Loading...
2017 10-05Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda – Thursday, October 5, 2017 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or he aring, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. City Council Chambers 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, Idaho Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. 1. Roll-call Attendance __X__ Treg Bernt (Arrived @ 6:07) __X__ Steven Yearsley __X__ Gregory Wilson __X__ Ryan Fitzgerald __X__ Jessica Perreault __O__ Bill Cassanelli __X__ Rhonda McCarvel – Chairperson 2. Adoption of the Agenda Adopted 3. Consent Agenda Approved A. Approve Minutes of September 21, 2017 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Heritage Hop Haus (H-2017-0100) by Prefunk Meridian Located 77 E. Idaho Avenue 4. Action Items A. Public Hearing Continued from September 19, 2017 for Rapid Creek Subdivision (H-2017-0117) by WHPacific located near the Southwest Corner of W. McMillan Road and N. Black Cat Road Continued to November 2, 2017 1. Request: annexation and zoning of 23.02 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district 2. Request: for preliminary plat consisting of 93 building lots and 11 common lots on 21.02 acres of land in a proposed R- 8 zoning district Adjourned 7:19 p.m. MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Meridian Planning and Zoning Meeting October 5, 2017. Meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission of October 5, 2017, was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Rhonda McCarvel. Members Present: Chairman Rhonda McCarvel, Commissioner Steven Yearsley, Commissioner Treg Bernt, Commissioner Gregory Wilson, Commissioner Ryan Fitzgerald and Commissioner Jessica Perreault. Members Absent: Commissioner Bill Cassanelli Others Present: Charlene Day, Andrea Pogue, Bill Parsons, Josh Beach and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance __X___ Treg Bernt ___X___ Steven Yearsley __X___ Gregory Wilson ___X___ Ryan Fitzgerald __X___ Jessica Perreault _______ Bill Cassanelli ___X___ Rhonda McCarvel - Chairman McCarvel: 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 October 5th, 2017. Let's begin with roll call. Item 2: Adoption of the Agenda McCarvel: Okay. The first item on the agenda is the adoption of the agenda . We have no changes, so could I get a motion to adopt the agenda as presented? Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, so moved. 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. TWO ABSENT. Item 3: Consent Agenda A. Approve Minutes of September 21, 2017 Planning and Zoning Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 2 of 27 Commission Meeting B. Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Heritage Hop Haus (H-2017-0100) by Prefunk Meridian Located 77 E. Idaho Avenue McCarvel: The next item on the agenda is the Consent Agenda and we have two items on the Consent Agenda, the approval of minutes from the September 19th Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and findings in fact and conclusion of law for Heritage Hop Haus. Could I get a motion to accept the Consent Agenda as presented? Perreault: Madam Chair? I believe that meeting was on September 21st. McCarvel: 21st. Thank you. Would you like to do the motion as well? Perreault: Absolutely. I move to approve the minutes of the September 21st, 2017, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Yearsley: Actually, it's the Consent -- McCarvel: It's a motion to accept the Consent Agenda. A second? Yearsley: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda. All those in favor say. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: FOUR AYES. TWO ABSENT. McCarvel: At this time I'd 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 the staff's recommendations. After the staff has made their presentation the applicant will come forward to present their case for approval of their application and respond to any staff comments . The applicant will have 15 minutes to do so. After the applicant has finished we will open the 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. You do have -- there will be a timer on the screen at the podium , so you can keep track of your time. 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 we will close the public hearing and the Commissioners have the opportunity to discuss and, hopefully, be able to make a recommendation to City Council. Item 4: Action Items Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 3 of 27 A. Public Hearing Continued from September 19, 2017 for Rapid Creek Subdivision (H-2017-0117) by WHPacific located near the Southwest Corner of W. McMillan Road and N. Black Cat Road 1. Request: annexation and zoning of 23.02 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district 2. Request: for preliminary plat consisting of 93 building lots and 11 common lots on 21.02 acres of land in a proposed R- 8 zoning district McCarvel: So, at this time we would like to continue the public hearing for Item H-2017- 0017, Rapid Creek Subdivision, and we will begin with the staff report. Beach: Very good, Madam Chair, Commissioners. As you mentioned, this is an application for annexation and zoning and for a preliminary plat. This project site consists of approximately 21.02 acres of land, which is currently zoned RUT, located at 4435 and 4323 and 4145 North Black Cat Road. To the north is the Oak Creek Subdivision No. 3, which is zoned R-8. To the east is a rural residential property, zoned RUT in Ada county. To the south is rural residential properties, zoned RUT in Ada county. And to the west is the Oaks South Subdivision No. 4, zoned R-4. As a -- as a property in the county there is no city history on this property as of yet. The Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation for the parcel is medium density residential. The applicant has applied for annexation and zoning of approximately 21.02 acres of land from the RUT district in Ada county to the R-8 zoning district in the city for the development of 93 single family residential detached homes in the proposed R-8 zoning, which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The city is requiring a development agreement on this property. As I said, say the proposed plat consists of 93 building lots and 11 common lot on 21.02 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district. Lots range in size from 4,060 to 9,981 square feet. An average lot size of 5,692 square feet. The gross density for the subdivision is 4.42, which is consistent with the medium density residential designation. The property is proposed to develop in two phases. There are some existing structures that will need to be removed from the site prior to signature on the final plat. Access is being proposed from the north from the Oak Creek Subdivision and from Black Cat Road. There are two common driveways proposed on the site for access to residential lots. Staff has reviewed those lots for compliance with the dimensional standards and found that they meet those standards. The minimum -- a minimum of ten percent qualified open space is required to be provided for the development in accord with the UDC based on the area of the preliminary plan, which is 21.2 acres, a minimum of 2.1 acres of qualified open space is required to be provided. The applicant proposes 2.98 acres for approximately 14.2 percent qualified open space . Based on the area of the, plat which is -- again is 21.2 acres, a minimum of two qualified site amenities are required to be provided. The applicant proposes to provide a tot lot, half-court basketball court, and a section of the city's regional pathway. Staff is Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 4 of 27 supportive of the proposed amenities. As I mentioned there -- there is a pathway being proposed. The pathway should comply with the standards listed in the UDC. Consistent with the Parks Department pathways master planning, a -- typically a 14 foot wide pathway easement is proposed that runs along the north side of the Five Mile Creek. Staff is supportive of the -- of the pathway along the Five Mile Creek, but is concerned about crossing Black Cat Road midblock. Therefore, staff recommends the pathway be extended north along North Black Cat Road to the intersection of West Belltower Drive and North Black Cat Road in order to accommodate a better crossing to the east side of North Black Cat Road. As I said, the Five Mile Creek runs along the southern boundary of the property. The UDC requires natural waterways, like the Five Mile Creek be left open as natural amenities. The applicant is requesting that the Five Mile Creek be left open and improved with adjacent landscaping and pathway, so they will be requesting that of Council as something we will move forward to Council as well. I will note that in discussion with this project with other departments of the city , several things came -- came to light. One being that there is an existing -- there is some -- there is some water or -- some body of water located on this -- this property and in reviewing the engineering report and soils report, the Public Works Department provided the -- the following condition, which I will read. There is some additional conditions, but this one I wanted to make sure it was -- was clear this evening. It says the applicant has engaged the services of Site Consulting, LLC, to perform their geotechnical investigation and to make recommendations for development. Several issues have come to light that will need to be carefully monitored and adhered to , including, but not limited to, cattle are -- were previously buried on the property. The extent of this animal graveyard is to be determined and removed during site clearing operations. The existing building structures are to be demolished. All existing wells and septic systems shall be abandoned per the requirement of IDEQ and IDWR. Letter C. It is anticipated that groundwater is at approximately two feet below the surface as measured in the onsite monitoring wells. It may be necessary to substantially fill the subject property to increase the clearance above high static groundwater . Applicant has indicated that they will be constructing slab on grade foundations in lieu of the traditional crawl space foundations to address this concern. It has been reported that additional test well monitoring data has been collected since the July 2017 report date . The new data will need to be submitted to the Community Development Department with a submittal of development construction plans. Letter D. The site currently has an existing pond in the northwesterly region of the property and it is reported that another pond was previously present on the south parcel in the center of the south property line. Letter E. All excavations caused by demolition, removal of animal carcasses, grubbing of ditches or the existing ponds are to be backfilled with structural fill. F. All areas receiving structural fill will need to be inspected and tested per the recommendations of Site Consulting, LLC. Inspection test results will need to be submitted to the Meridian Building section prior to the development being released for building permits. And, then, condition 2.1.4 -- bear with me. This is the last section I'm going to read to you. The applicant has submitted information indicating that the existing pond noted in site specific condition 2.1.3, letter D, has been identified as having a, quote, wet signature that could possibly indicate a wetlands area as defined by the Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant has engaged the services of a third- party wetlands consultant to conduct Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 5 of 27 a wetland delineation study to outline the specific wetland area and determine if the specific area can be avoided, protected, or mitigated. On that note staff, myself, and the planning department, worked with Bruce Freckleton, who is in the land development division, on doing our best to craft a fairly generic condition that can catch several things. Having said that, we -- we asked the applicant to provide us with some additional information as to the extent of that -- whether it is a wetland, whether it needs to be mitigated. To this -- to this moment now I haven't received anything from them. I'm sure Jane, the applicant's representative, will -- will provide some further details on that. Just wanted to keep you aware of that in our thought process . Having said that, we did receive written testimony from John Tessin, I believe is the last name, on some concerns about the property and their -- their feelings on the wetland and some animals and wildlife that exist on the property. With that Commissioner Perreault did ask for the density of Oak Creek Subdivision that's just to the north of this, so -- it's approximately 3.84 dwelling units per acre is the gross density for that project . Perreault: Do you have a net density figure? Beach: I do. The net identity is five -- let's see here. 5.24. Having said that, you asked for just specifically the R-8 section. It's not broken out for the specific densities, it's the project overall. So, I don't -- I don't have a better idea of what the R-8 density is going to be, unfortunately. So, you are aware, those are the specific zoning designations we are talking about in that subdivision. So, with that I will stand for any questions you have. McCarvel: Okay. Any questions for staff at this time? Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: Just so I can better reference myself, didn't we approve a subdivision just to the west about a mile in that same vicinity? Yeah. All right. That's all I had. I just wanted to make sure I understood where -- Beach: Apparently it's called Aegean Estates is I think what -- Yearsley: Okay. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: And, Josh, the dark line you have -- will you bring the plat back up? Beach: I will. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 6 of 27 Fitzgerald: That's the phasing? Beach: Yes. So, you can see -- follow my mouse here, this is -- this is the phase. Fitzgerald: Okay. Beach: And I can't read on here which is phase one and phase two. Again, you can ask Jane that I believe. Likely it will be the -- the northern section of that will be constructed first to tie into the existing. Fitzgerald: So just -- Beach: South will be first. Fitzgerald: South first. Okay. Just looking at the Google Maps and aerial, it looks like what would be considered the pond or the wetland potential , whatever that might be, we will let the applicant deal with that. It looks like that would all be in phase two likely. Is that my understanding? Is there other -- Beach: I believe that's the case. Fitzgerald: Okay. Beach: That the pond -- what they are calling the pond is in the northern section what she's saying is phase two. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thanks, sir. McCarvel: Okay. And just for verbal record for roll call attendance , Commissioner Bernt is here. Okay. And would the applicant like to come forward? Suggs: Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Jane Suggs. I work at WH Pacific. 2141 Airport Way. And I'm here representing Rapid Creek Subdivision and the current owners of the property, which are Viper Investments and Linda Harger and you may be hearing from Linda later in her testimony. I'm going to also share my presentation with Katie Miller. She works for our engineering department at Bailey Engineering and she's going to take a little bit of time after me. So, we are going to split our 15 minutes of applicant testimony. I'm going to make mine pretty short, because I think Josh did a really good job of talking about the land use of Rapid Creek. Clearly the staff report and Josh have shown that the annexation, the rezone and the preliminary plat have all been designed to meet your requirements. The Comprehensive Plan calling for medium density, which is three to eight dwelling units per acre and we are coming in at the 4.4 dwelling units per acre. So, we are -- we are on the lower end of that and we also -- let's see. Ninety-three buildable lots. If you could put up the landscape plan so we can kind of see up -- there you go. And do you have the rendering as well? Okay. I do on my jump drive, so -- okay. Well, we will look at the black and white. The rendering is Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 7 of 27 much more attractive. I thought we had that. Can you find that in my purse and maybe -- it's on the side. Thanks. We have designed the subdivision to provide not only the single family residential zones, which are front loaded, but we are very excited about the small lots that are in the center, so they are not impacting the people on either side -- well, to the north of us. These are also single family residential, but they are -- they as -- they are ally loaded. So, they are -- they are nice townhome lots. They -- and instead of an alley -- we don't put an alley in, we put in a minor local street, which is an ACHD maintained street. Yeah. That's a much more attractive picture of -- so, we have some open space in front of those. And can I use this to direct -- point to things? Beach: Give me just a second. I got to -- Suggs: Okay. Beach: -- turn on the annotation. Suggs: Well, it's pretty easy to see that the open space to the south of the smaller lot homes -- those are 23 rear lotted -- rear loaded homes. So, the garages are loaded from the back. So, you will see these pretty fronts of faces we included in our application material. You will also see the streetscape that you would see not only from the rear loaded lots, but also the front loaded lots. We are pretty excited about that. You will see here on the landscape plan the amenities, including a half basketball court, which is kind of cool, because usually we end up just putting in a tot lot. So, I'm excited to see the half basketball. That's kind of the amenity of choice these days. This o pen space also includes a nice large lawn area for open play and for some landscaping and we are continuing the pathway that runs along the entire southern boundary of our property. That's the 14 foot paved pathway that runs along Five Mile Creek and that continues to the west through the Oaks South Subdivision. Of course, Rapid Creek is built -- built to meet all the requirements of the Unified -- Uniform Development Code and just let me go ahead and say we agree with all the conditions . Josh read a bunch of conditions about our geotechnical requirements and we agre e with all of those. We can fill in the lot. We can excavate. We can put in the spread footings. This is in that area that's -- I have stood before you before talking about high ground water in some places and, in fact, the people to the north of us had to fill in their lots -- their property substantially to build those homes, the Coleman homes just north of us. We do have one request and that is the staff 's recommended condition 1.1.2 and it's the one that asks for the regional pathway to be turned up on Black Cat Road. We disagree with that condition and mostly because we already have planned for a sidewalk along that area. We think that a sidewalk will handle pedestrians. We also think that if we put a pathway within the right of way it can't be an asphalt pathway, it has to be concrete according to ACHD and probably most importantly you don't want bikers actually having to bike up to an area -- to an intersection that actually has more vehicular conflict than you would just crossing over a two lane street. Now, there is really no place to go right now across Black Cat Road. When Black Cat to the east of us develops there will be a pathway along the creek there and that's when you will actually have a pathway to go to the east. Otherwise, you're going north or south and you will be on the road . So, the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 8 of 27 bicycle follows the road requirements, which is following the flow of traffic. So, we wouldn't want bicycles to be flowing against the traffic on this particular location . I think that's a little disconcerting to me. I live off of Warm Springs and when I see car -- bicyclists coming on the wrong side and they are coming towards me at night, it's a little disconcerting to see a lighted bicycle coming my way. So, I think that we should keep the sidewalk, but in our pedestrian -- our bicycle path, our multi-purpose path, just end it right at Black Cat. So, I will respectfully request that that particular item be eliminated. We have reviewed all the conditions of approval. We agree with them, except for that one. I really want to thank Josh and Bruce Freckleton for meeting with us . They had some questions about wetlands and about the wet signature on the property. We have been fully disclosed, fully transparent. We have been working with people who have given us that information and we are continuing to work with professional s. I'm going to go ahead and let Katie talk about this particular topic and , then, I'm going to come up and finalize with you. Miller: Good evening. Katie Miller. Bailey Engineering. 4242 North Brookside Lane, Boise, Idaho. 83716. So, I just wanted to give you a little bit of history. Obviously, we are looking at the site very sensitively. There is some concerns about what can be wetlands on our site, how it's going to be mitigated if there is anything that's determined to be wetlands. So, I want to talk about -- a little bit about the history of the site, the jurisdiction and how it's determined, what we have done, what we currently are doing and what we are prepared to do at the end of all this. Linda Hargrove is the -- Harger is the owner of the property. She bought the property in 1985 to train her dogs. Prior to buying the property it was considered an upland pasture with an irrigation dit ch running through it. She built a huge manmade pond to train her dogs, which has been maintained and filled with irrigation water since that date . What has happened is it's created what appears to be an environment that's conducive to wetlands . So, with that we have called in the Army Corps of Engineers, because they are the jurisdiction that's required to determine -- make the final determination on how it should -- what should happen to it, how much of it is wetlands and how we proceed to move forward to mitigate it, if there is wetlands on site. With that said, we met with the Army Corps on site in June. The recommendation by the corps at that point was, yeah, there appears to be a lot of areas that could be determined as wet lands, but wetlands have three conditions in which they have to meet in order to be classified or determined as a wetland area. Those three points are wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and wetland vegetation. So, basically, just vegetation that grows in that environment. With that being said, he recommended immediately to shut off all the irrigation water to that pond to see what the groundwater levels would do. If it dropped below a certain level, then, we could determine that the wetland hydrology could be eliminated. Wetland hydrology is water within the first foot of the surface that's there for more than two weeks out of a year. So, it's a long-term amount of water in a certain area that is sustainable over a certain amount of time naturally. So, Josh mentioned our site consulting. It's regular practice to do groundwater monitoring as part of due diligence . So, since June we have been monitoring five different monitoring wells on the site every two weeks to see where the groundwater is moving. Since turning off the water to the pond, the pond has gone down substantially. There is a little bit of standing water at the bottom, only because the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 9 of 27 sediment that is there currently and it probably will remain there for a while. Groundwater levels are dropping, so we can conclude tentatively that we are going to lose in some cases -- maybe all cases -- that wetland hydrology, which is a necessary condition to determine the areas to be wetlands. What was also recommended by the Corps of Engineers in June was to hire a wetlands specialist to do a wetland delineation and we have hired Dave Kordiyak with the Wetlands Group. He's been in the industry for 30 years. He is a wetlands biologist. He's got a degree -- a master's degree in biology from the University of W isconsin where he studied wetlands specifically. He works all over the state of Idaho doing wetland delineation and mitigation . One of the projects he's worked on that's high profile that you guys probably know is doing the delineation for 400 acres out at Harris Ranch and Warm Springs. So, he is an expert. He knows what he's doing. He's been on site multiple times. We have got the delineation going. It's not done yet. We apologize. We expected to have that to staff by now. But what we are looking at right now is we are not the experts, we have hired the experts. We can clearly see by monitoring the groundwater that a large majority of the areas that can be considered wetlands have lost their groundwater monitoring. Even in the highest ground watering months this is the highest month for groundwater at the end of the irrigation year. All the snow has melted off. So, even at this time we are below two feet in all of our test pits, which would be a good indicator that the absence of the water in the pond has removed that source which has created a wetland. Therefore, it isn't wetlands. Again, we are not the expert. We are going to finish the delineation report. That will come to you guys. It also goes to the Corps of Engineers who has the final determination on what we need to do going forward . As Jane stated, we have agreed to the condition which states that we will meet and comply with anything the Corps determines we need to do. However, we also know that whatever that determination is that it's not going to change the site as we are proposing to you today. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: So, if you have to delineate wouldn't you lose lots, especially in that center -- central area or would you mitigate in another off -site location? Miller: We have other ways of mitigating. So, our client is, again, aware and is willing to comply with what -- whatever the Corps comes up with. It will most likely be an off -site mitigation, therefore, it's not going to impact the plan that we have in front of you tonight. Fitzgerald: Thank you. McCarvel: I'm curious, what happens when 93 homes start watering their lawns again? How -- how much water -- I mean -- Miller: W ell, considering the properties to the north and to the west of us brought in a lot of fill to raise the site to get away from the groundwater, we are going to be doing that as well. We have to meet their grade and, then, it will fall off towards the creek. In Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 10 of 27 addition, we are doing slab on grade homes, which will make a difference in how groundwater is treated, how the site is impacted. But at the end of the day the site is being raised. So, if you -- if you look at the Oaks all around us, they brought in hundreds of thousands of cubic yards of fill to raise that site and we have to -- in order for -- to eliminate the groundwater and also to comply and have everything fall and drained properly we are prepared to do that as well. