed much -- many times their life savings to enjoy what they have today. To summarize, apartment tenants are a different -- are at a different place in their life. It's not bad, it's just different, and they have a different mind set from those of the single family dwellers. My other point -- my second point is concerns about management and screening issues. As I stated, this proposed project could be further parceled off and sold to separate multiple owners. Properly vetting and managing the premises is of utmost importance. Yearsley: Your time is up. Can you finish up, please? Morton: Okay. We screen for about 20 different areas. Sex offenders. Criminals. All of that background. If they divide this up and, then, they want to blend mixed management styles and levels of expertise it can turn into a very shabby operation in our back door. I urge the Commission to deny the project, please. Yearsley: Thank you. Morton: Thank you. Yearsley: Next? The gentleman on the end. Burton: My name is Don Burton. I live at 3585 East Quin Drive, Meridian. That's in Sutherland Down Subdivision. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, thank you. Thank you for your service to our community. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you tonight. All I can say about the last speaker is hear hear. That's a different point of view than I would have ever thought of. That was very well put. You have my letter on file, so I will just try to fit within my three minutes and cover a couple things that I think are very, very important. One is the aspect of new developments that -- I think there is a concept that they should integrate into and enhance the surrounding community. I think we can see very clearly that most of the surrounding community doesn't think that this project neither enhances nor integrates into this community. The three story structures are just going to look like monoliths out there. The nearest three story structures to this area is well to the north, down the slope, below the canal in the Silverstone commercial- industrial area. Three story buildings are just going to -- someone said that they are going to block views, you're going to have to be looking up to the sky to see sky, so it's almost going to be straight up. So, I think that's a real major issue there. Traffic, at the risk of disagreeing with the Ada County Highway District, the access is to this -- to the project are very, very near to Eagle Road and the traffic light there. During rush or peak time to traffic I believe there will be gridlock at Eagle Road. Residents of the proposed project will, then, turn right on Easy Jet, right on Nephrite, drive right through Sutherland Farm, out to Victory Road. That's going to route a lot of traffic right through the existing residential part of the -- of the area. Sutherland Down is where I live. Sutherland Farm is next door. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 20 of 50 Both have park and community public areas, walking paths. To your question, Commissioner Oliver, yes, those paths to interconnect to the canal and to the north side of the canal. Residents of the new project I believe will be cutting through Sutherland Down, Sutherland Farm on private projects and will increase traffic, it will increase litter, dogs -- who knows. But there is also going to be an impact of liability in the Sutherland Farm area. There is a water feature over there. I think there is a great potential for a lot of complaints to be coming to the city and to the city police department from res idents of Sutherland Down and Sutherland Farm . Having said all that, I'm speaking on behalf of myself and my wife and as proposed I would encourage the Commission to deny this application. Thank you again for the opportunity to speak. Yearsley: Thank you. Who wants to be next? In the front. Butterfield: Thank you for your time. I'm Dr. Casey Butterfield. Actually, I have a building in the northern area of that medical complex and I don't see my other little complex people here, but I'm speaking for myself at this time. Yearsley: Address, please. Butterfield: That is 2630 South Eagle Road. Yearsley: Thank you. Butterfield: And that's Stone Creek Dental and when I first came into this project, building my office at that location, I was told that we would have parking on Easy Jet and we had plenty of parking in my complex. It was a shared parking kind of concept. Since that time we have eliminated parking on Easy Jet and even though you have heard testimony that there is going to be sufficient parking for this housing complex, everything I have seen, even in my complex, parking space is really limited and diminishing quickly for employees and people that come into visit us. My concern is people that go into visit all the residents after hours, where are they going to park? They are going to be parking over in our complex, which we will have to increase our cost of paying for people to come in and tow those vehicles at extra expense for a businessman in that area. My request, too, is to decrease the density and I think that would help and aid, not just the visibility and esthetics, but also in the impact of the businesses in that area. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Next? Right there in front. Montgomery: I am Bev Montgomery and I live at 2560 -- I have to look at my notes, because I have lost that in the process. South Teddy. I am speaking for my -- on behalf of myself, but we border a walking area, so we do lots of talking to neighbors. Anyway, I do thank all of you, Mr. Chairman and Committee Members, as volunteer people in the community, for coming and listening to our concerns and I appreciate that you will use a very intelligent and informed decision about this. I gave you this map, because I found about 25 maps and I finally decided I had to do one for myself. So, you see that number one is the Citadel Storage that's already been developed and that's industrial. Then you Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 21 of 50 see Sutherland Down that is a multi-family and low density -- high density area that was developed after we started to look about moving there and, then, you see the homeowners park here in two. You can see another one beyond there. The offices -- I got so mixed up, because when I looked at what we were shown when we were building our house, I thought those offices were part of that figure. So, when I give you that information I was all mixed up, so I'm sure others are, too. And, then, across, then, the number four thing is the proposed rental apartments and offices. We were given -- we started looking at this when -- before 2002, but this was the information that we got in 2002. The office portion of the development is comprised of a 11 lots, contains approximately 19 acres and the lots are intended to develop primarily with professional offices and the possibility of a some limited multi-family development. Notice limited. Depending on the future market condition in demand. A conceptual site plan has been prepared for the office area and at that point in time indicates 284,000 square feet of office area, with 878 parking spaces. The applicant requests that the approval of the planned unit development of multi-family residential areas includes lot sizes ranging from 3,800 to 1,900 square feet. The smallest lots that were intended to just be a buffer are located adjacent to the office and retail areas. Now, what's happened in the meantime is in 2004 the developer opted to go in and do that, at least in my understanding and in talking to the others, to use that multi-purpose area to develop Sutherland Down and you can see that that is there. So, right now we are concerned there is no buffer between the townhomes and the existing larger lot single family residents along South Nephrite and the proposed large scale apartment buildings as submitted for the Easy Jet Subdivision conditional use. We ask you to look at this very carefully and turn it down. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The gentleman up front. Mascorro: Speaking for myself and my wife. My name is Inger Mascorro. I live at 2827 South Nephrite Way. Two houses south of the proposed development. So, a three story building, put yourselves in my shoes and my immediate neighbors' position, you're going to walk out in your backyard and less than 60 feet away, just outside the doors of this building, a three story building. Multiple windows. Backyard privacy is gone. It's not something that I signed up to at that subdivision. I moved there -- and my wife back in December and people were saying -- the developers is saying, no, this isn't going to affect property values. Most definitely. If I knew -- when we moved in in December this hadn't been proposed yet. Had I knew that it was and it was potential, I would have never moved in there. So, if we ever want to move out, people aren't going to want to move right in the backyard of a three story building. Now way. So, yes, it is going to affect property values big time. Secondly, you know, somebody else had mentioned it as well. You know, we do have a private park, you know, that's maintained by the homeowners association, us as the owners, we pay for that park. It is a private park. We have a pond in the center of it that our families can use. This development -- the little part that's proposed there, the little play area, no, not -- not esthetically pleasing to the people that live there. They are going to go to this private park and with the pond that's in there, just in general, the liability increases for us as homeowners, because what if somebody falls in that pond that does not live in our subdivision and drowns in that pond -- or whatever. There is going to be more kids running around, more potential, more possibility. So, that's Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 22 of 50 just how you keep that out, you know. So, as a homeowner in the City of Meridian -- I mean you're going to be expected to receive more calls as well. A gentleman mentioned earlier about complaints to the city. How do you -- how do you manage that? Does the city have a plan to put in place on how you can keep somebody out of a private park? Has that happened? Do you guys have experience with that. You know, how did that get control -- as a subdivision how do we control that? You know, if you lower the density in this area it might be manageable. Maybe as a subdivision we might be able to -- you know what, there is not that many people coming to a park, it's not that much of a concern. You increase it three fold by allowing a three story building in that area, so -- I mean I'm against the development as a whole, but just because of the increase in population. I mean when I first moved in there I figured that was going to be a -- you know, four lots per acre subdivision or just commercial. You know, if it was two story -- if it's going to happen it's going to happen, but if it's a two stor y, I think I can live with that, because there is two story homes in the area. I can't back off that, because our home is a two story home. But even with two story you're still going to have the backyard privacy that's not going to be there anymore and to our immediate neighbors and so when they make their proposal that says that there is a two story building right up against the subdivision and that it's going to a three story building, it's still right there. I mean that first two story building, like I said, is literally going to be 50 feet from our backyard and our neighbors. So, it's right there. It's not like there is a buffer between the subdivisions with that two story building. So, thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The lady in the front on this side. C.Gabrielson: I, first of all, would really like to thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Carol Gabrielson. I live at 42 31 East Easy