2016 12-15Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting December 15, 2016
Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of December 15,
2016, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel.
Members Present: Commissioner Rhonda McCarvel Commissioner Ryan
Fitzgerald, Commissioner Treg Bernt and Commissioner Gregory Wilson.
Members Absent: Chairman Steven Yearsley.
Others Present: Machelle Hill, C.Jay Coles, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Josh
Beach and Dean Willis.
Item 1: Roll-Call Attendance:
Roll-call
X___ Gregory Wilson __X__ Treg Bernt
X__ Rhonda McCarvel __X__ Ryan Fitzgerald
Steven Yearsley - Chairman
McCarvel: Okay. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. At this time I would like
to call to order the regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian Planning and
Zoning Commission on December 15th, 2016, with roll call.
Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda
McCarvel: Okay. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Yes.
Fitzgerald: I move we adopt the agenda as presented.
Wilson: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda. All in favor
say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
McCarvel: At this time I would like to briefly explain the public hearing process
for this evening. We will open each item individually and, then, start with the staff
report. The staff will report their findings regarding how the item adheres to our
Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code, with their staff
recommendations. After the staff has made their presentation, the applicant will
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 2 of 59
come forward to present their case for the approval of their application and to
respond to any staff comments. The applicant will have 15 minutes to do so.
After the applicant has finished we will open to public testimony. There is a sign-
up sheet in the back as you entered for anyone wishing to testify. Any person
testifying will come forward and be allowed three minutes. If they are speaking
for a larger group, like an HOA and there is a show of hands to represent that
group, they will be given up to ten minutes. After all testimony has been heard,
the applicant will be given another ten minutes to have the opportunity to come
back and respond if they desire. After that there will be no more public testimony
and we will close the public hearing and the Commissioners will have the
opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a recommendation to City
Council.
Item 3: Action Items
A. Public Hearing Continued from 11/3/16 for Firenze Plaza
H2016-0102) by Sharryn Ann Clark and David L. Clark
Located at the Northwest Corner of E. Amity Road and
S. Eagle Road
1. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map to Change the Land Use
Designation on 26.81 Acres of Land from Low
Density Residential to Mixed Use Community
2. Request: Annexation and Zoning of 40.38 Acres
of Land from RUT to C-C (16.33 Acres) and R-8
24.05 Acres) Zoning Districts
3. Request: Preliminary Plat Consisting of Eleven
11) Commercial Lots, Two (2) Common Lots and
One (1) Right-of-Way Lot on 16.33 Acres in the
Proposed C-C Zoning District
McCarvel: So, at this time I would like to open the public hearing for Item H-
2016- 0102, Firenze Plaza. We will start with -- begin with the staff report.
Beach: Good evening Chair, Commissioners. As you said, this is the application
for Firenze Plaza. The applications that the applicant is requesting are a
Comprehensive Plan map amendment, annexation and zoning, as well as a
preliminary plat. The subject property consists of 37.83 acres of land, which is
currently zoned RUT within Ada county, on the northwest corner of East Amity
Road and South Eagle Road. The adjacent land use and zoning. To the north
are single family homes in the Tuscany Subdivision, zoned R-8. To the east is
South Eagle Road and single family residential properties, zoned R-4 and RUT.
To the south is East Amity Road and single-family or agricultural property, zoned
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 3 of 59
RUT within Ada county. And to the west are single-family homes, again, in
Tuscany Subdivision, also zoned R-8. Because this is an annexation, there is no
history on this property to speak of within the City of Meridian. The
Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for this property is low
density residential. The applicant proposes to amend the future land use map,
which is part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. They are proposing to change
the land use designation on approximately 37.83 acres of land from low-density
residential to mixed-use community. The purpose of this designation is to
allocate areas where community servicing uses and dwellings are seamlessly
integrated into the urban fabric. Some of this language is taken directly from the
Comprehensive Plan. The intent is to integrate a variety of uses, including
residential, and to avoid mainly single use and strip commercial type buildings.
Nonresidential buildings in these areas have a tendency to -- have a tendency to
be larger than in mixed-use neighborhood areas, but not as large as in mixed-
use regional areas. Goods and services in these areas tend to be of the variety
that people will mainly travel by car to , but also walk or bike to, up to three or four
miles. Employment opportunities for those living in and around the neighborhood
are encouraged. Developments are encouraged to be designed according to the
conceptual mixed-use community plan depicted in the Comprehensive Plan. The
applicant is proposing two public street connections. Before I get there, let me
just kind of go through. This slide here indicates -- on the top here this is as it
currently stands at low density residential. The applicant is proposing to change
it to mixed-use community, which is this designation here. So, obviously, low
density residential is the lowest density designation given to the Comprehensive -
given in a Comprehensive Plan. I'm not sure when exactly the Comprehensive
Plan was written. It was probably early -- early '90s is when that was put into
place and so this is -- even with no -- no annexed property within the city likely at
that point, it still had a designation. So, it's likely been that way for a while. To
change from mixed-use community could be a -- as you see here on the slide,
low density residential is -- is up here. Mixed-use community is down here. So,
it's -- it's a change from -- arguably a large change from what the current
designation on the property is. So, moving on to the conceptual plan. This is --
this has been fairly fluid over the past several months getting this to where
everyone was as agreeable as could be . So, the hearing last evening at the Ada
County Highway District, there were some proposals made and some -- some
discussion. We receive a staff report from the highway district based on the
discussion last night and the findings that were made by their commission. They
are not recommending approval of the right-out -- one onto Eagle Road and one
onto Amity Road. They believe it's adequate access to have these two public
road connections and the Mount Etna, as I believe it will be called, will not, as is
shown here, connect directly to either Mount Etna Drive -- it goes into the
Tuscany Subdivision or to Santo Stefano will be -- the proposal is to have that
between those two, if that makes sense. So, those two public street connections
the applicant is also requesting approval, as I said, of those drive aisle
connections, which did not -- were not recommended approval by the
commission last evening. The design of the future structures on this site are
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 4 of 59
required to comply with the design standards in the UDC and the City of Meridian
architectural standards manual. The development should incorporate high-
quality architectural design and materials consistent with the mixed -use
community designation in order for the development to be considered integrated
with the adjacent medium density residential and low density residential
designated property. The proposed mixed-use area, the future residential as
shown by the applicant, would be these -- these parcels here and commercial
development, which is proposed for the corner, as well as these four parcels
here, should be cohesive in site layout and architectural design and I have a
future -- a slide, a couple from now, that will show you what the conceptual
elevations that the applicant has -- has provided to staff. So, I would like also to
mention that in reviewing development applications within the mixed-use area,
staff looks at a number of things and I will go through what those are. I'm not
going to comment on all of them , mainly just a couple. So, first being residential
densities should be a minimum of between -- a minimum of six dwelling units per
acre. Where feasible higher density and/or multi-family residential development
will be encouraged, especially for projects with the potential to serve as
employment destination centers and when a project is adjacent to US 20-26,
State Highway 55, State Highway 16, or State Highway 69. Staff's
recommendation is that the zoning for Lot 1, Block 2 -- and, again, we have gone
back and forth from calling the remainder parcel A and B to Lot 1 and Block 2, so
for clarity's sake I will use the terms on your slide here. The portion here -- the
remainder of parcels A, B designated as R-15 and given an R-15 zoning
designation and just -- just for -- again, for transparency sake. Staff's thought on
that was that based on the fact that there was a collector roadway there, not fully
built out, but will be required to be, there will be a landscape buffer on either side
of that road and will provided what staff considers a buffer to the existing R-8
designated properties in the Tuscany Subdivision. Okay. And, then, the parcel
to the north here, our condition would that that would be R-8 and that the parcels
combined -- and, again, the applicant is not proposing to subdivide this and
develop into single family homes right now. But when that does happen that the
density be between six and 15 dwelling units per acre. Okay. So, keep that in
mind as I move forward here. The Comprehensive Plan, as I said, which we rely
on to make these types of recommendations, we look at what the
Comprehensive Plan currently shows, as well as we look at these things to see if
what is being proposed could work on a specific parcel, which is why staff is
recommending approval of this based on what the applicant has provided.
Having said that, there is potential for some different zoning designations on
these two pieces of property. So, the mixed-use designation that the applicant is
requesting allows for a variety of different zoning designatio ns and those
potential zoning designations are traditional neighborhood residential , traditional
neighborhood commercial, community commercial, light office, R-15 and R-40.
So, the potential to do TN-R and TN-C -- and if there is questions about what
those mean I can -- I can go through those a little bit further in the future. So,
moving back to the things that we looked at for mixed -use developments. A
conceptual site plan for the entire mixed-use area should be included in the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 5 of 59
application. The applicant has provided this conceptual plan. In a previous
version they had notated lot lines for this residential. Those are not included on
this. But, again, those two lots would have to come back in and be resubdivided
in the future and the zoning designations given to those would dictate the lot
sizes. So, development for multiple commercial and/or office buildings are
proposed, which is not including residential. The buildings should be arranged to
create some form of common usable area, such as a plaza or green space. All
development should have a mix of at least three land use types , which in this
case staff looked at this -- and this would be residential here, commercial on the
corner and we have required that the applicant use these four parcels here as
office. Office uses only, regardless of the zoning designation given to them.
Only uses allowed in the L-O district would be allowed there, as conditioned by
staff. Residential uses should comprise a minimum of 20 percent of the
development area. Densities, as I said, ranging from six to 15. So,
approximately 58 percent of this is being proposed as residential. Non-
residential building should be proportional to and blend in with the adjacent
residential buildings. As I said, I have a couple of slides of proposed elevations
to show you. Vertically integrated structures are encouraged. Unless a structure
contains a mix of both residential and office or residential and commercial land
uses, maximum building size should be limited to a 30,000 square foot building
footprint. For community grocery stores the maximum building size should be
limited to a 6,000 square foot building footprint. For the development of public
school sites a maximum building size does not apply. Supportive and
proportional public indoor, quasi-public spaces and places, including, but not
limited to, parks, plazas, outdoor gathering areas, open space, libraries and
schools, that comprise a minimum of five percent of the development are
required. Outdoor seating areas at restaurants do not count towards this
requirement. And, lastly, where the development proposes public and quasi-
public uses to support the development above the minimum five percent, the
developer may be eligible for additional residential densities and /or an increase
to the maximum building footprint . A lot there to absorb. So, the commercial
portion of this project depicts nine lots and four office lots. These properties vary
in size from 8,000 square feet of the smallest to approximately 279 ,000 square
feet, the largest. Because the site is located near Eagle Road and Amity Road ,
which is a major intersection in the city and is in close proximity to residential
uses, staff believes the mixed-use community designation and proposed
development are appropriate for the property. If the change to the future land
use map is approved, the proposed development will contribute to the mix of
commercial and residential uses in the area and development also provide
needed services and shopping area in this part of the city. Staff did receive a
large number of comments on this application , as well as several petitions. I
won't go in to -- I won't go into all the concerns that were raised, but I would like
to address a couple of those. There were concerns about traffic safety,
increased traffic through the existing residential subdivisions to the north and to
the west. Pedestrian safety. The proposed change to the Comprehensive Plan
from low-density residential to mixed use is a drastic change and not something
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 6 of 59
that the residents thought would ever happen. Again, that's not my words, that's
some concerns that were raised by the -- by the neighbors. The number of street
connections to the existing Tuscany Subdivision. The proposed increase in
density adjacent to existing R-8 zoning -- zoned property, among others. With
that, staff is recommending approval and I will stand for any questions you have.
McCarvel: Thank you. Any questions from the Commissioner for staff? Okay.
All right. Would the applicant, please, come forward. And, please, state your
name and address for the record.
Thompson: Good evening, Madam Chair. My name is -- and Members of the
Commission. My name is Tamara Thompson. I'm with The Land Group. 462
East Shore Drive in Eagle. With me tonight are Roger Collins, also with The
Land Group. Eric Holzer with Albertsons. And John Ringert with Kittelson &
Associates. And he hasn't made his chair yet, so I'm guessing he's in traffic,
which is kind of ironic. Staff presented a very thorough presentation of the
project and I will go through it real quickly. Some of the highlights. Again, the
property is located at the northwest corner of Amity and Eagle Roads and is
approximately 40 acres. The property is bounded on three sides by public right-
of-way. You have Eagle Road on the east. Amity Road on the south. And
Montague on the west. The property to the north and west are part of the
Messina Meadows, Tuscany Subdivision and those are zoned R-8 and they are
developed with single-family homes. Of this 20 acres -- of the 40 acres, 24
acres, approximately 60 percent are -- so, let me just clarify real quick. So, what
staff presented to you -- they have changed our proposal a little bit. So, I'm going
to give you what our proposal was. We are proposing R-8 on everything you see
in green there. They have split it up and -- to put R-15 on another portion. I have
a concept plan that I will show you at the end that will kind of pull out together,
but -- so, R-8 for 60 percent of the site, which is, like I said, exactly what Tuscany
has. And, then, the commercial portion, which is roughly 16 acres or 40 percent
of the project -- or 40 percent of the property than the C-C. Currently the closest
existing residential home to the commercial portion is over 500 feet away from
the main box that was the section that's -- that you can see on Eagle Road that
kind of pops over that staff is recommending office on, that is a little closer, a little
right around 300 feet to the buildings. But to the main intensive retail uses it's -
it's over 500 feet away. Staff went through our application. We are asking for a
Comprehensive Plan amendment from low-density residential to mixed-use
community. Annexation from Ada county RUT zone to the City of Meridian and
rezoned in accordance with the colors that you see on this map . We have a 14
lot preliminary plat for the commercial properties. Of that there is 11 building lots.
The others are either right of way that will eventually be dedicated to ACHD or
common open space lots. A specific development plan for the residential portion
is not included in this application and will be processed separately at a later date .
And here is just the overall map. Josh already kind of gave you that, so I will
skim over that one. This is our revised preliminary plat. We had -- I believe this
is our fourth revision after multiple meetings. This one is the result of the ACHD
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 7 of 59
meeting last night that we had and the connection point to Montague , which is
the road on the west side of the project. So, on all my maps north is up, just for
reference. The master plan includes a grocery-anchored daily needs center, with
restaurants, fuel, specialty retail, office and pedestrian plazas. The corner is a
specialty where -- with a nice pedestrian plaza in between with some tables and
that kind of thing for -- for restaurants with outdoor seating. The truck route will
utilize Amity and Eagle and the adjacent road sections of Mount Etna, which is
the road coming in off of Eagle Road and Bolaza, which is the one that calls here
on proposed street. That's Bolaza Street. And so they would not go into the
neighborhood at all. Any truck traffic would be limited to -- to that vicinity. And,
I'm sorry, I keep pointing to this and I know you can't see what I'm pointing at. I
hear this is brand new. And, then, again, from those new street sections, the
residential -- and I have it labeled on here -- is to the roads themselves are over
500 feet on the -- on the C-C zoned areas. Due to the increase in housing in the
vicinity, the area is underserved by grocery and other neighborhood supportive
services. Currently the closest shopping is three to four miles away, which is six
to eight miles round trip. Several sites in the area were considered. Analyzing
characteristics, such as access and circulation, market conditions, nearby
residential and it was determined that this site provides the necessary criteria for
to support a neighborhood grocery anchored center. Grocery varies from other
retail uses in that the customer typically goes directly home due to refrigerated,
frozen and other perishable items. The going home side of the road is extremely
important for a grocery store's long-term viability. This site is ideal for a grocery
anchored center. These are the proposed elevations of the markets. Actually, I
got a little ahead of myself . Let me go back here. The residential is planned as
single family on here for the R-8. The -- the property to the west of -- I'm sorry --
to the north of Mount Etna we are proposing that is single family detached and,
then, the property to the west and south of Mount -- Mount Etna and west of the -
of the shopping center could be a little higher density of up to -- I have a
concept plan for you here at the end and I have it laid out at six units to the acre
and it is more of a patio home style. The grocery elevations are included in her
application. The buildings of the commercial center will be a traditional modern
theme and will be constructed using a variety of high-quality natural materials,
including wood, split and smooth face CMU, mixed with metal panels and
canopies. Buildings will be designed with elevations that create interest and
using broken planes, different windows, cornices, that produce a rhythm of
materials and patterns. Varying building heights and elevations will help reduce
the appearance of large mass. At our ACHD hearing last night the biggest issue
was road connectivity to the neighborhood. To address this we changed our plan
based on neighbor feedback -- it won't let me go back anymore. Or, actually, it
won't let me do anything. There we go. Mount Etna used to go straight through,
so it was a long straight shot, and after looking at that closer, we did propose to
move it to the north to be closer to Zaldia, which is the collector in the area. So,
that reduces the distance on Montague, which in this section of Montague it is a
collector also. But this offset, if you will, helps reduce any type of traffic speeds
and it also makes it so it doesn't look like it's a through road. So, we have
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 8 of 59
changed our plan based on neighbor feedback and to create a more circuitous
connection between Santo Stefano and Mount Etna . So, that was ACHD's
request to put that mid-block, instead of directly into one of those streets. To
address concerns about traffic and circulation in the area , we are proposing to
widen the west side of Eagle Road and the roundabout with the development.