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: So, how are you going to take care of the storm drainage on your site, given its high groundwater and associated issues. Suggs: Thank you. Jane Suggs again just to answer questions, along with Katie. So, you might hang there. We have a couple of locations where we are showing surface water, storm water management and infiltration basins because of the separation between the groundwater and the storm water. So, you will see on the southwest portion of the site we have a green space that will be some storm water management . In our open space that's just south of the more compact lots there will be a little corner there that will also be used for storm water management. So, these would be like you see all over the surface type detention basins . I call them detention basin. So, not the infiltration. We are using that -- I'm sorry? Yearsley: I was going to say -- and you're going to be able to make your three foot separation? Suggs: But -- yes, we will when we are using the surface type storm water management. Yearsley: Okay. Suggs: We won't have -- we will have the separation there, so -- Yearsley: Okay. Suggs: And, again -- yeah. So, yeah, I think one of the things that we just want to impress upon you is that we will do everything that the Corps asks. That's the responsible party for any type of wetlands. A delineation doesn't mean it's wetlands and you have to mitigate for it. A delineation just shows you one of those items. Like if there are plants there you might see a delineation that shows what plants are , but without the water source that would not be a jurisdictional wetlands that would have to be mitigated. So, there -- there is a process that the Corps of Engineers goes through and you are all nodding your heads, so I think some of you kind of have been through this before. So, we are very much -- in fact, if we want to strengthen the condition we will do whatever the Corps says, which I think it does say, but maybe not specific -- in Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 11 of 27 those specific terms. We will do whatever they ask us to do, but we do know, based on the information we have now and talking to the Corps, there really isn't anything that will change our layout. So, if there is likely a very small -- tenth of an acre or something that might have to be mitigated and we would certainly do that off site. In fact, it's not really reasonable to try to mitigate on site for a very, very, very small wetlands, like a puddle, basically, so -- I want to just close, because I think our time is up, is that -- McCarvel: Once we start asking questions -- Suggs: Well, I just want to close in asking for that one condition on the pathway along Black Cat to be eliminated, but I would agree with all the conditions and just ask for your recommendation to the City Council that we go annex, rezone, and approve this particular plat. And I can answer any other questions. McCarvel: Okay. Bernt: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Bernt. Bernt: Got a question for you. Are the -- are you counting the drainage areas in your proposed development as open space? Suggs: Yes. They will not be holes, because of the sub surface. They will be nicely landscaped open spaces. There might be some times during heavy rains there might be some water in them, but they are designed to actually drain within 24 hours. So, they can be used as open play space and they are used like that in all your subdivisions around Meridian, as they are kind of nicely landscaped , they are gently sloping sides and they are used as open spaces. McCarvel: The homes that you have here all -- with the -- backing up to the alley. Suggs: Yes. McCarvel: Never mind. I got it. Okay. Any other questions? Yearsley: Just -- Fitzgerald: Go ahead. Yearsley: Just to follow up with that on those drainage areas. Those drainage areas won't be very deep, just -- pretty shallow. Suggs: They are very shallow. Again, you mentioned the ground water separation. So, they will be shallow -- that's why they are -- actually, for the size of the property they are actually pretty large, because they will be shallow and gently sloping, so -- and they will Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 12 of 27 be grass. I mean they will drain, but they will be grass. There is a special technique to -- Fitzgerald: And no sand bottom. Your grass -- Suggs: On these I don't think so. I don't think they have -- because those are like the ditches, you know, where they put the sand bottom and those become a little problem. But this will -- they will be hopefully -- because we are filling in there with a type of soil, they will be -- have to be designed with the type of soil that will drain . But, again, it's pretty free flowing there, because of -- so, yeah. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? Perreault: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Jane, the -- I know Nampa-Meridian Irrigation is -- that is a pretty big easement at File Mile Creek. Their access is south of you; correct? On the other side of the creek, not on your side? Suggs: They have -- I think they have a little bit of both. Fitzgerald: Okay. Suggs: They are allowing us to -- as -- in our discussions with them allowing us to put a pathway partially within their easement and that doesn't mean that they can't use that sometimes, too. Fourteen feet paved versus a dirt road, they might want to actually come on that side. But we are just doing that little bit into their easement and, then, of course, the Five Mile Creek also becomes Nine Mile Creek I found out. Five Mile Creek also has that natural area around it. So, it will remain natural like that, too. We won't be enclosing that in pipe or doing anything to really destroy that, because we feel like that that's a -- kind of a nice little riparian area there. Fitzgerald: Thank you. McCarvel: Commissioner Perreault. Perreault: Can you talk just a little bit more about the homes that -- the renderings look like they might be custom built homes. Can you share a little bit more about what the anticipation is with the homes, price points, that kind of thing? Suggs: I don't have information on the price points . But I think they are compatible to the other properties that are surrounding us, so we have showed pictures from -- that we were provided from the builder who will be building there , so -- and you have got copies of those in your application. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 13 of 27 Perreault: Those are actual renderings from the builder -- Suggs: Yes. Perreault: -- who is anticipated to build there, not -- Suggs: Yes. Perreault: -- just some examples. Suggs: They would be very similar to that. I can't say that that -- these are just -- these are some home designs that are used in other projects and these are the ones -- and we try to be careful about showing some -- like the ones I'm looking at now on the screen are all front loaded and, then, we had a group of homes that were actually the rear loaded ones that really -- they are a little narrower, because those are pretty narrow lots, but that's a lot of -- that's the kind of house I’m looking for. No yard. Perreault: Thank you. Suggs: Thanks. McCarvel: Okay. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Josh, these will all be included in the development agreement; correct? Beach: Yeah. We tie them to the landscape plan, the site plan and the elevations. Absolutely. Fitzgerald: Thank you. McCarvel: I have got one more question for Josh. You had mentioned that the staff had requested a lot of this information to go over before tonight. Do you have -- do you think staff has gotten the answers to their questions of what you needed ? Beach: Sure. So, I guess -- I guess to answer that question, the reason this project was continued to tonight was because we didn't -- we didn't have a comfort level as to what the Army Corps was going to say as far as -- if it was going to be designated or delineated as wetlands. What areas and what the impacts might be. I don't think in discussion -- we have asked for some more inf ormation and, as I said, we -- we really haven't been provided -- as they are still doing the study, so they haven't -- they haven’t offered us any additional information on that. So, some of it tonight is your comfort level Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 14 of 27 recommending approval of this to Council without having that information and whether that's going to impact your decision. That's up to you, so -- McCarvel: Okay. Beach: -- those are one of the things to consider, so -- Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, can we ask -- Jane, can you tell us when you expect that report to be done? Suggs: Again Jane Suggs representing the applicant. The specialist that we have hired Dave Kordiyak will likely be through with his work very soon delineating. He will send that to the Corps. It could be months before the Corps makes a determination. The thing to keep in mind is that -- well, two things. One is Meridian really doesn't have any regulations on wetlands, surprisingly. I mean they really do have to leave it up to the Corps of Engineers to determine that. I think the thing we are talking about is, again, delineation isn't saying it's a wetlands, delineation is saying there is one of those things that's available to create the opportunity for wetlands . So, we know that whatever -- based on the information that the Corps has already told us, the drop in the water level that we have already seen during the highest part of the irrigation system -- season, that we are not going to have anything that will change our plan . So, that's what we feel confident in. That's what our specialist has told us. The Corps of Engineers has told us that, but they can't really make the determination, because we haven't submitted a report, but I mean it's -- that report is not going to really hold up the plan that we have submitted. So, I mean nothing will change. So, again, we will be happy to provide that information to the city, but the city at some point doesn't really have any ordinances that actually say you have got to do something different. So, we all really go with what the Corps has to say and I think you feel comfortable with that, because they are the experts, they have been doing this for a while. Again, there is jurisdictional wetlands, nonjurisdictional wetlands. Some of you probably know about that. It determines what kind of mitigation is required. So, again, just -- I feel confident that the plan won't change and that's what we are asking you to approve tonight. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: With that comment you meant -- have they given an idea if it's going to be jurisdictional or nonjurisdictional, given -- Suggs: I will tell you what I know and I haven't met with the Corps. Katie has. But I think there might be one small area of less than a tenth of an acre that might be considered jurisdictional and, again, jurisdictional wetlands can be mitigated on site or off and the developer that we are working with has already said whatever is found we will mitigate through a mitigation bank, because that -- and it's not cheap, but it's a much more -- a reasonable way than trying to stop -- I mean stop development of a lot or lots Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 15 of 27 surrounded by 92 homes. So, that's the best way to do that. And there are mitigation banks all over the valley it turns out. So, I'm learning some stuff, too. I didn't know there were. Fitzgerald: Thank you. Suggs: Thanks. Parsons: Madam Chair, Members of the Commission, if I can just give you two cents on this topic. Staff is certainly -- we are not experts on wetland mitigation, nor do we pretend to be. But keep in mind, as Ms. Jane -- Ms. Jane. Ms. Suggs has mentioned in her rebuttal to you, she's accurate, we don't have a lot of teeth in the code that speaks to wetland mitigation. But keep in mind this is an annexation and one of those findings as part of annexation is is this in the best interest of the city to annex this particular property and so if you feel that we need more answers from the Army Corps of Engineers to give you that certainty, then, certainly we either continue this out, they can withdraw this application or you can recommend denial if you think you need that information. I can tell you in working with the Oaks development that they have had significant groundwater issues with those homes up there and the city had to remediate quite a few of those issues with the homeowners. We dealt with that for many months up there. Coleman Homes had to go in, put in sump pumps and pump out water out of those crawl spaces. So, I'm very happy to hear that the applicant is willing to do slab on grade, but I wanted to share with you that there is a groundwater issue up in that part of Meridian. So, I guess back to your decision tonight, as Jane mentioned to you, we don't know how long the federal government is going to take on getting us the answers that we need to determine this. We need to make sure that what we are doing here is in the best interest of the city. How much fill is coming in? How much -- we have no conditions in the staff report that says we want a master grading and draining plan for that development. How is that grading plan going to mesh with the adjacent lots. So, I think, one, we need to get some comfort level here. We need to understand what's going to come out of that report, because it is out of our hands. We don't know what the federal government is going to want as part of this project and what's going to come out from these wetlands. But I just at least wanted to put that in your mind. We don't typically want to get in a predicament where we are entitling property and, then, they come back and say, well, we can't develop it or the federal government wants us to do this, this and this and we have no control over it, because the federal government takes precedence over what our laws and rules are . So, take that in mind as you listen to testimony tonight and as you deliberate on this project. McCarvel: Okay. At this time we will take public testimony. I will just start at the top of the list of who signed up first. I have Carolyn Taylor. And as you approach the mic, please, give your name and address for the record. Taylor: My name is Carolyn Taylor -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 16 of 27 McCarvel: And, I'm sorry, those microphones -- you got to speak right -- you can pull it towards you. Taylor: Okay. My name is Carolyn Taylor. I live at 4923 West Torana in Meridian. 