Z - Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes for April 20, 2017Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 10 of 55
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to approve Item No. H-2017-0026.
All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
B: Public Hearing Continued from 3/16/17 for Goddard
Creek (H-2017-0007) by Brian Porter Located at 2780 W.
McMillan Road
1. Request: Rezone of 12.38 Acres of Land from R-
4 to the R-40 (5 Acres) and the C-C (7.38 Acres)
Zoning Districts
2. Request: Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map to Change the Land Use
Designation on 12.38 Acres of Land from Office
and High Density Residential to Mixed Use
Community
3. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a Self-
Storage Facility Consisting of Ten (10 Buildings
on Approximately 7.38 Acres of Land in the
Proposed C-C Zoning District
4. Request: Conditional Use Permit for a Multi-
Family Development Consisting of Eight-Two (82)
Dwelling Units in the Proposed R-40 Zoning
District on Five (5) Acres of Land
5. Request: Preliminary Plat Approval Consisting of
Twenty-Two (22) Building Lots and Five (5)
Common Lots on 12.38 Acres of Land in the
Proposed C-C and R-40 Zoning Districts
McCarvel: Okay. So, at this time we would like to continue the public hearing
for Item No. H-2017-0007, Goddard Creek, and I will give just a minute for the
room to clear. And we will begin with the staff report.
Beach: Very good, Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. As you said,
this is a public hearing that was continued from the March 16th Planning and
Zoning hearing -- or, excuse me, Planning and Zoning meeting. There are
several applications I have associated with this project. A Comprehensive Plan
map amendment, conditional use permit for multi-family development in a
proposed R-15 zoning district, conditional use permit for a multi-family
development in an R -- in a proposed R-15 zoning district, conditional use
permit for a self-storage facility in a proposed C-C zoning district, a rezone, a
preliminary plat and a development agreement modification. If you recall back
on the 16th of March we -- excuse me -- the Commission requested that the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 11 of 55
applicant address four items that were the -- the items to be discussed this
evening. Staff has written a memo kind of outlining the changes to the project
by the applicant in regard to those four items and I will go ahead and read my
memo -- portions of it to you this evening. We are asked to decrease the
residential density. The applicant reduced the number of building units from 82
units to 74 units and the number of residential lots has been decreased from 22
residential lots to 21 residential lots. The proposed gross density was reduced
from 16.5 dwelling units per acre to 14.8 dwelling units per acre. With a
reduction in the density the applicant provided revised legal descriptions and is
now requesting that the multi-family portion of the project that you see here on
your screen be zoned R-15 instead of the originally proposed R-40 zoning
district. The loss in units has also resulted in an increase of open space to 1.36
acres or approximately 27.2 percent. The next item that they were asked to
address were to increase parking for the project. The applicant has increased
the number of spaces from 202 to 205 total spaces, keeping in mind that with
the reduction in the number of the units it's not just an increase of three,
because they have also reduced the required number for the units, they have
also -- so, they have increased units by about -- parking spaces by about 15 or
20 overall in a little more analysis of that. So, as a result, the number of spaces
per unit will increase from 2.5 to 2.77. It doesn't seem like a lot, but with the
number of units there it's -- it's enough to accommodate a lot more visitor
parking. The project now provides 33 stalls for guest parking dispersed
throughout the development. The parking stalls have been eliminated from the
landscape buffer on the west boundary. So, if you recall from the previous site
plan they had some parking stalls that would have been in this required
landscape buffer between the residential component and the commercial
component to the west and they have reduced -- or they have eliminated those.
The next item was to modify the amenity package. The applicant has modified
the proposed amenities for the development and now proposes to include
enclosed bike storage, a 50-by-100 foot play field, a community garden with
raised beds, internal walking trails, a playground facility and a plaza with
covered seating. The next item was to improve vehicular access to the multi-
family project. If you recall there was concerns that the vehicular access in the
location here indicated by my mouse was -- was too close to Goddard Creek
Way. The applicant has, instead, kept that drive aisle, but kind of dead ended it
there and put their trash enclosure in that location and moved the access further
west on Apgar Creek to accommodate the additional stacking to get out to go
north or south on Goddard Creek. The previous site plan had a distance from
the proposed entrance on Apgar Creek Lane to Goddard Creek Way measuring
approximately 80 feet. With the proposed changes to the site plan the distance
will increased to approximately 220 feet. As I said, the change will result in a
greater ability for cars to stack there. With that those are the four -- the four
items that the applicant was requested to address. With that staff is still
recommending approval of the project and I will stand for any questions you
have.
McCarvel: Any questions from the Commissioners?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 12 of 55
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: Josh, can you go over the Comprehensive Plan map amendment
again, the specifics of that.
Beach: Sure. So, they are requesting to change from a combination of high
density residential and office to -- I believe it was mixed use. Let me pull that
back up. That wasn't one of the things that we were looking at this evening, but
I can definitely answer that question for you. Yeah. They have requested to
change the -- the overall site to mixed-use community to accommodate both
those uses.
Perreault: Thank you.
McCarvel: Any other questions? Okay.
Beach: I will also add that the mixed-use community designation gives a density
guideline for residential for between -- and the range is from six to 15. So,
again, with -- with the change by the applicant now better falls within that
guideline that -- it's the higher end, but it still falls in with the 14.8 dwelling units
per acre that staff still -- still with the previous project felt that it met that, but this
is a -- is a better fit.
McCarvel: Okay. Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward?
Parks: Good evening. Shon Parks with TO Engineers. 2471 North Titanium
Way in Meridian, Idaho. Josh, if you would load our slide presentation.
Beach: I will.
