2016 11-17Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting November 17, 2016
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of November 17,
2016, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Steven Yearsley.
Members Present: Chairman Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel
and Commissioner Gregory Wilson.
Members Absent: Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald.
Others Present: Machelle Hill, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Josh Beach and
Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance:
Roll-call
__X___ Gregory Wilson _____ Vacant
__X__ Rhonda McCarvel _____ 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 for the hearing date of November 17th, 2016, and let's begin with
roll call.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda
Yearsley: Thank you. Next item on the agenda -- the agenda is the adoption of
the agenda and the only thing that we have right now that's changed is the
Bannock Ridge Subdivision, file number H-2016-0113, is requesting to withdraw
their application and with that we have no other changes, so could I get a motion
to adopt the agenda as presented?
Wilson: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson.
Wilson: I move we adopt the agenda as presented.
McCarvel: Second.
Yearsley: Have a motion and a second to adopt the agenda as presented . All in
favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 2 of 43
Item 3: Consent Agenda
A. Approve Minutes of November 3, 2016 Planning and
Zoning Commission Meeting
Yearsley: Next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have on that
to approve the minutes of November 3rd, 2016, Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting. If there are no changes or modifications, I would entertain
a motion to approve the Consent Agenda.
Wilson: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Mr. Wilson.
Wilson: I move 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: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Item 4: Action Items
A. Public Hearing for Bannock Ridge (H-2016-0113) by Lee
Gientke Located 2940, 3101 and 3155 S. Mesa Way 1
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 9.42 Acres of
Land with an R-4 Zoning District
2. Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of
Thirty-Five (35) Building Lots and Four (4)
Common Lots on 13.57 Acres of Land in an R-4
Zoning District
Yearsley: So, for this first item we are not going to open the public hearing, we
are just going to -- I guess, staff, we just need to recognize that it's being
withdrawn; correct?
Pogue: Open it for that purpose.
Yearsley: Okay. We are going to open it just for the purpose to -- to recognize
that the application has been withdrawn and so -- do I need to do that by motion?
Pogue: May as well.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 3 of 43
Yearsley: Okay. So, can I get a motion to accept the withdrawal of the
application for file number H-2016-0113.
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
McCarvel: I move that we accept the withdrawal of application H-2016-0113.
Wilson: Second.
Yearsley: We have a motion and a second to accept the withdraw. All in favor
say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Yearsley: So, let me kind of run through what we are going to do for the next
items on the agenda. We are going to open each item one at a time. We will
start off with the staff report. The staff will present their findings on how the
application adheres to our Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code
with staff recommendations. After that the applicant will have an opportunity to
come forth and to present his case for approval and to talk about the project and
to comment on the staff's recommendations and comments. They will have up to
15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has had a chance to speak, we will open
it up to public testimony. There is a sign-up sheet in the back. Anybody wishing
to testify they will be given up to three minutes to do so -- to testify. If they are
speaking for a larger group, like an HOA, they will be given up to ten minutes.
After the public has had a chance to testify on the application , we will have the
applicant come back and respond to the public -- the public's testimony or
comments and, again, he will have ten minutes to do so. After -- after that we will
close the public hearing and the Commission will have an opportunity to discuss
and deliberate and, hopefully, make a recommendation to City Council.
B. Public Hearing Continued from 11/3/16 for 43 North
Subdivision (H-2016-0090) by KGA Development, LLC,
Located at 1318 NE 4th Street
1. Request: Preliminary Plat Consisting of 22
Building Lots and One (1) Common Lot on 1.81
Acres of Land in the R15 Zoning District
Yearsley: So, that being said, I would like to open the continued hearing of file
number is H-2016-0090, 34th North Subdivision and let's begin with the staff
report.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 4 of 43
Beach: Very good. Chair, Commissioners, as he said, this is for the 43 North
Subdivision. It is an application for a preliminary plat. The subject property
consists of approximately 1.81 acres of land, which is zoned R-15. There is
discrepancy in our map here. It shows two zoning districts. It's not actually split
-- a split zoned property, it is all R-15. At 1318 Northeast 4th Street. And that
better -- I shouldn't say better. Pull up a Google Earth map, so you can kind of
see currently what the property looks like . To the north we have multi-family
residential properties in the Creekside Arbor Apartments, which are zoned R-15,
and the Elm Grove Mobile Home Park, which is zoned R-8. To the east we have
a multi-family residential property, also Creekside Arbor, which is zoned R-15.
To the south we have multi-family residential in Miramar Apartments, which is
zoned R-15. And to the west we have vacant and single-family residential
properties, zoned both R-8 and R-15. In 2000 the property was rezoned from R-
8 and R-15 to entirely R-15. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map for
this property is high-density residential. The proposed plan consists of 21
building lots and four common lots. Let me get to the plat. It might be helpful.
Twenty-one building lots and four common lots on, as I said, approximately 1.81
acres of land in the proposed R-15 -- in the R-15 zoning district. The gross
density for the subdivision is 11.29 dwelling units per acre. The average lot size
is 2,658 square feet. All the proposed lots comply with the dimensional
standards set forth for that zoning district. The applicant is proposing two
common driveways. All common driveways should comply with the standards
listed in the UDC. Staff has reviewed the dimensions of the common driveways
depicted on the plat and they are consistent with those standards. The applicant
would be required to provide a five foot common lot adjacent to any properties
that do not take access from that common drive. They have requested
alternative compliance to provide a five-foot sidewalk instead. Because --
because this is a private driveway we don't typically require a sidewalk , but they
have elected to propose that in place of a five foot landscape buffer, which they
have asked for alternative compliance for and that was granted by the director.
There are several existing structures on the site that will be demolished as part of
the project. If you look back to the Google Earth shot, so common driveways run
kind of like north and south here. These existing homes -- the applicant will be
required to construct a portion of Northeast 4th Street as part of the project. To
go back to the plat here. This is Badley. Apartments are up here. Which is east
on the top. Common driveway entrance here off of Northeast 4th and one off of
Badley. They had to jog the street slightly, because this portion of Badley here is
private and that line right there is where it goes back public . So, they had to jog
the street out to meet up with the public road section. Sidewalks are required
along all public streets as set forth in the UDC. The applicant proposes to
construct a five foot wide sidewalk on Northeast 4th Street as part of this project.
Any -- any existing trees, which there are several, will need to be mitigated for.
They will contact Elroy Huff, city arborist, to go evaluate the trees. And any
existing and proposed fencing for the development shall be included in either a
site plan or landscape should comply with the UDC. The applicant is proposing
attached single family homes. The applicant has submitted conceptual
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 5 of 43
elevations for the project, which propose building materials, such as a mix of
shingle siding, lap siding, and architectural shingles with stone accents. The
elevations provided by the applicant appear to meet the standards in the UDC. A
design review application is required for this project. Staff has required that they
submit a master plan for their design review, so that we are not doing individual
design reviews for each building. They can just submit one for the whole project.
With that staff is recommending approval and I will stand for any questions you
have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? Would the applicant like to
come forward? Please state your name and address for the record.
Durtschi: Chairman, Members of the Commission, hello and good evening. For
the record my name is Sabrina Durtschi and I'm here on behalf of the applicant
and Briggs Engineering. My business address is 1800 West Overland Road,
Boise, Idaho. 83705. And tonight I have the pleasure of presenting to you this
preliminary plat application. I'd first like to begin and thank staff, in particular Bill
and Josh, for their help and assistance with this and since Josh did a really
thorough job with this presentation, I don't want to regurgitate some information.
I just kind of want to highlight a few key important things. One of the things that I
wanted to highlight was that I think this is a really important location for the City
of Meridian. It's a really special location I feel. One, because it's kind of on the
fringe of the downtown corridor and, two, it's really -- it's close to Fairview, so
there is a lot of shops and restaurants that give this location a high-level degree
of walkability and bikeability, which today people really find desirable. Also it's
allowing a density that downtown corridors really need to help sustain it. So, I
think that this is not only a special location, but I have a feeling that you're going
to be seeing a lot of in-fill. A lot of this area is going to slowly start redeveloping
and that's one of the reasons why we are here today is submitting this in-fill
application. As Josh had mentioned, we are doing a preliminary plat application
and this layout has evolved from our original layout. We -- besides reducing
units to meet the minimum standards and have the common drives coming in, we
changed those locations. Therefore, we are meeting the minimum standards for
your subdivision code. The one thing that we did ask for alternative compliance,
as Josh had mentioned, was for the sidewalk. We feel that that will give the
development good interconnectivity, which I think is really needed. Again, we --
we have read the staff's recommended conditions of approval and we agree with
them and we respectively request approval of this application this evening and I
will thank you for your time and consideration and stand for any questions that
you may have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? No.
Durtschi: Great. Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 6 of 43
Yearsley: We have one person signed up to testify. Lucile Leavell. Please state
your name and address for the record.
Leavell: My name is Lucile Leavell. My address is 2720 South Ariel Lane, but I
am the primary owner of Creekside Arbor, which is adjoining this property on two
sides. I have two concerns that I would like to make sure are addressed.
Number one, I do not believe that this plat lives up to Meridian standard for
outdoor or friendliness for children. There is no outdoor play area whatsoever.
Only in the driveway. And I find that Meridian has worked very hard to be friendly
to youth and children and this might -- lot might be fine across the street from a
park, but it is not. It is across -- it is surrounded by private property and I have a
concern in that area. I think it falls short of our standards. The standards I'm
familiar with in Meridian. Secondly, I am concerned that having that many
possible owners in such a small place -- I have not read their full application, but I
would like to be very sure that there will be a homeowners association that will be
an entity that we can speak to concerning any property problems or
neighborhood problems or conditions. I don't like the idea of having 22 separate
owners in that small space with no single entity who would have been put into
that area. Those are my two main concerns. And I realize they meet the
minimum legal requirements. I don't think they meet Meridian's family-oriented
requirements. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. Is there anybody else wanting to testify on this
application? Please come forward. Please state your name and address for the
record.
Ewing: Tuck Ewing. I represent Tico One, LLC. 1500 North El Dorado, Boise.
83704. I'm here -- we are the property owners just to the west of the applicant
property and we are certainly neutral on it. We have met at the neighborhood
meeting with the developers and we concur with everything. I just for the record
want to make sure that any and all utilities that may be going down 4th Street,
which I know there was some discussion about the water loop and certainly
sewer and all that stuff is stubbed to the west. Certainly in the future we don't
know what's going to happen on our property, but we want to make sure that we
are not going in and tearing up 4th Street, which, obviously, will be fairly new and
improved. So, we just request that all those utilities are stubbed to the west, so
that we can tie into them and provide that loop that I think will be required in the
future. So --
Yearsley: All right. Thank you.
Ewing: Thanks.
Yearsley: Anybody else? Thank you. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 7 of 43
Durtschi: Thank you. Again, I'm Sabrina Durtschi. 1800 West Overland Road,
Boise, Idaho. 83705. And thank you. To address just a few of the concerns and
questions. One, we will have -- this will be under an HOA. There will be CC&Rs
that will be submitted with the final plat and that the neighbors would be more
than happy if they would like to review once it's submitted. Two, as far as open
space, playgrounds, we are kind of -- this lot is under the threshold where open
space is required and this is kind of one of the -- the balancing acts of in-fill. It's
not like 40 acres out in suburbia where you can have plenty of room for parks
and schools. This is really -- these are really tight spaces that we have to, one,
make sure it pencils out for the developer and , really, it's really hard to
accommodate those kind of amenities as far as parks and et cetera. And the
third one is the sewer requirements. I believe -- I am not exactly sure where the
utilities are going to be coming f rom, but if the -- the owners across 4th Street do
you want to stub into -- in during that time when the street is constructed, they
are more than welcome to. It would, obviously, have to be at their cost, but we
would totally be open for them to construct -- when the construction of 4th Street
is happening. So, with that I will stand for any questions that you may have and
thank you again.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? I would entertain a motion to
close the public hearing on file H-2016-0090.