Currently the roundabout at the intersection of Amity and Eagle is a single lane.
It is in ACHD's five-year work plan to be completed in 20 -- in the year 2021. We
are proposing to do that work with our project and that would put it four -- four
years ahead of schedule. Additionally, to reduce potential impacts to the
neighborhood, four direct access points from the commercial center are
proposed. Two of those would eventually become the public streets that you see
on -- as Mount Etna and the proposed street. We are asking for the -- a right-in,
right-out off of Eagle Road and a right-in, right-out off of Amity. These two direct
access points are extremely important, as they alleviate the local roads and allow
more convenient access along Amity and Eagle Roads. Limiting access to a
single point off of Eagle and, then, having to make a left turn into the center is not
ideal and could cause congestion in that area . Having a right-in, right-out on
Eagle Road would alleviate that. Our traffic study supports the direct access and
ACHD staff supported it. The commission last night recommended not allowing
those, but it was after city staff told them that the city wasn't supporting it, which
staff wasn't supporting it, but we are still asking you and we will go back to ACHD
and ask them to look at that again also. So, we are -- we are still asking for the
two right-in, right-outs onto Amity and one onto Eagle Road. The project
includes ample site landscaping and landscaping adjacent to the future
residential uses. Multiple pedestrian paths are planned between the buildings,
as well as between the residential use, the public rights-of-way, and -- and on
site. The corner shop buildings adjacent to the roundabout are planned with an
outdoor pedestrian plaza. Public utilities are readily available and adequately --
adequately sized to support the property and the project. We have reviewed
staff's report -- the staff report and agree with most of staff's findings, with the
exception of a few, let me get here to -- this is kind of where we were before on
our road alignment and how that's changed and this is the concept plan. So, as
you see, the -- the northern part, north of Mount Etna, those are approximately --
well, we have lined them up on the north property line one to one with the
existing lots up there and, then, down in -- on the west side of Belissa Way, those
are currently laid out at R-6, which is fairly -- a fairly small lot. I was talking to Mr.
Parsons about another project that he liked and it's a senior housing facility --
and I can't remember the name, Bill, but it's on Locust Grove and Ustick and that
one lays out just a little over five units per acre. So, the R-15 is kind of -- it's
getting everybody very antsy, because that -- that is very high density, but if we
could keep that somewhere in the six to eight range I think that would be more
appropriate. So, I will just go real quickly through the conditions of approval.
1.1.1.D is -- staff is recommending that we do a street buffer along Montague and
our project is not on the Montague side at this point and anything put over their
potentially would need to be ripped out with development . So, we are asking that
that be postponed until those on -- Parcels A and B come back to you with their
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 9 of 59
preliminary plats. The -- 1.1.1.F and 1.1.1.G, I think we are fine there. We did
our calculations. This has to do with the amenities and open space. I did those
calculations before coming, so we just wanted to say that we -- mainly I was
asking the question if what we have is adequate in staff's mind and I believe it is,
but we can still ask him that question . 1.1.1.H, Lot 6 through 9 of the preliminary
plat, those are the -- the lots that staff is recommending as L-O. We would still
like those to be zoned C-C and the C-C zone has areas that -- that deal with
adjacency to residential and so we could do some lower intense retail there that
not a -- not a drive-through or something like that, but the L-O zone is very
limiting. 1.1.1.J. It's our part -- our proposal is that that parcel is zoned R-8 and
in our pre-application meeting with staff, staff recommended R-8. 1.1.1.L is -- the
two local streets are proposed to be constructed with the first phase and we are
requesting a waiver from Council for the two right-in, right-outs on parcel two.
These are the two that I was mentioning before, how important those are to
alleviate that traffic on the local street and those -- the left turn -- where we could
have right turns into the center. And, then, two that are on board with that one is
1.1.1M. That's the same as the 1.1.1L and 1.1.2A is the same as 1.1.1D that we
mentioned above. For some reason they just listed them a couple times. So,
with that I will respectfully request your approval tonight and I will stand for
questions.
McCarvel: Thank you. Do Commissioners have any questions for the applicant?
No? Okay. At this time I will be taking public testimony. I have the sign-up
sheet from the back. First one on the list is David Kearns. And as you approach
the mike, please, state your name and address for the record.
Kearns: David Kearns. Address is 2564 East Mount Etna Drive.
McCarvel: Okay. Go ahead.
Kearns: Commissioners, appreciate the time to speak with you this evening.
Last night my wife and I and many of our neighbors and friends ventured into
Garden City on slick, snow covered roads, to spend hours in an ACHD meeting.
I was well aware that going in that their role was simply as a referring body, to
focus on whether or not the development met their criteria for roads. After three
hours of presentations and testimony, one of the Commissioners motioned for a
road connection option. We weren't even considering it as a likely option. Then,
with a quick vote of three to one, it was late and they probably wanted to go
home, too. It passed without the ability to provide further comment on a specific
proposal. So, at this point in time I'm still considering and I'm consider with my
neighbors a motion for reconsideration with ACHD based upon the appearance
that the commission did not fully understand the motion that was before them.
Tamara, Roger and Eric generously gave a bunch of their time a couple of weeks
ago to come out and meet with our neighbors and I think they will probably all
admit that emotions were very high. This is an emotional thing. Hopefully they
will also admit that I did the best that I could to try and maintain civility during our
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 10 of 59
meeting, because there were a lot of people that were being very nasty and I did
what I could to try and personally cut off some of the inappropriate comments,
but now I'm the upset one. Last night a planning supervisor for the City of
Meridian sat through the same three hours of testimony and I'm sure it's difficult
to listen to emotional residents go on about the concerns about quality of living
and safety of their children. Then Mr. Parsons gave comment to the commission.
During this period, in a very condescending way, he said -- and I quote -- the
citizens don't understand. That statement made it clear that he does not take
seriously the feelings and the input of the very people he is paid to serve and I
fear that he is not alone when they feel like I'm just another whiny, spoiled
resident. Perhaps dealing with this day in and day out as a part of your job may
make one callous to some of the residents of your own town . One may think we
don't have the ability, the expertise, or are too narrow in our views to understand
what a long term vision is or how you believe it should be. Yes, change occurs.
I'm a Boise native. Born and raised. Went to Meridian High School. I
understand. The comments like these lead me to believe that he isn't thinking
about how he would feel if there is the same perceived threat to his home and
the loved ones who live there with him. This process is broken. It seems
impossible for a citizen to make a difference. It's stacked against common
residents in favor of those that are versed and do this as a part of their regular
jobs. Thankfully we are given the opportunity to comment, but it appears that
minds are already made up and it truly feels like this is all for nothing. Having to
wade through the different agencies to sort out who can help with what or even if
anyone can help is a helpless feeling. Deciding this development in segments is
wrong. Decisions which have a very real impact on our daily lives are being
made without all of the information --
McCarvel: Mr. Kearns?
Kearns: Yes.
McCarvel: Your three minutes are up. If you can get to -- are you speaking just
for yourself or for the HOA?
Kearns: I believe I'm just speaking for yourself.
McCarvel: Okay. Your three minutes are up, so if you could wrap up your
comments.
Kearns: I guess I will try to wrap it up very quickly here. I don't have any
problem with the commercial development here. I personally think it is a good
thing. I can see some benefits to it myself. I just want to make sure the
concerns are mitigated and are addressed. I have a list of concerns, but I don't
have time to go through them right here. But the main thing is do not zone for
higher density. The developers have already said that they don't wish for higher
density. Eagle Road is already a mess. Density is appropriate in some
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 11 of 59
locations, but it is not here. I hope that you will take our comments seriously
tonight. Thank you for your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. Next on my list is Robin Kearns. And, please, state your
name and address for the record.
R.Kearns: Robin Kearns. 2564 East Mount Etna Drive. Excuse me for having to
have a cough drop in my mouth, but I would be coughing constantly if I didn't. I
have most of the same concerns as my neighbors, but I have a question for all of
you that I hope you can answer for me, because I'm having a hard time
understanding this. What is the point of having a Comprehensive Plan? How do
you expect citizens to invest in Meridian if we cannot trust the Comprehensive
Plan. When my husband and I two years ago moved to Tuscany, we looked at
the Comprehensive Plan and, yes, we are very close to this. It's very personal to
us. But it's supposed to be residential. So, what is the point of this plan? As far
as I'm concerned we shouldn't even be here tonight listening to this . The
committee should be upholding the plan that was written . I know it's empty
ground, but that's probably why you create a plan ; right? So, that I can trust that
it's supposed to stay residential. I purchased my home here and now you're
going to build a grocery store within walking distance of my house , which some
people might agree to, but I personally don't mind driving two miles to the grocery
store. First, I ask that it's not even considered until it's a complete plan, because
we are going to be back here again arguing where the streets are going to be
when the residential people come in again. It's -- to me it's not a complete plan.
And, second, if you go ahead and go through with this -- and I do have to think
the people back here that they -- they also agree with R-8, that I think above R-8
is going to be a strong impact on our neighborhood. So, overall, again, I'd like to
go back to finish with my question -- my original question. I'm going to hope
someone -- one of you will answer. Why do we have a Comprehensive Plan and
why are we not following it. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Next on the list is Peggy McGee.
McGee: Peggy McGee. 2196 East Deerhill Drive. If you are the ones who have
the ability to amend the rules requiring connecting streets between commercial
and residential, I highly recommend that you do so. I have yet to meet a
Tuscany homeowner who wants that Mount Etna Street extended . We are the
only ones that would want to go through and we don't want to do that . No one
outside of our subdivision wants to go through . They shouldn't want to go
through, because it isn't their neighborhood. I have to assume that that's not
been brought up to ACHD. If it has I want it -- I want it clear that that's what I
would like. I'm against the proposed connecting streets. One new reason that I
didn't hear last night has to do with technology. Anyone going south on Eagle
will be -- if they are using their Google -- their MapQuest, will be directed to the
shortest routes and that new East Mount Etna Drive will be the shortest route into
the three long streets that connect the housing. That would be Santo Stefano,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 12 of 59
Mount Etna and Taormina. Those streets and all the housing in the whole
southern one-third of Tuscany Subdivision. This has the potential that I have not
even heard discussed yet to add a lot more traffic than your study indicates. The
ramifications of increased traffic you have already heard, so I won't go over that.
An ACHD member -- and I don't remember who it was -- did mention at the end
of last night's meeting that streets from Tuscany connecting into the new housing
could end in a parking lot next to Albertson 's. Hopefully, I'm being clear on this.
So, that this parking lot could be isolated from the rest of the commercial . So,
that if you had to have that East Mount Etna Drive, people coming off of Eagle,
whether they are coming from the south of the north, could only get into the
commercial or that -- that one section of the office. They wouldn't be able to go
all the way through. That makes sense if it has to happen, because, again, the
only people who would want to get to the Albertson 's or that section should be
the people from Tuscany. But, again, I know no one who wants that street there.
I'm perfectly fine going around to -- to Montague to Amity to Eagle.
McCarvel: Mrs. McGee?
McGee: Yes.
McCarvel: Your three minutes are up.
McGee: Thank you.
McCarvel: Can you get to the end of your comments.
McGee: So -- and it was mentioned here -- the representative from The Land
Group mentioned again tonight from neighborhood feedback last night, the
biggest issue -- and I will quote her -- was, indeed, connectivity to the
neighborhood. But for me and for the sheets back there I see, what we want is
no connectivity. None at all. Thank you for your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. Please come forward. Machelle -- or -- this is the screen
that they have up there; right? Okay. So, I just want to make a comment. This
whole system is new for all of us and so you can see your presentation time on
that screen. So, you can see how much time you have left. Once you start it will
that will be up there. So, please, state your name and address for the record.
Humphries: My name is Koriel Humphries. 2725 East Mount Etna. My
daughter's name is Emry Humphries, also on the list. You can cross us off.
She's right below me. I obviously live on Mount Etna. This is the first meeting I
have been to, because I have three children and that prevents me from going to
all the meetings, but I was knocking down doors as a -- we were talking about
our petitions going around preventing our neighborhood access to this
development. These are my three children. This is very personal to me. We
play outside every day and to open access to what could come through our
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 13 of 59
neighborhood, even though ACHD says just a little bit of an increase, which is
totally bogus -- a little bit of an increase -- these are three small children. There
are 100 children that live on Mount Etna -- three blocks of Mount Etna alone and
it is the same for Taormina. These children are my life. So, I want my daughter
to speak real fast. Can you tell them your name?
Emry: My name is Emry.
Humphries: And who lives across the street from us?
Emry: My friend Ellie.
Humphries: And what do you do every day?
Emry: Play with her.
Humphries: Do you cross the street?
Emry: Yes.
Humphries: Do you like to play with Ellie every day?
Emry: Yeah.
Humphries: What do you guys do every day?
Emry: Play on the front -- play outside.
Humphries: What do you like to play outside?
Emry: I don't know.
Humphries: Do you ride your bike?
Emry: Yeah.
Humphries: Do you like to do sidewalk chalk?
Emry: Yeah.
Humphries: Do you have a scooter you also ride?
Emry: Yeah.
Humphries: Yeah. Can you tell them how old you are?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 14 of 59
Emry: I am five.
Humphries: Can you tell them how old you are?
Gracie: I am three.
Humphries: What's your name?
Gracie: Gracie.
Humphries: This is a very real thing to us. Please know that. We do not want
access to this. We want our subdivision closed off. We want a wall built and we
want someone else to pay for it. And, then, apartments -- these are 300,000
dollar homes plus. It increases from there. Putting apartments or high density
residency just ruins our home, it ruins our subdivision. Please know that. Thank
you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Okay. Next on the list who wishes to testify is Romeo
Gervais.
Gervais: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Romeo Gervais. I live at
3019 East Fratello Street. So, just north of the proposed development. Just a
few comments. I mean the -- the big one that I -- I look at is it -- I'm probably one
of those weird people who actually did look at all the comprehensive plans and
things like that before I moved in and looking at that low density residential
designation is -- is one of the reasons I bought there . While I understand and
probably even support some of the commercial development and some of the
changes, the amount of change is really what bothers me -- is going from that
low-density future land use map designation all the way to this mixed -use
commercial and maybe that's part of the problem is is what the proposed future
land use map designation in which, then, pushes planning department into
recommending some of that higher density residential . The R-15 zoning
designation there is really a huge change for us and I just can't support that at all .
So, the R-8 at least makes sense. It's in line with the existin g Tuscany zoning. It
certainly seems to have some level of common sense. The other thing that I
would discuss a little bit is connectivity. I am a supporter of conductivity. In my
day job I drive fire trucks and things like that . So, I certainly support the
connectivity, but it can be done smartly and induced wholesale connectivity into a
commercial development is not a great idea, in my opinion. And the hard thing is
is when we are dealing with this as a preliminary plat level is how do we insure in
the future that those connections don't go in, when we don't have those
residential plans. When we look at their proposed site plan -- those are certainly
great site plans, but they are sketch plans and they could change. So, that would
be one thing that I would be really concerned about is as far as connections to
Burgo Way. So, we are -- we are at least establishing Mount Etna, which is a
good thing. Another concern that I have -- and it's referenced in some of the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 15 of 59
planning documents is the landscaping along Mount Etna Drive as we continue
to progress. Certainly we would -- I would ask for some additional landscaping
there along Mount Etna. Finally, I would just ask, in summary, just to limit the
density to R-8, to improve the landscaping, and, if possible, to place some
conditions on the plat to limit access points to Burgo and thank you for your time.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Next on is Karena Gardner. And, please, state
your name and address for the record.