Parks: I can kind of go through that. Thank you for the opportunity to continue
our conversation and to continue to discuss the ways we are amending our plan
to address some of the issues that we talked about in our last -- in our last
meeting. You're seeing here, as Josh had indicated, the entire site, including
both the multi-family and the storage facility site located here on the project
location. But most of the questions that had -- that you had last time and
comments address, really, the multi-family component and so we are really
going to concentrate on that element. The first item that we addressed was the
density item that you all wanted us to decrease. We have gone from 82 units,
as Josh had mentioned, down to 74 units, which is about a ten percent reduction
in units. And that brings us down to that R-15 zoning, which is much, much
easier to take than the R-40, which is the next step up in the zoning. It also
increases our open space just because of the reduction in density to 3.6 acres
of open space provided overall. The other item that was kind of contentious was
the parking and mostly the guest parking. As you can see, we have added
parking on the central island to both sides and that has given us the ability to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 13 of 55
increase the percentage of parking from 2.8 -- or 2.5 to 2.8 parking spaces per
unit. But, more importantly, it takes our guest parking from 17 spaces up to 33
spaces, which is a really big increase in -- in parking and those are all centrally
located. So, easily accessed to all of the units as well. And, then, as we
mentioned we have removed parking spaces from that landscape buffer, which -
- which helps us out as well. The other item that -- that was discussed that --
that we had addressed is this -- is the issue of traffic and roads. Increasing the
distance to -- of our entrance away from Goddard Creek Way to 250 feet to the
center line of our entrance to -- to the curb line of Goddard Creek, which really
does almost more than double our stacking distance and in addition to that we
have also added -- or we are adding five feet of width to Apgar from our
entrance down to Goddard, just to -- again, to increase the opportunities for a
wider, safer entrance experience as you come into that -- to the Selway
Apartments, as well as our -- our own community here. We are not only adding
some width to Apgar in that first section, but also adding width to McMillan -- or
McMillan Road and in addition to that we are adding right of way width to allow
ACHD to -- when they come through with their improvements in the coming
years, which is in their current CIP, that that can be widened with the addition of
that right of way. There was some concern about a stacking -- particularly in
traffic from Goddard Creek Way onto McMillan from some of the residents and --
and one of the things that we wanted to do was take a look at exactly what --
what that problem was and so we just randomly sent somebody out one
Thursday morning to take a look at exactly what those conditions were, how
much stacking was taking place, what the problem -- what the traffic problems
were in that particular location and the -- what we saw was that there was --
there was a little bit of stacking. Most -- most of it was just a single car. At the
worst case there was one instance where there was four cars stacked and this
was just in the morning rush hour time. We didn't get an opportunity to go back
out in the evening, but we just wanted to take a look and see, again, in that
morning rush hour exactly how bad it was and so the average wait time was --
as you can see here was about 60 second -- or 60 to 20 seconds or less. And
so that's just -- was just our observation during one particular morning. There
was also some concern about the amenities and we have addressed that by
adding some additional amenities, namely, a shelter and a community garden.
The other amenities remain as -- as they were before. The large playground.
The 50-by-100 play space. The bike parking. And in addition to that we have
added some nice amenities, including this -- a community garden that you see
that has some fencing and some raised beds for community members to rent
out plots and have their own garden space and also update shelter -- picnic
plaza region that will be located right next to the playground for some shading
and picnicking opportunities. And just to revisit some of the architecture that we
looked at before, we think we have -- we have got a very attractive set of
facades here on the two-story, three-story combination buildings. The all three
story combination buildings -- and just as a highlight, we just think that that
provides a really strong architectural facade. As we mentioned last time, we
have really highly planted landscape buffers, which is a strong element.
Walkable connections. We have provided this connection along the west side
from Selway Apartments that takes -- would take members of Selway down to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 14 of 55
McMillan Road and we have got a well-placed vehicular access now and good
land use transition from office -- from Selway Apartments to the north with a
similar density all the way down to McMillan and a good amount of open space.
We hope we have addressed your questions, but I will stand for any questions
you might have for me now.
McCarvel: Any questions for the applicant at this time? Okay. Thank you.
Parks: You're very welcome.
McCarvel: Okay. At this time we will take public testimony and the first person I
have on the list -- check you off. Don Fletch. Okay. I will let you say it.
Fleck: Hi. My name is Don Fleck. I live at 5197 North Black Sand Avenue,
which is in the community that this affects. I'm basically about a block and a half
from this. I regularly access Goddard Creek and sadly the statistics that the
good gentleman stated before I think are -- have no basis in documentation. I
think it -- I've been there many times and it's been much, much longer and
much greater wait. In the morning there is a school bus stop there. Parents
wait for their children out there, so that's a very congested area right outside of
where this -- these apartments are going to go. Also stated that, you know, they
are going to increase parking, well, that's a good thing, because the Selway
Apartments is sadly lacking. Theirs seems to be a little bit better, but,
unfortunately, I'm wondering with the density of cars that's going to be there,
how much additional traffic is going to be included onto Goddard Creek, Ten
Mile, and McMillan. As it currently is now McMillan is a very busy street,
especially in the evening and the mornings. Sometimes it's difficult to get out
there. Haven't seen any accidents there, but, then, I'm not out there all the time
either, so -- that's an uncontrolled intersection there at the stop sign, but there is
no traffic light. Previously the zoning for the Selway Apartments that -- there
was -- when that went in there was an agreement struck apparently with the city
and the developers of this section that 171 units could be built on that section of
land. Well, Selway Apartments fulfilled that with their -- their annexation or their
variance to build on that R-4 designated plot of land and I would ask that the
commitment to the community that was made then be held up, because we
have lived in this residence -- I have been there for over ten years and we don't
need to see anymore apartments in that section, it's already crowded enough,
and if you -- if you still consider that this is a good thing to do, I would ask that
the building standards of this particular apartment section at least meet the
minimum standards of Kelly Creek, which is the next adjacent apartments, with
architectural shingles, stone or stucco facades, and minimal planting. No vinyl
sidings be put into that -- that particular section. And that's -- that's all I have.
Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Next person I have signed up for testimony is Jamie
Ross. Not sure -- Jamie or Janey? No? Okay. Dan and Penny Fisher.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 15 of 55
Fisher: Good evening. Dan Fisher. 2382 West Apgar Creek Drive. First of all,
thank you for taking the time to hear our concerns about this high-density
housing project. As you're probably most aware. Our city has developed a very
detailed Comprehensive Plan, which clearly outlines the manner in which our
city intends to grow. The plan was most recently updated October 11th, 2016,
by Resolution 16-1173. As you know, the subject property is currently zoned R-
4 and the current land use plan calls for suburban office buildings to be built on
the property and I do realize that there is a section of high-density residential on
the -- on the north side of the property, but the predominance of the property is
-- is land use planned for suburban office. Our city planners put much effort and
thought into the types of development that would make our community in
general and our neighborhood in particular most livable. In the currently
adopted land use plan suburban office fits well within the needs of our
community. Suburban office space absorption rates were extremely high
though out the Treasure Valley, so this would be an excellent use for this land.