Wilson: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson.
Wilson: I move we close the hearing on H-2016-0113.
McCarvel: Second.
Yearsley: 0090.
Wilson: Oh. Yeah. Sorry. H-2016-0090.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing. All in favor
say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Yearsley: Comments or thoughts before we --
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 8 of 43
McCarvel: I think it's a good looking project, as well as in-fill space that it is and I
believe it's under five acres, so that's what -- it's not required to have any open
space.
Yearsley: Right.
McCarvel: I mean it would be lovely if I could, but I don't see a whole lot of the
places around it. It's just not common for that area and those tight spaces.
Wilson: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson.
Wilson: I agree, in-fill is difficult and if you look at the surrounding areas -- I
mean I think this preliminary plat fits the -- you know, the neighboring areas and I
-- I will be supporting it.
Yearsley: You know, I look at it as it's understanding it doesn't have a lot of open
space or, you know, yard or anything like that, but I think it's mainly more for, you
know, a retirement or a single type -- or, you know, just not -- not many kids
types of place. I like the look of the homes. I think they have done a good job to
make it good look. I like the idea of the sidewalk instead of the landscaping. I
think that brings that together a lot better. I'm grateful that they are going to have
an HOA as well. And, again, it does not have this -- there is no requirement for
open space, because it does fall into that requirement -- or of less than five
acres. To the stub outs, you know, my recommendation would be to get with the
city and as they do the design to talk to them about that and work that out -- that
agreement. I'm not quite sure how that will all play out, but I would recommend
getting with them and -- and discussing that with them. So, I think it looks good.
It meets the code. It meets the ordinances. You know, at 11 units per acre I
think it fits pretty well,
so --
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
McCarvel: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to
recommend approval to the City Council of file number H-2016-0090 as
presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 15th , 2016.
Wilson: Second.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve -- approve file number
H-2016-0090. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 9 of 43
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
C. Public Hearing for Black Cat and Chinden Annexation
(H-20160120) by Pine Street LLC, Located at 6280 N.
Black Cat Road
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 3.51 Acres of
Land with an L-O Zoning District
Yearsley: Thank you. Next item on the list is the public hearing for file number
H-2016-0120, Black Cat and Chinden Annexation, and let's begin with staff
report.
Beach: Very good, Chair, Commissioners. As you mentioned, this is called
Black Cat and Linder -- excuse me -- Black Cat and Chinden Annexation. It's an
annexation -- an application for annexation and zoning. The subject property
consists of approximately 3.51 acres of land , which is currently zoned RUT in
Ada county at -- located at 6280 North Black Cat. So, north is West Chinden
Boulevard and Tree Farm property, which is zoned C-C or Community
Commercial. To the east is vacant property, which has recently been approved
for the Trilogy Subdivision, which is zoned R-8. To the south is the Bainbridge
Subdivision and the Rambo Subdivision, both zoned R-8. To the west is North
Black Cat Road and single family homes, also zoned RUT in Ada county. There
is no history on this property. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map
designation for the property is medium density residential. The applicant
requests annexation and zoning of the property to the L-O zoning district. Legal
description submitted with the application shows the boundary of the property
proposed to be annexed and rezoned. The property is contiguous, as I said to
property that has been previously annexed into the city for the Trilogy
Subdivision and to the north. A site plan submitted that depicts two 12,000
square foot office buildings. The design of the site should comply with the design
review standards listed in the UDC. The applicant, as I will get to it, has
submitted a second concept plan they would like to be included in the
development agreement. A minimum of five foot wide detached sidewalk is
required around all buildings, as well as those serving public streets. As I said,
this -- they submitted a concept plan -- when the property does come in for
development they will be required to do, as I said, a certificate of zoning
compliance and design review, which we will catch the requirement for the multi-
use pathway along Chinden. Internal sidewalks. They will also be required to
construct a landscape buffer adjacent to what will be Exeter -- Exeter Avenue,
which is part of the Trilogy Subdivision. So, they will be required to provide the
landscape buffer, sidewalk, and curb and gutter on the -- on the west side of the
street. I will bring this over here as well, so you can kind of see what it currently
looks like. This property is outlined right here as a property in question. There is
an existing home and associated outbuildings on the site that will be removed as
part of this development. Chinden Boulevard is a state highway. UDC prohibits
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 10 of 43
access to state highways at locations other than at section line roads or at the
half mile between sections. A note should be placed on the face of the plat
prohibiting direct access to Chinden Boulevard and the applicant should dedicate
right of way in accord with ITD's requirements to allow for future highway
expansion one hundred feet from center line. So, the applicant will be required to
dedicate some additional right of way along Chinden to meet what ITD's
requirements are. Chinden Boulevard, adjacent to the property, is classified as
entryway corridor in the future land use map and does require a 35 foot
landscape buffer. The applicant has proposed to construct a 35 foot landscape
along Chinden located outside of the future one hundred foot right of way for the
highway. There was approximately 55 additional feet that will be -- will be
improved with grass until ITD purchases -- purchases that property for the
widening of Chinden Boulevard. The proposal meets the 35 foot minimum
landscape buffer required and accommodates the 55 feet of additional right-of-
way required by ITD. There are large trees on the site, which the applicant is
posing to remove or to relocate. Any trees over four inches in caliper that are
removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees. As
with the previous application, the applicant will have to meet with Elroy Huff, the
city's arborist, to discuss that and mitigate for any trees that are removed. UDC
requires sidewalks on both sides of public streets. Rambling Court is currently
improved with sidewalk -- or, excuse me, improved with pavement only. The
sidewalk on the north side of West Rambling Court -- so, as you see with my
cursor here -- it looks like there is a sidewalk there, but there is -- there is not.
The applicant for the Trilogy Subdivision was required, if you remember, to
construct a sidewalk along the north side to get up to Black Cat. There was
some concern for students getting up to a bus stop on Black Cat. So, that -- that
has been covered. The applicant shows a sidewalk section from Chinden
Boulevard onto the site. All sidewalks shall be constructed in accordance with
the UDC. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway is required, as I said, along
Chinden. The applicant is also required to construct a landscape buffer along
Black Cat. The elevations were submitted as part of the concept plan and
appear to meet at UDC requirements. As I said, any construction on this
property will be required to meet certificate of zoning compliance and design
review standards. With that staff has been in discussion with the -- the applicant
here Jerrod Wallgren, who did submit an additional concept plan that they would
like to be included in the development agreement and with that staff -- I will stand
for any questions. Staff is recommending approval of the project.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? Thank you. Would the
applicant like to come forward?
Mr. Chair, Commissioners, my name is Jerrod Wallgren. I'm with JGT
Architecture. Located at 1212 12th Avenue South in Nampa. Representing the
applicant for this annexation request. Do you have my --
Beach: I do.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 11 of 43
Wallgren: I don't have a whole lot of additional visual aids to what Josh provided,
but we might be able to see some up closer. The property at Black Cat and
Chinden is currently a -- basically an old farmhouse. There is -- the owner that
bought the property is currently renting that out with the intent to continue use as
a -- a residence until which time development happens. How do I -- so, there is a
-- there is a house and some outbuildings and, then, some pasture land on the
property.
Beach: My apologies, I'm messing with you here.
Wallgren: Take it away. We see this -- this property to -- if you would get the --
oops. Scroll down here. There we go. This does not want to work very well.
Parsons: We can control it here.
Beach: Yeah. I can scroll down for you.
Wallgren: I have got a look at the Comprehensive Plan -- if you look at the Black
Cat/Chinden intersection, it is laid out very similar to the Linder and Chinden -- a
couple miles to the east. We see that intended to be a future type of
development although this specific parcel is medium density residential , it will be
right on that corner with some fairly intense mixed use and commercial uses. So,
we feel that our proposal of a light office, the yellow zone will act as a good buffer
between those heavy commercial uses and -- and the neighboring residential.
Go to the next -- this is just an aerial of that -- a couple miles down, the Fred
Meyer development, and the aerial isn't up to date, but at the southwest corner
there is commercial development and what we see for this development is very
similar to what you might see further to the west on this -- across from the golf
course was some smaller type office buildings is the intensity of use that we see
happening on this site and the owner of the property is a doctor and he has some
connections in the medical field where he thinks this might be a good area for
medical office and so that's the vision at this point. If you could go to the next -- I
think we have got some site plans -- oriented this north so you can see -- the first
site plan we submitted was, essentially, kind of dividing the property in half into a
couple large buildings that could be larger -- you know, one large office or
multiple office tenants within those buildings and -- upon reading the staff report
there is the condition in there for substantial compliance with the plan and at this
point we are not necessarily proposing a specific project. I mean this is strictly
for annexation and so there is some concern about that condition , because this is
a vision at this point and we'd love to develop it this way, but understanding that
a 12,000 square foot building is rather large and depending on what sort of
tenant or buyer interest you have, the ability to do some smaller buildings would
be beneficial and so if you go to the next slide I think that's our concept with
potentially four buildings or, you know, who knows. They could get one large
user that wants the whole site. I mean it's a little difficult to out guess. So, that is
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 12 of 43
somewhat problematic with that substantial conformance to the proposed site,
but we would like to give ourselves a couple of options there. And, then, the last
slide I have is the division for the -- how the building might look and the intent
with this was to have a nice professional looking building, slightly contemporary
roof lines, yet some softer materials that -- you know, lower profile stuff that
would be compatible with the -- the neighboring residential uses and so with that
I would be happy to answer any questions.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions? Thank you.
Wallgren: Thank you.
Yearsley: I do not have anybody signed up for this application . Is there anyone
wishing to testify on this application? I guess with that we don't need to have the
applicant need to come forward.
Beach: Mr. Chair, quick -- we neglected in our staff report to indicate that the
applicant wanted to maintain the home for a period of time until the property
develops, so we may want to create a condition where that is -- that something is
-- typically we either want the property to connect immediately to utilities or -- or
be removed. So, I think if they are wanting to keep that, we may want to put a
condition there that allows for that up until the property is developed, if that's your
comfort -- I mean that's -- it's really up to you folks to decide what you'd like to do
there, but we didn't -- we didn't have a condition in there that spelled that out.
So, I just want to make sure.
Yearsley: Okay. Thank you.
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Yes.
McCarvel: Are utilities out that far even? Are they right up to that corner?
Beach: I don't -- I'm not sure I know the answer to that.
McCarvel: I'm open to leaving it -- you know, leaving it as is, but -- I mean there
is nothing to connect to right this second anyway.
Beach: Because they are not wanting to keep the house for -- I mean, again, it's
dependent on when the property develops, but because they are not planning on
keeping it long term I'm not sure it makes a whole lot of sense --
McCarvel: Right.
Beach: -- to connect the property.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 13 of 43
McCarvel: Right. I'm just trying to clear in my own head that it's not even there
yet anyway, so -- okay.
Parson: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, the utilities do run in Black
Cat, but Public Works has indicated in their staff report their preference is to tie
into the utilities that are going to be provided with the Trilogy Subdivision, which
is along their east boundary and so it would be their preference to probably hold
off on that until such time and we just want to make it clear the reason why we
need to have something in the developm ent agreement is because they are
requesting an L-O zone and to keep a single family home and that L-O zone
makes it nonconforming and we need to make sure if that's something that you
support, that we need to capture that in the development agreement to share
with City Council as they -- as this application moves along to them.