Gardner: Sure. Karena Gardner. 2571 Taormina. Sorry. That mom got me
going. We moved here two years ago and my son didn't know anyone who went
to school and he was so impressed that Mayor de Weerd was there walking laps
with them around that school and she was there enforcing that kids need to walk,
need to exercise more, they need to walk to school and all these kids -- you go to
Siena Elementary, they are running laps. They are running laps as a challenge,
because they took her up on that challenge. So, last year when they came in
and revised the school plans to move the kids around to a different school, they
kept our neighborhood in a walk zone. That means all these kids that live all the
way up to Amity are walking to school. They are walking, they are riding their
bikes, they are going about on safe roundabouts to get there and all these kids
are doing that. We are encouraged -- we are encouraged to walk. When we
moved into this neighborhood we were attracted to that. We lived in Utah where
everybody drove to school. It was very inconvenient. It caused a lot of accidents
and there was a lot of problems. Our Siena Elementary has everybody walking
to school. When we moved into this neighborhood we did our homework. The
reason we chose this neighborhood is because it was all zoned residential. The
plat behind my house and the plat that we are talking about was zoned
residential. All of us that moved onto the site had done our homework and that's
what it said. So, that's what we had to go off. Recently I heard of a child that
was -- spoke up in a big meeting that said that he was trying to walk around --
around the roundabout on Zaldia and he almost got creamed by a car, because
no one can see around that roundabout on Zaldia. Zaldia is one of the main
entrances -- it's a connecting road to get to our neighborhood. That is a main
entrance that people will use to get to this development. They will use Montague
and they will use Zaldia. That will cause all those kids walking to school up that
route increased traffic. You fill in high-density residential, so that's R-6, R-8, R-
15, that's that many more kids going up these very busy roads. When I go down
and I go down Amity and I'm turning right into Montague, I'm constantly -- that
road is not made as a good connecting road. People are constantly curving right,
swinging out wide. They can't -- you can't even have two cars there or they are
going to hit each other. It's not meant as a good connecting road. My son, who
is going to testify tonight, he gets on that bus stop on that corner every day and
it's a concern. You add a hundred more kids into those bus stops, those kids are
endangered, too. The reason people get emotional at these meetings is because
we love our neighborhood. We are proud to live in our neighborhood to be a part
of that community and that’s cool and we are very distracted by this plan,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 16 of 59
because that will affect the safety of our children and it will affect our homes.
Thank you for your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. Andrew Gardner. State your name and address for the
record.
A.Gardner: So, I'm Andrew Gardner. I also live at 2571 East Taormina Drive.
Anyway. So, I am a seventh-grader at Victory Middle School, the new one that
just came and I live on Taormina Drive. But every day I walk to the bus stop and
well, there is like 30 other kids who do so. It is a very busy corner, Montague
and Amity, and drivers that turn onto Amity from Montague, they are very
concerning, considering that the corner isn't the most developed either. And it's
kind of unsafe, too, because there is a good -- a good section of Taormina that
does not have sidewalk either. And you need to consider the safety of this bus
stop and if you're adding more traffic people will cut through Montague to get
there. Also the thought of adding apartments adds in more kids and at the start
of the year the buses were already crowed enough that we had to have four to a
seat and, as you know, it's a school bus and you can only have three to a seat to
fit comfortably. And, anyway, this is kind of the first two years. I can't imagine
the traffic for more cars coming at a stop and walking to it. It is like the
neighborhood I lived in, I feel safe here. There is so many great people that live
here, who are very concerned and have mentioned that they want to move out of
this neighborhood if this development goes in and like my mom already
mentioned, we moved here two years ago and it was the first time I made a good
friend that lives close to where I can ride my bike safely to the park. It would be
very upsetting to me if my friends start moving and I am no longer safe in that
area. Just keep the neighborhood the way it is and stop the development from
going through.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Gardner. Warren Cays.
Cays: Good evening, Commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to talk. My
name is Warren Cays. I live at 2595 East Mount Etna Drive. I really don't think I
can top anything that's been just said. As you have already been told -- and I
don't know if you have gone into the P&Z website. You have seen all of our
comments, you have seen all of our e-mails, you have seen all the postings. If
not you should go there and read them just to catch up on them. I see Greg is
not in his realm at least. Some of them. We all, when we moved into this
development, thought we were moving into a residential development. That's
what we were sold. That's what we are told. We came down to the city, met with
planning and zoning, went over the comprehensive map. It was pointed out to us
they are all zoned R-2. This was all supposed to be residential, low density, both
sides of the road on Eagle. The map still says that. We were just in there
Monday having a meeting and we went down and we looked at them, they are
still that. There was an article in the Meridian Press in August that has the map.
It still shows that whole area zoned for subdivisions. Not commercial. And to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 17 of 59
hear some individuals at the meeting last night at ACHD say, well, our new idea
is to have commercial in every mile block is ridiculous. But it also violates all of
our beliefs and our faith in what is going on in the city. We -- we almost beg that
you turn this down totally. A lot of the recommendation by -- that ACHD made
was based on, we feel, faulty information, especially with the traffic study that
was done. There are so many errors in it and falsehoods in it, it's not even
believable. One thing I want to point out quickly -- I see my time is running out.
But going on the new website, I see Tuscany has built in there -- not Tuscany.
I'm sorry. City of Meridian and Mayor Tammy's face is all over it --
opportunitymeridian.org. If you haven't gone there you should. It is now posted
along with some of the e-mails. I just want to read you a couple of things off
parts of it. Mayor Tammy. We are committed to being a premier city to live,
work, and raise a family. Built for business, designed for living. If you approve
this that will definitely not be true. The second one off the same website. We are
family centered. Meridian maintains a family-centered approach to ensure that
youth are our primary focus in our community. This commercial center built
where it's being proposed, with connectivity to Tuscany, just absolutely violates
any of that and as far as I'm concerned flies totally in the face of what the City of
Meridian is supposed to be. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Ann Stephens.
Stephens: Good evening. My name is Ann Stephens and I live at 4686 South
Stromboli Place in the Tuscany Subdivision. When we purchased our property in
Tuscany to build our home last year, we knew that the farmland on the east side
of Montague would eventually have homes on it. We did not anticipate that it
would be rezoned for commercial and high-density residential. I have lived long
enough to know that change happens and I can adapt to changes . This is,
however, a major change to the country atmosphere we anticipated that we could
enjoy. My main concern is the multiple-family dwellings and the mixed-use
community. The Tuscany and surrounding subdivisions are single-family
dwellings, as has been pointed out. I am opposed to multiple family dwellings
being approved now or in the future . It is currently listed in R-8 and that is what I
would ask that it be kept. I understand your staff has recommended -- the
Planning and Zoning staff have recommended R-15. I would ask that you
reconsider that and keep it at an R-8. We selected Tuscany, as did the other
residents, to build our home, because it is a safe residential area. We have great
biking paths, kids use them all the time to ride and walk to school , and we feel
safe having our grandchildren be with us in our current residence. But we also
think that we need to be aware of what's happening and we are not against the
commercial part of that, but our house does back up directly to Montague and
that is based -- our proximity to that new development in the housing is what is
very much a concern for us. Since Montague is going to be the back of the
development, I would also suggest that the same fence be used in Tuscany to
coordinate with -- the same fence be used in the new subdivision that is used in
Tuscany to coordinate with that and that the builder be required to build a
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 18 of 59
sidewalk -- to put in a sidewalk on the east side Montague behind your fence to
provide safety for walkers. Thank you very much.
McCarvel: Thank you. Connie Maus. Maus. Sorry. I will let you say it.
Maus: Well, if I was in Germany I would probably say Herr Maus, but am here.
So, I'm Connie Maus and I live at 2682 East Mount Etna Drive and I am here to
echo much of the same concerns that you have heard previously. So, I'm just
going to hit a couple of points that I think are important for us to really strongly
consider. One of these is the drive through. Tuscany, as now, is a residential
area. By putting in the commercial that has changed. I accept change. But by
putting that road in as an access in the back to the commercial area makes
Tuscany a drive through and how does that happen? Well, off of Locust Grove is
a nice access into Tuscany Road. A beautiful access. Now, what other areas
are close to there? There is Meridian Observation Point. There is Victory
Greens. There is Red Feather. All of those little subdivisions can come off
Victory, down Locust Grove, turn into Tuscany to get over to the commercial area
and that will bypass Eagle. So, we need to really think about that access road. It
needs not to be there. We strongly ask that you consider that. The other thing I
want to really strongly say is that on the corner of Amity and Montague is a bus
stop. That bus stop has anywhere from 60 to 80 children twice a day. Now,
that's just the children. There are mothers that walk down there. There are other
people that walk out in the morning. But if you increase the residential to R-15,
that will make that traffic on that road significant. I ask you, implore you for
safety for our community that you maintain our low density residential living.
Now, what does that really mean? Well, I counted and I took a low-level count.
If they put in those homes that they have showed on that plot and those people
take just two trips -- two cars out of that dwelling area, that's a hundred more cars
in the morning. Now, that's a lot of cars for us to deal with on Monday. So,
again, I ask you to think about what that does to us. Now, I'm going to go from
another standpoint and the third standpoint is that I am of the aging generation
now and I chose to live in a community where there were young children , so that
I could affiliate with children playing in the yard, being around them, so I could
continue to feel young and invigorated . By you changing or agreeing -- not you
individually, but agreeing to those changes makes safety a lot harder for those
children. Those children will not get to play in the front yard and that's how that
community is developed. It is not developed so kids play in the backyard. It is
the front yard and in the streets of Tuscany. That's where you will find the
children. So, I thank you for letting me talk. Know that I'm coming to you as an
aging person who has looked back and am looking forward to new changes . I'm
looking forward to new commerce. I am looking forward to you making good
decisions about safety for our community.
McCarvel: Thank you. Mike Boily. Mike Boily. And, please, state your name
and address for the record.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 19 of 59
Boily: Mike Boily. 4289 South Burgo Way in Tuscany Subdivision. I would just
like to point out a few things. A lot of the talk has to do with what's going on over
on Montague. The Mount Etna connection. The proposed -- what they have
proposed in regards to developing the area R-8 has a lot to do with Burgo Way
as well. If you look at the corner of Burgo Way and Zaldia -- I don't know if you
can blow up this map here. There is a community pool there, which is two
houses down from my house and across the street . It's about a tenth of a mile
from Eagle Road. Currently all my neighbors here access that pool from Santo
Stefano, Taormina, Mount Etna. They all come to that pool by my house. Not
only that, on the corner of Zaldia and Eagle Road you have a major school bus
stop. High school and junior high. Over a hundred kids at two separate times a
day. Never mind you head north on Eagle Road at the other Tuscany entrance
there is another bus stop for two more -- for high school and junior high. Well
over another hundred kids there. What's going to happen here -- if you connect
us through -- or allow this to go through to connect into our subdivision it is --
Burgo Way is going to become a through way. Montague -- Zaldia is going to get
hammered. All those kids that walk -- literally walk to those bus stops -- parents
on cold days drive their cars and park on the side there and wait for the school
bus to show up. There is already enough traffic with that. To go ahead and
allow this stuff to go through is going to completely destroy the subdivision . It's
going to make the corner of Zaldia and Burgo very unsafe where you have a
community pool and, like I said, I live two houses down from there. I'm the
middle house and I see well over 300 people go to those -- that pool in a day.
Walking. The lady with the three little kids probably pulling them along in a
stroller or a Radio Flyer wagon. Believe me, it happens. Hundreds of kids on
bikes. It will be detrimental to our subdivision. No matter what happens there it
needs to be blocked off. I'm okay with change. I'm a 23 year veteran. Change
happens every day in the military. I get it. I have served my country. You're in a
position to serve your community. I asked you to put a stop to this, to not let
anything come through to our subdivision and serve your community the way the
rest of us should. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Carolyn Tenn.
Tenn: Hi. My name is Carolyn Tenn. I live at 2839 East Fratello. Here are the
facts. There are six grocery stores within five miles of where we live. I don't
think we even need another grocery store . We have a Paul's, Fred Meyer,
WinCo, two Walmarts and an Albertson's very, very close to us. Okay? So, I
also have 15 aerial views of grocery stores, including Albertson's and commercial
developments that are by residential areas and only one of them has three
streets to -- through a residential subdivision like Tuscany and it's all winding.
The other one will hit a main street and go to the light. So, the people that are
exiting the grocery store, Albertson's, on Eagle Road will go out to the light and
not through the subdivision. How they are proposing this is -- so what -- they are
connecting the streets. My issue with that is one, Burgo, like the other gentleman
mentioned, here is the open for developing. There is a bus stop there. The high
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 20 of 59
schoolers walk there at 6:40 to 6:45 in the morning. It's dark. Okay? So, there
is an issue with them walking there when this traffic is going through, because
those people are going to be cutting up to our subdivision and we know there is
going to be a light going in there in the future. But my issue was safety, because
it's real ugly as a former -- former emergency road that these kids wear helmets
when they are walking to the bus stop. So, if they get hit by a car it's not going to
be pretty. The buses do not go into the subdivision. They only are on Eagle
Road and Amity. So, all these kids are walking in the dark. There is a high
school pick up. There is a middle school pick up. Then there is Siena
Elementary where all the kids are walking to the elementary school at the
northern part of the subdivision. So, you really have to think about safety here.
How they have the preliminary plat and the drive through is not a good idea. So,
that's a safety issue. Also the development is to enhance the community.
Please. It's not to cave into Albertson's and the high-density -- please, whatever
you do, do not put higher density in there. Please just keep it as is and don't put
any more through streets in. If you want, please, look. The Walmart on
Overland. Bear Creek. There is a blocked off road. So, that this road does not
lead right into the residential area of Bear Creek . Why? I'm pretty sure because
it's a safety issue. So, please, look -- please look at these, because all of these
are self-contained. If you're going to go ahead and approve a commercial for
Albertson's, make it self contained and not go through to Tuscany.
McCarvel: Thank you.
Tenn: Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Jeff Brummer.
Brummer: Thank you for your time and your service. I live on Mount Etna. I --
McCarvel: Mr. Brummer, please, state your name and address for the record.
Brummer: Jeff Brummer on Mount Etna.
McCarvel: Your full address, please.
Brummer: 2421 Mount Etna.
McCarvel: Okay.
Brummer: I'm here on behalf of my four kids as well. I am -- I love Albertson's,
you know what, they are an Idaho company, I'm an Idaho native, I'm all about
Albertson's, but in this scenario in the Albertson's jingle -- jingle it's your store --
it's not my store. When I bought my house on Mount Etna it was in no way,
shape or form planned out to have a through street going to Albertson's. It
wasn't. Do you think if any of you were purchasing a home and knew that you
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 21 of 59
would ever buy or it would affect your buying decision ? It's -- it's going to affect
mine. It's going to affect my house. It's going to affect my kids. It's going to
affect traffic. If -- if this is already a loss for Tuscany, the citizens of Tuscany
have to deal with a through street in their neighborhood going to a grocery store,
which is rarely -- one out of a hundred times ever happens, we have already
suffered a loss there. If that's a loss that you're going to deal to us, my only plea
is to never allow R-15 into that area. It was -- I purchased my house as well to
have low -- low density in the master plan in that area . To have R-15 come in
there, apartments, three, four, five hundred thousand dollar homes, that's
definitely right on the border there, are going to be affected. So, I'd ask you to
consider that and not blow us out a second loss on that. And I just -- thanks for
your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. Steven Stark.
Stark: My name is Steven Stark and my wife Kathy and I live at 2630 East Amity
Road. We live about just west of the development here on Amity Road and we
support the commercial development portion of this project. We strongly object
to the R-15 zoning and the high density zoning on this project. If it was left alone
with the R-8 up there we would -- we could approve of that. It's more consistent
and appropriate and we attended the City Council meeting for the development
across the street on the other side and the City Council emphasized that that
area was meant for R-4 or R-8, you know, and that would be consistent.