Jet Drive. The greatest concern I have in regards to the proposed Easy Jet apartment is the long-term impact to our neighborhood. Within a three mile radius of Sutherland Farm there are 854 apartment units. These units range of high end apartments with many amenities to low end units with few amenities. The Easy Jet apartments will definitely be at the lower end. The units will have only the basic amenities required by the City of Meridian. The drawings do not indicate the presence of a required office, mailboxes, or a storage facility, nor does the exterior meet the minimum architectural standards of our subdivision. With the f rantic pace that huge apartment complexes are being built in west Boise and Meridian, the market will become saturated and vacancy rates will start to climb. High end complexes such as Gramercy Village, The Fields at Gramercy, Red Tail Luxury Apartments, will weather the increase that's in vacancy rates much better than the lower end complexes, like the Easy Jet apartments. What do you do with an apartment building that no longer is profitable? The only two options are to decrease the rental rates to attract low income tenants or let it deteriorate and the owner uses it as a tax write off. Neither one of these options have a desirable outcome to our subdivisions. One of the items disclosed at the meeting with JUB Engineers was the fact that each apartment and commercial building will be built on a separate lot. Each building can be sold to a different buyer. Every indication has been that the owner and developer have no intention of retaining ownership of these buildings once they are completed. With five different owners it will be very difficult to maintain any consistency in the maintenance and management of the buildings Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 23 of 50 and grounds. It is also possible that some of the owners may be from out of state. In a letter dated October 9th, 2015, our HOA requested that there be a restriction of multiple separate ownership of individual apartment buildings. We feel that this is a very important issue. Allowing separate ownership of the three apartment buildings increases the likelihood that issues will arise in the future that could jeopardize surrounding neighborhoods and harm our quality of life. Who protects the surrounding neighborhood s when problems arise with multiple ownership? The administrative revie w didn't even choose to address this, even when our HOA requested that it be addressed. I think that speaks volumes as to who will protect us. The answer is no one. The opposition to this project is very strong, as indicated by the signatures on petitions and the letters written to Planning and Zoning. I want to make it very clear that we are not opposed to multi-family rentals and we have consistently asked the developers, one of whom lives in our subdivision, to work with us to arrive at a compromise. The developers have not chosen to do this. We have consistently said that we would be agreeable to duplexes, triplexes, four-plexes and townhomes if they meet the architectural standards of our subdivision and the density of the project is reduced. These type of rental units tend to attract working couples and families, which would be a good fit for our neighborhood. We respectfully request that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Meridian City Council carefully consider your ruling on this project. We want you to remember that your decisions have a powerful and long-term impact on our neighborhoods. We are not opposed to growth, but it needs to be growth that is well thought out and will be an asset for years to come to both our neighborhoods and for the City of Meridian. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The lady in the striped shirt. St. Charles: Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I have never spoken before, so I'm really terrified. 3482 East Yesternight. My name is Joanne St. Charles. I'm speaking for my -- myself, my husband and our next door neighbors. Just going to reiterate some of the stuff that's already been said and maybe add a little bit. A major concern of mine has been that there is limited access to Eagle Road. There is only access to Easy Jet that already backs up during peak traffic hours and with that kind of density we are going to see a traffic jam there in the mornings or they are going to make a free right. You can't just make a free right and go straight through the block like you can in a lot of other areas, you have to weasel though neighborhoods. So, there is just not -- there is no thoroughfare. They are going to have to use the smaller roads and there is no bus t here. There is not a grocery store for two miles. Other than Jack in the Box, if you want to count that. So, there has to be -- it's just a necessity that those people are going to have to be in and out of there with cars, because there is no bus and there is no walkable grocery store. There is a canal path, which they can access, but to access it they will have to go through -- either go up to Eagle or they can just cut right through Sutherland Down and right through the private park. We already have issues of maintaining that park, because the soil there is such bad soil they have a very difficult time keeping the grass green. The area that you can cross over the park has very shallow grass, because it's to code, they had to put brick underneath it to support fire trucks. So, it's very difficult to keep the grass growing there with the traffic we have already. With increased traffic that is really going to decrease the appeal of the park in terms of how it looks. Then I also agree with the Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 24 of 50 recommendations of Robert Neilson and the Sutherland Farm HOA, they both wrote excellent letters. I think that I'd like to recommend to please consider lower density, the four-plexes, duplexes, triplexes, minimum two story, something that would f it in better with our existing housing and also not create such a traffic nightmare. I was very concerned when I read about the planned stub to the south, which when I read it it looked like it indicated that this was a good thing because it was going to allow further limiting access to Eagle Road, which my concern there is if we have high density apartment complexes on this lot and, then, another lot to the south, all of that traffic is going to come through to Easy Jet and has to be making that left or the free right and I guess that's all. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Actually, let's do one on this side. I haven't seen a hand up on that side, so we will -- this gentleman. Caldwell: Good evening, Chairman and Council. My name is Art Caldwell. I reside at 3575 East MacKay Drive in the Sutherland Farm Subdivision. I'm going to refer to a few notes here off of my phone. I think this Easy Jet Development is something that's going to happen someday, because it's got vacant land and I know there is going to be something, but I think a number of things have been brought up this evening that make us wonder about what we start off with with the potential of having development seven times this big over time. My feeling right now is when people come in and turn on the Easy Jet towards Sutherland Farm, they will be getting an experience and have an impression about where they are going. I think that the height that's been pointed out, the three story is a big issue and I think it sets a precedent for those other seven potential developments. The first o ne brings on more three stories, perhaps some four stories and I think it's completely wrong with the current environment. So, the impression that is presented is not a good one. I think that it will bring on traffic that Sutherland Farm can absorb initially, but over time I think it's going to get too much, because I'm looking beyond this development and into the future developments. Currently there are four ways to enter Sutherland Farm off of every major street surrounding it. Eagle, Victory, Overland, and Cloverdale. All of them have routes that wind through neighborhood, such an Muirwood and Sutherland Farm. I think that there are additional design in the development where there perhaps will be three more roads that connect into that subdivision and I believe that we need to really pay attention to what we are doing now, because I think it sets a precedence for how we go into the future. Again, I would like to mention the idea of the park. The park is an awesome park right now. I think it can accommodate more people, but I don't think that Sutherland Farm or Sutherland Down or anyone else should be subsidizing that park for massive use and I believe that the use is going to at least double, if not more, with one development and not six times that. Anyway, I just disagree with the idea of making this development go through the way it stands right now and I would like to see the height of the buildings reduced and the density lowered. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Lady up front. I promise I'm getting to the guys in the back. I'm not ignoring you guys. Nicholas: Thank you for letting me speak tonight. My name is Kathryn Nicholas. I live at 2884 South Nephrite Way. And I'm speaking for myself. And I'm talking particularly -- it Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 25 of 50 has been partially addressed, but the landscape buffer on the south side of this development, there were tall trees originally put there and these were removed from the apartment buildings A and B at the south end of the project. This -- there is also no fencing or walls proposed there. This concerns me, because requirement of the driveway access easement to give the property adjacent to the south vehicular and pedestrian access to Easy Jet. Is this project just phase one of a much larger apartment development planned in the future? If this is the case the standard set with this project will be the precedent for what the future holds for the development. So, your decisions tonight are very important to all of us and particularly those of us who live on Nephrite Way. And thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The gentleman in the back. I see his hand keep raising all the time, so I'll give him an opportunity. Carlson: The back row finally makes it. I am Chuck Carlson. I live at -- Yearsley: Can you move closer to the microphone so that we get it on record. Thank you. Carlson: I'm Chuck Carlson and I live at 2706 South Teddy Avenue in Meridian. That's a Sutherland Farm development. I'd like to touch briefly on two subjects. Livability and expectation. Livability. Idaho is a great place to live. Livability is what convinces companies to bring their businesses and employees to Idaho. High density projects and homeowner communities not only decreases the livability of communities, but also decreases property values. If you approve this project you will be killing the golden goose that lays the golden eggs. Expectation. The homeowners in the Sutherland Farm, Sutherland Down, Muirwood, Thousand Springs, had a reasonable expectation when they purchased their homes that the surrounding areas would be developed in a manner that would enhance the livability and property value of their investment and the owner of the proposed project has a reasonable expectation to develop his property. He knew it was zoned R-4 when he purchased the property, just like the homeowners in the surrounding neighborhoods knew the zoning of their property when they purchased and the owners of surrounding properties have a reasonable expectation that other property owners will not develop or maintain their property in a manner that decreases their livability or property value. It is reasonable for surrounding homeowners to expect the Meridian Planning and Zoning to conduct themselves in a manner that is best for the community, not just one developer. Please, no apartments on Easy Jet and keep the proposed project zoning at R-4. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. This gentleman in the back. Castignola: Gentlemen, thank you for your interest in listening to us and your service. I own the home at 2611 South Tristram Way. Yearsley: And can -- Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 26 of 50 Castignola: I don't envy you. Yearsley: Can I get your name? Castignola: Sorry. Castignola. I don't envy you, because you're being forced to make a decision based on what a former planning commission has made. I don't believe they were wrong, I believe that R-4 zoning should stand. The profit motive I have a great deal respect for, but I also have a great deal of respect for the homeowners who are going to suffer a loss if this zoning goes through. I don't believe it should. I can think of many reasons. You have heard them all tonight. So, please, turn this down flat. R-4 is good enough. The profit of the owners of that piece of property has to be weighed against the losses of these subdivisions that are represented here tonight. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Can we keep the clapping down, please. This gentleman over here. Boudreaux: I just lost your pdf file on the zoning and when I -- excuse me. I'm John Boudreaux. B-o-u-d-r-e-a-u-x. I live at 2727 South Halo in Meridian and my concern is that when we purchased our property and we looked at the zoning and everything it was R-4. Now we are -- and now they are proposing R-15. Where is the buffer zone around our areas to give us this breathing space that we need. They were proposing more than R-15 originally. So, they scaled it down to make it look like we are getting a good deal. We are not getting a good deal, we are getting hosed and -- and the -- the plan called for R-4. Well, what's wrong with R-4? They can make plenty of money off of R-4, but, no, they want to go to R-15. Well, R-8 wouldn't be bad, because that would provide a buffer zone between us and the next step. But when you keep going up and you jump all these buffers, then, like other people have said, we are going to have R-3000 next door to us and we are going to have ghettos like they have in the big cities and I don't -- I didn't buy in that area to live in a ghetto or near a ghetto, because I know what ghettos are and do and what happens in ghettos, because I used to have to drive through them, so I know. I went through LA ghettos going to USC. So, I know what they are, I know what they look like, and I know what the surroundings are. So, this proposal in that regard is going to degrade our property and thank you much for your time. Yearsley: Thank you. Lady in the back. Williams: My name is Melece Williams. I live on 2540 South Tristram Way in Sutherland Farm and I'm representing myself. I'm here to talk about impact to schools. I'm a school teacher and I have been in the West Ada School District for the last eight years and I just looked at Pepper Ridge Elementary, which is the elementary school that these children would go to and right now they are at 658 children, which is 23 to one ratio. I also looked at Lewis & Clark, which is a middle school, and that is a hundred -- or 1,061 children. That's a 22 to one ratio. And Mountain View High School, which I have children that go to that and that's 2,096, 19 to one ratio. I looked on the internet and it's -- for the state of Idaho the average number of students for elementary in Idaho is 336, which all of these Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 27 of 50 schools are above that and the ratio is 16 to one. So, that's before any of this is built. I have a concern with the children, because I'm involved with them, and they are over capacity right now and so these units would involve young children and that was my concern. So, I am against the policy. So, please, consider that. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. This gentleman over here. Holder: Good evening, Commissioners and Chair. My name is Russ Holder and my wife and I live at 4145 East Easy Jet Drive I'm. Speaking on behalf of my wife and myself. The Sutherland Farms Homeowners Association has submitted detailed written information opposing the current proposed conditional use permit. Each argument against the proposed development is accurate and well founded and I will not speak to those issues, but I would like to speak to what is right. The residents of Sutherland Farms Subdivision care about the quality our lives and our community. We purchased our homes believing our community would be developed in accordance with previous R-4 zoning and platting documentation. We are simply pursuing what is right for our neighborhood and community. The development agreement entered into in 2002 was intended to be binding upon all heirs, successors, assigns and personal representative, including the City of Meridian's corporate authority. If the letter of the law were followed this development agreement would be binding and we would not be here tonight for this contentious meeting. Approving this zoning, the conditional use permitting, is inconsistent with the neighborhood and is not right, but, instead, only serves to provide financial gain for a few individuals at the expense of our community. Following the development agreement previous R-4 zoning is what is right, because it maintains a compatible sense of community. In the initial public meeting with Mr. Dave Evans, the contractor for this development, he expressed shock at the number of people that were present and the overwhelming opposition to the project. He stated that he was going back to the property owner and city to inform them of this overwhelming opposition. He further stated that he personally was not interested in moving forward with this kind of opposition. Apparently the property owner doesn't care -- doesn't share Mr. Evans' thoughts on community or quality of life. The owner has hired JUB, a company well versed in successful rezoning and conditional use permitting. Our subdivision's first meeting with JUB personnel, many statistics and studies were cited in support of this development. None of those statistics and studies were from local communities, but strategically selected to support their position. Why is the financial gain for a few individuals more important than the well being of our neighborhood and community? The Southern Farm homeowners have always supported developing the property in accordance with R-4 zoning, because that is what is right. We ask each of you to support long-term compatible community development consistent with the interest of the residents. We respectfully request the Commissioners of the City of Meridian to do what is right and disapprove the application of this conditional use permit for this development of the subject property. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? The gentleman standing up in the back. Stocking: My name is Ruland Stocking. My wife and I Gail Stocking just recently moved here from Phoenix and -- Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 28 of 50 Yearsley: Can we get your address? Sorry. Stocking: 2837 South Teddy Avenue. Yearsley: Thank you. Stocking: When we moved in we were so thrilled to be able to come into a community that was so diverse in both age and in the types of people that were living there. We didn't recognize that this type of situation was going to evolve and I will say this that when we moved up here first we had to go to an apartment. In this apartment there were probably ten different buildings, each one separately owned by different individuals. As a result of that there were multi types of people that were there. There were -- some of them had no animals. Others had animals. It was not well taken care of because of the fact that no one had control over that property. As a result of it, you go out walking in the yard and what do you find? It was like a mine field, because it wasn't maintained. Now, I don't know how you feel about it, but I know that we have animals -- or a dog and we take care of what -- the duties -- responsibility of owning an animal. Another problem that occurs is the fact that many of these will be moving out. We had friends in Phoenix when we lived there who would -- who lived adjacent to one of these types of apartment complexes. As a result of that they -- people would leave and they left their animals. You have probably read it in the newspapers yourselves as to how many animals are left in -- in complexes and as a result of that they literally had to take and start trapping these animals, so that they would take them themselves and have them neutered and, then, they were responsible -- part of the program there was they were responsible for feeding and taking care of those cats and dogs. Now, that ridiculous. I -- I can understand that the apartments are really required in neighborhoods, but in putting it here it really reduces the enjoyment that a lot of people have put -- now, I say this -- we -- we retired here and we put a lot of money into that house and yet the houses today already -- in one year have already reduced in value. Twice as many homes have been sold in this year as last year. I don't say that it's totally as a result of people doing this, I don't know, but I do know that many people have already looked at selling their homes. Secondly, I don't know had I have known this was going to happen -- and I speak for myself, because I'm going to get it when I get home with my wife -- I don't know that we would have moved in. We would have looked at other places that were more secure and that had the things that we liked, because I'm sure there are other areas in Boise or Meridian or someplace else that have the accessibility to this lifestyle -- Yearsley: Can you finish up quickly? Stocking: I appreciate your time. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The gentleman in the blue shirt in the back. Attinger: Thank you for your time. My name is Jason Attinger. I live at 2626 Tristram Way. It's the corner of Tristram and Hollandale. Probably the busiest corner in the Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 29 of 50 neighborhood. It's the street that -- Hollandale both our neighborhood and Muirwood. So, everybody that they are talking about that cuts through the neighborhoods, cuts through my house and I would estimate 75 percent of the people do not stop at the sign. I have got tire marks up on the -- up on the curb there where they haven't. I have had to pull my kid back. I have almost been hit several times. My wife is the one who ordered the ACHD traffic study. It was done during the summer, during a weekend, so, sorry to hit your numbers once again, JUB, but -- I know they are good at doing that stuff. The man talked about statistically or strategically giving statistics to you to make it sound good, giving you the numbers that make it sound great, meeting the bare minimums. This -- what does -- what this gets down to is it's setting a bad precedent. It's setting a bad precedent because if we build this project -- we allow this project to go through, then, it allows for further construction adjacent to that. Now, you have got a large representation here of people who are concerned -- voters here that are concerned, that are going to go out a hundred square feet, right, or a thousand square feet -- less than the size of this room. That's the playground; right? We know they are going to come to our park . But a quarter mile away is the fire station where all these people are going to vo te come next -- next November. All right? And as an Ada County precinct man and an 18 year military veteran who is still serving right now, I'm going to be voting as well and I know the Mayor's vision is a friendly neighborhood where we can raise our children, all right, and it's not to build