Yearsley: So, at that point it's in the development agreement, so it should be a
recommendation to add it, not a condition to add it; correct.
Parsons: Right now we don't have anything that addresses a single family home.
We were --
Yearsley: Right.
Parsons: -- assuming it was going to be scraped, but hearing the testimony
tonight and, then, hearing that they want to keep that for a period of time, we
probably need to address it and have something in the DA that allows them not
to hook up and keep that non-conforming use in place until such time as it
develops with the office part.
Beach: That's up to your comfort. You can allow that until the property develops.
You can put a time limit on that, you know, keep it for a period of two years or,
you know, whatever. You have some options. So, keep that in mind. You know,
there has -- there has been instances where we annex the property and it doesn't
develop for ten years and you have got an existing home on an L-O piece of
property for ten years that's nonconforming. If it gets sold and they want to add
on, they can't, because it's nonconforming. You know, just things to consider.
So, you know, I think the applicant said they don't really know -- they don't have a
user right now for the property. So, it could be a long-term residential unit there,
so --
Yearsley: I guess with that -- there is no other application, we would recommend
a motion to close the public hearing for file number H-2016-0120.
McCarvel: So moved.
Wilson: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 14 of 43
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to close the public hearing on file
number H-2016-0120. All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Yearsley: So, any comments?
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
McCarvel: I'm in favor of allowing that single family home to stay there until it's
developed -- I'd like to say until it's developed, but, again, who knows. I guess
we should maybe discuss a time line for that and the other thing -- I think the
applicant asked, you know, that they not be held to the -- the reasons that they
presented for the property or the purposes for the property. I would think if it was
much different than what they have proposed that it would need to come before
us again or they --
Yearsley: Right.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Yearsley: Well, I think what it is is they are providing two different options --
McCarvel: Right.
Yearsley: -- to go in the development agreement, so they can -- and if it has to
change from that, then, they have to go back to Council to modify the
development agreement, so, yes.
Wilson: Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Mr. Wilson.
Wilson: I mean on the second issue -- not the first issue, I mean I think I'm
amenable -- I mean I know they -- at this point they don't know what's going to go
in there and I think, you know, if it's two buildings I think that's great and, you
know, there are bigger employers there and if they are smaller that -- that would
be a fine fit, too. As for the first issue, in terms of how long that residential
property could stay there, I think -- I mean we were getting maybe two years -- I
think two or three years might -- I might be looking at that area and I'd like to
maybe hear your perspective.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 15 of 43
Yearsley: You know, I -- you know, we can do the two years. The only problem
is is someone has got to track that condition. From what I understand I think the
first phase of that development next to the east is going in -- is going to go in
pretty quickly -- soon or it's going to start construction; is that not correct?
Beach: They have their final plat approval for the first phase, which he said is
that east section, which would include the -- the Exeter Road here along the --
the east boundary of this project. You can see the cursor here. So, that would
be, you know, right along here. So, they will have -- they will access, they will
have utilities relatively soon. Now, some of that depends on the builder's speed.
They have got a couple years to get their final plan approved before they have to
get to an extension of that. So, hypothetically, it could be -- it could be soon, but
it might not be.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Yearsley: And so I don't -- given the condition of the home and the site, I would
just let it go until they develop, personally, in my opinion, is I think that site is
going to develop sooner rather than later, just given what's going on out that way,
and I think it is a good location for this and everything . So, I would -- I would be
amenable to leaving it just until it develops.
Parsons: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, I think an appropriate
condition would be with the submittal of the first -- issuance of the first certificate
of zoning compliance on the site that they remove the structure.
Yearsley: Right. Okay.
Parsons: Probably where I would land on it.
Yearsley: So state that again, just so I can make sure it's --
Parsons: With the submittal of the first certificate of zo ning compliance
application the applicant shall remove the existing home and outbuildings. Or
even say prior to first certificate of occupancy.
Yearsley: Okay.
Parsons: At least that way they can get it demolished while they are constructing
the office buildings.
Yearsley: Right.
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman? I -- you know, it certainly doesn't make sense to make
them hook up to utilities or anything that's there, but I'm just wondering once that
gets developed -- I mean how long do you want all those outbuildings and --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 16 of 43
Yearsley: That's what -- that's what he's saying is it gets demolished once --
once they start.
McCarvel: Once the property to the --
Yearsley: No. No. No. When they develop.
McCarvel: Okay.
Yearsley: When they do their first development -- you know, because they could
actually develop to the -- to the north and leave the house to the south and what
we are saying is when they start doing their first phase or whatever, that house --
that house has to go is what you're saying.
Parsons: Again, you could hold it up at CZC -- in the first CZC for building permit
-- prior to issuance of a building permit it has to be removed.
Yearsley: Right.
Parsons: You can do that as well. It allows them to get the CZC and the design
review done with us and, then, to get a demo permit with the building department
and remove the structures.
Yearsley: Okay. So, at that point I would entertain a motion.
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
McCarvel: After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I moved to
recommend approval of file number H-2016-0120 as presented in the staff report
for the hearing date of November 17th , 2016, with the following modification:
That the -- recommendation that the single family home be allowed to stay as is
until the first -- the issuance of the first certificate of zoning compliance.
Wilson: Second.
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second to approve file number H-2016-0120.
All in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
D. Public Hearing for Movado Estates Subdivision (H-2016-
0112) by DevCo, LLC, Located South Side of E. Overland
Road Between S. Topaz Way and S. Cloverdale Road
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 17 of 43
1. Request: Annexation and Zoning of
Approximately 102.69 Acres from RUT in Ada
County to the R-8 Zoning District (58.64 Acres)
and R-15 Zoning District (44.05 Acres)
2. Request: Preliminary Plat Consisting of 430
Single Family Residential Lots, 39 Common Lots,
and Nine (9) Other Lots on Approximately 102.69
Acres in the Proposed R-8 and R-15 Zoning
District
Yearsley: So, the one we are all waiting for. Let's begin for -- public hearing for
file number H-2016-0112, Movado Estates Subdivision, and let's begin with the
staff report.
Beach: Good evening, Chair, Commissioners. This is an application for
annexation and preliminary plat. The site consists of approximately 102.69 acres
of land. It is zoned RUT in Ada County. It's located on the south side of East
Overland Road between South Topaz Way and South Cloverdale Road. The
adjacent zoning -- land use and zoning. To the north is agricultural and single
family residential land, zoned RUT in Ada County. The east is North Ten Mile
Road. Excuse me. North Ten Mile -- North Cloverdale Road. I think I got some
things messed up here in my report. So, let's move over here. Overland Road to
the north. Cloverdale Road to the east. We have the Muir Woods and
Sutherland Farms Subdivision to the south and we had the Silverstone Office
Park to the west. So, as you can see on their plat it consists of this portion here
I'm outlining is in Boise. That's about right there. Earlier this year the applicant
worked with the city of Boise to include this entire 40 acre piece into the City of
Meridian and we have included that in our Comprehensive Plan for medium
density residential. A lot of work from the applicant to do that. They
accomplished that. As part of this project they will be moving the Ridenbaugh
Canal from its current location on the east side of Cloverdale Road to the west
side of Cloverdale Road, thus removing two bridges over to the -- the lateral and
the applicant has been working on that and so that will take some time to
accomplish. As a result of that, we will show you the phasing plan that they are
proposing. So, the applicant has applied for this to annex 102.68 acres of land
with both R-8 and R-15 zoning districts. Staff believes the proposed zoning
designations are generally consistent with the policies in the Comprehensive
Plan. The applicant, as part of this -- there has been a lot of moving parts in this
project. As part of this -- in the original application -- as I said, it gets a little
confusing, so for clarity sake typically we require an entire parcel to be annexed
in. In the original application the applicant left out approximately 11.56 acres
from the annexation, but because that is part of the entire parcel, we don't let
them leave out half of a piece of parcel, they have to annex the entire parcel. So,
our recommendation is that they include that in the annexation -- approximately
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 18 of 43
11.56 acres and include however my lots they would like to include as part of the
plat. Does that make sense? Is that -- are you following me so far? So, it gets a
little confusing. There has been a lot of -- the property boundary adjustment in
the county to get to Silverstone Apartments, which were approved earlier this
year, on their own lot. There were three parcels originally. Come to find that one
of those parcels was not a legal parcel and so the parcel went away. They
thought they could leave this 11.56 parcel outside of the plat and leave it as a
standalone lot, which they are unable to do. So, we have -- we have found that
out. Anyway, moving right along. The applicant proposes to develop 430 new
single family residential attached and detached home s, as shown on the
preliminary plat. Legal description submitted with the application shows the
boundary. The applicant will be required to submit a revised legal description
and the plat at least ten days prior to City Council, so staff has the opportunity to
revise the staff report to reflect those changes. As I said, the plat consists of 430
building lots, 39 common lots, and nine other lots in both the R-8 and R-15
zoning districts and what is currently 102.69 acres. As I said, that acreage will go
up in the plat and the annexation. A phasing plan was submitted with the
application. The phasing plan submitted with the application indicates the
pedestrian crossing over the Ridenbaugh Canal -- it's real difficult to see.
Essentially in this location here. What happened with phase -- phase 6-A, staff
feels that the construction of the pedestrian pathway over the Ridenbaugh Canal
should occur prior to that phase where pedestrians will be able to cross
Cloverdale Road. There is an existing HAWK signal that crosses Cloverdale
Road. It's a little bit south of the boundary of their plat for the Pepper Ridge
Elementary School, which is located on the east side of Cloverdale Road . As I
said, staff is recommending that that happen in the third phase. The applicant --
we have worked with the applicant a little bit and they have got a separate
proposal that they will bring forward to you tonight. All existing structures on the
plat on the -- all existing structures on the lot will be required to be removed as
part of this. There is an existing single-family home. To drive by there, there is a
home and a large RV parked out there. It's kind of a strange sight. That will
have to be removed as part of this -- part of this project as well. A minimum 35
foot street buffer is required along East Overland Road, which is considered an
entryway corridor. So, the landscape plan of the applicant has shown -- has
shown some landscaping there, but because this lot will now be included in the
plat, this will have to be modified to accommodate the 35 foot wide landscape
buffer that is required along Overland Road. A 25 foot landscape buffer is
required along Cloverdale Road and a 20 foot wide street buffer is required along
South Movado Way, which is considered a collector street and as you see on the
-- on the plat here, that is -- this is South Movado Way and I believe the applicant
is proposing to construct that entire length with the first phase. The plat is
required to comply with block length standards listed in the UDC. Staff has
agreed to the proposed plat and with the exception of the southeast corner of the
property, has found it to be in compliance with the aforementioned standards . As
you see here -- this is the southeast corner -- there is not a whole lot of
opportunity to provide a stub street or pedestrian crossing access. The applicant
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 19 of 43
has shown one and two pedestrian crossings. One being the crossing over the
Ridenbaugh, the second being a pedestrian access that will connect with the
multi-use pathway that the applicant is proposing to construct along the Eight
Mile Creek out to Cloverdale Road. There are common driveways proposed.
The applicant is proposing several of them. Each common driveway is allowed a
maximum of six homes to take access. The applicant is in compliance with that.