Albertson's is a big change, but R-15 is too big of a change. So, we strongly
oppose that. The other thing is the last time there was a development by our
house we lost irrigation at our house for over a year -- about a year and a half
and everyone told us they couldn't take away our irrigation water and they had to
do it -- they had to provide it and that didn't matter. When it was done I was
calling the city and calling the irrigation districts and trying to find out when it was
going to get dug up and when it was going to get repaired and it never happened,
so I just ended up going a year and a half without irrigation for our three acres.
So, I guess I’m asking to put some kind of provision in there that we are notified
when it's going to be dug up. It will have to be dug up, because it will be piped
and, then, compensated for our loss of water -- our pumping expense, things like
that. The last thing I'd like to say is we have lived there about 20 years and we
went through -- we used to be able to walk all the way to Victory without any
houses around there, so we have seen a lot of change and it's baffling for a
homeowner to understand the -- you know, the different agencies, the approval
process, the conditional use permits, the zoning and all that, but through all of
our experience it's been my experience that Bill Parsons has really been above
and beyond his job description to keep us informed, you know, and the
conditional use permits were in force and make sure that the developer did what
they were supposed to do, no matter how much they maybe tried to get out of it.
So, I just wanted to say that. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Melissa Feldman.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 22 of 59
Feldman: My name is Melissa Feldman . I live at 4304 South DaVinci Way and I
actually live -- Mount Etna turns into DaVinci and I live near the corner of Zaldia
and DaVinci. So, we will be sort of hammered both ways and I'm here to
represent my neighborhood and my family. I have two small kids that also cross
Zaldia every day to get to school and I am extremely worried that if this is -- those
connecting streets are -- are approved that that will just bring increased traffic.
There is already so much traffic on Zaldia during the school hours -- school day --
yeah, school hours -- hundreds of kids are walking and going to and from,
parents are picking their kids up -- I just feel that it cannot handle that sort of
traffic coming through from -- you know, if it was -- they were connecting streets,
both from Mount Etna, Zaldia, even at the in between. I just really strongly
oppose any street connecting. If we have to have the Albertson's, okay, but,
please, I beg of you, do not let it connect into our neighborhood. Keep that safe
for us. We bought it thinking that it was going to be low-density housing. That's
why we bought and, you know, our schools are already crowded. We already
had to split the neighborhood up. We are a walking district to our schools and as
of right now we have 26 to 28 kids per classroom and if we were to go with high
density that would -- it would make it impossible. There is just so many kids
already. So, if we do get the Albertson's just -- I really hope we don't have
connecting streets and we keep it zoned for R-8 and do not go to high density
and I thank you for your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. David Feldman.
Fitzgerald: Hey, Josh. While he's coming up, can you show us where the
walking school is? Where the elementary school is?
Beach: The Siena Elementary School is up here. In relation to theirs --
Fitzgerald: Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Please state your name and address for the record.
D. Feldman: David Feldman. 4304 South DaVinci Way. I just want to stand for
a minute and say that I think you can tell the frustration of the neighborhood here.
A lot of people are concerned and worried that their voice is not heard . It's a little
frustrating when you think -- or it seems like, you know, a developer or a grocery
store can just kind of come in when we have all, you know, done our due
diligence, we looked, we knew that there was a Comprehensive Plan and
because, you know, a big dog wants to come in and -- and make more money
and develop land, that they have the right to just kind of come in and infringe on
our neighborhood. I don't think that's right and I think if you would ask a lot of
people here, they will say they just don't want that Firenze Plaza period. They
would prefer it to be residential homes. I am one of those people. A lot of people
here tonight have also expressed -- they have said, well, if you have to build it,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 23 of 59
then, don't connect it. I am of that group. But I want to explicitly state I'm against
it period. We know -- we have grocery stores -- most -- nobody minds walk -- or
driving five minutes to get to a grocery store. The reason people bought in this
neighborhood is because we don't mind that. We don't -- excuse me. We don't
need additional traffic because of safety concerns for kids . We don't need
additional high-density housing that crowds our schools. We don't need
additional high-density housing that brings down the property value of our
homes. There is so many negatives to this. I'm saying don't build it at all. We,
the people, are telling you we don't want it. So, that's all I have to say. Thanks
for your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. Sean Weeks. Please state your name and address for
the record.
Weeks: Sean Weeks. 4760 Stromboli Place. So, I want to come up and wing it.
So, I have been kind of writing some of my thoughts down. I went to the ACHD
meeting last night and ACHD and the developer have the belief that the people of
Tuscany have a fear of change. The decision last night was not unanimous. In
fact, there was one proposed that the developer come back with iron clad plans
for the plats one and two -- or it was two and three or whatever the plans are,
because we don't have enough information. The developer says that they are
only going to develop the commercial part and the plats -- then the plots will be
sold. In the same sentence they say that -- they say how nice it's going to be and
they promise that it's going to be nice. How it won't affect traffic, that it won't
affect our own values of what my home is or anything else like that. And they are
all nice ideas. However, they only will develop a small percentage of the project
and the rest is unknown. They are going to sell the other part and, then, that's
left up to the developer and the city. So, that's not a fear of change, that's --
that's fear of not knowing what's to come. That's a healthy fear of protecting my
investment, my home and my children. The real fear that we have is not being
heard. The real fear we have is the voice of money is going to be louder than our
voices in this case. I don't understand how it's possible for ACHD and the city to
remain nonbiased on -- and please believe me, this isn't an attack on anyone's
character, but when the developer is paying to have a roundabout widened and
paying to have a street developed five years before its time, I mean I think that's
a great idea if I'm sitting in the position of ACHD or the city. So, I'm kind of
worried about that. Why do they get to have all the information when we are left
in the dark when we ask simple questions about the rest of this development.
So, this is not a fear of change, it's a fear of not knowing and not being heard and
it seems that every one of the residents of Tuscany gets a say about what's
going to happen to where they live. Please ask yourself if you lived where we
live would you not want a plan up front? Would you want real traffic sensors
placed in position that matter at peak times by nonbiased parties, not someone
that Albertson's hired or The Land Group hired, because we have eyewitness
accounts of those sensors not being in places at peak times. They are not
accurate. We have eye witness accounts of that. So, please, let me tell you
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 24 of 59
fears and they are not fear of change. I fear the traffic on the corner of Amity and
Eagle is already out of control. The traffic on Montague and Eagle is out of
control. I fear that the beauty of Tuscany, which is the pools and the parks and
being -- being able to play in your streets with your children , it's at risk. But I feel
that funneling our neighborhood -- just our neighborhood traffic to one place --
this is congesting the traffic. I mean even if it's just us -- if it was just our
neighborhood, nobody else coming through. I'm afraid that my home value of
almost 400,000 dollars will be significantly dropped, because of apartments going
up 60 feet from my home. I'm in the cul-de-sac.
McCarvel: Mr. Weeks, your three --
Weeks: I'm almost done.
McCarvel: Okay.
Weeks: So, if this is to move forward will our voice be heard? Can this
development go back to the drawing board? Until we have a set of plans that we
agree on can we have something to adhere to. Not a big set of ideas that once
Albertson's sells the plats they can wash their hands of all responsibility, while
the community suffers financially and have our safety jeopardized. Can we, as a
City of Meridian and Albertson's, have some skin in the game. After all, we are
Meridian, the top place to live in the United States. Please make the decision to
give us faith in the system, our leaders, and the City of Meridian. Thank.
McCarvel: Deanna Johnson.
Johnson: My name is Deanna Johnson. I live at 4742 South Stromboli. I live
right next door to Sean. We live in the cul-de-sac right off of Montague. My
house is -- my -- the back of my property is actually the corner of Amity and
Montague, which is a nice dirt spot on the map that you have right there and we
purchased our home not even nine months ago and we purchased it based on
the fact that we knew there was a big plot of nothing there and the fear was
what's it going to be become. So, we asked and we discovered that it's zoned
residential. It's going to be homes. We didn't need to worry about it. Because I
can tell you right now, if we knew that that was going to be an Albertson's we
never would have bought that home and we love our home and we love our
neighborhood and we moved there for our children . We have three small
children. My oldest is not even seven years old. My youngest is just barely
walking. And we wanted to have that area of our kids running and playing in the
streets and we like that we have this cul-de-sac that kind of is back there, but I --
I don't like that -- or I don't know who is going to be looking on me on the other
side of that fence. I am with Mr. Feldman when he says that he doesn't want it
all. I don't want it at all. I am not against change, but I think that corner is a
ridiculous place to put something. Eagle and Amity -- that roundabout is a
disaster. Half the people don't even know how to drive through it and just stop . It
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 25 of 59
is not -- it is not a smart place to put this. There has got to be a better place to
put something like this than on that corner that's a disaster and you're not even
sure if you're going to allow right turns or not. I think it's -- I think it's a mistake
and I also think that with the new things like Century Farm that's coming in with
600 homes and that YMCA that's being built , the traffic's going to be already a
mess without even adding this development to it. I think that the R-15 zoning is
an absolute disaster as well. Like Sean said, we paid almost 400,000 dollars for
our home less than nine months ago. The thought of losing that equity that we
don't even really have yet is sickening to me that we are going to lose that. I
believe that -- like it said, it's a walk zone. We are the farthest point where I live
from that school and I have a first grader. Do you think I want him going -- that's
a straight shot, straight up Montague. Montague ends right in this little parking
lot. I probably would never allow him to ride his bike to school if this goes in,
because it will never be safe. We don't need this development like people were
saying. There is an Albertson's on Lake Hazel and Five Mile. There is a new
WinCo going in. That new Rite Aid on Victory has a mini market inside it. You
can get your milk. You can get your milk at the Rite Aid. You don't have to go to
the Albertson's. I would like to say, though, like was stated before, that I do not
want this. I don't agree with it. I think it's a big mistake for our end of Meridian.
We don't want it to become like North Eagle Road. If it has to go in, please, say
no to R-15. Please keep it R-8. We don't want who knows what going behind
us, because there isn't a proper plan, like Sean was saying. So, please, see that
we can also get a proper plan in place that is complete , so we know what will go
in behind us. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Ken Mutell. Ken?
Mutell: I'd like to ask for ten minutes to speak for the group.
McCarvel: But they have already spoken.
Mutell: No.
McCarvel: Who has not spoken? Okay. Please come forward to the mike.
Okay. State your name and address for the record.
Mutell: Certainly. Ken Mutell. 2747 East Mount Etna Drive. Good evening,
Commissioners. As is evident, one overriding goal of our opposition to Firenza
Plaza and that's been safety of our own children. We presented two petitions
signed by 285 residents to the Mayor of Meridian and a copy to ACHD officials to
our concerns. We went before ACHD commissioners last night to plead our case
that no road should be allowed between Firenza and Tuscany. They listened,
then, they denied the children the protection we sought. They also denied the
developer's proposed solution that would have been the next best alternative and
replaced it with a sub-optimal solution from many of our perspectives. Here we
are with a developer causing an impact on our neighborhood by building a
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 26 of 59
shopping center and the mitigation is kicked down the road until the next
developer comes in for the residential portion. Decisions by residents to move to
Tuscany were based in part on the future land use plan -- that said was an area
planned low density residential development. Many of us specifically moved
here because we wanted to avoid the North Eagle Road commercial mess and
live in a quiet residential neighborhood. We are now confronted with a possibility
of a commercial shopping center with operating hours from 5:00 a.m. to 1:00
a.m. A total of 20 hours per day. It will have trucks coming and going at all
hours of the day and night. ACHD seems only concerned with Albertson's trucks,
but what about the gasoline tankers for the gas station. The Cisco trucks for the
restaurants. The fast food franchises and who knows what else for the other
stores. We are told they won't use our neighborhood streets and signs will be put
up to that effect. But the road through the residential sections have not been
identified yet. Will they be signed? Will they be used? We don't know at this
point. We had a discussion about Burga Way last night. It seemed to be high on
the commissioner's list of options, even after we pointed out they would go by the
busiest community pool in Tuscany. What happened if the developer --
residential developments wants that road as an access point? We are
concerned with this entire development, not just the portion Albertson's is
concerned with. The developers asked that both residential portions be zoned R-
8. However, the city had recommended R-15 due to the mixed use community
designation. A mixed-use community implies a higher density residential
development, potentially as high as R-40, which was confirmed by Bill Parsons,
whom we met with him earlier in the week. The developer has no intention to
develop the residential portion. They intend to sell it off. In speaking with the
planning department, it's clear that nothing can guarantee that we won't see
apartments across the street from 400,000 dollar homes. Even though a concept
plan has been presented showing R-8 and patio homes, developer can still come
back in and there is a process to up that density. We have tremendous concerns
with that. Nobody could say that that's good planning, it's going to enhance our
neighborhood if we see as dense as R-15 or R-40. I lived in Atlanta, Georgia, for
20 years and I have seen excellent implementations of mixed-use developments
there. However, I have never seen an implementation done right up against an
upscale neighborhood. If we built Firenze with no development around
boundaries today, just the buildout out would look something like this. You would
have a commercial plaza. You would probably surround it with higher densit y,
perhaps apartments. Around that you probably have some sort of started
homes, maybe another development that was a mid-level development, and,
then, perhaps you would get to a Tuscany type development. What you're doing
here tonight is skipping those intermediate steps. Because we don't know, other
than what's on a concept plan, which the developer has already admitted they
are not going to develop, we may be stuck with nice patio homes, five or six per
acre. We may have R-40 in there. We don't know. Again, 300,000, 400,000
dollar homes -- we just had a home sell for almost 500,000 dollars just down the
street. Because of the decisions made by the residents with -- with thought,
things are now being turned upside down. Residential becomes commercial.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 27 of 59
Safe becomes worrisome. Quiet becomes noisy and busy. We are concerned
by the precedence being set by this project and potential to dramatically change
the character of the area we live in. Why is the future land use map being
ignored? To future residents of Ada county and the City of Meridian our new
motto probably needs to become buyer beware . We have been told we can
request items to put in a development agreement , such as no new roads into
Tuscany, no apartments, no liquor stores, no payday loan stores, things of that
nature and I'm requesting that those be put in tonight. However, your staff tells
us that all these could be overridden later. It might not be easy, but there is a
path to accomplish it. And, oh, by the way, since we might not be within the 300
foot notice distance, we probably need to drive by the commercial plaza on a
routine basis to see if anything ever gets posted. Wow, what a way we have to
live. Apparently we are going to have to start a citizen's patrol to ensure the
development agreement isn't broken. We have repeatedly been told trust the
process. I got to tell you, after last night's meeting with ACHD I have got trust
issues. Your staff, while extremely helpful, has given us no comfort that we can
protect ourselves any better with the city. It seems we will be potentially
spending a bunch of time in public hearings over the coming months and years. I
have outlined the problems we see. Will a commercial center identified in the
future land use plan, less than two miles from us, with zoning already in place,
supported by Meridian Road, which is already five lanes in that location. Why
ignore the land use map? Sew the seeds for new North Eagle Road. Force
something into a location that can't handle the traffic. Adjoin an upscale
neighborhood incompatible with a mixed use development and, obviously, has
plenty of upset residents. Last night the analogy of fitting a square peg into a
round hole was used. We all saw that happen last night. With a rather big
hammer I might add. As a bonus the residents also got a lecture from one of the
commissioners about the fact that every square mile should have some type of
commercial development to cut down on traffic and we need to accept change .
Is that in line with the commercial land use plan? You just updated the plan --
the map and the comp plan in October of this year and I didn't see anything like
that in it. Is everyone not on the same page ? Can the public depend on
anything we are provided? This doesn't seem like the type of behavior in
keeping with being on the top ten list of places to live, to raise a family, or to
retire or all the other wonderful recognition the area has received. All we want to
accomplish this evening is to protect our children and to continue to live in a
neighborhood that resembles the one we bought into . Commissioners, I ask you
tonight to reject the revised preliminary plat, the annexation and a change in the
future land use map due to the concerns I have presented. The precedence you
will set with your actions and the potential impact on the Eagle-Amity Road
intersection from the adjoining developments. However, judging by how well that
went last night, I will offer a second option. Since many our concerns are based
on how the entire 40 acres will be developed and some of the proposed
mitigation steps cannot be implemented because it would be developed in
multiple steps, can we not tie the development of both the commercial and
residential sections together? That eliminates a lot of our concerns that have
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 28 of 59
been expressed by multiple people tonight where it's the fear of the unknown .