83646. And I think the biggest part of our concern is that there is a lot of wildlife that are using the property behind us and we didn't want to see them displaced . Also we have a great concern in the townhouses. We feel that density is extremely tight and will bring down our property values. It is suggested that this might be a Corey Barton neighborhood and I have never seen houses look that good in any of their subdivisions. Also Castlebrook has those drainage ditches for water release and they are very deep and you cannot play in them. So, just as a point of reference. We aren't -- I'm not concerned myself as to whether or not it should be annexed. Development is in -- Bernt: Inevitable. Taylor: Sorry. Yes. Inevitable. So, those are our concerns. Losing the wildlife -- we have a huge amount of California quail. We have egrets. We have herons. Geese. Ducks. And we have some red tailed hawks, they are a mating pair, that live out there and have had offspring. And so those are the concerns we have. We are hoping that -- also that they would put in more green space access for their homes . We have several large parks in our neighborhood that we pay good money for through our HOA and if they don't provide green space for their children , then, they will be over using our parks and, then, it will cost us more in our homeowners association to upkeep those and those are my concerns. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Next on the list is Bill Taylor. B.Taylor: Good evening. I live with Carolyn Taylor. Our backyard is on that property that they want to develop and -- McCarvel: Just state your address. Thanks. B.Taylor: Oh. It's 4923 West Torana. McCarvel: Thank you. B.Taylor: I had a concern about the play area, because a half a basketball court is not going to be enough for how many kids might be in there and they are not that far from our area and I had the same concerns Carolyn did. And another concern I had was when they start back filling it, raising the level, how are they going to get back in there? The only road in there is Oakstone and that's right through our subdivision. They would have to bring in their trucks right through our whole subdivision to -- to bring in their dirt and they spent months and months on that other end of -- over there the Oaks with double trailer dirt haulers and it just went on forever it seemed like and, then, they had all kinds of mud and dirt all over the street tracking it everywhere. There is no other access in there right now, except for that -- the Oaks -- that north end, that's Oakstone Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 17 of 27 and to get to that you have to go through the entire subdivision and if they fill that up to grade where they want to do it, that's going to take a lot of dirt. So, that's one of my concerns. The other one is the same as everybody else, it's a wildlife -- they do -- and that pond normally held water. During the winter it was iced over, but when they went in there and drained it -- there is an upper drain in case it would overflow and, then, they had -- they went in there and put in a lower drain to drain the pond, but if they hadn't of put in that lower drain it would have held water all year. I have lived right there. I was the first house on that Torana Street and there has always been water in there up until they put in the lower drain. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Jim Reed. Reed: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My address is 5155 West Torana. 84636. And I have the pond behind my house and it was an important thing, I noticed that they talked about it in the measurement on the groundwater and -- to see what would happen. The thing is is the pond -- one day a gentleman came over there with a tractor, dug it out, and dropped a drain way down and drained a big part of the pond. Otherwise, the pond would be way higher than it is now. So, it's very low, even though there is the 30 ducks on it as of last night and some of the other stuff -- of course we -- everybody has talked about the wildlife and the density of the neighborhood , I think it was mentioned earlier, Josh said that looking at five per acre, where in the Oaks it's 3.84 per acre and we have a playground -- if they have that kind of density, the amount of families and children that are going to be in there and the very small amount of play area that they are showing on the plan , those kids are going to go somewhere to play and kids play and they are going to be coming in our neighborhood. The other thing -- have they done a traffic study, because when they -- the street there in the Oaks that dead ends that will go south into that property that they will open up, a lot of people coming to the east on McMillan are going to cut through the neighborhood and go into the neighborhood that way. So, it's going to increase the traffic on Torana I think greatly and that's another situation with the traffic and the children, because it's pretty busy now with the amount of homes we have in the Oaks and -- let's see. What did I -- talked about lowering the drain. It's going to take tons of dirt to fill that area. Right now my house -- my back yard has quite a slope to it and the water all drains back into the lower lot. All the homes along -- on our street that back up to the south drain pretty heavily and I don't know how they are going to handle that runoff water that goes into there and how much dirt it's going to take, but the dust is going to be unbelievable and the ground is going to shake -- I don't know how many months of trucks it will take to bring dirt in there. So, I just think that there is more to this water situation out there and calling it wetlands that's been taken into consideration and I think it should be looked at much -- with a lot more intensity than has been given it before a decision is made . But whatever you make we will all live with and respect, but I wish you would take a -- more of a look at it before you make a decision. And thank you for your time. McCarvel: Thank you. Next on the list that is designated they wish to testify his Linda Harger. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 18 of 27 Harger: Linda Harger. 4435 North Black Cat Road. I'm the owner of one of these pieces of property. I bought this property in 1985. It was an existing kennel -- training kennel at the time. I bought it so I could train my dogs. I built those ponds. They are specifically designed for training retrievers for field trial competition , which I have done for 45 years. Prior to digging the ponds there was -- there is a ditch that goes through behind my kennel buildings and, then, down the southern edge of the property all the way into the irrigation ditch. I don't know what happened there. I simply rerouted the irrigation water. The irrigation water comes in in May, it goes out in October. By November those ponds are basically dry. Yes, ducks come in, just like they go into any other piece of water, they fly out. There is no wildlife that actually lives on my property, because I train dogs out there and until this summer dogs were out there every single day and birds don't stay around when the dogs are out there , they go back over into the Five Mile Creek. They talk about kids from this potential area playing in their area, how about the kids that come over and take my boat for -- my row boat out into the middle of my ponds and when I tell them they can't do that , they just leave it out in the middle of my ponds. They talk about their views. I moved out there and there was nothing there. It was a beautiful place. I have no interest in looking out my back yard now. I have planted trees and -- I can't even believe that this is an issue when this is my property , I should be able to sell my property and move, so I can have the same facilities elsewhere. I can't train out there, I can't take my dogs for runs out there, although other people do bring their dogs and let them through my back fence. I found that out. I just -- I understand their -- their concerns, but I have never complained about them building next to me. I have never complained about them building to the west of me . It's progress. It's the way it is. And -- well, that's just how I feel about it. Thank you. McCarvel: Thank you. Okay. There is no one else on the list that has indicated they want to testify, but is there anyone here that would like to at this point? Sir, come forward and state your name and address for the record. Longshaw: My name is Laura Longshaw. I live at 5027 West Torana Street, Meridian, Idaho. 83646. We built our house in 2015 and moved in. Yes, the view is beautiful. The wildlife is great. And she does go out there and she does train her dogs and there is wildlife out there while she is doing that. I stand in my backyard and look at them and watch her. I listen to her blow her whistles and -- and tell her dogs where to go and there are birds and there is wildlife out there. I have seen a fox cross over in the fields there. I have never seen anybody cross over into her property from my view. I'm very dishearted that something like this would happen. The wildlife and everything that is out there and, granted, we have got a beautiful view. We can see the Owyhees and stuff like that, which I'm pretty sure she could also. I know that Coleman Homes offered to buy her property at one time, but she didn't sell. So, I don't know why she would complain about the property being there. Our biggest issue is with the possible wetlands that we do have there and the wildlife that is there as well. Plus the structure of the homes that Corey Barton would be building if, indeed, that is the subdivision that he would be building. So, we have several concerns and we do ask that you look a little bit further into the situation out there. I live right -- well, I don't live on the corner where they would be cutting through into the new subdivision, but I live one house in from that. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 19 of 27 From seeing the structures that they have here, I'm going to have two backyards in my backyard. I don't know why that has to be, why they can't just do lots the same size as what Coleman Home has. I understand there is different features, different homes sizes and stuff like that. But that is -- that's another issue of mine is having two backyards in my backyard, as far as butted up along to my fence. And, then, the draining problem that I know Coleman had when they first built out there, they did take care of everything that the property owners asked them to. They went in and took care of all of the water and sucked it all out and -- and did everything that they needed to do. That's why on my part where we live they have structured it differently as far as the draining of the water . I have never had any problems with the water draining out of my yard or getting into my crawl space since they did change their structural of draining from when they first built along McMillan Road. So, I know that things have changed and I'm not going to be very happy to hear -- I work from home, so I'm not going to be very happy to hear all those trucks and see all that dirt come along as they go. So, thank you for your time. McCarvel: Thank you. Is there anyone else that wishes to testify? Chrispin: Matthew Chrispin. 