As you see -- it's a little difficult to see here on the plat. The applicant worked
with the Fire Department to allow this. There is two common driveways, each
one is several lots along the south here that the applicant has worked with the
Fire Department to allow that to be emergency access and provide a bollard and
that will be required to be striped no parking, so that there aren't issues in the
future with potential Fire Department -- fire truck trying to get through there and
having cars parked on there. So, they received approval from the Fire
Department to offer that. The majority of the proposed streets depicted on the
plat are public, with the exception of the streets through what the applicant is
calling the Village Cottages, which is this portion here. It's a 55 and older gated
community. The applicant is proposing 105 residential lots within the Village
Cottages and with that, as I said, two gated entries with the main entrance off of
the primary business. The primary subdivision spine road, which is South
Movado Way, the main entrance will be here, with a secondary access and if you
remember with the Silverstone Apartments it requires that the applicant provide a
secondary access, so they are proposing a private -- a private road from the
Silverstone Apartments down to East Peter Falls Road that will provide a
secondary access and gate for the 55 and older community. The applicant is
proposing to install two gates. The applicant is requesting alternate compliance
to allow for 105 homes on a p rivate street and also for a common driveway off of
-- off of that same private street. City code allows for the applicant to request for
alternative compliance for private streets. So, the applicant is requesting two
items. One being, as I said, a common driveway off of a private street, which
staff is in support of and director has approved. Second being 105 units off of a
private street with -- when there are gates the code explicitly says that no more
than 50 homes be allowed in a gated community. Staff has interpreted the two
gates being proposed that they be allowed 50 per gate. So, staff is not
supportive of the extra five units that they are asking for. The applicant has
requested to have a common driveway off a private -- a private street, as I said,
has been approved by the director. Prior to the Commission hearing the
applicant shall revise the site plan to meet the standards allowing there to be one
hundred units. Three public street accesses are proposed for this developmen t,
one via East Overland Road to the north, two on the west side of the property,
which are East Copper Point Way, which is here on the south. And East Peter
Falls, which is just south, as I said, of the proposed Silverstone apartment
complex. In an effort to improve safety, the UDC limits access points to arterial
roadways by combining and/or limiting access points in accord with this
requirement and as proposed by the applicant that recommends that there not be
direct access to South Cloverdale Road. There is some significant challenges
with providing a direct access, but staff has not yet received the staff report from
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 20 of 43
the highway district, in e-mail they have indicated that they are not requiring
direct access to Cloverdale Road. In addition to that, staff has a condition that
the applicant provide this access point to East Peter Falls Street up to the
Silverstone Apartments. Our requirement and condition was that that be a public
road. I received an e-mail from the highway district at about 5:50 prior to the
hearing tonight indicating that they are not in support of that. They do not want
the public street. So, just keep that in mind as we are going through and I
believe Mr. Conger will elaborate a little bit further on that as we go forward. As I
said, we have not yet received a staff report from the highway district. So, the
highway district did require a traffic impact study for the overall development,
which included the Silverstone Apartments. So, the traffic impact study will not
change much regarding this project, since it was already considered, but we
have not yet received the staff report. Street buffer landscaping is required to be
provided per the UDC. The pathways master plan depicts the regional pathway
on this side along the south side of the Eight Mile Creek. The applicant proposes
to provide the extension of the regional pathway as an amenity for the proposed
subdivision. A ten foot wide multi-use pathway must be provided and
landscaped in accord with the UDC. So, this is the pathways plan proposed by
the applicant. They are proposing sidewalks along the South Movado Way. A
multi-use pathway along the south side of the Eight Mile Creek that would
connect with that pedestrian pathway and, then, out to Cloverdale Road. As part
of this application staff did require that the applicant provide an additional ten foot
pathway going through -- if you recall, there is an existing ten foot multi-use
pathway coming out of the Sutherland Farms Subdivision that goes along the
south side of the Ridenbaugh Canal and as you can kind of see here it dead
ends where the Muir Wood Subdivision starts, which is where Boise's jurisdiction
starts. So, that pathway was not continued on out to Cloverdale. So, it dead
ends. There is a pedestrian pathway that goes south into the Sutherland Farms
Subdivision. Staff requests that the applicant -- that they provide a continuation
of that ten foot pathway halfway. Their original proposal was that it -- kind of
follow my cursor here and go through their -- their parkway and, then, connect
with the pedestrian pathway. I have an exhibit here -- I don't. The applicant got
that to me this afternoon. They are proposing that the pathway move forward
here along my cursor and, then, shoot straight north along this road way and,
then, connect with the pathway at this location. Staff is supportive of that and I
believe the applicant will have that -- that plan as well. There are several
elevations provided with this and, as you can see, based on the site plan there is
varying lot sizes. The applicant is proposing a variety of elevations. The stone
accents, architectural shingles, staff is supportive of these elevations and as with
the previous applications -- I don't believe there are trees. If there are there are
just -- just a few. Staff would require that the applicant mitigate for any trees over
four inches in caliper and, again, work with the city's arborist to mitigate for those.
Detached sidewalks exist on East Overland Road. However, I believe there is
gravel in between the existing curb and sidewalk that must be removed and
vetted to the first phase of development, alon g with a 35 foot landscape buffer is
required. The applicant is proposing 15.41 acres or 15 percent open space for
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 21 of 43
the development. The applicant is proposing eight amenities for the subdivision
that include a clubhouse, a pool, two separate play structures, a water feature,
an outdoor fitness facility in the park, a picnic area, and two sections of multi-use
pathway. The applicant is also proposing, as I showed you in the diagram here,
a variety of pedestrian connections throughout the development . The amenities
appear to meet the requirements of common open space and site amenities set
forth in the UDC. I will mention that there are some amenities provided for the 55
and older community that will not be for the use of the remainder. There is a
clubhouse proposed in a central location here and there are roundabouts that are
for the sole use amenities -- or those residents in the 55 and older. But those
residents will, however, be allowed to use the amenities in the rest of the
subdivision. Having said that, both projects will, then, meet the requirements for
open space and amenities. Street lighting is required to be installed within the
development in accord with the city's adopted standards. Underground
pressurized irrigation system is required to be provided for the development, as
well as an adequate storm drainage system. As I said, there are -- the applicant
did provide some conceptual sample building elevations for the development ,
which staff is -- which appear to meet the UDC standards. Because homes that
back up to South Cloverdale Road will be highly visible, staff recommends the
rear or sides of structures on lots that face the street incorporate articulation
through changes in material, color, modulation and architectural elements, both
with horizontal and vertical, to break up monotonous wall plans and roof lines. In
addition, the attached single family homes within the project will be subject to
design review and as with the 43 North Subdivision, staff has crafted a condition
that the applicant provide a master cite plan for all of those residences within the
development that will be single family detached to facilitate in your review both
for the applicant and for staff. With that staff is recommending approval of the
application and I will stand for any questions you have.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any questions?
Beach: There is a lot there.
Yearsley: There is a lot there. There is. I think we will have the applicant come
forward.
Conger: Good evening, Members of the Commission. Jim Conger. 4824 West
Fairview Avenue. Certainly good evening to you and we are extremely happy to
be here and happy to be in front of you on this Movado Estates after a long, long
planning process, as you can see in listening with Josh. This is a big project and
has taken numerous different agencies to get where we are today. So, I will start
out just giving you a quick overview where we are. I'm not going to repeat
anything as far as surroundings. Josh already did well. We are adjacent to the
commercial of Silverstone Business Park and a couple months ago we were in
front of you -- maybe even three months ago with the approval of the multi-family
apartment site of 312 units that we brought in in the blue area and we also did a
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 22 of 43
comprehensive map amendment and change that's going to allow the future
commercial that you can see in the green that will be our buffer against Overland
Road. Also as Josh indicated, the bottom right corner in the yellow and the
orange was the 42 acres that we have spent a little greater than 12 months
taking out of the city of Boise that was already previously zoned R-1-C and
bringing it into the City of Meridian, annexed here with this application. So, we
think it's a great move for Meridian in a lot of reasons. A, more homes, more
space, kind of allows Meridian to finish off, you know, everything to Cloverdale
Road. I will share with you really our architecture is the next that we will be going
into, which is an extremely wonderful housing project that is both -- well, let me --
let me back up one. That is both the tan, the orange, and the yellow, which is
what we are in front of you tonight for, of course. Our first product, which is the
Suburban collection, which is between Eight Mile and up to the bottom of your
screen, which is the Ridenbaugh Canal, which is the buffer between our housing
product and the existing -- not only Meridian neighbors, but also half of them are
Boise neighbors on our south boundary. This is traditional lots. They will vary in
size up to a third acre. This housing type will consist of the larger lots and will
have homes priced -- home prices starting in the low for 400,000s. Next I will
move to what we are calling our Movado North. This -- we have two products up
there. The first is the urban collection, which is situated in the oranges. Most of
that is between the Eight Mile Creek and our future commercial, which this
becomes a little -- little more dense as we start radiating towards the commercial
and the busy Overland Road. This collection consists of both single level and
two story, while providing homes starting in the low 200,000s. We have had this
product before. It's a housing product that many Meridian residents are very
eager to buy. And our last product probably -- you know, they are all exciting, but
this one is pretty exciting. This is the Village Cottage collection, the tan area.
This section of Movado is the gated village area that is designed for the more
mature buyer. We have had an extensive experience with this similar product
and neighborhoods in other parts of this valley and understand the specific needs
very well that this buyer requires. They place a livability value on -- not only
simple, but a secure lifestyle. These home buyers are attracted to this
neighborhood because of the secured gates. Also included is a no maintenance
lifestyle. No hassles of yard or exterior maintenance. All of that is taken care of
by the owners association. This kind of homeowner likes the neighborhood
social aspect that we provide with the community center that you can see in the
photo of this existing project and also this fireplace is a high value on the close
proximity to St. Luke's. This is a great location for that, as well as the walkability
to nearby commercial that does exist in this Silverstone Commercial Business
Park. And I think it's important to state these are not prestige gates. These
homeowners are a growing segment of our community that really relies on the
security of the neighborhood as they know their age group is -- is, you know, a bit
of a target for scammers and trespassers. So, what we have seen in the other
neighborhoods that we have produced of this same quality and same
atmosphere is that the security of the entire neighborhood is extremely important
for their housing choice for them to choose to live there. With a project of this
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 23 of 43
magnitude -- well, hold on one second. If it will play, we have a quick video -- I
promise it's less than a minute long -- of our -- one of our existing neighborhoods
that we put through. Josh, am I smart enough to hit like -- there we go. Thank
you very much.
(Video played.)
Conger: So, we will just take you through the secure gated environment, the
neighborhood, and also be -- this new one will be extremely similar, which is
strong architecture, lots of stone, different types of other components to go with
that stone and just high amenity details is required by this home buyer. There is
the community center in that situation. Past experiences has confirmed that this
is a highly sought after product, but we have to finish it with high amenities and
very strong architecture. The inside -- the interiors are very clean. They are
private streets. They are well maintained by the owners association and they just
have a long-lasting sense of pride that just -- they are always clean and this one
is, you know, pushing eight years old now -- ten years old. I think the good news
of a project this size several -- several benefits, but the biggest is the magnitude
of the amazing overall amenity package that we are able to afford and provide
with it and what's required to -- to attract the homeowners to this community.
Starting, we have over 15 acres of open space, which is amazing in itself. We
have purposefully designed the amenities that would best fit the residence of this
community, which consists of parks in the green areas. We have open play
fields of walking, running, and youth sports as well. Also numerous picnic spots
that will be scattered throughout the three major areas that we have. The
community center in the center of the project will have adult and kid pools --
kiddie pools, whatever you want to call them, changing rooms, sundeck lounging
areas, shaded trellis seating areas, as well as the vehicle and bicycle parking
and that is, again, centrally located on purpose, not only is this spine going to
bring a majority of the traffic in, it is also, from an anesthetic standpoint as you
come in this well-appointed landscape spine, we hit our community center that's
really the ah-ha moment as you come in, per se. As well in the right-hand side
we will have a natural athletic park. We did one of these in Boise last year and
it's been received well. It will have declining boulders, a natural parque course,
log balance beams, as well as berms and sand pit. So, it gets little Billy into a
different environment besides just the plastic play structures, which we have
those as well, but this gets them dirty and allows them to kind of get down with
the dirt here I guess. As you can see with our amenity package we have put a
great deal of time and effort working with our builders who ultimately get to work
with the end users, sometimes land developers we get a little third-party from the
actual users of these facilities and the homeowner, so working with -- with our
builders we are able to stay in touch with actually who will be using this produc t.