We don't know what that residential portion is going to be. We don't know what
roads are going to be there. We don't know how many times we are going to
have to come back here and fight the same fight over and over. Albertson's
won't develop the residential portion. If you can defer any approval on Firenze
until the property can be -- can be jointly developed, we can see how it's built out,
what roads are required, what mitigation steps are needed and let's not do this in
a piecemeal fashion. Right now Albertson's can feel good about requesting R-8
zoning, having only one road going through and getting their plans approved .
We are still left holding the bag. We don't know who will actually build the
residential sections, what roads will be asked to be put through, what mediation
will be provided. Tie this all together and, hopefully, we can come to a solution
we can all live with. We have been told to trust the process. I received many e-
mails from residents who have appeared before you on other projects that felt
their concerns were ignored. They told us not to trust the process. Unless the
commercial and residential parcels are developed together so we can
understand the outcome, I’m going to continue to have trust issues. One final
thought for tonight. Albertson's foundation's corporate value is making each
neighborhood better. Does it sound to you from testimony you have heard
tonight from all of us that they are making our neighborhood better? Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Kathleen Gallagher.
Gallagher: My name is Kathleen Gallagher. I live at 2747 East Mount Etna
Drive. Good evening, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen. I am against
Firenza Plaza and I ask you to deny this request. If there are any roads enter
Tuscany from the proposed development, there will be an increase in traffic that
will endanger the children in the neighborhood. We have plenty of children in
Tuscany, but none to spare. Thank you.
McCarvel: Richard Gardner.
Gardner: Commissioners, thank you. Richard Gardner at 2571 East Taormina
Drive. I wanted to just address a couple of things that -- that maybe haven't been
flushed out tonight. One is I think -- like a lot of people here, I'm not opposed to
all commercial development and I understand a grocery store has to be in
someone's backyard at some point, I simply don't think that this is a suitable
location for it. One of the concerns that came up last night at the ACHD hearing -
one of the commissioners mentioned couldn't we go up and put all the traffic
through onto Zaldia? Why do you need a new connection onto Eagle Road?
And certainly that's concerning that you have more intersections at locations
close to this roundabout where the ACHD's own policies didn't allow for it and the
answer that came back was that Burgo simply -- and I believe this very strongly --
Burgo, which connects to Zaldia on the north, simply isn't designed to handle that
kind of traffic. There is houses facing it directly. Now, if we wanted to design this
from scratch with the idea that there would be commercial at this intersection , we
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 29 of 59
could have done some things differently. You could make Zaldia a nice access
road and -- and pass it through. That wasn't done. This was really all designed -
the surrounding neighborhood was all designed with the idea that this would be
residential at some point. Putting the traffic there now on Mount Etna where it
hits Eagle -- my concern is that sooner or later you're going to have so many
people turning left to head north onto Eagle Road that there is just no workable
way to do it without putting in a stop light and a stop light there will be absolutely
incompatible with the roundabout to the south and the real problem is is that you
have these arterials doing double duty. Certainly the traffic from further growth to
the south is already a concern. There are hundreds or maybe thousands of
homes going in further south on Eagle Road and I get that growth is going to
happen. I actually -- unlike some of my neighbors I love the roundabout, I think
it's wonderful. I think it does what it's supposed to do , it gets traffic through.
Asking this intersection now to function as a commercial access is really asking it
to do double duty and it's just not set up to do that. I understand the convenience
of having commercial close by. Like many of my neighbors I moved here with
the understanding that I was going to have to drive two or three miles away. I
think the developers made the point that -- or made the argument that putting this
here it will reduce traffic on the arterials, because people will shop now where
they live. I think the idea that putting commercial here on the corner of Eagle and
Amity will reduce traffic is simply ridiculous. I don't see how that can happen. I
don't drive on North Eagle Road because I live there, I drive there because there
is stores there and I think we are going to see the same thing happen here . If
this goes commercial how do you say no to the next guy south of Amity? How do
you say no further down? I think we are turning Eagle Road into another
commercial corridor like its twin to the north. Thank you.
McCarvel: Ben Miller.
Miller: My name is Ben Miller. I'm at 2728 East Taormina. Commissioners,
thank you very much for your time. I'm vehemently against any sort of
commercial development at this corner. I think that proposing commercial
development at the corner is very short-sighted. If you look at even the design of
this whole neighborhood -- not only ours, but those in all directions, you will find
that it's going to be a huge cluster. If you step just a little bit back, with all the
homes that are being developed to the south , east, to the northeast and to the
southwest, when those are developed you will have kids that are going to be
riding their bikes and right now as the proposal stands to the developer is to just
simply increase the roundabout. Roundabouts are great. I agree. They are
awesome. They get traffic through. They are awesome for cars. As an avid
cyclist in this area they are great for cyclists, too, if you're really, really careful.
They are horrible for people who want to walk and I guarantee you that if you p ut
a commercial development at this corner you will have kids at risk crossing this
area. I have seen it. It will happen. I can guarantee it. Last night we were
scolded, because change happens. We were all ready for change to happen, but
the change that we were expecting was to go from dirt to homes, not dirt into
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 30 of 59
commercial development. Again, I implore you, please, please, do not allow this
to happen to this area. We have plenty of shopping all around us. Thank you.
McCarvel: Bill Humphries.
Humphries: Bill Humphries. 2725 East Mount Etna Drive. First I'm going to
apologize, because last night was extremely frustrating. So, I may be a little
rude, so I apologize. And I'm going throw ACHD under the bus tremendously I
hope, because one of the first things they talked about was that they are a
recommending body and they need to recommend to you about annexation and
zoning and they are -- basically, their rationale was, well, we are just a
recommending body, so who cares. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. So, my
recommendation is ignore their recommendation, because they didn't really
debate anything or think about it. To prove my point, none of them knew how to
pronounce any of those streets. They didn't have any idea which street went
where. They had no idea how Locust Grove does connect. My wife and I live on
Mount Etna. When she wants to go to Victory she's timed it multiple times. If
she goes out Montague, goes on Amity and goes on Locust Grove, it's longer
than cutting through the neighborhood to Locust Grove to Victory. So, she goes
through. So, you have the commercial development, it goes the opposite way.
People come through. It's shorter. She's timed it. It might look funny when you
get on the map and look at it, but it's true. Again, the frustrating part was -- I feel
like the developer, even though I didn't -- I'm not completely in favor of all the
developer's proposal, I felt like their proposal was better than what we ended up
with. Those -- if you're going to let all this go through -- and I agree with
everything that's been said -- you're going to put just two roads, Mount Etna and
Beliza I think is the name and -- without any right turns out of there, so you're just
going to push everyone onto one road, Mount Etna, to get onto Eagle and you're
just going to have it stack up and stack up and stack up and stack up and no one
can turn left. People are going to try to turn right. ACHD thought, oh, you know,
we will just take out those little right turns, so people don't have to stack up on
those other ones. I think that's ridiculous. And, again, I was unimpressed by the
amount of discussion. It was a couple -- it felt like a minute, votes, and we are
done and everything was changed and we had no say. I also heard from Mr.
Parsons the mixed use idea a little rework and we are in Idaho -- I was born and
raised in Idaho. We are not in San Francisco, we are not in Seattle, we are not in
New York, we are out in the country, people are not going to be in apartments or
these high densities and work at Albertson's. They are going to go to BSU, they
are going to work downtown, they are going to drive. It's ridiculous to think that
we have this wonderful planning, we have been to many conferences thinking
that we are an urban area. We are not. So, I just -- I disagree with that
completely. There was a mention if anything is going to go in that there should
be trees and a berm or some vegetation behind Albertson's. If you're going to do
this that's the minimum and I also think you should require that Montague be
finished, the sidewalks. Put a berm up with trees. It's almost like a wall and we
are asking them to pay for it again. So, I think that would help, especially the -- in
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 31 of 59
the school bus situation with Montague, because what people are describing is
when you're going west on Amity and you take a right into Montague, it's not
finished, so it's almost at right angles, so there is no -- your car, you just -- you
basically have to stop if you want to take a complete right angle, so -- if you try to
turn your way out. And so it's not finished. Thank you for your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. Okay. That completes the list of people indicated that
they would like to speak. Do we have anybody else that has anything new to
say? All right. Back in the corner. Please state your name and address for the
record.
Wadsworth: Jonathan Wadsworth. I live at 2706 Taormina. I think I was the last
house to be completed in Tuscany. In a previous life I worked for a developer --
actually, the developer who started Tuscany -- the first half of Tuscany and Bear
Creek and Paramount. Familiar with the area. I agree with my neighbors. It's an
interesting time to get to know your neighbors with all these things happening.
With regards to the development, I don't -- I don't want it. I personally don't need
to live closer to a -- to a supermarket than I do right now. But to be fair, they
have listened as well as they can. I mean they have a business interest they
need to accomplish. Their proposal -- the only thing I have that would be new
would be to talk about the R-8 and the requirement in a mixed-use designation to
have some high-density residential. The live-where-you-work concept. I
completely understand that and it works in a lot of spaces if you're acting in a
bubble. I guess I would ask that this not be considered a bubble. You have got
400 houses within a half a mile . They could still walk to work. They are not all
going to be required to come from this space. This can still serve as an R-8.
You can still live where you work and you can still supply all of the possible
employees that you would ever need for that commercial space with the Tuscany
Subdivision and an R-8 designation. So, I think an exception to that rule in this
particular situation is appropriate. That's all I've got.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you.
Hodson: Hi. My name is Kim Hodson and I live at 2259 East Taormina. I know
that one thing that hasn't really been brought up that worries and concerns me --
it also has to do with increased traffic flow is currently behind my house there is a
division going in called Paisley Meadows and right now there is no exit from that
neighborhood onto Amity. You have to exit to the neighborhood to the left or to
the top, so the north or to the west and so I do feel like if the grocery
development did go in and there was a connection , that you would have
Bellingham Park, which is already there; Estancia and Paisley Meadows and you
have them all coming to our neighborhood to access that and I know that,
because I go through their neighborhoods to get to Victory, because like the
other guy said, I need to go to Locust Grove. It is faster. I don't want that
increased traffic. I have four children and I have one in high school, I have one in
junior high, and I have two in elementary school and so these bus stops affect
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 32 of 59
every single one of my children and that Montague Road is not built for that traffic
increase. It's way too small. If a car is parked there, there is not -- there is -- you
know, it's tight for another car to go the other direction and that is where the bus
stop is for my high schooler and for my middle schooler and I do have two
elementary schoolers who do love to go and to bike to school and I do worry fo r
that safety. So, I would agree with the other things that have been said, that we
would prefer if this goes in that there is no connectivity to our neighborhood and if
you want to connect it we would be more than happy for you to put a path in
where bikers and walkers can go, but we really prefer to not have any access
with vehicles. That's -- those are kind of my biggest concerns and also to keep it
at an R-8 and not an R-15. Just with all the development I feel like it is just that
many more kids piling into our school and we already have that other Paisley
Meadows going in that is also going to affect our school. Again, with the home
values. I just think there is such an easy way to make everybody happy by
having no connectivity roadwise and by keeping it an R-8 and I feel like that's
really a way to make everybody happy, to do those two small things. So, thank
you very much for your time.
McCarvel: Thank you.
Steenkolk: Hi. I'm Suzanne Steenkolk and I reside at 2448 East Mount Etna. I
have been in Tuscany for two years now and my husband and I work at Micron.
So, we used to live in Southeast Boise and it was a big and serious decision for
us to come across town where we never ever got on the freeway, we had an
eight minute commute to get to work and we had no commercial development
beside us. But every time I drove through Tuscany I loved the children out in the
roads. There is a ton of kids in our subdivision and it is a true differentiator for a
neighborhood. The neighbors are always out in the front yards and all the kids
and that is the one reason that we moved there, because I wanted my kids to
grow up in that kind of environment. So, we made the trade-offs, but now we get
on the freeway and sit in 30 minute traffic and -- in order to give our kids that kind
of environment and I feel like this commercial property is going to majorly change
the esthetics of our neighborhood and the land value. Two of my neighbors just
sold their homes and they had them listed for 515,000 dollars and right around
340,000 dollars. So, you would come in and put up apartments next to all the
residents that live right there in these four and five hundred thousand dollar
home, it just does not work. We please ask you to keep the property at R-8.
Also Siena Elementary is in our neighborhood. It is in a walk zone and the
majority of the kids in our neighborhood walk there and attend that school and I
can give you the school property map . The majority of the kids that attend the
school are in Tuscany. Also I don't have kids in school yet, but this -- the
seriousness of this made me want to get up at 7:30 in the morning and I went
and stood at the bus stop for 30 minutes with kids on Montague and Amity and,
honestly, I was uncomfortable standing there, the traffic was going by so quickly,
and I asked Cascade Transportation for the number, so I could give you the
facts, but, actually, there are 160 students at four Tuscany bus stops. Half of
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 33 of 59
those are in the two bus stops that neighbor this Firenza Plaza property and,
then, you've heard about the pools, the Renaissance Park -- I mean this is the
culture of our neighborhood that the kids are always in the neighborhood . So, I
ask you, please, do not connect this in if you choose to approve the property.
We want a wall. We want it to be a separate entity. We want there to be clear
division. Our neighborhood is different than theirs and I even go as far as to say
I would like the Mount Etna road that's in their proposal changed to a different
name, so there is not the perception that we have anything to do with that group .
Also -- also I think it's fine that we have walking paths. It would be nice to go in
there, but I absolutely do not want the traffic coming through. You have heard a
million times tonight how all of us cut through to go to Locust Grove . So,
everybody -- the 1,500 houses now north of us are going to come and do the
same thing to us and our side streets that we knew were going to be side streets
now are going to because huge arterial traffic ways. The traffic report said that
there is going to be less than 25 average daily trips on Mount Etna. That's just
ludicrous. It's going to significantly increase and all these kids are out on the
road all the time. Also Eagle Road is just not set up to take all this traffic. We all
came to South Eagle Road, because we didn’t want to deal with North Eagle
Road, it's a disaster, and by making an exception and putting this development
through, we are starting to create the same mirror effect of North Eagle Road.
So, please, consider this. I didn't feel like ACHD listened to our concerns. We
stood up and said time and time again there is a major safety concern and our
subdivision is unique, because of all the kids and the school and the park as we
mentioned, so thank you for your consideration.
McCarvel: Thank you.
Pullara: Good evening. Richard Pullara. 2487 East Santo Stefano Drive. I'm
against this for all the same reasons from my great neighbors here and I
appreciate all the support. The high density. The road access. And instead of
going through all those things, I wrote down a couple of notes tonight that I heard
and these are things that just -- from common sense this just doesn't make sense
to me, so I hope as you're considering this you kind go through these things. So,
one of the things that was said earlier tonight that they are recommending is high
density, but there is no plans for the schools. No plan for schools. Our whole
neighborhood it defined based on children, based on the future growth of our
community. How could we go to a high density area without even considering
the impact of schools. We already know that Tuscany is -- I'm sorry, the Meridian
schools are overcrowded. Mountain View High School is overcrowded . And
there is no future plans yet that's been approved for a new high school. I just
went through this whole problem last year and saw all the arguments all the
different communities had about that. I will leave that one to you. There was
also a comment made about the delivery trucks and you show the map there
before -- they said, well, they only come in one part of the community, but with
only right-hand turns coming in and out of the sub -- of the new proposed area,
it's obviously going to affect the residential area. So, you don't want all those
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 34 of 59
delivery trucks out there. The other comment I heard from people making the
presentation was that the grocery stores are too far away. WinCo is moving
within three miles. So, that's really not a good argument there. My son also
goes to that same bus stop that's way overcrowded and I have just real safety
concerns there, because I don't think unless you actually go there and drive
through the neighborhood you can really appreciate how overcrowded that bus
stop is and it's not as simple as just add more buses and making those short
stops, because I called and asked them that and they said they just don't have
the money. So, it goes back to the -- if you're going to approve for high density
have a full plan. If you are going to put a more commercial zone, have a full plan
in place. Don't just do it halfway. Do the whole thing. I really do hope you take
our considerations, because decisions are made by those who show up and
outside the people developing here, not one person here has spoken on behalf of
favor for the whole thing. So, I hope you guys consider that. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Anyone -- please state your name and address for the
record.