The planned use also allows the neighborhood to be free from the
overcrowding, which is our -- our main concern. Mr. Porter's proposed use of
the property does not meet the guidelines established by the City of Meridian
Comprehensive Plan. It's a change to the Comprehensive Plan. While there
may be some overlay in the land use map, as I stated before, simply put it
doesn't meet the plan. I urge you to stick to the plan that was adopted by our
City Council as a de facto contract between the City of Meridian and the
citizens, particularly the members of our neighborhood. I'm not opposed to the
development of the subject property in any way, but we must grow responsibility
-- responsibly and I think that the impact of this high density housing project will
have in our neighborhood is extremely negative. Again, I urge you not to throw
out the city's Comprehensive Plan and allow for irresponsible growth and
overcrowding in our neighborhood. Thank you very much.
McCarvel: Bill Weed? Weddy?
Wade: Hello. Thanks for having us out this evening. My name is Bill Wade.
My address is 2244 West Apgar Creek Drive. I first want to thank Dan and
second his comments. As a resident of Apgar Creek since 2009 we have seen
development of the Selway Apartments. I originally lived here in Idaho in 2007
on West -- on Wapoot Drive and my realtor had the savvy to understand what
might potentially come in behind that and as I look out that backyard where we
would have purchased you have three story buildings called the Selway
Apartments. Understand that we need to have all types of housing come into
our communities, but with that being stated I don't know their original plans for
the Selway, but I can tell you every day when I drive home -- not on a one day
basis, to see traffic and to see how many people are now parking on the street
on Apgar Creek that are guests of the Selway Apartments. I can only imagine
what's going to happen four or five years down the road when that parking is no
longer sufficient for the proposed complex coming in. What I would like to urge
is that that company do more research by an independent firm that comes out
and actually does a survey and understand the traffic flow, understand what we
would potentially see within our neighborhood. I have a 12 year old daughter
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 16 of 55
that was four when I moved into that house and I see people race down Apgar
Creek. It's like a racetrack on this street. We have kids. We are a kid oriented
community. We have a large park within our community right on Apgar Creek
and the Selway has come in it's become a thorough way -- a thoroughfare for
those residents to, then, go over to now Sonic, go over to Walgreens, and so we
see increased -- particularly on Apgar Creek a much higher flow of people
coming through. We do have a bus stop at the end of that street and so I think
these factors need to be resubmitted to and before any decisions or proposals
are made on approving this project, that we really have some outside input on
what the true impact is by an independent firm, not by someone coming out one
morning on a Thursday. I understand that effort, but none of us in this room
would allow that to happen within our own community and take that to be the
sufficient amount of time and effort put into understanding traffic flow and what
the impact would be to the residents. So, I would urge that we -- before we
move forward and approve this particular project that we reconsider what it was
originally zoned for. There was a reason that the planning committee had that
plan of mind and as a parent, as someone that watches people drive down that
street every day at 60 miles per hour and it's very frustrating -- 40 -- I have seen
people -- I wouldn't say 60. Maybe once. But on a consistent basis in a 25 mile
per hour zone doing 40 with kids playing out to where your kids can't play in the
street, which is fine, but it's a little disconcerting to know that we are going to
add that much more and to think that Apgar would not become the way for
people to get out to Linder Road verses trying to get onto McMillan, I just think
that more said and needs to be done and go back and see what actually has
happened with the Selway Apartments and how that was planned and how that
has impacted our community before adding more apartments. Thank you for
your time.
McCarvel: Thank you. I don't have anybody else on the sign-up sheet that said
they wanted to testify, but is there anyone else who would like testify? Certainly,
ma'am. In the front.
Pullman: Good evening. My name is Jamie Pollmann. You had a Jamie, but
you said the last name wrong, so maybe that's where our mistake was.
McCarvel: Yeah. Okay. You have a very lovely P on the front.
Pollmann: I live at 5030 North Goddard Creek Way. I'm one of four houses that
actually live on Goddard Creek and my house is oriented where my backyard
and my kitchen window actually looks out on that intersection of McMillan and
Goddard Creek. So, I'm sorry, but Shon's half an hour metering of the traffic is
not even close to what's happening and my concern is not the apartments, my
concern is the traffic and I have the ACHD's report and they metered the traffic
at that intersection on McMillan in October 8th, 2014, and the last time they
metered the traffic at Goddard Creek and McMillan was January 28th, 2015, and
anybody that lives in Meridian, especially this north end, knows of the growth
that we have had, not only in residential, but commercial, retail. Where we are
at we are happy to have the businesses come in, but it's drawing cars from all
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 17 of 55
over that north area. It's not just the residents that use those streets anymore.
Residents from all over that attend Rocky Mountain are coming up and cutting
through up Goddard Creek, because it's a shortcut over to the high school, so
they don't have to deal with Linder Road and it's -- I think they said we -- up
capital improvements ACHD says are not -- we are not -- that intersection that
everybody here is concerned about, Goddard Creek and McMillan, is not even
on the five year plan for ACHD to improve the intersection, which I think is
extremely dangerous, there is no shoulders and on the one side where it's a T
intersection is that big old giant canal and there is very -- it's very poorly marked.
The center medium I guess is what I'm trying to say. The exit from Goddard
Creek does not have a designated turning lane, so traffic -- if someone coming
out of our neighborhood onto McMillan doesn't get all the way over immediately
after that planter that's there that you can see how the roads V's out, then, the
person trying to turn onto McMillan left -- if he doesn't immediately get over
there everybody else is stacked up behind him and so, then, we lose our ability
to have somebody to turn left and someone to turn right. It's a very congested
intersection. I was not aware of what Dan Fisher said that in the year 2016 that
Meridian city actually had updated their Comprehensive Plan and I just am -- I
think it's not compatible at this time for this much additional traffic to be put out
on those roads. We are not the only road in Meridian that's suffering. We
realize that. The growth has just overtaken the roads. It's -- it's everywhere.
It's not just us. But -- I'm done.
McCarvel: Thank you for your time.
Pollmann: Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Is there anyone else wishing to testify in this? Okay.
Fisher: I promise I'm not trying to become famous. Dan Fisher. 2382 West
Apgar Creek Drive. The HOA has put together a few points that they would like
to also consider. One of the key points that -- was a letter that we received from
the school district with a very high level of concern about what they are going to
do with the school children that are going to be generated by 74 housing units.