5179 Torana. I'm next to the creek that goes north and south and what I observed is the water in there is rising since the drainage pipe was put in -- when was -- no. The one you hired somebody to put -- McCarvel: Sir, you need to direct -- you can't have the conversation with -- Chrispin: Okay. There was a drainage pipe put in that's lower. The water continues to rise. So, I'm observing it. And my other concern is -- I got about a six foot slope that goes right to that property. So, we are -- how does all that water mitigate if I ha ve a six foot slope? So, that -- that's how my property goes. So, everything -- everybody's houses -- there is quite a big slope for about four lots and they raised up four feet and I still have a six -- about a six foot drop, so -- McCarvel: Thank you. Back there. LeFever: Hi. My name is Denise Hanson LeFever and I live at 4706 North Salvia Way and I had the opportunity to meet Linda during the course of a business transaction where I actually brought her a gentleman that was interested in buyin g those kennels and we walked the property and you could definitely see where she put in the water canals. You could see where all the dirt was displaced over to the side and there were mounds of dirt on the property and what -- what the problem is with that property now is it's not conducive to a kennel and training dogs because of the -- my buyer walked away from it, because of the encroachment of the neighborhoods around it. So, I just wanted to impart that information. I did attempt to try to get somebody in there to do that, because she's very passionate about what she does and she loves that kennel and whatnot, but we just couldn't find -- I couldn't get my buyer to take on it, so -- Bernt: One more time. What -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 20 of 27 LeFever: I couldn't get my buyer interested in it, because it is encroached by subdivisions. I mean there is a subdivision right off next to where the kennels are and so you have all this issue with -- if you have your dogs out they bark and so , then, you end up having the neighbors complain. So, now you have this kennel that's encroached right -- you know, the neighborhoods encroach next to it, so it's not viable for people that want to come in and buy this kennel any longer, because of the neighbors and the noise issues and whatnot and you could clearly see where she has gone through and dug out that canal system that is perfect for dog training and it has moved the dirt . The dirt is still there on the property, you know. I just wanted to say that, because I did have a buyer for that property and it didn't work out. McCarvel: Any other public testimony at this time? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward again. Suggs: Thank you very much, Commissioners. Jane Suggs representing the applicant. I'm just going to go through some of the information I heard and try to talk to you a little bit about that and the first was kind of your regular construction issues . First, construction would come in through Black Cat Road. We would not be bringing construction through the Oaks and phase two we will be connecting to that. There might be a temporary access there just for emergency services as we build out the phase one, but all the access for construction would come through Black Cat Road. That just makes sense. A lot of talk about grading. There were grades shown on the plat, so -- in fact, we were working with Bruce Freckleton, the director of the Public Works, and he -- well, Public Works person and he was showing us that, yes, we are doing two to three, some places four feet of fill, but you have heard that the other neighborhoods around us also filled. I think I was before you not too long ago with a project that was on Ten Mile where we were actually using the pavers to deal with the high ground water. So, we know you have to fill in those areas to get the separation and as also discussed we are using a slab on grade, so we are not going to have crawl spaces to get wet. So, we will be on the surface. And, of course, it is important to make sure as you are designing this whole thing that we have drainage from the lots and we will design for that. We have a great engineer that does that for a living. So, lots of discussion. You're talking about not liking to hear the trucks, not liking to know that they are going to fill in. Those are just construction that happened on those projects -- properties as well and I don't want to be glib about this, but any wildlife that's out there was on those properties as well before that became a subdivision . I mean I think that's one of the things we forget sometimes, that those houses and folks have been living there for maybe two years, but before there were houses it was a pasture, it had a canal running through it, so you see just north it has a canal. Those were areas that had wildlife as well and we are maintaining the Five Mile riparian area. So, I just kind of want to throw it out there that a lot of these concerns are your typical new construction concerns from people who just moved into new construction . We do have ACHD approval for our project. We were not required to do a full traffic study, but we were required to do a turning movement study on Black Cat Road and found out that we did not have to put any turn lanes in based on the traffic. We do expect that 90 percent of the traffic will actually come through Black Cat, because it doesn't make sense for our Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 21 of 27 traffic to go up through the Oaks to go some place. In fact, I think you will find that a lot of people on Torana if they want to go south, they will come through Rapid Creek to get -- to go south on Black Cat. So, you will likely see a reverse of that. We think that our green space meets all the requirements of the city and the amenities . We have enough green space -- in fact, more than the minimum that's required and we have amenities provided for the people that will live there. Let's see. There was some discussion about a draining pipe and I hear from our developer representative that there was a pipe that was actually -- not laid to drain, so they did go out there to make sure that the drain pipe drained and that is something you can do on your property. If you have an issue with drainage around your property, you do something to drain the water off of your property and that is not uncommon. So, again, just want to impress upon you that any of the water that's there or was there has been drained and it's -- it's manmade, it's irrigation water that was directed there. The irrigation water has been turned off. There will be pressurized irrigation to all the lots, but it will be based on the amount of water that's necessary to water plants. It won't be the flood irrigation that you see on the big lots that typically occurs. Let's see. Like I said, if we want to add some sort of condition about additional grading, that will come with the construction plans before anything gets built out there. So, Bill was concerned about grading. Like I said, on our preliminary plat, the second page, there is lots of grading information that shows existing and future grades, so that we can show that there will be some fill that will be brought into the property, just like all the properties around there. I don't think we need to delay at this point, because, again, I am confident and I can tell you with certainty that the layout, the plan, the -- we think the smaller lots add value . We are looking for opportunities in every subdivision to do more than just the same lot, single family, front loaded. These rear loaded lots I bet you will sell fast, because people want to live in this area, they want to live in Meridian and they want something other than your standard front loaded, you know, three bedroom, two and half bath home, and I think this is going to be that, but it's going to be on a smaller, kind of scale with the garage in the back, like I said, something I'm looking at. Let's see. I think that was it. I think there was basically -- I have never really seen a development like this occur next to another subdivision where there was a lowering of property values and I have to say this is kind of interesting, when we had our neighborhood meeting there was some concern , because a couple of people were not even closing yet on their home and they were concerned about the construction going on on this particular property or a plan for construction. Dean Quenzer, who owns Quenzer Farms, which is south of Five Mile, he came out and said it's hard to really fight development out here, because we sold to the City of Meridian a lift station, which is across the street from this property. So, everything drains to that. This is set aside for Meridian development, because there is a lift station -- sewer lift station right across the street and that certainly is sort of the plan in your Comprehensive Plan for this type of development to occur. So, can I answer any more questions? Bernt: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Bernt. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 22 of 27 Bernt: Are you one hundred percent positive that you are going to get positive feedback from the Army? Suggs: I am. Bernt: Hundred percent. Suggs: I am. Bernt: One zero zero. Suggs: This is not to say that won't be wetlands, but it is to say that if they are identified wetlands, then, we will come up with a mitigation strategy that won't change the plan. So, I cannot say that they are not wetlands, but I will say that we are sure that any mitigation that has to happen will not change the plan that we have . Bernt: Thank you. Suggs: Not good enough? One hundred and ten. I mean I am. I am and I'm doing that based on the information that we have gotten from the Corps so far and some preliminary information we have gotten from our wetlands expert, who has already kind of started doing that delineation and can tell us what we are looking at. With the drop of the water table there really just isn't -- in most of that area and in the pond there really isn't an opportunity to provide the water that will create wetlands any more. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: Jane, can you -- when do you plan to cut ground -- or if this was approved when do you plan to cut into this thing? Suggs: Utilities probably in the spring. Fitzgerald: Okay. Thank you. Suggs: Yeah. McCarvel: At this time could I get a motion to close the public hearing for Item H-2017- 0117, Rapid Creek Subdivision? Yearsley: So moved. Perreault: Second. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 23 of 27 McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to close the public hearing on H-2017- 0117. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Anyone want to jump on first? I just -- I feel like there is a lot of questions that have little bits still hanging out there that I think staff would appreciate getting answers to before moving forward. Bernt: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Bernt. Bernt: I would agree. I personally am not a fan when drainage space is considered an open space, no matter how deep it is or how shallow it may be, so that's one of my concerns. But it basically boils down to -- and I don't -- I'm sure that there has been due diligence made and I'm sure that there is plan s in place and, you know, in case, you know, water levels are where they need to be through mitigation and such . I would like to hear back from the Army before any decision is made going forward period. Just -- I know of a subdivision in Boise right now where they thought they had due diligence -- enough due diligence and all the homes are falling off the side of the mountain. So, I mean going -- going -- I'm not saying that that's going to happen in this situation, but, honestly, I -- going forward I believe that it's -- as a city I think it's important for us to make sure that that space is conducive for this type of development and -- and if we have to wait, then, we wait and it's that simple. McCarvel: I agree. I don't think it's a bad project at -- at some point, but I think there is some definite things that need to be dealt with and that we ought to give the chance for that to fall out. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Fitzgerald. Fitzgerald: So, overall I tend to agree with the applicant. I think this is the -- I think this -- I think lot lines, if you look at the plat, they line up pretty well with those neighborhoods to the north. I do think the applicant has the right to develop her property. It's challenging for me when you cut into your property and make ponds and, then, we tell her she can't develop it after they are made. I understand the -- the frustration there, so -- I think the -- you know, the -- it’s not -- they are smaller lots, I don't think those are a problem. I think overall the project looks good. I do think it is -- I work for the government. I think Commissioner Yearsley works for the government all the time. Things can go sideways and go squirrely on you in the middle of this thing. So, I -- I appreciate the staff's opinion on getting feedback so there is some certainty before we move this forward. I wouldn't want to deny it, I'd rather continue it, especially because we are not talking about it cutting into this thing until spring. So, that would be Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 24 of 27 my preference, rather than saying an absolute we are done or, you know, bring us back something else. So, that would be my preference if we are going to move that direction. I don't think -- I think this is -- it's a good overall project and they have worked hard and they have brought professionals to the table to make sure that they are doing the right thing, but we haven't got answers that we need. McCarvel: Right. And I can't say how many times we have heard, well, you know, just cutting out a few lots would mean there is -- you know, the project isn't viable financially. Well, I think there is a lot of big financial questions in the ground in filling and everything else that need to be answered to make sure that this is viable the way it stands. I was -- you know, the government can take for -- you know, this may be a couple of weeks, it could be a couple of months, I was advised -- and, Commissioner Yearsley, may -- you