up super apartment building complexes, so the owner, who has never shown his face, can make the most profit at the cost of the neighbors that are here tonight. The -- the engineering company, they have only made accommodations because we are resisting. Had they pushed their first plan revision, it would be all three story buildings and a bunch of shady parking lots and nothing would have changed. The only reason they are making changes to accommodate us, to keep us quiet. In the last meeting they tried to break us up into groups and section us off so we couldn't hear all our comments together. So, it's like, you know, a military tactic of interrogation there. Guantanamo Bay Elementary School. You know, they gave us cookies in the back and water, you know, and so, hey, here is cookies and water, shut up, write all your questions down, so the whole group won't get to hear them, so everybody can't realize these things in their head and voice their concerns. I know I'm coming up on my three minutes here, but the bottom line is that you are appointed servants of an elected official represented by these people here who have spoken. The people have spoken, they do not want this project and I guarantee you there are a lot more people than are in this room. There is a hundred or so people here, but there is Thousand Springs, there is Muirwood , there is Sutherland Farm, there is Tuscany South and it just continues south and, then, there is the development south of that. There is businesses as well. Please do not approve this project and if something has to happen -- I will finish up in the next ten seconds. Look at reducing the number. I know something has got to be built there. The guy owns the property; right? Reduce the number, make it flow with the rest of the master plan -- the original master plan for the community, the CCR, the fences and office -- if they are going to be part of our master plan, question, do they have to follow the CCR, because right now they don't and that means they would have to pay dues. Thank you. Yearsley: This lady standing up. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 30 of 50 Atkinson: Hi. My name is Janet Atkinson. My husband -- he's in the back of the room -- and I live at 4097 East Raja. I'm not going to repeat the things that our homeowners association worked very hard to put -- and very eloquently to put into our objections to what's happening. I'm impressed with my neighbors even more than I was before. I think they have been very eloquent tonight and very respectful tonight. I would just simply ask you to think about the effect -- we have purchased our homes, we have moved our families and our lives here. The largest single investment anyone of us has made is in our homes and at some point in time many of us are going to need to move. My husband and I are in our 60s and at some stage we may need to sell our house and use that money to live on for our requirement. I would ask you to think about the effect that you're going to have on each one of us and on our lives. I'm also concerned a bit for safety. I'm a big walker. I frequently -- because I work full time at this time of year I have to walk either before work or after work and it's dark. That's one of the routes that we typically walk on. I'd never in a million years have imagined a complex such as this being built on that property. I would have assumed it would have been something much more like Sutherland Down area would be with multiple family houses. We have taken a lot of your time, but I simply ask you to turn this down and if that's -- if you can't do that, to simply make this an area that will work with the homeowners that invested our lives and our money and our time there. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The gentleman in the back over here. Bartolino: Commissioners, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak tonight. I am Dr. James R. Bartolino. I'm speaking for myself and my wife Christine Ann Johnson. I would agree with the comments being made -- Yearsley: Can I get your address? Bartolino: Oh. Sorry. 4192 East Raja. I agree with the -- with the comments made tonight by my neighbors, as well as those made in the letters by the homeowners association. I have submitted a letter earlier as well. One of the speakers earlier eluded to the multiple ownership of the apartment complexes and the fact that it is a relatively low end apartment development, especially compared to the ones in the area. There is -- there is not adequate space for children to play, there is -- there is no pool. There is no garages. There is -- there is not anything. I speak -- I hear quite a bit of talk of sustainability when we refer to Meridian and Planning and Zoning, it's quite the buzz word among the planning community. I'm not sure what -- I'm a groundwater hydrogeologist. I'm not sure what sustainability means, but it's certainly used a lot. But as we see the probable deterioration of the value of these units and decrease in -- in rents and all, that doesn't strike me as sustainable development in accordance with -- with what the City of Meridian intends. Thank you very much. Yearsley: Thank you. This gentleman over here in the yellow. J.Montgomery: Thank you. Thank you guys. Gentlemen and -- Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 31 of 50 Yearsley: Speak in the microphone first. J.Montgomery: I'm John Montgomery. I live at 2560 South Teddy Avenue in Meridian, Idaho. And I do thank you for your time and your service to the city. As it's been said, you likely have reams of documents that have been presented by the homeowners association and many of us that took time to write to you about this very sensitive situation that we are facing in our lives and in our community. I would only add in -- in the documentation that it is -- it was stated the finding of housing opportunity for all economic groups in Meridian was made without property being developed with apartments. As proposed in 2002 the project was found to have compatible and efficient use of land, adding apartments directly next door to the single family residents and rural agricultural property as not compatible use of land. I think it's fairly clear by the people who are represented here and by the information that you have this is probably not a good situation for the City of Meridian and with all due respect to JUB and their people, a lot of what has been presented by them has already been found to be not correct in the evidence that you have available to you . So, I thank you for your time. Good evening. Yearsley: Thank you. Gentleman in the red back there. He had his hand up first. T.Williams: Good evening. I'm Terrell Williams. I live at 4267 East Easy Jet, right at the very end of Easy Jet. Earlier one of the speakers referred to that as our back door. I would submit that's our front door. That's where people come into Sutherland Farm, that's how they form their opinion of what Sutherland Farm is. Certainly an apartment complex like this has no place in an area where we have strictly single -- mostly single family homes and a few multi-family homes. I walked up Easy Jet and I counted the number of houses that either face or were on Easy Jet. There is 60. This would effectively double the number of dwelling units on Easy Jet and subsequent units would multiply that even further. The human traffic, the automobile traffic, the impact on schools -- there is nothing here to justify putting this development in where we have invested our time, our money, had our families. When I built my home, the -- I was restricted, I could not build a two story home to be able to protect the homes around me. This is a very important thing. This is our homes. We are not here to make a profit, we are here to live and to live as we expected to. I would admonish you to consider all of these people and their concerns and weight those against the dollar values of very, very few people. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The gentleman in the blue. Hosford: Good evening. My name is Paul Hosford. I live at 2711 South Knapp Avenue. It's on the corner Easy Jet and South Knapp in Sutherland Farm. I'm going to give you an out. You're a planning group, you plan for the future of Meridian. I'm going to give you a solution, because there is an alternative to -- to high density apartments in Meridian and it is near by. It's called Overland Road. Overland has high density zoning already. Overland has multiple successful apartment complexes. Overland has destinations. Restaurant. Shopping. Entertainment. Services. Both to the east and to the west. Not just in one direction as it would be on South Eagle. Overland was planned for higher density. Overland has businesses that probably wish for more traffic. Overland still has Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 32 of 50 room for these types of projects, like the one across from the new Walmart. There is fields up for sale now looking for developers. These projects work on Overland Road, because they each have direct access to Overland and do not cause a traffic choke spot, as this project would, and the precedent you're setting on traffic for South Eagle Road will lead to this traffic choke spot. Consider this precedent on what you decide on this project. Please do not allow higher density zoning of South Eagle Road. Please use Overland for what it's planned for. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. The gentleman in the back. Schafer: Thank you for your time. My name is Tad Schafer. I live at 4032 East Easy Jet Drive. I represent myself, my wife and my five kids. I hadn't come here tonight thinking I would speak, but I wanted to address the question of public safety and when I heard the report that ACHD had done traffic studies, I was dumbfounded, because anybody who spends anytime at the corner of Eagle and Easy Jet at the high traffic times between 6:00 and 8:30 realize that that's a very dangerous intersection already and will only get worse if this kind of a development is put in. In fact, I know last week late in the day on -- on Thursday there were two accidents in that vicinity and more closely to me three weeks ago my daughter and son were nearly struck crossing that -- Eagle Road as they were crossing over to walk to high school at Mountain View. I called Meridian police immediately that evening to report it and have officers monitor that situation. Also with concern for public safety and our park, I know that Meridian police have been called out to monitor our park already and I suspect that this situation will only get worse with more people coming from the park -- to spend time in our parks late at night when they should not be there and so I have a lot of concern for our safety if such a development is put in and I recommend that further study be done on that intersection of Eagle and Easy Jet and more consideration given to the amount of traffic that will be passing through there if this development is put in. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Yes. This lady over here. Huver: Hi. My name is Jennifer Huver. 