Willow Creek Elementary School is already at capacity and there is a lot of
concern about what they are going to do with those students. So, if we were to
put office space in that -- our office in that -- on that property, obviously, that
would be a concern also if it was single family homes, that wouldn't be a
concern. There is also a concern about the signage. During the hearing that
there were -- a requirement for two signs, but only one sign was actually posted
and a photograph was taken of the sign from two different spots. And the other
part was about the -- it was just about managing growth to achieve a high quality
development, two very dissimilar types of development on a single piece of
property. What type of quality of life are we providing for the residents of the
multi-family by having it right next to a storage facility, rather than having that
being more compatible use -- a commercial use such as offices. Those are the
other additional concerns that we had. Thank you.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 18 of 55
McCarvel: Thank you. And I thought I saw one more hand back there. Okay.
Sir.
Stillwell: Thank you. My name is Rick Stillwell and I'm at 5117 North Dove
Ridge Place in the Kelly Creek Subdivision and I will be brief. There were two
things -- two points that I wanted to make. There has been a number of
discussions -- a lot of discussion about traffic and part of what -- where the
traffic is going is through the development. I actually live on the east side of the
subdivision by Linder, which is on the exact opposite end and what's happening
is that a lot of people can't make that left turn or it's troublesome or timely to
make that left turn onto West McMillan. So, what they are doing is they are
driving through the development and turning right onto Linder to get -- to go onto
work and their businesses and that's -- I was out petitioning or -- or passing out
petitions on the east side of the neighborhood and I heard the same comments
that the gentleman previously talked about was the amount of traffic that's being
funneled through the subdivision, as well as speed, and I have heard the same
kind of stories of 50 miles an hour and whatnot. I don't know if that's -- if it's 50
or 45, but human nature being what it is, when people are on their way to work,
some are going to go faster because they are late or whatever. The only other
comment I wanted to make was I think there was a letter submitted by the
school and it was some concern about proper sidewalks. Apparently there was
a child that was killed near the Selway Apartments and there was some concern
expressed about making sure that there was proper sidewalks or a way that
these kids could walk to school and I think that's something that's very important
that should be addressed in this plan. Thank you.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Would the applicant -- anybody else?
Okay. All right. One more.
Blasko: My name is Jennifer Blasko. I own a home at 2257 West Wapoot Drive
and although I agree with my neighbors wholeheartedly about the traffic in Kelly
Creek, I also wanted to point out that it's also an issue for traffic for the rest of
Meridian that travels on McMillan Road. The amount of traffic turning right onto
Goddard Creek going towards Ten Mile, that backs traffic up that way, as well
as the central third lane, such as it is, when you're traveling towards Linder to
turn left onto Goddard Creek, it's only the -- that's where the third line begins
and there is only room for two, maybe three cars to actually pull off out of the
flow of traffic and it regularly backs McMillan up when you're traveling towards
Linder when people are trying to turn left into -- onto Goddard Creek. I would
highly recommend that an engineering firm do a study of the traffic patterns to
possibly refute the numbers that were presented here, especially since the
traffic there does begin at 7:00 o'clock when I leave for work, as well as
beginning as early as 4:00 o'clock when I return home. So, anyway, it does
impact more than just Kelly Creek is my concern. Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you. Okay. Is that it? Okay. Would the applicant like to
come forward?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 19 of 55
Doolin: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, my name is James Doolin.
I'm with the developer. My address is 4685 South Highland Drive, Salt Lake
City, Utah. First of all, I appreciate your guys' time, appreciate the feedback we
received tonight. A lot of the same feedback that we have heard in our
neighborhood meetings that we have tried to address and, then, we also tried to
address the -- the items you guys mentioned that were concerns in our last
meeting. Those -- without repeating everything, but decreasing the density from
82 units to 74 units, which is roughly a ten percent reduction in units. Increasing
parking from 2.5 to roughly 2.8. Where the city requires two spaces per unit, we
are at 2.8, with 33 guest parking spaces. And modifying the amenity package
and, then, moving the entrance. Beyond that I don't have much to say, other
than to address a few of the concerns. I believe our changes that we have
made for add value to our development and to the community. It's important for
us to be responsible developers and make sure our impact is not above and
beyond unnecessary impact to the neighbors and the neighboring community.
As was mentioned, the future land use map shows high density and mixed use
-- or, sorry, light office. I think it's important to note that the total site is 12 acres
and we are proposing 74 residential units over 12 acres. The -- the storage unit
takes up seven acres and so the traffic should be looked at as the impact over
the entire 12 acre development, because another development that comes in
would likely have a 12 acre impact of development of if it's mixed of -- or
anything outside of -- of what we are proposing. So, I just want to make note of
that. Somebody made reference or note to the buildings. We will not be putting
vinyl on our buildings. It will be stucco and stone. And then -- I guess it the
tricky part is undeveloped land when it gets developed causes impact. Again,
we are doing our best to be responsible. We are trying to make this a win-win.
Unfortunately, with the residents I don't necessarily think this is a win for them,
but we are proposing something that we feel would be valuable to the
community and its impact to the community is as least as possible. Lastly, I'm
going to have John Carpenter of TO Engineers come up and address the traffic
study conversation. I want it to be known we are not trying to provide
misinformation regarding traffic, we heard traffic was an issue. We went out
when it seemed like a reasonable time to go out and count traffic. It sounds like
many neighbors disagree with the data. We are not presenting it as if it's a
complete study, but it's -- we are trying to bring facts into the conversation,
instead of subjective conversation. But I will have John address the -- the traffic
-- or the -- the roads and other than that if there is any questions -- I will turn the
time over to John.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Mr. Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: So, I apologize, I was not here for the original discussion on the
storage unit side. Do you guys have a wall between the north side separating
that?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 20 of 55
Doolin: There is a wall and, then, on the -- the paneled side of that wall there is
a trail that connects the Selway Apartments to provide access -- pedestrian
access through our development out onto McMillan.
Fitzgerald: Okay. And, then, the north boundary as well, is there a wall on there
as well? What's Selway looking at?
Doolin: Selway -- yes, that is a wall.
Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you.
Doolin: Any other questions?
McCarvel: Any questions? Okay. Thank you.
Doolin: I appreciate your time. I will turn it over to John.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you.
Carpenter: Good evening. John Carpenter with TO Engineers. Happy to be
here tonight.