have got more years here, I was advised another option is to withdraw if they don't want to go through the denial, because if we deny it I think it's -- as you say, a year before they can bring it back. So, if they -- Pogue: They can appeal it if it's a denial -- McCarvel: Right. But to continue it without a real date in mind and how long this is going to take. If they withdraw it and get some answers in the next few weeks or a few months or whatever, it can come back rather quickly that way; right? That was the advice from counsel. So, I haven't had that one before me before. Yearsley: Madam Chair. So, you know, I struggle with this, because this applicant is trying to do the same thing that her neighbors d id. Fitzgerald: Absolutely. Yearsley: They raised their property -- their properties to get out of the water. She wants to do that. And we live in a property right state. They have a right to develop their property and it's very similar to what they developed the neighbors. We deal with wetlands all the time. To me if there is wetlands on the property you -- you spend the money, you put it into a bank someplace else. Fitzgerald: I agree. Yearsley: I -- I don't see that being a huge issue at this point and I'm okay continuing it out to a month and coming back and saying where are we at . Do we have any movement, you know, and, then, maybe reevaluating it at that point in time. I -- and I don't mean to be harsh and I do apologize for what I'm going to say, but I'm going to say it, because she had to live through what you're probably going to have to live through and, you know, so, you know, I have a little sympathy for her, because she ended up having to live through the dust, through all the compacting of the equipment and stuff, and it is unfortunate that you guys have to live through that , but I struggled with what she said, because it's true, because she can't run her dogs on this property, because they are going to complain of the barking noise and stuff like that, so it becomes an Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 25 of 27 unviable option for her to do what she does currently and it wasn't by her fault by any means, so why not give her the opportunity to redevelop. Fitzgerald: I do think it's in the right location, considering it's right across the street from the lift station, so this is where this property needs to -- it needs to be developed the way it -- McCarvel: Right. I think it definitely needs to be -- I think it's not an issue of whether it can be done, I just think there is a comfort level of still wanting a few more I's dotted and T's crossed before -- before we move forward, so there aren't the issues where we had to go in and fix -- fix water issues like what happened in the surrounding subdivisions. Yearsley: Right. And I realize that and I do appreciate that they are doing the slab on grade, because that solves a lot of crawl space issues, because you don't have a crawl space. The neighbors to the side that they are sloping down into this property, they may have water at the bottom of their property because they are actually draining illegally onto somebody else's property. Fitzgerald: You have to maintain your water on your own property. Yearsley: Yeah. So, it's a tough situation. Regard ing Treg's comment with open space -- drainages being an open space, we have them all over Tuscany. They look beautiful. Rarely see water, because we are designing for the hundred year storm event and it rarely happens. So, for 99 years you have no water in them and -- and for the 13 years I have lived there I have only seen that much water in the bottom of my pond . So, I don't see that being an issue. I think they look beautiful. They -- they work. My guess is you're looking -- given the -- the issues that they are having there will be a foot or two depth total for that and, like I said, you will rarely see water in them. So, I don't see that being a detriment to the property either, just because it's typically done all over the place. Fitzgerald: The whole swale along the neighborhood where you live is all that. Bernt: Right. But the -- like at the bottom of the property toward Eagle. Fitzgerald: And, then, behind the pool. Those are all drainage areas and the grass and they don't get wet very often. Bernt: We can talk about that later. Fitzgerald: Okay. Yearsley: So, those being said -- and, then, patio homes, I will talk about those. We have -- you know, Tuscany is probably one of the premier subdivisions in the -- in Meridian. I'm not saying it's the premier, but it's -- it's high end. We actually have a significant number of patio homes. They look good. They are high value. They -- Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 26 of 27 people like them and they are a good alternative to the difference and densitywise you don't notice the increased density. So, I think this -- okay. So, I think this actually fits in well with the neighbors. Even -- like I said, even if it is wetlands, it's not a high value wetland, because you have got so many homes in and around there you're going to cause problems with it anyway and it would be better to bank it. So, my recommendation is let's continue it out a month and let's see what happens, you know, and then -- and, then, revisit it in a month. Fitzgerald: And, Madam Chair, I think that that would be -- give them their professionals that they have hired, give them a little bit -- a little bit of another -- McCarvel: A little more time. Fitzgerald: -- a little bit more time to give us some answers, get the staff where they feel comfortable with some of the -- the feedback that has come back and I think it will give us a chance to really understand what's going on , an answer from the government or not. McCarvel: Right. And so that meeting -- we don't want the 19th, we want a month -- that would be November 2nd. If that's what we are looking at. Fitzgerald: Seeing nods from Bill and Josh. Beach: It is, in fact, one of the dates. McCarvel: And I don't -- if we are going to continue it, do we want to address the bicycle path tonight or do that on the 2nd? Yearsley: I think that would be part of the 2nd. McCarvel: Yeah. We can get that worked out. Yeah. Overall I think it looks great and it is -- it's right in the area that -- to be developed, it's just -- I think we want to be sure and take care of a few concerns that linger with staff and let them have their time to set it out. Yearsley: Madam Chair? McCarvel: Commissioner Yearsley. Yearsley: I move to continue file number H-2017-0117 to the hearing date of November 2nd, to have them -- give them opportunity to consider what they -- work with Army Corps to determine what's going to happen with the -- or potential wetlands or the pond. Fitzgerald: Are we dealing with the bike path on that? Yearsley: We will make that motion -- we can talk about that as well. Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission October 5, 2017 Page 27 of 27 Fitzgerald: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to continue H-2017-0117, Rapid Creek Subdivision, to the hearing date of November 2nd. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. McCarvel: Who would like the honors? One more motion. Fitzgerald: Madam Chair, I move we adjourn. Wilson: Second. McCarvel: It has been moved and seconded to adjourn the meeting. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: SIX AYES. ONE ABSENT. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:19 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) _ " G 61V A�7 RH N* DA McCARVEL - CHAIRMAN ATTEST: C. J4 COLE Cl CLERK 10 i�6A i� DATE APPROVED O O�JV, AU(, j Cityof (✓M� E IDl� IAN:-- IOAHO �+ S Fye& aPw Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: October 5, 2017 ITEM TITLE: ITEM NUMBER: 3A PROJECT NUMBER: 2l� Approve Minutes of September -1-9-,2017 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting MEETING NOTES DATE: E-MAILED TO SENT TO SENT TO STAFF AGENCY APPLICANT INITIALS CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION NOTES Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission September 21, 2017 Page 59 of 59 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:08 P.M. (AUDIO RECORDING ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS.) APPROVED RH DA McCARVEL - CHAIRMAN DATE APPROVED ATTEST; C.LJAY CO. ES - CITY CLERK Go4 O;jS,MAUC(:gr,1s City of ERjD1AN*- r IDAHO y Sr p ra,Y w � Ihez6F�y��� Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting October 5, 2017 Item #4A: Rapid Creek Subdivision- Preliminary Plat Landscape Plan Elevations Changes to Agenda: None Item #4A: Rapid Creek Subdivision (H-2017-0117) Application(s):  Annexation and Zoning  Preliminary Plat Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 21.02 acres of land, zoned R-8, located at 4435, 4323 and 4145 N. Black Cat Road. Adjacent Land Use & Zoning: 1. North: Oakcreek Subdivision No. 3, zoned R-8 2. East: Rural residential property, zoned RUT in Ada County 3. South: Rural residential property, zoned RUT in Ada County. 4. West: The Oaks South Subdivision No. 4, zoned R-4. History: •None Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: Medium Density Residential Summary of Request: The applicant has applied for annexation and zoning of 21.02 acres of land from the RUT district in Ada County to the R-8 zoning district in the City for the development of 93 new single-family residential detached homes on the site. The proposed R-8 zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The City may require a development agreement (DA) in conjunction with an annexation pursuant to Idaho Code section 67-6511A. In order to ensure the site develops as proposed with this application, staff recommends a DA as a provision of annexation with the conditions included in Exhibit B of the staff report. The proposed plat consists of 93 building lots and 11 common lots on 21.02 acres of land in a proposed R-8 zoning district. Lots range in size from 4,060 to 9,981 square feet (s.f.) with an average lot size of 5,692 s.f. The gross density for the subdivision is 4.42 units/acre which is consistent with the MDR designation. The property is proposed to develop in 2 phases as shown on the subdivision plat. Existing Structures: There several existing homes and accessory structures on this site that are proposed to be removed; removal should take place prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. Access: Access to streets should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-3. Access is proposed for this site via the extension of an existing stub street, N. Oakstone Avenue, at the north boundary of the site from Oak Creek Subdivision; and from a proposed connection to N. Black Cat Road. Except for N. Belltower Drive, access to N. Black Cat Road should be prohibited; place a note on the final plat. Common Driveways: There are 2 common driveway proposed on the site for access to residential lots. Staff has reviewed the lots for compliance with dimensional standards and found that both lots meet the standards of the UDC. Tree Mitigation: If any of the existing trees on the site are proposed to be removed, the applicant should contact Elroy Huff, City Arborist, at 888-3579 to schedule an appointment to confirm mitigation requirements prior to removal of any trees on the site. Any existing trees proposed to be retained on-site should be noted on the plan. Open Space: A minimum of 10% qualified open space is required to be provided for this development in accord with UDC 11-3G-3A.1. Based on the area of the preliminary plat (21.02 acres), a minimum of 2.10 acres of qualified open space is required to be provided as set forth in UDC 11-3A-3B. The applicant proposes 2.98 acres (or 14.2%) qualified open space. Site Amenities: Based on the area of the preliminary plat (21.02 acres), a minimum of 2 qualified site amenities are required to be provided. The applicant proposes to provide a tot lot, a half-court basketball court and a section of the City’s regional pathway. Staff is supportive of the proposed site amenities. A detail of the play equipment for the tot lot should be submitted with the final plat application. Pathways: Pathways should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-8 and 11-3B-12C. Consistent with the Parks Department Pathways Master Plan, a 14-foot wide pathway is proposed within the irrigation easement that runs along the north side of the Five Mile Creek. Staff is supportive of the pathway along the Five Mile Creek but is concerned about crossing Black Cat Road mid-block. Therefore, Staff recommends the pathway be extended north along N. Black Cat Road to the intersection of W. Belltower Drive and N. Black Cat Road in order to accommodate a better crossing to the east side of N. Black Cat Road. Utilities: All development is required to connect to the City water and sewer system unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer in accord with UDC 11-3A-21. Street lighting is required to be installed within the development in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Pressurized Irrigation (PI): An underground PI system is proposed to be provided to each lot in the subdivision in accord with UDC 11-3A-15. Storm Drainage: A storm drainage system is required for the development in accord with the City’s adopted standards, specifications and ordinances. Design and construction shall follow best management practice as adopted by the City in accord with UDC 11-3A-18. Stormwater is proposed to be retained onsite in seepage beds in accord with ACHD requirements. Waterways: The Five Mile