But possibly the most exciting item yet to come that I haven't talked about, that
Josh alluded to, will be completing the regional pathway system from the
Silverstone commercial on the left part of your screen all the way to Cloverdale,
which, as you can see on this screen, is that red -- red line. So, we have this
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 24 of 43
final section of pathway in this -- in this region is going to be a huge
accomplishment for the City of Meridian, which now even makes it more valuable
that we were able to take that 42 acres out of Boise, as it will help get this
completed to Cloverdale Road. We are pleased to be the developer to not only
bring this project, but also the funds to finish this regional pathway that's so
needed. Upon completion certainly this pathway will be a proud moment for the
City of Meridian. Needless to say, we have worked with passion over the last 12
months for the design, not only of the product, but the layouts, the amenities and
all of that was in conjunction with the Fire Department, your Public Works
Department, city of Boise -- you know, the city of Boise with their planning team
to get the 42 acres out and their city council, numerous meetings behind closed
doors working with your city staff, working with the Ada County Highway District,
Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District with this canal relocation eventually, just to
understand all the agency requirements, so we could bring a project in front of
you today that's approvable. We are pleased with the staff report. It does
recommend approval, but we have six small items -- three are really small, three
are medium, so we have six items that I'm going to quickly run through. First,
let's just jump right into them. Actually, I'm going to have Marcel hand out this
slide for you, so you can make notes on it as deemed appropriate. Item 1.1C,
Josh alluded to staff wanting the pedestrian bridge at phase three. We are
proposing phase 5A as shown on the phasing plan of September 7th, 2016.
Unless I'm confused, we have worked with staff and your staff is acceptable to
5A. Head nods. I'm getting one. So, Item 1.1C should be -- should be simple
and it is the right -- just specifically I could go into 15 minutes of why 5A is about
the soonest we can provide that because of the canal re location and everything
to put it in the right spot. I'm not going to bore you with that unless you ask me
later. Item 1.1E and 1.1.2D are two different conditions in this special condition,
but they are in association with the same requirement, which is that public road
requirement. That public roadway requirement --
Yearsley: Just back up.
Conger: Yes.
Yearsley: That's the one that ACHD has just basically said that they don't want
that to be a private road, so --
Conger: Correct.
Beach: You got that and we have an e-mail that I will include in the records for
this application for the best public record, too, so --
Yearsley: So, that one --
McCarvel: All that verbiage in the motion we can just --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 25 of 43
Yearsley: Just -- yeah. I just was wanting to confirm that that was the one.
Conger: That is correct. And I have a copy of that e-mail that Josh would just
have to print if you need me to submit it or Josh will submit it in the packet.
Yearsley: Josh will have it, so --
Conger: Yeah. Perfect. So, Josh, I have froze up. It's not letting -- yeah. There
we go. So, I'm going to be really quick, because it sounds like we are all on the
same page with that with ACHD. That is where the little red circle is. It really
needs to be private and it's got two private users that are using it. So, I'm going
to spare all of us going over any of that in detail . So, that is gone away. Site
specific condition 1.1F is the additional multi-use pathway. Josh had indicated,
you know -- so, basically, we have the red line going to the middle of the project
that we were already providing. Staff came back a little bit towards the end of
saying, hey, you know, we -- we think we need a little bit more. We actually
aren't opposed to the extra condition. We just propose to put it in the red line that
I have drawn here on the left side of your screen that runs north -south or up and
down. You will see I have rewritten that condition to specifically put it in the front
of certain lots. I believe Josh is in agreement with the conditions. So, the
conditions you have in front of you relative to 1 .1.1F would be our requested
condition that you put in your motion and I believe Josh is fine with that motion .
So, again, like I said, several of them are fairly simple. Moving to the next
condition, which was 1.1 -- yeah. I apologize. Let me back up. We will -- site
specific condition 1.1.2C. So, basically, what this condition in front of you is
limiting us to a hundred homes in the gated area per a code item that states, as
Josh indicated, 50, two gates, a hundred units. What we have done in our
application is we have requested an alternative compliance for the 105 homes
with the two gates in the Village area, which is the tan area again. The quick
history on this issue -- we have had numerous meetings with staff. What it
appears is this may -- it's a -- become vague of what the intent of that is. It
doesn't actually make any sense. The best that we could glean -- I think the best
staff could glean, speaking for them a little bit as well and myself , is this was a
life safety emergency code that was kind of a hangover from earlier days in life .
We have had -- with that we have had numerous meetings with Perry Palmer of
the fire department for the whole project, but specifically towards the end
numerous just on this code condition and we have Meridian Fire Department
approval acknowledging that the five additional homes do not pose a health or
safety risk. So, I guess with that I should stop talking, but I'm going to continue
on for a half a second and if we have to move the gate , redraw five lots, and
have them access that private road, it would really be a tragedy to not have those
five units inside the gates and part of this master plan gated area. So, we aren't
in front of you tonight losing five units, we are in front of you tonight whether I'm
going to get five in the gate or out of the gate. So, we believe that's acceptable
and, hopefully, you see it as well. Is that my beeper?
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 26 of 43
Yearsley: That is, but I will -- since the -- the size of the project and the different
-- I will allow you some more time.
Conger: And we are really close to the end anyhow. So, we were fine. So, I
don't want to jump off those five units, because that's a big deal to the project.
We believe the 105 with Fire signing off on it would be acceptable and you have,
as you already know, so I'm not educating you, I'm just reminding that you have
with the -- what did we do. With the alternative compliance and the way your
code reads you have the legal right to grant the 105 units with that request.
Canal fencing. I don't believe this is a big issue . I believe Josh is acceptable.
The condition 1.1.3A originally read the Eight Mile and the Ridenbaugh Canal.
We are striking the Eight Mile Canal from the fencing requirements. It should just
read Ridenbaugh Canal is required. You know, you're -- down below you can
see on the street your UDC Code 11.3.A6 actually, disallows the Eight Mile to
have solid fencing, because it's classified in your code is a natural drainage . So,
that fencing requirement on the Eight Mile per your code is -- is actually not
allowable, because I can't prevent access to the waterway the way your code is
written and it specifically calls out the Eight Mile Creek, along with three other
creeks in your city. 1.1.1C. This is, again, simple. This was improvements over
on Cloverdale that we are tying to phase 5A just like we tied the pedestrian
crossing. So, both of those tie nicely to the same phase and they are in the
same area and the same restrictions as why they have to be done in 5 A. So, I
won't belabor that point. In closing, Movado will be an amazing community. We
are lucky enough to have 102 acres with a blank canvas, providing numerous
housing options, as well as an amenity package and open space that's in our
mind incredible. We have worked continuously with your city staff and are very
appreciative as this project took many of their hours without any doubt. We
respectfully request that you move to approve the Movado development and in
accordance with the city staff report with the following conditions. I do not
believe it's necessary for me to reread through these.
Yearsley: Can you --
Conger: Yeah.
Yearsley: I don't think you addressed 1.1I.
McCarvel: You read back to 1.1.1C.
Yearsley: Yeah. Because it went from -- you didn't cover 1.1.15.
Conger: Okay. Mr. President, Members of the Commission, I -- I just labeled it
wrong on my verbal. So, five is the completion of some Cloverdale sidewalks. It
is identical to the requirement for the pedestrian ramp. So, we are tying that to
phase 5A of the development. So -- so, if you look at the very first bullet item of
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 27 of 43
1.1.1C, it's going to tie the Ridenbaugh Canal to 5A. The 1.15 will also tie that
same area, which is the sidewalk condition of Cloverdale, to phase 5A.
Yearsley: And that basically infers when that canal -- the Ridenbaugh Canal will
be moved out of the way and that can be constructed; is that correct?
Conger: That is correct, Mr. President.
Yearsley: Okay.
Conger: Yeah. It simply can't be done sooner until all our planning and
approvals with a lot of agencies get done. And, again, if you have more
questions on that I have slides of that area and I have the planning timelines of
working with the irrigation districts, the Ada County Highway District, and we end
up actually being a part -- a three-way partnership to get all that done. So, I can
go at length on that or leave it right there.
Yearsley: Okay.
Conger: I think the ultimate is we have two conditions we are deleting and we
have four conditions we are modifying. With that I appreciate your time and I
appreciate staff's time for the last two months on this project.
Yearsley: Thank you. Are there any other questions? I know this is a lot to
digest, so -- do you have issues with that 11 acres of pulling that into the plat and
having that ready for City Council?
Conger: Yeah. Mr. President, Members of the Commission, no, we didn't quite
understand that rule, but we actually don't object to it and we just left it silent and
we -- that is no problem to pull in and have it -- we will have it well in advance of
that timeline.
Yearsley: Okay. Any other questions?
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
McCarvel: I was just trying to look when they had the map up there what the
other connecting streets were to Cloverdale is the reason we are not trying to get
out there at all. It just doesn't -- that little space just doesn't match up to any
cross-streets coming up to Cloverdale. Is that the complication was getting out
there? I mean are there -- because, obviously, you can do the canal underneath
the road, but --
Beach: Are you referring to -- for the plat? Is there not -- not a --
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 28 of 43
McCarvel: Yeah. I mean -- said there is complications of having a road going --
you know, having an exit out to Cloverdale, just because nothing else -- are there
too many streets already coming in and out there?
Conger: Sure. Yeah. Mr. President, Commissioner McCarvel, yeah, that has
been, again, months of meetings with the highway district, your staff at the city
and Nampa-Meridian as well. So, there is several things that play a component
into this. Your UDC, trying to minimize points into major arterials as your staff
indicated in their staff report. Then we go with the highway district, who with --
with the removal -- their whole goal in the Cloverdale -- it currently is over
capacity and putting more road systems into Cloverdale makes no sense to
them. We also spent tens of thousands of dollars on a traffic study that before
everybody could make their decision of no connection point proved out that --
because ACHD's goal was actually to get all the traffic to migrate west to get the
collector inside of Silverstone that will either take you to Overland where the
signal is or take you to Eagle Road on the east-west collector to Eagle Road.
Tens of thousands of dollars in a traffic study was -- was needed before ACHD
would accept that the internal streets were clearly designed for this amount of
homes and that let them get their goal of alleviating -- or not putting more
pressure onto Cloverdale Road.
Yearsley: And, then, also if you see the little jog on the Ridenbaugh Canal, that's
going to get moved over to the west side and, then, they are going to have to
move the Five Mile Creek as well at the same time. So, there is a lot that they
would have to cross to get that to work.
Conger: Yeah. That's correct.
Beach: Commissioner McCarvel, I will say that, again, we don't have a staff
report from the highway district, so I don't have a lot of that analysis right now.
We have reached out to them, because we wanted some answers prior to
coming to the Commission hearing. They had indicated that they would be okay
with the connection, but they are not going to push for it and they are going to
leave it up to the city staff to determine whether or not we think we need that.
We have gone back and forth as staff. I don't think it's something that we
necessarily need as part of the project. We have got plenty of connectivity. With
the complications of moving a very major lateral to the other side of the road, it
doesn't make a whole lot of sense, in our opinion, to do that.