McCarvel: Address, please.
Carpenter: My address is 332 North Broadmoor in Nampa.
McCarvel: Okay.
Carpenter: And I will actually address Mr. Fitzgerald's question a little bit more.
If you can back up, Josh. The overall site plan if you would. So, adjacent to the
-- to the multi-family there is -- there is a wall there, but there is also a large
common area. So, there is landscaping and there is trees through there and,
then, on the north boundary there is a very large landscape buffer there as well.
So, there is a nice looking wall and, then, there is shrubs, trees, and quite a bit
of grass. So, there is a good buffer. On the traffic, I wanted to point out first just
a couple things. Josh, can you go over to the overall site plan? Kind of the
history how -- how we got to where we are today. W e actually started this
project with having access with the multi-family out to -- out to McMillan and the
storage units up to McMillan. We spent quite a bit of time with Meridian staff
and quite a bit of time with ACHD. ACHD controls the roads, obviously. Has
quite a bit of input. Their suggestion -- strong suggestion was to have our
access off of Apgar. They were concerned about the spacing out on McMillan
Road and so we would -- we listened to staff -- again both from ACHD and
Meridian and moved it over to Apgar. One of the comments we had from the
last meeting was to move our access a little further from Goddard Way. I think
that helps a bunch. One of the concerns that we have on the -- or one of the
problems the neighbors have on Apgar -- on the apartment side is just the
parking as they said. With the widening they were doing, even if people are
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 21 of 55
parking there there is still enough room for cars getting back -- back and forth
through there. One of the things that the city might look at his putting no parking
signs on Apgar. That would be a really easy solution for it. We -- we asked
ACHD if a traffic study was needed. ACHD does not require traffic study for this
size of project. It was a question that we had early on and once we had heard
the concerns for the neighbors we simply wanted understand it, so I had a
couple of our employees go out and just sit -- sit at the property, observe. We
took a bunch of video. They brought it back to me. There really is very limited
traffic during the rush hour. Traffic is something that increases when the --
when the city develops. Meridian has grown strongly over the years. Meridian
has a lot of good growth in the area and the traffic increases with it. ACHD has
plans to widen McMillan and they are going to widen it once there is a traffic
concern that warrants that widening. If you call ACHD right today and ask them
what it's going to be, they have it out there a ways, but as properties develop
more and more they will speed that up. There was a -- there was a comment on
the -- on the canal on the south side of McMillan. ACHD asked us to dedicate
additional right of way so they can fit their whole road and have the safety
separation from the canal. We have actually given up more right of way than
was typically required, just to have the space there for ACHD to build that road
in the future. We are trying to do our part with -- with McMillan. We are trying to
do our part with Goddard. We don't think there is a traffic concern there. And
when asked to move our approach over we slid it over as far as we could.
There is a lot of stacking space now available on Apgar. Let me see what else I
have. As far as the Comprehensive Plan goes, the Comprehensive Plan as a
guide. I think we are familiar with the Comprehensive Plan and the intent. It's --
if you look around the city, how it's grown, it doesn't match the Comprehensive
-- Comprehensive Plan exactly. It's -- it is a guide. There is two uses on there.
Office and multi-family -- high-density multi-family. We are similar to that. I
think it was James that mentioned the storage units actually helps out on the
traffic. Most of the people going to the storage units are going there at a
different time than rush hour. Typically during the day to drop off miscellaneous
stuff. So, that actually helps. If this was all offices you would see quite a bit of
congestion for people going out -- depending on the use, obviously, but there is
as likely to have more traffic going in and out to that office than you with the
storage units and the housing that we have planned. As far as the school goes,
I think that school letter is a good one. If you look at our site plan we have
sidewalks -- probably more sidewalks on this project per acre than I have ever
done. There is sidewalks along McMillan. There is sidewalks -- additional
sidewalk along Goddard. Now, there are two sidewalks on Goddard. We have
a sidewalk that's going from the Selway Apartments down to McMillan, which is
a really good thing, actually. Now the people in Selway have to walk all the way
out to Goddard, down Goddard, and over to McMillan. We are giving them a
direct route. The community itself has sidewalks in front of each of the units.
And, then, that sidewalk that I mentioned along McMillan, continues on across
the storage units. So, as far is the school letter goes and the -- and the
sidewalks, we have -- we have addressed that. We have taken care of that and
we think we have a very walkable, very usable plan. And, then, the schools --
you guys know how the schools are, they -- they build as there is a need. They
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 22 of 55
don't build them in advance. Taxpayers aren't going to do that. So, that the
schools are always a little bit behind the curve. The school -- Meridian is
building new schools today. I mean it's kind of an ongoing thing as development
happens. And that is it. I will stand for any questions that you might have.
McCarvel: Any questions from the Commissioners?
Cassanelli: One of the things I know that was discussed last time was that play
field. Yeah. Is that play field -- is it -- is it recessed? Is it a retention pond?
Carpenter: You know, I'm glad you brought that up. Our storm drainage on this
site has been thought out very well. We have all of our storm drainage going to
the subsurface. So, even though we show several boxes in there for storm
drainage, what's happening is the water is going in the curb -- into a catch basin,
sand and grease trap, and, then, it's piped subsurface underneath those fields.
So, it's a great dual purpose function. We have got that open space. It's not a --
there is not a depression there. So, there is not water backing up into that play
field, it's all to the subsurface.
Cassanelli: So, that play field will be level?
Carpenter: That -- that -- yes. Yeah. It's going to be a functioning, usable --
kids are going to run around, throw a frisbee, play field. It's not going to be a pit
that you're going to walk into and have wet. We are putting a lot of time into the
grading plan for this site, with the sidewalks, with the units that we have. It's --
it's actually a little complicated to get the drainage to work. This year we have
had a lot of rain. Still getting a lot of rain. This is going to be a graded out very
nicely and it's going to be attractive for the users. All of the -- the fronts of the
units face out to that green space for the renters to have attractive front yard.
It's got a -- it's got to be graded and it's got to drain correctly.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: What's the capacity for -- sorry, Josh. Could you print up the slide
that shows these in color. What's that capacity for that -- the patio -- covered
patio area? And what was shown -- looked to me like there were several tables,
but that's not actually -- that's just a photo representation, it's not actually what's
going to go in?
Carpenter: They are getting to a slide that's got a good color --
Beach: Bear with me.
Perreault: Sorry.