2839 South Nephrite. I am here to talk about the concern of parking and children and even though mine is almost out the door and in college I do have a big heart for the little ones in our neighborhood. There is free parking on the east side of Nephrite and I am concerned, because I don't want to see that become just a whole row of excess parking when that area develops and it does happen. You look around any high density area that has an apartment area and there is going to be additional parking on the street. People are going to find easier ways to get to their cars. So, I don't need to see an access coming to Nephrite, because I don't want people to have access to park right behind that property and lower the value of our neighborhoods that are right there. Also the concern for children. There is a bus stop on Victory coming out of our division. Let me see if I can get the name of the street. Does anybody know the name of the street? Thank you very much. At 7:00 o'clock in the morning, I'm sorry if I'm a mom, half the time I drive my kid to the bus stop. It's dark. You want to be safe. If there is a higher density of children that are living in those apartments, those parents are going to want to drive their kids to that -- to that bus stop in the morning and where are Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 33 of 50 they going to park? They are going to park in front of our home. It's going to be impossible to get in and out of there. And, of course, you have to have the safety of the children, but think about the people's homes that are right there at that parking area for the bus stop. The house on the corner is already for sale. I don't blame them. I don't know why he's moving, but I would move in the potential of the fact that the -- it's going to get heavier and more dense for the bus stops. Also with our park it's going to happen, people are going to use our park, so -- but what happens when those people from the apartments are going to use our park and they have parties? It's going to bring in more cars. Our kids are used to just running around that park and being safe and running there and not having any problem. In the summertime there is a slew of kids having a great time playing with their dogs and their cats and playing Army and they don't have to worry about cars. But that's all free parking right along the park -- the park area. So, when we think about the higher population that's coming in through that apartment and that is going use our park no matter what, we have to think about who they are going to be bringing with them to enjoy our park and they are probably going to be bringing cars and they are going to be parking in front of our park and they are going to have traffic and we are going to have to worry about our kids. So, please, think about the kids also, because high parking, a lot of children equals accidents. Yearsley: Thank you. I am going to take a five minute break. We have kind of been at this two hours. Just so we can just take a quick break. So, we will convene in five minutes. Thank you. (Recess: 7:59 p.m. to 8:08 p.m.) Yearsley: Let's go ahead and get started, please. If we could go ahead an d get started. All right. Thank you for allowing us this break. Who wants to be next? Yes. This lady in the purplish -- Broussard: Hello. My name is Bonnie Broussard. I live at 2662 South Teddy Avenue. I'm a board member of Sutherland Farm HOA, but I am speaking for myself, although I do have board approval for what I'm about to tell you. In researching this project it is part of the Sutherland Farm planned development that was approved in 2002 and back, then, the development agreement -- there is some documents in there that have a lot of staff findings regarding the potential use of the park. They requested that the park eliminate the houses that were proposed to be built around the park, so that it would be open and accessible and especially for the proposed future commercial office, multi-family uses and so I'm going to quote some of the items. It says the reduction or elimination of the houses would create larger open and usable park for the entire subdivision. Staff finds that the office, multiple family, townhouse uses will be within convenient walking distance of the park and open space provided within the residential development and staff finds that the site design incorporates interconnectivity through shared vehicular access points. The applicant has provided a pathway system that would connect the excessive uses, which would be that office space, multi-family, with R-4 residential uses. They also state that -- that removing those houses would expand the visibility corridor and increase the park size to approximately five acres. If the maintenance for the five acre private park were a Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 34 of 50 burden for the homeowners in the future, the Parks Department would consider maintaining the site if it was deeded to the city. So, based on these items staff and the city recognizes that there are maintenance costs for this park and that it is a burden that is put on the homeowners of Sutherland Farm HOA and because the project is within the Sutherland Farm planned development, we would ask that you would condition this project to help bear the burden of the maintenance of this park, with the same assessment fees that we currently assess each of the homeowners. If you would assess the actual owners of the apartment buildings, so whether they are occupied or not that they would pay the same assessment in order to help us defer these cost of maintenance, because we do have people that come in from other residences and developments that use this park and I am also the treasurer, so I see the bills from the maintenance of this, where they come in and they play with the switches for the fountains and break the fountains, which is very costly. They run over sprinkler heads. We are constantly replacing those. We have the extra cost for the maintenance for the dog uses out there and also our pathways are now starting to collapse and fall apart from the additional use on the park and I can see this only being exacerbated in the future and we will need the funds for that, because as it is right now our HOA fees -- almost a hundred percent go to maintaining the park and the pathway. So, we respect to your decision on this and hope that you can help us with a condition on this project. Yearsley: Thank you. Who wants to go next? Yes. Sims: Good evening. I'm Susan Sims. That's S-i-m-s. My address is 2867 South Groom Way and I am on the board of the Sutherland Farm HOA, but I'm speaking here tonight from myself and my family. First of all, thank you for hearing this and for considering our testimony. I would like to address a concern that has been found in the original 2002 planning development of Sutherland Farm. The quote is that the office portion of the development is comprised of 11 lots and contains approximately 19 acres, which is 15.2 percent of the total land area or approximately 16.5 percent of the total land area included within the Sutherland Farm planned unit development. These lots are intended to develop primarily with professional offices, with the possibility for some limited multi-family development, depending on future market conditions and demands. The limited multi- family development part has been accomplished with Sutherland Down, which is a mix of patio homes and duplexes. So, that is a limited multi-family. Now in completing this PUD that was proposed in 2002 and made by the city, the last portion to complete this is commercial office and as stated and as you may know, there is some commercial office off of Easy Jet and Eagle. Dr. Butterfield's office and a few others. But those were never in the Sutherland Down PUD, they -- these final five acres are the only possibility of getting the commercial part of the Sutherland Down -- I mean the Sutherland Farm PUD accomplished and I would propose that it become commercial buildings on these five acres and not multi-family, which has already been accomplished. Also the commercial buildings should be put in accordance with what is along Eagle, as it already is in Sutherland -- I mean in Silverstone community, which even in Silverstone Business Park nothing along Eagle is more than one story and anything that is built that is more than one story along Eagle has been set way back or it's actually on Overland proper. So, flowing Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 35 of 50 down Eagle Street to have three story apartment building is just a sore thumb. It does not fit within the plan that was made in 2002 and that's all I have to say. Yearsley: Thank you. Sims: Thank you for your time. Yearsley: Anybody else? Yes. Vanackern: Good evening. My name is Gary Vanackern. I live at 3967 East Raja Drive in Sutherland Farm. The smoke is awesome. I am representing myself and my wife. I would like to thank the Commission, honestly, for hearing the homeowners tonight and for your service to the city. I once heard that for every single person who writes their elected representatives there are 10,000 people who hold the same views, but are afraid. I hope that you take that into consideration in your decision tonight. I think there has only been one item brought up tonight that I don't share the same viewpoint on. I have seen -- not seen any single person testify tonight that has one positive thing to say about this project. I hope that speaks to you. This project -- while a lot of work has been done by JUB Engineering, I believe this high density does not fit the form -- does not meet the fit, form, or function of the area. The three story complexes are not consistent with the neighborhood. As a matter of fact, the empty lot that was right next to my home, the doctor wanted to build a three story home on it. They told him absolutely not. It was rejected by the association. It does not fit form or function in this area. This type of development should be on a larger access road, like Meridian Road or of the form that would be a direct feed into Eagle. What is the plan for Eagle Road congestion? What is the future plan? It's already congested. What happens when South Eagle gets developed after this sets a precedent from this decision? I request that you take into account the future development that will result from this decision. The congestion without this already creates five to six cycles of light backing up to three-quarters of a mile. Eagle cannot relieve or handle this future density. Overland can't handle it. It's backed up just as bad. I tried last night to get here -- back to my house, because I needed to get home. It took longer to get from over Eagle overpass to Easy Jet than it did from Gowen Road all the way to Eagle, because of the congestion -- in the rush hour congestion, because of the Overland and this entire area. It is not wide enough, it cannot handle this congestion no matter what ACHD says. I would like to address JUB's request for you to work with them on the brick and stone materials as presented tonight. I request that this must be a mix of stone, stucco contingent -- stone, stucco and hardy board to fit with the rest of the homes. Just simply throwing a little bit of brick on it does not work. This must be required on both the buildings and the garages. The garages have not -- have no architectural interest, that is why they have not been shown tonight in the presentation. Other developments that is architectural interest to their development. The noise needs to be buffered with -- the AC units are now buffered with the site plan change. That means that adjacent, their bulk of six AC units together within 50 feet from somebody's back yard. There is a noise issue there. There is no bus service in this area. Our kids cannot even ride their bike s to school, it is not safe. This will add additional risk. And I will just summarize by asking you one question -- or three questions. I first ask you to reject this entire project. I will close Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 36 of 50 by asking these three questions. Would you buy a house in the neighborhood? Would you like to sit in 20 minutes of traffic congestion every morning on the way to and the way home from work? And my final question is if you would feel safe living in this neighborhood with this project. Look at the age of the people here. They don't feel safe with this going in. Thank you for your time. Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? Yes. The lady in the back. Allen: My name is Annell Allen. I live at 3586 East Girdner Drive. And I just want to thank you guys for being here and listening to this community and also for all the speakers to enunciate the concern. My primary concern -- I'm a single mother and I purchased this house several years ago to raise my son and knowing that this facility is there I don't feel safe. I walk a lot with him and I just don't feel safe there and so I would not have purchased this home had that facility been there and I just wanted to voice that concern. Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? Yes. Harper: Good evening. My name is Todd Harper. I live at 2839 Nephrite Way within about 150 feet of the proposed development. I'm very concerned about it as well, that this isn't 2002 anymore. Had that development been built in 2002 we would not live at 2839 Nephrite. We would never move there. So, I think that they have missed their opportunity to develop at that site, that currently the infrastructure for the area does not meet -- will not accept that development. That -- my daughter goes to Mountain View High School and her school is well beyond capacity, that is constantly getting knocked down in the hallway because there are so many kids trying to get to class, so she has problems at school because of overcrowding. She went to Lewis & Clark previously and it was crowded as well. So, I don't know about the elementary school, but I assume that this will negatively impact the elementary school as well, that commuting has become a nightmare, that often getting on the freeway from my house it -- I have to go through three or four cycles of lights at Eagle and Overland and getting off the freeway at night I often have to go through two or three cycles for the light at -- for the off ramp of the freeway and, then, go through another two cycles of light at Overland, that it's just b ecoming unbearable with the amount of people that are moving in, that I think that before this development can be built the infrastructure has to be built to facilitate its demands. I'm a former police officer and we had a saying where I worked that five percent of the people cause 85 percent of the problem and that whereas typically would not go to many residential streets ever, but we were constantly going to apartments buildings, that apartment buildings are more prevalent to lower income people, single parents, latch key kids, and just that they are different demographics than what live in the community currently. That living on Nephrite I anticipate I will be heavily impacted by people using my street as a shortcut, that it would be far easier for people to come out of the driveway on Easy Jet and come down Nephrite to get to Victory than to make a left turn out of the development, a left turn onto Eagle, a left turn onto Victory, than it would be to just simply make a right turn out of the development to get down the Victory. The area is already congested and, then, a three story complex is also very objectionable, that basically my backyard faces Eagle now and this will be an eyesore, that, if anything, a two story would Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 37 of 50 be far more preferable, if anything, and, then, with this being built with more development planned to connect to it is also objectionable, that we are going to have far too much traffic coming out onto Easy Jet as is, but I would prefer that no traffic comes out onto Easy Jet and, if anything, that wait until further development to the south of this development is proposed where the development can accommodate all the traffic coming out onto Eagle, instead of out on Easy Jet. Yearsley: Can you hurry it up. You're out of time. Harper: And, then, finally, I would prefer that the fencing between the development and Nephrite Way where there is no pedestrian access to Nephrite from the development. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Yes, the lady in the back. Rocha: My name is Joan Rocha. I live at 3788 East Girdner Drive and I was the first -- our house was the first one built on Girdner Road and we were told that we were going to have office buildings in the -- that same thing, but I was going to address the fact of -- about the maintenance and office facilities there -- since there is no place for those on the -- on the map, they haven't shown them, will they be put in the open space and reduce the open space requirement? And will they have the same architectural detail as on the offices as they would on the apartment buildings. So, those were the things that I wanted to address. Yearsley: Thank you. Rocha: Thank you. Yearsley: Anybody else. Yes. N.Boudreaux: My name is Nancy Boudreaux. I live at 2727 South Halo Place. That's in Sutherland Farms. I don't know if the board here -- the Planning and Zoning is aware, but there are no parking signs from Eagle Road all the way up to the park on both sides of road. Now, where are these people going to park their excess vehicles? Are they going to come up a half a mile and walk back to the apartments? I doubt that. But, you know, that's a long ways for somebody, especially if you're carrying groceries and whatnot and I don't think there is going to be sufficient parking for the residents of these apartments if you go ahead and approve that, which I'm hoping against hope that you do you not approve this project. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Yes. The gentleman in the back. Howard: Good evening and thank you for your time. My name is George Howard. I live at 4012 East Raja. It was previously mentioned something about collecting dues or fees from these projects -- proposed project for the association. I don't know that I necessarily agree with that. That's kind of a unilateral decision there. But I would like to mention that Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 38 of 50 both ingress and egress out of this project is on Easy Jet and they are only about a hundred feet apart. The one ingress-egress that is to the west is fairly close to the intersection. You're not going to be able to get out there to make a left turn, especially during the busy hours. You're not going to be able to -- traffic stacks up at the stoplight, so it's going to force you to use the back exit, the one that's furthest to the east, or to make a left -- or right-hand turn and to proceed on through Easy Jet and traffic along through Muirwood or take one of the other exits out of the subdivision, which there are a few, but it's going to increase traffic. The project is an in-fill lot and there is more of these in-fill lots off to the south going up to Victory Road and I know these have to be developed and we kind of want them developed. It's better than having a weed patch and I don't like that either. I respect the -- it should be done. But to have these buildings be three stories amongst subdivisions -- there is three subdivisions there immediately. That's Sutherland Down, Sutherland Farm and Thousand Springs, but on down the road is Tuscany and there is another new subdivision on the corner of Victory and Eagle Road that's fairly new there. To have these monoliths stacked in here is not going to be a really esthetically pleasing to anybody going up and down Eagle corridor, in my opinion. I'd like to see the structures at least limited to two stories. Three stores is almost 40 feet, 39, 38 feet, something like this. You are better versed in the footage. But 40 feet tall is pretty -- is a pretty tall structure on these small lots and that they are trying to maximize the use of this property, but it is a narrow long lot and whatever you do there is going to be expected on down the road. There is already interest in buying properties on down toward the -- even down to Victory Road and rightly there should be. They should be d eveloped. It needs to be cleaned up and it would be to the benefit of Meridian and everybody to get that cleaned up. But I would like to see the profile limited -- the sight line limited to the rest of the buildings and facilities around the area. Thank you for your time. Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? Please. Hergert: My name is Bryce Hergert. I live at 2860 South Groom in Sutherland Farm . I, too, am on the Sutherland Farm homeowners association board of directors. But I'm speaking on behalf of myself this evening. Other than to say that I hope you will take the time to carefully read the findings in the letter that we submitted from the board, that you will consider that carefully, the issues that we raised in that. For myself I have an issue with the three stories. Now, that's the main issue. I understand that development is going to happen and that it should be, but the main thing that I see with that particular proposal is the three stories and that's where you exponentially take that out across those other pieces of property and you have to consider that this time, because that's going to be the precedent for what probably is going to be approved down the road. I have two issues with this esthetically. One is the exterior of the building and the garages do not have enough stonework or brickwork or stucco for the height of the buildings. I understand it was originally 24 inches that was proposed by the staff. JUB apparently considered that going up to four feet, but not all the way. I think that should be considered that that -- all of the entrances, the archways should also be stone, stucco or brick and as is with -- in our subdivision is required when each house is developed or constructed that each house would have a good amount of stone, brick, or stucco and that it went up to a certain height, which was four feet minimum and that it wrapped around the sides at least two Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 39 of 50 feet. I think that if you're going to put a project in there that's going to be sitting within our neighborhood you should consider making that a condition of anything that is approved there, hopefully not as it currently is proposed. The other issue I have and that I think that you should consider is that there needs to be more of a landscaping buffer between Easy Jet and these building. Whatever is in there -- currently they are not showing that they are going to do anything from what's there and currently there is only -- the amount of trees along Easy Jet coming into the subdivision -- I think if you're going to mitigate the damages it does visually, that you should require that they create more of an extensive landscaping package for that and create more of a corridor which hides some of the issues that you're going to see driving in there. The homeowners here have done a great job of presenting to you the things that we all feel and we don't want to overburden you, I know it's a tough thing that you have to deal with here, but we hope you will consider the feelings that all the homeowners as if you were one of us and I appreciate your time. Thank you. Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? All right. With no other public testimony, could the applicant, please, come forward. Bachman: Thank you, Chairman and Commissioners. Again for the record Lisa Bachman. JUB Engineers. 