McCarvel: It was just something that stuck out in my mind. I just wanted the
details on the record, because it's just been their complications with it.
Conger: No. That was a great question.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 29 of 43
Beach: The highway district has indicated that we should have a staff report
prior to Council. So, we will be able to go to that -- over that in a little bit more
detail at the Council hearing.
Yearsley: Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you.
Conger: Yeah. Thank you for your time.
Yearsley: I do have a few people signed up. A Lee Cloven. Coulson. And,
please, name and address for the record.
Coulson: Yeah. Sorry you can't read my writing. Mr. Chairman, Commissioners.
My name is Lee Coulson. I live at 2509 South Goshen Way, which is just south
of the proposed development. The property right now is being farmed. The
farmer accesses the property from Cloverdale and from Overland. Actually, if
you -- if you have the plat -- yeah. This is fine. So, the -- we would really like an
access point onto Cloverdale, because the development -- the road that goes
into the Silverstone development, the Sutherland Farms -- when the Sutherland
Farms development was developed, he was required to put a bridge across the
Ridenbaugh and the distance from those houses on the south side , for them to
drive up to Overland and around -- say like to Pepper Ridge Elementary, is
longer than the distance would be if you were driving through Sutherland Farms
and Muir Woods and I don't think it's fair to the homeowners of Muir Woods and
Sutherland Farms to be a main arterial to that subdivision. The -- another -- so,
that's -- that's a huge concern. We -- we know it's possible to -- you know, if they
do move the Ridenbaugh, we know it's possible to build a bridge. Sutherland
Farms was required to build a bridge and it has worked out for them. The
second issue I had with this development is if you look at the Meridian pathways
network map, there -- there is a developed pathway system from Mountain View
High School and the Meridian city park there. The Gramercy development added
a pathway along the canal in their development. The Eldorado development had
this -- continued the pathway. There is a pedestrian light across Eagle. The
Citadel storage continued the path on the south side of the Ridenbaugh and,
then, of course, Sutherland Farms has the pathway -- they are actually the first
development to start that pathway and it makes sense to continue the pathway
along the Ridenbaugh. My house backs up to the Ridenbaugh and there is a lot
of usage on the canal access road right now from kids going to school , joggers,
bikers and whatnot. That's my two biggest concerns with this development. One
other -- you know, the -- it's a little more condensed housing. My neighbor is
going to have three houses behind him. I don't know if you can -- yeah. So, we
are here. Before that cut through road was -- the first plat that the developer
showed the homeowners didn't have the cut through road. It was corner lots and
-- and so the lots lined up a little better with the Muir Woods lots. That's -- that's
my third concern.
Yearsley: Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 30 of 43
Coulson: Thanks.
Yearsley: We will have the applicant address some of those issues. Next I have
Mark Taylor. Sorry.
Taylor: Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission, my name is Mark
Taylor. I'm at 2951 South Goshen Way in Muir Woods and I'm also a member of
the Muir Woods homeowners association. I don't have a lot more to add than
what Lee just covered. Obviously, we live down the street from each other. But I
want to reiterate the concern that several people -- more than several people -- a
number of people in Muir Woods have about the lack of access from the new
development directly onto Cloverdale and our concern is exactly as Lee outlined,
which is we believe that that lack of access from the Movado development onto
Cloverdale will cause a number of people and additional traffic to flow back
through Sutherland Farms and out through Muir Woods onto the Cloverdale
Road area, particularly those that are in transit back and forth to the elementary
school and Pepper Ridge. So, that's number one. We also have had a number
of people express the same concern or desire to have a pedestrian pathway
extended along the Ridenbaugh Canal all the way out to Cloverdale. We think
that would be very beneficial for the entire community. And, then, one other item
that's come up in discussions about this -- and it's not a specific issue related to
the development as proposed, but it has to do with the condition of the
Ridenbaugh Canal right now. It's my understanding that the Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District has recommended previously that that canal be lined with
concrete. It isn't currently. At least not in that area. And it seems like this would
be an opportune time to do that. The cost, as I understand it, is not significant.
I'm not an expert in that area, of course, but I'm just passing that message along.
It's something that we have discussed and we would like to have considered.
Those are the issues that we have.
Yearsley: Thank you.
Taylor: Thank you.
Yearsley: And, then, I have Dale Eldridge. Name and address for the record,
please.
Eldridge: Okay. Thank you for your time. My name is Dale Eldridge. I live at
12276 Muir Ridge Drive. So, directly south of the proposed development. First
I'd like to say to DevCo, I think you have put together a quality product. My
concern is very similar to Mr. Coulson and Mr. Taylor is the traffic with Pepper
Ridge and the school that's designated on the application. There is going to be a
tendency with close to 700 residents, excluding the -- the mature neighborhood,
they are going to have children that are going to have to go to a school. There is
no school at all planned within this area. That's -- that's a pretty large amount of
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 31 of 43
kids. So, in order to drive kids, pick kids up, it's about a mile from East Copper
Way down Knapp over through Pine Bluff, but through Hollendale, down Muir
Wood to get over to Pepper Ridge Elementary. To go to the designated way it's
going to be about a mile -- 1.82 to two miles. I have been on Muir Woods for 14
years. As we have seen development to the west with Sutherland Farms, there
has been an increase in -- yeah, I think there should be serious consideration for
a connection to Cloverdale Road. I understand there are some complications,
but we are all front-on homes on all the streets I mentioned. They are not
designated for through traffic. If you -- you know, Pepper Ridge now has a
connection on the west side -- or, excuse me, the east side of Cloverdale, as well
as farther down, so it's not -- there is some precedent for connecting subdivisions
onto Cloverdale. And I do have a copy of the traffic impact study. It does note
that in phase three of the development, even without a connection it's going to
exceed the capacity of South Cloverdale Road. So, South Cloverdale is going to
have to be widened anyway. It mentions somewhere between the 2017 to 2025
time frame for that to happen. It -- yeah. That's my comments. Thank you.
Yearsley: Thank you. I don't have anybody else signed up. Is there others that
would be willing -- wishing to testify? Please come forward. Wait -- wait until you
come to the microphone. I need you to have -- talking on the microphone so we
have it on record, so -- and name and address for the record, please.
Beedle: My name is Guy Beedle. I live on 12388 West Muir Ridge Road -- Drive
and I just got out of the hospital, so I can't -- I didn't have anything prepared. My
main concern is -- I have been on Muir Ridge Drive for the last eight years. I
have had a house there. I'm the seventh house in. Right off the road. Right off
of Cloverdale. And just in the last eight years that I have lived there I have seen
probably a 75 percent increase in traffic just from Sutherland Farms and the
people that are going down Overland and cutting on to Eagle are bypassing that
and cutting down Cloverdale and come in through Muir Woods , because there is
only enough room for like four cars down there to make that turn onto Eagle,
going toward Victory that way and -- what else have I -- and just the traffic -- they
are right, it is busy going to Cloverdale. We can't even get out in the morning
sometimes for like 15 minutes getting out to take the kids to school and it's just --
they have already done traffic studies on Muir Ridge Drive and everything, which
already proved that we have way too much traffic already. We have too much
speed and the volume of the cars going through and stuff . And is this -- if they
can block it off down there, block it off so they can't come back through, because
you're going to have 700 guys -- who is going to want to go all the way down
around to go to Costco? Who is going to go all the way around to go to the -- to
the airport when you can just cut right through and cut up through Muir Woods or
Goshen and get right out onto Victory and go to the airport, instead of having to
go all the way around this way and all the way down. And another one was -- is
why couldn't they open up Knapp? Because that was supposed to be -- Knapp
Street comes right straight through to that Cloverdale thing and if they can open
that up that would probably relieve a lot of pressure that's going to come from this
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 32 of 43
onto Muir Woods and Sutherland Farms, because we didn't -- we are just getting
-- I'm out there -- I'm retired and I'm out there every day and I see the traffic is
more and more and more and faster and faster. The kids are getting older and
starting to drive and so they are driving faster and faster and so something
definitely has to be done and, then, you talk to the people that are putting these
roads in -- or the -- the times I have talked to them, so that we can eliminate this
problem down the road, you know, and I brought it up to one of the gentlemen
here that last -- I went to the first meeting and, then, I have been out of town for
the last meeting and he just asked me why don't I just move, you know. I mean I
got a nice house. I got a beautiful home. Why should I move. And another thing
that we were told when we bought here was that nobody would be building in
there for 15 years at least. But, you know, it's been eight, so that's about right
and the property level was down 18 inches below the waterline , the water table,
so how are they going to get away with building in there if it's down lower than
the -- you know, because we are all up a lot higher and all the way around are,
so -- but, anyway, I just -- I didn't have time to write down much, but thank you for
your time and I appreciate it.
Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else would like to testify? Please come forward.
Vansickel: My name is Elvira Vansickel and I live at 12252 West Muir Ridge. I --
if we -- can we look at that aerial again, please? So, I currently live -- as you
come into Muir Ridge I'm the second property from the corner and currently there
is a pump house right there where the ditch rider comes and maintains the canal
and I know that they are able to cross over a little bit further down Cloverdale --
right there and they use this road to maintain the canal. What is going to happen
with that road is my question, because there are certain -- our properties that all
along -- that back up to the canal, they actually go into the canal.
Understandably we can't use that property, but there is not enough room for the
ditch rider to drive his truck back behind our wrought iron fences and it's -- I don't
think it's stable enough for any truck to go back there . I know that they say that
that's acceptable for them to use to maintain the canal. I have -- I have lived
there for two years. Not longer than -- you know, as along as some of these
other people, but they have never come back behind my wrought iron fence to
maintain the canal. They always use that road on the other side of the canal.
So, that's my only question is what is happening to that road.
Yearsley: Okay. And I will have the applicant comment on that one.
Vansickel: Thank you so much for your time.
Yearsley: Thank you. Anybody else? Please come forward.
Boyack. Ross Boyack. 4270 East Overland Road. And I just basically have a
couple of questions. Well, first off, the one thing I have is you got Five Mile
Creek at the top of this and I believe it's Eight Mile.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 33 of 43
Beach: You're correct.
Boyack: Okay. And, then, the other thing is where this road is coming out on
Overland Road, is there any proposed traffic lights or anything that's -- for
Overland Road for letting these people in and out on that?
Yearsley: We will have to have the applicant comment on that one.
Boyack: Okay. And the other thing I was curious about is -- where ever it is.
There we go. Right there. This area that was Boise city. The l ittle finger part
there. Is that still Boise city or is that --
Yearsley: That is correct. That is still Boise city.
Beach: I can show quick. So, this -- if you follow my cursor, on the corner this
wraps around to about right there is also a Boise city.
Boyack: That's also Boise. Okay. And the other thing -- the last thing is curiosity
of why they are moving Ridenbaugh Canal on the other side -- on the west side
of Cloverdale Road. Just a concern.
Yearsley: I think the reason why is more than likely why is they are probably
wanting to move that is to -- when they widen Cloverdale -- they are looking in
the future to widen Cloverdale. It will be a lot harder to widen with two bridges,
so their thinking it will be easier just to move it to the one side and not have to
worry
about --
Boyack: Got you.
Yearsley: -- the crossings.
Boyack: Okay. Thank you.
Yearsley: All right. Thank you. Anybody else? Well, thank you. Jim, do you
want to come back up.
Conger: Mr. President, Members of the Commission, Jim Conger again. We will
go down though there and address a couple of the -- I think I heard three items.