Beach: Multiple slide shows going on here.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 23 of 55
Perreault: So, is that -- is that photo there of the multiple tables what -- is the
intention or is that just an example? Because it seems to me like a 12-by-12
picnic shelters is fairly small.
Carpenter: I'm going to -- I'm going to look over my shoulder to Shon. It's one
of those.
Parks: The plat as mentioned -- it's a 17-by-17 foot plat --
Perreault: Uncovered?
Parks: That table is -- that table is a 12-by-12 picnic shelter. So, it's a table with
-- four-sided table with a shelter above it. Due to the size of the area we are
dealing with a 17-by-17 plaza, we couldn't fit more than one of those shelter
coverings into it.
Perreault: Okay. But the plaza is uncovered? It's --
Parks: Yes. So, you will have a covering over the --
Perreault: Okay.
Parks: -- the picnic area.
Perreault: Thank you.
McCarvel: Anything else? Thank you. Okay. At this time I'd like to get a
motion to close the public hearing for Item No. H-2017-0007, Goddard Creek.
Bernt: So moved.
Perreault: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing for Item
No. H-2017-0007. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
MOTION CARRIES: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: Bill, could I ask you a quick question? Mr. Fleck brought up a
question about the agreement by the City of Meridian to only have a certain
amount of -- I guess density or house -- or roof tops on that whole square. Was
there a master plan that we should be aware of or are we -- that confused me a
little bit, since it hadn't been brought in before.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 24 of 55
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, this property was always
part of the Lochsa Falls -- Lochsa Falls development. It was planned to be -- it's
zoned R-4 currently, so it's in the city, but through that planned unit
development process it was slated for office uses. As part of that PUD Selway
was part of that as well and it was entitled to a certain number of units. So, what
the applicant is doing this evening is removing this property from that agreement
and having themselves enter into a new agreement subject to the plan that you
see before you, the storage units and a multi-family. So, they are unraveling
one approval to gain another approval.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, can I have a follow up for a second question?
McCarvel: Absolutely.
Fitzgerald: Bill, is the stucco, stone, and the -- can we add that in the -- in the
play field, making sure that's not a drainage area into the DA, that discussion, if
we go that direction?
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, absolutely. If you want it
level and subsurface drainage, I think -- I believe Josh and I have that covered
for you in there, but we can surely make it clear that it needs to be level surface
and have some of those elements in there for you.
Fitzgerald: Thank you.
Bernt: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Bernt.
Bernt: Question for Josh or Bill. How -- do we know how many units are in
Selway? A hundred seventy-one? Is that what I heard? All right. So, if we add
the -- the units that will be made in the proposed development that would
probably put near 250 units. If you multiply that by the average amount of
people that will be living just in this -- in that vicinity, it's quite a few people. I
actually like -- it's my opinion -- I love the development. I think the development
-- the look of it -- I think you have done a good job with it. I think that you list --
you listen to us before and you made the proper changes that -- that we have
had concerns with. I just don't like personally where it's located. My -- my
personal feeling on this development is it's just too dense. It's too dense and
there is too many units in that -- in that area. I do believe there is going to be a
massive problem with traffic that will bring multiple problems into that area. I do
-- we are very aware that there is massive development going on in Meridian.
We are very aware that -- that traffic is a problem, not only in the north, but even
creeping into the south parts of Meridian as well, something that we are dealing
with and something that ACHD is very aware of, but for right now it's my opinion
that -- I think that there could be better use of that property than apartments.
Although the apartments look beautiful, I think their design is fantastic. I don't
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 25 of 55
think you could have done a better job with how they look. I think -- I -- I can't
think of one negative thing about the proposed development, other than the
location. I just -- I can't approve this this evening and those are my thoughts.
Thank you.
McCarvel: Thank you.
Perreault: Madam Chair? Commissioners?
McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault.
Perreault: I agree with Commissioner Bernt regarding the traffic. I think that if
there was a plan -- specifically there is a plan to have a right turn lane off of
McMillan into Goddard, if there were dedicated lanes on Goddard Creek Way --
still not convinced that the entrance to the residential area is far enough to the
west for -- I'm guessing you're averaging about three people per unit, which is
another 240 plus individuals. Let's say there is -- that half of them are -- a little
less than half of them are leaving during normal business hours, got another
hundred cars that are coming out of there -- in and out of there in a 45 minute
time. So, I would have liked to have seen some dedicated lanes on Goddard
Creek. I don't know about Apgar. I'm not exactly sure what the width is on
Apgar, but that's my main concern with it. I agree with -- with Commissioner
Bernt that the development is designed well, but the traffic is just still too much
of a concern for me.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: This one's hard for me, because I -- I think the developer has done
their job in responding to both us and the community a little bit and I think -- we
are putting a storage unit on the majority of the -- that it literally has no impact
and so are we are going to replace that with offices that will have an impact and
so I'm having a challenge balancing those two. It's -- it's challenging to me. I
think the -- there is no impact with traffic at all with the storage units. So, you're
taking 12 acres, seven of which is a storage unit, and, then, five of which is
being put in with a little bit higher density, which is in the future land use map
designated for higher -- a higher density. So, I'm having challenges, because
the development is done well. I think the amenities are nice. And so I -- I'm not
sure where to go yet. But I think that we are -- we are making an exchange for
this -- basically an equal thing. Because we are going to get traffic and it's going
to be the same time people are coming out, going to an office, same time people
are going into their houses -- or leaving their houses to go to their jobs, too. So
-- and it is -- this is -- come out to the road and this is a walkable community.
This is the kind of place you want to have density, but I agree -- I understand
where you're going and it's -- where it's located is very difficult with apartments
right behind it. So, that's my -- so, for me it helped me with that, because I'm --
I'm having trouble. They have done a good job of laying it out, making it less
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 26 of 55
dense. The product is nice. The MEW and the -- the amenities are nice. I'm --
but I understand what you're saying.
Bernt: Would you -- Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Bernt.
Bernt: Would you agree that -- Commissioner Fitzpatrick, would you agree that
-- or would you disapprove of the notion that this high-density housing would
bring in equal to or more or less people to that area, as opposed to like office
space?
Fitzgerald: I think it's sixes. That's my challenge. That's my challenge in my
head. Because if we literally -- if someone -- developer come out and says -- is
it possible that 12 acres, how many -- I mean we have seen that situation
happen. I don't know.