Raine: David Raine. 2773 East Mount Etna Drive. A lot of great points made
here tonight and I just want to voice my own opposition to this project. I think the
low density is a major issue. Same thing. We moved in, we looked at the
Comprehensive Plan. I'd like to meet the guy that wrote that, because he either
moved out or -- I assume some thought went into that. I think it's on its third
iteration and nobody -- after three times writing it decided that, hey, maybe we
need commercial on all these little corners and so I'm curious as to where that
went and why they decided. The other thing I think about is when you look at this
plan you have got -- now you have Albertson's going in at the corner, what's
going to go in the corner across, on the other corners. I assume that's going to
attract a lot of other commercial. Has that been built into the whole traffic flow.
Have you considered that and what that will represent. The other thing is you
built a new YMCA and a school and I assuming you want people -- you're
encouraging people to walk. That's part of the idea of this road access. How are
you ever going to get across that road? Now you have got this total draw for
commercial, are we all going to carry flags across the road and what is that going
to do to traffic flow if you're encouraging that. So, a lot of things to think about.
Expand your view a little bit. Consider the big plan. Yes, it affects the
neighborhood. Yes, we are against the access. We spent a lot of money. We
did our due diligence. We have invested. Albertson's has not invested up to this
point. They still haven't purchased the land and so it's -- it's not too late. So, I'd
just ask that you consider all these things. You will hear our voices and do some
sound deliberation on this. Thank you.
McCarvel: Anyone else?
Ragland: Skye Ragland. 2300 East Taormina. And I just want to say we are --
my husband and I, we were life-long Boise residents. We built our dream home
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 35 of 59
in Meridian in Tuscany. We bought into the Meridian dream, the best place to
live. Honestly, I didn't get it until I moved into Tuscany. I don't have kids. I'm not
going to have kids. But this community is amazing. Having all the kids around is
great. We are so close to our neighbors like I have never seen before. We hang
out in the front yards with our neighbors in the streets. The traffic is slow. That's
so, we did our research, like everyone else. We thought it would become
residential. Honestly, I didn't think it would stay residential. I'm cynical like that.
I thought some of it would be commercial, but I had hoped that -- like so many
other neighborhoods that butt up against commercial in Ada county and in
Meridian, that we could have a wall. So, now there will be commercial and I
understand change happens. As many other residents have said, we can accept
change to commercial. It's not ideal, but we understand. The common theme
that we ask is that no street -- there be no direct access to the neighborhood via
a street. We want a wall like almost all the other commercial buildings that have
a neighborhood that backs right up against them. Why does our neighborhood
have to be different from this. None of the other residents in the neighborhood
that are most affected want direct access. But if the direct access is going to
happen and it's a lost cause for us , then, we, please, ask for a low density
housing for our home values and the safety and traffic. Please -- if commercial
and direct access is happening, please keep the rest R-8 as we will have enough
change. I want to add that I appreciate that The Land Group heard our concerns
and modified their plans, so that there wouldn't be a direct line from Mount Etna
all the way through Mount Etna. Mount Etna and Taormina are both great ways
to get to Locust Grove, which means people coming from Locust Grove and the
neighborhoods behind us will be using it to get to the commercial buildings if
there is direct access through the neighborhood and also there is -- a lot of the
reason we moved to Tuscany was the safety, the low traffic volume of the
particular street we are on and also we are so much closer to than any other
businesses. Where we lived in Boise before we were kind of out in the boonies.
It was left like Locust Grove and there was hardly anything out there and we
moved where we did because we are so much closer to businesses. I mean
WinCo is moving close. Rite Aid's right down the street. I mean anything we
need is within like three miles at maximum. So, I please ask that you don't
dismiss our concerns. The neighbor in the -- the neighborhood and the
community most heavily affected doesn't want this and also what about the
Meridian and Amity that's been mentioned and if nothing else, please, build a
wall and keep it R-8. Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Anybody else that has anything new to add? Okay. I think
everybody has spoken. At this time would the applicant like to come forward.
Thompson: Madam Chair, could we have a ten minute break? It's been a while
since we have taken a little break. Is that okay?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 36 of 59
McCarvel: Yeah. I was going to do that after you were finished, after we closed
the public hearing, but if you guys want to do that -- okay. Let's take -- we will
resume in ten minutes. Ten minutes. 8:20.
Recess.)
McCarvel: All right. Okay. We would like to resume. Excuse me. We would
like to resume the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting for December 15th,
2016, and at this time would the applicant like to come forward.
Thompson: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, Tamara Thompson,
again, with The Land Group. A daily needs grocery-anchored center is needed
in this area due to an increase in housing south of the freeway. All the
communities south of the freeway are growing, which creates that need.
Planning staff concurs that a commercial development is appropriate for this
property and will provide much-needed daily services and shopping for the
residences. One area that was brought up in the neighbor testimony is Meridian
and Amity and that is a state highway and those properties are a regional draw in
what -- in what they would bring. This is not that. This is a daily needs center.
It's much, much smaller. Everyone in the neighborhood is shopping somewhere
today. There is only a couple ways in and out of the neighborhood -- and I wish I
could give a pointer here. But Zaldia off of Eagle Road and Montague off of
Amity for the immediate area -- everything has to funnel to those two areas and
everyone today is driving between six and eight miles to -- to get their daily
needs and their services and those trips are on the streets, which this would
provide a more -- a closer shopping distance and a pedestrian -- a walking
distance. One of the considerations -- there is a little checklist for future land use
map changes in your comp plan and one of those is to -- a comprehensive plan
is needed to accommodate growth trends and it's needed to encourage services
like healthcare, daycare, grocery stores and recreational areas to be built within
walking distance of residential dwellings. So, those are items right there in your
comp plan in your -- in the checklist for future land use changes that -- and that's
what we are going through. There is a process for this and that's what we are
going through is that process. There is many shopping choices. Not everyone
will shop at Albertson's nor will everyone shop at this location every day. So, the
traffic that is perceived is not -- the traffic study does not show it as bad as what
the fears are of the neighbors. ACHD has very competent employees. They
review the traffic impact study and they have agreed that all the intersections
operate at acceptable levels of service with this development and with the
improvements that the development will be making to the area from the frontage
improvements and for the roundabout. We do understand that the unknown is
scary and it's -- right now with the current comp plan on the site there is -- there
is not a known there. There is nothing that says where road connections will be
and the R-8 that's -- that we are proposing is the same. That will come back in
the future. It will go through the same process. A preliminary plat will have to
come back before. It will have neighborhood meetings. It will have the Planning
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 37 of 59
and Zoning Commission and it will have City Council meetings. That whole
process is the same thing we are going through now and that will come again.
So, what we can do today is have some guidelines for those areas on what kind
of zoning. We have proposed that the homes be comparable to the Tuscany
quality in the -- in the materials of construction. Those types of things can -- can
give some assurances. And then -- and that could be in a development
agreement and, then, when those plats come back later, then, those things can
be -- can be vetted out with a specific development plan. It's really hard to put a -
and this isn't unusual. I'm sure that -- and I see them all the time with -- with the
properties that we work on with -- so, we -- The Land Group is the civil engineer
and planning firm for this project and I don't even -- I believe we had more than
30 projects in this -- in the City of Meridian this year and we do quite a bit for
Brighton and the Brighton communities are like that, too, where you have
different -- different areas that develop at different -- different times and you just
make a placeholder for those and, then, you have to come back and go through
the whole process again. The right-in, right-out off of Amity Road -- again, I want
to stress how important those are to the operations. Our traffic impact study has
those as important and ACHD planning staff agreed with that and originally had
that in their conditions of approval and we would like you to send a
recommendation for approving the waiver to City Council. We have revised our
plan based on neighbor concerns and the development will construct the needed
frontage improvements on the roundabout now and with that we respectfully
request your approval tonight.
McCarvel: Okay. Do we have any questions from the Commissioners for the
applicant?
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Fitzgerald: Tamara, I need to ask you a few questions. So, a couple things.
One in regards to density or lot size recommendations for those two sections.
There is a lot of concern on uncertainty in those bubbles. Would you guys be
willing to include in the development agreement a minimum lot size or something
of that nature? And Bill or Josh, would that be amenable? I mean can we do
something where it says, okay, we are going to do, you know, a minimum of -- if
we are going to go in an R-8 direction or if we are going to go -- in whatever
direction we are, can we -- can we establish an lot size minimum for both
sections? Is that something we can do?
Beach: Sure. I mean you can recommend whatever you would like. That's
something we have done in the past.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 38 of 59
Fitzgerald: Okay. Tamara, is that something that you guys would be willing to at
least work with us on? Because I think there is a need to give some certainty to
the -- to the neighbors.
Thompson: Yeah. Commissioner Fitzgerald, like I said, we are proposing R -8
and staff wanted to see something a little higher density, which definitely is
causing a lot of concern and the R-8 has dimensional standards that go with it,
so I guess I'm not sure -- do you want to do something different than those
dimensional standards?
Fitzgerald: No. I just want to make sure that we are -- if we are going to higher
density that -- especially in the southern -- southwestern section you're not going
into the maximum density that an R-8 can -- I mean we talked about six units per
acre. I think the folks in the room would probably I like to hear that that's
probably what you're going to shoot for. So, I think that's kind of the -- something
around that would probably be helpful and give some certainty to the folks in the
room. Can we work with you on that? Can we establish the minimum lot size,
maybe a possibility?
Parson: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, as Josh alluded to in the
first part of his presentation, there is many zoning designations that could go
within a mixed use designation. We provided the option of an R-15, R-40 is
there. Neighbors don't want that. And TN-R. And you can also recommend the
R-8. That's within your purview. The other thing that's on the table tonight in the
development agreement is we did require the applicant to bring forth a plat that
included the residential portion prior to City Council. So, if they don't intend on
doing that, then, we probably should modify that condition as well. But certainly
you can continue this out, have them bring forward a new plat that gives you that
certainty as to how those are to lay out and give the neighbors time to look at it
and continue this out and see how that residential portion can develop. You
have that within your purview. I don't want to limit the lots -- this development to
lot size. I think that's going to be cumbersome for us. What the neighbors need
to understand is if this property is R-8 that the minimum lot size for that zoning
district under our current code is 4,000 square feet with 40 feet of street frontage.
So, that is a very small patio home and that is similar to what is constructed
within the Tuscany development further north of you. So, that's something they
should be aware of . Density is important to us as far as our mixed use
designation, but staff thinks -- I think if we could get -- I think the biggest concern
for us or what we would really like to see on this particular property is a mix of
residential types and our TN-R zone does provide that. It does allow traditional
homes. It does allow alley loaded homes. It does allow attached homes. It
allows townhomes.
Fitzgerald: What's the minimum lot size on TN-R?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 39 of 59
Parsons: TN-R does not have a minimum lot size . It's all predicated on site
design. Vcast sidewalks, like Tuscany, with the tree-lined streets, it requires
street buffers. I mean those are -- it requires shorter block lengths. Walkability
like we are trying to -- it looks like we are discussing with this mixed use
development. So, I think that's probably the direction I would rather go is just
don't change the R-15 to either TN-R or R-8 and -- and keep our condition in
there that they either provide you a revised plat to review or City Council to
review or leave it as written in the staff report that says nothing can occur on
those lots until they come back with a subdivision and that's how we have it
structured at this point.
Fitzgerald: Thanks, Bill. So, the next question -- so, there was discussion of
possibly taking this thing and squaring it off, but not allowing that road to cut
through. What would that look like in your mind? I mean are you -- are you guys
going to put an access of a pathway that would be emergency access only or a
bike path? Would that be something that you guys would be amenable to?
Thompson: So, this is something that we discussed last night --
Fitzgerald: Yeah.
Thompson: -- at ACHD and the traffic study does stand alone -- or the
commercial section does stand alone. It doesn't need the connection to the
neighborhoods to make that work. What the connection to the neighborhood
does is it keeps those trips from the neighborhood from going onto the arterials
and, then, having to come into the center. It creates that connectivity there. So,
we feel that's appropriate and the traffic study has very -- a very small number of
trips per day, just because there are shopping choices. Not everybody shops at
the same -- the same day, but -- but in saying that, you know, I'm going to have
to -- I'd have to ask my client if that would be acceptable , but, you know, that can
certainly be something that you recommend.
Fitzgerald: And that's -- yeah. I think that's -- my fellow commissioner, I will let
you ask questions, but I think that's where I'm going.
McCarvel: Okay. Anyone else? All right. Thank you.
Thompson: Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. And at this time can I get a motion to close the public hearing
for H-2016-0102.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, I would move we close the public hearing.
Wilson: Second.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 40 of 59
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H -
2016-0102. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: FOUR AYES. ONE ABSENT.
McCarvel: Okay. Discussion?
Fitzgerald: You want to lead off?
McCarvel: And I'm betting we take more than a minute.
Fitzgerald: Yes.
McCarvel: Anyone want to --
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, do you want to start.
McCarvel: You bet.
Fitzgerald: Okay.
McCarvel: All right. I think the first thing we need to just acknowledge -- I mean
do we want to change this to a mixed use. I mean I think the corner is good for --
I mean the plan is Eagle Road is going to be five lanes. I mean Amity is going to
be wider than it is. That intersection is going to change drastically in the next five
to ten years. There is going to be pedestrian accessibility -- it's got to be to get
through that intersection. I think that corner lends itself well to a grocery store
and other little restaurants that are out there in the parking lot. But I think it's
imperative that this has been on the Comprehensive Plan as a low density
residential and I think we need to make some considerations in that mixed -use
designation. Maybe some concessions that normally aren't there, because this is
such a drastic change.
Bernt: Do you disagree?
Fitzgerald: Well, am in full agreement. I think -- and I'm -- and if you guys
haven't been to commissioner hearings in the past, I'm a big proponent of having
commercial on corners and stepping back into beautiful communities and I think
this is a unique spot and we do need to give a buffer to you guys' neighborhood.
But I do also think this is the right place for an Albertson's or whatever store it
might be and so I -- I think in certainly in the purchase of your homes and, then,
in working -- looking into doing the due diligence you do before you purchase
your home, we need to give you a buffer. So, I think this is a unique situation
that we need to take into account.
McCarvel: Okay.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 41 of 59
Bernt: Another thing that I -- I agree with you is -- is -- Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Bernt: Is keeping it -- you know, doing mixed use, but also leaving -- I like the
idea of the TN-R portion of the -- the possible proposed development, keeping it
R-8, keeping it low density. Maybe -- staff, could you explain to us and the folks
more detailed information on what TN-R is?
Beach: Sure. We have actually got some information here just in case there
was some questions. So, we had our -- our long-range planner Brian McClure
put together some -- some -- not photos, but renderings of what that could look
like -- and I will pull some of these up here. So, you have got connectivity. This
one doesn't have alley-loaded homes on it. I apologize, I was talking to myself
for a second there. This -- this has some pedestrian pathways in it. This one
does not have the alley-loaded home. So, these can be attached homes,
townhomes, detached single-family homes. So, typically these are smaller --
smaller lots. I happen to live in a development like this and it works -- it works
rather well. But it depends on your taste.
Parson: Yeah. Mr. Chairman, Members of -- or Madam Chair Person, Members
of the Commission -- used to the other president here. But typically with the TN -
R zone -- we just recently updated our code. It's a little bit different. It is more of
a traditional neighborhood design where you do have buildings towards the
street, hopefully not garage dominated homes, but the intent is to -- the design is
driven by the street scape. One, you get variations along the street. Under our
code we require a mix of residential products. At least a minimum two types, so
you get an attached home -- Josh has alluded to it and even traditional. So, you
could have the garage dominated homes plus attached homes as part of it. You
get shorter block lengths, but your density is based off of your net, not the gross,
and so currently under our code net density would be eight and maximum density
net density would be 15. We recently -- and next week our ordinances is on for
City Council approval for that UDC text amendment that we took action on about
a month ago and we actually changed our minimum net density down to six. So,
we actually reduced that, so that we could encourage more of these more
traditional TN-R type developments or your traditional neighborhood
development. So, we could get more of a mix and more of a blending into
surrounding communities, because we are growing rapidly, we want to protect
existing neighborhoods, and we want to make sure that when we do integrate in
with them we do have compatible design with those adjacent neighborhoods.