Creek runs along the southern boundary of the site. The UDC (11-3A-6B1) requires natural waterways like the Five Mile Creek be left open as natural amenities. The applicant is requesting that the Five Mile Creek be left open and improved with adjacent landscaping and a pathway. Note: Five Mile Creek was left open to the west of this site in Oak Creek Subdivision. Floodplain: This property lies within the Meridian Floodplain Overlay District. Building Elevations: The applicant has submitted 10 conceptual sample building elevations for future homes in this development, included in Exhibit A.4. Building materials appear to consist of a mix of horizontal and vertical lap and shake siding with stone/brick accents and asphalt shingles. Future homes on this property should substantially comply with the submitted elevations. Fencing: All fencing should comply with the standards listed in UDC 11-3A-6B and 11-3A-7. A mix of 6-foot tall vinyl and 4-foot tall vinyl is proposed throughout the project. Fencing is required adjacent to all micropath connections to distinguish common from private areas, per UDC 11-3A-7A.7. Fencing details should be included with the final plat landscape plan. Fencing on lots on Rapid Creek Street shall comply with the alley fencing standards of the UDC. Public Works Department Comments: 2.1.3 The applicant has engaged the services of Site Consulting, LLC to perform their geotechnical investigation and to make recommendations for development. Several issues have come to light that will need to carefully monitored and adhered to, including but not limited to: a. Cattle were previously buried on this property. The extent of this animal graveyard is to be determined and removed during site clearing operations b. Existing building structures are to be demolished. All existing wells and septic systems shall be abandoned per the requirements of the IDEQ and IDWR. c. It is anticipated that ground water is at approximately two-feet below the surface as measured in the on-site monitoring wells. It may be necessary to substantially fill the subject property to increase the clearance above high static ground water. Applicant has indicated that they will be constructing slab on grade foundations in lieu of the traditional crawl space foundations to address this concern. It has been reported that additional test well monitoring data has been collected since the July 2017 report date. This new data will need to be submitted to the Community Development Department with the submittal of development construction plans. d. The site currently has an existing pond in the northwesterly region of the property, and it is reported that another pond was previously present on the south parcel, near the center of the south property line. e. All excavations caused by demolition, removal of animal carcasses, grubbing of ditches or the existing ponds are to be backfilled with structural fill. f. All areas receiving structural fill will need to be inspected and tested per the recommendations of Site Consulting, LLC. Inspection/test results will need to be submitted to the Meridian Building Section prior to the development being released for building permits. 2.1.4 The applicant has submitted information indicating that the existing pond noted in Site Specific Condition 2.1.3d above, has been identified as having a “wet signature” that could possibly indicate a wetlands area as defined by the Army Corps. of Engineers. The applicant has engaged the services of a third party wetlands consultant to conduct a Wetland Delineation Study to outline the specific wetland area, and to determine if the specific area can be avoided, protected or mitigated. Written Testimony: John Tessin. Staff Recommendation: Approval Notes: Possible Motions: Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2017-0117, as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of October 5, 2017, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications to conditions) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny File Number H-2017-0117, as presented during the hearing on October 5, 2017, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial) Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2017-0117 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance) Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: October 5, 2017 ITEM NUMBER: PROJECT NUMBER: H-2017-0100 ITEM TITLE: Heritage Hop Haus Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law for Heritage Hop Haus (H-2017-0100) by Prefunk Meridian Located 77 E. Idaho Avenue MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2017-0100 Page 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of the Request for Conditional Use Permit for a drinking establishment on 0.05 of an acre of Land in the O-T Zoning District for Heritage Hop Haus, by PreFunk Meridian. Case No(s). H-2017-0100 For the Planning & Zoning Commission Hearing Date of: September 21, 2017 (Findings on October 5, 2017) A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 21, 2017, incorporated by reference) 2. Process Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 21, 2017, incorporated by reference) 3. Application and Property Facts (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 21, 2017, incorporated by reference) 4. Required Findings per the Unified Development Code (see attached Staff Report for the hearing date of September 21, 2017, incorporated by reference) B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the “Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975,” codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission takes judicial notice of its Unified Development Code codified at Title 11 Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted April 19, 2011, Resolution No. 11-784 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-5A. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this decision, which shall be signed by the Chairman of the Commission and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2017-0100 Page 2 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of September 21, 2017, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the Planning & Zoning Commission’s authority as provided in Meridian City Code § 11- 5A and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant’s request for conditional use permit is hereby approved in accord with the conditions of approval in the staff report for the hearing date of September 21, 2017, attached as Exhibit A. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits Notice of Two (2) Year Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit, when granted, shall be valid for a maximum period of two (2) years unless otherwise approved by the City in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.1. During this time, the applicant shall commence the use as permitted in accord with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, and acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. For conditional use permits that also require platting, the final plat must be signed by the City Engineer within this two (2) year period in accord with UDC 11-5B-6F.2. Upon written request and filed by the applicant prior to the termination of the period in accord with 11-5B-6.F.1, the Director may authorize a single extension of the time to commence the use not to exceed one (1) two (2) year period. Additional time extensions up to two (2) years as determined and approved by the Commission may be granted. With all extensions, the Director or Commission may require the conditional use comply with the current provisions of Meridian City Code Title 11. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, a denial of a conditional use permit entitles the Owner to request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. When applicable and pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521, any affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the final action of the governing board may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Attached: Staff report for the hearing date of September 21, 2017 By action of the Planning & Zoning Conunission at its regular meeting held on the J T�1 day of OCALAQeY , 2017. COMMISSIONER RHONDA MCCARVEL, CHAIRMAN COMMISSIONER RYAN FITZGERALD, VICE CHAIRMAN COMMISSIONER STEVEN YEARSLEY COMMISSIONER GREGORY WILSON COMMISSIONER TREG BERNT COMMISSIONER WILLIAM CASSINELLI COMMISSIONER JESSICA PERREAULT Rh nda McCarvel, Chairman Attest: ~� City of �T I -D1 AN?ti-- ay Colesjqity Clerlc`r,,. VOTED VOTED ' VOTED e -Q, VOTED. C� VOTED VOTED VOTED��.._ Copy served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Development Services Divisions of the Community Development Department, the Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By; Dated:"fJ .,;Lc) 171 City Clerk's Office 6— CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). H-2017-0100 Page 3 Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 1 STAFF REPORT Hearing Date: September 21, 2017 (continued from August 17, 2017) TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Josh Beach, Associate Planner 208-884-5533 Bruce Freckleton, Development Services Manager 208-887-2211 SUBJECT: Heritage Hop Haus – CUP H-2017-0100 I. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant, Pre Funk Meridian, is requesting Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval for the operation of a drinking establishment in the O-T (Old Town) zoning district. The site consists of 0.05 acres and is located at 77E. Idaho Avenue, on the northwest corner of Main Street and Idaho Street. See Section IX Analysis for more information. II. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in Exhibit C of the Staff Report. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission heard this item on September 21, 2017. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to approve the subject CUP request. a. Summary of Commission Public Hearing: i. In favor: Evan Izett (Applicant’s representative) ii. In opposition: None iii. Commenting: None iv. Written testimony: Larry Molnar v. Staff presenting application: Josh Beach vi. Other staff commenting on application: None b. Key Issues of Discussion by Commission: i. None c. Key Commission Changes to Staff Recommendation: i. None III. PROPOSED MOTION Approval After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to approve File Number H-2017- 0100 as presented in the staff report for the hearing date of August 17, 2017, with the following modifications: (Add any proposed modifications.) Denial After considering all staff, applicant and public testimony, I move to deny H-2017-0100 as presented during the hearing on August 17, 2017, for the following reasons: (You should state specific reasons for denial.) Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 2 Continuance I move to continue File Number H-2017-0100 to the hearing date of (insert continued hearing date here) for the following reason(s): (You should state specific reason(s) for continuance.) IV. APPLICATION AND PROPERTY FACTS A. Site Address/Location: 77 E. Idaho Avenue Section 7, T3N, R1E B. Applicant/Owner: Prefunk Meridian 729 N. Main Street Meridian, ID 83642 C. Applicant's Statement/Justification: Please see applicant’s narrative for this information. V. PROCESS FACTS A. The subject application is for a conditional use permit. A public hearing is required before the Planning & Zoning Commission on this matter, consistent with Meridian City Code Title 11, Chapter 5. B. Newspaper notifications published on: July 28, 2017 C. Radius notices mailed to properties within 300 feet on: July 19, 2017 D. Applicant posted notice on site by: September 10, 2017 VI. LAND USE A. Existing Land Use(s) and Zoning: The existing use on the property is defined as “Retail Beer and Wine Sales.” B. Character of Surrounding Area and Adjacent Land Use and Zoning: The surrounding area is all zoned O-T (Old Town) and mainly consists of small retail and service oriented uses. C. Adjacent Land Use and Zoning 1. North: Commercial business; zoned O-T 2. East: Commercial business; zoned O-T 3. South: Commercial business; zoned O-T 4. West: Parking lot; City Hall; zoned O-T D. History of Previous Actions:  This property is platted as par #0260 N'LY por lots 17-18, Block 2 of the Meridian Townsite Amended.  In 2008 , the property received Conditional Use Permit approval for a drinking establishment (CUP-08-006). This approval has subsequently expired. E. Utilities: 1. Public Works: a. Location of sewer: Existing structure is connected to City sewer. Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 3 b. Location of water: Existing structure is connected to City water. c. Issues or concerns: None E. Physical Features: 1. Canals/Ditches Irrigation: None 2. Hazards: Staff is not aware of any hazards that exist on this property. 