As far as traffic signal goes, that actually would be -- our entrance has been
worked hard with ACHD, not only for our multi-family, but for this single family
residential, as well as the commercial spine that you see . That has been --
several reasons. Missing power poles that are borderline 80 to 90 thousand
dollars to move, plus you can only move them within a two month period every
year, because of the demand on that line. So, back to the traffic signal portion.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 34 of 43
It, actually, is too close to Cloverdale to meet ACHD standards. The collector
road that is signalized is inside the Silverstone commercial , which is the whole
migration pattern to the west of anything that's running east-west out of this
property is still designed to get to the collector road that's inside of Silverstone.
Yearsley: So, just so I understand that, your collector road coming out will not
have a signal?
Conger: Correct. It will not,
Yearsley: Okay.
Conger: Yeah. I think touching -- touching base on Cloverdale one more time
and I -- this possibly is as good a screen as any to look at. What we have been
working with for the last 12 months in -- in forging a partnership with the irrigation
districts and the Ada County Highway District, is to relocate the canal, which, for
the record, is on our property, we are giving up land that we have had to pay for
to get it there. That's part of our partnership. Relocating the canal would be at
our expense, because Nampa-Meridian will probably provide the labor -- to
answer the question of an earlier gentleman, the canal is not leaking, we -- we
kind of pride ourselves in almost having a full-time partnership with Nampa-
Meridian Irrigation District. We deal with them all over the valley and very much
value them. There is no lining or concrete tiling required. W e have left sufficient
distance to stay out of it and that access road that the lady did have a question
on, will stay. I mean your staff has already talked to Nampa-Meridian. There is
no pathway opportunities there, so that -- that part is out, because that is their
maintenance road and that is -- the way they built the homes on the south side,
that's the only way they can access. So, moving -- moving back into our
partnership, why we are not having a Cloverdale access is we are giving up the
land -- ACHD is in partnership with this, because they are going to eliminate two
bridges. If we do a road out to Cloverdale we are not able to relocate the canal,
we are not able to eliminate two bridges to the public taxpayers when they
eventually widen this, which is not in the five year work plan. For the record we
would love it to be, but it's not. They simply don't have the funds and -- so, with
us not being able to relocate the canal, we would put one bridge in for an access
out, they would still have to widen the two bridges at the time that that off-site
happened with the highway district. So, that is why you see the -- you see the
culmination of many meetings with your staff and the highway district, that there
is no connection to Cloverdale. It is a dominoing effect. So, the -- the end result
of many, many meetings was to eliminate the Cloverdale access and that is a
public benefit of several million dollars of cost of the widening of this bridge and
maintenance over years and, again, that's what forged this land plan in this
corner. So, we have been a team player giving up land and both agencies have
worked very hard to figure out what is best for the public taxpayers for the next
hundred years and -- and no connection is the right answer to that question.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 35 of 43
Yearsley: Do you know how much -- just a rough estimate of how much land
you're having to give up to relocate all that?
Conger: Oh, our land size is probably right around one acre. Possibly a touch
less, but right around that.
Yearsley: Okay.
Conger: But we are also -- with that acre come the improvements and the Five
Mile relocation -- I mean it dominos quite a few little utilities right there.
Yearsley: Oh, absolutely.
Conger: Yes. I think touching base -- we hit the traffic signal. Please think long
and hard about the Cloverdale entrance. There is way too many moving parts to
-- to have that access come out. Plus all the traffic studies and the highway
districts have agreed that that's better for the future. I think as far as traffic going
south, really, the reason not to go to Cloverdale is far beyond that, but those are
public roadways. These were stubbed for a reason. We do not see a lot of traffic
-- our traffic study did not indicate a lot of traffic going this way. There are no
commercial services to the south. For someone getting to the school, you could
follow our red path above the -- Josh, could you go back one screen. Sorry. You
were on the perfect screen. If you look at a red path above that and get you to
the school, people are coming out of our spine , which is no front-on housing. It's
easy access. Overland Road, take a right. If there were actually a connection to
Cloverdale with it being the 20 to 30 percent over capacity that we know it is,
people don't go to roads that are over capacity, they stay away from that road.
So, even if you had an intersection they are probably not using it, they are going
to go to the path of least resistance. I think that hit it all. If -- Josh, if you could
go to my conditions --
Yearsley: Actually, one last one that I -- that I don't think was quite clearly
addressed. It was kind of somewhat addressed. There was several people
wanting to continue the pathway along Ridenbaugh Canal and I think you kind of
stated that on the north -- on the south side it's not your property, it's somebody
else's property that we can't do it and, then, on the -- on the north side it's
actually their access -- or Nampa-Meridian's access. So, you can't put a pathway
on that side, too; correct?
Conger: Yeah. Mr. President, Members of the Commission, that is correct. In
all discussions of Nampa-Meridian they are heavily guarding the north boundary,
because that is their only access to the Ridenbaugh Canal. It is used -- as the
nice lady said, it is used on a daily basis and it is used all winter when they do
their maintenance. So, I know your parks department called and asked the same
question and the resulting -- both are shaking their head -- the resulting was
there will be no pathway on that north side . I believe that's no surprise. As your
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 36 of 43
Comprehensive Plan and all your master pathway plans do not have it there,
because those same conversations from your planning teams probably occurred
with Nampa-Meridian and that pathway needed to occur on the south side or not
at all. If we roughly run to my Slide 3, Josh. Can you run that faster than me?
Or not my slide three, I apologize. If we could go to slide 11. What I think we
have worked through with your staff, which it actually was their idea to make this
connection. We did not include this again in our -- in our deal. Slide 11 --
Beach: I'm not sure which slide that is. I don't have numbers.
Conger: Oh, you don't have numbers. Right there. Thank you. So, again, we
are doing the best that can be with the plan ning, because that pathway to finish
on the Ridenbaugh should actually be to the city of Boise in those homes. I don't
believe any of those homeowners here would give up the back of their yards for
this pathway. So, that red line in our south -- in that bottom left -- the bottom left
corner is going to come up and make a straight as possible -- that will be a ten
foot sidewalk, not a five, and that will connect to the ten foot regional pathway
and that gets the city to match your other regional pathway to the one that's on
your master plan. So, we believe that's the best win-win situation.
Yearsley: And there is still also going to be a five foot pathway along your -- that
southern boundary road all the way to the corner. So, there still can be a straight
access through there, too; correct?
Conger: Yes, Mr. President. That is absolutely correct. In the blue is -- is the
five foot hardened pathways, which are your sidewalks and the like, that is a
straight shot through, which that's why we spend the money on sidewalks is to
move pedestrians through neighborhoods.
Beach: Mr. President, quick, if I may. I will say that -- I understand where the --
if I can go back to my aerial here. As you can see here, you have got a multi-use
pathway that goes along the south and, as I said, just stops right there. So, we
spent a lot of time working on the staff report. We got it to the applicant much
later than we would have liked and much later than he probably would have liked
as well. We were -- one of the last things we were looking at was -- we wanted
to figure out how to make this pedestrian pathway that dead -ends their work. It
didn't go through Boise, as we would have hoped. That's not part of the city. So,
we can't -- we couldn't require when they came in to construct that. We didn't
want that to dead end. So, our first thought -- which is, you know, I think a pretty
logical thought, was, well, heck, why don't we just do it on the north side. It
makes a lot of sense. It's a straight shot. It gets you right out to Cloverdale Road
and it would be beautiful -- I thought, well, I better check with the Parks
Department to see if that's something they would even entertain . So, I did that.
Jay Gibbons at the Parks Department indicated what Jim had said to us. The --
the irrigation district is absolutely not going to let anyone have a pathway on the
north side. There is absolutely no way. That's how they access the Ridenbaugh.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 37 of 43
That's how they maintain it, as was said. So, the last minute we changed the
requirement -- or the condition to what Jim has shown and agreed to provide the
pathway along this roadway to connect it up here, so that we -- we don't lose that
pathway connection, there still will be a ten foot multi-use pathway. It's just not a
straight shot out to Cloverdale, as we would hope, but you will still get there if you
connect with the other pathway that they are going to be constructing as part of
this project. So, I just -- just as a side note, this isn't -- we thought through these
things and we -- we tried to get there the best that we could and Jim, as I said,
has agreed to install that ten foot pathway, which I think is a big win for the city,
so --
Yearsley: Okay. I just wanted to make sure that that clarification was there.
And, like I said, we still have a straight shot. It's not a ten foot pathway, but it is a
five foot pathway --
Conger: Yeah.
Yearsley: -- straight across.
Conger: Yes. That is correct. Is there any other comments or questions you
guys have? Josh, can you go back to my slide for one second?
Yearsley: Did you have one other item you wanted to address?
Conger: No. I would just leave you on -- on the note of thanking you for your
time and I'll leave up the conditions that we would certainly appreciate as far as
the deletions and the modifications.
Beach: User error here. Let me get that for you, Jim.
Conger: Thank you very much.
Yearsley: Okay. Thank you. Actually, you know, there is a lot of people wanting
a road through to Ten Mile.
Beach: Cloverdale you mean.
Yearsley: To Cloverdale. Sorry. I -- I got your Ten Mile. And I understand trying
to weigh both items and I don't -- don't know if I, you know, think we should have
a Ten Mile. But we were able to provide that access a little earlier to pedestrian
access over to the school a little earlier -- just trying to think -- I don't know how
hard it would be to -- if you could use like a premanufactured bridge that you
could pick up and move again in the future , if that would be something that we
could put the -- that pedestrian bridge sooner rather than later, you know, and,
then, maybe try to use it twice or something like that if there was an option. I
know that they do make some pretty nice fancy kind of truss bridges that have
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 38 of 43
the trusses on the side that could be reused, picked and moved in the future and
that way it gets kids over to the school sooner, you know, and to allow that
pedestrian access sooner, rather than later. Just kind of would like your thoughts
on that.
Conger: No. That's a fair question, Mr. President, Members of the Commission.
There is several things that are problematic with that. I mean we have one shot
at getting Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District to approve a bridge. Talking
temporary bridges, relocation of bridges, get in their canal one and two times,
that's not a positive start out of a meeting for sure, because we get one chance at
this. They are agreeable to it, but it is going to be a nightmare to get the final
approval on the type of bridge. So, if we go in saying we are going to put the
bridge up, we are going to take that bridge out, we are going to replace it. The
other thing that's problematic is we are used to having these conditions -- can
you -- can you go out the back and connect. This is 102 acres. I mean we are
60 acres away from what you're trying to get me to connect to. That is 60 acres
that I don't have finished elevations on my road s, I don't have finished elevations
on the back of my lots, I couldn't even put a pathway out there. It would be
extremely temporary and, then, every time I do -- which is phase three and 4-A, I
have to close that pathway down for five to six months while I'm under
construction, so you're going to have a pathway that people are used to, then, I'm
going to close it, because I can't have the liability, I wouldn't have an insurance
company cover me, but now I'm closing it down for six months, then, I'm going to
temporarily open it back up and, then, to do that fourth phase I'm going to close it
for another six months, then, I'm going to go back to Nampa-Meridian and try to
move the temporary bridge to a permanent location, because I really have to get
the canal moved to put that bridge in the right spot . All that is negative. On a
positive side what you have in front of you is a red line on the north and a red line
on the south. The red -- one is three-quarters of a mile. The other 1.1 miles. I
have a slide in here -- and I can really bore you with it, but I don't know that you
want to. Safe streets, which is a -- safestreet.org, which is part of this -- a
nationwide school district deal, has -- you know, we go through and research
walkable distances to school. Well, you don't start getting red flags until you get
to 1.3. We are at three-quarters of a mile. So, as far as little Billy getting to
school, we care more than actually anybody in this room that little Billy can walk
to school, because we are trying to sell homes. I'm trying to sell more lots to my
builder. So, we do care. We are very comfortable with three-quarters of a mile.