McCarvel: Thank you, Bill.
Bernt: Thanks for the explanation.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 42 of 59
Parsons: I'm sorry, we have one further explanation on that. But I would express
to the neighbors that TN-R does allow for multi-family. So, if that's something
that you're -- and it's actually a permitted use, so it would not require them to
come back before you -- or it would be an allowed use outright and they could do
that without having to go through a public hearing process . So, if you are
inclined to keep the integrity and the wishes of the neighborhood, I would
suggest that maybe you -- you add a DA provision that restricts multi-family on --
at least on that TN portion of the development.
McCarvel: Okay. I'm -- I'm inclined -- or I'm inclined to just keep it R-8. I mean
keep it simple and so that there is no --
Fitzgerald: Guys, keep your applause --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: Let us have our conversation. I appreciate it, though. Thank you.
McCarvel: Appreciate it, but --
Fitzgerald: I -- I tend to agree. I like the TN-R where we are going, but it's not
there yet and I think if we are going to move this forward tonight I think we got to
stick with R-8.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: That's my gut.
McCarvel: And I do think that they should have a plat ready for City Council.
Fitzgerald: Agreed.
McCarvel: And I just think that's one of the concessions we should make, since it
is a drastic change in the plan. The other thing I think that was a difference
between staff and the applicant was the L-O versus the C-C zone for the
commercial pads for that little section there.
Fitzgerald: I think where it's located it's got to stay on. At least in my opinion.
McCarvel: It what?
Fitzgerald: That it needs to stay L-O just for light purposes for -- I mean you
have no idea what commercial could be put there in regards to what is allowed
and you're talking about -- and buddying up to -- to homes. Their backyards.
And so L-O is a much less impactful overlay there.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 43 of 59
McCarvel: Okay.
Bernt: Agreed.
McCarvel: Okay. I think the other major thing we have got to discuss is the right-
in, right-out that was originally approved by ACHD, but, apparently, they changed
their minds last night and I'm just wondering -- I mean with -- you're making me
dizzy over there.
Beach: I'm sorry, I'm looking for that so it's easier to see, so you can see it better
here.
McCarvel: Okay. I think we need to consider, then, along with -- is this going to
be connected to the neighborhood, then, how many entrances do we want on
that corner. Any thoughts?
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, my comment -- or my thoughts would probably be if
we decide to cut out -- whatever that name of that road is going to be -- and cut
that into a square, I think the right-outs are intelligent design, but that's -- it's just
very close -- at least on the southern portion very close to the roundabout. I don't
want to add more chaos to the mix, but maybe on Eagle Road right-in, right-out
of this would be appropriate. I don't know. I -- Bill, Josh, I mean your -- your
thoughts in regards to the design. How close are we to the -- to the roundabout,
especially on the south side. That's closer than the one on the north. Or on the
east. I'm just -- we cut off access to Mount Etna, having additional connectivity
somewhere would probably be helpful. I don't know.
Beach: So, it's tough for staff. This isn't something that we review. We rely
totally --
Fitzgerald: On ACHD.
Beach: -- and completely on the highway district to -- to give us this information.
Fitzgerald: Yeah.
Beach: So, I don't really have much to say, other than that.
Fitzgerald: I would say that I trust the staff of ACHD more than the
commissioners, but don't put that on the record. I thought --
McCarvel: I believe the applicant was going to go back to ACHD and see if they
can change their mind on --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 44 of 59
Fitzgerald: When I think we are making a recommendation, but it's not -- it's
completely a waiver for City Council, and so we can -- we don't have to make a
comment if we don't want to.
McCarvel: Yeah. I think -- you know, it's got to be up to ACHD what the long
term plan is for that intersection. I just -- I don't know that -- if Eagle goes -- when
Eagle goes to five lanes and Amity gets widened, that that stays a roundabout.
So -- I don't know.
Beach: So, I guess just -- sorry, didn't mean to interrupt. I was just going to say
just so the neighbors are aware that is something -- a waiver for those right-in,
right-out accesses isn't something that's automatically granted. It needs to be
requested. Of City Council and approved by the highway district, so --
McCarvel: Okay.
Beach: So that's clear.
McCarvel: Okay. And so, you know, if there is connectivity into the
neighborhood, I think -- you know, Montague's got to be improved. It sounds like
it needs to be anyway. But I mean there is, obviously, going to be landscape and
stuff with whatever residential goes in there and maybe they finish that up, but -- I
mean you have, obviously, got people going through the neighborhood to the
north, so now you might have people coming the other direction. I don't -- I mean
the connectivity is nice in some aspects. I mean I'm sure that, you know, people
on that south end, once they have to take several lefts out onto Amity to get into
that grocery store might, then, want the connectivity, but -- yeah, you might be
pushing people up to the north to come south on Eagle, instead of ta king the left
on Amity. What are you guys' thoughts?
Wilson: I live in Bellingham Park. I mean full disclosure. I mean I drive to
Tuscany. I walk through Tuscany. I'm pretty familiar with the traffic situation and
the walking situation there and I might not be popular in saying this, I trust what
ACHD is saying in terms of their studies and -- I mean anecdotally I would say I
don't see the same traffic problem that others see, so that being said, I think
cutting off the commercial I think is a reasonable sort of compromise, which -- I
mean this body we are trying to find solutions, I think -- I think that -- that seems
like a reasonable solution.
McCarvel: Because you still have -- the residential is, obviously, going to have
connectivity into Tuscany. I mean they are not going to cut off that little parcel.
Wilson: I think we -- yeah. The residential has to have -- I mean we are talking
about the commercial.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 45 of 59
McCarvel: Yeah. Because that would be -- if there is -- if there is additional
traffic that's what it was. But, still, I mean Montague and -- what was that other
east-west major street -- does it look like -- I mean those are pretty -- well, the
one looks like they are going to -- that look like pretty wide -- I mean I'm just --
there is -- I mean a development of the size that's going to have some streets
that have some heavy traffic on it, but -- and I think the more -- especially after
Amity is widened and -- that Montague is going to get used more and more just
by the residents just out of pure -- just that's the way it is. I don't know that the
grocery store is really going to cause that big of --
Wilson: I mean I'm trying to find a compromise here and that's where -- I'm
hearing residents say if you cut off the commercial that makes a lot of sense, but
you're exactly right, and it's kind of what I was trying to say at the beginning. I'm
not so sure this is a resolution to the traffic problem and I also know that putting a
wall between a community with stubbed -- you know, between Tuscany and this
small little community, that's not a solution either --
McCarvel: No.
Wilson: -- that fits with what we do here.
McCarvel: No. I think the -- the goal is to integrate that community with Tuscany
roadwise and pathway wise and the commercial stand on its own.
Wilson: And that's what I'm saying.
McCarvel: Okay. Any other comments?
Fitzgerald: So, are we inclined to keep the road? Is that where we are -- or
leaning that direction? Keep the connection? I mean for me initially making the
S-turn, taking the straight shot out makes a ton of sense to me and having that
landscaped in a way that it is not a dragstrip and, then, allowing people to drive in
the back and not have to figure out how to go through the roundabout and come
out and, then, out and, then, take a left or -- it makes a disaster for the neighbors
actually to get into the store. That's --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: -- which is I think -- as I'm thinking though this -- so, we want to take
this in pieces that -- I think the bulk parcels need to remain R-8.
McCarvel: Yes.
Fitzgerald: I think the -- block two should remain L-L. I -- I'm leaning towards
wanting to keep the road connection and having Montague fully -- fully improved
when we go to build this thing out.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 46 of 59
McCarvel: Okay. And I think the -- one of the other things that was brought up
by the applicant is the street buffer along Montague, that they wanted to wait and
I think staff usually likes to have that done right away.
Fitzgerald: I think if you have 160 kids sitting out there and that’s a rough angle
to start driving into, that's not an acceptable answer.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: At least right now.
Beach: So -- okay. As the condition reads right now, both of the remainder
parcels and the landscaping adjacent to those would not be put in until those
parcels are developed. So, if you wanted to change that we need to modify that
condition as well. Does that make sense? So, that would mean that the
Montague Way landscape buffer along remainder parcel A not be installed until
that is further subdivide -- subdivided. Excuse me.
McCarvel: But in the staff recommendation you're recommending that it go in
first; right? Or with the residential?
Beach: Let's see.
McCarvel: 1.1.1D.
Beach: It says the landscape buffer and sidewalk requirements along parcel A
and B shall be installed with the development of those parcels.
McCarvel: Okay.
Beach: Our condition right now is that it be developed when those parcels
develop. That's what I'm saying. If you're wanting to change that we can, but we
need to make sure that that is addressed.
McCarvel: No. I think the way it's -- it needs to be all the way down.
Bernt: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Yes.
Bernt: Are we saying that we are going to put a buffer and help out Montague
when the commercial development goes in, not necessarily when the residential
portion goes in? Is that what we are saying?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 47 of 59
McCarvel: Yeah. I thought that was the question that the applicant wanted
changed, but I think we leave it as staff has referenced.
Beach: So, then, Montague Way and the landscape buffer will be -- Montague
Way will be further widened and the landscape buffer put in when parcel A is
developed? Not right now, but when those residential homes --
McCarvel: Right.
Beach: Okay. Just wanted to make sure I was good on that.
McCarvel: I mean --
Fitzgerald: It's so hard.
Bernt: I -- Madam Chair? I lean more toward -- I mean if the -- if the concern is
volume of traffic, I lean personally more toward making that development when
the commercial portion is -- is -- I mean when the commercial portion is
developed I think there is -- to backtrack a little bit, I -- I know of some
subdivisions in our good city where there is more of a direct access from two
east-west major streets -- I -- I personally don't see that here in this subdivision. I
don't think there is going to be a ton of traffic coming, you know, through the
Tuscany Subdivision over to the commercial property. However, I do believe that
it may increase a little bit and with that said I think that it may make sense to, you
know, develop that area for the protection of the kiddos where they have areas
where they can collaborate and wait for the bus instead of on a somewhat
undeveloped'ish type roadway. I think that it would help out with the safety of the
kiddos. That's my personal -- that’s my personal opinion. But I'm new. I'm new
at this. This is my first -- this is my first meeting, so I don't know if that --
McCarvel: Welcome to --
Bernt: I don't know -- I don't know if that's quite the norm.
Wilson: Madam Chair?
Bernt: That's -- that's a major disclaimer. But --
Fitzgerald: That's a rough one to start with.
Bernt: I don't know if that's the norm. And so I would -- I would sort of punt to
staff to -- to answer if that may or may not be the norm of what we normally do in
these types of developments.
Beach: I don't know that there necessarily is a norm. I think in this case it's --
you know, depending on -- I mean there is a lot of things to consider here. So,
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 48 of 59
you consider the neighbors who live there. One. You consider code. You
consider the Comprehensive Plan. There are -- if there are concerns about
traffic on Montague Way -- right now it's not a full road or what we call a complete
street.
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Beach: Right? So, I leave that up to you, but if there is something that you want
to include, require with this first phase of this development, meaning the
commercial, that's within your purview to do.
Bernt: Madam Chair? I believe Montague Way will turn into a major
thoroughfare, you know, especially if we -- you know, decide to block off, you
know, and make this a separate -- and make this development -- this proposed
development a separate entity -- or, you know, from the connectivity through --
through Tuscany. I think it will turn into a very busy street, so that's my -- my two
thoughts.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, do you want to walk through each of these pieces or
how would you like to approach this thing?
McCarvel: Well -- do you have it up on your screen or do you want the printed --
Beach: I can pull the staff report up if that's what you --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: I'm looking at the staff report, but --
McCarvel: Page eight.
Fitzgerald: We might need what Tamara was asking for in regards to her
response.
McCarvel: Yeah. Because she had D through N.
Beach: You would like to do it like her response?
Fitzgerald: Just so we could see what the request was.
Beach: That's just fine. Give me two seconds here.
Fitzgerald: Thank you, sir. So, are we kind of all in agreement that we are going
to stick with R-8?
Wilson: Yes.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 49 of 59
Bernt: Yes.
Fitzgerald: Okay. Do we have a discussion or -- whether we want to make a
recommendation to the City Council on right-in, right-out, or are we going to
leave that to them to decide?
McCarvel: On?
Fitzgerald: On right-in, right-out.
McCarvel: I think we leave that to ACHD.
Fitzgerald: And Council?
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: Okay. And, then, in regards to -- I think it has to be a requirement
that by the time they hit City Council they have a final -- or a plat for them to
review.
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Fitzgerald: So, then, the question, then, becomes 1.1.1D, which is the 25 foot
wide street buffer.
McCarvel: Uh-huh. East side of Montague.
Fitzgerald: Yeah.
McCarvel: Okay.
Beach: I'm sorry, what's that?
McCarvel: So, the applicant is requesting that they be done when the residential
is done and it's currently in -- that it be done with the commercial.
Fitzgerald: Yeah.
McCarvel: Okay. Further down, Josh. No. Other way. 1.1.1.
Beach: Okay.
McCarvel: Yeah. Sorry. There you go.
Beach: Which condition are you looking for?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 50 of 59
McCarvel: D. Yeah. Right there. And the applicant is requesting that it be done
with the residence -- that improvement be done with the residential. You guys'
thoughts on a recommendation?
Fitzgerald: I think it's been -- at least from -- Madam Chair, from my opinion, if
we are going to leave the road connection, I think we have got to do the
Montague piece and I would also go so far as to say they have to do that section
of road. That improvement has to be done. Because this is talking about a
landscape buffer; is that correct? Is that the way you read this?
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: So, we -- I mean as we sell this thing -- or as they sell this, then, they
can deal with latecomers on that for the developer they work with, but -- so, for
the safety reasons and to make sure that that -- we are providing a safer access
for the kids at the bus stop, I think that's got to get done at the beginning.
Bernt: I agree.
McCarvel: Uh-huh. Okay.
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I just want to make one
clarification. Talking with the applicant. When this development came through to
the city -- when it got submitted, the residential portion was not -- and it's still not
part of their plat, that -- what you're looking at this evening. Our understanding
was they were going to go through the county and process a property boundary
adjustment and, then, just -- and create the parcels and, then, just bring in the
plat for the commercial piece, which you have seen tonight. We were told by the
applicant that the county would not approve it, so, therefore, we made a condition
in our staff report that they include the residential portion as part of their
preliminary plat boundary and that's where that recommendation came in our
staff report. The intent wasn't that the applicant would come back with platted
lots, the intent was that they would come back with two mega lots -- two larger R-
8 lots with a condition that they would further subdivide it in the future. So, I think
for the record this evening -- and if it's your intention for them to plat out lots as
part of that R-8, then, you could certainly still do that. But currently as
recommended in the staff report it was only our intention to have them plat those
as two large R-8 lots as you see -- as you have seen on the conceptual
development plan and that's what the community has seen as well.
McCarvel: Okay.
Beach: And just to further clarify a little bit, typically -- in this case the way that
the -- the lots are set up typically they are carving out a little portion -- a proposal
to carve out a little portion for commercial, which would, then, leave two -- what
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 51 of 59
are called illegal lots, because they weren't created with anything. And so
typically we don't like to do that. Because they need to get this cleaned up with
the county, make them legal lots identified in the county and as Bill said initially,
they -- the county said no and, then, they backtracked and said, yes, now they do
and this all happened while we were reviewing the -- the staff report and actually
prior to the staff report being completed. So, that's why there is a little bit of
confusion as to what we are looking for. So, we are just looking for -- we were
just looking for those to be included in the plat, but now that they are actually
legal lots, we don't even necessarily need to do that, if that makes sense.