250 South Beachwood. I'm going to attempt to address -- what do I have, 15 minutes? Ten minutes. Yearsley: Ten, but we may give you a little bit more, because of the amount of comments that we have, so -- Bachman: Okay. I will do my best. I jotted down some notes and have some coming in, so I will just go down each -- each one individually. Yearsley: Okay. Bachman: I guess I can kind of start with the whole -- not wanting apartments, because I think, really, that's what this boils down to, a lot of people's concerns. You know, the fear about it becoming HUD housing, attracting younger, partying, tailgating, their nature of lifestyle, those types of things -- I'm just trying to kind of restate some of the things and group it together. You know, as you now, and I'm sure this isn't the first time you have heard it. This is a very sensitive issue, saying that all development should require ownership. A lot of people who don't want to own, like good -- good people like myself at one point owned an apartment. My son. Lots of good, upstanding citizens, probably a lot of them in the room tonight have lived in an apartment at one time and weren't the ghetto loser kind of person and no disrespect to what they say -- they are saying, just -- you know, for a low income apartment area I could see that, but, like I said, I believe that we have a good development. Our rent rates actually range from 750 dollars to -- for the one bedroom to 1,050 for a three bedroom. So, they are not cheap apartments. It's a nice, high quality housing choice for somebody to choose to live within. The goal is to attract people that would like to live close to services and be able to not have to maintain a yard and have all the amenities of the clubhouse and the fitness center and those types of Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 40 of 50 things. As far as three story versus two story as you can see on the site plan is closest to Sutherland Farm along Nephrite Way. The three story buildings are away from Sutherland Farm, actually butt up to the field. So, we have all the buffering along Nephrite Way, as well as Easy Jet to separate this development from the Sutherland Farm development. If we were to have all two story buildings it would result in less open space. There would be more building mass, more rooftops, foundations and, quite frankly, it wouldn't be feasible to do this project if we had to take it down to two stories and in looking at the Meridian City Code, while it may not be allowed in their CC&Rs to build three story buildings, the -- the maximum height in an R-4 zone is 35 feet and the maximum building height in an R-15 zone is 40 feet. So, there is really not a whole lot of difference there and what you're going to see proposed, even if it remained an R-4 zoning designation. And kind of going along -- along those lines of opposition to the -- it's designated mixed use in the Comprehensive Plan. I'm not trying to, you know, continue to say that, but, really, that is the case and that area of mixed use zone in the comp plan continues south along Eagle Road. So, this isn't something -- if this is something the community does not want in this area, I -- I would recommend either the city look at amending the comp plan or these folks organizing together to change the future land use designation on the comp plan, because apartments are allowed, multi-family, commercial. What we are presenting is a mixed use development with the elements identified in the comp plan. As far as -- I guess -- let's see. Along the traffic -- I think I kind of addressed at the beginning. Currently -- one thing I didn't mention was that Eagle Road and Easy Jet, you know, signalized intersection, it's currently operating at level of service A or B right now, kind of the middle there and that's at peak time. Easy Jet has 582 trips per day, whereas they are right, Eagle is pretty busy with about 18,000 vehicle trips per day. So, to put the access out onto Eagle Road -- and, then, also to put -- have it be all commercial, the -- you can't have commercial along Easy Jet, you want the frontage off of Eagle Road. So, again, that wouldn't be feasible to the make whole project as a commercial development and it wouldn't -- it wouldn't necessarily improve the traffic situation either. As far as maintenance and ownership, you know, the concern about individual ownership of the lots, I can understand that. That's something I talked to the property owner about to better understand and so there will be a property manager that oversees maintenance and care of the common areas. This is very typical, actually, for a multi-family development to have individual ownership of the lot for an apartment complex. There will be CC&Rs in place for those protections. That is handled as a final plat in the CZC phase and we will make sure, you know, when that's submitted to staff -- I mean they could make a condition of approval that there is a management company that oversees all of the maintenance and that way we don't have the issue, like the gentleman indicated, of differing requirements for each lot and whatnot. I think I got that. Let's see. As far as the open space and use of the park, you know, that's why we increased the amount of open space in our development, was to accommodate the residents that would be living there. If they want to keep them out of their park I guess, you know, that could be something that they handle outside of this public forum. You know, that is a civil issue with the -- with the HOA trying to work those issues out. Hopefully, like I said, this will be an amenity, an improvement to the development with the open space and amenities that have been provided. Let's see. As far as the mailboxes, we will be required to provide those. That was actually a condition of approval. The landscape buffer along the south side of the Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 41 of 50 property, they mentioned that that was reduced with the trees taken out. Actually, one of the conditions of approval was that we increase that buffer and bring that landscaping in. So, we will be moving those two buildings to the north to widen out that landscaping area along the south property line. The whole issue about the zoning map showing R-4, I totally get that. I have actually worked on another development in Meridian years ago where we had the same predicament where we allo wed the planned unit development or planned development to have this, you know, lower zoning designation, but allowing for a mix to come in through a PUD and, then, when people like -- like these nice people tonight look at the zoning map, they go, well, we thought it was going to R-4 and it is an unfortunate thing kind of from the past. So, I actually -- I think it's a good thing to rezone it to match the land use designations and so I'm glad that's the direction that the City of Meridian is going in to actually get the property zoned for what their -- what the use is intended to be. Let's see. I think I addressed most of the issues. I kind of grouped them together. If there is anything I missed let me know about that and I can attempt to address it. Yearsley: I guess a couple of my notes. Fencing to the south -- on the south edge of the property. Are you going to have that fenced? What type of fencing are we looking at? Bachman: We can and we could put in vinyl fencing if that's what you would want to require. Yearsley: Okay. So, you weren't planning to fence it at this time? Bachman: It wasn't in our -- in our proposal initially, but certainly we would be open to doing that. Of course, we would want to be able to provide for future connectivity to the south as required by staff as well. Yearsley: Absolutely. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Absolutely. Oliver: So, speaking of connecting to the south, show me again where you would be connecting -- where that connection would be. I'm sorry, I'm not very good at this smart thing -- smart kind of thing. Can I just mark directly on here? Watters: Yeah. Choose a color at the top and, then, you can use the pen. Bachman: Okay. So, we are going to be connecting here in the -- oops. I think we -- we talked to staff earlier about where that would be connecting. So, it would be in the commercial area. Is that showing up? Yearsley: Right there. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 42 of 50 Bachman: Sorry. I don't know -- oops. Is there any way that you could just point to the two locations? Watters: I'm trying to. Bachman: Thank you. Oh. Okay. Watters: See the arrow right there? Bachman: Okay. Oliver: So, you would be coming off Eagle onto Easy Jet coming through where Sonya is pointing? Bachman: Correct. Oliver: And, then, the road would come through there. So, the parking would go away? Cross-access? Bachman: Yes, Commissioner, we would actually provide for a cross-access agreement, so that when that property develops in the future they can access through there. Oliver: Great. Thank you. Yearsley: A couple of other comments. Landscaping buffer along Easy Jet. There is some hatching along the front. Can you explain what you're planning to do on the landscaping along Easy Jet? Bachman: It's actually already in place. There is a -- do you have a picture -- do we have a picture of what that looks like? It's actually already landscaped with grass and trees and there is actually decorative lights along there. We don't have a picture. Yearsley: Okay. Just wanting to go through my comments. Can you also -- the apartment manager space is -- where do you anticipate having them be on property for the property management space? Bachman: Well, a majority of it will be off site, but within the clubhouse there will be an office. Yearsley: Okay. Bachman: Which is pretty typical for these apartment projects. Yearsley: But you will have someone there full -- well, not full time, but at least during the day and manage the property? Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 43 of 50 Bachman: Correct. We will make sure there is a phone number that the residents can see that they can call if they have a question or a concern, yes. Yearsley: All right. I think you touched on the multiple ownership of the apartments. There was a deal brought up about helping to maintain the CC&Rs for the park. You're -- just trying to make sure I -- we try to address comments. Your thoughts on that or what -- Bachman: I think the property owner might be amenable to having discussion with them and maybe working something out through their CC&Rs. An agreement. Yearsley: Okay. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Bachman: I'm not sure to what level or what that would look like, though. Yearsley: And I'm not saying that that's going to be a condition, I'm just wanting to ask the question, so -- Bachman: Okay. Fitzgerald: Lisa, during your conversation with ACHD did they -- there is not a possibility for a curb cut that goes to an intersection on Eagle Road; correct? Bachman: You mean access off of Eagle Road? Correct. Fitzgerald: I mean as a close proximity to the intersection that's already there. Bachman: Commissioner, there is actually already -- they are right. I heard somebody say there is a curb cut out there, but we are not proposing any access off of Eagle Road. Fitzgerald: But just for future commercial. I mean if there is something different that's going to go there, it will be highly unlikely they would allow access that close. Bachman: Correct. Correct. Yearsley: And, then, the access on Easy Jet, that first one, is approved by ACHD; correct? Bachman: Correct, Chairman and Commissioners. It's actually 245 feet east of Eagle Road, which is in compliance with ACHD's policies. Yearsley: Okay. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 44 of 50 Yearsley: Yes. Oliver: Sonya, could you pull up the picture that shows the actual apartments and what they would look like? So, one of the comments was made that you're going to have stone going just up so far into the entrances; is that correct? Bachman: Correct. On the presentation that I did we had done a rendering to show the area in front of the stairwells with some stone on it. Oliver: Going up only how many feet? Bachman: It just would go around the -- the entryway area. Oliver: Yeah. Bachman: But, then, this -- this does not reflect the condition of approval through staff. This is what we had proposed and we will amend the architectural rendering and resubmit those to staff when we go through design review and CZC. Oliver: Okay. Thank you. Yearsley: I think that's most of my comments. Does anybody else have any questions? Okay. Thank you very much. Bachman: Thank you guys. Yearsley: So, with that can I get a motion to close the public hearing on RZ 15-012, PP 15-016 and CUP 15-017. McCarvel: So moved. Fitzgerald: 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: If you guys don't mind, I would like to go first. So, we have a set of rules and regulations that -- and codes that we have to follow and -- and as part of our -- our view of an application the owner has property rights to develop how he would like. Our job is to work to mitigate with the issues from the property owners and come up with a reasonable solution. That being said, let me kind of qualify my statements. I live down the street from you guys, so I understand traffic, I understand what's going on and I understand the site and I know where the site is and the constraints with it. According to staff and the applicant, there was always a plan for apartments or high density residential within the Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 45 of 50 planned development and it was allowed for this location and it didn't need to go through a rezone to make that work based on the allowance that was there. I understand the concerns from the neighbors. I'm trying to figure out how to best to word these. I understand the traffic is bad, because I drive that traffic and understand that the traffic is going to get worse -- not by this development, by other developments. It's not just this one. It's just the way it is. And I don't know if we are probably the worst intersection in the -- in the county, so -- I don't know. That is not under our purview to reject it based on that, because ACHD has already approved the traffic and the application based on traffic. School is not under our purview. I -- my kids go to Mountain View and so I understand the school densities, but, again, that is the school needing to come up with a way to solve that impact. And I'm sure glad I'm not running for election right now. So -- so, for me, what it comes down to is density, personally. What is -- what is an appropriate density for this location and I have struggled with that most of the evening, listening to your comments, listening to the applicant's comments and trying to figure out what -- what makes sense and at this point I'm kind of leaning to requiring only two story apartments to help mitigate the density and the bulk and mass. Personally I think the three stories will stick out quite a bit on that location. So, I would be curious to see what other people have a tendency to think on that same situation. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: I would agree with you -- I have seen density done is places where it's allowed, where it's been done as apartment PUD, with that being Paramount or Bridgetower, it's done well in lots of places and I'm a big fan of mixed use. But I'm a little concerned about this one. Mostly because if you look at the map, about how close that first house is off that -- that building, it's -- there is no buffer and so -- and I -- when we do density on hard corners and those kind of things, I'm a big fan and I like apartments on hard corners and commercial hard corners, but there is always a little step in density between you get, you know, R-4 houses into a high density level and I -- I tend to agree with you wholeheartedly that a three story house in the backyard of that -- those several houses that are there is -- is difficult and too much density too close to a residential neighborhood is -- I am opposed to that. And so I think -- that being said, I think I have the same opinion that there needs to be a limitation of some kind there to maintain the value of people houses. It also gives the developer the ability to develop that property maybe in a different manner. McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel. McCarvel: I think, you know, sitting up here -- I mean every month we hear about the problems with traffic and problems with the school and we always try to honor -- you know, we have got to honor the rights of the property owner and recognize that we all as a community need keep on ACHD with their issue and do what we can with the schools to Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 46 of 50 keep expanding, because the fact is this valley is just growing. But I agree the three story thing just seems out of place. It's just a gut check. I don't know what the exact law is on this, but it just -- it does not seem to fit with single and maximum two story homes and I guess most of them are single. It's just not a fit. I would agree that the two story should be the max if that's -- Wilson: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson. Wilson: I'm glad that my fellow Commissioners are kind of in the same sort of mind set. I mean I was taking pretty close notes of -- of the testimony today and thing I circled several times was appropriateness of this development and I think that requiring two stories -- again, I mean we are kind of bounded by the situation here and what we can do, but -- but we can make this more appropriate by -- by making it two stories -- recommending two stories and I think I would support that also. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: After taking copious notes on all the testimony, I am just elated about the passion that everyone brought tonight about this project and it really is a gut check to make you think about what is appropriate and I'm of the same mind, that looking at having a three story building is not something I would want to be looking at, so I agree as well. Yearsley: Okay. So, a couple of things that -- just clarification. In your packets staff is recommending additional fencing along Easy Jet. The applicant said they were amenable to fencing on the south, if you're amenable to that. And, then, I guess the question that they brought up would be the configuration of the entryway having a little bit of relief on that. So, those are the -- I guess -- and, then, the mass and density. Fitzgerald: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Yes. Fitzgerald: Just a clarification or a question I guess. With the applicant's comment about that not being doable, I guess the question becomes are we going to move forward a rezone to R-15. With that being able to be sold to someone else would this same situation come back? Yearsley: I believe within the CUP we do have the ability to recommend a two story. Is that correct or -- Watters: That is correct, Chairman Yearsley. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 47 of 50 Yearsley: And, again, this is a recommendation to City Council, so it does have to go back and -- for their final approval of that. So, I believe that that is something that we can do. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Yearsley: So -- so, I don't know what your thoughts on those other items were. I didn't address the entry configuration, because it kind of got lost in the other arguments, so -- McCarvel: Mr. Chairman, just as someone who has lived in apartments and I see people walking into them in closed entries, I would almost prefer the somewhat open. I think it reduces, you know, burglary problems, all that kind of stuff. I think it's better to have it somewhat open and some air flow and not be musty and have the security. I think it's a stronger security issue having it closed. Yearsley: Okay. No. And I think -- like I said, I think that is probably not a bad issue, so -- so, if no other comments -- I guess are there any other comments before we move forward? Fitzgerald: One quick question, Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Absolutely. Fitzgerald: Sonya, for design review -- components of this in regards to stone and brick and stucco and those kind of things, you're going to have full purview per the development agreement to do -- to make sure it meets muster; correct? Watters: Chairman and Commissioner Fitzgerald, yes, I'm glad you brought that up. All the buildings on the site will need to go through design revie w approval. They will need to comply with the standards in the UDC, as well as the design guidelines or the design standards in effect at the time of development. We currently have some new standards that are in process right now. I would like to note, though, if you make any variations on the design guidelines that are noted in the report, those two items are specifically taken out of the design guidelines -- of our Meridian design manual. If you do make any variations to those please be very concise in what your expectations are, so that we may measure them, you know, with the standards when they come in. Also, the -- the open entryway, the intent of that is not to totally enclose the entry, just to have a little more design, rather than just an open staircase that you're looking at. Thank you. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Yearsley: So, help explain the concise -- what issue are you talking about on our being concise in our -- Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 48 of 50 Watters: Chairman Yearsley, Commissioners, right now the design guideline s are worded just exactly as in the staff report. At least 50 percent of the length of the structure and at least 24 inches in height. Yearsley: Okay. For the rock and the stucco? Watters: Right. It's a measurable amount right now. Yearsley: Okay. Watters: If you vary from that it needs to be measurable. Yearsley: Okay. Okay. And I kind of got the impression that we were in agreement with staff on the stone configuration, if I remember right, so -- McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? Then is there anything we need to do, then, on the entry? What you're saying sounds like what we were meaning. Watters: No. That is as the staff report is written. McCarvel: That is as the staff -- okay. Fitzgerald: So, we are talking about arches and some kind of an architectural entry point? McCarvel: Yeah. That's not a totally enclosed -- Fitzgerald: Yeah. Yearsley: Okay. So, I guess that comes down to building height or number of levels. open fencing. What was my other one? I think those were the two that we are down to. What's that? Fitzgerald: Entry point for structural -- change on the entry point for staircase, is that what you're -- Yearsley: No. Well, yeah, and I think we have kind of talked about that with staff. Their condition -- it's not saying it has to be closed, but at least more of an architectural entrance. Fitzgerald: Okay. Yearsley: So, I don't know, I think that's kind of what we were wanting as well, so it may not need to be modified. Fitzgerald: Okay. Meridian Planning & Zoning October 15, 2015 Page 49 of 50 Yearsley: So, anybody want to try this one? Oliver: We will shoot it, see what happens. Yearsley: All right. Let's go forth. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: After careful consideration of all staff, applicant, and public testimony, I move to recommend approval of file numbers RZ 15-012, 15 -- or excuse me. PP 15-016 and CUP 15-017, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 15, 2015, with the following modifications: Here we go. Staff recommends adding one additional condition of approval, which is meaning adding the vinyl fence not only to the front, but around to the south side as well to match the existing fencing that is already there. As well as reducing the height of the apartments from three stories to a maximum of two stories. Yearsley: I think that was about it. Fitzgerald: Second. Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve file number RZ 15 -012, PP 15-016 and CUP 15-017, with modifications. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Yearsley: Congratulations. Thank you guys very much. With that I believe we have one last motion to make. Oliver: Mr. Chairman? Yearsley: Commissioner Oliver. Oliver: I move that we close the meeting. Fitzgerald: Second. Yearsley; I have a motion and a second to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Opposed. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:05 P.M.