In fact, I believe the school district doesn't start the busing program until one
mile. So, clearly, the school district's comfortable at one mile and we are talking
bona fide pathways that already exist with signalize d crossings that are three-
quarters of a mile, which is a quarter mile less than the Meridian School District
busing requirements. So, we have ample way to get them to school. When this
is done it will be spectacular. It will be easier for half our neighborhood. The
other half will actually have the same distance walk once it's completed that they
probably had shorter walking out the front end of the neighborhood , so -- and,
again, 105 units of our product doesn't have school children, they are just paying
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 39 of 43
the taxes to the school district, which is a good thing. So, we believe there is so
many negatives and so much liability and danger to these temporary paths that
the three-quarters of a mile walk is -- is a walk in the park.
Yearsley: And I appreciate you explaining that, because that just -- trying to
figure out how best to make that work and I wanted to bring that up before we
started -- we closed the public hearing.
Conger: No. I appreciate the question at that time for sure, so --
Yearsley: All right. Thank you.
Conger: Thank you all.
Yearsley: With no more questions, I would entertain a motion to close the public
hearing -- I'm sorry, we can't. The way the laws are set, this is our process. You,
actually, have an opportunity to go before city -- before City Council, because this
will be heard before City Council again. So, you do have another opportunity to
discuss this. But according to our process we can't allow additional testimony.
I'm sorry, we can't -- I apologize and I know it's frustrating, but we are not on the
record and so we -- like I said, we can discuss this afterwards. It will be posted
again for Council.
Parsons: Sir, typically, these projects end up at Council about 30 days after the
Planning and Zoning Commission. So, if you live within 300 feet of a project you
will definitely get notified of the public hearing. The applicant will have to post --
re-post the site with new signs notifying day, time, and place again when the City
Council hearing is going to occur. Again, we can anticipate this sometime mid
December is what we are looking at, so -- I don't have a calendar in front of me,
but on December --
Yearsley: I think the clerk just said the 20th.
Parsons: The 20th? That's probably --
Yearsley: And, like I said, we can talk about this afterwards and ask questions
and stuff like this, but for the process itself we can't do this on the record. We
can't allow additional testimony. And I know it's frustrating, so -- all right. At this
time I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing on file number H -
2016-0112.
McCarvel: So moved.
Wilson: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 40 of 43
Yearsley: I have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Opposed?
Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT.
Yearsley: Well, this is a big project. I -- you know, I like the forethought that they
have done going into this. I like the mix of uses and the way they have
staggered it to have the -- the bigger homes adjacent to the bigger homes and
the smaller homes closer to the commercial. I even like the hundred -- the 55
and older subdivision portion of it. I think that's a -- something that we don't
really have a lot here in Meridian and so I think it will be a good -- good mix. I
understand -- and I live in your vicinity and I understand the growth in the -- the
problems that growth brings with traffic and traffic congestion as well. It's just
something that we have to deal with and work with ACHD to -- to mitigate for that
traffic and stuff. The access to Ten Mile --
McCarvel: Cloverdale.
Yearsley: Or -- I don't why I'm -- boy, that's -- sorry. Cloverdale. Yes. The
access to Cloverdale -- I think -- I like the idea of moving that canal and cleaning
that corner up and not having that access to Cloverdale. I don't think it really
gains a whole lot and I -- I guess it's unfortunate that we can put -- couldn't put a
signal to Overland. I think that would have been a great place for a signal at that
location as well. But I understand the other constraints with that. And I am
curious to hear what your thoughts on it are. I think most of the -- his
recommendations to -- on the changes I'm -- I'm okay with. I don't know if we are
going to see much of a difference between 100 and 105. So, I think I would be in
favor of leaving that to 105. But I would be -- I'm curious to see what your
thoughts are as well.
McCarvel: Yeah. Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
McCarvel: Yeah. I actually thought on the 100 versus the 105 and I'm like where
are you going to lose those five lots and I'm not going to lose them, I'm just not
going to put them in the gate. I mean that seem s pretty silly and if it's okay with
the Fire Department I think esthetically and the whole community wise, I think it's
fine as long as the Fire Department is okay with it. I think that was my only -- I
figured that was the reason for the rule.
Wilson: I -- Mr. Chair?
Yearsley: Commissioner Wilson.
Meridian Planning & Zoning
November 17, 2016
Page 41 of 43
Wilson: I agree I mean I think -- I think it looks weird those five lots outside the
gate. That being said, I mean I'm impressed with this project. I appreciate them
working pretty diligently and over a long period of time with the city of Boise and
the City of Meridian. I think there is a little bit of everything in this development --
development in terms of the 55 and older community and the gradations of family
homes and I think I'm -- I'm supportive of it.
Yearsley: Thank you.
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
McCarvel: I am in favor of letting that pedestrian crossing over the Ridenbaugh
Canal go until that five acres -- as Mr. Conger stated -- I mean I'm just imagining
kids crossing empty lot areas while the construction vehicles are trying to go in
and so they can get to their cross -- their cross paths. I think that's asking for
bigger problems than having them walk around.
Yearsley: Oh, absolutely. That's why I wanted to ask them before we closed the
public hearing to see what his comments were and if -- if that's something that
could be done or not or -- so, I agree. Like I said, I think the -- as long as -- you
know, I like the idea of having the -- like with the F, having that pathway go down
and connect to the other one, we still have access if you want to go faster to get
across on the -- it's not a pathway, but it is a sidewalk, so it is very well protected
and it does make sense to -- on that last one as well, to not do the detached --
detached sidewalk along Cloverdale until all that stuff has been relocated and
stuff as well. So, I think that makes that -- that work as well. So, I guess if there
is no other comments or concerns, I would entertain a motion.
McCarvel: Mr. Chairman?
Yearsley: Commissioner McCarvel.
Wilson: And I will help you keeping straight and -- go ahead if you have got it.
McCarvel: Well, I think we can cover it. After considering all staff, applicant and
public testimony, I move to recommend file -- approval of file number H-2016-
0112, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of November 17th,
2016, with the following modifications: That as submitted for record during this
meeting, the changes to staff recommendations provided by the applicant.
Yearsley: Okay. Are you guys okay with that motion? So, we don't have to go
through each one of those?
McCarvel: Or do you want me to go through each one?
Planning & Zoning
Commission Meeting
November 17, 2016
Item #4B: 43 North
Vicinity/Zoning Map
Proposed
Preliminary Plat
Proposed
Elevations
Item #4C: Black Cat and Chinden
Vicinity/Zoning Map
Concept Plan #1
Concept Plan #2
Item #4D: Movado Estates - Vicinity/Zoning Map
Preliminary Plat
Landscape Plan
Pathways Plan
Elevations
Silverstone Apartments Conceptual Development Plan
Safe-Routes-to-School Exhibit
Movado Estates
Meridian Planning & Zoning
Commission Hearing
November 17, 2016
Location Map
Site Plan
Suburban Collection
Urban Collection
The Village Cottages
The Orchards Gated Community
Site Amenities
Changes to Staff Recommendations
•1.1.1 c. – Applicant shall construct the pedestrian crossing over the Ridenbaugh Canal
with Phase 5A as shown on Phasing Plan dated 09/07/2016.
•1.1.1 e. / 1.1.2 d. – Delete Condition (public road requirement)
•1.1.1 f. – The applicant shall construct an additional portion of 10-foot multi use
pathway starting from the southwest corner of the property where Copper Point Way
connects to the property and travels west adjacent to lots 89, 87, 84 of Block 2; then
traveling north along Rolling Hills Avenue where it will then cross East Pewter Falls
Drive; and continuing north adjacent to lot 20 of Block 1 where it will connect with the
Regional Pathway on the south side of Eight Mile (Five Mile) Creek.
•1.1.2 c. – Delete Condition (100 Lot Gated Community Issue)
•1.1.3. a. – Ridenbaugh Canal is required to be fenced with an open vision fence at least
6 feet in height and having an 11-guage, 2-inch mesh or other construction, equivalent
in ability to deter access to the waterway in accord with UDC 11-3A-6B.
•1.1.5. – A minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk shall be constructed along
Cloverdale Road where none exists with phase 5A of the development and to
coordinate with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District and ACHD relocation of the
Ridenbaugh Canal and Cloverdale Road improvements.
Private Street
Village
Collection
Neighborhood Pathways
The Village Cottages
Village Gated Community
Changes to Staff Recommendations
•1.1.3. a. – Ridenbaugh Canal is required to be
fenced with an open vision fence at least 6 feet
in height and having an 11-guage, 2-inch mesh
or other construction, equivalent in ability to
deter access to the waterway in accord with UDC
11-3A-6B.
– Per UDC 11-3A-6: Ditches, Canals, or Drainage
Courses
•Eight Mile Creek is identified as a natural drainage which
does not permit fencing preventing access to the
waterway.
Changes to Staff Recommendations
•1.1.1 c. – Applicant shall construct the
pedestrian crossing over the Ridenbaugh Canal
with Phase 5A as shown on Phasing Plan dated
09/07/2016.
Site Plan
Changes to Staff Recommendations
•1.1.1 c. – Applicant shall construct the pedestrian crossing over the Ridenbaugh Canal with Phase
5A as shown on Phasing Plan dated 09/07/2016.
•1.1.1 e. / 1.1.2 d. – Delete Condition (public road requirement)
•1.1.1 f. – The applicant shall construct an additional portion of 10-foot multi use pathway starting
from the southwest corner of the property where Copper Point Way connects to the property and
travels west adjacent to lots 89, 87, 84 of Block 2; then traveling north along Rolling Hills Avenue
where it will then cross East Pewter Falls Drive; and continuing north adjacent to lot 20 of Block 1
where it will connect with the Regional Pathway on the south side of Eight Mile (Five Mile) Creek.
•1.1.2 c. – Delete Condition (100 Lot Gated Community Issue)
•1.1.3. a. – Ridenbaugh Canal is required to be fenced with an open vision fence at least 6 feet in
height and having an 11-guage, 2-inch mesh or other construction, equivalent in ability to deter
access to the waterway in accord with UDC 11-3A-6B.
•1.1.5. – A minimum 5-foot wide detached sidewalk shall be constructed along Cloverdale Road
where none exists with phase 5A of the development and to coordinate with Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District and ACHD relocation of the Ridenbaugh Canal and Cloverdale Road
improvements.
Thank you.
The Village Cottages
Village Gated Community
Alternative Compliance
Regional Pathway
Temporary School Access
Safe Routes
Cloverdale Road
Regional Pathway
Limit Access Points
•Movado Staff Report Page 8, Paragraph 2:
–In an effort to improve safety, the UDC (11-3A-3) limits
access points to arterial streets by combining and/or
limiting access points. In accord with this
requirement, (and as proposed by the applicant), staff
recommends there not be a direct connection to S.
Cloverdale Road. There are some significant
challenges with providing a direct access. Though staff
has not yet received a staff report from ACHD, in an
email they have indicated that they are not requiring a
direct vehicular connection to Cloverdale Road.
Adjacent Neighbors
•Boise Neighbors - Muir Woods
–Average Assessed Value: $340,047 (City of Boise)
•Meridian Neighbors – Southerland Farms
–Average Assessed Value: $349,733 (City of
Meridian)
•Movado – Suburban Collection
–Anticipate home values starting in the low
$400,000
Fire Department Village Approval
Adjacent Neighbors
11.5 Lots
20.5 Lots
16 Lots
12 Lots