3. Flood Plain: This property currently does not lie within the floodplain or floodway however the Meridian Development Corporation is in the process of re-evaluating the flood plain in Downtown and there is a possibly the subject property may be located within the flood plain. The property owner should contact the City’s Flood Plain Administer regarding the future flood plain boundaries. VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES AND GOALS This property is designated Old Town on the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Per the Comprehensive Plan, “This designation includes the historic downtown and the true community center. The boundary of the Old Town district predominantly follows Meridian’s historic plat boundaries. In several areas, both sides of a street were incorporated into the boundary to encourage similar uses and complimentary design of the facing houses and buildings. Sample uses include offices, retail and lodging, theatres, restaurants, and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors. A variety of residential uses are also envisioned and could include reuse of existing buildings, new construction of multi-family residential over ground floor retail or office uses. In order to provide and accommodate preservation of the historic character, the City has developed specific Design Guidelines for this area. Pedestrian amenities are emphasized in Old Town. Future planning in Old Town will be reviewed in accordance with Destination Downtown, a visioning document for redevelopment in downtown Meridian. Please see the Economic Excellence chapter for more information on Destination Downtown.” Staff finds that the request generally conforms to the stated purpose and intent of the Old Town designation within the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the following Comprehensive Plan policies to be applicable to this property and apply to the proposed use (staff analysis in italics):  Support compatible uses which will attract a high daytime and nighttime population to the downtown area. (4.04.01K) Staff believes that the proposed use of the property as a drinking establishment will attract people to the downtown area during the daytime and nighttime hours which has the potential to attract customers to other neighboring businesses.  Protect existing residential properties from incompatible land use development on adjacent parcels. (3.06.01F) Staff believes that the proposed use should be compatible with existing uses in the area. Staff believes that the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the surrounding uses. Staff recommends that the Commission rely on any verbal or written testimony that may be provided at the public hearing when determining if the applicant’s request is appropriate for this property. VIII. UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE A. Purpose Statement of Zones: Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 4 Per UDC 11-2D-1, the purpose of the O-T district is to accommodate and encourage further intensification of the historical city center in accord with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The intent of the O-T district is to delineate a centralized activity center and to encourage its renewal, revitalization and growth as the public, quasi-public, cultural, financial and recreational center of the city. Public and quasi-public uses integrated with general business, and medium high to high density residential is encouraged to provide the appropriate mix and intensity of activities necessary to establish a truly urban city center. B. Schedule of Use: Unified Development Code (UDC) Table 11-2D-2 lists the permitted, accessory, conditional, and prohibited uses in the O-T zoning district. C. Dimensional Standards: The dimensional standards listed in UDC 11-2D-4 for the O-T zoning district applies to development of this site. D. Landscaping Standards (UDC 11-3B): The standards for landscaping contained in UDC 11-3B apply to development of this site (if applicable). E. Off-Street Parking: Off-street parking is required in accord with UDC 11-3C-6B. F. Structure and Site Design Standards: Development of this site must comply with the design standards listed in UDC 11-3A-19 and the guidelines listed in the Architectural Standards Manual. IX. ANALYSIS A. Analysis of Facts Leading to Staff Recommendation: Conditional Use Permit: Per UDC 11-2D-2, a “drinking establishment” requires conditional use permit approval in the O-T zone. The subject site is currently operating as a “retail store, wine and beer sales and servings” business. The applicant is requesting to continue operation of the same business, but as a “drinking establishment.” The applicant has submitted a site/landscape plan with this application; however the site and building are not changing, only the use. Therefore, no additional site improvements are explicitly required by the UDC. Specific Use Standards for Drinking Establishments per UDC 11-4-3-10: A. The facility shall comply with all Idaho Code regulations regarding the sale, manufacturing, or distribution of alcoholic beverages. The applicant should comply with this standard. B. The drinking establishment shall not be located within three hundred feet (300’) of a property used for a church or education service. Nor shall the drinking establishment be located within one thousand feet (1,000’) of an adult entertainment establishment. The business is existing in its current location. The nature of the business will not change, only the hours of operation. C. For properties abutting a residential district, no outside activity or event shall be allowed on the site, except in accord with Chapter 3 Article E temporary use requirements of this Title. This property does not abut a residential district. . Access: Access to the site is provided from Main Street and E. Idaho Street. Parking: Because this site is located in Old Town, and because the existing building encompasses almost all of the property, off-street parking is not feasible on this site and is not provided. Furthermore, UDC 11-2D-4E (Old Town District) has no requirements for off street parking. However, full compliance with the UDC parking requirements is required if/when a site is proposed for new development or modifications are proposed for the facade of an existing building. The applicant believes there is sufficient on-street parking along Main Street and Idaho Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 5 Avenue. The Commission should determine if the existing parking plan is adequate. Hours of Operation: The hours of operation for the proposed use as stated in the application are daily from 11:00 am-2:00 am. Staff is supportive of the hours of operation for the site and is proposing that this be a restriction of the business. Elevations: Elevations of the existing building were not submitted with this application as no changes to the exterior of the building are proposed with this application. Any exterior modifications shall be subject to administrative design review in accord with the “Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines.” Furthermore, the applicant does not own the building and will only be a tenant of the space. Certificate of Zoning Compliance: The purpose of a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit is to ensure that all construction, alterations and/or the establishment of a new use complies with all of the provisions of the UDC before any work on the s tructure is started and/or the use is established (UDC 11-5B-1A). To ensure that all of the conditions of approval listed in Exhibit B are complied with, the Applicant will be required to obtain CZC approval from the Planning Department prior to establishment of the new use. All improvements must be installed prior to occupancy. Staff recommends approval of the proposed CUP with the conditions listed in Exhibit B. X. EXHIBITS A. Drawings 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan B. Conditions of Approval 1. Planning Division 2. Public Works 3. Fire Department 4. Police Department 5. Republic Services 6. Ada County Highway District 7. Parks Department C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 6 Exhibit A.1: Vicinity Map O-T I-L R-8 R-4 O-T N M A I N S T N M E R I D I A N R D E PINE AVE E STATE AVE E IDAHO AVE N E A S T 2 N D S T UNION PACIFIC RXR E BROADWAY AVE W PINE AVE W IDAHO AVE 33 30 33 32 911 517 831 505 58 611 502 817 211 641 603 521 200 800 36 218 235 113 201 134 15 10 3 5 46 240 211 6652 39 32 29 36 807 1010 829 23 93 0 49 59 22 21 16 55 58 24 3630 37 21 4 4638 713 12 20 8 22 3 621 14 0 22 1 22 6 60 4 43 32 22 13 7 12 9 12 1 91 4 11 1 20 6 83 0 11 6 12 0 906 23 4 12 7 40 92 5 91 7 39 18 105 18 11 4 1015 629 816 624 731 13 6 21 6 10 1 2 725 719 832 205 13 4 11 5 12 4 12 1 12 7 80 5 1023 1 1 6 33 22 6 22 6 13 5 22 0 820 1 2 8 13 1 3 2 92 2 72 3 814 622 7 2 5 51 37 23 2 13 0 23 1 91680 4 31 103125 13977 35 141 12 6 2254712941 706 921 714 704 23 4 10 1 3 Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 7 Exhibit A.2: Site Plan Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 8 B. Conditions of Approval 1. PLANNING DIVISION 1. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1.1 The site/landscape plan included in Exhibit A of this staff report is hereby approved by the Meridian Planning Department. 1.2 The facility shall comply with all Idaho Code regulations regarding the sale, manufacturing, or distribution of alcoholic beverages. 1.3 Any future exterior modifications of the building shall be subject to administrative design review in accord with the “Downtown Meridian Design Guidelines.” 1.4 The Applicant shall be required to obtain a Certificate of Zoning Compliance (CZC) permit from the Planning Department prior to commencement of the new use. 1.5 No new signs are approved with this CUP application. All business signs require a separate sign permit in compliance with the sign ordinance. 1.6 Heritage Hop Haus hours of operation are as follows: Daily from 11:00 am-2:00 am. 2. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 2.1 Public Works has no concerns with this application. 3. FIRE DEPARTMENT 3.1 The Fire Department did not submit comments on this application. 4. POLICE DEPARTMENT 4.1 The Police Department did not submit comments on this application. 5. PARKS DEPARTMENT 5.1 The Parks Department did not submit comments on this application. 6. REPUBLIC SERVICES 6.1 Republic Services did not submit comments on this application. 7. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT 7.1 ACHD did not submit comments on this application. Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 9 C. Required Findings from Unified Development Code 1. Conditional Use Permit (UDC 11-5B-6E) The Commission shall base its determination on the Conditional Use Permit request upon the following: a. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the expansion; recommended site improvements; dimensional and development regulations of the O-T district (see Analysis, Section IX for more information). b. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accord with the requirements of this Title. Staff finds that the proposed use is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan future land use map designation of Old Town and the UDC, if the applicant complies with the conditions in Exhibit B. c. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Staff finds that, if the Applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the operation of the proposed use should be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing and intended character of the area. Further, Staff believes that the proposed use will not adversely change the essential character of the area. d. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Staff finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently available to the subject property. Because the business is currently served by the above - mentioned public facilities and services, Staff finds that the proposed use will continue to be served adequately by those facilities and services previously mentioned. e. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, schools, parks, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. Staff finds that sanitary sewer, domestic water, refuse disposal, and irrigation are currently provided to the subject property. Please refer to any comments prepared by the Meridian Fire Department, Police Department, Parks Department, Sanitary Services Corporation and ACHD in Exhibit B. Based on comments from other agencies and departments, Staff finds that the proposed use will be served adequately by all of the public facilities and services listed above. Exhibit A Heritage Hop Haus – H-2017-0100 12 f. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. If approved, the applicant will be financing any improvements required for development. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the community’s economic welfare. g. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Staff finds that if the applicant complies with the conditions outlined in this report, the proposed use and expansion should not be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. Staff does not anticipate the proposed use will create excessive noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. Meridian Planning Zoning Commission Meeting DATE: October 5, 2017 ITEM NUMBER: 4A PROJECT NUMBER: H-2017-0117 ITEM TITLE: Rapid Creek Subdivision Public Hearing Continued from September 19, 2017 for Rapid Creek Subdivision (H-2017- 0117) by WHPacific located near the Southwest Corner of W. McMillan Road and N. Black Cat Road 1. Request: annexation and zoning of 23.02 acres of land with an R-8 zoning district 2. Request: for preliminary plat consisting of 93 building lots and 1 1 common lots on 21.02 acres of land in a proposed R-8 zoning district MEETING NOTES CLERKS OFFICE FINAL ACTION DATE: E-MAILED TO STAFF SENT TO AGENCY SENT TO APPLICANT NOTES INITIALS V/ CITY OF MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET Date: October 5, 2017 Item # 4A Project Number: Project Name: H-2017-0100 Rapid Creek Subdivision Please print your name For Against Neutral Do you wish to testify (Y/N) Vir c eAe *O �7�)_,� llli��lA�� C'l2 (s��� ✓1