McCarvel: But as long as we have the R-8 on it --
Beach: You got it. You can still annex them in and include that as R-8 parcels.
McCarvel: Right.
Parsons: And, then, further clarification -- and leave the condition on the DA that
they further subdivide it with the city in the future. That's what we have it
currently to.
McCarvel: Okay.
Parsons: But they would still have to come back and carve out their lots or come
through the -- through City Council -- both Planning and Zoning and City Council
for a subdivision on the R-8.
McCarvel: For a plat. Okay.
Parsons: Clear as mud?
Bernt: Clear as mud.
McCarvel: Okay. Okay. Want to go back through the applicant's -- or E, F -- can
you go back to Tamara's -- okay. So, F, G and -- okay. H we have kind of
decided is the -- we have decided to limit that to the L-O zone; right?
Fitzgerald: Yeah.
McCarvel: Okay. I think we are in agreement with J, that parcel B remains R-8.
Fitzgerald: Maintain R-8.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: So, that would be something we add into our discussion --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 52 of 59
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: -- that change. 1.1.1J.
McCarvel: Yeah. Okay. Okay.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Yes.
Fitzgerald: At some point we are going to have to get the fact of -- whether we
want this road to connect or not. That's -- I think that's the crux of the discussion.
Before we take anything on Montague we need to figure out if we are going to
support a connection there or if it's --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: -- we try to make it an emergency access or we just leave it.
McCarvel: Yeah. That's the one I can see both sides of the coin. I can see it be
extremely frustrating and creating more traffic on Amity and Eagle if it's not
connected. On the other hand -- I mean, you know, a lot of grocery stores are
cut off from the neighborhoods that are behind them , so -- what are your
thoughts?
Fitzgerald: My thoughts? Commissioner Wilson?
Wilson: I'm willing to cut that off, because I have seen other resident -- or other
grocery stores that are done that way and , then, also I'm listening to the
resounding voice of the residents and their opinion on this matter, but that being
said, just kind of like we said before and kind of talked about -- I don't know if this
solves that traffic issue that we are talking about --
McCarvel: Yeah.
Wilson: -- or the traffic -- you know, whatever -- to do whatever you think is an
issue -- this isn't the problem.
Fitzgerald: I think it -- Madam Chair, I think it potentially makes it worse to be --
to not connect it. But that's -- that's the way I'm leaning as I think through the
whole process. I think you cause -- with the roundabout there, with the
expansion of this thing, I think you're going to make it worse.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: But I would love to hear everybody else's thoughts.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 53 of 59
Bernt: I -- it's my personal belief, Madam Chair --
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Bernt: My personal belief is -- I don't see a ton of extra traffic coming from
different communities outside of the Tuscany Subdivision going through Tuscany
you know, from -- hypothetical from Locust Grove per se, down to this -- this --
this new -- this proposed development. I just don't see it -- I have looked at the
map, I have asked Josh to put it up specifically so I could look at it. I wanted to
see where the connecting streets were -- it's a pain. It would be a lot of work to
go all the way around. It's like it's a snake. I personally, if I lived in -- you know,
in a different community I would go down Locust Grove, down Amity, over to the
proposed development. I think that if there is increased traffic within this -- within
the Tuscany Subdivision to the proposed development, I think that it's going to be
generated mostly -- not all, not exclusively, but mostly from the residents that live
in Tuscany. That's my -- and by cutting that off I think that it would be a bigger
pain for the residents in Tuscany to have to go all the way around and create
more traffic on Amity and Eagle. That's -- that's my point of view. But I guess
also, you know, a resounding -- you know, you guys don't know what you're
talking about right now. I see heads going up and down as I'm saying this and so
I guess I lean more toward leaving the connective road than I do taking it out, but
it's not like one of these.
Wilson: I'm in the same boat. I think the traffic that's created is all intra-Tuscany
traffic, not external. It's not an additional traffic, but that being said I'm not going
to slam my shoe on the table and so I would like to hear what our two wiser
commissioners have to say.
McCarvel: I think -- I think the connectivity would be good. I do think -- I think
the R-8 is a no-brainer I think the connectivity would -- overall would be a better
thing for the neighborhood, because, I agree, I think it's mostly Tuscany traffic
that would get inconvenience and pushed out onto those roads. I don't think
most people are going to go behind Albertson's and to try to find their way
through. I mean the natural instinct is to go out the front, not to go back there
where the, you know, loading dock is. Okay. Any more discussion?
Wilson: I mean -- are you going to comment on process at some point? I think
that's kind of -- I can do it. I think it's important if you maybe -- just briefly.
McCarvel: I just -- I would like to selfishly take a minute in the discussion of this
and I hope you have all felt heard, that we didn't just dismiss anybody's opinion,
that we gave this a lot of thought. This Commission in particular -- I have not
been involved in a lot of others, but I have been a member of this one for two
years and I do think we take the public's concerns very seriously. We heard a lot
of comments and we hear them all the time about how we just don't take public's
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 54 of 59
concern and that we just go the way everybody wants us to go and I just don't
think that's the case with this Commission. I think we take both sides opinions to
heart and try to do right by everybody as best as we can . We are just volunteers
and we all live here, too, and we all know that some day something's coming to
our backyard. So, we do try to take everybody's opinions to be heard. But we
also need to do some due diligence for the property owner and for the community
in general. At this point I do think that is a good corner for a grocery store and
other -- other things and I think -- but in doing that in making it a mixed-use I do
think we need to protect the interests of those property owners who were
expecting low density and keep that low density and I think there is a good
compromise to be had here for everyone . So, before the motion gets made that's
my two cents.
Fitzgerald: And, Madam Chair, hopefully, I think the members of the audience in
and the neighbors -- hopefully ACHD wasn't horribly rude when they said that
they were scolding you on -- on the growth, because -- well, I'm sorry and I will
apologize for them. I don't know them very well, but I will apologize for them.
But your neighborhoods are going to change and I don't want to say that in a
rude or -- any other way, but that part of the world is growing extensively and
people want to live there. I mean that's the -- the reality is -- well, you guys have
said a number of times tonight is that it's one of the best places in the country to
live. People want to live out there. There is a Y out there. There is -- and they
have to have services or traffic is going to become like Eagle Road and so we
have to have -- use hard corners when we need them to put services so you
guys don't have to drive and I know that doesn't always play well, but we want to
keep traffic from everybody having to go out on the major roads to go get a
gallon of milk.
McCarvel: And just --
Fitzgerald: Absolutely. And so development is coming to your neighborhood and
it's coming in a big way. In the next five years it's going to look a lot different out
there, especially around the Y and the high school that is coming and the
elementary school that is out there -- that is coming or has been built recently
attached to the Y. That world is going to change, but you're also getting it --
someday its really cool amenities are going to change. Well, you're also getting
some big parks and some really cool amenities that are going to go out there as
well. So, hopefully, we are trying to balance the two.
Wilson: You know, I mean -- yeah. I mean you're exactly, that's -- that's the
center of growth in our state, really, and if you look south -- I know there is
farmland now, but if you look east of that farmland -- I mean that's Boise -- south
Boise, that's growing like gangbusters and I think that's what you can expect for
the south of Meridian. Someone -- someone had testified about why do we have
a Comprehensive Plan. Why aren't we just locked into that decision that was
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 55 of 59
made and I guess if we just stuck with the Comprehensive Plan maybe there
wouldn't be this commission --
McCarvel: Right.
Wilson: -- and we would all have our evenings to ourselves, but I think -- we
were told that that decision for how that was zoned was made in the early 1990s
I mean no one could have envisioned where Meridian was going to go in the
early 1990s. And a comprehensive plan -- you know, it's about orderly
development. I think that's what we are trying to get at here. This Commission,
City Council, we are trying to get an orderly development that's smarter, not
perfect. Okay? Because if we didn't maybe have a Comprehensive Plan I mean
who knows what could potentially go in there, I mean a factory or someth ing that
really didn't fit in that area potentially, so we have a Comprehensive Plan, we
apply it to the best of our ability, this Commission, and I think we try to get to the
solution that works best for all the different voices that come before us in this
Commission.
McCarvel: Okay. All right. At this time could I get a motion?
Fitzgerald: Not yet.
McCarvel: Not yet.
Fitzgerald: Can I ask a question about --
McCarvel: You bet.
Fitzgerald; -- 1.1.D.
Beach: 1.1.1D?
Fitzgerald: Yes. How do we want to handle that as a Commission as I'm making
this motion? With my -- my gut would be that that needs to be -- and, Josh, this
is not in there, but I think it needs to be in there is that needs to be finished out
upon development of phase one or the commercial piece. That half a road
needs to become finished. Montague. That needs to be finished product with a
sidewalk and a landscape buffer. It's got to be done for safety reasons to make
sure that we are giving a buffer from traffic for these -- for those people who are
walking.
Beach: Yes. So, before we get -- I guess before we move on, there is a -- based
on the discussion that you have had there is a couple of additional conditions that
would need to be modified.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 56 of 59
Fitzgerald: Okay. So, if we can, just quickly. A lot of these conditions refer to
the R-15 zoning district. If you're not going that way we need to either modify
them somehow or remove them completely. So, K, for example, not going to
have any R-15 in there. I'd just as soon strike the entire condition, because it
doesn't really apply anymore. Same with J. I think the applicant covered that.
There is another condition down here at 1.1.3B --
Fitzgerald: 1.1.3?
Beach: 1.1.3B. We would ask for a revised legal description to reflect the R-15.
If that's not something you're -- you can just strike that condition as well, because
we have the R-8 --
Fitzgerald: We already have the R-8.
Beach: We already have the correct one for R-8.
Fitzgerald: Okay. Okay.
Beach: So, quickly, one last question is you had mentioned a couple of times
that you wanted a revised plat prior to Council. Does that include platted
residential lots or are you just looking for -- as staff recommended that those two
larger pieces be included as individual lots and not further subdivided . Now, I
don't think the applicant is in the business of developing single -family homes, so I
don't know what their time is in finding a developer --
Fitzgerald: I think R-8 is fine.
McCarvel: Yeah. As long as we have the R-8 in there and we know that there is
not going to be a higher density or even with the TN -R that there is a potential for
real tiny lots and multiple family dwellings that I think the community would be
happy with that.
Beach: I guess having said that, we should probably strike that condition as well,
which is this condition here.
Fitzgerald: Which one is that?
Beach: 1.1.13C that a revised plat be incorporated -- those two remainder
parcels. So, this -- they are not remainder parcels anymore, they are legal lots
identified by the county. And that was the reasoning we had those in there is
because they weren't, but -- you're up to speed on that, so --
Fitzgerald: Okay. So, can I revise 1.1.1D to include the improvements of the half
of the street and sidewalk and 25 foot street buffer? Is that --
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 57 of 59
Beach: So, 1.1.1D?
Fitzgerald: Yeah.
Beach: Yeah. That --
Fitzgerald: And that would be the one to revise --
Beach: So, one -- I guess -- I apologize. One last thing is we did kind of roughly
receive a concept plan from the applicant for the residential portion.
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Beach: That can be included in the development agreement. Typically when we
when we review a residential plat that has something like that in it, it has to be
roughly similar. So, we -- we look at --
Fitzgerald: Can we see it?
Beach: -- roughly the same number of lots, roughly the same lot sizes. But,
again, zoned R-8, they have to meet that requirement regardless. There is a
minimum lot size.
McCarvel: I think we just include the word similar to the proposed plat that was --
Fitzgerald: This is in the development agreement? In the DA? Could we -- oh.
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, Tamara gave us a revised
concept plan and we showed you that this evening with ACHD's changes. I think
we just attach that to the DA and that kind of shows us what we envisioned for
the R-8 pieces.
McCarvel: Right.
Parsons: That's the cleanest way to do it.
Fitzgerald: Okay. Can we look at Tamara's changes one more time, so I can
make sure I know what I'm making a motion to do?
Beach: Do you need both of them on there again?
Fitzgerald: No. I'm just hoping that Madam Chair would step down for a minute
so I could become chair and she could make this motion. She's the complicated
motion maker. So, 1.1.1F -- Bill, do we have any issues with what
Tamara's asking in regards to the actual pathway, amenities and open space?
On six, seven, eight and nine?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
December 15, 2016
Page 58 of 59
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I think if Tamara provides
us those calculations I think we could probably work with her on that and cover
that.
McCarvel: And H should probably remain -- yeah. Remain as staff
recommended.
Fitzgerald: Remain as staff recommended.
McCarvel: Yeah.
Fitzgerald: 1.1.1.J, we will strike that to maintain R-8. We are not going to make
a recommendation on the right-in, right-outs; right?
McCarvel: No. We will leave that to ACHD.
Fitzgerald: Okay. I think I have -- I think I have all the pieces, parts, ma'am.
McCarvel: Are you ready for the question?
Fitzgerald: Yeah. This is ridiculous. Okay.
McCarvel: Could I get a motion, please.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: After considering all staff, applicant, and lots of public testimony --
thank you all very much -- I move to recommend approval to the City Council of
file number H-2016-0102 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of
December 15, 2016, with the following modifications: That the development
agreement include a revised concept plan provided by the applicant to staff.
That we revise 1.1.1D to include the improvements on Montague and the half
street improvements and sidewalk, curb, and gutter at the development of the
commercial component. That we -- Tamara provide -- or the applicant provide
calculations on the open space for commercial lots on 6, 7, 8 and 9 in regards to
amenity calculations. That we strike 1.1.1J. We strike 1.1.1K in regards to the
R-15. We strike 1.1.3D in regards to the R-15. And we strike 1.1.3C.
Wilson: Second.
McCarvel: All right.
Fitzgerald: Mr. Parsons, did I catch it all?
Planning & Zoning
Commission Meeting
August 16, 2016
Firenze Plaza- Zoning & Aerial Maps
Firenze Plaza- Exhibit
Overall Conceptual Development Plan (Revised per ACHD)
Overall Conceptual Development Plan (Revised per ACHD)
Proposed Zoning Designations
Landscape Plan
FIRENZE PLAZA
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission | December 15, 2016
V
I
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
Vicinity Map
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Zoning
Property = 40 Acres
24 acres (60%) = R-8
16 acres (40%) = C-C
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Zoning
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Revised Preliminary Plat
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Master Plan
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Exterior Elevations
N
E
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
M
E
E
T
I
N
G
R
E
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
Original Preliminary Plat Revised per Neighbor Comments
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Concept Plan
QUESTIONS?
THANK YOU
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Grocery in the Vicinity
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Truck Route
V
I
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
Vicinity Map
N
E
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
M
E
E
T
I
N
G
R
E
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
Revised per Neighbor Comments
F
I
R
E
N
Z
E
P
L
A
Z
A
Single Family Townhouse or Patio Homes
Conceptual Building Elevations for Commercial Buildings
Conceptual Building Elevations for Residential Buildings
TN-R Examples
V:\DIVISIONS\Long Range and Transportation\Brian\2015 Projects\0923 UDC Townhall examples\Renders
https://www.google.com/maps/place/45%C2%B032'07.6%22N+122%C2%B055'00.2%22W/@45.5359585,-
122.9173172,17.5z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d45.535438!4d-122.916733
https://www.google.com/maps/place/45%C2%B031'39.9%22N+122%C2%B055'06.3%22W/@45.527757,-
122.9189682,207m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d45.527757!4d-122.918421
https://www.google.com/maps/place/45%C2%B031'39.9%22N+122%C2%B055'06.3%22W/@45.527757,-
122.9189682,207m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d45.527757!4d-122.918421
,i
�AMY
It l
I!q 1 i�
1
I MEwMAJ
OAF
A
r
0
0
a
sem
w
i�-
AJ
imp TMIII 7 4A
-1, 1
r
'. ro
IT
A
WA�ILAFN IAOW
-
OF
«,
i
to
•
•
'Z!I
*=mm -meg=�= = =�== =•- -•s
•
14
•
IN
is
•;
•
rl
•_•-i--•a•a•-•-g
a
it
41
•
VA
�!!!!!!w
:oa•a=
®w®T W g W g W g W W6W®
"!-!-!-!
11
6 WOWS
!!
Ark
.3
N
0
8
m
Q
0
0
i�
III
:we
F