Bernt: But that would be office space of like five acres if they were to, you know,
even leave -- maybe we can -- you know, I don't know if these two
developments -- and correct me if I'm wrong. Do these two developments have
to be approved together? Are they married? So --
Beach: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission. To answer that question,
as -- as presented to staff and as applied right now it's one -- all these
applications are under one umbrella. Right? So, the way that we are presenting
it to you is there is -- however many it was -- six different application types and
so you have got options, you know, if you're feeling like you -- you want to --
correct me if I’m wrong, Bill. If you want to approve everything but the
conditional use permit for the multi-family project, I believe you have the ability
to do that. If -- if that's what you're asking.
Bernt: Madam Chairman. If it is a -- it is a tough decision, because I think it's a
beautiful -- I think it's a beautiful development. I really like how it looks. I don't
have any -- I don't have any -- I feel like I'm repeating myself now, but I don't
have any negative, you know, thoughts about the development itself. So,
maybe -- so, I just -- I don't -- I don't want to feel like I'm talking you into --
Fitzgerald: No, I --
Bernt: I'm a salesman. I love to hear the sales stuff all day long. I don't -- and I
don't feel like right now is a proper time to use my sales expertise.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair and Commissioner Cassanelli, do you have thoughts
tonight? I would love to hear you opinions.
Cassanelli: My thoughts just from last time, I -- I was opposed last time. One of
the -- one of the big issues for me was the density. They brought it down. I like
the project. I like the looks of the project. I have got a few concerns over the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 27 of 55
amenities. I think -- and that was the top conversation last time. I think kind of -
- maybe cutting corners a little bit on -- on some of the amenities. The overall
look of the project, I really like those. The walking -- you know, the walking --
the walkability of it. I like a lot of the things about the layout. I personally have a
problem with -- Commissioner Bernt summed it up well. When you combine
Selway and this project I think -- I think if Selway were -- were in this plot of land
I don't think -- you know -- and to the north where Selway is now were R-4, I
don't -- I don't think we would be increasing density if it were -- if Selway were
built out onto McMillan, if that makes sense. So, that's the -- that's the way I
stand. I still -- while I like the project. I think this project would be great in -- in
places where we are already zoned high density and I might just want a couple
of tweaks is all. I don't like it in this -- in this location. I just -- office, people
come and go I think at a slower pace. It's also -- you know, have to 5:00 o'clock
it's done. There isn't a problem on the weekends. Whereas, you know, a
project like this it's 24/7.
Fitzgerald: Okay.
Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, let me just elaborate on
what Josh was saying.
McCarvel: Uh-huh.
Parsons: We specifically bifurcated -- or required two different conditional use
permits for this particular reason to give you flexibility, but keep in mind we are --
the applicant is still requesting a comp plan change and that comp plan change
calls for a mix of uses and we kind of justified some of the comp plan change
based on the fact that we have commercial near the corner of Ten Mile. We
have office next to this property already that hasn't developed. So, in our mind it
made the logical sense to transition to a less intense commercial use, which is
storage, and, then, have that higher density. For us that isn't really a higher
density type development for us. We are six to 15. That's what the comp plan
that they are -- the comp plan change that they are applying for. So, to deny
just the multi-family portion of it, what else do we envision there and why are we
moving forward with the comp plan change? I guess that's the question I have
for you. We have met with the applicant, we have told him what to do, we said
we need some residential component to go with the vacant commercial at the
corners and provide that transition and that's typically how it's done. We -- if you
look at our mixed use standards in our Comprehensive Plan, we transition from
residential -- lower density residential to higher density residential or office to
more intense commercial. That's exactly what we have here before you. The
other idea is just -- is what the applicant presented to you. We as staff --
meaning planning and ACHD -- felt it was more appropriate for that multi-family
to be near that corner of that intersection to help disperse traffic through that
community easier. If that -- if you were to flip flop that plan and have that multi-
family going out onto McMillan, now they have two ways to go. You either have
to go right or left, there is no other way to move traffic through there. They are
stuck with one roadway. So, that's really why we set them up that way. Our
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 28 of 55
mixed use standards require that they have connectivity to adjacent
neighborhoods, they have pedestrian connectivity, that's what we have before
you this evening. So, I'm not trying to sway you in any -- one way or the other,
but I'm trying to explain to you what the mixed use is meant to be and why the
plan is the way it's presented to you this evening and why we have required -- or
encourage the applicant to submit the higher -- the R-15 zoning this evening.
Perreault: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner --
Perreault: Question for staff.
McCarvel: -- Perreault.
Perreault: Are we permitted to request the applicant to make some changes to
how traffic will flow through there or is that not in our --
Beach: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, I guess to answer your
question, Commissioner Perreault, is -- is yes -- just like last time when this was
continued there were certain things that the applicant was requested by the
Commission to address. I guess in general for staff's sake and for the applicant,
the more specific you can be as to what changes you would like to see the
better for -- for both of us. Having said that -- and just -- just for everyone's
knowledge and I guess interest, there were some discussions with applicant and
with ACHD as to whether or not the entrances for both of the projects would be
directly to McMillan, that they would potentially combine an access point onto
McMillan Road, so that both -- both projects would take that access and ACHD
was not in favor of that for -- for various reasons. One is -- as you see likely in
their staff report, McMillan is -- it's a -- it's a major arterial roadway. We want to
limit the number of accesses to those roadways, so that they can move traffic.
The more entrances you put on there, traffic gets slowed down, so -- we did
consider that, but that was something that ACHD did not -- did not recommend
approval of and so this is why the applicant has done what they have done.
Those are really their only two options. They don't own property up to Goddard
Creek Way. There is a common lot for the Kelly Creek Subdivision on their -- on
their east side of the project against Goddard Creek. So, they don't have direct
access to that road. So, it's either Apgar Creek Lane and as part of the -- part
for the Selway Apartments project that Bill here worked, there was a cross-
access provided for this very reason, so that when this property did develop --
and this was back in 2002 -- that that would be -- that would be used as an
access point for this project or any project that would be developed on this
parcel. So, the applicant did mention that we had talked to them originally and,
then, they were -- they were flip-flopped, right? The apartments were on the
west side and storage was on the east side, but that -- that didn't make sense as
far as traffic goes and, then, getting those folks -- especially not to McMillan
Road. There is -- there is not another way to do it if they put the project on the
other side of the parcel. So, that's kind of where we are. I did just want to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 29 of 55
mention that I pulled up the development agreement for the Lochsa Falls
Subdivision and one of the neighbors did mention that as part of that
development -- and it was a very large annexation. If you look here on the
screen -- do I have that up there, the development agreement -- okay.
McCarvel: Yes.
Beach: It does mention that the 171 multi-family dwellings was part of this
project -- as part of that entire annexation and I believe that's -- that's the
Selway Apartments and so we are -- they are asking in this project to -- for a
development agreement modification that would remove this specific parcel from
that development agreement, which would allow them, then, to create some
additional apartments. Again, that -- that's something that yourselves and City
Council have to look at, but I think that that's -- that's valid to note that as --
when this came in originally they were granted approval for a certain number of
apartments, which is why they -- that reason and because this parcel was slated
as office and not wanting to do office there anymore -- are a couple reasons why
they are wanting to amend their development agreement.
Parson: Madam -- Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, if I can go back
to -- we got off tangent just a little bit there for you, but, yes, you can require
some changes, but ACHD is not requiring changes of the applicant. The other
thing is the HOA for Lochsa Falls would have to be -- I don't know how their
license agreement with ACHD addresses that center median that's built in the
roadway. Under today's world we don't even plat those as common lots
anymore. Those are just part of the right of way. You enter into a license
agreement and when ACHD deems necessary that that intersection needs to be
rebuilt a certain way, the landscaping goes away and they add those turn lanes.
That's something that the applicant would have to pursue with ACHD. I can't
give you direction on that tonight. But keep in mind that we were here tonight to
talk about the four items that we addressed in our memo. If they have
addressed that plan the way you have directed them, then, that's what you're
acting on. I know all those other applications are there, but we specifically
continued this item to address that -- that plan. So, we need to look at that, too,
and make sure that they have addressed your concerns as part of modifications
to that portion that I believe from the last part of the hearing you guys were good
with the storage, you were, again, concerned with the items that we listened in
the memo. If -- if that meets the intent that you were looking for as part of your
motion -- and I will let you get to it and let you deliberate, but I just wanted to just
remind you of what was on the table this evening.
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Mr. Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: I think following -- and, Josh, thank you for bringing up the
development agreement. I think we have to go back to somewhat of a certainty
and I think a lot of us discuss that in the discussions and certainty says that
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 30 of 55
there is 171 units that are already taken in regards to multi-family in my opinion,
so -- the neighbors were expecting that was it in regards to 171 multi-family
units and now we are adding another 76 -- or -- sorry. Yeah. Seventy-four. So,
I think I'm going to agree with Commissioner Bernt and Commissioner Perrault
and say that this is not allowing certainty for the -- for the community in regards
to what they bought and so I don't think -- I would not want to move forward --
leave it as a clean slate not approve anything. I would probably move towards a
denial in that direction, to allow whoever takes the next step with this property
can start with a clean slate not have to deal with a jumbled-up mess. That
would be my opinion.
McCarvel: Okay. Thank you. Any other comments? Anybody ready to make a
motion?
Fitzgerald: You haven't commented. You're not commenting?
McCarvel: I -- I think they are -- I do, I think they are beautiful. I think it's exactly
-- I think they have addressed the concerns as good as they can be addressed,
but I don't know -- I'm kind of with you is I don't know that it's enough -- I mean I
go back and forth. With the storage units taking up that much space where
there is literally no activity and, then, these that are -- yes, they are multi-family,
but they are not your typical apartment. They are I would say more of a
townhome. They have their own garage. They have their own driveway for
parking and all these others are just guest parking, because of the need for not
having those parking -- guest parking being out on the street, so that every -- I'm
going to use the word townhome, because that's what they look like to me -- has
its own two spaces assigned. I somewhat see it as a good mix between your
typical apartment and single family residential. It's certainly not the R-4 in that
condensed little area, but over the entire space is that traffic kind of a wash,
having that much space taken up by the storage units.
Fitzgerald: Yes, ma'am.
McCarvel: So, I guess in the technical terms is it what everybody -- what was
expected with it being labeled an R-4, in reality is it over the entire quad? Is that
-- are we still getting to the same impact?
Fitzgerald: Rough.
McCarvel: Yeah. So, that -- that's my thought. I mean I normally would never
be -- almost never be in favor of something from an R-4 to an R-15. I mean the
-- I mean the R-40 I think pushed -- was an absolute no go in my mind. But they
did bring it down and make some changes and I guess I just needed to see it to
see if it still -- if it made sense at all and I'm -- I guess I'm still on the fence with
it.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
April 20, 2017
Page 31 of 55
Cassanelli: Madam Chair? Question for staff. Josh, the -- the original DA for
this -- that includes the Selway, that was -- that's that whole -- that includes this
parcel, too?
Beach: Correct. So, the parcel that this applicant is asking to develop was part
of Lochsa Falls and they are asking to take it out of that development
agreement.
Cassanelli: And when I look back at that, yeah, you're taking that from 171 now
to 250 and for everybody that bought in Lochsa Falls and Kelly Creek this was
what -- this is what they bought into. So, based on that, Madam Chair, I'm going
to go ahead and make a motion.
McCarvel: Commissioner Cassanelli.
Cassanelli: I'm going to -- I'm going to move that after considering all staff,
applicant, and public testimony I move to recommended denial to City Council
on file number H-2017-0007 as presented during the hearing on April 20th for
the following reason, that it does not fit the original development agreement for
171 units and the rest of that on 4.1 on the original agreement back -- I think that
was in August of 2002 -- July and August of 2002.
Bernt: Second.
McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to deny file number H-2017-0007,
Goddard Creek. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion fails.
MOTION CARRIED: FIVE AYES. TWO ABSENT.
McCarvel: Okay. Would the Commissioners like a five minute break before we
move on to the church? Okay.
(Recess: 9:08 p.m. to 9:14 p.m.)
McCarvel: Okay. Do we have everybody?
Fitzgerald: Madam Chair?
McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald.
Fitzgerald: Before we get started I have the Commissioners -- so, I live in the
neighborhood for the next application, so I -- I don't feel like I have a conflict, but
I will leave it up to my fellow Commissioners that -- whether you guys think I
have a problem. I feel like I can be unbiased, so -- but I want to make sure I
declare that.
Bernt: No issues here.